London...

[erjin999]

Did you read MY post as well ? He never should have been allowed on the us, let alone the underground !

[nemafakei]

"Yet, I havn't heard of an American national being blown away by plain-clothed US Marshals"

Um, I may be wrong, but given that your police all carry guns and regularly use them, I assumed that mistakes are made frequently enough over the entire country for them not to report them nationally most of the time.

[Megashrap]

Did you read MY post as well ? He never should have been allowed on the us, let alone the underground !

Good point Erj. Attention shouldn't be directed at why or how wrong the police were that shot the man, or was it a justified shooting, Attention should be aimed at why didn't they do it sooner, if any fuss at all.

Well, everything depends on whether the policemen properly identified themselves. If you saw 20 angry-looking guys in plain clothes coming at you with guns, would you stick around to find out who they are and what they want?

I see what your saying, but trying to pursue a suspected terrorist wearing say, black jackets with giant white letters for all the world to see doesen't sound to great of an idea either or flashing badges at every Tom and Jane they run upon while trying to pursue or apprehend a terrorist suspect capable of killing who knows how many people. It's just my opinion, but seems in these times were the potential for disaster is so damn high, I think a few civil liberties can be overlooked in hightened states of potential terror attacks.

[alchemi2]

Thats all part of the terror tactics to put us all on edge.

Tonight at work we all crapped ourselves when a a guy walked in to ask for a cahpoint, he was wearing a tracksuit under a big coat carrying a large backpack and obviously of ethnic origin. i've never seen so many staff freeze and be scared at such an innocent situation. FROZEN WITH FEAR is the only way to discribe it, we were all so relieved when he left and we were still breathing. It was ridiculous ::)

[erjin999]

The police shouldnt have shot him before he got to the station scar, they should have stopped him from boarding the bus. If they suspect he is carrying a bomb, do they not think he will detonate it, especially as he knows they are after him and he ran ? Why grab the guy (within range of getting splattered all over he place) when you can kill him from far ? A lot of this doesnt make sense to me.

[lowzeewee]

It was a mistake to kill him. Period. There was even an apology by Tony Blair, acknowledging the fact that it was a mistake.

Erjin and especially Mahdi pretty much summarized what I had wanted to say, mainly points 2 and 3. Point 1 is also relevant but not as 'heavy' as the two other points.

[Megashrap]

It was a mistake to kill him. Period. There was even an apology by Tony Blair, acknowledging the fact that it was a mistake.

Erjin and especially Mahdi pretty much summarized what I had wanted to say, mainly points 2 and 3. Point 1 is also relevant but not as 'heavy' as the two other points.

I just think it would've been a mistake under normal crime circumstances, and the type of protocol they would usually undertake. An everyday type of crime and the current events are not the same, and therefor should be treated different is all i'm trying to say.

[erjin999]

But Scar, its becuase of the situation as it is now that it was a mistake to let him on to the platform in the first place. What if his target was the ticket hall ? He passed that (they come before the barriers he was said to have jumped) or the bus ? He took that on his way to the underground.

what was the advantage of waiting to catch him at the station ? Having explosives is a big enough crime, they needn't wait to see if he goes to an underground station before try to arrest and prosecute him.

What was the thinking of the police ?

[Wolf]

The man killed by London police was not shot in the back -- he was shot in the back of the head. I heard on news radio at work that the London police are trained to shoot bomb suspects in the head because of the fact that explosives may be attached to the legs or torso... So, seven offices, or however many there were, fired however many rounds that struck this man in the head.

No wonder it took a day or two to identify him -- they had to find some teeth.

[erjin999]

It seems there may be much mor eto this then we realise. Also, I am not shure we can be too certain of any of the "details" until the enquiry finishes (Independent Police Complaints Commission [iPCC])...

[nampigai]

well i dont like the shoot-in-the-head policy...... i understand that you dont want to shoot in the chest where the explosives are... but i see nothing wrong with shooting them in the legs.

They obviously wont have explosives on their legs and if you are such a good shot that you can shoot someone 5 times in the back of the head then you can definately hit their legs. IMO.

they can still detonate themselves if they are shot in the leg, as terrible as it is I really don't see any other way.

[EWS]

Mahdi, the guy was studying here, and if he is studying here and doesn't know the language well enough to understand "Police, stop" then he shouldn't have been here in the first place.

I for one think the police did the right thing.

[erjin999]

3 posts up, I missed the links for the reason I had posted. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4163568.stm.

Dont forget to check out the "See Also" stories on the right.

Reading that, I have some serious doubts about the police action.

[Vidi]

I heard that he didn't valt the ticket barria, walked down the esculater and then satdown(!) on the tube, but the police said he did valt valt and then ran.  Hmm, mistake or coverup?

I hate the shoot to kill policy, but it is the only way to deal with bombers, or so thay say, what about a shot on each arm?  still it was a horrable thing, and since I live right next to london (barnet, where the northan line ends) I hope it won't happen again.

If you saw a bomber coming for you how would you deal with it, what if you <b>though</b> that he or she was a bomber?  :-

  - Vidi

[erjin999]

According to the reports, he picked up a newspaper (metro, I guess) on the way down, hardly the thing someone who has jumped the barriers after being confronted by police would do !

He was sitting, and was restrained only when police identified themselves, at which point he tried to walk over to them. He was wearing a light denim jacket, something the family have said before.

Most of this info is coming from a leak from the independant enquiry into the death, but if it turns out to be accurate, its damning. Police would have blatantly lied. Apparently there was even an order to take him alive.

How anyone can say what the police did was right, is beyond me.

[Vidi]

It has to be a Metro since thay are free. I pick one up every day on the way to school, while carrying a huge bag, why don't the police serch me? I could blow up a train if I had explosives of course I don't, but i'm just making a point, two policemen at every station, no one serched, do you think everyone should be serched?

If that guy was restrained then why shoot him? also that picture on the bbc news page eather was faked, did he fall of the seat? , or real , He didn't sit down, and where's the Bag for the expolisves?

Also being shown a bage or I.D. then why shoot him?  are they thinking he's going to come and kill us all?

  - Vidi

[erjin999]

The pic is no fake. Read up on this if you are not shure. Its in all the papers, all the news bulletins...

The point is now, they killed him without any reason whatsoever. That is of course if the enquiry is correct, and it is not complete yet, far from it.

Time will tell as they say.

[Andrew]

According to the reports, he picked up a newspaper (metro, I guess) on the way down, hardly the thing someone who has jumped the barriers after being confronted by police would do !

He could read the newspaper, concealing his face.

[Mahdi]

Mahdi, the guy was studying here, and if he is studying here and doesn't know the language well enough to understand "Police, stop" then he shouldn't have been here in the first place.

So... you're not allowed in Britain unless you speak English?

And I'm sure that in the panic of having 7 guys running after you with guns you might momentarily lose your grasp on your second language.  They say that if someone stubs there toe, they always swear in there mother tongue.

I for one think the police did the right thing.

[erjin999]

He could read the newspaper, concealing his face.

If that throws anyone off your trail, they dont deserve to be chasing you.

Seriously... it was described as a casually made journey on his way to work, he had been stopped by police before, and hadnt run, but cooperated, despite confusion over his visa status.

[gunner154]

Making a mistake and implicating some innocent person happened several times. After the deed is done, you conclude: 'No, it's not this guy'. Just do a bit of extrapolation and think about Gulf War 2...

[EWS]

He had been here for years.  I'm sorry but a student in Britain should speak English, if he doesnt then he shouldn't be here.  Its simple.  It's just as if I went to study in France, Sweden, Poland, Japan.  It would be expected of me to understand the language and speak it.

Further, I actually take the subway many days, and I see many people of arab facia  (couldn't think of appropiate word) with backpacks and they are not getting chased and shot?  If this was the case then others would have been shot by now, many more then the one.  I'm sure there is not a day goes by when an arab gets on a subway (or bus for that matter) and he is wearing a jacket and carrying a bag/rucksack/whatever and they don't get chased and killed.

It actually makes me angry that there are so many people in Britain who live here yet don't make an attempt to learn the language or the customs that we have.  So what if I am white?  I actually am a minorty in the area I live in, my landlord is muslim, my local takeaway are run by people or arab descent and everywhere around me are people or arab descent.  And I don't know where I am going with this so....

I guess we will have to wait on the report coming out, but if it turns out that the circumstances in which he were shot were different then has been documented, my opinion would probably change.  However, in the events that were initially described - the vaulting of the barrier, the refusal to stop - then I think the police could very well be justified.

[Dante]

Latest leaks (and CCTV footage) indicate that the man in question left his house, boarded a bus to the station, walked calmly to the underground and sat down on a seat on a train. He was being followed by three undercover police, who boarded the train with him. One of them spotted six armed officers on the platform, and went to the door, putting his foot it in to keep it open. He shouted "He's over here!" (or words to that effect) and heard something shouted back, including the word "police."

The man attempted to stand at this point, at which point one of the officers (known at this point as 'Hotel three') restrained him and forced him to sit down again. He was then shot six times in the head, and once in the shoulder. Given the positioning (with his back to the train wall) it would be hard to see how he could have been shot any way but at point-blank range, in the face.

It actually makes me angry that there are so many people in Britain who live here yet don't make an attempt to learn the language or the customs that we have. So what if I am white?

[Mahdi]

"Conforming to a given lifestyle shouldn't really be a requirement for acceptance into society"

Aye, if that was a condition ten you all would be speaking Bythonic right now.

In CAnada we actually pay people money to retain there original languages and culture.

[nemafakei]

"Conforming to a given lifestyle shouldn't really be a requirement for acceptance into society."

I don't know any of the detais, I'm just waiting for things to clear up a bit, but solely on the language point, if you go to a country, especially for an extended period, and don't learn the language, you do forfeit any priveledges granted by the ability to communicate.