Police kill Attempted Suicide Bomber

[The Phantom Ram]

How innocent was he? He was running from the police (he spoke good English apparently) and he came out of a house that the police are monitoring and believe is being used for terrorist activity.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Lemming

I must admit that I'm fully behind the police using guns when it comes to preventing terrorism. I heard that the person who was killed was already restrained, and I'm not sure if he was a suicide bomber or not.

If someone is identified as a suicide bomber by the police I believe the correct thing to do is shoot to kill.
...Restraint is not enough I'm afraid.

Knowing what we know now... on this Monday morning... I would just like to point out that I was stopped and searched under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, on Friday evening at Liverpool Street station, wearing a cricket jumper and cream trousers.

I was carrying a rucksack, in which I had obviously concealed a safety razor, a passport and various items of clothing.
With my goatee beard, shaven head and - errr - rucksack, I do clearly look just like a terrorist.

And if we are to believe that people can be "identified as a suicide bomber by the police" I would just like to point out that on the undercopy of the record docket that I was given, the policeman listed my build as, and I quote: "slim."

My girlfriend and my mother wouldn't call me "slim."
My brother would call me a fat bastard.

Are these the same policemen who can identify suspects with rucksacks as suicide bombers? And shoot them...dead, on sight?

I find that rather terrifying.

[The Phantom Ram]

Originally Posted by Oliver

And if we are to believe that people can be "identified as a suicide bomber by the police" I would just like to point out that on the undercopy of the record docket that I was given, the policeman listed my build as, and I quote: "slim."

My girlfriend and my mother wouldn't call me "slim."
My brother would call me a fat bastard.

It was perhaps his way of saying sorry for thinking you were a terrorist!

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by The Phantom Ram

It was perhaps his way of saying sorry for thinking you were a terrorist!

No, I think he did that with: "What shall I put down for 'hair' sir? I could put shaven."
To which I replied: "I'd be very happy with 'balding' thanks."

[Lemming]

These are serious times Oliver. I for one, am quite happy to help out the police with their duties if they stop me for carrying a rucksack. What's wrong with them stopping you if you are carrying a rucksack?

In my opinion if the police spot me - in times when terrorist attacks are potentially on the cards - and ask me to stop for searching, i'd be quite happy to. What I wouldn't do is run away, just over a few barriers and try to get on a train.

I'm glad you were searched by the police! I'm quite happy to be if found carrying a rucksack. Terrorism has no identity or "look", don't be offended because you were searched.

[The Phantom Ram]

Lemming, I agree entirely. I would quite happily get stopped 2 or 3 times a day if it meant suicide bombers could not get away with it.

I must admit I wondered what my rucksack looked like this morning as I crammed in 2 phone chargers, my MP3 player, a video and my work phone. As I opened it at work the wires sort of spilt out!

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Lemming

These are serious times Oliver.

These are indeed serious times, and I am not remotely offended at being stopped and searched by the short and pudgy arm of the law.

What I do object to is the histrionics from three policemen who have presumably never before been given the opportunity to "shoot to kill" on such a public stage.

"It's like playing cowboys and indians for real" so said my cousin twenty years ago, about patrolling the streets of Belfast when he was in the army.

I object to the murder of a foreign, but innocent, member of the public at large in a station that I use quite frequently a short while after the time that I would normally use it.

I object to the fact that everyone in the station was challenged to "get out and get down" (and therefore shocked and terrified) by the plain clothes men who did not announce their business, but merely attempted to put on their POLICE emblazoned baseball caps at the moment when their wrongly (and presumably ineptly) identified suspect finally began to break in to a run. Perhaps his visa had recently run out.

There must be a better way.

Afterall, if you shoot your suspects dead, on sight, then they're not going to be very useful under lights in the interview room.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Alas they arent going to be much use if they body parts are spread around a carrage under the gentle persuasion of half a stone of explosives. Its not like the IRA thing - self preservation was high on their list. A suicide bomber, by definition isnt too fussed and is looking forward to paradise.

[Oliver]

Originally Posted by Richie Benauds Love Child

Alas they arent going to be much use if they body parts are spread around a carrage.
A suicide bomber, by definition isnt too fussed and is looking forward to paradise.

I don't know much about arrest methods... but I'd sort of come to the conclusion, that if two or three armed and undercover officers sidled up to the suspect unawares, if they then grabbed his arms and disenabled him from grappling in his rucksack, perhaps one more Brazilian electrician would be alive today.

[Maranello]

Some interesting comments from Tim Hames in The Times today:

The inconsistency bordering on callousness of Scotland Yard has been breathtaking. It was initially suggested that Mr Menezes was under surveillance and had been approached after he walked from his residence in Stockwell to the Tube station. It is now clear that he started his trip from Tulse Hill, where he had stayed at someone else’s home, was watched, was noted wearing bulky clothing, yet was allowed (despite the slaughter at Tavistock Square on July 7 and the attempted blast on a double-decker at Hackney last Thursday) to board a bus for a 15-minute journey and was challenged only when he sought to buy an Underground ticket. Why was someone whom the police continue to insist was a “potential suicide-bomber” no menace on the No 2 bus, but an urgent threat who had to be taken out when moving in the direction of the Northern Line?

And then there was the attempt to “spin” this situation to suit the police immediately after the shooting. It must have been obvious within minutes that the man concerned had no explosives on him and it is highly likely that he had identifying documentation. Yet for hours on Friday police sources were briefing that this shooting was “directly connected” to their inquiries into the botched bombings of July 21 and over the weekend the implication rumbled on that he had lived in, or perhaps near, or somewhere quite close to, multi-occupancy accommodation that had been deemed “suspicious”.

This attempt to blame Mr Menezes for his own death continues unabated. It was hinted that he might have been an illegal immigrant, as if that justifies what occurred. It has been argued that it was “irresponsible” of him to wear a quilted jacket in July, as if that were a crime. There are, furthermore, “no excuses”, it is intoned, for the fact that he ran when armed plainclothed police officers shouted at him.

I don’t know about you, but if I found myself minding my own business on the São Paulo metro and was suddenly confronted by men wearing no uniforms but wielding weapons, screaming at me in Portuguese, I too might choose to bolt for it. It was not merely the police but their victim who had to make a split-second decision.