|
|
For days I have been trying to find the right words to post
about the poor bloke who was shot by the London Police.
I have thought - fuck this "we are at war with terrorists,
therefore you will not question anything the police do" shit.
I have also thought, fuck this "the cops were just waiting to
fulfill their racist agenda by shooting an arab dead" shit. (I'd
think that about the American military - (see my previous post),
but I'm yet to be convinced the british police are anywhere near
as cuntish).
So here is what I think about it.
I am not going to give you my own post on the subject, instead,
I am going to give you the reply I gave to someone else's
The bits in inverted comments are quotes from the post I am
responding to.
The bits not in inverted commas are my comments.
We start our sad story when the bloke who was shot leaves the
block of flats where he lives. The commentator I'm responding to
had this to say.
"The block of flats contained terrorists."
How can you be sure of that... And even if true, does that mean
EVERYONE in that block is a suspected terrorist. Of course not,
in exactly the same way that one suspect person in my street
doesn't mean that the whole street is a cell of Osama's mob of
loons.
"He leaves the block of flats. As the flats contain terrorists
he is followed by plain clothes police because they dont want
him to know he is being followed, for obvious reasons."
Fair enough. Discreet surveillance of him might very well be
justified. I say MIGHT.
"His clothing and the fact that he is at the train station lead
the police who are following to believe there is a possibility
he may have a bomb and be planning an attack, so they move to
sudue him. "
His clothing. You mean the jacket??? Yeah, I'd be wearing a
jacket as well in a London summer. I live in a part of the world
where wearing think jacket would be REALLY suspicious. But in
LONDON - nup.
"He then refuses to stop and instead runs directly for the
train. The police now have no choice but to not risk that he is
indeed a bomber and about to destroy the train he just ran into,
and many people."
No doubt about it, an impossible situation for the police, I
agree completely there. IF they properly identified themselves.
Otherwise, a bunch of burley guys in plain clothes pointing guns
at me -I'D RUN TOO.
"To save these people and themselves, they shoot him in the head
to make sure there is no chance that he will detonate his device
in his last seconds of life"
Assuming they were absolutelty sure he had a device, and that
shooting him in the head was the only way to stop him detonating
it.
"It is not the fault of the police, they did what they had to
do. On this occasion they happened to be wrong, but what if they
werent? They cannot take chances and think through all the
points people have raised about whether hes a bomber or not"
But if EVERYONE suspicious is feared to be a BOMBER, then we
have a serious problem. You walking in a strange way across the
road - then you MIGHT have a bomb. Bye Bye brains. Do you think
that's acceptable. I'm not so sure.
"One mans life is less important than the many that would have
been killed on that train if he had been a bomber and they hadnt
taken that chance."
NOT IF HE IS COMPLETELY INNOCENT OF *ANY* CRIME. Tell that to
his friends and family. I bet you would not tolerate for ONE
MICROSECOND if someone said that about your loved one.
"The only question that really needs answering is why did they
let him get on a bus. "
yes they do need to answer that. If they really thought he was a
bomber, then why was he allowed onto a bus?
"Its possible they didnt consider the bus a target given that
most of the attacks have taken place in the train system, but
thats just me speculating."
Yes you are just speculating, especially given you're ignoring
the fact that a BUS WAS BLOWN UP IN THE *** ACTUAL *** ATTACKS.
"And all the whinging about civil liberties is very
short-sighted."
Like fuck it is. And it's not whinging either. This is EXACTLY
what the terrorists want to see happen. If you assume the line
that they "hate our freedoms", then their actions are causing
our governments to take our freedoms away from us, and that
includes our right NOT TO BE SUMMARILY EXECUTED BY THE COPS". If
the "war on terror" is all about preserving our freedoms, then
any move to take them away because of the "war on terror" would
be to lose the war. SIMPLE LOGIC. You can't take away freedoms
in a war designed to protect them and say you are winning the
war. Doesn't computer, my friend.
"A few civil liberties taken away from particular people at
particular times are necessary to prevent people dying. "
Are they?? Except this poor bloke who was killed had his civil
liberties taken away from him, and HE DIED!!!!
"Somehow I think people dying rates a bit more highly than the
odd person being detained without doing anything. "
He wasn't detained. HE HAD HIS FUCKING BRAINS BLOWN OUT ALL OVER
THE CLOTHES OF LONDON COMMUTERS.
"His death is regrettable, but completely justifiable."
Again, you would not be saying this about a love one of yours.
Please think more carefully about this. And so will
I................
posted by Eddie Everett @ 10:16 PM
About the author:
The thoughts of an Australian Media insider who would be rounded
up by the thought-police if they knew who he was.
|
|
|
