Attack in London Today

If the above report is true, this is exactly the kind of thing I was referring to (many posts above) when I said that it looked like the authorities here were too ready to take pages from the US's reactions.

Even if the reported information is true it still doesn't validate some sort of shoot to kill policy. The law is quite clear that the government doesn't have any authority to authorise some sort of shoot to kill policy, at least as far as the police are concerned, not sure of what the situation is with the military.

If this was a hit it was a pretty poor effort. In public? In a ham-fisted way? (please spare me the pig jokes for that one) With a public inquiry?

Let me put it this way. Did the government kill Dr Kelly or did he commit suicide?

Nope, in this one I sense a cockup and attempted coverup - IF what is being reported is true.

Determining the truth is becoming more difficult all the time. I have always believed that most governments will do anything if they believe the "national interest" is at stake. Was Dr Kelly murdered? Its possible. I read a letter in the paper from a number of pathologists stating categorically that in their opinion it was not possible to commit suicide by cutting one ulna artery. The amount of paracetamol in his blood was much less than lethal concentration. (And his body had been moved to where it was found how?). Was he killed because his work and his beliefs would cause him to the blow the whistle on the whole Iraq business? I dont know.

Shoot to kill? Why not? Providing you get away with it. They did so for many years in N Ireland. But thats history.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5216068,00.html

Footage Contradicts London Police Report

Wednesday August 17, 2005 2:46 PM


MICHAEL McDONOUGH

Associated Press Writer

LONDON (AP) - A Brazilian shot to death a day after botched bombings in London had walked casually onto a train before being gunned down by undercover officers, according to leaked footage that appeared to contradict earlier police reports that said the man disobeyed police orders.

Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old electrician, was shot eight times last month in front of terrified commuters on a subway train, after undercover police tailed him from a house under surveillance.

Police first said the shooting was related to the failed bombings on the London transit system July 21 - two weeks after four suspected suicide bombers blew themselves up in three Underground stations and aboard one double-decker bus.

Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police commissioner, called the death regrettable, but said it appeared ``the man was challenged and refused to obey police instructions.''

Citing security footage, a British television station reported Tuesday that Menezes entered the Stockwell subway station at a normal walking pace, stopping to pick up a newspaper before boarding a train and taking a seat.

The ITV News broadcast, citing an investigation report into the shooting, also said Menezes was wearing a light denim jacket when he was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder. Witness reports described a terrifying scene of the man - wearing a bulky jacket on a warm July day - running through the train station, being tackled by a group of undercover police officers, then being shot several times at close range.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission, which is investigating the shooting, refused Wednesday to comment on the veracity of the documents cited by ITV News.

A police spokeswoman also refused to explain what Blair meant when he said it appeared Menezes disobeyed orders. She noted, however, that police never said Menezes had tried to vault the barriers at the Underground station or tried to run from police.

Lawyer Harriet Wistrich, acting for the Brazilian's family, said police had no reason to suspect Menezes was a bomber.

``He was not carrying a rucksack. He simply had a denim jacket,'' Wistrich told British Broadcasting Corp. TV. ``Was it necessary to shoot him dead as opposed to trying to confront him at an earlier stage? There was no indication he was about to blow himself up at all.''

ITV News said that, according to the IPCC report, a member of the team that tailed Menezes into the subway train said he heard shouting including the word ``police'' before turning to face the Brazilian.

``He immediately stood up and advanced towards me and the ... officers ... I grabbed the male in the denim jacket by wrapping both my arms around his torso, pinning his arms to his side,'' the unidentified officer was quoted as saying.

``I then pushed him back on to the seat where he had been previously sitting. ... I then heard a gun shot very close to my left ear and was dragged away onto therst shot from a handgun at the Brazilian's head from 12 inches away, according to the report obtained by ITV.

The report also said that, while Menezes was shot eight times, three other bullets were fired but missed.

Let's hear from those other people in the subway car. Not from the police.

It is incomprehensible that they couldv'e gotten so much wrong.

Anyone who thinks this was a purposeful murder, do you have a motive? You think it was completely unrelated to terrorism, or related?

As far as it is known until now,

· the Brazilian was held before being shot
· police failed to identify him
· he made no attempt to run away.


But of course this is terrorism related: before that, British police didn't react like that normally.

This is one mystery I'll follow with great interest.

I think the odds it was a "mistake" are minute.

(Re "terrorism related"--I think the conspiracy theorists are hinting that the death of the Brazilian was a "hit" of some sort...an intentional murder by the squad or a member of the squad, using terrorism as an excuse to kill someone they wanted to kill for some other reason. Otherwise, you'd have to believe they were a bumbling pile of testosterone-jazzed Keystone Cops, who didn't know their ass from a hole in the ground. I don't buy that.)

'Course, I know so little at this point.

Curious.

Any source for that?

One thing I do know is that the IPCC is in strife.

The integrity of that organisation comes into question as a result of this leak. If the leak was deliberate then that's corrupt, if it was negligent then it shows the organisation has some serious problems and it hasn't been in existence for too long.

I suspect that there are political pressures within the IPCC itself, warring factions as it were.

This leak puts immense pressure not so much on Tony Blair as Ian Blair. It is very muddy, I really hope the truth comes out, whatever that might be.

Well, the pressure might be much more on Sir Ian Blair than on the IPCC .
(Blair wrote to the Home Office on the morning of Mr Menezes' death to make sure the terrorist investigation took precedence over any IPCC investigation. Only later the Metropolitan Police agreed to hand over the shooting investigation to the IPCC. Its officers took over the inquiry the following Monday.)


It seems - interpreting yesterday's reactions - that the Home Office isn't backing Sir Ian fully anymore.

I'm just sick of the lies and the distortions and half truths. Not just on this topic but on the war, terrorism, and generally whats going on in this country.

Tony Blair lied about the necessity for war in Iraq.
Ian Blair lied when he said Menenzes was challenged by police and failed to stop.
Home Secretary Clarke says the police are doing a great job (including shooting dead an innocent man).
A newspaper editor is prosecuted for publishing his opinion.
The London bombings "have nothing to do with Iraq" according to govt. sources.
Ken Livingstone Mayor of London says London is the greatest and safest city on earth....50+ people dead in terrorist action is nothing compared with the Great Fire (1666 !!) and the WW2 bombings.
They are lying about the amount of damage terrorism is doing to Londons economy.
They are lying about the extent and number of attacks on the Muslim communities.

All total crap.


As I said yesterday quoting Yeats probably wrongly

Truth is beauty, beauty truth
That is all that ye know
And all that ye need to know


but it sums up my sentiments very well.

I feel pretty much the same as Steve.
Frustrated by the lies and astounded by the lack of sense this Government has shown.
Fear killed Menenzes. All this f*cking propaganda about 'terrorists'.
Since well before 9/11, the motives of Bush and Blair have stunk like a great pile of steaming pig ****.
I find that being patronized and expected to swallow their lies insulting to say the least.
What the hell is going on?
And were there everyday Germans saying the same thing in 1939?
We are a multi-racial country with more mixed marriages then any in the world. If we act like nazis abroad, it will reflect back in our own society.
As for all the conspiracy theories, each on their own is debateable, but when you start to sling them all together......

Thing is, what can any of us do about it?

"Ian Blair lied when he said Menenzes was challenged by police and failed to stop."



True, Steve?????

Ian Blair could've been repeating what he's been told--so possibly not intentionally lying.

But, SOMEONE intentionally lied.

However, it does seem a bit unfair to refer to the situation as fueled by "terrorist propaganda". It's not as if the London bombings were a hoax. They did happen. I think it would be prudent to try to put ourselves in the position of those who are sworn to protect and defend. It can't be easy.

But, they sure screwed up horribly with the Brazilian guy--if it was a mistake.

Walter-- You don't need a source for a conspiracy theory. I'm not trying to prove it's correct--just putting it out there.

I agree.

More reason not to stir the pot.

(Complicated)

I would never suggest "not stirring the pot", but just really looking fairly at the situation, before stirring the pot.

I'm under the impression that a lot of people are up in arms and just going off yelling and accusing without even giving credence to the likelihood that these people are doing the best they can in an incredibly difficult set of circumstances--and we likely couldn't improve on it. Just a little meditation on that may not STOP criticism--but it may make it more fair.

I just think it makes the criticisms resonate (and likely makes them more valid) when they come from that mindset.

"Ian Blair lied when he said Menenzes was challenged by police and failed to stop."



True, Steve?????

Reasonable question ms bunny. My understanding is that the leaked internal reports including eyewitness accounts show that he was acting quite normally until the moment one agent grabbed him and another shot him in the head.

He did not leap the barrier, that was a policeman. He ran down the last few steps of the escalator because he heard the train at the platform....as I have done many times...

He was not wearing a padded jacket, or a belt of explosives, or a t shirt saying "Bomb your way to Heaven".

Good for you Steve, your indignation is more than justified.

That is so sad.

Frankly, though, I can imagine it happening fairly easily in current, very agitated, circumstances.

Goddess help us, I can also imagine the motivation for trying to cover it up. Starting with the cops involved, and going up. And the confusion and drama of the situation.

But so terribly sad.


I'll find info on the Beeb's website, I assume? 'Tis general knowledge? (I have been way busy - and am out of touch with stuff.)


Edit:

Truth is beauty, beauty truth
That is all that ye know
And all that ye need to know

That'll be Keats, lovey. Ode on a Grecian Urn

Ode on a Grecian Urn

THOU still unravish'd bride of quietness,
Thou foster-child of Silence and slow Time,
Sylvan historian, who canst thus express
A flowery tale more sweetly than our rhyme:
What leaf-fringed legend haunts about thy shape
Of deities or mortals, or of both,
In Tempe or the dales of Arcady?
What men or gods are these? What maidens loth?
What mad pursuit? What struggle to escape?
What pipes and timbrels? What wild ecstasy?

Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endear'd,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone:
Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave
Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;
Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,
Though winning near the goal—yet, do not grieve;
She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,
For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair!

Ah, happy, happy boughs! that cannot shed
Your leaves, nor ever bid the Spring adieu;
And, happy melodist, unwearièd,
For ever piping songs for ever new;
More happy love! more happy, happy love!
For ever warm and still to be enjoy'd,
For ever panting, and for ever young;
All breathing human passion far above,
That leaves a heart high-sorrowful and cloy'd,
A burning forehead, and a parching tongue.

Who are these coming to the sacrifice?
To what green altar, O mysterious priest,
Lead'st thou that heifer lowing at the skies,
And all her silken flanks with garlands drest?
What little town by river or sea-shore,
Or mountain-built with peaceful citadel,
Is emptied of its folk, this pious morn?
And, little town, thy streets for evermore
Will silent be; and not a soul, to tell
Why thou art desolate, can e'er return.

O Attic shape! fair attitude! with brede
Of marble men and maidens overwrought,
With forest branches and the trodden weed;
Thou, silent form! dost tease us out of thought
As doth eternity: Cold Pastoral!
When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.'


Sorry - just can't help myself - and it is a lovely poem - and not at all unapposite. (Inapposite? )