War against terror

[Bernadotte 0]

You can relax Bernadotte, the dead mans name appears reassuringly Christian   .

I am relieved that the witness who described the victim as Asian was incorrect. Perhaps it was the same witness who claimed seeing wires and an explosive belt under his jacket.

I think we can all rest a little easier that Al Qaida has not been delivered such a clear cut propaganda victory.

[ShadowY 0]

Quote[/b] ]"this tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."

quote of the year

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Bernadotte-

Quote[/b] ]Do you really need me to explain what I meant?

No, you did explain it and i totally get what youre saying.

"It's a pity that the guy who got shot was not a black non-Christian"

Its no big issue, lets just say i consider it an inelegant choice of words (finding it a pity it happened at all seems most sensible to me).

.. Yes there have been attacks on asians

Quote[/b] ]Religious hate crimes rise fivefold

Vikram Dodd

Saturday July 23, 2005

The Guardian

The number of faith hate crimes has risen fivefold in the fortnight since the London bombings, the Guardian has learned. The Metropolitan Police has recorded 800 race and faith hate crimes since the July 7 attacks.

The number of faith hate crimes, predominantly directed at British Muslims, has passed the 200 mark. In the same fortnight last year, 30 faith hate incidents were reported by the Met.

Nationally, the figure for hate incidents directed at Muslims has passed 1,200 as a backlash continues.

The intelligence pattern of incidents and attacks provides one small comfort. There was no intensification in hate crimes after the revelation that the attacks were carried out by British-born Muslim suicide bombers.

Analysts believe the attacks are continuing at the same intensity as before. Most incidents are of name-calling and threatening phone calls.

The figures are almost certainly lower than the actual level, with studies showing hate crimes are under reported by a factor of four.

Police have won broad praise from Muslim groups for their efforts to protect them from a backlash. But ministers know that if police are seen to be failing to protect Muslims, that would further damage the chances that any information Islamic communities have about extremist activity is passed on.

After Thursday's failed bombings, police are trying to damp down any increased tensions which could trigger a rise in attacks.

The Met has now passed the effort to counter hate crime to its most senior Muslim officer, assistant commissioner Tarique Ghaffur. The Guardian has learned he will also spearhead the force's efforts to get British Muslims to inform on extremists, and those youngsters at risk of being influenced by extremists.

Senior officers have talked of a gulf in trust between the police and Britain's diverse communities.

The concern, underscored by a belief that more intelligence will come from Muslim communities if they feel confidence in the police, explains Met commissioner Sir Ian Blair's words of reassurance yesterday that his force was targeting "criminals", not members of one community.

The backlash is feared to have led to one murder in Nottingham, and arson attacks against several mosques. The once notorious Finsbury Park mosque in north London has received 30 threatening calls in the past fortnight.

A neo-nazi shooting in a train station would be a definate step up though.

[Nemesis6 0]

The once notorious Finsbury Park mosque in north London has received 30 threatening calls in the past fortnight.

Killing the people inside it or anything like that isn't acceptable, but demolishing the place is. Let the Imams/whomever get whatever they need and stuff, but SHUT THAT PLACE DOWN. I wouldn't mind that place being removed. Remove the mosque and do what they did in The Exorcist: The Beginning; place something on top of it to purify it. Maybe a playground or a kindergarten or something. What am I talking about? Look up the phrase "Finsbury Mosque" and you'll eventually understand what I'm talking about.

[walker 0]

Hi all

It was always the intention of the bombers to achieve a level of fear in society, that is why it is called terorism.

The purpose is to divide people. To get people to say the police are all too gun happy. To get people say the police dont do enough to stop the bombers they need to be tougher.

The reality is between the two.

The policeman who shot Jean Charles de Menezes shot him in, I am certain, the genuine belief that he was terrorist with a bomb. The suicide bombs of 7/7 and the failed suicide bombers of this week plus his comming from a house they had observation on, the bulky jacket, running from arrest, running into a tube sation where other bombings have taken place, his jumping over the barrier aparently grabbing a passenger will all have contributed to policeman's frame of mind.

The death of Jean Charles de Menezes is not the first time a policeman has shot an innocent and in the present climate I fear it will not be the last. I am afraid we just have to get used to it, it could well be me next time or you.

Such mistakes by the police were always a goal of the bombers as they drive wedge between the community and the police.

@ Nemesis6 The bomber wants you to look suspiciously at every asian looking face they want you to come up with stupid statements like they should demolish a mosque. Buildings do not do things it is people that do things. When you do such things the bomber has you working for him. should we then there for demolish your syangogue? I think not in both cases.

As has been stated reponcibility for this death lies with those who create the climate of fear where such acts become inevitable. I also think certain sections of the media need to stop being hysterical.

I for one do not blame the policeman in this case. I feel sorry for him as he will have to live with this for the rest of his life. The case is already under investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)

The police have made a mistake they need to dust themselves down, learn anything they can from it and get on with their job.

Sadly I think the US is the likely next target and I think it will be a spectacular to dwarf 9/11

There are going to be a lot more deaths before this is over and it will probably take 10 or twenty years. The majority will be inoccent bystanders people like you and me. We are after all the bomber's target, they are not after Tony Blair or George Bush junior. Such people are too hard to get to.

We just have to suck it up, in London we will just get on with life even a thousand 7/7s or 9/11s would not be a tenth as bad as the blitz. When it comes down to it more people have died on the roads than will ever die by the bombers hand.

We cannot live life worrying about such things. The bombers will do what they do.

In London we get on with watching the fireworks on the South Bank, going off to see the film in Leicester square, going to cafes and discussing the terrorism in the streets of London, Bahgdad and Egypt, drinking a pint in the Royal Oak while bemoaing the stupidity of western politicians and that we never should have gone into Iraq in the first place and that we can not leave till the place is calmed down, watching the cricket at Lords or on the telly sat in your favourite armchair after too much sunday lunch, chatting with people you have never met over the internet, waiting for the footie season to start and saving for our Arsenal season ticket, going off to see the new play by Kenneth Lonergan at the Donmar Warehouse, sweeping the streets, working in the city doing mergers and aquisitions, running a homeless shelter.

London twinned with Bahgdad and Kahbul all three cities know in such circumstanses you just get on with life.

Kind Regards Walker

[denoir 0]

It's a pity that the guy who got shot was not a white non-Muslim.  Al Qaida will probably get a great deal of recruitment mileage out of the mistaken killing of an Asian Muslim.

As it turns out, he was a white non-Muslim.

Jean Charles de Menezes -27 yo.

Could have by his looks easily been European. Well, I suppose it's good it wasn't a question of racial profiling  

Really great for Londoners, if they don't get blown up by terrorists, they risk being gunned down by police  

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stm

Quote[/b] ]Scotland Yard said Mr Menezes, who lived in Brixton, south London, was completely unconnected to the bomb attacks and added: "For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets."

The Brazilian government has expressed its shock at the killing and Brazil's foreign minister Celso Amorim is on his way to London to get an explanation from foreign secretary Jack Straw.

In a statement the government said it "looks forward to receiving the necessary explanation from the British authorities on the circumstances which led to this tragedy".

The shooting is being investigated by officers from Scotland Yard's Directorate of Professional Standards, and will be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

The family of Mr Menezes told the Brazilian media there was nothing in his past which would give him a reason to run from police.

Mr Menezes' cousin, Alex Alves, told O Globo television: "I asked that the body be released as quickly as possible, we need to bring him to Brazil, which is what the family wants".

"He does not have a past that would make him run from police," he said.

Mr Alves said Mr Menezes, who was from the city of Gonzaga in Minas Gerais state, had lived in London legally for at least three years and was employed as an electrician.

It looks at least like there is going to be a solid inquiry into the shooting and that charges will probably be filed against those responsible for de Menezes' death. Hopefully at least it will prevent similar things from happening in the future.

Walker:

Quote[/b] ]London twinned with Bahgdad and Kahbul all three cities know in such circumstanses you just get on with life.

Unfortunately yes. After the first bombings, I wouldn't have hesitated to visit London or had any problem with friends or relatives visiting it. Now, after the second bombing attempt, and after this shooting, I would not be too thrilled if somebody I cared about went to London. I know that the chances of a person getting hurt are extremely small, but still, I would not be comfortable with it. I really feel for the Londoners - it can't be very pleasant situation to be in.

I think that the worst part about it is that there is no apparent solution, neither long term nor short term. What's to stop an attack from happening two weeks from now? And the situation just gets more dangerous with nervous police officers who don't hesitate to shoot. Let's just say that running on the subway platform, to catch a train seems like a fairly dangerous thing to do now.

[philcommando 0]

When Pearl harbour occured in the 1940s, many suspected the president knew about the attack but failed to act, resulting in thousands innocent lives lost.

When 911 occured, many suspected and claimed the president knew about the attack but failed to act resulting in thousands innocent lives lost

When the London subway attack occured, many suspected and claimed MI6 knew about the criminals, but failed to act, resulting in innocent lives lost.

When a man was shot dead running away from police, in a subway that days ago was bombed and innocent civilians died, with the suspects and team not apprehended, detonators going off in other subways on the same day, many claim the police over-react, resulting in the death of one man. Did the policeman who shot him did the right thing? If you were the one, who saw the carnage of blown bits of bodies including babies, would you have shot that running suspect?

Who is right and who is wrong no longer matters, for he is dead and the policeman in remand. What matters is why are we so hot, on that policeman who did what he had to do under such extreme pressures, and yet we totally forgot about the criminals who murdered and injured thousands others in criminal acts??

Why do we continue to heap scorn on the legal authorities and yet do nothing to the illegal criminals who have done much worse under extremely peaceful conditions?

Samuel Huddington is another scholar who got it wrong. As present times had shown, it was NEVER a war of civilisations between Muslims and Christians. All along it had only been a despical war fought by brutual criminals who seek to dominate and enslave the world through the oil taps, using a pliable and easily influential religion against secular nations of the world. Be you a Jew, Hindi, Buddist, Christian,Muslim,etc...you are only pawns to be used and murdered at will by the beasts play for power.

For the sake of humanity, do join hands whatever faith you are and show that you are not fools to be used and abused. You have a duty in this fight for the sake of mankind and everyone has a role, - from informing the authorities when you smell something chemical in your neighbour's home to the trenches in Iraq. Stop the imans preaching death as a first! They have proven they mean their words when they rouse others with "Death to the West! and Death to infidels!"

[Bernadotte 0]

Bernadotte-

Quote[/b] ]Do you really need me to explain what I meant?

No, you did explain it and i totally get what youre saying.

"It's a pity that the guy who got shot was not a black non-Christian"

I did not say "black non-Christian."  Please stop flame-baiting.  

Its no big issue, lets just say i consider it an inelegant choice of words (finding it a pity it happened at all seems most sensible to me).

I certainly feel pity for the dead guy, however I was trying to express concern for Al Qaida possibly scoring a propaganda victory.  If you insist on giving elegance lessons then, at least, do not ignore the meaning of what I was saying.

[Bernadotte 0]

Could have by his looks easily been European.

Yes, given that Portugal is part of Europe.  

Quote[/b] ]...was employed as an electrician.

So perhaps he was wearing a bulky belt with wires sticking out.  

And from some newspaper:

Quote[/b] ]The terse Scotland Yard statement did not indicate whether the victim — identified as 27-year-old Jean Charles de Menezes, who had lived in London for three years — spoke English or whether the plainclothes police officers identified themselves before opening fire.

I think that the worst part about it is that there is no apparent solution, neither long term nor short term.

Sure there is.  It just can't be discussed publicly.

You don't think Britain was talking secretly with the IRA?

You don't think Spain is talking secretly with ETA?

You don't think the US is talking secretly with insurgents?

But wait!  You said "apparent" solution, didn't you?

Yes, I agree the solution will not be apparent for a while.

[theavonlady 2]

You don't think Britain was talking secretly with the IRA?

You don't think Spain is talking secretly with ETA?

You don't think the US is talking secretly with insurgents?

But wait!  You said "apparent" solution, didn't you?

Yes, I agree the solution will not be apparent for a while.

The twentieth century should have taught the citizens of liberal democracies the catastrophic consequences of placating tyrants. British and French restraint over the occupation of the Rhineland, the Anschluss, the absorption of the Czech Sudetenland, and the incorporation of Bohemia and Moravia did not win gratitude but rather Hitler’s contempt for their weakness. Fifty million dead, the Holocaust, and the near destruction of European civilization were the wages of “appeasementâ€â€”a term that early-1930s liberals proudly embraced as far more enlightened than the old idea of “deterrence†and “military readiness.â€

So too did Western excuses for the Russians’ violation of guarantees of free elections in postwar Eastern Europe, China, and Southeast Asia only embolden the Soviet Union. What eventually contained Stalinism was the Truman Doctrine, NATO, and nuclear deterrence—not the United Nations—and what destroyed its legacy was Ronald Reagan’s assertiveness, not Jimmy Carter’s accommodation or Richard Nixon’s détente.

As long ago as the fourth century b.c., Demosthenes warned how complacency and self-delusion among an affluent and free Athenian people allowed a Macedonian thug like Philip II to end some four centuries of Greek liberty—and in a mere 20 years of creeping aggrandizement down the Greek peninsula. Thereafter, these historical lessons should have been clear to citizens of any liberal society: we must neither presume that comfort and security are our birthrights and are guaranteed without constant sacrifice and vigilance, nor expect that peoples outside the purview of bourgeois liberalism share our commitment to reason, tolerance, and enlightened self-interest.

Most important, military deterrence and the willingness to use force against evil in its infancy usually end up, in the terrible arithmetic of war, saving more lives than they cost.

- Excerpt, The Fruits of Appeasement, by Victor Davis Hanson, April 2004

[Bernadotte 0]

...So too did Western excuses for the Russians’ violation of guarantees of free elections in postwar Eastern Europe, China, and Southeast Asia only embolden the Soviet Union.

The Russian's guaranteed free elections in postwar China?    That's where I stopped reading.

Talking is not the same as placating.  The willingness to talk to the enemy you are at war with requires more strength, courage and intelligence than most politicians are able to muster.

But Avon, if you really insist on comparing this war (along with everything else on Earth) with WWII then please tell us how you think it will end.

Hint: There will be no D-Day and any Hiroshima-type bomb will only make matters worse.

[walker 0]

Hi all

In Iraq I think it is perfectly reasonable to speak to the insurgents they have a political goal, same as political wing of hisbola, Sinn Fein for the IRA, and the political wing of the Lehi group, Stern gang. Such people can be spoken too they have narrow definable political goals they can be weened from their terrorism.

In the case of Al Qaida you are on a hiding to nowhere they want the whole world to be theirs, and any one who do not believe as they do killed. Such a group will aways self destruct as it did in Algeria.

@ theavonlady So According to your beliefs the Brits should never have spoken to people wanting a jewish homeland Irgun, Haganah, the Lehi group and Stern gang's terrorism and stayed in control of Palestine? Your argument is somewhat self contradictory as the nation you live in (Israel)was one that was founded on the terrorists bomb, as you sow so shall ye reap.

Kind Regards Walker

[Bernadotte 0]

There are going to be a lot more deaths before this is over and it will probably take 10 or twenty years.

Really?  What will happen in 10 or 20 years that will end this?  

[Bernadotte 0]

Such a group will aways self destruct as it did in Algeria.

But it didn't self destruct in Algeria.  The French secretly paid off the ringleaders and the rest were granted amnesty by the Algerian government.

Ok, given that the solution was facilitated by their own greed and desire for a return to normalcy I suppose once could say it did self destruct.

[denoir 0]

Sure there is.  It just can't be discussed publicly.

You don't think Britain was talking secretly with the IRA?

You don't think Spain is talking secretly with ETA?

You don't think the US is talking secretly with insurgents?

But wait!  You said "apparent" solution, didn't you?

Yes, I agree the solution will not be apparent for a while.

And how do you exactly negotiate with somebody who hasn't a pragmatic agenda, somebody that doesn't name terms.

The IRA, ETA, Hamas et al had an agenda of independence of their regions. To some extent parts of the Iraqi insurgency falls into that category.

These people in London, Madrid, Bali, New York do not fall into that category. They're even more utopian than for instance the Red Brigades ever were. What's on their agenda, at least officially, is the reintroduction of the caliphate (i.e back to the middle ages) and the removal of all western influence - cultural, economic or otherwise - from Islamic countries. In addition to being political utopists, they are also religious fanatics. They do not think in pragmatic terms, but base to a large degree their operation on a very strong religious belief. Practical worldly things don't matter when you are on a mission from God.

And even if there was some way to bribe them, appease them, threaten them or whatever.. who would you talk to? This is not a centralized terrorist organization. The terrorists in Madrid had nothing to do with the terrorists in who had nothing to do with the terrorists in New York - and it's a pretty safe bet that the British terrorists didn't have anything to do with the rest of them. So who would you talk to?

What we are looking at here is the propagation of a very dangerous idea that for some reason attracts people world-wide. How do you stop an idea?

[walker 0]

Hi Bernadotte

Historically terrorist organisations take that long to die off. Whether by bribes from governments and business, internal faction fighting, attrition by police actions, old age, boredom etc.

And I think this particular group will keep on killing round the world; in France because you cannot wear the Hijab in school, in germany because they wont allow Turkey to join the EEC, in sweden because they are too liberal and allow men and women to bathe in the same pool, in your home town because it wont build a mosque, in Saudi Arabia because they do not worship god in exactly the same way the as they do, especialy after the extremist wing says you have to do prayers 24 times a day for an hour each, on a steet corner near you because they do not like the way you look, act, smell, etc. etc. In the end they will kill themselves off.

This organisation is founded on the philosophy taught to young afghans and international radicals in the Madrasas of Northern Pakistan by lunatic Wahabi priests so radical that Saudi Arabia paid to have them sent to Pakistan. They were just the kind of lunatics the CIA wanted to indoctrinate young muslims to attack the godless commies. Pakistani security were happy to lend a hand and the CIA support and money came in handy. Not to mention all that Arab oil money.

If you need to know about this follow this link to find out about MAK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maktab_al-Khadamat

When the Afghan war ended and the Wahabi priests and Foreighn Fighters wanted to go home most went back to being farmers, doctors, teachers, shop keepers etc. but for the most radical etimated at 3 to 4 thousand, many of the nations in particular Saudi Arabia did not want them back, CIA trained insurgents back in a represive monarchy I think not. About two thousand formed the foreign core of the Taliban. Which then with the help of all those indoctrinated Afghhan orphans took over Afghanistan

Some perhaps a couple of hundred left to fight in the balkans and Chechnia others took a CIA brokered deal to move to other Arab nations and something over a thousand of them were given passports for Algeria, Sudan, and Yemen as part of CIA pension scheme. Most just went back to being farmers, teachers, doctors, shop keepers but some joined local seccurity services a few remained radicalised. Many of the 9/11 bombers come from that group. In Algeria about 200 plus lead a bitter terrorist war that killed tens of thousands but then it imploded into internal faction fighting and they killed them selves off fighting over which way to read a particular word in the Quran or some such.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Salvation_Front

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Islamic_Group

The Madrasas are still in action in Pakistan, although much reduced with out the billions pumped in by Sauid Arabia and the CIA and without the support of pakistan's inteligence community, and that nation is now the key target of Al Qaida as it has Nukes. The other main strategic target is Saudi Arabia not for its oil which is less and less relevant as other sources have started to surpass it, the target there is Mecca. Al Qaida's great goal is to control all muslims by holding Mecca and then bring Jihad to the whole world.

Kind Regards Walker

[Bernadotte 0]

Sure there is.  It just can't be discussed publicly.

You don't think Britain was talking secretly with the IRA?

You don't think Spain is talking secretly with ETA?

You don't think the US is talking secretly with insurgents?

But wait!  You said "apparent" solution, didn't you?

Yes, I agree the solution will not be apparent for a while.

And how do you exactly negotiate with somebody who hasn't a pragmatic agenda, somebody that doesn't name terms.

The IRA, ETA, Hamas et al had an agenda of independence of their regions. To some extent parts of the Iraqi insurgency falls into that category.

It's a good question, and anyone who has looked closely at those conflicts knows that many of the most destructive elements of those organisations knew little of their own agenda.

So, the first step is to get the enemy to agree (or disagree) on the details of their own agenda.  This way you may be able to distinguish between those who might talk and those who must die.  In other words, we need to force Al Qaida to "mature" more quickly because we have little more than a destructive, unworkable military response as long as they remain in a growth phase.

@Walker: I think this last paragraph strikes a common chord with what you've just posted.

[Balschoiw 0]

I guess we tend to take the wrong approach when talking about AQ and related groups today. AQ has turned into a mass movement, a concept or idea exported worldwide. It´s not a centralized movement but an idea.

Therefore eliminating AQ or splinter groups will have no effect on worldwide terrorism. Especially among young muslims the tendency to redical approaches is higher than among well educated elder muslims. Part of the problem is the loss of identity in foreign countries 2nd or 3rd generation youth faces. They are educated in terms of Islam but live in a contradicting western system that often collides with their educated Islam. This plus violent influence of the west in their assumed home-countries, no prosper outlook for jobs and social integration makes them easy targets for recruiters of the violent sort.

It doesn´t matter what the name behind those organizations is, be it AQ, or whatever. Such groups are founded on a daily rate and the recruitment rate has risen dramatically since Iraq war.

That´s the findings of a CIA study.

In simple words: Terrorism cannot be stopped. There is no uber-concept or organization behind it.

We have terrorism fueled by living circumstances and abuse of religion.

[Bernadotte 0]

Unrelated to events in London, here's my choice for quote of the month:

Quote[/b] ]For 60 years, my country, the US, pursued stability at the expense of democracy in this region, here in the Middle East, and we achieved neither...

-- Condoleezza Rice

Edit: I've just noticed that she said this over a month ago. But still...

[walker 0]

hi all

The head of the London Police force has formaly apologised for the tragic Death of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Quote[/b] ]Police chief 'sorry' over death

Met Police chief Sir Ian Blair has apologised to the family of the Brazilian man shot dead by police in south London on Friday.

He said the death of Jean Charles de Menezes was a "tragedy", but admitted more people could be shot as police hunt suspected suicide bombers.

The 27-year-old electrician's family condemned the shooting and said there was no reason to suspect him.

Brazil's foreign minister said his country was "shocked" by the shooting.

Scotland Yard confirmed on Saturday that Mr Menezes, who lived in Brixton, south London, was completely unconnected to Thursday's attempted bombings on three Tube trains and a bus.

Two men have been arrested and are still being questioned.

Police carried out controlled explosions on Sunday on a suspect package found in north-west London which may be linked to the failed attacks.

Speaking on Sky News, Sir Ian said: "This is a tragedy. The Metropolitan Police accepts full responsibility for this. To the family I can only express my deep regrets."

He said there was no reason the believe the four men sought over the failed bombings had left the country.

He acknowledged that "somebody else could be shot" as the hunt continued, but added "everything is done to make it right".

But he said the "shoot to kill" policy for dealing with suspected suicide bombers would remain in force.

"There is no point in shooting at someone's chest because that is where the bomb is likely to be," he said.

"There is no point in shooting anywhere else if they fall down and detonate it."

'Tragedy'

Mr Menezes's family is struggling to come to terms with the circumstances surrounding Mr Menezes' death.

His cousin, Alex Alves Pereira, from London, told the BBC: "Apologies are not enough. I believe my cousin's death was result of police incompetence."

Describing his cousin as a "person full of life" he said his cousin was "a victim of government's mistakes".

He said Mr Menezes was from the city of Gonzaga in Minas Gerais state and had lived in London legally for over three years.

Mr Menezes' grandmother, Zilda Ambrosia de Figueiredo, told Globo TV "there was no reason to think he was a terrorist".

'Shocked and perplexed'

Brazil's foreign minister Celso Amorim met officials at the Foreign Office in London on Sunday to seek an explanation for the shooting.

"The Brazilian government and the public are shocked and perplexed that a peaceful and innocent person should have been killed," he said.

"Brazil is totally in solidarity with Britain in the fight against terror but people should be cautious to avoid the loss of innocent life."

He said he spoke by phone with foreign secretary Jack Straw, who promised a full investigation into the death.

"I said that was very important. We can't recover the life of the Brazilian citizen who has been killed, but we can discover the details."

Mr Amorim is due to meet Mr Straw in person on Monday evening.

The BBC's correspondent in Brazil, Tom Gibb, said Mr Menezes had lived for a time in a slum district of Sao Paulo and that could explain why he had run from the police.

He said: "The murder rates in some of these slums are worse than in a lot of war zones and that could explain why, when plain clothes officers pulled a gun on him, he may have run away."

The shooting is being investigated by officers from Scotland Yard's Directorate of Professional Standards, and will be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Government minister Peter Hain said the threat of suicide bombings had put police under "enormous pressure", but added that they were acting responsibly...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4712061.stm

Kind Regards Walker

[philcommando 0]

In reply to Avon's post, do understand its not her words, but a report written by another for the benefit of readers to ponder upon.

Thanks Walker for that Scotland Yard apology. I can safely say no British policemen will just pull out a gun and kill innocents running on the streets during peacetime. Accidents may have happened, close to almost nil, but never in the scale compared to what criminals would do. Now, is there any apology from the subway attackers who bombed the subway? Any iman or mulluh stepping forward?

I think not. Democracy will always lose out to Theocracy, for in a democracy, men who kill other men will be brought to justice to answer for his crime irregardless of his beliefs, but in a Theocracy, men who kill other men in the name of the almighty is free to kill another as long as the theocratic leader says the almighty told him in a dream to go kill another thousand.

For those who believes that the current spate of terrorism is unstoppable, lets get serious and find out who gives the orders to kill innocent civilians. So far, the report and claims are that the criminals did it out of religious fervour, therefore being religious men, dont they take and accept command from others? So who are the ones who give the commands in the prayer halls of such religious lunatics?

Either this terrorism is based on religion or it is not. The battle-lines had been more clearer now than in 9/11. We now know who the actual enemies are, and they aint real  muslims,christians, jews, hindus, buddhists or aetheists.

Edit:- In anticipation of the question 'who are the real or the false muslims?'. The answer lies in every condemnation from world international islamic religious authorites on the bombings of innocent civilians since 911 till today.

By their own tongues they had condemn these criminals, therefore in extention, those who preach 'Death to Jews, Death to the West and Death to infidels' are guilty of deviance from the islamic faith.

Therefore, be him a village idiot mullah or a top notch cairo islamic theology grad who spout such nonsense are guilty of deviant practice and worse still if they kill someone in the name of the almighty. They must be treated as criminals for crimes against humanity and should not be supported or pitied.

[Bernadotte 0]

Quote[/b] ]Eighty-four thousand troops had proved insufficient to maintain law and order in the face of a campaign of terrorism waged by highly oraganised Jewish forces equipped with all the weapons of the modern infantryman.  Since the war 338 British subjects had been killed in Palestine, while the military forces there had cost the British taxpayer one hundred million sterling.  The declared intentions of Jewish extremists showed that the loss of further British lives was inevitable.

In these circumstances His Majesty's Government decided to bring to an end their mandate and to prepare for the earliest possible withdrawl from Palestine of all British forces.

-- British Foreign Office statement in the NY Times, 14 May 1948

Has Al Qaida killed 338 Brits yet?  I wonder if it will take less than 60 years to forget about Al Qaida.  

[Panda-PL- 0]

I'm not sure was the "shoot to kill" directive in force back then. Any info on if it should have been approved by someone and if so when it happened?

From the relations it would seem the man didn't struggle once being literally nailed to the ground by the officers. Seems like some officers tried to put the handcuffs on while another one approached and shot the man while his hands were spread out and pushed to the ground. If that is true then the London Police joined an international "we kill for joy" club.

Seems like I got a wrong picture of how police in UK works, sorry.

The man didn't act 100% rational, yet judjing from what was said about Brasil - yes I think I'd run too - as a simple reaction to seeing a gun.

[Nemesis6 0]

Walker, I think you misunderstood me - It's not just ANY mosque. We're talking about Finsbury Mosque here; The place where people train how to operate Kalashnikovs and ultimately get forwarded to Iraq. Just going ahead and demolishing mosques would be stupid. We're talking abo----... I'm going in a ring here, but do you see where I'm going with this?

[walker 0]

Hi Nemesis6

The Mosque did not do it, it was one small group of people who used the Mosque who were a radical pro Al Qaida group. They have not been at the Mosque since 2003 when they were expelled.

Possibly the expelled group have links to the bombings in London possibly not, that some of them will have supported the action with words or thoughts, if not deeds I have no doubt but the Mosque is used by several thousands yet only tens attended the preaching by Abu Hamza al-Masri.

That should tell you he and his philosophy is a minority. Abu Hamza al-Masri himself has been under arrest since august of 2004. never the less it may suprise you to know he himself says on attacks in Britain (from just before his arrest):

Quote[/b] ]"It is immoral to target people who have no say in the war. In fact they were against the war in Iraq...If it was not for this Zionist media... the people of this country...would have informed themselves...so it is not fair to target them. It is not Islamic...We’ve got to distinguish between the evil politicians and the normal people who go about their business every day."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Hamza_al-Masri

My own particular opinion is he may not have been expressing his true thoughts on this matter but covering himself for any potential court case.

In the case of this mosque there were internal battles between the majority of law abiding muslims who attend it and Abu Hamza's group including actual fights and assaults at which point the majority of muslims at the Mosque asked the police to deal with them. There was a raid and the radical element were expelled.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,878323,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2676481.stm

They then used to hold prayer sessions on a dead end street near the mosque where a few 10s of Abu Hamza al-Masri fans would attend and which the police and inteligence services were quite happy to film.

Quote[/b] ]Inayat Bunglawala, spokesman for the Muslim Council of Great Britain, said, "This man has alienated the public from Muslims with his vile rants. British Muslims are growing impatient that he is still able to tarnish them with these remarks. He is not welcome at any mosque in the country and we have nothing to do with him."

Quote[/b] ]After the 2003 raid, the mosque was reclaimed by mainstream Muslims, who installed a new board of trustees and imam. The mosque now offers courses open to the general public, and weekly attendance has tripled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finsbury_Park_Mosque

Should we nuke Israel because terrorists live there? I think not. The place is not the problem it some specific people who are there.

What you propose is what the terrorists want, you are in essence acting as their pawn. They want a division of London society on racist grounds it only serves such evil people. We have already had one unnecessary death and hysteria in the media and among people such as your self is a contributory factor.

When you are dealing with terrorists you need a clear head and calm considered reaction focussed only on the terrorist. You must not fall into the terrorists trap of blaming all the people in the social group the terrorist purports to represent. That is what they want, that is how they have you do their recruiting for them; by over reacting and attacking innocents.

Kind Regards Walker