Suicide bomber shot DEAD in London : )

[quote name='camoor']But that's the reason of the month why we're in Iraq. If you believe that, how can you support the fact that we attacked Iraq in the first place? Let them police their own.

Ooooh right - the terrorists (who really came from Afganistan and Saudi Arabia) and the nuclear weapons (ooooops)

Iraq aside, your arguement is bogus. Human rights abuses are human rights abuses, whether they happen in the US, the UK, or China.

However I do want more facts on this incident before I make a judgement.[/QUOTE]

Well, I did not support the initial rush to war in Iraq. I do support the war as it runs now. Don't turn an argument about how we deal with actual terrorists who are currently committing actual crimes into one about operations in Iraq.

It's not a human rights abuse to shoot someone who is about to detonate dozens of people. The police may have shot this person by mistake, however, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
 
[quote name='Rich']Oh, like this man being a deaf man just running to catch the train?[/QUOTE]

LOL, that was in response to his absurd statements and examples (and it applies to your blind statment as well). :roll:

[quote name='Rich']Assuming it wasn't for stealing someone's purse or something stupid like that where the pursuing authorities knew what they were chasing him for; then yeah, they prolly should have shot. But then everyone would bitch and moan.[/QUOTE]

EDIT: added what you previously stated
 
[quote name='doraemonkerpal']LOL, that was in response to his absurd statements and examples (and it applies to your blind statment as well). :roll:[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Rich']Assuming it wasn't for stealing someone's purse or something stupid like that where the pursuing authorities knew what they were chasing him for; then yeah, they prolly should have shot. But then everyone would bitch and moan.[/QUOTE]

EDIT: added what you previously stated.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Wow, they gave him a warning, how nice :roll:[/QUOTE]

Terrorists should feel lucky to get that much.
 
[quote name='camoor']How about innocent citizens?[/QUOTE]

They should be so overjoyed at the prospect of fighting terrorism that they willingly give up all freedoms and right, including the right to not be shot dead because they missed their train. Anyone who's not willing to give up all rights and freedoms is clearly a terrorist sympathizer and therefore deserves no rights or freedoms.
 
[quote name='Drocket'] including the right to not be shot dead because they missed their train.[/QUOTE]

Don't forget he was deaf, too. :roll:
 
[quote name='vienge']only liberals could find a way to sympathize with a terrorist.[/QUOTE]

Wanna find me where it said he's a terrorist they knew he was clearly a terrorist?
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Wanna find me where it said he's a terrorist they knew he was clearly a terrorist?[/QUOTE]


They were watching him to see where he went and who he met because he was linked to the people who blew themselves up on public transport. It seems that he left the house wearing concealing clothes unsuited to the weather. He approached a train station and they went to stop him. He fled.

He ignored their warnings and went hell for leather to get to a train despite the risk of being shot by the (reported) twenty or so armed men around him. Now, he could have been trying to escape or he could have been trying to make it to a concentration of targets. Either way, the moment that he got near the train the authorities were out of choices and he was a dead man.

From first hand witness reports the police shoved/jumped on him as he tripped on the platform/carriage door, then shot him. Given that they couldn't really fire wildly in a train station towards an occupied carriage, and given that if he detonated he'd kill them and everyone in the carriage, then I think it was reasonable.
 
[quote name='vienge']He ignored their warnings and went hell for leather to get to a train despite the risk of being shot[/quote]

I don't think you understand...he was late for his train!
 
[quote name='Rich']I don't think you understand...he was late for his train![/QUOTE]
I heard he was a descendant of Helen Keller.
 
[quote name='vienge']I heard he was a descendant of Helen Keller.[/QUOTE]

I heard he had 3 testicles and was have sex with liberals. (Why else would they support him?)
 
You should ALWAYS take sides with a person associated with terrorists over the people who serve to protect people from harm.

That's just common sense.
 
[quote name='vienge']They were watching him to see where he went and who he met because he was linked to the people who blew themselves up on public transport. It seems that he left the house wearing concealing clothes unsuited to the weather. He approached a train station and they went to stop him. He fled.

He ignored their warnings and went hell for leather to get to a train despite the risk of being shot by the (reported) twenty or so armed men around him. Now, he could have been trying to escape or he could have been trying to make it to a concentration of targets. Either way, the moment that he got near the train the authorities were out of choices and he was a dead man.

From first hand witness reports the police shoved/jumped on him as he tripped on the platform/carriage door, then shot him. Given that they couldn't really fire wildly in a train station towards an occupied carriage, and given that if he detonated he'd kill them and everyone in the carriage, then I think it was reasonable.[/QUOTE]

He was suspected, just like that egyptian chemist, you see where that lead went.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']He was suspected, just like that egyptian chemist, you see where that lead went.[/QUOTE]

He also refused surrender several times.

Get over it. The fucker went for a train and got pwnt.
 
[quote name='vienge']He also refused surrender several times.

Get over it. The fucker went for a train and got pwnt.[/QUOTE]

You seem to have a problem, it seems like every other post ends with some form of "shutup".

But, he went for a train, with what exactly?
 
[quote name='Rich']Don't forget he was deaf, too. :roll:[/QUOTE]

LOL, i think you're too simple-minded to argue against. :hot: what i said is called an "example."

1. One that is representative of a group as a whole: the squirrel, an example of a rodent; introduced each new word with examples of its use.
2. One serving as a pattern of a specific kind: set a good example by arriving on time.
3. A similar case that constitutes a model or precedent: a unique episode, without example in maritime history.
4. a. A punishment given as a warning or deterrent.
b. One that has been given such a punishment: made an example of the offender.

5. A problem or exercise used to illustrate a principle or method.


it was in response to one of PAD's ridiculous "OMFG, WHAT IF YOUR MOM/SISTER WAS BEING RAPED IN FRONT OF YOU" example.

your comments just show how asinine and immature you really are.

asinine:

1. Utterly stupid or silly: asinine behavior.
2. Of, relating to, or resembling an ass.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You seem to have a problem, it seems like every other post ends with some form of "shutup".

But, he went for a train, with what exactly?[/QUOTE]
the possibility of a threat to civilians. He refused surrender and was suspected of terrorist ties. The last resort was to ensure the safety of the population.
 
[quote name='vienge']the possibility of a threat to civilians. He refused surrender and was suspected of terrorist ties. The last resort was to ensure the safety of the population.[/QUOTE]

If they got something on him indicating he was an immediate threat that's one thing, suspected of terrorist ties is not a justification, especially when many claims of "suspected" terrorists have not been substantiated. Unless the police want to comment on what happened, we won't know where to begin.
 
[quote name='doraemonkerpal']LOL, i think you're too simple-minded to argue against. :hot: what i said is called an "example."

1. One that is representative of a group as a whole: the squirrel, an example of a rodent; introduced each new word with examples of its use.
2. One serving as a pattern of a specific kind: set a good example by arriving on time.
3. A similar case that constitutes a model or precedent: a unique episode, without example in maritime history.
4. a. A punishment given as a warning or deterrent.
b. One that has been given such a punishment: made an example of the offender.

5. A problem or exercise used to illustrate a principle or method.


it was in response to one of PAD's ridiculous "OMFG, WHAT IF YOUR MOM/SISTER WAS BEING RAPED IN FRONT OF YOU" example.

your comments just show how asinine and immature you really are.

asinine:

1. Utterly stupid or silly: asinine behavior.
2. Of, relating to, or resembling an ass.[/QUOTE]

You're too simple-minded to realize that your example was asinine and immature. A ridiculous example to counter a ridiculous example? Oh, you ARE mature. My bad.
 
[quote name='Rich']You're too simple-minded to realize that your example was asinine and immature. A ridiculous example to counter a ridiculous example? Oh, you ARE mature. My bad.[/QUOTE]

my example stemmed off of an anecdote about a guy running in a subway. to say that he couldn't hear somebody yelling at him while racing toward a train is not an absurd example, LOL! :hot: at least you admitted that PAD's example was ridiculous. too bad, you aren't smart enough to notice that mine wasn't. everybody in their lifetime has misheard something that was spoken to them, or has missed something b/c they were distracted and in a hurry. the example i gave was to show what could've happened and hopefully garner some empathy for the people that you guys are wishing death upon... even without knowing these people personally! i remember you mentioning that you were a christian in another thread, and that there is a difference between a christian extremist and what you are. however, your recent posts really negate what you originally stated.

the word for today is empathy:

1. Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives. See Synonyms at pity.
2. The attribution of one's own feelings to an object.

you never know what's going on with a person unless you were there or are in their shoes.
 
[quote name='doraemonkerpal']my example stemmed off of an anecdote about a guy running in a subway. to say that he couldn't hear somebody yelling at him while racing toward a train is not an absurd example, LOL! :hot: at least you admitted that PAD's example was ridiculous. too bad, you aren't smart enough to notice that mine wasn't. everybody in their lifetime has misheard something that was spoken to them, or has missed something b/c they were distracted and in a hurry. the example i gave was to show what could've happened and hopefully garner some empathy for the people that you guys are wishing death upon... even without knowing these people personally! i remember you mentioning that you were a christian in another thread, and that there is a difference between a christian extremist and what you are. however, your recent posts really negate what you originally stated.

the word for today is empathy:

1. Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives. See Synonyms at pity.
2. The attribution of one's own feelings to an object.

you never know what's going on with a person unless you were there or are in their shoes.[/QUOTE]

Christian? No. A Deist who believes in Christ? Yes.

And your example is still ridiculous to think that someone could be running from the authority for any amount of time and continually "misunderstand" what they're saying.

"Stop!"
"What? Keep Running?"
"STOP OR WE'LL SHOOT"
"The train is leaving? Oh fuck, thanks for the heads up!"
"DO NOT GET ON THAT TRAIN!"
"Get on? OK!"

*boom*

Besides, your example was deafness, not misunderstanding.
 
[quote name='Rich']Christian? No. A Deist who believes in Christ? Yes.

And your example is still ridiculous to think that someone could be running from the authority for any amount of time and continually "misunderstand" what they're saying.

"Stop!"
"What? Keep Running?"
"STOP OR WE'LL SHOOT"
"The train is leaving? Oh fuck, thanks for the heads up!"
"DO NOT GET ON THAT TRAIN!"
"Get on? OK!"

*boom*

Besides, your example was deafness, not misunderstanding.[/QUOTE]

LMAO! your example doesn't coroborate with what i previously said. if a guy says, "the train is leaving? oh ***, thanks for the heads up!" THAT OBVIOUSLY MEANS HE HEARD WHOEVER WAS CALLING OUT TO HIM! damn man, go back and reread what i already stated. *sigh* it's like arguing with a brick wall.

regarding the "deaf" portion of my example, i used it to show that may be one of the many reasons as to why a person would not hear somebody calling out to them. that is not an absurd example. you've never heard of a person who is hearing impaired?

:hot:

EDIT:

btw, where's the boom? my example didn't have a suicide bomber in it LOL!
 
[quote name='doraemonkerpal']LMAO! your example doesn't coroborate with what i previously said. if a guy says, "the train is leaving? oh ***, thanks for the heads up!" THAT OBVIOUSLY MEANS HE HEARD WHOEVER WAS CALLING OUT TO HIM! damn man, go back and reread what i already stated. *sigh* it's like arguing with a brick wall.

regarding the "deaf" portion of my example, i used it to show that may be one of the many reasons as to why a person would not hear somebody calling out to them. that is not an absurd example. you've never heard of people who are hard of hearing?

:hot:[/QUOTE]

You're grasping for fucking straws. The guy was running FROM authorities. Not running TO a train.
 
[quote name='Rich']You're grasping for fucking straws. The guy was running FROM authorities. Not running TO a train.[/QUOTE]

hello? i'm arguing for my example, you're arguing for the op's article. if you're going to jump into an argument, then stick with the topic! :bomb: geez, i thought it was pretty evident considering how many times i mentioned the word "example." PAD used this example, i countered with this example and so on and so forth.... :roll:
 
Why is it that every discussion in the VS forum degenerates into a "What is the definition of example?" ridiculous argument?

I tried to elevate this discussion, but apparently you're all too entrenched slinging hatred at each other to form a coherent argument.

Morons.
 
I'm not going to condemn the police for their actions because we haven't heard a complete account of what happened. But I think there could have been an alternative to shooting him once he was subdued on the ground (if that report is completely accurate). If he was already being held on the ground, couldn't they control his arms so he couldn't trigger any bomb? Not knowing what kind of explosive the man might have, isn't there a possibility of setting it off with the gunshots, or at least forcing him to release a trigger? These were plainclothes cops, right? If so, panic might explain why someone would run from someone with a gun in the subway a day after a terrorist attempt. The problem is they aren't going to be able to question this guy now and find out if/how he was tied to the terrorist bombings.

Like I said, I'm not going to condemn the cops; they are doing a very dangerous job and need to weigh protecting themselves and the public versus the suspect all in a heartbeat. I hope this guy was guilty for their sake.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']I'm not going to condemn the police for their actions because we haven't heard a complete account of what happened. But I think there could have been an alternative to shooting him once he was subdued on the ground (if that report is completely accurate). If he was already being held on the ground, couldn't they control his arms so he couldn't trigger any bomb? Not knowing what kind of explosive the man might have, isn't there a possibility of setting it off with the gunshots, or at least forcing him to release a trigger? These were plainclothes cops, right? If so, panic might explain why someone would run from someone with a gun in the subway a day after a terrorist attempt. The problem is they aren't going to be able to question this guy now and find out if/how he was tied to the terrorist bombings.

Like I said, I'm not going to condemn the cops; they are doing a very dangerous job and need to weigh protecting themselves and the public versus the suspect all in a heartbeat. I hope this guy was guilty for their sake.[/QUOTE]

He had no connection to the bombings:

Shot man not connected to bombing

A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was unconnected to the incidents, police have confirmed.

A Scotland Yard statement said the shooting was a "tragedy" which was regretted by the Metropolitan Police.

The man was shot dead after police followed him from a south London flat to Stockwell Tube station on Friday.

Two other men have been arrested and are being questioned after bombers targeted three Tube trains and a bus. The statement read: "We believe we now know the identity of the man shot at Stockwell Underground station by police on Friday 22nd July 2005, although he is still subject to formal identification.



"We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents of Thursday 21st July 2005.

"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets."

The statement confirmed the man was followed by police from a block of flats that was under surveillance.

His death is being investigated by officers from the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards, and will be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

Arrests

Two men are still being held at Paddington Green police station, central London, in connection with Thursday's attacks.



The first man was arrested at around 1630 BST on Friday during a raid on a block of flats near to Oval and Stockwell Tube stations.

Eyewitnesses said he was led away with a woman and child.

The second man was arrested late on Friday night, also in the Stockwell area.

Both are being held under anti-terrorism legislation which gives police 14 days before they have to bring charges.

CCTV images

Scotland Yard said they had been contacted by over 500 members of the public following the release of CCTV footage of four suspects.

Detectives said they were hopeful of useful lines of inquiry coming from the calls and e-mails.

Three devices found after the failed bombings were the same size and weight as those used in the suicide attacks of 7 July, which killed scores.

The fourth was smaller, apparently contained in a plastic box. The same chemicals appear to have been used.

They targeted Oval, Warren Street and Shepherd's Bush stations and a bus in Hackney.

The Hammersmith and City line train was removed from Shepherd's Bush station on Saturday afternoon. Transport for London said it hoped to have trains running on the line from Paddington to Hammersmith on Saturday evening.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4711021.stm
 
[quote name='RBM']Will police now shoot to kill? (BBC article, 3:30pm, 7/22/05)
[/size][/QUOTE]

"Mr Ramm said the danger of shooting a suspected suicide bomber in the body was that it could detonate a bomb they were carrying on them. "

Nice article. Mr. Ramm made a good point that shooting a suspected bomber will detonate a bomb. Clearly the police knew he wasn't carrying a bomb, otherwise why would they shoot him point blank 5 times and endanger those around them.
 
1. Not all bombs are volotile enough to be detonated by shooting them.

2. Better to detonate the bomb in an area with few people instead of inside or near a moving train where many people will be affected.
 
The innocent guy shot dead was Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, from brazil. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4711021.stm
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.............

Meanwhile Dr Azzam Tamimi from the Muslim Association of Britain told BBC News the police should review their procedures.

"Frankly it doesn't matter whether he is a Muslim or not, he is a human being.

"It is human lives that are being targeted whether by terrorists or whether in this case unfortunately, by people who are supposed to be chasing or catching the terrorists."
Click to expand...

41336597diesel2034tw.jpg


He's the white guy in front. How the hell he was described as looking south asian (which he was described as) is beyond me.
 
Thanks for the info Alonzo.

BTW, I'm noticing a pattern:

1. Conservative "christians" and neocons rush to judgement, in favor of suspiciously agressive action by a western government authority.
2. Conservative christians and neocons start circle-jerking about what he-men they are and how liberals are all big sissies.
3. Conservative christians and neocons are proven to be flat-out wrong.
4. Conservative christians and neocons hurriedly start a new topic --> Lather, rinse, repeat.
 
[quote name='Rich']I don't think you understand...he was late for his train![/QUOTE]

yea he deserved to be shot. That's what he gets for looking like a terrorist. Dont ever run from the london police and dare to disrespect them. Otherwise you will get shot point blank five times and there isn't a chance in hell you will survive. I totally agree with you Rich... who cares if he's innocent. You rather see 10 innocent people get shot point blank than to let one suspect get away.

I especially like this quote from the government.

"The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public.

"This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."

The terrorist bear the responsiblity of this innocent victim.
 
[quote name='beguile']yea he deserved to be shot. That's what he gets for looking like a terrorist. Dont ever run from the london police and dare to disrespect them. Otherwise you will get shot point blank five times and there isn't a chance in hell you will survive. I totally agree with you Rich... who cares if he's innocent. You rather see 10 innocent people get shot point blank than to let one suspect get away.

I especially like this quote from the government.

"The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public.

"This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."

The terrorist bear the responsiblity of this innocent victim.[/QUOTE]

Yes, he was shot dead because he "disrespected" the police. :roll:
I'd gladly sacrifice one innocent in the name of preventing terrorism; because I'm not stupid enough to give the authorities reason enough to make me that innocent.

And the terrorists ARE indirectly responsible for this death.
 
[quote name='Rich']Yes, he was shot dead because he "disrespected" the police. :roll:
I'd gladly sacrifice one innocent in the name of preventing terrorism; because I'm not stupid enough to give the authorities reason enough to make me that innocent.

And the terrorists ARE indirectly responsible for this death.[/QUOTE]
So, any form of breaking the law...is acceptably punished by death...as long as you use terrorism as an excuse?

intro3.jpg
 
[quote name='Rich']Yes, he was shot dead because he "disrespected" the police. :roll:
I'd gladly sacrifice one innocent in the name of preventing terrorism; because I'm not stupid enough to give the authorities reason enough to make me that innocent.

And the terrorists ARE indirectly responsible for this death.[/QUOTE]

Well I guess the terrorists are responsible for our abuses at abu ghraib too, since bush never would have had an excuse to invade Iraq without 9/11.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Well I guess the terrorists are responsible for our abuses at abu ghraib too, since bush never would have had an excuse to invade Iraq without 9/11.[/QUOTE]
Of course he would have. He just would have had to work a little harder to find it.
 
gee, who cares.

1) the US and the rest of the western world rule the world. whoever else dares oppose them deserves to die.

2) why does it matter how many of those damn arabs die (even if it's women and children..it's their fault for being born into the wrong race) as long as the great western world can continue to enjoy life.

3) 1 american/english/whatever life = 10,000 muslim lives

4) the US (and its allies) are not terrorists when they kill. when someone attacks the US (or its allies), they are terrorists.

come on everyone, cheer up. it's a videogame forum...
 
[quote name='evilmax17']So, any form of breaking the law...is acceptably punished by death...as long as you use terrorism as an excuse?

intro3.jpg
[/QUOTE]

YES! and don't you forget it! ;-P

"He stole my groceries! SHOOT him!" "We can't do that sir." "But I think those groceries are going to feed members of Al Quaida." "Well when you put it that way.". Police officer draws gun, shoots robber point blank in the head. "Thank you Officer." "Sure, whatever I can do to combat Terrorism.".
 
[quote name='vietgurl']gee, who cares.

1) the US and the rest of the western world rule the world. whoever else dares oppose them deserves to die.

2) why does it matter how many of those damn arabs die (even if it's women and children..it's their fault for being born into the wrong race) as long as the great western world can continue to enjoy life.

3) 1 american/english/whatever life = 10,000 muslim lives

4) the US (and its allies) are not terrorists when they kill. when someone attacks the US (or its allies), they are terrorists.

come on everyone, cheer up. it's a videogame forum...[/QUOTE]

LoL. this thread is getting too funny. The groceries one was too damn funny. Keep it coming.
 
Getting back to the story. From the sounds of it, the guy was a illegal alien in England, so he didn't belong there in the first place. Second, the guy didn't speak or understand a lick of english(according to what was mentioned on CNN), so there was no way he knew what the hell people where saying. Lastly, he was wearing a coat, which is pretty damn weird for this time of the year.
 
[quote name='supermariomelee']Getting back to the story. From the sounds of it, the guy was a illegal alien in England, so he didn't belong there in the first place. Second, the guy didn't speak or understand a lick of english(according to what was mentioned on CNN), so there was no way he knew what the hell people where saying. Lastly, he was wearing a coat, which is pretty damn weird for this time of the year.[/QUOTE]

Why don't we ever get any decent new posters? Being illegal is no reason to be shot or not care if someones shot. Either way, he was legal and spoke english

He had lived and worked in London legally for at least three years and spoke excellent English.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4711779.stm


Though I love that "from the sounds of it", he's from brazil, so you just assume he's illegal.
 
[quote name='spyhunterk19']If for no other reason than respect for the guy, change the thread title.[/QUOTE]

lol, Scrubking's like the Bush Administration - he'll never admit he's wrong.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']lol, Scrubking's like the Bush Administration - he'll never admit he's wrong.[/QUOTE]
Because for both of them, it would take too long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top