egafd.com

Thats easy to say now we've had a year of lies, truths and investigations.

Answer me this c.j.: If you have 200 civilians & children passing by, and had 2 seconds to decide whether a guy is going to blow them up or not, -and you've been told he's a bomber- would you pull the trigger and save lives, or gamble on their deaths by not killing him?

My answer is : I wouldn't gamble, and I'd shoot him dead. If I was wrong, I'd have to live with 1 death. Much easier than having 200-300 deaths on your hands aint it?

So maybe everyone should answer this question.......I've answered it.

[quote]You still don't get it Sam.
The fear of getting shot just doesn't enter into it. If you are carrying explosives as a suicide bomber are you going to be afraid of getting shot?
Like some of those Kamikazi pilots said "Fuck this, I'm not going to do it. I might get shot down".[/quote]

Mart, I've already mentioned the exact same thing you've just said further up the thread. They don't care about dying, but they do care about failing their mission. They want to cause affect. If it's easier to cause affect in Paris, or Berlin because the police aren't as trigger happy then they'll naturally migrate to these places over time. (these are example cities of course).

To keep trying, and to keep failing would be an embarrassment whiich they wouldn't like.

Well yeah. If I was given that info I would shoot. But that's where it ends. I wonder if the cops who shot'em had time to question anything before this shooting occured though? I know if I were that cop I'd ask some questions.

Nah I doubt they woulda had time. They were just going on the intelligence -which was wrong- thats why I think the shooters did the right thing. It's the intelligence & people who tried to do a 'cover up' that we should vent our anger on.

Mistakes happen though, we can't really eradicate human error.

Thanks...

The point which seems to be being missed here is that the armed officers have no right at all to shoot someone without a challenge, providing the person is behaving normally, as Menezes was, unless they have the Kratos order. That tells them that the suspect has been positively ID'ed as a suicide bomber who must be killed without warning.

In this case the armed officers did not "suspect" Menezes, who was not behaving suspiciously. The only reason they had to kill him without warning was if they had the order from their Gold Commander. The problem is that she denies she issued that order. Meanwhile the surveillance log has been altered, but the IPCC say they cannot find out who did it.

This looks like a complete cover up, and I doubt that a prosecution over health and safety will get to the bottom of it. But for the sake of justice we really need to, otherwise the police will think they can operate with impunity. Perhaps they already do.

You know what? Why keep making your point when obviously Sam and anybody else who agrees with'em ain't gon change their minds. I'm like you, I'm not from the UK but seeing two sides of the story, I smell a rat given how the police is over here as well. While we need and try to respect the law, some of them don't respect us which is something Sam and others don't see. They figure "well he acted funny so shoot'em". Yeah I'm against terrorism and any other unlawful things but I"M not a criminal or a terrorist and if the law targets ME they better have enough on me TO stop me 'cause I don't want NO police bullet or terrorist bomb to kill me, point blank. I just think this new terrorist society's got everybody scared to death to the point that they would want the government to take their freedoms away and think nothing of it. When it gets to the point that you can't go to the store without flashing your ID card or having to go thru some checkpoint just to go downtown or even check your phone records without your permission I think they might want to rethink their points. Heck, they may welcome these restrictions of movements.

Yes, I think you've got a point CJ. Many people seem to think that surrendering their liberties will make them safer. Good for them, but I'd rather they didn't surrender mine as well. I have absolutely no confidence in Blair, Prescott, Brown or any of their corrupt cronies. The less power these zeros have over my life, the better.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~Benjamin Franklin 1759

If it was true then, it's true now. If our reaction to terrorist atrocities is to surrender some of our freedoms in the hope of being safer, then the terrorists win. Our way of life appals them. Each bomb gives them more of what they want, as we give up a little more. Our civil liberties should be non-negotiable.

No one outside the government, the police and security services thinks ID cards will deter the cowardly deathmongers, so why do it?

[quote]I have absolutely no confidence in Blair, Prescott, Brown or any of their corrupt cronies.[/quote]

So.........who do you have confidence in? (just out of curiosity).

Anyone in particular?

Well I don't have confidence in Bush, Chaney, Condi or Rummey (Rumsfeld).