|
|||
|
British Muslim groups said they feared becoming targets of police over-zealousness after police admitted that they shot dead the wrong man in the hunt for London bombers.
Police said plainclothes officers chased the man onto an underground train on Friday, after he ignored warnings to stop, and shot him five times in the head. Police said they had feared he was carrying a bomb and was about to detonate it. "This is causing shock and dismay in the Muslim community," said Inayat Bunglawala, spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain. "There is enormous anxiety." He said Britain's 1.6 million Muslims understood the enormous pressure on police to find the four bombers who struck London's public transport, without causing casualties, two weeks after 52 people were killed in bomb attacks on trains and a bus. He added: "We believe it is absolutely vital that the utmost care is taken to ensure that innocent people are not killed due to over-zealousness." After the deadly July 7 attacks by four British Muslims, the Muslim community fears a backlash while the police eagerly want its cooperation in their investigations. Mr Bunglawala said there had been no major backlash so far. "There was a fairly low level of abuse. That was a tribute to the British people and the great care that police, government ministers and the mayor did to point out repeatedly that the bombings were the work of criminals," he said. Police confirmed on Saturday the man they shot was a 27-year-old Brazilian. Massoud Shadjareh of the Islamic Human Rights Commission said: "It doesn't matter if he was a Muslim or not. He was a human being who did not deserve to be assassinated." He said the killing was the result of British police officers being sent to Israel to receive training on how to prevent suicide bombings. "This is a recipe for disaster. What sort of police are we going to end up with?" he said. Police have declined to comment on reports about their training. The killing, in front of shocked passengers on a packed underground train, triggered speculation that traditionally unarmed British police had adopted a shoot-to-kill policy. Ahmed Versi, editor of the Muslim News, said: "The way the whole thing was done has raised concern in the Muslim community." "Young Muslims worry as they fit the target - being Asian-looking and wearing backpacks and coats," he said. "The police have been praised by the Muslim community since 7/7 for being very sensitive. After this shooting Muslims are now very worried," he said. "The police will now really have to reassure the community." Inayat Bunglawala said he was prey to the same suspicions and fears as non-Muslim Britons. "I was on the Tube (underground railway) when a Muslim chap got on with a short beard and a rucksack. I was standing right in front of him. Even I was concerned. So you can imagine what non-Muslims are feeling." Eeergh... I guess it was bound to happen sooner or later though, trigger happy idiots. posted by hungarian kid |
|||
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgPoliticsPolitics and Crime (Assorted topics)Muslims alarmed after UK police mistakably kill Brazilian |
|
|||
|
Note - Police said plainclothes officers chased the man onto an underground train on Friday, after he ignored warnings to stop, and shot him five times in the head. And - Police confirmed on Saturday the man they shot was a 27-year-old Brazilian. Pff idiots, for all they knew, he probably thought they were a group of thugs. It's just like... he could've been a tourist or something, maybe couldn't understand English or the police just spoke like idiots. Just telling him to stop, he sees them. They're in normal clothes... he's probably like "fuck... thugs... they want my money" so he runs, then these well-trained police that can shoot something in the eye from 500 yards unload 5 bullets into his head. Eeergh... stupid. You think, that they could've just shot him in the leg... atleast then he wouldn't be dead from such idiocy.. posted by hungarian kid |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
hungarian kid: Pff idiots, for all they knew, he probably thought they were a group of thugs.
It's just like... he could've been a tourist or something, maybe couldn't understand English or the police just spoke like idiots. Just telling him to stop, he sees them. They're in normal clothes... he's probably like "fuck... thugs... they want my money" so he runs, Unless you can run faster than a speeding bullet then might I suggest stopping and giving your money to the thugs... hungarian kid: then these well-trained police that can shoot something in the eye from 500 yards unload 5 bullets into his head. Eeergh... stupid. You think, that they could've just shot him in the leg... atleast then he wouldn't be dead from such idiocy.. This is not as cut and dry as you would like to make out here HK. okay...let's say the guy did have a bomb, they pop a cap in his leg and he proceeds to detonate his bomb spraying countless people and themselves over the inside of the tube train...would we all be bitching about the lack of police response or reassuring ourselves that if they had shot him "he might have been innocent"? The simple fact is London is now in very real danger of repeat attacks (8 bombs planted in 2 weeks) and tensions are high. Nobody can put themselves in the place of the men that have to make split second decisions to try and protect the rest of us. In my opinion there is nobody but the extremists that continue to carry out these atrocities to blame for the death of yet another innocent person in London. posted by Marlbro |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marlbro: hungarian kid: then these well-trained police that can shoot something in the eye from 500 yards unload 5 bullets into his head. Eeergh... stupid. You think, that they could've just shot him in the leg... atleast then he wouldn't be dead from such idiocy.. This is not as cut and dry as you would like to make out here HK. okay...let's say the guy did have a bomb, they pop a cap in his leg and he proceeds to detonate his bomb spraying countless people and themselves over the inside of the tube train... I must agree. There is no time for leg bullets posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't want to appear callous with my last post. I do think it was a tragic waste of life, and I do think there should be an investigation into the shooting by an independent authority. But today I heard on the news that some do-gooders now want to prosecute the police officer that shot him. This is ridiculous...who in the police force will be willing to take the actions necessary to stop a would-be suicide bomber if they are liable for prosecution if they make a bad call. Okay, you can’t just shoot every person that looks suspicious, but there are many reasons this man fell into the “have to be stopped” category. The following points have to be taken into consideration. Reasons to be suspicious: 1. This guy apparently came out of a building that was under observation by the police. 2. He was wearing a large padded coat on a blazing hot July day. 3. He was dark skinned. 4. He had a rucksack on his back. 5. He ran from the police. 6. He jumped a turnstile to get on the train. In his defence: 1. He didn't have a bomb. Very sad that a normally unarmed police force has to resort to this...but they did have their hand forced. posted by Marlbro |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marlbro: okay...let's say the guy did have a bomb, they pop a cap in his leg and he proceeds to detonate his bomb spraying countless people and themselves over the inside of the tube train... it sucks that i agree with you only because i always naively thought that if police did find themselves in a threatening situation where they had warrant to shoot a suspect or whatever, i always asked well...why didn't they shoot them somewhere else on their body so that it wouldn't be fatal. but then you bring up a good point of what if they still potentially had the capacity to do harm to other people even after they'd been wounded. it still sucks though that that's the final resolution, no matter what the situation was. its a tough call if the reasons that Marlbro gave were the same reasons that the police used to rationalize their actions because at the same time...the man was innocent and had nothing to do with anything...and his actions (possibly out of fear/confusion/?) got him killed...whose to blame here? so tragic... posted by gkiss |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
gkiss: it still sucks though that that's the final resolution, no matter what the situation was. Totally. gkiss: the man was innocent and had nothing to do with anything...and his actions (possibly out of fear/confusion/?) got him killed...whose to blame here? As I said the Terrorists. They have achieved only one goal, to create an atmosphere of complete hatred, mistrust, revulsion and fear of the whole Muslim community throughout the whole western world...surely this cannot be the desired end result, if so, for what purpose? Why would anybody want to be hated? posted by Marlbro |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
i don't know...i just think its too complex for me to understand...this whole terrorism thing...i truly don't get it. i just hope that people understand that terrorists are separate from middle eastern people/muslim people. they are in a category all their own separate from human beings and human kind altogether. i think its something like 1/8 people in london are muslim...that's a HUGE percentage and for that size population to be discriminated against would not be good. i don't know...but i don't think muslims (because they are the population that have been targeted all these years) have anything to do with terrorism whatsoever...terrorists are a separate peoples...if we can even call them that...they're not people anyways that's just what i think... posted by gkiss |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Of 2000 Muslims polled by Sky News 2% thought the London bombings were justified. There are approximately 1.6 million Muslims in the UK, that's a lot of possible support for this atrocity. It's hard to think so many people have such a twisted perspective, but then again look at the support for the Iraq invasion... posted by Marlbro |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marlbro: Of 2000 Muslims polled by Sky News 2% thought the London bombings were justified. I do not see why not terrorism is simply warfare you invaded Iraq and the faught bacn I'm sorry but I cannot quite see how this is any different then sitting in a plane thousands of feet in the air and dropping bombs, seriously if you fight in a war quite often you will suffer civilain casualties it is as simple as that, more Iraqi civilians have died then British since this war started. Marlbro: It's hard to think so many people have such a twisted perspective What perspective? they are simplty fighting a war in a way you, for some reason do not deem acceptable. posted by Kupov |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marlbro: It's hard to think so many people have such a twisted perspective, but then again look at the support for the Iraq invasion... but that's another topic. Heh yah, they probably see all the Westerners cheering on the war in Iraq and think the same thing. It's all fairly hypocritical, I mean the thing is full of contradictions. Marlbro: okay...let's say the guy did have a bomb, they pop a cap in his leg and he proceeds to detonate his bomb spraying countless people and themselves over the inside of the tube train...would we all be bitching about the lack of police response or reassuring ourselves that if they had shot him "he might have been innocent"? Fairly put, I still think they should've dealt with the whole thing better. posted by hungarian kid |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kupov: What perspective? they are simplty fighting a war in a way you, for some reason do not deem acceptable. Do I take it from this statement that you condone the deliberate targeting of civilians as a legitimate tacktic? Kupov: I'm sorry but I cannot quite see how this is any different then sitting in a plane thousands of feet in the air and dropping bombs As my statement about the "invasion" of Iraq indicates I don't agree with the governments stance on Iraq...neither do most Britains. Having said that, I see a world of difference between targeting military, freedom fighters or insurgents and hitting civilians than deliberately targeting civilians. The actions of these extremists will not in any way persuade the government to do anything they demand, therefore it’s pointless. posted by Marlbro |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marlbro: Having said that, I see a world of difference between targeting military, freedom fighters or insurgents and hitting civilians than deliberately targeting civilians. Exactly...plus, the mantra from these terrorists is BS. Most of the times, their justification for the attack is because of the "attrocities committed by the U.S. and Britian in the Middle East." Yet, they then go and detonate a bomb in Egypt, Iraq, etc. killing those same people that they supposedly care so much about. posted by GP |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Britons are among the most respected for their tolerance and open minds internationallya. I hope this incident won't jeopardise these high regards. posted by emdiharon |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
emdiharon: Britons are among the most respected for their tolerance and open minds internationallya. I hope this incident won't jeopardise these high regards. I think this sentiment is so bogus. Everytime something bad happens in Britain everyone starts gushing about how great the British are...that is why I started the "USA vs. Britain" thread right after the bombings...as a way of expressing my disdain for this sentiment. The fact that the British police are assholes like police all around the world should not jeopardize the standing of the British as people like the rest of us; but neither should the fact that something bad happened to Britain elevate them to superior standing. posted by arkhamite |
|||
|
|||
|
The time now is 24 May 2012, 17:12 php B.B. |