PDA

View Full Version : Breaking news, More Bombs!



Lory
21st-July-2005, 01:34 PM
Three more bombs on the underground! ?????

RachD
21st-July-2005, 01:36 PM
Three more bombs on the underground! ?????


I don't think it has been confirmed yet?
Warren Street, Shepherds Bush and Oval tube have been evacuated and suspended.

Lory
21st-July-2005, 01:44 PM
I just heard they are probably only dummy bombs and only the detonators that have gone off.

But the tube lines are being evacuated and tube services suspended

Dan Hudson
21st-July-2005, 01:48 PM
Plus a bus in Hackney it seems :confused:

Sparkles
21st-July-2005, 01:50 PM
Yup, all true according to the BBC (the three UG stations and a bus - No. 26) - but they haven't said 'bombs', just 'smoke' - let's hope smoke is all it is :sick:.

RachD
21st-July-2005, 01:51 PM
Plus a bus in Hackney it seems :confused:

Number 26.

Aparently we are on code amber for the tube, so it could get evacuated/suspended completely again.

David Franklin
21st-July-2005, 02:03 PM
At first, I was hoping we'd get some good intel off this - having live perpetrators and all that. But sounds like at least one of the tube guys got away, and I haven't heard anything about anyone being detained - fingers crossed they all haven't escaped. Obviously just having intact devices will be useful though.

Missy D
21st-July-2005, 02:08 PM
Nail bomb has gone off in Warren St!

KatieR
21st-July-2005, 02:16 PM
This is starting to get really heart breaking. I hope everyone is alright. :flower:

David Franklin
21st-July-2005, 02:23 PM
Nail bomb has gone off in Warren St!All reports I'm hearing is it was a nail bomb, but it didn't actually go off.

RachD
21st-July-2005, 02:28 PM
All reports I'm hearing is it was a nail bomb, but it didn't actually go off.

I think it went off, but only enough to blow the rucksack up? (According to a witness)

David Franklin
21st-July-2005, 02:32 PM
I think it went off, but only enough to blow the rucksack up? (According to a witness)Detonator only by all accounts.

Tessalicious
21st-July-2005, 02:48 PM
I think it went off, but only enough to blow the rucksack up? (According to a witness)Isn't it almost enough to make you pity the guy - goes out this morning intent on wreaking havoc and destruction, and the bomb in his bag only explodes far enough to put him in hospital surrounded by armed guards! Well, not quite pity, perhaps a little Schadenfreude instead - as far as I know no-one else got hurt so we're allowed to laugh at the guy.

stewart38
21st-July-2005, 02:50 PM
Isn't it almost enough to make you pity the guy - goes out this morning intent on wreaking havoc and destruction, and the bomb in his bag only explodes far enough to put him in hospital surrounded by armed guards! Well, not quite pity, perhaps a little Schadenfreude instead - as far as I know no-one else got hurt so we're allowed to laugh at the guy.

If you work in london you probably wont be laughing until you get home :sad:

I wondered why i couldnt get a signal

drathzel
21st-July-2005, 03:10 PM
And only yesterday they were saying they hoped that we would not have another day like 7/7 (their words not mine) Bastards :mad:

KatieR
21st-July-2005, 03:14 PM
I just wondered if anyone else was feeling the same way I am. Just found myself standing on the street corner quite distressed as I was on my way towards the train station when all these phone and text messages starting coming through once again appealing for my whereabouts and if I was alive and that I should come home.

I have to say that to me this has all had quite a large effect on me. Its hard going from happily going about my day only to have it thrown into total turmoil. I am really touched by peoples concern but for all I knew it could have been another 7th of July with the same if not worse consequences, then when you try and get in touch with people and try to find out what is going on and nobody really knows or you cant get in touch, it really is very upsetting - for me it is anyway.

DavidB
21st-July-2005, 03:14 PM
More people at work are talking about the cricket than this.

Purple Sparkler
21st-July-2005, 03:22 PM
I've been confined to my building! Ooh, the excitement (and the worry- they better let us out in 2 hours time).

David Bailey
21st-July-2005, 03:26 PM
I've been confined to my building! Ooh, the excitement (and the worry- they better let us out in 2 hours time).
I thought you wanted to leave... :innocent:

Hope you get out OK :flower:

stewart38
21st-July-2005, 03:27 PM
Ok Bank to Euston by underground based on existing services , not possible me thinks. im going home by foot now :sick:

Monika
21st-July-2005, 03:28 PM
Situation * Ref CR 24 Business Travellers update*

"Details remain unclear, but reports suggest that three small devices exploded at the following London Underground (LU – subway) stations at approximately 12.30 (local time): Warren Street, Oval and Shepherds Bush. There has been one confirmed injury at Warren Street. There have also been unconfirmed reports of incidents involving buses in Hackney Road in east London and in Newgate Street (EC4).

The incidents have triggered the evacuation of affected stations and the suspension of the tube system.

Further disruption is being caused by police investigations into security scares and other unconfirmed incidents.

At this time, police are not treating these incidents as being on the same scale as the events in London of 7 July.



Implications for Personnel

· Personnel currently in central London should minimize travel around the city until the situation stabilizes and should stay away from public transport, including transport hubs, and as far as practically possible avoid high profile, symbolic government buildings.

· Road closures, security scares and the suspension of parts of the transport network will cause congestion across London and are likely to make travel extremely difficult.

· Personnel should be prepared for communication networks to become overloaded; mobile (cell phone) calls and messages may not reach their intended recipient.

· Staff should not ring the emergency services unless absolutely essential.

Implications for Travellers

· Business travel to the UK can continue, though travellers should be prepared for serious travel disruption and, as above, central London venues should be avoided.

· Staff should expect travel delays due to enhanced security checks and security scares.

Implications for Management

· If they have not already done so management should account for the locations of all staff and discourage all non-essential staff movement into and around central London.

· Management should also give consideration to the business continuity implications stemming from potential repeat incidents over the next 48 hours.

Please note:· www.crg-online.com will provide frequent updates on the situation to subscribers.

Take good care everyone :hug: :flower:
·

latinlover
21st-July-2005, 03:32 PM
Some armed police on hungerford bridge moved us all along very agressively-don't blame them really.
why would people stop and run the risk of being blown up ?
I just went on my way-
big sub-machine gun, though,
lots of sirens everywhere.I have to confess to a sort of resignation at having my day or journey home disrupted rather than outrage or even fear or worry.Is that defiance or am I just an unfeeling b*st**d?
no need to answer that one guys!
scary!

DianaS
21st-July-2005, 06:44 PM
(THis is a really wet post, so you may like to ignore it)
Its a buggg-r isn't it
Bloody hell!
Saddest thing is that they are kids, around my sons age, just 20.
Can't help but wonder what their families make of it all
Awful to realise one day that your children are trying to kill themselves and others and theres so little you knew about it...

Young men need a right of passage and at around 20 it seems to really peak. I don't know whether its biological or what, but they seem to need a very strong focus and they are amazingly, intelligent, brave and naive.

At 20 I was at all sorts of demos, banning the bomb and engaging in non violent direct action, I was and still am passionate about my beliefs, but drew a line... many

It now seems that the line which we drew is being stepped over..
And a different agenda is gaining precidence
And I wondor whether if I had been 20 today how would I cope with a country that had carpet bombed Afganistan and killed so many innocent people

I would stand up to be counted
As I did in the "Not in My name" demos
and I took my son

I feel that this message may seen wet, or liberal, or colluding with murderers, and yes although they are 20 plus and naive they are murderers, but I also sense that our moral obligations are to look deeply what is happening in the world and to question, and to act morally

I can't help but feel that the suicide bombers are young vunerable males who are being used for political purposes, and to some extent their naivety and innocence is being sadkly misused

I do apologise to any one who has been affected by their actions, as ultimately they are adults and are responsibile, but I just see a pitiful waste of human life

Rhythm King
21st-July-2005, 10:51 PM
And I wondor whether if I had been 20 today how would I cope with a country that had carpet bombed Afganistan and killed so many innocent people

I'm sorry, where is the evidence that anyone "carpet bombed "Afghanistan, let alone us. Or Iraq for that matter. That is a complete distortion of the truth and to naively make comments like that is to spread the propaganda of the terrorists. The Taliban regime in Afghanistan openly supported the Al Q'uaida training camps in its country and regularly violated the human rights of its citizens, particularly the women. The Coalition only went there to enforce regime change after 9/11, not before.

Lots of innocent people are dying in Iraq, every day. They are being killed by hard-core Iraqi fanatics and Islamist (not Islamic) terrorists from around the Middle East, who go there to kill them because the ordinary decent Iraqi people disagree with their fanatical beliefs, as do the West. May I remind you that prior to the Coalition going to Iraq, Saddam Hussein was doing a pretty good job of killing and torturing and gassing innocent Iraqis too.

I am not saying I agree totally with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, nor that the US should invade every country with which it disagrees, or indeed that the UK should blindly support US foreign policy, far from it.

There is no excuse for blowing up Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, or anyone else in this country. If people want to demonstrate peacefully in our democratic society, then fine, they have that right. If they don't like the politicians and their policies (and lets face it, who does?) - vote them out at the next election. If not, go join the Mujihadeen in the Middle East, and fight as soldiers, like men, rather than act like cowards here.


I can't help but feel that the suicide bombers are young vunerable males who are being used for political purposes, and to some extent their naivety and innocence is being sadly misused

This I agree with, but suggest that it is rather more than "to some extent". Incidentally, suicide bombers are not just young males. Females do it too, particularly in Sri Lanka, where the Tamil Tigers started the phenomenon.

I am increasingly finding that such spirituality as I have is being drained away by people who spill blood in the cause of who effectively has the best imaginary friend. If you were the one omnipotent God, would you honestly let this happen in your Name?

Gus
21st-July-2005, 10:58 PM
There is no excuse for blowing up Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, or anyone else in this country. If people want to demonstrate peacefully in our democratic society, then fine, they have that right. If they don't like the politicians and their policies (and lets face it, who does?) - vote them out at the next election. If not, go join the Mujihadeen in the Middle East, and fight as soldiers, like men, rather than act like cowards here. :yeah: I find it alarming and distasteful when the insinuation starts that somehow we brought this on ourselves. There can never be any excuse in using your God's name (whatever God you hold true) as justification for the slaughter of innocents.

ChrisA
21st-July-2005, 11:09 PM
I'm sorry, where is the evidence that anyone "carpet bombed "Afghanistan, let alone us. Or Iraq for that matter. That is a complete distortion of the truth and to naively make comments like that is to spread the propaganda of the terrorists.
Well said.

Have some rep.

LMC
22nd-July-2005, 08:45 AM
Times article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1054-1703419,00.html) - Who needs big bombs once you have planted fear?

:yeah:

Unfortunately, it looks like we are in for a long haul.

The fear does gnaw at you... despite my bravado and determination that I *won't* let it get to me, I was upset enough to fall for the most obvious windup yesterday (still :blush: and a bit :mad: ) and I really didn't want to come into Kings Cross this morning.

Rumour is frequently worse than fact, as yesterday. Can we please all try not to jump off at the deep end when something appears on the BBC or TV news until we actually know what's going on?

Purple Sparkler
22nd-July-2005, 10:51 AM
Rumour is frequently worse than fact, as yesterday. Can we please all try not to jump off at the deep end when something appears on the BBC or TV news until we actually know what's going on?

:yeah:


There is no excuse for blowing up Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, or anyone else in this country.


There can never be any excuse in using your God's name (whatever God you hold true) as justification for the slaughter of innocents.

I was most impressed with this statement (http://www.islamispeace.org.uk/) from the Muslims of Britain campaign, and thought you both might like to read it too.

El Salsero Gringo
22nd-July-2005, 10:59 AM
I was most impressed with this statement (http://www.islamispeace.org.uk/) from the Muslims of Britain campaign, and thought you both might like to read it too.It would be a lot more impressive if it had ever been issued as a result of suicide bombings linked to Islamic causes anywhere else in the world.

stewart38
22nd-July-2005, 11:22 AM
re latest

----------------------


In the first incident, marksmen opened fire near Stockwell Tube station as passengers were evacuated. It is thought the man was killed.

Alarmed onlookers said they saw police, some in plain clothes, chasing a man before opening fire.

Reports said the suspect was pushed to the ground and shot five times at close range.


-------------------------------

Im sure they wanted to make sure he was dead

Will
22nd-July-2005, 11:27 AM
I'm sorry, where is the evidence that anyone "carpet bombed "Afghanistan, let alone us. Or Iraq for that matter. That is a complete distortion of the truth and to naively make comments like that is to spread the propaganda of the terrorists. The Taliban regime in Afghanistan openly supported the Al Q'uaida training camps in its country and regularly violated the human rights of its citizens, particularly the women. The Coalition only went there to enforce regime change after 9/11, not before.

Lots of innocent people are dying in Iraq, every day. They are being killed by hard-core Iraqi fanatics and Islamist (not Islamic) terrorists from around the Middle East, who go there to kill them because the ordinary decent Iraqi people disagree with their fanatical beliefs, as do the West. May I remind you that prior to the Coalition going to Iraq, Saddam Hussein was doing a pretty good job of killing and torturing and gassing innocent Iraqis too.

I am not saying I agree totally with the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, nor that the US should invade every country with which it disagrees, or indeed that the UK should blindly support US foreign policy, far from it.

There is no excuse for blowing up Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, or anyone else in this country. If people want to demonstrate peacefully in our democratic society, then fine, they have that right. If they don't like the politicians and their policies (and lets face it, who does?) - vote them out at the next election. If not, go join the Mujihadeen in the Middle East, and fight as soldiers, like men, rather than act like cowards here.

I am increasingly finding that such spirituality as I have is being drained away by people who spill blood in the cause of who effectively has the best imaginary friend. If you were the one omnipotent God, would you honestly let this happen in your Name?
:yeah:

stewart38
22nd-July-2005, 11:44 AM
There is no excuse for blowing up Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, or anyone else in this country. If people want to demonstrate peacefully in our democratic society, then fine, they have that right. If they don't like the politicians and their policies (and lets face it, who does?) - vote them out at the next election. If not, go join the Mujihadeen in the Middle East, and fight as soldiers, like men, rather than act like cowards here.




Picture the sceen you are having a big wedding party at windsor some big helicopters marked USA come out of the sky and blow up your whole familiy 30 dead I think ?

How do you deal with that

you have relatives held without trail for years and years some where in cuba

How do you deal with that ?

These issue are not straight forward

Gus
22nd-July-2005, 11:55 AM
re latest

----------------------


In the first incident, marksmen opened fire near Stockwell Tube station as passengers were evacuated. It is thought the man was killed.

Alarmed onlookers said they saw police, some in plain clothes, chasing a man before opening fire.

Reports said the suspect was pushed to the ground and shot five times at close range.


-------------------------------

Im sure they wanted to make sure he was dead


RIGGGHHHHT ... so lets think this through ..... a suspect terrorist on the run is chased down, a man who, one way or another, can provide vital information about what is going on in the terrorist netwrok .... and so you shoot him down?? Sorry, doesnt make sense ... neither does the 'five' shots .... if they were a armed reponse unit I thought training was to put a few bursts into the body ... THEN you would approach for the 'kill' (not that such a kill would ever be part of formal training?).

Sorry ... the whole thing is a bit too serious for non-validated rumour to be posted. Many of us owe our lives to the work of armed response units ... I dont think we need unsubstatinated rumour printed on the forum. If this 'incident' has been sunbstantiated then I apologise unreservedly, otherwise, lets leave it out, please. :flower:

LMC
22nd-July-2005, 11:59 AM
Sorry ... the whole thing is a bit too serious for non-validated rumour to be posted. Many of us owe our lives to the work of armed response units ... I dont think we need unsubstatinated rumour printed on the forum. If this 'incident' has been sunbstantiated then I apologise unreservedly, otherwise, lets leave it out, please. :flower:
It's on BBC News, it must be true

*hands Gus back his ODA hat*

Seriously, IMO, part of the problem is that respected sites like the BBC etc are reporting events based on "general public" statements. I'm reserving judgement on this one until the Met get around to telling us what happened. The actual truth will probably be somewhere between the two :rolleyes:

Gus
22nd-July-2005, 12:04 PM
It would be a lot more impressive if it had ever been issued as a result of suicide bombings linked to Islamic causes anywhere else in the world.I think it is difficult for a UK group to 'apologise' for other attrocities elsewhere .... Unfortuntaley the old adage of "one mans terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" rings true too many times. For instance, would ESG care to comment on the followinglink (http://www.cdiss.org/Documents/Uploaded/CDISS%20Programme%20-%20Database%20of%20Terrorist%20Incidents%20-%201940-1949.pdf)?

El Salsero Gringo
22nd-July-2005, 12:05 PM
RIGGGHHHHT ... so lets think this through ..... a suspect terrorist on the run is chased down, a man who, one way or another, can provide vital information about what is going on in the terrorist netwrok .... and so you shoot him down?? Sorry, doesnt make sense ... neither does the 'five' shots .... if they were a armed reponse unit I thought training was to put a few bursts into the body ... THEN you would approach for the 'kill' (not that such a kill would ever be part of formal training?).If you were pursuing a man you thought might be wearing an explosive device and had the intent to murder as many people as possible - and he ran into a tube station - what would you do, Gus? What reason would you give to the enquiry as to why you didn't shoot him as soon as you had the chance?

stewart38
22nd-July-2005, 12:08 PM
RIGGGHHHHT ... so lets think this through ..... a suspect terrorist on the run is chased down, a man who, one way or another, can provide vital information about what is going on in the terrorist netwrok .... and so you shoot him down?? Sorry, doesnt make sense ... neither does the 'five' shots .... if they were a armed reponse unit I thought training was to put a few bursts into the body ... THEN you would approach for the 'kill' (not that such a kill would ever be part of formal training?).

Sorry ... the whole thing is a bit too serious for non-validated rumour to be posted. Many of us owe our lives to the work of armed response units ... I dont think we need unsubstatinated rumour printed on the forum. If this 'incident' has been sunbstantiated then I apologise unreservedly, otherwise, lets leave it out, please. :flower:


?? thats what has HAPPENED

-----------
bomber at a Tube station in south London.
Armed officers opened fire up to six times on the suspect as he hurdled a ticket barrier and raced along a platform at Stockwell station.
Police screamed at passengers to evacuate and are thought to have shot the suspect as he stumbled on to a train.
Alarmed onlookers said they saw up to 10 plain-clothed officers chasing an Asian-looking man before opening fire
-------------


Policy is shoot in head and kill as lets chance of them exploding bomb, see news last few days yes put a few burst into his body he blows up and kills 25 people on the train

Nothing wrong with that so i dont understand posting :sick:

David Franklin
22nd-July-2005, 12:14 PM
If you were pursuing a man you thought might be wearing an explosive device and had the intent to murder as many people as possible - and he ran into a tube station - what would you do, Gus? What reason would you give to the enquiry as to why you didn't shoot him as soon as you had the chance?So, shooting someone who you think might be wearing an explosive device is OK? Perhaps those are the most appropriate rules of engagement, and it may well be the officer here was correct. But if those are the new "rules", we need to recognize mistakes are going to get made (table leg, anyone?), and innocent people killed.

Welcome to the 21st century...

LMC
22nd-July-2005, 12:20 PM
Policy is shoot in head and kill as lets chance of them exploding bomb, see news last few days yes put a few burst into his body he blows up and kills 25 people on the train

Nothing wrong with that <snip>
:yeah:

but with the reservation that I am still most unhappy with media reporting based *purely* on statements from the general public - general public statements are vital to ensure that cover-ups don't take place. But a member of the UK general public who has just witnessed someone being shot down in front of them will be in a shocked and emotional state - even if they are coherent. That doesn't mean that their testimony is inaccurate - but I would prefer to see a balance of statements by inclusion of a quote from official sources. To some extent, that is the fault of the "official source" for not being on the ball as well as the fault of the media for stirring an emotional response out of all proportion to the effect on the individual (non-involved) reader/viewer/listener.

I'm already afraid and not wanting to travel into London. I can handle it, at the moment anyway. But "be afraid" style media reporting is not helping :sad:

Rhythm King
22nd-July-2005, 12:22 PM
Picture the sceen you are having a big wedding party at windsor some big helicopters marked USA come out of the sky and blow up your whole familiy 30 dead I think ?

How do you deal with that

you have relatives held without trail for years and years some where in cuba

How do you deal with that ?

These issue are not straight forward


I quite agree with you and do not condone all the actions of Coalition Forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, without some reservations. The points you have made show that these incidents happened in Iraq/Afghanistan. The attacks in the UK were carried out by UK citizens, who were totally unrelated to the events in those countries. The point I'm making is if they disagree with the actions of this country - take democratic action. Don't go around blowing up innocent people who have nothing to do with it.

El Salsero Gringo
22nd-July-2005, 12:38 PM
So, shooting someone who you think might be wearing an explosive device is OK? Perhaps those are the most appropriate rules of engagement, and it may well be the officer here was correct. But if those are the new "rules", we need to recognize mistakes are going to get made (table leg, anyone?), and innocent people killed.

Welcome to the 21st century...I'm hypothesising as to why a man might be shot, several times, on entering a tube station. I have no more idea as to what happened today than you, or Gus.

But, to answer your question: if you are in a role and position to have a good intelligence that a person has a bomb strapped to his chest, and your judgement is that the best way to prevent an imminent loss of innocent life is for you shoot him dead before he can detonate the explosive - then not only is it OK but I insist as a matter of duty that you do so. And if you didn't, I'd throw the book at you afterwards.

Gus
22nd-July-2005, 01:02 PM
I'm hypothesising as to why a man might be shot, several times, on entering a tube station. I have no more idea as to what happened today than you, or Gus.I agree with the shoot to kill policy on 'suspected bombers' (simplistic view I know with dubiuous moral groundings but ....). The point I was trying to make was regards the original report. You DONT push someone to the floor THEN shoot them. If they are carrying bomb logic says you try to take them out from a distance as soon as possible ..... thats why I doubted the accuracy of the report. Seems like someone was shot, but the circumstances are less than clear ... with all the worry that there is I was expressing a personal view that I dont think that is helpful. Others may disagree.

Lee
22nd-July-2005, 01:05 PM
I'm hypothesising as to why a man might be shot, several times, on entering a tube station. I have no more idea as to what happened today than you, or Gus.

But, to answer your question: if you are in a role and position to have a good intelligence that a person has a bomb strapped to his chest, and your judgement is that the best way to prevent an imminent loss of innocent life is for you shoot him dead before he can detonate the explosive - then not only is it OK but I insist as a matter of duty that you do so. And if you didn't, I'd throw the book at you afterwards.


It was reported on the BBC web site that the suspecthad a sort of thickish coat - it was a coat you'd wear in winter, sort of like a padded jacket.

The point is, you don't run from armed police into a tube station (the day after an attack) and expect to get away unharmed, Police are under orders to shoot to kill if they believe someone is about to detonate a bomb, it's the only way to stop the terrorist hitting the button and killing everyone nearby.

I completly support this new rule, but realise it's open to human (police) error.

Lee

Gus
22nd-July-2005, 01:13 PM
If this 'incident' has been sunbstantiated then I apologise unreservedly, Seems like the incident has been substantiated ... didnt realise that when they said "pushed down and shot" that this took place in the confines of a tube not in the open ... total misinterpreatition by me. Stewart' I apologise but still wish this kind of thing wasnt posted on the Forum.

Alykat
22nd-July-2005, 01:19 PM
and your judgement is that the best way to prevent an imminent loss of innocent life is for you shoot him dead before he can detonate the explosive - then not only is it OK but I insist as a matter of duty that you do so.

Sometimes I wonder what civilisation has come to. While we're at it, let's bring back capital punishment for those people for whom someone's "judgement" has been to suspect them of potential terrorism, or we could always set up a UK version of guantanamo bay (oh yes, that's right, Britain was the first nation to invent concentration camps was't it?).

What happened, and is happening in London is awful, I would never doubt it. But personally I do not agree with killing people who fit the "profile". This may seem contraversial and naive to some of you, but for better or for worse I still believe human life is sacred.

El Salsero Gringo
22nd-July-2005, 01:43 PM
Sometimes I wonder what civilisation has come to. While we're at it, let's bring back capital punishment for those people for whom someone's "judgement" has been to suspect them of potential terrorism, or we could always set up a UK version of guantanamo bay (oh yes, that's right, Britain was the first nation to invent concentration camps was't it?).

What happened, and is happening in London is awful, I would never doubt it. But personally I do not agree with killing people who fit the "profile". This may seem contraversial and naive to some of you, but for better or for worse I still believe human life is sacred.Its not a question about 'fitting a profile'. It's a question of what you do, as an armed police officer whose duty is to secure the safety of the civillian population of London, when you follow a man you know is carrying a suicide bomb into a tube station. To pussy about with "human life is sacred" is just sophistry.

Alykat
22nd-July-2005, 01:59 PM
Its not a question about 'fitting a profile'. It's a question of what you do, as an armed police officer whose duty is to secure the safety of the civillian population of London, when you follow a man you know is carrying a suicide bomb into a tube station. To pussy about with "human life is sacred" is just sophistry.

Interesting point there, and I can freely admit I wouldn't be able to predict what decision I would make if I was in that situation.

My point rather relates to the implication that life/death decisions are being based on judgements. Whose judgement is being relied on (police, intelligence officers, sources in the terrorist world, politicans, human instinct?). Can this duty to rely on judgement not be abused by the wrong person?

With regards to "sophistry" , please enlighten me, in what way is my argument false in order to deceive people?

El Salsero Gringo
22nd-July-2005, 02:06 PM
Interesting point there, and I can freely admit I wouldn't be able to predict what decision I would make if I was in that situation.

My point rather relates to the implication that life/death decisions are being based on judgements. Whose judgement is being relied on (police, intelligence officers, sources in the terrorist world, politicans, human instinct?). Can this duty to rely on judgement not be abused by the wrong person?
Life/death decisions are always based on judgement and it is bad (although not new) that people have to be put in the position of having to make those judgements, particularly when lives are lost as a result of mistakes in either direction. Yes such power can be abused, and yes, mistakes are made. As David Franklin pointed out, table legs in plastic bags come to mind.


With regards to "sophistry" , please enlighten me, in what way is my argument false in order to deceive people?My apologies - I used the word in error. 'Unrealistic idealism' is more what I meant to imply.

Clive Long
22nd-July-2005, 02:13 PM
I don't know what the "right way" to resolve this is.

All I observe is that I listened to three "eye-witness" accounts of people on the carriage where the guy was shot:

"He had a shaved head"
"He was wearing a red base-ball cap"
"He was wearing an outdoor coat"
"He was wearing a blue fleece"
"He was Asian"
"He was Pakistani"
"He came on the carriage and sat next to me, then he got up and shouted"
"He ran on the carriage, tripped and police jumped on him"
"He stood in the doorway and the police got on the end of the carriage"

People's immediate recollection in situations of fear and confusion can be completely different. My point is I feel the police had a split-second decision to make in a climate where everyone is jumpy - how do they know they have the right person? I remember an experiment in the 70's on the
"Burke Special" TV Show which showed such "inaccurate recollection."

Added: I thought, well if he was innocent, why was this guy running from the police, into Stockwell Tube? Then I heard four witnesses say, "I heard a commotion, I was scared, so I ran to get away from the danger"
End of add

Do we want to live in a society where the occasional person (say one in a hundred) who is suspected gets shot, incorrectly, in order to protect the greater number? Even if the intelligence on suspects was infallible do I want to live in a society with this "escalated" level of violence and fear? It sickens me - but what sickens me more is the prospect of my free-living being curtailed by this. Maybe I should learn about how to live in such circumstances from people who lived in the West Bank, Tel Aviv, Beirut, Belfast, LondonDerry, etc. etc. None of us are immune from this.

This evening, I was going to go down the Northern Line then take Victoria Line to get a train. I'll now go by car. I changed my behaviour because of fear - prudent probably, but I feel it's one tiny aspect of "giving in" which I don't like.

Maybe the best we can do is enjoy life and treat the people we deal with a bit better than we sometimes do for we don't know what will happen.

Clive

stewart38
22nd-July-2005, 02:17 PM
Seems like the incident has been substantiated ... didnt realise that when they said "pushed down and shot" that this took place in the confines of a tube not in the open ... total misinterpreatition by me. Stewart' I apologise but still wish this kind of thing wasnt posted on the Forum.


I do see Gus point as well .

'our uninformed' debate shouldnt have harm on others but if I was to post I hear the bank tube as exploded without real evidence thats alarming and wrong and could cause distress to people who know people who work near bank etc

The latest I hear on this was he was pinned down and then shot several times at close range but Im sure there will be further info

Im also afraid if you shot everyone wearing heavy coats in summer you going to wipe out a lot of people over 85 who havent realised its summer yet.

Alykat
22nd-July-2005, 02:18 PM
Life/death decisions are always based on judgement and it is bad (although not new) that people have to be put in the position of having to make those judgements, particularly when lives are lost as a result of mistakes in either direction. Yes such power can be abused, and yes, mistakes are made. As David Franklin pointed out, table legs in plastic bags come to mind.

I couldn't put it better. :nice:


My apologies - I used the word in error. 'Unrealistic idealism' is more what I meant to imply.

Ah, "unrealistic idealism", well, there I will have to agree with you! Not that this acknowledgement will in any way alter my opinion :wink: , unrealistic idealism is not always such a bad thing.

David Franklin
22nd-July-2005, 02:29 PM
This evening, I was going to go down the Northern Line then take Victoria Line to get a train. I'll now go by car. I changed my behaviour because of fear - prudent probably, but I feel it's one tiny aspect of "giving in" which I don't like.To put things somewhat into perspective. If there was a tube bombing every day, you could expect to get killed in an explosion once every three hundred years. (Of course, in less than a month there wouldn't be a tube line left to be bombed...)

latinlover
22nd-July-2005, 02:43 PM
Im also afraid if you shot everyone wearing heavy coats in summer you going to wipe out a lot of people over 85 who havent realised its summer yet.


but presumably they wouldn't be runniing away from armed policemen?