Someone on the Tube needs their hand shaken...

[Purple Sparkler]

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/9808/nottinghillgate6zj.jpg

(Thanks to Dizzy for e-mailing this to me)

[Dizzy]

I take it you found the email mildly amusing then!!! :rofl:

You shouldn't laugh really........... :rofl:

[David Franklin]

Or you could try the new fashion craze...

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/TransparentBackpack.jpg

[dee]

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[stewart38]

Or you could try the new fashion craze...

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/TransparentBackpack.jpg

Although funny i guess that would help defuse what is a very serious situation.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Although funny i guess that would help defuse what is a very serious situation.
oh very droll :rolleyes:

[bigdjiver]

It appears that one of our servants has shot an innocent man dead.

one of my songs goes:

In my name, in my name
Great God almighty
they do it in my name

[ChrisA]

In my name, in my name
Great God almighty
they do it in my name

No they don't. It's just a substantially less sh1tty thing (providing it doesn't happen too often) than if one of our servants fails to shoot dead a guilty man, before he kills a much bigger bunch of innocent men dead.

I'm totally sick of all this bleeding heart stuff.

People want to live in this country in the current climate?

They need to learn the culture real quick...

These days, a policeman says stop - you DON'T run away into a tube train.

[frodo]

No they don't. It's just a substantially less sh1tty thing (providing it doesn't happen too often) than if one of our servants fails to shoot dead a guilty man, before he kills a much bigger bunch of innocent men dead.

I'm totally sick of all this bleeding heart stuff.

People want to live in this country in the current climate?

They need to learn the culture real quick...

These days, a policeman says stop - you DON'T run away into a tube train.
Bleeding heart aside though, if he'd been a 100% known suicide bomber, on average more lives may well have been saved by making the attempt to capture him.

[ChrisA]

Bleeding heart aside though, if he'd been a 100% known suicide bomber, on average more lives may well have been saved by making the attempt to capture him.
Yeah, possibly.

I'm not going to be amongst those castigating the officers who have to make those split-second decisions though.

And the 100% known suicide bomber? He stands very still, his hands totally visible?

I bet he lives.

[El Salsero Gringo]

No they don't. It's just a substantially less sh1tty thing (providing it doesn't happen too often) than if one of our servants fails to shoot dead a guilty man, before he kills a much bigger bunch of innocent men dead.

I'm totally sick of all this bleeding heart stuff.

People want to live in this country in the current climate?

They need to learn the culture real quick...

These days, a policeman says stop - you DON'T run away into a tube train.Is one automatically a bleeding-heart liberal if one takes a moment to think about the fact that an innocent man was shot dead, and (likely) a policeman's career was ruined?

One can only surmise, but perhaps if the man had known that he was being chased by three armed plain-clothes detectives and was under suspicion of carrying a bomb he would have stopped. Let's just say that if I were working in Brazil and had overstayed my visa - and was then chased by three beefy guys in suits, I'd probably make run for it too. The possibility that I might be rugby-tackled and then shot in the head would never occur to me.

I support the decision that it may be necessary to shoot-to-kill in certain circumstances - and I acknowledge that the decision the police took in this case might well have been the best they could have done under the circumstances. But it is still a tragedy and no one should be shy to admit it.

[bigdjiver]

No they don't. It's just a substantially less sh1tty thing (providing it doesn't happen too often) than if one of our servants fails to shoot dead a guilty man, before he kills a much bigger bunch of innocent men dead.

I'm totally sick of all this bleeding heart stuff.

People want to live in this country in the current climate?

They need to learn the culture real quick...

These days, a policeman says stop - you DON'T run away into a tube train.You were not there, I was not there, and he was not a guilty man. You do not know that he knew it was a policeman, you do not know that he comprehended what the guy chasing him with a gun was saying, you do not even know if he knew he was being chased. The first report said he vaulted the barriers and was wearing a bulky coat. The last report I heard claimed that he used his ticket to pass through the barriers normally, and had no such coat. My guess is that the policeman had to vault the barriers, and was bulked out by his body armour, and an eye-witness made a mistake. I thought our culture was that a man was innocent until proven guilty. I thought that our culture was that if the worst in our society had their legal rights respected the there was a good chance that all of our legal rights will be respected. People have died for that principle. Suspected serial killers have killed before the proof was found to arrest them, and the insane before their condition was established.

I have been stopped by police three times in my life, once for running with a bag, and twice for walking with one. I have heard tube trains coming into a station and ran for them. I have heard people shouting something behind me and thought it was nothing to do with me. I would probably run away from a man with a gun.

The terrorists are winning, we are scared. When we should be uniting as a society we are separating out people based upon their appearance. Cultural isolation, us against them, is the first step in making a bomber.

[Dance Demon]

No they don't. It's just a substantially less sh1tty thing (providing it doesn't happen too often) than if one of our servants fails to shoot dead a guilty man, before he kills a much bigger bunch of innocent men dead.

I'm totally sick of all this bleeding heart stuff.

People want to live in this country in the current climate?

They need to learn the culture real quick...

These days, a policeman says stop - you DON'T run away into a tube train.

:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: .........regardless of what the reason was for him running away, I doubt if there was anyone in London that wasn't aware of the carnage that was going on, and if someone shouts " POLICE!!! Stop"....you stop, or risk the chance that what happened to this guy might also happen to you..........

[ElaineB]

I'm sorry for this Guy and his family and I do not believe the Police thought - 'oh look, there is someone who we would like to shoot - he is no doubt innocent, but lets blow his brains out anyway!' The poor fellow must have been giving the wrong signals by whatever he did - and has been said, we do not know what was said, or who ran!

The point is that he and the Policemen who shot him are all the victims of Terrorism. :angry:


Elaine

[Dreadful Scathe]

. You do not know that he knew it was a policeman, you do not know that he comprehended what the guy chasing him with a gun was saying, you do not even know if he knew he was being chased. The first report said he vaulted the barriers and was wearing a bulky coat. The last report I heard claimed that he used his ticket to pass through the barriers normally, and had no such coat. My guess is that the policeman had to vault the barriers, and was bulked out by his body armour, and an eye-witness made a mistake.

You say the policeman was wearing body armour, he no doubt had other identifying marks, yet the guy still ran? You also say he may not have been the aware the police were chasing him - are the police so thick they cant tell the difference between a man running for a train and a man running from them ? i'd doubt it. Also, Ive never heard any of these reports about the lack of coat and using a ticket, they cant have been very widely reported ! Im sure he knew enough English to understand 'STOP!'


Cultural isolation, us against them, is the first step in making a bomber.

Rubbish. In society theres always 'us against them' - suits versus shop workers , cyclists versus car drivers, black vs white , football fan vs football fan , label versus label - in some quarters this can get quite nasty, but bombers are hardly a common occurrence.

[El Salsero Gringo]

There's a lot of peering into the Retrospectoscope(TM) going on in this thread.

It's entirely possible for the policeman AND the man to have behaved perfectly reasonably in their own world-view - and still for the man to have been shot. That's what makes it a tragedy. It's not fair to say that the man should have heard a warning (what if one wasn't shouted? what if his English was poor and he didn't understand who was chasing him? It seems fairly clear that he didn't understand *why* he was being chased). I don't accept that he 'deserved' to be shot because he should have known he was a terrorist suspect. (Nor am I saying that some fault lies with the police.)


You say the policeman was wearing body armour, he no doubt had other identifying marks, yet the guy still ran? You also say he may not have been the aware the police were chasing him - are the police so thick they cant tell the difference between a man running for a train and a man running from them ? i'd doubt it. Also, Ive never heard any of these reports about the lack of coat and using a ticket, they cant have been very widely reported ! Im sure he knew enough English to understand 'STOP!'DS, you're making some fairly substantial claims about something (as far as I know) you didn't witness. I don't know where you got all this information from - particularly about whether the police were identifiable (all plainclothes, I thought), whether a warning was shouted, or whether the man knew enough English to have understood it.

[ducasi]

I've got two observations...


I believe that unloading a gun into a man's head when he is pinned to the ground is the definition of over-kill.
It's a shame a post intended to lift people's spirits with a humorous picture has descended into bickering.

That's all I have to say.

[ChrisA]

Is one automatically a bleeding-heart liberal if one takes a moment to think about the fact that an innocent man was shot dead, and (likely) a policeman's career was ruined?

{snip}

But it is still a tragedy and no one should be shy to admit it.
Of course it's a tragedy; I never said it wasn't.

However, if the dead guy had turned out to be a terrorist, with bombs under his jacket, only moments away from killing twenty or more people in a packed tube carriage (and why not also take a moment to think about the prospect of that), we would all be applauding the copper in question for his bravery and fine judgement.

I can't imagine anyone would be regretting the fact that the bad guy hadn't been apprehended, convicted in a court of law, and imprisoned at your expense and mine for a few years.

So I conclude that the principle is right, but the implementation wrong on this occasion - it's a bugger and terrible for all involved, I know. Terrible times demand terrible measures sometimes.

Incidentally, while I'm on a politically incorrect roll, I'll say this too:



When we should be uniting as a society we are separating out people based upon their appearance.

Not only should we (whoever 'we' are) be separating out people based on their appearance, so should the mainstream, peace-loving, well-integrated Muslim community, peace be upon them.

Like it or not, the profile of the bombers is mostly young, male, asian in appearance, likely to be carrying a rucksack, likely to be getting a bit agitated when on public transport.

Muslims and non-muslims alike should be on the lookout for people fitting the profile, and maybe that would increase the chances of spotting the next perpetrators before the next carnage.

This is nothing to do with racism. If the bombers were from a different culture, I, a white guy with a big nose, would be only too happy to be stopped and searched every day in the interests of catching the buggers.

I'd also be more than happy to get one of those transparent rucksack thingies too.

[MartinHarper]

I can't imagine anyone would be regretting the fact that the bad guy hadn't been apprehended, convicted in a court of law, and imprisoned at your expense and mine for a few years.

I would. You get more information out of people who are alive, and that information might serve to prevent further attacks. Also, you avoid creating a martyr.

[Will]

No they don't. It's just a substantially less sh1tty thing (providing it doesn't happen too often) than if one of our servants fails to shoot dead a guilty man, before he kills a much bigger bunch of innocent men dead.

I'm totally sick of all this bleeding heart stuff.

People want to live in this country in the current climate?

They need to learn the culture real quick...

These days, a policeman says stop - you DON'T run away into a tube train.
:yeah: Have some Rep!

[Will]

I'm sorry for this Guy and his family and I do not believe the Police thought - 'oh look, there is someone who we would like to shoot - he is no doubt innocent, but lets blow his brains out anyway!' The poor fellow must have been giving the wrong signals by whatever he did - and has been said, we do not know what was said, or who ran!

The point is that he and the Policemen who shot him are all the victims of Terrorism. :angry:


Elaine
:yeah: Again, have some Rep!

[Dizzy]

Like it or not, the profile of the bombers is mostly young, male, asian in appearance, likely to be carrying a rucksack, likely to be getting a bit agitated when on public transport.

Muslims and non-muslims alike should be on the lookout for people fitting the profile, and maybe that would increase the chances of spotting the next perpetrators before the next carnage.

This is nothing to do with racism. If the bombers were from a different culture, I, a white guy with a big nose, would be only too happy to be stopped and searched every day in the interests of catching the buggers.

I'd also be more than happy to get one of those transparent rucksack thingies too.


:yeah:
I completely agree. I think Muslims and non Muslims alike should be looking out for these guys, not thinking racially every time the bombers' descriptions appear.

These bombers are the enemy - they are the ones making religion such a society obsession.

[bigdjiver]

I have a wicked sense of humour, sometimes so inappropriate that it shames me. Those pictures exceeded my limits.

If I heard “Armed Police, stop or I shoot” behind me I might assume that it was directed at the crazy guy with a gun that I was running away from.

I have not said a word against the policeman, given his mindset he should be regarded as a hero.

I speak against policy. The question for us all is whether "innocent until proven guilty" is a policy worth us all risking our lives for? Are we willing to accept the risk of dying because a policemen tries to restrain or disable a suspect instead of killing him?

The police stopped me for the third week running on my way home from the night shift at 2am. I knew that they ran they ran a three shift system too, and what the car slowing down beside me meant. I instantly walked over to the car and opened my bag to show my sandwich case. Most of my fellow workmates were foreigners. Should I be prepared to accept that, if they now behaved like me, they could be shot dead?

If I expect police officers to risk their lives protecting our liberties, should I not be prepared to risk my own?

I want my policemen to try and take such flimsily based suspects alive.

as for the bombers, another verse ran:

In your name
In your name
Great God almighty, they do it in your name.

[David Franklin]

Of course it's a tragedy; I never said it wasn't.

However, if the dead guy had turned out to be a terrorist, with bombs under his jacket, only moments away from killing twenty or more people in a packed tube carriage (and why not also take a moment to think about the prospect of that), we would all be applauding the copper in question for his bravery and fine judgement.Actually, I'd still be asking how the heck they managed to let a suspected bomber get onto the tube in the first place. If he had been a bomber with a trigger device, I think it unlikely the police actions (as described) would have prevented him setting it off.

I do think there has been a policy failure, but that failure was in what happened between Jean Charles de Menezes leaving that block of flats and him approaching at the tube. Not that I actually know what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that once you've let a suspected bomber get into a crowded public place, the police's options become very limited. At the level of alert we're talking about, there isn't much a suspect can do that couldn't be a prelude to setting off his device. It's not hard for a bomber to set up a trigger that goes off when he puts his hands up, for example. And the bomber has had time to think about exactly what he will do if confronted. So the police are going to be very nervous. Conversely, innocent people haven't planned what to do, and you can't tell how they will react when things go down. After all, it's not the rational part of the brain that reacts to sudden, unexpected danger; we've all heard of the "fight-or-flight" response - only in this circumstance, both responses will get you killed.

When I heard what had happened (even before the revelation the man killed was innocent - at this stage I was more bothered at losing a potential source of information), I wondered whether it would have been better to stage a 3am raid. Much less likely to encounter someone ready to set off a device, and therefore much more likely to be able to get a live prisoner. Interesting that that seems to be more-or-less what has happened this week.

[Dreadful Scathe]

DS, you're making some fairly substantial claims about something (as far as I know) you didn't witness. I don't know where you got all this information from - particularly about whether the police were identifiable (all plainclothes, I thought), whether a warning was shouted, or whether the man knew enough English to have understood it.

Indeed I am making substantial claims and I think they stand up too.

Police are identifiable in any country not just by their uniform and carrying of guns but also by their general manner. Especially armed police. Plainclothes doenst change that one bit. The dead man was from Brazil, he probably spot them instantly - but possibly ran because of it.

The police here do not normally carry guns, 'stop armed police' MUST be shouted I believe when guns are visible and 8 bullets fired means visibility was fairly high. Also, there is nothing to say the man was retarded and shouting the word 'STOP' works in any language because of the way it is said and the fact that is clearly a command. Think about this for a second* if someone shouted 'LIPS' the same way they would shout stop (loudly and agressively), you would likely turn to see who was giving you the command. He may have ignored it of course. Not clever.

Saying that though, I really just wanted to argue to get a few more opinions from people :). I agree with you in principle; the stories are a collection of circumstantial evidence that add up to the police doing everything by the book. Now that I read a newspaper today and picked up on the dead mans cousins story, I hear she says that he had something like a denim jacket on and used a ticket to get through the barrier. As she herself heard that from the police until they 'changed their story' we can only guess at what actually happened, hopefully from some honest actual eye witnessess.




* 'think for a second' one of my favourite insulting phrases that suggests you weren't thinking before ;)

[Ash]

MAN IN TUBE BOMB CARRIAGE SAID POLICE TOLD HIM THE BOMB WAS UNDER THE TRAIN

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/region_wide/2005/07/11/83e33146-09af-4421-b2f4-1779a86926f9.lpf

[Ash]

http://www.legitgov.org/cctv_image_of_uk_suspects_240705.html

[El Salsero Gringo]

http://www.legitgov.org/cctv_image_of_uk_suspects_240705.html
Cute. But I'd like to think that if someone went to the trouble of faking that image, they'd have been more careful than to leave a raling in the wrong place. It just looks like some detailing on his jacket, to me.

Same with the 'faked' moon landing pictures. The things that people point out as evidence for them being faked are so obvious that anyone who was faking them would have noticed and removed them.

[David Franklin]

Cute. But I'd like to think that if someone went to the trouble of faking that image, they'd have been more careful than to leave a raling in the wrong place. It just looks like some detailing on his jacket, to me.Additionally - I have several years experience with software for compositing and effects, and I can't see any way of compositing someone into that image in such a way that the railing "error" happens unless you actually did so on purpose. Any rotoscope/keying work would normally be on the man you're putting into the scene - so it's completely illogical to have made an error that displays the railing. Far more likely IMHO to be an artifact caused by the recording and/or compression methods.

[Jive Brummie]

The rules of engagement, of which these police officers will have been bound by are there to protect the individual carrying them out when appearing in a court of law.

When obeying these rules, if one thinks by giving a verbal warning you may in effect cause harm to either yourself or another individual you may open fire without said warning...in this case, not sure if it happened that way, but it would have been acceptable.

The rules were stiffened after Private Lee Clegg opened fire on a car with people in it over in Ireland some years ago. The car had driven through the road block of which Clegg was manning and he continued to shoot, even though the car was classed as no longer being a threat. He shot and he killed...he was sentenced and jailed.

Interestingly enough, some time later he was released.....and promoted.

That doesn't really have much relevance to this case but it's there to highlight that the person whom the public perceive as being the good guy sometimes does get shafted when carrying out a very tense, split second job of which these police were also doing. Yes it was an unfortunate occurence but I can't believe that anybody in London would be so daft to bolt when shouted to stop by police at this current time.

J x

[Ash]

http://www.arcticbeacon.citymaker.com/articles/article/1518131/30339.htm

[Graham W]

Why don't we just get out of Iraq...?

G

[bigdjiver]

... to highlight that the person whom the public perceive as being the good guy sometimes does get shafted when carrying out a very tense, split second job of which these police were also doing. I think we have to accept that Johnny-on-the-spot has to make guesses in treacherous situations, and second-guessing them in hindsight is seldom right. It does seem likely that this was a decision made on racial and sectarian grounds, and on the fact that the victim did not stop. I do not think that having law-makers and law-enforcers making decisions on grounds of race and religion will make our society safer.

If we are going to have a policy of shooting anybody that fails to stop when ordered to do so, and who is a danger to the public, then it follows that motorists who try to flee should be shot.

Personally I found myself in a stolen Bentley at the age of seven, being driven by our local tearaway aged eleven. :eek: ( I am not sure if that supports my point, or destroys it. :confused: )


Yes it was an unfortunate occurence but I can't believe that anybody in London would be so daft to bolt when shouted to stop by police at this current time.

J xI have the suspicion that there would be people moving away in all directions if they heard "armed police", and thinking, probably like the victim, "He will not shoot me, I have not done anything that bad."

This all smacks of "blame the victim".

[stewart38]

Why don't we just get out of Iraq...?

G


To save 167,456 lives if USA and uk moved out tomorrow, next question

[El Salsero Gringo]

If we are going to have a policy of shooting anybody that fails to stop when ordered to do so, and who is a danger to the public, then it follows that motorists who try to flee should be shot.If that motorist is driving a car full of explosives and is on his way to blow up his or her car, him or herself and a whole load of innocent people to boot - then yes - I would like them shot dead, as long as that's the best way to foil the plan. In which case, as soon as possible, if you please.

[bigdjiver]

Cute. But I'd like to think that if someone went to the trouble of faking that image, they'd have been more careful than to leave a raling in the wrong place. It just looks like some detailing on his jacket, to me... :yeah: The guy in the foreground has a similar light band near his wrist. I agree with David franklin too. IMO the "railing" is more likely to be the fake, although I do not believe that there is one.

Having seen the amazing picture of the people getting off the top deck of the bus after the top had been ripped off it, I could understand if people could not believe that either.

[El Salsero Gringo]

:yeah: The guy in the foreground has a similar light band near his wrist. I agree with David franklin too. IMO the "railing" is more likely to be the fake, although I do not believe that there is one.Ah but of course, the true conspiracy theorist would argue that the person who faked the photo *wanted* the fakery to be spotted, to get a message out to those people who are 'in the know' about 'what's going on.'

(Cue Twilight Zone music)

[bigdjiver]

If that motorist is driving a car full of explosives and is on his way to blow up his or her car, him or herself and a whole load of innocent people to boot - then yes - I would like them shot dead. As soon as possible, if you please.So would I. The questions are, knowing nothing of the cargo, if a white guy speeds away do you chase him? If it is a coloured guy do you shoot him?

[El Salsero Gringo]

So would I. The questions are, knowing nothing of the cargo, if a white guy speeds away do you chase him? If it is a coloured guy do you shoot him?The obvious question is how much do you need to know about what's in the car - and and how sure do you need to be about what you do know - before it's considered legitimated to shoot first and ask questions later.

I don't know the answers. In general I have some trust in those whose job it is to make those decisions, and I can't say that anything that's happened over the last month has made me question that. You might feel differently though?

[Ash]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1536751,00.html

[Rhythm King]

To save 167,456 lives if USA and uk moved out tomorrow, next question

Next question:

From the point of view of the above quote it's now tomorrow and the US, UK and other coalition forces remain in Iraq. Please identify the 167,456 lives you alledge will have been lost today, as a result of these forces not having withdrawn.

[stewart38]

Next question:

From the point of view of the above quote it's now tomorrow and the US, UK and other coalition forces remain in Iraq. Please identify the 167,456 lives you alledge will have been lost today, as a result of these forces not having withdrawn.

I said if the coalition forces left thats how many additional lifes would eventually be lost. Its a opinion and based on no fact what so ever. it might even be a silly opinion

If we assume they all left yesterday we have an additional 234 lives lost including 23 accidents as of 12 noon. Many more bomb attacks

this of course is only a guestimate

[Robin]

I've been sent a whole load of "fun" cartoons/satire based on this ... which puts one in a dilema. Even though I may have found them amusing, some people might class the whole thing as sick etc.

So... do i post them or not ?

[stewart38]

I've been sent a whole load of "fun" cartoons/satire based on this ... which puts one in a dilema. Even though I may have found them amusing, some people might class the whole thing as sick etc.

So... do i post them or not ?

post them

[Robin]

post them

Reasoning .. please ?

[Tessalicious]

I've been sent a whole load of "fun" cartoons/satire based on this ... which puts one in a dilema. Even though I may have found them amusing, some people might class the whole thing as sick etc.

So... do i post them or not ?Ooh, go on, post 'em. If people suspect they might be offended by them, they don't have to view them unless they want to be offended, in which case there's not much you can do to stop them. And for anyone else, it's a bit of topical entertainment.

[under par]

post it upstairs then everyone can make their own choice.

[ducasi]

I've been sent a whole load of "fun" cartoons/satire based on this ... which puts one in a dilema. Even though I may have found them amusing, some people might class the whole thing as sick etc.

So... do i post them or not ? This thread started with a couple of fun pictures but it was hi-jacked by people who instead wanted to discuss it all. I say hi-jack it back again! :devil:

[El Salsero Gringo]

I've been sent a whole load of "fun" cartoons/satire based on this ... which puts one in a dilema. Even though I may have found them amusing, some people might class the whole thing as sick etc.

So... do i post them or not ?The only reason not to post them is if you don't want people to think you're the kind of person who'd find them funny - whatever that kind of person is.

It's up to everyone to decide if they're going to find them sick, be offended etc etc. Their own emotions, their own choice, they're in control, yada yada yada bore bore bore

Just post the wretched things and stop being a wuss!

[Robin]

That seems to be the best reason yet !
http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/iqaeda.gif

[Robin]

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/mindthebig.jpg

[Robin]

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/mrjihad.jpg

[Robin]

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/no-running.jpg

[Robin]

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/pullmyfinger.jpg

[Robin]

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/redlight.jpg

[Robin]

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/shirt.jpg
------

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/terrorist.jpg

-----


http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/trains.jpg


------

http://www.itguru.co.uk/rd-temp/valuetnt.jpg

[Robin]

Thats the lot (for now anyway !)

[under par]

Thats the lot (for now anyway !)



:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah:


Well worth the wait Robin

[David Franklin]

I'm sorry, but some of these pictures look faked to me. Look at the smoke on the rucksack. It's all one colour - obviously a Photoshop job. And TNT is a professional military explosive and would never be found in the Tesco's value range.

[stewart38]

I'm sorry, but some of these pictures look faked to me. Look at the smoke on the rucksack. It's all one colour - obviously a Photoshop job. And TNT is a professional military explosive and would never be found in the Tesco's value range.


I bet you could ??


PREPARATION OF TNT



1. TAKE TWO BEAKERS. IN THE FIRST

PREPARE A SOLUTION OF 76 PERCENT

SULFURIC ACID, 23 PERCENT NITRIC ACID

AND 1 PERCENT WATER. IN THE OTHER

BEAKER, PREPARE ANOTHER SOLUTION OF 57

PERCENT NITRIC ACID AND 43 PERCENT

SULFURIC ACID (PERCENTAGESS ARE ON A

WEIGHT RATIO RATHER THAN VOLUME).



2. TEN GRAMS OF THE FIRST SOLUTIONS

ARE POURED INTO AN EMPTY BEAKER AND

PLACED IN AN ICE BATH.



3. ADD TEN GRAMS OF TOLUENE, AND STIR

FOR SEVERAL MINUTES.



4. REMOVE THIS BEAKER FROM THE ICE BATH

AND GENTLY HEAT UNTIL IT REACHES 50

DEGREES C. THE SOLUTION IS STIRRED

CONSTANTLY WHILE BEING HEATED.



5. FIFTY ADDITIONAL GRAMS OF THE ACID,

FROM THE FIRST BEAKER, ARE ADDED AND

THE TEMPERATURE IS HELD FOR THE NEXT

TEN MINUTES, AND AN OILY LIQUID WILL

BEGIN TO FORM ON THE TOP OF THE ACID.



6. AFTER 10 OR 12 MINUTES, THE OU TOO WILL HAVE TO TAKE

A NICE LONG SHOWER.

[Minnie M]

Thats the lot (for now anyway !)

I'm sorry, but some of these pictures look faked to me. Look at the smoke on the rucksack. It's all one colour - obviously a Photoshop job. And TNT is a professional military explosive and would never be found in the Tesco's value range.

:yeah: :rofl: :yeah: :rofl:
thank you guys, after laughing at Robins collection, this post just made me
laugh more

[MartinHarper]

The rules of engagement, of which these police officers will have been bound by....

The rules were stiffened after Private Lee Clegg opened fire on a car....

Why would the police stiffen their rules of engagement following an incident with the armed forces? I thought they had different rules, to be honest.

[Jive Brummie]

Why would the police stiffen their rules of engagement following an incident with the armed forces? I thought they had different rules, to be honest.


The rules of engagment are there to be obeyed by all armed forces who hold weapons.

Be it army, navy, air force or armed police. By having one set of rules you'll find the potential ambiguity which may occur dependant on 'whos' rules you follow...doesn't exist. One rule for everyone.

They outline many different things...and if you want to know them I'm sure they're probably on line, alternatively you could join up and you'll be instructed in them for free!

Only variation is one particular rule...which doesn't apply in Scotland.

J.

[MartinHarper]

One rule for everyone.

Hmm... I'm sure you're right, but that seems odd. For example, my extensive research (watching "The Bill") reveals that the police shout something along the lines of "Halt! Armed police!" before shooting. This sort of warning seems impractical in a war situation.

[El Salsero Gringo]

Hmm... I'm sure you're right, but that seems odd. For example, my extensive research (watching "The Bill") reveals that the police shout something along the lines of "Halt! Armed police!" before shooting. This sort of warning seems impractical in a war situation.Remember, Pt. Clegg was manning a police/army roadblock, dealing with civilians. In that situation where the armed forces are supporting a civilian police force it's not unreasonable that they should all have the same rules of engagement (otherwise you'd have a daft situation where a soldier can open fire but the policeman standing next to him can't.)

If a soldier is shooting at enemy soldiers in time of war, the situation and rules that apply are rather different.

[Dreadful Scathe]

its interesting the stories that are appearing now - the police are not looking very good at all.


looking dodgy in fact

[Robin]

This is just plain funny though

Play Me! (http://www.mooble.com/fun/terrorist.html)

[El Salsero Gringo]

This is just plain funny though

Play Me! (http://www.mooble.com/fun/terrorist.html)I heard that the story behind that is that an advertising agency did it as a "look-see" just to show to VW execs to be allowed to pitch for the VW advertising account.

Inevitably it leaked onto the Internet and caused such a fuss that VW were forced into issuing a statement disclaiming responsibility and certifying that that agency would never ever be given any VW business.

Hopefully the agency made up for the loss in gaining other clients on the strength of the furore.