Is anyone else sick of the de Menezes case?

[Treatment 10]

But it could quite easily be that this "passer by" didn't actually know who the police were chasing, and assumed it was a guy that he had seen wearing a thick padded jacket, remember no photos at that time were released to the public.

I didn't mean to infer that he was a plant, or an attention seeker. He just seemed very definite at that time.

[Kingmaker2 10]

I didn't mean to infer that he was a plant, or an attention seeker. He just seemed very definite at that time.

 

Sure, but he might have been convinced who the police were chasing ,even though he wouldn't really have known who they were chasing, since Jean Charles was walking at normal pace.

Essentially an unreliable witness, just like all those that swear they saw Madeleine Mccann.

[jamescfc 10]

Good post. That just about sums it up.

 

As always all the usual leftie Muslim apologists are crying foul and looking for conspiracy theories to support their tinpot, anti-British ideology.

 

Meanwhile those of a more rational disposition see the situation for what it was, as laid out so eloquently above by cloudybay

 

 

 

Sorry but he was working legally in this country. You are falling for the long list of lies put out about him in this cover up and believing everything your government and media tell you.

 

The evidence is damning, if you take the time to look into it. They even doctored the photo to make it look like he was someone else and this was reported in mainstream media. Is this what you want from those high up in your country??

 

How about this one contradictory little detail of many from 7/7. The train from Luton that 3 of the 'bombers' needed to have got (7.40am) to get them to King's Cross on time was cancelled (confirmed by Thameslink). They didn't even make it to the exploded tubes. This train time is still included in official reports and 'eyewitness' accounts given from a train that did not run.

 

 

Search for 'ripple effect 7 7' in youtube if you can stand to contemplate an enemy far worse than the Muslims your media wants you to hate.

[Anna K 10]

What I remember, very clearly, was a passer by being interviewed by CNN and he said that he was wearing a thick padded jacket. It makes me wonder who that '' passer by '' was now.

 

Isn't it amazing tho' that out of all the people who saw the actual incident the one chosen to report to camera (very confidently and professionally as I recall,) happened to 'have seen' a man in a thick padded jacket...

[Anna K 10]

What I remember, very clearly, was a passer by being interviewed by CNN and he said that he was wearing a thick padded jacket. It makes me wonder who that '' passer by '' was now.

 

And isn't it amazing that out of all the people who actually saw the incident and could have given an accurate account, the one chosen to speak to camera (very confidently and professionally as I recall,) just happened to be someone 'who saw' a man in a padded jacket...

[Meatstick 10]

The case is putting all of at risk. If an armed policeman is forced to hesitate in killing a possible terror suspect, it could cost the lives of many more.

 

Sure the Brazillian lad was innocent, but any shadow of a doubt, then take them down. Even though he was killed as an innocent man, I feel that his death was justified. And I'd hope the police did the same thing again given the information they had at that split second.

[Phanerothyme 12]

What I remember, very clearly, was a passer by being interviewed by CNN and he said that he was wearing a thick padded jacket. It makes me wonder who that '' passer by '' was now.

 

A lot of the eye witnesses reported seeing "the bomber" running, vaulting a ticket barrier, wearing a puffa jacket etc.

 

What they actually saw were the police officers following him.

 

No-one noticed JCdM because he strolled in, bought a paper, waved his oyster card over the ticket gate and wandered onto his train, already waiting on the platform like thousands of other unremarkable passengers.

 

The eye witnesses only remember things that attracted their attention. And even then their recall is unavoidably part fact, part fantasy.

 

If JCdM was a suicide bomber, he should have been intercepted before he boarded even a bus. There must have been some uncertainty about his identity at this point, as Gold Command had already torn a strip off the video surveillance officer who went for a slash whilst observing the entrance to the flat - which is where the whole mess started.

 

What interests me is what event or information put the execution into effect? After letting the suspect board a bus due to uncertainty over his identity, what convinced the officers "on the ground" or Cressida Dick that the threat was real enough to warrant elimination?

 

Or was it simply a precautionary manoeuvre? Hence Cressida Dick's prediction that it would happen again.

 

Or what?

[taxman 12]

I remember a witness who described a Middle Eastern man who ran onto the tube and was shot 4 or 5 times by the police in the head.....

 

Which just shows how perceptions can be changed by previous knowledge. If the first bombings hadn't happened and if the whole country wasn't twitching I wonder if the witness would have described him as "Middle Eastern"

 

The fact he was shot 7-8 times in the head rather than 4 shouldn't really discredit the witness as things happen so much more quickly in real life than our perceptions can cope with.

 

Anyone who has ever been to a London underground station knows that people don't walk calmly towards the ticket barriers...it's madness, people running from all directions, pushing, shoving, leaping over barriers, falling over bags, heaven forbid wearing rucksacks...

 

The real error occurred not in the underground station, but beforehand when some intelligence officers thought that de Menezes looked liked a suspect but others didn't and instead of making a quick interception they actually watched him and allowed him to enter the Underground...which is when all their phones stopped working.

 

Cressida Dick authorised the lethal shooting of someone who looked vaguely Middle Eastern. That is the sort of mistake that should get her the sack, but she still maintains she did nowt wrong....next Commissioner for London mayhaps?

[Anna K 10]

The case is putting all of at risk. If an armed policeman is forced to hesitate in killing a possible terror suspect, it could cost the lives of many more.

 

Sure the Brazillian lad was innocent, but any shadow of a doubt, then take them down.

 

But surely that's the point, why did the police feel the need to 'take him out' when he posed no threat at all.

 

He wasn't acting at all suspiciously.

He hadn't been identified as a suspect.

He wasn't wearing clothing that could conceal explosives.

[Muffin Man 10]

Not really Muffin Man, elementary mistakes were made in this case and really someone in charge should have been held to account for these mistakes.

Now please note, most hear angered by the De Menezes shooting are asking for the head of the person who pulled the trigger, but the people whi ran the operation.They were woefully under prepared and made very sloppy mistakes.

In most other companies somebody would have been demoted or even fired for them, so why is the Metropolitan Police any different.

 

As for conspiracy theories, what's that got to do with anything?

 

It's very telling that you sad Muslim apologists will stamp your feet, scream and launch into a relentless anti-police tirade over the unfortunate death of one man.

 

But when people are blown to pieces on tubes and buses and the entire country is threatened by the cancer of Islamic extremism you become strangely quiet and instead start waffling about American foreign policy and how "we had it coming".

 

Instead of droning on and on about the De Menezes shooting, let's hear you come out and condemn the scum who would destroy our community from within.

[Phanerothyme 12]

It's very telling that you sad Muslim apologists will stamp your feet, scream and launch into a relentless anti-police tirade over the unfortunate death of one man.

 

But when people are blown to pieces on tubes and buses and the entire country is threatened by the cancer of Islamic extremism you become strangely quiet and instead start waffling about American foreign policy and how "we had it coming".

 

Instead of droning on and on about the De Menezes shooting, let's hear you come out and condemn the scum who would destroy our community from within.

 

What's wrong, precisely, with muslim apologists? You use the term perjoratively.

 

If you don't think a mistake was made here, let's hear you say it, whilst we're on the subject of stamping our feet and demanding other people say things.

[taxman 12]

It's very telling that you sad Muslim apologists will stamp your feet, scream and launch into a relentless anti-police tirade over the unfortunate death of one man.

 

But when people are blown to pieces on tubes and buses and the entire country is threatened by the cancer of Islamic extremism you become strangely quiet and instead start waffling about American foreign policy and how "we had it coming".

 

Instead of droning on and on about the De Menezes shooting, let's hear you come out and condemn the scum who would destroy our community from within.

 

I condemn people who bomb underground trains and are mad, loony, religious bigots...and I condemn slack, amateurish coppers who shoot innocent people in the head then try to cover up their actions or lie about what they were doing.

 

Is that OK?