No hand luggage on UK flights ...............

[Miki]

The report (not the BBC) said they found 11 shells but he was shot 7

times in the head and once in the shoulder. So perhaps errors would

appear to be in many accounts on the murder. Especially in the early

days, where reports by the Met police themselves who were jumping fron

one foot to the other to cover their tracks,  were changing almost

hourly..

As far as a split second choice is concerned, he was followed for some while by these police, whose only early

recognition of the chap was because he had slanted eyes. They followed

him from his place of living, on and off two buses and in to the

station. Some early reports said he had a thick coat on hiding a bomb,

in the end, as is clearly shown in the photo of the poor lad laying dead on

the floor, it clearly shows him with a simple denim jacket on. Sorry but it was

guns in the hands of people who relied on intelligence but which was abysmal

and in the hands of people who themsleves lacked intelligence.

[quote] Of course it’s tragic that an innocent person was killed just as

in the same way innocent people (some of them Muslims as well) died

when the bombs went off in London [/quote]

So on that basis, one was a vile terrorist bombing of innocents

and was rightly condemned by all and sundry but in the police case, the

killing of the lad,  was just an error and no one to

blame.....they were not terrorists, so it doesn't

count........hopefully one day justice will be done, so the family of

Jean Charles de Menezes will see that the UK law is considerably better

than the terrorists form of justice and the people responsible will be

tried for the crime. I get tired of listening to people who cannot or

will not put one of their own family in the place of this young man,

when and if ever they do and they view the facts as known, we may well get a better and fairer view

of  how this case should be viewed, not one of  blindly

believing that the police cannot do any wrong.......

[Russethouse]

 With a 22 year old son of course I have thought 'there but for the grace of God' which mother hasn't ?

The policeman who shot Jean Claude were doing what they were told, they are not paid to question, especially in the situation they thought they were in. Yes, someone should pay the price, but I think its someone further up the line, if the people asked to carry out the orders, stop to question them, we are going to be in a fine pickle indeed!

[Chris Head]

Somebody has to be on the sharp end, to do the dirty work and put themselves in the firing line. The chain of command ended at the troops on the ground who simply followed orders and did their job. I'd have pulled the trigger too if there was any doubt about the safety of the public. So the Met have a little collateral damage, s*** happens, and whist it is regrettable it happened. The troops did their job well, maybe the people who gave the orders weren't too well informed? Whilst it would be far more desireable to be fighting an enemy that didn't hide, terrorism is a war of cat and mouse and the intelligence services are paramount in the war and given the complexities of their job mistakes are bound to happen.

Sure I can put myself in the place of somebody who has lost a loved one but Miki also put yourself in the place of the people who are charged with having to fight an almost impossible battle.

Chris

[Miki]

Chris,

Soldiers I can kind of  relate to, reading this case is not a fair way to relate

what they, the soldiers, have to go through in a war zone compared to this case in

question. It may have been bad when the actual bombs went off but the

police at that time, were not directly involved.

The Police officers in question, followed this chap for a fair while,

many and much safer opportunities to do somethimng were available but

all the time they were supposedly trying to recognise him as a

terrorist. When he was killed,  we were fed a load of tripe from

the top. A few days, slowly better facts were released.

The high ranked police were guilty of feeding the masses anything that

kept their name as clean as possible, until more witnesses started to

get their message through, then the change really started to

happen...... If I put myself in the place of one of the police

marksman, I would hope that I may be able to tell the truth and see how

that pans out but we all know that quite honestly, they have to be

found not guilty or the police will be seen to be reckless and they do

not want the majority of folks to see them as ever making simple errors

but one off ones that anyone could have made...sorry I don't go with

it. In this instance, it was nothing like an impossible battle Chris.

This was pretty simple operation that the police and/or intelligence

completely fouled up. To me, it has all been clouded by the bomb

incident, another time another incident, I am damned sure it would not

have been so gung ho..........................

Guess we have fors (well a couple anyway !) and againsts and none want to change, time to move on then.....................

[Miki]

[quote]

Yes, someone should pay the price, but I think its someone further up the line, if the people asked to carry out the orders, stop to question them, we are going to be in a fine pickle indeed!

[/quote]

You think so....the day we don't question is the day you can write

justice off as a bad joke. If you blindly kill someone on the order of

someone higher, then you have to be pretty sure or perhaps supremely confident beyond doubt,

that they are 100% right...And if you know they are making a terrible

error, knowing they are 100% wrong....what pickle will you and the high

ranking official be in if you carry it out ? Well the answer is

probably none, a surefure cover up will kick in to place and another

innocent could well be dead.........And do you think the so

called Pros will care? Innocent or not...job done !

If we, the public, accept without question that armed policemen never

make mistakes, then the UK will get themselves in a bigger pickle that

anyone asking questions. Thank goodness we have some press hacks who

will challenge and question all the errors that are made. So as far as

free speech being none existant, one will always find journalists, who

will question enough to make the authorities squirm and make errors in

their statements and reporting of the incident à la JC tragedy.

[Chris Head]

Miki I was reffering to terrorism in general as being an impossible battle. I can't believe than any of the pro's doing their jobs are doing less than their best, so they might make mistakes, we all do, it's just that the consequences of their mistakes are more serious than an accounting error or a piece of timber cut in the wrong place and I wold like to bet that the tangents they have to deal with are mind boggling. Would you do their job?

Chris

[Beryl]

It's interesting this questioning orders idea. A few months ago a commissioned officer had been court martialed because he questioned his orders re Iraq (may have been Afghanistan) and the legality of the War. He argued that as he was required to give orders to sub ordinates, he needed to be clear in his mind that his orders were legal. His court case was thrown out and the court martial stood.

The soldiers in the Third Reich were condemned for blindly following orders but....

Please don't get me wrong I am not comparing Britain with Nazi Germany, but to what extent should orders be unquestioned?

[Russethouse]

Where do we draw the line ? In some jobs people are trained to follow orders, Police, fire, ambulance, doctors, nurses, army, navy, air force.........if we say its OK for one to question orders, is it alright for the others ?

[Miki]

[quote user="Chris Head"]

Miki I was reffering to terrorism

in general as being an impossible battle. I can't believe than any of

the pro's doing their jobs are doing less than their best, so they

might make mistakes, we all do, it's just that the consequences of

their mistakes are more serious than an accounting error or a

piece of timber cut in the wrong place and I wold like to bet that the

tangents they have to deal with are mind boggling. Would you do

their job?

Chris

[/quote]

It is not a question of who will do what job Chris. That is far too

easy a statement  to make. No I wouldn't do it, does that make any

diference ? I don't fancy the job one bit but then there are probably

hundreds of jobs I don't fancy. . A chippie for instance, his most

common used term was/is  measure twice cut once...using his head

then. Too simple really to use in this though is it not !

I agree, terrorism in general has to be god awful to combat but let's

get it in perspective. This was never that kind of scenario. I don't

want to repeat just how many chances they had to stop the chap before

they killed him. All that was originally said was, that they were trying

to get a fix on him and if he really was a terrorist. They  say

communications went off or were intermittent, leaving the marksmen following

him to wait.....it stinks, I am of course not alone in thinking that. The

parents have seen a lot of the evidence and too much of it their

solicitor says, leaves too many questions unanswered and as was stated

earlier, leaving the police to police their own enquiries is bit ripe

to say the least.

Have no doubts, sooner or later, we will be given a

lot more facts and my bet is that the police from the ground upwards

will be seen to have acted pretty amateurishly in this tragedy and

witheld some pretty important facts to boot.

Beryl makes the point better than I did, if none of us ever

question.....we will allow others, through supposed none interest, to

do exactly what they want.......

[Miki]

[quote user="Russethouse"]Where do we draw the line ? In some jobs

people are trained to follow orders, Police, fire, ambulance, doctors,

nurses, army, navy, air force.........if we say its OK for one to

question orders, is it alright for the others ?[/quote]

For goodness sake, I thought the question was little more serious than

that. The short answer is yes, we should offer questions if we are

unsure in some circumstances, naturally one will need to follow orders

due to immediate situation, unlike the situation of the case we talk of.

Are we being asked to judge what should be done when you are asked to

kill someone or just carry out orders ? If so, what are half that lot

doing, doubt if very few of them will be asked to kill someone. What orders do

Doctors follow, apart from try not to kill a patient, same for Nurses

and Ambulance men. Firemen are not stupid and their superiors always

put their safety at the top of the list, so no problems with orders

there.

Sorry, I personally don't think you can use that lot, to make out it is

alright to kill a man under orders and to implicate that if a Doctor or

Nurse for instance, disobeyed orders we would be overun with

terrorists. !

[Chris Head]

No Miki, you're wrong. Pulling a trigger is no different to a nurse doing his/her job, to a fireman rescuing someone to a police officer arresting someone to a gardener digging out a weed. You have an idealistic view based on theory and emotion, it's just internet chit chat and those who have had to try and fight terrorism today and who have to do the dirty work that you decry would be rolling their eyes in their heads at your writing.

Chris

[Miki]

No different ? To a Nurse it might be whole lot of difference. To an

individual trained to kill, it will not lend itself, to compare it to a

regular job, however much you want to believe it can be. !!

I have no idealistic view, I could say you have the same, the truth is,

we are seeing things differently. If you believe that they did it

because they had no choice but to kill him, you stick wiith that,

please allow me to think differently without being told my thoughts are

based purely on theory and emotion. I think that it is totally

wrong.  I see it through clear eyes and thought, not emotions,

other than being rather sad that an innocent person being killed, was

totally wrong in this instance. I am not naiive and know that innocents

will get killed but they should nevr be killed in the way this chap was

killed. If anything, it was the way emotions were running high that may

well have got him killed.

Sure the hit men would be rolling their eyes, they never signed up to

help an old lady across the street did they. So anyone questioning that

they were only doing their job will be met with "well what do you

expect us to do"  Well I don't think killing an innocent man in

the way they did was a very good advert for the men we expect to fight

terrorism. I can only reiterate, this was a man that could have been

stopped at anytime...........Oh I won't go on, the facts are there

(well the facts we can see anyway) you see it how you want to, I won't

judge how you come about it, so allow me to believe the way I think

about it all, without you attempting, wrongly, to judge how I decide on

the rights and wrongs of this case.........

[Missy]

Since I've got a bout of insomnia (sorry diverging from anohter thread!)

I found these titbits of food for thought ....

>>>Almost a third of Americans ... can't remember what year 9/11 was. (Daily Telegraph) <<<

and

>>>Russian musicians returning from London after the Bolshoi Theatre's season face an overland journey because of the new UK cabin baggage ban on planes....They are under contract to keep their instruments with them and cannot check them in as hold baggage, chief conductor Alexander Vedernikov said....

Bolshoi musicians borrow their instruments from Russia's state collection and do not have the right to part with them under any circumstances, Russian media note.

(BBC)<<<

Hope some of you have shares in Eurostar as apparently bookings have gone up by 10% this week.......

[Quillan]

Chris – I am sorry but I can’t possibly agree with your ‘pulling the trigger’ statement. If you are a member of the armed forces, armed police or armed anti terrorist police you have a gun which will at best case serious injury and at the worse kill, it’s what guns do.

I agree with some of what Miki has said but can’t possibly agree with other bits. People have unwavering ideas in their own heads and seem blind to other ideas. Lets just take the idea of how a suicide bomber dress, long overcoat or big bag to hold vast amount of explosives. The type of explosives used was in packs about the length and width of a packet of cigarettes but only about 7 or 8mm thick. Experts will tell you that each bomber carried about 4 to 6 packs wrapped round their middle with a crude electric detonator, 9V PP9 battery and a firing switch. You do not need a big coat to hide this sort of device. These alleged bombers whose plot was foiled were supposed to be using the latest technology fluid explosives which can be hidden in a small jar like a baby food one.

OK we now have a couple of armed police following a person who based on previous intelligence fits their bill. What do they do just stop him in the street? If he was a terrorist what will he do, probably press the switch and blow him, the police and anyone else nearby up. The police were trying to find a place where they could stop him that would cause the minimum amount of deaths but he headed for the tube station where previously terrorist attacks had taken place. When he got to the tube station he then ran on to a train. Now then, how many of us have run through a tube station barrier because they were late and knew a train was coming, you can hear it and you can feel the air move around you so you run. Miki is right, running to get a tube train (on it’s own) does not make you a terrorist but then you have to join everything together.

Lets now look at another type of parent so often missed out, the parents of the bombers. If we are to place ourselves in the shot guys parents position we must do the same with them. Many of the bombers parents never knew or guessed that their son’s and/or daughters had been brain washed in to carrying out these bombings and they too have lost children. They also have to live with the fact that the children they created, educated and bought up to be good honest hard working individuals had turned in to mass killers.

Now we can put ourselves in the shoes of the parents of those who died, how do they feel and what do you say to them?

Don’t think that the officers who actually killed the guy have no feelings either or that they feel proud of the fact they killed what they thought was a terrorist which turned out to be an innocent person. I rather suspect they had a thing or two to say to their boss’s when it was over. They too have the death of an innocent on their conscience for the rest of their lives.

Yes the police do make mistakes. I can’t remember their names but there was the guy who was shot because they thought he had a gun and it was a table leg. There was also the guy shot in his Mini (several time if memory serves me well).

The other problem is that now it is very difficult for the police and the government to take precautions against people they suspect of terrorism. Unfortunately the current government passed the Human Rights law which invited the law courts to challenge the legitimacy of police actions. This has stopped the Afghan hijackers from being thrown out the country and suspect terrorist from being put under house arrest. The police can’t in turn make correct responses for fear of making their investigation public and scaring of the terrorists remaining at large. Already there are calls for the police to make available the proof of why they arrested all these people and they have had to apply to keep them in custody longer. It is wrong to keep people locked up indefinably whilst you continue your investigations but then other options like tagging and house arrest have been removed under the Human Rights act.

What I would really, really like to know is how those that publicly challenge the police and anti terrorist roles would actually defend the British public from these sort of things. Let them give a calm and logical non emotional description of how they would do it.

[Frederick]

The bottom line is there was a lot of indesision that day..trying to get conformation they were following the right guy....the whole thing was a cock up.....if there was any suspision that a device was being carried then to let the guy enter a confined space of a tube station where a  blast would do much more damage was a monumental mistake . He should have been taken out in the street if that was the order...he was permitted to place a lot more people in danger if he had been a bomber....and..... the communications are useless in the tube network so by letting him go in the station there would be no constant update report of the situation as it was developing .....As I said .  a cock up...  I hope lessons have been learned and some re training is going on .a suspected bomber should never ever be permitted to walk into a crowded building from the street again.....Its a tradgedy that a wrong  identification was made in this case  and we all feel  for the family ....but we have to rely on the Police to keep us safe and the other agencies fighting this battle for us ....unfortunatly mistakes do get made .

[Choochoo]

As\far as I understand it most baggage containers in the hold of aircraft these days are armoured to withstand your average sized bomb, so better it goes off there than in the luggage rack. What worries me about the whole thing is that eventually it will get so difficult for terrorists to blow up a plane that they will turn their attention to other things. Imagine a full up car ferry going down, easy to get a bomb on board one ot those. Cars are never checked. If you go as a foot passenger your luggage is scanned but if you are in a car, no problem, drive straight on. I once got on a car ferry and had my pocket knife confiscated, the next week I went on the same ferry by car with 2 gas bottles, a blow torch, a chainsaw, a gallon of petrol, a petrol strimmer etc. etc. Strange innit ?

John

[Andyphilpott]

In an effort to get back to the subject, it occurs to me that with all items now having to go into the hold, the liklihood of damage to cameras, laptops etc is so much greater and as airlines only (I think) compensate by weight of bag, the chances of getting much from them is slim I guess.

We all know of the problem of theft of/from baggage and now the pickings will be that much better.

Make sure that you are well insured!

Andy

[Beryl]

I see that Ryan air want the Government to help finance extra security, but I can't see that happening. Surely the days of budget cost airline travel must now come to an end to pay for it?

Pan Am didn't last long after Lockerbie.

[Rob Roy]

"Imagine a full up car ferry going down, ......"

I don't know the full capacity of a car ferry, but the terrorists like to explode their bombs over cities or urban areas, thus causing maximum damage on the ground as well as in the air. Car Ferries therefore, I would imagine, don't have the same impact, but I agree that the though of one exploding is awful. I have always thought that drowning must be horrible.

[Stefan]

[quote user="beryl"]

I see that Ryan air want the Government to help finance extra security, but I can't see that happening. Surely the days of budget cost airline travel must now come to an end to pay for it?

Pan Am didn't last long after Lockerbie.

[/quote]

beryl

Pan Am was on the slippery slope long before Lockerbie, the attack there was the last straw, OTOH the airlines involved in 9/11 are still operating ( just..).

 Ryanair wanting the UK government to help finance extra security...umm well having stopped ROFL, let me see, a conveniently  Irish based Airline, flying Irish registered aircraft ( and incidentally who will not accept UK Forces ID cards as valid ID)  asking the UK government for help.....well, I will credit O'Leary with one thing, the strength of personality to get stuck in publicly on this issue, unlike many of the UK based airline bosses.  

As for the end of budget travel? Well perhaps at last people are going to have to begin paying a realistic fare for their flights.....those of us who work in the industry just hope we will have job in a month or so....

[Deimos]

When it comes to over/under reactions and politicians it becomes impossible to make any judgement. Unfortunately the US Neo-conservative politicians have had to adopt a new method of convincing us to vote for them. It use to be fine for them to say "We can make your lives much better" but time showed everybody that was rubbish so now they are doing "The world is such a dangerous place and we can keep you safe". UK Labour (and to a lesser extent other UK political parties) are having to adopt a similar approach. If there is over reaction is it to convince us "what a good job they are doing keeping us safe" ? But then they never give details other than the "trust me I'm a politician".

Long ago we had several people arrested, house ransacked and nothing found". Before that they were shooting plumbers. UK news is using a lot of "alleged" and "thought that", etc.. In truth we have been through similar things before and it has proved to be nothing.

Pakistan gov. has to come up with stuff to try and convince Mr. Bush they are helping his "war against terror" - so it is not surprising they are "joining-in" (truthfully or otherwise - I have no idea).

Just maybe one way we could be kept safe is if we stopped invading other countries, killing innocent civilians (in large numbers), doing things that cause civil unrest/civil wars in other countries, maybe speaking up a bit when another country starts laying waste one of its neighbours (as the rest of the world excl. the US has done) etc.. Just maybe some of these measures may be a bit more effective than putting your car keys in clear plastic bags or whatever.

For me the difficulty comes as the current UK government has shown itself so untrustworthy that I can no longer "trust them because they are politicians". I need some facts and they just don't seem to like giving those out and that makes me wonder why as the "National Security" argument wears a bit then all the time.

The way some "western countries" seem to be acting at the moment must be making it so easy for the terrorist groups to recruit new members. However, bombs, guns and killing seems the favoured way these days (depressing world).

Ian

[Benjamin]

Ian

In Britain they can't stop invading other countries because they've handed over foreign policy to Mad Dog George in the White House.

Benjamin

[Russethouse]

Haven't we also got to take a look a why some British Muslims are so alienated ? It's not all foreign policy

There are someinteresting comments after this article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1843652,00.html