View Full Version : Terrorism (?)
I've just been reading an article on Yahoo news:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20081106/tuk-menezes-shooting-could-happen-again-dba1618_1.html
and it's got me thinking... "Who are the real terrorists?"
As much as I would not like to get blown up by some psycho with a bomb in his (or her) bag, I would really not like to get shot "seven times in the head at point-blank range" by police because they 'think' I may be a terrorist!
Am I wrong in thinking that we should all be afraid of leaving the house?
Terrorists can not strike real fear into 'Joe Public' unless they first get to the people in power... AND THEY HAVE DEFINITELY DONE THAT!
With innocent bystanders being publicly executed, houses being raided on flimsy information, and the insane restrictions on what you can and can't carry on airlines (not to mention all the other B.S.), I ask again;
"WHO ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS?"
Any thoughts out there?
I have been watching the trial unravel over here, with intrest.
I am still amazed to this day that a serving police force shot Jean Charles de Menezes seven times in the head at point blank range on a public train.
And be allowed to get away with it,
The couple sitting oppsite JCM stated in court they did not hear any police warring, and the train driver ran off the train into the tunnel
thinking some terrorist group had gone on a killing spree . . .
The problem is the police chief resigned Tony Blair, so he does not have to account for action taken under his watch . . . .
Why do you think YOU would be targetted as a terrorist? as opposed to the other 56 million people in the UK?
Why do you think YOU would be targetted as a terrorist? as opposed to the other 56 million people in the UK?
emm I know I would not be targetted, but then again I don't suppose
Jean Charles de Menezes thought he would be either:rolleyes:
Not sure what your point is?, I was just responding to the statement
expressed by bingtang11
"WHO ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS?"
Any thoughts out there?
a terrorist can kill at will if caught sentenced . . the police that shot an innocent man will not be held to account for there actions,
maybe that is bingtang11 point:rolleyes:
Terrorists are people that intentionally instill fear and panic. Police that accidentally kill someone are typically are not trying to instill fear, panic, or undermine the social order even though innocent people might be injured by them.
The exception would be when the public does not support a nations leaders and fear is used by offical agencies to keep political change from happening as opposed to a typical terrorist that is trying to make change happen.
Black Adder
08-11-08, 13:17
Terrorists are people that intentionally instill fear and panic. Police that accidentally kill someone are typically are not trying to instill fear, panic, or undermine the social order even though innocent people might be injured by them.
The exception would be when the public does not support a nations leaders and fear is used by offical agencies to keep political change from happening as opposed to a typical terrorist that is trying to make change happen.
Tom, I believe that the true terrorists (not the brainwashed) but the masterminds that sit in the back and send a victim their death, these masterminds are just bullies with means they get a kick out of it.
Bullies may get kick out of seeing others in pain
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Brain scans of teens with a history of aggressive bullying behavior suggest that they may actually get pleasure out of seeing someone else in pain, U.S. researchers said on Friday.
While this may come as little surprise to those who have been victimized by bullies, it is not what the researchers expected, Benjamin Lahey of the University of Chicago, who worked on the study, said in a telephone interview.
"The reason we were surprised is the prevailing view is these kids are cold and unemotional in their aggression," said Lahey, whose study appears in the journal Biological Psychology.
"This is looking like maybe they care very much," said Lahey, who worked on the study with Jean Decety, also of the University of Chicago.
The researchers compared eight boys ages 16 to 18 with aggressive conduct disorder to a group of eight adolescent boys with no unusual signs of aggression.
The boys with the conduct disorder had exhibited disruptive behavior such as starting a fight, using a weapon and stealing after confronting a victim.
They showed both groups video clips of someone inflicting pain on another person and tracked brain activity with a type of imaging called functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI.
In the aggressive teens, areas of the brain linked with feeling rewarded -- the amygdala and ventral striatum -- became very active when they observed pain being inflicted on others.
But they showed little activity in an area of the brain involved in self-regulation -- the medial prefrontal cortex and the temporoparietal junction -- as was seen in the control group.
"It is entirely possible their brains are lighting in the way they are because they experience seeing pain in others as exciting and fun and pleasurable," Lahey said.
"We need to test that hypothesis more, but that is what it looks like," he said.
Lahey said the differences between the two groups were strong and striking, but cautioned that the study was small and needs to be confirmed by a larger study.
BLACK ADDER - That's a very interesting scientific study. I Always knew some people enjoyed seeing others suffer.
We all struggle with different demons. The issue is that for a society to function efficiently. People must control their base desires that might be socially destructive. Otherwise killing, rape, theft and other untold crimes would be more common than not.
Police that accidentally kill someone are typically are not trying to instill fear, panic, or undermine the social order even though innocent people might be injured by them.
I don't quite understand how shooting someone in the head at point blank range... 7 TIMES... can be called "accidental"! If it was a misfire or a stray bullet, I could possibly accept that as collateral damage, but 7 times???? How dead did they want this poor guy? People facing a firing squad only get 1 bullet!
Why do you think YOU would be targetted as a terrorist? as opposed to the other 56 million people in the UK?
emm I know I would not be targetted, but then again I don't suppose Jean Charles de Menezes thought he would be either:rolleyes:
This is my point exactly... every time someone gets on a bus or the tube or is just walking down the street, should they be thinking to themselves, "Am I going to die today? Who's going to try to kill me... the psychos with the bombs or the officers with the guns?"
We are all the very real victims of terrorism because now we can't tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys" and we never know when or if one of them will stand in front of us.
Police that accidentally kill someone are typically are not trying to instill fear, panic, or undermine the social order even though innocent people might be injured by them.
Hello indotom
I am sorry but thats were we differ in opinion's, with regards to this case and the way the police have reported their actions to the media.
It is quite clearly that there is more to this case and the shooting dead of an innocent man, as the inquest is on going and eye witneses
(including the couple sitting opposite) are all starting to give a very different account of events in the on going inquest.
If your intrested even the pathologist is stating he was misinformed by the police.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/majornews/3385653/Jean-Charles-De-Menezes-inquest-pathologist-misinformed-by-police.html
I am sure the police do some very good work, but also bare in mind the best way to control a nation is to keep them in fear.
Look how Indonesia has changed since Suharto stepped down/passed away.
TopiToo
I am a mum to a daughter who is in that line of duty. In that incident quoted above, upon discussions with her, I see her point in 'the so-call mistaken identity'. But to her reasonings, its an instruction in her line of duty, her job as ordered by her superiors. A split second could mean her own life, yes she is one of the 56 million in the UK. If it is clearly the case of mistaken identity, although they cant bring him back, I believe his family should receive compensation for his death. To lose a son or daughter in any case is unthinkable, but to have a son/daughter who puts his/her life at risks doing a job against terrorism, I am proud of my girl, but still panic and wait for her news that she is home safe.
Hello izamarina
I am aware that officers on patrol are acting on instruction/orders from the chain of command, and as I stated before many good police officers do very good work.
If however the chain of command, breaks down ultimatley the buck must stop with the commissioner . . . would you not aggree?
This is his compensation:rolleyes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3417291/Sir-Ian-Blair-to-step-down-as-Metropolitan-Police-Commissioner-with-400000-pay-off.html
in another thread regarding the Bali bombers you state
"I do not support the death penalty by whatever method. Maybe I would have a different opinion if any member of my family was killed in that bombing.
But its ok for an innocent man to be shot, sounds like double standards to me:rolleyes:
If it is clearly the case of mistaken identity, although they cant bring him back, I believe his family should receive compensation for his death
Charles de Menezes was inoccent thats a fact . . no if's about it.
again I suggest we can only imagine what the de Menezes family must be going through,
and with not only the loss but mixed accounts of the events being heard in court,
followed by a commissioner who can retire in the knowlege he will not have any financial worries for the rest of his life.
I might add he was also on watch during the Stephen Lawrence case and at the time the Macpherson report which found the investigating police force to be institutionally racist.
Its a shambles and an insult to the de Menezes family, Ian Blair should not receive a penny he was incompetent.
TopiToo
I will not post again on this thread, as I am not sure its serving any purpose . .
Wombatasaurous
11-11-08, 12:25
You could be right....
TopiToo, I do agree that the wanker ian blair should not receive any pay-out whatsoever and if only that racist pig would live in the next 5 years and have a peaceful night sleep..He will I am sure will keep looking over his shoulders.
Yes, now the evidence presented showed that Menezes was innocent, and such unimaginable grief the family went through, but seriously, we only know of it now. If it is known at that moment, do you think any officer of the law would deliberately kill? Would the officer who pulled the trigger at the time, have that split second to think and ask, are you a terrorist? Its as I mentioned, in that line of work, its killed or be killed.
Double standards, indeed not. One is clearly, yes, now known as mistaken identity, and the family should be compensated for the loss.
Bali bombers however were found to be guilty and sentenced to death. I oppose to death sentence. It is my personal opinion.
It is sad indeed to lose a loved one in any situation. I for one, is sad, frighten and worry that everytime my daughter goes to work, she may not come back home, and if there is any part of her to bring home.
The problem is many people can't put their shoes on the field officers. Of course many people will say: "you must stop the person...ask him first...and then he must be captured and sentenced in jail."
Have you ever imagined being in the field or in combat? Like Izamarina said, a split of second's decision can determine whether you can save yourself and your friends, innocent people or your death.
The tricky thing is that terrorists hide among the citizens, and if the citizens don't help the police then there's little they can do to differentiate a terrorist and people like you and me.
The action is wrong, but justifiable. How could you have known that the poor guy hadn't been a terrorist only by seeing him and knowing him run? IF he had been a terrorist, ever split of second could have killed not only the officers, but also innocent people nearby.
Sirs and Madams, you only stay behind the desks, complaining on the defects done by the polices without considering their problems in protecting you. Shame on you.
Sirs and Madams, you only stay behind the desks, complaining on the defects done by the polices without considering their problems in protecting you. Shame on you.
sorry but thats a crock of sh*t
TopiToo
Thanks Topitoo,
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I don't sit behind a desk criticising (I don't even have a desk)... I look at the evidence presented and then make up my mind.
I don't blame the officers for their actions, nor do I defend them; they did what they felt they had to do.
What I can't understand is (I'll say it again) shooting him 7 times at point blank range in the head.
From the accounts now heard, he did nothing to suggest he was a terrorist, he made no sudden moves for "a trigger", and he did not try to run... how could he when the police gave no warning?
I understand that they did not want to aggravate a suspected bomber, but they had no real reason to suspect him other than mistaken identity.
I sympathize with Izamarina... my dad used to be in the police and I can appreciate the worry she feels for her daughter. Hopefully she will never be in the situation these officers were put in.
"We all struggle with different demons. The issue is that for a society to function efficiently. People must control their base desires that might be socially destructive. Otherwise killing, rape, theft and other untold crimes would be more common than not."
Ehhhm, I don't find it remotely tempting so I must control myself from killing, raping, stealing or committing other crimes. To do so aren't my desires, base nor otherwise. Regardless of laws and policing or the lack there of, there is no evidence to suggest things would be different for I or any other well balanced indivicuals.If you find this a struggle or suspect these are unconcious desires, I suggest you seek immediate counceling.
Black Adder
23-11-08, 19:15
"We all struggle with different demons. The issue is that for a society to function efficiently. People must control their base desires that might be socially destructive. Otherwise killing, rape, theft and other untold crimes would be more common than not."
Ehhhm, I don't find it remotely tempting so I must control myself from killing, raping, stealing or committing other crimes. To do so aren't my desires, base nor otherwise. Regardless of laws and policing or the lack there of, there is no evidence to suggest things would be different for I or any other well balanced indivicuals.If you find this a struggle or suspect these are unconcious desires, I suggest you seek immediate counceling.
Hey Pimp in, who said you were well balanced?
Hey Pimp in, .....
LOL...and the way your separated the word :)
sorry but thats a crock of sh*t
TopiToo
Oh, but if the terrorists bombed places near you, whom you would blame? ..The policemen for not protecting you and try enough.
Or you have others to blame? Like God or your destiny? Or the terrorists? Strangely enough, people seem to forget that it's the TERRORISTS who are the culprits.
I don't blame the officers for their actions, nor do I defend them; they did what they felt they had to do.
What I can't understand is (I'll say it again) shooting him 7 times at point blank range in the head.
From the accounts now heard, he did nothing to suggest he was a terrorist, he made no sudden moves for "a trigger", and he did not try to run... how could he when the police gave no warning?
Strange, I remembered long ago watching TV on the news that the poor person had been living illegally that he had tried to avoid the policemen, which arouse suspicion. I could swear on that.
Simply the shooting 7 times was to kill him, because the policemen thought that he had been a terrorist who could have pushed a button just to blow everything up. It was a mistake, but what would you have expected?
Despite of the news, I tried to dig a bit in internet and found this interesting site:
When Jean Charles de Menezes was pursued into a London underground station a couple of days ago, fell into a carriage and was then stood over by a plainclothes policeman and shot up to five times in the head, I said to my wife, "they had better be right". By that I meant that Jean Charles de Menezes had better turn out to be
An active member of a terrorist cell
Armed with a bomb
With his hand on the trigger
As it turns out Shot man not connected to bombing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4711021.stm)
Scotland Yard said Mr Menezes, who lived in Brixton, south London, was completely unconnected to the bomb attacks and added: "For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets." Its not a tragedy, its a crime.
When you set out to commit pre-emptive lethal violence on someone, you have to be perfect every time, because if you aren't, and you continue anyway to kill people, you become part of the terrorism that you claim to be fighting.
I worked in D'Arblay St in London's Soho during the IRA bombings of 1976, in the middle of a garbage strike when the streets were piled high with uncollected rubbish and Leicester square was roped off as a temporary dump. As I walked from Oxford St tube station past all these potential bomb caches, past parked cars that might erupt in my face at any moment, I did what every other Londoner did at the time, thought about it, and carried on.
One day on a train to Shepherd's Bush on the Central line I spotted a duffel bag left under a seat and got to pull the emergency handle at the next station to empty the train. It gave me a fright, but it didn't change anything because we knew then what we seem to have forgotten now, that changing what you do is to succumb to the fear which is the desired outcome for the bombers.
I actually don't blame the cop, this is what happens when the so-called leaders of societies see tragedy as opportunity to increase their control. They have hyped up their cops, put weapons in their hands and taken off the leashes, of course this is what happens.
We have spent generations teaching ourselves that a police state is not a safe, secure or free place. A police state is a terrorist organisation. The totally unjustifiable killing of Jean Charles de Menezes is either a warning to us all, or just the first name in what will be a long roll.
The question we have to ask now is who are the British people going to fear most, the few anonymous bombers or the police who are charged with protecting them? Right now that equation is not at all clear. And make that double for any not white, non English speaking resident of Britain.
Never have the words of Benjamin Franklin rung louder: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Source: http://www.kn.com.au/networks/2005/07/jean_charles_de.html
So I assume that he did run due to some fear and it triggered the suspicion more.
Look, I didn't say that it was ok to kill an innocent man, I just said that the circumstance didn't allow the policemen to think straight.
J
"My mommy."
I'm sorry Pimpin... am I missing something here?
I don't get it! :confused:
"The question we have to ask now is who are the British people going to fear most, the few anonymous bombers or the police who are charged with protecting them? Right now that equation is not at all clear. And make that double for any not white, non English speaking resident of Britain."
Thank you JohnJohn2... we're back to my original point.
"My mommy."
I'm sorry Pimpin... am I missing something here?
I don't get it! :confused:
"The question we have to ask now is who are the British people going to fear most, the few anonymous bombers or the police who are charged with protecting them? Right now that equation is not at all clear. And make that double for any not white, non English speaking resident of Britain."
Thank you JohnJohn2... we're back to my original point.
Hm, I would take my chances to meet policemen anytime than a crazy bomber and the kind who smiles and laughs after/before doing the bombing.
In fact, what is your point? You can tell us the solution on how to solve the problem.
There are several options:
1. Succumb to the will of the terrorists, do what they want and be their slaves. You are safe, you will not be bombed. You only need to leave your value, your dignity and your humanity and do what the terrorists want.
2. Refuse to succumb to he will of the terrorists:
a) you rely on the policemen or the authority to protect you from the terrorists. There lies several problem:
- identifying terrorists is not easy, moreover, a pool I read somewhere show that due to religious or race sameness, some people would rather hide potential terrorists than giving them up to the police.
- to perform their duties effectively, the policemen/women might disturb and take your privacy, like eavesdrop you, or come to your house or use your house to spy on the potential terrorists.
- policemen and policewomen are human beings, they can make mistakes, they can get stressed, etc.
b) you rely on yourself.
Which one will you choose? Please be practical, guys, if you keep on blaming the police, you must choose other options. Keep blaming policemen and policewomen without understanding them of their mistakes while hoping them to protect you, in my opinion, is a hypocrisy.
One more thing you might need to consider, the policeman cried for his mistakes. The terrorists laugh for the killing they made.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.