TristanAnderson
Jul 21 2005, 12:54
Jesus, another set of tubes and a bus all over the news.
What the hell is wrong with these people? They've made their point
there saying its not so serious..just the possible threat of bombs...so no one has gotten blown up yet...thankfully.
TristanAnderson
Jul 21 2005, 13:04
Some reports are saying that they were just detonators, others are saying somehting about a nail bomb
Singh400
Jul 21 2005, 13:05
Yeah, I was just about to post this.
3 train stations evacuated + 1 bus.
Windows of the bus were blown out, but apparently the bomb didnt go off properly, then backpack 'split' and there was a "funny smell" - the person with the backpack ran off once it didnt go off.
smoke coming from the trains. and loads of ppl evcuated.
1 person injured.
again? what is with who ever is behind it.
Hopefully they wont blow up. *why dont they just hose it down with water (whatever they find)*
TristanAnderson
Jul 21 2005, 13:06
The fact that is didnt kill the asshole may be a good thing, now theres the possibility of him being caught
Singh400
Jul 21 2005, 13:10
Westminster tube has just re-opened.
TristanAnderson
Jul 21 2005, 13:13
I think its a trick, a good percentage of London's emergency services are all now packed in two 3 specific places. Three real bombs now would create a lot of trouble
::Edit::
QUOTE (hAsin @ Jul 21 2005, 13:09)
Harsh as it may seem, I care a great deal more about my capital city than some idiot bombing their own country in the name of "Freedom"
Singh400
Jul 21 2005, 13:17
Reports comming in of "Dummy Nail Bombs"!!! WTF.
TristanAnderson
Jul 21 2005, 13:20
How do u have a dummy nail bomb? leave the nails out?
Dummy Bombs?
well maybe its a trick to luer *spelling* the police?
kurgan2001
Jul 21 2005, 14:52
QUOTE (hAsin @ Jul 21 2005, 09:20)
Dummy Bombs?
well maybe its a trick to luer *spelling* the police?
it could be ... have the dummies in one location and then have the real ones detonate somewhere else.
and it's lure ..
btw, the 7th July bombings, weren't they done by UK Citizens as well? (According to News here)
So, harsh as it may seem, I tend to care equally about both Capitals of the world with fucked up peoeple boming their own cities

*waits for another muslim name to pop up on the news*
lol maybe this one wont be as close to my name as the last one. what, do they have some kind of Muslim Name generator or something
QUOTE (hAsin @ Jul 21 2005, 16:56)
btw, the 7th July bombings, weren't they done by UK Citizens as well? (According to News here)
So, harsh as it may seem, I tend to care equally about both Capitals of the world with fucked up peoeple boming their own cities

*waits for another muslim name to pop up on the news*
lol maybe this one wont be as close to my name as the last one. what, do they have some kind of Muslim Name generator or something
now there, go easy on the vitriol. The fact remains that July 7th bombings were conducted by British citizens with so-called "muslim names" as you put it yourself. You may like it or not but that's a fact.
Now there's been bombings and suicide attacks in Baghdad for over two years now. Were Great-Britain at war and bombed on a daily basis, it would probably get as little coverage as Baghdad does now. So don't suggest that no ones gives a shit about Iraq while underestimating the significance of July 7th and today's events. FAWK this is the first time we've seen suicide bombers acting in Europe, and that's a major concern to all of us Europeans.
Zoga50
Jul 22 2005, 04:10
QUOTE (Kouby @ Jul 22 2005, 08:42)
FAWK this is the first time we've seen suicide bombers acting in Europe, and that's a major concern to all of us Europeans.
Well Kouby depends on whether you believe Blair's words that Britain's involvement in the Iraq war didn't brought on the tragedy. I personally don't, since there is no possible way that he or his party could say it did - there would be chaos.
QUOTE (Zoga50 @ Jul 22 2005, 06:10)
QUOTE (Kouby @ Jul 22 2005, 08:42)
FAWK this is the first time we've seen suicide bombers acting in Europe, and that's a major concern to all of us Europeans.
Well Kouby depends on whether you believe Blair's words that Britain's involvement in the Iraq war didn't brought on the tragedy. I personally don't, since there is no possible way that he or his party could say it did - there would be chaos.
As strange as it is I don't believe this to be really relevant. Sure those terrorists can claim that they bombed London because of UK's involvement in Iraq. Yet even if UK had no troops over there, there would have found something else (Afghanistan for instance). Even countries who opposed the war in Iraq, such as mine, are not safe from terrorism. They would use Afghanistan as a reason (we have troops there) or the
French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools, as hostage takers did some months ago when they held captive two of our journalists in Iraq....
There always is a "reason"...
TristanAnderson
Jul 22 2005, 09:32
QUOTE (hAsin @ Jul 21 2005, 14:56)
btw, the 7th July bombings, weren't they done by UK Citizens as well? (According to News here)
So, harsh as it may seem, I tend to care equally about both Capitals of the world with fucked up peoeple boming their own cities

*waits for another muslim name to pop up on the news*
lol maybe this one wont be as close to my name as the last one. what, do they have some kind of Muslim Name generator or something
**Cough** Yes.... "British"
Singh400
Jul 22 2005, 10:05
Police shot man 5 times in train station...
....
....

!
Edit* In East London, police surround a Mosque! :S Dodgy ground, very dodgy ground. A dog patrol has been taken into a mosque.
*shivers*
still no sacred ground, be it a mosque, church or budhist dagoba should be a refuge for criminals if they are there...
DangerousDave86
Jul 23 2005, 15:22
I'm sure the police would have just burst into a church, why not a mosque? If theres reasonable doubt to search, then why not do it properly?
Im yet to see police burst into a church with restricted animals.
I mean, Dogs are banned from Mosques. Now flame me if you want, but had this been a church where they "suspected" terrorists to be, they'd probably just have a stake out or something. They wouldnt've burst in there, surround the place all armed and all that.
oh and the guy they shot five times even though he was pinned down by the hands which were useless by TWO POLICEMEN, had NOTHING on him. He was suspicious because he dared to wear a Coat on 22C temperature
Singh400
Jul 23 2005, 16:20
Plus not to mention he was Asian. Seems like theres a shoot to kill Asians policy.
QUOTE (hAsin @ Jul 23 2005, 16:49)
Im yet to see police burst into a church with restricted animals.
I mean, Dogs are banned from Mosques. Now flame me if you want, but had this been a church where they "suspected" terrorists to be, they'd probably just have a stake out or something. They wouldnt've burst in there, surround the place all armed and all that.
oh and the guy they shot five times even though he was pinned down by the hands which were useless by TWO POLICEMEN, had NOTHING on him. He was suspicious because he dared to wear a Coat on 22C temperature
yeah, typical of police to overreact, they want to assure the public that they are doing something.
I just posted this at neowin ill post here aswell:
QUOTE
Even after he was pinned down by
TWO officers? thats how much they are scared of Asian people now? that they have to shoot him with 5 bullets even after two Policemen are holding him down?
so he ran, but again same thing, they had him pinned, why shoot?

They could've cuffed his hands right then so he couldnt press any buttons or blowhimself up, they had him pinned i'll say
againAbout deadly chemicals? do they become harmless if the career dies?
Let me Quote SkyNews:
QUOTE
Police believed the Asian man was responsible for an attempted attack on the nearby Oval Tube on Thursday and had set up surveillance on him.
Police
BELIEVED..
I didnt see
"police had evidence suggesting the man was directly related to the Oval Bombings, Attacks, etc etc" - Police believe a lot of stuff. But doesnt necessarily mean they are correct. And okay lets believe this guy was related to the Earlier Bombings or god forbid, he was a Muslim(even though theres no proof), about making the split second decision, i dont know whats so
"OMG OMG OMG!!!!" about a guy pinned down by two colleagues

Now had this been an Asian Background British Cop, who suspected a White Male and shot him, all hell would break loose in London.
*tisk tisk*
oh heres more:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stmPeople tend to overlook that the guy was pinned by two policemen was he couldnt possibly have dont ANYthing even if he tried *Australian Eye Witness in the train carriage said to Channel Nine News Australia*
Varolmak
Jul 23 2005, 17:36
there's also terrorist attacks in Egypt but surprise! No American media is talking about it.
canonassasin
Jul 23 2005, 17:52
QUOTE (Varolmak @ Jul 23 2005, 09:36)
there's also terrorist attacks in Egypt but surprise! No American media is talking about it.
Sad.
Man1k3n
Jul 24 2005, 02:18
All I can say about the recent events is that I feel a tremendous amount of grief for all Europeans right now. I just hope that somehow things will go back to normal and that this shit will stop soon. Its all over the news here in the states and now we're being affected by it, people here are scared at becoming a victim to something similar to what happened on september 11th.
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 07:35
The guy ran when he was ordered to stop. What if he had been carrying a bomb? and the police hadn't opened fire. All the people who are saying he shouldnt have been shot would now be on here saying "If they'd done what they were trained to do, he wouldnt have been able to detonate it."
I think the cop who shot him was dead right. He won't run from the police again will he.
thanks TA, but what part of:
he was pinned on the floor by TWO POLICE OFFICERS making him uselessdidnt you get?
Does anyone else catch my drift? oh well, me or anyone bitching about it wont do anything. R.I.P Brazilian Electrician
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 08:47
I don't "not get" any part of what you said, but the simple fact remains that he was ordered to stop, he ran, jumping a barrier on his way. He asked for everything he got.
You can't give a Policeman the job of protecting a country, and then blame him when he shoots somone because of their own incredibly stupid reaction.
Give him a medal
::Edit::
why do i get the feeling that this thread wont live much longer?
well firstly, the UK police intelligence is beyond "pathetic" as they were trailing this guy for a while. Lmao its like, they were after a computer and found a book
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 09:46
They were trailing him because he came out of a house which was under observation.
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 11:02
On a serious note, anyone seen on CNN, the family of this guy are now thinking of suing the Police. Which means that if he DID have any terrorist conections (emphisis on IF) theyre about to get a whole load of funding
Singh400
Jul 25 2005, 12:23
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 12:02)
On a serious note, anyone seen on CNN, the family of this guy are now thinking of suing the Police. Which means that if he DID have any terrorist conections (emphisis on IF) theyre about to get a whole load of funding
The guy they shot dead was completely innocent the police said so, and they publicly apologized. The only reason he was a suspect/followed because he had a Student Visa and it had expired! So naturally when police officers asked him to stop, he knew the gig was up and ran. He was not linked with terrorism in
anyway (the police also said this). The police were wrong to shoot him, and all of the police officers involved have been suspended impending inquire, rightly so aswell.
wow, Immigration Laws have gone a bit strict then havent they?

leave the country or get shot 5 times
*yes im joking again, no need for outbursts*
Lets see what happens eh? If the Brazilian man's family wins, then the Cop that shot him should pay it out of his pocket
RATMFan
Jul 25 2005, 12:58
I can somehow understand the shoot to kill policy but can someone explain why you need 5 head shots to kill a guy???
To me that says a lot of hatred on that person who shot him.
Sweet holy crap
What are we doing? These nutcase terrorists are actually winning if we change our lifestyles to them...
Murdering a man who is running from the police (for whatever reason, he might have just panicked for all we know, remember, those cops were undercover, so no uniforms... not sure what I would do if a guy with a gun is behind me)...
Is that what we stand for as Western nations? Are those our new values? What direction are we heading if we start doing that?
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 13:12
QUOTE (RATMFan @ Jul 25 2005, 12:58)
I can somehow understand the shoot to kill policy but can someone explain why you need 5 head shots to kill a guy???
To me that says a lot of hatred on that person who shot him.
probably more than one copper opened fire. also, what does it matter, 1 bullet in thehead or 5, ur stil screwed
RobertCraven
Jul 25 2005, 13:59
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 15:12)
also, what does it matter, 1 bullet in thehead or 5, ur stil screwed
Actually it _does_ matter. I can understand why police officers open fire at a suspect, everybody can. But since this guy was probably dead after the first head shot (

), how can you explain the necessity of four more shots?

Besides, to stop a running suspect, a shot in a leg should have been enough, shouldn't it?
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 14:06
QUOTE (RobertCraven @ Jul 25 2005, 13:59)
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 15:12)
also, what does it matter, 1 bullet in thehead or 5, ur stil screwed
Actually it _does_ matter. I can understand why police officers open fire at a suspect, everybody can. But since this guy was probably dead after the first head shot (

), how can you explain the necessity of four more shots?

Besides, to stop a running suspect, a shot in a leg should have been enough, shouldn't it?

True, but a potential bomber whos been shot in the leg, while pissed off, would still be able to detonate his explosives
RobertCraven
Jul 25 2005, 14:24
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:06)
True, but a potential bomber whos been shot in the leg, while pissed off, would still be able to detonate his explosives
And maybe a potential bomber would detonate his bomb right away and would not run at all, because he would know that he will be shot when he starts to run.
However, all I'm saying is, people should at least be a bit upset by an innocent guy receiving 5 head shots.
I just don't like being shot, because I look suspicious for a second, maybe that's it.
my point exactly RC. Hell, i dont even care if an Undercover cop, show another undercover cop because he looked sus.
its just stupid what happend

and yeah im still here why?
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 14:46
QUOTE (RobertCraven @ Jul 25 2005, 14:24)
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:06)
True, but a potential bomber whos been shot in the leg, while pissed off, would still be able to detonate his explosives
And maybe a potential bomber would detonate his bomb right away and would not run at all, because he would know that he will be shot when he starts to run.
However, all I'm saying is, people should at least be a bit upset by an innocent guy receiving 5 head shots.
I just don't like being shot, because I look suspicious for a second, maybe that's it.

The guy was shot while the train was in the station, for maximum effect, they would have wanted it detonated in a tunnel, like the other bombs, shooting him prevented himf rom getting that far, the fact remains that if he had stopped when he was ordered to, he would be alive now. No one to blame but himself
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:46)
the fact remains that if he had stopped when he was ordered to, he would be alive now. No one to blame but himself
Well, I disagree in the fact that up until now, it wasn't normal that a guy was shot dead when running from the cops.
There are procedures, like a shot in the leg or whatever, but shoot-to-kill is something that was invented because of suicide bombers, and the fact that we are changing laws, and changing what we think is an "affordable loss" because of those bastards is our loss, not theirs.
by the way: we don't know shit on how it exactly happened, so to say that the guy himself was wrong is jumping to conclusions.
The Western world is NOT a warzone, so there is no need for warzone tactics...
TristanAnderson
Jul 25 2005, 14:55
QUOTE (K2 @ Jul 25 2005, 14:53)
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:46)
the fact remains that if he had stopped when he was ordered to, he would be alive now. No one to blame but himself
Well, I disagree in the fact that up until now, it wasn't normal that a guy was shot dead when running from the cops.
There are procedures, like a shot in the leg or whatever, but shoot-to-kill is something that was invented because of suicide bombers, and the fact that we are changing laws, and changing what we think is an "affordable loss" because of those bastards is our loss, not theirs.
by the way: we don't know shit on how it exactly happened, so to say that the guy himself was wrong is jumping to conclusions.
The Western world is NOT a warzone, so there is no need for warzone tactics...
so how would you deal with suicide bombers? A shot in the leg?
I dont think we're letting them win by changing tactics, we're adapting to a new threat
Brains
Jul 25 2005, 16:43
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:55)
QUOTE (K2 @ Jul 25 2005, 14:53)
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:46)
the fact remains that if he had stopped when he was ordered to, he would be alive now. No one to blame but himself
Well, I disagree in the fact that up until now, it wasn't normal that a guy was shot dead when running from the cops.
There are procedures, like a shot in the leg or whatever, but shoot-to-kill is something that was invented because of suicide bombers, and the fact that we are changing laws, and changing what we think is an "affordable loss" because of those bastards is our loss, not theirs.
by the way: we don't know shit on how it exactly happened, so to say that the guy himself was wrong is jumping to conclusions.
The Western world is NOT a warzone, so there is no need for warzone tactics...
so how would you deal with suicide bombers? A shot in the leg?
I dont think we're letting them win by changing tactics, we're adapting to a new threat
changing tactics?

we are using the same tactic ever since 9/11 (4 years almost): one of violence.
according to
this eye-witness story, the brazilian guy was pinned down and one officer shot 5 times into him.
we are into a death spiral as far as "terrorist" attacks are concerned. we ("the West") are not any better at all.

read my signature.
QUOTE (TristanAnderson @ Jul 25 2005, 16:55)
so how would you deal with suicide bombers? A shot in the leg?
I dont think we're letting them win by changing tactics, we're adapting to a new threat
How
I would deal with him doesn't matter at all... But if you ask me, your starting point is all wrong. You seem convinced this man actually WAS a suicide bomber. 99,9999% of all people are NOT suicide bombers. Bringing those people in danger for the 0,00001 that ARE bombers is not acceptable, not by our Western standards ... And then you get the pathetic reply from the police "if anyone, blame the terrorists"... Yeah, ok, only problem is that innocent people getting shot dead is exactly what they want.
And if you want to go deeper into this particular case: Do you think they handled this allright? They have shot a possible suicide bomber INSIDE the underground, while following him already when he left his house. Yeah, that seems fine police work

I'm not even blaming the cops themselves, the pressure was high. But with shooting an innocent man a line was crossed in my view...One that should never have been crossed
This is exactly why the US is using the Patriot Act...to give them reason to do things such as this. Although i think its utter BS, it still doesn't go without saying that if you have no reason to worry then don't....if that man had not have run away with the police threating to shoot him and had just stopped there would not have been any problems...i mean seriously
My Ass is not going to walk around town giving any police officer a reason to arrest me...i mean you aren't going to walk out in the middle of times square and say HEY EVERYONE I HAVE A BOMB!!!!!!
very rarely do innocent bystanders get shot in incidents or the police "Get the wrong guy" they are trained in decisions like that.
so to say that it was dealt with in an incorrect manner is not accurate, they did there job and i blame the man for running...if you give them a reason to shoot you then you deserve it especially in a situation like that.
Major Tom
Jul 26 2005, 16:25
QUOTE (Kouby @ Jul 22 2005, 02:27)
QUOTE (Zoga50 @ Jul 22 2005, 06:10)
QUOTE (Kouby @ Jul 22 2005, 08:42)
FAWK this is the first time we've seen suicide bombers acting in Europe, and that's a major concern to all of us Europeans.
Well Kouby depends on whether you believe Blair's words that Britain's involvement in the Iraq war didn't brought on the tragedy. I personally don't, since there is no possible way that he or his party could say it did - there would be chaos.
As strange as it is I don't believe this to be really relevant. Sure those terrorists can claim that they bombed London because of UK's involvement in Iraq. Yet even if UK had no troops over there, there would have found something else (Afghanistan for instance). Even countries who opposed the war in Iraq, such as mine, are not safe from terrorism. They would use Afghanistan as a reason (we have troops there) or the
French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools, as hostage takers did some months ago when they held captive two of our journalists in Iraq....
There always is a "reason"...
You are absolutely right Kouby, there will always be a "reason".
Take Egypt, one of the spots bombed was popular with egyptians and by far mostly egyptians and other arabs were killed:
QUOTE
Two blasts rocked the popular Naama Bay tourist strip, including the suicide truck bomb attack at the hotel. Two miles away, a third truck bomb ravaged an area called the Old Market, which is popular with Egyptians.
QUOTE
The death toll stood at 88,
QUOTE
South Sinai's governor said Monday that 17 of the dead were non-Egyptians, including Westerners and citizens from other Arab states.
http://northarkansas.cox.net/cci/newsnatio...le&id=D8BJ63LG0 Lets have the people that want to blame everyone but the terrorists ecplain why they deserved it.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.