'Jacob, what he means is Spanish is his ethnicity.'

Oh, i'm so totally sorry, why didn't i think "Spanish? He's Spanish? Well, dammit, he must mean his ethnicity!!"

'To the Spanish, it's your mother who is important... so if your mother was Spanish, then you are Spanish - it doesn't matter who your father was or where you were born.'

But, you're still a Mongrel.

'concieved is important, as I was concieved in Spain. But mostly it's to do with your mother... I share more of her genetics than I do of my dad'

I thought your genetics were split 50-50. So how can you have more of one and not the other?

On topic - I s'pose, if you were cynical you could say the whole 'suicide bomber' thing is merely an excuse for a mistake made.

Holocaust me.

Don't be such a sour apple.

'Holocaust me.'

Patience, my little Mule. Patience.

On topic - So yeh, our Terrorists perform Fellatio upon testicles. Booooo!!

Whatever the **** that means Jacob. o_O

I now officially have no time for this discussion whatsoever. Sorry mojo but you can find the news articles yourself if you ever get desperate - I'm not going to be participating in this anymore because it's turned into a quagmire of crap. And frankly I don't have the energy nor inclination to argue with people who just put their hands over their ears and hum loudly when they don't like what they hear.

Next time we have some kind of discussion let's keep it objective and neutral, and I'll endeavour to do the same.

I thought the argument was fine, all you have to give is an article in your favour, Dino, to prove your point, so why didn't you just do that instead of spending all that time typing responses?

Okay, you've put yourself in the police's shoes to get your point across, but how about if it was you being chased? I know you've said that you wouldn't be stupid enough to do what he did, but if it did somehow eventuate like it did with him and you were shot and killed, would you still be congratulating the police? After all, they would have killed you to stop the possibility of you killing others, but you weren't going to, so how is that fair?

I'm not accusing the police of being completely in the wrong, as we all make mistakes, it's just such a shame that this one resulted in an innocent's life being lost.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm
http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/uk/4706913.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stm

Police, plain clothes and uniform, persued, challenged, and eventually shot the man who vaulted a ticket barrier to get to a tube train while wearing a heavy winter jacket in what has been hot humid summer weather. This guy WAS guilty, I don't care what anyone says, this guy was connected somehow, if to perhaps act as a decoy, incriminate the police, or something. Too much of a coincidence.

Either that or this guy was the ultimate in stupid.

And that's all I'm saying. If you don't like my opinions, then tough shit.

There have been 250 incidents of suspected Suicide Bombers.
There have been 7 incidents where the police nearly killed the suspects.
There has been 1 case that the police went all the way and shot, and only because the man actively attempted to evade capture and tried to board a tube train.
This is all since the 7th July.

It's in the rules that Police are allowed to kill suspected suicide bombers. He was one, thus they killed him.

(according to the Chief Policeguy who said it on Channel 4)

The Brazilian was plain stupid.

'This guy WAS guilty, I don't care what anyone says, this guy was connected somehow, if to perhaps act as a decoy, incriminate the police, or something. Too much of a coincidence.'

I find it odd that you say this, and yet when it comes to Saddam you're all for the fact he didn't have WMD's, even though possibilities that PA has mentioned could've happened. Such as him moving weapons etc.

Well, I've avoided this long enough.

I guess "innocent until proven guilty" isn't all that popular over there.

Hmm, I'll have to say that both the police and the man killed were quite stupid--the man for running, unless it was just his natural reaction because of his past in Brazil as Jacob discribed it and the police for letting him get so far before shooting him if they truly believed he was a suicide bomber as someone else has already pointed out. For me, the last part seems most striking.

But it probably happened so quickly that the police didn't have much time to think before he was near the train when they realized, "Oh shite, the supposed suicide bomber is about to board a train!" Who knows what was going through the heads of either side. Because of that, my opinion is pretty neutral.

Edit: In response to off-topic genetic stuffs, 50% of genes do come from each parent, but Dino probably meant his phenotype shows more of his mother's genes. Phenotype is the expression of genes that can be seen in an organism. Some genes are dominant over others, so he could look more like his mother for some traits if his father's were recessive to his mother's. (I took college level bio this past year. That's a very simplified explanation, but I think it gets the right point across.)

Well i believe it's a little late to be proved guilty once you've killed 300 people

I read two of these articles in my early research, so that throws claims of bias out the window. They were the most specific on the situation, but still leave a lot of questions.

That's the real issue here. What could possibly be a reasonable explanation for this?

Well they must have had him as a suspect, as he came out of a safe house known to the police, but him running into a tube station would have sealed his fate really. If he'd run anywhere else unless it was a high risk place he may very well still be alive.

Yeah, after a little more thought, the police were probably trying to avoid shooting him, so they waited until he was in a place where he could be a real risk if they didn't shoot him. There'd be more of an uproar if they had shot him while still near the house; people would be saying stuff like, "He wasn't near any public places where he could have hurt anyone! Why did they shoot him?!"

But I'm still neutral. Little thoughts like that in support to both arguments keep popping into my head.

If they believed he was a threat to public safety, why wouldn't they intervene before he made it to the station?

They tried to arrest him when they felt he was dangerous. He resisted, they ended up shooting him at the tube station.
That's why they waited.

'They tried to arrest him when they felt he was dangerous.

Because having explosives strapped to you and not being near a tube station is less dangerous?

'so he could look more like his mother for some traits if his father's were recessive to his mother's.'

Call me a cynic, but i think Dino's bullshitting about the whole Spanish thing.

On topic - The most recent bomb they've found is a nail bomb. Scarier biscuits considering the power of a nail travelling at high speeds.

And he did that wearing a WINTER jacket.

Who are you to propose that I'm bullshitting? You claim to be the regular expert on taking up the other side's point of view for the sake of argument, but when I did that in the child sex thread, you basically reacted by doing what amounts to covering your ears and humming loudly, simply because you didn't like what you were reading.

I might be out of line saying this, but to be honest Jacob I'd say that it's you who's the bullshitter here. All the times you've claimed that you only took the other side simply for the sake of arguments have simply been out of cowardice to be forward with your beliefs, so you bullshit to cover your ass in case anyone makes any accusations. Yet everyone knows the truth because every side you seem to take matches up with the opinions that you've demonstrated over time.

You're not nearly as neutral, honest or diplomatic as you'd like people to believe, so don't start to set me up as the bullshitter, because you're in no position to accuse others of things you're no less guilty of.

Now, to disambiguate, I am Spanish by ethnicity, and by citizenship in Spain. Just because my father was English it doesn't mean that I am of English ethnicity. Like they say, the your father is the key in the ignition, not the fuel in the engine. So yeah, I take a bit from my father, but the majority from my mother.

'Who are you to propose that I'm bullshitting? You claim to be the regular expert on taking up the other side's point of view for the sake of argument, but when I did that in the child sex thread, you basically reacted by doing what amounts to covering your ears and humming loudly, simply because you didn't like what you were reading.

I might be out of line saying this, but to be honest Jacob I'd say that it's you who's the bullshitter here. All the times you've claimed that you only took the other side simply for the sake of arguments have simply been out of cowardice to be forward with your beliefs, so you bullshit to cover your ass in case anyone makes any accusations. Yet everyone knows the truth because every side you seem to take matches up with the opinions that you've demonstrated over time.

You're not nearly as neutral, honest or diplomatic as you'd like people to believe, so don't start to set me up as the bullshitter, because you're in no position to accuse others of things you're no less guilty of.

Now, to disambiguate, I am Spanish by ethnicity, and by citizenship in Spain. Just because my father was English it doesn't mean that I am of English ethnicity. Like they say, the your father is the key in the ignition, not the fuel in the engine. So yeah, I take a bit from my father, but the majority from my mother.'

Wow, practically a whole post in response to a mere remark. This makes me even more adament that you're not who you say.

'And he did that wearing a WINTER jacket.'

Which begs the question once more, why didn't the Police make a move before he got anywhere near the public?

Meh, to be honest I'd been bottling all that up for ages, and it was just the straw that broke the camel's back rather than an overreaction to what you said. Sorry I was out of line there, should've kicked a tree or something.

It is't that usual for asian migrants to do that though, the week after the bombings i was at an R.E.M. cocert in hyde park,, and i was convinced the Islamic gent infront of me was a suicide bomber, big jacket, myseterious bags, no real interest in the music. But it turned out he was taking his daughter. Still, god knows why they wear the bloody coats.

There must have been more bombers, Or the first bombers died by mistake. Because 16 nail bombs were found in thier hired car but they werent set to go off. So they must of died by mistake or theres more to thier 'group'.

Stupid Asians!

Uh I mean...

Wasn't this guy Brazilian?

Yeah, you're right. My bad. Apologies.

I think it's very likely that there are more than a few terrorists in London...

Someone's on the ball today. Yes one would think so wouldn't one?

I wonder how many the police REALLY know about...

Update:

I was skimming through the paper today and noticed a somewhat shocking article concerning the unlucky Brazilian fellow who was shot and killed by undercover officers in a London subway train. According to a leaked report, the guy was not wearing a heavy jacket and did not jump the ticket gate as previously claimed. The only running he did was when he rushed to catch the train. Also, witness accounts in the report said the man was seated before he was shot. Despite these new developments, what was said by the officers and the man remain unclear.

Frankly, I have no idea what to think anymore. There's far to many elements that don't connect.

That leaked report has been on the news a lot recently.
If that is true, why ever did the police kill him? It's not like the police kill many people - they don't normally carry guns here, so why kill him without good reason?
I really don't understand why they did it, unless, even though he apparently looked innocent, they thought he was going to blow up the train he entered.

My dad worked it out on his GPS (it's pretty f'ing accurate) and I live just about 13 miles from where the bombs went off. Y'know, in a world that's thousands upon thousnads of miles wide, to think I was only 13 miles from a terrorist explosion is pretty unnerving. A bus was stopped just down the street from me because of an unattended bag, the other week. The police blocked off the road, cleared the area, and investigated. It was a false alarm, but I was amazed with how well they did their jobs.

The police are the authority here, they are here to protect us. We are bound by law to follow any reasonable, lawful request a policeman gives us. Like, say, if I jumped the ticket machine at a train station, and they told me to stop for example. They're doing their jobs, protecting us. The guy was an idiot and tried to run, therefore disobeying a law, and making himself a terrorist suspect. The officers in question were faced with a dialemma. Shoot the suspect, and have 1 casualty, or not shoot him, and, assuming he WAS a terrorist, give him an opportunity to detonate a bomb, killing tens, maybe hundreds of people. I ask you all, in that position, what would you do.

Truthfully, although I'd not be glad to take a life, would not hesitate to pound the guy with lead. All he'd need to do if he had a bomb was reach over and yank a cord or something and that would be it. If you give them that opportunity, you're not doing your job.

As has been mentioned, better that those officers get a few complaints, than if a bomb went off and the whole police force was critisized for allowing it to happen. It's not a shoot to kill policy, as the police have stated, but a shoot to protect policy. By shooting that man, they eliminated a risk. The guy was innocent, but he was a total dumbarse and look where it got him...