No, they must have declared that they were plain clothes officers, i believe it's required by their rules over here. Otherwise his actions become slightly more justified. But with 20 of them, and reports that they delcared it, i think it's pretty safe to say one of them did

I wasn't there, so I don't know. I'm not even going to speculate, we will never be able to here his side of the story.

I trust enough in my police force to assume that one of them would have told that they were the police, seeing as they are the rules.
No need to presume the worst when they tend to acheive the best.

That's rich coming from an American.

Nobody is giving up freedom here, this is a priorty situation. When a plain clothes officer pulls out a weapon, a badge, and announces that he is a plain clothes officer and that you are to freeze, you're a dumbass not to do it, because by law they have to shoot to kill if you don't comply, especially in a priority situation. This guy chose to run when the police pulled their guns out and it left them no option. The British people look at this and say "well the guy ran and gave them a legally acceptable reason to shoot to kill, at least the police are doing their jobs by the book and properly sorting out this terrorist thing". Brits don't think like you yanks do... we don't see this as taking our freedom away, we see it as doing what is necessary... doing our bit for Blighty. We in the UK YIELD for the police and other services to let them get on with their goddamn job, rather than being subversive little shits and whinging and whining all the time about taking freedom away and about the cops doing what they have to do.

The guy was innocent of the crime they shot him for, but he still broke the law by jumping over the gates. Idiots don't live long, and this guy was an idiot. When there is a terrorist situation, you just don't do this kind of shit.

May I ask which freedom was taken away here? The freedom to run from the cops when they suspect you of being a terrorist?

Stop trying to belittle me with your predjudice, anti-American slurs. Yes, I'm an American, but I'm not one of the people that blindly follows this nations leaders. I'm not for the Patriot Act, and I don't own a terrorist survival kit.

I have not read an article that refers to such an action being taken. What I have read merely states that they chased him with guns and shot him five times. If you have seen an article that clears up this matter, please post it, I would be willing to change my mind. I'm basing my knowledge on what I've read.

Passengers said that the man looked absolutely petrified, anyone would be if this happened to them. You weren't there, so you have no idea exactly how these events played out.

No, it's a policy of shoot first, ask questions later. You could be just a normal citizen completely unaware that your suspected of being in contact with terrorists. If a group of men with guns, in civilian attire chase you and you run, you'll be shot. You have rights that should protect you from this. The evidence should be more solid then a suspicion.

Failure. It wasn't an anti-American slur. What you were so blindly accusing Britain of, is what America is guilty of.

Look for it yourself you misinformed lazy infidel.

Then you read a faulty, biased document.

And you're an American, so you have abosolutely no authority to tell me that I don't know exactly how these events played out. YOU are the one who doesn't know how this played out, not me.

Yeah "fight the power" you ignorant little shit. WRONG. The LAW which everyone in England KNOWS states that if you run from a policeman who has reason to believe that you might be dangerous, you can be shot. Therefore you never run from a policeman.

These police announced that they were police, and that they wanted this person to freeze. He ignored them and continued, attempting to board a train. It's his fault for being an idiot, not the police for doing their jobs properly.

It doesn't matter what you're suspected of. Everyone in the UK knows about plain clothes police, everyone in the UK knows about the London bombings, and everyone in the UK knows about the laws about doing what the police tell you to do, and what happens if you don't comply. There's no excuse for it, yet he still ran. He was an idiot.

Shut up, you clearly know nothing of our rights or what we should be protected from. These plain clothes police are the people who protect us from terrorists, and they do an amazing job. Why should there be "rights" that make it legal for a terrorist to run away from a policeman without getting shot? That's just politically correct bullshit and all it would do is kill hundreds of people rather than save the life of a few morons who decide to run rather than comply.

You know it's actually illegal to not comply with a policeman? So the guy had already done something stupid just by running. Why should these idiots be defended? They're just criminals anyway, he probably ran because he was guilty of some other crime and thought the police wanted to bust him for it. So it's one less person in jail, one less person soaking up taxpayer's money in police custody.

More name-calling from Dino. Not a surprise.

I never accused Britain of anything. My comments were obviously directed at those in this thread, the people who don't question such actions. Where I live has no relavance to this discussion. I'm not going to group you up with all of Britain, it's just plain silly. A location is a location, it doesn't mean the inhabitants have the same ideas.

Funny. I already looked, every article has been fairly vague on the actual details of the event. It sounds to me that you, yourself have not read of such an event taking place, but are merely assuming. If you know it to be fact, present the article. It would definately strengthen your claims. I'm not at all saying this detail does not exist, but many reports do have it absent.

Yeah, that must be it.

Neither of us do, that's the point. Were you there? No? That's what I thought. Just because you happen to live closer to the events then I do is negligible.

You really have a way with words. There's no doubting that plainclothes officers cause a miscommunication when they confront a suspect. A lot of innocent people have died because of it.

You could also call the officers who shot him in the torso, idiots. If they believed he was strapped with explosives under that heavy jacket, it's probably not a good idea to shoot the damn thing. A shot or two to the head would have gotten the job done fine.


For all this man knew, they could have been the terrorists. We don't know what the man was thinking, humans have a tendancy to run when they're afraid. Not everyone is as cool and collected as yourself.

I'm sure they are doing a great job for the most part, but when innocent civilians are killed because of a hunch, there's a problem. If these were uniformed officers, it would be very stupid for him to run, but as I said the lack there of, causes confusion. It's not difficult to believe that someone would react the way he did.

More speculation, you're on a role.

These flame wars are becoming awefully redundant. This forum used to be such a nice place.

Why can't you two just stop flaming each other, and discuss this like mature people. Understand each other's view of point, and then make some kind of conclusion out of it. I'm getting sick of all the thread, getting filled up with flames. I think that there has been flames in evry single thread, created recently. Please just stop, or you will be the cause of this threads' closure.

I have not done anything along the lines of flaming, my tone is calm, my arguements valid.

Doesn't look like flaming to me, looks like some of the most constructive argument i've seen in this thread.

'Doesn't look like flaming to me, looks like some of the most constructive argument i've seen in this thread.'

From what i've seen, it's only Mojo who's acting like a mature adult. At any opportunity Dino gets, he gets his phallus of insults out and starts waving it around in everybody's faces. I wouldn't really mind, but he's seemingly only doing it to belittle and embarass Mojo.

I personally agree with what the Police did, but to back Mojo's point, the guy was Brazillian and he had been working here illegally for quite a few months. Not only that, but, from what i've read, he was from a violent part of Brazil where people carried guns. Now, if you came from a country like that, and you spoke very little English, and you saw plainclothes peeps aiming guns at you, i think you'd defecate yourself and speed off too.

I know that if i was in Iraq and something along the same lines happened there, there'd be a Jacob shaped hole in anything that got in my way.

More bigotry and ignorance from MojoMan. Not a suprise.

Yes you did, you accused it of giving up it's rights/freedom because of fear. That's what has happened in the US, not what's happened in the UK. Nobody has given up any rights.

I am assuming nothing. I live in Britain, and therefore have access to superior news sources on the subject, just as I deserve. You've no real right to access breaking news, but I, as a citizen of the UK, have priority over the details. So don't be so suprised when the only thing you manage to get ahold of for a wihle amounts to "OMG LIEK THE UK WAS SOOOO BOMBED IN LONDEN! TEH TERROROIST ARE LIEK, GETTING CHASED BY TEH SCOTTISH YARDz0r!".

Fine I'll find you an article when I can be bothered.

Again, don't be so suprised if it is. The US don't really give a shit about the UK, so they're not about to start providing accurate information on it. The only time you ever got anything that truely concerned the UK that we didn't get (which is an absolute travesty) is the Diana tapes. Especially considering that the majority of you didn't have a clue who Diana was, nor did you care.

NNo it isn't. It affects me as a British citizen, because it's MY country that's being attacked, not YOURS. Therefore I need to know all the little facts and details. You however, do not, because you're several thousand miles away.

When 9/11 occured, who had more right to comment on it, and speculate, and come out with crackpot theories, and moan about their rights being taken away? US citizens or UK citizens? It's the US of course - and that's the way it was. We in the UK thought what was happening was terrible, but to be honest the majority of us really didn't comment much on it, or even give a shit, and in fact some of us were glad to see a few Americans die for their stupidity in the middle east, as sick as that idea may be.

No they haven't. Present your proof of that please.

Everyone in the UK is fully aware of plain clothes officers, and because it's illegal for ANYONE except police to carry guns, most if not all people KNOW that they are plain clothes police the very second they take their guns out. It's really quite hard to get guns illegally in the UK, and it would be especially difficult to arm five people with five identical police issue guns. So I find it unlikely that this guy came to that conclusion.

Police know better than you where to shoot a man armed with explosives, so do not make assumptions. The police are not the idiots here, it's the dude who ran away, he's the idiot. The police had their reasons for shooting him where they did, and they did a good job. Personally I'm glad they killed him, I'd rather have him dead and hundreds safe, than have him still alive, doubt of the police's ability to do their job, and him potentially detonating a bomb.

As I said, they were all English police with English accents, armed with five identical police issue guns. It would've been a HIGHLY unlikely conclusion to make. But if this guy did make that conclusion, then it's his own fault. There's going to be some casualties of this thing, not through police doing a bad job, but from them obeying the law and doing their job properly, and other people just being idiots. If you don't like UK law, then tough luck, because we DO - it defends our great country from terrorists and does a fucking fantastic job of it too.

No there isn't. They obeyed the law and did what they HAD to do. For starters he wasn't innocent, he broke the law by jumping the barriers and running from a police officer. When someone runs from five police officers after they shout "FREEZE! POLICE!" and then tries to board a train, it's more than a hunch. It looks a whole damn lot like a suicide bomber in fact. To be able to come to the conclusion that the guy isn't a suicide bomber is MORE reckless than to kill someone who fucking well does a brilliant job of making himself look like one.

Not in the UK it doesn't, for aforementioned reasons.

Yes it IS difficult to believe. He reacted stupidly - if I was in a tube station, knew about the current climate created by the London bombings, and then had 5 people pull out guns and tell me "FREEZE! POLICE!", I'd just do what they say. I mean of COURSE there is going to be plain clothes officers there to control these terrorists... do you think that uniformed police would ever be able to track them down? They're so easy to avoid because you can see them coming.

Whatever. I'm a UK citizen, I'm allowed to speculate, cause I know the laws and the way things work here. If this were a US attack, then you would be the one with the license to speculate.

Right-ho. On the news [although it was ITV] it was told that the man shot dead had been living in England for months on an expired visa, so perhaps that is why he ran. [However the man's family is thinking of sueing the British Government].

I agree with what the Police did. If the man had gotten away, there woul've been this crap all over the news about a bomber on the loose, it would've caused mayhem. Nevermind the Police being verbally attacked.

It's unfortunate the man died, and it shouldn't of happened. But if he had been living in England for months, he surely would've picked up some of the language. Especially an important word such as "Police".

- Rexy

'because it's MY country that's being attacked'

Well, technically, erm, yes, it's not your country...as you're Spanish.

'Everyone in the UK is fully aware of plain clothes officers, and because it's illegal for ANYONE except police to carry guns, most if not all people KNOW that they are plain clothes police the very second they take their guns out. It's really quite hard to get guns illegally in the UK, and it would be especially difficult to arm five people with five identical police issue guns. So I find it unlikely that this guy came to that conclusion.'

I find it doubtful that when somebody pulls out a gun, you're going to be all "Now, is that an illegally acquired firearm, or is it standard issue for the Police?" especially when you're a Brazillian.

It's also worth noting that the Police allowed him to actually go to the Train station (this includes boarding a bus), not, if they were so worried, surely they'd've taken him down straight away?

I personally don't think the Government or Police should be sued or stand trial, they did their job, they made a mistake, oh well, get over it. It's going to happen. I also loathe the fact that American who shot dead that Iraqi shooter whilst he was injured on the floor has been brought to trial. It disgusts me, anyway.

I'm not intolerant of your opinions and I'm not oblivious to the world around me. I welcome all arguemnts on the matter, but when they become personal attacks, they're not helping anyone.

I know who I was directing that question to, so you can believe whatever you like.

That's all I ask, I'm interested to see this whole mess cleared up. If it's as solid as you say, I won't hesitate to shift my stance. You also need to keep in mind distance and ambient noises, they can have all the impact on issues involving communication. I'm not sure if there's anything out there quite that specific, but it could make all the difference.

I'm not going to reply to everything you said, you make some good points, I disagree with some, but I respect them. (Actually, it's because I'm a lazy infidel)

I know It may seem like I'm hurting my own argument by saying this, but the truth is more important. The man spoke almost perfect English according to his relatives. He had been living in England for the past three years, so it's unlikely that the man was confused about the laws and his surroundings. I do however, still believe that the actions taken by the man could make a lot of sense in the context of the situation. I believe there are other ways that these types of situations can be handled, without killing the person. If the evidence against him was strong, a shot to the head seems more reasonable to me. This is merely my opinion, no flaming please.

Yes but I was born here, I have full UK citizenship, and my dad is English. So really it is technically my country.

Maybe they wanted to confirm whether or not he was heading for the station, which might've been something that possibly matched up with intelligence reports or something?

I agree. They did a damn fine job too.

'Yes but I was born here'

Well, you're not Spanish then, you're British. English at that. It's like me saying i'm Italian/Dutch/Irish, when i'm not, it's in my heritage, but i was born in England. And so i am English. I don't see why you would tell people you're Spanish, it's bizarre.

'Maybe they wanted to confirm whether or not he was heading for the station, which might've been something that possibly matched up with intelligence reports or something?'

Regardless, if he was a suicide bomber, do you really think the Police would've allowed him to get five feet away from his front door, let alone take a bus to the Train station. Also, if he was a suicide bomber, surely as soon as the Police shouted "POLICE! FREEZE!" he'd've blown himself up, hoping to take the Police with him.

I hope the Police involved don't get taken to trial.

Agreed, I'm not going to loose any sleep over it.

If the guy was innocent then why did he turn round and jump a ticket box barrier and continue running? It gave the police reasonable suspicion; how could he just expect to get away?

There are two choices the police were faced with, shoot him in the head or don’t bother. I know personally I’d rather shoot him point blank than live with the burden of him blowing up a train along with innocent lives.

Jacob, what he means is Spanish is his ethnicity. I'm half Peruvian, that doesn't mean I from the country. Spanish can mean two things, the general term used for Hispanic, or, the term used for a person from Spain. Get it? Got it? Good! :lol:

It's kinda complicated. 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. Also, where you are 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, so I'm more like her than I am like him as a consequence, which is another reason why I'm considered Spanish rather than English.

Another factor is that I have a citizenship in Spain too, so I am just as much a citizen there as I am here.

I agree with you 100%.

'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?