It's important to realise that the house was actually a block of flats
judging by the TV coverage, he came out of a communal entrance from
what I can see.

On 7/24/05, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To quote news reports,
> http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2005/07/24/world/londonattacks-070524
> 
> "The police force said officers saw Menezes emerge from a house that
> they had been staking out as part of the hunt for the bombers. They
> said suspicions were aroused because he was wearing an unseasonably
> bulky jacket and acting oddly, so they followed him.
> 
> They eventually chased him into the station and onto a train, where
> they shot five bullets into his head in front of stunned passengers."
> 
> So the guy exited a house they had under surveillance, and was wearing
> a very heavy coat that could have hidden a bomb belt. He was followed
> to the subway and was told to stop. Instead he ran. What was the
> police to do? Risk the deaths of quite a few more people. THe guy
> could have prevented the whole thing just by stopping and complying
> with the police.
> 
> larry
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/24/05, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So what do you do with a suicide bomber with a set of explosives? You
> > tackle him and he sets the belt off killing possibly dozens of people.
> > You let him go and he detonates the belt.  Do you want to explain to
> > the mother or father who has just lost their 5 year old kid that we
> > were trying to protect the bomber's rights? Or how about the husband
> > of the pregnant woman who was beside the bomber when it went off?
> > 
> > The police had id'd themselves as police, told him to stop. He did
> > not. He ran, and acted in a manner similar to a suicide bomber.
> > 
> > What do you do in this case?
> > 
> > There is no good answer. The metropolitan police said it right. They
> > were incorrect and are reexamining their procedures. What do you want?
> > How many people do you want to die for the police to err on the side
> > of causion or on the side of the guy with the bomb belt?
> > 
> > larry
> > 
> > On 7/24/05, Jennifer Larkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It's more than an unfortunate tragedy. It's a warning. They targetted
> > > and killed someone innocent in the name of protecting people from a
> > > theoretical threat. And their response is "Sorry. It is an unfortunate
> > > loss." Not even "We need to re-examine our procedures and see what
> > > could have been done to handle the situation better." Just "He acted
> > > suspicious so we shot him in the head. It's not our fault. If you have
> > > a problem with this, shove it."
> > >
> > > Who's next?
> > >
> > > Some guy with chills who is on his way to the doctor's office trying
> > > to keep warm?
> > >
> > > Someone who knows that innocent people have been detained indefinitely
> > > without access to lawyers and has just suddenly realized that he is
> > > wrongly under suspicion?
> > >
> > > You?
> > >
> > > On 7/24/05, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > It unfortunately sounds like there was mutual panic - on both the
> > > > victim's part, cops chasing him. and on the police. They may have
> > > > thought he had a dynamite belt on him, and rather than endanger
> > > > others, decided to shoot.
> > > --
> > > "You can't destroy EVERYthing. Where would you sit?" The Tick
> > >
> > > Now blogging....
> > > http://www.blivit.org/blog/index.cfm
> > > http://www.blivit.org/mr_urc/index.cfm
> > >
> > > 
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:166121
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to