Let's see, suspicious individual, wearing a bulky padded jacket in 80+ degree heat, fleeing police investigating suicide bombers... sure shoot him in the bulky padded jacket, there's a plan...
"80+ degree heat"
Oxymoron for some of us, especially here in Texas.
The expectation that the police wouldn't shoot someone fleeing them is quite ridiculous. I guess the naysayers would rather give the cops a sticker for a "jolly good effort." Perhaps they could congratulate each other for trying really hard over tea.
I'll take making a mistake and the potential consequences rather than a bomber succeeding every time.
Might there be a market for transparent rucksacks? 
Prof Rogers can kiss my ass. He will snivel and bitch no matter what. I can only hope that he will be one of the victims of the next bombing, as that would be about the only thing that would ever make him happy...except GWB's assasination of course.
If a police officer points a gun at you, yells "stop", and you decide to run, then you deserve whatever you get.
So, let me get this straight, he's under surveillance because he's been linked to a failed mass murder attempt, he leaves his house wearing a heavily padded jacket in hot weather, he heads to a train station, he runs when challenged by police, when trying to excape he runs onto a train - (previous scene of recent succesful mass murder act and the last place most people would use as an escape route as once train is moving you are trapped) and the squawking donkey's want bloody warning shots??
God help us if these people ever get into power.
There are more good lines in this post than there are candy cherry thingies in a fruitcake.
The Muslim Council of Britain said Muslims were concerned there was a "shoot to kill" policy in operation.
Meanwhile, the British Council of Britain said that British were concerned that there was a "blow yourself up like a barbaric moron" policy in operation.
When the suspect began to travel down an escalator to the trains the officers yelled "Police, stop!"
Oh, really? What did the guy do then?
He was tailed from a distance and followed on to a bus.
Ya know, that might have been a good time for the whole "Stop!" routine to begin with.
Professor Paul Rogers of Bradford University said...
Oh, this is going to be good. You can just tell, can't you?
From an overwhelming preponderance of evidence, this is how reporters go about their business:
Snoop: Hey, Scoop-- the cops just shot a suspected... ah... fully-mobile self-demolitions expert. What should we do?
Scoop: Find a lefty-moonbat professor, immediately!!
Snoop: Don't worry, I've got just the guy:
Prof. Moonbat: "The kind of tactics the Met appear to have used this morning are very similar to the very tough tactics that the Israelis use against suspected suicide bombers."
Snoop: That's right, Scoop, this country is going down the toilet. The cops are acting like a bunch of damn Jews, I tell ya! And you know the story with those Jews-- they're a bunch of Nazis!!
Print it, Scoop, print it!!
Who else is wondering just how good an 'eye-witness' this Whitby gent is? The one who the press aew quting everywhere. fact is tere are just too many 5th-columnists in London right now, and that's the real problem.
Not attacking his credibikity as such, but wondering why the usual contextualising didn't occurr for the 'reports'.
The press wouldn't be hoping for a violent backlash would they? Naah, surely not. Couldn't be that wicked. Could they?
Why did they let him get on a bus, for heaven's sake? When two bombers have actually triggered bombs ON A BUS in the past two weeks?
How do I get a job with the "Bobbies".
Good shooting son...now, mobile targets!!!!
Pure speculation here. Do you suppose the guy that that was killed was acting as a sort of test dummy and was sent out by extremists to see if the Brits were prepared to "shoot to kill"?
Funny - it's only certain ethnic groups Liberal oppose profiling.
When investigating the Gambino Crime Family in New York and New Jersey do you think the police are on the lookout for Swedes or Turks? Of course, not. They're looking for Italians most would consider white.
The FBI serial killer profile is well known -- white males in their 20's & 30's are always considered first as the data supports it.
Is this type of double-standard from the Left naive or intentionally obstructionist? I'm beginning to wonder...
bohemianlikeyou
This witness quoted yesterday said the dead guy was already on the ground in the subway car before he was shot.
I just hope you never bang a policeman's wife, Art.
I mean, outside the whole insult to the institution of marriage business, I could see you running into that cop in the subway system, running away, and being shot dead by one of his compatriots.
Don't worry.
It can't happen here!
God Bless The Freedom To Shoot Suspects and Executive Pay
By the way, I don't like wearing t-shirts or shorts. I have a fine body, but I think it is indiscreet and low-class to not cover up.
Let the tarts and muscle-heads show off, they are idiots anyway.
I'm not saying I'd wear a jacket, but I have been known to put on a jacket _just_ because of all the extra pockets it provided.
I know people who put on jackets _just_ for how they looked.
But you support blowing people's brains out for wearing seasonally inappropriate clothing?
Screw you. May your children be shot for wearing seasonally inappropriate clothing, if you really think that.
Not sure what these people want. As far as i can see it the terrorists have made it clear that the gloves are off. So does that mean we can't do the same?
I am still travelling by tube everyday to work and i am pleased to see the armed police for a change in London. You can't believe how much more respect all the police are getting from normal people compared with a few months ago. Now when the police tell you to move, you move no questions no attitute..you try to not get in their way. If i started running after being told to stop i would not expect any good things to happen to me.
If they shot the man in the leg and he was able to detonate a bomb, the police would be criticized for not shooting to kill. This should make all people more compliant when told to STOP. If the good Muslims are alarmed, perhaps they will begin to notice and report those in their midst who demonstrate some radical speech or behavior.
Hey josh,don't be a dumb ass.The guy wasn't shot for wearing a coat he was shot because he ran.He and you are both Darwin Award canidates.
It is a difficult split-second-decision - or actually, it is not.
It is a question of minimizing regret. If the person running away from the police in a too-big jacket turns out to be innocent, too bad. One innocent life lost.
If the person turns out to kill 20 people in a bomb blast, including the pursuing police officers, worse.
It is a painful decision, but not difficult. You have to shoot. And given what has just happened in London, you have to shoot to kill.
It is hard, but the terrorists brought this new environment, not the police. So the muslims should blame the terrorists, no-one else.
"I don't like wearing t-shirts or shorts. I have a fine body, but I think it is indiscreet and low-class to not cover up."
You are such great comedy Josh. I suppose it is only decent not to flaunt you ripped abs and bulging pecs eh? You might give everyone else a complex.
By the way, do you think it is "indiscreet and low-class to not cover up" in regards to women as well? What a good little liberal you are.
"But you support blowing people's brains out for wearing seasonally inappropriate clothing?"
What in the hell are you smoking jackass. That has got to be the most blatant and pathetic strawman argument I have ever seen.
(just dreaming....)
Due to the state of emergency brought about by recent terrorist attacks in the United Kingdom, and due to the fact that all of these attacks were carried out by Muslims,
We hereby issue the following
EMERGENCY MOSQUE CLOSURE DECREE
All mosques, and all other places of Islamic worship, are immediately closed. Any of Our Subjects found violating this decree will be immediately and permanently exiled.
Mosques will be gradually re-opened, on a case-by-case basis, as the proper authorities determine whether or not the mosque was a significant supporter of terrorist activities. If the mosque is found blameless, it will be re-opened.
If not, the mosque will be permanently closed, the property will be forfeit to the Kingdom, and all religious staff associated with that mosque will be permanently exiled from Great Britain.
Exilees who refuse to go into exile will be executed.
(signed)
Elizabeth, Queen
Now you know where the expression, "You are joshing me" came from. Like father like son.
A hundred veiwpoints describing the same event, no wonder witnesses are unreliable. The address was found in an unexploded rucksack containing a bomb. Was it a plant to point the police to a terrorist candidate who had rejected the mission for fear he would tell?
We are at war, dummy. Even those who talk to terrorists about soccer or cricket are suspect and rightly so.
Shooting first and asking questions later is sometimes the only choice.
It's like the torture question at Gitmo, do you think asking a detainee "Pretty PLEASE." will get answers?
Josh wants the enemy to be given all the breaks, all the doubt, all the freedom of action and tie the polices' hands behind their backs. It's the Liberal view that there are three sides to a two-sided issue: right, wrong, and their view.
Josh,
This guy who was shot had been identified as an accomplice of the bombers, and was being followed by the police. He didn't stop when ordered and run towards a train...
Why is it that people like you keep defending extremists? What about the 50+ people who died in London, and those still at risk from the terrorists still at large? Really, what's wrong with you "anti-anti-terrorism" people? What will it take for you to understand that there are people out there that are VERY SERIOUS about killing civilians, and they would kill even "supporters" like you if they had a chance?
The cops are saying the guy was innocent.
Hmm... Xofis, if true, that's no good news. Not only because the death of an innocent is bad in itself, but because it backfires. Now there will be calls for the police to be more soft, to wait for terrorists to explode before they are searched, etc. Then again, why did this guy run?!? Was he trying to jump the turnstiles and travel free, knowing full well that the police was looking out for bombers in the underground? Was he a drug pusher that didn't want to be stopped by the police for other reasons?
This needs to be investigated thoroughly...
Plus, there's at least one failed suicide-bomber still hanging around...
British Police Admit Dead Guy Had Nothing To Do With Bombers
You guys were so, so damned sure of yourselves.
You don't know many Pakis, so you -knew- it couldn't be anyone you knew or liked.
That's the great part about religious or race wars. The civilian casualties are rarely people you know.
There have been many innocent people at Gitmo.
If only one of those innocent people had been a pretty, white girl, it would all be different.
How do you know it would be different? The US government at the least isn't very hospitable to Aryan Nation-types.
You clearly know absolutely nothing about police procedure in general or the specific circumstances of this particular situation. You're just an ignorant buffoon trying to keep your veneer of superiority up despite being repeatedly humiliated.
They guy wasn't a Pakistani, or even a Muslim. He was an Hispanic.
Josh,
Hindsight is 20/20, bucko. Re-read - I'm assuming you actually HAVE read - the circumstances surrounding the shooting.
Now, imagine you are a cop with his ass on the line. Can you honestly, truly, state that this was not alarmingly - and I mean that in the strongest sense - suspicious behavior? If your reply is that it was not, you are a deluded liar. Pure and simple. Then realize that scoring political "points" means more to you than reality.
You're out of touch. You're living in a dream world, Josh old boy. Place yourself, just for a moment, in the shoes of a London cop. I have, and I sure as hell would not want to be a London cop right now.
But point your righteous finger at the cops, Josh. Shriek about what bloodthirsty bastards they are. Do it loud, do it often, and do it publicly. Only then will some people realize that you, and others like you, aren't serious about what's going on. It's all a conspiracy, you see. That oil-thirsty Bush is at it again!
I've browsed your blog. Love the request to prove that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program instead of just nuclear energy. So you trust the mullahs, after reading all their statements about the Great Satan? Their actions in the hostage crisis, and their executions - many caught on video, try Googling. You do realize that "progressives" like you are executed in Iran, don't you?
Keep playing your game, Josh. Your little pseudo-intellectual "gotcha" game. It's all a conspiracy, I tells ya! A conspiracy! There were no bombs! It was Bush/Blair/Howard/Freemasons! Oil, oil, oil!
If/when Iran tests their first nuclear weapon, I will be on your blog demanding a solution. Because you're so effing brilliant...
Josh is one or all of the following:
1.) A terrorist
2.) A Pakistani
3.) A muslim
4.) A liberal
5.) A Troll
That would explain his response to the shooting.
Oh shit! The dude was a Brazilian who apparently had nothing to do with anything.
This is very bad.
Josh
I know "Pakis". I worked with several who were
1/extremely pleased when the bombs denotated at Nairobi and Daar Es Salaam.
2/expressed disappointment on VE Day anniversary that the allies hadn't given Hitler time to "finish of the Yids".
3/were ecstatic on 9/11.
Hmmm, surprising comments from the mayor's office..
" The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public.
"This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility." "
Ken's idea of responsibility is interesting, to say the least.
I suppose we have to puff our chests out and say that this fellow died so that millions don't have to die in the future. Or something.
The expectation that the police wouldn't shoot someone fleeing them is quite ridiculous.
If a police officer points a gun at you, yells "stop", and you decide to run, then you deserve whatever you get.
Maybe in Texas the first statement is true, but in Britain we aren't quite as intoxicated with firearms and the death penalty as y'all.
As for the second statement, I'm thinking of writing to Ian Blair and asking him to make it Met policy. Somehow I think he'd be less than amused.
I'd be damn nervous too if sombody with an idealogy and beleif I fully and publically support was killing and terrorizing my neighborhood and I felt no need to convince my neighbors that I vehemently disassoiate myself from the lunitic.
I'd be damn nervous living in a neighborhood of people I deem evil and hoped would be punished and those neighbors got wise to me.
yea damn nervous, but I would not leave, I would stand my ground scream bigotry and profiling and civil rights and sue and call on all fearful supporters to rise up to my defence.
dw
And how precisely does one 'vehemently dissociate' one's self if one is say, Arab? Or African? Or Asian? (Or Brazilian?) Does one carry a sign saying "I am not one of them"? Perhaps the odd public denunciation of terrorism every five minutes?
Or do you wear a sweater marked "New York" - oh, whoops, one of the suspects did that.
Yep, more drivel from people who never had to wonder before in their life about living in the West as a person of non-Euro ancestry.
Does anyone know if the police who chased this guy were in uniform.?
"Yep, more drivel from people who never had to wonder before in their life about living in the West as a person of non-Euro ancestry."
Is that like being a Jew in any country in the Middle East save Israel, by chance?
What do you mean, there are barely any? None in most countries? Well, I guess you're in a rather odd spot to be talking Maher.
Is that like being a Jew in any country in the Middle East save Israel, by chance?
Indeed it is. And can you point to a place where I suggested that THAT was an excusable state of affairs? Or is this just more turnabout-is-fair-play logic?
Have you been a Jew in an Arab country, Chaos? Perhaps YOU would like to tell us about it. Or about being an Arab in a Jewish state.
What do you mean, there are barely any? None in most countries? Well, I guess you're in a rather odd spot to be talking Maher.
I'm not sure how I'm in an odd spot to be talking. I'm British. Unless you think I should be setting the internal policy of countries I don;t live in. That seems to be perfectly acceptable for some people.
Or perhaps you don't think I'm 'really' British, Chaos.
Meanwhile, on the front page of The Australian newspaper:
"Five police bullets end it for London bomber who tried again"
I look forward to the retraction.
Come on, Chaos. Let's hear what else you have to say, while you're assessing the spot I'm in.
Meanwhile, Arthur updates his page to take a shot at "the left" (don't like shoot to kill? don't like labels? got an alternative?) but doesn't apologise for swallowing the presumption of Asian identity whole, either. WMDs, anyone?
This bloke is "apparently" unconnected to the attacks. But he was never "apparently" Asian on this blog. Interesting, that.
Sorry for the long direct quote but it is extremely relevant:
Shooting to kill saves lives - one tragedy will not change that
By Lord Stevens, former Commissioner of the Met
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/...ews/
news4.shtml
When I was Commissioner of the Met it was my sad duty to end many, many years of police tradition and bring in what's been called a shoot-to-kill policy against suspected suicide bombers.
Of course, in reality it is a "shoot-to-kill-to-protect" policy, to save innocent lives. I introduced it after much soul-searching over a great deal of time.
Now the revelation that the man killed on Friday by an armed police officer was, in fact, innocent of any bombing intent may lead some to seriously question that policy.
But we are living in unique times of unique evil, at war with an enemy of unspeakable brutality, and I have no doubt that now, more than ever, the principle is right despite the chance, tragically, of error. And it would be a huge mistake for anyone to even consider rescinding it.
To understand why, put yourself in the place of a police officer.
Previously, the standing instructions in firearms incidents was for officers to fire at the offender's body, usually two shots, to disable and overwhelm.
But I sent teams to Israel, and other countries hit by suicide bombers, where we learned a terrible truth.
There is only one sure way to stop a suicide bomber determined to fulfil his mission: Destroy his brain instantly, utterly.
Which means shooting him with devastating power in the head. Anywhere else and even though they might be dying, they may still be able to force their body to trigger the device.
My heart goes out to the officer who killed the man in Stockwell Tube station. I've never yet met a firearms officer who has killed in the line of duty who hasn't been traumatised and haunted by the experience.
To get close enough to be certain of killing a fleeing man he believed might have been about to trigger a suicide bomb, that officer knowingly put himself in a position where he thought he could be blown to tiny pieces, almost vaporised.
How horrifying, how terrifying...and, yes, despite the way events unfolded, how brave.
Don't forget, either, that like every officer who fires a weapon in a firearms incident his actions will now be subject to a meticulous investigation.
Ultimately, I believe, officers like him will continue to do their job because there's no choice—the danger from real fanatics out there is too acute.
Let's look at the facts.
There are 8,000 active terrorists at large in the world—and they're just the ones we know about. And the vast majority of these people are driven by the most perverted, evil version of Muslim extremism.
It's the kind of extremism that led four suicide bombers to blow themselves and over 50 innocent people to death in London on 7/7. The kind that led others to attempt—but fail—to murder and maim again last Thursday.
And almost certainly the kind that has brought death and destruction to Sharm el Sheikh in Egypt this weekend. So what do we do about it?
One devastating fact we must address is there are EIGHT MILLION stolen or lost passports floating around the world, to be used and abused. So yet again the need for proper border controls becomes obvious.
Then there are ID cards. Over and again I heard terrorism and crime experts this week sing their praises. For instance, ID cards were a vital weapon used in Hong Kong to solve their massive illegal immigration and human trafficking problems.
Vital
Similarly, we should consider introducing at our borders the kind of photographic system used in Pakistan which automatically captured those airport arrival pictures and passports of the two 7/7 bombers that were revealed in the papers this week.
Yes these are expensive options. But in a dangerous world, safety doesn't come cheap.
Then there is security at home. I said after 7/7 that those bombers would be British-based and so, sadly, it turned out to be. I believe Thursday's second batch will be the same.
What these two incidents show is the need to further engage the British Muslim community in the war against al-Qaeda.
Communities defeat terrorism. And there's never been a more vital time to realise that.
If the police in Britain adopt a shoot to kill policy, they are going to need better intelligence than that they used to "identify" this fellow. And they are going to have to have an EXTREMELY comprehensive scrutiny system in place for the aftermath of an incident like this one. And that system will have to be WHOLLY independent of the police and politicians. We have, believe it or not, been down this slippery slope before.
you know, maher, any other time i would say that the incident is a text book case of excessive force but this happened after 7/7. that's like saying after 9/11 a person snuck a .45 on a plane and pulled it out and yelled "haha just kidding"...what do you think the temporary dutied sky marshalls would have done? double tap to the head.
in this situation, i do not sympathize with the dead fellow at all...so far what i gather is that his english was fluent, there have been no mention of limited mental capabilities that might of hindered his comprehension of the word "STOP"....
so what do you expect mr. Mughrabi? perhaps for the police to continue, "please sir, pray take the time to heed our warning: if you don't stop running we shall be force to shoot at the count of three...one...two...etc"
you suggested that they need better intelligence as to prevent misidentification. well at last count, how many men of middle eastern blood have volunteered for service in an intelligence position? (i'm going to generalize this towards extremists operating out of the mid east...given the situation...nothing personal) and as any career intel officer will tell you...90% is always bullshit. perhaps you should present yourself to MI:5 or the Met and sort this problem out? cause i really despise people who just complain about what should be done...you seem like man of decent intellect, why not contribute?
i'm from Texas but doesn't mean Texans are all crazy bastards with an itch to kill. i would like to say your reasoning is idealogical...but idealism only works in a country where people respond to it. sadly enough, most of the world still only responds to blood.
that's like saying after 9/11 a person snuck a .45 on a plane and pulled it out and yelled "haha just kidding"
No it isn't.
so what do you expect mr. Mughrabi? perhaps for the police to continue, "please sir, pray take the time to heed our warning
This tactic of putting forward a nonsense alternative whenever some course of action is criticised is getting a bit tired.
you seem like man of decent intellect, why not contribute?
How do YOU know that I'm NOT contributing? Do you think I like the idea of my loved ones and friends being blown up any more than you do?
i'm from Texas but doesn't mean Texans are all crazy bastards with an itch to kill.
Ah, you don't like cultural stereotypes, huh? Hurts, does it? Now perhaps you get my point.
i would like to say your reasoning is idealogical...but idealism only works in a country where people respond to it. sadly enough, most of the world still only responds to blood.
1) Your English needs work.
2) This division of the world into 'civilised' and 'bloodthirsty' is itself ideological. I speak as one who lives on both sides of the notional divide.
They say the person killed was Brazilian and Hispanic. But was he a muslim.
One thing is for sure. If he had been a Muslim, his innocence would be even more "apparently" than it is now.
One good question asked here is why a man considered a risk is allowed to use a bus.
Another good question to ask here is why did he run when the police asked him to stop. If he was innocent, why did he feel the need to run? Further, if he had obeyed the law, perhaps he would not have ended his life.
You are on your way to a police state when you support police state tactics directed at others. There is a predictable trajectory to riding that tiger.
So, the police have a policy to protect innocents that kills innocents. Sane people would reconsider the policy.
Approving this state murder puts you on the same side as that statist commie Red Ken.
A few things.
Firstly the police who tried to apprehend the man were in plain clothes, they weren't in uniform. Secondly he was shot 5 times in the head, AFTER he tripped and fell to the ground.
Also the man was completely unconnected with the men who carried out the attacks, he was followed by the plainclothes policemen because he was seen leaving a building which had been under surveilance by police because its address was apparently found in one of the backpacks used by the bombers. Note this doesn't make him an accomplice, he was an electrician by trade, he could have been working in the building, or it could have been a block of flats and he was unlucky enough to be a neighbour of one of the bombers.
As was also mentioned BBC site, the man had apprently spent some time living in slums in Brazil before he came to Britain, areas where crime and shootings are higher than almost anywhere else in the world that isn't a warzone, and when confronted by plainclothes men shouting at him, possibly with guns drawn, (can anyone verify that the police did or did not challenged the man without drawing their weapons?) it could have easily been his natural reaction to turn and run.
Finally as previous posters mentioned why was the man allowed to board a bus unchallenged? If they truly thought he was a suicide bomber why allow him to board a form of transport which had been attacked only hours/days before?
While the police are under an immense amount of pressure its their job to manage it and act accordingly so that situations like this don't occur. Allowing the situation to develop to the point where the only apparent option was to shoot the man dead was a failure on the side of the police.
Armed police isn't the norm in Britain, thank various deities, and I personally hope that this will help guard against that possibility and shoot-to-kill policies being used again anytime in the future.
All of the above can be verified on the BBC website, but heres a few URLs.
Family condemns police shooting
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/47.../uk/
4711639.stm
Shot man not connected to bombings
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/47.../uk/
4711021.stm
The police marksman's dilemma
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/47.../uk/
4711619.stm
Art,
Your new tactic, blame the policy, is pretty dumb.
In the military (where, I grant, higher discipline is usually expected than for cops, although you should do a study on the drinking and whoring of Marines sometime, perhaps) they might expect someone to leap onto a hand grenade. I mean, many Medals of Honor have posthomously been handed out for that.
Too bad it wasn't a pretty, white girl. Those are the only victims that matter to the media.
Viva Aruba! Viva Jon Benet Ramsey!
Maher, you've been pretty upset and condemnatory. Somehow, I would like to hear you say that the REAL enemy here is Islamic terrorism, and that you condemn it absolutely.
Or could you actually do that???
Maher appears to be having a pity party. Poor persecuted me. Why, oh why, do people look at me suspiciously just because people just like me have been blowing up, shooting and beheading commuters, vacationers and other assorted individuals? And, Maher, my friend (and you are my friend) if it is that difficult living in the West being of non-European ancestry, have you considered moving to a more hospitable place? There really are no laws against your leaving. As a friend, and an immigrant, I think you should consider the possibility. Just think of the lower cost of living in, say Pakistan. I’m not sure in which country you would not stand out, but do give it some consideration. For your own good. Advice from a friend; a friend who understands you.
And Josh, yes, you should be shot for wearing inappropriate clothing. I thought everyone understood that. Especially seersucker. Never wear seersucker. First we write snarky articles about you, then we shoot you.
Mark, if this makes any police officer hesitate, I really, really hope that the next suicide bomber is standing directly next to you.
Al least there will not be any ambiguity about that. Oh, and try to avoid wearing seersucker.
So, according to a relative, his english was fine?
Perhaps the dead person should have watched Chris Rock's educational video on "How not to get your ass kicked by the Police"
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail.../2458063?
htv=12
"Rule One: STOP IMMEDIATELY. Even Rodney King knows, if the Police have to chase you, they're bringing an Ass Kicking with them."
A lot of interesting comments, but relatively few that identify the relevant points. The first point is did the Police have reason to suspect the guy was a suicide bomber (the answer is yes) and the second is did he stop when challenged (the answer is no). Nothing else is relevant.
It doesn't matter whether the guy spoke English (he did), it doesn't matter whether the police identified themselves as they were undercover (in the UK they always do) and it doesn't matter what his previous experiences of being held up in Sao Paulo were (he wasn't in Sao Paulo).
Did the police do the right thing? 100% absolutely. Should they have done exactly the same thing if it was a pretty white girl instead? Damn straight. Would I feel the same if it was a friend of mine or family member? Subjectively, probably not but that is not relevant. Objectively if I or anyone I know ran from armed police I would expect the police to fire and rightly so. The European Convention on human rights is one of the worst pieces of unneccesary red tape foisted on us by the EU. The Human Rights Act should be reppealed and we should withdraw from the ECHR. The sooner the better.
I've got the perfect solution for stopping terrorism - institute a dictatorship. That way, Bush would be allowed to have anyone killed without question. Were they innocent? It doesn't matter, because even if they were, it would send a message to the terrorists that they're next.
It may seem a bit heavy-handed, but think about it: How many suicide bombings happened in Iraq when Saddam was in power? None -- because he "took out" anyone who might do such things. Sure, I understand that one of the "reasons" Bush gave to go to Iraq was that Saddam was tyrannical and would kill and torture innocent people -- but at least he prevented someone from walking into a crowded market and blowing up 50 other people.
Don't like "shoot to kill"? Well, I don't like it either. But what do you replace it with?
Maher,
From what I understand, being an Arab and living in a Jewish country is not necessarily as bad as being an Arab and living in an Arab country. Arabs living in Israel have rights and privileges not extended to many Arabs in their own country. That is the result of Israel being a real democracy.
Even if one disagrees with that, there can be no argument whatsoever that being an Arab living in a Jewish or Western country is incomparably better than being a Jew or Westerner living in an Arab country. First off, Jews are virtually extinct in many Arab countries (For example, synogogues are not well established and frequented in Saudi Arabia)
Maxkelly,
You wrote:
"...but at least he prevented someone from walking into a crowded market and blowing up 50 other people. "
LOL. I assume that was satire...you really need to put the markers on it, though.
It is a bit much like saying "Even though Hitler killed six million jews, at least the trains ran on time, everyone had work and there was very little petty crime and no murders."
Well, the fact that London police don't carry firearms is a bit distressing. Most are not even trained nor qualified to carry a firearm! In NYC, after 9/11 there were armed police officers wearing flak jackets and helmets along with fully automatic assault rifles. They stood at major intersections. Police vehicles were seen all over the place near highway exit ramps, bridges and tunnels. Armed officers on the subways, etc. The Manhattan Police Headquarters was barricaded for a few city blocks to prevent anyone not authorized to even get close. There were 4-5 checkpoints and several metal detectors before you entered the building.
We were deeply worried about a second or third strike. Militarily, one would go after command and control centers, hence the added security at the One Police Plaza and the court houses. Wall Street is the financial district and security there also had a huge presence.
I don't understand the Politically Correct Pacifists ruling the British Media and intimidating the government. I would say, the majority of Britons outside of London are far more conservative. Sorta like America's Red States...
“Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity is not a sin, the victim can’t help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity.” —Robert A. Heinlein
Police State tactic?
In a police State you'd be shot first then asked to stop.
Mark, exactly how were police surveilling a suspect building supposed to know ANY of the details you offer as exculpatory.
And please advise as to how an unarmed policeman stops a suicide bomber. This should be good.
Menezes is not an innocent victim, he broke the law by continuing to run away from the police after the they asked that he stop.
Given the terrorized environment (London tube attacked twice in two weeks) under which the police were operating, Menezes' questionable behavior during this hightened alert led to the response received.
Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian man killed by London police, was a law-abiding, legal resident, a Catholic, and an electrician on his way to work (to fix somebody's fire alarm). The policemen who pointed guns at him and started running after him were not wearing uniforms. He probably had no clue why they were after him. I'd say running away would be a pretty normal survival instinct in that situation.
After the July 7 attacks, Jean thought about buying a scooter in order to avoid catching the subway to work. He was as frightened and appalled with the terrorist attacks as any other innocent Londoner.
They shot him after he was already pinned down. Even if he was a suicide bomber (which obviously HE WAS NOT), he would not have waited til the Police had him to detonate the device. He'd have done it during the chase/shooting. So the police action was a complete FIASCO in my opinion.
"Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian man killed by London police, was a law-abiding, legal resident..."
And just how are the police supposed to know that? If someone is running away from them, are they to ask for his id, and run a check, all the while in pursuit?
But of course we know that the same group of people who criticize the police now are the same ones who'll jump on them if, in a similar situation, the guy turns out to have a bomb on him and blows it up.
em>"Even if he was a suicide bomber (which obviously HE WAS NOT), he would not have waited til the Police had him to detonate the device."
So you're both a mind-reader and you've got x-ray vision? You're guessing at intentions. If he did hvae a bomb, it would have been plausible that he wanted to get into a crowded subway where he could do maximim damage. You've no idea whether he had a bomb or not, and anyone wearing a heavy jacket or coat in winter is a suspect to anyone who's mind is no not clouded by an obvious anti-police bias.
Hindsight is an excellent tool for trollers and smug politicians, but it seldom works well for cops.
Neither has there been much admission that the true blame for this needless death falls most appropriately on the previous terrorists...
...and yes, on the lefty civil libertarians and the divisive victimhood professionals who have spent the last decades trying to make the cops appear to be the bad guys, the lefties who have instigated the idea that when the cops yell "Stop!" an ethically and legally acceptable response is to run like the wind.
Leila, would you mind telling your countrymen that if they should find themselves being told to stop by men who identify themselves as police officers, they should do so. Or is running from the police a Brazilian custom?
Tragic though it is, the man was shot because he ran from the police at a time when he should not have run for any reason. Worse the man did not stop even after several warnings. The question is not why the police shot him, but rather why did he run.
Remember the Brits like the Americans and all our allies are at war. It is the duty of the civilian population to keep this in mind.
End of story
Last night both the Washington Post (online) and LA Times (online)ran this shooting as their lead story. Second story was the Egyptian bombing. One has to question their priorities.
Once accosted, the scumbag's job was to get himself killed by police to make the Brits look like nasty infidels. I don't like religion at all because faith is not a valid toll of conceptualization. Islam is the worst religion of all. Mohammed forced them to kill everyone who would not worship him and they are still doing it centuries after he is dead. Islam, most likely, will be responsible for getting all of humanity killed. Islam is evil.
I don't see any need to retract anything Maher. I'm not the one blaming the police in clear contradiction of the evidence they had available at the time.
Have you ever seen "Men in Black"? In the scene where the candidates are being assessed for their fitness, a scenario is presented to them and they have a split second to decide whom to shoot. Our Hero shoots a young white schoolgirl. When asked whether he thought that was really the most dangerous person there, he explains, "A young white girl carrying books on Quantum Physics, in the middle of the ghetto in the middle of the night -- everything about that adds up to something really bad."
Sometimes when you have only seconds to decide what to do, playing "One of these things is not like the others" is your best bet. The police have been extensively trained in exactly that little game, and I'm guessing it's pretty generally reliable.
Of course we could just lock everyone on earth in their own room and not let anybody out, ever -- but if we're not going to go that far, we really need to have clear rules of engagement. Stopping when a cop yells "Stop or I will shoot!" would probably be fairly high up the list.
Muslims everywhere have no problem organizing a parade of slogan shouting sign-waving breast beating zealots to condemn any cause or to call for any kind of change. Yet, in the aftermath of 911, Bali, and now London, the silence is deafening. Muslims in the West in particular deserve to be "nervous and jumpy", right along with the rest of us. Until they speak out and make it clear that they do not condone the kind of Islam that calls for Jihad against the west, they will remain suspect. Frankly, the silence from Western Muslims is deafening. They have no problem chanting and hopping around and writing and complaining about every other issue; I EXPECT them to do the same when it comes to Islamo Fascism. If you aren't clearly for us... then you are against us.
the English police did the right thing.
The London Anti terror police make me and many others feel safer as a result of what they did, far better than waving flowers at the bastards,(they shot the wrong man, we don't know for sure...) and followed a prescribed and legally approved policy. If in doubt kill the mass murdering muslim terrorists quick and send them to their heaven before they are even ready to do so themselves, after all aren't they all supposed to go to heaven to join their 7000,000,000 virgins instead of hanging around here and having to do a shitty job, be oppressed, etc..
It is a good and useful policy, shoot to kill, to save the rest of us in London from a bunch of mass murdering muslim terrorists who have killed 50+ innocents injured another 700+ and if the second lot of bombs had gone off, they didn't 'cause the dumb f**** didn't know what a sell by date is. Another 50+ innocent men, women and children who live,are travelling or visiting London, would have been dead and another 1000+ innocent men, women and children injured. Did any of those murderous muslim bastards say anything? issue a warning of any form?
Unlike the repeated warnings our police gave to this ignoramus Brazilian,how many English people jump the ticket barrier and run down the tube when warned by the cops to stop, only the dumbass ones who don't know the cops can stop the train and seal both neighbouring stations too so get nicked for all their mindless muscular exertions.
the mass murdering muslim bastard terrorists killed and maimed and traumatised all those families and their friends, and the rest of the country, whilst stuffing their faces and lungs with the food and air of a free and tolerant nation.
To the snivelling sob's, one individual out of sixty million who broke the law, ran away, acted like a terrorist, by heading for the tube, for example, maybe he was a wannabee, we willl find out, but even if he was not, the cops said stop, at a time when people are getting blown to pieces without any warning whatever, but then listening to what the English police say is not really important, as they are not armed and so you can just ignore them, and boogie down the tube without paying for your ticket, well in this case wrong guess, wannabee, or whatever, whilst mass murdering muslim terrorists are killing the innocent is sadish..
So put your money where your mouth is donate to the victims fund, Africa, America, Asia, Europe, S America, Australia, anywhere i have missed out??? etc..
For a start, and continue by any form of voluntary work over many years to heal their traumas, in the meantime please fell free to take every advantage of what a liberal democracy offers by way of cynicism, criticism, conspiracy theories, freedom of speech, thought, religion, practice, behaviour etc...
Yours.. from Central London
Have to say again, if the police tell you to stop, you stop. If they have guns, put your hands up ensure you have nothing in your hands. If you do this you will NOT be shot no matter where you are from. This is the country i live in and this is how things work here.
In many countries where human life is cheap, they will shoot you anyway just like Saddam used to do. But not in London. Perhaps we should put up a sign pointing out the "bleeding obvious" to all.
Maher - do you live in England? Not sure as you don't seem to have heard of the Independent Police Commissions which take place after any shots are fired. These are run by judges etc who are part of our "separation of powers" which we have had in place for several hundred years (judges, monarchy, government) to ensure honesty. I am trying to think of the equivalent in the middle east...hmm...no can't.
The police were plain clothes but did give SEVERAL warnings before he entered to tube and when he was sprinting down the escalators pushing people out of the way (like you do). He may have run in the slums of Brazil, but anyone living in London for a week will realise there is not the need to do so here.
Chrenkoff is right, no one here has offered another solution. I cannot think of one either, but i can tell you when i go to work by tube tomorrow i hope to see a lot of police with guns. And this is something i would never have said a few months ago.
I used to be proud that our police didn't have guns and we don't shoot people. I guess the terrorists have changed me, so i can understand that they have probably changed the police as well as they are only human. And it is these humans we are asking to chase after walking bombs...
One of the tragic ironies of this mistaken London PD killing of a suspected terrorist later determined not to be is it demonstrates the profound weakness of the "terrorism is a law-enforcement issue" pimped by Kerry and other limp-wristed bedwetters.
They don't like the idea of a "war on terrorism," and they wish to define the problem down to simply that of a law-enforcement matter. Yet, when law enforcement actually steps in and makes a high profile, irreversible mistake in killing an innocent man suspected as a terrorist, these same folks sputter and rage against the policy and its injustice while offering no alternative at all.
As an abstract matter, sure, some terrorist cells can be broken up by arrest with all kinds of respect paid to due process and lawful search and seizure, but what the hell do you do after the second series of mass-murdering bombings in two weeks in the same mass transit system? Send engraved invitations to suspects to kindly please come down to the station house, with a lawyer preferably, so that we might discuss the suspect's propensity for flammatory Islamic rhetoric and wearing backpacks filled with C-4?
Unbelievable. The Left is constantly moving the goalposts; if they should ever succeed in mass acceptance of the suicidal notion that terrorism is simply a law-enforcement issue, they'll then proceed to work on defining terrorism as a rational response (a position already aggressively advocated here by a perennially unemployed Jihadi troll) to social and political grievances.
'Mistaken killing' etc.
Has anyone ever heard of the French Police admitting to a mistake?
Despite their claims, France is as much or more at risk of terrorism than UK.
But guess why no bombimgs there? Absolute ruthlessness, and official dissembling. Massacre and denial. (Cote D'Ivoire).
I predict that unless UK authorities adopt similar approach, large parts of the Midlands will become Muslim only sharia autonomous zones within the next decade.
It's all there in the history of British South Asia already- that's how Pakistan was created, by appeasing terror and British sympathies for Muslims over Hindus. They'll do it again.
Just to complicate matters, the police made another arrest of a third bombing suspect today at the same building the shooting victim was observed leaving.
Two thoughts:
I do think that the plainclothes issue is important - were they able to clearly identify themselves as policemen (I mean, did they have any way of proving it other than saying "stop! I'm a cop!)? Maybe this guy had been mugged before by people posing as policemen. Otherwise, "stop whenever anyone claims to be a policeman" could be a recipe to make mugging easier.
Second, it bothers me not that they shot him, but when they shot him. If they had shot him while running, it could be seen as a necessary act to prevent him from getting away. But as I understand it, they already had him on the ground at the time.
Third, it wouldn't bother me so much if it weren't for idiots like John Gibson immediately crowing about what a great thing the British police did. To argue that they made a justified mistake is one thing. But he made the immediate assumption that the current policy is wonderful and that the guy was a terrorist, without waiting to see how the facts came out.
People wouldn't be so quick to assume that the police must have acted inappropriately if so many neoconservatives were not so quick to assume that everything must be hunky-dory.
"Yet, when law enforcement actually steps in and makes a high profile, irreversible mistake in killing an innocent man suspected as a terrorist, these same folks sputter and rage against the policy and its injustice while offering no alternative at all."
The concern is that (a) the police appear to have subdued the suspect before they shot him, making it questionable whether the shooting was necessary; and (b) does the current police procedure make it sufficiently clear when the people yelling "stop!" are plainclothes policemen instead of civilians?
I'm not saying that the police were not justified; I'd just like to know a little more before jumping to conclusions one way or another.
How do you 'subdue' a human bomb?
Ie, how do you render his hands, the usual operators of a manually triggered bomb, still?
Without detonating any explosive which may be in the clothed part of his body?
Compeletely and utterly still so that not even a finger moves?
Without touching him and perhaps triggering the bomb thus?
In a matter of seconds?
In a public place where a blast could kill dozens?
The former police chief who gave British police their "shoot-to-kill" orders defended the tactics. Former Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir John Stevens said: "There is only one sure way to stop a suicide bomber determined to fulfil his mission – destroy his brain instantly, utterly.
"That means shooting him with devastating power in the head, killing him immediately."
I'm not sure that I have a lot to add but I would point out:
1. Those who say he was not breaking the law. A Constable has the right to stop you and require that you tell them your name, address and occupation, not doing so is an offense. If you run away you are resisting arrest-there fore he was an offender at the time of the incident.
2. Firearms officers in the Met, when in plain clothes identify themselves (when the time comes) by wearing hats, base ball caps with the distincitive police checker (Blue for the Met Red for the City of London) with police written on it. They are obviousily police.
HAHAHA! Wrong! How typical. Fox News and the rest of the Bush satanists have trained you ignorant attack-bots well. I love how you rabid rightwing fruits always twist words and distort news reports. Duck and jive, bob and weave...pathetic.
There has been at least a dozen retractions that have received miniscule attention. Just like 9-11, they release photos in record time. Just like 9-11, we now find out that the bus bomber photo and the "mastermind" photo were that we saw plastered all over the papers and TV just long enough to have it ingrained in our minds. Well, both are alive and well.
The guy at Stockwell was NOT wearing a "bulky coat". Psy-op disinfo. He was carrying NO bag. And as far as the "surveillance", the Brazilian worked until 1 AM the night before. So how did they not know? Also the fact that he's an electrician and "wanted to work in law enforcement" further enforces the conjecture that he was a possible hired patsie.
Your analysis is chock full of complete horse-shit. The guy wasn't "Asian". The Brazilian man did NOT jump the turnstile, and contrary to your innaccurate recant, the victim was chased by 5 undercover off-duty's(probably working for a private "security" firm) and was shoved/tripped from behind by two of the five "cops". He did NOT
"stumble".
Flat on his back and with two guys right on top of him, a 3rd man reported to be an undercover cop shot him 5 times in the back and neck. NOT in the 'head' as many have reported innaccurately.
Admit it, that morning of 7-7 when Giuliani once again pulled a rabbit out of his hat and magically appeared within minutes on CNN, SkyNews, BBC, MSNBC, and FOX. All morning. Now you're going to tell me that he just happened to drop by all those media outlets spur of the moment and they gave him nice and neat 15 minute segments? Rudi had the same prepared sales pitch on every single program. Looks like Rudi is pimping for some more tasers, sound cannons, and various other high-tech weapons sales for his company Giuliani Security. With this being his 3rd mega million dollar payday courtesy of another federal fat-cat contract. BTW, Rudi's thug Bernie Kerik just happened to also appear as a guest on FOX and CNN just before Rudi.
Giuliani the murderous weasel is directly involved in this bombing and coverup. Israel's Bin Netanhayu was also in London and was warned beforehand as Im sure you heard. Of course when the media picked this up Sharon issued a gag rule and there were denials. Now we come to find out that it was true after all. The Israeli's freely admit it. it's even on the Whitehouse website. How ironic that Netanhayu and Giuliani just happened to have breakfast together that very same morning! What a coincidence that Giuliani happened to be only a block away from BOTH the 9-11, AND 7-7 attacks. Yeah, and I got a bridge in Brooklyn for you.
Eyewitnesses-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
attack...1533421,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
attack...1535565,00.html
Police Patsie Murder-
http://wagnews.blogspot.com/
The absolute best research and analysis of the London bombings can be found here...THe UNAUTHORIZED TRUTH BEHIND UK BOMBINGS
Look. England is now a third world country due to grotesque levels of immigration from the third world. The police have to turn into third world police to handle the problem.
Go look at your New York Police dealing with Jewish, Italian and irish immigrants a hundred years ago. And we STILL have a murderous Italian crime organization after they have been "assimilating" for 100 years.
The Italian Squad of the NYPD was a masked gang of barely restrained thugs who were required to kick in doors late at night and beat teh crap out of Italian criminals imported into the USA.
And the Italians in NYC, like Pakistanis in London, will never turn in their own kind. Get used to it.
England faces a multi-generational nightmare of racial strife that will only get worse as they permit more third-worlders from Asia, Africa, South America and the Caribbean to enter their country. Their cops are going to get armed, and there will be a h@ll of a lot more shooting before it is over.
England, get used to it. And be sure to thank your cheap-wage manufacturers of 1965 (now bankrupt!) and current day leftists for the blessings they have wrought.
We thank our bankrupt manufacturers every day for the racial strife they imported into Milwaukee and dumped on us 50 years ago. But, hey! At least black urban disfunction keeps the leftist social workers fully employed, right?
Why did they let him get on a bus, for heaven's sake? When two bombers have actually triggered bombs ON A BUS in the past two weeks?
Kate Shaw | Homepage | 07.23.05 - 8:15 am | #
************************************
When it became clear the man intended to get off the bus near the station the officers urgently requested armed assistance -— fearing he had a bomb beneath his padded jacket and planned to detonate it on a train.
You care to explain how you would have kept him off the bus?
Or did you overlook this part
"urgently requested armed assistance "
That would imply that the officer's trailing him were NOT armed.
Firstly the police who tried to apprehend the man were in plain clothes, they weren't in uniform. Secondly he was shot 5 times in the head, AFTER he tripped and fell to the ground.
*************************************
Yes 5 head shots to ensure a total ceasation of neural activity and no triggering of a bomb.
Here is a good scenerio, let's see how you answer it (from Captains Quaters)
You have taken your wife and children to the subway in your city. Just as you turn away to see them off on their day, you hear loud voices telling someone to stop now and for everyone else to get down. As people drop to the ground, you see a young man vault the turnstiles and run hell-bent for the same subway car your family just boarded. You notice that he's wearing a long trenchcoat despite the 80-degree heat and what looks like a bulky sweater underneath, and that he looks terrified. Several police trail behind him by twenty feet, yelling at him to stop, but he speeds up instead. The doors to the car have not closed, and he sees them open and lunges towards your family. At this point, it occurs to you that if he has a bomb, he could set it off at any time and kill dozens of people -- including you and your family.
What would you like the police to do?
What happened in London was that a completely innocent man was accosted and shot down like a mad dog because of fear. Why he ran, or exactly how well the officers identified themselves will never be known. But face the facts, he was the victim of mistaken identity by the cops, and the true terrorists are giving each other high fives and cheering, as they know they've won, now we're killing each other for them.
And the fact is Dan if you had asked me a few years ago the answer would be that I wouldn't want the police to do anything, but now - I have to back them.
Pity it was a Brazillian - I never heard of a Brazillian ever causing any trouble outside his own country.One of the most harmless countries in the world.
OK, let's take it from the top.
Maher, you've been pretty upset and condemnatory. Somehow, I would like to hear you say that the REAL enemy here is Islamic terrorism, and that you condemn it absolutely.
I haven't uttered a word of condemnation against the police. I am aware these are difficult times. However I also feel that for such a drastic change in policy, extra regulation will be required. Police in Britain have gone seriously off the rails before when confronted with this sort of problem. I feel quite free to condemn the media since I work in it.
I am happy to say that Islamist terror is part of the problem. However in my experience even dictatorial measures far more savage than anything that will ever be attempted in Britain are not the solution.
Maher appears to be having a pity party.
A baseless remark. As for "people just like me", I'm as white as a lily and very unlikely to fall victim to the sort of profiling that did for this bloke.
And, Maher, my friend (and you are my friend)
This I doubt. You wished someone else on this board might be the next one blown up further up this thread. That's not the style of my friends.
if it is that difficult living in the West being of non-European ancestry, have you considered moving to a more hospitable place?
I didn't say it was that difficult. I said people had no awareness of the difficulties. That is a different statement. As for the logic of transfer, "go back to Africa" isn't the style of my friends either. You should try this on a European Jew and see what kind of reaction you get.
I will repeat, I don't stand out. And you are not my friend, Mr Hide Behind my Pseudonym.
Or is running from the police a Brazilian custom?
The person who wrote this clearly knows little of what often passes for policing in Latin America's poorer areas.
Mohammed forced them to kill everyone who would not worship him and they are still doing it centuries after he is dead.
Rubbish posing as history.
I don't see any need to retract anything Maher. I'm not the one blaming the police in clear contradiction of the evidence they had available at the time.
Chaos
I didn't ask you to retract anything, but you seem to be unable to read. I suggested that you might not be able to make assumptions about the 'spot' I'm in, given that you don't know me from Adam.
Muslims everywhere have no problem organizing a parade of slogan shouting sign-waving breast beating zealots to condemn any cause or to call for any kind of change. Yet, in the aftermath of 911, Bali, and now London, the silence is deafening.
There have been demonstrations all over the Muslim world (and in Muslim communities in the West) in solidarity with the people of London. I see the pictures on the news wires. If you want these to get the same coverage as the bombs themselves, I don't think you really grasp how the media work.
If you aren't clearly for us... then you are against us.
Manichaean drivel.
Maher - do you live in England?
I have done, in many separate spells. I was born in Scotland. I lived in Streatham Hill for a couple of years until 2003.
Not sure as you don't seem to have heard of the Independent Police Commissions which take place after any shots are fired. These are run by judges etc who are part of our "separation of powers" which we have had in place for several hundred years (judges, monarchy, government) to ensure honesty.
Don't patronise me. I am well aware of all this. I am not convinced that in this situation it will necessarily be sufficient.
I am trying to think of the equivalent in the middle east...hmm...no can't.
Let's try and unravel this. I am somehow supposed to answer for the way Middle Eastern countries are governed, despite the fact that I work advocating democracy in the Middle East. And despite the fact that many of those Arabs who find themselves in Britain are victims of precisely this failure to separate powers.
Egypt, for example, and a very good example, since it has a much longer history of interaction with the West than Saudi Arabia. A country running an emergency law for 25 years and making a mockery of human rights. Who keeps its regime awash in aid, I wonder?
Unbelievable. The Left is constantly moving the goalposts; if they should ever