scootz
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 01:33 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by woodster
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
quote:
Originally posted by woodster
true the cctv is poor but unless you need to go to spec savers you can see the poor guy doesn't look or act like a suicide bomber .... he calmly
buys a newspaper then quietly walks to catch his train ... no bag or big coat .... why didn't the police stop him in the street why wait until
he got on a train ??
We spoke about the Suicide Bombers Handbook on another thread Woodster... what does a suicide bomber look like, or act like... can you provide a
definition, because there ain't one in the Handbook!
so in other words its ok to shoot anyone thats getting on a train .... as the poor guy looked like any other passenger that day .. paper in hand
calmly taking his seat
Nope... that's not the point I'm trying to make!
Even suicide bombers can look "like any other passenger" and "paper in hand calmly take a seat". There is no
'universal' suicide bomber demeanor!
Also, I may be wrong (I frequently am), but did he he "paper in hand calmly take a seat"... ??? I thought the poo hit the fan
immediately upon him boarding the train?
|
|
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 01:37 PM |
|
|
When did we get an automatic swear-censor on the site... poop 
Personal fave is b*llocks to nutsack!
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 01:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Benzine
There seems to be a Pascal's Wager type viewpoint from lots of people.
"It's better to believe in god and there not be a god than to not believe in god and there is a god"
"It's better to shoot a person & he turns out not to be a terrorist than to not shoot someone who turns out to be a
terrorist"
Pascal's Wager blows goats.
that’s the whole point of terrorism, its not the initial death toll since it is truly a hopelessly ineffective way of killing your enemy. Rather it is
to breed fear and suspicion so that the enemy turns on itself and it seems to be working very well so far. Quite ironic that ‘we’ are meant to be
liberating a country in the name of giving them safety and freedom when the same government is rapidly removing their own people of the same thing.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 01:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
Quite ironic that ‘we’ are meant to be liberating a country in the name of giving them safety and freedom when the same government is rapidly removing
their own people of the same thing.
Amen... !
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 01:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
When did we get an automatic swear-censor on the site... poop
Personal fave is b*llocks to nutsack!
never noticed? oh go on give it a go in the name of research Try 'You are taking the P%ss!!' for example 
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 02:17 PM |
|
|
Lol... wee... but (in the name of research) I've found an important loop-hole - stick an exclamation mark at the end of said sweary-word and you
have good old PISS!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 02:19 PM |
|
|
The 'F' word still works though!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 02:20 PM |
|
|
So does a few more of the 'hard-stuff'.
Gosh, I'm shocked now... think I'll go for a wee (not piss!) lie down
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 02:50 PM |
|
|
Clearly P!$$ is actually ruder than F$ck!
never fail to learn stuff on here...
|
|
|
Fozzie
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 03:11 PM |
|
|
The automatic censor has been there forever... nowt to do with me.....and for some reason, it doesn't always work..... 
I would be very grateful though if you didn't keep 'testing' it....... I have the migraine of migraines today......
Thank you kindly
Fozzie
'Racing is Life!...anything before or after is just waiting'....Steve McQueen
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 03:25 PM |
|
|
There seem to be two sides this argument, and some common ground
Common ground- That JCdM was killed by policemen who thought that he was a terrorist, and that he was shot dead because they believed that he would
otherwise set off a bomb that would kill many people
Side A. That some or all of the police involved carried out criminal acts, and need to be sent to prison, or receive some other suitably severe
punishment, for so doing.
Side B. That the police made a hugely regrettable, but understandable, mistake, and that lessons need to be learned from it to reduce the chance of
something similar happening in the future.
I’m on Side B
John
|
|
|
BenB
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 03:30 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
ditto
and why does anyone need to be shot so many times in the head to be stopped?
After the first shot the subsequent shots really are immaterial. I think it'd be the first one that bothered me most
|
|
|
woodster
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 03:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
There seem to be two sides this argument, and some common ground
Common ground- That JCdM was killed by policemen who thought that he was a terrorist, and that he was shot dead because they believed that he would
otherwise set off a bomb that would kill many people
Side A. That some or all of the police involved carried out criminal acts, and need to be sent to prison, or receive some other suitably severe
punishment, for so doing.
Side B. That the police made a hugely regrettable, but understandable, mistake, and that lessons need to be learned from it to reduce the chance of
something similar happening in the future.
I’m on Side B
John
it looks like we will agree to disagree ....... good debate everyone
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 03:38 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by woodster
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
There seem to be two sides this argument, and some common ground
Common ground- That JCdM was killed by policemen who thought that he was a terrorist, and that he was shot dead because they believed that he would
otherwise set off a bomb that would kill many people
Side A. That some or all of the police involved carried out criminal acts, and need to be sent to prison, or receive some other suitably severe
punishment, for so doing.
Side B. That the police made a hugely regrettable, but understandable, mistake, and that lessons need to be learned from it to reduce the chance of
something similar happening in the future.
I’m on Side B
John
it looks like we will agree to disagree ....... good debate everyone
You disagree with my summation? Or with the side I've chosen?
John
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 3/12/08 at 06:28 PM |
|
|
I would entirely agree with John, but i would say that side B goes a little further for some, namely that the police acted correctly. Ie it was
unlucky for Jean but tough s***, greater good etc.
I wouldnt jail the firearms cops who did the deed, thats ridiculous. Remove whoever was in charge from command, failing to identify him is
unacceptable. Why in 35 mins did no one go in for the face to face ID?
The cops at the scene had been led to believe that he had been ID'd positively, which is where it all went wrong.
The video that started this thread is pointless, its revealed as spin with the comment at 1.00.
|
|
|
