Add a Comment | The Bastard

Met: We Shoot Innocent People - Get Used to it

Political Bastards
The Zigster 12/12/2008 09:30

Sir Michael Wright. Soon to become a Law Lord for his perversion of the inquest into the cold blooded murder of Jean Charles de Menezes

UK - The Metropolitan police have yet again apologised for the cold blooded murder of Jean Charles de Menezes after the jury at the inquest into his death returned an open verdict.

The jury were instructed by the coroner that they could not return a verdict of unlawful killing, which the coroner will get a knighthood or some other gong for and which the Metropolitan Police will be delighted about as they will not be investigated any further and will not have to apologise for murdering other innocent people.

There is no doubt that if the powers at be had not ordered the coroner to manipulated things in their favour, that the jury would of returned a verdict of unlawful killing. Then the real truth would have been revealed that the police are trigger happy racist fuck wits who think anybody who is not white and has a foreign accent is an Islamic terrorist.

This is a fucking injustice and two the trigger happy racist fuck witted police have got away with. Let us not forget that witnesses said under oath that the police gave no warning before shooting Charles de Menezes who probably was scared shitless as he was being chased by a bunch of thugs with guns who thought they were in a fucking episode of The Sweeney.

Hey we are told that all of the police issued with firearms are specially trained and have to apply a strict remit before even thinking of drawing any weapon?

Oh what a load of bollocks, oh what a load of bollocks, oh what a load of bollocks!

Charles de Menezes found out what compete and utter bollocks when the thugs with guns calling themselves the police squeezed off a few into his innocent body.

There’s a often a misconception that the British police are unarmed firstly what do you call batons and pepper spray other then weapons, if people mean firearms well sure your average beat officer is not.

But if he does not like the look of you and he can not beat you to death with a baton then hay he can call on his mates in the armed response vehicle to to terminate you, as where ever you happen to live in Britain there is an armed response unit patrolling the area you live.

Yep there are trigger happy thugs roaming the area you live. But if that is not bad enough now beat officers are to be issued with taser guns. If you are of middle eastern extraction then its zappppppppppppp!

Oh you are dieing of a heart attack or epileptic seizure, oh your innocent are you, well never mind we can fix the inquest in our favour like we did with de Menezes.

Yahoo	StumbleUpon	Google	Live
Technorati	Scoop	del.icio.us	Digg
Sphinn	Furl	Reddit	Facebook
Twitter	Fark	Newsvine	Mixx
Linked in	Propeller

6 comments

We at The Bastard appreciate your comments and opinions. So if you have an opinion, agree with or even strongly disagree, Please leave a comment.

List Comments

Page: [1]
1.	Oh Ziggy- at times you really do talk rubbish. If this is what you believe, one must seriously question your ability to reason on any subject. There is every doubt that the Coroner was lent on - in fact there is no evidence to suggest that he came to this conclusion other than from the evidence presented to the court. I do not understand the psyche of a policeman and question their motives, but to suggest the British Police are trigger happy belies all the evidence - but facts never worry you - your opinion is always the base of your logic however unreasoned your arguments Charles de Menezes was not entirely innocent -apparently - he was an illegal migrant, some have denied this but it seems to be fact. Sure he did not deserve to die but possibly could have exhibited symptoms of guilt. This happened only days after the London Bombing. The Police believed that he,Charles de Menezes was a bomber, what would you have done? He could have blown up the entire train and killed many people - is that better? Hindsight is for idiots - you are running after a man whom you believe is a bomber, you need to protect the public in general and however well trained a cold fear must be in your own heart. Would you have dealt with the situation differently? Of course you wouldn't. If you wish to be taken seriously, check your facts before putting pen to paper, people are only interested in your thoughts if the reasoning is sound. Get real Terence Godfrey 12/12/2008 17:50
2.	Not long after this the police raided a house supposedly occupied by terrorists, only it turned out all three inhabitants of the house were innocent & what’s more the police shot one of them who happened to have applied to join the police service. Ziggy Encaoua 14/12/2008 13:47
3.	Ziggy Your comment still begs so many questions. So the police raided a house and arrested three people who turned out to be innocent. The guy who was slightly injured was probably shot by accident, but even if he wasn't so what. Question 1. Is it better to kill a few innocent people, however terrible, for the greater good? I have first hand experience of a terrorist outrage and the subsequent efforts over many weeks, of the police to stop further mayhem. These men often show great bravery over and above the call of duty to protect the rest of us. I often question police motives but I will defend bravery to the hilt. As ever, you have not the whit to suggest better ways for society to protect itself from the real evil of the terrorist. Ok, Ziggy, what would you do to protect us from future carnage. Let us have your reasoned argument. Terence Godfrey 20/12/2008 10:53
4.	A better foreign policy might be a start Terence, instead of just being Americas lap dog. Don't forget that Britain's entry into questionable conflicts in the middle east are what incited these terrorists (some of them British) to perform their evil acts. Perhaps things will improve now with a new President in charge. If America can once again try diplomatic solutions instead of military ones, then maybe the whole world can become a safer place. Only by addressing the causes of terrorism (through diplomatic talks) instead of the symptoms (shooting anyone who looks different) can a real peace be found. Geraldine McDaid 21/01/2009 9:49
5.	There is a lot of truth in that Geraldine Dr Suusi Watson 31/01/2009 5:29
6.	I probably agree with you Geraldine, but that is not the point of this debate and really is a red herring. He was not shot because he looked different and there is hard evidence that this is not the case. He was shot becuase the copper who pulled the gun believed he was a bomber. Similarly, Ziggy's statement that the coroner had been lent on is similarly without foundation. No evidence - except it fits his rhetoric. Again for Ziggy, to pronounce on what the policeman should do in the heat of the moment is a little rich, considering the most daring decision, he you or I have ever made is whether to blow the skin off a rice pud! Although a reasonably law abiding guy, I do not understand what makes a copper tick, many are quite vindictive, but I do know that their work is hard and can be dangerous and keeps us all safe in our beds. possibly not Mr de Menezes, but he happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. To suggest as Ziggy seems to, that this is common place is manifestly untrue. I really do believe that if an argument is to be credible it has to be based on fact. Conjecture, especially that which is so out of line with know facts is worthless similarly using a completely different argument in your reply and the good Docs support constantly devalues Blogs. That is not the argument of this comment. Terence Godfrey 10/02/2009 11:43
Page: [1]

Fill out the form to Comment on this story ID: 454


UBBC:
The Comment:
Name:
Email Address:	Your Email Address will NOT be displayed
Pie to 3 decimals?

\| \| \|

	All Content © 1992-2010 Somniferum Publishing Oy. Powered By SM CMS © 2004-2010 Sue Malsoft.

This page loaded in 0.083 seconds.