Posted on 07/24/2005 6:11:57 AM PDT by areafiftyone
I did another search and "pare" in Portuguese translates to "it stops"
From ORBAT.
..Which leaves us with the question: why did he run when police told him to stop? He was ordered to stop as he crossed a main street, but ran into the subway station, vaulted security barriers and ticket turnstiles, and kept running till he got onto a waiting train and was killed.
Remember the foiled Ricin attacks, what if this man was carrying something that has prompted the British govt to take the hit on a wrong killing, to preserve public peace and not create panic.
I think the killing as a mistake is a cover story. The ramifications of even a foiled WMD attack would be tremendous. That's why the shots to the head after the guy RAN away.
Different situation! A suicide bomber is RUNNING AWAY! The police have him under surveillance SINCE he left the neighborhood and DON'T attempt to stop him until he gets to a crowd? And the police now say he had nothing to do with the bombings. I'm not drinking Kool-Aid or filtering, my BS meter just went to the warning level.
Given the circumstances, I am convinced that that is not so. If the suspect had halted as ordered, I believe that he would have been tackled, taken to the ground, sat upon, and five shots would have been fired into his head. I believe this because that is the stated policy and tactics of the authorities.
You can blame the cops if you want, you can claim you would react differently, but it all means squat. They did what they did because it was the right thing to do at the time. Hindsight is always 20-20.
I notice you didn't have much to say once I provided proof for what I wrote. No matter. Now you're yammering about a suicide bomber "running away." In your zeal to tar and feather the Brit police, you leave out the point that where he's running TO is where all the people are, where a suicide bomber can do the most damage.
And if the suspect that the police are sitting on is believed to have a bomb on him or in his backpack, and the suspect won't keep his hands away from his body, what should the police do then?
I do wonder however when Springsteen is going to make up a song about it.
So, he couldn't do damage on a street full of people?
Incapacitating shot. They got close enough to trip him and shot the head 5 times, they could've pumped his lungs, legs, arms, neck full of lead.
Clock, give it up. You're way wrong on this one. Yes, there were some people on the street--but a bomb would do the most harm in an enclosed place, such as a bus or a train--and these are often crowded.
LOL--or hurting the hand if they DID shoot the gun out of it, no doubt!
Apparently they weren't taking the British cops seriously until this. Or did they think the shoot to kill rule was a suggestion.
Apparently they weren't taking the British cops seriously until this. Or did they think the shoot to kill rule was a suggestion.
This man is no different from one who points an empty gun at police. Innocent victim NOT.
How do we know he is innocent? Maybe he runs materials for terrorists.
I am sure there are thousands of non-moslem useful idiots willing to aid them.
Where is Mi5 in all this? Was it their intelligence that lead police on the hunt?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.