It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by CatHerder
Then you must have never viewed news from Isreal before; you must have never viewed news from the 70's when the IRA used the same MO for dozens of bombings; you must have never viewed news reports from Indonesia before; you must have never read/viewed any news from the Congo, or from any other African nation in the past 20 years. Need I go on?
You need to look into this with a little more effort and a little less predisposition.
Originally posted by Tinkleflower
"We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents of Thursday 21st July 2005."
Originally posted by The Conspirator
Originally posted by xu
so they released no details about this yet? isnt this interesting, what about his shocked mother and father who would probably say something like we couldnt imagine that he would do something like this etc. you know there was similar news about the previous ones family, there is no detail about this guy besides he was running didnt listen to warnings and then was knocked of and been shot 5 times.
do we know if he had any hearing disability, or any social or perceptive disability, was he autistic, was he paranoid schizophrenic etc, obviously there wasnt any bomb on him, otherwise the police would go crazy bragging about it and it would be all over the news, I mean there would be no doubt about the boy carrying a bomb on himself because it would be very much emphasized, also note that the news is presented as " he is believed to be a would be suicide bomber" not saying he was and he was on a suicide bombing mission. and if you noticed there is not much information released about this and this will be forgotten in a matter of days.
I think that police forces should admit that they were not sure that the man was a suicide bomber and he didnt carry any bombs on him(except one witness testimony everything points to this), but also they should add that they shot him 5 times from close proximity just in case.
also I strongly believe that if the cops had a more sharp and fast logic at that condition they could take the man alive, since more than one officers were on top of him.
if this is a mistake then they should admit it is (these kind of things happen). and if the cops could force an unnatural act of bravery they could take him alive, there was one suicide bomb attempts here in a mason lodge, and one of the waiters noticed the guy who has just entered to the place was a suicide bomber and he grasped him and knocked him onto the ground while firmly grasping him with his whole body on top, and the bomber triggered the bomb, because of this unnatural act of bravery of the waiter the damage yield of the bomb was remarkably lessened in closed space. well if there was 3 cops instead of that waiter in such a condition they could probably broke his neck by then or any other method for later being revived in a hospital etc.
[edit on 23-7-2005 by xu]
The security services and police didn't just decide to shoot him because he was running away - they had survelliance on him before 7/7, he'd already popped up on the radar (so to speak), that's how they knew exactly where to find him after 7/7 and why they put him immediately under survelliance. They would have had a profile on him and known quite alot about him. This has been used successfully before - they have stopped 6 attacks to date in this country since 9/11. Most have been arrested without fuss - security services don't shoot if they don't have too.
Look at it from their point of view - 4 copycat attacks 2 weeks after 7/7, they know this fella is involved in some way (at least has terrorst links)...they see him leave his house with a large jacket on and head straight for the underground that was attacked the day previous. He's approached by armed police and told to stop and follow instructions - he runs straight into the tube station and boards a tube - what the hell are they suppose to think?????????
For any normal person, the threat of armed police is enough to make you do as they ask, if that isn't a big enough deterant then clearly your upto no good, therefore can't really complain when they take you down.