Mumbai Attack - Armed police would not fire back!

Mumbai Attack - Armed police would not fire back!

www.independent .co.uk

What angered Mr D'Souza almost as much were the masses of armed police hiding in the area who simply refused to shoot back. "There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything," he said. "At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, 'Shoot them, they're sitting ducks!' but they just didn't shoot back."
...
The militants returned inside the station and headed towards a rear exit towards Chowpatty Beach. Mr D'Souza added: "I told some policemen the gunmen had moved towards the rear of the station but they refused to follow them. What is the point if having policemen with guns if they refuse to use them? I only wish I had a gun rather than a camera."

(visit the link for the full news article)

Sebastian D'Souza took pictures of the suspects at the railway station where many were killed.

The news snippet is the what the photographer observed at the railway station.

So either the Police were ultra cowards or they wanted the event to get worse or they were part of some conspiracy.

Hmmm...

www.independent .co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Holy SHnikes what a bunch of PUSSY WILLOWS!

If I have a gun and your out killing mad people you better look out. These police officers should all be fired and replaced because they failed to do their job. Serve and Protect.

Originally posted by blowfishdl
Holy SHnikes what a bunch of PUSSY WILLOWS!

If I have a gun and your out killing mad people you better look out. These police officers should all be fired and replaced because they failed to do their job. Serve and Protect.

What I don't understand is how did 10 people kill over 200 including several major police officials in a city like Mumbai where there are armed police all over the place and so called 'Commandos' NSG.

Mumbai had so much fire power in that city how the hell did 10 people who supposedly came off a boat wearing Versace t-shirts cause so much destruction?

Oh, and they had time to take a police van, change into police clothes and drive about shooting civilians!?

Unbelievable! Something smells really fishy here...

Did India WANT their own 9/11 I wonder?

I'm not the only one asking the same question:

www.independent.co.uk...

[edit on 29-11-2008 by Jinni]

[edit on 29-11-2008 by Jinni]

That's odd
I saw CNN footage of police officers being interviewed who shot back
candles were light for an officer that was protecting the innocent
i saw a belt with a bullet hole

not to mention dead terroists even before the NSG arrived

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
That's odd
I saw CNN footage of police officers being interviewed who shot back
candles were light for an officer that was protecting the innocent
i saw a belt with a bullet hole

not to mention dead terroists even before the NSG arrived

Yes, police officers were killed, no one is disputing that.

The OP is talking about the scandalous inaction of officers at the Railway station.

This is again a broad picture painted by words to make it look like all the police did nothing and that's not true( you can see video footage).

The police were not as well trained as the terrorists and they were not even closely armed as the terrorists. Good luck getting a few shots off when your getting suppressed by grenades and AK-47 fire.

Did some of the police freeze up and not do anything but hide, I'm sure. Did all? Nope.

D'Souza managed to approach the police and tell them to use their weapons. He was on the scene and he believed they could and should have. I'd rather take his word than yours I'm afraid.

Did all police at the Railway station do nothing? Maybe.

The two suspects did get away and managed to jack a car too before going on to kill major police officials!

Boy, they seemed to have all the time in the world!



[edit on 29-11-2008 by Jinni]


..............................................................................
[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 30-11-2008 by 12m8keall2c]

It is unfortunate, but the police, while they carry guns, are not accustomed or trained to effect offensive measures against those who utilize offensive military and paramilitary measures.

Years ago, a man was slaughtering civilians in a McDonald's in California. The slaughter went on, and on, and on. Cops on the scene were frozen. No one would engage and take a shot.

Recall the Columbine High School massacre. Police lined up out the ying-yang, but no one with the courage to load up and go in. They too, were frozen.

Even our FBI was overwhelmed. Eight FBI agents cornered two bank robbery suspects in Miami. One suspect was wounded outright, but the other suspect, using aggressive military assault tactics wounded five and killed two.

The difference?

Different training. Different skills. Different intuitions. Different tactics. Different weapons. Different capabilities.

Now our cities have aggressive, highly trained SWAT teams. Indian police were unprepared. All the way around.

I would expect that to change very quickly.

The alternative is just too expensive.



[edit on 29-11-2008 by dooper]

Probably they were just hawaldars who I think still have that old long gun which you have to load everytime after each shot or they were shell shocked and they didnt want to attract attention to themselves by unsucessfully shooting at terrorists or probably they were under orders.

It all depends on what their job was, some just do patrol and look around to call others who will do the shooting.

Different people have different roles.

Gosh those excuses are really pathetic for a situation where innocent people are being slaughtered.

Well they had guns for god sake! So their kit is indicative of their role - to protect!

In the UK, if someone is dying and you don't help then you can be convicted for manslaughter or murder. Given their role was to protect (which is why they had guns) they would all be convicted I'm sure. Furthermore, there were only two terrorists. Two.

So:

+ Either the Police were ultra cowards
+ or they wanted the event to get worse
+ or they were part of some conspiracy.

According to your post ModernAcademia you are suggesting all three?




..............................................................................
[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 30-11-2008 by 12m8keall2c]

reply to post by Jinni

Jinni, I think there's truth in all you said. These men weren't prepared physically or mentally to aggress and engage these armed men.

Based on personal observation, there are few men who have the instincts to flash to aggress a predator. Probably one or two out of a hundred. No hesitation, no wasted motion, but very aggressive action.

Don't think that heads won't roll over this.

They were fearful, their fear paralyzed them, and their charges suffered the consequences.

This is one reason I say over and over again that individuals are primarily responsible for their own security, and that would include the carrying and familiarity with firearms.

You can't count on anyone but yourself.

Hmm that story does reak of suspicion. A station full of police, all armed. Decided that TWO men, were far more outnumbering a dozen or so officers? Heck even if they were affraid, that is no excuse for at least one of them risking his neck to save innocent people. Yet no one did a thing?

Also, for them to get close to top ranking police officials, how could that be possible? They higher ups would no doubt be protected by loyal and capable officers. For them to be killed so easy, another stink in the story (we have no proof the terrorists were responsible for the high ranking police deaths tbh, just media reports claiming, for all we know, these higher ups, objected to something and paid the price for it?).

Perhaps the indian police were practicing a form of non-violent resistance. It seemed to work well for Ghandi.

Does anyone else notice that the hard to explain deaths of the police officials provides cover for the possible stand down orders to the police on the scene? The officials were probably told that the police wouldn’t be shot if they didn’t shoot. Now that policeman are dead, the witnesses have to go. The assassin is always killed in turn.

The photographer even testifies that he saw an armed police officer laying on the ground walked up to and shot by a gunman. How scared or untrained to you have to be to lay there with a loaded gun, and watch as a gunman works his way up to you, shooting people all the way?

This is way more than stinky.

Too bad India has it western roots of government tied back to the Brittish systems...


They have been anti-gun from the start....



More Guns, less Crime...






This event awoke the nation of Indian...

A billion strong... a billion more united...


No corner of the earth that has a belief in liberity and freedom is safe from the threat of Islamo-Fascism.


The Western/Modern World is at war...

At war with a retro-grade force that appears to have come from the 7th century...


There was a time when the western world had there head in the sand, more concerned about petty disagreements, then the threat that Mouhammadism is bringing to their doors...


The Western World opened their eyes to this threat almost 1300 years ago...

Frankish Knights meet the Muslims invaders at the Purinise... and drove them back


The first Crusade started, to drive the muslems out of Iberia...


All of Christendom, united, and working together, to push back the follower of the Quran...




We are yet again in these darkest of Days...

Europe is under seige, only this time, they do not seem to have the political will to survive...


In the next hundred years, a new chapter in the clash of East v West will be written...


I only hope, that good unites to fight evil, and this retro-grade force, is once again driven back...



So now i leave you with the words of a man who is far smarted then i can ever dream to be:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.

That was written by Winston Churchill, in 1899, over 100 years ago...

Originally posted by Jinni

The two suspects did get away and managed to jack a car too before going on to kill major police officials!

Boy, they seemed to have all the time in the world!

[edit on 29-11-2008 by Jinni]

Yes I agree with this. When there wasn't much information about the attacks in the news, I was sure all of these men would be killed. Then reports started coming out about how oddly professional these men were, with their weapons and tactics, and I just thought that was strange, but I was still sure they would all be killed. Then when I heard that 9 out of 10 of the men managed to escape after that carnage I can hardly believe it!

[edit on 30-11-2008 by unnamedninja]

There are bound to be a couple of pussies amongst any force.

14 policemen died this week, all of them went into battle knowing that they were facing far superior firepower.

Karkare, Salaskar and Kamte died after going into battle with Webley revolvers (ww2 era); all other policement died after knowingly going into battle with bolt action .303 enfields (pre-ww2).

I can't believe you are focusing on the few cowards rather than the vast number of heros.

Clearly you have some sort of anti-India agenda but this is ridiculous. Why dont you just go ahead and post a thread about how glorious and noble the terrorists were?

And can you please just admit to being a Pakistani with a grudge, rather than claiming to "not be Pakistani, just having lots of Pakistani friends". That was the exact line that Token used to give before being pushed into admitting that he was indeed Pakistani. Just admit it, and we can have an honest debate about your grievances...

The only thing to conclude from that article is that India needs to repeal its stupid Raj-era firearms laws and arm a great faction of society with better arms.

They were probably not ready for this kind of attack.

Personally not ready and professionally not ready.

It happens.

It is so easy to tell other people how they should do their job in the cover of internet. Next time maybe you should go and do the job yourself.