Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » He didn't even LOOK Asian and/or muslim (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: He didn't even LOOK Asian and/or muslim
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okay, maybe you and I have a different mental image of a suicide bomber. How would you restrain a suicide bomber in a public place in a way that would prevent him from detonating the bomb?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Badvok
Member
Member # 1085

 - posted      Profile for Badvok   Email Badvok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Okay, maybe you and I have a different mental image of a suicide bomber. How would you restrain a suicide bomber in a public place in a way that would prevent him from detonating the bomb?

Oh I'm sure there are ways, I'm not an expert but I suspect that standing on or otherwise constraining his hands would do the trick. Don't forget this was a close-up incident, they were on top of him!
Posts: 296 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OpsanusTau
Member
Member # 2350

 - posted      Profile for OpsanusTau   Email OpsanusTau   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is quite unsettling to think that we are in or moving towards a place where shooting someone in the head on mere suspicion of being a suicide bomber is a defensible action.
Posts: 3791 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
See, as much of a pacifist as I am, I'm not willing to say that these cops should have dogpiled the guy in the hope that they could effectively prevent him from detonating.

The mistake lay in originally identifying him as a potential bomber; I do not fault them for dealing with a potential suicide bomber in this way, however, especially when he continued to behave in a suspicious manner AND appeared to directly endanger the public.

The lesson here is that running from armed police, particularly when the city is on high terrorist alert, is a bad idea.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Funean
Member
Member # 2345

 - posted      Profile for Funean   Email Funean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
It is quite unsettling to think that we are in or moving towards a place where shooting someone in the head on mere suspicion of being a suicide bomber is a defensible action.
Five times. After he's lying on the ground.

Other than that tidbit, I'm inclined to agree with TomDavidson; it was a bad situation that almost a begged a bad outcome.

But c'mon. I think we can expect A LITTLE better, and more importantly, can admit that, gosh, that went badly, didn't it? The fact that the police made perfectly human errors and perhaps didn't handle this situation perfectly doesn't mean that they are incompetant or evil, but we don't have to insist that they were just fine and the scenario couldn't have gone better.

Posts: 5277 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Badvok
Member
Member # 1085

 - posted      Profile for Badvok   Email Badvok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
The lesson here is that running from armed police, particularly when the city is on high terrorist alert, is a bad idea.

Oh quite true but:
1. Did he know they were police? We'll probably never know now. They were plain-clothes officers.
2. Did he know they were armed? When was the gun drawn? Hopefully the inquiry will find this out.
3. Was he challenged clearly or warned in any way? No witnesses (other than police) have confirmed this yet. The inquiry may find this out.
4. How could shooting him in the head prevent detonation any better than restraining him?
5. Why didn't the officer with the gun down him earlier? Perhaps he wasn't trained sufficiently?

[ July 25, 2005, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: Badvok ]

Posts: 296 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mormegil
Member
Member # 2439

 - posted      Profile for Mormegil         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
at the end of the day, we had someone under surveillance wearing a heavy coat disobeying police orders and running onto a subway car. Are you arguing that the police should not prevent someone from boarding in that situation?
"prevent someone from boarding"? Sure.

Shoot someone five times *after* he's already being held down? For wearing a coat and running from the police?

Ever watch "Cops"? People run from the police ALL THE TIME. Is it stupid? Of course! But do we really want "running away" to be a capital crime in and of itself?

I can definitely come up with lots of scenarios where shooting a man running from police is an okay thing to do.

This was not one of them.

Their suspicions were pretty flimsy, and they shot him after he was already being restrained.

I felt the same way before I found out he was innocent.

Posts: 800 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Member
Member # 2546

 - posted      Profile for Archer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The suicide bomb vest made for the palestinians are triggered when the person moves his arms away from his body. They design them like that to clear the bombers arms out of the blast radius so more of the blast hits the bystanders.

I'm sure they could rig vests to be triggered by pulling a string that's run down inside the jacket into the hand or any one of a dozen other methods.

The British police had no idea what kind of trigger a suicide bomber would have chosen for that particular time.

So the answer to your question of "How could shooting him in the head prevent detonation any better than restraining him?" is that he couldn't deliberately trigger the bomb no matter what method he chose after getting shot in the head five times.

Even if the police had the guy restrained to some extent after they chased him down and tackled him, the guy wasn't immobilized. Being immobilized is what it'd take to be sure that he couldn't trigger the bomb.


quote:
Why didn't the officer with the gun down him earlier? Perhaps he wasn't trained sufficiently?

If the police think they're following a terrorist, the last thing they want to do is shoot him. The police's fondest hope and dream is that he leads them to other terrorists. Stopping the guy before he got to his destination would have been a sign of bad training.

They confronted him because he went to the subway station where other bombings had taken place while wearing something that could conceal a bomb. The police's fear for the public safety became a higher priority than tracking down other terrorist contacts.

I really doubt there was any way to tell the guy was going into the station before he did it and the policemen shadowing him would have hanging back some distance, not standing next to him.

When they caught up and confronted the guy, he did exactly what a terrorist with a bomb would do, make a break for a subway car.

Posts: 205 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Nic Hobson
Member
Member # 2384

 - posted      Profile for Nic Hobson   Email Nic Hobson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hi All

Just a few things.

The guys doing the shooting were not beat plod. They are SO19 (Met Police Firearms Specialists) trained by the SAS. The shooting took place in a busy station and it is not the practice of the police fire arm officers or SO19 to start shooting randomly while there are crowds around (for me this shows how professional they are no one but Mr Menezes was hurt).

He did speak English, this has been confirmed by friends of his.

Now as for him running away this is the one that’s got me beat as I just don’t know why you would. I know people are saying that they would run if three people approached them with guns pulled out but no one else in the station did, it was just him.

Finally this was in London during the day at a busy station we just don’t get teams of crazed armed robbers running through trying to mug people in tube stations so it is very unusual to see someone with a gun let alone someone being chased by people with guns.

Nic

Posts: 12 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
A. Alzabo
Member
Member # 1197

 - posted      Profile for A. Alzabo   Email A. Alzabo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Now as for him running away this is the one that’s got me beat as I just don’t know why you would. I know people are saying that they would run if three people approached them with guns pulled out but no one else in the station did, it was just him.


It's always puzzled me why people do this in the U.S. also. It's odd that innocent people take off running, but they do. Maybe there're psychological or sociological studies out there.

On the other hand, this guy was Brazilian and as someone who works with a number of Brazilians and has heard some of their "funny" stories about carjackings, kidnappings, and extortions in Brazil I think the first thought of a Brazilian when confronted by a group of plain-clothes armed men might not be "Oh, the police!".

quote:
Finally this was in London during the day at a busy station we just don’t get teams of crazed armed robbers running through trying to mug people in tube stations so it is very unusual to see someone with a gun let alone someone being chased by people with guns.

But this does happen in Brazil, where armed gangs will sometimes take over tunnels and stop traffic and force drivers to pay a "toll" or carjack or kidnap them. One Brazilian coworker has started stories with "The third time I was carjacked...".

[ July 25, 2005, 01:46 PM: Message edited by: A. Alzabo ]

Posts: 2519 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ender wiggin
Member
Member # 9

 - posted      Profile for ender wiggin   Email ender wiggin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have two friends who ran into to some police one time and were told to stop. For some reason which even they can't explain they ran away. They weren't doing anything illegal. The cops never did find them even though they got the helecopters and everything searching. These friends still can't explain what exactly made them run from the cops, but they would have been in a lot of trouble had they been caught. so innocent people do sometimes run.

However, I have to agree with the "bad luck" theory. I can't see what the cops could have done differently and still preformed thier duty to protect the public.

Posts: 971 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by A. Alzabo:
It's always puzzled me why people do this in the U.S. also. It's odd that innocent people take off running, but they do. Maybe there're psychological or sociological studies out there.

That's because most of the time they aren't innocent. Actually, I don't know if that is true, I even tried to look it up and couldn't find any stats to back it up one way or the other, although, since resisting arrest is against the law, and running from the police is resisting arrest, then they are guilty [Smile]

Anybody have more information on whether or not innocent people run?

Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think this is a tragic situation, but I don't see that the officers were negligent. They clearly believed that this guy was a bomber by his actions and circumstances.

Add to the bad luck list that he could have renewed his visa, and therefore have had one less reason to run.

I'm glad I'll never have to make a split-second life-or-death decision that will be examined for weeks by millions of people. Imagine if you had been the cop that didn't fire, and a half-dozen people were blown up. The fact that he was held down, if they believed him to be a bomber, was immaterial. My sympathy goes out to the family of this man and to the cops.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Drake said:
quote:
I think this is a tragic situation, but I don't see that the officers were negligent.
The officers were not negligent. However, whomever implemented a policy that allowed the police to kill without visible direct threat was negligent.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nic, welcome to Ornery

"They are SO19 " so they are trained and they know how to shoot in a crowded place, every one has units who can do that. what they need to know is the profile of a typical suicide bomber, the philosophical state of mind of a suicide bomber and other background info like that.

what they also need is to develop an arrest protocol for a suicide bomber, that will keep him alive.

and what you all brittish should do, is to start checking people at public places as "undemocratic" as it may seem to you. i have been only last month to london, and as an israeli i cant help not to notice how easy it is for a terrorist to virtually do whatever he wants inside a museum or a tube station or anywhere public

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's a tough call under the circumstances, FdR. First off, there is no such thing as shooting to disable in this case (or most others). If the protocol is to shoot, then the protocol is to kill.

I'm not so sure about a requirement for "visible direct threat". I assume the discussion centers around visible, since it can easily be argued that a person under surveillance running into a crowded tube station while fleeing police is a very direct threat.

So now, the question is, how do you weigh the risk to a trainload of people against the risk of injuring or killing a suspect on mistaken identity or motives?

I don't imagine I'd be very open to such a discussion if it was my cousin who got shot by police. But, that's the choice we're stuck with, thanks to people willing to blow up a bunch of random people trying to go to work.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
here, with 50!! warnings a day, and not mere scares, real warnings of suicide bombings and locations and all, we still menage to block a fairly large presentage of attacks, and we dont shoot at innocent civilians.

its all a procedure of protocols, and psychology, and work method, that the london police and any other police force in the world needs to adopt

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Member
Member # 2546

 - posted      Profile for Archer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by FiredrakeRAGE:
The Drake said:
quote:
I think this is a tragic situation, but I don't see that the officers were negligent.
The officers were not negligent. However, whomever implemented a policy that allowed the police to kill without visible direct threat was negligent.


I can't speak for Europe but I'd imagine in similar circumstances in the US that police officers would not have to be specifically told to use lethal force if they have a terrorist suspect who they think is in the middle of the freaking act of detonating his weapon in a crowded subway station.
Posts: 205 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Archer said:
quote:
I can't speak for Europe but I'd imagine in similar circumstances in the US that police officers would not have to be specifically told to use lethal force if they have a terrorist suspect who they think is in the middle of the freaking act of detonating his weapon in a crowded subway station.
If there is no indicator other than suspicion and a fleeing suspect? They could shoot, but they would probably be fired thereafter. It really depends on the exact situation though.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Consider an analogy. It is a couple of weeks after 9/11. Cops or soldiers approach a man carrying a backpack in an airline terminal, whom they consider to be a suspect. When approached, he breaks and runs toward the long lines of people waiting at security. They yell for him to stop, he ignores them.

What should they do? What would you want them to do, if you were one of those people standing in line?

I suggest that there is no easy answer, there is no obvious choice right choice.

Hannibal points out that it is possible to put a system in place to reduce these risks, or the need to make such a choice. But the only thing that changes is the location and circumstances under which such choices are made.

I don't find it credible to suggest that all the people killed at West Bank and Gaza checkpoints were any more threatening than the guy running for the subway in London.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Drake said:
quote:
I suggest that there is no easy answer, there is no obvious choice right choice.
In a free society, there is but one right choice - detain the guy.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
come on, what kind of people you think we are?

Drake, the checkpoints are the worst place possible to be, you are serving shifts in a place that you know everyone hates you, and you dont know where you gonna get it, and if its the next person in line or not ever.

cases of women suidice bombers who faked pregnency, children of 15, and even 13 years of age with charges have been reported there. many a suicide bombers found out that they couldnt pass and exploded inside those checkpoints killing soldiers and palestinians by stenders alike. there is NOTHING to compare a checkpoint in gaza to the london incident.

not to mention that the sole purpose of the checkpoints is to let palestinians come and work inside israel, and they attack those places on purpose.

to serve as a soldier in a checkpoint is a very taxing duty, both phisically and more importantly mentaly, thats why we should get the hell out of the territories and lock ourselves completly to palestinians

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't deny any of what you've said about checkpoints, Hannibal. I don't think you're bad people, certainly.

And if 15 year old kids at a checkpoint are a threat, and I think they very much could be - and some demonstrably have been - I don't see how you can suggest that bulky-coat guy walking out of the terrorist house and sprinting toward the subway should not be fired upon, or that it represents a lack on the part of the UK anti-terror procedures.

You can have all the protocols you want, and still kill innocents, especially when the bad guys choose to pose as innocents. All you will change is the location at which you make those mistakes. For the UK, that was at a subway this time. For Israel, this will often happen at a checkpoint. There has to be a "first search" done somewhere - and that location will become the most dangerous and error-prone.

It is interesting that the former Commissioner claims that methods used were based on an Israeli model.

quote:
The “shoot to kill” policy appears to have been discreetly introduced into anti-terrorist procedures in 2003, after then-Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Stevens sent teams to both Israel and Sri Lanka to study how they dealt with suicide bombers.

On Sunday, Lord Stevens wrote in graphic language in the popular tabloid the News of the World why he had taken the decision.

“There is only sure way to stop a suicide bomber determined to fulfill his mission: Destroy his brain instantly, utterly. Which means shooting him with devastating power in the head, killing him immediately. Anywhere else and even though they might be dying, they may still be able to force their body to trigger the device,” he wrote

I'm afraid there's taxing duty in store for us all in the years to come.

[ July 25, 2005, 07:35 PM: Message edited by: The Drake ]

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
true, thats why though israel has checkpoints, so that such stuff wont happen inside a major city.

the open-fire protocol in a checkpoint is much trigger happier then inside the green line, if some one will run striat to a checkpoint with no stopping he will be gunned down for sure. but the millitary handles checkpoints and the palestinians are not israeli citizens. while the police handles israel, and has to treat with israeli citizens

maybe now, you people whould understand why we use strgeted assasinations, we keep helicopters in the air 24/7 so that if intteligence will identify a car (and be 100% sure mind you) that is harboring a suicide bomber on its way to die, we destroy him inside the car.

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"I'm sure they could rig vests to be triggered by pulling a string that's run down inside the jacket into the hand or any one of a dozen other methods."

Yeah, dozens of other methods including a dead-man switch, either rigging the detonator to a cheap strap around the ribs type heart monitor or just rigging it so that the switch is held in the bombers hand and detonates if his hand relaxes.

A bullet to the head is by no means a sure-fire way to stop a suicide bomber.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

and we dont shoot at innocent civilians

Except you've not only segregated your likely bombers on the basis of their ancestry but require them to carry identity cards and are building a big wall to keep them away from the "real" people.

London is not nearly as restrictive -- and the price London pays for this is the need to respond more reactively and less proactively to potential threats.

quote:

the millitary handles checkpoints and the palestinians are not israeli citizens

This is a very salient point. You have the luxury of not having to respect the rights or lives of the demographic most likely to bomb you, which makes it considerably easier to intercept them.

[ July 25, 2005, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
but require them to carry identity cards and are building a big wall to keep them away from the "real" people.


every israeli citizen over the age of 15 carry an identitiy card, so if the palestinians want to come and work here, they need identity cards too.

"building a big wall to keep them away from the "real" people."

we are entitled to do what ever we want inside our territories, and the wall, by the guidance of our supreme court, is being built on the green line. the wall is built inside israel, we have every right to build it. and its purpose if to block palestinian terrorists from entering israel, since our borders with the palestinians are pretty much non existant and wide open, the wall's purpose is to limit the palestinians from illegaly entering israel, and using only the border passes to enter. just like you wont let mexicans enter america freely.

the wall is only here because of the palestinian terrorists, who caused the israeli population to simply not believe a word the palestinian say, and understanding that the only way for them to stop terrorism is by making one-sided actions such as building the wall.

"This is a very salient point. You have the luxury of not having to respect the rights or lives of the demographic most likely to bomb you, which makes it considerably easier to intercept them." the well being and rights of the palestinians are respected as much as possible in those checkpoints. palestinians ARE able to sue israelis, and many do so, and the israeli supreme court, the only place in israel still not hit by politics, many times rule in favior of the palestinians. soldiers know that there are strict rules that they have to follow.

but still given that, ofcourse getting into a checkpoint is an uncomfortable thing. but i tell you what, after 9/11, for us your israeli allies, entering on a plane inside an american airport is also a rather uncomfortable thing.

if you wanna work in israel, then you are going to be checked because it is people of your demoraphic who bomb israel.

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Member
Member # 2546

 - posted      Profile for Archer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jesse:
"I'm sure they could rig vests to be triggered by pulling a string that's run down inside the jacket into the hand or any one of a dozen other methods."

Yeah, dozens of other methods including a dead-man switch, either rigging the detonator to a cheap strap around the ribs type heart monitor or just rigging it so that the switch is held in the bombers hand and detonates if his hand relaxes.

A bullet to the head is by no means a sure-fire way to stop a suicide bomber.

No, its not a sure-fire method which is why I said "he couldn't deliberately trigger the bomb no matter what method he chose after getting shot in the head five times." (emphasis added)

I'm aware of the existence of dead-man switches. But I'm not aware of any terrorist group currently using them. The police are trying to stop the methods they know are being used rather than the methods that are unusual.

Posts: 205 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

if you wanna work in israel, then you are going to be checked because it is people of your demoraphic who bomb israel.

So what you are arguing is that England would be better off kicking anyone of Arabic descent to Milton Keynes and building a wall around it, and then only shooting the people who try to run through the two or three gates?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Badvok
Member
Member # 1085

 - posted      Profile for Badvok   Email Badvok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:

if you wanna work in israel, then you are going to be checked because it is people of your demoraphic who bomb israel.

So what you are arguing is that England would be better off kicking anyone of Arabic descent to Milton Keynes and building a wall around it, and then only shooting the people who try to run through the two or three gates?
LOL, nice idea, but I don't think even terrorists deserve to be sent to Milton Keynes.
Posts: 296 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
if you want to play dumb, then play some where else
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"if you want to play dumb, then play some where else"

I scarcely read this thread, but I love this line, hannibal. Humphrey Bogart caliber material

Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm pointing out that the way Israel manages its terrorist problem -- by officially making Palestinians like second-class citizens (or not citizens at all), ostracizing them and subjecting them to frequent invasive searches, and literally walling them off from the rest of the country's population -- would not be tenable in most other Western countries. One cost of this approach may well be the occasional accidental shooting, and even Israel has those at its own checkpoints.

If your argument is that Western countries need to more proactively segregate, I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you.

[ July 26, 2005, 10:38 AM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Badvok
Member
Member # 1085

 - posted      Profile for Badvok   Email Badvok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hannibal/Ricky, can you comment on this . Is this just palestinian propaganda or is there any truth in it.
Thanks.

Posts: 296 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom, you couldnt spill more palestinian propoganda if you tried

palestinians are not second class citizens, they are merely NOT israeli citizens just like an american is not an israeli citizen. if palestinians want to work in israel, they need to get a permit, which is an long process just like getting a green card to work in the states.
when palestinians enter israel, they are searched, just like when israelis enter the united states are searched
the palestinians are not walled of from the *rest* of the country, it is a mere border being built between israel and the future state of palestine, just like a mexican cant enter the united states anywhere he wants, but through valid border passes, just like a palestinian citizen wont be able to.

the searches that an israeli goes through the border guards in an american airport, are invasive aswell. nobody inserts a stick up our asses, but we need to take off the shoes, belts, and even hand bags. even the pages of the books are searched. so dont give me invasive

we are not segregating. palestinians are going to be citizens of another country, which is not israel. and we have every right to errect a wall between israel and palestine.
palestinians who have work permits to israel will still be able to enter israel trhough the checkpoints

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Badvok, you have entered the site of the extreme lefties of israel, they are just as bad as the settlers.

sure the wall on the WEST side is not built exactly over the green line, it is circling major settlement blocks that the US administration have approved. the suggested wall is not a finallity, and needs to go through the supreme courts approval, (which so far has not approved any initial suggested wall, and pushed it westards)

Sharon is after all a right winger, and he will try to make the wall built as eastwards as possible. that is the difference between a leftwinger PM and a right winger PM. and where i stop supporting sharon (i never had actually, i just aprove of the pullout plan) and start supporting a leftwing PM.

IF the palestinians had agreed to Ehud Barak's offer in 1999, then they whould have had 97% of the 1967 territories. because of the recent intifadah, the palestinians have lost the major settlement blocks - which the USA promised israel that they can keep them

the east barrier idea, is a mere propoganda by the Gush-Shalom activists, who assume what "might" happen.

there is no chance that such thing will be built, as it has no purpose of security and it will never be approved in the knesset. ofcourse it is a wet dream of many a hawkish right wingers in israel, it is a dream

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Security fence politics probably deserve an entire thread. The big problem is the route of the fence, changed from the green line to appease the settlers.

Which maybe isn't a bad analogy to what Texans did in creating the Mexican border [Smile]

I agree with others, that this particular solution, or turning the UK into an Iraq or Northern Ireland with checkpoints and searches on the street and everywhere else, would be an overreaction at the very least. 10 bombings from now, who knows if that will still be true?

Consider that there could easily be 20,000 to 30,000 radical muslims in the UK, which is often stated as the size of the insurgency in Iraq. Now that's a truly sobering thought.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Member
Member # 2546

 - posted      Profile for Archer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
Security fence politics probably deserve an entire thread. The big problem is the route of the fence, changed from the green line to appease the settlers.

Which maybe isn't a bad analogy to what Texans did in creating the Mexican border [Smile]


I didn't know Texans dug the Rio Grande.


Separation might be an option is Israel. Where the fence is already built, its stopping atttackers from crossing over. If there becomes a real and separate Palestine whose border matches the fence and both sides are politically OK with that, its probably not a bad thing.

If the area on both sides of the fence remain Israel, the wall is only going to continue to increase resentment.

As for whether Palestinians in Israel are treated differently than Israeli citizens, I've read from a number of places (which aren't pro-palestine) for a number of years that its true. Such things as a palestinian having trouble getting electricity and water for his house even though its available to citizens in that community.

And why underestimate how hard Tom can try? I've seen people who are much more palestinian propagandists than he's been so far. [Wink]


I don't see separation being an option for Britain or the rest of Europe. There might be areas where immigrants more frequently settle but its nothing like palestinian refugee camps or similar places that can be easily isolated. They aren't going to build walls around arab "ghettos" in their cities even if the political will to do something that drastic increases.

If they want instead to displace the population completely, it'd be much easier to deport them altogether than to build camps then care for the displaced people there.

Posts: 205 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Drake

"or turning the UK into an Iraq or Northern Ireland with checkpoints and searches on the street and everywhere else, would be an overreaction at the very least. 10 bombings from now, who knows if that will still be true?"

Its not like that in israel.we dont have "checkpoints and searches everywhere" we have them on the BORDER, your picture of israel is wrong, out of luck of knowledge.

Archer

"As for whether Palestinians in Israel are treated differently than Israeli citizens, I've read from a number of places (which aren't pro-palestine) for a number of years that its true. Such things as a palestinian having trouble getting electricity and water for his house even though its available to citizens in that community"

in palestinians in israel, i take it you mean arab israelis, then basically as far as the law concerns they are 100% the same as myself. unfortionatly, its harder for them to get accepted to work. but is is also hard for a non russian-jew to get accepted to a place where the bosse are all russian-jews. what you said about electricity and water, is of no relation to the fact of a citizen being an arab israeli or not.
water is being supplied to the municipality, and if the municipality is under heavy debts, some times the water are being stopped. ellectricity is stopped for some one who doesnt pay his electricity bill. and unfrotionatly, both those things happen in israel to poor jew and arab citizens alike.


"I don't see separation being an option for Britain or the rest of Europe."

ofcourse it is impossible, this is not the purpose of which we are building the wall. we build it to mark a distinct border between israel and the future palestinian state , and for stopping illegal entrence of palestinians to israel.

we dont build a wall around arab israeli cities, just like england wont build one around its own arab english citizens. -- that is racism.

about Tom

bringing up so many lies in a single statment i mean, thats not so easy

[ July 26, 2005, 01:08 PM: Message edited by: Hannibal ]

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*laugh* What lies, exactly? [Smile]

I am pointing out -- and continue to point out -- that the solutions applied by Israel to their terrorist problem (isolation, intensive search, assassination) are solutions that simply cannot apply to the rest of the world. And if the price of NOT building a wall around our Muslim immigrants is the occasional wrongful shooting, at least until better ways of rapidly identifying a threat are developed, then at worst London is no worse off than Israel, which regularly commits its OWN wrongful shootings at checkpoints.

By the way, I'm a fat, middle-aged white guy. And when I'm flying inside my own country, I'm still asked to remove my shoes and let people rummage through my carry-on. That's not a form of security being applied uniquely to Israeli visitors, or even to international visitors.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1