Shoot-to-kill-to-protect
That little gem is from a character named Lord Stevens.
Let us frame things: Mr. Menezes was pinned, immobilized, to the ground by ununiformed police.
My town is famous for justifying murder by police. Last week our local police shot dead a 13 year old girl (black, of course) for "menacing" them with a can of spray paint. An acquaintance of mine remarked that town police use more deadly force than that permitted to the US miltary. That's saying something! Unnecessary force coupled with the perverse attitude of absolving the police from inappropriate conduct and action has its champions in Britain, too:
London Mayor Ken Livingstone absolves police: This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility.
Glen Smyth: Police officers in these circumstances are expected to make split-second decisions that have life-long consequences.
Home Office washes its hands: It was an operational matter for the police.
As to the police work required to nab suicide bombers, these people don't just get up in the morning and say, Gee it's a great day to bomb the London Underground. I think I'll get that suicide vest out of the basement! No, no, no! They discuss. They plan. They use stealth. Their plot evolves incrementally, over months and sometimes years. What is needed is human intelligence--within the community. Not a gang of cops in scruffy plain clothes from the suburbs profiling dark-skinned urban men attired in baggy outfits and then shooting them in the head point-blank--a nice little recommended tactic from Israel and a convenient endrun around Britain's long-standing legal tradition of habeas corpus.
Update: Did Tony Blair really say this? "Our men will continue, if necessary, to shoot suicide bombers, aiming for the head. But, shooting them in another part of the body is okay too, if it keeps them from carrying out their deadly mission." What kind of dumbass micromanaging is that? The point is, the headshot is Israeli operating procedure adopted by Operation Kratos allegedly used to prevent a suicide bomber from detonating his payload. (Not that it has ever been very successful). I should like to inform Mr. Blair that the error is the hysterical, profiled, and circumstantial grounds on which deadly force is used.
Let us frame things: Mr. Menezes was pinned, immobilized, to the ground by ununiformed police.
My town is famous for justifying murder by police. Last week our local police shot dead a 13 year old girl (black, of course) for "menacing" them with a can of spray paint. An acquaintance of mine remarked that town police use more deadly force than that permitted to the US miltary. That's saying something! Unnecessary force coupled with the perverse attitude of absolving the police from inappropriate conduct and action has its champions in Britain, too:
London Mayor Ken Livingstone absolves police: This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility.
Glen Smyth: Police officers in these circumstances are expected to make split-second decisions that have life-long consequences.
Home Office washes its hands: It was an operational matter for the police.
As to the police work required to nab suicide bombers, these people don't just get up in the morning and say, Gee it's a great day to bomb the London Underground. I think I'll get that suicide vest out of the basement! No, no, no! They discuss. They plan. They use stealth. Their plot evolves incrementally, over months and sometimes years. What is needed is human intelligence--within the community. Not a gang of cops in scruffy plain clothes from the suburbs profiling dark-skinned urban men attired in baggy outfits and then shooting them in the head point-blank--a nice little recommended tactic from Israel and a convenient endrun around Britain's long-standing legal tradition of habeas corpus.
Update: Did Tony Blair really say this? "Our men will continue, if necessary, to shoot suicide bombers, aiming for the head. But, shooting them in another part of the body is okay too, if it keeps them from carrying out their deadly mission." What kind of dumbass micromanaging is that? The point is, the headshot is Israeli operating procedure adopted by Operation Kratos allegedly used to prevent a suicide bomber from detonating his payload. (Not that it has ever been very successful). I should like to inform Mr. Blair that the error is the hysterical, profiled, and circumstantial grounds on which deadly force is used.
posted by Nur-al-Cubicle | 4:49 AM
3 Comments:
Sorry, but the police were wearing ragged plain clothes and brandishing revolvers. How was he to know they were police?
Futhermore, once he was effectively stopped and pinned to the ground, he was executed! Five shots to the head, a point-blank range! Think about that! That can't be right!
I must add a few more details.
Having live in New York City, I would say that the turnstile-jumping maneuvre is commonplace. I've seen it hundreds of times. New York cops and transit police are armed but seldom perform a public execution based on suspicion aroused by turnstile-jumping.
Second, it is a tradition that British police, at least in London, rarely, if ever, use revolvers. There may be as few as 8 cases of British police firing a weapon per year thoughout the whole country. The world believes that the London policeman is unarmed AND in uniform. Why should the poor Brazilian believe that these gun-toting shabby plainclothesmen were police?
If he hadn't been watching TV, is there a chance he wouldn't have known about the emergency of 21 July? Is he guilty by failing to read The Mirror headlines?
I grant that he ~~may~~ have purchased an illegal drug, and preferred to flee than face arrest, legal fees, loss of job, etc. Many unpragmatic people would react in this way. But this is not a capital offense requiring summary execution on the scene of arrest to my knowledge.
Would you agree that the Brazilian deserved to know that the house he visited was under surveillance by armed police and that by his very presence there he risked his life? Do you think that with this knowledge he would have behaved differently?
Last, your argument is what we call, "blaming the victim". This was commonly done to rape victims: misogynists would promptly claim that their gender and attire provoked the crime.
London is the capital of the world. No one wants to see violence done there. I hope the cells spawning the bombings will be broken up. It is a very difficult task. In the meantime, no one wants to see public executions based on profiling.
Where is the vaunted discipline of the British people? Why are they giving into hysteria and rash acts? We expected better of them, of all people.
And thanks for your visit and thought-provoking comments, Ashraf.
The sum total of secret surveillance of unwitting third parties, coupled with gunplay among dozens of tube travellers in a city of millions and ending with execution on suspicion is hysterial behavior. Clearly, the authorities have panicked and have no idea how to respond.
In NYC, how are you going to "randomly check" 4.7 million daily subway travellers? You cannot--it's Public Relations stunt. I fear that stakeouts in Brixton and Stockwell are stunts as well--and fatally flawed.
Post a Comment
<< Home