-
Posts
-
Should’nt this guy fall on his Sword?
mr blair should be sacked for many reasons let alone this one.
but i cant help having the idea that.. if mr meneses hadnt been in our country as an illegal, working for cash in hand he would never have been shot. he came from one of the violent countries i the world where many people are murdered daily. and while i feel sad for this man and his family, i would like to know why they are still here in england ?? why are his 13 strong family living here at our expense whilst they continue to extort our government for financial gain. [something they would never be able to do back home] and can we have a leaving date for them all please ? and while were at it can they re pay all benefits paid to them when they are componsated for the death of john charles, the same as we have to if we are paid out for injuries. ? i know some will think im being nasty but not so i simply want his family to be treated the same as we are under the same circumstances, after all if a brit was shot in brazil by over enthusiastic cops would his family be treated this well ? not on your nelly..I may not always agree with waspish, but on this subject we think very much alike.
The late Mr de Menezes WAS here illegally. He was granted admission as a tourist but saw fit to not only overstay his permit, but also obtained a forged Home Office stamp in his passport to attempt to circumvent this permission.
Traces of cocaine WERE found in his blood – i.e. he was consuming illegal substances which is another criminal offence.
He was on his way to work when he was killed ….. work????? ….. but he was prohibited from working as he was only a ”visitor” on a tourist visa – another offence.
If he had obeyed our laws, chances are that none of this would have happened. If he had returned to Brazil when he should have done, he wouldn’t have been here to get mistaken for a terrorist and killed.
Quite frankly, prosecuting Police under the Health and Safety legislation is total and utter bollocks. This was done simply to appease the Media and the chattering classes – it wasn’t possible to prosecute them under any other criminal law as there was absolutely NO evidence that any Police Officer had committed a criminal act.
OK so there was clearly a cock-up in communications and (the then) Commander Cressida Dick was the senior officer in charge – but then she has now been promoted to Deputy Assistant Commissioner, so her career is still set to be fast-tracked upwards.
Nobody is complaining about Police radio communications, which don’t work in the London Underground – never have worked – and STILL don’t work. Oh no …. its costs too much money to install relay transmitters in the Underground doesn’t it?
So they have been fined £175,000 with £385,000 costs on top – a total of £560,000. This money comes out of YOUR pockets as taxpayers and simply means that a Police budget somewhere has to be cut to pay for it (i.e. to give the Government’s money back to the Government).
Personally, I think that the required £560,000 savings should be made by withdrawing ALL Police staff and protection from the Houses of Parliament as they are the stupid dickheads that passed the Health & Safety laws in the first place.
Next time a bunch of murderous terrorists want to kill a load of people, a full H & S risk assessment will have to be undertaken before anybody even goes near the scene, in case a bunch of greedy criminals want to try to make some money by suing the Police.
looks like PB’s caught the Uber disease :shock:
Yeah … sorry about that. Just having a bit of a Sunday rant !
Since when did it become illegal to test positive for cocaine?
If he did return to Brazil when he should have he would infact not be popping up the daisies, but that is rather deflecting from the point some people did not do there job properly, and ended up killing him due to there incompetence of not being able to tell the difference between a white man and a black man.Prosecuting the old bill for this was a bit of a joke, cos whatever fine was going to be imposed is not going to make any difference simply for the fact we as the tax payer will be footing the bill for it, it’s not like it’s a company who will be hit in the pocket and really hurt them, it’s the damn tax payer who pays for the police in the first place.
That main copper in charge who everyone keeps saying should resign, he should resign and half the idiots who surround him, and now im to bored to rant anymore lol.
@forumhostpb wrote:
I may not always agree with waspish, but on this subject we think very much alike.
The late Mr de Menezes WAS here illegally. He was granted admission as a tourist but saw fit to not only overstay his permit, but also obtained a forged Home Office stamp in his passport to attempt to circumvent this permission.
Traces of cocaine WERE found in his blood – i.e. he was consuming illegal substances which is another criminal offence.
He was on his way to work when he was killed ….. work????? ….. but he was prohibited from working as he was only a ”visitor” on a tourist visa – another offence.
If he had obeyed our laws, chances are that none of this would have happened. If he had returned to Brazil when he should have done, he wouldn’t have been here to get mistaken for a terrorist and killed.
PB- that is a total “cop out”
To infer that because he was here and had broken a couple of (minor) laws he in some way contributed to recieving 7 bullets in his brain is a diversionn from the event.
Next time you do 40 mph in a 30 mph, in a car which perhaps has a slightly warped brake pad and one headlight higher than the other (hence breaking a few minor laws)- it in no way, under any circumstances, allows the police to literally blow your head off. Nor would it allow me to say “well, if you hadnt gone out in a faulty car and driven over the speed limit, you’d still be here today”
Being here illegally and taking drugs (which reading other threads on here is quite common amongst JC members!) does not excuse multiple co/ck ups by the police- any of which could have been sorted and not resulted in a gang style execution
Now if you wanna argue that in the aftermath of multiple terrorists attacks, innnocent people will be killed by the police to ensure the attacks cease..then fine, we can debate civil liberties etc-
Of course, the “spin” put out by the police after the event (most of which was false) adds to the bad taste in the mouth
To pick up on Anita’s points:
”Testing positive for cocaine” is in itself not illegal – it is the taking of this Class A drug in the first place that is illegal. By virtue of ”testing positive” Mr de Menezes clearly HAD taken cocaine at some time prior to being killed and THAT is illegal.
I don’t agree that his mistaken killing was due to the Police not being able to ”tell the difference between a white man and a black man.” Both Mr de Menezes AND the terrorist suspect had broadly the same skin colour. The terrorist was apparently of Middle Eastern origin and Mr de Menezes was Brazilian (neither were either black or white). The photographs of both men show a remarkable similarity in both skin colour and tone.
To pick up on Slayer’s points:
Equating the Road Traffic Acts and the Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations (minor speeding and dodgy headlamps / brakes) with offences against the Dangerous Drugs Act, forging Visas in passports and working over here illegally is not a good comparison in terms of their degree of criminality.
The fact is that he WAS here illegally and he DID brak the law whilst a visitor to our country. IF he had left when he ought to have done then he wouldn’t have been here to be killed.
The general point is that Police action was taken in the immediate aftermath of a major terrorist incident killing dozens of people and another foiled attempt to do a similar thing. Sure, everybody was jumpy and likely to ‘over react’ to a situation which, under more normal circumstances, would have been managed in a more calm and collected way.
But for those who are all too ready to attack the Police ….. ask yourself this:
WHAT IF Mr de Menezes really was a terrorist and had explosives concealed about his person – ready to commit suicide for his cause and maim and kill as many of us as he could in the process???
WHAT IF the Police, by shooting him in the head multiple times, managed to prevent him from detonating these explosives (even in his death throes) and thereby saved a large number of lives???
Would we still be baying for the head of Sir Ian Blair???? Would the Media and the chattering classes still be pursuing them through the Courts under the Health and Safety Acts ???
Somehow i don’t think so.
@forumhostpb wrote:
To pick up on Anita’s points:
”Testing positive for cocaine” is in itself not illegal – it is the taking of this Class A drug in the first place that is illegal. By virtue of ”testing positive” Mr de Menezes clearly HAD taken cocaine at some time prior to being killed and THAT is illegal.
I don’t agree that his mistaken killing was due to the Police not being able to ”tell the difference between a white man and a black man.” Both Mr de Menezes AND the terrorist suspect had broadly the same skin colour. The terrorist was apparently of Middle Eastern origin and Mr de Menezes was Brazilian (neither were either black or white). The photographs of both men show a remarkable similarity in both skin colour and tone.
Ok well i guess we seen different photo’s, cos the guy i seen was as black as the ace of spades.
But for those who are all too ready to attack the Police ….. ask yourself this:
WHAT IF Mr de Menezes really was a terrorist and had explosives concealed about his person – ready to commit suicide for his cause and maim and kill as many of us as he could in the process???
But he wasnt lol
WHAT IF the Police, by shooting him in the head multiple times, managed to prevent him from detonating these explosives (even in his death throes) and thereby saved a large number of lives???
They didnt lol
Would we still be baying for the head of Sir Ian Blair???? Would the Media and the chattering classes still be pursuing them through the Courts under the Health and Safety Acts ???
Somehow i don’t think so.
I’m sure someone would put in a claim somewhere that they was scared and it caused them unimaginable amounts of stress and its the police’s fault, and not forgetting the old chest nut of a breach of there human rights!
Ultimately someone somewhere is actually responsible for this guys death, someone who made an error in judgement to say yes this is the terrorist we are watching, he or she should be held responsible for this sh!t. I know the top chief copper or whatever everyone keeps asking for him to resign, he shouldnt go, he didnt make the wrong call, ok he fcked everything else up after it lol, and maybe some form of punishment should come his way.
I think maybe it’s all just a waste of time, with so many covers up and bullsh!t that goes on behind the scenes that the public dont know about, ultimately they will do whatever they want regardless.@forumhostpb wrote:
To pick up on Anita’s points:
”Testing positive for cocaine” is in itself not illegal – it is the taking of this Class A drug in the first place that is illegal. By virtue of ”testing positive” Mr de Menezes clearly HAD taken cocaine at some time prior to being killed and THAT is illegal.
I don’t agree that his mistaken killing was due to the Police not being able to ”tell the difference between a white man and a black man.” Both Mr de Menezes AND the terrorist suspect had broadly the same skin colour. The terrorist was apparently of Middle Eastern origin and Mr de Menezes was Brazilian (neither were either black or white). The photographs of both men show a remarkable similarity in both skin colour and tone.
To pick up on Slayer’s points:
Equating the Road Traffic Acts and the Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations (minor speeding and dodgy headlamps / brakes) with offences against the Dangerous Drugs Act, forging Visas in passports and working over here illegally is not a good comparison in terms of their degree of criminality.
The fact is that he WAS here illegally and he DID brak the law whilst a visitor to our country. IF he had left when he ought to have done then he wouldn’t have been here to be killed.
The general point is that Police action was taken in the immediate aftermath of a major terrorist incident killing dozens of people and another foiled attempt to do a similar thing. Sure, everybody was jumpy and likely to ‘over react’ to a situation which, under more normal circumstances, would have been managed in a more calm and collected way.
But for those who are all too ready to attack the Police ….. ask yourself this:
WHAT IF Mr de Menezes really was a terrorist and had explosives concealed about his person – ready to commit suicide for his cause and maim and kill as many of us as he could in the process???
WHAT IF the Police, by shooting him in the head multiple times, managed to prevent him from detonating these explosives (even in his death throes) and thereby saved a large number of lives???
Would we still be baying for the head of Sir Ian Blair???? Would the Media and the chattering classes still be pursuing them through the Courts under the Health and Safety Acts ???
Somehow i don’t think so.
PB- IF me auntie had bo/llox she’d be me uncle
IF Hitler hadnt decided to murder 6 million jews and 25 millions Russians in the process- we’d be calling the Invasion of Russia a war for freedom against dictatorship
“IF” cannot be used in an argument when dealing with fact.
As i said though- we can discuss an erosion of civil liberties, a “shoot first, ask questions later” policy, a view that innocent people will be killed in a police clampdown following major terrorist attack- thats fine and I am happy to debate that BUT to try and dress it up as something else doesnt wash for me.
As for Road Traffic acts etc- more INNOCENT people die each year through speeding and faulty cars than are ever die through the misuse of drugs
Depends on what your viewpoint
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!