No Stupid Questions?
You know the teacher that told you there were no such a thing as a stupid question? Well she lied!
The Muslim Council of Britain demanded police explain why an Asian-looking man, reported as a "suspected suicide bomber" by Sky News, was shot dead at Stockwell station in south London on Friday.
So here is the question the Muslim Council is asking: "You know that guy who was about to blow up the metro and kill dozens of people? Yeah, the one with wires coming out of his bag? Yeah the one who had jumped over the ticket counter and ran into the tube and refused to stop when you asked him.. yeah. .that one.. why did you shoot him?"
Are you freaking kidding me?
Here is the whole article.
posted by Watch at 12:03 PM
4 Comments:
Well, I'm not too sure where you got the "wires coming out of his bag" thing (and it's certainly NOT in the article you link to). The only eye witness report that I've read (so far) that even mentioned a bag was a witness saying he was surprised this guy DIDN'T have a bag. And a bag with WIRES??? Haven't heard anything about that yet. Anyway, that's beside the point really.
I suspect that the authorities probably did do the right thing in this case, since this person was clearly being followed by armed undercover operatives (probably Special Forces by the sound of it) so this wasn't probably a case of everyday police officers taking out a suspect (and many have suggested that most everyday officers, even the armed ones, and the ones from Special Branch, probably wouldn't shoot a guy 5 times after he hit the ground, so I suspect we'll get more details soon...).
It seems to me though that the statement you think is so stupid is pretty fair, considering the possibility that the authorities did the right thing is stated explicitly, and also that at the time, all the police had said was that a man was pursued, shot, and killed. Nothing about a bomb, or the suspect being a suspected bomber, just a man pursued, shot and killed.
I can see how the parent of a 16 year old south Asian or Arab kid who wears baggy clothes (all the rage) and has been known to hop a turnstill and run from the police might want more details after hearing reports that a "shoot to kill" policy had been initiated. I think those reports are probably bogus, and this was a specific situation and not indicative of some new, wide-spread policy (plus, since most officers in London are unarmed, what would they shoot with???). But still. If Muslims in Britain were already afraid of being harassed and profilied by police, I don't think it so crazy that this incident might worry them a little... and all they're asking for is some more infomation about what happened... which I'm sure will be forthcoming from the authorities soon.
"Why'd you shoot and kill that guy?" doesn't seem like a stupid question to me, and it seems obvious from the releases from the Muslim Council of Britain that if the answer is "because he had a bomb strapped to him" that they would find that to be a perfectly acceptable answer.
The problem is, when this article was written, no one had said that yet... at least no one in authority who would be in a position to know. And while I don't envy the officers who need to make these types of decisions (and it sounds like, in this case, there was something going on that made the decision as easy as it could be) nonetheless, "We shot him 5 times because we THOUGHT he had a bomb" might not be to comforting to parents out there (as I said, I expect in this case, it was a lot more than that, but still...).
I see kids on the subway all the time wearing coats that look like they're for February, with wires from their cell phones and iPods running all over the place, and I can see how a parent might get a little panicked given today's news (and I know of what I speak... I leave for London soon myslef, and my Mom is beside herself!)
3:50 PM
Well, sadly, I guess it WASN"T a stupid question at all. Here's the latest report:
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Police say the man they shot dead at a London Underground station "was not connected" with this week's attempted bombings on the city's transit system.
"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets," the police statement said Saturday.
I guess we'll learn more in the near future, but this is pretty shocking.
2:24 PM
You know what, I'll admit this, if this guy wasn't about to blow something up, then the London police need to be given a stern talking to and whoever decided to shoot him should be investigated.
6:03 PM
Well, good for you bluetory. I would have liked your post to be a little more contrite, but the fact that you posted anything at all is heartening. A lot of Blogging Tories (I won't name names) were absolutely apoplectic that newspapers were refusing to refer to this man as a "suicide bomber" (a decision which now seems entirely correct in its cautiousness) and declaring their wholehearted support for the shooting, even before the facts were in (and, as you've seen from my comments, I was pretty sure the police had done the right thing too, though I tried not to be too definitive in my statements.)
Unfortunately, many of our fellow bloggers haven't been as big as you in their willingness to admit they may have been mistaken. I suggested to one prominent Blogging Tory that he may want to modify his "1 down, 4 to go" post once the police had indicated that the Brazilian man shot dead by police was "not connected" to the bombings and that the event was a "tragedy". However, rather than modify the post or print a correction, the post has simply disappeared. I support the right of bloggers to edit or delete their own posts as they see fit, but this particular case was rather upsetting to me. If one wholeheartedly supports the shooting of a man by police, and questions subsequently arise regarding whether a fatal shoting was justified, it seems rather inappropriate to simply delete your earlier post without comment, as though you had never made it. But you seem to be on the path to the high road here, and good for you.
Might I suggest that you also consider modifying your ORIGINAL post? "Why was this man shot 5 times until he was dead?" doesn't seem like such a stupid question today, and I think you would agree.
6:55 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home