The prime minister said the police would have been criticised for failing to act had the man turned out to be a terrorist.What a terrible thing to say. So was he a sacrificial lamb, or merely 'collateral damage'? Can anyone imagine the TERROR this man must have gone through, and the pain his closest must now be going through?
I've said this before, but if we are at war, let it be official. Let the Queen declare war on the 'jihadists' (Mr de Villepin), and then there will no longer be any need for Mr blair to justify himself.
I feel sick.
Dont run and you wont be shot.
RépondreSupprimerI will not go in to the obvious disregard for democracy you continue to show. I will, however, remind you, that according to a witness, he was shot five times(now we hear it was eight), once he was on the ground, held down by officers.
RépondreSupprimerLook, I'm not just trying criticise for the sake of it. I just value democracy and freedom too much to let something like this go. If the police had a reason to shoot an unarmed helpless man eight times, let them tell them what it was.
I agree.
RépondreSupprimerBUT until a report says that this was blatant police brutality, I trust their judgement. They are more qualified to deal with such a situation better than you or I.
I dont disregard democracy, I cherish it. South Africa overcame some serious obstacles to achieve democracy. I cherish my newfound freedom and appreciate my right to vote. As a consequence, I do vote every chance I get.
HOWEVER, I have serious reservations about "innocent" people who run away from police. I'll admit, a few armed policemen suddenly appearing out of nowhere would shock me too, but I'd NEVER run.
The burden of proof rests not with the victim but with the police (and their internet supporters).
RépondreSupprimerFurthermore, eyewitness accounts said the man was already subdued. If one is subdued, one cannot run.
Finally, a few armed policeman suddenly appearing? How about a few thuggish looking men in plain clothes producing guns right after you narrowly escaped a terrorist attack? Of course, in your role as unwavering supporter, you are required to say that you still wouldn't run, but we know how hollow that is.
thankyou very much danica!
RépondreSupprimeradrian, I respect you for the struggle you went through. However, do not fall into the 'comparison game'. Sure, we are free to vote here, there is no official discrimination based on colour, creed etc. However, that does not mean that true democracy exists in this country (UK-or France for that matter), far from it.
The government and it's law enforcers, should serve us, the People, as we, the People are the state. The government and police are not some kind relative looking over us and whom we should obey like good little kids. They are responsible for the wellfare of the People. They are accountable for their actions.
As for 'innocent people who run away from police', have you ever been in that situation? Furthermore, if, and it's a big if, he was running away because he had outstayed his visa, should that justify him being shot EIGHT TIMES WHILE SUBDUED?
I note, that the eywitness account still hasn't been confirmed OR denied.
On democracy, while OT, I agree Jez. Had there been democracy, the war which helped motivate the terrorist attacks would not have taken place in the first place. Were there democracy, police officers would be voted into their jobs and the process of law enforcement would have citizen oversight (government oversight is not the same thing). We are getting dangerously off topic, though.
RépondreSupprimerGuys.
RépondreSupprimerYou are missing the point.
Does true democracy exist ANYWHERE? NO. And thats because human nature makes it impossible for that to happen. No political doctrine is perfect and democracy is no different.
If the guys visa had run out, I have even less sympathy for him now. He had no business in the UK anyway. Illegal immigrants area cause for major concern in the UK.
Like I said, until a report says otherwise, im giving the police the benefit of the doubt as opposed to a border hopping illegal.
Check this out:
RépondreSupprimerhttp://www.wimp.com/taser/
LOL! : )
"Does true democracy exist ANYWHERE? NO. And thats because human nature makes it impossible for that to happen."
RépondreSupprimerThere is nothing inherent to humanity preventing democracy. There have been successful experiments in democracy that have broken out in the past, but have been crushed by those in power who felt threatened by the loss of control. A cursory reading of the debates on the forming of the U.S. Constitution or of the same era yield the concern elites felt over allowing "th beast in men's shapes" having any real power:
The people who own the country ought to govern it.
- John Jay, coauthor of the Federalist Papers and the first Chief Justice
The evils of experience flow from the excess of democracy.
- Elbridge Gerry, fifth Vice President it the U.S.A., and the first "gerrymanderer"
The people should have as little to do as may be about the Government.
- Roger Sherman, co-signer of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and a representative of Connecticut
Landholders ought to have a share in the government to support these invaluable interests and check the other many. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority.
- James Madison
The concern is equal in more modern times:
[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction.
...We should dispense with the aspiration to "be liked" or to be regarded as the repository of a high-minded international altruism. We should stop putting ourselves in the position of being our brothers' keeper and refrain from offering moral and ideological advice. We should cease to talk about vague and--for the Far East--unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.
- George Kennan, Former Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff, February 1948
If it's class warfare, my class is winning.
- Warren Buffett
This is a gathering of the haves and the have-mores. Some call you the elite, but I call you my base.
- President George Walker Bush
Al Smith once remarked that "the only cure for the evils of democracy is more democracy." Our analysis suggests that applying that cure at the present time could well be adding fuel to the flames. Instead, some of the problems of governance in the United States today stem from an excess of democracy - an "excess of democracy" in much the same sense in which David Donald used the term to refer to the consequences of the Jacksonian revolution which helped to precipitate the Civil War. Needed, instead, is a greater degree Of moderation in democracy.
- Samuel P. Huntington, The Crisis Of Democracy: Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral Commission
[T]he effective operation of a democratic political system usually requires some measure of apathy and noninvolvement on the part of some individuals and groups. In the past, every democratic society has had a marginal population, of greater or lesser size, which has not actively participated in politics. In itself, this marginality on the part of some groups is inherently undemocratic, but it has also been one of the factors which has enabled democracy to function effectively. Marginal social groups, as in the case of the blacks, are now becoming full participants in the political system. Yet the danger of overloading the political system with demands which extend its functions and undermine its authority still remains. Less marginality on the part of some groups thus needs to be replaced by more self-restraint on the part of all groups.
- Samuel P. Huntington, The Crisis Of Democracy: Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral Commission
Additionally, the punisment for an expired visa in any country that even aspires to be regarded as civilised is not to be shot in the back while subdued.
Regarding horray for tasering: http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow/demnow/demand/2005/feb/audio/dn20050225.ra&proto=rtsp&start=30:19
Now, here's a crazy idea: how about we stay on topic?
Well, you certainly have it all figured out. I want to see your reaction when the attacks start in France.
RépondreSupprimerThe reason this man was shot so many times was that the officers were trying for a non-reflexive shot. That is when a bullet severs the medulla oblongata so that a person cannot even reflexively push a button or pull a trigger. I don't fault the officers' actions, I fault their aim.
I have notjing to add to DJEB's post.
RépondreSupprimerExcept, to the Lone Ranger: In fact, my friend, the attacks started in France a many years ago:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_23-7-2005_pg4_7
If the police had to shoot the man 8 times while he was subdued, in order to get him in the right place, I suggest they need a little more training.
For now, I am waiting for the inquest to answer ALL questions.
How many bomb attacks since France passed the legislation?
RépondreSupprimerNOT MANY.
London should follow their example.
FIFO to terrorist types.
France didn't invade Iraq.
RépondreSupprimerEXACTLY.
RépondreSupprimerYet, France was attacked. Without provocation. Which only goes to show that these scumbag terrorists don't need a reason to bomb and will attack regardless of the reason.
If you're not an extremist Islamic nation, you're fair game to them. thats why I say:
SHOW NO MERCY.
All of France's "humanitarian" work in Algiers and there has been no motivation? Amazing that.
RépondreSupprimerI was a bit in a rush to reply earlier. Sorry.
RépondreSupprimerJust like Ken Livingstone, I reject all terror, INCLUDING fundamentalist terror. There is no EXCUSE for killing innocent civilans. There are, however, plenty of EXPLANATIONS. There were explanations for the bombings in the parisian metro, as DJEB has pointed out. France is no spring chicken in the field of terror and support for terror. There was a period during the french revolution which is known as 'the terror', and school kids are taught about it as such. Just because our leaders(of course) and the media refuse to call it terror, terrorising and supporting the terrorising of civilans in other('enemy') countries IS terror.I feel like I am stating the obvious here. If it's ok to support terror and to practice terror in the name of democracy, I'm not sure I believe in democracy.
Let me also remind you that US imperialism, started a long time ago, when
European nations were practicing colonialism themselves(see the Philippines, Cuba, Puerto Rico...).Half a century after decolonisation began, western imperialism is in full swing.
Adrian, you say you 'cherish [your] newfound freedom and [your] right to vote'. Were you personally barred from voting under Apartheid?
RépondreSupprimerJEZ:
RépondreSupprimerNo, I was simply too young to vote.
However, after learning of the struggle and fully understanding the disgusting discrimination and disenfranchisement of the majority of our population, and the lives it cost to give us that right, I make sure I vote.
Adrian, remember: voting (in most 'democratic' countries) is a right. You also have the RIGHT NOT to vote. Or to SPOIL your vote. Some countries like Belgium impose a penalty on those who don't vote. That, in my opinion, is undemocratic in practice.In the UK and france(and probably in all democracies)spoilt votes are not counted. That, to me is also undemocratic in practice. Telling people they should vote if they want to voice their opinion, is, I would say, undemocratic in spirit.
RépondreSupprimerThis is off topic, I know, but I just wanted to show, that while we have far more freedom than under Apartheid in SA, we are still farfrom having true democracy. And no, it's not a pipe dream. It's a goal.
If people want to abstain from voting thats their right as you say.
RépondreSupprimerHowever, if one doesn't make an effort to choose one's leaders then one shouldn't have the right to criticise them when things don't go their way.
And why on Earth is the right to free speech negated if one does not vote? Give me one good reason.
RépondreSupprimerObviously you could't, so you ran away. (Not that I expected much more.)
RépondreSupprimerRunning away was a good call on your part, neo fascisti.
RépondreSupprimerDear "Lone Ranger,"
RépondreSupprimerYou, sir, were and are full of crap.