FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

22Jul05 Jean Charles De Menezes Stockwell tube train murder
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Unexplained Deaths, 'Suicidings', 'Accidents', Plots & Assassinations
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Wokeman
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK

PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 1:17 am    Post subject: Distract Reply with quote

Distraction, diversion and deflection. This is what conjurers do. And this is also the stock in trade of what agencies are extremely good at. Now you see it, now you do not, you thought you saw it, but you didn't, you saw something, but you didn't, etc. It has worked for the Brits for a long time. And later, we taught that trade to the United States, etc etc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:10 am    Post subject: Eyewitnesses Surface on De Menezes Killing 2.5 years later Reply with quote

Harry Potter novel in new edition?

How many times did the original story and subsequent versions take?

Too many to count.

Now 'eye-witnesses' reports have magically surfaced.

De Menezes killing what the witnesses saw

Quote:
Sean Rayment
London Independent
Sunday November 4, 2007

Graphic eye-witness accounts of the last seconds of the life of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian mistakenly shot by the police in July 2005, will be released to the public for the first time this week.

The release of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) report is one of three hurdles the head of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Ian Blair, will have to clear in the next 12 days in order to keep his job.

Britain's most senior policeman is so far defying calls for his resignation since the Met was found guilty on Thursday of "fundamental failures" in the anti-terror operation that led to the 24-year-old Brazilian's death in a Tube carriage at Stockwell station the day after a failed bomb attack on London
.

However, it appeared last night that Sir Ian could escape personal censure in the report, although it will criticise Commanders John McDowell and Cressida Dick, who ran the operation that led to the death of Mr de Menezes, according to a the News of the World.

(Article continues below)

The IPCC is believed to have suggested that prosecutors must consider if Commander Dick was "grossly negligent". It also reportedly concluded that Commander McDowell failed to brief colleagues properly.

Sir Ian could also face a vote of no confidence this week by the Met's political watchdog, the Metropolitan Police Authority. He must also appear before the Greater London Assembly.

The IPCC will tomorrow decide when to make its report into the incident public. Kept secret while legal action over the shooting took place, the report contains evidence that has not yet entered the public realm, an IPCC spokesman said.

"The report will fill in a lot of the gaps," he said. "The trial did not give a full picture in that certain witnesses were not called. It will give a clear idea of what happened on the Tube train itself."

The report sets out the law and will make recommendations for the future. It has already been considered by the Crown Prosecution Service, which decided there was insufficient evidence to charge individual officers. But details of Mr de Menezes' last moments – he is believed to have been shot seven times in the face – will reignite debate over the Met's handling of the case and make clear whether or not the 27-year-old electrician acted aggressively towards the police.

A key defence of the Met is that in the immediate aftermath of the 7 July bombings and the failed bomb plot of 21 July, the armed officers had to make a split-second life-or-death decision on whether Mr de Menezes – mistaken for a terrorist – was carrying a bomb.

The Met was fined £175,000 on Thursday, plus £385,000 costs, after it was convicted at the Old Bailey of exposing the public to unnecessary risk under health and safety law. Critics of Sir Ian Blair say he should take responsibility for the force's failings and what were described as 19 " catastrophic errors".

One former senior officer alleged that Sir Ian, 54, has lost all support among rank-and-file police and some senior officers. "He should quit," he said. "Blair is out of his depth... A member [of] the selection panel [when Sir Ian was chosen] said if you're faced with three lemons and a raspberry you go for the raspberry."

Sir Ian does have important backers, however. The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, is unswerving in his support, as is the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith.

His supporters point out that the jury found that no individual should be held responsible for Mr de Menezes' death and that the failings were not " systemic".

Glen Smyth, Metropolitan Police Federation chief, said: "Sir Ian has not been treated fairly. It is nothing but naked political opportunism to seek his resignation."

Next in line? Contenders for Met's top job

Sir Hugh Orde

Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland. Former Met officer who helped develop race relations strategy. Has spent five years in Belfast.

Ian Johnston

Head of the British Transport Police and former Assistant Commissioner of the Met.

Sir Ronnie Flanagan

Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary who advised on reforms to Iraqi police. Former Chief Constable of Royal Ulster Constabulary and its successor, the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

Mike Todd

Chief Constable of Greater Manchester and former Met Assistant Commissioner, where he was in charge of policing the Notting Hill Carnival. A skilled media operator.


The actual report

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/ipcc_stockwell_2.pdf
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Dissapearing Eye-witnesses...

If one scrolls down to 16.5.2 one sees how the police get round the initial media reports.
They allege the eye-witness reports in the confusing situation described not De Menezes but coppers who were chasing him when it was stated he wore unseasonal clothes.

Funny as these were replayed over and over and now 2.5 years later they are dismissed in such a manner.

In other words the media will report anything, irrelevant if real or not, then it will be discounted as being an issue of 'confusion'.

Who says the eye-witnesses weren't plants sent to Stockwell tube to spin stories to a complicit media which sold the WMD story for months before the invasion?

Notice further down 16.5.3 that the 'forensic recovery' becomes a joint operation with SO13. In another thread it has been alleged by Staraker that the anti-terrorist police did not have jurisdiction over all these events

16.5.5 another witness who spoke allegedly about a belt which De Menezes was carrying has not ...come forward.

Why couldn't they interview the officer or the embedded journalist?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

16.6.25 states the De Menezes had documents on him which show he was born in Sao Paolo

According to his biography on Wikipedia
Quote:

The son of a bricklayer, de Menezes grew up on a farm in Gonzaga, Minas Gerais, Brazil. After discovering an early aptitude for electronics, he left the farm at age 14 to live with his uncle in São Paulo and further his education.


Something similar to the infamous bus driver Psaradakis who was born in Greece and came to London and from the age of 14 allegedly worked in the rag trade here...

After having shot him they knew allegedly he was not a terrorist within 24 hours yet Brown want detention without trial for more than 50 days!!!

How could they know so quickly, unless it was a set up?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nick Cooper
Suspended
Suspended


Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

conspiracy analyst wrote:
Notice further down 16.5.3 that the 'forensic recovery' becomes a joint operation with SO13. In another thread it has been alleged by Staraker that the anti-terrorist police did not have jurisdiction over all these events
That'll be you lying again. In the "other thread" you erroneously claimed that "anti-terrorist police" have automatic authority over all other forces, and as somewhat lame justification cited the legislation that does nothing more than define how the non-territorial forces can request the assistence of territorial forces - and vice versa - and confirming that their officers have equal powers. Looking at 16.5.3, all is actually says is that the Directorate of Professional Standards and SO13 - both part of the MPS - were required to carry out the investigation together. Yet again, it seems that an understanding of the precise use of English lets your down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nick Cooper
Suspended
Suspended


Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

conspiracy analyst wrote:
After having shot him they knew allegedly he was not a terrorist within 24 hours yet Brown want detention without trial for more than 50 days!!!

How could they know so quickly, unless it was a set up?
Well, duh! The Brazilian driving licence in his pocket.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Wokeman
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK

PostPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I've said elsewherre, 'They' knew J-C wasn't a terrorist to begin with. He had left that morning, wearing exactly what he was wearing when he was shot: a denim jacket and jeans. However, a different story was put out describing him as 'wearing a heavy woollen jacket' (it was a warm day but he was set up to be suspect, who could have concealed a bomb) It was further alleged that J-C had ran and 'vaulted the ticket barrier' (obviously the behaviour of a suspect). Had it not been for the intervention of a whistle-blower on the IPCC, who told a newspaper that none of these descriptions were true, that image of J-C de Menezes as a suspected terrorist would have stuck, although it must be said, the true facts of J-C's quite innocent behaviour as he made his way to work, wasn't exactly shouted from the rooftops by the MM.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Staraker wrote:
conspiracy analyst wrote:
Notice further down 16.5.3 that the 'forensic recovery' becomes a joint operation with SO13. In another thread it has been alleged by Staraker that the anti-terrorist police did not have jurisdiction over all these events
That'll be you lying again. In the "other thread" you erroneously claimed that "anti-terrorist police" have automatic authority over all other forces, and as somewhat lame justification cited the legislation that does nothing more than define how the non-territorial forces can request the assistence of territorial forces - and vice versa - and confirming that their officers have equal powers. Looking at 16.5.3, all is actually says is that the Directorate of Professional Standards and SO13 - both part of the MPS - were required to carry out the investigation together. Yet again, it seems that an understanding of the precise use of English lets your down.


Whereas they had none before by being assigned joint operational capability with the ability to shoot to kill and not be prosecuted, the local forces de facto have second role. THis is what happened in the De Menezes murder.

It isn't a matter of the use of English. Its a matter of the 'war on terror'...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Staraker wrote:
conspiracy analyst wrote:
After having shot him they knew allegedly he was not a terrorist within 24 hours yet Brown want detention without trial for more than 50 days!!!

How could they know so quickly, unless it was a set up?
Well, duh! The Brazilian driving licence in his pocket.


So does that not make him an alleged terrorist.

So if we all are issued with ID cards we wont need to be detained for 56 days.

They knew who he was they were following him.

This was a giant propaganda exercise in the 'war on terror' nothing more nothing less.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nick Cooper
Suspended
Suspended


Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

conspiracy analyst wrote:
Staraker wrote:
conspiracy analyst wrote:
Notice further down 16.5.3 that the 'forensic recovery' becomes a joint operation with SO13. In another thread it has been alleged by Staraker that the anti-terrorist police did not have jurisdiction over all these events
That'll be you lying again. In the "other thread" you erroneously claimed that "anti-terrorist police" have automatic authority over all other forces, and as somewhat lame justification cited the legislation that does nothing more than define how the non-territorial forces can request the assistence of territorial forces - and vice versa - and confirming that their officers have equal powers. Looking at 16.5.3, all is actually says is that the Directorate of Professional Standards and SO13 - both part of the MPS - were required to carry out the investigation together. Yet again, it seems that an understanding of the precise use of English lets your down.


Whereas they had none before by being assigned joint operational capability with the ability to shoot to kill and not be prosecuted, the local forces de facto have second role.

Prove it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nick Cooper
Suspended
Suspended


Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

conspiracy analyst wrote:
Staraker wrote:
conspiracy analyst wrote:
After having shot him they knew allegedly he was not a terrorist within 24 hours yet Brown want detention without trial for more than 50 days!!!

How could they know so quickly, unless it was a set up?
Well, duh! The Brazilian driving licence in his pocket.


So does that not make him an alleged terrorist.


No, it means they have a fast-track method of working out who the man they have just shot is. If I - God forbid - get shot by the police today, they will find various forms of ID on me that will allow me to identify me fairly quickly. They don't have to know who I am beforehand, in the bizarre manner you are claiming they did with de Menezes.

Quote:
So if we all are issued with ID cards we wont need to be detained for 56 days.

They knew who he was they were following him.


No, they knew who some of the them thought he was.

Quote:
This was a giant propaganda exercise in the 'war on terror' nothing more nothing less.


Which managed to convey the message, "we're a bunch of incompetents who shoot completely innocent people"? Yeah, that's great propaganda....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Staraker wrote:
conspiracy analyst wrote:
Staraker wrote:
conspiracy analyst wrote:
Notice further down 16.5.3 that the 'forensic recovery' becomes a joint operation with SO13. In another thread it has been alleged by Staraker that the anti-terrorist police did not have jurisdiction over all these events
That'll be you lying again. In the "other thread" you erroneously claimed that "anti-terrorist police" have automatic authority over all other forces, and as somewhat lame justification cited the legislation that does nothing more than define how the non-territorial forces can request the assistence of territorial forces - and vice versa - and confirming that their officers have equal powers. Looking at 16.5.3, all is actually says is that the Directorate of Professional Standards and SO13 - both part of the MPS - were required to carry out the investigation together. Yet again, it seems that an understanding of the precise use of English lets your down.


Whereas they had none before by being assigned joint operational capability with the ability to shoot to kill and not be prosecuted, the local forces de facto have second role.

Prove it.


SO13 I presume are an armed wing?
By creating joint operation capability that implies at the level of commanders does it not?

The rank and file bobby seeing something dodgy will be overriden by his/her commander.

So if the armed wing bumps somenone off they take responsibility for the crime scene, erasing all possible traces of a murder investigation.

Recently there was a case in the media of a small boy who picked up the gun which his mother told him not to, which was buried in the garden for safekeeping from her boyfriend and shot his little sister. The boy said the gun fell and accidentally killed his sister. Forensic tests showed he was holding it to his sisters forehead.

How was De Menezes killed and under what circumstances and where exactly? All we have is police reports and we do not know. Nor will we.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Staraker wrote:


No, it means they have a fast-track method of working out who the man they have just shot is. If I - God forbid - get shot by the police today, they will find various forms of ID on me that will allow me to identify me fairly quickly. They don't have to know who I am beforehand, in the bizarre manner you are claiming they did with de Menezes.

Quote:
So if we all are issued with ID cards we wont need to be detained for 56 days.

They knew who he was they were following him.


No, they knew who some of the them thought he was.

Quote:
This was a giant propaganda exercise in the 'war on terror' nothing more nothing less.


Which managed to convey the message, "we're a bunch of incompetents who shoot completely innocent people"? Yeah, that's great propaganda....


No you mistake the context.
7/7 has just happened. Not many believe the story. Before they question it De Menezes occurs. The 24hour embedded media run stories about a man with wires who ran past the police, wore a thick jacket, had wires coming out of his vest, looked arab etc.

The point isn't in the detail. Its for it to be in the news 24/7.

Much like the Stephen Lawrence event. Going on more than a decade.
Every propaganda exercise needs to have a case.
Racism=Lawrence events.
Homophobia= Pub bomb in Soho.
War on Terror and Policing=De Menezes shooting.
War on Terror=7/7, Scotland Airport.

Which of the above events are real and happened as reported and which are propaganda exercises are the burning questions of out time.

By promoting and accepting the OCT on a few of the above or on all of them you do yourself no favours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
numeral
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 500
Location: South London

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SO12 were the Special Branch.
SO13 were the Anti-terrorist Branch.
They have now been combined into SO15, the Counter-Terrorism Command.
The specialist firearms unit is CO19.

Quote:
Central Operations (CO), commanded by Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur, is responsible for pan-London units that support the BOCUs and specialist units. Units in this department include Central Communications Command (CO10), including Metcall (C3i), Public Order Operational Command Unit (CO11), Olympics Preparation Operational Command Unit (CO12), Traffic Operational Command Unit (CO15), Transport Operational Command Unit (CO17), Operational Support OCU (CO18) comprising Mounted Branch, Air Support Unit, Dog Support Unit and Marine Support Unit, the Specialist Firearms Command (CO19), and the Territorial Support Group (CO20).


Quote:
Specialist Operations

Specialist Operations (SO), commanded by Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman, is responsible for units that undertake tasks of national importance. This department has recently undergone restructuring and now consists of three commands, known as: Protection Command, Security Command and Counter Terrorism Command.

The Protection Command, headed by Commander Peter Loughborough, is divided into four sections. The first section is Specialist Protection, who are responsible for the personal protection of the Prime Minister and other government ministers. The next section is Royalty Protection, who are responsible for the personal protection of members of the Royal Family and the protection of royal residences. The next section is the Diplomatic Protection Group, who are responsible for the protection of embassies and the personal protection of visiting heads of state and heads of government. The final section is the Palace of Westminster (Houses of Parliament) section, who are responsible for patrolling the building and conducting searches of visitors.

The Security Command, headed by Commander Ian Carter, is responsible for security at Heathrow Airport and London City Airport. Their duties include patrolling the interior and exterior of airport buildings and the local area.

The Counter Terrorism Command, also known as SO15 and headed by Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke (who is also the National Co-ordinator of Terrorist Investigations), was formed by the merger of Special Branch and the Anti-Terrorist Branch. The priority of this command is to keep the public safe and to do everything they can to ensure that London remains a hostile environment for terrorists. Their responsibilities include: bringing to justice anyone engaged in terrorist or related offences, providing a proactive and reactive response to terrorist and related offences, preventing and disrupting terrorist activity, gathering and exploiting intelligence on terrorism and extremism in London, to assist the British Security Service (MI5) and the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), and to assist the National Co-ordinator of Terrorist Investigations (DAC Peter Clarke) outside London.

_________________
Follow the numbers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
conspiracy analyst
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 2274

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

numeral wrote:
SO12 were the Special Branch.
SO13 were the Anti-terrorist Branch.
They have now been combined into SO15, the Counter-Terrorism Command.
The specialist firearms unit is CO19.
[/quote]

Who directs CO19?
The Metropolitan Police?

A joint operation on paper but in practice one must override the other.

The local bobby cannot be in charge of terror subjects.

Staraker has argued the anti-terrorist police are no different from the normal police. So why did a specialist unit bump off De Menezes according to the OCT?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15953
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Transcript: letter from David Davis to Jacqui Smith calling for Sir Ian Blair to resign
Here is the transcript written by the Shadow Home Secretary David Davis to Jacqui Smith, calling for Sir Ian Blair to resign.


Dear Jacqui

JEAN CHARLES DE MENEZES - GUILTY VERDICT

Yesterday the Metropolitan Police Force commanded by Commissioner Sir Ian Blair was convicted of criminal breach of duties for the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Sir Ian Blair responded by saying that he would not resign because the "case thus provides no evidence at all of systematic failure by the Metropolitan Police Service and I therefore intend to continue to lead the Met".

In fact, the trial judge, Mr Justice Henriques, noted a series of serious failures, including the failure to deploy the firearms team "as a matter of urgency' for which 'no explanation has been forthcoming".



He regretted the failure to make a positive identification of Mr de Menezes, noting the "serious failure of accurate communication which has not been explained".

He also referred to "the failure to have a firearms team in place and thus the failure to stop Mr de Menezes before he boarded public transport" and "the failure of the control room to adequately receive or have communicated to them broadcasts from the surveillance team".

He concluded: "This was a corporate failing with a number of failures contributing to the ultimate tragedy."

Ken Livingston said on the Today program this morning: "The system did fail. I can't say to you for certain but I am pretty certain that if we had police radios that worked underground, Jean Charles de Menezes ... good chance he would be alive today."

He went on to blame under-funding of the police for the failure of the system.

Sir Ian Blair himself publicly stated on the morning of 7 July 2005 that the Met had "set the gold standard in counter-terrorism" (Today Program, BBC, 7 July 2005).

This clearly indicates that Sir Ian believed that the organisation, procedures and systems in place were as rigorous, robust and effective as they possibly could be.

However, the criminal trial illustrated failings of preparation, organisation, resourcing, equipment, command, control and communication that directly conflict with the Commissioner's judgment.

Mr Justice Henriques spoke for many of us when he expressed his hope that the further necessary lessons would be learned.

However, in dealing with national security, the public expect the police to exercise foresight - not just hindsight - in designing our strategy and securing our capability to respond to the terrorist threat we now face.

I regret to say that in view of the systemic failures that led to the death of Mr de Menezes, the public can have little confidence that Sir Ian Blair is the right person to ensure those vital lessons are learnt.

In your response, you said that Sir Ian had your "full confidence and our thanks and support". I would ask you to reconsider that judgment in the interests of public safety and confidence.

The trial shed light on serial, systemic errors that the judge described as a "corporate failing".

We now need the right leadership, at every level, in order to restore public confidence.

The judge, opposition parties and the mayor of London have acknowledged the systemic failure for which only the Commissioner can bear responsibility.

I put it to you in the strongest terms that the most important and immediate action that the Home Secretary can and should take, in these circumstances, is to replace Sir Ian Blair with a Commissioner who can command the force's confidence, restore the public's trust and protect the nation's security.

Yours sincerely,

David Davis

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_artic le_id=491395&in_page_id=1770

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
insidejob
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 474
Location: North London

PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:52 am    Post subject: Not a strategy of tension Reply with quote

I don't think de Menezes killing was a strategy of tension. This means the only reasons he was killed was because he had some relationship to 7/7 or 21/7. He had been used by MI5 as part of their operations, despite what the family and campaign says.

Why kill a Brazilian as part of the strategy of tension? Surely, they'd have killed a UK Muslim, a UK black person or, even better, a UK white person. If the white population is the most important target for the strategy of tension, then shooting a Brazilian wouldn't cut it.

The only reason to kill a Brazilian would be to soften up the public before ‘a tragic accident’ leads to the killing of a Muslim or white citizen. But this is unlikely.

But it must be that the de Menezes killing was deliberate rather than a c***-up.

We are told that the police had an ID of Osman that led him to the south London block of flats. That is, they had his address. So, why didn't they raid his flat? Why do surveillance?

We are told that it was reasonable for the police to kill de Menezes because they feared he may have been Osman and feared he could have killed many people. But what happened on the tube?

A surveillance officer grabbed de Menezes and held his arms so that he could not detonate any bomb. So, when the firearms officers turned up, de Menezes was not a danger. Did the surveillance officer say, 'shoot him, he may have a bomb'. No! Who's job was it to determine whether de Menezes was a threat. The surveillance officer and not the firearms officers. So, did the surveillance feel that shooting the suspect was the right policy? No. He was as shocked as the passengers (well almost).

Did the firearms officer do anything to determine whether the suspect was, in fact, Osman? No. Did they ask him, 'are you Osman'? No. They just shot him.

Are we really supposed to think that the police's operational anti-terror policy is: if you are following a dangerous terrorist who could kill a lot of people, but you don't know whether he’s the terrorist and you don’t know whether he could kill a lot of people and you feel a bit stressed, pump seven bullets in his head. So, why didn't the firearms officers give evidence? Why were they let off?

My 'de Menezes must have been involved in 7/7' is an unsatisfactory explanation but so is the strategy of tension.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From this Panorama Press Release we learn that Operation Kratos was "signed off" at MI5 on 22 January 2003

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2006/03_march/0 8/panorama.shtml

Jean Charles de Menezes was executed on 22.7.2005

Kratos had been "live" for 911 days . . .

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Hearing Could Decide Met Chief's Future

Updated:08:30, Thursday November 22, 2007

The future of under-fire Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair could be decided today.

Members of London's police watchdog will hold a vote of confidence in the UK's most senior officer.

The extraordinary meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority's 23 members follows the conviction of the force for breaching health and safety laws over the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005.

An Old Bailey jury found the Metropolitan Police endangered the public as officers hunted on-the-run suicide bombers in the aftermath of the failed July 21 attacks.

The Commissioner has so far received the backing of Prime Minster Gordon Brown and London Mayor Ken Livingstone.

But his critics, led by Shadow Home Secretary David Davis, have repeatedly said his position is untenable in the wake of the Stockwell failures.

Elected members of the London Assembly dealt a hammer blow to Sir Ian earlier this month when a majority of members agreed a vote of no confidence.

And the belated publication of an independent inquiry into the death of Mr de Menezes handed his opponents even more critical material.


http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1293828,00.html

Sir Ian Bliar has been in the job 33 months and 3 weeks.

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From the MPA:

Quote:
November Full Authority and Extraordinary Meeting

58/07
16 November 2007

A meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) will be held in meeting room 1 (ground floor), 10 Dean Farrar Street, London SW1 on Thursday 22 November 2007 at 10.00 a.m.

The start of this meeting may be delayed due to an extraordinary meeting of the Authority to be held at 9.00am. This will discuss the implications of the guilty verdict in the Health & Safety trial of the Crown vs the Office of the Commissioner.

Len Duvall, MPA Chair, said:

“This is the first practicable opportunity for the Authority to discuss issues relevant to the Health and Safety trial verdict when all members can be present for such an important item of business.

“I have been mindful that members needed adequate time to read and reflect on the contents of the Stockwell 1 report, published on Thursday 8 November 2007, which will obviously be very relevant to the subject matter of the meeting.”

At the Full Authority meeting members will receive a preliminary report requested by the Chair of the MPA from the Commissioner to outline new safeguards put in place for the use of corporate credit cards.

Len Duvall continued:

“I have asked for a report from the Commissioner to clarify policies regarding Met corporate credit cards in response to long running concerns raised by the MPA Corporate Governance committee and current issues raised in the media.

“The Authority needs to be assured that rigorous management supervision is in place to enforce existing regulations and to address the following issues; that any evidence of misconduct will be robustly pursued, all outstanding returns are fully detailed, all cards issued that are not specifically required for organisational purposes will be removed, reconciliations are completed speedily and mechanisms are put in place to ensure that future arrangements rule out abuse.

“The MPA Corporate Governance committee will be scrutinising ongoing work and a full report detailing the progress of our concerns will be prepared for the Authority in the New Year.”

Other items on the agenda include:

* MPS Taser trial – update report
* 2008-11 budget submission (Corporate Business Plan)
* Operation Ribble report – ‘Cash for Honours’ inquiry
* C3i/airwave update report

Commissioner Sir Ian Blair will give an update on operational policing issues in London and present a written performance report. Please note: the Commissioner's update will take place as near to 12:00 as possible, discussion permitting.
Notes to editors

1. Details of Metropolitan Police Authority processes, including extraordinary meetings, vote of no confidence and suspending standing orders can be found at:
www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2007/07-054.htm

2. The committee papers for the Full Authority meeting can be found at:
www.mpa.gov.uk/committees/mpa/2007/071122/default.htm

3. The agenda for the extraordinary meeting can be found at:
www.mpa.gov.uk/committees/mpa/2007/071122-egm/default.htm

3. Confidential anti-terrorist hotline: 0800 789 321

4. Crimestoppers: 0800 555 111
Further media information

For further information, please contact the MPA press office


http://www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2007/07-058.htm

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian Bliar wins vote of no confidence at MPA.

Bliar said:

"I am a man of honour. I hope this vote ends months of speculation"

15 against the no-confidence motion
7 in favour
1 abstention

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nambo
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 32

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Disco_Destroyer wrote:
I did see the article, I am not saying I believe the MSN story just adding it for interest sake. I think the story of Dum Dums is enough to say the official story is at odds? Unless of course its standard for cops to carry them Surprised One would have thought 7 bullets were plenty, I'd say one Dum Dum would also do the trick, obviously they didn't want a surviver!!


When I had access to a secure Police carpark, I once saw police bullets left on the passenger seat of an unmarked police car.

I was somewhat shocked to see they where Dum Dum bullets.

Not to say all police bullets are, but the only ones I ever saw where.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mark_e
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 155
Location: Ipswich

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The following has just struck me about all this.

When i was younger, i used to shoot target rifle. for practice for one competition we used to shoot polo mints at 25m. the competition involved shooting at a landscape drawing at 25m, small circles on the drawing. you could just about make out things like a church spire, your spotted would say things like '9 o'clock from the clock tower, half way up' it was a really interesting thing to participate in

this was not really the top notch standard and i was not in a stress situation i guess, but there are two things that stand out. Keen eyesight and identification skills are key. in order to be a 'sharpshooter', 'marksman' or 'sniper' (depending on how it's spun) these two aspects would surely be trained as much as, if not more than actually pulling the trigger, which is in essence the easy bit. now imagine doing this in the public domain and getting it wrong. the risks are so immense that correct target identification becomes the most important aspect of the job, hence surely the thing which on which the most training time is spent.

And they got it wrong?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mark_e
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 155
Location: Ipswich

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
When I had access to a secure Police carpark, I once saw police bullets left on the passenger seat of an unmarked police car.

I was somewhat shocked to see they where Dum Dum bullets.

Not to say all police bullets are, but the only ones I ever saw where.


That really surprises me. i am somewhat shocked, although maybe not altogether surprised, that ammunition would be left laying around as most armouries would be signing in and out exact numbers of rounds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nick Cooper
Suspended
Suspended


Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 329

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nambo wrote:
Disco_Destroyer wrote:
I did see the article, I am not saying I believe the MSN story just adding it for interest sake. I think the story of Dum Dums is enough to say the official story is at odds? Unless of course its standard for cops to carry them Surprised One would have thought 7 bullets were plenty, I'd say one Dum Dum would also do the trick, obviously they didn't want a surviver!!


When I had access to a secure Police carpark, I once saw police bullets left on the passenger seat of an unmarked police car.

I was somewhat shocked to see they where Dum Dum bullets.

Not to say all police bullets are, but the only ones I ever saw where.

British police have routinely used semi-jacketed soft-points for years, so the introduction of hollow-points specifically for Kratos does not represented the radical change in practice suggested by much of the media reporting. Really they've just shifted from one type of expanding ammunition to another.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:35 pm    Post subject: IPCC Jean Charles de Menezes murderers walk. Again. Reply with quote

IPCC

Quote:
21 December 2007

IPCC decision on Stockwell shooting discipline

No disciplinary action will be taken against four senior Metropolitan Police Service officers as a result of the fatal shooting of Jean Charles De Menezes. All disciplinary reviews have now been concluded.

The four senior officers are Deputy Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick and three officers identified as Silver, Trojan 84 and Trojan 80.


Independent Police Complaints Commission chair Nick Hardwick took the decision after considering the views of the Metropolitan Police Service, the Metropolitan Police Authority and the solicitor for the family of Jean Charles de Menezes.

The health and safety trial verdict made it clear that mistakes were made that could have been avoided. The issue considered by the IPCC was whether those mistakes amounted to personal misconduct.

Planning and management were central to Deputy Assistant Commissioner Dick's responsibilities on that day. The IPCC considered whether DAC Dick was responsible for failures in the planning or management of the operation that amounted to a disciplinary offence and which led to the conviction of the Office of the Commissioner for the Metropolis. The trial jury's response to this, having considered all the evidence, in their rider was unequivocal – in reaching their verdict they attached "no personal culpability to Commander Dick."

The IPCC cannot foresee any circumstances in which new evidence might emerge which would cause any disciplinary tribunal to disregard the jury's rider.

The responsibilities of DAC Dick and Silver, Trojan 84 and Trojan 80 were intertwined. The IPCC cannot see how any disciplinary tribunal could conclude that although no personal blame is attached to DAC Dick, it could attach to the other three officers.

-ends-

Notes for editors

The Metropolitan Police Authority announced that it was not recommending any disciplinary action against DAC Dick when the IPCC published its full report of the Stockwell One investigation on 8 November (PR 1005.) The IPCC received the Metropolitan Police Service's final memorandum (dated 19 November) with its recommendations about discipline regarding Silver, Trojan 80 and Trojan 84 on 23 November. Nick Hardwick wrote to the lawyer for the family of Jean Charles De Menezes on 7 December seeking their views.

The IPCC has sent separate letters, setting out the reasons in full, to the MPS, MPA and the family's lawyer.

Silver and Trojans 80 and 84 were the pseudonyms adopted throughout the Old Bailey trial in October.

On 11 May 2007 the IPCC announced that 11 other officers would not face disciplinary action - see IPCC press release PR808.

The IPCC has overall responsibility for the police complaints system. Since April 2006 it has taken on responsibility for similar, serious complaints against HM Revenue and Customs and the Serious Organised Crime Agency in England and Wales.

The IPCC has the task of increasing public confidence in the complaint systems and aims to make investigations more open, timely, proportionate and fair.

The 15 Commissioners who run the IPCC guarantee its independence and by law can never have served as police officers. No Commissioner has worked for HM Revenue and Customs. They are supported by more than more than 200 independent IPCC investigators, casework managers and other specialists.

Since April 1 2004 the IPCC has used its powers to begin 189 independent and 567 managed investigations into the most serious complaints against the police. It has set new standards for police forces to improve the way the public's complaints are handled. The Commission also handles appeals by the public about the way their complaint was dealt with by the local force.

The IPCC is committed to getting closer to the communities it serves. Its Commissioners and staff are based in IPCC regional offices in Cardiff, Coalville, London and Sale plus a sub office in Wakefield.

The IPCC website is constantly updated at www.ipcc.gov.uk or members of the public can contact the IPCC on 08453 002 002.

For further information please contact:
Richard Offer, Head of Media
Tel: 020 7166 3214
Fax: 020 7166 3514
Mob 07710 381890
Journalists out of hours: 07717 851 157
Email: richard.offer@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Press release from Justice4Jean

Quote:
Dear friends

Hope this finds you well.

The IPCC have just announced that none of the four senior officers involved in the botched police operation that killed Jean will face disciplinary charges.

In May 2007 the IPCC announced it would not be taking disciplinary action against 11 of the 15 officers served with Regulation 9 notices during their investigations. Today's announcement deals with the remaining four officers and means that no police officer will face any disciplinary action over the shooting. All the police officers involved in the case have now been let off scot-free.

Below you will find the press release we released today. We'll be stepping up the campaign for justice in 2008 and hope to have the inquest into Jean's soon. This will finally be the opportunity for the family to ask the questions they have wanted and fully examine all the issues raised by the case.

Justice4JeanFamily Campaign Press Release

21 December 2007

MENEZES FAMILY BRAND IPCC DISCIPLINARY DECISION A 'SCANDAL'

The family of Jean Charles de Menezes reacted with anger today at the decision by the IPCC not to recommend disciplinary action against the four senior officers involved in the botched anti-terrorism operation that led to the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes.

Vivian Figuierdo, cousin of Jean, who lived with him at the time of the shooting said:

"The decision today is a scandal. It is entirely premature for the IPCC to do this before an inquest where vital evidence about the actions of these officers could come to light. Sadly we have come to expect this from the IPCC – they have done nothing to hold the police to account for the killing of an innocent man. Time after time they simply bow down to police pressure and protect the status quo. If the jury at the health and safety trial found the police guilty of catastrophic errors – why is it that no police officer is being held individually accountable? This decision comes at the end of a very difficult year for us; to be told, just before Christmas that not a single police officer will be held responsible has ruined our festive season when we have already suffered enough. It's the worst Christmas present we could get"

Harriet Wistrich, solicitor for the Menezes family said

"Twice the IPCC have invited us to make representations as to the timing of a decision in relation to discipline. On both occasions we strongly urged the IPCC not to announce the decision prior to all the evidence being explored. It is disappointing that the IPCC have disregarded the serious objections raised and that this decision is made before the family's legal representatives have been given any disclosure of the evidence other than the IPCC report. We fear that if new evidence emerges at the inquest it may be harder to bring disciplinary decisions in the future as officers could argue abuse of process"

A spokesperson for the Justice4Jean campaign said

"It is nothing short of a public scandal that despite two lengthy and critical IPCC reports and a damning jury verdict at the Old Bailey, the IPCC and the MPA still cannot find any reason to bring disciplinary action against a single person for the shooting dead of Jean Charles de Menezes. The IPCC has shown it is no better than the discredited Police Complaints Authority that it replaced in holding police to account. The cynical and disgusting timing of this announcement is a clear attempt to bury bad news. It is clearly time for the government to review the effectiveness of the IPCC"

ENDS

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jean Charles de Menezes was executed 911 days after Operation Kratos was signed off on 22.1.2003

Check it yourself.

http://www.timeanddate.com/date/duration.html

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
On Gardening Leave


Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why can't we know who Silver, Trojan 84 and Trojan 80 were?

Why are those details kept secret in an advanced, liberal democracy?

Informative profile of the, possibly paternally challenged and uncommonly purposeful former Head of the Diversity Directorate at New Scotland Yard, responsible for implementing the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report and the oh so effective Operation Trident and of course who is entirely "not responsible", or is that, irresponsible, for the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes, Cressida Dick here

Promoted to MPS Commander on 9.11 (2000) and then left, apparently, to achieve her M.Phil. in Criminology at Cambridge and returned to protecting us all in July 2001. In 8 months?

Did you know that Cressida Dick is an "Elder" of the International Institute for Critical Incident Decision Making? as is the ubiquitous David Veness CBE, QPM, M.A. MLL

Not bad for a girl who worked down the chip shop, thinks she's a copper now is it?

_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alulim
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Posts: 290
Location: New Albion

PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some people here in the US have suspected Jean Charles de Menezes was specifically targeted. From what I've read of the killing, it seems the official story is a blatant lie.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Unexplained Deaths, 'Suicidings', 'Accidents', Plots & Assassinations All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 7 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group