View Full Version : More London Bombs
4 more London bombs (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4703777.stm)
To be honest I didn't think for one minute that 7/7 was gonna be the only attack on London.
I'm watching it on the news now. I'm not too sure on the facts at the minute though.
F-ck Casey
07-21-2005, 02:13 PM
Man, they really hate you guys. They didn't even do that to America when they attacked us.
DiSiLLUSiON
07-21-2005, 02:19 PM
Probably some copycats?
Link04
07-21-2005, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by DiSiLLUSiON@Jul 21 2005, 02:19 PM
Probably some copycats?
Could be.
Dave+Kay
07-21-2005, 02:29 PM
They wern't bombs. not from what i last heard. they're fakes. bombs with detonators but no explosives. the bangs people heard where the detonators going off.
The detonators went off but there were no explosives in the bombs. All that there was was the smell of burning rubber, according to witness accounts. One person was hurt.
It's good to hear this wasn't a large-scale thing like the 7/7 bombings, but it really makes you scrutinize just how much Britain's security forces have tightened up at subway stations. Because of their carelessness, we could've had another couple of hundred people dead or injured. They need to step up their efforts at security in the tunnels.
Dave+Kay
07-21-2005, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by Mark@Jul 21 2005, 02:51 PM
The detonators went off but there were no explosives in the bombs. All that there was was the smell of burning rubber, according to witness accounts. One person was hurt.
It's good to hear this wasn't a large-scale thing like the 7/7 bombings, but it really makes you scrutinize just how much Britain's security forces have tightened up at subway stations. Because of their carelessness, we could've had another couple of hundred people dead or injured. They need to step up their efforts at security in the tunnels.
that's what i thought. how could that happen exactly 2 weeks after 7/7. our security should be better than that. it could have been much, much worse.
Messy Marj
07-21-2005, 03:25 PM
Jesus. Fucking terrorists. <.<
esaul17
07-21-2005, 04:21 PM
Is this a coincidence? 7/7. 7+7=14. 14 days. 14 days=2 weeks. This happened two weeks after 7/7.
OMFG! Conspiracy!!!!!!!!
Gluez
07-21-2005, 04:49 PM
OMG! Why do terrorist wanna bomb London? Did London did anything wrong? Terrorist s**k man. They don't feel pity to others. F**k. Come bomb my house assh**le!
Originally posted by Gluez@Jul 21 2005, 02:19 PM
OMG! Why do terrorist wanna bomb London? Did London did anything wrong? Terrorist s**k man. They don't feel pity to others. F**k. Come bomb my house assh**le!
One word: Iraq.
And I'm not going to delve into it any further.
Y2JMeteora2006
07-21-2005, 05:08 PM
I fear that this is gonna get worse than what it already is. A family memeber was in London when the Furst set went off. She survived though and i thank GOd for it.
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
Originally posted by esaul17@Jul 21 2005, 05:21 PM
Is this a coincidence? 7/7. 7+7=14. 14 days. 14 days=2 weeks. This happened two weeks after 7/7.
OMFG! Conspiracy!!!!!!!!
You probably over analysed it a little bit there.
We need x-ray screens in train stations, like in Israel. With those it shouldn't be too hard to find bombs on people... they're part timers with raw materials, not James Bond.
Originally posted by Dean+Jul 21 2005, 05:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dean @ Jul 21 2005, 05:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--esaul17@Jul 21 2005, 05:21 PM
Is this a coincidence? 7/7. 7+7=14. 14 days. 14 days=2 weeks. This happened two weeks after 7/7.
OMFG! Conspiracy!!!!!!!!
You probably over analysed it a little bit there.
We need x-ray screens in train stations, like in Israel. With those it shouldn't be too hard to find bombs on people... they're part timers with raw materials, not James Bond. [/b][/quote]
No because it would slow things down therefor making ques of people therefor making all those people vunerable.Percides there has to be a limit to security otherwise they'll start fucking putting cctv in your own homes and fucked up shit like that.
Originally posted by Hellflame+Jul 21 2005, 06:51 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hellflame @ Jul 21 2005, 06:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 21 2005, 05:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--esaul17@Jul 21 2005, 05:21 PM
Is this a coincidence? 7/7. 7+7=14. 14 days. 14 days=2 weeks. This happened two weeks after 7/7.
OMFG! Conspiracy!!!!!!!!
You probably over analysed it a little bit there.
We need x-ray screens in train stations, like in Israel. With those it shouldn't be too hard to find bombs on people... they're part timers with raw materials, not James Bond.
No because it would slow things down therefor making ques of people therefor making all those people vunerable.Percides there has to be a limit to security otherwise they'll start fucking putting cctv in your own homes and fucked up shit like that. [/b][/quote]
It's supposed to be working well in the countries who already use screens, and their major rail systems are probably just as busy as the UK's.
Originally posted by Dean+Jul 21 2005, 05:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dean @ Jul 21 2005, 05:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 21 2005, 05:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--esaul17@Jul 21 2005, 05:21 PM
Is this a coincidence? 7/7. 7+7=14. 14 days. 14 days=2 weeks. This happened two weeks after 7/7.
OMFG! Conspiracy!!!!!!!!
You probably over analysed it a little bit there.
We need x-ray screens in train stations, like in Israel. With those it shouldn't be too hard to find bombs on people... they're part timers with raw materials, not James Bond.
No because it would slow things down therefor making ques of people therefor making all those people vunerable.Percides there has to be a limit to security otherwise they'll start fucking putting cctv in your own homes and fucked up shit like that.
It's supposed to be working well in the countries who already use screens, and their major rail systems are probably just as busy as the UK's. [/b][/quote]
I doubt it since London has the 2nd busiest transport network in the world.
Dave+Kay
07-21-2005, 06:29 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame+Jul 21 2005, 05:59 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hellflame @ Jul 21 2005, 05:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 21 2005, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by -Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 21 2005, 05:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--esaul17@Jul 21 2005, 05:21 PM
Is this a coincidence? 7/7. 7+7=14. 14 days. 14 days=2 weeks. This happened two weeks after 7/7.
OMFG! Conspiracy!!!!!!!!
You probably over analysed it a little bit there.
We need x-ray screens in train stations, like in Israel. With those it shouldn't be too hard to find bombs on people... they're part timers with raw materials, not James Bond.
No because it would slow things down therefor making ques of people therefor making all those people vunerable.Percides there has to be a limit to security otherwise they'll start fucking putting cctv in your own homes and fucked up shit like that.
It's supposed to be working well in the countries who already use screens, and their major rail systems are probably just as busy as the UK's.
I doubt it since London has the 2nd busiest transport network in the world. [/b][/quote]
yeah. putting screens in on the underground would be a good idea. but impractical. i would slow everything down so much. so many people come and go off the underground that it's going to be hard to do anything.
arT saveS
07-21-2005, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
I know I quoted your entire post, but I'm referring to 4 words. "...terrorism will be stopped."
Terrorism will never be stopped. Death, war...feuding will always go on between different people. There is no stopping something as large as terrorism. Unless everyone except the Aussies and the Swiss die, terrorism will always be around.
In order to get to one of the Cubs' game, I needed to take a train. Unfortunally, the Red Line was closed due to bomb threats that were made earlier. I ended up paying $53 in taxi fair.
Anything can happen considering the fact that there is no security in train stations. Like Dean said, they need to get X-Rays or something along the lines.
They tightened security and it still happened? Someone must really not like England to try and set off 4 more bombs
Originally posted by arT saveS+Jul 21 2005, 07:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (arT saveS @ Jul 21 2005, 07:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
I know I quoted your entire post, but I'm referring to 4 words. "...terrorism will be stopped."
Terrorism will never be stopped. Death, war...feuding will always go on between different people. There is no stopping something as large as terrorism. Unless everyone except the Aussies and the Swiss die, terrorism will always be around. [/b][/quote]
It probably wont happen in our life time but it will happen,afterall there have been plenty of time periods where the world has been a peaceful place.
arT saveS
07-21-2005, 09:48 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame+Jul 21 2005, 04:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hellflame @ Jul 21 2005, 04:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -arT saveS@Jul 21 2005, 07:07 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
I know I quoted your entire post, but I'm referring to 4 words. "...terrorism will be stopped."
Terrorism will never be stopped. Death, war...feuding will always go on between different people. There is no stopping something as large as terrorism. Unless everyone except the Aussies and the Swiss die, terrorism will always be around.
It probably wont happen in our life time but it will happen,afterall there have been plenty of time periods where the world has been a peaceful place. [/b][/quote]
Well I remember, some 4.9 billion years ago, before there was even Earth, there was quite a large period of silence and peace. But ever since humans came to be, or even dinosaurs, there has been violence, and I can't think of any period of time between when the dinosaurs roamed the planet and humans came to rule, where peace truly existed.
Ander
07-21-2005, 09:48 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame+Jul 21 2005, 01:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hellflame @ Jul 21 2005, 01:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -arT saveS@Jul 21 2005, 07:07 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
I know I quoted your entire post, but I'm referring to 4 words. "...terrorism will be stopped."
Terrorism will never be stopped. Death, war...feuding will always go on between different people. There is no stopping something as large as terrorism. Unless everyone except the Aussies and the Swiss die, terrorism will always be around.
It probably wont happen in our life time but it will happen,afterall there have been plenty of time periods where the world has been a peaceful place. [/b][/quote]
End of terrorism:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1805000/images/_1807666_nuclear300.jpg
iam not sure of the facts because i havent been in today but i heard the news on the radio and this makes me feel even worse.
people in london will be wondering what to do with themselves, living in fear. its just not on.
Burningsoul
07-21-2005, 10:03 PM
they really do need screens or somethin down in the tunnels, they do it in airports so why not stations, sure it would slow things down but a delay is better than deaths.
And about this hole ''end of terrorism'' it will never end, as long as people have their own believes, religions etc you are always goin to have people dissagreein and some people will take it further resultin in violence and terrorism.
Originally posted by Ander+Jul 21 2005, 09:48 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ander @ Jul 21 2005, 09:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by -arT saveS@Jul 21 2005, 07:07 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
I know I quoted your entire post, but I'm referring to 4 words. "...terrorism will be stopped."
Terrorism will never be stopped. Death, war...feuding will always go on between different people. There is no stopping something as large as terrorism. Unless everyone except the Aussies and the Swiss die, terrorism will always be around.
It probably wont happen in our life time but it will happen,afterall there have been plenty of time periods where the world has been a peaceful place.
End of terrorism:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1805000/images/_1807666_nuclear300.jpg [/b][/quote]
Thats bound to happen sooner or later :lol:
Whimsicality
07-22-2005, 01:03 AM
Originally posted by Hellflame+Jul 21 2005, 05:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hellflame @ Jul 21 2005, 05:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -arT saveS@Jul 21 2005, 07:07 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 21 2005, 12:44 PM
I'm not gonna say that we deserved this however much much much worse things happen in the middle east that both English and American troops have done.
Whats fucked up is that everyone now fears going on the Underground,all this bullshit is just making people afraid,cowards make people feel afraid in an effort to force their spirits to submit into fear however Londoner's spirits will not be broken and we will not give in to fear.It'll be a struggle to get used to shit like this happening but terrorism will be stopped.
I know I quoted your entire post, but I'm referring to 4 words. "...terrorism will be stopped."
Terrorism will never be stopped. Death, war...feuding will always go on between different people. There is no stopping something as large as terrorism. Unless everyone except the Aussies and the Swiss die, terrorism will always be around.
It probably wont happen in our life time but it will happen,afterall there have been plenty of time periods where the world has been a peaceful place. [/b][/quote]
Or so say the history books :)
It may wax and wane, but I can't imagine terrorism going away. I'm not saying peace isn't a noble hope, but violence will never be abolished from the Earth.
Dave+Kay
07-22-2005, 10:37 AM
Ok. my dad just told me that there was more 'troube'. Police were checking bags at a checkpoint and someone ran away. the chalneged him twice (or three times. i can't remember) then shot him. that's all i know. also the bombs yesterday wern't fake. they had the same amount of explovies in the as the 7/7 bombs, they just failed to detonate properly. That is what my newspaper (the telegraph) says anyway.
LONDON - Police shot and killed a man wearing a thick coat at a London subway station Friday, a day after the city was hit by its second wave of terrorist attacks in two weeks.
The man died after being shot by officers at the Stockwell subway station in south London, police said.
Passengers said the man, described as South Asian, raised suspicion wearing a winter coat in the heat of summer. Most said he wore a backpack, according to Reuters, reminding many of images of the four suicide bombers behind both the July 7 and Thursday's attacks.
Witnesses said he ran onto a train at Stockwell station, police chased him, he tripped, and police then shot him.
"They pushed him onto the floor and unloaded five shots into him. He's dead," witness Mark Whitby told the British Broadcasting Corp. "He looked like a cornered fox. He looked petrified."
Another witness spoke of the scene just outside the station.
"I was about to go in when I saw a lot of people coming out. They looked shocked. There was a bit of panic. The guy I spoke to said, 'I've just seen someone shot'," said Andrew Wajnowski, 18, a part-time kitchen boy.
"I saw three people shoot at an Asian guy who was wearing a rucksack."
Police said the man was a suspect in the attacks at Thursday lunchtime that caused chaos but killed no one in an apparently failed bid to repeat suicide bombings which killed 52 two weeks earlier.
Alistair Drummond, of the London Ambulance Service, said paramedics had been called to the station at 10:10 a.m.
Service on the Northern and Victoria Tube lines, which pass through Stockwell, was suspended because of the shooting, British Transport Police said. Stockwell is one station away from the Oval station, which was affected by Thursday's attacks.
Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8655541/)
Crazy! He was shot dead in front of all those people! I guess it's better for them to be traumatized instead of injured/dead, though.
User Name
07-22-2005, 06:49 PM
So he tripped and fell... Why didn't the police just cuff him there? I mean, was it really necessary to unload their guns on the guy when they had him where they wanted?
I can understand the circumstances, but still. This isn't right.
Dave+Kay
07-22-2005, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by Cameron@Jul 22 2005, 06:49 PM
So he tripped and fell... Why didn't the police just cuff him there? I mean, was it really necessary to unload their guns on the guy when they had him where they wanted?
I can understand the circumstances, but still. This isn't right.
yes. they have been told to shoot to kill on all possible threats because they are willing to die so are a threat at any time. no matter where they are. Basicly as long as they are in a position or state to detonate a bomb they are a threat.
Danielle
07-22-2005, 08:49 PM
Imagine if he was innocent.
He was found to be innocent.
Dave+Kay
07-22-2005, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame@Jul 22 2005, 08:50 PM
He was found to be innocent.
Not last i heard. last i heard he was strongly connected to the bombings. but even if he was, he had the chance. he should have stopped when he was chalenged. even though that sounds really hard but they can't afford to take risks.
i was in school when this happened , they let us skip the lesson and watch it on the big tv in the hall , i don't know how anyone could do anything like that.
Originally posted by Testorz+Jul 22 2005, 08:54 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Testorz @ Jul 22 2005, 08:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 22 2005, 08:50 PM
He was found to be innocent.
Not last i heard. last i heard he was strongly connected to the bombings. but even if he was, he had the chance. he should have stopped when he was chalenged. even though that sounds really hard but they can't afford to take risks. [/b][/quote]
Well the news are reporting now that he had no connection at all with any terrorist groups and had no explosives on him.
Danielle
07-23-2005, 09:10 PM
So an innocent man was killed because of some assumptions.
Originally posted by Danielle@Jul 23 2005, 09:10 PM
So an innocent man was killed because of some assumptions.
Basicly yeah
The dude who was killed was Brazilian and had a wife and kids,thats how fucked up it is.Its so fucking fucked up.
Danielle
07-24-2005, 11:27 AM
I'm glad someone else is pissed off about this,most of my family think it was justified because he could have been a terrorist but so could anyone!
Yeah well I'm mixed race and I carry a backpack around and i go on the Tube alot so maybe I'll get shot too.
I Don't Need No Accuser
07-24-2005, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame@Jul 24 2005, 12:33 PM
Yeah well I'm mixed race and I carry a backpack around and i go on the Tube alot so maybe I'll get shot too.
Well he was also wearing a winter jacket in summer. Why was he running in the first place? They said they chased him into the station.
Originally posted by I Don't Need No Accuser+Jul 24 2005, 03:19 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (I Don't Need No Accuser @ Jul 24 2005, 03:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 24 2005, 12:33 PM
Yeah well I'm mixed race and I carry a backpack around and i go on the Tube alot so maybe I'll get shot too.
Well he was also wearing a winter jacket in summer. Why was he running in the first place? They said they chased him into the station. [/b][/quote]
He was proven that he had NOTHING to do with anything involving terrorism,the day he was wearing a leather jacket the clouds were dark and it looked like it could piss down any second.
Danielle
07-24-2005, 04:55 PM
I think anyone would run if some normal clothed men were behind them with guns to be honest.
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Originally posted by Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks.
Originally posted by Mark+Jul 24 2005, 05:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark @ Jul 24 2005, 05:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks. [/b][/quote]
1. It wasn't the same Underground station that was bombed twice,as a matter of fact no station was bombed twice.
2. I'd bet my life on it that if you saw a number of tonk dudes running towards you with guns that you'd run too.
3. Why the hell would they wanna patrol that place anyway,I've been there,there's NOTHING there of any importance at all.
Originally posted by Mark+Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark @ Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks. [/b][/quote]
What would be wrong with running to get on a train you could potentially be late for? And if he was running because he saw the people approach him, I would rather run away and sort it out later instead of stopping to reason.
Originally posted by Dean+Jul 24 2005, 04:25 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dean @ Jul 24 2005, 04:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks.
What would be wrong with running to get on a train you could potentially be late for? And if he was running because he saw the people approach him, I would rather run away and sort it out later instead of stopping to reason. [/b][/quote]
Let's think of a hypothetical situation; You're a non-white person (unfortunately, police do racially stereotype) in a subway station that had just been attacked 2 times in the last two weeks, some policemen come up to you to ask you questions.
Do you; A: Run like hell, jumping over a turnstile, while police are in pursuit? or B: Answer the policemen's questions, knowing that you're innocent and the situation can be resolved?
I would pick B, even if I was late for a train. It's better than rousing the suspicions of policemen that are obviously on-edge.
I know you're against what the police did, and I am too. But to tell you the truth, this seems like he brought it on himself by his actions.
Originally posted by Mark+Jul 24 2005, 08:19 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark @ Jul 24 2005, 08:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 24 2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks.
What would be wrong with running to get on a train you could potentially be late for? And if he was running because he saw the people approach him, I would rather run away and sort it out later instead of stopping to reason.
Let's think of a hypothetical situation; You're a non-white person (unfortunately, police do racially stereotype) in a subway station that had just been attacked 2 times in the last two weeks, some policemen come up to you to ask you questions.
Do you; A: Run like hell, jumping over a turnstile, while police are in pursuit? or B: Answer the policemen's questions, knowing that you're innocent and the situation can be resolved?
I would pick B, even if I was late for a train. It's better than rousing the suspicions of policemen that are obviously on-edge.
I know you're against what the police did, and I am too. But to tell you the truth, this seems like he brought it on himself by his actions. [/b][/quote]
I stand by what I said if the officers in question weren't wearing uniforms. Were they?
Originally posted by Dean+Jul 24 2005, 04:53 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dean @ Jul 24 2005, 04:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 24 2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks.
What would be wrong with running to get on a train you could potentially be late for? And if he was running because he saw the people approach him, I would rather run away and sort it out later instead of stopping to reason.
Let's think of a hypothetical situation; You're a non-white person (unfortunately, police do racially stereotype) in a subway station that had just been attacked 2 times in the last two weeks, some policemen come up to you to ask you questions.
Do you; A: Run like hell, jumping over a turnstile, while police are in pursuit? or B: Answer the policemen's questions, knowing that you're innocent and the situation can be resolved?
I would pick B, even if I was late for a train. It's better than rousing the suspicions of policemen that are obviously on-edge.
I know you're against what the police did, and I am too. But to tell you the truth, this seems like he brought it on himself by his actions.
I stand by what I said if the officers in question weren't wearing uniforms. Were they? [/b][/quote]
Why would he run away from some plainsclothesmen?
They undoubtedly introduced themselves as police.
Originally posted by Mark+Jul 24 2005, 08:25 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark @ Jul 24 2005, 08:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 24 2005, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 24 2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks.
What would be wrong with running to get on a train you could potentially be late for? And if he was running because he saw the people approach him, I would rather run away and sort it out later instead of stopping to reason.
Let's think of a hypothetical situation; You're a non-white person (unfortunately, police do racially stereotype) in a subway station that had just been attacked 2 times in the last two weeks, some policemen come up to you to ask you questions.
Do you; A: Run like hell, jumping over a turnstile, while police are in pursuit? or B: Answer the policemen's questions, knowing that you're innocent and the situation can be resolved?
I would pick B, even if I was late for a train. It's better than rousing the suspicions of policemen that are obviously on-edge.
I know you're against what the police did, and I am too. But to tell you the truth, this seems like he brought it on himself by his actions.
I stand by what I said if the officers in question weren't wearing uniforms. Were they?
Why would he run away from some plainsclothesmen?
They undoubtedly introduced themselves as police. [/b][/quote]
What would you do if you were approached by people looking like civilians carrying guns?
Of course, if they introduced themselves as police and their weapons were visible it's entirely possible that the man pannicked and ran. What the man should or shouldn't have done is entirely dependant on whether:
- The police where in plain clothes.
- Their weapons were visible (most likely not if they were plainclothesmen)
Originally posted by Dean+Jul 24 2005, 07:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dean @ Jul 24 2005, 07:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 24 2005, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by -Dean@Jul 24 2005, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 24 2005, 06:49 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Dean@Jul 24 2005, 02:45 PM
First the police don't patrol areas where they're really needed, and now the ones who are on patrol unload their guns into an innocent man. Yep, this really makes me feel comfortable about riding a train to and from school.
Well, he didn't exactly make himself look innocent by running through a subway station which had been attacked twice by bombers in the previous two weeks.
What would be wrong with running to get on a train you could potentially be late for? And if he was running because he saw the people approach him, I would rather run away and sort it out later instead of stopping to reason.
Let's think of a hypothetical situation; You're a non-white person (unfortunately, police do racially stereotype) in a subway station that had just been attacked 2 times in the last two weeks, some policemen come up to you to ask you questions.
Do you; A: Run like hell, jumping over a turnstile, while police are in pursuit? or B: Answer the policemen's questions, knowing that you're innocent and the situation can be resolved?
I would pick B, even if I was late for a train. It's better than rousing the suspicions of policemen that are obviously on-edge.
I know you're against what the police did, and I am too. But to tell you the truth, this seems like he brought it on himself by his actions.
I stand by what I said if the officers in question weren't wearing uniforms. Were they?
Why would he run away from some plainsclothesmen?
They undoubtedly introduced themselves as police.
What would you do if you were approached by people looking like civilians carrying guns?
Of course, if they introduced themselves as police and their weapons were visible it's entirely possible that the man pannicked and ran. What the man should or shouldn't have done is entirely dependant on whether:
- The police where in plain clothes.
- Their weapons were visible (most likely not if they were plainclothesmen) [/b][/quote]
The police were wearing plain clothes because they were under cover terrorist police.
And Mark once again I'm gonna state the fact that the station the dude that was shot at had NOT been attacked and NO station was attacked twice.
And I'd run aswell if I saw some tonk people running after me with fucking guns as would 90% of people,you're not gonna just stand there and say "oh yes,please shoot me" are you.
Derek The Infamous
07-25-2005, 03:12 PM
Jesus christ, hellflame..do you think that really matters? Stop pushing your 'facts' down Mark's throat because you, yourself aren't really thinking right now.
Police identify themselves, they tell the man to stop, the man instead of stopping runs faster..it's foolish. He could've easily been a terrorist that had planted a bomb in the station. As sorry as I feel for the innocent man, he got what he received from absolutely ignoring the cops' demands.
Whether the station was attacked before or not it doesn't matter, cause terrorists could've easily planned to bomb a new station, thus fleeing the scene when the cops came around.
Instead of thinking what you say is right all the time, open your mind to other possibilities. Instead of saying it was wrong to attack because that particular station was never attacked before, think that maybe they thought the person had planted a bomb somewhere and was running from the scene.
I see you doing this all the frickin time and it's seriously starting to frustrate me as a moderator.
Grow. Up.
The way some people are talking it just seems everyones completly ignoring that this shit happened practuacly down the road from me and people who live thousands of miles away are trying to say they know more than the person who lives near where these bombings took place.
Derek chill out man I wasn't trying to make myself look like the king of knowledge,I was mearly getting frustrated that people were just ignoring the person who lives closest to everything that happened.
If I got anyone at all pissed off with my assertive corrections then I apolagize however I will not apolagize for telling my beliefs in the fashion that I did. Facts are facts and if it means you have to correct someone every now and then then so be it,just like you have to correct people with the LPA rules every now and then.
To be honest I think its sods law that I've been caught out with this because I know alot of people here that have stressed that their beliefs on a particular subject are the absolute right beliefs,I wont mention names but with the way its going now its like I'm being told I don't consider anyone elses opinion,I do Derek,I'm just passionate about my beliefs thats all ^_^'
Originally posted by Hellflame@Jul 25 2005, 03:25 PM
I was mearly getting frustrated that people were just ignoring the person who lives closest to everything that happened.
Hey I live nearest to Old trafford than probably everyone on this forum, that doesn't mean, I know more about Manchester United's football results than someone who lives in the US does it. ;)
They have their opinions you have yours. Accept it.
Originally posted by Adam+Jul 27 2005, 07:18 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Adam @ Jul 27 2005, 07:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Hellflame@Jul 25 2005, 03:25 PM
I was mearly getting frustrated that people were just ignoring the person who lives closest to everything that happened.
Hey I live nearest to Old trafford than probably everyone on this forum, that doesn't mean, I know more about Manchester United's football results than someone who lives in the US does it. ;)
They have their opinions you have yours. Accept it. [/b][/quote]
Yeah I get your point.
And I do consider every persons point on the matter however I feel strongly about my own.
User Name
07-27-2005, 10:59 PM
Originally posted by Derek@Jul 25 2005, 08:12 AM
As sorry as I feel for the innocent man, he got what he received from absolutely ignoring the cops' demands.
I figured that you, of all people, would use a little more logic into their posts. Thanks for proving me wrong, Derek. I mean, he got what he deserved? What the hell?
Originally posted by Hellflame@Jul 25 2005, 07:19 AM
The police were wearing plain clothes because they were under cover terrorist police.
And Mark once again I'm gonna state the fact that the station the dude that was shot at had NOT been attacked and NO station was attacked twice.
And I'd run aswell if I saw some tonk people running after me with fucking guns as would 90% of people,you're not gonna just stand there and say "oh yes,please shoot me" are you.
I would stay in a hypothetical situation where men came up to me toting guns in a subway station. What the hell kind of thugs pull out guns in the middle of a busy subway station? For one thing, they'd expose themselves for carrying weapons. Secondly, anything they'd do to me would be stupid for them, seeing that if they shot me, they'd have dozens of people tackling them.
So, I'd use common sense and stay put. It's best to stay in a crowd where there's lots of witnesses. And please don't give me any of that "they're terrorists, they don't care if they're caught" nonsense because their main objective is to take down as many people as they can at one time. They're trained to be discreet with their actions so as to not rouse suspicions. Pulling out a gun on an insignificant guy like me for no reason wouldn't further their cause at all.
If the station had not been attacked before, and you have apparently figured out their formula that no station can be attacked twice, wouldn't that increase the chances that terrorists would hit that station by that logic?
What you're doing is speculating on what he thought and why he ran. From police accounts, they came up to him to ask him some questions (I don't even know if they had their guns out), and he jumped over a turnstile and ran from them. Did they announce they were police officers? Why would he have ran? These questions can't be answered until the investigation is complete, so let's just stop the speculation and wait for the results.
Originally posted by Cameron+Jul 27 2005, 10:59 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cameron @ Jul 27 2005, 10:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Derek@Jul 25 2005, 08:12 AM
As sorry as I feel for the innocent man, he got what he received from absolutely ignoring the cops' demands.
I figured that you, of all people, would use a little more logic into their posts. Thanks for proving me wrong, Derek. I mean, he got what he deserved? What the hell? [/b][/quote]
Yeah,kinda shocking man.
And Mark you're right,we should wait for the final report of the investigation.
Derek The Infamous
07-28-2005, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Hellflame+Jul 28 2005, 05:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Hellflame @ Jul 28 2005, 05:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Cameron@Jul 27 2005, 10:59 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Derek@Jul 25 2005, 08:12 AM
As sorry as I feel for the innocent man, he got what he received from absolutely ignoring the cops' demands.
I figured that you, of all people, would use a little more logic into their posts. Thanks for proving me wrong, Derek. I mean, he got what he deserved? What the hell?
Yeah,kinda shocking man.
And Mark you're right,we should wait for the final report of the investigation. [/b][/quote]
Yeah of course it has to be turned against me. :rolleyes:
Let's assume for a second that the guy actually identified himself as a cop.
Now, if you said this as you were approaching a man and he darts off like he's trying to lose you, would you not threaten to discharge your weapon/or at least shoot him in the leg? I know damn well I would. Because if I say I'm a cop, and someone runs from me in a TRAIN STATION IN LONDON, I'm going to assume he's avoiding me for a reason.
Now we're not sure the guy identified himself as a cop, but if he did and the guy still ran..then I dont know what to say. You of course misread my post (good job Cameron!) cause I said 'he got what he received'.
That means, because he ran, he got shot. It in no way meant he deserved it or justified the situation. Just that, because he didnt stand still..it happened.
Anthony.
07-28-2005, 03:00 PM
When you are from Brazil, you learn to run for your life.
And there's also the fact he was already on the ground when they shot him SEVEN BULLETS IN THE HEAD.
Overall, I'd call this a very big mistake.
Chris(tmas)
07-28-2005, 04:25 PM
I know he has a hangover because of that.
Okay, enough jokes.
Link04
07-28-2005, 04:28 PM
Speaking of London's Bombings, take a look at this:
Doctored image?
http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705...05doctored.html (http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705doctored.html)
Originally posted by Link04@Jul 28 2005, 01:58 PM
Speaking of London's Bombings, take a look at this:
Doctored image?
http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705...05doctored.html (http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705doctored.html)
That's odd, but isn't the guy walking into the station the suspect? The guy with the white hat just seems to be a bystander.
Those are the 7/7 bombings,thats a station up in leeds they got on a train to get to London at.
User Name
07-28-2005, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by Derek@Jul 28 2005, 07:48 AM
(good job Cameron!)
I aim to please, Derek. ^_^ :lol:
Originally posted by Derek+Jul 28 2005, 02:48 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Derek @ Jul 28 2005, 02:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Hellflame@Jul 28 2005, 05:07 AM
Originally posted by -Cameron@Jul 27 2005, 10:59 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Derek@Jul 25 2005, 08:12 AM
As sorry as I feel for the innocent man, he got what he received from absolutely ignoring the cops' demands.
I figured that you, of all people, would use a little more logic into their posts. Thanks for proving me wrong, Derek. I mean, he got what he deserved? What the hell?
Yeah,kinda shocking man.
And Mark you're right,we should wait for the final report of the investigation.
Yeah of course it has to be turned against me. :rolleyes:
Let's assume for a second that the guy actually identified himself as a cop.
Now, if you said this as you were approaching a man and he darts off like he's trying to lose you, would you not threaten to discharge your weapon/or at least shoot him in the leg? I know damn well I would. Because if I say I'm a cop, and someone runs from me in a TRAIN STATION IN LONDON, I'm going to assume he's avoiding me for a reason.
Now we're not sure the guy identified himself as a cop, but if he did and the guy still ran..then I dont know what to say. You of course misread my post (good job Cameron!) cause I said 'he got what he received'.
That means, because he ran, he got shot. It in no way meant he deserved it or justified the situation. Just that, because he didnt stand still..it happened. [/b][/quote]
I aint turned against anyone,I just found that comments a little shocking but now that you explained it I see your point.
Link04
07-28-2005, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by Mark+Jul 28 2005, 05:13 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark @ Jul 28 2005, 05:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Link04@Jul 28 2005, 01:58 PM
Speaking of London's Bombings, take a look at this:
Doctored image?
http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705...05doctored.html (http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705doctored.html)
That's odd, but isn't the guy walking into the station the suspect? The guy with the white hat just seems to be a bystander. [/b][/quote]
Even so, why would they doctor an official photo? What possible motive would they have?
Originally posted by Link04+Jul 28 2005, 07:45 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Link04 @ Jul 28 2005, 07:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Mark@Jul 28 2005, 05:13 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Link04@Jul 28 2005, 01:58 PM
Speaking of London's Bombings, take a look at this:
Doctored image?
http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705...05doctored.html (http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Jul05/250705doctored.html)
That's odd, but isn't the guy walking into the station the suspect? The guy with the white hat just seems to be a bystander.
Even so, why would they doctor an official photo? What possible motive would they have? [/b][/quote]
My thoughts exactly.
It's been confirmed that the person shot by the police was wearing a denim jacket, and the person that jumped over the turnstiles was in fact a police officer.
The Outsider
08-16-2005, 05:21 AM
what was reaqlly freaky for me is that i found out my cousin had just gotten off one of the trains in the subway. when he started walking away he heard the bomb go off down the tracks.
Originally posted by Dean@Aug 2 2005, 04:33 PM
It's been confirmed that the person shot by the police was wearing a denim jacket, and the person that jumped over the turnstiles was in fact a police officer.
I read that in the paper while i was in France and it sickened me.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.11 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.