|
Post by Dominic on Jul 27, 2005 7:01:31 GMT -5
as it was not melicious could it be tried as murder?
|
|
|
Post by belfastdon on Jul 28, 2005 12:54:57 GMT -5
we now know why he ran - its now reported on tonights new that his visa expired over 2 years ago
|
|
wash25
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 335
|
Post by wash25 on Jul 28, 2005 17:17:02 GMT -5
Oh see. His visa was expired anyway. No harm no foul.
|
|
|
Post by Noel's Barmy Army on Jul 29, 2005 21:36:44 GMT -5
Its the govt's new way of dealing with immigration...
|
|
|
Post by brumoscardo on Jul 30, 2005 14:21:43 GMT -5
we now know why he ran - its now reported on tonights new that his visa expired over 2 years ago His family, relatives and friends say it wasn't.
|
|
wash25
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 335
|
Post by wash25 on Aug 1, 2005 2:04:59 GMT -5
Oh, in that case...
|
|
|
Post by Currian on Aug 1, 2005 7:07:42 GMT -5
POLICEMAN WHO SHOT SHOULD BE UP FOR MURDER... LISTEN TO THE STORY THE GUY WAS UNARMED AND ON THE GROUND There once was a dutch soldier in Iraq who shot a warning bullet at an Iraqi threatening him. The guy died because the bullet had hit him. They wanted to get the soldier into jail for 10 years because of this. Ridiculous! But I do agree with you.
|
|
angelchild
Oasis Roadie
Precious Precious Silver and Gold!!
Posts: 270
|
Post by angelchild on Aug 3, 2005 8:26:17 GMT -5
The policeman did nothing wrong, what was the bloke playing at running away! And by the sounds of things he shouldn't of been in the country anyway
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 10:38:12 GMT -5
The policeman did nothing wrong, what was the bloke playing at running away! And by the sounds of things he shouldn't of been in the country anyway He was running because there were undercover people with guns running at his direction. Whether his visa was valid or not is NOT fuckin relevant, there's something a little more important called 'human rights'. I advise the people posting shit here to have a look at it.
|
|
|
Post by tezza202 on Aug 6, 2005 11:45:50 GMT -5
The policeman did nothing wrong, what was the bloke playing at running away! And by the sounds of things he shouldn't of been in the country anyway He was running because there were undercover people with guns running at his direction. Whether his visa was valid or not is NOT fuckin relevant, there's something a little more important called 'human rights'. I advise the people posting shit here to have a look at it. They did tell him to stop didn't they?
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Aug 6, 2005 12:10:28 GMT -5
human instinct, to get the fuck outta there, you cant blame him for his death, if this happened to an english man in brasil hell would break lose
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Aug 6, 2005 12:17:28 GMT -5
but i should point out that if the man had been a bomber and got to set himself off so to speak, and it emeged that the Met had a clean chance to stop it, there would be uproar, what happened was a tragedy, and was an extemely unfortunate turn of events, but its wrong to downplay the fact that an innocent man was killed, but you can see the position those policemen where put into
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 15:41:24 GMT -5
It's not about a BRAZILIAN man being killed in the UK, it's about an INNOCENT man being killed. It could have been a citizen from a different country in any other country (there are many right now) using methods to fight crime (terrorist crimes) that share the mentality of the worst dicatorships man kind saw last century.
The only scenario acceptable for killing the man is simple, they were 100% that he was a terrorist AND that he was about to commit an unstoppable terrorist act. That is in the constitution of your country, is it not? Since the man was NOT a terrorist they could NOT have been 100% sure.
For anyone to think it's okay to kill innocent people (from Japan, USA, UK, Brazil, Afghanistan, Iraq... a human being from any country)... I just can't understand that mentality. I can't understand how a person in the "free world" could think that way. Certainly an INNOCENT PERSON from their FAMILY didn't face DEATH that way.
Now, about the family of the dead man... I hope they get millions from the responsibles, even if that won't make up for what they LOST FOREVER.
Imagine there's no heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today...
Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace...
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world...
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Aug 6, 2005 15:45:51 GMT -5
It's not about a BRAZILIAN man being killed in the UK, it's about an INNOCENT man being killed. It could have been a citizen from a different country in any other country (there are many right now) using methods to fight crime (terrorist crimes) that share the mentality of the worst dicatorships man kind saw last century. The only scenario acceptable for killing the man is simple, they were 100% that he was a terrorist AND that he was about to commit an unstoppable terrorist act. That is in the constitution of your country, is it not? Since the man was NOT a terrorist they could NOT have been 100% sure. For anyone to think it's okay to kill innocent people (from Japan, USA, UK, Brazil, Afghanistan, Iraq... a human being from any country)... I just can't understand that mentality. I can't understand how a person in the "free world" could think that way. Certainly an INNOCENT PERSON from their FAMILY didn't face DEATH that way. Now, about the family of the dead man... I hope they get millions from the responsibles, even if that won't make up for what they LOST FOREVER. Imagine there's no heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today...
Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace...
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world...
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as oneive scanned my posts at not at one point can i find me saying it is ok to kill innocent people, not the first time youve put words in my mouth, ill ask you kindly not to, to quote myself , but its wrong to downplay the fact that an innocent man was killed
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 15:46:27 GMT -5
He was running because there were undercover people with guns running at his direction. Whether his visa was valid or not is NOT fuckin relevant, there's something a little more important called 'human rights'. I advise the people posting shit here to have a look at it. They did tell him to stop didn't they? Well, if people dressed like civilians start chasing you what would you do? If I had a hair of doubt in my mind they are really the police I would run like hell. Being innocent I wouldn't expect the police to chase me. And I wouldn't expect real police to shoot me in the head 8 fucking times. Would you? Tell me honestly, would you?
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 15:48:38 GMT -5
ive scanned my posts at not at one point can i find me saying it is ok to kill innocent people, not the first time youve put words in my mouth, ill ask you kindly not to I didn't even quote you Dom. If you read the other posts in the thread you'll understand what motivated my reply, certainly not your post.
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Aug 6, 2005 15:49:58 GMT -5
the fact that your wrote "your country" made me think you were talking to me, i apologise, got wrong end of stick
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 6, 2005 15:50:30 GMT -5
This is a real imotive thing. But there is no way that police officer should be charged with murder or anything else for that matter. Remember, he has to live with the fact he shot the guy for the rest of his life, and I know people will say 'what about the dead guys life' but you cant punish the officer for what he did.
As for human rights, its the Human Rights Act which has allowed terrorists and those who support them to live in the UK and claim benifits etc while at the same time preaching hatred towards the country, without any sort of punishment. Thankfully, it looks like the PM is gonna change all that now.
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 15:56:04 GMT -5
the fact that your wrote "your country" made me think you were talking to me, i apologise, got wrong end of stick I see what you mean, I'm actually typing a reply to you on the 'fix you' thread to adress the other issue as well. cheers ;D
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 16:01:49 GMT -5
This is a real imotive thing. But there is no way that police officer should be charged with murder or anything else for that matter. Remember, he has to live with the fact he shot the guy for the rest of his life, and I know people will say 'what about the dead guys life' but you cant punish the officer for what he did. As for human rights, its the Human Rights Act which has allowed terrorists and those who support them to live in the UK and claim benifits etc while at the same time preaching hatred towards the country, without any sort of punishment. Thankfully, it looks like the PM is gonna change all that now. Well, I will not discuss if anyone should be charged with murder or not, but the man was murdered. When I mentioned human rights I didn't think of a single organization or act, I'm actually talking about human rights. I don't know if in your country there are organizations that use an act to preach hate towards the country. But I was a bit confused when I read they want to allow terrorists to live in the country? Terrorists should be arrested, judged and prosecuted, like any other criminal. I ask as an off-topic discussion, what did you mean by that exactly?
|
|
|
Post by Dominic on Aug 6, 2005 16:25:17 GMT -5
the fact that your wrote "your country" made me think you were talking to me, i apologise, got wrong end of stick I see what you mean, I'm actually typing a reply to you on the 'fix you' thread to adress the other issue as well. cheers ;D see you there dude
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 6, 2005 16:35:27 GMT -5
This is a real imotive thing. But there is no way that police officer should be charged with murder or anything else for that matter. Remember, he has to live with the fact he shot the guy for the rest of his life, and I know people will say 'what about the dead guys life' but you cant punish the officer for what he did. As for human rights, its the Human Rights Act which has allowed terrorists and those who support them to live in the UK and claim benifits etc while at the same time preaching hatred towards the country, without any sort of punishment. Thankfully, it looks like the PM is gonna change all that now. Well, I will not discuss if anyone should be charged with murder or not, but the man was murdered. When I mentioned human rights I didn't think of a single organization or act, I'm actually talking about human rights. I don't know if in your country there are organizations that use an act to preach hate towards the country. But I was a bit confused when I read they want to allow terrorists to live in the country? Terrorists should be arrested, judged and prosecuted, like any other criminal. I ask as an off-topic discussion, what did you mean by that exactly? Well there are various islamic preachers who have claimed asylum in the UK and live on state benefits while at the same time preaching hatred towards the country and claiming that suicide bombings are justified. one of them even claimed that 'the black flag of islam will fly above No. 10 Downing Street one day' or words to that effect. And because we are signed up to the Human Rights Act, they are protected against deportation etc. But this week the PM annouced this is all going to change.
|
|
|
Post by thebluesgnr on Aug 6, 2005 17:17:17 GMT -5
1) Preaching crime is illegal (not really sure because I don't live in the UK, but I'm pretty sure about this one).
2) That law doesn't break anything in Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
3) If the "Human Right Acts" which I'm not completely familiar with goes against 1) I do think it needs to be changed. I'm not sure that's the case though... from a quick search around the web: "What is the Human Rights Act?
The Human Rights Act means that the state - the government, the police, the courts, your local authority - have to resepect your rights." In my mind I seriously doubt (I choose to not believe) there's an act in the UK that is prohibiting it from arresting and deporting people breaking the law. And it seems these people are even breaking the Human Rights act, by being discriminative against other people.
Anyway, I hope they won't use this as an excuse to take away more civil rights.
Just to clarify my previous reply on this, when I said human rights I meant "stuff" like this:
"Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed."
From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This article also seems pertinant: "Article 14.
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations."
|
|
wash25
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 335
|
Post by wash25 on Aug 6, 2005 19:20:17 GMT -5
But it IS about Brazil. Cuz everyone's sorry that the guy was shot. Of course it was innocent and it sucks that it happened. I mean, it's a tragedy blah blah obviously. Nobody's disputing that. The f-ing Prime Minister apologized for goodness sakes. So whatever.
But the nerve of the Brazilian government to like, act all apphauled-- crying alligator tears the way they are-- when innocent people get killed in Brazil on an hourly basis-- it's like shut the fuck up already.
I mean how about getting your house in order before you start moaning about human rights? I mean, for a Brazilian government official to lecture the UK about human rights-- it's laughable. The Brazilian ambassador should be shipped off to Guantanamo Bay. Or if you want to be really cruel-- put him in a Brazilian prison.
|
|
|
Post by tezza202 on Aug 6, 2005 19:52:22 GMT -5
They did tell him to stop didn't they? Well, if people dressed like civilians start chasing you what would you do? If I had a hair of doubt in my mind they are really the police I would run like hell. Being innocent I wouldn't expect the police to chase me. And I wouldn't expect real police to shoot me in the head 8 fucking times. Would you? Tell me honestly, would you? Well you would have been whinging your tits off if the police didn't shoot. And he wernt half acting susipcious was he! Jumping over ticket barriers onto trains.. What a grand idea. They're in a lose-lose situation anyway. The police acted on instinct, and after the bombings I don't blame him!!!
|
|