MrMonkey Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Monkey, why can't you just act normal? ← But would that be fun :turned: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify his species. I've realised that he is not actually a mammal. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment. But Monkey does not. He moves to an area and argues and argues until every t-f member is consumed and the only way he can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what that is? A virus. Monkey is a disease, a cancer of this forum. He is a plague. And the senior members are... the cure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicH_87 Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 'apparently' the dude that pegged it and got shot, ran becasue his visa had run out and he was now an illegal immigrant. could be a cover story though, seeing as no-one seems to have actually know him. i find it strange that he got shot 5 times in the head, surley only one or two officers could of had a direct shot on him at one time? sounds like a case of starved armed officers with an ichy trigger finger to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munki Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 'apparently' the dude that pegged it and got shot, ran becasue his visa had run out and he was now an illegal immigrant. could be a cover story though, seeing as no-one seems to have actually know him. i find it strange that he got shot 5 times in the head, surley only one or two officers could of had a direct shot on him at one time? sounds like a case of starved armed officers with an ichy trigger finger to me. ← The policy is minimum of 4 shots, they need to ensure the person is 100% dead and has no chance on setting a bomb off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicH_87 Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 The policy is minimum of 4 shots, they need to ensure the person is 100% dead and has no chance on setting a bomb off. ← oh great, we have policies for people lives now? i wish guns were never invented, i'd like to see a terrorist sneak a bow and arrow through customs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMonkey Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 oh great, we have policies for people lives now? i wish guns were never invented, i'd like to see a terrorist sneak a bow and arrow through customs. ← Why, when they have bombs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicH_87 Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Why, when they have bombs. ← good point. ok i wish gunpowder was never discovered, i'd like to see them sneak a mace through customs. :turned: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munki Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 oh great, we have policies for people lives now? i wish guns were never invented, i'd like to see a terrorist sneak a bow and arrow through customs. ← Yeah, the state of the country does suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Policy is there for a good reason though. If there a suspected suicide bomber, and you shoot them in the chest, you could potentially set-off there bombs if they have them strapped to themselves. If you shoot them in the head, it doesn't always kill them straight off, so they could then possibly still trigger the device if they are wearing one. If there not a suspected suicide bomber, then the policy is "shoot to disable". I'm not trying to argue guns and shit is a good idea, but meh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caleb Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Surely they could use instant tranquilisers? Seems a shame to kill a good animal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 (edited) If this guy had an expired Visa, why did he run through the station and jump the ticket barriers before he even knew the police were on to him? AAAAAAND... what if the police know something about the man that they dont want the public to know... if they tell the world that they have successfully killed one of the bombers, the others will most likely leg it (live to die another die) and return in a more suprising way that the police wont be ready to handle, instead the bombers may now think they are safe because the police are informing everyone that the guy they shot isnt a bomber when he actually is. There will be a lot more to it than we actually know, I mean, why would a police officer risk his job, his life, and his family's life over it? How often do the police use force these days, rather than just pretending they havent seen the trouble makers and picking on law abiding citizens who step a toe out of line? Nobody could have predicted it, and it could also work as a scare tactic, and the fact tyhat the guy in charge of the police has said they will still shoot to kill means they are on to something. What miffs me off are the people sueing the police and disagreeing with it. One minute everyone wants these bombers caught and dealt with, Next minute, the police are the bad guys and the bombers are being picked on. This isnt a game. This is war. Edited July 25, 2005 by andyroo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicH_87 Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 maybe it was just a case of bad timing and the cops turned up just as he was starting his record beating attempt at running from the ticket booths to the platform. does anyone know if he was carrying a bag or anything? i know a lot of bombers strap explosives round their wastes but surley it's pretty clear weather or not they have an explosives/detanators on them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 maybe it was just a case of bad timing and the cops turned up just as he was starting his record beating attempt at running from the ticket booths to the platform. does anyone know if he was carrying a bag or anything? i know a lot of bombers strap explosives round their wastes but surley it's pretty clear weather or not they have an explosives/detanators on them? ← No, he started running upon entering the station, ran through to the ticket barriers, jumped over them and then down to the station where he was confronted by twenty armed police officers. Twenty. and he ran. What a numpty. He would rather die than be caught. What does that say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caleb Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 That hes a clown? i heard he did have a bag but that doiesnt mean anything these days, we need facts (Y)" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 That hes a clown? i heard he did have a bag but that doiesnt mean anything these days, we need facts (Y)" ← I heard he had big shoes and a red nose :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caleb Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Hell have had more than a red nose with 4 9mm rounds in the back of his skull lol. not too sure about the shoes yet, get back to me later . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_Fel Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Why do people always think the world should be fair and just? Its not the way it works and it will never work like that. Shit happens take it on the chin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Marky Time® We've been here longer, we don't force the government to do things, Er, anti-War protests, referendums, protests in general. What the hell do the asylum seekers force them to do? They come here, and there's a system already in place for them. That's the way it is. They have no power here, and if tehy kicked up a fuss they're more likely to be deported. ← It's not just a man with a gun, it's armed police in full unifrom, with MP5s walking about. If they told me to stop I think I would, I wouldn't just go "Oh noes, better run away and get shot". Go fact-collecter. The Police were in plain clothes, NOT full uniform. Hence the "undercover" nature of their watching of him. ← In the end there's nothing 'we' can do about it directly. We can voice our opinions all daylong, it isn't going to change anything. The people who are doing this have the mind set of a spoilt child. Once they have decided on something they cannot be persuaded to think something else. They just follow what they have been brainwashed to believe is right, (their religions). I believe in justice and revenge. If someone personally bombed my family/friends/hometown, then i would try and seek revenge on them, (an eye for an eye if you will), but i wouldn't go to jail just to get them back, and there is noway i would kill myself for revenge. If however, they bomb other people/places then it up to those people to seek revenge and fight whatever cause they have. What i don't understand is why these people are allowed to continue preaching their f**ked up religions. The people doing this are extremists, who deliberately distort the views of their religion to suit their needs. Using extreme stereotypes to try and judge all people is a f**king stupid idea, don't you think? The autorities seem to know exactly who is doing it, they know where 'religious trianing camps' are based, yet we never hear about them being raided, bombed or arrested. They don't know who the cells are, hence them not being stopped. They do find some out, and they DO stop some of them, but there are always more. They didn't know anything about this cell; for example only now they're finding out that a week or 2 ago, two of them were at a white water rafting centre in Bala, in Wales. They don't really know much about them at all. They DID raid most of the terrorist camps, as the Al-Qaeda bases were mostly run by the Taliban in Afghanistan. There was a "war" there, if you remember, and most of them were stopped. However, people are resourceful... IMO, if someone or some groups of people are prepared to take other people lives as well as their own, they should be killed as quickly as possible. They want to die anyway so why don't we save them the trouble and do it oursleves. And, on the subject of revenge, if someone has a member of their family killed, they should be allowed to sek the killer or the group of people behind the murder, and kill them with no conciquences to their actions. However if my mum was killed tomorrow, and i went and killed the murderer, then i would be tried in court and sent to jail, merely for seeking revenge, where as if my mother was never killed, then i would never have commited a crime. They got rid of the death-penalty because of miscarriages of justice and just simple mistakes. If you killed someone who was actually innocent, but you thought was guilty, it's all going to end up f**ked up. Use your head. I have been called racist many times for the things i've said about GROUPS of people, however, i never hate anyone for their colour, i only hate them for their beleifs and their actions. I strongly believe that without religion, there would be a LOT less violence all over the world, but in the end it all boils down to greed and selfishness. Ulitmatly it's selfish people who want their own way that cause trouble (like a spoilt little child). The majority of violence always seems to be casued by the least educated/intelligent people in the world. Not really. Think about most of the wars that have happened. We've joined in most of them, haven't we. They mostly use the techniques and weaponry we develop. I know my point hasn't really come across, more like a few points to think about. And to finish, if tomorrow i could kill/remove from society all religious leaders no matter where they live and what they preach, then i would without hesitation. I think if people just chilled out and lived their life for fun, rather than to please their god then the world would be a much nicer place. Religion used to be a massive part of society, it was used in medicine, polictics and in almost ever action people made throughout their day to day lives. However over time it has been phased out of medicine by science, its been phased out of politics by itellegence and it's been phased out of peoples day to day life by technology and a general view that life it for living not for preaching un-confirmed bullshit. Maybe it time is was phased out of the world completely. ← 'apparently' the dude that pegged it and got shot, ran becasue his visa had run out and he was now an illegal immigrant. could be a cover story though, seeing as no-one seems to have actually know him. i find it strange that he got shot 5 times in the head, surley only one or two officers could of had a direct shot on him at one time? sounds like a case of starved armed officers with an ichy trigger finger to me. The inquiry has heard it was 8 times. More about this later though... ← oh great, we have policies for people lives now? My Dad worked in the police training force in Iraq. Because of the danger of suicide bombers there, they developed specific strategies to deal with them, which are very similar to the ones in place here. Put simply, it is "Kill them before they kill you." If you have someone who you think might be a suicide bomber, try and assess the situation as quickly as possible. If you're in a situation where there's cause to have these strategies, chances are the general population are also going to be vigilant, and more likely to be less suspicious. If someone is even acting like one, then chances are they are going to be dangerous. If you shout "Stop", they have a chance to detonate their bombs. If you shoot them non-fatally, they have a chance to detonate their bombs. i wish guns were never invented, i'd like to see a terrorist sneak a bow and arrow through customs. They used equipment to make the bombs and the materials themselves from this country. They therefore probably carried very little through customs. If you're intending to go a place to blow yourselves up, why take a weapon such as a gun if you don't need to use one? Just one more potential problem you're making for yourself. Also, when was the last time a terrorist used a gun? ← Policy is there for a good reason though. If there a suspected suicide bomber, and you shoot them in the chest, you could potentially set-off there bombs if they have them strapped to themselves. Correct, and the above points about wounding them non-fatally still stands. If you shoot them in the head, it doesn't always kill them straight off, so they could then possibly still trigger the device if they are wearing one. In that high-pressure situation, after firing the gun at someone you might not immediately be able to see if they've been hit, or where, or what condition they're in. If you're trying to shoot to kill, it's better to keep shooting til they go down. If there not a suspected suicide bomber, then the policy is "shoot to disable". I'm not trying to argue guns and shit is a good idea, but meh. ← Surely they could use instant tranquilisers? I assume you're joking, but if not: People have been known to have been shot and continued running/moving/performing actions. Adrenaline and endorphins flowing through people in high-pressure situations means they can at times be oblivious to injury. If someone can put a sizeable hole in you with a bullet and it won't affect you, a little tranquiliser on a dart might not have a super quick or efficient effect. ← maybe it was just a case of bad timing and the cops turned up just as he was starting his record beating attempt at running from the ticket booths to the platform. does anyone know if he was carrying a bag or anything? i know a lot of bombers strap explosives round their wastes but surley it's pretty clear weather or not they have an explosives/detanators on them? He was wearing a "thick coat" that was not like "One you'd usually wear in the summer", and he was carrying a rucksack. Just an unfortunate coincidence I guess? ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haz Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 I just got back from Egypt, coincidentally, from the Red Sea, fortunately I was on the mainland as opposed to the panincular where Sham El Sheik is. Pretty incredible security they have their though, nothing like you would find in the west. Every main road junction has a Military Police fortification and at least 5 guards with AK-47s. The majority of hotels even have such guards, I heard on CNN that even the hotel which was bombed had them, but the bomber just drove straight past. In all honesty though, I'm more worried about the London bombs, they were closer to me there than they were in Egypt. Unfortunately getting through Egyptian Passport Control last night was a complete arse, what can you do? Haz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMonkey Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 Mark, if they were in plain clothes I think he still might of noticed the MP5s. Not many terrorists use H&K weapons bar the G3A3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 Mark, if they were in plain clothes I think he still might of noticed the MP5s. Not many terrorists use H&K weapons bar the G3A3. ← I don't really see what that's got to do with it? Either way, the point I was making is that people in non-uniform aren't going to be as obvious as people in full, hi-vis. uniform, are they? Which is basically what you were saying they were in... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Bleech Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 Mark, if they were in plain clothes I think he still might of noticed the MP5s. Not many terrorists use H&K weapons bar the G3A3. ← if someone was pointing a gun at me my first thought would not be 'hold on a god damn second he is pointing a gun at me! ahh I see he is using a MP5 that must mean he is a british police officer. Oh wait a min he could also be a member of the terrorist organisation G3A3. oh what to do?' that said i would have stopped. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nb88 Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 If your saying he ran because he was guilty of something, he still didnt deserve to die as he wants a terrorist... and i still think that he was innocent and he was running so he didnt get killed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyroo Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 (edited) If your saying he ran because he was guilty of something, he still didnt deserve to die as he wants a terrorist... and i still think that he was innocent and he was running so he didnt get killed ← Please, PLEASE, PLEASE read the thread. He walked to the station from his house completely unaware he was being watched. When he entered the station he started to run, still completely unaware he was being watched. He sprinted into the ticket area, and jumped over (not through with a ticket) the ticket barrier. He then sprinted down to the platform, where he was met by twenty armed policemen waiting down there for him. They told him to stop, and he turned around and ran up the other end of the platform to get on at the furthest cariage. He tripped, fell and the policmen caught up him, and pumped him full of lead. You dont know he wasnt a terrorist, in fact you dont know anything except what the media tells you. Please read my previous posts as to why the police would say he wasnt a terrorist. They has reason to have him under surveillence in the first place, since the first bombings, and then he runs away when told to stop by armed police. EDIT: You also reckon that the guy would have thought the twenty armed blokes were not police. There has just been a bombing, the undergrounds are swarming with police, do you really think that the police wouldnt notice twenty blokes armed to the teeth with sub machine guns strolling into the station? And there are cctv cameras everywhere in underground stations, so the idea that he thought they were someone else is rediculous. Edited July 26, 2005 by andyroo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted July 26, 2005 Report Share Posted July 26, 2005 Fair enough. The fact that he WAS wearing the thick coat and a rucksack all kinda were a bit unlucky. Can kinda see why they might've been suspicious (Y) I don't get why the family are still getting all arsey with the police. Yes, they shot their son, but why the f**k was he doing what he was doing? He under surveillance and so on, so surely he must've been up to something sketchy, and the way he acted in the tube station didn't help him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.