- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 1160 Hour
- Reading permission
USA media cannot say if killed man had a bomb.
The "news" article is from The New York TImes, the USA largest and most importantant newspaper. They forgot to include some essential facts:|
Did the man who was killed have a bomb?
What was his name?
Since it was plainclothes officers who confronted him, did he run because he was afraid of becoming the victim of a hooligan attack?
None of the 7/7 suicde bombers and none of the 7/21 non-suicide non-bombers concealed their bombs under heavy coats.
China media outlets are admittedly censored by the government. They make no secret of it and it is known to all. American media outlets claim otherwise. It's truly saddening to know that a New York Times reporter is in jail for failing to reveal a source while her own newspaper cannot print whether or not a man shot dead by police in another country had a bomb on him.
5 Shots in a Train Car Leave Londoners Shaken
By ALAN COWELL
Published: July 23, 2005
LONDON, July 22 - It was around 10 a.m. on a sunny, summery Friday when London crossed a once-unthinkable line in its unfolding war on terror.
In a city where most police officers do not carry guns, the shock from the shooting death of a man in a subway car was palpable. It raised questions about police firearms practices, kindled uncertainty among Muslims and deepened the anxiety of a city that looks, these days, under siege.
Subway riders filled up a train in London Friday. Many Londoners said they now felt uneasy about riding the city's subways and buses.
The police said they had trailed a man, described as South Asian in appearance, from a house in Stockwell that they had under surveillance. He was clad in bulky clothes on a warm summer day, witnesses said.
He vaulted over a turnstile and dashed onto a train, with plainclothes police officers right behind him. The police said the man did not obey orders to stop, so the officers shouted at the passengers to get down and take cover.
The man stumbled onto a train, and a passenger, Mark Whitby, told the BBC: "I looked at his face. He looked sort of left and right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, a cornered fox. He looked absolutely petrified, and then he sort of tripped, but they were hotly pursuing him."
The officers "couldn't have been any more than two or three feet behind him at this time," Mr. Whitby said, "and he half tripped and was half pushed to the floor, and the policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand."
The officer with the gun "held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him," Mr. Whitby said.
The gunshots reverberated much further than the grimy confines of Stockwell station, in a hardscrabble neighborhood of south London. It was the first such shooting in memory. Between 1997 and September 2004, the police opened fire on 20 occasions, killing 7 people and wounding 11, according to the Metropolitan Police. The statistics do not specify where the shootings took place.
Although most London police officers are unarmed, since 9/11 Londoners have grown used to seeing special armed units, who have been given antiterrorism training.
Police rules require officers to give warning if they intend to open fire and to "ensure that their responses are proportionate and appropriate in the circumstances and consistent with the legitimate objective to be achieved." Officers are supposed to aim for immobilizing body-shots, but television reports said Friday that shoot-to-kill shots had been authorized to prevent suicide bombings.
Even as Londoners absorbed the news of the shooting, a debate unfolded whether it was justified.
Although no information was available about the man's identity or ethnicity, many Muslims feared that Britons were blaming them. "The police may have a good reason to shoot this man dead, but they have to explain why," said Inayat Bunglawala, the spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain.
A Web site run by The Guardian newspaper posted heated arguments about the police action. "I just hope they shot an actual terrorist," one contributor wrote. Others defended the police. "You can't blame the police these days," said Kash Johnson, a 44-year-old chef. "If his hand was on the trigger, what else could the policeman do?"
People milled through the streets and pubs of Stockwell on Friday night, trying to sort through confused, sometimes contradictory, emotions.
"I think it's disgusting that they had to shoot him," said Carol Marriner, a 41-year-old homemaker. "He could just have been late going to work. I can understand the political situation, but they could be shooting any innocent person."
But then, said Lois Cowley, a 17-year-old student: "One of my friends was on that tube, and to be honest I'd rather this guy got shot than him blow up my friends. Death is too good for him. The police did what they had to."
Not so, said Benjamin Rogers, an 18-year-old student: "Shooting him five times is overkill. They could have wounded him and jumped him. The police officer who did that should be fired."
Zane Growns, 27, a graduate journalism student who saw the officers chasing the man into the station, said: "In wartime people used the tube as a shelter, a place to be protected. Now the war is in the tube." The Underground was used as a bomb shelter during the Blitz in World War II.
"Now we will just say to ourselves: I'm lucky I wasn't in that carriage, I'm lucky I wasn't in that bus, I'm lucky I wasn't there when it happened," she said. "This changes the face of London."
In the 15 days since four suicide bombers took 52 lives in addition to their own, London's self-confidence has seesawed between bravado and bewilderment as the police cordon off areas and close streets. But the notion of armed police storming aboard a subway train and shooting a suspect in full view of passengers had, until Friday, been nearly unthinkable.
The moment defined the price London might have to pay to fight back - even though it remained unclear late on Friday who the man was or even whether he had anything to do with the London bombings.
"He had a baseball cap on and quite a sort of thickish coat, a coat you'd wear in winter, sort of like a padded jacket," Mr. Whitby said. "He might have had something concealed under there, I don't know. But it looked sort of out of place with the sort of weather we've been having, the sort of hot humid weather."
"He was largely built, he was quite a chubby sort of guy. I didn't see any guns or anything like that. I didn't see him carrying anything. I didn't even see a bag to be quite honest."
After the shooting, said Ms. Growns, "everybody stepped outside - the people were panicking but also the police."
"You could sense they felt that this was it - that this was the moment."
It was a moment that left some Londoners, particularly Muslims, wondering whether their city's new position on the front lines of the campaign against terror will tear its social fabric, though nothing was immediately known publicly about the dead man.
Nakib Islam, 19, a Muslim high school student, said, "I am afraid of a stronger backlash" against Muslims. He was speaking after a bomb alert at an east London mosque that turned out to be a hoax.
"eople who look like me" all became suspects, Mr. Islam said. "I even don't wear my rucksack anymore when I use the tube because of that." Backpacks have become the emblems of bombers since the images of July 7, and one of the suspects in the attacks on Thursday was seen entering a railroad station hefting a substantial pack.
Throughout the city, Londoners absorbed the shock of the second attacks in two weeks.
"I wonder why London is different to New York and Madrid, why is it being sustained here?" said Patricia Mitchell, 35, a call-center worker. "I'm wondering if it's an easier target. It feels like London has a lot more people and a lot more public transport. But I was completely surprised. I totally thought it was going to be an attack on London and then they move on to another city."
Riding an eastbound train on the Bakerloo line, Karla Neilson, a 36-year-old computer specialist, also mused about her city.
"I think about where I sit, and I look at people a little more," she said. "I was a little nervous today, more nervous than I was two weeks ago. After the first bomb, I thought, oh, it is all over. And now I see they are carrying on."