Posted on 07/23/2005 1:32:06 PM PDT by areafiftyone
You're correct that he could have looked much different from that photo. Obviously there was some sort of reason for the police to react so extremely, and perhaps part of it was how he looked. This is a time when racial profiling needs to be used to effectively defend ourselves from these attacks.
However, I don't agree with the nut cases that seem to think anyone with brown skin is better off dead or who say something to the effect that it was a mistake, but at least it wasn't a white guy.
He looks like a nice guy from the photo, and I think it is terrible that an innocent person was killed. I'm not placing blame on anyone, as it appears to have been just an unfortunate situation. I'm just embarrassed and upset by the words I have read from some of the sickos in this thread.
RE: Malcom Gladwell's new book, Blink.
I have heard this author discuss this book and the theory of snap decisions - he was very interesting and instructive.
Apparently the cops were wrong about this man, but he was Very wrong in not realizing that the rules of "free" rides on the metro had changed, after all of the British authorities started looking for terrorists.
I believe they acted appropriately when he ran onto the train.
How many people in Sharm el Sheik wish that someone had done the same to the bombers who completed their mission a few nights ago.
I don't believe that every person with brown or dark skin should be shot dead either. But unfortunately, given the right set of circumstances, situations like this can and will occur. It's happened in the past and it will happen again. He does look like a nice guy, but then photos are only a small part of a person's demeanor. Even Ted Bundy fooled everybody until the evidence mounted against him.
Very, very good post and an intelligent one.
If you're 27 years old, and speak any western language, whether it's Spanish, German, French, Portuguese, Italian, whatever, the words "stop" and "police" are the English words you recognize immediately, even if you don't speak English.
Heck, even the "stop" signs in some non-English speaking countries are spelled "S-T-O-P".
Couldn't have stopped him beore he went in the station?
Again, who said it was a "house"? iT was an apartment complex. And why the hell didn't they stop him before he went into the station if he was such a danger? It does NOT make sense.
How about, stop him before he gets in the station? I'm sue if he DID have a bomb, the people on the subway would have appreciated that.
No. You have to look at the information the police had at any given second - not at the final result. Human beings, including the police, are not equipped with omniscience.
They said they followed him to the station, from a "suspicious" apartment complex.
Simply put they didn't know where he was headed when he first left the apartment complex. Knowledge that he was headed for the subway station came later by observation.
Why isn't anyone pissed that, if he was truly a suspect, they let him get down into the subway?!
He wasn't a suspected bomber until he entered the station. Note that when he did enter the subway station he was confronted by the police and ran.
Because most cops over there don't carry guns. Now we see why.
So why say he was coming from a suspicious place with a big coat? THAT isn't enough to keep him from getting onto the subway, but failing to stop to guys in plainclothes is enough to pump him with five bullets in the back?!? Come on.
I wonder why they didn't stop him before he got on the bus?
Good point. Or, better yet, RAID THE SUSPICIOUS APARTMENT.
Yes, I wonder why the police were just watching the building, instead of checking out the place and the occupants.
So he's clean as a whistle till they tell him to stop? Why did they tell him to stop then? He was on a bus before he got to the station. Why did they let him on it, as "carenot" just pointed out above? You are giving the cops all the reasons in the world to blow him away, but NO reason to keep him from getting to an area where he could hurt lots of people. Still ain't making sense.
And, if the choice is between profiling and bullets in the head, I think we know what he would have wanted.
No he's still a person of interest. Basic rule of life number 25, if you run from the cops they will think you're guilty of something. Lesson here - do not run from the cops.
are giving the cops all the reasons in the world to blow him away, but NO reason to keep him from getting to an area where he could hurt lots of people.
Because he wasn't a suspected bomber at that point? Would you have preferred that the cops shoot him five times outside the station if he ran?
But let me turn this over to you. Answer these questions please.
1)How much evidence do law enforcement officials have to have before they act against a suspected suicide bomber?
2) How many people are you willing to have die before such evidence is collected?
3) Do you agree that law enforcement officials are not omniscient and often have to make important decisions with imcomplete evidence?
Because it was an ongoing investigation. Also because "checking out the place" is the same thing "watching the building and the occupants".
The problem is that people would have complained about either outcome because we have bunch of whiners who can't deal with the fact that life isn't perfect and can never be made so. I'm simply annoyed at people who object to both a problem and all realistic solutions to the problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.