The W
Views: 100882773
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
26.11.07 1711
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Man shot in Britain had nothing to do with bombings Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(280 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (23 total)
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 1159/1494
EXP: 3961429
For next: 44650

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 78 days
Last activity: 20 hours
#1 Posted on 24.7.05 0940.39
Reposted on: 24.7.12 0943.56
The link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/24/international/24london.html?ei=5065&en=b04575c1815189bb&ex=1122782400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

    Originally posted by New York Times
    Scotland Yard admitted Saturday that a man police officers gunned down at point-blank range in front of horrified subway passengers on Friday had nothing to do with the investigation into the bombing attacks here.

    The man was identified by police as Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian, described by officers as an electrician on his way to work. "He was not connected to incidents in central London on 21st July, 2005, in which four explosive devices were partly detonated," a police statement said.


This is a problem I have with the mentality that we should do everything in our power to prevent any terrorism attack from ever happening again. OK, so some terrorists set off some bombs on 7/21, and the only thing that prevented them from doing more damage was their own incompetence. Meanwhile, this poor schmoe just trying to head for work gets his head blown off because the police has switched over to a shoot first-ask questions later policy. So not only do the police not stop the terrorists, they also end up killing more people than the terrorists themselves that day.

Of course, this was not intentional on the British police's part. They were trying to save lives. But this is the sort of thing you get into when you feel like you have to try to prevent an attack before it actually happens. This is why we are on to something with the idea that one is persumed innocent until proven guilty.

We need to try to keep terrorism in perspective. It's more a media event than anything else. You are much more likely to die from just a regular old homicide than an terrorist attack. And you are even more likely to die from an accident. This is not to say that terrorism should be ignored. We just need to be careful not to overreact, and consider all steps carefully (and realize it may be better to assume some risks from terrorism than it would be to assume the price that the effort to try to eliminate ALL risk may cost)

(edited by ges7184 on 24.7.05 0942)
Promote this thread!
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 141

Posts: 2600/6363
EXP: 33809620
For next: 310478

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 hour
#2 Posted on 24.7.05 1053.45
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1055.35
Obey the police, stop when asked to, dont RUN into a crowded subway system where less than 24 hours previous people HAD set off explosives, and your chances of survival are greatly improved.

Unfortunate? Yes. Preventable? Most certainly, IF the dead man had simply followed police instructions.
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator
Level: 139

Posts: 3476/6022
EXP: 32156744
For next: 310783

Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 19 hours
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
#3 Posted on 24.7.05 1315.55
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1320.59
This is the series of events according to the BBC:


    1: Jean Charles de Menezes leaves a house under surveillance and arrives at Stockwell station
    2: Witnesses say he vaults the automatic ticket barriers and heads for the platforms
    3: He then ran down an escalator after being approached by up to 20 plain-clothed police officers and tried to board a train
    4: He apparently refuses to obey police instructions and after running onto a northbound Northern line train, he is shot dead



Apparently, if you leave a house that is under surveilance due to a terrorist threat, avoid ticket agents and jump a turnstile, run from 20 cops, and then jump on a train - you might be mistaken for a suicide bomber.

I can see how they might make that mistake, as unfortunate as the result was.

I can also see that the guy who was shot probably wasn't thinking "Oh shit, they think I'm a terrorist" so he was probably not expecting the kind of action. Still, what do you do, shout - "Impending use of lethal force" when a guy does the exact thing you are trying to stop "him" from doing - hopping on a crowded train?

The guy who was killed probably figured that he was ditching a fee avoidance and that he was better off getting away. It's really unfortunate for him that this happened, but I'm having a hard time understanding why he didn't stop for any of the 20 plainclothes officers.

I do think this may have an effect on turnstile jumping in the UK, however.
Eddie Famous
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 1226/2182
EXP: 7011993
For next: 176643

Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 368 days
Last activity: 362 days
#4 Posted on 24.7.05 1709.18
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1713.08
    Originally posted by ges7184
    We need to try to keep terrorism in perspective. It's more a media event than anything else.



Yes that's right. The MEDIA stages terrorist attacks like the London bombings and 9/11. The attacks aren't really a horrific act of murder, they are a TV program. I certainly hope you were on some kind of mind-altering substance when typing that since I find it hard to believe that any sane person would believe such utter (use your own euphemism here).

    Originally posted by ges7184
    You are much more likely to die from just a regular old homicide than an terrorist attack. And you are even more likely to die from an accident. This is not to say that terrorism should be ignored. We just need to be careful not to overreact, and consider all steps carefully (and realize it may be better to assume some risks from terrorism than it would be to assume the price that the effort to try to eliminate ALL risk may cost)


Thank you Mr. 20/20 hindsight. The saddest part of this situation is that people like you were so practically DROOLING to spout this garbage, you are probably glad this guy became swiss cheese.
BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 65

Posts: 660/1091
EXP: 2214943
For next: 120697

Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2875 days
Last activity: 2604 days
#5 Posted on 24.7.05 1747.13
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1748.04
    Originally posted by Ges7184
    Meanwhile, this poor schmoe just trying to head for work gets his head blown off because the police has switched over to a shoot first-ask questions later policy


If he was "just trying to head to work", why did he ignore police instructions to halt? It's certainly regrettable that an innocent man was shot by police, but when you ignore police commands, it seems to me like you are taking your life into your own hands.


    But this is the sort of thing you get into when you feel like you have to try to prevent an attack before it actually happens.


Uh, isn't that the way that we should feel? I'd prefer that we don't play the "Terrorism Waiting Game".


    This is why we are on to something with the idea that one is persumed innocent until proven guilty.


Think of it this way. A cop is chasing a suspect. The cop tells the suspect to "halt". Instead of heeding the cop's warning, the suspect reaches into his jacket as if to remove something (a gun?). Would you say that in this situation, where the cop's life was in danger, that the suspect should be "innocent until proven guilty"? Now imagine that instead of it being one cop, it was dozens of civillians on a subway train.


    It's more a media event than anything else.


I'd really like to know what that means.


    and realize it may be better to assume some risks from terrorism than it would be to assume the price that the effort to try to eliminate ALL risk may cost


But the "risks" in this case would be that the suspect was a suicide bomber - meaning that many innocent civilians would have been killed on the subway. Is that an acceptable risk to take?

It's all well and good to criticize the cops in hindsight, but given what I've read about this, I'd like to think that cops would act this way in another similar situation.


(edited by BigSteve on 24.7.05 1847)
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 1160/1494
EXP: 3961429
For next: 44650

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 78 days
Last activity: 20 hours
#6 Posted on 24.7.05 1819.54
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1824.15
    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
      Originally posted by ges7184
      We need to try to keep terrorism in perspective. It's more a media event than anything else.



    Yes that's right. The MEDIA stages terrorist attacks like the London bombings and 9/11. The attacks aren't really a horrific act of murder, they are a TV program. I certainly hope you were on some kind of mind-altering substance when typing that since I find it hard to believe that any sane person would believe such utter (use your own euphemism here).




What I mean by "media event" is that the act itself is not really in and of itself what the terrorist is shooting for. Blowing up a building or killing a few folks will do little to bring down a world power. It's the media attention that follows, and any fear that might cause, and attention it may get among potential future recruits, that makes terrorism a feasible tactic. Without media, terrorism is not nearly as effective. (I definitely don't mean that the attacks are staged.)


    Eddie Famous
    Thank you Mr. 20/20 hindsight. The saddest part of this situation is that people like you were so practically DROOLING to spout this garbage, you are probably glad this guy became swiss cheese.


And I am glad you know me so well. You know my thoughts and feelings. Why, yes, I was drooling. In fact, I had to wipe the drool off my keyboard to finish typing the message. Kinda gross actually. And I did indeed throw a party. Your invitation must have been lost in the mail. Because obviously anybody that refers to a dead man as becoming "swiss cheese" has the kind of sensitivity that would be welcomed in my world!

As far as the other comments go, the many about him running from the police, that's fair. However, to play devil's advocate, I will note that all the accounts I've read so far have indicated he was being chased by "plainclothes" officers. Maybe the man didn't realize that he was being chased by police officers, and was simply running because he thought he was in danger. Just a thought. It could also well be what Guru suggested as well, or something else entirely.



(edited by ges7184 on 24.7.05 1820)

(edited by ges7184 on 24.7.05 1908)
Eddie Famous
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 1227/2182
EXP: 7011993
For next: 176643

Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 368 days
Last activity: 362 days
#7 Posted on 24.7.05 1852.58
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1853.18
    Originally posted by ges7184
    And I am glad you know me so well. You know my thoughts and feelings.


It's really tough to figure out where you are coming from when you come up with excuses like the following for the guy running away from police in what could certainly have been a terrorist situation...

    Originally posted by ges7184
    However, to play devil's advocate, I will note that all the accounts I've read so far have indicated he was being chased by "plainclothes" officers. Maybe the man didn't realize that he was being chased by police officers, and was simply running because he thought he was in danger. Just a thought.


Ridiculous. Maybe he thought he was being filmed as part of a reality prank show by the vicious media trying to kill innocent people under the guise of reporting terrorist acts.

    Originally posted by ges7184
    It's the media attention that follows, and any fear that might cause, and attention it may get among potential future recruits, that makes terrorism a feasible tactic. Without media, terrorism is not nearly as effective.


Yes, you are correct. If the media had completely ignored the 9/11 attack, those people who were killed in the towers and planes would still be alive today.

By the way, ask the innocents of Chechnya how effective terrorism is there. Barely covered in World media, that one. Or all the terrorist attacks in the African continent, or in Thailand. They'll be glad to know that no one was killed or lives ruined since the world didn't get coverage of them. Damn us media!


(edited by Eddie Famous on 24.7.05 1659)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 214

Posts: 6577/16369
EXP: 144109540
For next: 1615880

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 1 hour
Last activity: 31 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on 24.7.05 1922.17
Reposted on: 24.7.12 1923.12
Eddie...cool it.
Lord of the Manor
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 161/280
EXP: 306986
For next: 1127

Since: 24.2.03
From: London, United Kingdom

Since last post: 638 days
Last activity: 560 days
#9 Posted on 24.7.05 2024.48
Reposted on: 24.7.12 2026.49
Trust me, the media are not necessary to make the terrost attacks worse. I've found that they've hlped here, because at least you can get a sense of what the hell is going on when there's all this madness surrounding you. The reality is horrific and that's what is reported here and I feel better for that because I would much rather be informed than not.
ekedolphin
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 2618/5387
EXP: 27110971
For next: 21033

Since: 12.1.02
From: Indianapolis, IN; now residing in Suffolk, VA

Since last post: 161 days
Last activity: 1 day
#10 Posted on 25.7.05 0032.02
Reposted on: 25.7.12 0032.08
Sorry, but I don't buy the argument that de Menezes was killed due to police incompetence. The city of London has been the site of two separate terrorist attacks within two weeks. There's no way de Menezes could not have known that, seeing as how he had been living in the UK for the last three years (and even if he hadn't been, anyone with access to a television set must surely have known about it).

As it turns out, he wasn't a terrorist, or at least there was no imminent threat from him. But there was absolutely no way of knowing that at the time, and the police were absolutely justified in doing what they did. They had probable cause to suspect that he was about to engage in a terrorist activity, and it's better to kill one person and have him not be a terrorist than to back off him and have him be a terrorist.

I mean, what if the police had been correct in their suspicion? We'd be criticizing them for not exercising lethal force, and hundreds of people would be dead. So I'll shed no tears for Jean Charles de Menezes-- he should have known better than to turnstile-jump into a subway, run from twenty uniformed police, and choose not to follow their instructions to halt. That's a damn stupid thing to do even if terrorism isn't something expected. If you do it in a city with the recent history of London, you're taking your life into your own hands.

I just hope that this incident doesn't make the London police gun-shy about doing the same thing in a similar situation. Because a terrorist could be counting on that, and the next guy might very well actually be carrying a bomb.
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 2924/3273
EXP: 12823537
For next: 267816

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 233 days
Last activity: 34 days
#11 Posted on 25.7.05 0349.06
Reposted on: 25.7.12 0349.07
1) Plainclothes police, eke. They were *not* wearing uniforms.

2) There are extenuating circumstances here, and I completely understand why the police did what they did. But the basic situation here is this: Plainclothes police officers tried to stop a suspect. The suspect ran. Police officers proceeded to shoot and kill the suspect.

In my opinion, that's not a desireable outcome to the situation. It's as unacceptable as a police officer shouting in the middle of the street, "Police! Freeze!" and then shooting everybody who runs. No amount of terrorism makes that situation acceptable.

However, there are times when things get out of hand and police officers have to make split second decisions about whether the suspect is attempting to blow up a train, or grabbing a weapon, or something of that sort. It happens all the time. Sometimes bad decisions are made and innocent people die. I don't fault the police for this - it comes with the job. But it's still a tragedy and combating terrorism shouldn't be any form of free pass.

-Jag
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 2005/2042
EXP: 6332931
For next: 59868

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3068 days
Last activity: 281 days
#12 Posted on 25.7.05 0836.11
Reposted on: 25.7.12 0838.25
    Originally posted by Eddie Famous
    Ridiculous. Maybe he thought he was being filmed as part of a reality prank show by the vicious media trying to kill innocent people under the guise of reporting terrorist acts.


News flash: if I'm walking down the street and a bunch of people start chasing me out of the blue, and they're not wearing police uniforms, I'm running.

If I'm a dark-skinned individual in a country that's just been hit twice in a month by terrorist attacks and a bunch of non-uniformed people start chasing me out of the blue, you BET I'm running. For all I know, I may be about to be curbstomped by angry locals just for LOOKING like an Arabic Muslim.

I doubt that he knew that his apartment was under police surveillance. I doubt that his first impulse was to stop and check the credentials of the people who were pursuing him, as all good-thinking innocent people do when confronted in public by plainclothed strangers. I'm not sure that he had time to think "Rationally, if these are policemen looking to arrest me for something I had nothing to do with, I have nothing to fear. I should simply stop, cooperate, and be confident that I will be exonerated, the public will be forgiving after my name and face have been plastered all over the headlines, and everyone will simply accept that I really did have nothing to do with this."

Instead, out of nowhere, he had people screaming FREEZE! at him on his way to work, his fight-or-flight instinct kicked in, he panicked, he ran, he tripped, and it cost him his life. I doubt he expected that to happen, either.

Being a cop isn't easy in peaceful times, much less in times like these, but taking a life should _always_ be the last resort. The cop in this case made an adrenaline-fueled decision and screwed up badly. Nobody should be screaming "Disband Scotland Yard" because he did, but it should also make them think long and hard about a shoot-to-kill policy in incidents like these.
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 408/810
EXP: 1529509
For next: 48046

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 141 days
Last activity: 12 days
#13 Posted on 25.7.05 0947.27
Reposted on: 25.7.12 0947.41
If I'm a dark-skinned individual in a country that's just been hit twice in a month by terrorist attacks and a bunch of non-uniformed people start chasing me out of the blue, you BET I'm running. For all I know, I may be about to be curbstomped by angry locals just for LOOKING like an Arabic Muslim.

The article described him as light skinned, Brazilian, and Roman Catholic.

My questions concern the plainclothed policemen. First, at what point did they pull their gun? Did they wait until the guy was running and therefore couldn't see the gun? Or, did the guy see the guns? Also, I understand they they were not in uniform, but how did they look? Meaning, did they look like ordinary people? Or, if you look twice, can you tell that they are some sort of policeman or security person?

This was certainly a tragedy, but the available evidence seems to point to the victim ultimately bearing the majority (but not all) the blame. Unfortunately, everything the guy did screamed terrorist.
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 2006/2042
EXP: 6332931
For next: 59868

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3068 days
Last activity: 281 days
#14 Posted on 25.7.05 1138.54
Reposted on: 25.7.12 1139.06
    Originally posted by Corajudo
    The article described him as light skinned, Brazilian, and Roman Catholic.


Light-skinned, perhaps, though one need not be particularly swarthy to look Arabic (particularly in Britain). He may have been Brazilian and Roman Catholic rather than Saudi and Muslim, but can one tell that from a glance? Someone who'd throw-bricks-first-ask-questions-later might not.

I may be a white-bread suburban American boy, but I can empathize as to how those who aren't might feel a wee bit twitchy in these circumstances, for obvious reasons.

There's a fine line between necessary and excessive force, and the cops in this case didn't have adequate time to peruse the How To Deal With Suspected Terrorists handbook. That said, five in the head was a bit much (especially if the guy was DOWN), and the comments of "Better innocent and dead than terrorist and alive" fucking chill me to the bone. Shoot to wound > shoot to kill should be the policy unless the officer's DEAD sure of his facts and there is no alternative.

Not condemning the officer yet, just saying.
Lord of the Manor
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 162/280
EXP: 306986
For next: 1127

Since: 24.2.03
From: London, United Kingdom

Since last post: 638 days
Last activity: 560 days
#15 Posted on 25.7.05 1224.48
Reposted on: 25.7.12 1225.52
    Originally posted by vsp
    Shoot to wound > shoot to kill should be the policy unless the officer's DEAD sure of his facts and there is no alternative.

    Not condemning the officer yet, just saying.



That's fine under normal circumstances, but the point here is that if a suspect is a suspected suicide bomber, shooting to wound does nothing. The bomber can still trigger the explosives, it doesn't take much. The head shot strategy is to make sure the CNS is shut down therefore making detonation impossible. Also, do you really suggest shooting a suspected suicide bomber anywhere covered by clothing, not knowing where the explosives on him?
BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 65

Posts: 662/1091
EXP: 2214943
For next: 120697

Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2875 days
Last activity: 2604 days
#16 Posted on 25.7.05 1330.27
Reposted on: 25.7.12 1331.08
    Originally posted by vsp
    Light-skinned, perhaps, though one need not be particularly swarthy to look Arabic (particularly in Britain). He may have been Brazilian and Roman Catholic rather than Saudi and Muslim, but can one tell that from a glance? Someone who'd throw-bricks-first-ask-questions-later might not.


So you really think that there is any likelihood that a guy who is neither Arab nor Muslim thought to himself, "Uh-Oh, I think a band of racists are chasing me, and I've been mistaken for an Arab Muslim! Better run"? Or would it be more likely that, when chased by twenty individuals all brandishing weapons and shouting "Freeze!", it might occur to this individual that these were cops rather than a band of thugs that just happened by? Your scenario seems like a huge stretch.


    That said, five in the head was a bit much (especially if the guy was DOWN), and the comments of "Better innocent and dead than terrorist and alive" fucking chill me to the bone. Shoot to wound > shoot to kill should be the policy unless the officer's DEAD sure of his facts and there is no alternative.


This doesn't exactly comfort me, either. However, how much more sure should these officers have been. Of course in hindsight they weren't sure enough, but would you have them wait for the suspect to actually detonate the bomb?


    I'm not sure that he had time to think "Rationally, if these are policemen looking to arrest me for something I had nothing to do with, I have nothing to fear. I should simply stop, cooperate, and be confident that I will be exonerated, the public will be forgiving after my name and face have been plastered all over the headlines, and everyone will simply accept that I really did have nothing to do with this."


Are you saying that people should run from the cops if they're innocent? Now, I understand your point, but the flip side to that is, if you run from the cops, you take your life into your hands.

Is it tragic that an innocent man was killed by police? Of course it was. But hindsight is 20/20, and I would really like to know what anyone here would have done differently in this situation (other than "be more sure when you're going to shoot someone"). Like I said in my first post, what if a suspect is confronted by police and reaches into his pocket (as if to draw a gun)? The cop can't be sure that the suspect has a gun, so should he wait until he sees the barrel before taking action? It's the same type of situation here: the cop was (understandably) under the presumption that the suspect had the ability to lethal force.
Canard
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 1/92
EXP: 51538
For next: 6813

Since: 25.7.05
From: England

Since last post: 122 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#17 Posted on 25.7.05 1342.35
Reposted on: 25.7.12 1343.02
Well they've come up with a reason why he may have been running from the police - apparently he was in the country on an expired student visa. As he was working illegally as well, I guess he probably thought they were trying to arrest him for that and he could probably outrun them for now.

More info here : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4713753.stm
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 2008/2042
EXP: 6332931
For next: 59868

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3068 days
Last activity: 281 days
#18 Posted on 25.7.05 1344.59
Reposted on: 25.7.12 1345.01
    Originally posted by BigSteve
    Are you saying that people should run from the cops if they're innocent? Now, I understand your point, but the flip side to that is, if you run from the cops, you take your life into your hands.


Is there something I've missed that clearly indicates that _he knew they were cops_ when he ran? You could ask him what he was thinking, but, well, they shot him dead, which sort of takes out that option.

All _I_ know is that if an acknowledged shoot-to-kill policy has led to the death of an innocent, the policy has failed and needs some rethinking.

And, yes, if I'm minding my own business some day and angry armed men show up and are apparently after me, I'm getting the hell out of there by any means possible. If they're cops and make that clear, that changes the circumstances.

EDIT: ^^ Caught me while I was typing. If that is in fact why he was running, I can understand why he did what he did, though even that doesn't make him deserving of involuntary ventilation.




(edited by vsp on 25.7.05 1449)
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 104

Posts: 2087/3059
EXP: 11613000
For next: 249165

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 2021 days
Last activity: 1955 days
#19 Posted on 25.7.05 1509.19
Reposted on: 25.7.12 1511.20
"But hindsight is 20/20, and I would really like to know what anyone here would have done differently in this situation (other than "be more sure when you're going to shoot someone")."

Taken him down before he got anywhere near a tube station, and preferrably within minutes of him walking out of that surveilled flat's door. Fewer civilians, fewer enclosed spaces, a much higher chance of getting him into custody without resorting to putting five bullets into the poor guy's head.
dwaters
Lap cheong
Level: 78

Posts: 382/1615
EXP: 4316921
For next: 65324

Since: 16.10.02
From: Connecticut

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#20 Posted on 26.7.05 0928.47
Reposted on: 26.7.12 0929.01



"Are you saying that people should run from the cops if they're innocent? Now, I understand your point, but the flip side to that is, if you run from the cops, you take your life into your hands."





Unless you are driving a white Ford Bronco slowly down the freeway. (Sorry, that's what comes to mind when I think of a police chase).

I really feel for the poor commuters who had to witness someone being shot in the head before going in to work. I bet that image sticks in your brain forever....

Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: politically correct sayings/phrases question
Next thread: Discovery launched
Previous thread: Hanoi Jane returns...and Ricky Martin saves us from stereotypes
(280 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Man shot in Britain had nothing to do with bombingsRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.243 seconds.