<p>If indeed Britain captures some of them alive, would the use of torture in order to obtain vital information on other bombers and plans be acceptable? I say yes.</p>
<p>No. But not only on humanitarian grounds. The Israelis have studied this issue in depth for more than a decade, and have found that information obtained this way tends toward being extremely unreliable, as well as putting their own people at risk.</p>
<p>Do you think torture works…from what I have read, useful information is rare…and I would hazard a guess that the people doing the bombings are low on the totem pole, are given minimum information, etc.</p>
<p>One of the suspected bombers was shot dead at a Tube station apparently ready to carry out another attack.</p>
<p>The police are hunting the other 3.</p>
<p>The one they shot is has been shown not to be involved…the British police have admitted to shooting the wrong…he was on the ground and the police put 5 bullets in his head…that according to witnesses on the train</p>
<p>you believed torture was acceptable…do you think that x number of individuals in London are going to be knowledgeable about the financing and organization??? Enough to stop this worldwide? London, Beirut, Sharm El Sheikh. Do you think torture is going to reveal the motivation and propensity to self destruct/murder for a cause???</p>
<p>All torture does is give a green light for our soldiers to undergo the same treatment and we will have no right to say anything</p>
<p>I guess this discussion will boil down to whether one believes terrorists are treated according to the usual Geneva Conventions.</p>
<p>Here is where that kind of by-any-means-necessary thinking leads:</p>
<p>
Source: <a href=“http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4711021.stm[/url]”>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4711021.stm</a>
Source:<a href=“http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1094380[/url]”>http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1094380</a></p>
<p>If our fears of terrorism lead to western nations abandoning the respect for human rights and individual liberties that characterize our systems of government, then the terrorists have achieved an easy victory. </p>
<p>For those who advocate torture - how many individuals who are innocent or tangentially involved or who are victims of mistaken identity or casual acquaintances of suspected terrorists would it be o.k. to torture in the quest for information?</p>
<p>I hope the Brits are forthcoming with more info on why and how this happened. I wonder how much experience the “gun bobbies” that came to do this deed have?? Most Bobbies don’t carry guns and this seems like a good reason why. I know they have “gun bobbies” who come when summoned so this is very troubling.</p>
<p>I thought at first that it could be lack of experience, but after further reading it appears that the British police have adopted a shoot-to-kill policy with respect to suspected suicide bombers, and their training is specifically to shoot the suspect in the head rather than risk setting off explosives that may be strapped to the body. The rationale for shooting in this case was probably fears that the man was carrying explosives and was about to set them off. </p>
<p>In other words, the officer who fired the shots was probably doing exactly what he was trained to do. Except that he was wrong.</p>
<p>My guess is that the suspect ran and tried to evade the police because he was frightened precisely because he was being followed and then chased – he probably had some other reason to fear police, perhaps immigration status – and also quite likely that there was a language problem as well. We’ll never know what was in his mind – but this case really does show how easily it is for authorities to be wrong. Unfortunately, as they themselves acknowledge, tragically and perhaps criminally wrong. Fear is an emotion that tends to cloud the judgment of everyone who experiences it.</p>
<p>The man that was shot was a Brazillian student, and had a visa to work and study here, he also spoke very good English.</p>
<p>So the police don’t know yet why he didn’t stop.</p>
<p>Hey, had they captured rather than killed him, they could hvae tortured him to gain vital information about the other bombers.</p>
<p>Before accusing the London police of wrongful behaviour, ask yourself this question: How would you have felt about this situation had it turned out that the man did indeed have a bomb under his coat? Suppose also that your son or daughter were nearby and by shooting the man before he had a chance to detonate the bomb that this action saved the lives of the police, your child and all of the other civillians nearby?</p>
<p>To be consistent in your view, you must be willing to be just as critical of the police in the scenario where many lives were saved as the one which actually played out. Likewise, had the police done nothing in the above scenario and your child had been killed, you must be willing to say the police did the right thing by respecting the rights of the bomber, even though it cost the life of your child.</p>
<p>You can not judge the action based on hindsight. You have to evaluate it based on what information was available at the time of a split second decision. Based on what I have read and heard of this case, the police did exactly the right thing and I hope that our police would have the public support to do same thing should they ever be confronted with this situation.</p>
<p>Why was the man from Brazil running from the Police? If the police tell you to stop, you are supposed to stop or face the consquences. If he was not doing anything wrong, they why didn’t he stop?</p>
<p>Was he running from the bobbies? Is this an established fact? Clearly his family/friends in Brazil assert that he clearly understood English language…was he in fact ordered to halt???</p>
<p>I think there were 5 plain clothes officers chasing him, they chased him from a house that was under surveillance, the repeatly told him to stop or they’d shoot, he then entered a tube station and vaulted over the barrier and ran onto a train.</p>
<p>In my opinion the police did the right thing.</p>
<p>A similar thing happened after the Madrid bombers, one of the bombers was cornered in a house, instead of shooting on sight, the police tried to arrest him, he then blew himself up along with one other police officer.</p>
<p>Well if he was chased that far and didn’t cooperate…as in follow the order to cease and desist…they had little option. So now the bobbies will be prosecuted???</p>
<p>The police officer has been taken off firearm duty, an investigation is pending.</p>
<p>This is usual procedure.</p>
<p>They did have an option, the guy was on the ground and the police officer who shot him within 2-3 feet of his head…this is according to several witnesses on the subway…so he was in custody basically and they shot him 5 times in the head? From what they said, the police, is that they followed the victim because he left the building they were watching, when they saw him enter the tube, they chased and took action, the victim ran and when he fell to the ground (this part from witnesses on the tube) he was shoot in the head 5 times</p>
<p>Ad the police chasing him were in “plain clothes”, so it is scary to say the least</p>