Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket
Don't Fall for the PsyOps | 28.07.2005 17:36
The more the LIES of the Bliar Government are peeled away, the more this looks like a deliberate murder, intended to keep an unintended witness silent. Who do the CCTV pictures show doing the actual shooting? Do they work for the London Police, or some other agency? Where was this man's call that morning? He was, after all, an electrician?
Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket
Relatives say Met admits that, contrary to reports, electrician did not leap tube station barrier
Mark Honigsbaum
Thursday July 28, 2005
The Guardian
Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head, was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday.
Speaking at a press conference after a meeting with the Metropolitan police, Vivien Figueiredo, 22, said that the first reports of how her 27-year-old cousin had come to be killed in mistake for a suicide bomber on Friday at Stockwell tube station were wrong.
"He used a travel card," she said. "He had no bulky jacket, he was wearing a jeans jacket. But even if he was wearing a bulky jacket that wouldn't be an excuse to kill him."
Flanked by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished.
"My cousin was an honest and hard working person," said Ms Figueiredo who shared a flat with him in Tulse Hill, south London. "Although we are living in circumstances similar to a war, we should not be exterminating people unjustly."
Another cousin, Patricia da Silva Armani, 21, said he was in Britain legally to work and study, giving him no reason to fear the police. "An innocent man has been killed as though he was a terrorist," she said. "An incredibly grave error was committed by the British police."
Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill. Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London's streets.
The following day Sir Ian apologised when detectives established that the Brazilian electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London, was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has began an inquiry which is expected to take several months. Yesterday it emerged one armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Ms Figuerdo condemned Sir Ian's decision to authorise the leave, saying she wanted to see the man who shot her cousin, and he should be in jail.
The body of Mr de Menezes is being flown to Brazil tonight for a funeral tomorrow. Simultaneously, a memorial service will be held at Westminster Cathedral, with TV coverage beamed live to Brazil.
Ms Peirce condemned Sir Ian's statements on the case, saying there had been a "regrettable rush to judgment".
She was astonished that the phrase "shoot to kill" was being used as if it was a legitimate legal term; the family would demand "transparency" both as to the facts of what had happened and on the policy.
She added that the family were ready to cooperate with the complaints body, and she saw no reason for delay: "They know what their questions are and we see no reasons why they should not be answered.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1537457,00.html
Ok, this thing with the murdered Brazilian is just too much. Why isn't anybody talking about this in what would seem to be an extremely logical deduction. Consider:
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.eyewitness/index.html
"As the man got on the train I looked at his face. He looked from left to right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, like a cornered fox. He looked absolutely petrified," said Whitby.
"The next thing I saw was this guy jump over the barriers and the police officers were chasing after him and everyone was just shouting 'Get out, get out,'" Wells said.
"He half-tripped, was half-pushed to the floor. The policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand, he held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now this is saying they thought he was a suicide bomber... well is that how you confront a suicide bomber? I mean the man is wearing pounds of explosives, or must be, so is it the best tactic to chase him into a crowded area, throw him to the ground, and fire at his torso five times, exactly where the explosives must be...?
We all know, now, that Menezes was not a suicide bomber. He was just a Brazilian electrician. So why, then, was he so scared or as the witness says "petrified". I mean if the police are chasing you (or just some random 3 guys, as by some account the "police" were plainly clothed) then would you be "petrified"?
You might be startled, a nerved, surprised, ready to defend yourself or maybe scream for help (as he was in a crowded area). But not petrified!
It seems we have both the victim and the officers behaving not at all as they should have been. The police behaved as though Menezes was not a suicide bomber (or at least not one about to blow up) and Menezes did not act as the innocent electrician that we're told he was.
http://rense.com/general67/cops.htm
"Jean was followed from the apartment building where he resided, to a subway station, where he was then accosted by 'plain clothes officers' who chased him down to the train, tripped him, jumped on him, and then shot him five times in the torso."
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.tube/index.html
The shooting is a rarity in London, where police generally are not armed except for special response units.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.eyewitness/index.html
"Then I heard shots. I thought it was three but someone else said five.
It sounded like a *silencer gun* going off, and then there was blind panic, with people shouting and screaming and just running away.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odd isn't it, going from no guns at all, as they usually are, to carrying silenced weapons... Why? To cause less panic... maybe, but I wouldn't imagine silenced weapons are standard issue now in London.
Could those have been special operatives?
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.tube/index.html
Police said the man had emerged from a house that was under police observation, prompting surveillance officers to follow him to the Stockwell station.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So going back to my original point, what were they doing leading him to a crowded area while suspecting he was a suicide bomber! They should be fired just for that!
-Unless they knew he was not a suicide bomber…
If we examine closely the reported behavior of the policeman and the victim, two odd conclusions might come to mind. First, it seems the police had full intent on going after Menezes and not because he was a suicide bomber, (as they followed him from his home and confronted him way late, and not at all as a suicide bomber should be confronted).
Also the behavior of Menezes resembles someone about to get killed, and who knows it, and not someone who's about to get questioned or at best, arrested or beaten up and mugged.
With the above, lets consider:
The police, officially, followed Menezes not knowing what is up, except that he looked "suspicious". They followed him from a building that was under surveillance, as well as, was being searched (a fact Menezes could not have missed). I can't find direct reference that the building was being searched (it has been reported by CNN) but since we know the bombings had occurred prior to this incident I don't believe the police could have been just "waiting for something" at the building, they'd either be searching, or not there at all. What could they have been surveying, the terrorist are either there or not, they must have been searching the whole building. However it was not Menezes in particular that was their target, that seems certain, initially anyways.
Once at the subway station nonetheless, they started chasing
him and he started running away... Well suicide bombers don't run, they blow up, the police know this, so what the hell... Wouldn't the fact he's running mean that he's not a suicide bomber to the police? Else the fact that they chased him would imply the police do not fear death; or that they knew he is not a suicide bomber. And why would you shoot him EIGHT times when he's strapped with explosives... explosives could explode no...? -the officers being a foot away and all… Else, if they thought he was not a suicide bomber but a terrorist, why shoot him five times to ensure that he's dead? Isn't it better to get him alive and get him talking?
Since we know that the building was under surveillance, we can safely assume there must have been a reason for that, as I'm sure every random building is not under surveillance in London right now.
Reports have indicated that the building was a residence of one of the suspected bombers and therefore, it wasn't just under "surveillance" but the police had been working in that building. If so, Menezes must have seen the cops around the area and must have been aware of the situation (with the terrorist bombings and all and the extremely jumpy authorities) which causes even more confusion as to why would he behave as he did, he wasn't that dumb, he was an educated electrician!
Unless of course we theorize a bit and consider that he saw something he was not supposed to see, at his home building, while the police were working in there. And that something made him convinced to flee as otherwise he knew he is a dead man, if the cops get him. Why else would an educated man that came to a new country to start a new life would behave so odd?
This is just a suggestion though... If , for example Menezes, was a special agent (I don’t think there’s any chance he was involved with terror) then that would explain many things… but not everything.
(Alleged) Shooting officer sent on holiday
Jean Charles de Menezes
A police officer involved in the fatal shooting of an innocent Brazilian man at a London Tube station has been given a holiday paid for by Scotland Yard.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4720979.stm
Relatives say Met admits that, contrary to reports, electrician did not leap tube station barrier
Mark Honigsbaum
Thursday July 28, 2005
The Guardian
Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head, was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday.
Speaking at a press conference after a meeting with the Metropolitan police, Vivien Figueiredo, 22, said that the first reports of how her 27-year-old cousin had come to be killed in mistake for a suicide bomber on Friday at Stockwell tube station were wrong.
"He used a travel card," she said. "He had no bulky jacket, he was wearing a jeans jacket. But even if he was wearing a bulky jacket that wouldn't be an excuse to kill him."
Flanked by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished.
"My cousin was an honest and hard working person," said Ms Figueiredo who shared a flat with him in Tulse Hill, south London. "Although we are living in circumstances similar to a war, we should not be exterminating people unjustly."
Another cousin, Patricia da Silva Armani, 21, said he was in Britain legally to work and study, giving him no reason to fear the police. "An innocent man has been killed as though he was a terrorist," she said. "An incredibly grave error was committed by the British police."
Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill. Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London's streets.
The following day Sir Ian apologised when detectives established that the Brazilian electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London, was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has began an inquiry which is expected to take several months. Yesterday it emerged one armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Ms Figuerdo condemned Sir Ian's decision to authorise the leave, saying she wanted to see the man who shot her cousin, and he should be in jail.
The body of Mr de Menezes is being flown to Brazil tonight for a funeral tomorrow. Simultaneously, a memorial service will be held at Westminster Cathedral, with TV coverage beamed live to Brazil.
Ms Peirce condemned Sir Ian's statements on the case, saying there had been a "regrettable rush to judgment".
She was astonished that the phrase "shoot to kill" was being used as if it was a legitimate legal term; the family would demand "transparency" both as to the facts of what had happened and on the policy.
She added that the family were ready to cooperate with the complaints body, and she saw no reason for delay: "They know what their questions are and we see no reasons why they should not be answered.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1537457,00.html Ok, this thing with the murdered Brazilian is just too much. Why isn't anybody talking about this in what would seem to be an extremely logical deduction. Consider:
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.eyewitness/index.html "As the man got on the train I looked at his face. He looked from left to right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, like a cornered fox. He looked absolutely petrified," said Whitby.
"The next thing I saw was this guy jump over the barriers and the police officers were chasing after him and everyone was just shouting 'Get out, get out,'" Wells said.
"He half-tripped, was half-pushed to the floor. The policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand, he held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now this is saying they thought he was a suicide bomber... well is that how you confront a suicide bomber? I mean the man is wearing pounds of explosives, or must be, so is it the best tactic to chase him into a crowded area, throw him to the ground, and fire at his torso five times, exactly where the explosives must be...?
We all know, now, that Menezes was not a suicide bomber. He was just a Brazilian electrician. So why, then, was he so scared or as the witness says "petrified". I mean if the police are chasing you (or just some random 3 guys, as by some account the "police" were plainly clothed) then would you be "petrified"?
You might be startled, a nerved, surprised, ready to defend yourself or maybe scream for help (as he was in a crowded area). But not petrified!
It seems we have both the victim and the officers behaving not at all as they should have been. The police behaved as though Menezes was not a suicide bomber (or at least not one about to blow up) and Menezes did not act as the innocent electrician that we're told he was.
http://rense.com/general67/cops.htm "Jean was followed from the apartment building where he resided, to a subway station, where he was then accosted by 'plain clothes officers' who chased him down to the train, tripped him, jumped on him, and then shot him five times in the torso."
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.tube/index.html The shooting is a rarity in London, where police generally are not armed except for special response units.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.eyewitness/index.html "Then I heard shots. I thought it was three but someone else said five.
It sounded like a *silencer gun* going off, and then there was blind panic, with people shouting and screaming and just running away.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odd isn't it, going from no guns at all, as they usually are, to carrying silenced weapons... Why? To cause less panic... maybe, but I wouldn't imagine silenced weapons are standard issue now in London.
Could those have been special operatives?
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/22/london.tube/index.html Police said the man had emerged from a house that was under police observation, prompting surveillance officers to follow him to the Stockwell station.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So going back to my original point, what were they doing leading him to a crowded area while suspecting he was a suicide bomber! They should be fired just for that!
-Unless they knew he was not a suicide bomber…
If we examine closely the reported behavior of the policeman and the victim, two odd conclusions might come to mind. First, it seems the police had full intent on going after Menezes and not because he was a suicide bomber, (as they followed him from his home and confronted him way late, and not at all as a suicide bomber should be confronted).
Also the behavior of Menezes resembles someone about to get killed, and who knows it, and not someone who's about to get questioned or at best, arrested or beaten up and mugged.
With the above, lets consider:
The police, officially, followed Menezes not knowing what is up, except that he looked "suspicious". They followed him from a building that was under surveillance, as well as, was being searched (a fact Menezes could not have missed). I can't find direct reference that the building was being searched (it has been reported by CNN) but since we know the bombings had occurred prior to this incident I don't believe the police could have been just "waiting for something" at the building, they'd either be searching, or not there at all. What could they have been surveying, the terrorist are either there or not, they must have been searching the whole building. However it was not Menezes in particular that was their target, that seems certain, initially anyways.
Once at the subway station nonetheless, they started chasing
him and he started running away... Well suicide bombers don't run, they blow up, the police know this, so what the hell... Wouldn't the fact he's running mean that he's not a suicide bomber to the police? Else the fact that they chased him would imply the police do not fear death; or that they knew he is not a suicide bomber. And why would you shoot him EIGHT times when he's strapped with explosives... explosives could explode no...? -the officers being a foot away and all… Else, if they thought he was not a suicide bomber but a terrorist, why shoot him five times to ensure that he's dead? Isn't it better to get him alive and get him talking?
Since we know that the building was under surveillance, we can safely assume there must have been a reason for that, as I'm sure every random building is not under surveillance in London right now.
Reports have indicated that the building was a residence of one of the suspected bombers and therefore, it wasn't just under "surveillance" but the police had been working in that building. If so, Menezes must have seen the cops around the area and must have been aware of the situation (with the terrorist bombings and all and the extremely jumpy authorities) which causes even more confusion as to why would he behave as he did, he wasn't that dumb, he was an educated electrician!
Unless of course we theorize a bit and consider that he saw something he was not supposed to see, at his home building, while the police were working in there. And that something made him convinced to flee as otherwise he knew he is a dead man, if the cops get him. Why else would an educated man that came to a new country to start a new life would behave so odd?
This is just a suggestion though... If , for example Menezes, was a special agent (I don’t think there’s any chance he was involved with terror) then that would explain many things… but not everything.
(Alleged) Shooting officer sent on holiday
Jean Charles de Menezes
A police officer involved in the fatal shooting of an innocent Brazilian man at a London Tube station has been given a holiday paid for by Scotland Yard.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4720979.stm
Don't Fall for the PsyOps
