De Menezes Murderer/Patsy Rewarded
Various | 21.02.2007 02:42 | Analysis | Anti-racism | Repression | London
Surveillance video proved the police to be lying about the incident. It appears that this officer was rewarded for covering for the real shooter, who may have worked for an intelligence service, and murdered the electrician who saw something he should not have. You do not empty a clip into someone's head at point-blank range.
De Menezes shooting officer promotedFrom correspondents in London
A SENIOR British officer involved in the killing of a Brazilian allegedly mistaken for a suicide bomber on a London underground train was promoted today to a top policing job, looking after the royal family's safety.
Cressida Dick was in charge of the operation that led to Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, being shot seven times in the head on an underground train at Stockwell station in south London in July 2005.
His family said they are "disgusted" by Ms Dick's promotion.
The shooting came amid frenzy in London over the threat of suicide bombers.
Two weeks earlier four British Islamists had (allegdly) blown themselves up on three underground trains and a bus, killing 52 people, and detectives say that the day before the shooting five other suspects had attempted to carry out copycat attacks.
(However, both the police and Blair Regime were caught in several lies about the incident which, like 911, remains adequately explained or investigated.)
The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), which oversees the London force, said, despite "unprecedented circumstances", Dick had been promoted to the rank of Deputy Assistant Commissioner.
Her job, which begins on March 19, has responsibility for the protection of the royal family and other senior individuals.
"Having considered these circumstances, we are satisfied that our decision to confirm promotion is the right one to take at this time," said Len Duvall, the MPA's chairman.
"The MPA is keenly aware that the people of London must have confidence in the police who work, in what are often difficult circumstances, to protect them.
"By confirming this promotion we are making it clear that the officer retains our full confidence."
(or is being rewarded for her silence ...)
The family of de Menezes said they were angry at the news.
"The idea that police officers who were responsible for Jean's killing are being promoted makes me feel sick," said Patricia da Silva Armani, one of Jean's cousins.
"I do not understand how people who kill innocent civilians are allowed to carry on working as if nothing has happened. To promote her is disgraceful."
Last July it was reported by the BBC the police watchdog, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), had recommended Dick face criminal action for her handling of the operation.
However, prosecutors decided no police officers involved in the incident should face action. The Crown Prosecution Service instead ruled the London force as a whole should be prosecuted under health and safety laws.
(Strange behaviour, no?)
Britain's top court, the House of Lords, will rule on a judicial review of the CPS decision not to hold any individual officers responsible after an appeal by de Menezes's family.
The full IPCC report into the shooting will not be made public until that legal action is completed.
www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21255427-5005961,00.html
The true inside facts about the 7/7 London bombings
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp
A SENIOR British officer involved in the killing of a Brazilian allegedly mistaken for a suicide bomber on a London underground train was promoted today to a top policing job, looking after the royal family's safety.
Cressida Dick was in charge of the operation that led to Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, being shot seven times in the head on an underground train at Stockwell station in south London in July 2005.
His family said they are "disgusted" by Ms Dick's promotion.
The shooting came amid frenzy in London over the threat of suicide bombers.
Two weeks earlier four British Islamists had (allegdly) blown themselves up on three underground trains and a bus, killing 52 people, and detectives say that the day before the shooting five other suspects had attempted to carry out copycat attacks.
(However, both the police and Blair Regime were caught in several lies about the incident which, like 911, remains adequately explained or investigated.)
The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), which oversees the London force, said, despite "unprecedented circumstances", Dick had been promoted to the rank of Deputy Assistant Commissioner.
Her job, which begins on March 19, has responsibility for the protection of the royal family and other senior individuals.
"Having considered these circumstances, we are satisfied that our decision to confirm promotion is the right one to take at this time," said Len Duvall, the MPA's chairman.
"The MPA is keenly aware that the people of London must have confidence in the police who work, in what are often difficult circumstances, to protect them.
"By confirming this promotion we are making it clear that the officer retains our full confidence."
(or is being rewarded for her silence ...)
The family of de Menezes said they were angry at the news.
"The idea that police officers who were responsible for Jean's killing are being promoted makes me feel sick," said Patricia da Silva Armani, one of Jean's cousins.
"I do not understand how people who kill innocent civilians are allowed to carry on working as if nothing has happened. To promote her is disgraceful."
Last July it was reported by the BBC the police watchdog, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), had recommended Dick face criminal action for her handling of the operation.
However, prosecutors decided no police officers involved in the incident should face action. The Crown Prosecution Service instead ruled the London force as a whole should be prosecuted under health and safety laws.
(Strange behaviour, no?)
Britain's top court, the House of Lords, will rule on a judicial review of the CPS decision not to hold any individual officers responsible after an appeal by de Menezes's family.
The full IPCC report into the shooting will not be made public until that legal action is completed.
www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21255427-5005961,00.html
The true inside facts about the 7/7 London bombings
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp
Various
Comments
Hide the following 3 comments
this is really old news
21.02.2007 11:44
bored
This is too serious to be dismissed as old news. Kick Len Duvall out first
21.02.2007 18:42
Not bored
Focus Is Interesting
22.02.2007 03:54
It's interesting that the Plant felt compelled to engage in this.
Spot the Freeper
Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven distinct traits:
1) They never actually discuss issues head on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) They tend to pick and choose their opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussion in the particular public arena. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Their disdain for "conspiracy theorists" and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain. Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) An odd kind of "artificial" emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their presentation. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the "image" and are hot and cold with respect to emotions they pretend to have and the more calm or normal communications which are not emotional. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to "act their role in type" as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth.
7) There is also a tendacy to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within. I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
Who Really Shot Him? Who Did They Work For? What Did He See?