Apparently, the death of Jean Charles de Menezes was not caused by a police 'Shoot to kill' policy, it was caused by terrorism.
In their press release of 3rd September, prior to their meeting on 6th September, Len Duvall, chair of the MPA, says: “The background to the IPCC report is the tragic death of Jean Charles de Menezes. He became the 53rd victim, along with many injured, caused by terrorism in the capital in July 2005."
So are terrorists now relying on our police to fulfill their deadly aims? Also, doesn't this cast considerable doubt on the impartiality of the MPA 'independent statutory body' in its role of allegedly overlooking the work of the MPS?
For full press release see:
http://www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2007/07-041.htm
So are terrorists now relying on our police to fulfill their deadly aims? Also, doesn't this cast considerable doubt on the impartiality of the MPA 'independent statutory body' in its role of allegedly overlooking the work of the MPS?
For full press release see:
http://www.mpa.gov.uk/news/press/2007/07-041.htm
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
The lie of the land
09.09.2007 10:21
Because the government has refused to open an independent enquiry (not that such a beast remains anymore thanks to the Enquiries Act), and we are left only with the "official narrative" that clearly leaves more questions than it can answer, they leave themselves wide open for charges of complicity, incompetence, duplicity and even conspiracy in the 7/7 bombings. The official evidence just doesn't match up with events on the ground, and there are just too many coincidences to take their account seriously.
The government is accomplishing the terrorists apparent aims - the government is shutting down free speech, protest, the right to hold governments to account, and basic civil liberties of its citizens. Who was it again that is supposed to attack us because they hate our freedoms? Well, either the government is determined to remove those freedoms (therefore we won't get attacked) or the government is achieving those same ends themselves and are, ipso facto, the same terrorists they warn us against. They surely can't have it both ways.
Doubting Thomas
Don't believe a word
09.09.2007 17:05
As for Len Duvall's claim that, “The IPCC is an independent organisation". It is a fact that they didn't set foot on the platform for five days. That is not the sign of an independent organisation, it is the sign of Uncle Toms.
A Person