London under siege?
So, it appears that this rather cynical post at Shot By Both Sides was correct, and the police messed up big-time in Stockwell yesterday. The guy they followed from a flat they'd been watching in a housing estate in Tulse Hill, challenged at the entrance to the tube station, who fled onto the tube and got five bullets in his head from police who assumed he was a suicide bomber, is totally innocent - at least, unconnected to the recent bombings or any other bomb plot. I just heard on the ITV news that the guy was of South American origin, and was therefore quite possibly not even a Muslim.
The rumours have been flying around London. As ever, the Evening Standard passed judgement on the man, calling him a "bomber" (dead men can't sue), which no doubt sold many papers to people who then got the "suspected" bit in the small print. In a particular restaurant I went to, I heard it from someone who thought he knew what he was talking about that the staff had been tipped off and that the police had got their man. Then we hear that he was thought not to have a bomb, and now we know they got the wrong man.
Well, you can never be too careful, can you? I mean, never mind a bomb, the guy might have been carrying a table leg.
In the wake of a second set of terrorist attempts on London, the rhetoric of pulling-together and Blitz spirit have given way to the suggestions that a crackdown on civil liberties might be inevitable and justified. A classic example of this is the twaddle in the Daily Mail today. Stop and search in the streets and on the Underground, police road blocks, snooping, increased detention powers ... oh, and don't even think of listening to the anti-racist crowd. Never mind treading on the toes of ethnic minorities or invading their "family sanctums". This is the war on terror.
I actually went back to the bookshop to get a picture of the guy who wrote the piece in the Daily Mail. He seemed to be a middle-aged white man, which means he has no excuse for not knowing why stop-and-search became unpopular with the so-called race industry and why it was abandoned: it was used in a malicious and racist way by police and ended up causing a riot - along with the shooting of an innocent black woman which left her paralysed for life. Harrassing people in the street because of their ethnicity, or because they drive a car too flash for their apparent station in the world, is just wrong.
Who is going to be "under siege" here anyway? Eight small bombs, only four of which actually explode, is not a siege. People who cannot go out to do their lawful business without being hassled by the police (perhaps more than once per journey, rather than once every few months as is currently the case) are the ones who will feel under siege. Of course, people will usually consent to having their bags searched by the police, as long as the police are courteous, and do not betray malice, hostility or racism.
The problem is when you startle people, and then assume that their lack of co-operation constitutes guilt. People from third-world countries, or from ethnic minorities with a history of suffering police harrassment, are much less likely to trust the police than middle-class people who might perceive the police as on their side and out there to protect them. In Northern Ireland, I remember very clearly an incident of a man who was shot dead in the street by the army after refusing to stop when ordered to; this man had suffered prolonged harrassment from the army. (Cases of this happening to deaf people are not unknown either.)
One of the first things Tony Blair said in his speech after the 7th July bombings was that we would not let them change us, but the imposition of something like martial law, with a shoot-to-kill policy in the streets, would be doing just that. Londoners might get on the tubes as normal after a bombing - after all, you have to get where you're going, don't you? But the story would be different if this country starts looking like a locked-down military dictatorship and the people who are supposed to be protecting us from the terrorists end up shooting us in the streets themselves. Terrorists, unlike the police, don't get the benefit of the doubt when they kill people.
Comments
It is a shame what happened to that poor fellow which shows why Al Quran speaks so harshly against those who cause trails and tribulations.
Al Qaida and other mufsids hold nothing but thier own deviance sacred. They cause fitna where ever they go. Remember Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. They created this environment and they should be to blame for it.
I doubt sincerely that had these bombings and muders not happened there wouldnt be a need for the authorities to be so aggressive. They have a legal and moral obligation to protect the people of London and that is probably what they were trying to do. Thier ignorance of who they were actually chasing down is an excusable accident.
Wa Allahu Alim.
Posted by: bikhair | July 23, 2005 9:07 PM
An excusable accident? "Accident" is a dangerous word, US army uses the word very often when they "accidently" bomb the schools or hospitals in Iraq. The circumstance was in tense, that is true, lots of pressure, yes probably true, but the Met is police, not a baker. It is their job and what they get paid for to protect the innocent and catch the bad buy. Yes they are human too but hey, one electrician from Brazil was killed with 5 shot in his head BY MISTAKE. It is not a excusable mistake - can you say that if this happens to your family? I doubt it.
Posted by: milan tokyo | July 24, 2005 1:07 AM
Ironically how many "witnesses" describe the event in front of tv cameras, saying "oh yeah, he looked pakistani" - he doesnt look anything close to pakistani!!!
There's too much wrong info that the public is given. My friend told me of an incident earlier that morning, that didnt even get any press.
Posted by: Keith | July 24, 2005 3:07 AM
So like, I'm Chinese and according to Metro police they're looking for a "Muslim of South Asian or African descent" and most most certainly Asians and Africans look SOOOOOOOOOOOOooooo similar, I mean its not like they live on different continents across a treacherous ocean separated by the tallest mountain range in the world. So I guess this means I'll be nixing any London plans anytime soon. I certainly wouldn't want to be seen trying to run after a train or bus because I'm chronically late all the time. Plus getting executed in front of dozens of people? Not exactly the way I wish to go. And like how do you fit "not ethic" when this guy was a WHITE GUY. Brazilian = WHITE GUY. I'm sorry but in my definition if you're of European descent you're a white guy. So if white people can be passed off as a dark-skinned Muslim, then I'm pretty sure a Chinese person is going to get executed by MI5. At least if that happens I hope it'll be James Bond!
Posted by: Eric | July 24, 2005 9:07 AM
I understand your surprise that a hispanic person could be mistaken for Pakistani in the UK, but believe me the UK is in many ways still a very insular society, and I can understand how people make the mistake. I'd hate to say your fears about mistaken identity are unfounded, but they're not, after all there are plenty of nutters kicking off in Thailand and Indonesia right now, and the average British policeman won't be able to tell them apart from the Chinese. Having said that, London is a city of 9 million people, so the odds are far more likely that you will be hit by a bus than shot by a copper. Just don't wear heavy clothes, and don't run away of someone points a gun at you, and whatever you do don't run towards a tube, bus or crowd of people.
Have a nice day.
:-(
Posted by: Blewyn | July 24, 2005 10:07 AM
"...the UK is in many ways still a very insular society..."
I've worked across the country. London is not like the rest of the UK.
Posted by: thabet | July 24, 2005 10:07 AM
of course, how some Brazilians pride themselves on being âÂÂwhiteâ and âÂÂnot Latino/Hispanicâ is another story for another time.
Well, Latinos are Americans of Cuban or Mexican or other Latin American origin, many of them mestizos, ie part native American. That's not the case with Brazilians - there are of course natives, but also blacks and people from all over Europe. So if they are, say, German-Brazilian or Ukrainian-Brazilian, they will not think of themselves as Latino any more than French Canadians or Italians do. (Some of them in fact still speak German.)
Posted by: Yusuf Smith | July 24, 2005 12:07 PM
I agree with what Eric said in principle and I haven't seen the picture of the man who was shot, but there are tons of different shades of people in Brazil. In fact, Brazil is famous for having people of all shapes and sizes. There are black Brazilians, white Brazilians, brown Brazilians....and every shade in between. My Algerian husband, who is fair skinned but with African hair (extremely rough and curly), gets mistaken for Brazilian specifically because of his unique bi-racial look. Still I do not condone in anyway shooting, much less shooting an innocent man, and I'm not saying it was an excusable mistake because he might have been brown. Far from it. All I am saying is that Brazilians come in all shapes and sizes.
Posted by: cncz | July 24, 2005 12:07 PM
What a surprise!
Posted by: Cat | July 24, 2005 12:07 PM
of course, how some Brazilians pride themselves on being "white" and "not Latino/Hispanic" is another story for another time.
Posted by: cncz | July 24, 2005 12:07 PM
"of course, how some Brazilians pride themselves on being âÂÂwhiteâ and âÂÂnot Latino/Hispanicâ is another story for another time."
Why would Portugese speaking Brazilians identify with a yank-centric label that is generaly used to describe Spanish speaking Americans? And btw, according to the US census, 'white' and 'hispanic' are not mutualy exclusive.
Posted by: none | July 24, 2005 4:07 PM
cncz,
You know the best looking Brazilians are the blacks right? Lol!!!
Posted by: bikhair | July 25, 2005 12:07 AM
Another failure for ethinic racial profiling if you ask me. All the right wingers in the states are hot about this issue of profiling being one of the important ways to prevent terrorist attacks. Especially in NYC where we have a huge under ground transport system, profiling has become an issue as if the authorities in NYC are able to tell the difference between someone from the Middle East and lets say a Puerto Rican or a Cuban.
Now if the Brits or the Americans are specifically targetting Middle Eastern looking Muslim men between the ages of 17-45, my husband isnt Middle Eastern but is bi racial and people think he is from Northern Pakistan, Morroco, Algeria, all of North Africa, Central-South American, etc.
Posted by: bikhair | July 25, 2005 12:07 AM
On another note, I just read some of the eye witness reports about the shooting and I must say, this man certainly doesnt look Asian. I guess you only look Asian when you run from the cops. I witnesses are usually idiots anyway.
Posted by: bikhair | July 25, 2005 1:07 AM
"Terrorists, unlike the police, donâÂÂt get the benefit of the doubt when they kill people."
You might want to ponder why that is for a second. It seems to me if you had really understood the above sentence, it might have changed the way you wrote the entire post.
Posted by: celebrim | July 25, 2005 5:07 AM
As you will see, no one is going to mourn this guy, have a minute silence for him, raise a flag, or light a candle for him. It was a mistake, he is only Brazilian, who cares. Welcome to the real world.
Posted by: anonymous | July 25, 2005 8:07 AM
Anonymous,
Even in my country, the US people are far more sensitive about bombings that happen in the west than when they happen in non western countries. The only reason the conservatives bring up the bombings in Africa, many years ago, is to show that Clinton did bother striking back against terrorism. It has nothing at all to do with the fact that people died. After all they are just Africans. Lets all be politically incorrect here, no one really cares about Africans.
Posted by: bikhair | July 25, 2005 6:07 PM
i designed a t-shirt as a kind of ironic statement last week and it's available to buy if you want to poke a bit of sarcasm in the face of the people that watch you on the tube.
Posted by: Vijay | July 26, 2005 10:07 PM
I'm a South Asian guy living in New York City, and the other day the police stopped me as I was walking towards my train and asked to check my bags. I was delighted. In fact, on another occasion, when I was allowed to walk by without having to open my bags, I felt quite disappointed. "I'm a South Asian man...I have a mustache, I fit the profile completely, so why aren't they checking me?" I asked myself in despair. Anyway, now that I was frisked, I feel more contented. If this is racial profiling, bring it on! If this is the only way to remain safe from brown-skinned religious fanatics, I'll welcome this intrusion into my daily routine again and again and again. I won't whine that my civil liberties are being curtailed or violated. Civil surveillance is cool!
Posted by: Faloodaputra | July 29, 2005 6:07 PM
this is late, but sheesh y'all, brazilians=not Latino either, that was my entire point... and as for the German part, look at the lovely gisele bundchen, but does she speak german or just have a german name
lol on the Best looking Brazilians one
salam alaikoum
Posted by: cncz | July 30, 2005 9:07 AM
Checking your bags is one thing... shooting you in the head is another.
Posted by: Ann | July 30, 2005 11:07 AM