Ladies and gentlemen, Sir John Stephens:
‘there is only one sure way to stop a suicide bomber determined to fulfill his mission: destroy his brain instantly, utterly.’
Meanwhile across town, the world continues to be turned upside down, this time because the most coherent and sensible response to the apparent shoot-to-kill policy comes from The Times specifically an
article by Michael Portillo (!)
To add to that impression [that if a man is running it is reasonable to deduce that he has a guilty reason for doing so] the Home Office leaked the story that there were irregularities in de Menezes’s immigration status. That is disgraceful. Even if it were true it would be irrelevant to his death, but this poison was released, I suppose, in order to help explain why the man was running away (which, as it turns out, he was not). The Home Office’s conduct has to be investigated too, which is another reason for needing a public inquiry.
…
The commissioner has repeatedly referred to the Met’s shoot-to-kill policy. That has puzzled me. When I was defence secretary, ministers used to spend hours agreeing the rules of engagement for our troops deployed in, say, Bosnia. Quite rightly, elected politicians signed off the detailed conditions in which British soldiers could use lethal force. It should not be a matter for a policeman to decide in what circumstances a person can be killed in Britain. Elected people should have that responsibility.
…plus lots of other accurate and timely criticism of the whole mess. That link again
And then Neil said:
A very good article, but the conclusions he draws about the state of the nation are a little unfair- it’s not as if the Tories were squaeky clean in government themselves, was it? This should be seen to be more to do with the culture of the Met, I think…
And then tom said:Yeah, I think there’s always going to be some political point scoring, but I don’t think that because the tories had a shit government it means we should let all subsequent governments be shit. Whilst I agree that the culture of the Met should be under scrutiny here, it’s the job of the government to ensure that that scrutiny is applied. The points he makes about the shortcomings of the current regime are, i think, perfectly valid, it’s important to try to get our organisations and elected officials to live up to our highest aspirations.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Login [ « ] [ » ]