Everyone's on edge. Who wouldn't be?

Nice touch with the grey box at the bottom.

Athena has a good point. The whole cell may be feeling the pressure as the Brits close in on them. They may have decided to do as much damage as they can before the whole cell is rolled up.

They tackled him, then fired five shots into his head?

Criminy. Don't mess with the Brits, I guess. They don't mess around with things like radiation guns.

Another innocent muslim killed by the MAN. Now we know why they hate us, because we interfered with his right to dignified death (like Terri)...it's not his fault if stupid, fascist imperialists get in his way. I blame the redstaters for the whole incident.

I had read a theory that the explosives that were planned to be used in the second attacks were found in a car by the police, so the terrorists had to mix up a batch from scratch without the help of the original bomb maker.

I've also read that the explosive they're using is extremely unstable and volatile and must be used soon after being made up. Bomb makers call the stuff "Satan's Mother." Apparently, the period of time between the two bombings is easily enough for the stuff to have gone off.

I had heard about the five shots to the head thing earlier on the radio, and was impressed with the marksmanship of the officers. But thsi sounds like they were right on top of him. Oh well. Still impressed.

And I hate to quibble with Sir Ian, but I just don't find this death regrettable, aside from the lost interrogation opportunities, of course. Maybe that's cold and un-Christian of me, but I can't help myself.

This fascist was clearly one of the "loves death more than life" variety. I'm actually quite happy the cops obliged him.

One of them was carrying a black handgun - it looked like an automatic - they pushed him to the floor, bundled on top of him and unloaded five shots into him," he said.

So, how many cops were shot? Some one had to take a bullet or two if they were on top of him when he was shot.

\moonbat on

(Sniff)

We've given them all the justification they need for yet another attack. When will the cycle of violence end?

Answer: when we get out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, and Spain. And the Balkans.

(Sniff)

\ moonbat off

No, when we get out of North America.

It kinda sounded like (via. eye witness accounts) that the cops fucking executed the guy. I guess he tripped/fell to the ground inside the car, some cop ran up and gatted the guy 5 times at close range.

So effin cool.

"Durka durka this motherfucker."

How many cops does it take to beat a suspect?

None, he fell.

Well, if you suspect that the guy is a "wired" suicide bomber, capping him is probably the only safe course. Besides, don't you think that at least a few Bobbies are less than thrilled with their weak-ass justice system?

Or it could be that they weren't actually cops but rather some lads with sand-colored berets on loan to the cops to help out with a very high-risk op. They don't think like cops - they think like soldiers.

Hmm, noname, that's an interesting theory. And I would venture to guess that the UK doesn't have a Posse Comitatus law or the bright-line separation that the US does re: Military operations vs. Civilian law enforcement.

I'm a hard-core libertarian, and I still say that when it comes to identified criminals, shooting-to-kill is the best way to go.

Anybody ever seen the B-western Johnny Concho, with Frank Sinatra? For the big finale, the two criminal bad guys confront Sinatra in the middle of the town's main street for a showdown, just like every other Western ever made.

But this time, instead of the hero going mano-a-mano, the townsfolk appear in the second story windows of every business and home, and open fire. They had had enough. The shooting continues until the two criminals are dead. "Shoot 'em again."

If libertarian means anything, it means refusing to surrender your life, liberty and property to thugs.

"any society -- even one governed by a libertarian regime -- requires citizens to obey the lawful orders of police"

and (I'd add) to challenge unlawful actions in court rather than on the street.

Correspondingly, a civil society must afford a fair means of challenging potentially unlawful actions in court.

"If libertarian means anything, it means refusing to surrender your life, liberty and property to thugs."

I'd follow the Libertarian ideal exemplified by the HBO series "Deadwood". After capping this guy, they should drag his lifeless body to the nearest Chinaman and feed the corpse to the hogs.

I have a bit of a theory....

I think that given the arrests internationally, the second cell, wanted to do some damage before they were inevitably caught. They felt the net closing in, and went ahead, despite the absence of the bomb maker.

What's interesting about 7/7 is that they were supposed to be suicide bombers, but the bombs used timers. What if they were simply meant to leave the bombs on the vehicles, and leave, and not meant to be suicicde bombers? Alternatively, what if they were told that this was a dry run? This would explain the need for timers instead of a manual detonation which a suicide bomber would perform. Their handlers were basically giving them a gentle push into unwilling martrydom by setting the timers to go off early (They went off at 8:50 I believe on 7/7, were they told it would go off at 9 :00?).

In light of that, what if they did the same thing yesterday? Of course, the 7/7 bombers have no way of letting us, or their brothers in arms know that they were duped, but the guys from yesterday were able to live to tell the tale, that they were duped into being unwilling martrys with bombs on timers that went off early. When the bombs went off (as little as they did), the guys seemed a little panicked. One guy was trying to claim the bag (which was know blackened and smoking on the floor of the train) wasn't his. If this stuff is as volatile as they claim, wouldn't you at least try stomping on the bag to get it to go off?

it is claimed that on 9/11 many of the hijackers didn't know either a) they would be hijacking a plane, or b) that they would be sending it, and themselves, into oblivion. In Iraq, we see suicide bombers having to be handcuffed to cars, and the Palestinians shame men into martyrdom by spreading rumours that they are having to use women because no men are brave enough. I think for many, it's great to talk smack about being a suicide bomber and killing a bunch of infidels, but when push comes to shove, I don't think too many are willing, especially among those who enjoy the benfits of living in the west.
If this is true with regards to yesterday, then word will already have gotten out that bombers are being duped into being suicide bombers which should make for some interesting arguments among the terrorists.

Regarding the piling on the guy, he was wearing a big hug coat, and the UK is having a small heatwave. To many, that would be suspect, and I think it's safe to assume that they thought he had a bomb. Perhaps piling on top of him was akin to soldiers diving on grenades to save their comrades, or in this case the general public.

At least they didn't throw him in Gitmo for TORTURE.

"Lo! Better to be shot in the skull five times than see a female guard's private parts or have a panties on your head. Blessed be merciful Allah!"

Sura 4

don't you think that at least a few Bobbies are less than thrilled with their weak-ass justice system?

Yes!

and (I'd add) to challenge unlawful actions in court rather than on the street.

No. The courts may have the last word as a matter of practice, but the defensive use of violence, including deadly force, is absolutely the prerogative of every person in a free society. Deadly force is often necessary in the defense of peaceful civilization.

That's just the fucking way it is, and we don't need to apologize for it.

If libertarian means anything, it means

I've read somewhere that the British agency doing anti-terrorist work (MI5? MI6?) is NOT a law enforcement agency. Their function is not (necessarily) to capture individuals and evidence to present in court, but to thwart the threat, pretty much whatever it takes. Earlier (immediate) application of deadly force is not surprising in this context - no need to wait to be fired upon, etc.

I've also seen it suggested that in the US it would be prudent to move our antiterrorist function from the FBI (which IS an law enforcement agency) to one that can take a more "active" role if need be. The threat that the West faces is not from "criminals" but from agents of a foreign power intent on destroying our civilization. IF it takes a little (or a lot) more active aplication of preemptive force to stop that threat, I'm all for it.

Yeah, first thing I thought too was they thought he had a bomb. Non compliance under those circumstances should get you shot.

But ye gods, they piled on him first?

Brave lads. Brave lads indeed.

A good primer on hostage rescue / anti-terror.

oh please oh please oh please let London Tubes be Brit slang for fuzzy squeakhole

RING interesting theory. I think an alternative explanation for timers is to help assure simultaneous detonation. Also it might be easier to set a timer and passively wait for paradise than to push the button and make it happen.

> Suspected Jihadist Shot To Death In London Tubes

> oh please oh please oh please let London Tubes be Brit slang for fuzzy squeakhole

I can't speak for the Brits but I think it just became part of my working vocabulary.

My brother sat right next to the guy on the tube. Apparently the man was acting very nervous and suspicious, like a guy on the run (which he appears to have been). He ran with the cops after him, and my brother sensibly did not follow.

My brother was interviewed by the police along with other witnesses. One other witness told him that the suspect pulled a gun in the moments before being shot. Obviously, this is only hearsay, but interesting nonetheless.

The local Texas Muslems can have a real blow up time in Houston. The Royal Mayor won't even let the Houston PD go after MS13.

TexasAC

These guys have balls big enough to carry around in a dumptruck. Tackling a guy you think might be wearing a suicide belt? That's COMMITMENT.

Unfortunately, their ventilation of his head seems to be a maneuver borrowed from Sean Connery's "interrogation scene" from THE UNTOUCHABLES. Not much info to be had from a corpse, but it's better to shoot than take a chance on his reaching for a detonator. Or maybe they knew the guy was a low-level operative with no valuable stories to tell, and they decided to forego the trial and appeal process & skip right over to the execution. No tears here.

What do you mean, we can't interrogate him? I'm from New Orleans, Bubba... I'm gonna need some black candles, a white hen, some gris-gris powder & High John the Conquerer, and a bottle of Bacardi 151 to offer to The Baron. We'll have this SOB talking in no time...

Gosh darnit, I'm so sorry they won't be able to question him. From what I understand, they chased him onto the train, held him down, and shot him five times in the head. Good for them. He might have been trying to detonate a bomb. I wish they'd shot him ten times in the head.

What do you mean, we can't interrogate him? I'm from New Orleans, Bubba... I'm gonna need some black candles, a white hen, some gris-gris powder & High John the Conquerer, and a bottle of Bacardi 151 to offer to The Baron. We'll have this SOB talking in no time...

LOL!

Later.
bbeck

I'm glad they shot him. They've spent YEARS "monitoring" these jerks, and got 7/7 for a reward. It's time the jihadis got another image in their minds when they think of English justice, rather than dithering cowards hovering impotently outside a mosque. Let them contemplate being shoved to the ground and having bullets emptied into their heads instead. Anyway, the cops caught 2 other guys that day - let them question THEM. I wonder how much worthwhile information they get from these punks anyway. That one guy is probably worth much more dead than alive, if it causes some hotheaded kid to think twice about carrying a bomb.

Ooooops! Gunned down the wrong dude. So sorry - he didn't have anything to do with the bombings.

I guess you should never run from plainclothesed men waving pistols and machine guns at you.

I guess you should never run from plainclothesed men waving pistols and machine guns at you.

Unless they're Muslims - then you should run as hard as you can.