Brekend Nieuws | Forum | Brits Nieuws | Het Nieuws van de V.S. | Het Nieuws van de wereld | Politiek Nieuws | Nieuws sc.i-technologie | Het Nieuws van de oorlog & van het Terrorisme | Het Nieuws van sporten | Multimedia | Vastgestelde Homepage

Vertaal:

Vrijdag, 17 Oktober, 2008

Door Vicky Short en Paul Mitchell |

De explosieve verklaring is voorgesteld aan inquest in de politiemoord van Jean Charles dat de Menezes voorstelt, dat hij was ontsproten alhoewel hij unarmed gekend om was te zijn.

Het bewijsmateriaal gegeven dat werd de onschuldige Braziliaan ondanks zijn die niet duidelijk als veronderstelde terrorist wordt geïdentificeerd werd gedood. Bovendien hebben de ambtenaren in kwestie gezegd dat zij bereid waren om DE Menezes zelfs zonder vergunning te doden van het bevelen van ambtenaar Cressida Dick.

Jean Charles was fataal ontsproten twee weken na 7 Juli het bombarderen in Londen, dat 56 mensen en één dag na een duidelijke ontbroken tweede poging doodde om apparaten te doen ontploffen. Hij werd naar verluidt verward met Hussain Osman, één van ontbroken 21 Juli, 2005, bommenwerpers. Ambtenaren van de anti-verschrikking speldden hem aan de vloer van een ondergrondse trein van Londen en pompten zeven kogels in zijn hoofd bij punt lege waaier.

Vorige week, openbaarde een Speciale ambtenaar van de Tak dat hij zijn nota's veranderde omdat zij erop wezen dat de politie dood Jean Charles ontsproot aangezien hij een trein bij Stockwell buispost op 22 Juli, 2005 inscheepte, alhoewel hij unarmed gekend om was te zijn. De ambtenaar, die als „Owen wordt bedoeld,“ gaf bewijsmateriaal op 8 Oktober.

Owen was de coördinator van het afgevaardigdetoezicht in de controlekamer van de Werf van Schotland tijdens de toezichtverrichting die resulteerde in de dood van de jonge elektricien en nota's over de gebeurtenissen van de dag over zijn computer had gemaakt. Nadat hij zijn bewijsmateriaal bij inquest had gegeven, werd Owen gevraagd om al zijn nota's met betrekking tot het ontspruiten.

Hij eist hij op zijn computer registreerde om de namen van ambtenaren in de codenamen te veranderen die door het hof worden gegeven hun identiteiten te beschermen, maar toen een paragraaf schrapte waarin Dick, die nu afgevaardigde hulpcommissaris van de Metropolitaanse Politie is, ambtenaren had verteld om Jean Charles toe te staan om zijn reis voort te zetten omdat hij „om het even wat niet.“ droeg

De volledige paragraaf leest, de „bespreking van het Beheer. CD [Cressida Dick]: Kan op buis als het dragen van om het even wat niet lopen. Overreed door niet geïdentificeerd mannetje onder beheer.“

Het spreekt Dick vlak eigen bewijsmateriaal bij inquest op 7 Oktober, de vorige dag tegen, waarin zij beweerde dat zij tot haar ambtenaren opdracht gaf Jean Charles „tegenhouden“ omdat hij een „terroristenbedreiging.“ was

Owen says he deleted the paragraph because it was “misleading.” He claimed he couldn’t remember if it was Dick talking although he said it was probably her when questioned further.

“I believe it was the commander but when I reflected I couldn’t be sure, or whether she was saying this is what we are going to do or this is one of the options. It was a woman’s voice.”

When asked if he realised he had committed a serious offence, Owen said, “I have removed a line I believed was wrong and gave a totally false impression.” He told the inquest he had deleted more than he had intended because he was rushing to an appointment. When asked if “management” had asked him to make the changes, Owen replied, “No. I am sure of that, sir.”

Owen also made the startling revelation that he did not submit the crucial paragraph to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) inquiry in 2006 or the health and safety trial last year into the shooting, at which he gave evidence, “because he wasn’t asked to.”

Commander Dick also claimed she was informed “they think it’s him” when Jean Charles left a building linked to Hussain Osman and made his way to Stockwell station. Chief Inspector Vince Esposito, a counter-terrorism expert advising Dick on the day of the shooting, said he believed, “without a shadow of doubt,” that Jean Charles was failed bomber Hussain Osman and that a “critical shot” to the head was only administered if a suspect was identified and was carrying a device.

However, speaking at the inquest on October 10, “Pat,” who acted as contact between Scotland Yard and the surveillance team, reported he had said only that Mr. de Menezes was “possibly identifiable with” the suspect. “I was always under the impression that the subject had been unidentified,” he stated.

Another senior officer, Detective Inspector Merrick Rose, revealed that he could not “recall” whether images of the real suspect, Osman, were discussed at a dawn briefing before Jean Charles’s death—begging the question, was a comparison between the two men ever made?

Dick denies that her instruction to “stop” Jean Charles was an order to shoot to kill and that she did not say “at all costs.”

Mark Lewindon, now retired, was a detective chief inspector in Special Branch at the time. He had told the inquest he had overheard the order from Dick when she was speaking in the operations room at New Scotland Yard. “It was said he shouldn’t be allowed to get on the train and I think the words she used were ‘at all costs,’ ” he said.

Dick responded in her defence that “I would need to be absolutely satisfied that this person posed a dreadful imminent threat to members of the public before I would order a critical shot.”

“I was asking for what you might call a conventional—albeit aware of all the risks—challenge from the firearms officers.”

Subsequent evidence demonstrated that, whether or not Dick was calling to make operational a shoot-to-kill policy, the police involved had already been instructed to do just that.

A tactical adviser and senior firearms advisor known as Trojan 84 made the extraordinary admission to the inquest that police were prepared to take a “critical” shot without orders from their superiors.

The inspector had been in charge of briefing the marksmen who shot dead Jean Charles. Giving evidence in open court for the first time, Trojan 84 said: “We felt that for any DSO [designated senior officer] to make a decision about a critical shot was a hugely difficult decision to make and maybe career-threatening.

“In relation to the critical shot, the instruction would come direct from the DSO but what I also mentioned was that if we were able to challenge, but the subject was not compliant, then a shot may be taken.”

When Trojan 84 was asked if officers were prepared to take the critical shot without authorisation, he replied, “Yes.”

“It was my job to tell the team they would be supported whatever decision they took because of the structures that were in place.”

Trojan 84 could only have conceivably issued such instructions if they had been already laid down at the highest possible level—much higher than the DSO Cressida Dick.

The shoot-to-kill policy implemented against Jean Charles is known as “Operation Kratos,” adopted in secret two years earlier in high-level discussions between top police officers and the government. Under its remit, a senior police officer is on standby 24 hours a day at Scotland Yard, the headquarters of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), with the authority to deploy special armed squads to follow and, if deemed necessary, shoot dead suspected suicide bombers.

It is now clear that, without any clear identification or indication of an imminent threat, the police were determined that someone would die that day in furtherance of the so-called “war on terror.”

Moreover, even the limited safeguard of accountability to a designated superior officer would not be allowed to interfere with what was a political and not a security-driven decision. As the World Socialist Web Site insisted in the immediate aftermath of police murder, “there was a deliberate decision to kill, rather than arrest, de Menezes, taken at the highest level of the police force rather than by the officers immediately involved.”

Jean Charles was shot in cold blood primarily in order “to instill fear in the population and implement a shoot-to-kill policy that had been secretly decided on by Prime Minister Tony Blair and top officials two years previously.” The treatment meted out to de Menezes sent out the clear message—first articulated by Blair—that the “rules of the game” had changed.

Have Your Say: Lies begin to unravel in police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report here.

RSS TrackBack URL

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Related News

• De Menezes officer knew he wasn’t bomber
• Watchdog to report on Menezes killing
• Police officers cleared in De Menezes case
• Police ‘failure’ in Menezes murder
• Cousin of Jean Charles de Menezes–”We fear another cover-up”

This entry was posted on Friday, October 17th, 2008 at 11:53 pm and is filed under War & Terrorism News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Loading ...

ADVERTISEMENTS

SITE MAPS

7/7 Afghanistan Alternative-Energy Art Barack Obama BBC Big-Brother Bilderberg Biometrics Bush CCTV Censorship CIA Climate-Change Cover-Up Cults Culture Database-State David-Hicks David-Ray-Griffin Debt Democrats Demos Drugs Education Entertainment Environmental News EU False-Flag FBI Fraud Free-Speech Freemasons G8 Globalization Guantanamo Health-News History ID-Cards Internet Iran Iraq Israel John McCain Law Marches Media News MI5 MI6 Microsoft Military MoD Money Music NASA Neocons New World Order NSA Oil Pakistan Podcast Police-State Political News Propaganda Reviews RFID RINF Rumsfeld Science Science & Technology News Secrecy Security Slavery Space Sports Spy Spying Stephen-Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony-Blair Torture TV UK-News UN USA- USA-News Video Voting war War & Terrorism News Warfare White-House Wolfowitz World-News Yahoo
2003 - 2005 Archives | 2005 - 2007 Archives | 2007 - 2008 Archives | Current Archives | Past Version