De Menezes execution

by **robertdreed** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:28 pm

You know what I just thought of? The Amadou Diallo case from the 1990s in NYC- "41 shots"- and there was another one there- Patrick Dorismond, a security guard who was killed after rebuffing undercover narcotics officers attempting to entrap him into selling marijuana. Giuliani's Raiders, acting on the order that suppressing cannabis was to be considered part of the "broken-window" theory of crime...a sign of lawlessness. Both cases discussed here <a href="http://saxakali.com/immigration/dorismand2.htm">saxakali.com/immigration/dorismand2.htm</a> Maybe the Brits are trying to catch up, in the Impunity sweepstakes. Maybe they get Extra Points, for executing someone in public without the slightest pretext being present, at all. This is one of the things that I was trying to tell people on my radio show back in the 1990s- the Drug War was a pilot program, designed to soften people up for absolute State power. Certainly by the 1990s, many Americans had been conditioned to accept police intrusions that would have been considered unthnkable in the 1970s, as part of a more or less permanent and inescapable status quo. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 8/22/05 9:02 pm

by **robertdreed** » Mon Aug 22, 2005 10:46 pm

The story I linked has more details than most on the Dorismond killing, so I'm excerpting it. PATRICK DORISMOND: ANOTHER VICTIM OF GIULIANI'S NYPD "Our best organizers in the South," the reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "are the police themselves." One could not but remember those words in witnessing the brutal killing by plainclothes policemen of yet another unarmed young black man - this time Haitian-American - in the streets of New York on Mar. 17, the third such killing in the past 13 months. More shocking still was the response of Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and his police commissioner Howard Safir ("a trained seal" in the words of New York Times columnist Bob Herbert). Rather than expressing remorse or repentance, they have launched a vicious offensive, trying to portray the victim as a criminal. Nothing could be further from the truth. Patrick Dorismond, who had just turned 26 on Feb. 28, was a security guard with the 34th St. Partnership, a commercial association in midtown Manhattan. After working his shift from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m., he had gone with fellow guard Kevin Kaiser to the Wakamba Cocktail Lounge, at the corner 37th Street and 8th Avenue, to have a few beers. Patrick was very happy, and when another guard asked him why, he replied: "Tomorrow is payday." When Dorismond and Kaiser emerged from the bar around 12:30 a.m., they were approached by a man who asked them if they had any marijuana for sale. "Get out of my face," Patrick told the man, according to Kaiser. But the man persisted, witnesses say, and, within seconds, a brawl was taking place. It turns out that the would-be drug buyer was, in fact, Detective Anderson Moran of the New York Police Department (NYPD). Moran summoned his two back-up cops, called "ghosts." One of them, Detective Anthony Vasquez, shot Patrick Dorismond in the chest. "The last memory I have of this man is him rolling on the ground, gasping for air, with blood coming out of his mouth," Kaiser told the Times. The police version of the incident, not surprisingly, differs from that of all the other witnesses. The NYPD says that Patrick Dorismond attacked Det. Moran and that Det. Vasquez's gun went off accidentally when the victim "lunged for it." "I don't have to ask the police what happened. I know what happened. They murdered him," declared a life-long friend of Dorismond at a Mar. 18 demonstration of about 700 people held in front of the shooting site. "Patrick was the kind of individual who, unless you put your hands on him, wouldn't touch you. So all this nonsense that you are hearing that he lunged at the police and they said 'he's going to get my gun,' that's a damn lie."...

by **antiaristo** » Tue Aug 23, 2005 9:34 am

Delicate job for officer better known for celebrity inquiries Rosie Cowan, crime correspondent Tuesday August 23, 2005 The Guardian John Yates, the Scotland Yard deputy assistant commissioner in charge of liaison with the family of Jean Charles de Menezes, is familiar with delicate policing issues. But one of his previous jobs, briefing the royal family on the case against Princess Diana's former butler Paul Burrell, could hardly be in starker contrast to his latest assignment, which took him to a remote hill farm several hours' drive from Rio de Janeiro, to meet Maria and Matozinhos de Menezes, parents of the young Brazilian shot dead by police at Stockwell tube station. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1554518,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...18,00.html</a> That's very interesting. In other words Yates framed Paul Burrell and then manipulated William Windsor. (Correos certificado 16 November 2002 Regina v Burrell Dear Sir Michael, Is the Prince of Wales not the tiniest bit curious about why Her Majesty’s Constabulary should lie about the evidence against Paul Burrell? Has he not the slightest interest in how it can be that Detective Inspector Maxine de Brunner should take it upon herself to lie to the faces of the Heir to the Throne and his successor? And that Her Majesty’s Constabulary should then take no action against the offending officer? After all, she got him into this mess, did she not? Cards on the table. The only reason why a junior officer would act in such a way – commit barefaced treason for no personal gain – is because said junior officer was acting on orders. And the only persons that are empowered to issue such an order are the more senior members of the royal family. The “powers…of which we know nothing” (aka the Sovereign Commander of the 33º Scottish Rite Freemasonry) ordered the frame-up of an innocent man. She told no one, and then she died. D.I. Maxine de Brunner found herself stranded in no man’s land without her sponsor. The police got caught up in their own conspiracy and could not abort the prosecution. And the royal specimen bottle blew up in the royal face right in front of the servants. It’s not as though the Queen Mother hasn’t got form in this kind of thing. Remember Crawfie? Marion Crawford was encouraged by the Queen Mother to write The Little Princesses. That same Queen Mother then vilified poor Crawfie as a traitor and a betrayer of royal secrets for money. She taught Elizabeth and Margaret that the working class can never be trusted, and a rival for the girl’s affection was eliminated. And Margaret died a bitter woman. Paul Burrell was more of a father to William. If you give a boy his first pornography, you must be willing to answer his questions. William had to be taught that the working class can never be trusted, and must be turned against Paul Burrell, guilty or no. And she had plenty of other good reasons besides the “rape tape”. Not least the forthcoming inquest into the death of the Princess of Wales. I see Regina has already fixed the judge (brought in a ringer) and jury (drawn exclusively from Palace servants). But there was no way that she could avoid taking evidence from “Diana’s Rock”. Unless he were eliminated. Of note here is that the Burrells appear to be taking up a new life in a foreign jurisdiction and I wish them life and peace. As with Crawfie, the character assassination runs rife in old Blighty. All this will come as no surprise to the Prince of Wales or indeed to Prince William. Ask them to show you a copy of my letter to Prince William dated 4 January 2002. What Regina called “powers…of which we know nothing”, I called “the Shadow Sovereign”, and Adolph Hitler called “the most dangerous woman in Europe”. Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. St James’s Palace has nothing to fear from your enquiry. But Clarence House certainly does. And strange to say, your master the Prince of Wales is moving over to Clarence House and taking over the “powers…of which we know nothing”. Oh, what a tangled web we weave! Please acknowledge receipt by return. Yours Sincerely, John Cleary BScMAMBA <a href="http://p097.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm9.showMessageRange?topicID=6.topic&start=1&stop=20">p097.ezboard.com/frigorou...=1&stop=20</a>

by **antiaristo** » Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:34 am

Well blow me down with a feather! Who can possibly deny that the 7/7 bombing was done by the British themselves? And that the perpetrators are keeping a close eye on this site? Less than two days ago I wrote on this thread So, on 18 July the thrust was shifting away from “suicide bombers” and towards dupes. And there was talk of a master bomber, presumably Aswat, the MI6 agent. Then came the harmless “bombings”. Then came the Stockwell shooting. Now we don’t hear anything about 7/7. Except for the purposes of excusing the excesses of the State. Strange, eh? This is today’s front page Suicide bombs breakthrough gives police vital clues Vikram Dodd and Rosie Cowan Wednesday August 24, 2005 The Guardian The four terrorists who killed 56 people in London on July 7 triggered the bombs themselves by pressing a device similar to a button, senior police sources have told the Guardian. The discovery scotches the theory that the four British-born men may have been duped into carrying the rucksack bombs on to three crowded tube trains and one bus, unaware they were going to explode.<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1555215,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...15,00.html</a> There you are: PC Plod has cracked it. They had BUTTONS! Next case!

by **antiaristo** » Wed Aug 24, 2005 7:33 am

Just a reminder of how Fascists like Blair operate Evidence presented to the commission investigating the train bombings on March 11 in Madrid in which 191 people died and 1,700 others were injured confirms that a conspiracy of lies was used to justify the Iraq war and deceive the Spanish people. The evidence emerged when current Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero testified at the Spanish Congressional Commission of Inquiry into the Madrid bombings. Zapatero confirmed allegations first published in the Spanish daily El Pais on December 13 that the former Popular Party (PP) government led by José María Aznar ordered the destruction of computer records dealing with the key period between the Madrid train bombings and the general election held three days later that it lost to Zapatero’s Socialist Workers Party (PSOE). El Pais reported that a specialist computer company was paid $12,000 to erase the computer records, including back-up security copies. Zapatero confirmed the allegations during questioning at the inquiry, “In the prime minister’s office we did not have a single document or any data on computer because the whole cabinet of the previous government carried out a massive erasure.” “That means we have nothing about what happened, information that might have been received, meetings or decisions that were taken from March 11 until March 14,”he added. Since then, it has emerged that Aznar and his cabinet office in fact erased all records covering their eight years of government. According to the New York Times, a Spanish official said every file had been wiped out on the hundreds of computers at the presidential complex, known as the Moncloa Palace. “Not a single trace of any files was left behind,” the official said. “Zero, nothing.” Knowledge that the files were destroyed only came to light because the commission had requested the minutes of Aznar’s Cabinet Office crisis meetings on the day of the bombings. Officials from Zapatero’s government could not produce them, nor any other document of the time, including conversations held by Aznar with the heads of the Spanish media, foreign envoys, what reports he received or what instructions he gave. It means none of Aznar’s declarations earlier this month to the commission can be proved or disproved. None of his statements regarding crisis meetings he held or measures taken by his government following the bombings can be verified. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that Aznar and his government not only lied about what they knew about the authorship of the Madrid bombings, but that they also systematically lied about the illegal war in Iraq and rushed to destroy their records after their surprise election defeat by the PSOE on March 14 to hide the truth. <a href="http://wsws.org/articles/2004/dec2004/spai-d29.shtml">wsws.org/articles/2004/de...-d29.shtml</a> As a result the parliamentary inquiry went nowhere. Just as the Menezes inquiry will reveal NOTHING.

by **antiaristo** » Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:35 am

Upthread I wrote this It seems to me that SIR Ian Blair has set-up his own organisation by infiltrating a SAS hit squad with a separate agenda. If I were a cop I’d want rid of him. What the Israelis call a “wet job” the SAS calls “butcher and bolt”. In other words you destroy the target (butcher) and get the hell away (bolt). Let’s look at the butcher aspects (i)There is no camcorder footage from the MILITARY surveillance officer. (ii)A CIVILIAN surveillance officer seeks permission to apprehend Menezes and is denied. (iii)The hit takes place UNDER GROUND and so outside of radio contact. It is known that poor Cressida lost control of the operation for just this reason. And in today’s Times we find the proof As the firearms officers ran into the station they are believed to have been out of touch with everyone else involved in the operation. It has been disclosed that the two groups involved — one from Scotland Yard and the other from the Army — were using different radio networks as they trailed the innocent electrician from his home on July 22. Officers on the train are understood to have decided that from the way Mr de Menezes was dressed, and that he was not carrying a bag, he was not about to blow himself up. But that crucial assessment by surveillance experts reportedly never reached the Yard officers taking part. Independent investigators are trying to discover what messages were missed because soldiers and police couldn’t talk directly to each other. Senior police sources say that surveillance teams lost contact with one another as they were trying to make a positive identification of their target. <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1748176,00.html">www.timesonline.co.uk/art...76,00.html</a> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p097.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antiaristo>antiaristo</A> at: 8/24/05 6:46 am

by **antiaristo** » Wed Aug 24, 2005 6:44 pm

The tap dancing begins. Now we know what the perpetrators were doing during those five days they had exclusive jurisdiction of the crime scene. 6.30pm Police watchdog has 'crucial' Stockwell tube footage Staff and agencies Wednesday August 24, 2005 The police watchdog confirmed tonight that "crucial" CCTV footage had been recovered from the scene of the fatal police shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes. There have been confused reports in recent days about whether or not the cameras were working at south London's Stockwell tube station, where the innocent Brazilian was killed, and speculation that tapes may have been removed. But Nick Hardwick, chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), which is conducting the inquiry into the killing by the Metropolitan police, said tonight that his team had important footage in their possession. He said there would be further verification but he was confident the inquiry now had all the relevant CCTV film and that there was "no reason" to believe any had been deliberately withheld. Speaking after a meeting with a delegation of senior Brazilian judicial officials, Mr Hardwick said he was not aware of any "missing" information about the July 22 killing of the electrician, who was mistaken for a suicide bomber. He confirmed that the issue of the CCTV was something about which two Brazilian officials had asked. Mr Hardwick said: "Some of the CCTV footage we have had has been crucial to the investigation. I have seen it and it is very helpful." However, he declined to definitively clarify whether there was any CCTV film from the platform that might show the last moments of Mr de Menezes' life, before he was shot seven times in the head at close range by police. Asked tonight whether such footage did exist, Mr Hardwick said: "I am not going to go through a detailed list of all the evidence we have got or not got. At the moment we are still establishing some of that." He repeated the IPCC's criticism of the Metropolitan police over the delay at putting the external body in charge of the inquiry. The delay was a "cause for concern" that his organisation would have to address, he said. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1555561,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...61,00.html</a> The`problem for the Masons is that three of the four monitors were being watched by members of staff at the time of the incident. They KNOW the cameras were working. At the moment the union is acting as their spokesman. Let's see if that holds up.

by **antiaristo** » Thu Aug 25, 2005 6:58 am

AAhhhh, the power of the Internet A press officer for the commissioner issued a terse statement last night, denying there was any dissension in the ranks. "We are not aware of who the mayor may have been referring to or that any Metropolitan police service officers, disgruntled or otherwise, have sought to undermine the commissioner in any way." Looks like the rank-and-file don't like being shat upon, eh? also this On the subject of the CCTV film, Mr Gomes Pereira said: "What they have is parts of the film. Parts of the walk of Jean Charles in the tube station [are missing]. They mentioned to us that some of the cameras were out of order." Mr Hardwick declined to definitively clarify whether there was any CCTV film from the platform. There are conflicting reports that the platform cameras were either not working or that the tapes had been removed - claims denied by transport unions. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/story/0,16132,1555965,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/attack...65,00.html</a>

by **antiaristo** » Thu Aug 25, 2005 5:18 pm

This is taken from the interview with Janice karpinski, who took the fall for Abu Ghraib. It is published here as a service to the rank and file of the Metropolitan Police. And those civilian contractors who were imported were not subjected to the same Uniform Code of Military Justice discipline as the soldiers. They were cleared, removed from the face of the earth, and seven soldiers are being held responsible. It was grossly unfair.

by **Peachtree Pam** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 4:22 am

states that shots were at intervals, gave correct total: 10-11 shots: De Menezes 'shot for 30 seconds' Witness feared terrorists were attacking train as police fired at Brazilian, leaked statement reveals Vikram Dodd and Hugh Muir Friday August 26, 2005 The Guardian Armed police officers fired at Jean Charles de Menezes for over 30 seconds when they killed him at Stockwell tube station, according to a witness statement made to independent investigators and obtained by the Guardian. The witness says the shots were fired at intervals of three seconds and that she ran for her life fearing terrorists had opened fire on commuters. The death of the innocent Brazilian, who was mistaken for a suicide bomber, is being investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. Much of the immediate eyewitness evidence after the shooting proved to be wrong. But the witness correctly said that 11 shots were fired - a fact which was not made public at the time. The account from Sue Thomason, a freelance journalist from south London, gives new detail of the shooting and of the terror witnesses endured. In her statement she says: "The shots were evenly spaced with about three seconds between the shots, for the first few shots, then a gap of a little longer, then the shots were evenly spaced again." Mr de Menezes was killed on July 22 on a tube train after being followed from his flat by undercover officers and soldiers who were hunting terrorists behind failed bombing attacks on London on July 21. On the morning of July 22 Ms Thomason was on her way to work, and was reading a book as the train pulled into Stockwell. Her statement to the IPCC says: "When the tube was stationary at the platform at Stockwell I recall shouting, it was a male's voice, it may have come from more than one male. People then started to get out of their seats and look in the direction where the shouting was coming from. "I recall hearing gunshots... The shooting was coming from the carriage to the left of me. When I heard the gunshots I thought it was terrorists firing into the crowd. I thought about getting behind a seat... After the initial first shots... I left the carriage." She and other commuters started running along the platform to leave the station. Her statement continues: "While I was making my way to the escalator I remember hearing more shots coming from behind me. I thought that I would be shot in the back... Half way up the escalator I remember looking behind me and hearing two more shots... "Once I got outside the station my legs went. "I would say there was 10 or 11 shots fired. The shots were ... evenly spaced out (timewise)." She says two IPCC investigators who interviewed her were equipped with a map of Stockwell tube which had key features in the wrong place. This initially led them wrongly to challenge her account. In an email of complaint to the IPCC she wrote: "If the people investigating such a serious matter... can't even get the plan of the station correct for interviewees to point out where they were, then what chance does the rest of the case have?" She also says a key detail she gave of the number of shots and the interval between them was missed from her final statement until she insisted it be included: "I'm not anti the IPCC, I just want them to get it right." The IPCC last night said it was unable to comment on the witness statement but in a separate development announced that it had received - and rejected - a complaint from a Scotland Yard firearms officer. The officer had lodged the complaint over comments made by IPCC director John Wadham last week when he spoke of the Metropolitan police's "resistance" to the IPCC running the inquiry. Government plans to crack down on alleged extremists after the attacks on London will today come under attack from a coalition of politicians, unions, pressure groups, faith groups and writers who state their "grave concerns". The initiative, led by the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, and launched with a letter to the Guardian, involves signatories from groups such as Liberty, the Muslim Council of Britain, Unison, the GMB, the Refugee Council and the Green party - as well as Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Mark Oaten, former ministers Frank Dobson and Tony Lloyd, Labour peers Lord Bhatia and Lord Ahmed and the Very Reverend Colin Slee, the Dean of Southwark. In the statement, the group says: "We support the police and measures against those who plan, support or carry out such terrorist attacks. "However, a number of the security measures which the government has said it is considering risk criminalising or excluding people who condemn terrorist attacks and whose cooperation is indispensable to the work of the police in fighting terrorism." Meanwhile, a study in the online version of the British Medical Journal today reveals that almost a third of Londoners suffered serious stress after the July 7 attacks.

by **Qutb** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:18 am

11 shots, three seconds intervals? That settles it, then. These weren't panicking police officers who thought they had caught a suicide bomber. This was a cold-blooded public execution of what they knew was an innocent man. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Peachtree Pam** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 9:01 am

Notice how the authorities tried to keep this out of her statement.

by **Peachtree Pam** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:30 pm

which I am cross-linking here ..... Antiaristo, notice Nico's emphasis on the driver of the bus being changed and the fact that the bus was DELIBERATELY diverted into Tavistock Square: <a href="http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?9.879">www.team8plus.org/forum_v....php?9.879</a>

by **antiaristo** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:38 pm

Pam, I'm going to read that now. But let me encourage you to take a look at the George Smith thread <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=569.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...=569.topic</a>

by **Peachtree Pam** » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:41 pm

Hi Antiaristo, I just read it in its entirety....funny how things just seem to "connect", whether in US or UK.......

De Menezes execution

Re: De Menezes execution

Dorismond killing

A safe pair of hands - for the Windsors

Re: De Menezes execution

Re: Destruction of Evidence?

Sir Ian Blair and the SAS Infiltrators

Destruction of Evidence

A Policeman's Lot is not a Happy One, Happy One...

Re: A Policeman's Lot is not a Happy One, Happy One...

leaked witness testimony

What the Hell?

Intervals

Nico's 7/7 timeline

Re: Nico's 7/7 timeline

George Smith thread

Who is online