Especial: Ecos Distantes

Especial: Ecos Distantes » Expandir

The Diplomatic Times Review: "The Chicago Sun-Times in a July 26, 2005 editorial asks us to, 'Remember the name Jean Charles de Menezes, because his ghost might haunt us for years to come.'"


Crash Course: "By the time the third bullet entered Jean Charles de Menezes' head, I'd like to think this thing called 'Western civilization' still had a chance to live. But then: bullet #4. Bullet #5. Bullet #6. Bullet #7."


The Truth by Scott: "We talked about the victim, a 27 year old Brazilian electrician. We talked about the police. We talked about terror. The people I spoke with expressed their sympathy for the police (and little for the dead man), saying how frightened the police must have been after 2 bombings in the subway and how they could hardly be blamed for having twitchy trigger fingers. I actually agree – I don’t blame the officers too much. But I don’t lay any blame on Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian, either. In fact, his death scares me more than subway bombs.
(...) If the thought of us killing our own in panic isn’t the definition of “success” for a terror operation, I don’t know what is. We have to do better."


Free Speed Nation: "The newspapers carried some terrible stuff over the weekend. Firstly though, I suspect I'm not the only non-Sun reader who saw the front page of Saturday's edition - 'One down, three to go' - and assumed it referred to the shooting in Stockwell station. Apologies to the Sun for thinking they could get it that wrong.
(...)
While it's quite right to say that dealing with the suicide bomb threat is incredibly difficult and it is reasonable to defend policemen who kill suspects, we should ensure that the police, their actions and their policies are not free from intense scrutiny - and in this particular instance an enquiry held as publicly as is possible. Why did the police kill an innocent man? Perhaps through sheer terror at what might happen if they didn't. Every innocent life lost is a small victory for the terrorists."


LACLOG: "¿Seguridad o libertad?, pues las dos, esta claro, pero no una a costa de la otra, eso nunca."



Confessing Evangelical: "I can see why the 'shoot to kill to protect' policy may be necessary, and I have considerable sympathy for the police officer whose feelings of grief and guilt at having shot an innocent man we can barely begin to imagine. But this terrible event was the first any of us in the general public had heard of this new strategy. Who knows how Mr de Menezes would have reacted had this policy been as widely advertised before last Friday as it has been since then?"


THE CONSERVATIVE HIPSTER: "Knowing what they did know, not what we now know, would you have done any different?"


M. Ellis Conroy’s OM&TR: "De Menezes was a victim of terrorism, not a victim of the terrorists. He was a victim of a dangerous climate where the very people who are supposed to protect us in times of crisis have allowed themselves to be frightened and paranoid, have allowed their latent xenophobia to colour their thoughts and their perceptions. An entirely human reaction that might be, ‘under the circumstances’, but it’s one we should be able to control. In this case, it’s obvious we haven’t. And that’s exactly the way the terrorists want it."