Different Blair Same Old Story

By sizemore Last edited 153 months ago
Different Blair Same Old Story

Doesn't look like they get the Evening Standard in Brazil. Despite Ian Blair's denials in yesterday's rag the Brazilian government are sending their own team to investigate the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes. Not that the Met's reputation is in tatters or anything - they just want a little clarification as to how things went so spectacularly wrong on the 22nd of July.

There are also a few questions about how the investigation following the killing was handled. It's all very well for Ian Blair to insist that "At that stage I and my officers thought the dead man was a suicide bomber and we were in the middle of the biggest counter-terrorist operation.", but how does that ignorance and a full plate somehow excuse outright lies?

Alex Thomson from Channel Four News last night pointed out that "the coroner who carried out the post mortem was misinformed that Mr Menezes had leapt the ticket barrier and tripped at the tube train. Surely, by then, the police knew this information was false?" Lying to a coroner is never a good idea. Don't these idiots watch Quincy?

Now that it looks like the person responsible for leaking the Independent Police Complaints Commission papers has been suspended we are back to trusting the processes already in place to help the truth win out. Hands up everyone that that fills with confidence.

Ian Blair is refusing to resign. An innocent man died on his watch in an obvious fuck up of colossal size. If there was no formal attempt to cover up some of the mistakes then there was definitely a distortion of events put into play that has poured doubt on everything that followed. One of our readers suggested recently that the "taking a leak" story and the absence of video is intended to cover up the fact that Menezes was never under surveillance until he arrived at Stockwell. Debatable for sure, but the mere fact that the tide of support for the police in very difficult times has swung so far away from them under Blair's command is a disgrace. We're now at the stage where foreign governments are concerned enough to send their own judicial officials to ensure we don't fuck up anymore.

Could the police muddle on without Blair? Dare say. Blair insists that "My job is to stay here looking after London". Actually that was your job a few months ago. Your job now is to spin what happened to the point that no one trusts you, your police officers or the results of the investigation that you refused to hand over to the IPCC until five days after the killing.

Knighthoods used to mean something. If you're big enough to take the praise when things go right to the point of having the Queen throw titles at you then you should damn well have the guts to go when you screw up. Not the best end to a career perhaps but it beats being shot to death in fucking Stockwell.

Last Updated 19 August 2005

Adrian R

The details of this are outright scary. The actions suggest cold-blooded murder of an everyday guy, doing everyday things, who showed no resistance to arrest and neither looked suspicious. Someone has to fall for this.


Someone has to fall for this

Not so much 'fall' as have his tightly gripped fingers pulled one by one from the ledge.

Blairs are hard to remove.


what i want to know is why some witnesses (members of the public) were quoted in the media as saying he tripped and was shot while lying on the floor? what did they have to gain by lying? its all very very weird. i think we need to wait for the full report before judging.


The witness who said Menezes tripped and was wearing a bulky jacket now believes that he actually saw surveillance officer:



It appears the police have dug themselves a deeper hole by failing to contradict witness statements in the media that they knew to be inaccurate. Perhaps they stupidly thought that this would give them some cover, and the controversy would dissipate over time.

Menezes was sitting on a train, reading a newspaper, sunk into his daily routine. A man pointed to him and shouted "He's over here!" Puzzled, he stood up and approached the man, and that was the last thing he ever did.

Andrew Milner

The Stockwell shooting had several purposes. First and foremost as a distraction from the 7 July bombings. Second to create the opportunity through intimidation to reassert police control. Kill one terrify 10,000. Stockwell was such an unmitigated public relations disaster because a racially insensitive, trigger-happy death squad shot the wrong type of victim. Had they shot a Muslim and/or unfashionable Asian as intended, the framing would have gone like clockwork. The fact that the hit squat was paramilitary is no surprise. This operation was just too dirty even for the Metropolitan Police Service. However, as a distraction from the bombings earlier in the month, Stockwell was a runaway success. Is anyone still discussing 7 July at all, especially the notion that it was a false flag operation?
Obviously this situation has not been fully played out. Whether or not Ian Blair is forced to resign depends largely on how many consecutive days the story remains on the front pages. He does have the unhappy knack of opening his mouth and putting his foot in it, but I still think there’s more dirt to come out. Specifically, those eyewitnesses who were so keep to come forward; were part of the surveillance team doing a bit of impromptu damage limitation? If the Metropolitan Police would fabricate just about every detail of the Stockwell shooting, you can't help wondering just how kosher the 7 July bombings were (no pun intended).


I'm sure the police would welcome such conspiratorial rubbish to make the rounds; that way, all critics of their deep incompetence and dangerously flawed shoot-to-kill policy can be lumped together with tinfoil hat wearing theorists of all kinds.

It appears the only real "conspiracy" was the autonomous attempt to "conspire to silence" by the various authorities - through leaving mistaken media reports uncorrected - and a "conspiracy to warrantless credulity" on the part of the media and the public towards the initial police and witness accounts.

That anyone would believe the initial narrative of a team of surveillance officers shadowing, running down and selectively executing a suspected bomber on a subway train - as if such Hollywood-style escapades were in the realm of the possible - struck me, from day one, as incredible.

Observed from afar - I am not British - the contours of the nightmarish dream bubble surrounding this event are truly astounding in both their fragility and mutability. It's like watching some amorphous blob-like creature struggling to birth itself from behind its amniotic, media-generated scrim.

Condolences to not just the family of the victim, but to everyone who has had their eggshell cracked by this travesty, the horrible events that preceded it, and the ill-advised commitment to the doomed war that brought this all on.


uh oh:

"On the Saturday after the shooting, officers raided the flat in a high-profile operation watched by the world's media. As a result, a man, identified only as 'C', was arrested 'on suspicion of the commission, instigation or preparation of acts of terrorism'. But he was released on 30 July with no charge, raising the possibility that the flats had no connection with the bombings."