'Shoot-to-kill' demand by US

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1086397,00.html

'Shoot-to-kill' demand by US

Martin Bright, home affairs editor
Sunday November 16, 2003
The Observer

Home Secretary David Blunkett has refused to grant diplomatic immunity to armed American special agents and snipers travelling to Britain as part of President Bush's entourage this week.
In the case of the accidental shooting of a protester, the Americans in Bush's protection squad will face justice in a British court as would any other visitor, the Home Office has confirmed.

The issue of immunity is one of a series of extraordinary US demands turned down by Ministers and Downing Street during preparations for the Bush visit.

These included the closure of the Tube network, the use of US air force planes and helicopters and the shipping in of battlefield weaponry to use against rioters.

In return, the British authorities agreed numerous concessions, including the creation of a 'sterile zone' around the President with a series of road closures in central London and a security cordon keeping the public away from his cavalcade.

The White House initially demanded the closure of all Tube lines under parts of London to be visited during the trip. But British officials dismissed the idea that a suicide bomber could kill the President by blowing up a Tube train. Ministers are also believed to have dismissed suggestions that a 'sterile zone' around the President should be policed entirely by American special agents and military.

Demands for the US air force to patrol above London with fighter aircraft and Black Hawk helicopters have also been turned down.

The President's protection force will be armed - as Tony Blair's is when he travels abroad - and around 250 secret service agents will fly in with Bush, but operational control will remain with the Metropolitan Police.

The Americans had also wanted to travel with a piece of military hardware called a 'mini-gun', which usually forms part of the mobile armoury in the presidential cavalcade. It is fired from a tank and can kill dozens of people. One manufacturer's description reads: 'Due to the small calibre of the round, the mini-gun can be used practically anywhere. This is especially helpful during peacekeeping deployments.'

Ministers have made clear to Washington that the firepower of the mini-gun will not be available during the state visit to Britain. In return, the Government has agreed to close off much of Whitehall during the visit - the usual practice in Britain is to use police outriders to close roads as the cavalcade passes to cause minimal disruption to traffic.

A Home Office spokeswoman said: 'Negotiations between here and the US have been perfectly amicable. If there have been requests, they have not posed any problems.'

An internal memo sent to Cabinet Office staff and leaked to the press this weekend urged staff to work from home if at possible during the presidential visit. Serious disruption would be caused by 'the President Bush vehicle entourage requesting cleared secured vehicle routes around London and the security cordons creating a sterile zone around him'.

Meanwhile, negotiations are continuing between police and demonstrators about the route of the march. Representatives of the Stop the War Coalition will meet police at Scotland Yard tomorrow to discuss whether protesters will be able to march through Parliament Square and Whitehall. Spokesman Andrew Burgin said he hoped for 'a good old-fashioned British compromise'.
 
In the case of the accidental shooting of a protester, the Americans in Bush's protection squad will face justice in a British court as would any other visitor, the Home Office has confirmed.
If I were the one who pulled the trigger in an accidental shooting ANYWHERE, I would expect to face justice in court. Why shouldn't government employees?
 
Can someone please explain something for me? I keep reading:

The US requests... Britian refuses... in return, Britian provides...

What is Britian providing these accomodations in return for. For their refusals?
 
The Americans had also wanted to travel with a piece of military hardware called a 'mini-gun', which usually forms part of the mobile armoury in the presidential cavalcade. It is fired from a tank and can kill dozens of people. One manufacturer's description reads: 'Due to the small calibre of the round, the mini-gun can be used practically anywhere. This is especially helpful during peacekeeping deployments.'

:what: As in a Dillon Mini-Gun? :D

~W
 
Sure, why not. One of those Chevy Suburbans in the convoy is a fully outfitted surgical suite complete with a surgeon and team. Reagan's assassination attempt made it happen. It is what is necessary in today's world.

Story just confirms to me the issue in Britain is not gun control, it is self-defense. Evidently using violence to protect life is not acceptable. I suspect Britain's 911 will change a few attitudes, but not before.
 
Wait a minute...a minigun? I don't believe it. Some reporter heard that a Secret Service agent wasn't allowed to carry an Uzi in his briefcase and got excited. Where would they put a minigun? Is Jessie Ventura following Bush around to keep him safe?
 
a series of extraordinary US demands

Since when is taking appropriate steps to insure the security of the President considered "extraordinary US demands?" Especially when you consider there will be alot of anti-US, anti-Bush/Blair protestors everywhere he goes?
 
*sigh*

Remember when you didn't have to worry about a suicidal fanatic in a Piper Cub?

If the mini-gun story is true, I wonder if it's meant for point defense against kamakaze attacks from light aircraft or helicopters?

Kind of hard to stop one of those with a SIG 229, even if it is loaded with .357SIG uber-rounds.

If this is, indeed, the case, let the Brits have the mini-gun, and neglect to tell them about the brace of Stinger MANPADS systems. :D

LawDog
 
Hey, it's their country. I have a hard time believing that the Secret Service seriously thought a bomb in the tube system was a threat to the President on the surface, but maybe their subway system is just that different. Who knows?

IF the story is true, I find it more likely that the American diplomats demanded 150% of what they wanted and walked away with 90-100%, as most good negotiators do. The Brits, for their part, probably started the bidding at no American control whatsoever, no secure zones, no patrols, and the President riding a mass transit bus; then they worked their way up to what they had been willing to allow all along.
 
Mini gun & Peace keeping deployment, Isn'nt that an OXYMORON?

:rolleyes:

The minigun and other weapons are the only thing keeping some people from attempting acts of violence.
 
Remember, the shoe bomber was British:evil:

He was also incompetent, but that is beside the point.

A bomb in the tube system could disrupt if it was BIG enough.

Some of us appreciate POTUS, and some do not.

But the fact remains, that he would be a very big prize .
 
The diplomatic immunity is so that if an attacker shows up and the presidents men shoot at him, but hit a civie, they dont get "charged".
 
The diplomatic immunity is so that if an attacker shows up and the presidents men shoot at him, but hit a civie, they dont get "charged".
My only question is: How could that possibly happen with a minigun? :scrutiny:
:)

I don't see a problem here. If Bush doesn't want to play by their rules, he should stay here where he gets to make the rules (or, rather, his security forces are above most of them). Doesn't matter to me whether he goes or stays.

I wonder how we would respond if, half of ... say ... New York was shut down, close air cover was flown by foreign jets, foreign "security forces" were granted immunity from prosecution and they packed some rotary cannon, heavy machine guns, anti tank rockets and other fun ordinance, just so some Euro bigwig could make an appearance.
 
I was looking forward to the British Protesters (Communists mostly) getting accidentally shot by the mini-gun.

I know, I know, non-initiation of the use of force, but they're COMMUNISTS!

I'll go pray for forgiveness before the god's* of Laissez-faire for my transgression, but it was worth it.

-Morgan
*(Mises, Locke, Rand, Friedman, et al.)
 
I wonder how we would respond if, half of ... say ... New York was shut down, close air cover was flown by foreign jets, foreign "security forces" were granted immunity from prosecution and they packed some rotary cannon, heavy machine guns, anti tank rockets and other fun ordinance, just so some Euro bigwig could make an appearance.

Ever lived in Washington? The police shut down streets and take other semi-disruptive measures occasionally to make way for visiting dignitaries from all over the world. I don't think they bring in heavy weapons, but security is pretty heavy. I imagine the same happens in NY with the UN being there and all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top