Tragedy in London

This weekend, there was a sad twist in the tale of the London bombings. London plain clothes police shot to death a Brazillian man in a London tube station. He had left a building under police surveillance for housing terrorists and conspirators. He was wearing bulky clothes that might have concealed explosives. He had panicked and jumped over a train ticket barrier when approached by the police. He fit "the profile" of a potential suicide bomber. The police felt they had no choice but to shoot him in the head, lest they set off explosives if they shoot his body. The fatal mistake was that this was a completely innocent man.

The Guardian has an excellent leader article analysing the complex moral and practical dilemma faced by policy makers and law enforcers in London's current climate.

One always has to condemn the unnecessary death of an innocent man. But in these circumstances, did the police have any choice? They were acting on available intelligence, after all. The scary thing is that terrorism related intelligence will never be 100% accurate. Is that element of doubt enough to negate all police action? Should they prize the sanctity of "the one over the many" or should they act to maximise "the greater good"?

I don't know the answer. I am just glad that I don't have to answer questions like that. It is easy to pontificate from far away, when I don't have family living in London under the dual threat of intended terrorist attacks and unintended police action.

To the family of the innocent Brazilian electrician, this unimaginable tragedy must understandably forever shake their faith in London's law enforcers. I hope that in time, they will recognise that their son was ultimately yet another victim the terrorists who planned and executed the bomb attacks; they might not have pulled the trigger but they are the true killers here. This, then, is the great achievement of the terrorists; an environment of heightened fear and paranoia, where people can die even without another bomb going off.