Friday, 23 December 2016

Alleged Berlin Lorry Terrorist shot dead in Milan!

Italian police cordon off an area around the body of Anis Amri after a shootout with police in Milan's Sesto San Giovanni neighbourhood
Italian police cordon off an area around the body of Anis Amri after a shootout with police in Milan's Sesto San Giovanni neighbourhood CREDIT: DANIELE BENNATI/AP PHOTO

BREAKING Berlin market attack suspect shot dead in shootout in Milan, Italy: security source

Anis Amri shot dead by police in Milan


"The Italian interior minister, Marco Minniti, has delivered a press conference. 
He said that at 3am this morning, during a routine patrol by the state police, a squad car stopped someone who appeared to be the suspect, Anis Amri.
"At the moment he was stopped he took a pistol out of his backpack and shot the police who had asked him for identification documents," Minniti said.
"The patrol immediately responded . . .  the agent was hurt but he is in hospital and is recovering and is not in intensive care.
"State police officers responded and the person that attacked our patrol was killed.
"The person killed after a number of enquiries were made under the circumstances, without any shadow of a doubt is Anis Amri, the presumed suspect of the terrorist attack in Berlin."
The Hero Figure
The agent who was injured during the shootout was named as Christian Movio  by the Italian interior minister, who thanked him personally.
"Police officer Christian Movio was hurt and is now in hospital recovering, and is not in intensive care," Mr Minniti said.
He added: "I was able to speak to Christian Movio. He is a very motivated young man, he is an extraordinary young man. We consider these two young officers to be extraordinary people carrying out their duty and rendering extraordinary service to the community."
Cristian Movio 
Note: No exit hole so the bullet must have lodged in his shoulder?
Shoot to kill policy across Europe?
So what I predicted has come to pass, and the now 'standard operating procedure' seems to have been implemented yet again. A person of Arab/Muslim origins is named as the accused and ends up dead rather than being arrested. We never get to hear his side of the story or possibly to protest his innocence.
Amri is said to be a Tunisian man with connections to Islamic State and have been using six different names under three different nationalities. With this background one wonders why he wasn't already under arrest?
Was there a plan to blame and 'neutralise' 'Naved B.'?
Of course he was the second person to be firmly accused. The first,  Naved B., a 23-year-old Pakistani asylum seeker, was said to have been followed from the lorry by someone who kept in contact with police all the time, allowing him to be arrested some distance away in the Tiergarten public park, near the Victory Column. 
Navid may consider himself lucky to be alive. 
Given that the public information put out about him was apparently so strong, it is surprising he wasn't immediately engaged in the same manner. 
One cannot help wondering if somewhere a plan went wrong or what would have happened if he had been shot dead? Would the case then have been closed down? Would we have heard that subsequently "residence application papers" had been found under the driver's seat in the cab.
Of course terrorists have a habit of being very helpful to police by leaving identification documents at the scene. It has happened in virtually all of them and even by people blowing themselves up, from which the paper documents have been retrieved virtually unscathed! We have to ask how likely it was that any terrorist would be so helpful to investigators or so absent minded to have placed their identity under the driver's seat before setting off? Or for that matter why if it was immediately discovered it took two days to rule another man out of the equation?
Clearing 'Navid B.' because his blood did not match.
One reason for clearing Naved B., despite his own protestations of innocence I suppose, although they probably counted for little in the scheme of things, was the fact that apparently his blood did not match that found in the cab.
This is a very strange conclusion don't you think?  We may assume the blood in the cab came from the Polish driver, Lukasz Urban, 37,who it is said was stabbed and shot? The only way this could work is if the real terrorist's blood was also in the cab that would mean that the now dead accused Amri must have been injured at the time sufficient to leave blood in the cab. Is that what they are claiming?
Had his papers not been in the cab, clearly it would have been far less likely, indeed impossible, that his photograph and details could have been so widely circulated so soon. Once this had happened his days were numbered.
Undetected travel across Europe
So it is claimed Amri after the attack travelled from Berlin to Paris and thence to Milan via Chambray. As such he must have passed through at least two national borders, may be three, and many hundreds of miles through countries on high alert and looking for him. This despite all the cameras and surveillance technology. If so it certainly raises security issues yet again.
Questioning the official account.
Now as to the reports coming out of Italy there are some serious reservations as we have come almost to expect in these incidents. No one should accept them without subjecting them to critical evaluation. If an innocent man were shot dead, how would we know if the government determined to tell us otherwise? 
As we have noted Marco Minniti told a press conference in Rome that Amri had been fatally shot after firing at police who had stopped him for a routine identity check at around 3am (02.00 GMT). 
The scene in Milan this morningThe scene in Milan this morning CREDIT: FOTOGRAMMA / MEGA
The gold survival blanket is becoming an iconic image to these incidents isn't it? why is it there?
Forensic officers examine the scene in Milan where Anis Amri was shot

The story goes like this: Two days after the incident, Thomas de Maiziere announces that Amri's fingerprints had been discovered on the steering wheel of the truck. 
Then early morning (3 am (02.00 GMT)) on Friday 23rd December, 2016, Police on a routine patrol in Milan, Italy, stop a "very suspect" man as he walks through the city centre and ask for his identification papers. The suspect immediately produces a gun and fires at an officer.
This happens outside the Piazza  Maggio station area of Milan. Is the Piazzo Maggio classed as the city centre? (I have searched hundreds of images and not one shows this building?)

EDIT 24.12.16: It now transpires it was not a "City Centre" location as earlier reported but the northern most suburb of Milan outside the Sesto San Giovanni railway station there.

How could such a mistake be made and how did it originate? It is not unusual for factual descriptions to change in such incidents. No one has explained to date what he was doing there or how he got to be there at 3 am.

Sesto San Giovanni - stazione ferroviaria - fabbricato viaggiatori.jpg
However a slightly earlier report stated that Police rushed to the area after a call from someone that he had been spotted. 
So the first question to be asked is, was this a "routine patrol" that just happened to spot him as suggested by minister Minniti, or was it an intentional response to a tip off?  Clearly these are very different scenarios and lead to different responses.
Police in a squad car and a man on foot. If they already suspected he was a terrorist, wouldn't they have drawn their weapons in advance and challenged him ordering him into the prone position? Is it likely whilst so threatened he would fumble in his back pack, manage to retrieve a weapon and fire it at the officer before being shot dead? 
The body is covered as Italian police cordon off an area The body is covered as Italian police cordon off an area  CREDIT:  DANIELE BENNATI/AP
not a uniformed policeman to be seen!
It should be noted that his body is located on what appears to be a pedestrian crossing so it seems he made no attempt to run when he must have seen the police car approaching. Nor has the police car sustained damage which might have been expected if he intended to resist arrest or wanted the police to retreat.
The phenomenon of the 'Patsy'
There is no doubt in incidents of this sort, innocent men have been identified and subsequently neutralised thus closing the case and allowing the true perpetrators to go free. The term applied to such unfortunate individuals is of course "the Patsy".
So can we be sure that stated Anis Amris was indeed the Berlin lorry driver rather than a convenient 'Patsy'? It seems to me, we are increasingly be inured to a policy of 'shoot to kill' and execution without trial or proper justification. 
Notice how Minniti specifically justifies it in his press conference: "I'd also like to thank all the security teams in this country. Italy must really be proud of them. For the police to identify this person and neutralise them means there really is a system that is capable of functioning.. It's not simple when faced with this level of terrorism to guarantee safety." 
He replicates statements by the French Interior Minister following the Charlie Hebdo and Paris incidents. Clearly "shoot to kill" and extra-judicial killings in such cases is now OFFICIAL POLICY. It was hinted at by Cameron in Britain also.
Europe following in American footsteps
The USA has long set the tone with drone strikes and 'terrorist events'. Now Europe is following in its footsteps, and all based on a largely fraudulent 'Jihadist threat', actually created by America and the West! 
France is subject to a "State of Emergency" - effectively Martial Law, where civil rights and protections have been suspended. There is pressure for Belgium, Germany and other European nations to go the same way. Britain is on a state of alert only one short of actual nuclear attack! In fact both French and British political leaders have stated we are actually "at war". 
Everywhere repressive laws have been introduced and the police 'militarised' on the back of it. Is it not incumbent on all of us to question and challenge the voracity of the evidence and the reliability of the narrative that we are being sold? Too much is at stake for us not to do so. Too much evidence exists of fraud and intentional misrepresentation not to do so.
So the questions remain: 
  • was Imri truly the driver of the Berlin lorry?
  • was he working for ISIS, the CIA, Mossad, some other intelligence agency or none of them?
  • was he set up as a 'Patsy' when the first attempt to pin it on 'Naved B.' went wrong?
  • given the fact that the news did not start breaking until about 9 am, why is the body still on the street and do the images reflect the true location of the killing?
  • why is there a conflicting story as to the "routine patrol" spotting Imri before challenging him as against the story they were responding to a tip off?
  • and do you really think that given the fact that he was considered the most wanted and dangerous man in Europe, they would have dispatched a couple of rookie cops in the middle of the night to arrest him?
  • what was Imri doing there walking the street at that time of the morning when he might expected to attract attention, if he knew he was the subject of an intensive search?
  • given that armed officers were already speaking to him, and suspected who he was - a desperate terrorist- was he given the opportunity to search in his back pack, pull out a gun and fire a shot before they fatally shot him?
  • how at close range did a bullet manage to make a small hole in the officers uniform with no evidence of either blood staining or exit hole?
  • was the man shot dead the same one in the circulated image said to be Imri?

Rather suspicious image of Imri
(Note wall hanging and black dots on wall to rear)



    Turkish and US-led Coalition raids kill 94 civilians in al-Bab and Raqqa during past 24 hours

    Is this what those little incidents in Berlin and Ankara was meant to distract from?

  2. The well-named journalist and the public blow-back:

    After Praising Russian Ambassador’s Murder, US Newspaper Shocked by Blowback

    © AFP 2016/ Natalia KOLESNIKOVA US 22:57 22.12.2016(updated 00:34 23.12.2016) Get short URL5495271377 Following an article praising the assassination of Russian Ambassador Andrey Karlov in Turkey, New York Daily News (NYDN) columnist Gersh Kuntzman has been surprised by pushback from readers, suggesting also that 'this is a disturbing trend' - that Americans may empathize with a Russian killed by an Islamic terrorist. It seems that, despite the best efforts to revive mid-20th-century Cold War stereotypes, mainstream media is falling for them once again. The New York Daily News columnist now can attest to it, from his own experience. On Tuesday December 20, Kuntzman wrote a piece with a headline that speaks for itself: ‘Don’t cry for Russia’s slain envoy, who was Putin’s lackey.’ The article glorified the murder of Russian Ambassador Andrey Karlov, and stooped to calling it an example of "justice being served."

    Read more:

  3. From ITV here:

    So now the location has moved from the "City Centre" to the northern suburb of "Sesto San Giovanni?

    "Amri was reportedly killed during a shoot-out in the city's northern Sesto San Giovanni suburb, after he produced a gun from a backpack when approached by police officers who asked him for ID while conducting a routine patrol.The reports come just minutes after a reported sighting of Amri in Aalborg, Denmark.



  6. Mother asks: "“I want the truth about my son. Who was behind him?”

    Amri’s brother Abdelkader wept as he said “my brother is dead. Bring us his remains, even one of his fingers, and I will put it in my pocket. ... They killed him when he was still only a suspect. Why?”


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.