Johnson's lies

[cbe]

Colin, it is clear from all your posts on here that you are a very confused man so I shouldn't be surprised that you are confused about who said what on this thread. Until you pressed me to make comments about prison I have made only ONE reference to prison. I said (in reference to Onasanya ) perhaps everyone should be allowed out of prison on a tag like the aforementioned Labour MP.If you are going to whinge and whine constantly at least address your comments to the correct poster.

[Richard]

There was an interesting article by Kenan Malik in the Sunday Observer:
'Can all offenders, (including terrorists and serial rapists), be deradicalised or redeemed?'
'Do all offenders, however abhorrent the crime, example deliberate cold-blooded murderers, deserve a second chance?'
Khan had been invited to a "learning together" event and the two people he murdered, Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones, were an organiser and a volunteer for the programme.
Whether any or all failures within the prison/probation system are down to budget cuts and staff shortages, had Khan served a full sentence, he would eventually have been released and he may still have behaved as he did, just a few more years down the line.
Do terrorists deserve a second chance then?
Khan is reported to have taken part in an HII programme. In Britain the main programme aimed at extremist offenders, encouraging and empowering participants to disengage from an extremist group, cause or ideology.
Khan's solicitor claimed he was unable to receive intervention from a deradicaliser but few experts can agree on what deradicalistation means.
There is little evidence to show that people stay out of terrorism because they have been on programmes which help them to think differently anyway.
Politicians do not understand why some individuals are drawn to jihadist groups or even the nature of Islam.
If you don't understand the dragon fully then how can you possibly slay it?
Jihadists can commit the most heinous, inhuman crimes and view them as righteous.
Should the possibility of redemption be defined by the crime? It does not mean that everybody is capable of redemption but neither does it mean that some people who have committed heinous crimes are incapable of change.
To acknowledge the possibility of redemption is the mark of a civilized society, to deny it is to take a black and white view of human nature, uncomfortably close to the worldview of someone such as Usman Khan.

[ColinL]

Richard, a calm and measured contribution. The subject was debated on the radio programme, the Moral Maze at the weekend that raised alsorts of conflicting points and posed the question of whether the crimes of terrorism should be in a special category of crime; of whether people can be deradicalised (given that they were radicalised in the first instance), of the issue that given many are born and bred British our society has somehow failed to prevent them rejecting ournpluralistic society. There are no easy answers, but there have been according to some of the witnesses many people who have changed back and are active in combating extremism.

[ColinL]

Johnson shows again how dishonest he is towards voters. A Press Association photographer attached to him during the election said this morning on World Service that the nasty buffoon used an airplane to take his minders and press from London to Scotland for a staged photo opportunity with picked audience in central Scotland. It was used for the purpose of Scottish news outlets. After some 30 minutes they reboarded the plane and returned to London.

So much for his concerns for Scots and the issues that they face. None of the British tabloid or 'quality press' thought it worthwhile featuring this deceit of reality on their front pages. A few days later he flew from one town to another that would have taken a hour by train or about just under two hours by road. He is taking liberties with voters because he desperately needed to avoid voters who might actually ask him difficult questions , or indeed any questions. Voters have been conned by the press that he understand working class voters. That is the dishonest Tories and press

[seahermit]

The usual personal vitriol from Colin towards his hate figure, poor old Johnson! Mudslinging, allegation and insinuation. This is not the way to conduct a debate and I hope nobody else will be tempted to stoop to this stuff.

In any case, the battle is over, won, atleast for a few years. Colin seems to have not woken up to that yet, or atleast he cannot bear to face up to the reality. The left-wingers will probably continue to fume and bluster and rale against the wicked Tories - won't alter a thing. The Tories have 80 reasons for not being unduly bothered by people such as Colin.

[ColinL]

Identify the hate, vitriol, mud slinging if you are able to do so.