Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Shamima Begum allowed back to the UK

I read a comment from those those that are judging this case (struggling to find it now) that mentioned the right to fairness (for her) supersedes any national security interest. The lives of decent people then have been relegated to somewhere further down the pecking order.

The attitude from the great and good of the UK has been that if we treat others nicely nicely then they will like us and become like us, this thinking only proves the great and good are naïve fools but it is the people that ay for their foolishness.

These types and their thinking tell us it is wrong to put up barriers or otherwise protect oneself as such moves actually cause criminality and violence They think they can lead us to a world of commune, peace and love, but in the meantime an attacker can only be the victim of a badly governed society, that being the real villain of the peace.
Yet I am pretty sure that those making such assertions have plenty of barriers and protection already in place.
 
Yet I am pretty sure that those making such assertions have plenty of barriers and protection already in place.

Ah yes, those creating and governing the brave new world of sink estates and concrete jungles will live far away from the impact of their experiments and, I bet, even in the leafy villages will still live behind walls, private security, triple lock doors, night lights, guard dogs, alarms and the local nick on speed dial. They encourage others into the melting pot that they pay their way out of because they know full well how hot in gets inside.

Local nicks are, of course, becoming less local for most as time passes, but when you are in charge it is entirely possible to make sure your local is not one that gets earmarked for closure.
 

The lad's family is sueing the government too.

She added: "Usman Khan was a convicted terrorist under multi-agency public protection when he killed Jack and Saskia on November 29 2019.

"These circumstances raise questions about the assessment and management of Usman Khan's risk."

Could you imagine the uproar if Khan had been left banged up from the same quarter?

Meanwhile...


The Americans only released him on the proviso he returned straight to the UK on release... doesn't that set alarm bells ringing?
 
Best summarised as ‘Some people are just wrong ‘uns’.

That is a truism, and one that to my mind reinforces the reality of the proverb 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'.
Prison needs to be a source of education and rehabilitation but also deterrence and punishment.
Prison should be all of those, the issue is the order in which they are done and funded. Primarily it should to my mind be punishment & deterrence, secondarily an opportunity to earn education and rehabilitation.
I read a comment from those those that are judging this case (struggling to find it now) that mentioned the right to fairness (for her) supersedes any national security interest. The lives of decent people then have been relegated to somewhere further down the pecking order.

The attitude from the great and good of the UK has been that if we treat others nicely nicely then they will like us and become like us, this thinking only proves the great and good are naïve fools but it is the people that ay for their foolishness.

These types and their thinking tell us it is wrong to put up barriers or otherwise protect oneself as such moves actually cause criminality and violence They think they can lead us to a world of commune, peace and love, but in the meantime an attacker can only be the victim of a badly governed society, that being the real villain of the peace.

So we continue to tear down protections at every opportunity as a sort of penance and restorative move. We have a Police force that is subdued and ill equipped to take on armed violence, likewise the citizenry and much to the annoyance of the peace and love brigade we still put up whatever barriers we can.

Paradoxically this all goes to create an even more divided, bunkered down and fractured society, or ghettoization.

You are absolutely correct and can be summarised as "The lives of decent people then have been relegated to somewhere further down the pecking order." which will without doubt lead to your conclusion of "Paradoxically this all goes to create an even more divided, bunkered down and fractured society, or ghettoization.".

The real sadness is that those who make up the 'great and the good' are neither in reality 'great or good' in their thinking or deeds, the question that needs answering is it because of stupidity or design.
 

The eye catching paragraph in that one is where the families representative mentions;

"...where state agents or public bodies, by their acts or omissions, may have caused or contributed to a death", the right to life under the European Convention on Human Rights is engaged".

That does suggest a whole lot of Governmental culpability and accountability then. I wonder if that also might put the Home Office in the chair if say a terrorist gunman starts up (predictable event) but as the Police have chosen to be routinely unarmed (omission) are unwilling to tackle him with truncheon/tazer etc. Surely if the Police have made that choice I still have the right to expect them to tackle a marauding gunman as the order of duty of care for the Police is;

- Civilians
- Police themselves
- The criminal in question

They must therefore risk being shot to tackle the terrorist and protect me. the Police arguing that they cannot take on a gunman as they are unarmed is the choice they have made.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
The eye catching paragraph in that one is where the families representative mentions;

"...where state agents or public bodies, by their acts or omissions, may have caused or contributed to a death", the right to life under the European Convention on Human Rights is engaged".

That does suggest a whole lot of Governmental culpability and accountability then. I wonder if that also might put the Home Office in the chair if say a terrorist gunman starts up (predictable event) but as the Police have chosen to be routinely unarmed (omission) are unwilling to tackle him with truncheon/tazer etc. Surely if the Police have made that choice I still have the right to expect them to tackle a marauding gunman as the order of duty of care for the Police is;

- Civilians
- Police themselves
- The criminal in question

They must therefore risk being shot to tackle the terrorist and protect me. the Police arguing that they cannot take on a gunman as they are unarmed is the choice they have made.
Sue his mosque.
 
The eye catching paragraph in that one is where the families representative mentions;

"...where state agents or public bodies, by their acts or omissions, may have caused or contributed to a death", the right to life under the European Convention on Human Rights is engaged".

That does suggest a whole lot of Governmental culpability and accountability then. I wonder if that also might put the Home Office in the chair if say a terrorist gunman starts up (predictable event) but as the Police have chosen to be routinely unarmed (omission) are unwilling to tackle him with truncheon/tazer etc. Surely if the Police have made that choice I still have the right to expect them to tackle a marauding gunman as the order of duty of care for the Police is;

- Civilians
- Police themselves
- The criminal in question

They must therefore risk being shot to tackle the terrorist and protect me. the Police arguing that they cannot take on a gunman as they are unarmed is the choice they have made.

That the courts see 'law' as above the realities of life, is perhaps why the justice system is such a mess.
 

Her own lawyer says she could be a threat. I note he's not offering to put her up in his house.

Meanwhile.

The shadowy Islamic State cell looking to free Western jihadi brides | Daily Mail Online

The IS courier is a lying bastard. He took that £4500 for himself, and bought a puzzle book to put in the envelope. I hope his IS masters punish him for this. Don't believe me? Wait til you see the flash motor he will be cutting about in next week.
 
The IS courier is a lying bastard. He took that £4500 for himself, and bought a puzzle book to put in the envelope. I hope his IS masters punish him for this. Don't believe me? Wait til you see the flash motor he will be cutting about in next week.
Bet he got the puzzle book from his MI6 handler.
 

Latest Threads

Top