[News] London Bridge Incident

[theonlymikey]

He was warned and did nothing. Said there was no money.

That's about all we really we really need to know.

Money > Safety has equalled a terrorist attack on the Tories watch.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Shame on ANYONE trying to make political capital out of this.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The terrorist was jailed in 2012 for 16 years, released after only 6 years served. Labour haven't been in power since 2010.

So the tory was lying. Even I didn't think he was actually lying, just twisting the facts. What an absolute shower the tories are now.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The Labour law on early release did not fall off the statute book once they lost the 2010 election. Perhaps there were other priorities for the coalition in those two years after the election. Surely the point here is that no-one should be attempting to make political capital out of this incident but it is difficult to put the genie back in the bottle once Yvette Cooper fails to resist the temptation.

The tory did.

Calling it out the lies is not 'making political capital'

If someone said the attack was my fault I'd bloody well react*.

*Edit: if the accusation was a lie.

It seems that Cooper's accusation is the truth.

The tory on the radio didn't mention Cooper once. He was not responding to any accusations. He was simply making (up) some accusations of his own, specifically that the attach is labour's fault.

 

[theonlymikey]

Shame on ANYONE trying to make political capital out of this.

Emotionally, I agree with you.

However from a practical point, Republicans and the NRA have pushed a similar mantra after nearly 500 mass shootings this year. It stifles debate and by the point the time is right it's been forgotten about or there's another.

If you really want to pay respect to the victims, make sure they haven't died for no reason. Make sure policies are pursued to to stop this type of things happening again, for the greater good.

And as an electorate, we need to know who's hands we are safer in.



Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[beorhthelm]

He was warned and did nothing. Said there was no money.

That's about all we really we really need to know.

Money > Safety has equalled a terrorist attack on the Tories watch.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

why do we relentlessly make every issue about money. releasing prisoner is a process with rules and guidelines. the questions should be were they followed, do they need changing. if funding is short then there is a prioritisation, which feeds into that process. you can throw a couple of billion at probation service, if they have a guideline to parole all well behaved prisons after so much of their sentance, they will. and if they are released at end of sentance and want to re-offend, they will.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

The tory did.

Calling it out the lies is not 'making political capital'

If someone said the attack was my fault I'd bloody well react*.

*Edit: if the accusation was a lie.

It seems that Cooper's accusation is the truth.

The tory on the radio didn't mention Cooper once. He was not responding to any accusations. He was simply making (up) some accusations of his own, specifically that the attach is labour's fault.

Sure, that’s fine but I’m just making the point that either everyone leaves it in the aftermath or everyone doesn’t. If you want to accuse the Tories of stuff, fill your boots. Just don’t go all precious (I don’t mean you specifically) if they do the same. There is no VAR to check appropriacy and a supporter of either side is hardly the best judge.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Emotionally, I agree with you.

However from a practical point, Republicans and the NRA have pushed a similar mantra after nearly 500 mass shootings this year. It stifles debate and by the point the time is right it's been forgotten about or there's another.

If you really want to pay respect to the victims, make sure they haven't died for no reason. Make sure policies are pursued to to stop this type of things happening again, for the greater good.

And as an electorate, we need to know who's hands we are safer in.



Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Is that a serious question?

Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Bill 1984. It introduced police powers to arrest a person suspected of involvement in acts of terrorism connected to Northern Ireland.

Corbyn: Voted against it

1989 Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Bill, which proscribed the IRA and Irish National Liberation Army.

Corbyn opposed it.


Terrorism Act 2000

This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Fourteen-day detention

This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Control Orders

The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Ninety-day detention/28 day detention

Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days

Corbyn: Voted against at every stage

Counter-terrorism Act 2008

This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act

This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Justice and Security Act 2013

Corbyn: Voted against it

“We in the radical end, the left, of the unions and the Labour Party, have got to be realistic that NATO is a major problem and a major difficulty, and we have to campaign against NATO’s power, its influence and its global reach, because it is a danger to world peace and a danger to world security.” Jeremy Corbyn 2011

“High Time for an End to NATO” Jeremy Corbyn writing in the Morning Star 2012

“It’s a Cold War organisation. It should have been wound up in 1990.” Jeremy Corbyn 2015

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Sure, that’s fine but I’m just making the point that either everyone leaves it in the aftermath or everyone doesn’t. If you want to accuse the Tories of stuff, fill your boots. Just don’t go all precious (I don’t mean you specifically) if they do the same. There is no VAR to check appropriacy and a supporter of either side is hardly the best judge.

I don't mind who accuses who of what. If what the tory had accused labour of (responsibility for the killing) was true and fair, fine. You may have noted that I have not held back with my disdain for Momentum Labour over the last few years. The fact of the matter here is that what the tory said was lies. See posts by [MENTION=14365]Thunder Bolt[/MENTION] and others

 

[theonlymikey]

Is that a serious question?

Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Bill 1984. It introduced police powers to arrest a person suspected of involvement in acts of terrorism connected to Northern Ireland.

Corbyn: Voted against it

1989 Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Bill, which proscribed the IRA and Irish National Liberation Army.

Corbyn opposed it.


Terrorism Act 2000

This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Fourteen-day detention

This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Control Orders

The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Ninety-day detention/28 day detention

Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days

Corbyn: Voted against at every stage

Counter-terrorism Act 2008

This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act

This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.

Corbyn: Voted against it

Justice and Security Act 2013

Corbyn: Voted against it

“We in the radical end, the left, of the unions and the Labour Party, have got to be realistic that NATO is a major problem and a major difficulty, and we have to campaign against NATO’s power, its influence and its global reach, because it is a danger to world peace and a danger to world security.” Jeremy Corbyn 2011

“High Time for an End to NATO” Jeremy Corbyn writing in the Morning Star 2012

“It’s a Cold War organisation. It should have been wound up in 1990.” Jeremy Corbyn 2015

It was positioned as a statement not a question, and a non-tribal statement at that. Note there was no mention of any political parties in my post.

Your ability to fire off a few meaningless links is awesome though.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Hastings gull]

]It was positioned as a statement not a question, and a non-tribal statement at that. Note there was no mention of any political parties in my post.[/B]

Your ability to fire off a few meaningless links is awesome though.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

That is of course true and you stated that we need to know in whose hands we are at our safest. JC thus gave you a pretty damming record of Corbyn's reaction to legislation aimed at curbing terrorism, in an attempt to clarify in whom we should have the most confidence. Thus his post was surely entirely valid, even if you might not have wanted to read it.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It was positioned as a statement not a question, and a non-tribal statement at that. Note there was no mention of any political parties in my post.

Your ability to fire off a few meaningless links is awesome though.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

It is called relentless campaigning for a political party. His longstanding oeuvre on NSC

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I don't mind who accuses who of what. If what the tory had accused labour of (responsibility for the killing) was true and fair, fine. You may have noted that I have not held back with my disdain for Momentum Labour over the last few years. The fact of the matter here is that what the tory said was lies. See posts by [MENTION=14365]Thunder Bolt[/MENTION] and others

There is room for debate and interpretation on both sides. Thunderbolts argument relied upon her assumption that the coalition should have repealed Labour’s legislation between 2010 and 2012 so that subsequently Friday’s terrorist would not have been released early. It was partial truth, as were the interventions of Yvette Cooper, Priti Patel etc. I am getting so tired of both sides constantly and hypocritically calling each other liers. As a aside I know you share my dislike of Momentum Labour which is one reason I am surprised you have waded in so strongly on this issue. There is a lot more nuance here than than the usual cheerleaders of both sides would have us believe.

 

[Questions]

What's that got to do with losing our identity
Regards
DF

I think maybe YOUR identity is different than a lot of other peoples.

 

[theonlymikey]

That is of course true and you stated that we need to know in whose hands we are at our safest. JC thus gave you a pretty damming record of Corbyn's reaction to legislation aimed at curbing terrorism, in an attempt to clarify in whom we should have the most confidence. Thus his post was surely entirely valid, even if you might not have wanted to read it.

Okay doke Fair enough. Unfortunately I don't know enough about why he voted against them. So I took the liberty of lifting the text from the BBC reality check (second link of the Google search after the sun where JC nabbed his records from)link on Corbyns terror voting record.

Its not too dissimilar to Mays record and the context suggest fair reasons for doing so.


Reality Check: May and Corbyn's record on anti-terror legislation


"I am shocked that Jeremy Corbyn, just in 2011, boasted that he had opposed every piece of anti-terror legislation in his 30 years in office."
- Amber Rudd, Home Secretary, BBC Election Debate
"Can I just remind you that in 2005 Theresa May voted against the anti-terror legislation at that time. She voted against it, as did David Davis, as did a number of people that are now in your cabinet because they felt that the legislation was giving too much executive power."
- Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, BBC Election Debate.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been accused by the Conservatives of consistently blocking anti-terror legislation. Last night, during the BBC Election Debate, Jeremy Corbyn suggested that Theresa May's record was inconsistent and that the prime minister had voted against some anti-terror measures in the past.
Reality Check has looked back at the key votes since 2000.
Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have taken very different paths to becoming leaders of their parties. Mrs May has almost exclusively served as a minister or shadow minister during her 20 years as an MP. In 2010 she became Home Secretary - after the Conservatives formed the coalition government with the Lib Dems. She remained in that post until becoming Prime Minister in 2016.
Mr Corbyn first became an MP in 1983 and had previously never held a position on the front bench before becoming leader in September 2015.
With that in mind, what is the record of both leaders when it comes to anti-terror legislation?

Terrorism Act 2000

This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.
May:*Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading)
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*This legislation was supported by both Labour and the Conservatives and was therefore highly unlikely to be defeated.
Sometimes MPs will seek an informal arrangement with opposition MPs not to vote together. This is known as pairing and is used when members have other commitments and are likely to miss a vote. It is not known whether Theresa May was paired in this case. As well as Mrs May, other absent MPs included Prime Minister Tony Blair and Conservative leader William Hague.
Mr Corbyn was one of a handful of rebels and spoke out against the legislation. He argued: "I am not in favour of violence or terrorism but one does not solve those problems by imprisoning the innocent."
Second Reading refers to a vote that takes place in Parliament before the legislation moves to a committee of MPs who scrutinise it line by line. Third Reading is the final chance for the Commons to debate the contents of the legislation.

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York. It allowed foreign terrorist suspects to be detained indefinitely.
May:*Voted for it at Second Reading; absent at Third Reading
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*Again, like the 2000 Terrorism Act, the legislation was supported by the leadership of both parties. The vote was not close.
Mr Corbyn opposed it, saying the legislation was rushed, and argued it was "extremely dangerous because it is a denial of civil liberties".

Fourteen-day detention

This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.
May:*Voted against it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The Conservative front bench opposed the act, saying it gave too much power to the then Home Secretary David Blunkett.

Control Orders

The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.
May:*Voted against it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The Conservative front bench opposed the act. David Davis, who was shadow home secretary at the time, said the legislation had "clearly been very badly drawn-up".
Mr Corbyn voted against. He has previously described control orders as damaging to community relations. He said: "They make people less, rather than more, co-operative with the police and everyone else."

ID cards

Legislation which paved the way for the controversial introduction of ID cards, was introduced by the Labour government in 2006. The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010.
May:*Voted against it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The Conservative front bench opposed the introduction of ID cards on the basis that the voluntary scheme would lead to "creeping compulsion".
Mr Corbyn also opposed, telling Parliament that ID cards "will not solve crime, fraud or terrorism".

Ninety-day detention

Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days.
May:*Voted against the 90-day aspect. She voted for it at the Third Reading after major changes
Corbyn:*Voted against at every stage
Context:*The Conservative front bench was strongly against the 90-day detention aspect and their opposition contributed to Tony Blair's first defeat in the Commons. The Conservatives did go on to support a Labour backbench MP's proposal to extend the detention period to 28 days, which was passed.
Mr Corbyn was one of 49 Labour MPs who rebelled against the government. He also voted against the subsequent proposal to extend detention without charge to 28 days.

Counter-terrorism Act 2008

This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days, but the Labour government abandoned this after being defeated in the House of Lords.
May:*Absent from the vote
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The position of the Conservative front bench was to abstain from the vote. The party was concerned with aspects of the 42-day detention proposal.
Mr Corbyn was also against the 42-days proposal. He was worried the plans would give increasing powers to government and that future home secretaries would extend the detention period still further.

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act

This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.
May:*Voted for it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*Theresa May, as home secretary, introduced the new regime saying it would be more focused and targeted than control orders.

Justice and Security Act 2013

This legislation granted controversial new powers to close court doors on the grounds of national security. It allowed ministers to ask for a "closed material procedure" - an order to bar the public, press and claimant in a case from court.
May:*Voted for it at Second Reading; absent at Third Reading
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*This was legislation Mrs May introduced as Home Secretary. Even though she missed the vote at Third Reading it's almost certain this would have been an agreed absence as she spoke up for the bill in Parliament.
Mr Corbyn said he opposed secrecy in courts and voted against it.

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016

Referred to as the "snooper's charter" by critics, this legislation allowed for the bulk interception of communications.
May:*Voted for it
Corbyn:*Absent from the vote
Context:*This was legislation introduced by Mrs May as home secretary. She said the ability to access telecommunications data would allow law-enforcement agencies to investigate criminal activity and protect the public.
This vote took place after Mr Corbyn was elected leader. He was absent from the Commons vote even though Labour, as a whole, voted for the legislation at Third Reading. It is not known whether he was paired. The party abstained at Second Reading.




Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[theonlymikey]

Okay doke Fair enough. Unfortunately I don't know enough about why he voted against them. So I took the liberty of lifting the text from the BBC reality check (second link of the Google search after the sun where JC nabbed his records from)link on Corbyns terror voting record.

Its not too dissimilar to Mays record and the context suggest fair reasons for doing so.


Reality Check: May and Corbyn's record on anti-terror legislation


"I am shocked that Jeremy Corbyn, just in 2011, boasted that he had opposed every piece of anti-terror legislation in his 30 years in office."
- Amber Rudd, Home Secretary, BBC Election Debate
"Can I just remind you that in 2005 Theresa May voted against the anti-terror legislation at that time. She voted against it, as did David Davis, as did a number of people that are now in your cabinet because they felt that the legislation was giving too much executive power."
- Jeremy Corbyn, Labour leader, BBC Election Debate.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been accused by the Conservatives of consistently blocking anti-terror legislation. Last night, during the BBC Election Debate, Jeremy Corbyn suggested that Theresa May's record was inconsistent and that the prime minister had voted against some anti-terror measures in the past.
Reality Check has looked back at the key votes since 2000.
Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have taken very different paths to becoming leaders of their parties. Mrs May has almost exclusively served as a minister or shadow minister during her 20 years as an MP. In 2010 she became Home Secretary - after the Conservatives formed the coalition government with the Lib Dems. She remained in that post until becoming Prime Minister in 2016.
Mr Corbyn first became an MP in 1983 and had previously never held a position on the front bench before becoming leader in September 2015.
With that in mind, what is the record of both leaders when it comes to anti-terror legislation?

Terrorism Act 2000

This legislation - introduced by the Labour government - gave a broad definition of terrorism for the first time. The Act also gave the police the power to detain terrorist suspects for up to seven days and created a list of proscribed terrorist organisations.
May:*Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading)
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*This legislation was supported by both Labour and the Conservatives and was therefore highly unlikely to be defeated.
Sometimes MPs will seek an informal arrangement with opposition MPs not to vote together. This is known as pairing and is used when members have other commitments and are likely to miss a vote. It is not known whether Theresa May was paired in this case. As well as Mrs May, other absent MPs included Prime Minister Tony Blair and Conservative leader William Hague.
Mr Corbyn was one of a handful of rebels and spoke out against the legislation. He argued: "I am not in favour of violence or terrorism but one does not solve those problems by imprisoning the innocent."
Second Reading refers to a vote that takes place in Parliament before the legislation moves to a committee of MPs who scrutinise it line by line. Third Reading is the final chance for the Commons to debate the contents of the legislation.

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

This was passed after the 11 September attacks in New York. It allowed foreign terrorist suspects to be detained indefinitely.
May:*Voted for it at Second Reading; absent at Third Reading
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*Again, like the 2000 Terrorism Act, the legislation was supported by the leadership of both parties. The vote was not close.
Mr Corbyn opposed it, saying the legislation was rushed, and argued it was "extremely dangerous because it is a denial of civil liberties".

Fourteen-day detention

This was a measure, contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which allowed the police to question terrorist suspects for up to 14 days.
May:*Voted against it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The Conservative front bench opposed the act, saying it gave too much power to the then Home Secretary David Blunkett.

Control Orders

The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. A form of house arrest, control orders were replaced by Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures - or TPims - in 2012.
May:*Voted against it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The Conservative front bench opposed the act. David Davis, who was shadow home secretary at the time, said the legislation had "clearly been very badly drawn-up".
Mr Corbyn voted against. He has previously described control orders as damaging to community relations. He said: "They make people less, rather than more, co-operative with the police and everyone else."

ID cards

Legislation which paved the way for the controversial introduction of ID cards, was introduced by the Labour government in 2006. The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010.
May:*Voted against it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The Conservative front bench opposed the introduction of ID cards on the basis that the voluntary scheme would lead to "creeping compulsion".
Mr Corbyn also opposed, telling Parliament that ID cards "will not solve crime, fraud or terrorism".

Ninety-day detention

Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings, this legislation - part of the 2006 Terrorism Act - extended the detention-without-charge period from 14 to 28 days. The Labour government was forced to back down after trying to convince Parliament to back 90 days.
May:*Voted against the 90-day aspect. She voted for it at the Third Reading after major changes
Corbyn:*Voted against at every stage
Context:*The Conservative front bench was strongly against the 90-day detention aspect and their opposition contributed to Tony Blair's first defeat in the Commons. The Conservatives did go on to support a Labour backbench MP's proposal to extend the detention period to 28 days, which was passed.
Mr Corbyn was one of 49 Labour MPs who rebelled against the government. He also voted against the subsequent proposal to extend detention without charge to 28 days.

Counter-terrorism Act 2008

This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days, but the Labour government abandoned this after being defeated in the House of Lords.
May:*Absent from the vote
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*The position of the Conservative front bench was to abstain from the vote. The party was concerned with aspects of the 42-day detention proposal.
Mr Corbyn was also against the 42-days proposal. He was worried the plans would give increasing powers to government and that future home secretaries would extend the detention period still further.

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act

This was the 2011 legislation used to replace control orders with TPims.
May:*Voted for it
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*Theresa May, as home secretary, introduced the new regime saying it would be more focused and targeted than control orders.

Justice and Security Act 2013

This legislation granted controversial new powers to close court doors on the grounds of national security. It allowed ministers to ask for a "closed material procedure" - an order to bar the public, press and claimant in a case from court.
May:*Voted for it at Second Reading; absent at Third Reading
Corbyn:*Voted against it
Context:*This was legislation Mrs May introduced as Home Secretary. Even though she missed the vote at Third Reading it's almost certain this would have been an agreed absence as she spoke up for the bill in Parliament.
Mr Corbyn said he opposed secrecy in courts and voted against it.

The Investigatory Powers Act 2016

Referred to as the "snooper's charter" by critics, this legislation allowed for the bulk interception of communications.
May:*Voted for it
Corbyn:*Absent from the vote
Context:*This was legislation introduced by Mrs May as home secretary. She said the ability to access telecommunications data would allow law-enforcement agencies to investigate criminal activity and protect the public.
This vote took place after Mr Corbyn was elected leader. He was absent from the Commons vote even though Labour, as a whole, voted for the legislation at Third Reading. It is not known whether he was paired. The party abstained at Second Reading.




Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

And to finish off. I'd just like to point out not a single one of those laws relates to releasing terrorists after conviction.

75 terrorists have been released under Tory cuts. One if them committed more terrorism. The buck stops with the conservatives on this.

I know who I feel safer under.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

 

[Sheebo]

And this for a bloke found guilty of trying to blow up the London Stock Exchange? Easy to apply hindsight, but beggars belief that the system in place could have been so naive and gullible. Innocent people have died as a direct result.

Bang on - I cannot believe this stat.

Ps I’m sure people on this thread were saying the women killed was foreign? Was that fake news being passed off as fact on NSC - surely not? Not that it matters - RIP

 

[JC Footy Genius]

And to finish off. I'd just like to point out not a single one of those laws relates to releasing terrorists after conviction.

75 terrorists have been released under Tory cuts. One if them committed more terrorism. The buck stops with the conservatives on this.

I know who I feel safer under.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

All the examples show Corbyn always finds an excuse not to back anti-terrorist legislation.

75 terrorists have been released because the law requires it. Mentioning 'Tory cuts' when there isn't any evidence that a lack of resources or personnel was a causal factor in this incident just proves the point that you are using this awful incident for party political purposes.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

There is room for debate and interpretation on both sides. Thunderbolts argument relied upon her assumption that the coalition should have repealed Labour’s legislation between 2010 and 2012 so that subsequently Friday’s terrorist would not have been released early. It was partial truth, as were the interventions of Yvette Cooper, Priti Patel etc. I am getting so tired of both sides constantly and hypocritically calling each other liers. As a aside I know you share my dislike of Momentum Labour which is one reason I am surprised you have waded in so strongly on this issue. There is a lot more nuance here than than the usual cheerleaders of both sides would have us believe.

Fair comment. By way of explanation I saw a post criticising politicization of the events after having listened to a tory politicizing the issue on the radio (with what I still understand were lies). I had not (and still have not) seen what Cooper said.

I also see that now, 10 years after coming to power, the tories have decided to take a look at the 700 terrorists who have been let out of gaol. So the political element of my attitude comes from my astonishment (which has grown during the day) that the tories, who have been in power for 10 years, have just woken up to the possibility that releasing 700 terrorists into the community (doubtless after the have been fully 'deradicalized' - yeah, right) might be a bit of a cock up. And they are blaming this on the last labour government.

Well, it has become political, and I feel very strongly that the Boris conservatives are not fit to govern (and are a disgrace, and this is yet more evidence). So that's why I'm vexed.

That said, I don't doubt that under Corbyn the same 700 would be loose on the street, and if they were I'd be up in arms about that too. But I'd be campaigning against Corbyn ONLY if he and his chumps were also blaming this on a previous tory government, as part of their relentless lies. Corbyn is a cock but he isn't a serial liar.

I know governments like to blame their predecessors for all their troubles (remember the austerity - that was banished recently in Boris' manifesto?) - but really. Really. And attempting to score undeserved political points over these deaths. Words fail me (if you see what I mean. I could go on....).

 

[theonlymikey]

All the examples show Corbyn always finds an excuse not to back anti-terrorist legislation.

75 terrorists have been released because the law requires it. Mentioning 'Tory cuts' when there isn't any evidence that a lack of resources or personnel was a causal factor in this incident just proves the point that you are using this awful incident for party political purposes.

No evidence?

You haven't read the newspapers then.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk