The Conservative Party - Part Two.

[Magilla 510]

29 minutes ago, cgksheff said:

Both Prevent & Channel are currently perceived to be ineffective.

...am not sure that would stop the thought police dragging you off and making life that bit more difficult, should you publicly question the actions of the government.

[L00b 441]

1 hour ago, cgksheff said:

"Prevent" is not a "de-radicalisation programme".

It is a first-step safeguarding process and may sift out any referrals with no further need (currently - the majority).

"Channel" is a voluntary de-radicalisation programme to which Prevent candidates may be invited.

 

Both Prevent & Channel are currently perceived to be ineffective.

All dancing-on-the-head-of-a-semantic-pin aside…

 

…any advances on this PM hopeful’s proposal to repurpose that ‘first-step safeguarding process’, designed to target extremists (of any hue), away from the far-right fringe thereof, and towards the merely-opinionated?

 

Heh, it’s only your and every Briton’s right to be a contrarian, that he is targeting 😏

[PRESLEY 1,231]

17 hours ago, Mister Gee said:

The Tory mob are a bit quiet this evening, maybe the penny as dropped?

They are Sulking and very deflated after the Slaying of Boris and so they should be, look at either of the  potential party leaders, its all doom and gloom for them and for the rest of country actually.

[Anna B 1,417]

2 hours ago, cgksheff said:

"Prevent" is not a "de-radicalisation programme".

It is a first-step safeguarding process and may sift out any referrals with no further need (currently - the majority).

"Channel" is a voluntary de-radicalisation programme to which Prevent candidates may be invited.

 

Both Prevent & Channel are currently perceived to be ineffective.

Sorry but that's scarey, very 1984... 

 

As bad a piece of legislation as 'hate crime,' which has already had some unintentionally dubious outcomes.

A law that's badly written and doesn't pin down what words like 'hate' or 'vilify' mean in law, can be used to pick anybody up for whatever reason  depending on how they chose to interpret it. 

 

We're supposed to have Freedom of Speech in this country, which is already under threat with things like LGBTQ. (Ask JK Rowling... )  We'll be like China, or Russia, or Germany in the 1930's afraid to speak out or stand up for what's right.

 

Communist or Fascist, this is how it starts. We must never allow it. Ever!

Edited August 3, 2022 by Anna B

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

2 hours ago, PRESLEY said:

 look at either of the  potential party leaders, its all doom and gloom for them and for the rest of country actually.

...until they compare both candidates with that personalityful Sir Keir.

Then they're OK after all.

[PRESLEY 1,231]

1 hour ago, Jeffrey Shaw said:

...until they compare both candidates with that personalityful Sir Keir.

Then they're OK after all.

Are you on about the same bloke that slaughtered Boris at the last PM's questions, infact every PM's questionsr.  Oh!  Just heard a report on Look North, they are short of  Donkeys on Scarborough beach,  so when the cons lose the next GE, there are plenty of vacancies on the beach 

Edited August 3, 2022 by PRESLEY

[hackey lad 3,987]

3 hours ago, PRESLEY said:

Are you on about the same bloke that slaughtered Boris at the last PM's questions, infact every PM's questionsr.  Oh!  Just heard a report on Look North, they are short of  Donkeys on Scarborough beach,  so when the cons lose the next GE, there are plenty of vacancies on the beach 

First sentence . Pack it in , you're  not funny any more 

[PRESLEY 1,231]

50 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

First sentence . Pack it in , your not funny any more

 Who the hell are you,  you once called me a mardy bum,  back at ya.  Its different when your trying to take the P--- out of Anna B and others,  get a grip.

Edited August 3, 2022 by PRESLEY

[hackey lad 3,987]

19 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

 Who the hell are you,  you once called me a mardy bum,  back at ya.  Its different when your trying to take the P--- out of Anna B and others,  get a grip.

I find your comments on PMQs  funny 

[Slinny 278]

11 hours ago, hackey lad said:

I find your comments on PMQs  funny 

Don’t you get bored with all this bickering, , let’s face itwe are in for a very rocky ride ,  well ordinary people  not rich people are ,  but that as always been the case , I go out cycling to forget about all the crap . When I was working no time to bother about politics at all , to many sit on their bums looking at computers  

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

4 minutes ago, Slinny said:

Don’t you get bored with all this bickering, , let’s face itwe are in for a very rocky ride ,  well ordinary people  not rich people are ,  but that as always been the case , I go out cycling to forget about all the crap . When I was working no time to bother about politics at all , to many sit on their bums looking at computers  

Hmmm...

Maybe the problem is...

... too many have ONLY EVER sat on their bums looking at computers?

[cgksheff 44]

19 hours ago, Anna B said:

Sorry but that's scarey, very 1984... 

 

As bad a piece of legislation as 'hate crime,' which has already had some unintentionally dubious outcomes.

A law that's badly written and doesn't pin down what words like 'hate' or 'vilify' mean in law, can be used to pick anybody up for whatever reason  depending on how they chose to interpret it. 

 

We're supposed to have Freedom of Speech in this country, which is already under threat with things like LGBTQ. (Ask JK Rowling... )  We'll be like China, or Russia, or Germany in the 1930's afraid to speak out or stand up for what's right.

 

Communist or Fascist, this is how it starts. We must never allow it. Ever!

There is no such law, and there, probably, never will be. It is just electioneering twaddle.

 

What there is .... since 2015 .... is the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act, which includes the responsibilities on specific bodies to have “due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism”.

Would you not think that that is worthwhile?

 

There is enough protection within the law and guidance to avoid over-reaction.

 

From The Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 (Risk of Being Drawn into Terrorism) (Amendment and Guidance) Regulationsￂﾠ2015 (legislation.gov.uk) :

 

‘Safeguarding’ is the process of protecting vulnerable people, whether from crime, other forms of abuse or (in the context of this document) from being drawn into terrorist-related activity.

 

The current UK definition of ‘terrorism’ is given in the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT 2000). In summary this defines terrorism as an action that endangers or causes serious violence to a person/people; causes serious damage to property; or seriously interferes or disrupts an electronic system. The use or threat must be designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public and is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause.