hypochondriac

Maybe if you need a human toilet brush.

But we got the terrorist training manual and ricin details prior to the trial. Why was the only photo released him as a 12 year old? There was clearly a concerted effort to obscure facts from the public and it erodes public trust and makes politicians seem untrustworthy (with good reason!).

Maybe some but by no means all.

A luxury at present!

Interesting how reluctant Just Stop Oil are to go and lie in the road when it's freezing outside.

I hope someone asks them about it and pushes for a proper answer. Overall I thought the speech from Starmer was pretty good. I wasn't a fan of pushing online censorship but he is suggesting that heads will roll and we won't shy away from dealing with identity issues and integration (remains to be seen if it's just words of course.) Like you say though we need some honesty including where the government have failed.

Just like the attack is now being blamed on the internet to justify draconian censorship measures. Yes some people engaged in unacceptable violent disorder in the immediate aftermath when emotions were running high and were rightly punished but some were jailed for extraordinary amounts of time in what was a disproportionate response. When Rayner dismissed links to terrorism as 'fake news' and 'conspiracy theories' this is a lie given that she would have known that that is exactly what it was and as Starmer has admitted it was now. Like I said, I understand the desire for short term gain by withholding the information and lying about the circumstances of the attack but longer term it's going to be incredibly damaging. The next Radukabana, why will anyone believe anything the authorities tell them about what happened?

Delaying information from being released for months when it was released prior to the trial anyway had no bearing on justice. Information liable to collapse a trial or cause contempt of court should obviously not be released but there was none here. It was clearly withheld because Starmer didn't want to make people angrier than they already were.

There clearly was a cover up at the time as information was withheld from the public with threat of arrest when the information that is now known would have had a 0% chance of collapsing a court case. All it's done is undermined public trust in institutions. I agree with whelk, full transparency as early as possible required.

I think it's clear that as they didn't find evidence of an underlying ideology motivating his crimes, they didn't think that it met the current definition of a terrorist attack under the letter of the law. Starmer basically admitted that he is clearly a terrorist and that the current definition as written is wrong and that he will change it. My main issue is Starmer's claim that he wasn't able to mention the bit about ricin or the terrorist manual as it could collapse the court case. This strikes me as untrue as firstly that information came out prior to the court case in any even and secondly none of that information would have any chance of collapsing the case. A cynic would suggest this information was deliberately withheld from the public in order to try not to pour petrol on the flames of anger in the aftermath. I understand that line of thinking but withholding it has really just further undermined public trust in the authorities. Complete bollocks imo that releasing that information would have had any chance of collapsing a court case.

Apparently the home secretary is contacting social media companies asking them to remove 'dangerous content' that Rudakubana supposedly accessed. Firstly why wasn't this done earlier as presumably this was known about months ago? Unless it's being done for PR purposes now. Secondly what is this dangerous content? If it's illegal like the terrorist manual then that is covered under existing laws and should already be removed. You could be suspicious that they are using this incident to further censor speech they don't like.

No he wasn't that's ridiculous. Stop lying.

But we are told on here all the time that the real problem is far right extremism.

How is it pro Israel to accurately describe what Hamas is and why it is pointless and potentially dangerous to negotiate with them?

Yeah that's stupid. Not sure what the justification for that could possibly be. Americans are a bit weird tbf.

You're probably alright if you're not prompting anal sex to children.

Only two genders. Some will be mad on here.

Throw out that filthy DEI Donald.

Hopefully it leads to just the right amount of hate towards the right type of people.

An awful lot to like about many of his executive orders.

Given that we've had Prevent investigations for all manner of things, it appears quite incredible that Radukabana was referred three times and it was deemed that intervention was not required. Seems there's a case to answer there about if the system is fit for purpose. Is Prevent turning a blind eye to certain types of extremism?

See above. This stuff was being pointed out since the start of this thread.

It was never close. Your attitude has no understanding of what extremist Islam is and why it's impossible to negotiate with it. Lighthouse was attempting to explain this over a year ago.

Exactly. There isn't a solution. Their children and grandchildren were already guaranteed to face more of the same. As you say they've reduced the threat for now which is about the best they could have done from their perspective.

What was the realistic alternative that would have ended the killing? There wasn't one. I feel like this is going round in circles constantly but Hamas are an islamic extremist organisation that want Israel to cease to exist. Their existence I their land is an affront to them and they will be satisfied when they are killed or at least no longer there. It is not possible to negotiate with terrorists such as this. Destroying Hamas and Hezbollah and preventing them from properly hurting you for a number of years is therefore the best policy albeit a very flawed one full of not great options. There will be many more deaths in the future regardless unfortunately but that's religious fundamentalism for you.