An excuse sometimes kicked around for not sending more sickos to prison and for longer is “muh over crowding”.
In short the prisons are apparently too full.
I don’t buy this as a valid excuse not to deal with an issue but since I have heard it trotted out then let’s entertain it a bit. If the prisons are too full then who are they full of? Obviously prisoners, but can we establish unusual patterns of any kind?
Well there is definitely one when it comes to maximum security prisons.
*
One in five inmates serving sentences in Britain’s maximum security jails are Muslim, figures show.
There are currently 5,885 highly dangerous criminals behind bars in the eight Category A prisons in the UK, of which 1,229 follow the Islamic faith.
The figure equates to 20 per cent of high-security prisoners.
The percentage rise has been far greater than the Muslim population increase in the UK, which is currently at five per cent.
Belmarsh prison in south east London currently has 248 Muslim inmates out of 868, which equates to more than 28 per cent.
Manchester prison is home to 202 Muslims out of the 1,106 prisoners, while 163 out of the 615 inmates at Long Lartin, Worcestershire, are Muslim.
Full Sutton, East Yorkshire, has 137 Muslim prisoners out of 586, while Woodhill in Milton Keynes has 108 out of 707.
Frankland prison in County Durham has 97 Muslim prisoners out of 832 while Wakefield, West Yorkshire, has 75 of 724.
According to watchdog Independent Monitoring Board, Muslims form the ‘biggest power bloc’ and are taking over from the previous ‘gangs’.
In a report released last year, it said: ‘Against this background we note that some prisoners and staff found the Muslim presence overwhelming.
‘The social and religious fragmentation within Whitemoor potentially posed risks for discipline and hence safety.’
The Prison Officers Association also warned that radicalisation is a growing problem with ‘clear evidence of an Islamic gang culture aimed at young men’.
Last year, extremist Kamel Bourgass, serving life for murdering a policeman as he went on the run from a ricin factory, won a Supreme Court case after claiming he had been held in solitary confinement for too long at Whitemoor.
(Kamel Bourgass – murdered a police officer. Sued the state for being “left alone too long”)
**
What can we take from this? We can definitely conclude that when it comes to maximum security prisons Muslims are way over represented in relation to their reported nationwide figure of 5%. In one well know prison the figure was 28% Muslim – which is INSANE.
Its not like anyone can make the argument that they are being picked on for no reason at all by “racist” police and Intel agencies. You do not see the inside of a max security prison for not paying your fare on the tram. You can pretty much take it to the bank that everyone inside a max security prison is a very high risk indeed.
You can also see the extent to which we are taken the piss out of. Kamel Bourgass murders an ordinary police officer, making his wife a widow and robbing the kids of a father. And our utterly cuckolded system does what? Allows him and his greasy lawyers to sue for “damages” after being kept in isolation.
What an insult to the memory of that officer and his family, and what a total perversion of justice when loopholes in our system can be abused by a demon like that and his parasitical legal team.
Worse still is the fact that once in prison they are able to organise themselves into effective networks across the prisons. They will exploit all rights and every freedom and to achieve what? So that their aides on the outside can plan and plot to plant bombs and explosives which murder children, women and innocent men.
Even when inside they remain a threat. You kinda get the impression that they live and exist here only to hurt or destroy us. Thats what the majority are in those max security prisons for – foiled or successful attempts at harming ordinary citizens.
When they get caught and sent down it is the citizens who must pay the cost of their incarceration, food, medical care, and so on. It seems like a totally unsustainable cycle to me. I logically and rationally do not comprehend allowing any outside group here whose actions can be shown to be repeatedly dangerous and hateful toward the host.
All those that are presently in those max security prisons I’d be tempted to expel back to their place of origin. However, that would seem like letting them off for what they did, esp as they’d vanish into the ether and hook up with like minded people. How long will it be before 28% becomes 50% and then 75%? Its not at all unlikely if current trends are followed.
It is worth remembering that this ^^ only covers max security prisons. Someone like Frankish would not go to such a place, not even with radically tougher sentences. Nor would any of his ilk and nor would most child sex offenders (but some will).
Whether those same patterns and % can be found in lower category prisons I am not sure but it would not be a massive surprise to find out that they were mirrored across the lower cat prisons as well.
If it is indeed a repeated theme throughout different categories of prison then we have a big problem. It would seem like basic maths and common sense that as their numbers grow so too will their presence inside prisons.
That’s why its not at all unrealistic to imagine a day where the % is 50 or 75. What this will then mean is that your prisons really will be too full and the nature of their crimes so serious that it would be a barrier and a danger to getting others into prison for crimes that fell short of murder, attempted murder, or plotting acts of terror.
It will also mean that the costs will balloon as their % inside prisons gets bigger. Then there are the hundreds of millions spent in the country itself and all on counter terrorism and trying to negate a mass murder (of ordinary people) before it occurs.
This is NOT a phenomenon that courts and the prison service faced until very recent times. I see no rational reason why their %’s are going to magically take a down turn.
I think this also explains why your Governments under fund the police in so many other important areas. There are dedicated police units that do deal with child abuse and many other terrible things. There is not a lack of will on the part of police to bring such people to court. There is a lack of man power afforded to such units and a lack of cash.
But is it any wonder? Look what we spend on counter terrorism.
In 2007 it was at over ONE BILLION £. By 2010 that had grown to three billion. Not sure what it is in 2016, but I’d guess at around ten billion.
I don’t think people (understandably) realise what that amount looks like or what it could do?
Just for demonstration purposes this is what just ONE billion can buy.
A billion pounds will buy 147,000 state pensions or 300,000 job seeker’s allowances for a year, according to Department for Work and Pensions forecasts for 2015/16. Alternatively it could fund 2.3 million people’s disability living allowance per annum – three quarters of the total.
It could pay for 167,000 hip replacements or 1.4 million hospital day cases. A billion pounds could also pay for two flagship hospitals, such as Birmingham’s Queen Elizabeth Hospital which opened in 2010.
Mental health is becoming a bigger election issue. A billion pounds would provide an eight-hour course of talking therapy for 2.5m people. Or 750,000 eight-session courses of mindfulness therapy, based on figures from the Personal Social Services Research Unit.
£1bn could fund 8,500 troops.
With £1bn the government could, for a year, fund 27,000 primary or 22,000 secondary school teachers.
Using the last Labour government’s Building Schools for the Future programme the average cost of a secondary school was £25m. That would mean an extra 40 secondary schools.
The housing shortage is a long-standing issue. With £1bn the government could build 16,600 new social homes or 50,000 shared ownership homes, according to the charity Shelter.
Spend the money on roads instead and what can you get for £1bn? The government set out plans last year to turn the main route to Southwest England along the A303 and A358 into a dual carriageway with a tunnel at Stonehenge. A billion would pay for half the job.
Think tank the IPPR suggests other things a billion could pay for: 180,000 jobs guaranteed at the minimum wage for 30 hours a week, or support for 100,000 socially excluded families.
What about hard-working families, that oft uttered mantra? The IPPR says £1bn could make universal the offer of 15 hours a week of childcare for 37 weeks of the year. This is currently available to only the 40% most disadvantaged two-year olds.
And that is just £1billion. Keep in mind we spent three billion on just counter terrorism in 2010.
(Say goodbye to all the money for good stuff )
I know that people feel disconnected from mainstream politics and I understand why. They speak in riddles and never follow through with pre election promises (usually not). But it is really vital that people do understand at least some basic points and one massive point is that the cost of counter terrorism and the cost of keeping all these Islamists in max security prisons is bleeding us dry and it is irrefutably denying budget that can be spent in ways that would enhance the lives of so many different people and in so many different ways.
We could be a rich country that was safe and a relative utopia for all. The extra budget that we’d have for mental health would be a long overdue and welcome investment. We could employ more specialists who would be able to identify personality abnormalities in the young much sooner and perhaps intervene before those abnormalities ended in tragedy.
The only counter terrorism we required in the past related to the IRA. But that was a totally different set of circumstances and the IRA have not been active for many years. The IRA were political and territorial. They were not driven by a perceived divine ideology. The potential was always there to broker some sort of peace agreement with the IRA. I do not believe that same potential exists with the Islamic terrorists inside of Britain. In my fairly reasonable grasp of both the IRA and Islamic terrorism I am sorry to say that there is no chance you will ever broker any kind of peace with the Islamic terror cells that exist here. They are not interested.
There would be a way we could wipe out that vast counter terrorism cost and redirect the £ to all those things mentioned. However, there is really only one sure way to achieve it and there is not a single party that would dare suggest it. None and no matter how bad or costly things got. Not only would no party dare suggest it but I’m afraid we have a large number of very illogical and emotional people in this generation.
They do not do what is right or sensible.
They pursue positions that make THEM “feel” a good person. Even if that position is palpably damaging to many others. They’ve developed a form of Stockholm syndrome. Due to the current social mood (emotional and illogical), people would sooner let that counter terrorism bill rise and they’d sooner the %’s of these people in our prisons increased than suggest anything that might be deemed as radical but logical and necessary.
They are too fearful to do anything else except for fall in line with present social “norms” (which are anything but normal). They don’t want to speak out for fear of offending someone. They don’t want to speak out for fear of their friends not liking them or perhaps risking their job. They may even incur the wrath of the Thought Police who take speaking out against this very seriously.
Its the elephant in the room that very few have the guts to speak about. They know they have a good factual argument. Its just that they can expect an avalanche of insane personal attacks and even threats for presenting those facts. They are undesirable facts as it were.
Due to this mentality being prevalent then I guess we are stuck in this race to the bottom in which our prisons become overwhelmed by so many serious criminals of an Islamic background that the state will simply have no idea what to do with anyone that commits crimes that are legally less serious.
I guess we’re stuck with a growing counter terrorism bill and I guess we can say goodbye to all the great things you could do with that money.
Its a crying shame and with no end in sight.
I feel somewhat sorry for this generation as they and their children are faced with threats that did not exist when I was a child. We did not have to worry that we could be blown up and nor did we need worry about perverts trying to coerce us online. We did not worry about creeps being able to take sneaky pics of children with sophisticated camera phones.
I feel like as a people we have failed the young. We should never have allowed British culture to be reduced to this. We put far too much faith in establishment parties even when they let us down and caused the problems again and again. We kept voting for them and why? Because its what we are used to. We incline toward whatever the established order is, good or bad.
We were collectively naive to think these people represented us and our interests even though that IS what they are meant to do. They don’t. Any benefit you get from their actions are accidental. Maybe there was a time when politics attracted men of valour who really did have a vision. But not for half a century I’d suggest. Today I would describe politicians as living like royalty. Rich and generally out of reach of being called to full account by the people.
No British Government since I was born was worth of the name and the honour. Nil. Thatchers cabinet were crawling with paedophiles who sodomised boys (later revealed to be known by her). Blair sent our troops to Iraq on lies. Brown sold our national gold reserves. Cameron has blood on his hands from the criminal mission in Libya.
These political leaders are not independent and answerable to you. They are answerable to international predator banks, the city of London crowd and the hedge fund boys.
They only care about stripping the wealth of the people and they have absolutely no interest in the future of your children, the country, or anything else you might expect a representative Government to fight for.
Don’t you see that it is entirely possible that your Governments may actually hate you? Measure whether or not they love the people of this country by what they do. Do you think their actions show they have a deep love of the people and have their future at heart? Or do their actions show a successive culture of disdain and contempt for you? A hatred played out via policy if you will.
There are no ethical or moral grounds to letting animal abusers just walk free and live among good people. There are no ethical or moral grounds to justify two thirds of those found with child abuse material getting a non custodial sentence. This should NOT be passively accepted if we have any moral fibre left.
It doesn’t matter if prisons are stuffed full of crazy Islamists, sorry, that is no get out clause for NOT negating other threats. Its hardly the fault of the British man or women if Muslims are filling up our prisons. Why should we compromise on justice by accepting that people like Frankish can walk because they need the space for some Islamist with damage in mind? We didn’t make these Muslims that way. We have been EXTREMELY friendly and HIGHLY tolerant, in fact I do not think any other people could have been more tolerant.
Can you imagine China and the Chinese being so tolerant? Can you imagine the Japanese being this tolerant? There are no other people who would accept a large influx of incomers and do as much to accommodate and help them as our people do. If you can think of any people that would be as tolerant as we are or the Germans or French – let me know. I personally do not believe that any nations in Asia or Africa would accept and tolerate this at all, and esp not from those they welcomed and tried to accommodate.
And they’d be RIGHT not to tolerate it if their generosity was being unrewarded and if a disturbing % of the incomers didn’t want to fit in and in fact hated them.
As these issues dominate our press we need to remember that the press have so much space. If they are obligated to devote increasing space to the threat of terrorism etc then that is less space and less man power that they have to expose issues involving child and pet abuse.
We bizarrely found ourselves in a position all summer of trying to keep a dog abuse story going in the press at a time when you had large scale acts of terror dominating headlines. I sometimes felt bad trying so hard to get media coverage when I’d see pictures from Europe with dead people and body parts scattered all around. Bad in the sense that I (probably wrongly) felt I was pulling attention away from even more coverage for those big stories over terrorism and human tragedy.
At one stage I began to feel that I was dealing with a lesser evil. Does that make sense? Hope so. I then realise that in actual fact it is not a lesser evil at all. The only big difference is that terrorism based evil is more spectacular and by its very nature it is designed to command world wide attention. One death might even be enough – depends who they target.
But ploughing a truck into a crowd of people and killing dozens is definitely going to get global coverage.
The terrorism against our children and pets is less spectacular in nature. The perpetrators usually do not SEEK any kind of media attention AT ALL. The opposite is true. Attracting media attention is not their goal. The terrorist acts openly but the terrorist of kids and pets acts covertly and in secrecy.
With the physical and psychological damage they do to victims they are every bit as evil and sociopathic as those Islamic zealots. It merely manifests in a different way, but they bring terror, death and destruction just the same.
The difference is that there’s no £3 billion to counter the terror for those victims and potential victims. Nope. Its left up to a few under staffed and under funded police units, the odd charity, and organic movements like this one (and a few others).
Imagine if for one entire month the mainstream media quit going on about the war on terror and instead really pushed the daily terrorism of children and pets in this very nation. Inside of four weeks you would find that it would suddenly become the raison d’etre for nearly everyone.
Maybe we should somehow try to take over all broadcasting channels. Worldwide and for 24hours. Imagine every channel you turned to being hijacked by our message. Dream on though. It would probably be technically impossible and even were it possible you’d probably find yourself hiding in the cupboard with Julian Assange.
Operation Frankish 