Saturday, August 08, 2009

WANTED ! APPLICATIONS FOR HOME SECRETARY, QUALIFICATIONS? COURAGE AND DECENCY, PRESENT AND PAST INCUMBENTS NEED NOT APPLY.

Jack Straw the ex Home Secretary is a self serving coward, and simply one of a long line of failures to hold that office, all of whom suffered a failure of nerve and resorted to self preservation when the chips were down. When high profile and controversial cases are presented to the home / Justice secretary his position and the position of far too many of his predecessors is that he and they knew what the right and decent thing to do was/is. That consideration however comes second to what will public opinion be? Or put another way ‘how will it play with Rupert Murdoch’ that is what concerns Straw and that is what makes him unfit for office.

‘Janus faced Jack’ has ‘previous’ his ambition first came to my attention when he very publicly reported his own son to the police for smoking cannabis. Most parents would have dished out a rollicking and a lecture but Jack saw an opportunity to curry favour with the reactionary press. Had this been a genuine matter of conscience he could have done this with no publicity but it was of course an opportunity to portray himself as an honest; tough but fair politician, so somehow the press found out about it; quite devious and disturbing actually. Not unlike ex President Clinton interrupting his campaign to fly back to Kansas surrounded by massive publicity to sign a death warrant for a man with a mental age of 12 nobody was going to be allowed to call Clinton soft on crime right?

Jack then progressed upward and later he set free the beast Pinochet; not on compassionate grounds as he claimed but because he feared the war criminal Thatcher’s clout with the gutter press and on he sailed. Just recently Ronnie Biggs was judged by him too dangerous to release; again his fear of Rupert. But then he realised that the man he described as too dangerous was indeed about to die in prison and that would make his description of him look stupid and false so he’s now out , right decision wrong reason, more deceit from Jack.

Abdelbaset Mohmed al Megrahi now haunts Straw; the Libyan remains in prison despite being terminally ill; is he a danger to Britain? The question is rhetorical, a new born child would be more of a danger. The question now for Straw is not what is the right thing to do, the decent compassionate thing to do; it’s what is the best solution for Jack Straw. Rupert and his press army are salivating, the reactionary followers of Rupert’s papers are waiting to pounce. He knows what the right thing to do is, so would all the other Home Secretaries; they also knew what was the right thing to do in the Myra Hindley case but not one of them had the courage to release her and she died in jail. Just like tough guy Clinton (another President like Bush who managed to dodge Vietnam) who was not prepared to risk damaging his career by being labelled soft on crime. He can display what would be in my opinion courage and compassion worthy of his office and release him or; he can play the tough guy for the sake of the mob being orchestrated by Rupert, what do you think? As I’ve said before he’s got form and he’s a coward, my money’s on the latter.

In a similar way the proposals from the Scottish Govt. to reduce prison sentences and increase community punishments is the right one; it’s another right decision for the wrong reason. McCaskill and the SNP couldn’t care less about prison reform they simply want to save money but the opposition main parties are wrong to oppose it; I don’t know anyone in the Labour Party for instance who does not support an increase in community service and a reduction in prison sentences, that’s why their protestations are feeble sounding. Proper prison reform takes courage and long term planning; we simply haven’t yet found a Home Secretary with the bravery to do it.

25 comments:

the broken down barman said...

see, big man, this is when you are good. When you take on the big boys, when you take on the noble and the right causes, you are on fire.
leave out the petty little immature squabbles and insults and you sound ok, like a grown up!!
I know you will find it hard to believe, and even harder to accept, but we do have similar core beliefs.
We both long for a system of justice which is fair to everyone. we both try to right wrongs as we find them. I could go on....
What got me started following and commenting on your blog in the first place was your narrow mindedness. it really annoyed me that you were so incapable of even considering you could be wrong, ever!
I started this message as a way of trying to build bridges, but the more i think about it, the more i deteste you.
You Scream and shout like Wolfie Smith, your like the sex pistols without the sex and the bang. You write your blog as if your a free mind, decrying every alterative opinion as SNP or Tory but dont have a scooby what your talking about.you would argue that you had the brains you were born with, or that all men are equal, then decry another mans opinion as lunacy without consideration.
you are a fraud and a hypocrite, a trouble maker and a charaltan.

A disgrace

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(the broken down barman) 09/08/09
“it really annoyed me that you were so incapable of even considering you could be wrong, ever” ----juvenile drivel.

“all men are equal” ----------- I never have and never will state that all men are equal; think you and me for a start, you are getting confused.

“you are a fraud and a hypocrite, a trouble maker and a charlatan”----- one correct out of four but it’s a start.

You are clearly not coping very well with being slapped around all the time, maybe you should take a break, I’m getting worried about you.

Rumbold said...

Jack Straw is Janus-like. But he is not the Home Secretary. Alan Johnson is. Jack Straw is the Justice Minister.

My opinion of Jack Straw is as high as yours.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

SORRY EX HOME SECRETARY HE GETS ABOUT A BIT. HE HAS BEEN IN POSITIONS LIKE THIS BEFORE AND FAILED TO DO ANYTHING WHICH MIGHT REMOTELY DAMAGE HIS CAREER.

Anonymous said...

To suggest that Myra Hindley should have been released from prison on compassionate grounds is lower than I thought that even you could sink.

Any person who is guilty of the heinous crimes that she and Ian Brady carried out is deserving of no compassion.

I presume that you have no consideration for the friends and family of their victims.

I can't believe that you are even drawing a comparison between the Myra Hindley and Ronnie Biggs cases.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 09:31
This is nothing more than a demonstration of your own rather disturbing prejudices and bears no relation to what I said.

I did not suggest that Hindley should have been released on compassionate grounds.

Whether anyone is entitled to be treated with compassion is a matter for each individuals subjective opinion, even yours.

“I presume that you have no consideration for the friends and family of their victims”

I will not comment on this; I am happy to let people read it again.

“I can't believe that you are even drawing a comparison between the Myra Hindley and Ronnie Biggs cases”

I did not draw any comparison between these two cases; you are a liar; I could have mentioned many other cases of criminals who were released and quite rightly so.

Anonymous said...

Terry Kelly
"I did not suggest that Hindley should have been released on compassionate grounds."

Terry Kelly
"they also knew what was the right thing to do in the Myra Hindley case but not one of them had the courage to release her and she died in jail"

Your words in both cases.

What planet do you live on?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 11:33
You clearly don’t know the first thing about this. You should keep your mouth shut until you know what went on.

Hindley’s case for release was nothing to do with compassion; it was based on the fact that she was being unfairly treated by the Govt. There were then and there are now many people who are back in society who were released after serving sentences for heinous crimes because they a) had served their sentence and b) met the criteria for release which was the case with her.

Had she been called Jean Smith and not been famous she would have been released.

You are a perfect example of one of Rupert Murdoch’s gullible clowns.

the broken down barman said...

what do you mean im not doping with getting slapped about all the time??

the broken down barman said...

and myra hindley deserved to die in jail

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(the broken down barman) 10/08/09
I feel that you don’t sustain an argument for very long before losing your rag and descending into abuse; it’s quite worrying; perhaps you should take a break.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(the broken down barman) 10/08/09

We do not execute people, we do not put them in jail and throw away the key, we release those who have served their time and are judged suitable to be released, that way we get to call ourselves civilised.

You said somewhere that you and I shared core values! Would you like to reconsider that statement-----------------Please?

the broken down barman said...

only ever retort with the same malice that you show to myself and other commentators on your blog. it is mostly you that starts the insults and the badgering, but of course your so blinkered you will not see this.

Anonymous said...

Did you not mean that Myra Hindley was infamous and not famous

Anonymous said...

Please clarify.

Are you saying that Myra Hindley should have been set free?

Anonymous said...

Terry, I have empathy with 'the broken down barman' here.
You are the very epitome of "losing your rag and descending into abuse".
Perhaps a slightly more phlegmatic approach where people have strong opinions?
You do not have to be right all the time you know.
Cheers

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(the broken down barman) 11/08/09
I have a policy which I have used since I started doing this; I do not set out to insult people but; I am always prepared to retaliate if they insult me. Go and re-read your contributions.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

If you want to be pedantic then, her crime was infamous and she was famous; just like Dr. Crippen or the case of the Lindbergh baby.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 12/08/09
"losing your rag and descending into abuse".

I do hope you won’t mind too much old chap if I disagree with this point.

“You do not have to be right all the time you know”

Now you tell me!

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 11/08/09

It’s rather obvious where you are going with this but I will give you a chance; let’s call you (Anonymous 1) so I will recognise you if you want to take me on.

You are moving the argument away from the quality of our Home Secretaries past and present but; I’m not running away from your question, I want you to answer a question from me in return; my answer to your question is yes.

My question to you is should someone who rapes a child or tortures a child or murders a child or indeed all three ever be released?

Anonymous said...

From anonymous 1.

The question that you pose cannot be answered in a generalised manner as I believe that each and any case must be looked at individually. My personal belief is that where any of these crimes have been committed then the severest sentences should be imposed leaving little hope for future freedom for the offender.

I also beleive that "whole natural life" sentences should be commuted in the case of particularly heinous crimes.

I do believe for many reasons Myra Hindley should never have been released. The main reasons are as follows.

1. The crimes of sexual abuse, torture and murder that she committed with Ian Brady were of the most evil and pitiless acts against children that have ever been recorded.

2. The crimes were pre-meditated and planned. She knew exactly what she was doing to the point that she made tape recordings as they begged for their lives.

3. She lied about her actual involvement with the murders and showed little remorse until 21 years later when she started a campaign for early release. This was the point where she fully confessed hoping that she would gain some public sympathy by trying to repent. This was all a bit late for the families of the victims who had to live through her denials for that period of time.

And I could go on and on.

All cases are different and have many angles to consider. That is why I believe that it was correct for the Home secretary and the House of Lords to decide to inter her for her whole natural life.

Your statement to suggest that letting her out that it would be the courageous and decent thing to do, just beggars belief.

Maybe you could explain to me why you think she should have walked back in to the community as a free woman.

As for your arguments regarding Home secretaries, I have to say that i am not particularly interested.

It was you statement regarding Myra Hindley that I found to be extremely offensive.

I notice that you didn't publish my last comment. Do you only want people to see one side of the discussion.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 14:57
“Your statement to suggest that letting her out that it would be the courageous and decent thing to do, just beggars belief”

I’ve skipped what went before this because it is as I suspected what has been said ad nauseam by the Sun.

“Maybe you could explain to me why you think she should have walked back in to the community as a free woman”

For a start no lifer is ever released as a free person, they are released under license and can be recalled anytime and constraints are placed on them. But I asked you that question because there already people who have been released who have actually committed more horrible crimes than her, they are not famous though, that’s what makes the home secretaries cowards, and leaves you with no argument.

I have no idea what you are talking about with some post I did not print, it’s so easy for people to make that accusation because I can’t disprove it but; if it’s fit to print it goes in so send it again.

Anonymous said...

From Anonymous 1.

The comment that you did not publish is the comment that I thought that you were replying to from 11/08/2009.

I don't make copies of comments, therfore i can't resubmit it as it was fairly lenghty and detailed.

I am not aware of other people who have committed more horrible crimes than Hindley and Brady.

If they did and their crimes were planned and premeditated then I don't believe they should have gone free. Perhaps you could supply some details instead of making a bland and unsubstantiated statement to try and hide the glaring stupidity of your remark about Myra Hindley.

At the end of the day, I very much doubt that anybody that has committed worse crimes against children than Hindley/Brady would remain anonymous and known only to you.

To use a previous mistake as justification for setting free a vile and evil murderer is another statement of gross stupidity.

I know that Ian Brady accepted the weight of his crimes and publicly stated that he should never be released . Myra hindley. however, constantly lied about her involvement for over 21 years after her conviction and only fully confessed to her involvement when trying to curry favour with the public when seeking early release.

There are currently 21 other people who are serving "whole life sentences" in the uk due to the nature of their crimes. Myra Hindley was not unique.

The fact that you brought her in as a comparison to Ronnie Biggs shows that you will stoop to any depth to support your argument.

I wonder if you would extend to the same level of sympathy to the family and friends of Hindley's victims.

You are quite disgusting.

Anonymous said...

I noticed your comment here today about comments that you did not print.

I have recently sent 2 posts that made reference to the sordid past of one of your Labour colleagues in Renfrewshire.

I can only assume that you chose not to post either of them due to your fear of the details becoming public knowledge in Renfrewshire.

Both posts contained nothing but facts and I even provided links to the source of the information.

Can you confirm why you chose not to publish these posts or try to refute the content.

You can call me anonymous 3 if you like.

By the way, your comments about Hindley were way out of line.

How can you put Hindley and Biggs into the same sentence never mind using them as a comparison?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 10:34
“The comment that you did not publish is the comment that I thought that you were replying to from 11/08/2009”

I can’t make any sense of this.

“I am not aware of other people who have committed more horrible crimes than Hindley and Brady”

I am but it’s not really the point, I am using that to explain to you that Hindley was treated differently from them because of the newspapers and other publicity, she was treated unjustly.

“If they did and their crimes were planned and premeditated then I don't believe they should have gone free”

What rubbish; planned and premeditated is a con; it’s whether they are judged suitable for release which matters and thankfully that is not down to barbarians like you.

Try some digging and you might find out about released criminals; it’s a subject that I have an interest in, I’ve spoken to criminal lawyers, prison officers, policemen, ex cons and others interested in the subject. Have you even considered why we don’t know who they are? Have you heard of new identities? Do you honestly have a clue what you are on about?

“I know that Ian Brady etc”

Brady is in Broadmoor; Hindley was in the normal prison system, do you actually know the difference?

“There are currently 21 other people who are serving "whole life sentences" in the uk due to the nature of their crimes. Myra Hindley was not unique”

Hindley was not given a ‘whole life sentence’ she was given a ‘life sentence’ by the judge it was subsequent home secretaries who gave the life tariff; this was done because they were afraid of public opinion, I don't think you are really following this are you.

“I wonder if you would extend to the same level of sympathy to the family and friends of Hindley's victims”

I will not sink so low as to comment on this.