Previous post
A terrorist, released early from prison, went on a knife attack in London yesterday. Yes, you read that correctly. The terrorist was granted early release.
“Today, while being under active police surveillance and ‘very stringent licencing conditions’, he launched a horrific knife rampage in Streatham, south London, leaving one man in a life-threatening condition, though he later recovered.
Wearing a fake suicide vest, Amman stole a £3.99 blade from a convenience store and stabbed the man, in his 40s, in the stomach before knifing a female cyclist, in her 50s, in the back.
Armed police were on the scene within minutes, having been following him because they suspected he was going to launch a terrorist attack imminently. After he failed to stop, Amman was shot dead outside a Boots chemist.
After the rampage, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the government would announce further plans for ‘fundamental changes to the system for dealing with those convicted of terrorism offences’ on Monday.”
Two things in the above news item jumped out at me.
Those two things, combined with the fact that he was released after only serving HALF of his sentence, is just mind-boggling. Authorities didn’t want the 20-year old terrorist released. Why? Lack of remorse for one. Secondly this was a guy who was arrested on suspicion of planning a terrorist attack, yet pled guilty to terrorist documentation and publication charges. His sentence in late 2018 was for three years and four months.
A. That is a very light sentence for a terrorist
B. They released him EARLY because why? He was a good boy?
If he was such a good kid, then why was he under active surveillance?
As The Guardian reports, this is a person who pledged his allegiance to ISIS and actively wanted to carry out a terrorist attack.
“If you can’t make a bomb because family, friends or spies are watching or suspecting you, take a knife, molotov, sound bombs or a car at night and attack …”
Yet he was released. And then went on a stabbing spree. Just like Usman Khan’s attack at London Bridge last November. A judge warned that Khan was a danger, yet he was released anyway. Two people were killed during that attack. It was glaringly apparent that avowed terrorists do not change their stripes while in prison. Authorities SHOULD have put an immediate halt to their early release program. They didn’t. And now more people are suffering as a result.
Meanwhile the Mayor of London is perturbed.
Responding to the #Streatham stabbing, London Mayor @SadiqKhan says, "I'm actually angry" and that he has got lots of questions for the government over public safety. https://t.co/xDkD28fCLz
— Twitter Moments UK & Ireland (@UKMoments) February 3, 2020
‘Why aren’t they [the Government] providing the resources to the prison service and probation service to do the proper supervision required.’
London Mayor Sadiq Khan responds to the Streatham stabbing and says the terror attack was ‘foreseeable’. pic.twitter.com/6ATO4wk8Wz
— Good Morning Britain (@GMB) February 3, 2020
One of the questions I have is, what has HE been doing to fix this situation? Then again, he also still believes that prison will rehabilitate terrorists. Guess what? It won’t. Period. Keep in mind, Khan has always been fine with open borders and letting just anyone in to the country. So, his outrage is quite hypocritical in my opinion.
The court sentencing guidelines are very problematic when it comes to dealing with terrorists. The notion that terrorists can be released early is proving to be incredibly dangerous to the citizens of Great Britain and London in particular.
However, there are those who need a reality clue bat still. Via Powerline I found this.
“Co-leader of the Green Party, Jonathan Bartley, 48, who heard the gunshots, told Sun Online: “I am absolutely shocked and devastated.
“I am in disbelief that this could happen in Streatham. This is one of the most diverse, inclusive and tolerant communities in London.””
My jaw landed on the floor with a resounding crack upon reading that absurdly tone-deaf comment. Terrorists don’t give a rats ass about tolerance, diversity, and inclusiveness. The ONLY thing they care about is spreading terror and hate to all those they deem as undesirable. And guess what Johnny boy? That means YOU.
Sudesh Amman was a known terrorist sentenced to prison. The authorities let him loose. The consequences of that decision really shouldn’t have been a surprise to anyone who was paying attention.
For the safety of British citizens, we can hope that the courts and authorities have finally gotten a clue.
Feature Photo Credit: Derks24 at Pixabay, cropped and modified
SFC D says: I have a suggestion for you, UK. Remember the IRA, and how you dealt with them? Let’s try that again, but with middle-eastern terrorists. After all, they all went to the same training camps.
Scott says: Good post Nina, though I’ll disagree slightly with you, I believe that prison can in fact rehab terrorists… give them 99 years in solitary( and make them serve every second of it), and I’ll bet a years pay that they will be thoroughly rehabbed by the time they’re released…
GWB says: Amman stole a £3.99 blade from a convenience store
So, obviously they need to ban knives from convenient stores.
(This brings up again, what seems to be a penchant for using the word “machete”* to describe any knife larger than a penknife. The first stories I saw said he used a “machete”. But I seriously doubt you could find a real machete for under 4 bob in England.)
(* We had a bit of a go at trying to figure out how that dude attacking the Hanukah celebration with a “machete” was “stabbing” people given it’s inherently non-stabby design.)
they suspected he was going to launch a terrorist attack imminently
Mind, there’s a difference between the “they” that is the technocracy of the judicial/prison system and the “they” of the police. The first “they” didn’t think anything at all of his potential for mayhem. The second were thinking “We can only hope he is close enough we can shoot him down before too many get hurt.”
B. They released him EARLY because why? He was a good boy?
No, this is England we’re talking about. They do early release because it’s not nice to keep people in jail past the time their Netflix account would expire. The Brit judicial/prison system is mired in the cultish belief that if we’re just nicer to people, well, they will be nicer, too!
yet he was released anyway
Because it’s simply what they do. To determine if he was adequately rehabilitated or dangerous or whatnot would be to judge him and we can’t have that now, can we?
It won’t.
I’m with Scott on this: adequate punishment will rehabilitate some.
But, this is the largest problem in our society (not just Britain, but the US, as well): the belief that prison should be about rehabilitating the criminal – tied to the idea that actual punishment is BAD, “cruel and unusual”. Just one more demonstration of how progressivism is inherently stupid because it ignores the fundamentals of human nature.
For the safety of British citizens, we can hope that the courts and authorities have finally gotten a clue.
They haven’t.
(As an aside, I don’t as much mind them being released early, as long as it’s in a neighborhood of surly Texans. He’ll either straighten right up, or he’ll lay right out. And then you’ve saved the community the suffering, and you’ve saved the state the money of future incarceration.)
GWB says: given it’s inherently non-stabby design
ITS, not IT’S. Sheesh.
MortMain says: “This is one of the most diverse, inclusive and tolerant communities in London.”” What does that have to do with anything? Liberals are deranged.
5 Comments