Election Year or Fear!

[Andy_Faber]

The woman is an utter disgrace imo and what she suggested is indefensible. People are of course entitled to their opinions about immigration but they are not entitled to suggest what she advocated.
Can see the point of releasing her but I entirely approve of any repeat offenders suffering the same consequences.

Which regrettably they haven’t (Ricky Jones) and (only guessing) won’t (Kneecap, Bob Vylan) so yes it will run and run.

[ramAnag]

Which regrettably they haven?’t (Ricky Jones) and (only guessing) won?’t (Kneecap, Bob Vylan) so yes it will run and run.

You make a reasonable point and there does appear to be something of a contradiction, although I think there is some degree of difference.
Ricky Jones was, if I remember correctly, referring to avowed racists as ‘scum’ and I have to agree. Where I think he was wrong was suggesting they should have their throats cut.
Bob Vylan was, again if memory serves, referring to atrocities committed by Israeli troops. Again I agree with his criticism but not his ultimate suggestion which was both offensive and stupid imo.
The aim of the Connolly woman was ultimately to encourage the multiple murder of innocent asylum seekers via an act of arson. She did so at a critical moment knowing that social/civil unrest was the likely outcome. For that, again imo, she was fully deserving of a prison term.

[Geoff Parkstone]

And these views are in no way influenced by the fact that you agree with the "politics" underpinning the 'differently" ill expressed exhortations to violence? Honestly? Are you really being unbiased in your assessment of 3 equally repellent opinions?

[Andy_Faber]

You make a reasonable point and there does appear to be something of a contradiction, although I think there is some degree of difference.
Ricky Jones was, if I remember correctly, referring to avowed racists as ?scum? and I have to agree. Where I think he was wrong was suggesting they should have their throats cut.
Bob Vylan was, again if memory serves, referring to atrocities committed by Israeli troops. Again I agree with his criticism but not his ultimate suggestion which was both offensive and stupid imo.
The aim of the Connolly woman was ultimately to encourage the multiple murder of innocent asylum seekers via an act of arson. She did so at a critical moment knowing that social/civil unrest was the likely outcome. For that, again imo, she was fully deserving of a prison term.

I?m with GP in questioning your ability to be impartial in this, but my point/observation is a different one, that the outcome of these four incidents are all known, the inequity (perceived) will further inflame an already tinder dry situation

[MadAmster]

The woman is an utter disgrace imo and what she suggested is indefensible. People are of course entitled to their opinions about immigration but they are not entitled to suggest what she advocated.
Can see the point of releasing her but I entirely approve of any repeat offenders suffering the same consequences.

She was released because she had served 40% (the new criterium) of her sentence. This was reduced from 50% to try to ease prison overcrowding.

[ramAnag]

I?m with GP in questioning your ability to be impartial in this, but my point/observation is a different one, that the outcome of these four incidents are all known, the inequity (perceived) will further inflame an already tinder dry situation

I thought I’d already addressed that and I do wonder why only my impartiality is being questioned.
As I said, to me what Vylan and Jones suggested was foolish and wrong. What Connolly suggested was, imo, much worse and more consequential.

[Geoff Parkstone]

So a dead racist is OK but a dead illegal immigrant isn't? An interesting perspective

[SithHappens]

It's not often I disagree with RA but I do on the 'consequential' element. The other two are public figures and in my opinion that amplifies their comments to make them more consequential.

I believe the same of Farage over the same incident Connolly made her comments on. What she said was worse than Farage, but the public platform Farage had when 'just asking questions' had more impact than a post on X which would have been one post of millions.that day. Those who's algorithms mean they would see her comments would probably see Farages inflammatory comments too. Its my belief that more people would have been out rioting and intimidating innocent people at that time because of what he said than what she said

If she hadn't been arrested the overwhelming majority of us would never have known what she posted. I'm not excusing it, she deserved to be punished, but others have said less but caused more damage..imo

[ramAnag]

So a dead racist is OK but a dead illegal immigrant isn't? An interesting perspective

…and as you know, a huge and not untypical over simplification, as I have never advocated the killing of racists.

It’s my opinion, that’s all, that when someone publicly encourages arson as a means of murdering innocent people and stirring up hatred, they deserve what’s coming to them and I’m not going to change that opinion.
Let’s not forget of course that you have a history of making inflammatory comments about migrants, particularly those who cross the channel by boat which, given that you often talk sense about other things, is particularly disappointing.
Didn’t you, at least once, advocate sinking a few boats and, by implication, drowning many? Another interesting perspective.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Since this is a form of social media and incitement to sink boats might put me in jail, let me just observe that the "green" environmentalist part of me favours restocking the channel with great whites (as harks not Churchills)