Outrage at Tory rhetoric

Dominic Grieve has stated that he has received death threats as a direct result of Boris Johnson calling politicians who support Britain remaining in the European Union collaborators with the EU.

What Johnson stated had within it an echo of the rhetoric used towards those who engaged with and supported the German National Socialists during the second world war.

Johnson has refused to retract or apologise for what he has stated and therefore that means he does not realise the significance and dangers of what he has said. The forgoing must mean that Boris Johnson is an even larger Buffoon than already many credit him as, or he is promoting a deliberate policy to divide this nation even further than it is divided already.

How can any reasonable person who resides in Britain continue to support this man?

I can't remember no-deal being discussed during the referendum or the Irish backstop for that matter. However, I do believe that there were leave-voters who were so ignorant (naive, if you want to be kind) that they did believe we could just 'leave' the EU; they way you leave a restaurant after a meal.

No, I don't believe all leave voters fall into that category. But the lack of understanding among some voters was extraordinary.

If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the 'truth'. The latest lie now being repeated is that when people voted to leave, they chose to leave without a deal. They did no such thing, but this is being touted by such trustworthy individuals as Dominic Raab and several others in the so-called cabinet.

The language used by the self-proclaimed "war cabinet" led by prime minister Johnson is so hostile that it could be labelled 'propaganda used in the time of war". Without any regard for good relations and domestic peace, they lie, accuse and discriminate. A new low for freedom.

www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/peter-littger-on-germany-s-view-of-boris-johnson-1-6213584

Not disagreeing with you, growstuff.

There is absolutely no comparison between the military and the civilian establishments, apart from the fact that they deprive offenders of their liberty.

Yes, I know, Maizie, but some of the inmates don't meet the threshold for actions which would be considered criminal in civilian law.

The emphasis is on correction rather than retribution.

The biggest difference, however, is that everybody has been in the forces. Whilst not everybody will be highly academic, there won't be many with the very poor literary skills of many in normal prisons and the forces weed out anybody with obvious mental health problems. The prison population has a high percentage of prisoners with very poor literary skills and mental health issues.

It is a prison, really, growstuff, it just has a different title. But, as you have rightly pointed out, the general run of its inmates and the reasons for their incarceration, is very different from an HMP.

Colchester "prison" is known as a "corrective training" centre, not as a prison.
Pantglas, I don't see that you've addressed my points at all.

Perhaps Pantglas could explain what is punitive about the regime at Colchester. I have found an HMIP report from 2014 but it doesn't detail the regime.

Though I think that, as growstuff and others have said, Colchester is very different from the normal run of prisons. I don't see how they can be compared.

My mistake: "inside knowledge"

The chief inspector of prisons claims Colchester is "not at all punitive". He must have some idea what he is talking about but perhaps you also have insight knowledge of prisons.

I still believe prevention is better than cure.

I don’t agree with the statement that Colchester is ‘not at all punitive’. My point being that it IS more punitive with less ‘perks’ than UK and (according to you) Scandinavian prisons and with the much lower reoffending rate.

Pantglas1, It would be interesting to hear your definition of ”not at all punitive” (said about Colchester).

I do not feel I made a ”huge deal” of Urmstongran's comment. Yes, I did compare our prisons with those in Scandinavia and tried to shed light on their belief in ”catching them young” rather than ”lock them up” when it is too late. You think that was unfair. Are you saying then that if somebody makes a comment we should just say ”Amen to that”?

Greta - you made a huge deal of Urmstongran comment on tougher sentences and threw in the liberal Scandinavia prisons and their better reoffending rates.

My point with introducing Colchester was that they had the lowest rates without the liberal regime and now you you don’t like it so who exactly is pointless?

Growstuff - I’ve answered your point in my last post.

Pantglas1, if you are not willing to compare like with like your posts are pointless.

You cannot compare Colchester with normal prisons in the UK.

Firstly, inmates haven't necessarily committed crimes. They have been guilty of breaking military laws, such as insubordination.

Secondly, on average they do not have the problems with mental health and literacy, which are common in civilian prisons.

Thirdly, there is an emphasis on "correction" and rehabilitation and they aren't locked up for 23 hours a day. Yes, the regime is tough, but as military personnel, they will be used to a tough life. However, there are courses available, so if they are discharged from the forces, they have a chance of finding employment. Civilian prisons just don't have those resources available.

It might not be a bad thing if other prisons followed Colchester's example, but it would take a massive increase in prison officer numbers. I haven't seen any hint of the financial input which would be necessary.

Have you ever asked a member of the armed forces whether they would prefer to be in Colchester or an HMP?

Try asking any member or ex member of the armed forces where they would prefer to serve their sentence, Scandinavia prison or Colchester to see which is liberal and which is punitive.

Pantglas1,
This is an extract from www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-43243247:

Quote: In practice it rarely exceeds 180 detainees, most of whom have breached military rules rather than criminal law, and usually holds about 50 inmates.

The chief inspector of prisons, Peter Clarke, said: "It was refreshing for HM Inspectorate of Prisons to inspect a training centre where drugs and violence were virtually unknown and where the culture is incredibly positive, forward-looking and not at all punitive”. End quote

If it is ”not at all punitive” perhaps it can be described as more liberal, wouldn't you say?

I agree they don’t call it a prison but criminals go there after sentencing for rehabilitation and training. It is not a liberal regime and the reoffending rate is a lot less than a liberal regime so they must be doing something right.

Read the article I linked, which explains why.

You’ll need to expand Growstuff- typical of what exactly?

My mistake. Colchester isn't even classified as an HMP.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23793619

The inmates of HMP Colchester aren't typical, as you well know.

OP this is blatant vote-buying IMO ahead og a GE and designed to spike LP's chances.