Unman Khan and some light on the issue

A complex tragedy which can not and should not be reduced to sound bites in my opinion.
Mr Merritt and the others who have lost children/family members are likely to be in a state of shock and heightened emotions.
One of those who acted so bravely is Polish and one is a Muslim.

Mohammed’s boss said: ‘He was there. He held the guy down. ‘The terrorist was pinned down to the floor. ‘He was on his break. He came back afterwards to work. ‘He didn’t say anything. He went back to work. He was washing dishes.’

Read more: metro.co.uk/2019/12/01/mohammed-kitchen-porter-joined-polish-chef-stop-london-bridge-terrorist-11248935/?ito=cbshare

Twitter: twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

One was Polish so not all were ‘Londoners’.

And how dare you criticise a bereaved father’s choice of newspapers Monica. It was entirely up to him and do you seriously suggest they did not print his request (ignored by the Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Express) faithfully word for word?

Personally I am incredibly proud of those Londoners, whatever their backgrounds were, for preventing more deaths by a person who has the audacity to call himself a British citizen. We need to look at why these disenfranchised radicalised Muslim men feel the need to attack us so violently and without discriminating against women and children (Manchester bombing). Oh yeah, it was the Iraqi War that Blair took us into that began this wasn't it? Makes me so cross.

What he said was powerful from whatever position it came .He deserves our respect.

Well what did you mean Pinkquartz?

I am just saddened that David Merrick has said what he has said within a clearly partisan political newspaper. I felt that what he said was so much more powerful when said from an independent non-aligned position.

I don't know how we can know which party Mr Merrick would vote for, although I suspect we can rule out the Conservative party. I confess, that would apply to my adult children and grandchildren, they wouldn't vote Conservative, Ukip or Brexit, though they may vote for Green, Lib Dem, Labour, independent.

Why varian should be ashamed of reproducing David Merrick's words is a mystery to me. So far as I recall, no one criticised Jo Cox's family or husband for making pubic statements in the aftermath of her murder.

`

Monica

"Are you suggesting that if two countries go to war and happen to share a similar religious background it is because their religion discourages discussion. How would you explain the two world wars where the main countries involved were all Christian?"

No ! I did not mean that.

Why should anyone be ashamed to reproduce Mr Merritt's comments? He is a brave and honest man speaking up for his murdered son who by all accounts was a wonderful young man who did a great deal of good in his short life.

Those who should be ashamed are those who still support the disgraceful Boris Johnson.

I suppose the poor man must be totally beside himself with shock and grief. Infact he possibly hasn't reached grief yet.

I am refraining from voicing my opinion of David Merrick's articles and comments as his son has been brutally murdered.

Shame on you, Varian, for reproducing it.

exploitation

He is condemning the cynical exploitagion of his son's tragic death by Boris Johnson. He has said his son intended to vote LibDem and he will do the same, but his point was not to endorse any party, just to make it clear how distasteful and disrespectful to his family Boris Johnson's remarks have been.

I am afraid that Jack Merritt's father has postioned his views within a partisan political sector. He is clearly a Labour Party supporter and is now using his personal tragedy to favour one particular party.

I would feel just the same had he placed himself in any other political party and used his son's death for a political cause.

The father of London Bridge terror attack victim Jack Merritt has accused Boris Johnson of using his death to “make political capital capital”.

David Merritt, who has been vocal about his son’s stance on rehabilitation in the eight days since his death, said on Twitter that the PM represented “the worst of us”.

Writing on Twitter on Saturday, Merritt said Johnson had been taking people for a ride during the BBC Election Debate against Jeremy Corbyn on Friday evening.

He wrote: “Corbyn spoke the truth last night. Johnson lied and used our son’s death to make political capital.

“Wake up Britain, this man is a fraud.

“He’s the worst of us, and he’s taking you for a ride.”

Cambridge University graduates Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones, 23, were attacked by Usman Khan during a prisoner rehabilitation event at Fishmongers’ Hall on Friday November 29.

Khan attacked five people, including the graduates, armed with two kitchen knives and wearing a fake suicide vest before he was tackled by members of the public on London Bridge and then shot dead by police.

During the BBC debate, the two party leaders were asked about balancing the needs of security against human rights in the wake of the terror attack.

Corbyn said: “What happened on the streets of London was utterly appalling and I was very moved by what Jack Merritt’s father said about what his son was trying to do.

“That he wanted a society where you did address the huge problems where somebody committed awful acts; of course you must imprison them, of course you try and rehabilitate them if you can.”

Johnson said: “I have huge sympathy for Mr Merritt and the families of both victims and it was an absolutely terrible thing.

“But I still think it’s wrong that someone like Usman Khan, who was sentenced to 21 years or 16 years plus five on licence, should have been out automatically on eight years.”

But Merritt said on Twitter that there was no justification for cutting the early release tariff and claimed it was just trying to “look tough.”

He added: “There is no justification at all for cutting the early release tariff from a half to a third of sentences for all sentences over four years that carry a maximum life sentence – that’s just trying to look tough on the backs of other prisoners’ suffering.

“If prisoners have engaged with rehabilitation and turned their lives around, why should they be punished for what Khan did?”

Speaking to reporters in Reading, Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson said: “I’m heartbroken for Jack Merritt’s father for what he is going through, which I can’t even begin to imagine the intensity of that grief.

“And that he has something to say and he has really clearly said he did not want politicians to politicise his son’s murder.

“And the very least Boris Johnson could have done was to listen to a grieving father and respect his wishes. And instead, he has done the opposite.”

Sarah Turnnidge Huffpost UK

pinkquartz I would respectfully point out that the Kurds are not a branch of Islam, they are a separate ethnic group, their territory is divided up between Turkey, Iran and Iraq and their fight is for national independence, not for any set of specific religious beliefs.

I am confused. You said And Islam doesn't even allow discussion. But it does, how else were these different branches of Islam developed if there hadn't been discussion followed by disagreement?

Are you suggesting that if two countries go to war and happen to share a similar religious background it is because their religion discourages discussion. How would you explain the two world wars where the main countries involved were all Christian?

Monica

The wars in the ME are possibly proof of the lack of discussion....IMO
plus your own words " Many Muslims would be prosecuted in Saudi Arabia because they do not share that countries conservative interpretation of Islam."

They have different outlooks, cultures and beliefs in the same way that Buddhism changed with each country that adopted it.
Zen in Japan was nothing like Tibetan Buddhism in Tibet.

Wasn't a lot of the trouble in different ME countries because of differences between Kurds, Shi'ite and Sunni.? I expect there are more than that. All Muslims but still fighting each other.

I am not meaning to argue just explore what the Govt might be doing for de-radicalisation.
It is important that the issues are faced and that we don't have more people killed while trying to help with rehabilitation.

I am worried that the Govt isn't really doing anything positive.

Also when I mention discussion I also meant that debating is a formal part of some religions but many of the Muslims are taught Islam in Madressa's where the children and young are repeating extracts of the Koran over and over. I think it is a robotic way of learning that drives the info deep, rather like the way we were taught times tables.

I do hope that there are some people involved in helping these people to be de-radicalised.

pinkquartz, many, possibly the majority of Muslims do not share the very strict version of Islam promulgated by Saudi Arabia. Like any religion there are a wide range of approaches to it and there are extremists and liberals. Many Muslims would be prosecuted in Saudi Arabia because they do not share that countries conservative interpretation of Islam.

I also think you are wrong to say that Islam doesn't allow discussion, of course it does, otherwise why does it have all its different groups and beliefs?

Every religion has many versions. I am a catholic brought up in England and I can remember reading about all the rules and edicts coming out of Irish bishops when I was much younger. The Irish church was to catholicism what the Wahabi clerics in Saudi, are to Islam, but a bit more right wing, and I use to be so thankful that my Irish grandparents had had the sense to emmigrate to England where the Hierarchy were, as a whole to the left of the irish church. Other religions - Jews, Hindus all have these wide diverging wings from left to right.

"The other thing is that they then need to live in a society that is so radically different from one lived in a country where Islam is the religion and culture. The aspects of our society that we see as freedom - they see as license.:

yes and this is the other reason why I think it will never be possible to deradicalize.

I put in a post above that S Arabia has the Wahibi version of Islam which is super and hard core. It must be much easier to live there if you are a Muslim because your belief system is supported by the culture.

We don't want to change our society so what is the answer?

I don't think there is a solution. Religion is so dangerous.
And Islam doesn't even allow discussion.

If however the individual wanted to change then it can happen.

I am curious to know what other Muslims believe about this....but I have not seen it discussed anywhere.

I think the problem is that this method is being used in Saudi Arabia, a country with a very poor human rights record. The people in Saudi are then released into Saudi society, which is a country which espouses a very conservative form of Islam that is easier for them to conform to.

The other reason is that this terrorism arises from religious extremism. It also arises from the dislocation of many young men, often refugees, or from refugee families caught between two cultures, the home (family or national) culture and the wider societal culture found in Western Europe and the USA. I think there is a natural fear that if studying their religion, albeit a distorted version, turned them terrorist, a education in the true meaning might just conversely deepen their faith and their radicalism.

The other thing is that they then need to live in a society that is so radically different from one lived in a country where Islam is the religion and culture. The aspects of our society that we see as freedom - they see as license.

By that I mean things like the freedom of women to make their own lives and careers away from their family. The control they have over their own bodies, the secular nature of our society.

There is no simple answer to this complex problem. But I think in this country we cannot rehabilitate Islamic terrorists (terrorists for other causes will have different motivations) without doing it within an Islamic context, brought to them by people who they can relate to and can also help them, as Muslims, to be able to live their religion in this society, that is so different to much that they are used to, either within their family or geographic background.

"because their knowledge of the Koran is respected and they can explain that attacking innocents is totally haram- and will not lead to paradise- but the opposite."

If this is true then why wasn't this being used on Khan?
If it works then why not use? He was on a rehabilitation course when he carried out the violence and murder. he lied.
This worries me.
It sounds simple to correct their knowledge via learned scholar imams. It should be done then.

Rehabilitation is not a simple matter.
I don't know the specifcs of the programme that was used in its case but it obviously can't be assessed (other than academically) until it's been used for a while.

Regarding security at the venue - this was a rehabilitation meeting of some sort. Why would that need more security than a political or religious meeting?

Finally, today I heard an ex-offender on the radio talking about how his mind was changed by education - getting to know his faith better through discussion with religious scholars. As I understand it, this is a cornerstone of the programme they were using here. Let's not throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.... though I know some will "learn what to say", those who are genuinely changed are the programmes best advocates.

Fantastic, grannylyn65. Well done.

More than 93,000 suspected violent criminals and sex offenders have been released without restrictions by police in England and Wales since 2017, figures obtained by BBC Newsnight show.

People suspected of offences including rape and murder have been among those "Released Under Investigation" (RUI).

Richard Miller of the Law Society said a "major scandal" was brewing over the way RUIs are being used.

In the meantime, a real scandal is brewing about the decision, since 2017 (therefore clearly by the Tory Government) to release 10s of 1000s of violent and dangerous criminals, without putting any restrictions on them at all, to save money and due to overcrowding in prisons. Johnson and Patel are trying to keep a lit on it by... blaming corbyn of course- but it won't wash ...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50563533

because their knowledge of the Koran is respected and they can explain that attacking innocents is totally haram- and will not lead to paradise- but the opposite.