Police investigating death of Ann Widdicombe

[GoodHonest]

Very strange

I don"t think it is about who "stands a chance", more about the individual"s personal fixation or trigger related to a certain person, maybe, because we don"t really know anything yet? Of course it would be great if this idiot went through the door straight into a double barrelled shotgun or a pitchfork or something but that is the movies really, not so much real life.

You are right.

We know nothing yet.

Just that another woman has been murdered in her own home - likely by a big strapping bloke. Who chooses to take out their rage or dissatisfaction with their little lot in life on a woman, (more often than not being ill-matched in size, stature or strength) rather than with any of the men that they may come across who just might match their physical attributes.

Nowt new really.

Personally I'm not a fan of hate speech laws. I support the right of Heather Herbert to say vile things about Ann Widdicombe, for example, and I'm glad that that wasn't considered criminal in and of itself.

People say horrible things all the time. If every single one was criminal it would be impossible for the police to police it. Especially given everyone has different opinions on things and different beliefs. For example to a vicar it might be hateful to say that god doesn't exist (given the vicar's job is predicated on god existing) or to Muslim it might be hateful to draw Mohamed (given this is forbidden in the Hadith).... and so on.

However, incitement to violence is illegal. I've never seen Palestine Action calling for people to use claw hammers or a weapon of their choice, yet they are proscribed and Bash Back are not. I have no fixed views on Israel v Palestine, other than lots of innocent people are being hurt on both sides. But Bash Back have admitted damaging property (e.g. Wes Streeting's office, a conference building in Brighton and the EHRC office) and are somehow not proscribed.

That aside, and back to your point...

That image is encouraging violence for the easily persuaded.

Exactly this. And possibly the already angry. There's a lot of anger around these days in polarised politics etc. Images like that doing the rounds with the easily persuaded and/or already angry are the opposite of helpful. The contrast between that and the women's groups peacefully protesting to keep women's sports etc is quite something. But the subject matter is interchangeable for some people. The "omincause" and "right side of history" thinking seems to take over at times.

That image is concerning.

Horrifying.

If that's not inciting violence I don't know what is.

You could also argue that with Palestine action, taking whips and sledgehammers and then breaking a policewoman's spine with sledgehammer. Apparently, taking 'action' is justifiable to those idiots.

I don't remember Palestine Action calling for this to happen (i.e. inciting violence in its name). But yes, actual acts of violence in its name is awful. As you say some people do seem to think this is justified action.

The difference between doing it and inciting it is that (thankfully) the doing has a limited impact. That doesn't change anything for the people who are directly impacted or their families, obviously. But inciting violence has an unknown and potentially unlimited impact, because it reaches and inspires the violence doers.

Not sure the female police officer would think having her spine broken by a Palestinian action thug was limited impact or the security guards who had whips used on them. Fortunately, they received prison sentences which might make others think that violence means some punishment.

Whether PA or TRA violence or inciting violence or from orher groups it is all wrong and needs dealing with.

Not sure the female police officer would think having her spine broken by a Palestinian action thug was limited impact or the security guards who had whips used on them.

I fully agree. My choice of words was perhaps clumsy but that's what I meant by the impact being limited except for those who are directly impacted like this (and their families, who are also impacted by the injury or death of a loved one).

I was thinking of the "blast radius". Direct action has a blast radius that is limited by how far that direct action reaches. That said, the mental/emotional impact on those directly affected and indirectly affected doesn't have limits. I definitely missed this with my simplified statement.

The point that I was trying to make (badly perhaps) is that the "blast radius" of images like the one that I shared is unknown and unlimited. Its message is a clear incitement of violence and it's reaching an unknown and unknowable number of people. By any reasonable assumption, there is bound to be at least one person who is inspired by that image to grab a hammer and "smash" whatever or whoever they think is in the wrong.

I think it was my clumsy wording that didn't help here.

Whether PA or TRA violence or inciting violence or from orher groups it is all wrong and needs dealing with.

Yes, this is what I was trying to say. You put it far better than I did @ENGLANDalltheway

A video has surfaced on social media of Joshua Kerry giving a speech at what appears to be some sort of Marxist/Communist rally or meeting. There is no official confirmation of it being him and some of the comments on the FB page it was posted to are denying it is him, saying it's the 'far right' trying to whip up a conspiracy against the left. However, I've looked really closely at the video and compared it to the photo of him issued to the media by the police and I'm pretty sure it's the same man. He has short hair and is not bearded, but it still appears to be him.

Is there any detail about what he was saying there?

Pathetic creature. He sounds like a stupid 6th form sociology student.

As there has been some interesting discussion about groups that promote/incite violence I thought this sounded relevant:

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/proscribe-militant-trans-group-bash-back-ex-political-violence-tsar-l9t757tjn?utm

Sadly, I don't have access to the whole article, as I don't subscribe to the Times, but I managed to catch sight of the sub header just before the sign-up information appeared.

From what I read, it sounds like they released a guide specifically about targeting MPs. Does anyone here have access to the article so as to confirm that either way?

Share token here.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/92edc115-e95e-4243-8b3a-d6d8bea365df?shareToken=de9863d309971901b859ca40ce94f512

i wonder why it's taking so long for the police to decide whether there is a further charge or something terrorism related to be brought? Or have I missed it? It seems to have fallen from the headlines and yet the story was left sort of dangling in mid air.

At what point will poor Ann be able to have a funeral? What needs to be concluded by the police and forensics before that can happen? Does anyone know?

Meanwhile, Zack Polanski thinks it's appropriate to share this post on X......

He now claims it was an oversight, that any significance in relation to recent events was lost on him and the fact that it's horribly inappropriate and possibly criminally inciteful went whoosh right over his snaggle-toothed little head.

He's either an evil liar or he truly is far too stupid to be allowed anywhere near politics.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/reform-uk-zack-polanski-police-guillotine-t-shirt-0bxrb26jq

An oversight.

Alrighty then.

All better…

For Christ's sake. Didn't Jo Brand say something about someone once (off to look it up) .... I see she 'joked' about throwing battery acid instead of a milkshake. That was absolutely stupid but not aimed at an individual.

This Polanski jerk should receive the same treatment as Scott Heather Herbert. For being a herbert.

Maybe he's testing out where the public's tolerance of oversights is?

Said I could make women's boobs bigger through hypnosis. Said that I had never actually said this. Realised I actually had when someone found a recording of me saying it on the BBC. Happens to us all, right?

Seem to have forgotten to pay my council tax on my boat. Silly me.

Said that I was a spokesperson for the Red Cross. Realised I wasn't when someone pointed out that I wasn't. What a silly sausage I am.

Reshared an image guillotining Nigel. I really am a silly billy.

Ah well, no harm done. But check out this grifter..... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-zack-polanski-clacton-byelection-b3011062.html

For clarity, I am neither a fan of Hypnotits Polanski nor Farage. They are very welcome to keep swiping at each other.

However, on this issue Farage is right to call out how dangerous it is to apparently support violence against politicians, even if it truly was unintentional. I wonder if Polanski may have found the threshold at which the public tells him he's gone too far, with either not being clever enough to lead a party or with being duplicitous.

Thank you for sharing this.

The article was every bit as good as I had hoped it would be. It feels like a slice of this thread is now sitting out there in mainstream news.

This is an important conversation.

Proscribe ‘militant’ trans group, says ex-political violence tsar
Lord Walney said Bash Back ‘deserves more serious attention’ after it published a guide on how to arm themselves and carry out repeated illegal attacks on MPs

Ministers should consider proscribing a militant transgender activist group which has targeted the offices of MPs, the government’s former adviser on political violence has said.

Writing in The Times, Lord Walney said the conduct of the group Bash Back “deserves far more serious attention than it has so far received” and that ministers should test it against the same threshold that led to the proscription of Palestine Action.

Bash Back is a transgender-led direct action group which vandalised the office of Wes Streeting in July last year when he was the health secretary, and it has pushed for a “new era of trans rage”.

The Times previously revealed that the group had produced a guide for members urging them to arm themselves and carry out repeated illegal attacks on MPs and organisations.

Illustration of a poster for the militant transgender activist group Bash Back with a masked person breaking a window with a hammer.

Women have been saying how violent trans activists are for years. Angry men who cannot have want they want are very dangerous.

He has no chance of being anywhere near power, just ignore. Would be nice if he got lifted but they couldn"t jail him for this I don"t think.

Everybody knew who she was talking about though, there were a lot more dummies just prepared to clap like sheep at her attempts to be smart back then, it wouldn"t go over so well now, she is firmly on the Z List now anyway?