Yaxley-Lennon supporter to be prosecuted

[JohnD]

Perhaps he is also a Corbyn supporter.

Maybe you're right, and followers of Yaxley-Lennon and Buffoon Johnson tend to be Left-wing socialists. However my experience suggests the reverse, and there is no suggestion of it in the information I have seen.

Perhaps you know different.

And perhaps you don't.

 

[JohnD]

or .....

I will disregard notch's fatuous trolling on this occasion.

 

[ellal]

where is the evidence he was 'radicalised'?

perhaps he is just a nasty scroat -they dont need radicalising

I assume then that you believe that a 'nasty scroat' is born that way?

 

[Yafo]

Pity some are looking for wiggle room.

Either the action needs condeming, or it doesn't. In my opinion, it needs condemning!

At that point, the reasoning of why it happened should be sought. Anybody think it was NOT because he was a refugee, just normal school behaviour of 1 individual? So then, why would he have a dislike (or more) of such a person?

I look forward to the excuses defending the actions.

 

[SammyInnit]

Either the action needs condeming, or it doesn't. In my opinion, it needs condemning!

Who said it doesn't? You're making it up.

The only thing being questioned is the relevance to Tommy Robinson, no one's saying it shouldn't be condemned.

I look forward to the excuses defending the actions.

I don't agree with the title of this thread - he might be a Yaxley-Lennon supporter, but call him what he his, racist thug.

 

[Notch7]

I assume then that you believe that a 'nasty scroat' is born that way?

Why would you assume that?

Why would JohnD make the assumption he had been radicalised?

 

[Notch7]

Pity some are looking for wiggle room.

Either the action needs condeming, or it doesn't. In my opinion, it needs condemning!

You are conflating the argument.

The thread title and statement make assumptions without providing proof, to suit a narrative.

Because I have questioned that, you are therefore saying I am not condemning the action - perhaps you can kindly point out how you have reached that conclusion.

 

[ellal]

Why would you assume that?

Nature or nurture....

Either someone is born as a 'nasty scroat', because as you said 'they dont need radicalising'...

Or someone is born 'innocent' and people/circumstances make them a 'nasty scroat' which is in effect radicalisation.

You can't have it both ways!

 

[Notch7]

Nature or nurture....

Either someone is born as a 'nasty scroat', because as you said 'they dont need radicalising'...

Or someone is born 'innocent' and people/circumstances make them a 'nasty scroat' which is in effect radicalisation.

You can't have it both ways!

People/circumstances can not assumed to be radicalisation.

The government's Prevent Duty Guidance defines radicalisation as "the process by which a person comes to support terrorism and extremist ideologies associated with terrorist groups".

 

[SirGalahad]

People/circumstances can not assumed to be radicalisation.

The government's Prevent Duty Guidance defines radicalisation as "the process by which a person comes to support terrorism and extremist ideologies associated with terrorist groups".

That's slightly misleading as the Government Prevent strategy is solely aimed at Islamic Terrorism and not white extremism.

I provided a definition of radicalism that is broader and includes all form of extremist ideology. I think you only need to go through the kids and his parents social media posts that unfortunately he has been brought up on far right ideology which is why I say the bully is as much a victim as the Syrian kid.

 

[Notch7]

That's slightly misleading as the Government Prevent strategy is solely aimed at Islamic Terrorism and not white extremism

Nevertheless, upbringing in terms of people and or circumstances may not necessarily be a process of radicalisation.

A bad upbringing can just result in a scroat.

Radicalisation is a process of extreme ideology.

In this particular case, the most shocking thing is the schools lack of dealing with the issue.

 

[SirGalahad]

Nevertheless, upbringing in terms of people and or circumstances may not necessarily be a process of radicalisation.

A bad upbringing can just result in a scroat.

Radicalisation is a process of extreme ideology.

In this particular case, the most shocking thing is the schools lack of dealing with the issue.

The kid has been posting YL material and Britain First material which is an extremist organisation. Radicalisation is the process by which the person supports an extremist views - politcal, social, religious etc of which upbringing can be one aspect- being in a household that openly shares extremist views.

The school will have to answer for their own lack of action.

 

[HawkEye244]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-46369501

The BBC does not mention his online activity. No doubt it is irrelevant, or perhaps because it would identify him. His Facebook page also includes Boris Johnson's anti-burqua "joke" and other material from Britain First.

It's a shame to see young people attracted to a self-publicising notorious criminal and violent thug. This is called "radicalising."

As a child, he correctly receives the law's protection. As his victim should also have done.

Masterful trolling from a notorious sh1t talker - bravo old man, bravo .

 

[ellal]

Radicalisation is a process of extreme ideology.

Do you not think 'Britain First' is just that?

In this particular case, the most shocking thing is the schools lack of dealing with the issue.

The most shocking thing is the violence in the first place!

And sadly schools act within a system that makes taking positive action very difficult.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

As to the bully I hope that he is not given a court fine or sentencing that would affect his future life. He is as much of a victim as the Syrian Kid of this vile ideology pushed by the racists and propagated in part by the YL and Farage of demonising refugees.

How thick do you want to claim he is?