The EU debate - Part III

[Stan]

I've broken Kustard

 

[DMD]

Then you don't understand the point I'm making.
It isn't labelling that is the problem it is people's behaviour.
One of the main distinguishing features of British culture from most other countries is the aversion we have to spot checks on ID. I think this is great as it sets a limit on the power of the state. But we've let the police apply this non-uniformly on the basis or race for decades. So we've let our innate racism undermine one of our own cultural strengths. When I was young, policeman on the beat were seen by most as friends who could help you when needed but that culture has been more or less destroyed by their own behaviour.
Any erosion of culture has been due to not applying it to all, not by other cultures being adopted.

I understand the point you're making, I just don't agree with it. Profiling works in many, many areas, not just stop and search, but even in that limited environment, to just argue 'it's racist' adds little.

You'd be better arguing your case for a better system, as the focus on race just dilutes it.

 

[BobbyD]

Question for the bright sparks out there.

Why has the national policy changed from building council houses through the government in the 70's and 80's to now having it all built by housing associations?

Also are housing associations even that effective? Do they still charge a lot higher than a council house or is it roughly similar?

 

[The Zlatan]

Firstly you've chosen to ignore all the stats (not mine) and made nonsensical accusations without base, in your opening paragraph. Secondly, I've not passed anything off as my own.

And finally, you honestly can't see the glaring error in your 90% and 5%stat? The reason why quoting mass grooming is misleading is because you're quoting 1400 odd offences committed by these men, which may very well be a high percentage in itself BUT committed by 35-40 muslim asian men So... and here's where your whole disingenuous argument really falls flat..... it's 35-40 (**** it lets say 100 muslim men and really go over the top) amounts to 0.004% of the asian muslim population in the UK Even IF we take the number of muslim asian offenders and compare it to the total number of offenders of child sex assaults, it equates to 5% of offenders, which tallies nicely with them being 5% of the population as YOU'VE pointed out

Goodnight fella

No I haven't, I acknowledged what you copied and pasted from the Guardian in my final sentence. You just chose to ignore it because it was tied up in questions you have no answers to, which you also conveniently ignored.

No, I don't. There have been just over 250 convictions for this criteria of crime since 1997, 90% of those convicted are Muslim, it's got nothing to do with whatever numbers you're spewing out trying to justify your apologetics for Islamic, *****phile rapists. You should have just asked instead of trying to second guess.

 

[PowerSpurs]

I understand the point you're making, I just don't agree with it. Profiling works in many, many areas, not just stop and search, but even in that limited environment, to just argue 'it's racist' adds little.

You'd be better arguing your case for a better system, as the focus on race just dilutes it.

I agree that profiling works in many cases but the point is that applying it to something like stop and search fatally undermines equality before the law and creates racial tension. There is no rationale whereby profiled use can be justified in such circumstances unless through a belief that the profiled groups are less deserving of fair treatment which is just about the definition of discrimination. My better system would allow no use by state authorities for criminal purposes of any profiling. What do you think should be done about discrimination?

 

[PowerSpurs]

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell is denounced by Labour MPs after footage emerges of him calling on left-wing activists to target Tories and incite protests against his own party colleagues

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...incite-protests-against-party-colleagues.html


You have to love the left wing twats

So a Labour backbencher isn't entitled to call for protests against Tory policies? And for those protests to be visible to all MPs.
Wow!

 

[The Zlatan]

No. You posted cretinous tripe and I pointed it out.


Ok?...

How is pointing out that humans are tribal 'cretinous tripe'?

Good read.

Gave likes to all the posts ripping into Zlatan. That was fun.

Thanks.

cheers mate. But if the only answer he's got is to try and point out that I missed a letter off of one word, it says a lot about his level of intelligence.

Answer to what exactly, a pantomime level of argument? I made a point and you disregarded it without any reason. You then continued on your little frothy mouthed tirade, frantically typing away that I was an idiot.

I see Zlatan has been continuing with his white supremacist campaign, ably abetted by Kustard.

Zlatan is clearly a religious nut who thinks his god is white but Kustard claims to be non religious (despite his comment in my sig). What motivates an atheist or agnostic to think that whites are superior to other human beings?

Safe bet that this will be answered with the use of the words snowflake and safespace (sic).

I believe it was this sort of attitude that kept these terrible crimes covered up for so long as a countless amount of young, white girls were passed around by Muslim *****philes like a piece of cheap Halal meat. People were discouraged from coming forward for fear of being called racists, and here we go, I outline what happened and who was responsible, and because of that I'm apparently 'continuing with my white supremacist campaign'. Hey, whatever helps you sleep at night, buddy, after all it's not me going to bed every night knowing that I am part of a problem that resulted in young girls having their lives destroyed for the sake of tolerance, diversity and multiculturalism.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

The mess that the government's child abuse investigation has become hardly makes good reading.

In my view, a significant issue with Rotherham and the other Asian ones was the media and Police being fearful of a backlash and allegations of racism restricting the investigation.

The government inquiry into the involvement of high officials, either directly or aiding in a cover up is so badly flawed, it's understandable that there is speculation and suspicion of high level obstruction to protect people.

It shouldn't be about race, position or politics. It's about right and wrong and protecting the vulnerable.

I'm not convinced by this argument about the police fearing a backlash and being accused of being racist.
I mean, it's never bothered them in the past, has it?
I think it's a convenient excuse, to be honest.

What have all of these recently uncovered historic sex abuse scandals had in common?
Vulnerable youngsters who the authorities couldn't give a crap about and whose complaints go ignored.
Everyone knew about Savile. Everyone local knew about Rotherham.
Nobody did anything because it was just kids from homes, runaways and council estate children.
They weren't deemed good enough to bother protecting.

 

[NSIS]

How is pointing out that humans are tribal 'cretinous tripe'?

Thanks.


Answer to what exactly, a pantomime level of argument? I made a point and you disregarded it without any reason. You then continued on your little frothy mouthed tirade, frantically typing away that I was an idiot.


I believe it was this sort of attitude that kept these terrible crimes covered up for so long as a countless amount of young, white girls were passed around by Muslim *****philes like a piece of cheap Halal meat. People were discouraged from coming forward for fear of being called racists, and here we go, I outline what happened and who was responsible, and because of that I'm apparently 'continuing with my white supremacist campaign'. Hey, whatever helps you sleep at night, buddy, after all it's not me going to bed every night knowing that I am part of a problem that resulted in young girls having their lives destroyed for the sake of tolerance, diversity and multiculturalism.

You're the ****ing pantomime here you racist ****wit..

Do us all a favour and go and peddle your **** elsewhere...

You disgust me!...

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

I think a fair few, especially on the left have an odd idea of what "racism" is. They contribute to the problem they claim to be defending. That ideology is failing, and should do so sooner rather than later in favour of a more uniting ideology we can all get behind.

The elite are a minority. The majority are after them with pitchforks and castration shears.

By voting for a Tory banker and a billionaire that inherited his wealth?
If they're not the elite, then **** knows who is. The Queen, maybe?

 

[DMD]

I'm not convinced by this argument about the police fearing a backlash and being accused of being racist.
I mean, it's never bothered them in the past, has it?
I think it's a convenient excuse, to be honest.

What have all of these recently uncovered historic sex abuse scandals had in common?
Vulnerable youngsters who the authorities couldn't give a crap about and whose complaints go ignored.
Everyone knew about Savile. Everyone local knew about Rotherham.
Nobody did anything because it was just kids from homes, runaways and council estate children.
They weren't deemed good enough to bother protecting.

You may not be convinced, but it was the argument offered at the time for cancelling the tv programme.

 

[DMD]

By voting for a Tory banker and a billionaire that inherited his wealth?
If they're not the elite, then **** knows who is. The Queen, maybe?

Gosh. You really have a grip on events. Honest.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

You may not be convinced, but it was the argument offered at the time for cancelling the tv programme.

What TV programme and what does that have to do with police investigations?
There's been repeated admissions that they weren't bothered because of the status of the kids.
The same is true over and over again, unfortunately.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Gosh. You really have a grip on events. Honest.

Would you like to point out where I've been factually inaccurate?

 

[steveninaster1]

You must log in or register to see media

 

[Tobes]

Would you like to point out where I've been factually inaccurate?

I doubt it, he'll just waffle and deflect for a page until you get bored.

Same as ever.

 

[The Prime Minister]

So a Labour backbencher isn't entitled to call for protests against Tory policies? And for those protests to be visible to all MPs.
Wow!

He is shadow chancellor, you clot not a back bencher

 

[Page_Moss_Kopite]

Good news

Whiplash claims to be limited to a max £425

All thanks to Brexit*






* It has nothing to do with Brexit, but everything else is blamed on Brexit by snowflakes and cupcakes

Man Yoo's profits have nosedived due to the value of the pound nosediving after the brexit vote.

[HASHTAG]#blamebrexit[/HASHTAG]

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

You must log in or register to see media

They're a bunch of bullshitters. Constant, endless bullshit, whenever any of them speaks.

 

[DMD]

I agree that profiling works in many cases but the point is that applying it to something like stop and search fatally undermines equality before the law and creates racial tension. There is no rationale whereby profiled use can be justified in such circumstances unless through a belief that the profiled groups are less deserving of fair treatment which is just about the definition of discrimination. My better system would allow no use by state authorities for criminal purposes of any profiling. What do you think should be done about discrimination?

I'm not convinced by this argument about the police fearing a backlash and being accused of being racist.
I mean, it's never bothered them in the past, has it?
I think it's a convenient excuse, to be honest.

What have all of these recently uncovered historic sex abuse scandals had in common?
Vulnerable youngsters who the authorities couldn't give a crap about and whose complaints go ignored.
Everyone knew about Savile. Everyone local knew about Rotherham.
Nobody did anything because it was just kids from homes, runaways and council estate children.
They weren't deemed good enough to bother protecting.

Would you like to point out where I've been factually inaccurate?

I think this is in danger of disappearing down the rabbit hole like some others sadly do. It's often happens when tedious tobes trying to rewrite a question.

The point raised was that shouting 'racist' is just a way of avoiding a discussion. From that, you offered the situation of stop and search as something that you felt was what you would describe as racist.

I disagreed, for a number of reasons, one is that a fair percentage of the officers involved are black. If there's an argument, it could be about discrimination, but in raising it in an argument about the use of the term 'racist' you're actually supporting the claim, as there's more to it than picking on people simply because of their skin colour.

There are incidents that are solely to do with race. There was a Scottish lad burned to death solely because of his skin colour, there are other similar incidents. Anecdotal admittedly, but attacks of such nature appear to get more coverage and a harsher sentence if the victim is black than they do if they're white. That's wrong too.

The point remains, that just calling out 'racist' resolves nothing.


EDIT, this isn't the programme I had in mind, but it makes a similar point. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3733215.stm