• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Rafa87 said:
The problem is you keep doing this, you keep basing the ‘fact’ of your argument on something you’re making up.

“The police are trained to not make these assumptions for minority’s but not for white men” - this is absolute, categorically gonads. White people are not targeted, treated differently or oppressed by the police in this country. The police are not told to assume guilt of white men or assume they have done something wrong. No one’s even mentioned him being drunk. You added that in the same way that to prove your point yesterday you posted an article you hadn’t read and told everyone it showed you were right.

Just stop making things up Rob, you’re doing the exact thing you’re accusing the police of here and that’s making assumptions and then claiming that you’re correct because of them with zero proof.

This case isn’t anything like George Floyd or numerous other cases - this case comes down to actually just being poorly trained police officers who turned up and did an awful job of assessing the situation, didn’t ask the correct questions, and as a result as the situation worsened they didn’t react to it and therefore it escalated with basically every choice they made then being wrong. This case is nothing to do with racism or treatment of white people being different to the treatment of any other. I reckon the exact same thing could happen, but replace the officers who attended with different ones and there’s a good chance this case turns out differently.

What really shocks me is I originally thought that as a poster you had differing views to others but you stick by them and had good points to actually argue your case, your discussion of this case so far shows that you’re easily led, will believe anything as long as it suits your narrative and that you will happily pass off things that you think happened as absolute fact.
Click to expand...

Could not disagree more im afraid. Moving on though.
 
If I were one of those police officers having to explain myself to the IOPC, and have a choice of explaining that I acted incompetently, or explaining that I acted in accordance with what I believed was the right thing to do according to my DEI training, I think I know which way I would go. I am sure the investigation will be a lot more involved than that, but it does feel that the narrative has already been written.
 
thfcsteff said:
Just to be clear...you believe that if it were not for DEI-style training introduced after George Floyd's murder in the US, this situation would not have occurred? You believe that it was specifically the training which made the officers not check Norwalk for wounds? Have there been other reported situations which you feel reach that threshold of analysis?
Click to expand...

This type of training has been in place for decades now it just got ramped up post George Floyd. So it’s not exclusively related to that.

The grooming gangs would be the glaring example. Many of the victims beleive they were not taken seriously by police. Many officers involved were told to stay away due to fears unrest in the Muslim community. The guy in Nottingham that killed two students was not sectioned due to an over-representation of young black men in detention.

You speculated that they made their assumption based on the fact they might well have encountered drunks racially abusing people before. Would that not be an example of unconscious bias or racial profiling?
 
Glenda's Legs said:
If I were one of those police officers having to explain myself to the IOPC, and have a choice of explaining that I acted incompetently, or explaining that I acted in accordance with what I believed was the right thing to do according to my DEI training, I think I know which way I would go. I am sure the investigation will be a lot more involved than that, but it does feel that the narrative has already been written.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Yet another example of post-truth society at the double.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
If I were one of those police officers having to explain myself to the IOPC, and have a choice of explaining that I acted incompetently, or explaining that I acted in accordance with what I believed was the right thing to do according to my DEI training, I think I know which way I would go. I am sure the investigation will be a lot more involved than that, but it does feel that the narrative has already been written.
Click to expand...

That’s a fair point.
 
robp135 said:
This type of training has been in place for decades now it just got ramped up post George Floyd. So it’s not exclusively related to that.
Click to expand...

And to think, you told me that in my Dad's time it was 'different'...dearie me...

robp135 said:
The grooming gangs would be the glaring example. Many of the victims beleive they were not taken seriously by police. Many officers involved were told to stay away due to fears unrest in the Muslim community. The guy in Nottingham that killed two students was not sectioned due to an over-representation of young black men in detention.
Click to expand...

I had deleted my post to try and give us all a break FWIW, but I'll reply as I didn't delete fast enough LOL.
The grooming gangs issue is terrible. Appalling. As was the Westminster scandal. As was Savile. As are the many white grooming gangs which exist. ALL grooming gangs and pedos are SCUM, and many have sadly been allowed to get away with it for far too long.
As for Axel Rudakubana and your assertion, what's your source? And what are you even trying to say? That he slipped through the mental health net because there are a disproportionate amount of young black men in detention??? Make it make sense!!!!



robp135 said:
You speculated that they made their assumption based on the fact they might well have encountered drunks racially abusing people before. Would that not be an example of unconscious bias or racial profiling?
Click to expand...

I explicitly said I felt IF it was the case, it was a mistaken assumption. Unconscious bias? Racial profiling? No, more really sloppy poor work combined with assumptions.
 
robp135 said:
This type of training has been in place for decades now it just got ramped up post George Floyd. So it’s not exclusively related to that.

The grooming gangs would be the glaring example. Many of the victims beleive they were not taken seriously by police. Many officers involved were told to stay away due to fears unrest in the Muslim community. The guy in Nottingham that killed two students was not sectioned due to an over-representation of young black men in detention.

You speculated that they made their assumption based on the fact they might well have encountered drunks racially abusing people before. Would that not be an example of unconscious bias or racial profiling?
Click to expand...

Lies. An unnamed social worker said they were told to stay away. Why do you repeat verbatim lies from the far right. It's worth verifying stuff.
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Will catch up on question time this morning, seemingly looked like a car crash from the small clips
Click to expand...
I watched some of it last night and I have to say I thought Robert Kenyon came across a lot better than I expected him to, especially after the interview with Chris Mason earlier in the week.
Obviously he’d been thoroughly coached in how to answer what he wanted to answer (nothing wrong with that - to the extent that all politicians do it). He didn’t always manage it,
he was definitely struggling at times and seemed out of his depth but I didn’t think it was a car crash. It definitely helped that he didn’t get a pile-on from the other panelists which would normally happen, as that would not have been a good look with a by-election looming.
 
thfcsteff said:
And to think, you told me that in my Dad's time it was 'different'...dearie me...
Click to expand...

Don’t really get your point here?

thfcsteff said:
I had deleted my post to try and give us all a break FWIW, but I'll reply as I didn't delete fast enough LOL.
The grooming gangs issue is terrible. Appalling. As was the Westminster scandal. As was Savile. As are the many white grooming gangs which exist. ALL grooming gangs and pedos are SCUM, and many have sadly been allowed to get away with it for far too long.
Click to expand...

You asked about specific about cases. I’m giving you examples and rather we than address them your deflecting. Did race play a part in the girls not being believed? Did the police not properly investigate for fears of cresting issues within those heavily Islamic communities?

thfcsteff said:
As for Axel Rudakubana and your assertion, what's your source? And what are you even trying to say? That he slipped through the mental health net because there are a disproportionate amount of young black men in detention??? Make it make sense!!!!
Click to expand...

Not talking about him.

www.theguardian.com

Nottingham killer was not sectioned because of his race, inquiry told

Valdo Calocane released in 2020 after mental health staff considered research on over-representation of young black men in detention
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

thfcsteff said:
I explicitly said I felt IF it was the case, it was a mistaken assumption. Unconscious bias? Racial profiling? No, more really sloppy poor work combined with assumptions.
Click to expand...

It is textbook racial profiling. But as long as your consistent and always give the befeift of the doubt until all the facts are laid out fair enough.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I watched some of it last night and I have to say I thought Robert Kenyon came across a lot better than I expected him to, especially after the interview with Chris Mason earlier in the week.
Obviously he’d been thoroughly coached in how to answer what he wanted to answer (nothing wrong with that - to the extent that all politicians do it). He didn’t always manage it,
he was definitely struggling at times and seemed out of his depth but I didn’t think it was a car crash. It definitely helped that he didn’t get a pile-on from the other panelists which would normally happen, as that would not have been a good look with a by-election looming.
Click to expand...

Cheers, I will look at it with open eyes and report back. Conscious that clipped videos are done to support one view so
 
robp135 said:
Always desperate to defend this one aren’t you.
Click to expand...

Ouch. Are insinuating I'm defending grooming gangs? Type it with your chest out. I think it's 6th or 7th time that has happened on here. And not to any other poster. There's one reason for that. I'm open about being a Pakistani.

How watch Rob say it's because he sees me as left wing. Weasel.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Not that @LutonSpurs can’t speak for himself, but that’s out of order @robp135
Click to expand...

He is an angry little toad. But free speech. Let em expose themselves. It's always telling when they begin to shed their mask.

Also on the grooming gangs, we had a discussion a couple of years ago and I've really thought about it. You helped me challenge my own biases on the issue. Thank you Glenda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back