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

[monkeybarry]

It was the main tactic they used.

It's the main thing they have that's outside of the status quo.

It feels like you are struggling to win your own argument with yourself.

It is ok to be wrong and change your mind - you'll get no judgement here.

 

[thfcsteff]

Don’t really get your point here?

You told me it was 'different' for my father's era/time. Here you're saying the same initiatives have been in place for decades. Here's the thing (and I'm being honest)...your opinions on what my Dad did/didn't experience are inconsequential to me. You weren't there (and to the best of my knowledge the 'era' is beyond your scope of experience).

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?

Laughable. I'm deflecting? You're conflating and deflecting! It's almost as if you've been salivating over a moment when you can bring muslim rape gangs into the picture. How many times does it have to be said? Scum. All of them. Like all pedos. Yet here you are, attempting to conflate and create some grand 'DEI-driven breakdown' narrative and wholly buying into this 'two-tier police' rubbish spouted by the usual dog-whistling foghorns who have a platform.

Not talking about him.

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

Ah ha! Ta-daa!
A link to what you were actually talking about (the ESP's been off recently so I personally found it helpful).
So, since the one mention you referenced regarding a study of over-represented black men in facilitites, this guy was sectioned 4 times and subsequently released. I know you don't generally tend to 'go deep' on these things, so I'd encourage you to read more about the whole case. It is a disgraceful failure, but it is a disgraceful failure of an over-stretched and under-resourced NHS, and a disgraceful failure of his various case managers. You can hear the whistles all you want, they don't apply here. This is straight up failure of the system. The mum of one of his victims said exactly what Norwalk's family said, i.e. don't politicize this death. Alas, the usual suspects don't give a f uck about anything other than their own agendas.

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.

I'll point something out to you.
Every single day, everyone on this forum finds themselves profiling someone. Maybe it's as innocuous as looking at a tshirt someone's wearing, or their shoes, or their hair, and passing some tiny judgement (sometimes good, sometimes bad). Humans do this, even subconsciously.
Let's agree that it is possible the police involved in not looking after Norwalk at the scene of the murder had perhaps surveyed the situation immediately and concluded that Henry might've been high or drunk, and let's agree that this was possibly based on previous experiences. Let's also agree that THIS WAS TOTALLY WRONG and that Henry Norwalk was utterly disserviced there.

Where I will absolutely NOT agree with you, is that this came about as a result of over-DEI training and this myth of a 'two-tier police system'. It was a failure of the police on duty. Conflating it as being the result of overthrust training on DEI is conflation designed to feed a greater narrative. I'm personally not having it.

 

[Rorschach]

Lads and ladies, you are getting to the 'someone is wrong on the internet' meme stage.

 

[thfcsteff]

Always desperate to defend this one aren’t you.

What are you doing?!!!

 

[thfcsteff]

The quip is about his insistence on defending pedofiles. Only he can explain why he does it.

Now can you answer my question?

What an appalling thing to say. You owe the man an apology.

 

[LutonSpurs]

I've never been racist to anyone on this forum. Rob and others just get away with it. Not in terms of banning. In terms of all the fudgein bystanders. You can't call it out as racism for what ever reason. Fuk all of ya. Bye.

 

[Mikey10]

The only one telling lies is you.

 

[robp135]

I've never been racist to anyone on this forum. Rob and others just get away with it. Not in terms of banning. In terms of all the fudgein bystanders. You can't call it out as racism for what ever reason. Fuk all of ya. Bye.

I never said you were racist. I said you were defending sex offenders to be clear.

 

[robp135]

What an appalling thing to say. You owe the man an apology.

Why?

 

[robp135]

You told me it was 'different' for my father's era/time. Here you're saying the same initiatives have been in place for decades. Here's the thing (and I'm being honest)...your opinions on what my Dad did/didn't experience are inconsequential to me. You weren't there (and to the best of my knowledge the 'era' is beyond your scope of experience).

Decades meaning 20 years. You went back to the 70’s.

We’re not going to agree on this so il just let it go now.

 

[thfcsteff]

Decades meaning 20 years. You went back to the 70’s.

We’re not going to agree on this so il just let it go now.

Yeah, you'll let it go because you're out of wriggle room.

Once again your lack of clarity and accuracy shines bright. You make grand statements and support them with vague generalizations.

I should have seen you clearly when you started telling me about what my father did or didn't deal with.
Your last line? I tried that a while back yet you kept coming. You know your truth here.

 

[thfcsteff]

Why?

Because it is beyond out of order, and a accusation. In fact, I think it's a disgrace.

 

[robp135]

Yeah, you'll let it go because you're out of wriggle room.
I should have seen you clearly when you started telling me about what my father did or didn't deal with.
Your last line? I tried that a while back yet you kept coming. You know your truth here.

I never said anything about your Father. You brought him up. I said I don’t think it’s massively relevant to what’s going on 50 years later. If that offended you I do apologise. But to be very clear I never said a single thing directly about you or you Dad. If I am wrong about that please quote me.

 

[robp135]

Because it is beyond out of order, and a accusation. In fact, I think it's a disgrace.

Why is it a disgrace to question why someone would continually defend sex offenders?

 

[robp135]

I have been on this forum for about 6 months. From day one was made to feel unwelcome by Luton specifically. He has questioned my intelligence, my intregtrity, called me many names and tried to convince people I was an alt account. He has also made several remarks about my wife. Including at times when I was not involved in the conversation. For which there has never been an apology.

I know I can be overly passionate and at times it’s difficult to express your points in writing. I’ve had some heated discussions with you all. We’ve always found common ground. It never got personal. Nobody ever went out of their way to insult me except for him. For a period of time I tried to just ignore him and told him very clearly I did not wish to engage with him. But he always kept taking shots and misrepresenting me. Perhaps in hindsight I should have kept that going when this topic came up knowing where it would end up.

Now I am calling out what I have seen as a pattern where, whenever the grooming gangs have been brought up, he is straight on the offensive. There is never clear condemnation like you have made several times in this conversation. It’s always attempts to deflect and point blame elsewhere. And frankly I think that is questionable. I’ve not mentioned his race or religion. As I understand he views himself as an atheist. But that’s the accusation that comes back at me.

I think the murder of Henry Nowak had a racist element to it in many ways. I think the grooming gangs were the same. I think George Floyd was the same. But I have not one time mentioned his or anyone else’s race in these conversations and I completely reject all forms of racism.

Il take a break from this part of the forum for a bit. As that’s what’s fair on everyone else and when I come back I won’t engage with Luton anymore.

 

[monkeybarry]

Lads and ladies, you are getting to the 'someone is wrong on the internet' meme stage.

I think that started on page 1

 

[thfcsteff]

What is sadly clear here is that there has been a clear polarization and fracture. I am sorry you have felt that way. I do remember people accusing you of being someone's alt account, something I never thought was the case. Yes. We have found common ground before for sure.

I also have great sympathy for Luton (who is a friend too). He is sadly targettee břsomeone who has become the forum's 'go to' whenever muslim extremism or rape gangs come up; I can only sadly think that is because he has spoken of his roots. I think it is extraordinarily poor that he should have to shoulder the weight he does in that regard. And again, I think accusing anyone of defending pedophiles is a massively erroneous thing to do'
Massively wrong.

I also think it is wrong to assume that every white person who wants to discuss immigration is a Tommy Robinson fan.
I have always been clear that I believe this social polarisation is wholly intentional by those engineering it. Which is why on the case in discussion ( Henry Norwalk's murder) I am firmly against the flimsy argument that it was a result of a two tier poling strategy. It was a horrorshow but certainly not the result of two-tier policing strategies.

This area of the forum always heats up and I also take time away from it.

Personally, I hope we can all take a step back, and see/recognise where this has derailed. And maybe we can return to some 'civility' and common ground rules of courtesy for engagement here.
I think we all want the same things in life, and generally, on this forum!

 

[Lost Mango]

Why is it a disgrace to question why someone would continually defend sex offenders?

Because he has clearly and continuously not defended sex offenders.

What he has done is continuously and clearly argued against the lazy narrative that the sex offending story was due to ethnicity and race, which people on here have regularly tried to make it.

Your accusation is without foundation and is a horrible attack on a person. It is a shame you can't see you got it wrong and an offer an apology but would rather continue to dig yourself in.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

Because he has clearly and continuously not defended sex offenders.

What he has done is continuously and clearly argued against the lazy narrative that the sex offending story was due to ethnicity and race, which people on here have regularly tried to make it.

Your accusation is without foundation and is a horrible attack on a person. It is a shame you can't see you got it wrong and an offer an apology but would rather continue to dig yourself in.

You beat me to it, no one has defended grooming gangs, anyone that has followed this thread for any length of time will know the argument has been against divisive comments such as "you are more likely to be" or that Rape and cover ups are only more prevalent in certain societies and within certain religious groups. Grooming gang and rape in the UK has clearly been called out by everyone on this thread, so for someone to claim anyone is defending it is a lie, a real outright lie.

There was a time when there was at least 4 accounts also being outwardly racist with it (more on other threads is you include veryold poster) and many targeting Luton with it, many who have since left.

With respect to Rob I think he knew what he was doing with the post towards Luton, so its funny that its now "woe be me".

Now I know this place gets heated and people get emotional and even admitting we could all do better, myself massively included, I do find that post hilarious considering the poster clearly likes to call people out (which is fine, its a place is for it) and admitted to trolling (again fine, all for it)

There have been statements made on here about why people don't post on here and how its a thread where people get shouted down, when the real reality is that there have been a group of folk on here who would not back down to bigoted and racist views or one sided agendas against immigrants, immigrations, races and religions. The reality is that side is the one that has largely been abused, suffered digs, personal insults about being overly "moral", "leftys", "woke" and thats before the bigotry Luton has suffered, no one had rode in on a white horse every to call it out, which is fine, but the claims that only one side makes this thread uncomfortable and unattractive is laughable and selective in view, that side has just not backed down to the bigotry and racism that has often over the years crept into the narratives on here.