So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Is it wise for girls under the age of consent to wear short skirts for example.
In a free society, people should be able to do things that are unwise without fear of sexual assault, or other disproportionate consequences.
If young people stop making clothing choices that I disapprove of, then I will know that I no longer live in a free society, and that I should have done more to defend a free society years earlier.
Well yes but i am free to walk drunk in tottenham at 3am. But if im robbed i have to partially blame myself. And britain was a free society in the 1950s but you didnt see girls under 16 in short skirts.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Is it wise for girls under the age of consent to wear short skirts for example.
In a free society, people should be able to do things that are unwise without fear of sexual assault, or other disproportionate consequences.
If young people stop making clothing choices that I disapprove of, then I will know that I no longer live in a free society, and that I should have done more to defend a free society years earlier.
Well yes but i am free to walk drunk in tottenham at 3am. But if im robbed i have to partially blame myself. And britain was a free society in the 1950s but you didnt see girls under 16 in short skirts.
A few years ago, I often walked drunk through London at 3am. Without fear of robbery.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Is it wise for girls under the age of consent to wear short skirts for example.
In a free society, people should be able to do things that are unwise without fear of sexual assault, or other disproportionate consequences.
If young people stop making clothing choices that I disapprove of, then I will know that I no longer live in a free society, and that I should have done more to defend a free society years earlier.
Well yes but i am free to walk drunk in tottenham at 3am. But if im robbed i have to partially blame myself. And britain was a free society in the 1950s but you didnt see girls under 16 in short skirts.
A few years ago, I often walked drunk through London at 3am. Without fear of robbery.
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
If it is a bomb, and we should note that Elon Musk seems open-minded, but if it is a bomb then the question arises: was there common purpose between the exploding Tesla driver and the New Orleans killer, whose car was also electric and contained explosives?
Sky have just said both vehicles were hired from the same car agency !
That sounds like a remarkable coincidence - but how many large nationwide car rental firms are there? Not many, I would guess.
If it were Alamo or Sixt, then maybe - I've never heard of this Turo before?
Airbnb for cars. People renting cars to each other.
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
In the first half of the season, each team plays almost every other team exactly once and has approximately half its games at home.
I can't see how the strength of schedule argument works on half a season.
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
If it is a bomb, and we should note that Elon Musk seems open-minded, but if it is a bomb then the question arises: was there common purpose between the exploding Tesla driver and the New Orleans killer, whose car was also electric and contained explosives?
Sky have just said both vehicles were hired from the same car agency !
That sounds like a remarkable coincidence - but how many large nationwide car rental firms are there? Not many, I would guess.
If it were Alamo or Sixt, then maybe - I've never heard of this Turo before?
Airbnb for cars. People renting cars to each other.
Ah, OK, ta. I had Zipcar before I had my car, and never rent abroad, so I'm well out of their target market.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Is it wise for girls under the age of consent to wear short skirts for example.
Pretty despicable language from Truss. She was never fit to be in Cabinet, let alone PM.
I wonder how Elon decided which of his multiplying personae to choose from when re-tweeting this latest broadside in the British culture wars.
Phillips is very weak on the issues of militant islam because her seat is vulnerable. Liz is right to put the boot in.
That's not me condoning Musk's mischief-making.
I see Liz has made a documentary with The Wall Street Journal called 'The Prime Minister vs. The Blob' - Interesting that they have picked up on the blob nomenclature. I said that Truss had made a mistake calling it 'the deep state' in America and should have called it 'the blob', and this feels like a success for that strategy.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Well, yes - because to admit to this would require our society and, bluntly, the male population within it to ask itself some very hard questions about the nature of male sexuality and male sexual deviancy and how this might be dealt with. And I am afraid a lot of men do not want to confront this or ask themselves or others any of these hard questions let alone think about actions to take which might render this behaviour less harmful to its victims.
The Pelicot trial clearly demonstrated how easy it was to recruit men to rape. It's a problem for all communities.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Is it wise for girls under the age of consent to wear short skirts for example.
In a free society, people should be able to do things that are unwise without fear of sexual assault, or other disproportionate consequences.
If young people stop making clothing choices that I disapprove of, then I will know that I no longer live in a free society, and that I should have done more to defend a free society years earlier.
Asking that question ends inevitably in the burqa style clothing. It is blaming the victim and excusing the perpetrator because "he was led on"
Simple fact is the common thread about industrial level sexual abuse of minors is that the perpetrators are seen as beyond questioning either through status eg the church scandals being an example, would throw into doubt policies eg the islington cases, or community relations eg rotherham. Those three and the view that the victims are often not seen to matter
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
In the first half of the season, each team plays almost every other team exactly once and has approximately half its games at home.
I can't see how the strength of schedule argument works on half a season.
Simples. Away trips. Liverpool to Everton, Bournemouth, Fulham, Brentford, Manchester City, Brighton, Villa, Forest and Chelsea. Their lead is quite thin considering the advantage of momentum built so far on awkward opponents home bringing confidence of wins strung together. Have we not already seen so many sides looking so superb on the first half of fixtures and their football fall apart when the pressure builds and draws mount up? There is absolutely no way anyone can know the psychology of how this Liverpool squad reacts to taking just 1 point from 9, 2 from 12. Another huge danger to Liverpool’s title hopes is Mo Salah. His percentage involvements in Liverpool goals so far is phenomenal, but the dangers of this easily overlooked with wins flowing. It shouldn’t be seen as only danger of him spending months in treatment room, he could remain fit, but his form for goal involvements dry up for undroppable player right till season end.
The point is in muslim culture girls of that age are covered up.
Worth remembering that Asian girls too have been abused within their communities but there has been a lot of silence on this. There should not be. Those girls too are forgotten victims.
I used to live next door to a couple. Well, 'couple'. The girl said she was 16, though I had my doubts going by her voice. Sadly never got to see her. But every night my partner and I could hear her being beaten to sh*t through the walls, crying, wailing. My partner tried to talk to her through the door, but she refused to come out and wouldn't open the door. Police, council - both said there was nothing they could do. After a while she just wasn't around.
I really wish I could forget it.
The Police and Council couldn’t do anything ?
Did they give a reason for their indifference to this girls plight ?
It was my partner who phoned them - and it was ~30+ years ago, so.... not 100%.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Well, yes - because to admit to this would require our society and, bluntly, the male population within it to ask itself some very hard questions about the nature of male sexuality and male sexual deviancy and how this might be dealt with. And I am afraid a lot of men do not want to confront this or ask themselves or others any of these hard questions let alone think about actions to take which might render this behaviour less harmful to its victims.
The Pelicot trial clearly demonstrated how easy it was to recruit men to rape. It's a problem for all communities.
Of course. But again and again you will not face the particular issues faced by many islamic communities in this country or the authorities' inabiliy to confront it.
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
In the first half of the season, each team plays almost every other team exactly once and has approximately half its games at home.
I can't see how the strength of schedule argument works on half a season.
Simples. Away trips. Liverpool to Everton, Bournemouth, Fulham, Brentford, Manchester City, Brighton, Villa, Forest and Chelsea. Their lead is quite thin considering the advantage of momentum built so far on awkward opponents home bringing confidence of wins strung together. Have we not already seen so many sides looking so superb on the first half of fixtures and their football fall apart when the pressure builds and draws mount up? There is absolutely no way anyone can know the psychology of how this Liverpool squad reacts to taking just 1 point from 9, 2 from 12. Another huge danger to Liverpool’s title hopes is Mo Salah. His percentage involvements in Liverpool goals so far is phenomenal, but the dangers of this easily overlooked with wins flowing. It shouldn’t be seen as only danger of him spending months in treatment room, he could remain fit, but his form for goal involvements dry up for undroppable player right till season end.
The question needs to be if not LFC then who? This reminds me of the year Leicester won it. Put simply. No one else is in any kind of title winning form.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Well, yes - because to admit to this would require our society and, bluntly, the male population within it to ask itself some very hard questions about the nature of male sexuality and male sexual deviancy and how this might be dealt with. And I am afraid a lot of men do not want to confront this or ask themselves or others any of these hard questions let alone think about actions to take which might render this behaviour less harmful to its victims.
The Pelicot trial clearly demonstrated how easy it was to recruit men to rape. It's a problem for all communities.
The reaction to it has also demonstrated how hard it has been for many men to confront what it says about them as a class. An awful lot of men from the age of 22 to 70 were prepared to behave in ways which defy the imagination and not one of the men on that website spoke up. Not one. There have been other examples of similar sites allowing men to discuss how men can drug and abuse women. This was not a one-off nor just a French peculiarity.
Pretty despicable language from Truss. She was never fit to be in Cabinet, let alone PM.
I wonder how Elon decided which of his multiplying personae to choose from when re-tweeting this latest broadside in the British culture wars.
Phillips is very weak on the issues of militant islam because her seat is vulnerable. Liz is right to put the boot in.
That's not me condoning Musk's mischief-making.
I see Liz has made a documentary with The Wall Street Journal called 'The Prime Minister vs. The Blob' - Interesting that they have picked up on the blob nomenclature. I said that Truss had made a mistake calling it 'the deep state' in America and should have called it 'the blob', and this feels like a success for that strategy.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
I would like it to be true certainly. I would certainly hope it is less than 10%. I am not aware of any research on the subject however
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
As viewcode gave it a like, I take it as green light to watch and report back.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed? La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable. Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second. Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10. Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it. Hope this helps 🙂
If it is a bomb, and we should note that Elon Musk seems open-minded, but if it is a bomb then the question arises: was there common purpose between the exploding Tesla driver and the New Orleans killer, whose car was also electric and contained explosives?
Sky have just said both vehicles were hired from the same car agency !
That sounds like a remarkable coincidence - but how many large nationwide car rental firms are there? Not many, I would guess.
If it were Alamo or Sixt, then maybe - I've never heard of this Turo before?
Airbnb for cars. People renting cars to each other.
Turo is massive compared to Alamo or Sixt; it's peer to peer car rental, and it's probably 60+% of the non-airport car rental business in the US.
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
As viewcode gave it a like, I take it as green light to watch and report back.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed? La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable. Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second. Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10. Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it. Hope this helps 🙂
If you haven't read the Conclave book, how do you know the twists are the same?
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
They still have to play the Mighty Reds at the City Ground. And as we tonked them at Anfield...
So many people at all levels of power in the UK need to be in prison for this.
He's right, as usual.
The Rochdale scandal is like a grotesque family skeleton that lurks in the closet, waiting to burst out and scatter its bones across the kitchen table.
It's deeply upsetting and, I fear, very far from a one off.
Anyone looking at the IICSA Reports already knows that Rochdale and Rotherham were not one-offs. The extent of child sexual abuse is horrible; the refusal of authorities - from the police to local authorities to schools, churches and the rest - is endemic and also goes back decades.
And it is not restricted to any one culture or race or religion either. The main common factor is that the perpetrators are men - of all types, ages and classes - and that the victims are children: mostly girls but not exclusively so.
It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.
If we did we would not allow men convicted of possession of images of children being abused (some babies and in unimaginably horrible ways) to walk free from court, as happens all too often. We would be insisting that the government took seriously the recommendations of the IICSA Reports seriously instead of burying it them in a drawer somewhere. We would not be honouring those who failed to protect children when they had a duty to do so (Hodge) or argued for the lowering of the age of consent to allow sex with children (Hewitt) nor someone who thought that child abuse was overblown and most videos of it simulated (Fox) and so on. We would fund those who try to deal with it properly. And so on.
If we really valued our children we would be behaving very differently as a society. But we don't. Or not enough. We only get outraged - some of us anyway - to make points against people or groups we dislike or to hide our discomfort with the reality of what goes on and our own hypocrisy when the awful stories come to light. What, for instance, have we done or are doing for any of the girls so harmed by the grooming gangs? Have we done anything at all for them other than thank them for their bravery for giving evidence?
It happens because while those in power consider the mass rape of girls in towns like Rochdale "bad", they consider it less bad than the possibility that tge population might take a sub-optimal view of immigration from Islamic countries. So it's brushed under the carpet.
It’s been brushed under the carpet in some ways, but not in others. I agree with Cyclefree’s earlier remarks where she said, “It happens because we do not take such sexual violence seriously and because there is also a disdain for working class girls and a belief that somehow the victims are complicit. We do not take the safeguarding of children seriously. We do not value them as we ought.”
In some ways, Rotherham etc. have been repeatedly kept in the public eye, used to promote Islamophobia. It’s Tommy Robinson’s main shtick. Even the last Tory government got on the bandwagon to a degree and commissioned a report on grooming gangs and ethnicity. Said report then rather disappointed those who wanted a stick to use against immigration by concluding there is no clear link between grooming gangs and ethnicity/religion/immigration (as you also noted above).
However, instead of doing anything about the recommendations in this and other reports to tackle the problem, the issue just remains a political football. In particular, people like Leon here or Elon Musk on Twitter keep shouting about the issue because they want to promote Islamophobia. (The same people support Donald Trump being President, a man who has committed serious sexual assaults and barged into the dressing rooms at beauty pageants to see young women naked.)
We should continue to take Rotherham etc. very seriously. We should also be cognisant of those who seek to use events to forment hatred.
Foment. Oddly I agree about Islam not being the core of this issue, but you, Cyclefree and others are very much missing what is the key element, which is the utter impunity with which members of certain communities perpetrated these crimes, due to the authorities actively protecting them for the sake of community relations. That is what led to the epic proportions of the abuse - our own authorities and their fetishisation of community relations above all other considerations.
No - I do not miss this key element at all. I have written about it repeatedly in headers on here. And BTL. It is an element of all such scandals. At least some of these Asian men have been convicted. How many were convicted over the abuse in Islington children's homes or in Islington or in the many other places and groups responsible for similar crimes?
Society has refused to face up to elements of Islam and some foreign cultures which are problematic, to put it mildly. It has also refused - and is continuing to refuse to - face up to elements of our own society's culture and behaviour which are equally problematic. I do not downplay the issues with Asian grooming gangs but we make a big mistake in thinking that this is all down to them. And an equally big mistake in thinking that this is the only example of the authorities turning a blind eye or covering up matters which embarrass them.
The common thread is not the race of victim or perpetrator, it is that women and girls, as witnesses to crimes of sexual violence committed against themselves, are too often not treated as credible or reliable witnesses.
I've argued on here before that this might be a problem we need to address as a society, and I get told that the criminal justice system is working just fine. But in other crimes, say of property crime, or assault, witnesses are not routinely disbelieved as they are in crimes of sexual violence.
Society is not willing to accept that the numbers of perpetrators of violence against women and girls is as high as it is, and so it finds excuses to minimise those numbers and to only convict a small fraction of those responsible. To admit that the number of men who commit these crimes is much higher is too terrifying to contemplate. Pretending that this is mainly a problem of Muslim perpetrators is part of this same exercise in denial.
Is it wise for girls under the age of consent to wear short skirts for example.
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
In the first half of the season, each team plays almost every other team exactly once and has approximately half its games at home.
I can't see how the strength of schedule argument works on half a season.
Simples. Away trips. Liverpool to Everton, Bournemouth, Fulham, Brentford, Manchester City, Brighton, Villa, Forest and Chelsea. Their lead is quite thin considering the advantage of momentum built so far on awkward opponents home bringing confidence of wins strung together. Have we not already seen so many sides looking so superb on the first half of fixtures and their football fall apart when the pressure builds and draws mount up? There is absolutely no way anyone can know the psychology of how this Liverpool squad reacts to taking just 1 point from 9, 2 from 12. Another huge danger to Liverpool’s title hopes is Mo Salah. His percentage involvements in Liverpool goals so far is phenomenal, but the dangers of this easily overlooked with wins flowing. It shouldn’t be seen as only danger of him spending months in treatment room, he could remain fit, but his form for goal involvements dry up for undroppable player right till season end.
So away to 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 12th and 16th to come. Leaving 2nd, 5th, 11th, 13th to 15th and 17th to 20th played.
Easier, sure, but some of those high flyers may not sustain their first halves. And how big is home advantage these days anyway?
Your other points are well taken, but strength of schedule is not a great point.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
I would like it to be true certainly. I would certainly hope it is less than 10%. I am not aware of any research on the subject however
I would also say painting it broadly on all men has negative consequences, for example as a man if I am in the high street and see a child crying obviously lost for example after being separated from their parents while shopping these days I would probably avoid helping for worry of being accused. Had enough of that when I was out with my own son and being seen as suspicious as a lone male with a 5 year old holding my hand
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
I would like it to be true certainly. I would certainly hope it is less than 10%. I am not aware of any research on the subject however
There's an old saying that 10% of people will always shoplift, 10% of people will never shoplift, and 80% will shoplift if the circumstances are right.
There's a huge amount of evidence that, when people think they are protected, then they will act out.
Rochedale is an example of where a combination of (1) "concern for community relations" became code for ignoring the behaviour of groups, and (2) the care system being totally broken, with many young women being subject to terrible sexual assault, and this going essentially ignore by the authorities.
The combination of these allowed a group of men to prey on young women without fear of consequence.
The same is true, of course, of Catholic priests - where abuse of nuns and of children was covered up by the church and authorities for decades.
It turns out that if you remove "consequences" of any sort, then many otherwise moral people will act in awful ways,
If it is a bomb, and we should note that Elon Musk seems open-minded, but if it is a bomb then the question arises: was there common purpose between the exploding Tesla driver and the New Orleans killer, whose car was also electric and contained explosives?
Sky have just said both vehicles were hired from the same car agency !
That sounds like a remarkable coincidence - but how many large nationwide car rental firms are there? Not many, I would guess.
If it were Alamo or Sixt, then maybe - I've never heard of this Turo before?
Airbnb for cars. People renting cars to each other.
Turo is massive compared to Alamo or Sixt; it's peer to peer car rental, and it's probably 60+% of the non-airport car rental business in the US.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
Polling suggests you’re closer to the truth, and that something around a quarter to a third of all women have experiences sexual assault. There are, of course, no reliable figures for the number of men who say they are perpetrators.
I readily admit the extent of the problem wasn’t something I was really aware of until the MeToo movement in 2017. Which then unfortunately became very much a party political issue in the US.
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
In the first half of the season, each team plays almost every other team exactly once and has approximately half its games at home.
I can't see how the strength of schedule argument works on half a season.
Simples. Away trips. Liverpool to Everton, Bournemouth, Fulham, Brentford, Manchester City, Brighton, Villa, Forest and Chelsea. Their lead is quite thin considering the advantage of momentum built so far on awkward opponents home bringing confidence of wins strung together. Have we not already seen so many sides looking so superb on the first half of fixtures and their football fall apart when the pressure builds and draws mount up? There is absolutely no way anyone can know the psychology of how this Liverpool squad reacts to taking just 1 point from 9, 2 from 12. Another huge danger to Liverpool’s title hopes is Mo Salah. His percentage involvements in Liverpool goals so far is phenomenal, but the dangers of this easily overlooked with wins flowing. It shouldn’t be seen as only danger of him spending months in treatment room, he could remain fit, but his form for goal involvements dry up for undroppable player right till season end.
The question needs to be if not LFC then who? This reminds me of the year Leicester won it. Put simply. No one else is in any kind of title winning form.
Man City can still overhaul Liverpool from here imo. They would be my tip, the know how to get over line when field compacts up. It’s psychology that wins titles, not football. Anyone who wants to scoff, we have so often seen sides going well’s form fall apart, haven’t we, so how well they genuinely were playing becomes a distant memory.
Liverpools good first half of season means they have a lot of cup football to squeeze in too, almost like a poisoned chalice, where arguably flopping out CL in last 8 helped Man C in last seasons Prem run in. In old CL, topping group helped with knock out fixtures, not with this new format maybe.
Still far too many ifs and buts about this premiership title race.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
I would like it to be true certainly. I would certainly hope it is less than 10%. I am not aware of any research on the subject however
There's an old saying that 10% of people will always shoplift, 10% of people will never shoplift, and 80% will shoplift if the circumstances are right.
There's a huge amount of evidence that, when people think they are protected, then they will act out.
Rochedale is an example of where a combination of (1) "concern for community relations" became code for ignoring the behaviour of groups, and (2) the care system being totally broken, with many young women being subject to terrible sexual assault, and this going essentially ignore by the authorities.
The combination of these allowed a group of men to prey on young women without fear of consequence.
The same is true, of course, of Catholic priests - where abuse of nuns and of children was covered up by the church and authorities for decades.
It turns out that if you remove "consequences" of any sort, then many otherwise moral people will act in awful ways,
Which is why those who chose to ignore were responsible for a major escalation of the crime.
Rotherham should have seen dozens of plods, social workers and council officials jailed as enablers.
Is it only me, or are Liverpool fans everywhere unaware of the assistance they have got from the first half of the fixtures, and counting their mythical cormorants before they’ve hatched?
They still have to play the Mighty Reds at the City Ground. And as we tonked them at Anfield...
It’s funny how some sides just seem to become a bogey side for someone else. Maybe it’s something analytical like paper rock stone. Or maybe it’s just random. 🙂
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
As viewcode gave it a like, I take it as green light to watch and report back.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed? La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable. Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second. Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10. Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it. Hope this helps 🙂
If you haven't read the Conclave book, how do you know the twists are the same?
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
As viewcode gave it a like, I take it as green light to watch and report back.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed? La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable. Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second. Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10. Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it. Hope this helps 🙂
If you haven't read the Conclave book, how do you know the twists are the same?
It’s a more than reasonable assumption, given the plotting. And the lack of imagination that goes into a lot of movie making.
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
As viewcode gave it a like, I take it as green light to watch and report back.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed? La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable. Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second. Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10. Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it. Hope this helps 🙂
If you haven't read the Conclave book, how do you know the twists are the same?
It’s a more than reasonable assumption, given the plotting. And the lack of imagination that goes into a lot of movie making.
Some adaptations of books can be truly frustrating. I suspect some people who haven’t read sweet pea are enjoying the TV series, but if you have read the book the series is unwatchable, as it’s like your favourite psychopath movie been remade for ceebeebies.
Sometimes people adapting a book clearly don’t understand the book at all, omitting fundamental things. Jackson’s Lord of Ring films abysmal adaptation of a book too imo. Scouring of shire replaced by blending back in shire hardly been missed is quite fundamental, missing whole point of book of where progress comes from - go on adventure come back changed.
Ditto Stan the mans A Clockwork Orange misses important bits.
So whenever they try to sell film “based on John Another’s Best Seller” our reaction must be, maybe it’s not actually what the book was about or very good tie in at all.
The good news here is that Andrew Marr is generally wrong.
The bad news is that in this case, I think he is right. The narrative is being built that "Nothing can be done. The rules say we must not fix the problems."
Which then neatly pivots into "We must set fire to the rule book".
As I've long said on housing - get used to planning proper development *now*. Before the FuckTheGreenBelt Party wins enough support.
You have two options - find some ways to fix the problems in a liberal democratic fashion. Or someone else will have a go.
Added to which, and as we’ve been discussing, plenty of people in authority are depraved, or too cowardly to take action against the depraved.
Why would millions doubt that the system is hugely weighted against them?
I’ve seen hundreds of beavers over Xmas, only laughed once, at the ones in high vis jackets and surveying equipment. Would you like some more reviews of my festive movie catchup?
As viewcode gave it a like, I take it as green light to watch and report back.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed? La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable. Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second. Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10. Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it. Hope this helps 🙂
Despite my teenage Fellini/Almodovar/Fassbinder jag, I do have middlebrow tastes and the films I am looking forward to in 2024 are "Captain America: Brave New World" and "Mission Impossible: subtitle". I assume there is something nice I will like, but I haven't got an internal must-see list. In the odd periods where I was WFH during Covid and the cinemas were open I saw "The Courier" and "Copshop" and enjoyed both, but since then lack of health and time have curtailed my cinemagoing other than the re-release of Star Treks I & II a few years ago, and the more recent rereleases of "Tenet" and "Blade Runner 2049", both of which I really enjoyed, but other than that I haven't seen much recently. We will see what happens, no doubt.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
I would like it to be true certainly. I would certainly hope it is less than 10%. I am not aware of any research on the subject however
There's an old saying that 10% of people will always shoplift, 10% of people will never shoplift, and 80% will shoplift if the circumstances are right.
There's a huge amount of evidence that, when people think they are protected, then they will act out.
Rochedale is an example of where a combination of (1) "concern for community relations" became code for ignoring the behaviour of groups, and (2) the care system being totally broken, with many young women being subject to terrible sexual assault, and this going essentially ignore by the authorities.
The combination of these allowed a group of men to prey on young women without fear of consequence.
The same is true, of course, of Catholic priests - where abuse of nuns and of children was covered up by the church and authorities for decades.
It turns out that if you remove "consequences" of any sort, then many otherwise moral people will act in awful ways,
People are as good as they want to be and as bad as they can be. Laws are really important.
Another thrilling T20 match between the Kiwis and Sri Lanka, this time in Nelson. Once again the side winning the toss chose to bowl and once again it was the wrong decision - all three matches.
Sri Lanka won by seven runs having lost by eight last Saturday and forty five on Monday. Mitchell hit four sixes in a row but then holed out to Binura on the boundary. Sri Lanka had previously hit 75 in four overs with Perera scoring the only century in the series.
A full house at the Saxton Oval - named after one John Waring Saxton who settled in Nelson in 1842, two years after the Waitangi Treaty which remains a source of contention to this day.
The Kiwis are a young side and could be a serious force in the 2026 T20 World Cup.
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
Interestingly in that story (and I think far from uniquely), the daughter accused by father and mother of abuse.
The figures for all abuse (not just sexual) in this country are shocking. A few years back I made the argument that, unless we live like a hermit, we will know someone who has suffered abuse, perhaps even within the last year. Others argued that that was ridiculous.
"Approximately one in five (20.5%) people aged 16 years and over (9.9 million) had experienced domestic abuse since the age of 16 years.
An estimated 4.8% of people aged 16 years and over (6.6% of women and 3.0% of men) experienced domestic abuse in the last year. This equates to an estimated 2.3 million adults (1.6 million women and 712,000 men)."
Note also that about a third of the people being abused (where abuse is of all types) are male.
The plain fact is that we have far too much violence in society; men - and women - who think that raping, hitting or generally abusing other people is acceptable behaviour.
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
Interestingly in that story (and I think far from uniquely), the daughter accused by father and mother of abuse.
I guessed it was possibly about Muslims from the "fox13seattle", if that means "Fox News". My take was that they would be "Daily Mail"-ing it; that is, perhaps boost a story about the "other", framed to place them at the head of their mob of finger-pointing readers.
But I don't see the father and mother accusing the daughter of abuse - did you mean it that way round?
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
Interestingly in that story (and I think far from uniquely), the daughter accused by father and mother of abuse.
I guessed it was possibly about Muslims from the "fox13seattle", if that means "Fox News". My take was that they would be "Daily Mail"-ing it; that is, perhaps boost a story about the "other", framed to place them at the head of their mob of finger-pointing readers.
But I don't see the father and mother accusing the daughter of abuse - did you mean it that way round?
I did not, apols. A mistake that puts a different slant on what I wrote.
To be clear: the girl accused both her father and mother of abuse.
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
Interestingly in that story (and I think far from uniquely), the daughter accused by father and mother of abuse.
I guessed it was possibly about Muslims from the "fox13seattle", if that means "Fox News". My take was that they would be "Daily Mail"-ing it; that is, perhaps boost a story about the "other", framed to place them at the head of their mob of finger-pointing readers.
But I don't see the father and mother accusing the daughter of abuse - did you mean it that way round?
I did not, apols. A mistake that puts a different slant on what I wrote.
To be clear: the girl accused both her father and mother of abuse.
Thanks - it was the more likely interpretation, but on this subject the extra check helped, I thought.
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
Interestingly in that story (and I think far from uniquely), the daughter accused by father and mother of abuse.
I guessed it was possibly about Muslims from the "fox13seattle", if that means "Fox News". My take was that they would be "Daily Mail"-ing it; that is, perhaps boost a story about the "other", framed to place them at the head of their mob of finger-pointing readers.
But I don't see the father and mother accusing the daughter of abuse - did you mean it that way round?
I did not, apols. A mistake that puts a different slant on what I wrote.
To be clear: the girl accused both her father and mother of abuse.
As a further comment, I have seen reports where the mother has kept silent or been complicit - perhaps a more frequent scenario there is where there is a new relationship or step-parent and children from a previous relationship.
In "send them to another country for forced marriage" circumstances, which has occurred in the cases of both sexes *, the women (especially matriarchs) may have a role as "cultural guardians" - which can condition behaviour.
I'm not aware enough of numbers to give an informed assessment.
* Does anyone have stats on forced marriage? I would think victims are majority or overwhelmingly female, however men-as-victims has tended to be a bit of a blind spot for feminists, and imo they have not really resolved the ideological tension between 'women are the victims' and 'equal justice for victims'. Though it's fair to point out that perpetrators are majority or overwhelmingly male.
They’ve got problems there. No locks on the canal so it’s a real bugger to seal a breach. They’ve been trying with stop planks but it doesn’t look as though they’re working very well.
As to their legal duties, I haven’t checked the original act but it would usually include a statutory right of navigation for licensed craft.* If so, they are probably liable for any loss or damage incurred by their negligence or fault to any boat on the canal, because they would have failed in that duty, but proving it and enforcing it under provisions 300 years old may be tricky.
Thinking of the surrounding area, they will definitely be liable as they have a duty to maintain the canal.
*One of the reasons it was dead easy to close the Derby Canal is it didn’t have that right, so they just padlocked the gates and then said there had been no traffic on it.
They’ve got problems there. No locks on the canal so it’s a real bugger to seal a breach. They’ve been trying with stop planks but it doesn’t look as though they’re working very well.
As to their legal duties, I haven’t checked the original act but it would usually include a statutory right of navigation for licensed craft.* If so, they are probably liable for any loss or damage incurred by their negligence or fault to any boat on the canal, because they would have failed in that duty, but proving it and enforcing it under provisions 300 years old may be tricky.
Thinking of the surrounding area, they will definitely be liable as they have a duty to maintain the canal.
*One of the reasons it was dead easy to close the Derby Canal is it didn’t have that right, so they just padlocked the gates and then said there had been no traffic on it.
Looking at where it happened on the map and the drone footage, it seems the River Bollin burst its banks and put extra pressure on the upstream side of the embankment, though the breach has occurred away from the culvert/bridge that carries the river through the embankment. The 1:25,000 map shows a stream leading away from the canal at that point, so my WAG would be that there's a sluice in the canal there, and it failed at that sluice.
Wonderful way to start the day, with numerous Malwarebytes alerts when I come to pb.com (and some other places), from either Firefox or Edge.
Reads: Website blocked due to phishing.
Outbound from firefox/edge.exe.
Domain is us.v-cdn.net, but no idea what that is.
Going to see if I can resolve this but scans are showing nothing. Not sure if it's something at my end or something here. I think it might be the latter.
Edited extra bit: experimenting it seems to just be this thread/article/comments section, a few others don't trigger anything.
Fortunately, the girl survived, and is getting protection: "A Lacey father and mother are charged with attempted murder, attempted kidnapping and assault after being accused of trying to kill their teen daughter in what the victim described as a possible honor killing.
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
Interestingly in that story (and I think far from uniquely), the daughter accused by father and mother of abuse.
I guessed it was possibly about Muslims from the "fox13seattle", if that means "Fox News". My take was that they would be "Daily Mail"-ing it; that is, perhaps boost a story about the "other", framed to place them at the head of their mob of finger-pointing readers.
But I don't see the father and mother accusing the daughter of abuse - did you mean it that way round?
I did not, apols. A mistake that puts a different slant on what I wrote.
To be clear: the girl accused both her father and mother of abuse.
As a further comment, I have seen reports where the mother has kept silent or been complicit - perhaps a more frequent scenario there is where there is a new relationship or step-parent and children from a previous relationship.
In "send them to another country for forced marriage" circumstances, which has occurred in the cases of both sexes *, the women (especially matriarchs) may have a role as "cultural guardians" - which can condition behaviour.
I'm not aware enough of numbers to give an informed assessment.
* Does anyone have stats on forced marriage? I would think victims are majority or overwhelmingly female, however men-as-victims has tended to be a bit of a blind spot for feminists, and imo they have not really resolved the ideological tension between 'women are the victims' and 'equal justice for victims'. Though it's fair to point out that perpetrators are majority or overwhelmingly male.
As a further aside, and without wishing to ignore the potentially fatal attack or the planned forced marriage, one was also struck by, in that story but also in the latest news column by its side, and below:-
the boyfriend's family had taken out an injunction so this attack did not come out of the blue
the parents had been stopped "by security" which implies the school was no stranger to violence
Latest news includes a man shot in his stomach
A teenager shot dead on new year's eve
A road rage gun incident
A boy shot dead in WA
A man shot in Renton
Ten people stabbed in Chinatown
A drunk driver killed two schoolchildren
6 stabbings, 10 victims in Seattle's recent attacks
They’ve got problems there. No locks on the canal so it’s a real bugger to seal a breach. They’ve been trying with stop planks but it doesn’t look as though they’re working very well.
As to their legal duties, I haven’t checked the original act but it would usually include a statutory right of navigation for licensed craft.* If so, they are probably liable for any loss or damage incurred by their negligence or fault to any boat on the canal, because they would have failed in that duty, but proving it and enforcing it under provisions 300 years old may be tricky.
Thinking of the surrounding area, they will definitely be liable as they have a duty to maintain the canal.
*One of the reasons it was dead easy to close the Derby Canal is it didn’t have that right, so they just padlocked the gates and then said there had been no traffic on it.
With the planned cuts in government grant over the next decade, the CRT is likely to run into similar underinvestment problems.
For all the deserved praise of how well S Korea resisted what was a blatant coup attempt, the country is sharply divided politically, in a manner disturbingly reminiscent of the US.
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=389430 When former President Park Geun-hye was embroiled in a political crisis due to an influence-peddling scandal, which ultimately led to her impeachment by the National Assembly on Dec. 9, 2016, public opinion turned sharply against her leadership. Voters were widely unified in their disapproval, and her approval ratings plummeted to as low as 4 percent in some polls.
President Yoon Suk Yeol has not suffered the same levels of backlash despite his declaration of martial law, a far more serious violation of the law and the Constitution in the eyes of many. In major surveys, his approval rating never dropped below the 10 percent mark and it is now bouncing back to as high as over 30 percent after his impeachment by the National Assembly.
The Korea Times surveyed 1,000 people through Hankook Research and found that extreme political polarization may be one of the reasons.
When asked whether the Constitutional Court should uphold the impeachment motion against Yoon, 98 percent of supporters of the opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) said the court should remove the president by upholding the impeachment, while 85 percent of supporters of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) said the court should dismiss it. ..
I’m not one to jump on the anti Musk bandwagon, certainly don’t have Musk Derangement Syndrome, but here he is bang wrong. Robinson is inside, quite rightly, and should remain inside and serve his sentence.
I’m not one to jump on the anti Musk bandwagon, certainly don’t have Musk Derangement Syndrome, but here he is bang wrong. Robinson is inside, quite rightly, and should remain inside and serve his sentence.
Musk is making an error here.
"Musk Derangement Syndrome" can equally mean the weird nerds who defend Musk from anything (I don't put you in that category...)
This is just part of a pattern in what Musk is saying. And it's not a good reflection on him, and terrible for society when people believe what he says. And if you read below the thread, you can see plenty of people believing it.
They’ve got problems there. No locks on the canal so it’s a real bugger to seal a breach. They’ve been trying with stop planks but it doesn’t look as though they’re working very well.
As to their legal duties, I haven’t checked the original act but it would usually include a statutory right of navigation for licensed craft.* If so, they are probably liable for any loss or damage incurred by their negligence or fault to any boat on the canal, because they would have failed in that duty, but proving it and enforcing it under provisions 300 years old may be tricky.
Thinking of the surrounding area, they will definitely be liable as they have a duty to maintain the canal.
*One of the reasons it was dead easy to close the Derby Canal is it didn’t have that right, so they just padlocked the gates and then said there had been no traffic on it.
A problem is that those responsible public bodies can be suborned or intimidated.
There was a landslip on a Lake District lane used as a route for active travel and tourism, where the Water Company United Utilities had a duty to maintain under a Victorian Act which let them build the dam. They closed it for years, and then the County Council proposed permanent closure.
The Council's complacent claim was that a "suitable alternative" for local people and horses / walkers / wheelers / cyclists was several miles a route on the A591 road past Thirlmere, identified in national newspapers as one of the 'top UK driving roads', i.e., a route on a public road for hoons and morons in Audis and BMWs etc who want to go racing. And also of course the normal dozy average drivers at the wheel who are functionally asleep (at least who aren't on phones, drink or drugs). It already has significant numbers of KSIs.
It's a form of regulatory capture, rather than the public body defending the interests of the public. And they only ever back down when there is a vociferous local campaign willing to go as far as Judicial Review, and not all areas have groups able to mount these multiple times.
And since our Police Services have not recovered from their organisational disembowelling by David Cameron and Theresa May, especially traffic police who were also cut by the previous Labour administration, suitable enforcement would never be applied.
Men rape you and beat you up. What possible reason is there to like them?
Sorry will disagree there, some men are a problem. I would hope the vast majority of them would find crimes of rape whether women or children as repugnant as I do. I think its a mistake to demonise men for it just as it would be to claim all black men are muggers when its clearly a small proportion of them.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
How do you know it's a small proportion? Or are you saying what you would like to be true?
I would like it to be true certainly. I would certainly hope it is less than 10%. I am not aware of any research on the subject however
"Thirty-four percent reported some proclivity to rape or force sex. Participants who reported both proclivities indicated higher rape myth acceptance, offered more justifications for the increasing use of violence against women, were lower in rape empathy, held more gender stereotyped attitudes toward women, and accepted interpersonal violence more than those who reported no proclivities."
Someone else shared a better piece of research with a larger sample, but I couldn't find it again right now. Like I said earlier, the percentages are terrifyingly high. Rapists are not as aberrant as we would like them to be.
Comments
I can't see how the strength of schedule argument works on half a season.
Prosecutors say the Timberline High School student was attacked by her parents outside the school after she tried to escape the family."
source: https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/lacey-possible-attempted-honor-killing
Suggestion: Try guessing the rest of the story before you read it, then tell us how close you came. (For what it's worth, I got the essentials right when I heard the first part of the story.)
That's not me condoning Musk's mischief-making.
I see Liz has made a documentary with The Wall Street Journal called 'The Prime Minister vs. The Blob' - Interesting that they have picked up on the blob nomenclature. I said that Truss had made a mistake calling it 'the deep state' in America and should have called it 'the blob', and this feels like a success for that strategy.
https://www.wsj.com/video/wsj-opinion-the-prime-minister-vs-the-blob-liz-trusss-44-days-in-office/8FCADD90-7A85-4A70-88ED-EBC354D80CAD#
Simple fact is the common thread about industrial level sexual abuse of minors is that the perpetrators are seen as beyond questioning either through status eg the church scandals being an example, would throw into doubt policies eg the islington cases, or community relations eg rotherham. Those three and the view that the victims are often not seen to matter
Have we not already seen so many sides looking so superb on the first half of fixtures and their football fall apart when the pressure builds and draws mount up? There is absolutely no way anyone can know the psychology of how this Liverpool squad reacts to taking just 1 point from 9, 2 from 12.
Another huge danger to Liverpool’s title hopes is Mo Salah. His percentage involvements in Liverpool goals so far is phenomenal, but the dangers of this easily overlooked with wins flowing. It shouldn’t be seen as only danger of him spending months in treatment room, he could remain fit, but his form for goal involvements dry up for undroppable player right till season end.
What possible reason is there to like them?
This reminds me of the year Leicester won it.
Put simply. No one else is in any kind of title winning form.
However having said that its a lot like northern ireland, most people on either side weren't terrorists but weren't willing to call it out. Same is true of men....I think we all know a man who we wince at their attitude to women but don't call it out and we need to start doing so.
In some ways, she's learned from her time out of office.
Anora? I didn’t like it. Oddly, it’s 100% more realistic than Pretty Woman, but 100% less likeable. How long can they get away with putting “comedy” in the synopsis before being jailed?
La Chimera. Didn’t like it. I do get it: upside down was sensory underground; when the old lady said he’d find his girlfriend because he can find everything, he did. Ditto Anora - it was just too cold for a comedy. Without anyone to like other than the victims, it was, overall, unlikable.
Dune 1. Didn’t like it. Appreciate the source predates Star Wars, but it’s still Star Wars, emperors, villains who offer little else but villainy, the force, endless battles. It’s all been done to death, without a spark of originality it’s just plain boring. An important problem is casting of Timothy Wonka, just the same in all his films - cross between Bambi and a chimney sweeps brush, with acting range of neither. Not bothering with the second.
Civil War. Oh boy - can I give something 0/10. Muddled and pointless sixth form level film making - the only moment of excitement was when Jess is about to be executed in the head and, as porn violence we will watch it. Reminded me of those $50 budget films trying to make you believe Godzilla is jumping up and down on the subway they are hiding in. 0/10.
Conclave. Watched it day it came out on digital release. It’s okay. I hadn’t read the book so didn’t know the twists coming, if you have read the book, don’t bother with this there’s nothing else there, though it’s directed and acted very well and went at a good pace. But if you don’t like pat Hollywood endings, and hate woke, and a woke pat Hollywood ending will make you vomit, don’t go near it.
Hope this helps 🙂
It's also a way for people to rent cool cars.
Leaving 2nd, 5th, 11th, 13th to 15th and 17th to 20th played.
Easier, sure, but some of those high flyers may not sustain their first halves. And how big is home advantage these days anyway?
Your other points are well taken, but strength of schedule is not a great point.
There's a huge amount of evidence that, when people think they are protected, then they will act out.
Rochedale is an example of where a combination of (1) "concern for community relations" became code for ignoring the behaviour of groups, and (2) the care system being totally broken, with many young women being subject to terrible sexual assault, and this going essentially ignore by the authorities.
The combination of these allowed a group of men to prey on young women without fear of consequence.
The same is true, of course, of Catholic priests - where abuse of nuns and of children was covered up by the church and authorities for decades.
It turns out that if you remove "consequences" of any sort, then many otherwise moral people will act in awful ways,
There are, of course, no reliable figures for the number of men who say they are perpetrators.
I readily admit the extent of the problem wasn’t something I was really aware of until the MeToo movement in 2017. Which then unfortunately became very much a party political issue in the US.
Liverpools good first half of season means they have a lot of cup football to squeeze in too, almost like a poisoned chalice, where arguably flopping out CL in last 8 helped Man C in last seasons Prem run in. In old CL, topping group helped with knock out fixtures, not with this new format maybe.
Still far too many ifs and buts about this premiership title race.
Rotherham should have seen dozens of plods, social workers and council officials jailed as enablers.
That truly adds a twist to my argued position.
And the lack of imagination that goes into a lot of movie making.
Sometimes people adapting a book clearly don’t understand the book at all, omitting fundamental things. Jackson’s Lord of Ring films abysmal adaptation of a book too imo. Scouring of shire replaced by blending back in shire hardly been missed is quite fundamental, missing whole point of book of where progress comes from - go on adventure come back changed.
Ditto Stan the mans A Clockwork Orange misses important bits.
So whenever they try to sell film “based on John Another’s Best Seller” our reaction must be, maybe it’s not actually what the book was about or very good tie in at all.
Why would millions doubt that the system is hugely weighted against them?
"Why Rotherham happened
A story of catastrophic elite failure
Louise Perry"
https://www.louiseperry.co.uk/p/why-rotherham-happened
Despite my teenage Fellini/Almodovar/Fassbinder jag, I do have middlebrow tastes and the films I am looking forward to in 2024 are "Captain America: Brave New World" and "Mission Impossible: subtitle". I assume there is something nice I will like, but I haven't got an internal must-see list. In the odd periods where I was WFH during Covid and the cinemas were open I saw "The Courier" and "Copshop" and enjoyed both, but since then lack of health and time have curtailed my cinemagoing other than the re-release of Star Treks I & II a few years ago, and the more recent rereleases of "Tenet" and "Blade Runner 2049", both of which I really enjoyed, but other than that I haven't seen much recently. We will see what happens, no doubt.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y7zz99jlxo
Another thrilling T20 match between the Kiwis and Sri Lanka, this time in Nelson. Once again the side winning the toss chose to bowl and once again it was the wrong decision - all three matches.
Sri Lanka won by seven runs having lost by eight last Saturday and forty five on Monday. Mitchell hit four sixes in a row but then holed out to Binura on the boundary. Sri Lanka had previously hit 75 in four overs with Perera scoring the only century in the series.
A full house at the Saxton Oval - named after one John Waring Saxton who settled in Nelson in 1842, two years after the Waitangi Treaty which remains a source of contention to this day.
The Kiwis are a young side and could be a serious force in the 2026 T20 World Cup.
Therefor he is in possession of notta-lotta credibility.
He also seems to be keen to jump to a conclusion before having much information.
There's not even any debris visible.
Here are the latest official figures:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/domesticabuseinenglandandwalesoverview/november2024
"Approximately one in five (20.5%) people aged 16 years and over (9.9 million) had experienced domestic abuse since the age of 16 years.
An estimated 4.8% of people aged 16 years and over (6.6% of women and 3.0% of men) experienced domestic abuse in the last year. This equates to an estimated 2.3 million adults (1.6 million women and 712,000 men)."
Note also that about a third of the people being abused (where abuse is of all types) are male.
The plain fact is that we have far too much violence in society; men - and women - who think that raping, hitting or generally abusing other people is acceptable behaviour.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/ce90729r30po
And a video by what it was like to be on a canal boat as the canal drains (he provided the drone shots used by the BBC above).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yP5-IzWTQ44
But I don't see the father and mother accusing the daughter of abuse - did you mean it that way round?
https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1874432134343249970
To be clear: the girl accused both her father and mother of abuse.
Peel Holdings buy 'underexploited' assets and develop them. If it doesn't make money, they will not be kind unless there are specific legal duties.
They are very secretive. I wonder what the impact of the planning changes on them will be?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peel_Group
In "send them to another country for forced marriage" circumstances, which has occurred in the cases of both sexes *, the women (especially matriarchs) may have a role as "cultural guardians" - which can condition behaviour.
I'm not aware enough of numbers to give an informed assessment.
* Does anyone have stats on forced marriage? I would think victims are majority or overwhelmingly female, however men-as-victims has tended to be a bit of a blind spot for feminists, and imo they have not really resolved the ideological tension between 'women are the victims' and 'equal justice for victims'. Though it's fair to point out that perpetrators are majority or overwhelmingly male.
As to their legal duties, I haven’t checked the original act but it would usually include a statutory right of navigation for licensed craft.* If so, they are probably liable for any loss or damage incurred by their negligence or fault to any boat on the canal, because they would have failed in that duty, but proving it and enforcing it under provisions 300 years old may be tricky.
Thinking of the surrounding area, they will definitely be liable as they have a duty to maintain the canal.
*One of the reasons it was dead easy to close the Derby Canal is it didn’t have that right, so they just padlocked the gates and then said there had been no traffic on it.
"Free Tommy Robinson!
@TRobinsonNewEra"
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1874625502323134570
Wonderful way to start the day, with numerous Malwarebytes alerts when I come to pb.com (and some other places), from either Firefox or Edge.
Reads: Website blocked due to phishing.
Outbound from firefox/edge.exe.
Domain is us.v-cdn.net, but no idea what that is.
Going to see if I can resolve this but scans are showing nothing. Not sure if it's something at my end or something here. I think it might be the latter.
Edited extra bit: experimenting it seems to just be this thread/article/comments section, a few others don't trigger anything.
And (less consistently) profile pages of others. But I think it's only PB stuff. Going to log out for a bit and see if anywhere else triggers this.
[For reference, even reloading the comments here activate the phishing blocked alert].
If so, I would prefer to pay.
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=389430
When former President Park Geun-hye was embroiled in a political crisis due to an influence-peddling scandal, which ultimately led to her impeachment by the National Assembly on Dec. 9, 2016, public opinion turned sharply against her leadership. Voters were widely unified in their disapproval, and her approval ratings plummeted to as low as 4 percent in some polls.
President Yoon Suk Yeol has not suffered the same levels of backlash despite his declaration of martial law, a far more serious violation of the law and the Constitution in the eyes of many. In major surveys, his approval rating never dropped below the 10 percent mark and it is now bouncing back to as high as over 30 percent after his impeachment by the National Assembly.
The Korea Times surveyed 1,000 people through Hankook Research and found that extreme political polarization may be one of the reasons.
When asked whether the Constitutional Court should uphold the impeachment motion against Yoon, 98 percent of supporters of the opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) said the court should remove the president by upholding the impeachment, while 85 percent of supporters of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) said the court should dismiss it. ..
"Cricketers should stand up to Taliban’s gender apartheid"
The article may be of interest to @TheScreamingEagles and @Cyclefree
https://x.com/cdp1882/status/1874597876900217137?s=61
NEW THREAD
Musk is making an error here.
This is just part of a pattern in what Musk is saying. And it's not a good reflection on him, and terrible for society when people believe what he says. And if you read below the thread, you can see plenty of people believing it.
There was a landslip on a Lake District lane used as a route for active travel and tourism, where the Water Company United Utilities had a duty to maintain under a Victorian Act which let them build the dam. They closed it for years, and then the County Council proposed permanent closure.
The Council's complacent claim was that a "suitable alternative" for local people and horses / walkers / wheelers / cyclists was several miles a route on the A591 road past Thirlmere, identified in national newspapers as one of the 'top UK driving roads', i.e., a route on a public road for hoons and morons in Audis and BMWs etc who want to go racing. And also of course the normal dozy average drivers at the wheel who are functionally asleep (at least who aren't on phones, drink or drugs). It already has significant numbers of KSIs.
It's a form of regulatory capture, rather than the public body defending the interests of the public. And they only ever back down when there is a vociferous local campaign willing to go as far as Judicial Review, and not all areas have groups able to mount these multiple times.
https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-uk-slams-council-assertion-busy-road-safe-305017
And since our Police Services have not recovered from their organisational disembowelling by David Cameron and Theresa May, especially traffic police who were also cut by the previous Labour administration, suitable enforcement would never be applied.
"Thirty-four percent reported some proclivity to rape or force sex. Participants who reported both proclivities indicated higher rape myth acceptance, offered more justifications for the increasing use of violence against women, were lower in rape empathy, held more gender stereotyped attitudes toward women, and accepted interpersonal violence more than those who reported no proclivities."
Someone else shared a better piece of research with a larger sample, but I couldn't find it again right now. Like I said earlier, the percentages are terrifyingly high. Rapists are not as aberrant as we would like them to be.