Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Away from the IndyRef – today’s Populus poll sees UKIP up 4

1246

Comments

  • Options
    PAWPAW Posts: 1,074
    There needs to be a clear out in the Crown Prosecution Service as well. A colleague of mine
    working in Birmingham was attacked by an asian gang while walking home on the main road though Small Heath. He was knocked to the ground and punched and kicked. By chance a police car was near, and some of his attackers were arrested. My friend was in his late forties, grey hair, five foot four, inoffensive and very unfit. The CPS declined to prosecute on the grounds he "might" have attacked the gang. It is clear that the CPS is part of the cause of the problem that asians have become untouchable.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    What has never been tried is actually sacking people who are responsible for failing to take action.

    Quite a number of people were sacked in the aftermath of the Baby P scandal (not just Sharon Shoesmith).
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Smarmeron said:

    @Flightpath
    "Interestingly no one is demanding a return of parliament for what is clearly an issue that is of vital importance to our society. "
    Isn't there supposed to be an inquiry into politicians involved in similar crimes?
    When they find a suitable judge that is.

    And what happens if they investigate judges, who is going to judge a judge?
    It seems everyone has to watch everyone:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIPmu6bYZOs
  • Options
    FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    PAW said:

    There needs to be a clear out in the Crown Prosecution Service as well. A colleague of mine
    working in Birmingham was attacked by an asian gang while walking home on the main road though Small Heath. He was knocked to the ground and punched and kicked. By chance a police car was near, and some of his attackers were arrested. My friend was in his late forties, grey hair, five foot four, inoffensive and very unfit. The CPS declined to prosecute on the grounds he "might" have attacked the gang. It is clear that the CPS is part of the cause of the problem that asians have become untouchable.

    As Enoch Powell pointed out the race relations act etc. ensure the indigenous people are now second class citizens in their own country.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Speedy said:

    Another for Socrates that shows the police might have helped the perpetrators more actively (from page 36 of the report):

    "5.9 In two of the cases we read, fathers tracked down their daughters and tried to
    remove them from houses where they were being abused, only to be arrested
    themselves when police were called to the scene. In a small number of cases (which
    have already received media attention) the victims were arrested for offences such
    as breach of the peace or being drunk and disorderly, with no action taken against
    the perpetrators of rape and sexual assault against children."

    In everyone of the cases the police will have the names and numbers of the officers who made those decisions. So what are South Yorks Police doing about it, probably bugger all. So how about the IPCC? Some of those coppers could now be in senior positions, in fact the chances are that they will be, what is the impact of that on honest disclosure and investigation?
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    What has never been tried is actually sacking people who are responsible for failing to take action.

    Not sacking.

    Jailing, and en masse. That would focus a few minds.

    (Same rule should be applied to the banking industry, but that's another argument).
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited August 2014
    Neil said:

    What has never been tried is actually sacking people who are responsible for failing to take action.

    Quite a number of people were sacked in the aftermath of the Baby P scandal (not just Sharon Shoesmith).
    I'll take your word for it if you'll provide me with a source, don't remember hearing of a single copper disciplined let alone sacked for that fiasco.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    What has never been tried is actually sacking people who are responsible for failing to take action.

    Quite a number of people were sacked in the aftermath of the Baby P scandal (not just Sharon Shoesmith).
    I'll take your word for it if you'll provide me with a source.
    www.google.co.uk

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Ah the good old community charge. I vaguely remember people who looked in need of a wash being angry about it on the box.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited August 2014

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    Mr. Owls,

    Welcome back! I hope your operation, or do we have to say procedure these days,
    went OK are you are recovering nicely.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    New report: more than 1,400 children may have been groomed while in care of Rotherham council between 1997 and 2013

    Still, we shouldn't be too critical of Rotherham Council. At least they were zealous in ensuring children were not fostered by UKIP members.
    kipper parents = bad

    Asian sex gangs abusing children = mhhh move along, nothing to see.

    As I said earlier, no resignations - sack the guilty and no nice payoffs.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,321

    Speedy said:

    Another for Socrates that shows the police might have helped the perpetrators more actively (from page 36 of the report):

    "5.9 In two of the cases we read, fathers tracked down their daughters and tried to
    remove them from houses where they were being abused, only to be arrested
    themselves when police were called to the scene. In a small number of cases (which
    have already received media attention) the victims were arrested for offences such
    as breach of the peace or being drunk and disorderly, with no action taken against
    the perpetrators of rape and sexual assault against children."

    In everyone of the cases the police will have the names and numbers of the officers who made those decisions. So what are South Yorks Police doing about it, probably bugger all. So how about the IPCC? Some of those coppers could now be in senior positions, in fact the chances are that they will be, what is the impact of that on honest disclosure and investigation?
    It would be richly entertaining - leaving aside for the moment the terrible impact of the crimes - if every member of South Yorkshire police was arrested, bailed for three years for ongoing enquiries, refused access to legal services, denied the chance to have the case heard in a court and at the end of it, the majority of them were told they would not face charges. It could also apply to Thames Valley, West Mercia and West Midlands Police, possibly the Met too (even if the last are not guilty of this, they're almost certainly guilty of something - it's the Met, after all)!

    It might well lead to a slightly more responsible attitude on the part of the police towards the use of bail, for a start...

    On topic, if a teacher behaved as these police officers appear to have done, the very least that would happen to them is to be banned from teaching for life. We are expected to refer any incidents, even any suspicions, of child sex abuse to our superiors and through them, to the police. If we cover up or fail to report such incidents we can ourselves become criminally liable. Indeed, I would expect any teacher who acted as the council in particular have done to get three years in prison.

    I am absolutely astonished that the same standard does not apply to police or council workers. An easy way of preventing disasters like this from going unchecked would be to extend the law to cover them. If they act like this, ban them from office or from public service. If they take a more active role in the coverup, put them in the dock for conspiracy. That way, although it would be rash to say these sort of things would not happen, it would be quick and straightforward to punish those who have, by their silence, colluded in these crimes.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    What has never been tried is actually sacking people who are responsible for failing to take action.

    Quite a number of people were sacked in the aftermath of the Baby P scandal (not just Sharon Shoesmith).
    I'll take your word for it if you'll provide me with a source.
    www.google.co.uk

    www.made.a.claim.and.cant.back.it.up.co.uk
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    Mr. Owls,

    Welcome back! I hope your operation, of do we have to say procedure these days,
    went OK are you are recovering nicely.
    Your right they did keep calling it a procedure.

    Wonder what the heck is wrong about the term operation?
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited August 2014

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2014
    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?

    Well this sums it up (from page 69 of the report):

    "8.2 We were contacted by someone who worked at the Rotherham interchange in the
    early 2000s. He described how the Police refused to intervene when young girls who
    were thought to be victims of CSE were being beaten up and abused by perpetrators.
    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were
    all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited August 2014
    Quincel said:

    AndyJS said:

    A few days ago it emerged that UKIP apparently expect to win 3 to 6 seats.

    The 6 most like in my opinion are Thanet South, Boston, Great Grimsby, Great Yarmouth, Thurrock, Castle Point. (It's possible Rotherham may be one of them in place of Castle Point although I doubt it).

    Where do you think a UKIP majority will come from?

    Polling shows that a lot of UKIP support comes from former non-voters. If (and it's a very big if) they can hold onto them then they can get more votes than expected even if they do only take the sort of proportions of other parties' votes that you suggest. The interaction between voters choosing to stay at home or choosing to vote is crucial in UKIP's dynamics.

    I'm aware of this. The support UKIP is counting on is the flakiest in the electoral spectrum. It's people who CBA to vote. This is why I am so baffled at UKIP's hubris over all the seats in the HoC it's sure to win, and what it will and won't do when the Tories come begging for a coalition.

    These assumptions rely on the idea that people who don't bother voting will, in 2015, break the habit of a lifetime and turn out to vote for the Angry Party, which I can't see happening. As malcolmg might say, ye canna change the laws of physics.
    MikeK said:

    DavidL said:

    We had had a generation of politicians of both parties that had screwed our economy, we had Unions that were completely out of control and we had a class ridden management structure that was spectacularly incompetent.

    There is some evidence that British industry was targeted by the KGB in the 1960s and 1970s. Jack Jones was a Soviet agent, Hugh Scanlon probably was, Scargill took Libyan money in the 1980s so GOK what was happening before then, at least one Soviet defector in a position to know said Wilson was an agent and Michael Foot accepted Soviet money as well.

    If this was indeed the strategy then it was nearly very successful.
    What about Burgess, Maclean, Philby and Blunt? All fat Tories of the Elite establishment that did damage to the UK.

    We - the people - will never trust the Lab/Lib/Con governments again.
    It's a bit of a stretch to describe communists as Tories, Mike!
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:



    AndyJS said:

    A few days ago it emerged that UKIP apparently expect to win 3 to 6 seats.

    The 6 most like in my opinion are Thanet South, Boston, Great Grimsby, Great Yarmouth, Thurrock, Castle Point. (It's possible Rotherham may be one of them in place of Castle Point although I doubt it).

    Where do you think a UKIP majority will come from?

    Let's look at Great Yarmouth for example.

    2010 result:

    Con 18,571
    Lab 14,295
    LD 6,188
    UKIP 2,066

    If we figure half the LDs go to Labour that takes them to about 17,000. UKIP then has to take 15,000 of Con's 18,000 votes to win the seat. That's not going to happen.

    IMO the LDs now are where UKIP will be in 5 years' time (except for the MPs UKIP won't have). People voted LD in 2010 to avoid voting Tory, but got Tory anyway and now repent.

    People who vote UKIP in 2015 will find they get Labour and will go on the same journey post 2015 and before 2020 as LDs have been on since 2010.
    1000 BNP -> UKIP
    700 LD -> UKIP
    2500 LAB -> UKIP
    4000 CON -> UKIP
    3000 DNV -> UKIP


    2000 LD -> LAB
    3000 LAB -> DNV

    4000 CON -> UKIP
    1000 CON -> DNV

    Tough ask for UKIP but that lot takes it to a 3 way marginal.
    I make that nine Ifs.

  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were
    all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."
    They were children.

    Any policeman involved in this, needs to take a long, hard look at themselves, and ask what happened to their sense of decency and values.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    Mr. Owls,

    Welcome back! I hope your operation, or do we have to say procedure these days,
    went OK are you are recovering nicely.
    Thanks

    I had received a holding response from Circle re the FOI on agency staff on my return BTW.

    Asks my permission for a 14 day extension to which I said OK

    Will post the in full with my question when received.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited August 2014
    Speedy said:

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."

    Sounds like the stereotyping of some communities as "chavs" has lead to them being abandoned by the police.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    ydoethur said:



    It would be richly entertaining - leaving aside for the moment the terrible impact of the crimes - if every member of South Yorkshire police was arrested, bailed for three years for ongoing enquiries, refused access to legal services, denied the chance to have the case heard in a court and at the end of it, the majority of them were told they would not face charges. It could also apply to Thames Valley, West Mercia and West Midlands Police, possibly the Met too (even if the last are not guilty of this, they're almost certainly guilty of something - it's the Met, after all)!

    It might well lead to a slightly more responsible attitude on the part of the police towards the use of bail, for a start...

    On topic, if a teacher behaved as these police officers appear to have done, the very least that would happen to them is to be banned from teaching for life. We are expected to refer any incidents, even any suspicions, of child sex abuse to our superiors and through them, to the police. If we cover up or fail to report such incidents we can ourselves become criminally liable. Indeed, I would expect any teacher who acted as the council in particular have done to get three years in prison.

    I am absolutely astonished that the same standard does not apply to police or council workers. An easy way of preventing disasters like this from going unchecked would be to extend the law to cover them. If they act like this, ban them from office or from public service. If they take a more active role in the coverup, put them in the dock for conspiracy. That way, although it would be rash to say these sort of things would not happen, it would be quick and straightforward to punish those who have, by their silence, colluded in these crimes.

    Sounds good to me. The current use of police bail, pending further enquiries, seems to have descended into an abuse of process. The Filth will always try it on (witness their abuse of adult cautions) but a lot of the blame must surely lie at the door of the defence solicitors, whose ignorance and lack of gumption on behalf of their clients seems tantamount to professional incompetence.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,027

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    Mr. Owls,

    Welcome back! I hope your operation, of do we have to say procedure these days,
    went OK are you are recovering nicely.
    Your right they did keep calling it a procedure.

    Wonder what the heck is wrong about the term operation?
    Because it's not just the operation. It includes preparation and follow-up. I think.

    Anyway, whatever it was Mr Owls, welcome back, and I'm glad everything seems to be OK.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Speedy
    Perhaps if there had been a proper inquiry into the force on other matters, they might have rooted out a few of the worst of the "bad police" , and sharpened the idea of the remainder?
    Who knows?
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883
    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949

    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    What has never been tried is actually sacking people who are responsible for failing to take action.

    Quite a number of people were sacked in the aftermath of the Baby P scandal (not just Sharon Shoesmith).
    I'll take your word for it if you'll provide me with a source.
    www.google.co.uk

    www.made.a.claim.and.cant.back.it.up.co.uk
    Entertaining though this is, can I point you both to the below link to quarrel over if it counts as 'quite a number'?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Baby_P#Aftermath
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220
    This line - "girls being picked up from school by taxi drivers to be abused" - struck a chord.

    When I was a teenager my Italian uncle was staying with us and collected me from school one day. He was much younger than my mother and very handsome and when I met him I kissed him on the cheek, our normal family greeting. I remember the following day being asked to see the headmistress when I arrived and being asked who this man was and what my relationship was. A bit heavy handed maybe? No - the teachers saw an underage girl being met by an older man they didn't recognise and were doing what any sensible adult should do.

    Why weren't teachers at these childrens' schools raising questions about them being picked up by adults in cars? Or were they and being ignored? These children were not in a desert. They were surrounded by adults who should have acted like adults and been responsible for the children around them.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220

    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were
    all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."
    They were children.

    Any policeman involved in this, needs to take a long, hard look at themselves, and ask what happened to their sense of decency and values.
    Quite. Well said.

    Someone who thinks an abused girl or woman is not worthy of police protection is not fit to be a police office, IMO.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,994
    Mr. Owls, hope you're in good health.

    Mr. Dickson, a slightly unfair comment. My bets generally this year have been ok, but most winners with Ladbrokes, so that account's growing and Betfair's a bit flat.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,321
    edited August 2014
    Cyclefree said:

    This line - "girls being picked up from school by taxi drivers to be abused" - struck a chord.

    When I was a teenager my Italian uncle was staying with us and collected me from school one day. He was much younger than my mother and very handsome and when I met him I kissed him on the cheek, our normal family greeting. I remember the following day being asked to see the headmistress when I arrived and being asked who this man was and what my relationship was. A bit heavy handed maybe? No - the teachers saw an underage girl being met by an older man they didn't recognise and were doing what any sensible adult should do.

    Why weren't teachers at these childrens' schools raising questions about them being picked up by adults in cars? Or were they and being ignored? These children were not in a desert. They were surrounded by adults who should have acted like adults and been responsible for the children around them.

    That's a good question Cyclefree - although there may be explanations for it. For example, the men may have picked the girls up just out of sight of school, or the teachers may not have thought any evil of girls being picked up by a licenced taxi (I like to think in light of this I would be suspicious if it happened a lot - but I'm not sure it would have necessarily registered as a dangerous thing before. I assume taxis are licensed by the council and can be trusted, and at one school I worked at, with many children brought in from remote areas, it was normal for them to be picked up by taxis. If I saw the children kissing or otherwise having physical contact with the drivers that would be a horse of a different colour).

    Although of course, even if the teachers did report concerns - as Gordon said in Batman Begins, 'in a town this bad, who is there to rat to?'
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were
    all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."
    They were children.

    Any policeman involved in this, needs to take a long, hard look at themselves, and ask what happened to their sense of decency and values.
    The whole of page 92 of the report might provide an explanation, example:

    "11.5 In her 2006 report, she stated that 'it is believed by a number of workers that one of
    the difficulties that prevent this issue [CSE] being dealt with effectively is the ethnicity
    of the main perpetrators'."

    Perhaps because they thought the criminals were asian and the victims were just whites the police didn't care.
    However one must suspect the local police might had other more monetary reasons or even political orders rather than reverse racism, example from page 93:

    "11.8 All the senior officers we interviewed were asked whether ethnic considerations
    influenced their decision making. All were unequivocal that this did not happen.
    However, several of those involved in the operational management of services
    reported some attempts to pressurise them into changing their approach to some
    issues. This mainly affected the support given to Pakistani-heritage women fleeing
    domestic violence, where a small number of councillors had demanded that social
    workers reveal the whereabouts of these women or effect reconciliation rather than
    supporting the women to make up their own minds. The Inquiry team was confident
    that ethnic issues did not influence professional decision-making in individual cases."

  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.

  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Speedy said:

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."

    Sounds like the stereotyping of some communities as "chavs" has lead to them being abandoned by the police.
    The Lawrence Enquiry report didn't reach the South Yorks Police, then. That had quite a lot to say about stereotyping as I recall.

    Must be hellish to be an ordinary, honest, hard-working copper in South Yorks because every time you turn around your force is being dragged through the mud for something that has nothing to do with you and every thing to do with the people who are issuing your orders.

    Perhaps the time has come to just lance the boil and get rid of the force altogether. The senior officers, and those now serving in other forces, can go off with their pensions and the turf can be taken over by West Yorks Police. Clean the stables.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883
    LATEST BJESUS

    26.8.14 LAB 333 (331) CON 259(261) LD 34(34) UKIP 0(0) Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)
    Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
    BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
    Using current polling adjusted for 253 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    This line - "girls being picked up from school by taxi drivers to be abused" - struck a chord.

    When I was a teenager my Italian uncle was staying with us and collected me from school one day. He was much younger than my mother and very handsome and when I met him I kissed him on the cheek, our normal family greeting. I remember the following day being asked to see the headmistress when I arrived and being asked who this man was and what my relationship was. A bit heavy handed maybe? No - the teachers saw an underage girl being met by an older man they didn't recognise and were doing what any sensible adult should do.

    Why weren't teachers at these childrens' schools raising questions about them being picked up by adults in cars? Or were they and being ignored? These children were not in a desert. They were surrounded by adults who should have acted like adults and been responsible for the children around them.

    That's a good question Cyclefree - although there may be explanations for it. For example, the men may have picked the girls up just out of sight of school, or the teachers may not have thought any evil of girls being picked up by a licenced taxi (I like to think in light of this I would be suspicious if it happened a lot - but I'm not sure it would have necessarily registered as a dangerous thing before. I assume taxis are licensed by the council and can be trusted, and at one school I worked at, with many children brought in from remote areas, it was normal for them to be picked up by taxis. If I saw them kissing or otherwise having physical contact that would be a horse of a different colour).

    Although of course, even if the teachers did report concerns - as Gordon said in Batman Begins, 'in a town this bad, who is there to rat to?'
    Yes - there may well be explanations. But at all the schools my 3 children went to, the teachers were scrupulous about knowing which adults they could go home with and not letting them go home with them without prior permission from parents.

    But here it does read as if those adults who should have been responsible and helped the parents simply did not care or turned a blind eye or, worse, colluded. It is unforgivable and those who behaved like that should not get off scot free.

    How a society treats its children says a lot about it. What we are reading today is a cause for shame. State authorities failed - abysmally - in their most basic function of protecting the vulnerable from harm.



  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2014
    Cyclefree said:

    This line - "girls being picked up from school by taxi drivers to be abused" - struck a chord.

    When I was a teenager my Italian uncle was staying with us and collected me from school one day. He was much younger than my mother and very handsome and when I met him I kissed him on the cheek, our normal family greeting. I remember the following day being asked to see the headmistress when I arrived and being asked who this man was and what my relationship was. A bit heavy handed maybe? No - the teachers saw an underage girl being met by an older man they didn't recognise and were doing what any sensible adult should do.

    Why weren't teachers at these childrens' schools raising questions about them being picked up by adults in cars? Or were they and being ignored? These children were not in a desert. They were surrounded by adults who should have acted like adults and been responsible for the children around them.

    They did report it (from page 71 of the report):

    "8.16 One of the common threads running through child sexual exploitation across England
    has been the prominent role of taxi drivers in being directly linked to children who
    were abused. This was the case in Rotherham from a very early stage, when
    residential care home heads met in the nineties to share intelligence about taxis and
    other cars which picked up girls from outside their units. In the early 2000s some
    secondary school heads were reporting girls being picked up at lunchtime at the
    school gates and being taken away to provide oral sex to men in the lunch break."
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.
    I don't pay the licence fee and I still watch plenty of TV, through a combination of [not live] online streaming and DVDs.

    What is there that is broadcast live on TV that you must watch live?

    If people like you who did not like the BBC simply decided to stop funding it you would put it into crisis almost overnight. Instead, you whine and moan.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,321

    Speedy said:

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."

    Sounds like the stereotyping of some communities as "chavs" has lead to them being abandoned by the police.
    The Lawrence Enquiry report didn't reach the South Yorks Police, then. That had quite a lot to say about stereotyping as I recall.

    Must be hellish to be an ordinary, honest, hard-working copper in South Yorks because every time you turn around your force is being dragged through the mud for something that has nothing to do with you and every thing to do with the people who are issuing your orders.

    Perhaps the time has come to just lance the boil and get rid of the force altogether. The senior officers, and those now serving in other forces, can go off with their pensions and the turf can be taken over by West Yorks Police. Clean the stables.
    Or indeed, just merge all the Yorkshire police forces, possibly adding in Humberside. It's a big, logical area, it would create a strong single police force that would rival the Met in size and clout and it would make the lines of authority nice and easy rather than a bit of a mish-mash as at present. One headquarters at Leeds or York and hey presto! Plus imagine all the savings from not having three/four command structures.
  • Options
    HughHugh Posts: 955
    *pops into PB*

    *finds thread unreadable due to thick layer of Rightwing spittle and bile*

    *toddles off*
  • Options
    BlueberryBlueberry Posts: 408
    ...I said it at the time of the Oxford rapes and I'll say it again...

    The BBC and the CPS are also guilty in Rotherham because rather than investigate Nick Griffin's claims about the drug-rape of white minors by Muslim men, they chose instead to scandalise and prosecute Griffin under racial hatred laws. That set the tone for the following decade.

    Gordon Brown is also to blame: when Griffin was cleared by jury for the second time, Brown actually suggested that the race laws might have to be changed to get a conviction. In doing so, Brown sent a powerful signal to public officials that they should prioritise good race relations ahead of child abuse, if they knew what was good for them.

    Of course, none of these parties will admit any guilt, the media circus will move on and people will forget about this in a day or two. Apart from the 1400, but they don't have any twitter followers so who cares.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220
    Speedy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    This line - "girls being picked up from school by taxi drivers to be abused" - struck a chord.

    When I was a teenager my Italian uncle was staying with us and collected me from school one day. He was much younger than my mother and very handsome and when I met him I kissed him on the cheek, our normal family greeting. I remember the following day being asked to see the headmistress when I arrived and being asked who this man was and what my relationship was. A bit heavy handed maybe? No - the teachers saw an underage girl being met by an older man they didn't recognise and were doing what any sensible adult should do.

    Why weren't teachers at these childrens' schools raising questions about them being picked up by adults in cars? Or were they and being ignored? These children were not in a desert. They were surrounded by adults who should have acted like adults and been responsible for the children around them.

    They did report it (from page 71 of the report):

    "8.16 One of the common threads running through child sexual exploitation across England
    has been the prominent role of taxi drivers in being directly linked to children who
    were abused. This was the case in Rotherham from a very early stage, when
    residential care home heads met in the nineties to share intelligence about taxis and
    other cars which picked up girls from outside their units. In the early 2000s some
    secondary school heads were reporting girls being picked up at lunchtime at the
    school gates and being taken away to provide oral sex to men in the lunch break."
    Shame on those who were told about this and did nothing.

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883
    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.

    Its less than 40p per week.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Hugh said:

    *pops into PB*

    *finds thread unreadable due to thick layer of Rightwing spittle and bile*

    *toddles off*

    1400 kids raped and your reaction is to have a go at right wingers. I don't think I'll ever understand people like you. It's a sort of sickness of the mind and soul.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited August 2014

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.

    Its less than 40p per week.

    If you think it's good value, you're quite entitled to pay it yourself. Other people shouldn't be forced to because of that.

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883
    Blueberry said:

    ...I said it at the time of the Oxford rapes and I'll say it again...

    The BBC and the CPS are also guilty in Rotherham because rather than investigate Nick Griffin's claims about the drug-rape of white minors by Muslim men, they chose instead to scandalise and prosecute Griffin under racial hatred laws. That set the tone for the following decade.

    Gordon Brown is also to blame: when Griffin was cleared by jury for the second time, Brown actually suggested that the race laws might have to be changed to get a conviction. In doing so, Brown sent a powerful signal to public officials that they should prioritise good race relations ahead of child abuse, if they knew what was good for them.

    Of course, none of these parties will admit any guilt, the media circus will move on and people will forget about this in a day or two. Apart from the 1400, but they don't have any twitter followers so who cares.

    Why is it the BBCs fault
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited August 2014
    Hugh said:

    *pops into PB*

    *finds thread unreadable due to thick layer of Rightwing spittle and bile*

    *toddles off*

    So you are going to avoid todays news then.
    By the way you have a point, this will boost the right in the polls.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.
    I don't pay the licence fee and I still watch plenty of TV, through a combination of [not live] online streaming and DVDs.

    What is there that is broadcast live on TV that you must watch live?

    If people like you who did not like the BBC simply decided to stop funding it you would put it into crisis almost overnight. Instead, you whine and moan.
    Run out of arguments to actually defend the system, so you play the man instead. Pathetic.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Cyclefree said:

    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were
    all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."
    They were children.

    Any policeman involved in this, needs to take a long, hard look at themselves, and ask what happened to their sense of decency and values.
    Quite. Well said.

    Someone who thinks an abused girl or woman is not worthy of police protection is not fit to be a police office, IMO.

    It's on a par with those who think that women who've been abused whilst wearing short skirts and being under the influence of alcohol, were 'asking for it'.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    OK, it turns out that for once the Beeb are innocent.

    This is from the conclusions of the report:

    By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue.

    So the BBC did not edit the original article for reasons of political correctness, they edited it to make it a more accurate account of what the report actually said.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,856

    If Labour had any decency, they should resign en-mass, and then not re-stand in the next election.

    Don't be silly, it's clearly the fault of the Tories.
    Labour are sitting pretty thanks to UKIP. They split the right wing vote - they get Socialism.
    Instead of crying about spilled milk, perhaps the Tories need to clear it up - that is, win back the votes they've lost to UKIP.

  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    ydoethur said:

    Speedy said:

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."

    Sounds like the stereotyping of some communities as "chavs" has lead to them being abandoned by the police.
    The Lawrence Enquiry report didn't reach the South Yorks Police, then. That had quite a lot to say about stereotyping as I recall.

    Must be hellish to be an ordinary, honest, hard-working copper in South Yorks because every time you turn around your force is being dragged through the mud for something that has nothing to do with you and every thing to do with the people who are issuing your orders.

    Perhaps the time has come to just lance the boil and get rid of the force altogether. The senior officers, and those now serving in other forces, can go off with their pensions and the turf can be taken over by West Yorks Police. Clean the stables.
    Or indeed, just merge all the Yorkshire police forces, possibly adding in Humberside. It's a big, logical area, it would create a strong single police force that would rival the Met in size and clout and it would make the lines of authority nice and easy rather than a bit of a mish-mash as at present. One headquarters at Leeds or York and hey presto! Plus imagine all the savings from not having three/four command structures.
    You obviously know more about the area than I do. Is a unified Yorkshire force, which would surely have to be based at York, viable? I duuno, but I note that the present North Yorks force seems to police an area that has significant differences with other constabularies in the area (and my thus have a different ethos that may not translate well in either direction) and that in recent times Yorkshire has never managed to produce a unified local government (all that business about Ridings).
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,856

    Speedy said:

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."

    Sounds like the stereotyping of some communities as "chavs" has lead to them being abandoned by the police.
    The Lawrence Enquiry report didn't reach the South Yorks Police, then. That had quite a lot to say about stereotyping as I recall.

    Must be hellish to be an ordinary, honest, hard-working copper in South Yorks because every time you turn around your force is being dragged through the mud for something that has nothing to do with you and every thing to do with the people who are issuing your orders.

    Perhaps the time has come to just lance the boil and get rid of the force altogether. The senior officers, and those now serving in other forces, can go off with their pensions and the turf can be taken over by West Yorks Police. Clean the stables.
    Some communities can be safely demonised. The White poor in Rotherham, for example.

  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    "It has not proved possible to follow up any individual cases where there were
    references to the Crown Prosecution Service in files and minutes dating back to
    1997. We were told that those in the CPS before 2010 who would have dealt with
    CSE had all retired."

    How convenient.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,321
    Speedy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    This line - "girls being picked up from school by taxi drivers to be abused" - struck a chord.

    When I was a teenager my Italian uncle was staying with us and collected me from school one day. He was much younger than my mother and very handsome and when I met him I kissed him on the cheek, our normal family greeting. I remember the following day being asked to see the headmistress when I arrived and being asked who this man was and what my relationship was. A bit heavy handed maybe? No - the teachers saw an underage girl being met by an older man they didn't recognise and were doing what any sensible adult should do.

    Why weren't teachers at these childrens' schools raising questions about them being picked up by adults in cars? Or were they and being ignored? These children were not in a desert. They were surrounded by adults who should have acted like adults and been responsible for the children around them.

    They did report it (from page 71 of the report):

    "8.16 One of the common threads running through child sexual exploitation across England
    has been the prominent role of taxi drivers in being directly linked to children who
    were abused. This was the case in Rotherham from a very early stage, when
    residential care home heads met in the nineties to share intelligence about taxis and
    other cars which picked up girls from outside their units. In the early 2000s some
    secondary school heads were reporting girls being picked up at lunchtime at the
    school gates and being taken away to provide oral sex to men in the lunch break."
    Speaking as a teacher, I am beyond astonished that such reports were made and not acted upon. Indeed, in my experience the police tend to be hypersensitive on such reports from headteachers rather than supine. I am further beyond astonished that they were not reported in the local press (or were they?) which would have been the next port of call for most heads I have worked for by way of trying to head off the problem by raising public awareness.

    Are we into some kind of Kafkaesque conspiracy here in South Yorkshire?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,321
    Incidentally @Cyclefree‌ - it may depend a bit on the school. If it's a small school it's possible to check who children can go home with, and I would expect most infant/junior/primary schools to do so. In a secondary school of 2000, it's much less practicable. Obviously if there is behaviour that gives cause for concern, or if there is a child we are worried about, we might monitor them - but otherwise bus/gate/crossing duty at the end of the day can sometimes feel like a war zone, stopping them from pushing each other into the path of traffic or working off disputes in the traditional fashion - and it makes it difficult to monitor everything at once.

    I'm not trying to be an apologist for an oversight that apparently didn't happen anyway, but I can see how it might have happened. Certainly when I return to work on Monday I expect we will all be warned to be on the alert for such incidents to a much greater degree than before as a result of this.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited August 2014
    Now would be a good time to point out the only prison sentences given out over this:

    Zafran Ramzan rape, 2 charges of sex with a child - 9 years
    Razwan Razaq 2 charges of sex with a child - 11 years
    Umar Razaq sexual activity with a child - 4.5 years
    Adil Hussain sexual activity with a child - 4 years
    Mohsin Khan sexual activity with a child - 4 years

    Some of them will be out this year.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,856
    Socrates said:

    @SimonStClaire

    This is the killer bit.

    "Prof Jay says she would not be surprised if similar situations of widespread abuse might arise in other towns."


    I'd be surprised if there aren't.

  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Hugh said:

    *pops into PB*

    *finds thread unreadable due to thick layer of Rightwing spittle and bile*

    *toddles off*

    Good.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,856
    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    *pops into PB*

    *finds thread unreadable due to thick layer of Rightwing spittle and bile*

    *toddles off*

    1400 kids raped and your reaction is to have a go at right wingers. I don't think I'll ever understand people like you. It's a sort of sickness of the mind and soul.
    He probably thinks the girls were asking for it.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220

    Cyclefree said:

    Speedy said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @HurstLlama
    South Yorkshire police seemed to have been a law unto themselves?

    According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were
    all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection."
    They were children.

    Any policeman involved in this, needs to take a long, hard look at themselves, and ask what happened to their sense of decency and values.
    Quite. Well said.

    Someone who thinks an abused girl or woman is not worthy of police protection is not fit to be a police office, IMO.

    It's on a par with those who think that women who've been abused whilst wearing short skirts and being under the influence of alcohol, were 'asking for it'.
    And that attitude was quite common amongst the police 20-30 years ago. A lot of work was done to train police officers so that they took allegations of rape seriously. It sounds as if the same needs to be done with allegations of abuse of children, particularly when there may be a racial/cultural angle to it. We clearly need to do more to educate people that women / girls are not there to be used as sexual playthings and take - head on - cultural assumptions which some people in some minority communities may have.

    And this applies as much to how they view women of Asian descent e.g. re "honour" killings, forced marriages, not allowing them to date or talk to or marry men from other communities etc. Both attitudes are part of the same regressive view of women: "Asian" women cannot live their own lives as they want; "white" women are there to be used and not worthy of respect or honouring. And both "Asian" and "white" girls suffer crimes as a result of such attitudes.

    If EdM really wants his Shadow Minister for Stopping Crimes Against Women to do something useful, she might start by looking at this topic - and without any blinkers.



  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Sean_F said:

    If Labour had any decency, they should resign en-mass, and then not re-stand in the next election.

    Don't be silly, it's clearly the fault of the Tories.
    Labour are sitting pretty thanks to UKIP. They split the right wing vote - they get Socialism.
    Instead of crying about spilled milk, perhaps the Tories need to clear it up - that is, win back the votes they've lost to UKIP.

    How about an end to concurrent sentencing, 50 year sentences for sexual violence against children, and independent inquiries in all the other cities where this likely happened?

    That would be an actual proper response to this stuff, but Cameron is too pathetically scared of his party looking like mean Tories to do anything like that.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    OK, it turns out that for once the Beeb are innocent.

    This is from the conclusions of the report:

    By far the majority of perpetrators were described as ‘Asian’ by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue.

    So the BBC did not edit the original article for reasons of political correctness, they edited it to make it a more accurate account of what the report actually said.

    Well the BBC News at 6 did not cover up the pakistani element of this case.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,321



    You obviously know more about the area than I do. Is a unified Yorkshire force, which would surely have to be based at York, viable? I duuno, but I note that the present North Yorks force seems to police an area that has significant differences with other constabularies in the area (and my thus have a different ethos that may not translate well in either direction) and that in recent times Yorkshire has never managed to produce a unified local government (all that business about Ridings).

    I'm not sure I'd say I know 'more' about the area, although I do know it a bit from family links. I would however say that it is inconceivable that such a force would be more difficult to manage than the West Midlands or Thames Valley area, which both sprawl across half a dozen radically different counties most of whose councils can't stand the sight of each other.

    It would of course mean a somewhat strange mix of rural (the Dales and Moors) and urban (Leeds, Bradford and Hull) - but that's true of Avon and Somerset as well and I would have said they do OK by and large.

    Put it this way, it is much more difficult to imagine that a large force, with remote decision making, would have let this one pass than a small, compact force like South Yorkshire. From all I hear, this isn't the first time in the last few years they have dropped the ball and dropped it badly either. It would also be larger and better-resourced than the local constabularies - a potential counterweight to the Met in the north in terms of specialist services, which might also be a good thing.
  • Options

    @CarlottaVance

    I can tell you now that in my village/small town the people who are cheering for UKIP are as much in the families on the Council Estate as they are in the three-bedroomed semis

    They just tell you that to get rid of you.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    After seeing the news at 6, I believe there could be short term movements in the polls in the Tory/UKIP direction.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    "The Deputy Council Leader (2011-2014) from the Pakistani-heritage
    community was clear that he had not understood the scale of the CSE problem in
    Rotherham until 2013. He then disagreed with colleague elected members on the
    way to approach it. He had advocated taking the issue 'head on' but had been
    overruled. He was one of the elected members who said they thought the criminal- 94 -
    convictions in 2010 were 'a one-off, isolated case', and not an example of a more
    deep-rooted problem of Pakistani-heritage perpetrators targeting young white girls.
    This was at best naïve, and at worst ignoring a politically inconvenient truth."

    How much damage must be inflicted from the "it's a tiny minority" myth for us to get the message?
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220
    Incidentally, perhaps this Professor Jay should be the replacement for Judge Butler-Sloss.

    If anyone is going to get to the bottom of child sex rings in the Establishment it sounds as if she will.

    Personally, I'd like to see an inquiry into other towns and a determination to find out where the perpetrators and senior managers in Rotherham now are.
  • Options

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.

    Its less than 40p per week.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA
    I haven't watched TV since 2002 and it's also costing 40p a week.

    Over a lifetime it will cost me about £10,000.

    Not worth a penny of it.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Cyclefree said:

    Incidentally, perhaps this Professor Jay should be the replacement for Judge Butler-Sloss.

    If anyone is going to get to the bottom of child sex rings in the Establishment it sounds as if she will.

    Personally, I'd like to see an inquiry into other towns and a determination to find out where the perpetrators and senior managers in Rotherham now are.

    It is absolutely essential that inquiries into other towns, or a UK-wide inquiry is now done. Cameron would be a moral failure as a Prime Minister if he does not ensure this is done.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,994
    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Raheem Kassam ‏@RaheemJKassam 23m
    EXCLUSIVE: UKIP Candiate Slams Rotherham Failings, Calls for 'Resignation of Everyone Involved' >> http://bit.ly/1mNzzXD

    A Kippers answer.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Sean_F said:

    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    *pops into PB*

    *finds thread unreadable due to thick layer of Rightwing spittle and bile*

    *toddles off*

    1400 kids raped and your reaction is to have a go at right wingers. I don't think I'll ever understand people like you. It's a sort of sickness of the mind and soul.
    He probably thinks the girls were asking for it.
    Please leave Hugh alone, he is genuinely too stupid to realise how stupid he is.

  • Options

    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?

    The training presumably, addresses the skills needed to balance the severity of a crime against the ethnicity of the perpetrator and to disregard the latter if the former is severe enough.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    What happens when mass immigration creates segregation and ghettoisation, and entire parts of large cities are divided on racial and religious lines?

    Birmingham... Rotherham... East London...

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited August 2014

    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?

    More than a third of the cases were already know to agencies, and nothing....if you can't act when we are talking about 100's and 100's of instances that you are aware of, what will a bit of retraining do?

    When you are talking about such large scale inaction, you need to clear the stables out and start afresh, with the new people having a clear mandate, you never ever should fear being called a racist for just doing your job and investigating such serious crimes properly.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220

    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?

    Apparently senior managers and councillors in Rotherham and senior members of the South Yorkshire Police.

    Staggering indeed.

  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220
    edited August 2014

    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?

    The training presumably, addresses the skills needed to balance the severity of a crime against the ethnicity of the perpetrator and to disregard the latter if the former is severe enough.
    No - not if the latter is severe enough. The ethnicity of the alleged perpetrator should be ignored. An allegation of a crime against a child should be investigated regardless.

    We cannot and should not soft soap alleged crimes because that might harm vested interests or powerful people or embarrass particular groups, and that should apply whether we're talking about banks or politicians or people coming from a particular community. "Equality under the law" and all that.

  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    I heard this on the BBC World Service this morning. On hearing that the perpetrators were mainly Asian, my immediate thought was - what about Bradford?

    I doubt that Rotherham is a unique case.

    Even more troubling, I doubt Asians have cornered the market on child abuse.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,856

    @CarlottaVance

    I can tell you now that in my village/small town the people who are cheering for UKIP are as much in the families on the Council Estate as they are in the three-bedroomed semis

    They just tell you that to get rid of you.
    Well, somebody's voting for UKIP in large numbers.

  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Cyclefree said:

    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?

    The training presumably, addresses the skills needed to balance the severity of a crime against the ethnicity of the perpetrator and to disregard the latter if the former is severe enough.
    No - not if the latter is severe enough. The ethnicity of the alleged perpetrator should be ignored. An allegation of a crime against a child should be investigated regardless.

    We cannot and should not soft soap alleged crimes because that might harm vested interests or powerful people or embarrass particular groups, and that should apply whether we're talking about banks or politicians or people coming from a particular community. "Equality under the law" and all that.

    There really isn't much hope of putting a stop to FGM is there?
  • Options
    HughHugh Posts: 955
    isam said:

    What happens when mass immigration creates segregation and ghettoisation, and entire parts of large cities are divided on racial and religious lines?

    Birmingham... Rotherham... East London...

    We excitedly post about it on internet forums and angrily vote for the most Rightwing party we can find that appears, you know, respectable?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    edited August 2014
    Hugh said:

    isam said:

    What happens when mass immigration creates segregation and ghettoisation, and entire parts of large cities are divided on racial and religious lines?

    Birmingham... Rotherham... East London...

    We excitedly post about it on internet forums and angrily vote for the most Rightwing party we can find that appears, you know, respectable?
    It's a crying shame, nothing to get excited about at all

    Shouldn't you be digging Socrates out for drooling over child abuse? Or do you only do that when youre calling yourself tim?
  • Options
    Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    Perpetrators of these dreadful crimes should never have been labelled by race, religion or any other label... They should have been treated as criminal suspects and subject to robust investigation, prosecution and conviction...

    The victims should never have been labelled by race, class, from broken homes or anything else... They should have been treated as individuals deserving of the full protection of the authorities...

    And the response now shouldn't be to reinforce stereotypes and seek affirmation of ones prejudices. It should be to demand even this late an effective, unprejudiced criminal investigation of all involved in Rotherham and elsewhere...

    Posting clips of Enoch Powell and blaming immigration per se is self serving and does nothing to deal with what is dreadful criminality.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,994
    Mr. 56, worth stating that there does appear to be a racial element to this, regarding both perpetrators and victims. It's wrong to generalise the unforgivable acts of a few to everyone who shares a particular demographic with them, but we should not ignore racial elements where they exist.

    Would we do so if a group of white rapists were exclusively targeting Asian children? I don't think so.
  • Options
    HughHugh Posts: 955
    Socrates said:

    "The Deputy Council Leader (2011-2014) from the Pakistani-heritage
    community was clear that he had not understood the scale of the CSE problem in
    Rotherham until 2013. He then disagreed with colleague elected members on the
    way to approach it. He had advocated taking the issue 'head on' but had been
    overruled. He was one of the elected members who said they thought the criminal- 94 -
    convictions in 2010 were 'a one-off, isolated case', and not an example of a more
    deep-rooted problem of Pakistani-heritage perpetrators targeting young white girls.
    This was at best naïve, and at worst ignoring a politically inconvenient truth."

    How much damage must be inflicted from the "it's a tiny minority" myth for us to get the message?

    What message, Socrates?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    edited August 2014
    Rexel56 said:

    Perpetrators of these dreadful crimes should never have been labelled by race, religion or any other label... They should have been treated as criminal suspects and subject to robust investigation, prosecution and conviction...

    The victims should never have been labelled by race, class, from broken homes or anything else... They should have been treated as individuals deserving of the full protection of the authorities...

    And the response now shouldn't be to reinforce stereotypes and seek affirmation of ones prejudices. It should be to demand even this late an effective, unprejudiced criminal investigation of all involved in Rotherham and elsewhere...

    Posting clips of Enoch Powell and blaming immigration per se is self serving and does nothing to deal with what is dreadful criminality.

    Well the perpetrators were all of one race and religion, a race and religion that wasn't shared with the victims... Like it or not it's a factor

    Immigration per se isn't to blame, it's mass immigration, which makes integration nigh on impossible....

    It's not first generation Muslim immigrants that are joining Isis and raping white children, it's their children, men who have grown up in a segregated society,... I wouldn't dig out Muslims in General for it. That would be ridiculous
  • Options
    BlueberryBlueberry Posts: 408

    Blueberry said:

    ...I said it at the time of the Oxford rapes and I'll say it again...

    The BBC and the CPS are also guilty in Rotherham because rather than investigate Nick Griffin's claims about the drug-rape of white minors by Muslim men, they chose instead to scandalise and prosecute Griffin under racial hatred laws. That set the tone for the following decade.

    Gordon Brown is also to blame: when Griffin was cleared by jury for the second time, Brown actually suggested that the race laws might have to be changed to get a conviction. In doing so, Brown sent a powerful signal to public officials that they should prioritise good race relations ahead of child abuse, if they knew what was good for them.

    Of course, none of these parties will admit any guilt, the media circus will move on and people will forget about this in a day or two. Apart from the 1400, but they don't have any twitter followers so who cares.

    Why is it the BBCs fault
    Panorama secretly recorded him making a speech to BNP members in Keighley in 2006. Rather than investigating the claims Griffin was making in his speech about the child rape of local white girls (kaffurs) by largely immigrant Muslims, the BBC scandalised Griffin's criticism of Islam. Ludicrous. And very harmful given what was going on and what happened next.
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Socrates said:

    BBC coverup:

    http://newsdiffs.org/diff/657896/657911/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

    How fucking disgusting. This is the crap my TV tax pays for: left-wing propaganda to cover up who's committing crimes.

    It's a "license fee", not a "tax" ^_~
    Flat rate TV Poll Tax :)
    Fantastic Value for Money
    If so, then there's no need for it to be compulsory is there?
    Of course its not compulsory if you do not own a TV or radio you don't pay.

    Surely you are not in favour of avoidance or evasion?

    Sure you wouldn't be able to hide all your TVs when the knock at the door comes.
    I suppose you think stamp duty is voluntary, as you can just choose to not buy a house. No, I'm not in favour of avoidance. I'm in favour of letting people watch TV without having to pay a forced subscription to the BBC, to subsidise their left-wing propaganda and tripe like Eastenders.

    Its less than 40p per week.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA
    I hope you are well.

    Two points. First if a charge is unjustifiable in principle, the question of how cheap it is doesn't arise. You wouldn't for instance defend a heroin dealer or protection racketeer by saying he offered good value for money. Secondly, most of us are comfortable with thinking of annual charges as annual charges. "Less than 40p a week" ffs: with the possible exception of Hugh, the readers of this blog are unlikely to be struck dumb with amazement by the revelation that if you divide a number by fifty two, you get a number 1/52 the size of the one you started with.

  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,220

    Cyclefree said:

    Staggering we're discussing extra 'training'. Who the **** needs training to realise raping kids is a serious crime?

    The training presumably, addresses the skills needed to balance the severity of a crime against the ethnicity of the perpetrator and to disregard the latter if the former is severe enough.
    No - not if the latter is severe enough. The ethnicity of the alleged perpetrator should be ignored. An allegation of a crime against a child should be investigated regardless.

    We cannot and should not soft soap alleged crimes because that might harm vested interests or powerful people or embarrass particular groups, and that should apply whether we're talking about banks or politicians or people coming from a particular community. "Equality under the law" and all that.

    There really isn't much hope of putting a stop to FGM is there?
    There is if we have the will to do so. It's the will and the determination to do so that are lacking.

  • Options
    Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    edited August 2014
    isam said:

    Rexel56 said:

    Perpetrators of these dreadful crimes should never have been labelled by race, religion or any other label... They should have been treated as criminal suspects and subject to robust investigation, prosecution and conviction...

    The victims should never have been labelled by race, class, from broken homes or anything else... They should have been treated as individuals deserving of the full protection of the authorities...

    And the response now shouldn't be to reinforce stereotypes and seek affirmation of ones prejudices. It should be to demand even this late an effective, unprejudiced criminal investigation of all involved in Rotherham and elsewhere...

    Posting clips of Enoch Powell and blaming immigration per se is self serving and does nothing to deal with what is dreadful criminality.

    Well the perpetrators were all of one race and religion, a race and religion that wasn't shared with the victims... Like it or not it's a factor


    Immigration per se isn't to blame, it's mass immigration
    In what way is it a factor? Does the race or religion of the perpetrators and victims determine whether criminal acts have or haven't been committed?
  • Options
    Yuck. I'm also feeling v down so apologies if this is unfair but a weakness of democracy would appear to be when you have a dominant % position with a section of the voters, you don't want to rock the boat with them.
  • Options
    hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    As someone else mentioned, has there been a long running problem with South Yorkshire police ? Over recent years they seem to have been involved in many scandals, that go back over the last 40 years. We had Hillsborough with missing Police notebooks, deliberate lies given to the press via a local MP and a cover up. Then there were also child abuse cases not investigated and now we have Rotherham.

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,952
    Rexel56 said:

    isam said:

    Rexel56 said:

    Perpetrators of these dreadful crimes should never have been labelled by race, religion or any other label... They should have been treated as criminal suspects and subject to robust investigation, prosecution and conviction...

    The victims should never have been labelled by race, class, from broken homes or anything else... They should have been treated as individuals deserving of the full protection of the authorities...

    And the response now shouldn't be to reinforce stereotypes and seek affirmation of ones prejudices. It should be to demand even this late an effective, unprejudiced criminal investigation of all involved in Rotherham and elsewhere...

    Posting clips of Enoch Powell and blaming immigration per se is self serving and does nothing to deal with what is dreadful criminality.

    Well the perpetrators were all of one race and religion, a race and religion that wasn't shared with the victims... Like it or not it's a factor


    Immigration per se isn't to blame, it's mass immigration
    In what way is it a factor? Does the race or religion of the perpetrators and victims determine whether criminal acts have or haven't been committed?
    Don't people get heavier sentences for racially motivated attacks?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    SeanT said:

    Tim_B said:

    I heard this on the BBC World Service this morning. On hearing that the perpetrators were mainly Asian, my immediate thought was - what about Bradford?

    I doubt that Rotherham is a unique case.

    Even more troubling, I doubt Asians have cornered the market on child abuse.

    According to Andrew Norfolk on The Times - who is the most authoritative journalist on this subject - the scale of abuse in Bradford is WORSE than Rotherham.
    I wonder why...
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Rexel56 said:

    isam said:

    Rexel56 said:

    Perpetrators of these dreadful crimes should never have been labelled by race, religion or any other label... They should have been treated as criminal suspects and subject to robust investigation, prosecution and conviction...

    The victims should never have been labelled by race, class, from broken homes or anything else... They should have been treated as individuals deserving of the full protection of the authorities...

    And the response now shouldn't be to reinforce stereotypes and seek affirmation of ones prejudices. It should be to demand even this late an effective, unprejudiced criminal investigation of all involved in Rotherham and elsewhere...

    Posting clips of Enoch Powell and blaming immigration per se is self serving and does nothing to deal with what is dreadful criminality.

    Well the perpetrators were all of one race and religion, a race and religion that wasn't shared with the victims... Like it or not it's a factor


    Immigration per se isn't to blame, it's mass immigration
    In what way is it a factor? Does the race or religion of the perpetrators and victims determine whether criminal acts have or haven't been committed?
    I know it's a different country, but the answer looks like Yes. Two examples - Tawana Brawley from the 1980s and Michael Brown currently.
This discussion has been closed.