Election Year or Fear!

[swaledale]

I think politically the BBC are responsibly neutral as their remit requires, although I do find them overly WOKE - for my personal taste - perhaps to their own detriment eg the unnecessarily (disproportionately) high number of female football pundits. No problem with eg tennis or athletics where the womens competition is as good if not better viewing than men's...but it just grinds my gears

Overly WOKE and they platform Farage repeatedly???

[ramAnag]

I guess that's one way of stopping debate! The thing is, if its a matter of opinion then fine one can do that if on the other hand if its a matter of fact then and lets face it we are in a post truth world, which often gets repeated on here by a certain poster then allowing it to go unchallenged isn't on.

I think that’s fair. ‘We’ll have to agree to disagree’ is certainly a good way to end an argument which is in danger of just endlessly going round and round in unresolved and ever more acrimonious circles, but where fiction is being passed off as fact, or opinion forming anecdotes are clearly flawed, they surely have to be called out.

[swaledale]

I think that?s fair. ?We?ll have to agree to disagree? is certainly a good way to end an argument which is in danger of just endlessly going round and round in unresolved and ever more acrimonious circles, but where fiction is being passed off as fact, or opinion forming anecdotes are clearly flawed, they surely have to be called out.

Meanwhile Tesla shares and sales are dropping like a stone, Canada has cancelled a Musk satellite contract, people are organising boycotts of USA goods in Europe and Reform is breaking up with talk of the outcast Lowe setting up a separate more extreme right wing party!! Farage meanwhile keeps quiet over Trump after realising that even his voter base of ignorant nutters doesn't much like Trump!!

Maybe Trump will be the disruptor that actually destroys the USA's influence over the world

[swaledale]

...all of which IMO relate to a negative human trait of 'following the herd'. That first anecdote rings so true to me (in business settings which I accept are a bit different), I've sat amongst colleagues where the majority will either go with the opinion of a senior/subject 'expert' or won't speak up against same, despite diagreeing with them, either for fear of being accused of an 'ism' of some sort, or having a 'marker' against them for job retention/career progression, or just for being made to look foolish around peers. Then its resident gob****e AF (or notable others) who speak up at risk, with later slaps on the back from the cowards in the room. Having followed the grooming issue a bit and more so over the last few days I find it unbelievable that so many 'professionals' (police, social workers etc) could independantly decide that community harmony mattered more than protecting vulnerable females, there MUST have been a significant amount of 'follow my leader'/herd mentality going on

There was also a fair degree of prejudice by the Police and other authorities towards the girls involved, viewing them as cooperating with their abusers, being nobody's who were not worthy of attention rather than treating them as victims of both life and their abusers.

Over 2 decades ago when I worked in the social housing arena, I encountered much the same attitude from Police and Social services towards domestic the victims of domestic abuse. Often the victim would after being placed in a safe house or relocated to another house, then get back in touch with their abusive partner and invite them back to live with them, many times they would refuse to press charges or give evidence. All immensely frustrating, but those who walked away from such cases saying it was the victims fault, singularly failed to understand the nature of these relationships, matters ahve improved, but the same prejudice is shown towards victims of crime who happen to be of lower economic or social status by the authorities.

Its also worth noting that the vast majority of serial child abusers are white!

[swaledale]

For a prime example of just how deluded and thick trump is - today he was moaning about the deal whereby Canada sells electricity to some parts of the USA, stating it was a very bad deal and I'm paraphrasing here, whichever stupid individual signed it should be ashamed of making such a bad deal!

Guess who signed the deal? Yep, it Was Donald Trump!!! Priceless!

[Trickytreesreds]

There was also a fair degree of prejudice by the Police and other authorities towards the girls involved, viewing them as cooperating with their abusers, being nobody's who were not worthy of attention rather than treating them as victims of both life and their abusers.

Over 2 decades ago when I worked in the social housing arena, I encountered much the same attitude from Police and Social services towards domestic the victims of domestic abuse. Often the victim would after being placed in a safe house or relocated to another house, then get back in touch with their abusive partner and invite them back to live with them, many times they would refuse to press charges or give evidence. All immensely frustrating, but those who walked away from such cases saying it was the victims fault, singularly failed to understand the nature of these relationships, matters ahve improved, but the same prejudice is shown towards victims of crime who happen to be of lower economic or social status by the authorities.

Its also worth noting that the vast majority of serial child abusers are white!

the police/ council/social services had no right to ignore, bat away any of these girls. They were minors and not legally responsible for anything.
Their claims WERE ignored out of fear, is ISMS, and community harmony under the flag of multi culturalism. That is a fact. Amazing some of those councillors involved, were in those grooming gangs

Not that old chestnut, yes of course whites are the main child abuses. Simple ratio's of population proves that.
But I don't see any whites getting ignored where justice of grooming is concerned.

BTW, when it comes to grooming gangs, Pakistanis lead the way in the crime charts.

(this is where all the claims racist. xenophobe. little Englamder. bigot etc) would be used for daring to point this out

Justice and law apply to everyone. As recently shown, some in the system, think skin colour/***uality/religious back ground, should get you a softer approach in court.

[ramAnag]

the police/ council/social services had no right to ignore, bat away any of these girls. They were minors and not legally responsible for anything.
Their claims WERE ignored out of fear, is ISMS, and community harmony under the flag of multi culturalism. That is a fact. Amazing some of those councillors involved, were in those grooming gangs

Not that old chestnut, yes of course whites are the main child abuses. Simple ratio's of population proves that.
But I don't see any whites getting ignored where justice of grooming is concerned.

BTW, when it comes to grooming gangs, Pakistanis lead the way in the crime charts.

(this is where all the claims racist. xenophobe. little Englamder. bigot etc) would be used for daring to point this out

Justice and law apply to everyone. As recently shown, some in the system, think skin colour/***uality/religious back ground, should get you a softer approach in court.

I don’t think anyone is saying otherwise, but it is true that where some t*enage girls themselves, and some parents, were complicit it does make things harder. You may not want to hear that but, having worked in this area, I can assure you - without excusing anything at all - that such scenarios are not uncommon.

Likewise no one has disputed that the grooming gang form of abuse is one favoured by Pakistani abusers. White abusers are probably more likely to act individually but does it really make any difference to the victims?

You won’t get called any of the things you claim by saying that Pakistanis are the main participants of grooming gangs. You will when you try and make out that specific races/religions are synonymous with child abuse…and rightly so imo.

Yes, justice and the law should apply equally to everyone. There are many ways in which this doesn’t always appear to be the case but I’m not sure skin colour/ s*xuality/ religion are the principle examples of being treated advantageously by the courts. Could you provide some examples?

[Trickytreesreds]

I don?t think anyone is saying otherwise, but it is true that where some t*enage girls themselves, and some parents, were complicit it does make things harder. You may not want to hear that but, having worked in this area, I can assure you - without excusing anything at all - that such scenarios are not uncommon.

Likewise no one has disputed that the grooming gang form of abuse is one favoured by Pakistani abusers. White abusers are probably more likely to act individually but does it really make any difference to the victims?

You won?t get called any of the things you claim by saying that Pakistanis are the main participants of grooming gangs. You will when you try and make out that specific races/religions are synonymous with child abuse?and rightly so imo.

Yes, justice and the law should apply equally to everyone. There are many ways in which this doesn?t always appear to be the case but I?m not sure skin colour/ s*xuality/ religion are the principle examples of being treated advantageously by the courts. Could you provide some examples?

I was referring to the sentencing council , who for some bizarre reason seems to belive it should be a two tier system.

The Sentencing Council published new principles for courts to follow when imposing community and custodial sentences, including whether to suspend jail time, on Wednesday.

The updated guidance, which comes into force from April, details that a pre-sentence report would usually be necessary before handing out punishment for someone of an ethnic, cultural or faith minority, alongside other groups such as young adults aged 18 to 25, women and pregnant women.

The independent body said a greater emphasis has now been placed on the "critical role" of pre-sentence reports, with more detail on when judges should request for the information to be compiled ahead of sentencing decisions.

This includes details about the circumstances of the crime and the offender.

Its been bad enough, being hestitant to persue crime, due to racism accusations being thrown about. Never mind introducing a more lenient system when they actually do decide to implement to law.
Like it or not, being in a minorty should not get you one inch of leniancy or hesitancy of investigation.

[Andy_Faber]

Yes, justice and the law should apply equally to everyone. There are many ways in which this doesn?t always appear to be the case but I?m not sure skin colour/ s*xuality/ religion are the principle examples of being treated advantageously by the courts. Could you provide some examples?

Tricky appears to have provided a cast iron example in his immediately-following message, which I was aware of from a news report on the BBC website, I?m guessing it?s still there. Tricky?s interpretation, even accounting for his perceived bias in this area, seems spot-on, and I can?t find any rationale relating to it.

[ramAnag]

I was referring to the sentencing council , who for some bizarre reason seems to belive it should be a two tier system.

The Sentencing Council published new principles for courts to follow when imposing community and custodial sentences, including whether to suspend jail time, on Wednesday.

The updated guidance, which comes into force from April, details that a pre-sentence report would usually be necessary before handing out punishment for someone of an ethnic, cultural or faith minority, alongside other groups such as young adults aged 18 to 25, women and pregnant women.

The independent body said a greater emphasis has now been placed on the "critical role" of pre-sentence reports, with more detail on when judges should request for the information to be compiled ahead of sentencing decisions.

This includes details about the circumstances of the crime and the offender.


Its been bad enough, being hestitant to persue crime, due to racism accusations being thrown about. Never mind introducing a more lenient system when they actually do decide to implement to law.
Like it or not, being in a minorty should not get you one inch of leniancy or hesitancy of investigation.

Yep, I thought you were and, as both MA and I have already pointed out, the government immediately made it clear they didn’t support the overall views of the Sentencing Council.

It is, imo, a more nuanced issue than you make out and it is interesting that you choose to overlook the issue of class where sentencing is concerned.