Discrimination -

I deny nothing.

Do you claim the Jersey and Kincora cases went on so long because of the racism boat?
 
Sponsored Links
Your first two links I quickly scanned as don't have much time left but it gave me an idea of the content.. Both stories were threatening violence so they're not really relevant to this discussion so don't know why you spent so much time putting them up.. If someone is threatening violence then yes, it should of course be a criminal matter as someone will be scared, rightly so.

But what does the law say?

"Section 4A makes it an offence to use threatening, abusive or insulting language with the intention of causing someone else harassment, alarm or distress. The offence is only committed if it has that effect."
 
So are you denying the fact that the Rotherham abuse went on for so long because people were afraid of rocking the racism boat?

Again, your examples have nothing to do with what I am saying - and you know it.

There was a systemic breakdown of the services which those unfortunate girls should have relied on and there was an element of racism involved but also to a greater degree incompetence and neglect by the services.
 
There was a systemic breakdown of the services which those unfortunate girls should have relied on and there was an element of racism involved but also to a greater degree incompetence and neglect by the services.

No there wasn't racism. There was the fear of being seen as racist.
 
Sponsored Links
I deny nothing.

Do you claim the Jersey and Kincora cases went on so long because of the racism boat?
When you are capable of not asking stupid questions then get back to me.
 
No there wasn't racism. There was the fear of being seen as racist.

There was an element of being seen as racist but I think that is a convenient excuse to hide behind for the Police and services.
 
Why do you think the Jersey and Kincora cases went on so long?

How long did Jimmy Saville get away with his vile practices?

Why did Army cadet abuse go unheeded for years?

There's a pattern, and it's not race.
 
I suggest you both do some reading on the Rotherham case. If you think the fear of not being seen as racist over many depts had nothing whatsoever to do with this going on for so long then you had better let them know that you keyboard warriors know more somehow.
 
While you are at it, please let the EDL that all their nasty slogans and ammo based on Rotherham was all false, that the police, social services, press and government made it up, just for them to gain.
 
But the practice of complaints being ignored or swept under the carpet is common. It's not confined to race fears.

Think of the Little Sisters of (no) Mercy, or the (Un) Christian Brothers.

Maybe it's just more convenient for people to close their eyes.
 
There was an element of being seen as racist but I think that is a convenient excuse to hide behind for the Police and services.
I do not see that as convenient. Anything but and it's not an excuse, it makes it worse because it means they admitted deliberately failing these girls. Strange way of thinking you have.
 
I suggest you both do some reading on the Rotherham case. If you think the fear of not being seen as racist over many depts had nothing whatsoever to do with this going on for so long then you had better let them know that you keyboard warriors know more somehow.

Straw man argument. I said there was an element of this. I did not discount it. Also the reason they justified the fear of racism was that they did not want to inflame the situation with reprisals. So I find it rather unbalanced that you can accept they let these girls down horribly and then accept their reasoning without questioning.

The victims need our support, the criminals need to be punished and those who let this happen need to be brought to task and fired if needs be.
 
Why do you think the Jersey and Kincora cases went on so long?
How long did Jimmy Saville get away with his vile practices?
Why did Army cadet abuse go unheeded for years?
There's a pattern, and it's not race.
It is indeed commonplace for the establishment to protect itself; for powerful and influential individuals to get special treatment. What was different about Rotherham was that the perpetrators were nobodies; their only shield from standard treatment by the police was their race, not their money or influence.
 
perhaps they'd been friends of Cyril Smith?

But, as ever, the victims were even lower "nobodies" and treated with contempt.
 
Straw man argument. I said there was an element of this. I did not discount it. Also the reason they justified the fear of racism was that they did not want to inflame the situation with reprisals. So I find it rather unbalanced that you can accept they let these girls down horribly and then accept their reasoning without questioning.

The victims need our support, the criminals need to be punished and those who let this happen need to be brought to task and fired if needs be.
Who's reasoning? The many reports on the matter citing that fear of racism did actually play a part? Their reasoning? Why yes, I do accept it, why wouldn't I? I don't know better than the reports and investigations they did to find out what went wrong, although you seem to because you think I am unbalanced with my acceptance?

I wrote about it originally because JohnD cannot seem to admit that misplaced political correctness had a part in allowing this to go on for as long as it did. I have no idea why he finds it so hard to admit it, it's very strange.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top