hypochondriac

Posts on X are also subject to moderation via the independent mechanism of Community Notes. This has seen many posts including ones from Musk being clarified or corrected frequently. Is that the case for news organisations? Certainly not at the same speed.

So what? I don't care what the motivation is. It's a positive that it's being highlighted and that pressure is being put on the right people to actually do something.

Double post

As I said, my understanding of the last enquiry was that the person involved in it said that rape gangs were not the main focus of the inquiry. So there hasn't been a full and thorough investigation on this issue.

I think the positive from last year is that it shows how quickly things can turn around if you have the right people making good decisions. If we sign a half decent striker, a winger and a defender or two then even if we let a load go we should have more than enough about us to be up near the top of the division. It shouldn't take much to have us challenging again.

Maybe but that hasn't happened so it's speculation at the moment. The problem here is the coverup from the government and police which is what I think is the most relevant part here. Fear of being accused of racism is a big reason why this has been allowed to continue unchecked for years and it can't keep happening.

Indeed. The fact that this was carried out largely by groups of Pakistani men is not something that anyone should be pleased about. I'd much rather it had never happened but ANY systemic coverup involving police and government should be thoroughly and properly investigated. That would be the case if any religion of belief set influenced this horrible abuse.

It might be that he will want to leave at any rate. If that is the case then it makes even more case to get him back. A combination of Big Les, Downes and Charles in the middle might get us above Derby's total which is what matters at this point.

My view with BBD was that once we lost out on Delap there wasn't much else that we could afford and I thought he was worth a go. He's turned out to be much worse than I thought.

BBD Onuachu Sulemana ABK KWP Leaving in January would be great business TBH. Gives us less to do in the summer.

As I understand it, the person who did that enquiry said that the 'grooming gang' part of the enquiry was a side issue and wasn't the major part of the enquiry. Did the Catholic church abuse carry on for decades because politicians and police covered it up? Maybe it did, in which case I'd support a similar enquiry for that too. I haven't yet seen evidence that the two things are comparable in relation to how those in government and the police covered things up.

Obsessed with it is a terrible thing to say. Not sure if you're talking about me but if so I'm not obsessed, I didn't even know all the details until the court transcripts were highlighted last week. I was sickened, as it appears many were and by the cover up from the establishment and police which in many ways is just as bad if not worse than the crimes. If someone has court transcripts from Catholic sex cases where there was systemic cover ups within the police and government and where people were targeted because of their race and ethnicity then I'll be equally appaled and will call that out too in the same way. Has that happened?

I've already said I disagree with how Musk has been tweeting but that's clearly untrue. Plenty of people from across the political spectrum have reacted with horror and confirmed that there very much has and continues to be a problem here. It's not all Muslims clearly but there is quite obviously a cultural problem with these rape gangs, it's undeniable. https://x.com/TheHarrisSultan/status/1875390537337073789?t=n0aPtPKTwPinT-Fj9GLPsA&s=19

Recalling Charles is a no brainer. We won't get anyone better and we need to do what we can to maybe hang onto him for another season or at the worst maximise his value. Maybe get a young promising loanee in who might consider staying with us for next year. Everything should be geared towards next season and there is no point in wasting money on a player who won't be staying anyway. The only reason to get someone in not for next year is if we have a specific job for someone for next year and we can test out the system with that type of player.

There's been some speculation about that but we don't know what is said behind the scenes. For all we know, Trump is supportive of his tweeting. It's not like Trump hasn't had his own fair share. Personally I don't mind public figures providing their opinion on UK politics but the relentless nature of this means it's probably been discussed behind the scenes or he's trying to influence Reform to be softer on Tommy Robinson.

I didn't say it was harmless. I don't think he should be doing it. My theory is he's deliberately being as inflammatory as possible daring the government to try to do something but knowing that there isn't much they really can do because Trump isn't going to ban him. In my opinion it's calculated.

He's taking the piss quite obviously. Most of the crap he posts on twitter is trolling which is hilarious when the media reports his latest tweet as news.

That performance was awful but you can hardly blame someone with this terrible shower of players, with Fernandes and Downes out and very little to replace them. He has to be given time to implement things (his staff only arrived this week).

Can we just pretend this game didn't happen?

Presumably you're supporting Farage over this one as he criticised Tommy Robinson.

What is the 'language of Islamophobia?' What's 'prescribing to conspiracy theories about Muslims?' Both of those statements would give me cause for concern given that the child rape scandals have previously been dismissed as conspiracy theories. 'allows us to express ourselves in a more informed and considerate manner' sounds Orwellian.

I'll repeat, I can only agree that something is a thing if there's a definition of that thing that I can agree is reasonable. If there is a fair and reasonable definition that doesn't involve talk of Muslimness then I'll have a look. I do have more than a sneaking suspicion that some parties seek to use a broad definition and wooly wording about Muslimness in order to dampen criticisms of Islam itself (this isn't some unfounded fear given the MP from the other week) and is the same fear about including trans in the conversion therapy ban with fears that doctors will feel threatened for questioning someone's feelings. Laws that seek to prevent open discrimination or hostility towards someone because of their religion or to prevent abuse against people in the name of converting them from whatever perceived problem they have are clearly desirable and reasonable. The big problem is that badly worded laws have unintended consequences and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Like I said it matters if Islamophobia is viewed as racist because it has an impact on prosecutions and sentencing so it's important that it's correct. Regarding it being a thing, we'd have to agree on some definition of it in order to agree that. Definitions using Muslimness or perceived Muslimness isn't acceptable in my opinion and is deeply problematic and also hasn't yet been accepted in law anyway as far as I'm aware.

Thanks. So the definition that Streeting is talking about is "expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness." What is that? The recent MP who stood up in Parliament wanted desecration of the Qaran to be made illegal. Would that be Islamophobic? I can see why that would meet the definition of perceived Muslimness. The other reason it matters is because the charge of stirring up religious hatred is currently lower in this country than stirring up racial hatred since to secure a prosecution currently you have to show that what someone did was likely to stir up religious hatred and that they intended to do so. It's a very clear distinction that matters so yes types of discrimination and how they are categorised matters quite a bit.

It's not pointless at all. Not least it's not pointless because many organisations try to silence legitimate cricism of Islam with the label of islamophobia. It's not a form of racism and it lessens the impact of that term by trying to say it is. Racism is an incredibly serious and damaging charge and if it can be defined as whatever you like then you're potentially leaving someone open to life ruining accusations that are unfounded. I certainly won't be using Wikipedia as an authority but I'd be interested in reading the Streeting article and how he makes that case if you have a link. I also didn't agree that "islamophobia is unpleasant" since I don't know what definition you're using for that.