Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

I assume quite a few more. One of the charges is that some have links to the labour party and they are the ones attempting to widen the scope of the enquiry. Not sure how true that is.

So there is a good chance that these 4 are trying to politicise this as well. Goody.

  • Like 1
Posted
56 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Because a big part of her job is presiding over the process they are involved in that she has messed up. Her performance in the commons yesterday should have been enough to see her lose her job on its own.

It’s a shame that it has become political. Pathetic by the Tories to try and capitalise.  A cynical view, but some of these victims will be very easy to manipulate. It is pretty obvious Jess Phillips has the more natural empathy with the victims and a track record of concern over Badenoch who pretends she gives a shit. 
It is pity that controversy is there as important to highlight the despicable culture of not being seen as a racist when clear who the perpetrators are. 

  • Like 5
Posted
4 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

So there is a good chance that these 4 are trying to politicise this as well. Goody.

BBC report says that other survivors on the panel support the process and Phillips. I think a lot of the current turmoil is bring driven by one side of the media, prodded on by Kemi doing her best Captain Mainwaring impression.

  • Like 4
Posted
3 hours ago, whelk said:

It’s a shame that it has become political. Pathetic by the Tories to try and capitalise.  A cynical view, but some of these victims will be very easy to manipulate. It is pretty obvious Jess Phillips has the more natural empathy with the victims and a track record of concern over Badenoch who pretends she gives a shit. 
It is pity that controversy is there as important to highlight the despicable culture of not being seen as a racist when clear who the perpetrators are. 

Interesting. Looks like it's not just political opponents upset at Jess Phillips:

Jess Phillips not planning to quit, I understand, but she’s still under pressure from colleagues. 

A minister tells me they “can’t see how Jess remains”, while a Labour backbench MP says: “I haven't seen her deliver anything apart from loud noise.”

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, whelk said:

It’s a shame that it has become political. Pathetic by the Tories to try and capitalise.  A cynical view, but some of these victims will be very easy to manipulate. It is pretty obvious Jess Phillips has the more natural empathy with the victims and a track record of concern over Badenoch who pretends she gives a shit. 
It is pity that controversy is there as important to highlight the despicable culture of not being seen as a racist when clear who the perpetrators are. 

Ok I agree the Tories are hypocrites - they could have done this inquiry and their criticism holds little weight. I dont think Labour ever wanted this Inquiry, hence the original vote to not do it. If you were a victim of abuse, surely you want justice and to stop abuse over anything else, rather than make a political point. To me, its more likely that those in power (this isnt just the Labour Government but includes them) dont want to confront the nasties that are going to be exposed, having been forced politically to do this inquiry in the first instance. There are a lot of people who are going to come out of this very badly, a bit like the epstein case which clearly has elements of cover up. I can imagine a lot of pressure from various quarters to dilute it.

Edited by Sir Ralph
  • Confused 1
Posted
7 hours ago, whelk said:

It’s a shame that it has become political. Pathetic by the Tories to try and capitalise.  A cynical view, but some of these victims will be very easy to manipulate. It is pretty obvious Jess Phillips has the more natural empathy with the victims and a track record of concern over Badenoch who pretends she gives a shit. 
It is pity that controversy is there as important to highlight the despicable culture of not being seen as a racist when clear who the perpetrators are. 

Totally understand the cynical view of the victims. I've no idea of who has been involved or the scope of discussions they've had to this point. Nor on the source of any advice they've had.

From what I gather, some of the victims raised concerns. For Phillips to use the word "untrue" regarding people who have been dismissed repeatedly by those in authority over decades, could reasonably be taken very badly.

Such is the nature and length of the abuse and lack of action across any number of abuse allegations, it's no wonder that there's pressure on the scope. However, that pressure shouldn't be coming from authority, regardless of their concerns over resources, timing etc. It's been over many decades, so there's not a political party or authority that gets to score points.

Where someone has concerns about ethnicity being pushed aside, using "untrue" isn't a great way of reaching a common consensus. Likewise for those concerned about the presence of police and social services on running it. This isn't the first enquiry where there's been tone deafness on who best to be chair. It's reasonable that some victims don't trust anyone connected with the services that repeatedly let them down, be in charge. 

  • Like 2
Posted
8 hours ago, whelk said:

It’s a shame that it has become political. Pathetic by the Tories to try and capitalise.  A cynical view, but some of these victims will be very easy to manipulate. It is pretty obvious Jess Phillips has the more natural empathy with the victims and a track record of concern over Badenoch who pretends she gives a shit. 
It is pity that controversy is there as important to highlight the despicable culture of not being seen as a racist when clear who the perpetrators are. 

It now appears that there's a number of people invited on the panel who aren't group based sexual abuse victims and are victims of other types of childhood sexual abuse and they are the ones pushing for the scope to be expanded. Given your final paragraph presumably you agree that this is not on if true?

Posted

Given the counter statement today about jess Phillips, the big question that now needs answering in relation to this issue is who on earth invited loads of victims of individual grooming or wilder child sexual abuse on a panel relating to an inquiry on grooming gangs? Was the purpose to dilute the findings?

Posted
11 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Given the counter statement today about jess Phillips, the big question that now needs answering in relation to this issue is who on earth invited loads of victims of individual grooming or wilder child sexual abuse on a panel relating to an inquiry on grooming gangs? Was the purpose to dilute the findings?

I think you know the answer to that. 

Posted
3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

It now appears that there's a number of people invited on the panel who aren't group based sexual abuse victims and are victims of other types of childhood sexual abuse and they are the ones pushing for the scope to be expanded. Given your final paragraph presumably you agree that this is not on if true?

It seems at risk of turning into some culture war debate to beat the govt with.  I want the truth obviously, although already aware of the risible approach of some involved where clear more concern about how they were perceived rather than highlighting the obvious trend and helping the victims.
You can put two victims against each other who will have different opinions - there isn’t a definitive right answer on Phillips.  

 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, whelk said:

It seems at risk of turning into some culture war debate to beat the govt with.  I want the truth obviously, although already aware of the risible approach of some involved where clear more concern about how they were perceived rather than highlighting the obvious trend and helping the victims.
You can put two victims against each other who will have different opinions - there isn’t a definitive right answer on Phillips.  

 

Right but there does now appear that there are a number of people invited on this panel who are not grooming gang victims. These people have also confirmed that they were looking to widen the scope of the investigation-a charge that Phillips denied in the commons- which would have the effect of diluting the findings. You're right that some people are politically partisan but that fact is surely not a good way of discovering the truth.

Posted
4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Right but there does now appear that there are a number of people invited on this panel who are not grooming gang victims. These people have also confirmed that they were looking to widen the scope of the investigation-a charge that Phillips denied in the commons- which would have the effect of diluting the findings. You're right that some people are politically partisan but that fact is surely not a good way of discovering the truth.

I have no idea why an inquiry into grooming gangs wouldn’t have a clear remit to just do that. No idea who is trying to widen the scope and why others invited as seems pointless as not going to be acceptable to anyone. 

  • Like 2
Posted
40 minutes ago, whelk said:

I have no idea why an inquiry into grooming gangs wouldn’t have a clear remit to just do that. No idea who is trying to widen the scope and why others invited as seems pointless as not going to be acceptable to anyone. 

Agreed. Seems very odd to me. 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

He was one of the many fighting aged men fleeing from oppression I’m sure. 

Maybe there were no defenceless women in Sudan for him to stab with a screwdriver? Depressed me watching the article on the news. Need to just throw him off a roof

Posted
1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This just highlights how pathetically soft we are as a nation.

I beg your pardon look at this and you’ll find we’re not 

 

IMG_0156.jpeg

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...