What Is Happening To Our Country?

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

East Stand Nic having a bit of a melt down?

He gets beaten up so bad and a bit cruel as he is not the brightest. Did you know he has been on a plane more than five times?

He has spaffed his post quota now so emojis from now on 

Edited Tuesday at 08:26 by whelk

[tdmickey3]

7 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

East Stand Nic having a bit of a melt down?

I wish the wanker was a subscribed member and we could ridicule the lying prick some more 

[egg]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjr0lx7n0y3o

That'll cheer a few people up. 

[whelk]

1 hour ago, egg said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjr0lx7n0y3o

That'll cheer a few people up. 

Makes sense and no idea why not been set in motion a long time ago. Reality of the situation means we need to upgrade our infrastructure to tackle

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, egg said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjr0lx7n0y3o

That'll cheer a few people up. 

Good. Mad this wasn't done earlier tbh but credit for actually doing it now. Edit: although there's no security so they can come and go as they please which is another big problem. 

Edited Tuesday at 10:00 by hypochondriac

[Farmer Saint]

6 minutes ago, whelk said:

Makes sense and no idea why not been set in motion a long time ago. Reality of the situation means we need to upgrade our infrastructure to tackle

Really close to me FFS  #fuckingnimbys

[tdmickey3]

12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Good. Mad this wasn't done earlier tbh but credit for actually doing it now. Edit: although there's no security so they can come and go as they please which is another big problem. 

Where did it say no security, i must have missed it?

I read this 

He said there would have to be sufficient engagement with local authorities and adequate security arrangements in place. "Those conversations have been going on for some time now," he added.

[egg]

39 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Good. Mad this wasn't done earlier tbh but credit for actually doing it now. Edit: although there's no security so they can come and go as they please which is another big problem. 

There are discussions taking place about security arrangements. People aren't being detained though, they're being accommodated, so people will come and go. 

Am I sensing that the messaging has morphed from no more expensive hotels, to accommodate these people on army bases, to detain then? 

[egg]

34 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Where did it say no security, i must have missed it?

I read this 

He said there would have to be sufficient engagement with local authorities and adequate security arrangements in place. "Those conversations have been going on for some time now," he added.

I think his point is that people will be allowed freedom of movement. 

[whelk]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

There are discussions taking place about security arrangements. People aren't being detained though, they're being accommodated, so people will come and go. 

Am I sensing that the messaging has morphed from no more expensive hotels, to accommodate these people on army bases, to detain then? 

I have no problem detaining them until we establish their future status. Old adage but if you don’t like it, don’t come.

[whelk]

51 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Really close to me FFS  #fuckingnimbys

Cheap farm labour?

[egg]

4 minutes ago, whelk said:

I have no problem detaining them until we establish their future status. Old adage but if you don’t like it, don’t come.

I struggle with the idea of essentially imprisoning people. House them in a facility where basic needs are provided for by all means though. 

[AlexLaw76]

How long before we see outrage because of the state of said accommodation, when it was good enough for squadies (in many cases) not that long ago.

Edited Tuesday at 11:06 by AlexLaw76

[ChrisPY]

4 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

 

Lived here 6 years, work for two very large charity groups. I know what happens in family homes, rich and poor and they have much much higher levels of respect for families and far greater hatred toward pedo types etc. The UK government activity promotes pedo stuff and gives them dishwater weak punishments when they are caught. over here you will be dead within a year if caught. 

 

Do you happen to have any experience of those living in Thailand and not being caught?

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Cheap farm labour?

Ooh, never thought of that - becomes appealing...

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

How long before we see outrage because of the state of said accommodation, when it was good enough for squadies (in many cases) not that long ago.

Let's wait and see shall we. No need to invent things to become annoyed about yet.

[hypochondriac]

11 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Let's wait and see shall we. No need to invent things to become annoyed about yet.

Quote

 It's almost as if paedo's, nonces and criminals come in all creeds and colours, and not just Pakistani Muslims as some people would have you think.

 

Agreed.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, egg said:

struggle with the idea of essentially imprisoning people.

Why? 
 

If they’re entering the country illegally, they’re committing an offence. If they don’t want to be detained, perhaps they should stay in a safe country, like France…

[Farmer Saint]

41 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

 

Agreed.

What you on about? You have called the grooming gangs Pakistani Grooming Gangs multiple times. It just turns out that maybe we should be investigating other grooming gangs as well. Don't let that blind you in your hatred of all things brown and Muslim.

[LuckyNumber7]

2 hours ago, egg said:

There are discussions taking place about security arrangements. People aren't being detained though, they're being accommodated, so people will come and go. 

Am I sensing that the messaging has morphed from no more expensive hotels, to accommodate these people on army bases, to detain then? 

They certainly should be detained until they're either granted or refused asylum.

Some of them are bloody dangerous, and they shouldn't be allowed to just wander about and potentially disappear.

[hypochondriac]

48 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

What you on about? You have called the grooming gangs Pakistani Grooming Gangs multiple times. It just turns out that maybe we should be investigating other grooming gangs as well. Don't let that blind you in your hatred of all things brown and Muslim.

You think that highlighting cases of Pakistani rape gangs and the fears of victims that expanding the original remit of the investigations will dilute the focus on these particular types of cases (which make up the majority of cases) and the fact that many of the girls were abused in large part because they were white and English with a religious component involved means that I think that paedos, nonces and criminals are ONLY Pakistani Muslims? 

That's the precise opposite of what I think. Besides, the link you posted is about a grooming gang that involves exploitation of children so that part of the investigation would already be covered in any investigation into grooming gangs- which is what has been asked for- with no need to expand the terms. 

Failing to investigate this specific offence of grooming gangs and the motivations behind it for fear of being perceived as racist is what has allowed this to go on for so long. 

Edited Tuesday at 13:56 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, egg said:

I struggle with the idea of essentially imprisoning people. House them in a facility where basic needs are provided for by all means though. 

I struggle with the idea of allowing unknown threats including potential rapists, paedophiles, terrorists etc to roam the streets of Britain. Neither option is great, the first option is infinitely preferable to the second. 

Edited Tuesday at 13:39 by hypochondriac

[AlexLaw76]

Just a usual largely peaceful triple stabbing by a friendly Afghani 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ypkd57n97o.amp

[tdmickey3]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Just a usual largely peaceful triple stabbing by a friendly Afghani 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ypkd57n97o.amp

Just a largely stupid post

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Just a largely stupid post

I agree, using the term “largely peaceful” in the context of violence is ridiculous. 
 

No doubt the suspect will be easily identifiable as someone who either should not be here, or came over on a dinghy (even both).

 

[Turkish]

10 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I agree, using the term “largely peaceful” in the context of violence is ridiculous. 
 

No doubt the suspect will be easily identifiable as someone who either should not be here, or came over on a dinghy (even both).

 

DId you know you're more likely to be stabbed by a British person than an illegal immigrant? 

[Weston Super Saint]

7 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

. Remember I have spent over 15 years here in total,

 

But always post on the Saints web at about 06:00 every day.

Maybe that's just a coincidence and you're really just having a late lunch at about 14:00 local time when you make your first post of the day?

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

You think that highlighting cases of Pakistani rape gangs and the fears of victims that expanding the original remit of the investigations will dilute the focus on these particular types of cases (which make up the majority of cases) and the fact that many of the girls were abused in large part because they were white and English with a religious component involved means that I think that paedos, nonces and criminals are ONLY Pakistani Muslims? 

That's the precise opposite of what I think. Besides, the link you posted is about a grooming gang that involves exploitation of children so that part of the investigation would already be covered in any investigation into grooming gangs- which is what has been asked for- with no need to expand the terms. 

Failing to investigate this specific offence of grooming gangs and the motivations behind it for fear of being perceived as racist is what has allowed this to go on for so long. 

No, I think ONLY highlighting grooming gangs as Pakistani is the issue. I am yet to find a post mentioning any other nationalities of grooming gangs that should be investigated, and the way you purposely call out the Pakistani's is the issue when all reporting of this doesn't call out the nationality on it's own.

That's the issue.

Maybe you can point to where you've talked about other nationality grooming gangs?

Edited Tuesday at 15:31 by Farmer Saint

[Farmer Saint]

34 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

I agree, using the term “largely peaceful” in the context of violence is ridiculous. 
 

No doubt the suspect will be easily identifiable as someone who either should not be here, or came over on a dinghy (even both).

 

If they are Afghani could they not have come through the proper legal channels?

Edited Tuesday at 15:34 by Farmer Saint

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

No, I think ONLY highlighting grooming gangs as Pakistani is the issue. I am yet to find a post mentioning any other nationalities of grooming gangs that should be investigated, and the way you purposely call out the Pakistani's is the issue when all reporting of this doesn't call out the nationality on it's own.

That's the issue.

Maybe you can point to where you've talked about other nationality grooming gangs?

I can't be bothered to go and find the actual stats but these types of grooming gang cases in the UK have been predominantly perpetrated by Pakistani males. Even Labour have begrudgingly accepted that to be the case. Lets remember that Baroness Casey said in her report that the ethnicity of people involved in grooming gangs has been shied away from. You're doing what she was criticising by requesting that we look elsewhere. A grooming gang investigation will include all types of grooming gangs but will obviously heavily feature Pakistani grooming gangs because they are the highest in number for all the reasons that have been outlined elsewhere- cultural, religious, familial etc. Baroness Casey highlighted this:

"disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation"

In a later interview, Lady Casey said the data should be investigated as it was "only helping the bad people" not to give a full picture of the situation, adding: "You're doing a disservice to two sets of population, the Pakistani and Asian heritage community, and victims."

The report concluded that ignorance and a fear of being seen as racist meant organisations tasked with protecting children turned a blind eye to abuse.

"We found many examples of organisations avoiding the topic altogether for fear of appearing racist, raising community tensions or causing community cohesion problems," the report said.

The audit criticised the "failure" of the authorities to "understand" the nature and scale of the problem to date.

Wanting a grooming gang inquiry in order to stop girls from being exploited doesn't mean that you'd ignore the smaller amount of grooming gang cases not involving Asian men, that would be bizarre.  

Edited Tuesday at 15:43 by hypochondriac

[Farmer Saint]

22 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I can't be bothered to go and find the actual stats but these types of grooming gang cases in the UK have been predominantly perpetrated by Pakistani males. Even Labour have begrudgingly accepted that to be the case. Lets remember that Baroness Casey said in her report that the ethnicity of people involved in grooming gangs has been shied away from. You're doing what she was criticising by requesting that we look elsewhere. A grooming gang investigation will include all types of grooming gangs but will obviously heavily feature Pakistani grooming gangs because they are the highest in number for all the reasons that have been outlined elsewhere- cultural, religious, familial etc. Baroness Casey highlighted this:

"disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds amongst suspects for group-based child sexual exploitation"

In a later interview, Lady Casey said the data should be investigated as it was "only helping the bad people" not to give a full picture of the situation, adding: "You're doing a disservice to two sets of population, the Pakistani and Asian heritage community, and victims."

The report concluded that ignorance and a fear of being seen as racist meant organisations tasked with protecting children turned a blind eye to abuse.

"We found many examples of organisations avoiding the topic altogether for fear of appearing racist, raising community tensions or causing community cohesion problems," the report said.

The audit criticised the "failure" of the authorities to "understand" the nature and scale of the problem to date.

Wanting a grooming gang inquiry in order to stop girls from being exploited doesn't mean that you'd ignore the smaller amount of grooming gang cases not involving Asian men, that would be bizarre.  

I'm just talking your language on it. That's always been the issue. Can't be arsed to read your post as frankly it's too long, but I assume you can't find the posts I requested.

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

I'm just talking your language on it. That's always been the issue. Can't be arsed to read your post as frankly it's too long, but I assume you can't find the posts I requested.

Lets just be glad that the pressure is on for Labour to do a proper inquiry that gets some semblance of justice for the victims. Those who have turned a blind eye or who seek to deny or downplay the ethnic and religious makeup of a disproportionate number of the perpetrators are no longer in control of the narrative. There should no longer be a cover up of the motivations for the majority of these crimes. People Insinuating racism for pointing out the truth are frankly a big part of the problem and have contributed to the mass rape of working class children and young women in this country.

Edited Tuesday at 16:10 by hypochondriac

[egg]

3 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Why? 
 

If they’re entering the country illegally, they’re committing an offence. If they don’t want to be detained, perhaps they should stay in a safe country, like France…

If they're charged under the immigration act, they're potential criminals. If they're not, they aren't, so they shouldn't be "remanded" through the back door. 

[Farmer Saint]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Lets just be glad that the pressure is on for Labour to do a proper inquiry that gets some semblance of justice for the victims. Those who have turned a blind eye or who seek to deny or downplay the ethnic and religious makeup of a disproportionate number of the perpetrators are no longer in control of the narrative. There should no longer be a cover up of the motivations for the majority of these crimes. People Insinuating racism for pointing out the truth are frankly a big part of the problem and have contributed to the mass rape of working class children and young women in this country.

That's quite a jump - congrats for that.

That's like saying that those who voted Brexit have contributed to the deaths of hundreds of people crossing the channel in dingies and the criminal acts of those who have comes across.

[egg]

3 hours ago, LuckyNumber7 said:

They certainly should be detained until they're either granted or refused asylum.

Some of them are bloody dangerous, and they shouldn't be allowed to just wander about and potentially disappear.

Plenty of people walking the streets are potentially bloody dangerous. That's not a reason to lock them away. 

[hypochondriac]

30 minutes ago, egg said:

If they're charged under the immigration act, they're potential criminals. If they're not, they aren't, so they shouldn't be "remanded" through the back door. 

Edit: posted in error.

 

9 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

That's quite a jump - congrats for that.

That's like saying that those who voted Brexit have contributed to the deaths of hundreds of people crossing the channel in dingies and the criminal acts of those who have comes across.

You could argue they'd contributed but in reality their contribution would be relatively tiny.

Edited Tuesday at 16:39 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Plenty of people walking the streets are potentially bloody dangerous. That's not a reason to lock them away. 

In what way is that the same thing? 

[Farmer Saint]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

I'm not sure you're going to get much sympathy for people who have left 

 

You could argue they'd contributed but in reality their contribution would be relatively tiny.

As would any normal person not calling out the ethnic minorities of grooming gangs, but that's the point you made.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'm not sure you're going to get much sympathy for people who have left 

 

You could argue they'd contributed but in reality their contribution would be relatively tiny.

That doesn't make any sense, but I'm not after sympathy. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

That doesn't make any sense, but I'm not after sympathy. 

Ignore that it was sent in error.

[egg]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

In what way is that the same thing? 

The call is for non criminals to be locked away just in case a minority of their group become dangerous. That's not how it works. 

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, egg said:

The call is for non criminals to be locked away just in case a minority of their group become dangerous. That's not how it works. 

Should it also apply to children? Listening to some posters it would be like locking up children in a prison full of nonces.

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

As would any normal person not calling out the ethnic minorities of grooming gangs, but that's the point you made.

But we know that the prevailing attitude of failing to call out the minorities involved in grooming gangs has been a leading factor in its proliferation and continuation for decades. 

[egg]

Just now, Farmer Saint said:

Should it also apply to children? Listening to some posters it would be like locking up children in a prison full of nonces.

Yes, seems so. Collective pre emptive punishment of every illegal immigrant, just in case a few are wrong uns, but keep the vulnerable women and kids with them. It's almost as though people don't think when it comes to immigrants. 

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, egg said:

The call is for non criminals to be locked away just in case a minority of their group become dangerous. That's not how it works. 

I genuinely don't see a problem if you're a foreign man and you illegally enter the country on a small boat then the policy should be that you are detained somewhere like a barracks, provided with food and basic services but have your movements and interactions with the native population restricted until there is some certainty about who you are and the danger you pose to others. That to me is not the same thing as detaining every person in the country because they might pose a threat.

If a migrant t thinks that's an unfair approach then maybe they should consider not entering the UK on a small boat.

Edited Tuesday at 16:47 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Yes, seems so. Collective pre emptive punishment of every illegal immigrant, just in case a few are wrong uns, but keep the vulnerable women and kids with them. It's almost as though people don't think when it comes to immigrants. 

Statistically it's the men that are the issue though isn't it. Id we had a bunch of women coming over and committing serious crimes then maybe you'd have to look at it but that seems very unlikely.

[egg]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

But we know that the prevailing attitude of failing to call out the minorities involved in grooming gangs has been a leading factor in its proliferation and continuation for decades. 

That's true, but Farmer makes the valid point that your attention has exclusively been on that group. 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, egg said:

That's true, but Farmer makes the valid point that your attention has exclusively been on that group. 

How many non Pakistani grooming gangs have either you or farmer posted about beyond the link Farmer just posted?

[egg]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I genuinely don't see a problem if you're a foreign man and you illegally enter the country on a small boat then the policy should be that you are detained somewhere like a barracks, provided with food and basic services but have your movements and interactions with the native population restricted until there is some certainty about who you are and the danger you pose to others. That to me is not the same thing as detaining every person in the country because they might pose a threat.

So lock all the men away? 

What about the women and kids? 

Splitting families just in case dad's a potential nonce or thug?

 

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Statistically it's the men that are the issue though isn't it. Id we had a bunch of women coming over and committing serious crimes then maybe you'd have to look at it but that seems very unlikely.

Ditto. 

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

So lock all the men away? 

What about the women and kids? 

Splitting families just in case dad's a potential nonce or thug?

 

Ditto. 

Do you have a statistic for how many men are arriving on small boats compared to family men with the rest of their family?

Edit just checked. According to migration observatory 76% are adult men so detaining the adult male population who come over would solve a massive part of the problem

 

Edited Tuesday at 16:54 by hypochondriac