6 coppers to take him down or 1 member of the public with his bike? 
 

 

 

There are quite a few people who didn't seem to be arsed when Boris Johnson said it was "spaffing money up the wall" that now seems to be up in arms about everything. 

I think what I'm more interested in is whether things have changed for the better since the incidences that the report was set up to investigate - which were some time ago. 

I've no idea if they have or not.

6 minutes ago, kent_white said:

There are quite a few people who didn't seem to be arsed when Boris Johnson said it was "spaffing money up the wall" that now seems to be up in arms about everything. 

I think what I'm more interested in is whether things have changed for the better since the incidences that the report was set up to investigate - which were some time ago. 

I've no idea if they have or not.

 

I remember listening to that live on radio. Thought I misheard it at first but no, the feckless gobsite really sunk to a different depth with that one.

Twitter has probably not been this busy since Musk bought it.

Job done.

If he was that arsed about the girls who’d been raped he’d be contacting them and doing whatever he could to set them up for life.

I suspect he may give no fucks whatsoever about them

35 minutes ago, kent_white said:

There are quite a few people who didn't seem to be arsed when Boris Johnson said it was "spaffing money up the wall" that now seems to be up in arms about everything. 

I think what I'm more interested in is whether things have changed for the better since the incidences that the report was set up to investigate - which were some time ago. 

I've no idea if they have or not.

It wasn't acted upon, as Jenrick exposed today with his endless media rounds of hot air, there was no legislation tabled to tackle it. As Robinson said to Jenrick when he was in the Home Office he didnt even mention these issues once in the HoP, lest of all start policy to act. There was some piecemeal actions but the focus of the government was about stopping the boats (amongst other non policy slogans) for a long time. Braverman's own department disagreed with her statements when she was in the cabinet as she tried to shake the tree of populism rather than policy. May did make a start as Home Secretary but then sort of backed off after the mess of the vans rounding people up and the backlash for it's broad stroke stupidity.

The facts have completely got lost and the real fact that now in opposition the same people are trying to weaponise such an issue without a single thought for those who are most vulnerable, surfing in the wake of a businessman from another country is all rather desperate, and shows how pitiful political debate has become for some.

For what it's worth, the IICSA inquiry was an inquiry into child sexual abuse set up in the wake of the Savile revelations rather than an inquiry relating specifically to grooming gangs

It had four chairs, with three of them resigning, and also suffered the suspension and subsequent resignation of its senior lawyer two years in, with some sexual abuse support groups also withdrawing from it due to a lack of faith in its competence

Where it did focus on grooming gangs, it was decided the investigation would not focus on areas like Rotherham and Rochdale where the grooming gangs were (as far as we can be aware) at their most prolific

It wasn't exactly stellar

1 minute ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

For what it's worth, the IICSA inquiry was an inquiry into child sexual abuse set up in the wake of the Savile revelations rather than an inquiry relating specifically to grooming gangs

It had four chairs, with three of them resigning, and also suffered the suspension and subsequent resignation of its senior lawyer two years in, with some sexual abuse support groups also withdrawing from it due to a lack of faith in its competence

Where it did focus on grooming gangs, it was decided the investigation would not focus on areas like Rotherham and Rochdale where the grooming gangs were (as far as we can be aware) at their most prolific

It wasn't exactly stellar

The Jay report was fully realised enough to tackle the issues raised and was focused on the issues in Rotherham.

For those who can be bothered - from just under 10 years ago

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/1954/jay-report-into-child-sexual-exploitation-in-rotherham/

I'd say that was enough time to start to do something about it.

2 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

For those who can be bothered - from just under 10 years ago

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/1954/jay-report-into-child-sexual-exploitation-in-rotherham/

I'd say that was enough time to start to do something about it.

Yeah but Starmer

6 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

It wasn't acted upon, as Jenrick exposed today with his endless media rounds of hot air, there was no legislation tabled to tackle it. As Robinson said to Jenrick when he was in the Home Office he didnt even mention these issues once in the HoP, lest of all start policy to act. There was some piecemeal actions but the focus of the government was about stopping the boats (amongst other non policy slogans) for a long time. Braverman's own department disagreed with her statements when she was in the cabinet as she tried to shake the tree of populism rather than policy. May did make a start as Home Secretary but then sort of backed off after the mess of the vans rounding people up and the backlash for it's broad stroke stupidity.

The facts have completely got lost and the real fact that now in opposition the same people are trying to weaponise such an issue without a single thought for those who are most vulnerable, surfing in the wake of a businessman from another country is all rather desperate, and shows how pitiful political debate has become for some.

I meant culturally. I understand that the recommendations of the report weren't all enacted. 

But I like to think that we've moved on a bit from that early 2000's era. And the squeamishness about holding people to account based on race. 

10 minutes ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

For what it's worth, the IICSA inquiry was an inquiry into child sexual abuse set up in the wake of the Savile revelations rather than an inquiry relating specifically to grooming gangs

It had four chairs, with three of them resigning, and also suffered the suspension and subsequent resignation of its senior lawyer two years in, with some sexual abuse support groups also withdrawing from it due to a lack of faith in its competence

Where it did focus on grooming gangs, it was decided the investigation would not focus on areas like Rotherham and Rochdale where the grooming gangs were (as far as we can be aware) at their most prolific

It wasn't exactly stellar

It’s as thorough an inquiry as you will ever get with a host of recommendations. 
 

It’s wrong to suggest otherwise and indeed it was universally praised by politicians following its publication. We all know why some are choosing to criticise it now suddenly. Though they aren’t in any way qualified to do so. Surprise surprise. 

4 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I meant culturally. I understand that the recommendations of the report weren't all enacted. 

But I like to think that we've moved on a bit from that early 2000's era. And the squeamishness about holding people to account based on race. 

I think we are in an even worse place now thanks to political extremes and reaction from some Muslims and religious communities. 
Of course neither care about stopping this stuff. All about scoring points. 

Just now, kent_white said:

I meant culturally. I understand that the recommendations of the report weren't all enacted. 

But I like to think that we've moved on a bit from that early 2000's era. And the squeamishness about holding people to account based on race. 

The thing is until legislation is tabled and acted upon, 'culturally' is meaningless - it's about what is in place to safeguard, what legally do councils have to do. Relying on individuals was the issue in the first place.

Also without legislation things can swing the other way and innocent people could be exposed because of others within ethnic groups.

Which is why you need legislators to do their job and, well legislate. Which finally, appears to be happening.

1 minute ago, Not in Crawley said:

The thing is until legislation is tabled and acted upon, 'culturally' is meaningless - it's about what is in place to safeguard, what legally do councils have to do. Relying on individuals was the issue in the first place.

Also without legislation things can swing the other way and innocent people could be exposed because of others within ethnic groups.

Which is why you need legislators to do their job and, well legislate. Which finally, appears to be happening.

I see what you're saying but I'm not sure if I agree with you. I think attitudes and cultures do change in major public institutions like the police and the CPS. Slowly admittedly but they do change. Although I agree - making it a statutory obligation tends to make it happen more quickly than relying on cultural change. 

Hopefully we'll see this now we've hopefully got some competent folk running the show. Let's see.....

12 hours ago, mickbrown said:

You're a retired Australian, relax, it doesn't apply to you.

No sir. A retired Brit. That's where my pension comes from. 

4 hours ago, Nowack said:

I just read what "Dunning Kruger" is on Wikipedia and agree but now I think I am in a paradox.

You should have just asked Spider. He over estimated his abilities when faced with a binary choice and fucked it up.

As you agree with the gormless git, I'll put you in the same pigeon hole.

2 hours ago, kent_white said:

Yep. It was absolutely disgusting what happened to her when she won the seat. And what's happening to her now. 

Interesting how it's 'absolutely disgusting' for her yet what Farage has had to endure for years is OK is it?

Leftie Brummie with a face like a bag of spanners. Nothing to see here.

1 minute ago, bolty58 said:

Interesting how it's 'absolutely disgusting' for her yet what Farage has had to endure for years is OK is it?

Leftie Brummie with a face like a bag of spanners. Nothing to see here.

I've never once said that. I've also said that he's probably one of the most influential British politicians of the past 20 years. And once went to one of his rallies at the Reebok. But no - I don't think he's been treated fairly either. 

But that Jess Phillips acceptance speech made me feel really uncomfortable. Maybe my protective instincts just kick in because she is a woman and was getting hounded by a bunch of men. Although I'm sure she can look after herself better than I ever could 😁

4 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

Interesting how it's 'absolutely disgusting' for her yet what Farage has had to endure for years is OK is it?

Leftie Brummie with a face like a bag of spanners. Nothing to see here.

And now Musk of all people has made him look like a proper widgie.

His mate Musk.

Wonder if Trumpy will still let him attend his rallies

9 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I've never once said that. I've also said that he's probably one of the most influential British politicians of the past 20 years. And once went to one of his rallies at the Reebok. But no - I don't think he's been treated fairly either. 

But that Jess Phillips acceptance speech made me feel really uncomfortable. Maybe my protective instincts just kick in because she is a woman and was getting hounded by a bunch of men. Although I'm sure she can look after herself better than I ever could 😁

Back to the fair voice of the left. Well done.

28 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

No sir. A retired Brit. That's where my pension comes from. 

That’s not how you spell “retard”.

Another typo.

Edited January 7, 20251 yr by Jol_BWFC

8 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

That’s not how you spell “retard”.

Another typo.

 From a fucking moron like you 

The ultimate irony.

9 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Interesting how it's 'absolutely disgusting' for her yet what Farage has had to endure for years is OK is it?

Leftie Brummie with a face like a bag of spanners. Nothing to see here.

Two wrongs don't make a right: They both get terrible stick. 

She has worked tirelessly for women and their rights, and has vile abuse for it.

Now had to have her security stepped up.

On the other hand, she often presents her case in an particularly aggressive manner, that at times borders on an "anti-men" rhetoric. 

She also talked about stabbing her leader in the front.

She failed to criticise her constituents for their part in recent civil unrest. We know why, but in fairness she isn't alone and such behaviour has gone on for many years.

On the current issue, a current victim of one of the rape gangs wrote to her and hasn't had a response in 4 months.

Not a good look.

The life of a politician. 

2 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Now had to have her security stepped up.

 

truss saying shes on the side of the groomers wont have helped

i'd have her banged up

2 minutes ago, Casino said:

truss saying shes on the side of the groomers wont have helped

i'd have her banged up

There's a mucky fantasy in there somewhere. Go on, admit it.

1 hour ago, Casino said:

truss saying shes on the side of the groomers wont have helped

i'd have her banged up

Probably not. 

Similarly Starmer and Philips organising a poster campaign pre-election saying Sunak doesn't want to lock up paedophiles won't have helped neither.

Lock them all up then.