Boris Johnson's Burkha Comments

coopster_the_1st

verylonglegs wrote:

It's no surprise Coopster has finally gone full on Daily Mail reader over a couple of threads but it is surprising some of you who should know better are still entertaining his nonsense and offering a reply. Why even bother with it?

Here we go again, another leftie liberal trying to shut down debate because it is a conversation that they do not have the cognitive bandwidth to process as it is racist to talk about Pakistanis in a bad way but they are also pedophiles and that is a bad thing to....

DeVlaeminck

Well it's moved on a bit from the original topic but I don't think there can be any argument that grooming gangs were hushed up for a long time in large part because of fears for being seen as racist bit also maybe in part because the girls were more often than not working class teenagers who arenn't a powerful group in our society. That isn't tin hat territory they are the findings of official reports and the testimony of MPs, parents and victims which can be googled for anyone that doubts it.

Whether the media is downplaying it now is a different question. I suppose it depends how important you think the rape of tens of thousands (if Rotherham is at all typical) of girls is. It's such a big story, something that I'd have thought was literally not possible to have happened in the uk, that it's almost surreal. In that sense it's a bit like Trump being elected, if anyone had suggested that might happen and that the President would be tweeting policies on the hoof they wouldn't have been believed. You could argue that the sheer number of these grooming gangs has normalised it as just part of society, it's no longer a shock. The next stage should be police action which at least does appear to be happening now whereas it didn't before but beyond that it's very difficult to know how you prevent the problem in the first place - is it a case of more money into police and social services and better education of both but there is still the question of how these networks of men using the girls as sex slaves seem so common. We also know apparently quite a few women in the sex industry aren't there by choice, we talk about slavery as part of history yet it goes on in every decent sized town right now.

DeVlaeminck

When I say choice I mean are actually captured and imprisoned, whether many are there because they have no other option for whatever reason is a bigger question of course.

rjsterry

Coopster the 1st wrote:

verylonglegs wrote:

It's no surprise Coopster has finally gone full on Daily Mail reader over a couple of threads but it is surprising some of you who should know better are still entertaining his nonsense and offering a reply. Why even bother with it?

Here we go again, another leftie liberal trying to shut down debate because it is a conversation that they do not have the cognitive bandwidth to process as it is racist to talk about Pakistanis in a bad way but they are also pedophiles and that is a bad thing to....

We are talking about it. Nobody is denying that men of Pakistani origin appear to be over-represented in this particular pattern of offending. I don't think anyone is arguing that misguided concerns about appearing to be racist have partly contributed to the issue not being properly addressed when it first occurred. I've posted the FullFact review of the studies that have been carried out and while they broadly support the above points the consensus seems to be that wider study is needed to get a more accurate picture. The Home Secretary, Said Javid ordered just that last month.

The trouble is you keep banging on about a mainstream media cover-up and backing up your argument with mainstream media reports of the things you say they are covering up. And you only seem to bring this issue up to attack other people's disapproval - not outrage - at Johnson's comments. I mean if we are playing the whatabout game, where is your condemnation of CSE in the RC and CofE churches, children's homes, etc. We don't seem to be getting anywhere.

Ben6899

verylonglegs wrote:

It's no surprise Coopster has finally gone full on Daily Mail reader over a couple of threads but it is surprising some of you who should know better are still entertaining his nonsense and offering a reply. Why even bother with it?

Fair comment.

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Well it's moved on a bit from the original topic but I don't think there can be any argument that grooming gangs were hushed up for a long time in large part because of fears for being seen as racist bit also maybe in part because the girls were more often than not working class teenagers who arenn't a powerful group in our society. That isn't tin hat territory they are the findings of official reports and the testimony of MPs, parents and victims which can be googled for anyone that doubts it.

Whether the media is downplaying it now is a different question. I suppose it depends how important you think the rape of tens of thousands (if Rotherham is at all typical) of girls is. It's such a big story, something that I'd have thought was literally not possible to have happened in the uk, that it's almost surreal. In that sense it's a bit like Trump being elected, if anyone had suggested that might happen and that the President would be tweeting policies on the hoof they wouldn't have been believed. You could argue that the sheer number of these grooming gangs has normalised it as just part of society, it's no longer a shock. The next stage should be police action which at least does appear to be happening now whereas it didn't before but beyond that it's very difficult to know how you prevent the problem in the first place - is it a case of more money into police and social services and better education of both but there is still the question of how these networks of men using the girls as sex slaves seem so common. We also know apparently quite a few women in the sex industry aren't there by choice, we talk about slavery as part of history yet it goes on in every decent sized town right now.

Everything I have read suggests it was more that reports were ignored rather than actively concealed although that makes little difference to the victims. If you compare this with, some of the institutional CSE, where there was very definitely a cover-up by those in authority, you can see the difference.

DeVlaeminck

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what- ... s-covered/

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/rotherham-whistleblower-explains-why-sex-abuse-ring-was-covered/

Fair enough. Although that was a local authority and police attempting to cover up their ignoring the issue, and the media uncovering and reporting it.

veronese68

DeVlaeminck wrote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/rotherham-whistleblower-explains-why-sex-abuse-ring-was-covered/

Certainly looks like a cover up by the local authorities, not so much by the mainstream media as our resident swivel eyed loon keeps insisting. Whilst posting links to the aforementioned media which neatly underlines the point he doesn't know what he's talking about. It has nothing to do with Boris's comments, as pointed out it's just childish whataboutery that fits in with his agenda.
Nobody on here thinks these cases are anything but appalling, as you say it's hard to believe it's possible in this country.

surrey_commuter

I once stumbled upon a documentary about the legalisation of hard core pornography. Somebody had won a case at the ECHR that it was a breach of their human rights to be deprived of such material. In the documentary the vendors of such filth were very unhappy as they had always labelled their mags/films as hard core and now nobody believed them that now it really was the good stuff. The problem was that it had gone unreported which is amazing that you can get a conspiracy of both the feminist Guardianistas and the Daily Mail resisting the urge to write headlines about the EU forcing porn on our children.

My point is that this is a suppression of news story that I can not back up by posting half a dozen links

bompington

Ben6899 wrote:

I was using whataboutery to make a point. I fully agree that whataboutery is the worst type of argument.

FTFY ;-)

chris_bass

rjsterry wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

... but are happy to facilitate the suppression of news of gangs of paedophile Pakistani men grooming, raping and abuse girls in many places across the UK.

He has never said anything like that.

More to the point, what has any of this to do with Johnson's comments?

both deal with covering things up

Ben6899

bompington wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

I was using whataboutery to make a point. I fully agree that whataboutery is the worst type of argument.

FTFY ;-)

Exactly.

coopster_the_1st

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/rotherham-whistleblower-explains-why-sex-abuse-ring-was-covered/

Fair enough. Although that was a local authority and police attempting to cover up their ignoring the issue, and the media uncovering and reporting it.

How would you compare the prominence of the Pakistani paedophile gangs with the Windrush thing?

Any update on Windrush makes headline news, as today, and that is fair enough. However last weeks update was on the BBC news website hidden away in the English only news section. That this the media, maybe in collusion with the establishment hushing it up, and providing protection to the scum.

Ben6899

In all fairness, Coopster, anyone minded to visit the BBC to get an update on the news will look further than the front headline page. I genuinely don't think you need to "worry" that because a particular story isn't up there in lights, people won't read it.

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/rotherham-whistleblower-explains-why-sex-abuse-ring-was-covered/

Fair enough. Although that was a local authority and police attempting to cover up their ignoring the issue, and the media uncovering and reporting it.

How would you compare the prominence of the Pakistani paedophile gangs with the Windrush thing?

Any update on Windrush makes headline news, as today, and that is fair enough. However last weeks update was on the BBC news website hidden away in the English only news section. That this the media, maybe in collusion with the establishment hushing it up, and providing protection to the scum.

Are you Stephen Yaxley-Lennon?
Do you believe the United Nations is a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world?

I won't even ask if you think the world is flat

veronese68

If somebody wanted to hide a piece of information surely not putting it on the internet would be a good start.

rjsterry

Coopster the 1st wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/rotherham-whistleblower-explains-why-sex-abuse-ring-was-covered/

Fair enough. Although that was a local authority and police attempting to cover up their ignoring the issue, and the media uncovering and reporting it.

How would you compare the prominence of the Pakistani paedophile gangs with the Windrush thing?

Any update on Windrush makes headline news, as today, and that is fair enough. However last weeks update was on the BBC news website hidden away in the English only news section. That this the media, maybe in collusion with the establishment hushing it up, and providing protection to the scum.

I'll be honest, I don't spend much time aggregating the relative prominence of each story across the media and comparing that to what I believe is the 'correct' news hierarchy. Various public bodies with a duty of care have failed to take accusations of CSE seriously. Some of those responsible have tried to cover up their failings by further ignoring the issue, 'losing' evidence and dismissing those who raise concerns from within those organisations. That, having made those mistakes, those organisations were more concerned with their own corporate and personal reputations than the interests of the victims seems to be common to all these scandals. I suppose that is part of the reason they become a scandal.

kingstongraham

The fact they have been brought up on this thread about something completely unrelated is definitely part of the problem.

coopster_the_1st

rjsterry wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to-read/rotherham-whistleblower-explains-why-sex-abuse-ring-was-covered/

Fair enough. Although that was a local authority and police attempting to cover up their ignoring the issue, and the media uncovering and reporting it.

How would you compare the prominence of the Pakistani paedophile gangs with the Windrush thing?

Any update on Windrush makes headline news, as today, and that is fair enough. However last weeks update was on the BBC news website hidden away in the English only news section. That this the media, maybe in collusion with the establishment hushing it up, and providing protection to the scum.

I'll be honest, I don't spend much time aggregating the relative prominence of each story across the media and comparing that to what I believe is the 'correct' news hierarchy. Various public bodies with a duty of care have failed to take accusations of CSE seriously. Some of those responsible have tried to cover up their failings by further ignoring the issue, 'losing' evidence and dismissing those who raise concerns from within those organisations. That, having made those mistakes, those organisations were more concerned with their own corporate and personal reputations than the interests of the victims seems to be common to all these scandals. I suppose that is part of the reason they become a scandal.

Until Brexit I also spent little time considering if there was anything untoward with the news I was consuming, which was mainly the BBC. I knew papers took a political stance and could keep that in mind while reading their articles but always took it at face value that the BBC was unbiased.

The BBC has shifted its approach and join the rest of the gutter media in Conclusion or Agenda reporting, where it writes the story to fit a pre-decided agenda or conclusion. This has clearly been the case with Brexit, hence its nickname Brexit Bashing Corporation.

However, the more you look, the more you see, and the BBC has now turned more sinister. It is intentionally keeping news of paedophile gangs away from its headlines. We all know this is because it is Pakistani men involved. They were equally quiet on Telford earlier this year and despite the Sunday Mirror exposing the scandal, it was only later in the week that the BBC decided it was headline news. This despite the Rotherham cover-up and the same thing happening in tens of other places around the country, the media are also hushing it up.

Look at the England only site right now https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/england

The page has 4 headline sizes as you move down the page. The BBC deemed the 31 man paedophile gang article only warranted the 4th headline size for prominence putting it on par with other headlines such as 'Two injured in light aircraft crash'.

As a comparison and related to this thread, what prominence did the BBC put Boris' burka comments which was an article in another newspaper?

*I reference the BBC as it is UK's most popular online news site.

DeVlaeminck

To be fair I don't see how people can argue with that. It's pretty much accepted this is also a racist crime - they target white girls - some of the victims have said as much. So can you imagine a white gang grooming muslim girls on this scale and it not being front page news. I understand why they downplay it - they, like the police and like the social workers are afraid of being branded racist.

The state is also shit scared of racial tensions turning violent - when you look at some of our cities and towns there is a huge divide in terms of where people live, go to school etc. When I lived in Leicester white tradesmen would routinely ask why I lived in the asian area of Leicester and what it was like - they weren't being racist they were genuinely curious - and Leicester has relatively good race relations.

rjsterry

My point was that I wouldn't expect the news to be a scientific survey of current affairs in the first place. I've never assumed that what gets top billing and what's item 6 and what doesn't make it into the half hour at all is anything more scientific than whichever editor's gut feeling on the night based on what they think will grab people's attention or they will want to hear about. Trying to determine whether there the BBC is engaged in some sort of organised cover up based on the font sizes on their website seems to be only one step up from reading tea leaves.

And yes, I think on balance not having a race riot kicked off by some far right wing nuts is a good thing and if that means the media thinking a bit more carefully about how they tell certain stories, I'm fine with that.

DeVlaeminck

But it fuels the right wing when the media doesn't give the same airtime to certain stories for cultural sensibilities - especially when it involves the mass rape of white girls in a racist crime. Especially when the police, social services etc have already ignored the story for the same reason. I'm sorry but some of you are refusing to see what is in front of your eyes - until people admit this is the problem - this is the scale of it it's going to continue.

pblakeney

Is there a Godwin's law equivalent for Powell?
Cos that's where this debate is heading.

Ben6899

DeVlaeminck wrote:

But it fuels the right wing...

Let's be honest here - it doesn't take much to fuel the right wing.

surrey_commuter

DeVlaeminck wrote:

But it fuels the right wing when the media doesn't give the same airtime to certain stories for cultural sensibilities - especially when it involves the mass rape of white girls in a racist crime. Especially when the police, social services etc have already ignored the story for the same reason. I'm sorry but some of you are refusing to see what is in front of your eyes - until people admit this is the problem - this is the scale of it it's going to continue.

Most on here are not arguing that there isn’t a problem with the relevant authorities but to blame the media when it was the Times that drove the Rochdale story and to think the Mail/Express are in on it is ludicrous.

Online media know exactly how many people read each story and for how long. My hunch is that the problem is the class status of the victims. Look at the prominence Milly Dowler got. Was that the nature of the crime or because she was an attractive middle class girl with eloquent parents?

sgt.pepper

Ben6899 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

But it fuels the right wing...

Let's be honest here - it doesn't take much to fuel the right wing.

Historically this isn't true. Although there are always agitators on the fringes, widespread 'extremism' arises out of the desperation that comes out of a ruling class fails the people it supposedly represents. And you would have to be wilfully naïve to think that the BBC was still neutral, rather than pushing its current social/cultural agenda.

nickice

I don't know if I'd go as far to say that there was a media cover-up but it was certainly surprising how long it took for these cases to become stories. I can see that the media are/were perhaps thinking of race relations but, as others have said, that just directs people towards the likes of Tommy Robinson and will make race relations worse in the long term.

Vino'sGhost

rjsterry wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

verylonglegs wrote:

It's no surprise Coopster has finally gone full on Daily Mail reader over a couple of threads but it is surprising some of you who should know better are still entertaining his nonsense and offering a reply. Why even bother with it?

Here we go again, another leftie liberal trying to shut down debate because it is a conversation that they do not have the cognitive bandwidth to process as it is racist to talk about Pakistanis in a bad way but they are also pedophiles and that is a bad thing to....

We are talking about it. Nobody is denying that men of Pakistani origin appear to be over-represented in this particular pattern of offending. I don't think anyone is arguing that misguided concerns about appearing to be racist have partly contributed to the issue not being properly addressed when it first occurred. I've posted the FullFact review of the studies that have been carried out and while they broadly support the above points the consensus seems to be that wider study is needed to get a more accurate picture. The Home Secretary, Said Javid ordered just that last month.

The trouble is you keep banging on about a mainstream media cover-up and backing up your argument with mainstream media reports of the things you say they are covering up. And you only seem to bring this issue up to attack other people's disapproval - not outrage - at Johnson's comments. I mean if we are playing the whatabout game, where is your condemnation of CSE in the RC and CofE churches, children's homes, etc. We don't seem to be getting anywhere.

appear to be over represented???? Are you having a liberal smug larf or what? They are representative of a group of people who view white girls as below human and fair game, by a group that claims to be victim minorities but are in fact the majority, theyre only british whenn it suits and muslim the rest of the time. They have a culture of deciet and lying, theyve even got a name for it.

This isnt racist right wing commentary its #notfakenews.

rjsterry

Vino'sGhost wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

verylonglegs wrote:

It's no surprise Coopster has finally gone full on Daily Mail reader over a couple of threads but it is surprising some of you who should know better are still entertaining his nonsense and offering a reply. Why even bother with it?

Here we go again, another leftie liberal trying to shut down debate because it is a conversation that they do not have the cognitive bandwidth to process as it is racist to talk about Pakistanis in a bad way but they are also pedophiles and that is a bad thing to....

We are talking about it. Nobody is denying that men of Pakistani origin appear to be over-represented in this particular pattern of offending. I don't think anyone is arguing that misguided concerns about appearing to be racist have partly contributed to the issue not being properly addressed when it first occurred. I've posted the FullFact review of the studies that have been carried out and while they broadly support the above points the consensus seems to be that wider study is needed to get a more accurate picture. The Home Secretary, Said Javid ordered just that last month.

The trouble is you keep banging on about a mainstream media cover-up and backing up your argument with mainstream media reports of the things you say they are covering up. And you only seem to bring this issue up to attack other people's disapproval - not outrage - at Johnson's comments. I mean if we are playing the whatabout game, where is your condemnation of CSE in the RC and CofE churches, children's homes, etc. We don't seem to be getting anywhere.

appear to be over represented???? Are you having a liberal smug larf or what? They are representative of a group of people who view white girls as below human and fair game, by a group that claims to be victim minorities but are in fact the majority, theyre only british whenn it suits and muslim the rest of the time. They have a culture of deciet and lying, theyve even got a name for it.

This isnt racist right wing commentary its #notfakenews.

Not sure what you don't understand. The stats that are available show that the perpetrators in about a third of cases of CSE by gangs are of Pakistani origin, whereas men of Pakistani origin make up much less than a third of the population. Hence "over-represented".

There's still the other two thirds but feel free to continue to ignore them and cling on to your conspiracy theories.