P.S. did anyone hear Keith Vaz on R4 this morning? What an apologist! Did everything to avoid the "They think that white teenage girls are worthless and can be abused without a second thought" angle and started spouting statistics that most found guilty of this type of crime are white. Well I'm sure his stats are correct but he was deliberately and disgracefully (IMO) ignoring the known facts about this case. And hiding behind the police saying that there was no racial angle. I understand why they have to say that. I'm appalled that Vaz simply nods in agreement when it suits him.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
The term racist is used too often
Collapse
X
Collapse
-
-
Duh. It's obvious isn't it.Originally posted by SupremeSpod View PostFor whatever reason, the girls should've known better than to accept gifts from strangers, they either didn't or they did and chose to ignore it.
From that one statement you've assumed that I think the girls somehow deserved what happened to them. For the record I categorically do not.
Who's really to blame then?
Is it the criminals for exploiting "vulnerable young girls"?
Is it the girls themselves for not thinking "Hang on a minute, why's he giving me all this stuff"?
Is it the education system for not telling the girls to be wary of strangers who want to give you things?
Is it their parents?
Is it society as a whole?
MF in 'How to debate like Spod' Mode.
What happens in General, stays in General.You know what they say about assumptions!Comment
-
Are you accusing the Greater Manchester Police of telling lies?Originally posted by Platypus View PostP.S. did anyone hear Keith Vaz on R4 this morning? What an apologist! Did everything to avoid the "They think that white teenage girls are worthless and can be abused without a second thought" angle and started spouting statistics that most found guilty of this type of crime are white. Well I'm sure his stats are correct but he was deliberately and disgracefully (IMO) ignoring the known facts about this case. And hiding behind the police saying that there was no racial angle. I understand why they have to say that. I'm appalled that Vaz simply nods in agreement when it suits him.
Comment
-
Instead of having a go at me, why not debate the issue?Originally posted by MarillionFan View PostDuh. It's obvious isn't it.
MF in 'How to debate like Spod' Mode.


Comment
-
Sorry just getting into the style of management you obviously use. Asking questions with no answers.Originally posted by SupremeSpod View PostInstead of having a go at me, why not debate the issue?
You mentioned 'don't accept things from strangers' as you're should have known better. You then tried to
blanket cover the argument with the 'they did but ignored it'. It's just a crap way of debating.
I would argue that the majority of girls would come from dysfunctional homes where parents don't give a crap, to wrapped up in themselves. In that case it becomes a situation that a stranger becomes a friend, then a lover or father figure and from then the abuse stems. They target 'vunerable' children. So who is to blame? The men obviously.What happens in General, stays in General.You know what they say about assumptions!Comment
-
It is the systematic abuse of the weak
of one community by the strong of another. I believe it to be racist.What happens in General, stays in General.You know what they say about assumptions!Comment
-
-
I didn't try and blanket anything. I raised the point that for whatever reason they either knew better and chose to ignore that knowledge or they didnt know but should have!Originally posted by MarillionFan View PostSorry just getting into the style of management you obviously use. Asking questions with no answers.
You mentioned 'don't accept things from strangers' as you're should have known better. You then tried to
blanket cover the argument with the 'they did but ignored it'. It's just a crap way of debating.
I would argue that the majority of girls would come from dysfunctional homes where parents don't give a crap, to wrapped up in themselves. In that case it becomes a situation that a stranger becomes a friend, then a lover or father figure and from then the abuse stems. They target 'vunerable' children. So who is to blame? The men obviously.
The term "dysfunctional homes" get's overused in my opinion.
Comment
-
Heywood, where this actually took place, has been known for years as a down trodden place and within the last 10yrs actually featured in the European Teenage pregnancy top 10.
The odd thing is, Heywood has a very low Asian population, unlike Rochdale 4miles away, or even Bury about 3miles away. However there are lots of broken families, unemployment etc. There are 2 major estates which are the typical council fall out, and suffered from no investment for 30yrs+. Although the council have built a new sports centre recently, however they dont think about people needing jobs and decent homes to give them a chance.
I wouldnt be surprised to see the police out in force again this weekend as no doubt those who think retaliation is needed will be visiting the kebab shop (again)... Will probably see the EDL visit (again). Last time it happened, there were 3 coppers left to cover Oldham, 2 for Rochdale and all the rest where in Heywood
And my ex-Mrs wonders why I spend all my time trying to get my son to move in with me, and leave the tulipe parts of Heywood that she lives in...
I didn't say it was your ******* fault, I said I was blaming you!Comment
-
No they didn't repeatedly accept gifts from strangers. They thought the person that had groomed them was their boyfriend!!Originally posted by SupremeSpod View PostOh FFS.
Ok, where did I say they were "asking for it" and "wanting it"?
They repeatedly accepted gifts from strangers! They should have known better! Read the article.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Business expenses: What IT contractors can and cannot claim from HMRC Jan 30 08:44
- April’s umbrella PAYE risk: how contractors’ end-clients are prepping Jan 29 05:45
- How EV tax changes of 2025-2028 add up for contractor limited company directors Jan 28 08:11
- Under the terms he was shackled by, Ray McCann’s Loan Charge Review probably is a fair resolution Jan 27 08:41
- Contractors, a £25million crackdown on rogue company directors is coming Jan 26 05:02
- How to run a contractor limited company — efficiently. Part one: software Jan 22 23:31
- Forget February as an MSC contractor seeking clarity, and maybe forget fairness altogether Jan 22 19:57
- What contractors should take from Honest Payroll Ltd’s failure Jan 21 07:05
- HMRC tax avoidance list ‘proves promoters’ nothing-to-lose mentality’ Jan 20 09:17
- Digital ID won’t be required for Right To Work, but more compulsion looms Jan 19 07:41

Comment