Met caught out targetting Black drivers..?

[srb7677]

Thomas I do not have the time right now to respond to all your shit because I have to leave for work in a minute, but my evidence showed far more than disparities in housing. Did you even read past the first few paragraphs?

It showed that nearly 20% of people think some races are inherently more stupid than others, whilst nearly 40% think some races are inherently lazier. These are overtly racist assumptions, signposting the prevalence of racist thinking. And the fact that these are the most staunchly anti-immigration types demonstrates a pattern.

If you cannot see that, then you are wilfully blind because you emotionally do not want to see it.

And 100,000 plus reported hate crimes, up from 40,000 7 years ago? Added to the obvious fact that a lot of lower level racism wouldn't even be reported? Yet you deny the prevalence of racist attitudes? In spite of my evidence, which you appear not to have read properly?

And incidentally, I and everyone I know have during our lives along the way witnessed numerous mostly verbal racist incidents. I doubt that any of them were reported. Yet I and anyone I know have never witnessed anti-semitism in the Labour Party. What the f**k do you think I am going to infer from that? My conclusions are not unreasonable however much you choose to disagree with them.

And incidentally at least 18% with racist attitudes - though if you count those who think some races are inherently lazier than others it is more like 38% - is not a tiny minority. It is more than 1 in 6. That is pretty widespread.

And you appear to be labouring under the false assumption that I have stated that most, or at least a majority, of the population are racists, when I have said no such thing. I said such attitudes were widespread in the sense of forming the views of a substantial minority. 1in 6 (or nearly 4 in 10 depending on whether you include racist assumptions about work ethics) is a substantial minority. I or 2% would be a tiny minority, not 18%

[Sheepy]

The local Jewish media cover the story for those who like to consider all sides:
https://www.thejc.com/news/israel/israel-continues-airstrikes-on-hamas-targets-for-fifth-night-following-balloon-bombs-1.505729

But then we all know it starts as getting a rise out of the Zionists, who turn up with a hammer to crack a nut, while everyone else just thinks here we go again.

[Thomas]

Thomas, you can bury your head in the sand all you like but it convinces me of nothing.

Here is some evidence of the prevalence of racism in this country.....

https://theconversation.com/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657

Ok i just spent 5 minutes of my precious time reading through that utter total bollocks , and where is the evidence of the prevalence of racism or as cromwell put it , the many claims of racism being true?

Cause i cant see it at all.

you link states...

Black and Muslim minoritiesare twice as likely to live in overcrowded housing.

That isnt evidence of racism.

I grew up among the asian community in glasgow , and multi generational , often crowded households are a choice and way of life rather than something that is foisted on many asian families.

They are also much more likely to be stopped and searched by the police.

This is bollocks. I posted links showing the white working class in scotland from the sink counicl estates over a twenty year period were stopped and searched far more times in proportion to minority communities.

We asked whether interviewees agreed that "some races or ethnic groups are born less intelligent than others" and found that 18% of the British public agreed with the statement.

You destroy your own argument here. 18% having this view is evidence of widespread racism? 18% is a tiny minority steve.

We also asked whether "some races or ethnic groups are born harder working than others", to which a substantially larger percentage – 44% – said yes.

Lets ignore yet again 44% is a minority , what racist about this?

It was a long held view here in scotland that white working class protestants were harder working than catholics , and other age old stereotypes and empty beliefs. Its a vague question that doesnt specificaly mention black or asian minorities , dressed up as racism.

The asian community ion glasgow havce a reputation of being extremely hard working , is this racist too?

your article then goes on with this bollocks..

The claim that there are innate group differences in intelligence would widely be recognised as a racist statement, whereas innate differences in work ethic may not have the same blatant connotations. But whether we go for the lower or the higher figure, on this evidence a substantial minority of the British public subscribe to some form of racist belief.

Highlighting what i have just said about the ambiguity of the second statement , while again trying to spin it off a racism.

the final paragraph reads

Racial discrimination may be more widespread than the limited amount of testing carried out has so far proved – just as COVID-19 infections have almost certainly been a great deal more widespread than the testing indicated. We need more testing. But, even more importantly, the testing that has already been carried out indicates a pressing need for real change.

Yet more empty headed insinuation .

The whole article is nothing more than a pile of stinking manure of ifs and buts and ambiguous statements dressed up as racism.

...and this is your evidence?

[papasmurf]

Glass houses and all that.

Quite. There is no British political party free of sexual scandals and picking out just one if frankly stupid.

[srb7677]

The law should be the same for everyone , contrary to what is being insinuated in this thread , a claim of racism is just that  , a claim till proven otherwise. Like any other claim. There shouldnt be a seperate law for black folk where a claim of racism is automatically assumed to be an indicator of guilt on the accussed.

Sadly though, we are living in increasingly intolerant times, where those who cry out loudest for "tolerance" are the most spitefully intolerant of all. Any view that doesn't pander to theirs is then automatically proof of what these fecking zealots say is the truth, like being critical of someone who is black means racism. It can never be simply perfectly justified comment on behaviour or actions - look at the Lawrence Fox episode for example - you can't say anything negative about Megan Markle because its 'racist'. No, its that she's a greedy, vain, vacuous, self obsessed and privileged bitch, and it wouldn't matter what colour her skin is, she would STILL be the same

The liberal/left have allowed this distorted vision of a 'racist Britain' to grow out of the politics of victimhood, where supposedly being black, gay, a woman or a "non binary" means you're daily subjected to abuse, injustice and prejudice on a grand scale. No one is denying racism/sexism/homophobia etc exists or that it can be damaging to those who experience it, but the crime figures simply do not support this narrative. Racism or dreadful behaviour BY those same people is virtually ignored in the liberal media, so we up with the likes of the Daily Mail and the telegraph reporting on these issues instead of a balanced coverage. This is in no ones interest

Yet virtually every day we get this shit that because an 'accusation' of racism has been made, the implied reporting of it is that its true. Look at the comments made on this thread? It can't possibly be proved, but that doesn't stop people claiming that "in most cases it is true" If you are a celebrity or in a high profile position, you daren't voice an opinion that's out of step with the latest 'woke' or PC trend anymore, because you end up losing your job or having your contract curtailed, often without ANY legal charges even being made. At best, you'll be forced into making a humiliating public apology if you want to keep your job. We are heading for either greater separatism bought on by divisive identity politics, or a dystopian future where you daren't voice an opinion that isn't endorsed by orthodox liberalism

Btw, SRB has added his tuppenny line to that effect, yet even though its not stated what these 'motives' are, the implication doesn't need much translation. I think he means you and I, but you know what? I couldn't give a shit

That's a rant, not a cogent argument.

[srb7677]

Not according to steve and cromwell , Tip of the iceberg principle , no smoke without fire and all that ( apart from racism ,anti semitism , misogyny , sexual misconduct , corruption and female harrassment in the labour party of course)

When it comes to alleged sexual misconduct in the Labour Party, need I not remind you of the example set by Alex Salmond, who was actually the leader of your fucking party?

Glass houses and all that.

[srb7677]

Precisely, when close scrutiny shows the vast majority of such accusations are found to be totally groundless.

Whilst in the real world it is a fact that only a minority of reported incidents of crimes of any kind tend to be false allegations.

[srb7677]

Thomas, you can bury your head in the sand all you like but it convinces me of nothing.

Here is some evidence of the prevalence of racism in this country.....

https://theconversation.com/how-racist-is-britain-today-what-the-evidence-tells-us-141657

According to the surveys quoted nearly a fifth of the population think some races are are born less intelligent than others, whilst some 38% think some are innately less hard working. And these tend to be the ones opposing immigration and suchlike. The inferences are obvious.

And I and everyone I know have witnessed numerous racist incidents, mostly of a verbal nature. Do you think we are unique in that respect? If so, you need to present a logical argument as to why that might be. Otherwise the obvious conclusion is that my social circle is representative of wider experience, and that most people have witnessed numerous racist incidents, suggesting some high degree of ubiquity.

I am not saying that this means most Brits are racist as you seem to want to assume, but clearly there is a substantial minority who are.

And incidentally, neither I nor any of the party members I know have personally seen nor heard any incidents of anti-semitism in the party. If it were widespread don't you think we would have? Unless of course my locale is atypical in this respect and it is widespread in the party everywhere else (though I communicate with party members all over the country and still have seen nor heard none). And then that leaves you having to explain why my local party is an exception.

And incidentally re Zionism. Zionism is an ideology, not a race. It is not racist to be critical of any ideology, especially one that is frequently used to justify land thefts and oppression. It is no more racist to be critical of Zionism than it is to be critical of socialism, liberalism, or conservatism. Genuine anti-semites might try to use the word in a racist way but context ought to make that obvious. Most party members critical of aspects of Zionist ideology - I am myself - are not anti-semites.

I will also point out as further evidence of the more general point that recorded hate crimes have topped 100,000 per year. Some of these might have been false allegations, but false allegations generally only make up a minority of reported crimes of any type.....

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8537/

So whilst every person accused of a racist crime is innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law, the likelihood is that a majority of them are guilty and will be found to be such.

It is also notable that according to this evidence, reported incidents of hate crimes have greatly increased year on year since 2013. Do you not find this a worrying trend or will you bury your head in the sand about that too?

It is also obvious to anyone with a few brain cells that reported incidents will not include a lot of lower level verbal racist comments. As my first piece of linked evidence demonstrates, nearly a fifth of the population have overtly racist opinions.

I have offered evidence before by the way even if not in this thread - I am one of the few that usually does - so you can quit with the false accusations that I don't.

[Thomas]

Precisely, when close scrutiny shows the vast majority of such accusations are found to be totally groundless.

Not according to steve and cromwell , Tip of the iceberg principle , no smoke without fire and all that ( apart from racism ,anti semitism , misogyny , sexual misconduct , corruption and female harrassment in the labour party of course)

[Thomas]

LABOUR REBELS LAUNCH NEW PARTY

it wisnae us it wis the nasty blairites honestly.

[papasmurf]

Yet virtually every day we get this shit that because an 'accusation' of racism has been made, the implied reporting of it is that its true.

Precisely, when close scrutiny shows the vast majority of such accusations are found to be totally groundless.

[Thomas]

ahhh but this was new new labour in scotland and those nasty blairites wasnt it?



So what did scottish momentum and arch corbynite ricky leopard do ?

[Thomas]

Not only do labour appear to have problems  dealing with anti semtism in their party with a weak and ineffective disciplinary system , but as we know in scotland it also applies to misconduct issues concerning harrasment of females....






...and this is the party who run around casually tossing off claims of racism while failing to keep their own house in order repeatedly over the years....

[Thomas]

The law should be the same for everyone , contrary to what is being insinuated in this thread , a claim of racism is just that  , a claim till proven otherwise. Like any other claim. There shouldnt be a seperate law for black folk where a claim of racism is automatically assumed to be an indicator of guilt on the accussed.

Sadly though, we are living in increasingly intolerant times, where those who cry out loudest for "tolerance" are the most spitefully intolerant of all. Any view that doesn't pander to theirs is then automatically proof of what these fecking zealots say is the truth, like being critical of someone who is black means racism. It can never be simply perfectly justified comment on behaviour or actions - look at the Lawrence Fox episode for example - you can't say anything negative about Megan Markle because its 'racist'. No, its that she's a greedy, vain, vacuous, self obsessed and privileged bitch, and it wouldn't matter what colour her skin is, she would STILL be the same

The liberal/left have allowed this distorted vision of a 'racist Britain' to grow out of the politics of victimhood, where supposedly being black, gay, a woman or a "non binary" means you're daily subjected to abuse, injustice and prejudice on a grand scale. No one is denying racism/sexism/homophobia etc exists or that it can be damaging to those who experience it, but the crime figures simply do not support this narrative. Racism or dreadful behaviour BY those same people is virtually ignored in the liberal media, so we up with the likes of the Daily Mail and the telegraph reporting on these issues instead of a balanced coverage. This is in no ones interest

Yet virtually every day we get this shit that because an 'accusation' of racism has been made, the implied reporting of it is that its true. Look at the comments made on this thread? It can't possibly be proved, but that doesn't stop people claiming that "in most cases it is true" If you are a celebrity or in a high profile position, you daren't voice an opinion that's out of step with the latest 'woke' or PC trend anymore, because you end up losing your job or having your contract curtailed, often without ANY legal charges even being made. At best, you'll be forced into making a humiliating public apology if you want to keep your job. We are heading for either greater separatism bought on by divisive identity politics, or a dystopian future where you daren't voice an opinion that isn't endorsed by orthodox liberalism

Btw, SRB has added his tuppenny line to that effect, yet even though its not stated what these 'motives' are, the implication doesn't need much translation. I think he means you and I, but you know what? I couldn't give a shit

good post deppity , and totally agree yet again.

[DeppityDawg]

The law should be the same for everyone , contrary to what is being insinuated in this thread , a claim of racism is just that  , a claim till proven otherwise. Like any other claim. There shouldnt be a seperate law for black folk where a claim of racism is automatically assumed to be an indicator of guilt on the accussed.

Sadly though, we are living in increasingly intolerant times, where those who cry out loudest for "tolerance" are the most spitefully intolerant of all. Any view that doesn't pander to theirs is then automatically proof of what these fecking zealots say is the truth, like being critical of someone who is black means racism. It can never be simply perfectly justified comment on behaviour or actions - look at the Lawrence Fox episode for example - you can't say anything negative about Megan Markle because its 'racist'. No, its that she's a greedy, vain, vacuous, self obsessed and privileged bitch, and it wouldn't matter what colour her skin is, she would STILL be the same

The liberal/left have allowed this distorted vision of a 'racist Britain' to grow out of the politics of victimhood, where supposedly being black, gay, a woman or a "non binary" means you're daily subjected to abuse, injustice and prejudice on a grand scale. No one is denying racism/sexism/homophobia etc exists or that it can be damaging to those who experience it, but the crime figures simply do not support this narrative. Racism or dreadful behaviour BY those same people is virtually ignored in the liberal media, so we up with the likes of the Daily Mail and the telegraph reporting on these issues instead of a balanced coverage. This is in no ones interest

Yet virtually every day we get this shit that because an 'accusation' of racism has been made, the implied reporting of it is that its true. Look at the comments made on this thread? It can't possibly be proved, but that doesn't stop people claiming that "in most cases it is true" If you are a celebrity or in a high profile position, you daren't voice an opinion that's out of step with the latest 'woke' or PC trend anymore, because you end up losing your job or having your contract curtailed, often without ANY legal charges even being made. At best, you'll be forced into making a humiliating public apology if you want to keep your job. We are heading for either greater separatism bought on by divisive identity politics, or a dystopian future where you daren't voice an opinion that isn't endorsed by orthodox liberalism

Btw, SRB has added his tuppenny line to that effect, yet even though its not stated what these 'motives' are, the implication doesn't need much translation. I think he means you and I, but you know what? I couldn't give a shit