latest snowflake outrage

[johnofgwent]

Having herself often been a victim of racist abuse online, and aware that black people are pulled over by the police in hugely disproportionate numbers, it was wholly natural to assume racism as a motivating factor. Of course the police would quickly have become aware that they'd pulled over an MP so they were guaranteed not to exhibit racism whatever the original motivations for the stop and search. There were alleged suspicions - wholly fallacious - as to a suspicious number plate being cited for the stop, which was then conveniently assumed to be a police error once they knew who they'd stopped.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/race-and-the-criminal-justice-system-statistics-2018


The above page will let you downloaded a CPS publication that shows blacks were "over represented" in stop and search, arrest, prosecution, conviction and in the prison population.


Now I'm no expert on statistics (well, I did use it in a few published scientific papers but that was a while ago) but it seems to me an overly racist approach would show an over representation in the first two, possibly the third, but not the last few


To have an "over representation" as mong the CONVICTED and INCARCERATED tells me there are clearly more black criminals than white ones and that furthermore, the nature of the crime warrants locking up over the myriad other possible punishments.

[DeppityDawg]

Having herself often been a victim of racist abuse online, and aware that black people are pulled over by the police in hugely disproportionate numbers, it was wholly natural to assume racism as a motivating factor. Of course the police would quickly have become aware that they'd pulled over an MP so they were guaranteed not to exhibit racism whatever the original motivations for the stop and search. There were alleged suspicions - wholly fallacious - as to a suspicious number plate being cited for the stop, which was then conveniently assumed to be a police error once they knew who they'd stopped.

So just more avoiding the questions, laced with the usual left wing politically correct soundbytes

1) Lots of people get abuse on line for all sorts of motivations, not just race. Nowhere am I denying there is racism in our society - what I have said and what you keep ignoring, is that I am suggesting that this should be evidence based, not that it always be taken at face value. Once again, there IS NO EVIDENCE of racism in Dawn Butlers accusations - if there is, then provide a link to it?

2) No, it isn't "natural" to assume a racist motive when there is no evidence of it. You can call it what you like, but unless it meets the accepted definition then it is simply someones opinion. Its my opinion that the term "gammon" is a racially motivated insult because it is mocking someone because of the colour of their skin - you don't have to agree with me, but you have used the term on here, not that that is surprising for someone like you who doesn't believe he can also be offensive. The problem with this shit is that people lose their jobs, livelihoods and careers over other peoples "assumptions", and that is just plain wrong, unless these things can be categorically proved

3) There is (or was) a reason why black people were stopped and searched "disproportionately", and that was because they are "disproportionately" represented in gang and knife related crime, both as victims and perpetrators. Pretending that this over representation doesn't exist won't make it go away. Yes, there is a case that crime and disadvantage go hand in hand, but disadvantage is experienced by all ethnicities and they aren't all over represented in crime or in prison populations. So sorry, don't waste your politically correct theories on me because I don't buy them

4) As for what is "fallacious" or not isn't for you to decide. Or were you there by some strange twist of fate, Steve? No. You know no more than the next man about what actually happened, and you know nothing of what "motivations" were behind Dawn Butler being stopped. Yet again its your OPINION, unsurprisingly supporting someone who shares similar beliefs to your own

[srb7677]

And off we.go with misrepresentation and avoiding the point. Ok, let's have a conversation about WHY black people are pulled over then? Let's address a.few elephants in the room.

Secondly, I said the same Dawn Butler who claimed racism. Yet theres no evidence of racism when she was stopped by the old bill. So do you think she was a."victim of racism" or not? If you do, supply the evidence. If not, WHY did she make the claim?

Finally I made no such suggestions about "Manning up". I am talking about what constitutes racism and evidence of it - that it should be evidential, not that we should simply accept the claim every time it is made. What is your problem with that? If there is clear evidence of racism, then prosecute. We don't simply accept claims every time someone makes them. Like Dawn Butler did when there is NO EVIDENCE.

Stick to what is written, not what you THINK is written.

Having herself often been a victim of racist abuse online, and aware that black people are pulled over by the police in hugely disproportionate numbers, it was wholly natural to assume racism as a motivating factor. Of course the police would quickly have become aware that they'd pulled over an MP so they were guaranteed not to exhibit racism whatever the original motivations for the stop and search. There were alleged suspicions - wholly fallacious - as to a suspicious number plate being cited for the stop, which was then conveniently assumed to be a police error once they knew who they'd stopped.

[DeppityDawg]

It is the same Dawn Butler who is chronically aware that black drivers are far more likely to be pulled over than white ones, which is itself highly suggestive of racist assumptions in play. In the light of which her reaction is perfectly understandable.

And I have heard her speak about the need to champion working class concerns at the very meeting in which I met her. She fully supports the policies in our 2017 manifesto.

You do seem to stress the working class a lot - as do I - whilst rejecting anyone from an ethnic minority who moans about racism. It might not be your intent but it does give the impression that it is the white working classes you speak for and forget that the ethnic minorities on the receiving end of racism can themselves also be working class. That you choose to interpret that as accusations of racism is your bat.

What you certainly do appear to do is suggest that those black or Asian people subjected to racism should man up and stop complaining about it  because you are fed up with hearing it. That certainly gives the impression that you are not overly bothered by the racism of others, and think those on the receiving end are the actual problem for making such a big deal out of it. None of this makes you personally a racist but it does make you look like someone who doesn't see racism in others as a problem - unless I presume it is targeted towards the white working class, in which case I suspect you'd whinge as much as any black victim of racism

And off we.go with misrepresentation and avoiding the point. Ok, let's have a conversation about WHY black people are pulled over then? Let's address a.few elephants in the room.

Secondly, I said the same Dawn Butler who claimed racism. Yet theres no evidence of racism when she was stopped by the old bill. So do you think she was a."victim of racism" or not? If you do, supply the evidence. If not, WHY did she make the claim?

Finally I made no such suggestions about "Manning up". I am talking about what constitutes racism and evidence of it - that it should be evidential, not that we should simply accept the claim every time it is made. What is your problem with that? If there is clear evidence of racism, then prosecute. We don't simply accept claims every time someone makes them. Like Dawn Butler did when there is NO EVIDENCE.

Stick to what is written, not what you THINK is written.

[srb7677]

Right. And would this be the same Dawn Butler who got pulled over by the Police and immediately cried "racism"?  Only,.the police claimed that the car had privacy glass, so they had no idea the occupants ethnicity? Her dashcam footage similarly showed no evidence of "racism". So are we to believe that every time a black person cries racism, it must be true? Or do we look at the evidence? Because if we don't, we create a climate where "victim" mentalities flourish and real problems go unresolved because people are distracted by overblown reporting.

And for the record Steve, I don't doubt Dawn butler is a decent human being for one minute. But I've never heard her stand up for the "working class" where there wasn't a chance to push her same,.boring identity politics. If she was a candidate in my seat, I wouldn't vote.for her, not because she's black, but because I feel she's too biased towards her identity to fairly represent people of other ethnicities.

I never stated.anywhere that "only white people can be working class". Can you show me.where I did? Or is this simply another veiled way of suggesting I'm a racist,.Steve?

It is the same Dawn Butler who is chronically aware that black drivers are far more likely to be pulled over than white ones, which is itself highly suggestive of racist assumptions in play. In the light of which her reaction is perfectly understandable.

And I have heard her speak about the need to champion working class concerns at the very meeting in which I met her. She fully supports the policies in our 2017 manifesto.

You do seem to stress the working class a lot - as do I - whilst rejecting anyone from an ethnic minority who moans about racism. It might not be your intent but it does give the impression that it is the white working classes you speak for and forget that the ethnic minorities on the receiving end of racism can themselves also be working class. That you choose to interpret that as accusations of racism is your bat.

What you certainly do appear to do is suggest that those black or Asian people subjected to racism should man up and stop complaining about it  because you are fed up with hearing it. That certainly gives the impression that you are not overly bothered by the racism of others, and think those on the receiving end are the actual problem for making such a big deal out of it. None of this makes you personally a racist but it does make you look like someone who doesn't see racism in others as a problem - unless I presume it is targeted towards the white working class, in which case I suspect you'd whinge as much as any black victim of racism

[DeppityDawg]

What I am about to suggest is that you appear to have undergone a sense of humour bypass, .
Support comes and goes, waxes and wanes, but is potentially there to be persuaded. Though your vote is clearly lost. If we convincingly promised to double your income and halve your expenses, you'd still vote against us because Dawn Butler said something about racism. And incidentally, I am no fan of middle class types like Emily Thornberry in our midst and was critical of her at the time of her public snobbery. I do not trust her progressive credentials. Never write Labour off though, unless you think one party rule for ever is ever going to happen. 15-20 years ago people were writing off the Tories as terminally unelectable. It is worth noting that in both 1997 and 2001 the Tories gained some 50 less seats than Labour have now. But they were the largest party by 2010. And Labour was being written off for good in the 80s and 90s before that. Yet they won massively in 97. Tis only a fool who writes us off permanently, as the fullness of time will tell.

And for the record. I have actually met Dawn Butler and she is a true progressive who cares about all economically oppressed people. But she also feels strongly about racism - naturally enough since she and others like her are frequently on the receiving end of it. But that of course is enough to damn her in your eyes, in spite of her wanting a real living wage for all working people, affordable and secure rents for all, an end to exploitative work contracts, etc. She is actually thoroughly working class from a working class background. Or can only white people be working class?

Right. And would this be the same Dawn Butler who got pulled over by the Police and immediately cried "racism"?  Only,.the police claimed that the car had privacy glass, so they had no idea the occupants ethnicity? Her dashcam footage similarly showed no evidence of "racism". So are we to believe that every time a black person cries racism, it must be true? Or do we look at the evidence? Because if we don't, we create a climate where "victim" mentalities flourish and real problems go unresolved because people are distracted by overblown reporting.

And for the record Steve, I don't doubt Dawn butler is a decent human being for one minute. But I've never heard her stand up for the "working class" where there wasn't a chance to push her same,.boring identity politics. If she was a candidate in my seat, I wouldn't vote.for her, not because she's black, but because I feel she's too biased towards her identity to fairly represent people of other ethnicities.

I never stated.anywhere that "only white people can be working class". Can you show me.where I did? Or is this simply another veiled way of suggesting I'm a racist,.Steve?

[Thomas]

What I am about to suggest is that you appear to have undergone a sense of humour bypass, .

yawn , steves ever favourite tactic , once challenged on the guff you talk , shout "im only joking" to deflect.

Change the record man FFS.

And incidentally, I am no fan of middle class types like Emily Thornberry in our midst and was critical of her at the time of her public snobbery.

What ?

Your party is not only full of those types , but labour get a lot of their support from the south east english middle class woke types. Doesnt the name "sir keir knight of the realm " starmer give you a teeny weeny clue about who is in charge of your party steve.

Good solid working class guy that sir keir . FFS.

Never write Labour off though,

No one is writing labour off.

Had the conversation on here yesterday with your other labour buddy good old , on how the scandal that is the FPTP two horse race stitch up means labour have every chance of getting into government as tony blair showed on 20 % of the overall electorates votes , which is why despite all the bleating about electoral reform , labour love the current system and will never change it when the odds are stacked so much in their favour.

15-20 years ago people were writing off the Tories as terminally unelectable.

I dont believe anyone seriously thought that , and for labour to get into power last time , if you remember  , they had to become tories in all but name.

[Thomas]

Of course they once said that of the Liberal party. But in those days not so many had a vote !

Just have to keep our boots on their necks then john to get rid of labour.

Apart from the multicultural ghettoes of london , and the docile welsh in the valleys , who else is voting for them en masse?

Most scottish and english i know would cross glasgow high street to spit on labour during rush hour traffic. Most wouldnt give labour the steam off their urine.

[srb7677]

That about sums up your attitude. Are you suggesting I'm some kind of knuckle dragging neanderthal Steve?

What I am about to suggest is that you appear to have undergone a sense of humour bypass, .

Take a look at the last election results and tell me where your majority will come from. Because your core support left a long time ago. Though with the kind of MP Labour selects these days, you'll be in good company. Lots of contempt for the working class from the Guardian reading Thornberry types, and a lot of talk about victims from the Dawn Butlers is about as far as it gets.

Support comes and goes, waxes and wanes, but is potentially there to be persuaded. Though your vote is clearly lost. If we convincingly promised to double your income and halve your expenses, you'd still vote against us because Dawn Butler said something about racism. And incidentally, I am no fan of middle class types like Emily Thornberry in our midst and was critical of her at the time of her public snobbery. I do not trust her progressive credentials. Never write Labour off though, unless you think one party rule for ever is ever going to happen. 15-20 years ago people were writing off the Tories as terminally unelectable. It is worth noting that in both 1997 and 2001 the Tories gained some 50 less seats than Labour have now. But they were the largest party by 2010. And Labour was being written off for good in the 80s and 90s before that. Yet they won massively in 97. Tis only a fool who writes us off permanently, as the fullness of time will tell.

And for the record. I have actually met Dawn Butler and she is a true progressive who cares about all economically oppressed people. But she also feels strongly about racism - naturally enough since she and others like her are frequently on the receiving end of it. But that of course is enough to damn her in your eyes, in spite of her wanting a real living wage for all working people, affordable and secure rents for all, an end to exploitative work contracts, etc. She is actually thoroughly working class from a working class background. Or can only white people be working class?

[johnofgwent]

I know its an old cliche cromwell , but the likes of keir hardie must be turning in his grave watching what labour and their cosy feet support have morphed into in the 21st century.

I honestly believe we are watching the death throes of a once great party.

Of course they once said that of the Liberal party. But in those days not so many had a vote !

[DeppityDawg]

Perhaps you and your mates can head down to Islington to find some Labour luvvies to beat some sense into. Whilst those of us with genuine concerns about the economically oppressed millions can leave you all to it.

That about sums up your attitude. Are you suggesting I'm some kind of knuckle dragging neanderthal Steve? Because thats what it looks like? You forgot to add "fascist" in front of mates though.

Listen Mother Theresa. You and your party need to get elected before you can do anything other than cast lofty ideals around. Take a look at the last election results and tell me where your majority will come from. Because your core support left a long time ago. Though with the kind of MP Labour selects these days, you'll be in good company. Lots of contempt for the working class from the Guardian reading Thornberry types, and a lot of talk about victims from the Dawn Butlers is about as far as it gets.

[Thomas]

Cash for honours: 'Labour deliberately tried to conceal secret loans'

The devastating assessment from MPs on the Public Administration Committee is the first official verdict on the cash-for-honours scandal which marred Tony Blair's final weeks in Downing Street.

https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/cash-for-honours-labour-deliberately-tried-to-conceal-secret-loans-6634523.html

[Thomas]

What's more, almost 100 of Labour's own MPs had rebelled and voted AGAINST making the Lords a democratically-elected House, and our more cynical readers might conclude that – with 217 current Labour Lords sitting on the red benches – the honourable members of the people's party were just a little too fond of having a cushy retirement home right next door to their workplace, where they can trouser £300 a day just for clocking in for a quick nap.

Then in 2012 Labour sabotaged the coalition government's plans for an 80%-elected Lords by refusing to back the reform in the face of a likely Tory backbench rebellion, because it knew that if the proposals were enacted the Lib Dems would support Tory moves to redraw election boundaries and eliminate the sizeable unfair advantage that Labour currently enjoys in Westminster elections.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19149212

And of course as everyone knows , the labour party like to dangle peerages and knighhoods in front of wealthy donors.

Cash-for-Honours scandal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash-for-Honours_scandal

[srb7677]

Like you, they are too busy calling people who don't share their twee but everso nice views bigots....

Sadly, some are. Bigots of one stripe or another are a sad fact of life. Denying that is burying your head in the sand. You are playing to the gallery as far as they are concerned.

As for my views being "bullshine", my belief in furthering economic equality - levelling up, to coin a phrase - and helping the struggling working classes out effectively is genuine. You might regard such desires as bullshine, but I think a secure roof over your head with reasonable rents matters to people. A decently paid and secure job matters to people. That you appear to regard such things as less important than the whole identity politics hate fest makes you the mirror image of Blairites who themselves obsess about little else. You probably deserve each other.

Perhaps you and your mates can head down to Islington to find some Labour luvvies to beat some sense into. Whilst those of us with genuine concerns about the economically oppressed millions can leave you all to it.

[Thomas]

Since you quoted it, I saw Thomas's risible dig at Labour quoting a party policy poster from 1910 proposing to abolish the House of Lords.

Am presuming he is actually aware that Labour won neither of the 1910 elections, being as it was then a new party struggling to gain traction under FPTP? The reason the Lords were not abolished is down to Labour not gaining power at the time. There was in fact to be no Labour majority government for another 35 years, and abolishing the Lords was not then in the manifesto it won by.

So the attempt to portray this as yet another Labour betrayal is another typically risible example of Thomas distorting reality to fuel his own mouth-frothing hate, as usual.

Labour has been promising House Of Lords reform and/or abolition pretty much for as long as Labour has existed, and it never seems to get round to doing a great deal about it. The last time it was in government it brought forward a bill, in March 2007, to make the Lords a fully-elected chamber. The bill passed by 113 votes, but Labour then sat on it for three more years until it was kicked out in 2010.

You simply cannot be trusted on anything you promise , yet despite al lthis , all we hear from party zealots like yourself and good old is tired lame excuses blaming everyone else for labours duplicity , and yet on this forum topday , you are yet again telling us to trust labour to deliver electoral reform?

Trouble is steve people simply arent as daft as you would like them to be or gullible as yourself.