• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Sick sick world what is wrong with people

Lost Mango said:
A source told the newspaper said the cases that had been reviewed were a mixture of intrafamilial, online and in-person child sexual abuse and exploitation.

A source told the Standard the criteria of cases that had been identified for review were “much broader” than “the profile most typically associated with commentary or reporting on grooming gangs”.
Click to expand...

No shock, there is a broad array of abuse and abusers here. CSE is a massive problem in this country and has been for decades. Time we looked under every stone and not just focus in on one level or profile
 
robp135 said:
It’s not when you put it into the context of his contribution to this thread. Which is obsessively posting articles about white men commuting sexual assault and then sanctimoniously questioning why others don’t care about the victims.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and who was the first to get slapped with that sanctimony you speak of!!!

The reason for that is most likely because long before you were here, as the 'identified muslim' on the forum, Luton was repeatedly 'asked' to 'account' for muslim rape gangs. Like it was his responsibility!!! Which is outrageous! ALL DECENT HUMANS condemn muslim rape gangs, Luton included. Yet he was/is somehow 'required' to state as such? BTW, it was actually rather more pointed and aggressive than sanctimonious (sadly), the sort of bile which makes people feel like brick.

The truth is, this was never acknowledged. So I suspect that because he did not bow down and 'apologise' for something which had fudge all to do with him, he might've decided to respond in kind.

If some on this forum could wrap their heads around the fact that decent people of all faiths and colours hate pedos and rapists, then we would not be in these bizarre situations on this forum.

For the record, I have not talked about this with Luton at all.
 
robp135 said:
That would be very broard but in this context of this conversation about grooming gangs the people that attended each particular Mosque, the Pakistani people in each town or bourgh where these crimes took place and all British Pakistanis can be categorized as a collective community of different scales.

That does not make each individual responsible what what happened. Most of course are not. But they do hold a greater responsibility of determine why this type of crime was so prevalent within their community and identify whether there are any cultural reasons that led to it happening and being covered up to such a degree.
Click to expand...

Are you actually saying you think @LutonSpurs has a 'greater responsibility' in 'explaining' these crimes?
Should we then expect any white people on here who gather in pubs with their mates who support Farage and Robinson to explain why that community firebombs innocent people's homes?

I actually think this post shows something is a bit 'off' with how you perceive these matters (my opinion).
I don't care for it and honestly, don't personally want to see it on this forum ( not that I have any control over that)...
 
Last edited:
thfcsteff said:
If some on this forum could wrap their heads around the fact that decent people of all faiths and colours hate pedos and rapists, then we would not be in these bizarre situations on this forum.
Click to expand...
A point agreed with here the other day and then weirdly ignored later on to seemingly dig out Luton again.

Evil exists everywhere, simplistic but absolutely the truth
 
thfcsteff said:
Are you actually saying you think @LutonSpurs has a 'greater responsibility' in 'explaining' these crimes?
Should we then expect any white people on here who gather in pubs with their mates who support Farage and Robinson to explain why that community firebombs innocent people's homes?

I actually think this post shows something is a bit 'off' with how you perceive these matters (my opinion).
I don't care for it and honestly, don't personally want to see it on this forum ( not that I have any control over that)...
Click to expand...

Not trying to be a dingdong here but you are responding to posts where the questions get answered if you just kept reading.
 
thfcsteff said:
Yeah, and who was the first to get slapped with that sanctimony you speak of!!!

The reason for that is most likely because long before you were here, as the 'identified muslim' on the forum, Luton was repeatedly 'asked' to 'account' for muslim rape gangs. Like it was his responsibility!!! Which is outrageous! ALL DECENT HUMANS condemn muslim rape gangs, Luton included. Yet he was/is somehow 'required' to state as such? BTW, it was actually rather more pointed and aggressive than sanctimonious (sadly), the sort of bile which makes people feel like brick.

The truth is, this was never acknowledged. So I suspect that because he did not bow down and 'apologise' for something which had fudge all to do with him, he might've decided to respond in kind.

If some on this forum could wrap their heads around the fact that decent people of all faiths and colours hate pedos and rapists, then we would not be in these bizarre situations on this forum.

For the record, I have not talked about this with Luton at all.
Click to expand...

I wasn’t on the forum then. I can only respond to what I have seen.
 
Lost Mango said:
A source told the newspaper said the cases that had been reviewed were a mixture of intrafamilial, online and in-person child sexual abuse and exploitation.

A source told the Standard the criteria of cases that had been identified for review were “much broader” than “the profile most typically associated with commentary or reporting on grooming gangs”.
Click to expand...

Imagine the Telegraph article had been read by the person who shared this. We all knew he hasn't. And we all knew the headline was meant to be incendiary.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Imagine the Telegraph article had been read by the person who shared this. We all knew he hasn't. And we all knew the headline was meant to be incendiary.
Click to expand...

Lost Mango said:
This came from the Standard.

Think the Telegraph will have made editorial choices to mot include this (behind a payeallbthat I'm not willing to pay to access)
Click to expand...
Basically this was Met a re-review of legacy cases/reports going back 10+ years . The review kicked off months ago. The parameters weren't as strict/specific as 'grooming gangs' suggest, so the Telegraph, alas, using lightning rod language.

More here...
www.bbc.co.uk

Met Police investigating 'tens of grooming gang cases'

Sir Mark warned against using "grooming gangs" as a catch-all term as it covers different offences.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
robp135 said:
I wasn’t on the forum then. I can only respond to what I have seen.
Click to expand...

That's fine.

Take what I said as giving you some further context as to why the situation is as it is. Thus now you DO know, you can also respond with that information in hand. Unless you choose not to trust me/the information I have passed on.

What you choose to do with that information is, of course, your business.
 
thfcsteff said:
That's fine.

Take what I said as giving you some further context as to why the situation is as it is. Thus now you DO know, you can also respond with that information in hand. Unless you choose not to trust me/the information I have passed on.

What you choose to do with that information is, of course, your business.
Click to expand...

I knew this already. I don't doubt hes been given some brick on here that crossed the line. Ive seen the other side as well. He gives as good as he gets. And at the end of the day I suggested we just ignore one another as it would make the experience on the forum better and he actively went out of his way to do the opposite even in the football threads.
 
robp135 said:
Not trying to be a dingdong here but you are responding to posts where the questions get answered if you just kept reading.
Click to expand...

In fairness, you DID answer the question.
Honestly?
As someone who has always tried to offer a middle path in this area of the forum, I actually did not want to believe your answer, because as I initially read it, you appear to clearly state that you believe those people with Pakistani roots DO hold a 'greater responsibility' to investigate and explain these crimes simply because of their lineage/potential cultural connections.
So I wanted to ask the question.
You appear to have answered.

I won't go deeply into why I think this is a really poor, poor take on matters...I will simply start with the simple bit.
Which is that you have made assumption after assumption. Both about these communities and @LutonSpurs . How do you know what these communities are doing to address a myriad of issues which exist in their own communities? What do you know about @LutonSpurs ? Why the fudge should he have to 'justify' himself to ANYONE?
You are in a sea of dangerous assumptions. Honestly? Just get out, towel-off, and give your ego a break here.

I'm now going to sound patronising, but know that I genuinely am trying to offer some learned-advice here (I mean it, I am trying to be helpful)...age gives you perspective on the futile expenditure of energy on things which don't matter, as well as the reality that we ALL know far less than we think about pretty much anything. I realised several years ago that I will die knowing less than I ever thought was possible, but that is only because I spent decades thinking I knew more about everything than I ever did. This offers emancipation from being trapped in cubes where words like 'I'm sorry' and 'I don't know' no longer feel like weaknesses being shared with people, but powerhouse strengths that free up mind and body.

I wish you luck.
 
robp135 said:
I knew this already. I don't doubt hes been given some brick on here that crossed the line. Ive seen the other side as well. He gives as good as he gets. And at the end of the day I suggested we just ignore one another as it would make the experience on the forum better and he actively went out of his way to do the opposite even in the football threads.
Click to expand...

What can you control...and why not try to empathize? You felt your Irish heritage had seen you suffer abuse, so then you have an idea of how it feels. So why not understand?

p.s. you have, IMO, copped out by saying you can 'only respond to what you've personally seen' despite previous knowledge. Again, that is your business, but sorry, no free-pass there mate.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Basically this was Met a re-review of legacy cases/reports going back 10+ years . The review kicked off months ago. The parameters weren't as strict/specific as 'grooming gangs' suggest, so the Telegraph, alas, using lightning rod language.

More here...
www.bbc.co.uk

Met Police investigating 'tens of grooming gang cases'

Sir Mark warned against using "grooming gangs" as a catch-all term as it covers different offences.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

Which is, of course, quite the surprise!
 
thfcsteff said:
What can you control...and why not try to empathize? You felt your Irish heritage had seen you suffer abuse, so then you have an idea of how it feels. So why not understand?

p.s. you have, IMO, copped out by saying you can 'only respond to what you've personally seen' despite previous knowledge. Again, that is your business, but sorry, no free-pass there mate.
Click to expand...

Ive not asked for a free pass.
 
robp135 said:
Ive not asked for a free pass.
Click to expand...

(...is this the moment where I say 'I didn't say you asked for a free pass' and we then descend into a pantomime act before there's a rapid shift of gears and we suddenly end up in a whole other conflated-topic conversation?...I'll pass ;))...

You avoided the question and instead chose to respond to the 'p.s.'...very odd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back