|
|
Post by Valerioch on Aug 5, 2024 19:53:29 GMT 1
First BBC now Sky News from the MSM caught out, oh dear… plenty of clips doing the rounds of swords and machetes outside a Birmingham McDonald’s too… apparently there are no “no go areas” on this country though…
What a dangerous s**t hole politicians have created in the last 25 years
|
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Aug 5, 2024 20:20:57 GMT 1
Plymouth tonight - the government have lost total control, this has been inevitable for years but stoked repeatedly by the Prime Minister's words, it risks escalating very badly
|
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Aug 5, 2024 21:12:15 GMT 1
Some interesting scenes in Brum tonight. Large gangs of Asians roamining streets with a variety or weapons, smashing cars and in one video attacking a pub
I'll await the press conference from the PM
I've just seen a tweet from Jess Phillips saying the people have turned out because of rumours racists were coming to attack them (and blamed the 'racists' for speading rumours). And you wonder why people in this country think there are different rules for different groups of people
|
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 8:36:46 GMT 1
Some interesting scenes in Brum tonight. Large gangs of Asians roamining streets with a variety or weapons, smashing cars and in one video attacking a pub I'll await the press conference from the PM I've just seen a tweet from Jess Phillips saying the people have turned out because of rumours racists were coming to attack them (and blamed the 'racists' for speading rumours). And you wonder why people in this country think there are different rules for different groups of people Yeah, I've seen the same footage and as far as I can see, no police in sight. I'm unsure now whether Labour and the police think any white person who happens to be caught up in this is taken to be far right and therefore fair game. It will be interesting to see if anyone puts this to Starmer as from what I can see a fair amount of the press are as two tier as Keir.  And that is embarrassing from Phillips but then hardly unexpected. Par for the course for Labour from what we have seen. When its groups of white working class protesting and causing issues on the streets is the fault of the far right, when it groups of Asians protesting and causing issues on the streets it the fault of the...far right. Lord knows who they think they are kidding. Just to add, nice to see Musk taking Starmer to task on Twitter. There has been a lot of talk about misinformation on social media and Twitter in particular and some of it is warranted but by the same token, when I look to the MSM I wouldn't know about large gangs of Asians roaming streets with a variety or weapons, smashing cars, attacking people and in one video attacking a pub. I only know that is happening because of Twitter. Which shows the importance of the platform (and that it is in the hands of Musk). |
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Aug 6, 2024 10:14:12 GMT 1
Its worth pointing out that as a general rule the police will be looking to make arrests for criminal and rioting outside the immidiate environment where the trouble is taking place. Pitch battles between Police and protesters are a recipe for disaster so they tend to try and just maintain a viewing and monitoring role, and only interveen when there is clear danger to life and property. Its understandable people might view this as letting the rioters off, and no doubt dammage does take place which is not good but justise is often best served at a calmer distance. So just because things don't happen immidiately doesn't mean they won't in the future.
Its a policy that came out of the London and Bradford riots in the early 2010's where arrests and prosecutions for the riots were still taking place 6-12 months after the events. Its a similar policy they use for football related incidents as well.
The 400 or so arrests and court cases so far are likely to be the low hanging fruit where the Police have identified "regular customers" and been able ID and arrest people quickly, but lots more will follow in the coming months.
Another tool the Police have now is the use of drone technology, which can produce evidence from thousands of metres away and is often used to track movements of people over long distances. Its a very effective tool as the drones are out of sight and harm, but produce a lot of evidence used in court cases.
Similarly the tracking of social media is very effective as well now, and a lot of the Police work will be being done online in following treads and individuals via various social media. I imagine we'll be seeing the Malicious Communications Act 1988 used a lot in upcoming court cases.
The whole social media area is a tough one for the Police and there is so much misinformation being put out and hyping communities up its very difficult to control. I went into town on the bus yesterday and heard two old ladies tell the bus driver there was a riot planned in Shrewsbury on Saturday so they were doing their shopping today. Which kind of shows how quickly information and potential alarm can be spread across communities.
|
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Aug 6, 2024 11:48:06 GMT 1
Its worth pointing out that as a general rule the police will be looking to make arrests for criminal and rioting outside the immidiate environment where the trouble is taking place. Pitch battles between Police and protesters are a recipe for disaster so they tend to try and just maintain a viewing and monitoring role, and only interveen when there is clear danger to life and property. Its understandable people might view this as letting the rioters off, and no doubt dammage does take place which is not good but justise is often best served at a calmer distance. So just because things don't happen immidiately doesn't mean they won't in the future. I do take your point and it seems a sensible approach. I've got no doubt that there is an element of manipulation/mis-information on social media and there are people pushing agenda's, however things like this certainly don't help to disprove the accusations of two tier policing www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/05/police-review-liaison-officer-muslims-weapons-mosque/#:~:text=Staffordshire%20Police%20has%20launched%20a,within%20the%20place%20of%20worship. |
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Aug 6, 2024 12:16:17 GMT 1
Its worth pointing out that as a general rule the police will be looking to make arrests for criminal and rioting outside the immidiate environment where the trouble is taking place. Pitch battles between Police and protesters are a recipe for disaster so they tend to try and just maintain a viewing and monitoring role, and only interveen when there is clear danger to life and property. Its understandable people might view this as letting the rioters off, and no doubt dammage does take place which is not good but justise is often best served at a calmer distance. So just because things don't happen immidiately doesn't mean they won't in the future. I do take your point and it seems a sensible approach. I've got no doubt that there is an element of manipulation/mis-information on social media and there are people pushing agenda's, however things like this certainly don't help to disprove the accusations of two tier policing www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/05/police-review-liaison-officer-muslims-weapons-mosque/#:~:text=Staffordshire%20Police%20has%20launched%20a,within%20the%20place%20of%20worship. Not sure that links working, but assume it links to a case where a two tier approach has been taken. I do feel for the Police in these cases as they have to tread a very fine line between inforcing law and order, whilst also working with a whole range of different communities and as the old saying goes "can't please all of the people all of the time" There is also so much social media focus now that every decision they make is shown to a much larger audiance than it once was. The Police themselves also have a range of different views within their own ranks too, and unfortunately as the last few years have shown some officers using their own positions to carry out crimes. I'm quite split on the whole social media thing as well. On the one hand the rise of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc have helped play a massive role in democratising information and allowing people to share and exchange information in ways that have never been possible before. But at the same time there needs to be responsibility shown from everyone using it, and to take whats shared on social media with a degree of sceptisim. Last week for example the name and back ground of the alledged Southport killer was suggested to be an asylum seeker called Ali Al-Shakati - and by the afternoon of the attack the name was being widely shared on twitter/X often by pretty well respected commentators and journalists. This arguably contributed to the protests in Southport over the next few days. However the name appears to have been generated by a small US based news agency and rapidly spread. There is an element of monetization in all this as well where getting traffic through social media generates money - which can be problematic too. I appriciate people want immidiate access to information about horrific events like this, but the old fashioned side of me things that letting the authorities deal with it calmly and methodically. I'm not sure I need to know 24/7 whats happening in Leeds, Hull, Birmingham and Liverpool and whether having everything so easily accessible is that helpful. |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Aug 6, 2024 12:42:37 GMT 1
Convicted rioters may find they are chucked out of rented accommodation and lose their job, if they have one.
|
|
hankmaloysenior
Midland League Division One
When it's time to party, we will party hard!
Posts: 463
|
Post by hankmaloysenior on Aug 6, 2024 12:53:27 GMT 1
Some interesting scenes in Brum tonight. Large gangs of Asians roamining streets with a variety or weapons, smashing cars and in one video attacking a pub I'll await the press conference from the PM I've just seen a tweet from Jess Phillips saying the people have turned out because of rumours racists were coming to attack them (and blamed the 'racists' for speading rumours). And you wonder why people in this country think there are different rules for different groups of people Quite. And if Starmer does address it - it'll be very interesting to see the rhetoric and terminology used. He and others in the media, social media and even on here, have been very quick to call the rioters scum, neanderthals etc (which is completely justified for a significant proportion causing direct violence). Will he and others use the same terminology for Muslim rioters? I'm not sure whether there's two-tier policing but there's undoubtedly a two-tier response from Labour and some on the left in relation to any issues relating to the Muslim community. The level of mental gymnastics to justify or ignore issues is astonishing. It's one of the main reasons the grooming scandal went on so long and was so widespread. I suspect there are some who don't know how to approach the condemnation and are terrified of being branded Islamophobic but I also think there's a level of sub-conscious bigotry (the bigotry of low expectations) and white saviour complex. Islam has a growing population of around 2 billion, with funding driven from the some of the richest countries on earth and an ideology that largely aligns with most right wing beliefs. Ironically, most Muslims are more conservative, than most conservatives. It's absolutely fine to be direct and criticise Islam and Muslims when required. |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Aug 6, 2024 14:02:13 GMT 1
Let's just let the police get on with thelr job, without fear or favour.
|
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 14:05:53 GMT 1
Its worth pointing out that as a general rule the police will be looking to make arrests for criminal and rioting outside the immidiate environment where the trouble is taking place. Pitch battles between Police and protesters are a recipe for disaster so they tend to try and just maintain a viewing and monitoring role, and only interveen when there is clear danger to life and property. Its understandable people might view this as letting the rioters off, and no doubt dammage does take place which is not good but justise is often best served at a calmer distance. So just because things don't happen immidiately doesn't mean they won't in the future. I do take your point and it seems a sensible approach. I've got no doubt that there is an element of manipulation/mis-information on social media and there are people pushing agenda's, however things like this certainly don't help to disprove the accusations of two tier policing www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/05/police-review-liaison-officer-muslims-weapons-mosque/#:~:text=Staffordshire%20Police%20has%20launched%20a,within%20the%20place%20of%20worship. Considering that was after the event that would mean the police knew they were armed and allowed them to walk the streets as such. They were then reassured that no one would be arrested, so no follow up, for having done so. I don't hold out too much hope that Staffs police will find any issues with their conduct. Other than that, appreciate the police will deploy different methods to tackle the current unrest however, I think the best example of tier two policing is no policing at all. Which is what appears to have happened in Birmingham yesterday. |
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Aug 6, 2024 14:12:07 GMT 1
All very good but there's already a massive threat in such areas and normal people are scared. The reaction was always going to be to protect themselves and this will be hijacked by their extremists. If the riots had started with whites being targeted by Asians don't you think there'd be vigalante gangs protecting and retaliating? The current troubles were started by our extremists no one questions that and a worrying number of people sympathise with them and are looking to blame politicians for political reasons..... The answer is stop antagonizing the situation on line and stop rioting, Britain's a multicultural country and we all need to live together
|
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Aug 6, 2024 15:10:19 GMT 1
Considering that was after the event that would mean the police knew they were armed and allowed them to walk the streets as such. They were then reassured that no one would be arrested, so no follow up, for having done so. I don't hold out too much hope that Staffs police will find any issues with their conduct. Other than that, appreciate the police will deploy different methods to tackle the current unrest however, I think the best example of tier two policing is no policing at all. Which is what appears to have happened in Birmingham yesterday. Whilst there weren't any police clearly visible on the videos from Bordesley last night, the Police did seem to be monitoring the situtation and issued the statement below about the events and their subsequent respose. www.westmidlands.police.uk/news/west-midlands/news/news/2024/august/large-gathering-in-birmingham-but-no-clashes-with-members-of-opposing-groups/The main Stetchford Police station is just up the road from Bordesley and the armed response unit are based at Digbeth just up the road as well, so whilst i obviously wasn't there I'd be surprised if there wasn't a presence of some kind there, or one that could have been deployed if required. Don't think I'm giving any great Police secrets away (If I don't post anymore I've been arrested) but when I worked on the commonwealth games in 2022 the Police made use of drones to review and monitor the crowds and any potential issues, which were a very impressive piece of kit, and allowed us close monitoring of crowds from a distance, with Police units on standby near by if needed. I understand these continued to be used for Policing after the games and are reguarly used over the city centre so likely to have been in use during the disturbances earlier in the week, and evidence likely to be used in follow up to the crimes committed and outlined in the Police statement. |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 15:40:58 GMT 1
Considering that was after the event that would mean the police knew they were armed and allowed them to walk the streets as such. They were then reassured that no one would be arrested, so no follow up, for having done so. I don't hold out too much hope that Staffs police will find any issues with their conduct. Other than that, appreciate the police will deploy different methods to tackle the current unrest however, I think the best example of tier two policing is no policing at all. Which is what appears to have happened in Birmingham yesterday. Whilst there weren't any police clearly visible on the videos from Bordesley last night, the Police did seem to be monitoring the situtation and issued the statement below about the events and their subsequent respose. Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... |
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Aug 6, 2024 16:01:50 GMT 1
Whilst there weren't any police clearly visible on the videos from Bordesley last night, the Police did seem to be monitoring the situtation and issued the statement below about the events and their subsequent respose. Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... My understanding is that the Police did deploy to the pub shortly after the incident occured and the situation was calmed shortly after, along with a commitment by the local community to pay for damage to the pub. Clearly wasn't a good situation but seems to have been resolved with some good community leadership. www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/ckg22p3dex0oAgain we don't know but i expect lots of CCTV and footage will be looked at and arrests could follow later. Its not of great comfort when events happen that harm people and property, but justise does generally tend to catch up with the perpitrators at a later date. There is though no doubt a change in Policing styles from the past though. My father was in the Police in the 70s and 80s including a spell in the Met, and was discussing it with him last night, that in the past there would have been much more of a proactive Police presence on the ground where potential flare points were expected, where as now the Police take much more reactive operational approach. Part of that is due to resources and the Police being much smaller in numbers than they used to be, but also that having Police on the ground also generated conflict as well and antagonised communities and often led to pitched battles as well. There is still a lot of proactive policing where demos and protests are planned and agreed with the Police in advance - as most of the Westminster protests are, where as unplanned protests and sudden events tend to have a more reactive approach to them. Thats maybe something for the longer term Home Office planning to look at if civil unrest is to increase, and in part why the law was changed by the last Government. So for example some of the just stop oil protesters were given 5 year sentences in prision for planning disruption to the road network recently, before they committed the crime. I'd expect more or those sort of laws to come through the system in the coming years too. |
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Aug 6, 2024 16:37:58 GMT 1
Whilst there weren't any police clearly visible on the videos from Bordesley last night, the Police did seem to be monitoring the situtation and issued the statement below about the events and their subsequent respose. Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... You realise your quoting a right wing news organisation? What do you expect? “The channel is described as right-leaning on political issues. It has faced criticism several times for providing a platform to far-right figures without adequately challenging their rhetoric. The channel has been found to have breached Ofcom's standards on several occasions.”2 |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 16:41:22 GMT 1
Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... My understanding is that the Police did deploy to the pub shortly after the incident occured and the situation was calmed shortly after, along with a commitment by the local community to pay for damage to the pub. Clearly wasn't a good situation but seems to have been resolved with some good community leadership. So what was it? Were the police monitoring the situation as you suggested earlier or not? If so, why was that allowed to happen in the first place? Why should those men, women and children go unprotected and left to feel unsafe as an armed mob tried to gain entry? I mean considering, as you suggest, they would have been monitoring the situation? And according the assistant manager interviewed by GB News, the police had not yet been in touch (at the time that was recorded anyhow). So when did they arrive, where is that reported? And no doubt the situation was calmed sometime after, whether the police intervened or not. And I fail to see the relevance of that other than to downplay what had happened. As the incident had occurred and we can only image what that must have felt like for those inside the pub, especially the children. I'll not address the comments from those who sought to apologise for the incident other than to say when people show you who they are, believe them. Again, this looks like an effort to downplay what had happened. And whilst the information you are sharing regarding police methods makes interesting reading that isn't the point here, its not the methods deployed but whether those methods are deployed evenly (to all those involved in the current unrest). And that, as a number of incidents are showing, including the incident in Yardley, doesn't appear to be the case. For all the talk about communities needing to feel safe and protected that did not happen in Yardley. And when I hear the PM and Labour politicians constantly talking in that regard towards certain communities but not others, its hard not to conclude why. Again, two tier policing. |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 16:48:01 GMT 1
Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... You realise your quoting a right wing news organisation? What do you expect? “The channel is described as right-leaning on political issues. It has faced criticism several times for providing a platform to far-right figures without adequately challenging their rhetoric. The channel has been found to have breached Ofcom's standards on several occasions.”2I've no time for that. If you have an issue with what is reported then I am more than happy to discuss that but if you are just going to dismiss it in that manner then I'm simply not interested. |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 17:42:37 GMT 1
Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... Again we don't know but i expect lots of CCTV and footage will be looked at and arrests could follow later. Its not of great comfort when events happen that harm people and property, but justise does generally tend to catch up with the perpitrators at a later date. Just to add in addition that the different and changing methods that you have mentioned have been touched on by Richard Cooke, the chairman of the West Midlands Police Federation. 👍 This is from todays Telegraph...
Richard Cooke, the chairman of the West Midlands Police Federation, raised concerns over how officers had dealt with the incident at the Birmingham pub.
Mr Cooke, who represents rank-and-file officers in the region, admitted there were questions over the policing approach to the incident following criticism over a lack of arrests at the scene.
He said: “You look at these videos and it does look bad. You see a load of thugs in balaclavas waving knives around, and you don’t see any police. There were a number of things that could have happened yesterday, and so I think the force was looking at several potential incidents that could have happened, and this was one of them.
“It is all about understanding the context to me, but there is no doubt that it is not a good look to have criminals marauding in the streets.
“What you are supposed to do if you have someone with a machete or a bladed weapon is send armed support in, and of course they don’t want to do that. So I think it is a case that if it is peaceful, in the sense of nobody has been injured, I think the conclusion is that it is better to wait.
“There is clear CCTV of the guy with the sword – they need to ensure that he is arrested and people like him are dealt with where there is the evidence, because my worry is that there is a focus on the alleged far-Right protests.
“I just wonder whether there is the determination to deal with everyone on all sides with equal ferocity given the stance taken by the political leadership of labelling ‘far-Right’ – which may well be the case – but there are clearly other elements coming into play.”
Mr Cooke added: “The excuse often given, and I don’t necessarily agree with it, is that you don’t confront them at the time because on the balance of risk, someone might get hurt if we confront them.
“But actually, there is a bigger picture – if you don’t confront them, you pay a heavy price in terms of the psychology amongst the wider public says that the police aren’t going to do anything, and if you allow that to take root it becomes a bit cancerous.
“To me, if I see someone waving swords around I think they have got to be confronted as soon as possible. You cannot let it stand – and too often that is what we are seen to do.” |
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Aug 6, 2024 18:30:07 GMT 1
You realise your quoting a right wing news organisation? What do you expect? “The channel is described as right-leaning on political issues. It has faced criticism several times for providing a platform to far-right figures without adequately challenging their rhetoric. The channel has been found to have breached Ofcom's standards on several occasions.”2I've no time for that. If you have an issue with what is reported then I am more than happy to discuss that but if you are just going to dismiss it in that manner then I'm simply not interested. I haven’t dismissed it, I understand why they behaved that way, read my previous post which outlines my thoughts………I’d expect a report with a right wing slant from them which isn’t helping the situation but just fanning the flames. Worth reading Elliott Bennett on Twitter who outlines how it affects anyone with a different colour skin even when your parent were both Bon in the UK. There’s indiscriminate racist attacks occurring not just against asylum seekers, illegals or extremists but against innocent families and communities, they’re scared so what are they supposed to do? What happened when the far right got a sniff that the awful crime in Carlisle had been committed by someone with a different colour skin |
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Aug 6, 2024 19:15:29 GMT 1
All very good but there's already a massive threat in such areas and normal people are scared. The reaction was always going to be to protect themselves and this will be hijacked by their extremists. If the riots had started with whites being targeted by Asians don't you think there'd be vigalante gangs protecting and retaliating? The current troubles were started by our extremists no one questions that and a worrying number of people sympathise with them and are looking to blame politicians for political reasons..... The answer is stop antagonizing the situation on line and stop rioting, Britain's a multicultural country and we all need to live together The fact you refer to “our extremists” says it all, we have opposing sides in this country, and the longer the political establishment turn a blind eye, the worse it will get. Applying a sticking plaster through a few short jail sentences will not sort a gaping wound of an utterly failed policy of open borders and failed multiculturalism and integration |
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Aug 6, 2024 19:18:27 GMT 1
Whilst there weren't any police clearly visible on the videos from Bordesley last night, the Police did seem to be monitoring the situtation and issued the statement below about the events and their subsequent respose. Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... Indeed, this morning within 10 minutes of turning the TV on I saw BBC and ITV reaching out to “traumatised” illegal immigrants in hotels. No such coverage to those trapped in that pub with a baying mob outside - mind you they were probably “largely peaceful” as always. I must have imagine news reporters being approached with a knife, and machetes and swords being wielded on our streets |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 19:28:40 GMT 1
I've no time for that. If you have an issue with what is reported then I am more than happy to discuss that but if you are just going to dismiss it in that manner then I'm simply not interested. I haven’t dismissed it, I understand why they behaved that way, read my previous post which outlines my thoughts………I’d expect a report with a right wing slant from them which isn’t helping the situation but just fanning the flames. Worth reading Elliott Bennett on Twitter who outlines how it affects anyone with a different colour skin even when your parent were both Bon in the UK. There’s indiscriminate racist attacks occurring not just against asylum seekers, illegals or extremists but against innocent families and communities, they’re scared so what are they supposed to do? What happened when the far right got a sniff that the awful crime in Carlisle had been committed by someone with a different colour skin Where is the right wing slant, how is reporting from the pub and speaking to someone who was there at the time fanning the flames and not helping the situation? I find that a bizarre thing to say, that makes absolutely no sense to me at all. And as I touched on earlier, it will be interesting to see who else took the time out to go there to speak to them about their experience (which was no doubt absolutely horrific and more so for the children in attendance). And we know about the attacks by the far right, that is not disputed. However, we have a PM, a government, a police, a media speaking out against such attacks. We have a PM, a government, a police, a media voicing their concerns about the safety of such communities and that they should and will be protected. As they should. However, they are not calling out all violence committed by all demographics. And not only is that causing anger and resentment its clearly putting people in danger as we saw in Yardley yesterday (where a large group of armed men were allowed to roam as they pleased attacking people, cars and a pub without a policeman in sight because they happened to be Asian targeting white people). All violence should be called out, each and every community should not be left to feel unsafe and all should be reassured they will be protected. Yet for some reason all that seems to be beyond Two Tier Kier. |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 6, 2024 19:36:12 GMT 1
Well if that was the case, if the police were monitoring things, how come they allowed the mob to move on to a pub in nearby Yardley which they then tried to forcibly enter? Why would the police allow the men, women and children in the pub to feel unsafe because they were having to deal with a large and armed mob outside trying to force entry? I have seen so much said about communities feeling unsafe and that they should be protected. So why did the police not afford that protection to the people in that pub, why were they left to fend for themselves against an armed mob? Why did the police think that it was acceptable for those people to feel unsafe? And what message does that send out with regards to who the police are willing to protect and who they are not willing to protect. Again, two tier policing. I mean GB News takes a fair amount of flak but I suspect they are the only news channel to reach out to those who were inside the pub. So fair play to them... Indeed, this morning within 10 minutes of turning the TV on I saw BBC and ITV... Was it Ed Balls interviewing Yvette Cooper again?  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2024 6:49:42 GMT 1
They say that a week is a long time in politics... Well me sideways! We're a totalitarian state within a foooookin' month! Starmer wants facial recognition cameras a priority. Its all a bit communist China where they can freeze your assets for any little bit of distemper. We're moving towards cashless already. Anyone who protests they don't want hordes of fighting age men from Afghanistan, Pakistan or people from Chester/Ellesmere Port/Liverpool next door is absolutely duucked. Your card is suspended. There must be many Labour voters reading finding it hard to disagree. You voted in a nutter. He controls the media. The police etc The only thing he can't control yet is X We have a totalitarian state already I hope you're all pleased with yourselves So far there have been no riots in Wales, suggesting that you are not representative of the people of your country. More like the drunken bum that sits on the park bench with a bottle of meths shouting at the trees. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2024 12:24:56 GMT 1
Hope to see as many of the threatening and intimidating thugs locked up, regardless of colour, religion or political affiliation.
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Aug 7, 2024 21:01:19 GMT 1
Hope to see as many of the threatening and intimidating thugs locked up, regardless of colour, religion or political affiliation. I'm sure the authorities will be keen to stamp out all actions by thugs. But bear in mind many of those through the courts so far have previous convictions ,have assaulted an emergency worker trying to keep the peace or committed arson. A baying mob outside a pub is not the same as someone trying to set fire to your accomodation or having your windows smashed in and your car smashed up. |
|
|
|
Post by kenwood on Aug 7, 2024 21:35:21 GMT 1
I note that crowds of people have been out in force in numerous locations protesting against the thuggish idiots who have caused so much trouble.
How brilliant is that.
Citizens in our towns and cities making their views known and saying immigrants are welcome here and basically standing up to those who would spew out their racial hatred .
Wonderful , I wonder what Farage and his filthy followers make of this latest news.
|
|
|
|
Post by colouroflove on Aug 8, 2024 3:17:58 GMT 1
Some interesting scenes in Brum tonight. Large gangs of Asians roamining streets with a variety or weapons, smashing cars and in one video attacking a pub I'll await the press conference from the PM I've just seen a tweet from Jess Phillips saying the people have turned out because of rumours racists were coming to attack them (and blamed the 'racists' for speading rumours). And you wonder why people in this country think there are different rules for different groups of people Quite. And if Starmer does address it - it'll be very interesting to see the rhetoric and terminology used. He and others in the media, social media and even on here, have been very quick to call the rioters scum, neanderthals etc (which is completely justified for a significant proportion causing direct violence). Will he and others use the same terminology for Muslim rioters? I'm not sure whether there's two-tier policing but there's undoubtedly a two-tier response from Labour and some on the left in relation to any issues relating to the Muslim community. The level of mental gymnastics to justify or ignore issues is astonishing. It's one of the main reasons the grooming scandal went on so long and was so widespread. I suspect there are some who don't know how to approach the condemnation and are terrified of being branded Islamophobic but I also think there's a level of sub-conscious bigotry (the bigotry of low expectations) and white saviour complex. Islam has a growing population of around 2 billion, with funding driven from the some of the richest countries on earth and an ideology that largely aligns with most right wing beliefs. Ironically, most Muslims are more conservative, than most conservatives. It's absolutely fine to be direct and criticise Islam and Muslims when required. Why not just call out the terrorism for what it is. Attempting to burn down hotels of asylum seekers and terrorising communities of people because of the colour of their skin and/or their religion is exactly this. 5 days of watching what has occured in Manchester, Westminster, Hull, Sunderland, Liverpool, Plymouth, Middlesbrough etc has understandably put a community on edge. As a result some people having watched the police seemingly stand watching as hotels are set alight, shops, library's etc torched, people are stopped from driving or dragged out of their cars if they're not white or had private property such as cars and front windows caved in. So yes community vigilantism kicks in. The reality is that in Birmingham community elders visited that pub and apologised for the behaviour of the yobs. We've got people post GB news clips- such bad faith actors that they make the Mail look impartial... But back to the case in hand. Let's call this out for what it is-terrorism. The fat right are terrorising British citizen and causing millions of pounds of damage. I'm worried about all extremism. Just as Islamic extremism is an internationally funded business so is far right- funding streams coming from international right wing think tanks funded propogating an islamophobic far right view of the world backed by the likes of the Mercers. But let's focus on the facts in the UK here- the counter policing website states in the year ending March 2023: There was also a greater number of referrals relating to Extreme Right Wing (19%) terrorism concerns compared to Islamist extremism (11%) – a trend which has continued over the last few years. Maybe if we stopped solely focussing on one type of extremism and also concentrated on trying to unpick right wing extremism instead of making excuses for it society would be safer in general. |
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Aug 8, 2024 6:53:13 GMT 1
|
|
