To think that Musk is now overstepping himself and the UK gvt should threaten action

[Bogginsthe3rd]

Musk has just posted this on twitter (among other unhinged tweets). To me this reads as a thinly veiled threat to democratically elected UK MPs and actually the UK government should consider sanctions to the US if he continues this attack when he enters the White House?

This is all about post truth politics, and degree to which you think emotions and feelings should dictate what politicians do.

The UK is not like the US in as much as it regulates speech by law; and it has systems by which its democracy must adhere to form a government.

This means that the UK is an "elective dictatorship" in the sense that whoever wins with a big enough majority is given everything at their disposal for around five years when the law says that there is another go at deciding who is in charge.

I read a credible story in the FT that Musk is looking at ways to destabilise the UK Government. His monomania about the UK (and indeed Germany) is bizarre.

Extract from that FT article

Elon Musk has privately discussed with allies how Sir Keir Starmer could be removed as UK prime minister before the next general election, according to people briefed on the matter.

Musk, the world’s richest man and key confidant of US president-elect Donald Trump, is probing how he and his right-wing allies can destabilise the UK Labour government beyond the aggressive posts he has issued on his social media platform X, the people said.

Jess Phillips’ life work has been supporting victims of abuse. She was doing it long before she was elected as an MP. If you really cared about these women you’d be horrified at the threats of violence against her not scoring cheap political points. Badenoch won’t even meet them.

And if you’re incapable of understanding the concept of incitement @1dayatatime, you really should do some research. Because incitement to violence is a crime.

Frankly, if the UK constitution is that easily destabilised then perhaps we need to take a different look at the way things are run. (I've long believed that we do). If anyone's destabilised our democracy in recent times it's Boris Johnson and his prorogation of parliament to suit his own political ends.

@bombastix upthread gives one of the many good reasons why:

This means that the UK is an "elective dictatorship" in the sense that whoever wins with a big enough majority is given everything at their disposal for around five years when the law says that there is another go at deciding who is in charge.

This, and an unelected upper house.

As to Jess Phillips, especially given her previous championing of women's rights and drawing attention to the large numbers murdered at the hands of men, people will be disappointed in the way she voted and are entitled to say so. The optics are horrendous, whatever justification she gives as to the way the whole issue has been handled and the level at which she believes inquiries should have taken place. Personally, I agree. What's worse: allowing huge rings of sexual traffickers and abusers to have their behaviour (again) rugswept, or sending the message that the UK has allowed its politics to be swayed by an influential, American bigmouth? As far as I'm concerned that one's a no-brainer.

But calling her a 'genocidal rape apologist' is another thing entirely - the first word in particular is horrendous and deliberately incendiary. There is no need for it whatsoever. This woman has had enough issues with her personal safety in the past, without elevating these again on the whim of a powerful American who, as she rightly says, is going way over his remit. And I find it interesting, as always, that it's a woman first and foremost who has, yet again, been pushed into the firing line. Interesting that he didn't choose to make similar examples of the many male MPs who also voted 'no'.

Add in a couple of misogynistic slurs for good measure - it's a US right-winger we are talking about after all. Incidentally, Musk's own track record as to allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct hardly put him in the strongest position to throw around slurs of that kind.

Rule #1 of misogyny: 'women are responsible for what men do'.

I honestly shudder to think what's on his hard drive.

@1dayatatime

Something may not be a direct threat, but describing someone as a "rape apologist" may prompt others to harm that person and therefore put them at risk.

But you know this and are just trying to argue your point. To goad and irritate. I don't believe for a second you're arguing in good faith.

I believe it is you scoring cheap political
points across all threads on this subject.

My post mentioned politicians in general, yet once again you are making it about labour vs conservative. I am sick to death of this being made a political football while the rapes
continue and those that facilitated it remain unaccountable.

We were talking about Jess Phillips as were you when you said “when one of their own feels threatened”. Don’t play innocent. It doesn’t work.

I do feel that many people just want justice for the victims and those responsible to go to jail.
Why hasn't this happened?
Mind you, it took the people fighting for justice for the victims of Hillsborough decades to get anywhere and people didn't go to jail for that.
Would another enquiry result in those vile human beings being locked up and prosecuted? It just never seems to happen and that's what people want you to see. It's just so depressing and yet many are known to the authorities and the police. I can't get my head around how soft we are in this country tbh.

No no, it is you making it party political, as always.

I didn’t name any politicians. Other politicians of all stripes have suffered threats and violence. This is disgusting and unacceptable of course and a huge issue has been made of it each time.

Not so much outrage and action from them when it is poor working class girls being brutalised is there?

Once again, I am motivated by fury and the cover up by both parties, ongoing inaction and obfuscation, their outrage when they are threatened themselves but lethargy when girls are being tortured.

Your political allegiance colours every thought you have, to the detriment of the real victims.

The increased danger to Jess Phillips who has championed abuse victims her entire life is something that should horrify every woman. It should be beyond politics. The fact that you, yes you have attempted to make political capital from it speaks volumes. Anyway the discussion is all here, other posters can judge for themselves.

👏👏👏

@Bogginsthe3rd - Do you NOT think foreign born rapists should be deported? In fact, should not all foreign born criminals be deported immediately and forever? Why should we have our society and culture ruined?

But this is what it's become, isn't it? It's a party political issue. And this is one of the many problems I have with the current constitution.

Look at the published list of MPs votes. That's the whip in action, alright. Labour overwhelmingly voted 'no'. The Tories overwhelmingly voted 'yes'. Insignificant others largely abstained, which IMO shouldn't be an option. Our representatives were elected to do a job: they need to be seen to do it. Instead, they took the cowards' stance. From all this, a not unlikely deduction is that members voted the way they were told to vote because they didn't want to cause any potential damage to their individual political aspirations.

The fact that everyone - no matter what their political persuasions - is apparently not horrified by this issue; by the way it has destroyed the lives of women and girls, is a stark reminder that it's a man's world. It shows us just why and how men are able to continue harming women with impunity.

I'm with you completely as to your last sentence. This issue is universal. It should not be one of party politics, but of absolute basic humanity.

But ... here we are. Again.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/criminals-and-immigration-offenders-removed-on-charter-flight

46 is a bit pathetic no?

How many were flown to Rwanda?

Not enough.

Quote in the Times from Becky Riggs who became the leader on child abuse investigations on the National Police Chiefs Council in the summer.

“She said that there was misinformation regarding the scale and nature of group-based crimes, adding that the November report “makes it clear that group-based offending occurs in various forms, in diverse settings, and across different ethnicities”.

Riggs added: “While media coverage often focuses on specific communities and so-called grooming gangs, it is crucial for law enforcement and their partners to respond forcefully to this type of crime in all its forms, regardless of media coverage.

“We must always return to the data, maintaining a balanced approach to addressing the threat in all its forms. Children are at risk from perpetrators of all races, ethnicities and genders.”

The report, based on 2023 data, stated that there were 4,228 reported group-based crimes out of a total 115,489 child sexual exploitation and abuse crimes. Of the group-based offences, more than a quarter were familial, 9 per cent were institutional and 17 per cent were in a child sexual exploitation setting involving an imbalance of power. Nearly 40 per cent of offending did not fit a category and 9 per cent was unknown. More than 80 per cent of suspects were white, 7 per cent were Asian, 4 per cent were black and 8 per cent mixed or other.”

While any abuse of girls is horrific, by focussing on a small subsection we miss legislating and helping the wider community of girls and women who are subject to horrific abuse. We are letting unelected misogynists and racists derail our legislative process and not helping the victims.

Why?

Because apparently 46 deputations within less than a month of being elected is a bit pathetic.

I know it was the DM, but people are questioning a lot of what is actually behind the lack of prosecutions for individuals known to the police and what else is being covered up?
Makes you think.
My heart goes out to the victims , they have have the life sentence not the criminals.

@BIossomtoes

"And if you’re incapable of understanding the concept of incitement @1dayatatime, you really should do some research. Because incitement to violence is a crime."

If you read my earlier posts you would see that I agree with you that incitement to violence is very much a crime.

The question is whether for example whether the following are simply freedom of opinion or incitement to violence :

1. Saying at the time that Liz Truss is a useless PM and should resign.
2. saying Keir Starmer is a useless PM and should resign
3. saying Jess Phillips is a rape apologist (which I personally think is unfair and untrue)
4. calling for a fresh election (which imo will never happen anyway)

Now on the other hand publicly calling for the death or throat cutting of a particular politician or group of people is very much incitement to violence.

The article is behind a paywall, so I'm only able to answer on the basis of what you have included above. But it's by no means a new revelation that the majority of CSA takes place within the family, or is perpetrated by someone known to the child.

And of course, this is far harder to identify and prosecute: partly because of the nature of trauma itself and the capacity of the mind for blocking it out; partly because of savvy abusers who know to pick vulnerable victims who will likely not be believed; partly because there is a culture of blaming victims and disbelieving women and girls rather than accepting the prevalence of male abuse, and partly because of a further culture of silence, rugsweeping and denial. These cultures are also often perpetruated through official or public channels. Doubtless there will be other variables I haven't mentioned above.

That this is the case does not mean attention should not be given to breaking organised trafficking rings or 'information exchanges'. Nor does it mean other victims will be ignored; the circumstances detailed above merely make abuse more difficult to identify, especially when the child loves and trusts the adults concerned. The secretive, furtive nature of abuse in itself is in no way an excuse for claiming 'if we can't help all victims we'll ignore those which are in plain view'.

It's precisely these cultures of silence and enablement that perpetuate the conditions which make abusing vulnerable girls so easy in the fisrt place. As for only focusing on a subset and ignoring the rest: our society has never, ever concerned itself with the protection and wellbeing of victims and potential victims. It's concerned with maintaining these enabling cultures which give males carte blanche to act with complete impunity, whilst women and girls are expected to capitulate to their will, be blamed when they do, and bullied into submission and silence when they object.

Doubt this? If so, you only have to look at the backlash against #MeToo. The overwhelming compulsion was to silence those speaking openly about their experiences, some for the first time in many decades.

Always ask yourself who stands to gain by keeping the status quo precisely as it is.

The report, based on 2023 data, stated that there were 4,228 reported group-based crimes out of a total 115,489 child sexual exploitation and abuse crimes.

Article from November 2024 with more context on the data (I can't access the Times article either);

Nearly half of perpetrators of group child sexual abuse are children, data shows'

Nearly half of abusers involved in group sexual exploitation of children are themselves aged between 10 and 17, police data has suggested.

A national taskforce found that 48% of 4,768 perpetrators recorded in police figures in 2023 were aged 10 to 17.

Another 430 were aged under 10, although the age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10.

Data was gathered from 44 police forces in England and Wales.

A total of 4,228 crimes linked to group sexual exploitation of children were recorded.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/children-data-england-b2650925.html