Hq - please explain why some topics cannot be discussed ?

[itsthefuture]

Just that hq.

I had posted about dispatches documentary aired 15/4/20

Clearly I cannot say what about.

I have drawn parallels to the cse scandal with certain elements of society grooming children.
That's a fact
And widely discussed now on the boards.
I work I law and have brought many of those perpetrators to justice.
I think had I listed about that issue 15 years ago I would have been told I was being racist an shit down , just as I an now in trying to talk about another minority group and their links to crime .

Why can this. It be discussed openly?
Why do my posts keep getting deleted despite the evidence?

It seems mn is very jumpy about allowing discussion around certain topics . Why? Why can we
Not discuss the facts around travellers sites and crime ?
Why can I not talk about a documentary aired last night around this very topic !? Please explain. This is not a thread about a thread . I'm just curious as to why some topics are taboo and taken down ? Hindsight has shown us that there are lessons to be learnt about certain elements of society regarding crime.
Why is it ok to talk about some things and not others ?
Thanks

I'd guess that threads about travellers end up being full of abuse and racism against the travelling community.

If you really work "in law" then you'll know full well.

I've just googled several words in your op. I agree with peachgreen
And I don't think that you work "in law"

Its not the topic as such, it's that there ends up being lots of posts deleted for racism or xenophobia and then the thread ends up redundant and full of holes so mumsnet pulls it.

Anyone who works “in law” checks their work before pressing sen

I think it’s a legitimate question. Just because a question attracts some racist answers doesn’t mean the question is wrong although it makes it harder for MNHQ to ensure the conversation is reasonable. .

We have been here before with Rochdale etc. Topics that cannot be discussed. It’s very unhealthy.

I assure you I do work in law. I've brought many CSE perpetrators to
Justice.

Yeah my op is full of terrible typos - apologies. iPhone auto correct is a bastard.

I assure you I do work in law.

Then why are you asking thus question?

I think it’s as simple as

MN own the joint

They won’t allow discussion of anything that’s hassle for them.

How nice that you’ve brought perpetrators to justice. How strange, in the circumstances, that you don’t grasp the legal issues.

The wording of your post was goady. All travellers are criminals style. Then linking to Rotherham as an implication that minorities get away with crime. I get that you were speaking out due to Dispatched but who needs another post & thread that implies there's no white crime in comparison to minorities crime?. So I was glad the post was zapped, particularly before loads of racist bores could start their usual pile-on. You don't sound as if you work in Law.

I have never said white or mainstream crime doesn't exist. It does . Absolutely. It accounts for the majority . But I still do not get why facts cannot be discussed for fear of being labelled.

It does smack of "you can't say that it's racist " so the actual issue is brushed under the carpet for fear of being called racist.

And that's a very slippery slope. I identify it with the CSE scandal because I can see parallels. I've no axe to grind I assure you.

‘Work in law’ is quite a stretch though, isn’t it, OP? You aren’t a lawyer, I guess?

OP, I’m not white and I don’t understand the accusations of pretending white crime doesn’t exist.

I aren't going to disclose my exact profession save to say - I do work I law . I deal with victims and suspects. I have specialist role .

I do t think thy matters? We should be able to discuss an issue , rather than pretend it doesn't exist.

I would be a big hypocrite if I said anything different.

I've never said white crime doesn't exist .

the actual issue is brushed under the carpet for fear of being called racist.

Which is exactly what happened in Rotherham, as the Casey report stated very clearly.

Hindsight has shown us that there are lessons to be learnt about certain elements of society regarding crime

And right there is the problem.

There is a problem with criminals around crime.

There is a problem if those specific criminals groups of specific criminals are not investigated due to fears of accusations of discrimination.

That is not the same as ‘there is a problem with ‘ certain elements of society’.

Did the documentary show that the police are declining to investigate crime committed by travellers?

If so, that is your analogy. Police failing to investigate because of fears of being seen to be discriminatory.

However, what I saw in your posts was not that, it was ‘crime levels around 27% of traveller sites is higher’.

Crime on and around certain estates in my borough is high. Not all estates, just some. That doesn’t give me the right to say that an ‘element in society’ , people who rent social housing, are a ‘problem’. But it does mean I have a right to expect the police to investigate the crime.

I did not see in your thread any references to police being reluctant to investigate crime committed by travellers.

Exactly @YinMnBlue.

OP I don't know about this situation and I will read up on it now that you have alerted us to it.

One thing I am certain of is that you are not a lawyer. You are deliberately trying to imply that you are, when it's quite obvious that you are not. This makes your message far less credible.

If you want people to know the truth you have to be truthful yourself.

i work on the nhs frontline

I'm confused. On Monday, you posted the above. Now you work in law bringing 'perpetrators' to justice. I didn't realise that the NHS also employed lawyers 🤷🏼‍♀️