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’m now beginning to conclude that you were involved in the documentary and are desperately trying to drum up publicity by trying to pick fights online.

😂😂😂🤔😂
Goodness me . The poster who said the middle have zero experience nailed it if this is the best anyone can do!!!!

I have no affiliation with the documentary, the journalist, the channel or any thing else ! Jesus Christ this is seriously clutching at straws now !!! It's actually made me laugh! 😂

In fact this is now entertaining me and no longer just pissing me off .

Keep going 😂🤣

I needed a laugh .

The ‘middle’?

Well, your terribly important frontline job bringing perps to justice doesn’t seem to take up a lot of your time, does it?

What's truly tickled me is that I've now been elevated from low iq, dyslexic, non English speaking general dimwit to affiliation to a channel 4 documentary having something to
Do with its production! 👍.

So - which is it ?

*I meant the middle classes.

Cnoc
Only about 60 hours a week.

She goes on to say that that is not the only thing that will affect crime figures and cites population stability, composition,poverty and deprivation.

She agrees those factors tend to be associated with traveller sites more than any particular ethnic group or their practices.

But - the facts are there . The things associated with higher crime are prevalent around traveller sites .

So what would have been an interesting documentary would have been an attempt to understand how and why these "things associated with higher crime" - poverty and deprivation, for instance - are more prevalent within travelling communities.

The documentary makers have been asked to provide their evidence.
I'll be interested to see if they do. This professor on Twitter thinks it wasn't too impressive:
twitter.com/profcolinclark/status/1251846435898867712

If you genuinely want to discuss any of these things, have a look here: www.realities-checked.org/

I don't doubt there's crime associated with traveller sites. I just think that documentary was bad faith "journalism".

Where I think it's probably been one of the most honest documentaries I've seen on this issue - only going on personal experience.

I do however wonder how many are getting outraged on behalf of a group of which they have no experience of working with?

And obviously it goes without saying Twitter is THE font of all knowledge.

🙄

And from past experience there is absolutely no way I'd put my name to some random weird site saying it's just trying to expose truths . Because obviously in absolutely no way would that be remotely dodgy fora professional to list their details and submit them .....

Ffs . I think my assumed low iq had you all fooled!

Twitter is THE font of all knowledge

It's merely a useful signpost to people & professionals in all walks of life. You can look at anyone's credentials and see what you think - you don't need to believe anything at all (Twitter, Ch4 or other TV, newspaper journalism etc) without engaging your own critical faculties.

there is absolutely no way I'd put my name to some random weird site saying it's just trying to expose truths

Your choice, but I really wouldn't think you could describe this as a "random weird site" - it says who it's run by, that it's academic research by LSE, University of Plymouth etc. It will be accountable to academic scrutiny and ethics. It's specifically seeking opinions from "professionals who come into contact with travelling communities" so you could be part of the conversation - which you said you wanted.
www.realities-checked.org/who-we-are

Anyway, no skin off my nose! Just giving you some alternative suggestions to challenge your bias/lived experience.

I find it really odd we can't discuss a tv programme highlighting certain issues but HQ allow threads about illegal drug use including where it's best to buy the stuff and breaking lockdown to do so. HQ is very questionable at times.

As is Mumsnet then. And yet - I'm disbelieved because I'm not fitting the mn narrative?

I have direct - direct. - personal experience- I would like to know how many shouting me down on this thread can genuinely say the same ?

How do I know that is a genuine site run by a university?

How do I know it's not a set up?

This thread has shown me there are posters clamouring to report me to my management because I'm saying something they don't like !

I have direct - direct. - personal experience- I would like to know how many shouting me down on this thread can genuinely say the same ?

You can keep baiting this question, but I feel just as disinclined to share my personal experience with you as you do to believe there might be a different experience out there.

Fair enough! I would be happy to take part I. That research were I assured it was totally confidential. Sadly I've been bitten a few times on here .

And that's fine no squirrels- you are on of over 100 posters. 👍

You know squirrels I think it depends in what capacity you work with travellers.

If your supporting them - good .
If
You are challenging them it's
Different.

I just want to support you OP. I also work in law as a criminal investigator for a govt department. I know what you know ... but .. my god it's not 'PC' to say it !!!

On my local FB pages today there’s a big news report about a traveller site being raided by the police in a big operation and how they have recovered 6 stolen caravans and 2 trailers.

The area I live in is quite rural and we have a lot of traveller sites both official and unofficial. The areas affected by them are well known to locals and house prices are lower for this reason.

Growing up in the seventies and eighties the local gypsy site was raided regularly and stolen cars recovered and it’s no different now. Traveller camps are a mix of people, a sizeable number of whom don’t respect the law or other people’s property It’s not racist it’s just how it is.

Thank you people who dare to speak the truth about this !

It was getting awfully lonely .

I'm NOT racist. But I need to be able
to speak the facts as I experience them.

@imcockerhoop, you misunderstand me. Working for a Channel 4 documentary is certainly no guarantee of not being a ‘dimwit’. Which is why I asked about the credibility of the research it supposedly presented.

You seem to have an obsession with middle-classness as disallowing anyone from having an opinion on or being in contact with Travellers. I grew up next to a halting site and went to school with a lot of Travellers and settled Travellers. I was involved in running a Traveller Access event designed to highlight pathways to university.

Cnoc .
And that's why you won't see what I see.

If you are supporting the travelling community you will of course be welcomed.

If you are trying to take back stolen cars , heavy plant , or caravans , or conduct a search you will be regarded quite differently.

FFS @imcockerhoop give it a rest! You’re talking in riddles, it’s like trying to complete a jigsaw with half the pieces missing trying to make any sense of what you’re saying.
Is the gist of your argument that you believe travellers commit high levels of crime and everyone’s too scared of accusation racism to challenge them?