Suella Braverman thread 2

[AdamRyan]

As we filled up thread one eith our battling over whether it's feminist or racist to support Suella Braverman's weekend statements, I thought another would be good.

Here's some of what she said:

"What's clear is what we've seen is a practice whereby vulnerable white English girls, sometimes who are in care, sometimes in challenging circumstances, being pursued and raped and drugged and harmed by gangs of British Pakistani men who've worked in child abuse rings or networks. We've seen institutions and state agencies, whether it's social workers, teachers, the police turn a blind eye to these signs of abuse out of political correctness, out of fear of being called racist, out of fear of being called bigoted. And as a result, thousands, we are not talking small numbers, we are talking large numbers, thousands of children have had their childhoods robbed and devastated. And there are many of these perpetrators still running wild, behaving in this way. And it's now down to the authorities to track these perpetrators down, without fear or favour, relentlessly and bring them to justice"

Sunak has since rowed back on this and the Home Offices own research suggests there is not enough quality research to say any particular ethnicity is disproportionately involved in "grooming gangs"

It’s not an implication. It says he doesn’t think they belong in prison. That’s not true. They could highlight the faults in their policies or stats showing perceived incompetency but to state that is his view is absolutely wrong.

But I’ve just seen how you talk about this board elsewhere and find it so disgusting I won’t engage with an obvious bad faith poster again.

*AdamRyan · 03/04/2023 20:40
I've just got annoyed by FWR refusing to vote for starmer because he "doesn't know what a woman is"
Based on him saying his position is trabs rights shouldn't overrule womens rights

I know wedont discuss trans stuff on this thread but it's like turkeys voting for Xmas again. Just like Brexit

I'm GC for the record but also not an idiot who thinks a party of Braverman, Rees Mogg and Johnson will be good for women*

We’re idiots? You’re a misogynist.

No 'implication' in that tweet Adam. It's a very bold claim presented as fact and will get them in to all sorts of bother (which they richly deserve).

I doubt it given the kind of absolute bollocks politicians of all persuasions put on posters
£350m for the NHS anyone?
Braverman saying 100 million people are planning to come to the UK and maybe up to a billion?

People think the conservatives are good for women are idiots in my opinion. That doesn't make me a misogynist

In part you answer your own question - the Home Office does (in theory) what the minister asks. Braverman has only been home sec for 5 minutes. she is not persoanlly responsible for what the Home Office was doing previously.

Previous honme secretaries including Pritti Patel have also tried to deal with some of the issues raised by the grooming gangs. Back in April 2021 Patel was trying to get some of the Rochdale grooming gang deported after their sentances. Five minutes on google and you can see she was raising the matter earlier than that too.

It is very clear that this is not just a few weeks before the elections. You are just wrong about that.

Persoanlly I think there is a cultural difference in attidues to women in men from conservative religious backgrounds or who are from commitees who have moved here from countries with conservative attitudes to women.

Numerically white men are most like to be abusers of course, most people in this country are white. But there is evidence from Home Office reports that the number of men from a south asiain background who are "over-represented" (Home Office's word) in these acts.

It is also obvious that they, unlike white men, are less likely to be investigated or called to account. They victimes of asian gangs are more likely therefore to be let down by the authorities and that is a bloody scandal.

We can't just say more white men do this, if you're being abused by a white guy we'll investigate but if its an asian guy we won't.

As I said in a post on another thread: if you're angry or concerned about the treatment of women and girls in Afghanistan or Iran, caused by conservative religious beliefs in action, and you can see that and yet wilful won't see the problem here then you're a colluding, bloody hypocrite so bothered about having a dig at the Tories that you would rather score fake political points that actaully be any use to the victims.

Patel was right, Braverman is right.

The best article I've seen on this is here

https://capx.co/the-scourge-of-grooming-gangs-demands-real-solutions-not-just-punchy-rhetoric/

The same reason that Labour suddenly cares about crime?

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-tweets-second-attack-ad-against-rishi-sunak-despite-gutter-politics-row-12851979

I don't think that's really that similar to ISIS rhetoric.

People can be culpable for different things, and that includes dishonest rhetoric as well as acts of violence.

Also note:

https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/their-own-words-why-isis-hates-west

"While this ordering alone spells out what ISIS considers the most significant reasons for its actions, the group insists it is “important to understand” that “foreign policies” occupy only a secondary position. “The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam,” the article says."

I'm not replying to this. You didn't read the whole post. It was disgraceful

The whole of the post I was quoting. And I'm saying nothing more on it

@PorcelinaV my whole post got deleted

I put it in again with the bits redacted where I made a direct accusation towards AdamRyan + his ‘ilk’

For anyone curious, here it is with the direct accusation at the OP removed:

A rise.

A rise.

That could be from 0-1 it does not make it a proportionally significant threat to Islamic extremism.

[redacted]

If you call ordinary people on the centre right or centre left ‘far right’ when they speak truthfully about unpleasant consequences of political decisions they are living through, then you create that context [conducive to fostering a rise in far right extremism] where it didn’t previously exist - through your silencing, suppression, denial, minimising and glossing over their suffering. It only serves to piss people off and persuades no one. [redacted]

That's a great article.

I particularly laughed at this:
"The party has come under fire after releasing an advert that claimed Mr Sunak did not think child sex abusers should go to prison - something critics branded a "dog whistle"."
Who are the dogs being whistled in this case?

I agree with Lucy Powell at the end:
while the tweet might not be to "everyone's taste", it was part and parcel of "political campaigning" and served to highlight an issue the party felt the government had failed on.
Asked whether she was "comfortable with pointing the finger at Rishi Sunak", Ms Powell told Sky News: "I'm comfortable with taking a sort of standardised graphic that the prime minister used himself many, many times in recent months and years, to highlight how one of his own policies isn't working."

If the conservatives don't like that approach, maybe they should stop dishing it out themselves.

Thanks for sharing the link

In the first redacted part it said:

“I am also going to take a moment to point my finger at [second person pronoun] and [second person possessive determiner] ilk [username]”

followed by, basically said what appears in the square brackets beginning ‘conducive context’

Then the second redacted statement was [second person pronoun] “are culpable.”

You can piece it together.

Nothing else. Nothing particularly controversial.

I think if we're expecting politicians to care, or be genuinely principled, we'll be waiting until hell freezes over.

Yes, undoubtedly there is political capital to be made from this area.

But I also know that across the UK, a lot has gone wrong where ethnicity/religion engendered political correct looking the other way, fear of speaking frankly, a culture of underplaying or even covering up.

So while in every country, child sexual exploitation has become more and more normalised and expected, our triggers more and more dulled, it doesn't help that certain communities got even more help in sweeping things under the carpet.

So, Rotherham etc grooming scandals, Batley Grammar School teacher still in hiding from death threats, Wings Of Heaven film banned UK-wide because of protests, Koran smudging incident leading to children getting death threats...all have two things in common, religion/ethnicity meaning that we just don't even discuss the ramifications.

I don't recall any of that with Catholic Church abuse scandals, the attempted banning of Life Of Brian, Last Temptation Of Christ etc.

It's not that we don't realise numerically more girls are abused by whites. It's that there is no impediment to us criticising, or authorities investigating.

But PC considerations applied strictly to the Muslim grooming scandals, and instances of free speech being chilled.

I am not a male. My username is a character from one of my favourite books.

It's been quite entertaining to watch you assume male username = man and make spurious allegations about me but I'm bored now.

Your post implied far right extremists were justified if they turned to terrorism.

I'm not sure why you save your deleted posts but it is disgraceful to suggest terrorism is an acceptable response to some actions. In my opinion that's close to inciting violence from others.

I won't be responding to you again either because your viewpoint is not something I care to debate with.

I will however continue to post about Braverman's fascist tactics and hope for some readers that makes the penny drop.

In the article it says:

the authorities have too often been paralysed by nervousness about race. Not only have some of the most vulnerable people in society been sacrificed on the altar of political correctness, but far from dampening tensions, officials have actually ended up doing untold damage to race relations in the process.

And for this reason, I know loads of people are up in arms panicking about the possible fallout from Braverman’s comments -her naming a specific religious/ethnic group of men and talking about ‘British values’ - but I believe it may have actually helped ease these tensions and helped salve some of that damage.

Watching Question Time, you can feel the bristling tension of so many people who feel silenced and unheard - the Brexiteers and so on, I feel, with those comments, she may be helping to steer the country away from another crisis like the one leading to Brexit.

So, Rotherham etc grooming scandals, Batley Grammar School teacher still in hiding from death threats, Wings Of Heaven film banned UK-wide because of protests, Koran smudging incident leading to children getting death threats...all have two things in common, religion/ethnicity meaning that we just don't even discuss the ramifications.

I don't recall any of that with Catholic Church abuse scandals, the attempted banning of Life Of Brian, Last Temptation Of Christ etc.

What is "Wings of Heaven"? I just googled and can't find any reference to it or it being banned so its impossible to know whether it's comparable to Life of Brian

The people making death threats to the teacher in Batley and death threats to children will be subject to UK law. Death threats are routinely minimised and not dealt with - hence why many female MOs have left politics. What evidence do you have that Muslims making death threats are treated different to other people making death threats?

Again, unfortunately this is "fear of the intruder" making it feel like these crimes are more common, serious and scary than other similar crimes. Whereas the reality is there are horrible people out there who make death threats if they feel someone has transgressed. Its not a race or religion thing

Ah, I found it
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/film/2022/jun/07/uk-cinema-chain-cancels-screenings-of-film-the-lady-of-heaven-after-protests

It wasn't banned. Cinemas pulled it after protests, presumably for safety reasons. You can still stream it in the UK if you want. Although it has dire reviews.

Not sure of your point really - in the case of both Lady of Heaven and Life Of Brian religious people were offended?

Of course people make death threats over all sorts of things. These days even if you think that men aren't women!

But some death threats are motivated by religion. In Islam they have the death penalty for things like apostasy and blasphemy. Some Muslims act on these ideas to privately threaten or attack people. Whether or not they are strictly following the religion, they are inspired by it.

Sounds like a person desperate to get Starmer in and the Tories out. But Adam Ryan only has one vote. How sad. What a bunch of idiots we must be, not to listen to the great Adam Ryan and vote for what he / she wants.

And I'm still not gonna vote Labour. 😂

My thoughts. The Tories have never shown an interest I protecting the vulnerable.
It has been said before that Pakistani people and Indian people like to blame each other for their problems. Could hold some truth, Suella being from one of those groups.
That would insinuate a personal hate from her towards them... but who knows.
Her concern did seem misplaced given what they stand for.

Well they all do things for their own political gain.

The question you need to ask yourself is, does the party need to reach full purity spiral before we vote for them? Because then there really would be no one.

But there are things we need to draw the line at. After all, what woman would vote for a party who doesn't know what a woman is?

Now that would be like turkeys voting for christmas. Don't you agree AdamRiley?

#AdamRyan not Riley.

Adam, I'm not "othering" anyone based on their background, but I didn't spend my whole adult life championing free speech etc to now cower when it's threatened, either by TRAs or religious zealots.

Wings Of Heaven was effectively banned. Death threats ensured no cinema dared show it. That's a ban by any other means. I can't recall a single instance otherwise of anything similar.

The Batley teacher is still in protective custody. That's beyond standard death threats, yes?

An autistic child who accidentally drops a holy book on the floor, threatened publically by community leaders meeting in the school, the mum in tears, the head and chief police officer nodding along like donkeys, that's outside my scope of experience living in UK for 59 years.

My reactions are not borne of "othering", they're borne of frustration and anger that certain communities hold such sway. If any other religion or group did the same, I'd criticise in same terms.

And anyone telling me that the grooming scandals weren't influenced heavily by fear of speaking out because of religious and ethnicity considerations only needs to look at my examples, even now we as a country find it hard to speak up.

And TRAs take advantage of this very well.