|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2024 19:41:21 GMT
As I keep pointing out people perceive a very sudden elevated risk of danger for very good evidential reasons. But keep failing to ever provide any of those "very good evidential reasons" - strongly suggesting they don't actually exist. All The Best The very good evidential reasons are that no one knows who they are and arrive in numbers in the local area. It is not like a bunch of Jocks coming down from Scotland who are citizens with known problems. They are unknown quantities and therefore the perception of elevated risk is very real |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 19:42:17 GMT
And that's reason enough to attack it. I assume most people don't know who or what is in your house, by your logic that makes your house a valid target for violence. You really have not though any of this "reasoning" through have you? It takes mere seconds to poke huge holes it because there's just nothing to it. All The Best Precisely, by Sandy's logic a mob of black or asian people are justified in torching a building he is in because for all they know he is a dangerous white supremacist so they're just protecting their kids.Based on the evidence of the last few threads on here they'd be right as well. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 19:43:34 GMT
But keep failing to ever provide any of those "very good evidential reasons" - strongly suggesting they don't actually exist. All The Best The very good evidential reasons are that no one knows who they are and arrive in numbers in the local area. It is not like a bunch of Jocks coming down from Scotland who are citizens with known problems. They are unknown quantities and therefore the perception of elevated risk is very real Ah, back to numbers again. Numbers you couldn't describe or quantify last time, any hope you'll do better this time? All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2024 19:48:32 GMT
The problem is no one knows who or what they are in the hotel. There are no criminal records that cover them and there is no information on them at all other than what they give to the authorities. And that's reason enough to attack it? I assume most people don't know who or what is in your house, by your logic that makes your house a valid target for violence. You really have not thought any of this "reasoning" through have you? It takes mere seconds to poke huge holes in it because it is just so utterly poorly thought out. All The Best I did not say it was I said that they are being told to suck it up and they are saying they will not. I do not know what holiday makers arrive in the house four doors up what I accept is they are usually UK citizens or those with visas from foreign lands. 40 to 50 people about whom nothing is known and who are mostly young males from different cultures present a very specific problem for parents of young girls. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2024 19:54:06 GMT
And that's reason enough to attack it. I assume most people don't know who or what is in your house, by your logic that makes your house a valid target for violence. You really have not though any of this "reasoning" through have you? It takes mere seconds to poke huge holes it because there's just nothing to it. All The Best Precisely, by Sandy's logic a mob of black or asian people are justified in torching a building he is in because for all they know he is a dangerous white supremacist so they're just protecting their kids. I did not use the word justified, do you wish to try again? They know all about me if they care to find out, I have my passport and I am not claiming asylum with no documents at all. Anyone can be a dangerous individual but once again I bring you back to risk. If nothing is known about an individual other than what he tells you does he present a greater risk to you than other people, if you multiply that by 40 or 50 then is that is a real problem? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 19:54:37 GMT
And that's reason enough to attack it? I assume most people don't know who or what is in your house, by your logic that makes your house a valid target for violence. You really have not thought any of this "reasoning" through have you? It takes mere seconds to poke huge holes in it because it is just so utterly poorly thought out. All The Best I did not say it was I said that they are being told to suck it up and they are saying they will not. I do not know what holiday makers arrive in the house four doors up what I accept is they are usually UK citizens or those with visas from foreign lands. 40 to 50 people about whom nothing is known and who are mostly young males from different cultures present a very specific problem for parents of young girls. If you genuinely cared about protecting children form the perceived danger of child sex grooming gangs you be advocating for the banning of the Catholic Church. Asian Grooming Gangs would have to commit one Rotherham type crime spree every week for a decade and still they wouldn't be close to the Catholic Church's tally for kiddie abuse.... So this clearly is NOT about protecting children.; and is almost exclusively about the colour of someone's skin - and that makes it a cut and dried case of racism. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2024 19:58:04 GMT
The problem is no one knows who or what they are in the hotel. There are no criminal records that cover them and there is no information on them at all other than what they give to the authorities. So if they don't know who's in the hotel how so they know torching it will make their daughters safer? They know nothing about the people in the hotel other than they are illegal migrants seeking asylum and have no documentation. Not having them there makes their daughters safer as the whole issue is one of risk. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 4, 2024 20:02:35 GMT
I did not say it was I said that they are being told to suck it up and they are saying they will not. I do not know what holiday makers arrive in the house four doors up what I accept is they are usually UK citizens or those with visas from foreign lands. 40 to 50 people about whom nothing is known and who are mostly young males from different cultures present a very specific problem for parents of young girls. If you genuinely cared about protecting children form the perceived danger of child sex grooming gangs you be advocating for the banning of the Catholic Church. Asian Grooming Gangs would have to commit one Rotherham type crime spree every week for a decade and still they wouldn't be close to the Catholic Church's tally for kiddie abuse.... So this clearly is NOT about protecting children.; and is almost exclusively about the colour of someone's skin - and that makes it a cut and dried case of racism. All The Best No use in trying to spread it out. Asylum seeker hotels in an area bring in mainly young men of unknown criminality levels. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 4, 2024 20:04:00 GMT
So if they don't know who's in the hotel how so they know torching it will make their daughters safer? They know nothing about the people in the hotel other than they are illegal migrants seeking asylum and have no documentation. Not having them there makes their daughters safer as the whole issue is one of risk. They aren't illegal immigrants they are asylum seekers. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 4, 2024 20:06:06 GMT
Precisely, by Sandy's logic a mob of black or asian people are justified in torching a building he is in because for all they know he is a dangerous white supremacist so they're just protecting their kids. I did not use the word justified, do you wish to try again? They know all about me if they care to find out, I have my passport and I am not claiming asylum with no documents at all. Anyone can be a dangerous individual but once again I bring you back to risk. If nothing is known about an individual other than what he tells you does he present a greater risk to you than other people, if you multiply that by 40 or 50 then is that is a real problem? The people who have been on the news the past few days committing acts of violent disorder targeting religious and ethnic minorities are presumably British citizens too. How do we know you're not one of them? So a mob of ethnic minorities burning down a building with you in makes their kids safer by your logic. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 4, 2024 20:08:36 GMT
If you genuinely cared about protecting children form the perceived danger of child sex grooming gangs you be advocating for the banning of the Catholic Church. Asian Grooming Gangs would have to commit one Rotherham type crime spree every week for a decade and still they wouldn't be close to the Catholic Church's tally for kiddie abuse.... So this clearly is NOT about protecting children.; and is almost exclusively about the colour of someone's skin - and that makes it a cut and dried case of racism. All The Best No use in trying to spread it out. Asylum seeker hotels in an area bring in mainly young men of unknown criminality levels. I beg to differ slightly: Illegal immigrants are technically all criminals. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet3 on Aug 4, 2024 20:09:39 GMT
I did not say it was I said that they are being told to suck it up and they are saying they will not. I do not know what holiday makers arrive in the house four doors up what I accept is they are usually UK citizens or those with visas from foreign lands. 40 to 50 people about whom nothing is known and who are mostly young males from different cultures present a very specific problem for parents of young girls. If you genuinely cared about protecting children form the perceived danger of child sex grooming gangs you be advocating for the banning of the Catholic Church. Asian Grooming Gangs would have to commit one Rotherham type crime spree every week for a decade and still they wouldn't be close to the Catholic Church's tally for kiddie abuse.... So this clearly is NOT about protecting children.; and is almost exclusively about the colour of someone's skin - and that makes it a cut and dried case of racism. All The Best So by Sandy's logic burning down Catholic churches full of Catholics would make our kids safer, right Sandy? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:09:50 GMT
If you genuinely cared about protecting children form the perceived danger of child sex grooming gangs you be advocating for the banning of the Catholic Church. Asian Grooming Gangs would have to commit one Rotherham type crime spree every week for a decade and still they wouldn't be close to the Catholic Church's tally for kiddie abuse.... So this clearly is NOT about protecting children.; and is almost exclusively about the colour of someone's skin - and that makes it a cut and dried case of racism. All The Best No use in trying to spread it out. Asylum seeker hotels in an area bring in mainly young men of unknown criminality levels. Ah, so institutional kiddie-fiddling by hundreds of Catholic Priests over decades and decades = OK But kiddie-fiddling by barely a hundred men of a "different culture" over just a decade or two = Bad. Like I said, not about protecting children at all, is it? For the record, unless you chosen to have you criminal record made public, every single person in this country is equally suspect of "unknown criminality levels". All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Aug 4, 2024 20:11:43 GMT
No use in trying to spread it out. Asylum seeker hotels in an area bring in mainly young men of unknown criminality levels. I beg to differ slightly: Illegal immigrants are technically all criminals. Genuine Asylum Seekers are NOT Illegal Immigrants. I am willing to bet that no one at all attacking that Rotherham hotel had any fucking clue about the legal status of anyone in there. The ONLY thing they cared about was the colour of their skin. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Aug 4, 2024 20:18:17 GMT
I beg to differ slightly: Illegal immigrants are technically all criminals. Genuine Asylum Seekers are NOT Illegal Immigrants. I am willing to bet that no one at all attacking that Rotherham hotel had any fucking clue about the legal status of anyone in there. The ONLY thing they cared about was the colour of their skin. All The Best I bet you cannot say that without questioning your own logic, if they arrived here illegally that makes them illegal immigrants, the clue is in the illegal bit, they might well become legal by definition as the system which they are told is overwhelmed and the likely hood is they will receive another block amnesty, which of course happens every time. |
|
