Re: Rotherham : Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:08 pm  

What clique would this be then?

Poor downtrodden little englanders moaning with no justification again

Re: Rotherham : Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:04 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Seeing as you think it is so easy to sort, why don't you tell us your solution?

If a child is found onmedical examination to have injuries which cannot have been caused either accidentally, or in the manner claimed, the doctors will report it and a prosecution will be brought. You do not need the child (who may, for instance, be a baby) to agree to be a witness.

If a girl is found on medical examination to have suffered FGM, a prosecution shuld be brought. You do not get sexually mutilated by accident and no jury would believe that it happened without the knowledge of the parents.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

I personally think this is a minefield that will probably wreck careers so I can totally understand why people won't willingly walk through it.

If it was my career I would rather it be "wrecked" than live with letting mutilators of little girls escape punishment and of course continue their perverted activities. By a long chalk. But I entirely disagree with this premise. If a girl has suffered FGM then how could attempting to pursue a prosecution wreck anyone's career? The poor girl would still be and remain mutilated, and at least I tried. The worst that would happen is if it could not be proved who was responsible. Why would that wreck my career?

Re: Rotherham : Fri Aug 29, 2014 10:07 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

...

I suspect it is you - the clique - that don't want their views challenged - easier to hack people off than have to justify your posts when they are scrutinised. ...

I challenge you to produce a single example where I have done this. You can't, as I haven't.

If I didn't want my views challenegd, why the fsck would I write any of them on a public messageboard?

Re: Rotherham : Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:12 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

If a child is found onmedical examination to have injuries which cannot have been caused either accidentally, or in the manner claimed, the doctors will report it and a prosecution will be brought. You do not need the child (who may, for instance, be a baby) to agree to be a witness.

If a girl is found on medical examination to have suffered FGM, a prosecution shuld be brought. You do not get sexually mutilated by accident and no jury would believe that it happened without the knowledge of the parents.

If it was my career I would rather it be "wrecked" than live with letting mutilators of little girls escape punishment and of course continue their perverted activities. By a long chalk. But I entirely disagree with this premise. If a girl has suffered FGM then how could attempting to pursue a prosecution wreck anyone's career? The poor girl would still be and remain mutilated, and at least I tried. The worst that would happen is if it could not be proved who was responsible. Why would that wreck my career?

Are you wanting both parents to be prosecuted, just the fathers, or just the mothers?

After successful prosecutions, are you wanting jail sentences for parents or is fining them okay?

Part of the problem with having GPs report parents for this is that females who have had this performed will then be withdrawn from most NHS services and suffer from further heath problems. You will be warned about this. Are you prepared to accept this consequence?

The children that are placed in care as a consequence of their parents being jailed. In your opinion are they better off in care than they would have been with their families? What are you going to say to the children who say you ruined their lives?

I just don't think this problem can be solved with prosecutions. I think the govt should be doing everything they can to engage these communities and persuade them to end these procedures, but if they choose to go with their own beliefs and perform them I think we've just got to accept that we've done all we can.

Re: Rotherham : Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:38 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I challenge you to produce a single example where I have done this. You can't, as I haven't.

If I didn't want my views challenegd, why the fsck would I write any of them on a public messageboard?

Because you are in a very safe place here - 99% of the regular posters on here are never going to challenge your views - simple really. Where else do you post your views, I would be very surprised if the other boards you post on -if any- are left wing leading boards

What you have done is to frustrate those who disagree with you away from this board. It has now reached a point where your views are seldom ever challenged and when they are you know you can rely on the usual suspects to back you up.

Are you seriously suggesting this board is as vibrant and interesting as it was 12 months ago? If you agree it isn't why do you think that is?

Re: Rotherham : Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:47 am  

cod'ead wrote:

What clique would this be then?

Poor downtrodden little englanders moaning with no justification again

Perhaps you need to take some time and consider why you description of multi-cultural Wincanton cannot be substantiated by the legal census of the very same place.

Based on the available evidence you have just made that up to suit your argument - none of your cliquey mates -like FA- on here are ever going to bring you task on what is a made up post. That is what I am mean by a clique - even Stevie Wonder can see it exists on here

Re: Rotherham : Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:12 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Are you wanting both parents to be prosecuted, just the fathers, or just the mothers?

After successful prosecutions, are you wanting jail sentences for parents or is fining them okay?

Each defendant would have the opportunity to address the court as to their guilt or innocence and level of culpability and any mitigating factors. The court has well-established sentencing guidelines but if no jail sentences are passed then any sentences will lose the (very badly) needed deterrent effect so yes, i would hope that the default position would be jail time.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Part of the problem with having GPs report parents for this is that females who have had this performed will then be withdrawn from most NHS services and suffer from further heath problems. You will be warned about this. Are you prepared to accept this consequence?

If that were tru then the parents should again be investigated and if found to be neglecting their child to its detriment, they should lose the child.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

The children that are placed in care as a consequence of their parents being jailed. In your opinion are they better off in care than they would have been with their families?

You assume both parents would be jailed. Experience teaches us that that is unusual. But it is not a matter of whether they are "better off", the law needs to be brought to bear to stop FGM for as yet un-mutilated kids' benefit, and if you are looking for some sentencing utopia whereby stiff punishments for serious criminals somehow do not seriously impinge on family life, well, good luck with that. It isn't a consequence I or anyone would WANT, but is a consequence the parents should have thought of when deciding whether or no to let a butcher loose on their child. They are responsible.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

What are you going to say to the children who say you ruined their lives?

I would hope that eventually the fact I did no such thing, but that their own parents did it all by themselves, would be realised. But whether they realised it or not should not be a factor in doing what is necessary to try to eradicate this barbaric practice. No apologist for mutilators can change that, nor can any amount of emotional blackmail. Just as if Rose and Fred West had young kids, I would "ruin their lives" by sending their parents to jail without parole, if you want to look at it that way. I would say it is a very twisted way to look at it, but those kids' opinion would not deter me one second from prosecuting, convicting and locking up the Wests.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

I just don't think this problem can be solved with prosecutions. I think the govt should be doing everything they can to engage these communities and persuade them to end these procedures, but if they choose to go with their own beliefs and perform them I think we've just got to accept that we've done all we can.

And tolerate this butchery? Really? We shall just have to fundamentally disagree on that one, then.

Re: Rotherham : Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:24 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Because you are in a very safe place here - 99% of the regular posters on here are never going to challenge your views - simple really. Where else do you post your views, I would be very surprised if the other boards you post on -if any- are left wing leading boards

What you have done is to frustrate those who disagree with you away from this board. It has now reached a point where your views are seldom ever challenged and when they are you know you can rely on the usual suspects to back you up.

I've done nothing but the same as what you or anyone is free to do and that is post whatever I want within the AUP. The nonsensical view that I have "frustrated" away most users is pretty mad, especially as the board has a "foe" function but it is a free country and if it was true that people chose not to post somewhere simply because they suspected the presence of another poster they disagreed with, even one they would never see, then I respect their choice.

Of course IF people have taken such a decision not to post, it could at least as likely be that they don't want to engage with the sort of right wing, fascist, racist, reactionary and homophobic stuff that certain posters regularly come up with. But you wouldn't have thought of that, would you?

Sal Paradise wrote:

Are you seriously suggesting this board is as vibrant and interesting as it was 12 months ago? If you agree it isn't why do you think that is?

As you apparently know every person who has ever posted, and know if, and why, they no longer do, how can anyone dispute your analytical findings? You have the statistics, and the signed statements.

It is not for me to answer such crackpot theories, anyway. Those who run the forums decide what goes and what doesn't, I'm very happy with that, if they tolerate me - or you - we remain free to post, if they don't, then we're out. I have nothing to do with running the boards. I would hope my posts tend towards the vibrant and interesting, but whether you're right or wrong. it wouldn't be my problem, would it.

Just checking the front page now,

Record users Online 4,468 on Sat 8th Feb 2014 @ 11:02AM
Current users online ~1626

Doesn't seem too shabby to me.

Re: Rotherham : Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:25 pm  

The Video Ref wrote:

Good post. These girls will not be offered any real opportunity to mix with, or make a contribution to, wider British society.

And this is the problem. Multi-culture often = mono-culture. Where people are brought up with, and stick to, their own kind.

Apart from a certain element within the Pakistani community who are quite happy to use multiculturalism from their mono cultural backgrounds to get their carnal bliss hits.

Re: Rotherham : Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:19 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

What has happened to Mintball?

Emigrated to get away from immigrants?