Outlaw Pete wrote: » Yes, Travis, I am. lol. You said: And your source for this is that you apparently have a "bit of cop on" :P So the truth is you just made it up. Thought as much.
str8talkingguy wrote: » You talking to me?
My source is a bit of cop on
str8talkingguy wrote: » ".. police are raging behind closed doors .."
Lefty Bicek wrote: » 'They' most certainly have form. And plenty of it, over decades. And it is not just one force, as far as this issue pertains. It is not apparent that you know anything about which you're commenting on.
WrenBoy wrote: » If members of my family suppressed the investigation of a large scale sex grooming gang, then yes I think extra scrutiny should be put on them in future to ensure it doesn't happen again. Lessons should be learned and not just shrugged off, but sure look your entitled to your view.
Niner leprauchan wrote: » No, 'they' don't have form. A small group within 1 force is not the entire police service of the UK.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » so what you are saying is that if a member of the family next door to you, or even a few houses down, suppressed the investigation of a large scale sex grooming gang then extra scrutiny should be put on you in future to ensure it doesnt happen again. can you see how stupid that sounds?
WrenBoy wrote: » I do ya.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » you realise that this is a different police force to the ones involved in rotherham and manchester and that police forces in the UK are separate?
Niner leprauchan wrote: » No, 'they' don't have form. A small group within 1 force is not the entire police service of the UK. Let's put it another way, does your family all have 'form' because one person committed a crime? How about the entire company you work for? Ridiculous tarring
WrenBoy wrote: » Well they have form, they did cover up or at least refuse to seriously investigate Grooming gangs for a time. Being sceptical wouldn't be unreasonable.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Source?
WrenBoy wrote: » I did not, either you're mistaken or lying. I said the police/media don't deserve the full trust of the people and should have their actions questioned, they have failed in this area before in the grooming gangs they failed to investigate after being made aware of them.
Boggles wrote: » You said Stephens claims are not unreasonable. They are, he is a fúcking idiot.
Snake Plisken wrote: » So brave behind your keyboard!
Hunky Monster wrote: » Jimmy Saville.
Boggles wrote: » He is all ready claiming cover up. The media, the police, everyone - they are all pro-pedophile.
Deleted User wrote: » Meanwhile sympathising with likes of Weinstein....
Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: » I going to pretend you didn’t type that with a straight face. Your posts are heavily coloured by politics and sticking it to “teh liberals”. How stupid do you think people are?
Deleted User wrote: Tommy Robinson berates police officer, records it and posts it to his own news website. What the **** is he thinking.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » I was referring to the phone call from the police officer leading the case as I don't think he spoke to Tommy the way a leading officer into an allegation of sexual assault on a child should speak to their parent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuRhTqu4Itc That officer is now no longer on the case and his daughter has apparently been reinterviewed.
WrenBoy wrote: » Did I say that ?
Boggles wrote: » All the media and police are pro-pedophile?
The diabolical press hate Tommy Robinson more than they love children. The Pro-Paedophile News Cycle And Evil Tommy Robinson.
Pro-Paedophile News Cycle Below we have a list of headlines from the pro-paedophile news cycle
The modus operandi of the press is pretty clear for anyone bothered to look into it. The press hate Tommy Robinson more than they love kids. In fact its perfectly reasonable to conclude that the press are pro-paedophile and anti-child victim
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » I see ti SYL fan club managed to derail the thread for a few pages.....as usual.