Timidity of the British Media

porsche959 · 22-01-2015 01:14AM

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

The European Union needs immigration. We need the movement of people between countries. We need people willing to work in the service industry for low wages. And to move up through the pay structure based on their work ethic and skills. That's the principle of the Europe that we all voted for. A Europe free of fascist and far-left tyranny.

Don't fully agree with all of this, but thanked post as it represents a refreshingly honest and consistent assertion of neo-liberalism.

RobYourBuilder · 22-01-2015 01:14AM

Do we really?

It's been proven than non EU immigration has cost Britain nearly €180 billion. It has been a net loss for them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11209234/Immigration-from-outside-Europe-cost-120-billion.html

We also know that know that circa 21% of all non EU citizens resident in the union, are on welfare. That's not even factoring in the social costs. We need skilled workers, of course. But why are we importing so many problematic immigrants who will become reliant on state support? Doesn't make sense to me.

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/social-europe-jobs/non-eu-citizens-twice-likely-be-unemployed-303834

reprise · 22-01-2015 01:16AM

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

The European Union needs immigration. We need the movement of people between countries. We need people willing to work in the service industry for low wages. And to move up through the pay structure based on their work ethic and skills. That's the principle of the Europe that we all voted for. A Europe free of fascist and far-left tyranny.

Hmmm. You might be confusing yourself with the type of bilge that mysteriously appeared after we voted for something resembling a common market.

The_Kew_Tour · 22-01-2015 01:17AM

The media might be timid, but there Daily Papers are Right Wing as you get pretty much day in day out for some .

Hackery · 22-01-2015 01:21AM

Agreed

Sociopath2 · 22-01-2015 01:25AM

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Note that he completely ignored this remark;

Any other ethnic group and he would have been all over it.

He has page after page of posts defending Islam's reputation, usually with short sniping comments, but I can't find any condemning the Paris attacks.

I think that says everything that needs to be said about the calibre of the man.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 22-01-2015 01:41AM

reprise wrote: »

As was already stated to you, the race of the victims was of paramount importance to the kiddy rapers. It's part of the sick story.

That was someone else, see below.

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The ethnic Pakistani groups in Rotherham regarded white girls as trash, fit to be exploited and not treated as human that's the point.

So, back to square one.

Eutow · 22-01-2015 02:18AM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That was someone else, see below.

So, back to square one.

Various posters have already responded to you and have explained why the media have used the word "white" when they are reporting on the Rotherham case. You have either deliberately chosen to ignore it to suit your own agenda, or you are overly paranoid and seeing things that aren't there. Maybe you are just looking to find something to get offended by.

There is a well known case of a young man by the name of Stephen Lawrence. He was a teenager that was killed in a racially motivated attack in England. Look at media reports and you will see that they refer to him as the "black" teenager Stephen Lawrence. Like the Rotherham case, the persons/victims skin colour or ethnicity is brought up. The reason, it was a motivating factor behind the crime, and so relevant to the reporting of it.

wretcheddomain · 22-01-2015 02:30AM

beks101 wrote: »

And let's not forget, as emotive and provocative a subject as this is, as devastating as the last few weeks' events have been and as much as people love to finger point for any reason when it comes to media matters...these cartoons don't just only characterize free speech; they also represent a lack of respect for other people's religion, which is a ticking timebomb in terms of the environment of increasing terrorism and violence and attacks on the west that we find ourselves in.

Should we respect Scientology then?

catallus · 22-01-2015 02:40AM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Should we respect Scientology then?

Such a facetious point ignores the cultural reality in which we live.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 22-01-2015 03:32AM

Eutow wrote: »

Various posters have already responded to you and have explained why the media have used the word "white" when they are reporting on the Rotherham case. You have either deliberately chosen to ignore it to suit your own agenda, or you are overly paranoid and seeing things that aren't there. Maybe you are just looking to find something to get offended by.

There is a well known case of a young man by the name of Stephen Lawrence. He was a teenager that was killed in a racially motivated attack in England. Look at media reports and you will see that they refer to him as the "black" teenager Stephen Lawrence. Like the Rotherham case, the persons/victims skin colour or ethnicity is brought up. The reason, it was a motivating factor behind the crime, and so relevant to the reporting of it.

And I don't agree with it. I dont believe it was because of PCism or because the offenders felt that white firls were in some way more immoral and most answers answered a slightly different querstion to the one I posed as I pointed out.

Eutow · 22-01-2015 03:03PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Why does the media continuously emphasise the fact that the victims were "white" girls? Are other girls less news-worthy?

This question was answered by various posters, two of which I have posted below.

inforfun wrote: »

The news worthy part of it being white girls is, that they are/were targeted just because of that, being white by these "asian" gangs.

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The ethnic Pakistani groups in Rotherham regarded white girls as trash, fit to be exploited and not treated as human that's the point.

You then responded later on with this:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Which may be a valid point, but the question wasn't why white girls, the question is why does the media always sepcifcilly say "white" girls?

The media in this case also refer to the girls as being “white” because that was why they were targeted. If the girls were “black” or “asian”, the media would always refer to them as “black” or “asian”. The media have a duty to report why a crime was committed, and people as in the general public, want to know why a crime was committed, the motivating factor behind it.

The fact these girls were picked out by the perpetrators in question because of their race is important to the reporting of the crime both by witnesses and the media. If they were black, asian or whatever and the perpetrators were white it would still carry the same importance and the media would keep referring to the girls race.

I mentioned the Stephen Lawrence case, which you didn’t comment on when you responded to my previous post. I could ask you why the media keep referring to him as the “black” teenager. It is the same reason as in the Rotherham case, in that race was an important factor behind the crime, and people want to know the facts behind it.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Nothign to do with PC or being offended.

I'm merely pointing out that the media is trying to evoke more sympathy by discribing the girls as white and that raping a white girl is in some way an even bigger crime than a non-white girl.

What makes you think that?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I dont believe it was because of PCism or because the offenders felt that white firls were in some way more immoral and most answers answered a slightly different querstion to the one I posed as I pointed out.

So, you don’t believe these girls were targeted because they are white” and that the perpetrators though they were immoral? What do you believe happened then? The media didn’t decide the facts of the case. They are just reporting what was found to be the case from evidence.

wretcheddomain · 23-01-2015 04:23PM

catallus wrote: »

Such a facetious point ignores the cultural reality in which we live.

My point is that if Scientology were to amass the same following as Islam then, according to your point, we should respect Scientology.

I refuse to be forced to respect ideas merely because many people believe it. If I don't respect an idea when 1 person holds it, wouldn't it simply be hypocrisy to respect it if a billion people hold it?

K4t · 23-01-2015 05:04PM

wretcheddomain wrote: »

My point is that if Scientology were to amass the same following as Islam then, according to your point, we should respect Scientology.

I refuse to be forced to respect ideas merely because many people believe it. If I don't respect an idea when 1 person holds it, wouldn't it simply be hypocrisy to respect it if a billion people hold it?

Stop making so much sense.

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:19PM

blinding wrote: »

The timidity of the british media is most obvious in their lack of criticism of the royals (example prince Andrew; the manner in which most of the media are trying to put him in the clear is nauseating)
Its as if they have a default setting that any criticism of the royal family is a career killer ! ! !

well, maybe its the fact that the man is innocent until proven guilty. or maybe you believe once accused, automatically guilty. or if high up or a member of the royal family, automatically guilty

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:25PM

keano_afc wrote: »

I watched that Angry, White and Proud programme and to be honest the only thing thats stuck with me was the Muslim guy outside the mosque telling the protesters that "your son will be Muslim, your daughter will be Muslim, your grandchildren will be Muslim."

I found the declaration of the aims of these people far more threatening that the skinheads protesting.

or maybe he knew what these vermin were up to and he wanted them to fall into the trap of proving his point? of course he could be a nut also, i don't know

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:33PM

Help!!!! wrote: »

Ill agree that some are racist but there are some that are just sick of the way the non muslins are treated in the U.K. & just want to voice their opinions.

opinions about what. how are non muslims treated in the uk. i suspect all these people are pissed off about is the fact they don't get enough dole to drink and smoke more. or that most of the states money isn't spent on the military to go around slaughtering in all muslim countries. they certainly don't care about the abused children.

Help!!!! wrote: »

Why are these hate preachers not arrested?

maybe because the police realise its a waste of time. the odd one might be arrested but realistically i think the police are realising that all arresting them does is make them even more extreme in their views. thats what i think anyway, i don't know whether that is the answer or not.

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:36PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

No, it's just another example of political-correctness gone mad. Specifically mentioning "White" girls (or any colour) = you must be racist .. why does it matter etc :rolleyes:
The reality that it's just simply a statement of fact (as you highlight in this instance) gets lost in that outrage

In short, it's a mix of people actively looking to be offended and competing with similar types to show how MORE PC they are!

its nothing to do with PC as PC doesn't exist

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:40PM

DeadHand wrote: »

The media emphasised this fact because there were important racial and cultural elements to the case.

As indigenous Christian or non-religious girls they were seem as inherently inferior human beings and immoral sluts deserving of any degradation they suffered by the Muslim men who raped and tortured them with impunity for years. The rapists were informed by their beliefs to see it as a just and proper way to treat those young women and children.

Another key factor in the case was the fact that most of the victims came from working/welfare class backgrounds. No-one in authority cared enough about them to risk their careers by making accusations that would automatically be construed as racist. Had the same horrors befallen middle class girls, a stop would have been put to it much more swiftly.

As it was, the fear of being branded racist far outweighed any sense of duty or compassion those in a position to help may have had. They were paralysed utterly by political correctness.

The authorities, in fact, at times protected and aided these rapists. Those who did speak up were immediately silenced and forced to attend equality and diversity courses. One unfortunate man who went to retrieve his daughter from one of these Muslim rape gangs was promptly arrested by the police.

No, the suffering of non-white girls is in no way less newsworthy. That is why the suffering of Syrian and Iraqi girls at the hands of ISIS and Nigerian girls at the hands of Boko Haram is, rightly, reported in the media constantly.

Mentioning the victims were white was reporting a relevant fact, not an attempt to evoke greater sympathy.

it had nothing to do with the non existant nonsense that is political correctness. it had to do with the simple fact that people were covering themselves so it wouldn't be found out about their involvement in covering up what happened so they wouldn't lose their jobs. they were just thinking of themselves. anyone who did speak up was silenced so other peoples cover wouldn't be blown. fear of being branded racist was a small part, but for the most part they were only worrying about their self preservation. i'd agree with your view in relation to the girls social class and the relevant authorities not giving a **** yet would have if the girls were from middle or upper class backgrounds.

RobYourBuilder · 23-01-2015 05:40PM

end of the road wrote: »

its nothing to do with PC as PC doesn't exist

If you keep repeating something, it doesn't make it true.

RobYourBuilder · 23-01-2015 05:43PM

end of the road wrote: »

it had nothing to do with the non existant nonsense that is political correctness. it had to do with the simple fact that people were covering themselves so it wouldn't be found out about their involvement in covering up what happened so they wouldn't lose their jobs. they were just thinking of themselves. anyone who did speak up was silenced so other peoples cover wouldn't be blown. fear of being branded racist was a small part, but for the most part they were only worrying about their self preservation

Sure it didn't, champ.

A researcher was sent on a diversity awareness course - and faced the sack - for raising the alarm about the appalling abuse of children in Rotherham and the fact most of the perpetrators were of Pakistani descent, it has been reported.

Some 1,400 children were abused between 1997 and 2013 in the South Yorkshire town, including cases of them of being made to witness brutal rapes, being covered in petrol and threatened with being set alight, according to a devastating report last week.

Many of the victims were young girls in care of the council - which was accused of "blatant" failures in not dealing with the problem.

The researcher, who was seconded to Rotherham Council from the Home Office in 2002, spoke to BBC Panorama anonymously and said she was told she must "never, ever" again mention the fact they most of the abusers were Asian men.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/02/rotherham-abuse-researcher-diversity-course_n_5750560.html

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:49PM

Help!!!! wrote: »

So are the people of Rotherham who clapped them as they walked down the streets racist too?

maybe, maybe not. but why they would want to clap trouble making trash i don't know.

Help!!!! wrote: »

There are a great deal of of non Muslim people in the U.K. who feel let down by the government

most people feel let down by the government. always been the way and always will be.

Help!!!! wrote: »

& are tired of being accused of being a racist if they put up the St Georges flag outside their home

thats just waste of space councils and their ""relevant" enforcers/units/whatever trying to justify their jobs by going after people for such nonsense. bottom class politicians is all they are.

Help!!!! wrote: »

They said they were going on a peaceful protest & they did, they were not the ones throwing things

yeah. they were trouble making trash

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:53PM

DeadHand wrote: »

The rampant, widespread rape and torture of white children and young women by gangs of Muslim men was commonly known about by the rest of the community in Rotherham. Anyone who brought it to the attention of the authorities was roundly ignored, thanks to political correctness. Many in authority who brought it to the attention of their superiors were not only ignored but undermined and disciplined. Thanks, again, to political correctness.

The father who desperately tried to free his daughter from the clutches of one of these rings only to be arrested by the police for doing so. Did he not give a rats arse?

True, failure of parenting was a huge factor in the case. Still, the ultimate blame for the horror lies with the crippling culture of political correctness and moral cowardice within the authorities and those doing the actual raping.

I agree that the social standing of the victims delayed moves to protect them but the fault lies squarely with those who had the official power to act. What would you have the plain people of Rotherham do after the law failed them, after their misgivings and suspicions were dismissed out of hand? Round up the men suspected of involvement and lynch them?

get it into your head. it was nothing to do with political correctness as it doesn't exist. it was about simple incompetents and self preservation. the police arresting that man for going to get his child, all self preservation on their part so it wouldn't get out they were incompetent. end of

end of the road · 23-01-2015 05:58PM

Help!!!! wrote: »

they said they were going on a peaceful protest.

saying and doing are to different things. extremists don't do peaceful.

Help!!!! wrote: »

The main cause of the problems were the police.

yeah, i'd agree the police over there aren't shy about sturring up **** and causing or instigating trouble themselves and do it a lot. but lets face it these trouble makers aren't shy themselves about sturring and causing trouble.

end of the road · 23-01-2015 06:00PM

DeadHand wrote: »

No, they aren't. Not yet, at least.

Produce one case of a lynching or attempted lynching by a "white extremist" group in Britain in modern times. As much as the leftwing, liberal media and many national governments would have us believe that the far right are as big threat to European society as Muslim extremists are it simply isn't true.

Had the authorities had the courage and conviction to do their jobs in the first place these idiots wouldn't have bothered coming to Rotherham and the indigenous people of that unhappy city wouldn't have felt drawn to them.

It's a story we're seeing all over Europe- ordinary people being drawn to the far right by disillusionment at all the failure of mainstream politics to do anything about the Islamification of swathes of European cities, the culture of appeasement toward aggressive Islam and by frustration at the poisoning of open, honest debate by the perpetually, professionally offended scouring the press and airwaves for an opportunity to scream "racist" and "bigot" at anyone who expresses even the mildest misgiving at the affects of mass immigration on our societies and the now obvious problem of Islam and it's compatibility with Western values.

Agreed. Doing something about Muslim rape gangs, for example.

the far right are as much of a threat as muslim or any other extremists

Donkey Oaty · 23-01-2015 06:03PM

end of the road wrote: »

the far right are as much of a threat as muslim or any other extremists

Threat to what?

Sociopath2 · 23-01-2015 06:08PM

end of the road wrote: »

the far right are as much of a threat as muslim or any other extremists

No they're not. Hyperbole to justify ignoring the elephant in the room. The far right in England is disorganised and has very low levels of support. The elements inclined to violence are very well contained by the police.

The London nail bombings shows the level of sophistication they are capable. Nothing more than lone wolf terrorism with very crude improvised devices.

By scale and capability extremist Islam is a far greater threat. It's absurd to suggest anything else.

end of the road · 23-01-2015 06:23PM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Threat to what?

society and to the world

reprise · 23-01-2015 06:30PM

end of the road wrote: »

get it into your head. it was nothing to do with political correctness as it doesn't exist.

Whats this article here about?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

Have you some special definition of existence you would like to share?

You saying that political correctness doesn't exist is about as logical as you making an argument that the internet doesn't exist.

Would you like some more links?

Sociopath2 · 23-01-2015 06:44PM

end of the road wrote: »

society and to the world

Please explain how they pose as great a threat as Islamic extremists to society and the world.

Just to clarify we are speaking about actual recognised far right groups, not governments or organisations you feel are far right.

Timidity of the British Media

Comments