[isleaiw1]

Valley Blues, on 13 April 2025 - 10:30 AM, said:

Positive discrimination is illegal.

It’s quite clearly wrong, hence it being made illegal.

It’s now called positive action.

Which is positive discrimination just dropping the word that makes it illegal.

Still wrong.

I chose my words deliberately.

[isleaiw1]

No furore about a Labour MP being charged with corruption in relation to her aunt's govt in Bangladesh.

There seems to be a few charges stacking up now...

[Mr Mercury]

isleaiw1, on 13 April 2025 - 10:57 AM, said:

No furore about a Labour MP being charged with corruption in relation to her aunt's govt in Bangladesh.

There seems to be a few charges stacking up now...

Wasn’t she the anti corruption minister as well….

[Wooden Spoon]

dart in the crossbar, on 13 April 2025 - 08:30 AM, said:

As I see it just now. Doesn't make me right. I might change for views a bit as I learn more.

On recruitment.

I'd reckon that the great companies recruit and retain great people. I'd bet that they do research to find out whether they miss out on some great people, including people who share any characteristics. And then take action to get those people. I'd guess that they do it quietly, cleverly and legally as they realise that any quotas or positive action can also result in the public having a lower level of confidence in perceived beneficiaries of such action, even when their employees weren't recruited in such a way. Eg ' You're only here because you...' 'actually I started 10 years before that was implemented'. 'This company employs weak staff just because they are ...'. As I see it, it can be a blunt instrument that can be counter-productive and do a fair bit of harm to individuals and companies.

On child protection.

An independent public enquiry might consider the extent to which the responsible adults / adults in power judged that the children were potential victims and the adults potential abusers. The extent to which the responsible adults made decisions based on their judgments about the children's backgrounds and behaviour and not thee abuse that they suffered. The extent to which the responsible adults took decisions based on the law irrespective of the backgrounds and characteristics of the adults. 'Rotherham' should be in scope, but maybe even Saville too. Whilst they are obviously different, the central points in both (and more) are the responsible adults' response to the law, age of consent etc and the background etc of the children v that of the adults. There may be a thread of victim-blaming and looking the other way for some adults. An enquiry would find out.

I may have missed it, but I don't see a 'Hillsborough' pressure group behind a child protection public enquiry. I'd have thought that a 'Justice for the abused children' campaign would have the potential to garner significant support from influential people.

As I say, I'm no expert but think this just now.

There’s one key point you’ve missed. Deliberately perhaps?


Maggie the whistle blower mentioned it. The enquiry into Telford mentioned it. People who want to cover it up, or dilute it don’t mention it.


The fear of being branded racist or the authorities failing to act because it could be deemed racist.

[Blue roan lily]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 01:59 PM, said:

Wasn’t she the anti corruption minister as well….

Yep
It doesnt matter what title theyve got they are all on the gravy train..
And its got the most carriages in history

This post has been edited by Blue roan lily: 13 April 2025 - 02:43 PM

[calvin plummers socks]

clarevoyant., on 13 April 2025 - 09:22 AM, said:

Having TV on in the background and observing another lengthy spell of adverts makes you wonder if white folk are discriminated against when it comes to getting a gig in said adverts.

You get very mardy about a lot of things which don’t concern you?

[Mr Mercury]

656 illegals immigrants crossed over on small boats yesterday. All to be looked after, given free medical treatment , cash, phones and clothes handouts, meals and a roof over their heads. Nobody has any idea who they are or where they’re from but our money will be used to look after them, they won’t be affected by any of this lousy governments policies.
Smash the gangs going ok then liar Starmer?

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 13 April 2025 - 04:27 PM

[Valley Blues]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 04:26 PM, said:

656 illegals immigrants crossed over on small boats yesterday. All to be looked after, given free medical treatment , cash, phones and clothes handouts, meals and a roof over their heads. Nobody has any idea who they are or where they’re from but our money will be used to look after them, they won’t be affected by any of this lousy governments policies.
Smash the gangs going ok then liar Starmer?

Reported last week that channel crossings up by a quarter on this time last year.

Give the government some slack, though. They inherited a black hole.

[dart in the crossbar]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 04:26 PM, said:

656 illegals immigrants crossed over on small boats yesterday. All to be looked after, given free medical treatment , cash, phones and clothes handouts, meals and a roof over their heads. Nobody has any idea who they are or where they’re from but our money will be used to look after them, they won’t be affected by any of this lousy governments policies.
Smash the gangs going ok then liar Starmer?

Are you confident that everything that you have written there is factually correct?

[Spire-ite]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 04:26 PM, said:

656 illegals immigrants crossed over on small boats yesterday. All to be looked after, given free medical treatment , cash, phones and clothes handouts, meals and a roof over their heads. Nobody has any idea who they are or where they’re from but our money will be used to look after them, they won’t be affected by any of this lousy governments policies.
Smash the gangs going ok then liar Starmer?

I cannot understand any government allowing this to happen. We are being invaded by mainly young muslim men (who hate us and our culture) who are not fleeing anything otherwise there would be women and children arriving in equal numbers. They dispose of their identity. Purely just here for benefits and health care. They are welcomed in, in fact chaperoned in.
When we go abroad, how many times do you have to show passports, go through strict security etc, and they know who we are before we even get to the airport. The billions this is costing is obscene. The security risk is immense.

[Mr Mercury]

dart in the crossbar, on 13 April 2025 - 04:53 PM, said:

Are you confident that everything that you have written there is factually correct?

Near enough yes. Well they’re certainly being looked after far better than many of our own citizens, and I’m sure we’ve all seen the clips of NHS staff at the hotels, and I doubt they’re going hungry while they’re there and I doubt the heating is turned off and I doubt they’re left penniless. Anyhow, what ever is correct or not the numbers are simply unsustainable, would u agree?

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 13 April 2025 - 05:04 PM

[Goku]

You lot write same post every day

[Mr Mercury]

Spire-ite, on 13 April 2025 - 04:55 PM, said:

I cannot understand any government allowing this to happen. We are being invaded by mainly young muslim men (who hate us and our culture) who are not fleeing anything otherwise there would be women and children arriving in equal numbers. They dispose of their identity. Purely just here for benefits and health care. They are welcomed in, in fact chaperoned in.
When we go abroad, how many times do you have to show passports, go through strict security etc, and they know who we are before we even get to the airport. The billions this is costing is obscene. The security risk is immense.

It’s beyond mindboggling.

Goku, on 13 April 2025 - 05:02 PM, said:

You lot write same post every day

Because the same thing keeps happening day after day after day. And there doesn’t seem to be any real appetite or ungency to stop it.
How olds your young un mate because I genuinely worry about the state of this country in a few years time. And it’ll be our kids and grandkids who suffer.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 13 April 2025 - 05:10 PM

[dart in the crossbar]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 05:02 PM, said:

Near enough yes.

That's a handy clarification, thanks.

Spire-ite, on 13 April 2025 - 04:55 PM, said:

I cannot understand any government allowing this to happen. We are being invaded by mainly young muslim men (who hate us and our culture) who are not fleeing anything otherwise there would be women and children arriving in equal numbers. They dispose of their identity. Purely just here for benefits and health care. They are welcomed in, in fact chaperoned in.
When we go abroad, how many times do you have to show passports, go through strict security etc, and they know who we are before we even get to the airport. The billions this is costing is obscene. The security risk is immense.

Are you confident that everything that you have written there is factually correct?

[Mr Mercury]

dart in the crossbar, on 13 April 2025 - 05:14 PM, said:

That's a handy clarification, thanks.

Costing an estimated £40k per person per year so I’m happy enough to post what I did.
No comment on the numbers?

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 13 April 2025 - 05:17 PM

[Spire-ite]

dart in the crossbar, on 13 April 2025 - 05:14 PM, said:

That's a handy clarification, thanks.



Are you confident that everything that you have written there is factually correct?

It is merely my opinion. But if any of it is factually wrong, would you be so kind as to share it with us?

[Mr Mercury]

Spire-ite, on 13 April 2025 - 05:20 PM, said:

It is merely my opinion. But if any of it is factually wrong, would you be so kind as to share it with us?

Well if we want cold hard facts that’s 8000 so far this year, ALL getting fed, warmth and shelter. That’s a 46% increase on the same period last year. Apparently costing an eye watering £54k per year pp if they’re housed in a hotel. Absolutely absurd.

[dart in the crossbar]

Spire-ite, on 13 April 2025 - 05:20 PM, said:

It is merely my opinion. But if any of it is factually wrong, would you be so kind as to share it with us?

If they are your opinions no fact checking ought to be required.

[Valley Blues]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 05:37 PM, said:

Well if we want cold hard facts that’s 8000 so far this year, ALL getting fed, warmth and shelter. That’s a 46% increase on the same period last year. Apparently costing an eye watering £54k per year pp if they’re housed in a hotel. Absolutely absurd.

Record numbers made the crossing for the first four months of a year.

Smashing the gangs doesn’t appear to be going quite to plan. Or maybe it’s going exactly to plan 🤷🏻

But they did inherit a black hole.

Can’t believe nobody’s brought up the balls-up they’re making of the blood scandal compensation…

[isleaiw1]

Mr Mercury, on 13 April 2025 - 04:26 PM, said:

656 illegals immigrants crossed over on small boats yesterday. All to be looked after, given free medical treatment , cash, phones and clothes handouts, meals and a roof over their heads. Nobody has any idea who they are or where they’re from but our money will be used to look after them, they won’t be affected by any of this lousy governments policies.
Smash the gangs going ok then liar Starmer?

Who says they are given phones and clothes?