Did they use that actual term?

If so why? It’s not a neutral objective description is it? It’s an emotive epithet which ought not appear in anything genuinely independent.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

And why would it be? These reports clearly state that the police the council and social workers failed to protect these children because they were concerned about inter community relations.

Meanwhile your chief concern is what language they used in the report.

I give up,

which funnily enough is exactly what the police the councils and social services did.

One more point

In a post above, I am accused of being "emotive" about Trump. I am certainly passionately opposed to everything he stands for, but I try to look at it objectively.

In another thread, I am accused of holding conspiracy theories about him. Which only proves to me just how successful he has been in using his "Big Lie" tactics to draw a smoke screen around his activities in the minds of some. I responded with this:-

My postings on Trump are very far from a conspiracy theory. To suggest they are is to attempt to deny what is in plain sight.

For confirmation of that, listen to Biden's speech yesterday on the danger that Trump and the "Maga" movement are to democracy and the threat to America's soul.

There are some things which do not require evidence to be true. They are self-evident. Just as in the declaration of independence, this is one of them. That Trump got away with things, and overcame two impeachments, was only down to the requirements of a 2/3rds majority in the Senate. Not whether he was guilty or not. That's no conspiracy. It's obvious.

As he has continued to flout the law since leaving office, and is no longer protected as the POTUS, the Justice Department can do their work. As I have said many times, be patient.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

So Biden says he is a danger and we must believe it. Meanwhile Trump says Biden is a danger but we mustn't believe it.

Here's a thought perhaps politicians make speeches damming the opposition because well it's what they do.

Check out Tony Blair slagging off Maggie (yes I know she had gone by the time he moved up). If Maggie was so bad how come he never rolled back her policies or maybe it just suited him and every other politician to demonise the other side.

Try taking what politicians say at their party rallies with a pinch of salt.

Edited by Badger11 (04 Sep 2022 10.17am)

One more point

What kind of 'democracy' is it when journalists aren't allowed to question the most powerful leader within the west.

This is not what people voted for and many have buyer's remorse and will get to show that in November.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Sep 2022 11.13am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

So along with defending Police and institutional failures on what I regard as an industrial scale up and down the country for what amounts to decades you are now defending the biggest US failure as well.

Maybe you're just attracted to failure.....Trump had energy independence and a successful economy before covid. Biden has ruined all of that energy independence and ruined the economy as well....certainly from what it should be.....war also followed as well, which I also predicted.

Anyone who follows your politics should really be connecting the dots by now. Your politics leads to increased misery for the majority.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Sep 2022 12.54pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)