The Guardian brands Elon Musk "Worlds Richest Pub Bore"

growstuff

David49

As long as everyone is content that the failings were restricted to local level in several local authorities and that policy was not endorsed from above that’s fine.

I don't understand what you mean.

Are you implying that central government somehow prevented any action?

Goodness gracious political interference would never happen, not even in the Post Office inquiry, it’s unthinkable.

I would add that those who find merit in his "dirty tricks" policies should look very closely into his accusations and insinuations and the personality behind them, before backing him and his ambitions. His stategies and tactics are straight from Machiavelli, and for the same reasons as that master "influencer".

A therapists view of Machiavellianism -
www.choosingtherapy.com/machiavellianism/
Does this sound familiar?

Musk's only true intention is to create civil division and unrest amongst any western government he can in order to promote his own far right agenda whatever the issue.

He is also as we now know perfectly capable of knifing Farage in the back because Farage did not follow all his demands. Friends, mates, "exchanging notes" on day, crucified the next.

He is an extremely disturbed man in my opinion and imo all shades of UK political opinion should go our own way.

LizzieDrip

I know what you mean Allira👍

The words I really want to use to describe Musk are totally unprintable

You might be banned!

I will just say that he makes me feel very uneasy. And queasy.

David49

As long as everyone is content that the failings were restricted to local level in several local authorities and that policy was not endorsed from above that’s fine.

I don't understand what you mean.

Are you implying that central government somehow prevented any action?

As long as everyone is content that the failings were restricted to local level in several local authorities and that policy was not endorsed from above that’s fine.

I know what you mean Allira👍

The words I really want to use to describe Musk are totally unprintable

LizzieDrip

He certainly has MaizieD. He’s achieved his aim - sad little man!

sad little man!

I can think of lots of words to describe him but I wouldn't choose those!
Although he is a man, of course.

He's got us all talking about him but forewarned is forearmed.

He certainly has MaizieD. He’s achieved his aim - sad little man!

MaizieD

Well, Musk has certainly set off a tsunami of misinformation and hysteria.

Which he probably intended. He is not interested in truth, he's only interested in self, add in limitless access to money and you have a very dangerous person.

Well, Musk has certainly set off a tsunami of misinformation and hysteria.

David49

There has been a national enquiry in to child sex abuse in general, which seems to have been a waste of time because 10 yrs on none of the recommendations have been implemented.

It didn’t focus on Rotherham, the police and social services knew full well what was happening but decided nothing needed to be done, did the DPP decide that it was not in the public interest not to prosecute.

What was this?

www.iicsa.org.uk/

Final report issued in 2022. Not 10 years ago.

David49

There has been a national enquiry in to child sex abuse in general, which seems to have been a waste of time because 10 yrs on none of the recommendations have been implemented.

It didn’t focus on Rotherham, the police and social services knew full well what was happening but decided nothing needed to be done, did the DPP decide that it was not in the public interest not to prosecute.

Have you read the link I posted?

29 men were prosecuted, so I don't know why you think the DPP decided not to prosecute.

Rotherham Council was replaced with a team of commissioners.

Undoubtedly, there needs to be more action on the recommendations of the previous inquiry, but I really don't see what advantage there would be in having another inquiry at this stage.

David49 there have been a number of enquiries, the latest one was wide ranging, extensive and lasted 7 years. It published its recommendations in 2022 but they were not acted upon by the then Tory government.

We do not need yet another enquiry; we need to act on the recommendations of the last one!

Here are the facts, not opinions, from today’s Tortoise News:

“For the record:
a 2022 report on child sex abuse in Telford found police were “nervous” on account of the mainly Asian suspects’ race, but there is no evidence Starmer resisted prosecutions out of “political correctness” or fear the far-right would exploit them.

On the contrary, as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 to 2013, he
worked with the then-chief prosecutor Nazir Afzal to bring a landmark 2012 prosecution against a grooming gang of British Pakistani men in Rochdale;
changed official guidance on child sexual exploitation to encourage police to investigate suspects and make it easier to bring complex cases to court; and
created the post of special prosecutor for child abuse and sexual exploitation.

In 2011 a Times investigation by Andrew Norfolk counted 14 grooming gang prosecutions in the previous three years.

In 2022 the report of an independent inquiry into child sexual exploitation by Professor Alexis Jay counted 35 child grooming-related convictions in Starmer’s last three years as DPP.

For comparison:
Kemi Badenoch, the new Conservative leader, has called for a new national inquiry into grooming gangs even though her party called for no such thing in 14 years in power. Starmer and Jess Phillips, his safeguarding minister, have rejected calls for a fresh inquiry on the basis that the Jay report was comprehensive and what’s needed now is action.”

David49

There has been a national enquiry in to child sex abuse in general, which seems to have been a waste of time because 10 yrs on none of the recommendations have been implemented.

It didn’t focus on Rotherham, the police and social services knew full well what was happening but decided nothing needed to be done, did the DPP decide that it was not in the public interest not to prosecute.

Did the DPP decide it was not in the public interest to prosecute

There has been a national enquiry in to child sex abuse in general, which seems to have been a waste of time because 10 yrs on none of the recommendations have been implemented.

It didn’t focus on Rotherham, the police and social services knew full well what was happening but decided nothing needed to be done, did the DPP decide that it was not in the public interest not to prosecute.

As others have said, there was an enquiry.

^ ... there is no doubt that the racial element did have an influence on decision to prosecute.^

What does this mean?

David49 There has been an inquiry.

David49

Iam64

Starmer did have ‘ some influence’ David49. He saw victims were being blamed for the abuse. He oversaw the first prosecution of gangs of men who groomed, raped, exploited in the most horrific ways. The men were of largely Muslim Pakistani heritage in Rochdale.

If he did have significant influence then it looks really bad not having an enquiry, there is no doubt that the racial element did have an influence on decision to prosecute.

Did that influence come from the top.

You might be interested in this article from the FT:

archive.is/QY8xJ

Iam64

Starmer did have ‘ some influence’ David49. He saw victims were being blamed for the abuse. He oversaw the first prosecution of gangs of men who groomed, raped, exploited in the most horrific ways. The men were of largely Muslim Pakistani heritage in Rochdale.

If he did have significant influence then it looks really bad not having an enquiry, there is no doubt that the racial element did have an influence on decision to prosecute.

Did that influence come from the top.

My post above was in reply to Galaxy

Starmer did have ‘ some influence’ David49. He saw victims were being blamed for the abuse. He oversaw the first prosecution of gangs of men who groomed, raped, exploited in the most horrific ways. The men were of largely Muslim Pakistani heritage in Rochdale.

I'm not trying to stop you "saying that isnt going to work." Nor have I, in any way, suggested that. You are entitled to express your opinion.

However, freedom of expression is a restricted right. Saying people - people whose background and experience you don't know - show a form of cowardice i.e., are cowards, simply because they don't fit your bias, is simply wrong.

It’s been unfortunate for Starmer that he has a feud with Musk, however the grooming scandal did happen when he was in charge of the DPP and he may have had some influence.
It would have been better to allow the Public Enquiry to go ahead.

It is a fact that abuse in South Africa is appalling.

I give up! Neither of those camps that should say.