Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Please be careful everyone

Was gonna write a whole load of details and information about it but my blood boils every time

My mum is not young and she is not well in the first place , and this has resulted in my mum having a stroke and being in hospital she is now Not the same person

I will prob come by tomorrow and give more details about the actual incident

Promise if I find the person I?m guaranteed to get a life sentence

MAIN THING IM HERE IS TO TELL EVERY ELDERLY LADY AND WOMAN DISTRACTED WALKING WITH THERE CHILDREN TO PLEASE WATCH OUT NO JOKE HONESTLY THIS CRAP HAS ALMOST TOOK MY MUMS LIFE!!

Not to sure why 'black boy' was needed in the title.Clearly identifying the criminal is not the purpose of this thread as no further was given. I beleive that if it was a white boy you wouldnt have included it. I feel there is racist tone in this thread.

ollieloudon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not to sure why 'black boy' was needed in the

> title.Clearly identifying the criminal is not the

> purpose of this thread as no further was given. I

> beleive that if it was a white boy you wouldnt

> have included it. I feel there is racist tone in

> this thread.


I disagree. I think someone is entitled to pass on the details/description of someone who has attacked their mother. I suspect that those are all the details that his mother has which he is passing on (although it would probably be more useful to know where, geographically, this took place). I'd expect the same to be passed on if they were white.


Hope your mum recovers soon Peckhamguy.

ollieloudon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Not to sure why 'black boy' was needed in the title.Clearly identifying the criminal is not the

> purpose of this thread as no further was given. I beleive that if it was a white boy you wouldnt

> have included it. I feel there is racist tone in this thread.


Interesting that you don't object to the identifying of the person as male. Rather sexist of you.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Interesting that you don't object to the

> identifying of the person as male. Rather sexist

> of you.


There has to be some form of identifying noun and the baseline ones are girl/boy/woman/man. Throwing in "black" for no reason that I can see does look rather odd. Sure the OP was just writing quickly when upset and did not have any racist intentions, but it does look odd, just as it would if it said "tall man," "short woman" or whatever. Given the number of black people living in this area I don't think the argument that it in any way helps identify the perpetrator holds any water.

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > Interesting that you don't object to the

> > identifying of the person as male. Rather sexist

> > of you.

>

> There has to be some form of identifying noun and

> the baseline ones are girl/boy/woman/man.


Really? They could have used 'person', which is the real baseline.


But that is irrelevant to my point. I just found it interesting that ollieloudon saw one piece of supposed discrimination in the OP's description, but not the other. I thought it said a lot about ollieloudon specifically and what some sections of society see as 'acceptable' discrimination in general.

El Presidente Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We have actually reached the point where in the

> eyes of some, accurately describing an individuals

> appearance is racist.


To be fair, a few years ago on here it was pretty immediate. At least this one took over a week before it descended into that sort of crap.

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Yes , me too, but you can always rely on

> rendelharris to do the libtard thing...


Ugh, please don't use that Americanism. 'Liberal' and 'left-wing' are very different (though not completely mutually exclusive)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
    • Exactly - a snap election will make things even worse. Jazzer - say you get a 'new' administration tomorrow, you're still left with the same treasury, the same civil servants, the same OBR, the same think-tanks and advisors (many labour advisors are cross-party, Gauke for eg). The options are the same, no matter who's in power. Labour hasn't even changed the Tories' fiscal rules - the parties are virtually economically aligned these days.  But Reeves made a mistake in trying too hard, too early to make some seismic changes in her first budget as a big 'we're here and we're going to fix this mess, Labour to the rescue' kind of thing . They shone such a big light on the black hole that their only option was to try to fix it overnight. It was a comms clusterfuck.  They'd perhaps have done better sticking to Sunak's quiet, cautious approach, but they knew the gullible public was expecting an 24-hour turnaround miracle.  The NIC hikes are a disaster, I think they'll be reversed soon and enough and they'll keep trying till they find something that sticks.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...