Can the (Met) police ever change?

shep

Guru
Yes, obviously. What do you think politics is?

Being 'in politics ' to me would have meant in a professional capacity or else most of us could be 'in it'.

Perhaps we're all 'in politics ' because we come on here?
 

mudsticks

Legendary Member
You claimed sexual abuse, in one of your generalizing post, apparently you repeat that so much you don't remember it yourself.
Nope, no I didn't - I've looked and not once did I say or even imply that the cop was sexually abusing the woman in the clip

You however said that i did, Shep said I did.

But that's palpably untrue, you have both misrepresented me.

So you can now either retract and or apologise for telling untruths about what I've said.

I won't however be holding my breath on that one
 

shep

Guru
Taking the p, yes. Insults, not so much. Did Rex Harrison trigger you?

It's not a case of being 'triggered ' rather more a case of me attempting to converse with someone I'd normally dismiss within 30 seconds of speaking to in real life and then that person thinking he's a smartar*e.

I assume you're a he?
 
It's not a case of being 'triggered ' rather more a case of me attempting to converse with someone I'd normally dismiss within 30 seconds of speaking to in real life and then that person thinking he's a smartar*e.

I assume you're a he?

My post was intended to convey my delight and wholehearted agreement with your premise. I am truly sorry if my endorsement has upset you in some way.

We are indeed all engaged in politics when we post our thoughts in a public forum. Merely allowing the thoughts a little headspace probably counts too, even if nothing leaks into the real world, but you know, trees falling and all that.
 

mudsticks

Legendary Member
My post was intended to convey my delight and wholehearted agreement with your premise. I am truly sorry if my endorsement has upset you in some way.

We are indeed all engaged in politics when we post our thoughts in a public forum. Merely allowing the thoughts a little headspace probably counts too, even if nothing leaks into the real world, but you know, trees falling and all that.

Perhaps you should consider yourself lucky, nay priveleged @newfhouse, on account of not being summarily 'dismissed' :laugh:

by our political correspondent of The Middling Shires. :rolleyes:
 

dutchguylivingintheuk

Well-Known Member
There will be decent guys in the police, who may or may not have tried to make a difference, but the prevalence of misogyny, abuse and sexism within the ranks is well documented.
The damage has been done by their own hands.

The behaviour of the police at the Sarah Everard vigil is very relevant because its part of a pattern of behaviour.
Not all of us have such short memories.

Nope, no I didn't - I've looked and not once did I say or even imply that the cop was sexually abusing the woman in the clip

You however said that i did, Shep said I did.

But that's palpably untrue, you have both misrepresented me.

So you can now either retract and or apologise for telling untruths about what I've said.

I won't however be holding my breath on that one
There is nothing untrue, as you see with above quotes it's an pattern of you to continuously drag sexual abuse into a discussion about the police, even if there is no indication there was sexual abuse taking place. it is your own assertion that i claimed you said or implied the officer was sexually abusing her. I was just reminding you, despite your own claim above ''not all of us have such short memories'' what you actually said.

Please don't border recycling your ''i don't understand what you're saying argument'' you always use that when you're proven wrong, if you're gonna turn and twist to not admit you're wrong, at least try to be original.
 

mudsticks

Legendary Member
There is nothing untrue, as you see with above quotes it's an pattern of you to continuously drag sexual abuse into a discussion about the police, even if there is no indication there was sexual abuse taking place. it is your own assertion that i claimed you said or implied the officer was sexually abusing her. I was just reminding you, despite your own claim above ''not all of us have such short memories'' what you actually said.

Please don't border recycling your ''i don't understand what you're saying argument'' you always use that when you're proven wrong, if you're gonna turn and twist to not admit you're wrong, at least try to be original.

Believe me I won't 'border' ever again with any attempt to understand, the half of your posts.
I really don't know why I have up until now.

English not being your first language is one thing, but just throwing a whole screed of words down scattergun style and hoping that someone will decipher their meaning is another all together

It's very easy for you to claim you're words have been misrepresented, when what you said in the first place was pretty much unintelligible.

But just to be remind you, I bring the subject of misogyny and sexual abuse into this discussion about the police.

Because ...

..wait for it..

..that's exactly what this thread started by @glasgowcyclist is about.
I don't expect this is limited to the Met but after recent incidents, including the conviction of one of their own for the abduction, rape and murder of a woman, I would have hoped they'd be doing everything possible to get rid of misogyny within their ranks.

This information from Fiona Hamilton of The Times suggests it's got a long way to go.

(Warning: Contains disturbing dialogue between police officers.)


View: https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1488475474628120579?s=20&t=gSOGwXPkw9n72cmbf5mq2A


If you want to discuss other matters about the police, maybe start another thread.
 

shep

Guru
Where did I say he was sexually assaulting her ?

YOU tell me what YOU think the copper was doing then, trying to steal her watch maybe, sexually assault her (if you listen to @mudsticks) read her palm?

C'mon then fella, what was happening?

I didn't actually say that you had said he was sexually assaulting her but I did refer to you in my post because of the many times you've pointed out the poor conduct of the police In your opinion, do you think he was getting some kind of 'kick ' from holding onto her like he did?
 

dutchguylivingintheuk

Well-Known Member
Believe me I won't 'border' ever again with any attempt to understand, the half of your posts.
I really don't know why I have up until now.
Ok deal

English not being your first language is one thing, but just throwing a whole screed of words down scattergun style and hoping that someone will decipher their meaning is another all together
I will be the first to admit my writing isn't always great, i also adjust it if needed, however the times you claim you can't read what i write right upon the point where be might be getting somewhere makes that sound a bit silly to me. Especially since i see you in similar situations with others, the message is then different but the idea is the same.
And it's off course your right as a free person to do so but it is also my right to call you out for actions i believe you do.


It's very easy for you to claim you're words have been misrepresented, when what you said in the first place was pretty much unintelligible.
Is ''You claimed sexual abuse, in one of your generalizing post, apparently you repeat that so much you don't remember it yourself.'' in response of you asked where you said where ''Still waiting for you to show me where I said he was sexually assaulting her.'' really that hard to understand? i overly used those quote boxes to show the context where my comment is responding to, if you read my comment while ignoring the quote boxes sure i understand why you don't get it, but if you read the whole thing like how it's intended, how can it be so hard to understand?

i mean the first three parts, ''you claimed sexual abuse,'' ok i think you worded it slightly differently in your one of your original posts but the meaning was the same. Second part ''in one of your generalizing post'' seems pretty obvious to me too. ''apperently you repeat it so much you don't remember yourself'' might not be nice to hear but again doesn't seem to unclear to me.


But just to be remind you, I bring the subject of misogyny and sexual abuse into this discussion about the police.

Because ...

..wait for it..

..that's exactly what this thread started by @glasgowcyclist is about.


If you want to discuss other matters about the police, maybe start another thread.
Yes but i topics develop when this topic started, the horific Murder on Mrs Everhard was just in the news. At the events we where discussing now it was about an (female)Just stop oil protestor was giving an interview before being arrested. Inserting sexual abuse into that discussion is nonsense, and repeating that claim in generalizing terms every time is exactly what that does.
You where called out for it then pretend you couldn't remember saying that so i provided you with a reminder service. You're welcome
 

mudsticks

Legendary Member
I didn't actually say that you had said he was sexually assaulting her but I did refer to you in my post because of the many times you've pointed out the poor conduct of the police In your opinion, do you think he was getting some kind of 'kick ' from holding onto her like he did?
"YOU tell me what YOU think the copper was doing then, trying to steal her watch maybe, sexually assault her (if you listen to @mudsticks) read her palm?

C'mon then fella, what was happening?"


It couldn't be plainer what you were saying.
Unless you've reinvented the meaning of words.
As that Dutch guy seems keen to do too.


So you're also saying the conduct of the police has been repeatedly poor, but only 'in my opinion'
You don't actually think it has been poor yourself?

Well that speaks volumes.

I have no idea of the motivation of the officer in that clip.

It certainly looks like unnecessary and prolonged contact, to me.
 
Top Bottom