Dawn Butler

[wilts rover]

It should also be pointed out that Dawn Butler is not just any MP. She is an MP who was forced to close her office due to racist attacks and death threats only a few weeks ago. And is in the party who had an MP murdered by a far-right terrorist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53346803

[phil old leake]

Once again people reading what they want to read. Who’s said she lied

[BillyStubbsTears]

Once again people reading what they want to read. Who’s said she lied

No one said it explicitly. Belton strongly implied it.

[MachoMadness]

State of this thread, f**king hell. No sources, no evidence, just people DESPERATE to prove a black woman is lying. Really makes you think.

What exactly is it really making you think, Macho?

This woman is a politician. She is serving the country and all people within it. She says that her video proves that the police are institutionally racist. Saying that is no better than saying that we don’t have any racists in this country.

It now appears that there may be parts of that video that she did not want the media/british people to see.

Do you really think the police are institutionally racist? And as you talk about evidence, do you really believe she has shown the footage to prove it?

Do you really think that when she claims such outrageous nonsense that she claims is proof, she can’t be questioned or discussed without sources and evidence BECAUSE she is black?

Again, what does it really make you think?

Yes, the police are institutionally racist. That doesn't mean every police officer is a cross burning fascist, and no one is saying that they are. I know people like to make that strawman argument, though. But the system disproportionately targets black people and, when crimes are committed gives them disproportionately severe sentences. This is not up for debate, it's fact. What is also a fact is that the police haven't disputed her account and admitted they made a mistake. So why Dawn Butler needs to provide any more evidence - beyond the video that she already posted - is beyond me.

The facts are pretty clear. And yet you still have people questioning it. Why? Her account is backed by everyone who was there, video evidence, and decades of statistical evidence. So I have to question the motivation of people who feel the need to question that.

[belton rover]

Once again people reading what they want to read. Who’s said she lied

No one said it explicitly. Belton strongly implied it.

Woah there Billy!
I strongly implied that she lied?
Please enlighten me.

[belton rover]

State of this thread, f**king hell. No sources, no evidence, just people DESPERATE to prove a black woman is lying. Really makes you think.

What exactly is it really making you think, Macho?

This woman is a politician. She is serving the country and all people within it. She says that her video proves that the police are institutionally racist. Saying that is no better than saying that we don’t have any racists in this country.

It now appears that there may be parts of that video that she did not want the media/british people to see.

Do you really think the police are institutionally racist? And as you talk about evidence, do you really believe she has shown the footage to prove it?

Do you really think that when she claims such outrageous nonsense that she claims is proof, she can’t be questioned or discussed without sources and evidence BECAUSE she is black?

Again, what does it really make you think?

Yes, the police are institutionally racist. That doesn't mean every police officer is a cross burning fascist, and no one is saying that they are. I know people like to make that strawman argument, though. But the system disproportionately targets black people and, when crimes are committed gives them disproportionately severe sentences. This is not up for debate, it's fact. What is also a fact is that the police haven't disputed her account and admitted they made a mistake. So why Dawn Butler needs to provide any more evidence - beyond the video that she already posted - is beyond me.

The facts are pretty clear. And yet you still have people questioning it. Why? Her account is backed by everyone who was there, video evidence, and decades of statistical evidence. So I have to question the motivation of people who feel the need to question that.

Macho, I get that you think I am uneducated because I don’t agree with you, but I’m not, and I do know what institutionally racist means.

The police admitted making a mistake, which they did. But the mistake was absolutely nothing to do with hunting down black people or being institutionally racist.
One thing worse that not producing facts and sources in a debate is using So called facts and sources to twist the reality of the situation.
Shame on you.

[BillyStubbsTears]

OK Belton. Your OP strongly implied she'd been economical with the truth. That alright?

[wilts rover]

That's right Belton, the police apologised for their mistake when checking the number plate of the car.

However what they have yet to explain is what it was about that particular car that officers of the Violent Crime Task Force in the area "as part of our proactive work to protect communities from violence" thought they needed to check the number plate in the first place?

[belton rover]

OK Belton. Your OP strongly implied she'd been economical with the truth. That alright?

Somewhat, Billy. However, not revealing the whole truth about an event and lying about the event are two very, very different things, especially when discussing such an important topic.
Perhaps you should avoid skim reading other people’s views before expressing such detailed and clear views of your own.

[MachoMadness]

Yes, shame on me, bringing facts into the equation. Talking of twisting things, Belton...
Where did anyone say the police were "hunting down" black people? Nobody said that. You keep getting mad at arguments nobody is making. That's not what institutional racism is. It's about conscious and unconscious biases, and a system that upholds them and delivers racism by outcome. Maybe you could have a look at your own biases instead of pearl-clutching and trying to play the "he's saying I'm thick!" card.

[belton rover]

Yes, shame on me, bringing facts into the equation. Talking of twisting things, Belton...
Where did anyone say the police were "hunting down" black people? Nobody said that. You keep getting mad at arguments nobody is making. That's not what institutional racism is. It's about conscious and unconscious biases, and a system that upholds them and delivers racism by outcome. Maybe you could have a look at your own biases instead of pearl-clutching and trying to play the "he's saying I'm thick!" card.

Firstly, Macho this quote from you, suggests to me that you think I am incapable of taking part in an educated discussion with you:

‘State of this thread, f**king hell. No sources, no evidence, just people DESPERATE to prove a black woman is lying. Really makes you think.‘

That’s not me playing the ‘thick’ card, that’s you indirectly telling me I’m thick.

Secondly, you think, and I quote, that ‘the police are institutionally racist’ and had no valid reason to stop the black person/people in that car. So yes, I can only presume that you do think they were being hunted/targeted/hounded/picked on. All these awful adjectives mean the same thing don’t they?

[BillyStubbsTears]

OK Belton. Your OP strongly implied she'd been economical with the truth. That alright?

Somewhat, Billy. However, not revealing the whole truth about an event and lying about the event are two very, very different things, especially when discussing such an important topic.
Perhaps you should avoid skim reading other people’s views before expressing such detailed and clear views of your own.

Belton.

I'm not particularly sophisticated in my arguments on things like this. 


If you impugn someone's honesty, you're impugning their honesty. It's simply a matter of semantics what you call it.

Making a "shades of grey" argument is something that the kind of politician I detest would do.

[belton rover]

OK Belton. Your OP strongly implied she'd been economical with the truth. That alright?

Somewhat, Billy. However, not revealing the whole truth about an event and lying about the event are two very, very different things, especially when discussing such an important topic.
Perhaps you should avoid skim reading other people’s views before expressing such detailed and clear views of your own.

Belton.

I'm not particularly sophisticated in my arguments on things like this. 


If you impugn someone's honesty, you're impugning their honesty. It's simply a matter of semantics what you call it.

Making a "shades of grey" argument is something that the kind of politician I detest would do.

Billy, it wasn’t ‘shades of grey, and I think you know that.

But on ‘shades of grey’ politicians, is there, or has there ever been a politician anywhere in the world who hasn’t ever used ‘shades of grey’ responses?I admire your loyalty to your particular political party, but to suggest that any of your favourite politicians don’t make ‘shades of grey’ arguments is, quite frankly, laughable. Unless, of course, it’s a case of all politicians are detestable, but some are less detestable than others.

[MachoMadness]

Sort of like how you started this thread indirectly saying Dawn Butler is a race baiting liar, then? And, for the record, it isn't just you I was referring to. It isn't even, to be fair, just people on this thread. I don't think you're thick, but I am confused as to why so many people are completely unwilling to accept that maybe - just maybe - she's telling the truth, when all the evidence says that she is?

And no, there's a difference between "hunting" black people, and seeing two black people driving a nice car and assuming in the back of your mind there must be something untoward, so you check their reg plate and pull them over. One is an example of a conscious bias, one is an unconscious bias. Both are bad, but you're not going to change anything by misidentifying the problem.

[Herbert Anchovy]

I believe the London Met were institutionally racist in the 1980’s. Then again they were also anti working class too. When I was joining anti racist demo’s in London in the early 80’s the racism displayed by some Police officers was barely disguised and if you complained about it there was a very good chance that you’d be on the receiving end of a bloody good kicking from them.

Nowadays I don’t believe that they’re institutionally racist but I do believe there a racists in the force. The Police is a reflection on society after all.

[belton rover]

Sort of like how you started this thread indirectly saying Dawn Butler is a race baiting liar, then? And, for the record, it isn't just you I was referring to. It isn't even, to be fair, just people on this thread. I don't think you're thick, but I am confused as to why so many people are completely unwilling to accept that maybe - just maybe - she's telling the truth, when all the evidence says that she is?

And no, there's a difference between "hunting" black people, and seeing two black people driving a nice car and assuming in the back of your mind there must be something untoward, so you check their reg plate and pull them over. One is an example of a conscious bias, one is an unconscious bias. Both are bad, but you're not going to change anything by misidentifying the problem.

My opening post raised a question about a politician saying she had just shown the world ‘proof’ that the police were institutionally racist. That is what I have difficulty accepting.

No one in their right mind would argue that black lives don't matter, or that there is no racism in this country, consciously or subconsciously. No one in their right mind would think it is acceptable to treat people unfairly because of the colour of their skin.

But, just because someone is on the side of right, that must not allow their actions to be unconditional or unquestionable.

[phil old leake]

Belton I can’t imagine many people would  disagree with any of that.
So that thought process should also be used on both sides of the argument.
Just because someone claims something happened doesn’t  mean it’s true
Just because someone says something didn’t happen doesn’t mean it didn’t
Too many Agenda seeking people are just taking every media left wing allegation /statement as fact
I believe some people should wake up and taste the coffee
On every side of the argument
It amazes me how so many people are just stuck in their little cocoon and won’t see the wood for the trees.  Again on all sides of a debate

[wilts rover]

Phil & Belton - you raise some good points there.

Unfortunately I would only take them seriously if you were able to do the same yourselves and look at the evidence on both sides of the argument. At no point in this discussion have you shown any facts or evidence as to why you believe there is no institutional racism in the police (or specifically the Met Police).

Nor have you shown any particular empathy for black people's experience with the police and in society.

You have both, for want of a better phrase, trotted out a right-wing agenda, the police are always right because they say so.

Here's some reading:

UK police use restraint on black people four times as often as with their white counterparts, and whilst black people only make up 3.3. per cent of our population, we account for 12 per cent of police altercations in which officers use force. That includes cases like that of Sarah Reed – who became the centre of a police brutality case in 2012, when Met Police constable James Kiddie yanked her by the hair, dragged her across the floor, pressed her neck and repeatedly punched her in the head. It also includes George The Poet’s friend, Julian Cole, who was accosted by six police officers outside a nightclub in 2013, and had his neck broken. Julian didn’t die, but due to police violence, the course of his life was radically altered.

When it comes to direct killings at the hands of the police, black people are also more than twice as likely to die in police custody than white people. Across demographics, there have been 402 deaths in Met police custody since 1990, and no convictions.

https://www.huckmag.com/perspectives/opinion-perspectives/a-brief-history-of-police-brutality-in-the-uk/

[belton rover]

Phil & Belton - you raise some good points there.

Unfortunately I would only take them seriously if you were able to do the same yourselves and look at the evidence on both sides of the argument. At no point in this discussion have you shown any facts or evidence as to why you believe there is no institutional racism in the police (or specifically the Met Police).

Nor have you shown any particular empathy for black people's experience with the police and in society.

You have both, for want of a better phrase, trotted out a right-wing agenda, the police are always right because they say so.

Here's some reading:

UK police use restraint on black people four times as often as with their white counterparts, and whilst black people only make up 3.3. per cent of our population, we account for 12 per cent of police altercations in which officers use force. That includes cases like that of Sarah Reed – who became the centre of a police brutality case in 2012, when Met Police constable James Kiddie yanked her by the hair, dragged her across the floor, pressed her neck and repeatedly punched her in the head. It also includes George The Poet’s friend, Julian Cole, who was accosted by six police officers outside a nightclub in 2013, and had his neck broken. Julian didn’t die, but due to police violence, the course of his life was radically altered.

When it comes to direct killings at the hands of the police, black people are also more than twice as likely to die in police custody than white people. Across demographics, there have been 402 deaths in Met police custody since 1990, and no convictions.

https://www.huckmag.com/perspectives/opinion-perspectives/a-brief-history-of-police-brutality-in-the-uk/

Wilts.
I really don’t give two hoots whether you take my points seriously or not.

The reading you have painstakingly copied and pasted is all well and good, and I don’t doubt the facts that have been stated. However, ‘Huck Mag’ is hardly a source for unbiased writing is it?

Facts are facts, but a good writer, with a strong opinion on the topic uses facts to persuade. We all do it, some more successfully than others. The problem with the wonderful internet is that facts and statistics are readily available for anyone to use in such a way. Discussion and debate is becoming obsolete because people like you are incapable of listening to a difference of opinion without googling until you find something from someone else to prove your point.
Whatever happened to ‘man in the pub conversation? Do you think that, before the internet, people carried encyclopaedias and right/left wing propaganda around before engaging in discussion?

I’m not sure why I need to tell you this next bit, but I do: I have voted Labour all my life, even last time when the most detestable politician I have ever known was in charge (through gritted teeth). Your assumption that I am right wing, I  Can only assume came from one of your fact finding missions.

I’ll leave you with a quote from Blackadder to Baldrick to think about the next time you are searching the net for other people’s opinions:

Blackadder: What do think of Percy’s new ruff?
Baldrick: I think he looks like a bird who’s swallowed a plate.
Blackadder: Yes but that’s what I think! Try and have a thought for yourself - thinking is so important. What do YOU think?
Baldrick: I think thinking is so important.

[phil old leake]

Wilts you really are a shallow minded left winger

The figures may be factual or they may be politically motivated and twisted  If they are right they are right and I don’t doubt they are

It still doesn’t lead to the assumption that police are are pandemic of racism

They do an exceptional job in this country without vocal support from their career obsessed leaders and politicians.

They police with consent and mainly unarmed unlike most forces throughout the world

Let’s just hope you never get mugged or burgled or assaulted and the nearest police officer decides not to use his stop search powers to investigate a suspicious person or vehicle whether the individual in question is white asian black mixed heritage lgbt or any other orientation because he is too afraid to act in case some left wing bystander decides to film it put it all over social media make a complaint for no reason Only because they can