And Even More Good News From Labour.
News1 min ago
Black Police Authorities warning
27 Answers
This should follow on from my question "Muslims angered yet again", that was removed.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-106913 3/Boris-orders-inquiry-Met-race-claims-Black-P olice-Association-urges-ethnic-recruits-boycot t.html
Black Police Authority said it would be failing in its duty if it did not tell black and ethnic minority potential applicants 'what a hostile and racist situation it is there'.
Britain's only black police chief, Kent's Mike Fuller, says ethnic minority officers have to work twice as hard as whites to get on.
Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur was put on gardening leave last month after calling a press conference to announce plans to take the force to an employment tribunal, claiming racial discrimination.
Another senior ethnic minority officer, Commander Ali Dizaei, was suspended last month over misconduct allegations.
Can we take the word of these very senior policemen, who seem to have their own very special axe to grind, and who have not done so bad for themselves, thank you very much?
Life was much simpler before we became a multi racial/multi-faith nation.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-106913 3/Boris-orders-inquiry-Met-race-claims-Black-P olice-Association-urges-ethnic-recruits-boycot t.html
Black Police Authority said it would be failing in its duty if it did not tell black and ethnic minority potential applicants 'what a hostile and racist situation it is there'.
Britain's only black police chief, Kent's Mike Fuller, says ethnic minority officers have to work twice as hard as whites to get on.
Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur was put on gardening leave last month after calling a press conference to announce plans to take the force to an employment tribunal, claiming racial discrimination.
Another senior ethnic minority officer, Commander Ali Dizaei, was suspended last month over misconduct allegations.
Can we take the word of these very senior policemen, who seem to have their own very special axe to grind, and who have not done so bad for themselves, thank you very much?
Life was much simpler before we became a multi racial/multi-faith nation.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
SP1814
Andrew Marr Born 1959
Dominic Sandbrook born 1974
Let's see a show of hands...who here has had experience of the 1950s and before pre-immigration days.
No need to read in the right wing press about the happy days of the 50s, or for the need of rose tinted spectacles, we know what it was like first hand.
I rest my case.
Andrew Marr Born 1959
Dominic Sandbrook born 1974
Let's see a show of hands...who here has had experience of the 1950s and before pre-immigration days.
No need to read in the right wing press about the happy days of the 50s, or for the need of rose tinted spectacles, we know what it was like first hand.
I rest my case.
anotheoldgit
The difference between Mr Marr and Mr Sandbrook is that they don't have a political axe to grind.
I've read the Daily Mail and books by Sandbrook and Marr and I know who I would turn to for a reasoned study on politics.
Also, Hugo Young.
You can't believe all you read in the papers.
What I know about the 50s is that if you were a woman, you could forget any idea of higher education.
If you were working class, you couldn't entertain the idea of attaining success in management or politics.
If you were working class, forget about university.
The country was run under patrician lines - something like 60 MPs were related to Harold MacMillan by blood or marriage.
There was no such thing as a meritocracy.
Who would want to return to that? To the humiliation of Suez? To the fear of the Cold War?
To no ambition? To council houses with outside baths? To the lack of choice...in anything?
Who would want to go back there. Sounds worse than the seventies.
The difference between Mr Marr and Mr Sandbrook is that they don't have a political axe to grind.
I've read the Daily Mail and books by Sandbrook and Marr and I know who I would turn to for a reasoned study on politics.
Also, Hugo Young.
You can't believe all you read in the papers.
What I know about the 50s is that if you were a woman, you could forget any idea of higher education.
If you were working class, you couldn't entertain the idea of attaining success in management or politics.
If you were working class, forget about university.
The country was run under patrician lines - something like 60 MPs were related to Harold MacMillan by blood or marriage.
There was no such thing as a meritocracy.
Who would want to return to that? To the humiliation of Suez? To the fear of the Cold War?
To no ambition? To council houses with outside baths? To the lack of choice...in anything?
Who would want to go back there. Sounds worse than the seventies.
Just a quick note on the assertions that this inquiry is a waste of time/money and that we should let them get back to policing.
1. Because of overwhelming anecdotal evidence (whether true or not), the police is perceived to be racist.
2. That perception is felt among ethnic minorities who, as a result, don't see the police as an attractive employer.
3. That means that they don't apply to work there so that ethnic minorities are under-represented.
Some of you are thinking, 'So what? Why should race matter? It's positive discrimination/political correctness."
It matters because policing relies on the cooperation of the community. And if a community feels that the police don't represent them, it alienates them and creates a them-and-us attitude. That's not a chip on the shoulder, that is human nature. It would be the same for us the other way round.
If they're alienated, they're less likely to report crime, assist with investigations, and boost police intelligence. Put together, that makes the streets less safe and increase crime.
So it'snot really a waste of time. It's essential that we do something about it.
1. Because of overwhelming anecdotal evidence (whether true or not), the police is perceived to be racist.
2. That perception is felt among ethnic minorities who, as a result, don't see the police as an attractive employer.
3. That means that they don't apply to work there so that ethnic minorities are under-represented.
Some of you are thinking, 'So what? Why should race matter? It's positive discrimination/political correctness."
It matters because policing relies on the cooperation of the community. And if a community feels that the police don't represent them, it alienates them and creates a them-and-us attitude. That's not a chip on the shoulder, that is human nature. It would be the same for us the other way round.
If they're alienated, they're less likely to report crime, assist with investigations, and boost police intelligence. Put together, that makes the streets less safe and increase crime.
So it'snot really a waste of time. It's essential that we do something about it.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.