I didn't mean to imply all men of these ethnicities Syl so I apologise, that is definatly not true. There are predators of every colour and creed. Also, the younger generation of Muslim and Pakistani men who mix with all ethnicities may want to date or marry white partners but the old fashioned parents and grandparents forbid it. This outdated mentality goes against western and indeed British values.
No, I know you didn't imply that, I'm just pointing out that the term 'Asian'...which even when the police, authorities, etc, stopped pretending these gangs had nothing to do with ethnicity, and dared to narrow it down...often used the blanket term Asian, which included men from many countries that had nothing to do with it.
It was quite a revelation when, after Baroness Casey's report came out this week, the actual words Pakistani and Muslim have been bandied about on the news so freely.
Anonymous said
Jun 19 12:15 PM, 2025
Anonymous wrote:
My friends and I also experienced older Muslim and Asian men trying to pay us ten pounds for sex when we were out shopping. That's one of the more wholesome interactions. I can't empthasise enough how predatory and misogynistic these men are. They genuinely think white teenagers can be bought for a coke and packet of crisps. Some were married, a few were affluent but all had a sense of entitlement. These gangs targeted and sexually abused vulnerable children and for the police or government to cover up their crimes for any reason I think is an offence worthy of jail along with the groomers themselves. This is the reason multicultural Britain doesn't thrive, because men of different cultures don't view their own wives and daughters as equal to themselves and see western women as easy prey. This way of thinking is criminal and we have allowed it for too long in the UK.
But you then chose to go into paid sex work...................
Anonymous said
Jun 19 8:53 PM, 2025
For the third time MP's will vote on the assisted 'Right to Die' bill tomorrow. It's expected they will vote in favour of what still remains a lengthy complex way for those with terminal illnesses to make a witnessed request for assisted dying. I don't know for sure what I think is the right choice and it is very humbling. It certainly puts the petty things in life in stark perspective. I do believe people with terminal illnesses deserve the autonomy to end their lives if they wish, since these people will sadly pass away no matter what. I just worry they may change their minds. I don't know what others think, it's a very significant bill that has divided the medical community.
Syl said
Jun 19 11:52 PM, 2025
My view is people should have the right to choose to die, humanely, and with medical assistance, if they find their lives intolerable and there is no hope of recovery.
Anonymous said
Jun 20 12:03 AM, 2025
Anonymous wrote:
For the third time MP's will vote on the assisted 'Right to Die' bill tomorrow. It's expected they will vote in favour of what still remains a lengthy complex way for those with terminal illnesses to make a witnessed request for assisted dying. I don't know for sure what I think is the right choice and it is very humbling. It certainly puts the petty things in life in stark perspective. I do believe people with terminal illnesses deserve the autonomy to end their lives if they wish, since these people will sadly pass away no matter what. I just worry they may change their minds. I don't know what others think, it's a very significant bill that has divided the medical community.
I’m 100% behind people having the right to die how they wish provided strict guidelines are in place. I can’t imagine the pain their loved ones go through watching them die a long agonising death so, for me, it would be for the relief of their loved ones too.
Magica said
Jun 20 12:20 AM, 2025
Syl wrote:
My view is people should have the right to choose to die, humanely, and with medical assistance, if they find their lives intolerable and there is no hope of recovery.
Definitely agree,.we should have a choice. Too many suffer when there is no hope of cure, just waiting to die in pain.
I know what if would want.
Maddog said
Jun 20 4:23 AM, 2025
Syl wrote:
My view is people should have the right to choose to die, humanely, and with medical assistance, if they find their lives intolerable and there is no hope of recovery.
You should move to Canada. They will straight up kill you if you get the sniffles at an advanced age..😉
Syl said
Jun 20 1:23 PM, 2025
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
My view is people should have the right to choose to die, humanely, and with medical assistance, if they find their lives intolerable and there is no hope of recovery.
You should move to Canada. They will straight up kill you if you get the sniffles at an advanced age..😉
That's the exact opposite to what I believe in.
Anonymous said
Jun 20 2:07 PM, 2025
I think most will concur that adults with terminal illness going through unbearable pain should have autonomy and have the the right to die. However I think this specific bill does not offer enough safeguards. Two doctors will still have to give their consent and different doctors will have differing opinions about the same individual. So this bill may not necessarily give all those with terminal illnesses the release from agony that they need. Also there is the dangers of coercion where the terminally ill elderly, mentally ill or disabled who wish to live longer may be victims of domestic abuse, made to think they are a burden. They may be manipulated into ending their lives. I think the premise is morally sound but the bill itself needs amending. I think pallative care should also be much improved because if people were in less agony they may not choose assisted dying. Patients can live for years after a terminal diagnosis. I just think the bill could be improved before it is passed.
Maddog said
Jun 20 5:16 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
My view is people should have the right to choose to die, humanely, and with medical assistance, if they find their lives intolerable and there is no hope of recovery.
You should move to Canada. They will straight up kill you if you get the sniffles at an advanced age..😉
That's the exact opposite to what I believe in.
Well, hopefully what you believe in continues to matter. Gotta keep those costs down. Keeping the terminal alive is expensive.
Syl said
Jun 20 5:56 PM, 2025
Anonymous wrote:
I think most will concur that adults with terminal illness going through unbearable pain should have autonomy and have the the right to die. However I think this specific bill does not offer enough safeguards. Two doctors will still have to give their consent and different doctors will have differing opinions about the same individual. So this bill may not necessarily give all those with terminal illnesses the release from agony that they need. Also there is the dangers of coercion where the terminally ill elderly, mentally ill or disabled who wish to live longer may be victims of domestic abuse, made to think they are a burden. They may be manipulated into ending their lives. I think the premise is morally sound but the bill itself needs amending. I think pallative care should also be much improved because if people were in less agony they may not choose assisted dying. Patients can live for years after a terminal diagnosis. I just think the bill could be improved before it is passed.
I agree. There will always be people who want to see someone off before that person is ready, and I guess when this law is passed, that will happen in some cases.
I also agree that end of life care should be improved. No matter how long a person has left, if they are unable to care for themselves they should be cared for with dignity, and their pain managed as best it can be.
All many people want is the choice, their choice, not some greedy family members or a state decision to cut the care at the end.
Anonymous said
Jun 20 8:41 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I think most will concur that adults with terminal illness going through unbearable pain should have autonomy and have the the right to die. However I think this specific bill does not offer enough safeguards. Two doctors will still have to give their consent and different doctors will have differing opinions about the same individual. So this bill may not necessarily give all those with terminal illnesses the release from agony that they need. Also there is the dangers of coercion where the terminally ill elderly, mentally ill or disabled who wish to live longer may be victims of domestic abuse, made to think they are a burden. They may be manipulated into ending their lives. I think the premise is morally sound but the bill itself needs amending. I think pallative care should also be much improved because if people were in less agony they may not choose assisted dying. Patients can live for years after a terminal diagnosis. I just think the bill could be improved before it is passed.
I agree. There will always be people who want to see someone off before that person is ready, and I guess when this law is passed, that will happen in some cases.
I also agree that end of life care should be improved. No matter how long a person has left, if they are unable to care for themselves they should be cared for with dignity, and their pain managed as best it can be.
All many people want is the choice, their choice, not some greedy family members or a state decision to cut the care at the end.
The only thing I can think of is for folks to legally appoint some sort of independent guardian(ship) - someone outside the family who is au fait with the patients illness and wishes.
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then. If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
Maddog said
Jun 21 7:00 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then. If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
And in Canada they won't ask you to kill yourself.
But it's a clever, albeit hyperbolic example of the three systems.
There's an old saying.
You can have one, maybe two of the following but never all 3.
Cheap, fast and good..
Anonymous said
Jun 21 7:12 PM, 2025
Syl wrote:
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then. If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
Anyone would think that US ER staff are standing outside the dept waiting for customers, trolley at the ready. When in actual fact they queue up just like the NHS with the sweet bonus of a bill for having to queue.
Maddog said
Jun 22 12:02 AM, 2025
Anonymous wrote:
Syl wrote:
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then. If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
Anyone would think that US ER staff are standing outside the dept waiting for customers, trolley at the ready. When in actual fact they queue up just like the NHS with the sweet bonus of a bill for having to queue.
No one thinks that.
But wait times for procedures are a matter of record. The shortfall in our system is cost..We have the most expensive healthcare on the planet, but it's definitely not the slowest..And it's definitely faster than the other two countries in that meme (unless you consider euthanasia to be healthcare then the Canadians are quicker in that form of treatment)..
Anonymous said
Jun 22 12:40 AM, 2025
Maddog wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Syl wrote:
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then. If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
Anyone would think that US ER staff are standing outside the dept waiting for customers, trolley at the ready. When in actual fact they queue up just like the NHS with the sweet bonus of a bill for having to queue.
No one thinks that.
But wait times for procedures are a matter of record. The shortfall in our system is cost..We have the most expensive healthcare on the planet, but it's definitely not the slowest..And it's definitely faster than the other two countries in that meme (unless you consider euthanasia to be healthcare then the Canadians are quicker in that form of treatment)..
Do you actually read the posts you are replying to? Re your “cost” argument, numerous links have been provided (repeatedly) where cost isn’t the only shortfall you have. Accept facts, the world disagrees with you.
Maddog said
Jun 22 6:07 PM, 2025
Anonymous wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Syl wrote:
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then. If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
Anyone would think that US ER staff are standing outside the dept waiting for customers, trolley at the ready. When in actual fact they queue up just like the NHS with the sweet bonus of a bill for having to queue.
No one thinks that.
But wait times for procedures are a matter of record. The shortfall in our system is cost..We have the most expensive healthcare on the planet, but it's definitely not the slowest..And it's definitely faster than the other two countries in that meme (unless you consider euthanasia to be healthcare then the Canadians are quicker in that form of treatment)..
Do you actually read the posts you are replying to? Re your “cost” argument, numerous links have been provided (repeatedly) where cost isn’t the only shortfall you have. Accept facts, the world disagrees with you.
2 Billion Muslims disagree with me too. I'm OK with that..
Red Okktober said
Jun 25 2:29 PM, 2025
Starmer has now 'pledged' to spend 5% of GDP on national security by 2035 without giving any indication where the money will come from. The idiot couldn't say where the funding was coming from when it was recently set at 3%, now he's got another 2% to find on top of that.
The government recently had to make cuts to welfare and foreign aid to try to get up to 2.5% by 2027 - he's running out of places to get money from.
He won't be PM in 2035 so I don't suppose he cares that much anyway, and will just say any figure that comes into his head for now, or whatever Trump tells him to say.
No, I know you didn't imply that, I'm just pointing out that the term 'Asian'...which even when the police, authorities, etc, stopped pretending these gangs had nothing to do with ethnicity, and dared to narrow it down...often used the blanket term Asian, which included men from many countries that had nothing to do with it.
It was quite a revelation when, after Baroness Casey's report came out this week, the actual words Pakistani and Muslim have been bandied about on the news so freely.
But you then chose to go into paid sex work...................
I’m 100% behind people having the right to die how they wish provided strict guidelines are in place. I can’t imagine the pain their loved ones go through watching them die a long agonising death so, for me, it would be for the relief of their loved ones too.
Definitely agree,.we should have a choice. Too many suffer when there is no hope of cure, just waiting to die in pain.
I know what if would want.
You should move to Canada. They will straight up kill you if you get the sniffles at an advanced age..😉
That's the exact opposite to what I believe in.
Well, hopefully what you believe in continues to matter. Gotta keep those costs down. Keeping the terminal alive is expensive.
I agree. There will always be people who want to see someone off before that person is ready, and I guess when this law is passed, that will happen in some cases.
I also agree that end of life care should be improved. No matter how long a person has left, if they are unable to care for themselves they should be cared for with dignity, and their pain managed as best it can be.
All many people want is the choice, their choice, not some greedy family members or a state decision to cut the care at the end.
The only thing I can think of is for folks to legally appoint some sort of independent guardian(ship) - someone outside the family who is au fait with the patients illness and wishes.
Actually, you go to A&E if you need stitches, and you will be stitched up and sorted there and then.
If it's not that serious, you may have to wait a few hours, but that's not so bad.
Far better than getting a second mortgage.
And in Canada they won't ask you to kill yourself.
But it's a clever, albeit hyperbolic example of the three systems.
There's an old saying.
You can have one, maybe two of the following but never all 3.
Cheap, fast and good..
Anyone would think that US ER staff are standing outside the dept waiting for customers, trolley at the ready. When in actual fact they queue up just like the NHS with the sweet bonus of a bill for having to queue.
No one thinks that.
But wait times for procedures are a matter of record. The shortfall in our system is cost..We have the most expensive healthcare on the planet, but it's definitely not the slowest..And it's definitely faster than the other two countries in that meme (unless you consider euthanasia to be healthcare then the Canadians are quicker in that form of treatment)..
Do you actually read the posts you are replying to? Re your “cost” argument, numerous links have been provided (repeatedly) where cost isn’t the only shortfall you have. Accept facts, the world disagrees with you.
2 Billion Muslims disagree with me too. I'm OK with that..
The government recently had to make cuts to welfare and foreign aid to try to get up to 2.5% by 2027 - he's running out of places to get money from.
He won't be PM in 2035 so I don't suppose he cares that much anyway, and will just say any figure that comes into his head for now, or whatever Trump tells him to say.