Media coverage over “Pakistani Sex Gangs” has reached hysterical levels over the last week, with every self promoted expert wanting to get their minutes in front of the camera to use the actions of a few criminals to lambast every single Pakistani – Muslim in the country.
I’ve written previously about this issue back in November 2011 in a blog post: “Britain’s Pakistani Sex Gangs”
Just as the racists used this heinous crime as a recruitment card back in November, Nazi Nick of the BNP was quick to point out:
Nick Griffin Tweets on Grooming May 8 2012
I recently submitted my thoughts to MPACUK on this subject and they were gracious enough to include them on a very finely & nuanced article titled “Rochdale Sex Gang Reveals Horrific Islamophobia”
Raza Nadim of MPACUK also appeared on the BBC’s The Big Questions and was the only person to speak any sense:
A fellow brother and activist in the struggle (please do check out his blog http://saqib67.wordpress.com/) supplied me with the following information gleaned from a FOI request submitted from civil liberties group Just West Yorkshire to the West Yorkshire police force on sexual offence arrests in the last three years:
When an all White British male gang are found guilty of the rape of an 18-month-old boy and sexually assaulting a three-month-old as part of a paedophile network the entire white British male population are not made to apologise.
When ultra orthodox Jews are sexually molested by members of their own community and then try to cover it up, no one would say that the faith of Judaism is to blame.
Decades of clerical abuse and cover up have left the Catholic church at breaking point, but would any rational person blame white people to be the root cause for this problem?
If you go and watch that video clip again, see the reaction of those who were arguing that it is an inherent Pakistani problem. Both Mohammed Shafique & Andrew Norfolk who wrote scathing pieces in Rupert Murdoch’s “The Times” last week were left looking rather foolish, as they chose propaganda rather than looking at the facts.
hotterthanapileofcurry.wordpress.com 
While your facts show that more white people were convicted of sexual offense in west Yorkshire in the past 3 years making up 3353 of the 4713 offices 71% of all offenses however white people also make up 85.6% of the UK population. So per head of population there are less white sex offenders than there should be.
If we take those of Asian heritage who make up 2.6% of the UK population and look at that in respect to those arrested in the last 3 years, the 888 arrests is actually 18.8% of those arrested. Which is a disproportionately large percentage considering they make up only 2.6% of the population, so statistically there is a problem and one could say a major problem.
Your figures would be more meaningful if you also provided the ethicity profile for the whole population in the region. For example, if there are only 19 Chinese people in West Yorkshire then they are all sex offenders.
A few points:
The official media narrative is street grooming is endemic in northern cities densely populated with pakistani’s. Truth: 47 out of 53 arrested for street grooming are white.
Police should aggressively hunt & target such street grooming paedos with no fear of race card being played. 53 arrests, only 11 convictions is a poor conversion rate, do they know how to build a case? Rochdale case suggests not – it was dropped three years ago before being restarted recently. Who bore the brunt of this? The victims
If a blogger like me can access such information on street grooming & report it. Why can’t journalists? Lazy or following owners agenda?
The Press that blamed Islam as inspiring these street grooming sex crimes were – Rupert Murdoch’s Times (Davis Aaronovitch) & Richard Desmond’s Daily Mail (Melanie Phillips). Both owned by israeli firster zionists as were the columnists who wrote it.
The facts are meaninglessness where agenda is top. Tell a lie, repeat it endlessly, until they believe it as the unassailable & undisputed truth.
Pingback: Baroness Warsi and the EDL join hands on grooming « Hidden British News
Pingback: I’m Not A Rapist, Honest!
Pingback: Rotherham abuse report identifies racism fears | An Endorheic Spiral
Debbie Jones, Ofsted’s national director for social care, said: “We recognise that along with other organisations, we didn’t give child sexual exploitation the forensic focus that we do now in our current framework.”
The former children’s minister Tim Loughton said Ofsted had been part of the problem after its inspectors said children’s services in Rotherham were adequate as recently as 2012.
Interviewed on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Loughton said: “Ofsted have got to prove itself and they are not there yet. Ofsted was part of the problem and they are absolutely part of the solution. The problem was that Ofsted were inspecting the wrong things. It was too much about process in local authorities in protecting children and it was not about the qualitative outcomes of ‘are children actually safer?’ In the last few years we changed the way Ofsted goes about their inspections. They are much more child-focused now.”
Loughton said every council needed an effective action plan for safeguarding children, and it was unacceptable that in too many cases such plans were still not in place.
Jones responded by saying Ofsted’s current inspections looked in detail at child sexual exploitation.
Ofsted’s report – The sexual exploitation of children: it couldn’t happen here, could it? – was commissioned by the chief inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw, after the exposure of child abuse scandals including in Rochdale, Oxford and Telford, as well as Rotherham.
It criticised children’s services in Rotherham for “widespread or serious failures that result in children being harmed or at risk of harm”. For a long time -many years there has been a great deal of criticism of the performance of Ofsted. I would not trust the views of Ofsted about anything.
Jones said: “It cannot be acceptable that local authorities and their partners are still failing to grasp and deal with [child sexual exploitation] effectively. While we have found examples of excellent frontline practice, it is clear that some areas have moved faster, further and more effectively than others.
Is it the incompetence or is it the impudence of Ofsted which is the most annoying ? – Where have they been up to now ?! Giving clean bill of health to local authorities in which there was massive abuse ! It does not come to public notice, because the results are not that dramatic, but Ofsted gives many times far too high grades to schools which are either failing or at best satisfactory. They rely too much on their conversations with school head teachers, and they fall victims, many times, to dishonesty and misrepresentation which their inspectors are not sharp enough to spot.
Sexual exploitation and abuse of children in care has been rife for decades, under all parties. Remember the Islington scandal? The real elephant in the room is why are so many children in Britain so vulnerable to abusers in the first place. Why is the focus on the failings of the council rather than those of the parents? It is the responsibility of a child’s mother and father to protect them – it is no accident that children who live with both parents are statistically the least likely to be abused sexually or physically. It is the breakdown of the married family which has left so many British children exposed to people who wish to do them harm. The councils did not bring these children into the world. Every child that was abused had two parents. Where were they and why are they exempt from any blame?
Yes, ideally every child would have loving, capable parents who are able to take care of them. Unfortunately that is not the case. That is simply a fact. So instead of deflecting the blame onto the parents, why don’t we stick to pointing the finger at those who work in the professions who are actually entrusted to and paid to step in when parents are unfit for task? What on earth have they been doing? Twiddling their thumbs, collecting their salaries and hoping nobody would notice gross dereliction of duty? The vast majority of the children in the Rotherham case were NOT in care. In both Rochdale and Rotherham there were instances of fathers trying to get their children away from the rapists, but they, and not the rapists were arrested for hate crimes. The disturbing thing is not that people don’t know this, but that they do but will go to an unbelievable attempt to blame anyone but the perpetrators because of their ethnicity. Do we blame the parents for Seville’s victims, Politician abusers victims, victims of priests?, no, only victims of ‘Asian’ rape gangs
The Home Office were first made aware of what was occurring in Rotherham back in 1998 this is when ‘grooming’ was viewed as ‘child prostitution’ which meant that many children who were being abused, some as young as 12 years old, were being arrested then convicted or cautioned for offences relating to prostitution. Figures for 1995-96 show that 177 children under 17 were convicted of offences relating to prostitution. A further 207 – including a 12-year-old girl – were cautioned.
Us ‘lefties’ do not want to sweep anything under the carpet …if anything we truly do want it ALL out in the open, which includes how it was these men were able to get away with abusing children in that way for so long.
Well that reason is how our own very loving government viewed child abuse at that time (as mentioned above). Which really doesn’t surprise me seeing as at that time the Home Office were also busy hiding the fact that Westminster was also involved in child abuse (the very same kind of abuse that was happening in Rotherham) and going by recent news …also the murder of some of those children abused.
The biggest kick is when you think about why it was the age of consent for women were changed. This is a copy and paste from goggle.
The age of consent for sexual activity in the UK is 16. In England and Wales, the age of sexual consent for women has been set at 16 since 1885, when campaigners fought to raise it from 13 to prevent child prostitution.
Makes one wonder why it is then in 1998 calls were being made to treat child prostitutes as victims rather than criminals.
IA
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk