How can the man in charge of child protection say Rotherham had nothing to do with race?

Muslim Terror in Rapingham

If you haven’t yet listened to the latest Radio Free Delingpole podcast I urge you to do so: but first you’ll need a strong stomach.

uk_muslim_rape_gangIn it, I talk to George Igler of the Discourse Institute who has been following the Rotherham child rape gang story closely for the last three years. The full story is more shocking than you can possibly imagine, not just because of the ugliness of the abuse itself (redolent of that horrible scene from the movie Taken where smack-addled girls are serially abused in a filthy dive by countless grubby men) but also because of the extent of the cover-up by the left-liberal establishment of social workers, local government officers, child welfare charities, diversity co-ordinators, not to mention the regional police forces and even imams.

Truly this is one of the biggest scandals of our time. And it’s going to get bigger.

 (More below the fold)

Esmeralda Weatherwax

I frequently disagree with privileged leftie Dan Hodges. But credit where it is due, I completely agree with what hewrites here 

I’ve just read an interview that appears to have been published in this morning’s Guardian, with Amelia Gentleman and Nazir Afzal, the Crown Prosecution Service’s lead on child sexual abuse and violence against women and girls. It deals with Rotherham and – if Afzal’s words have been reported correctly – he should be sacked.

His statements are staggering. He begins by claiming race was not an issue in the targeting of victims. “He argues that evidence suggests that victims were not targeted because they were white but because they were vulnerable and their vulnerability caused them to seek out ‘warmth, love, transport, mind-numbing substances, drugs, alcohol and food’,”

This is factually wrong. The vast majority of sexual abusers select victims of the same ethnic origin. In Rotherham, the opposite happened. As the Jay report explicitly states, “In a large number of the historic cases in particular, most of the victims in the cases we sampled were white British children, and the majority of the perpetrators were from minority ethnic communities.”

Gentleman continues: “Afzal rejects the suggestion that no action was taken by officials ‘to avoid rocking the multicultural boat’.” This is despite the fact that Jay and a series of other independent reports into the abuses have shown conclusively that is precisely what did happen

(He) rejects the suggestion that no action was taken by officials ‘to avoid rocking the multicultural boat’…claiming, “This has ‘very little’ to do with political correctness,”. Not only does that statement fly in the face of all the evidence, it flies in the face of previous statements by Afzal himself.

Most incredible of all, though, is this statement: “I’ve yet to hear personally a victim say the reason why the police weren’t interested was because of the colour of the perpetrator.” In fact, a number of the victims have stated publicly they believe the race of the perpetrator was the reason the police had no interest in pursuing the crime. In addition, Jay and an earlier report into the abuses both independently found evidence that youngsters in the town were afraid to even approach the police with a complaint of this nature for fear it would be dismissed on grounds of racial sensitivity.

Let’s just remind ourselves who Nazir Afzal is. He’s not a politician or a commentator. He’s the member of the Crown Prosecution Service, with prime responsibility for prosecuting people who abuse children. And yet when confronted with one of the worst collective cases of child abuse in British history – abuse that several independent reports have shown to have been perpetrated beneath a shield of racially sensitive official paralysis – he seeks to deny this was a factor in the crimes.

How can a man in his position claim not to have heard any of the victims claiming race was a factor in police failing to pursue the crime, when several of them did so? More pertinently, if he doesn’t believe this was a significant factor, what confidence can those victims, or anyone else have in his ability to tackle further abuses on this scale in the future?

It is my belief that the Crown Prosecution Service is rotten to the core, and also requires a public inquiry. I remember it opening mid 80s and taking over from the individual police forces’ in house solicitors; standards dropped within months. I fear it may need closing and rebuilding from the ground upwards.

Welcome to Rapingham


Here are some of the disturbing revelations in the podcast.

  • The rape gang phenomenon has existed in the UK for at least 25 years, the first recorded instance being of a trial in Birmingham in 1989. But – typical, this, of what was to come – the defendants were not Muslim rapists. They were the Sikh fathers of abused daughters who had tried to attack the perpetrators of the crime only to end up being arrested themselves while the police turned a blind eye to the sex crime.
  • It exists not just in impoverished, racially-divided, working class Northern towns by also in places as white and genteel as Henley-on-Thames
  • It begins like this: a “Romeo” targets the girls, wins their affections, pretends to be in love with them, makes them feel grown-up with presents, treats, drink, drugs. Then the trapdoor shuts. Next thing they know these girls are being plied with booze and heroin, shut in a room with strangers – often related: cousins; brothers; etc – who serially rape them, with the whole business being filmed. The video footage is used to blackmail the girls, who in any case, generally feel too ashamed to report the crime to the authorities. Most of them become addicted to the heroin whose purpose is first to make them resist less and secondly to make them keep coming back for more, despite their better judgement.
  • These practices have long been widely known to the police, to social workers, to child-care charities and local councils. All found an excuse to absolve the rape gangs of criminal behaviour by claiming that these sexual activities were consensual – ie that these girls, some as young as 11, were sluts who had it coming to them.
  • Each child is worth about £200,000 (around $300,000) a year to the gangs – which makes them even more lucrative than the drugs trade.
  • Money is also one of the reasons for the complicity of so many local councils. At a time of general spending cutbacks, money can always be found for jobs in the all-important “Diversity” industry. On salaries as high as £100,000 a year, senior council workers have a vested interest in not rocking the boat. Better to cover up these scandals and preserve the illusion of community cohesion then to have unwelcome public attention drawn to these unsavoury goings-on.
  • Does the broader local Muslim community know what’s going on? Of course. Remember, the 200 prosecutions so far have been brought mainly against the gang organizers – not against the many thousands of men who have participated in these rape parties.
  • Also, the Muslim community has deliberately exploited white liberal squeamishness by threatening race riots and by warning off police that if they try to take the matter further they will report them for “racism.”
  • Why haven’t more people in authority lost their jobs? Because time and again they deploy a formulaic excuse which they may well have learned at diversity workshops organised by groups like Common Purpose: yes there has been a scandal; it may be worse than we think; but only we have the training and experience to deal with it, which is why it is vital that we keep our jobs.
  • Why wasn’t this reported earlier? It was. But often the people protesting were members of the BNP or the EDL whose “far-right” taint meant that their complaints could safely be dismissed by the left-liberal Establishment as racially motivated and dishonest. The same “racism” accusation was levelled against anyone brave enough to speak out such as Labour MP Ann Cryer. Most people therefore found it more convenient to look the other way.
  • Rotherham – with 1400 girls abused – is just the tip of the iceberg. This has been going on, largely unchecked, all over Britain for a period of 25 years. And, if people take apologists like this woman seriously, it may well go on largely unchecked for some time to come….

One thought on “How can the man in charge of child protection say Rotherham had nothing to do with race?”

Comments are closed.