Rotherham victim says abusers are 'untouchable'

Zack Morris

end of the road wrote: »

self preservation and caring about reputations over children.

Yes, they didn't want to be labeled as racists by the PC brigade.

RobYourBuilder

end of the road wrote: »

no such thing as "crying racism" . i don't want the discussion shut down. but i do not like seeing these kids and what they went through being used to further a potentially questionable agenda by people who have form in using events to further their questionable views on things.

Translation: I don't have a breeze what I'm talking about so I'm going to throw a few buzzwords about the gaff. "Questionable agendas". "Questionable views". What are you even talking about?

Anyway, did you even read the article? Or is that "questionable" too?

end of the road

Zack Morris wrote: »

Yes, they didn't want to be labeled as racists by the PC brigade.

wrong. the pc brigade don't exist

BlaasForRafa

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Translation: I don't have a breeze what I'm talking about so I'm going to throw a few buzzwords about the gaff. "Questionable agendas". "Questionable views". What are you even talking about?

Anyway, did you even read the article? Or is that "questionable" too?

Why do you lot even give this guy the time of day? He's the same on every single thread. If no-one responded to him he'd feck off and be a nuisance somewhere more suited to his brand of repartee....youtube comment sections or something.

reprise

end of the road wrote: »

wrong. the pc brigade don't exist

Sure they don't me old Sinn Fein, sure they don't.

RobYourBuilder

end of the road wrote: »

wrong. the pc brigade don't exist

I've told you this before. Just because you keep repeating things, doesn't make them true.

end of the road

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

I've told you this before. Just because you keep repeating things, doesn't make them true.

no but the fact they don't exist makes it true.

SeanW

sabat wrote: »

Like any of you really give a sh1te about the welfare of the girls of Northern England's underclass...

I can say with a good degree of certainty that I care more than Keith Vaz does.

end of the road wrote: »

wrong. the pc brigade don't exist

Umm ... I refer you to a previous post:

A researcher was sent on a diversity awareness course - and faced the sack - for raising the alarm about the appalling abuse of children in Rotherham and the fact most of the perpetrators were of Pakistani descent, it has been reported.

Some 1,400 children were abused between 1997 and 2013 in the South Yorkshire town, including cases of them of being made to witness brutal rapes, being covered in petrol and threatened with being set alight, according to a devastating report last week.

Many of the victims were young girls in care of the council - which was accused of "blatant" failures in not dealing with the problem.

The researcher, who was seconded to Rotherham Council from the Home Office in 2002, spoke to BBC Panorama anonymously and said she was told she must "never, ever" again mention the fact they most of the abusers were Asian men.

Rotherham Council even tried to have her sacked when she resisted pressure to change the findings of the report she completed, she said.

She interviewed 270 under-age girls who had been victims of abuse, identified by sexual exploitation outreach service Risky Business, and passed the report to the council.

She recalled the reaction of one official to it, saying: "She said you must never refer to that again. You must never refer to Asian men.

"And her other response was to book me on a two-day ethnicity and diversity course to raise my awareness of ethnic issues."

She also told the programme that data backing up her report, stored by Risky Business, went missing just after it was submitted.

This was the same Rotherham local authority that took "ethnic" foster children (who had been kept together as a family) from their foster parents in a great hurry, so much as to split them up, when they found out that their foster parents were UKIP members.

So much for internal divisions and ineptitude, Rotherham Council was able to act very effectively when they found that children were being (well) cared for by people whose political opinions they didn't like.

In doing this, the Rotherham local authority proved that it was the real racist, because whereas they saw racial divisions, the 'kipper couple only saw 3 children that needed a home.

How co-incidental that the same Rotherham authority that acted swiftly and decisvely to "protect" those ethnic children from those horrible evil secret UKIP monsters, failed spectacularly to protect children from actual danger when the cultures/races etc were reversed?

EOTR, you tell us all you like about how Rotherham council was simply incompetent and there is no Political Correctness at play. But the facts tell a different story, and if you cannot see that it's because you are wilfully blind. The same goes for Nodin and the rest of the multicultural left.

And that story is that Rotherham council are indeed competent, and well capable of pursuing what they percieve to be their mandate. That just happens not to be what any sane person (i.e. anyone other than a multiculturalist) would think it to be. The same is true of Keith Vaz, who knew exactly what he was doing when he took confidential statements from victims and made them public.

end of the road

SeanW wrote: »

EOTR, you tell us all you like about how Rotherham council was simply incompetent and there is no Political Correctness at play. But the facts tell a different story, and if you cannot see that it's because you are wilfully blind. The same goes for Nodin and the rest of the multicultural left.

me and nodin aren't blind to anything.

SeanW wrote: »

that story is that Rotherham council are indeed competent, and well capable of pursuing what they percieve to be their mandate. That just happens not to be what any sane person (i.e. anyone other than a multiculturalist) would think it to be. The same is true of Keith Vaz, who knew exactly what he was doing when he took confidential statements from victims and made them public.

why don't you find the thread on the case of the children taken from UKIP supporters. if i remember rightly i posted in that showing my disgust at those children been taken. but don't let facts get in the way of a good old rant about multiculturalism and this political correctness thing.

DeadHand

Deeply ironic how some of the self professed "open minds" here are now trying to censor discussion on child rape and torture.

Hypocrisy is the outstanding trait of the politically correct left.

porsche959

end of the road wrote: »

thats the sad reality unfortunately. these certain individuals are very brasen to use these poor kids to further their agenda on here. its disgusting

The knuckle-dragging element seems to have latched onto this case to an obsessive extent that probably betrays what they are really about.

It is well researched that the far right has long been littered with child abusing scum so I am wondering if it is a distraction or deflection tactic at some level?

porsche959

reprise wrote: »

It may surprise you to know, but there are people that can look at this incident and ask themselves a very simple question: could it happen here?

Already has, I'm afraid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_to_Inquire_into_Child_Abuse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kincora_Boys%27_Home

porsche959

Zack Morris wrote: »

Yes, they didn't want to be labeled as racists by the PC brigade.

Another newly registered poster ranting about the PC brigade, Christ surely it's obvious to all but the most dull-witted at this point.

crybaby

People making excuses for the police should be ashamed of themselves.

Any human being that puts the excuse of fear of being labelled a racist over the welfare of a raped child doesn't really deserve much time.

It is obviously being carried out by Asian gangs so the police should target the Asian gangs and protect the children exactly what is so difficult about the situation?

BeerWolf

Hire someone to assassinate them.

end of the road

crybaby wrote: »

People making excuses for the police should be ashamed of themselves.

Any human being that puts the excuse of fear of being labelled a racist over the welfare of a raped child doesn't really deserve much time.

It is obviously being carried out by Asian gangs so the police should target the Asian gangs and protect the children exactly what is so difficult about the situation?

ja pc brigade will come after them

DeadHand

porsche959 wrote: »

The knuckle-dragging element seems to have latched onto this case to an obsessive extent that probably betrays what they are really about.

It is well researched that the far right has long been littered with child abusing scum so I am wondering if it is a distraction or deflection tactic at some level?

Impressive moral gymnastics here. It's now "knuckle-dragging" behaviour to highlight mass, organised rape and torture if the perpetrators and victims happen to be the wrong colours.

This is the kind of high-minded, politically correct thinking that allowed these crimes to happen in the first place and allows them to continue unopposed.

Maybe this is a story because it is actually happening, not because of a "far right" (whoever they are) conspiracy. Again, it takes olympic level moral gymnastics to blame a largely imaginary "far right" for the ongoing, organised rape of white girls by Asian Muslims in Rotherham.

Those here zealously attempting to demonise anyone with an opposing opinion, shout down the discussion and downplay this problem itself as well as the clear cultural and religious aspects of this problem as well as refusing to acknowledge the proven, stated effects institutional political correctness have in hampering the investigations into these crimes remind me of the cranks who unthinkingly defended the Church when the first of it's child abuse scandals broke. They dishonestly tried to place the blame for the outrages everywhere (the media, pornography, shadowy forces) but where they actually belonged.

Similar groupthink. Similar dogma.

end of the road

DeadHand wrote: »

Impressive moral gymnastics here. It's now "knuckle-dragging" behaviour to highlight mass, organised rape and torture if the perpetrators and victims happen to be the wrong colours.

This is the kind of high-minded, politically correct thinking that allowed these crimes to happen in the first place and allows them to continue unopposed.

Maybe this is a story because it is actually happening, not because of a "far right" (whoever they are) conspiracy. Again, it takes olympic level moral gymnastics to blame a largely imaginary "far right" for the ongoing, organised rape of white girls by Asian Muslims in Rotherham.

Those here zealously attempting to demonise anyone with an opposing opinion, shout down the discussion and downplay this problem itself as well as the clear cultural and religious aspects of this problem as well as refusing to acknowledge the proven, stated effects institutional political correctness have in hampering the investigations into these crimes remind me of the cranks who unthinkingly defended the Church when the first of it's child abuse scandals broke. They dishonestly tried to place the blame for the outrages everywhere (the media, pornography, shadowy forces) but where they actually belonged.

Similar groupthink. Similar dogma.

nobody is trying to shut down any discussion. political correctness doesn't exist, its just simple nanny nonsense. i don't give a **** what colour the abusers are. its irrelevant. abusers are filth and need to be caught and locked up. thats it.

nokia69

end of the road wrote: »

nobody is trying to shut down any discussion. political correctness doesn't exist, its just simple nanny nonsense. i don't give a **** what colour the abusers are. its irrelevant. abusers are filth and need to be caught and locked up. thats it.

just because you keep saying political correctness doesn't exist doesn't make it so

the delusion of a social justice warrior knows no bounds

end of the road

nokia69 wrote: »

a social justice warrior

"social justice warrior" . is that another mythical person like those of the "pc brigade" anyone who uses such **** as "pc brigade" or "social justice warrior" can't be and don't deserve to be taken seriously

Smiles35

nokia69 wrote: »

just because you keep saying political correctness doesn't exist doesn't make it so

the delusion of a social justice warrior knows no bounds

The thread went quiet for 5 hours and aparently that was reason enough to belive a conspiracy was in effect.

SeanW

Nodin wrote: »

Good to see we're avoiding sweeping generalisations. Do carry on.

The Left has no problems with generalisations, as this thread and others have proven.

porsche959 wrote: »

Already has, I'm afraid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_to_Inquire_into_Child_Abuse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kincora_Boys%27_Home

Thing is, these things can only happen when a person or group of people is held to be above reproach. The Catholic Church abused children en-masse for nearly half a century, because priests, nuns etc were held in the highest (unearned) regard and esteem, such that noone would believe anything bad about them.

The same is true of Rolf Harris and Jimmy Saville, they both got away with abusing children for so long because they were considered almost above human. In the latter case, some were known to have looked the other way. Same again with an MP paedophile ring in Westminster in the 70s and 80s.

As for the Kincora case, looks like that was loyalist leaders, again, the loyalists were colluding with the RUC at the time. So they could expect a free pass.

The Rotherham Muslims were no different. In the name of multiculturalism, they were held to the same standards as the others mentioned above. That's why when researchers and social workers tried to highlight what was going on, they met a wall of disintrest, antagonism and animosity.

end of the road wrote: »

why don't you find the thread on the case of the children taken from UKIP supporters. if i remember rightly i posted in that showing my disgust at those children been taken. but don't let facts get in the way of a good old rant about multiculturalism and this political correctness thing.

Fair enough, I don't recall the thread, but if you say you were apalled by the coduct of the Rotherham council in that case, I have no reason to doubt you.

But I find it bizarre that you can see evidence in multiple reports that Rotherham council did everything it did intentionally to further its agenda. Noted the spectator about the UKIP fostering row:

One of its functionaries explained it was concerned about Ukip’s opposition to the ‘active promotion of multiculturalism’.

For your good self, Nodin and anyone who agrees with ye, I have 3 (groups of) questions.

1. Do you accept or reject the claims in the Huffington Post UK article that suggested that Rotherham council was more concerned about covering up the ethnicities of the perpetrators, than protecting the children? Why?
2. To what factor do you ascribe the taking of the foster children from the UKIP couple? Do you accept or reject the view in the Spectator article that it was linked to a policy of "active promotion of multiculturalism?" Why?
3. Do you believe that Keith Vaz is the best suited person to investigate the Rotherham horrors? Do you believe that the information he leaked was something done in good faith?

end of the road

SeanW wrote: »

Fair enough, I don't recall the thread, but if you say you were apalled by the coduct of the Rotherham council in that case, I have no reason to doubt you.

oh i absolutely was disgusted by it. i believe anyone in the council or social services who sanctioned and carried out this should have been jailed

SeanW wrote: »

Do you accept or reject the claims in the Huffington Post UK article that suggested that Rotherham council was more concerned about covering up the ethnicities of the perpetrators, than protecting the children?

yes, but i'd say covering themselves more.

SeanW wrote: »

Why?

probably worried about the election, or maybe some of the people were friends of theirs or neighbours, i don't know. i do know they don't give a **** about the children.

SeanW wrote: »

To what factor do you ascribe the taking of the foster children from the UKIP couple?

i believe it was politicaly motivated pure and simple.

SeanW wrote: »

Do you accept or reject the view in the Spectator article that it was linked to a policy of "active promotion of multiculturalism?"

i reject it. i believe it was simple good old politics at play. taking children from someone of a different political belief to yours isn't promotion of multiculturalism. i cannot find any evidence this couple were either racist toards the children or anyone, or did anything to encourage the children in their care to be racist.

SeanW wrote: »

Why?

because there are some who will use whatever to further their own political agenda and will even go as far as to take children from those of a different political belief.

SeanW wrote: »

Do you believe that Keith Vaz is the best suited person to investigate the Rotherham horrors?

no absolutely not. he cannot be trusted and is dangerous.

SeanW wrote: »

Do you believe that the information he leaked was something done in good faith?

absolutely not.

Venus In Furs

"The PC brigade" is an inflammatory and puerile term though - it's not conducive to mature discussion; it's the preserve of The Sun and phone-in shows. I don't think it's becoming of a person of decent vocabulary, which most people on this thread seem to have, to be resorting to using it.
(I'm not suggesting the use of this phrase is more of a concern than the abuse obviously, just that the constant use of it does kinda look as if sticking it to the PC brigade is all some people are concerned with here).

This case is absolutely heartbreaking and horrific. There are (to put it mildly) unpleasant attitudes towards females among extremists of Islam - this is obvious and something people cannot deny/stick their heads in the sand about. As a person whose views tend to fall left of centre, I have no issue whatsoever with acknowledging this reality.
If the entire cover-up hinges on fear of being deemed racist/seen to insult Muslims, it is very disturbing indeed. I personally don't believe that is the only reason though (as has been said, what about other child abuse cover-ups then?) but I do believe it is part of it - I believe it is complex and nuanced also though; a web.
How many people were told never to mention that the abusers were muslim again, and sent on "diversity training"? How verified are these stories? I'm not trying to cast doubt, but such claims really do have to be definitely true, otherwise there's no point in using them to substantiate an argument.

Who are the people who decided there should be no mention of the men being muslim? State officials I presume - police? Social welfare personnel? I'm just trying to paint a picture here - not cast doubt.

When people talk about the PC brigade, sometimes the term is used wrongfully - however I know full well who they're talking about at other times: middle-class, highly educated, mostly white, ivory tower occupying folk, cultural relativism (to the point of ludicrousness) espousing folk, who simply cannot for the lives of them admit when any group of people (apart from white men) is experiencing issues that are detrimental to itself and others. I don't get the stuff on this thread about them hating working-class people though - it's the opposite usually. The only group they are hostile to are white middle-class people (despite usually being same), mostly men.

Who are these people though? Are they within the police force? Social services? Or are they from universities, government, trickling their message down? I'd like to know how this works.

RobYourBuilder

I don't get the stuff on this thread about them hating working-class people though - it's the opposite usually.

Bullsh*t. Look at any thread on immigration on an Irish discussion forum. I damn near guarantee that you will see posts from supporters of multiculturalism saying;

● The Irish are too lazy to do the jobs.
● Immigrants are better workers.
● Immigrants are better looking(references to the gene pool).
● Immigrants are better educated.
● Immigrants speak better English(this one is usually aimed at the Dublin working class).

And plenty of references to welfare leeching scobes, dutch gold and all that jazz.

Venus In Furs

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Bullsh*t. Look at any thread on immigration on an Irish discussion forum. I damn near guarantee that you will see posts from supporters of multiculturalism saying;

● The Irish are too lazy to do the jobs.
● Immigrants are better workers.
● Immigrants are better looking(references to the gene pool).
● Immigrants are better educated.
● Immigrants speak better English(this one is usually aimed at the Dublin working class).

And plenty of references to welfare leeching scobes, dutch gold and all that jazz.

Perspective I guess. To me, the people who keep going on about welfare-leeching scobes and the like tend to be the ones who have a problem with immigrants also.
Not that it's always cut and dry or that what you write above doesn't happen either.

RobYourBuilder

Who are these people though? Are they within the police force? Social services? Or are they from universities, government, trickling their message down? I'd like to know how this works.

Have a read of the Alexis Jay report. It was posted earlier in the thread. Here: http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/downloads/file/1407/independent_inquiry_cse_in_rotherham

nokia69

http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_2_oh_to_be.html

He knew that the official multiculturalist educational policies that he was expected to implement would sooner or later lead to social disaster such as these riots: and when he repeatedly exposed the folly of these policies in print, the advocates of “diversity”—who maintain that all cultures are equal but that opinions other than their own are forbidden—mounted a vicious and vituperative campaign against him

a good article on the PC left and the damage that they do

SeanW

end of the road wrote: »

oh i absolutely was disgusted by it. i believe anyone in the council or social services who sanctioned and carried out this should have been jailed



yes, but i'd say covering themselves more.



probably worried about the election, or maybe some of the people were friends of theirs or neighbours, i don't know. i do know they don't give a **** about the children.



i believe it was politicaly motivated pure and simple.



i reject it. i believe it was simple good old politics at play. taking children from someone of a different political belief to yours isn't promotion of multiculturalism. i cannot find any evidence this couple were either racist toards the children or anyone, or did anything to encourage the children in their care to be racist.



because there are some who will use whatever to further their own political agenda and will even go as far as to take children from those of a different political belief.



no absolutely not. he cannot be trusted and is dangerous.



absolutely not.

Thanks for answering my questions

A lot of that seems very reasonable, but I just can't shake the feeling that Rotherham CC knew what they were doing in both cases and were guided by a multicultural-left ideology. Especially when they're reported to have said so.

end of the road

SeanW wrote: »

Thanks for answering my questions

A lot of that seems very reasonable, but I just can't shake the feeling that Rotherham CC knew what they were doing in both cases and were guided by a multicultural-left ideology. Especially when they're reported to have said so.

oh they knew what they were doing all right, no question.