Britain: a police-protected pedophile brothel 14

From the Telegraph:

More than 1,400 children were sexually abused over a 16 year period by gangs of paedophiles after police and council bosses turned a blind eye for fear of being labelled racist, a damning report has concluded.

Details of the appalling depravity in the town and the systemic failures that allowed it to continue were laid out in a report published by Professor Alexis Jay, the former chief inspector of social work in Scotland.

Victims were gang raped, while others were groomed and trafficked across northern England by groups of mainly Asian men.

“Asian men” were they? The very fact that the Telegraph is reluctant to use the word “Muslim” – though they were in fact Muslim gangs of paedophiles – goes a long way to explaining the prevailing mind-set in Britain which made the prolonged abuse possible.

Senior officials were responsible for “blatant” failures that saw victims, some as young as 11, being treated with contempt and categorised as being “out of control” or simply ignored when they asked for help.

In some cases, parents who tried to rescue their children from abusers were themselves arrested.

So the authorities were in league with the criminals. The police colluded with the Muslim rapists, pimps, and enslavers of children.

Police officers even dismissed the rape of children by saying that sex had been consensual.

In the UK, if an adult has sex with a child under 16, he has committed the crime of rape whether the child “gives consent” or not.

So now what has happened as a result of the report being published?

[The Prime Minister’s office] described the failure to halt the abuse in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, as “appalling”.

Following the publication of the report, the leader of Rotherham council, Roger Stone, resigned, but no other council employees will face disciplinary proceedings after it was claimed [by whom? – ed] that there was not enough evidence to take action.

Fourteen thousand children abused over a 16 year period, and there is “not enough evidence”?

There were calls for Shaun Wright, the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire to step down after it emerged that he was the councillor with responsibility for children’s services in Rotherham for part of the period covered by the report. …

Professor Jay wrote: “No one knows the true scale of child sexual exploitation in Rotherham over the years. Our conservative estimate is that approximately 1,400 children were sexually exploited over the full inquiry period, from 1997 to 2013. … It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated … [Some] had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone.”

The report pinned the blame squarely on failings within the leadership of South Yorkshire Police and Rotherham council.

Prof Jay said: “Within social care, the scale and seriousness of the problem was underplayed by senior managers. At an operational level, the police gave no priority to child sex exploitation, regarding many child victims with contempt and failing to act on their abuse as a crime.”

It emerged that there had been three previous reports into the problem which had been suppressed or ignored by officials, either because they did not like or did not believe the findings.

“Did not like” the findings is obviously the truth. It was the duty of the police to find out if they were true. They could only “not believe” them as long as they didn’t investigate them. Wouldn’t it be nice if police could simply say that they didn’t believe any reported crime and so save save themselves all further trouble!  (And there was a time when the British “bobby” was held in the highest esteem! How “multiculturalism” has corrupted them and undermined the rule of law, while changing Britain from a decent country into a paedophile brothel.)

The report stated: “Some councillors seemed to think it was a one-off problem, which they hoped would go away.

There’s another great new technique for effective policing – hoping the problem will go away.

Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.

There is only one “ethnic identity” which anyone in Europe is afraid to identify, and it is not an ethnic identity at all: it is a religious affiliation. And the fear is not of “being thought racist”, but of being killed by vengeful adherents of that religion: Islam.

For years, the police failed to get a grip of the problem, dismissing many of the victims as “out of control” or as “undesirables” who were not worthy of police protection.

So the British police now get to decide who is “worthy” of their protection and who is not. Even if that were not in itself destructive of the rule of law, wouldn’t convention and common sense tell them that children always needing protection?

Responding to the criticism levelled at the police, Chief Superintendent Jason Harwin, the district commander for Rotherham, issued an unreserved apology to all the victims of child sexual exploitation.

And that makes it all right, does it – a healing redeeming apology? Makes it as if no crime has been committed. Saves the courts and the prisons a load of work.

What if the perpetrators had been white Britons? Would they have been investigated, stopped, arrested, tried and punished? The answer is “probably yes”. Only Muslims can break the law in Britain, even commit extreme crimes, and have a very good chance of getting away with it.

Had no one looked into all this before Professor Jay?

Sure, there had been those three earlier reports – which “were not acted upon and were left to gather dust while the abuse continued”.

Posted under Britain, Islam, jihad, Muslims, United Kingdom by Jillian Becker on Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Tagged with , , , ,

This post has 14 comments.

Permalink
  • nonnamous99

    “Asian
    men” were they? The very fact that the Telegraph is reluctant to use
    the word “Muslim” – See more at:
    http://theatheistconservative.com/2014/08/27/britain-a-police-protected-pedophile-brothel/#sthash.ZCw9WZza.dpuf

    • nonnamous99: You cannot be so unaware of what’s happening in the world to ask such a question! Do Catholic men put bombs in tube trains and buses in London? Are Catholics waging savage war to establish their religious rule in the Middle East? If you say something critical in Europe about Catholics or Catholicism are you arraigned before a court and punished?

      • nonnamous99

        Actually, Catholic men have put planted bombs in London. They’re identified by the media as IRA members, not Catholics.

        If Muslims commit an act of terrorism motivated by their religion, then of course it would be appropriate to identify them as Muslim extremists. When they’re accused of a crime in which their religion is irrelevant, why should it be mentioned? Simply to fan the flames of bigotry. When I read in the paper about anybody else being busted for child molestation, the individual’s religion is never mentioned.

        • The IRA’s cause was connected with Catholicism versus Protestantism, and the fact was well known and much written about.
          Don’t you understand that the REASON why this Rotherham horror was allowed to go on for 16 years was that people in authority were afraid to prosecute and take whatever other steps were necessary to end it BECAUSE THEY FEARED TO BE ACCUSED OF “RACISM” OR – MORE APTLY AND DANGEROUSLY – “ISLAMOPHOBIA”. It was the fact that the perpetrators WERE MUSLIM that kept everyone silent, and conniving with the crimes. Their fear of what they might be accused of was greater than their sense of their moral duty and understanding of their and legal duty to stop the abuses. THEREFORE IT WAS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY THAT THE REPORTS OF IT SHOULD SAY THAT WAS THE REASON, AND YOU CAN’T SAY THAT WAS THE REASON WITHOUT MENTIONING THE WORDS “ISLAM” AND “MUSLIM”. The criminals got away with their crimes BECAUSE THEY WERE MUSLIMS. And then the reporters also tried not to say those words. Not only justice but truth was destroyed by political correctness – such as you are advocating. In fact, there could not be a more striking manifestation of real Islamophobia than this cowering, this submissiveness to savagery. It shows that Islam , – that Dark Age ideology – has already won in Britain. The Britons are dhimmis. And anyone who fails to see this has lost their moral judgment.

          • nonnamous99

            It’s skin color and ethnicity that’s the issue here, not religion. If these criminals were all white, British converts to Islam there would have been no coverup, they would have been afforded no special treatment. Their religion is irrelevant. If the perpetrators had been African Christian immigrants I’m sure the same coverup would have occurred. By dragging religion in unnecessarily, you undermine legitimate criticism of religion.

            • You seem to have a remarkable talent for missing the point.

            • Andrew M

              You’re right, this savagery has nothing to do with Islam. It’s not only completely irrelevant to mention it here, it’s also offensive.

              Oh, wait. Aren’t Muslims supposed to follow the example of Muhammad, the highest and most exalted human being ever? The Koran says so 91 times, so I’d say the answer is yes.

              So, what did Mohammed do? For one, he molested a child:

              Narrated ‘Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old [emphasis mine], and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).— Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64

              These guys are just being good Muslims. The bad Muslims are those pesky fools calling upon the Muslim community to embrace LGBT and women’s rights, to separate mosque from state, to tolerate the responsibly occasional use of alcohol, and to invoke the principle of ijtihad to maybe, just maybe, align them closer to secular human values.

              Mohammed would disagree with these bad Muslims on every count. They’re the one we need to worry about, not these pious child molesters. Fretting about their faith would just be bigoted, after all.

    • liz

      Not all Italians are Catholic, and not all Asians are Muslim, or vice versa. The common denominator among all these paedophiles, (and terrorists, for that matter) is that they are Muslim.
      Their religion is also what they use as a justification to commit rape and other acts of terrorism. Mohammed did it, so it must be “righteous” behavior, and they are merely following his example.

  • Don L

    Second Post:

    I can’t get this out of my head…who are these people and what nonsense excuses this? Ah, back to love vs justice. Well, since they like the slams…let’s adopt justice as punishment for their outrageous designed negligence:

    Lets gather all the children of these police and council members (small to adult) load ’em on a plane, give ’em parachutes and drop them all off in ISIS territory. And, let them watch scream and beg for it not to happen. Turnabout sucks!

  • Don L

    If it were jewish gangs…the camps and smoke stacks would be back.

    Look to the Euro as the underlying, unifying decline of sanity, the rise of social equality, across Europe. And, has anyone noticed the French government has collapse over France’s failing economy. The ‘other peoples’ money. always runs out.

    • REALBEING

      Cannot really get this info very easily, Don. It is kind of like the media in our country is pre-occupied with some asshole playing golf incessantly…..

      They could do like we do….just cut down another forest, get a couple of lines of presses going and run them day and night.

      There you go………….plenty of money…………

  • REALBEING

    If I had the power within my reach I’d flush this entire flagrant violation of Humanity that some call a ‘religion’ right down the Universe’s toilet!!!

    • liz

      Well, we do have the power to “wipe them off the map”. That would work, too. But, no, civilization seems to have hit the evolutionary stage of senility, and instead we’re allowing the vermin to take over.

      • REALBEING

        As long as the “Golfer-In-Chief” is still smiling in his golf cart on the links, and The United Nations gang of idiots sleeps at the steering wheel of the planet, these monsters will have free range!

        To quote an old song, we need a hero!!!!