Wednesday, 15 May 2013

The recent report about yet another grotesque Muslim child rape gang in Britain has provoked a flurry of pro-Muslim spin from the British media establishment. It emerged during this scandal that some of the girls involved had made complaints to the police about what was being done to them (being gang-raped, sexually tortured and coerced into prostitution) and the police did nothing. Social workers also knew what was going on and did nothing. The police and social workers have since apologised for failing to take action. But there's another group that should be hanging their heads in shame today: journalists. The Muslim rape gangs were known about in the affected areas long before the story broke in the national press. It was headline news in local papers in places like Yorkshire. Indeed, some of the newspapers were running campaigns demanding that police prosecute these crimes! It is standard practice for the major news outlets in London to scan the regional newspapers to see if there are any stories worth picking up. So they must have known about these goings-on, and chosen not to report them, for about a decade before the story finally surfaced after it could no longer be repressed. Britain's journalists, social workers and police should be in the dock alongside the Muslim rapists. But they won't be.

And now that their favourite perpetrators have been exposed and convicted, they are running spin to protect them.

The Telegraph, in a blog post that shamefully has had the comments turned off (seems to be standard practice on the Telegraph with any post related to Muslims/the EDL/Jews these days), contrives to blame Nick Griffin for the cover-up. Nick Griffin (leader of the British National Party) was one of the very few public figures who spoke about this problem long before it was publicly acknowledged. Admittedly, he did it only behind closed doors, no doubt to avoid prosecution. But he was secretly filmed by the BBC and prosecuted anyway for incitement to racial hatred. He only got off because Muslims aren't a race. Then shortly afterwards the government extended the incitement laws to cover religion too.

But now this pitiful coward in the Telegraph blames Nick Griffin for having issued a warning about the rape gang problem all those years before.
There's one more figure who played an important role in this saga. As long ago as 2001, Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP, was making claims about Asian grooming gangs. In 2004 he repeated these allegations in a speech clandestinely recorded by the BBC for a TV documentary, Secret Agent. He was arrested and charged with inciting racial hatred.

Which is exactly what he was doing, of course. He was making his allegations to stir up ethnic strife. Right-thinking people, aware of the BNP's record as liars, presumed that these stories were just racist demagoguery. No doubt Griffin feels vindicated today. He has no right to: thanks in part to his thuggish intervention, the scandals were ignored – and the abuse continued.
Source

Now that it can longer cover up the truth about its favourite minority, the Guardian moves quickly to do some spin for them. "Is child grooming and sexual abuse a race issue?" it says, sounding brave. Of course its answer to that question is no. It begins by acknowledging that both negroes and Asians are grossly represented in the statistics compared to their share of the population.
A 2011 study by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre looked at the 2,379 potential offenders caught grooming girls since 2008. Of 940 suspects whose race could be identified, 26% were Asian, 38% were white and 32% were recorded as unknown. Asians are roughly 7% of the population.

A report for the children's commissioner in 2012 found there were 1,514 perpetrators. Of these, 545 were white, 415 were Asian and 244 were black. The ethnicity of 21% of perpetrators was not recorded. Attempts to analyse the Asian figure further runs into problems. Just 35 of the 415 Asians are recorded as having Pakistani heritage and thus highly likely to be Muslim, and only five are recorded as being from a Bangladeshi background. The heritage of 366 of the Asian group is not stated in those figures.

But it concludes that "Asians" are over-represented because of their occupational profile.
However, the view in different parts of law enforcement is that it is wrong to take these figures and cases and say the race or religion of the perpetrator leads to them committing these crimes.

A more credible link, says one senior source involved in bringing the criminals to justice, are their occupations. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source said the demography of certain areas and the makeup of the night-time economy explained the over-representation of Asian offenders.

The source said: "Young vulnerable girls migrate to the night-time economy, where they come across taxi drivers and people working in takeaways, who are more likely to be Asian. It is better to focus on the professions of offenders, not their race or religion."
Source: Guardian

It also cites the abuse of an "Asian" girl by one of the gangs as proof that it is not
a race issue. Of course, they are actually correct. It's not a race issue. It's a religion issue. Islam is a religion that specifically sanctions the sexual enslavement of non-Muslim females and its supposed founder, the so-called prophet Mohammed, is described in the standard Muslim texts as having kept slaves, including sexual slaves. Since Muslim morality is defined by the reported actions of this so-called "Perfect Man", it should hardly be surprising that his followers today have an above-average tendency to engage in these activities. But that is a possibility that the establishment media dare not even hint at. Even they put on their fake bravado and broach the race issue, the religion issue is never mentioned. I would hazard a guess that the "Asian" victim mentioned was Sikh or Hindu, rather than Muslim, but that's information that I don't think we'll be getting from the establishment media any time soon.

How absurd is it to say that there are people who have an ethical code that sanctions sexual enslavement of outgroup members and then they in fact engage in the sexual enslavement of outgroup members, but somehow the two facts are completely unrelated? If Nazis had an ideology that sanctioned the killing of Jews, then went around actually killing Jews, somehow I don't think we'd be hearing any spiel about "a tiny minority" of Nazis and their ideology magically being disconnected from their actions.

8 comments:

Rufus News From Atlantis said...

I live in an area which has been swamped by Pakistani, Bangladeshi and now Kosovar and Chechen immigrants. They openly groom very young girls by getting them hooked on heroin which they then pay for with their bodies. The local media is silent. The police (West Yorkshire Metropolitan Scum) do nothing - other than to arrest people for 'racism' if they dare to speak about the destruction of our children. The local MP refuses to discuss the crimes of the non-indigenous criminal swarm. the local councillors are all immigrants themselves, and they also say nothing. Life in multi-culti UK gets worse daily.

Anonymous said...

CZ

I have known of this sexual predation for a dozen years or more.

It is inconceivable that the police did not act unless they were ordered not to. These attacks took place at a time when New Labour was importing millions of Muslims into the country to change the very face of Britain. So the police were reigned in.

If for nothing else we must be grateful to the Conservatives. The moment they were elected, the cuffs were off the police.

The question now is how to reverse the damage that even Hitler dod not manage but Labour did.

DP111

Anonymous said...

It was a race issue because the vile perpetrators threw the race card at these young girls, telling them they were "racist" if they didn't want to "date" their predators. If their parents showed resistance, they would tell the girls that the parents were "racist."

Imagine you are 11 years old, and all you've ever known in your life is a society where "racism" is the ultimate, unforgivable crime. You are a sitting duck for this kind of manipulation.

Anonymous said...

What else do you expect from the complacent dhimmi UK establishment?

They won't be satisfied until the entire country is just another Muslim majority third world backwater...

Anonymous said...

That guy at the Telegraph is a f**king scumbag. What a disgusting and immoral individual.

Yeah, the Muslims were raping the girls because of Nick Griffin - if he hadn't opposed them, it wouldn't have been rape. It would have been "marriage." Why not go all the way with such depraved thinking?

Jackass of the highest order.

Anonymous said...

British media never allows comments when it comes to muslims. Eu always turn that of, except so e times the daily mail.

And again, you speak the truth you are being arrested because you're a racist. Hello islam, goodbye free speech and life in itself.and islamophobia is a disease, yeah right!

Anonymous said...

Not focus on race or religion but on occupation!

Rad the Quran and know why they are per definition will always rape young little girls and exploiting them. There will come a time when they will start to steal newborns from hospitals and rape them rape them right on the streets, if we don't act now and start calling the thing by its name. Muslim equals pedophile! There I said, now the rest of human kind (suffice to say, I do not count muslims as humans).

Anonymous said...

CZ: Did you read the latest update by the Daily Telegraph apologist for Rape Jihad who wrote that piece you quoted partly from? His line now is that his 'blahg' was edited by his 'editors' in such a way that it was distorted. Yeah, right. I have never before known any DT scribbler to use that excuse! Here's my take on it: He wrote it as it appeared and neither he, nor his editors, realised the effect it would have (they didn't "turn comments off" after it appeared, there never were any comments permitted; this is a stunt the DT does quite often, they'll print the title of the blog, say "Comment on this", which is designed to get people to read the whole piece and go to the next page which helps their advertising revenue, and then the reader discovers "Comments are closed" at the bottom of the next page.) The next day the DT put up some silly piece by a woman on its main Comments page online ; that article garnered over 2,000 comments and quite a few took the blog apologist apart, accusing him of supporting gang rape by his absurd attack on the BNP (only after that article and the scathing comments appeared did he come up with the new ending for his blahg and blaming his 'editors'). I read quite a few comments on the Comment article, any that dealt directly with Islam's Rape Jihad were removed outright and, eventually and predictably enough, the ENTIRE 2000+ comments were removed and none thereafter allowed. The DT are pro-Islam and have been for some time. It's not good enough to say that there are 'hate speech laws' on the statute books and that they're therefore legally hamstrung from writing the truth: what's being done and has been done for decades to children and women in the UK is evil and immoral. The DT supports Cameron and sexual perversion (homosexuality, lesbianism, "gay" marriage) and the EU and Turkey's entry into it. Once people understand the ties between the Left as a totalitarian power, and Islam, they'll appreciate why there is silence about Rape Jihad. The EU's support for Moslems also means that, along with Rape Jihad against native children, thousands of children, girls and women are being trafficked into Europe for sexual enslavement and prostitution. That helps, too, to break down European societies and Christian morality. The Left (and that includes Communism, Socialism and Nazism) long ago embraced Islam so I suppose these newspapers decided to go with whom they believe will be the decisive power.

Diversity Macht Frei

Iostream

Share It

Search

Loading...

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews