If you was a police officer and you was following a vehicle along the road, which you were going to pull over because of a faulty brake light, and the passenger threw something out of the car before they pulled over, wouldn’t you have good grounds to assume that the occupants of the car were trying to hide something? Of course you would, you’d assume that the passenger had thrown drugs or a weapon or some other incriminating item out of the car in order to not be caught in possession of them.
The action of the passenger would quite rightly give the police officer behind them a reasonable suspicion that the occupants of the car had done wrong. As with police officers and wrong’uns so it is with local councils. If they try to stop people from looking at one of the problems the council has, then it is reasonable to assume that the council has a lot of problems to hide. ‘Having a lot to hide’ may well be why Rotherham council is trying to ban demonstrations against the Islamic Rape Gangs that have afflicted the town and clocked up in excess of 1,400 victims.
Douglas Murray writing on the website of the Gatestone Institute has also a reasonable suspicion that Rotherham council still has a lot to hide. Although the council is whining about the cost of policing anti Islamic Rape Gang demos, the real reason may be that there are a lot more problems that the council would like to sweep back under the carpet.
Douglas Murray said:
“There are some decisions so stupid that a person who lacked restraint might howl. One such case arose last week in the Britain.
For years, the issue of the “grooming” of young girls by Muslim men, mainly of Pakistani origin, has been a subterranean issue in Britain. Reports of such trends have circulated for most of the last fifteen years. They have been treated not just with fear but with dread.
Eleven years ago, in 2004, Channel 4 television was going to broadcast a documentary called “Edge of the City.” It included footage of parents of girls as young as 11 who had been groomed for sex by gangs of men described as “Asian.” But there was a problem. The European Parliament elections were coming up. The extremist and allegedly racist British National Party was expecting to do well in those elections in certain parts of the North of England. The organization “Unite Against Fascism,” (a group that often behaves pretty fascistically, itself) was among the associations calling for the documentary to be pulled. The timing was certainly problematic: leaders of the BNP, among others, were boasting that the documentary would favor its party as if it were a political broadcast. The police joined those expressing concern; Channel 4 decided not to broadcast the program until after the elections.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of Channel 4’s decision, it proved final. No one wanted to help extremist groups that might take advantage of this story. But the story was there and needed reporting. The scandal over the delay in the broadcast played into a growing narrative — not without foundation, as it turns out — that there was an attempt at the highest levels, including the police and local authorities, to downplay the report.
That view has persisted ever since. It is only because of the fearless Times of London, its journalist Andrew Norfolk, and a tiny handful of others, that some of the rape-gang cases have been given the front-page attention they deserve.
In recent years, the public has learned not just that the crimes have been more numerous than anyone could have imagined, but also that they have also been more widespread. And it is not only in the North of England that these “grooming” cases have emerged.
Two years ago, in the Operation Bullfinch trial at the Old Bailey in London, seven men, all of Muslim background, were found guilty on 59 counts of child grooming and exploitation. The details of the case are painful: they include the drugging and gang rape of at least six underage girls over a period of several years. These rapes took place not in some “forgotten” Northern town, but in and around the university city of Oxford. Crimes of a similar nature have finally begun to come to court in recent years. Newspapers such as the Times deserve a huge amount of credit for covering them soberly, carefully and prominently.
The feeling remains, however, that these child-rape crimes are still passed over or covered up. The results of an independent official inquiry into the exploitation of young girls in Rotherham, reported last year, found failures at nearly every level of the institution of state. “The Jay Report” found that at least 1400 girls had been victimized in the Rotherham area alone, between 1997 and 2013. The report also mercilessly exposes how the police, council and social services were all found to have failed utterly throughout the period in question. A more damning cross-section of institutional failure could hardly be imagined.
Yet, even in the wake of that national scandal, the taboo on this subject apparently remains. Last week, in Bradford, 14 men and a 16-year-old male were charged with offenses “relating to rape and sexual abuse of a child under 16.” The offenses are alleged to have occurred between 2011 and 2012. The men, most of whom are in their twenties, but the oldest of whom is 62, constitute a sadly familiar list of surnames: Khan, Ali, Mahmood, Younis, Hussain. Although reported in the local press, the case has warranted only a single, bare-bones BBC news story in the national press. It may be that the national press is waiting for the trial to commence — or might it be that there are other things going on? And so there are. Crimes of this nature are still being kicked under the carpet — for reasons of “political correctness” — with no concern for the harm done to the children. The issue is a true tinderbox.
That brings me to what is so howl-worthy. In the midst of all this — all the undeniable years of cover-up, avoidance and fear that extremist groups would prey off the story — public anger is exploding in towns where such grooming has gone on. In parts of the North of England, there have been protests against the grooming of underage girls. Some of these may take unpleasantly generalizing form — it may for instance include people who wrongly claim that “all Muslims” are somehow responsible for these crimes. But so long as the protests are legal, they must be allowed to continue. Not everybody has a column in the national press or can make voices heard on the airwaves. This does not mean that some of the groups that organized these protests — including the English Defence League and a group called “Britain First” — are at all savory. But it is possible to imagine a decent local person wanting to make his voice heard, and wanting to march against the wholesale failure of the authorities of the town that has made itself so infamous.
But now, apparently, the local council in Rotherham is hoping to remove even that power from the people of the town. Last week, the local council in Rotherham moved to request from the Home Secretary emergency powers to ban anti-child grooming marches in the Rotherham area. The reason, they said, is one of expense. According to a local paper, one protest alone last September cost the town more than a million pounds — undeniably, a terrible drain on resources.
Mr Murray then added:
“That grooming has gone on in the area and been covered up or ignored by the authorities is not just an opinion — it has been proven. Public grievance about such horrors is understandable. But if lawful expressions of this grievance are banned, then only one thing can happen: People will assume that there is something even worse going on. A town whose authorities allowed child-rape to go on for a decade, but which now bans marches objecting to child-rape, is setting up a whole new narrative of victimhood from which no good can possibly come. Howls of rage — especially such howls — must be protected speech, especially when they have a basis in fact. “
He’s right, the attacks on women by Islamic Rape Gangs isn’t just a ‘far right fantasy’ as some Lefties would say it’s a proven fact and the covering up and minimising of these crimes committed by Muslims by Rotherham Council and South Yorkshire Police has also been proven. He’s also correct when he says that banning these protests will not de-escalate to cool down the situation, it will only make matters worse. The answer to the tension in the area is not to ban those who are angry from speaking out about the problems in Rotherham but to deal, effectively and once and for all with the problem of Islamic Rape Gangs.
Link
Original source for Mr Murray’s piece for the Gatestone Institute
To me, there remains an ominous unanswered question. Why were these gangs so confident, for so many years, and in so many towns, that they need fear no repercussions from the police, local authority, or child protective services? It certainly seems that their confidence was well placed, because apart from the BNP, only the Keighley MP (Mrs Cryer), ever spoke out against them. No councillors, no police, no social workers or care home supervisors went to the press.
A few token resignations is nowhere near enough. The rallies should continue until all those in authority who took part in the cover up are sacked, and prosecuted.
And that’s why they want the protests banned, so the whole perverse racket can be shoved down the memory hole.
Some Police, some social workers and some local authority workers were, very obviously, participators in this child rape structure, either for sex, or for financial gain. Nothing this huge could be that much buried for as long as it was, without!
Whether or not they were participators in the sexual side of these offences is difficult to say but it is a distinct possiblity. Apart from taking part in the sexual side of the child rape culture of Islamised parts of towns like Rotherham there is as you say the fiscal aspect. There could also be a political angle where social workers adn others from the local authority turn a blind eye either because their professional training had a surfeit of leftism in it (social workers come to mind here) or individual councillors relied on the rapist Muslim vote or they were workers from other parts of the council outside Children’s Services who needed the patronage of certain councillors to keep hold of their jobs.
The cover up in Rotherham is not confined to a few police officers, social work heads or councillors, I think it may be wider than that but may well be linked to the Labour party as Labour is the dominant political force in the area and has been for decades.
“Labour, the dominant political force in the area.”
Still is, according to the last GE results.
That says plenty about the Rotherham electoral mindset.
Goes back to my previous post about “none so blind…”
Or perhaps they prefer to stick their collective heads
up their fundaments and sing “la,la,la.”
Rotten to the core.Of course Rotherham have something to hide,and also don’t forget there are many muslim voters there,so upset the apple cart,no give you my vote! Scared to upset their muslim friends,scared to lose their votes,and always good old”not good for community cohesion” to fall back on.Rotherham council can deny all they like,they knew it was going on and turned a blind eye,shame on them,shame on them.