There is a fascinating story that is being carried by Breitbart London today and it concerns how much the UK Home Office knew about the problem of Islamic Rape Gangs prior to the extent of these problems being revealed to the public. According to Breitbart, the Home Office knew of the existence of the problem of Islamic Rape Gangs a full ten years before this issue came into the consciousness of the general public and during Lord Blunkett’s time in office as Home Secretary. Attempts by a Home Office review to find out about when the Home Office was told of the Islamic Rape Gang phenomenon have established that there is enough circumstantial evidence to show that a draft of a major report into this problem was received by the Home Office. The enquiry found that although there is no evidence that documentation relating to the Islamic Rape Gang problem was deliberately destroyed, they did find that a chaotic filing system at the Home Office in the past had failed to put this report into the Home Office archives.
Breitbart said:
Britain’s Home Office had received information about Pakistani grooming gangs raping vulnerable white girls more than a decade before it finally commissioned an investigation, a review has found.
A review had found that documents relating to an unpublished report which detailed “men who are believed to be responsible for pimping and grooming young people into prostitution” in Rotherham, north east England, was sent to the Home Office in 2002, but the department failed to act on it.
This revelation is going to cause many to ask questions as to why this information contained in the draft report was not acted upon? Was it because it was seen as a localised problem and thereby got pushed down the priorities pile or was it something more concerning, such as the Home Office not wanting to, as they may have seen it, create a problem for themselves by acting upon the information contained in the report? I think that these questions as to whether this lack of action was merely incompetence or political arse-covering, are valid ones to ask.
For me, the main question that I’d like to ask is how high did this knowledge about the report into the Rotherham Islamic Rape Gangs go? Was it something handled by a relatively junior civil servant who shoved it to one side when something more urgent came along or who was fobbed off by excuses from the political and policing establishment of Rotherham? This is quite possible. It’s not beyond the bounds of reality that some overworked and relatively underpaid civil servant may have been careless and shoved this in a ‘miscellaneous’ file where it disappeared. However, what if this did go further than the desks of junior civil servants? What if the knowledge of what was going on went higher than that? If that was the case and if it went as far as to pass across the desk of the Home Secretary, who at the time was David (now Lord) Blunkett then we have to ask the question how much if anything, did Lord Blunkett know about the situation in Rotherham and if he was aware of these problems why didn’t he do anything about the Islamic Rape Gangs whilst he was Home Secretary?
The Breitbart article goes on to reveal some quite worrying failures on the part of the Home Office. In addition to the missing report from a researcher into child sexual exploitation matters, there is also evidence in the Home Office archives that other information about the Islamic Rape Gang problem had been mishandled. Breitbart stated that letters had been received in 2003, also during Lord Blunkett’s tenure as Home Secretary, from concerned parents complaining about a lack of police action against Islamic Rape Gangs. It appears from the evidence of the letters, the academic reports and allegations from former police officers, that the Home Office knew more than most about the extent of the Muslim Rape Gang problem. Unfortunately, the Home Office did nothing useful with this information and practically did the square root of sod all to keep women and children safe from these savage gangs of rapists.
I keep coming back to the question ‘why was nothing done’? Was it because of the usual type of Civil Service incompetence or staff fearing the effect on their careers if this can of rapey Islamic worms were opened? This sort of scenario is quite possible.
A more darker question to ask is, was nothing done about these Islamic Rape Gangs for dubious ‘community cohesion’ reasons by a Labour government that had gleefully propped open the doors of the nation? It would be helpful if the veteran Left winger Lord Blunkett would state whether or not he was aware of any concerns being raised about the problem of Islamic Rape Gangs whilst he was Home Secretary. I accept that in the period immediately following 2001 the British Home Secretary would have had their hands full with anti terrorism matters after the 9/11 attacks, and it is possible that these issues could have been missed. But it seems odd that such serious crimes as gang rape and sex trafficking were not given the attention that they deserved.
It’s difficult to be absolutely certain whether the reason for the poor handling of information about Islamic Rape Gangs in the early 2000’s was down to a cover up for political expediency for ‘community cohesion’ reasons or the usual sort of incompetence that we’ve come to expect from the Civil Service. But what cannot be denied is that the Home Office were aware to some extent of the existence of problems regarding Islamic Rape Gangs. My question continues to be did Blunkett know about either the draft report from the Luton academic or any of the letters sent to the Home Office by aggrieved parents of Islamic Rape Gang victims? I feel that it would be good if Lord Blunkett could come out and publicly clarify this issue.
