This BBC News piece – ‘Child sex exploitation “social norm” in Greater Manchester’ – mentions just about everything else but the Islamic and Pakistani nature of what has happened with the sex-grooming gangs all over the UK.
This article is basically a response to the now well-publicised Muslim sexual-grooming gangs in the north of England and elsewhere.
And let’s not forget that – as the title states – this article is specifically about the problems in the Greater Manchester area. Need I say more?
The BBC also uses the near-euphemism “some areas of Greater Manchester”. Even a moron could work out that “some areas of Greater Manchester” is another way of saying those towns and areas which have large Muslim ghettos: Rochdale, Oldham, Bury, Bolton, etc.
What we have here is the same old BBC deceit and obfuscation about these issues.
It must have taken some considerable editorial skill for the writer of this piece (who is, surprisingly, unnamed) not to mention Muslim or Pakistani grooming-gangs a single time. Indeed it must have taken a very high level of ideological bias not to do so.
In other words, the BBC has learned precisely nothing in the last few months.
That’s because the BBC can’t learn anything on this matter because the very mention of the ethnic and/or religious nature of the criminals concerned will necessarily and automatically lead – so Leftist theory has it – to racism and even fascism. And as we learned in Rotherham, the fight against racism is far more important than the lives of young girls.
This pious, zealous and eternal fight against largely fictitious racism has so far meant that:
*) Parents who are also members of Ukip can’t adopt children.
*) When people express a problem with mass immigration that they are automatically castigated.
*) People are sacked for harmless jokes and membership of political parties.
*) People can’t speak in public (universities, public meetings, on the BBC, etc.).
*) People’s Facebook accounts are closed down.
*) People a thrown into prison for what they think; not what they do.
*) Demonstrations are banned.
*) Academics and politicians are stopped from entering the UK.
Ann Coffey’s Report
Not only does the Labour Party’s Ann Coffey fail to mention the Muslim/Islamic nature of the sexual-grooming gangs, she systematically attempts to place the entire blame elsewhere: whether that be “music videos” or the lack of “training”. (The SWP similarly blamed it all on “cops and cuts”.)
The previous academic report on the Rotherham case, for example, didn’t mention “music videos, sexting and selfies” (even if they are indeed “fuelling the increased sexualisation of children”). Yet these things seem to the basis of Ms Coffey’s own report: ‘Real Voices’.
These are separate issues.
If it were all about videos, sexting or a lack of training, why have these problems been worse in places like Greater Manchester – places with large Muslim populations – than anywhere else?
Muslim grooming-gangs have existed since the mid-1990s and possibly earlier. So Ann Coffey seems to be deliberately trying to fudge the issue here.
That’s not a surprise. Coffey’s own Labour Party is largely responsible for the issue in Rotherham, Greater Manchester and elsewhere. It was Labour Party councillors who believed that racism was the ultimate sin and that anyone and anything could be sacrificed in the fight against it.
Ann Coffey is also quoted as saying that the “prevailing public attitude” blamed children for what happened in Greater Manchester and elsewhere.
No it wasn’t the “prevailing public attitude” at all, Ms Coffey.
It was the “attitude” of people who belong to your party; as in the Rotherham case. It was also the attitude and ideological views of Leftist social workers, Labour councillors and those police chiefs who’ve been hoodwinked by Marxist theology (i.e., theory).
These cases were most certainly not the fault of the “public”.
Indeed various members of the public in Rotherham and elsewhere attempted to do something about Muslim sexual-groomers. And guess what: Labour councillors, Leftist social workers and the police didn’t allow them to do so.
Ms Coffey shouldn’t blame the public at large for the Leftist hegemony we now have in Greater Manchester and elsewhere in the UK.
In fact this BBC piece itself includes a quote from Tony Lloyd (the Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner) which states that it wasn’t the public which was at fault at all: it was the “system”. Tony Lloyd says:
For too long their voices were ignored or, worse, dismissed by the system.Again, Ms Coffey herself implicitly states in her report – despite what she said earlier – that it wasn’t really the fault of the public (or “sexualised videos”, lack of “training”, etc.) at all: it was the fault of “social workers, prosecutors and juries” all of whom “carry [anti-racist or Leftist] attitudes around with them”.
So let’s face facts: Ann Coffey MP has the perfect credentials to be part of the problem: not part of the solution. She’s not that much unlike the SWP social worker Gordon Jelly – formerly an employee of Rotherham Council – who blamed Muslim sex-grooming on “cops and cuts”.
Coffey was also was trained in sociology at the Polytechnic of South Bank, at which she was vice president of the students’ union. She began work as a social worker – like Gordon Jelley – in Birmingham, then Wolverhampton and, finally, in Stockport. She was also Tony Blair’s Parliamentary Private Secretary. (Coffey is now married to the vice-chair of the University of Sussex’s University Council, Peter Saraga.)
As for this BBC News article (rather than the views of Ann Coffey MP), it says, for example, that “girls in uniform were regularly stopped by men outside schools”.
Now I’m willing to accept that on a few occasions non-Muslims have done this. However, in the vast amount of these cases this is being done by Muslim gangs and by Muslim individuals. (I have personal experiences of this happening many times in Bradford.)
And even when the BBC gets more specific, it still doesn’t mention Muslim or Pakistani grooming-gangs. For example, it states the following:
[The report] was commissioned by Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Tony Lloyd to assess the improvements in protecting youngsters after nine men were jailed in 2012 for running a child sex ring in Heywood and Rochdale.Now it just so happens that the nine men who were jailed for running this “child sex ring” in Heywood and Rochdale were all Muslims. But that’s not a surprise because all the other sexual-grooming gangs – from Rochdale to Oxford to Oslo – have been overwhelmingly made up of Muslim men as well.
After reading this BBC News piece, you may have the feeling that nothing much is going to change when it comes to tackling the nationwide and widespread problem of Muslim grooming-gangs. To the BBC, the fight against racism is the ultimate fight. So much so that the ideology of anti-racism demands that that the writer of this piece never once mentions the word “Muslim”; never mind the word “Pakistani” or even “Asian”.
And if racism is still regarded as the ultimate sin of the early 21st century, then it’s a good bet that many Muslim grooming-gangs are going to carry on doing what they’ve been doing for up to twenty years.
Finally, the only mention I could find of Muslims in Ann Coffey’s report is this:
I visited the Council of Mosques in Rochdale in March 2014. They are concerned that, as a consequence of the media coverage, they are seen as part of the problem and not part of the solution. They are emphatic that the behaviour of the offenders was criminal not Asian, and are concerned that this distinction is not being made by the wider public.
The BBC and Ann Coffey MP are part of the problem.
The Report's References to “Pakistanis” and “Asian”
1) “A small minority of British Pakistani men are criminal sex offenders as in other communities. So it is important to understand why those particular men became criminal sex offenders. The assertion that it was a racial crime in that the girls were targeted because they were white is undermined by the fact that one of the men in the Rochdale case was also convicted of a serious sexual offence on a British/Pakistani girl. We do not know whether these men also abused other British/Pakistani girls.”
The reasoning above is intentionally grotesque. One Muslim (out of well over a hundred who've been convicted), in one gang (of dozens or more) abuses a single “British/Pakistani girl” and Ann Coffey automatically assumes that this can't be a Muslim/Pakistani and an anti-white problem?
2) “One British/Pakistani woman who I talked to was concerned about an underreporting of sexual assaults in the community because of the shame it is felt to bring on the victim and the victim’s family.”
3) “Part of the problem is that people think of CSE as the Rochdale model of predominately Asian men sexually exploiting white girls so there is a poor understanding of the broader picture.”
4) “Sunrise CSE Team in Rochdale..... Rochdale is characterized as being identified with the particular form of child exploitation of groups of predominantly Asian men abusing white girls as a result of widespread media coverage of recent trials. However they report that 85 per cent of the cases they manage are single offenders, many peer on peer.”
Exactly, “85 per cent of the cases they manage” would have been “single offenders” because, as everyone now knows, the Muslims in the grooming-gangs weren't being “managed”: they were being ignored or even enabled to do what they were doing.
5) “High-profile court cases, such as Rochdale, have elevated CSE into the public consciousness, but at the same time have left the impression that CSE is only about vulnerable white girls being exploited by groups of Asian men.
"If offenders are always portrayed in a particular way, e.g. Asian males, then the signs in people who don’t look like offenders will be missed and with them opportunities to protect children.”
6) “Sian Griffiths... said: 'Being Asian is not an explanation of the motivation for the offending behaviour. There needs to be an understanding of the combination of personal, cultural and opportunistic factors that created the conditions for sex offending.'....”