What fear of being accused of being a racist lead to

'Despite irrefutable evidence that the girls were being sexually abused, no one — according to a report published by the House of Commons on June 5 — acted to draw all the facts together, apparently due to fears by police and social workers that they would be accused of racism against Muslims.
...
Evidence presented to us suggests that there is a model of localized grooming of Pakistani-heritage men targeting young White girls. This must be acknowledged by official agencies, who we were concerned to hear in some areas of particular community tension, had reportedly been slow to draw attention to the issue for fear of affecting community cohesion. The condemnation from those communities of this vile crime should demonstrate that there is no excuse for tip-toeing around this issue. It is important that police, social workers and others be able to raise their concerns freely, without fear of being labelled racist."

These allegations have been confirmed by the imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation, Taj Hargey, who says race and religion are inextricably linked to the spate of grooming rings in which Muslim men are targeting under-age white girls.

Writing in the Daily Mail on May 15, Hargey states: "Apart from its sheer depravity, what also depresses me about this case is the widespread refusal to face up to its hard realities. The fact is that the vicious activities of the Oxford ring are bound up with religion and race: religion, because all the perpetrators, though they had different nationalities, were Muslim; and race, because they deliberately targeted vulnerable white girls, whom they appeared to regard as 'easy meat', to use one of their revealing, racist phrases."

"But as so often in fearful, politically correct modern Britain," Hargey continues, "there is a craven unwillingness to face up to this reality. Commentators and politicians tip-toe around it, hiding behind weasel words. … Part of the reason this scandal happened at all is precisely because of such politically correct thinking. All the agencies of the state, including the police, the social services and the care system, seemed eager to ignore the sickening exploitation that was happening before their eyes. Terrified of accusations of racism, desperate not to undermine the official creed of cultural diversity, they took no action against obvious abuse."

According to Hargey, "Another sign of the cowardly approach to these horrors is the constant reference to the criminals as 'Asians' rather than as 'Muslims.' In this context, Asian is a completely meaningless term. The men were not from China, or India or Sri Lanka or even Bangladesh. They were all from either Pakistan or Eritrea, which is, in fact, in East Africa rather than Asia."
He also says the grooming rings in Britain are actually being promoted by imams who encourage followers to believe that white women deserve to be "punished." He writes that Muslims in Britain "have been drip-fed for years [with] a far less uplifting doctrine, one that denigrates all women, but treats whites with particular contempt. In the misguided orthodoxy that now prevails in many mosques, including several of those in Oxford, men are unfortunately taught that women are second-class citizens, little more than chattels or possessions over whom they have absolute authority."

Hargey points to a telling incident in the trial when it was revealed that Mohammed Karrar branded one of the girls with an "M," as if she were a cow. He writes, "'Now, if you have sex with someone else, he'll know that you belong to me,' said this criminal, highlighting an attitude where women are seen as nothing more than personal property. The view of some Islamic preachers towards white women can be appalling. They encourage their followers to believe that these women are habitually promiscuous, decadent and sleazy — sins which are made all the worse by the fact that they arekaffurs or non-believers. Their dress code, from mini-skirts to sleeveless tops, is deemed to reflect their impure and immoral outlook. According to this mentality, these white women deserve to be punished for their behavior by being exploited and degraded."' 

If you haven't read the case reports you might not know the full horror of this case. Read more here http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/britain-rape-jihad-against-children/2013/07/14/0/

'Black virgin' condemned to die | News.com.au

A horrific story about rape in Pakistan.

More here http://mobile.news.com.au/world-news/teenage-rape-victim-destined-to-be-killed/story-fndir2ev-1226653694764

Presumably the BBC's interest will not be raised as it's about Pakistan not India

Mahdi Mohammed: Iraqi immigrant paedophile allowed to stay in Britain after approaching young girls is jailed for trying to groom 13-year-olds | Mail Online

'They refused to say why Mohammed had been allowed to stay in the country.'

Read more: in The Mail

FFS seriously
 

Allegations of rape within a political party but the BBC aren't interested

Reports of allegations of rape within the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) are all over the internet.

The Mail  managed to cover the story:

'Ordinarily, we would not bore you with the interminable machinations of the far Left. This scandal, though, goes beyond militant politics because it involves an allegation of rape against a senior figure in the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) by a more junior colleague.

She is in her 20s. He is a middle-aged, full-time party activist who has a partner. Remember, when you read what follows, that the SWP is also an organisation that has always professed to champion the cause of women’s rights. Many of its estimated 2,000 or so members are women, after all.

Women such as comrade Candy Udwin. Miss Udwin, 58, daughter of an eminent psychiatrist who enjoyed all the privileges of a comfortable middle-class upbringing in the leafy Surrey suburbs, now sits on the party’s seven-strong ‘disputes committee’.

The committee — or DC — is the mechanism for resolving routine grievances and disciplinary matters in the party ranks.

Decisions by the committee have to be ratified at the annual conference. Hence Miss Udwin’s address in Hammersmith earlier this month.

'We [on the disputes committee] are here to protect the interests of the party and to make sure that any inappropriate behaviour of any kind by comrades is dealt with, and we do that according to the politics of a revolutionary party,’ she said.

Even, it seems, when the ‘dispute’ involves the aforementioned allegation of rape. Not just sexist or misogynistic behaviour, but rape.

Instead of calling in the police, it now transpires the claims were dealt with internally by Candy Udwin and her comrades on the disputes committee. The SWP insists it was the alleged victim herself who chose not to involve the police, but that does not excuse the charade that ensued.

No one on the committee knew the young woman, but all seven knew the ‘accused’ — who, it must be said, has vehemently denied the allegations against him. He was referred to as Comrade Delta throughout what can only be described as the kangaroo court hearing that followed.

Five of the committee had even worked alongside him at the SWP. That revelation alone would have immediately disqualified any potential juror from trying a case in the British courts.

It was not the only shortcoming. Comrade Delta was given a copy of his accuser’s statement before the hearing, but she did not see ‘his evidence against her’. The woman was also subjected to embarrassing questions about her sexual history and relationships with men.

The SWP, just to remind you, is the party which often boasts of its proud record on women’s rights.

What verdict then did the ‘disputes committee’ eventually reach?

They exonerated Comrade Delta. The decision was unanimous and was approved by conference. Party members voted to accept the panel’s findings by 231 votes to 209, before retiring to enjoy a buffet supper.

Could there be anything more distasteful — or plain wrong — than asking for a show of hands to ‘decide’ whether a young woman had been raped?

Friends say the woman has been left feeling utterly betrayed and traumatised by the process.
The only spurious justification given at Hammersmith Town Hall for these shameful events (apart from the fact they say they had the young woman’s consent) was that the SWP had no confidence ‘in the bourgeois court system’ to deliver justice.

Of course, the SWP, which describes itself as a ‘revolutionary socialist party’ in the tradition of Leon Trotsky, didn’t want you to find out about any of this.

The only reason that details have leaked out now is because someone made a secret recording of the ‘dispute committee session’ at the annual conference. A transcript has now been posted on the internet. It runs to 27 damning pages.'

Why nothing about this case on the BBC? It's not as though the Socialist Workers Party is unknown to them. A regular on the BBC is 'comedian' Mark Steel, a long time SWP member, albeit one who resigned from the party in 2007, long after he started to make his hugely amusing
appearances on BBC radio. The 'Right To Work' campaign that the BBC gave huge prominence to last year was a SWP offshoot.
I think it safe to say that an equivalent sex scandal at the BNP would be headline news on the BBC so why not when it's the equally vile SWP?

Now why might the BBC have a soft spot for the extrame-left Socialist Workers Party? Who can say.

Anna Chen’s blog on the SWP’s current Sex Implosion  provides an insight into the cultish nature of the party, and the toll – both financial and emotional – which it takes on members.

Here's an interesting aside, during the course of discussing the SWP’s role in the Stop The War Coalition, Anna Chen makes a shocking, but unsurprising revelation:

When a Jewish socialist group requested platform time to speak against the war, they were refused on the grounds that their presence would alienate Muslims. The guy who’d made their case protested and was told that “you people” were “too sensitive.”

 The SWP just get lovelier by the day, don't they.

How could George Galloway say such a thing?

How could the great egalitarian (sic) George Galloway say that the rape allegations facing Wikileaks founder Julian Assange amount to little more than "really bad manners" and "bad sexual etiquette"? It's beyond me...


In a completely unconnected matter I spotted this video of rules for Muslims during Ramadan, I found the first ruling from Palestinian Authority Mufti Muhammad Hussein most instructive...

Less is later?

Yesterday the BBC finally got around to reporting the latest Northern England sex grooming and child sex case. It was a fairly lengthy article that managed to report that 'The case, involving Asian defendants and white victims' but also added this odd line 'police insist the grooming was not "racially motivated".' Of course 'Asian' in this case, as in so many others before it, is code for Muslim and as for the police insistence... The perpetrators are all Muslims (of Pakistani or Afghanistani heritage). This case is a vile one:

'Some of the girls were beaten and forced to have sex with "several men in a day, several times a week", the jury was told.

One teenager told the jury she was forced to have sex with 20 men in one night.
Another recalled being raped by two men while she was "so drunk she was vomiting over the side of the bed".'

Yet the BBC and the police seem more concerned with trying to snuff out the idea that this case is anything to do with Islam. The BBC do manage to quote Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of of the Ramadhan Foundation, who  accused Pakistani community elders of "burying their heads in the sand" on the issue of on-street grooming. and said:

"There is a significant problem for the British Pakistani community...There should be no silence in addressing the issue of race as this is central to the actions of these criminals.... They think that white teenage girls are worthless and can be abused without a second thought; it is this sort of behaviour that is bringing shame on our community."

Why does Mohammed Shafiq understand what Assistant Chief Constable Steve Heywood of Greater Manchester Police (GMP) does not. He denied that the ethnicity of either the defendants or the victims was a factor:
"It is not a racial issue," he said. "This is about adults preying on vulnerable young children.
"It just happens that in this particular area and time the demographics were that these were Asian men."

Strange how in the North of England this is so often the case.


Today the NEW article the BBC  have on their site is a far shorter one. No mention of religion, no quotation from Mohammed Shafiq or Steve Heywood, just the plain facts of the case with no emotive details. It's almost as though the BBC want to hide the facts; why?


As an aside it is odd how when a Catholic priest is accused of paedophilia the BBC are up in arms and denigrate the catholic church  but when nine Muslim men are convicted of paedophilic crimes, shhh...

One Israeli news story that the BBC are reporting, indeed headlining

The BBC are pleased to headline that 'Israel ex-President Moshe Katsav jailed for rape' and start the report thus 'Israel's former President Moshe Katsav has been jailed for seven years for rape and other sex offences.'

I predict that this story will remain on the BBC's Middle East news page for somewhat longer than the news of the murder of five members of the Fogel family did.

To preempt my 'Anonymous' critic; yes I think rape is serious, yes I think this story should be reported BUT I believe that the degree of coverage of negative stories about Israel that the BBC provide is strong evidence of something close to an obsession.

Posted to make people aware that there are some women who do cry rape without any foundation and that men suffer as a result

The Mail reports:

'A man jailed when a woman falsely cried rape told of his fury yesterday after learning that police knew the woman was 'unreliable'.

Warren Blackwell, 40, spent three years in jail as a convicted sex attacker until his 'victim' was unmasked as a fantasist who had accused other blameless men.

The woman - named under Parliamentary privilege as Shannon Taylor - said he indecently assaulted her outside a social club in the early hours of January 1, 1999, after a New Year's Eve party.

A report revealed yesterday that officers were told Taylor was 'unreliable', ' unstable' and craved attention - but they failed to disclose it at his trial.

The mistake led to an appalling miscarriage of justice which saw father-of-two Mr Blackwell jailed in October 1999 for three years, which was later increased to five, despite no forensic evidence to back up the claims.

His conviction was quashed in September 2006 when it became clear that not only did Mr Blackwell not commit the crime, it never took place.

In 2006, Lord Campbell-Savours used Parliamentary privilege to name the woman.

Taylor, who is said to have made seven other false sex attack allegations, including one against her father, would otherwise have kept her identity secret for life.

But she was not prosecuted for perjury, because prosecutors decided she was too ill.'

Read the whole story and remember it the next time Harriet Harman starts wittering on about the appallingly low conviction rates for rape in the UK. The police also have a lot to answer for with regard to this case, but as the article makes clear no policeman will pay any sort of penalty.

Any comment Harriet Harman?

The Mail reports that:

'A woman lied to police and pretended she was the victim of a brutal double rape in order to get out of a motoring offence, a court heard.

Sarah Hunter, 30, told police she was dragged from her boyfriend's car and raped in an alleyway by two men to avoid being prosecuted.

Specialist officers spent seven hours interviewing her while forensic teams performed a finger-tip search of the area.

But Hunter finally admitted to police she made the allegation up because she was scared of being prosecuted for crashing her boyfriend's car which she was not insured to drive.'

Still think that all rape victims need anonymity whilst those accused of rape do not?

What is rape?

India Knight ponders the matter:

"How a woman who wakes up next to some bloke she was too drunk to remember having sex with is able, in the cold light of day, to compare herself to the victim of a genuine sexual assault is beyond me. It’s repellent – the most grotesque embracing of faux-victimhood. It reminds me of celebrities who blame something that elicits sympathy, such as “exhaustion” or “depression”, for their stay in rehab rather than the fact that they’ve been up all night smoking crack. "

Read it and think about it and then (and only then) pass comment.