[N_Fiddledog]

$1:

The inspection team also found a "a culture of covering up uncomfortable truths, silencing whistle-blowers and paying off staff rather than dealing with difficult issues."
In her report, Miss Casey stated: "I found a Council in denial. They denied that there had been a problem, or if there had been, that it was as big as was said. If there was a problem they certainly were not told – it was someone else’s job. They were no worse than anyone else. They had won awards. The media were out to get them.
"When faced with the solid findings contained in the report it had itself commissioned by Professor Jay, it did not accept them. And without accepting what happened and its role in it, it will be unable to move on and change."

From the same source that gave you this one:

$1:

It was revealed that council bosses, police and social workers had turned a blind eye for fear of being labelled racist.

It's from the Telegraph news report on the two studies dealing with Muslim Grooming Gangs.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

Seems police, social workers and a good part of white English society saw the girls as deserving of what they got, just as the abusers did.

I have no doubt that's true. And not just them, there's you. But where you seem to differ from the investigative teams responsible for the reports on the subject is you seem to be demanding we stop there and look no further.

Not just the victims, but even those accused of ignoring their pleas suggested, or outright stated political correctness or fears of being called racist were among the reasons they did not do their jobs.

[Thanos]

I don't dispute that the horrid background of English society led to police to be dismissive of lower-class girls being exploited. I'd assume though that the addition of political correctness, where it's hands off on non-whites and on Muslims especially, just made it that much more difficult for the victims to be saved and for the criminals to face any consequences. Kind of a perfect storm of awfulness those girls got trapped in, detested by their own nation's disgusting class system combined with the worst of the touchy-feelies that liberalism pushes for non-white criminals.

[andyt]

The perfect storm was between the white English attitudes towards these girls and the attitudes of the abusers, they were very similar. You forgot about about the latter.

As The Guardian said:

$1:

It is as if everyone has agreed who is worthless and who isn't; who can be saved and who can't. The police, the local authority, the government, and indeed the grooming gangs, appear to share the same ideology about sexual purity – and its value.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

The perfect storm was between the white English attitudes towards these girls and the attitudes of the abusers, they were very similar. You forgot about about the latter.

As The Guardian said:

I forgot nothing (and again it's an opinion piece in the leftist Guardian, not a news report).

You forgot two authoritative reports factored in the class rational, but concluded the more compelling fact as primary motivation was a political one of not wanting to appear incorrect.

Or as some of those involved put it they did not want to appear racist. But yes I imagine there was a mitigating factor with them as there appears to be with you, of "doesn't matter anyway, nobody's going to care. They're just slags. Why rock the boat."

[N_Fiddledog]

The ex-social worker from The Guardian has an opinion that nobody wanted to help the girls, because the officials harbored a prejudice against the class of the girls and their sleazy sexual behavior.

BTW these girls were as young as 11, and some of the complaints came from parents. In fact two fathers tried to physically remove the girls from a place they were being abused. When the police arrived it was the fathers who were treated like criminals.

I have an opinion you must also factor in a religious and cultural supremacist bias within the immigrant Muslim Pakistani community making it socially acceptable to target Kufar (unbeliever) girls. (Sikh girls were also targeted).

The 2 reports from Professor Jay and British government official Louise Casey talked to the officials being blamed for ignoring the crimes and came to conclusion the most common and powerful motivation as to why they ignored the calls for justice from the girls and their parents was they did not want to compromise themselves by appearing politically incorrect in investigating Muslim Pakistanis.

[andyt]

Do you think anybody is going to come forward and say they didn't do anything because they saw the girls as lower class slags? No doubt they were worried about the Muslims getting in their face, but the primary reason seems to have been that the girls were from families that were deemed no-count. Is it really your contention that if these girls had come from upper class homes, the system would have responded the same way? We know how it goes in North America with middle class white girls that go missing or are killed vs black or aboriginal ones.

BTW, Muslim girls were also abused, as the articles make clear. Likely far fewer because they would be much more closely guarded by their families. But also, neither the girls nor their families would come forward to complain if they were abused, since we know how it goes with Muslims and girls/women that report rape.

[Zipperfish]

The thing is that the judge in one of the cases--not Rotherham, the other big one--said that these men targeted the girls because they weren't Muslim That is going to get people fired up.

[andyt]

Sure. Rightly so. But it's not the whole issue, nor the primary one. Get people fired up to get rid of the Muslims, and ignore the issue that's pure English. No change required in white English society. No sir.

As we've seen, the men targeted girls that were vulnerable, including Sikh and Muslim ones. Just that those girls weren't very vulnerable, they mostly weren't out late at night hanging out in chip shops and minicabs.

But sure, it's much more fun to get a Muslim hate on than actually look at the larger picture. It's so much fun to feel righteous in getting to hate a whole group of people, make them the problem, instead of looking at the larger society. Worked for Germany for a while too, made them feel good about themselves.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

As we've seen, the men targeted girls that were vulnerable, including Sikh and Muslim ones.

Sikhs for sure. From the very beginning. They're unbelievers. Kufar.

The Muslim girl allegations were made after Muslim Grooming gang stories became front page news. After the gangs began to get actually charged we heard some scattered reports of 'Muslim girls get abused too'.

It was more, "Oh yeah, well I know this Muslim girl who told me..." from Muslim apologist groups who wanted to rewrite the story with themselves as victim.

Were any charges laid? I don't remember hearing about any, but yeah, I imagine there were unknown cases of Mohemmedan sickos making moves on friends and family.

What that has to do with the Muslim Grooming gangs though, I don't know.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

Do you think anybody is going to come forward and say they didn't do anything because they saw the girls as lower class slags?

Well actually...

$1:

Police in Rotherham refused to believe victims and sometimes even blamed them for the abuse calling them 'little slags', the report said.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... andal.html

$1:

No doubt they were worried about the Muslims getting in their face, but the primary reason seems to have been that the girls were from families that were deemed no-count.

Seems to you maybe. The two serious investigations and eventual reports came to a different conclusion. They reported it was mostly Muslim gangs involved and the reason the crimes were ignored was because officials did not want to be called racist.

And the cries for help were not just ignored, whistle blower reports were actively stifled.

$1:

A researcher who raised the alarm over the sexual abuse of teenage girls in Rotherham more than a decade ago was sent on a 'ethnicity and diversity course' by child protection bosses who refused to act on her evidence.
The researcher, who was seconded to Rotherham council by the Home Office, was told she must "never, ever" again refer to the fact that the abusers were predominantly Asian men.
Speaking to the BBC's Panorama programme under the condition of anonymity, the researcher said that she identified more 270 victims of trafficking and underage prostitution by mainly Muslim gangs in Rotherham.

But, despite being sent to Rotherham Council, the report - based on interviews with underage girls seeking help from the council's anti-child prositution project, called Risky Business - was never published.

Indeed, the council tried unsuccessfully to sack the researcher after she resisted pressure to change her findings.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... alarm.html

$1:

Whistleblowers who flagged up a lack of action by council bosses were bullied, harassed and driven out of their jobs, the report revealed.

Instead of acting on the confidential information given to them to help protect children at risk of abuse, the bosses turned on the informants.

Inspectors found the council went to ‘some lengths’ to cover up information handed to it and then silence the people who provided it. In three cases, people who blew the whistle felt they had been marginalised by bosses, bullied, harassed and victimised as a result.

Similarly, a youth service, whose job it was to highlight the horrendous level of child sex abuse in the community, was closed down.

In two cases, whistleblowers claimed they were deliberately ‘restructured’ out. In a third case, they felt they had been marginalised and were forced to leave their job.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... andal.html

How would the class of the victim explain that? Perhaps you might not bother to investigate if you had a low opinion of the victims, but why would you attack workers or organizations who tried to report the crimes or help the victims?

[andyt]

Those are good points, I have to admit.

OK, let's try this: since abusers come from all backgrounds, What's different here is the inaction by the non-Muslims. Ie it's not just Muslims that abuse children, by any stretch of the imagination. It's the reluctance of the authorities t act that's the core of the issue. Therefore it says less about Muslims, and more about the white, Christian, authorities. England does need to get a grip. The Muslims are just taking advantage of the situation. Make it clear that there will be no repercussions, and you'd have people of all religions, ethnicities, what have you, come out of the woodwork to take advantage.

You want to look at everything thru the lens of being at war with Islam. The scenario in Rotterdam could have just as easily occurred with people from non-Muslim cultures, including the domestic one if it was clear there was not going to be any consequences. Getting rid of Muslims would solve nothing, getting rid of the idiocy of the people running the show would. Elect Neil Farrage, and you'd be keeping the Muslims underfoot while allowing whites to run riot.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

It's the reluctance of the authorities to act that's the core of the issue. Therefore it says less about Muslims, and more about the white, Christian, authorities.

Rotherham is, or at least was Labour Party controlled.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sout ... e-31479039

Labour is secular. Christianity has nothing to do with their authority. They are what over here, we would call Progressives. They have been refusing to notice the problem and suppressing anybody who would like to deal with it. Progressives, as you know, need to be "Politically Correct", and Muslim Grooming gangs are not that.

There have been thousands of cases of Muslim Grooming gangs across England. They call them that because because the particular phenomena of grooming underage British girls is being perpetrated by Pakistani Muslims in most of these cases, currently being revealed.

If the Brits are going to deal with the problem, the UK needs to be allowed to notice what it is - Muslim Grooming Gangs.

[andyt]

Sure, sure, only Conservatives are Christians.

Notice the fact. Then realize the root cause is that authorities weren't going after these gangs, whether for pc reasons or because they didn't think the girls were worth protecting.

Again, disappear all the Pakistani Muslims, and abuse of girl will continue. We have it here, doesn't usually seem to involve Muslims.

Deport all Muslims out of Britain, you'll still have abuse of girls. other people would be running the chip shops and driving the mini cabs and in a position to abuse these lost girls. Without the authorities changing their views of these girls you'll still make it easy for the perps, of whatever religion. But then the Daily Smear wouldn't be reporting on this, nobody would hear about it or give a shit. Including you.

[N_Fiddledog]

$1:

The Labour Party is a centre-left political party in the United Kingdom.[4][5][6][7][8] It grew out of the trade union movement and socialist political parties of the nineteenth century and has been described as a broad church; the party contains a diversity of ideological trends from strongly socialist, to more moderately social democratic.

Broadchurch means secular as in separation of church and state.

The Labour Party is not a "Christian Authority". If you have evidence suggesting it is, produce it. Except you can't, because it isn't.

The party leader at the time all these Muslim Grooming gang stories broke was Ed Millband. He describes himself as "a Jewish Atheist"