Main Edition
US
FR
January 4, 2025 - 8:00am
The “grooming gangs” scandal (calling them “rape gangs” would be more accurate) has resurfaced, largely thanks to a New Year’s Day report about Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips declining to commission a Home Office-led inquiry into historic child exploitation in Oldham. The decision was based on the grounds that it is a job for “Oldham Council alone”.
As the issue has returned to national salience, many who have hitherto shown zero interest in condemning child sexual abuse have put themselves at the forefront of the debate. X owner Elon Musk has lobbied for the release of activist Tommy Robinson, who has erroneously been credited for uncovering the scandal. In fact, Musk’s hero, far from breaking the rape gangs story, almost scuppered the 2018 trial of several men who had carried out horrific acts of sexual violence on a number of girls.
I have been campaigning alongside parents of organised child sexual abuse victims in Leeds since the late-Nineties. The Coalition for the Removal of Pimping was set up by a mother, Irene Ivison, concerned about girls aged 13 or 14 being picked up and coerced into “relationships” with older men, then pimped out to friends and business associates across the city. The same had happened to Ivison’s teenage daughter, who was then murdered. Eventually, the parents behind the organisation piqued the interest of a filmmaker, who made a documentary about it for Channel 4 called Edge of the City.
Due to be screened in May 2004, the film was pulled just hours before transmission because the British National Party advertised it as a “party political broadcast”. The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police claimed it might trigger race riots, and that it would therefore be dangerous to screen. I was extremely familiar with the story the film told: huge numbers of vulnerable young girls were being sexually abused and pimped out by organised gangs of men, most of whom were Pakistani Muslim. Partly thanks to the BNP’s actions, these men’s horrific crimes were denied broader exposure.
Similarly tragic is the case of Charlene Downes, who was targeted by organised pimping gangs in Blackpool in the early 2000s. I began looking at the story of her disappearance in 2004, a year after she went missing. Charlene was abused in exchange for vodka and cigarettes by a number of men who ran takeaways in an area of Blackpool referred to as “Paki Alley” because the residents were primarily brown-skinned foreigners. The added tragedy of her story was that she had already been abused by dozens of white men before ending up in the hands of the Pakistani men. Why didn’t the Right speak up when such girls were being abused by white British men?
The question remains as to what should be done. Is yet another inquiry, on top of the Rochdale and Rotherham ones, any more likely to yield results? After all, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), which published its final report a little over two years ago, was barely reported on, and many of its recommendations have yet to be implemented.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSo you’re saying it’s all the fault of the far right? Using the far right is a lame excuse to cover up. If you don’t want to bring your culture/community into disrepute (feed the trolls) then do not behave in a way that will do such a thing.
One of the Rochdale rapists stated in court that what he did wasn’t that big a deal, clearly the focus needs to be educating the men of Pakistani descent rather than wasting time shifting the focus to the far right! You love telling men how wrong they are, Julie, or is it just the white ones that you take issue with?
These men chose to groom, exploit and rape young white girls, no one made them. Not the far right, not the politicians and certainly not the girls themselves. The consequences, including the ire of the far right, is all theirs.
The use of “far right” here is ironic on two counts – there are negligible so called amongst British Whites, and the ones who are genuinely, viciously far right in beliefs and ideology, in large numbers, are the religious group responsible for the “grooming gangs”.
Bindel doesn’t use the term at all. Are you skipping the articles, or hypersensitive to the point of imagining slights at this point?
That’s what we read in comments time and time again; those who (for reasons they won’t even admit to themselves) attack activist writers such as JB. If only they had one ounce of her courage and will to make a difference.
Aye. And many seem to ‘hate read’ or flat out skip the articles so they can chime in against the big bad Left, acting as if any individual writer insufficiently in lockstep with their beliefs is in favor of or personally to blame for every leftward failing past and present. There’s a few sincere, raging Lefties and outright trolls here too, but the (un)herd now suffers from severe inbreeding, especially around a handful of culture-war topics.
There’s also just enough sensible, civil commenters like you—and like I strive to be, with wavering success—to keep me subscribed.
She uses “Tommy Robinson” instead as short-hand.
Anyone who didn’t get the sub-text is sound asleep.
Anyone who can’t separate a billionaires support of a specific extremist from general blame of the far-right is wedded to a thought tribe, and keen to take offense.
No…just understands how the “brush” is used, such as “thought tribe” for example…or “keen to take offense” (offence…) for pointing it out.
I tend to use American spelling, otherwise my text turns red on this side of the Atlantic. No offense intended there. Of course those who don’t identify what you do with the same hyper-focus are ‘sound asleep’—no offence intended?
Where does she say that?
“There should never be room for the type of cultural relativism that leads to certain groups of men getting away with child rape”. Amen, and to this:
“But neither should we ignore the fact that throughout history, victims of this heinous crime rarely get justice, whoever the perpetrator”.
She is saying that the outrage seems conspicuously absent when the perpetrators look or sound a bit more like you. That’s true in brown-toward-brown instances too. It’s a human thing that people should try to correct for in their hearts and minds, with self-examination, mediation, prayer, and mixing with Others.
Garbage. She hates all men, but like her fellow metropolitans, she’s too scared of muslims to call them out and thinks white people are the same as the gang rapists.
It is quite bizarre that they publish her at UnHerd, where her clear bias—which I think you overstate a bit—clashes with the MRA, anti-feminist, male chauvinist, sometimes outright anti-woman contingents that thrive here. I know those aren’t the only people who find fault with Bindel—and I’m not a fan—but she sure brings em out.
Clickbait
Good point. She elicits a lot of heated responses, like Poppy Sowerby and Terry Eagleton do.
Nearly! I agree she is in no way excusing the mainly Pakistani men. She is NOT saying that no one was outraged, but what she IS saying is that a particular small band of white thugs did not complain about white men abusing girls. That was politics, of course, as is the Labour shrugging off of a national inquiry.
Ok. I can see that should have done more homework before chiming in with such confidence. I just don’t think individual authors/campaigners/activists/commenters should made to answer for every excess and failure of their side, whatever side that is or is perceived to be. Let alone in one article. I find a general tendency to do that in one direction here; in the opposite direction, for example, at the NYT. I can see that much of the anger and outrage I’m detecting is more than that. I regret that I came in so hot and ill-informed.
Bindel lets herself and the 10,000s of victims down with her refusal to highlight the real issues for what they really are. What she does is akin to trying to diminish the fact that the Nazis slaughtered 6 million jews by playing up the fact that there were other ethnic groups they similarly slaughtered.
The Nazi’s killed 11.5 million people in concentration camps. Just over half, 6 million were Jewish. The rest, of whom 3 million were Polish, have been ignored. That is racism. I don’t know much about Julie Bindel, but the rape gang horror in Oldham and elsewhere has been ignored due to the ethnicity of the rapists. That is racism.
Julie Bindel instead of thanking Musk for shining the light, takes a punch at him in a short article in an effort to discredit him. Big picture, Julie, big picture.
A Big Picture that somehow requires solidarity with a many times convicted extremist.
Many times convicted in the UK. Amazingly you can get convicted with little provocation. Don’t post a meme that irks Starmer, ok?
Weak. He’s been convicted for a lot of things, well before his courthouse performances. Look it up. Extreme politics makes strange bedfellows.
The UK establishment hate Tommy Robinson, they will prosecute him for all kinds of BS that they could have ignored
If they went after child rapists with as much enthusiasm, we never would have heard the name Tommy Robinson
No but he still would have spent jail time for major assault and multiple kinds of fraud that occurred before all this notoriety. In addition to Robinson, the overexposed football hooligan, who are your present-day heroes?
Yeah, for example he did time for mortgage fraud, he didn’t tell the bank that his parents gave, or loaned him the deposit for his house, by the letter of the law this is fraud, but if they want to lock up TR for that, then I’d say half the people reading this should also do time
My present day heroes, Kmac, Joyce, and Morgoth
Good choice
An eclectic list. Robinson also served time for assaulting someone who turned out to be an off-duty cop—always something to avoid if possible. Have a good Sunday evening over there.
Particularly on the left, but also on the right, the religion of anti-racism trumps everything.
There is no crime so heinous that it cannot be denied, obfuscated, covered-up or condoned on the twin alters of anti-racism and multi-culturalism, even where, as in this case, the crimes themselves are racially motivated.
To date it has been down played by the MSM but it is becoming increasing clear that these crimes were widely covered-up and even aided and abetted by the police, local authorities and social services no doubt while they burnished their anti-racial credentials.
There should have been outrage. The people concerned should have been hunted down, exposed and punished. The fact that this did not happen speaks to the level of complicity. That is why a public enquiry is necessary.
I strongly recommend the following articles
https://www.jaccusepaper.co.uk/p/constitutional-democracy-cannot-survive
https://www.jaccusepaper.co.uk/p/what-is-to-be-done-about-rape-gangs
Why would you want an inquiry that had been appointed by Jess Phillips or Keir Starmer? Refusing one is a bad look on their parts, but what if they had said yes? Who would have been on it? More to the point, who would not have been? Those who would be loudest in bemoaning that, were you among the objectors to the failure to include people with experiences directly relevant to the inquiry into Grenfell Tower? Look how long Hillsborough took, and even now we are expected to accept that 97 people were unlawfully killed by no one. And who would want another Hutton Report? That is not a rhetorical question. There are people who would, and we are ruled by them.
As a sign that, in the quest for truth and justice, the lead was being taken by the wrong sort, Nigel Farage has effectively broken with Elon Musk and with his own base by once again disowning Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, Lee Anderson has had to order a Yaxley-Lennonist heckler out of a Reform UK members only event, and even from solitary confinement Yaxley-Lennon is reprising on a much larger stage the role in which he very nearly caused a rape gang trial to collapse in 2018, just as in 2004 the endorsement of the BNP had compelled Channel 4 to pull a documentary on such matters lest it provoke race riots. It may be fun to watch these ferrets in a sack, but it does the victims no good.
Child sexual abuse is no more or less a part of Islamic culture than it is of any other. Was Jimmy Savile a Muslim? Was Cyril Smith? Was Greville Janner? Was Jeffrey Epstein, one of whose closest friends is soon to be named British Ambassador to the United States? In London today, there was a demonstration in support of Marcus Fakana, who is in prison in Dubai because the age of consent there is 18. At one year, Fakana’s sentence has already been reduced by 95 per cent. In conquering Syria, Palestine and Egypt, Amr ibn al-As, companion of Muhammad, had clearly acquainted himself with their existing culture, since he is reported to have decried the man who, “sees the mote in the eye of his brother, yet places a beam in his own eye.”
Basically English men now don’t have the b*lls to protect their women.
It’s Bindel. A lefty who seemingly likes to inhabit right of centre publications.
This isn’t supposed to be a right of centre publication. It’s supposed to bring a different point to that of the mainstream media, hence its name.
The comment section has certainly drifted to the right, particularly since UnHerd extended to the USA where the so-called left is equivalent to the centre of the Tory party over here, but hopefully the editorial will continue to cover unherd ground regardless.
“throughout history, victims of this heinous crime rarely get justice, whoever the perpetrator”
“Why didn’t the Right speak up when such girls were being abused by white British men”
“Partly thanks to the BNP’s actions, these men’s horrific crimes were denied broader exposure”
You think you are being clever, but we know what you are doing.
The familiar tactics, shifting blame to the “Far right” and White men (who, I would observe as a non White, are paying the price for decades of being extraordinary nice to women as well as minorities, both groups neither respect nor deserve it).
Simultaneously, blaming “men” or pretending this always happens..All in order to cover up for genuinely awful “preferred” minorities with horrible mindsets and attitudes, while the “Left” are very happy to malign and attack non preferred, non victim minorities (and I should add, am very glad and even relieved I don’t belong to the former group).
I was an avid Guardian reader for a decade or so, before it’s coverage of these grooming gangs (or for instance, the taharrush attacks in Cologne) made me realise how evil and two faced the whole leftist / feminist complex are.
Tommy Robinson spent more than a decade fighting against these gangs, and paid a heavy price for it. While you “feminist” jokers were more obsessed with not being seen as racist, as the fiasco of the 2004 documentary that you yourself mention, shows all too well. More concerned about the BNP than the plight of those girls, weren’t you?
Disgusting.
Spot on friend. What a repulsive article.
This odious feminist will never be able to find an angle where its not possible to blame white men for the ills of the world.
Even the Mirpuri rape gangs.
Again, you’re saddling Bindel with words she did not say and assigning to her views she has not expressed, by lumping her in with every one you can label a “feminist joker”. Don’t you hate it when your opponents do that sort of thing?
At least make some effort to engage with her individual claims.
That’s why I literally started with three of her own lines, to illustrate what she and her type have been doing for decades.
So let’s try Bindel for dummies, for your benefit.
“throughout history, victims of this heinous crime rarely get justice, whoever the perpetrator”
1. Women are “denied” justice as a matter of course (this of course is standard feminist stuff)
2. It wasn’t really anything out of the ordinary that numerous “Asian” gangs got away with massive crimes for decades. Always happened, nothing specific about this, move along….
“Why didn’t the Right speak up when such girls were being abused by white British men”
3. It’s the “Right” being horrible racists, they only cared about the grooming gangs because they were “Asians”, they never complained about the (non-existent, imaginary) White British grooming gangs, did they?
4. And also going back to 2 above, again nothing to see, horrible White British men do the same thing as these gangs, even though they actually don’t.
““Partly thanks to the BNP’s actions, these men’s horrific crimes were denied broader exposure”
5. Again, it’s all their fault. Not us trying to suppress it for decades by labelling everyone racist, or caring more for the perpetrators than the victims.
6. It was a bunch of men who did it. Nothing special or unique about them, no. But when we talk about White British male criminals, their ethnicity is all important.
You seem full of rage, to the point where you might have trouble breathing well or thinking straight. Bindel is angry too, to a clear and unfortunate degree, also not over nothing at all, given what she has seen across decades of work and campaigning. Her bias is evident, but how far off is she when she says that victims of rape rarely get justice, especially “throughout history” and around the globe?
Bindel does throw in a rhetorical jab at the Right. What else would you expect? But her overall case is a general one: painted with too broad a brush, but not unfounded. Do you deny that some on whatever label you’ll accept for the extreme right amplify the violence of foreigners, with little or no mention of homegrown atrocities? When it comes to this sort of tunnel-vision, everyone ought to stop it. Including the far Left and its apologists, no doubt. That’s Bindel’s main point here: Call out sexual violence against women, without fear or favor.
Samir Iker’s response is an objective response to yours, complete with quotes.
I don’t see that any “rage” is evident, let alone breathless rage, but certainly sarcasm.
The “rhetorical jab at the Right” is irrelevant to the point of the article so is clearly thrown in for another purpose. No prizes for understanding what that is.
Also I am unaware of any “homegrown atrocity” which is the equal of the subject of the article, or any cover up so far, or high, reaching.
It seems to me, Julie Bindel feels like the justifiable outrage of the treatment of the victims of the Pakistani r*p* gangs somehow rains on her parade. That it detracts from the seriousness of her experience and crusade. I have always thought Julie Bindel’s championship of the female victims of abuse screams extended self pity. I received serious, serious, serious kickback when I suggested previously that she was making money out of another woman’s abuse by writing about it and then comparing the woman’s experience to her own. There is no real doubt, Julie Bindel is a misandrist (white male) and that is what drives her. For some reason, probably because she doesn’t want to and it has proved lucrative, she doesn’t want to let go of the hatred of white men probably triggered by the abuse she experienced. That hatred is her driving force.
Ok, it’s hard to read tone and mood in typed characters, and I could have left that aside. But I’m referencing and quoting Bindel’s actual words too, just not in a way that’s makes a point you want or perhaps are able to hear. I could have thanked Samir for making ‘some effort to engage with her actual claims’, if only for the benefit of a dummy like I supposedly am.
The Rotterdam abuses are singularly appalling, I agree. But why should Bindel be required to focus her attention solely in the way that pleases her political opponents? Or address only those who shine a pinpoint laser of (justified) outrage on a problem that is widespread and longstanding in its broader context. And this is her life’s work, biases and all. I think just about all of her articles are angry rants (tone alert again?) that show political and anti-male bias. But she is sincere, knowledgeable, and credible in her witness, imperfect as it is. That’s not nothing.
Maybe the problem is UnHerd, which is becoming a typical leftist outlet.
No matter how many times I read that paragraph, “thanks to the BNP’s actions, these men’s horrific crimes were denied broader exposure” feels like quite a stretch. Did Channel 4 really pull a broadcast because the “Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police claimed it might trigger race riots, and that it would therefore be dangerous to screen”? Why did they even run it by him? Many of today’s headline news items trigger all kinds of reactions, but they still fill our TV screens.
As a Leeds resident I would have liked like to see this documentary and judge for myself its balance and objectivity, and its depth. I would also like to know what legal instrument was used to suppress its broadcast. Twenty years on we have entered a previously hard to imagine era where debate or comment around any protected characteristic ( interesting in itself) is fraught with risks starting with NCHI reporting. Far from creating healthy exchange this allows escape from scrutiny far too easily. I admire JBs commentary and I hope one day we will see what Channel Four found.
The more you think about it, the more absurd it seems.
Firstly, when it’s about the sexual abuse of young girls, even if it’s a handful of cases ( in this case it was unbelievably widespread and massive), nothing, absolutely NOTHING, should come in the way of exposing and punishing the culprits. If it means the odd p*ki slur directed at brownies like me, so be it.
The more you dig into it, worse it gets.
If they were so concerned about “race”, why did these women, and other leftists, make it about race? Indians, Sri Lankans and many other “Asian” communities have zero involvement, and it’s all about one particular religious ideology, which is the common thread behind every one of these gangs. Is criticism of Hinduism or Christianity going to be “racist” as well?
And finally, what race riots? When have White British started riots against others, and ironically covering up these gangs increased the risk of that happening, if anything.
There were riots targeting Indians in Leicester and numerous displays of hostility against Jews in recent years. Guess who’s responsible? Not Whites, but ironically, the very same religious group that is supposedly being protected from “race riots”.
It sounds like the establishment thought it was too hot a potato, the police didn’t want to deal with the fallout and the BNP conveniently provided them with a cover to stop the doc being aired.
That paragraph snagged on me aswell, it just doesn’t wash.
Now there’s 20 years of bitterness all stored up and lancing the boil is going to be much worse.
The whole thing is just rotten.
When Channel 4 broadcast the Despatches documentary, Undercover Mosques in 2009 it was the programme makers that were investigated by the police when it exposed to the public some very shocking writings and teachings being disseminated in various mosques up and down the country. Bizarrely the police accused them of television fakery. I remember being incredibly shocked by the reaction of the police and the fact that nothing was said about what the programme had uncovered. It was depressingly clear that the powers that be were intent on a two tier approach even then. The police were later forced to issue an apology but by then it was too late.
Are left wing commentators such as Julie Bindel being deliberately obtuse in failing to acknowledge that it is the actions (or rather, inactions) of the left that are pushing people to the right? And the weakness of the Tories then pushes people further right.
What ordinary people want is for someone in power to effect meaningful improvement across a range of issues, including this issue of predominantly Muslim rape gangs. When you live through the failure of Labour and Tories, what else is there to do but pin your hopes on a further right Party? Many who are making this shift were previously long term Labour supporters.
TL;DR left, centre and right wing failures create the far right. Stop blaming the people.
This is a multifaceted scandal.
The Pakistani rape-gangs to start with. Anyone from abroad will read that phrase, open-mouthed, not in England, surely?
The failure to intervene out of fear of being labelled Racist. The soul- destroying apathy of all tbose who saw and did nothing.
The fact this took place in Labour controlled cities. Starmer, now Labour PM, then in charge of the CPS.
The sickening realisation this is England today. The shame of the mainstream media who hid the facts from the public. The shame that it takes foreign pressure, from Musk, to bring it to all to light.
The shame of Labour supporting columnists, who proliferate in Unherd, continuing to try to divert attention away from Starmer and the Labour councils.
For them it is just a political problem. A story to spin.
What a country….
Ah, so it’s all due to lack of investment, our old friend ‘underfoonding’, eh?
Nope, the suffering inflicted on these girls is a consequence of corruption and institutional class hatred in the Labour Party establishment.
Just finished watching the Spectator’s YT interview on the subject with Douglas Murray. He mentioned the Channel 4 doc being pulled and suggested that local Leftists didn’t want to give the BNP a leg up prior to elections.
DM also addressed Musk and his X campaign re: Robinson and said it is indicative of standard ‘blame the messenger’ deflection tactics on this issue.
The reality is that a hard investigation would expose the institutional failure of multiculturalism.
Surprise surprise. No mention even of Starmer. No call for Phillips to resign. No mention of her job title Under-Secretary of State for Safeguarding of Women and Girls.
Why does Unherd defend Labour in every article? Is Unherd just Starmer’s political puppet?
So…”I was doing something but the far Right stopped me”…there, fixed…and much shorter.
If you listen to Maggie Oliver she tells the story investigations were stopped and evidence databases deleted following the 7/7 (2005) tube and bus bombings. Ie under Phoney Blair who opened the flood gates and under Labour Home Secretary Charles Clarke,
Labour’s radically progressive approach to immigration and multiculturalism has its dirty finger prints all over this, but it is fair to say the Tories, with a few notable exceptions, were pretty pathetic on the issue
There is a simple explanation for “Jess Phillips declining to commission a Home Office-led inquiry into historic child exploitation”. If she is seen to favour such an inquiry, Ms Phillips is worried that she might cease to receive such speedy treatment from the two-tier NHS:
https://unherd.com/newsroom/jess-phillipss-nhs-gaza-claim-should-be-investigated/
Anyone thought of blaming the cowardice of the press and broadcasters, especially the BBC for suppressing this story and continuing to downplay it?
National exposure of two-faced lawyers’ duplicity can never be sufficient. Use of the law to overset the interests and results of democracy is now rife and likely to become catastrophic under two-tier Keir. Why else is Labour creating a new quango about once a month?
It was the BNP who first raised the issue, and the establishment closed ranks and prosecuted its leader.
I think Julie is right …. We don’t need another inquiry that kicks the issues down the road, we need the Jay report findings to be loudly and publically implemented and for Jess Phillips to sponsor and push all this in the full glare of punishing perpetrators of whatever hue. I suspect she is running scared of all the Muslims in her community that nearly dislodged her, and Starmer is very wary of his own culpability being more exposed when he was Dir of CPS.
Sue Rowbotham, who made hundreds of referrals detailing the abuse and sexual grooming while working for the NHS in Rochdale between 2005 and 2011 dismissed Musk’s calls for another public inquiry, but said the UK still needed to get to the bottom of the motivations of paedophile rings, which she said were often dominated by Asian men.
“We need to discover the motivations, not just sexual, behind this abuse, if we are going to prevent it from happening again and again,” she said.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/03/musk-accused-of-politicising-of-young-girls-in-uk-to-attack-starmer?utm_term=6778dff5db1b462c2cf22c923a071e8c&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUK&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=GTUK_email
Interestingly this is a line of inquiry missing from Julie’s article.
The underlying motivation is key which unsurprisingly was absent from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. Clearly the motivation is derived from the Old Testament and the ideas of misogyny, patriarchy and racial superiority which have been infused within Islamic teachings. This is why Pakistani men find it acceptable to groom, rape and torture young white women and why young Pakistani men sexually harass young white women on the street.
The failure to identify the motivations, which are based on illiberal religious values, is why Julie is so keen to deflect attention on to the “far right” and why State authorities are so keen to deflect attention to the possibility of “far right” riots as if grooming, raping and torturing vulnerable white girls on an industrial scale isn’t a legitimate reason to riot, especially when State authorities and the Progressive Left are so willing to turn a blind eye to motivations.
The role of the ‘Establishment’, the media and the law has been to ensure that this issue was never raised, and if it was raised, those responsible should be clamped down on. instantly and very hard. This, together with the series of lies ( it’s not happening,well if it is it’s good for us, if not so good, we deserve it, it’s too late to do anything about it, so we should boast about our National tolerance and love of diversity ) has been extraordinarily effective. Btw, why were those tried for one of the gang rape gangs kept anonymous? The breach of that anonymity was what first sent Robinson to prison.
Why didn’t the Right speak up when such girls were being abused by white British men?
.
Why do you think so? We’ve heard of white gangs of rapists?
Dear Julie, you have a huge blind spot in your brain. I’m not sure any ophthalmologist can fix it.
The Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse was framed using the Equality Act which is why the most heinous examples of Pakistani led rape gangs were omitted and why the overall focus became disproportionately on white communities.
It is also because of the Equality Act, the underlying motivations for the industrial scale rape and torture of vulnerable white girls was omitted in case the underlying motivations of misogyny, patriarchy and racial superiority infused within Islamic Hadiths infringed upon the epitaph of “protected characteristics”.
We now live in a multicultural society in which the Islamic religious mores of misogyny, patriarchy and racial superiority are “protected characteristics” with opposition against these illiberal religious mores considered Islamophobic by the same people who are either adjacent, complicit or have been directly involved in the mass rape, mass torture and murder of vulnerable white girls.
Crimes against humanity are specific crimes that are part of a large-scale attack on civilians. They include:
Murder
Torture
Sexual violence, including rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, and forced pregnancy
Enslavement
Persecution
Enforced disappearance
Amongst others.
The Progressive Left and their complicit silence on the religious motivations behind gang rape and torture are an insult to humanity.
BNP didn’t have anything stopped. Whilst not the best flavour with the rape gangs they were driven off the streets by the Police in the name of racial Harmony. Harassed and then removed with Police banning orders
Bindel is part of the problem not the solution. Everything she writes always leans left and has her hate men approach
Even this article organized pimping gangs is a typical deflection.
Frankly the blame for the cover up lies squarely with the apologists for such horrific behaviour and those who showed such utter contempt for vulnerable young girls, despite being in positions of power and having a duty of care for them. To raise the spectre of the “far right” is misguided and misleading.
For far too long those understandably outraged by what they had seen going on in their own communities have been silenced and suppressed by the use of the pejorative term “far right” and many are rightly tired of it now. To continue with this nonsense is to perpetuate the obfuscation and betrayal that allowed the the abuse of minors by these gangs to carry on for a further two decades when in any decent society it would have been unequivocally stopped in 2004, the perpetrators made an example of and suitably punished.
Since mass uncontrolled immigration was green lit by Blair, to rub the noses of the conservatives in “diversity”, we have seen the great and good line up to think the very worst of any poor working class blighter who resented seeing their towns and communities swiftly and radically changed.
Those (often snobs of the worst order) who love to point the finger of blame at the plain and sometimes rough speaking, have always thought the worst of the working classes and have never held back in their contemptuous condemnation – it is they that have a lot to answer for.
I’d like to see UnHerd publish an article on this subject by Tommy Robinson.
That would be truly unheard.
More Unherd nonsense.
Read this. (It is shocking, so you know).
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/04/grooming-gangs-scandal-cover-up-oldham-telford-rotherham/
Very sad this is behind a paywall. They should make an exception for this one.
Here it is:
https://archive.is/EAbKj
That’s a hard read. Some of it goes beyond what we would normally term abuse.
A crime is a crime is a crime
If context, ie, skin colour, is more important than protecting victims from criminals, you are every bit as twisted as the people you claim to abhor.
You lost your moral compass, and this article, odious as it is, is funny only in its demonstration of your total lack of self awareness.
You were “well aware” in 2004?
Well done you
Protecting us plebeians from the BNP was far more important than protecting thousands of children.
If JB and other feminists have been up close and personal with this issue for such a long time, how come they didn’t blow the whistle?
How disappointing.
Julie Bindel joins the ranks of prevaricators and apologists.
Essentially mitigating the vicious and sustained racist rape campaign against British children perpetrated by majority Muslim men – because ‘Far Right’ people (AKA citizens who were dismayed at the lack of action from the various authorities) complained about children being raped.
When will people with Left wing DNA open their eyes and call this out for what it is.
The worst scandal, the worst betrayal, the worst atrocity in UK domestic history since the war.
“Partly thanks to the BNP’s actions, these men’s horrific crimes were denied broader exposure.”
Blaming the BNP for seeing that the truth about the rape gangs would so annoy ordinary Brits that they might consider riots or voting BNP is ridiculous. Why was the Chief Constable asked, listened to or even felt his concern should lead to censorship? The truth is the truth and that documentary could have saved 000s of girls and Britain’s soul and culture.
I’m not sure it’s just cultural relativism. It seems rather to be judging the female members of an out group differently to the female members of an in group. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe white and Sikh girls were preyed on but not Moslem girls, as if different rules applied.
The lack of concern by the authorities probably reinforced those attitudes.
There is an important point that the author seeks to muddy here. Yes, of course there are white abusers. But if there had been abuse on this scale by white men feminists would have been all over it, claiming it was rooted in patriarchy, misogyny, toxic masculinity etc and doing their best to tar all men with the same brush. There would have been no cover up, no fear of rioting white men.
No one would have been afraid of speaking out because they might be accused of anti male sexism. No one would have feared losing their job and no one would have feared a knock on the door from the all powerful patriarchy. Indeed, those who spoke up would be cultural heroes, launching a thousand hashtags and everyone would have jumped on the bandwagon.
Also disappointing from Unherd.
The survivors and victims deserve better
Decent people need to become a lot bolder and blunter about using phrases like “Pakistani paedophile rape gangs”.
Yes pimping gangs in Blackpool were atrocious. But this is nation-wide, with big networks.
Author’s article will be detested by those on the Right who’ve sought to weaponise the issue because it adds uncomfortable facts and seeks focus now on Alexis Jay’s recommendations. They aren’t interested in solving problems, same in so many other areas. It’s about cynical weaponising wherever and whenever possible.
One of the ironies of course is many of these Right wing weaponisers have a dreadful attitude towards women too. Not of the rape-gang nature but the same types who support the likes of Tate and probably delight in Trump’s ability to use his power to abuse some women.
Your first para is of course right – but it’s right of both left and right. It’s pretty much how politics is now done. And feminists like the author do exactly the same.
I honestly think it was the left who really wound this up first, feminists especially, with the right being rather late to the game. In any case it’s not worth arguing about. The point now is to point out when it is being done, and refute it with facts and arguments – and not give those you broadly agree with a free ride.
Always appreciate your comments.
From:
Analysis: A new Home Office report admits grooming gangs are not a ‘Muslim problem’
20 December 2020
The study finds no credible evidence for a far-right stereotype that has spread widely in the media, writes Dr Ella Cockbain (Univesity College London, Security & Crime Science)in an article co-authored with Dr Waqas Tufail for The Guardian.
“It is time to call off the witch-hunt. We need finally to accept what credible research has been telling us for years: that child sexual abuse is not a “Muslim problem” but is endemic to virtually all communities. Look at the numbers: the sheer scale makes the ubiquity of abuse inevitable. An estimated one in 13 adults in England has been sexually abused as children. In 2019/20, police across the UK recorded more than 73,518 sexual offences against children, and the Home Office review itself reminds us that only around one in 10 victims actually disclose child sexual abuse to an official at the time.
“The fact that so few children come forward should concern us all. We know too many children have tried to tell and not been taken seriously. We know obvious warning signs have been missed. We know the court process is traumatising. We know children across this country have been and are being raped and sexually assaulted in many different contexts, often by family members and other trusted figures.
“The common denominator is not immigration, race, culture or Islam. Child sexual abuse is the product of a complex interplay of patriarchy, power, exploitation, opportunity and disregard for children”.
The full article is here:
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/dec/analysis-new-home-office-report-admits-grooming-gangs-are-not-muslim-problem