Grooming Gangs: The Shameful Reality that Awaits after Covid-19

Summer edition of the Salisbury Review is now on sale

When Sajid Javid commissioned a study on grooming gangs in 2018, many of us reclined back on our chairs and rejoiced – “finally!”. It felt like a stuffy prep school headmaster came in and shouted “f*ck it” during assembly. People not merely wanted but needed to understand the motivation behind these barbaric acts. But last week, Boris Johnson’s government deprived us of that knowledge.

The Home Office responded to a petition calling for the release of the review: “Tackling child sexual abuse is this Government’s priority. Any insights gained from our internal work will inform our future action to end this devastating abuse, including forthcoming Strategy”. The keyword here is “internal”. In short, they have chosen not to release it.

Jonathan Wong created the petition, which attracted over 120,000 signatures. Why it did not attract millions remains a mystery, given the severity and nature of the issue – perhaps online circulation withered. An identical change.org petition garnered 15,000 extra signatures.

The Independent newspaper reported almost 19,000 child sexual exploitation victims last year. That was up from 3,300 five years before. Lancashire, Birmingham, Surrey and Bradford recorded the highest concentration of cases. Prevalence is not abating. 

If this scandal proved anything, it was that self-censorship because of racial sensitivity is a pervading disease that handicaps authorities from doing their job. Operation Linden exposed as much – hate speech purveyors were shown the extremity of their work. And how did our government react? They self-censored. Johnson’s election signalled a turning point in British politics. A new age where government is forthright, transparent, and bombastic – slightly Trumpian even, or so that’s what I thought.

Governmental namby-pamby prose caked the response to Wong’s petition. “We continue to support…”, “we continue to look for ways…”, “we will continue to challenge…” and on and on it went. The only concrete promises came in the way of a £4 million increase for specialist local services dealing with victims of sexual violence and a doubling in funding for related charities.

Refusing to release the review came at a convenient time. Only The Independent, Breitbart and The Spectator covered the news. Everybody else is too busy printing headlines about PPE. Or they dare not touch it. 

No one can stamp out sexual assault for good. There will always be a sick minority who commit sexual abuse. But what we require is transparent investigation to better prevent these crimes. Where the police fail, the community succeeds.

With Rochdale, the motive related to race. Asian grooming gangs targeted young white girls. A survivor who goes by the pseudonym Ella Hill admitted there was a religious and a racial element to her targeting. This is not to villanise Asians and their religions. Most sexual abusers in the UK are white. But to understand the phenomenon, we must be free to speak, analyse and debate. And how can we do that if our government disables us from doing so?

Until the government has the temerity to release the review, they will only lend credence to genuine racists motivated by what they see as a coverup. And what message does it send to the perpetrators? Not to mention, what message does it send to the victims who so bravely spoke out?

One can only imagine the review is so damning that the Home Office can’t release it for fear of public outrage. If the government can’t trust us on this, what do they expect in return?

Subscribe to the quarterly print magazine

Subscribe to the quarterly digital magazine

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

43 Comments on Grooming Gangs: The Shameful Reality that Awaits after Covid-19

  1. >Most sexual abusers in the UK are white.
    But surely not per capita. Do white perps pass their 12-year-old victims around hundreds of mates across the country after plying them with cocaine and vodka and sharing them with scores of mates in the upper floors of takeways?

    • Correct. Another important difference is that most perps know they are doing wrong. Those who defer to a different, depraved sharia morality feel entitled. Colin Broughton has supplied the startling evidence in posts below.

  2. I note that the devil-worship known as “Islam” isn’t mentioned in this article. Why?

    The grooming gangs aren’t characterised by being white versus black, or rich v poor, or Liverpool v Everton. Instead they’re consistently ISLAMIC. In the comparative privacy of a Salisbury Review article, why not admit the fact?

  3. I do find it amazing that people still believe in the possibility of any of the established parties bringing change of any sort in this area, or any of the others inflicted on the population without their consent or prior knowledge.
    We are too far off the track now and each newly elected set just seem to turn the screw that bit tighter.

    Regarding the report, I wouldn’t have expected any down to earth and honest tome being laid bare for all to read. The outward appearance of this multi-everything cauldron we live in being a success, must take precedent in all things.

    Personally, I’m not sure what difference it makes to the general public, as everyone knows who the main culprits are. The usual suspects can witter and twitter all they like to try and deflect the blame elsewhere as they do, but deep down even they can’t really deny it.
    So I just look upon this refusal to publish as a Government to terrified of unleashing the displeasure of certain groups for one thing, but mainly as a pathetic attempt to hope the public will forget and it will all go away.
    A final report in black and white is a bit too much like admitting there is a problem, and it’s not going to go away, like many others.

  4. The establishment claims to be fighting “extreme” Muslims. It certainly is – fighting against Muslims who want democracy, peace, and expose sexual exploitation in Islamic society.

    Such ideas are quite extreme in Islamic society. Unfortunately, *these* guys really *are* a “tiny minority of extremists”.

  5. Colin – interesting you should mention slaves. Just seen a film (free on Amazon Prime) called Capernaum. It’s set in Lebanon and by a Lebanese and in it an 11 year old is married to a man of 40 and part of the deal seems to be she is being sold to pay rent.

    I checked a Wiki page on child marriage to see if it were really possible in modern Lebanon and found that there are formal ages of consent in many Islamic countries that are not alarming. The practice is different – there being 100s of infants married off in Iran among other places every year. A Saudi student told me some years ago that although sauds are not to marry till 18, 12 is not unknown.

  6. One reason why more did not sign the petition might very well be fear. One has to enter one’s personal details. Who knows what might be made of this by hostile parties? So people might think. And they would be right to.

    The Labour MP for Bradford West, Naz Shah ‘liked’ and shared a tweet which said, ‘Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths . For the good of diversity.’’ She subsequently deleted this tweet, but her real attitude has been revealed.

    The authorities clearly think likewise about this report. Cover up the truth for the sake of diversity. As it happens, I should think that many or most people will have drawn their own conclusions already about the motivations behind these gangs.

    Years ago, the then BNP leader Nick Griffin was prosecuted under hate legislation when he was filmed by the BBC briefing a meeting of activists about Asian grooming gangs. This was before most people had heard of them.

    The BBC wasn’t interested in the allegations, true or not, only in nailing Griffin and the BNP. Griffin was cleared but I have no doubt that the message that raising the issue was a dangerous thing to do meant that perhaps thousands of young white girls continued to be abused.

    The official line has always been to cover up; to ignore, to sacrifice white girls and the culture of the host population to the ideology of multiculturalism and multiracialism.

    There is an official campaign, as articulated by the Met Police Chief, the intensely politically correct Cressida Dick, to spread the ‘narrative;’ that ‘most abusers are white’ so there is nothing particular about these gangs,

    This is sheer obfuscation. Of course most abusers are white, because most of the population still is. It’s proportions of abusers in particular areas which tell the tale. And that tale reveals the desperate failure of multiculturalism and liberal social attitudes in general.

    These grooming gangs are motivated racially, that’s obvious, but also religiously. Let’s not be mealy-mouthed about Islam. The teachings of the Qur’an and the words and actions of Mohammad clearly say that white girls may be preyed on because of who they are. They are doubly inferior to Muslim men:

    1. Non-Muslims are the worst of creatures.
    2. Females are very inferior and exist for the use of men.
    3. Muslims may take and use any non-Muslim woman if they can.

    • I should also have said that Mohammad, the ‘perfect man’ and example of behaviour forMuslims married a girl of six, had sexual relations short of penetration until she was 9 when he did have penetrative sex with her.

      So sex with ‘under age’ girls is allowed in Islam. Actually, having ‘sexual pleasure’ with new-born babies is allowed in Shia Islam and is not forbidden in the Sunni version.

      • Is that last point in the Bukhari hadiths? I don’t recall it in the koran but I gave up in weary disgust before I was halfway through.

    • Let’s not be mealy-mouthed. Exactly, but that is the way of things now and I fail to see how anything can be truly tackled while we have this politically correct stranglehold on speech. Minority groups seem to be all powerful. Watch the Government of the day, regardless of its rosette colour, and all its institutions tremble at the threat of being branded racist by the myriad of groups set up to protect their own interests.

    • Inshallah, as God wills it. In the view that there is no will but God’s, if any enterprise is carried through to success it must have been by God’s will. The success proves it. This enterprise may be a train robbery or a rape.

  7. Why does anyone care ‘why’? If these scum had a good enough reason would it change things. The question to be asked is why do we allow these scum into the country? Is there a dire need for taxi drivers?

    • …..the question is Helen why is the British government intent on covering up the truth on who is responsible for these crimes and why is it prepared to make law up 12 months after fact so as to lock up the main man who has spent 10 years of his life highlighting who are doing these things and why.

      Release the report Bojo you chicken.

    • Your question needs no answer, but given the reality there is a reason why what the report discovered should be made known. There are large numbers of ex-Muslims and reform-minded Muslims in the UK who are ignored by HMG and such toxic media corporations as the BBC. Ahmadis, for example, are open-minded and live peacefully with other faiths and none. Their inputs to the endemic sex abuse gangs would be useful. When one of their number, a Glasgow shopkeeper, was murdered by a Bradford sunni, none of the Islamic establishment, the MCB, attended the service of reconciliation, and his family have been driven from their homes by extremists without any action (as far as I know) by the ‘moderate’ imams we are told exist, nor the police of course.

      We can’t go on like this. Sooner or later we are going to have vigilante action and/or (no-go areas as are said to exist already in Malmo) with sharia patrols immune to prosecution.

      • The problem there is that Ahmadis aren’t regarded as Muslims by other Muslims, Sunni or Shia. These aren’t ‘extremists’. They are mainline Muslims.

        As for ‘reform-minded Muslims’, one cannot ‘reform’ Islam without destroying the religion. It would inevitably undermine belief in the Qur’an as the actual word of Allah and so Mohammad. It would become something else entirely. Given the remoteness of Allah, likely a form of Deism.

        Any attempt at such reform would be bitterly resisted. Mahmoud Muhammad Taha, a Sudanese thinker who tried to switch Islam away from the belligerence of the Medinan verses to the more pacific Meccan ones, was executed for his pains by the Sudanese government,

        • Yes, but I don’t see that as a problem Colin. Nothing will change unless everything is openly challenged and the evidence exposed to examination, even though the MCB and the like will walk out and cry islamophobia. (We could start with that – the numbers show that Muslims are safest from each other in Britain, America and Israel and similar countries, not in Islamic republics where islamophobia really has a basis.)

          It’s my guess, on the basis of people I’ve worked with and overseas Arab students I’ve met is that there’s a lot more discontent in the UK with their ‘representatives’ (and the ummah come to that) than HMG realise. There’s Quilliam and even a council of ex-Muslims in the UK – with a secret location of course.

  8. Richard Arnold – the promotion by Mr ‘root out racism’ Starmer was a surprise. However, there is the possibility that she, like Corbyn, does not read or understand everything she smiles upon. I don’t think we have ever in my lifetime had such a bunch of low intelligence semi-illiterate MPs in opposition. One thinks back to scholarly Michael Foot with growing warmth!

  9. Excellent … I sent some days ago this letter to every member of the House of Commons Petitions Committee, with a cc to the Home Office. I’m not holding my breath for replies:

    Dear Petitions Committee member,

    Thank you very much for forwarding the Home Office’s response to the petition calling for the publication of its Grooming Gang Review.

    The response, most of which appears to have been written by a platitude machine, makes no attempt to justify the Home Office’s judgement that publication of the review would not be in the public interest, other than to assert that ‘Extremists may also seek to exploit legitimate concerns to sow further division’. That might well be the case, but, surely, ‘extremists’ of all and any toxic variety will always take opportunities to exploit legitimate concerns. If this test were to be applied in all areas of public policy – especially those with an impact on crime and safety – no progress could be made and no public body or state agency could be held accountable. In this respect, a former Crown prosecutor – Mr Nazir Afzal – who instigated charges against a grooming gang has warned that far-Right groups were using the “vacuum” of reliable information to spread their beliefs and gain support. A practicing Muslim, Mr Afzal has called for research on potential links between ethnicity and child- abuse since 2012. “The sooner we have evidence, the sooner we can truly confront it. The Home Office should show some courage and publish.”

    It’s clear that for reasons yet to be explained the Home Office has retracted the promise made by the previous Home Secretary in July 2018 that there would be ‘no no-go areas of inquiry’, to which he added this assurance: ‘I will not let cultural or political sensitivities get in the way of understanding the problem and doing something about it.’

    In a letter to The Independent newspaper, the Home Office has said it had applied a “public interest test” to the review and had judged it exempt from the Freedom of Information Act because it concerned the development of government policy. ‘One of the main purposes of the exemption is to protect the “safe space” necessary for ministers and officials to consider policy options in private without risk of premature disclosure … Disclosure would risk pre-empting decisions still to be made by ministers.’

    May we take it, therefore, that once government policy in this area has been developed, the grounds given for the exemption falls away, and that the review will be published?

    Regards,
    David Kernek

    • I love the “platitude machine” phrase, but I was upset to read “former Crown prosecutor – Mr Nazir Afzal – who instigated charges against a grooming gang has warned that far-Right groups were using the “vacuum” of reliable information to spread their beliefs and gain support.”
      I know that you were quoting, and those aren’t your words, but it upsets me. Far-Right is a myth. It’s the imaginary enemy of Socialists. When their socialism goes wrong, which it always does, they blame it on the Far-Right. Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini were all socialists. If you see a gang of thugs walking down the street with knives you’ll know they are socialists. That’s what socialism does – intimidate and close down discussion. When they get power then it turns really ugly.
      There is no Far-Right, except as another mask that socialism wears.

      • Well put. It’s particularly idiotic when ‘far right’ is used as a synonym for repressive authoritarian freedom-crushing regimes and identified as islamophobic – as if there could be anything more repressive than Islam.

        It’s a shame we have the left/right dichotomy. We should go back to Aristotle who studied over1000 city states and came up with monarchy, aristocracy, oligarchy, tyranny and democracy. The last he thought the least worst perversion of ideal rule – by wise and just people like himself! These days we have varieties of tyranny, often masquerading as democracy, and varieties of democracy. I think it’s obvious what the Left aspires to.

  10. To use loose language is to mimic a similar problem the police had/have. Fair criticism, I should have been more specific. It was in fact a Pakistani grooming gang concerning Ella Hill who were Muslims. No Hindus, Sikhs or Asian Christians were involved.

  11. The authorities are cowards. The law is meant to be applied. It is not. So those who do not apply, but whose task is to apply it, have to be outed, condemned and punished. The same goes for the perpetrators. If not, then raw justice will apply.

  12. Jake, you are obviously an intelligent fella. You write well.

    I suspect you know full well that 84 % of child rape grooming convictions are committed by Pakistani Muslim men. I suspect you know full well that describing these perpetrators as Asians defames Sikh, Hindu and Christian Asians.

    So why belittle an other wise good article with ambiguous untruthful words.

  13. ” Asian grooming gangs targeted young white girls. ” More namby-pamby talk. They were Muslim rape gangs. Sikhs don’t do it.
    ” Most sexual abusers in the UK are white.” Please state your evidence for this.

  14. First of all, the gangs are not Asian, they are almost exclusively Pakistani ancestry Muslims. Sikhs and Hindus are understandably annoyed to be lumped together with these perverts.

    The founder of Islam raped a girl of nine (Aisha who he ‘married’ age six as documented in their scripture) and quite likely many others of the same age. He was in his 50s. There are plenty of quotes in the koran and hadith traditions justifying such behaviour. Islamic state, led by scholarly thugs, had the marriage age set at nine in honour of their prophet. Although Islamic countries have formal ages of consent that do not alarm us, the reality is different. Older men marry girls of primary school age in Iran and many of the other 50 plus states. The film Capernaum (set in Lebanon and directed by a Lebanese) has as man of 40 taking a girl of 11 as a wife. Not only that, as payment for rent owed.

    The conclusion to draw from the cover-up of the report is that child-rape is worse in Pakistani-heritage groups than imagined, possible endemic. In Yorkshire rumours abound: that one of the accused told the court that God made white girls for him to fuck and use as he wished; that another quoted a shura from the koran justifying the sexual slavery of infidel women. As the author says, failing to make the facts known is bound to provoke such untestable allegations. Worse, it prevents leading Muslims from admitting this crime and forcefully doing something about it. That ‘something’ will include admitting that Islamic teaching and texts need revising and that it is a blasphemous heresy to say that God would choose a man like Mohammed as his messenger.

      • Your question about most being white – that will be absolute numbers. The prisons are said to be disproportionately stocked by ethnic minorities and, as evidence for that, the Home Office says it doesn’t keep a record of prisoner ethnicity! There’s no doubt that Muslim gangs are a phenomenon in their own right.

        I saw on Breibart a report about a Huddersfield case this week, but not a word anywhere else. IPSO evidently has ordered reports that might disrupt community cohesion to be cut. A Bradford Muslim MP has also, according to Guido, supported the view that the girls themselves should ‘shut their mouths’ in the interests of community relations. A singularly ill-chosen phrase given that one of the other rumours I’ve heard is that oral sex, forbidden according to an online Muslim Scholar who advises on these matters, is okay with infidels. No way of checking whether such advice is given of course without swamping oneself with vile stuff and possibly getting a visit from plod.

        • “A Bradford Muslim MP has also… supported the view that the girls themselves should ‘shut their mouths’ in the interests of community relations.”

          Not true.

          I don’t really get your comment about oral sex. Ill-chosen or otherwise it may be in the context of the other quote, why wouldn’t it be “okay” with anybody? And why would plod be interested in you if you did search for it in a legitimate context?

          • Andrew, this is the part where you say, ‘Sorry, those lists that Guido has are shocking and don’t seem to have been rebutted. Can the accusations possibly be true?’

            And I say, ‘Never mind that. She’s just one with a poor sense of humour. Come up here and I’ll show you parts of Bradford where the law on wearing uniforms is ignored – Taliban members or sympathisers everywhere, and where they still want to kill Rushdie’

            Then you say, ‘You’re right. There needs to open democratic debate about this. Think of the pressures on the ex-Muslims we all have as colleagues who have to cope with this.’

          • Naz Shah recently promoted to Starmer’s shadow-cabinet was the MP who said it. She is of course a Pakistani who supported the rapists.

          • Werdna 30TH APRIL 2020 AT 7:52 PM
            “A Bradford Muslim MP has also… supported the view that the girls themselves should ‘shut their mouths’ in the interests of community relations.”

            Sorry Werdna, you are totally wrong on this.
            A spoof identity on Twitter, pretending to be Owen Jones, posted a message in support of another post:-
            “Exactly Areeq, those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of #diversity!”

            Naz Shah fell into the trap of believing it really was Owen Jones and signalled her support of this by not only “liking” the post, but also be retweeting it.

    • And it is not just Pakistani men here – one could more specific; invariably their origins are in today’s West Punjab (Pakistan) and Mirpur regions of Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The Bangladeshis may have joined in the action too. The Pakistani Sindhis tend not to be majorly involved in such crimes. Neither do the Pashtuns, even if their attitudes to women is nothing to glorify on a Nat Geo miniseries. There is a culture of rampant machismo in these cultures (hello feminists!), together with a religion which is the height of misogyny (hello again!) together with an honour culture which sees the humiliation of women as rightful payback (hello once more!) for imagined grievances (colonialism; 70 years ago now). The trifecta of all that is the unfortunate predicament which the victims find themselves in.