Rotherham abuse enquiry

First topic message reminder :



LIVE: Prof Alexis Jay presents her report into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham
At least 1,400 children were subjected to "appalling" sexual exploitation in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013, a report has found.
Children as young as 11 were raped by multiple perpetrators, abducted, trafficked to other cities in England, beaten and intimidated it said.
The report was commissioned by Rotherham Borough Council in 2013.
Five men from the town were jailed for sexual offences against girls in 2010.
'Doused in petrol'Professor Alexis Jay, who wrote the report, said there had been "blatant" collective failures by the council's leadership, senior managers had "underplayed" the scale of the problem and South Yorkshire Police had failed to prioritise the issue.
She also found the majority of perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage.
Prof Jay said: "It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered."
She said she found examples of "children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally-violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone".


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089



It's only a few though Didge....


She also said this number was a very conservative figure.


And this was only Rotherham.

The only thing exposed here is the systematic cover up of widespread child rape on a massive industrial scale over a 16 year period and only because the perpetrators were Paki Muslims.




This is only the cases in rotherham.



We already know that there have been similar things happening in other UK towns and cities over this same time period.




And we remember your excuses and denials when this started to come to light.


'It's only a few...' eh dodge???


Remember???


No doubt you'll be denying that too....

Actually there have been plenty of cover ups proving again your unconcern for child abuse victims, being as you use this as seen for a platform for your racism, all knew this the moment you starting calling Pakistanis as Pakis, but again as per usual you are too daft to recognize this.
Actually I stated to wait and see on the inquiry and the cases and what I argued against is you claiming a whole people, that being Asians or Pakistanis are all sex offenders as that was what was being claimed by you and others, blatantly ignoring the fact, there is estimated to be around 300,000 child offenders in this country, yet your only concern is for a small percentage of that, where most rational people are concerned about all child sex crime.
The reality is I exposed your racism again and you can spout off to your hearts content, as all can see you fucked up again.

Never mind Matti, my view here is to always prosecute those guilty and expose those with poor racist agendas like yours

Laters

We know who the real racists are.

And we know where their loyalties lay.



Am I a racist for calling an Australian an Aussie?


Not at all, it's an abbreviation and easier to type. That is all.



Same applies to Paki being simply an abbreviation of Pakistani.



The problem with you lefties and "progressives" is that you see racism where there isn't any and don't see it where it is.


That's why twats at rotherham thought it was racist to prosecute Paki Muslims for rape and abuse of white children.


While ignoring the fact that it was racism that these Paki Muslims were targeting white children in the first place and that it was racism to not act because the perpetrators were Paki Muslims.



And now it transpires that an influential group of Paki Muslims were councillors and continually blocked attempts to act against The Paki Muslim child rapists.

Would you call a Pakistani man a Paki to his face tommy, as part of an amicable conversation?

Why would I be telling a Paki that he was a Paki?


I'm sure he would already be all too aware of that and It would be an irrelevant conversation and completely superfluous.

Obviously you wouldn't be telling him what he is. Use your imagination, I'm giving your intelligence the benefit of the doubt here, you know what I'm asking. Would you refer to Pakistani people as 'Pakis' in front of or in conversation with a Pakistani person?

According to the BBC here are the details of those who were in charge when all this was going on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28964072

If they're using PC as the reason for failing to do anything then they are weak-kneed little weeds for doing so because no half decent person would have ignored the information they were presented with. Their feeble excuses are nothing more than a ridiculous attempt to find a reason to explain why they didn't do what they should have done all along.
They're not fit to have held these positions and should never ever again hold any position of trust in any sector of our society.
They failed to protect the general public particularly all these children who were abused and if that's not an offence under any of our laws then it damn well should be.

Very well said Irn.


And les I would use Paki for a Pakistani as much as Iwould use Aussie for Australian or manc for someone from Manchester etc.


It is a natural abbreviation to me, no more and no less.

Tommy Monk wrote:Very well said Irn.


And les I would use Paki for a Pakistani as much as Iwould use Aussie for Australian or manc for someone from Manchester etc.


It is a natural abbreviation to me, no more and no less.

Sorry Tommy. Paki is generally regarded as offensive and there really is no need to use it other than to be offensive imo.

And I would think that most people have pretty much said the same thing as I have regarding those that did nothing

Irn Bru wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Very well said Irn.


And les I would use Paki for a Pakistani as much as Iwould use Aussie for Australian or manc for someone from Manchester etc.


It is a natural abbreviation to me, no more and no less.

Sorry Tommy. Paki is generally regarded as offensive and there really is no need to use it other than to be offensive imo.

you are well indoctrinated into the PC mentality then IRN?

Tommy Monk wrote:Very well said Irn.


And les I would use Paki for a Pakistani as much as Iwould use Aussie for Australian or manc for someone from Manchester etc.


It is a natural abbreviation to me, no more and no less.

Even if I believe you (and I don't, considering your opening post saying "it's only a few of them" implies you're suggesting "it's all or many of them"), the term "Aussie" or "Manc" doesn't have a 'history' of racial abuse in this country.

The Indian media use the term "Pak" but this is not deemed offensive as the term has never been used in a derogatory way in India.

You can use the word "Paki" all you want but because of the emotions that word still invokes amongst the British Asian community, don't expect to make any friends.

As for this case, I think it's obvious we need a more detailed, public enquiry.

For 2 reasons:

1. even now, it's seems this particular case is still being washed under the carpet.

2. there may be similar cases in other parts of the UK.

Zack, agree with your last post 100%.


We should be seeing prosecutions here for those covering it all up.



But I think you'll find that any descriptive noun for group identity can and have been used in conjunction with other insulting words in The past.


No reason to be over sensitive over one or two and not all the others.


Isn't this part of why rotherham happened in The first place...???

Tommy Monk wrote:Zack, agree with your last post 100%.


We should be seeing prosecutions here for those covering it all up.



But I think you'll find that any descriptive noun for group identity can and have been used in conjunction with other insulting words in The past.


No reason to be over sensitive over one or two and not all the others.


Isn't this part of why rotherham happened in The first place...???

And you're right about the word Paki being used with other derogatory terms and yes, it is about sensitivity.

But with all due respect, you weren't on the front end of racial abuse. So when a British white person converses with me and uses the term Paki in casual conversation to either refer to myself or another brown person, it tells me something about their background. So it might be over sensitive but it also says we might not be on the same wavelength when if comes to being sociable/friendly.

As for Rotherham - ok, yes. To put it bluntly, British white liberal/socialist do gooders were culturally over sensitive, within their local police force and council.

But let's not forget, the local Police classified these victims as "drunken slags". This was a predominantly white police force (I'm assuming) who ignored girls of their race.

On the council, most of them were Britsh white people, I think 3/4 of them were pakistani/indian. They didn't do anything either.

As for the Asian/Pakistani community, I'm sure many knew what was going on. But as usual, the shame and embarrassment (which is huge in Indian/Pakistani culture - honour!) the exposure would cause means they stuck their head in the sand and went into denial mode. Which of course meant the abusers could continue to get away with it.

The common problem across all these communities (including some of the British white people) thought these girls were effectively asking for it, even though they were below the age of consent. That's shocking. Why wasn't under age sex investigated, regardless of the circumstances? Even if an underage girl says 'yes' to sex with a grown man, that is considered grooming and is illegal. So why was the attitude of the police force so dismissive?

To be honest, the investigation is too narrow. They need to go back at least 10 years before 1997 and investigate other areas (I've heard stories centred around Lancaster University).

Well black is another group descriptive word that can and has been used against people in a racist and derogatory way before too but we're all quite happy using black still to describe a racial group.



Paki to me is just an abbreviation.



And I don't buy the shame and honour bit about inaction etc, I would feel more shame and dishonour knowing and doing nothing. They obviously didn't care for the victims and their shame and dishonour.



I'm sure these children were not asking for being mass raped and beaten and threatened with knifes guns, covered in petrol and their families threatened.


It was more than just failings, it was systematic and widespread and purposeful cover up.

You still didn't answer directly; would you use the term Paki in front of someone who is Pakistani? If you don't answer I'll just assume cowardice on your part since the only reason you wouldn't answer is because you know that in person, IRL, you know you would at least make an effort to be decent and respectful.

As Zack says, the term has a history of being used as a term of offense- and you know it, you're not that stupid.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Zack, agree with your last post 100%.


We should be seeing prosecutions here for those covering it all up.



But I think you'll find that any descriptive noun for group identity can and have been used in conjunction with other insulting words in The past.


No reason to be over sensitive over one or two and not all the others.


Isn't this part of why rotherham happened in The first place...???

And you're right about the word Paki being used with other derogatory terms and yes, it is about sensitivity.

But with all due respect, you weren't on the front end of racial abuse. So when a British white person converses with me and uses the term Paki in casual conversation to either refer to myself or another brown person, it tells me something about their background. So it might be over sensitive but it also says we might not be on the same wavelength when if comes to being sociable/friendly.

As for Rotherham - ok, yes. To put it bluntly, British white liberal/socialist do gooders were culturally over sensitive, within their local police force and council.

But let's not forget, the local Police classified these victims as "drunken slags". This was a predominantly white police force (I'm assuming) who ignored girls of their race.

On the council, most of them were Britsh white people, I think 3/4 of them were pakistani/indian. They didn't do anything either.

As for the Asian/Pakistani community, I'm sure many knew what was going on. But as usual, the shame and embarrassment (which is huge in Indian/Pakistani culture - honour!) the exposure would cause means they stuck their head in the sand and went into denial mode. Which of course meant the abusers could continue to get away with it.

The common problem across all these communities (including some of the British white people) thought these girls were effectively asking for it, even though they were below the age of consent. That's shocking. Why wasn't under age sex investigated, regardless of the circumstances? Even if an underage girl says 'yes' to sex with a grown man, that is considered grooming and is illegal. So why was the attitude of the police force so dismissive?

To be honest, the investigation is too narrow. They need to go back at least 10 years before 1997 and investigate other areas (I've heard stories centred around Lancaster University).

Good morning Zack

The excerpt below completely vindicates your post

" Police in Rotherham faced fresh outrage last night after it emerged officers undermined investigations into rape and sexual assault against vulnerable girls.
A damning report revealed a unit which deals with serious sex crimes spent a great deal of time trying to 'disprove the word' of some of the victims.
Officers in South Yorkshire Police's child abuse unit were also 'pressured' by senior colleagues not to record rapes as crimes, it was revealed...............


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2737227/How-police-refused-treat-rape-allegations-crimes-Report-reveals-sex-crimes-unit-spent-time-trying-disprove-word.html#ixzz3Blu7dnLT
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

gerber wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

And you're right about the word Paki being used with other derogatory terms and yes, it is about sensitivity.

But with all due respect, you weren't on the front end of racial abuse. So when a British white person converses with me and uses the term Paki in casual conversation to either refer to myself or another brown person, it tells me something about their background. So it might be over sensitive but it also says we might not be on the same wavelength when if comes to being sociable/friendly.

As for Rotherham - ok, yes. To put it bluntly, British white liberal/socialist do gooders were culturally over sensitive, within their local police force and council.

But let's not forget, the local Police classified these victims as "drunken slags". This was a predominantly white police force (I'm assuming) who ignored girls of their race.

On the council, most of them were Britsh white people, I think 3/4 of them were pakistani/indian. They didn't do anything either.

As for the Asian/Pakistani community, I'm sure many knew what was going on. But as usual, the shame and embarrassment (which is huge in Indian/Pakistani culture - honour!) the exposure would cause means they stuck their head in the sand and went into denial mode. Which of course meant the abusers could continue to get away with it.

The common problem across all these communities (including some of the British white people) thought these girls were effectively asking for it, even though they were below the age of consent. That's shocking. Why wasn't under age sex investigated, regardless of the circumstances? Even if an underage girl says 'yes' to sex with a grown man, that is considered grooming and is illegal. So why was the attitude of the police force so dismissive?

To be honest, the investigation is too narrow. They need to go back at least 10 years before 1997 and investigate other areas (I've heard stories centred around Lancaster University).

Good morning Zack

The excerpt below completely vindicates your post

" Police in Rotherham faced fresh outrage last night after it emerged officers undermined investigations into rape and sexual assault against vulnerable girls.
A damning report revealed a unit which deals with serious sex crimes spent a great deal of time trying to 'disprove the word' of some of the victims.
Officers in South Yorkshire Police's child abuse unit were also 'pressured' by senior colleagues not to record rapes as crimes, it was revealed...............


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2737227/How-police-refused-treat-rape-allegations-crimes-Report-reveals-sex-crimes-unit-spent-time-trying-disprove-word.html#ixzz3Blu7dnLT
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Thanks Gerbs.

Tommy Monk wrote:Well black is another group descriptive word that can and has been used against people in a racist and derogatory way before too but we're all quite happy using black still to describe a racial group.



Paki to me is just an abbreviation.



And I don't buy the shame and honour bit about inaction etc, I would feel more shame and dishonour knowing and doing nothing. They obviously didn't care for the victims and their shame and dishonour.



I'm sure these children were not asking for being mass raped and beaten and threatened with knifes guns, covered in petrol and their families threatened.


It was more than just failings, it was systematic and widespread and purposeful cover up.

It's not about YOU.

Like I and Les have said, feel free to use that word amongst a company of Pakistani men and see what reception you receive. Please record it on your phone so we can all have a laugh.

As for the term "black", I think you will find other derogatory descriptions were used in those days. You know that.

And of course you don't understand pakistani culture. You're not pakistani. But again, it's not about you and what you 'buy'.

Justice for these girls in not about making Tommy happy with the world.

And it's not all about tip toeing about round Pakis either....



And those Pakis in rotherham and elsewhere are not the victims in any way so don't try to turn it around like they were suffering from shame And victims of dishonour or any other such bullshit.


THose who knew and did nothing are equally to blame fro allowing it to continue and effectively by doing this they were complicity in The cover up.

Tommy Monk wrote:And it's not all about tip toeing about round Pakis either....



And those Pakis in rotherham and elsewhere are not the victims in any way so don't try to turn it around like they were suffering from shame And victims of dishonour or any other such bullshit.


THose who knew and did nothing are equally to blame fro allowing it to continue and effectively by doing this they were complicity in The cover up.

I think it is clear to all your lack of care really for this whole case, because all you seem to debate about is Pakistani's. Aiming anger only at them themselves with the odd throw in a bone comment about all involved. Clearly Zack has pointed out the Police who are vastly white, completely let the girls down, and treated them with disdain, as did the Councillors as did social services and yet hardly any of your points is on this but only your concern of those involved who are Pakistani. It seems to be yet again your are trying down the play the significance of many people involved here because your only interest and agenda is towards the Pakistani community.
So by your logic, is it only a few whites?

Think you need to read my first couple of posts on this thread.


I clearly condemn all involved in cover up.



I want to see those who covered up hunted down and prosecuted as accessories or misconduct in a public office.

Tommy Monk wrote:Think you need to read my first couple of posts on this thread.


I clearly condemn all involved in cover up.



I want to see those who covered up hunted down and prosecuted as accessories or misconduct in a public office.

That was one of your throw in a bone comments to distract your true intentions as seen

Waffle

Hardly waffle, how many times have you used the word Paki?
Happy to count them, but it is used in the majority of your posts, so let me know?
How many posts have you not talked about Pakistani's out of all your posts here?
That is all people need to know to prove the angle of your arguments here.

Waffle

Tommy Monk wrote:Waffle

Exposed.

I don't care if they are offended by being called Pakis to be honest. I am more concerned that another systematic cover up of wrongdoing has been exposed. Children were raped and terrorised and those that could act didn't because they were too scared. They knew damn well some of those girls weren't going to be credible and the first thing the perps would shout is Racist!

The creeping appeasement of any wrongdoing to prevent accusations of racism is what should be causing howls of outrage. Not how offensive Paki is.

Nems wrote:I don't care if they are offended by being called Pakis to be honest. I am more concerned that another systematic cover up of wrongdoing has been exposed. Children were raped and terrorised and those that could act didn't because they were too scared. They knew damn well  some of those girls weren't going to be credible and the first thing the perps would shout is Racist!

The creeping appeasement of any wrongdoing to prevent accusations of racism is what should be causing howls of outrage. Not how offensive Paki is.

Sorry nems but that is just balls, if you allow a poor cover up to endorse racism, then you create further problems into the mix, as seen many people failed many young girls here and we have seen many cover ups from the Clergy to the likes of Jimmy Saville all utterly wrong where many victims have been poorly let down, disgustingly, yet we do not see anyone shouting it is okay to call those white offenders or those complicit in this cover up as Chav, Whitey etc etc, thus to use such cases to actually endorse the use of racism as seen is not only wrong but completely hypocritical, where there is no way you would refer to the white Police, Social Services and Councilors in any derogatory racist terminology based on them being white.
This was one complete an utter disgusting scenario, that though does not excuse racism

Didge wrote:

Nems wrote:I don't care if they are offended by being called Pakis to be honest. I am more concerned that another systematic cover up of wrongdoing has been exposed. Children were raped and terrorised and those that could act didn't because they were too scared. They knew damn well  some of those girls weren't going to be credible and the first thing the perps would shout is Racist!

The creeping appeasement of any wrongdoing to prevent accusations of racism is what should be causing howls of outrage. Not how offensive Paki is.

Sorry nems but that is just balls, if you allow a poor cover up to endorse racism, then you create further problems into the mix, as seen many people failed many young girls here and we have seen many cover ups from the Clergy to the likes of Jimmy Saville all utterly wrong where many victims have been poorly let down, disgustingly, yet we do not see anyone shouting it is okay to call those white offenders or those complicit in this cover up as Chav, Whitey etc etc, thus to use such cases to actually endorse the use of racism as seen is not only wrong but completely hypocritical, where there is no way you would refer to the white Police, Social Services and Councilors in any derogatory racist terminology based on them being white.
This was one complete an utter disgusting scenario, that though does not excuse racism

I disagree
PAki Paki Paki Paki Paki
Its a word same as Manc Jock Mick Scouser Bean Donkey Chinkey la la la
I don't care what terminology is used around these bastards. I want to know are they Paedophiles because they are Pakistani or has being Pakistani allowed them to be Paedophiles?

Are Asian men more likely to be paedophiles? Is this organised approach to raping children a cultural thing? So we see gangs of men from other cultures passing round children in this manner. Why are the children targeted predominantly white British?
are Pakistani girls passed round this way? Is it their preference to rape white children or is it part of their general contempt for those that have bent over backwards to accommodate them.

That is what should be of concern, not whether it is wrong to call them Pakis.

More waffle.
Deflection.

Nems wrote:

Didge wrote:


Sorry nems but that is just balls, if you allow a poor cover up to endorse racism, then you create further problems into the mix, as seen many people failed many young girls here and we have seen many cover ups from the Clergy to the likes of Jimmy Saville all utterly wrong where many victims have been poorly let down, disgustingly, yet we do not see anyone shouting it is okay to call those white offenders or those complicit in this cover up as Chav, Whitey etc etc, thus to use such cases to actually endorse the use of racism as seen is not only wrong but completely hypocritical, where there is no way you would refer to the white Police, Social Services and Councilors in any derogatory racist terminology based on them being white.
This was one complete an utter disgusting scenario, that though does not excuse racism

I disagree
PAki Paki Paki Paki Paki
Its a word same as Manc Jock Mick Scouser Bean Donkey Chinkey la la la
I don't care what terminology is used around these bastards. I want to know are they Paedophiles because they are Pakistani or has being Pakistani allowed them to be Paedophiles?

Are Asian men more likely to be paedophiles? Is this organised approach to raping children a cultural thing? So we see gangs of men from other cultures passing round children in this manner. Why are the children targeted predominantly white  British?
are Pakistani girls passed round this way? Is it their preference to rape white children or is it part of their general contempt for those that have bent over backwards to accommodate them.

That is what should be of concern, not whether it is wrong to call them Pakis.

No it is not the same word as those you have chosen, it is in the same league as n---er, thus you are excusing racism, plain and simple and not once have you referred to any white child sex offnders in any racist terminology and no doubt you never would, you would call them scum and evil as we all would, but you think it is okay to then use guilt by association onto the whole Pakistani community but not the English or British one, even though we have 30,000 convicted sex child offenders 95% being white and estimated at there being 300,000 in this country. All you are doing is being angry against one ethnic groups whilst poorly ignoring your own. Seriously, are you that naive to Paedophile rings that are global, that target and abuse women in countries where they can like Cambodia?
So yes it is wrong to think it gives you a green light to be utterly racist, because you would not even do the same to any white sick vile child offender, showing the hypocrisy of your argument and this is not about even just the offenders but as seen your view to an ethnic group, yet I do not here you ask the same questions about your own. Most rational people are sickened that there are so many child offenders, but as seen it is viewed by some where they only show real outrage, then the offender is of a different ethnicity, well wake up sister, they are all scum.

If you think that it is okay to be racist, that is your choice, but you seem unconcerned to ask the same questions about our culture, even though as seen 0.5% of the adult population are estimated to be child offenders.
That worries me more than anything

Im not excusing anything what I am saying is these men are bastards and I want to know why they do what they do and I want to know why their ethnicity prevented action from being taken.
I refuse to be side tracked by how offensive the word Paki is. To me nothing is as offensive as an adult abusing and terrorising a child. Save the racism concerns for another time lets get the focus on how this was allowed to happen and why.

Nems wrote:Im not excusing anything what I am saying is these men are bastards and I want to know why they do what they do and I want to know why their ethnicity prevented action from being taken.
I refuse to be side tracked by how offensive the word Paki is. To me nothing is as offensive as an adult abusing and terrorising a child. Save the racism concerns for another time lets get the focus on how this was allowed to happen and why.

No you are saying it is okay to use racist words and terminology, and it never is and I am very much against discrimination and the hate and violence it leads to where your view again is based around an ethnic group, blatantly ignoring our own ethnic group where again you never use racism to define them. The fact is you are side tracking the debate on to racism when there is no need to be racist in the first place, so you tell me, what relevance does racist terminology have when talking about evil sick child offenders?
None, as seen you are thus yourself detracting away from why they are scum and thus excusing racism.
Nothing is as offensive as abusing a child so why should you detract from that, because that is what you are doing, by thinking it is acceptable to add racism to the mix.
This should be about the victims and how they were poorly let down and what to do to ensure it does not happen again

Nems, the two points are linked. Of course everyone is outraged, and had said as much is this thread, about the abuse and that it was able to happen. Everyine is also disgusted that PC has gone so far as to be a cause of this being covered up.
However, when idiots like tommy instantly resort to words like paki, which IS a racist term with real nasty connotations you don't have with Scot or Manc or Brit (so they are nothing like the same), it is an unfortunate reminder of WHY we have an ended up with a damaging PC counter culture to hold back actual racists.
We cannot truly prevent things like this happening again if we refuse to acknowledge what is racist and what isn't.

This is not about whether the word Paki.


Which is just a direct abbreviation of Pakistani.




So stop with the fake moral outrage just to deflect.

Eilzel wrote:Nems, the two points are linked. Of course everyone is outraged, and had said as much is this thread, about the abuse and that it was able to happen. Everyine is also disgusted that PC has gone so far as to be a cause of this being covered up.
However, when idiots like tommy instantly resort to words like paki, which IS a racist term with real nasty connotations you don't have with Scot or Manc or Brit (so they are nothing like the same), it is an unfortunate reminder of WHY we have an ended up with a damaging PC counter culture to hold back actual racists.
We cannot truly prevent things like this happening again if we refuse to acknowledge what is racist and what isn't.

Les I view it the other way round.
I think drop of the hat racism that we see from Tommy etc is a push back against the endless PC nonsense we were all subjected to. Remember no more baa baa black sheep and chair person and person hole cover ? That twaddle is so mind meltingly pedantic that is devalues instances of genuine racism and or sexism.

Tommy Monk wrote:This is not about whether the word Paki.


Which is just a direct abbreviation of Pakistani.




So stop with the fake moral outrage just to deflect.

No this debate was ruined the moment you started to be racist and detracted from the real issue here.
If you had not been racist, would anyone have gone on about racism or you being racist?
No
This should have been about how many people got away with a crime for years, how the Police, Social Services and Councillors failed untold girls who suffered horrendous abuse. It should never have been about racism, but what to do now and ensure this never happens again

Nems, if that is the case at best tommy can be described as juvenile; 'I don't like being told to respect different types of people so I'll say any bad word I like' kind of like a kid saying fuck in front of his mum...

Tommy you never did say whether you would use the word Paki in the company of Pakistani people- would you refer to these abusers specifically as 'Paki Muslim child abusers' if discussing this in person with a Pakistani person?

Nems wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Nems, the two points are linked. Of course everyone is outraged, and had said as much is this thread, about the abuse and that it was able to happen. Everyine is also disgusted that PC has gone so far as to be a cause of this being covered up.
However, when idiots like tommy instantly resort to words like paki, which IS a racist term with real nasty connotations you don't have with Scot or Manc or Brit (so they are nothing like the same), it is an unfortunate reminder of WHY we have an ended up with a damaging PC counter culture to hold back actual racists.
We cannot truly prevent things like this happening again if we refuse to acknowledge what is racist and what isn't.

Les I view it the other way round.
I think drop of the hat racism that we see from Tommy etc is a push back against the endless PC nonsense we were all subjected to. Remember no more baa baa black sheep and chair person and person hole cover ? That twaddle is so mind meltingly pedantic that is devalues instances of genuine racism and or sexism.

That is genuine racism, where in fact the debate from the start has been centered around racism and not about the case at hand. To say PC nonsense when it was mindless idiots who were racist that brought about a PC culture, because many people have seen what racism does, or do I need to remind you of history Nems. Once you go down the road of racism you excuse yourself and others to hatepeople collectively through guilt by association, whilst again blindingly ignoring the problem of child abuse within many cultures. All this does is fail to see the problem overall and actually does nothing to help any of the victims, where again this is not only about sick vile offenders but how so many young girls have been let down by authorities but also by their own families, to this point in this day and age that such young girls have no where to turn to. The scum that carried out these crimes preyed on the vulnerable and the reality is as a nation we have let them all down.

It's about racism when hangs of Paki Muslims deliberately target non Paki Muslim children for mass rape, violence and abuse.



It is about racism when those in authority fail to act to stop this for years and in fact deliberately cover it up while knowing full well the extent and seriousness of The crimes and all because it is Paki Muslims carrying out this abuse.






Anyone else would have got jumped on from a great height.



You know it as much as I do.



We know who the real racists are and where their loyalties lay.

Tommy Monk wrote:It's about racism when hangs of Paki Muslims deliberately target non Paki Muslim children for mass rape, violence and abuse.
It is about racism when those in authority fail to act to stop this for years and in fact deliberately cover it up while knowing full well the extent and seriousness of The crimes and all because it is Paki Muslims carrying out this abuse.
Anyone else would have got jumped on from a great height.

You know it as much as I do.We know who the real racists are and where their loyalties lay.

You made it about racism and thus let the victims down, they had no support, lack of love from their families and the authorities do nothing to help them.
This should be about preventing this happening again.

Has been happening in towns and cities up and down the country.


I want this to be about prosecutions of those who perpetrated the crimes and also those who cover it all up.

Tommy Monk wrote:Has been happening in towns and cities up and down the country.


I want this to be about prosecutions of those who perpetrated the crimes and also those who cover it all up.

On that I agree with you

Tommy Monk wrote:And it's not all about tip toeing about round Pakis either....



And those Pakis in rotherham and elsewhere are not the victims in any way so don't try to turn it around like they were suffering from shame And victims of dishonour or any other such bullshit.


THose who knew and did nothing are equally to blame fro allowing it to continue and effectively by doing this they were complicity in The cover up.

Don't try that shit with me Tommy.

I never said they were 'victims' of dishonour.

That's right, they were not victims, they were complicit in The cover up and also guilty.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:And it's not all about tip toeing about round Pakis either....



And those Pakis in rotherham and elsewhere are not the victims in any way so don't try to turn it around like they were suffering from shame And victims of dishonour or any other such bullshit.


THose who knew and did nothing are equally to blame fro allowing it to continue and effectively by doing this they were complicity in The cover up.

Don't try that shit with me Tommy.

I never said they were 'victims' of dishonour.

But you are very good at playing the victim card arnt you fuzz.......

I give you a post in another thread....

wahhhh...I'm the victim says Fuzz.....

"you is only criticising me cos I is Muslim" says Fuzz.....read it and see.....


Thank you
Reply with quote

Re: Why must we be......

Post by Fuzzy Zack on Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:54 pm

victorisnotamused wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Manufactured consent by heightening the emotional side of the brain and suppressing the rational side.

Most of you won't appreciate the above statement - but you will one day. When you've calmed down. Lol!


bullshit Fuzz.....yours is the voice of the defeatist...or is it colaborator......


Lol!

You say bullshit but then go on to prove my point exactly.

Your emotional side is so heightened that you now think I'm a collaborator, just because I'm a Muslim.

That's why you're an idiot.


and my reply ......

no you wanker...i think you are a colaborator because of your words...i did offer you the alternative of defeatist...
there were a number of folks pre WWII who were all for a pacifist stance towards germany.......that didnt make them nazi's ..it did however make em pathetic cowards who would bend their knees to anything......

but no...poor old fuzzy is a "victim"....Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

Exactly victor, he tried that earlier by claiming that the wider rotherham Paki community suffered the shame and dishonour of it all as if they were the the victims somehow.



What a load of bullshit!!!



The ones who knew were complicit in The crimes and Just as guilty as all the others who covered it up.




Not victims, active participants in allowing it to happen and continue happening through their knowledge and subsequent inaction and silence.

Fellow posters, cut the bullshit.


the authorities were too PC to admit that anything was happening in their back yard.

Rotherham will not be the only town and police force to be in the meda.

Take note from Zack....................................... The community was not able to speak for various reasons.

This in not a racist post. But the people in charge were terrified of being labelled as such.

Why no compassion on here for the victims ?