Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial?


by Sunny Hundal    
5:09 pm - May 8th 2012

      Share on Tumblr

A few years ago I was involved in a minor media bun-fight when I opposed attempts by Asian media and activists to prevent a film from being shown. A Channel 4 documentary titled ‘Edge of the City‘ was looked at child grooming and molesting of young girls by men of Asian origin in the town of Bradford.

It was pulled the first time because the BNP exploited it for upcoming local elections. The second time some Asian activists and Eastern Eye newspaper were still opposed on grounds it would inflame racial tensions.

It might have done, but it still needed to be shown, I argued at the time. You can’t sweep these things under the carpet just because people of different races are involved.

In fact a story I wrote at the time even prompted the BNP to organise a march on this issue, but I was unrepentant. It was a heinous crime and shouldn’t be hidden away.

But the national media is equally irresponsible.

The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and at times even The Times have placed a lot of emphasis on the races of the people involved without offering wider context. The GMP Assistant Chief Constable said today:

It is not a racial issue. This is about adults preying on vulnerable young children. It just happens that in this particular area and time the demographics were that these were Asian men.

However, in large parts of the country we are seeing on-street grooming, child sexual exploitation happening in each of our towns and it isn’t about a race issue. The street grooming issue is about vulnerability and who has access to that vulnerability.

This is exactly right. These heinous men found it easier to prey on young white girls, but don’t think for a second that they would not do the same to Asian girls. Tales of rape, sexual exploitation and trafficking are rife across the Indian sub-continent.

The idea that they avoided Asian girls because somehow they have more respect for them is utter rubbish; they have no respect for any women of any race.

Ethnic minorities are over-represented in prison for sexual offences, but only by a few per cent (hat-tip Binita Mehta), not that much.

In certain areas they can form a bigger percentage (especially if they are a bigger part of the local population) – but I’d challenge anyone to offer evidence that Asians are more predisposed to sexual violence than other races.

The worst thing about the coverage from the likes of the Daily Mail is that it makes it more likely that such cases will be suppressed in the future because people will worry it will once again inflame racial tensions.

This is a case of rape culture and sexual exploitation and the degradation of women. Instead the right-wing tabloids are once again using it to bang that familiar drum: ‘coming here, taking our women‘, which only feeds into BNP and EDL narratives.

Addendum
I should clarify a point. I have no doubt some of these men were racist and bigoted towards other races, religions and cultures. That’s not unusual in society, even amongst Asians.

But beware of thinking that is their motivation behind their actions. These people would just as likely exploit Asian girls (of all religions) if given the opportunity – there isn’t a shortage of such exploitation in Pakistan. This is an excuse they may used to justify (for e.g. ‘these girls are easy, maybe they want it’) their heinous behaviour. It doesn’t mean that motivated them though.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Media ,Race relations

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


I’m just throwing this out there but perhaps it has something to with the fact that almost half of the known offenders in cases of grooming have been Asian. One can’t draw entirely confident conclusions from that data because so many of the offenders are unknown but, still, it’s very hard to believe it’s an irrelevance. If people deny this, or would like to give a more thorough account of the motivations, they’d better explain the data. And, indeed, someone should.

2. Barrington Womble

Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of of the Ramadhan Foundation accused Pakistani community elders of “burying their heads in the sand” on the issue of on-street grooming.

“There is a significant problem for the British Pakistani community,” he said.

“There should be no silence in addressing the issue of race as this is central to the actions of these criminals.

“They think that white teenage girls are worthless and can be abused without a second thought; it is this sort of behaviour that is bringing shame on our community.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17989463

perhaps it has something to with the fact that almost half of the known offenders in cases of grooming have been Asian.

Lots of factors can lead to this. For example, the local police and community DID sweep the problem under the carpet so it just grew.

Second, there has been ‘grooming’ in other cases in other contexts too. But wat’s heinous about this is the gangs element. That makes it more sickening but doesn’t make it an Asian or Pakistani problem as a motivating factor.

Third, for eg, most religious folks involved in paedophilia cases were Catholic priests. But to say their religion or race were motivating factors would be an absurd assertion to make.

From this article
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/08/asian-sex-gangs-on-street-grooming

As researchers specialising in this crime, we are repeatedly asked: “Are on-street groomers Pakistani?” The honest answer is yes and no. There is still no reliable estimate of the number of “on-street groomers” nationwide, let alone of their ethnicity. Crime is usually measured using police or court records. Those on-street grooming cases that are actually reported are difficult to disentangle from other crimes. This is because on-street grooming is not a criminal offence. Instead, cases are charged under a wide variety of offences, from rape to internal sex trafficking to false imprisonment.

I deal with data on this for a northern children’s services department and deal liaise with colleagues across the north on the issue.
I can confidently say that the offenders in this sort of crime where girls are picked up and groomed is almost exclusively done by men of Pakistani origin against white girls.
Yes, other groups produce sex offenders, but the white and Indian communities are usually single offenders and/or harming people close to them – not this sort of highly organised targeted group offending against vulnerable girls who are initially strangers.
My authority and the police go out of their way to stress it’s not a racial issue purely because they don’t want to stir up racial tensions.
Whilst I can understand this and too a certain extent support it, I would advise against protesting too much about the media coverage, as their stance is fairly tame given the reality of the situation on the ground.

Third, for eg, most religious folks involved in paedophilia cases were Catholic priests. But to say their religion or race were motivating factors would be an absurd assertion to make.

According to the Anglican scholar Philip Jenkins, Catholic priests are not more liable to be involved in cases of abuse than any other men. Even if they were, however, it be self-evidently absurd to ask if there’s a feature of the occupation of “priest” that mades them more liable to commit such crimes.

5. Anon

Thank you for your comment. Your perspective should be more widely known.

Thank you Anon for your comment. I was absolutely appalled to hear the BBC attempt to sweep this under the carpet by saying “a majority of groomers are white men.” They used a study to indicate 38% of offenders were white males while 24% of offenders are asian men. Excuse me, but over 80% of males in this country are white while perhaps less than 10% are asian. This indicates a HUGE problem. Why are one particular group overrepresented in such a hideous manner? I suspect Jews and Chinese are under-represented, so why are Pakistanis doing this?

A couple of things to clarify:
1- The Indian community I refer to are in my patch almost exclusively Muslim and they are not involved – which shows the issue certainly is NOT an Islamic one.
2- There are very large numbers of very nasty white, black and other child sex offenders, they just typically don’t engage in this sort of highly organised group activity.
3- I don’t think for one minute that anything other than a small minority of Pakistani men engage in or condone this sort of activity. It’s just every case of this nature that I see involves this group.

”Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial?”

Because the racial element is a big part of the reason.
To white Middle England, the ethnic and cultural make up of this group of men will add an ”appalling and repulsive” factor. And you can call that racism, or a kind of tribalism if you like. Everyone in England will probably know or come across some Pakistani origin and south Asian people, but not know what it’s like within the closed world of the Asian communities from which these men come. You can know your neighbours or people who run local businesses, but when people still lead largely segregated, community based lives, there will always be some aspects of people being strangers to each other.
So Daily Mail readers will react to this story differently to if it had been an all white or racially diverse group.

On Liberal Conspiracy you can talk about it rationally to the point where these factors and the sensationalism seem to be totally overdone by the media. And that is probably the correct view. But you have to be an ultra-liberal to see things that way and most people aren’t that liberal.

Different communities often have a lot of secrets from each other. Or if not exactly secrets, do things as a community about which the wider community might be largely ignorant. The way of conducting business within a community for example – or as we see at elections these days, with how local politics works on the ground in areas like Tower Hamlets, Birmingham and Bradford. The wider community is often totally ignorant of what is going on right in front of them. But one community is acting in the intrests of itself or leading members from within that community.
And it’s often a pretty closed environment. Were non-Bangladeshi origin people in Tower Hamlets really aware of the massive push to elect the mayor of their choice for the borough? I don’t think they were, and most non-Bangladeshis never even voted as the campaign went under their radar.

So I think that the focus on these abuse cases is ”fall out” from having these kind of parallel societies.

11. Barrie J

The Catholic Church, at the highest level, was happy to bury child abuse to avoid ‘embarrassment’.
Indeed it could be argued their lack of action encouraged priests to abuse knowing full well that their behaviour would go unreported.

Why then should we be surprised when another community does the same.

The media and security services have no problem linking innocent Muslims everywhere with acts of terrorism.

If the police are reluctant to address sex crimes, where Muslim men may be involved is there another group they would like to act on behalf of the victims?

At least one comes to mind.

12. Kulvinder

As always this type of debate tends to degenerate into various arguments about ‘those people’ or ‘you people’ abusing ‘our girls’.

I wouldn’t call the abuse of children in asia by ‘western men’ a race issue, or imply that ‘white people’ are *somehow* more inclined to exploit vulnerable individuals than ‘non white’ people.

The fact of the matter is the predominant reason for the abuse is one individual(s) has power over another more vulnerable individual and goes on to abuse that relative power for their own ends.

If Jerome Taylor wants to say that ‘kaffirism’ plays a significant role than i’d be interested to know what rationale he thinks ‘white’ sex tourists who abuse asian children have for the crimes they commit.

I’m not seeking to be deliberately antagonistic by linking sex tourism and the abuse in this country; i’m merely pointing out that in both cases men from different social, cultural and ethnic groups – as well countries – sexually objectify vulnerable individuals whom they also see as belonging to ‘the other’ before abusing them.

Yes brown/muslim men abuse white/christian children in the UK just as white/christian men abuse brown/buddhist children in S.E.Asia, and yes *part* of the cognitive process they go through to dehumanise their victims may well be that they don’t belong to the same religion or ethnicity. But it is short sighted and unhelpful to focus on religion and ethnicity as being the *predominant* factor.

Having said all that none of this will make any difference because the kneejerk

‘ASIAN/MUSLIM PAEDOS ABUSING OUR WHITE/CHRISTIAN CHILDREN’

angle has already caught on and theres very little anyone can do to stop it.

“This is exactly right. These heinous men found it easier to prey on young white girls, but don’t think for a second that they would not do the same to Asian girls. Tales of rape, sexual exploitation and trafficking are rife across the Indian sub-continent.

The idea that they avoided Asian girls because somehow they have more respect for them is utter rubbish; they have no respect for any women of any race.”

So are you backtracking on your comments from a few years ago about this Sunny?

“Could it be, leaving political correctness aside, that some Muslim leaders don’t want to give a negative impression of what many of their own youth are doing in Bradford? That these young girls are picked on because of their race and the perception that they are ‘easy’? That racism exists even in crime?

I don’t need to keep flashing my liberal and non-communal credentials around to raise these uncomfortable questions.”

http://www.asiansinmedia.org/news/article.php/television/571

“But we should not deny that there is an element of racism in all this – the Pakistani guys intentionally go for young white girls, according to some, because they see them as “easy”. Or maybe because they feel the community will look away because the girls are not Asian.”

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/46

FWIW I agree with your conclusions. These young girls are picked on because of their vulnerability, not because of their race, and grooming for sexual exploitation is a growing problem, one that’s perpetrated by men (mainly) of all races/religions and so on. I’m just surprised to see you criticising the media for using similar arguments to ones you were using not so long ago.

@Kulvinder – I’d argue that there is at least some racial element to rich westerners going to SE Asia to abuse kids (sadly).

12

Well said.

I wonder if the Catholic church would like to comment on this subject… them being experts.

I think that the other thing that we should say out loud without fear from the politically correct brigade is that some girls would be less likely to attract attention from ‘marauding hoards of sexual predators’ if they wore a skirt rather than a belt around their middle .

I watched a girl, for all the world like one of the St Trinian’s, walking home from school the other day, and I could see her pants at the top of her legs, her skirt was so short.

It did nothing for me, but I’m sure that many would have been turned on by it. You have to wonder how naive a 15 16 17 year old can be to go around like that.

And what of these girls’ parents?

I was amazed, having heard that they were all from chaotic families, to hear an indignant father (whose words were spoken by an actor) give a most erudite denouncement of everyone but himself. They must have very well educated chaotics in England!

All I can say is that no daughter of mine would go out looking so erm…provocative.

OK politically correct gang… now say what you will.

All this shows is that we need to replace the corporate media with a working class media.

18. Charlieman

Thanks to Anon for the first post and for the clarification.

A lot of us have personal knowledge of survivors of sexual abuse and the circumstances. Academics and down to earth criminologists have a wider understanding of child sex abuse than us. But perhaps these grooming abuses point to different circumstances and causes, and that the racial/national aspects lead us (the non-experts) to overlook other circumstances and causes.

One of the circumstances is that collectively we do not give a shit about the vulnerable young people who are abused by groomers. I am writing about people “in care” or “under supervision”. The case presented by Sunny is about underage children, but we don’t do much either to help post-16 vulnerable people or significantly older people with cognitive problems.

And it isn’t entirely about money or funding of services. It’s about giving a shit about people; if we cared about vulnerable people (possibly even knew how to care), we would do something about it. It is cheaper, long term, to raise young people to become confident citizens, different but equal. So it is cheaper and more moral to care.

As for causes: literature and scholarship has discussed close family sexual abuse throughout written history; given that we (non-experts) know so little about modern grooming cases, I’ll keep my gob shut.

I can (kind of) vouch for Anon’s word here on practically every point. I also live in ‘the North’ and knowing several people who work in courts (and spent a few months during a period of unemployment exploiting the courts heating and cheap cafe and witnessing these kinds of cases with my own eyes) this is far more widespread than people understand. I’ve also more personal experience in that my partner has been on the receiving end of this herself several times, having been assaulted and, earlier on in the year, would have been dragged into a car by Asian youths if a passer-by hadn’t have intervened.

The police go out of their way to downplay these incidents. Not just the fact that it’s by far and away white victims but the fact that these attacks are happening at all. The amount of court appearances, for example, don’t match what is generally being reported in local ‘court round-ups’.

From what I understand, I’d also agree that assaults of this nature when perpetrated by white or black people, tend to be as individuals whereas the opposite appears to be the case when perpetrated by Asian males. Why this is, I can’t really begin to speculate. Whether it’s because gang culture in my area tends to be, generally, an Asian phenomenon – I don’t know. Why the gang culture is predominantly Asian, again, I don’t know.

To a large extent, I can sympathise with the police as, in areas like mine, we’re sitting on a potential powder-keg but it puts people like me (ex ANL member and, generally, a yoghurt-knitting lefty in every sense) in a difficult position. I’d rather not live in the middle of a running race war if I can help it – and there’s a fair mix of nazi boneheads and EDL members to ensure this happens if ‘word’ got out, but I’m wondering whether trying to keep a (necessary) lid on much of this is creating other problems.

20. Kulvinder

I’d argue that there is at least some racial element to rich westerners going to SE Asia to abuse kids (sadly).

Yes but they don’t go there *because* of that racial element. The racial element is a cognitive mechanism (one of many) to dehumanise the victim – the men convicted today probably dehumanised their victims in much the same way.

The important point is the sex tourists aren’t neo-nazis – they aren’t abusing their victims *because* they consider them to be untermensch – in the same way that the asian/muslim men don’t abuse their victims *because* of ‘kaffirism’

I don’t think the vast majority of abusers think about their victims in ideological terms. What they’re seeking to do is abuse a power dynamic and ethnicity is only one of numerous dynamics that exist. Some victims were apparently from comparatively deprived socio-economic backgrounds and other abusers have certainly exploited that

The exploitation involves children as young as 11 being targeted by groups of men or gangs. They are given gifts and attention, then sold or passed on to others once they are trapped.

If they were targeting ‘white girls’ for ideological reasons they’d be going after white girls irrespective of their background, but they don’t they seek the vulnerable.

Similarly the sex tourists don’t target the comparatively affluent in S.E.Asia – its always the poor.

Focusing on race and ethnicity fetishises it into the type of ‘their men’ and ‘our girls’ debate that i mentioned before.

Good post. WRT Kulvinder’s point – I assume the tension produced when a more conservative community lives alongside a less restrained one is one factor behind the grooming situation. But when it comes to children, the UK is itself *more* restrained than some other countries – so the pattern is reversed.

Having said all that none of this will make any difference because the kneejerk

‘ASIAN/MUSLIM PAEDOS ABUSING OUR WHITE/CHRISTIAN CHILDREN’

angle has already caught on and theres very little anyone can do to stop it.

It’s not really knee-jerk in this instance, though–is it?

Kulvinder

Actually I’m willing to bet that a lot of Western men pursue sex tourism in Asian countries because of species ethnic/cultural features they attribute to their women. Louis Theroux had a programme on people seeking Thai brides, and the men who he interviewed were open in saying that they liked Asian women because they thought they were meek and docile and unlike those brash, independent Western girls. I’d guess that applies to their scummier cousins.

If they were targeting ‘white girls’ for ideological reasons they’d be going after white girls irrespective of their background, but they don’t they seek the vulnerable.

Would they? It could be as simple a reason that girls in luckier positions would have friends and family members to inform and, perhaps, would be less liable to go off with strangers in the first place.

Similarly the sex tourists don’t target the comparatively affluent in S.E.Asia – its always the poor.

Again – the affluent are just less likely to be prostitutes, would-be brides or generally inclined to go off with sleazy old men. It’s tactics, not doctrine.

I think talking about child abusing westerners in Asia was a bit of a distraction.
Firstly, there are indeed untold thousands of western men who go to south east Asia on holiday and take up with the prostitutes and bar girls in those country’s bar/sex industries. The percentage who would be there looking for children and underage teenagers would definitely be a very small minority of that total.

As distasteful as many people find the sex tourist/bar-girl/prostitute thing, it must be differentiated from child abuse. I have never seen any sign of it, as it’s against the law obviously, and in Cambodia where I’ve visited, there are even warning notices in tourist hotels saying that it is serious crime in Cambodia and offenders are punnished harshly.
So you’d have to be a bit mad to even think about it even if it was what you wanted.
I don’t imagine Cambodain prisons are too nice.

As for regular sex tourism, as unpleasant as it can be, I think that many foreigners think they are just partaking in a local culture. I think even in my Lonely Planet guidebook it said that a majority of Thai men use prostitutes on a regular basis.
Everyone does it (it seems). Including the police I suppose.

When you read about the industry, and how many of the women are from the poor parts of northern Thailand, or from Burma, it is a pretty sad situation – but one that Thais seem to accept and do nothing about. Even though Thailand is actually quite socially conservative. They just have this cultural difference and think it’s normal for tens of thousands of women to work as prostitutes, because there is a demand for it.

My point here is only that bringing up western men in Asia, was in many ways quite different to what is being discussed here. But has some similarities too of course.

The correct analogy is to simply imagine that, in Britain today, groups of white men have banded together with the express purpose of sexually abusing Asian children.

26. So Much For Subtlety

This is a case of rape culture and sexual exploitation and the degradation of women. Instead the right-wing tabloids are once again using it to bang that familiar drum: ‘coming here, taking our women‘, which only feeds into BNP and EDL narratives.

Sure but that rape culture, what communities have more of it than others?

The reasons the tabloids go on about it is probably because 1. for a long time they couldn’t (because people like the posters here shouted them down with accusations of racism) while now they can and 2. because there seems to be a cultural problem here with some ethnic communities – it is actually a relevant factor.

I should clarify a point. I have no doubt some of these men were racist and bigoted towards other races, religions and cultures. That’s not unusual in society, even amongst Asians.

So … this is a tacit admission that the men involved frequently make it clear that they are targeting white “slags” because they are white and “slags”?

But beware of thinking that is their motivation behind their actions. These people would just as likely exploit Asian girls (of all religions) if given the opportunity – there isn’t a shortage of such exploitation in Pakistan.

They may do so. I am sure. But this is the other threat here. Communities that have lived with Muslim communities for long periods have tended to become more like them over time. Ask any Western woman who has traveled in Northern India and in Southern India. If White girls are treated this way, pretty soon White girls will be kept at home and forced to wear the niqaab too. Is this something we want for Britain? These crimes need to be punished or that is the way we are going to go.

This is an excuse they may used to justify (for e.g. ‘these girls are easy, maybe they want it’) their heinous behaviour. It doesn’t mean that motivated them though.

Really? That is generous of you. Does that extend to members of the BNP and the EDL who may produces similar excuses about immigrants taking all our jobs etc etc? If so, you needn’t concern yourself about the tabloids. They are just providing excuses, not justifications.

27. Dick the Prick

Great thread – cheers folks. There’s a massive difference between racism and racial awareness and this kinda crime gives rise to kneejerk in any human being. We’ve all known this verdict was in the post for the last 3 months and it’s been kinda silent. Tris @15 does well to bring up the Catholic analogy and Eire’s internal dialogue – these conversations need to be had. It ain’t a race issue, although it kinda raises the question that so many more white kids are taken in to care than Asians as a kneejerk from Baby P, but guess normal folks have just got to keep their eyes open. It’s done, the fucks are gonna have real fun for the next few years and find out what abuse means. Guess we should keep our fingers crossed for Rochdale.

28. So Much For Subtlety

24. vimothy

The correct analogy is to simply imagine that, in Britain today, groups of white men have banded together with the express purpose of sexually abusing Asian children.

Not at all. Because this is a left-wing site and so we have to consider that jack boot stamping on someone’s face for the rest of history. The question you have to ask is one of power. White people have power. Asians do not. Thus White men grooming Asian children is not even remotely like Asian men grooming White children.

The fact that these particular White children seem to have no power at all is beside the point.

At least I assume that is why people demand the ethnic issue is played down and it is openly why the police admit to not wanting to talk about it at all.

29. So Much For Subtlety

15. Tris

I wonder if the Catholic church would like to comment on this subject… them being experts.

There is no evidence that child abuse is more common in the Catholic Church than elsewhere. And as I have pointed out any number of times, you are vastly more likely to be abused in the State sector.

I think that the other thing that we should say out loud without fear from the politically correct brigade is that some girls would be less likely to attract attention from ‘marauding hoards of sexual predators’ if they wore a skirt rather than a belt around their middle .

Or we could make them all wear a niqaab. The utter impossibility of punishing sex crimes in Islamic law is presumably one reason for this culture being so ingrained. Not to mention that Muhammed took slaves for sexual purposes from non-believing communities.

I was amazed, having heard that they were all from chaotic families, to hear an indignant father (whose words were spoken by an actor) give a most erudite denouncement of everyone but himself.

How do you know it was his fault? The majority of divorces are initiated by women for basically frivolous reasons. Men simply have no chance of getting to even see their children. They certainly do not get custody. This man might have been a perfectly fine and respectable husband and father whose wife just saw Eat, Love Pray one too many times. Certainly if men got custody more often I expect that this sort of abuse would be a hell of a lot less common.

30. Charlieman

They are off again, aren’t they? They are unable to ask why or how vulnerable people are susceptible to abusers.

31. Kulvinder

@Ben

I assume you meant specious ethnic/cultural features; and for the sake of argument i don’t disagree. But that just highlights their sexual objectification of the women rather than an inherent racist intent. By analogy brown/pakistani/muslim/asian/mirpuri (delete as you wish) men attribute specious cultural and ethnic features onto white/english/christian/western women – they’re *less* sexually meek and docile etc

The point, with regards to the original argument, is in both cases there isn’t a ‘racist’ intent as such. There is sexual objectification on ethnic or racial grounds but thats very different to saying that racist ideology is a predominant factor.

Would they? It could be as simple a reason that girls in luckier positions would have friends and family members to inform and, perhaps, would be less liable to go off with strangers in the first place.

If socio-economic conditions weren’t a factor, and their actions were predominantly ideologically motivated there wouldn’t be a skew in the social demographics affected. They would be *targeting* girls irrespective of their background. The factors you point to above may affect why some girls become victims but it doesn’t affect the actions of the abusers. If they were ideologically driven they would target the affluent – the fact that the more affluent were more resistant wouldn’t matter; their motivation would be ideological (against *all* members of society) rather than predatory and opportunistic.

Again – the affluent are just less likely to be prostitutes, would-be brides or generally inclined to go off with sleazy old men. It’s tactics, not doctrine.

I agree! thats my point! targeting of victims is based on the power dynamics between abuser and victim. Its about the tactics the abuser uses and not doctrine or ideology.

The original point i was making was turning this into a debate surrounding issues like ‘kaffirism’ diverts it into a debate about ideology and doctrine.

Some pakistani muslims target vulnerable girls from different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds because they are the easiest victims – the most likely to be coerced. Similarly some british christians target vulnerable girls from different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds because they are the easiest victims – the most likely to be coerced.

There is a disproportionate number of ‘pakistani muslim’ abusers in the uk because the girls who are vulnerable in the uk are more likely to be coerced by the tactics of ‘pakistani muslims’ in the uk. There is disproportionate number of ‘british christian’ abusers in places like thailand and cambodia because the girls who are vulnerable in those countries are more likely to be coerced by the tactics of ‘british christians’ who live there.

In neither case would it be helpful to focus on ‘pakistani muslims’ or ‘british christians’ (in an ideological sense) as being *the problem*. Its just how the power dynamics come together.

32. Charlieman

Quick analysis of So Much For Subtlety for tonight.

Three posts in succession on “Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial?”

at 10:27

at 10:34

at 10:40

One of my rules in life is that when I give a smart wisecrack, I’ll give the recipient a while to reflect. An honest response in the morning suffices. The converse applies more frequently to me.

I had never conceived the idea of defensive barrage commentary

33. So Much For Subtlety

30. Kulvinder

But that just highlights their sexual objectification of the women rather than an inherent racist intent. By analogy brown/pakistani/muslim/asian/mirpuri (delete as you wish) men attribute specious cultural and ethnic features onto white/english/christian/western women – they’re *less* sexually meek and docile etc

Sorry but sometimes the world of post-modern politics is too complicated for me. They are targeting White girls for specifically racist reasons but you think this is not evidence of racism? An interesting approach I have to say. I would think that anyone who projects specious assumptions regarding cultural and “ethnic” (what is that by the way if not cultural?) features on to a racially defined group of people is acting in a racist way more or less by definition. Waddayathink?

The point, with regards to the original argument, is in both cases there isn’t a ‘racist’ intent as such. There is sexual objectification on ethnic or racial grounds but thats very different to saying that racist ideology is a predominant factor.

So their racism is incidental to their racist behaviour?

If socio-economic conditions weren’t a factor, and their actions were predominantly ideologically motivated there wouldn’t be a skew in the social demographics affected. They would be *targeting* girls irrespective of their background.

So Asian girls would be involved. So would Black girls. In fact more would be involved because they come from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Are there more involved? So far people have been saying these sort of men victimise Asian girls …. in Pakistan. Besides, Germans did not kill Jews because they lived in Poland. They killed them because they were Jews. They just couldn’t reach the ones in Argentina. In the same way, girls from poor broken homes may be more vulnerable, but that does not mean they are being targeted because they come from poor, broken homes.

If they were ideologically driven they would target the affluent – the fact that the more affluent were more resistant wouldn’t matter; their motivation would be ideological (against *all* members of society) rather than predatory and opportunistic.

Well surely if race is the driving issue they would not care if the girls were rich or poor as long as they were White, no? Besides, how do you know they are not? The fact that they have more success with girls from poor homes may only reflect the special vulnerability of girls from poor homes.

Again – the affluent are just less likely to be prostitutes, would-be brides or generally inclined to go off with sleazy old men. It’s tactics, not doctrine.

Sleazy old men? Diana Spencer did not come from a poor family.

There is a disproportionate number of ‘pakistani muslim’ abusers in the uk because the girls who are vulnerable in the uk are more likely to be coerced by the tactics of ‘pakistani muslims’ in the uk. There is disproportionate number of ‘british christian’ abusers in places like thailand and cambodia because the girls who are vulnerable in those countries are more likely to be coerced by the tactics of ‘british christians’ who live there.

So this is a tactical issue is it? Why aren’t poor White girls vulnerable to the tactics of White men in the UK? Why do they have to go to Thailand? Besides, girls in Thailand are most likely to be abused by Thais. Not by Westerners.

In neither case would it be helpful to focus on ‘pakistani muslims’ or ‘british christians’ (in an ideological sense) as being *the problem*. Its just how the power dynamics come together.

I do not find this a particularly convincing argument. All the evidence seems to be saying that this is a particular problem with a particular community which has particular attitudes towards “slags”.

One of the men convicted was white (& non muslim). But I expect this will be overlooked by the media and anyone with an agenda.

35. Kulvinder

@So Much For Subtlety

Waddayathink?

I think you should try harder to make an argument that i can respond to :)

36. Charlieman

@32. So Much For Subtlety: “Sorry but sometimes the world of post-modern politics is too complicated for me. They are targeting White girls for specifically racist reasons but you think this is not evidence of racism? An interesting approach I have to say. I would think that anyone who projects specious assumptions regarding cultural and “ethnic” (what is that by the way if not cultural?) features on to a racially defined group of people is acting in a racist way more or less by definition. Waddayathink?”

I think that you failed to deliver that anecdote to anyone that gives a shit.

Dammit I was going to make the ‘western men going to Thailand’ point later (just thought of it while at the gym) but Kulvinder has beat me to it.

Just out of curiousity – what drove the white, older Catholic men to abuse young boys at Catholic churches?

Was it because they were also white kids? Was it Catholicism? We rarely see that being put in terms that imply they were being abused BECAUSE the kids were also Catholic.

One of the men convicted was white (& non muslim). But I expect this will be overlooked by the media and anyone with an agenda.

Really? I’ve not seen a white person listed in the names of those convicted.

Kulvinder -

But that just highlights their sexual objectification of the women rather than an inherent racist intent.

But the character of their sexual objectification – I’m theorising, at least – is based, in part, on their assumptions about characteristics they’ll have according to their background. And that seems to be true of thugs such as those in Rochdale.

I think we’re agreed on this, but perhaps part ways in our beliefs as to how significant a factor this is. That’s fine. My point has always been that this is an issue that demands more substantial and systematic research.

If socio-economic conditions weren’t a factor, and their actions were predominantly ideologically motivated there wouldn’t be a skew in the social demographics affected. They would be *targeting* girls irrespective of their background.

Sorry, but this isn’t true. People can have ideological motivations but retain a sense of tactical expediency. The Shankhill Butchers targeted isolated Catholics because they were easy to kidnap but that doesn’t mean they killed them for reasons other than their being Catholic. The murderers of Stephen Lawrence attacked him and Duwayne Brooks because they were alone and hopelessly outnumbered but that doesn’t mean they did so for reasons other than their being black. Socio-economic factors may, to some extent, explain their disproportionate targeting of white girls but it isn’t the self-evident truth you seem to be asserting.

40. So Much For Subtlety

34. Kulvinder

I think you should try harder to make an argument that i can respond to

Not sure I can. I tried, God knows I tried. Oh well. We won’t think less of you.

Charlieman

I think that you failed to deliver that anecdote to anyone that gives a shit.

I agree. Or rather I would if you used a different word. Anecdote does not mean what you seem to think it does. However that does not reflect on me.

Sunny Hundal

Just out of curiousity – what drove the white, older Catholic men to abuse young boys at Catholic churches?

Who knows? But if paedophiles were attracted to becoming Catholic priests because of the robes and the access to choir boys, wouldn’t you kind of think the robes and the choir boys had something to do with it?

Was it because they were also white kids? Was it Catholicism? We rarely see that being put in terms that imply they were being abused BECAUSE the kids were also Catholic.

I doubt many of the children abused in America were White. Certainly a lot in Canada were not. There is no culture of abuse in Catholic communities. There is not even the remotest hint of tolerance for this. On the other hand in some communities in the UK there is very widespread contempt for “slags” and many people who seem to think the victims got what was coming to them.

But it is possible, I am sure, to have a discussion about Catholic abuse in a way it is not about this sort of abuse. The first thing LC usually brings up is celibacy. Do you think that religion and culture played a role in Catholic abuse?

[*] Shankill

42. Arthur Seaton

“The majority of divorces are initiated by women for basically frivolous reasons.”

Oh the frivolity of divorce! Good to see Le Pen groupie So Much for Zyklon B add an amusing Victorian misogyny to his petri-dish of hysterical bigotry. Do carry on telling us how this case proves the Muslims are going to get get our women Mr Zyklon, we’re eager to learn.

43. Charlieman

@32. So Much For Subtlety

This is total barrage. How do you have the opportunity to *think*?

44. john reid

ITV said before the news report “we stress that most rapes are by white people” and then revealed 83% of those found guilty are Pakistani asian, hardly the press saying its A race thing.

45. Dick the Prick

Is there politics here? Perverts are banged up – cool?

What does it say about white culture in Britain today, that there were girls in a position to be exploited in this way? Where were their families? Where was the wider community? Where was the State, from the school, to the surgery, to the police, to the social services department?

47. al awaki

Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial?

Please be accurate – the left wing media – bbc news, the guardian, independent and most UK blogs and social media etc is trying to cover up, or diminish the race angle.

Other media, and people are sick of white people being called racist by the left wing media, whilst non- whites get away with rape, child abuse, honor killing, ethnic cleansing, child witch murder, vote rigging, and other forms of multiculturism because socialists want their votes.

Hi Cath,

In that piece I said this preceding those comments

I have argued before that this is an issue more about segregation, poverty and drugs than race. Paedophilia is not just an Asian issue. That however doesn’t make this any more right. There have been other documentaries on paedophilia, one specifically focused on the Catholic Church, so we can’t complain of being unfairly picked on.

The point I was trying to make (possibly badly) was that Muslim leaders assumed this was a race issue and therefore did not want to air this issue because they assumed that.

also, people have referened Mohammad Shafiq’s comments above to say if he says it must be true, and that there is a racial element to it.

But this is what the same guy said last year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12142177

Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Muslim youth group the Ramadhan Foundation, rejected any suggestion such abuse was “ingrained” in Britain’s Pakistani community, but he said it was an issue.
….
But he added: “These gangs that operate are criminals. There’s nothing in their culture, there’s nothing in their religion to suggest that this sort of thing is ingrained.

“And for Jack Straw, a former home secretary, to suggest that this somehow is ingrained within young Pakistani men, I think is quite dangerous.”

The important thing is to become more culturally aware and gain a greater understanding as to why a particular group of men will unite and organise themselves to groom and rape young girls, even gang rape regularly colluding together with no shame as if it were an acceptable practice or law of the land. Here in the UK it is wholly unacceptable which is why It’s vital to understand where, why and how these attitudes have been nurtured and condoned. For this there needs to be fearless honesty and accountability that can address the root source cause. Only then can solutions as to what can be done to bring light to the delusions and misogyny be achieved.

50. Charlieman

@49. Charle: “The important thing is to become more culturally aware and gain a greater understanding as to why a particular group of men will unite and organise themselves to groom and rape young girls, even gang rape regularly colluding together with no shame as if it were an acceptable practice or law of the land.”

That is a fine question. But how did “care” expose vulnerable people to abusers? It is not a fucking hypothesis.

51. So Much For Subtlety

42. Interesting, Arthur, that you seem to think divorce was Victorian. How amusing. By the way isn’t Arthur’s pathetic ad hom a violation of comment policy?

43. Charlieman

This is total barrage. How do you have the opportunity to *think*?

I don’t know, although I could make a few suggestions. Certainly no one seems able to even challenge anything I have said so it is not as if the bar is all that high.

Sunny Hundal

The point I was trying to make (possibly badly) was that Muslim leaders assumed this was a race issue and therefore did not want to air this issue because they assumed that.

So the perpetrators make it clear this is a race issue, their community leaders think this is a race issue. But here on LC we are to assume anything but that it is a race issue? Interesting.

It is interesting that they did not want to air it because of race. Presumably what they meant is that they did not care if White girls were suffering as long as no one should criticise the South Asian British Muslim community.

“And for Jack Straw, a former home secretary, to suggest that this somehow is ingrained within young Pakistani men, I think is quite dangerous.”

Dangerous != untrue.

52. Charlieman

@51. So Much For Subtlety:

Me speaking: “This is total barrage. How do you have the opportunity to *think*?”

SMFS: “I don’t know, although I could make a few suggestions. Certainly no one seems able to even challenge anything I have said so it is not as if the bar is all that high.”

Me: No response.

53. Albert Spangler

I’m actually quite impressed by SMFS, combining some interesting analysis with some pretty heinous jumps of logic . I’d half suspect there was a group of people who’s fulltime job was to patrol comments and make those statements with such rapidity and force that people get put off responding, if I thought anyone really cared that much.

My view is that the police and media are on the defensive. There has been such a problem with institutional racism that there’s been a kind of backlash against anything that could be perceived to ‘against’ minorities, to the point where it’s far easier to ignore and downplay certain crimes to avoid the responsibility from the usual ‘racism’ hooting types. Yet institutional and general racism also exist far more than many people would believe.

I personally detest racism with a burning passion, and I honestly think that a lack of desire to confront these issues due to fear of being branded ‘racist’ plays into both the hands of horrible far right types and the criminals who play the racist card to avoid confrontation. Fake racism declarations are, in my mind, almost as damaging as actual racism, as it only breeds resentment and anger amongst all types of people.

I come from a similar position to 19. I’ve had family members assaulted and racially abused by people, yet the police refused to classify it as a racist assault. While this may stay from the main point here, I think it’s a similar problem, a lack of willingness to confront these issues in case it lands someone in the shit.

There is a nasty gang culture which some people seem to try to live up to, and it needs to be dealt with honestly, ignoring cries from both the right and left about whatever they see the problem as being (it’s racism wah/it’s muslims durr) and confront it head on. It does not need to be a racial issue, as much as many other people want it to be, and I don’t think it should be. But it needs to be dealt with strongly by people who are prepared to do the right thing without worrying about and falling into the trap of pc whinging or bnp ranting. Otherwise we blunder into the territory of it being ‘more ok’ to groom children of a particular race. It’s always vile, and it should always be stopped, regardless of culture, race or anything else.

@ SMFS – I completely agree about that comment to you.

I heard the man from the Ramadhan foundation on the news last night, and I thought he was quite good – it would have been great if this had all been aired and dealt with originally, and I think both BNP types and liberals with misplaced anxieties haven’t helped matters. I’ll confess that I’ve sometimes blanked out awkward facts because I don’t like their provenance, at least at first – but if they are true it’s better for everyone to discuss them rather than allow the BNP/EDL to own them, distort them, and (correctly) claim that the problem is being ignored. If it’s only the BNP discussing them you definitely won’t be reminded, for example, about the possible Thai parallel.

55. Dear Old Ted

The backdrop to this is massive reductions in the funding of services for young people across the country. Let’s face it, ‘we’ don’t really like kids or women in this country, especially if they are working class and haven’t had a decent start in life.

56. flyingrodent

Why the media focus on race in the “child grooming” trial?

Well, indeed. You didn’t see a lot of focus on race in this case from 2009… http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/8035680.stm …or this one from 2010. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11569283 Neither of them are any less horrifying than the Bradford case.

I’ve written about this before*, and it’s as plain as day that race is presented so centrally because it gives this case an attribute that the others lacked – an opportunity to pin the blame on an unpopular bugbear and then indulge in a bit of moral grandstanding.

From the get-go, every time this case has appeared in court, it’s been accompanied by a rash of articles and reports decrying the political correctness that somehow prevents their authors talking about race and sexual abuse – while their authors are explicitly talking about race and sexual abuse. Linking race and sexual abuse is taboo, an unmentionable truth, a no-no, a sacred cow, the gorilla in the pantry or whatever, they tell their readers and viewers, and then they… explicitly link race and sexual abuse.

As insane as it sounds, half the newspapers in this country have run editorials or opinion pieces in the last year claiming that they are being prevented from speaking out on race and sexual abuse, while actually speaking out forthrightly and stridently about race and sexual abuse in the highest-selling media organisations in the land. As any sane human would expect, none of them have faced any negative consequences whatsoever.

The target of these pieces isn’t Asian men, or Muslims or any specific minority or even child abusers at such. The target is the public’s perpetually offended sense of personal victimhood, injustice and persecution, which is the vein you must hit if you want to sell newspapers.

It’s absolutely no different to stories about women having a billion kids so they can claim council houses or Britain’s Got Talent contestants claiming disability allowance, both of them with the assistance of our overweening culture of soft-touch blah blah whatever.

Both give the reader 1) villains to villify; 2) a context of your-money-funded villain-encouragement to rail against and 3) a sense of personal, wounded outrage and resentment to nurse and stroke… thus bringing the reader back to buy the paper again the next day, to find out what else they are not allowed to hear about.

All-white child abuse rings can’t really be sold to this market. They don’t trip the right switches. If a bunch of white men abuse a group of children, nobody can pretend that the abusers are somehow protected by a nebulous political correctness; nobody can credibly feign concern that they could face a recriminations for stating that child abuse is wrong. It’s just a depressing reminder that there are large numbers of evil fucks out there, and it’s hard to make money by depressing your readers and making them feel helpless.

Asian men abusing kids, though – that can easily be reconciled into a pre-existing freakout about PC Gone Mad/Overindulgence of criminals/Reluctance to criticise ethnic minorities/Discrimination against white people or any number of similarly retarded, tabloid-fodder stories. It stokes anger and indignation. Indignation sells bucketloads!

Summary: The targets here aren’t Asians, or criminal-coddling libruls or even sex offenders.

The targets here are sales targets. If that means making race a critical factor where its relevance is debatable and pretending to be afraid of a non-existent, never-occurring PC Brigade retribution… Well then, that’s all well and good.

Don’t imagine that everything is about politics. It isn’t. Even the Express is a business; even the Mail would tell its readers tomorrow that labour unions are awesome or that hoodies are lovely, if those stories sold better than encouraging a sense of aggrieved victimhood does.

*http://flyingrodent.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/concern-trolling-how-to.html

Hardly surprising that a writer from an asian backgroundclaims ‘it’s not a race thing’if there was evidence that it was, would you speak about it in your article?somehow i’m doubtful.

Sunny says

I’d challenge anyone to offer evidence that Asians are more predisposed to sexual violence than other races.

Ben says

almost half of the known offenders in cases of grooming have been Asian

Sunny says

Lots of factors can lead to this. For example, the local police and community DID sweep the problem under the carpet so it just grew.

Ah.

So it’s the fault of the police who stood back and allowed Pakistani gangs to groom under age girls and not clamping down on it sooner..

Displaying their institutional racism for all to see, once again.

This is all very confusing………….

@pajar et al – it may be the case that Asian men, or certain subsets of that group, are over represented in one type of sexual crime, and there are various cultural factors why that might be so at this time, in certain places. There might also be legitimate points to make about the position of women in for example some MENA countries. But that all seems perfectly compatible with SH’s point about Asian predisposition to sexual crime.

“Hardly surprising that a writer from an asian backgroundclaims ‘it’s not a race thing’if there was evidence that it was, would you speak about it in your article?somehow i’m doubtful.”

Exactly.

“Police fears of being branded racist ‘left grooming gang free to abuse teenage girls for two years,’ says former Labour MP”

Because of people like Sunny…

62. Tom (iow)

How it works
http://xkcd.com/385/

Sunny,

Regarding the caption: “Why the media focus on “race” in the child grooming trial.

I think the headline to your article is a question which can be answered by flipping the profiles of the people involved:

‘White men grooming Asian girls’,
‘Black men grooming White girls’,
‘White men grooming black girls’,
‘Asian men grooming Chinese girls’,
‘Asian men grooming Eskimo girls’ ………

Whatever the scenario race is the vital element – not a peripheral one.

Failure to discuss this properly for fear of talking about a concern of the far-right does us no favours.

PS:I heard Kieth Vaz talk about it on the Today programme this morning and he mentioned BNP about 4 times before finally being cornered into talking about the case rather than his concerns.

The comment @62 is right. The reason that the media focus on race is that it is a signal issue. To see why just mentally swap the races of perpetrators and victims and imagine that groups of white men were banding together to sexually abuse Asian children. It would be immediately obvious to everyone that such a thing is monstrously racist: an act of violence against both Asian children as children and Asian children as Asians.

But since we live in a world where unpleasant truths are not to be spoken, although the press can’t ignore the fact that race is an issue (they are human after all–for the most part, anyway), instead they reinterpret the whole thing through a lens that is more familiar: how this will affect the anti-racist movement that seeks to make the native British more understanding about foreign cultures.

Race and religion are an issue as the people doing it are pakistani muslims, pure and simple.

There have been a load of cases of pakistani muslims raping/grooming and prostituting white british girls. 36 in blackburn, 4 in derby, the 9 in the bbc article. There were several pages in the Times in March on this very subject, including a peice about a girl who killed herself due to the abuse. The texts between the men were very revealing about their attitude towards white girls, they were massively derogatory. if you want to read the articles, you will have to pay Murdoch to get thru the paywell, or you could go your library and have a look at the back issues.

It is played down by the bbc/guardian etc as they are full on with the multi cultural agenda.

Hopefully this will see the light of day more and more, but I doubt there will be questions on Queston Time.

Kulvinder @12

If Jerome Taylor wants to say that ‘kaffirism’ plays a significant role than i’d be interested to know what rationale he thinks ‘white’ sex tourists who abuse asian children have for the crimes they commit.

That ”kaffirism” is an interesting concept here. I see that there was a bit of discussion of it on twitter last night between Jerome Taylor and Sunny.
http://twitter.com/#!/jerometaylor

I don’t really understand how twitter works, but it seems like Sunny was rejecting the idea of there being such a thing. These men were from Pakistan and Afghanistan though remember. Many of them were not even raised in the UK or went to school here, but Pakistan. Where things are totally different to the UK. They may still well hold very strong Pakistani views, and view any teenage girls running around at night to be not much better than prostitutes. Which would be quite common in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Some British Pakisatnis have obviously been influenced by this culture too.
And this will be one of the reasons for the media coverage the opening headline of this thread was asking about.

Many of these men, though whilst living in the UK, have brought their very male and tribal kind of identity with them and remain inside and socialise in those kinds of groups. Men socialising only with other men from their cultural and linguistic group. Of course a certain amount of ”kaffirism” would come into it I’d say.
When they’re working as taxi drivers, taking the drunk English people home at night and tut-tutting about the way that English women behave.

Of course new immigrants from south Asia or north Africa find it quite bizarre and shocking when they first see it. Why wouldn’t they? Coming from Pakistan to England for the first time, and getting a job in a kebab shop or working as a mini-cab driver. It’s a different world.
The idea of ”Slutwalks” would be a pretty alien concept to much of the wider Asian communities in the UK, so the fact that Asian born men don’t get it is hardly surprising.

67. flyingrodent

since we live in a world where unpleasant truths are not to be spoken…

All manner of “unpleasant truths” about the Bradford grooming trial along the lines you describe, both real and hysterical, have been spoken at very, very great length throughout, right up until the present moment.

There have been numerous reports about apparent links between crime and race, specifically relating to this case, in the Mail; the Guardian; on Channel Four news and its accompanying website; in the Telegraph and a on vast array of other news websites.

There have been announcements made on child grooming as a specifically Asian problem by the Minister for Children; by the previous Home Secretary; by various Members of Parliament; by the police Child Protection Centre, all of whom laid out their opinions in the starkest possible fashion. Elsewhere, it’s the hot topic on blogs, newspaper websites and nutter hangouts, with every crackpot in the land free to express his or her opinion as bluntly as he or she likes…

…And I discovered that all of this has been happening, not by months of painstaking research, but by searching on Google for five minutes back in December. Admittedly, the search was hampered by the sheer, massive quantity of whiners complaining that they’re not allowed to talk about the subject that they are in fact talking about entirely unimpeded by anyone, but it wasn’t much of a chore.

Now. Which unpleasant truths, exactly, are not to be spoken? It seems to me that every point you’re making has been repeatedly made, at ten times the volume, on far bigger platforms than this one.

Try this news report:

Last Friday, the Council, Afghanistan’s highest Islamic authority, issued a non-binding edict saying that women were worth less than men – a statement released by Mr Karzai’s office and then endorsed by the president on Tuesday.

“Men are fundamental and women are secondary,” it said, adding women should avoid “mingling with strange men in various social activities such as education, in bazaars, in offices and other aspects of life”. [Thursday 8 March 2012]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/9130508/Hamid-Karzai-under-fire-on-Afghan-womens-rights.html

66 wins; 61 is a close second.

The fact that none of the victims were of Pakistani origin tells us little, because Pakistani girls are from far closer-knit communities (so far less likely to find themselves in care or on the streets in the first place), even before any questions of knowledge were on offer.

And in general, the idea that this is some kind of race-hate-revenge mission against whitey seems deeply implausible, given the alternative scenario where we’re simply seeing some opportunistic sleazy perverts who’ve decided “we can do what we like to some girls and get away with it”.

The first scenario exists pretty much solely in racist conspiracy theories (with the fear of it being the main driver behind Deep South lynchings of black chaps who looked funny at white ladies, back in the day). The second exists, in real life, all of the time across (a subset of) men of all classes, races and nationalities.

So you’d want some pretty extraordinary evidence to support the conclusion that this case was the former rather than the latter…

If it is opportunity on its own rather than racially driven as well, then the victims would not be exclusively white.

The thing is, I’m struggling to find out any info on the actual ethnicity of the victims, the news reports seem to go “abused 70-odd young girls.” with seperate statements from people unconnected conjecturing about motivation “regard white girls as easy meat.”
From the two running narratives I’d infer that all the victims were white, but that’s not quite the same as knowing.

I think there are many factors at play here. I mostly agree with you Sunny (amazing, I know). There are cases of this in Asian countries, but this is different because of the race issue. The other factors that leads to a situation like this I think are as follows:

(1) Middle white England finds this particularily horrid simply because it is all Asian men. There is no getting around racial stereotypes. When whites see a situation like this it hits a nerve. It hits the nerve that says “we let these guys into the country and now they rape our children”, and in such an emotive case can you blame them for thinking that? It doesn’t matter if they were born here and are call Matthew or Adam. It is based on the colour of their skin and their social background.

(2) It doesn’t fit well with the white’s perspective of Asian men as not treating women well. Whether it is stonings for adultery, not allowing them to drive or be educated, or smacking their wife, even if this is a small minority, it is the small minority who ruins it for the rest. This type of offence just adds to that sterotype.

Yes there are awful white’s, black’s, hispanics, etc. etc. etc. But it is because this happened in Britain, a predominantly white country. The same type of outrage would have taken place locally if a group of white men had been found guilty of assaulting Pakistani underage girls. The nerve hit there would have been: “look at these white imperialists coming into our country as usual and taking our women like they own them”

There is racial divides here. To try and say there isn’t is nuts, but why worry about the reporting of it? We all know the tentions at play here. We should only be worried when that sentiment crosses social boundaries, and impedes on legal boundaries, but given the sentences ranging from 4 years to 19. It sounds like the courts got it spot on.

Ah, yes–the generic “whiners” trope. You’re one of my favourite UK bloggers, Flying Rodent, but at times I wish you came with more than one speed.

73. Kismet Hardy

I’ll tell you what fucks me off. A bunch of evil cunts do evil things and the focus is on ‘Asian’ and ‘Muslim’, and Asians and Muslims have to actually say things like not all asian muslims are paedophile rapist scum or, you know, non-asian non-muslims can often be paedophile rapist scum too, like.

I’m going to draw a wanky parallel because I’m in a wanky mood. When an American soldier (bear with me) goes nuts and machine guns a bunch of kids, everyone (rightly) says he has mental issues. Only the crazy will say this behaviour is indicative of all Americans. An Asian Muslim does something similar? Obviously a terrorist like the rest of them.

These paedo blokes are scum. And while no one can do anything about the fact that they’re Asian, they categorically are NOT muslim

And in general, the idea that this is some kind of race-hate-revenge mission against whitey seems deeply implausible, given the alternative scenario where we’re simply seeing some opportunistic sleazy perverts who’ve decided “we can do what we like to some girls and get away with it”.

Who’s claimed it was a “race hate mission”? I’ve no doubt that they were doing it to satisfy their perverse libidos but it’s entirely plausible that they targeted white girls because of their particular disdain for them.

See

One of the men branded his victim a ‘white bitch’ when she resisted…

And

One of the men on trial in Liverpool said: “You white people train them in sex and drinking, so when they come to us they are fully trained.”

Impressed as I am by the in-depth sociological commentary on this thread, I have to wonder if there’s a fundamental aspect being missed – namely that procuring underage sex is an almost universally vilified activity, and that if you are engaged in such activity your aims are not only to evade detection by the law, but also to prevent word of your illicit activities getting back to your nearest and dearest.

In this sense there’s a direct relationship between white men travelling to Asia to abuse and these Asian gangs targeting girls outside of their communities – because it significantly lessens the risk of being found out by their own families, who would likely disown them in a heartbeat if that happened.

Interestingly enough, the ethnicity of paedophiles has never been mentioned… until now. Anyone would think that there was a real need to focus on the race of the perpetrators. There isn’t. The case of Little Teds nursery in Plymouth being a good case in point.

Have a look at this article from the Telegraph and tell me where anyone’s ‘race’ has been mentioned.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/5488501/Female-nursery-worker-arrested-over-paedophile-network-investigation.html

Kismet Hardy re Comment 73:

“These paedo blokes are scum. And while no one can do anything about the fact that they’re Asian, they categorically are NOT muslim”

Scum – Agreed.

The fact they don’t observe the teachings of their religion is self evident – but exactly who are you to say whether a Muslim is a Muslim, or a Christian a Christian, or a Hindu a Hindu (etc etc etc)?

If their crimes had been fare dodging, drink driving, fraud or GBH would you be so keen to propose these men were not Muslims?

Are prisons the sole preserve of atheists?

@74

Quite. The fact that fat, sweaty, white men go to Thailand to indulge in sex with teenage girls seems to have escaped the attention of the BNP and other psychos.

79. flyingrodent

Interestingly enough, the ethnicity of paedophiles has never been mentioned… until now.

Also interestingly, any time I’ve seen a thread on sexual offences on LibCon previously, it’s usually only a matter of seconds before a load of jokers start kicking off about false rape allegations, misandry and so on.

Amazingly, that hasn’t happened in this case. No doubt that’s because they’ve been found guilty, and no other reasons are relevant.

Ah, yes–the generic “whiners” trope.

I did also make a couple of fairly straightforward points in that comment, ones that should be fairly difficult to refute, I would’ve thought.

@72. Kismet Hardy: I think you’ll find that the verdict on an American soldier going crazy on a killing spree is a bit more split than just ‘he’s a mentalist’. I’ve never seen a forum or message thread anywhere (wherever on the political spectrum) that would be so unanimous in its reaction. I think there would be a lot of people that would be quoting lists of other atrocities committed by ‘crazy Americans’ on civilians etc.

Also, is the “they categorically are NOT muslim” a tip of the hat to the ‘X couldn’t be Y because a real Y wouldn’t do X’ type of argument or something else. From what I understand from the story, and the fact that I don’t live too far from the Heywood/Rochdale area, under any other circumstance, the people involved would be described as Muslim and largely of Pakistani descent.

I’d much rather the Rochdale/Oldham/Ashton areas didn’t erupt into race-rioting this summer, but I’m not sure it helps anyone either if we ignore ‘uncomfortable’ issues if they are there.

81. Chaise Guevara

@ 79 Oliver

“Also, is the “they categorically are NOT muslim” a tip of the hat to the ‘X couldn’t be Y because a real Y wouldn’t do X’ type of argument or something else.”

Yeah, it’s No True Scotsman. For the record, I’ve argued with Christians trying to make out that atheists are unusually immoral, then defend against examples of atrocities carried out in the name of Christ by saying the people who did them aren’t really Christians because Christians don’t carry out atrocities…

…so far less likely to find themselves in care or on the streets in the first place…

This is true. But black children are far more likely to be in care than children of other backgrounds and they represent 1% of the victims of these crimes.

The question was: ”Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial?”
And a good reason is that it is such a difficult and spun issue. You can see that here – and the way it was talked about on the radio today. Nicky Campbell kept asking was race an issue, and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown thought it was partly. Race or culture.

When people live and socialise within particular communities, and do business through their contacts within those communities, this is another thing that can draw the interest the media when unusual stories or practices come to light.

For example, I have only heard of ”sheds with beds” in the last few days.
It was something on the radio about Newham and the Olympics or something, and being in that part of east London, rightly or wrongly, I thought that this world be something in the ”immigrant communities”. Landlords letting out ever smaller and unsuitable sub-divided rooms and even sheds, to desperate people who needed somewhere to sleep.
New immigrants perhaps as Newham has so many. All those young men and students from Indian and Pakistan. And the asylum seekers who came through Calais. They all head to places like Newham, where everything is possible.

Is it a race issue too? I can only guess.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/slum-landlords-put-thousands-at-risk-in-squalid-sheds-with-beds-7310559.html

Becoming landlords is something that south Asian communities have gotten in to in a big way in many parts of the country. And they will have gone into these businesses and bought up houses and shops in a collective way that gives them more clout than individuals from the wider community. So in some cities that have a student housing area, a disproportionate number of the landlords might be Asian. Because that was a way of making a living that was seen as valuable within that comnmunity, and money moved around in the community in a way that the wider society can not match.

A similar community based way of running mini-cab firms operates all over the country I’m sure. With new arrivals quickly finding jobs and accomodation within their own community.

Which is all fine. But it will invariably have something of the Sub-continent about it as far as keeping things in-house and away from the tax system.

On that last point, I remember the two brothers from Forest Gate who got raided by the police where one was shot, explaining £20,000 in cash in a box under the bed as being their custom for not putting money in banks, and that it was from rents on property they owned. The police at first had thought it might be money for terrorism.
It was probably not put through all the proper channels for tax.
Why whould it when they were getting cash from their tennants?

@Kismet Hardy:

“they categorically are NOT muslim”.

Is this an argument regarding ex-Muslims or Muslims being ‘bad’ at being ‘good’ Muslims? What’s the score with Muslims turning their backs on their faith? I thought Muslim communities were generally against this kind of thing?

@ 81. Chaise Guevara

I thought as much. I’ve seen a lot of that defence style over the last few years and applied to a lot of stuff: capitalism, religion, patriotism etc.

You are really quite stupid if you believe that to be the case. Why don’t you try doing some actual case specific research instead of spouting your leftist brainwashed drivel as fact.

There may be a racist agenda in some of the reactions to this case, but interestingly Dr Prabha Kotiswaran’s new work on Indian sex workers in Calcutta
(Dangerous Sex, Invisible Labor: Sex Work and the Law in India, Publisher: Princeton University Press ISBN-10: 0691142513 ISBN-13: 978-0691142517) suggests that many women in the sex industry in Calcutta took to such work because of the extent of sexual harassment in the workplace.

There is a proven attitude to women among Indian men that is problematic. If the men in the current case were Indian would this not be relevant? Such attitudes will not disappear because the people have crossed borders, nor does it mean that other men do not behave appallingly.

87. Chaise Guevara

@ 84 Oliver

” I’ve seen a lot of that defence style over the last few years and applied to a lot of stuff: capitalism, religion, patriotism etc.”

Aye – basically any group that someone belongs to and feels the need to defend.

Ben: where’s the 1% source? All I’ve seen is assertions that the girls were white and no breakdown of ethnicity. Also, are there many black people in Rotherham anyway…?

89. shellshock

@Sunny
you ask:

Just out of curiousity – what drove the white, older Catholic men to abuse young boys at Catholic churches?

Was it because they were also white kids? Was it Catholicism? We rarely see that being put in terms that imply they were being abused BECAUSE the kids were also Catholic

I think it is to do with the repession of sex and sexuality. muslims and catholics have similar views it seems on the status of women, which is they are worthless and their sexuality is dangerous and provocative.

However poverty is the great leveller, so if you can convince yourself of the worthless of the people you abuse, you justify your own actions. The majority of children abused by the church were poor. Full stop. There were few middle class children in their ranks, they were orphaned, poor, from too large families etc etc.

Similarly there is an undercurrent of hatred against poor people in the UK. Particularly poor white ‘chavs’ who are held responsible for their poverty, and despised for it.

The victims in both scenarios were powerless, and the hypocrisy of religion is common to both sets of abusers. Holding themselves to be on a higher level than the rest of society with their faux piety.

One thing is for sure, there will be many many more of these cases to come. And the communities from whence they come will need to take a long hard look at themselves when they are sneering at ‘easy’ white girls, and point out that western culture is going to hell in a handcart. Just like the church, the belief system on which they have built their lives is easier to protect than vulnerable children.

See page 10 -

http://www.ceop.police.uk/Documents/ceopdocs/ceop_thematic_assessment_executive_summary.pdf

(Minor correction: it’s 1% of known victims.)

I did also make a couple of fairly straightforward points in that comment, ones that should be fairly difficult to refute, I would’ve thought.

Straightforward, perhaps, but not necessarily any less generic—I’m beginning to wonder if you don’t outsource some of your LC comments to an acerbic bot with handful of templates, a find and replace function and electronic copy of the Viz Profanisaurus.

You’re right that they’re hard to refute, though, at least by me. They properly belong to a conversation that you’re having with someone else.

Yes, I agree that people are free to speak their minds. Yes, I agree that people do so. None of that is inconsistent with unpleasant truths not being recognised. What do I mean? Well, let’s think of an example. Wikipedia tells me that estimates of the casualties in Libya are about 30,000 dead. Does the fact that we have a free press in this country mean that people here have properly acknowledged their own role in that? Of course not. For one thing, the scale is too great. For another, they mostly lost interest as soon as it dropped off the evening news. And that’s merely our latest foreign jaunt. We could easily extend the sample out and get an even greater effect size.

But wait, just because it doesn’t follow that simply because people are free to speak the truth, they will, neither does it follow that people won’t. In a nation of millions, there’s bound to be a few philosophers. Sure, but what of it? When I’m making generalisations, I like to keep them general.

And is it an accurate generalisation? Well, YMMV, but si monumentum requires, dear Mr Rodent, circumspice. From where I sit, this thread alone is sufficient evidence. On the one hand, predatory racists are systematically abusing and gang-raping vulnerable children—a phenomenon which is widespread and with a now long-running history. On the other hand, comments here centre not on the plight of victims or the condemnable actions of the perpetrators, but on contorted attempts to prove that members of one ethnic group gang-raping the children of another ethnic group is not in fact racist (mere expedience!), and complaining (even whining) about how this makes everyone else look.

If other commenters can’t see that such acts stem from a racist view of these children as worthless and disposable, and that such attitudes need to strongly and unconditionally condemned in public and not minimised and covered up because it makes us feel uncomfortable then there is little that I can write or say to move them, but given the (in my experience) prevalence of such views, it is hardly surprising that this has gone on for so long and indeed continues to do so.

93. Kulvinder

Ben that report contains general information about localised grooming and explicitly makes clear that it doesn’t draw national conclusions about ethnicity as the data is incomplete. To your credit you’re the only one that has provided any information about the subject of black children who are abused but given the report is quite clear that the only point it is making is that 1% of known victims are black; im not sure what if any help it is.

Interestingly it does highlight the lack of local demographic research as being an area of weakness. It would be safe to assume however that where the ‘black’ and ‘asian’ population were present in significant numbers (which can’t really be said for Rochdale) we’d see similar sorts of social tensions. Its worth remembering that the race riots of 2005 were founded upon false rumours of asian men abusing a black girl.

Now to be fair i admit to a massive amount of extrapolation (not least because the original rumours were false) but nonetheless it does demonstrate those kinds of rumours have traction in areas where there are significant numbers of black and asian people living in proximity.

Kulvinder -

Actually, you’re right on this point. If officials in London and Birmingham, say, didn’t provide data to CEOP that might explain that statistic. That’ll teach me to speculate in public.

95. someone whose comments will be censored any time now

bullshit sunny

People here seem to be conflating two issues; 1)The grooming in Rochdale 2) Grooming elsewhere. It’s certainly true that white men may abuse white kids ( catholic church for instance) in other areas, and black/white/asian men frequently go to thailand etc…

But, In Rochdale, there does seem to be a racial element. Many posters here and community leaders in Rochdale (who are Asian themselves) identify that in that particular area of the country this is a racial problem.

The idea that you can point to a group of white/black men on the opposite side of the country, even from several years ago, and say ‘oh look, child grooming is not about race’ is farcical. Nobody is arguing that all asians everywhere are latent racist pedophiles, what is being argued is that, in Rochdale, groups of asian men tend to see white girls as easy targets. This has been going on for years and years in that area. Why are all the victims white, if there are asian men in that area then there must be asian women too. So why are only white girls being targeted in Rochdale?

Sarah AB

Great piece by Nick Lowles, I thought.

You seem to rate Hope not Hate Sarah. I find them totally lame, and that article too. How many times does he mention the BNP? Does he think we’re all soft in the head and can be so easily swayed by those idiot people from that tiny party?

The convicted men were all born in Pakistan and one in Afghanistan. Which has to be part of the explaination to what has gone on here. Things are so very different in those two countries, where women who are raped can be imprisoned for having unlawful sex. Of course a percentage of immigrants from those countries will retain some very backward views.

You cannot judge a great religion like Islam (peace be upon the wonderful, forward-thinking men who practice it, and the girls and women at home waiting for a male relative to take them shopping or outside once a week) by a few hundred million practitioners, or by the fact that everywhere there is an Islamic Republic they have instituted laws and values that would lock up homosexuals, take women out of the agora unless accompanied by a wiser male relative–for God’s sake, do you want a gang of Pakistani men to rape you in their sex club? Then stay inside and let the western sluts have that kind of fun, or by the fact that the Islamists are self-segregating and want to enforce their tribal and original manners and customs in the country that they move to because there own country is a hell created by Islamic Practitioners.

Sure, anyone who has been to India knows that Islamic men molest “western” women in public. Sure, these married men guard their own Islamic daughters and think your daughters are whores sent by Allah for their personal use.

But there are probably several Muslims who aren’t rapists or grudge carrying horndogs looking on western women as sluts.

Great article, and keep publishing stuff like this while you can, because after the Islamists take power, homosexuals and liberals and other enemies of the Prophet, peace be unto his name–I don’t want Muslims after my ass–will be silenced, arrested, or killed.

Thank goodness for Brendan O’Neill.

If you want an insight into how cowardly public debate in Britain has become, look no further than the controversy over the Rochdale Asian sex gang. The discussion about the despicable crimes committed by these eight Pakistanis and one Afghani has revealed extraordinary levels of relativism and self-censorship in modern Britain. Indeed, it seems it is now virtually impossible to have a serious discussion about problematic cultural attitudes, because to do so would apparently offend minorities and, even worse, stir up the passions of the latently racist white masses. And so, in the name of protecting Muslim communities’ sensitivities and dampening down white working-class people’s alleged savagery, we keep quiet about certain things; we gag ourselves.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100157120/muslims-sex-gangs-and-white-working-class-women/

100. douglas clark

Rant mode. Locked and engaged.

I think that there are always predators on the vulnerable.

It doesn’t have, at it’s root, racism.

It has, at it’s root a pernicious desire to be top dog. To dominate a given situation for reasons of sexual stimulous.

It does not matter to these people who they abuse, it only matters to them that they can. And get a boner.

It is, largely, a warped sense of sexual gratification. The rest of it are excuses for totally inadequate men to use in Court, should they be unlucky enough – in their view – to arrive there.

It is their inability to relate to anyone that damns them as beyond the pale.

And I agree with the Flying Rodent that racialising this is a nonsense. White men do it too. As Kulvinder might have said, there ain’t much of a difference between seeking gratification in London and in Thailand. Although the brutality of a gang is another issue.

I seem to recall, in a website a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away, that Sunny rightly had issues with predatory Lebanese walking around the beaches of Cronulla and dictating their dress code and ‘morals’. That resulted in a riot.

It is the two faces of the same coin. A repressed or repressing sexuality finds an excuse for anything it wants to do or pretends not to want anyone else to do. Well, fuck that.

My opinion?

People that are freaked out by their ‘cultural identity’ are likely to fuck up. The rest of us should treat them with utter contempt. They do not represent you, whether you are a Catholic a Bhuddist or a Muslim or whatever else. And the full force of the law should be dropped on them, from a great height. Whatever their claims to a cultural ‘identity’.

Rant over.

If other commenters can’t see that such acts stem from a racist view of these children as worthless and disposable…

Once again, no evidence has been offered for the conjecture that this is a *racist* view.

Yes, they view the kids as worthless and disposable. See also: how middle-class people in general perceive chavs (a group that the girls being abused in this case would definitely fall into).

Do white paedophiles abuse runaways, children in care, children with unstable family lives? Yes, of course they do: those are the most important factors in whether a child is likely to end up being abused.

The rapists in this case are reflecting a wider view in British society; it’s no bloody surprise that people in British society are fervently trying to blame it on the darkies instead…

Why are all the victims white, if there are asian men in that area then there must be asian women too. So why are only white girls being targeted in Rochdale?

Try reading the thread, you prat. Mostly because they’re targeting girls who’re in care, who tend not to be Asian; also because it’s easier to objectify someone you have no social connections with than your mate Bob’s niece (hence the relevance of sex tourists).

john b, you’re spinning. First you equate sex toursim in Thailand with what went on in Rochdale, when 99% at least (it must be) of sex tourists are content to go with the prostitutes and bar girls that are above the age of consent. It’s still grubby, but is more like visiting a brothel or massage parlor in the UK (I presume)

Secondly this thing about ”racism” and everyone saying this or that.
People are saying all kinds of things. Many bending over backwards to make sure nothing negative about the culture of Pakisatn is said.
How do you think a ”Club 18-30” resort would go down in Pakistan?
With plane loads of drunken Brits flying out there to party?

It couldn’t happen of course, and these men were from that country.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning that.

103. Chaise Guevara

@ 99 damon

“Thank goodness for Brendan O’Neill”

Bloody hell, he’s right for once. However, there’s a corollary taboo that we also need to avoid. Yes, if cultural issues are feeding into crime, it’s better to discuss that than sweep it under the carpet. But if this particular case is generating more heat *specifically because it involves perceived foreigners/non-whites*, that’s not something we should brush under ther carpet either.

Basically, I’m sure it would be fun to take turns shouting “racist!” and “PC gone mad!”, but let’s not.

Sunny it would be more conducive to leaving comments if not met by abuse. My comment at #49 and the abuse at #50. It’s uncalled for and you should moderate. I work in gender internationally I should be able to give a view without abuse? The question I suggested is crucial and glad to see today’s Independent tackle it brilliantly Sex grooming the Asian Question . http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/child-sex-grooming-the-asian-question-7729068.html

105. Sadtoseeitgo

I’ve read a belly full of news paper articles and blogs on this case over the last couple of days. They have all had the socialist, multiculti, PC brigade trying cover up the facts and muddy the waters in the interests of not raising racial tensions.
They have tried to cover the perpetrators with the cloak of “Asian” (we all know it’s Pakistani Muslims, not Chinese Budists), divert attention to sex tourism in Thailand, Catholic priests buggering the choir boys, bad parenting of the victims, etc etc.
.
The facts speak for themselves the perpetrators of this type of crime are overwelmingly Pakistani Muslim men and the victims are white none-Muslim girls.

Guess this is part of the celebrated multi-culturism that make these Northern towns so vibrant. I’m so glad I live in a dull mono-cultural Southern town, not for me this New Labour multi-culti experiment.

What’s to be done about it? Well I think it’s probably a bit late now, better get use to it.

106. Chaise Guevara

@ 104 Charle

“Sunny it would be more conducive to leaving comments if not met by abuse. My comment at #49 and the abuse at #50. It’s uncalled for and you should moderate. I work in gender internationally I should be able to give a view without abuse?”

So basically, you’re falsely accusing Charlieman of abuse (all I had to do was check the comment to see that he’d done no such thing) and using that to call for him to be deleted/banned. If you want anyone who dares to disagree with you to be moderated out, it’s a bit rich to present yourself as seeking a sensible dialogue – and you can’t expect the rest of us to shed a tear if you decide the site is not “conducive to leaving comments”.

If you really do want an honest conversation, don’t sabotage it by calling for opposing views to be silenced.

107. Charlieman

@104. Charle: “Sunny it would be more conducive to leaving comments if not met by abuse. My comment at #49 and the abuse at #50.”

If you take more time to read my comment @50, you will observe that I agreed with you in the first sentence. I agree that there is a valid “why” question about “why” people from a particular social/racial/national background commit any type of offence.

In the second sentence, I raised the point that vulnerable young people “in care” were failed by the organisations who are supposed to look after them.

I am particularly angry about the second point because it is something that can and should be resolved. Care organisations cannot supervise every moment of a vulnerable person’s life but they should have spotted that something was wrong a lot earlier.

@ 3 Sunny “most religious folks involved in paedophilia cases were Catholic priests.”
Sorry Sunny, you are doing the very thing you accuse the media of doing about these cases. All the serious academic research I have seen suggests Catholic priests are no more likely than other clergy to engage in paedophilia, and much less likely than other equivalent professions, and the wider population. Yet you and others keep returning to ‘Catholic abuse’, with a drip drip effect of innuendo, so beloved of the BNP. I am not seeking to defend the Catholic Church, which clearly like the other faiths and professions has had a sexual abuse problem, or to minimise the suffering of those individuals who were subjected to these abhorrent acts. We need to remember the Sittlichkeitsprozesse, and expose the lazy non-rationalist, non-logical reasoning of the current fashion for sectarian Catholic-baiting and Moslem-baiting amongst the right-on, pseudo-intellectual, opinion-forming classes who have now become useful idiots for racists. If Joseph Goebbels’ speech at Berlin’s Deutschlandhalle on 30th May 1937, were to appear as an editorial in a newspaper these idiots would aapplaud.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Nicola Chan

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  2. Tory Reform Group

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  3. Kisandka Maracas

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  4. Jonathan Wood

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  5. Claire Mackenzie

    “@sunny_hundal: The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/RB3u8kWf (my piece, earlier)

  6. Dr Ayan Panja

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  7. Saima Mir

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  8. Naida Haq

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  9. Naz

    Update on my piece on child grooming trial. Race is present but is it the motivating factor? Unlikely http://t.co/iesY0m5H

  10. Naz

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  11. nia

    @Conwy9 @SalmaYaqoob Argh! Sorry! Credit goes to @sunny_hundal Here's the link to his piece: http://t.co/HDxeejVJ

  12. nia

    Sorry, several re-tweets of pearls of wisdom from @sunny_hundal and we'd mis-typed his name, link here: http://t.co/PFahoqlL via @libcon

  13. Nazmin Akthar

    The gang rape case – why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/iesY0m5H (my piece, earlier)

  14. flyingrodent

    @johnb78 Self-pimpery, but another explanation for THE OUTRAGE suggests itself http://t.co/ehFoVyEm

  15. The Samosa » Archive » Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial

    [...] Originally published in Liberal Conspiracy Tweet [...]

  16. Why liberals turned a blind eye to the 'grooming' of girls – Telegraph Blogs

    [...] immediately the Guardian produced a comment piece denying that there was a racial element. Sunny Hundal made the same point, even while linking to a criminal justice report which seemed to suggest the opposite. The BBC this [...]

  17. Shahzeb Jillani

    Split views: interesting blog on why some UK media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial of Asian men? http://t.co/TbJcOS7A

  18. Faridha Karim

    @HappyNaida @sunny_hundal: …why is the media fixated with their Asian / Pakistani origins? http://t.co/WTkjxghA” shocked at the responses

  19. The Samosa » Archive » Why media focus on race in ‘child grooming’ trial

    [...] Originally published in Liberal Conspiracy Tweet [...]

  20. Realising Justice for the Rochdale Victims | The Platform

    [...] considered fair game. The Greater Manchester Police Assistant Chief Constable, Steve Heywood, commented, “It is not a racial issue. This is about adults preying on vulnerable young children. It just [...]

  21. The Hammer

    Why the media focus on race in the ‘child grooming’ trial? | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/LKy4m9w2

  22. takhalus

    @munir104 http://t.co/U6HiCIdi

  23. How Politically Correct Liberals Left a Muslim Gang Free to Rape British Girls « ACT! for America Houston

    [...] The mantra was taken up by the left-wing Guardian newspaper, a prominent Labour MP, and assorted left-wing bloggers, while the BBC — the taxpayer-funded propaganda arm of Britain’s liberal-left establishment — [...]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.