Elon Musk has finally put it back on the map. Many warnings were given at the time, but there was a huge cover-up. Mostly a Labour cover-up.
The advantage of the present Starmer regime is that the Labour mendacity is now seen by more people. Even outside that nowadays somewhat less ‘united’ kingdom.
Looking back, yes even reading my own modest contribution from nine years ago now, is a surreal experience.
That contribution was in Dutch. I translated it and updated it to a limited extent.
Reading reports about ‘Rotherham’ is an absolute must for anyone involved in politics and at the same time not recommended.
It is bad for your blood pressure. Because of the atrocities and the disgusting cover-up.
It hits harder and your blood pressure rises longer than after watching a video clip of a beheading. Even one in ISIS style:
It is mainly the time it takes to decapitate a person with a knife: incomparable to the death penalty through beheading by guillotine or executioner’s axe. The perpetrators clearly do not consider the victim – sometimes a random hostage – as an enemy, criminal or thoroughly bad person, but as a piece of cattle.
Some people should perhaps not read this piece any further.
Easy meat
In 2016 I studied in particular the report Easy Meat by Peter McLoughlin. It was published by the Law and Freedom Foundation, nicknamed the ‘mosquebusters’; Yes, it was before ISIS and before ‘Cologne’.
Unlike almost all other reports on these 7th century horrors in 20th and 21st century Britain, McLoughlin mercilessly puts the spotlight on the role of Mohammedanism and those complicit by obsessively looking away.
The Law and Freedom Foundation is led by the phenomenal lawyer Gavin Boby. He wrote the foreword to the report. In it he has included a fantasy. A bit like I did last week in an essay on ‘Cologne’. With one difference: his story about a form of vigilantism in response to the complete failure of the institutions, was purely in the form of a warning.
This is how Boby magnificently concluded his foreword:
It is not realistic to simply condemn these crimes: it must be fought mercilessly.
If this does not happen, those of us who are now dismissed as firebrands, but who later stand up for restraint, will be dismissed with the simple words: “They are raping our children.”
Samantha was 12 years old
To get an idea of the 7th century horror in detail, first a long quote. About the experiences of 12-year-old Samantha in 2006.
On 27th October 2006, Samantha was abducted by two Asian men who drove her around Oldham for hours and then raped her. They threw her out of a moving car near Chadderton. She ran away and asked another man for help. He invited Samantha inside and dragged her upstairs and abused her. She ran away while he called his friends over the phone to join him.
Then a taxi, with a passenger in it, pulled up next to her to ask if she was OK. They said she looked very upset and like she had been through hell and offered to take her to the police station and then home. They took Samantha to a house on Attock Close, locked her in a room where five Asian men raped her for almost 24 hours. The ringleader was Shakil Choudhury; he was jailed for three years. This case (…) gives us an idea of how common it is for a range of men in some Muslim communities in Britain to contemplate abducting, raping and sharing a non-Muslim schoolgirl among their friends and family.
It is clear that they have little fear of being caught and convicted of a crime, and seeing a schoolgirl in a vulnerable situation is enough to give them the idea of actions that most of the population of Britain would never consider.
And what happened when this case was prosecuted only reinforced the perpetrators’ belief that they could behave in this way without significant punishment. Only one of the men involved in the abduction and sexual abuse of this 12-year-old girl was prosecuted: Shakil Choudury. He served only 3 years (of the 6-year sentence he was given) for these crimes, although the guidelines suggested he should have been sentenced to between 11 and 17 years.
On appeal, judges refused to extend the sentence (apparently because no violence was used, and the 12-year-old had been drinking alcohol). Despite refusing to name his accomplices, Choudury was released after 3 years. So even when the CPS decided to prosecute, try and appeal, the judges gave ridiculously low sentences.
Read the underlined sentence again, please.
The Privacy of Child Rapists
The scandal of thousands of destroyed lives (and an unknown number of girls murdered) finally came to the attention of British national politics and the international media in 2013, after a parliamentary committee published a report in June 2013. On page 34:
The Serious Case Review detailed one occasion when police were called to the home of Child S after she was found by her mother, at age 13, in her living room with a 32 year old male at 5am. Her mother phoned the police, reporting that Child S had been burnt by the man. Upon arrival, the police were told by Child S that she had burnt herself and so the police took no further action and failed to inform social services of the event. This was despite the fact that she had been considered to be at risk of child sexual exploitation since she was ten. Emma Jackson told us that she felt unsupported when she made her allegation of rape, my child protection officer, said to me, “If it is any consolation, you are not the first girl that has been abused and raped and you are definitely not the last”. Then one of the CID officers who was in charge of the case said to me, “If you go back to these men, we just think that it is little White slappers running around with Asians”, and that was their attitude.
South Yorkshire Police lost the clothing with DNA evidence she had provided to support her allegation of rape, reducing the case to her word against that of the attacker.
Read the underlined sentences again, please.
The girls have been terrorized, brainwashed or a mixture of the two.
That parliamentary commission came about after groundbreaking publications by journalist Andrew Norfolk in 2011 and 2012.
He got a lot of information from Mothers of Prevention.
One of them ..
… recorded the names, phone numbers and text messages of 177 ‘Asians’, including a police officer, that she found in the mobile phone of her 13-year-old daughter, who had been missing for 5 days. The police told the mother that using this information would be an infringement of the human rights of the girl and the men.
That name, Mothers of Prevention, is not a misplaced joke on my part.
It is the name that feminist Julie Bindel – the most important name on the good side – gave to her publication of four years earlier: ‘A lone voice’ in the words of McLoughlin.
Although Norfolk’s publications certainly contributed to the establishment of the parliamentary commission, he too is keen to reject the link with activities of pro-caliphate groups. “Nonsense”, the idiot wrote in the reports about it (p 54).
Caliphatists
The pro-caliphate group in Luton called itself Real Khilafah in 2005. This does not refer to the Islamic State – which had not yet been declared – but to the initiatives that were undertaken in (then not yet divided along ‘religious’ borders) India, immediately after the abolition of the Ottoman Caliphate (by Atatürk in 1924). Under the name Khilafat Movement.
(See also: my 2014 E-book IS, the Kurds and the Caliphate; Turkey: from sick occupant to paranoid neighbor and/or my recent blogpost about mister Gandhi).
Norfolk’s story was by no means a direct follow-up to the alarming reports of the courageous Julie Bindel (she initially had nowhere to go with her story).
Between her publication in 2007 and his publications, the English Defence League had been founded and violent scenes had taken place in the streets of Blackpool and other towns.
The Timeline
Now this extremely informative timeline can be supplemented with:
2025 > @ElonMusk woke up and alerted x.com users.
The disgusting practices began long before 2005.
At the end of the previous century, reports had already emerged.
These had also led to some initiatives to at least bring some things to light.
In 2004, however, the documentary Edge of the City (by Channel 4) was not broadcast on television, under pressure from ‘Unite against fascism’. Something similar happened with a programme on Radio 5.
The new fascists adorned themselves with the label anti-fascists.
More precisely, there was actually racism masquerading as anti-racism.
The foundation for the so-called marriage jihad comes almost directly from Mohammed: Mohammedan men are allowed to marry non-Mohammedan women, but the other way around is not allowed.
The idea of capturing women from the enemies and degrading them to sex slaves also comes directly from ‘the prophet’.
In the 1980s, however, the sex jihadists did not yet dare to target native, white British girls. And so their first victims were Asian themselves: Sikh girls of Pakistani or Indian descent.
The predators and their young helpers pretended to be Sikhs: they took on a different name and hid their Mohammedan background in appearance.
And so the first resistance came from organised Sikhs.
However, the media, police and politicians portrayed the actions of the Sikhs against the sex jihadists as gang violence. Sikhs went to prison. At the same time, this so-called violence between gangs did give rise to the very first steps against the Mohammedans.
In 2003, Channel 4 News had already announced that documentary. The announcement also features Labour MP Ann Cryer.
If you (rightly) call Julie Bindel a heroine, you could call this woman a devil.
She owed her candidacy for Labour to a shortlist that only included women. In the announcement of her candidacy, this subject came up with the repulsive statement “I believe there is a very strong cultural reason, it’s nothing to do with the religion lets [sic] make it quite clear, its [sic] to do with the Asian culture” (Capter 4, The Cover-up, p 76).
Another statement of hers: “My hope is that this adverse publicity will embarrass these young men into more appropriate behaviour.”
Just say ‘shame on you’ to mohammedan perps.
That horrible focus on race instead of ‘religious’ ideology
This focus on race instead of ‘religious’ ideology results in absurdly distorted figures. For example, about the victims: ‘unknown 33%’, White: 61%, Asian 3%, Black: 1%. Of the known victims, 95% were white. And those 4% ‘Asian’ victims were mainly Sikh girls. It never happened that an ‘Asian’ girl fell into the hands of a ‘white’ GROUP of perpetrators.
One of the historical leaders of the Sikhs, the legendary Tegh Bahadur, is still known in India today as Hind Di Chadar: savior of the Hindus and their faith.
In the 19th century, they defended the British Empire against a Mohammedan uprising. In the Second World War, the British India Corps, which included a very disproportionately large number of Sikhs, ensured a first turning point in the fight against the Nazis (in North Africa, against Rommel).
In that tradition, at the end of the 20th century, these Sikhs stepped forward as saviors of (Western) civilization.
And were betrayed.
On YouTube you can find images of the Sikh initiators in the 80s. Below those you find comments from presumably Mohammedan persons with a Pakistani background: triumphantly they let it be known that the Sikhs have allowed themselves to be taken in by the Hindus. That obvious hatred and warmongering…
They aren’t supposed to
Compared to the politicians, the British academics went one step further. They came up with texts such as:
… religion seems to be a red herring here, in that many offenders seem to be Muslim only in a nominal sense. Prior to arrest many drank alcohol, took drugs, did not have beards, and all engaged in extramarital sex with underage girls. Hardly the hallmarks of a strict [!] Muslim.
Loughlin adds a typically British comment to this quote:
Here Cockbain and Brayley seem to be going further, suggesting that it may be appropriate to regard the perpetrators as non-Muslims (considering that 25% of British Muslims think that those who leave Islam should be killed, it is dangerous to say that a Muslim is not a Muslim).
Even more insane:
The defendants in question are at most nominally Muslim. Practising Muslims certainly aren’t supposed to have sex with children.
‘Aren’t supposed to’…
Warning: literal head desking can cause serious harm.
The authors managed to get this text published in The Guardian on May 8, 2012, but Loughlin reports that the article subsequently disappeared from that newspaper’s website.
A difference with the Netherlands?
It is somewhat reassuring and at the same time very sad to read how Loughlin presented the Dutch approach as an example to the British.
Contacts with Dutch people contributed to the production of a video in 2008 entitled My dangerous loverboy.
The target group was of course young girls, but the film was never shown to the girls themselves; only to ‘all types of ‘social workers’.
The content of the video was also seriously flawed. The target shown in the video was 16 years old, while the average British victim was 14 years old and even girls of 11 years old were targeted.
There was no reference to the Muslim background of the perpetrators.
The convicted perpetrator in the film was 18 years old, while the actual perpetrators were on average 29 years old.
The gangs hanging around schools and shopping centres was not mentioned.
After ‘Cologne’
Why didn’t Loughlin’s report have much more of an impact at the time? The actual events were really much much worse than ‘Cologne’?
After the cesspool had been opened up quite a bit, and the role of Labour had also been denounced, the voters in the district in which Rotherham is located, simply chose a Labour candidate again.
Did the fanatical attacks on the feminist Bindel play a role in this?
Looking the other way continues, but it initially seemed as if the reaction to ‘Cologne’ had turned out differently.
After all the targets were now not only young girls, chosen on the basis of an insecure appearance and from a relatively inattentive environment.
You could say ‘less easy meat‘.
At least as important was that the intimidation at Cologne, the testing of our reaction now took place in all public view.
And it happened after ‘Rotherham’…
There was some hope
The knowledge of the fact that 70% of illegal immigrants are young men has increased somewhat.
The same applies to the fact that Frontex, the organisation set up specifically to monitor the EU’s external borders, blithely has stated that they have been able to establish that 800,000 people have crossed the border illegally; that they have therefore failed 800,000 times over.
An important line of defence of those numerous people who obsessively look the other wayers is the suggestion that sex jihad does not exist at all. That there is no qualitative or quantitative difference with the abuse by native men.
The most painful aspect of the accusations that come ‘our way’ after ‘Cologne’ is that no attempt seems to be made to use the increased concern about sexual assault and rape to take stronger action against long-standing abuses that have nothing to do with immigration.
Loughlin also described that fundamental difference between the Mohammedan gangs and the long-standing/known sexual child abuse.
That other abuse is closely linked to the anonymity of the online grooming.
Those perpetrators do not know each other.
To conclude with a euphemism: that says something, no, that says almost everything, about the underlying ‘cultural’ problem.
P.S.:
Nine years ago I translated the quotes from the report Easy Meat by Peter McLoughlin into Dutch. I had to translate them from Dutch to English because the URL used by the Law and Freedom Foundation then is now no longer owned by Gavin Boby.
Note *:
Rotherham is in quotation marks: the town is symbolic of all the gangs of Muslim men who hunt(ed) down young white girls to effectively make them into sex slaves.