UK child sex ring aided by the left

[IQS.RLOW]

Unbelievable and disgusting on a grand scale where 1400 young girls where subject to sexual abuse that went on for years mainly because the people in authority were too scared of being called racist by the finger pointing left.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... t-now.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Denis MacShane, MP for Rotherham from 1994 to 2012, actually admitted to the BBC’s World At One that “there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat, if I may put it like that. Perhaps, yes, as a true Guardian reader and liberal Leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.”

Obviously the MO didnt want to affect his chances of re-election by offending the rapist vote, so stuff the fact that 1400 girls were being pack raped by Paki Muslims

You can see this would be exactly the type of situation an ALP member would find himself in, aside from those ALP members who would be participating in the raping.

[Rorschach]

Pathetic...

[5.56 NATO]

Pathetic...

But not at all surprising..they are what they are.

[IQS.RLOW]

When you put Muslim enclaves together with leftwing bureaucracy, the outcome is inevitable. In fact you can interchange the former with many failures in society and as long as the latter is there to enable them it becomes a tragedy.

The common denominator is having the left being the bureaucracy as the guardian at the gate of decency. They are not up to the job of protecting society. They are at the forefront of actively trying to destroy it.

The left hate democracy that much they are willing to try and destroy it at any cost, being it young girls being raped, electricity prices being high, demonising carbon etc. The left is a cancer on society. Bash their fucking skulls in I say.

[skippy]

Pathetic...

It is pathetic, boofy, we all know most Muslims are extremist fascists so support right wing loonies. To try to say this occurred as a result of one side of politics aiding it is just a sad reflection on those making the accusations.
It also shows how desperate IQ has become.

[skippy]

The left hate democracy that much they are willing to try and destroy it at any cost, being it young girls being raped, electricity prices being high, demonising carbon etc. The left is a cancer on society. Bash their fucking skulls in I say.

You forgot to mention a sponge cake not rising and your jeans fitting too right.

[IQS.RLOW]

Nice try at trivialising the lefts involvement in letting 1400 young girls getting raped, sodomised, doused in petrol and gang banged by a bunch of filthy muzzies.

You should wear some of that guilt skip, but I know you are too much of a coward to do so.

[Rorschach]

Pathetic...

It is pathetic, boofy, we all know most Muslims are extremist fascists so support right wing loonies. To try to say this occurred as a result of one side of politics aiding it is just a sad reflection on those making the accusations.
It also shows how desperate IQ has become.

1/ Glad we agree.
2/ I never said anything about one side or the other of the political divide (but now I will).
3/ Ah no they don't support RW anything, they eschew democracy and use the PC brigade which are mainly of the LW progressive persuasion as USEFUL IDIOTS.
4/ The FACTS speak for themselves re the Progs and Multiculti and Islamic extremism.
5/ THE GUARDIAN has done those of us use to tolerating denial from people like yourself, a favour, because it has become the home of the more LW Prog amongst us. Those we use to point out were LW progs and biased in the media now seem to have all become employed in some way or another by the Guardian, many came from Fairfax or the ABC... so no use denying the FACTS.
6/ If you want to refute something Skippy, perhaps it is better if you try to refute the facts for a change. IQS even provided a quote in which there was a confession of the facts. So no use trying to deny them eh.

[IQS.RLOW]

Everything the left touches is either damaged or ruined.

http://townhall.com/columnists/dennispr ... /page/full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Last week, it was revealed that between 1997 and 2013, at least 1,400 girls -- in just one relatively small English city (Rotherham, population 275,000) had been raped by gangs of men over the past decade.

As summarized in a British government inquiry:

"It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators."

Why was nothing done for 16 years?

Police incompetence was a factor, but not the primary reason.

The primary reason was political correctness. It turns out that the perpetrators were all, or nearly all, of "Pakistani heritage" and the girls were all, or nearly all, white.

This explanation is not that of conservatives alone. Virtually everyone, including media and politicians on the British left, acknowledge that this is the reason. What neither they nor the American left have acknowledged is that political correctness was created and is sustained by the left.

It is a testament to the lack of self-awareness on the left that it experiences no cognitive dissonance. The New York Times and other left-wing media have thoroughly reported this story and the fact that political correctness is to blame for the ongoing atrocities against these girls. Yet they are oblivious to the fact that they are the very ones who created the moral monsters known as political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity -- the doctrines that forbid judging non-whites, Muslims and others by the same moral standards as whites and Christians.

These left-wing doctrines made 16 years of gang rapes of English girls possible.

In 2002, a Labor Party MP from nearby Keighley, Ann Cryer, complained to the police about "young Asian lads" raping girls in her constituency. In her words, she "was shunned by elements of her party." And note, that as is demanded by the left in the U.K., she didn't even mention that the rapists were Pakistani, lest Muslims be blamed for this evil. They were "Asian lads."

And, for the record, her attempts to get local imams to intervene with the men failed; she was called a racist.

National Review editor Rich Lowry reports that, "In a BBC documentary, the author of a 2002 report to the Rotherham council on the scandal said her work was quashed. When she noted that the perpetrators were from the Pakistani community, a colleague told her 'you must never refer to that again -- you must never refer to Asian men.' She was sent to diversity training and, by her account, nearly fired."

British Home Secretary Theresa May told Parliament that "institutionalized political correctness" was responsible for the lack of attention given to the mass rape.

In 2001, Jack Straw, then-MP from Brighton, and formerly U.K. home secretary, announced that "there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men ... who target vulnerable young white girls." Straw was dismissed by the left. For example, Keith Vaz, a Labour MP, told the BBC: "I disagree with Jack Straw ... I don't think you can stereotype an entire community."

The immediate case that prompted Straw's statement was the conviction of two Brits of Pakistani heritage on charges of rape. Multiculturalism and political correctness clearly infected the judge in that case. He "said he did not believe the crimes were 'racially aggravated,' adding that the race of the victims and their abusers was 'coincidental.'"

"Coincidental."

Lies are to political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity what water is to fish.

[IQS.RLOW]

The mindset of the left.

When teenage thugs are called "troubled youth" by people on the political left, that tells us more about the mindset of the left than about these young hoodlums.

Seldom is there a speck of evidence that the thugs are troubled, and often there is ample evidence that they are in fact enjoying themselves, as they create trouble and dangers for others.



Why then the built-in excuse, when juvenile hoodlums are called "troubled youth" and mass murderers are just assumed to be "insane"?

At least as far back as the 18th century, the left has struggled to avoid facing the plain fact of evil -- that some people simply choose to do things that they know to be wrong when they do them. Every kind of excuse, from poverty to an unhappy childhood, is used by the left to explain and excuse evil.

All the people who have come out of poverty or unhappy childhoods, or both, and become decent and productive human beings, are ignored. So are the evils committed by people raised in wealth and privilege, including kings, conquerors and slaveowners.

Why has evil been such a hard concept for many on the left to accept? The basic agenda of the left is to change external conditions. But what if the problem is internal? What if the real problem is the cussedness of human beings?

Rousseau denied this in the 18th century and the left has been denying it ever since. Why? Self preservation.

If the things that the left wants to control -- institutions and government policy -- are not the most important factors in the world's problems, then what role is there for the left?

What if it is things like the family, the culture and the traditions that make a more positive difference than the bright new government "solutions" that the left is constantly coming up with? What if seeking "the root causes of crime" is not nearly as effective as locking up criminals? The hard facts show that the murder rate was going down for decades under the old traditional practices so disdained by the left intelligentsia, before the bright new ideas of the left went into effect in the 1960s -- after which crime and violence skyrocketed.

What happened when old-fashioned ideas about sex were replaced in the 1960s by the bright new ideas of the left that were introduced into the schools as "sex education" that was supposed to reduce teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases?

Both teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases had been going down for years. But that trend suddenly reversed in the 1960s and hit new highs.

One of the oldest and most dogmatic of the crusades of the left has been disarmament, both of individuals and of nations. Again, the focus of the left has been on the externals -- the weapons in this case.

If weapons were the problem, then gun control laws at home and international disarmament agreements abroad might be the answer. But if evil people who care no more for laws or treaties than they do for other people's lives are the problem, then disarmament means making decent, law-abiding people more vulnerable to evil people.

Since belief in disarmament has been a major feature of the left since the 18th century, in countries around the world, you might think that by now there would be lots of evidence to substantiate their beliefs.

But evidence on whether gun control laws actually reduce crime rates in general, or murder rates in particular, is seldom mentioned by gun control advocates. It is just assumed in passing that of course tighter gun control laws will reduce murders.

But the hard facts do not back up that assumption. That is why it is the critics of gun control who rely heavily on empirical evidence, as in books like "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott and "Guns and Violence" by Joyce Lee Malcolm.

National disarmament has an even worse record. Both Britain and America neglected their military forces between the two World Wars, while Germany and Japan armed to the teeth. Many British and American soldiers paid with their lives for their countries' initially inadequate military equipment in World War II.

But what are mere facts compared to the heady vision of the left?