#LocalCrimeStory: British Report Claims that Over 1400 Children Were Sexually Exploited in City of Rotherdam Over 16 Years, But Bureaucracy Did Nothing, For Fear of Being Branded Politically Incorrect

A couple of caveats before the article itself:

Having witnessed a Child Sex Panic in America (the McMartin case, etc.), I'm a little hesitant to fully endorse one of these reports.

And I'm troubled by this sentence in the Daily Mail article:

The majority of victims believed the perpetrators to be their boyfriend who gave them gifts, alcohol and drugs. Some of the victims still maintain they were not groomed or abused.

That's a little worrisome -- that the "victims" still maintain they weren't victimized.

Maybe those particular kids weren't victimized.

My concerns registered, here's the story.

The sexual abuse of about 1,400 children at the hands of Asian men went unreported for 16 years because staff feared they would be seen as racist, a report said today.

Children as young as 11 were trafficked, beaten, and raped by large numbers of men between 1997 and 2013 in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, the council commissioned review into child protection revealed.

And shockingly, more than a third of the cases were already know to agencies.

But according to the report's author: 'several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist'.

...

The lack of reports was partly down to a fear of being racist, Prof Jay wrote, as the majority of the perpetrators were described as 'Asian men', and many were said to be of Pakistani origin.

By Asian, the British usually mean Pakistani.

Some (not many) disturbing details at the link. The report avers that kids were "groomed" to be sex partners (I assume when older), and that many were trafficked into full child prostitution.

As for the idea that the bureaucracy shied away from this out of fears of appearing "racist:"

I can understand, at a basic level, why the media and government do not wish to hype stories that can generate anger and fear against a minority.

I understand that. That's laudable.

But... this has gotten to the point where the media and government simply lies to us about things implicating race.

And then they wonder why we don't believe them, and why "rumors" and "internet claims" get spread so far and wide.

Well, here's why: Because we know you're lying. We know you're covering things up. We know that when a man is accused of a crime that seems terroristic, and you won't reveal the suspect's name for 72 hours, we know the kind of name it is.

We all know the reason why the spree murders of three gay men is not being covered in the national media.

When you deny people facts, they will resort to rumor and speculation, because that becomes their best sort of information.

No one wants rumor and speculation to be their best sort of information. Everyone in the world recognizes these are very poor sorts of information.

But when major institutions conspire to suppress better types of information, for "the greater good," then people really have no other choice but to resort to other, lesser sources of it.

They always think the public is going to "Go Crazy With Insane Hatred!!!" if they know the truth.

Do they?

Have we seen pitchfork and torch mobs recently?

Do your jobs, Idiots.

If you conceive as the first priority of your job as being the suppression of fact, then find another job.

Like in elective politics, or political agitation, the sorts of jobs where suppressing the truth is the job.

But get the hell out of government bureaucracies that are supposed to be responsive to actual facts, and get the hell out of the media which is allegedly dedicated to nothing but the full and fair reportage of the facts.

posted by Ace at 05:03 PM

| Access Comments