[Closed] "1,400 children were subjected to "appalling" sexual exploitation in Rotherham"

I pretty fed up of the racism tag being used to block free speech and debate.

Racism means you discriminate against people because of their ethnicity/ biological makeup, e.g. colour of their skin, slitty eyes, ginger hair etc. This is clearly ridiculous and you would have to be very stupid individual to hold these prejudices.

What is perfectly acceptable is to judge or criticise people on their beliefs, that is after all what happens every day on STW. If I believed in the fairies and prayed to them every day and thought the rest of you were dirty infidels for not sharing my beliefs no one would think twice about taking the piss, but if I stuck my bum in the air 5 times a day to pray to Allah then no one would say anything for fear of being called a racist.

[i]I think we've outed some proper racists here. [/i]

We've just had to sack a receptionist because she was, well, just a bit racist. It was pretty shocking really, complaining that some "Indians" were looking at the next door cottage in her village. When Seema (duh) asked what the problem was her response was " well, they fit in in do they?"

There are loads of people who will say "I'm not racist" but haven't given any other thought to it and say some really terrible things!!

Shit thing to have happened to loads of kids, and nothing was done because it was too much like hard work, they're all a bit chavvy and into drugs and no-one gives a shit about them. There are people that need to go to prison for this

What is perfectly acceptable is to judge or criticise people on their beliefs, that is after all what happens every day on STW. If I believed in the fairies and prayed to them every day and thought the rest of you were dirty infidels for not sharing my beliefs no one would think twice about taking the piss, but if I stuck my bum in the air 5 times a day to pray to Allah then no one would say anything for fear of being called a racist.

That's all well and good and personally I don't think Badnews is actually racist. It's just that there is a fine line between attacking ideology/beliefs and making sweeping statements about an ethnic groups being more likely to do this or that based on you're own personal prejudices.

And if I want to be perfectly truthful with myself, it was only after saying that UKIPers are probably more likely to be racist that I found a bit of evidence for that. So I can be guilty of prejudiced thinking, everyone can, the difference being is that you should try to be aware of it.

That's my final sensible contribution to this thread, on with the hilarity.

Thanks Tom for your kind words, it's been good to debate on this, let's just hope that justice is served (I think the issue is attracting a lot of political, media and public pressure that it will do).
Time I did some work!
Exit badnewz, pursued by bear.

It's ok, Ernie would catch me out as being a hypocrite sooner or later. Had to come clean! 😉

I jest.

What I want to know is what measures are going to be put in place to help prevent this from happening again.

it's been good to debate on this

I think we've outed some proper racists here.

Easy on the self-congratulations all you ace debating society members. Remember the context a bit, perhaps.

I think we've outed some proper racists here.

We've just had to sack a receptionist because she was, well, just a bit racist. It was pretty shocking really, complaining that some "Indians" were looking at the next door cottage in her village. When Seema (duh) asked what the problem was her response was " well, they fit in in do they?"

There are loads of people who will say "I'm not racist" but haven't given any other thought to it and say some really terrible things!!

Shit thing to have happened to loads of kids, and nothing was done because it was too much like hard work, they're all a bit chavvy and into drugs and no-one gives a shit about them. There are people that need to go to prison for this

+1

What I want to know is what measures are going to be put in place to help prevent this from happening again.

I wouldn't know where to begin, the report leaves me speechless.

Easy on the self-congratulations all you ace debating society members. Remember the context a bit, perhaps.

It's good that people can find common ground. Silly polarization can help to highlight each side of the debate but at the end of the day humanities problems usually stem from the fact that we can often never relate to each other and find a compromise.

I was interested to see an interview on sky news today, with a young muslim chap who's a youth leader (I think) in Rotherham - he was upset that the police/council had never asked their community about their views on racism and was angry at the presumptions that were made about their community. He mentioned something about the community not having a problem with the police targeting those who committed violent offenses (I think).

The point being, if someone had spent the time to actually create dialogue then this might have been avoided. Which leads me to believe, as others do on here, that the "racism" excuse is a little bit of a cop out although not entirely invalid.

I know loads of people who could be considered to be racist, that's their right, as long as their views do not impact negatively on other peoples lives that's fine.

You can hate black people, that's fine as long as you don't go around physically or verbally abusing them.
If someone does not want Indians living next door that's fine, and that's fine to say that. Not a lot they can do about it , if it happened they might actually like there new neighbours, or not.

I

Is that point people keep making about "30 years of left wing thinking" sarcasm? If it's not, then you must think Thatcher was a pinko liberal, right? Fackin' hell!

You can hate black people, that's fine as long as you don't go around physically or verbally abusing them.

Or you know, mark them down in exams or treat them differently in a job. It's so easy to do all of this unconsciously, much easier to just try and change your subconscious attitudes a bit. If you really actually care.

Every person who allowed this to happen should be exposed and face the consequences.
Whether that's losing there jobs or facing charges.

There is no excuse, I would rather be branded for evermore a racist than stand by and let this happen.

People will have there beliefs. If they are afraid to air them, you can never challenge them.
Some of the nicest people I know are racist.
And would help anyone out in genuine need what ever colour they are.

But feel this country is being destroyed by mass immigration.

So there for racist in many peoples eyes.

People who chose to foster children, good kind people surely.
have children removed because the vote ukip.

[i]People who chose to foster children, good kind people surely[/i]

or people seeing an opportunity to indoctrinate children into their political/religious/whatever beliefs and get paid for doing it?

I still stand by them doing that chip, not because they are racist but because the bigger the cultural gap between the children and the foster parents the worse the mental health outcomes are for the children.

It doesn't mean they should be banned from fostering and I don't think they were. It just means that there are people more suited to those individual children. Fostering isn't a right.

The social services have to make a judgement based on the child's best interests, not the foster parents. If those children were damaged in anyway, then they would be responsible.

**** off it was a black baby who would have been put with a black family if one was available.
But this people chose to help because its a baby who needed love and interaction.

The baby was taken because the PC brigade branded them as racists.

If they were they would not have cared to help.

What I want to know is what measures are going to be put in place to help prevent this from happening again.

This is the real issue here and the reason I'm such a stubborn *

However, even the current government at the very highest level has played a part in covering up some very sinister activity:

[b]of course, despite it being unlikely under the circumstance, the 114 lost files could be coincidental.

However, revoking the visa of a journalist who was going to investigate child abuse on Jersey shows complicity:[/b]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leah-mcgrath-goodman/david-miranda-uk-detention_b_3844480.html

[b]Given that a number of sources report a network of abusers within the care system trafficking children between Jersey, Islington, Lambeth and North Wales amongst others, not to mention a stash of extreme abuse images turning up in Belgium which appear to have been taken on Jersey, is it not fair to be a mite suspicious?

Of course, the fact that Jimmy Savile tried to avoid association with Haut de la Garenne (the Jersey House of Horrors) may be a source of further suspicion.

Given that there are several children who appear to have been sent to Jersey and gone missing (an issue raised in Parliament by MP John Hemming) you really have to wonder what the * was going on there:[/b]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trenches-filled-with-lime-found-at-jersey-house-of-horrors-care-home-6693782.html

This could in fact go beyond government, as ultimate authority over the crown dependency of Jersey is in the hands of the Queen...

The baby was taken because the PC brigade branded them as racists.

If they were they would not have cared to help.

http://writepass.com/journal/2014/04/literature-review-on-children-in-care-who-have-been-put-into-transracial-placements/

Free essay as you won't have access to many journals.

The baby was taken because the [s]PC brigade branded them as racists[/s] stuck to normal protocol.

You seem to be more worried about the foster parents than the child.

If they were they would not have cared to help.

Not everyone cares for altruistic reasons, even if they do, the subconscious comes into play.

Hi Tom, I use **** off a lot and not meant as an insult, more of. "I don't beleive it".

If this family did not vote ukip it would have remained with them .

It's ok, I don't spam the report button 😛 . You're right, it would, unless the social services found out they were anti-immigration through other means.

It's literally that simple, it has everything to do with the child not being suitable for that placement and nothing to do with PC gone mad.

I'd be outraged if they were not allowed to foster at all....

Tom_W1987 - Member
It's ok, I don't spam the report button . [b]You're right, it would, unless the social services found out they were anti-immigration through other means.[/b]

There appears to be widespread propaganda and misunderstanding about what UKIP actually stand for, but AFAIK, they are not racist, not against immigration and not 'against' immigrants per-se, but rather about a reform of immigration.

For the decision to be made purely on the basis of their affiliation to UKIP I find worrying; it smack of the two-party system attempting to marginalise (by any means) any alternative or opposition. It feels somewhat totalitarian to me.

I don't think the two main parties would have any say at all in what child gets placed where.

It's up to the professionals involved in the case. Even if they aren't racist etc, I should imagine they will have to do a risk assessment for that placement. If the risk of that child being in a home that could contribute to mental health issues is increased for whatever reason, then it's fair play to remove the child.

If procedure wasn't followed and they literally yanked the child away with the excuse "you're racist", then I'd be more than a little surprised.

they are not racist, not against immigration and not 'against' immigrants per-se, but rather about a reform of immigration.

I do find this a bit funny though

Ukip is part of the group Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD). The group includes representatives of the Danish People’s Party, the True Finns Party, the Dutch SGP and the infamous Italian Lega Nord – all of them far-right. Nigel Farage is co-President of the group along with Lega Nord’s Francesco Speroni, who described multiple murderer Anders Breivik as someone whose “ideas are in defence of western civilisation."

Mario Borghezio, another member of the group, declared in a radio interview that Breivik had some "excellent" ideas. Farage’s reaction was to write a strongly-worded letter to Borghezio, asking him to withdraw his comments or Ukip would pull out of the EFD. Borghezio not only did not apologise, but responded with an extraordinary speech in which he raged: "Long live the Whites of Europe, long live our identity, our ethnicity, our race… our blue sky, like the eyes of our women. Blue, in a people who want to stay white."

Nigel Farage did not withdraw from the EFD. He continues to co-preside over it, along with the leader of the Lega Nord. [b]MEP Nikki Sinclaire, however, was expelled from Ukip for refusing to take part in the EFD because of their “extreme views”.[/b]

Personally, I think UKIP is a partly racist party that has yet to truly distance itself from and shake off supporters that are, I think the above just misses being an example of association fallacy because of that.

The expulsion of Nikki Sinclaire makes that clear.

Tom_W1987 - Member
I don't think the two main parties would have any say at all in what child gets placed where.

You don't think that people in public organisations are told how to think and speak?

You don't think that the media and political parties are uncomfortably close?

You don't think that perhaps, in the case of S Yorks, the vacuum of opposition (understandably) created during the miner's strike and the pit closures couldn't have created any cronyism or complacency?

Geroge Orwell
In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

And in the case of UKIP

What people believe prevails over the truth.

This + 1400
You know that the evidence points towards that they targeted Asian women as well and did not preferentially target white girls, it's just that the cultural attitudes within the Asian community have meant those girls have often not come forward.

I don't care what colour the girls were they targeted.

What I get from that post Is they may be the worst type of depraved scum, but they weren't racist .

@Lifer, nice Is that from the Ladybird book of UKIP bashing?

In any case, it does not really matter what you or I think about the party in regard to this case, but it is lamentable that the couple were persecuted solely for involvement with 'a party' which is now the main opposition in their constituency. It does not seem democratic in the least.

So you don't think anything is politicised?
You don't think that people in public organisations are told how to think and speak?

You don't think that the media and political parties are uncomfortably close?

You don't think that perhaps, in the case of S Yorks, the vacuum of opposition (understandably) created during the miner's strike and the pit closures couldn't have created any cronyism or complacency?

Do you think political parties send out directives to social services, to flaunt their own procedures and take children away from good hard working UKIPers?

persecuted solely for involvement with 'a party' which is now the main opposition in their constituency. It does not seem democratic in the least.

So you don't actually care about the children then, all you care about are the poor ickle middle englanders? You think that fostering a child is a right? That it's all about the foster parents? What about the rights of the child?

They were 'persecuted' because social services decided the foster parents cultural identity wasn't close enough to that of the childs, this is a judgement they make everyday in fostering cases.

This + 1400
You know that the evidence points towards that they targeted Asian women as well and did not preferentially target white girls, it's just that the cultural attitudes within the Asian community have meant those girls have often not come forward.

Not all Asians, they left the Muslim girls alone. They targetted white girls and Asian Sikhs. I believe the first people who raised the alarm about this abuse were from the Sikh community but they were accused of being racist.

Do you think political parties send out directives to social services, to flaunt their own procedures and take children away from good hard working UKIPers?

Small minded people with a little bit of power making decisions based on the own bigotry towards other peoples rightful political views.

Not all Asians, they left the Muslim girls alone. They targetted white girls and Asian Sikhs. I believe the first people who raised the alarm about this abuse were from the Sikh community but they were accused of being racist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-22731537

Not many Sikhs from ****stan. LOL.

[s]Small minded people[/s] Professionals with a little bit of power making decisions based on evidence based practice

Remember the context a bit, perhaps.

This is a good point, the overall context has a great deal of gravity.

That's partly why I decided not to continue on this thread. Ultimately horrific acts of injustice have been committed, and I feel uncomfortable forwarding my politics, which I freely admit are right-wing, on a public forum and getting involved in a game of one-upmanship. I think that would be wrong. But civility is a virtue, and although myself and Tom are hardly back-slapping, I'd rather leave a conversation on a good note than a vindictive one. As I said, I hope justice is served, but at the end of the day a discussion on Singletrackworld is rather meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

A council that sparked outrage after taking three eastern European children away from their Ukip-supporting foster parents has apologised over its handling of the case after a review concluded that mistakes were made but the decision was taken in the [b]children's best interests.[/b]

LOL

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/may/20/council-mistakes-ukip-foster-parents

That's partly why I decided not to continue on this thread. Ultimately horrific acts of injustice have been committed, and I feel uncomfortable forwarding my politics, which I freely admit are right-wing, on a public forum and getting involved in a game of one-upmanship.

Fair enough badnewz. You make a good point with the last sentence. I guess we are both getting at the same thing here, using children as political one upmanship etc instead of having their best interests at heart.

Do you think political parties send out directives to social services, to flaunt their own procedures and take children away from good hard working UKIPers?

No, I think cultural norms develop within organisations that serve to develop and engender a view of what is 'acceptable' or that leads to things not being questioned, often leading to totally unacceptable behaviour becoming not just tolerated in the name of 'the greater good' but effectively normalised.

This can happen with both obviously negative things, like racism & corruption, (as happened in the past with the police) and things that are initially done for the best of misguided reasons, like for example taking children away from young unwed mothers as 'unfit' and then adopted or stolen from aboriginal 'savages' and native american families and put in childrens homes or fostered in 'white' households as happened in Australia and the USA.

Tom_W1987 - Member

Do you think political parties send out directives to social services, to flaunt their own procedures and take children away from good hard working UKIPers?

However, it intrigues me how the "vote red or blue" gravy train work their influence on many levels. The media is awash with soundbites - you've used on such, "Middle Englander" - that have been invented, appropriated, or twisted to infer insult and belittle opposition.

It interests me - Media Studies in the classical meaning of the name - that people can't see when they're being played.

Not many Sikhs from ****stan. LOL.

From aboriginal families and put in childrens homes or fostered in 'white' households.

Aaaand.... how have you just not shot yourself in the foot there?

In November after the case made national headlines, the council's strategic director of children and young people's services, Joyce Thacker, told the BBC that her decision had been influenced by Ukip immigration policy, which she said called for the end of the "[b]active promotion of multiculturalism[/b]".

Sources close to the case subsequently told the Guardian that there were [b]multiple legal and social[/b] reasons why the council wanted to ensure the children be placed with foster parents who [b]spoke their own eastern European language.[/b]

Social services on mental health grounds like to place children with families that encourage the awareness of the childs own culture.

The children where Eastern European 😀
Mental note to self: must research facts and not wade in blindly from memory.

Small minded people Professionals with a little bit of power making decisions based on evidence based practice

I do not believe that at all.

The children where Eastern European

You're saying that just because they were white, it was okay?

digga - Member
that people can't see when they're being played.

Who's playing who?

The foster care row provided Ukip with a boost before a parliamentary byelection in Rotherham last year

So who did the children go to, were they polish?

a local law firm is now planning on sueing west Yorks police and the counciil for their failings on behalf of the victims, expect many more victims to now come forward along with anothe inquiry into the previous inquiries and the curent one.

So who did the children go to, were they polish?

God knows, but I should imagine someone who spoke the correct eastern European language.

If they ended up in residential care long term then you may......just may.... almost have a point.

Tom, But they were not taken away from their parents for anything like the same reason

Social services on mental health grounds like to place children with families that encourage the awareness of the childs own culture.

Personally I'd rather see a 'coloured' (horrible word, and I'm using colour as a simplification of the complex issues of race and culture) child in a caring white foster or adopted family, however deliberately taking them away from their loving and caring families and culture to 'normalise' or 'assimilate' them into polite society is a completely different thing, as you well know.

white foster or adopted family than an institution

Yeah, we don't whether they were put into residential care or not. So I don't think accusations can be made.

'normalise' or 'assimilate' them into [s]polite[/s] white society is a completley different thing, as you well know.

Which is supposedly precisely how a lot of black children feel now, when they do end up in the care of white foster parents. Which is why the social services try to place children with parents who have a closer cultural identity.

And when it doubt there is always Occam's razor - take the view with the least assumptions. Stating that those children were removed because of left wing bias against UKIP, is to make a hell of a lot of assumptions about the case that we are not privy to.

I could not give a **** what colour or religion people are,as long as they are good people, and treat everyone with the respect I would expect untill they prove otherwise.

But if people have different views to mine I don't just brand them a racist and that be an end to it.

The town I grew up in has a very large polish community that has appeared in a very short space of time.

People are seeing our police force being decimated and police stations sold for posh flats.
They are seeing hospitals and A&Es closed and being at the point they are about to implode.
They are seeing our armed forces being seriously cut back .
They are seeing there schools overcrowded with oversubscribed classrooms and portacabins for extra classrooms were their used to be a football pitch.

And they are seeing a high level of immigration and immigrants on the ground.
And this could all be a coincidence and be adding 2 and 2 and coming up with 5.

I personally believe this country Is potless due to the enormous social security bill which may or may not be affected by immigration.

But just because I consider my self not racist as in I don't believe I am better than anyone else and treat everyone with respect does not mean I agree with mass immigration. And I am sure there are people who would happily banned me a racist but would treat some differently or look down on them because of race.

I am sure there are racists in ukip but because you support ukip does not make you a racist .

I am sure there are racists in ukip but because you support ukip does not make you a racist .

And that's not the reason why they were removed...

I personally believe this country I potless due to the enormous social security bill which may or may not be affected by immigration.

Most of it's blown on old people, I'm sure you've heard the whole aging population thing before....

chip, you sound more like a BNP voter* to me tbh.

*not necessarily racist.

I don't think Chip would ever vote BNP imo, that's a bit harsh. Plays into the hands of the usual right-wing counter - that we always label them as racist. The left needs to find a way to engage the disaffected working classes again...

I do think fears about immigration are understandable, I just don't think they are entirely justified.....note entirely.

We can see from the Israeli-Palestine threads what political polarization at it's most extreme looks like, America is a good example as well. Do we really want our politics to end up looking like Americas? God no.

*ramble over*

God knows, but I should imagine someone who spoke the correct eastern European language.

If they ended up in residential care long term then you may......just may.... almost have a point.

They were apparently placed with another white British family according to this [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20476654 ]BBC report[/url], if that is the case then the council's position seems be untenable. But then this is the council, who on release of the report, released a press release whose first paragraph said the the report concluded that its child services were stronger and better co-ordinated. ([url= https://twitter.com/craigawoodhouse ]See this twitter feed[/url]

I do think fears about immigration are understandable, I just don't think they are entirely justified.....note entirely.

My point exactly.

Deadlydarcy, you are either rich or stupid, for your sake I hope you are rich.

Deadlydarcy, you are either rich or stupid,

Or ginger or scottish!

They were apparently placed with another white British family according to this BBC report, if that is the case then the council's position seems be untenable. But then this is the council, who on release of the report, released a press release whose first paragraph said the the report concluded that its child services were stronger and better co-ordinated. (See this twitter feed

Nice find, any idea of whether they spoke the language? If social services felt the new family were more likely to provide the children with a positive awareness of their own background then that's somewhat of a justification.

We don't know whether that was a long term placement either, as that BBC report came out in 2012.

My point exactly.

Deadlydarcy, you are either rich or stupid, for your sake I hope you are rich.

Don't take that as a swinging endorsement of UKIP policies, take that as empathy with the working classes.

I should have added lucky to my choices.

Because they are what you would have to be to not be affected either by the massive cuts in public spending or mass immigration.

It does not say but as the initial placement was a short term emergency one, I envisage this one was as well. The fact that it says "families" implies the kids were spread among more than one. If the council had found a suitable long term foster parent of the same culture, I am sure they would have said so as they were under so much media pressure.

@chip well said, its just the cheap catch all insult to brand people as racist who make such statements plus STW likes a good bit of name calling.

Racism is just a new word for saying you dont like someone, but now becoming seemingly more acceptable against one group of people by another group of people.

Racism is just a new word for saying you dont like someone, but now becoming seemingly more acceptable against one group of people by another group of people.

Do you accept that racism exists?

I would argue that some use your line of reasoning as a way of shutting down debate around racial issues, just as some use the word itself to shut down certain arguments.

"youre a racist", is indeed used to stifle debate and also to demean certain sections of society,who for whatever reason have a dislike for a certain group of people.

lots of people dont like others for some reason, on this forum it seems to a hatred of the unemployed, so called benefit scroungers and chav scum, but only by a certain few.

I still stand by them doing that chip, not because they are racist but because the bigger the cultural gap between the children and the foster parents the worse the mental health outcomes are for the children.

It doesn't mean they should be banned from fostering and I don't think they were. It just means that there are people more suited to those individual children.

Fostering isn't a right.

The social services have to make a judgement based on the child's best interests, not the foster parents. If those children were damaged in anyway, then they would be responsible

anyway Tom are you NSPCC?

Ah, Mr Glover, champion of the vulnerable.

As always you've totally missed my point, and had a mild to at insinuating I think child abuse is ok (classy) 🙄

My point is, the more people like you bang on and on and on, about "links" and "rumours" between everyone and everything, the less everyone else will believe.

You aren't doing "the vulnerable" any favours at all.

You are wrapping it up in a "conspiracy theory" layer of tinfoil, and making everyone else treat it with the same amount of attention they give to Lizard Overlords and Moonbase Observation posts.

Yes sir Mr Glover sir, you are truly a man of wisdom and insight and I bow before you (in a moonie)

Do detectives have conspiracy theories? Or just theories?

Would it help if I had a magnifying glass or a lollipop?

I trust you have been doing ample research of your own to prove your concern for the plight of children in care in the hope that issues can be highlighted for positive change.

To placate you for my doubtless sins, I include a link to the blog of MP John Hemming, who has also been investigating the mysterious case surround Haut de la Garenne on Jersey:

http://johnhemming.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/the-disappearance-of-children-from-care.html

Due to your knowledge on the subject, I'm sure you can tell me how many children go missing each year?

Deadlydarcy, you are either rich or stupid, for your sake I hope you are rich.

or ginger or Scottish

I might be a bit stupid, but the rest are wrong I'm afraid. I'm not that lucky either. Never won a thing in a raffle or anything similar. 🙁

I trust you have been doing ample research of your own to prove your concern for the plight of children....
...
Due to your knowledge on the subject, I'm sure you can tell me how many children go missing each year?

Here's an idea....

Just for a change, instead of totally ignoring what I said.

Then testing my knowledge of something I didn't even claim to have any knowledge of in the first place....

why don't you at least try to address the point I [b]actually made[/b] ?

(Just to help you stay on track, why don't you quote the actual words I wrote, that way you can stay on track and not start making things up that I didn't say?)

Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets.

to add to the conspiracy theories how many of the leaders of social services, the council, the safeguarding children board and the police in Rotherham are alumni of http://www.commonpurpose.org.uk/ ?

more good reading here http://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/

Thanks for that big n daft, seems you're not daft at all 😉

Seems the former councillor responsible for children's services at Rotherham Council and the current South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, Shaun Wright, has resigned from the Labour Party but not from his PCC role. What a complete selfish t**t not having the balls to take some responsibility for these horrendous cases of abuse of hundreds of children 🙁

Resignation offers too much retention of self esteem and they can always plead they were forced to do so, sack them all, every last one who turned a blind eye, ignored the evidence, failed to investigate or follow up accusations. Then prosecute each and every one of them to the absolute maximum possible for whatever offence will hit them hardest, minions to managers, administrators to leaders. 1200 children's lives have been ruined, their childhood stolen.
Big n Daft - as someone who grew up in Rotherham I am rarely surprised by what I hear of the behaviour of the council and some of its members. I'm sure that there must be some excellent people but they seem to be continually overshadowed by their less capable colleagues.

anyway Tom are you NSPCC?

Nope, nor a quack or anything related to the matter at hand.

but having a certain political affiliation isn't a "cultural" thing, arguably the diversity of political opinion within our culture is one of it's strengths

Yes, yes it really is. The vast majority of UKIP members and voters are white.

my understanding is that they stopped fostering

Stopped or forced to stop?

on a scale of likely harm in a short term placement and in the context of the reports out this week may I postulate the social work team should have been focusing their efforts elsewhere at the time

Maybe.

MrsCat has just pointed out my error that it was 1400 children and that is more than the entire school population of the comp we both attended in sunny Rotherham. It's hard to conceive of something on that scale not being discovered without a significant amount of collusion or conspiracy.

Well worth reading Big n Daft's links, especially the blog that mentions the intimidation and threats the author received when trying to publicise the case of the victims.

Tom you were so careful to use the same language as Joyce Thacker about the culture of the foster parents that I thought you were in a common purpose with her?

However the notion that political party membership defines you culturally in absolute terms is clear trolling, or stupidity

Not sure either way about the whole common purpose thing, but heard before it may be an avenue worth investigating.

Just stumbled across this on twitter if it's any help to you big n daft:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/charitable_donations_2

Admit this may be a conspiracy theory, but given government can hold back Iraq inquiry, it's a bit strange that they release a report which damages the reputation of South Yorkshire Police just after involvement with Cliff Richard

big_n_daft - Member
to add to the conspiracy theories how many of the leaders of social services, the council, the safeguarding children board and the police in Rotherham are alumni of http://www.commonpurpose.org.uk/ ?

Anyway, some revealing stats on this: http://www.channel4.com/news/ceop-warns-against-focus-on-race-after-major-grooming-study

26% of grooming gangs are "Asian" - so clearly not all. However, taken against the another statistic, that Asians are only 7% of the population, it is worrying and it is unfortunate the demographic is not/cannot be further dissected.

More here: http://lawandfreedomfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Easy-Meat-Multiculturalism-Islam-and-Child-Sex-Slavery-05-03-2014.pdf

Very interesting article here from a respected journo and womens campaigner:

http://www.juliebindel.org/?p=76

The more i hear about what goes on, the more i believe David Icke is right.

Ferris-Beuller - Member
The more i hear about what goes on, the more i believe David Icke is right.

Why, did he break the grooming story?

Colossally hard-hitting and damning article in the Telegraph today: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11059138/Rotherham-In-the-face-of-such-evil-who-is-the-racist-now.html

It covers a lot of what we've already discussed, but it is nonetheless interesting as an extremely direct attack on authorities.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100284170/rotherham-abuse-scandal-its-not-all-about-race-its-about-criminal-ineptitude/

More balanced Telegraph article.

The other article that Digga posted is a bit crap and rather typical of the unsavory elements of the right.

"Men of ****stani heritage treated white girls like toilet paper. They picked children up from schools and care homes and trafficked them across northern cities for other men to join in the fun. They doused a 15-year-old in petrol and threatened to set her alight should she dare to report them. They menaced entire families and made young girls watch as they raped other children."

It wasn't only white girls and it's debatable whether they even targeted white girls selectively.