Rather than respond to individual emails line-by-line I wrote a single response 
that I hope addresses points raised. Again, I want to stress that if Marxists 
or other leftists had taken this seriously in the beginning, it would not have 
fallen to political enemies to expose.

——-

The report centers on detailed accounts from victims like Sammy Woodhouse and 
others, corroborated by decades of police operations, court cases, and local 
inquiries (Rotherham ~1,400 victims 1997–2013; similar in Rochdale, Oxford, 
Oldham, etc.).

High-profile convictions (e.g., Rotherham, Rochdale) repeatedly show patterns: 
groups of men of Pakistani heritage targeting young White girls, using taxis, 
takeaways, and “boyfriends” as entry points. These aren’t isolated; multiple 
independent reviews confirm organized networks.

Dismissing this requires ignoring court records, not the report. Claiming “no 
evidence” or “racist trope” contradicts guilty verdicts and victim impact 
statements.

Rotherham’s Jay Report (2014), Casey reviews, and others documented authorities 
(police, councils, social services) ignoring or downplaying abuse to avoid 
“racism” accusations or community tensions. Girls were dismissed as 
“prostitutes” or making “lifestyle choices.”

Baroness Casey’s audit noted poor ethnicity data collection precisely because 
of this reluctance, with flawed stats used to claim “mostly White perpetrators” 
despite localized evidence of overrepresentation in group-based CSE.

The Rape Gang Inquiry builds on this: denial created a vacuum where abuse 
continued. Criticizing the report for naming the ethnic/religious pattern (87%+ 
Muslim names in many convictions per some analyses) ignores why data was 
suppressed.

The ~250,000 figure extrapolates from high-profile cases (e.g., Rotherham’s 
1,400) across 149+ local authorities over 70+ years. It’s presented as a 
minimum/order-of-magnitude estimate, drawing from a 2018 Lords question and 
patterns in convictions—not precise census data.

Official inquiries admit the true scale is unknowable due to poor recording, 
underreporting (victims intimidated, disbelieved), and destroyed records.

Dismissing the estimate because it’s not “definitive” is circular: the same 
institutional failures that hid the abuse make exact counts impossible.

Compare to other scandals (e.g., Catholic Church, sports): we accept 
extrapolated victim numbers from patterns and testimonies. Here, critics demand 
impossible precision only when ethnicity is involved.

Child sexual abuse overall has offenders from all backgrounds. But group-based 
grooming/trafficking networks in UK towns showed clear ethnic clustering in 
multiple inquiries—disproportionate Pakistani Muslim involvement in “localized 
grooming” per police data from affected areas.

Broader “White majority” stats dilute this by including solo familial abuse or 
different offender types. The report and prior reviews focus on organized 
street grooming gangs. Cultural factors (e.g., attitudes toward non-Muslim 
girls, “grooming” tactics tied to specific communities) were downplayed, per 
whistleblowers and reviews.

Data gaps exist because of avoidance. Better recording (as the report 
recommends) would clarify, not refute, patterns.

Ad hominem attacks (e.g., on Lowe’s politics or “right-wing” framing) don’t 
refute evidence. Survivors and whistleblowers (often vilified) provided input. 
Dismissing it perpetuates the same institutional protection of “community 
relations” over victims.

Precedents like Rotherham show cover-ups succeeded until media (e.g., Andrew 
Norfolk) and public pressure intervened.

The report calls for better data, prosecutions, licensing (taxis), cultural 
acknowledgment, and ending “racism” excuses. Opposing it hinders prevention for 
current/future victims.

Child protection is color-blind in principle: ignoring perpetrator patterns (as 
in any organized crime) endangers children. Ethnicity here is a risk factor in 
this specific modus operandi, like in other gang crimes.

Critics often rely on motive fallacy, data skepticism they don’t apply 
elsewhere, or broadening to all CSA to dilute the issue. The report’s strength 
is surfacing suppressed truths via victims, aligning with official inquiries’ 
findings on failures. Prioritizing evidence over discomfort protects 
children—exactly what was missing for decades.

For the full picture, review the report alongside Jay/Casey documents and 
conviction records.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#42173): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/42173
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/119887039/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to