Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Muslim Rape Gangs: the Disturbing Role of Britain's Leading Child Welfare Charity
Breitbart ^ | James Dellingpole

Posted on 08/29/2014 9:29:35 AM PDT by RoosterRedux

Among the more nauseating spectacles of the Rotherham child rape scandal has been the squirming evasion and shameless attempts at face-saving by the various authority figures whose job it supposedly was to prevent such horrors happening.

One of them is a man named Javed Khan. He is the head of Britain's largest children's charity Barnardo's which now stands accused of having known about the Muslim rape gang problem for well over a decade - but which chose to do next to nothing to confront it.

In an ugly interview with Sky News, Khan infuriated viewers - and his normally mild-mannered interviewer Eamonn Holmes - with his mealy-mouthed evasiveness.

Not only did Khan refuse to call for the resignation of South Yorkshire Police Commissioner (and former head of Rotherham Council Children's Services) Shaun Wright but it often seemed as though he was trying to make excuses for the various institutions which allowed mass child rape to occur on their watch.

Holmes could barely contain his fury.

"You're the expert in the field. You're the man who people turn to when all else fails. Your charity's job is to protect children, to protect the innocence of those children. I put it to you, Mr Khan, no one else has bothered: are you going to fail them as well?"
Khan once again evaded the question. As well he might - for the children's charity he represents is almost as heavily compromised by this scandal as Rotherham Council and South Yorkshire Police.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: childabuse; childrape; muslimrapegang; rotherham
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
To: RoosterRedux

They’ll reconsider, yes.

But they’ll also find out it’s too late. I remember several years back when someone in the UK got the bright idea to count all the different spellings of “Mohammed” in the annual most popular baby names survey. And it came out as #2.

Now it’s #1. The UK is, IMHO, past the tipping point. I’m thinking that it would be a good idea for Bess to start dusting off and updating the old WWII contingency plans to have the Royal Family flee to Canada ...


41 posted on 08/29/2014 11:16:04 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

That’s not what I said.

Islam says that when they hit 10% of the population they are to work towards enslaving (literally) and killing non-Muslims and work to make that the policy of the US government.

IOW, this particular “religion” has said that when they reach that point their adherents are to become criminals.

I’m saying that our immigration policies should help them never reach that point. Sort of like limiting the number of ebola patients we will allow to fly into our country...

If another religion said that at some point or another their adherents all have to kill gays (for instance) then they likewise would be COMBATANTS.

I do recognize the need for limits on what is considered criminal. Refusing to bake a wedding cake for gays could be defined as a crime and we’d be in big trouble, unless the measure of what makes somebody an enemy of the nation is that they are actual physical enemy combatants.

What I’m saying is basically, as I understand it, what Geert Wilders was saying: we need to stop Muslims from becoming a large percentage of our population. How to do that without religious discrimination? I think the only way you legally do it is by recognizing Islam as a religion only up to the point where they are required to ALSO be a criminal/terrorist enterprise. Because they preach actual physical violence against non-adherents, which makes them combatants. Refusing to bake wedding cakes does not similarly make somebody an enemy COMBATANT.


42 posted on 08/29/2014 11:24:49 AM PDT by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion
Islam says that when they hit 10% of the population they are to work towards enslaving (literally) and killing non-Muslims and work to make that the policy of the US government.

I sincerely doubt the Koran or hadiths say any such thing. That may indeed be a common dynamic, but that's very different from it being official written Islamic doctrine.

This is especially so because until recently Islam did not expand by immigrants leaving Islamic countries and moving to secular/Christian countries. Islam expanded by conquest, making the 10% meaningless.

43 posted on 08/29/2014 11:30:03 AM PDT by Sherman Logan (Perception wins most of the battles. Reality wins ALL the wars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

There are characteristics that identify a cult, totally independent of the religious teachings. Stuff like forbidding access to any view besides their own, punishing disagreement with the leader, controlling all the physical conditions of the adherents (such as food, clothes, who adherents can associate with, being imprisoned, etc), threats if they leave the belief system, etc

And Islam fits it all. They are a cult.

Ever think of what Ramadan does? It messes with the meal and sleep cycles. Typical cult practice. The same thing, if used by the US military, would be called torture, used to “soften” the captive’s ability to resist, and making them more vulnerable and suggestible.

Not allowing a woman to be in public without a man with her? It means the only man (the only people who have any power in the society) she can get help from is her husband, who is legally allowed to rape her, etc. It’s a cultist’s dream situation.

If you abandon Islam, you are required to be killed. Threats much? Speak against Islam and you must be killed? The worst mob in the world can’t beat those threats.

Islam is a cult - not because of what they believe but because of what they DO, as official protocol.


44 posted on 08/29/2014 11:35:39 AM PDT by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
His organization was uniquely positioned to know the identities of very vulnerable girls. Some digging might uncover a nest of snakes (which is why digging will be studiously avoided).

And if they can get sharia implemented in certain areas, this kind behavior will cease to be illegal.

45 posted on 08/29/2014 11:38:56 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

I wonder if I’d be able to find that source, to see what was cited.

If the principle of abrogation is specifically stated in the Quran or hadiths then Muslims would be combatants regardless of the percentage issue, since Mohammed’s later, violent commands would replace any of his earlier, more peaceful quotes that people use when claiming that Islam is a “religion of peace”.

It would be interesting to ask Muslims why they don’t routinely kill non-Muslims in America and other places, as commanded in the Quran. It would be interesting to ask them why they haven’t executed Obama as an apostate yet, as commanded in the Quran. For them to have an official excuse, there must be something written about when that command is required and when it is simply a goal to strive for.


46 posted on 08/29/2014 11:46:57 AM PDT by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion; Sherman Logan
IIRC, the strategy of growing muslim population to 10%+- (or any percent for that matter before changing the strategy) is a construct within the Koran and Hadiths though it is not specifically spelled out.

Muslims are admonished to fight when strong enough to be victorious over the enemy BUT to engage in hudna when they cannot win a military victory (or when they need to reload).

Since they have no chance of winning a frontal assault at the present time against the West AND since the liberal immigration policies in Europe, Australia, Canada, and U.S. have permitted to enter in great numbers, they do not need to fight at this point to satisfy Koran/Hadiths...they just have an ongoing hudna and engage in Da'wah (proselytize).

When they have built sufficient strength or have a sufficiently well-designed terror infrastructure, they will again engage in military action.

47 posted on 08/29/2014 12:14:06 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

So they can’t eat pork or drink alcohol because that is a sin but they can have sex with children???


48 posted on 08/29/2014 12:18:41 PM PDT by AppyPappy (If you really want to annoy someone, point out something obvious they are trying hard to ignore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Anger, disgust.

This is THE story in Britain at the moment. And its not going away soon. Heads have and will roll.


49 posted on 08/29/2014 12:20:43 PM PDT by the scotsman (UK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
I got the feeling that rape was partially consensual.

You would be very, very wrong about that.

50 posted on 08/29/2014 12:22:31 PM PDT by Albion Wilde ("LEX REX." ("The law is the king.") -- Samuel Rutherford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

Good, good!


51 posted on 08/29/2014 12:22:35 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

They’re just following in the example of Mohammed.


52 posted on 08/29/2014 12:23:21 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

I might be, but why are you so sure?


53 posted on 08/29/2014 12:23:58 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
BTW, here's her (Amanda Kijera's) Twitter photo...


54 posted on 08/29/2014 12:28:12 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
Here's the more revealing edition.


55 posted on 08/29/2014 12:30:00 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
I am sure because most of the girls were groomed from ages 11 and 12, well before the age of consent, and brutalized. Would the rapists have chosen any females capable of moving away or fighting back effectively? They chose schoolgirls from single mother homes who had no place to run. The girls were threatened and terrified into compliance. If you are showing me a picture of an adult survivor of child sexual abuse who is still believing she has to project sexiness to be acceptable as some sort of proof, you are showing me a victim who still needs healing and you are participating in her victimization to look upon her as anything but a wounded survivor.

More Rotherham Horrors: Teen Raped by 250 Men Over Two Years, Police Informed and Did Nothing

UK Police Arrested Parents Trying to Stop Muslims from Raping their Children

56 posted on 08/29/2014 2:10:12 PM PDT by Albion Wilde ("LEX REX." ("The law is the king.") -- Samuel Rutherford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: kidd

I was just thinking that exact same thing.


57 posted on 08/29/2014 2:19:24 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Like if they’ve had enough manpower come in through our southern border? That’s when they would start an open ISIS-type frontal attack on US soil? The language about sharia coming near to us, ISIS coming here, etc - would that seem to be an indicator that they believe things are close to ready for them to do a frontal assault here?


58 posted on 08/29/2014 3:05:16 PM PDT by butterdezillion (Note to self : put this between arrow keys: img src=""/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde
You have made a mistake.

My original comment about consensuality had to do with the liberal who went to Haiti and was raped.

Not the Rotherham issue.

59 posted on 08/29/2014 3:45:19 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion
Not a frontal assault but definitely a guerrilla action...which is mighty effective.

In a way, what happened in Ferguson was a guerrilla action. It was not based in fact, was illegal, and its target was propaganda not military.

60 posted on 08/29/2014 3:48:45 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson