Just to underscore that the Murdoch Times long ago ceased to be a paper of record, and has become little more than an upmarket version of the Super Soaraway Currant Bun, the latest Sunday Times shock horror story was, like the now-discredited Tower Hamlets fostering saga, a thinly veiled attack on Scary Muslims (tm). The same tactic used by the Sun - and of course by Fox News Channel (fair and balanced my arse).
Under the headline “Asians make up 80% of child groomers - study”, readers are told “More than 80% of people convicted of child-grooming offences are Asian, a report will reveal this week … The research, by the anti-extremism organisation Quilliam, looked at 58 cases of grooming gangs identified in the UK between 2005 and 2017, which led to 264 convictions for grooming … Of the 264 offenders, 84% were of Asian heritage, mostly Pakistani; 8% were black and 7% were white”.
And, circumventing the paywall as well as upping the demonisation count, the Mail On Sunday applied its own inimitable spin to the story, telling “Revealed: 84% of men convicted of grooming young white girls are Asian and see them as 'easy targets' for sex … Quilliam study says seven in ten are believed to be of Pakistani-Muslim heritage … The study - likely to provoke controversy - is written by two British Pakistanis … Asian gangs abused white girls because they hold entrenched racist attitudes towards them”.
It’s likely to “provoke controversy” because what both the MoS and ST say is not true. But on with the anti-Muslim frighteners: “The Quilliam study comes after a spate of high-profile court cases, one of which involved the Rochdale child abuse ring … In 2012, nine British Pakistani men were convicted of abusing under-age white girls. Although the testimonies of three victims led to the convictions of the gang members, police believe the group abused and trafficked as many as 47 white girls”. Any more dirt to fling?
There certainly is: “A separate grooming gang from Rochdale involving ten more men was convicted at a trial in 2015 … The first case was made into a controversial three-part BBC drama called Three Girls, which was broadcast earlier this year”. The hated BBC has suddenly become useful to the inmates of the Northcliffe House bunker.
So why are these stories are little better than the usual pack of lies? Simples. The Quilliam report talks only of grooming gangs. It does not talk about individuals grooming young women and girls, or, interestingly given the Murdoch and Rothermere press’ obsession with those “web giants”, any grooming that takes place online.
Does that make a difference? It certainly does: as Iram Ramzan has confirmed, “Majority of CSE offenders/paedophiles are white. unfortunately when it comes to street grooming Pakistanis are disproportionately represented”. Why should her voice be important? Well, she works for the Sunday Times. SHE WROTE THAT ARTICLE.
Yes, the writer of the ST’s shock horror article admits her story is grossly misleading - to the point of rank dishonesty. Worse, the significant contributory cause - that those involved in this crime are invariably those working in the night-time economy - goes ignored.
But readers become frightened and hateful towards Muslims. So that’s all right, then.
Nobody ever got poor by over estimating paranoia, fear and loathing in the suburbs.
I'm definitely no fan of the Murdoch press, which is why I was shocked at Sky news raising the question about Quilliam's funding from John Templeton Foundation. They've also had funding from Bradley foundation, which funds Horowitz Freedom centre, which then funds Ezra Levant, owner of Rebel Media and employer of Tommy Robinson. Horowitz also fund Robert Spencer. So anything written by Quilliam, may as well have been written by Robert Spencer and Tommy Robinson. Whatever these people have to say is invalidated by the fact that they're paid to push an agenda.
Post a Comment