Rotherham child abuse scandal: 1,400 children exploited, report finds


Dagobah Resident
This story is developing & being debated live...

Rotherham child abuse scandal: 1,400 children exploited, report finds

Rotherham child exploitation report Live

At least 1,400 children were subjected to "appalling" sexual exploitation in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013, a report has found.

Children as young as 11 were raped by multiple perpetrators, abducted, trafficked to other cities in England, beaten and intimidated it said.

The report, commissioned by Rotherham Borough Council in 2013, revealed there had been three previous inquiries.

Five men from the town were jailed for sexual offences against girls in 2010.

'Doused in petrol'
Professor Alexis Jay, who wrote the latest report, said there had been "blatant" collective failures by the council's leadership, senior managers had "underplayed" the scale of the problem and South Yorkshire Police had failed to prioritise the issue.

Prof Jay said police "regarded many child victims with contempt" and that by far the majority of perpetrators were described as 'Asian' by victims".

Despite this, the report concluded: "Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought as racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so."

Revealing details of the inquiry's findings, Prof Jay said: "It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered."

She said she found examples of "children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone".

Failures by those charged with protecting children happened despite three reports between 2002 and 2006 which both the council and police were aware of, and "which could not have been clearer in the description of the situation in Rotherham".

She said the first of these reports was "effectively suppressed" because senior officers did not believe the data. The other two were ignored
, she said.

The inquiry team found that in the early 2000s when a group of professionals attempted to monitor a number of children believed to be at risk, "managers gave little help or support to their efforts".

The report revealed some people at a senior level in the police and children's social care thought the extent of the problem was being "exaggerated".

Prof Jay said: "The authorities involved have a great deal to answer for."


FOTCM Member
At least 1,400 children were subjected to "appalling" sexual exploitation in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013, a report has found.
This is a huge.

I find the way it's written very curious, though to be expected with the BBC. I have made a point of bringing up the most recent scandals when out and about, because i am really interested to see how much is filtering through, and i would say the last scandal (the suppression of the historic abuse, with direct links to parliament) caught peoples attention.

"2013" - what, they mean 9 months ago??

I also read:
A paedophile who worked as a child protection and care worker expert advised the Home Office on children’s homes, it has been revealed.

Peter Righton, who died in 2007, advised the government on reforms to the care home system in 1970, for a report that detailed how new homes should be controlled by local government.

Righton, who was one of the founding members of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) lobby group, had also been a consultant for charity the National Children's Bureau as well as a Governor at the New Barns School, Gloucester.

Thanks Ascien - shared.

Edit: removed duplicate article from other source


Dagobah Resident
I'm sure that some, if not all of these, have been on SOTT or the forum - some before I joined. But just for emphasis on the reports in this context, I feel that I should post them because these British isles are so much more creepy & horrifying for child abuse than say, America. Only those states or towns in the US that are fairly small remind me of Wales or some places in the north of England; countryside areas where child abuse is prominent - it's really everywhere though, but I feel more scared (imagining myself been shipped of to paedos) when I see places like the Scottish highlands - cold, "desolate" with no one around for many many miles. Anyway, more Peter Righton & the UK establishment information...

Officer involved in 1992 child porn arrest said five suitcases stuffed with letters suggested links to establishment and senior clergy
·Terry Shutt says letters were found at Righton's Worcestershire property
·Claims they pointed to a child abuse ring involving establishment figures
·Shutt says senior members of the clergy and public officials were named
·But former West Mercia police officer says the leads were not investigated
·Righton was a founder member of the Paedophile Information Exchange
·He was convicted of child porn offences in 1992 but died a free man in 2007
·Righton was once considered to be a leading authority on child care

PUBLISHED: 02:14 EST, 9 July 2014 | UPDATED: 06:35 EST, 9 July 2014

A former police officer involved in the 1992 arrest of notorious paedophile Peter Righton claims letters found at his home pointed to a child abuse network involving public officials and clergy.
Terry Shutt, a former detective constable with West Mercia Police, said five suitcases stuffed with letters found at the property in Evesham, Worcestershire suggested Righton was in touch with an extensive network of individuals who wanted to abuse children.
Righton, who died in 2007, was a social work expert and founder member of the Paedophile Information Exchange, who campaigned to decriminalise sex with children.

Mr Shutt was working as a detective constable when officers raided the home of paedophile Righton - who was once considered to be one of the country’s most respected authorities on child care.
As well as images of child abuse, they found five suitcases full of letters, which Mr Shutt says pointed to be him belonging to a much wider paedophile network.

In amongst all the other documentation, there was a definite link to establishment figures, including senior members of the clergy,’ he told BBC’s Today programme this morning.
‘So for me there was a definite feel that this was something bigger than we were looking at locally and that it should have been investigated further,’ he added.

The Metropolitan Police did investigate the letters, but the now retired Mr Shutt says many of the most important leads were not followed up.
He claims it was seen to be more important to protect the establishment.
A confidential Hereford and Worcester Social Service report from the 1990s said the letters from Righton’s home suggested links to clergy, civil servants, social services and and education staff, according to the BBC.
The Met Police last night it couldn’t comment on the case, but a police source told from the time told the BBC that claims the investigation was deliberately shut down were ‘nonsense’.

Yesterday Peter McKelvie, a campaigner who first raised the alarm about prominent individuals engaged in child sex abuse two years ago, said he told police in 2012 that seven boxes of potential evidence about Righton were being stored by West Mercia Police.
He claims he told officers these boxes might contain evidence of further abuse by senior members of the establishment.
Speaking in public for the first time in 20 years, the former local authority child protection chief also said there were still people in power who were involved in child abuse two decades ago.
The prevailing feeling in the comments section seem to be one of bafflement. This next one is simply galling to read. For safety, I'm leaving the deactivated link only. When/if you read it, you might understand why.


Note: this next article is long.

The sheer scale of child sexual abuse in Britain

The Guardian Published April 1998
In November last year, every newspaper in Britain carried the story of how Scotland Yard had worked with police forces around the country to raid the rooms of teachers at private schools in search of evidence of their involvement in a paedophile ring. The more interesting story, however, was the raid which never happened.

In the weeks before the operation, specialist detectives from the Paedophile Unit at Scotland Yard had discussed with Thames Valley the possibility of raiding a teacher at the most prestigious private school in the country – Eton College, whose pupils include the off-spring of some of the most powerful families in Britain, including the heir to the throne, Prince William.

The move started after a teacher who had recently left Eton went to Thames Valley police and claimed that one of his colleagues had been indecently assaulting boys at the school. Detectives investigated and discovered that the suspect teacher had been the target of similar allegations in the past; and that police in Yorkshire had seized a collection of child pornography and found letters from the teacher in which he referred to “sending the happy items”.

Clearly, this did not amount to proof that the teacher was guilty. His former colleague may conceivably have had a grudge against him; the letters in Yorkshire may have had some innocent explanation; other witnesses who also suspected him, may simply have been mistaken. But the whole series of raids was being mounted on similar intelligence which Scotland Yard believed was strong enough to demand that suspects be interviewed and their property searched. Yet when the raids finally took place, Thames Valley held back, arguing that the evidence was too weak to justify action.

The result: the truth about the suspected abuser was never found.

Earlier last year, the Guardian revealed the international police hunt for two unidentified men who had made the “Bjorn tape”, a chilling video which recorded their relentless sexual assault on an adolescent Dutch boy who was carried in front of the camera, limp and hooded, before being strapped into a chair where he was defenceless against the indulgence of his two attackers.

Following the story in the Guardian, which was linked to an ITV documentary, Dutch police traced Bjorn’s accent to an area in the north of Holland, where they combed through files of reported child abuse – and found him. It turned out that he had contacted the authorities a year earlier to complain that a Dutch man, whom he named, had been drugging and raping him since he was only three years old, most recently with the assistance of an English man. The Dutch man had been tried and – in the absence of the video – he had been acquitted. He had then sued Bjorn for making a malicious complaint against him. Bjorn had collapsed into mental illness and been given refuge in an orphanage.

Now, the tape not only proved that the boy had been telling the truth in all its grim detail, but it also confirmed the identity of the English man who had taken part. He is John Peters, a former soldier who went AWOL in the early 1970s after being charged with having sex with a 14-year-old boy in public toilets near his base in Sutton Coldfield. Since then, Peters has been convicted in Denmark of a separate offence of child abuse.

Although Bjorn’s Dutch abuser is now due to be tried again in Holland, Peters remains at liberty. Just as he evaded the police in Sutton Coldfield in the 1970s, so now he has evaded them again in Holland, simply by crossing a border. He is believed to be in Asia, whose population of impoverished and vulnerable children has become a magnet for paedophiles and whose police have no active intelligence link with the British or Dutch. The result: the abuser has escaped.

That same story in the Guardian also disclosed the activities of Warwick Spinks, a British paedophile who was then serving a sentence of five years after Scotland Yard arrested him for abducting and raping two homeless boys from the streets of London. He had sold one of them into a brothel in Amsterdam.

Spinks is a paedophile of grandiose ambition, a man who has commercialised his obsession, first by running an agency in Britain which sold boys to like-minded punters, and then by moving to Amsterdam where, as the Guardian disclosed, he worked in brothels and joined a group of British men who produced videos in which five boys were alleged to have been raped and murdered for the pleasure of viewers.

As he approached the end of his five-year sentence, Spinks was transferred from prison to a probation hostel in south London where, last September, he was asked to fill in a form so that the police could enter his details on the new register of sex offenders. He is precisely the kind of compulsive offender for whom the register was designed so that police can keep an eye on their movements. Spinks, however, refused to fill in the form.

He simply walked away from the hostel and sent his probation officer a postcard with an invitation to come and see him in Amsterdam. Since then, he has travelled to Frankfurt, Johannesburg, Moscow and Prague pursuing his own special interests with never a care for the sex offenders’ register or any other limb of the child protection system. The result: another abuser has escaped.

The sexual abuse of children is a special crime, not simply because of the damage it does to its victims, nor even because of the anger and fear it provokes in communities, but more particularly because it is so easy – easy to commit, easy to get away with.

Recently, it has broken into the headlines, through the communal fear of a handful of child killers like Robert Oliver and Sidney Cooke; in the exhumation of the crimes of Mary Bell; with the reluctant resignation of Grampian’s Chief Constable following his force’s bungled inquiry into a paedophile murder. But the debate that has followed has been fragmentary and confused, discoloured by populist reactions from ministers.

Over the last six months, the Guardian has conducted the most detailed and exhaustive investigation of paedophilia that has ever been undertaken by a British newspaper. We have tracked down abusers and their victims, we have spoken to the social workers and detectives and Customs officers who deal with them, to private agencies and to the most senior officials who lead the defence against child abuse.

We have seen the results of courageous work by thousands of dedicated men and women but also we have seen the results of cover-up and concealment, occasionally of corruption, of whistleblowers who are punished for trying to expose the truth, of local authorities, churches and other organisations who have closed ranks to deny or conceal allegations against their staff.

In an investigation of this, the most secret of crimes, we have found evidence of what is an open secret among many of those who fight it – that after twenty years of scandal and alarm, after numerous inquiries and reports, and despite the best efforts of those who work in it, we have created an elaborate and sophisticated failure, a child protection system which does not protect the children.

The origin of the problem is the easiness of the crime, the violent equivalent of taking candy from babies. It is physically easier for a rapist to overpower a child than an adult, to subdue a victim who has less than half his body-weight. In February of this year, for example, police reported that a paedophile had boarded a train outside Brighton one evening and abducted not one, but three young boys, aged between eight and eleven. Police said that the man forced the three boys to get off in the village of Glynde, where he marched them into the public toilets and indecently assaulted all three of them before threatening to kill them, raping one of them and putting them all back on the train.

Equally, it is easier to confuse a child than an adult. A woman who spent four years from the age of seven being raped regularly by her stepfather, told the Guardian she had never thought to complain: “I thought it was normal, I thought everyone was going home from school and being hurt by their dad.” Children have emerged from abuse to report variously that they were told that there was a bomb inside them which would explode if they disclosed what was happening; that there was no point in telling because no one would believe them and they would be put into care; or, commonly, that the abusive parent would be sent to prison, thus destroying the family and bringing hardship and misery to the other parent.

Children are conned by their abusers in a way that no adult would be. Bruce McLean, for example, who is serving nine years for indecent assaults in Cheshire, was using Manchester United tickets to entrap boys. A man who is now awaiting trial for producing a small orgy of child pornography videos in the north of England bought adolescent girls with Kentucky Fried Chicken and toffees, according to one who has spoken to the Guardian.

The ease of the crime is reflected in its scale. No one knows the exact numbers, but to construct a picture is to watch an arithmetical explosion. Start with a hard fact. At the last count, there were 2,100 child sex abusers behind the bars of British jails. Now think of all those who have previously been convicted but who have been released back into the community. You have to multiply by 50: according to the Home Office Research Department, there are 108,000 convicted paedophiles in the community.

Now, think of all the child victims who are conned and confused and never report their abuse in the first place; and all those cases which are reported but which fall short of the demands of the courts; and all those cases of rape and indecent assault which are convicted but which are not statistically recorded as crimes against children. At the most conservative estimate, the NSPCC and specialist police agree with studies here and in the United States, that the official figures for convictions record no more than ten per cent of the paedophile population. Which means that today in Britain, there are probably 1.1 million paedophiles at large. Other studies suggest that the figure is very much higher.

This vast scale appears to be confirmed by “prevalance studies” which take samples of the population and establish how many were childhood victims of sexual abuse. In the UK, the United States, Germany, Switzerland and Australia, studies consistently find that around 20% of women and around 8% of men suffered sexual abuse as children. In the current population of UK children, that would cover 1.5 million girls and 520,000 boys, a figure that is consistent with the projection of 1.1 million offenders.

Child sex abuse is not only easy to commit, it is also easy to get away with. It is the least reported crime on the planet. Numerous victims say that they were silenced by their own emotions – the same emotions which gag the adult victims of rape, but which are magnified in a child’s mind. Some children simply cannot report it: social workers in East Sussex four years ago found paedophiles deliberately targetting children who were too disabled to give evidence. Others had picked children who were terminally ill and who died before the system could catch up with them.

Those children who do report what has happened to them are uniquely likely to find their stories rejected. Often, like the adult victims of indecent assault, they will have nothing but their own word as evidence. And the word of a child is viewed with suspicion from one end of the criminal justice system to the other. It is for that reason that the tribunal of inquiry into abuse in children’s homes in North Wales is only now attempting to get to the truth of hundreds of complaints which were first made by children up to 20 years ago – to council officials, doctors, social workers and parents who, almost without exception, believed not a word of it.

North Wales is only the beginning. It is now clear that during the last 30 years, children’s homes in Britain suffered an epidemic of rape and violent assault. It was an epidemic that went unnoticed, like a plague that struck dumb its victims or else blinded those around it.

There are now literally thousands of men and women, in North Wales, South Wales, Manchester, Liverpool, Sunderland, Northumbria, Edinburgh – in seventeen different police areas in all – who have come forward to make detailed, credible allegations about their childhoods of abuse in care. The combined force of these different inquiries amounts to the biggest contemporary police operation in the country. And yet, at the time that these people were children, at the time that they were being used as human aids to masturbation, just about all of them were overlooked by just about every agency that was supposed to protect them – the police, social workers, the Social Services Inspectorate, health visitors, doctors.

The passage of time, itself, often allows abusers to escape. In Cardiff, Paul Conibeer, who is now aged 28, is trying to persuade the police to prosecute Alan Williams, Lee Tucker and John Gay for buggering him and passing him around their friends when he was a 13-year-old in care. The three men have since been convicted of paedophile offences and become involved in the abuse of children in Portugal and Amsterdam, where they shared their pleasures with Warwick Spinks. Police in Cardiff, however, say Conibeer’s story is too old to be proved. Conibeer has a grim alternative: “I’m giving it a year. If nothing is done in a year, I’m doing it my own way. If I can take three scum off the street that would be my debt paid back to society, because I have been a bad bastard in my time.”

The fact that the sexual abuse of children is so hidden is not entirely the result of the age its victims. This is also a crime of conspiracy, of the abuse of power and, from time to time, of incidents which suggest that a paedophile with prestige may be more likely to escape justice than a more humble offender.

For example, police now invest relatively little time in the surveillance of public toilets where gay men go cottaging. The one thing that is likely still to trigger such an operation is a complaint that under-aged boys are involved – unless, that is, the toilets in question happen to be those behind the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand, in which case, under the terms of a long-standing Metropolitan Police policy, the operation will take place only if it has the approval of an officer of the rank of commander or above. According to experienced London officers, the reason is that those toilets are used by High Court judges and barristers, and the Metropolitan Police have always said they do not want to encounter such a powerful offender without special authority.

Fleet Street routinely nurtures a crop of untold stories about powerful abusers who have evaded justice. One such is Peter Morrison, formerly the MP for Chester and the deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. Ten years ago, Chris House, the veteran crime reporter for the Sunday Mirror, twice received tip-offs from police officers who said that Morrison had been caught cottaging in public toilets with underaged boys and had been released with a caution. A less powerful man, the officers complained, would have been charged with gross indecency or an offence against children.

At the time, Chris House confronted Morrison, who used libel laws to block publication of the story. Now, Morrison is dead and cannot sue. Police last week confirmed that he had been picked up twice and never brought to trial. They added that there appeared to be no trace of either incident in any of the official records.

A lot of paedophiles are loners. The NSPCC found that 70% of them were closely related to their victim – and, contrary to popular belief, they were not always men. Dr Michelle Elliott from Kidscape says she has dealt with more than 700 cases of women sexually abusing children and that she takes on one or two new such cases each week. Academics who have analysed the history of sexually abused children on the At Risk register have found that one in three were assaulted by adolescent or pre-adolescent children. The Young Abusers Project in London, has dealt with one abuser who was only seven years old.

Even though most abusers – whatever their age or sex – work alone, there is clear evidence of some conspiracy, of the existence of paedophile rings, sometimes deliberately infiltrating parts of the child protection system, often taking advantage of each other’s political or social power to conceal their activities.

Researchers at Manchester University trawled the records of eight police areas in search of cases of organised abuse and they concluded that nationally they would expect to find 242 cases every year where children were the victims of adults who had colluded together to use them for sex. They noted, in line with other specialist researchers, that these official records probably captured only one tenth of the truth. It is these cases of organised abuse which present some of the most frightening incidents.

Some are never brought to trial – like the group of men who were believed by police to be abducting homeless girls from the streets of London in the early 1990s and holding them in a converted garage with padded walls, where they were being abused and finally killed. The closest they came to being caught was when the man who was said to be disposing of the girls’ bodies, for £2,000 a time, was identified by Number Eight Regional Crime Squad, in Wales, as an ex-convict, a man with a history of spectacular violence who was living in Cardiff. Police investiged him but were unable to identify those who had hired him or to find evidence to charge him.

Others come to trial only partially – like Robert Oliver and Sidney Cooke and their friends who together abducted, drugged, raped and killed Jason Swift, Barry Lewes and Mark Tildesley. They were convicted of manslaughter. Officers from Operation Orchid were frustrated, first because there was insufficient evidence to convict them of murder, and, second, because they were never able to bring any charges at all in relation to six other boys who, they believed, had also died at the hands of the same ring.

Often the links between abusers lie beneath the surface of less horrific conspiracies. Take, for example, the case of Greystone Heath, an approved school for boys in Warrington, which for years enjoyed an unsullied reputation until police finally discovered that it had become a hot spot for paedophiles. This one institution – whose history of abuse is echoed now in scores of others – is a model of everyday paedophile collusion.

It appears to have started in 1965 when a 21-year-old student teacher named Keith Laverack went to work there and embarked on a campaign of buggery and indecent assault. Over the ensuing four years, he raped at least 16 boys, three of whom he shared with his colleague, Brian Percival, the clerk and storeman at the home. Once these two men had established sexual rights over the boys at Greystone, other abusers joined the staff: Alan Langshaw, who raped at least 24 boys; Dennis Grain who raped at least 18; Roy Shuttleworth who raped at least ten; Jack Bennett who indecently assaulted two; and Steve Norris who assaulted an unknown number.

The Greystone abusers then fanned out. Keith Laverack went to childrens’ homes in Cambridgeshire; Alan Langshaw became Principal of St Vincent’s Catholic boys’ home in Formby; Grain and Shuttleworth were both promoted to other homes in the Warrington area; Steve Norris went to North Wales. At their new homes, all of them continued to rape boys who were in their care and wherever they went, they crossed the paths of other paedophiles.

In Cambridgeshire, Keith Laverack worked with numerous colleagues, four of whom are now also suspected of abusing children. Dennis Grain worked in Doncaster for the same group of private schools as Terence Hoskins who went on to become headteacher of St Aiden’s Community Home in Widnes, where he liked to thrash naked boys with a cane, which he then pushed into their backsides, while his housemaster, Colin Dick, indecently assaulted those who caught his eye. Dennis Grain had previously attacked boys in Danesford childrens’ home in Congleton, opening the door to three others, John Clarke, Joseph Smith and Brian Hudson, who set about the boys with relish. Dennis Grain, in the meantime, went off to work at Eton, where he became a housemaster. The web is almost endless.

While he was Principal of St Vincent’s, Alan Langshaw recruited a care worker named Edward Stanton, who joined in Langshaw’s orgy. Stanton appears to have got the job through the good offices of Roy Shuttleworth, who was continuing to abuse the boys at Greystone and who is believed to have known Stanton from their time in Birmingham when they took the same course in residential child care.

That course in Birmingham, in turn, is believed to have been lectured by Peter Righton, a notorious paedophile who attempted to legitimise his obsession in a series of academic studies. Righton, for his part, belonged to the Paedophile Information Exchange, along with Jack Bennett who joined in the abuse at Greystone. Righton had earlier worked in the same childrens’ home in Maidstone, Kent as Peter Howarth, who went on to become a legendary abuser in the homes of North Wales where he shared his indulgence with Steve Norris, formerly of Greystone.

Each of these men claims to have abused alone. Even though their paths connected so frequently, even though the Greystone abusers were assaulting boys in buildings within yards of each other, even though several of them were raping the same boys, they claim never to have colluded with each other. No one who has been involved with investigating Greystone believes them.

The evidence suggests that such abusers not only collude to give each other work and access to children, but also to infiltrate the child protection system. Peter Righton lectured not only in Birmingham but in numerous other colleges. Before he was finally taken to court and convicted, he became a highly regarded consultant in child care and, eventually, the Director of Education at the prestigious National Institute of Social Work in London, a position from which he was able to have some influence on Government policy.

With similar cynicism, Keith Laverack, who opened the catalogue of abuse at Greystone Heath, went on to run the Guardian Ad Litem panel for Cambridgeshire County Council, with the job of representing the interests of children in court cases. This job not only introduced him to the most vulnerable children in the area but also gave him access to files on abused children all over the country. Terence Hoskins, who worked with some of the Greystone abusers, used connections with South Yorkshire police to get access to his own file, from the supposedly secret National Criminal Intelligence Service, NCIS.

Roger Saint who spent years assaulting his foster children in Clwyd secured himself a job on the local adoption panel, from which he could referee complaints about people like himself.

But this is only the beginning. Beyond the inherent difficulty of detecting and preventing this most secret crime, beyond the obstacle course of concealment erected by the collusion of clever paedophiles, the child victims of sexual abuse are betrayed by organisations who repeatedly prefer to avoid embarrassment by concealing awkward allegations and by a system of protection which simply does not work.
In my opinion, we'll never know the true scale of child abuse in the UK, let alone anywhere else. Lastly there's this nonsense from Rochdale council.

Reading these things makes me so sad and angry. Why isn't there a real furore about this, especially from parents? Is their belief in the establishment that strong? Patriotism? I can sort of understand not getting 9/11, but systematic abuse of children over decades and across neighbouring countries involving authority figures would have me frightened for MY child, & others too. Where's the public pressure? It seems that people would rather see non-entities aka celebrities, be hung out to dry for whatever is possible as opposed to those who ACTUALLY AFFECT the lives of MILLIONS in a tangible & meaningful way. I don't know about anyone else, but this issue gets me going in way I wasn't aware of & I have to fight off the tears. This awakening of conscience activity is so tough, I think I'm starting to understand why so many people would rather "switch off."

Minas Tirith

Jedi Council Member
Thanks for posting and keeping us updated.

I lived in the UK for about a year and there virtually wasn't a week when not a new child abuse "scandal" hit even the mainstream press. And now it even seems to get worse and worse.

Ascien said:
Reading these things makes me so sad and angry. Why isn't there a real furore about this, especially from parents? Is their belief in the establishment that strong? Patriotism? I can sort of understand not getting 9/11, but systematic abuse of children over decades and across neighbouring countries involving authority figures would have me frightened for MY child, & others too. Where's the public pressure? It seems that people would rather see non-entities aka celebrities, be hung out to dry for whatever is possible as opposed to those who ACTUALLY AFFECT the lives of MILLIONS in a tangible & meaningful way. I don't know about anyone else, but this issue gets me going in way I wasn't aware of & I have to fight off the tears. This awakening of conscience activity is so tough, I think I'm starting to understand why so many people would rather "switch off."
Good question. I don't know if it's something particularly English, but living there, it seemed that the average Brit doesn't carry a lot of revolutionary, or public pressure potential. There is this: "Keep calm and carry on"-thingie that's immensely popular (a Winston Chrchill quote by the way :evil:), and the attitude that "It will be just fine". During the huge floodings last year the government did absolutely nothing to help, but the complaining was only done privately and only after months and months of rain and keeping calm and carrying on did the public pressure slowly rise. Just a couple of observations.



FOTCM Member
Minas Tirith said:
Good question. I don't know if it's something particularly English, but living there, it seemed that the average Brit doesn't carry a lot of revolutionary, or public pressure potential. There is this: "Keep calm and carry on"-thingie that's immensely popular (a Winston Chrchill quote by the way :evil:), and the attitude that "It will be just fine". During the huge floodings last year the government did absolutely nothing to help, but the complaining was only done privately and only after months and months of rain and keeping calm and carrying on did the public pressure slowly rise. Just a couple of observations.

In my opinion, and i lived out of the country on and off as a child, the English, being the imperialist nation, had to be also one of the most deluded and repressed, otherwise they'd struggle to get away with what they have! As a guest on STR said, they convinced the working class that those victories were 'theirs', that Britain was always a 'united kingdom' (rather than disparate groups recently evicted from their lands/moved by industry to the cities) and the history books were rewritten to reflect this. And as for the lack of revolutionary attitude: very true, but more so, they still have the (from anger) to get out of their chairs, but considering the effects of migration, poverty which meant surival over generosity - look at the mining and mill towns - and 50+ years of propaganda (paid for by the tv license!) people are completely without a support network to even discuss these things.

Watching the English by Kate Fox is an easy reading and funny look at the English, some interesting observations - like the liminal nature of pubs. How we are so uptight we NEED alcohol to lower our inhibitions just to talk!

I wonder if the Victorian era wasn't a useful tool to instill a repressed construct to manipulate us better. After all, wasn't Queen Victoria a raging drug taking nymphomaniac (of sorts)?

Times like these are where gossip is a force for good, but if you don't talk to your neighbours, drive to work and drive home, who are you talking to about it ? This is why i try to broach the subject, to get an idea for who is watching what. You can be very surprised by what people are actually noticing but not saying.

Ascien - i'll read through what you've posted for sure (i've just logged in), thank you. I agree it's a good idea to have the it all in one place.

But i wanted to post this, to give an idea of how it's being spun:

- 2 fathers of abused children tried to intervene and were stopped by police maybe even arrested!. (see Guido Faulks tweet and image attached)
- The tabloids are trying to spin it as another 'Asian gang' sex slavery issue (see newspaper image and tweet comments)
- another peer/lord to Margaret Thatcher has been found to have been a paedophile (tweet with link to article) - that makes a minimum of 2 surrounding her - the other being Jimmy Savile who went with her to chequers (her PM residence for holidays) at Christmas. His name: Sir Nicholas Fairbairn


Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes · 15h
"Raping your daughter you say? Have you been drinking sir?" #Rotherham

Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes · 19h
"In two cases fathers tracked down their daughters and tried to remove them from houses where they were being abused." Police arrested them.

Jack Hope @JackLeslieHope · 16h
I'm wondering if you need to meet the criteria of paedophile before U are legible for a knighthood? Wtf is going on? _ …

Jacob Richardson @jjarichardson · 19h
Extremely angry that the Rotherham abuse case is being twisted into a race issue when it's a victim blaming and establishment cover-up issue

Alexander Nekrassov @StirringTrouble · 14h
The same hacks who refused to investigate the abuse in #Rotherham are now expressing shock and horror over it.

cherry berry @cosyring · 15h
Have they arrested the paedophiles in Westminster paedophile ring yet, or do we have to wait until they all die! #childabuse

Dan Rebellato @DanRebellato · 14h
But, dear tabloids, a fear of appearing racist was ONE factor in the failure of care. ONLY ONE.



Jedi Master
Ascien said:
Reading these things makes me so sad and angry. Why isn't there a real furore about this, especially from parents? Is their belief in the establishment that strong? Patriotism? I can sort of understand not getting 9/11, but systematic abuse of children over decades and across neighbouring countries involving authority figures would have me frightened for MY child, & others too. Where's the public pressure? It seems that people would rather see non-entities aka celebrities, be hung out to dry for whatever is possible as opposed to those who ACTUALLY AFFECT the lives of MILLIONS in a tangible & meaningful way. I don't know about anyone else, but this issue gets me going in way I wasn't aware of & I have to fight off the tears. This awakening of conscience activity is so tough, I think I'm starting to understand why so many people would rather "switch off."
As a child I refused to obey my mothers request to keep a priest company, while she prepared tea for him, my mothers response was, ‘what’s wrong with you he’s a priest,’ and I explained briefly that he had kissed me, and I was not going up there alone, to which she made excuse for him, that he was away somewhere foreign, and had picked up a custom.
Even my older brother said the same thing, ‘What’s wrong with you...’ when he found me hiding, and after I asked him not to tell the guy where I was, as the guy was going out of his way, looking for me.

I took this ‘what’s wrong with you’ quiet seriously, and tried to find out from a neighbour, and asked about this guy... seeing that he used to call there also, all I can remember is the rage simmering expression of a frown, while eyes getting wider in a fixed stare and the words ‘what are you trying to insinuate,’ to which I speedily replied nothing, nothing forget it, it’s nothing... I remember being more scared of peoples reaction, than of the guy himself, and maybe there was something wrong with me.

People generally don’t like being disturbed if everything is ok, if their trough is full, and one might just be a troublemaker, and just not a nice person, to be upsetting their worldview.

My brother, was complaining about the bad press, the church was getting about child abuse... and found my self getting a little angry, saying, ‘what if it was one of your children, how would you feel then,’ though it made little difference, ‘it was just a few bad eggs,’ lets get back to the way things were... ignorance is bliss.

Cant Imagine, how a child must feel like after some of the horrendous ordeals, though a child thinking that being abused was, ‘normal’, is beyond words, but somehow I think they must know, how else to survive, except create a big lie and dissociate, as much as everybody believes their own lies, about how they are, and how the world is, and ‘the myth of sanity,’ comes to mind...



FOTCM Member
Posted in the 'Re: Raised Terror threat in Uk...Apparently' thread',35881.0.html

itellsya said:
And Rotherham - seems like someone has been ordering for files to be deleted. Which i would expect is highly unusual, since most everything is kept on record forever! But maybe that's just the publics telephone calls, internet activity, spending habits and travel (oyster cards).

And apparently, Cameron and Clegg think calling for someone to resign is sufficient. I think i saw a BBC interview with this guy their calling to resign, and if i remember correctly, he joined mid way through the scandal and was 'regretful'. I'll try find it and post - yeap posted at the end.

Scandal hit Rotherham 'deleted abuse files'

Senior staff from Rotherham Council ordered a raid on offices to delete and remove case files of abused girls

Shaun Wright and Roger Stone
South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright, left, and Roger Stone, leader of Rotherham Council Photo: PA

By Nicky Harley

12:40AM BST 29 Aug 2014

Top ranking staff ordered raids to delete and remove case files and evidence detailing the scale of Rotherham's child exploitation scandal, sources have revealed.

More than 10 years before the damning independent inquiry revealed sexual exploitation of 1,400 children in Rotherham a raid was carried out on the orders of senior staff to destroy evidence, it has been claimed.

In 2002 high profile personnel at Rotherham Council ordered a raid on Risky Business, Rotherham council’s specialist youth service, which offered one-to-one help and support to vulnerable teenage girls, ahead of the findings of a draft report, according to the Times.

The raid was to remove case files and wipe computer records detailing the scale and severity of the town’s sex-grooming crisis, sources told The Times.

It took place shortly after senior police and council staff became aware of the contents of the draft report of a 2000-01 research project that found evidence of a hidden child sex abuse scandal.

Files which revealed victims, offenders and how individual cases were handled by the child-protection authorities were removed.

The draft report was intended to form part of a national Home Office pilot project on child sexual exploitation in several English towns. The chapter on Rotherham remains unpublished to this day.

A researcher claims she refused to follow order by senior council officials instructing her to “remove or rewrite” sections of the report, which criticised the repeated failure of police and social services to protect children from identified abusers of Pakistani origin.

David Cameron, the Prime Minister, and his deputy Nick Clegg have backed calls for South Yorkshire’s police and crime commissioner Shaun Wright to resign.

But then what would Cameron know, he's been 'away' :

(from Twitter)
Will Black ‏@WillBlackWriter

It's atrocious that in two months @David_Cameron has had four holidays but the child abuse inquiry has no panel
If, for example, Cameron dares to stand up against those who would wish to keep 'VIP' child abuse covered up, he could go down in history as the prime minister who dared lift the rotten carpet and expose decades of predation. If, conversely, he decides to keep paddling around belly-down in the shallow water, it won't merely be that he doesn't make a mark but will be remembered as the prime minister who had a chance to take on something massive and sinister but bottled it.

Whether or not Cameron dares to stand up for this wave, the fact is it's bigger than him and it's going to flood the complacent beach of Westminster regardless. He can either raise himself up and try to surf it or try to duck it. If he does duck it, however, his recent claims to being 'child friendly' will seem insincere and he has no guarantee that he won't be caught in a rip current and dragged out of his depth anyway. As William Pitt - or perhaps it was Gary Busey - once said: "Sometimes you have to surf or die".

CONsidering Cameron was at the forefront of 'internet child protection' legislation (see: the US guy who headed that dept exposed for child rape) his delays only expose him and his ilk further as being marionettes for some very sick people. What they have on him, i assume, is legion. But then considering this is the guy who withdrew funding from the same charity which assisted his disabled son, who died not long ago, their first born, i'm not that surprised!
David Cameron's commitment to protecting disabled services in the UK has been criticised after a charity of which he is a patron had its funding cut by £250,000. The Kids charity helped the Prime Minister look after his son but has had its support reduced as a result of local government funding cuts.

So traffic terror alerts from a ravenous wolf barely cloaked in a sheeps still dripping skin; yeah, i don't trust this lot ;)


FOTCM Member
This might be a good thread to just record the goings on.. even more ridiculous now that Tony Blair has been named philanthropist of the year by GQ.

(i've checked sott and these specific articles aren't posted). Articles are from 2013 & 2014
From twitter:
Charles Edward Frith @charlesfrith · 12h

Margaret Thatcher's private secretary Peter Morrison now known to be a prolific paedophile boy rapist

Tony Blair's Children's Minister @margarethodge concealed paedo ring while leading Islington

"and so I think my great regret there was believing without question the advice that I was given by the social services managers. I can tell you that I sat across the table, like you and I are sitting across the table now, and said, are you telling me the truth? Is that all I need to hear? And in the end, I believed them. I should have challenged that. [That] I really regret. What I didn’t do was hear the voices of those kids who had suffered abuse. I should have.”

Top Bottom