I came across Peter McLoughlin, author of ‘Easy Meat’ and one of the authors of ‘Mohammed’s Koran – Why Muslims kill for Islam,’ on Twitter. His Twitter feed, to my knowledge, never ‘incited hate’ yet Twitter suspended him permanently as did Facebook for telling the truth about the Muslim rape gangs.
In the 2014 edition of Easy Meat Telford was already discussed. But in 2014 no-one had any real evidence of the scale of the grooming phenomenon in Telford or elsewhere, and that was because none of the professional organisations had bothered to keep any data. I noted how books by academics as late as 2009 managed to artfully describe the grooming gang phenomenon whilst avoiding any mention of the fact that the victims were almost always white working class girls and the perpetrators were almost always Asian or African Muslims. From 2009 to 2011 when the marches of the English Defence League put the grooming gangs on the agenda (just as those marches once again put the problem of FGM on the agenda), professional police agencies and NGOs scrambled to claim they had never before heard of this grooming phenomenon. In Easy Meat I set about proving that this was a tissue of lies, a fabrication which any journalist could easily pick apart should they so wish. But for decades the entire news industry was equally complicit and chose to abandon those working class girls to this fate.
As I pointed out in 2014, the police organisations had clearly known about the grooming phenomenon for many years. By 2007 part of the Serious Organised Crime Agency had already commissioned a short educational film to be shown in schools. The obvious aim of that video was to cut off the supply of victims to the gangs by teaching schoolgirls to understand the traps set by the gangs. Of course, that educational video was never shown in schools nor on TV, thus ensuring that the gangs could continue to prey on victims across the entire country. The key question people should be asking themselves is this: which organisations had the power to ensure that schoolgirls never got to see that video designed to protect them from the gangs. The same organisations who had the power to stop that video from being viewed are the same organisations who fund antifa in the UK. That the Left have sacrificed so many schoolgirls to rapists demonstrates that the Left have no principle but the acquisition of power by any means necessary. When a victim group are no longer useful to the Left, that victim group is abandoned.
We can be confident that however large the problem is in Rochdale or Rotherham or Oxford or Newcastle or Telford, the problem is far greater in areas with a higher density of Muslims. In those areas there will be Muslims related to the rapists who are in powerful positions in local or national politics, or who are major donors to political parties, or who work for the police or CPS or NGOs. Their domination in such towns and cities is so great that the grooming scandal in those areas will probably never be revealed to any extent. Bradford and Birmingham were among the first places where the evidence publicly surfaced, but to this day Muslims and their allies in those areas are able to suppress any investigations, as Colin Cramphorn and so-called antifa did in Bradford in 2004. That police in the Birmingham area pursued a TV company for a documentary revealing the insurrection being planned in mosques rather than pursue the Muslim grooming gangs in their area should tell us all we need to know about the priorities of the police in Muslim-dominated enclaves.
2. A variety of police forces have released the findings of their investigations into why these young girls were failed, the most famous of these is perhaps the Bullfinch report that came out of Oxford. Police stated that a break in the communication chain between themselves, schools, nurses, social services, parents etc all led to young girls being groomed and raped. They have since initiated, and apparently implemented, a strategy to ensure better overall communication between everyone responsible for the safe-guarding of children in order to ensure children are better protected. Did police in other areas of the UK pick up on Bullfinch and attempt to implement it in their areas?
This is window-dressing. After the furore created by the alliance between antifa and West Yorkshire police over the 2004 Channel 4 documentary on Muslim grooming gangs in Bradford, that particular police force closed down their investigative unit, claiming there was no evidence that there were any grooming gangs! To this day mothers in that area are demanding an inquiry about the failures of the police and the government, and these mothers are getting no support from anyone.
For decades now there has been a determination by the agents of the state that they will not see what is going on. That the Serious Organised Crime Agency was able to commission My Dangerous Loverboy by 2007 is ample proof that the police knew what was going on (the first version of the video was ready by July 2008). The single largest chapter of Easy Meat documents in forensic detail how from the early 1990s onwards all these different state-funded agencies knew about the grooming gang phenomenon. But after 2009 they all pretended they hadn’t known. In the four years since Easy Meat was first published, there has not been one attempt to refute the evidence contained in the book. In the run-up to the BBC’s recent drama and documentary about the grooming gangs, I was repeatedly approached by the BBC for input, but due to family circumstances I was unable to do more than provide them with free copies of Easy Meat. Naturally, my book has received no credit.
Rather than now try and bring all these disparate groups together, introducing more bureaucracy and more opportunities for passing the buck, the simple solution to the problem – instructing potential victims about how the gangs operate – was quietly shelved. Muslims and their allies will not allow anything to tarnish the image of Islam and its followers. Which organisation is now overseeing the pursuit of grooming gangs in the UK? The National Crime Agency. And what is the National Crime Agency? It is just a re-brand of the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the very organisation who produced that instructional video a decade ago. This re-brand is just another slight of hand by the establishment. They had to re-brand SOCA as NCA to conceal that over a decade ago SOCA was fully aware of the Muslim grooming gangs. Back then SOCA did no data collection, no press conferences. They didn’t even make a fuss when their (taxpayer-funded) warning video went unseen. They knew what the problem was, they knew that the potential victims were being kept in the dark. And SOCA remained silent. Is it accidental that the very Parliamentary Bill which created SOCA in the first place was also one of the Bills which attempted to criminalise those who criticised Islam? Instead of pursuing the disclosure of reality all leadership in Britain is dedicated to misleading the public.
3. Are there other plans similar to Bullfinch that you know of?
After permitting Muslim gangs to trap and rape non-Muslim schoolgirls for the best part of 5 decades, with far less than 1% of the perpetrators going to prison, I am certain that the agents of the state are not going to behave significantly differently. They can’t be bothered to bring prosecutions for FGM where the evidence is tangible and where specific laws against this mutilation have existed for over 4 decades. These multi-decade scandals are now too large to be exposed and the abuses of the legal process we have seen for decades are only going to continue. The grooming gang scandal was not addressed when the Muslim population had 1/10th of the power they have now, so there is no reason to expect any change in direction. That the “independent inquiry” into this scandal lost leader after leader (with one leader leaving allegedly saying that the problem came down to the UK having too many Asians) shows that the problems of Islamisation will only continue and only get worse. All the evidence is that this independent inquiry is going to be a whitewash, with the grooming gang scandal submerged by as many other forms of child abuse as possible.
The hot air around Bullfinch is just that. As I pointed out in the second edition of Easy Meat, before the 2015 General Election PM David Cameron promised legislation that would lead to the imprisonment of police and social workers who did not act on information about grooming. This promise by Cameron was only reported in an interview by the BBC (which might as well be considered a branch of the state), with Cameron saying the grooming gang problem was as serious as terrorism. Have you since seen any sign of this proposed legislation? Have you seen anyone other than me point out Cameron’s hollow promises on this matter? Instead of the Muslim grooming gangs being treated as terrorists, it is Tommy Robinson who is slandered by the state and the media as a terrorist. Robinson’s EDL should be credited with forcing Times’ journalist Andrew Norfolk out of his years of silence, when by Norfolk’s own admission he was repeatedly hearing about Muslim grooming gangs between 2004 and 2009. And what was one of the major actions in the state slandering Tommy Robinson? The 2018 Colin Cramphorn memorial lecture, given by the police officer in charge of counter-terrorism on whose watch Islamic terrorism had expanded beyond all imagination. Remember who Cramphorn was? The Chief Constable who in 2004 worked with Leftists to ensure that the first TV documentary to discuss the Muslim grooming gangs should be branded as racist, and that it should not be seen until after elections (when elections are the very point at which a true democracy would have used the appropriate mechanism to address this political problem). If any single individual can be blamed for the cover-up and the continuation of the grooming gang scandal, it is Cramphorn – a man who was showered with gongs for his service to the state. There should be no doubt that the police force are an extension of the political parties and both police and political parties work hand-in-hand with so-called antifa.
With Telford now in the news we are told that hundreds of referrals were ignored. We still have a former socialist Home Secretary (the man who first used the phrase “easy meat” a decade ago) appearing on national TV tip-toeing around what the possible cultural factors could be which unite so many Muslim men to group together to rape white working-class schoolgirls. What has come out recently about Telford sounds like a re-run of stories from Bradford twenty years ago. Nothing can change because the ruling elite are never going to allow their Muslim allies to be seen in an accurate but negative light. As I show in Easy Meat, the Labour government spent the best part of a decade trying to introduce laws to criminalise anyone who pointed out that the grooming gangs were predominantly Muslim. The destruction of freedom of speech and the cover-up of the rape of schoolgirls are directly connected.
4. We rarely hear about the forgotten victims who are the boys. In your experience of researching how probable is this?
Once again, there is a dearth of information, so we can only speculate about the proportion of schoolboys raped by grooming gangs. We taxpayers fund a veritable army of state employees to look after children and to bring wrong-doing to the attention of the judicial system. And with very rare exceptions this army of state agents ensure they see nothing and ensure they collect no data about this outrage, even though there are a variety of documents that prove this scandal goes back to the 1980s and the 1970s. It seems our modern Corporatist state has learned from the actions of the National Socialists, and the army of state agents keep no records of events that they are told to keep hidden. Those few whistleblowers were sacked and silenced.
However, it would seem unlikely to me that the grooming of boys was happening at a higher rate than the grooming of girls. From the 1970s until recent years police would have been far more concerned with homosexuality than with underage (non-consensual) sex between a Muslim man and schoolgirl. For instance, as recently as the late 1980s Greater Manchester Police and the courts sent adult homosexuals to prison for lengthy sentences simply for having consensual sado-masochistic sex. The lawyers for the gay men argued that the violence between these consenting adults was far less than the violence inflicted by one man upon another in a boxing match, but the judge ruled that the violence was not comparable because boxing was “a manly pursuit”. Even appeals as high as the European Court of Human Rights in the 1990s did not recognise that these adult men had the right to consent to acts inducing pain. Yet we are told by the English courts that schoolgirls (for whom giving consent was a legal impossibility) were consenting to rape, torture and degradation at the hands of Muslim grooming gangs.
If a white schoolboy was to claim that he’d been raped repeatedly (something that would probably be quite clear from an examination of his anus), the police would probably take it more seriously than if a white girl reported that she’d been forced to have sex against her will. Moreover, given the near universal hatred of Muslims for homosexuality; it seems unlikely to me that some groomer would be considered admirable by his Muslim peers for seducing a schoolboy, and it is also unlikely that there would be a queue of other Muslims who would pay to rape this boy. I have seen no evidence to make me question these expectations. There may well be schoolboy victims, but I expect they would be very much the exception. For every forgotten victim who was a schoolboy I would expect perhaps hundreds of forgotten victims who were schoolgirls. If data eventually proves me wrong on the proportion of schoolboy victims, then I would say that was further evidence that the Muslim grooming gangs were seeing the rape of these children as acts of war, where normal values are superseded by a different moral order.
5. Do you believe if this was affecting mostly middle class or Muslim children it would be have been dealt with swiftly? Is there a class issue in play here?
The Conservative MP for Telford is on record as saying that the gangs are targeting white working-class schoolgirls, echoing the Labour MP for Blackburn who had already said 10 years ago that Pakistani gangs saw white schoolgirls as “easy meat”. Political correctness puts white people at the bottom of any hierarchy of suffering. The white working class in Britain are now the most despised group in their own country, thanks to decades of denigration of the British in general and of the working class in particular. The bourgeois Left have never forgiven the working class for supporting Margaret Thatcher in preference to a Bolshevik revolution. The middle class applaud themselves as Brits by thinking they are at least cosmopolitan and internationalist, unlike the working class whom they both fear and despise.
There are undoubtedly some middle class girls who have fallen into the clutches of the gangs. But on the whole the Muslim gangs live cheek-by-jowl with the white working class (and to some extent with working class blacks and Sikhs), and so the white working class are most ready to hand and most numerous. The working class are already despised by the salaried agents of the state, so these schoolgirls are not believed when they go to complain. On top of that, the desire by the middle class to appear “non-racist” and politically correct would mean that these agents of the state would always give preferential treatment to a non-white immigrant than to a member of the white working class. The chattering classes’ idea of diversity is to have any number of immigrants and foreigners appear on TV debates and even TV adverts, when it is vanishingly rare to see a representative of the working class be allowed to air an opinion in the media, even though the working class are by far the biggest demographic in the country.
What brings out the contrast most is to imagine the swiftness of the violent consequences if thousands of non-Muslim men in Britain had systematically raped and pimped thousands of Muslim schoolgirls. Muslims would not have stood for this, as we have seen with the variety of forms of terrorism Muslims have employed for far less serious issues – riots, execution squads and suicide bombings over things as trivial as cartoons by non-Muslims. But it appears that for 5 decades British men and women have just stood by and watched as the political elite and the agents of the state facilitated the industrial rape of schoolgirls. The traditional institutions of the working class have been eviscerated (trade unions, churches, social clubs) by deliberate policies from the ruling elite and by technological change, resulting in the destruction of communal bonds and the fragmentation of a once homogeneous society. With the destruction of these working class communities the media (and now social media) became the ways by which many understood what was going on in their own society. The ruling elite are determined to bolster community bonds among immigrant populations whilst destroying the same bonds among the indigenous population – mosques which preach hatred of non-Muslims get state funding and charitable status, whilst pubs which welcome anyone are taxed on their sales and on their profits. Pubs go out of business, often replaced by mosques. Muslims have the infrastructure and the ideological framework to organise violent responses at the drop of a hat. The indigenous population have been weakened, fractured and betrayed by those who are in the position of leadership. There are literally thousands of state-funded proponents of Islam. By contrast there are literally zero state-funded critics of Islam. That imbalance should leave people in no doubt where the state is heading.
If these indigenous communities and their organisations had not been so weakened since the 1960s, then we may have seen a violent response by the white working class to the rape of the girls of their community. Since we now have proof that the Muslim rape gangs were operating back in the 1970s, it could well be that the so-called “Paki bashing” phenomenon of the 1970s was itself a response to the organised rape of schoolgirls by immigrants. Our institutions (controlled by the middle class) have done nothing other than systematically deceive the public over the last 5 decades. To most people’s astonishment, there is considerable evidence to show that the indigenous population are disproportionately the victims of racist violence, with the grooming gangs being, in the single largest instance, the instigators of such racist violence.