The thing about these reports (links below) is to read them for yourself, and make your own mind up. Don’t let others tell you about them, or pass their own views on without you reading them yourselves. As the author put it.
“Just read them yourselves and make your own mind up. Then ask why people tell you they are saying something different.”
There is a big, big issues involved in this affair. Bigger than what goes on the Rotherham, bigger than the detail you read in the papers, it is this.
There are two approaches to the integration of new ethnicities and peoples arriving in the UK.
1. * One is to allow the new communities to live in ghettos, remain culturally half in the UK and half in their land of origin. Protect them by accepting and tolerating both the good and bad practices they bring with them. Do not be concerned when they are the victims of criminality, when they are disadvantaged in terms of jobs. Give them educations and a house, but forget that for them a university only means three years delay before they end up being a taxi driver. Give them grants, demand nothing under the disguise of tolerance, while accepting massive social problems unless they encroach upon the white middle classes. This is PC tolerance, something that criminals have hidden behind.
2. *The other is to accept and welcome strangers, to show tolerance. To provide help, education and support. To focus on integration and the agreement among us all, through law, as to what is expected of all, regardless of creed, colour, ethnicity or sexuality. It is to allow individual freedoms, while at the same time showing no more toleration of illegality for the immigrant community as one would from the white community. This is not meaning adherence to some spurious and fascist concept of “British Values” meaning those of the empire. It is about creating a country where the only thing we have to agree is to we abide by the same law, or be punished equally regardless of ethnicity.
Not surprisingly I adhere to the latter of these approaches, people are welcome but they like us should abide by the law. If we all do then we should go about our way in peace, with freedom of religion, politics, equality of opportunity, access to education, housing and employment. If any of us break the law we should suffer the consequences, if we should see someone break the law it is our duty to inform the Police. Once punished they get a fresh start.
This may appear naïve, but every other way is madness and doomed to create civil disorder
UKIP offer no solutions. Their emphasis on immigration misses the issue. As a former empire and trading nation we were never going to be able to prevent immigration without measures and tactics that most would consider racist and violent. Never more so than now, with global changes to transport and technology, massive population shifts through water shortages, famine, political upheaval and war.
The issue in the UK is not immigration, it is the failure since World War 2 of UK “Integration” policy.
A policy wherein many have been willing to accept immigrants as cheap labour, while concurrently despising them and their families, wanting to discard them when when economies change and work dries up. When they are denied access to work and banking, impoverished and forced to live in ghettos .
If we look at what has happened in Rotherham it was not an issue of ethnicity, Islam or Kashmiri cultural attitudes. Misogyny and child sexual abuse is all too common from primarily men of all ethnicity, all religions and colours.
The issue in Rotherham & elsewhere is one of criminality, criminal gangs, corruption and the use of politics and positions of power to disguise their criminality. It is that these men hide behind political clout and protection, sometimes using the term racism to discredit those who try to expose them.
When the four men threatened and screamed abuse at that guy outside the Town Hall, when they called him racist, don’t ask is he a racist? That is what they want you to do, it was the purpose of the attack.
Question why in town and country where there are plenty of racist why did they pick on him, simply for trying to help people understand the Jay report?
The answer is simple. They were doing it to intimidate and stop him. Really, they don’t want even their own community to read and understand the report…only their version is acceptable.
I know these types of thug, they are amongst the most misogynistic and racist in Rotherham. They hate young white girls, they hate those from their own community who disagree with them or are from a different caste. They use and abuse the Roma.
What they were doing was intimidating him to make him shut up. If that failed, it was to discredit him and his evidence. He had hit a raw nerve, he was threatening something they wanted or new.
People out there should simply read the stuff he wrote for themselves and make up their own minds.
Then ask the question, why did they want to shut him up ?”
Bye, bye everybody.