SUNDAY COLUMN: Why We Must Deport the Rochdale Rapists

Anne Marie Waters

Sunday August 9th 2020

 

Last weekend I spoke at a rally in London demanding the deportation of the ‘Rochdale three’.  These are three men convicted of raping and pimping girls in Rochdale, Greater Manchester.  They were jailed, stripped of their citizenship, and “deported”.  Yet somehow they remain in the country to this day.

The admirable group Hearts of Oak intends to take legal action against Home Secretary Priti Patel to have the men removed.  In a statement, its spokesman Alan Craig said the following:

“There has been a complete failure of duty by the Home Office, and an abject betrayal of the victims and residents. This also sends a clear message to the wider public that the Home Office is not prepared to do its duty and rid the country of these and similar monsters.

“We had hoped for better from you, Ms Patel. You have said rightly that the child victims ‘have been let down by the state’. Yet you do not remove these paedophiles and thereby you perpetrate the injustice against them.”

The rally was a joint effort in partnership with Women Against Groomers, whose representative said: “Rochdale residents are very unhappy with the total lack of action regarding the removal of the three men.”

It’s hard to describe, quantify, or put in to words, the betrayal of our young girls by the state and its machinery.  A clear lesson is given to us, the ordinary people of Britain, and that message is of existential significance.

The British people have received notice that they don’t matter, that foreign rapists are far more important than British girls.

I’ll return to this a bit later, but first, let us look at Rochdale in detail, and remind ourselves exactly what has been going on.

“Three Girls”

Dramatised by the BBC, “Three Girls” is the story of the Rochdale grooming scandal.  We’ll begin the story in 2008, when a young girl in Rochdale, Greater Manchester, was arrested for breaching the peace.  She told police that she had in fact been raped by “Asian” (in reality, Muslim) takeaway and taxi drivers in the area of Heywood.  She was ignored, and she wasn’t the only one.  Hundreds of attempts had been made to get police to take this seriously, but each time the working class white girls were not considered credible witnesses.

In 2011, when Nazir Afzal took over as chief prosecutor for the north west, he reversed the decision about the credibility of witnesses.  This reopened investigations in the town.  Afzal’s status as a British Pakistani Muslim was of course exploited to the hilt and used as ‘proof’ that these rapes had nothing to do with the religious values of the men involved.  Nonsense.  One good apple does not mean the orchard isn’t poisoned.

The Rapists

These were racist rapes, but they were not treated as such.  The case provided the perfect demonstration of moral inversion; the world is quite simply turned upside down.  The men who raped these white English girls did so because they were white English girls, whom they thought of as trash (for being white English girls).

Shabir Ahmed, the ring leader of the grooming gang, made it clear what he thinks of these girls at the trial.  He referred to them as “prostitutes” and was quick to condemn white people in general, but particularly white women.  His outburst in court included “It’s all white lies. Shame on the police. You’re looking for scapegoats. Where are the white people?”

He would later try this trick again; accuse whites of racism.  That is now standard behaviour, and it’s a get-out-of-jail card for anyone, including child rapists, who happen to have non-white skin.

Ahmed was taught to cry “racism” (as were the countless other Muslim child rapists caught in the act in recent years) by a system that demonstrates over and over again that it will cower down in fear at the very sound of the word.

Police didn’t investigate the cases in Rochdale for years, and for the simple reason that the girls were white and poor, and the men were brown-skinned immigrants.  Britain has decided in no uncertain terms that white and poor is far, far less important than brown-skinned and immigrant, and both brown and white have received that message loud and clear.  Over and over again.

As soon as the details of these crimes began to become clear to the public, the response of our public sector was to protect Muslims and Islam.  The girls are irrelevant in comparison.  Despite the overwhelming evidence that this particular crime was carried out by Muslims, police and public sector chiefs continue to prioritise the reputation of Muslims.  Police go to great lengths to make sure we don’t even consider that Islam may be part of the problem (despite the fact that its scripture condones the rape of non-Muslim women).

The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre also prioritises Muslims rather than get to the heart of the actual issue.  “Child sexual exploitation is not confined to one community, age demographic, social status or gender” they said.

Think about it for a moment, we have been told that 1,000s of girls are being raped by Muslim men, it was covered up for decades by police, and yet, when it is uncovered, what is the priority of child protection?  To make sure we don’t blame Muslims.  British people need to understand the significance of that.

We also must understand the significance of the police reaction.  According to the Guardian:

Detective Chief Superintendent Mary Doyle, of Greater Manchester police, said: “As long as there are adults willing to abuse vulnerable children and other adults, it will continue.” On the issue of race, she said it was about vulnerability, not ethnicity. “I think if we start to get ourselves hung up on race and ethnicity issues, we take away the real issues,” she said.

Real issues?  The targeting of white girls by gangs comprised exclusively of Muslim men isn’t a real issue?

It is, but that is covered up because the rapists are more important than the victims.

The Rochdale trial eventually came to an end and the rapists were given short sentences to once again reflect how unimportant British girls are in Britain.  There is little point telling you what the sentences were, because they weren’t served.  They rarely are.  They ranged from 4 to 19 years in prison, but needless to say, not only are many of them already back on our streets, but they victims have to see them there, and the government doesn’t appear to give a damn – despite the hard-hitting rhetoric from Priti Patel and others.

The “Deportations”

It’s May 2020 and a woman is walking through a supermarket in Greater Manchester.  Who does she bump in to?  Adil Khan, who had raped her as a child.  He was sentenced to jail but only served a few years, and now he is back to his life, back to the streets of Rochdale.  He is free.  She will never be free.  This is because she is British and in Britain, that means her rights and needs are at the very very bottom of a very tall ladder.

In 2017, Home Secretary Theresa May stripped the rapists of their British citizenship, and they subsequently lost their appeals against this ruling.  Shabir Ahmed argued that he didn’t get a fair trial because the jury was “all white”.  It didn’t work (nobody would have been surprised if it had), and he is due to be deported on his release.

But for now, three men, Adil Khan, Abdul Aziz, and Qari Abdul Rauf, have all been released from prison, and all stripped of their citizenship.  And yet they’re still here, still free to torment their victims.

Theresa May ordered their deportation, they appealed, lost the appeal, but as reported by the Independent in 2020, they remain in the UK regardless.

Nobody seems to know quite why they are still here.. and Hearts of Oak intends to pursue the matter through the courts.  I wish them well.

To conclude, I will tell you why these men remain in Britain.  It’s the same reason that I have been repeating throughout this column; because they matter, and the native British don’t.

The Assault on the British 

Imagine a mother with two children.  She treats the children very differently.  One of them gets anything he demands, his needs are always paramount – regardless of how unreasonable they may be.

No matter what this child does, he is rewarded.  This child routinely and frequently uses violence against the other child, and when he does, he is rewarded and the victimised child blamed for provoking his own assault.  This continues year on year on year.

What messages is that mother sending to her children, and what messages do they receive?

The wayward child who is constantly indulged is told to continue with his destructive behaviour and he will continue to be rewarded for it.  There is never any punishment for his wrong-doing, he has a place of privilege and is untouchable.  The result will be that his behaviour gets worse and worse, and his victim (the other child) will suffer more and more.

And what of this other child?  What message does he receive?  That he is worthless.  Nothing more.  A mother who watches her child abused and beaten and does nothing but blame them for it, is a mother who has told her child that he means nothing to her.

A hierarchy has been established, the mother, as the authority figure, has determined the status of the children; one is so important that no matter what he does, he is not blamed.  The other is so low, and so unimportant, that they are not even deserving of basic justice, protection, or consideration.

Both children have had this communicated to them repeatedly.  What happens is only to be expected; the bullying child continues to bully without consequence, the bullied child learns not to fight back because they believe they are worthless and deserving of this punishment.

Now, consider the British government as the mother.  The ill-behaved child represents Muslims (or another protected minority group such as ‘trans activists’) and the bullied child symbolises the native British population.

This analogy is entirely and completely appropriate.  British people seem always to be the least important party in any given situation, even when they are children and victims of rape.

That is the reason these rapists are still here, simply because they are more important than their victims.  They are more important than their victims because their victims are native British.

That’s the world we now live in.  We either accept this, or we don’t.

I do not accept it, and I will fight for my entire life against the injustice of it.

Rape victims matter, including British ones.

We must now send our own message right back to the governments that have betrayed us so spectacularly; we have awoken, we know the truth, and we won’t stand for it for much longer.

The fightback has started.  Be a part of it.

Text ‘Join’ to 60777

 

Anne Marie Waters 

Leader 

For Britain 

Text ‘Join’ to 60777