Andrew Norfolk is the journalist from The Times who finally broke through the media stonewalling on the Rotherham Grooming Gang, here he gives a speech about how he investigated - esp from the 11 minute mark he details the cover up and the extent to which the UK establishment was exactingly aware of the child abuse - and knowingly feeding vulnerable kids into the system
https://twitter.com/PaulSen66796559/status/1158758232183189504
youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1061&v=qrUiHB5qJJ0
(tweeted by Paul Senior, husband of Jayne Senior, one of the few politicias in the UK to stick their neck out for the girls)
view the rest of the comments →
mintmachine ago
I am with you on the fact that abuse has been coveredup but Beware of using Andrew Norfolk he made stuff up , and it was only found out later https://inforrm.org/2019/06/28/unmasked-the-andrew-norfolk-report-in-10-points-brian-cathcart/
MolochHunter ago
@Vindicator is this a Donkey alt?
look at the garbage he's posted
white washing muslim involvement on the fucking Rotherham Grooming Gangs ??
jesus fucking christ you evil fucker
darkknight111 ago
No. Speech patterns do not match.
mintmachine ago
Molochhunter,i had respect for your postings, however you are way out of line on this one.
I know alot of csa in the uk, and obviously more than you. I was a supporter of Anndrew Norfolk until he was caught making up facts about a court case and even the judge admonished him. Paddy French who was one who exposed him is a quality journalist who exposed much North Wales child abuse and in particular the child abusing policeman Gordon Anglesea https://paddyfrench1.wordpress.com/2016/12/16/the-death-of-gordon-anglesea/
If you care to check the research then you will find this is all correct. MMy asgendas is the truth and if yours truky is then you will take this all onboard and not quote Andrew Norffolk which weakens any case you make. If you want the truth not jsut follow an agenda blindly you will do this.
As for "asian" child abuse as it is euphemistically called over here, yes there is a problem with grooming gangs in many cities that has been covered up for a variety of reasons, but attacking me with ad hominem attacks will not help uncover that, nor will supporting Andrew Norfoolk who has been proved to have lied about it.
As for Donkey , i know nothing about him, i do not follow the ins and outs of shills or accusations as it is a waste of time, as is havign to justify myself against this sort of attack. i research and publish and this drains my time/
MolochHunter ago
a) irrespective of whether Andrew Norfolk has integrity issues has no bearing on the fact that muslims are a massive over-representative risk to children's sexual security in the UK
b) the link you sent me made the explicit argument that because of Norfolks dishonesty, Muslims arent the risk factor he presents them as
I dont have an issue with you casting shade on Norfolk
I have a massive problem with you using that to diminish Islamic agency in grooming gangs. And yes im fully aware of the British aristocracy using grooming gangs as supply side infrastructure for UK pizzagate
mintmachine ago
which words in this do you regards as saying that Muslims are not the risk factor he presented them as and what do you have to back up your assertion?
"which has been researched and written jointly by me and by Paddy French.
Andrew Norfolk, the chief investigative reporter of the Times newspaper, published three series of front-page articles relating to Muslims in a period of 15 months – all of which were fundamentally inaccurate.
In each case he presented a Muslim or Muslims as posing a threat to white people or to wider society when the facts did not support this.
He did this even though at that time Muslims were already suffering peak levels of hate crime.
His three series of articles began with these reports: ‘Christian child forced into Muslim foster care’ (28/8/17), ‘Security stepped up after scathing report led to death threats’ (25/7/18), and ‘Jailed rapist given chance to see his victim’s child’ (27/11/18).
Our analysis of Norfolk’s methods indicates that important facts were omitted or marginalised, untrustworthy or inadequate witnesses were relied on, quotations were taken out of context, expert testimony was ignored – and there were clearly shortcomings in verification.
We found that, in our view, the key omitted facts should have been known to any responsible and conscientious journalist, who, we believe, would have given them prominence in any report.
The Times newspaper management fully endorsed Norfolk’s flawed reporting, putting it on the front page, supporting it in editorials and comment articles and defending it stubbornly even as contrary evidence mounted up.
Though its readers have in our view been seriously misled, the paper has never adequately corrected or apologised for, let alone withdrawn, the key articles.
IPSO, the paper’s complaints handler, has done the least it could to uphold standards in these cases, essentially giving the reporter and his paper free rein to continue.
We call on the Times to instigate a credible, independent inquiry (not involving IPSO) into what has gone wrong. If they refuse, it should be taken as evidence that Norfolk’s ethical standards are those of the paper as a whole. Every journalist working for the paper in any capacity will be tainted.
The full UNMASKED report can be read here [pdf]:
MolochHunter ago
still trying to diminish the threat of muslim rape gangs eh?
poor widdw muswims experiencing hate cwimes. YEA thats kinda what happens when you engage in ETHNIC CLEANSING via culturally motivated mass rape
One social service alone referred 1700 girls to the Rotherham council in 13 years - 3 years shorter than the Alexis Jay enquiry's 16 year span '1400 conservative figure'
1700 girls minimum in a city of 110 000
the 2011 census for Rotherham showed an adult male sunni pakistani population of 2300 - nearly one girl each eh?
to date, around 50 have been incarcerated and 430 remained under investigation or trial as of late 2017 - and how much higher would that figure be if police and council had not routinely destroyed evidence and/or rejected complaints as 'racially moivated'?
so we have nearly 500 in a pop of 2300 - one in 5 in that community - ACTIVE PEDOPHILES plus those that werent caught but participated plus those that knew but didnt report their muslim brethren to authorities and helped in the coverup. So we'd be looking at over 50% of that migrant demographic being a clear and present danger to vulnerable children
The Australian royal commission into church pedos found 126 victims per year. Rotherhams is 110 victims per year - but Rotherham is only ONE PERCENT of Australias population
Let me spell that 110:126 ratio out for you, when extrapolated as a per capita risk: Rotherham style muslim rape gangs rape children at a rate SEVENTY TWO times greater than white Society's most dangerous perpetrator demographic, being priests
'‘Jailed rapist given chance to see his victim’s child' - yea - Ive spoken to Rotherhams survivors personally on twitter. Theyve been forced to make custody visits to their rapists in jail - and here's the evil kicker - the pedophile muslims didnt even INITIATE custody visits. The Moloch worshipping council members got in touch with them in prison and said 'Hey, you know you could get custody visits"
And what does a culturally motivated mass child rapist think then? "I dont give a fuck about my kid to a whore - oh WAIT -Oh - heres a way i can continue to exert control over my former sex slaves life, and get revenge for her testifying against me"
"muslims experiencing hate crimes'?
you sucker of Satans scaly pecker YOU ARE DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING that kept those girls sexually enslaved, you fucking moron. Prioritising Raycism OVER the sexual security of schoolchildren
Honestly. Take a good hard fucking look at yourself.
mintmachine ago
So Moloch Hunter, you are not interested in my questions on how the post i posted could possibly be interpreted as trying do anythign but reveal the turht. ? You instead now go full hog and set up a strawman that I am trying to "diminish the threat of muslim rape gangs" .
I have noot and there is no evidence that i have, but to cover your lack of knowledge having called out on an inaccurate post, you are not big enough to admit it and add it toyour knowledge, you have to continue with your agenda all the way through.
A pity but not worth my time
MolochHunter ago
this is points 2 and 3 in your own article immeditely after point 1, being - Norfolk is a liar
In each case he presented a Muslim or Muslims as posing a threat to white people or to wider society when the facts did not support this.
He did this even though at that time Muslims were already suffering peak levels of hate crime.
you now want to pretend you arent diminishing the muslim threat to children?
how the fuck does anyone reading those 2 points not come to the conclusion i did ?
explain your shit
mintmachine ago
That is not my own article , that is the article i posted, talking about 1 particular court case. The judge found that Norfolk had exaggerated and lied in that particular court case. It sees according to you that i am not allowed to post that truth as it goes against your agenda., and you ASSUME that if i post this article of truth, then I am defending all diminishing ALL muslim child abuse. NO that is your strawman.
I posted it as truth on Norfolk ,not that any lies in that court case could be extrapolated to all muslim threats . You appear to be obsessed with this one issue .I am not wasting more tie on you
MolochHunter ago
and what side of the paedostocracy do you imagine that judge might be on?
learn to be a bit more discerning, there's a good chap
mintmachine ago
You havent read it, I have . The evidence was there, Norfilk deliberately issed out facts such as the grandmother was muslim to make his point. Your condescension is unwarranted, but you have no facts to go on so you have to resort to attacking the messenger. Sad but true. God knows what cognitive dissonance you would suffer if you knew the comparative figures for muslim v christian abuse , or know about Gladio B, but I will leave you to your voat thuggery and attempted suppression of facts in favour of your chosen view though fear. Bye. I will not be replying to you again
MolochHunter ago
"God knows what cognitive dissonance you would suffer if you knew the comparative figures for muslim v christian abuse"
ive already provided some figures above. you provided no figures in reply
lame-o child rape apologist