Golding’s goons get it wrong about Rotherham again

Another day, another dollar! That’s the Britain First philosophy and it shows. They know that fear and hatred are big money-spinners and Biffers milk any hint of division and paranoia for all it’s worth.

Yesterday afternoon they posted another rehashed old post about child sexual exploitation in Rotherham. As if the beleaguered South Yorkshire town hasn’t had enough of these lying scumbags and their religiously motivated modern ‘blood-libel’. But their timing was a little awry yesterday.

They’d have done better to ignore Rotherham altogether rather than remind people of their role in creating and maintaining tensions in the town. Yesterday was the day that Dale Jones (30) was convicted of the racially-motivated murder of Mushin Ahmed (81). We await the verdict in respect of co-defendant Damien Hunt, also aged 30.

Discretion has never been a Biffer virtue though, a fact that was ably demonstrated when they posted this yesterday afternoon.

BF Rotherham grooming gang not entirely muslim.png

Although the Britain First introduction describes the 6 as a Muslim grooming gang, two of those convicted (yes – that’s a full 33%) were British born white, non-Muslims. It’s funny how the Biffers neglected to make that point in their headline. It’s almost as if they want to give a false impression.

Also on the same day that the Biffers posted the above Facebook meme, S. Yorkshire police and Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council issued statements about the long-term investigation that has only just completed its report. You can read the MBC statement here, including the part about not letting people use the tragedy to divide their community.

Rotherham statement MBC council united cse sex abuse

You can also read S. Yorkshire police responses to frequently asked questions (FAQs) here. In particular notice the statement about ethnic background of perpetrators.

Rotherham south yorkshire police race offenders asian

Let’s just restate that for the hard of understanding. 10% of the perpetrators were Asian (not necessarily Muslim). 72% (more than 7 times as many) were of Northern European racial origin. That means White, by the way. The same pattern emerges all across the UK.
To put it another way – there is a very real problem with child sexual exploitation in this country. And a particular race of perpetrators features very highly in the crime statistics. It’s also a very gender biased crime with the vast majority of perpetrators being male.

The solution then is obvious.

Let’s send all the white men back to their countries of origin.

That’s not as crazy as it seems. There won’t be a single white Brit whose ancestry can’t be genetically determined to hail from mainland Europe or even Africa. If we want to stop child sexual exploitation on British streets – send all the white men back to Africa!

BF paedo scum off our streets.png

Of course, we don’t seriously want to suggest forced repatriation of anyone to their ancestral country (or continent) of origin but it does highlight just how ludicrous it is to blame an entire race (or religion for that matter) for a problem they hardly feature in at all.
If we’re going to tackle child sexual exploitation in UK we need to take a leaf out of Rotherham’s book and do what they’ve been doing for the last couple of years. We need to tackle it together without getting distracted by over-generalised and wrong assumptions about race or religion.

Let’s start by rejecting those divisive fools who would exploit the victims further for their own political and racist ends. Let’s challenge the hateful rhetoric of Britain First and their kind whenever we come across it and let’s make sure that the people who peddle this poison know exactly what the rest of us think about them.

We can tackle child sexual exploitation if we do it together.

United we stand. Divided we fall.

No pasaran!

Their loss is Fransen and Golding’s gain

SKY News Rotherham hate crime imageMany of you have already seen the awful SKY News report on the escalation of violence in Rotherham. In it we learn that hate crime in the town has increased dramatically since Britain First and other racist groups descended on Rotherham to take advantage of the child sex exploitation scandal. There’s even a clip of Fuhrer in waiting, Jayda Fransen repeating the far-right’s hackneyed old lies about Islam and paedophilia.

We blogged about this here, including an extract from EBF’s special report on the Biffers, showing just why Fransen’s ‘link’ is so unfair.
Since this news article broke we’ve been inundated with Biffers and assorted neo-nazi trolls trying to convince us that the increase in violence in Rotherham has nothing to do with Britain First’s campaigning. We’re not at all convinced by these denials. It’s obvious to us what such shameless incitement by Fransen, Golding and their racist chums has led to.

BF Full metal jacket fight war islam muslim

Britain First has even arranged to help make their followers more effective fighters, as if their target audience wasn’t violent enough.

EBF BF fight club

They do this under the guise of ‘patriotism’, as though fanning the flames of racial and religious hatred and sectarian violence is somehow a patriotic act.

EBF BF patriot racist cockwomble hate crime meme

They pretend that their only concern is protection of children and yet they never seem to hold demonstrations opposing white or non-Muslim paedophiles. We put that to one of the Biffer trolls who approached us in the EBF inbox. The response was that there are no white paedophiles in Rotherham. Oh really?

Tom Steven Wilkes Rotherham paedo jail November 2015

Tom Steven Wilkes is a 22 year old Rotherham man. Like many of those implicated in the Rotherham sexual exploitation investigations he is a white, indigenous British man and definitely not a Muslim. Not exactly Britain First’s stereotypical ‘Paedo Muzzrat’. Not that Britain First’s loyal band of thugs would care anyway. These people aren’t interested in facts. They’re only interested in justifying their hatred.

BF EBF Muslim grooming hate speech

The idea of Muslim grooming gangs is as good a cover story as any for sensitive souls like this chap whose Facebook profile picture proudly displays evidence of his part in another episode of civil unrest in Halifax, a few miles from Rotherham.

Reece

Reece is clearly no angel but his Facebook page makes it equally clear that he’s very naïve. Most of his social media contacts are slightly awkward declarations of undying love for his girlfriend. In many ways he’s just a typical but slightly immature young lad trying to find a place in the world. Reece’s social media profile has all the bravado of adolescence combined with the ‘all or nothing’ lack of perspective of a young man who still has far more to learn than he knows.

He’s also one of 7 neo-nazis who, along with 10 Muslim men have been charged with public order offences following a Britain First rally in Rotherham. At the time Britain First made a very big deal of the affray, claiming that these fine, upstanding ‘patriots’ had been attacked by the Asian lads. In a wonderfully immature plea of “He started it”. It’s the sort of ‘defence’ familiar to schoolteachers everywhere and it’s as transparent as it’s childish. In truth, it doesn’t matter ‘who started it’. What matters is that sectarian violence flares up and people get hurt whenever Britain First comes to town.

If the Queen thinks that everywhere in Britain is permanently given a fresh coat of paint because wherever she goes, that’s all she sees then Biffer Queen, Jayda Fransen must think that every English town is perpetually stained red with the blood of innocents. Britain First sees a lot of violence because, regardless of who throws the first punch or petrol bomb, they incite it, they provoke it and they profit from it.

BF demo muslim grooming paedo sex rotherham

None of these people look like they’d be particularly interested in, or even able to understand, nuanced arguments about over-generalisation or community cohesion. That’s OK though. They don’t need to understand.

Their role is to wave the racist flag of Britain First.
Their role is to carry out the violence that Fransen and Golding only allude to.
Their value is in the trouble they cause and in the mileage that Britain First can get out of their subsequent prosecution.

Their futures are expendable. Nobody will employ those misguided little Nazis who, following imprisonment and release will have their convictions for racially-aggravated disorder undermining their life-chances for years to come – in some cases indefinitely. Some convictions are never ‘spent’.

These are the people who Britain First’s, Deputy Fuhrer patronisingly describes as the ‘elite’.

EBF BF Jayda Fransen eliteThese are the thuggish enforcers of Golding’s fantasy Fourth Reich. But they’ll never be the leaders of the Biffers’ brave new world.
They’re the expendable cannon-fodder, the backstreet Biffers whose imprisonment, whose sacrifice in the never-ending quest for donations is a price the Britain First leadership is prepared (for them) to pay.

If only the violent, easily-led young men of Derbyshire and Yorkshire were a little more educated, a little better equipped to see what is so obvious to the rest of us. They’re pawns in Golding’s greedy game. And whatever the outcome, whatever happens to Britain First, these young men inevitably will be the losers. They’re the sacrificial ‘forlorn hope’ in this cynical, lucrative game of sectarian violence and endless, repetitive merchandising for profit.

Jayda Fransen: A sympathetic figure or a vindictive profiteer?

We’ve been doing a bit of soul searching here at EBF lately. We’re concerned that we may have been too hard on someone who is actually more a victim than a perpetrator of callous hatred and abuse. We’re not sure but we thought we should ‘put the idea out there’ and see what others think.

The ‘someone’ in question isn’t exactly the most obvious ‘first in line’ for compassion. In fact not all of us think she’s in line for consideration at all, let alone ‘first’. But in the spirit of discussion and sharing of ideas that EBF has always been based upon we’re all happy to put our virtual names to this. Enough of us have doubts to make this blog worth writing.

BF BBC3 WWOCB Jayda FransenWe’re talking, of course about Jayda Fransen, deputy leader and ‘Fuhrer in waiting’ of Britain First. She’s certainly responsible for a wealth of hate speech and the organisation she fronts clearly intends to stir up as much inter-racial and cultural conflict as it can but our question is ‘how responsible is she’ for that?

We all watched with interest (and for many more than a little cynicism) her performance in the BBC3 documentary ‘We want our country back’ as she hinted but never elaborated on past trauma. We have speculated about the possibility of some sort of early Abuse that might have led her down the road to hatred and I have to admit, even within the team we haven’t all agreed.

Is Jayda the hapless (and potentially helpless) victim of some abusive past?

If so should she be held responsible by the age of 29 for her subsequent anger and hatred?

Or is she just a cynical Nazi using her gender and perceived ‘feminine vulnerability’ to justify her vindictiveness?

It’s certainly possible that Jayda experienced some sort of abuse in her early years. We’ve highlighted before the problems with her account of a late adolescence spent in hostel accommodation rather than a children’s home or foster care. But those details, interesting though they are don’t necessarily mean that nothing happened. Perhaps she used the wrong term when caught off-guard by the interviewer. Perhaps she told a partial truth to protect the feelings of others or perhaps she made the whole thing up. We don’t know.

It’s equally plausible though that nothing untoward happened to Jayda during her early years. We know that historical abuse is a powerful psychological tool in the arsenal of the far right. That’s why they make such a big deal of the events in Rotherham and other places. Exploitation of children, especially of girls is emotive and, from the perspective of the Biffers extremely good for business. If Jayda really was just a cynical manipulator of emotional ‘groupthink’ would she have said anything different?

BF BBC3 WWOCB Jayda Fransen threatening Muslim restaurant Halal campaignFinally, even if it’s all true (as it very well might be) should that let Jayda off the hook for the abusive and discriminatory hate speech and incitement that she and her followers spew so regularly and predictably into the life of our nation? Does such a history give her the right to libel and slander others for her own personal profit?

Whatever her past, the reality is that her current behaviours are both malicious and destructive. Jayda undoubtedly profits from other lies. Lies she tells about Muslims, about the Koran and even about her own legal ‘qualifications’. Would a history of childhood trauma of any kind excuse this sort of slanderous trouble-making in an adult?

Should we report upon Jayda’s abusive behaviour more sympathetically?

If so how will that impact upon our work next year when she becomes Fuhrer?

We have no collective answer to these questions. Each of us within the EBF team has our own opinion but there’s no real agreement.

What’s your opinion?

Rotherham’s white grooming gangs?

Although we have always disagreed very strongly with Britain First’s idea about how to deal with child sexual exploitation in Rotherham we, like so many others have always accepted the reports that the majority of the offenders were men from ethnic minority groups, and that a significant proportion of them were of Pakistani origin.  So many news reports, so many politicians and so many senior policemen made the same claim that it seemed very credible.

This June an extremely interesting reportwas published. Entitled ‘The Way Forward for Rotherham it was produced by the Rotherham local safeguarding children’s board and it makes harrowing but fascinating reading. This report casts doubt upon the popular narrative, going so far as to suggest that 68% of offenders in Rotherham were actually white British. That’s a very far cry from the media narrative about ‘Muslim grooming gangs’ and a powerful slap in the face for the racially motivated ‘campaign’ from Britain First to oppose all UK Muslims because of Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandals. According to the report…

“The number of offenders, including suspects, were mainly White”

Yes, we know – we were fooled too. But let us say that again – just so you get it…

“The number of offenders, including suspects, were mainly White”

But don’t just take our word for it. Read the report for yourself if you like. It’s here.

Rotherham grooming csa white british 68 percent

Or have a look at this

“..the Crown Prosecution Service’s lead on child sexual abuse and violence against women and girls, tries to offer a calm perspective. Unruffled by mounting media hysteria over the ethnicity of abusers in Rotherham, he suggests stepping back and taking a wider view of the nationwide picture of child sex abuse.

His role means he has oversight of all child sex abuse cases in England and Wales. “So I know that the vast majority of offenders are British white male,” he says, setting the number at somewhere between 80 and 90%. “We have come across cases all over the country and the ethnicity of the perpetrators varies depending on where you are … It is not the abusers’ race that defines them. It is their attitude to women that defines them.” “

Of course, we don’t imagine there are hordes of white British child sexual exploiters roaming Rotherham’s streets any more than there are hordes of Asian Muslims doing the same. We do think that it’s important that any such headline is responsible – hence our somewhat ironic reference to ‘white grooming gangs’ which we hope might expose the equally prejudicial use of the term ‘Muslim grooming gangs’.

The report states that 24% of the perpetrators were Asian, let alone Muslim. We compared this to the demographic breakdown of Rotherham’s population and it does, genuinely seem disproportionate. The 2011 census (a representative date for the offences under consideration) shows a Muslim population of 3.7%.

Rotherham 2011 census demographic religion muslim 2

Rotherham’s combined Asian population numbers around 5.6%.

The total BME population is 8.1%.

Census 2011 Rotherham ethnicity

That means that Asians were over-represented by a multiple of 4 (give or take) in the figures released last June. However – they do not represent a majority of perpetrators and they most certainly do not represent the entire Asian population (or even the entire Muslim population).

So what does all this mean?

First of all it means that any organisation that is genuinely concerned about protecting children really ought to focus its resources on more than a minority of offenders. By focusing exclusively upon Asian Muslims (assuming that the recently published figures are accurate) Britain First ignores over three quarters (76%) of Rotherham’s child sexual exploitation. Additionally, they ignore the non-Muslim Asians who presumably make up a very significant proportion of the remaining 24%.

But – for simplicity’s sake let’s forget the obvious problem that Asian doesn’t necessarily mean Muslim and assume that all of the Asian 24% were Muslims. Rounding the figures up that means that a grand total of 17 of the 71 repeat offenders in these ‘grooming gangs’ would have been Asian Muslims. Of course the true figure would be less than that but we want to keep the sums simple.

At the time of the last census Rotherham had a total population of 257,280. Muslims made up 3.7% of that figure. That equals a total of 9,520 Muslims living in Rotherham. Even if we assume that all 24% Asian perpetrators in Rotherham were indeed Muslim (statistically very unlikely) that means that approximately 0.2% of Rotherham’s Muslim population is known to be involved in child sexual exploitation. That’s approximately 1 in 500.

Let’s put that another way… 99.8% of Rotherham’s Muslims are not involved!

Of course – that still leaves the problem of the 0.2% of Rotherham’s Muslims who have been involved in some way with child sexual exploitation. That involvement, according to the report, ranges from online grooming and ‘inappropriate relationships’ to procurement and actual rape. These are all significant crimes and all the offenders deserve to be prosecuted but it’s not at all the image Britain First likes to portray.

The impact of far right and neo-nazi intervention

Of course there can be no justification for the fact that the officials in Rotherham ignored the problems of child sexual exploitation that were reported to them. But it does appear that their fears about further exploitation by neo-nazi groups were well-founded.

Those fears seem to have been understandable given the way that far right groups like Britain First, the English Defence League, the National Front, UKIP and the BNP have exploited the situation for their own, divisive ends. It seems that the authorities in Rotherham were very aware of the way that Britain’s neo-nazis had capitalized upon similair revelations in Derby and elsewhere and were desperately trying to prevent its repetition.

There does appear to have been a very real problem in Rotherham and quite possibly elsewhere. But it’s not the fault of the 99.8% of British Muslims who played no part in child sexual exploitation. It’s the fault of the offenders themselves and the leeway afforded them by an overly defensive local authority and an overly sensitive police establishment who, in part because of fears about the far-right’s reaction, avoided the issue.

What’s the truth?

To be fair, we genuinely don’t know how accurate or representative even these figures are. It seems that as more information comes to light the picture of what happened in Rotherham keeps on changing. Perhaps we’ll never know for sure.

What we are certain about is this…

The problem of inadequate official responses to child sexual exploitation and related crimes will not be solved by targeting a minority of offenders, ascribing their criminal tendencies to all members of their ethnic group and then persecuting the innocent. That has merely diverted police time and money away from the real perpetrators and distracted public attention from the real problem. There is no point in attacking 99.8% of a minority group because of the actions of 0.2% of their number. Unless of course your motivation has nothing to do with protecting children at all.

Child Sexual Exploitation is a problem for us all. It impacts upon all our communities and we all need to be aware of it, of how to protect our own children and of how to best help others. None of us benefit from divisiveness, least of all the children. Perhaps it’s time for the far right to put away their flags and megaphones and join in the work that needs to be done to protect children from abuse?

We’re sure that many of Britain First’s supporters are as upset and concerned as the rest of us. Child sexual exploitation really IS outrageous but if experiences in Rotherham and Derby have shown us anything it’s that over the top condemnations of entire groups do nothing to solve the problems we all face. On the contrary they just make it more difficult for those in authority to address their localized problems openly. If only those BF supporters who actually care about these children could come to the table (and the library!) and try to help instead of hurling abuse and flags all over the place it might make a difference!

But that wouldn’t help Britain First’s wider cause. It wouldn’t help them to demonise and alienate UK Muslims. It wouldn’t help them sell their trashy merchandise and con donations out of their supporters. And that’s why the likes of Folding Golding and Dutchy Fransen will never stop fuelling division and prejudice. For them it’s not about child protection – it’s about profit.

We don’t believe that Britain First cares a damn about Rotherham’s children.

We believe that they care only about exploiting their trauma still further in a shameful attempt to further their own neo-nazi cause.

We also believe that the vast majority of the good people of Rotherham and of the wider UK can see right through their shallow, divisive and racist agenda.

BF EBF Muslim grooming hate speechUpdate 11/8/2015

Oh look. They’re at it again. This time in Blackburn. Have these people no shame?

tempFile_2015-08-11-14-04-29

The ‘Muslim paedo’ myth

Britain First is great at jumping on bandwagons. Arguably that’s all they ever do (apart from beg for money). One of the most common bandwagons they board as readily as the rest of us hop on to public transport (goose-stepping up the ideological bus like the bunch of demented Biffers that they really are) is the ‘Muslim paedo’ myth.

You know the one – this is the myth that would have you believe that there are no paedophiles outside of Islam and no Muslims who aren’t paedophiles. This is the myth that all Muslims are either paedophiles or paedophile enablers. This is the myth that anyone who opposes Britain First is a paedophile lover. This is the myth that says that there would be no paedophile problem in the UK without Muslims. This is the myth that would have you believe that UK paedophiles didn’t exist until 1997 when immigration ‘began’ at the behest of Tony Blair. This is the myth that tells you this stuff just didn’t happen – it couldn’t have – it didn’t involve Muslims and it was going on long before 1997.

wpid-fb_img_1432144866759.jpg

John Broomfield
John Broomfield (RCO Biffer)

If Britain First was really interested in dealing with paedophilia then they’d address the real problem head on. They’d do something constructive to help like support victims charities or child protection organisations. But they’re not really interested in child protection. That’s why they ignore white paedophiles and even promote them within their own organisation. Let’s not forget that the RCO Biffer, John Broomfield is himself a convicted paedophile.

It’s interesting that we haven’t seen Broomfield in any of the Britain First pics or videos recently. He hasn’t been at any of the rallies or meetings as far as we can tell. Maybe he was just too embarrassing for this group of ‘anti-paedo’ campaigners. Maybe they just quietly got rid of him. They certainly haven’t issued any statements about him. It almost smells like a cover up. Hang on though – isn’t that the sort of sneaky move they criticise others for?

We don’t know if Broomfield has gone or not. We do know that until EBF started exposing the sex offender in their ranks Britain First’s Biffers had no problem taking orders from an RCO who was also a convicted paedophile – so long as that paedophile was white. It’s almost as if they’re really just a bunch of hypocritical racists. Not that anyone would ever believe that!

The reality is that paedophilia is a problem throughout society. It’s been present for decades, perhaps centuries and it exists amongst all ethnic and religious groups.

The Biffers would have you think that child abuse is about Muslims. We would have you do a bit of research yourself. It really doesn’t take much time on google to learn just how stupid this myth really is.
image

Who supports Exposing Britain First?

EBF multiculturalWe are often told that we are all ‘unwashed Lefteyes’ with mutlicoloured hair. We are ‘Communists’, we are ‘traitors’ we are ‘paedos’ and ‘terrorist sympathisers’ – among other things. Well, we’re not. I’ve been supporting EBF since the group first started out and I have made many friends there – and they are all different.

Some ARE ‘lefteyes’, no doubt about it – unwashed or not, I don’t know, I haven’t met them all.

One is a Communist, a nice, working class Communist who just wants this weird thing called ‘equality’ for everyone. You could definitely count him as a ‘Lefteye’ I think it’s safe to say.

One EBF friend does have multicoloured hair, if you count the many shades of Henna hair products, pretty much like the ones Jayda Fransen seems to use.   ALL of them are people who love their country. Not traitors.  They love the diverse communities they live in, they love all the influences our immigrants have had on the country, from Fish n Chips to Ice Cream, from Tikka Masala, to tea. They appreciate the contribution immigrants have made here and they like the fact that we can offer a safe haven for asylum seekers – albeit not as much as we could. None of them are ‘paedos’. All my friends are rightly disgusted by any such offence and have every sympathy with victims. All my friends think that more needs to be done to bring offenders to justice and to support victims; all of them want no more cover ups. No-one makes any distinction between Muslim offenders or non-Muslim offenders – and we all know that Britain First really mean ‘brown skinned’ when they say Muslim. The offence is equally abhorrent whoever commits it.

Nor are we terrorist sympathisers.  Terrorism, coming from any quarter is just awful, the suffering and death too awful for words. We all believe that ISIS needs to be dealt with but none of us have the answers. Not for lack of talking about it, not for not wishing to know, but because its’ complicated. There is no panacea and we all believe that there are many variables that go towards radicalising people, people from all backgrounds, not just Muslims.

BF compassion EBFMany of us think that Britain First are contributing to the radicalisation process in two ways. They are alienating Muslims here, marginalising them and making some defensive about their religion, potentially pushing them towards the waiting arms of those few who would turn them. Britain First are also radicalising non-Muslims by creating fear and hatred and supporting comments about attacks on Mosques. Most of all this happy band are all different. We are men and women, Muslims and Jews and Christians and atheists and Labour party members and Conservatives and older people and young people and bus drivers and teachers and shop workers and office workers and factory floor workers and nurses and black and brown and white and gay and straight and pagan and dinner ladies and fire station personnel and a cycle shop owner and a greengrocer and a councillor – so many ordinary people. Just ordinary people.

Some have been to a march or two, like the anti Pegida march in Newcastle where 1,500 people went and peacefully said they did not want Pegida in Newcastle, some went to London for the March 21st march against racism, many have not been on a march in their life.  We lie all over the country, and I mean ALL over the country – we WILL get that get together organised ONE day. But we are just ordinary people, and we oppose Britain First.

And opposing Britain First doesn’t mean we give a green light to paedophiles or terrorists and it doesn’t make us traitors.

Simples.

Jayda hates paedos!

Britain First’s Deputy Fuhrer, the 100% British haridon with a remarkably Dutch sounding surname has finally said something remotely interesting. How cool is that? Well actually, not very.

Using the microblogging social media site, Twitter she published this…

Jayda paedo tweet bf ebf

Unfortunately for Fraulein Jayda she doesn’t appear to have thought through all the implications.

For example, Britain First OberstFuhrer, John Broomfield is himself a convicted paedophile. Whilst nobody here at Exposing Britain First particularly sympathises with Broomfield (or indeed any paedophile), castration does seem a little extreme. Still, if the Deputy Fuhrer, Dutchy demands it we’re sure it won’t be long before RCO Broomfield gets gelded by some obedient but overzealous biffers. Best sleep with one eye open from now on, John!

Her ‘no true Christian’ quip seems a tad strange in the circumstances too. Jayda’s a Roman Catholic which presumably means she’s heard about the ways that British catholics were persecuted after the reformation. Not that the staunchly sectarian Britain First cares a jot about any of that. Following in the footsteps of co-founder, Jim Dowson the biffers are most definitely on the side of the protestants. That’s a topic for another post altogether though.