Twenty Two Years And Counting.
ChatterBank17 mins ago
Muslim Grooming Gangs
49 Answers
https:/
Police and social services cover up Muslim grooming gangs in case it caused racial tension.
Police and social services cover up Muslim grooming gangs in case it caused racial tension.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// Manchester appointed its Deputy Chief Constable from that area! [West Yorkshire].
Actually, it didn’t. The Deputy Chief Constable is Ian Pilling and he is a Lancashire lad.
GMP have 4 Assistant Chief Constables, (and one temporary Assistant) perhaps you meant one of those.
GM Police has an Asian Assistant Chief Constable is not the issue. The more relevant point about its leadership while it was ignoring girls being abused, was that all the Chief Officers are Men - not one woman in high command.
ProfessorMaisie
You individual you were referring to is Mabs Hussain but you were a bit coy of telling us his name.
You singled out the only Asian officer in high command at GMP as not inspiring any confidence that past mistakes would not be repeated.
Of course, that might be perceived as racist, so instead, you withheld his name and just said he had come from the West Yorkshire service.
Rochdale is under GM Police so its record on not properly Investigating Asian grooming gangs is just as bad as West Yorkshire’s record.
You individual you were referring to is Mabs Hussain but you were a bit coy of telling us his name.
You singled out the only Asian officer in high command at GMP as not inspiring any confidence that past mistakes would not be repeated.
Of course, that might be perceived as racist, so instead, you withheld his name and just said he had come from the West Yorkshire service.
Rochdale is under GM Police so its record on not properly Investigating Asian grooming gangs is just as bad as West Yorkshire’s record.
youngmafbog
// Those that covered it up should be named and shamed, sacked and the main perpetrators jailed. //
The leadership at Greater Manchester Police, and other police forces across the country, during the relevant time, is a matter of public record.
And so are the names of the Home Secretaries from Labour and the Conservatives who were advising (and appointing) the Chief Constables.
// Those that covered it up should be named and shamed, sacked and the main perpetrators jailed. //
The leadership at Greater Manchester Police, and other police forces across the country, during the relevant time, is a matter of public record.
And so are the names of the Home Secretaries from Labour and the Conservatives who were advising (and appointing) the Chief Constables.
Maggie sums it up here for me...
//“I want the law changing so there can be retrospective accountability for people whose duty it is to protect the vulnerable. It’s knowing and deliberate neglection of duty…[those who were involved] should be charged with gross misconduct - it’s criminal - where is the accountability? "//
There should be no hiding place for those showed blatant dereliction of duty.
//“I want the law changing so there can be retrospective accountability for people whose duty it is to protect the vulnerable. It’s knowing and deliberate neglection of duty…[those who were involved] should be charged with gross misconduct - it’s criminal - where is the accountability? "//
There should be no hiding place for those showed blatant dereliction of duty.
not an awful lot new here - except Meghan said - "I mentioned Vancouver not Manchester for chrissakes. Who would live in that white northern slum"
the report is here
https:/
I think it must be the most depressing official document i have ever read. - - sample spoofed a bit:
Child 1: was plied with drugs forced to sell drugs and abused. this was ignored by the social services and police
Child 2 was an addict and prostitute. She was frequently absent and was being abused during the absences. This was ignored by the social workers and police
Child 3 from the age of 9 was known to be at risk. She was found in the home of a known child abuser. After being returned to her accommodation the social workers and police ignored her
Child 4....
and so on until child 25
It was before Peter Fahy who was the last but one (CC)
everyone was new and knew nossing
everyone involved has retired on police pensions
the report is here
https:/
I think it must be the most depressing official document i have ever read. - - sample spoofed a bit:
Child 1: was plied with drugs forced to sell drugs and abused. this was ignored by the social services and police
Child 2 was an addict and prostitute. She was frequently absent and was being abused during the absences. This was ignored by the social workers and police
Child 3 from the age of 9 was known to be at risk. She was found in the home of a known child abuser. After being returned to her accommodation the social workers and police ignored her
Child 4....
and so on until child 25
It was before Peter Fahy who was the last but one (CC)
everyone was new and knew nossing
everyone involved has retired on police pensions
AOG - // Ah yes Stephen Lawrence and haven't we been made to pay for that?
Muslim child grooming gangs, Black on Black killings, drive by shootings, Eastern European white slavery.
Then they say mass immigration into our country as been beneficial. //
As usual, you are reaching some seriously dodgy conclusions by associating one situation with another.
How are 'we' 'paying' for Steven Lawrence, who was murdered by white racists?
And now on earth is Meghan Markle included in this febrile mix of fact, assumption, and bias?
Your OP states a fact - and no sensible person would argue with it, but the rest of your posts are simply ranting without basis wether in debate or necessarily in fact - and that is not what AB is about in my view.
Muslim child grooming gangs, Black on Black killings, drive by shootings, Eastern European white slavery.
Then they say mass immigration into our country as been beneficial. //
As usual, you are reaching some seriously dodgy conclusions by associating one situation with another.
How are 'we' 'paying' for Steven Lawrence, who was murdered by white racists?
And now on earth is Meghan Markle included in this febrile mix of fact, assumption, and bias?
Your OP states a fact - and no sensible person would argue with it, but the rest of your posts are simply ranting without basis wether in debate or necessarily in fact - and that is not what AB is about in my view.
// Maggie sums it up here for me...// and mama
read the report and you will see that no criminal cases would be brought.
Det A was near when a lot of reports were mis-filed. Det A didnt like Det Sgt B ( what?) but we cant link the two. Det A wanted to be on a the murder squad and not the child protection team .... 2005
You are never going to be able to prove anything
and it was all called off because of the London bombings. Excuse me the inquiry was terminated 1 Jul 05 and the bombs went off 5 days later
I dont think anyone will take responsibility
read the report and you will see that no criminal cases would be brought.
Det A was near when a lot of reports were mis-filed. Det A didnt like Det Sgt B ( what?) but we cant link the two. Det A wanted to be on a the murder squad and not the child protection team .... 2005
You are never going to be able to prove anything
and it was all called off because of the London bombings. Excuse me the inquiry was terminated 1 Jul 05 and the bombs went off 5 days later
I dont think anyone will take responsibility
A 145 page report that does not (cannot?) answer the question "Why?"
I have still to see, from any report, any attempt at all at explaining why they made the choices they made, to drop these investigations into the rape and other abuse of children.
I saw on TV Andy Burnham say it was down to a "lack of resources". That's nuts. They had resources. Resources are always finite, so it comes down to how they chose to deploy them. In other words, it's down to their choices. Why they made the choices they made ... no response.
I have still to see, from any report, any attempt at all at explaining why they made the choices they made, to drop these investigations into the rape and other abuse of children.
I saw on TV Andy Burnham say it was down to a "lack of resources". That's nuts. They had resources. Resources are always finite, so it comes down to how they chose to deploy them. In other words, it's down to their choices. Why they made the choices they made ... no response.
Latest Posts
Masterchef - The Professionals
Film, Media & TV21 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles44 mins ago
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|