Share |

Tuesday, 23 October 2012

BBC: Coy about Child Abuse

The BBC, so it would seem from recent news, has always been a little coy about revealing the identities of child abusers, thus it should come as no surprise that in its short report on a case being brought against nine men resident in Rochdale it says nothing regarding their characteristics other than the fact that they are aged between 26 and 39. The nine are said to have sexually exploited a teenage girl since 2005. However, to discover who they were we have to rely upon other sources, such as The Daily Mail and the Manchester Evening News, and given the identities of the men in question, it perhaps becomes apparent why the BBC was so reluctant to divulge any details: seven possess Muslim names and would appear to be of either Pakistani or possibly Bangladeshi origin, whereas the other two are Africans.

The nine accused are: Mohammed Ali, 27; Chola Chansa, 32; Asrar Haider, 38; Abdul Huk, 36; Freddy Kendakumana, 26; Roheez Khan, 26; Anjam Masood, 30; Mohammed Rafiq, 31, and Ali Asghar Hussain Shah, 39. All have been accused of sexual activity with a child under the age of 16, six of them with ‘inciting sexual activity with a child under 16’, and Kendakumana ‘with three counts of rape’ and ‘attempted rape’. The men were arrested in May and will appear between 7 November and 6 December at Bury Magistrates’ Court. This, of course, follows on from the trial of a Muslim grooming gang from Rochdale earlier in the year and the subsequent unrest inthe Heywood district of the town that this provoked in February. Whereas these men and others like them involved in similar crimes elsewhere can still be brought to justice, Jimmy Saville cannot, yet it is to the deceased Saville that the BBC continues to devote its prime news coverage, not to the live phenomenon of Muslim paedophile grooming gangs.

Last night, the BBC’s main television news opened with the Saville Scandal, bumping the latest Muslim terror plotters into the second and most definitely secondary slot. Revolting as the Saville Scandal may be, the BBC appears to be using it to bury other bad news whilst exhuming Saville. Serious questions need to be posed regarding the broadcaster’s editorial policy, for in its news coverage, it is not serving the public in the manner that it should. To withhold information about the backgrounds of the members of this latest Rochdale paedophile grooming gang from the public when other news outlets do not do so seems very odd indeed. Why does the BBC choose to behave in this manner?


  1. "Why does the BBC choose to behave in this manner?"

    Is that a rhetorical question or do you really not know?

  2. This fits with my own suspicion that BBC and other media are instructed to follow excessive multicultural policyies and do so if only to protect their own careers. This would explain the undue focus on any wrongdoing, by the majority, while ignoring similar acts or obscuring the identity of minority culprits involved in criminal activity or wrongdoing.

    One can imagine the arrogance of the elites smugly believing they are doing their duty to limit social unrest and maintain the myth of social cohesion. The minions beneath them soon get the message if they wish to progress in their own careers and perhaps they do become indoctrinated and automatically begin to treat minorities more favorably

    This attitude filters down to the general public, through the education system and media outlets who push the same lenient agenda in respect of minorities.

    Eventually the racism of lower expectations becomes established and the majority adopt a resigned acceptance that criminal minorities will be treated as less culpable and more leniently dealt with, and will also be excused from having to respect majority social or cultural values.

    This resignation won't last ordinary people see what's happening and feel helpless and resentful but as resentment grows, so will anger and rebellion.

    The elites have prospered from peddling excessive multiculturalism and will be reluctant or unable to recognise the game is up, but it is. You can't fool all the people all of the time.

    1. Sorry, policies not policyies

    2. Yes, the manner in which the BBC has chosen to report this case is very much in line with official NUJ policy on the coverage of matters relating to race and religion. The code is designed to systematically distort reporting and is far from blind to race or belief, for it does not treat crimes committed by indigenous and non-indigenous peoples/faiths on the same footing. The tendency is always to treat the latter as ‘victims’ and ourselves as potential ‘oppressors’ and ‘racists’, etc. It is a false narrative of course, but it does not stop the BBC from enthusiastically propagating it.

  3. As Andrew Marr a BBC political commentator once put it: "The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias".
    The corporation goes blithely on knowing that politicians will never take any meaningful action against it. However the Savile issue has put the BBC hierarchy in the spotlight and isn't it gleeful to see them all squirming. If Cameron had any political awareness ( which he hasn't) he would seize this opportunity to make radical changes to the organisations political bias, cut the licence fee and force it to reduce its operations and channels.

  4. The question to ask is: why are politicians so silent. BBC is clearly an anti-tory organisation. It is clearly left leaning on almost all major political issues. So where are the the Conservative right-wingers? As the bloated unaccountable corporation is involved in what appears to be a Savile cover-up conspiracy the radical right is nowhere to be seen. There's an open goal waiting for them. This is a major opportunity to cut this publicly funded monolith down to size. A major opportunity to cut this evasive, secretive and bureaucratic empire down to size once and for all.

  5. Always supporting all those who expose this massive problem of "Child Cruelty" from all your friends at Tom Thumb and friends. Thank you.


Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.