Rochdale In The News Again

cyfrifia wrote:

To ignore history is not a brilliant idea. It is reported

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/89115/one-in-three-rapes-robberies-and-violent-attacks-written-off-by-gmp-as-no-crime

that a huge number of rapes and violent attacks have been 'written off' as 'no crime' by police in recent years.


There are press rumours that Manchester police intend to re-trace their footsteps, and to arrest large numbers of known child grooming gangs and rapists this year, before Christmas. Obviously that would be a good idea, everyone would want to happen, but, we will see.

Update: 28 men arrested by West Yorkshire police.
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11443422.28_men_arrested_in_Keighley_grooming_gang_probe/?ref=var_0

Alll very good articles   But as a foot note do you want to know the latest on the bridge openings?

Now before you see red.  This very post was out put in the middle of a thread about the Rotherham child abuse case and comparsions to Rochdale.    I really am lost for words.  

Dont these people who type lines like this are playing into paedos hands by trying to stiffle and supress and not talk about it.  Very very dangerous people out there.

Expect you must be right about that, Chill, or, we would not have the situation as it is.

Opening bridges? Hum. I think I got lost somewhere. Are you posting your commemnts along another line of communication at the same time as on here? Or am I just being thick? - - It has been known - -

Scientific research shows that the brains of older people who use twitter are damaged by overload of irrelevant information, causing them to lose concentration and ability to focus. Younger brains are simply marmalised.

Atlas wrote:Opening bridges? Hum. I think I got lost somewhere. Are you posting your commemnts along another line of communication at the same time as on here? Or am I just being thick? - - It has been known - -

Sorry, I was showing that a person on Facebook land put a comment about the bridges in the middle of a conversation about child abuse,  Utterly dumbstuck I was.  It's clear some people do not want to face up to hard facts.    Comments are even being made about why RMBC is investigating Knowl View again and how the money should be spent on other things .  The said same people are always asking why Rochdale is in the papers all the time,  Why do you *bleep* think.  Its becuase the child abuse has never ever been resolved.  How many people in charge have been in court or reported as being arrested and questioned under caution?

Oh that's why the child abuse victims are still suffering,  as not one single person on whose watch is being brought to justice

Never mind we can all see pictures of One Riverside and back-slapping demonstrations go on and concerted on record attempts to stiffle any meniton of child abuse.

I note that Rotherham Council is now being discusssed at being put under the Government microscope.  Why not Rochdale as well?

The 'government microscope' is kept in the too little too late cupboard.

In places like Rotherham and Rochdale, and many other towns and cities, it might be an idea if senior police officers were required to walk around the town centre streets at night in plain clothes, get a taxi, buy a takeaway, to get an idea of what goes on, or would that be considered too dangerous for them?

It seems that senior police and council officers are the last people to even get an inkling of what happens in the towns they are responsible for.

Ah. Knowledgeable it is now that I am - hmm - Facebook - I do that all the time otherwise read it I cannot. Hmm - better now.


There are none so blind as them as cannot see. Nor so blind as they who have no wish to. We have many 'Sod you Jack I'm alrighters' in our fair land. Just keep taking the money and the plaudits boys. Shovel it in I got huge pockets in which to hide it. Slimeballs the lot of them - but hey - that's life.

yet more damning reports


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-29137965

Actually, not that damning this time - though I would suspect the real figure is much higher.

According to that BBC news report, Rochdale Council reckon there are only three children in Rochdale at high risk and susceptible to being targeted by groomers. Is that correct?

Of course not. Not even in the best of times would that be anywhere near the mark. But it looks good - in print. There are (and always will be) some incidences that slip the net. One can only hope that the majority get caught out and are dealt with 'properly'. Meanwhile we must let the 'machine' roll on and await the outcomes of the present netting.

It needs a change of culture and attitudes from those who label themselves as 'British' whilst harboring 'other' loyalties and cultures contrary to that which is. Sad state of affairs but not unexpected by we who had already had experiences of 'other' cultures prior to the mid twentieth century, who themselves had been unable to cast off their own cultures and 'adapt'. Multicultural societies bring there own problems - witness the USA. It will take decades - if not longer.

It would be wrong to be at all complacent about all the issues that came to light in the Rochdale grooming reports.

Rochdale is in the national news again with an appearance by Councillor Karen Danczuk and an argument about role models and her now famous online 'selfies'.

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/91774/janet-street-porter-setting-back-womens-rights-says-councillor-danczuk

She was very unconvincing. She should have enjoyed her 20 minutes of fame and scarpered PDQ. Those that live by the media will surely get trashed by it.

posting photos of your tits is NOT a blow for a womans right to choose. It is trivial and tacky.

Karen Danczuk's 'selfies' have become quite a national talking point. The conversation not so much about Rochdale, as about different ideas within feminism. Feminism has had a remarkably confused and confusing impact, with contradictory and strongly held attitudes in different age groups, different places, classes and social groups.

It is reported in the national press that the Equalities and Human Rights Commission will be investigating the taxi firm that tried to provide non-asian drivers on request. It might be expected the Equalities and Human Rights Commission might be providing some support for the human rights of the many victims of grooming, but no mention of that.

I did say did I not -.   You cannot discriminate on the grounds of ethnicity. It's not allowed.
You can ask for a 'particular' individual by name to 'service' your requirements which is not the same thing.
Perhaps the owner of the taxi firm should have made that plain to those with 'particular' requests before taking the bookings. There is more than one way of skinning a pig - to quote a familiar saying.
When I owned and ran White Cabs - now Cosy Cabs, Halifax Road, I had quite a number of customers who had a preference for particular drivers (for whatever reasons) who were always prepared to wait for that particular driver to be 'free' to service them. Not a problem and NEVER WAS.

A non-discriminatory society where all are treated equally, and equally at ease with each other, is ideal. A good start for that would be for all to be treated equally by the law, and by relevant authorities and agencies.

I'll drink to that.

Unfortunately, we are aware that for a number of reasons, and for a very long time, a certain ethnic community has not been either properly policed or prosecuted, the failures of multiple authorities to act are well known, the disastrous results well documented. It is admitted that many who should have been arrested and prosecuted on very serious charges have not been. Consequently a CRB check is devalued to the point of being misleading. The council should be wary of approving such documents.

In the main most ordinary people would have no trouble with whichever taxi driver was sent to convey them from A to B. It is only a 'particular' customer the 'groomers' are looking out for. Generally young (13-16) white females with a less than caring attitude to life and possibly 'up for a good time'. These would be targeted in preference if such was the intention. However - 99% of the drivers are only interested in making a living. The authorities can only DO that which is reasonably possible in vetting.
Perhaps educating the young at the schools towards the dangers of 'good time guys' with 'booze and fags and drugs is the only wedge you can put between the problem.
The police and outrageous attitudes towards 'political correctness' are more culpable than most for allowing this pernicious industry to blossom. It was always a problem with the young girls and boys from the care homes, including some of the staff at those places, but it has gone far beyond that in the last 30 years.

In the main, what people want is a safe, polite driver.

There are times, for example, when someone responsible for arranging a taxi to take an unescorted girl or group of young girls with behavioural problems on a regular run from care home to school, when that person, in light of publicity, or what they might know, may ask for a white driver, named driver, or female driver. Are they obliged by law to accept whatever driver is on duty?

Broadly similar question to: Should a parent have choice as to which surgeon operates on their child, or have to accept whatever surgeon is on duty?

Opinion in the Guardian is that customers requesting white drivers are going to hell in a handcart.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/26/heywood-minicab-discrimination-society-limits
That idea does at least extend the travel options available.

Perhaps the stereotype of asian men only raping and abusing young white girls should be re-assessed? According to BBC File on 4 report, child sexual abuse is a hidden problem within the Pakistani community.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04mctw3

As I said previously. A customer retains the right to ask for a particular service i.e. Joe Bloggs to pick him up and take him/her to his/her destination. Quite within the law. Quite within their rights. It just requires some attention to detail. It's not a problem. - If such a service cannot be given then the customer has the right to go elsewhere and seek other avenues. What we cannot do is contravene the laws we have made. If the law has proven to be inadequate then one should take issue and try and have it changed.

It is a basic right to choose who you want, or what type of person you want to do a job for you.

Some people are startled and offended at the idea that we have that right, sadly, they have absorbed so much political correctness they have lost touch with such a basic right, and think it shocking to even think of having or wanting a choice.

Political correctness has been very damaging to our society, a leading cause of so many agencies failing to function, and so to the ruination of many young lives.

If we want to build a better and safer society, it will be necessary to stick political correctness where the sun don't shine.

I'll drink to that.

Navigating turbulent seas of political opinion, we are somewhat adrift. We may know where we are in terms of attitude, but longitude remains guesswork, due to overwhelming tides of unreliable statistics.

If a means could be found of determining accurate and reliable statistics, despite variations in political temperature, humidity and waves of change, the British public might then see clearly where they are, and which way to go.

Perhaps a prize could be offered for the invention of a method of ensuring accurate, reliable and useful statistics.