I agree with the leader of Rochdale Council when he says that what has happened in Rochdale cannot be described as an ‘Asian crime’. Absolutely. It is a Muslim crime. No one wants to tarnish the reputations of UK Sikhs, Hindus, Chinese, etc.
Labour's Colin Lambert told MPs it was 'too easy to badge a communit' and there were 'issues' across the country. Yet, in this case, and in many other cases in the rest of the UK (specifically the North West), various Muslim communities must be ‘badged’ because it is these Muslim communities, or the males in such communities, which are committing the sexual crimes of sexual abuse and grooming. To deny the many examples of Muslim community-abuse is to blind oneself to the facts and the evidence.
Of course, not every male of these Muslim communities is an offender. And the Muslim women and children certainly aren’t. Yet the sexual crime of grooming and paedophilia are still characters of these Muslim communities regardless of the fact that many Muslims within them are not sexual criminals. Would we have said that Nazi Germany was not Nazi simply because there were Germans at the time who didn’t join the Nazi Party or carry out Nazi crimes? No one is claiming that all Muslim males are abusers. And no one is even saying that every Muslim within these communities is a sex-abuser.
Even a fellow Labour MP rejects Colin Lambert’s PC interpretation of recent events. The ex-Home Secretary, Jack Straw, said that Muslims see white girls as ‘easy meat’. And Baroness Warsi has admitted that there has been a targeting of white girls. She said the some Pakistani men see white girls as ‘fair game’.
However, Mr Lambert told the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee:
"If their clear statement is that the crime was committed because of the Asian community, then I strongly disagree with them, because it's too easy to badge a crime.
"It happens right across all our communities. In terms of badging it as an Asian crime, that's wrong. There are issues in all communities."
Lambert is wilfully not getting the point. If it were only ‘Asians’ that were being criticised or singled out , then that would be racism. ‘Asian’ is more or less a racial and/or geographic term. But we aren’t talking about Asian racial groups or all the people of Asia. We are talking about Muslims - Pakistani Muslims. Whether they are brown or not is irrelevant.
I am also a little bit suspicious about all this talk about (some of) those abused Rochdale girls coming from children’s homes in Rochdale. It’s as if people are saying that if you live an unconventional life (in a home), then you must expect certain criminal things to happen to you.
However, the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, Peter Fahy, has come fairly close to agreeing with the position advanced here. He correctly makes a vital distinction between ‘sexual offences as a whole’ and ‘sexual grooming’. More precisely, Peter Fahy said that looking at sexual offences as a whole, the ‘Asian men do not feature disproportionately’. But he added that
"[I]f you look at this kind of offence [grooming], on the streets, then clearly Asian men do feature disproportionately."
That disproportionality is a result of Muslim community-abuse in which many Muslim men - brothers, cousins, fathers and even next door neighbours - have joined together to abuse non-Muslim girls. They must surely do so because they don’t think what they’re doing is wrong! And they don’t think it’s wrong because Islam, and their Muslim heritage, deems such things to be acceptable. More precisely, the abuse, sexual slavery and concubinage of non-Muslim females, by Muslim males, goes back to Mohamed and the Koran itself.
*) 'Kuwait woman politico proposes legalising sex slaves':