Let’s start by making ourselves very clear; we appreciate and understand that work undertaken by any organisation that help victims of sexual abuse cannot be underestimated; it cannot be dismissed or ridiculed.
Organisations that carry out this kind of work help victims get back on their feet and provide the support that they need.
We have come across many cases where individuals have suffered abuse and indignity caused by grooming gangs across the UK; we don’t ignore the fact that paedophiles who work on their own or in pairs are predominantly white. They are disgusting and depraved people who prey on children, its the crime and the victims we need to consider above all else.
Just so everyone is clear on this, we are disgusted by white paedophiles, they make a case for capital punishment or life imprisonment (when we say life, we mean life) given the fact that castration, whether it be chemical or surgical does not “stop” offenders from having intercourse or urges to act out their depravity.
We should not, however, dismiss the fact that a specific group type of sexual offence is predominantly carried out by Pakistani Muslim men, the “grooming gang” issue, whereby vulnerable young children are preyed upon, groomed, abused, pimped out and repeatedly raped for years by their captors.
We need to be honest about the “Asian” stereotype that the media portrays when it comes to this type of crime, most of the “grooming offenders” were Muslim. Can you hear the gasps of condemnation coming from the left as we state this undeniable fact? Have a look at just how many offenders have Muslim names.
It’s this politically correct, systematic denial of facts from the left in politics and culture that have helped facilitate the required elements for the unchecked expansion of paedophile groomers; they were left alone for years because people feared being called a racist. Just think about that for a moment – people were paralysed with fear to speak out on the issue, as a consequence hundreds of vulnerable children’s lives have been destroyed by predatory (predominantly Muslim) gangs.
Tommy, the man who the left “love to hate”, the man that the “real far-right” want to kill, the man that the political elites now fear, it was he, not them, who drew attention to this problem more than a decade ago. He was reprimanded by the media and called all the names under the sun, racist, far-right, xenophobe, bigot, just to name a few pejoratives out there.
Tommy called it out for what it was and what it still is.
You tell us, was he ahead of the curve?
Did the police, social services, other government agencies or charities speak up about the issues of Asian (predominantly Muslim) grooming gangs?
No, they did not, nothing was done for fear of political correctness, for fear of being labelled whatever pejorative suits at the time. Protecting offenders! Children were abused and still are because people, groups, and organisations couldn’t and can’t bring themselves to state a self-evident truth.
Tommy was courageous enough to do it; he carried that message with him from way back in the days of the EDL. It was easier for people to denounce him rather than see what was obvious; children suffered; at least he has a clear conscience knowing he did the right thing. He brought attention to the issue, and because of that, authorities had to take action.
All those who threw rocks at him for telling the truth are the ones who can’t have a clear conscience, that’s why they live, eat and sleep in their virtuous echo chamber of political correctness. That way, they can feel less guilty of their inaction; this is the degradation of the politically correct; they are complicit in the abuse of young children. Political correctness costs lives, literally!
Going back to the very start of this article, we asked you to cast your minds back to an article written by Sarah Green for the Guardian. You can see that article HERE.
The article title tells us everything we need to know – Sexual abuse charities need money – but not from Tommy Robinson.
The article title, just on its own without going through the merits (or not) of the content, should start people asking questions. Let us be crystal clear, we appreciate and respect anyone who helps victims of sexual abuse, it is a very noble and commendable cause, it can’t be comfortable listening to horrific stories of abuse, especially so with children.
The question is, WHY does Sarah Green not want a regular MEP salary going towards helping child victims of grooming gangs? Is it the mainstream medias constant drumbeat about how racist, divisive and Nazi-like Tommy is? Or could it be something more? Could it possibly be that personal political views come into play here? We think so after doing some digging around, what we found did not surprise us one bit.
She retweeted a post coming from @EVAWuk which links to the Guardian article.
The End Violence Against Women website confirms that she is the Co-Director of the organisation.
We have confirmed her Twitter profile, take note her Twitter feed has a picture of a bee in the top left-hand corner, this will be something we will look at shortly so keep that in mind. We have confirmed she is who she said she is in the Guardian article.
So what about her political, cultural and group allegiances? Her twitter feeds shows “solidarity” with HOPE Not Hate, who she refers to as her “cousins.” Shes “glad” to hear that the very day Tommy launched his campaign in Manchester with a barbeque, was a day of precipitation. HOPE Not Hate are fully aligned with powerful Trade Unions. Union activists and representatives tend to hate Tommy, which is ironic being as they are supposed to promote hope, not hate? Well you can make your own mind up as to whether it is hope or hate they are championing in this footage HERE.
Perhaps Sarah thought a rainy day would put people off from attending Tommy’s campaign launch? Who knows for sure?
Now we come to the “bee” in Sarah’s profile, could she be aligned with any protest group who hate Tommy Robinson? Have you ever heard of Stand Up To Racism?
We think it’s safe to say that Sarah does have a political, cultural and group bias, this is evident by her numerous inaccuracies, accusations and defamation of Tommy’s character in her garbage hit piece that was posted in the Guardian.
We respect the work you do Sarah for sexual abuse victims; we don’t respect you for your political bias and defamation of Tommy. For example, you state that “he makes lies about the sexual abuse of girls his main campaigning and recruitment message.”
What lies Sarah? Please do tell, can you be a little more specific about those exactly? An unsubstantiated accusation is nothing more than that; you are projecting your political bias now with nothing but a charge that carries no weight, perhaps the weight of slander maybe?
You then go on to talk about the “far-right” in the next paragraph, this misleads the readers of your hit piece, you are no longer talking specifically about Tommy, but some nefarious far-right movement who “go mercilessly for a deeply patriarchal sense of entitlement related to the “protection” and control of women’s bodies. It is incendiary and reckless and supposed to induce fear and hate.”
Sarah, it would seem that you have purposefully associated Tommy with the “far-right” to paint a pre-determined picture, to push a typical far-left narrative, this is normal for people who associate with left-wing groups and trade unions, its defamation, the dirty politics of personal assassination.
You have also added an interesting part to this equation, we are now painting a picture of you, but with “your own words.” Perhaps you have strong feminist leanings when you conflate Tommy with the far-right and “control of women’s bodies” are you for real? Do you seriously think that Tommy wants to get into the uterus business, how assinine can you possibly be?
Sarah goes on to say that “This messaging simultaneously makes the safety and very bodies of women and girls of colour invisible – because it is seemingly only white girls’ bodies that need protection, even though black and Asian girls have been significant among child sexual exploitation victims.”
Seriously Sarah – you need some help with your research, you have been let down badly by whomever you entrusted to do that for you, unless that is, you just parrotted the far-left line of “Racist, Nazi” as soon as you object to a differing political and cultural view of the world.
How dare you!
Have you any idea just how much time Tommy has spent working with Sikh organisations who also have had to deal with majority Pakistani Muslim men grooming their daughters? Last time we looked, they aint so white.
The disease of the left sees everything through the lens of race and colour, not all victims are white, but when you look at all the areas where this disgusting grooming occurred, you will find that the majority of the victims are in fact, white!
You should know all of this Sarah, especially so given the position you are in?
We could go on taking down the rest of the diatribe your friends in the Guardian were happy to post on your behalf.
But we won’t waste any more of our time. It is with sadness that we have to post this article at all. You are an essential player in aiding sexual assault victims, for that we take our hats off to you. Where we lose respect for you, is when you become a political hack to defame the character of a good man who raised the grooming issues more than a decade ago.
You can speak on behalf of your organisation, you can’t speak on behalf of all victims, and you shouldn’t. Victims come from different backgrounds, they all have different political beliefs, and you, madam, should not drag them into your political biases. Don’t forget Tommy has met and worked with many victims, each and every case breaks our hearts, each and every story of repeated abuse, rape, drugging and pimping makes our blood boil. Our anger quickly subsides when we see how they deal with the physical, emotional and mental trauma. It is humbling!
Victims deserve much better from you Sarah, let’s hope you keep your politics out of their lives. Tommy campaigns for victims because sometimes their stories are ignored or silenced. Have you even considered the possibility they wanted him to be a voice for them?
If you don’t want Tommy’s earnings from his MEP salary, that’s fine, although that’s a little perplexing given the fact that your article states “precious services are going to the wall, and we need help and support from all elected people, community leaders and more.”
Tommy will help any victim, in whatever way he can and in whatever way they want it, you don’t set the rules here Sarah, THEY DO!
Shame on you.
For all our readers, please take note.
We know how much the left lie, all the time, they manufacture issues that aren’t there, they hate our world view with a passion, but let’s not sink to their level.
We do not, in any way, shape, form or fashion, want Sarah Green or her organisation to be harassed in any way, doing so could interfere with the work she does helping victims of sexual abuse.
It would be appropriate for her to speak with Tommy and engage him on a personal level regarding all her defamatory accusations. We know you are passionate, we know you would stick up for him because you know him, he is one of you, but this is one battle where we need to think above and beyond our disappointment and outrage.
This is about the victims.
If Sarah can be decent enough to do this, she will engage Tommy and give him the chance to dispell the myths that surround him. And perhaps atone for her defamation?