Jump to content
superkaur

Muslim from sexual abuse grooming gangs reveals why they target British Non-muslim Girls

Recommended Posts

The report author invited all of those convicted to be interviewed in his review. Only one agreed.

"There was a complete lack of remorse," said Mr Spicer, who cannot identify which abuser he interviewed.

"In fact he didn't accept that he'd done anything wrong... He felt the victims were responsible for their own abuse."

The report continued: "If convicted for rape in his home country, he would be beheaded or buried up to the neck and stoned.

"He was asked about what he thought about the United Kingdom and influences in his education.

"He said you can get anything here - any sex, drugs, alcohol. There is no control. He spoke in a derogatory way about lack of morals in British girls and did not go with Muslim girls because there are not many of them."

This review was unable to establish a true understanding of the offending carried out by perpetrators.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/newcastle-gangs-abused-adults-and-children-with-arrogant-persistence-review-finds-11263201

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
14 hours ago, InderjitS said:

bring back gibbet  , cage and hang them for people to see them dying of starvation and exposure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest GuestSingh

The whiteys are weak in many morals and values and that won't change because that's part of their 'culture', so the job of certain suleh becomes easier. How can this end? Immigration conflicts with the ego and greed of the establishment who, also, strongly oppose discrimination/racism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GuestSingh said:

The whiteys are weak in many morals and values and that won't change because that's part of their 'culture', so the job of certain suleh becomes easier. How can this end? Immigration conflicts with the ego and greed of the establishment who, also, strongly oppose discrimination/racism.

Very true.

The racist white mainstream establishment is so mentally ill they wont tackle the problem they are creating and  created themselves. Even the far right people like tommy robinson who are labeled as thugs in the racist white media knows its a muslim religious and cultural problem he knows its not an asian racial problem because at school he and his non-muslim sikh and black friends were singled out for not being muslims when there was fights and how his cousin sister was groomed by muslim gangs. Thats why he and generally the far right white working class know the score and are respected amoung non-muslim minorities.

But the racist white centre- right establishment and its media (the dailmail, the sun,etc) knows the truth but they wont say it because they need muslims and their backward countries on their side to tackle islamic terrorism and have economic cooperation. They want to shift the blame on to your racial skin colour your brownness or asianess. They would rather have a racial prejudice against all browns all asians than point our the real predators and the backward intolerant abrahamic religious culture they come from.

I feel we should call out the racist white establishment where ever it rears its ugly head its bad enough fighting and calling out  islamo-fascists and their grooming gangs without the sly white racists in western establishments aiding and covering for them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/03/2018 at 2:05 AM, superkaur said:

Very true.

The racist white mainstream establishment is so mentally ill they wont tackle the problem they are creating and  created themselves. Even the far right people like tommy robinson who are labeled as thugs in the racist white media knows its a muslim religious and cultural problem he knows its not an asian racial problem because at school he and his non-muslim sikh and black friends were singled out for not being muslims when there was fights and how his cousin sister was groomed by muslim gangs. Thats why he and generally the far right white working class know the score and are respected amoung non-muslim minorities.

But the racist white centre- right establishment and its media (the dailmail, the sun,etc) knows the truth but they wont say it because they need muslims and their backward countries on their side to tackle islamic terrorism and have economic cooperation. They want to shift the blame on to your racial skin colour your brownness or asianess. They would rather have a racial prejudice against all browns all asians than point our the real predators and the backward intolerant abrahamic religious culture they come from.

I feel we should call out the racist white establishment where ever it rears its ugly head its bad enough fighting and calling out  islamo-fascists and their grooming gangs without the sly white racists in western establishments aiding and covering for them.

It is more like the mainstream media on the left wing of the political spectrum that is more likely to whitewash this like BBC, Guardian,  Independent,  Channel 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2018 at 8:42 AM, Ranjeet01 said:

It is more like the mainstream media on the left wing of the political spectrum that is more likely to whitewash this like BBC, Guardian,  Independent,  Channel 4.

I love how every bbc bit on operation blue star phrases it as Harminder Sahib Ji was freed from armed Sikh extremists by the Indian army. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

I love how every bbc bit on operation blue star phrases it as Harminder Sahib Ji was freed from armed Sikh extremists by the Indian army. 

Really, they say that?!

Western liberal/atheist people are foolish. I doubt people of religious mind would think/say that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Premi5 said:

Really, they say that?!

Western liberal/atheist people are foolish. I doubt people of religious mind would think/say that

Yeah. There is some sympathy given but they always paint it that way, anything I've seen. Especially poor taste given the british and Sikh history. 

A lot of people know the truth no matter the media inacurracies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Honestly, I don't know. I will look into the matter and see if some answers comes up. Bear in mind I was talking about regular Sikhs. Not the Gurus themselves. Even if there was a fire, it wouldn't have been Vedic in any sense. Well the difference is in what is meant and being suggested. To them "fire" means the whole Vedic shebang and a return to it. One can equally call out practises from Vedic times which are now obsolete and say "lets return to them!" right back to these groups. It's not hard to concieve in reality that certain things remained similar but the intention of disucssing the matter is important. In the case of weddings, there is very little information. Guru Sahib rejected the janeu for example, to which there is a Sakhi and Bani attached. But it is not until Guru Ramdas Ji that Sikhs get their own ceremony, and again I will repeat I was deducing with regards to the use of fire. Lots of ambiguity. Maybe the couple did just stay sitting or standing whilst Laavan were read by Sangat, maybe not. As for Sikhs such as my great-grandparents, that was just a matter of circumstance. One cannot use that argument to promote a return to Vedic style weddings.   Yes I'm aware that within Hindu weddings it is indeed Agni Devta. But we are talking about Namdharis, and from what I have seen, there is no invocation from Rig Ved - that's what I'm saying, we assume that the fire present in a Kooka wedding is considered as Agni Devta when in actual fact to me, it seems as though it's....just a fire. Which really has no particular meaning per se; just a continuation of one aspect of the ceremony. They read Suhi Mahalla 4. A fire is only Agni "Devta" if one believes and invokes.  
    • the fed is lying to all of us https://www.peakprosperity.com/the-fed-is-lying-to-us/
    • I have a english pdf of Rig veda , the oldest scripture of Hinduism, the oldest of the 4 vedas ,  and perhaps the most revered .  It starts with a hymn praising Agni and asks it to reside over the 'straw and fodder' of the havan. HYMN I. Agni. 1 I Laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice,
      The hotar, lavishest of wealth.
      2 Worthy is Agni to be praised by living as by ancient seers.
      He shall bring hitherward the Gods. Looking at the index of the scripture , I am surprised , Agni is like everywhere in it almost. So , yes the marriage rites are basically asking Agni devta . "Agni devta" is the main witness of hindu marriage .    EDIT ---- A hymn in another mandal says  HYMN LIX. Agni. 1 THE other fires are, verily, thy branches; the Immortals all rejoice in thee, O Agni So , I think Agni may not be the "fire" as in flames, but rather the heat energy pervading the universe, be it in form of fire energy, metabolic heat in body, nuclear heat inside sun, power plants, etc or the latent fuel inside wood , etc. It basically refers to the "heat" form of god . I could be wrong though. and I don't think I have enough time to go through the vast expanse of the text . 
    • So during marriages of 4th guru onwards , they married by fire ? and that includes Guru Gobind singhji as well ?  I am genuinely curious because of the many claims made by RSS about "reminding sikhs of their past" , this is also one that one commonly encounters, that ancient sikhs and gurus married by fire and that it wasn't until those evil pesky britishers who drove a wedge between hindus and sikhs and voila Anand karajs started  Whats the meaning of 'laav ' ? perhaps it could mean something altogether then ?  Anyways , regardless , I would reckon Hinduism have had far, far more changes to it considering its almost 10 times older than sikhism is (500 vs 5000 !) . Hinduism is so old infact, that rig vedic deities like Indra, Asvins , Maruts,  etc are not even heard of today , let alone worshipped  Sikhi is more pristine in comparison in the turmoils of time. 
    • Just use this:
×

Important Information

Terms of Use