To think that Musk is now overstepping himself and the UK gvt should threaten action

The original unfounded claim about a Home Office circular to police seems to stem from an interview Nazir Afzal - the former Crown Prosecution Service chief prosecutor for north-west England - gave to the BBC on 19 October 2018. He now admits that he had not seen any such circular himself, despite apparently stating its existence as fact.

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government. When this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved.
Maybe we need a proper constitution,

I've never seen a more appropriate username

So Musk can say whatever he likes because of free speech?

Pwahahaha - we would be all locked up at that rate - what if he called her a cunt - which on the scale of hurty words would get you a longer sentence? Maybe if he said all the witches in England should violently overthrow the Government - now that's fighting talk!

You’re really going to shut freedom of speech down because he called someone a witch?! Nothing would be said in the world in that case! It’s also legally not libel whomever said that

No im not ok with it, shes clearly not any of that. I’ve been raped myself so no I hate him using those words but at the same time it’s freedom of speech and I will always defend that. It’s our choice to agree/ believe him or not

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g2g7qgl1eo

How Elon Musk seized on baseless memo claim to fuel wave of misinformation

The party endorsed by Musk

Not a single Reform MP has bothered to turn up to today's House of Commons debate on tackling violence against women and girls

The last government signed the agreement with Vietnam on migration and returns shortly before the general election;

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-signs-new-agreement-with-vietnam-on-illegal-migration

The report, based on 2023 data, stated that there were 4,228 reported group-based crimes out of a total 115,489 child sexual exploitation and abuse crimes.

Article from November 2024 with more context on the data (I can't access the Times article either);

Nearly half of perpetrators of group child sexual abuse are children, data shows'

Nearly half of abusers involved in group sexual exploitation of children are themselves aged between 10 and 17, police data has suggested.

A national taskforce found that 48% of 4,768 perpetrators recorded in police figures in 2023 were aged 10 to 17.

Another 430 were aged under 10, although the age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10.

Data was gathered from 44 police forces in England and Wales.

A total of 4,228 crimes linked to group sexual exploitation of children were recorded.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/children-data-england-b2650925.html

The article is behind a paywall, so I'm only able to answer on the basis of what you have included above. But it's by no means a new revelation that the majority of CSA takes place within the family, or is perpetrated by someone known to the child.

And of course, this is far harder to identify and prosecute: partly because of the nature of trauma itself and the capacity of the mind for blocking it out; partly because of savvy abusers who know to pick vulnerable victims who will likely not be believed; partly because there is a culture of blaming victims and disbelieving women and girls rather than accepting the prevalence of male abuse, and partly because of a further culture of silence, rugsweeping and denial. These cultures are also often perpetruated through official or public channels. Doubtless there will be other variables I haven't mentioned above.

That this is the case does not mean attention should not be given to breaking organised trafficking rings or 'information exchanges'. Nor does it mean other victims will be ignored; the circumstances detailed above merely make abuse more difficult to identify, especially when the child loves and trusts the adults concerned. The secretive, furtive nature of abuse in itself is in no way an excuse for claiming 'if we can't help all victims we'll ignore those which are in plain view'.

It's precisely these cultures of silence and enablement that perpetuate the conditions which make abusing vulnerable girls so easy in the fisrt place. As for only focusing on a subset and ignoring the rest: our society has never, ever concerned itself with the protection and wellbeing of victims and potential victims. It's concerned with maintaining these enabling cultures which give males carte blanche to act with complete impunity, whilst women and girls are expected to capitulate to their will, be blamed when they do, and bullied into submission and silence when they object.

Doubt this? If so, you only have to look at the backlash against #MeToo. The overwhelming compulsion was to silence those speaking openly about their experiences, some for the first time in many decades.

Always ask yourself who stands to gain by keeping the status quo precisely as it is.

@BIossomtoes

"And if you’re incapable of understanding the concept of incitement @1dayatatime, you really should do some research. Because incitement to violence is a crime."

If you read my earlier posts you would see that I agree with you that incitement to violence is very much a crime.

The question is whether for example whether the following are simply freedom of opinion or incitement to violence :

1. Saying at the time that Liz Truss is a useless PM and should resign.
2. saying Keir Starmer is a useless PM and should resign
3. saying Jess Phillips is a rape apologist (which I personally think is unfair and untrue)
4. calling for a fresh election (which imo will never happen anyway)

Now on the other hand publicly calling for the death or throat cutting of a particular politician or group of people is very much incitement to violence.

I know it was the DM, but people are questioning a lot of what is actually behind the lack of prosecutions for individuals known to the police and what else is being covered up?
Makes you think.
My heart goes out to the victims , they have have the life sentence not the criminals.

Because apparently 46 deputations within less than a month of being elected is a bit pathetic.

Why?

Quote in the Times from Becky Riggs who became the leader on child abuse investigations on the National Police Chiefs Council in the summer.

“She said that there was misinformation regarding the scale and nature of group-based crimes, adding that the November report “makes it clear that group-based offending occurs in various forms, in diverse settings, and across different ethnicities”.

Riggs added: “While media coverage often focuses on specific communities and so-called grooming gangs, it is crucial for law enforcement and their partners to respond forcefully to this type of crime in all its forms, regardless of media coverage.

“We must always return to the data, maintaining a balanced approach to addressing the threat in all its forms. Children are at risk from perpetrators of all races, ethnicities and genders.”

The report, based on 2023 data, stated that there were 4,228 reported group-based crimes out of a total 115,489 child sexual exploitation and abuse crimes. Of the group-based offences, more than a quarter were familial, 9 per cent were institutional and 17 per cent were in a child sexual exploitation setting involving an imbalance of power. Nearly 40 per cent of offending did not fit a category and 9 per cent was unknown. More than 80 per cent of suspects were white, 7 per cent were Asian, 4 per cent were black and 8 per cent mixed or other.”

While any abuse of girls is horrific, by focussing on a small subsection we miss legislating and helping the wider community of girls and women who are subject to horrific abuse. We are letting unelected misogynists and racists derail our legislative process and not helping the victims.

Not enough.

How many were flown to Rwanda?

46 is a bit pathetic no?

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/criminals-and-immigration-offenders-removed-on-charter-flight

But this is what it's become, isn't it? It's a party political issue. And this is one of the many problems I have with the current constitution.

Look at the published list of MPs votes. That's the whip in action, alright. Labour overwhelmingly voted 'no'. The Tories overwhelmingly voted 'yes'. Insignificant others largely abstained, which IMO shouldn't be an option. Our representatives were elected to do a job: they need to be seen to do it. Instead, they took the cowards' stance. From all this, a not unlikely deduction is that members voted the way they were told to vote because they didn't want to cause any potential damage to their individual political aspirations.

The fact that everyone - no matter what their political persuasions - is apparently not horrified by this issue; by the way it has destroyed the lives of women and girls, is a stark reminder that it's a man's world. It shows us just why and how men are able to continue harming women with impunity.

I'm with you completely as to your last sentence. This issue is universal. It should not be one of party politics, but of absolute basic humanity.

But ... here we are. Again.

@Bogginsthe3rd - Do you NOT think foreign born rapists should be deported? In fact, should not all foreign born criminals be deported immediately and forever? Why should we have our society and culture ruined?

👏👏👏

The increased danger to Jess Phillips who has championed abuse victims her entire life is something that should horrify every woman. It should be beyond politics. The fact that you, yes you have attempted to make political capital from it speaks volumes. Anyway the discussion is all here, other posters can judge for themselves.