Sadiq Khan cover up of London rape gangs

Fuck knows I wanted to vote for Khan last mayoral elections because the racist abuse he received was abhorrent. Plus he grew up locally to me.

But the man's a coward who won't confront his own bias. He dismissed Joan Smith from her role as co chair of the London VAWG board because she refused to pretend men with special identities posed no threat to women. Smith has researched the strong correlation between terrorists and domestic violence histories. This seems so important: a theory which cuts across culture and race thereby pulling the narrative away from racist far right rhetoric; and an opportunity to prevent the growth of misogynist violent men into full blown extremists whilst also protecting the women and children they start out by harming.

Ellie Reynolds, one of the abuse survivors who quit her role in the government inquiry's victims and survivor's liaison panel is being interviewed on Woman's Hour now.

There is a reason he needs an entourage wherever he goes. How low has London fallen since he is the mayor. I hope when the next Mayor comes he is indicted for his corruption and crimes if found guilty of such things. I can’t wait.

Please explain?

If I was a mayor and there'd never been a grooming gang scandal I'd be thinking "what is more likely, that this phenomenon didn't come to my town, or that it did but it's been covered up deliberately or through incompetent policing that has failed to join the dots?" I would also be thinking, "however unlikely it might be I can't simply assume that there's nothing to see here - I need to be certain there's nothing to see here".

Why not explain what the glaring errors are, for clarity?

I suppose if you read your post again, you wouldn’t see the glaring errors you are making in your thinking it’s very sad

Why should London be magically different from Rochdale? Surely every mayor of every town (and certainly every town with large muslim populations) should be thinking that there's a high chance that it's happening in their tow, and that the absence of a big scandal is not evidence of anything, other than the possibility that Rochdale is a decade ahead of London in dealing with it

Doesn't surprise me. The way he was baiting Susan Hall in that meeting was sickening. He thought pretending he didn't know what grooming gangs meant was funny!

The Express article references a video in which Khan professes not to understand the question and deliberately conflates grooming gangs with county lines. Unless anyone is arguing this is AI, engage with the substance of the topic. I get really pissed off with those who denigrate the poster because the source is from the right.
Jesus where would we be in the GC argument if we waited for the Guardian or the BBC to stand up for women. Don't make me laugh. It is only the Telegraph, Times, Mail, Express and GB news taking up this cause with any integrity whatsoever. I say this as a former regular reader of the Guardian. Haven't touched it since they trashed Suzanne Moore and Hadley Freeman.

It feels like we are just failing over and again to do the right thing. I just can’t believe the extent to which so many people are willing to overlook the rape and torture of children.

The idea that there are no grooming gangs operating in London is nonsensical, London is not some mythical utopia.

That Khan ignores, even denies the existance of such gangs is shameful.

Jesus

Dennis Jones was Peterborough City Council's Labour leader - until he resigned from the party after referring to grooming gang victims as "poor white trash from Rotherham".

these girls really are viewed as natural victims by men like this, and also apparently by a poster on this thread

So if I understand the article correctly, SK denied that there was evidence of Rochdale-style grooming gangs operating in London, while having read reports of sex crimes that Maggie Oliver claims indicate the existence of such gangs.

He hasn't denied having read the reports, just denied that they indicate what it's being claimed they indicate, right? Surely the key point is exactly what's in the reports and whether it was reasonable to support the conclusion he did.

An inquiry might be a good idea, but I don't see anything yet, without much more information, to incriminate him.

Good call. Offensive interuptaron ahoy!

At least it's clear why they're hiding behind a name change.

Are you really trivialising this with your scolding and laughter? Laughing at a woman who works with survivors? What are you doing to help them, with your lofty lefty credentials and your righteous reading choices?

Happy to call a rapist a rapist, no problem with that at all.

OP, he absolutely needs to go and i want to see prison for those at the top who have been covering this scandal up.