Rupert Lowe’s rape gang enquiry, report published

[Yddraigoldragon]

The report has been published, link below.

http://bit.ly/4uE5odw

It is harrowing.

you're not even human as far as I'm concerned

As I said upthread, go over to X and check out Donna Rachel, independent councillor in Shropshire. She's got some expertise in this area, and is nobody's idea of a woke lefty.

Some people like Donna; some don't. There's a post in this thread slagging her off. YMMV.

Yesterday she pointed out, in some detail, the methodological problems with this report.

For the past 24 hours she's been getting a lot of critical comments from Lowe cultists, beginning with "kike bitch" and getting more offensive from there.

I'm not interested in hearing not even human as a rejoinder when Lowe tolerates open fascists in his organisation.

Deflection tactics. Happens quite often. Any cause supported by right wing parties is so quickly dismissed. Why can't we focus on the scandal that is the muslim Pakistani rape gangs that have abused thousands of children under the noses of all political parties, governments, state authorities and police forces. Ruined lives, murdered and tortured.

Talking of force teaming we've had SNP/Rainbow Greens, Green Party/Ultra Islamic political leaders. It's far from an exclusive tactic of the right wing.

Who made the comment not even human? It's hard to follow who it is you are commenting on. Was this on X?

I might also add, if we're talking about ruined lives - and women reliving extremely traumatic experiences for the purposes of your report - it's not great optics to have the unqualified kids who put the report together grinning like Cheshire cats when they hit publish

It's not hard to follow if you scroll up one or two posts.

Do you have any comment on the antisemitic filth being directed towards Donna by Rupert Lowe supporters?

I meant to comment on this earlier, when I read the report, but I got distracted. Yes, it is obscene.

Do you think it was good optics for Sammy Woodhouse to be a featured speaker at a white nationalist conference? Do you concede that this possibly undermines her credibility?

Interesting article in the Telegraph, gift link should work but backup here archive.ph/MT2pb

You're not answering.

Do you think that Sammy Woodhouse being photographed as a keynote speaker at a fascist knees-up serves the interests of the survivor community?

Nor are you.

Do you think that white supremacist Steve Laws, white supremacist Sam Wilkes, or white supremacist Jared Taylor - all members in good standing of Restore Britain - are advocates of women's safety?

Are the statements of girls/women in the report falsified, yes or no?

You are on the FWR forum where women who know that only men have a penis are routinely called fascists/racists/white supremacists for knowing this fact so you'll have to get used to people not believing anyone who cries 'but he's a blah blah blah' over and over. It means nothing any more.

And I think Sammy can go where the fuck she wants, she doesn't answer to you.

So @FernFaery says:

to you, racism is King and the mass rape of girls is an acceptable price to pay to feed the Anti-Racism crocodile.

This is how I know you're new to FWR. Because if you had been around here for a while, you might know that I've made myself rather unpopular with tribal leftists for mentioning rape coverups in the Socialist Workers Party, and specifically the fact that "Stand Up To Racism" (the SWP in a funny hat) receives generous financial support from the trade unions, and frequently has Labour and Green politicians appear on its platforms.

When I say Sammy Woodhouse being keynote speaker at a white nationalist conference does not serve the interests of the survivor community, that is precisely what I mean.

I am not saying the women who gave evidence to Lowe's pseudo-inquiry were lying, and I would not say such a thing.

I'm saying that Lowe's organisation, which is riddled with neo-nazis and white supremacists, does not serve the interests of survivors.

You, on the other hand, are quite happy to say that anyone who doesn't support Uncle Rupert is attacking survivors.

I see you.

I am not saying the women who gave evidence to Lowe's pseudo-inquiry were lying, and I would not say such a thing.
I'm saying that Lowe's organisation, which is riddled with neo-nazis and white supremacists, does not serve the interests of survivors.

So you read pages and pages of testimonies from raped girls and your first thought is, ‘who has been involved with producing this report, and do I like them?’

Bring yourself to acknowledge the link between the culture of these men and their crimes. Just once.

Thank you for confirming that you don't have an ethical problem with neo-nazis and white supremacists.

Looking forward to seeing how much traction this gets on FWR

I don’t think anything has undermined Sammy’s credibility

Bloody offensive to suggest someone is less credible because she is not, in your eyes, a perfect victim.

Is it ok for right wingers to be groomed or raped?

Perhaps her personal experiences have influenced her opinions, perhaps she would have had these views anyway; it doesn’t matter either way.

Maybe she’s there because these are the only people who will give her a voice.

How do we know she wouldn’t be at the Labour Party Conference if they’d platform her and allow her to speak honestly and openly about her experiences?

It’s irrelevant what her politics are and she is a brave woman. Trying to discredit the victims now is just as abhorrent as those who tried to discredit them in the past.

Yes I agree with this. You’ve put it well.

Totally agree with you 💯

Why on earth is it relevant?
She was 14 when she was first raped in 1999. The violence and pain went on for years.
Why do you do you seek a reason to trivialise that now?

The RCC is present in the UK, abuse happened here and was systematically covered up by the RCC here.

If you want another example: the BBC, Stoke Mandeville, and Broadmoor with Savile.