
(Since writing the report below, new information has surfaced. See “UK: Prosecutor ‘branded a racist’ for prosecuting Muslim rape gang” and “Rotherham child sex scandal: these children were victims of ‘anti-racism’” ).
British Government knew about Muslim child grooming gangs and chose to hide this knowledge.
A new comprehensive report, titled “Easy Meat: Multiculturalism, Islam and Child Sex Slavery,” examines how authorities knew about the rampant child abuse by Muslim gangs yet refused to prosecute offenders.
A summary of this article, published by the Gatestone Institute, discusses the key points of the report, highlighting how “police, social workers, teachers, neighbors, politicians and the media” turned a blind eye to the crimes of these Muslim gangs for fear of being accused of racism or “Islamophobia.”

The “conspiracy of silence” regarding child grooming by Muslim gangs was exposed in 2010 when the underground investigation Operation Retriever found and convicted 13 Muslim men for grooming approximately 100 underage girls for sex. This generated more investigations and led to the discovery of several Muslim grooming gangs. Although many offenders were identified, few were prosecuted.
According to the “Easy Meat” report, these offenders are 154 times more likely to be Muslims, while the victims are almost always non-Muslim girls. But authorities have “never deemed it important to declare this, or even denied the pattern existed.”
These incidents were deemed unimportant because of multiculturalism. The report tells us:
“There is far more to this story than has come out so far. The population are already outraged by what they have learned in the last year or two, but know only a fraction of the scandal… This massive over-representation of Muslim men in this crime spree has been borne out by the prosecutions of the last three to four years, but it is clear that it must have been known long ago and should have been made public. Because the predators were Muslims, the agencies responsible for child-protection have almost entirely failed in their job to protect vulnerable children. From a fear of being called ‘racist,’ police forces across the country have buried the evidence.
“On the rare occasion when the phenomenon [of child grooming] would be discussed in more than the briefest details, political activists and the authorities would come together to stop the public from knowing more. Political correctness would be used to make sure that people did not speak about this phenomenon, enabling the perpetrators free rein to sexually abuse schoolgirls for decades. Yes, decades. We know that in an age where parents are not allowed to smack their children, this sounds unbelievable.”
The problem is much more prevalent than previously reported. In fact, as many as 10,000 schoolgirls have been victimized over the years by these Muslim gangs. According to a House of Commons report, as of November 2012 “at least 16,500 children were identified as being at risk of child sexual exploitation during one year.”
Their method is to drive around towns at night and zero in on young, non-Muslim schoolgirls between the ages of 11 and 16. They often give the girls drinks and drugs to entice them into the car. Many of the victims are from care or foster homes, where they might not be immediately missed. The younger the better is usually the policy with the girls they target. The younger the girls are more likely to be virgins who are free from any sexual diseases. (Most of these men have Muslim wives whom they do not want to contaminate.)
The report criticizes British Government for using multiculturalism as an excuse to turn a blind eye to this issue. The Government continues to excuse Muslims because many of the crimes they commit under British law are not crimes according to Sharia law. As the report says, “Multiculturalism is a fundamentally incoherent doctrine, invented to conceal the serious conflicts which have arisen when peoples from vastly different cultures, with different values, are forced to live together.”
In its reluctance to be even-handed and non-discriminatory, the Government has outright refused to take into account religious or ethnic connections to these and other crimes perpetrated by Muslims. The possibility that Islamic law might have something to do with this behaviour is not worthy of consideration.
The British Government expects all its citizens, including Muslims, to embrace multiculturalism. However, the religion of Islam is by its very nature opposed to the principles of multiculturalism through its intolerance of all dissenting voices. Moreover, the symbiotic relationship between Islam and the political left cannot last since once Muslims achieve power, they kick behind them the ladder of multiculturalism that they used for climbing to power.
Further Reading
- ‘The Islamisation of Britain (Part 1): a crisis in demographics’
- ‘The Islamisation of Britain (Part 2): retention and conversion’
- The Islamisation of Britain (Part 3): Censorship and Islamophobia
- The Islamisation of Britain (Part 4): 2013 in Review
- “UK: Prosecutor ‘branded a racist’ for prosecuting Muslim rape gang”
- “Rotherham child sex scandal: these children were victims of ‘anti-racism’“
Support us!
We appreciate your support; it enables our research and helps us inform your prayers.
So click below to support Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings

Click on the social media links below to share this post:









Why would anyone be shocked by this?, the british government is as rotten as they come.
we get the government we deserve
it is a reflection of our society
unless we humble ourselves before GOD and seek HIS forgiveness it will only get worse as HE has predicted
This is not strictly on the subject, but I think it is a nice commentary on how the country has changed with multiculturalism. Most of us are familiar with at least two symbols used on Ordnance Survey maps. The square with a cross is church with tower, and the circle with a cross is church with spire.
Not any more ! On the latest maps, the circle with the cross is “Current or former place of worship with spire, minaret or dome”. And whereas this symbol used to be reserved for church or chapel with neither tower nor spire, any place of worship without one, even if Muslim or Hindu, now gets a plain cross !
It is worth observing that this situation allies itself with the objectives of the Frankfurt School of Marxism which has had its agenda carried forward by the mainstream political parties and the mainstream media over the last fifty or so years. For those not familiar with the ideas of Herbert Marcuse and his followers, its aims have been: ‘We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.’
To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution – but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future – the School recommended (among other things):
1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
“One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud’s idea of ‘pansexualism’ – the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:
• attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
• abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
• abolish all forms of male dominance – hence the presence of women in the armed forces
• declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors’
In this report we see that the creation of racism offences has hampered the effective operation of policing to keep the children safe, so helping to bring about an unreliable legal system which makes victims feel even more battered by the system than they were by their oppressors. That the children were sexually abused helped bring about the further disintegration of what already were chaotic family lifestyles.
This ‘cultural revolution’ is now being assisted by those in the church – some call them churchians – whose following of Jesus is tempered by their accommodation to the worldly culture around them. Until the church gets its act together and disciplines those who fail to adhere to Scripture.
How could a church discipline churchians who fail to adhere to Scripture ? We aren’t living in a state of otherwise lawless bishoprics or enclosed monasteries. If they were excommunicated or something similar, they would just go to another kind of church, if they so wished.
thanks for this information. i had an idea this was part of the Marxist plan to overthrow the bourgeoisie classes in UK/the west but did not know where it originated or know all the details. Wait until Islam takes over, the Marxists, atheists and hard line socialists will all be forced to convert or face death atheism is a crime in Islamic lands.
@Davidw: There are two great (in number) proselytising world views – Christianity and Islam. There will come a time when there will be a head-on conflict between them, unless God intervenes first with the second coming of Jesus. Atheists and hard line socialists may well be the first target of Islam, because when the church is persecuted it thrives, as in China in the latter part of the 20th century and Rome in the first century. It may prove easier to attack those who do not have God to defend them than to attack the Church. What we need to be watchful for are those who convert to Christianity from Islam, because under Sharia they are under a sentence of death. Unlike Islam, where you try to amass sufficient ‘good behaviour marks’ to assuage Allah’s anger, in Christianity we have a generous God who has come down to Earth in human form, to take the penalty of every wrong that we have ever done or will ever do. What we have is a loving relationship with our heavenly Father, not some celestial referee counting up all our merits and demerits to see whether we are good enough. We are, or should be, honest enough to tell everyone that no-one, except Jesus, is good enough to meet God’s standards and we rely on His righteousness to justify us before God and not our own.
@Rox: Most churches will require a certificate of transfer from the church that one leaves to be admitted into the church one intends to join. This certificate will state that the subject is a ‘member in good standing’. Such a certificate cannot be issued to a member who has been removed from the membership as a result of church discipline. To become a member of the other church, hey would have to enter by means of the method of entry for new converts and that would usually involve a declaration of faith, after some sort of membership classes. However we also need to be aware that there are some organisations which call themselves churches which a sincere believer would have difficulty in recognising as such.
Surely if I started going to a Methodist church, they would be only too glad to see me, and not start asking awkward questions about where I might have been before. I have never come across any mention of these “certificates of transfer” before. If I went to the vicar of my parish asking him for an official certificate of transfer allowing me to join the Methodists, I don’t think he would know what I was talking about. It crosses my mind that, despite the name “UK Fred”, this Fred might have experienced such practices in a different country.
Sure enough, an internet search does not reveal these certificates to be such a widespread practice in England as in some other countries, including the USA ! No worries, because if you do want one, you can download it from the internet, print it yourself, and fill it in yourself. The system doesn’t seem to be entirely foolproof.
I am not called “@Rox” , by the way. Plain “Rox” will do.
Sorry for upsetting you with the @, Rox.
On the substantive point of the transfer certificate, it is something that most church members would never see.
UK Fred’s 1-11 list is an impressive one, but it occurs to me that most of these things could well have happened totally independently of the Frankfurt School of Marxism. A good example is immigration. This has been brought about by a very large number of different factors, and different decisions made by different people at different times. It’s very difficult to believe that the FSM was in any way a primary force organising all this.
Then if control of the media, excessive drinking, and breakdown of the family, were reckoned to be agents of corruption and governmental collapse in the West, wouldn’t
Communists have seen the very same things as a danger to their states in the East ?
Did these Communist countries have a reliable legal system and no reliance on the state, to ensure their stability ? I don’t think so. And again, it’s difficult to conceive how the Frankfurt School of Marxism could have engineered all this in the West in practice.
Conspiracy theory par excellence.
Rox, in terms of control of the media, all a government has to do is to keep some facts out of public view. For example, one lady in our congregation was amazed to hear of the Coalition for Marriage and even more amazed to hear that 600,000 had signed their petition. She had thought that there was overwhelming support for same-sex marriage and that she was in a very small minority.
With regard to most of the Frankfurt agenda, it was sold as freedom when the end was licence. Remember that Marx himself, as well as Lenin, urged that communists take advantage of the opportunities presented by what they called ‘useful idiots’.
With regard to the communists seeing the effects of the breakdown of the family, they did, and under Stalin divorce was made much more difficult because the population was not even self-replacing.