Hacked Off deliver ludicrous blessing of the Rotherham investigation

28 August 2014

1:36 PM

28 August 2014

1:36 PM

Andrew Norfolk, the Times journalist that blew open the Rotherham child abuse scandal, can sleep well in his bed tonight, for he has been completely vindicated now. Forget the Jay Report, and the resignation of the Leader of Rotherham Council. No, Norfolk has been blessed with great reward from a far higher power; from the the fathers of the nation: Hacked Off.

The campaign for regulation of the press have released a statement praising this Murdoch stooge:


‘Hacked Off Executive Director Joan Smith said: “This is investigative journalism at its best. Andrew Norfolk has uncovered a dreadful story of abuse, in Rotherham and elsewhere, which has been ignored or brushed aside for more than a decade. Hacked Off congratulates Andrew Norfolk and reiterates its support for press freedom, which is vital if those who abuse the trust of the public are to be called to account.”‘

Given the legal lengths that Rotherham Council went to in order to restrict information reaching the Times, it is laughable to think that they would not have taken full advantage of the additional restraints Hacked Off want to put on the media.

Incidentally, Joan Smith is the ex-partner of Denis MacShane – the Labour MP for Rotherham when the abuse was going on, who has now admitted he did too little, though he says no victims ever approached him. In 2009, at the high point of the expenses crisis, she wrote in the Guardian a piece entitled ‘I am sick of my country and this hysteria over MPs’:

‘I am sick of my country. I am sick of the daily undermining of democracy, and sick of the sadistic pleasure people take in humiliating decent public servants.’

The decent public servant who was her ex ended up in the slammer for expenses fraud. One might be forgiven for asking whose side Joan is really on.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • jesseventura2

    Butch looking enough to get her a labour selection?

  • alfredo

    Doubtless she would welcome an investigation into what Common Purpose was up to or covering up in Bradford and other northern cities these last 15 years with whoops of joy.
    After all, with a network extending, apart from Hacked Off, to the police, councils, social services, education, the churches, ‘charities’, etc., etc., to which even cats in the street belong, CP can hardly have played no role at all.

  • Terry Field

    Her face reflects her character. Plato was correct.

  • John Byde

    Well done, Andrew Norfolk. There’re still a few decent honourable journalists around on both sides of the political fence. Kudos.

  • The Masked Marvel

    No scolding from Hacked Off of all the journalists who not only looked the other way for years, but actively worked to demonise and call racist those who raised concerns about it? What a shock. Hacked Off are disgusting hypocrites. No surprise there, either, seeing as it was co-founded by the former executive editor of the BBC College of Journalism.

    • Autulocus

      I am reliably informed that one Professor Alan Pussbridger is the principle of this well known college,renowned for its course on ‘ Disguised Left Wing Bias’.

      • The Masked Marvel

        Yes, very droll. They don’t need such a course, obviously. They do it instinctively. They do, though, have course on how to infuse Left Wing Bias into programming: Warmism, homosexual marriage, and multiculturalism, for example.

  • Lydia Robinson

    From the same article –

    “While Narey acknowledges that “in the Midlands and north of England there does seem to be an over-representation of minority ethnic men in [offending] groups”, he argues strongly that no useful conclusions can be drawn until the government undertakes a serious piece of research into what is a nationwide problem. (Keith Vaz, who chairs the Commons home affairs select committee called for such an inquiry today.) Narey also refutes the allegation that Muslim men are grooming white girls because of cultural assumptions about their sexual availability, as girls from minority backgrounds have been similarly abused.”

    Barnardo’s should hang their heads in shame.

  • Lydia Robinson

    Here’s an odious article from 2011 in The Guardian:

    Small wonder that social workers felt too frightened to come forward.

  • Wessex Man

    That Denis MacShane, he certainly knows what he want when it comes to women first this one Joan Smith, then Vicky Price, he should spend more time locked up for not cleaning his glasses!

  • David davis

    Is she for real? I mean, really, in the flesh? I don’t think I’ve viewed such an ugly creature for some years.

  • sir_graphus

    It’s a preview of the Hacked-Off future where the new establishment decide what should and shouldn’t be investigated. Terrifying.

  • Ronovitch

    Joan Smith infamously wrote a ferocious hatchet job of Liz Hurley’s private life. Smith is an exceptionally ugly person whose hypocrisy knows no bounds. It is a very good thing that she is being exposed.

  • artemis in france

    None so blind as those who cannot see their own hypocrisy.

  • Liz

    Sounds like jealousy.

  • Lydia Robinson

    This woman and her convicted criminal lover should butt out. But it’s an indication of how the left have such power in this country that they can appear on a public stage like this and feel no shame. Rather like the Paedo enablers in Rotherham council.

  • Lydia Robinson

    Denis MacShane – convicted criminal. Nuff said.

  • fitz fitzgerald

    … the report on the Oxford violation & grooming scandal is surely overdue…

  • Carol Croft

    Yet another ‘journalist’ that does not understand the proposed press self-regulation. What are these ‘additional restraints’ that Hacked Off propose to hamper the press?

  • rubes love

    ‘…who was first to expose the scandal’? I think you’ll find that Nick Griffin was among the first to expose the muslim grooming gangs and was hauled through the courts for doing so.

    • Jackthesmilingblack

      “Nick was right.” Get over it.

  • John Smith

    Common Purpose

  • channel.fog

    She’s the one who wrote the achingly self-righteous piece in the Guardian saying how unfair the attacks on the Parliamentary expenses troughers were. When she was still with MacShane. And when he was claiming the expenses that led to his stay as a guest of Her Majesty.

  • The_greyhound

    Another incompetent corrupt public sector crew, trying to prevent the public knowing what they had done – Leicestershire Police attempted to muzzle the Coroner in the infamous Fiona Pilkington case.

  • gelert

    isn’t the photo of MacShane in a wig ?

  • extoryagent2

    Hacked Off obviously haven’t read the source document, right to the very end.

    The political correctness stinks but I fear that there is more to this story:

    “Some people we interviewed suspected that a small number of those with political

    authority in the Council had links to the perpetrators of CSE through taxi firms and

    other business or family interests. We were told by the Police that there was no

    evidence to support these suspicions.” Paragraph 13.60, Page 113

    For all the careful wording, Professor Jay might as well have added, “That’s the very police that arrested the victims but not the perpetrators.”

  • AJH1968

    Please tell me that there was no procreation in their
    dubious partnership. I realize it is rather unfair to bring up a person’s
    appearance, and I know completely inappropriate most of the time. In this case,
    and due to the appalling suffering and misery these two are indirectly or
    tacitly responsible for, I think we should make an exception. That aside, how many
    pimples does this wretched woman have.

    • Basilthedog

      Yes, Dennis McShane certainly knows a sexy siren when he sees one. Now shacked up with Chris Huhne’s ex, isn’t he?

      • AJH1968

        Why would a normal heterosexual male do that to himself,
        twice, unless he was deeply disturbed?

      • Autulocus

        Despite the endorsement on her driving license?
        Hope he was wearing a safety belt when they got down to business!

  • Lockstein13

    A small request of clarification from an American:
    In a number of articles on this topic, I’ve seen the term “Asians” used to refer to Pakistani muslims.
    QUESTION: is this use of “Asian” in this manner typical/proper British English, or moreso the equivalent of American Media’s Political Correctness describing young black street thugs as “mischevious youths” (I kid you not)?
    Thank you for your help.

    • MrLouKnee

      When the British press use the word “Asian”, its to defect attention away from the fact that they are Muslims, so an entire continent is shamed for the sake of the religion of peace

      • Unenlightened_Commentary

        I think even “Muslims” is too broad a category. Whatever the problems of Somali, Turkish, Bengali or Nigerian groups in this country, it is not from there that the grooming gangs have emerged. It is almost entirely from the Pakistani population.

        • ferkan

          Yes, but people like to use ‘muslims’, because it’s a nice way of grouping people together and indicating that all muslims are evil.

          • Tom M

            Mmm I suppose you have explained to the Muslims that all Kaffirs aren’t evil either.

            • ferkan

              I have the same contempt for anyone who tries to generalise by race or religion. So if I meet a Muslim expressing ignorant opinions I’d point it out.

              • Tom M

                So how would you have treated or viewed the German army if you had been fighting them in 1940? Would you have assumed they are all Nazis or would you have taken the view that you would wait and see what their thoughts and personal points of view are before engaging in combat?
                The reason I ask is that on a personal level I would take the same view as you do to next door neighbours, work colleagues etc. However when you have to take a view of an identifiable belligerent group of people or nation for example then some generalisation has to be applied has it not?
                If I lived in the Ukraine you would forgive me if I thought that the Red Army appearing was a bad Putin inspired invasion and looked at the soldiers with some apprehension as opposed to thinking they are individuals with their own points of view.
                The same I fear applies to those whose centre of gravity is religion. Those who owe their allegiance to a religion should be looked upon and considered in the same way as any other group with followers who subscribe to it’s aims and objectives.
                I think the expression is “fly with the crows, get shot with the crows”.

                • ferkan

                  You’re suggesting I consider ‘muslims’ like an invading army?

                • Tom M

                  No I’m suggesting that you consider Muslims as a belligerent religious group whose common denominator is an extreme and stated dislike of Western Culture sufficient to plant bombs in the underground, blow up the twin towers, behead soldiers in the main street etc etc.
                  When a group of otherwise disparait people do things with a common view then don’t be surprised if the rest of us find the common denominator and use it as a label.
                  After all I do believe us non-believers (Kaffirs) are grouped together in the Koran are we not? Correct me if I’m wrong but I can’t remember readng in the Koran anywhere that Kaffirs should be assessed individually. I am correct in thinking that the Koran just assumes we are all the same aren’t I?

                • ferkan

                  Ha. If I judged all people by the barmy texts they live their life by, I’d have many fewer people left to talk to.

                  Strangely, my Muslim friends and colleagues have never resorted to calling me a Kaffir and getting ready to blow me up. But perhaps I’ve being naive and I should start being more cautious.

                  Have a nice day Tom.

            • Aldabaran

              If the Western world had not bought into the Islamist’s trick of ignoring national identities and grouping all Muslims together, the global sense of community among Islamists would be significantly weaker.

              The mistake carries on with US commentators and others talking down the reality of countries like Iraq and Syria. Actually they had pretty viable national identities, based on long-standing historical ones, for many decades. Damascus and Baghdad were different worlds.

              Another case of the US and others foolishly tumbling straight into the pit dug for them by Islamist propagandists. We should stick to calling everyone by their nationality identity.

              • Tom M

                Quite so Aldabaran. My favourite in this regard is the deal struck by Faisal Sharif and Chaim Weizmann in Mecca in 1920 I believe. Faisal ( head arab) told Weizmann (head jew) that the Jews could have Palestine as he considered the arabs who lived there were of a social order even lower than the Jews.

    • Lagos1

      A bit of both. British people usually use the word Asian to describe Asians from the Indian subcontinent – India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. Just as Americans usually think of Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese when they use the word Asian.

      However in this case it is also a way of avoiding the word “Muslim” because this issue doesn’t involve Asians who are Sikhs, Hindus, Christians etc.

      • Dougie

        Do we know that no Sikhs, Hindus or Christians are involved in similar activities anywhere in the country? I think you are jumping to conclusions. The plentiful reports of gang rapes etc. coming out of India of late shows conclusively that many Hindus have appalling attitudes towards women. And, of course, we can be sure that the men involved in the much-rumoured Westminster paedophile ring (if it existed) were mostly Christian.

        • Hexhamgeezer

          I’m sure that hundreds of Pakistani Mu$lim$ will appreciate your thoughtful and balanced response. Not so sure the thousands of white English female victims of them would be quite so pleased.

        • P_S_W

          No we don’t, and we can therefore wait and refer to them when that is proven.

    • TrulyDisqusted

      It’s how the Left in Britain operate.

      If the good people of Britain were to correctly read Muslim next to every negative story involving Muslims, it would take two newspapers and half a days news bulletins to blow the whole Religion of Peace and Tolerance out of the water, so they purposely selected the term “Asian” to mislead since most Britons associate Asians with South East Asia and not the Middle Eastern Muslims the negative news articles are referring to.

      Lefties Lie: they need to because truth and reality are usually the polar opposite from whatever their “morally Highest Ground” positions tend to be. So when you see Lefty organisations called United Against Fascism (UAF) know instantly that they are the Fascists and that Hacked Off are only Hacked Off that they haven’t yet managed to create their totalitarian Police State where they hold all the wealth and POWER and anyone off message legally gets a bullet in the skull in the street.

      Oh, ALL of their super expensive, yet ultimately ill fated plans are always funded by other people’s stolen taxes, since none of them ever had a real job in their lives but all of them earn more than the presidents of small nations.

      Hope this clears it up for you.

      • ferkan

        “”Asian” to mislead since most Britons associate Asians with South East Asia and not the Middle Eastern Muslims the negative news articles are referring to.”

        And where exactly is Pakistan?

        • TrulyDisqusted

          Pakistan sits south east of Afghanistan (an Arab, Muslim country) and west of India.

          I don’t recall ever having read an article about India or Indians where Indians were referred to as “Asian” because most authors know that describing Indians as Asians would confuse the reader and send their minds 2000 miles further east.

          Which is exactly why the Lefty Media chose Asian as an almost exclusive reference to articles concerning Arab/North African Muslims…

          • ferkan

            Yes, and is it in the Middle East by any standard definition or understanding? I’ll answer for you. No. So your point is incorrect.

            • global city

              One thing’s for certain, Pakistan is not Arab.

    • ferkan

      It is simply a cultural difference. Asian in the UK has always in my lifetime referred to people in and around the Indian Subcontinent. As a rule, most of us could not spot the difference between a Bangladeshi, Pakistani or Indian person, so they are all called Asian.

      The attempt to recast this historical difference as a leftist conspiracy is amusing.

      • TrulyDisqusted

        Well you must live in a different part of the UK to me.

        Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi were collectively known as ” Paki’s”.

        Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Malaysian) were commonly recognised by as Prince Philip has termed (more than once) for their “slanty eyes”.

        I’ve yet to meet anyone else out with the media who shares your definition.

        • ferkan

          Ah. Probably I do. You share your racism with pride?

          I’ve lived in the Midlands, London and around. Fortunately, I’ve not had to associate too much with racists.

          • TrulyDisqusted

            No Sir, I merely observe the world around me and I use a lifetime of knowledge and experience to decide what it is I am looking at.

            Since you mention it, race (and genocide) seems to be favourite weapon of the Left, usually as an excuse for their latest round of genocide, but since I don’t suffer from your Lefty mental illness, I have no fear of race, nor indeed of being labelled racist by a member of the mentally ill.

            Why is it that in your world: 2+2 always = 47 plus £300 MILLION to pervert history and science?

            • ferkan

              In my world, calling someone a ‘Paki’ is generally, but not always, perceived as hostile. It generally is meant with hostility and causes significant and real distress and often fear in those on the receiving end.

              You may dismiss this as oversensitivity, but perhaps you’ve never experienced being on the receiving end of prejudice, so you don’t know what it’s like to be abused for the colour of your skin (to be fair I’ve hardly experienced this myself, but at least I can imagine).

              And what exactly have I said that you are interpreting as 2 + 2 != 4?

              • TrulyDisqusted

                Actually, I didn’t invent the word “Paki” I simply used it the same way that everyone else did in Britain at that period in history.

                I’ve been lucky enough to have lived and worked all around the world and I can promise you that white people are racially abused and targeted in every non white country in the world, simply because they are white (and presumed easy pickings). I’ve been robbed at knifepoint, I’ve had a gun stuck in my ribs, I’ve been knocked to the ground and beaten because I am white and on the good days, they only spat on us, kept us waiting, gave poor service and ripped us off as much as possible simply because I am white in a non white country.

                Show me anyone in the UK offended by the word “Paki” and I’ll tell them to get over themselves.

                If you really want to know what racism is, you’ll need to leave the Western world, because you need to see experience these professionally offended ethnic in their home environment to see true, deadly racism at work.

                People are racist the world over, get used to it!

                • ferkan

                  I’ve also lived and worked in a number of countries. I’ve travelled in the Americas, Asia, Europe, Africa. I’ve experience some racism, but nothing too bad. Nothing like some of my clients have experienced here in the UK. However, you’re right, racism exists everywhere, it’s clearly natural. This does not mean it should be accepted.

                  Perhaps how you were treated in other countries also had something to do with the way you act? I say this only because I have generally experienced courtesy and kindness when travelling and working in other countries, and only rarely negative actions – and I could not look much more white, blue eyed and blond(ish). But for you, it’s been so hard to be white. Interesting.

                  You say did not invent the word ‘Paki’, you just used it like other people. Well done. I used to be homophobic when I was at school. But I now realise I was ignorant and unkind.

                • TrulyDisqusted

                  “Perhaps how you were treated in other countries also had something to do with the way you act? ”

                  Exactly! It’s all my fault! Obviously as a WHITE man in a non white country, it’s my fault I was robbed in the elevator of a Marriott, Robbed at knifepoint by a licensed taxi driver, whereas your clients are obviously delicate little wall flowers too fragile to exist in evil, racist Britain were evil racist white Brits call them names and look at them “funny” – but always in an aggressive intimidating way.

                  Luckily for them, they’ve got you…. as clients of yours, who pays their bill? Who is it that is paying you to look after the poor, racially abused waifs and strays of the world by evil British white people in Britain and if it’s so bad here, why do they put themselves through it?

                • ferkan

                  When I was talking about how might have acted I was referring to:

                  ‘on the good days, they only spat on us, kept us waiting, gave poor service and ripped us off as much as possible’.

                  Again, I’m lucky enough that that does not happen very much to me abroad. Ripped off yes, poor service yes, all the time? No. I’m simply guessing that if you’re ok with calling people ‘Pakis’ then you might experience some adverse effects related to that attitude. I guess you should stop going abroad, it does not sound like a very pleasant experience for you.

                  Also, you were robbed in the Marriott just because you were a white man?

                  I’m lucky enough to have never been mugged on my travels. Were I to be mugged, I would assume it was because I stood out as wealthy, not because I was white. This is quite different from being specifically targeted in a hate crime. I’m sorry if you’ve been a victim of hate crime. Not that I’d like either to happen to me.

                  As for my clients, they generally suffer from psychosis, so yes, they were a too fragile to live the lives they led. The majority of my clients have experienced traumas ranging from bullying to torture to as sexual abuse. In most cases this is not racism, but just the environment they lived in. But in some cases, it was clear racism (but not always from white people).

                  Of those who are non-white, most are generally second or third generation, and so have no other home to go to. Nor would they generally want to. At the same time, I’m not in any way saying that things are worse in the UK than elsewhere. I like my country because I think it has become a place where people of all kinds are accepted.

                  Who pays the bills? When its NHS, the taxpayer, just like for every other UK citizen.

                • TrulyDisqusted

                  Thanks, I knew the longer you keep spouting, the more you’d confirm that it’s you who is the RACIST.

                • ferkan

                  What exactly have I said that is racist. Quote precisely from my text please, and explain how you came to that conclusion.

                • Alexsandr

                  In what way did you have an irrational fear of gays? Or are you misusing phobia when you mean dislike?

                • ferkan

                  The standard (and dictionary) meaning of homophobia, as I suspect you well know is a dislike or prejudice against homosexual people.

                  I would sometimes say things like, ‘it’s disgusting’ or ‘it’s unnatural’. Not because it was, but because that’s what I’d picked up from school and society.

                  Although in truth, my homophobia was well treated, if you like, in the traditional manner, by exposure to my ‘fear’. Spending time with gay people was the final nail in the coffin of my prejudice.

                • Alexsandr

                  Its a false definition dreamt up by the left. Phobia has a precise meaning. Look it up. We should shun it. As I said, hatred is not the same as phobia.

                  Same as islamophobia. Fear of Islam is a quite justifiable fear, not a phobia.

                • ferkan

                  A false definition? A definition is a definition. It’s well understood that homophobia is meant as a dislike or prejudice. If you want to deny the reality of common understanding and dictionary definitions, that’s your prerogative.

                  However, homophobia does share some characteristics in common with a standard phobia. Being a prejudice, homophobia is irrational (like a typical phobia). Sometimes it also expresses itself as hysterical fear (they’ll corrupt our children, bring down the devil etc). So it can indeed be an irrational fear, even if sometimes it’s simply ignorant prejudice without fear.

                  I don’t need to look up the definition of ‘phobia’ I’m a psychologist.

                • Autulocus

                  Look in your classicalclassical Greek dictionaryy
                  Phobia means fear not hatred. Bit over Plod’s head as he draws up the charge sheet but there you go and have a nice day.

                • ferkan

                  This is getting silly.

                  Phobia = fear. I’m not disputing that.

                  However, the literal translation of homophobia would be ‘same fear’, so fear of the same (which I’m beginning to experience in the comment section).

                  Clearly then, in common modern British usage, the meaning is not just a direct translation of the greek. You can pick up any contemporary english dictionary to find the current definition or you can look at wikipedia for a relatively interesting history of the term (the term was introduced into widespread use in 1972 by a psychologist, George Weinberg, and at one stage was used to mean fear of being seen as gay.

                  This particular thread started when Alexsandr, seemingly keen to ignore my basic point and to perhaps appear clever, questioned what I meant when I said I used to be homophobic (when is was quite clear). Unfortunately, Alexsandr missed the basic fact that words are not always used according to a direct literal translation from greek (etc) – as he would have worked out had he translated both parts of homo-phobia, when he was trying to be smart).

                • Autulocus

                  Agreed. but the mission creep of the true meaning is to be deplored when the word phobia is correctly used in other contexts. Future accuracy is likely to be degraded as the PC brigade project misleading propaganda into the media in their display of ignorance.

                • ferkan

                  It’s not mission creep is it though? Mission creep seems to suggest that the meaning has changed over time according to an agenda.

                  Homophobia never meant ‘fear of the same’. The term was deliberately introduced in order to challenge attitudes to homosexuality. You can of course challenge this agenda, but it was basically a ‘liberal’ agenda, not a PC agenda. Nobody, to my knowledge has deliberately tried to change the original meaning of homophobia to meet a PC agenda. Can you show otherwise?

                  And what exactly is the problem with the common usage of this word? In what way does it cause difficulties? Do people often get confused?

                • Autulocus

                  I agree that the misuse of the word ab iniitio is at the root of the problem. One assumes that the misuse was not deliberate but due to ignorance. It seems that this was a mistake of the Parliamentary draftsman responsible for the creation of the relevant Bill.
                  As a result we have a word in circulation that can mean either ‘ hatred’ or ‘fear’ depending on the context.The mission creep is that which will occur henceforth as more and more uncertainty results..
                  Perhaps, when they have a moment from shouting abuse at each other, our erring Parliamentarians could find time to rectify their mistake.

                • ferkan

                  Now you’ve lost me? What’s parliament got to do with this?

                  Words are not introduced into the English language by parliament!

              • jesseventura2

                And why did the labour luvvies not ban Bangla, Taffy, Paddy, Jock etc.etc.

          • Wessex Man

            Well that really surprises that you haven’t experienced racism in those areas, hang on you are not white Anglo Saxon are you? and you don’t recognise the racism directed to the white peole in those areas do you.

            Much like the fabled Mehdi Hsan who finds it perfectly acceptable to scream the most vile insults at any white Anglo Saxon who may dare to challenge the common purpose and blind racism.

            • jesseventura2

              Medhi in the closet and can;t get out because his fellow peace loving vermin will kill him?

        • ferkan

          By the way… I’ve searched quite hard on the internet, and have failed to find anybody disagreeing with my impression of UK usage of the word Asian. From wikipedia to a variety of language and expat websites – and the OED. A liberal conspiracy?

          • TrulyDisqusted

            Good for you! Isn’t it about time you switched identities again?

            • ferkan

              What label? The dictionary definition?

              • TrulyDisqusted


                Sorry mate, I’ve already got all I wanted from you.


                • ferkan

                  You’ve done well. Failed to substantiate a single point. I summarise:

                  Said I added up 2 + 2 != 4. But could not point to what I said.

                  Said I was a racist, but could not point to what I said.

                  Told me that my definition of UK Asian was incorrect, but you disagree with the dictionary and wikipedia (leftist conspiracy).

                  A slippery man, why when he can’t back up what he says, slips away to another point.

                  And finished it with a “Dismissed”.


    • ferkan

      Do you have many examples of US TV describing ‘young black street thugs’ as ‘mischievous youths’, or might this be selective attention?

    • David davis

      When the British-Political-EnemyClass’s media-chummies’ arms and TerrorPolice Attack-dogs are really twisted up to hurt them properly and force them to talk, they refer to what are predominantly ethnic Bangaldeshi and Pakistani males as “Asian Men”.

      When they think they’re not being closely monitored, which is most of the time, they just say “men”. “Men” is meant to be taken as “any men”, which is to suggest, mostly “white”.

  • GUBU

    Don’t point out the irony of it all.

    People like Ms Smith don’t really do irony.

  • thomasaikenhead


    Well done for exposing the links between Denis MacShane and Joan Smith!

    The pair deserve to ne held to account for their past antics.

    It is incredible that they found the time to pontificate on the non-existent issue of foreign women being tracked into the UK and forced into prostitution but did not notice that hundreds and hundreds of English girls in Rotherham were being groomed, raped, beaten and prostituted by gains of men of Pakistani origin?

    For Denis MaShane to claim ignorance of these events is simply not credible, as the report by Professor Alexis Jay made clear, the abuse was well-known to both police, social workers and Rotherham councillors but they failed to act.

    You should hang your head in shame, Joan Smith.

    • Barakzai

      The self-righteous – like Smith and the whole Hacked Off faction – don’t do shame. Nor, evidently, do ‘decent public servants’ in Rotherham, where accountability is of no significance, at least not if it could affect their bloated salaries and pensions.

      • thomasaikenhead


        You are right, of course which is why it is so good to see the likes of Steerpike highlighting the involvement and activities of people like Joan Smith and Denis MacShane.

        The more that they are put under the spotlight and subjected to scrutiny, the better their actions can be judged and evaluated, and their cant and hypocrisy exposed.

        • FrenchNewsonlin

          But how much did that harridan in the photo above and her cohort of silly slebs cost the taxpayers over the Leveson farce? Hacked Off, Common Purpose, Rotherham, all ‘enriching’ contributions from the Millibandi conspiracy.

    • Rocksy

      Hang certainly

      • thomasaikenhead


        Her future career as a feminist and journalist is certainly hanging in the balance!

        If she really is the perceptive, intelligent academic that she claims to be, how could she possibly have been ignorant about the industrial scale abuse of young White school girls by Muslim men of Pakistani origin that has been taking place in the UK for decades?

        AS I mentioned elsewhere, Channel 4 made a documentary, Edge of the City, about such events and that was over a decade ago.

        The former Labour MP Ann Cryer has campaigned for years on the subject.

        For Smith or MacShane to claim ignorance is simply not to be believed.

        • robertsonjames

          Cryer, despite her odd views on some subjects, is incorruptible and cannot be persuaded to say things she honestly believes to be untrue (even if what you and I believe to be true might differ greatly from what she believes to be true).

          That is the essential difference between her and shiftless, careerist creeps like the McShanes and Smiths of this world whose main animus against the free press is that it might inconveniently expose their amoral activities.

          Cryer may be wrong. Indeed often she is. But she cannot be bought. Nor can she be persuaded to speak what she considers to be lies or assist in the knowing cover-up of grave injustices because it would assist her party. Thus, as a parliamentarian, she was worth a thousand (no, a hundred thousand) McShanes.

  • Fencesitter

    It’s a side issue, but why cap up Joan Smith’s job title? “Executive director” is neither a person, a place, or an office of state. Personally, I like to reserve the capital letter for the Queen alone. Lords and Sirs too, for sure. But prime minister takes lower case as far as I’m concerned. Sorry, Dave.)

    • Peter Stroud

      Well said!

    • Autulocus

      Hacked Off and Shacked Up – You takes your choice and lives with the consequences. It’s a Shane really but that’s the way it is.