Sarah Champion is a Labour MP for Rotherham, the city in Yorkshire that has become synonymous with Islamic sex slavery. Our English correspondent Wat Tyler sends this report with the latest on Ms. Champion, including her attempt to wriggle out from under the weight of her history of truckling to Islam.
Sarah, Champion of Islam
by Wat Tyler
I wanted to draw your readers’ attention to this Times piece about Sarah Champion MP, and what a martyr she is made out to be for standing up to the muslim grooming gangs ever since it became politically expedient to do so.
Last August Sarah Champion was ousted from her position in Jeremy Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet, where she had been Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities. As Stephen Evans of LibertyGB wrote last year:
I do suspect that Ms Champion has an eye on her future political career and is willing to sacrifice herself now in a bid to bank brownie points for when Corbyn and his cronies get the heave-ho and Labour return to a more centre-left position.
The Times article is behind a paywall, so I can’t reproduce it in full. The author is Andrew Norfolk, and the title is “Terror police boost security for MP Sarah Champion over criticism of Asian sex gangs”. This is the opening paragraph:
An MP who received death threats after condemning the sexual abuse of girls by groups of British Pakistani men has been given increased security amid fears that hard-left and Muslim opponents are trying to force her from office.
In other words, it’s the usual — she’s getting state protection and therefore she’s a brave martyr. What I find so irritating is the determination to direct people’s rightful outrage into worthless channels.
I am not aware of one thing that Sarah Champion has done to protect any girl, or to get any muslim rape gang prosecuted. Being a talking head after trial, conviction and sentence doesn’t count.
In February 2016, on the day that a muslim rape gang in Rotherham gang was sentenced for sex-slaving white British girls, she got together with muslim advocates at a public meeting to promote the message that muslim girls were the victims. See here, at 14:04 26 Feb 2016.
Remember: This is the day that the Rotherham rape gang were sent down. And what does Sarah Champion say about herself?
Rotherham abuse trial: Local MP speaks at anti-violence conference in Rotherham
I’m in Rotherham, where local charity against violence, Apna Haq, are hosting a conference with local MP Sarah Champion and others to raise awareness of child sexual exploitation in Asian communities at Clifton Park Museum
“… anti-violence conference…”, “…raise awareness of child sexual exploitation in Asian communities…”
She was teamed up with a group called Apna Haq, who went on Radio Sheffield that day to say that “Asian girls” were the victims, and to decry the “racist rhetoric” — the interview since been scrubbed by the BBC.
This is a screen shot of her speaking at the event:
It seems that Apna Haq are among the people who have now turned on Sarah Champion. No one should have any sympathy for her now when she is attacked by her former allies.
Apna Haq are now the people who “supported and endorsed” the report attacking Sarah Champion.
What was she doing in the two decades prior to when these men were sentenced?
We know what she was doing a week afterwards, coming out with anodyne boilerplate in the local press:
Verdicts will make victims the ‘empowered women they were destined to be’, says MP Sarah Champion… ‘These convictions are a significant step forward in reassuring victims and in rebuilding public confidence that abusers will be brought to justice. I want to see more brought before the courts as quickly as possible.’
Mind you, she is no stranger to domestic abuse herself: “MP Sarah Champion tells of abusive relationship” — in which she was the abuser: “SHADOW domestic violence minister Sarah Champion told of her shame after admitting being arrested for an attack on her ex-husband.”
Note the victim language throughout. It’s not hard to see the same in the current stories about her needing, and getting, state protection for speaking out after the event.
I think this veneer needs to be stripped away. It’s scuffed up as it is, and she knows it. See this interview by Al-Beeb, of all people.
This is a lady trying to keep ahead of justice. She’s going to have to run faster than this.
The UK has terminal progressivism
FREE TOMMY ROBINSON NOW!!!!!!!!
You could be right, perhaps this is all a calculated positioning as a future centre left leader for the Labour party. But she could have done that without offending the muslim voting block. I wonder if there is more to it, perhaps she is just sick of the hypocrisy of the Left which only see racism from white people.
I admire your charitable gloss on this woman’s behavior. Why, next, she’ll be leading the charge to get Tommy’s sentence reduced, surely? A woman of valor.
“Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities” Why the plural?
“the Rotherham rape gang were sent down”: Does “sent down” mean “convicted of a crime”?
“Sent down” is quaint english for sent to jail, probably comes from “send them down to the cells” which are usually holding cells below the court awaiting the prison van.
If this woman was normal, she wouldn’t be in the Labour party.
If this women was truly disgusted with islam, pakland men and the Labour party, she would resign from the Labour party.
But she hasn’t which suggests to me that this is all about her and not the thousands of white English children who have been raped, tortured, trafficked and murdered over many decades.
As Wat Tyler asks, where was she during the decades when it wasn’t even admitted that the paklanders were treating our children like, in their own words, white trash to be used by them as they wanted?
“What was she doing in the two decades prior to when these men were sentenced?” According to Wikipedia, “Champion studied Psychology at Sheffield University. Before entering Parliament, she ran art workshops and was employed as the Chief Executive of a children’s hospice in Rotherham. Champion was first elected to Parliament at the 2012 by-election.” IMO, however flawed her history, better late than never. Before election to Parliament, she would been harassed, maybe worse, and silently disappeared.
She hasn’t done anything to protect young women and girls because she has Stockholm Syndrome.
Heck, I bet the guys in the photo are her childhood groomers. The contempt and hatred for the infidel is obvious in their expressions.
Re: “The contempt and hatred for the infidel is obvious in their expressions.”
It isn’t often I find myself in agreement with the Moslems, but in this case they’re right: Sarah Champion is more-than-worthy of contempt.
Champion – or someone like her – had to exist somewhere in this atrocity and scandal, i.e., a highly-placed politician or bureaucrat with the necessary clout to keep the lid on this horrible crime.
As the late Iris Chang insightfully noted of atrocities – they tend to occur in pairs. First, the actual act of violence itself, then the cover-up and denial that the violence occurred in the first place. Without question, Sarah Champion is complicit in the second stage of this crime – and before this is through, perhaps it will be discovered that she played a role in the first as well.
Champion serves to highlight yet again that the dilemma facing traditional westerners isn’t simply the soldiers of Allah; it is also those 21st-century Quislings – like Sarah Champion – enabling them.
Who is worse? The wolf who terrorizes the sheep, or the shepherd who let him into the fold in the first place?
When the UK press uses “Asian” doesn’t that include Hindus and Sikhs, as well as ethnic Chinese, etc that are not part of grooming gangs? What are the Hindu vs. Muslim population numbers?
As a US reader that spent about 2 months in the England/Scotland in the late 80s, I don’t remember seeing _any_ asians.
Soon enough they might just decide to use the word “humans” for full ambiguity in the name of rights. Even that won’t satisfy as it will be perceived as driving a wedge between animal lovers and your common slaughtering homo sapiens by combining the two under that title . So I fear unless we use precise terms that neutraly discriminate as they were designed to (Arab, Pakistani origin, ethnic Brit , Muslim, Christian etc.) we will be reduced to headlines like:
“Creatures convicted for non pertenance to western human culture”
You (they) really don’t want that redux because the next step is (currently legitimised) non hominid slaughtering hominids will find no excuse not to target them once the convicts are not given clear human title, possibly eat them if times are hard. Animal rights activists are not likely to step in in this case either as technically it would be seen as an internal dispute of violent members of the same genus and so no discrimination on grounds of inter-species level divergence of biological evolutionary process might be found as acceptable.
I extrapolate to an extreme obviously, a common human endeavour.
unless we use precise terms that neutrally discriminate as they were designed to (Arab, Pakistani origin, ethnic Brit, Muslim, Christian etc.)
The left would tell you there is no such thing as “neutral” discrimination. Such a claim by the left is in aid of their determination to villify those who built Western culture…by the way, if you can say “Brit” for British, why not “Paki” for Pakistani ‘origin’? Every language clips that way.
Especially as Paki means pure in Urdu.
The real answer is that we Brits did use it as a term of abuse.
So Brits replaced “Paki” with the dim-bulb “Asian” and that cured all of the problems it has with Paki immigrants (and 2nd gen Pakis)?
I propose this instead: First, the UK went bend-over tolerant toward anyone who wasn’t an ethnic Brit, enshrining Tolerance as the Capital Virtue (kicking out discernment, wit, and forbearance entirely) AND ONLY THEN did Pakis transmogrify into “Asians”…y’all bit the apple that Evil Government was dangling.*
*IOW, we’re in Original Sin territory here. Even if Brits don’t believe in the dogma, they nonetheless behave that way. Time to dust off C. S. Lewis.
Jd – so the result is Brit, which now insultingly means:
“one who speaks the name of others in an abusive manner” and then banishes their name to protect them.
is still perfectly acceptable to use. Don’t you think that is conceited and that to protect any British from negative implications of the word we should now be called Atlantics ?
You see where this leads us in circles. The fact is the British don’t much appreciate too many foreigners around them in their homeland, which you will find is a sentiment that exists among natives in many other countries also. Nothing new there, except that you might now look for the cause of UK becoming migrant beyond tolerance…unless you think that the current direction will eventually break through into some new idyllic paradigm currently being sold/fobbed us in exchange for our extended patience/silence… or even that we no longer have the choice ?
Neutral discrimination just means there is no assumption that there exists any particular bias in any way. That is salt, that is sugar (or cocoa and pepper if you prefer!) , you discriminate between one or the other according to your taste or necessity , does not mean you think salt is terrible just because you prefer sugar in your tea. I am glad I don’t run a left wing kitchen, you would have “Not coloured crystals” on both containers.
So to assume I am discriminating, or the listener is going to discriminate, in a prejudiced or unpleasant way when I say Paki, is prejudiced discrimination itself and hypocrit.
If they want Paki to have good connotations, well then Paki had better behave, because people do build up an impression based on past experience. Just as salt has a bad reputation when used in tea, so people from different ethnicities, including Brits, have their reputations follow them around with respect to certain fields, whether timeliness, manners, loudness, aggressiveness etc. etc. etc.
I don’t see the problem with that…and I say that as someone who has been targeted for being English, male etc. on different occasions. So what? People are trouble and I would be stupid to spend my time trying to teach the world a lesson beyond setting a good example. I don’t mind people getting it (imo) wrong as long as they don’t try to force their view, but I detest when someone tells me how I HAVE to view anything or how to think, by using threat – it is alien and unnatural, destructive to own intuition, self confidence, and responsibility.
Short of the United States at some future time landing on the shores of the UK to liberate that country from sharia they are through. .
This sounds like a job for Sventheviking!
The irony is Champion has named the wrong culprit.
She has said it is a problem with Pakistani heritage males, while in the UK many involved in the rape, forced prostitution and trafficking of schoolgirls are Pakistani males, readers here at GoV will be well aware, of the epidemic of rape in Sweden, Germany and other enriched European countries, ‘lover-boys’ in Holland (another innocuous sounding label for sex-slavers) etc all have a common denominator – Islamic backgrounds and supremacist attitudes towards non-Muslims.
It was the same with another Labour female MP, who peeps above the parapet and who at least, tries to protect girls, namely Ann Cryer.
(Although she had her staff check the backgrounds of girls’ mothers making complaints, to make sure they didn’t have “links with Far-Right parties such as the BNP.”)
Presumably if they did, she wouldn’t believe them, as only Labour supporting victims tell the truth, apparently.
After she had overcome her “initial disbelief that large-scale paedophile abuse was the norm for a section of the community — in some parts of Britain”, she spoke out about ‘Asian’ rape and enslavement gangs (‘grooming’ gangs makes them sound like hairdressers), she was vilified as a ‘racist’ and ostracised by her Labour colleagues.
As she noted: “Those prosecuted were from the Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian and Turkish communities”.
However Cryer claims it’s a “deep-rooted misogyny that perpetrates this form of abuse.”
Which is undoubtedly true but she also said: “One thing I quickly found out was that this misogyny had little to do with Islam.”
Even those on the left who speak out are unable to name the problem.
That’s right, an ideology founded by a violent slave-taker, slave-trader and slave-keeper, including sex-slaves, and Muslim males, who are compelled by the Koran to follow Mo’s example, and are behaving little differently – have nothing to do with Islam.
It’s amazing just how willfully-blind these leftist cultural relativists can be.
The same left that marches on Washington because Trump made a crude comment about a woman sees no problem with rape gangs because to do so would be RACIST.