It took 6 years of street protest to get the police to start investigating sexual abuse of underage girls by Pakistani / Muslim gangs, I do not think that we will ever know how many Sikh girls were abused because of the honour code.
The U.K. government has failed to protect children from sexual predators over many years, the NSPCC report shows that 16,000+ underage children some of whom are very young are raped every year. My question is why has there been no campaign by the media forcing the government to act
Snip.
“As a result many, many, more victims have found the confidence to report abuse, knowing they will be treated with sensitivity and respect, that we will listen to them and that we will take their allegations seriously.”
Share this story About sharing
Email
Facebook
Twitter
Linkedin
Child sex offences soar in Manchester
17 June 2015
Full glare now shines on child abuse
20 May 2015
1,400 child abuse suspects identified
20 May 2015
Abuse inquiries and what happens now
4 February 2015
Rotherham child abuse scandal: 1,400 children exploited, report finds
26 August 2014
Background: Rotherham abuse scandal
5 February 2015
A real horror story
T.M.
Violating another site’s copyright by posting whole articles is against the rules on the SDMB. I’ve redacted most of what you posted. Feel free to post a link and synopsis if you wish to continue this line of discussion.
Please don’t do this again.
It is an article posted on line by the author (NSPCC) and is therefore in the public domain. The report by the NSPCC is a nightmare horror story of sexual crimes against children some only babies, the report shows an increase of 38% in figures given in prior reports, my figure of 16,000 + needs to be amended to 24,000 plus. It must be remembered that these are only the reported cases.
For those who do not know the NSPCC is the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty towards Children (they are the authority on the subject)
Those who are interested should go to
NSPCC (2015) How safe are our children?
That’s not how it works.
Also part of a BBC news item
TM, the material on the NSPCC (and BBC) website remains their copyright. They may have given an implied license for the distribution of their report but you can’t assume that and the SDMB plays safe by avoiding publishing the full text, or substantial sections, of other people’s work.
This doesn’t mean you are limited in referring to this report. All you need to do is post a link to it and select any short passages you think are key and quote them (preferably using the QUOTE function) as this is covered by American “fair usage” rules.
When you signed up you accepted the terms and conditions which included respecting this and abiding by the moderators’ decisions on what constitutes fair use
I refuse to apologise when the safety of children what ever their race creed or colour is at steak. The essence of the NSPCC of which I am a proud supporter is to bring the cruel suffering of children to a wide an audience as possible.
The NSPCC don’t grant you the right to post up big chunks of their material without consent. See the “Copyright Restrictions” part on their website here:
That’s at least in part because a report must be assessed as a whole, and they don’t want people cherry-picking to make a point that they themselves would not have made. A proud supporter would respect their wishes, I’d have thought.
(Also, more generally, can you please learn to quote properly when you are posting bits of newspaper articles? You can practice in the ATMB forum, or by playing around with the “preview post” function. It’s sometimes not easy to see which part of your post comes from you, and which part is from the Daily Mail. There’s not all that many UK-based posters here, so let’s try and keep standards up, eh? 
).
I’m not asking you to apologize.
I am, however, TELLING you not to violate the copyright of others. Failure to do so will not end well for you.
I wasn’t suggesting you apologise, just explaining why big chunks of your post were removed. Of course the NSPCC is a great organisation and the message in the report is important so if you want to bring the suffering of children to our attention stick to the rules of the board and do it in a way that won’t get edited: Quote the key points and link to whole report. As **Jonathan Chance **had to cut much of the material to stick to US law it is very hard to work out what your point was.
The first point does not link to the second and if you look at the “More on the story” references you will see there is a very strong media campaign forcing the government to act.
Having encouraged you to post important material on child sex abuse in a way that we can make sense of, my view is that the Saville case is in a different category to most of the abuse recorded by the NSPCC and if we want to understand Saville in the sixties, seventies and eighties it is not that useful to mix his case with contemporary occurrences of abuse whether within families or by predatory gangs “what ever their race creed or colour”.
It is believed by many including myself that there is a global network of paedophilia of which the Saville case is but the tip of a very large iceberg. One of the problems has been that the media has until Saville ignored the problem. This is a lot deeper and darker than people think.