Not trying to take a side.
You can retract your f**.
Yes there is a debate now and it is very open, and there are many reports that it was not so open and people were hurt for a long time. Was that political cover up? Each can decide - but I think the debate shows there was a real issue.
I never said there wasn't, so no, I won't retract my "fuck." I asked for evidence that politicians are covering up child trafficking gangs, and what you provided was not that.
> Yes there is a debate now and it is very open, and there are many reports that it was not so open and people were hurt for a long time. Was that political cover up?
No, it fucking wasn't. Get a grip. This is a serious issue and you're playing word games. That's why I'm talking to you like this.
There was a debate at the time the Rotherham scandal occurred. Multiple local inquiries were held. I pointed you at the News Agents episode that talked about this and you clearly paid no attention because you're still trying to argue semantics. Grow up.
https://www.thefp.com/p/muslim-grooming-gangs-cover-up-keir-...
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/06/18/the-grooming-ga...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/17/what-is-the-casey-r...
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/16/grooming-gan...
https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gangs-scandal-timeline-w...
How the grooming gangs scandal was covered up https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/f247768ad7912bdc
https://theweek.com/crime/the-grooming-gangs-scandal-explain...
https://womenagainstrape.net/statement-rape-and-grooming-gan...
Straight up FP is lying, so you’re off to a fucking awful start. You can verify this against the News Agent interview I’ve mentioned for the third time now. Watch it on YouTube.
I don’t have an Economist account but it doesn’t seem to mention coverup in be lede. Given it would be the biggest political story in Britain, I doubt it says coverup by politicians.
Al Jazeera talks about the inquiry being ordered, still no coverup.
Guardian talks about the disgustingly bad reporting standards of the police. Still no coverup by politicians.
Sky News is a timeline of inquiries. Literal opposite of a fucking coverup.
Telegraph is talking about the inquiry that Labour eventually launched. It’s lying about the use of the term coverup: no abuse was covered up by politicians by running, or not, an inquiry.
The Week is an explainer for the scandal, no coverup by politicians.
Women Against Rape are talking about the police, not politicians. Anyone knows, and I already mentioned, the failures of the police here.
Did you seriously just waste your time finding links you obviously didn’t read to still fail to answer a simple fucking question:
Where is the evidence that POLITICIANS covered up child abuse rings? That was the flagged comment and you have failed to back the claim.
Jess Phillips certainly didn’t, and Chris Philp is referring to authorities not handling reports correctly: an issue that has been raised since the Rotherham abuse scandal. A scandal, I remind you, where the current Prime Minister was in charge of the CPS and whom Andrew Norfolk (who broke the news story) specifically credited as working hard to uncover and prosecute the perpetrators of in his last interview with The News Agents.
Also, you just quoted a fucking Parliamentary debate on the very issue that was claimed to be covered up! Just let that sink in.