Twitter author Profile picture
Aug 12, 2018 64 tweets 22 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
I appreciate "Grooming Gangs: Quilliam & the Myth of the 84 Percent" is prohibitively long. Not the fault of @Reg_Left_Media & I, but the report was THAT bad.
So in an effort to spread the truth as far as possible, I'm gonna try to do a highlights thread:…
"“The Times’ creation of grooming as a new racial crime threat is a classic example, it seems, of a bold claim resting on shaky foundations: anecdote, opinion and spurious statistics.“
- Dr Ella Cockbain
An outrageously false claim by @munazainab, pre-report:

"Asians or British Asians make up 6.9 per cent of the UK population, yet they’re found responsible for almost half, 46 per cent of child sexual exploitation (CSE) crimes.”
This screams loudly of her dangerous incompetence. Muna Adil is a rank amateur in the field with no qualifications and she demonstrates this clearly. Quilliam were never researching all "child sexual exploitation crimes"!

@miqdaad could work on correction?…
The anti-Asian misinformation stemming from the report began on day of the report's release.

This was the Times' Dec 10, front-page headline for their exclusive on the Quilliam report. Utterly and dangerously false/borderline hate

“Asians make up 80% of child groomers - study”
The misinformation spiralled out into other national media organisations, who added their own layers of disinformation and so perceptions were being formed based on false claims, established through misrepresenting a report.
Quilliam are complicit in this. They've never corrected
On Adil/Rafiq attempting to trade of their backgrounds: "We believe this collective appeal to identity politics can be seen as an attempt to manufacture a false legitimacy in lieu of genuine statistical analysis."
Still in the intro and Quilliam's report is already falling apart at the seams.

For the record, their first claim is 100% false. How they could make such a claim is staggering. Second claim is misleading. There is no "collection" of anything. They haven't published this!
On Methodology, "all we know about the research method from the Methodology section is: Quilliam have analysed some, but not all, of what they have defined as ‘Asian grooming gang’ convictions in the UK."

AKA worthless data. Are you paying attention @sajidjavid?
Vital questions on Quilliam's methodology, that not a single journalist has even bothered to ask. With the possible exception of @MatthewStadlen, who seems to have lost his backbone along the way.
FWIW, we've tried to make Quilliam stand behind their statistics. We're just a whisper in a hurricane though. The media has been absolutely complicit in creating/maintaining racist stereotypes in Brexit Britain.…
In a nutshell, why Quilliam's report should never be cited by any serious person, ever.
It is in the twisting, manipulating and misrepresenting of data and the cherry-picking of available data that disproves Quilliam's spurious claims of an objective "strong voice from within"


Observe the hoops Quilliam jump through to try and establish their "Asian Model; distinct from white abusers and exploiters. Think about it, how do these factors NOT apply to white "paedophile rings"...?

This claim by Quilliam is 100% false. Again, just think about what they are saying - The white guy stereotype hanging around outside schools/online with a proverbial bag of candy, ISN'T involved in "grooming" his victims. Absurd!
This ALONE should utterly discredit Quilliam's report and speaks loudly towards their bias and agenda.

They use data in ways that was expressly warned against by its compilers - without any disclaimer whatsoever.

CEOP 2011
CEOP 2013
Quilliam had a minimum of FIVE MONTHS research and found only 18 white "grooming gang" convicts.

"Out of the 264 grooming gang convictions, we identified 222 offenders as Asian (84%), 22 Black offenders (8%), 18 white offenders (7%), and 2 offenders with unknown ethnicity (1%).”
In UNDER 5 hours and using the exact same arbitrary parameters (to establish the "Asian Mode") as set out by Quilliam, we found 126 white convictions. The disparity is inexplicable.

Every single case is linked to here:…
Our research, combined with Quilliam's supposed research, results in the rather less headline-grabbing and inflammatory result of "Asian gangs" being at 41%.

- This figure, is still worthless until Quilliam publish how they obtained their data.
In summary,
It is in their Analysis section that Quilliam's report goes from bad to worse to outright spin. Quilliam's go on to draw conclusions that based on biased speculation that their own supposed data does not support.
Quilliam attempt to pass off a SINGLE EXAMPLE as "REPEATED REFERENCES"....Why?
And it is at this point where Quilliam's report devolves into the sinister. They use every propaganda trick in the book to crowbar in the classic "they are raping our women" trope.
Here, they bizarrely use an black Africa "grooming-gang" as evidence of their "Asian Model" preying on white girls - This is despite the ruling judge completely rejecting that there was any racial element to their crimes. Of course, the Judge's opinion was omitted from the report
Next, Quilliam totally mischaracterise a female ticket-inspector who was allegedly racially abused in the course of her duties as a sex-crime "victim". 100% false! This level of duplicity and effort to advance racism with racism is reprehensible.
All sexual contact with minors, being incapable of giving consent, is exploitation and criminal.

However, Quilliam STILL feel the need to misrepresent, skew and spin to push their trope. ANOTHER false claim (and the sum total of their "evidence").
Why what Quilliam are doing is dangerous for the victims and future victims: - - "Focusing on a “single model of child sexual exploitation” will lead to authorities being “blinkered” and “blind”
Yet more evidence of selection-bias. Quilliam champion Nafir Afzal, but omit that he rejects their theories.
All of this is important. Correlation not causation.

"Attributing the cause of rapes and sexual exploitation involving hundreds of actors to two factors - culture and religion, is inept and reductionist, but will be accepted by the already prejudiced at face value."
Almost there! Well done if you've made it this far. It's hurt you more than it's hurt me, believe me! "Case Studies" next....
Not sure if Quilliam ran out of time, money or hot air, but this promise, which came earlier in the report, never materialised.
Not only did they not analyse ANYTHING "in depth"; they didn't analyse anything AT ALL.

They literally copy/pasted from some articles while omitting everything from these same articles which contradicted their hypothesis. Shameless bias. Examples here:…
SUSPICIOUS OMISSIONS - Quilliam's report, despite claiming to plug a whole in academia, completely ignored numerous genuinely academic studies.
Motivation to exclude becomes apparent when the findings of the excluded becomes known. For example, Barnardos (2016):
Quilliam's most egregious omission was their wholesale exclusion of the OCC's 2012 report - The most comprehensive of its kind to date. It found that whites were the single largest offending ethnic group in groups and gangs.
"White’ form the largest group of perpetrators in both gangs and groups” — 545 were recorded as ‘White’, 415 were recorded as ‘Asian’, and 244 were recorded as ‘Black’ (with 21% ethnicity not provided)"
- OCC, 2012
Furthermore, the OCC consider their own "21% Asian" figure to be artificially high (based on systemic racism).

" it is evident that data are more proactively gathered on men and boys of Pakistani and Kurdish origin"
“The Inquiry was informed in several site visits of groups of perpetrators who were described generically as ‘Asian’ but who, upon further investigation, turned out to include Afghan, Kurdish and White British perpetrators.”

On motives (not race/religion)
And more conveniently and painstakingly compiled here by @Spoonhead8.
“Their (Quilliam's) eagerness to cherry-pick evidence, misrepresent evidence, take evidence out of context and exaggerate places huge question marks over their objectivity.” — @Reg_Left_Media…
Is #HarasRafiq a reliable source?
Has #MunaAdil any qualification, formally or through experience, at all, to write such a report?
This is @Iram_Ramzan ,the journalist who was tasked with launching the report for the @thetimes .... And of course applied all of her journalistic skills to critique the report....
“Neo-Nazi site The Daily Stormer used Quilliam’s report as the basis for their call to deport all ‘brown people’ from the UK.” — @Reg_Left_Media…
“Quilliam’s authors have simply repackaged the ‘academic racism’ popular in America. There, ‘grooming’ follows all the same patterns and contains the same traits. ” — @Reg_Left_Media…
"Statistics show that blacks are the leading offenders and whites are the leading victims but what academic racists do, as Quilliam have done, but to a much lower standard, is to link these statistics to the offenders’ race and culture through stripping away all context. "
One aspect of why this all matters: White people brainwashed into thinking non-white people are "raping our white women" kill innocent non-white people.
In stark contrast to Adil and Rafiq’s claim that “We began thinking we would debunk the media narrative that Asians are over-represented in this specific crime”, it is apparent that the authors bent-over-backwards to do the polar-opposite, in spite of their ‘Pakistani background’
"Author and journalist @cjwerleman suspects this can be explained by Quilliam’s loyalty to their right-wing funders being above their loyalties to the British Asian Muslim community."

Article here:…
“White English men have stomped elderly Muslim men to death, set them on fire, murdered them in terror attacks and threatened entire communities with acid attacks. ” — @Reg_Left_Media…
To be continued (just found out my 93-year-old grandmother has pneumonia) with #MaajidNawaz injecting his poison into the debate....
For those interested, this is also important background information. This thread links to my notes for the article and is all taken from academic reports broken down into categories.
"CEOP figures show that in Britain, 96% of the child victims of indecent images of children (IIOC) are white. In all of these images showing sexual contact between an adult and a child, all of the offenders were white."

Are white predators racially targetting white girls?
To draw on @SarahChampionMP: White men are raping and exploiting white girls (and the forgotten boys). There I said it! (for Rupert Murdoch) #SoRuddyBloodyBrave
- Quilliam: They're raping our women because Asian and Muslim
- Experts: "All three of the CEOP, the OCC and the Home Office are in agreement that groomers of children target their victims according to their vulnerability and not their race."
"All three studies(1,2,3) describe the under-reporting of ethnic minority victims a) by the victims themselves owing to their unique cultural considerations and b) in how the Police document the crimes due to a racial bias. ” (OCC).
Enter the snake....
"Racially motivated sexual assault" courtesy of the #IDW's token Muslim.

His recklessly inflammatory claims on @ThePledge are based on nothing but the misrepresentations made in the report - A report he is further misrepresenting. This is scandalous.
"Nawaz is speaking nonsense. Almost everything he says is a falsehood. It doesn’t matter how Muslim or Pakistani he claims he is, he should never be invited to speak on this subject as an authority ever again."
Once again, Nawaz repeats his outrageous lie that Quilliam found that 84% of those convicted for gang-grooming related crimes were ‘Muslim’ and just in case the next Darren Osbourne missed it the first two times, Nawaz repeats his hate-mongering fabrication a 3rd time, in 3 mins
#MaajidNawaz has also used his radio platform at @LBC to spread unfiltered anti-Muslim propaganda.
For clarity,
Incredibly, here he is defending #TommyRobinson's lies with lies of his own. There is a word for people like #MaajidNawaz and it isn't #CounterExtremist.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Twitter author

Twitter author Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!