Guy Dampier exposes the UK rape gang cover-up, detailing how the 2014 Rotherham inquiry revealed 1,400 to 1,510 victims of Pakistani gangs while authorities avoided racism labels by outsourcing investigations to imams. He highlights the obstruction of whistleblowers from Risky Business, noting no prosecutions for file theft or fake minutes, and argues that European Convention on Human Rights laws prevent deporting criminals despite their crimes. Dampier contends rapid demographic shifts fuel sectarianism, urging strict border controls and repealing international treaties to protect Western values, ultimately suggesting America's approach should guide Europe toward a future free from regulatory nonsense. [Automatically generated summary]
In Rotherham, the whistleblowers came from an organization called Risky Business that worked with at-risk girls.
They had an office.
One morning they came in and they found that someone had got through the front door, got through the door into their office, got into the locked filing cabinet, and gotten onto the password-protected computer, and files that they had had suddenly gone missing.
And new documents had been written onto their computer, creating minutes of meetings that had never occurred.
And they could prove it hadn't occurred because the individual involved...
So we're going to take this interview in a slightly different direction than I've taken some of the other interviews here at ARK.
You've been writing a lot about the grooming scandal here in the UK, which for about two weeks in the US, about a month ago, we were talking about quite heavily because Elon started tweeting about it.
But before that, not much.
Subsequently, not much.
So I guess my first question to you is, how did you get involved in that, interested in that?
They would leave anything involving the Pakistani community to Pakistani heritage councillors or to imams.
They didn't want to touch it.
They made people censors.
There's a famous quote where somebody was reporting on abuse involving Pakistani taxi drivers abusing girls.
And they were told, in the presentation, you must say men of a certain ethnicity involved in a certain occupation.
So you had to cut race out.
That is the reason why no one will touch it.
That was the first cover-up, and that was, in some cases, a real cover-up.
So in Rotherham, the whistleblowers came from an organization called Risky Business that worked with at-risk girls.
They had an office.
One morning they came in and they found that someone had got through the front door, got through the door into their office, got into the locked filing cabinet, and gotten onto the password-protected computer, and files that they had had suddenly gone missing.
And new documents had been written onto their computer, creating minutes of meetings that had never occurred.
And they could prove it hadn't occurred because the individual involved was on holiday at the time.
It wasn't even in the country, I think.
So that was a real cover-up.
Has anybody ever been prosecuted for that?
No.
We have no idea who did that.
I mean, we can guess who did it, who had the keys and the passwords and everything else, but we don't know who did it.
Then you've got the sort of the second one, which is the more cultural cover-up.
That's the don't look at it too closely.
So, you know, it came out in 2014. There was a big scandal.
It was a big stink.
And then walk it back slow.
Nobody wants to touch it because, all right, it's been there, but do you want to write an academic paper on that?
Do you want to be called a racist?
No, fine, leave it be.
And the authorities, the people that did look into it, desperately tried to hide it.
So you can look at the Home Office report in 2020. So finally, there was pressure on the Home Office.
We're going to look at the contested issue.
Is ethnicity a real issue here?
Well, the civil servants deliberately tried to do nothing.
And then when they're forced to do something, they produce a paper.
Which is incredibly poor quality.
You know, it's the home office.
They have access to all the data they want.
They can question anybody they want.
They can go into prisons and talk to all the abusers.
They can talk to the police officers.
They don't do any of that.
What they do is they do a little summary of all the papers that have been done so far, all of which say the data quality is really bad.
And they say, on the basis of this, we can say that the most, the largest group of abusers in child sex cases are white.
Well, most is not even the same as majority.
That means like under 51%.
And Britain is a country that at the moment is sort of about 75% white, was previously 85% white, the census before that was 95% white, the census before that.
If you're talking about a country that is overwhelmingly white, and they're a small group, you're actually talking about other groups being overrepresented.
And in fact, their own evidence admitted that.
But all they wanted was that headline, whites are the largest group.
So how do you connect this issue to more broadly what's happening with immigration and the demographics of the country and what so many people here are talking about and what you can see on the streets of London, which is that this country and this city have significantly changed?
But I would also point out that the offending method is different, generally.
So in those ones, what you're talking about is abusing girls within your family or close network, and it tends to be one-on-one.
Whereas the difference with the rape gang stuff is it tends to be gang rape by large groups of people where you're sharing them around friends and family.
Both are obviously very, very bad crimes, but they're different offending patterns, which again, I think comes back to the culture.
You know, there's a culture of, if I have the opportunity, I can rape this girl within my community, but these girls outside of the community, they are fair game, and I can share them with my friends.
And we don't feel any shame or guilt about that.
So the culture is a huge issue.
And then I think the second one is the element of power that comes with demography.
So one of the reasons in Rotherham why things didn't happen was because the local Labour Party needed Pakistani votes, needed the Pakistani councillors, and so they basically outsourced anything involving them to the community or to the community leaders.
And those community leaders in many cases made poor, in some cases criminal, decisions.
To essentially cover it up and not touch their own guys.
I think what you can see in London with, let's say, the protests over Palestine and other things, is that when you have groups of people, they're going to represent their interests.
And if you have large groups of foreigners, you've come into the country very fast, they haven't integrated terribly well, a lot of their interests are going to be the interests of where they come from, not the interests of the population as a whole.
And I think that is one of the real dangers from Britain in the next sort of 10, 20 years, is that increasing trend towards sectarianism.
I think it's also, to some degree, the question for America.
You can look at something like California, where you had, I forget the name of it, but the big vote back in the 1990s about Spanish, about should English be the official language of California.
They won that one.
But there was a sort of gradual Hispanicization of certain things, and you did get low-level corruption with that, or community corruption.
So one of the advantages you've got is, you know, a lot of the people coming to America are from south of the border.
So, you know, if you've been to Texas, like, that stuff already crosses over a little bit.
There's quite often a shared faith.
Spanish is, of course, a European language.
It's not a million, million miles away, whatever problems there come.
In the case of Europe, increasingly, the people that are coming are coming from very foreign cultures, very different cultures.
Often cultures with links to...
The country already because of the imperial history, but with strong cultural difference.
So I think that is a greater shift, a greater change for Europe.
The reason why it's happening in America, I think, is partly because America is the leader of the West, partly because it has a more vibrant politics, partly because Donald Trump really did change things.
You know, a bit of great man theory, he really did shift things.
And Europe has not had that yet.
I think Europe's on a time lag, and a lot of these things will come through.
Everyone's going to be looking to America for guidance and encouragement.
We're talking about grooming gangs, rape gangs have been found in 50 different places in Britain and they're talking about a handful of local inquiries.
That's clearly insufficient.
And even if they do go ahead and even if they've got the best of intentions, they're not statutory inquiries.
They have no power to compel anybody to come and give evidence.
And that means that a lot of people simply won't.
And there's no guarantee that they won't do what they've done in previous inquiries, which is deliberately make sure the inquiries are happening in faraway places where there's been no reports beforehand.
And you can safely come back and say, well, we asked a couple of people and they said there wasn't a big problem, so no biggie.
That is clearly not what's needed.
At a minimum, we should be talking about a national inquiry.
It should probably be independent.
It should probably be headed up by someone foreign who's got no link to the British government to ensure that they don't have any level of coercion on them.
And it should have statutory powers to go in everywhere.
And if people don't want to speak to the inquiry, that should be enough for criminal charges.
That should be enough for them to, you know, go to jail.
You just simply can't handle the number of people that are coming in.
I think there's no reason why you couldn't slash things to a very, very small amount.
In fact, if you just took people who were earning sufficient money to actually really genuinely be net contributors to the country, you'd already be talking about a very small amount.
So if you included them and spouses, and even with the spouses, you'd have a certain level to make sure they can support themselves, you'd already reduce immigration to a tiny amount.
If a government got in tomorrow and wanted to do it...
They could go to the immigration rules, they could change those rules, they were going to force immediately, and you could slash immigration with basically zero negative economic impact immediately.
Then you get to the second one, the harder question, which is what do you do with the people you've got here?
If they've committed criminal acts, you can and should deport them.
That's been made very hard.
Unfortunately, that's going to require us dealing with international law.
Because it's international law that hobbles us.
There's been a huge, huge growth in that stuff.
Sort of post-1945, a lot of it gets instituted.
It's got very universal, utopian aims.
And then it gets progressively taken over by lawyers and judges, and it expands.
So in our case, one of the big problems is the European Convention on Human Rights.
Not a bad thing when they instituted it, but it's grown.
It now has a doctrine called the Living Instrument Doctrine, which basically is we can reinterpret it.
And the end result is that in many cases, you simply cannot deport people, criminals, who've committed serious crimes, including rape gang members.
You know, we have never deported a single rape gang member.
Never.
And that's in well over a decade or sort of maybe 15 years of these guys going on trial.
I think Britain has an incredibly positive future if the changes can be made.
We have an incredibly smart population.
we have a fantastic position just outside of europe between the europe and the united states we have a wonderful natural position a wonderful history wonderful set of laws of institutions of culture everything else all this need to do is clear out the rubbish clear out the regulations clear out the nonsense that is in the way and that can be done and then britain will be a rich a prosperous god willing a safe country good luck my friend thank you very much Thank you.