J retweeted
FOR 20 YEARS LITTLE WHITE GIRLS WERE GANGED RAPED IN OLDHAM BY PAKISTANI MEN. THE COUNCIL PUT THE GIRLS MOST AT RISK UNDER ONE ROOF WHILST THE MEN DROVE WAITING FOR THEM TO COME OUT.
Not satisfied with opening a child brothel, the council gave a taxi licence to a man who had abducted and sexually assaulted a 13-year-old.
Meanwhile, the police left the leader of the Rochdale rape gang to roam free whilst the council continued to pay him and continued allowing him access to children.
Andy Burnham's Assurance Review recorded all of it and told Oldham there had been no cover-up. His Labour Party colleagues used his review to attempt to close down the campaign for a statutory inquiry.
Between 2019 to January 2025 Burnham stood by a review that could not compel a witness, had not interviewed a single survivor, and had not even seen the police files. He described the sham as 'thorough'.
Only under extraordinary public pressure did he back an inquiry with the power his own review never had. Even then, his support was only for something 'limited'.
In June 2025, six years after we began our campaign, the government conceded the National Statutory Inquiry. Oldham was the first town named for it.
The National Inquiry has the power to compel Prime Minister Andy Burnham. It must use it and force him to testify. Anything less than this is a continuation of the cover up.
Andy Burnham called his review 'thorough'. His own police force had hidden its files from it, and he knew that when he said it. He must stand in front of the National Inquiry and explain why.
He must say who approved Operation Hexagon, and why a police force under his authority was sent after the people exposing the rape of children instead of the men raping them.
He must tell the people of this country why his reviewers did not contact or interview a single survivor of Oldham's rape gangs. A review of the gang rape of children in a town was published without one of those children being asked what happened to her.
And above all, he must answer why he fought a statutory inquiry for six years, and only backed one when he had no choice left.
Left to their own devices, Burnham will be allowed to hide away from what he did. Which is why it is left to us. We must not stop until the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is forced to sit in that witness chair and testify for what he did.
Raja Miah MBE
_________
You know what we are up against. The mainstream media will not touch my work. Institutions I investigate do not volunteer their records. Politicians do not suddenly decide to hold themselves to account.
And yet, despite every attempt to stop us, we forced the national inquiry. We did that because enough ordinary people refused to go away.
But getting the inquiry was never the end of this campaign. In many ways it was only the beginning. Now we have to watch where it goes, what it investigates, which places it avoids, which witnesses it calls, which records it obtains and whether the same institutions that failed these children are allowed to control the story again.
Nobody else is going to do that work for us. And I cannot do it indefinitely working on my own. That is why I keep talking about 50,000 committed subscribers.
It is not a vanity number. I did not pluck it out of the air. With fifty thousand people with me means when we uncover something important, it does not depend on a newspaper editor, a television producer or an algorithm deciding whether you are allowed to see it.
It gives us reach they cannot easily shut down.
But there is another reason. I need to build a proper backroom operation around this work. At the moment I am investigating, researching, writing, publishing, producing the videos, running the newsletter, dealing with the technology and then starting again. It is unsustainable.
I need people behind me who can take care of the technical and production work so that I can spend my time doing the thing I do best. That is why we have been pushing so hard for new paid subscribers.
🔴 SIGN UP HERE
👉 redwallandtherabble.co.uk
If you read my work and want it to continue, I need your help. Sign up for free. There are no paywalls to access any of my work. If you can afford the £3 a month or £30 for the year, please become a paid subscriber.
We forced the inquiry. Now we need the numbers to make sure they cannot control what happens next. Unfortunately, we are reaching the end of the road where I can continue working this way.
The paid subscriptions have stalled. Worse, tens of thousands of people are now reading these articles without even joining the free mailing list. The audience is growing, but the number of people actually standing behind the work is not growing with it.
Over a million people engaged in my content this week. Only a small fraction followed up with a subscription to my newsletter This is becoming impossible to sustain.
🔴 SIGN UP HERE
👉 redwallandtherabble.co.uk
Raja Miah MBE
J retweeted
That old hoodie has survived a divorce, two dogs and a house move. Let it retire. The BÆRSkin Hoodie 5.0 is 340gsm anti-pill MicroFleece warm to 30°F, with 12 pockets. Buy 2 Hoodies, Get 1 Rainjacket Free. Shop now →
J retweeted
OMAR FALLOUT: Congresswoman Ilhan Omar comes out of hiding for her first televised interview since the raid on her DC home. She is currently facing two federal investigations.
@BillMelugin_ reports.
J retweeted
🚨 EU PARLIAMENT ERUPTS 🚨
🇩🇪 A German MEP warns Canada could become a “living hell.”
📄 We obtained the draft statement circulated by Canada.
🇨🇦 Europe held a dedicated debate. Where’s ours?
What is Carney negotiating on Canadians’ behalf?
Watch below 👇
J retweeted
It’s not whether Keir Starmer will answer the questions. It’s whether the right questions will be asked.
Keir Starmer has now been named as a core participant in the statutory grooming gangs inquiry. How could he not be? He was Director of Public Prosecutions between 2008 and 2013, and he was Prime Minister when Labour voted against the proposed national inquiry in January 2025. Two positions of considerable authority, two periods of responsibility and a great many questions that deserve answers.
People are asking whether Starmer will have to give evidence. The inquiry has statutory powers to compel witnesses and documents. But being a core participant does not, in itself, mean someone has been compelled to testify. For me, the more important question is what he will actually be asked.
The failures surrounding grooming gangs did not begin with Starmer, nor do I believe they end with him. I would go much further back, to the Home Office under David Blunkett, and examine the decisions, policies and institutional culture that allowed the exploitation of children to continue. I want to know who knew what, when they knew it, what instructions were issued and why warnings from victims, whistleblowers and professionals were repeatedly ignored.
We have heard testimony from people connected to Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford and Oldham. We have heard allegations that concerns about racism influenced institutional responses, that children were treated as making lifestyle choices and that professionals were discouraged from confronting uncomfortable truths. These allegations require proper examination, not dismissal or political point-scoring.
I also want the inquiry to examine the alleged correspondence and guidance circulating between central government, police leadership and local authorities. If documents existed, where are they? Who authorised them? What did they say? And if instructions were given to minimise or suppress concerns, who gave those instructions?
The political dimension cannot be ignored either. Did electoral considerations influence decisions? Were politicians worried about alienating particular communities? Did party loyalty ever take precedence over safeguarding children? Those questions should be asked without fear or favour, and the answers should be established through evidence.
I have chosen not to become a core participant myself. I have serious reservations about confidentiality obligations and restrictions that could affect my ability to speak publicly. I want to remain free to discuss the wider issues, challenge institutions and continue advocating for survivors, while respecting the law and protecting confidential information.
This inquiry must not become another exercise in institutional self-preservation. It must follow the evidence wherever it leads, whether that means the Home Office, police forces, local councils, senior civil servants or politicians of any party. The victims have waited long enough, and they deserve more than carefully rehearsed political answers.
It’s not whether Keir Starmer will answer the questions. It’s whether the right questions will be asked.
J retweeted
Ilhan Omar says she has to move out of her D.C. apartment.
She told MS NOW that threats came after federal agents searched her home in an immigration fraud probe and her address went public.
Threats against anyone are wrong. Period.
But remember this.
President Trump took a bullet in Butler and stood up shouting fight.
He did not move. He did not run.
J retweeted
“80% reduction in net migration shows that Labour's plan is working.”
Says, Andy Burnham.
Do you agree?
J retweeted
Emmanuel Macron says that France has not been invaded by Muslims or Islamists and that the riots in France are AI-generated. That 2,500 fires have been set, 6,000 cars have been destroyed, and 200 stores have been looted was therefore AI.
J retweeted
Replying to @David__Osland
🔴KEMI BADENOCH: Housing Benefit
'Taxpayers foot the £2,700 a month rent on @KemiBadenoch's six-bedroom farmhouse in Essex.
Then she goes on telly and argues that taxpayers shouldn't subsidise other people's rent.'
- @David__Osland
J retweeted
Taxpayers foot the £2,700 a month rent on Kemi Badenoch's six-bedroom farmhouse in Essex. Then she goes on telly and argues that taxpayers shouldn't subsidise other people's rent.
J retweeted
Macron speaking earlier today to reporters in Doha, Qatar, and claiming "France was not invaded by hordes of muslim immigrants. Those images are false, it's AI and foreign manipulation."
The man thinks we’re fucking daft
Barbra Streisand says she has a large platform and people listen to her. She says it's HER DUTY to tell people how horrible Trump is.🙄
👇👇👇
“As someone fortunate to have a platform larger than most, I believe it is both my right and my duty to speak up when I see injustice in the world. We can’t have a president who doesn’t respect our Constitution.”
J retweeted
Mahmood Warns She Might Walk Out Of The Government Entirely —
Do You Support Her Decision? 🇬🇧
J retweeted
Replying to @leckston
This whole Chagos debacle is stinks of political establishment wrongdoing and skulduggery with a British territory and British taxpayers money being used as a vehicle for their idealogical bigotry, hate of Country and possible personal gain. Every penny spent to date by the British Government must be accounted for and any sniff of fraud punished. No one is above the law, including Labour and their apparatchiks.
J retweeted
Replying to @leckston
He has been pushing this Dodgy Deal for 13 yrs along with Starmer, Hermer and Mandelson. None of who were vetted, except possibly Starmer. 😤😤😤
J retweeted
ITV spent a year undercover inside Reform UK. Holding a political party to account is fair enough, that’s what journalism is supposed to do.
But if Reform’s claims are right and a forged passport to get inside HQ, paid to canvass in wards they narrowly lost, lying to a veteran then this isn’t scrutiny. It’s deception and interference.
If they’re found guilty, they deserve the full force of the law and proper sanctions.
Targeting Reform because it’s Reform is disgraceful. Accountability cuts both ways.



























