Every @UKLabour MP that voted against an inquiry should hang their heads in shame, this should have been led by government @Keir_Starmer @jessphillips @NatalieFleetMP you are a disgrace

Know who they are. Every MP on this thread has betrayed women’s rights. I invite one and all to sue me if they think I’m wrong.

139 MPs want this man to use women’s toilets. Their names are linked in next post.

Liz Kendall bought a baby boy via surrogacy when she was 51 years old, sorry if I’m not interested in her opinion about child mental health.

Please watch this 2 minute video about Burnham. I campaigned for many years on behalf of child abuse survivors and I can tell you every word in this is true.

When I first went online two decades ago we were told do NOT give away any personal details. Protect yourself. Now we will have to give away all details to gain any online access. How did this happen?

THREAD of previous research, opposition and which MPs voted For and Against/ The unsupported assisted dying bill is BACK..... It puts vulnerable people at risk, fails on safeguards, and distracts from fixing broken palliative care. Tell your MP loud and clear: We do NOT want this. Copy the letter in this post (add your own personal reasons) and send it TODAY. Every constituent who speaks up makes it harder for them to ignore us.

Andy Burnham And The Truth About Britain's Biggest Rape Gang Investigations Yesterday, I shared Part 1 of my deep dive into @AndyBurnhamGM and his role in the cover up of the Pakistani Rape Gangs. Today, I bring you Part 2. Read it yourself and you will come to understand why it is that Burnham has been running away from meeting with me. Part 2: What Burnham Should Have Done The BBC documentary The Betrayed Girls aired in July 2017. Burnham had been Mayor since May. He had been in post for two months when the programme confronted the country with what had been happening to children in Greater Manchester. Maggie Oliver was on that documentary. The evidence was there. What he should have done was stand up and demand a statutory public inquiry. He could have said he did not have the powers to get to the truth. He could have said the government must come in, must compel the evidence, that he would not allow this to be managed at local level by the organisations responsible for the failure. He knew he did not have the powers to get to the truth. Instead, he spent seven years commissioning a series of toothless, worthless processes, specifically in Oldham. Called Assurance Reviews, Burnham’s interventions could not compel a single witness, could not compel a single document, could not place anyone under oath, and could not name a single person responsible for the cover-up. Those processes, across four separate publications failed to name a single person responsible. Burnham failed to hold a single person to account. Not one police officer was exposed, not one politician was identified, not one council official who had looked the other way while children were being raped was named. Worse than this, the people summoned could simply ignore the summons. The vast majority did. Seven years. Not one person held to account. Yet Burnham celebrates it as an achievement. He uses the word BIGGEST to describe what he did. _________ The Reviews Were Built to Fail The Oldham Assurance Review was requested by Oldham Council after their attempt to facilitate their own review collapsed. Shaun Fielding, then Oldham Council leader, ran to Andy Burnham to help. Let that settle. The body under scrutiny asked for its own review and was then allowed to help write the terms of reference under which it would be investigated. Greater Manchester Police also sent amendments to the terms of reference. Read that again. The police force whose decisions regarding the rape gangs were being examined amended the document that defined what would and would not be examined. The council, the police, and the politicians all shaped the scope of what was supposed to hold them to account. The subjects of the review then sat on the steering group that oversaw it. GMCA lawyers shaped the drafting of the review itself. They delayed publication when Oldham Council warned that certain sections, their words, a direct quote from the correspondence, “could open Oldham Council, GMCA and the review team to legal action.“ The institution under scrutiny threatened legal action to sanitise the document examining its conduct, and it worked. The terms of reference excluded organised crime. We now know these were not groups of men who happened to know each other. They were organised crime networks dealing drugs, trafficking children, operating across town lines and across years. Excluded. Mosque safeguarding was excluded. The men came from communities with no safeguarding architecture, where the men running the mosques and the community centres were often the same men running the political operations that delivered votes to Labour. Excluded. Postal vote fraud was excluded. The same network that operated the abuse also operated the vote harvesting. Excluded. Schools were excluded entirely. Survivors of the Oldham rape gangs have confirmed to me that they were dragged into cars outside school gates. School staff have told me confidentially that they went to retrieve children from rape dens and brought them back in the next morning, from flats with nothing in them but mattresses. The places where children were taken to be gang raped were outside the scope of the review. Excluded. The review covered only the years 2011 to 2014. Years of abuse before 2011, excluded. Years after 2014, excluded. Within that limited window, every single case it examined confirmed what I had been saying for years. Every child it looked at had been a victim of the Pakistani rape gangs. Every single one. The review confirmed taxi drivers were still being licensed despite evidence they had sexually assaulted children in their vehicles. No one could explain why this had been allowed to take place. Burnham’s expert team never stopped to ask. Children’s homes were confirmed to have functioned as child brothels. Instead of being appalled and demanding answers from those involved, the report described the Council’s actions as placing all the children at risk of gang rape in a home near the traffickers and rapists as ‘innovative‘. Despite everything, they were forced to admit that Shabir Ahmed, the ringleader of the Rochdale gang, had worked for a council body that gave him access to children. They failed to follow the trail to where and how many children he accessed. Confirming he was a Labour Party member, the review found nine separate occasions on which he should have been arrested and was not. Nobody was asked to explain why. Selective Note Taking When it came to taking testimony, the interviewees received questions in advance. They gave unsworn answers. They were then permitted to amend their own records before those records entered the file. The answers they gave were taken in private by Newsam and Ridgway without tape recorders. They made selective notes of what they considered important. Then GMCA lawyers could intervene in the records afterwards. In the small print of the published report, there is a disclaimer. The review team accepts no responsibility for the accuracy of the information provided to it. They could not compel a single witness to attend. Could not compel a single document to be produced. Placed no one under oath. Then published a disclaimer stating they take no position on whether anything they were told was true. This is what Burnham called an investigation. Apparently, it was the biggest Britain had ever seen. Part 3 will follow. _________ I’m Raja Miah MBE. For seven years, I led a campaign that exposed how senior Labour politicians helped protect Pakistani rape gangs. The people of my town EXPOSED ANDY BURNHAM and helped force the national inquiry. You won’t see me on the BBC. You won’t read my work in the legacy press. That’s not an accident. I take this to a place from where there is no coming back. All of my work is 100% free. There are no paywalls to access any of my content. I just ask those that can afford to do so to support me. Either with a subscription to my newsletter or by a one off contribution and buying me a coffee using one of these links. Sign up to my newsletter here; redwallandtherabble.co.uk Buy me a coffee here; BuyMeACoffee.com/recusantnin… paypal.me/RecusantNine I represent no political party. I have no side other than the survivors and the communities left abandoned by a political elite. I bring a type of campaigning unique in this space. This is why those in power have desperately tried to silence me. With the ongoing mainstream media blacklist of my voice, I need your help. Please, if you can, share, subscribe and support the work. Raja Miah MBE

PLEASE SHARE RT🚨 Just when you think you seen them all. Another police brutality video coming to light of 3 male police officers beating a man head to toe including his face with cuffs. The bastards are lawless thugs @RestoreBritain @RestoreNetwork_ #RestoreBritain #RupertLowe #England #EnglishPride #Patriot #BritishValues #SaveBritain #ProudToBeEnglish #BritishHeritage #MakeBritainGreat #VoiceOfThePeople #UnitedKingdom

Keir Starmer, the man who failed to prosecute Jimmy Saville, the man who failed to prosecute Pakistani Muslim men grooming and raping and murdering our young girls, is now somehow going to protect them by denying them access to social media. It's a joke.

My 17-year-old daughter: “I’m confused. We’ve always been taught not to share personal information or anything that identifies us online because it isn’t safe. Now they want us to do exactly that to access social media.”

Astonishing statement from a politician who did what he did with the cover up of the Pakistani Rape Gangs and the industrial scale rape and trafficking of little White girls from across Greater Manchester and beyond.

She's the mother. If her kid is on social media all the time instead of spending "quality time" doing other things, that's on HER.

Maybe instead of banning children from using social media we should ban parents from having their eyes stuck like glue to their phones when they’re out with their kids!?

👇As a mum of 3 under 16s I take responsibility for my children. They know their boundaries - in real life and online. The 15 year old uses social media to find jobs, learn more about her hobby / future career, contact her friends and do schoolwork. The 6 and 8 year old do not, because we have never outsourced parenting to a screen. What “keeps me up at night” is that we have no idea how many people are in the country let alone who they are. That my girls’ right to privacy has been sacrificed on the altar of trans rights. That millions of people don’t have jobs. That youth unemployment is rocketing. That my local high street is dying and my local pub has shut down. That the cost of my food shop goes up - seemingly every week. That our defence is not fit for purpose. Etc.

I am going to say this bluntly You are a FAILURE as parents if you can't keep you child off social media yourself YOU bought them the phone YOU can confiscate it during homework YOU are the parent, NOT Keir Starmer Authoritarian ban for your "convenience" is not the answer

BBC News spreading misinformation live on air. The reporter asked the school children to raise their hands if they welcome the social media ban for under-16s. None of them do. The reporter then says it’s “most” of them that are disappointed. No all of them are.

Have Labour thought this through even a little bit? They are going to ban every 13-16 year old from Youtube, causing every single one of them to hate this Government, and then allow all of them to vote in 3 years time. They are just so bad at politics.

🚨 NEW: Bluesky will be included in the UK's social media ban for under-16s as it is "user to user"