You can read Part 1 of this series here.
LAST week we began a three-part series on how the elite class in British society – that left-leaning group who disproportionately dominate the institutions – mislead and gaslight the rest of the country when it comes to some of the most important issues of our time.
While the members of this class talk endlessly about the need to counter ‘misinformation’, it is often they who are fully invested in spreading misinformation, especially when it comes to issues, beliefs, and events that do not support their socially liberal if not radically woke agenda.
In Part 1, we looked at the strange case of London’s Labour Mayor, Sadiq Khan, who has been pushing some rather misleading statistics about the impact of mass immigration on the UK economy, which contrary to what the new elite would have you believe is definitely not propelling us to the prosperous, sunlit uplands.
Today we turn to former BBC presenter and now podcaster Emily Maitlis who, for all the reasons I’m about to outline, has similarly morphed into a symbol of this insular and increasingly remote class – somebody who claims she is interested in truth, evidence and knowledge, except when these things happen to challenge or completely undermine her ideological worldview.
Maitlis caught my attention because of her debate with former Reform UK and now independent MP Rupert Lowe, during which she completely misrepresented the evidence on another issue that many people care a great deal about but which the elite class would rather not have to discuss, the Pakistani Muslim rape gangs.
In the heated debate, a clip of which you can watch below, a visibly irritated, angry and self-righteous Maitlis repeatedly criticises and attacks Lowe for what she clearly thinks are extreme views.
Much like the reaction of the elite class to the scandal more generally, she criticises him for drawing attention to the rape gangs. She criticises him for calling out one specific group. She criticises him for demanding a dedicated national inquiry into the issue. And she openly rejects much of what he says.
‘It is absolutely nottrue’, she says, that the vast majority of rape gang perpetrators are Pakistani Muslim, even citing a report in the Times to suggest that whites are more likely to be involved in the rape gangs than Pakistani Muslims.
She describes Lowe as ‘racist’ for talking about it, adding that Lowe, who recently asked members of the public to donate to a campaign that is trying to force a fresh inquiry on the issue, should be ‘ashamed’ for ‘making money’ out of the ‘re-exploitation’ of the victims of rape gangs.
And she repeats an argument often made by Labour MPs, suggesting Rupert Lowe and others are wasting their time calling for a dedicated inquiry because ‘there has already been one’, in reference to the inquiry that was headed by Professor Alexis Jay which concluded its work three years ago.
Before I deconstruct these points one by one, and show you why Emily Maitlis and the elite class are completely and utterly wrong on this issue, watch this clip:
YOUTUBE CLIP HERE PSE
Let’s start with Maitlis’s suggestion that white British men are more likely to be involved in organised rape gangs, that ‘there are four times, eight times, ten times as many white grooming gang suspects’.
I wasn’t surprised to hear her say this. It’s the view I encountered when I gave a talk to the similarly white, affluent, liberal and insular members of the elite class at the University of Oxford, many of whom, like Maitlis, are heavily invested in doing all they can to deny the uncomfortable reality.
Much like Lowe, for more than an hour I watched some of the most educated people in the country fall over themselves to claim that minorities have done nothing wrong and that, actually, the rape gang scandal is somehow the fault of white people.
The only problem is this is completely and utterly wrong.
And to be perfectly honest with you I think it’s outrageous that we have to keep pointing this out to supposed ‘journalists’ who are meant to be committed to pursuing the truth, not morphing into political activists who routinely prioritise their own radical ideological views over the truth.
The reality is this.
Anybody who knows anything about the rape gang scandal knows there is now a mountain of evidence which points clearly to the conclusion that everybody in the elite class would rather we all avoid and pretend is not there.
Pakistani Muslim men are consistently and disproportionately more likely to be arrested and convicted of organised rape gang activity.
Here’s what I wrote last year in this newsletter, right after I discussed the issue at Oxford where, astonishingly, I also found myself having to point out to the audience that one of the most prolific rape gangs in the country had been active in . . . Oxford.
My summary of the evidence is worth reading in full not only because we’ve welcomed a lot of new readers since then but because, clearly, lots of people in the media class are still not aware of what is actually behind the scandal. It is here.
We have some truly shocking statistics in some areas of Britain.
Like the fact that in Rochdale, one in every 280 Muslim men over the age of 16 was prosecuted for rape gang offences, in Telford it was one in every 126, and in Rotherham, the epicentre of the scandal, it was one in every 73. Think about that. One in every 73.
And nor is this the only evidence which, clearly, the producers and editors of the News Agents podcast either have not bothered to read or find too uncomfortable.
As writer Connor Tomlinson points out, in 2013 the National Crime Agency found 75 per cent of group-based child sexual exploitation offenders were Asian, while four years later the Quilliam Foundation found that of 264 people convicted for group-based child sexual exploitation since 2005, 222 of them (84 per cent) were Asian.
More recent data, obtained from Freedom of Information requests submitted to West Yorkshire Police, similarly shows that Asian and Pakistani men are disproportionately over-represented among child sexual abuse offenders in Bradford —a city where local councillors have been desperately working to block a national inquiry into the issue.
That same study also found that while non-Whites account for 26 per cent of the country’s population, they account for 55 per cent of all the suspects who have been arrested in that part of the country for child sexual exploitation offences.
In other words, they were twice as likely as their White counterparts to be arrested for these offences, which is unsurprising given – as we’ve also shown – foreign nationals from places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Eritrea, are far more likely to be arrested and convicted of sexual assault and rape, in some cases twenty times more likely.
Even the research cited by Maitlis from the Times, which she said shows whites are more likely to be involved in the rape gangs, shows no such thing. What it shows is that, relative to their share of the overall population, Whites are significantly less likely to be rape gang suspects while Pakistanis are more likely to be. Anybody with a basic understanding of statistics and evidence would have known this.
Last year, for example, even while using limited data, it found Pakistanis made up 2.7 per cent of the population but 14 per cent of alleged rape gang offenders.
It was a similar story when the UK Home Office released a report back in 2020, which other left-leaning journalists such as Pippa Crerar jumped on at the time to try to claim that whites are more likely to commit these offences. This too was deeply misleading, reflecting an attempt by journalists to gaslight the British people and impose their own ideological views on everybody else.
In a country where the vast majority of people are still white it is unsurprising to find that most sexual assaults are committed by whites. What the report found is that Asian men are three times more likely to commit organised, gang-based sexual exploitation, while even the Home Office could not hide the fact that most cases ‘mainly involved men of Pakistani ethnicity’.
Aside from ignoring this evidence, what Maitlis also ignored in her debate with Lowe is why he wants to discuss this specific group.
Routinely, as testimony from victims and perpetrators makes clear, and which any good journalist would know, the rape gang members often contrasted ‘good and pure’ Muslim girls with the ‘white slags’ and ‘white bitches’ they clearly felt justified, on religious grounds, in abusing and raping.
Members of the elite class might want to conceal the reasons and motivations that have driven some men into these gangs but the abusers and rapists themselves have often been much less shy. Some openly said in court they are ‘here to f*ck all the white girls’, while some read from the Quran during the assaults.
Ordinarily, in a society where the media class was just as invested in finding the truth as everybody else there would be a serious national discussion about this – not just about the statistics but the cultural attitudes, networks and beliefs that have been imported from elsewhere in the world and which have very clearly left a large number of Pakistani Muslim men in our country with the belief that this kind of criminality and sickening behaviour is acceptable, or even justifiable.
But nobody in the media class seems to want to talk about that. This general lack of interest in finding the truth was also reflected in Emily Maitlis dismissing Rupert Lowe’s call for a dedicated, statutory national inquiry, claiming ‘there’s already been one’ in reference to an earlier report by Alexis Jay.
Once again, anybody who knows anything about the rape gang scandal knows this earlier inquiry was completely unsatisfactory.
We now know that the rape gangs have been operating in at least 50 towns and cities. We know police officers, social workers and local councillors were involved, either by covering up the scandal or openly participating in it. And we know hundreds of thousands, maybe more than one million, children have been abused and raped since at least the 1980s, if not earlier. It is, in other words, a systemic national scandal which, in turn, demands a dedicated, national inquiry.
But this is not what the Jay inquiry was – far from it. That inquiry looked at all forms of sexual abuse and was not focused solely on the issue of the rape gangs. There was no dedicated inquiry. It included only one rape gang victim as a core participant. Nor did it look at areas that are known to have been affected by the rape gangs; in fact it mentions Rotherham only once in the entire report. Many areas where the rape gangs have been, and still are, active have escaped scrutiny.
It is, in short, a completely unacceptable state of affairs. Most journalists should know it is completely unacceptable and be demanding to know the truth, much as they demanded to know the truth about Grenfell, Windrush, George Floyd and more.
Imagine how legacy media and left-leaning commentators in this country – Emily Maitlis, Rory Stewart, Alastair Campbell, Jon Sopel and the like – would react were it revealed that organised gangs of white men had been driving into Muslim areas, plying Muslim girls with alcohol and heroin, abusing and gang-raping them, and trafficking them across the country precisely because they are Asian and Muslim? Can you imagine the collective outrage that would ensue – the sheer volume of calls for a major inquiry, for statues, monuments, hashtags, for the truth?
Furthermore, the way in which radical progressives such as Maitlis seek to downplay the rape gang scandal and deflect attention on to a ‘racist’ right wing is precisely why this utterly horrific scandal was covered up for decades.
In denouncing Rupert Lowe as ‘racist’, Maitlis is exhibiting the very reaction that led to the mass rape of women and girls in this country being brushed under the carpet for decades, with councillors, social workers, police officers, national politicians and more refusing to look too hard into the shadows in case they too were branded ‘racist’ by a prevailing culture and strictly enforced taboos that the likes of Maitlis, the media class, the BBC and the new elite have actively shaped and policed.
Maitlis is not only reflecting how the elite class think but is also demonstrating that she has very clearly learned nothing from the few local reports into the rape gangs scandal that have been released. Or maybe she hasn’t even bothered to read them. Because if she had she would know that her attitude is exactly what enabled the scandal to take root and spread like wildfire.
The reason the likes of Maitlis, Keir Starmer, Yvette Cooper and other ‘progressives’ struggle so much with this scandal is precisely because it turns their worldview – ‘minorities are good, majorities are bad’ –on its head.
This is the core reflex at the heart of radical progressivism: the idea that all racial, ethnic and sexual minorities are being discriminated against, persecuted, and suffering emotional ‘harm’, and so must consistently be protected from a suspicious, dangerous, threatening white majority — from people like Rupert Lowe.
For Maitlis, the idea that Lowe might want to keep searching for the truth by holding a dedicated inquiry is deeply uncomfortable, while the fact 76 per cent of British people also want such an inquiry is clearly unknown to her, reflecting just how adrift both she and much of the surrounding media class are from the rest of the country.
This is why, rather than address the troubling truth, many progressives find it easier and more politically palatable to talk about the dangers posed by Tommy Robinson or Rupert Lowe than the dangers posed to white working-class children by organised gangs of Pakistani Muslims who hate those children precisely because they are white and non-Muslim.
Make no mistake: this sickening attitude remains firmly entrenched today. It’s held not only by Maitlis and co but has been voiced by Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who recently accused all those people who voice concern about the scandal of ‘jumping on a bandwagon of the far right’, and Labour MP and Leader of the House of Commons Lucy Powell, who dismissed people who talk about it as blowing ‘a little trumpet’ and engaging in a ‘dog-whistle’.
Can you imagine a world in which a front-line politician said the equivalent about somebody like George Floyd or Stephen Lawrence and remained in post? And even now, ask yourself how many BBC Verify, BBC Newsnight or Rest is Politics episodes have you heard that accept, rather than refute, the facts of this scandal?
It was only when Elon Musk, at the beginning of this year, drew worldwide attention to them that the rape gangs finally became unavoidable and the establishment was once again forced to address a topic they would rather not be talking about at all.
The fact of the matter is that had media organisations in this country been doing their job, had so-called journalists such as Emily Maitlis, who used to have us believe they cared about the truth, been doing what they are supposed to do by pursuing the truth no matter where it leads, the British people would never have needed Elon Musk to revive interest in the scandal at all.
And nor, by the way, would they now need the likes of Rupert Lowe, Nigel Farage and other renegade voices still to be demanding a fresh national inquiry so we can figure out how the mass rape of our children was allowed to go on for so long.
And if Maitlis & Co had been doing their job properly when they had the chance, who knows how many of those poor girls would have been saved and not had their lives ruined by the refusal of the elite class in this country to pursue the one thing its members now routinely lecture the rest of us about: the truth.
This article appeared in Matt Goodwin on May 27, 2025, and is republished by kind permission.
