Search This Blog

Monday, 1 August 2011

Labour Party Paedophiles : A Child of 9 ”Was she ASKING for it?” (Labour25)

A Child of 9 ”Was she ASKING for it?” (Labour25)

A Child of 9 years old is raped and Labour Councillor William O’Rouke replies… ”Was she ASKING for it?”

Dawn ‘M’ (Labour25 hotline caller

It has come to light just how Glasgow’s Pollok Labour Council thinks of little girls who are raped by paedophiles. Labour Party paedophile ‘protector’ William O’Rouke was at the hearing of the rape of a 9 year old girl. The girl had been seduced and raped by a paedophile, and although it wasn’t put forward that the child had not been ‘harmed’, Labour Party Paedophile protector William O’Rouke commented .. ”if the child consented to it, it wasn’t rape”

When talking to a police woman William O’Rouke said… ”Was force used on the child?” to which the police woman said ”No.” William O’Rouke then replied ”So she wanted it to happen then?” and ”Was she asking for it then?” The police woman then explained to William O’Rouke that the child was not old enough to give her consent to sex. Labour Party Paedophile protector William O’Rouke then added ” You can go into any School and see girls in short skirts and along with their sexual behaviour and promiscuous nature and realise you need to lower the age of consent” ( google ‘Harriett Harman and the age of consent’ )

The Police Woman made report of what Labour Party paedophile protector Councillor William O’Rouke was saying and all hell broke loose. Another Labour Councillor Johann Lamont who made her comments on a rape case from a Councillor from another party, kept silent on her own party on this bigger Paedophile issue, as the whole sex crime episode had just gone full circle and bit her on the arse.

Labour Party paedophile protector William O’Rouke then added that because the childs mother was a prostitute, it meant that the child also knew what she was doing.. his words were ”she is not a typical innocent 9 year old girl.” Then he added.. ” she was older sexually than here age” and he explained that it was not bad for a child of a prostute mother and poor background to see that it was not a crime to ‘have’ a child of her background. Two more Labour Councillors Jim Scanlon and Jim Todd were at the meeting in which Labour Councillor William O’Rouke was ‘Ranting’… And said NOTHING !

This is disgracefull behaviour. If you are in the Labour Party you are Either a Paedophile or a Paedophile protector… and that means if you speak out aloud to protect paedophiles like William O’Rouke did… or you stay silent like Labour Party Councillors Johann Lamont, Jim Scanlon & Jim Todd..

Shame on all Four of you !

The site would personally like to thank the lady who text messaged this article to our Labour25 investigations hotline team. Please note that for privacy, and will never use a persons correct surname because of Labour Party violent activist retaliation when they are exposed as a Paedophile Party.