UK government’s booklet for “asylum seekers” is an admission that whistle-blowers were right all along
RHODA WILSON
On Wednesday, the UK Home Office published a booklet to be handed out to “asylum seekers,” educating them that rape is a crime in the UK.
This booklet serves as an admission that whistle-blowers and others persecuted by the state for speaking out about crimes committed by people from specific cultures or ethnic groups are not racist but have been speaking the truth; but a truth the Government doesn’t want you to know.
“The British government has decided that adults arriving in this country require dedicated instruction that women are equal, that sex requires consent, and that sex with a child is a crime,” Raja Miah wrote.
He was referring to the booklet published on Wednesday by the UK Home Office to educate “asylum seekers” about UK laws and customs that may differ from those in their home countries.
Read more: Home Office hands out pamphlet to educate “asylum seekers” that rape is a crime in the UK
“The booklet covers gender equality, domestic abuse, sex and consent, and respect in public. One poster lists what you must never do to a child, including sexual contact with a child under 16. Another explains that in the UK both people must say yes to sex, and that it is still rape if you are married to the person,” Miah explained.
The publishing of the booklet follows a spate of reported sexual offences committed by migrants where the offenders claimed they did not understand UK law. “That rationale is not printed in the booklet itself. The Home Office wrote down the instruction and left out the reason why they published it,” Miah said
The unsaid reasoning behind the booklet is not hard to find, he added. “It is in the court records of the last twelve months, and in the Home Office’s own filing cabinet. Let me help remind you.”
The Unsaid Reasons Why “Asylum Seekers” Are Being Educated About Sex Crimes
By Raja Miah, 20 August 2026
Table of Contents
The Cases The Posters Now Address
The booklet’s Respect in Public section instructs readers never to make sexual comments to someone even as a compliment, never to whistle or make kissing noises, never to follow someone or block their path.
1. In September 2025, Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, an Ethiopian asylum seeker housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping, was convicted at Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court of five offences. Two counts of sexual assault, one of attempted sexual assault, one of inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity and one of harassment without violence.
Days after arriving by small boat, he told two teenage girls he wanted a baby with each of them, tried to kiss them and put his hand on one girl’s thigh. He sexually assaulted a woman by putting his hand on her leg and telling her she was pretty. He received twelve months, the maximum a magistrates’ court can give, was mistakenly released from HMP Chelmsford a month into it, and was deported to Ethiopia after a two-day manhunt. His charge sheet reads back the poster’s prohibition list almost line by line.
The booklet’s Sex and Consent section states that anyone under 16 is a child and cannot legally agree to sex, and that there are no exceptions to this rule.
2. This month, at Nottingham Crown Court, Abdul Khan was sentenced to nine years and six months for two counts of rape of a 13-year-old girl, sexual activity with a child, sexual communication with a child, meeting a child following grooming and perverting the course of justice.
Khan arrived in the back of a lorry in 2015 and gave a date of birth of 26 December 2004 in his asylum application. He was already serving 23 months for sexual communication with another child.
3. On 27 March 2026, at Warwick Crown Court, Ahmad Mulakhil was sentenced to 15 years with a further year on licence for the abduction, rape and sexual assault of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton. A jury convicted him of child abduction, rape, two counts of sexual assault and taking an indecent video of his victim, and cleared him of a second count of rape. He had admitted a further rape charge before trial.
He arrived by small boat four months before the attack. His victim said he laughed while attacking her. His co-defendant, Mohammad Kabir, was acquitted of all charges, and no finding stands against him.
4. At the same court, on 8 December 2025, two 17-year-old Afghan asylum seekers, Jan Jahanzeb and Israr Niazal, were detained for ten years and eight months and nine years and ten months respectively for having admitted the rape of a 15-year-old girl in Leamington Spa. They were named after the judge lifted a reporting restriction.
Those cases collide with the government’s premise. The booklet exists, we are told, because convicted men claimed not to understand UK law.
But Khan did not misunderstand the age of consent. He posed as a 14-year-old boy on Snapchat, because he understood exactly which age would open the door. When arrested, he did not plead confusion. He denied ever meeting the girl until DNA evidence proved he had, and picked up a conviction for perverting the course of justice on the way.
Mulakhil is the man who actually ran the defence the booklet anticipates. He told the jury he believed the girl when she said she was 19. Passing sentence, Judge Kristina Montgomery KC told him the claim was an obvious lie and that the jury’s verdict left no doubt he knew she was under 16.
A man who misunderstands the law explains himself. A man who understands it conceals himself. These are files of concealment, not misunderstanding, and the government has answered them with a leaflet about misunderstanding.
The domestic abuse and gender equality sections need no court reports at all, because the Home Office has been processing this behaviour inside its own estate for years. Since 16 July 2019, the department has maintained standing guidance for its staff titled ‘Domestic Abuse: Responding to Reports of Domestic Abuse from Asylum Seekers’.
It was revised as recently as November 2024. Its revisions added a referral checklist for staff. Its provisions include rehousing a woman who is a dependant on her abuser’s asylum support claim and relocating the perpetrator within the asylum estate. Instructions of that specificity are written for practice rather than possibility. The paperwork is the caseload.
And alongside the behaviour booklet, on the same day, the Home Office published a companion leaflet titled ‘Domestic Abuse, Know Your Rights: Support for Asylum Seekers’.
One document instructs the husband, the other shows his wife the way out, and the department printed both sides of the same front door.
The Booklet They Already Had
Since 2 October 2019, the Home Office has issued Rights and Expectations in the UK, a 42-page guide for asylum seekers covering British culture, values, law, health and safety, produced in eleven languages including Urdu, Pashto, Punjabi, Farsi, Kurdish and Arabic.
It is still live on gov.uk today. The Home Office’s own accommodation guidance still tells asylum seekers they should receive a copy.
So, this week’s document is not the state discovering induction material. It is the state judging that 42-pages on British law and culture were not enough, and that the gap requiring a dedicated publication was consent, rape, domestic abuse and sex with children.
Something happened between 2019 and 2026 to persuade the Home Office that a general guide to British law, culture and expectations was no longer sufficient. It has not told us what.
The Sentence The State Once Punished
The booklet opens by telling its readers that “laws and customs here may be different from your home country.”
Read that sentence against the last twenty years.
Connecting sexual offending to culture and country of origin was the accusation that isolated Ann Cryer inside her own party by 2003 and put a police panic alarm in her home.
It was the fear that led the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire to ask Channel 4 to postpone ‘Edge of the City’ ahead of the 2004 elections.
It was the climate in which Sara Rowbotham’s 103 referrals and 181 alerts to police and social services went nowhere, and in which Operation Augusta, with 97 potential persons of interest and at least 57 potential victims identified, was closed in 2005 because, in the assurance review’s own finding, senior officers removed resources rather than knowing all lines of inquiry were exhausted.
The British state now begins its own publication from the proposition its institutions spent twenty years treating as the offence.
- It addresses a defined population.
- It anticipates that their home customs may differ from British law.
- And it then specifies the crimes it is worried about.
Its own contents list runs gender equality, domestic abuse, sex and consent. What was racist in 2003 is Home Office copy in 2026.
The booklet also chooses its verbs carefully. For controlling a woman, for domestic abuse, for taking images without consent, the warning is that it “could” affect your asylum claim. For rape, and for sex with a child under 16, the wording changes to “will.”
The word “will” appears twice in the booklet’s warnings. Both times the offence is sexual.
The Children Never Got A Poster
The booklet’s kindest pages are written for victims. It promises anyone who has suffered sexual abuse that support is available and that they will be treated with respect and dignity. Its help pages list thirteen helpline numbers, from Rape Crisis to the Samaritans, with a free interpreter service behind them. Three separate times it assures the reader that reporting a crime will not harm their asylum claim.
The girls [victims] in the case files received the opposite of every one of those sentences.
Where the booklet promises dignity, the files recorded blame. The girls Sara Rowbotham’s team referred were written up as making lifestyle choices. Where the booklet promises that help is a phone call away, the calls in Rochdale travelled the other direction: 181 alerts and 103 referrals from the professionals to the state and moved nothing.
Where the booklet promises that reporting carries no cost, Victoria Agoglia, in the care of Manchester City Council and known to be at risk of sexual exploitation, reported being injected with heroin by an older man. She was fifteen when she died, and what the investigation into her death forced open was closed with its lines of inquiry “unexhausted.”
The girls [victims] were recorded as the problem, while the arriving adults are addressed as people requiring explanation and help.
The Receiving Towns Get Nothing
The Home Office has now demonstrated what it can produce when it decides prevention matters. Nine pages, designed, translated and distributed, inside a government one month old. Alongside the booklet, it published an entire gov.uk collection titled ‘Resources for Asylum Seekers in the UK’. Every document in that collection is addressed to the asylum seeker. Not one is addressed to the communities that receive him.
This is no longer an abstract gap. The Burnham government is dispersing asylum accommodation across the country, instructing wealthier areas to take their share.
Kebatu offended within days of reaching Epping. Mulakhil offended within four months of reaching Nuneaton. Neither town was told the risks these men potentially posed before they arrived.
- There was no briefing for the school a mile from the accommodation.
- There was no material for parents to help keep their children safe.
- There was no published safeguarding assessment for a receiving council to see.
The state has proven it knows how to write prevention. It wrote it for one side of the encounter, yet dispersed the other side unprepared.
A Leaflet Is What Remains When Enforcement Is Ruled Out
The booklet arrived in the same month Abdul Khan was sentenced, in the same month the National Grooming Gangs Inquiry marked fourteen months of administrative outputs, with the men the government is deporting placed beyond the reach of its powers to compel testimony and the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) strand excluded from its Terms of Reference, and thirty days into the Burnham government, which now owns both the document and the question it raises.
Kebatu offended within days of arrival. Mulakhil within four months. The booklet proposes to reach such men in the window between the beach and the offence, with a 9-page booklet helpfully translated into their language.
The Version the State Can No Longer Tell
For twenty years there was a version of events the state could live inside. In that version, there was no pattern, only crimes. [They claimed that] the men who raped children in Rochdale and Rotherham and Oldham were individuals; their origins were incidental and anyone who connected the offending to culture or country was not describing reality but manufacturing hatred. That version had teeth. It isolated a Member of Parliament (“MP”), postponed a film, buried 181 alerts, and closed a live investigation with the lines of inquiry still open. It held for two decades because the state enforced it.
On 19 August 2026, the state stopped enforcing it. A booklet that tells a defined population of arriving men that laws and customs here may be different from their home country, and then walks them through consent, the age of a child and the equality of women, is not written by a government that believes origin is incidental. It is written by a government that has conceded the pattern and is now managing it. There is no reading of those 9 pages that restores the old version. The Home Office cannot hand this document to arriving men while maintaining that the people who said some men needed telling were inventing the connection.
So, the confession stands – and it cannot be unpublished. Every future denial now has to argue with a Home Office document. Every future smear of a whistle-blower now has to explain why the government printed what the whistle-blower said. The children got case files that blamed them. The towns got nothing. The men got a booklet – and the country got the truth by accident, set in a government typeface with a crest in the corner and a helpline on the back page.
They typeset the admission. And we forced them to do it.
About the Author
Raja Miah is a second-generation British Bangladeshi Muslim who is internationally recognised as an expert in tackling extremism, safeguarding children and strengthening communities. He has worked directly with world leaders, including multiple UK Prime Ministers and Secretaries of State.
For the last seven years, he has been exposing how UK politicians have protected the Pakistani (Muslim) rape gangs. He publishes articles on his Substack page, ‘The Forsaken’, and on his websites, ‘Red Wall & the Rabble’ and ‘Recusant Nine’. You can also follow him on YouTube HERE, Twitter (now X) HERE and Facebook HERE.
See Related Article Below
Would You Mind Awfully, If It’s Not Too Much Trouble of Course, Not Raping Our Children?
Few things sum up the inadequacy and stupidity of the British State better than this.
JUPPLANDIA
Yesterday saw one of those days where different stories converged simultaneously to give the clearest possible picture of Modern Britain under globalist progressive rule.
We had two significant court cases reported in the media.
The first was a case involving these men:
Khan Agah, 19, and Noorullah Ahmdzai, 26, two Afghani asylum seekers, encountered a romantic scene while walking through Barking Park on the 16th of August 2025. They saw a man and a woman reclining on the grass.
With touching innocence, the two people they encountered were stargazing on a romantic date. The man had a guitar, and was serenading the woman. It’s hard to think of a more civilised method of courtship than this.
Unfortunately, First World romance had the misfortune of encountering Third World savagery.
In the Third World, there may be instances of men serenading women. There may even be instances of stargazing first dates, although it seems quite unlikely. And especially unlikely in Afghanistan, where it is considered perfectly normal to rape not just women and girls, but little boys too.
The rape of children is so culturally normalised and condoned in Afghanistan, both through the boy-rape practise of bacha bazi and through Islamic instruction on forced child marriage, women and children being the possessions of fathers and husbands, and Koranic instructions on sexual slavery, that the Taliban formalised the whole thing in their legal code.
Decree Number 18 of the Afghan Criminal Procedural Regulations “legitimizes child marriages by allowing fathers to arrange unions for minors and treating a girl’s silence after puberty as consent”. The Regulations also explicitly recognise slavery as legal. Impoverished families frequently sell their children into sexual slavery while Afghani society as a whole accepts raping these children as perfectly normal, the sort of thing wealthier men acquire as an enjoyable luxury in the same way a western man might decide to purchase a sports car. Slave markets are common, and Afghan men discuss their salivating anticipation of purchasing child sets slaves online in a completely shameless fashion.
Khan Agah and Noorullah Ahmdzai knew exactly how to react, according to Afghani cultural practices, when encountering the star gazing couple. A woman in a park at night was quite clearly a whore who wanted sex with anyone. Just to be on the safe side though, the two men decided that one would hold a knife to the throat of the man while the other raped the woman. This is what they proceeded to do, in a manner completely natural and unremarkable to their cultural heritage.
The second case being heard in court and reported on yesterday was fairly similar. In that case a fourteen year old girl made the mistake of deciding to travel on a train from Kent to London. Her reward for this dangerous activity was to be repeatedly raped on the journey by two Afghan migrants who happened to find her alone in an otherwise empty carriage. The Inner London Crown Court heard how Baryalai Rahimi, 25, faces three rape charges and other sexual offences, while Mirebadurahman Sadat, 29, is charged with assault by penetration and causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
It is of course true, as most of the British middle class Establishment would rush to interject, that there are Afghans who aren’t rapists. It is equally true that there are white British men who are rapists. What such people won’t acknowledge however is that Afghan culture sees child rape as normal and a perk of wealth or power, while British culture sees child rape as horrific, evil and disgusting. This is quite a significant distinction, and it is reflected in the likelihood of an Afghan being a child repost compared to a White British man being a child rapist.
The Afghan migrant or asylum seeker is therefore many, many times more likely to rape women and children than a British by birth, ethnicity and culture man is.
This is an irrefutable fact. It’s an obvious and glaring fact if you actually acknowledge what cultural lessons and practices are taught in Afghanistan (just as it would be obvious with regard to Pakistani men who committed the vast bulk of the gang rapes covering at least 250,000 white victims over a 30-40 year period. One must recall as well, that each of these victims were raped many times by many men. We are talking here about MILLIONS of rapes that would not have happened without Pakistani men being imported to Britain).
In roughly the last 20 years there has been a near ten fold increase in recorded rapes in Britain. In 1997 there were 8, 841 recorded rapes. In 2026 there were 74,265 up to August. By the end of the year we might be at 11 or 12 times the number of rapes that occurred in 1997.
To put this in context around 50,000 rapes in the former Yugoslavia during the war that ripped that country apart were classified as a humanitarian emergency rape crisis by the UN at the time. Britain sees more than that every year now.
Most tellingly of all, our ten fold increase in rape is actually remarkably close to the increase in net migration to the UK. The last time (other than 2020 COVID travel restrictions) that Britain saw below 50,000 net migration, was 1997. In 1997 we saw migration at 47,000. Through the last 20 years since we have added 10 million people at least to the UK population. This averages 500,000 per year.
Remarkably, the rate of increase of rape matches the rate of increase of migration almost exactly. Both show roughly a ten fold increase.
Our chart of the origins of sexual offenders tells us that several Third World nations produce far more sex offenders than Britain, without these imports, would itself produce. These are the nations represented by the occupants of the small boat dinghy invasions. The people we are the least effective at stopping are the people who are most likely to be rapists.
Our newly installed, never faced a general election as leader Prime Minister tells us that small boat crosses are down, that net migration is down, and that everything is improving. What he doesn’t admit is that net migration can go down when net emigration goes up-which it has. More people fleeing Britain because it’s becoming such a shithole can have an illusory effect of making your net migration figures look better when you are actually still having obscene numbers of arrivals, because to get the net figure all emigration is subtracted from all immigration.
You can also reduce the ‘number of small boat crossings’ by the boats getting bigger rather than by the boats being stopped. You’ll have a lower number of boats, but more illegal migrants.. This is exactly what has happened. Much larger vessels are now coming, and French police and the media report armed military type forces guarding some of these boats to prevent French efforts to stop them. France is paid by Britain to halt these illegal crossings, but French police somewhat reasonably don’t wish to be shot at in order to fulfil an obligation to another nation. The armed gangs aren’t challenged, and the bigger boats cross.
So much for the last Labour Prime Minister’s pledge to “smash the gangs”. Whatever migrant ‘smashing’ Kier Starmer engaged in, it remained a private business of no benefit to the UK.
It seems though a new and typically British solution has been discovered.
Rather than stopping the boats, smashing the gangs, deporting the illegals, preventing the rapes, patrolling the Channel, intercepting and returning the boats to France, removing the asylum financial and welfare pull factors and withdrawing from asylum accords and laws (effective measures) Britain has decided to politely ask Third World savages not to rape anyone. Referring to the Afghan rape cases yesterday, the Hungarian Conservative online news account said this:
“The convictions emerged just as Britain was debating extraordinary new Home Office guidance for asylum seekers explaining that rape, sexual harassment and sex with children are illegal, giving the case a disturbing irony.
The nine-page booklet, Understanding Behaviours and Expectations in the UK, tells arrivals that consent is required for sex, including within marriage, that anyone under 16 cannot legally consent, and that threats, force or pressure must never be used to obtain sex. It also warns against sexual remarks, following people or making ‘kissing sounds’ at strangers.”
I’m awfully sorry to trouble you, and it’s absolutely lovely to have you here, it really is, vibrant multiculturalism-yay!-but could you possibly stop raping people? I know, I know, I don’t mean to be a drag. We all need a good time, goodness gracious me, let the old hair down, have a bit of fun and so forth, but blast it, we generally don’t like it involving women and children without their consent, you see? I hate to impose on you like this, old boy, I really do. You have all my sympathy. Young lad, hormones surging, the sap rising in the stem, so to speak, we have all been there, even an old fuddy duddy like me…..look, can we offer some sort of compromise, yes? State funded brothels, perhaps, with every new asylum centre?”
God help us all.
••••
••••
••••
••••
(UKR)