Leftists
Own the UK's Grooming Gang Crisis and Tommy Robinson's Prison Torture
It
Takes a Village to Destroy a Child. The Left Built that Village.
Her
broad, sunny smile fairly bursts through the photograph. Her joy is so bright
you almost squint. She is a child, innocent of life. Charlene Downes was 14 in
2003. She's been missing ever since. During a trial, jurors heard a tape in
which a suspect stated that he chopped up her body and cooked it into
kebabs. The case was
tossed out because of problems with the gathering of evidence. Charlene's
sister, Emma, was later tried for "racially aggravated assault." Emma slapped the face of the murder
suspect's brother. Emma was convicted for her crime.
Lucy
Lowe's smile is not as explosive as Charlene's. Her blonde brows are shallow
crescents; her nose is a pretty little button. Lucy has that loving look that
suggests that she will hit her stride as a kind, middle-aged matron. In fact,
Lucy gave birth at 14. The child's baby daddy, Azhar Ali Mehmood, pimped Lucy
and other underage girls. By 16, Lucy was pregnant with their second child. Mehmood then murdered Lucy, her mother, and her
sister by setting fire to the family home. Mehmood is now in jail. Even so, Lucy's
father received an anonymous threat warning him not to discuss grooming
gangs.
Vicky
Round is not so much smiling in her photo as sizing you up. She looks pretty,
young, and afraid. Vicky dreams of becoming a model. She is hooked on heroin
and crack. She died of an overdose at age 20. The pimps and rapists who gave
her drugs and "who made her life hell still walk the
streets."
Becky Watson looks like the star of a Nancy Drew
Netflix series. Her deep dimples, her sportive cocked head, and her tomboyish
pony tail all add charm to her lovely features. The grooming gang began raping
Becky when she was 11. They took their victims to a dilapidated house. Rapists arrived
in a chauffeured minibus. Becky's "mum" gave the police a list of ten
men who had raped Becky. The police did not act. Becky was killed in a
mysterious car accident. She was 13.
Charlene
and Lucy, Vicky and Becky are a handful of the countless victims of the UK's
grooming gang crisis. Grooming gangs have been in operation in the UK at least since 1975. The assailants were largely Muslim men
of Pakistani descent. Doctors, police, teachers, social workers and judges knew
about grooming gang activities. Too many not only didn't take any action, they
abetted the crime. They blamed the victims. They labeled eleven-year-old girls
"prostitutes" or "mentally ill" and sex between children
and adult men "consensual." They arrested those attempting to rescue
trafficked girls. No one knows how many victims there were. Estimates range
between the thousands and the tens of thousands.
Why
was this allowed to continue for decades, with new cases coming to light even
now? Those who could have stopped the destruction of children were horrified at the thought of being thought
"racist" or "Islamophobic." British authorities' facilitation of
rape is not a thing of the past. On August 4, 2018, The Times (London)
published an account of a police officer asking if it is
okay for a 26-year-old Iraqi man to have a 12-year-old girlfriend. The officer
did not want to be "culturally insensitive."
British
media participated in squelching discussion of the grooming gangs. Human rights
activist and citizen journalist Tommy Robinson was attempting to fill the gap
when he was arrested on May 25, 2018, for reporting on a grooming gang trial.
He was imprisoned and, he alleges, kept in conditions that can be defined as
torture. Feces and spit were flung into his cell. He was told his food was
poisoned and that his wife would be attacked with acid. He was kept in solitary
confinement with minimum ability to move.
On
August 1, 2018, a higher court verbally demolished the behavior of the
lower court that
imprisoned Robinson. Robinson was freed. But he was not safe. The Times (London), the New York Times, the Guardian and British tabloids rushed to publish pieces defaming the
newly freed Tommy Robinson.
Men
around the world lust after young girls. In spite of this universal proclivity,
in the US sex between an adult man and a child is a crime. Why does the US
protect girls, and why did the UK betray them? The answer is culture. It is not
enough, in the case of the grooming gangs, to convict this or that assailant.
One must also analyze and decommission cultural features that generate
pathology.
In a March 18, 2018 Independent article, one grooming gang survivor cited Islam
as one factor her rapists used to justify raping her. She wrote, "I was
taken to various houses and flats above takeaways … to be beaten, tortured and
raped over 100 times. I was called a 'white slag' and 'white c---' as they beat
me. They made it clear that because I was a non-Muslim, and not a virgin, and
because I didn't dress 'modestly', that I deserved to be 'punished'. … 'Muslim
girls are good and pure because they dress modestly, covering down to their
ankles and wrists, and covering their crotch … You show the curves of your
bodies … showing the gap between your thighs means you're asking for it.'"
Indeed,
the attitude that covered women are virtuous and that uncovered women are vile
can be found in a variety of Muslim media, from the Koran and hadith to a modern Iranian propaganda poster that depicts a covered woman entering
Heaven and a woman in a miniskirt entering Hell.
The
anonymous author begged her readers not to condemn all Muslims. She reminded us
that all religions have produced scriptures that have been used to justify
atrocities. Counter-jihadis agree with her. No responsible counter-jihadi
condemns all Muslims, and we all recognize that members of a variety of
religions have done bad things. We ask that Muslims be frank and fearless when
responding to critiques of Islamic scriptures that denigrate non-Muslims and that recommend sex slavery.
That
grooming gangs are a cultural phenomenon, and not merely individual crimes
committed by individual criminals, is supported by family involvement. Grooming gangs are a family affair, argues Peter McLoughlin, author of Easy Meat. Rapists include not just the initial
contact who selects and grooms a given girl, but his father, brothers, uncles,
and cousins. Female family members participate as well. They show up at trial
venues and threaten accusers or otherwise derail prosecutions.
It is
simply inaccurate to blame only Islam for the grooming gang crisis. There are
other guilty parties. Leftist culture fed the grooming gang culture as roadkill
feeds maggots. There is such a thing as corporate guilt, and leftists bear the
corporate guilt for the rape gangs and for Tommy Robinson's unjust imprisonment
and torture. Further, the spectacular perversions that leftist culture
engendered are responsible for the tensions in the UK today. Working class
white British people are no more naturally hateful or xenophobic than any other
population. Their current rage has been building for decades as their children
were abused and the powers-that-be betrayed them. If, God forbid, violence
should break out, the spark will not be the supposed inherent bestiality of
working class British people. The spark will be the abysmal performance of
leftists in power and leftist culture. Leftists will have blood on their hands.
And of course they will blame working class whites.
I am
not alone in this assessment. On August 6, 2018, contrarian journalist Brendan O'Neill published "How the Left Made Tommy Robinson: It Was
Their Censorship of ‘Islamophobia’ That Made Robinson a Star." In it he links to a May 23, 2017
column, "After Manchester: It’s Time For Anger:
We Need More Than Mourning In Response To The New Barbarism. O'Neill argues in both columns that
the left has suppressed free speech about Islam. The left has done so because
it has contempt for and fear of working class whites. The suppression of free
speech has created a vacuum that might be filled by the very frightening forces
the left says it wants to forfend against.
Several
features of leftist culture fed the grooming gangs. Leftists see the West as
hopelessly corrupt. The West is racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic,
transphobic, oppressive, imperialist, fascist, cold, and capitalist. It needs
to be overturned, so that a Marxist paradise can take its place. Non-Western
cultures are useful as levers to overturn the West. Borders must be open so
that newcomers can vitiate Western culture. Too, nanny states with
cradle-to-grave benefits tend to produce fewer children. Someone must be
brought in to do the work to support the welfare state. These newcomers must
not be encouraged to assimilate, but, rather, must be urged to keep their own
culture.
Discouraging
assimilation and channeling immigrants into ethnic enclaves serves several
purposes. European leftists despise America. They want to demonstrate, with
their "embrace" of non-Western cultures, how righteous they are. They
are virtue signaling on a national scale. European leftists peddle white guilt
as another form of virtue signaling. To ask someone from a non-Western culture
to assimilate to a Western one would be a sin. Finally, some argue that the
lack of emphasis on assimilation was in fact a disguised form of racism.
Europeans kept their immigrants in separate communities, and, in their snobbish
minds, never had to worry about dirtying their hands by having day-to-day
contact with such riffraff. Something like this process occurred across Western
Europe after WW II, and it has been described in a number of books, including
Bruce Bawer's While Europe Slept and Douglas Murray's Strange Death of Europe.
In an
October 23, 2009 article, Tony Blair speechwriter Andrew Neather wrote in the Evening Standard that immigration
"didn't just happen; the deliberate policy of Ministers from late 2000…was
to open up the UK to mass immigration … the policy was intended … to rub the
Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."
The
above paragraph is not anti-immigrant or anti-immigration. My parents were
immigrants. I respect and love them and their life experience. But there is a
difference between allowing judicious numbers of immigrants, closing the door
when need be, requiring assimilation, and powerful leftists consciously
recruiting immigrants and engineering the immigrant experience to aid their
plan to carry out a stealth cultural genocide of the Western homelands they
despise.
Another
leftist value that contributed to the grooming gang crisis is cultural
relativism. Leyla Hussein is an anti-female-genital-mutilation
campaigner from Somalia. Hussein offers a shattering description of her own
mutilation in a YouTube video. "Four women held me down and cut
my clitoris. I felt every single cut. I was screaming so much I just blacked
out," she reports. It is her goal to ensure that what happened to her
never happens to another child.
In
2013, Hussein approached British shoppers, asking them to sign a sham petition
in favor of FGM. She told the shoppers that FGM is an aspect of her
"culture, tradition, and rights." When approaching potential
signatories, Hussein would say, "It's just mutilation." In thirty
minutes, nineteen people signed the petition. Hussein proved her point. Political
Correctness has reached a "crazy" level. She was furious. "FGM
is not culture, it is violence. Stop using the 'culture' word. This is
happening to children. We are human beings. We can't watch children being cut.
I don't care what culture you belong to."
In
her statement, Leyla Hussein, a Muslim woman born in Somalia, champions
Enlightenment values, the values that, along with the heritage of the Ancient
Greeks and the Judeo-Christian tradition, are one of the pillars of Western
Civilization. "We are human beings," she insists. "Culture"
is no excuse for torture, she insists.
Hussein's
insistence on morality as a universal value for all human beings, independent
of particular cultural trends, would find approval with Sir Charles James Napier, speaker of a famous quote about sati.
When Hindus told him that it was their culture to burn widows alive on their
husband's funeral pyre, Napier said, paraphrase, "You follow your culture
and I'll follow mine. My culture requires me to hang men who burn women
alive."
Leftists
revile men like Napier – and "Uncle Toms" like Hussein. More
importantly, they revile the concepts of right and wrong as independent of
culture. To address the grooming gang crisis articulately, leftists would have
to acknowledge that cultural relativism, their cherished dogma, sacralized the
destruction of the lives of innocent girls. When debating this topic with
cultural relativists, I often show them a map plotting sex ratio variation. Girls born into countries with a Judeo-Christian
heritage, no matter how poor, are more likely to live out a full lifespan than
girls born into Muslim countries, no matter how wealthy those countries are. You
can "feel" however you want to "feel" about gender
apartheid, but lifespan statistics don't lie.
Shazia Hobbs
is the child of a Pakistani Muslim father. She spent five years of her
childhood in Pakistan. She speaks out against FGM and what she characterizes as
an epidemic of child rape in the Pakistani community in the UK.
In
September, 2017, Hobbs was suspended from Twitter. Hobbs reported that "she is frequently called 'racist'
and accused of being 'full of hate' for calling for the jailing of parents who
subject their daughters to genital mutilation … 'I get the biggest amount of
hate from Pakistani men and feminazis who tell me I'm "fueling the far
right." I'm trying to put a stop to these harmful practices. I've had more
love and acceptance from the so-called "far right" than from the
Pakistani community.'"
In
spite of Twitter's ban, Hobbs managed to reach London Mayor Sadiq Khan with a
text asking him to bring the full force of the law against those who mutilate
little girls' genitals. Although FGM is a crime in the UK, no cutter has ever been
convicted. The National Health Service estimates 5,391 new
"recorded" cases of FGM in the UK in 2017. One has to wonder how many
"unrecorded" cases there were.
In
March, 2018, the BBC featured Mayor Khan reading Hobbs' tweet in the context of a series of truly
abusive messages that suggested, inter alia, that he blow himself up. Let me
repeat. A daughter of a Pakistani father, raised as a Muslim, tweeted a request
that the mayor of London address FGM, and that mayor classed as dangerous hate
speech her courteous defense of little girls' anatomical integrity. Khan went
on to denounce "misogyny" and tweets that damage "our"
search for gender equality. He closed by alleging that Hobbs' tweet would recruit
Muslims to become terrorists. There you have it. Shazia Hobbs, by caring about
FGM, created a new crop of terrorists.
Hobbs
responded with an open letter to Khan. She wrote, "You … accuse
me of hate speech. I constantly receive so-called hate speech from the Muslim
community, the very community that is being protected under the guise of 'hate
speech,' which has actualised into threats to my person whereby I live with a
panic button and a personal alarm, both provided by the police. I live under
this constant threat and for asking you a valid question about FGM you have
endangered me further.
"I
am a woman who has experienced the brutality of a forced marriage [at age 18,
to a much older stranger, who acknowledged that he married her only for her passport]
in which I was vaginally and anally raped for the best part of three years. [She
was hospitalized after one rape, and required internal
stitches.] I speak out in order to give a voice to those who still live under
this.
"And
while you are using the narrative of hate speech to silence people like me,
young Muslim women, men and in fact anyone who lives under the harmful cultural
practices of Islam find themselves further isolated and unable to talk about
what is going on in the community."
Clearly,
leftists betrayed and abandoned their stated commitment to women's rights in
order to protect the good name of Islam, the non-Western lever they hope to exploit
to topple Western Civilization.
The
left fetishizes victimization, but it acknowledges only some victims. As Orwell
put it, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than
others."
That
the leftist victim caste system facilitated the grooming gangs is evident from
a thought experiment. Imagine that in the UK, the US, or Israel, there have
been, for forty plus years, grooming gangs of Christian or Jewish men. These
men manipulate underage Muslim girls, who are then sexually trafficked. A
heroic citizen journalist attempts to expose the gangs, but he is arrested on
trumped up charges and tortured. We all know what would happen. The story would
be front page news worldwide. The pope, the president, Hollywood, Oprah and the
UN would address it. Victim names would be branded into our consciousness. But
working class British girls' tears do not move leftists. They are the wrong
flavor.
The
left's caste system is also quite evident in a comparison between the decades it
took the British left to address grooming gangs, and the rapidity that British
authorities exercise when addressing alleged "hate crimes." Tommy
Robinson was arrested, booked, and sentenced to torturous imprisonment in under
five hours. In 2016, Kevin Crehan was found dead in a British jail. He was
incarcerated for leaving a bacon sandwich outside a mosque. Sussex Police Hate
Crime Sergeant Peter Allan (yes, "Hate Crimes Sergeant" appears to be a real job title)
reported that Nigel Pelham would be imprisoned for posting negative comments
about Muslims and Islam in his Facebook posts. Pelham's posts are revolting. Whether nor not prison is the answer
to revolting Facebook posts is another question. What is not in question is the
championing of Muslim victims of hate speech and British authorities tossing
less ethnically well-endowed victims to the wolves. In 2018, Mark Meechan was
convicted of a hate crime for teaching a pug dog to give a rather weak
imitation of a Nazi salute. Meechan is not a Nazi; he is a Scottish comedian.
His girlfriend talked about how utterly adorable the pug dog was, and so
Meechan, as a prank, taught the dog to do the worst thing he could imagine –
imitate a Nazi salute. Meechan was fined 800 pounds.
The
Leftist caste system is also evident in who first covered the grooming gang
crisis. Peter McLoughlin notes that in 1975 an article appeared in a Rotherham
newspaper reporting
grooming gang activity. That article, sickening though it is, appears to have
sunk like a stone and left not a ripple. The first journalist to cover the
gangs in depth and gain attention was Julie Bindel. According to Commentary Magazine, "The left-wing lesbian feminist
writer Julie Bindel" published in "of all places, in Standpoint, the
conservative English monthly … Bindel was compelled to publish the piece in
Standpoint because 'progressive' outlets such as the
Guardian would not touch the issue."
Bindel was labeled a racist and "her name was included on a website called
'Islamophobia Watch: Documenting anti-Muslim Bigotry.'"
The
left's caste system is glaringly evident on social media. In recent weeks and
months, social media has hosted a moral panic about the US "torturing"
immigrant children. At the same time, the left suppresses discussion of
victimized British girls. The left is rushing to announce its support for
freedom of the press, as CNN's Jim Acosta squares off with White House Press
Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Yet left-wing media engage in a feeding
frenzy to attack citizen journalist Tommy Robinson, even as he is imprisoned on
unjust charges. British journalists repeatedly drew
attention to Tommy Robinson's mother's house, even as she has received notification from the police
that there are plans to murder her.
Leftists
announce, with much breast-beating, their commitment to the poor, poor, working
class. Ironically, poor and otherwise disenfranchised whites occupy the bottom
of the leftist caste system. The left hates poor whites for a variety of
reasons. Leftists care a great deal about image, and lumpen proletariat whites are
not chic accessories. British leftists deploy a specialized vocabulary to
demean their social inferiors, with words like "gammon," "yob," "thug," and "chav."
Leftists also despise poor whites because whites are supposed to be so very
privileged, and yet poor whites haven't risen to the top. "You were born
with white privilege, which makes your life easy and you all-powerful, and yet
you still have a working class job and drive an old car? You must be a total
loser," is their attitude. Leftists hate poor whites for their
ingratitude. Poor whites all too often are not grateful to the left for its salvific
overtures. Poor whites may be religious, hard-working, and hoping to rise in a
capitalist system. These are all negative qualities to the left. The revolution
has room for only one religion, Marxism. Hard work and success interfere with
the leftist narrative that the poor are doomed without Marxist rescue and that
capitalism offers no hope.
There
is a sinister, hidden reason why leftists hate poor whites. Leftists love to
signal their virtue. They do so by bashing whites and whiteness. They, though,
are often white. By bashing poor whites, they are creating a sub-class of
whites that does not include them. Though white, they have a "get out of
jail free" card. "I may be white, but I'm not that scummy kind of
white."
The
girls victimized by the grooming gangs were often either poor or disadvantaged
in other ways. They often came from single-parent homes. Their lower class
status played a role in how the crisis was handled. "I often wonder,"
Charlene Downes' mother asked, "if she had been from a posh family and was
having piano lessons, would they have tried harder to find her?"
Rich,
white leftists signal virtue by publicly supporting open borders, Affirmative
Action, and multiculturalism. Then they choose to live lives virtually
unaffected by any of the Utopian fantasies they espouse. Rich leftists often
live in protected enclaves. Vocal support for Affirmative Action is a way for
rich whites to signal their own virtue while sacrificing nothing. Rather it is
poor whites who pay the price, as described by Russel K Nieli and Richard D. Kahlenberg. It is poor white kids, not rich ones,
whose chances of being accepted to an elite university are eroded by
Affirmative Action. Support for open borders is another virtue-signaling
soapbox. It is poor workers, not rich ones, who suffer the negative impact of
mass, illegal immigration, as Harvard's George J. Borjas has shown. Multiculturalism is a fine
dream when you live in a gated community. Robert Putnam's work suggests that for the poor whites who
live in mixed communities, diversity can mean an erosion in community cohesion,
neighborliness, quality of life and safety.
Poor
whites and rich white liberals live in different worlds. Some rich American
liberals trying to understand the Trump phenomenon had an Aha moment when they
realized that support for Trump overlapped with
regions hit hardest by the opioid crisis.
Tommy
Robinson himself is a working class guy who inhabits a different world than
those who hate him. In 2017, Tommy received a tweet, "Please someone just
murder Tommy Robinson." Robinson discovered that the sender was a
privileged young white man who lived at home with his mother in a town with
virtually no immigrants. When Tommy met with the young man in person, Robinson
pointed out that he, Robinson, grew up under very different circumstances. In
his working class town of Luton, he personally knew Muslims who joined ISIS.
Tommy's cousin was victimized by the grooming gangs. In the BBC documentary,
"My Hometown Fanatics," Stacey Dooley filmed Luton Muslims
marching in the street shouting, "UK go to Hell."
The privileged, sheltered young man who wanted Robinson murdered had no such
life experience.
Finally,
there is another feature of the left that may have contributed to the grooming
gang crisis. Yes, the rapists are to blame. Yes, the authorities didn't do what
they should have. But where were the families? Interviews with family members
contain comments like, "I didn't know she was in trouble." Or,
"I knew she was in trouble and I tried to intervene but she rebuffed
me." Or, "I didn't feel I could change anything." Victims say
things like, "I didn't realize I was being abused." No one has
parented such girls. One also reads of victims' parents who were themselves
drug addicts or absentee. The daughters of such parents were often fobbed off
to the welfare state. The welfare state had no real investment in the girls,
and allowed them to be exploited.
I
asked a British friend for her perspective. She wrote, "The problem is the
state incentivizing single motherhood. Young, uneducated women see no future
for themselves. If they have a child, they can get benefits, housing, almost
free groceries. Why work when you can get all that?" She described one
situation. "A young woman, 16 years old, was the daughter of a single
mother on welfare. The mother got a new partner and decided to kick her
existing children out of the housing authority apartment. The 16-year-old
wanted to continue her education and go on to Community College. She was
offered a room in a halfway house for male offenders. Her boyfriend's family
wanted to take her in but if they did, she would lose any financial assistance
for her education. Her boyfriend's family invested in elaborate locks for her
room at the halfway house. Her sister was 17 years old. She had a baby and got
her own apartment, and financial support."
There
is a slew of studies that demonstrate that children raised in the same home
with both of their biological parents do better on an exhaustive range of
measures than children raised with step-parents, in foster homes, or by single
mothers. Fathers matter. Discipline matters.
Traditional
values matter as well. In interviews with families of grooming gangs victims,
one hears echoes of the sexual revolution. Parents say things like, "I
didn't want to tell my daughter that she couldn't make her own choices about
her own sex life." Really? A parent feels it's out of line to tell an
eleven-year-old girl that sexualization is an unhealthy choice? For many
children, traditional religion, as well as parental discipline, plays a protective
role. Studies show that religious females
engage in sexual activity later than non-religious females. These questions should be asked. Did
erosion of the family, abetted by state policy, play any role in the grooming
gang crisis? Do Britain's lowered rates of religiosity play any role?
I am
Catholic. As such, I own the church sex abuse crisis. I want the full story to
come out. I want to be a responsible Catholic who contributes to the church
taking a more positive direction. I expect no less of a stance from my brother
and sister Muslims, and from leftists. Shazia Hobbs, Leila Hussein and Julie
Bindel have shown courage. Others must follow in their footsteps. Those who created
the grooming gang crisis must publicly acknowledge their sin, make amends to
the victims, and clean up the mess their ideology contributed to creating.
Danusha
Goska is the author of Save Send Delete and Bieganski, the Brute Polak Stereotype. Her book God through Binoculars will be out later this year.
Horrifying. The crimes are of course horrifying, but the lack of concern by those that could protect these girls is disgusting. They are culpable.
ReplyDelete