My friend Juwannadoright reblogged the original post and made some very cogent points here, I recommend her take highly. I do want to go a bit farther with it however. She does make the point that I took my title from. A large part of the problem we have in the west is because we are afraid to call things by their correct names. In this particular case we have a crime ring in the UK running rampant because everybody, including the police and the courts are afraid to say the next clause “endemic sexual abuse of children by predatory Muslim paedophile gangs.” I can’t speak for you but, I’ve noticed little reluctance to speak out (whether or not justified in any given case) against any hint of pedophilia in organized Christianity, and here I thought double standards were bad.
#UK: Britain’s Rape Jihad Crisis
By Soeren Kern
A court in London has sentenced seven members of a Muslim child grooming gang based in Oxford to at least 95 years in prison for raping, torturing and trafficking British girls as young as 11.
The high-profile trial was the latest in a rapidly growing list of grooming cases that are forcing politically correct Britons to confront the previously taboo subject of endemic sexual abuse of children by predatory Muslim paedophile gangs.
The 18-week trial drew unwelcome attention to the sordid reality that police, social workers, teachers, neighbors, politicians and the media have for decades downplayed the severity of the crimes perpetrated against British children because they were afraid of being accused of “Islamophobia” or racism.
According to government estimates that are believed to be “just the tip of the iceberg,” at least 2,500 British children have so far been confirmed to be victims of grooming gangs, and another 20,000 children are at risk of sexual exploitation. At least 27 police forces are currently investigating 54 alleged child grooming gangs across England and Wales.
Judge Peter Rook, who presided over the trial that ended on June 27 at the Central Criminal Court of England and Wales (aka the Old Bailey), sentenced five of the men to life in prison and ordered them to serve a minimum of between 12 and 20 years before becoming eligible for parole.
Rook said the severity of the jail terms — which are longer than those in other high-profile grooming cases such as those in Rochdale, Derby and Telford — were meant to send a message to abusers that they would be targeted and brought to justice.
After reading the sentence, Rook said the men — who are from Pakistan and Eritrea (see profiles here) — had committed “a series of sexual crimes of the utmost depravity” and had targeted “young girls because they were vulnerable, underage and out of control.”
The ringleaders of the gang, brothers Akhtar Dogar, 32, and Anjum Dogar, 31, were given life sentences and were told by the judge that they had been found guilty of “exceptionally grave crimes.” They are to remain in prison for a minimum of 17 years before becoming eligible for parole.
The mother of Girl “C” told the British newspaper The Guardian that she had begged social services staff to rescue her daughter from the rape gang. She said that her daughter’s abusers had threatened to cut the girl’s face off and promised to slit the throats of her family members. She said that they had been forced to leave their home after the men had threatened to decapitate family members.
All the agencies of the state, including the police, the social services and the care system, seemed eager to ignore the sickening exploitation that was happening before their eyes. Terrified of accusations of racism, desperate not to undermine the official creed of cultural diversity, they took no action against obvious abuse.”
According to Hargey, “Another sign of the cowardly approach to these horrors is the constant reference to the criminals as ‘Asians’ rather than as ‘Muslims.’ In this context, Asian is a completely meaningless term. The men were not from China, or India or Sri Lanka or even Bangladesh. They were all from either Pakistan or Eritrea, which is, in fact, in East Africa rather than Asia.”
Hargey points to a telling incident in the trial when it was revealed that Mohammed Karrar branded one of the girls with an “M,” as if she were a cow. He writes, “‘Now, if you have sex with someone else, he’ll know that you belong to me,’ said this criminal, highlighting an attitude where women are seen as nothing more than personal property. The view of some Islamic preachers towards white women can be appalling. They encourage their followers to believe that these women are habitually promiscuous, decadent and sleazy — sins which are made all the worse by the fact that they are kaffurs or non-believers. Their dress code, from mini-skirts to sleeveless tops, is deemed to reflect their impure and immoral outlook. According to this mentality, these white women deserve to be punished for their behavior by being exploited and degraded.”
“It is very sadistic. It is very violent. It is very ugly.”
Emphasis mine and there is quite a lot more detail at #UK: Britain’s Rape Jihad Crisis, do read it.
There are several issues implicit in this story:
- The obvious fear of the British authorities (and American ones are not any better) of being seen as Islamophobic, they have an obvious preference to sell their own
citizenssubjects down the river to keep from being criticized by the PC police. To me that is inexcusable, the mark of a just government is that it tells the truth, bluntly and without fear, anything else is a betrayal of the heritage we share and that so many have died for over the millennia.
- We fought, many of us on all sides of the political spectrum, to establish that no woman, anywhere, was ever asking for rape and torture in the way she dressed and acted, after many years we won that battle in our societies, and now we are throwing that victory away to these animals?
- In some ways, I can understand so-called crimes-of-passion, I cannot and will not make excuses for them but can understand that some people just do not have the proper inhibitions to be members of polite society. Usually this means that they will have to be shut away from society for many years, that’s too bad but, the function of the state is to protect the people and it cannot be helped. But that doesn’t apply here, does it? Because…
- This is a commercial operation, grooming they call it, I don’t. I call it slavery, not white slavery, not any of the modifiers, it’s pure and simple slavery, for profit, and the slavers enjoyment of course. I’m certain that Wilberforce is very proud.
- It is inflicted on (mostly) helpless young girls in a society rendered helpless itself by its own government. The British government has managed to repeal every right that a British freeman had (pretty much only in the United States do they still exist) and now because of a fear of the Islamist, the government refuses to protect them as well. The phrase, “Ripe for the plucking” comes to mind.
- And finally, and somewhat less important, is that the court is finally doing the right thing and sentencing these vermin to life terms (hanging would be better but it is Britain, after all) but what sort of life term is 17 years? I mean I’ve heard of the locust state and I’ve heard of (and seen) 17 year locusts but I didn’t know they were both part of British jurisprudence.
Still this is a good news post, that is the strongest measure to protect themselves the British have taken in years, usually this has been their response:
- Political Correctness vs. The Truth (nebraskaenergyobserver.wordpress.com)
- Rape Jihad: Muslim ‘Child Grooming’ Of White Sex Slaves Now Widespread Epidemic In Britain (patdollard.com)
- Britain: “Rape Jihad” Against Children (iowntheworld.com)
- What the He!! Is Going On in England? (nationalreview.com)