-
Unknown A
Why has the issue of sadistic mass rape on British soil reared its ugly head once again, this time on the international front? There are many reasons, but one is fundamental. The increasingly desperate need in the west for a serious discussion about the perils of an unthinking and self aggrandizing multiculturalism. A word that in itself is primarily cliched advertisement for the self proclaimed, admirable and wondrous tolerance of the progressive hypocrites on the left and right alike. It's time for us in the free world to look at human beings in their various cultures as they truly are and and not as the good thinkers wish, and then so dangerously insist that they must be. This means laying out the stark reality not only of cultural differences, but of the proclivity of the worst of people who are very bad indeed to use religious affiliation as camouflage for their machinations.
-
Unknown A
This is a temptation regarded by the ancients as paramount. The use of God's name in vain, which the confused assume merely means don't swear, but which truly means do not claim virtue when pursuing the lowest of selfish ends. This is the sin of the Pharisees as well, who literally became murderous when when Christ called them on their hypocrisy. There's arguably no more widespread pathology of aim plaguing us in the developed world today, excepting perhaps that of pride. It's also the case that manipulators, those for example, who cry victim at the drop of a hat, as well as outright criminals, are highly prone to cloak themselves in the guise of moral virtue. That's exactly what puts the most extreme con in the most exceptional of con men. Before we elaborate on that point, let's establish a few more basic and simultaneously indisputable facts. First, democracy is by no means the natural state of man and woman.
-
Unknown A
The vast majority of countries around the world are barely countries at all in the modern Western sense of the world. They are instead, far too often unproductive totalitarian hellholes run by thugs and inhabited in the main by the sort of people who either allow themselves to be ruled by the hedonistic and power mad, or who are so beaten down and corrupted themselves that they envision progress merely as the opportunity to rise and perpetuate the same crooked game, this time as victors. Let us second abandon the naive and idiot pretense that women are easily integrated as full and equal partners into functional and productive marriages, families and states, and that such integration is also a default condition. Here's an alternative view, which, as in the case of religious and Moral hypocrisy is much more natural in the absence of constant and disciplined future and community oriented socialization.
-
Unknown A
Sexual desire runs rampant, not least among young single men, along with all the other forms of present focus, hedonistic and power mad behavior. Hence the well established association between the proclivity to rape and otherwise assault and more general criminal conduct. Self centered immaturity is the rule, not civilized self disciplined conduct. The same can be said of foolishness as opposed to wisdom under the dominion of the immature. Unprotected women are not only fair game, particularly when foreign, but responsible by the very fact of their unguarded status and self evidently wicked attractiveness for whatever dire fate might befall them. This means not only the rape and sadistic abuse of said women, but their blaming and shaming for the provocative fact of their solitariness. This is the default defense and worldview of the worst of men. She was asking for it. A society where women can bring their talents to the table as independent, safe and respected individuals requires, by contrast, certain stringent psychological and social preconditions.
-
Unknown A
A widely shared view of the value of women as equal intrinsically to men, a police and justice system with genuine integrity, material and more specifically hygienic standards associated only with industrialized societies. It also requires effective birth control and the mores that allow or even encourage its use. These conditions are prohibitively difficult to meet. Furthermore, their existence is taken for granted at our extreme peril, with particularly severe ramifications for the poorly defended and female. None of these preconditions apply in the default oppressive authoritarian society where intercourse of any sort between men and women is severely restricted and punished and all forms of sexual psychopathology flourish. In no small consequence, it is nonetheless from precisely such societies that much of the mass immigration that characterizes many Western countries occurs and has for decades in consequence of the idiot presumption that these mobile and often desperate people will bring with them none of the terrible presumptions and customs they are hypothetically fleeing.
-
Unknown A
Consider in that regard the 195 countries that currently make up the world. A mere 24 of these are true Western democracies characterized by respect for an existence of freedom, human rights, limited government, separation of church and state, and rule of law. That's 1 in 8 or 12%. That alone proves that such rule governed classically liberal democracy is the exception, strongly indicating at the same time that the absence of democratic attitude and social order rather than its presence, must be assumed as the default. The naive and reflexively self aggrandizing Westerner striving above all to consider him or herself in the best possible light, proclaims instead that deep in the chest of every oppressed person beats a heart longing for responsible freedom. But a totalitarian state is in truth a distributed network of deceit and cruel oppression, more than a mere top down hierarchy of power. Everyone in a tyranny lies about everything, all the time, to everyone, including themselves and those whom they claim to love.
-
Unknown A
This is why removing the putative head, the most obvious dictator in in the revolutionary manner, remember the Arab Spring or the liberalism of Libya and Iraq, most frequently produces chaos or even worse, oppression. There are many pathways, personal and communal, to rigidity and instability, and very few to responsible freedom, abundance and progress. Thus immigrants from authoritarian states are most likely to bring with them authoritarian attitudes. 24 genuine free democracies 1 of the remaining 171 or 88 of the world's countries, 59 of them are fully authoritarian, replete with all the horrors such Systems entail. Another 20 are chaotic failed states. The remainder are at best a mixed bag. Not fully authoritarian, not entirely chaotic, but certainly not thriving democracies, and certainly not the Western countries that the oppressed or predatory of the world flee to. Given a choice, what are the cultural preconditions for civil society and good governance?
-
Unknown A
What cultural features characterize the 24 versus the rest, particularly the worst of the rest? 40 of 50 or 80 of Muslim majority countries are fully and unabashedly authoritarian. A mere 3 of the remainder are democracies Morocco, Turkey and Indonesia, if the definition is allowed to be approximate and generous. The rest are at best a mixed bag. And what if majority Protestant or Catholic countries, 100 of these Africa, accepted and reasonably so, are highly functional free societies. Observation of a track record like that might suggest to a genuinely objective observer, a causal connection. Why the stark difference? None of even the possible reasons look good for those who proclaim that the rewards of multiculturalism are untrammeled and certain. First, in the Islamic world, divine law, Sharia rules. And it is indisputably the case that the more fundamentalist accounts of Sharia, and potentially all accounts, don't mesh easily with the democratic idea of man made laws subject to change and improvement by consensual, involuntary agreement.
-
Unknown A
For Islamist supremacists, God's law, by their interpretation, of course, is regarded as immutable and superordinate to any human legislation. Does this presumption not stand in virtually absolute opposition to a foundational democratic idea, the sovereignty of the people? Some might argue that Shura, the Islamic principle of consultation is akin to democracy. However, akin to is by no means identical with and such differences matter in the case of fundamental principles, and they matter a lot. Shura is traditionally a consultation among a select group of Islamic scholars or leaders and not an electoral process involving universal suffrage. It is therefore not a voluntarily accepted social contract subject equally voluntary update and change, but a variant form of top down elite imposed governance or tyranny. The historical method of leadership selection in the Islamic world think of the caliphs clearly and indisputably reflects this elitism. The same can be said regarding the imams.
-
Unknown A
If such bending of the knee among such people and in such states was truly to the one God ruling validly forever from on high, something might be still said for it, at least among those who claim religious inspiration. A thorny problem remains, however, the Word of God according to who Islamic totalitarianism, which is far too often ruled by immature and hedonistic thugs, is likewise far too often submission to the thug's interpretation of God. This leaves precisely as much room for disagreement about the divine as thugs might be expected to allow, which is none. Or else the idea that Islam should govern all aspects of life, from personal behavior to state laws, also directly conflicts with the democratic principle of pluralism and freedom to choose. Remember as well, in keeping with all this, that the punishment for rejecting such claims, the price paid for apostasy is not infrequently death.
-
Unknown A
There is no manner in which any of this self evidently aligns with the Western principles of freedom of thought, religion, and expression. It therefore seems incumbent on those who believe that such commensurability exists to prove that it does, particularly given the aforementioned statistical difference between Muslim and Christian majority societies. Rather than insisting that the burden of proof be put upon the skeptic of the multicultural project, the difference between the societies under consideration, Bad as it is in general, it's clearly worse for women. Traditional Islamic jurisprudence assigns very different rights and roles to men and women. The typical woman in the authoritarian Muslim countries generally requires a male guardian's permission to marry, travel, or work. Their inheritance share is lesser. Typically half men can divorce unilaterally with ease, while women cannot. Polygamy is legally allowed in many of the same countries, but polyandry in none. That is, by no means all Women's political participation is severely restricted, dress codes are frequently or even typically severe, laws against domestic violence are minimal or absent, and in some cases marital rape is not recognized or criminalized.
-
Unknown A
Access to education and employment is restricted or absent, and women have limited control over the reproductive choices. The judicial system also operates in ways severely biased against women, with their testimonies often valued at less than men's and their access to justice impeded. If those who inhabit such countries cannot treat their own mothers, wives and daughters equally, then their track record for tolerating others, including anyone who does not share their attitudes, religious and otherwise, is unlikely to be good. The rape gangs point to this terrible fact. The testimony from the trials indicates a common and obvious disregard, to put it mildly, for the women concerned. Why are we to assume that no cultural reasons whatsoever are relevant? Is the possibility that claimed religious belief is involved, however false that claim might be, is simply to be taken off the table? What explanations are then left? The culpability of host society and victim.
-
Unknown A
That seems to be the tact that we have taken. That's not so good for us, particularly if we're wrong and certainly does nothing for the young women involved except blame them and continue to fail in their protection. And there's more with regards to differential vulnerability in relationship to the presumed niceties of the multicultural project. It's an axiom of both psychology and biology that a relationship exists between status or social standing and vulnerability. Animals lower in hierarchical positioning have less opportunity and they suffer more. And exactly the same thing holds for human beings. This means, as the old adage has it, that the working class tends to die of pneumonia when the aristocrats catch cold. This is true even in advanced societies where the reality of absolute rather than relative poverty has been substantively ameliorated. Poorer is not as terrible as poor, but it still has its marked disadvantages.
-
Unknown A
This means not only that political and cultural elites can flaunt and advertise their admirably open minded cosmopolitan tolerance while remaining protected from the worst aspects of the policies they facilitated, but that the burden of their self serving error will fall squarely on the working class and more specifically on the most vulnerable among them. These would be, as they always have been, unprotected adolescent females. We have not even allowed ourselves to know the full scale of the disaster that has befallen such girls. How many have fallen prey to the depredations of the rapists? Is it a quarter of a million, A half, or the full Monty? How many cumulative acts of rape have occurred? We won't allow ourselves to know within an order of magnitude. And one of those who have fallen victim? Well, first they were raped brutally. Then they were pilloried or even arrested for their hypothetically disorderly behavior.
-
Unknown A
Then they were told to remain silent for the sake of a social cohesion that doesn't truly exist and gaslit when they dared to speak. And all at the hands of those directly charged with their protection. And all the while the progressives run their godforsaken hands about Islamophobia. That term for cowards, collaborators and fools. And hate speech. That term for those who hate speech, actual hate manifested in sadistic and racially motivated gang rape. That was fine as long as nobody talked about it. The message to working class Brits know your place and take your punishment in the most brutal and concrete possible way. The rapes themselves were sickening, brutal, sadistic, low and criminal. The COVID up, cowardly, hypocritical and unforgivable. All of it, in a word, evil of the personal and institutional kind. Hence the admittedly unfortunately delayed but fully justified international outrageous. Consider in this regard the plight of one true spokesman for those virginal sacrifices, the hypothetically nefarious and now internationally notorious Tommy Robinson.
-
Unknown A
He is admittedly no angel. That primarily class difference in conduct certainly doesn't seem to matter when the virtuous left is agitating for the economically oppressed, when its existence is so demonstratively attributed to the injustice of the system rather than the criminality of the perpetrator. But it sure draws attention and condemnation from the same good thinking people when a working class bloke dares to speak. Who the hell do we require as a spokesman under such circumstances? Perhaps it is only the monsters, or at least those with the capacity for monstrousness, who have the spirit to speak when convention becomes complicit. And remember, not only did Mr. Robinson stand up to the mad and dangerous rape gang criminals at the risk of his own skin, but also to their middle and upper class protectors and stooges. He did this despite his own unprivileged socioeconomic status. He did this while being pilloried constantly as at least the first approximation of a Nazi, by anyone who mattered.
-
Unknown A
Who else did even a fraction as well. Let he who is without sin therefore cast the first stone. In a recent podcast with Winston Marshall, Nigel Farage, leader of the increasingly popular Reform Party, indicated that the majority of British Muslims might well be more concerned about the rape crisis than the typical non Muslim citizen of the Fair Isle, not least because of the rising tide of anti Islam sentiment stirred up by the scandal. Mr. Marshall pushed back on this presumption of majority moderate Muslim stance. He referred to a Henry Jackson poll indicating that 75% of British Muslims did not believe that Hamas committed rape on October 7th. Half agreed. Furthermore, the Jews have too much power in the UK, according to that same March 2024 poll. That attitude extended to the influence of Israel and Jews more generally on American foreign policy. Slightly more than three quarters held a positive view of Hamas, ominously enough, while 40 believe that MPS on the Israel side of the Israel Palestine debate should be removed from office.
-
Unknown A
A majority also wanted rooms set aside for public prayer in non religious places, compulsory use of halal food in all schools and hospitals, and legal restriction against displaying a picture of Muhammad. Two additional majority held opinions stood out starkly. 77 believed it would be desirable to have Islam declared as the national religion, with an equivalent proportion expressing support for the establishment of Sharia law across the uk. This, of course, begs a crucial question. Apart from shedding doubt on the presumption of a moderate majority, why did the immigrants in question leave the countries where such policies are already in place? The answer to that is straightforward. Many believe the west can only be improved by the imposition of Muslim practices. After all, the uk, like so much of the rest of what was once Christendom, has declared itself structurally racist, unjust and colonialist. Our security and wealth is deemed by the same accusers a consequence of nothing but theft and oppression.
-
Unknown A
Corrupt, unproductive, poverty stricken, authoritarian societies are the result of foreign tyrannies imposed upon them. Or so the story goes. Instead of the fault of themselves, the states in question, or the reigning culture or religion, we can blame the radical postmodern neo Marxists and their dismal and resentful leftist ancestors for laying the groundwork for that set of evasions and rationalizations. That attribution does not ameliorate the associated danger of the views, however. During the Marshall discussion, Farage himself noted that approximately a quarter of young Muslim men believe that jihad is acceptable. Undermining his own argument with regard to the tolerance of the people in question, he concluded with this rather dire prognostication. We have a Muslim population growing by 75% every decade. If we alienate the whole of Islam, we will lose by 2050. Goodness knows what kind of terrible state we will be in. It is difficult to interpret this as anything but a warning and worse, capitulation.
-
Unknown A
Perhaps it was for such reasons that Elon Musk so publicly withdrew the support that he had very recently been offering to the leader of the Reform Party. Although there have been more recently signs of a stiffening of Farage's position and a corresponding rapprochement on the part of the world's foremost industrialist, we might also observe with equal pessimism that the objections from the international community to the mass rape scandal in the UK is not coming in the main from moderate Muslims from within the UK itself, or from hypothetically moderate Muslim countries, but from other Western democracies. Surely it is incumbent on those within the Islamic world who claim no causal association between the tenets of the Mohammedan faith and the wretched treatment of women at the hands of the brutes to forthrightly indicate that such behavior is not only utterly unacceptable but absolutely at odds with the faith.
-
Unknown A
Where are the public demonstrations in the societies of the Muslim world against the deceivers and liars who claim religious affiliation in the name of Allah while daring to behave in such an atrocious manner? So what might be the way forward, if any, in light of all these intractable differences? The unspeakable depravity of the crimes in question, the utter cowardice and prevarication of the liberal elite, and the betrayal of the working class? Does such a way exist, even in principle? Even if optimism is allowed to be our guiding light? It is not at all obvious that the answer is yes. But there are genuine glimmerings of hope, not least within the Islamic world itself. During his interview with Farage, Winston Marshall highlighted a series of positive developments on the international scene. The Muslim countries heading the Abraham Accords, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco may well be heading a true move to a peaceful and cooperative future, not only in the Middle east, but to equally vital control of the worst excesses of the hypothetically fundamentalist Islamist hypocrites.
-
Unknown A
Had the short sighted and politically expedient Biden administration been willing to grant Donald Trump the least bit of credit for this remarkable development and continued the process, Saudi Arabia would have also been a signatory. That could still happen given the administrative change in the US The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, has stated his opposition to the Islamist extremists in a very blunt manner. He stated quite recently in Riyadh that he would destroy them today, that he wants to coexist with the world and that his state would represent the moderate teachings and principles of Islam, with the right being on his side. The UAE Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed has been even more provocative and forthright, stating there will come a day that we will see far more radical extremists and terrorists coming out of Europe because of lack of decision making, trying to be politically correct, or assuming that they know the Middle east and Islam far better than we do, an attitude of pure ignorance.
-
Unknown A
This means that there are leaders within the Islamic community itself not without influence seeking to diversify and modernize their respective states, who are already more willing than their Western counterparts both to admit to the existence of of the psychopathic manipulators cloaking themselves in the guise of pure religious Islamic fundamentalism and to exercise severe control over their machinations. Equally, moderate attitudes could be fostered among the Muslim immigrants to the West. That would mean, however, that Western leaders would have to bite the bullet, as their moderate Islamic counterparts already have, and help separate the wheat from the chaff within the Muslim immigrant communities themselves. This will be of great and true benefit not only to the moderates within those enclaves, but to those Westerners called upon to share cultural, economic and social space with them. That would be the working class as well as to the moderate Islamic world internationally, whose leaders are endeavoring to do the same thing.
-
Unknown A
This would mean justly and courageously identifying, pursuing, and incarcerating or deporting the bad actors. This would mean applying the law of the land to the presumably oppressed and victimized newcomers, precisely as it is applied to citizens of longer standing. This would mean firmly and unapologetically noting where Western traditions, legal and otherwise, clash with the axioms of authoritarian intolerance. This would mean withstanding the accusations of Islamophobia, far right affiliation, and the associated risk of reputation destruction, demolition of career, and general cancellation that the leftist revolutionaries and the cowards and appeasers of the right are so happily willing to inflict. This would also mean finally publicly admitting to the mass rape of hundreds of thousands of British girls, the investigation of the causes of such atrocious behavior, and the meeting out of severe and certain punishment, not only to the perpetrators who are truly beyond the pale and must be treated as such, but to the enablers and allies who turned a blind ear for their ease and their reputation when called upon to open their eyes, speak their peace truthfully, and defend their less fortunate compatriots.
-
Unknown A
This is a terrible pathway forward, made palatable perhaps not only by the even more intolerable fact of the alternative capitulation to the worst of men cloaking themselves in the guise of the divine, swearing enmity to the west and to free women, posing true danger to the poor and marginalized and threatening not only the free societies of the world, but those who are striving toward freedom within the many countries who remain unsustainably repressive and authoritarian. When conscience calls upon us to speak, silence is a sin. God swore to Abraham that he would spare the evil cities of Sodom and gomorrah if only 10 good men could be found if the eternally threatened metropolis is to survive. Therefore, each of us is called upon to be one of those 10. It has been said that the truth will set us free, although there is no accompanying promise that such freedom will come without cost.
-
Unknown A
But the hell that the lie engenders, and this includes the lie of the complicit silent, is more intolerable and lasting than whatever trials emerge in consequence of honest discussion, negotiation and confrontation. We cannot make peace by pretending that it is already here when it is clearly not, particularly not when evil is obviously afoot. If we are going to continue the multicultural experiment, which is in part an experiment in how to make peace in the broader international world, we will have to accept responsibility for dealing with the evil of diversity as well as the good. This means standing up for what is right, even when the perpetrators of malevolence and crime are members of communities deemed oppressed for whatever reasons by the purposefully naive, holier than thou enemies of the free, productive and well worth preserving West. We need to drop our naive belief in the untrammeled goodness of diversity and multiculturalism.
-
Unknown A
We need to respond maturely and with discernment to the true complexities of religious, racial and ethnic difference, which offer promise and danger in at least equal measures. We need to admit to the scale of the mass sadistic rape catastrophe and thoroughly examine its causes. We need to document the reality of the complicit behavior of those deemed protectors of the innocent and to hold them to account for their appalling failure. We need, as alluded to previously, a frank and unflinching discussion nationally as well as internationally about how to identify the criminals shrouding themselves in the guise of Islam, separate them from those who want harmony and peace, and stop them dead in their tracks. We need, finally and above all, to stop raising our moral stature falsely by lying and prevaricating while sacrificing others to our pretension. The alternative is grim indeed, and not only for the traditional inhabitants of the UK specifically, and the west more generally, but to all those within the Muslim world who could and would move forward to the enlightened freedom of attitude and action that makes the west the destination of choice for the truly downtrodden and dispossessed of the
-
Unknown A
world.