In a piece for the Spectator, the Free Speech Union’s Freddie Attenborough argues that the adoption of the APPG’s broad definition of Islamophobia, which stifles discussions about the over-representation of Muslims in grooming gangs, has led to a chilling effect on free speech. Here’s an excerpt:
At PMQs this week, Kemi Badenoch told MPs that Labour’s adoption of the All Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslim’s definition of ‘Islamophobia’ has inhibited public discussion of rape gangs. She pointed out that, according to this definition, anyone who draws attention to the over-representation of Muslims in the grooming gangs is guilty of Islamophobia. This, she argued, is why some members of the Parliamentary Labour Party have been “scared to tell the truth”. She’s right, but the problem runs deeper than that.
The definition Mrs. Badenoch referred to was drawn up by the APPG in 2018, when the co-chairs were Wes Streeting and Anna Soubry. It issued a report that defined Islamophobia as “a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness” and went on to give examples of how this prejudice manifests itself. The definition was formally adopted by the Labour Party in 2019.
At the time, the report was criticised for defining Islamophobia too broadly. For instance, it says “claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword” are an example of “classic Islamophobia”. By that definition, Tom Holland’s book on the history of Islam – In the Shadow of the Sword – is Islamophobic. Another example the report gives is accusing Muslim majority countries of exaggerating or inventing claims of genocide perpetrated against Muslims. That would make anyone who disputes Iran’s description of Israel’s military operation in Gaza as ‘genocide’ an Islamophobe – including, ironically, Sir Keir Starmer. …
These concerns have been brought into sharp focus in the past week because the APPG report gives the example of “grooming gangs” as a “subtle form of anti-Muslim racism”. …
It isn’t just the Labour Party that has adopted the APPG definition. Alarmingly, it has been embraced across the political spectrum. The Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, the Scottish National Party, the Scottish Conservatives, Plaid Cymru, and the Scottish Greens have all formally adopted the definition. This means that members of these parties risk being sanctioned if they say anything that falls foul of the definition – including mentioning the religious or ethnic characteristics of the men found guilty in rape gang cases. (The Conservative Party has refused to adopt the definition, citing concerns over its potential impact on free speech.) …
The definition has also been widely adopted by local authorities. A Freedom of Information request conducted by Hardeep Singh for Civitas in 2023 revealed that 52 councils in England – approximately one in six – have adopted it. Many of these councils are in areas where grooming gangs have been operating. In these areas, councillors or council workers could face disciplinary action if they speak out against grooming gangs in ways that might be deemed Islamophobic under the APPG definition. …
This is a dangerous path to go down, one that risks eroding the principles of free speech and open discourse that our democracy depends on.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
These muppets can invent as many crackpot re-definitions as they want: nobody outside the laughing academy is obliged to adopt them. Islamophobia is a stupid word anyway, but it has a clear etymological meaning that’s probably beyond the wit of most politicians. Personally, I reject all of their ridiculous definitions and I’ll stick with the proper meaning of words.
Quite agree. I’m exactly the same. It’s the bastardization of the English language plus the rearranging of facts in order to support an agenda. They severely underestimate us if they presume we can’t see exactly what they’re doing. Christopher Hitchins was right all them years ago.
I also agree with Paul here;
”The sheer number of Pakistani Muslim men involved in England’s gang-rape atrocities suggests the entire Islamic community knew what was happening – and had been happening for decades. Which, it must be said, didn’t seem to bother them unduly.
This raises a very uncomfortable reality: The atrocities – on a par with war crimes – occurred in a country where Pakistani Muslims are the minority, and where the majority English control the government, media, police and judicial systems.
Circa 2050 the young English could be the racial minority, and Pakistani Muslims may well control the government, media, police and judicial systems.
One wonders what will happen to young English girls then. The witless might suggest there will be a multicultural utopia. The less witless might argue that the slave markets in Iraq where ISIS sells captured Yazidi girls provides a more realistic indicator of a future Islamic England under Sharia Law.”
https://x.com/PWestoff/status/1878173328898392074
Quite correct, whole communities must have known, and nobody said anything?
That is the most alarming aspect. We have to get these foul people out of our country, but there is no legal or moral way to achieve that, that I can think of.
Nightmare really.
Most of the convicted Muslim paedophiles, upon release from prison, are welcomed back into their communities and families as if nothing had happened. Speaks volumes.
But bien pensant Florence of Belgravia on the Rest is Politics tells us that it was only about 90 Pakistani men involved.
He is a very dangerous liar. It is shocking that such a man tutored the future King and his brother.
I’ve made the exact same comments i.e. some, probably a lot of, Muslims knew or suspected what was happening but kept quiet to protect their community, on MSN more than once and will continue to do so. I encourage everyone else to do the same, obviously a lot of woke people wouldn’t recognise the truth if it slapped them in the face but if one person takes onboard what is said then it’s worth people’s time commenting on MSN.
I suspect that the entire Pakistani “community” knew that it was (or was likely to be) going on because they came from the same culture and most came from the same area of Pakistan where extreme misogyny is prevalent.
I don’t think you can necessarily extend that to the whole Islamic “community” since (regrettably) that now includes many white Brits who have converted but who don’t share the same culture.
A phobia is an irrational fear e.g. arachnophobia (any species of spider found in the UK is harmless therefore there’s no rational reason to be scared of them). Given that the Koran repeatedly talks about spreading Islam through conquest and encourages Muslims to kill unbelievers rational people are right to fear Islam and, in terms of pure logic, it isn’t possible for Islamophobia to exist.
There is one aspect of the paedophile Pakistani Muslim rape gangs which I only recently learned of from a Hindu friend.
Pakistani Muslims are by religion racists. Perhaps not all are racist but we can say at least a sizeable number are. Their attitude is that Hindus and Sikhs are subhuman.
The problem is that is not limited to Hindus and Sikhs. It applies to all infidels.
A very good question asked by a GB News panel member today was why did they target very young white working-class girls.
The first reason is that regardless of what they do to infidels they will still end up in Muslim heaven because the infidels are all going to hell anyway and are subhuman. That is what they believe as part of their religion.
When I tried to find any academic research into this I could not find any – but that means nothing more than no academics will write about that aspect if they want to keep their jobs – and possibly their lives or bodily integrity.
So Jenrick was right to talk about people with medieval attitudes in today’s Britain. Islam is an outdated and immature belief system which has no place in the modern world.
The second reason is the grooming part. These young girls are easy prey to grooming. It is a typical modus operandi of the pimp. Lavish care and attention and gifts on the girls. Then when lulled into a false sense of care and security comes the violence and rapes.
These very young girls – and the youngest recorded was eight years old according to a professional who was interviewed by Charlie Peters of GB News – simply do not have the life experience to realise the danger they were in – and still are because no-one in the police, social services or government have done anything to stop it happening.
Of course many are not of high intelligence. One witness Peters interviewed has an IQ of just over 50 so she stood no chance.
And the lie to Labour’s claims their new bill in Parliament would ensure coordination between police and other agencies is that the same would happen as before but now there would be closer cooperation and coordination in letting it all carry on as it was before.
So Jenrick is really getting close to putting the questions we all have to start asking:
1) even if a majority of Pakistani Muslims claim they do not have these dreadful attitudes, of course they will say that but can anyone possibly know what is truly in their minds?
2) bearing in mind with high birth rates it has been estimated Muslims will be in a majority in as short as two decades, can the rest of the population sit back and wait for that to happen and hope it will all be OK?
3) following the sound advice to hope for the best but plan for the worst, is the only option to start deporting Pakistani Muslims?
Such a policy would of course hit the moderates as hard as the radicalised Muslims and would be a tough policy for government to adopt.
4) is it the only way to ensure peace and security for what is currently the majority against what is a sizeable and ever faster increasing minority?
5) Why did the Serbs want to ethnically cleanse their territory of the Muslims who were found in numbers in Kosovo and to do that to the degree of standing against international condemnation?
These are all questions to be asked.
There is historical precedent for concern on a national security level.
How big was Europe? Prior to 700 AD Europe was all the land surrounding the Mediterranean.
The Moors invaded the ‘Europe’ as it then was and conquered half of Europe. Infidels were given the choice of converting to Islam or death by the sword – a medieval method still favoured by Muslims today.
A Caliphate existed in Spain and Portugal for 700 years during the Golden Age of Islamic expansion and intellectual and other advancements until around 1400. During this time Christianity kept what was left of Europe in the dark ages.
So you have to ask yourself, if you were the leader of this country, can you afford Woke values of the current Labour government which have been wrought by well funded left-wing pressure groups almost subliminally undermining and destroying social cohesion and sowing division and divisiveness in the name of DEI.
All of the above is perfectly reasonably argued and rational.
Am I or anyone else to be barred to asking these questions because Keir Starmer and his Wokist mates want to encourage a people with medieval beliefs and values to become so entrenched in the UK that we may well be looking at a Parliament in as short as 20-30 years which will be enacting Sharia law and imposing that on those of us who by that time might be in a minority?
Worse still, imagine if a majority in Parliament could be won by a minority Muslim party just as Starmer’s dreadful Labour government has? So such a government would not even have a majority in numbers of voters behind them and so no mandate for such a major change to the laws of the UK.
Great post, but watch out for the resident Mr Whinger, because you definitely went over 140 characters there. We wouldn’t wish to traumatise somebody by forcing them against their will to read a longer comment on here now would we?
There are also many parallels between the Pakistani rape gangs and the way in which Andrew Tate operated. He used the ‘Loverboy Method’, a known tactic used by sex traffickers to lure their victims, he always targeted young women and teenagers with “daddy issues”, they need to be naive with minimal life experience because any even slightly older woman would tell him to go f**k himself and be less likely to fall for it in the first place, let alone put up with the amount of physical, sexual, psychological and financial abuse and exploitation that followed. Another parallel both sets of groomers used is sending one of their ‘successful projects’, a girl who has been sufficiently brainwashed, to go out and lure other gullible girls in. Girls would understandably find a female less threatening, which I think is human nature generally. Hell, it worked well for Hindley and Brady.
Predatory men such as these have their tried and tested tactics down to a fine art and they prey on the naive and vulnerable, as we know.
It’s obvious to everyone that nonsense lie-words like “Islamophobia” serve a political purpose. Traditionally, “islamophobia” was an attempt by the Establishment to pretend that people who objected to our children being murdered by the Establishment’s imported people are mad. But the recent development is even more extraordinary: now the Establishment is telling us that they have to protect the rapists from us by claiming that if we object to our children being raped by the Establishment’s imported people then we are “Islamophobes” (i.e. “mad”). This is a regime that has spent decades ignoring the victims of the Establishment’s beloved rapists.
Quite extraordinary!
Yes, I read years ago that Muslims actually stole the term from “homophobia”, because they saw that it had been used so successfully against “normies” to silence all criticism of sodomy.
In fact, it’s not “Islamo-Phobia”, because we are not afraid.
It’s “Islamo-Nausea”, because the whole world is sick of Islam.
Speak for yourself – I’m afraid of Islam.
However, I would argue that it doesn’t qualify as a ‘phobia’, as that would be an irrational fear.
But a phobia is an irrational fear (like a phobia of small spiders). There is a measure of rationality in your fear so it could be argued it’s not a phobia.
Yes, sorry I was trying to say that in my post – not irrational. Mind you, I would say that, wouldn’t I?!
A fear of spiders is not a phobia.
The fact that large numbers of people are wary of spiders yet may never have experienced a trauma from an encounter with a spider suggests the fear is likely to be a genetically inherited response to avoid danger.
Even very small spiders can cause very serious harm to humans. So a response of avoiding them is not irrational but rational.
Venom from a small spider can cause large areas of skin and muscle to became raw open ulcerated wounds.
The only reason why some may not think this is rational is because the fear has not been developed by traumatic experience but inherited genetically or by some related signalling pathway passed down through generations.
In other words, some people cannot rationalise the fear but that does not make it an irrational fear. It just means they think it is irrational because they cannot understand the mechanism by which that fear is learned because their knowledge of the mechanism is too limited based upon their own very narrow personal experience.
You are absolutely right. I remember reading years ago that humans are genetically programmed to loathe and fear dangerous creatures like spiders, snakes, parasites, and large predators like lions and wolves, in order to increase our chances of survival. In the same way, I read that we are genetically programmed to love the sound of streams, rivers and the sea, wind and rain, fireplaces and eating in the open air, because it’s a kind of ancient memory.
You are also right about small spiders. People should remember that the tiniest spiders most easily enter your house, and there grow to be large ones.
It is also true that spiders bite humans and other animals in their sleep. Show them no mercy.
No not afraid of them, but I am deeply concerned by the actions of our political class in this as in so many issues.
At the end of the day, there’s more of us than there are of them, our country has suffered horrendous nightmares in the past eg the romans and the Normans and we survived and recovered most of what we lost, and I am an incurable optimist and think we can do it again.
But first we have to stop it getting worse.
So an absolute ban on immigration from Pakistan is an essential first step.
Not negotiable.
There is simply no way that could happen (unfortunately)
“our political class” …. “there’s more of us” …. “our country has suffered” …. “we survived and recovered” …. “we can do it again.” …. “we have to stop it” ….
Sadly it is too late to refer to “us”, “our country”, “we”.
There is no “us”, “our country”, “we”. There was not before either. Those people who live decades and centuries ago would not recognise the people of this country today as part of them, their country and they.
London and other cities are full of people who may hardly consider themselves to be part of “us”, “our country”, “we”. They voted repeatedly for Mayor Khan, that utterly disgraceful excuse for a human. Clearly he must have the same attitude to the infidels of this country as he goes about doing great harm to London and all who live in the South-East of England within and beyond the M25.
I will also never again have anything to do with the police after repeatedly being the victim of crime and having nothing done except the criminals being protected and the victims left without justice or closure.
Local government is also chock-a-block with corruption as are so many other parts of government and the private sector.
How much money are police officers taking from criminals to turn a blind eye?
You cannot possibly believe with all that has happened over the Pakistani Muslim paedophile rape torture and murder gangs [yes they have murdered and not just victims but their whole families] that the police are not taking money from them and other criminal gangs. IMHO the question is simply ‘how much’.
So how many of ‘the police’ are “us”, “our country”, “we”?
If a police officer is being beaten to death it is far safer to rapidly leave the area than it is to stick around and help or be a witness. My advice is leave them to die and save yourself by a quick exit.
I have very little doubt that it will not be long before vigilantes will start dealing with crime and criminals rather than rely on the state and all its corrupt machinery. They may already be doing so but just keeping a low profile and operating in the shadows.
What the dreadful problem of Pakistani Muslim paedophile rape torture and murder gangs has shown is law and order has not just broken down but no longer exists.
The greater problem is in these circumstances criminal gangs take over with protection rackets and Italian mafia style Dons will be the ones the public will give their allegiances to in return for justice which will be swift, bloody and cruel.
They could even be Pakistani Muslim mafia style Dons for all I know. Wouldn’t that be an outcome!
A Five Year Total Moratorium on All Immigration from the Third World would be most effective, after renouncing all international “rules” forcing the West to accept any parasite claiming “asylum”.
The whole point of Brexit was to take control of our own borders, which has not happened, even 8 years later.
That’s true I’ve seen that too.
Following the Orwell playbook…
I wonder if this would be classed as “Islamophobia”…
This needs to catch on over here. “Free Phallustine” for the win!
https://x.com/nexta_tv/status/1878452101933563927
”It isn’t just the Labour Party that has adopted the APPG definition. Alarmingly, it has been embraced across the political spectrum. The Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, the Scottish National Party, the Scottish Conservatives, Plaid Cymru, and the Scottish Greens have all formally adopted the definition”
Those parties are not across any spectrum. They are all far left.
Including the Fake Conservative Party now led by a Nigerian Birth Tourist.
The tories out of a bad lot seem to be slightly less bad, however it is undeniable that in 14 years in government they failed to tackle this problem.
Which leads me to belive the problem lies in the civil service, the blob which as we know from “yes prime minister” and latterly dom Cummings, makes all the decisions.
Elected minsters are just there to take the credit, or in recent years, the blame.
How we need Milei’s chainsaw, or as an alternative mr guillotine’s interesting invention.
The Civil Service may well be a problem, but Johnson had a huge majority and did nothing about it. Lack of political will.
Yes that’s true.
But do we know how much political will is required to overcome the fucks in the civil service?
Probably quite a lot, but if you stand for high office then that’s the game you’re in. It’s tough at the top!
It is an impossible game played on the Civil Service’s home ground on rules only they know and are well versed in.
These days no Minister is in office long enough to learn the rules let alone how to play and even less how to win a game.
Sorry but I simply do not buy that. They can be sacked if necessary. If laws get in the way, you can change them. What is lacking is the political will. They simply do not have the balls and/or the inclination to take the actions necessary to carry out the will of the people.
How do you sack the people who control who gets sacked?
You don’t.
Have you never heard a former Minister say that they pulled the right levers but nothing happened? The Civil Service has a million and one ways to thwart the government.
Dominic Cummings set out to tame them and we all know what happened to him. Despite what people in the media wrote about him he is a very smart guy with a lot of good ideas based upon wide reading.
You sack them too.
It has never happened to the best of my knowledge.
But if you have specific examples that would be helpful.
I do know of the case of the chinless wonder who sued for constructive dismissal on the basis a Minister made his life hell but that is a very isolated case and he was not sacked but jumped ship.
Home Office chief Philip Rutnam quits
Senior civil servant plans to sue for constructive dismissal after war of words with Priti Patel
29 Feb 2020 The FT
Philip Rutnam: £340k payout to official after Priti Patel bullying claims
4 March 2021
So he got his revenge in the end.
He does look a very sad individual from the photo. He came across on TV at the time as a typical Whitehall chinless wonder and most unimpressive IMHO.
But he was not sacked. The Mandarins would never let that happen to one of their own.
They know they can last 30 years and more in the service and Ministers might last only a few months.
Examples? No. All I am saying is that Parliament is sovereign and can do whatever it wants. The fact that they fail to ensure policies they were voted in to pursue is a demonstration that they are not that bothered.
With the current Government as we saw only recently, Parliament cannot do what it wants.
WTF has Parliament got to do with what Government Ministers can achieve in their Whitehall departments? Absolutely nothing especially when the governing party has 420 seats in Parliament controlled by the Prime Minister to do what he dictates.
Starmer whipped his majority to vote a particular way or else be chucked out of the party.
So ‘Parliament’ did what Starmer wanted and not what MPs wanted – and we are now seeing what some MPs wanted and it was not what Starmer wanted.
Parliament is a legislative assembly controlled by the official party of government.
So there is no ‘Parliament which can do whatever it wants’. Parliament can only do what individuals either allow it to do or which the social political and economic realities dictate.
The reality is that Whitehall mandarins and their acolytes are continually manipulating what is done by Government in this country regardless of the policies Ministers want to implement.
There is no such thing as a sovereign Parliament in the sense of an institution considered in isolation from the context in which all those involved operate and the handful of individuals who control what takes place within it.
Reply to transmissionofflame
I am tired of you doubling down every time you get yourself into a hole of your own making.
It would be so much easier for you to recognise the reality instead of doing what you do every time like a broken record.
If your staff refuse to carry out your orders, you dismiss them and employ people who will. That’s what the US President does – the senior White House staff are brought in with the President. I suppose if every single public sector worker refused to comply then it would get logistically more difficult to replace them, but that’s a bit far fetched.
Laws are made and unmade by votes in parliament. Of course the government of the day controls the agenda and controls the votes through the whipping system, but MPs can vote however they want.
You are a hoot.
Totally disconnected from reality.
If it was all so simple it would have been done decades ago.
But it hasn’t because it isn’t.
Dream on that you are so tough you would get it done.
How about you stand for Parliament and show us all how it is done genius.
Try learning some manners.
Has the political will been there or not? I’m not saying it’s “simple”, but we don’t elect leaders to do things that are simple and easy.
I tried being polite.
Did not work.
Sometimes you have to use a different approach.
Madness is trying the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
So what’s your proposed solution to the “civil service problem”? Surely we can’t go on as we are.
Not sure. I will have to spend some time thinking that one over.
Problem solving involves defining the problem and I do not have enough knowledge of the inner workings of Whitehall to be able to identify all elements of it let alone to define it.
I am sure that one aspect is transparency over the roles of senior civil servants: who they are; what parts they play in advising government; what advice they give. Who they have contacts with in finance, commerce and industry is another aspect of transparency.
Another aspect is not allowing senior Civil Servants to remain in one job in one department for too long and to rotate them.
What is too long? In general longer than 5 years sounds a potential starting point.
Beyond the above I am not as yet equipped for form any settled views yet.
Well I hope someone undertakes such an exercise but I don’t think I will see it in my lifetime. Doubtless the wider establishment would kick up a huge fuss. In any case I don’t imagine that a majority of MPs could ever be found to enact significant reforms.
The world is full of people with simple solutions to complex problems.
Currently the most visible among them are called Keir Starmer and Rachel ‘Bank of Scotland Economist’ Reeve who should be prosecuted.
Lying on her CV is presumtively a criminal offence and it only needs someone to file a formal complaint with Mr Plod to get it moving.
Mr Plod however may not get it moving despite that.
The Cummings videos, with various interviewers, and those with Truss, highlight the stranglehold that the Administration have, even when the ministers have chosen a policy which, I have to admit, isn’t often.
Yes, but in the UK, Parliament is sovereign. With a simple majority it can make or repeal any law it wants to. All that is required is the political will, which has been lacking.
They managed to lock us in our homes for a fake pandemic, a scotch egg is a substantial meal, but they are afraid of civil servants? Lame excuses. We elect them to do stuff. This is not a game. They are a pathetic shower.
He had a majority that contained far too many MPs brought in by Cameron who inhabited the Lib-Dem wing of the party.
Exactly – Fake conservatives. Using the civil service as an excuse suited them.
It is frightening how scared politicians of many parties are of their LGBTQI+++ etc activists.
I have watched from a distance as politicians of certain parties including MPs ingratiate themselves, fawning over a handful of hard extremist activists some of whom are just plain nasty who wear as their uniforms and identity badges dresses and other extravagant apparel [for men that is] so they can be recognised instantly and paid homage.
Exactly how this kind of power-through-influence comes to exist and functions is unclear. It is gained by control over politicians who are not naturally part of their dogma and agenda but adopt it to avoid being attacked and drummed out of their parties.
I would be in serious trouble with those people f I were to suggest one of the reasons for gender dysphoria could well be female hormones in the water supply from the contraceptive pill. These remain in our drinking water because we cannot get rid of them and they also end up in the food chain in fish via our rivers, seas and oceans.
Have you ever heard of the modern phenomenon of gender bender fishes which transmute from male to female because of contamination in the waters they live in?
If it can happen to them it can happen to humans.
And those nice tasty female hormones will never ever be gone from the water supply.
A medical friend went so far as to say that women who take the contraceptive pill should not be allowed to urinate into toilets connected to the sewerage and waste water recycling systems.
Yes folks that is how it is. Enjoy every nice glass of water and cup of tea as you are slowly poisoned by it.
WC Fields is reputed to have said when asked about his aversion to water: “Never touch the stuff—very unhealthy. Fish fuck in it.”
Today his answer would be very different and in a voice a couple of octaves higher I suspect if he did ever drink water.
Has anybody seen this website? Not sure how often they update, and I don’t know if somebody were to look into the Tory party they would find similar, but this came to my attention off the back of this latest Labour person, Ivor Caplin, who was arrested for arranging to meet up with a minor for sex and the paedo hunters nabbed him as part of a sting. Anyway, take a look. It goes back years. Surely it’s not exclusively a ‘Labour thing’?
”This site was created to make the British public aware of the agenda of the Labour party. Of primary concern is the knowledge that there are 25 convicted paedophiles behind bars having had positions with the Labour Party. How many more remain free as the Labour Party ignores the infection in their ranks.
It is said that ignorance is bliss and perhaps Labour lives this ‘bliss’ for a reason. It was the Labour Government that introduced explicit sex education for 5 year olds. Acceptances of homosexuality material also aim at primary school children. Are these grooming tactics brought into the curriculum by the Labour party.
We are here to ask the difficult questions. We are very concerned about what is happening to our children. Are paedophiles really becoming a protected species. We intend to uncover and inform.”
https://labour25.com/
Looks like there’s way more if this list is legit;
”Labour Pedos, 50 of them.
Wanna bet there are a lot more?
Of course there is, it will be endemic.”
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1878469173635932257
From what Nadine Dorries said,there is little difference between the 3 old major parties on this.
Very informative thread, if anyone’s got a Twitter account. In Germany Afghans and Pakistanis are proportionally 16X more likely than German-born citizens to be implicated for rape. Similar findings play out across Europe. The countries might differ ( Algerian migrants are always in the top 5-10 across all crimes ), but the one constant is Islam;
”It’s not just Britain, by the way. This is happening all across the West.
It’s tough to measure immigrant crime in the U.S., because very few states track immigration status in their criminal justice system.
But Europe does. And the numbers are genuinely incredible. ”
https://x.com/njhochman/status/1877084306754920475
I could imagine that (invariably) short, unattractive, unfit men of an Asian heritage may struggle to pull Heidis or Brunnhildes. Isn’t this the core of the whole problem……the reason why Muslims etc have to control and mandate female behaviour? Just sayin’….
A good article by Raymond Ibrahim here, which gives some historical context to this very issue;
”The ongoing revelations of Muslim “grooming gangs” targeting young white girls for sexual exploitation in the UK is as old as Islam itself, and even traces back to Muhammad.
Much literary evidence attests to this in the context of Islam’s early predations on Eastern and Greek Europeans. According to Ahmad M. H. Shboul (author of Byzantium and the Arabs: The Image of the Byzantines as Mirrored in Arabic Literature) the Eastern Roman Empire (“Byzantium”) was the “classic example of the house of war,” or Dar al-Harb — that is, the quintessential realm that needs to be conquered by jihad. Moreover, it was seen “as a symbol of military and political power and as a society of great abundance.”
The similarities between pre-modern Islamic views of Eastern Rome and modern Islamic views of the West — powerful, affluent, desirable, but also the greatest of all infidels — should be evident. But they do not end here. To the medieval Muslim mindset, Byzantium was further representative of “white people” — fair- haired/-eyed Christians, or, as they were known in Arabic, Banu al-Asfar, “children of yellow” (reference to blonde hair).”
https://www.meforum.org/mef-online/why-islamists-have-always-preferred-blondes
For anyone on Twitter I highly recommend following Marc Vanguard’s account as his thing is analyzing all the crime data from across Europe and presenting it in ‘easy on the eye’ graph form, which is very helpful for lay people like me. He specifically focuses on the ethnicity of the offenders and compares it with natives. Gold mine of a source and much appreciated and shared his work is;
”Despite making up 26% of the permanent resident population in Switzerland, foreigners account for 47% of rape suspects.
Swiss data is a gold mine for understanding how high immigrants’ crime rates are.”
https://x.com/Marc_Vanguard_i/status/1877449004335706503
But surely it’s gentlemen that prefer blonds, and these genetic misfits don’t really qualify, sorry if I sound like a racist.
Plus I suspect the true rates are much higher than that
There are two obvious precursors to the convenience of calling everything Islamophobic. Obviously this political party needs to keep things sweet and also there is fear. There aren’t many Christians these days who will threaten to kill you for dissing their faith. It is just the line of least resistance. And these girls, they are disparaged by many white people in this country all the time. They get called chavs and scum. They only time they appear in the massmedia is in places like Jeremy Kyle where they are mocked and ridiculed for their coarsenss as if they wished it upon themselves.
Why keep on using this ‘grooming’ euphemism as if you are worried about stating it as it is. These are predatory child rape gangs. It has nothing to do with bloody grooming. We are talking about sadistic opportunistic sexual practices and even torture. So please dispense with the grooming malarkey.
Anyone who is unable to tell right from wrong is not the sort of person I want running the country irrespective of their political or religious inclination.
Vaguely on-topic (anti-whitism): The Military That Cried ‘White Supremacy’ – Ann Coulter
They can say what they like but the people know full well who was largely responsible – and it wasn’t the Pilgrim Fathers
I want to encourage people to take issue with phrases such as “Asian grooming gangs”, every media outlet apart from, possibly, GB News uses this phrase, and if they read articles e.g. on MSN, saying this leave a comment saying that this term is a mealy mouthed euphemism. Obviously the grooming gangs weren’t made up of men of Chinese, Indian, etc. heritage. Nor were they made up of men from Hindu, Sikh etc. communities. It was Muslim men that committed these vile crimes and a lot of woke people need to have this fact rammed down their throats until they stop living in denial.
As a Christian is it possible to fear Islam? Why would people, for whatever reasons or intentions, encourage the idea to fear?
Paedophilia thrives in the silence of the victims and those who know that it is occurring yet turn a blind eye. It is an abhorrent abuse of power and there are unfortunately far too many examples of the abuse of power that are still being silenced around the world.
Our eyes need to be wide open to the abuse of power wherever and whenever it occurs and we must all have the right to speak out about it without fear of censorship and cancellation if the world is to reset its moral compass.
The future of a civilised world depends on our ability to speak truth to power and recent history demonstrates clearly the consequences of blocking that right for the benefit of the abusers and to the detriment of the victims.
Tousi TV have been covering the issue in Oldham and Greater Manchester and have disclosed some fascinating and worrying links with national and local government
How can anyone in a civilised nation claim that criticising the rape and predation of women and girls, is worse than the actual offences themselves?
Anyone in any way defending the perpetrators of those heinous crimes deserves to be prosecuted, and locked up as complicit in those crimes.
Its time we and our politicians realised that Islam is not compatible with our values and culture and some of Islam’s values and associated culture if adopted are illegal in our country. When adopted by extreme Moslems as some are then the behaviour of the grooming gangs and other despicable acts are not considered wrong. We need to get rid of the DEI nonsense and insist people living in our country comply with our laws and culture. Imigrants applying for British citizenship should be tested on the values they must follow and sign an effective contract which would ban things like unfair treatment of women and the burka (as they have in France), before the rights of British citizenship is granted. We should all be able to value our citizenship and those not prepared to accept the conditions above should not benefit from it and told if they want to stay longer than six months they must accept them or leave. My comments are not racist, but just insist people living in our country should be civilised.