Posted on 09/09/2014 2:24:07 AM PDT by servo1969
Last week, it was revealed that between 1997 and 2013, at least 1,400 girls -- in just one relatively small English city (Rotherham, population 275,000) had been raped by gangs of men over the past decade.
As summarized in a British government inquiry:
"It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators."
Why was nothing done for 16 years?
Police incompetence was a factor, but not the primary reason.
The primary reason was political correctness. It turns out that the perpetrators were all, or nearly all, of "Pakistani heritage" and the girls were all, or nearly all, white.
This explanation is not that of conservatives alone. Virtually everyone, including media and politicians on the British left, acknowledge that this is the reason. What neither they nor the American left have acknowledged is that political correctness was created and is sustained by the left.
It is a testament to the lack of self-awareness on the left that it experiences no cognitive dissonance. The New York Times and other left-wing media have thoroughly reported this story and the fact that political correctness is to blame for the ongoing atrocities against these girls. Yet they are oblivious to the fact that they are the very ones who created the moral monsters known as political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity -- the doctrines that forbid judging non-whites, Muslims and others by the same moral standards as whites and Christians.
These left-wing doctrines made 16 years of gang rapes of English girls possible.
In 2002, a Labor Party MP from nearby Keighley, Ann Cryer, complained to the police about "young Asian lads" raping girls in her constituency. In her words, she "was shunned by elements of her party." And note, that as is demanded by the left in the U.K., she didn't even mention that the rapists were Pakistani, lest Muslims be blamed for this evil. They were "Asian lads."
And, for the record, her attempts to get local imams to intervene with the men failed; she was called a racist.
National Review editor Rich Lowry reports that, "In a BBC documentary, the author of a 2002 report to the Rotherham council on the scandal said her work was quashed. When she noted that the perpetrators were from the Pakistani community, a colleague told her 'you must never refer to that again -- you must never refer to Asian men.' She was sent to diversity training and, by her account, nearly fired."
British Home Secretary Theresa May told Parliament that "institutionalized political correctness" was responsible for the lack of attention given to the mass rape.
In 2001, Jack Straw, then-MP from Brighton, and formerly U.K. home secretary, announced that "there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men ... who target vulnerable young white girls." Straw was dismissed by the left. For example, Keith Vaz, a Labour MP, told the BBC: "I disagree with Jack Straw ... I don't think you can stereotype an entire community."
The immediate case that prompted Straw's statement was the conviction of two Brits of Pakistani heritage on charges of rape. Multiculturalism and political correctness clearly infected the judge in that case. He "said he did not believe the crimes were 'racially aggravated,' adding that the race of the victims and their abusers was 'coincidental.'"
"Coincidental."
Lies are to political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity what water is to fish.
From the Guardian in 2001: "Retired detective chief superintendent Max McLean, who led a previous police investigation into sexual exploitation involving the grooming and trafficking of young girls in Leeds, questioned whether it was a cultural problem" (italics added).
Perhaps Detective Chief Superintendent is unaware of the following from his own country (as reported last week in the New York Times):
"The same [as in Rotherham] was true in recent prosecutions in Oxford, in southern England, and the northern towns of Oldham and Rochdale, where nine men of Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Afghan origin were given long prison sentences in 2012 for abusing up to 47 girls. Investigators in Scotland have reportedly uncovered a similar pattern of abuse."
So why did the judge "question whether it was a cultural problem"?
Because morally judging cultures (except Christian, Israeli and American cultures) is forbidden by the left. Indeed not judging non-Western cultures is the very definition of "multiculturalism."
And finally, from the same report: Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of Muslim organization the Ramadhan Foundation, "to suggest that this is somehow ingrained in the community is deeply offensive."
"Offensive?" But what, Mr. Shafiq, if it's true?
The answer is clear and important. For the multicultural left and the victim-status groups it defends -- and for the millions of young people the Left has indoctrinated at schools and universities -- whether something is true is not what matters. What matters is whether it can be deemed offensive by the left.
Some 1,400 girls were raped by gangs of men -- "[While one girl was being raped] the rest of the men, all in their 20s, stood over her, cheering and jeering, and blinding her with the flash of their cameras" -- thanks to leftism's morality-denying doctrine of multiculturalism.
This is all but one more example of the most important moral rule since the beginning of the 20th century: Almost everything the left touches is either damaged or ruined.
In this case, it was the lives of 1,400 English girls.
Apparently 1,400 is an except-able number in England, however I’m willing to bet the number here in America far exceeds that, per capita.
Revolution Now!
These girls are mostly from the British underclass, most of which is white, but is otherwise quite remarkably similar in pathology to the American underclass. See the writings of Theodore Dalrymple.
IOW, there was probably no father around for most of them, and mom was often involved in drugs or other low-level criminal stuff and/or had a procession of boyfriends through the home.
These perps chose white girls because they wanted to dominate the dhimmi, but they chose THESE white girls because they were vulnerable, just as girls in similar situations in the US are vulnerable and are singled out by predators.
This is not inaccurate. Such ploys are always used by perps around the world. Girls are snared by being treated nicely. They feel special because they have a boyfriend.
This doesn't last long nor does the pretense of caring.
But they don't just (generally) grab girls off the street. They are seduced and then exploited. Which is why it's called "grooming," not "grabbing."
Of course, if they go to Iraq and join ISIS, they'll be able to use more traditional and less time-consuming Muslim methods of getting girls.
No, put their dead bodies on display like pirates were done centuries ago, as a warning to others of their kind. Like Clint Eastwood said, “Buzzard's gotta eat, same as the worm.”
Aside from the teachings of Mohammad (pork be upon him) this is what happens when the populace is disarmed. We decent citizens need to take our countries back!
Among the best defenses of the death penalty I've ever heard is the enormity of capital crimes exceeds the limitations of human law, thus, "we send you to a higher court for dispensation."
The post-modern liberal cannot stand such an argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.