Posted on 12/01/2012 11:34:53 PM PST by george76
In a chilling parallel to the scandal sweeping Britains towns and cities, where a multitude of girls have been lured into sex-for-sale rings run by gangs, the Dutch pimps search out girls at school gates and in cafes, posing as boyfriends promising romance, fast car rides and restaurant meals.
The men ply their victims with vodka and drugs. They tell them lies: that they love them and their families dont care for them. Then, the trap set, they rape them with other gang members, often taking photos of the attack to blackmail the girl into submission.
...
Hard-line criminal behaviour is happening behind those windows. Girls are physically abused if they dont work hard enough. It is slavery, which was abolished a long time ago in the Netherlands
Anita de Wit says ... There are thousands of girls being preyed on by male gangs in Holland.
Anita visits schools to warn girls exactly what a lover boy looks like, and makes no bones of the fact that most of the gangs are operated by Dutch-born Moroccan and Turkish men.
I am not politically correct. I am not afraid of being called a racist, which would be untrue. I tell the girls that lover boys are young, dark-skinned and very good looking. They will have lots of money and bling as well as a big car. They will give out cigarettes and vodka. They will tell a girl that she is beautiful.
Anitas bluntness is a far cry from the approach in Britain, where political correctness has stopped police and social workers telling girls the same home truths: that in many towns, particularly in the north of England, the handsome men chatting them up at the school gate are very likely to be of Pakistani descent.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
There was a case in Britain where the police did not act after a young girl came to them for help, because they were afraid of being called racist. Muslims are using the liberals’ cowardice, and that of western societies in general, destroy the west. It isn’t PC to speak the truth, let alone act on it.
Ha, ha, bibliophobia?
Sounds like a real war on women.
FINALLY,
Someone gets my “humor”
:0)
I said nothing about the Dutch, just responding to your lame barb at Libertarians. It’s fairly obvious, unless one is stupid, that the people involved in the story don’t have the freedom to escape their circumstances without the risk of violence, which, to anyone with a brain is obviously not Libertarian.
Personally, I have problems with Libertarians myself, but it’s mainly from the standpoint of their being an apparent set-up in their higher levels by monied leftists. I DON’T have any problem with people pretty much doing whatever they want in their homes/personal spaces, as long as OTHER PEOPLE don’t have to clean up the mess physically or financially.
On the libertarianist side of that equation, Darwin weeds out most of the idiots that follow the hedonistic stuff, and hardly anyone crosses the border because there’s only hard work and no freebies.
On the statist/leftist side, you get everything you so despise, and vast quantities of it, because WE get to pay for all of it AND it’s sold as such...
Side note - Do realize that we’re essentially 85-90% all the way with that “platform” you posted, and there weren’t ANY Libertarians who actually were in office who got any of that stuff rolling, just Demon’Rats and Republicans...
Beware of the loud libertine lobby braying away on this thread.
Beware of the loud libertine lobby braying away on this thread.
I agree, Red Horse, the lack of parental guidance is a big issue. I read a detailed article about teenage girls active in prostitution in the UK, and what struck me was how none of them seem to come from two parent families. The role of the pimp seems often to be the male authority figure otherwise lacking in her life.
The key difference between statism and libertarianism concerns enforcement regardless of whatever morality is at stake.
I don’t recall Christ requiring the force of law, but that’s what Islam requires; Sharia law.
The moral divide in this Country is established by Leftism and Conservatism. How it’s administered is determined by the amount of required statism (the application of law). A pure libertarian society would effectively be one of anarchy. Hitler demonstrated the consequences of a pure form of statism. Somewhere between the two extents, “normal” societies function.
Not sure why the definitions and graph in #16 and #19 are in question.
- - - - - - -
A note for the impaired:
I’m a Pro-Life Conservative Libertarian. I believe in the limited use of law to govern the citizens. I’m for capital punishment, a strong foreign policy, and contrary to the sorely reckless assertions made in this thread, I’m for the maximum sentencing possible for crimes against minors. I think parents should have the right to personally execute the perp where sentenced under the governing law.
The Libertarian Party is generally a party of jackasses that embraces Leftism under the guise of libertarianism. They support egregious behavior in principle which includes the killing of nascent life. The party tacitly supports using law to force citizens into supporting homosexual behavior. That’s a party of Leftism.
I’m a registered Republican, and vote the Pro-Life, Conservative ticket. I would never join the kind of party represented by the Libertarian Party nor Democrat Party.
I was one of the few here whom immediately stood up for Todd Akin. I’m an open and frequent supporter of Palin and West. I’m a supporter of the Thomas More Law Center, and other conservative groups including Free Republic.
Unfortunately, many conservatives are comfortable with creeping statism, but they just don’t want to pay for it which gives the false sense they’re for Liberty. If Christianity had its version of Sharia, good chance many so-called conservatives would go for it. I don’t think this violation of the 1st Amendment is what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
Do Libertarians get blamed for that?
There are lawful brothels in Nevada, obviously overrun by Muslim gangs.
There have been "houses of ill repute" in virtually every gold rush, land boom, any area which is conspicuously rolling in dough, and then there are the high-dollar call girls who take care of the luminaries in places like Washington, D.C. and New York City--they just charge more.
Where these activities are illegal, they still go on.
It takes two to tangle. If one is against the existence or such, simply don't patronize the establishment. If no one does, there won't be one (well, there, at least).
Oh. That's the Leftists agenda. It really doesn't have squat to do with being libertarian. It's just another Communist hijack.
You missed my point entirely...your philosophy is no different from that “statism” you hate. The end result will be the same because man is flawed and his reasoning is therefore flawed. All through history tyrants have cited “good reason” for their tyranny. Without accepting God as the authority...he truly is the only worthy authority...there is no morality...only man’s will and all his arrogance to guide.
Apologies. I glossed over the God factor since I don’t consider faith and morality exclusive to libertarianism*. This point is underscored by the 1st Amendment; Congress shall make no law... Certainly the 1st Amendment is not declaring that God shall be ignored. It is, however, limiting the extent govt can have over one’s religious activity. That’s a libertarian position, as is the 2nd Amendment.
The Constitution and Christianity are perfectly compatible. What has become of the govt is a different matter. The evolving policy is increasingly Leftist and increasingly statist. I’d prefer a smaller govt that is more Conservative and more libertarian. This shouldn’t be controversial.
* This has nothing to do with the Libertarian Party platform.
My apologies, I misunderstood what you were trying to say. I now realize we are in agreement! My emphasis on God has evolved as I come to more understanding of the influences of evil and temptation has on man. It has really opened my eyes and makes me appreciate the Founding Fathers more. Not to mention God’s perfection.
And you were quite clever. :-)
WHat I have often found is confusion between the ideal world, where libertarianism would work out just perfectly, versus the real world, where very people have a truly libertarian attitude for a variety of reasons. People want their welfare, people don’t want to take the consequences for their actions, people don’t want to just believe things alone, etc. Once it is realized that so much of the national/world population feels this way, there is where you realize how idealistic libertarianism is. In fact, it’s really hard to not embrace some degree of statism.
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.