Julie Bindel (@bindelj) was the first to report on The Rotherham Horror — the vicious sex-trafficking gangs of Muslim men who preyed on English girls, an atrocity officials ignored for fear of “racism” — and I want to begin this by giving her full credit for her work.
One of the things that most shocked me about this story was a simple question: Where were the feminists? Here you have girls as young as 11 being raped and pimped out, and you might think that there would be daily outpourings of feminist rage about it, yet this problem has been allowed to fester for years without decisive official action? Something is clearly wrong in British culture, if political correctness could keep feminists quiet about this savagery. But Julie Bindel was not silent — she wrote a lengthy article for the Sunday Times of London about Rotherham in September 2007 — and her courage deserves recognition.
Emma Jackson’s courage also deserves recognition:
Emma Jackson has a way of referring to her younger self that makes her teen years sound as though they were decades ago. “My mum is my best friend,” she reflects at one point as we are talking. “Now I’m older I’m really happy with that, but when I was 13, I saw things differently. I was much younger and I didn’t want my mum at all. I just wanted my friends.”
The past sounds so far away that I have to keep reminding myself that Emma is still only 20. . . . [T]hose friends she sought out so assiduously at 13 in the local shopping centre near her home in Yorkshire turned out not to be friends at all, but a well-organised gang of criminals, using teenage boys as bait to enable them to groom young, naïve girls like Emma for a life of prostitution. ‘
From the distant vantage point of adulthood, she can now discern a disturbing pattern in how they treated her, but at the time it all felt spontaneous – and, at first, exciting. She was initially befriended by courteous, good- looking lads a few years older than she was. Through them, she was introduced to their older friends, and finally, slowly and imperceptibly as she tells it, into the arms of what seemed a glamorous suitor called Tarik. . . .
“Yes, there probably are a lot of girls who get involved because they come from broken homes, or are in care, but when you look at the whole situation, as I have, there are plenty who don’t. The gangs know that if they take a girl from a nice family, she will probably be more naïve, not as streetwise as kids who have been in care. And because you are naïve, you are more trusting, easier to impress. They like that. It makes you easier to control. . . . .”
That’s from an interview Emma did with Peter Jackson of the Independent in January 2010 — more than four years ago — and if you do the math, you realize that Emma’s exploitation began in 2002-2003. The failure of British officials to crack down on this horrible trafficking of young girls is inexplicable and inexcusable.
England is a country about the size of the state of Alabama; most of the problem was concentrated in a few districts of northern England. Rotherham has a population of about 250,000, of which about 8% are non-white minorities. The traffickers were a very distinct group — Pakistani Muslim men in their 20s and 30s — and the girls who were victimized were also a distinct group: white, ages 11-17, predominantly from lower-class households, many of them already under supervision by social-service and child-welfare agencies because of family or school problems. The basic outlines of this problem were clearly in evidence by the late 1990s. Let any American imagine, therefore, what the reaction would have been if something like this were happening in Huntsville, Alabama. Would we expect local law enforcement and child-welfare agencies to do nothing? If there were a problem so specific and so localized, involving the sexual exploitation of young girls, wouldn’t we expect a joint federal/state/local task force to target the perpetrators? The FBI would be swarming all over these vicious creeps.
EVERYBODY KNEW WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN ROTHERHAM!
That’s the astonishing thing, as you read Professor Alexis Jay’s investigative report: Case after case came to the attention of authorities, and yet the systematic exploitation of girls continued. The families of victims were terrorized, and the failure of police to act convinced many people in Rotherham that the Pakistani pimps had political protection through local Labour Party officials. Emma Jackson’s assertion that victims could come from any kind of background is certainly true, but most of the girls came from poor families, broken homes and trouble backgrounds:
Anybody who knows anything about how pimps operate understands this: Street hustlers have a keen eye for vulnerable girls, those with “a desperate need for attention and affection,” and they know how to impress young fools with the ostentatious display of symbols of wealth. Nice car, flashy clothes, jewelry — never mind how this stuff is obtained, whether by theft or fraud or drug dealing, all that counts is creating the superficial impression of wealth and status, and vulnerable girls are seduced by the glamour.
The modus operandi of pimps is well-known, and certainly no social worker or police officer can be ignorant of this. But carefully read these accounts of two victimized Rotherham girls from pages 44-45 of Professor Jay’s investigative report:
This is insanity. As early as 2000 (i.e., two years before Emma Jackson’s exploitation began), social workers and the CID (Criminal Investigation Department) were aware of the case of Child A, who had been “associating with a group of older Asian men” and had already had sexual intercourse with five adult men by age 12! Yet a criminal investigator argued against treating her case as criminal abuse because it was “100% consensual”? Insanity, I tell you!
What is incredible is that, after one such case was clearly identified, the repetition of similar cases (like Child C, apparently exploited from the time she was 11) did not result in a law enforcement response to the pattern. Remember, this was occurring in a community of about 250,000 people — a medium-sized city, not a vast metropolis — and the sex-traffickers fit a very definite “profile.” In a city that size with an 8% minority population, once it became known that girls were being exploited by Pakistani men in their 20s or 30s, does anyone really think that it would have been difficult for police investigators to identify the chief suspects? But this kept happening year after year after year:
Even though this pattern was evident in the 2000-2002 time frame, the inexplicable laxity of law enforcement — who didn’t seem to place a high priority in stopping this abominable exploitation — seems to have emboldened the traffickers, so that in 2008, a pimp was driving around Rotherham with a drunk 12-year-old whore in his car and “indecent photos of her on his phone.” Insanity!
Decades ago, in the late 1970s, U.S. law enforcement became aware of what was known as the “Minnesota Pipeline.” East Coast pimps figured out there was a market demand for blue-eyed blonde teenagers, and so you had runaway girls from the upper Midwest showing up as prostitutes in New York City. Public awareness resulted in a crackdown and, although the problem has not been entirely eliminated, the FBI is very much involved in prosecuting interstate sex trafficking rings:
- COLUMBIA, SC — United States Attorney Bill Nettles stated today that George McLeod, III, a/k/a “Pimpstick Quezzy,” age 30, of Columbia, pled guilty today in federal court in Columbia, to interstate transportation for the purpose of prostitution, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2421, and aggravated identity theft, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1028A. . .
- PORTLAND, ME — United States Attorney Thomas E. Delahanty, II announced today that Samuel C. Gravely, 27, of Portland, pled guilty yesterday in U.S. District Court to interstate travel to promote prostitution. Court records reveal that on March 28, 2013, the defendant drove three women from Portland, Maine, to Boston, Massachusetts, for the purpose of having them engage in prostitution services. . . .
- NEWARK, NJ — A Colorado man today admitted his role in a conspiracy to transport women across state lines for prostitution in New Jersey and other states, U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman announced. James Roy Smith, 36, a/k/a “Mister Smith,” of Lakewood, Colorado, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Stanley R. Chesler to a superseding information charging him with conspiracy to transport women across state lines to work as prostitutes and transportation of a victim across state lines with the intent that the victim work as a prostitute. . . .
These investigations and prosecutions go on day after day, year after year. If the FBI can be expected to do this work in a nation of 300 million people, do you expect anyone to believe that police can’t bust pimps in Rotherham, with a population of 250,000? Insanity!
Independent Inquiry CSE in Rotherham by Unity_MoT
Part of the problem, however, is made clear both in Professor Jay’s report and in the testimony of Emma Jackson: The girls involved in this are often simply so deluded — so emotionally broken, so confused by peer pressure, so dominated by pimps — that they don’t realize they’re being exploited, and refuse to cooperate with investigators. Here is Emma Jackson’s 2013 testimony to a committee of Parliament:
Emma Jackson: I am 23 now. I was groomed at the age of 12, and that started in Meadowhall, which is a local shopping centre. I used to go on the weekends with my friends. Back then that was the place where children went on a weekend and they hung out. They have the children’s arcade, and we used to go in there. I got targeted by young boys who were a couple of years older than me, so they were not grown men.
Chair: How old would they have been?
Emma Jackson: They would have been 13, 14, and I would have been 12. This went on where I would see them every Saturday for about a year and this fellow started to introduce older brothers or cousins or friends who were about 16, 17, 18. Some of them had cars. At that age-I was coming up to 13 then-I was a teenage girl, and I quite liked the idea that some of them were a bit older and that they had cars, because that is teenage girls. You start wanting a bit more freedom. Your parents start to give you a little bit more freedom, and you do things that you should not do or that your parents tell you not to do. You still do, and that is kids.
Chair: I have a 15-year-old daughter. I know exactly what you mean.
Emma Jackson: You tell them not to do something and they will do it. . . . Then it started where they introduced older people to us and we started to go into Rotherham town centre to hang around instead of Meadowhall. I had turned 13 at this point. Then when we started hanging around in Rotherham town centre and we were there, we were seeing these men every day, and by now they were men. The younger boys had disappeared, and it was men.
Chair: Men of what age?
Emma Jackson: In their 20s. They started to get older as time went on; some were in their 30s. . . .
You can and should read the whole terrifying thing. The point is this: Emma Jackson and the committee chairman agreed that youthful rebellion is normal, that when “teenage girls . . . start wanting a bit more freedom,” they can be expected to “do things that you should not do or that your parents tell you not to do.” That’s simply what kids do, we are assured — but is this really true? Of course, every parent must confront the fact that children reach a certain age where they begin to assert their independence and establish their own identity. It is not true, however, that parents must simply surrender to the willfulness of their children and let them do whatever they want to do.
“But mom, all the other kids are hanging out at the mall!”
Yeah, give into that childish argument, and next thing you know, your 13-year-old daughter is being pimped out as a prostitute.
Three things would seem necessary to prevent this:
- Girls must be warned about the dangers of exploitation. It is easy to see, in hindsight, how girls like Emma Jackson were lured into prostitution. She was 12, getting attention from boys 13 or 14 she knew from school. Then these boys introduced her to older teens and young adult men who had cars and money. By the time a pimp raped her at 13, this world seemed “normal” to her, and Emma was then pimped out to other men without realizing that she was a victim or that her “boyfriend” the pimp was a criminal. It is unfortunate to think girls so young must be warned about something so horrible, but it is obvious that naivete makes girls vulnerable.
- Parents must be empowered to protect their children. Reading the accounts of what went on in Rotherham, you get the sense that the safety of young girls was entrusted to social workers and police — government bureaucrats, really — who were in some cases shockingly indifferent to the plight of the victims. It is as if the right of parents to protect their own children has been so co-opted by the government that no mother or father felt the right to take action on their own. One wishes these pimps would have had to fear a vengeful Liam Neeson-type father coming after them with a pistol.
- Police must take seriously the exploitation of youth. This is the biggest takeaway from Rotherham. It is blindingly obvious that officials were not serious about enforcing age-of-consent laws. Girls under 16 have statutory protection in England, but police and social workers seem to have the idea that it is normal for underage girls to be screwing around, even with adult men.
Don’t take my word for this. Listen to Emma Jackson:
The Asian community in Rotherham know this is happening, and they are absolutely appalled by it. They want these people out of their community like anybody else would. They do not want their children around these people. But I think also what has happened — and not just with the Asian community but with everybody in Rotherham who is a young person or in their early 20s — is it is spoken about and it is almost accepted in a way because it has been going on that long. It is just normal. It has been going on that long, and been left to go on, that we have normalised it. That is just part of growing up; that is what happens.
A society that is willing to tolerate such things will soon learn to accept such things — “just part of growing up” — and it doesn’t take too many years of toleration before pimps and perverts figure out they can get away with such things. This horror story in Rotherham should be a wake-up call for parents not just in England, but everywhere.
Evil works 24/7 and never takes a holiday. You think your kids are safe from evil in your town? So did Emma Jackson’s parents.
“But mom, all the other kids are hanging out at the mall!”
ELSEWHERE:
- Sheffield Star: Rotherham child sex abuse scandal — the victims’ stories
- Breitbart London: Petition Demands Resignation of Police Boss Who Failed to Stop Rotherham Paedos
- Daily Mail: Deputy quits, child probe ordered
- Guardian: Rotherham abuse report: Shaun Wright quits Labour but not PCC role
- Independent: The Rotherham child abuse scandal is a tale of apologists, misogyny and double standards
- Breitbart London: Former Rotherham Children’s Services Director Admits She Failed to Act, Keeps New Role
- Telegraph: Rotherham: In the face of such evil, who is the racist now?
Remember how Western feminists were outraged about the Taliban’s treatment of women in Afghanistan? That is, until George W. Bush did something about it? Then Muslim treatment of women became a nuanced matter of cultural differences that we really had no right to interfere with.
It’s the same phenomenon that caused about an eighty percent chance of a “Free Tibet” sticker accompanying a “No War in Iraq” one on a progressive’s Volvo. It confused me, the question why Tibetans deserved freedom but Iraqis did not, until I realized that they were not using the word “free” as a verb.
Raising awareness is as far a progressives ever want to go. Choosing to act, to put some skin in the game, risks failure. Plus, it involves risk and even worse, potentially associating with the wrong people.
A gal who stayed at my house for a short while about 10 years ago had the unusual tale of being abducted in a very similar manner from a shopping mall. She was kidnapped and taken to an apartment in a high-rise where she was not allowed to leave, and where she was raped on a daily basis. (This was about age 15 or 16.) She was part of a group of about 7-8 hoes that were all like her: Under-18 white girls. She eventually escaped — not because anyone was looking for her (she had been living with her dad, who hated her) but because a former boyfriend spotted her shopping for clothes with one of her pimp’s trusted women. He made an outcry and she was able to run.
This wasn’t in the UK, however. It was in Denver, Colorado in the early 2000s. I imagine other large cities have similar things going on: Young gals being groomed at malls and other teen hangout spots, then kidnapped and enslaved by “Asians” (which is British PC-speak for moslems) – with cops and government types knowing it’s going on, but not giving a rat’s ass or being too frightened of being labeled as “racist” to talk about it.
These guys are a lot more entrenched in our day-to-day lives than many of us imagine. They will be quite difficult to get rid of.
The levels of outrage invoked by this story and the continued revelations are legion. What strikes me, however, is the number of “old verities” and assumptions which would necessarily have to be discarded in order to get to the point where hundreds of young girls are exploited in this fashion: Assumptions about teen behavior; assumptions about parental rights and duties; assumptions about the proper role of law enforcement; assumptions about “equal protection” regardless of perpetrator demographics ad infinitium, ad nauseum. Make no mistake this is the world which Progressives desire to create. The Progressive Left owns this story. Is it any wonder that they’re no where to be found?
We hear the “the sex was consensual” argument in the US for underaged boys, still. Because boys like attention from older women and it’s like… Sex with Teacher! Score! But I’ve said forever that girls react almost the same way. An older man makes a 13 year old feel adult and special and even powerful because, you know, she can command his attention. Often pre-pubescent children being sexually abused feel special, too.
I don’t know that there are actual systems of grooming boys for women, though I’m sure everything happens at least once somewhere, but I’d put money on there being systems for grooming gay boys for men. And wasn’t there some story about a boy fleeing Jeffery Dahmer, naked and bleeding, clearly a teen, and *police* let Dahmer take the boy back when he explained it was a lover’s tiff?
Because no one wants to be a hater, you know.
This is where there is no substitute for good, old-fashioned patriarchy. Do you imagine that such conduct would have been possible a century ago? Would the stout yeomen of Yorkshire have allowed a group of wogs to whore out their daughters in 1914? No. There would have been some regrettable, minimally-investigated homicides, then no further official notice.
More recently, my own father walked a prospective, unsuitable suitor for my step-sister out to the back of his car. He opened the trunk, displayed a shotgun, and told the young man that anyone who mistreated his family would end up dead. My father was an Ivy League educated, sophisticated, Christian gentleman, but he would have gladly lived out his final days on Death Row if it meant the man who betrayed his beloved child was dead. If Britain still breeds men worthy of the name, they would do the same.
No argument from me.
In fact, when I was a teenager, and this was even *cough*[unintelligible]*cough* years ago, my father would “coincidentally” arrange to be cleaning his guns in the front room when my dates showed up. And the look on his face conveyed the fact that he’d mount the boy’s head on the wall if he touched me inappropriately.
This sort of thing is what dads are supposed to do, in my mind.
That’s okay, I like my Pakistani child rapists dead. Or in prison for life, but preferably dead.
Hear, hear.
You know, we like to think that this would never happen in this country, but in Stacy’s list of child abuse perps above, none of the men have semitic names. In this day, even in this country, if Muslims were doing it, I fear that the outcome would be like Rotherham all over again. (Except in areas of the country where intact families with armed dads and brothers are more the norm. But the pervs wouldn’t be doing their “shopping” in those areas, anyway…which speaks highly for family values and the 2nd Amendment.)
Reading the victims’ stories from the Sheffield Star link above is enough to make a decent person projectile vomit.
Think, too, on how the Asians of Rotherham must see this, both the perpetrators of the crimes and those who are appalled. How can they feel anything but contempt for Western civilization? Why would they want to assimilate and adopt values of tolerance and pluralism when they see that these values make the men so weak that they will not protect their daughters from rapists?
Naive, huh? That pretty much describes the level to which today’s children are being educated.
Just a coincidence, hmmmmmm?
[…] Emma Jackson, Victim of #Rotherham Rape Gangs: ‘They Like Us Naive’. […]
The real solution is not allowing the immigration of groups like Pakis.
That cat is long out of the bag. At least in the UK. It should be a warning for us though.
It would seem a similar tale is being played out on our border with Mexico. Instead of Pakistani Muslims we have all manner of dangerous felons from south of the Rio Grande streaming north and setting themselves up to control vast areas of territory. The locals look to the Federal government for protection and receive none. Instead, citizens are treated to endless bromides about diversity and opportunity, and if they object, to accusations of racism. Meanwhile, the streets of border towns are becoming war zones; ranchers and farmers are being killed or driven off their own land by thugs. So, the question becomes, what happens when citizens who know that the government refuses to hold up its end of the bargain, decide to act accordingly?
Not only that, but now that this has come to light (which was not only foreseeable, but inevitable), the anti-immigrant sentiment that the authorities wanted so desperately to avoid will manifest tenfold — and it will harm the innocent all the more.
It just goes to show that regardless of one’s intentions, denying reality is ultimately counter-productive.
Or just enforcing existing law.
Years ago, I was part of a small libertarian group that took a very preliminary look at American immigration policy.
Without a drastic change in the leadership of both the US and Mexico, the most viable solution we could come up with was to annex Mexico. That was still a big longshot.
Since that wasn’t exactly a libertarian solution, we agreed to disband.
The accepted capital “L” Libertarian solution is to end the War On Drugs, destroying the cartels and changing Mexico’s economy.
I do not think that alone would be enough. Anything we do to change immigration policy has to deal with all the illegals here already. Short of armed troops throwing them back across the border, we’re not going to get rid of them. I don’t like the idea of amnesty either.
Amazing how much of a market there is for sex with captives.
Amazing how many people don’t want sex with a partner, but a terrified subject.
And the fathers were arrested when they tried to reclaim their daughters. I think that’s the single most horrifying detail of the whole story.
PS – I call BS on the claim that “are absolutely appalled by it. They want these people out of their community like anybody else would.” They might not want their children around these people, but I see no evidence – in Rotherham or anywhere else – that they give the slightest of damns what happens to children of the “dirty beasts” (h/t Oslo muslims) they are, for the moment, forced to live next to.
Mandatory E-Verify (hint, they oppose it because it’d be effective), legislation criminalizing the provision of welfare benefits to immigrants (legal and illegal, bring back “public charge” laws), a constitutional amendment revoking birth-right citizenship and overturning the Supreme Courts ruling that free education must be provided to illegals, a new Operation Wetback ….
I could go on.
Short of armed troops throwing them back across the border. . .
Why is that not an option? It’s liking saying if I can force my way into my neighbor’s basement, I get to stay,
And eat his food. And use his hot water. And run up his phone bill.
All while sending his stuff to my mother in her house.
Methinks Farage had best start measuring the curtains in 10 Downing Street…
Imperial guilt is a powerful thing. First you take over the empire, and then the empire, it takes over you…
Okay, let’s deal with the armed troops thing.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to live in a nation where the armed forces conduct door to door searches. Today it may be illegal aliens. Tommorrow it may be two liter soda bottles. Or incandescent light bulbs. Or religious publications.
Most illegals aren’t violent. Yes, they are criminals, but we don’t treat jaywalkers the same as bank robbers.
The military should not be involved in law enforcement. For a long time that was illegal. Then we started “bending” the rules for the drug war and then we repealed the law.
E-Verify, like the income tax before it, coerces employers into becoming unpaid spies for the Feds. I can’t support that.
Like many libertarians, I think all government welfare benefits should be abolished. In this case, welfare is a poorly disguised vote buying scam.
I also don’t support giving Federal funds to cities. Detroit just went broke, there are dozens of other cities teetering. Should their mismanagement be rewarded. Jerry Brown just invited millions of illegals to California, he’s counting on Federal money to bail them out.
And don’t get me started on public education.
I don’t think the answer is more law. I think it starts with repealing the laws that got us into this mess.
I know this is important, but I keep gagging and retching. I just can’t read this right now, even though I know I need to. So I’ll try it again in the morning.
This has been one of, if not THE, most depressing news stories of my lifetime. I can “understand” terrorist attacks, murder sprees, drug epidemics, and all manner of violence and sin.
But unless there is a huge piece of this story that I am not getting, I simply cannot get my head around the systematic enslavement of CHILDREN with the knowledge of authorities and/or their parents. It makes me terrified of the… I can’t even think of a good descriptive word…unwillingness (?) of authorities to simply DO WHAT IS RIGHT and rescue these girls.
I don’t give a damn about the race of the perpetrators; they should all be summarily shot. But the “good guys” went AWOL on this? They had “meetings” to discuss “what should be done”? What their “options were”? They were so caught up in “process” that they could not simply INTERVENE???
I truly weep for these kids. I am so utterly shocked at the failures involved here that I can’t even feel anger; just a sick, nauseating bewilderment. God help us all…
Read “The Five Pound Virgin” and tell me that. Further, it was found during the WWII evacuation that there were children from London’s East End who had never *been named* by their parents. No, there have been horrible things always.
This is exceptional because those charged to protect children cowered before the fear of being called racists! Not the exploitation, itself, dreadful as it is.
So many pathologies. So few ways to treat them.
Well, these are the times where everybody is entitled to have what they want, when they want it, and damn the consequences and what damage it may do to other people. Because progress! And if you don’t agree, you are some flavor of racist/homophobe/bigot/Islamophobe/misogynist or a combination in between.
Holy heck. I’ve already upvoted you several times this week. I think I’m hyperventilating…I need a paper bag…
The Death of Common Sense: How Law is Suffocating America, Phillip K. Howard.
Some pervert approached me in a shopping mall when I was 14; while it was the MN pipeline era, I’m not blonde, and furthermore, was Christmas shopping! He pretended he knew me and I kept telling him I was mistaken; he wanted me to go outside for a walk with him. Um, no. I didn’t report him to anyone because he hadn’t done anything but it was a long time before I went shopping alone again.
AND in some cases, the “authorities” tried to blame the kids.
The libertarian nonsense that ending the war on drugs makes criminals vanish in a puff of smoke is getting unbearable.
The cartels make as much (if not more) money from trafficking young girls for sex slavery.
One libertarian said to me, “If we’d end the war on drugs, then it would make their slave trafficking vanish.” And that’s only the second stupidest thing a libertarian’s ever said to me.
My plan with the war on drugs is to stop using the word “war” as a euphemism. Destroy cocaine fields with napalm. Kill traffickers. Put corrupt cops in front of firing squads as the traitors that they are. (And I think they are the biggest problem.)
I absolutely despise teenagers and even I don’t blame them.
The cowardice in the face of this assault on society is sickening. It goes to show how the key element in this entire worldwide problem is the license granted to followers of political Islam.
Imagine how different your worldview would be if the people who raised you never once mentioned the Golden Rule, and instead reinforced how proper and just it is to treat certain humans as though they are less than cattle.
Have a look at a blog post featured in full over at PamelaGeller today, composed by a Hindu named Satya D., titled,ISIS beheading children and women (after stripping naked) -parallels Hindu Story (Warning, many extremely graphic photos, although well curated to not focus explicitly on the mutilations)
The takeaway for me was not just the extreme, ultra-violence of ISIS, but the worldwide nature of this, and the fact they are forcing us to understand that they will never be willing to stop. In other words, the only way this ends is to physically stop them. Cowards cannot do this.
This inhumane treatment is worse than the way slaves have mostly been treated, historically. This is not to make slavery appear better: it’s to help people understand that political Islam is worse.
As bad as the slave trade was, most people in the world still assumed the slaves were still basically people. Just “lesser” people. But political Islam goes an order of magnitude further. These victims aren’t just “lesser” humans to these monstrous followers of perverted imams and clerics: the victims are objects upon which (not whom) all manner of violence, degradation, and death is the privilege of said followers to dispense. And more importantly, those actions are all the victims are “good” for, and the perpetrators are honored for recognizing this and extolled for being willing to wreak such ruin.
Further, these followers have been inculcated to know that negotiation and discussion is only and forever a tool by which to gain time to re-arm, re-organize, and reinforce.
We all know this in our gut. Netanyahu’s confidence numbers plummeted when he called a halt to operations in Gaza. The people know that HAMAS will always and forever use any pause by Israel to recover, reorganize and re-arm.
Political Islam is telling you they will never stop.
They are forcing a binary choice: them or us. We’ve moved past the chance to convince, coerce, or encourage better behavior from them. Any man who can behead a child, or strip and gut a woman, merely because he feels it’s his privilege to do so is not a man you can reason with.
Arm yourselves. We have reached a point where going forth unarmed is a very – bad – idea.
Britain supposedly gave the world bureaucracy. Evidently they are excelling at the level of unconcern for which bureaucracy has striven all these centuries to perfect.
If you look at the articles at Pam Geller’s site, you can tell it really isn’t about sex. It’s about absolutely dehumanizing the victims.
We’re reduced to but one.
The EU has now forced member states to take in immigrants that were previously denied entry. It’s really a nasty outcome of the creation of that ridiculous ruling body.
Exactly.
I like to see the processes of law play out completely. But if someone is guilty, they really do need to repay their debt to society.
Preferably the less expensive way.
When my granddaughter was born, my son celebrated by buying the shotgun to clean in front of prospective boyfriends.
(Also because I advised him that it was the best weapon of choice for home defense, if you’re only going to have one.)
Feminists weren’t very outraged about the Taliban. They were busy focusing on the three women who became the darlings of the left after 9-11.
“The Asian community in Rotherham know this is happening, and they are absolutely appalled by it.”
I have no doubt about the first statement. The second half, however, stands in stark contrast to the example and orders of Mohammed and the behavior shown by Pakistanis and Afghanis in their home countries.
One of the best memories liberals have given me recently was an incident where I observed two gay men holding a baby as they discussed the situation in Syria and argued that we should stay out of the fight with ISIS because ‘who are we to judge their culture?’
can’t make this shit up.
“Most illegals aren’t violent.”
Bull. Both burglary and invasion are acts of violence.
Why do you think the Confederacy fired on Fort Sumpter?
E-Verify doesn’t turn anyone into a “spy.” It makes each employer responsible for obeying the law.
If you want to see what a society looks like when it’s completely dependent on “the authorities” to do ANYTHING, take a look at the gawkers that stood around after the Lee Rigby murder.
Sheep.
The EU is a leftist, statist organization that thwarts the will of the electorate.