Robert McCaw and the others at Hamas-linked CAIR are banking on the ignorance of the public. The phenomenon of Muslim rape gangs in Britain is well known to those who dare to face the facts.
The Guardian reported in October 2014 that “sexual exploitation of vulnerable children has become the social norm in some parts of Greater Manchester.” The perpetrators were overwhelmingly Muslim men, as in Rochdale, where a group of Muslims were involved in a large-scale sex trafficking ring involving young non-Muslim girls.
In the British town of Rotherham, Muslim gangs brutalized, sexually assaulted, and raped over 1,400 young British girls, while authorities remained extremely reluctant to say or do anything in response, for fear of being labeled “racist.” Rotherham officials “described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought as racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.”
And what were the ethnic origins of those perpetrators? The Guardian report didn’t mention it (which in itself was telling), but 75%, and probably more (since it was so politically unacceptable to report such things) of these rape and sexual exploitation gangs were “Asian,” which is British Newspeak for “Muslim.”
According to official figures released in December 2019, over 18,700 children had fallen prey to grooming and rape gangs in Britain during the previous year. This was up from some 15,000 victims in 2014.
Former Home Secretary Sajid Javid noted that the perpetrators included a “high proportion of men of Pakistani heritage.” That’s why the British authorities were so slow to act. The mother of one rape gang victim noted that South Yorkshire Police “would not listen and left you in dangerous situations, letting people do what they wanted and they never questioned anybody about what was happening.” One South Yorkshire Police official even told this victim’s father that the perpetrators could not be prosecuted because of who they were: “With it being Asians, we can’t afford for this to be coming out.” The official also observed that the rape gangs had been operating freely in Britain for thirty years.
Politicalite “reported in 2018 that ex-North West Chief prosecutor alleged that the Home Office ordered police to ignore grooming gang claims in 2008 – though Home Secretary Jacqui Smith had nothing to do with the order.” The news site also noted that Nazir Afzal, who “successfully prosecuted the notorious Rochdale rape gang told the BBC in 2018 that in 2008 the Home Office sent a circular email to all police forces calling on them to not investigate the sexual exploitation of young girls in towns and cities across the UK.” Said Afzal: “You may not know this, but back in 2008 the Home Office sent a circular to all police forces in the country saying ‘as far as these young girls who are being exploited in towns and cities, we believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour and therefore it is not for you police officers to get involved in.’”
Twelve years later, the same reluctance to face this problem was still prevailing. In January 2020, the Daily Mail reported that according to a “damning” new report, “sex attacks on young girls by Asian grooming gangs were ignored by police fear of stoking racial tensions, a damning report has ruled.” The Birmingham Mail reported in November 2014 that Birmingham’s City Council buried a report about Muslim cab drivers exploiting non-Muslim girls back in 1990.A researcher, Dr. Jill Jesson, drafted a report on this issue. But, she explained, “the report was shelved, buried, it was never made public. I was shocked to be told that copies of the report were to be destroyed and that nothing further was to be said. Clearly, there was something in this report that someone in the department was worried about.”
So who is Robert McCaw trying to kid? Why, everyone. And if he keeps this up, he may end up getting a plum position in the British government.
“CAIR Urges Senate to Reject Anticipated Nomination of ‘Anti-Muslim Conspiracy Theorist’ Anthony J. Tata for Pentagon Post,” by Ibrahim Hooper, Hamas-linked CAIR, April 29, 2020:
(WASHINGTON, DC., 4/29/20) – The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today called on members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services to reject President Trump’s reported nomination of anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist Ret. Army Brig. Gen. Anthony J. Tata to the position of undersecretary of defense for policy.
While not yet officially nominated, news of Tata being tapped by Trump has been reported by Politico and the Washington Post.
Last year, Tata authored a novel titled “Double Crossfire” that falsely claimed young Muslim men in Great Britain engage in the “gang-raping [of] British women as part of their transition to manhood” and such crimes are covered up by the government and media. This anti-Muslim trope is widely used by Islamophobic far-right groups and white supremacists in Europe.
In 2018, Tata also said on Fox News that “there is intent to harm Western society by Islam” and “it’s a truism that has to be built into policy so we can strengthen our borders.”
“CAIR strongly urges the Senate Armed Services Committee to reject anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist Tata’s nomination to the number three job in the Defense Department,” said CAIR Director of Government Affairs Robert S. McCaw. “Tata’s revolting promotion of the anti-Muslim trope that Muslim youth in Britain engage in sex crimes as a rite of passage and that Islam is a perceived threat to the West makes him totally unfit to serve as the Pentagon’s policy chief.”…
Ade Fegan says
and still they are given credibility !
mortimer says
The HOME OFFICE is filled with the TRAITOR CLASS. They should have ZERO credibility with the British people, now that they have been exposed. The Home Office is failing to protect the British people and keep them safe from predators! What could be worse than that? Well, they are also removing the FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and the right to make a PUBLIC GRIEVANCE against the ABUSERS ! They are TRAITORS.
Everyone in the Home Office should be reviewed with minute scrutiny to determine if they are at all concerned about protecting the indigenous British people from persecution. It seems the Red-Green Axis is the only thing being protected by the Home Office. They are globalist IDEOLOGUES.
Boris Johnson should imitate Hercules and CLEAN OUT this modern Aegean Stable … the traitor-packed Home Office.
Geof Barrington says
Agreed BoJo should get at it now . He has all the power in the world at the moment . But I fear that he is s globalist and wont do much .
Hoping just the same
pragmatist says
Nothing will be done.
Wellington says
Islam from its outset has been rooted in sex crimes and many other crimes. And anyone averring otherwise is either demonstrating their ignorance or their mendacity.
Well, there was no guarantee that mankind would NOT get a major religion which was rotten from the outset. Thus is the way of things when “mere” probabilities are taken into account.
And sadly and tragically, mankind did. Mankind got Islam.
I despise this effing religion, which is also a totalitarian ideology and, in effect, a criminal enterprise as well. You know, if one could go back in time and eliminate three people before they malevolently influenced future history, what better “trinity” here, I would ask, then Mohammed, Marx and Hitler? They’e my top three.
Mural says
+1. Loved the bit about Islam and probability. Have you taken any formal course in probability or were you teaching this in your academic life?
Wellington says
“Have you taken any formal course in probability or were you teaching this in your academic life?”
Both, Mural. And aided by life experiences approaching 70 years now.
You know, where other people see design, I see probabilities. For instance, it was probable, though not a given, that mankind would construct a major religion which was rotten from the outset. Mankind did. It’s called Islam.
And it was also probable, though not a given, that mankind would construct a religion or two that worked optimally with the democratic tenets invented by the ancient Greeks. Mankind did. Mankind developed Judaism and Christianity. (N.B., one can embrace the Judeo-Christian ethic without necessarily embracing its theology—for me a testimony not to any supreme being per se but to the laudable cleverness and subtlety of a people like the ancient Jews who, nonetheless, magnificently fooled themselves).
I don’t outright deny design by some kind of higher power but I think it probable that the universe is indifferent to us and that mankind is on its own, whether constructing religions with an enlightened ethic (Judaism and Christianity; other religions too like Hinduism and Buddhism, though respecting these two latter religions not as much as the two former because of the importance placed on individual worth by the two former) or a very unenlightened ethic (Islam first and foremost here but other religions too, dead or still alive, like the Aztec faith or that of the Carthaginians or the still very marginal Satanism).
Yes, I know many, including very impressive people, good people, who like to see design and extrinsic purpose to existence. I, however, do not. I see “only” probabilities and I would note as well that all religions make all kinds of threats for not accepting their “proposals” erroneously stated as fact (so-called miracles too which, as David Hume sapiently pointed out, cannot be accepted UNLESS the non-miraculous explanation for the event or prophecy in question would be even more extraordinary than the miraculous narration—no miracle, as Hume indicated, meets this test and I agree with the sage 18th-century Scottish philosopher here). Islam compounds this by allowing its own followers in its theological blueprint to use force as well, contra other religions, like Christianity, which “merely” threaten with punishment in this world by some deity or in the next world by some overarching higher power or powers. I’m OK with this but I’m not OK with that third threat unique to Islam among the major faiths of the world and which is why Islam is uniquely a menace to mankind respecting the major religions on earth.
Sorry to go on so long, but time is running short for me and I feel compelled to state how I see existence, whatever such perspective be worth, lest I run out of time. Mea culpa for the long digression but I have bared myself here in microcosm how I view the macrocosm.
gravenimage says
Fine post.
PRCS says
July 1, 1950.
James Lincoln says
Wellington,
A fine post, my compliments.
And this is coming from a devout Christian.
Mural says
Nice post. Thanks for sharing.
David Hume makes a legit point there.
It reminds me of what Christopher Hitchens once said, which I paraphrase : it is easier to believe that a Jewish girl was lying rather than the elaborate divine birth story.
Westman says
Wellington, your view is very much my own, respecting the good fruits of certain religions and philosophies that promote a high evaluation of all humans and eschewing those religions and philosophies that reduce freedom and turn humans into warring parties.
I do believe there is a purpose behind existence and religion is an attempt to make the best guess; emphasizing the better parts of our nature, giving stability to society, and supressing the more destructive parts of our nature.
Islam is the only religion that glorifies gore, booty, and the worldly subjugation of women and unbelievers.
If CAIR is frightened enough to criticize the appointment of Gen Tata, he is the right man for the job.
Claudius says
Very good post. And yes, Islam is a menace that works slowly under the radar until it has enough power to take over. And then it snuffs out all opposition, including the freedoms that allowed it to take over. Best to constantly expose it, like a snake in the grass, especially in this good age of the Internet.
Terry Gain says
Mural
Did Christopher Hitchens explain: how that Jewish mother’s illegitimate son managed, to perform miracles; how he somehow rose from the dead and showed himself to his disciples who were so convinced that he was God that they died for him; how he revolutionized the world and provided a new ethic for living;
Terry Gain says
Westman and Wellington
“Islam is the only religion that glorifies gore, booty, and the worldly subjugation of women and unbelievers.”
………..
And that’s just the beginning of a description of an evil ideology. Islam is the only supremacist, totalitarian, conquest ideology which is objectively wicked and yet claims to be a religion. It is obviously a fake religion. Islam is the antithesis of a religion. Islam will conquer the world unless it is properly characterized and responded to for what it is. There is nothing to be gained by surrendering on this point, which provides Islam with a protective shield.
Wellington says
Terry Gain: May I suggest your reading Michael Grant’s “Jesus: An Historian’s Review of the Gospels.” In this provocative but fair work by a great historian of antiquity, Grant goes into what the “miracles” were and that they may not have been what Christians over the centuries have thought them to be. Much more than this I will not say except to note that David Hume anticipated Grant by some two hundred years here. And someone like Thomas Jefferson was convinced that the miracle stories were later embellishments by writers who came after Jesus’s death and did not occur at all. This doesn’t make these people right but it doesn’t make conventional Christians right either.
As for rising from the dead, what did people experience? Many early Christians (e.g., Gnostic Christians) thought it was a spiritual resurrection, not a physical one (this kind of sneaks its way into the 24th chapter of Luke), and they were brutally stamped out after the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. decreed that only a physical resurrection could and must be accepted (the same with the Athanasian v. the Arian view of the Trinity, which latter view interestingly makes an “appearance” in Mark 13:32). Then again, two thousand years ago, a multitude of people thought that dreams were as real, if not more real, than waking life and dreaming of Jesus was, presto, turned into his rising from the dead. Interesting how Jesus apparently only “appeared” to people who already believed in him. Why not to Pilate, to the Sanhedrin, etc.?
Matters are often not what they seem to be or what is accepted as truth. I think it especially necessary to be extra cautious with any religious pronouncements from any faith since tendentiousness exists all over such pronouncements—and invariably threats are leveled at those who, using their reason, are skeptical of such pronouncements. Jesus himself in Mark 16:16 says that those who are not baptized and believe are condemned and John 3:18 states that those who do not believe are already judged, and so on. Plato and Aristotle, Galileo and Einstein, never made threats if one did not accept their ideas. This is the difference between philosophy and science on the one hand and religion on the other. It is one of many reasons why I am not religious at all.
gravenimage says
Terry, as you well know, an ideology need not be with good or true to be a religion.
All that is necessary is that its followers believe themselves to be worshipping a supernatural deity, and this is obviously the case with Muslims.
gravenimage says
need not be good or true
Terry Gain says
Wellington
Well Wellington, it appears that Jesus guy was quite the actor. Did a marvellous selling job on the 12 apostles, most of whom were so convinced by his acting after he rose from the dead, like God, that they died for Him. Your antipathy for holy Christianity helps me to understand why you believe evil Islam is a religion. I find it interesting that you feel that you’ve been threatened with non-entry into heaven because you do not accept the divinity of Christ. Why would you expect to go to heaven if you don’t believe in God? And why would you be threatened by something that doesn’t exist? Not exactly logical.
https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1-300/whatever-happened-to-the-twelve-apostles-11629558.html
Wellington says
Terry Gain: Your last communication is full of error and fallacious reasoning.
First, lots of Muslims have died and will die for their faith, just as the Twelve Apostles did for theirs, just as many from other faiths have and all the while believing that certain miraculous events occurred. Means nothing respecting how true the faith is.
Second, I don’t have an antipathy towards Christianity, indeed I have many times said I admire its ethic and that the whole world would be infinitely better off if every Muslim became a devout Christian. Just because I don’t think Christianity is the true faith (I don’t think any faith is), doesn’t mean I have an antipathy towards it. Reservations, yes. Disagreements, yes. Criticisms, yes. Doubts, yes. But antipathy, no.
Third, I am not threatened in the least by possible non-entry into Christian heaven, which quite frankly I don’t think exists. I simply in general don’t like to be told you had better believe this or else, which is a characteristic of religion in general as opposed to philosophy and science. It’s the general principle I was addressing, though I gave specific examples from the New Testament, and nothing particular to Christianity.
As I have written before here at JW, virtually every religion issues two threats for not believing or doing something—1) some deity may punish you in this world; 2) you will be punished in the next world. Here, Islam is no different form other religions. But Islam is unique (and thus a gigantic menace) because it has a third threat, i.e., its followers may use force in this world to spread or maintain their faith, even to the extent of killing apostates and waging war across all the earth to make all the world eventually Islamic. Christianity and other major religions (a lot of minor religions too) don’t have this third threat and I am relieved they do not. Anyone who cherishes freedom should be.
What happened two thousand years ago, or 1400 years ago, or three thousand years ago, when medicine and magic were intertwined, when people possessed a zeitgeist that was replete with non-philosophical and non-scientific assumptions, when dreams wee considered as real if not more real than waking life, etc. is alone reason to doubt any religious pronouncement. And check out Grant’s book I mentioned. What, are you afraid to do so? I have never been afraid to read the Bible. Or the Koran for that matter.
I am not a religious man. Don’t have a religious bone in my body and I adhere to the principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Religions of all kinds put forward extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. If religions did produce extraordinary evidence for their extraordinary claims, then what would be the point of faith, something I have not at all. Your turn if you care but please be more careful, more accurate, if you respond with respect to characterizing my convictions and assessments. I stand by what I say and write but I don’t feel compelled to stand by what I have never asserted.
Terry Gain says
Wellington
Terry Gain: Your last communication is full of error and fallacious reasoning.
First, lots of Muslims have died and will die for their faith, just as the Twelve Apostles did for theirs, just as many from other faiths have and all the while believing that certain miraculous events occurred. Means nothing respecting how true the faith is.
1. You point out that Muslims have died for their faith – a faith which promises a carnal paradise – but you ignore the point which I made is that the apostles were witnesses to Christ’s miracles and died for a faith reinforced by the fact that they witnessed Christ’s resurrection from the dead after he was crucified.
………..
Second, I don’t have an antipathy towards Christianity, indeed I have many times said I admire its ethic and that the whole world would be infinitely better off if every Muslim became a devout Christian. Just because I don’t think Christianity is the true faith (I don’t think any faith is), doesn’t mean I have an antipathy towards it. Reservations, yes. Disagreements, yes. Criticisms, yes. Doubts, yes. But antipathy, no.
2. Although you Have said nice things about Christianity in the past, you made it quite clear that your faith is atheism and you are anti-religion.
………….
Third, I am not threatened in the least by possible non-entry into Christian heaven, which quite frankly I don’t think exists. I simply in general don’t like to be told you had better believe this or else, which is a characteristic of religion in general as opposed to philosophy and science. It’s the general principle I was addressing, though I gave specific examples from the New Testament, and nothing particular to Christianity.
As I have written before here at JW, virtually every religion issues two threats for not believing or doing something—1) some deity may punish you in this world; 2) you will be punished in the next world. Here, Islam is no different form other religions. But Islam is unique (and thus a gigantic menace) because it has a third threat, i.e., its followers may use force in this world to spread or maintain their faith, even to the extent of killing apostates and waging war across all the earth to make all the world eventually Islamic. Christianity and other major religions (a lot of minor religions too) don’t have this third threat and I am relieved they do not. Anyone who cherishes freedom should be.
3. You used the word threat to describe Christ’s teaching that entrance to heaven is gained only through him. It is a logical to think that God would provide eternal life to people who don’t believe in Him. You have taken your stand. Stop looking for loopholes.
……
As I have written before here at JW, virtually every religion issues two threats for not believing or doing something—1) some deity may punish you in this world; 2) you will be punished in the next world. Here, Islam is no different form other religions. But Islam is unique (and thus a gigantic menace) because it has a third threat, i.e., its followers may use force in this world to spread or maintain their faith, even to the extent of killing apostates and waging war across all the earth to make all the world eventually Islamic. Christianity and other major religions (a lot of minor religions
4. You ignore the fact that Christianity teaches us to love one another, to turn the other cheek, to pray for our enemy, as well as to love God. Our rights based secularism which acknowledges the inherent worth and equality of every individual, would not have been possible without the advance of Christianity and the belief that every human being is made in the image of God. The first Christians were persecuted not just for their belief in God but because they opposed slavery.
………..
What happened two thousand years ago, or 1400 years ago, or three thousand years ago, when medicine and magic were intertwined, when people possessed a zeitgeist that was replete with non-philosophical and non-scientific assumptions, when dreams wee considered as real if not more real than waking life, etc. is alone reason to doubt any religious pronouncement. And check out Grant’s book I mentioned. What, are you afraid to do so? I have never been afraid to read the Bible. Or the Koran for that matter
5. You should watch the recent video of David Wood and J Warner Wallace in which they argue that all advances in science occurred because of the Christian belief that life on earth was created by an all knowing (and mathematically competent) God. You have no grounds for stating that I am afraid to read Grant’s book. You have assumed facts not in evidence. You don’t follow your own advice.
…….
I am not a religious man. Don’t have a religious bone in my body and I adhere to the principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Religions of all kinds put forward extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence. If religions did produce extraordinary evidence for their extraordinary claims, then what would be the point of faith, something I have not at all. Your turn if you care but please be more careful, more accurate, if you respond with respect to characterizing my convictions and assessments. I stand by what I say and write but I don’t feel compelled to stand by what I have never asserted.
6. It is bad form to admonish someone else to be careful when you yourself are careless with facts. I appreciate that your profession has enabled you to talk down to people without suffering negative consequences. Please try to elevate yourself. I am not your inferior. Your philosophy is incoherent. You do not require extraordinary evidence to justify Islam’s claim that it is a religion and deserving of First Amendment protection. It is in fact absurd that the founders, non of whom had suffered under Islam or studied Islam, embedded a poison pill in America’s Constitution, guaranteeing Islam a status which is the opposite of what the Constitution stands for. The founders sought to guarantee freedoms and rights created by God. They did not seek to grant protected status to an ideology which is opposed to all those rights and freedoms and indeed all other religions and which not only denies free will, but is opposed to freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, gender equality and indeed that all men are created equal.
Islam may be a religion according to barbaric and irrational standards but in America it is the antithesis of a religion as it is opposed to the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the American Constitution. Of course, you believe that Satanism is a religion, so obviously you will not be moved.
Wellington says
Terry Gain: Salient points here.
1) As Grant, Hume, Jefferson and others (including yours truly) have pointed out over centuries now, the miracles may not have been what conventional Christians have thought they were, starting with the Apostles themselves. Read Grant’s work I mentioned; he devotes an entire chapter (chapter 2) to “What were the miracles?
2) What did the Apostles (and others) witness respecting Jesus’s resurrection? As I already pointed out in a previous post, many early Christians thought it was a spiritual resurrection and yet others may have dreamed about Jesus and interpreted this as his rising from the dead. We are talking about a time when superstition reigned and hard science did not yet exist. Moreover, the first written accounts of this supposed resurrection came decades after Jesus’s death (first by Paul who never met Jesus and then the Gospels and Acts with Mark being the earliest of these five). Something else. NO ONE actually witnessed the resurrection itself, only its “after effects.” This too is worthy of note. Finally here, testimony by religious people who already believe in what they are professing MUST be treated with a good amount of skepticism. Interesting that Jesus did not make an “appearance” to Pilate, Caiaphas, the Roman soldiers who beat him, et al. Hmmm.
3) I am not an atheist, I am an agnostic. Big difference. In fact, I developed a logical proof demonstrating that atheism is illogical and I have had Christian friends and students who thanked me for running it past them so they could use it when dealing with atheists.
4) The worth of the individual was not just put forward by Jews and Christians. The ancient Greeks philosophically and politically came to this conclusion too and which is why the Greeks invented both philosophy and democracy. As far as loving one another, I think Christianity has this wrong. There are certain people I don’t want to love—Hitler and al-Qaeda types for example. I’m not a big fan of the turn the other cheek directive either. Any polity that would try to run itself based solely on what Jesus taught would not last very long. I think, and here I am not alone, Michael Grant for instance, that Jesus thought the world was going to end in his lifetime, that the end of the world was not merely imminent but had already begun. He was terribly wrong about this and the use of his death by Paul and others as his great triumph strikes me as the greatest irony in history, making Beethoven going deaf look like only junior varsity irony.
5) I know of no early Christians who opposed slavery, including Jesus himself. The first statement against slavery that we know of anywhere in world history came form a group of Quakers in Philadelphia in the late 1680’s. Christians were instructed to treat their slaves well (Paul says this, for example in Philemon) but there is nothing in the New Testament condemning slavery per se.
6) I give a great deal of credit to the Judeo-Christian tradition in the creation of science. By removing God from nature, as the ancient Jews did, this allowed for the rational understanding of nature rather than being mesmerized by it. But don’t forget that in the rise of science the ancient Greeks also played an enormous role and had antiquity not ended when it did, I think it highly likely that the scientific method would have been fully developed by the Greeks around 500-800 A.D instead of around 1500-1800 A.D.
7) Lighten up. I didn’t mean to insult you when I jocularly said what are you afraid of respecting the reading of Grant’s book. As for Islam not being a religion, of course it is. In fact, it is probable, when you take a look at all the religions that we know existed, a lot of them were terrible but still religions. Also, and you never address this though I have brought it up numerous times, the Founding Fathers could not have known about Nazism or Marxism when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were formed because these two horrible secular ideologies didn’t even exist then and yet believing in them is protected by the First Amendment. So why not Islam, which actually did exist when America was founded? Please don’t again dodge this matter of protecting Nazism and Marxism per the First Amendment. Terrible belief systems, whether religious or secular, are protected by the First Amendment as far as belief per se is concerned but not necessarily certain actions.
8) I do not believe I have been careless with any facts in this back and forth with you. What facts have I been careless about? Finally, I never talked down to my students and I enjoyed great reviews of my teaching by hundreds upon hundreds of students, some of which reviews by way of letters I still have. So, you made an accusation with no supporting information.
Your turn if you care.
Gray says
Terry Gain and Wellington: Terry Gain, I agree with most, if not all, of what you say. Thank you for having the courage and steadfastness to articulate your position, and then to stick with it, in the face of unrelenting opposition and continuing personal abuse. I particularly endorse Terry Gain’s criticism of those contributing to this blog who talk down to other contributors, treating them as intellectual inferiors. Fortunately most contributors seem to treat others with a modicum of courtesy. Most, but not all, sadly. As you both know, I recently contributed to an earlier JW post. I knew my position would be unpopular, and indicated I would say no more on the matter, as I had no desire to participate in an interminable exchange of views with multiple contributors. I was later sorry I said that, as I was shocked by the intemperate personal abuse subsequently directed at me. I was particularly incensed to be accused (by people who know nothing of me, or of my background or level of knowledge of the subject) of taking particular positions (which I had not taken) and of believing certain things (things which I do not necessarily believe) and of being generally ignorant and uninformed (which I don’t believe I am). And yes, I too can appreciate ‘jocularity.’ But I can also tell the difference between genuine humour and ad hominem personal abuse. However, in this particular instance, I felt I was unable to respond to all this overt contempt and denigration, because I had initially said I would not respond. So I was hoist with my own petard, as they say. And, before I’m accused of being a tender, hot house flower who simply can’t stand being corrected by my intellectual betters, may I simply say this: I have spent many decades living in an atmosphere of continual disputation. In the autumn of my years, I see little point in seeking more argumentation, particularly with those who, I suspect, have a closed mind on the subject, and are unable even to conceptualize a differing point of view to their own. So there it is. Maybe I’ll contribute again to JW: maybe I won’t. But if I do, don’t be surprised if the worm turns, and I respond in kind to jeers and denigration (even if they do emanate from my intellectual betters, whose knowledge in all things vastly surpasses mine).
gravenimage says
How is answering someone’s points in-depth “jeers and denigration”?
Aussie Infidel says
Wellington, My top three also. There are a few others too one could mention, like Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Mussolini, Mao, Pol Pot etc; but the totalitarian trio you mention, wiped out untold millions of people to satisfy their own twisted ideologies and inflated egos. And worst of all, their descendants are still pursuing their psychotic dreams.
mortimer says
Wellington wrote: “Islam … rooted in crimes”. This is factual. Mohammed was getting nowhere preaching tolerant religion. He had about 100 followers. He tried a new strategy by hiring a bunch of desert thugs called the ‘ANSAR’ (the auxiliaries) who acted as his enforcers. Henry Ford did something similar by hiring Mafia thugs to police his factories and intimidate the workers. The ethos of Islam is based on the lawless criminality of the Ansar … the mindset of the opportunistic mobster. A Muslim may act reputably with a dirty kafir, but he doesn’t have to. Islam is opportunistic and nothing opportunistic is ethical.
R Russell says
Wellington.
What about the gods in the Old Testament – the ones who had live babies burned to appease them? The people who sacrificed them were pretty evil too.
But they too had a crescent (bull’s horns) Interesting.
Then there were the ‘sons of God’, direct creations by YHWH God who forced themselves onto human women and produced hybrid Nephilim.
Since Adam and Eve decided to trust someone other than YHWH God, the human race has been in a mess. That is why Jesus came – to sort it out.
Eric Rearden says
I think the government may pay more attention if the British citizenry was armed. Muslim scumbags might think twice about such behavior if they paid a price (either by courts or citizen retaliation). Just seems like the Brits fall in line with their government, even when doing so is counter to public safety and good morals.
libertyORdeath says
Maybe the parents of these rape victims should take out these criminals and then call it an “honor killing”
Mural says
+1
dsinc says
+2
Woke Infidel says
Really! 🙂
giuseppe frainetti says
thats right
Michael Copeland says
84% of the child sexual exploitation offenders were (South) Asian, while they only make up 7% of total UK population and that the majority of these offenders are of Pakistani origin with Muslim heritage.
That was the finding of Quilliam, the muslim “think tank”. A Quilliam spokesman, Haras Rafiq, said:
“We didn’t want there to be a pattern of people from our ethnic demographic carrying out these attacks. But unfortunately, we were proven wrong.”
https://www.quilliaminternational.com/press-release-new-quilliam-report-on-grooming-gangs/
gravenimage says
Yes–and Quilliam is itself an Islamic group.
PRCS says
“In 2018, following a terrorist attack in Strasbourg, France, Tata told FOX News “there is intent to harm Western society by Islam” and “it’s a truism that has to be built into policy so we can strengthen our borders.”
Per Wikipedia:
The perpetrator was Chérif Chekatt…a 29-year-old Strasbourg-born man of Algerian ancestry and French citizenship characterised as a “hardened criminal” who “converted to rigorous Islam” [whatever the hell that is].”
Uncle Nihad and the gang know full well he was a Muslim acting out jihad. Violent jihad. The most pleasing kind to ‘Allah”
They don’t deny it. They avoid mentioning it, because they’re not asked to. Or expected to.
Innocence by omission.
Mural says
Any Individual who is under fire from this moronic group CAIR s doing something right.
It is surprising why Indians and Sri Lankans are not protesting about being clubbed under ‘Asian’ here.
PRCS says
1. True
2. So, what’s the holdup?
Mural says
Unity,, PRCS. And most people I’m this world have to work to put some food on the table, unlike these low-lives from CAIR.
PRCS says
And you can bet that Uncle Nihad and the gang aren’t poverty stricken. Pushing the sharia is big business.
gravenimage says
True, Mural–a lot of good people are consumed with taking care of their families and other personal matters to pay much attention to what is happening to our societies.
Tony Naim says
I call on the President to fully support Gen. Tata to the post he is nominated for. It seems to me that Gen Tata understands very very well the position of Dhimmitude those girls in the UK are thought of by their Muslim Gang offenders based on their religious education and teaching.
Dhimmitude in Sharia law dehumanizes these female victims based on their non-Muslim status.
Had they been Muslim girls they would not have been treated like this by the Muslim gangs.
CAIR is promoting savagery in America.
CAIR gets more and more brazen with time as the islamic population in the US grows.
phyllis says
CAIR, MB have to go. If they aren’t improving humanity what the hell are they here for. Stop these savage, morons with all it takes to get it done. I’m glad that Gen Tata will get the job done, sooner than later. We have to stand up against islamism and it’s vulgar belief system. Females have NO rights. That alone should get the job done.
PRCS says
Against Muslims and their vulgar belief system.
Their beliefs, vile as they are, would be harmless without ‘Allah’s’ slaves to act them out.
mortimer says
Look, PRCS, Less than one-tenth of 1% of Muslims are violent jihadists. The majority of Muslims today do not want to be like Mohammed. The majority of Muslims today are in total denial about the opportunistic, amoral character of Mohammed. The majority are trying to get along with the ‘other’. 35% of Muslims are non-practicing or actual apostates.
Muslims are humans who have the wrong information. Everyone can change their mind. And many are leaving Islam every day. The best counterjihadists are former Muslims who understand the doctrines perfectly and are thus even more capable to refute them.
Exaggeration doesn’t help our cause. It’s the ideology and the self-hypnosis that are our enemies.
gravenimage says
Mortimer, over half of Muslims even in the US want to impose barbaric Shari’ah law on us–this is the purpose of Jihad terror.
And how is PRCS exaggerating by noting that pious Muslims do indeed refer to themselves as “slaves of Allah”?
And he is also right that without Muslims committed to Islam that we would have nothing to worry about re Jihad terror.
The ideology of Islam would be a dead one, no more dangerous to us than the ancient and defunct worship of Baal. And without dedicated Muslims, “self-hypnosis” would largely apply to people who see themselves as attractive as they were twenty years ago, think they are far more charming to the ladies than they really are, or that they turn into great storytellers after that third martini.
PRCS says
Look, Mortimier–at GI’s informed and nicely articulated response!
Allow me to suggest that this unusual time presets you with a perfect opportunity to improve your reading comprehension skills.
pragmatist says
What on earth makes you believe all that – you appear to be most sadly misinformed?
PRCS says
Mort is usually pragmatic, too. And then: without warning–over the cliff.
Walter Sieruu says
Those Muslims ,in England, who rape girls and engage in sex trafficking of young girls are evil, heinously vile and those Muslim hooligans have,time and time again, proven by their own actions that they are despicable and extremely dangerous.
Likewise, there is more than enough proof from that those wicked and cruel behavior of those brutal Muslim thugs that they are inspired by the Quran and other authorized written works of Islam to have strong spiteful to females and even more so if those young females are not Muslims.
Those vicious psychopath Muslim thugs by their evil actions are also showing their hideous Islamic hate for Western laws and the whole of Western civilization.
So CAIR may try to hide and cover-up the many evil fruits of Islam and the followers of Islam by shouting out “anti- Muslim bigotry” yet the truth is that the religious authorized written works of Islam but all the facts together prove that Islam and fruits of the religion of Islam are evil.
James Lincoln says
The United States needs to declare the muslim brotherhood, along with its front organizations like cair, isna, etc., terrorist organizations.
They should be shut down and prosecuted – not listened to like “civil rights” organizations.
And yes, Ret. Army Brig. Gen. Anthony J. Tata would make a fine Undersecretary of Defense for Policy.
gravenimage says
CAIR slams General for “revolting promotion of the anti-Muslim trope that Muslim youth in UK engage in sex crimes”
……………………..
They aren’t all “youth”, but they are almost entirely Muslim.
Once more, CAIR doesn’t want anyone to be allowed to tell the truth about Islam.
The Hittite King says
I am not a part of western civilization. However, it makes me very sad to see that people from this libertarian, humane and noble civilization have been persecuted. I use my zero tolerance logic when the persecuted are the children. Westerners have opened their country’s doors for people living in poor and deprived countries. However, ungrateful and vile bigoters who have invaded western countries, rapes western children without shame. I personally believe in race and cultural inequality. There is no need to be Einstein to see the difference between a British and a Pakistani. Likewise, as a Turk, I think even Muslim Turks are superior to Pakistani Muslim rapists. Millions of Turks live in Europe, but they don’t rape children like Pakistani rapists. Because after all, Turks have a noble pre-Islamic culture which is today is the part of the Turkish culture. And Turkish culture is compatible with secularism. After all, do not try to fool yourself. Let’s be honest. You can call me a racist, it doesn’t bother me.
gravenimage says
The Hittite King, I think this has far more to do with ideology and culture than it does race. Many Turks were indeed rapists–during the period when Christian girls were seized as sex slaves and sold in bazaars, and when Muslim Turks raped Armenian and Greek girls during the Armenian Genocide.
I think the difference with you is that you have left Islam and embraced logic.
As for Pakistan, many Pakistani Muslims are pretty similar genetically to Hindu Indians–in fact, a few generations back man of them *were* Hindu.
Again, the difference is ideology, and the ugly creed of Islam.
E T says
CAIR IS The Muslim Brotherhood hoods.
libertyORdeath says
With all the evidence of these grooming gangs and large scale gang rape how can anyone believe this garbage? Add to that the thousands of terrorist attacks against Western targets and you can kinda see why the General would point out that “…there is intent to harm Western society by Islam”. Even if it is not every one of the 1.8 Billion muslims that are trying to infiltrate and destroy Western society, even a tiny percentage is enough to cause concern.
How are we losing this information and propaganda war so badly? What can be done to turn the tide?
maemae77 says
Muslims just don’t want the truth about their ideology exposed.
mortimer says
Islam is intrinsically totalitarian. Islam is a thought-control and mind-control cult. Muslims uncritically repeat what the mullahs say this week. Muslims turn off any independent thoughts they may have. Thought-crime … independent thinking … is the worst crime in Islam.
gravenimage says
True, maemae and Mortimer.
Owen Morgan says
So muslim rape of white, non-muslim girls is now “white supremacism,” according to CAIR? Good to keep up with these definitions.
mortimer says
Robert McCaw is taking advantage of the fact that most people (and doctrinaire Leftards in particular) don’t know about the ideology of JIHADISM and the plots uncovered by various intelligence agencies involving various Islamist terror-groups and the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Muslim Brotherhood is a big conspiracy. Islam itself is an ANTI-FREEDOM CONSPIRACY. Islam presents itself as a form of strict religious morality, but it is in fact an intolerant, totalitarian political ideology.
Robert McCaw knows most Westerners are unaware of Islam’s political agenda. And, yes, Islam does use rape as part of its political agenda of softening up the kafirs for subjugation.
Islamic history is replete with examples of rape as part of official policy. 300,000 Bengali women were raped as part of Pakistan’s jihad in Bangladesh in 1971.
Sorry, McCaw, you lose.
OLD GUY says
Well of course CAIR would stand up against anyone accusing muslims or islam of doing something wrong. Sharia law protects islam from criticism even if it is the truth you cannot talk about it or write about it. Thanks to Obama and Hillary along with the islamic nations they have passed a Resolution in the UN that creates anything said against islam or Muhammad is hate speech and punishable by prison or death. But muslims can threaten any other religion or group it wants to with no repercussions. So much for FREEDOM of SPEECH.
PRCS says
“Sharia law protects islam from criticism even if it is the truth you cannot talk about it or write about it.”
Muslims can punish ‘blasphemers’ where Islamic law (the sharia) is THE law. Given that it’s NOT the law here, they are–much as it hurts their feelings–not protect by it here.
ed says
Raping infidels is not a crime in islam