Saturday, April 03, 2021



White Rape Victims of Brown Muslims Are ... 'RACISTS!'

Four Muslim migrants from North Africa gang-raped a 36-year-old woman on the Spanish island of Gran Canaria, after she stopped to ask how she could help them. According to the March 3 report,

The alleged victim is believed to have lived on the Canary Islands, whereas the suspects are thought to have arrived only recently on a boat…. [T]hey were given initially government-provided accommodations managed by the Red Cross but later kicked out for breaking the rules. They are then thought to have set up camp in the park where the woman was allegedly attacked after enquiring about their situation. The woman had asked if she could help them with anything, but within ‘a matter of seconds’ this had led to her being assaulted…

This woman, who was described “as either an Irish expat or coming from a Nordic country,” joins countless other European women—especially those “from a Nordic country”—to be raped by Muslim migrants.

Why is this ongoing phenomenon not being checked? One of the reasons revolves around the specter of “racism.” The “woke” establishment tends to see European women accusing Muslim men of raping them through a skeptical light.

For example, in Sweden—the rape capital of Europe—studies continue to reveal that migrants, mostly from North Africa, the Middle East, and Muslim sub-Sahara, account for the overwhelming majority of rapes, as captured by the following headline: “Report: 9 in 10 Gang Rapists In Sweden Have Foreign Origins.”

To neutralize these findings, on March 9, 2021, the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (“Brå”) said that “Immigrants’ sharp over-representation in rape statistics may be due to the fact that Swedish women are more likely to report immigrants for rape than they are to report Swedish men.” Stina Holmberg, a research councilor at Brå, elaborated:

It may be that you are more inclined to report something you [a Swedish women] have been exposed to, if the crime was committed by someone you feel more alien to, and who has low social status.

Skepticism for rape reports against non-white males turns to open hostility whenever this issue is forthrightly discussed, as Sarah Champion, a Labor politician and MP for Rotherham (the epicenter of sex grooming), learned last summer, when she was accused of “fanning the flames of racial hatred” and “acting like a neo-fascist murderer.” Her crime? She had dared to assert that “Britain has a problem with British Pakistani men raping and exploiting white girls.” (The same elements that accused Champion of being a “murderer” also, and rather unsurprisingly, characterize the UK’s anti-extremism program, Prevent, as being “built upon a foundation of Islamophobia and racism.”)

Perhaps most telling is an April 2020 article, titled, “I was raped by Rotherham grooming gang—now I still face racist abuse online.” In it, a British woman (alias, “Ella”) revealed that her Muslim rapists called her “a white c*nt, a white whore, a white b***h,” during the more than 100 times the Pakistani grooming gang raped her in her youth.

“We need to understand racially and religiously aggravated crime if we are going to prevent it and protect people from it and if we are going to prosecute correctly for it,” Ella said in a recent interview:

Prevention, protection and prosecution—all of them are being hindered because we are neglecting to properly address the religious and racist aspects of grooming gang crimes…. It’s telling them that it’s OK to hate white people.

That there are “racial” and “religious” aspects to the epidemic of Muslims raping European women is an understatement. According to Dr. Taj Hargey, a British imam, Muslim men are taught that women are “second-class citizens, little more than chattels or possessions over whom they have absolute authority.” The imams, moreover, preach a doctrine “that denigrates all women, but treats whites with particular contempt.” Consider a few earlier examples:

Another British woman was trafficked to Morocco where she was prostituted and repeatedly raped by dozens of Muslim men. They “made me believe I was nothing more than a slut, a white whore,” she recollected. “They treated me like a leper, apart from when they wanted sex. I was less than human to them, I was rubbish.”

Another British girl was “passed around like a piece of meat” among Muslim men who abused and raped her between the ages of 12 and 14. Speaking now as an adult, a court heard how she “was raped on a dirty mattress above a takeaway and forced to perform [oral] sex acts in a churchyard,” and how one of her abusers “urinated on her in an act of humiliation” afterwards.

A Muslim man explained to another British woman why he was raping her: “you white women are good at it.”

A Muslim man called a 13-year-old virgin “a little white slag”—British slang for “loose, promiscuous woman”—before raping her.
In Germany, a group of Muslim migrants stalked a 25-year-old woman, hurled “filthy” insults at and taunted her for sex. They too explained their logic—“German girls are just there for sex”—before reaching into her blouse and groping her.

Another Muslim man who almost killed his 25-year-old German victim while raping her—and shouting “Allah!”—afterwards inquired if she liked it.

In Australia, a Muslim cabbie groped and insulted his female passengers, including by saying “All Australian women are sluts and deserve to be raped.”

In Austria, an “Arabic-looking man” approached a 27-year-old woman at a bus stop, pulled down his pants, and “all he could say was sex, sex, sex,” prompting the woman to scream and flee.

In short, there certainly is a “racist” aspect to the rape of European women by migrants—though in reverse: non-white Muslim men tend to see white women as nymphomaniacs that are “hot” for being degraded and abused—a stereotype that, incidentally, stretches back to the very beginnings of Islamic history.

Even so, Ella’s attempts to highlight these “religious and racist aspects” that fueled the abuse she and other European girls and women experienced—that is, her attempt to connect the dots in an effort to help eliminate this phenomenon—led only to “a lot of abuse from far-left extremists, and radical feminist academics,” she said. Such groups “go online and they try to resist anyone they consider to be a Nazi, racist, fascist or white supremacist.”

They don’t care about anti-white racism, because they appear to believe that it doesn’t exist. They have tried to floor me and criticise me continually and this has been going on for a couple of months. They tried to shut me down, shut me up … I’ve never experienced such hate online in my life. They accuse me of ‘advocating for white paedophiles’ and being a ‘sinister demonic entity.’

Such is the price for speaking unpopular truths—especially those that directly challenge the official narrative.

****************************************

The Verdict in Derek Chauvin's Trial Must Not Be a Reflection of Anything Other Than the Facts of the Case

The media narrative about the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin should disturb you if you are concerned with due process. It is a criminal trial, and the jury must use the standard beyond a reasonable doubt to find Chauvin guilty of anything. This article does not advocate for either finding. Instead, it promotes the idea that Chauvin’s guilt or innocence must rely on the facts in the case and whether or not they prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

This idea is fundamental to our justice system, but it appears almost no talking heads in the media and none of the activist lawyers recall that principle. The narrative is beginning to sound a lot more like mob justice, with the threat of a repeat performance of last summer’s violent riots hanging in the air. In a civilized society based on due process, the City of Minneapolis and American citizens should accept this. Unfortunately, with the barricaded court building, heightened security, and National Guard at the ready, we seem resigned to it.

The lawyer for George Floyd’s family, Benjamin Crump, wrote this in an editorial for USA Today:

A guilty verdict would also show progress — a long overdue sign that America is finally ready to not just confront but eradicate the racism mired in police activity that has been evident but ignored for decades.

As a lawyer, Crump should know this is not what a verdict demonstrates. A guilty verdict would show that the jury unanimously found the evidence proves Derek Chauvin’s guilt for the crime’s specific elements beyond a reasonable doubt. That is it. It is not a reflection on society, a symbol of progress, or a reflection on any other police officer or department.

The verdict’s basis is the complete set of circumstances present during the nearly full hour of bodycam footage that documents the interaction between the shop employee, George Floyd, his companions, and the Minneapolis police officers summoned to the scene on May 25, 2020. Not anyone’s perception of what should happen based on their own experience, prejudice, or thoughts about America’s history.

Truly stupid people with platforms also feel the need to weigh in. Mediocre comedienne and constitutional scholar Chelsea Handler, for example:

According to Handler, there is no need for a trial when you have seen a tenth of the story on video. Of course, the nine-minute, twenty-nine-second viral video clip is the only one Chelsea has ever seen. The only one demonstrated liars, like Benjamin Crump, want you to consider when forming your opinion. The clip is out of context and brutally emotional. Crump is the same lawyer who said Jacob Blake was unarmed when police shot him in Kenosha, Wisconsin, in another out-of-context viral video. The media carried Crump’s water on that claim, and Kenosha burned as part of the 2020 Summer of Rage.

Then there is former congressman and former Republican Joe Walsh shrieking like a teen girl on Twitter:

Imagine thinking you stand for freedom when you think due process is not required and only a single element of the entire interaction matters. It might shock Walsh to find out that the hold Chauvin used is part of Minneapolis police officers’ training. It was not applied to put pressure on his trachea, and the medical examiner found no evidence that it did. How this will factor into the trial remains to be seen.

The legal teams will also bring many other elements of the situation into evidence. The defense will present the level of fentanyl and methamphetamines in George Floyd’s system. The Hennepin County medical examiner’s statement that if George Floyd had been found dead, it would have been considered an overdose will be an issue. The defense team will present Floyd’s medical condition, his COVID-19 status, his behavior resisting arrest, and his constant complaints of trouble breathing long before he was on the ground. The fact that first responders are taught if someone can talk, they can breathe may be noted.

Legal commentators from the Right like Ben Shapiro and the Left like Barbara McQuade have both noted that based on the facts of the case and the elements of the crimes Chauvin has been charged with, a conviction will be difficult. That is because of due process and the evidentiary standard in a criminal trial matter. Even Vice President Kamala Harris said convicting Chauvin will be difficult. She also said people are conditioned to trust police officers. Perhaps she doesn’t recall the events of the last nine months or the disgusting ad she made with Joe Biden during the campaign.

No American should celebrate either verdict. A guilty verdict does not mean anything other than that the evidence proved the criminal elements beyond a reasonable doubt. An acquittal doesn’t mean George Floyd’s family did not lose a brother and a son. Not every tragic thing that happens is a crime. It is imperative that Americans circle back to the fundamental principles of our justice system, understanding that due process may not always serve anyone’s preferred narrative.

********************************************

The Coming Christian Inquisition

It’s been happening for a while, but we’ve pretended what we were seeing wasn’t really happening. It always starts slow, and usually happens to someone else. There was the Christian baker who didn’t want to bake a cake, a florist who didn’t want to do flowers, and a photographer who didn’t want to provide services for same-sex weddings.

Because leftists belong to the party of “tolerance,” they decided to destroy the livelihoods of these folks to put the fear of “god” into them. The baker won his case before the Supreme Court, but leftists continue working to destroy him because he will not bow to their will.

Several California communities ruled that people cannot have Bible studies in their homes for some reason. Churches were targeted during the pandemic with threats of jail time and severe fines for those who dare to think they should obey God rather than men.

The Left is melting down because a small Christian university had the nerve to make it to the Sweet Sixteen basketball finals. According to one social justice warrior/reporter, that was a bridge too far. “Oral Roberts University isn’t the feel good March Madness story we need,” she wrote. Personally, I find it ironic that the Ohio State team took a knee during the national anthem and was beaten by a lesser-rated team. Turns out the lesser-rated team was ORU!

Because ORU has biblical standards of behavior and a code of conduct, that was too much for this “Diversity & Inclusion” reporter. Anyone else see the irony here? Once again I quote my favorite philosopher, Inigo Montoya from “The Princess Bride,” who remarked to Vizzini; “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

To leftists, diversity means, Agree with us or we’ll destroy you! This reporter seems to think people of faith have no place on the basketball court or anywhere else. She wants to see that schools like ORU never have another opportunity to compete in the public square. The Church, in my opinion, has avoided the fight of standing its ground on moral issues for far too long. The government is bringing the fight to the Church’s front door.

Think I’m being overly sensitive to ORU? Consider the “Equality Act” being pushed by every leftist in Congress. The “equality” they are pursuing is only for the radical Left. People of faith will see what little accommodations we now have in the public square disappear. Read the legislation for yourself.

The Equality Act isn’t about equality at all. We have that under the Constitution. Leftists want gay rights to trump all other rights. The homosexual demand for fairness began years ago when sodomy laws were repealed. Then it was demanding same-sex marriage. How will my gay marriage hurt you? We just want the right to marry, they told us. The Supreme Court legalized it; the Left demanded we accept it. No equality, just our unconditional surrender!

Think I’m kidding? Ask Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker who won his case before the Supreme Court in 2018. Thought that settled it? The Left ignored the High Court and came after him again.

Time to wake up and tell your senators to kill this legislation while we can. There are no other options but to fight back or surrender.

****************************************

Embrace Your Western Privilege

We "white" Westerners, especially the heterogametic ones, are loaded to the gills with "privileges," which obtain regardless of our economic status, intelligence level, or familial problems. Just by being "white" and, worse, "white" and "male" (as if we were dogs, too, not men, but, just males), our type of Western citizen "has one over" on "blacks," "persons of color," "females" &cetera.

To the countercultural mandarins in charge of Mencius Moldbug's "Catheral," this will not do. So, they tickle the brains and pluck the corroded heartstrings of some relevant and conveniently corralled college students, on the verge of blossoming into full-fledged "social justice" types (regardless of whether these types know a damned thing about what society is for, or what the nature of justice is), until they're whipped up into a fervor, and then deploy them into the society like red ants boiling out of a hill.

Are they right? Do we white, and often male, Westerners have this mythical privilege? Of course we do. The problem is not in defining us as privileged, the problem is in identifying what comprises that privilege, exactly. Allow me to explain.

I am privileged to live in a stable nation-state, with a reasonably uncorrupt government, with a largely workable health system, a somewhat extensive infrastructural network, a healthy police force, and, well, some kind of education system that at least has electric lights and clean floors.

I am privileged to have been raised to be polite, courteous, punctual, and sympathetic towards people in straits, especially relatively defenseless people such as girls and human embryos.

I am privileged to have the opportunities for autodidacticism granted me by access to the glorious Internet.

I am privileged by having an immediate, intuitive connection with the bulk of the great minds of the past and their important discoveries, through my European Christian heritage.

I am privileged because, by being white, I don't have to deal with much racial "vibes" except when I'm not around mostly other white people, and because I was raised to judge a man by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin.

I am privileged because I was raised in the Catholic, Apostolic Faith, which grants me the prospect of eternal life and the Beatific Vision if I can muster the character and commit the conduct that would please the great Judge of Souls.

I am privileged because I have been soaked since birth in mind-expanding counterculture, which, while not classical art and, so, not classically beautiful, nevertheless filled my mental storehouse with a big load of potential metaphor by which I can grapple with the confusing world and try put to use in committing a detournement against that very counterculture.

I am privileged because I was born a human mind, defined by my faculty of sovereign, creative reason and the agape that develops in me when I can engage others and assist them in making the same discoveries—or, for that matter, discoveries new to me!—I have made, and thus feel myself wounded in the heart by the beauty of the truthfulness of human nature.

I am privileged because I exist in a heritage of inchoate Platonic republicanism, modified and restrained Athenian democracy, Judeo-Christian morals, and a cultural mode of general decency that, at least only a short while before my time, still believed that beauty, truth, and goodness were aspects of an indivisible whole.

I am privileged to be able to recognize my privilege.

I am privileged because I probably have so many privileges I can’t enumerate them all.

The problem with the assault on my person, my identity, my race, my sex, my religion, my culture, and my nation-state—indeed, the assault ongoing against my very world—is not that I have privilege, but, that, almost all demographics besides “white” and “male” ones, possess many, if not most, of these privileges, too.

The “social justice” types, the “pod people” as I call them, acting like symbolic Communists in the 1956 chiller Invasion of the Body-Snatchers, maybe with a cabbage leaf poking out of their back collar, are so blinkered they deny, disregard, belittle, and, sometimes of late, and increasingly so, work to destroy these privileges that properly, and often actually, belong to us all.

So, they swing their hammer of (in)justice at politeness and punctuality. They swing it at Christianity (hoping it’ll knock Judaism down, too, I’ll bet). They swing it at Classical European culture, which shines the light of the wisdom of ancient Egypt itself on the benighted world of modern barbarism and ignorance. They swing it at cultural optimism, the ideal of truthfulness, at the Good itself. They implicitly swing it at the Artemis mission, at Space Exploration (SPACE! exploration)—because, after all, face it, that’s just “whitey on the moon,” blowing tax revenue that could be going to into fat studies scholarships, or something.

Do you check your privilege, as a Westerner? Do you recognize how many people had to live, and love, and struggle to survive and reproduce, in order for you to exist at all?—in order to give you the chance to “check your privilege”?

I check it, I try to check it as often as I can. My privilege is a gift from God, as far as I’m concerned. I don’t want to hoard this gift, I want to give it away. Because such privilege is human privilege, and the “social justice” cultural illiterates don’t grasp that, because they don’t even know what a human being is. They just hammer home those sharp nails into the blackboard of globally extended European civilization and all of the best things that it stands for—or, stood for.

***************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com TONGUE-TIED)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://john-ray.blogspot.com (FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*****************************************

No comments: