As calls mount for a full inquiry into the Muslim child-rape gang scandal, the Starmer government is adamant in its refusal, which naturally begs the question: why? The obvious answer is because the Labour government, and Starmer personally, stand to be deeply embarrassed by what they did (or more correctly, failed to do) about the horrors they knew were taking place.
But there’s an even deeper reason why the UK media-political class are so determined not to look too deeply into the mass rape of white underage girls by packs of Muslim men: Why?
One of the major reasons for the cover up by every level of the British civil and media class is that they were not just terrified for being called ‘racist’, but they are committed Islamophiles. ‘Islamophobia’ is the worst thing they can imagine. Worse even than child rape. To confront the possibility that rape and brutalisation of non-Muslim women is endemic in Islam is their darkest nightmare.
Yet, that’s exactly what it is. Just ask British-Iranian human rights activist, Lily Moo.
I was shocked to experience this personally growing up in Birmingham. I went to a school that was predominantly Muslim and 92% of the population of that school were Muslim kids, boys […] were poisoned into sexualizing any girl who is not a Muslim girl.
The ‘poisoning’ was not by Western media, but by the religion of Islam itself.
In the madrasa, a lot of the boys would go into a Friday school where the imam would make it okay and even encourage them to assault teenage young white girls because They want it. That’s why they come out looking like they do. They should only protect and respect a Muslim woman or Muslim girl who’s fully covered up. Therefore it’s open season on all the white girls or any non-muslim girl […]
It’s all being taught inside of the UK by madrasas, the Islamic schools for boys. BBC has even done documentaries on these, this is all public information […]
In a Sharia law a rapist is basically the victim of this story, because he was tempted to sin against the young girl. Child marriage is allowed under Sharia law. What is happening to the UK when a white British girl is raped and killed and then they called that an honor killing? What is happening to the UK?
Lily Moo personally experienced the sexualised bullying by Muslim boys in Britain.
After I left my high school my face was cut out on a picture and put on a porn website and the Muslim boys in school were passing this picture around to each other. To the point that we had the police involved. All of this record is there. My teenage brother’s nose was broken and beaten because he wouldn’t stand for such rudeness and foul behavior. Everywhere my sister and I were to go, living in the West Midlands at the time, was always with an escort so that we would not be preyed upon.
It should surprise no one, really, that Pakistani men in Britain are so rapey. After all, they’re only keeping up the traditions they learned ‘back home’.
According to Hina Jilani, a lawyer working for women’s rights […] In Pakistani culture, women are seen as the repository of a family’s ‘honour’. ‘If you want to damage a man’s honour, you do it through his wife.’
In other words, the mass rape of White British children is being used a weapon of the unspoken war by which Islam is rapidly subjugating Britain.
Which is nothing new: Muslims have used rape as a weapon of subjugation for as long as there has been Islam. According to Indian writer and defence analyst Rakesh Krishnan Simha:
The misogyny that pervades radical Islam is not accidental, isolated, or a new phenomenon […] it has filtered into the thinking of modern-day Islamists, resulting in violence and rape on an industrial scale not seen since the Jewish Holocaust.
India has been a strong supporter of Israel in its war against Hamas. One reason for this, says Simha, is because Indians immediately recognised the brutality of the enormities Hamas committed against women on October 7. Muslims committed the same, even worse, horrors against Indian women for centuries.
When Hindus see hundreds of Islamic terrorists paragliding into Israeli border neighborhoods and raping women, they are reflexively reminded of the countless invasions mounted against India over the past millennium in which Islamic invaders destroyed Indian cities, killed adult men, and carried off women and young children. In fact, during the previous millennium, the concept of Jauhar – in which Hindu women committed mass immolation – became popular because it was preferable to becoming the slave or concubine of an unwashed, illiterate, lascivious marauder from Afghanistan, Iran, or Tatarstan.
Author Omendra Ratnu points out another significant reason for this painful choice of burning themselves while still alive. This was due to the Islamic practice of necrophilia – the sexual abuse of Hindu women’s dead bodies. “After Jauhar, all that the barbarians would get were ashes.”
Others attest to Islam’s long history of mass rape.
According to US-based Bangladeshi journalist Anushay Hossain, the first time rape was consciously applied as a weapon of war was during the 1971 Bangladesh War of Independence. She writes: Each time I go home to Bangladesh, a relative, usually male, takes me aside and whispers stories to me about the “piles, and piles of bodies of rape victims” you would find under bridges in mass graves.
Australian doctor Geoffrey Davis, who was brought to Dhaka to perform late-term abortions and facilitated the large-scale international adoption of war babies born to Bangladeshi women, estimated up to half a million Bangladeshi women raped – repeatedly – by the Pakistani army are ‘very conservative’. Untold numbers of women died, Davis says, in special ‘rape camps’.
Like the mass rapes of Israeli women by Hamas, the playbook of Islamists worldwide remains the same. Their prurient upbringing, religious sanction, and historical role models all encourage them to rape and abduct non-Muslim women. This has gone on since jihadi hordes burst out of Arabia. And wherever they are in a majority, the thousand-year-old pattern of violence against women is repeated over and over again. All of this can be distilled into the words of the 19th orientalist Julius Wellhausen: “Victory over an enemy would seem to have been consummated only when the enemy’s daughter was introduced into the conqueror’s harem.”
Hence the British establishment’s desperation not to inquire too deeply into the industrial-scale rape of British girls. They’d have to admit that what Britain is seeing is an unspoken war of conquest, with rape as its foremost weapon.
