The Unfathomable Horror of Britain’s Rape-Gang Holocaust

Yesterday, British MP Rupert Lowe released the long-awaited report on one of the most outrageous horrors committed by Muslims against the West in the 1400-year history of that religion. Specifically, the systematic human trafficking and rape of white British girls by Muslim migrants, most of whom were of Pakistani descent, over the course of decades since the 1950s.

Read more Investigating the Newsoms

There were, according to the report, an estimated 250,000 victims. Many were raped hundreds of times by their captors. The report describes literally millions of rapes of children.

The Daily Signal’s Tyler O’Neil provides a taste:

The Rape Gang Inquiry published a report Tuesday finding that these “coordinated operations” extended “to all corners of the country,” in 149 local authority districts, about 40% of all such districts. Member of Parliament Rupert Lowe, leader of the Restore Britain party, led the initiative, and his report heavily criticizes both the leftist Labour Party and the establishment Conservative Party.

The report accuses Labour leaders of having “framed legitimate concerns as ‘far-right’ agitation,” and claims the government “failed to impose mandatory ethnicity recording or launch a full statutory inquiry despite clear evidence.”

Why ignore or suppress the investigations? Because they’re politically inconvenient.

“Political correctness, fear of accusations of racism, and fear of losing electoral support from certain demographics have taken precedence over the protection of British children,” the report states.

Naturally, Rupert Lowe has an axe to grind, and the British government is running a separate investigation into the issue, but there’s good reason to take Lowe’s report seriously.

The rape gang issue is politically explosive—and extremely problematic for the woke leftist worldview.

…

The report lays out the general process: predominantly young Muslim men would entice girls as young as 11, giving them attention, drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes. After a few months, taxis would pick the girls up and take them “to houses, flats, restaurants, and hotels where they were raped repeatedly by groups of men, tortured, filmed for blackmail, and told they were ‘white trash’ or ‘kuffar’ who merited punishment.”

“Survivors described daily rapes, ‘red rooms’ of extreme torture, trafficking between cities, and institutional disbelief that compounded their suffering,” the report adds.

The report notes that there is no exact figure for the victims, but estimates 250,000 victims over a period of decades. A British newspaper put the reported figure for one year at 18,700.

The full 219-page report can be found . In the foreword, Lowe pins the blame on British immigration policy:

I am grateful to everyone on my team who has contributed to exposing this demonic chapter in Britain’s history. A combination of the paralysing fear of ‘racism’ accusations and the scramble for votes from imported foreign sub-cultures meant that pure evil was allowed to metastasise. Nor is the horrendous ordeal over. The root cause was immigration, beginning with the British Nationality Act 1948 and escalating under Tony Blair from 1997 onwards. Believing proud nations to be responsible for the mid-20th century destruction of Europe, our post-war leaders embraced diversity and multiculturalism as the supposedly civilised alternative. This report establishes beyond any doubt that this ‘open society’ obsession has in fact enabled untold barbarism of its own. Oil and water do not mix and cultural differences, going back centuries, are the genesis of this problem.

He isn’t wrong, per se. But even amid releasing perhaps the most explosive political document of the 21st century, Lowe is still too kind.

“Untold barbarism” is certainly accurate. The problem is that Lowe and even the Restore UK politicians who are offering the report to the world don’t seem to be willing to say, with a full throat, that the marauding rape gangs introduced to British shores by a treasonous political class are following sharia Islam.

Because the Quran and the Hadith provide the justification under religious law for the institutionalized rape of infidel women — if they’re to be interpreted in a fundamentalist (we’re supposed to call it “extremist,” though within the Islamic world the interpretation is quite mainstream) manner.

The Arabic phrase at issue is “ma malakat aymanukum,” which translates to “those whom your right hands possess” and is commonly interpreted to mean female infidels.

Read more The Spectacle Ep. 431: UFC Fight Shows American Greatness at the White House

Classical Islamic scholars and fiqh manuals — a fiqh manual is an Islamic law book — interpret ma malakat aymanukum to refer to female slaves acquired via war, purchase, or gift — primarily non-Muslim war captives. The owner could have sexual relations with his female slave (ama or concubine) without marriage; otherwise, sex outside of marriage is prohibited in sharia law.

And there are several points within the Quran discussing the practice:

And then in the Hadith, several passages show the prophet Muhammad and his companions engaging in or permitting the sexual exploitation of captives:

The Islam the Brits imported from Pakistan sees all interactions between Muslims and infidels as coming under the context of war. Which means letting them into Great Britain was to provide an open invitation to pillage the British working class without any real consequence. The war came to British soil, but the British refused to fight.

And the British political class was too cowardly to insist that that version of Islam be consigned to the ash heap of history before it was allowed to breathe British air. Even after it was obvious what the consequences of importing it were.

I come back to the story of Charles Napier, who in the mid-19th century was the British general in charge of the Empire’s military exploits in India. Napier and his forces were on the march through the countryside and came upon a strange scene in an Indian village — the locals were building a funeral pyre and were readying the widow of the deceased to be thrown on top of it and burned to death in the fire.

Upon inquiries, Napier was made to understand that this was sati, a local custom by which Indians disposed of widows they had no further use for.

The general was less than impressed. His brother recorded that his response was:

Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.

To go from Napier to Pakistani rape gangs operating with impunity on British soil in 150 years is almost impossible to fathom.

The political class in Great Britain had better hope there are no Charles Napiers watching their exploits. Because in the aftermath of this report, every light pole and tree branch in the country is a potential gibbet for those who stood by and watched as the barbarians they imported abused and defiled a quarter million of their most vulnerable young citizens.

Read more Do the US and Iran Finally Have a Peace Deal?