By William DiPuccio

Is it possible for Islam to undermine and replace the core values of Western civilization? By core values, I’m referring to deeply held principles such as inalienable rights, religious and personal freedom, equality of the sexes, free speech, and the separation of religion and state.

According to some, even posing this question places you in the company of conspiracy theorists and “Islamophobes.” Perhaps that accusation would be true if we assumed that all Muslims are engaged in an effort to bring North America and Europe under Muslim rule. But, Islam is not a monolithic faith and many Muslims who live in the West have internalized Western values. Some have even championed the cause of human rights within Islam.

There is, however, a substantial minority of Muslims in our midst who adhere closely to the teachings of traditional Islam (albeit with some modern adaptations) and believe that every nation must submit to Allah’s rule. They seek to do this by gradually implementing some form of sharia in society, one precept at a time, blurring the line between mosque and state. In their view, the only legitimate form of government is an Islamic theocracy ruled by a caliph- -that is, a successor to Muhammad. These Muslims are often referred to as “Islamists.” Based on an analysis of surveys conducted by Pew Research, globally, over two-thirds of Muslims are Islamists. 

But, how many Islamists are there in North America, and do they really pose a threat? There are no direct polling numbers for measuring Islamism, but using responses to individual questions from different polls, we can approximate the number of Islamists. According to a 2017 poll by Pew Research, 31% of U.S. Muslims believe there is only one true way to interpret their religion and 38% believe that traditional understandings of Islam are all they need. A 2015 Canadian poll showed more dramatic results: 42% of Canadian Muslims said that Islam is “irreconcilable” with the West. 

Even more telling, is a 2012 poll by Wenzel Strategies.¹ In that poll, 73% of American Muslims said that if the Constitution and sharia law conflict in any way, a Muslim should follow the Constitution (20% were not sure). But, when asked if sharia should be the supreme law of the land, 32% agreed. The Wentzel poll also revealed that, 58% of Muslim-Americans believe that criticism of Islam or Muhammad should not be permitted under the First Amendment, and 46% say that those who engage in such criticism should face criminal charges. 

Since specific questions relating to sharia and free speech are a more reliable gauge for identifying Islamist behavior than broad philosophical questions which are open to multiple interpretations, we can conclude, based on the Wenzel poll, that 32% to 58% of American Muslims are Islamists (assuming this poll is reliable). This aligns with the 42% of Canadian Muslims who said that Islam is “irreconcilable” with the West, and with the 38% of Muslims, identified in the Pew poll, who believe that traditional understandings of Islam are all they need.

What this means is rendered academic: Take nearly any mosque, any Muslim neighborhood, or any Muslim demographic group, and it is virtually certain that a percentage of the sample population will work towards the implementation of sharia law in society and, in rare cases, even commit violent acts in the name of Islam.

“But,” someone will object, “there were only 3.45 million Muslims in the U.S. in 2017, comprising 1.1% of the population. Even if half of U.S. Muslims are Islamists, we are talking about a population group numbering less than 2 million out of 326 million. Such a small population of Muslims, no matter how determined, would have little chance of making headway against the prevailing culture.” 

The mistaken assumption behind this objection is that a group’s influence is proportional to its numbers. Yet, consider the dramatic, legal and social gains made by gays and lesbians who comprise, at most, 4.5% of the population. Same-sex marriage, unthinkable 20 years ago, is now the law of the land. Though transgenders, made up only 0.6% of the population in 2016, their cause is highlighted in the media everyday and their participation in society has garnered substantial popular and legal support in the last few years. 

The same is true for Islamists. Their small numbers belie their influence. In my book, Can Islam Transform the West?, I present several lines of evidence to support this, including the Islamist impact on free speech, their antisemitism, their propagation of hate, and their influence on Congress and American universities. In this article, we will consider only one of these elements: Free speech. 

Free speech is a right guaranteed under the First Amendment. Traditional Islam does not have such a right. In fact, Islamic blasphemy laws prescribe severe punishment and even execution for those who criticize Islam or Muhammad. A substantial number American Muslims have been influenced by these blasphemy laws. According to the 2012 Wentzel poll, mentioned above, though 90% of Muslims in America agree with the First Amendment, 58% also believe that criticism of Islam or Muhammad should not be permitted under the First Amendment, 46% agree that those who criticize or parody Islam in the U.S. should face criminal charges (17% not sure), and 12% agree that those who criticize or parody Islam should be put to death (9% not sure). The poll also revealed that 43% of Muslim-Americans believe that U.S. citizens do not have a right to evangelize Muslims (28% not sure).

Though most Muslims do not engage in terrorism, a number of terrorist threats and attacks on Western targets have been provoked by words or pictures which some Muslims found offensive. The most infamous of these confrontations is the Charlie Hebdo massacre of 2015 in which 12 staff members of the French magazine were gunned down in retaliation for publishing satirical images of the Prophet Muhammad. That same year, two terrorists were killed in an attempted attack at an exhibit in Garland, Texas which featured cartoon images of Muhammad.

Islamists have come to realize that they don’t need to change one jot or tittle of the U.S. Constitution or European human rights laws to suppress criticism of Islam, they only have to render those rights ineffective. Their plan is working. Following the Charlie Hebdo attack, 42% of the French people wanted the press to avoid publishing cartoons that would upset the Muslim community. 

Overall, the mainstream, Western media, both in Europe and the U.S., have responded to such attacks with fear and self-censorship. You will find little, if any, serious criticism of Muslims and Islamic beliefs in these sources, much less cartoons or satire about Muhammad. Unwittingly, nearly every major media outlet and publisher- -both electronic and print, both popular and academic- -are acting in dutiful compliance to traditional Islam’s blasphemy laws.

The impact of Islamism on free speech goes beyond the media. Islamists have aligned themselves with Progressives in Europe and America to suppress criticism of Islam by labeling nearly all criticism, even reasoned criticism, as “Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted.” 

Forsaking the time-honored tradition of free speech in the West, hate speech laws in Europe and Canada, along with speech codes on social media, and in businesses and universities here in the U.S., have made it more difficult or virtually impossible to criticize Islam without incurring considerable social, financial, and even legal consequences (e.g., legal harassment, fines). Facebook and YouTube now routinely ban, financially punish, or suspend critics of Islamism including prominent ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

In our society there is a collective punishment for those who criticize Islam. Critics risk being defamed, labeled as bigots, boycotted, harassed, threatened, and even physically attacked. This is how Islamic blasphemy laws are entering the West through the back door. Free speech rights are suffering the death of a thousand cuts. 

To repeat the question I posed at the outset: Is it possible for Islam to eventually undermine and replace the core values of Western civilization? The answer, based on the evidence presented here, is that it is not only possible, but it is happening in plain sight. And, it will continue as long as we empower Islamists by our ignorance, indifference, and lack of courage.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/05/are_islamists_undermining_the_west.html

Here’s an easy game to play.

You say, “Obama”. I say, “Racist”. Eight years of this nonsense has long since inured everyone to Obama’s magical ability to tie any random thing to racism. But we did get a break for four years only for the Lightbringer to return with his magical racism.

“A disease like this just spotlights the underlying inequalities and extra burdens that black communities have historically had to deal with in this country. We see it in the disproportionate impact of covid-19 on our communities, just as we see it when a black man goes for a jog, and some folks feel like they can stop and question and shoot him if he doesn’t submit to their questioning,” Obama blathered.

Obviously Obama was watching CNN coverage of the Aubrey case and thinking about how many riots he could stirred up. But really, the coronavirus is racist?

Yes, it’s had a disproportionate impact on the black community. Also on the Jewish community. Not because the virus is anti-Semitic. We’re still not sure why men are more likely to die of it than women. It’s probably not because the virus is sexist.

But Barry is a one trick pony. And this is his one trick.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/05/obama-coronavirus-racist-daniel-greenfield/

Despite France dealing with the economic, psychological and human suffering wrought by the coronavirus, President Emmanuel Macron is moving forward with controversial plans to authorize the teaching of Arabic in schools across the nation in cooperation with Tunisian authorities. 
 On May 2, at the same time France was preparing to first week of the lockdown, a decree was published in relation to teaching Arabic in schools, which was signed by Macron, the Prime Minister Édouard Philippe and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Yves Le Drian, according to French outlet Valeurs Actuelles.
 The law states that France “in cooperation with Tunisian authorities” would provide “additional education in the Arabic language”. Tunisia will also have a direct role in selecting teachers for the program in France. “Depending on the needs of the language course, the government of the Tunisian Republic will select Tunisian teachers,” the text of the law reads. According to the law, this educational option would ensure “linguistic diversity” in France and would initiate the teaching for Arabic in French schools from the 1st grade. Arabic is the second most spoken language in France, with between 3 to 4 million speakers. 
 Under the new law, the option to study Arabic would be made available to French students all the way up until university. Although optional, the decree specifies that the results from Arabic courses will be taken into account when evaluating each student. Not limited to simply learning Arabic, students will also study Arabic culture and civilization and “notable elements of Tunisian culture”.

‘The Arabization and Islamization of France is on the march’

Since the publication of the decree, indignation has flourished on all sides across social networks. On May 2, Jean Messiha, part of the National Rally, produced a statement on Twitter slamming the new law. “By decree of April 30, 2020, the anti-national government plans to teach Arabic from elementary school at an age when children barely discover the French language. The Arabization and Islamization of France is on the march,” Messiha wrote.
 For his part, Belkacem Lounès, former Rhône-Alpes EELV regional advisor and ardent defender of the Berber cause, attacked the minister violently on the Facebook page of Berbères TV, “We wonder what objective is pursuing the Minister of National education and the French government? Is this a way to appease, even to attract the sympathy of Islamists from here and elsewhere for whom Arabic is the sacred language of the Koran?” Tensions about possible implementation of the law have been flaring on and off for nearly two years. In September of last year, Hakim El Karoui, essayist and founder of the Muslim Association for Islam in France, published a report in which he advocated teaching Arabic at school. According to him, integrating the language of Muhammad into the school system would allow the central state’s monopoly of learning be brought into a more local and community setting.
A few days later, Jean-Michel Blanquer, who had just been appointed Minister of National Education, claimed that he was won over by the proposal from El Karoui, writing, “We must give prestige to these languages. Arabic is a great literary language which should not only be learned by people of North African origin or from Arabic-speaking countries. It is this qualitative strategy that we will pursue.”
Marine Le Pen, president of the National Rally, vigorously rejected Blanquer’s proposal, saying, “Of course, there is a great Arab culture, but here is France, and I want us to learn French culture.” Politicians like Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, president of Debout la France, told BFM TV, “This is the beginning of a fatal track for the country. I do not want the Arabization of France.” The idea behind the decree actually dates back to a Franco-Tunisian agreement from March 31, 2017, initiated by Minister of National Education Najat Vallaud-Belkacem at the time for former Prime Minister François Hollande. Vallaud-Belkacem had previously denounced Greco-Latin language lessons, referring to them as elitist.

rmx.news/article/article/the-islamization-of-france-is-on-the-march-french-government-launches-plans-to-teach-arabic-in-schools

Travel restrictions imposed in many countries due to the Coronavirus crisis have had a beneficial effect: illegal immigration has been greatly reduced. But with the gradual deconfinement of European countries, the continent may have to face an upsurge in migratory traffic, reported French daily Le Figaro.

The newspaper cited an alert from the European police agency Europol. “Migration flows decreased during the confinements linked to Covid-19” , the migrants finding themselves “to a large extent” unable to move, noted Europol in a report published on Friday 15 May.

“Relaxation of travel and movement restrictions will likely lead to an increase in the movements of irregular migrants, both facilitated and non-facilitated,” the agency based in The Hague warned. In addition, Europol has observed a change in operating mode for migrant smugglers, due to the reinforced border controls within the European Union. The means of travel were thus gradually transferred from the airways to the land and sea routes. “Small boats are increasingly used to cross river borders. Migrants are also smuggled in, hidden in freight vehicles and freight trains that still cross borders,” explained the agency.

Travel restrictions in Europe could also complicate the use of seasonal labor in the agricultural sector and increase the demand for clandestine migrants already present in certain regions, Europol warned. The agency also fears that the closure of establishments offering sexual services in countries where these activities are regulated will intensify sexual exploitation.

freewestmedia.com/2020/05/17/will-deconfinement-explode-migrant-flows/

By Andrea Widburg

On Friday, Thomas Lifson wrote that last week’s news about the Flynn unmaskings was just the beginning. He cited a post by retired naval officer J.E. Dyer, at Liberty Unyielding, for insights about what Acting Director of National Intelligence Ric Grenell was carrying in a sizable satchel he delivered to the Department of Justice on May 7, 2020. Anyone could see that the satchel contained substantially more information than the five pages revealing the myriad Obama officials who unmasked General Flynn’s name.

Dyer’s article is worth reading in its entirety, but Lifson gives a quick, elegant summary:

The key message is that for years the Obama administration was mining the incomparable database of the National Security Agency (NSA), which captured virtually all electronic communications – emails, text messages, everything – launched into the ether. The potential for abuse is breathtaking. Everything that political enemies said to each other, except in private in-person conversations or in snail mail letters, could have been spied upon. And now it looks like staggering numbers of intercepts were monitored. Dyer makes that case.

What especially caught my eye was the exponential growth rate of queries that “desk jockeys” in the various federal agencies made to view information about United States Persons of Interest during Obama’s second term, all without having to log the specific inquiry or the identity of the person unmasked. Here’s the data, straight from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence:

Two thoughts flow from this extraordinary data. First, I am indebted to Mary Theroux, of the Independent Institute, who alerted me to the National Security Agency’s collection and storage capacity. Its Utah Data Center, completed in May 2019 at a cost of $1.5 billion, is located at Camp Williams, near Bluffdale, Utah. The structure covers somewhere between 1 to 1.5 million square feet, with 100,000 square feet dedicated to the data center and the remainder for technical support and administration.

The Data Center’s storage capacity is estimated to exceed exabytes, plural. If you’re wondering, a single exabyte is equal to one quintillion bytes (or 10 to the 18^th power of bytes). That’s a lot of information.

Mary Theroux pointed out that there is no way that the U.S. can scan this information in real-time. That is, there’s nothing in this massive database that will alert our intelligence agencies to a planned terrorist attack. Instead, this database exists as a repository to hunt down information after the fact. In that regard, it gives the government power that Levrentiy Beria only dreamed about.

As you recall, Levrentiy Beria was the head of the secret police under Stalin. He was responsible for tens of thousands of deaths (including the Katyn massacre) and hundreds of thousands of imprisonments. Beria’s job was to get rid of anyone whom the increasingly paranoid Stalin perceived as a threat.

In that capacity, Beria famously said, “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.” In other words, because he was spying on everybody, should a person be unfortunate enough to catch Stalin’s eye, Bernie could sift through those saved records and retrofit a crime. A government with exabytes of computer data has a lot of material for retrofitting crimes should it need it.

Second, the Obama administration’s radical increase in inquiries during his second term demands explanation. It’s to be hoped that, in the coming months, John Durham and Bill Barr provide that explanation. In the absence of that information, though, it’s not unreasonable to guess that Barack Obama was getting his ducks in a row to preserve his legacy.

Barack Obama was always thinking about the long game. After all, he announced right before his election that he would “fundamentally transform” America. A good insurance policy for ensuring that legacy was to track the opposition and remove – or prepare to remove – anyone who looked like a risk. Once Obama was in his second term, the administration was in a position to consolidate power for a permanent Democrat government class.

If this was, in fact, what Obama was doing, it’s a dead certainty that Trump wasn’t the only person Obama’s administration spied upon. After all, while Trump incurred Obama’s wrath for poking at him with the Birtherism, Trump didn’t announce his candidacy until mid-2015 and, for quite a while, the political class assumed that he was a joke. Obama could not have been worried about Trump.

However, the numbers show that Obama’s minions were searching more and more records when Obama could reasonably be worried about other candidates: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee – any one of them might have a chance of becoming president. Moreover, although Hillary was the “anointed one,” Obama knew from his 2008 primary campaign and from Hillary’s stint as Secretary of State, that Hillary was a tin-eared candidate whom many people hated with a passion. She was going to need all the help he could give her if she was going to be Obama’s third term.

In sum, my best guess is that we’re going to discover that Obama had teams of faceless drones searching through that enormous NSA stockpile of data for information about every Republican whose head ever appeared above the parapet as a threat to a permanent Democrat presidency.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/05/was_obama_systematically_spying_on_everyone_who_could_threaten_his_legacy.html

In the night on Friday, around midnight, police officers discovered two dead children in an apartment in Schwarzach. The suspected murderer is a father from Schwarzach, reports the Idowa portal, but without mentioning that the suspected murderer of the two children is the 36-year-old migrant Samir A.

According to an acquaintance, the latter had called in the night of Friday. Due to the telephone call, the woman was afraid that Samir A. had suicidal intentions. The police then checked the man’s home address and other known addresses. In the meantime, the 36-year-old Samir A. telephoned his former partner and mother of the two children, who lives separated from him. However, he did not inform her of his whereabouts.In the father’s apartment, the police discovered two children, a little boy aged 8 and his little 6-year-old sister. Both were found dead.

Based on the initial investigations by the Straubing criminal investigation department, the suspicion of the crime was directed against the 36-year-old father, who took turns with their mother to look after the children during the night. A large-scale search was initially unsuccessful, according to the police press release. Shortly before 4:00 a.m., the 36-year-old turned himself in to the police in Straubing and was arrested. The Straubing criminal investigation department investigates in close cooperation with the Regensburg public prosecutor’s office, also with regard to the exact course of the crime and the background.

.journalistenwatch.com/2020/05/16/staatsanwaltschaft-samir-a/

A Turk born in Switzerland is allowed to stay in Switzerland, although he was sentenced to 28 months in prison in 2016 for raping a woman. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Berne has revoked the revocation of the settlement permit by the Berne Security Directorate. According to the verdict published on Friday, seven years ago the now 25-year-old man and two accomplices committed a crime against an unconscious young woman. The young Turkish man performed sexual intercourse unprotected.One of the accomplices recorded the act.The latter subsequently sent this video to at least seven people. The three young men also stole from the victim. The young woman suffered severe post-traumatic stress disorder. Between 2011 and 2017, the young Turk was also punished for several minor offences, such as traffic violations. In 2016 the young Turk met a young Swiss woman whom he married in mid-2019.According to the Bernese Administrative Court, the young man has since completed an apprenticeship and has proven himself in his training. After a preliminary hearing, the court considered it plausible that the complainant had in the meantime matured and was making serious efforts to lead an orderly life in accordance with the law. His wife’s family supported him. In 2013, when the victim was raped, he was more of a hanger-on, according to the court that sentenced him. He has been without criminal record for three years.Admittedly, the rape was a serious offence, which would indicate that the person had to be expelled. The man also had a certain connection to his home country, although he was born in Switzerland. For example, he had spent several holidays in Turkey and at least one aunt and stepfather still lived there. According to his own statements, however, the young Turk has no contact with him. In this case, however, it should also be noted that the young Swiss wife of the Turk has no connection to Turkey at all. According to the court, expelling the young Turkish man would “result in a considerable impairment of his married life and would be particularly difficult for his wife to cope with”.In addition, there were no indications that the young Turk could relapse in violence and sexual offences. Sometimes the young Turkish man’s private interests were “of considerable weight” in view of growing up in Switzerland, the marital relationship and the rather difficult integration of the man in Turkey.

polizei-schweiz.ch/tuerke-darf-trotz-schaendung-einer-jungen-bewusstlosen-frau-in-der-schweiz-bleiben/?fbclid=IwAR1N39fCvZ8yxNz-LtqlNYdiAK20tfnANQPw8j004ZuLZ_53Cbt6gAzfduQ

In July 2018, Britain’s then Home Secretary Sajid Javid ordered a review into the characteristics of child sexual grooming gangs. “The scandal of child grooming gangs is one of the most shocking state failures that I can remember,” he said.

“I will not let cultural or political sensitivities get in the way of understanding the problem and doing something about it. It is a statement of fact… that most of the men in recent high profile gang convictions have had Pakistani heritage… I’ve instructed my officials to look into this unflinchingly.”

The review was long overdue, to say the least. In 2015, Prime Minister David Cameron told the BBC that the rape and sexual abuse of underage girls had been “on an industrial scale”: “Young girls… being abused over and over again on an industrial scale, being raped, being passed from one bunch of perpetrators to another bunch of perpetrators”. According to The Independent:

“The Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal saw gangs undertake the organised sexual abuse of children from the late 1980s until the 2010s and the failure of local authorities to act. Rotherham Council finally commissioned an independent inquiry led by Professor Alexis Jay, which found in August 2014 that some 1,400 children, most of them white girls, were abused by predominantly British-Pakistani men”.

Girls as young as 11 were raped by “large numbers of male perpetrators“.

As the charity Parents Against Child Sexual Exploitation (Pace) told the BBC in 2014, the sexual abuse and rape of under-age girls and young women had been taking place for decades in nearly “every town” across the UK. In 2017, to mention one example, 17 older men and one woman were convicted of grooming, raping and sexually abusing under-age girls and young women from 2011-2014 in Newcastle. Those prosecuted, according to The Independent, “were from the Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian and Turkish communities and mainly British-born…”

The review that Javid ordered was completed late last year and one would therefore expect a public debate about the issue as Javid, even before he ordered the review, insisted that there needed to be an “honest, open debate” about child abuse, “including racial motivation”.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government, however, has nevertheless refused to publish the review, which it says will “only be used for internal policy-making”.

“One of the main purposes of the exemption is to protect the ‘safe space’ necessary for ministers and officials to consider policy options in private without risk of premature disclosure,” officials told The Independent in response to a freedom of information (FOI) request.

“Disclosure would risk pre-empting decisions still to be made by ministers. In addition, the information could be misleading if made public and used out of context…. We recognise that this topic in general and any insight and learning are matters of strong public interest, although it does not necessarily follow that it is in the public interest to disclose any specific information relating to it.” [Emphasis added.]

The refusal to make the report public came even as The Independent reported in December 2019 that:

“Almost 19,000 children have been sexually groomed in England in the past year, according to official figures that have prompted warnings of an ‘epidemic’. Campaigners say the true figure is far higher and accused the government of failing to tackle child sexual exploitation, despite promises made after high-profile cases in Rotherham and Rochdale. More than 18,700 suspected victims of child sexual exploitation were identified by local authorities in 2018-19, up from 3,300 five years before”.

In 2018, police recorded crime showed that in the past five years there had been “a staggering twelve-fold (1,086%) increase in sexual grooming”.

It is hardly believable that authorities are seriously proposing that publishing specific information pertaining to a crucial societal issue — the heinous sexual exploitation of children and the need to protect them from gangs of male sexual predators — is not in the public interest. This is the kind of semantic acrobatics that are apparently needed to obfuscate the fact that the UK government is terrified of having the “open debate” Sajid Javid insisted was necessary only a few years ago.

Instead, the government has said that it will soon publish a national strategy that will set out a “whole system response to all forms of child sexual abuse” [Emphasis added.]

A parliamentary petition demanding that the government release the review in full currently has more than 120,000 signatures, which means that parliament has to consider the petition for a debate. A debate — and a different strategy — is very much needed. Survivors have tried to explain that grooming gangs operate differently than pedophiles in general. Ella Hill, a survivor of the Rotherham grooming gang, wrote in March 2018:

“Grooming gangs are not like paedophile rings; instead, they operate almost exactly like terrorist networks, with all the same strategies…

“As a teenager, I was taken to various houses and flats above takeaways in the north of England, to be beaten, tortured and raped over 100 times. I was called a ‘white slag’ and ‘white c***’ as they beat me.

“They made it clear that because I was a non-Muslim, and not a virgin, and because I didn’t dress ‘modestly’, that they believed I deserved to be ‘punished’. They said I had to ‘obey’ or be beaten.

“Fear of being killed, and threats to my parents’ lives, made it impossible for me to escape for about a year. The police didn’t help me…

“Like terrorists, [groomers] firmly believe that the crimes they carry out are justified by their religious beliefs.”

“The government’s repeated failure to acknowledge the role of racism and religious bigotry in grooming gang crime has led to inadequate investigation, protection and prosecution,” one survivor, who wanted to remain anonymous, told The Independent in December 2019.

In the era of “victimhood culture”, in which so many groups vie for the top spot of “most victimized”, being an actual victim of sexual abuse apparently has little currency among the social justice elites. Where, for example, are the feminists in all this? Where is the “me too” movement?

As the government is too squeamish publicly to debate the findings of the review, it is bound to be even more terrified of being seen as specifically targeting ethnic rape gangs to stop their crimes — yet that is what victims such as Ella are asking them to do. Not to mention that basic democratic principles of the public’s right to information are being completely disregarded. Ultimately, these kinds of politically correct theatrics can only lead to one thing: Bad policies. A refusal to talk openly and honestly about issues usually does. A generation of exploited children will pay the price, but that, apparently, is not something that bothers the authorities all that much.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15930/victimhood-culture-uk-rape