Pathologising the Pakistani rape gangs

Inquisitions, not inquiries

The Rwandan Genocide exposed many to the depravity of the ‘Dark Continent’ for the first time. Westerners saw rape being used as a weapon of war itself, rather than merely as one of the spoils of victory. It shattered the common notion that Africa was one massive safari of women carrying baskets of fruit on their heads; the Africa of Handa’s Surprise.

If so many were willing to rape and express no remorse, it strongly suggests that they lacked a clear concept of ‘rape’ in the first place. And if there is no clear concept, then we can presume that there will be no word for it. ABC’s Lingua Franca podcast once commented on the testimonies of Rwandan Genocide survivors in court, claiming that there is no word for ‘rape’ in Kinyarwanda, the national language of Rwanda:

The court records of the trial of Jean-Paul Akayesu at the ICTR devote several paragraphs to the problems of interpreting and translating crucial terminology from Kinyarwanda to English. It is noted that during this trial, four terms were used ‘interchangeably’ by witnesses to designate rape:

Gusambanya: to commit adultery

Kurungora: to have sexual intercourse with a woman, to marry

Kuryamana: to sleep with, share a bed with

Gufata ku ngufu: to take by force

The first three expressions mentioned here clearly reflect the standard semantic associations in Kinyarwanda between the act of sexual intercourse and the status of marriage. These are very different connotations from those of ‘violation’ and ‘unlawful non-consensual penetration’ that are raised by the term of ‘rape’ in English or ‘viol’ in French. The fourth term does carry the notion of force, and this was a significant factor at one point in the proceedings when the accused objected to the witness statement being translated as ‘rape’. However, the Chamber noted that the term used was the one which was most closely connected to the concept of force, and therefore they ruled that the phrase in Kinyarwanda had been ‘accurately translated’ by the English term ‘rape’.

Other expressions used by victims to convey the act of rape include: Gukorerwa ibyamfurambi — ‘he did something to me which was not correct’ — and kutwambika ubusa ku musozi — ‘they made us naked in the hills’. In some cases, rape victims give their whole testimony in Kinyarwanda but use the French word violer or viol when they refer to the actual act of rape. For example: ‘babanjye kumfata ku ngufu, bankorera icyaha cya viol’ — ‘they started to take me by force, they committed the crime of rape’.

The academic Gedaliah Braun shed light on this in an article linking morality, abstract thinking, and how they manifest — or rather, how they don’t — through language. While in South Africa, she observed that (once again) there was no word for ‘rape’ in Zulu, and suggested there was no word because they didn’t understand what rape was in the abstract.

If that was the shot, then here’s the chaser: Urdu, like Zulu and Kinyarwanda, does not have a word for rape either. Well, now it does, but it did not until the ’80s when — after pressure and demonstrations by feminists — Urdu borrowed the Arabic term Zina-bil-jabr, meaning ‘fornication by force’. A Mirpuri may claim that they have native words for ‘dishonour’, but semantically, this only alludes to virginity. It tells us nothing about consent; a woman is ‘dishonoured’ even if she has consented, and still bears the brunt of the punishment in any case. Likewise, Punjabi may have a word for rape today — balatkar — but this is a Sanskrit-derived word meaning ‘coercion’. This might relate to our idea of ‘rape’, but it doesn’t inherently say anything about sex per se. It wasn’t until the British formalised the definition of balatkar to mean ‘rape’ under the penal code of the British Raj that it took on its contemporary meaning.

Pakistani girls are still subject to ‘virginity tests’ (i.e., hymen checks) to prove their chastity. These have become so common that the hymenoplasty, an entirely cosmetic procedure that restores a broken hymen, had to be made illegal in 2022, due to ‘honour-based abuse’. It’s an old meme that the first intimate experience an Asian girl in this country has is anal sex. This is corroborated by STD diagnoses, where although Asians might currently rank among the lowest in terms of carriers, they represent the largest proportional increase in diagnoses from 2022.

---

What this tells us is that many Pakistanis lack a concept of what rape is — or, at the very least, don’t have one that can stand up to moral scrutiny in this country. This is obvious when you look at the reactions of the family members of ‘grooming gang’ members during sentencing. Most, indeed all, people with a British sensibility would feel repulsed, angry, and embarrassed by family members who were convicted of gang raping 11-year-olds. So when the family members of Pakistani gang rapists have been seen threatening victims and their families amid court proceedings, we must ask: what did they know? If we go by the hypothesis of Peter McLoughlin in his book Easy Meat, it is possible that one-third of Pakistani men between the ages of twenty and forty-six would have solicited sex with an underage girl at some point. It is thus almost a mathematical certainty, then, that a majority of Pakistani Muslims will have had a fairly close relative involved, and most likely would have known something about what was happening even if they didn’t. This makes them complicit as a group.

This much is not much in dispute. But what many have really missed out among all the furore is just how complicit the women in these communities are. There’s very little evidence to suggest that there were any women willing to report the activities of their male relatives to the police. Some have suggested that a ‘culture of fear’ supposedly poses an impediment to potential female informants. But they could easily have informed police anonymously. Black and Eastern European women have no problem reporting to the police, even when they’re at risk of domestic abuse and/or family reprisals. We must not let feminists, or people like Miriam Cates, hijack the crusade against the Pakistani rape gangs so that they may keep the debate focused on such anodyne topics as ‘keeping girls safe’ when they have been instrumental in ensuring the exact opposite. Genuine feminism was sacrificed at the altar of ‘race relations’. From now on, we’re the feminists.

The best case scenario, rather perversely, is that some Pakistani women are simply ambivalent towards the crimes their brothers, fathers, sons, and husbands have committed. Even if they disapprove, they don’t deem the offence significant enough for them to snitch; it is simply ethnocentrism and kinship that ensures they never tell. But what is more likely the case is that many Pakistani women thought that these girls had it coming; that they deserved it. We know very well from evidence and court proceedings that even the family members of the rapists denounced the victims as ‘whores’ and ‘prostitutes’. This, however, isn’t just the opinion of some toothless, backwards Ukhti who has been here for some fifty years but still can’t read her mail. Even Bushra Shaikh, who has been on national television a number of times and is seemingly well-integrated, writes in a (now-deleted) X post:

ADAM HATYCH: ‘OK, answer this very simple question. Why are none of the victims ever Muslim girls?

BUSHRA SHAIKH: ‘You’re not ready for that conversation.’

Well, I’m ready for this conversation.

This isn’t just an attempt to demonstrate their supposed moral superiority or to absolve themselves of blame; they completely and utterly despise you. It is the sort of racism that even the edgiest of the Online Right will have no theory of mind for. The way they talk about white girls over the dinner table warrants their deportation back to Pakistan based on hate speech laws alone. They also reserve a deep, singular hatred of Eastern European women. In my school — which was majority Muslim — I remember just how casually they’d refer to Polish, Lithuanian, and Romanian women as ‘prostitutes’, which was bizarre. Where would they get this idea from at the age of thirteen? Unless, of course, they had family members who were VivaStreet aficionados.

And yet: it is somehow even worse than this. As many have observed of Indians online, their perceptions of white women are primarily informed by pornography. This is true also of Pakistanis, even Pakistanis who live in this country. Indeed, public data tells us that Pakistanis are some of the biggest consumers of pornography on the planet, and it would be reasonable to assume the same of Pakistanis in this country. There is, of course, the famous Salon article from ten years ago informing us that, according to data released by Google, they are the world’s top gooners (though they have since been usurped by India, obviously). Both countries, along with a host of Middle Eastern states, lead the way for just about every depraved category of pornography you can imagine. Of course, Westerners don’t typically find pornography using Google Search, but I think it is hard to imagine that the fourth most popular search term on PornHub is ‘pain’, as it is in Iraq.

On the whole, Pakistanis in Britain are highly insular and poorly socialised. They almost never interact with natives, and assume white women behave the way they do in the gangbang videos they love to watch. No small wonder, then, that in his own mind, a gormless rapist may have really believed that these girls were willing participants. You saw this play out in Cologne when hundreds of German women were sexually assaulted on New Year’s Eve by asylum seekers. This wasn’t merely the case of a few rabid, low-IQ Arabs with no impulse control, but people who assumed German women were putting out because they were showing ankle. This is what a sexually free society looks like once you decide to import a bunch of third-world peasants whose only prior sexual experiences would have been getting raped by older boys.

In fact, white women are one of the biggest pull factors for them coming here, considering that they usually end up living in the exact same squalor in the West as they did in whatever dump they were in before. Imagine, for a moment, that you are a 80 IQ adolescent in some dusty village in Syria. Your only prospective lay would be a goat, your best friend (assuming he doesn’t get you first), or your overweight first cousin in an arranged marriage. You then open up TikTok and are greeted with endless blondes in crop tops. You have been ‘one-shotted’, as a certain individual puts it. Suddenly, moving to the West is worth the risk of drowning in the Aegean. This is also the reality of the average Pakistani in Bradford, except without the goats.

Consider, also, the disgust (or lack thereof) when it comes to the act of gang rape (and group sex more generally) in itself. Although Pakistanis aren’t the only demographic that is overrepresented — see also blacks, where running ‘train’, or the ‘two man’ is completely socially acceptable — Pakistanis still stick out like a sore thumb. This, alongside their porn-addled brains, helps explain why they made up a lot of the queue in the infamous Bonnie Blue gangbang.

Do you understand now? Never forget the basic fact that these are groups of Pakistani men — some foreign, some born here — forming rape gangs, completely autonomously, up and down the country, under zero duress. As such, we can infer that this isn’t just a pattern; and that, in fact, there is something inherent that seemingly compels the men of these communities to do this all on their own. ‘Muscular liberals’ must choose between wrapping up 11-year-old girls in sheets so they’re not raped, or catapulting foreign rapists back to wherever they came from while pacifying, with force if needed, the rest of the ‘community’.

---

It’s quite obvious from the depravity of their behaviour that these rapists were partially motivated by a desire for racial vengeance, not merely sexual gratification. One of the worst aspects of the Pakistani rape gangs has to be the sheer sadism on display, and the macabre sexual acts performed. This wasn’t just a lack of empathy; it was the positive enjoyment of suffering endured by the outgroup. Take the case of Sara Sharif, who was subject to years of torture at the hands of her father and stepmother. Apparently, I am going to have to settle for the pair of them being called ‘lunatics’ when the motive was quite clearly racial. Sara Sharif was half-Polish, and her stepmother South Asian. None of her stepmother’s biological children were subject to abuse like this.

Another giveaway is the type of language used by 5Pillars-adjacent scumbags: that of conquest and war-footing. Bushra Shaikh, once again, writes the following on this topic:

Much of Western culture parades their women around like trophies. Your daughters are literally walking around naked and encouraged to have multiple sexual partners. Your women are taught to be hyper-independent and then end up lonely, no kids, no husband.

You wouldn’t recognise honour if it smacked you in the face.

Brown men have died protecting their honour, while men in the West turn into women.

This is easily one of the most insidious posts I’ve seen in response to the uproar over the Pakistani rape gangs. In essence, she — like many of her co-religionists — is saying that white girls had it coming and deserved to be raped because their clothes fit a bit too tightly and they’re allowed to talk to boys and ‘freemix’. Funny that she suggests women are paraded around like ‘trophies’ when in her own country, Pakistan, women are effectively sold to prospective husbands for money or, in the absence of legal tender, livestock.

But this isn’t even the worst aspect of the post. The real pièce de résistance is that last line, concerning ‘honour’. ‘Brown men have died protecting their honour’, she tells us. I’m sorry, but when? This sort of sentiment reveals a few things. One of them is hybristophilia; sexual interest in and attraction to those who commit crimes. She is, if only tacitly, lauding the perpetrators as paragons of masculinity while also chastising ‘Western men’ for being soft, or something. She, and many other women within these communities, may view the perpetrators not as criminal low-lifes, but as dominant and powerful figures.

There’s obviously a precedent for this, in that being violent and chauvinistic is expected of your average Pakistani by their own women. Not beating your wife is considered a dereliction of your spousal duties by the wife herself, never mind the two-dozen family members you share a house with. This is the language of war footing, which in this case is informed by Islam and its doctrine of Dar al-Harb; she is the cheerleader handing out flowers to brave warriors who can do no wrong.

This sort of thing doesn’t always manifest itself directly through thunderous proclamations about the kuffar, but also through ridiculous TikTok trends like ‘when he’s on Deen with a hint of road’. The converse is also seen: as one of the few people who bothered to keep up with Muslim Twitter throughout the Southport Riots, the main sentiment was ‘protect your women’ — as if the main motive of xenophobic rioters was the capture of Pakistani war brides, and not their literal deportation. It reveals that they think women are fair game in war if that is their instinctual reaction.

---

This thinking is also underpinned by Islamic teaching. There is a big fuss on the Online Right whenever someone suggests that there is an ‘Islarrrm’ problem in Britain, especially in the aftermath of a terror attack or any sort of discourse on the so-called ‘grooming gangs’. This is understandable, because for over a decade we were all subject to innocuous debate about a ‘clash of civilisations’ and the need for ‘integration’ whenever some Islamist decided to gun down French youngsters having fun, with absolutely no thought given to the disastrous immigration policies that allowed this to happen in the first place.

A decade on, however, things are very different. The first question asked is not ‘was he a Muslim?’, but rather ‘was he a foreigner?’, to which the answer is almost always ‘yes’. This is largely down to the relentless work of people like you and me; the people who were clued up on the very worst aspects of immigration when others were still making the case for shared ‘Commonwealth values’, and who now toe the line.

There has, however, been an over-correction. Ostensibly, it might not seem like Islam is the biggest motivating factor for these rapists, but given the lack of remorse demonstrated by both the perpetrators and their families, it’s certainly used as a post-hoc justification. This is because Islam doesn’t condemn the sexual enslavement of non-Muslim women, and as such allows the perpetrators to absolve themselves of any guilt.

We have to once again start asking uncomfortable questions about Islam’s place in Britain. Islam is an outlook on civilisation; it is not just a personal relationship with God. It’s perhaps this conflation with the latter — more ‘Christian’ — idea that leads people to believe that being a ‘real Muslim’ is when you dress modestly, abstain from alcohol, and turn up to prayer. This is unfortunate, and the phobia of so-called ‘counter-jihad’ is in large part due to Tommy Robinson yammering about Islam for nearly two decades and looking like an idiot while doing so, or bores like Andrew O’Neil droning on about how ISIS could possibly be so hateful. The former is an example of how not to be a patriot; the latter is an example of who not to employ if you want to a successful right-wing, anti-establishment television channel. But I digress.

The scale of this atrocity and complicity gives us an open goal to assert moral superiority. Take Bradford West MP Naz Shah, who famously retweeted someone suggesting that the Rotherham victims should ‘shut their mouths… for the good of diversity’. This isn’t an orthodox leftist position, or even a political one per se, but the position of someone who genuinely doesn’t care about the victims, which suggests that it is in essence a moral one. Given that she’s Muslim, you need to pull her up on TV and start asking pressing questions about her creed, and whether this has influenced her thinking. That she hasn’t been asked about this is a sad indictment of our media, and an even sadder one of the Labour Party. If she were the MP for another constituency, it is possible that she’d be deselected. But alas: Bradford West isn’t most constituencies, and the people who voted for her don’t care about the victims of the Pakistani rape gangs either, for obvious reasons.

Former Liberal Democrat leader and evangelical Christian Tim Farron has been badgered for years by the media due to his principled opposition to abortion. He has even been asked stupid hypotheticals about how he’d vote if a total ban on abortion was ever put forward in Parliament. Why hasn’t Naz Shah been scrutinised in this way? Why aren’t Islamic scholars ever asked point-blank, on television, about Islam’s history of slavery, something that is far more comprehensive than Christianity’s history of slavery. Why aren’t they asked about what they think about Muslims having non-Muslim sex slaves, as they have since the time of the Prophet? It’s Islamic Theology 101 that Muslims are compelled to install Sharia wherever they are. As such, you need to make the case that these people cannot truly be integrated, not only on account of ethnic kinship, but also on account of the entire moral and legal corpus from which they derive their ideas and will never deviate from, because it is endorsed by God.

You’re never going to convince someone like Miriam Cates, however well-meaning she might be, that the problem with immigration is the low-level criminality and annoyances caused by Kurdish barbershops, Afghan vape shops, and Indian Deliveroo drivers. She still wouldn’t be convinced even if you showed her the demographic patterns in the allocation of London’s social housing, or crime statistics by ethnicity, or even the so-called ‘grooming gangs’. But she will be fully convinced when she realises that there is a large minority of people across many cities in this country who actively despise her, whites, and Christians; that they have no moral qualms with those from their own ethnic group who gang rape little white girls, and that this has all be going on for so long that it can only be explained by wider community complicity, and that this is underpinned by deficiencies in morality, ergo, religion. A lot of the public doesn’t understand that if resentful minorities — and especially Muslims — had the whip-hand over you, they would step on you. They genuinely do not believe in the ‘Golden Rule’.

The truth is that you need to make the case for ‘civic nationalism’. By this, I mean actual ‘civic nationalism’; a ‘nationalism’ that filters out most people by default, citing the supremacy of actual British values — lest you end up convincing yourself into thinking that the problems are homeless crackheads who primarily seem to harass those who frequent Heaven nightclub, Albanians driving massive German cars at their tacky flag parades, Gambians ‘milling around’, and other low-brow tropes that skirt around the big issues. Urdu not having a native word for ‘rape’ is far more ‘redpilling’ than any of this.

---

Separately, and quite underdiscussed, is the deeply unsettling nexus between grooming gangs and the heroin trade. At the epicentre of all this is an established infrastructure of Pakistani criminal networks, whose involvement in heroin trafficking hasn’t just devastated communities through addiction, but also more than likely serves as a calculated mechanism that facilitates the sexual exploitation of vulnerable children.

The numbers speak for themselves. The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) suggests that 1.3 million Europeans suffer from opioid dependency, with Britain accounting for just under a quarter of these cases, with an estimated 300,000 heroin-dependents, more than any EU country. We also have one of the highest rates of heroin-related deaths in Europe. Britain is the only developed country in the world where the total retail value of its heroin is higher than that of other drugs. In fact, at £4bn per year, it is almost the same size as that of the European Union as a whole, which is estimated at €5.2bn (£4.3bn) per year. The raw tonnage of heroin imported into Britain is also higher than any EU country, and by some margin as well. Harrowing — and nor can this all be hand-waved away with the single word, ‘Glasgow’.

Pakistani criminal networks, who have dominated the heroin trade in this country for decades, have been instrumental in ensuring the seamless transportation, distribution, and proliferation of heroin all throughout Britain. It’s no coincidence that Pakistan serves as a launchpad for large amounts of Afghan heroin, importing 150 mega-tonnes in 2010, most of which is then distributed in other countries. In a rare victory for the Sunni ulema over the Shi’ites, Iran has been ravaged by heroin trafficking over the rather porous Pakistani-Iranian border by Pakistani criminals.

Within Britain itself, you can also see the consequences. Over the last thirty years, among both genders, there has been a staggering increase in heroin-related deaths, which now account for half of all drug-poisoning deaths. A ‘Talk-to-Frank’ social worker will blame poverty for this; indeed, when I searched the web for a more nuanced take, the only ‘nuance’ I got was that ‘Margaret Thatcher’ and ‘neoliberalism’ was to blame.

I, however, will provide Pimlico Journal readers with some actual nuance. Wales is, on balance, poorer than the North of England. Yet while the number of drug-related deaths among men is comparable, the discrepancy between men and women is larger in Wales than in places like Yorkshire and Lancashire. Thus, despite worse material conditions in Wales, women are more likely to die of drug-poisoning in the North than in Wales. What has caused this? Well, one factor may be that the North of England has been plagued by ‘grooming gangs’ in a way that Wales hasn’t.

The case is often made that ‘grooming gangs’ targeted the most vulnerable, because they could get away with abusing them and not others. This is half true. But is is also true that a vicious cycle of addiction was purposefully created to retain victims and render them pliable, dependent, and easy to exploit. Imagine why a victim of gang rape and torture might take heroin in the first place: to dissociate and to numb. What escape does a 12-year-old have? Eventually, heroin becomes the primary tool of control, where victims become dependent on heroin and their addiction is weaponised to enforce silence and compliance, and their next ‘fix’ can only be paid for with sexual favours. It is perhaps this fact that contributed to many of the rapists believing that their victims had actually consented.

Pimlico Journal deputy editor Scott Goetz is one of the few people who have seriously asked whether or not these gangs had a profit motive. I think it’s reasonable to suggest that yes, there was, albeit through heroin. Now, these ‘grooming gangs’ not only have someone to sexually exploit, but a lifelong customer. This has been going on for decades, and there have probably been tens of thousands of women who have been sexually abused, fallen into the trap of addiction and died, alone, without being heard by anyone. In the end, every crack and heroin den starts off like this. Women don’t take a cheeky hit of heroin at a house party because they tried a gateway drug, like we were all taught in PSHE. No: in reality, there is almost always abuse and coercion, often sexual abuse and coercion.

---

So where do we go from here? For one, long sentences for inbred rapists does not feel like justice, and I’m sure the victims and their families would agree. These people will continue to be clothed and fed with no prospect of receiving ‘prison justice’ because they will be guaranteed protection by Muslim gangs. They will be just as comfortable as they were on the outside because these people don’t have hobbies, nor do they engage in public life. For some, it would be an improvement from the state-sponsored squalor they live in anyway.

You could start throwing them in Pakistani prisons, as some have suggested, but the problem is that most perpetrators are British citizens, and there are huge legal barriers involved, even with a more active Parliament. Perhaps you can start arresting family members: if imprisonment wasn’t punishment enough for these rapists, then maybe the prospect of their wives being punked out by ‘Bertha’ might make it so. But proving complicity in a court of law would be difficult. Of course, you could execute them — but then again, is death really a punishment for people who think they’re going to Jannah?

Somehow, though, this is the least of our worries. What probably ought to worry us all is that Pakistani rape gangs, comprised of low-IQ cab drivers, kebab shop workers, and petty criminals, managed to run large-scale child trafficking operations in fifty different towns and cities across Britain since at least the ’80s and effectively get away with it. In fact, the rot goes back even further than that: the first cases of ‘grooming’ and sexual abuse began as far back as the ’50s, as documented by Mithras for J’accuse.

To call these gangs ‘Mirpuri’ — while technically correct — is not ideal in a rhetorical sense. Pakistanis from other regions have already started making the case that Britain incidentally imported Mirpuri peasants who are known for being unusually stupid and rapey even within Pakistan. This is simply incorrect: in no way is Mirpur distinctly backwards by Pakistani standards. The truth is that wherever there are Sunni majorities with large Shia, Christian, and Hindu minorities the outcome is always the same: the large scale abduction of girls, usually pre-pubescent, who are forced to convert and marry Sunni men. It is endemic to border regions in that country — such Balochistan — so there must be no attempt to white-wash the other tribes. Call them Pakistanis: it’s what they are.

Clearly, little thought has ever been given to the state of the places we’re importing people from, because what could we possibly be thinking when we decide to invite in people from places like Somalia or Afghanistan? More specifically, in the case of the Mirpuris, it is likely that some of the first Pakistani immigrants to Britain were direct participants in the 1947 Jammu massacres. You hardly needed to inspect the social housing statistics to know that these groups are likely to cause problems for us, economic, social, and otherwise.

The industrial-scale rape of English girls alone should be enough to repudiate the blank-slate approach that has dominated our migration policy for the last eighty years, and probably leftism altogether. In an ideal world, the Labour Party would be treated as a criminal enterprise: for its role in the cover-up, and for the fact that its councillors have been actively involved in the abuse. This wasn’t just a bureaucratic failure; nor was it the fruits of ‘stakeholder politics’, a word now thrown around by so-called ‘Red Tories’ to hint at their own dissatisfaction with Labour.

And yet, the politics of Tony Blair aren’t actually particularly relevant to the ‘grooming gangs’. More specifically, we should hold Jeremy Corbyn, Dennis Skinner, and their cadre of brassy northern ‘mums’ and union pinkos to be culpable. They spent the Thatcher and Major years play-acting as ‘Bolsheviks’ and moralising about ‘community’. Comically, they loved to play into supposed divides between a caring, socialistic North, which protected the ‘vulnerable’, unlike the callous, capitalist South — and all the while, the most vulnerable of all, primarily in the North, were being drugged, raped, tortured, and ignored in the name of race relations and political convenience. It’s also ironic because this scandal is one of the few genuine cases of institutional classism in Britain. Imagine, for a moment, how negligent social workers might have arrived at the conclusion that vulnerable girls could have consented to being plied with alcohol and drugs in return for sexual favours? They come home from work, switch on the television, and are treated to dozens of Channel 4 and 5 programmes committed to ‘chav’ bashing, a phenomenon that reached its zenith in the ’00s. In the end, they reach the same conclusion as the illiterate Muslimah who doesn’t watch television at all: that these girls are underclass delinquents who knew what they were getting into and seduced these men for alcohol and drugs.

You can punish the perpetrators all you like: it is still not justice. We now have a hostile ethno-religious bloc entrenched in dozens of local councils, with the sole ambition of advancing their interests, often directly at the expense of natives, whether it’s allocating social housing to their own or blocking inquiries into ‘grooming gangs’. They have shown nothing but contempt for us, leeching off the generosity of the majority-white taxpayer while also crying about oppression — and yet, will still brazenly brag about subjugating you if they had the chance. Cities like Birmingham and Bradford have become black boxes: places where we can see the inputs and the outputs, but have no clue about their inner workings. Councils like Tower Hamlets have basically become semi-autonomous breakaway Islamic ethnostates. Many prisons are now totally subject to the authority of Muslim gangs. We have MPs like Naz Shah, not only in Parliament, but as members of the ruling party. Vast swathes of the country need favela-style ‘pacification’, but you have to make the ideological and moral case for it. Shouting impotently about ‘remigration’ does not cut it.

It’s likely that there are untold horrors still yet to be uncovered regarding the ‘grooming gangs’. Eventually, many — even those on the Right — are going to have to come to terms with the fact that virtually all Muslim immigration over the last eighty years has been a total disaster, a conclusion that most still stop short of. The point where it became ‘too much’ was fifty years ago or more — not the Boriswave. The British Right must not forget about the Pakistani rape gangs. They are far more insidious, far more politically potent, than ‘vape shops’ or whatever irrelevant trope too-clever-by-half anonymous accounts on X have made the order of the day. We don’t want inquiries; I can’t imagine Bradford and Birmingham will have anything to say about themselves except that they’re sqeaky-clean. We want inquisitions.

---

Image credits: goodadvice.com, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0

This article was written by Henry Reynolds Skelton, a regular Pimlico Journal contributor. Have a pitch? Send it to pimlicojournal@substack.com.

If you enjoyed this article, please consider subscribing. If you are already subscribed, why not upgrade to a paid subscription?