90 Miles From Tyranny

Monday, January 3, 2022

Cover-Up Continues? Police in Rape Gangs Hotspot Not Recording Ethnicity of Abusers

Police in Rotherham, where the authorities failed to tackle South Asian heritage “grooming” gangs due to political correctness for years, failed to record most abusers’ ethnicity in the year to December 2019.

Despite national and regional inquiries all concluding that victims had been failed and claiming lessons had been learned after the grooming gangs scandal was finally exposed at scale, an investigation by The Times has found that every police district in South Yorkshire, a major centre of abuse, still “routinely failed to log the ethnicity of those suspected of sexually abusing minors”.

Rotherham, which along with Rochdale was arguably ground zero for the scandal breaking nationwide, was the district most reluctant to log predators’ ethnic background, failing to record the ethnicity of an astonishing 67 per cent of suspects.

Independent investigations strongly suggest that a highly disproportionate number of grooming gang abusers are men of South Asian, mostly Pakistani Muslim heritage, and their victims largely white working-class girls and young women, but members of the media are still generally unable to describe suspects as anything other than “Asian” — to the chagrin of British Sikhs, among others — because the authorities almost never release information on their national and religious background.

“I reviewed these historic failings and, like this investigation by The Times, found that data collection on offenders is still poor, which is why I am making it mandatory for police forces to record the ethnicity of those arrested and held in custody as a result of their suspected involvement in grooming gangs,” commented Home Secretary Priti Patel of the situation, not explaining why she did not implement such a measure before the newspapers highlighted police failings if she was already aware of them.

The Tory MP, whose department has broad responsibility for policing, border control, deportations, and national security in the Boris Johnson administration — and is performing rather poorly across the board — added that “community and cultural factors are clearly relevant to understanding why people offend”, although to date police, prosecutors, and judges have remained unwilling to concede that the systematic abuse of mostly white non-Muslim girls and women by mostly South Asian Muslim men is racially or religiously...

Even before COVID or BLM riots, crime rates began to rise under leftist district attorneys who refuse to put criminals in jail.

We still debate the reasons that crime fell in the 1990s. Better policing? Longer jail sentences? An aging population? Removal of lead from the atmosphere? They all may have played a role, along with other factors we are probably missing.

That debate is now academic. Crime has been rising for several years now. The new concern is why, and how we can get it to stop. Again, there are many factors, but the rise of leftist prosecutors who are soft on crime must be at the head of the list.

In my hometown of Philadelphia, crime as a general matter has been getting worse for years, and there are statistics to prove it. Philadelphia, like many big American cities, is experiencing more violent crime than at any point in its history.

Murder rates are a good proxy for violent crime generally, not only because it is the most horrific crime, but because it is harder to obscure statistically. Whether the authorities want to report it or not, whether or not the police get called, it is hard to hide the fact that someone was killed. Looking at that statistic gives us a fair impression of the level of violence in the city more generally.

The trend is discouraging, to say the least. In 2021, Philadelphia shattered the previous record in murders, which was 500 in 1990. As of December 31, a total of 559 people have lost their lives this year in the City of Brotherly Love. After some of the safest years in decades, the murder rate has climbed steeply since 2016. This year now has more than double the murders of just five years ago.

Other crimes are up, too. Carjackings were nearly unknown in the city just a few years ago. They exploded in 2020 and are up another 80 percent this year, according to Philly police. Earlier this month a member of Congress, Mary Gay Scanlon, was carjacked in broad daylight in South Philadelphia. People who don’t live in Philadelphia will say that it was always unsafe, but this level of crime, this type of brazen lawlessness, just did not happen until recently.

What’s changed? Why now? Why here? Some national trends play into it. Crime is up everywhere, and local politicians would like to...

Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,

Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.

If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.

Please Leave Silently Into The Night......

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,

from the beautiful to the repugnant,

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,

you could be inspired, you could be appalled.

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.

You have been warned.

JOE ROGAN INTERVIEWS DR. ROBERT MALONE | JOE ROGAN PODCAST

Girls With Guns

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #156

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #155

House of Representatives Votes to Eradicate Blasphemy Against Islam

The House of Representatives has passed a bill that seeks to eradicate blasphemy against Islam. The bill, H.R. 5665, is truly remarkable as it amounts to Congress making a law respecting the establishment of Islam and reducing the United States government into a tool of the world’s ayatollahs.

The actual text of the bill not only seeks to eradicate blasphemy against Islam around the world – and solely against Islam at that – but even requires the federal government to reorganize some portions of the State Department along the lines of an Islamic religious institution which will be responsible for interpreting the Quran. For example, the text of the bill mandates that “[t]he Secretary of State shall establish within the Department of State an Office” and the “purpose” of the office is described as “[m]onitoring and combating acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur in foreign countries.” That is, the State Department is required to create an office that is a cross between George Orwell’s Big Brother and the Taliban.

The word ‘combat’ in the text of the law is problematic but fits in perfectly with the concept of waging violent jihad against the countries deemed to have committed blasphemy against Islam. Almost every dictionary defines the word primarily as an action pertaining to war. While the internet firm Google’s dictionary defines 'combat’ as “fighting between armed forces,” Cambridge Dictionary defines the word as “a fight, especially during a war.” According to Collins Dictionary, “combat is fighting that takes place in a war.” This is no hyperbole as the State Department has a long history of supporting Islamic terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and ISIS. Former Assistant Secretary of State, Robin Raphel, ran her office as though it were an outpost of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and she lost her security clearance when she was investigated for counterintelligence activities. Little wonder then that Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, used the term “Rogue State Department” and President Donald Trump described the State Department as the “Deep State Department.”

The blasphemy law further requires the newly created office to be headed by a person appointed by the “President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate” and the person to be responsible for the “assessment and description of the nature and extent of acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement” and for determining if any utterances constitute “instances of propaganda” or “promote racial hatred or incite acts of violence against Muslim people.” Since the word ‘Islamophobia’ is not defined in the text of the legislation and words such as ‘hatred’ and ‘propaganda’ are subjective, the head of the newly created office will be ultimately responsible for interpreting the Quran and issuing legal opinions on whether statements made around the world amount to hatred or anti-Islamic propaganda under such interpretation.

In Islam, the person who interprets the Quran and issues legal opinions or edicts in the manner described by the new law is the Grand Mufti, and the opinions and edicts themselves are known as fatwas. Many of us are old enough to recall one of the most spine-chilling and famous fatwas issued by Ayatollah Khomeini against the author Salman Rushdie for committing blasphemy against Islam by writing his book, The Satanic Verses. Just as in the case of Ayatollah Khomeini, the Grand Mufti of the State Department too will have unlimited powers without any checks and balances, and neither the authority of the Mufti nor any fatwa issued by him can ever be challenged in a court of law. This is because the State Department’s opinions will be part of an annual report that is mandated by the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 which “prohibits judicial review” of “agency actions taken under this Act.”

That kind of unlimited power might appear unconstitutional just as the blasphemy law along with its requirement that the State Department police the world and provide Halal certificates for free speech may appear unconstitutional, but those objections would not matter to dishonest judges. The courts most likely would rule that anyone who has filed a lawsuit challenging this law lacks standing as the law applies only to those outside the country and the person filing the lawsuit has not faced any injury. Therefore, even if the entire federal government were transformed into one big Islamic outfit with the sole purpose of using American resources to propagate Islam, American citizens can do nothing about it.

The entire purpose of the law, then, is to use the resources of the US government to arm-twist every other country into becoming a Sharia-compliant state. Ironically, the State Department would be responsible for squelching the freedom of expression in other countries and then publishing reports that complain about the lack of freedom of expression in...