Oxford Grooming

oxford-muslims-guilty3by Tim Heydon.

As the Oxford Asian grooming ring face jail, the police were at pains to tell us that abuse of young girls is a feature of all ethnic groups.
So it is, but what is revealed by the grooming rings in Rochdale Oxford and elsewhere is the remarkably high incidence of such criminal activity in what remains a relatively small though rapidly growing section of the population.

We are also told by the police that the Oxford gang did not select these young girls on the basis of their race. We are seriously asked to think that it never crossed the minds of these mostly Asian men that the girls whose innocence they were plundering were white. Believe that and you will believe anything.

According to the police, the determining factor in the Oxford ring’s selection of their victims was their ‘availability’, which is indeed an important factor. This availability of the white girls is largely a result of the general collapse in morality, including sexual morality and the assault on the traditional family engineered by leftism /liberalism in post 1960’s Britain. Most, if not all, the Oxford girls
came from broken homes and many of them were in the ‘care’ (sic) of the Social Services. (We are seeing another aspect of the sexual liberalismof ‘Swinging Britain’ in the arrest of aged celebrities following the Jimmy Savile affair).

But to suggest that ‘availability’ was the sole reason for the Asian predation of young white girls is to dismiss the men involved as mere ordinary criminals and to miss the most important point about them which is of course the point of this suggestion. The key characteristic of the Oxford Gang is not that that they are Asian or North African and anti-white, but that they were muslim. After all, Sikhs and Hindus are Asian, but do not indulge in Rochdale and Oxford-style grooming, at least as far as we know.

What is it about Islam that it seems to produce such behaviour in our society that no other ‘community’ does? Fundamentally, it is the attitude to women encouraged by Islam. In that religion, women are very much inferior to men. The white girls are triply inferiors:

1) They are non-believers and so worthy of the harshest treatment. The Qur’an, the literal word of God, never let it be forgotten states:
(Surah 48:29)  ‘Muhammed is God’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another’.
(Surah 9:123) ‘Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them. Know that God is with the righteous.’
(Surah 9:73) ‘Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.’

2) They are female. Islam did something to improve the lot of women in the beginning, giving them new rights such as those of inheritance and divorce.  Nevertheless, unlike Christianity, Islam has no inner inherent motivation to move on and progress from what was enlightenedin the 7th Century. Like much else about it, it is ossified in pre-Medieval practices.

The Qur’an establishes the divinely-ordained place of women as inferiors who are there to please and serve men. Modern muslims who are influenced by Western norms always find that more liberal interpretations of Islamic teaching are confronted by the plain meaningof their sacred text.

Thus: (Sura 4:34) ’Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them.’

Husbands are advised: (Sura 2:223) ‘Women are your fields: go, then into your fields whence you please.’
Disobedient Women may be beaten: (Sura 4:34) ‘Good women are obedient: They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.’

Since (according to the Qur’an) God sanctions wife –beating, the ideaof marriage in Islam is entirely different from that in Christianity.

There, mutual love becomes ‘an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man’ as one Christian catechism has it. (The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1997 no 1604).  Further, if wives can be beaten, the attitude must be fed that women in general may be, and so they are. The beating of sisters and other women in a household is a marked characteristic of Muslim societies. (See ‘The Hiddden Face of Eve’ by Nawal el Saadawi).

The inferiority of women is expressed in many other ways. For example, a muslim man may have  four wives and he need not show just cause for divorce. A muslim woman must obtain her husband’s permission to venture outside the home. The testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man (Sura 2:282).  According to the traditions (Sahih Bukhari, vol 7, bk 67 no 5193), Mohammed thought that ‘this is the deficiency of her intelligence’. He added, ‘isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?… This is the deficiency of her religion’. Mohammed also thought that it was women who would mostly populate hell.

Robert Spencer (Islam Unveiled 2002, pps 88, 89) relates that ’Numerous reports from the Middle East suggest that the Western Understanding of Rape barely exists it the muslim world. Or more precisely they know what it is but under Islamic rules of evidence, it almost never happens. The testimony of the victim herself is inadmissible. Reliance of the Traveller dictates that ‘if testimony concerns fornication or sodomy, then it requires four male witnesses.’ This ruling is in force wherever Shari’a  law applies today.  ‘Time’ Magazine (25th Nov 2001) said ‘For a woman to prove rape in Pakistan….four adult males of impeccable character must witness the (sexual penetration) in accordance with Shari’a’.  It is not difficult to see that men brought up in the knowledge of Shari’a as expressed in the Pakistani legal system may be surprised by the view of rape taken by  British law.

In the light of the injunctions of their sacred text and the traditions of Islam, it is hardly surprising that Muslim men can treat women with disdain. Women are derided as inferior beings who suffer from severe mental and moral deficiencies. They must be viewed with suspicion as harbouring all sorts of physical and spiritual  impurities – when a moslem man has sex he is supposed to call on Allah at the critical point to prevent himself ‘merging’ with the female.

3) The Oxford girls’  mere ‘availability’ marked them out as without worth in the context of an Islamic culture which regards an intact hymen as by far the most important part of an unmarried woman. This view of them would be held by the very men who degraded them.

It is fair to say that the status of a woman in an Islamic society like Pakistan is only marginally better than that of a domestic slave in Roman times – women in Islam must be the property of some man. This being the case and seeing that this religion  countenances violence towards women;  sees them as being merely for the sexual use of men and for procreation rather than for mutual love; is suspicious of their sexuality as dangerous and potentially socially disruptive; views the person of women as the repositories of spiritual danger and possibly dirt and teaches that the superiority of men is given divine sanction and further, thinks that non-believers are worthy of death and deserve second-class status as a minimum, the emergence of muslim grooming rings aimed at white non-believing girls  becomes more understandable.

Of course, not all muslim men behave like the grooming gangs.  Nevertheless, the injunctions of Islam and the entrenched attitudes of
Islamic societies must surely have deep-seated effects on the general approach to relations between the sexes and to the unbelievers muslims live amongst.

3 thoughts on “Oxford Grooming

  1. My question is simple – does Mohammed set an appropriate life-role example for Muslim men? And if the answer is no then what is the point of Islam?

  2. Next time a white paedo is convicted, do you think the media will be telling us that “abuse of young girls is a feature of all ethnic groups.”?

    Next time there is case of a white guy raping someone, will the media be saying “Muslims and Blacks commit rape too”?

    No way.
    Basically, on every topic that comes up; from employment to crime to “racism”; the media is just anti-White.

  3. Whilst the mindset may indeed have roots in the Koran and by extension the Pakistani society (and I would agree), many of these people involved in such crimes will be second or third generation in this country and will not be all that ignorant about what the norms and expectations are here.
    Therefore, rather than needing to cite passages in the Koran or Hadith as an explanation of their rationale (as though they were dutiful students of Islam or otherwise pious adherents cocooned from wider society), I think it is more simply based on a wider belligerent attitudinal problem towards a host society which stems from a system like Islam being distinct from the host.
    A society which (through a much wider Islamic lens than ‘women’) they do not care about, do not respect and which they see as weak, decaying – and thus in need of their “improvement” (ie, the establishment of their ‘perfect’ Islam).
    To me, they are more like depraved children in a sweet shop – with a vicious and wicked concious awareness of how they are taking over it. They have known that the authorities and the rest of society are pretty useless – which means they have, and often can, get away with it and whatever else they like.
    Along the way, I suspect that their wider families and communities have also benefited from the drug trades and the prostitution of indigenous girls and all the rest of it (in a sideways fashion), with groups of people in their communities raking in a lot of money to establish ‘legit’ businesses, or to fund this or that for the advancement of ‘their own’ kind.
    Only in recent years is it starting to get taken seriously, but I seem to recall in the newspapers a few years ago that some ex-police officer said it has been going on for over 25 years and that it has got worse. It has become so big that they could no longer keep it suppressed. Now they are still trying to disguise the reality of aspects behind it.
    Rape, pillage and plunder are all traditional traits of an invading force. Today it is no different. The rape and humiliation of those people being conquered is still in effect – and with about 40% unemployment for some of the colonisers, the pillage and plunder is more in terms of welfare, living off our backs and off our downfalls as a society – all in order to expand and increase their own numbers and wealth/clout.
    It is also the land of milk and honey here compared to where they originally originate from, then they have a massive race-relations industry shielding them, they then have this general superiority belief of their ‘ways’ as Muslims – and in addition, these people in the gangs in particular will tend to see the British as pathetic cowards who are even governed by an establishment that hates it’s own people.
    These ‘groomers’ must be laughing up their sleeves and think that all their Eids have come at once – and Muslims in general probably cannot believe the idiocy and stupidity of this country for their allowing of such massive displacement to start with (which they would never allow ‘back home’), never mind the stupidity of not being wise to the agendas which have broken down the traditional defences and reactions of our people and civilisation.
    Add to it therefore the chaos created by such liberal societies; the mass flow of people, an endless community of strangers, rampant egalitarianism, individualism, lack of parental control fostered over the years, promiscuity, family breakdown, MTV, drugs being common place, a nation brainwashed into accepting multi-racialism (and which would bend over backwards to do away with themselves), societal engineering, particularly of the youth …. and it creates a toxic brew – as we can see in both this case and in others before it.
    Islam is certainly a significant aspect of this. I do not think it can be denied. This religious and cultural chauvinism can also be pointed to in the Netherlands, Germany and elsewhere where this kind of thing goes on – but at the same time, so can all the all the other kinds of ills in which this situation has been allowed to develop in the first place – and in which these people can now swim in so freely.
    That it is even possible for it to occur in this country must make it arguable to some people as to whether things like this are a disgusting symptom (that is more obvious to see), rather than being the more hidden source of the illness itself, at some kind of deeper cellular level.
    Our national body has been attacked. The immune system has been numbed. It does not really know or understand how to fight back, so it tends to get sicker and sicker. Rather than seek medical help, the body still seems to listen to the equivalent of ‘witch doctors’ and their mumbo jumbo.

Leave a Reply