#vigilantism

Does kneeling lead to healing?

Image may contain: 3 people, crowd

Does kneeling lead to healing?

Around the world, we have seen images of law enforcement officers kneeling to protest police brutality in the wake of the inexcusable murder of George Floyd. It begs the question if the UK police officers in the picture above don’t practice brutality themselves, why are they kneeling for the actions of a small band of police officers in a different country? The same goes for the majority of honest cops in America who put their lives in harms way to protect and serve us.

At what point in society do we acknowledge such vacuous virtue signalling as anything other than an act of cowardice and an insult to the very people they claim to be apologizing to?

A bigger question might be why weren’t these British cops kneeling when police across the country were outed over the deliberate and documented 20-year cover-up of child grooming gangs on the grounds they didn’t want to be seen as racist by targeting the overwhelming majority of the known perpetrators – Asian (Pakistani) men?

We summarised the outcome of the Rotherham Inquiry here. It is shocking beyond belief and 19,000 of these identified white girls will never recover from the psychological scars. Their skin colour shouldn’t matter. It is what happens when identity politics clouds common sense. How could anyone condone arresting the fathers who were trying to break their underage girls out of rape dens? Because that is what happened. Minors were doused with gasoline and threatened with being set alight by their captors if they told anyone about what had happened.

Where were these same BLM-in-name-only protestors in the UK calling for justice for these poor girls when it became public knowledge? Are demonstrations merely determined by the most fashionable social justice issue du jour? Is systematic rape based on ethnicity on one’s own doorstep deemed less contentious than systematic racism in America?

Kneeling is nothing short of submitting to mob rule. Pure and simple. Furthermore, how does getting on one’s knees heal racial divide and conquer police brutality? We’ll get to that.

We were struck by a video of a Trump rally several years ago where the organizer invited the President of BLM New York up on stage to allow him to talk to those assembled. The outcome was not what the prevailing sentiment would have guessed before viewing the clip.

The problem with BLM is the way it seems to convey mixed messaging. BLM remains silent when so many blacks are dying in Chicago from gun violence not at the hands of police? When a 77yo former African American police captain in Louisville was shot and killed by rioters over a TV last week, BLM said nothing. It was too busy lashing out at white liberals abusing the #BlackLivesMatter Twitter hashtag to advertise their wokeness by putting black squares on the social media avatars.

And if cops truly felt so disgusted about George Floyd’s demise wouldn’t they have been better to strip off their blues, resign on the spot and trample on their badges to show how much the cause means to them?  It is hard to see the kneeling as anything more than a hollow gesture to rack up social woke points.

Why are they apologizing for things they haven’t done? If they have been privy to witnessing police brutality, did they speak up? Or were they ignored by politically-aligned police chiefs bent on seeking their next promotion by suppressing negative behavior under their watch to please city mayors?

That is not to say police officers don’t have a right to express themselves as private citizens but as public servants on the job they should not be succumbing to acts of appeasement.  They should be reprimanded for such displays of weakness. How can they keep public order by such acts of surrender? What message do they send to crowds?

Throughout history, kneeling has been a token of submission. The height of self-debasement. The term “die standing or live on your knees” derives from that.

Earlier in the week, we wrote of a YouTuber Smooth Sanchez who was claiming to represent Black Lives Matter (BLM). He was asking white women to get on their knees to admit their white privilege, apologize and pay reparations. Some complied. Some refused, only be taunted with vile abuse in the form of “racist“, “bigot” or “Neo-Nazi.

What is it with the idea that ordinary law-abiding citizens who happen to be white must atone for the sins of people they are not related to and weren’t alive at the time much of the oppression was committed? How will self-loathing whites kneeling and asking for forgiveness help black people in reality, especially if they haven’t done a thing? How do we stop racism if we constantly seek to define everything by it? Surely by making skin colour the basis by which we function as a society, then racism can’t be effectively stamped out.

In 2017 we wrote about four Ann Arbor councillors taking a knee during the national anthem ahead of session. Given these people were in a position to influence policy why didn’t they head down to the Ann Arbor Police Department and study the data about police brutality, the extent of the problem (if any) and what steps were put in place to mitigate it?

Ann Arbor is a city of 360,000. Crime versus the national average of cities it’s size revealed that burglary and motor vehicle theft were at rates at half the national average. Murder 1/5th. Robbery at less than half. Assault in line. Rape, marginally above.

Taken in isolation, Ann Arbor PD killed one African-American woman who attacked them with a knife in 2014. Since then a clean slate. If new measures to weed out bad apples were put in place, shouldn’t those councillors have promoted the successful program that they implemented instead of joining a chorus which threw its own law enforcement it sets the guidelines for under the bus?

Wouldn’t it be better to have city mayors incentivise police chiefs to proactively manage their officers in ways which would lead to the types of outcomes the public wants? We doubt the wimpy response of Ann Arbor politicians is an isolated event. That is the problem. Making a public statement to appear virtuos but fail to follow up with meaningful policy achieved what exactly? Their actions were as useless as draping one’s social media avatar with whatever cause is fashionable to show one is against the bleeding obvious.

The fish rots at the head. No amount of kneeling will fix problems unless the raw data is openly discussed and the brutal truth examined. The Minneapolis PD was subject to a federal review of procedures in 2015. The statistics revealed that few officers were fired or suspended for claims made against them. The majority were either reprimanded or given extra coaching. Yet MPD still continued to see complaints pile up. This appears to be a senior management issue.

Bad (insert profession) deserve to be weeded out of any organisation, especially where public order is at stake.

Pointing the finger at the majority of law-abiding citizens who aren’t racist will do absolutely nothing to solve this crisis. As Mark D Robinson said, the majority is “the first ones taxed, the last ones considered and the first ones punished.

Having whites declare their white privilege on their knees will solve nothing. It is actually an insult to blacks for whites to think that apologizing for things they haven’t done just to feel better about themselves rather than seek to find solutions through constructive free speech which acknowledges history. It is the same mentality as pushing gender politics. Do these same people think telling capable, educated, intelligent and ambitious women that they need special treatment?

Having whites kneel will not lift one single black person out of the oppression so many Democrat lawmakers highlight when it is decades of their policies that have perpetuated the problems in the first place. It is actually racist to push this kind of tribalism, as many of our narrative busing videos of everyday African Americans attests to. 

In closing, if we want to take stupidity to the next level, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti publicly said he wants to drastically cut the police budget in coming years. One can only assume that stifling the one body that can keep communities safe will only enforce the very stereotypes that the death of George Floyd was supposed to stop. 

Kneeling does not lead to healing. Lets not pretend that it does. Bold leadership that avoids political correctness and identity politics is required.

Inviting or inciting violence?

クリックすると新しいウィンドウで開きます

As a father of two daughters the idea of child grooming gangs is a chilling prospect. One of my children was sexually molested on a Tokyo subway aged only 13. Nationality doesn’t matter. Religion doesn’t matter. I took time off work every morning for months trying to find the perpetrator. Had I caught him, care for what happened to me mattered not. Vigilante justice? Call it what you will. It doesn’t get more personal when your own blood, especially a child, is the innocent victim. Any parent who loves their kids would contemplate such sacrifice. When people realise that the authorities are willfully turning a blind eye to obvious crimes, law makers should not be surprised if vigilantism and chaos become the by-product. The arrest of Tommy Robinson has all of the hallmarks of the judiciary inviting the ‘hellfire‘ on themselves. CM often gets criticized for defending free speech as if it is some gross distortion of the facts. That the looming Orwellian dystopia CM describes doesn’t exist.

Whether one agrees with Tommy Robinson’s views or not, one cannot fault his passion to bring to light the problems of child rape gangs in Britain and the political correctness to hide the predominantly ‘Asian’ nature of the perpetrators. Millions (and growing) have seen his 75 minute live-stream video outside Leeds Court where he was summarily arrested for ‘suspicion of breaching the peace‘. Despite having the alleged defendants and spectators scream obscenities like “go f*ck your mother!” or “your wife is a prostitute” or “I’m here to see your mum” and others push him in front of the police, nothing happened to them. Why the sexual references? The police officers claimed they didn’t see him being physically assaulted but suggested they’d get a warning if they did witness.

Robinson did absolutely nothing violent, obscene or provocative to warrant an arrest. Disturbing the peace? The amount of people that came up to him unsolicited congratulating his work, asking to go on future marches and take selfies was apparent. The fact he has two best selling books on Amazon is testament to him being far from a lone voice. Is it any wonder the authorities want to gag him? Should those that support him be dragged in front of the courts too?

He made numerous references about being aware of his restrictions the day he was arrested last week. He spoke to nearby police to ensure and confirm he wasn’t crossing lines. He made the reference on his video that the police were likely monitoring it to try to nab him on any remote technicality. Well they did. He was aware of the risks. He may well have violated his court order on a “legal” technicality. CM isn’t a lawyer but the video didn’t appear to show disorder. He was jailed for 13 months and on top of that a media gag was placed by the court on discussing details of his trial. Should we be surprised that 1,000s marched on Downing St?

CM documented the two decades of cover ups contained in the independent inquiry into the Rotherham child grooming scandal which was along the lines of what Robinson was reporting on in Leeds. In April we wrote:

“The details of the Rotherham grooming gang scandal was tabulated in an independent inquiry looking at the problem between 1997-2013 showing the extent of the cover up. The table above shows the actions taken after 157 complaints about child grooming in Rotherham were made to the South Yorkshire Police since 2013. The Inquiry tabulates a case of a father being arrested for trying to get his daughter out of a rape den. A 12yo girl was raped in a park then doused in gasoline and threatened with being lit if she said anything about what had happened. The sad thing is that these gangs are wide spread – Rotherham, Rochdale, Newcastle, Bristol, Aylesbury, Oxford, Peterborough, Keighley, Newham, Leeds, Bradford, Telford, Sheffield and London. The report discusses how the gangs transfer the children within the ‘safe houses; in the network to keep the industry clandestine.”

The gory details are all in the report. CM encourages people to read the contents to be aware of how terribly young kids have been groomed, threatened and undoubtedly psychologically damaged for life. Many have tried to commit suicide. It is a travesty. Even if you hate what Tommy Robinson stands for, at the very least open your eyes to the industrial level of this crime. Take this example:

Child F (2006) was a victim of serious sexual abuse when she was a young child. She was groomed for sexual exploitation by a 27-year-old male when she was 13. She was subjected to repeated rapes and sexual assaults by different perpetrators, none of whom were brought to justiceShe repeatedly threatened to kill herself and numerous instances of serious self-harm were recorded in the case file, including serious overdoses and trying to throw herself in front of cars...doctors were seriously concerned about her because of the number and seriousness of hospital admissions over such a short time, many associated with serious drug misuse and self-harm.”

This is what the Inquiry had to say about the Police:

We deal with the response of South Yorkshire Police at some length throughout this report. While there was close liaison between the Police, Risky Business and children’s social care from the early days of the Risky Business project, there were very many historic cases where the operational response of the Police fell far short of what could be expected. The reasons for this are not entirely clear. The Police had excellent procedures from 1998, but in practice these appear to have been widely disregarded….We were contacted by someone who worked at the Rotherham interchange in the early 2000s. He described how the Police refused to intervene when young girls who were thought to be victims of CSE (child sexual exploitation) were being beaten up and abused by perpetrators. According to him, the attitude of the Police at that time seemed to be that they were all ‘undesirables’ and the young women were not worthy of police protection.

The Council was no better:

In 2004-2005, a series of presentations on CSE were first made to councillors and then other relevant groups and agencies, led by the external manager of Risky Business, from Youth Services. The presentations were unambiguous about the nature and extent of the problem…In 2006, a Conservative councillor requested a meeting with the Council Leader at which he expressed his concerns about CSE. This had come to his attention via constituents. He told the Inquiry that the Council Leader advised him the matters were being dealt with by the Police and requested that he did not raise them publicly…

Interviews with senior members revealed that none could recall the issue ever being discussed in the Labour (Party) Group until 2012Given the seriousness of the subject, the evidence available, and the reputational damage to the Council, it is extraordinary that the Labour Group, which dominated the Council, failed to discuss CSE until then. Some senior members acknowledged that that was a mistake. Asked if they should have done things differently, they thought that as an administration they should have tackled the issues ‘head on’, including any concerns about ethnic issues.”

In any event, when Robinson was arrested there was no other media present covering what should be viewed as a highly contentious, topical and heinous crime against human rights. Anyone with a heartbeat should be repulsed by the systematic rape of 11 year olds. 12yo girls shouldn’t have their tongues nailed to tables nor raped by 30 men in one day nor have 6 pregnancies in 4 years. It would be fair to say that the majority of Brits (much less the world) would be appalled by what has been going on. Yet media blackouts are deemed a preferable response by the judiciary. The people who have been covering it up should be convicted  as accessories, not those trying to expose such a shameful episode. Look how well that worked for Angela Merkel after the Cologne New Year’s Eve assaults were eventually exposed several years back.

No-one in their right minds wants to invite vigilantism but the seemingly farcical arrest of Robinson would seem to be inviting it rather than his videos inciting it. It is clear people in Britain are fast realizing that freedoms are being removed. Reprehensible legislation is being introduced to silence the truth. Whether once can say with certainty that this is 1984, it would seem things are pointing toward it. Politically motivated violence in Germany is surging post legislation designed to gag the populace.

Robinson is no saint. He has a checkered past which he freely admits to in his book, Enemy of the State. Yet his arrest has caused outrage around the world. If the authorities thought banging him up would limit the damage they’ve made a grave mistake. Anything that is pulled or deleted finds a way of resurfacing and ballooning the awareness. Conversely some people have posted pictures of him having been assaulted and bashed in prison (this has not happened since this arrest) as a way to incite more anger. If his followers want to save him, misreporting facts, trying to scale the gates at 10 Downing St or threatening the judge that convicted him won’t help the cause. They can’t swing public opinion with the two wrongs argument.

Growing numbers of the British population are getting fed up and if more of this type of politically correct hand-wringing continues the problem is likely to get out of control. The government and judiciary may think limiting the actions of those deemed to ‘incite’ division by jailing them will quell further unrest. However they should beware the public reckoning they ‘invite’. Will cooler heads prevail? At this juncture, it would appear not.

We say again, while it is debatable as to whether Tommy Robinson was in violation of his court order on a legal technicality, the bigger issue is the thousands of children that have been permanently damaged by the deranged acts of sick people. No matter what their background, colour, race or religion they should be given the maximum penalty for raping children if found guilty. They may not have taken lives, but they have stolen the sanctity of it. To that end, Robinson should be congratulated for bringing it to light, not censured. It is not just Tommy that deserves the right of free speech but the voice given to those poor children silenced for decades while those who were supposed to protect them turned a blind eye. Perhaps even SJWs will find it in their hearts to see the virtue of Robinson’s actions to stand up for those that couldn’t defend themselves. His only weapon is free speech. If some want to call his actions ‘hate speech‘ then they only prove how little they truly care for real victims.

Is Tommy Robinson in the minority with a #2 rank book on Amazon?

IMG_0711.PNG

There is no moral equivalence to be drawn here with this latest attack outside Finsbury mosque in London. Innocent people were mown down by a van driven by someone filled with rage and hate. Social media is already screaming “bigot, racist, terrorist, anti-Muslim, radical” but there is a much bigger point not being addressed. The social boiling point is being reached much more rapidly than the media will admit.  Tommy Robinson was accused across social media for inspiring anti-Muslim rhetoric and fueling this person to commit the crime. His tweets matched his long standing convictions and predictions. Perhaps everyone who has bought Tommy’s book “Enemy of the State”  (ranked #2 book on Amazon UK, #131 in Canada and #2375 in America & now $350 on paperback) could be a risk of commiting such acts if that is the generalization. Of course it is nonsense. By the measure of the sales success perhaps his views maybe more mainstream than the negative ‘extreme’ moniker that is often hurled at him.

Could it be argued that a growing number of people are growing sick and tired of random jihadi attacks and see this book as a guide on how the government isn’t  handling the problem? That was not a intended to be a fact checking laced comment rather pointing out that many people potentially share his supposed ‘patriotic’ view as demonstrated by the commerciality of his writing. This is no longer a pure jihadi problem but one that is now likely to become tit-for-tat terrorism which carries far more negative connotations.

Think beyond the all too common propensity to push prejudices by lashing out on social media with little thought to trying to understand the full arguments of alternative views. Do we take a book review from apologists as fact when most of those have probably never read his book cover to cover? I am reading it because I want to form my own judgement rather than rely on others’ bias. He has strong views but no better way than self vetting. I’ve read Mein Kampf in what must be the most appalling book ever written – grammatically and content-wise. For one whose family escaped the deaths camps of Poland, trying to understand the ravings of Hitler brought added perspective to the horror although some might conclude reading it is an endorsement. It is not.

Innocents are dead or injured in this attack on Fisnbury Park Mosque. If indeed Tommy has a minority view, most people wouldn’t buy his book. Are all the people that buy it racist? Even if one thinks they are then even more reason to say that the government’s current pandering to political correctness won’t solve these hate fueled events whether radical jihadis or right (left?) wing nutters. Do violent video games incite massacres? Are all ‘Brexiters’ a carbon copy of the man who murdered Labour politician Jo Cox days before the referendum?  Do we need to bring in Islamophobic legislation like Canada (Bill M-103) to shut down people expressing concern? No, No and No. Current policy approaches are having the opposite effect as this attack proves.

At the time of the Manchester bombing I warned that vigilantism would be an ugly side effect of endless political correctness. Coincidentally Robinson suggested similar views about the rise of vigilantes after that post in a vlog. Wasting a lot of time on what  motivated the driver to commit such a terrible crime is not necessary. It is obvious. It is a revenge attack. This is highly likely to be a person screaming out for something to be done about a problem he obviously doesn’t think is being handled properly by elected officials. He probably viewed himself as a vigilante even if that title might be an overreach in this instance.  This in no way defends his despicable actions. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter was often used by IRA sympathisers. Still it doesn’t in anyway condone killing or maiming innocents, no matter what ideology, faith, race or background they come from. It is plain awful. The majority of people would agree with that view.

Revenge attacks and reprisals only exacerbate a rapidly deteriorating relationship. However trying to say the perpetrator proves that not all such attacks are driven by radical Islam doesn’t address the core of the problem. The majority of good people (note a deliberate statement not to go down the identity politics line) want an end to innocent deaths at the hands of extremists but if free speech and the ability to tackle radicalism (wherever it lies) aren’t openly addressed these events will sadly continue. It should be totally in the interests of the majority of ‘good’ Muslims (I detest that phraseology) to want to stop radicals from collectivising their faith with what they perceive is the wrong interpretation. Common sense would say they are the most important link in the chain to weed out those who want to kill in the name of Allah. They need to be front and centre of the debate.

What the UK government (and other governments) have created is a monster of their own making. Candles, flowers, lit monuments, avatars, expressions of sympathy and ‘love conquers hate’ posts dodge the need to have a serious debate on the problem. Now we have seen first hand a real openly targeted revenge attack in the UK, people need less sanctimonious posturing on social media and focus their energies on truly understanding what is at stake. That is to ditch the liberal hand-wringing and have an open debate on the problem. Robinson’s book isn’t selling in the volumes it is by chance. Politicians should pay attention to this trend. It is not about arguing about whether he is right or wrong but noting the simmering underbelly of a growing number of people fed up with inaction. This is the end of the beginning not the beginning of the end.