02-15-2019 01:00:05 PM -0800
02-15-2019 09:32:56 AM -0800
02-15-2019 07:34:51 AM -0800
02-14-2019 05:19:47 PM -0800
02-14-2019 04:32:01 PM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Stretch, grab a late afternoon cup of caffeine and get caught up on the most important news of the day with our Coffee Break newsletter. These are the stories that will fill you in on the world that's spinning outside of your office window - at the moment that you get a chance to take a breath.
Sign up now to save time and stay informed!

Suicide by Condescension?

On August 4, the Times of London ran two articles that, taken together, inadvertently illustrated precisely what Britain is up against these days.

In one article, Paul Morgan-Bentley, identified as the Times's head of investigations, reported that the Home Office had “received more than 3,800 reports of forced marriages or victims being at risk of forced marriage in the past three years,” with “[h]undreds of the victims” being children, the youngest of whom was four years old. (Yes, four years old.) Yet during this period, according to Morgan-Bentley's investigation, “fewer than 80 suspects had been charged.” Even though forced marriage became illegal in the UK in 2014, “only three cases have resulted in convictions.” Morgan-Bentley quoted Jasvinder Sanghera, founder of a support group for victims of forced marriage: “We’ve got a number of professionals who are turning a blind eye. They don’t want to rock the multicultural boat.”

Add these new revelations to the already well documented unwillingness of British authorities, over a period of decades, to do anything about Muslim rape gangs, and you have plenty of fodder for self-righteous newspaper columns exploding with outrage at do-nothing government officials. But at whom did Times columnist Janice Turner vent her spleen on August 4? Why, at none other than Tommy Robinson, of course, who – at the expense of his own health, sanity, financial well-being, and personal freedom – has been drawing attention for his entire adult life to such Islam-engendered social calamities, which have otherwise been almost entirely ignored.

To read Turner, however, you would believe that Tommy himself is the problem. Under the headline “We ignore Tommy Robinson at our peril,” Turner depicted him as a “violent” creep, a “football thug and mortgage fraudster” (years ago, after combing through his finances, the authorities convicted him of lending money to his brother-in-law, because they couldn't find a more serious infraction to get him on) who is “too thick or arrogant to grasp contempt laws” and hence “risked derailing complex trials and denying alleged rape victims justice.” As it happens, it was Tommy, not Turner, who played a major role in bringing such rapes to light in the first place.

“Cast him out to the nutty fringes, no-platform and ignore him, keep his views off our airwaves, cut the publicity oxygen pipe and hope he chokes,” wrote Turner. “Except I don’t think we have this choice.” It's not just Tommy whom Turner wants to exclude from the public square. She feels the same way about Raheem Kassan, one of the exceedingly few Muslim-born people in Britain who now speak up boldly to criticize that religion. “[M]any have argued that the BBC should not host Kassam at all,” Turner writes, using one of those transparent journalistic formulas, the point plainly being that she doesn't think the BBC should host Kassam. To give Kassam a platform, she maintains, is “to legitimise hatred, normalise fascism and draw Islamophobia into the mainstream.”