THE CULTURAL PRODUCTION OF CHILD RAPE
The surrender of British children by policy
In recent days the issue of the mass rape of children in Britain has been noticed by notable figures online.
People such as Elon Musk have expressed outrage on the discovery that up to a million British children have been raped by organised groups of largely immigrant men.
Called “grooming gangs” in the mainstream media, these men are commonly of Pakistani origin.
It has been taboo to mention this fact. Numerous reports have been issued going back to the 1980s, and yet the gangs continue to operate all over Britain to this day. Victims have been blamed - even when children. Parents have been prosecuted for trying to save their children1. Many of the rapists walk free today.
How could this happen?
As with practically every large scale social ill, this is no accident. It is a direct result of political decision making.
Today I will argue that the mass rape of children in Britain has been manufactured by cultural production.
In this very long report, I will show a timeline of national and international political strategies which have resulted in the mass production of child rape in Britain.
Please bear in mind this is no mere exercise in the abstract.
The criminal abuse of children in Muslim communities in Britain is not only a treasonous scandal, but has ended, ruined and continues to ruin the lives of real children - some of whom I know.
I have also personally alerted authorities to the endemic abuse in one British Muslim community and no local or national police or government agency ever replied.
In one case I spoke to a former senior detective tasked with investigating child abuse. By way of reply I was handed a book on Jimmy Savile.
Its title was “In Plain Sight”.
The message was clear. Everyone knows, but nothing will be done.
CONTENTS
Foreword: Cultural production explained
Part One - The 1980s transition to Omniliberalism
Part Two - Changing Regimes
Part Three - From Producer to Consumer
Part Four - The Policy of the Three Wise Monkeys
Part Five - Eliminating the Nation
Part Six - The Betrayal of the British People
Part Seven - Nothing Can Be Done
Part Eight - The Cultural Production of Public Feeling
Part Nine - Don’t Look Back in Anger
Part Ten - Something Must Be Done
Part Eleven - The Replacement of Our Civilisation
Part Twelve - Towards a Global Culture
Epilogue - The Interdigitation of Evil
Foreword: On the cultural production of mass child rape
What is “cultural production”?
Cultural production is the term I use to explain the process by which our liberal global system mobilises all aspects of culture to manufacture meaning for mass consumption.
It provides a belief system for a power structure managed by the use of media.
Cultural production is the use of all aspects of mass culture to supply meaning to an economic-military system with global ambitions.
How can the mass rape of children be a product of political management?
The several factors which have optimised the conditions for the organised rape of children by immigrant populations have been created by policy.
I will now give a history of this process.
The liberal system developed global ambitions following the fall of the Soviet Union. A new politics with new meanings was required. Radical change was presented as progress, as new wars and new economic measures replaced the old political and moral paradigm - which required the creation of new values.
The marketisation of everything ensued, to produce a global consumer marketplace. Everything is now a thing to be consumed.
This includes children, and life itself.
This would be the economic basis for the new world order.
To do this, old values of nation, kinship, religion, tradition, custom and law had to change.
The nation states must turn a blind eye to the damaging, downstream effects of globalisation. To do otherwise would interrupt the drive for efficiency, delivered through the refinement of a technique of governance intended to be universal and permanent.
This technique, as we shall see, makes use of mass media to manipulate public feeling in the service of the tolerance of evil.
PART ONE
FROM PARTY POLITICS TO OMNILIBERALISM
In the late 1980s the process began in the UK of dissolving left and right into a uniparty.
The Labour Party underwent a campaign of modernisation, which saw Neil Kinnock advertise the party as having driven out the loony left of the Militant Tendency.
This was the beginnings of the replacement of socialism with Labour managerialism that would deliver three election victories to Tony Blair.
It was the birth of New Labour.
Something similar happened to the party of the right - the Conservative Party. Margaret Thatcher had also won three elections those of 1979, 1983 and 1987.
She had famously stated that anyone - like Labour Leader Neil Kinnock - who refused to return illegal immigrants to their country of origin was “proposing international chaos”.
This “international chaos” is the norm today, as norms have been replaced with normlessness generally. As we shall see, this normlessness has been presented as our new virtues.
These are virtues of necessity - made necessary by the replacement of national politics and cultures with a liberal-consumer system with global ambitions.
Thatcher’s revolutionary programme of free market privatisation also did this. It undermined the traditional customs and culture that Conservatives claimed to wish to conserve.
Mrs Thatcher was ousted in a traditional Conservative palace coup in 1990. With the fall of the Soviet Union, a new norm in politics was required to replace that of the traditional conservatism she had come to represent.
After her, both parties adopted a consumer liberalism which had no ideological loyalty beyond the delivery of efficiency. It would be as neutral as the idealised market itself, simply providing the best bargain to all comers. With the fall of the Soviet Union, this system had realistic and accelerating ambitions towards world domination. The political managers realised this was the new world order to which their politics must in future be realigned, and so they were.
Following Neil Kinnock’s rebranding of the Labour Movement, Tony Blair came to power in 1997 to win three elections with his New Labour - a managerialist, consumer-valued electoral machine which plotted in secret to “multiculturalise” Britain against the wishes of the electorate.
In every election since 1997 public opinion has backed strict controls on immigration. Politicians promised to do this in public, but privately pursued policies which would massively increase it instead.
The intention was to “make Britain truly multicultural”, as former Blair adviser Andrew Neather told the Daily Telegraph in 2009.
The Conservative Blair was David Cameron - a liberal who legalised gay “marriage” and, like Blair, launched a regime change war.
These politicians were themselves the product of a process of political change which began around forty years ago. It was effectively the surrender by policy of the basis and character of our civilisation.
It has degraded the rule of law, and is an act of treason against the native British people which has handed their children to foreign sexual predators for four decades.
The replacement of national political culture was a necessary alignment with emerging globalised order.
PART TWO - CHANGING REGIMES
THE WARS OF MIGRATION - 2003-2011
The regime change wars matter because they magnified the flood of migrants enormously.
Urged by Benjamin Netanyahu since the 1980s, wars on Iraq (2003) and Libya (2011) smashed open the floodgates of mass migration, creating a black market in human trafficking in which NGOs and criminal networks participate as stakeholders.
Both parties of the new liberal consensus - the neoliberal consensus - promoted mass migration into Britain by design.
The wars they launched smashed open the floodgates.
Blair pressed for the 2003 war in Iraq, Cameron launched the 2011 one on Libya alongside Hillary Clinton.
The extremists funded by the US and UK and its ally, Israel, functioned like the anti-Soviet mujahedin in Afghanistan. They were led by Osama bin Laden. In Syria today, another offshoot of Al-Qaeda is sponsored by the US, UK and Israel, and has now come to power.
Cameron and Clinton funded the same brand of Islamist extremism to topple Gadaffi in Libya.
One of these Islamists came back to Britain after fighting in an Islamist militia in Libya and bombed the Manchester Arena in 2017, killing children amongst the 22 dead.
When Gadaffi was murdered, weapons from his former army were shipped by the US and UK to arm Syrian “rebels” - then called the Nusra Front.
Today, they are called HTS. The Nusra Front was founded on the orders of Mohammed al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS/Daesh. It was formed by Al-Jolani, who is the leader of Syria today.
This brand of Islamic terrorism is a cultural product too. I wrote about that here.
PART THREE - FROM PRODUCER TO CONSUMER
The liberal regime granted permission for foreign criminals to act with impunity at home as well as abroad. Why did it do this?
In the late 1980s the Conservative Party decided it had to change. Not everyone agreed.
What was the nature of this change? The economic reforms under Thatcher had deindustrialised Britain, transforming it from a producer to a consumer. The new industries were services.
An economy based on buying things needs buyers most of all, and it does not care who they are.
This is the basic model of the liberal-consumer economy, intended to be exported globally.
It transformed the industrial West into addiction economies, with resulting import networks vital to maintaining international discipline through the threat of sanctions.
Access to these vast consumer markets could and would be denied to any nation resisting assimilation into the system.
From the point of view of the political management mass immigration is a magic trick. It provides an endless supply of new consumers, who will all, it is said, eventually multiply revenues.
I believe this neoliberal global imperative provides the rationale for the change in policy in the Conservative party.
What was that about?
PART FOUR - THE POLICY OF THE THREE WISE MONKEYS
It is my argument that the “values” and “beliefs” promoted by political power are simply advertising slogans for an economic model.
The move to mass consumerism and away from industrial and agricultural production required the manufacture of new meaning.
The lives of ordinary people were transformed. Work changed, traditional roles were dissolved as factories and trades vanished - sometimes taking entire communities such as those of the mining towns with them.
Political planners could see this coming in the late 1980s. And so they decided to never challenge the downsides of mass migration.
The unofficial policy anticipated the crimes we see today.
Its remedy was that of the Three Wise Monkeys: they would see, hear and speak no evil of the evil their New System had created.
The reason why is obvious. It was all their fault.
PART FIVE - ELIMINATING THE NATION
How Politics Erased the National Interest
The British Nationalist Jonathan Bowden is undoubtedly one of the greatest speakers these islands have produced.
Initially a member of the Conservative Party, he is one of several nationalists who warned of the rape of British children by immigrant gangs in the 1980s.
Nick Griffin2, former leader of the British National Party, was prosecuted following a campaign supported by the BBC for his warnings about organised crime in Britain’s muslim areas.
He was convicted in 2006 of “stirring up racial hatred”. Griffin was threatened with up to seven years in prison for warning of
“paedophile drug rape”
conducted by Pakistani gangs in Keighley, West Yorkshire. As the Daily Mirror reported almost 20 years ago,
“Griffin, 45, was allegedly taped telling a crowd: "These 18, 19 and 25-year-old Asian Muslims are seducing and raping white girls in this town right now.”
His comments were framed for years as baseless examples of racist hatred - tainting by association anyone else who dared suggest the truth.
Griffin’s BNP was marginalised and destroyed, with Griffin claiming he had refused money and backing to fuse his nationalism with Zionism.
As the Independent reported, his position on Zionist matters has always been unambigious.
"The only lengthy publication to BNP leader Nick Griffin's name is a diatribe against Jews who, he claimed, secretly control the media."
– Denis MacShane, MP for Rotherham
Griffin’s movement was replaced by the emergence in 2009 of the Zionist English Defence League (EDL) led by Tommy Robinson3, which was itself neutralised when its containment of the issues failed to contain public anger.
The EDL replaced nationalism with “counter-jihad” - a specifically anti-Islam populism.
The extremism it uses as an example of Islam is that produced by the sponsorship of the West - and Israel - in organisations like Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Alongside this, however, Robinson has also done unique and brave work to expose the scandal of mass child rape by largely Pakistani gangs in Britain.
PART SIX - THE BETRAYAL OF THE BRITISH PEOPLE
In his Tangmere speech of 2007, Bowden relates conversations he had with future Tory grandees at the time of the transition of the Conservative Party - from a party of the Right, to a party of Liberal “rights”.
In the past, the Tories would tolerate some Right-wing populism, some Powellites, some anti-Federalites who shifted a bit further. No longer! If you come out with this stuff you’ll be purged.
Bowden was a Young Conservative initially. He witnessed the change pushed through the party which would result in the betrayal of the British - and their children.
When I was 18 there were a brace of MPs who could have been in Le Pen’s party inside the Tory Party.
Bell, Amery, all of these people. Everyone knew they were there. They’re dead now. That’s gone.
The coherent Right within the Tory Party no longer exists. The choice is accept what’s happened or go outside, and if Cameron and the others were here and had to be honest they would say, “If you want to oppose what’s happened it will involve conflict within our society, and we don’t want that.”
Bowden died in poverty at the age of 50. He was living in a caravan. He is described by Wikipedia as a “far right activist”.
This is how protestors were framed by Keir Starmer - many of whom were jailed for making outraged posts on social media about the murder of children by an Islamist-inspired immigrant.
Most of the judges who jailed them had also freed convicted paedophiles.
Bowden’s speech, from which these extracts are taken, begins with the discussion of violent gang behaviour in the UK and United States.
His critique of the mass formation of youth crime and delinquency is a startling indictment of the impact of international normlessness which has replaced our national cultures.
In answers he gives to the audience at the end, he records the internal reasoning of a conservative establishment which had decided to surrender completely to mass migration and its consequences.
PART SEVEN - NOTHING CAN BE DONE
When questioned about Tory policy on immigration, Bowden says some Conservatives admitted around 1990 that,
“[Enoch] Powell was a genius. He was the last to speak, but it’s happened now. It may have been a disaster.”
Referring to Enoch Powell’s warning of the “rivers of blood” which would flow from unchecked migration into Britain, Bowden says that not only did the Conservative Party admit that this disaster may have already happened, but that its policy was
“Nothing can be done”.
He said in 2007,
One of Cameron’s aids said to me 14 years ago, “It’s un-British to oppose what’s happened, because it involves intolerance.”
And I said, “Well, what about tolerance for our identity?”
And he said, “We can’t go there. We’ve got to go with what’s happened, and we’ve got to plead for forgiveness from these other groups.”
Plead for forgiveness from these other groups, because they might come for us later. This is what they say amongst themselves!
While he lived, Bowden testified to the difference between what is presented to the public in politics, and what is true.
He revealed that there were “two discourses” in British politics - what you are told and what is said in private.
You see, there are two discourses in this society: what people say in the public space and what people say behind.
It would be very, very interesting if people could actually know what the people they see on the box [television] all the time actually say behind.
In actual fact, they’d be quite amazed actually in a sort of dispiriting way, but they’d have to realize that that entire establishment has given up.
Bowden warned that the Conservative establishment had given up on Britain and the cause of the English, Irish, Scots and Welsh as a matter of policy - decades ago.
PART EIGHT - THE CULTURAL PRODUCTION OF PUBLIC SENTIMENT
There is more to cultural production than liberalisation of law and economy.
It is the provision of meaning to political decisions, which are themselves taken to promote - in this case - an internationally coordinated raft of strategic economic and military agendas.
In brief, the beliefs you are sold are stories you are told about the world being made around you.
The destruction of the EDL was promoted by a classic piece of cultural production. An interview with a young EDL member was lampooned by a youtube satirist, turning his outrage at rape gangs into a joke.
“Muslamic Ray Guns” was a viral hit, gaining over two million views. People were encouraged to laugh at the moron in the video spouting nonsense.
They could then forget all about the rape of children.
The video was produced from this 2011 interview broadcast by PressTV - which introduced the segment announcing “a sense of incoherent anger” over mass migration.
Yet there was no incoherence at all - save for the young man’s slip of the tongue in substituting “muslamic” for “Islamic”.
His failure to observe the orthodoxy of respect for a culture entirely alien to his own was the hook on which the production of “muslamic ray guns” was hung.
It was a masterpiece of laughalong child-rape comedy. It was released by “DJ” Alex Vegas, who describes himself on his YouTube account as
“Some bloke from the UK who makes music”
On twitter he goes by the name of Alex Ross. His profile shows this about his forebears.
Alex’s work was promoted by the algorithm and went viral. The song made claims of the organised mass rape of children seem ridiculous, beclowning anyone who dared to make them.
Four years later the Labour MP for Rotherham Sarah Champion would announce that up to a million British children had been raped by immigrant gangs.
PART NINE - DON’T LOOK BACK IN ANGER
A second and later instance of cultural production also shaped mass perception, this time neutralising outrage at a 2017 Islamic terror attack in Manchester.
People can no longer be prevented from looking back at what - and who - they have lost. Yet they can be made to do so with no genuine feeling at all. How?
The vigil for the victims of the Manchester Arena attack was interrupted by a woman singing “Don’t Look Back in Anger”.
This moment was promoted as a spontaneous eruption of the spirit of Manchester rising as one to reject hate.
In fact, video of the event shows the crowd baffled, disturbed by, and even cringing at this woman’s attempt at self-insertion. Carrying a cheap bouquet of flowers, Lydia Bernsmeier-Muller warbles the Oasis classic.
She had no connection to any of the victims, and has worked for the BBC.
I reported on this strange example of what Ian Cobain has called “controlled spontaneity” - a strategy of staging public responses to attacks by people of migrant backgrounds.
These attacks were anticipated by the same authorities whose policies had brought such people here in such number. They knew this was coming, just as they knew the rapes were happening. They created the conditions, and the control of public feeling was created as a sort of cure.
Here is my report on the “spontaneous” song at the vigil in Manchester:
These policies had created a sense of grievance in the new migrant arrivals by prosecuting wars abroad. These politicians promoted a sense of guilt and obligation in their native populations about their awful history.
These policies had told the British people to make “refugees” welcome, and to fear nothing more than being called racist.
These policies had also sponsored the same terrorists whose example of barbaric killing was being virally transmitted to Britons themselves.
The power of cultural production is perhaps most obvious in the testimony of the security guard at the Manchester Arena - who could have stopped the bomber, but did not.
This is another reason why nothing can be done. To notice the mass rape of British children is as racist as to stop a man determined to kill them.
PART TEN - SOMETHING MUST BE DONE
As Robert Jenrick pointed out on January 2nd, the British authorities have turned a blind eye to the mass rape of British children for the sake of “community relations”.
A very specific community has been having non-consensual relations with our children for around four decades, in plain sight of the authorities.
As Jenrick notes, it is only now that Elon Musk has publicised this forty year scandal of Pakistani rape gangs that it can no longer be contained.
Musk posted this on the same day Jenrick’s article appeared.
THE NECESSARY DENIAL OF REALITY
The denial of reality is fundamental to the completion of Project Global.
The production of a uniform culture requires that hard facts and disturbing realities are glossed over.
This includes the organised rape and murder of your children.
The police, the government and all other instutions have been complicit in this, with many explaining their complicity by saying they were terrified of accusations of racism.
Perhaps they do not realise the goal of their managerial masters. Perhaps they do. Whatever their degree of insight into the purpose of mass cultural production, it remains a fact that many of the men who raped our children still walk our streets today.
This is the reason for the outbreak of rage over the murder of three children by an immigrant inspired by Al-Qaeda.
The law was applied with maximum force to people who have suffered in mandated silence the murder and abuse of their children for decades.
This is why Britain exploded in fury last August, mere weeks after Keir Starmer became Prime Minister. He won a landslide of 20 percent of the eligible votes.
Half of all the people who are entitled to vote did not bother to do so.
The replacement of national politics with a counterfeit has made it worthless to vote for change.
PART ELEVEN - THE REPLACEMENT OF OUR CIVILISATION
British people have voted against mass migration in every election since 1997. This fact explains why so many now do not vote at all.
Our politics has been rendered meaningless, as our political class are merely delivering a global agenda regardless of the will or interests of the people - and at the expense of everything of value in their lives. They are simply to accept the New World and the chaos it calls order.
This world is to be borderless, denationalised, it is to be “green” and “sustainable”, it is to be supervised by machines and their algorithms.
Everything that interrupts this system is to be smoothed out.
From the point of view of technocratic managerialism, things such as families, kinship, clans, tribes and nations are simply obstacles. They make things inefficient.
So do so-called “taboos” on incest, child sexual exploitation, the definition of male and female, and so on. These are replaced with new “taboos”.
All the new taboos attach severe penalties to stating the obvious.
The obvious reveals that the system is evil, as it is obviously criminalising and barbarising everyday life from street to state level.
PART TWELVE - TOWARDS A GLOBAL CULTURE
If people retain social, cultural and traditional bonds and the meanings they provide, they cannot be managed by a single ideology.
For this reason a counterfeit culture is produced. It includes religious belief and secular ritual.
It aims to deliver a product like chicken - it is the chickenability of policy - the goal being an object of consumption which offends none and satisfies all.
To achieve this maximal good for the greatest possible number, everything of genuine value must go. When there is nothing left but the chicken nugget, no one will covet anything but fool’s gold.
This is why we inhabit an economy of consumer desire.
This is an addiction economy, where obsolescence of output combines with dependence on consumption. What you want, ideally, is a population with no ties to anything other than bargains.
Where meaning is required, intense feeling can be infused into the products of the New World Order.
Passions are conjured about wind turbines, about solar panels. Flying on an aeroplane is now “a violence”, according to the zelotic Green vanguard.
Noticing reality is severally “trans genocide”, “racism”, or “antisemitism”.
Intense feelings are also conjured over mass migration. To love strangers more than kin is not only the new normal, it is a signal of the highest wisdom.
That these strangers may not love you back is never mentioned. That they may in fact hate you is taboo. It is also taboo to say they may have good reason to hate you.
The reason these people may hate you is taboo because the political managers who brought them here also bombed and wrecked their home nations, and those of their brethren.
Immigrants are told you voted for the wars which have destroyed their homelands and killed their kinsmen.
If democracy were true, you would indeed be personally responsible.
If.
LIFE AS A BARGAIN HUNT
Regime change has changed our regimes at home. It has internationalised hatred and vengeance. It has created a borderless lawlessness, and has reduced human life - born and unborn - to a product to be consumed and discarded at will.
The children raped in Britain can be seen as bargains which have been hunted and consumed by an enterprising community of pleasure seeking individuals.
The highest principle of the liberal system is the seeking of personal pleasure. This hedonic utilitarianism is defended by liberal philosophers. It is the arithmetic of ethics, which permits the destruction of life born and unborn as a matter of convenience.
These are the values we are fed to make the medicine go down. The medicine of course is an international sickness, a man made virus of manufactured misery intended to terminate all life as we knew it.
This is the reason that all has been known and nothing done about the industrial scale of child rape in Britain.
The several factors which have optimised the commodification of children are the result of political decisions. These decisions were taken to replace traditional culture with an international consumer liberalism, intended to be exported worldwide.
It has reduced human life to the status of a product.
Liberal global consumerism is a dream of domination which has annihilated much of what makes life worthwhile, including the value of human life itself.
We are living through a moment of grand disenchantment, in which the reality behind the fantasies we have been sold for decades is revealed. The promises do not match the product.
The mass rape of children is one aspect of the production of a mass culture with global ambitions.
Some norms cannot be assimilated. Instead, normlessness becomes the rule. A new normal is invented, which abolishes the idea in essence.
This too is no accident, as liberalism is not essentialist.
It does not believe in what is - it urges what it says should be.
It replaces the normal with the New Normal. In doing so, it abolishes normality everywhere. The marginal is normalised, the normal marginalised.
Extremes become banal. As another example, spectacular acts of barbarism may explode at any moment, in any marketplace across the West. And they do.
EPILOGUE: THE INTERDIGITATION OF EVIL
The factors which comprise our dissolving new reality are interdigitated, like fingers in the steepled gesture made by the leaders who manage it.
The economic, military and strategic factors reduce to the abolition through degradation of every aspect of our civilisation.
There can be no surer indication of this policy than the cultural production, permission and perpetuation of a system which optimises the mass rape of our children.
This issue has resurfaced today, and its integration into the new model of cultural production emerging in the post-global West has yet to be resolved.
The most comprehensive eyewitness account of this scandal I have found is provided by twitter user KWilliam. Be advised the content is extremely disturbing and very well evidenced.
Here is a transcript of a 2004 interview with Griffin. He outlines his position, that of his party, and states for example that the presence of “genuine Sikh refugees” in Britain can be explained by the refusal of the government of India to grant them a homeland in Khalistan.
A prominent member of Tommy Robinson’s movement today is a sikh called Harman Singh Kapoor, and his EDL had the sikh Guramit Singh amongst its leadership.
The EDL had ties to the former driver for the Zionist terrorist Meir Kahane.
Here is the 2011 statement made by Tommy Robinson on the Zionist principles on which he founded the EDL. It is hard to find today, but is recorded here.
The English Defence League was formed two years ago.
One of the fundamental beliefs that this movement was built on was its support for Israel’s right to defend itself. In our first demonstrations, we went to Birmingham, and we flew the flag of Israel, the Star of David.
In the first public speech I ever gave, I wore the Star of David in Leeds. The reason for this is because Israel is a shining star of democracy.
If Israel falls, we all fall. This is what our movement has been built on for two years.
The English Defence League will not be deterred from its support for Israel and the Jewish people. Recently, in the EDL there have been internal arguments, which are nothing more than that. Every large family has its disagreements, but when push comes to shove, we all stand on the same side.
Meanwhile, some people on the fringes of this movement wish to direct it toward their own agenda. This will never happen. Israel is a beacon of democracy amid repressive Arab states. Recently some people have jumped on the EDL bandwagon and tried to use our platform to express anti-Semitic views. These statements are not in accord with the fundamental beliefs of the English Defence League. These people are not welcome, never have been welcome, and never will be welcome within the EDL. We reject all anti-Semitism.
The EDL stands where it always has stood, which is side-by-side with Israel.
We repudiate any individual, group or writing that favors anti-Semitism, neofascism, and any race-based ideology. Any rogue elements within the EDL who go against our mission statement and our beliefs will be removed from the organization; we are determined to remain true to our mission. Anti-Semitism will not ever be tolerated within the EDL.
The EDL stands for freedom. It always has, it always will. We want the Jewish people and all free people to remain free forever, and we all stand together in this fight against Islamic jihad.
Excellent analysis. It’s all so harrowing Frank. I do think there are additional reasons why these grooming gangs have been able to rape our beautiful, mostly underprivileged, and typically very vulnerable children for decades. Firstly, as you note, the Luciferian powers that be, and a large portion of society (mainly, I would argue, the chattering classes) have no interest in the sanctity of life coupled with a distain for working class people. They have been totally desensitised by the atheistic/humanist agenda that’s been peddled for decades as witnessed from their zeal for abortion, euthanasia, transgenderism and so on. Secondly, we know that child rape, sacrifice, and murder is a core part of the ruling ‘elite’ satanic practices (see James Delingpole interview with Nathan Reynolds as one example but there are many other victims who have now come forward with their stories). Of course, the Epstein and more recently the P Diddy case have again exposed the utter degeneracy and evil the ruling classes are involved in particularly towards children and young people. From a spiritual perspective, Satan and his followers know that they wound Jesus Christ the King most by hurting or killing His children. It’s all so deeply disturbing.
This is a phenomenal essay, Frank, deserving of a very wide audience. It’s an overarching analysis that I’ve heard nowhere else, and it makes complete sense. Bravo, Frank: you are doing the Lord’s work.