By Jon MC
Introduction
The first of these essays gave an overview of Islamic slavery in history. This history ranged spatially from England, through Africa, to India and temporally from the advent of Islam up to the present and showed how slavery was normative throughout Islamic history, regulated under Sharia and that the principle aim of Islamic slavery was the obtaining of female sex-slaves (including pre-pubescent girls). As such Islamic sex-slavery forms a powerful foundation in forming Islamic and Muslim attitudes to non-Muslim women and their sexual slavery.
The second essay showed that Islam regards non-Muslims as being the sum of all vices and scarcely human whereas Muslims are the holders of all the virtues. Consequently, “true-believer” Muslims have very negative attitudes towards non-Muslims, which may well include, hatred, revulsion, despite, anger, hostility and aggression, a desire to punish Kafirs for their “defiance and rebellion” against Islam and resentment for their worldly success. There may also be fear amongst Muslims of being corrupted (away from Islam) by Kafirs. Attitudes towards non-Muslim females will be even worse, given the inherent Islamic misogyny and the general attitude towards non-Muslim (in particular white) women as carnally desirable, yet sexually depraved, that pervades much of Islamic history.
This essay will aim to draw together what has been discussed so far and elucidate how it can be used to ‘justify’ the actions of child rape gangs from a “Muslim perspective”. Here the word “Muslim” is used rather than Islamic because at the heart of this essay is how Muslims may have thought about the girls from an Islamic perspective.
No major comment will be made about the systemic failures of the arms of the state to protect these girls, for the simple reason that had their been no majority Muslim child-rape grooming gangs there would have been no victims of Islamic child-rape grooming gangs.
In the UK the narrative on why primarily Pakistani men are raping primarily white children has moved back and forth between “there is a problem with some sections of the Muslim community” and “there is an ethnic dimension” to “it’s all a racist right-wing myth” and “white men do it just as much”.
Even those brave enough to openly discuss the problem balk at linking Islam to the grooming gang rapes and it is this failure – driven by the all-too-real fear of the consequences to career and social life of being called a racist or an Islamophobe – that permits the “elephant in the room” to remain largely ignored.
However, as evidence comes out from other European countries that the same phenomenon is found there as well (Netherlands and Germany for example), but in these cases the perpetrators are not Pakistani, but instead are, primarily, a mix of North African Muslims and Eastern European Muslims, the “ethnic” argument gets ever harder to sustain, especially when those UK perpetrators that weren’t Pakistani were either North African Muslim, or Muslim converts (bar a very few).
There is little “ethnic” link between Mirpuri Pakistanis and Muslims from North Africa, for example; but there is a religious link, that makes them all “brothers”, Islam.
From the evidence of the victims of the rape gangs, it is clear that the perpetrators regarded them as worthless, trash1, slags2 etc. In some cases the victims were branded as the property (i.e. slaves) of their Muslim ‘owner’2. Trial evidence shows that the victims were raped and tortured with a depravity that is almost beyond belief and that this behaviour was justified Islamically1.
In the report4 on a Triggernometry podcast, also available in the report and the newspaper article ‘Ella Hill’ (a pseudonym of a victim) makes clear the link between Islam and the rape gangs.
“When I was being beaten, I was called a white slag, white whore and white cunt.”
Ms. Hill pointed out that her white skin was always on the mind of her Muslim perpetrator. The grooming gangs viewed white girls as ‘easy meat’ because they sing, dance, drink alcohol and her Muslim torturer/rapist viewed anything contrary to Islamic teachings as worthy of ‘punishment.’ She said, “There are a lot of narratives within these grooming gangs which make hatred of white people a justification for what they are doing.” Ella highlighted how the grooming gangs use Islamic scripture to justify rape after a young girl has her first period. Her rapist’s attitudes were linked to his idea of what a good “true-believer” Muslim was and a bad disbeliever.
Although white girls form the vast majority of the victims of these so-called “Asian” gangs, it should not be forgotten that the gangs preyed on other “Asians”, particularly Sikhs, and Sikh girls may well have been the main (or at least earliest) victims of the first such gangs. One reason for the grooming and rape of Sikh girls, as noted in “Easy Meat” was “the long-standing resistance of Sikhism to Islamic domination”, which resistance is another affront to Muslim sensibilities and pride, especially for those from the Indian sub-continent. However, the common thread is that all these girls, whether white “Christian”, Sikh, Hindu or “other” are all non-Muslim, a pattern of victimisation that is repeated across Europe.
Returning to ‘Ella Hill’, she was told that: “Muslim girls are good and pure because they dress modestly, covering down to their ankles and wrists, and covering their crotch area. They stay virgins until marriage. They are our girls. White girls and non-Muslim girls are bad because you dress like slags. You show the curves of your bodies (showing the gap between your thighs means you’re asking for it) and therefore you’re immoral. White girls sleep with hundreds of men. You are the other girls. You are worthless and you deserve to be gang-raped.”
This relates to the doctrine of Awrah and also the theme of rape-as-punishment, both of the females concerned and, through this humiliation, their wider community for their acting contrary to “the laws of Islam”.
It is also known that, in many cases, the Yazidi sex-slaves of ISIL members were told by their rapists’ that their repeated rapes were “holy actions”5. The Islamic permission to rape sex-slaves has been thoroughly discussed6, these are the women “whom your right hand possesses” and many Muslims are not shy about affirming this7. This permission is also reinforced in the Ahadith and Sirat. Mohammed himself had at least one sex-slave8. Recall that white sex-slaves were particularly prized by Muslims, something that applies today as well and in the case of Yazidis “blue- and green-eyed Yazidi girls were much coveted and fetched the highest prices” in ISIL’s slave markets. This did not prevent their torture. Admittedly the Yazidi case is slightly different, in that the Yazidi sex-slaves, unlike their British and European counterparts, were clearly obtained as “ghanima” – that is the spoils of war, but the attitude of the Muslims of ISIL and the Muslim child-rape grooming gang members to their victims is essentially the same.
The greater parallel here, partly stated in the previous essay, is that in the historical Muslim-Arab mind the white female (the females of Byzantium and, later, Europe) were both highly desirable in a purely carnal sense, yet sexually depraved. ‘Ella Hill’ relates that something very similar has leached into the mind-set of the wider Muslim “Ummah” today in that the Pakistani-Muslim child mass-rapist of the UK also thinks that white women are slags, whores, cunts and “easy meat” indeed. Source9 puts it this way “white women were long viewed as the “femme fatale” of Islam —from a carnal perspective, the most desired, and from a pious perspective, the most despised of women.”
Thus it seems that there is a long-ingrained view within Islam that all non-Muslim women are immoral, sexually depraved and “easy meat”, that their dress and behaviour ‘provokes’ men to an intolerable degree who are then ‘forced’ to commit mass-rape in response (given the opportunity). Several defendants in these rape trials have claimed ‘provocation’ as a “defence” in outbursts in UK Courts.
At this point it is, perhaps, worthwhile to summarise some key points so far:
- Islam regards the enslavement of non-Muslim females for sexual purposes as normative and legally regulates both this and slavery more generally within Sharia codes.
- Islam contrasts the superior and exalted character of Muslims with the totally depraved character of non-Muslims.
- Islam regards the ‘natural order’ (as ordained by Allah) as Muslims being rulers and non-Muslims being either slaves, Dhimmis or Harbis, the last being non-Muslims who are yet to be subjugated.
- Islam teaches that Jihad must be waged against Harbis until the whole world is under Islamic domination and the capture of Kafir females and their rape as sex-slaves is deeply intertwined in Jihad (as inducement, intent and reward).
- One aim of the rape of Kafir women is to humiliate non-Muslims and show the ‘superiority’ of Islam.
- Many Muslims regard all non-Muslims as living under an implicit Dimmah. Any breach of the conditions of a Dhimmah renders the Dhimmi population liable to murder, despoilation and the rape of its females (whether adult or child).
- The crimes of Muslims should be covered up and it is (in particular) a sacrilegious act to report the crime of a Muslim to Kafir authorities which, due to not judging according to Sharia, will be inherently unjust to Muslims in the Islamic view.
- Where repercussions are not too severe, Sharia law should take precedence over state law when the two are in conflict (e.g. the positions on slavery).
- Some Muslims at least will feel victimised/persecuted by not living in a Sharia compliant society (even if this is a matter of their choice). This attitude is based on the historical “victimhood/persecution” narrative within Islam that almost invariably saw Muslim enclaves in non-Muslim lands as “oppressed/persecuted” and the Muslim world as permanently under threat from the darul Harb.
Islamic Justifications
It should be stated that there are no verses in the Koran or Ahadith that overtly permit the rape of non-Muslim women who are not lawfully enslaved under Sharia. There are Koran verses and Ahadith that, as shown previously, legalise, via Sharia, the rape of non-Muslim female slaves who are defined in the words of the Koran as “those whom your right hand possesses” and in fact any female captured in battle, raiding or war. Thus a prima facie view would be that there is no Islamic/Sharia justification for the Islamic rape gangs in the UK and Europe and this will be the view promulgated by many Muslims and pro-Islam apologists.
However, this is to neglect the complexities that arise from the historical Islamic views of non-Muslims and their definitions as Harbis and Dhimmis, several Islamic doctrines including those discussed in the second essay as well as more general Islamic attitudes towards the non-Muslim world as darul harb.
In May 2023 in France, a Muslim man told an underage girl with whom he had been chatting on Facebook, “I will burn you all. I will cut your throats. I will rape you and your mother because I have the right to do so.”10. Why did he think he had the right so to do? (UK readers will doubtless see parallels here with the incident that took place on Finchley Road, a Jewish area of London, in 2024 where a convoy of Muslims in cars bedecked with Palestinian flags shouted “Fuck the Jews, rape their daughters.” Inevitably, no charges were preferred against those Muslim men11.
In principle there are three possible Islamic reasons for his claim to a “right to rape”:
1.He considered the French girl as his slave.
2.He considered the French as Harbis with whom he was at war.
3.He considered the French as Dhimmis who had broken their Dhimmah.
In this case, where the man was not even present with the girl, he did not “own” her in the sense of her being one of “those whom your right hand possesses” so the reason of her being his slave can be dismissed. However, as shown above in the case of the UK Muslim who branded at least one of his rape-victims, once a Muslim believes he “owns” a female then he does have this right according to Sharia. UK and European state laws outlaw slavery, but as explained in the second of these essays, religiously-minded Muslims are expected to enact Sharia even when it conflicts with state law, provided that the repercussions for so doing are not too severe, so provided that Muslims can “get away with it” they may see no reason not to enslave females when so doing is permissible under Sharia (and get away with it they did in the UK, in some cases from as early as the 1960s).
Since people in the free world are not directly subject to Sharia law12 then they are Harbis according to Islamic Theology and thinking, thus it has to be allowed that, in principle at least, Muslims would think that they can “cut your throats” due to the injunctions of Jihadi doctrine13 and once captured, as has been shown, females would then be subjected to rape.
Some Muslims, as shown in the second essay, think that all those in the free world are implicitly under a Dhimmah due to the “co-religionist” clause of the Pact of Umar. Further, the peoples of the free world would be in breach of this implicit Dhimmah due to their living contrary to “the laws of Islam” as it is expressed in the Pact and which the pact requires the Dhimmis to observe.
Thus reasons (2) and (3) are at least potential ways in which the ‘right’ to rape could be assumed by Jihadist-minded Muslims.
In the case of (2) there is a long and convoluted argument to be had over when offensive sword-Jihad (historically the predominant form as both conquest and raiding) is justified. In a nutshell, one view has it that it is only a Caliph can authorise offensive Jihad and since, today, there is no widely acknowledged Caliph, then the argument maintains that such Jihad is unlawful under Sharia. However, the continued terrorist attacks on the free world prove that not all Muslims agree with this argument and there are counter arguments to be made, from the rather fanciful offensive-Jihad-as-defence-of-Muslims to more sensible arguments as to why such Jihad is permissible. For example, those Jihadists who are “inspired by the Islamic State” which, it should not be forgotten, declared war (sword-Jihad) on the entire free world, are then carrying out the lawful (under Sharia) instructions of the Islamic state’s Caliph (Abu Hafs al-Hashimi al-Qurash, current leader in 2025), and such calls for Jihad by a Caliph to individuals or groups living within the darul Harb to conduct “individual” sword-Jihad are well documented in the cases of Al-Qaeda and ISIL, and they are also not without historical precedent.
In 1914 the Ottoman Empire issued a call to Jihad aimed “to rouse Muslims in the British, French and Russian empires to rebellion.” (i.e. to conduct sword-Jihad)14. That the call failed miserably is not to negate the intent. Recall that the darul harb (“territory of war”) is where Jihad, in its forms aimed at the non-Muslim should be carried out.
Putting these points together it follows that if a Muslim believes (or persuades himself) that he is following the instructions of a legitimate Caliph to wage sword-Jihad from within the darul harb then the “capture” and rape of Kafir females becomes lawful.
Further, there are other ways of viewing the Islamic obligation to conduct sword-Jihad that do not require the imprimatur of a Caliph’s say-so. Thus some of the Islamic terrorists that have carried out atrocities across the non-Muslim world may be acting under the aegis of these interpretations, or as will be shown below, they may be regarding non-Muslim populations as Dhimmis who are in breach of their Dhimmah and who are, therefore, “fair game”.
The argument for (3) rests on the concepts within Dhimmitude. In general the case in the “West” rests on the Islamic belief (or attitude) that historic Dhimmahs enforced on subjugated populations within the darul Islam also encompassed all other “co-religionists” and their descendants, relegating them all to the status of Dhimmis, which means that Western females can be “punished” for both breeches of implicit Dhimmahs in the West and elsewhere in the world and for any “aggression” by the West against Muslim lands15,16. A point made by “Ella” was that her Muslim torturer/rapist viewed anything contrary to Islamic teachings as worthy of ‘punishment’ and according to the Pact of Umar breeching a Dhimmah means that Muslims “are allowed to do with us [Dhimmis] what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.” (In other words Dhimmis who break their Dhimmah revert to the condition of Harbis and thus maybe despoiled, raped and murdered with impunity by Muslims who, due to Jihadi doctrine, can see these acts as holy and pious acts of worship.)
In both sword-Jihad and cases of breech of Dhimmah, rape is used as a means of punishing, humiliating and terrifying the Kafir population as well as to assuage the feelings of hatred, anger and resentment felt by Muslims towards the “defiantly rebellious” non-Muslims who are resisting (if only by their lifestyles) the “laws of Islam” – a point “Ella” also makes. Thus those Muslims who do believe that all non-Muslims are bound by implicit Dhimmahs can also believe that they have the “right” to rape those Kafir females whom they can.
Thus, although it requires a particular mind-set on the part of the perpetrators, the argument can be made that the grooming of non-Muslim females within the UK and Europe, which can be seen in this mind-set as their capture as sex-slaves, resulting from a broken Dhimmah, then legitimises their rape because captured Kafir females are to be used as sex-slaves.
No comment is being made here about the rationality of such attitudes, or the convoluted thinking that is required to reach such conclusions and it is quite unlikely that many, or even any, of the perpetrators in the child-rape gangs personally went through such a process, but much of this attitude will have been the ingrained attitudes of Muslims towards Dhimmi and Harbi populations (as exemplified in the second essay),
Reaction and attitudes of the wider Muslim Community in the United Kingdom
With eruption of the “child-rape gang scandal” and the horror and outrage rightly generated by the publication of some Court transcripts in the UK in early 2025, the question was raised as to why various Muslim communities in the UK tolerated, accepted and protected the perpetrators for, in some cases, many decades; why some such were highly regarded within their communities despite their actions being known about and why so few Muslims were prepared to report them to the authorities. The high status of known perpetrators within their communities is something noted by Charlie Peters in his talk on the Triggernometry podcast17.
Cynically, it might be said that “good decent Muslims” didn’t bother with “outing” because they knew the state authorities would take no action and the denials, deflections and inaction of those authorities is almost as great a scandal as the events themselves, but this does not detract from the fact that most of those Muslim communities accepted and protected the perpetrators of what to non-Muslims at least were the most depraved and heinous of crimes.
The reasons for this are multi-faceted.
One factor would be strong in-group preference and protection; whether the extended family, the local community, clan, or the wider “Ummah”, protection of individuals from within the group to out-group “ threats” (here legal repercussions through “Kafir courts” which, by very definition, would be ‘unjust’ to Muslims) would be seen as very important. In the case of the Rochdale child-rape grooming gang witnesses for the defence included a local imam, a local councillor, and other respected spokesmen for the local Muslim community. The defence witnesses all testified to the good character and religious observance of the guilty men, who were regular mosque attendees. One of the perpetrators was praised for his understanding of the Koran (he was presumably “Hafis Koran” – i.e. he had learned the entire book by heart) and his commitment to teaching it to young children.
A second would derive from Sharia law and Taysir. If Islamic slavery could be enacted without much in the way of repercussions, or if the benefits of such outweighed those repercussions, then their would be little reason to refrain from the practice and the fact that these gangs operated with impunity for, in some cases, many decades would reinforce the conclusion that Islamic sex-slavery was acceptable in the UK (and Europe) and it would demonstrate a more “Islamic” way of life – at least in that facet of the whole.
A third would derive from Islamic attitudes to females in general and Dhimmi/Harbi females in particular. Given that the rape-gang members openly stated that their victims (slaves) were “worthless trash” it is likely that many within these Muslim communities held similar views relating to the doctrine of ‘Awrah and of “Kafir females” and so did not consider what was being done to the Kafir girls as worthy of concern. After all, those girls chose to dress the way they did, chose to act the way they did, so what did they expect? They brought it on themselves as “exposed meat”. Had they been “good girls”, they would have chosen to dress and act differently – i.e. Islamically – and thus would not been so outrageously provocative and enticing.
Another factor could well be that there were Muslims who supported these actions, though not participating themselves. They may have been quietly, or not so quietly, pleased that the Kafirs were being humiliated and punished through the rape of their females (for reasons given previously) and, to paraphrase the Koran they may have derived a sense of the healing of their breasts and the removal of their anger in their hearts if they felt anger due their ‘oppression/persecution’ in the West. Put simply, the vile rapes of these girls would allow Muslims with these attitudes to vicariously “get their own back” on the Kafir.
The doctrine of Sitr was described in the second essay. Recall that this is a religious duty to “veil” – cover-up – the crimes of Muslims, including, as shown by the references to Islam-web, the crime of child rape. Hence, for Muslims to reveal these crimes, either within the Muslim community or, far worse, to the non-Muslim authorities would be seen as a sacrilegious act.
Another point made by Charlie Peters in the linked podcast is that once these perpetrators have served their time they are generally welcomed back into their communities without reserve.
The cover-ups extended beyond the muslim community itself. In many cases (though not all) these gangs were operating in cities with large Muslim minorities who were politically active in the Labour party and well represented on the Councils or as activists within party structures. In addition many local Councils liaise with the Muslim Communities through “Community Leaders”, many of whom are largely self-appointed, arising out of the Pakistani Biradari system (about which much has been written elsewhere) and such leaders are almost invariably pious, orthodox Muslims. Consequently, these community leaders have an agenda in their dealings with the Authorities. In many cases these Councillors and others, including senior managers within Council structures, shut down those who raised concerns, whether they were council workers or even Members of Parliament. Social workers who pointed to the “ethnicity” of the perpetrators were called racists and Islamophobes, silenced, threatened with job-termination and sent on “re-education” courses to purge them of their racism / Islamophobia (a very effective set of silencing tools)18. Even when those enforcing the cover-ups themselves were not Muslim, the evidence of the sources indicates that this was done out of fear that exposing the Muslim child-rape gangs would result in a loss of votes from Muslims or massive “community tensions” (the father of a Rotherham victim was even told there would be riots if the truth became public – was this an allusion to Muslims rioting?)19, which leads to the questions (1) as to who first voiced the idea that criminality within Muslim communities should be covered up and those wishing to expose the horrors be silenced, (2) why the exposure of such criminality would lead to a loss of votes and (3) from which of our communities was the rioting expected?
Muslims continue to deflect (by smear) from the issue. As recently as February 2025 Humza Yusuf (former leader of the Scottish Nationalists and First Minister of Scotland) took to “X” with a message that implied that anyone who speaks about the Muslim child-rape grooming gangs is an Islamophobe20, thus expressing the Muslim victimhood/persecution narrative as well. A disturbingly high number of Muslim “influencers” of various types are also deflecting attention by fabricating “white grooming gangs” made up of individual sexual predators, who – heinous and disgusting as they are – are not members of organised gangs21.
Muslims also continue to exonerate the gangs. Imam Mohammed Hoblos, who is Australian and Lebanese, has been banned from much of Europe for being too “extremist” and radical. He has said that whilst all sins are bad, Muslim paedophiles who never miss prayer are better, in the eyes of Allah, than state-law-abiding Muslims who do miss prayers. This is, I suspect, an honestly held belief and shows with how little regard the lives of Kafir children are regarded by orthodox Islam. This ‘gentleman’ was to be speaking, along with other orthodox speakers, in the UK before Ramadan in 2025 at a series of meetings around the Country hosted by “One Ummah”32, although his participation is now unlikely (due to his views being publicised by GB News). These are often well attended meetings, what does that say about the attitudes of those willing to pay to hear Hoblos and other orthodox preachers?
Repeated surveys show that ~40% o UK Muslims want the law of the land to be Sharia law, a system that would reduce all non-Muslims to Dhimmitude and legalise sex slavery. What does this say about their attitudes to non-Muslims in general and in particular their females?
All of these things put together, both from within and without these Muslim communities, would strongly reinforce toleration and acceptance of the perpetrators within their communities and, from the perpetrators’ perspective, add further validation of their actions.
That is not to say that all Muslims would agree with a communal cover up, there are Muslim voices that have spoken out and it would not be fair or just to neglect that fact22. But it also has to be said that these were, generally, individual voices and relatively few at that.
The “Ethnic and racial dimension”
Kemi Badenoch23 was correct (if a trifle unkind) to claim that the UK child-rape grooming gang members were “peasants” from Pakistani sub-communities, to be precise almost all of the Pakistanis in the UK rape gangs are from the Mirpur region. It is also true that few to no Bangladeshi Muslims are in the UK gangs and relatively few Muslims from other ethnicities are present either, although in Newcastle perpetrators were from mainly British-born Muslims (thus indicating that second and subsequent generation British Muslims are more orthodox than their forebears) and belonged to the Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian and Turkish communities, in other words a wide range of different Muslim ethnicities24.
Neglecting Newcastle which undermines the argument, there can be a great temptation to see the phenomenon in “ethnic” terms and simply assume that the Mirpuri culture is at the root of the problem. This may be done from what are, in truth, laudable motives; the avoidance of tarring all Muslim communities (of which the UK has many disparate groups) with the same brush. But, as the aphorism says, “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions” and to limit the discussion in that way is to neglect important elements of the bigger picture.
As was stated earlier, other European countries also have the same problem with these gangs and here the perpetrators are not Mirpuri Pakistanis but mostly other ethnicities (North African, Eastern European, Middle Eastern and Afghan along with a smattering of others, including Bangladeshi and Pakistani Muslims as well).
Thus when the focus is broadened beyond the UK the ethnicity argument becomes untenable. It is certainly true that of the UK’s Muslim populations the sub-group of “clannish peasants” from Mirpur are the main culprits, but across Western Europe as a whole this would not be true, or at least they would be far less noticeable when all the various ethnicities were included.
Thus whilst the close-knit, mutually supporting nature of this UK group may facilitate such behaviour as described in the sections above, it does not explain it, unless the implication is to be that any such group of “clannish peasants”, given the opportunity, would behave this way. This argument, or its adjunct, that people are inherently evil and only behave in a “good” way through compulsion, is, it is suggested, implied by the view that these clannish peasants, due to the nature of their unskilled jobs (taxi-drivers) had the opportunity to indulge this behaviour and so did. There are many problems with this implicit ‘explanation’, including that it removes agency from the perpetrators and also that many other groups of “clannish peasants” do not so indulge themselves.
An important point that should not be overlooked is that ethnicity and culture are deeply intertwined and that culture has complex roots of which one very important part is almost always religion. It is generally agreed that the cultural identity of Europe, for good or ill, is rooted in over a millennium of Christianity. Equally then, it is perfectly reasonable to say that the Mirpuri culture is, for good or ill, rooted in (roughly) 800 years of Islam. As much can be said for the other ethnicities involved in the child-rape gangs in the UK and Europe. Hence even the ethnicity argument has to include a religious dimension when presented honestly and fully.
Consequently, although the study of “just why sub-community X from Country Y is over-represented in the child-rape gangs of European Country Z” may provide many years of grant-work and a plethora of papers for ethnologists, it is, at root, irrelevant to the bigger picture. The cultural roots of (almost) all the perpetrators in these child-rape gangs are linked by the common thread of Islam and it is Islam that legitimates their behaviour, not their “cultural identity”, which, to be used as an explanation, must be divorced from its Islamic underpinnings – and that, of course, may well be the intent of some.
Conclusion
Given that these large scale rape gangs, many of whose members numbered well into double, or even triple, figures25, were almost entirely composed of Muslims it cannot rationally be denied that the large scale child-rape grooming gang phenomenon is a primarily Muslim manifestation of more general child sexual abuse and exploitation.
Further, the fact that these activities, whilst widely known within some Muslim communities were and are covered up, at least insofar as reporting the perpetrators to the UK authorities is concerned, and also that being a member of such a gang seems to result in little to no reputational damage within said Muslim communities; with perpetrators, families and ‘spokesmen’ of convicted and clearly guilty members claiming that the perpetrators were the victims of miscarriages of justice due to “white lies”18, Islamophobia and racism, or that their victims (children) intolerably ‘provoked’ them by their dress or actions, or that in committing such acts (which included the most vile torture and multiple simultaneous rapes of children) the perpetrators had done “nothing wrong”, certainly seems to point to a profoundly different sense of right and wrong than that held by most other communities. This was demonstrated by the reactions of, for example, the Rochdale child-rape gang during their trial and on their conviction. None of whom showed any sense of guilt, rather they defended themselves and justified their activities by shifting the blame on to the victims and accusing the judge and the trial as motivated by racism.
It is, of course, impossible to say what really goes on in the minds of the members of these gangs of child-rapists and their supporters, how they justify and sacralise26 these acts in their own minds.
A further factor that obfuscates understanding the problem is the simple fact that most non-Muslims are ignorant about Islam (a fact thoroughly exploited by many Muslims for their own ends). It is, perhaps, for reasons of this ignorance, amongst other reasons that have been discussed, that most speakers, commentators and writers on this subject have shied away from the obvious religious dimension to the phenomenon, restricting themselves to, at best, statements about “ethnicity”.
As pointed out previously, there is little ethnic connection between, for example, a Mirpuri (Pakistani) Muslim and a Muslim from North Africa or the Middle East. There is, equally obviously, the religious connection of the shared religion of Islam in which each is considered “brother” of the other and both are members of the universal “Ummah” (tribe) of Muslims, which ‘tribe’, do not forget, for the religiously minded, is implacably opposed to the ‘tribe’ of Kafir/Harbis.
However, the ever greater weight of evidence pointing to the widespread (throughout Europe27 and beyond) prevalence of this phenomenon, encompassing as it does Muslims from much of the Muslim world makes even the ethnic argument, which at least implies something special about this phenomenon, untenable and requires that the phenomenon be understood in relation to Islamic teachings and attitudes.
In these three essays it has been shown that:
- The Muslim history of religiously mandated sex-slavery of non-Muslim females sets the foundation for the justification of the actions of these Muslim child-rape grooming gangs.
- According to Islam, Kafirs (which word means people who actively reject Islam and who are therefore “people of rebellion and defiance” against Islam), generally also termed Harbis, (a word that means they are “at war” with Islam and Muslims) are regarded as possessing “the sum of all the vices” and are bereft of any virtues.
- Jihadi doctrine in Islam states that Muslims are at war, whether “hot” or “cold”, with Harbis until the Harbis are either converted, subjugated as Dhimmis, driven out (ethnically cleansed”) or killed (genocided).
- Dhimmis are subjugated minorities within Muslim Countries, subject to a Dhimmah (contract of protection). The limited (and easily set aside) protection of a Dhimmah must be bought by payment of Jizya. A Dhimmah may be broken either by a breech of one of its terms or by the failure to pay Jizya, at which point the Dhimmi is once again classed as a Harbi which in turn means they and their community are, under Sharia, lawfully subject to despoilation, rape and murder. Although no formal Dhimmahs exist today it has been shown that Muslims implicitly regard minorities within Muslim Countries as existing under a de facto Dhimmah and many Muslims regard all non-Muslims anywhere in the world in the same light.
- Islam regards Harbis and Dhimmis who are in breech of their Dhimmah as prey, and in both cases such females are to be taken as sex-slaves, not merely for carnal gratification but also to humiliate and punish the Kafirs / Harbis for their defiance of Islam / breech of their Dhimmah.
- Acts of sword-Jihad, which thus include slave-taking, by Muslims resident in the darul Harb (non-Muslim world) can be lawfully mandated, according to Sharia, by a Caliph – including, for example, the Caliph of the Islamic state.
- Many Muslims believe in the primacy of Sharia law (which enshrines sex-slavery) over national state law and further believe that Sharia must be enacted within non-Muslim Countries of residence as fully as possible28, even when such practices contravene national law, limited only by what would bring shame or serious state-law repercussions on the Muslims and/or their community.
- Islamic misogyny means that non-Muslim females (in particular) are deemed worthless and, once enslaved, can be badly treated as sex-slaves without moral qualm29.
- The doctrine of Sitr gives a religious mandate for the cover-up of the sins of a Muslim up to and including child sex abuse24and thus protects the perpetrators from any reputational damage within their community or reporting to non-Muslim authorities, the latter being particularly sacrilegious.
- Islam also legitimates child-sex (through Mohammed’s ‘marriage’ to Aisha) and effectively (due to the witness requirements for rape) decriminalises rape.
The arguments discussed above provide an explanation of this peculiarly Muslim manifestation, linking as they do many elements of Islamic thinking, doctrine and more general attitudes into a framework that permits the understanding of the phenomenon in Islamic terms.
Which is not to say that this is a full explanation; simple hatreds and in particular white-hatred31, criminality and, doubtless, a range of other more comfortably understood reasons and excuses, are also involved; but it is to say that the ingrained attitudes and teachings of Islam provide the underpinnings that allow these gangs to operate without any qualms as to the rectitude of their actions and to do so quite openly within their own communities.
Contrary to much of what has been said by others; that this phenomenon is caused by anti-white racism, or that it is due to the bad attitudes of a bunch of backward ethnic clans; the real root causes are tied to Islam. The Islamic practice of Jihadist sex-slavery forms the foundation of the phenomenon, Islamic attitudes to women along with Islamic doctrines (Theological, Jihadist and from Sharia) form further support structures and the Islamic belief that all non-Muslims are either Harbis or Dhimmis gives the final legitimisation for such actions.
Therefore these gangs should properly be called Islamic child-rape grooming gangs to indicate the centrality of Islamic teaching and attitudes to their formation, duration and protection within some Muslim communities found, not just in the UK, but in much of the non-Muslim world.
Unless these facts relating to Islam are properly acknowledged and addressed the phenomenon of these child-rape grooming gangs will never be fully understood.
There is an additional parallel that is worthy of illumination. It has been seen that a strand within Islamic terrorism has been the targeted murder of Kafir children (e.g. Manchester Arena and various knife attacks in Europe where non-Muslim children were deliberately attacked). An attack on children is an attack on the the future of the Kuffar, whether this attack is via massacre or rape and both types of attack include the sending of a symbolic message to non-Muslims, which is that their future will be cut-off, either by death or subjugation in accord with Islam’s claimed “manifest destiny” to rule the entire world.
Further reading and watching:
1. Ayaan Hirsi Ali: https://courage.media/2025/01/28/is-islam-to-blame-for-the-grooming-gangs/ & https://courage.media/2025/01/29/is-islam-to-blame-for-the-grooming-gangs-part-two/
2.https://www.gbnews.com/news/uk/grooming-gangs-uk-rotherham-south-yorkshire-police
3.This video by the New Culture Forum: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ58WG3hd2g which completely demolishes the “ethnicity” argument when the totality of European experience is counted and says much of what I have in these essays.
4.https://dailysceptic.org/2025/02/21/special-episode-of-the-sceptic-guy-dampier-on-exposing-the-truth-about-the-grooming-gangs/
References and footnotes:
1.https://news.sky.com/story/sex-abuse-gangs-view-white-girls-as-worthless-and-trash-10982586 and https://christianconcern.com/comment/grooming-gangs-we-cant-ignore-the-islamic-connection/ (first section)
2.https://nationalpost.com/opinion/michael-murphy-britains-mass-child-rape-horror-and-the-price-of-not-being-called-racist
3.https://www.sott.net/article/497150-Survivor-and-medical-doctor-defines-the-activities-of-the-grooming-gangs-as-racially-and-religiously-aggravated-rape and https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rotherham-grooming-gang-sexual-abuse-muslim-islamist-racism-white-girls-religious-extremism-terrorism-a8261831.html
4.https://dn720306.ca.archive.org/0/items/easy-meat/Easy%20Meat.pdf
5.https://www.npr.org/2015/08/13/432122595/new-york-times-islamic-state-uses-quran-to-justify-rape-of-yazidi-women
6.See: K.4:24, 23:5-6 ,33:50, 70:22-30.
7.https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-wife-defends-rape-yazidi-14116726
8.Sunan an-Nasa’i 3959 It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but ‘Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed: “O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.’ Comment: in other words Allah reinforced the message that the rape of captive women was allowed.
9.https://www.meforum.org/mef-online/why-islamists-have-always-preferred-blondes
10.https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19724/rape-enslave-non-muslim-women
11.https://metro.co.uk/2021/05/16/convoy-drives-through-london-shouting-fk-the-jews-rape-their-daughters-14590888/ and https://metro.co.uk/2022/11/20/all-charges-over-convoy-who-shouted-rape-jewish-daughters-are-dropped-17793247/
12.In the UK if the Labour government decides to enshrine the APPG definition of “Islamophobia” essays like these would definitely be illegal. Thus the UK may soon enshrine elements of Sharia as reflected in the Pact of Umar which bans Dhimmis from any criticism of “Allah, his book, his religion and his prophet”. It follows that were that to be done, Jihadist-minded Muslims could take that as a licence to kill anyone who criticised Islam.
13.Koran 8: 12. “… I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks …” In other words, behead the Kafirs.
14.https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/publishing/journal-british-academy/4/rival-jihads-islam-and-great-war-middle-east-1914-1918/
15. Koran 9:14-15 states: “Fight against them [Kafirs] so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people, and remove the anger of their (believers) hearts…”
16.Whilst it is obviously true that the West has attacked Muslim Countries in the recent past, it should not be forgotten that Islamic terror on the west pre-dated these events. In fact throughout history, western military response from the Crusades to the destruction of the Barbary slaver/pirates was as a response to Islamic aggression, not the other way around as Muslims invariably claim.
17. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBkX-M0SRPc&t=2548s There is much of interest there, although in my view Peters downplays the Islamic aspect.
18.See for example: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/13/grooming-gang-victims-rotherham/ and https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/04/grooming-gangs-scandal-cover-up-oldham-telford-rotherham/ and https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1itxj4l/report_muslim_community_leaders_blocking_women_in/
19.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/01/02/simon-danczuk-tony-lloyd-ex-labour-chairman-grooming-gangs/ and https://www.edwest.co.uk/p/the-tragedy-of-telfords-girls
20.https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/01/31/humza-has-learnt-nothing-from-the-grooming-gangs-scandal/ and https://x.com/HumzaYousaf/status/1884190344579015033?mx=2 Yusuf also lies, claiming that this gang was “one of the biggest child grooming gangs in UK” when it was an order of magnitude smaller than several convicted Muslim gangs and its victims were two orders of magnitude less than some of the Muslim gangs as well. He is an educated, ‘assimilated’, Muslim, what do his attitudes say about wider attitudes in his Muslim community?
21.https://lucaajwatson.substack.com/p/white-lies
22.https://www.asianimage.co.uk/news/19051694.grooming-gangs-will-race-always-factor/
23.https://news.sky.com/story/kemi-badenoch-says-grooming-gang-abusers-are-peasants-from-sub-communities-in-other-countries-13288479
24. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-gang-newcastle-asian-pakistani-bangladeshi-muslim-response-faith-leaders-operation-shelter-police-convictions-a7888946.html
25.See, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddersfield_sex_abuse_ring which numbered at least 41 rapists, https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rochdale-grooming-sick-paedo-gang-31882223 which numbered 42 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_child_sex_abuse_ring where the total number of rapists may have exceeded 100 and https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/02/truth-about-grooming-gangs-finally-coming-out-abuse-uk/ where 126 Muslims were prosecuted and 73 in Rotherham.
26.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4184966/Child-sex-gang-members-shout-Allahu-Akbar-court.html
27.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14296287/british-sexual-assault-rape-victim-italy-milan-new-years-eve.html similar to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015%E2%80%9316_New_Year%27s_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany also: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grooming-gang-newcastle-asian-pakistani-bangladeshi-muslim-response-faith-leaders-operation-shelter-police-convictions-a7888946.html
28.https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2016/12/over-40-percent-of-uk-muslims-support-aspects-of-sharia-law
29.https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/01/23/the-grooming-gangs-scandal-is-far-worse-than-you-think/
30.Doctrine of Sitr. For example: https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/202255/ and https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/179537/ and https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/184937/
31.https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/racial-vengeance-gets-a-free-pass-in-grooming-gang-britain/
32.https://www.gbnews.com/opinion/multiple-radical-islamic-preachers-are-coming-to-the-uk-in-a-few-days-time-says-patrick-christys and https://oneummah.org.uk/
