Amanda Marcotte, the unspeakably vile blogger hired by the Edwards campaign, whom I wrote about the other day, has posted repeatedly on the Duke Case. One post claims that “to put it bluntly, in a male dominated society, gang rape is a version of fox hunting, a sport of sorts. “, and links to a story from the Guardian, reporting from London, headlined ‘They don’t see it as rape. They just see it as pleasure for them’, [By Rose George, June 5, 2004 The Guardian | Guardian Unlimited]

Instead, I’d like to talk about the act of the gang rape itself, because I reread an article recently that really gets to the heart of why it happens and why it’s possibly the most socially acceptable form of rape. It’s called “They don’t see it as rape. They see it as pleasure for them.” It’s about the growing problem of gang rape in England and it’s an evocative look at why gang rape exists and why it’s tolerated–to put it bluntly, in a male dominated society, gang rape is a version of fox hunting, a sport of sorts. It’s the patriarchy in its essence, where the leaders of male dominance are active sadists but their followers have managed to convince themselves they do like women, they aren’t evil, etc. [Alleged gang rape at Duke University | Participate.net (NEW LINK)]

Ah, gang-rapes taking place in London? Could it be…not fox-hunters at all? This is a lengthy story in the Guardian, and some of the incidents involve white criminals and even white victims, but the largest element in the gang-rapes in this story are black women in London being victimized by black men.

I lose count of how many government agencies, schools and official establishments refuse to comment for this story. They say the same thing. “Sorry. It’s too sensitive.”

“The added element in this is ethnicity,” says Trail. The Haven’s statistics indicate that, in 2002, in the under-16 age group, 43% of the assailants were black, as were 33% of the victims. Even in an ethnically diverse population such as Lambeth-Southwark-Lewisham (LSL), this goes beyond demographics. It is controversial. When a documentary on juvenile gang rape was broadcast by Channel 4 in 1998, the channel was accused of racism. Trinidad-born writer Darcus Howe was a lone voice of support. Later, writing in the New Statesman, he recounted how his girlfriend Betty was gang raped for hours in Trinidad, and how - after he spoke out in support of the documentary - he got anonymous phone calls saying his daughter would get gang raped, too.

“For heaven’s sake,” Trail says, “this isn’t about race, it’s about rape.” He points to high numbers of sexually transmitted diseases in LSL, which also has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe - problems that were also hampered by a refusal to look at the racial demographics, in the beginning. “My line is lean, mean and clear,” Howe concluded, in the New Statesman. “I take a side in this war, the side of black women … There is nothing to discuss.”

There is much to discuss, but it takes courage. A Met press release from last year - which stated that black women are three times more likely than others to be raped, and black males aged between 10 and 17 are eight and a half times more likely to be charged with rape - was never released. And there has been little sign of the “debate in the black community” promised by Ken Livingstone’s race adviser, Lee Jasper (who was not available for comment).

The Commission for Racial Equality was hardly more forthcoming. “We need more data and we need to know it is being collected in a robust and methodologically sound way,” a spokesman told me. “If there is a problem, we need to know who is involved and who the victims are. We are also concerned that low levels of confidence in the police might mean that young ethnic minority women are less likely than other victims to report attacks.”

The majority of rapes are committed by adults at home, according to Women Against Rape. But young girls are being gang raped by young men or boys, who are - in reported cases - often black. Why? “It’s very difficult to explain things away with cultural factors,” says Peter Misch, a forensic psychiatrist specialising in adolescents at London’s Maudsley hospital. He recalls visiting a young offenders’ institute in Siberia in 1993, where each of the 20 offenders aged 14-16 was in for group rape. Camila Batmanghelidjh, who runs the children’s charity Kids Company in Peckham, south-east London, thinks gang rapes go in clusters. “It’s not about race. You have to ask - is it because the black community is the most marginalised and pressurised, and does that lead to emotional consequences?” She prefers to concentrate on the state of mind of most boys she works with. She calls it “emotional coldness”.

It’s commonly observed that when people say “It’s not the money…” then it’s the money. See how many people are saying it’s not about race? Same thing?

In order to combat what it calls a “nativist surge” in Western Europe, the U.S. State Department has created a position to coordinate efforts aimed at integrating Muslim immigrants into European society. Daniel Fried, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, recently announced the decision:

The growing Muslim presence in Europe is “a fascinating issue and one that the American government is just now trying to get its mind around,” Mr. Fried told editors and reporters at The Washington Times. “It’s a huge problem, we are thinking about it seriously, and we’ve tried to do some intellectual framing-up.”

Farah Pandith, until recently a staffer on the National Security Council (NSC), moved to the State Department last week to head the new effort.

[Europe’s Muslims Find Ally in U.S., By Nicholas KralevWashington Times,February 13, 2007

How exactly any of this falls under the responsibility of the U.S. government is beyond me, but I guess our leaders have decided that destroying Western Civilization in North America isn’t enough, they want to go after it at its source.

Moreover, it’s not as though European elites need the help. Jean-David Levitte, French ambassador to the U.S., seems convinced that all he and his pals need to do is throw more money at social programs. These were his words of wisdom about the 2005 riots in France:

“The unrest that existed in poor neighborhoods had nothing to do with jihad and much to do with social conditions,” he said. “That’s why we have to put the emphasis on improving the social conditions — schools, jobs, better housing — and hopefully all this will trigger better absorption in the social fabric of France of this minority.”

As far as I can tell, the State Department’s main contribution will be American style therapy. One program, for example, brings American Muslims to Europe in order to meet with their coreligionists and try to “break down stereotypes” and end their “self-isolation.” This is necessary, Mr. Friend says, because a:

“process of alienation” is occurring within Europe’s Muslim communities, and that their host countries have “no sense of integration.”

“Europe has to learn to do that,” he said. “You have a weird nativist surge in Western Europe, and a kind of odd panic: Aliens are here, they don’t accept our values, they are a threat to our way of life and turn to radicalism.”

I guess these guys think that they’ve done an absolutely wonderful job “integrating” all those immigrants who were marching in our streets last year waving foreign flags.

Don’t think it’s only gazillions of annoying Mexicans who are laboring to destroy America’s borders and sovereignty — illegal alien Irish may have fewer overall numbers, but they are organized, loud and have matching T-shirts.

The San Francisco contingent of illegal Irish assembled last week at the Irish Cultural Center for a political organizing session around illegal alien amnesty, with elected Democrats and their representatives attending and offering support. (See the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform and the Irish Voices blog to read more cheerful advocacy for open borders.)

Celine Kennelly, director of San Francisco’s Irish Immigration Pastoral Center, estimates that 50,000 of the country’s 150,000 Irish-born residents are illegal, with many thousands of them in the Bay Area. Most of them entered the country on a legitimate student, work or tourist visa and stayed after it expired.

    “The immigration system absolutely needs to be fixed,” said Kennelly. The undocumented Irish “have employed people, they’ve paid taxes, they’ve contributed favorably to society, they’ve tried every visa option and entered the ‘green card’ lottery every year. But it’s becoming impossible to live here without a Social Security number and a driver’s license. It’s a pressured situation.”
[Irish make their presence felt in fight over illegal immigration, San Francisco Chronicle 2/09/07]

One out of every three Irish residing in the US is a lawbreaking border buster? Who knew?! That charming brogue suddenly sounds less appealing when it’s whining that the Irish are too Special to follow American immigration law.

According to a friend of borders who attended the meeting, ILIR co-founder and vice-chair Ciaran Staunton stated, “Someone told you, you wouldn’t get a job without a Social Security number. You made one up. You got your job.” [Here's an audio clip of the statement.] Giving instructions on how to break the law is not exactly kosher. Why didn’t Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s representative object?