The 2025 Audit on Muslim Rape Gangs

Another year, another report about brown men gang-raping White children. However, this particular report does “move the narrative forwards” considerably. It establishes several things that progressives desperately didn’t want established.

Before we get to those things, let us first acknowledge the absurdity of a world in which we have to rely on official reports to tell us things that we know - or should know - by common sense. Until yesterday, educated middle-class people were seriously pretending to believe (since no official report told them otherwise) that White men are more “rapey” than Pakistani men. I ask, does that even sound likely? Observe the body language, mannerisms and attitudes of Pakistani men and declare that you genuinely think they are probably less likely to rape than White men. Well, many progressives did exactly that. They were aided in this self-delusion by data that had obviously been distorted - a fact now established by this new report - but they didn’t care that it had obviously been distorted, because it helped them to delude themselves and thus think well of themselves.

Reliance on official “data” can be, during times of institutional corruption, a terrible weakness. It means the surrendering of common sense to officialdom, and that officialdom can declare things which are obviously untrue but will be taken as gospel.

And yet, on this particular issue, perhaps because it is so monstrous, the truth finds ways of creeping through all the lying and obfuscation. It is happening very slowly, but it is happening. The government, police and media (yes, many heads should roll…) tried to prevent it, but theirs is a Sisyphean struggle against reality.

Now for the things established by the new report:

• ethnic data about these crimes is largely absent, due to police negligence. In 66% of cases, the accused’s ethnicity is not recorded.

• even in this “curated” data, Pakistanis are hugely over-represented (they are 4% of Rotherham’s population but 64% of its suspects in child sexual abuse) and White British hugely under-represented (86% of population but only 22% of suspects)

• there have been widespread cover-ups by media, government, police, judiciary, schools, social work departments, and even churches. Virtually all of the institutions of British civic life are implicated.

• a full national inquiry should be conducted. This recommendation has been “accepted” by the Government, finally doing what should have been done 11 years ago by the Conservative government (or, more truthfully, 25 years ago by the New Labour government).

• with that national inquiry in mind, police forces should be ordered not to destroy records (implying that they otherwise would, which indicates how corrupt the report’s writer believes Britain’s police forces to be)

It is worth giving some details of the cover-ups.

We learn how a previous report (from just seven months ago!) skewed its data outrageously. It excluded offenders of “unknown” ethnicity so that White men were 88% of the remaining total, when including the “unknowns” (as a separate category) makes White men only 28% of the actual total.

We learn of the staggering difference between two reports on the ethnicity breakdown of offenders in “group-based child sexual exploitation” cases. COCAD 2023 says that “Asians” (eg. Pakistani Muslims) are only 7% of offenders nationwide. An investigation by Greater Manchester Police says that, within that area, it is 54%. Admittedly this is for two different areas, but the discrepancy is unbelievable. Moreover, the 7% is contradicted by other data in this new report, which notes that COCAD knew the ethnicity of only 34% of offenders.

The report also admonishes a Home Office (!) report from 2020 which made the startling declaration:

it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with… the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.

The report notes that this quickly became “received truth”, quoted extensively in the media and other official reports. (No doubt some of my readers will have had it quoted to them by smug progressives when attempting to discuss this matter on social media.) But the report says:

this audit found it hard to understand how the Home Office paper reached that conclusion, which does not seem to be evidenced in research or data.

It seems that the Home Office simply made it up, not merely without evidence but actually in ardent defiance of the evidence.

These are just three examples of the “cooking of books” that has been done in order to obscure the truth and cover up this atrocity.

---

This report is devastating to the cause of progressivism and the credibility of progressives. By necessity, it neutralises most of their common arguments regarding the Muslim rape gangs:

• “but White men do it too!”
  Yes, but nowhere near as much. White men are under-represented both per capita and in absolute numbers

• “Pakistani men are not over-represented!”
  That has now been officially revealed as the opposite of the truth. In fact, Pakistani men are a staggering 38 times more likely to do it than White men

• “White men do it more!”
  As above

• “these men aren’t specifically targeting White kids!”
  The report shows that, in the Greater Manchester area (where ethnicity is recorded diligently for this crime), 94% of the victims are White

• “it’s just a far-right fever dream!”
  No, it’s every sane person’s nightmare, and it has turned out to be completely real

• “oh, so you’re rejecting official data…?”
  As mentioned earlier, it has now been officially stated (and illustrated) that police, government and other organisations have been skewing the data

• “race doesn’t matter! We can bridge the divide!”
  Buried in the report is an acknowledgement that racial difference leads to “disregard” (lack of empathy), making sexual abuse much more likely. This is an implicit admission that racial diversity inherently endangers women and children and that they are much safer in a monoracial environment.

The progressives’ other favourite argument:

Why do you only get angry when brown men do it? You don’t actually care about the victims, you’re just racist!

… is neutralised by their own principles, which hold that a crime is automatically worse if it is inter-racial because that means it violates the group, not just the particular individual victim. So, if White people are especially outraged by White girls getting raped by Pakistanis, progressives should understand exactly why. They pretend not to because, by their own principles, they would have to join us in our outrage, when their inclination is always to betray their own group and side with “the other”. But this is getting ever harder as the scale and viciousness of what Pakistanis are doing to White British girls becomes widely-known.

All of this means that Tom Holland’s infamous tweet from ten years ago, though pitiful and pathetic, is now the only defence that progressives can muster when this issue is brought up.

Unfortunately, it only incriminates the progressives further by confirming exactly why this epidemic was allowed to grow in the first place - the people turning a blind eye thought they were being “good” by doing so.

What will happen now? Possible arguments that progressives could use:

• “with an official national inquiry now on the way, the issue has been dealt with and therefore anyone who continues to make hay about it is simply an evil racist exploiting the suffering of these poor girls”

• “yes, we covered it up, but only because of the afore-mentioned evil people who would exploit if it were not covered up”

• “the raping is not due to Islam, Pakistani culture or race, but because of general misogyny throughout British society”
  I think this would be a futile argument since the new report makes clear that this is really about “Pakistani men”, not “men”. Progressives could then claim there is a vein of misogyny specifically in Pakistani culture, but that would essentially be a racist remark. They are boxed in by all of their principles.

In short, like the man caught in a cupboard clutching a porn magazine with his trousers down, there is no way to claim “it’s not what it looks like”. It has to be, it is, everyone knows it is, exactly what it looks like: a very large number of men from a barbaric alien culture have such contempt for the native British that they industrially rape our young girls. It couldn’t be anything but what it is, and it couldn’t be any worse than it is.

The only path left for progressives is to move to saying that, though “the far-right” were indeed correct about this issue, their solutions to it remain unthinkable and therefore “the far-right” must not be allowed a seat at the table. Unfortunately, there are no actual solutions to the issue except “far-right” ones; it would be like trying to drive a car without first getting into it. More on that later.

For now I will point out that even the writer of this report, Baroness Louise Casey, is clearly of a progressive mind. Upon its release she has been interviewed by various news agencies and she appears deeply conflicted. On the one hand, she has to acknowledge that there is a particular problem with Pakistani men raping White girls (although even this, she tries to say in as round-about a way as humanly possible). On the other hand, she has to advocate that, in response to this fact, we not become racist. That is an irrational position, but she is terrified of “the far-right” gaining strength on the back of her research (much as Robert Putnam was in 2007). Unfortunately for Baroness Casey, her research, like Putnam’s, strengthens “the far-right” precisely because it refutes her progressive worldview.

At one point in the afore-linked interview, she even seems to excuse the word “Pakistani” being tippexed out of a police crime log, on the basis that it was done with good intentions, to thwart racism. She also concedes, wistfully, that the truth about Muslim rape gangs is “a gift to the racists”. Of course, she doesn’t admit that this is because “the racists” were right all along, but they were. And that is the crisis now facing progressives in the wake of this report, which it seems Baroness Casey agonised about writing.

She and her fellow progressives now face a terrible challenge: admit that “the racists” were right all along while skilfully avoiding admitting that “racism” (in-group preference) would have saved tens of thousands of pubescent girls from rape, and to shore up the progressives’ own creed even though it was what doomed those girls to that rape.

---

The social standing of progressives has been tenuous for some years now. Progressivism now seems a suicidal worldview, a failed project, an utterly irresponsible dream, and a cruel imposition upon the most vulnerable people in our society. Its proponents now seem, frankly, like something between villains and imbeciles - either wicked or lamentably naive. Long gone is the smug confidence of the 1990s when progressives could casually “stick it” to “the bigots”, those uneducated Little Englanders who disliked foreigners and were too unsophisticated to grasp the practical benefits, moral virtue and intellectual majesty of multiculturalism. Today, multiculturalism means “brown men gang-raping White children”. It meant that in the 1990s, too, but progressives destroyed anyone who dared say so. They would still do this today, if they could, rather than face the truth that their ideas are insane and inhuman.

The emerging reality of the Muslim rape gangs puts paid to several progressive dreams:

• the dream of multiculturalism
  If this is their culture, why should we want it here? If this is how different cultures co-exist, why shouldn’t we want monoculturalism?

• the dream of equality
  Demonstrably, different cultures are not of equal value and different communities are not of equal moral worth, since this community produced these men and then sat idly by while they committed these appalling crimes, often covering for them. The men and their relatives were very racially aware, calling the 12 year-old victims “White slags” and “White cunts”. Equality does not exist.

• the dream of Islam being a religion of peace
  Rape is, at the best of times, not a peaceful thing. But mass rape across ethnic lines could be seen as an act of war. Whether Islam doctrinally condones this behaviour or not - and it is very arguable that it does - a notably high percentage of its followers are clearly happy to do it.

• the dream of diversity
  We see the hostility, loathing, contempt and distrust that one group can have for another group. If this is what diversity brings, I think most people would prefer no diversity.

• the dream of integration
  Mass immigration into Britain began 80 years ago. After all that time, integrating these people has failed to such an extent that tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of our daughters have been gang-raped by them. If the draconian “police state” measures that would clearly be necessary to stop this are the price that must be paid to have a successful multiracial society, is it really worth it?

What even are those measures that would be necessary? It’s really a question of how draconian are you prepared to be, because no level would be enough short of mass deporting from Britain every single Pakistani male. If there are a thousand of them left in Britain, any White parent living close to them will have to be on-guard, 24/7, in case one or ten or a hundred of them should one day be inclined to do this to our daughters. And we can never know for sure that they are not thus inclined. So our future, with them, is one of permanent uncertainty, suspicion and paranoia. Or else, we can simply delude ourselves that there is no danger, most Pakistanis are fine, the guilty ones were identified and jailed, and the rest pose no risk, so there is nothing to worry about. But then more girls will get raped - and we all know it.

What the British state - and its progressive cheerleaders - have imposed on Britain is a permanent rupture of social trust, civic harmony and individual peace of mind.

---

Of course, nobody is claiming that “every Muslim is in on it”. That would be absurd. However, a great number of them clearly are. There is clearly something in their culture, maybe their religion, maybe even their biological make-up, which leads them to do this. To emphasise, I am not saying that any man is “compelled” (by any factors) to rape. There is always a choice. But we have to acknowledge that a lot of Muslim men, especially Pakistani Muslim men, keep making the wrong choice.

So, is it their culture, their religion, their genes? All three? How can we know? And really… why is this our burden? Why is this our mystery to solve? And in any case, the answer probably differs from one Pakistani rapist to the next! I say that we will never solve this riddle.

That doesn’t mean we can’t solve the problem, of course, but those measures are decades away. Things will have to get a lot worse, and progressives - already discredited - will have to be forced out of power in order that what must be done can be done.

In the meantime we endure the tedious spectacle of them trying to shore up their position. As progressivism collides with reality, it disintegrates, but the intellectual arrogance which attends that worldview means that it must persist; it cannot admit fallibility, nor culpability for atrocities.

So instead they will obfuscate, wasting a lot of time on the afore-mentioned question of “why” these men do this. Expect protracted debates on whether the cause is misogyny, bad morals, race, culture or Islam. For progressives, all but one of those options would be a Devil’s bargain.

• Blaming it on misogyny
  They would claim the problem is not specific, certainly not exclusive, to Pakistanis or Muslims, because all men and boys are capable of misogyny. Therefore the solution is lessons at school about how to treat women. Unfortunately, this would be completely ineffectual. Muslim boys would simply mock such lessons, seeing them as further proof of the weakness of the White infidels. The gang-raping would continue unimpeded. However, progressives will favour this option since it avoids the nightmarish consequences of the others and is the only one that allows their worldview to persist.

• Blaming it on bad morals
  It would be ironic for progressives, who have spent many decades joyfully chipping away at the very concept of morality, to use this option, but they might in order to avoid the others. The argument would be that, somehow, irrespective of race and religion and culture, certain communities in Britain today are just not teaching their young men proper morals. However, this would mean insulting the vast numbers of Pakistanis in Britain. It would also require the progressives to condemn some moral codes as “bad”. In every way, this would be a nightmare for them.

• Blaming it on race
  This would mean that race is real, race is immutable, races are different, racial diversity is a suicidal policy, and the only solution to this situation is racially-directed mass deportation. (This is the truth, but progressives will let every working-class English girl be gang-raped a thousand times before they admit it.)

• Blaming it on culture
  This would allow them to sidestep the need for mass deportation by arguing that, since it’s culture, it can be “unlearned”. However, that would require a “cultural supremacist” attitude, demoting a particular culture to second-rate and rubbishing the very concept of multiculturalism. Even worse, the “unlearning” could only be achieved by a programme of indoctrination of a minority group (see below).

• Blaming it on Islam
  This would mean either that Islam must be banned in Britain (good luck with that!) or that Muslim communities undergo the afore-mentioned “indoctrination” programme (see below).

Any such programme would immediately be condemned as racist and would cause a huge amount of trouble for the regime and for progressives. Furthermore, after all that, it would be completely futile anyway. Why? Because all of our social programmes and institutions are designed to work on us, on White European people, not only because we have been the historical majority but because it has been solely us that the regime ever sought to condition. Moreover, the people involved in social work, anthropology and academia, the people who would devise such a programme, are mostly White middle-class women who only know how to deal with similarly-minded people.

As a result of all this, as a society Britain simply doesn’t know how to condition “the other”, short of oppressive measures which have been unfashionable since 1945 - so much so that, when racial diversity first caused problems in the 1950s, such measures were not even contemplated. Instead, it has always been the carrot: asking them politely, explaining calmly why they should, offering them trinkets if they do, etc. They played along when we used the carrot, but if we ever try the stick, they will get very aggressive - and we all know it.

Fundamentally, they do not fear us. They have learned over eight decades that they needn’t. (If they feared us, they would not be mass raping our girls in the first place.) What we are now learning is that making a foreign people fear you, while unpleasant, might be the only way to maintain civilisation, because if they do not fear you, they will exploit you and then you, unable to instil fear in them, will be helpless - the fool who gave up his weapons believing that everyone else would do the same, now finding himself staring at a dozen gun barrels.

---

Following a recommendation in the report, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has agreed to launch a full nationwide inquiry into the atrocity. This is something people have been demanding for a long time. I am skeptical that it will do much good. As I have said before, we already know what happened and we don’t really need to know why and in any case that is probably impossible to find out. The important question is how to stop it. Of course, that is ostensibly what an inquiry is intended to discover, but I strongly suspect that the answers will be unpalatable to our current regime. However, just by studying this atrocity, the regime makes its own demise that bit more inevitable.

Of course they will want to obfuscate, but the problem is that any cover-up, any attempt to minimise or mitigate this issue, will immediately be seen as such. To put it colloquially, nobody is buying it any more. So the regime is fated to condemn itself with this inquiry. For that reason, I welcome it.

Having said all of that, Starmer has already stated that the inquiry’s remit will be somewhat circumscribed: it will not encompass the cover-ups of the atrocity by police, social workers and government. It will focus solely on the atrocity itself. People are understandably angry about this, but I think it is right that an inquiry - with an already huge remit - should have a single purpose. The atrocity is one scandal, the cover-up of it a separate one.

And also, there is a sort of poetic process at work here: the current regime will justify its abolition by telling everyone in great detail about the atrocity it allowed to happen. Its successor can then look back and analyse the regime’s corruption and, hopefully, bring those responsible (and still alive) to justice. Starmer himself might be among them, having been the Director of Public Prosecutions at a crucial period. It almost feels that there is a sort of inevitability to events now. The regime must condemn itself; it has exhausted all ways to avoid doing so. Having condemned itself, it must be abolished. Having been abolished, it must be punished. Having been punished, it must be remembered as the most ignoble phase in the history of our people.

The report also exacerbates another problem the regime has, a mere side-issue for now but potentially very hazardous for them in future: the fact that their nemesis, nationalists, were right all along. In fact, given the preponderance of gang-rapists within the Pakistani population (at least 1 in 16 in Rotherham have been arrested for it), nationalists were right all along not just about the rape issue, but about Third World immigration in general. This is a serious blow to the regime’s credibility and creates the potential for a hostile take-over in future which they must try to thwart here and now. This is the narrative they will probably settle on:

Yes, you were correct and we were wrong, but you were correct for bad reasons and we were wrong for good reasons.

But I don’t believe that will “fly”. Moral posturing of this kind - not facing reality but instead choosing nice ideas over truth and responsibility in order to puff oneself up as virtuous - is what enabled this atrocity in the first place. To boast of your noble intentions after their disastrous result has become apparent… is the behaviour of a fool.

But that, really, is all that the regime in Britain can now do: describe itself as foolish so as to avoid being thought evil. Of course, it is evil, but it has to explain itself in some other way - and that other way is damaging enough.

A regime that describes itself as foolish - at this devastating scale - surely cannot be long for this world.

What needs to be done is obvious. Every police force, every social work department, the judiciary, the civil service, the entire political system… it all needs rooted out and rebuilt from the ground up. The only questions remaining are who is going to do it, and when it is going to be done.

But it is going to be done.