Saturday, 5 September 2009
Most of my readers are North Americans, and I welcome this. After all, the USA is the dominant country in the Anglosphere and educating Americans about the over-policed, politically correct, welfare-dependent, chav-infested nightmare that is contemporary Britain is thus an important task. The outrage outlined below is taken from The Times (London). Clearly, the rise of the dysfunctional single mother on long-term benefit dependence is directly implicated in incidents like these. The 36 year-old mother of the two vile Yahoos described below had only this to say of their sickening crimes: “It’s got nowt to do with me. They weren’t even in my care.”
Maybe they weren't, but they certainly were for most of their ragged lives. It is self-evident that Anglo-American feminism is directly responsible for outrages like this. Obviously, as Professor Daniel Amneus has shown, a father's absence from the family unit has a variety of negative effects on his children's well-being, including a heightened risk of delinquency. However, the fact that Anglo-Saxon culture sets women atop pedestals has allowed irresponsible sows like this to pump out child after dysfunctional child without censure or rebuke. Now, Britain is beset by a feral army of murderous parasites, stealing and leeching their way from cradle to grave. The popular international image of Britain as a land of gracious manners, social decorum and quaint, old-world charm is effectively meaningless - a fossilized perception from a lost age.
Sixties feminism began the slippery slide, a deranged Pickett's Charge towards mass delinquency and social dysfunction. When the feminist agenda of rights-without-responsibilities reached the broad female masses in the mid-Eighties, its impact cohered perfectly with the rise of long-term unemployment in British working class communities wasted by Thatcherite policies. This gave underclass women carte blanch to start families without fathers; indeed, they were rewarded for doing so. The more dysfunctional children they produced, the more benefits they received - so the more children they produced. By contrast, decent and industrious people were actively penalized for trying to live reasonably. Aside from the dysgenic effects of such a policy, it made lifetime welfare-dependence a normal aspiration among underclass females - a 'right' that can no longer be challenged. As ever, our hands are bound by Anglo-American feminism and its tired, destructive mantra: women can do no wrong, women can do no wrong...
It will be noted that her horde of brutalized children were born to a number of different fathers, as is now usual among the British underclass. At the time of the offence, the boys' father - 'a violent drunk' - was newly separated from his partner. None of these males was remotely capable of adopting normal paternal responsibilities. Of course, when female mate-choice is unfettered from the stabilizing hand of patriarchy, the Stone Age is never far away. Women by nature prefer polyandrous 'line marriages' to shiftless, sociopathic misfits; and if this trend is allowed to continue unabated, the West looks surely doomed.
On a steeply sloping stretch of abandoned wasteland near Edlington two brothers decided to torture two children to within an inch of their lives.
The brothers, aged 10 and 11, had played the same game the week before. They had kicked and punched an 11-year-old boy, stamped on his head and then, picking up a brick and pinning him against a tree, had asked if he wanted to die. The boy fled when the brothers were interrupted by a passer-by, but there was to be no lucky escape on Saturday, April 4.
That day the brothers chose a more isolated spot for their attack. To reach it they turned their backs on the South Yorkshire village and passed along a narrow track before hurdling a ditch to reach open land. They went downhill through the long grass, negotiating ferns, thistles and brambles en route to a winding, wooded stream. Far in the distance came the screams, yells and laughter of children at play on the recreation ground.
The victims were two children, best friends aged 9 and 11. They lured them to a flooded former quarry known as the Brick Pond with the promise of showing them a fox. When the boys got there, the attack began. The brothers beat them, sexually humiliated them, burnt them with cigarettes and hit them with bricks and sharpened sticks. They told them that they were going to kill them.
One brother was reported to have filmed parts of the attack on a mobile phone stolen from the younger victim. The brothers were also reported to have danced around at one stage chanting: “We’re going to prison! We’re going to prison!”
When they had finished torturing the boys, the brothers left to help their father to build a shed at local allotments. They were arrested there after the youngest boy was found wandering the streets, barefoot and dazed. The man who spotted him had thought initially that he had been covered in red paint. Only when he took a closer look did he see that the boy was saturated with blood.
As the man and his wife cared for the boy, their son went out to the Brick Pond to search for the boy’s friend. He found him unconscious in a small ravine where a rail line had once run, half-submerged in water and naked from the waist down. The boy had a deep wound in the back of his head, caused by a broken sink being smashed down upon him.
An air ambulance crew took more than an hour to stabilise the boy before he could be moved. Both boys were taken to hospital; the elder, in a critical condition, spent two days on a ventilator in intensive care.
The father of the 11-year-old victim said last night that if his son had been left for half an hour more it would have been too late. He said that his son had been strangled with barbed wire and looked like something out of a horror film. “He had holes all over his head, cuts and gashes to his throat — everywhere. He was cut from his head to his feet. At first, he could not see. He was blinded from where they had smashed him so much and stamping on his face.” He said that his son had been forced to eat glass and had told him: “I just couldn’t swallow it.”
Three days after the attack the brothers were charged with attempted murder. Usually caked in dirt and grime and wearing tattered clothing, the pair were washed and scrubbed for their appearance at a youth court in Doncaster. One wore a red England football shirt, the other a grey Umbro T-shirt. The younger boy was so small that he could barely see over the dock.
As the narrative proceeded, journalists who had covered vile criminal cases for decades stopped taking notes because their hands were shaking too much. A court usher started to cry. Others turned pale. No one had heard the like of it.
The brothers took their victims to a mound of timber, described as a den, which was hidden from public view and beat them. They then moved them to the foot of a 15ft ravine and inflicted hideous injuries on them. They robbed the boys of a mobile phone and £4, beat them with sticks and forced them to kiss each other, to commit sex acts on each other and then to urinate in each other’s mouths. They burnt the younger boy’s ears and eyelids with cigarettes and threw rocks and bricks at him. They forced him to eat nettles and stamped on his face and groin.
Afterwards one of the brothers broke a branch from a tree and drove the sharpened end into the boy’s arm, penetrating to the bone. A lit cigarette was then pushed into the open wound. Finally, the brothers announced that they were supposed to go to meet their father, but could not leave yet as they had not killed the boys, who would be able to identify them to the police. They told the younger boy that they would strangle him but then said that he should go away and kill himself. The boy picked up the sharpened stick that had been used to injure him and tried to ram it down his own throat.
He was the lucky one. His friend suffered much worse and pleaded to the brothers: “Leave me. I can’t see. Leave me to die.” At which the brothers picked up an abandoned sink and dropped it on the back of his head. He was left for dead, unconscious and with ligature marks around his neck. A noose was later recovered nearby.
Theirs was a tough, abusive childhood. They were from a dysfunctional family of seven brothers and stepbrothers aged from 8 to 19. Home was on a former council estate in a north Doncaster suburb. It was a family whose 36-year-old matriarch, approached after her sons’ arrest for attempted murder, felt able to yell through her letterbox: “It’s got nowt to do with me. They weren’t even in my care.”
The pair had been in her care, for what that was worth, throughout their lives until, 25 days before the attack, they were taken away by social services and placed with a foster family seven miles away in Edlington.
One former neighbour said that the mother’s life was so dominated by alcohol and cannabis that she “just doesn’t give a s***” about her children, while her partner was described as “a violent drunk”.
A neighbour said: “She never cooked a meal for them. They just scavenged for food or ate fish and chips and stuff.” A local teenager recalled: “Every day I saw them they were scruffier. Their fingernails were always black. Their shoes were too big for them. They used to scavenge trainers and tracky bottoms from skips. When it rained they’d go to a sports shop and steal umbrellas.”
By February this year the elder of the two had appeared before the courts on four separate occasions for violence, common assault and battery, for which he received a 12-month supervision order in January. The same month his brother was reprimanded for common assault and assault causing actual bodily harm. When the attack happened in April, he was already on bail for two assaults and a burglary.
The two victims appear to be making a remarkable recovery. Though traumatised by their ordeal, they can smile and laugh; they are playing outside again. To them and to their traumatised families, both South Yorkshire Police and Doncaster social services owe an explanation. Could and should they have intervened sooner to end the brothers’ lawless rampage?
And there were have it - the sterling results of Welfare-dependent underclass matriarchy. What music they make! But it behoves us to ask what lessons we can draw from the atrocity above.
The specific British problem is that it has a US-type economy, wherein elites reinforce their already entrenched privileges generation after generation. This creates a vast, alienated underclass with no hope of social mobility and little stake in mainstream society. However, because Britain retains a broadly European social outlook, it deals with these Americanized malcontents with a lax, European approach; and the feral underclass views this as a mark of weakness, not any kind of deterrent. Thus, caught between American economic policy and European social policy, the UK promotes the growth of its dangerous underclass like no other country on Earth. If things continue in this conflicted groove, Britain will soon be demographically dominated by a vast, indigenous underclass and a growing core of Islamic malcontents. After all, in Britain white middle class emigration is at an all time high (200 000 a year), an irreversible drain of brains and talent.
The die is cast; you must leave now, while you still can.