Right now, Europe is doing all it can, as fast as it can, to make itself the most irrelevant continent on Earth.
How can this be? How can the cradle of Western civilization have fallen so far?
Now, there are signs of an awakening, with the EU Parliament recently voting to limit mass migration. But is it too little, too late? Because Europe has been in the throes of a political correctness movement that verges on fascism for so long, one wonders if the ship can be righted. And alas, it’s been our British cousins leading the way.
So we lead this week with an important piece from our True Crime Girl, writing on what may be the biggest sex crime in history…. And a warning of what happens to Western democracies when common sense gives way to progressive moral relativism.
True Crime Girl: The Biggest Sex Assault In World History
The release of The Rape Gang Inquiry Report should rank among the darkest moments in British history. It documents what victims have been saying for decades: thousands—perhaps tens of thousands—of young girls were groomed, trafficked, raped, beaten, drugged, and sexually exploited while the institutions sworn to protect them repeatedly failed.
This was not simply a policing failure. It was a collapse of government, prosecutors, social services, local councils, schools, political leadership — and culture. Time after time, vulnerable girls were dismissed as “troubled teenagers” instead of being recognized for what they were—children being systematically preyed upon by organized gangs of adult men.
Perhaps the report’s most explosive conclusion is that many officials appeared more concerned about being accused of racism than they were about protecting children. In many of the most notorious grooming gang cases—including Rotherham, Rochdale, and Telford—the offenders were disproportionately men of Pakistani Muslim heritage. According to the inquiry, authorities often hesitated to acknowledge that pattern or aggressively pursue investigations for fear of accusations of racism or Islamophobia. Sound familiar?
The result was catastrophic: complaints were ignored, victims were disbelieved, investigations stalled, and predators remained free to target more children.
Recognizing patterns identified in criminal investigations is not an indictment of an entire religion or ethnic community—the overwhelming majority of Muslims neither commit nor condone these crimes. But refusing to confront uncomfortable facts because they are politically inconvenient serves only one group: the predators.
The report also raises major questions for Britain’s political leadership. Prime Minister Keir Starmer served as Director of Public Prosecutions from 2008 to 2013, during a period when many of these scandals were unfolding. While reforms were introduced under his leadership, victims and critics continue to ask why Britain’s prosecutorial system failed so many children and whether more aggressive prosecutions could have prevented additional abuse.
Another deafening silence has come from many organizations that have built their reputations defending women and girls. If thousands of young girls suffered years of horrific sexual violence, where has the sustained national outrage been? Why hasn’t this become one of the defining causes of modern feminism? Where’s Code Pink? The National Organization for Women? If anyone involved here even looked like Donald Trump, they’d be all over this.
The report also forces Britain, Western Europe and the United States to confront broader questions about immigration, integration, and democratic values. How have some extremist Islamist movements become influential enough that governments appear reluctant to confront them? Have fears of being labeled intolerant discouraged honest discussions about extremism and public safety? (Answer: Yes).
And as Islamist political organizations seek greater influence in some Western democracies (think: DSA), where should governments draw the line between protecting religious liberty and ensuring that civil law—not religious doctrine—remains the supreme law of the land?
History will remember the men who committed these unspeakable crimes — unless, of course, the global leftist media buries it. But history should also remember the politicians who looked away, the prosecutors who failed to prosecute, the police leaders who failed to investigate, the social workers who failed to intervene, and the activists who remained silent — or who actively advocated against investigating.
A civilized nation is judged not by how it treats its strongest citizens, but by how it protects its most vulnerable. By that measure, Britain failed an entire generation of girls. There needs to be an accounting — and an example made for the rest of the Western world.
(Note: At this writing, the reporting is that Keir Starmer is set to resign any day. So his looks to be the first head to roll. Good riddance. Expect more).
The UFC Take Down: A Great Case… Or A Blown Opportunity?
So at this writing, five people are in custody for a wide-ranging plot to not only kill Donald Trump (again), but to kill as many people attending a UFC event on the White House lawn as possible.
The arrest of these five in connection with the plot should serve as a watershed moment. Not simply because law enforcement stopped it, but because of what the case appears to reveal about the ideological currents running through today’s discontented left.
It’s not a pretty picture. And as we’ve warned repeatedly in this space: it’s not going away.
From the reporting so far, the conspiracy appears to combine two of the most dangerous strains of contemporary extremism: anti-capitalist radicalism and antisemitism — the so-called “Red-Green” alliance. Those themes have become increasingly intertwined in activist circles, online forums, and protest movements where political grievances are distilled into a worldview that sees violence as not only justified, but necessary.
Now whether the target was chosen because of its association with business, politics, Israel, or some combination thereof (as has been reported), the plot reflects a broader trend that deserves far more attention than it has received. But as ever, the mainstream media has been happy to look away and concentrate on the algae content in the D.C. reflecting pool.
That said, amid the self-congratulation that inevitably follows a successful takedown, one uncomfortable fact stands out: authorities reportedly learned of the plot because one of the suspects’ mothers picked up the phone and called. Had she not done so, where would the investigation be today?
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that a private citizen—not sophisticated intelligence collection—was the critical factor that prevented what could have been a mass-casualty event.
Even more puzzling is the apparent rush to publicize the arrests.
Reports indicate that as many as 23 individuals may have been involved. If that number is even close to accurate, why end the clandestine phase of the investigation so quickly? Why not flip one of the conspirators and send him back into the organization? Why not conduct controlled calls, monitored meetings, consensual recordings, undercover introductions? Why not identify and arrest every participant before exposing the investigation?
These are standard techniques used every day against organized crime, narcotics trafficking, transnational gangs, and foreign intelligence networks. The goal is not simply to arrest the people standing in front of you. The goal is to identify everyone behind them. To map the network.
And perhaps most importantly: to get to who financed this operation. Radical movements do not sustain themselves on ideology alone. Travel, communications, logistics, equipment, safe houses, and recruiting all require resources (at least two conspirators traveled and staged outside the nation’s capital). Every serious conspiracy has a support structure. Every support structure has organizers, facilitators, and funders.
Perhaps there are good reasons for the timing that have not yet been made public. One thing we know at this forum is that, if you’re not in the middle of it, it’s hard to know everything that’s going on in an investigation. So if there are explanations for all this, those explanations should eventually emerge.
But from the outside, the case raises a troubling question: Was the objective to dismantle an entire extremist network, or merely to secure a quick series of arrests — and publicity?
As we’ve said so many times before: enforcement against these insurrectionists (that’s right, I said it) starts with big, multi-person cases. Conspiracy cases. Why? Because those are the cases you can build out from.
Today’s DOJ clearly knows this. And midterms or no midterms – the Trump DOJ is here for another two-and-a-half years. And clearly, the local police departments in these blue jurisdictions can’t be counted on to even keep the peace in the way they would normally do (which is not their fault – their orders come from the mayors). So large, multi-person conspiracy cases are the only recourse.
So here’s hoping DOJ keeps going and gets to the cowards hiding overseas who provide the funding and impetus for these radical groups. And that the goal remains penetrating the hideous NGO-activist network the left has constructed, and locking up as many of these violent thugs as possible.
As we said: this is not “protest.” This is insurrection. And the federal laws to prevent and enforce against it are solidly on the books.
Weekend Pod: Rich Staropoli On The Big UFC Takedown
Regarding the big UFC case, we discussed the timing and Washington politics of it with our friend Rich Staropoli, former supervisor with the U.S. Secret Service, who is well-plugged-in to the goings on down in our nation’s capital.
Was the announcement of the case premature? Is there some reason the work of the Secret Service keeps getting obfuscated? Was there more to be gained here?
If you know Rich… you know he has opinions on all this — and won’t be shy about sharing them.
So click below for the sizzle… and HERE for the full hot take.
Join us!
The Iran Deal: Was It Worth It?
The jury remains out on this one. Before adding our voice to the ongoing cacophony around this issue, let’s recognize a few things up-front:
1. Donald Trump has access to more and better intel than all the commentators (certainly including us);
2. There is a two month tryout period here before the deal is finalized. That’s a long time when dealing with a mercurial, non-unitary Iran;
3. Donald Trump has an undeniable habit of coming out on top, no matter the circumstances. Call it instinct, experience, luck, whatever…. But the left has thrown the kitchen sink at this guy, and he’s still standing. He has some antennae that most of us simply don’t.
Now, all of that said: Here’s our take from this past week’s Nightwatch, which goes out weekly in the wee hours on all the platforms. Guest was the best Middle East expert we know (and we know plenty), Eric Seidel, a former prosecutor with deep experience in the Mideast region.
Reposting it here, due to the import of the issue. Simply put: this deal will be a major part of Donald Trump’s legacy. And we have… concerns.
To be clear: We fervently hope the President is right on this one. But having concerns is not unpatriotic or disloyal; it is democracy.
As has often been said: foreign policy is rarely a game of making the best choice; it’s choosing the least-bad choice.
Has that been achieved that here? One gets the feeling that we will know, soon enough.
And if it is Iran that blows this deal? Let’s be frank: I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes.
From The Desk Of Our Legal Editor: Colombia has chosen the Tiger
Trump-backed Abelardo de la Espriella - El Tigre - has won Colombia’s presidential election. Iván Cepeda lost. Which means: the left-wing narco-accommodation model lost.
De la Espriellais a Colombian lawyer who also apparently works in Florida and Georgia. He is a political outsider who has never held political office before, and he is an American citizen. He ran with a Colombian nationalist message, a hard-line security platform, and a promise to pull Colombia back toward Washington. He is unabashedly pro-American. And slightly more than half of Colombia just voted for him.
It is also very safe to say that El Tigre is anti-communist. He has promised to “disembowel” the left in Colombia. He speaks the language of Trump, Bukele (El Salvador), and Milei (Argentina).
This is the latest defeat for the left in the Southern Hemisphere. Venezuela, Cuba, Argentina, and now Colombia. Communism is collapsing across the region.
This is not happening by accident. Trump’s efforts in this hemisphere have been largely successful because the strategy is simple and clear. Close our border. Squeeze the money. Back the allies. Pressure the enemies. And stop pretending that Marxist narco-politics is a legitimate governing philosophy.
Colombia is a very big win in that strategy.
For decades, Colombia has been one of the central battlefields in the fight against drugs and communism. The narco-terror group FARC began in the 1960s as a Castro-style Marxist insurgency. It sold itself as a movement for the poor and then financed itself through cocaine, kidnapping, extortion, and terror. That is the usual communist pattern: promise “justice” or “land reform,” seize territory, destroy civil society, and then call the wreckage liberation.
The 2016 Colombian peace deal with FARC was supposed to end their de facto civil war. Not surprisingly, it did not. The reality is that other than cocaine, there were just not many other ways to make a living in rural Colombia. The main FARC organization demobilized, but the machine did not disappear. FARC dissidents, the ELN, cartel networks, illegal miners, smugglers, and armed groups kept operating. Cocaine remained the engine.
Petro’s answer was “total peace.” Another slogan. (The Cepeda campaign was still chanting “Yes we can” hours after he had clearly lost.) Petro’s “total peace” idea meant negotiations with armed groups - one of which Petro himself previously belonged to -- concessions to criminals, and more time for Colombians to “re-imagine” drug-dealing terrorists as normal political actors.
The people did not believe it anymore.
De la Espriella is offering the opposite. With the likely help of the United States, he intends to build ten CECOT-style mega-prisons and use aggressive tactics against the armed groups that have terrorized Colombia for generations: “Gentlemen of the left, in me, you will have a sworn enemy who will do everything possible to destroy and confront you.”
Drug overdoses kill tens of thousands of Americans every year. That does not include cartel violence, gang murders, corruption, broken families, poisoned cities, and the social wreckage that follows the drug trade wherever it goes. Colombia has been the primary place where that war begins. It now appears that the United States has a really willing partner at the source.
Right-wing, American-backed leaders in South America are nothing new, but De la Espriella appears to be taking it to a new level, and he has Trump behind him. Also, FARC is just not as powerful as it once was. With Venezuela and Cuba effectively gone, their cooperating rear base, sanctuary, and drug-trade route are gone.
The American border is closed under Trump, and the cartel money is being squeezed. The pipeline is broken. The people who built fortunes off the destruction of American communities are suddenly facing intense pressure and potentially their demise. If nothing else, they are clearly on the run.
Colombia will be much harder to fix than El Salvador. There is still almost no industry in parts of the country except cocaine, and FARC will not disappear because of one election. But at least someone is willing to try. An American citizen.
And finally….
Always good to check in with the fine folks at The Faculty Lounge to see who’s on the wrong side of history today….
Sadly: not an exaggeration.
