Do you have a deep respect for the integrity of lawyers? Do you have an abiding trust in the veracity of Muslims? Then I’m afraid you’re going to be sadly disappointed by Lutfur Rahman and his many supporters. This highly trained lawyer made history as Britain’s first Muslim mayor, winning two elections in the proudly vibrant London borough of Tower Hamlets. Now he has made history again: a high-court judge called Richard Mawrey has just ruled that Rahman is guilty of corruption and illegal practices. He has been stripped of his mayoralty and barred from standing in any future election.
Triumph of the Villains
It’s a final triumph for Rahman’s racist and Islamophobic enemies, who could not bear to see a brown-skinned Muslim mayor fighting for the oppressed and impoverished Bangladeshi residents of Tower Hamlets. That, at least, is the story Rahman and his supporters will now be spinning. And why not? Accusations of racism and Islamophobia have proved very useful to Muslims who combine gross corruption with farcical incompetence. This is an extract from the judge’s ruling in the electoral court:
Though Mr Penny [Rahman’s lawyer] did his best to counter the allegations by calling many witnesses who claimed to have attended polling stations without observing anything amiss, the body of evidence to the contrary was overwhelming and convincing. By contrast, the witnesses for Mr Rahman were not always very impressive. Quite obviously Mr Rahman and his team had rounded up a large number of sympathetic voters and had handed them pro forma witness statements with only the name of the witness and of the polling station to be filled in. Witnesses whose command of English turned out in the witness box to be rudimentary nonetheless produced polished English prose in their witness statements containing words that appeared to baffle them in cross-examination. The occasional witness claimed to have typed out his witness statement himself, oblivious to the fact that its appearance was absolutely identical to that of other (allegedly unconnected) witnesses. The nadir came when one witness gave a graphic account of how he had attended a polling station to cast his vote and found it a haven of tranquillity, only to be confronted by Mr Hoar with absolutely incontrovertible evidence that the witness had, in fact, voted by post well before polling day and could not have voted in person on the day. (Judge’s Ruling on the Mayoral Election held in Tower Hamlets on 22nd May 2014)
I bet he did vote on the day. Corruption and incompetence are characteristic of the Third World, but that is exactly what you would expect in Tower Hamlets: the Muslim “community” there is a Third World colony in a First World nation. If you import Third World people, you will get Third World behaviour. This isn’t difficult to understand, but liberals resolutely refuse to understand it. Instead, they perform a traditional cultic ritual: they wring their hands and lament the inevitable consequences of their own policies. The Guardian is upset by “the division that has blighted [Tower Hamlets] for more than five years.” Can you believe that? Mass immigration by non-White Muslims into a White Christian nation has led to “division.” And Muslims who are corrupt in Bangladesh are also corrupt in Britain. Who could have foreseen it?
Rumours of corruption
Not highly educated, high-IQ liberals. Still, give the Bangladeshis of Tower Hamlets their due. Unlike their relatives back home, they haven’t chopped up any atheist bloggers to date. But if they do, liberals will respond just as they did to the Charlie Hebdo massacre: with more hand-wringing and more denial of the obvious. This is the electoral judge again:
The evidence laid before this court … has disclosed an alarming state of affairs in Tower Hamlets. This is not the consequence of the racial and religious mix of the population, nor is it linked to any ascertainable pattern of social or other deprivation. It is the result of the ruthless ambition of one man. The real losers in this case are the citizens of Tower Hamlets and, in particular, the Bangladeshi community. Their natural and laudable sense of solidarity has been cynically perverted into a sense of isolation and victimhood, and their devotion to their religion has been manipulated — all for the aggrandisement of Mr Rahman. The result has been to alienate them from the other communities in the Borough and to create resentment in those other communities. (Judge’s Ruling on Lutfur Rahman)
According to the judge, Rahman was the Pied Piper of Tower Hamlets, leading the poor innocent Bangladeshi community astray with his ruthless ambition and cynical manipulation. As a genuine White Londoner might say: “What bollocks!” Of course the problems in Tower Hamlets are indeed caused by the “racial and religious mix” there. The Guardian reported “long-term watchers of Tower Hamlets” who “say rumours of corruption in the borough did not start with Rahman. Before he came on the scene — when the Labour, and before them the Liberal Democrats, were in power — there were allegations of vote rigging and postal vote fraud.”
The allegations were correct: Bangladeshis were applying their long-honed electoral skills. Rahman knows his own people and their deeply corrupt culture. He didn’t trick them: he treated them. He channelled large sums of money to them and their religion. That’s how he was able to win “the open support of the Borough’s Muslim clergy.” The crooked non-White lawyer Barack Obama used “Hope and Change” to win elections; the crooked non-White lawyer Lutfur Rahman used “Hoque and Choudhury.” Alibor Choudhury is Rahman’s thuggish lieutenant, while Hafiz Moulana Hoque is the “Chairman of the Council of Mosques of Tower Hamlets.”
“Faith in Allah Always”
Note that “Hafiz” in Hoque’s name. It’s the honorary title given to a Muslim who knows the Koran by heart. So would you expect Hafiz Hoque to be a dedicated crook? Of course not. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what he is. As a close ally of Lutfur Rahman, he responded warmly when Rahman asked him and his fellow Muslim clerics for “their blessing so that he can be on the path of truth, honesty and have faith in Allah always.” The blessing duly arrived:
On 16 May 2014 (6 days before the election) the Weekly Desh, a newspaper published in Bengali and in English with a circulation of about 20,000 (mainly in the Borough), carried a letter. The letter was solely in Bengali and no English version appeared in the paper. … The letter was signed by 101 Imams and other religious leaders and scholars. Leading the list was Mr Hoque. …
BE UNITED AGAINST INJUSTICE
MAKE LUTFUR RAHMAN VICTORIOUS
… We are further observing that today’s Tower Hamlets have made significant and enviable improvements in the areas of housing, education, community cohesion, inter-faith harmony, road safety and youth developments. In order to retain this success and make further progress it is essential that someone is elected as Mayor of the Tower Hamlets Borough on 22nd May who is able to lead these improvements and who will not discriminate on the basis of language, colour and religious identities.
We observe that some people are targeting the languages, colours and religions and attempting to divide the community by ignoring the cohesion and harmony of the citizens. This is, in fact, hitting the national, cultural and religious ‘multi’ ideas of the country and spreading jealousy and hatred in the community. We consider these acts as abominable and at the same time condemnable. … As a cognisant group of the community and responsible voters and for the sake of truth, justice, dignity and development we express our unlimited support for Mayor Lutfur Rahman and strongly call upon you, the residents of Tower Hamlets, to shun all the propagandas and slanders and unite against the falsehood and injustice. … (Judge’s Ruling on Lutfur Rahman)
Note the smarmy and insincere liberal phraseology: “community cohesion,” “inter-faith harmony,” “cohesion and harmony.” Note also the blatant lying: the clerics claimed that Rahman would “not discriminate on the basis of language, colour and religious identities.” But they were supporting him precisely because he would discriminate: against Whites, for Bangladeshis; against kaffirs, for Muslims.
* * *
Tower Hamlets is a shining example of what a “racially diversified, de-Christianized America” will look like. It will be a corrupt and violent kleptocracy. As we’ve seen, the judge’s report into Lutfur Rahman’s criminality is full of farce. But it’s also full of tragedy. Mass immigration by non-Whites into London has had serious consequences for London’s Whites both financially and physically. Bangladeshis, Jamaicans and Somalis haven’t won any Nobel Prizes for Britain, but they’ve certainly excelled at crimes like murder, rape and robbery.
One of the many White traitors who assisted the rise of Lutfur Rahman in Tower Hamlets is called Michael Keith. Once a far-left Labour councillor in the borough, he is now a professor at Oxford University and “Director of the ESRC [Economic and Social Research Council] Centre on Migration Policy and Society.” Back in 1995 Keith was certainly applying Jewish ideology back in 1995:
One of the targets of Mr Keith’s ire was a leaflet that had been put out by the Liberal Focus team. Entitled ‘Focus Fights for Mrs X’ it related how an elderly lady living on ‘possibly Wapping’s most dangerous estate’ [Wapping is a ward in Tower Hamlets] was, in essence, living in fear of attacks by thugs and nothing was being done to help her. The vice in this leaflet was that it contained a photograph of a large black man in a very aggressive pose. It was said to be the boxer Mike Tyson but this is not easy to verify from the photocopies that remain. At all events, it was described as ‘the Mike Tyson leaflet’. It was just about tenable to describe this leaflet as playing to racial fears. (Judge’s Ruling on Lutfur Rahman)
The “racial fears” were perfectly justified: as non-Whites flooded into Tower Hamlets, many poor elderly Whites were trapped by the rising tide. Weak and isolated, they were easy prey for vibrant criminals. And who spoke up for them? Their fears about the crime they faced were “racist” and despicable. Any attempt to speak the truth was demonized by White traitors like Michael Keith and non-White crooks like Lutfur Rahman.
Brave New Britain
The consequences are plain to see in 2015. A Third World colony is firmly established in Tower Hamlets and Lutfur Rahman’s downfall will not end its pathologies. What do liberals think will happen in Britain as Muslims continue to grow in numbers and influence? The kleptocracy of Tower Hamlets wasn’t due to the “ruthless ambition of one man.” It was due to the incurable corruption of many men — brown-skinned ones like Alibor Choudhury, Rahman’s thuggish lieutenant, and Hafiz Hoque, Chairman of the Council of Mosques. Muslims in Tower Hamlets voted for Rahman not despite his corruption but because of it.
The electoral judge pretended otherwise. He would have been sacked for racism if he had spoken the full truth: that Third World immigration is turning Britain into a Third World nation, where gross corruption mixes with farcical incompetence. And with other things, as the judge hinted at the end of his ruling:
On past form, it appears inevitable that Mr Rahman will denounce this judgment as yet another example of the racism and Islamophobia that have hounded him throughout his political life. It is nothing of the sort. Mr Rahman has made a successful career by ignoring or flouting the law … and has relied on silencing his critics by accusations of racism and Islamophobia. But his critics have not been silenced and neither has this court. Events of recent months in contexts very different from electoral malpractice have starkly demonstrated what happens when those in authority are afraid to confront wrongdoing for fear of allegations of racism and Islamophobia. (Judge’s Ruling on Lutfur Rahman)
The judge is obviously talking about Rotherham, Oxford and other rape-enriched British towns and cities. But he didn’t name them. In other words, he was silenced: he didn’t speak the full truth for fear of the consequences, but I suppose it’s encouraging that he alluded to them at all. His final words were these: “Even in the multicultural society which is 21st century Britain, the law must be applied fairly and equally to everyone. Otherwise we are lost.”
Then Brave New Britain is indeed lost while Muslims and other non-Whites remain here in growing numbers, injecting the poison of identity politics ever deeper into the body politic. But let’s not forget the wise words of the former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks: “the process began with Jews.” Muslims exploit the “culture of victimhood,” but they didn’t invent it. Jews did. Meanwhile, Israel responds to ethnic enrichment in the only sensible way: with a resounding Bronx cheer.