Earlier this year, in the Munk Debate on the “refugee” crisis in Europe, I touched on the epidemic of child gang-rape on the Continent and observed that “migrant rights now trump children’s rights”:
“Migrant rights now trump children’s rights.” Hold that thought:
AN IRAQI asylum seeker who confessed to raping a 10-year-old boy in a swimming pool, claiming it was a “sexual emergency”, has had his conviction overturned.
This was a Viennese rape case that received quite a bit of coverage a few months ago, mainly because of the accused’s defense that he was undergoing a “sexual emergency”: Like almost 80 per cent of “refugees”, Amir is a fit young man. He’d scrammed out of the country leaving his wife behind and therefore had not enjoyed conjugal relations for four months. Hence the “sexual emergency”:
When the youngster went to the showers, Amir A. allegedly followed him, pushed him into a toilet cubicle, and violently sexually assaulted him.
Following the attack, the accused rapist returned to the pool and was practising on the diving board when police arrived, after the 10-year-old raised the alarm with the lifeguard.
The child suffered severe anal injuries which had to be treated at a local children’s hospital, and is still plagued by serious post-traumatic stress disorder.
Amir was convicted of rape and serious sexual assault of a minor and sentenced to six years. However, the Austrian Supreme Court has now quashed the verdict. But hang on, didn’t the guy confess? Ah, yes, but…
The Supreme Court yesterday overturned the conviction, accepting the defence lawyer’s claim that the original court had not done enough to ascertain whether or not the rapist realised the child was saying no…
You might think the screams would have been a clue there, but apparently not:
The appeal court said the initial ruling should have dealt with whether the offender thought that the victim had agreed with the sexual act, or whether he had intended to act against his will.
I believe in Austria the minimum age of consent is 14, so, by definition, a ten-year old cannot “consent” to a “sexual act”, if violent anal rape can be dignified as such.
Or at least that’s the way we used to understand it in the civilized world. Of course, in much of the rest of the planet – and especially in the Muslim world – children are obliged to “consent” to all kinds of things. Once upon a time, when the unfortunate denizens of such societies came to the west, we were culturally confident enough to require them to assimilate with us.
Instead, in an age of civilizational self-loathing, we assimilate with them. So the same sexual license young Muslim men enjoy in, say, Kandahar now extends to Linz and Salzburg .
When I made my point in the Munk Debate, our opponents, the telly historian Simon Schama and the former UN High Commissioner Louise Arbour, thought it was an opportunity for comedy. Simon reckoned me and Nigel Farage were just “a bit sad” – losers who couldn’t get any action and so got turned on by obsessing about migrant rape. This insouciance did not work out well for him.
To accord their response more respect than it merits, Louise and Simon’s point was that: sure, there’s a bit of child rape here and there, but what’s the big deal? It’s a relatively small and manageable amount.
It’s not, but let that pass. That was my point: “Migrant rights trump women’s rights” and “migrant rights trump children’s rights” and (in some of the most grisly cases) “migrant rights trump disabled rights”. It’s not that there’s only three or four – or seven or twelve, or 29 or 97 or 236 or 1,768 – rapes. It’s not the “small” number of cases, but the fact that, in a fainthearted age prostrate before the multicultural pieties, these “few” cases are changing us. So that the most eminent jurists in Austria feel obliged to assimilate with their invaders: hey, how was poor old Amir supposed to know the cute l’il moppet wasn’t consenting to anal rape?
Is this ruling of general application? Would Fritz and Gerhard have their appetites so indulged? Or do these new migrant rights also trump such outmoded concepts as equality before the law?
From the expanded e-book edition of Mark Steyn’s Passing Parade:
According to the Vienna Institute of Demography, by mid-century a majority of Austrians under 15 will be Muslim. This is a country that not so long ago was 90 percent Catholic. But “not so long ago” is another country: Salzburg, 1938, singing nuns, Julie Andrews — “How do you solve a problem like Maria?” Salzburg, 2038: How do you solve a problem like sharia?
But the Sound of Music gags aren’t really that funny, are they? The hills are alive with the sound of child rape, but in the halls of justice, amidst all the celebrations of diversity, no one can hear their screams.
Share or comment on this article