So Mr Liddle at long last acknowledges (in The Sun) that the BNP was right all along about the issue of Muslim paedophile gangs preying upon English children.
Only he cannot bring himself to use the word English. Instead, in common with the bulk of 'mainstream' journalists, he uses the generic term white. This unwillingness to name the ethnic nationality of the great majority of the thousands of child-victims is in itself a further insult both to them and to the English people as a whole. It sits uneasily with Mr Liddle's supposed role as a critic and debunker of the evil ideology of political 'correctness' that he himself should be a slave to that ideology in his use of language. The word hypocrite comes to mind, 'traitor' even. But then perhaps Mr Liddle is not English and feels no loyalty to, or solidarity with the English.
After the criminal offenders (predominantly Muslims) themselves, it is those whose duty it is to care for and protect these socially disadvantaged children, including social workers and police officers, who are seriously at fault here. Also culpable are the Establishment politicians who promoted and still maintain, the anti-English ideology of political 'correctness' and pursued the disastrous policy of encouraging the mass immigration of ethnic aliens from the Third World. Such a combination of anti-national policies was inevitably going to create a political culture in which Muslim gangs would regard themselves as above the law and be emboldened to prey upon the most vulnerable of our people, our children, secure in the knowledge that the kufrs' dhimmified police and social services, media and politicians would look the other way.
One of the main reasons these Muslim paedophiles behave in the way they do is that they know that the Establishment and officialdom (eg, social workers, police officers, journalists and politicians) are running scared of allegations of 'racism' (whatever this curious term is supposed to mean). The Muslim rapists know full well that the pusillanimous police and politicians are willing to engage in suppressio veri (suppression of the truth) in a vain attempt to maintain the fiction that the 'diversity' of races, religions and cultures within our society, which an open-door immigration policy has created, is a boon to the English.
Another important reason for their criminal behaviour is the racial and religious hatred which many Muslims feel for the English and 'infidels' in general. Such hostile attitudes are culturally mainstream in Islam. You don't see gangs of Muslims raping the children of other Muslims. Why not? Because they have strong feelings of solidarity with their co-religionists and fellow-tribesmen, but antipathy towards others; exactly the kind of natural feelings which, in the English, are condemned by the Establishment as 'racism'. Talk about double standards!
The hypocrisy of the Establishment is even more reprehensible in view of the fact that there is a social class dimension to it. A Cabinet consisting largely of wealthy individuals from privileged backgrounds presides over a system that permits the most vulnerable and disadvantaged members of society, children from deprived backgrounds, to be brutally abused and exploited, as a direct consequence of their administration's politically 'correct' (ie, anti-English) policies.
Those members of the Cabinet who are ethnic aliens themselves might perhaps not be expected necessarily to have the best interests of the English at heart. But what of those members of the Cabinet who are English? What excuse can they offer for their betrayal of their countrymen?