Since news broke about the New Year’s Sex attacks there has been neither sight nor sound of Guardian journalist Roy Greenslade. Even his Twitter feed has gone dead. Strange. Very strange. So who is Roy Greenslade? And should I care? Read on.
Firstly, it should be noted that Greenslade is a tireless supporter of mass-Islamic immigration into the UK and Europe. For him, it’s more than a dream, it’s a raison d’etre. That said, allez…
Indeed, in his regular Guardian columns, it wasn’t that long ago that he was throwing words like ‘bigot’ and ‘xenophobia’ around like confetti. Anybody who dared even raise a modicum of objection to the Islamification of Europe and the UK were denounced in language which was always inflammatory, language that was always calculated to coerce, silence and bully.
A story published in November of last year charmingly entitled: Local newspaper editor slaps down bigots to welcome Syrian refugees, is fairly typical of the man’s style.
Greenslade’s ‘bigots’ in this instance happened to be residents of the small Scottish island of Bute who had raised concerns about the proposed influx of middle-Eastern migrants arriving into their community, but they could just as easily be you and me. That people had the temerity to raise legitimate concerns outraged metropolitan elitists such as this particular writer.
Thus instead of attempting to look at the situation from the point of view of the people who actually live in Bute - even for a moment - Greenslade and his fellow Guardianistas smeared the residents of the island one and all as ‘bigots.’ Nice.
For if you didn’t happen to share his enthusiasm for the Islamification of Britain and Europe, if you had reservations – which many people did – in Greenslade’s mind it was because your brain was not quite as sophisticated as his, your intelligence not quite as advanced as his own. Greenslade knew better.
Criticism of mass immigration does not actually make you a 'racist' in the same way that criticism of religion doesn't actually make you a Satanist. But who's counting, eh Roy? But I digress.
The article went on to praise the editor of a local newspaper who had chorused the journalist's own views when expressing his worries that Bute might become infamous for ‘narrow-minded bigotry.’ Music to Greenslade’s ears, who went on to praise an editor who:
“By stepping in rather than standing back, has shown the kind of humanity that probably reflects the island’s majority opinion and, in so doing, has surely embarrassed the prejudiced naysayers and negated the spread of their xenophobic views.”
Not only were those opposed to an influx of Syrian migrants ‘bigoted’ they were also ‘prejudiced’ and ‘xenophobic.’ Oh yes, Mr Greenslade certainly knows how to wield the language of divisiveness all right. And wield it he does, fanatically so.
It was typical Guardian-think: smear and attempt to destroy those who express concerns about the ramifications of mass Islamic immigration into their communities. Greenslade’s tactics were as contemptible as they were predictable.
For here is a man who is a fully paid up member of a small but very vocal groups of media and political elitists who make it their business to sneer at the views of the ‘unenlightened masses.’ Greenslade and co have built careers deriding the vulgarity of white, European culture, while at the same time promoting what they detect to be the inherent superiority of everything Islamic. It’s his bread and butter.
These types, exist you see, in a quaint Metropolitan bubble populated by pseudo-socialists not averse to the odd sip of champagne and certainly not averse to inhabiting million pound townhouses in the better areas of Islington. There’s Liberals too, intent on signalling their virtue. And what better way to do just that than defend the spread of Islam?
The fact that Islam exhibits some very worrying fascistic tendencies is but a minor inconvenience. Greenslade and co had a persecuted minority whose interests they could now advance with impunity. But more importantly, they had a cause that could make them feel good about themselves.
“Look at me, I’m just so ridiculously cosmopolitan it hurts!. I feel all warm and fuzzy and I like it” That was the message they wished to transmit. And if in doing so it helped consolidate a place on the media and political feeding trough then so much the better. Pro-Islam didn’t become a useful badge of honour, it became expedient, at least for a career in the mainstream media.
So when kindred spirits like the BBC’s Fergal Keane attempted to blackmail the UK with his ‘desperate’ migrant reports, he was joining Greenslade in helping to construct a wilfully disingenuous narrative that sought to steamroller rationale debate in favour of emotional blackmail.
What Greenslade and Keane were advocating was for Europe to surrender its borders to millions of predominantly Muslim males. What could be more natural than that? The real question was: why? Another question was: To whose benefit? It certainly benefited the migrants who were able to enjoy the fruits offered by the welfare states of Northern Europe.
But what precisely was Europe gaining in return, apart from the highly dubious notion of cultural enrichment? But these were questions that Keane and Greenslade were determined not to face. Hence the use of ‘bigots’ ‘racist’ and all those other disgusting words hurled around in the left-wing Liberal infused media.
What Mr Greenslade failed to take into account throughout his mean-spirited columns was the fact that his despised white working class Europeans were not as stupid as he would paint them. For starters they knew a thing or two about Islam, especially its questionable attitude to women.
And if they worried about what may befall their wives or daughters under encroaching Islamification of their neighbourhoods, who other than the worst kind of fascist could blame them? No, not all Muslims are paedophiles, but they do exist - 1,500 teenage girls in towns such as Rotherham and Oxford can bear testimony to that. And thanks to Greenslade their numbers are increasing.
Labelling ordinary people as ‘racists’ was nothing less than gross. It attempted to slur and smear ordinary people and reduce them to something sub-human. These so-called 'racists' were doing nothing more than protecting themselves from a co-ordinated attempt by the elitists to disenfranchise them of their culture and heritage.
Let us digress for a moment to consider this writer's logic and expose it to scrutiny: Those who feel comfortable living in largely mono-ethnic societies are, in his mind, ‘racists’ and ‘bigots.’ OK fine. Extending that logic we can conclude that the residents of say Karachi, Addis Ababa, Lima, Beijing, Bogota, Tokyo etc.,. must also be ‘bigots’ and ‘racists’ too, for do not they live quite happily in largely mono-ethnic societies? Right?
Wrong. In the bizarre brain of this man such criteria only applies to Europeans. So there you go the logic of Roy Greenslade in a nutshell.
And Greenslade was – is - a master of the art. If it was your bent to open the pages of The Guardian over your bowl of munchy-muesli one of those fine Islington mornings, you would invariably be met by his latest pro-mass immigration propaganda.
He huffed and he puffed, exposing ‘racists’ here and ‘bigots’ there. They were everywhere and this crusader had made it his mission to name and shame anyone who dared raise a voice of dissent.
That the vast majority of his targets were just ordinary men and women who, when faced with unprecedented levels of immigration from an ideology opposed to such quaint ideas of democracy and female emancipation, expressed their concerns, Greenslade merely sneered. Opponents were vile, right-wing UKIP-voters, vermin to be gradually erased from planet Guardian.
Moreover, Greenslade, like Keane, happily ignored the legions of young, male Muslims trekking across Europe in search of the welfare bounty and willing young maidens of countries such as Sweden and Germany. With scruples that would make Goebbels blush, they manipulated the migrant crisis to fit their pro-immigration narrative with a cynicism that was as reckless as it was shocking.
Daily they rammed images of ‘desperate’ children down the throats of their minions. Rightly they calculated that such emotional blackmail would demolish opposition to the march of the male migrants whom they wished to see installed the length and breadth of Europe.
The journalist couldn’t hide his joy whenever fellow members of the journalistic elite furthered the cause of European Islamification. When Philip Stephens of the Financial Times wrote a piece condemning what he deemed as David Cameron’s ‘fear’ of migrants and highlighting how Merkel’s open door immigration policy “is getting it right,” Greenslade was positively salivating.
By the same token, anybody who dared to question the judiciousness of allowing over a million overwhelmingly male migrants to enter Europe unchecked was nothing better than a right-wing Nazi.
That Greenslade and his ilk could dismiss the legitimate concerns of the continent’s citizens so contemptuously revealed much more about the attitudes of the metropolitan elite than it did the ordinary people of Europe who they sought to demonise and ultimately bully into submission.
All of which brings me to the recent sexual attacks in Cologne.
That organisations like the BBC and Guardian attempted to conceal events in Germany and other European cities on New Year’s Eve should have surprised nobody. One would only have to consider how they similarly concealed the Islamic grooming and gang-rape in places as far apart as Sweden and Rotherham.
Nothing – not even systematic child rape – will stop the Guardian cliques of this world. For as Macbeth noted, “I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more, returning were as tedious as go o’er.” In other words, Big Media are in way too deep. And they know it too....
And so to Twitter.
Greenslade, like many other journalists, is a regular tweeter, using the social media site to plug his 'enlightened' views to one and all. But since January 6th tweeted he has not. Indeed since the terrible news of the New Year’s Eve sex attacks eventually broke, this mass-Islamic immigration enthusiast has been eerily silent.
Now Mr Greenslade’s silence tells its own story. I’d like to believe he’s scrutinising his past behaviour, thinking long and hard about his attempts to slur and defame decent people opposed to forced Islamic immigration. I’d like to think he’s currently engaged in a period of sober reflection.
Collaborator was the term used in World War II for anyone who aided and abetted - directly or indirectly - those who perpetrated inhumane acts.
I’d also like to think that he’s asking himself some pretty searching questions right now. Here’s one for starters:
“How culpable am I in relation to the sickening New Year’s Eve sex attacks?”
That’s one question I hope he is asking himself. But you know what, I doubt it, I really do. When the dust has settled on Cologne, it will only take a few days for the writer and his ilk to raise their head above the parapets and resume their ‘desperate’ migrant narratives. I wager that within the week he'll be back to hurling his disgusting 'racist' 'bigot' and 'xenoophobe' slurs around.
It wouldn't surprise me to hear him add his weight to the 'hate-crime' accusers, that cowardly bunch who, while they have no stomach for words - for debate or discussion, happily tolerate actions such as sex crimes. He might even join in with his fellow moral cowards for a spot of victim blaming. Let's see.
Good for Roy. He’ll be back doing his stuff in a few days.
Now I’m not sure if the victims of those sexual attacks will recover in just a matter of days, but if they are able to do so, it will be no thanks to Roy Greenslade and friends.
Review: Newsnight: BBC2 January 6th, 2015 >>>