""Keith has demolished all opposition here by simply stating the facts relating to the crimes.""

In your dreams!

""He opponents have been reduced to stuttering repetitive parrots, there is no defense for what has happened to these children.
They are unable or unwilling to answer any of the points he raises.""

You can't really be that dim, so I suppose you are just on your usual anti "liberal" troll.

Nobody, but NOBODY, has defended or attempted to defend what happened to those children.

The argument here is simply about the way in which three or four posters here are affected by the words "Muslim", "Islam", "Asian" and "Pakistani", the mere mention of which sets them foaming at the mouth.

Your claim that Keith has demolished all opposition by presenting facts is ludicrous.

He has presented only the opinions of a group of politicos and self styled "experts" whose outpourings he regards as proof of his case.

He doesn't even quote them honestly or accurately, as I have pointed out several times. Jack Straw was at pains to point out that these crimes were "Not a predominantly Asian problem, but disproportionately a white problem".

That didn't fit Keith's agenda, so it was ignored.

All that I want to see is a balanced and logical appraisal before drawing conclusions. Raw figures based on this local matter are statistically insignificant unless one also reports the total number of this kind of case over the same period, in the same area.

Does anybody believe that there were only seventeen cases in thirteen years?....No?

In that case all the rest must have been committed by predominately white groups.

Keith's answer is to ignore the logic, and attempt to broaden the area:

""Derby was typical of a pattern of exploitation being tracked by police and experts around Britain.""

And there is one controversial factor that many of the experts in the field are often not happy to discuss freely. The race of the abusers.

The string of convictions in cities such as Rotherham, Preston, Blackburn, Rochdale and now Derby have more often than not involved Asian men, specifically men of Pakistani origin, and mainly Muslim.""

Even if this statement (unsupported by a shred of evidence since Keith doesn't give sources, probably doesn't have credible sources) were true, it is also true that these towns are likely to be atypical of the country as a whole, since they all fall within the coast to coast strip of country between Birmingham in the South, and North Yorkshire in the North which, according to public records contains 59.63% of the Pakistanis in the UK.

If anybody has any concern with the plight of the victims, I would have expected some insistence on the whole picture.

Those who react with an instant knee jerk to a "Muslim" crime are not screaming about the crime at all. They are not bothered about the victim. It is the perpetrators they home in on, and their critical faculties (if any) go on hold while they pursue their agenda of finding a justification of their "Muslim = BAD".

I know Keith won't bother to read this, so would somebody mind explaining it to him?

No point trying to explain it to Ake.

Don T.