Like I say, Jim; I just don't get the analogy. I remarked far above [to Steve, I think] about the Hegelian Leap which Islam had made whereby a quantative difference has become a qualitative one, saying there that this particular problem could not be appropriately addressed by cries of, "OK, then, what about so-&-so?"; which, if I understand your last post, is what you now claim to be doing.

You know; like if I say Sutcliffe the Yorkshire Ripper was a bad man, you feel that an answer might be something like "Well, I don't know so much; Christie killed more you know, & Haig more unpleasantly" (or maybe vice·versa, doesn't really matter).

So what if the British are as racist as you say: how does that excuse, or affect, or whatever, the objections to what these British Pakistanis have been, I REPEAT AND AM HAPPY TO DO SO TILL BLUE IN THE FACE IF IT WILL ONLY PENETRATE SOME THICK SKULLS ROUND THESE PARTS, *in small numbers but disproportionately* indulging in, which is what we are on about here?

I honestly, I say it again, cannot make out where you think you are coming from. That is what is not to understand. & I am not a thicko like Lox, & you know that is the case. & neither are you ~~ generally.

~M~