""The cultural explanation is not mine.""

You made it yours when you extrapolated from what your sources actually said something more than they intended, chose to believe it, and posted to that effect on this thread.

""Don I do now " believe that " but only because of the testimony of all those knowledgeable people, and always acknowledging that only a tiny minority succumb.""

Like Jim, I find that ""Simple, straigtforward, uncomplicated; you put that forward because you believed it. As far as I can see, nobody else has said it; it is your summing up of what you believe.""

With respect to your constant claims of a "massive over representation", let's examine that.

You have 53 British Pakistanis convicted, and 400 individual cases brought to light by Hilary Wilmer. I have been accused of maligning that lady by asking what seems to me a very reasonable question, namely ""What makes Ms Wilmer so certain that all 400 were Pakistanis, and how did those 400 terrified children all instantly identify their abusers as Pakistanis?""

I'm seventy years old and I haven't yet found a way to tell apart the different Asian races.

Ignoring all that let's suppose for the sake of argument you have 453 abusers.

In a British Pakistani population of 1.5 million this is 0.03%. Even if this were (which is pure speculation, given the lack of any hard evidence) the tip of the iceberg and the real figure was ten times larger (you would think that would be noticed), it would still only be 0.3% of British Pakistanis.

Where is this massive over representation?

The answer is that Pakistanis are massively over represented in a few Pakistani criminal gangs, and nowhere else.

WELL BUGGER ME! What a surprise.

Don T.