""Fault is it? OK:-

Your theory is that aspects of their culture predispose (slightly) young British Pakistanis to sex trafficking, and Paedophilia.

The faults, or flaws, in this theory are

1. Several other ethnic groups in this country have exactly the same cultural mores as Pakistanis (Indian, Sikh, etc.), yet have no such problem with their young men.

2. Out of 1.2 million British Pakistanis, only a handful in a very confined area of the country have been found indulging in this "cultural" aberration.

3. As has been said before, your claims of over representation stem from skewed statistics which no genuine mathematician would adduce as even indicating, much less proving a conclusion.

4. Even were the statistics more solidly based, any over representation cannot possibly support your "cultural effect" theory.

It is simply not tenable in the face of the minute proportion of the British Pakistani community involved.

The conclusion: Your extrapolation from a miniscule sample to a conclusion about the whole community is totally invalid.

The best you have, is a statistical anomaly arrising from a localised activity of a small number of sexual predators, who happen to be ethnic Pakistani.

In short, the only way in which you can manage to maintain your "theory" is by ignoring a whole body of cantrary evidence.

Don T.""

Taking a leaf out of your book Keith, and repeating what I have already said (but not to the excessive degree to which you do it), I think the above is clear, factual and accurate.

If you wish to retain any credibility, you need to respond to the points in that post.

To write me off as "Don the folk singer from Kent" shows the lengths to which you are prepared to go in avoiding dealing with any counter argument, and your unawareness of how little you actually know about any of us on the Cat.

Don T