BS: Muslim prejudice

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 11:10 AM

Lox said of Emma's story,

"There is nithing in her statement (not sworn under oath I might add) to suggest that..."

So you don't really believe her, do you Lox!

IT CAN'T BE TRUE.
IT JUST CAN'T.
RACIST. BIGOT. LIAR.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 11:07 AM

Oh yes - I forgot - you say that while most are able to overcome this predisposition, these few found their cultural predisposition to rape too much to handle.

You think that is a plausible suggestion.

You are not prepared to examine it and when it was examined and torn to shreds you stuck by it through thick and thin, which makes it your firm view really doesn't it ... yes it does.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 11:05 AM

ok - you dont say they are closet paedos, you say they are culturally predisposed to raping teenagers.

You say they need to to get sex.

This hypothesis has no relevance to any of the actual evidence posted.

(and is no difference to saying they are closet paedos.)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:55 AM

I do not say they are closet paedos.
I do say they are over-represented in this type of grooming/rape, at least in Midlands and North of England.

What research there is corroborates that.
95% of convicted offenders were BPs.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:44 AM

No keith.

You cabn say what you want.

You do say what you want.

You say British Pakistanis are closet Paedos.

There is no evidence to support that.

ALL the research contradicts your view SPECIFICALLY.

The only reported allegation that we have seen supports MY view which is that what race the criminals are is IRRELEVANT.


Oh look its Alzheimers O'Clock .... time for keith to repost an already discredited argument as if the responses to it never happened and as if the evidence that contradicted it doesn't exist ...

... go on keith ... your predictable move ....

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:42 AM

Lox,

Narey (Barnados) acknowledges that "in the Midlands and north of England there does seem to be an over-representation of minority ethnic men in [offending] groups",

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:41 AM

Jim,
"Straw is not 'explaining' anything of the sort; he is 'suggesting' that there 'might' be a connection -"
READ AGAIN JIM. NO SUGGESTION OR MIGHT! IT IS HIS EXPLANATION

Mr Straw added: "These young men are in a western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they're fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that, but Pakistani heritage girls are off-limits and they are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan, typically," he said.

"So they then seek other avenues and they see these young women, white girls who are vulnerable, some of them in care... who they think are easy meat.

Jim, "all we know is that the British Pakistani involvement is miniscule on the national scale "
EVIDENCE JIM????

I have NEVER, NEVER, EVER said it was to do with race.
As I have already posted TWICE TODAY,
"His explanation was that they did it, not because of their race, but because their own girls are off limits."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:40 AM

From the same article:

"There is an accumulation of evidence pointing to a growing problem with the sexual exploitation for criminal purposes of teenagers, both girls and boys. Barnardo's has recently produced a report, "Whose Child Now?", which warns that children as young as 10 are being "brainwashed" and then sexually exploited by gangs in much the same fashion as Emma. It estimates, on the basis of work done by the charity in London, that 1,000 children in the capital alone are at risk of sexual exploitation in this way."

That is the same Barnardos who flatly contradict your opinion Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:31 AM

I know Lox.
They were criminal gangs of street groomers, pimps and child rapists who happen to all come from the BP community.
But that must not be said.
Right Lox

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:27 AM

".....only reporting Straw's explanation of it."
Straw is not 'explaining' anything of the sort; he is 'suggesting' that there 'might' be a connection - it is you who is making definitive statements on the issue.
Until we can examine the suggestion in context of the situation as a whole we have no way of knowing if it is a valid one.
You continue to make claims out of context and you continue to exaggerate the racial side of the situation by overstating the size of the problem.
We have no idea what other factors there might be; all we know is that the British Pakistani involvement is miniscule on the national scale and to overstate it is acting against the advice of Straw and others that there are no racial implications to be drawn from the information in hand - so stop drawing them.
"IT WAS JUST NOT WORTH POSTING!"
Absolute bollocks - it contradicts your whole argument that there is a racial connection between the crimes and the culture - and the fact that you continue to deny this gives your whole approach a racist agenda.
You really shouldn't do this sort of thing in public; it makes you appear a bigger fool than you acually are, if that were possible, especially now you now appear to be admitting something that you have been denying for over a week.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:26 AM

Jack Straw was talking about young boys fizzing and popping with testosterone.

This reported allegation states that the young boys were being used as bait.

If this highly organized crime cell represents Pakistanis, then the Mafia represents Italians and the Krays represent Londoners etc etc.

All bullshit.

These were not ordinary Pakistani citizens.

They were Mafiosi dealing in prostitution.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:21 AM

Keith, instead of responding to the post you imagine I have posted, why not try actually reading it and digesting it so that you can compose at the very least a relevant response if not an intelligent one.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:15 AM

The gangs are BPs as well as the boys Lox.
You yourself have acknowledged that the gangs are BPs.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 10:10 AM

Thanks Lively.

Now lets examine her words.

First, lets distinguish between her opinion and her testimony.

She is not a psychologist, so at the age of 20, in light of her recent trauma and the damage done by these guys to her, it would be deeply misleading to present her assessment of their psychology as anything more than her opinion.

We did learn this though.

"those friends she sought out so assiduously at 13 in the local shopping centre near her home in Yorkshire turned out not to be friends at all, but a well-organised gang of criminals, using teenage boys as bait to enable them to groom young, naïve girls like Emma for a life of prostitution."

So - as I have said all along - "organized criminals" - and in addition "using boys as bait"

That doesn't sound like repressed boys getting it elsewhere, it sounds like young boys being used as bait by organized crime gangs.

Unless we are alleging that British Pakistanis have a predisposition to organized crime as well, then we have to acept that these guys are not representative of British Pakistani culture but of criminal culture.

Their crimes are no different to other traffickers who also groom young and old girls.

There is nithing in her statement (not sworn under oath I might add) to suggest that Pakistanis are closet Paedos.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 09:13 AM

Sorry, link failure. If interested follow this Google search instead (first result):

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%27They+like+us+naive%27%3A+How+teenage+girls+are+groomed+for+a+life+of+prostitution+by+UK+gang

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 09:10 AM

"If we had an accumulation of actual witness testimony, actual first hand allegations, that would be different.
But we don't.
We don't even have one example."

Lox, here is one first hand witness testimony by way of an Independent article back in end January: "They Like Us Niave"

With particular reference to some of the points being made here: "Emma believes, on the basis of her own experience, that there was something in the culture of second- and third-generation men from the Indian sub-continent that drew them into such activities. "White girls are classed as lower," she says. "These men class women as lower anyway, but white women are lower still. And in their tradition, girls become women at 12, so perhaps they didn't think they were doing wrong with me."

I wouldn't personally draw any conclusions from her statement (and I'm not offering it as "evidence" in support of any arguments being made here either), other than that is her opinion based on her experience, but her statement raises questions for me about the problems of discussing sensitive issues surrounding race and culture at all. If for example, Emma was to make that statement here on Mudcat, would she be hounded off the forum by a group of angry liberals crying "racist!"?

I think there was a video interview conducted by the BNP of another victim. No doubt the fact that the interview was conducted by the BNP will render the testimony not credible in the eyes of most posters here (and of course I understand why) but I may try to find it, as it brings another important issue into the discussion. And that is the perception among some that (to put it approximately in the words of one victim's father) "No-body except the BNP gives a damn about this going on."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 09:09 AM

Jim,
"Are you suggesting that they are placed 'on limits'?"

No Jim,I am offering no ways of solving the problem, only reporting Straw's explanation of it.
If you have a better one, I will consider it.
But you don't.
Right Jim?

"Then why do you continue to insist that it is an aspect of British Pakistani culture (IT IS STRAW WHO INSISTS, BECAUSE THEIR GIRLS ARE OFF LIMITS)and why did you edit any references to it not being a racial issue out of Straw's statement?"
EXACTLY! I HAD NO REASON TO EDIT IT OUT, AND I DID NOT.
IT WAS JUST NOT WORTH POSTING!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 09:00 AM

Lox,
""But there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men... who target vulnerable young white girls."

To which the Dando institute responded that this is not evidentially supported."


In a briefing paper, researchers at University College London's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science concurred that victims were typically white girls while 'most central offenders are Pakistani'.
The offenders were not viewed as paedophiles but had picked the girls 'because of their malleability'.
The report concluded that 'race is a delicate issue' that should be 'handled sensitively but not brushed under the carpet'.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 08:54 AM

"I agree with it."
Then why do you continue to insist that it is an aspect of British Pakistani culture and why did you edit any references to it not being a racial issue out of Straw's statement?
"but because their own girls are off limits."
Are you suggesting that they are placed 'on limits'?
"I do not know if the problem is confined to the Midlands and North of England."
You don't even acknowledge how significant it is in the North or in the Midlands (or if you do, you haven't told us), yet you continue to make it an issue by exaggerating its size - IT IS NOT A CITY-WIDE ISSUE, NORTH, SOUTH, EAST OR WEST AS FAR AS WE KNOW BUT YOU CONTINUE TO PRETEND IT IS.
"17 court prosecutions since 1997, 14 of them in the past three years, involving the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by groups of men."
To repeat, the grooming, seduction, and rape of young women is as old as sex and has been happenning as far back as written history - stop making it a British Pakistan problem - that's racist.
"Also the testimonies of MPs, support workers, police, etc., etc., etc.,"
Support workers have warned against people like yourself making it a racist issue and police and judges have specifically said that there is no racial connection - yet you have consistently attempted to make it one by the sheer size of your slimy postings. Try reading them all in one go, it will save you forking out for an emetic (or maybe in your case, it won't)!
The people who commit these crimes are criminals; attempting to single them out ar Asian or Pakistani or coloured or foreign is evil - it's what scum like the BNP thrive on.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 08:40 AM

Round we go ...

Straw said

"But there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men... who target vulnerable young white girls."

To which the Dando institute responded that this is not evidentially supported.

The process went as follows:

Step 1 - allegation.

Step 2 - Investigation.

Step 3 - conclusion (flatly contradicting Keith).


Keith shoose tpo ignore steps 2 and 3 as they contradict his racist hypothesis.

For keith, the process goes as follows

Step 1 - allegation.

step 3 - straight to conclusion.

For keith, the content of the inveatigation is irrelevant.

For keith, the existence of the investigation is evidence that the allegations are true, regardless of what the investigation finds.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 07:38 AM

Jim,
"And why are you continuing to ignore Straw's point that
THERE IS NO RACIAL INFERENCE TO BE DRAWN FROM THESE EVENTS?"

I am not ignoring it.
I agree with it.
I just posted,"His explanation was that they did it, not because of their race, but because their own girls are off limits."

I do not know if the problem is confined to the Midlands and North of England.
That is just where the evidence has all come from.

17 court prosecutions since 1997, 14 of them in the past three years, involving the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by groups of men.
The victims came from 13 towns and cities and in each case two or more men were convicted of offences.

Also the testimonies of MPs, support workers, police, etc., etc., etc.,.....

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 07:27 AM

And why are you continuing to ignore the challenge that your 'city-size' problem is a gross overtatement in order to make a racist point?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 07:24 AM

"There is indeed "a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men" as Straw said."
What is that 'specific problem' - I asked first?
And once again - why areyou now quoting Straw's statement in full and trying to give the impression that you didn't edit it.
And why are you continuing to ignore Straw's point that
THERE IS NO RACIAL INFERENCE TO BE DRAWN FROM THESE EVENTS?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 07:11 AM

Those areas have a high BP population, but it is still a minority group.
They should be a minority of any offending group, if not over represented.

In this area, for this crime, only BP gangs are involved.
There is indeed "a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men" as Straw said.

Your explanation Jim??

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 06:51 AM

"Straw said that this IS a crime of BPs."
No Keith - he said some British Pakistanis commit this crime, but there is no racial inference to be taken from that fact. Perhaps you forgot to read it when you edited it.
"Rotherham, Preston, Blackburn, Rochdale "
All with high Asian populations - what's your point? Nobody apart yourself has suggested that these are exclusively Pakistani crimes
"He said: "Pakistanis, let's be clear, are not the only people who commit sexual offences, and overwhelmingly the sex offenders' wings of prisons are full of white sex offenders."
Which you edited out of your posting - why, and why are you trying to give the impression that you didn't?
"Mr Straw added: "These young men are in a western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they're fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that, but Pakistani heritage girls are off-limits and they are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan, typically," he said."
Most of which you edited out of your quote - why?
"But there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men... who target vulnerable young white girls"
Would you like to give us a run down on what those 'specific problems@ are?
"are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan,"
As many Jewish, Catholic, Northern Protestant.... are expected to marry within their faith - what's your point?
"Because they're vulnerable they ply them with gifts, they give them drugs, and then of course they're trapped"
As happens outside the Pakistani communities, including the indigenous one - what's your point?
More later
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 05:52 AM

More of Straw.
However, speaking on the BBC's Newsnight programme after the case, Mr Straw said vulnerable white girls were at risk of being targeted by some Asian men.



"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."

He said his own constituency was one of the areas where it was a problem and called on the Pakistani community to be "more open" about the abuse.

He said: "Pakistanis, let's be clear, are not the only people who commit sexual offences, and overwhelmingly the sex offenders' wings of prisons are full of white sex offenders.

"But there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men... who target vulnerable young white girls.

"We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on and to be more open about the problems that are leading to a number of Pakistani heritage men thinking it is OK to target white girls in this way."

Mr Straw added: "These young men are in a western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they're fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that, but Pakistani heritage girls are off-limits and they are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan, typically," he said.

"So they then seek other avenues and they see these young women, white girls who are vulnerable, some of them in care... who they think are easy meat.

"Because they're vulnerable they ply them with gifts, they give them drugs, and then of course they're trapped."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 05:47 AM

Jack Straw.
"But there is a specific problem which involves Pakistani heritage men ... who target vulnerable young white girls.


"We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on and to be more open about the problems that are leading to a number of Pakistani heritage men thinking it is OK to target white girls in this way."


Straw called on the British Pakistani community to be "more open" about the issue. "These young men are in a western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they're fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that, but Pakistani heritage girls are off-limits and they are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan, typically," he said.


"So they then seek other avenues and they see these young women, white girls who are vulnerable, some of them in care ... who they think are easy meat.


"And because they're vulnerable they ply them with gifts, they give them drugs, and then of course they're trapped."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 05:41 AM

---Pakistani culture imposes such a high standard on its people that their young men do what all young men do in similar situations, no matter what their racial origins - go elsewhere for their pleasures and perversions. I asked once before and never received a reply - what would you have them do - lower those standards in order to keep 'our white girls' safe?---

I must differ, Jim, about the "height" of these standards, and object again to your use of the over-wide & overdefined term "CULTURE" HERE, WHEN YOU MEAN "CUSTOMS", WHICH ARE ONLY A SMALL PART OF THE OVERALL CONCEPT OF "CULTURE" [bugger this obtrusive shiftlock: sorry, not shouting really!], which is both an emotive and a far too non-specific word to be used in this connection.

They are not "high" standards: they are different ones, alien to the way of proceeding in regard to marriage which is traditional in this country. I have never thought it in any way "racist" to evoke the fine old principle of "When in Rome", and suggest that those who opt to come and share our facilities with us because they prefer them to those of their own original environment can be reasonably expected to adjust their expectations to a rational degree to the expectations they find when they arrive. It is surely at least arguable that the failure of the older generation to do so, and their insistence on imposing their imported expectations on to their younger generation, who can see all around them the signs of a less exigent set of expectations, could be at least a contributory factor to the phenomenon we are discussing on this forum.

So the answer to your question is that their changing their expectations to be more concordant with those of the community in whose midst they have chosen to come and participate would be a welcome *alteration* of their standards, rather than in any way a "lowering".

In summary, I do not perceive their standards as "high", they are rather, IMO, unreasonable and incongruous with their adoptive lifestyle.

You seem to me to be obstinate & unreasonable, Jim, in not even agreeing to consider such a possibility as I suggested in the para before last, and in persisting in immoderately and offensively impugning the motives of others more rationally inquiring with shrill and hysterical cries of "racism".

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 05:41 AM

That is an extraordinary distortion of Straw's words!
Straw said that this IS a crime of BPs.
Deny that Jim.
His explanation was that they did it, not because of their race, but because their own girls are off limits.
Deny that Jim.

I refer to the Midland and Northern towns because that is all we have evidence for.

There is a lot of evidence of BPs raping hundreds of children by this method.
Deny that Jim.
There is no evidence of non BPs doing it.
Deny that Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 05:13 AM

"Certainly not in those towns and cities of the Midlands and the North."
Are you seriously claiming that these events are to be fitted into city or town contexts like Leeds or Birmingham or Bradford? Absolute distorted rubbish; the 'facts' you have presented so far come from people working in small communites - there are no such city-wide organisations in existence and certainly no documantary evidence - if there is, point it out. The only person who could possibly have commented on such a scale is former Home Secretary, Jack Straw who has stated unequivocally that there is no racial conclusion to be reached in all this (but you edited that out as being unimportant, and in doing so, tainted your own evidence!)
He also suggested that the perpetrators were young men fizzing and popping with testosterone - but you edited that out too, also on the basis of it being unimportant.
His only cultural conclusion is that Pakistani culture imposes such a high standard on its people that their young men do what all young men do in similar situations, no matter what their racial origins - go elsewhere for their pleasures and perversions. I asked once before and never received a reply - what would you have them do - lower those standards in order to keep 'our white girls' safe?
You have suggested that the crimes of British Pakistanis you have presented here (five pages of slimeslide to prove that British Pakistanis are culturally prone to paedophelia) have a cultural basis.
Taking your 'reasoning to it's logical conclusion, the only religious body in these islands that can be claimed as being culturally prone to paedophelia is a Christian one - the church that has provided the world with serial paedophiles and has aided and abbetted them in their crimes for decades, and possibly centuries.
Rather bizarrely, you suggested that "Catholic priests can be regarded as an ethnic group with a culture and customs of their own", thus making it racist to criticise them for indulging in and covering up serial paedophelia!!
These crimes were known about and covered up by both the churh heirarchy and the Irish establishment - doesn't this make Catholic Ireland a depraved culture, as you would have us believe the British Pakistanis are?
"but no one can produce any evidence of anyone else doing it."
Bollocks - the grooming and raping of children has gone on throughout history and is well documentad as having done so - it was a part of English life in Elizabethan times and is well documented as being rife in Victorian times - it is as old as sex itself. I suggest you read the works of Fernando Henriques. Nowadays it seems to be the domain of Eastern European gangs who sprang into existence following the fall of communism.
Once more you are manipulating facts in order to prove the depravity of British Pakistanis.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 05:11 AM

===You just say the same stuff over and over again until everyone gets bored and you get the last word.=== Lox
,,,,
If any foreigner or whatever asked for a definition or exemplar of the concept of "POTS'N'KETTLES", could anyone ever do better?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 11 - 02:38 AM

"youdon't readpeoples posts"

Wrong yet AGAIN Lox.
I have been assiduously scrutinising every one, hoping to see,
1. Any evidence of a non BP gang doing this, and,

2. Any better explanation for why only BP gangs are doing it.

We have been waiting two months now.
Will it be coming anytime soon?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 08:32 PM

"Only a blinkered fool would deny that there is a real issue here."

Not that you would have a clue what people think, or what the issues are, or indeed what work has actually been done on the subject as youdon't readpeoples posts, you ignore inconvenient arguments, and you ignore the only actual available evidence.

You just say the same stuff over and over again until everyone gets bored and you get the last word.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 08:29 PM

Only a blinkered fool would deny that there is a real issue here.
Lox and Jim both deny it.
There is copious evidence of BPs grooming and raping children, but no one can produce any evidence of anyone else doing it.
Certainly not in those towns and cities of the Midlands and the North.
Right Jim?
Right Lox?

As to why they do it.
You have all read the suggestion provided by Straw, Cryer, Ahmed, Saffiq and Allibhai-Brown.
They have convinced me, but anyway no other suggestion has been provided.
Has it Jim?
Has it Lox?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 07:23 PM

"Sure. To be clear, I'm not commenting on the piece's author, or indeed the source. But considering the context of the comment,"

Lively, I'm afraid this comment is wasted on Keith.

Actual content is not relevant in his eyes.

He is all about the social status and/or race of the commentator, not about the content of their comments.

Consequently, in his view, Straw Cryer ahmed etc are all qualified to form psychological diagnoses, without any kind of diagnostic procedure, of people they do not know EN MASSE.

Their qualifications are either being Moslem or being Prominent public figures.

Its a wonder we bother employing psychologists and psychiatrists at all when we have these intuitive mind readers to diagnose whole communities for us.


"And that the subject is certainly worth discussing. To be clear, hundreds of reports of allegations, is sufficient for me to form that conclusion."

Indeed - these are extremely serious and controversial allegations and therefore it is essential that they be fully and properly investigated.

Thankfully, the Dando institute has begun that process, and consequently we have more information than just reports of allegations.

Amongst other things, the authors concluded that street grooming is not a new crime type, and that we can deduce nothing about race.

There is also a second investigation being carried out by Ceop.


So yes, it is important that serious allegations should be properly discussed and investigated.

And it is also essential that the conclusions of the investigators are not ignored as keith is doing.

To draw conclusions based on the fact that Allegations have been made, while ignoring the investigation that they sparked, indicates rejection of its findings.


PS - It doesn't matter how many people say that they have heard that allegations have been made, that does not constitute an accumulation of circumstantial evidence.

If we had an accumulation of actual witness testimony, actual first hand allegations, that would be different.

But we don't.

We don't even have one example.

Keith can't provide ANY.

We just have estimates, guesses, projected psychological profiles and slander.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 06:02 PM

"apart from the other two musketeers, that is, and one of them seems to have gone awol. Difficult not to notice that both of them have remained remarkably silent, either in support or condemnation, of your forgery,"

I loathe this kind of petty "my gangs bigger than your gang" bullshit, whatever direction it comes from.

Instead of braying about how many supporters are waving your flag, how about just arguing your own personal corner, all by yourself alone?

I believe you have the clout to do that Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 05:53 PM

BTW, Jim ~~ re your designation of us as "Musketeers", I take it you realise that will make you one of the Cardinal's men.

From what you have posted recently on the ongoing Religion thread, I cannot feel this implication can be precisely what you intended!

Hunt the hare & turn her ~~

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 05:06 PM

Sorry for cross posting there.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 05:03 PM

"Not quite sure how you interpret the article to which this refs as a "dismissal" exactly, Lively. Would you care to expound?"

M - sorry, my point was the irony of a far right-wing blogger so succinctly dismissing the argument that in some some way marrying one's cousin naturally turns one into a child rapist.

In other words the poster's comment of: "Hmmmm I get it", translates as "What crap!"

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 05:00 PM

Thanks, Lively. I have several times said that I dislike & mistrust the use of the term "culture" here, as being both too broad and too emotive; and would prefer the references to be specifically to possible connections with marriage customs and expectations; which are indeed, in a broad sense, subsumed under, and a part of, "culture", but both more specific and less emotionally loaded.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 04:50 PM

Sure. To be clear, I'm not commenting on the piece's author, or indeed the source. But considering the context of the comment, I did find some irony in the implicit summary dismissal of the argument being made in that piece, when compared to the length of this discussion.

I'm unsure how many posters here are debating the precise nature / volume of the alleged crimes currently under discussion? Though it's clear that some posters do so, and in no uncertain terms.
For my part I have read and heard enough to conclude that there appears to be a serious issue in need of addressing. And that the subject is certainly worth discussing. To be clear, hundreds of reports of allegations, is sufficient for me to form that conclusion.

Without a basic agreement among contributors that there is indeed a subject to discuss and what the nature of that subject is, it would seem that there can be no further discussion on the topic!

I don't go as far as accepting some of the arguments being posited here regards the 'causes' within Pakistani culture. And in particular, I find the fashion of Keith's presentation of those arguments, too reductive to render them credible. However, I don't consider myself suitably knowledgeable concerning the multiple possible contributing factors, to determine alternative 'causes'.

I find it an insurmountable leap, to move smoothly from "There appears to be a serious problem worth discussing here." to the conclusion that "Pakistani culture causes child rape."

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 04:40 PM

Most of your lot have fallen silent too, haven't they, Jim?, apart from you and ObnoxiousLoxious. Steve has explicitly announced his departure on his bicycle. So as far as that goes things seem equalised out to me, and not nearly as knockdown as you would have it appear.

"Forgery" now, is it?, to go with "Final·Solutions" and [self-admittedly unmentioned except by you] "Deportations".

Did you read the note I sent you just before you went, about my race & present affiliations? &, in particular, about the hysterical tendency I am increasingly feeling concern about in your posts: of which "forgery", tho maybe not quite up there with Heydrich & Gas Chambers & cattle-trucks, is on the verge.

Wack-fa-lalal &c

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 04:22 PM

"You don't make a lie true by retelling it Jim. "
And you don't make it any more true by continuing to deny it Keith, especially as your (present and last-minute) expanation has convinced nobody, as evidenced by your total failure to get any support for your appeal that you are not a conniving racist, apart from the other two musketeers, that is, and one of them seems to have gone awol. Difficult not to notice that both of them have remained remarkably silent, either in support or condemnation, of your forgery, apart from one suggesting that because others do it, it's ok.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 04:19 PM

---However, the brevity of the dismissal of the "Pakistani culture/girls off limits" argument being posited here and elsewhere, rather made me smile.---

Not quite sure how you interpret the article to which this refs as a "dismissal" exactly, Lively. Would you care to expound?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 04:09 PM

That piece is by Abul Taher, a muslim journalist who has also written for The Times and The Guardian.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 03:39 PM

It's pretty challenging to read up on this topic without stumbling into swathes of far right-wing sites, not too surprising no doubt, I've passed over them as far as possible but this umm 'commentary' offered by one poster on a Daily Mail piece made me think wryly "I must admit, he has a point there.."

Hmmmm I get it, they go noncing because theyve been forced to marry their cousins?

Actually, that's the entire text of his commentary, and the link isn't really worth clicking. However, the brevity of the dismissal of the "Pakistani culture/girls off limits" argument being posited here and elsewhere, rather made me smile.

Meanwhile: 1507 posts here, and counting..

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 03:09 PM

He said it was just BPs doing it.
I just LEFT out the bit where he said they did it because their own girls are off limits.

You don't make a lie true by retelling it Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 01:56 PM

"When Straw spoke, I had no reason to doubt him."
Except, of course, that you edited out the bit about the issue not being about race, then went ahead and made it such
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 11:50 AM

Lox, if you want to claim that on-street grooming by groups does not exist, and there are no victims, I am happy to leave you looking a twat, but that is what we have been discussing since 23rd Jan.

Evidence that in those towns and cities it is mainly done by BPs.

Jack Straw spoke about his own personal experience and contact with victims.
The Dando Institue report on On-Street Grooming By Gangs, that has resulted in at least two follow up studies of On-Street Grooming By Gangs, that found 95% BP perpetrators.
Ann Cryer said she had the same experience in her constituency.
Hilary Wilmer with her hundreds of cases, all BPs.
She corroborates all the previous.
Senior police officers, serving and retired.
Shafiq, Allibhai-Brown and Ahmed all tell the same story from BP perspective, and it corroborates all that has gone before.
Hindu and Sikh organisation who report hundreds of their girls have been victims too.
Perpetrators, all BPs

Your evidence of non BP involvement.
Er,......NONE.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 09:45 AM

The alzhainers again eh keith?

Ceop haven't done their report yet.

Dando investigated it and concluded that it isnt a crime type.

Just because an allegation is investigated that does not make it true.

It is what the investigation concludes that matters.


"!" ... indeed - your evidence is imaginary chidrens imaginary testimony (imaginary because you have never seen it or even know who provided it if at all)

Apart from that it is the psyvchological opinions of non psychologists and politicians with an agenda, and reports that people have made allegations

i.e. ... no evidence.

No evidence that Pakistanis are closet Paedos.

No evidence that there were hundreds of victims.

No evidence that there is a seperate crime type of Street grooming.


Just tenuous convoluted arguments, hot air and 2 months of loyalty to a racist smear.