BS: Muslim prejudice

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 07:51 AM

Lox, that piece makes clear that sexual repression is an issue.
It states that girls a married young so they are not tempted into intimate liasons, but men are left to marry late.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 07:33 AM

""There is no evidence that would ever make you consider the possibility that there might be an issue.
IT CAN'T BE TRUE
IT JUST CAN'T, or you might have to open your mind.""

Well Keith, when you've finished with looking in the mirror.........there are still questions ignored, waiting for answers.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 07:14 AM

"All wrong again Lox! "

You'd love that to be true.


But the truth is that you posted it originally to support your "hypothesis".


And it does nothing of the sort.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 07:12 AM

It was only to answer Don's question Lox.
Its origin is all explained right there, and anyway you said you could remember it.
All wrong again Lox!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 07:03 AM

"Lox, you have it wrong. Again!
That is not my creative writing but a cut and paste from the university piece."

Well it still contains nothing to support your hypothesis that Pakistanis are closet Paedos.

In future use quotation marks.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 06:36 AM

Lox, you have it wrong. Again!
That is not my creative writing but a cut and paste from the university piece.
It is just about BP culture and customs, which was just what Don asked me about.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 06:25 AM

Don, I did answer your question.
Jim, all you posts are just an Egyptian river.
Denial.

There is no evidence that would ever make you consider the possibility that there might be an issue.
IT CAN'T BE TRUE
IT JUST CAN'T, or you might have to open your mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 05:49 AM

Keith,

This link "thread.cfm?threadid=135090&messages=1037#3084586"

does not lead to any German report.

It just leads to one of your dull passages of creative writing.


Fortunately, I read whjat you post, and i do remember the German study you linked us to.

It said nothing about British Pakistanis, Street Grooming or child abuse.

The only connection was the tenuous unsupportable one that you asserted.

And that was refuted.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 05:21 AM

No it isn't, Jim. You have resolutely attempted to evade the unavoidable points I have made, and gone on asserting your foolish nonsense that, because Keith has a 'track record', of which Jim, in all his high-and-mighty rightness, disapproves, you can discount anything he may say on any topic for ever after; and denouncing any adducement of undisputed statistics as a desire to throw stones at people and scrawl Pakis Go Home on walls; which I assure you are things I have never felt the remotest desire to do. And then rounding off such foolishnesses with the triumphant tone of one who has incontrovertibly won the argument and has been left in victorious possession of the field.

You haven't; and you're not. I fear you have merely contrived to make yourself look uncomprehending; and doctrinaire; and politically rather than intellectually motivated; and a bit silly...

Regards

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 05:20 AM

Bloody HTML.

The only bit of those last three sentences that should be bold underlined is "yours, and yours alone".

Perhaps some kind Elf........?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 05:15 AM

""Don, I did promise to answer questions, but I have had enough of this now.""

This is precisely what I expected.

No answers? Claim not to be arsed to read the posts in which those questions appear.

No answers? Ignore questions, and complain about personal attack.

No answers? Claim to be bored with the discussion, and refuse to respond.

These are classic Keith A diversionary tactics, enabling you to continue presenting your opinion as fact.

No matter who your sources are, or how reliable they are (dubious), the conclusions drawn and presented as fact are yours, and yours alone. You go way beyond anything your sources actually said, and then blame them when challenged.

There is an obvious and desperate need for you to have your opinion accepted, which is why you cannot do as we ask, and consider alternatives.

There are no personal attacks in my posts, simply honestly stated assessments of your agenda and attitude.

Don

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

"I am not going to respond anymore."
I didn't think for one oment you would.
"Your last post just repeats what you have been saying for days."
Which you and your tiny handful of supporters have provided no answers.
You have no proof and it is, as I said, your opinion and your opinion alone - totally unsubstantiated.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 03:21 AM

"Who else other than you (and the BNP and their ilk) has made such a definitive claim?"

The list would depend on which of the 2 issues you mean, but we have been through all this.
Your last post just repeats what you have been saying for days.
If you have nothing new to say I am not going to respond anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 02:58 AM

"Very misleading Jim, to the point of deception."
No Keith - it is your opinion, a conclusions based apparently on a handful of opinions of others, though nobody has gone as far as you have here. We have all examined the evidence, we have all come to our own conclusions - your (very much a minority here) opinion is just that - your opinion, and it is breathtaking arrogance to claim that it has any more validity than anybody else's.
To me it is a racial/cultural slur, no different than any other I have ecountered in the past, aimed at West Indians, Africans, Jews, Irish, Travellers even Christians, and when it is made without proof it becomes inflammatory rabble-rousing. If you have proof that paedophilia and sexual predatory behaviour is part of the British Pakistani culture, please produce it - you have not so far; you haven't even managed to cut-n-paste it.
Who else other than you (and the BNP and their ilk) has made such a definitive claim?
As far as I can see, nobody here is defending the worst excesses of Muslim culture. For me, this problem isn't the problem of one religion, but of all religions that gain secular power and excessive influence. In Ireland we are still living through the consequences of a Christian church gaining such power and influence and abusing it to a horrific extent. Does this make all Irish Catholics suspect sexual predators?
"This is not a job or anything."
Just as well really, you are not making much of a fist of it!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 11 - 01:26 AM

Don, I did promise to answer questions, but I have had enough of this now.
I am thick skinned but anyone would find this level of personal abuse distressing. This is not a job or anything.

Here I posted some German University course material on BP culture, not Asian and Muslim culture. Google it to source and I am sure they have similar pieces on other British cultures.
thread.cfm?threadid=135090&messages=1037#3084586

Here is a BBC report about cousin marriage and its consequences.
They single out BPs as being overwhelmingly the cultural group affected.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4442010.stm

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 08:05 PM

""How many of your Radical Christians have killed their daughters rather than let them marry out of the closed circle of Radical Christians?""

You are right.

Radical Christians tend to kick their daughters out into the street instead, where they get picked up by kindly strangers who groom them, infatuate them, get them hokked on drugs then rent them out to all and sundry.

It is a matter of public record that this has been happening, both in the USA and the UK, for many years past.

These few localised Pakistani gangs have only jumped on the band wagon very late in the game.

Check it out. There's plenty of precedent, although it wasn't treated separately from other abuse until their capture.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 07:54 PM

""The BP culture has much in common with other Muslim and Asian cultures, but is nevertheless separate and distinct.""

Says who Keith?   Who's your preferred expert for this piece of random opinion?

Evidence please, or your opinion is meaningless.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

""I don't know all the answers but seeing as you are posing the question I assume that you can back up the intimation that the Moslems do not indulge in any ill feeling towards other peoples. Would you care to share the proof of that or is it just one of those unproveable hypothoses that you seem to be so against?

D.

(I had got bored with the same old arguments if you had not gathered by my earlier post. But the argument that Moslems are paragons of virtue intriugues me...) ""


DeG, I can understand that you would be intrigued by an assertion on my part that all Muslims are paragons of virtue.

In fact, had I ever said (or even implied) that such was the case, I would consider myself certifiable.

When you put words like that into an opponents mouth, you make yourself ridiculous.

Bringing Muslim/Jewish affairs into the argument is equally specious, as I can cite as many crimes committed by Israel, as you can by Palestine, probably many more.

Your question above is easily answered. You obviously believe strongly that Muslims harbour ill feeling toward the rest of humanity, all Muslims.

Your stance is, I would suggest, as difficult to prove as that which you erroneously ascribe to me.

Obviously some Muslims bear ill will. How else to explain the events of 7/7, but when you tar every Muslim with that same brush you are wrong, and since you must be aware of that fact your motives are called into question.

Keith gets a big kick out of seizing on any opportunity to denigrate immigrants, which is why he will not consider that these highly localised gangs committed these crimes, not because they are Pakistani, not because they are Muslim, but because they are Paedophiles and Rapists.

His agenda demands that he "Prove" that their culture is responsible for their actions, enabling him to feel that they are "lesser" in relation to his "Law abiding White British" self.

Do you now understand why we keep pointing out the very obvious flaws in his biased reasoning?

How does he explain that other Muslims do not react in the same way to his theoretical "sexual repression"?

Using the same dehumanising "BP" he simply says ""The BP culture has much in common with other Muslim and Asian cultures, but is nevertheless separate and distinct..

Sorry, but other Muslim men have the same urges, and the same constraints, but do not act in the same way, men whose cultures are indistinguishable from the Pakistani culture.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 06:26 PM

Dave - I call Kith a racist because he has spent a month arguing that Pakistanis are closet Paedophiles.

I don't see you saying that.

I don't call people racists because they disagree with me.

I call them racists when they deliberately smear a specific race with unsupported accusations.

It is a clear, consistent and verifiable line of argument that iis recorded repeatedly on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 06:19 PM

"I rest my case"

I asked what the common denominator was that connected International Trafficking Gangs and the trafficking gangs in the north of England.

Keith says "The theory that cultural practices and customs could be Lox's common denominator, came from people with knowledge of the culture and from within it.
That led me to the opinion that they are probably right."


It follows that Keith thinks that British Pakistani culture is the common denominator connecting International Gangs and the Pakistani ones.



Keith has no case.


Just a lot of lies amd an unsuppported hypothesis that Pakistanis are closet paedos.


Pretty Idiotic if you ask me!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:49 PM

I rest my case.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:45 PM

I have never disliked anyone on the grounds of creed, colour or race. Let alone hated them. In fact, in my whole life, I can honestly say there are only 3 people I have ever seriously disliked. All of them white and English. What I do detest is anyone behaving like a twat and dressing it up as serious debate. Robert Mugabe does it all the time. Gadaffi seems to be doing it at the moment. Maybe I am being a racist to point that out though.

D.
(Who's list could go to 5 or 6 if this goes on much loner)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:41 PM

"The theory that cultural practices and customs could be Lox's common denominator, came from people with knowledge of the culture and from within it.
That led me to the opinion that they are probably right."




So lets be clear about this.


The common denominator between Russian Sex Trafficking Gangs, Pakistani Sex trafficking gangs, Romanian sex trafficking gangs etc is that they are all British Pakistani?


Keith you are also a fucking idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:35 PM

PS - I note your deliberate chopping in half of a sentence in order to make it seem nonsensicaal.

This one:

"I read [from an earlier post] that singling Moslems out, or in Keiths caee Pakistanis, and saying that they are naturally predisposed to violence, rape, paedophilia etc, is a racist approach."

You cropped it as follows:

"Keiths caee Pakistanis, and saying that they are naturally predisposed to violence, rape, paedophilia etc, is a racist approach."

And presented it as if that were my sentence.


A definite deliberate misrepresentation.


Keith depends on Lies, deliberate misrepresentation and wilful ignorance as his tools to back up his opinion that pakistanis are closet paedos.

He has been arguing this case for over a month and ignored all evidence or rationale that doesn't fit his view.


Imagine spending a month of your life trying to prove, on the basis of a couple of politicians opinions, that Pakistanis are closet Paedos, who struggle not to abuse chilfren on a daily basis.

How much would you haave to hate Pakistanis to do that?

The evidence is building up day by day now in this thread that it would have to be a lot!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Lox
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:24 PM

"Was I wrong (racist)to report what they said?"

Don't lie - you have stated that you have a hypothesis that Pakistabnis are culturally predisposed to child abuse and the only reason 99.99% of them don't do it is because they succeed in their struggle to overcome it.


"Are they all lying about the fact of their own experiences.?"

They have had no experience of any aspect of organized crime.

They have been lobbied by their constituents, but they are not witnesses.

They did not go to the police and none of their allegations were proved.

The rest is opinion.



"Except for Wilmer and the police, all the people on the list think culture is the common denominator."

Don't forget the experts who did the only study - they don't think do either.


The only people who think so are POLITICIANS. Expressing theeir OPINION.


"You have still not made an alternative suggestion.
You contribution is entirely negative.
A non contribution."

You are a Liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:23 PM

I don't read that insinuation at all

Of course not. Because you choose not to. Your interrpretation must be right which makes me a...















Wait for it...

















RACIST BIGOT LIAR!

Say it loud enough and you don't even need to stick your fingers in your ears to miss the other persons point.

:D
(Just how is Tomato pronounced anyway...)

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 03:55 PM

"Then where did this come from........?
As far as I can see it is Keith's opinion, nothing more."

Very misleading Jim, to the point of deception.
How I came to form my opinion I have laid out here, and none of it came from me.

The evidence for the over representation is all factual.
The fact of the convictions.
The numerous witnesses speaking from the fact of their own experience.
Even you acknowledged they could not all be lying.
That led me to the opinion that there is an issue.

The theory that cultural practices and customs could be Lox's common denominator, came from people with knowledge of the culture and from within it.
That led me to the opinion that they are probably right.

I could not have formed such opinions in a vacuum.
How does it make me racist to report these things?
The Guardian and BBC also reported them!
Far from "distorting" them I cut and pasted them.

Your argument has not changed.
IT CAN'T BE TRUE.
IT JUST CAN'T
RACIST BIGOT LIAR!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 03:25 PM

"they are not 'unsubstantiated opinions"
Then where did this come from and what research has been carried out and evidence collected to back up such a definitive statement which is a cultural condemnation of a whole community - including victims of the worst aspects of Islam?
As far as I can see it is Keith's opinion, nothing more.
"but let us accept that this is a crime that the culture (not the religion) of the Pakistani community is largely responsible for."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Brian May
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 11:40 AM

So, why do you think there is prejudice against Muslims??

That is why I started this thread.

All I can see are more and more reasons that support the reasons why people ARE prejudiced - or are they assessing what they see and hear and judging THAT. I DON'T see any reasons to think that I am wrong - there are just more and more 'facts' being reported which underline Muslim intolerance to anything that doesn't fit their paradigm. There is NO tolerance of any description, even to their own (and that includes their family members).

Now I'm sure the media seldom report the facts, they edit them and filter them etc etc.

BUT many of these same things are being reported on Al Jazeera - are they anti-muslim and bigoted and racist and all the other labels I've seen here? Because if you think THEY are then you are delusional.

It's depressing how the same people keep denying what's happening. Are you THAT frightened that you can't even face the possibility it's true? Or are you just going to smear us all with the same old invective, any excuse not to face reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 11:24 AM

If that is what you really think, Jim, then I feel I have done. I will simply content myself with saying that I feel you are grossly mistaken about that. They ARE facts; they are not 'unsubstantiated opinions'; you can find them substantiated in impeccably maintained and available court statistics. What you may think they 'become', in ill-chosen metaphors, when adduced by somebody you refuse to listen to because you disapprove of his 'track record' is the only 'unsubstantiated opinion' in the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 11:09 AM

"You are surely not seriously suggesting that we should suppress unpalatable facts in case the BNP make unworthy capital of them?"
No I am not - but these are not facts, they are unsubstanitated opinions, used in this case by somebody with a track record.
Presented as facts, they be come nothing more than stones to throw at immigrants, or, at the very least, a spray-can to spray 'Pakis out' on the wall.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 08:13 AM

... as are irrelevant warnings that they might be misapplied by ill-motivated groups for their own ill-intended agendas... You are surely not seriously suggesting that we should suppress unpalatable facts in case the BNP make unworthy capital of them?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 08:08 AM

Sorry, Jim: never mean to patronise.

I am taking the group disposition as a donné and working out from there. It seems to me the statistics are not in dispute, are they? Or do you know different? Those at issue are, after all, based on convictions in particular places over a certain period in specified places. Even if atypical on a national rather than a regional basis, they still need examination & explanation.

And I still think that comparisons with other statistics related to other groups in other places at other times are the opposite of helpful.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 07:30 AM

"It is necessary to look for an explanation as to why this particular group should be so particularly disposed to this particular behaviour-pattern"
First it is necessary to prove that it is particularly disposed.... and has not been taken out of context and presented as an irrefutable fact.
And please don't 'oh please' me, it's paronising.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 06:56 AM

... and do, Jim, stop confusing the attempts to explain the phenomena with the actual phenomena themselves, as material to be exploited by the BNP. I should say the very opposite is the case. In relation to accuracy or otherwise of the explanations, the BNP, like the Flowers that Bloom in the Spring, tra-la, have nothing to do with the case. The fact that someone may misuse a truth does not, ipso facto, stop its being true.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 06:50 AM

"We are ALL 'potential' rapists, thieves, murderers, whatever"
Exatly my point - why single out British Pakistanis for special mention and why make it a cultural issue as Keith has?===

Oh, Jim, please: because of the observable disproportionality of that one demographic in relation to that one particular offence, which happens to be the one under discussion.. Nothing else. You seem to think this can be explained away by irrelevant refs to other demographics doing all sorts of other things which are undisputed. It can't.

It is necessary to look for an explanation as to why this particular group should be so particularly disposed to this particular behaviour-pattern. So it is reasonable to look for the explanation as to whether there is anything in the conditioning unique to this group, which this group undergoes and which others don't. There are aspects of their ~~ let us say 'customs' rather than 'culture' ~~ which could provide the explanation. It is not racist to point out differences of conditioned expectations among different demographics, surely. You are ready enough to do it with other tendencies to be observed, due to their conditioning, among other groups, like Irish Catholics, aren't you just!

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 06:08 AM

Well, I did promise to answer reasonably put questions.
I would prefer to ignore you.

"by telling us - in your OWN words - whether this predisposition is uniquely constrained to members of the Muslim faith/ British Pakistani community?"

No I do not believe so.

"And whether the fact that a higher proportion of white British people have been convicted in said area means that there is a higher predisposition towards crimes of sexual abuse in white British society than in other elements of our society"

If you mean sex crimes in general, there may well be.
From what I have read and presented about this particular crime, I believe BPs are over represented.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 06:04 AM

"We are ALL 'potential' rapists, thieves, murderers, whatever"
Exatly my point - why single out British Pakistanis for special mention and why make it a cultural issue as Keith has?
If cultural pressurse of a certain type is responsible for this behaviour than everybody prone to those pressures must be considered usual suspects - why be selective and rule them out?
Keith, and now apparently you, are choosing to ignore the consequences of his argument - one used frequently by grouls such as BNP - 'immgration is a threat to our way of life'.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: cobra
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:51 AM

"...It has been suggested that repression might predispose some.
That is all...."

At last. Some clarification. The above statement is a significant move away from your hysterical and nonsensical rantings on this thread.

Now, in order to wrap things up, any chance you can illuminate the discussion by telling us - in your OWN words - whether this predisposition is uniquely constrained to members of the Muslim faith/ British Pakistani community?

Before you respond, it would be helpful if you can reflect on those members of the host (read white British) community who have been found guilty of abuse of a sexual nature against minors. And whether the fact that a higher proportion of white British people have been convicted in said area means that there is a higher predisposition towards crimes of sexual abuse in white British society than in other elements of our society?

Answers supported by a statistical analysis please, as opposed to some Googled shit.

Thank you

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:39 AM

For heaven's sake, Jim, learn what 'potential' means. We are ALL 'potential' rapists, thieves, murderers, whatever ~~ the point is, most of us resist fulfilling these potentials; & so do the vast majority of British Pakistanis too as we have never tired of saying: but a %ge, small but disproportionate to their numbers, don't.

As to your going on about RCs, I repeat that "Oh, so what about ... then!" is a childish, foolish, *desperate* argument, merely intended to divert from the main point. We are not talking about RCs, so leave them out for heaven's sake, and stop trying to muddy the issue in this unworthy & unintelligent fashion. I say again, Jim; I am disappointed in your fatuous, doctrinaire, prejudged approach to this topic altogether. I expect better of a man of your intellect.

So I am starting to sound like Keith, am I? So what? I have not hidden my agreement with Keith on this issue for a second. You, OTOH, are starting to sound like grotty·stinky·offensive· foulmouth·lamebrain Lox. I know which I'd sooner sound like. How about you?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:24 AM

"You are pointing the finger of suspicion not only at EVERY MEMBER OF THE BRITISH PAKISTANI COMMUNITY, (not true Jim) but also at anbody who has been part of a culture which can be said to have been sexually suppressed, which includes those who have suffered the oppression described by Mike in his last posting (not true Jim). According to you ALL MALE PAKISTANIS ARE POTENTIAL SEXUAL PREDATORS"

That last has absolutely no justification.
It has been suggested that repression might predispose some.
That is all.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 05:10 AM

"How is that out of proportion?"
If you don't understand how you have read none of the postings here but one more time:
"let us accept that this is a crime that the culture (not the religion) of the Pakistani community is largely responsible for".
You are pointing the finger of suspicion not only at EVERY MEMBER OF THE BRITISH PAKISTANI COMMUNITY, but also at anbody who has been part of a culture which can be said to have been sexually suppressed, which includes those who have suffered the oppression described by Mike in his last posting. According to you ALL MALE PAKISTANIS ARE POTENTIAL SEXUAL PREDATORS.
How is this not the consequence of your definitive statement?
You have now resortted to "do you still beat your wife - yes or no" type questions to rescue some sort of victory out of your shambolic and selective arguments.
I suggest you look for 'disgrace' a little nearer home.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 04:51 AM

From a BBC piece from yesterday about the motive for the killing in Pakistan.


All that one sees are some anguished rants from some of Pakistan's best known liberals, many of whom are not even resident in the country.

Even hours after the assassination, we have seen none of the fierce onslaught against free speech that erupted on social media within minutes after Mr Taseer's murder.

Nor have we seen eulogies of his killers mushrooming on Facebook as they did after Mr Taseer's murder. It is a silence smug in the knowledge that their agenda is not at risk.

So why kill a man who considered himself - and was indeed considered by the world around him - to be so ineffective that he had not even bothered to seek proper security for himself, despite being constantly threatened by Pakistan's millions of faceless fanatics?
, it is all about ideology. It didn't matter if Mr Bhatti's battle had proved to be a non-starter or if he was an ineffective and powerless minister.

What mattered was that he had spoken against blasphemy laws in the past and was likely to do so again if a situation arose. That made him a legitimate target, not to be tolerated, not to be ignored.

Mr Taseer had said that he would continue to fight against blasphemy laws even if he was the last man standing. He could not stand for long.

And the ideology that led to his assassination has now sent another determined and deadly message to the state - that it will continue to fight till the last liberal falls.

This is how different the two commitments are. And for the liberals in Pakistan, this is how hopeless the situation seems to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 03:52 AM

I have not distorted it and have reported exactly as I found.
How is that out of proportion?
Labelling me racist bigot is just a cheap smear, and much easier than actually refuting what I post.
You are a disgrace to this forum to resort to such a low strategy.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 03:42 AM

Keith - you were a racist bigot to distort it and present it out of proportion, and you continue to be.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 03:19 AM

Was I wrong (racist)to report what they said?
Are they all lying about the fact of their own experiences.?

Jim seems to be answering no to the second question.
So, was I wrong (racist bigot) to report here what was being openly reported in all the national media?

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 03:07 AM

"It does not come from me "
What does come from you is your attempt to use what others have described as an attack on British Pakistanis as a whole and their culture; you continue with this line. This is the answer to the question you are "going to push for" You are openly indulging in racial stereotyping.
Nobody here is suggesting that these hasn't happened, we suggest that you has deliberately blown them out of proportion as a cultural phenomenon.
While we are 'pushing for answers', why aren't all cultures that are subject to sexual repression suspect? Following the reports of sexual abuse on children in Ireland, every Catholic falls under your suspicion of being a paedophile.
You want sexual repression, go and read up on 'original sin', 'being conceived in sin', 'impure thoughts', 'churching'. Examine the constant suspicion and humiliation the Christian church, Catholic and Protestant, has heaped on its members down the ages, for being 'sinners' and potential sinners, even to the extent of having effected another aspect of their culture, their music.
Go and find out how other religions regard and treat women, backed up in Christianity's case by the bible.
Nobody here is defending the excesses of Muslim culture; I doubt if many here can claim to understand the religion to any great extent, but it is unacceptible to use it as an attach on the practioners of that faith, as you have here - immigrants have enough to contend with without having to put up with racism.
This is aimed at you too Mike - you are beginning to sound like Kweith at his worst.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 01:46 AM

I am going to push for answers to the two questions in my post.
Was I wrong (racist)to report what they said?
Are they all lying about the fact of their own experiences.?
(NOTE, not opinions or arguments, but statements of fact.)

There is also the issue of where your alternative explanations are, and why you pretended to have posted some.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 01:29 AM

Two issues.
Is there a problem, and if so why?
Lox says,
" Keiths caee Pakistanis, and saying that they are naturally predisposed to violence, rape, paedophilia etc, is a racist approach."

It does not come from me that there is a problem, but from all those on the list, speaking from their own experience.
Was I wrong to report that?
Are they all lying?

Lox says,
"An unbiased analysis would seek to find those common denominators"

Except for Wilmer and the police, all the people on the list think culture is the common denominator.
You have still not made an alternative suggestion.
You contribution is entirely negative.
A non contribution.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 01:18 AM

I meant "passed the K", of course!

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Mar 11 - 01:16 AM

GregF: How many of your Radical Christians have killed their daughters rather than let them marry out of the closed circle of Radical Christians? Or ganged up to abuse & traffic the young daughters of non-Radical-Christians (the commission of which offence, I repeat as promised till blue in face, by a small but disproportionately significant minority, is the main topic of this thread).

& we have passed the ton on this thread after all. & with the collusion of some of us who swore we wouldn't contribute to the phenomenon. Oh, well

~M~