1400 children sexually exploited in UK town Rotherham: report

[nontabury]

there are "lies, dam lies and statistics" - (attrib - Mark Twain Benjamin Disraeli)

So true and they can be used by both sides of the argument.

[nontabury]

I repeat, as you're at it again

JPB, you contradict yourself so often with your back peddling and first denying and then restating what you said previously that it is no longer worth the effort of responding to you on what you claim to believe in any particular post.

From your latest pathetic effort, despite your previous denials, you have reverted to desperately trying to prove that the men responsible in Rotherham committed their horrible crime because they are Muslims of Pakistani origin.

NONE of the evidence, from the police, social services, the CPS even the offenders themselves, backs up your claim that they committed their crimes because of their religion and ethnicity.

If you have such evidence; put your money where your mouth is and produce it.

The figures you quote? Well, I could equally say that there are Asian Christians, white Christians, black Christians, mixed race Christians, Arab Christians. Your supposition that they must be mostly Muslim is just that; pure supposition based on nothing except bigotry.

Yes, this topic started out about Rotherham; but has moved on to wider areas. Something which you are happy with when it suits you; but not so happy about when these wider discussions shows your ranting up for what it is!

Regarding these men purposely targeting non Muslim girls, yes it's not in the official report, however on the streets of Rotherham, it is well known that this was so, this information coming from the young girls themselves, why was it not mentioned, never mind downplayed in the report, the same as in the previous reports I don't know.

[7by7]

These vile men targeted vulnerable girls.

That the majority of their victims were white is a due mainly to circumstance and opportunity. All the reports show that they abused Asian, Muslim girls as well. Not as many, but that is probably because, for a variety of reasons, fewer Asian girls, Muslim or otherwise, are likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and so vulnerable to grooming gangs.

If saying this means yet more accusations of being an apologist for child abuse will be thrown at me; so be it; I care nothing for the opinions of racist bigots who use the victims of child abuse to further their own agenda.

[Mosha]

These vile men targeted vulnerable girls.

That the majority of their victims were white is a due mainly to circumstance and opportunity. All the reports show that they abused Asian, Muslim girls as well. Not as many, but that is probably because, for a variety of reasons, fewer Asian girls, Muslim or otherwise, are likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and so vulnerable to grooming gangs.

If saying this means yet more accusations of being an apologist for child abuse will be thrown at me; so be it; I care nothing for the opinions of racist bigots who use the victims of child abuse to further their own agenda.

These vile men targeted vulnerable non muslim girls.

[Mosha]

In Rochdale it was proposed whites drivers only taxis. There was outrage. Not at what caused the proposal, but at the inequality.

[Ulysses G.]

As said before; all the actual historical evidence, not my evidence but that of Islamic scholars, shows that Aisha must have been older than 12, probably closer to 18, when she married Mohammed.

Not according to Ibn Hisham who was the editor of Mohammed's biography or Aisha's own words. The truth is that no one can prove otherwise.

The majority of traditional hadith sources state that Aisha was married to Muhammad at the age of six or seven, but she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine, or ten according to Ibn Hisham,[6] when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Hisham

"The Prophet entered into marriage with me when I was a girl of six and at the time of joining his household, I was a girl of nine years of age."

Edited December 9, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[7by7]

These vile men targeted vulnerable non muslim girls.

If that is true, that they only targeted white, non Muslim girls, perhaps you can explain how come some of their victims were Asian and Muslim?

In Rochdale it was proposed whites drivers only taxis. There was outrage. Not at what caused the proposal, but at the inequality.

Taxi firm in Rochdale offers white drivers on demand after two of Pakistani origin were jailed for sex-grooming of girls in town

Mr Campbell said around 20 drivers had left Eagle Taxis after the two drivers were prosecuted.

He added: ‘One of them got a knife held to his throat, one of them had his car smashed up.’

Mr Campbell said the exodus cost him an estimated £40,000 - 30 per cent of the firm’s annual profit: ‘It was devastating.’

He said: ‘The Asian drivers are harder working, they do what they are asked and they don’t complain about it.

'If the public could actually see these [Asian] people close up and see what they are about, I don’t think they would be asking for white drivers.......

Mark Widdup, of Rochdale Council, said: ‘There is currently nothing in the conditions of their licence which state that they cannot operate such a policy, just as some firms choose to offer customers only female drivers.’

So, where is the 'outrage' you claim?

[7by7]

As said before; all the actual historical evidence, not my evidence but that of Islamic scholars, shows that Aisha must have been older than 12, probably closer to 18, when she married Mohammed.

Not according to Ibn Hisham who was the editor of Mohammed's biography or Aisha's own words. The truth is that no one can prove otherwise.

The majority of traditional hadith sources state that Aisha was married to Muhammad at the age of six or seven, but she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine, or ten according to Ibn Hisham,[6] when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Hisham

"The Prophet entered into marriage with me when I was a girl of six and at the time of joining his household, I was a girl of nine years of age."

A biography written some 200 years later.

The historical records show that it was impossible for her to have married as young as nine; see my earlier posts on the subject and the links contained therein.

Or are you joining the ranks of those who refuse to accept evidence which conflicts with their prejudices?

Evidence that the majority of child abuse in the UK is carried out by white, non Muslims.

Evidence that child marriages and sexual abuse occur in many non Muslim countries.

Evidence that out of the top ten countries where child marriage is prevalent, only four are predominantly Muslim. The country with the highest rate being India.

[Ulysses G.]

The historical records show that it was impossible for her to have married as young as nine; see my earlier posts on the subject and the links contained therein.

Not according to many experts and a quick search proves that. You are doing what you always do, finding anyone that supports your spin and pretending like it is mainstream thought. It isn't.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Mosha]

7 DM is blocked 6000 miles away. Nice to see you quote them when it suits.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/22/equalities-watchdog-to-investigate-white-drivers-policy-of-rochdale-minicab-firm

[7by7]

UlyssesG,

I know you don't like anything which contradicts your view of the world and instantly dismiss it as spin; but perhaps you should read the links provided earlier.

But be prepared to learn something.

Edited December 9, 2014 by 7by7

[Ulysses G.]

I've read all about it and I've learned not to trust your spin. I've seen too many times that, even when confronted with irrefutable evidence, you just deny it and keep on denying the obvious.

Edited December 9, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[nontabury]

These vile men targeted vulnerable girls.

That the majority of their victims were white is a due mainly to circumstance and opportunity. All the reports show that they abused Asian, Muslim girls as well. Not as many, but that is probably because, for a variety of reasons, fewer Asian girls, Muslim or otherwise, are likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and so vulnerable to grooming gangs.

If saying this means yet more accusations of being an apologist for child abuse will be thrown at me; so be it; I care nothing for the opinions of racist bigots who use the victims of child abuse to further their own agenda.

This thread relates to child sexual abuse in Rotherham, yet out of 1400 young victims, they all had one thing in common, they were not Muslims.

[jacky54]

The historical records show that it was impossible for her to have married as young as nine; see my earlier posts on the subject and the links contained therein.

Not according to many experts and a quick search proves that. You are doing what you always do, finding anyone that supports your spin and pretending like it is mainstream thought. It isn't.

That what he does, he's like a nutter who claims men never landed on the moon or that 9/11 was an inside job and posting links to support it. The mainstream overwhelming view is not the one 7x7 presents as the truth. This Imam says there are actually 7 hadith confirming the age of aisha when she married, of course he might not have read the Huffignton post issue linked by imam 7x7 which disagreed.

[7by7]

7 DM is blocked 6000 miles away. Nice to see you quote them when it suits.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/22/equalities-watchdog-to-investigate-white-drivers-policy-of-rochdale-minicab-firm

I did not, as you imply, quote them because you cannot access them in Thailand; I was unaware that you could not!

To be honest, I quoted the Mail so that you and others could not dismiss the report as left wing bias!

Your Guardian link does not show any expressions of outrage; merely an investigation to establish whether or not the policy is legal.

I do not know if any ruling has been made yet; but suspect that as most taxi drivers are on self employed contracts that, like customers asking for and being provided with a woman driver, no regulations have been breached. As the Guardian article you have linked to, and others, make clear.

Meanwhile, I eagerly await any expressions of outrage over the firm's policy which you can find; but I'm not holding my breath.

[7by7]

Jacky54, I suggest that you, too, read the many links provided earlier on the question of Aisha's age when she married.

They show that the majority Muslim view, backed up by actual historical records rather than accounts written many years after her death, do not support your view nor that in the video you have posted.

You refuse to believe that, of course, as it means you cannot use it to further demonise Muslims.

Just as you ignore the fact that the majority of child marriages occur in non Muslim countries.

[nontabury]

Snip

I am also sure none of the Asian girls abused were Muslim!

From the Rotherham report:

11.17 With hindsight, it is clear that women and girls in the Pakistani community in

Rotherham should have been encouraged and empowered by the authorities to

speak out about perpetrators and their own experiences as victims of sexual

exploitation, so often hidden from sight.

11.15 The UK Muslim Women's Network produced a report on CSE in September 2013

which drew on 35 case studies of women from across the UK who were victims, the

majority of whom were Muslim. It highlighted that Asian girls were being sexually

exploited where authorities were failing to identify or support them. They were most

vulnerable to men from their own communities who manipulated cultural norms to

prevent them from reporting their abuse. It described how this abuse was being

carried out. 'Offending behaviour mostly involved men operating in groups . . . The

victim was being passed around and prostituted amongst many other men. Our

research also showed that complex grooming ‘hierarchies’ were at play. The physical

abuse included oral, anal and vaginal rape; role play; insertion of objects into the

vagina; severe beatings; burning with cigarettes; tying down; enacting rape that

included ripping clothes off and sexual activity over the webcam.' This description

mirrors the abuse committed by Pakistani-heritage perpetrators on white girls in

Rotherham.

I stand corrected. But still doesn't change my view that there is a cultural attitude involved in what happened.

There is no need for you to stand corrected, please see my post 717. This relates to events in Rotherham, does it also relate to Rochdale, Bradford and other northern towns, in addition to those in the south I don't know. However it does seem a coincidence that members of one religion were and are involved in all these crimes against vulnerable children.

[nontabury]

The historical records show that it was impossible for her to have married as young as nine; see my earlier posts on the subject and the links contained therein.

Not according to many experts and a quick search proves that. You are doing what you always do, finding anyone that supports your spin and pretending like it is mainstream thought. It isn't.

That what he does, he's like a nutter who claims men never landed on the moon or that 9/11 was an inside job and posting links to support it. The mainstream overwhelming view is not the one 7x7 presents as the truth. This Imam says there are actually 7 hadith confirming the age of aisha when she married, of course he might not have read the Huffignton post issue linked by imam 7x7 which disagreed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cs6qDHpbbME

No doubt 7x7 will soon reply stating that this video is a fake, staring Rowan Atkinson and produced by the BNP in an attempt to discredit the Muslims.

[jacky54]

Jacky54, I suggest that you, too, read the many links provided earlier on the question of Aisha's age when she married.

They show that the majority Muslim view, backed up by actual historical records rather than accounts written many years after her death, do not support your view nor that in the video you have posted.

You refuse to believe that, of course, as it means you cannot use it to further demonise Muslims.

Just as you ignore the fact that the majority of child marriages occur in non Muslim countries.

I have read them and they are utter rubbish and it is just a lie to pretend they reflect the majority view, much as you would like to think so. Nobody is 'demonising' Muslims, again that is what you try to twist, that opposers of Islam hate Muslims, that is another lie. It is another lie that most marriages to pre pubescent girls take place outside of Muslim countries. Why don't you start accepting the truth about Islam? I have suggested that you read the Koran, seems you are not that interested in the subject though.

[7by7]

Yet again, facts which disprove your prejudice are dismissed by you as lies!

How can anyone take you seriously?

[jacky54]

Lies are not facts. How can anyone take you seriously, you admit to never having read the Koran, but then pose as an expert on Islam and it's wicked history.

[Ulysses G.]

How can anyone take you seriously, you admit to never having read the Koran, but then pose as an expert on Islam and it's wicked history.

That seems like VERY legitimate criticism.

[JockPieandBeans]

Intazar Medhi, a lawyer based in Lahore, tells IPS that the Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929 – which prohibits girls under the age of 16 and boys under the age of 18 from being legally wed – is one of the least invoked laws in the country.

For instance, he tells IPS, girls in rural areas are often given in marriage in order to settle disputes, or debts. Some are even ‘promised’ to a rival before they are born, making them destined to a life of servitude for their husband’s family.

How nice. However, have the audacity to fall in love with the wrong person and its stoned to death.

When the Sindh government announced its plans to extend the marriage age, CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Sherani denounced the move as an effort to “please the international community [by going] against Islamic teachings and practices.”

Seems like another Mohammed likes them young.

Experts say Pakistan has the highest school dropout rate in the world, with 35,000 pupils leaving primary education every single year, largely as a result of early marriages.

And thats just the ones that actually get to go to school.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/07/pakistani-rights-advocates-fight-losing-battle-to-end-child-marriages/

" Pakistan has almost 5.5 million children that are out of school, the second highest number in the world only after Nigeria. Pakistan also has the highest number of illiterate adults in the world, after India and China "

http://tribune.com.pk/story/666285/5-5-million-children-out-of-school-in-pakistan-unesco-report/

Which member of this forum was shouting loud about the legal age for marriage in Pakistan ?

Yet another assertion blown clean out the water.

The hits just keep on coming.

[Morch]

These vile men targeted vulnerable girls.

That the majority of their victims were white is a due mainly to circumstance and opportunity. All the reports show that they abused Asian, Muslim girls as well. Not as many, but that is probably because, for a variety of reasons, fewer Asian girls, Muslim or otherwise, are likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and so vulnerable to grooming gangs.

If saying this means yet more accusations of being an apologist for child abuse will be thrown at me; so be it; I care nothing for the opinions of racist bigots who use the victims of child abuse to further their own agenda.

Putting aside the tedious arguments regarding the acceptable age of consent 1400 years ago, the prevalence and child marriages worldwide, and the Muslim prophet's marriage - Is pointing out the overwhelming over-representation of certain ethnic groups in connection with these offenses (referring to perpetrators) and/or commenting on their religious affiliation also considered racist bigotry?

Saying that opportunity was the main criteria for picking victims, rather then religious affiliation may be correct. Applying that same argument vs. ethnic group affiliation probably harder to discredit, even with allowances to different lifestyles in certain communities, the figures ought to have been different (if I read correctly, then the latest case would be an anomaly in relation to the percent of Asian victims, when compared with the figures quoted for the national level).

[JockPieandBeans]

Saying that opportunity was the main criteria for picking victims, rather then religious affiliation may be correct.

Sorry Morch.

When an atrocity of this scale is carried out over the course of years and at least 1400 victims. That cannot be construed as opportunist. that comes under the category of systematic, targeted abuse.

As well as Rotherham. You can add, Bristol, Rochdale, Derby, Oldham and Bradford.

There is nothing opportunist about it. There is 1 common denominator in all these cases.

[7by7]

JPB, I have already shown you the meaning of the word 'opportunist' yet you still fail to grasp it's meaning.

These men were opportunists in the way they picked there victims.

Saville was opportunist in the way he picked his victims.

Those responsible for the abuse in Catholic children's homes were opportunist in the way the picked their victims.

All who commit this vile crime are opportunists; they prey on children that they can easily access; that is the meaning of opportunist in this context.

Here endeth the English lesson.

[Mosha]

Saying that opportunity was the main criteria for picking victims, rather then religious affiliation may be correct.

Sorry Morch.

When an atrocity of this scale is carried out over the course of years and at least 1400 victims. That cannot be construed as opportunist. that comes under the category of systematic, targeted abuse.

As well as Rotherham. You can add, Bristol, Rochdale, Derby, Oldham and Bradford.

There is nothing opportunist about it. There is 1 common denominator in all these cases.

Dewsbury, Batley

[Morch]

Saying that opportunity was the main criteria for picking victims, rather then religious affiliation may be correct.

Sorry Morch.

When an atrocity of this scale is carried out over the course of years and at least 1400 victims. That cannot be construed as opportunist. that comes under the category of systematic, targeted abuse.

As well as Rotherham. You can add, Bristol, Rochdale, Derby, Oldham and Bradford.

There is nothing opportunist about it. There is 1 common denominator in all these cases.

Could have phrased it better, perhaps.

Do the victims represent a cross section of UK society and population? Or do they generally come from groups more likely to be vulnerable to these sort of crimes?

Just meant that perpetrators target victims, and often going for groups which represent a more likely opportunity for "success". Nothing to deny it being a systematic effort.

[7by7]

Lies are not facts. How can anyone take you seriously, you admit to never having read the Koran, but then pose as an expert on Islam and it's wicked history.

So the child marriage figures I posted previously, which are sourced from UNICEF, are lies?

This Hindu, Indian girl is lying?

I am certain that I have read as much of the Koran as you; however all my assertions about what it says have come via scholars who have not only read it but studied it carefully.

Yours come from Islamaphobic websites who cherry pick and edit to suit their agenda.

I could do the same with the Bible were I so inclined; but as I do not wish to demonises a whole religion due to the actions of a minority who are perverts I wont.

You carry on denying the truth.

JPB, in every country where child marriages occur, with the possible exception of Saudi Arabia, they are illegal. Yet, as the figures show, this abomination does not only happen in Muslim countries.

You and your mates can deny that and say the figures are lies as much as you like; but it wont change the facts.

[JockPieandBeans]

JPB, I have already shown you the meaning of the word 'opportunist' yet you still fail to grasp it's meaning.

These men were opportunists in the way they picked there victims.

Saville was opportunist in the way he picked his victims.

Those responsible for the abuse in Catholic children's homes were opportunist in the way the picked their victims.

All who commit this vile crime are opportunists; they prey on children that they can easily access; that is the meaning of opportunist in this context.

Here endeth the English lesson.

You are the one who has failed to grasp its meaning.

The targeted abuse of children by gangs of predominantly Asian ( men ) in towns and cities across the Country is not opportunist. It is a targeted effort, that has 1 common denominator.

Saville was not an opportunist. Saville was a predatory peado.

An opportunist is someone who commits a crime as a one off thinking they will get away with it. Whether that crime is robbery, rape or murder. As soon as you commit that crime on a number of occasions, the opportunist has gone and moved onto habitual offender. In the case of both of the above, they had moved beyond habitual offenders and had become serial offenders.

There is a marked difference, but you, of course, would not know that.