1400 children sexually exploited in UK town Rotherham: report

[H1w4yR1da]

1) Forced marriage is illegal in the UK; arranged marriages are not.

Arranged marriage was common practice in Europe up to about 100 years ago and is still practiced in many parts of the world and by many cultures and religions.

But MOSTLY by Muslims re. forced marriage.

2) FGM has been discussed at length, and I agree the lack of prosecutions is a scandal. But as proven, though you wont accept the fact, FGM is not just a Muslim practice; it is practiced by people from many religions.

But MOSTLY by Muslims

3) Yes, it is unfortunate that so called 'honour' killings have taken place in the UK; But as you admit, they are illegal and the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Again, so called 'honour killings' and 'honour' violence is not just a Muslim thing.

Not just, but MOSTLY a Muslim thing.

Just because a few backward tribes in Africa who call themselves Christians follow these barbaric customs doesn't take away from the fact that the common denominator in alll these so-called 'customs' is Islam.

4) You used close family members marrying to justify your bigoted view of how primitive and inbred Muslims are.

It's not bigoted to judge people by their actions.

If people behave in a 'primitive' way (see child sex-grooming, Lee Rigby, 7/7 etc) then it's perfectly legitimate to regard them as such.

And referring to other posters as bigots just highlights the fact that you wish to silence their opinion. Like 'racist', it's the great debate killer. Just plain facist.

Any discussion on the multitude of Islamic atrocities is met with cries of "homophobia" by those who wish we should just ignore the dangers of Islamic supremacism in the name of diversity and multiculturalism.

[JockPieandBeans]

Pieman, your ignorance is again well to the fore.

1) Forced marriage is illegal in the UK; arranged marriages are not.

Arranged marriage was common practice in Europe up to about 100 years ago and is still practiced in many parts of the world and by many cultures and religions. Arranged marriage.

2) FGM has been discussed at length, and I agree the lack of prosecutions is a scandal. But as proven, though you wont accept the fact, FGM is not just a Muslim practice; it is practiced by people from many religions.

BTW, in the prosecution you refer to, the accused was acquitted.

3) Yes, it is unfortunate that so called 'honour' killings have taken place in the UK; But as you admit, they are illegal and the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Again, so called 'honour killings' and 'honour' violence is not just a Muslim thing.

Honour Crimes

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

Notwithstanding, three times this number (i.e. 18%) in the entire sample selected one or more of five ‘reasonable justifications’ for physical punishment of female members of the family. The figure was highest among Asian Christians (23%), followed by Muslims (20%), Sikhs (14%), and Hindus (13%).

4) You used close family members marrying to justify your bigoted view of how primitive and inbred Muslims are, even though you have absolutely no evidence to back up your assertions that these particular people married a close family member.

You don't believe my word that marriage between siblings or marrying a niece/nephew is against Islamic law; so read this.

I showed you that cousins marrying in the UK is legal, and has been for centuries, you dismiss that as irrelevant! Of course you do. You do the same with all facts which demolish your bigotry.

6) I did not 'moan' about having to comply with my employers dress code; I simply said that both my wife and I have to. As do many employees in the UK and other countries. No moaning there; simply a statement of fact.

You also seem to have completely failed to understand the rest of that post; even the part you have quoted.

Problems with your English again?

Is that the sum total of your reply Mohammed ? Which must be said, ignores most of the points that I made.

However, this does not surprise, let me tell you why.

I would doubt very much if there was a person in the UK, who was an Athiest, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jew, Sikh or any other that you care to mention, would defend Muslim Culture the way you do. There is only religion that would try to defend the way that you do. Muslims.

You have been OUTED Mohammed, I do not care how many times that you try to deny, wriggle, squirm or lie, you are most definitely a Muslim. So take your Taqiyya and spread your denial elsewhere.

It is Friday, get your dish-dash and sandals on and make your way to the Mosque double quick time.

Do I have a problem with my English ? I have no idea. I speak Jockanese, English is my 2nd language. The one thing I do not have a problem with, is denying what I am. Something that you cannot say the same.

[Bangkok Herps]

Any discussion on the multitude of Islamic atrocities is met with cries of "homophobia" by those who wish we should just ignore the dangers of Islamic supremacism in the name of diversity and multiculturalism.

You're mixing up your prejudices -

* it's Islamophobia you're being accused of here

* it's racism for you on the Ferguson thread

* the homophobia that you're accused of must be somewhere else

[Tep]

Pieman, your ignorance is again well to the fore.

1) Forced marriage is illegal in the UK; arranged marriages are not.

Arranged marriage was common practice in Europe up to about 100 years ago and is still practiced in many parts of the world and by many cultures and religions. Arranged marriage.

2) FGM has been discussed at length, and I agree the lack of prosecutions is a scandal. But as proven, though you wont accept the fact, FGM is not just a Muslim practice; it is practiced by people from many religions.

BTW, in the prosecution you refer to, the accused was acquitted.

3) Yes, it is unfortunate that so called 'honour' killings have taken place in the UK; But as you admit, they are illegal and the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Again, so called 'honour killings' and 'honour' violence is not just a Muslim thing.

Honour Crimes

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

Notwithstanding, three times this number (i.e. 18%) in the entire sample selected one or more of five ‘reasonable justifications’ for physical punishment of female members of the family. The figure was highest among Asian Christians (23%), followed by Muslims (20%), Sikhs (14%), and Hindus (13%).

4) You used close family members marrying to justify your bigoted view of how primitive and inbred Muslims are, even though you have absolutely no evidence to back up your assertions that these particular people married a close family member.

You don't believe my word that marriage between siblings or marrying a niece/nephew is against Islamic law; so read this.

I showed you that cousins marrying in the UK is legal, and has been for centuries, you dismiss that as irrelevant! Of course you do. You do the same with all facts which demolish your bigotry.

6) I did not 'moan' about having to comply with my employers dress code; I simply said that both my wife and I have to. As do many employees in the UK and other countries. No moaning there; simply a statement of fact.

You also seem to have completely failed to understand the rest of that post; even the part you have quoted.

Problems with your English again?

Is that the sum total of your reply Mohammed ? Which must be said, ignores most of the points that I made.

However, this does not surprise, let me tell you why.

I would doubt very much if there was a person in the UK, who was an Athiest, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jew, Sikh or any other that you care to mention, would defend Muslim Culture the way you do. There is only religion that would try to defend the way that you do. Muslims.

You have been OUTED Mohammed, I do not care how many times that you try to deny, wriggle, squirm or lie, you are most definitely a Muslim. So take your Taqiyya and spread your denial elsewhere.

It is Friday, get your dish-dash and sandals on and make your way to the Mosque double quick time.

Do I have a problem with my English ? I have no idea. I speak Jockanese, English is my 2nd language. The one thing I do not have a problem with, is denying what I am. Something that you cannot say the same.

Even for this poster, this is a new level of nasty.

And yet, this vile, direct attack on and disrespect for another member, like the previous ones, is allowed to stand.

Shame.

[JockPieandBeans]

You use the word Muslim as a slur against posters. You disrespect them in a vile and disgusting manner continually. You have hijacked this thread and moved it from any serous and proper discussion of child protective behaviours and prevention to be focussed solely on issues warped by your bigotry.

Is that the best you can do ? If you had read the whole thread you would have seen the I have attacked everyone involved. From the Muslim perpetrators, the Government, the Police, Social Services and anyone who allowed, through a fear of being branded Racist, Bigoted and / or Islamophobic.

Whilst it is flattering that you can focus on the word '' Bigot '' It is worth noting that you have refrained from commenting on the actual thread topic. You also refrained from commentating when I said I was opposed to aspects of Muslim Culture, which is '' Illegal in the UK '' but happens on a monthly basis. Does that mean that you actually condone those illegal practices ?

You really must try harder, as you can throw all the '' Bigot '' accusations that you like. I do not care. As I have already pointed out to you. There is nothing '' Bigoted '' about being against '' Illegal practices ''

Just to keep it on topic.

Hot on the heels of the Oxford Grooming Gang being convicted.

Here is another Grooming Gang, this time in Banbury, just down the road from Oxford.

A gang which groomed vulnerable young girls at parties they had organised on social media has been convicted of a string of sex offences

• Ahmed Hassan-Sule, 21, of Glyndebourne Gardens, Banbury, was found guilty of 13 counts of sexual activity with a child and one count of assault by penetration
• Kagiso Manase, 20, of Warwick Road, Banbury, was convicted of three counts of sexual activity with a child, two counts of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity and one count of sexual assault
• Takudzwa Hova, 21, of Broughton Road, Banbury, was found guilty of one count of rape, one count of sexual activity with a child and two counts of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. He was found not guilty of one count of rape
• Mohamed Saleh, 21, of Orchard Way, Banbury, was found guilty of two counts of sexual activity with a child. He was found not guilty of one count of sexual activity with a child and one count of rape
• Said Saleh, 20, of Orchard Way, Banbury, was convicted of one count of sexual activity with a child but was found not guilty of another count
• The 17-year-old, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was found guilty of one count of rape

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-31765083

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

[Scott]

Some inflammatory and off-topic posts and replies removed. In addressing users, please use the appropriate username. Keep the discussion civil.

[Mosha]

You use the word Muslim as a slur against posters. You disrespect them in a vile and disgusting manner continually. You have hijacked this thread and moved it from any serous and proper discussion of child protective behaviours and prevention to be focussed solely on issues warped by your bigotry.

Is that the best you can do ? If you had read the whole thread you would have seen the I have attacked everyone involved. From the Muslim perpetrators, the Government, the Police, Social Services and anyone who allowed, through a fear of being branded Racist, Bigoted and / or Islamophobic.

Whilst it is flattering that you can focus on the word '' Bigot '' It is worth noting that you have refrained from commenting on the actual thread topic. You also refrained from commentating when I said I was opposed to aspects of Muslim Culture, which is '' Illegal in the UK '' but happens on a monthly basis. Does that mean that you actually condone those illegal practices ?

You really must try harder, as you can throw all the '' Bigot '' accusations that you like. I do not care. As I have already pointed out to you. There is nothing '' Bigoted '' about being against '' Illegal practices ''

Just to keep it on topic.

Hot on the heels of the Oxford Grooming Gang being convicted.

Here is another Grooming Gang, this time in Banbury, just down the road from Oxford.

A gang which groomed vulnerable young girls at parties they had organised on social media has been convicted of a string of sex offences

• Ahmed Hassan-Sule, 21, of Glyndebourne Gardens, Banbury, was found guilty of 13 counts of sexual activity with a child and one count of assault by penetration
• Kagiso Manase, 20, of Warwick Road, Banbury, was convicted of three counts of sexual activity with a child, two counts of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity and one count of sexual assault
• Takudzwa Hova, 21, of Broughton Road, Banbury, was found guilty of one count of rape, one count of sexual activity with a child and two counts of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. He was found not guilty of one count of rape
• Mohamed Saleh, 21, of Orchard Way, Banbury, was found guilty of two counts of sexual activity with a child. He was found not guilty of one count of sexual activity with a child and one count of rape
• Said Saleh, 20, of Orchard Way, Banbury, was convicted of one count of sexual activity with a child but was found not guilty of another count
• The 17-year-old, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was found guilty of one count of rape

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-31765083

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

An aversion to alcohol?

[JockPieandBeans]

An aversion to alcohol?

I have seen far too many Muslims drinking alcohol, for an aversion to alcohol to be a reason.

[KarenBravo]

German helmets and not anteaters?

[Steely Dan]

Pieman, your ignorance is again well to the fore.

1) Forced marriage is illegal in the UK; arranged marriages are not.

Arranged marriage was common practice in Europe up to about 100 years ago and is still practiced in many parts of the world and by many cultures and religions. Arranged marriage.

2) FGM has been discussed at length, and I agree the lack of prosecutions is a scandal. But as proven, though you wont accept the fact, FGM is not just a Muslim practice; it is practiced by people from many religions.

BTW, in the prosecution you refer to, the accused was acquitted.

3) Yes, it is unfortunate that so called 'honour' killings have taken place in the UK; But as you admit, they are illegal and the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Again, so called 'honour killings' and 'honour' violence is not just a Muslim thing.

Honour Crimes

Backing for the extremer manifestations of ‘izzat’ was small. Thus, only 6% of all young Asians believed that, in certain circumstances, it could be right to punish physically a female member of the family if she brought dishonour to it or the community. No Sikhs agreed with this, but 9% of Hindus, 8% of Christians, and 6% of Muslims did so.

Notwithstanding, three times this number (i.e. 18%) in the entire sample selected one or more of five ‘reasonable justifications’ for physical punishment of female members of the family. The figure was highest among Asian Christians (23%), followed by Muslims (20%), Sikhs (14%), and Hindus (13%).

4) You used close family members marrying to justify your bigoted view of how primitive and inbred Muslims are, even though you have absolutely no evidence to back up your assertions that these particular people married a close family member.

You don't believe my word that marriage between siblings or marrying a niece/nephew is against Islamic law; so read this.

I showed you that cousins marrying in the UK is legal, and has been for centuries, you dismiss that as irrelevant! Of course you do. You do the same with all facts which demolish your bigotry.

6) I did not 'moan' about having to comply with my employers dress code; I simply said that both my wife and I have to. As do many employees in the UK and other countries. No moaning there; simply a statement of fact.

You also seem to have completely failed to understand the rest of that post; even the part you have quoted.

Problems with your English again?

Quite right honour killings are not just a Muslim thing. My overall concern about honour killings can be split precisely by their prevalence amongst different communities. This equates to 91% Muslim and 9% the rest.

Incidentally Denmark found birth defects due to inbreeding were five times more prevalent in the Muslim population as the general population. A history lessen about ancient incidences of inbreeding is not exactly relevant in 2015, and as with most of your verbiage is just your indefatigable attempts to downplay or disguise the obvious and largely unique issues of the Muslim population.

[Bangkok Herps]

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam.

[H1w4yR1da]

Any discussion on the multitude of Islamic atrocities is met with cries of "homophobia" by those who wish we should just ignore the dangers of Islamic supremacism in the name of diversity and multiculturalism.

You're mixing up your prejudices -

* it's Islamophobia you're being accused of here

* it's racism for you on the Ferguson thread

* the homophobia that you're accused of must be somewhere else

Dont be a prick. You knew what I meant. Youve never heard ofAndroid predictive text? Shit happens. Edited March 7, 2015 by H1w4yR1da

[H1w4yR1da]

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam.

And absolutely nothing to do with this thread and just pure deflection.

Poor effort!

[Commerce]

The Catholic church has now cleaned things up ...

.

[Steely Dan]

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam.

I figured it out, the common denominator is that they are all off topic, which coming to think of it also seems to apply to most of the posts from some of our esteemed members.

[JockPieandBeans]

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam.

And absolutely nothing to do with this thread and just pure deflection.

Poor effort!

Yes, Its quite astounding the amount of posters that have come onto a 40 page thread in the last 3 pages, who have absolutely nothing to say about the topic.

Only spout off topic deflections.

[Scott]

Continued nasty, inflammatory remarks will result in suspensions.

[Bangkok Herps]

Wow, I'm the prick and I have herpes! Poster maturity here gets stronger every day.

FYI, I'm sure this is very important to you, but I've been reading the thread off and on from the first page since some time ago. Child abuse is odious, protection by the authorities is even more odious, and this terrible scandal is just one more in a sequence of scandals where authorities protected other authorities and men rather than protecting the most vulnerable. There wasn't much to say that hasn't already been said - I haven't seen a single person defending child abuse or defending the cover-up of child abuse, so the most "on-topic" points are redundant.

The only reason I piped in at this point (and more than once earlier, for those who don't notice these things) was to introduce a bit of logic to a poster's attempt to hijack the scandal to serve his own hateful ends. Of course, being unfamiliar with logic, the poster and his cohorts have not recognized it as such, which is why I'll have to explain in fuller detail.

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam.

I figured it out, the common denominator is that they are all off topic, which coming to think of it also seems to apply to most of the posts from some of our esteemed members.

You see, there's something called "correlation" and there's something called "causation". They aren't the same.

Learning that you have to prove causation, not just correlation, when you want to show that one variable caused another is one of the basic principles of true investigation.

On top of that, there's something called "confirmation bias". That's what happens when someone only wants to pull out the data that confirms their preconceived notions, rather than looking at the whole picture.

With the combination of confirmation bias and the correlation/causation confusion, it can become very easy to prove any point you want to make. Just pre-select only that data that involves the people you want to fit your theory, and say, "Look, it all correlates!" while ignoring all the data that doesn't fit. You've ignored 90% of the data, and you haven't proved causation, but you feel good inside because your preconceived biases have been confirmed.

In this case, our resident Muslim-obsessed poster pulled out a sex abuse scandal involving a small number of men and shouted, "Look, another scandal with Muslims, it must be their Muslimness!"

I pointed out the stupidity of that logic by pulling out many more far larger sex abuse scandals involving every walk of man, showing that all he had done was cherry-pick the data - he hadn't proven any correlation, much less causation.

Until he takes in all the data and shows there is a correlation, and that that correlation is not correlated to other variables but is an actual product of their Muslim orientation, then his claims of a Muslim connection are nothing more than the products of his own bias.

Of course, making firm claims about our certainty in subjects where we don't have the data at all has been a common pastime recently on these boards.

I'm sure all of you are bright enough to follow that. Question, of course, is whether you will.

[7by7]

With your superior knowledge and education. Perhaps you could come up with the common denominator that causes Pakistani Muslim Grooming Gangs and African Muslim Grooming Gangs.to operate with the same MO ?

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam.

And absolutely nothing to do with this thread and just pure deflection.

Poor effort!

Yes, Its quite astounding the amount of posters that have come onto a 40 page thread in the last 3 pages, who have absolutely nothing to say about the topic.

Only spout off topic deflections.

Perhaps you could tell us what your post of 6th March at 9:37 listing what you consider to be Muslim only crimes, but which aren't despite the assertions of the ignorant, and even talking about dress codes at work has to do with this topic?

According to you, all that is on topic; but showing that child abuse and sexual grooming is not just a Muslim thing in a topic about child abuse and sexual grooming is an off topic deflection.

The reason for that is obvious; you can't accept that these atrocious crimes are also committed by non Muslims and so have to ignore all the evidence which shows you to be wrong.

If you want to campaign against ALL child abuse, I'll be right there with you; but you don't.

You are only interested when the perpetrators are Muslim. The reasons for that are as appalling as they are obvious.

[Commerce]

You are correct 7by7 that other sections of the community have their paedophiles, however what is different in the case of Rotherham and other English towns is that these Muslim men purposely targeted white( none Muslim girls). Yet I've yet to hear anybody accusing them of being Racist, and according to this weeks report, many people in Rotherham were aware of these crimes yet were afraid to speak out, in case they themselves were accused of being racist, by the apologist.

Just an added point, I did mention in an earlier post that I used to live in Rotherham and work for the local authority many years ago, and I can assure you that the numbers of Pakistani Muslims in Rotherham is far greater than those mentioned. How can this be so, I' ll leave you to work it out.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Correct! See pie chart 1.8 and figures in 1.9 as attached.

http://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rotherham.gov.uk%2Fjsna%2Fdownload%2Fdownloads%2Fid%2F38%2Frotherham_demographic_profile_-_2013&ei=WLz6VLvXCs6XuATD0oCIDw&usg=AFQjCNGpQBv-s7OuhVvGWNR7Hy3twlA2jQ&bvm=bv.87611401,d.c2E

Official UK Govnt figures........

[Commerce]

Forgot about this one,sorry I mis read, i thought Rotherham but this is Rochdale so it might be off topic, same crime by the same people though in the same County

Rochdale grooming gang leader gets 22 years for child rape

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/aug/02/rochdale-grooming-leader-child-rape

Ahmed? Aye, there's a British name....... Amen. .. What a count, removing 'o'.

[7by7]

From the document linked to above, fig 1.9 shows that 91.9% of the population of Rotherham is classified as White British; 3% classified as Pakistani origin.

So what is your point?

As for the vile men targeting just white girls, as has previously been shown; they didn't.

They targeted vulnerable girls. That the majority of them were white is due to many variables; as has been discussed at length earlier in the topic.

But certain posters ignored that as it does not suit their prejudices.

[Commerce]

And absolutely nothing to do with this thread and just pure deflection.

Poor effort!

Yes, Its quite astounding the amount of posters that have come onto a 40 page thread in the last 3 pages, who have absolutely nothing to say about the topic.

Only spout off topic deflections.

Perhaps you could tell us what your post of 6th March at 9:37 listing what you consider to be Muslim only crimes, but which aren't despite the assertions of the ignorant, and even talking about dress codes at work has to do with this topic?

According to you, all that is on topic; but showing that child abuse and sexual grooming is not just a Muslim thing in a topic about child abuse and sexual grooming is an off topic deflection.

The reason for that is obvious; you can't accept that these atrocious crimes are also committed by non Muslims and so have to ignore all the evidence which shows you to be wrong.

If you want to campaign against ALL child abuse, I'll be right there with you; but you don't.

You are only interested when the perpetrators are Muslim. The reasons for that are as appalling as they are obvious.

Show me an example of any town or city in the world where 1400 kids have been groomed for, and put through, awful sexual abuse or rape.

I think your search will come up with Muslim towns and cities - as the ideal to do so is written in the Quoran.

[JockPieandBeans]

FYI, I'm sure this is very important to you, but I've been reading the thread off and on from the first page since some time ago. Child abuse is odious, protection by the authorities is even more odious, and this terrible scandal is just one more in a sequence of scandals where authorities protected other authorities and men rather than protecting the most vulnerable. There wasn't much to say that hasn't already been said - I haven't seen a single person defending child abuse or defending the cover-up of child abuse, so the most "on-topic" points are redundant

As you say, there wasn't much to say that had not already been said, so you said:

And while you're at it, you should also figure out what their common denominator is with Westminster politicians, Australian Jews, Northern Ireland childcare givers, private school administrations, US Swimming coaches, and Catholic priests. Sure isn't Islam

Just so that there is no misunderstanding. When a thread is opened up on any of those that you have listed, where it concerns the UK I will be just as vocal. As there is currently no threads of that vein open and running, there is no need for me to comment on something that is off topic.

In this case, our resident Muslim-obsessed poster pulled out a sex abuse scandal involving a small number of men and shouted, "Look, another scandal with Muslims, it must be their Muslimness!"

I pointed out the stupidity of that logic by pulling out many more far larger sex abuse scandals involving every walk of man, showing that all he had done was cherry-pick the data - he hadn't proven any correlation, much less causation.

Until he takes in all the data and shows there is a correlation, and that that correlation is not correlated to other variables but is an actual product of their Muslim orientation, then his claims of a Muslim connection are nothing more than the products of his own bias.

I do not need to highlight what the topic of the thread is. What I have highlighted since the start of this thread, and will continue to do, is a direct result of the scandal highlighted by the original investigation into the thread topic. There is no data to '' cherry pick '' However, if you wish to bring the topic into a broader spectrum, let me put this in very general terms.

I would expect data to show that most sexual assaults in :

1. China were carried out by Chinese.

2. Thailand to be carried out by Thai's.

3. Russia to be carried out by Russians.

I am pretty sure that you get the picture.

That brings me to the UK, where some analysts have put that figure as high as 48% committed by Muslims. I wont bother providing links, they have already been supplied on this thread and I am sure you can use google.

The correlation is there for all to see. Muslim Grooming Gangs the length and breadth of the UK, all from different Continents, all with the same MO.

[7by7]

<snip>

there is no need for me to comment on something that is off topic.

Yet you are very happy to bring up a lengthy list of off topic points when it suits you!

Even though all those off topic points were easily demolished.

[MrWorldwide]

Yet again, I find myself in complete agreement with suradit69 - I'm hoping to find something for that at the pharmacy this evening.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

Stick to the topic please.

[Bangkok Herps]

Looks like someone still doesn't understand the difference between correlation and causation.

I'm still waiting for you to even try to show me a single study that shows causation rather than simple correlation.

You certainly don't understand confirmation bias either.

If one analyst says "48%" and another says "14.8%", which one are you going to remember and quote to me?

If Pakistani Muslims commit a disproportionately high number of sexual assaults in England, but English Atheists commit a disproportionately high number of sexual assaults in Thailand, and Spanish Catholics commit a disproportionately high number of sexual assaults in Sri Lanka, and European Jews commit a disproportionately high number of sexual assaults in Australia, which one of those examples are you going to see as emblematic of culture and which one are you not?

if you find actual, broad-scale data that shows a likely causation, instead of correlation, that would be great. Until then, why not try to focus on addressing the problem and leave the stereotypes and biases behind?

Perhaps if you did that, you would figure out something that would actually help reduce sexual assault....because even if you were right that Pakistani Muslims were likely to abuse children, starting a religious back-and-forth with them is only going to provide a cover and won't do one bit to keep any children more safe.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Bangkok Herps

[Bangkok Herps]

I checked google like you suggested, and quickly found this data for England and Wales:

In 2011, males accounted for the vast majority of prosecutions for sexual offences (98.2 per cent). More specifically, males aged 18 and over accounted for 89.7 per cent of proceedings for sexual offences, with similar proportions for rape (89.6 per cent) and sexual assault (89.2 per cent) proceedings (see Table 4.2). 9,042 defendants proceeded against for sexual offences in 2011 (91.2 per cent of total) were of a known ethnicity (see Table 4.4). Of these persons:  78.0 per cent were White;  9.9 per cent were Black;  9.7 per cent were Asian;

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/214970/sexual-offending-overview-jan-2013.pdf

It looks like the biggest risk factor in offending is maleness. Over 98% of offenders were male, more than twice their representation in the population. We should be doing everything we can to address this clear wave of sexual assault among the ugly male culture in Britain. Starting with White male culture, of course, because they were the largest offending group.*



* I realized that I should post a "satire alert" for those who aren't sensitive to such things.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Bangkok Herps

[Bangkok Herps]

Also found this Freedom of Information request:

As at 31 March 2014, the latest point in time for which data is available for public use, the male prison population in England and Wales for all offenders serving immediate custodial sentence for rape was 5,682. Of this, there were 676 offenders who self-declared their religion as Muslim (12% of the total).

http://www.google.co.in/url?q=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/324097/number-males-rape-muslim.doc&sa=U&ei=2NP6VNnDBo-wuASU8YGwBw&ved=0CDcQFjAF&sig2=jGw4tQVtl9ib_sqsN0V1Tw&usg=AFQjCNH0kNl2gXOGvuUzybsy6MizbrTLFQ

Unfortunately, these numbers do not fit your agenda. So the appropriate response is to discard them, and keep searching until you find the numbers that do fit your agenda. Whatever manipulating of the data is necessary to get to something that fits your preconceived beliefs.

Of course, even if you then scan through enough different numbers until you've found the ones that fit your agenda and explained away the ones that don't fit your agenda, you still would only have cherry-picked a supposed correlation. Not a causation.

Edited March 7, 2015 by Bangkok Herps