egafd.com

"There are nasty abusers from every race and community - there are just more, percentage-wise, from the Pakistani community in Britain."

You have no evidence to back this statement up "in Britain" as your reply shows. If you had, you would need to have figures for "the Pakistani community in Britain" as a whole.

"Most, if not all the abusers were Pakistani men. I don't know how many Pakistani men there are in Rotherham but that is a percentage of the community that is quite high"

So you have no idea then.

If you want to totally misrepresent the figures, best to take a line from Sam Slater. He is a master. Here's one from Sam

"Just heard on the radio that ethnic minorities in Rotherham make up around 8% of the population. Less than 6% are of Pakistani origin. These men came from that 6% and are responsible for over 50% of all sex crimes in the town involving under-aged children."

As far as I am aware about 5 Pakistanis were found guilty of child abuse in Rotherham. So if I were to say for example, that 10 while people were convicted of all the post office robberies in Blackpool in 2013 and therefore, white people robbing post offices is much more prevalent in Britain than black people or Asians, you would rightly argue that I was talking rubbish, Max, would you not? This is exactly the sort of thing you are arguing re. child abuse.

Max, I am not arguing that there isn't a problem in the Pakistani community. But I think people like your good self need to think a bit more before making sweeping statements about Pakistanis in the whole of Britain. You have nothing to back up your statement apart from muttering about Rotherham.

Here is one "fact" for you.

In Rochdate, 95% of the men on the sex offenders' register are white. Of course, the Rochdate gang righly have a high profile in the media, but as I have already explained to you, child sex abuse occurs mainly in the family rather than gangs of taxi drivers wandering around.

It seems Sam Slater is deep in your head. Not healthy. All the points you've made in this thread are extant without the need for these repeated Sam Slater crowbars.

You guys clearly have differences, but I'm sure you don't want readers to infer this as ungentlemanly goading.

*Please note this isn't a covert request for a lengthy debate, nor an attempt to draw Sam Slater into commenting here. It's simply me chucking in my tuppence worth in passing.*

"It seems Sam Slater is deep in your head."

Oh, no he isn't. The pantomime season has come early, Alicia.

" Not healthy"

Thank you for your advice but I don't think it is necessary nor am I sure about your medical credentials.

"All the points you've made in this thread are extant without the need for these repeated Sam Slater crowbars."

I mention Mr. Slater because he is the main proponent of the a. Islam is evil b. Islam provides guidance on abusing non-Muslim children. c. Rotherham is an example of this in action.

I disagree and the evidence increasingly supports my view. The Pakistanis involved are criminal scumbags.

""You guys clearly have differences, but I'm sure you don't want readers to infer this as ungentlemanly goading."

"ungentlemanly goading"?

I suspect you have confused this forum with a vicar's tea party. If all anyone gets is "ungentlemanly goading" on here they have been very lucky, I have had far, far worse. I could mention who has been more comprehensively insulting fellow posters on here more than most of late, but I do not wish to bring forward another medical diagnosis from you.


*Please note this isn't a covert request for a lengthy debate, nor an attempt to draw Sam Slater into commenting here. It's simply me chucking in my tuppence worth in passing.*

I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in having a lengthy debate with you.

Have a good weekend, Alicia

A small number of Pakistani men were convicted but it's been said that the vast majority, if not all, of the abusers of those 1400 girls were Pakistani men. This may not have been proven by a Court but the victims have stated it, and a lot of footage from TV news reports show men of that ethnicity picking up white girls late at night around Rotherham.

It annoys me how the definition of the term 'racist' is now so vague, the impact that it has if thrown at a person is so heavy, the fact the person making the charge does not have to explain what they mean, and so on, is such that you are more or less a racist now for just breathing. The term used to have a specific definition: treating someone negatively or excluding them because of their colour, creed, race of religion. That's what I always understood it to originally mean.

It morphed into this term where it just means anything and nothing now and that causes huge problems, I believe Lord Macpherson in his report into the Stephen Lawrence murder in the late-1990's made it all worse when he said that racism means anything you want it to mean, and he also introduced this thing of 'perceived racism' which is even more vague. Being called it, even though you don't really know what you might have done, you don't know what the person making the charge means, hits you as hard as being called a traitor, child molester or whatever. We really need to establish a proper definition of this term in society, where someone can only be it if they fall within the parameters of the definition of the term, and there is no vagueness.

Having the term 'racist' meaning everything and nothing, and considering the impact on the accused as I've said, causes immense problems in society. Just think, they have allowed the abuse of vast numbers of girls across the midlands and the north out of fear of being called 'racist'. It is terrible.

I wish I'd bet on the form, content and tone of response....

Fair enough. Sam Slater is not in your head: it's official. My concern was unfounded.

You say "the evidence increasingly supports my view" across different threads/topics. That may well be 100% true. Or it may simply be your perception of what that evidence means (in other words, your view supports your view). Or somewhere in between.

The "ungentlemanly goading" was my attempt to (sensitively) suggest some may read your comments and infer you were being a prick. Just as a friendly heads up. It's nice to try to be nice, tea party or otherwise.

Also, to clarify, you could not bring forward another medical diagnosis from me as I never ventured one.

I don't want a lengthy debate about this!!

Yes you do

Oh no I don't. Panto season started early as I said.

Seems David is clutching at straws and these latest findings actually leave us with more questions than answers.

1. How many Muslim girls have been abused?

2. How many Muslim girls have been abused in the same way in Rochdale, Oxford, Derby etc? Even if many Muslim girls were abused in Rotherham, we need more for it to be considered a pattern.

3. The article David links to, a few things stood out:

[quote]She told BBC File on 4: "The Pakistani girls are not going to be part and parcel of this report. There's no record of what's happened to them. They're too afraid to have ever gone to the law.[/quote]

It is quite common for sexually abused girls (and boys for that matter) to be afraid or ashamed enough to report these crimes. But in the case of the victims in Rotherham, the problems were more about the victims not being taken seriously rather than under-reporting abuse. But with suspected Pakistani victims, the first worry is about being afraid. Why? Is it because Pakistani girls would not get the same sort of support from family and friends compared to their white counterparts? That shame and honour are much more rife in their communities?

Maybe the next quote from the article throws some light on this:

[quote]"The men will get away with this because nobody wants to address it and nobody wants to own up to the fact that their daughter has been molested."[/quote]

Ah........ I see. Bringing shame on to the family.

And finally, from the article,

[quote]Although none of the victims would talk directly to the BBC,....[/quote]

Well, there we have it. David used an article based on conjecture to liken me to an EDL supporter or some sort of Islamic apostate. Yet more evidence of his terrible attitude when it comes to me. He's obsessed with me.

Latest police reports suggest that 75% of grooming gangs in the UK are made up of Asian males (which I think is unfair to call them 'Asian' when Asia is the biggest continent on the planet stretching from Europe to the Bering Strait). Muslims make up between 4-6% of the population and account for 75% of street grooming gangs. Some people seem to think this is coincidental. I don't.

I suppose it's just coincidental that the 15,000 jihadis that have signed up to IS were Muslim, and religion played no part in their views too. Heads well and truly in the sand.