egafd.com

"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."

Let's be precise for a moment, shall we, please? First much of this thread is about my response to Max who extrapolates from the figures on Pakistani grooming gangs in Rochdate to state "There are nasty abusers from every race and community - there are just more, percentage-wise, from the Pakistani community in Britain."

My point to Max is that he appears to have no figures to back up the extent of child abuse by Muslims throughout "Britain". If you have that info, Sam, please share it.

Secondly, you had admitted, Sam that you "hate Islam" and you believe that child sexual abuse is increased by the statements in the Koran. This is correct, is it not? No misrepresentation on my part.

Your hatred of Islam seems to me to be shared by all extreme right wing groups such as the EDL. This is correct, is it not?

Now let's examine your next statement "David used an article based on conjecture to liken me to the EDL etc. etc. "

This is wrong clearly. You are mixed up. The reference I use to come to my conclusion about you being like the EDL support is that you extrapolate from the Rotherham rape gangs to make some religion wide comments about Islam. As far as I am concerned this is incorrect.

My view is that the Pakistani rape gangs were criminal scumbags. And the news that they were also raping Pakistani girls, which you rather unfortunately, describe as conjecture as if the Asian support workers interviewed on the Radio 4 programme were for some reasons telling lies supports my view that these guys are criminal scumbags rather than devout Muslins following what you refer to elsewhere as "No mention of rape in the commandments and 'rape' in the Quran isn't even a word because unmarried non-Muslim women can be taken as sex slaves"


" 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.

Again your use of statistics is very poor. Just because the raping of children has been carried out by gangs of Pakistanis, as I am sure you know, there are many other techniques leading to rape e.g. internet grooming, rape within the family etc etc. I can also quote you figures like I said to Max. 95% of the people on the Sex Offenders Register in Rochdale are white.

Now I am not denying that there is a problem with rape by Pakistani gangs as the appalling events in Rochdale, Rotherham and some other cities show. But to repeat I do not believe that it is because they are followers of Islam, more that they are criminals.

I have no desire to have some internet argy bargy with you, Sam. Note my response has attempted to be reasoned.

Like I said, I just happen to disagree with you..

This is the programme referenced in the opening thread. Support workers talk about the rape of Pakistani girls by Pakistani gangs in Rotherham and how they take advantage of the sense of shame these girls and the fear that their fathers will find out - a trick played by child abusers throughout the world, the use of power and shame to control their victims whether they are in their family, childrens homes, groomed over the internet etc. etc. Scumbags all!

As usual, David is more concerned about attacking me than getting to the truth.

But to help Max out, here is an article that at least lends weight to his and my assertions on sex grooming gangs (note: I was careful to specifically talk about 'grooming gangs' rather than just 'grooming'). It is only one part of the country, but it is interesting and valuable information nonetheless. Is the West Midlands an anomaly? Rochdale, Rotherham, Derbyshire, Oxford and other cases in London only seems to back up this report, not contradict it.

And David's slanderous implication that I'm an EDL supporter or Islamic apostate just shows you his attitude to all of this - that Islam cannot be criticised in the same way every other religion and institution should be. And if that means implying you're a bigot to shut you up, so be it. As long as Islam is protected, that is all that matters. It just further confirms my belief on how the left will give up it's chore principles when it comes to Islam.

And......this post has reminded me what went through my mind when I read David's implication of EDL or apostate leanings. But first, let's discuss the types of racism there are:

1. The first type of racism is about inferiority. You could think Black people are inferior, which means you can justify treating them as inferior. This type of racism led to slavery.

2. Then we have dislike, fear of the other, or both. You just don't like Black people. This could run along with #1 or not. Thinking Black people are inferior could cause you to dislike them, but, it doesn't have to be. One could admit that Black people are just the same as White people, but dislike them for their difference, nonetheless. A more modern type of racism.

3. Then we have subliminal racism. You don't think you're racist and feel like you have no ill will or superiority complex over other races, yet sometimes what you say and do contradicts that. This could be why, for instance, we have smaller numbers of Black managers in football or Black members on the boards of large corporations etc etc. Nobody thinks they're racist and nobody means to be racist, but it's there.

Now.....let's have a look at David's implication again:

"Unlike Mr Slater with the anti-Islam views that only an EDF supporter or in his case, lapsed believer can have,..."

Firstly, he says 'only'. To have a hatred or dislike of Islam means you can only be a bigot or an apostate. So who really has the childish, narrow-minded view here? David gives no room for reasoned thought and conclusions - if you don't like Islam, you're a bad person. I do find it worrying that on more than one occasion now he's accused me of being an ex-Muslim apostate, given he knows what the Quran and Hadith says about apostasy, and what even vast numbers of even westernised Muslims think about apostasy. Is this a veiled threat?

Never mind.......let's get to my point. As I say, he has a very narrow-minded view of who is capable of disliking Islam, but while he thinks this is a clever little tactic of putting people he disagrees with into horrid little boxes without evidence, he also, in one sweeping move, dismisses intelligent, liberal Muslims who themselves critique their own religion and culture. Apparently, in David's world, practicing Muslims are incapable of holding a mirror up to themselves and seeing their own failings and faults. Only civilised, White intellectual liberals at the Guardian are capable of such mind-skills. Put simply, why does David assume Muslims don't have the capability of auto-critique like White, western liberals?

And who's the real racist here? The guy who treats Muslims like everyone else and holds them to the same expectations as everyone else or is it the guy who assumes they cannot be self-critical like we can and have to be protected and mollycoddled like some kid with special needs?

What annoys me about the left and right-wing media is that when it comes to Islam, the right always concentrates on the Muslims with more extreme, abhorrent views and the left goes against that, concentrating on being some PR campaigner for Islam. What I'd like to see is more column inches and airtime for liberal, intelligent Muslims who admit things need to change and are willing to fight and drag their own religion and cultural practices into the 21st century......and there are Muslims like that, just like there've always been anti-religious, anti-establishment movements across Europe for the last 2-300 years. We just never get to hear them and it's because, in part, of attitude's like David's.

Oh well, I did try to be civil. Unfortunately, disagreeing with Sam Slater on a topic for any length of time brings down a constant stream of victimhood and anger from him.

Sam clearly has extreme views on this topic.

Stating that he "hates Islam" and "No mention of rape in the commandments and 'rape' in the Quran isn't even a word because unmarried non-Muslim women can be taken as sex slaves"

Despite his long, rambling, poorly argued post he completely fails to answer my challenges that I have put to him for weeks. Inconvenient truths are so, so annoying aren't they, Sam?

1. If Pakistani rape gangs indicate the influence of Islam in these actions, why then did these gangs also rape Muslim girls?

2. If Islam is such an "evil" influence on true believers, why is child rape not totally endemic in the Pakistani community in the UK? Maybe you believe it is with the Muslim community only taking a break from it to go to Friday prayers.

3. Instead of banging on endlessly about Pakistani rape gangs, please provide figures about the percentage of child abuse offences committed in Britain by Pakistani Muslims as part of the overall number of child offences in the UK which will also include internet grooming, workers in childrens care homes, family members etc. etc. Obviously if your views are correct you would see this reflected in nationwide figures covering all child offences.

Over to you Sam. Let's see whether you have the guts to reply SPECIFICALLY to my post rather than rambling on and on about how you are some terrorised victim.

There are so many incorrect interpretations and misconceptions in your post Sam, I thought I would correct a few for you.

"But to help Max out, here is an article that at least lends weight to his and my assertions on sex grooming gangs"

This is irrelevant to the content of this thread. Obviously there is a problem with Pakistani grooming gangs in a number of towns. Providing a link to the Birmingham article does not move the discussion forward.

Obviously the point I am making to both yourself and Max is that you cannot extrapolate from a number of individual cases at a local level to argue as Max did that the Pakistani community as a whole IN BRITAIN has a greater proportion of child sex offenders.

"And David's slanderous implication that I'm an EDL supporter or Islamic apostate just shows you his attitude to all of this"

Again you haven't grasped what I am telling you. You "hate Islam". This strikes me as extreme to "hate" one of the great religions of the world. You may hate the Muslims who read the words of the Koran literally as an excuse for heheading people just as I hate the evangelical Christians of the US who take the Old Testament an eye for an eye, literally as an excuse for killing staff working in abortion clinics. But I don't "hate Christianity".

People who have such a simplistic view tend to be people who are rather simplistic themselves like people in the EDL. I do not accuse you OBVIOUSLY of being an EDL person. What I state SPECIFICALLY is "Unlike Mr Slater with the anti-Islam views that only an EDF supporter or in his case, lapsed believer can have".

It is my understanding that you were brought up a Muslim based on something I recall you posted on the forum way back. If I have got that wrong I am more than happy to apologise and withdraw the comment. That is why I state "in his case, lapsed believer". So perhaps you can clarify - were you brought up a Muslim or not?

"if you don't like Islam, you're a bad person"

OBVIOUSLY I do not believe that nor have I stated that. There are faults in all religions and I deplore the use of Muslim clerics who are largely uneducated to use a literal interpretation of some of the more bloodthirsty parts of the Koran in their speeches.

That is enough from me. I could go on about your other misrepresentations but I can't be arsed.

Anyway I have shown courtesy in clarifying YOUR points. Let forumites see if you have the courtesy to clarify MY points, here.



Come on, Sam. Don't be shy!