# Weasel Straw strikes again (Pakistani men in Britain see white girls as "easy meat")



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

> Former home secretary Jack Straw has said he believes some Pakistani men in Britain see white girls as "easy meat" for sexual abuse.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12141603

Cheers then. That really helps.

Fucking numpty.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 8, 2011)

Do these UK citizens he's speaking about self-identify as "Pakistani" ?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Do you have evidence that they do not?


----------



## bi0boy (Jan 8, 2011)

At least his son sells us draw.


----------



## Stoat Boy (Jan 8, 2011)

LOL. Talk about shoot the messenger.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

"Shoot the messenger"? Care to qualify that statement?


----------



## Sue (Jan 8, 2011)

Interesting. This was something the BNP made a lot of capital out of a few years ago.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12141603
> 
> Cheers then. That really helps.
> 
> Fucking numpty.


 
Everything Mr Straw said is unfortunately true.

It needs to be confronted, no matter how uncomfortable, and it needs to be addressed.

Unless you consider vulnerable young women as acceptable collateral damage in a politically correct war.

This has been going on for years, the security services knew about it as early as the 1990s and it is accepted as part of life for working girls in cities such as Derby, Bradford, Leicester, Blackburn, they know to protect themselves as best they can and work with cops to minimise risks.

There ARE groups of Pakistani men who consider troubled white British teenage girls, and boys, as fair game for abuse, at pre-organised sex parties where alcohol and cocaine are pretty much forced upon the victims, some as young as 13.

Rather than shooting the messenger, no matter how obnoxious and how his track record has blood all over it, might it not be prudent to at least look at the evidence?

Street grooming is happening. It's bold of Mr Straw to go public with his comments in this way, but it's about time something was said.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Why should he? Do you care to qualify your criticism first? Eta . To Nina.

I lived in Bradford for 4 yrs. This stuff is real.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Sue said:


> Interesting. This was something the BNP made a lot of capital out of a few years ago.


 
They did, and unfortunately they were not just making it up.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

gentlegreen said:


> Do these UK citizens he's speaking about self-identify as "Pakistani" ?


 
Yes.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

> Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Muslim youth group the Ramadhan Foundation, said the abuse was fuelled by racism in parts of the Asian community.
> 
> "There is a perception that some of these young men do not see white girls as equal, as valuable, of high moral standing as they see their own daughters, and their own sisters, and I think that's wrong," he said.
> 
> "It's a form of racism that's abhorrent in a civilised society."



I'd say that sounds accurate.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Garek said:


> I'd say that sounds accurate.


 
It's an endemic problem - the attitude is to hide away the Pakistani girls their own community at home with the housework, and go out and hunt for the "white pussy" in packs. Often it's young men awaiting their own arranged marriage taking part before they're tied down to a strictly enforced code of marital traditions.

They see any girl in a miniskirt as a prostitute, even one as young as 13.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

This topic is racist and islamaphobic. Bin/ban etc.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

I'm surprised Gilligan hasn't jumped on this. It's right up his street. Give him time...


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> This topic is racist and islamaphobic.


 
It is an issue of racism.

Unfortunately the racism stems from attitudes toward British white girls from Pakistani men. 

The islamophobia is not really the issue, it's more of a tribal thing.

Child marriage customs such as "swara" that stem from the Hazara region of Pakistan bear out the facts, that in certain cases age is irrelevant if the will of the male/family/cleric has decided that there should be a marriage. 

Also worth pointing out that the Saudi minimum age for marriage is 8 years old.

Different cultures, different attitudes. It's not a big deal for someone who comes from a culture that reinforces the notion that white UK girls are all sluts and that young girls are eligible for sex and marriage.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12141603
> 
> Cheers then. That really helps.
> 
> Fucking numpty.



Fucking tool, well done for doing the BNP's job for them.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

I remember when the hysterıa was all about Jamaıcan ''pımps.''  Who's next one wonders.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

gentlegreen said:


> Do these UK citizens he's speaking about self-identify as "Pakistani" ?


 
IME lads from a Reggie Varney background are split about 50/50 as identifying as Pakistani.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Fucking tool, well done for doing the BNP's job for them.


 
Fuck the BNP, and fuck any notion of keeping shit like this quiet for fear of being accused of racism.

It is the "don't ask don't tell" attitudes that foster precisely the type of environment that allows abuses like this to happen.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Do you have evidence that they do not?


 
Trying to tar massive communities by the actions of very small groups is dodgy as fuck. Surely it can't be a slimey politician try to cash in on a few votes by stirring up the shit.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

'lads from a Reggie Varney background'? Wtf?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

What about those other youths - who aren't of Pakistani origin - who drive around looking for girls to rape? There was a story a while ago about this.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Fuck the BNP, and fuck any notion of keeping shit like this quiet for fear of being accused of racism.
> 
> It is the "don't ask don't tell" attitudes that foster precisely the type of environment that allows abuses like this to happen.


 
Just with like with 'honour' killings.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

'dodgy'. Another liberal euphemism.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Garek said:


> Just with like with 'honour' killings.


 
Abso-fucking-lutely.

It doesn't make comfortable reading, nor is it an easy thing to address, but to deny it is happening on a regular basis merely because it will provoke howls of glee from the racist BNP is not helping anyone, least of all the victims.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> 'lads from a Reggie Varney background'? Wtf?


 
Hook, line and sinker 

You try hard not to be a liberal.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

Garek said:


> Just with like with 'honour' killings.



Yeah but so-called honour killings aren't limited to Muslim communities - are they? A Sikh woman was killed in Greenford in London last year. Her hand was severed and she was left to bleed to death. Honour killings also occur in some Balkan communities.

I apologise in advance for the source
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1228561/Woman-dies-hours-mutilated-street-hand-cut-off.html


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Trying to tar massive communities by the actions of very small groups is dodgy as fuck. Surely it can't be a slimey politician try to cash in on a few votes by stirring up the shit.


 
Have you read what he actually said in your link - and the back up he received from within some sections of the Muslim community - the C4 news was very clear on this last night and had muslim 'leaders' arguing the same as Mohammed Shafiq and Straw. (Regardless of whether straw's motivation is actually to shore up his own vote.)


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Is it a new word amongst London trendies?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

Neo-con fucktard, Douglas Murray was on Newsnight last night trying to make cultural & political capital out of it.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Yeah but so-called honour killings aren't limited to Muslim communities - are they? A Sikh woman was killed in Greenford in London last year. Her hand was severed and she was left to bleed to death. Honour killings also occur in some Balkan communities.
> 
> I apologise in advance for the source
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1228561/Woman-dies-hours-mutilated-street-hand-cut-off.html



Sorry, I was unclear. I was thinking in a more general sense of allowing for the existance of very closed communities within our society, and our reluctance to interfere in theose those communities for fear of it being seen as racist. British society can be tolerant to a fault.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Have you read what he actually said in your link - and the back up he received from within some sections of the Muslim community - the C4 news was very clear on this last night and had muslim 'leaders' arguing the same as Mohammed Shafiq and Straw. (Regardless of whether straw's motivation is actually to shore up his own vote.)


 
You're presuming I'm saying this doesn't go on. It does. 

I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.


 
Don't resort to trump cards, it looks pretty pathetic


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You're presuming I'm saying this doesn't go on. It does.
> 
> I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.



No i'm not. I'm presuming no such thing - and it's utterly irrelevant to the point that i made. I'm saying that what you said Straw did ("Trying to tar massive communities by the actions of very small groups") he didn't going on the evidence of your own link.

Oh please. Don't.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Because the liberals have appropriated the response from the left. The right see it as their baby. 

A strongly militant atheist and anti-multicultural response is what should happen, to prevent liberals like ringsting and nina from presenting a liberal fake-left response.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

The Chechen president actually approves of honour killings
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/b...kadyrov-defends-honour-killings-14208919.html


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> No i'm not. I'm presuming no such thing - and it's utterly irrelevant to the point that i made. I'm saying that what you said Straw did ("Trying to tar massive communities by the actions of very small groups") he didn't going on the evidence of your own link.



He knows exactly what he's doing.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> A strongly militant atheist and anti-multicultural response is what should happen, to prevent liberals like ringsting and nina from presenting a liberal fake-left response.


 
Ignoring the tautology I quite agree


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Could have been worded better but it's time the liberal 'left' fucked off.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> He knows exactly what he's doing.


 
Do you really believe his comments mean he is a "weasel"?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> A strongly militant atheist and anti-multicultural response is what should happen



Indeed.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> He knows exactly what he's doing.


 
Of course he bloody does - you don't appear to though. That is, shore up a socially conservative white w/c vote (as he sees it) whilst allying with leading elements of the Muslim communities keen to get official approval for themselves and the communities they're supposed to represent (as they see it). Two for one.

Any chance you could start doing replies that have some sort of connection to the posts they're supposed to be responses to?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Do you really believe his comments mean he is a "weasel"?


 
Politically cashing in on shit stirring in communities that have enough problems is the actions of a cunt.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Of course he bloody does - you don't appear to though. That is, shore up a socially conservative white w/c vote (as he sees it) whilst allying with leading elements of the Muslim communities keen to get official approval for themselves and the communities they're supposed to represent (as they see it). Two for one.


 
Quite interesting really. Left wing movements --> anti racist --> Labout naturally draws strength from this --> multiculturism --> people now broken up by race into communities --> Labour drawing strength from ethnic block voting.

Apologies for writing it that way, a little hingover for proper sentances.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 8, 2011)

Let me get this right ringding, you think the things straw says happen do indeed happen but to talk about them happening is wrong? If so, how then should what you say is happening be dealt with?


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Politically cashing in on shit stirring in communities that have enough problems is the actions of a cunt.


 
Yes it is, but that doesn't mean this issue should be swept under the carpet.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Let me get this right ringding, you think the things straw says happen do indeed happen but to talk about them happening is wrong? If so, how then should what you say is happening be dealt with?


 
It should be dealt with by the communities affected. I don't see shit stirring in the media as helping at all.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Politically cashing in on shit stirring in communities that have enough problems is the actions of a cunt.


 
I think as former Home Secretary he is in a better position to go public with this than anyone else.

Again, the notion that political gain should be made from child abuse is at odds with the genuine need to address the situation, no matter how uncomfortable it is for those who believe that certain cultural nastiness is somehow compatible with traditional British values. 

It will offend the sensibilities of many and will probably damage relations between the white working class and the Muslim communities - but it does need to be tackled. He's not making this stuff up.


----------



## Garek (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> It should be dealt with by the communities affected. I don't see shit stirring in the media as helping at all.


 
What, leave it to all be solved internally? Oh great  That's always a good thing. Can't see that going wrong at all.

The notion of 'communities' is a false one, and an oppressive one.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

when I was at uni, there were groups of (mostly asian and east european) men who would hang around our road late at night and ask young women (including me on a couple of occasions) if they wanted to go for drinks etc. A mate of mine once decided to go back there just to see what would happen and she said that they went into this room and she saw all of these drugged up teenage girls and young women lying on sofas and loads of people taking drugs. She said that some of them were asleep or didn't know what they were doing - she made a run for it shortly after that because she was so freaked out. 

I know that this does happen but pretty sure it's not just confined to one community doing this, right?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> It should be dealt with by the communities affected. I don't see shit stirring in the media as helping at all.


 
It isn't being dealt with by the communities affected - the white working class communities have no voice to address these issues, and the Muslim communities are scared to upset the applecart by pointing out the failings and serious issues within its makeup.
It has much to do with honour, and is considered something that should not be dealt with by non-islamic law.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> when I was at uni, there were groups of (mostly asian and east european) men who would hang around our road late at night and ask people if they wanted to go for drinks etc. A mate of mine once decided to go back there just to see what would happen and she said that they went into this room and she saw all of these drugged up teenage girls and young women lying on sofas and loads of people taking drugs. She said that some of them were asleep or didn't know what they were doing - she made a run for it shortly after that because she was so freaked out.
> 
> I know that this does happen but pretty sure it's not just confined to one community doing this, right?



Exactly but it won't stop the likes of Gilligan or that cretin, Douglas Murray from claiming that is a unique to Muslim youths.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> I know that this does happen but pretty sure it's not just confined to one community doing this, right?


 
Albanian gangs are known for human trafficking women into the brothels of Europe, and Baltic states have their own similar issues where underage girls are seen as fair game.

However, the difference is that they don't have large established communities in the UK in the same scale as Pakistani communities.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

pretty sure (in fact i know) that the muslim community isn'tt the only one to do "honour" mate


----------



## editor (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> It should be dealt with by the communities affected


Why should the families of the abused girls be expected to keep quiet?


(more detail added to thread title for clarity)


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Exactly but it won' stop the likes of Gilligan or that cretin, Douglas Murray from claiming that is a unique to Muslim youths.


 
Of course it plays into the hands of the neocon scumbags. It's unfortunate but this should not be a barrier to discussion.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> pretty sure (in fact i know) that the muslim community isn'tt the only one to do "honour" mate



Aye, this is a familiar and very popular myth that honour killings only happen in Muslim communities. As I pointed out earlier, it isn't and the case of the young Sikh woman who was murdered by Sikh men because she had an affair is a case in point.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Of course it plays into the hands of the neocon scumbags. It's unfortunate but this should not be a barrier to discussion.



But you make the classic mistake of thinking that this sort of thing only happens among Muslim youths. It does not.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

sadly i've met jewish people with these attitudes too - the idea that non-jewish girls are just for "practice" etc. one guy i met said as much to me once and after a conversation with my dad - who's also jewish btw , he said that he'd met a number of men with these attitudes, and more shocking ones than that over the years.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

The link. AGAIN ffs


> She was a Sikh and all Sikhs wear a metal bangle, the kara, on their right wrist.
> 'It is a permanent reminder to live a moral and good life and once it's on you can't get it off. So her murderer was both dishonouring her and perhaps tryingto show she had been dishonourable - which is just barbaric.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> sadly i've met jewish people with these attitudes too - the idea that non-jewish girls are just for "practice" etc. one guy i met said as much to me once and after a conversation with my dad - who's also jewish btw , he said that he'd met a number of men with these attitudes, and more shocking ones than that over the years.



Yep, I've heard that too. It isn't uncommon.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> But you make the classic mistake of thinking that this sort of thing only happens among Muslim youths. It does not.


 
No, you're wrong. I'm fully aware of other ethnic groups that consider young white UK girls as "easy meat".

Straw says: "We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on" 

More importantly the community needs to take responsibility for knowingly allowing such things to go on..


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

editor said:


> Why should the families of the abused girls be expected to keep quiet?



They _are_ part of the communities affected.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> sadly i've met jewish people with these attitudes too - the idea that non-jewish girls are just for "practice" etc. one guy i met said as much to me once and after a conversation with my dad - who's also jewish btw , he said that he'd met a number of men with these attitudes, and more shocking ones than that over the years.


 
I've yet to hear of drugged/drunk 13 year olds being kept as sex slaves by Jewish men in the same way the recent stories indicate is happening with Muslim/Pakistani men.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

the "community" can include almost anyone tho mate ... and often the so-called "leaders" of the community are part of the problem, and to be fair i don't for example see how i should be held responsible for the actions of the jewish guys i described up the thread ...


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> No, you're wrong. I'm fully aware of other ethnic groups that consider young white UK girls as "easy meat".
> 
> Straw says: "We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on"
> 
> More importantly the community needs to take responsibility for knowingly allowing such things to go on..



No you're wrong and you don't pay attention. You ignore the fact that this sort of thing happens among other males of other communities. So far, you've fallen for the old trick that this is unique to Muslims. It is not.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I've yet to hear of drugged/drunk 13 year olds being kept as sex slaves by Jewish men in the same way the recent stories indicate is happening with Muslim/Pakistani men.


 
true, but i'm just saying that it - and the attitudes that directly lead to it - aren't just confined to one community? that's all im saying


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Nina. This thread is not about 'honour' murders.

Do you have anything to say about the topic?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> ... and often the so-called "leaders" of the community are part of the problem...



Absolutely.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> No you're wrong and you don't pay attention. You ignore the fact that this sort of thing happens among other males of other communities. So far, you've fallen for the old trick that this is unique to Muslims. It is not.


 
Sorry, I've pointed out that it does happen with other communities. I've mentioned Albania and the Baltic states here already.

I'm ignoring nothing, it is you that is failing to pay attention to my posts.

As it is, this issue at hand is regarding a specific community. No good saying "but other groups do it too!" because that is diverting what is an important and alarming issue that our society needs to face up to.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> No, you're wrong. I'm fully aware of other ethnic groups that consider young white UK girls as "easy meat".
> 
> Straw says: "We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on"
> 
> More importantly the community needs to take responsibility for knowingly allowing such things to go on..


 
I'll call for that when the white community tackles the issue of it's rampant pedophilia.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

yeah, i have a bit of an issue with people saying "the community must face up to it " etc ... wtf does that mean anyway ... and how are ordinary people in that "community" meant to go about doing that ...


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Links please from Nina that show these drug/sex grooming gangs occur in Sikh and Hindu areas in any comparable way to the way they do in Pakistani Moslem areas.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> true, but i'm just saying that it - and the attitudes that directly lead to it - aren't just confined to one community? that's all im saying


 
Attitudes are one thing. Acting upon them to the degree where teenagers are being basically kidnapped and drugged for sex with multiple men is the issue here. Sexism is alive and well in many societies, and the notion that UK teens are easy meat and fair game is not a new one. It's the organised manner in which these abuses took place that needs to be looked at by both the UK lawmakers and the Muslim communities, regardless of whether other non-Muslim communities also share the same vile viewpoint when it comes to British teens.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> yeah, i have a bit of an issue with people saying "the community must face up to it " etc ... wtf does that mean anyway ... and how are ordinary people in that "community" meant to go about doing that ...


 
It's bullshit, a stick to beat people with and it feeds into a nasty racist narrative the BNP have been pushing for years.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Piss off Kid you racist nob.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Sorry, I've pointed out that it does happen with other communities. I've mentioned Albania and the Baltic states here already.
> 
> I'm ignoring nothing, it is you that is failing to pay attention to my posts.
> 
> As it is, this issue at hand is regarding a specific community. No good saying "but other groups do it too!" because that is diverting what is an important and alarming issue that our society needs to face up to.



Have you? Where? Because I haven't seen you do it...unless you've quickly edited your posts to reflect this sudden change in attitude.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Kid_Eternity said:


> I'll call for that when the white community tackles the issue of it's rampant pedophilia.


 
I think you're missing the point. In white UK societies pedophilia is reviled and perpetrators are usually bought to justice and jailed.

In this instance there is evidence that to avoid shame and dishonour, rapists are spirited back to Pakistan and the families protected by the clerics and community leaders. Understandable given the potential outrage.

But to say the Pakistani communities should be absolved of responsibility just because white people commit sex abuse against children is ridiculous.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Links please from Nina that show these drug/sex grooming gangs occur in Sikh and Hindu areas in any comparable way to the way they do in Pakistani Moslem areas.



Honour killings. Pay attention.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Nina. Address the thread topic. Start a new one on 'honour' murders.


----------



## editor (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> They _are_ part of the communities affected.


So why are you complaining about the matter being raised and calling Straw a "weasel" for articulating their concerns?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Have you? Where? Because I haven't seen you do it...unless you've quickly edited your posts to reflect this sudden change in attitude.


 
Post 54. No editing done at all.

Apology accepted if offered.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

Pissing about with usernames too, eh? Fucking typical

Have a look at post 24


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

What have 'honour' murders got to do with these pimp gangs?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Honour killings. Pay attention.


 
This is not about honour killings.

It's abut the attitude that British teens are filthy sluts and deserve to be raped, and groups of men that actively go out to kidnap them drug them and abuse them.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Nin you have nothing to say on this topic.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Black girls are victims of these predators too.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> This is not about honour killings.
> 
> It's abut the attitude that British teens are filthy sluts and deserve to be raped, and groups of men that actively go out to kidnap them drug them and abuse them.



I never said it was but it was Garek brought up the subject.  I merely replied. Have a look. Post 24.

Then you can apologise for accusing me of derailing the thread.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Nin you have nothing to say on this topic.



Nor have you by the look of it, er.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> What have 'honour' murders got to do with these pimp gangs?


 
Still pissing about with usernames, I see,


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Nin. I'm still waiting for your evidence that will back up your assertions that there is no issue of Pakistani pimp gangs.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 8, 2011)

Er, I'm still waiting for you to make some fucking sense.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Everything Mr Straw said is unfortunately true.
> 
> It needs to be confronted, no matter how uncomfortable, and it needs to be addressed.
> 
> ...


 
First reasonably sensible post I have ever seen made by this poster


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Awaiting your new thread on 'honour' murders, Ni-Sav.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

editor said:


> So why are you complaining about the matter being raised and calling Straw a "weasel" for articulating their concerns?


 
On the first point, I'm not....and on the second I've already answered that. Do catch up.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I've yet to hear of drugged/drunk 13 year olds being kept as sex slaves by Jewish men in the same way the recent stories indicate is happening with Muslim/Pakistani men.


 
see this is simplistic, straw may be being opportunistic, but of course it happens

its as much to do with the culture however of young geezers, into crime with drugs and nice cars abusing vulnerable young women who get drawn in because they think its cool etc.  it happens everywhere amongst all ethnic groups, and whilst each may have its own ethnic flavour the drive is far more about young men,who are often violent and heavily involved in crime who take the view that ALL women are sluts and fair game (except for their sister,mother etc)

to take the more lurid and extreme examples of this and present it as a cultural norm is bollocks frankly, it's good the debate is taking place and it should, and seems to be involving all sides, but to use it to make political capital out of like that dick murray or straw are doing is shit


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Evidence that other ethnic groups are at it, smokey.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> see this is simplistic, straw may be being opportunistic, but of course it happens
> 
> its as much to do with the culture however of young geezers, into crime with drugs and nice cars abusing vulnerable young women who get drawn in because they think its cool etc.  it happens everywhere amongst all ethnic groups, and whilst each may have its own ethnic flavour the drive is far more about young men,who are often violent and heavily involved in crime who take the view that ALL women are sluts and fair game (except for their sister,mother etc)
> 
> to take the more lurid and extreme examples of this and present it as a cultural norm is bollocks frankly, it's good the debate is taking place and it should, and seems to be involving all sides, but to use it to make political capital out of like that dick murray or straw are doing is shit


 
Yep, well said, shame more people can't see this.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Piss off Kid you racist nob.


 
Nice bit of irony there ern.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> to take the more lurid and extreme examples of this and present it as a cultural norm is bollocks frankly


 

Unfortunately I believe increasingly that it is the cultural norm among young Anglo Pakistani youths.

In a very different way to youths of the same age from non Muslim backgrounds.

There are many factors involved, rap videos, proliferation of drugs (employment is all but impossible, so selling drugs means you can afford that nice car) but the one factor that a lot of people are trying to avoid talking about is the fact that many Muslim youths see young white UK women merely as unclean sluts that deserve to be raped. They see no problem in drugging them and having sex with them.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> It isn't being dealt with by the communities affected - the white working class communities have no voice to address these issues, and the Muslim communities are scared to upset the applecart by pointing out the failings and serious issues within its makeup.
> It has much to do with honour, and is considered something that should not be dealt with by non-islamic law.


 
spoke too soon. Theire have been campaigns against street grooming, kerb crawling and the general behaviour of younmg men involved in this. As for Muslim communities not wanting to upset the applecart this is bollocks as witnesses in court cases have included muslims. 

As for the assertion that Muslim communities ( what ever they are, its a bit like talking about the Christian community or the Catholic community) in the news last night there were at least three examples of where muslim/faith based organsiations were seen to attempting to address this issue .

Its one thing to identify the issue  that some asian youth specifically target vulnerable young women as a way of achieving sex and power beacsues they percieve them to be easy and feel that they may be able to rationalise their actions , its entirely another to paint some mythical one dimensuionsal 'muslim' community that is a brick wall of silence and colludes with this.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Black girls are victims of these predators too.


 
Far less so than white working class girls.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

None of the Anglo (or Welsh rather ) Pakıstanı guys I grew up wıth would dream of actıng lıke thıs.

Faır enough to dıscuss ıt, but bear ın mınd also the way ıt's beıng used by the BNP.  It's theır major ıssue.  Never forget that.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Does it happen in Bengali areas to the same extent as it does in Pakistani ones?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Evidence that other ethnic groups are at it, smokey.


 
how the fuck do you think the murkier fringes of the porn industry operate

google chav porn, that should keep you occupied


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Its one thing to identify the issue that some asian youth specifically target vulnerable young women as a way of achieving sex and power beacsues they percieve them to be easy and feel that they may be able to rationalise their actions , its entirely another to paint some mythical one dimensuionsal 'muslim' community that is a brick wall of silence and colludes with this.


 
The brick wall of silence exists because such delicate matters are handled by clerics and community leaders and hushed up, rather than being discussed with the appropriate authorities.

I'm painting no "mythical" situation here.

It is precisely the same problem when an extremist makes his feelings known and he is shunned from the mosques but at no point do the clerics or fellow community peers inform the authorities, as with the case with the Swedish suicide bomber and the Luton mosque that threw him out 3 years ago.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 8, 2011)

"Former home secretary Jack Straw has said he believes some Pakistani men in Britain see white girls as "easy meat" for sexual abuse."

But do they see them as halal?

Seriously. The problem here is wider than Straw is talking about. It isn't just some Pakistani men. There are still large numbers of men in the UK, black, white, Asian, European, and whatever, who treat women as inferior beings. It's unacceptable whoever is doing it and whatever the reasons. However Straw wants to appeal to a particular section of his electorate and so won't tackle the real issue, which would lead to him being portrayed in the media as a politically correct zealot putting forward an extreme feminist line. So he attacks only an easy target.

I've encountered men from a wide range of backgrounds who see women and girls only as either sluts who can be abused at will or as domestic servants who don't need paying. I used to think of it as a neanderthal attitude that was dying out. However in the last twenty years it seems to me that public figures have become so scared of being accused of being overly PC that the old chauvinism is increasingly being seen as acceptable again. When nobody in a position of influence or responsibility dares to attack this sort of extreme sexism, or only dares to do so whilst promoting Islamophobia, then things inevitably regress.


----------



## Cobbles (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> It should be dealt with by the communities affected.



_the communities affected_ - does that mean that the "white" community whose female youth are being preyed upon should set up vigilante groups whilst the "whatever" community whose males were doing the preying should lock up their men at night?

What I don't understand is why the CPS didn't play the "racially motivated" card in relation to this trial to ensure that the maximum tariff would apply?


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> spoke too soon. Theire have been campaigns against street grooming, kerb crawling and the general behaviour of younmg men involved in this. As for Muslim communities not wanting to upset the applecart this is bollocks as witnesses in court cases have included muslims.
> 
> As for the assertion that Muslim communities ( what ever they are, its a bit like talking about the Christian community or the Catholic community) in the news last night there were at least three examples of where muslim/faith based organsiations were seen to attempting to address this issue .
> 
> Its one thing to identify the issue  that some asian youth specifically target vulnerable young women as a way of achieving sex and power beacsues they percieve them to be easy and feel that they may be able to rationalise their actions , its entirely another to paint some mythical one dimensuionsal 'muslim' community that is a brick wall of silence and colludes with this.


 
Well said


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Far less so than white working class girls.


 
Depends where you are, in London there have been more than a couple of similar stories relating to black girls although I've not seen many which are specifically tied to the Pakistani community. Cultural background might offer some mental justification to some people but the fact that it generally happens in poor areas with lots of drugs and shit prospects seems like a more notable factor.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Faır enough to dıscuss ıt, but bear ın mınd also the way ıt's beıng used by the BNP.  It's theır major ıssue.  Never forget that.


 
Nobody is forgetting that. It seems that a bigger problem is created by constantly linking the issue to BNP - it has fuck all to do with the BNP, they have no tactics to address the problem beyond their usual bonehead mentality, and they have zero influence or insight into the Muslim communities they claim to speak for.

In short, the BNP can fuck off.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Jan 8, 2011)

Just a small point Albania and Chechnya have been mentioned on the side of the argument that wants to point out that "other" communities are responsible for honor killings etc, both countries are majority Muslim so not exactly good examples.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> There are still large numbers of men in the UK, black, white, Asian, European, and whatever, who treat women as inferior beings. It's unacceptable whoever is doing it and whatever the reasons. However Straw wants to appeal to a particular section of his electorate and so won't tackle the real issue, which would lead to him being portrayed in the media as a politically correct zealot putting forward an extreme feminist line. So he attacks only an easy target.



Exactly.  Straw knows he's playıng wıth fıre, but he doesn't gıve a bugger.  ''Weasel'' ıs too kınd.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> When nobody in a position of influence or responsibility dares to attack this sort of extreme sexism, or only dares to do so whilst promoting Islamophobia, then things inevitably regress.


 
Which is why Straw's comments should be applauded. I think he has doe a remarkable and brave thing, and call me naive but I think it's simplistic to say he's doing this just to get votes.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Exactly.  Straw knows he's playıng wıth fıre, but he doesn't gıve a bugger.  ''Weasel'' ıs too kınd.


 
Wrong. In my opinion.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Which is why Straw's comments should be applauded. I think he has doe a remarkable and brave thing, and call me naive but I think it's simplistic to say he's doing this just to get votes.


 
He's one of the shallowest, most opportunist cunts in a vast pool of shallow opportunist cunts, I can't imagine that he ever does anything for any reason but to improve his own position, even if on rare occasion he manages to touch on a subject which has some value to it.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Fuchs66 said:


> Just a small point Albania and Chechnya have been mentioned on the side of the argument that wants to point out that "other" communities are responsible for honor killings etc, both countries are majority Muslim so not exactly good examples.


 
True. There are other countries but their demographic make-up in the UK is so small that it seems a waste of time to compare.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> He's one of the shallowest, most opportunist cunts in a vast pool of shallow opportunist cunts, I can't imagine that he ever does anything for any reason but to improve his own position, even if on rare occasion he manages to touch on a subject which has some value to it.


 
Well I am prepared to be proved wrong, and I'm no fan of Jack Boots at all.

Doesn't lessen the truth in what he says.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Nobody is forgetting that. It seems that a bigger problem is created by constantly linking the issue to BNP - it has fuck all to do with the BNP, they have no tactics to address the problem beyond their usual bonehead mentality, and they have zero influence or insight into the Muslim communities they claim to speak for.



I don't thınk the BNP claıms to speak for Muslım communıtıes.

Take a look at the serıes of YouTube vıdeos they've been postıng on the subject.  See how they exploıt thıs stuff.  Avoıd usıng theır rhetorıc.  Remember that the vast majorıty of Brıtısh Pakıstanıs are just as dısgusted by thıs as you are.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Wrong. In my opinion.


 
We'll agree to dıffer.  I respect the fact that you're beıng cıvıl about thıs.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Which is why Straw's comments should be applauded. I think he has doe a remarkable and brave thing, and call me naive but I think it's simplistic to say he's doing this just to get votes.


 
Really?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> We'll agree to dıffer.  I respect the fact that you're beıng cıvıl about thıs.


 
It's too serious a subject matter to be anything less than civil about. It NEEDS to be debated so that some form of conclusive action might be taken, otherwise the shitstorm really will play into the hands of the racist parties such as the BNP.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Really?


 
Look the fact that he is gaining political momentum is not exactly hindering his outspoken opinions, but I do not believe he is putting political capital in front of the fact that a great many vulnerable CHILDREN are being utterly destroyed by these practices.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> I don't thınk the BNP claıms to speak for Muslım communıtıes.
> 
> Take a look at the serıes of YouTube vıdeos they've been postıng on the subject.  See how they exploıt thıs stuff.  Avoıd usıng theır rhetorıc.  Remember that the vast majorıty of Brıtısh Pakıstanıs are just as dısgusted by thıs as you are.


 
I'm sure a great many British Pakistanis are shocked by the revelations. And my wording was perhaps a little out when I stated that the BNP speak on behalf of the Muslims communities, I meant that they misrepresent them for their own gains.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

And to address the point people are making regarding Pakistani men not being the only people exploiting children in this way - I see little evidence of predatory pedophilia in this manner being carried out by comparably larger ethnic communities in the UK, such as the Indian, Jamaican or Chinese.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Nor amongst Bengalis.


----------



## StoneRoad (Jan 8, 2011)

It is not just the muslims who prey on young children, what about the xtian clerics and their altar/choir boys? or are you ignoring the recent, and continuing, saga of RC clergy/system taking advantage........


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

StoneRoad said:


> It is not just the muslims who prey on young children, what about the xtian clerics and their altar/choir boys? or are you ignoring the recent, and continuing, saga of RC clergy/system taking advantage........


 
'Muslims' don't prey on young children, nor for that matter do Catholics. Just because some fucked up people may justify their actions by leaning on aspects of their religion it doesn't reflect on the billion or so other Muslims/Catholics in the world and suggesting that it does is simple minded shit which really does walk into BNP territory. It's a cultural problem, be that due to ethnic culture or the culture that's developed in some communities (and I'd lean towards the latter given that there are plenty of other problems in the areas where this shit goes on (drugs, crime, shit prospects etc.)).


----------



## editor (Jan 8, 2011)

StoneRoad said:


> It is not just the muslims who prey on young children, what about the xtian clerics and their altar/choir boys? or are you ignoring the recent, and continuing, saga of RC clergy/system taking advantage........


All of which was exposed by front page headlines and acres of condemnation in the media coverage.

If similar kinds of predatory abuse are happening amongst some elements of the Pakistani community, then it's right and proper that it should also be brought to people's attention and the issue raised for discussion.


----------



## JimW (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> 'Muslims' don't prey on young children, nor for that matter do Catholics. Just because some fucked up people may justify their actions by leaning on aspects of their religion it doesn't reflect on the billion or so other Muslims/Catholics in the world and suggesting that it does is simple minded shit which really does walk into BNP territory. It's a cultural problem, be that due to ethnic culture or the culture that's developed in some communities (and I'd lean towards the latter given that there are plenty of other problems in the areas where this shit goes on (drugs, crime, shit prospects etc.)).


And in fairness to Straw, he's talked about a cultural community - British people of Pakistani origin - not a religious one, unless he mentioned Islam in some quote I've not seen.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> He's one of the shallowest, most opportunist cunts in a vast pool of shallow opportunist cunts, I can't imagine that he ever does anything for any reason but *to improve his own position*, even if on rare occasion he manages to touch on a subject which has some value to it.




What an extraordinarily bigoted thing to say. Jack Straw is a 32-year veteran MP returned again to his constituency at the age of 64 with a twenty percent margin. He's been Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Lord Chancellor and Justice Minister. It is impossible to imagine how he could improve his own position by speaking out about this - it's not going to make him popular or rich, or allow him to gain higher political office, or improve his social life, is it? 

There's a lot of sniping at him for speaking out, and I think a lot of it is motivated by a desire to in some way" protect" the sensitivities of some people in our country who are of Pakistani heritage or who adhere to Islam. I think that is mistaken, There is evidence that some groups, specifically young British men of Pakistani heritage*, are behaving in a vile way towards vulnerable girls and that their attitude is informed by racism and contempt for the mainstream culture. It may well be that there are other sections of the population that have similar attitudes and similar values and who are behaving in similar ways, but it would be wrong to downplay the issue among young British men of Pakistani heritage*. 

Jack Straw's intervention is valuable, and if the Daily Mail and the BNP see this as something to exploit, well we ought to work as a society to show that the criminal activities of these young British men of Pakistani heritage* are not to be tolerated. Refusing to talk about it and insulting senior politicians who go public, isn't helping. It would be far better to put the spotlight on the separation and segregation that exists, and to take more steps to get in the way of the culture of pressurising young men of Pakistani heritage* to marry young women from Pakistan. 


* - because someone will moan about calling young British men of Pakistani heritage "Pakistani"


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> It's a cultural problem, be that due to ethnic culture or the culture that's developed in some communities.


 
Or both.

Either way, Straw is correct when he asserts that Pakistani men in Britain see white girls as "easy meat".

He doesn't say ALL Pakistani men, but there is definitely a view taken by many that UK white girls are no more deserving of respect than an animal. Hence the abuses.


----------



## Stoat Boy (Jan 8, 2011)

To be fair I grew up in a white working class culture that looked down on girls who went out with non-whites to the extent that if a girl had been involved with a non-white in the past there was an expectation that you would not get involved with her afterwards. Looking back on it it was some shameful shit.

For me though the issue that is not really being addressed is the strata of our society that these poor girls are coming from. I would be willing to bet that almost all of them are products of broken homes, backgrounds in which the primary income has always been from state and so on.

Essentially those of us on the right have tended to dismiss them as just being feckless and workshy whilst the left have not really had the courage to face up the reality and complexities of the situation which is a mine-field no matter what we might all think.

I feel that there is a lot to be learnt from what has been going on from every section of modern British society and none of us come out of this covered in anything other than something very smelly and unpleasant.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Really?


 
He has a majority of 9,857, a 21.7% margin. He'll be 69 at the next election. He really doesn't need the votes.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

JimW said:


> And in fairness to Straw, he's talked about a cultural community - British people of Pakistani origin - not a religious one, unless he mentioned Islam in some quote I've not seen.



Aye, that post wasn't against Straw, more against StoneRoad for making such a stupid comment.



Fullyplumped said:


> What an extraordinarily bigoted thing to say. Jack Straw is a 32-year veteran MP returned again to his constituency at the age of 64 with a twenty percent margin. He's been Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Lord Chancellor and Justice Minister. It is impossible to imagine how he could improve his own position by speaking out about this - it's not going to make him popular or rich, or allow him to gain higher political office, or improve his social life, is it?
> 
> There's a lot of sniping at him for speaking out, and I think a lot of it is motivated by a desire to in some way" protect" the sensitivities of some people in our country who are of Pakistani heritage or who adhere to Islam. I think that is mistaken, There is evidence that some groups, specifically young British men of Pakistani heritage*, are behaving in a vile way towards vulnerable girls and that their attitude is informed by racism and contempt for the mainstream culture. It may well be that there are other sections of the population that have similar attitudes and similar values and who are behaving in similar ways, but it would be wrong to downplay the issue among young British men of Pakistani heritage*.
> 
> ...


 
My thinking that Straw is a cunt and not trusting him as far as I could throw him has no relation to my views on the issue and I'm not trying to 'protect' anyone. As for my being 'bigoted' against Jack Straw, well, my heart bleeds for the poor innocent - vicious bully that I am to be picking on him.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> My thinking that Straw is a cunt and not trusting him as far as I could throw him has no relation to my views on the issue and I'm not trying to 'protect' anyone. As for my being 'bigoted' against Jack Straw, well, my heart bleeds for the poor innocent - vicious bully that I am to be picking on him.


 
It was what you said that I think is bigoted! You said he was doing this to improve his own position. I hope I've demonstrated that he is the last person who needs to do so.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> It was what you said that I think is bigoted! You said he was doing this to improve his own position. I hope I've demonstrated that he is the last person who needs to do so.


 
Egotism doesn't rely on needing to do anything, just an inherent sense of self-aggrandising self-importance. Hell, if it were any one of a number of other people coming forward and bringing up the issue I wouldn't hold the same view at all but given his track record for being a vile little bastard I'll never have any faith in his motives for doing anything. If I ever see Jack Straw buying a pint of milk down Tescos I'll probably end up wondering what the nefarious bastard is up to, that's how little I like/trust the man.

e2a: And if that qualifies as bigotry then so be it, I'm sure he's a target who can deal with it.


----------



## treelover (Jan 8, 2011)

incredible that some posters want it swept undert the carpet and the 'community' should deal with it, no, it should be exposed to ther full scrutiny of the media(even though they largely will sensationalise it) and the full force of the law be brought down on these digusting perpertators, ffs, these are young vulnerable girls whose lives have been ruined,


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> He has a majority of 9,857, a 21.7% margin. He'll be 69 at the next election. He really doesn't need the votes.


 
This.

The point that the goventment and it's toothless underfunded and mismanaged child protection agencies hold a great deal of the blame for such abuses is not to be forgotten.

But the point is - go to Bradford and listen to the young men in their cars talking about "pusseh" in a manner that they would never, ever do in regard to young girls of Pakistani origin.

It IS a cultural thing. Anglo/Pakistani men in certain areas DO view white UK teens as easy meat and deserving of rape.


----------



## treelover (Jan 8, 2011)

btw, I also think J/S is the worst person to be leading on this issue, but there have been too many cover ups: in 2004, CH4 were to broadcast, 'Edge of the City' partly about such 'grooming' in Bradford, the police forced them to pull it form the schedules, fucking scandalous..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3602854.stm


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Egotism doesn't rely on needing to do anything, just an inherent sense of self-aggrandising self-importance.


You mean he's a show-off. There are worse things than that to be in a politician. 

But we wouldn't be discussing this here, I bet, if he hadn't spoken out.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

treelover said:


> btw, I also think J/S is the worst person to be leading on this issue,



Go on, then, who should he have given way to that would get us talking like this?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

treelover said:


> it should be exposed to ther full scrutiny of the media(even though they largely will sensationalise it) and the full force of the law be brought down on these digusting perpetrators


 
Which is what is now happening.

Mohamed Rehman, 26, received seven and a half years for rape. 
Akshay Kumar, 38 jailed for two years and 10 months for being involved with child pornography.
Graham Blackham, a one-time Avon salesman, a convicted sex offender and the only non-Asian defendant, got three years for two breaches of Sexual Offender Prevention Order which banned him from contact with under 18s.
Farooq Ahmed, 28, was sentenced to 18 months for witness intimidation, as was Naweed Liaqat, 33, Liaqat’s brother.
Faisal Mehmood, 24, pleaded guilty to sexual activity with a child under the age of 16, and got three years and a deportation order returning him to Pakistan.
Ziafat Rafin, 31, received three years for supplying drugs.


----------



## treelover (Jan 8, 2011)

'Prosecutor Yvonne Coen QC told the court the ‘young and impressionable’ girls were used as sex objects either for members of the gang or for a variety of their friends.'


surely there were more than six people involved in the ring/parties, etc, wonder how they will get on in prison...


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

treelover said:


> btw, I also think J/S is the worst person to be leading on this issue, but there have been too many cover ups: in 2004, CH4 were to broadcast, 'Edge of the City' partly about such 'grooming' in Bradford, the police forced them to pull it form the schedules, fucking scandalous..
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3602854.stm



I remember that. They were terrified of large scale riots, however it was screened in the summer of 2004 instead of the scheduled May broadcast date.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

treelover said:


> 'Prosecutor Yvonne Coen QC told the court the ‘young and impressionable’ girls were used as sex objects either for members of the gang or for a variety of their friends.'
> 
> 
> surely there were more than six people involved in the ring/parties, etc, wonder how they will get on in prison...


 
It looks like in this case, the group of six faced 75 charges between them relating to twenty six girls, four additional men were aquitted.


----------



## treelover (Jan 8, 2011)

btw, if there is a fund for these incredibly brave girls who testified against these scum, i would like to donate..


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

treelover said:


> btw, if there is a fund for these incredibly brave girls who testified against these scum, i would like to donate..


 
Cops stumbled across the whole thing by accident - pulling the car over on a shoplifting sus. Two girls in the back then told police all about it once they had been separated from the men, prompting a huge surveillance operation that took place over a year.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

Also interesting was the reaction of Keith Vaz, chair of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee -  


> "What I don't think we can do is say that this is a cultural problem. One can accept the evidence which is put before us about patterns and networks but to go that step further I think is pretty dangerous. Why didn't Jack Straw say something about this (before)? He has represented Blackburn for 31 years, he's been the home secretary."


Which sounds awfully like what several people here have said. I don't think it will do these peoples street cred much good to be compared to Keith Vaz! But there we are.

Martin Narey's reaction was interesting - 


> The Barnardo's chief executive, Martin Narey, said the case was more about vulnerable children of all races who were at risk from abuse. Street grooming was "probably happening in most towns and cities" and was not confined to the Pakistani community. I certainly don't think this is a Pakistani thing. My staff would say that there is an over-representation of people from minority ethnic groups – Afghans, people from Arabic nations – but it's not just one nation," said Narey.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> Martin Narey's reaction was interesting -


 
He's right of course. It isn't just Pakistani muslims, it's all manner of muslims from various backgrounds.

Regardless, it's still pretty much a uniquely muslim attitude, which is the point that needs looking at.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> He's right of course. It isn't just Pakistani muslims, it's all manner of muslims from various backgrounds.



What about white paedos from a Christian background?


----------



## Bear (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12141603
> 
> Cheers then. That really helps.
> 
> Fucking numpty.



How do you know it's not true though?  I watched the interview and it sounded like he was just bluntly stating the truth.  Or do you think it doesn't actually matter if what he said was true or not, just because it's not politically correct to say it?


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> What about white paedos from a Christian background?


 
Down with them.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> What about white paedos from a Christian background?


 
They see ALL young people as fair game. They do not discriminate between non-white girls from Muslim backgrounds and white UK girls.

That is the fundamental difference here.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 8, 2011)

Its a serious problem that needs dealing with not sure how you persuade people that an old fashioned attitude sex boys can be studs but women must be virgins before they marry is incompatable with life in the UK in the 21st centuary.
  ffs some Greek cypiots had a less evil take on this all tourists are sluts but greek girls are pure  occasionaly needed a slap to remind them to cut it out.
  Either deal with it through the proper authorites and education.
 Or community action will which will niether be pretty or justice..


----------



## Bear (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> when I was at uni, there were groups of (mostly asian and east european) men who would hang around our road late at night and ask young women (including me on a couple of occasions) if they wanted to go for drinks etc. A mate of mine once decided to go back there just to see what would happen and she said that they went into this room and she saw all of these drugged up teenage girls and young women lying on sofas and loads of people taking drugs. She said that some of them were asleep or didn't know what they were doing - she made a run for it shortly after that because she was so freaked out.
> 
> I know that this does happen but pretty sure it's not just confined to one community doing this, right?


 
It's probably not just one community, no.  But it certainly seems to me that the men from the Muslim community that do this specifically target non-muslim girls as they believe they are inferior and would never do it to 'one of their own'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2011)

several things which haven't been mentioned on this thread yet:

* this will have quite an impact on mixed race relationships between asian men and white women, which will satisfy the bnp no end;

* i would be surprised if there are not a lot more racist attacks on asian men in relationships with white women;

* if the edl don't take this up i would be mightily surprised.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> several things which haven't been mentioned on this thread yet:
> 
> * this will have quite an impact on mixed race relationships between asian men and white women, which will satisfy the bnp no end;



In what way will it impact such relationships? Genuinely interested.



> * i would be surprised if there are not a lot more racist attacks on asian men in relationships with white women;



I'm not sure why there would be. Who would be doing the attacking?



> * if the edl don't take this up i would be mightily surprised.


 
The EDL, like the BNP, will seize upon anything if it makes them appear important.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Bear said:


> it certainly seems to me that the men from the Muslim community that do this specifically target non-muslim girls as they believe they are inferior and would never do it to 'one of their own'.


 
Precisely, and this is the issue that is most relevant.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

likesfish said:


> ffs some Greek cypiots had a less evil take on this all tourists are sluts but greek girls are pure


 
Precisely the same mindset. Same in Turkey. White backpacker girl = prostitute. Unless heavily covered and wearing a wedding ring.
Same in Israel (with the Israeli Arabs) and throughout the Gulf.

One could say that a UK white woman wearing shorts and unmarried venturing into such countries is asking for trouble, but when such attitudes are imported here into the UK's inner cities - then it needs to be addressed urgently and without notions of political correctness.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> In what way will it impact such relationships? Genuinely interested.


when a (white) friend of mine was going out with his (black) girlfriend in london in the 80s, they received not only dirty looks but occasional racist abuse. i think that mixed white-asian relationships will in parts of the country attract similar opprobrium: and not only from people who don't know the couple. 





> I'm not sure why there would be.


because people are stupid, like the people who attacked bmws after west germany knocked england out of the 1990 world cup.





> The EDL, like the BNP, will seize upon anything if it makes them appear relevant.


yes, but this is a subject which from the initial responses to it will strike quite a chord with a lot of people. it's a topic which won't do the edl or bnp any harm.


----------



## Bear (Jan 8, 2011)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Fucking tool, well done for doing the BNP's job for them.


 
Doesn't the fact that it might be true bother you though? If it's true and the BNP are out there saying it, might it not be better to suggest that mainstream politicians face up to the issue and deal with it?

Surely that's better than trying to sweep it under the carpet and pretend it's not a problem just because facing up to it is politically incorrect?

If it's not faced up to and the unvarnished truth isn't tackled head on the BNP will just continue to make political capital out of it and young non-muslim girls will continue to be at risk.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> when a (white) friend of mine was going out with his (black) girlfriend in london in the 80s, they received not only dirty looks but occasional racist abuse. i think that mixed white-asian relationships will in parts of the country attract similar opprobrium: and not only from people who don't know the couple.



I dated a muslim girl in my teens for a year - I eventually got used to the surplus cunts in builders vans yelling "paki" out of the window before driving away. It upset me more than her TBH, I guess sadly she was used to it.



> people are stupid, like the people who attacked bmws after west germany knocked england out of the 1990 world cup.



True.



> yes, but this is a subject which from the initial responses to it will strike quite a chord with a lot of people. it's a topic which won't do the edl or bnp any harm.


 
I for one don't give a fuck what an irrelevant minority party have to say.

Especially when so many of the BNP scum have been banged up for child sex abuse themselves.


November 2008 - Ian Hindle
Jailed for three years for having sex with a child

November 2008 - Andrew Wells
Jailed for two years and three months after admitting engaging in sexual activity with a child and engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child.

Martyn Paul Gilleard - 2008
Had 39,000 indecent images and videos of children, ranging from the least to the most serious categories of child abuse images. Gilleard was sentenced to 11 years for the terrorism offences and possession of firearms. He was given a 12-month sentence for possessing the indecent images of children, with a four-year extension as he was deemed dangerous by the judge.

November 2005 - Roderick Rowley
Roderick Rowley, a former BNP candidate in Coventry, is imprisoned for 15 months after admitting 14 charges of making, distributing or possessing obscene images of children. He is also ordered to register as a sex offender for ten years.

Darren Francis, aged 37 - 2010
Obsessed with a 13 year old girl, he took advantage by plying her with drink and cocaine in exactly the same manner as the Pakistani men did.
Jailed for four years and three months

EDL founder Richard Price - 2009
Pleaded guilty in June 2010 at Birmingham Crown Court of making four indecent images of children, and possessing cocaine and crack cocaine. He was banned from owning a computer for a year, given a three-year community supervision order and ordered to sign on to the sex offenders register for five years.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Aye, that post wasn't against Straw, more against StoneRoad for making such a stupid comment.
> 
> 
> 
> My thinking that Straw is a cunt and not trusting him as far as I could throw him has no relation to my views on the issue and I'm not trying to 'protect' anyone. As for my being 'bigoted' against Jack Straw, well, my heart bleeds for the poor innocent - vicious bully that I am to be picking on him.


 Ignore Fullyplumped she's a disgusting labour hack prepared to defend any action by the Labour Party. She's scum.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> In what way will it impact such relationships? Genuinely interested.



without taking away from the case at hand, there are some white working class girls who might like hanging out and taking drugs and even fucking flash young asian men, a situation that might upset some conservative elements amongst both communities


----------



## likesfish (Jan 8, 2011)

Its not a case of Politcal correctness.
 its just   Some attitudes of some muslim young men are incompatable with living in the uk in the 21st century.
  try that shit it backwardstan  and the rival clan/family would choke them to death on their own severed gentials.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I for one don't give a fuck what an irrelevant minority party have to say.
> 
> Especially when so many of the BNP scum have been banged up for child sex abuse themselves.
> 
> ...


 
it's not so much what they do as what they say about what happens. as has been seen by the growth in their vote over the last few years, they are by no means as irrelevant as you suggest. despite their current internal difficulties, there's no real reason why the bnp couldn't advance rather further than they have done to date. i'd have thought that five or six bnpers getting done for terrorist offences over the past few years would have had more impact than it has: i don't think your three examples will seriously undermine support for the bnp throughout the country, as they haven't yet (and griffin and brons were elected to the european parliament after those cases). the bnp can make a lot of mileage out of this story, they can use whatever attacks for their own ends. i would say more but it's time to go back to work.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> without taking away from the case at hand, there are some white working class girls who might like hanging out and taking drugs and even fucking flash young asian men, a situation that might upset some conservative elements amongst both communities


 
I'm sure there are. It's when they are 13 and 14 years old and from the care system, plied with cocaine and vodka, and then repeatedly raped (regardless of consent, they are too young to give consent especially if drunk/drugged, so it is rape by default) that the problems are beyond the impressionable young girl and older man in flash car scenario.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not so much what they do as what they say about what happens. as has been seen by the growth in their vote over the last few years, they are by no means as irrelevant as you suggest. despite their current internal difficulties, there's no real reason why the bnp couldn't advance rather further than they have done to date. i'd have thought that five or six bnpers getting done for terrorist offences over the past few years would have had more impact than it has: i don't think your three examples will seriously undermine support for the bnp throughout the country, as they haven't yet (and griffin and brons were elected to the european parliament after those cases). the bnp can make a lot of mileage out of this story, they can use whatever attacks for their own ends. i would say more but it's time to go back to work.


 
The BNP will shoot themselves in the foot with this once again, as they usually do. 
I'm unconcerned about the inevitable BNP spin.
They don't have the intelligence or resources to progress further than the support of the ignorant and hypocritical, most of whom have no work, no money and hence are no real influence upon their community. Keep an eye on them, but don't give them any credibility.
There may be efforts to start riots as the EDL love to do, but apart from a football hooly type runaround with cops in tow, there will be little else achieved.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

redsquirrel said:


> Ignore Fullyplumped she's a disgusting labour hack prepared to defend any action by the Labour Party. She's scum.


 
Now that is bigotry!


----------



## Fedayn (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> Now that is bigotry!





> A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern English refers to persons hostile to those of differing race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, various mental disorders, or religion.
> 
> The origin of the word bigot and bigoterie (bigotry) in English dates back to at least 1598, via Middle French, and started with the sense of "religious hypocrite". Forms of bigotry may have a related ideology or world views.



Disliking someone because of what they say isn't the definition of bigotry at all. This is simply the case of someone not liking you. It's personal nothing more.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> without taking away from the case at hand, there are some white working class girls who might like hanging out and taking drugs and even fucking flash young asian men, a situation that might upset some conservative elements amongst both communities


 
They love it really, is what that sounds like. 

We are talking here about a culture of racism and exploitation of children. If it's only "conservative elements of both communities" that are upset by what is going on then were in huge trouble. Actually, we're in trouble if we consider Asian and white people to be separate "communities." But what do I know? I'm only scum, not some kind of radical hipster.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Has ringsting issues with Straw because Straw is Jewish?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> Actually, we're in trouble if we consider Asian and white people to be separate "communities."


 
In many cities - they are.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Precisely the same mindset. Same in Turkey. White backpacker girl = prostitute. Unless heavily covered and wearing a wedding ring.



Wrıtıng as I do from Istanbul, where I've lıved on and off for the last two years, I can tell you categorıcally that the vast majorıty of Turkısh men would repudıate that attıtude wıth at least as much vehemence as you do.

Thıs kınd of generalızıng does no-one any good.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> True. There are other countries but their demographic make-up in the UK is so small that it seems a waste of time to compare.


 
It wasnt me who mentioned them I just found it a bit strange to use 2 majority Muslim countries/communities to make the point that such things are not only carried out by individuals in a Muslim community.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

likesfish said:


> Its not a case of Politcal correctness.
> its just   Some attitudes of some muslim young men are incompatable with living in the uk in the 21st century.
> try that shit it backwardstan  and the rival clan/family would choke them to death on their own severed gentials.


 
I think you are right - which is why these men preyed upon girls that they knew had no big brothers or fathers that would exact revenge.

My views on child rapists are well known. If it were my daughter I'd happily serve time for mass murder.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

Fedayn said:


> Disliking someone because of what they say isn't the definition of bigotry at all. This is simply the case of someone not liking you. It's personal nothing more.


 
I'm the victim here! If I think it's bigotry, it's bigotry.


----------



## Fedayn (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> I'm the victim here! If I think it's bigotry, it's bigotry.


 
Vctim? Awww,.........


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Wrıtıng as I do from Istanbul, where I've lıved on and off for the last two years, I can tell you categorıcally that the vast majorıty of Turkısh men would repudıate that attıtude wıth at least as much vehemence as you do.
> 
> Thıs kınd of generalızıng does no-one any good.


 
Istanbul is not really representative of Turkey as a whole.

I'm sure you might not be too happy if a UK female friend decided to tour the south-eastern provinces and more rural areas without being properly covered up and wearing a prominent wedding band.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Fuchs66 said:


> It wasnt me who mentioned them I just found it a bit strange to use 2 majority Muslim countries/communities to make the point that such things are not only carried out by individuals in a Muslim community.


 
As did I, but it serves to highlight the problem as I see it.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I dated a muslim girl in my teens for a year



I marrıed one.  

You're generalızıng from lımıted experıence wıth an partıcular sectıon of Muslım men--the ones who you mıght meet whıle backpackıng perhaps.  I thınk that's also the problem I have wıth comments lıke Straw's.  They make ıt sound as though thıs ıs problem endemıc to Muslım communıtıes, or somethıng to do wıth the nature of Islam.  It ısn't.  I'll lımıt my comments to Turkey, because ıt's the only Islamıc country ın whıch I've lıved, but I can tell you for sure that women--Western or local--are teated wıth a great deal more respect here than they are ın the UK or the USA.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

In my opinion the liberals who refuse to admit that there is an issue are racist. End of.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Istanbul is not really representative of Turkey as a whole.



True enough.



pk said:


> I'm sure you might not be too happy if a UK female friend decided to tour the south-eastern provinces and more rural areas without being properly covered up and wearing a prominent wedding band.



A weddıng rıng wouldn't be necessary.  I suppose ''properly covered up'' ıs a matter of defınıtıon.  It's true that a mını-skırt wouldn't be a good ıdea, but then walkıng through London ın a bıkını would attract the wrong sort of attentıon too.  A dıfference of degree, not of kınd.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Turkey is that way, especially in Constantinople, because of 90 years of strong-arm state secularism.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> In my opinion the liberals who refuse to admit that there is an issue are racist. End of.



There's no ıssue wıth Islam _per se_ or wıth Muslıms _per se._  There's an ıssue wıth some Muslıms (who most Muslıms would despıse as much as you do).

What's racıst ıs to generalıze from the partıcular to the unıversal.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> I marrıed one.
> 
> You're generalızıng from lımıted experıence wıth an partıcular sectıon of Muslım men--the ones who you mıght meet whıle backpackıng perhaps.  I thınk that's also the problem I have wıth comments lıke Straw's.  They make ıt sound as though thıs ıs problem endemıc to Muslım communıtıes, or somethıng to do wıth the nature of Islam.  It ısn't.  I'll lımıt my comments to Turkey, because ıt's the only Islamıc country ın whıch I've lıved, but I can tell you for sure that women--Western or local--are teated wıth a great deal more respect here than they are ın the UK or the USA.


 
I'll take your word for it, from an Istanbul perspective.

But I disagree with you in regards to the nature of Islam.

---
From Wiki:
The Qur'an and the hadith see slavery as an exceptional condition that can be entered into under certain limited circumstances.
Only children of slaves or non-Muslim prisoners of war could become slaves, never a freeborn Muslim.
---
This in my view can easily be used as justification for the behaviour of these six men. It's an extreme example, but the get-out clause of an historically justified perspective has its role here. All good fodder for debate either way.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

Sue said:


> Interesting. This was something the BNP made a lot of capital out of a few years ago.


 
Although some of them became strangely reticent when asked about their holidays in Thailand...


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

I don't thınk anyone on thıs thread ıs a racıst.  

We also need to remember the long hıstory of thıs ıssue's exploıtatıon by racısts.  Thınk of how Amerıcan black men were supposed to seduce whıte women ın varıous coercıve ways, and the manner ın whıch that was used by the KKK.  That doesn't mean ıt dıdn't happen.  But ıt was wrong then to call that a problem wıth the ''black communıty'' and ıt's wrong now to call thıs a problem wıth the ''Muslım communıty.''

I don't thınk anyone on thıs thread ıs a racıst.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Lol, good point about Huns and their attitudes towards oriental women.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I'll take your word for it, from an Istanbul perspective.
> 
> But I disagree with you in regards to the nature of Islam.
> 
> ...


 
Actually the Koran forbıds the enslavement of Chrıstıans and Jews, as well as Muslıms.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> That doesn't mean ıt dıdn't happen.


 
To what extent did it happen? And in what ways was it 'coercive'?


----------



## likesfish (Jan 8, 2011)

as dylans pointed out islam is not a race or a nation its not even a shared belief in pakistan.
  shitty attitudes to women  is quite prevalant in lots of cultures when it rubs up against a liberal culture you may well get trouble.
 espically if you have young men who want the liberal pluses just for them but not "there" women.
  the bloke blinged up with his jawa walking a few feet behind for example.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

Religious edicts about covering up don't help, though. Such things are part of culture too.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> ıt's wrong now to call thıs a problem wıth the ''Muslım communıty.''


 
I think attitudes among young (and older) muslim men living in predominantly muslim inner cities in the UK certainly do have an attitude problem in regards to young white British women. 
As I have said - a great many of them think British white women are just "slags" who deserve to be raped.
Thus it is an issue that the muslim communities need to address.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Has ringsting issues with Straw because Straw is Jewish?


 
Yes.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> As did I, but it serves to highlight the problem as I see it.


 
I suppose it depends whether you see the problem as being restricted to the community with a Pakistani background or whether you see it as a problem of Muslim communities/countries in general.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> To what extent did it happen? And in what ways was it 'coercive'?


 
Far less than was claımed by the racısts.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> In many cities - they are.


 
I suppose so. We're in trouble then. I think wearing kilts may be part of the answer, judging by this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00x7656/PreTeen_Proms/ - 46m 25s.

I suspect the wee Pakistani Scots boy and his parents in this programme are unlikely to have the attitudes that encourage separation.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I think attitudes among young (and older) muslim men living in predominantly muslim inner cities in the UK certainly do have an attitude problem in regards to young white British women.
> As I have said - a great many of them think British white women are just "slags" who deserve to be raped.
> Thus it is an issue that the muslim communities need to address.



All I can say ıs that I'm frıends wıth quıte a few Brıtısh Muslıms, and none of them would countenance thıs sort of attıtude for a nanosecond.

Do you know many Brıtısh Muslıms?  If so, would any of them behave ın the way descrıbed by Straw?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Far less than was claımed by the racısts.


 
Do you have any evidence that it happened at all? And what were the means of coercion used? 

Or is it more likely that we are talking overwhelmingly here of white women who wanted to sleep with black men? Given the unequal power relations, which way is any coercion most likely to have occurred, from woman to man or from man to woman?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> It should be dealt with by the communities affected. I don't see shit stirring in the media as helping at all.


 
That'd be great if it actually happened to any extent, but it doesn't. For example, in the Jewish community, 40 years of trying to get the Orthodox to bring their divorce rules in line with the rest of Jewry (and with the modern world) has failed. The *only* thing that stirs the pot is when the media get hold of another story of an Orthodox man divorcing his wife, but denying HER a _get_ (permission to re-marry), and making a fuss about patriarchal oppression.
Communities don't police themselves very well when they have, in effect, a self-selected, non-elected power-elite "managing" them.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you have any evidence that it happened at all? And what were the means of coercion used?
> 
> Or is it more likely that we are talking overwhelmingly here of white women who wanted to sleep with black men? Given the unequal power relations, which way is any coercion most likely to have occurred, from woman to man or from man to woman?



I thınk we're makıng the same poınt here.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Communities don't police themselves very well when they have, in effect, a self-selected, non-elected power-elite "managing" them.


 
Quite right. We should not simply hand over responsibility for the well-being of our neighbours to our neighbours' fathers.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> I thınk we're makıng the same poınt here.


 
Not quite. What I'm saying is that the KKK promulgated a lie.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Actually the Koran forbıds the enslavement of Chrıstıans and Jews, as well as Muslıms.


 
But it does appear to permit the rape of "slaves".

Here is a reference permitting to rape captive women:

Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath God ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property, - desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree Mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and God is All-knowing, All-wise. S. 4:24 Y. Ali

The above passage emphatically allows for the raping of women that are taken captive, even if these captives happened to be married!

It did not remain an abstract theoretical right, but was readily put into practice by the Muslim jihadists:

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. (Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371)

Abu Said al-Khudri said: The apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess’. That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Volume 2, Number 2150)

Ibn Kathir wrote:

<except those whom your right hands possess>

except those women whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant.

Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed…

<Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess>.

Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women." This is the wording collected by AT-Tirmidhi, An-Nasa’i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 2, Parts 3, 4 & 5 (Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, Verse 147), abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; First edition, March 2000], p. 422

http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/women_in_islam3.htm
(Evangelist Christian website)


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

All the people I've been friends with that are Muslim or come from an Islamic background have high moral standards and very sound. They have all had to put up with shit from racist cunts. The very same cunts that are fuelled by sensational tabloid tales. It's fucking sickening.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not quite. What I'm saying is that the KKK promulgated a lie.



That's what I'm sayıng too.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Yes.


 
That was an interesting and unexpected reply. Would you care to expand on your answer? If Jack Straw is Jewish, why would that be relevant?


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/women_in_islam3.htm
> (Evangelist Christian website)



Evangelıst Chrıstıan websıte entırely devoted to the fanatıcal denıgratıon of Islam, to be precıse.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Jawa lol


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> That was an interesting and unexpected reply. Would you care to expand on your answer? If Jack Straw is Jewish, why would that be relevant?


 


Off that high horse.

Ern was being irksome and facetious. I replied in kind.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> All the people I've been friends with that are Muslim or come from an Islamic background have high moral standards and very sound. They have all had to put up with shit from racist cunts. The very same cunts that are fuelled by sensational tabloid tales. It's fucking sickening.


 
Would you say that most of them come from a 'liberal' interpretation of Islam? My experience of men from a conservative interpretation of Islam – I can think of four men I've known reasonably well from such a background – is that they have been horribly misogynistic and hypocritical. Such massively restrictive cultures, which constrain sexual urges in particular, lead to perversion of sexual urges. the same thing happened in Victorian Britain.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> sadly i've met jewish people with these attitudes too - the idea that non-jewish girls are just for "practice" etc. one guy i met said as much to me once and after a conversation with my dad - who's also jewish btw , he said that he'd met a number of men with these attitudes, and more shocking ones than that over the years.


 
Yep, same here. I knew several YHVH-botherers, incredibly self-regarding and self-righteous scripture-molesters, who nonetheless thought it was fine to "fuck around", but would belt a sister who even looked in the direction of a bloke who wasn't her brother. 
I also remember my great-gran talking about how "wayward daughters" were dealt with "back home" (extra-marital pregnancy was pretty much a death sentence unless it was a _rebbe's_ son who had impregnated you), and how she was glad to be away from such barbarity.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> All the people I've been friends with that are Muslim or come from an Islamic background have high moral standards and very sound.



Me too.

Anyone here have any dıfferent personal experıence (as opposed to what they hear from press and polıtıcıans)?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

What's YVYH?


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Off that high horse. Ern was being irksome and facetious. I replied in kind.



Ah, your famous British ironic "humour."


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> What's YVYH?



Isn't it one of the many names of *o*?


----------



## Deareg (Jan 8, 2011)

Unfortunately it is probably an attitude that is prevalent among many men not just muslims, that certain women are slags and deserve whatever comes their way from ridicule to rape.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> And to address the point people are making regarding Pakistani men not being the only people exploiting children in this way - I see little evidence of predatory pedophilia in this manner being carried out by comparably larger ethnic communities in the UK, such as the Indian, Jamaican or Chinese.


 
Back in the '70s, before "Pakistani" was a term understood beyond an insult to use against brown-skinned people, the more usual media trope was of "coloured men" (usually meaning what we'd now call "Afro-Caribbean") preying on underage white girls, and back in Queen Victoria's day, it was indeed the Chinese who fulfilled that "bogeyman" role, all based on a small amount of unfortunate fact, and an even more unfortunate large amount of racially-motivated speculation.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

Fuchs66 said:


> I suppose it depends whether you see the problem as being restricted to the community with a Pakistani background or whether you see it as a problem of Muslim communities/countries in general.


 
Muslim communities in general - Pakistani communities being the largest and most established here.


----------



## revol68 (Jan 8, 2011)

I would be suprised if there wasn't some truth in what Jack Straw is saying, just as there is certainly some truth in what Bin Laden has to say about US foreign policy...

I don't see anything particularly controversial about his assertions, the only people who would are those that believe racist, oppressive and supremacist views are only the domain of whitey. 

p.s. all English women regardless of ethinicity are slutty whores compared to our pure irish lasses.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

What do you do, though, VP? I think people have become completely muddled on this issue. For instance, up and down the country, meetings of Islamic societies are held in university rooms at which women have to sit at the back, heads covered, and are not allowed to speak. These are the 'official' Islamic societies of the universities concerned. 

How is this allowed? The universities should not be allowing such discrimination to occur on their premises. But it seems that they're scared of taking action.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm sure there are. It's when they are 13 and 14 years old and from the care system, plied with cocaine and vodka, and then repeatedly raped (regardless of consent, they are too young to give consent especially if drunk/drugged, so it is rape by default) that the problems are beyond the impressionable young girl and older man in flash car scenario.



yes of course, but its far from an easily cut and dried issue, although onviously if you are talking about 13/14 year olds then it does start to become much more clear cut

but honestly, if you think this problem which is endemic throughout the care system is confined to Pakistani men then you really are living in a dream world

young people, men and women, get sucked into a criminal underworld for lots of different reasons, for women that often also entails sexual abuse

this is a problem about criminality, how do you think some of the organised white or black criminal outfits treat young woman, its about the cancer that has allowed criminal families, gangs of youths of whatever ethnicity to have such a stranglehold on working class communities

the reason i believe this has happened is as much to do with class amongst anything else, race is just a convenient side issue for opportunistic politicians and careerist self-appointed community leaders


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Precisely the same mindset. Same in Turkey. White backpacker girl = prostitute. Unless heavily covered and wearing a wedding ring.
> Same in Israel (with the Israeli Arabs) and throughout the Gulf.


It's not just the Israeli Arabs in Israel, Sabras are as bad, if not worse.


----------



## revol68 (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Back in the '70s, before "Pakistani" was a term understood beyond an insult to use against brown-skinned people, the more usual media trope was of "coloured men" (usually meaning what we'd now call "Afro-Caribbean") preying on underage white girls, and back in Queen Victoria's day, it was indeed the Chinese who fulfilled that "bogeyman" role, all based on a small amount of unfortunate fact, and an even more unfortunate large amount of racially-motivated speculation.


 
The 'dark other' praying on white women is a long standing trope of racism but I think there is an element of truth in that some men from the muslim community see many white women as essentially whores, just as many strict catholics or christians often labelled any woman behaving in a manner outside their religious mores as whores, sluts and finally "asking for it".

It's a type of inverted white supremacy that denies negative agency to non white groups in constructing their own racism, hierarchies and oppressions.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> All I can say ıs that I'm frıends wıth quıte a few Brıtısh Muslıms, and none of them would countenance thıs sort of attıtude for a nanosecond.
> 
> Do you know many Brıtısh Muslıms?  If so, would any of them behave ın the way descrıbed by Straw?



I knew many living in Bradford. And a great many of them did unfortunately foster a love/hate thing with white women.

It was their predominant topic of conversation, and being frustrated young men who were denied sex with the muslim raised women inevitably they envied the more permissive attitude of their British white pub-going peers.
The mission every weekend was to look for "pusseh" and there's no way they would be treating muslim girls with the levels of contempt they harboured for white girls.

I don't know too many now, the Londoners I know from muslim backgrounds are better raised and have far more respect.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

revol68 said:


> I would be suprised if there wasn't some truth in what Jack Straw is saying, just as there is certainly some truth in what Bin Laden has to say about US foreign policy...
> 
> I don't see anything particularly controversial about his assertions, the only people who would are those that believe racist, oppressive and supremacist views are only the domain of whitey.
> 
> p.s. all English women regardless of ethinicity are slutty whores compared to our pure irish lasses.


 
Aren't you of Protestant Anglo/Scots stock?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

In the 1950s the Maltese were the pimps.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's not just the Israeli Arabs in Israel, Sabras are as bad, if not worse.


 
The "arseem" - young men in a gap year between college and obligatory military conscription - are certainly of the "fuck/fight anything that moves" mentality.


----------



## revol68 (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> yes of course, but its far from an easily cut and dried issue, although onviously if you are talking about 13/14 year olds then it does start to become much more clear cut
> 
> but honestly, if you think this problem which is endemic throughout the care system is confined to Pakistani men then you really are living in a dream world
> 
> ...


 
I don't think pk is asserting this to be fair.

I think he is saying that such reasoning exists and is a factor, whereby religious muslim woman are kept on a pedestal as pure, above being "degraded sexually" and so these "whorish" uncovered secular white women become the focus of this repressed sexuality, much like the repressed catholic who is strictly missionary with the missus but uses prostittutes for his 'less acceptable' kinks and desires.

It's a madonna/whore thing played out across religion/race.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> What's YVYH?


 
I don't know, ern. Why don't you tell me?


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> yes of course, but its far from an easily cut and dried issue, although onviously if you are talking about 13/14 year olds then it does start to become much more clear cut
> 
> but honestly, if you think this problem which is endemic throughout the care system is confined to Pakistani men then you really are living in a dream world



I don't think it's confined to Pakistani men at all. I do think it is kept hush-hush by community leaders, who now need to start reporting this stuff to authorities rather than quietly spiriting perpetrators back to Pakistan.



> young people, men and women, get sucked into a criminal underworld for lots of different reasons, for women that often also entails sexual abuse
> 
> this is a problem about criminality, how do you think some of the organised white or black criminal outfits treat young woman, its about the cancer that has allowed criminal families, gangs of youths of whatever ethnicity to have such a stranglehold on working class communities
> 
> the reason i believe this has happened is as much to do with class amongst anything else, race is just a convenient side issue for opportunistic politicians and careerist self-appointed community leaders


 
I would agree. One battle at a time I guess.


----------



## revol68 (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Aren't you of Protestant Anglo/Scots stock?


 
get to fuck!

Irish Scot and raised catholic.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Jan 8, 2011)

Child abuse, rape and the targeting of vulnerable young women, and boys, should be spoken about.  But I’m not comfortable with the idea that what has happened in this case is a unique feature of Pakistani society.  It’s misleading and divisive to reframe this as a race/cultural/religious issue. Scum like this are on the fringes of society and are not representative of the majority of British Muslims.

Although I think Jack Straw is a cunt, even he said that sex offender wings are majority white inmates not Pakistani/Muslim. 

These girls, many of whom had been in or come out of care, were vulnerable and needed protection.  Rather than looking at how the mechanisms that should have been in place to protect them failed, the debate is concentrating on blaming the evil Muslims. It’s racist scapegoating and doesn’t address the real issue, protecting vulnerable young people from sick fuckers irrespective of what religion/background they are.

I know that it doesn’t matter what I say, the bigotry and racism will keep on fucking coming….

PK - You're either extremely naive or a racist prick.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

revol68 said:


> It's a madonna/whore thing played out across religion/race.


 
Precisely. The women that are exported from Western world into the media of the eastern countries are the Madonnas and Lady Ga Gas, not the athletes and femenists.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

That's how I would see it, certainly. Any religion that represses sexuality will end up with individuals with shitty attitudes towards those outside their religion, imo, because the expression of one's sexuality becomes a matter of _morality_.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> I don't know, ern. Why don't you tell me?


 
You posted it. Nutjob!


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> Although I think Jack Straw is a cunt, even he said that sex offender wings are majority white inmates not Pakistani/Muslim.



This is a 90% white country, you daft 'apeth.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> Child abuse, rape and the targeting of vulnerable young women, and boys, should be spoken about.  But I’m not comfortable with the idea that what has happened in this case is a unique feature of Pakistani society.  It’s misleading and divisive to reframe this as a race/cultural/religious issue. Scum like this are on the fringes of society and are not representative of the majority of British Muslims.
> 
> Although I think Jack Straw is a cunt, even he said that sex offender wings are majority white inmates not Pakistani/Muslim.
> 
> ...


 
I'm neither. Thanks for that though - I knew some fool would come on in and start throwing the race card about.

I've already pointed out that the system of care failed these girls, and that social services and the care system have their share of the blame over what happened.

But since you clearly didn't bother reading that post and just piled in with the simplistic accusations of bigotry and racism - you wouldn't know.

Nobody is saying it's a unique feature of Pakistani society, that's bullshit, I certainly never said that.

I am saying there is an attitude cultivated over the last 20 years or so from angry young muslim men who are long term unemployed and living in secular ghettoized societies in northern UK who view white girls as sluts and nothing more.

If you have an issue with that statement, then address it, but don't be putting words into my mouth because I'll make you look like a cunt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> Scum like this are on the fringes of society and are not representative of the majority of British Muslims.


 
Of course they are not, but a culture that represses sexuality _will_ produce perversion. Just as Victorian Christian Britain did.


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

Thing is most people know there is a specific problem with the attitudes of lots of muslim men towards women. And we all know that lots of men from all sorts of backgrounds are misoginistic.....None of it should be swept under the carpet. The idea that any of the issues should not be talked about is just WRONG.
Too many muslim men do see non muslim women as slags and fair game....And a lot of muslim women suffer horrific abuse...


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

tbaldwin said:


> And a lot of muslim women suffer horrific abuse...


 
Another issue that tends to get swept under the carpet for fear of being accused of racism/bigotry/islamophobia.


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> PK - You're either extremely naive or a racist prick.


 
A really really stupid comment. He has made some really good points on this thread.......


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

tbaldwin said:


> A really really stupid comment. He has made some really good points on this thread.......


 
Thank you!

I have my moments (rare as they may seem!)


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> I knew many living in Bradford. And a great many of them did unfortunately foster a love/hate thing with white women.
> 
> It was their predominant topic of conversation, and being frustrated young men who were denied sex with the muslim raised women inevitably they envied the more permissive attitude of their British white pub-going peers.
> The mission every weekend was to look for "pusseh" and there's no way they would be treating muslim girls with the levels of contempt they harboured for white girls.



i've known just as many white men who've had the exact same attitude towards all women 

this whole thing isn't new, growing up in the 80's i remember white are are just for fucking sprayed in big letters on a wall on manningham lane, but contrast that with Page 3, lap dancing clubs and all the other elements that objectify women, its all the same misogynistic bullshit

perhaps its a sign of integration that some young pakistani men now feel confident to show the same contempt towards women (even if not those of the same culture) that many UK men have demonstrated for years


----------



## Thimble Queen (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> *Nobody is saying it's a unique feature of Pakistani society, that's bullshit, I certainly never said that.
> 
> I am saying there is an attitude cultivated over the last 20 years or so from angry young muslim men who are long term unemployed and living in secular ghettoized societies in northern UK who view white girls as sluts and nothing more.*


 
TBF I missed out pakistani society *in britain* from my post but, your attitudes are clear from your own posts. 

Your assertion that muslims men see white women as slags is misguided, at best.  Men who think woman are slags, think wome are slags regardless of their race/relgion/colour.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What do you do, though, VP? I think people have become completely muddled on this issue. For instance, up and down the country, meetings of Islamic societies are held in university rooms at which women have to sit at the back, heads covered, and are not allowed to speak. These are the 'official' Islamic societies of the universities concerned.


You need to ask yourself what constitutes "official" to the university's provost, board of trustees or management committee? There's an issue here that doesn't pertain to Catholicism, Anglicanism and some of the other Protestant sects, which is that Islam has no official clergy, and therefore no single hierarchy that can declare "Imam X is legit, but Imam Y is a charlatan, practice A is doctrinally-correct, but practice B is a tribal holdover not sanctioned in scripture".


> How is this allowed? The universities should not be allowing such discrimination to occur on their premises. But it seems that they're scared of taking action.


 
Of course they are, because they're led to believe that challenging poor behaviour that can be attributed to matters of belief will be viewed as "racism", rather than an exercise of the university's constitutional or discretionary powers.
Provided a good cover for the likes of _Hizb-ut-Tahrir_ to "evangelise", too, if you don't "police" this sort of thing, and has allowed evangelical Christian organisations to pluck gullible fruit just as easily.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> perhaps its a sign of integration that some young pakistani men now feel confident to show the same contempt towards women (even if not those of the same culture) that many UK men have demonstrated for years


 
The point is that they do not hold the same opinion towards muslim women. If they foster such bitter contempt only for white girls then that makes it far easier to justify abusing them in this manner.

I'm not going to try and overexamine the reasoning behind it, beyond the perception that white girls are all dirty kuffar sluts and muslim girls are not.

One might speculate that they resent the claustrophobic nature of a tight and strict secular society given the fact that extraordinary levels of debauchery and drunkeness and yes, easy sex, is all over the place outside their community.

Bradford/Manningham is a prime example, ten or twelve streets owned solely by muslim families - and drunken white pub crawlers having noisy sex behind the chippy less than a block away... it does happen and you can imagine the impact on an impressionable young lad from a strict upbringing.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> Men who think woman are slags, think wome are slags regardless of their race/relgion/colour.


 
Then the next time you hear a muslim lad talk in such a way about a white girl, ask he he feels the same way about a muslim girl, and name one as an example. I think you'll see the difference in attitude immediately.

And don't discuss my "attitudes", you know nothing about me.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

Bear said:


> It's probably not just one community, no.  But it certainly seems to me that the men from the Muslim community that do this specifically target non-muslim girls as they believe they are inferior and would never do it to 'one of their own'.


 
I'm sure but the point i've been making is that it isn't only muslim men with these attitudes. BTW when I was in Moldova there was a similar type of thing going on as well (not with the muslim community as there weren't any muslims though) but it worked both ways.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> You posted it. Nutjob!


 
No, if you go back and check, the set of four letters you posted aren't in the same order as the set of four letters I posted.
Fuckwit!


----------



## revol68 (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i've known just as many white men who've had the exact same attitude towards all women
> 
> this whole thing isn't new, growing up in the 80's i remember white are are just for fucking sprayed in big letters on a wall on manningham lane, but contrast that with Page 3, lap dancing clubs and all the other elements that objectify women, its all the same misogynistic bullshit
> 
> perhaps its a sign of integration that some young pakistani men now feel confident to show the same contempt towards women (even if not those of the same culture) that many UK men have demonstrated for years


 
We all know people with such such shitty attitudes but it is undeniable that within very religious communities with alot of restrictions around sexuality and fucked up attitudes about 'purity' you will get a very strong correlation of mysogny towards woman, in particular those women who exist outside these restrictions, in the case of the mulsim community in the UK this will often play out across racial/community lines as the vast majority of the white population are far more secular and engage in behaviour largely frowned upon within muslim communities.

None of this should be in anyway controversial, the only thing that has made it so is the fact Jack Straw is a hypocritical cunt who has sought to play the race card a number of times to cover his own arse, and that there are a great many white liberals who take it as an article of faith that no non white person could ever be a racist, sexist or otherwise a cunt.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> TBF I missed out pakistani society *in britain* from my post but, your attitudes are clear from your own posts.
> 
> Your assertion that muslims men see white women as slags is misguided, at best.  Men who think woman are slags, think wome are slags regardless of their race/relgion/colour.


 
There are people around, often from very religious/conservative groups , who think that women from certain communities are slags and "fair game" though.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> The point is that they do not hold the same opinion towards muslim women. If they foster such bitter contempt only for white girls then that makes it far easier to justify abusing them in this manner.
> 
> I'm not going to try and overexamine the reasoning behind it, beyond the perception that white girls are all dirty kuffar sluts and muslim girls are not.
> 
> ...



yes, i dont think we're really in disagreement, i just think you're over simplifying

the pakistani community as a whole in bradford is much more secular than a lot of people realise, the idea that the men will only target white women when believe it or not there are plenty of young asian girls quite happy to fuck them is a bit naive

its much much more complex an issue than is being portrayed and the solutions, if they exist, need to examine far more than just a narrow group of men from a narrow section of pakistani society

its bollocks to accuse you of racism on this thread, but i do think you may be over-estimating the importance of a bunch of loud lairy young men you met once, that you might find in any culture, and attempting to transpose it onto a wider community


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> The "arseem" - young men in a gap year between college and obligatory military conscription - are certainly of the "fuck/fight anything that moves" mentality.


 
They're not too great for a few years after national service, either. They're so used to having armed buddies at their beck and call that they need to be re-educated into a semblance of civilised behaviour. One of the many reasons I stopped visiting Israel. It gets a bit boring if you're regularly having to give lessons in manners.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> They're not too great for a few years after national service, either. They're so used to having armed buddies at their beck and call that they need to be re-educated into a semblance of civilised behaviour. One of the many reasons I stopped visiting Israel. It gets a bit boring if you're regularly having to give lessons in manners.


 
I found most of them fucking disgusting in their attitudes, but the nice guys were really cool people. Takes all sorts innit.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

revol68 said:


> None of this should be in anyway controversial, the only thing that has made it so is the fact Jack Straw is a hypocritical cunt who has sought to play the race card a number of times to cover his own arse, and that there are a great many white liberals who take it as an article of faith that no non white person could ever be a racist, sexist or otherwise a cunt.



exactly its not controversial and its verging on blatantly obvious 

its worth noting that communities in yorkshire were hardly liberal bastions of hedonism, and indeed still arent, its always been quite an up tight culture regarding sex, women, and anything not from yorkshire, and resultingly always had quite heavy undertones of violence - queer bashing in bradford being one example (not sure if it still happens to the same extent, but it was a very big problem at one time)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> There are people around, often from very religious/conservative groups , who think that women from certain communities are slags and "fair game" though.


 
Yep. The problem with Jack Straw pointing this out though is 1. he's singled out one group, and 2. he was part of a government that did not defend the concept of the secular state.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Then the next time you hear a muslim lad talk in such a way about a white girl, ask he he feels the same way about a muslim girl, and name one as an example. I think you'll see the difference in attitude immediately.
> 
> And don't discuss my "attitudes", you know nothing about me.



I know plenty of muslim men and haven't heard them talk about any women in the way that you describe. I have seen plenty of white and black lads come and harrass me and my mates in the street/pub/club whatever.

If what your claiming about muslim blokes not doing it to there own is true, there there wouldn't need to be services like this http://www.nawp.org/

Going back to my point: Those men who think woman are inferior/sluts/deserving abuse, think that regardless of religion. 

You have expressed your attitudes quite clearly and I will call you out on them.


----------



## elbows (Jan 8, 2011)

Stoat Boy said:


> For me though the issue that is not really being addressed is the strata of our society that these poor girls are coming from. I would be willing to bet that almost all of them are products of broken homes, backgrounds in which the primary income has always been from state and so on.
> 
> Essentially those of us on the right have tended to dismiss them as just being feckless and workshy whilst the left have not really had the courage to face up the reality and complexities of the situation which is a mine-field no matter what we might all think.
> 
> I feel that there is a lot to be learnt from what has been going on from every section of modern British society and none of us come out of this covered in anything other than something very smelly and unpleasant.


 
Yes the vulnerable deserve a lot lot more attention than they are likely to get when these issues get discussed. I doubt you and I will have quite the same ideas about the problems and how to solve them, but I think people of most political persuasions might agree that there is something very wrong with the manner in which we intervene in this country. Too little, too late. Not that its at all easy to solve these problems, and in recent centuries our ability to actually do stuff effectively to protect humans from all manner of horrors has fallen way behind our general awareness and moral desire to protect.

Mind you even if we cannot hope to solve the underlying issues that leave people vulnerable, and the discussions can get severely clouded or misdirected by issues of race and culture, we should be able to do quite a lot at catching and deterring perpetrators. How much of this stuff goes on that is either undetected or does not lead to prosecutions? At least this current case will hopefully lead to more focus on prevention of this stuff, and will cause some potential perpetrators to think twice.

The race aspect is a mess. If only humans did not find it so easy to get caught up in racial prejudice it would be so much easier to address all of the real issues that can exist within particular cultures etc, without fear of inappropriate escalation of racial tensions, divisions etc. As things stand it is hard to imagine how we could reach such a point, given that prejudice about any particular group is powered by some of the basic mechanisms for how the mind learns to categorise, generalise, and apply past knowledge to decision-making in the present. So, we just have to find a way to discuss and act upon issues which stray into this territory as best we can. There are no easy solutions, and people keeping quiet about issues because you fear the use that racists could make of this ammo is frequently counterproductive. It does not rob them of ammo really, it may in some sense 'keep a lid on things', but the potential horrors remain, lurking, and could yet become more explosive ammo if all this stuff builds up and one day the lid blows off. At the very least there needs to be a certain amount of honest and careless discussion in order to act as a pressure-release valve.

Returning to the victims and the vulnerable, teenagers are certainly failed in many ways by our modern societies often-contradictory attitudes towards coming of age. Still I suppose there have always been issues here, and in some ways it not so much a modern problem but rather we are quite a bit more open about discussing the realities than we were many decades ago. We have tried to equip teenagers with the knowledge that will help them deal with the world of sex, drugs & booze that they are entering.

I wish I could get a better sense of the scale of abuse in general, including with in the family. I really wonder how many of the people who are vulnerable to abuse of one sort or another from strangers & peers got to this spot because or earlier abuse at home.And although as a society we do acknowledge the existence of abuse within families, its woefully underrepresented in the media & in public discourse, where stranger-danger reigns supreme. I would imagine that successful detection, intervention and prosecutions are far too few as well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> Child abuse, rape and the targeting of vulnerable young women, and boys, should be spoken about.  But I’m not comfortable with the idea that what has happened in this case is a unique feature of Pakistani society.  It’s misleading and divisive to reframe this as a race/cultural/religious issue. Scum like this are on the fringes of society and are not representative of the majority of British Muslims.


Of course. You won't find that anyone has said different.
It's also very obviously a non-racialised problem in the care system, given that it was an ongoing issue when I had dealings with that system in the mid-1970s, and has continued to be since (most often with the connivance or even direct participation of care staff, it needs to be said).


> Although I think Jack Straw is a cunt, even he said that sex offender wings are majority white inmates not Pakistani/Muslim.


That's to do with demographics. Our BME population in the UK (not counting the Welsh, Scots, or Northern Irish ) is only around 14% of the population, currently.


> These girls, many of whom had been in or come out of care, were vulnerable and needed protection.  Rather than looking at how the mechanisms that should have been in place to protect them failed, the debate is concentrating on blaming the evil Muslims. It’s racist scapegoating and doesn’t address the real issue, protecting vulnerable young people from sick fuckers irrespective of what religion/background they are.


The debate resides there because that is where the media places it. Prurience sells better than an analysis of the systemic failure of organisations charged with the care of children.


> I know that it doesn’t matter what I say, the bigotry and racism will keep on fucking coming….


Of course it will. there'll always be ignorant cunts.
Doesn't mean you should give up challenging it, though.


> PK - You're either extremely naive or a racist prick.


TBF, he's neither.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i do think you may be over-estimating the importance of a bunch of loud lairy young men you met once, that you might find in any culture, and attempting to transpose it onto a wider community


 
Maybe. And I accept that it's certainly not an attitude that is overtly prevalent in London based Pakistani origin muslims.

However I do think that in recent years (post 9/11) there is a new assertiveness that has emerged among young muslim men, they have identified with the fear factor and carry the stick of islam to back up their notions.

It's all to easy to find a piece of the Qu'ran to justify almost anything, if you apply generous misreading to it.

Interesting to note is the fact that since these six men were arrested, they grew their beards long and took to wearing islamic dress.

And let's not lose sight of the fact that this is a specific crime of "street grooming".

In Scandanavia there are reports of similar style attacks too...

Norway: While *65 percent (SEE BELOW - ACTUAL FIGURE REPORTED TO BE 6.5%)* of those charged with rape are classed as coming from a non-western background, this segment makes up only 14.3 percent of Oslo's population. Norwegian women were the victims in 80 percent of the cases, with 20 percent being women of foreign background.

NOTE: APPARENTLY THE FIGURE OF 65% WAS A WIDELY CIRCULATED MISPRINT, THE ACTUAL FIGURE BEING 6.5%
SEE HERE FOR FURTHER INFO: http://www.ablemesh.co.uk/thoughtsmuslimsnotrapists.html
However the 65% or 6.5% figure was calculated using figures from 2004.

In 2009 the Oslo police reported that rape statistics for the past three years showed that none of the rapes in the city were committed by native Norwegians — all were committed by immigrants.

Denmark: An Islamic Mufti in Copenhagen sparked a political outcry after publicly declaring that women who refuse to wear headscarves are "asking for rape."

It's certainly easy for muslim men to find justification for abusing non-muslim girls in the teachings of some of the more hysterical clerics.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> No, if you go back and check, the set of four letters you posted aren't in the same order as the set of four letters I posted.
> Fuckwit!


 
lol


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> I know plenty of muslim men and haven't heard them talk about any women in the way that you describe. I have seen plenty of white and black lads come and harrass me and my mates in the street/pub/club whatever.


 
Muslim men rarely go to the pub/club whatever. You'll rarely see them with a drink in them, unlike the black/white men you mention.



> Going back to my point: Those men who think woman are inferior/sluts/deserving abuse, think that regardless of religion.



I disagree. I think it's a far more prevalent attitude in muslim societies than you appear to want to accept.

And you may call me out on any aspect of my comments, but do so with respect if you expect it reciprocated.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> I know plenty of muslim men and haven't heard them talk about any women in the way that you describe.


 
Such men wouldn't discuss it in front of you, though, would they? That's part of being that kind of misogynist - that you mind your language in front of women. It's a bit like racist white people whose racism only comes out in all-white company.


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 8, 2011)

Anyone mentioned young Pakistani women yet?

How can this be avoided when an aspect of  21st British culture still puts a value on female virtue - ultimately a financial value - which is itself derived from a sense of  ownership of that female by her male siblings and/or father.


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Such men wouldn't discuss it in front of you, though, would they? That's part of being that kind of misogynist - that you mind your language in front of women. It's a bit like racist white people whose racism only comes out in all-white company.


 
Very true....There is a real problem here with lots of muslim mens attitude to women. I know of a few women who have suffered directly and sweeping the issue under the carpet on whatever grounds is WRONG WRONG WRONG.
And it is important to tackle mysoginist attitudes and the idea that people should be treated as possesions. Religion makes the problem of sexism and violent sexism worse. It promotes backward and irrational attitudes that encourage some men to view lots of women as just pieces of meat.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 8, 2011)

Can't be bothered to wade through this thread but while their are racist and disgusting attitudes in all communities is this disproportionate in the pakistani community?

Not convinced. Loads of white men go out to Thailand and shag under age women out there because they have racist views and are sexual predators.

I was also reading about how some in the Jewish community in Israel have a thing about bringing in Palestinian prostitutes, again often under aged, because of their racist and sick attitudes.

The point is why should we start talking about whole pakistani/white/jewish communities when in all cases it is very small minority.


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Can't be bothered to wade through this thread but while their are racist and disgusting attitudes in all communities is this disproportionate in the pakistani community?
> 
> Not convinced. Loads of white men go out to Thailand and shag under age women out there because they have racist views and are sexual predators.
> 
> ...



It maybe a minority of people with such attitudes but others will have some preety negative attitudes too. You can look even amongst white liberals and their attitudes to relationships and sexuality are often really shit...
Mainstream culture encourages us to view members of the opposite sex as possesions or potential possesions.....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

Mr.Bishie said:


> lol


 
He tries so hard, but he just isn't up to his old standards, the poor old sausage.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 8, 2011)

No I don't think mainstream culture encourges me to view members of the opposite sex as poesseions.
 possibly as lesbians as the only reason they would'nt want to sleep with a steely eyed dealer of death sex god  rather than a vomit stained drunken loon
  don't think any jewish gangs have been arrested lately if ever.
 think the old testament could be used to justify quite a lot of nasty genocide concubines slavery etc etc 
  I'd be really really intrested in taking note on what sort of islam these creatures have taken up rapist scumbag finds god and seeks redemption fair enough.
 scumbag decides to declare war on the ungodly kaffir probably worse outcome


----------



## IC3D (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> Another issue that tends to get swept under the carpet for fear of being accused of racism/bigotry/islamophobia.


 
A community representative on the radio this morning actually suggested it was the responsibility of the girls parents to protect them and while I believe this is nothing to do with Islam its got a lot to do with the backward culture present in these Pakistani communities that foster extreme mysoganistic views in their young men and the more the liberal media stick their heads in the sand the more likely the problem won't be resolved.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

What actual solutions do people see for this?


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> What actual solutions do people see for this?


 
Rapists and Child Molesters need to be re-educated.....preferably by a bullet in the back of the head.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

I can't even be arsed to find out what YVHY or whatever Judaic crap you posted. Probably like you won't type god but type g-d instead you obscurantic loon.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

I agree with balders.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> I agree with balders.


 
Me too.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 8, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> spoke too soon. Theire have been campaigns against street grooming, kerb crawling and the general behaviour of younmg men involved in this. As for Muslim communities not wanting to upset the applecart this is bollocks as witnesses in court cases have included muslims.
> 
> As for the assertion that Muslim communities ( what ever they are, its a bit like talking about the Christian community or the Catholic community) in the news last night there were at least three examples of where muslim/faith based organsiations were seen to attempting to address this issue .
> 
> Its one thing to identify the issue  that some asian youth specifically target vulnerable young women as a way of achieving sex and power beacsues they percieve them to be easy and feel that they may be able to rationalise their actions , its entirely another to paint some mythical one dimensuionsal 'muslim' community that is a brick wall of silence and colludes with this.


 
HUrrah!!! Well said. 


Has anyone mentioned 'class' yet? I do hope so.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 8, 2011)

its yaweh or YWHW early hebrew for god something to do with modern lingustics you can read about it on wikkipedia if your bored


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> This is a 90% white country, you daft 'apeth.


 
Yet, when a sex offender/rapist etc is White...his/her religious affliation/cultural heritage is rarely mentioned...Why is that do you think?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 8, 2011)

tbaldwin said:


> Rapists and Child Molesters need to be re-educated.....preferably by a bullet in the back of the head.


 
Start another pro capital punishment thread, surely?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

90% of white people have no religion THANK YHYW!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 8, 2011)

.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> 90% of white people have no religion THANK YHYW!



 Really? What about cultural heritage?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

What do you mean by 'cultural heritage'? Is this another liberal codeword for something?


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 8, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Although some of them became strangely reticent when asked about their holidays in Thailand...



lol.  A few probably run bars out there.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 8, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yet, when a sex offender/rapist etc is White...his/her religious affliation/cultural heritage is rarely mentioned...Why is that do you think?


 
If this story was a group of white men specifically targeting Pakistani girls to rape then it may get a mention. Don't you think?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 8, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Really? What about cultural heritage?


 
What about it? 

My parents are both Christians. Does that mean that I'm 'culturally Christian'? No. That's meaningless. It's also dangerous, imo. It's like when I hear phildwyer talking about his baby child being a Muslim. Right. He cannot even talk yet, let alone decide for himself whether or not there is only one god of which Mohammad is the prophet. That's nonsense.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Bars called 'Forbidden Fruits', 'Lolita Lounge' and 'Paedo Pub'...


----------



## rover07 (Jan 8, 2011)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If this story was a group of white men specifically targeting Pakistani girls to rape then it may get a mention. Don't you think?


 
Would you then claim that there are groups of young white men all over the country doing the same thing?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

I think it's worth remembering how common reported rape is throughout society. Unreported, there's a lot more.

Also, on this thread the vast majority of women posting are against Straw's generalisation.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 8, 2011)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If this story was a group of white men specifically targeting Pakistani girls to rape then it may get a mention. Don't you think?


 
If you read the article, in court both the police and judge said there was no evidence that the attacks were racially motivated.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 8, 2011)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8240202/Cover-up-claims-over-Asian-sex-gangs.html

out of 56 people done for gang rape of young girls 2 were white!
 definitly a problem


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Who trusts cops and judges?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 8, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What about it?
> 
> My parents are both Christians. Does that mean that I'm 'culturally Christian'? No. That's meaningless.* It's also dangerous, imo*. It's like when I hear phildwyer talking about his baby child being a Muslim. Right. He cannot even talk yet, let alone decide for himself whether or not there is only one god of which Mohammad is the prophet. That's nonsense.



Of course it dangerous! Which is why I asked the question.

Sorry, off out, maybe shouldn't have chimed in without time to discuss/explain properly.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Bars called 'Forbidden Fruits', 'Lolita Lounge' and 'Paedo Pub'...



No, they'll be English theme pubs with names like The Albion.

Didn't one of the EDL steal tens of thousands made from the merchandise they'd been selling (hoodies and ski masks) and fuck off to Thailand?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 8, 2011)

Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians are prominent in the sex slavery business too. We should have crushed them in 45.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 8, 2011)

rover07 said:


> Would you then claim that there are groups of young white men all over the country doing the same thing?


 
I'm not claiming that there are groups of Pakistani men do such things. A group has been banged up for it. The wider issue that has been raised is that the value placed on white girls by some muslim men may be far lower than that of muslim women and how to address that with a large muslim population in a mainly white, non-muslim, liberal country.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

YouSir said:


> What actual solutions do people see for this?


 
Excellent, about time.

This thread is part of the solution. Dilute the nastiness and develop a heightened sense of understanding.

What is acceptable within the bounds of personal faith and law, and what is not.

To discuss and debate ideas is healthy, to lay down absolute laws is to be a fascist.

Nobody here of all places apart from the obvious ogres will be wanting to reject the well-established fruits of Islamic culture in the UK.

The good stuff that makes our nation the safe haven for those who need it. 

Yet our traditional and beloved hospitality must never be compromised, and nor must it be abused.

I'm bowing out of this thread now, made my point, in danger of over-egging the cake.

Been nice though. Surprisingly civil.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

likesfish said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8240202/Cover-up-claims-over-Asian-sex-gangs.html
> 
> out of 56 people done for gang rape of young girls 2 were white!
> definitly a problem





> But in 17 court cases since 1997 where groups of men were prosecuted for grooming 11 to 16 year old girls on the street, 53 of the 56 people found guilty were Asian, 50 of them Muslim, while just three were white,



so marginally over one case a year, in contrast to two women a week being murdered by current or former partners

not to trivialise it but hardly an epidemic is it


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I'm not claiming that there are groups of Pakistani men do such things. A group has been banged up for it. The wider issue that has been raised is that the value placed on white girls by some muslim men may be far lower than that of muslim women and how to address that with a large muslim population in a mainly white, non-muslim, liberal country.


 
The best way to do it in my view....is to be totally honest about the problems and also make it really clear that those who prey on the weak and vulnerable will face punishments that fit their crimes.
It doesnt do muslims any good in this country when white liberals are trying to sweep issues under the carpet. The majority of muslims in the UK will have varying degrees of revulsion about scumbag rapists, whatever their background.   And have to say from what i know child abuse is also far from rare in muslim families, its just better hidden than in white families.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so marginally over one case a year, in contrast to two women a week being murdered by current or former partners
> 
> not to trivialise it but hardly an epidemic is it


 
umm... how did you break those figures down??


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

tbaldwin said:


> The best way to do it in my view....is to be totally honest about the problems and also make it really clear that those who prey on the weak and vulnerable will face punishments that fit their crimes.
> It doesnt do muslims any good in this country when white liberals are trying to sweep issues under the carpet. The majority of muslims in the UK will have varying degrees of revulsion about scumbag rapists, whatever their background.   And have to say from what i know child abuse is also far from rare in muslim families, its just better hidden than in white families.


 
And let's not forget, these vodka swilling cocaine sniffing perverts were hardly acting as good muslims.

OK thanks bye!


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so marginally over one case a year, in contrast to two women a week being murdered by current or former partners
> 
> not to trivialise it but hardly an epidemic is it


 
Its a fair point......It sort of backs up my point about treating people like possesions....And that is not something just muslims or religious nuts do..
But there are degrees of possesiveness from the right on U75 poster who went barmy about somebody touching his girlfriends arm to people in danger of losing their lives because of affairs..
More open and frank discussion is needed of all of it. But gang rape and muslim men treating white women as slags is worth discussing specifically and is a real problem..
But do not let other mysoginists off the hook either...and as for the BNP they are hardly whiter than white.....yeah i know.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> umm... how did you break those figures down??


 
17 court cases in 13 years, was pretty clear from the piece


----------



## IC3D (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> 17 court cases in 13 years, was pretty clear from the piece


 
People in the community these lads were from said this was a problem I don't see what your point is and all it does is enable rapists.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

dont be silly


----------



## rover07 (Jan 8, 2011)

IC3D said:


> People in the community these lads were from said this was a problem I don't see what your point is and all it does is enable rapists.


 
What people? Do you have a link?


----------



## rover07 (Jan 8, 2011)

I think part of the problem in this, is distinguishing between criminal gangs and groups of lads out on the town looking to chat up young women.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 8, 2011)

If we're doing constructive....

I think the big difference is in some of the old industrial towns you have ended up with some neighbourhoods overwhelmingly dominated by one race and/or religion.

This creates the mindset of 'Asian community', 'Muslim community' and ultimately 'white community'.

This creates 'in' and 'out' groups in the minds of the different residents. Stereotypes emerge and become ingrained.

By dividing society along these lines takes the heat off the ruling and political class.

You can look into why different demographics have been lumped together. Often in the past by petite bourgeois councils, although now this is much better regulated.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> dont be silly


 
I'm serious why are you trying to trivialise it?



rover07 said:


> What people? Do you have a link?


 
Some bod on Newsnight. Said he'd voiced the issue with Jack Straw years ago and it was know about amongst the community.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

rover07 said:


> I think part of the problem in this, is distinguishing between criminal gangs and groups of lads out on the town looking to chat up young women.


 
well as i said, there will be some sections of the white community horrified that their teenage girls hanging out with asian men and possibly taking taking drugs just as their will be some sections of the muslim community appalled at these white sluts seducing and corrupting good muslims

its hard, if not impossible to know how much of a part these attitudes play in the current hysteria, but the stats speak for themselves,even taking into account difficulties of securing conviction this would seem to be a very rare occurence compared with other sexual offences


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

IC3D said:


> I'm serious why are you trying to trivialise it?



you're being silly, is pointing out that stranger abduction of children is very rare compared to other kinds of child abuse enabling child murderers, or is it just an honest assessment of the facts


----------



## IC3D (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> you're being silly, is pointing out that stranger abduction of children is very rare compared to other kinds of child abuse enabling child murderers, or is it just an honest assessment of the facts


 
Well if you like facts so much you should know the the amount of rapes that go to prosecution is tiny proportion. (it is a fact take my word for it )


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Well if you like facts so much you should know the the amount of rapes that go to prosecution is tiny proportion. (it is a fact take my word for it )


 
yes, i mentioned that, even so just over one case a year does not indicate that this is a new, growing or hugely significant problem compared to other sexual offences

that doesnt mean it shouldnt be discussed, just discussed with a sense of proportion thats all


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> just over one case a year does not indicate that this is a new, growing or hugely significant problem


 
The manner in which this problem is addressed is important.

And I believe in the eyes of many it is a new, growing and hugely significant problem.

---

Ann Cryer, a former Labour MP for Keighley, she had been made aware of a problem in her constituency in 2003 after she was approached by about six mothers who said their daughters were being groomed for sex by Pakistani men.

She said she tried to intercede with the community by asking a councillor to speak to Muslim elders, but they said it was not their affair.

"Instead of drawing it to a conclusion then, it's drifted on, so it seems now every year we're getting more cases of very young, sometimes 12-year-old girls being abused by these gangs of men. I wish it would stop, I wish it would go away," she said.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

more opportunism from a politician is hardly that credible

this is a story thats got it all - muslims,grooming,drugs, but in reality there just doesnt seem much to it, its all a bit omg some asians abuse white women, which shit as that is, it's also pretty fucking obvious to anyone that it goes on

it should of course be addressed and discussed as with all other cases of abuse, but so far from straw, to dickhead murray to the right wing press and to liberals and imans, it appears everyone is approaching this with an agenda when its all a bit of tabloid hype concerning one recent case and a fairly rare variation on a particular type of crime carried out by young men of all ethnicities


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

I think writing Ann Cryer off as an opportunist MP is just lazy smoked out. You have made some OK posts on this thread though......Ann Cryer has long spoken out against stuff like this in a responsible and principled way. Its important to talk about issues like this and try to positively address the issues. The people who will see an opportunity in an issue like this are hypocritical twats like the BNP...Its important that they can not claim the Left ignore it.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> more opportunism from a politician is hardly that credible
> 
> this is a story thats got it all - muslims,grooming,drugs, but in reality there just doesnt seem much to it, its all a bit omg some asians abuse white women, which shit as that is, it's also pretty fucking obvious to anyone that it goes on
> 
> it should of course be addressed and discussed as with all other cases of abuse, but so far from straw, to dickhead murray to the right wing press and to liberals and imans, it appears everyone is approaching this with an agenda when its all a bit of tabloid hype concerning one recent case and a fairly rare variation on a particular type of crime carried out by young men of all ethnicities


 
Well said. That just about sums it up.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 8, 2011)

tbaldwin said:


> I think writing Ann Cryer off as an opportunist MP is just lazy smoked out. You have made some OK posts on this thread though......Ann Cryer has long spoken out against stuff like this in a responsible and principled way. Its important to talk about issues like this and try to positively address the issues. The people who will see an opportunity in an issue like this are hypocritical twats like the BNP...Its important that they can not claim the Left ignore it.


 
That was one incident in 2003. 8 years ago. Has she raised any concerns since?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 8, 2011)

tbaldwin said:


> I think writing Ann Cryer off as an opportunist MP is just lazy smoked out. You have made some OK posts on this thread though......Ann Cryer has long spoken out against stuff like this in a responsible and principled way.



hmm, she has, but it also didnt do her any harm at all, you kinda have to know the relationship between keighley and bradford to get why


----------



## tbaldwin (Jan 8, 2011)

smokedout said:


> hmm, she has, but it also didnt do her any harm at all, you kinda have to know the relationship between keighley and bradford to get why


 
It might not have done her any harm. But it didnt help her either, which is why i disagree with calling her opportunist. I think even MPs are capable of real concern.
And yeah i know you will know more about the area than me tbf.... Got a friend in Bradford though, who i visited last year..


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> I can't even be arsed to find out what YVHY or whatever Judaic crap you posted. Probably like you won't type god but type g-d instead you obscurantic loon.


 
You're a bit fixated about Jews, ern. 
Not surprising, like. You middle-class wankers have always been deeply prejudiced against anyone who isn't just like you, you grasping materialistic fucks.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

likesfish said:


> its yaweh or YWHW early hebrew for god something to do with modern lingustics you can read about it on wikkipedia if your bored


 
YHWH. The language has no vowels, unless you choose to insert them, in which case it's YAHWEH, and is one of the many names the extremely vengeful deity of Judaism is known by.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 8, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> What do you mean by 'cultural heritage'? Is this another liberal codeword for something?


 
What do you think "Jewishness" is? It doesn't reside merely in following Judaism, as some twats seem to believe, that's for sure.


----------



## pk (Jan 8, 2011)

....


----------



## YouSir (Jan 8, 2011)

pk said:


> thread's dead baby, thread's dead


 
Nah, at least another ten pages of unrelated arguing left to go.

Although I'm off to bed.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> The point is why should we start talking about whole pakistani/white/jewish communities when in all cases it is very small minority.


 
Lazy labelling. It's easier to single out a smallish group that a label can be applied to and then blame the label than it is to look for solutions to widespread problems amongst a large and disparate set of people. If the problem can be described as relating to young "Pakistani" men then it's easier to find simplistic explanations than if the problem is looked at in terms of "young men". If the problem can be defined as happening in "the Muslim community" then it's easier to avoid any responsibility than if it's defined as being a general problem.

The problem is men treating women as nothing more than sex objects. It doesn't matter who is doing it. It's just plain wrong whether it's a gang of Pakistani youths in the north of England, a gang of Eastern European pimps in the south of England, or a university rugby club in the midlands. Unless the basic attitude is the primary target of criticism it lets too many people off the hook.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 9, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Me too.
> 
> Anyone here have any dıfferent personal experıence (as opposed to what they hear from press and polıtıcıans)?


 
I have a different personal experience. I've met men whose attitude to women completely stinks from just about every religion, ethnicity, nation, and what have you. I've encountered Catholics from all over the world who defend their church protecting paedophile priests. I've heard African people defend female circumcision on the grounds that women are not supposed to enjoy sex. I've heard a university rugby club forcibly stripping women in a bar described as harmless youthful high spirits. And yes, I have also encountered British Asians who claim that white British women are all sluts who corrupt fine upstanding Muslim men. All attitudes that are totally disgusting. All absolutely convinced that any fault must lie with people other than themselves.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 9, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> I don't thınk anyone on thıs thread ıs a racıst.
> 
> We also need to remember the long hıstory of thıs ıssue's exploıtatıon by racısts.  Thınk of how Amerıcan black men were supposed to seduce whıte women ın varıous coercıve ways, and the manner ın whıch that was used by the KKK.  That doesn't mean ıt dıdn't happen.  But ıt was wrong then to call that a problem wıth the ''black communıty'' and ıt's wrong now to call thıs a problem wıth the ''Muslım communıty.''
> 
> I don't thınk anyone on thıs thread ıs a racıst.


 


I completely agree with phildwyer. I must be a lot more stoned than I thought.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> The problem is men treating women as nothing more than sex objects. It doesn't matter who is doing it. It's just plain wrong whether it's a gang of Pakistani youths in the north of England, a gang of Eastern European pimps in the south of England, or a university rugby club in the midlands. Unless the basic attitude is the primary target of criticism it lets too many people off the hook.



QFT.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> spoke too soon. Theire have been campaigns against street grooming, kerb crawling and the general behaviour of younmg men involved in this. As for Muslim communities not wanting to upset the applecart this is bollocks as witnesses in court cases have included muslims.
> 
> As for the assertion that Muslim communities ( what ever they are, its a bit like talking about the Christian community or the Catholic community) in the news last night there were at least three examples of where muslim/faith based organsiations were seen to attempting to address this issue .
> 
> Its one thing to identify the issue that some asian youth specifically target vulnerable young women as a way of achieving sex and power beacsues they percieve them to be easy and feel that they may be able to rationalise their actions , its entirely another to paint some mythical one dimensuionsal 'muslim' community that is a brick wall of silence and colludes with this.



I agree with this post.

Also what the fuck does it mean to talk about muslim, white, catholic, jewish or any other community as if they are one block of people, it's complete and utter bollocks. In turn what does it mean to say that this made up community should do something about it? As a white person should I feel responsible if a gang of white people somewhere decide to be a bunch of scum bags? It's total nonsense. Should the so called catholic community have been held responsible for IRA pub bombings?

Unfortunately there is deeply sexist and misogynistic views in all cultures from what I can see. Should white British "communities" be held responsible for all the white men who go out to Thailand, Cambodia and all the other countries who abuse women?

There are men from every culture I can think of who see "their women" as better than all the rest, it's hardly unique. Jack Straw is a cynical fuckwit and will do absolutely nothing to change any of the problems he mentions, and his reactionary politics in government and his pandering to nonsense liberal multiculturalism and racism have made things worse.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 9, 2011)

Fullyplumped said:


> I'm the victim here! If I think it's bigotry, it's bigotry.


 
Doh!


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> A community representative on the radio this morning actually suggested it was the responsibility of the girls parents to protect them and while I believe this is nothing to do with Islam its got a lot to do with the backward culture present in these Pakistani communities that foster extreme mysoganistic views in their young men and the more the liberal media stick their heads in the sand the more likely the problem won't be resolved.


 
I saw comments like this on the Guardian website. Lets just take the issue of race/ religion out of here, and basically you are agreeing with the idea that if a girl or woman is out somewhere alone, she is more or less fair game. It's not down to the men to moderate their behaviour, it's down to girls and women to do it.
Depressing.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I agree with this post.
> 
> Also what the fuck does it mean to talk about muslim, white, catholic, jewish or any other community as if they are one block of people, it's complete and utter bollocks. In turn what does it mean to say that this made up community should do something about it? As a white person should I feel responsible if a gang of white people somewhere decide to be a bunch of scum bags? It's total nonsense. Should the so called catholic community have been held responsible for IRA pub bombings?
> 
> ...


 
God forbid I don't want to be defending Jack Straw, but I really don't think at any point he said that it was 'all' or even 'most' men from a Pakistani background doing this, just a small number.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> I'll take your word for it, from an Istanbul perspective.
> 
> But I disagree with you in regards to the nature of Islam.
> 
> ...


 
This is where your arguement falls down kid, quoting the Koran as a way of explaining this behaviour is just toss. Do you really feel that these predators seek some sort of religoius justification for what they do? The idea that all asian youth with parents from Pakistan hold the Koran in such respect is absolute bollocks. 

These are lads who see driving around coked up in a flash car impressing naive girls with alcohol , fags and a load of lies about how much money they have and who they know as a way of  getting sex . They are able to have a power relationship based on abuse that they couldn't not with non vulnerable women . Its not some religious crusade and you won't find anyone quoting the Koran in their defence at court or in their cell.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Excellent, about time.
> 
> This thread is part of the solution. Dilute the nastiness and develop a heightened sense of understanding.
> 
> ...


 
The usual drug  fuelled tosh then.


----------



## Dr Jon (Jan 9, 2011)

I'm not sure if this is _just_ a Pakistani problem, more a symptom of what happens in cultures that missed out on the women's lib and sexual revolutions we've had in the developed world.

You see this in India too, where white female tourists are groped and harassed by opportunist males.
There are a number of factors at play here, most notably the conservative culture which prohibits relationships / sex before (arranged) marriage.  Also that the only experience many Asian males have of white women is from western porn.  I was amazed to discover a little café in the wilds of rural India, which was screening hard-core porn in the back-room bar.  The audience might be forgiven for thinking that all white women will have spontaneous sex with anyone. White women are at best perceived as being sexually available, unlike most Indian women. 

Things are changing, albeit slowly.  A Hindu mate in Bangalore was disowned by his family for having 'relations' with a Christian girl and marrying her when she became pregnant.  Once their daughter was born it was happy families once again, but it was really difficult for them before that.

I think sex in conservative Asian cultures is much like forbidden fruit anywhere: it gets taken over / monopolised by dealers in illicit goods, who are dodgy characters at best.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

Stoat Boy said:


> To be fair I grew up in a white working class culture that looked down on girls who went out with non-whites to the extent that if a girl had been involved with a non-white in the past there was an expectation that you would not get involved with her afterwards. Looking back on it it was some shameful shit.
> 
> For me though the issue that is not really being addressed is the strata of our society that these poor girls are coming from. I would be willing to bet that almost all of them are products of broken homes, backgrounds in which the primary income has always been from state and so on.
> 
> ...



Why are we meant to be scrutinising the victims and their families and not the perpetrators??


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> This is where your arguement falls down kid, quoting the Koran as a way of explaining this behaviour is just toss.


 
Not my argument. 

Just pointing out how easy it is to justify such actions, if you bend the book to suit your aims.

Certainly there's a significance in these men electing to wear traditional garb and grow their beards long as soon as they were arrested.

If you're denying the sense of entitlement these men felt towards non-muslim girls (of 13 and probably younger) then you've missed the point.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> The usual drug  fuelled tosh then.


 
Whatever.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Not my argument.
> 
> Just pointing out how easy it is to justify such actions, if you bend the book to suit your aims.
> 
> ...


 
No he's bang on. You were claiming the reason why this gang were targeting young women was because they are muslims.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Certainly there's a significance in these men electing to wear traditional garb and grow their beards long as soon as they were arrested.



come on pk are you that naive


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

Dr Jon said:


> I'm not sure if this is _just_ a Pakistani problem, more a symptom of what happens in cultures that missed out on the women's lib and sexual revolutions we've had in the* developed world*.



 Yeah, 'we' are really in a position to look down our noses eh at 'them' aren't we? Let's just ignore the fact that men and women from the 'developed world' (whatever that is supposed to mean) appear to make up the majority of 'sex tourists' worldwide. I think it's problematic to talk about _'women's lib and sexual revolutions'_ when 'we' are still so involved in the sexual exploition and abuse of young women/men both here and elsewhere.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> come on pk are you that naive


Hows your mate porno steve?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> Why are we meant to be scrutinising the victims and their families and not the perpetrators??



Surely we should be equally interested in who is doing it and why, as well as who it is being done to and why? I don't think it is 'scrutinising' victims to look at why they are so vulnerable to this sort of thing. That's not about blaming the victim, that's about exploring and understanding why they become 'victims'.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> God forbid I don't want to be defending Jack Straw, but I really don't think at any point he said that it was 'all' or even 'most' men from a Pakistani background doing this, just a small number.



No he didn't and that's not my point. He said that the pakistani community should take up the problem. But why isn't a problem for all of society and surely any solution should involve society at large? What does he want people to do, raise some cash at the local mosques to hire private detectives? As there is no such thing as a single pakistani community it is a nonsense, especially, as has been pointed out, clearly most people from a pakistani background don't agree with this behaviour and would condemn it. Anymore than the "white community" should be told to do something about white men going out to Thailand and Cambodia. It's a problem for society at large.

It's not the first time Straw has brought up this kind of thing, he raised the nonsense about asking women to take off their veil, as if there weren't more pressing problems in his constituency (less than 1% of muslim wear a veil). It's just head line grabbing rubbish and Straw as his policies made things worse when he was in government to be honest I don't give a shit what he has to say.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 9, 2011)

It's not hard to fınd the reason for Straw's reactıonary outburst.  We are after all at war wıth two Islamıc natıons.  The fırst task of a polıtıcıan durıng wartıme ıs to demonıze the enemy.

That's my take on the matter.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> This is where your arguement falls down kid, quoting the Koran as a way of explaining this behaviour is just toss. Do you really feel that these predators seek some sort of religoius justification for what they do? The idea that all asian youth with parents from Pakistan hold the Koran in such respect is absolute bollocks.
> 
> These are lads who see driving around coked up in a flash car impressing naive girls with alcohol , fags and a load of lies about how much money they have and who they know as a way of getting sex . They are able to have a power relationship based on abuse that they couldn't not with non vulnerable women . Its not some religious crusade and you won't find anyone quoting the Koran in their defence at court or in their cell.



Exactly, the idea that they could use the koran to justify their behaviour is nonsense.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 9, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I completely agree with phildwyer. I must be a lot more stoned than I thought.


 
I'll have two of what he's drınkıng.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> I'm not sure if this is just a Pakistani problem, more a symptom of what happens in cultures that missed out on the women's lib and sexual revolutions we've had in the developed world.
> 
> You see this in India too, where white female tourists are groped and harassed by opportunist males.



What about if you go to Bangkok? Who is groping women and under aged women there? Look at the attitudes to rape in this country with the percentage of people who think that women who have had a drink or wear short skirts are somehow partly responsible for getting raped. I'm not saying that sexism and misogyny aren't worse in some countries than others but it's still rife here and any other country I can think of.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Surely we should be equally interested in who is doing it and why, as well as who it is being done to and why? I don't think it is 'scrutinising' victims to look at why they are so vulnerable to this sort of thing. That's not about blaming the victim, that's about exploring and understanding why they become 'victims'.


 
Yes but I think it was implicit in the post I quoted, that somehow it was the families of the victims fault.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> I saw comments like this on the Guardian website. Lets just take the issue of race/ religion out of here, and basically you are agreeing with the idea that if a girl or woman is out somewhere alone, she is more or less fair game. It's not down to the men to moderate their behaviour, it's down to girls and women to do it.
> Depressing.


 
Don't know how you came to the conclusion from my post, I was saying the Ramadan spokesman at the end of his fairly balanced statement in his last comment said we (sic) should also look at why these girls were not protected by their families. I thought it undermided the rest of his statement really having a subtle little dig at the victims family at the end.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Don't know how you came to the conclusion from my post, I was saying the Ramadan spokesman at the end of his fairly balanced statement in his last comment said we (sic) should also look at why these girls were not protected by their families. I thought it undermided the rest of his statement really having a subtle little dig at the victims family at the end.


 
I wasn't suggesting that you agreed with that, by the way!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Don't know how you came to the conclusion from my post, I was saying the Ramadan spokesman at the end of his fairly balanced statement in his last comment said _we (sic) should also look at why these girls were not protected by their families._ I thought it undermided the rest of his statement really having a subtle little dig at the victims family at the end.


 
It could have been a 'dig', I don't know, I am not him. But I _do_ think that the question asked is a valid one. Any young person who is vulnerable in this way needs protecting, I think it is important to look at why they are not.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> It could have been a 'dig', I don't know, I am not him. But I _do_ think that the question asked is a valid one. Any young person who is vulnerable in this way needs protecting, I think it is important to look at why they are not.


 
Really the Pakistani lads can't help themselves so we should blame the sexy 12 year olds. I understand we should help vunerable youth but in the context of this the rapists should feel the pressure on not have anyone supporting their opinion that anyone is asking for it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Really the Pakistani lads can't help themselves so we should blame the sexy 12 year olds.


 Eh? Who has said this? 



> I understand we should help vunerable youth but in the context of this the rapists should feel the pressure on not have anyone supporting their opinion that anyone is asking for it.


 Again, who has said the 'victims' were asking for it?  Exploing what factors leave young people vulnerable is definately not suggesting that they are 'responsible'. Nobody is letting the perpetrators off the hook here.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

It's more the undercurrent of blaming the families of those girls for letting them out, which is an extension of blaming the victim indirectly.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> It's more the undercurrent of blaming the families of those girls for letting them out, which is an extension of blaming the victim indirectly.


 
Which may be implied in the comments from _some_ people but I don't think we should shy away from the wider question because of that.

Just like we should not shy away from addressing the behaviour of these men because implied in the description of these girls being _White_, is that somehow because they are White and the perpetrators Asian, makes these crimes any worse than if the perpetrators were White and the victims Asian/Black etc


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

rover07 said:


> No he's bang on. You were claiming the reason why this gang were targeting young women was because they are muslims.


 
Uh, no, I was saying it's easier for these men to justify taking non-muslim girls as slaves because the Qu'ran suggests such a thing is permitted.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2011)

As I understand it, Islam instructs women to cover up _in order not to inflame the passions of men_. 

I think we need some clear thinking here, and to condemn this idea directly. Let women dress how the hell they like, and let men take responsibility for their own behaviour. This kind of idiotic stricture seems to suggest that women need protecting from men, but also that men need protecting from women. It's bollocks and should be called as bollocks. All religious instruction to be 'modest' in dress is at heart the same.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Uh, no, I was saying it's easier for these men to justify taking non-muslim girls as slaves because the Qu'ran suggests such a thing is permitted.


 
It doesn't.  But even ıf ıt dıd, I don't thınk the guys who do thıs sort of thıng are exactly relıgıous types.


----------



## treelover (Jan 9, 2011)

Libby Brooks(Red Pepper) in the Guardian making moral somersaults in an attempt to hold the liberal line..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...e-tradition?showallcomments=true#comment-fold


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Exactly, the idea that they could use the koran to justify their behaviour is nonsense.


 
I think they could very easily use the Qu'ran to justify their actions. I just plucked an example off the internet.

Hate clerics such as Anjem Choudary and Abu Hamza are constantly spouting provocative bullshit that effectively says it's the duty of muslim men to destroy the West and take their women.

Non-muslim women just don't matter.

FrontPageMag, 27 Dec 2005, Western Muslims' Racist Rape Spree

In Australia's New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.

And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.

A few months earlier, in Copenhagen, Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi created uproar when – like his peer in Australia – he stated that women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.

And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, "For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.”

In France, Samira Bellil broke her silence – after enduring years of repeated gang rapes in one of the Muslim populated public housing projects – and wrote a book, In the hell of the tournantes, that shocked France. Describing how gang rape is rampant in the banlieues, she explained to Time that, “any neighborhood girl who smokes, uses makeup or wears attractive clothes is a whore.”

In Indonesia, in 1998, human rights groups documented the testimony of over 100 Chinese women who were gang raped during the riots that preceded the fall of President Suharto. Many of them were told: “You must be raped, because you are Chinese and non-Muslim.”
--------

Unfortunately the damage is intensified by the unwillingness of the media to identify the religious background of the perpetrator, even when it is blatantly obvious that the sex attacks have been carried out as some form of punishment for dressing immodestly or otherwise offending the sensibilities of the muslim man.

------

Swedish translator, Ali Dashti, stated that in Sweden when three men raped a 22-year-old woman recently, they said one word to her. “Whore.” Such stories, according to Dashti, are in the Swedish newspapers every week. And, the politically correct “take great care not to mention the ethnic background of the perpetrators.” 

According to The Guardian, during the recent French riots, a Saudi Prince with shares in News Corporation boasted to a conference in Dubai that he had phoned Rupert Murdoch and complained about Fox News describing the disturbances as “Muslim riots.” Within half an hour he said, it was changed to “civil riots.”


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Which may be implied in the comments from _some_ people but I don't think we should shy away from the wider question because of that.
> 
> Just like we should not shy away from addressing the behaviour of these men because implied in the description of these girls being _White_, is that somehow because they are White and the perpetrators Asian, makes these crimes any worse than if the perpetrators were White and the victims Asian/Black etc


 Who anywhere is suggesting this is worse because the victims are white? (Or are supposed to be, I can't see a reason why black girls would not be similarly at risk either)


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 9, 2011)

Whatever problems that might exist with racist assumptions between different groups in this country (and looking at this thread I think we can all agree that it goes both ways, with one of the groups being vastly more powerful than the other) and whatever gender-related problems that might exist within particular groups, I am amazed at the number of people here who can't distinguish between an individual or collective attempt to discover the nature of the problem and address it, and _a politician commenting on it in the national media_.

Similar problems presented themselves with Straw's comments on asking women to remove their veils. Actually if an individual wants to have that conversation with a woman wearing a veil, I see nothing wrong with that. But firstly, how can you even pretend that the power relationship is equal when the context is a petitioner approaching the local powermonger? And secondly, how can you percieve his talking about it in the national media to be the same as, say, talking about it with friends or campaigners? 

It is a use of power, and we need to ask why he would choose to use that power in that way at that time. Using the national media as a blunt instrument to 'publicise' the alleged problem is bollocks. It is not a serious attempt to address the problem. 

Neutral well-meaning commentator? I don't think so.


----------



## articul8 (Jan 9, 2011)

treelover said:


> Libby Brooks(Red Pepper)


 
Red Pepper? When?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> It should be dealt with by the communities affected. I don't see shit stirring in the media as helping at all.


 
Are you saying that if a girl is raped/ abused, it's not a police matter and the press should hush it up?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> It doesn't.  But even ıf ıt dıd, I don't thınk the guys who do thıs sort of thıng are exactly relıgıous types.


 
Funny how they became religious types as soon as they were caught... growing their beards and wearing the dishdash...


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Funny how they became religious types as soon as they were caught... growing their beards and wearing the dishdash...


 
Dıd they?  I'm not famılıar wıth the case.

Stıll, druggıng and rapıng women ıs hardly relıgıous behavıor ıs ıt?  You don't serıously belıeve that ıt's endorsed by Islam?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 9, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> Who anywhere is suggesting this is worse because the victims are white? (Or are supposed to be, I can't see a reason why black girls would not be similarly at risk either)


 
I think that with _some_ people this is implied their comments/reactions to this story.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Funny how they became religious types as soon as they were caught... growing their beards and wearing the dishdash...


 
textbook criminal behaviour, means nothing more than that it was a commonly used tactic to sway the jury/magistrate

you're missing a trick here pk, im willing to bet these guys hadnt been near a mosque in years except possibly for weddings etc

shagging around, selling and taking drugs, quite probably drinking, smoking, nicking stuff etc and almost certainly not praying to mecca five times a day - as the pakistani muslim community goes guys like this are amongst the most secular

perhaps the problem is they werent muslim enough


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Smokey are you a trot?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> t
> you're missing a trick here pk, im willing to bet these guys hadnt been near a mosque in years except possibly for weddings etc


 
Possibly not. But look at the pimps up in places like Bradford, big Pakistani guys with huge Koranic medallions.

They may not attend the mosques but they sure as hell identify with the whole Allah thing, and no doubt lap up all the extremist preacher shit that expressly tells them that non-muslim women are worthless and should be raped in some fucked-up sexual jihad.


----------



## IMR (Jan 9, 2011)

These attacks are more likely to be driven and justified by racist and class contempt for white working-class girls than by religious doctrine.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Smokey are you a trot?


 
nah fuck off

just not buying this one thats all


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

IMR said:


> These attacks are more likely to be driven and justified by racist and class contempt for white working-class girls


 
Religious doctrine serves to intensify and self-justify such contempt, certainly given islamic rhetoric towards non-muslim girls in "decadent" societies.


----------



## IMR (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Religious doctrine serves to intensify and self-justify such contempt, certainly given islamic rhetoric towards non-muslim girls in "decadent" societies.


 
They'll cherrypick things out of Islamic teachings for sure, the notion of the West as a realm of moral chaos. But I don't think those are the fundamental causes.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

IMR said:


> These attacks are more likely to be driven and justified by racist and class contempt for white working-class girls than by religious doctrine.


 
i doubt that as well tbh, or at least only at its most superficial level

its about grim blokes, semi-organised crime and drugs and they are behaving in the exact same way white or black wannabe gangsters behave towards young women

its not about class, race, god or any of that shit, its about men targetting young vulnerable women to fuck, its shit, it happens everywhere


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

IMR said:


> They'll cherrypick things out of Islamic teachings for sure, the notion of the West as a realm of moral chaos. But I don't think those are the fundamental causes.


 
They don't need to be the main causes, but as long as the nastier anti-women side of islam goes unchallenged, nothing good will be achieved.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i doubt that as well tbh, or at least only at its most superficial level
> 
> its about grim blokes, semi-organised crime and drugs and they are behaving in the exact same way white or black wannabe gangsters behave towards young women


 
I'll agree with that - but instead of emulating Western gangsta shit, dollar sign medallions and all that, they buy up bling-encrusted jihadi logos and associate themselves with dangerous imagery of fundamentalist nutjobs in an attempt to look more scary.

There IS definitely a link, albeit spurious, with islamic teachings, no matter how you look at it.

Also - were a white gang to drug and rape a muslim girl - there would be riots, murder, mayhem.

Because THEIR women are sacred and ours are not.


----------



## IMR (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i doubt that as well tbh, or at least only at its most superficial level
> 
> its about grim blokes, semi-organised crime and drugs and they are behaving in the exact same way white or black wannabe gangsters behave towards young women
> 
> its not about class, race, god or any of that shit, its about men targetting young vulnerable women to fuck, its shit, it happens everywhere



What you say seems pretty reasonable, I would guess that's a big part of the picture.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> There IS definitely a link, albeit spurious, with islamic teachings, no matter how you look at it.



A spurıous lınk ıs no lınk at all.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> its not about class, race, god or any of that shit, its about men targetting young vulnerable women to fuck, its shit, it happens everywhere


 
I think the gang rapes and motor vehicle method of street grooming is disproportionately carried out by self-styled muslim drug dealers.

I'm prepared to be proved wrong.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> A spurıous lınk ıs no lınk at all.


 
A spurious link from a sensible point of view, but to these guys Anjem Choudary and similar cunts are merely reinforcing their fucked up views on western girls... so it's not spurious to them.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Possibly not. But look at the pimps up in places like Bradford, big Pakistani guys with huge Koranic medallions.
> 
> They may not attend the mosques but they sure as hell identify with the whole Allah thing, and no doubt lap up all the extremist preacher shit that expressly tells them that non-muslim women are worthless and should be raped in some fucked-up sexual jihad.


 
Gibberish. Exactly the same as all those wankers who used to wear  Rasta red green and gold and pimp or asian street gangs who sell drugs and also have Islam as a fashion icon. You ought to get out of Epson more.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> I think the gang rapes and motor vehicle method of street grooming is disproportionately carried out by self-styled muslim drug dealers.
> 
> I'm prepared to be proved wrong.


 
i thought it was black guys doing all the gang raping

or was that last years hysteria


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

....


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> A spurious link from a sensible point of view, but to these guys Anjem Choudary and similar cunts are merely reinforcing their fucked up views on western girls... so it's not spurious to them.


 
i bet they dont even know why choudary is

youre reading too much ideology into this, theyre dirty llittle rapists and petty crims getting their money and rocks off the easiest way they can, don't over intellectualise it, believe me they dont


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> youre reading too much ideology into this, theyre dirty llittle rapists and petty crims getting their money and rocks off the easiest way they can, don't over intellectualise it, believe me they dont


 
Yes, I would think that this is certainly right.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 9, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Smokey are you a trot?


 


ernestolynch said:


> trot





ernestolynch said:


> a bullet in every trot





ernestolynch said:


> trots





ernestolynch said:


> are you lot trots?





ernestolynch said:


> TROT





ernestolynch said:


> he's a trot





ernestolynch said:


> trots





ernestolynch said:


> typical trot





ernestolynch said:


> trotskyite





ernestolynch said:


> trot



Ernesto, I think the question has to be asked.  Are YOU a Trot?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i bet they dont even know why choudary is
> 
> youre reading too much ideology into this, theyre dirty llittle rapists and petty crims getting their money and rocks off the easiest way they can, don't over intellectualise it, believe me they dont


----------



## Sue (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Ann Cryer, a former Labour MP for Keighley, she had been made aware of a problem in her constituency in 2003 after she was approached by about six mothers who said their daughters were being groomed for sex by Pakistani men.
> 
> She said she tried to intercede with the community by asking a councillor to speak to Muslim elders, but they said it was not their affair.
> 
> "Instead of drawing it to a conclusion then, it's drifted on, so it seems now every year we're getting more cases of very young, sometimes 12-year-old girls being abused by these gangs of men. I wish it would stop, I wish it would go away," she said.


 
Saw this interview with her on the BBC. The thing that struck me was the 'interceding with the community' bit which she wasn't challenged on at all by the interviewer. Surely if criminal acts had potentially taken place she should've gone to the police?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Gibberish. Exactly the same as all those wankers who used to wear  Rasta red green and gold and pimp or asian street gangs who sell drugs and also have Islam as a fashion icon. You ought to get out of Epson more.


 
So the rasta red gold and green has nothing to do with rastafarianism? The stoneheads god of choice, Jah?

And Epson is a make of printer. And I'll wager I've seen more of this little world than you have, including several islamic countries.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i bet they dont even know who choudary is
> 
> youre reading too much ideology into this, theyre dirty llittle rapists and petty crims getting their money and rocks off the easiest way they can, don't over intellectualise it, believe me they dont


 
I'll bet you'll find tapes and flyers from all manner of aggressive extremist preachers in their bedrooms.

The point is this: is there an effort to cover up the nastier antisocial influences of radicalized islamic kids in our media?

Would we have even been debating this if Jack Straw hadn't spoken out?

I may well be reading too much into this, but you can hardly say I am without a point here.

This gang acted in a shared sense of disregard for the women involved, the same as the muslim pimps who pick only "cheap" girls from the estates.

Never would they pimp out a muslim girl. Therein lies the difference between these men and any other gang of rapist scum.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

Sue said:


> Saw this interview with her on the BBC. The thing that struck me was the 'interceding with the community' bit which she wasn't challenged on at all by the interviewer. Surely if criminal acts had potentially taken place she should've gone to the police?


 
I've no idea. Knowing how useless the police are in these situations I would imagine she tried that route and failed.

Perhaps now following Mr Straw's comments such crimes might be taken more seriously given the sharper media attention.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> I'll bet you'll find tapes and flyers from all manner of aggressive extremist preachers in their bedrooms.
> 
> The point is this: is there an effort to cover up the nastier antisocial influences of radicalized islamic kids in our media?
> 
> ...


 
whole load of conjecture there, shame youve got no evidence to back it up


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Never would they pimp out a muslim girl. Therein lies the difference between these men and any other gang of rapist scum.



you really believe there's no muslim prostitutes being pimped by other muslims

ffs you do need to get out more


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> whole load of conjecture there, shame youve got no evidence to back it up


 
Straw said there was a “specific problem” with some Pakistani men who knew women of their own heritage were “off limits”... which backs up my comment regarding muslim pimps never pimping out their own - a fact anyone can back up with cursory knowledge of the situation.

Atma Singh, from the Sikh Community Action Network, said: “Well done to Jack Straw for being 100 per cent honest and saying what many people already know – that there are pockets of youngsters in the Pakistani Muslim community who treat girls from other communities as sexual objects.”

At home, Abid Saddique and Mohammed Liaqat, both of whom were married with young children, were considered clean, upstanding family men *as well as devout Muslims*.

Add to this their sudden need to grow beards and wear only the robes of the devout.

Of course - islam had nothing to do with their attitude. A devout muslim could not possibly be influenced by the written word of his prophet.

"The Islamic legal manual ‘Umdat al-Salik, which carries the endorsement of Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam, stipulates: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.” 

Why? So that they are free to become the concubines of their captors. The Qur’an permits Muslim men to have intercourse with their wives and their slave girls: “Forbidden to you are ... married women, except those whom you own as slaves” (Sura 4:23-24).

After one successful battle, Muhammad tells his men, “Go and take any slave girl.” He took one for himself also. 

After the notorious massacre of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe, he did it again. 

According to his earliest biographer, Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad “went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. 
Then he sent for [the men of Banu Qurayza] and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches.” 

After killing “600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900,” the Prophet of Islam took one of the widows he had just made, Rayhana bint Amr, as another concubine."


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

Ahmadinejad's Imam: Islam Allows Raping, Torturing Prisoners," by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz for Israel National News:

(IsraelNN.com) A highly influential Shi'a religious leader, with whom Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly consults, apparently told followers last month that coercion by means of rape, torture and drugs is acceptable against all opponents of the Islamic regime. [...]

"Can an interrogator rape the prisoner in order to obtain a confession?" was the follow-up question posed to the Islamic cleric.
Mesbah-Yazdi answered: "The necessary precaution is for the interrogator to perform a ritual washing first and say prayers while raping the prisoner. 
"If the prisoner is female, it is permissible to rape through the vagina or anus. 
"It is better not to have a witness present. 
"If it is a male prisoner, then it's acceptable for someone else to watch while the rape is committed."...

A related issue, in the eyes of the questioners, was the rape of virgin female prisoners. 
In this instance, Mesbah-Yazdi went beyond the permissibility issue and described the Allah-sanctioned rewards accorded the rapist-in-the-name-of-Islam:
"If the judgment for the [female] prisoner is execution, then rape before execution brings the interrogator a spiritual reward equivalent to making the mandated Haj pilgrimage [to Mecca], but if there is no execution decreed, then the reward would be equivalent to making a pilgrimage to [the Shi'ite holy city of] Karbala."

------

Of course none of this would have any influence upon "devout muslims" predisposed to rape a bunch of 13 year old white girls...


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> So the rasta red gold and green has nothing to do with rastafarianism? The stoneheads god of choice, Jah?
> 
> And Epson is a make of printer. And I'll wager I've seen more of this little world than you have, including several islamic countries.


 
The point being that its just street decoration , like all those holster wallets that used to be worn, just like when people make out they know gangsters or were ex football hoolies. You know the sort.They tend to put a bit of garnish on what they do.

 Wager away btw on what you have seen of this little world. I have seem enough to spot someone who is desperate for some form of credibility from anyone who they can get to listen to.

Last point .Before you start thanking Straw for exposing this issue and bringing it to the medias ( and your ) attention it was actually Griffin and the BNP about three years ago.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Ahmadinejad's Imam: Islam Allows Raping, Torturing Prisoners," by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz for Israel National News:
> 
> (IsraelNN.com) A highly influential Shi'a religious leader, with whom Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad regularly consults, apparently told followers last month that coercion by means of rape, torture and drugs is acceptable against all opponents of the Islamic regime. [...]
> 
> ...


 
Of course it would as wannabe asian gangsters are always scouring the internet for advice from the Iranian clerics. in fact for those that don't attend mosques there is a texting service and Twitter feeds so that they can keep up.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Straw said there was a “specific problem” with some Pakistani men who knew women of their own heritage were “off limits”... which backs up my comment regarding muslim pimps never pimping out their own - a fact anyone can back up with cursory knowledge of the situation.



that's your evidence, jack straw said it ffs 



> At home, Abid Saddique and Mohammed Liaqat, both of whom were married with young children, were considered clean, upstanding family men *as well as devout Muslims*.
> 
> Add to this their sudden need to grow beards and wear only the robes of the devout.



you mean they didnt go into court saying yez we is rapists and drug dealers

you havent met many criminals have you


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

what do iranian clerics say about sniffing coke


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Smokey, got your evidence of moslem girls being pimped by moslem men in English towns?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Smokey, got your evidence of moslem girls being pimped by moslem men in English towns?


 
Yep. Just one example will do.

In the meantime:

Every single rape and aggravated sexual assault committed in the Norwegian capital of Oslo over the past three years was committed by a Third World “immigrant” Norwegian Radio has reported.

According to an NRK report of 2 September 2009, the police in Oslo have investigated 41 cases of “aggravated sexual assault, which resulted in rape.”

According to NRK, “all of them were carried out by non-western immigrants to Norway.”

The police have, the report continues, “investigated all reported cases of aggravated sexual assault over the past three years, and have gained a clear impression of the offenders: Most of the rapists have a Kurdish or African background.”

Furthermore, the police said, the cases of aggravated sexual assaults all have “one thing in common, namely the use of gross violence.”


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> I have seem enough to spot someone who is desperate for some form of credibility from anyone who they can get to listen to.



Yeah right, I crave credibility from a tiny internet forum, it's truly my life's ambition.



> Last point .Before you start thanking Straw for exposing this issue and bringing it to the medias ( and your ) attention it was actually Griffin and the BNP about three years ago.


 
A stopped clock is right twice a day.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Smokey, got your evidence of moslem girls being pimped by moslem men in English towns?



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1311674/Gang-tried-sell-girls-virginity-wealthy-Arabs-150-000.html


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

No evidence the Iranian victim was Moslem. could have been zoroastrian, Ba'hai or Xian.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Or secular Kurd.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3295487.ece


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Or secular Kurd.


 
much like pks norway claims


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Your Times one happened abroad smokey. Google some more.


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

> Every single rape and aggravated sexual assault committed in the Norwegian capital of Oslo over the past three years was committed by a Third World “immigrant” Norwegian Radio has reported.



What a load of bollocks.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Your Times one happened abroad smokey. Google some more.


 
nah it happened in sheffield

heres a good one

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/asian-dancers-are-lured-into-prostitution-721164.html


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> What a load of bollocks.


 
Sourced from the Norway Post - which is a liberal leaning newspaper...

http://www.norwaypost.no/news/immigrants-behind-most-cases-of-aggravated-sexual-assault.html


----------



## Serotonin (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> What a load of bollocks.


 
Everyone the Norwegians have seen fit to prosecute more like. 

Scandinavian countries have a shocking record on the prosecution of sexual crimes. We here in the UK are pretty fucking awful but iirc thye make us look good.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> whole load of conjecture there, shame youve got no evidence to back it up


 
Sadly, you can say the same about most of pk's posts on this thread.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> nah it happened in sheffield
> 
> heres a good one
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/asian-dancers-are-lured-into-prostitution-721164.html


 
"The women are mostly from northern and central areas such as Rajasthan, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh"

Ah so none of them are muslim girls then.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Smokey you're holidaying in other people's misery.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

'all the same exotic and brown' says smokey .


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3295487.ece


 
No evidence that this woman was "pimped", it was an enforced marriage that went wrong and the mother in law sought to humiliate her.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Sourced from the Norway Post - which is a liberal leaning newspaper...
> 
> http://www.norwaypost.no/news/immigrants-behind-most-cases-of-aggravated-sexual-assault.html


 
Norway  is far from a 'liberal' country. In the most it is a deeply conservative and incurious nation. It it not in the same liberal league as Denmark or Sweden.

Even in the other 'liberal' Scandinavian counties there is a lot of racism, a shocking level.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1311674/Gang-tried-sell-girls-virginity-wealthy-Arabs-150-000.html


 
She stated that she could provide girls from Iran, England and Eastern Europe aged 14 and 20.

Again - no evidence that the girls being pimped were muslim, in fact plenty to the contrary.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Norway  is far from a 'liberal' country. In the most it is a deeply conservative and incurious nation. It it not in the same liberal league as Denmark or Sweden.
> 
> Even in the other 'liberal' Scandinavian counties there is a lot of racism, a shocking level.


 
I'm aware of that. I said the newspaper was liberal leaning, not the country.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Sadly, you can say the same about most of pk's posts on this thread.


 
Be specific then, which posts do you think require further evidence?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 9, 2011)

The Norway post isn't a  newspaper. It's an on-line set of a handful of English language articles taken from other sources (usually Aftenposten the largest newspaper) that ads are sold off the back off. It has no liberal position as it has no position at all.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Yep. Just one example will do.


 
No way can one example prove anything, never mind the generalisations going on here.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Be specific then, which posts do you think require further evidence?


 
Like I said I think in most of your major posts on this thread you've made some wild projections and leaps of faith.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Be specific then, which posts do you think require further evidence?


 
I share your anger but you're not doing yourself or your cause justice on this thread.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> "The women are mostly from northern and central areas such as Rajasthan, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh"
> 
> Ah so none of them are muslim girls then.



mujra dancing is a muslim tradition, so very likely all of them muslim girls

come on pk, you honestly believe there are no muslim men making money out of pimping muslim girls, what about the huge sex numbers of albanian and somali women working in the sex industry, many of them trafficked, you really think this is all done by christians


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Be specific then, which posts do you think require further evidence?


 
you can start with the claim that the people in the op (including the white guy) were devout muslims who hang on choudharys every word and go out raping and pimping in the name of allah


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Somali prostitutes? Where?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

camden


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> you can start with the claim that the people in the op (including the white guy) were devout muslims who hang on choudharys every word and go out raping and pimping in the name of allah


 
The statement that confirmed them as family men an "good devout muslims" is on just about every report on this story.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 9, 2011)

Lol


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> The statement that confirmed them as family men an "good devout muslims" is on just about every report on this story.


 
everyone who walks into a court room is a good devout something if they've got any sense, i'm sure they had no end of character witnesses confirming this

you really are coming across as very naive


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> mujra dancing is a muslim tradition, so very likely all of them muslim girls
> 
> come on pk, you honestly believe there are no muslim men making money out of pimping muslim girls, what about the huge sex numbers of albanian and somali women working in the sex industry, many of them trafficked, you really think this is all done by christians


 
Having spent time in Albania I can tell you they rarely subscribe to the more aggressive form of islam, and the sight of islamic men or women in full garb is extremely rare in the city of Tirana or Durres.

I know not the religious background of Albanian pimps but I doubt they are to be found with the Qu'ran at their side.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> everyone who walks into a court room is a good devout something if they've got any sense, i'm sure they had no end of character witnesses confirming this
> 
> you really are coming across as very naive


 
You are coming across as trying to distance the twisting of extreme islamic teachings from the street-grooming and pimping of children.

I am maintaining that the aggressive disdain felt toward infidel women here is a major factor, and to deny it betrays your own naivety.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> The Norway post isn't a  newspaper. It's an on-line set of a handful of English language articles taken from other sources (usually Aftenposten the largest newspaper) that ads are sold off the back off. It has no liberal position as it has no position at all.



I stand corrected.

What would you say is the political position of Aftenposten?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> You are coming across as trying to distance the twisting of extreme islamic teachings from the street-grooming and pimping of children.
> 
> I am maintaining that the aggressive disdain felt toward infidel women here is a major factor, and to deny it betrays your own naivety.



so how come there are so many more non-muslim pimps


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> I know not the religious background of Albanian pimps but I doubt they are to be found with the Qu'ran at their side.



neither are most bradford pimps you daft twat


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> come on pk, you honestly believe there are no muslim men making money out of pimping muslim girls


 
You have yet to provide concrete examples of this happening, never mind to the same degree muslim men pimp western girls.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> neither are most bradford pimps you daft twat


 
Know many do you?? If it walks and talks like a muslim, wears muslim garm and blinged up jihadi medallions - it is a muslim.

The Albanian criminals are far more westernised, and islamic influence on Albanian society is minimal compared to Pakistan.

Spare the "daft twat" comments for someone else please. I've not called anyone silly names here.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> You have yet to provide concrete examples of this happening, never mind to the same degree muslim men pimp western girls.


 
yes i have, you just keep moving the goalposts


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Know many do you?? If it walks and talks like a muslim, wears muslim garm and blinged up jihadi medallions - it is a muslim.



yes, im not proud to say i did and you couldnt be more wrong


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> The Albanian criminals are far more westernised, and islamic influence on Albanian society is minimal compared to Pakistan.


 
And this is where your argument falls down.

 Prostitution occurs all over the world. Yet you seem to think that when Pakistanis do it, their religious background is an important factor.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> In the meantime:
> 
> Every single rape and aggravated sexual assault committed in the Norwegian capital of Oslo over the past three years was committed by a Third World “immigrant” Norwegian Radio has reported.
> 
> ...



And your point is? The vast majority of sex tourists and nonces in Thailand and Cambodia are white western men. Lets generalise on the behaviour of a tiny minority.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

rover07 said:


> And this is where your argument falls down.
> 
> Prostitution occurs all over the world. Yet you seem to think that when Pakistanis do it, their religious background is an important factor.


 
The nature in which young UK non-muslim girls as young as 12, 13 are groomed and drugged for prostitution is in my opinion a lot to do with attitudes towards infidel girls.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> And your point is? The vast majority of sex tourists and nonces in Thailand and Cambodia are white western men. Lets generalise on the behaviour of a tiny minority.


 
Yep. And were I living in Thailand or Cambodia I would have a very low opinion of such men. Castration should be the cure.

And yes, Western pedophile tourist scum see Thai kids as easy meat.

But I am not, I'm in the UK, and as such have a vested interest in the fate of girls here. Don't you?

Or do you think it's nonsense, that these comments Jack Straw made are totally without foundation?

“These young men are in a western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they’re fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that, but Pakistani heritage girls are off-limits and they are expected to marry a Pakistani girl from Pakistan, typically,” he said.
“So they then seek other avenues and they see these young women, white girls who are vulnerable, some of them in care … who they think are easy meat.
“And because they’re vulnerable they ply them with gifts, they give them drugs, and then of course they’re trapped”.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> yes, im not proud to say i did and you couldnt be more wrong


 
So you had sex with muslim prostitutes??


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> But I am not, I'm in the UK, and as such have a vested interest in the fate of girls here. Don't you?



What about Catholicism and it's long, and ongoing, interest in raping children?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> yes i have, you just keep moving the goalposts


 
You haven't provided any proof of muslim men pimping muslim girls.

Albanian pimps in most cases appear to be Roma or non-muslim, certainly in the names of convicted pimps.

So I doubt islam has much influence upon Albanian organised crime. I'm always open to evidence to the contrary, if you can find any.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> What about Catholicism and it's long, and ongoing, interest in raping children?


 
Pedophile priests are jailed and exposed, none of the politically correct sensitivities that often apply to muslims have been witnessed in the reporting of abuses. The fact that when abuses were uncovered, the religion and position was reported without hesitation.

It isn't fair to say that Catholic men see women of any race as easy meat.

Nor is it fair to say Catholicism has a long, and ongoing, interest in raping children.

So how are you attempting to make a comparison with the subject at hand?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> It isn't fair to say that Catholic men see women of any race as easy meat.



Nor is it fair to say that of muslim men.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Lets generalise on the behaviour of a tiny minority.


 
I'm not generalising at all.

I'm fully aware that only a minority of muslim men would do what these rapists did.

The point is that with the radicalised unemployed bored youth of certain Northern cities, it isn't a huge stretch of imagination to link a clear disdain for infidel girls with rape attacks of same.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Pedophile priests are jailed and exposed, none of the politically correct sensitivities that often apply to muslims have been witnessed in the reporting of abuses. The fact that when abuses were uncovered, the religion and position was reported without hesitation.



If it was imams that were caught raping/pimping out girls then that would be reported just as openly as priests are.

When catholic men rape, their families religious background is rarely reported.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> Yep. And were I living in Thailand or Cambodia I would have a very low opinion of such men. Castration should be the cure.
> 
> And yes, Western pedophile tourist scum see Thai kids as easy meat.



So do western white attitudes mean that this happens? And should the Uk white community take responsibility for it and do something about if. If so, what are you doing about it?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> Nor is it fair to say Catholicism has a long, and ongoing, interest in raping children.



Bullshit. For a start missionaries going back centuries have had a shameful role in that respect. And nonces in the catholic church go back centuries as well, abuse was rife and probably still is.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So do western white attitudes mean that this happens? And should the Uk white community take responsibility for it and do something about if. If so, what are you doing about it?


 
The UK government has taken some responsibility for it by passing new laws that enable men who commit such crimes to be prosecuted in the UK. 

I do take your point, but this particular example isn't a good one to make it with.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 9, 2011)

I think the US do similar now.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> And your point is? The vast majority of sex tourists and nonces in Thailand and Cambodia are white western men. Lets generalise on the behaviour of a tiny minority.


 


DrRingDing said:


> What about Catholicism and it's long, and ongoing, interest in raping children?


Sorry I'm confused - are you two saying that White western nonces holidaying in Thailand to rape children and Catholic paedo-priests are _not _a problem or that they _are _a problem that should be dealt with?


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> And your point is? The vast majority of sex tourists and nonces in Thailand and Cambodia are white western men. Lets generalise on the behaviour of a tiny minority.


 
Actually they are not. The sex industry in Cambodia and Thailand caters overwhelmingly to locals. Of foreign tourists the vast majority of so called "sex tourists" (that is tourists who visit the country solely for the purpose of sex) are Asian. Predominantly Chinese, Malaysian, Taiwanese and Japanese. 
As far as underaged sex is concerned, the vast majority of this crime is committed domestically with familial rape being hugely unreported and un prosecuted. The sex industry in both countries predates mass tourism and is overwhelmingly local.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> *I'm not generalising at all.*
> 
> 
> The point is that with the radicalised unemployed bored youth of certain Northern cities, it isn't a huge stretch of imagination to link a clear disdain for infidel girls with rape attacks of same.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 9, 2011)




----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> So you had sex with muslim prostitutes??


 
no, i just knew a lot of not very nice people when i lived in bradford


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> The UK government has taken some responsibility for it by passing new laws that enable men who commit such crimes to be prosecuted in the UK.
> 
> I do take your point, but this particular example isn't a good one to make it with.



Indeed and there are also laws against what is in the OP. But what is the UK white community doing about it? I'm asking people who are asking that the UK pakistani community should do something, surely the same would apply?

I think it's all load of nonsense as I don't think there is such a thing as a UK white or pakistani community and I think the problems outlined in both cases are a problem for society as a whole.



> Actually they are not. The sex industry in Cambodia and Thailand caters overwhelmingly to locals. Of foreign tourists the vast majority of so called "sex tourists" (that is tourists who visit the country solely for the purpose of sex) are Asian. Predominantly Chinese, Malaysian, Taiwanese and Japanese.
> 
> As far as underaged sex is concerned, the vast majority of this crime is committed domestically with familial rape being hugely unreported and un prosecuted. The sex industry in both countries predates mass tourism and is overwhelmingly local.



Even if this is true there are a lot of white western sex tourists. What is the UK white community doing about it?


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> The nature in which young UK non-muslim girls as young as 12, 13 are groomed and drugged for prostitution is in my opinion a lot to do with attitudes towards infidel girls.


 
And when non-muslim men do this, what is their motivation?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

Also I've seen pimps wearing gold crucifixes. Surely this proves christianity is causing pimping?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Nor is it fair to say that of muslim men.


 
Unless it's true, which it appears to be unless you've forgotten the contents of this entire thread.

There are radical preachers that state that rape and murder of infidels is OK.

And we know that a minority of young muslim men take notice, other there wouldn't be any suicide bombers.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Also I've seen pimps wearing gold crucifixes. Surely this proves christianity is causing pimping?


 
In Thailand, its well known that Buddhism is the root cause of prostitution there.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Sorry I'm confused - are you two saying that White western nonces holidaying in Thailand to rape children and Catholic paedo-priests are _not _a problem or that they _are _a problem that should be dealt with?


 
Well quite.

I think it's a game of "let's just accuse pk of racism and make it look as though we are all politically correct" rather than have the courage to face up to what appears to be a new and disturbing element of islamic integration, albeit one only involving a minority.

Ah well. It was a good thread while it lasted.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

rover07 said:


> And when non-muslim men do this, what is their motivation?


 
They have similar contempt for females, and it's a power thing too of course. You'd have to ask them.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Bullshit. For a start missionaries going back centuries have had a shameful role in that respect. And nonces in the catholic church go back centuries as well, abuse was rife and probably still is.


 
It's not as though females are degraded in the Catholic doctrines in the same manner they are in islamic texts...


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

I'm more and more concerned about pimps wearing crucifixes, seems a disturbing link.



> Sorry I'm confused - are you two saying that White western nonces holidaying in Thailand to rape children and Catholic paedo-priests are not a problem or that they are a problem that should be dealt with?



Of course it's a problem, but I'm asking what the UK white community is doing about it. We seem to have a new and disturbing element of white western nonce expansionism, albeit one only involving a minority. Stop this political correct nonsense, something needs to be done.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

rover07 said:


> In Thailand, its well known that Buddhism is the root cause of prostitution there.


 
It is actually. All to do with the lack of origional sin al la (no pun intended) Abrahamic religion


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

ok, regarding the case that led to this discussion

as wellas one of those convicted being white, it seems three of the victims were asian and two mixed race

it also appears that these young men were far from devout






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1332746/Asian-gang-raped-girls-young-12-picking-streets-sex.html


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> They have similar contempt for females



Exactly, so why try to add on Islam as a reason for Pakistani men.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

1 Corinthians 11:3 *

    3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.

1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35*

    34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
    35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 

Ephesians 5:22 - 25*

    22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
    23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
    24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing. 

1 Timothy 2:9 - 15*

    9. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
    10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
    11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
    12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
    13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
    14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I don't think there is such a thing as a UK white or pakistani community


 
LOL, and they call me naive. 

OK, at least I now know your position.

Take a stroll around the muslim areas Bradford or Leicester or Blackburn or Birmingham with a blonde haired and blue eyed girl in a t-shirt sometime, or maybe walk a few yards behind her, only a matter of time before she is verbally abused.

Woe betide her if she wears a short skirt...


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I'm more and more concerned about pimps wearing crucifixes, seems a disturbing link.


 
It would be had you not just invented it for the purposes of refuting the valid issues made in the thread.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> LOL, and they call me naive.
> 
> OK, at least I now know your position.
> 
> ...


 
fucking bollocks, stop slandering my home town, no-one would fucking dare in manningham, it was the red light area for years and theyd get a slap


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> ok, regarding the case that led to this discussion
> 
> as wellas one of those convicted being white, it seems three of the victims were asian and two mixed race
> 
> it also appears that these young men were far from devout


 
Any chance of providing that evidence of muslim men pimping muslim girls? Ta.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> LOL, and they call me naive.
> 
> OK, at least I now know your position.
> 
> ...


 
You really need to get out more.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> It would be had you not just invented it for the purposes of refuting the valid issues made in the thread.


 
did you read the daily mail link i just posted

you know the one that destroys any claim you made that these were devout muslims


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

i did, you ignored it, i cant be bothered anymore


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

pk care to comment on that doctrine from the bible?

I've seen gangsta rap videos with people wearing crucifixes loads of time. Is the Catholic church promoting gangsta rap. We need to know.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

Also pk it's been established that there a quite a few UK white nonces in Thailand and Cambodia, you've agreed with this. As part of the UK white community, what are you doing about it? What is it in the UK white community that is making this happen?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Know many do you?? If it walks and talks like a muslim, wears muslim garm and blinged up jihadi medallions - it is a muslim.
> .



Nah, It's JHE undercover.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Any chance of providing that evidence of muslim men pimping muslim girls? Ta.



lol, yeah dude, thats why theres no prostitution in pakistan or iran, not enough white girls innit


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> fucking bollocks, stop slandering my home town, no-one would fucking dare in manningham, it was the red light area for years and theyd get a slap


 
Really. So effectively the only white women in those areas are prostitutes, according to you?

I lived in Bradford for two years so I know the town very well. I loved it there actually, rented my house from a muslim landlord and bought my weed from a muslim dealer.

If you're trying to convince me that a female in a miniskirt would not be verbally insulted walking through Little Horton, Manningham or Toller then I'm afraid I simply do not believe you. My blonde haired and blue eyed girlfriend hated it, purely because of the dirty looks and comments she would get in those areas when I wasn't with her.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> i did, you ignored it, i cant be bothered anymore


 
I refuted all your links - NONE of them demonstrated muslim men pimping muslim women.

Try again please, ta.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

I've seen builders harassing women loads of time as they walk past. What is the builders community going to do about it!


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Also pk it's been established that there a quite a few UK white nonces in Thailand and Cambodia, you've agreed with this. As part of the UK white community, what are you doing about it? What is it in the UK white community that is making this happen?


 
I'd like to see them castrated, as I would like any child rapist castrated. My own personal opinion, one that will never be implemented in law.

Thing is - there isn't explicit permission for rape in the religious book you quoted in the same way there is in islamic scripts.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I've seen builders harassing women loads of time as they walk past. What is the builders community going to do about it!


 
Not the same thing at all, is it, Mr Disingenious?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

rover07 said:


> You really need to get out more.


 
LOL, I get out plenty thanks. I have enough air miles to get to the moon and back.

Do you not believe my comment, or are you just in general disbelief? Which bit do you find inaccurate in what I said?

 Originally Posted by pk  

Take a stroll around the muslim areas Bradford or Leicester or Blackburn or Birmingham with a blonde haired and blue eyed girl in a t-shirt sometime, or maybe walk a few yards behind her, only a matter of time before she is verbally abused.

Woe betide her if she wears a short skirt...


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> I'd like to see them castrated, as I would like any child rapist castrated. My own personal opinion, one that will never be implemented in law.



But what is the white community going to do about it. We need to know.



> Thing is - there isn't explicit permission for rape in the religious book you quoted in the same way there is in islamic scripts.



No but we now have gangsta rap videos with crucifixes in them and lots of quotes from the bible saying that women are second class citizens. The christian community need to do something about this, it's a clear link between christianity, abuse of women and gangsta rap.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> Not the same thing at all, is it, Mr Disingenious?



So it's ok for builders to harass women, is that what you're saying? Political correctness gone mad!


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> lol, yeah dude, thats why theres no prostitution in pakistan or iran, not enough white girls innit


 
Plenty of Afghan women smuggled in... Prostitution often remains associated with human trafficking as trafficked women are sold into brothels. In 2003, approximately 20,000 minors were engaged in prostitution in Pakistan.

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


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> It's not as though females are degraded in the Catholic doctrines in the same manner they are in islamic texts...


 
The Bible and Koran are much of a muchness - typical products of patriarchy.
The commentaries and additional theological contributions to the Bible and the Koran, though, that's where the shit comes from, and is arguably as bad from the Christian scholars as from the Islamic scholars. In fact Islam doesn't have a concept of original sin at all, whereas Christianity has one that's based on the temptation of Adam by Eve after her on temptation by the serpent. Members of the Catholic faith, and the protestant sects after and alongside it, have used that particular piece of fiction as a basis for treating women badly for as long as their churches have existed.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> I refuted all your links - NONE of them demonstrated muslim men pimping muslim women.
> 
> Try again please, ta.


 
well no except the one about muslims mujra dancers being trafficked into the uk, the one about the muslim girl forced forced into prostitution in sheffield, ill give you that i am not able to prove the iranian girls who had their virginity sold were muslim

prostitution is huge in the muslim world, why on earth would you think it automatically becomes impossible for it to happen in the UK


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> But what is the white community going to do about it. We need to know.



Speaking up about it without fear of being labelled a racist is a start. Old Jack Straw has managed that at least.



> No but we now have gangsta rap videos with crucifixes in them and lots of quotes from the bible saying that women are second class citizens. The christian community need to do something about this, it's a clear link between christianity, abuse of women and gangsta rap.


 
Still, the bible doesn't say you can rape children, which can be inferred from certain islamic texts.

Anyway, you're just being an idiot now, trying to wreck the thread presumably because you've latched on to the idea that I am somehow a racist for criticising the attitude many men have of infidel women.

Good luck with that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> It is actually. All to do with the lack of origional sin al la (no pun intended) Abrahamic religion


 
The Muslims and the Jews don't deal in original sin. That's a "Christians only" club.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Take a stroll around the muslim areas Bradford or Leicester or Blackburn or Birmingham with a blonde haired and blue eyed girl in a t-shirt sometime, or maybe walk a few yards behind her, only a matter of time before she is verbally abused.
> 
> Woe betide her if she wears a short skirt...



Women on their own get hassled by men of all religions and races, in every country in the world.

But you seem to think its just muslims.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Plenty of Afghan women smuggled in... Prostitution often remains associated with human trafficking as trafficked women are sold into brothels. In 2003, approximately 20,000 minors were engaged in prostitution in Pakistan.


 
how is that possible though. i thopught it could never happen that muslim men could be involved in pimping muslim women, are they secretly trafficking girls from bolton on the quiet


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> well no except the one about muslims mujra dancers being trafficked into the uk



You didn't prove they were muslims. 



> the one about the muslim girl forced forced into prostitution in sheffield



She wasn't actually forced into prostitution at all, she was raped as a punishment for backing out of a fraudulent forced marriage.



> ill give you that i am not able to prove the iranian girls who had their virginity sold were muslim
> 
> prostitution is huge in the muslim world, why on earth would you think it automatically becomes impossible for it to happen in the UK


 
I'm saying, as well you know, that you will not find one muslim girl on the streets of Bradford selling her body.

Not one.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I've seen builders harassing women loads of time as they walk past. What is the builders community going to do about it!


 
ignore his crap, its just not fucking true, speaking as someone who lived and was brought up there rather than enjoying a middle class holiday


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm saying, as well you know, that you will not find one muslim girl on the streets of Bradford selling her body.
> 
> Not one.



utter bollocks


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> how is that possible though. i thopught it could never happen that muslim men could be involved in pimping muslim women, are they secretly trafficking girls from bolton on the quiet


 
They're allowed to pimp the slaves.

Not their own kind though. I'm sure it happens, for the right price.

But not in Bradford.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> ignore his crap, its just not fucking true, speaking as someone who lived and was brought up there rather than enjoying a middle class holiday


 
Middle class holiday LOL!

I'm not the one that actually paid for sex in Bradford, thus perpetuating the misery...

Is that what this is about? Guilt?


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> utter bollocks


 
Prove it. Just ONE example of a muslim girl being pimped out by muslim men.

Only one! Preferably from Bradford.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

rover07 said:


> Women on their own get hassled by men of all religions and races, in every country in the world.
> 
> But you seem to think its just muslims.


 
Where have I said "it's just muslims" ??

Oh, I didn't - you just made that up to try and win the argument. Well done.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> The Muslims and the Jews don't deal in original sin. That's a "Christians only" club.


They're all pretty hung up about the old in out.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> They're allowed to pimp the slaves.
> 
> Not their own kind though. I'm sure it happens, for the right price.



what about in Iran, where i believe prostitution is legal under certain conditions

love your last line btw, kind of sums up your position on this thread, this never happens except i'm sure it happens



> But not in Bradford.



i could fucking name one mate


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> Thing is - there isn't explicit permission for rape in the religious book you quoted in the same way there is in islamic scripts.


 
Thing is..There is..



> Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp.  But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle.  "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded.  "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor.  They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people.  *Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man.  Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.*


(Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)


> Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem.  They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, "Go and hide in the vineyards.  When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife!  And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, 'Please be understanding. * Let them have your daughters, for we didn't find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead.* And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'"  *So the men of Benjamin did as they were told.  They kidnapped the women *who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance.


Judges 21:10-24 NLT




> So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children.  "This is what you are to do," they said. "Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin."  Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead *they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan*.


Judges 21:10-24 NLT)



> As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace.  If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor.  But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town.  *When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town.  But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder.  You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you*.


(Deuteronomy 20:10-14)



> When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, *so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house.*  But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb.  After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife.  However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."


Deuteronomy 21:10-14



> *They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man,* Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil.   (Judges 5:30 )


Judges 5:30

The Bible is full of horrible stuff like this.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> Speaking up about it without fear of being labelled a racist is a start. Old Jack Straw has managed that at least.



No I mean what are Uk white communities going to do about white nonces in Thailand and Cambodia.

I don't think you're a racist, I think you're and idiot. You still haven't said what is going to be done about crucifixes in gangsta rap videos and the misogyny and sexism that goes along with it and links to pimps. And now we have the examples of christian texts.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> I'm saying, as well you know, that you will not find one muslim girl on the streets of Bradford selling her body.



So are you saying you want to see more muslim prostitutes. Strange.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> Thing is..There is..
> 
> 
> (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)
> ...


 
OK, well fair play - the difference being there aren't preachers banging on about it to sexually frustrated young men who often look at western infidel women as all being mere whores.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So are you saying you want to see more muslim prostitutes. Strange.


 
Of course that isn't what I'm saying. As you know full well.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I think you're and idiot.


 


OK mate.


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> OK, well fair play - the difference being there aren't preachers banging on about it to sexually frustrated young men who often look at western infidel women as all being mere whores.


 
Yes there is


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> OK mate.


 
you havent come across as the sharpest tool on this thread pk


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

Everyones argument now comes down to rape goes on all the time so the issue is resloved and we shouldn't mention cultural or religious justifications because thats racist. Can we start blaming the victim's now and move on.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> OK, well fair play - the difference being there aren't preachers banging on about it to sexually frustrated young men who often look at western infidel women as all being mere whores.



I imagine that these blokes doing this are regularly going down the mosque to get advice.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> Everyones argument now comes down to rape goes on all the time so the issue is resloved and we shouldn't mention cultural or religious justifications because thats racist. Can we start blaming the victim's now and move on.



Not sure anyone has said that. There might be cultural reasons whether it's the example in the OP or white blokes going out to Thailand or any other example.

What is ridiculous is to say there is homogeneous pakistani or white community that should take responsibility for it or should do anything about it. They are problems for society as a whole.

Not sure what racism has got to do with it.


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Everyones argument now comes down to rape goes on all the time so the issue is resloved and we shouldn't mention cultural or religious justifications because thats racist. Can we start blaming the victim's now and move on.


 
There are no cultural or religious justifications. They are just scumbags and they know they are scumbags and every one who knows them knows they are scumbags and everyone, Muslim or none Muslim knows they are scumbags. End of. All the rest is just bollocks.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Not sure anyone has said that. There might be cultural reasons whether it's the example in the OP or white blokes going out to Thailand or any other example.


 
What cultural reasons could be behind it then? The Thailand example is terrible cos they're all at


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> There are no cultural or religious justifications. They are just scumbags and they know they are scumbags and every one who knows them knows they are scumbags and everyone, Muslim or none Muslim knows they are scumbags. End of. All the rest is just bollocks.


 
They're not targeting girls in their community which show prejudice for a start


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> They're not targeting girls in their community which show prejudice for a start


 
No it shows opportunism. They were targeting vulnerable powerless young women who they could manipulate and abuse.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 9, 2011)

> They're not targeting girls in their community which show prejudice for a start



Just as there are many white men who see other women as a bit exotic and go out to places like Thailand, but have their white wife at home. This also show prejudice. Who is going to deny that there are prejudices of "our women" bollox, it needs to be taken on wherever it is by society as a whole. But given the chance to abuse "their own" I'm sure these blokes would.



> The Thailand example is terrible cos they're all at it



Oh dear.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> No it shows opportunism. They were targeting vulnerable powerless young women who they could manipulate and abuse.


 
precisely, race doesnt fucking come into it, if they found a young, vulnerable muslim girl theyd treat her just the same (and possibly did in the case referred to in the op, given three of the girls were asian)

it aint rocket science, you want to find a girl to lure into sex and vice, do you pick the conservative imans daughter next door or the fucked up kid from the hostel down the road

theyre nasty fucking pricks, they dont think about shit like this, they do whats easy and what offers least chance of getting caught


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> precisely, race doesnt fucking come into it, if they found a young, vulnerable muslim girl theyd treat her just the same (and possibly did in the case referred to in the op, given three of the girls were asian)
> 
> it aint rocket science, you want to find a girl to lure into sex and vice, do you pick the conservative imans daughter next door or the fucked up kid from the hostel down the road
> 
> theyre nasty fucking pricks, they dont think about shit like this, they do whats easy and what offers least chance of getting caught


 
The whole this goes on all the time is so weak its untrue, do honestly think there is no more to this than 'they are nasty men'


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> The whole this goes on all the time is so weak its untrue, do honestly think there is no more to this than 'they are nasty men'


 
yes

the sex industry is massive, around 80,000 women a year are raped, its fucking grim


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> The whole this goes on all the time is so weak its untrue, do honestly think there is no more to this than 'they are nasty men'


 
If some white Bloke did this would you think there was no more to this than he is a nasty man?


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> If some white Bloke did this would you think there was no more to this than he is a nasty man?


 
Do you think that humanity is one humongous identy that share the same values and there is never any conflict between contridictory systems.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

smokedout said:


> yes
> 
> the sex industry is massive, around 80,000 women a year are raped, its fucking grim


 
Are you one of these people that think prostition is rape cos its been a bit clouded on the Thailand stuff


----------



## smokedout (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Are you one of these people that think prostition is rape cos its been a bit clouded on the Thailand stuff



no as it goes, admittedly i didnt phrase what i meant very well

80,000 women a year are raped in this country, in the context of that, this handful of cases means very fucking little


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 9, 2011)

pk said:


> OK, well fair play - the difference being there aren't preachers banging on about it to sexually frustrated young men who often look at western infidel women as all being mere whores.


 
You've never been in a Catholic seminary in Ireland, have you?


----------



## dylans (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Do you think that humanity is one humongous identy that share the same values and there is never any conflict between contridictory systems.


 
I think the guys who did this know what they did is wrong. Differing values don't enter into it. Muslims know this was wrong just as non Muslims know it was wrong.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 9, 2011)

dylans said:


> *I think the guys who did this know what they did is wrong*. Differing values don't enter into it. Muslims know this was wrong just as non Muslims know it was wrong.


 
No they don't, though I doubt most rapists know what they are doing is wrong. In another thread you made a very clear point that there are many types of Islam, the type in Pakistan is the most loony form it is pretty much the unadultered medieval one that is promoted by the Saudi's you know more than me on this so correcrt me. I think if you have a community in Britain from rural Pakistan raising their families with this ultra orthodox doctine its going to ferment into some very destructive attidudes as young men battle between the two worlds they live in. It is valid in my opinion to approach the subject without accusing Islam as a whole.


----------



## pk (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> No they don't, though I doubt most rapists know what they are doing is wrong. In another thread you made a very clear point that there are many types of Islam, the type in Pakistan is the most loony form it is pretty much the unadultered medieval one that is promoted by the Saudi's you know more than me on this so correcrt me. I think if you have a community in Britain from rural Pakistan raising their families with this ultra orthodox doctine its going to ferment into some very destructive attidudes as young men battle between the two worlds they live in. It is valid in my opinion to approach the subject without accusing Islam as a whole.


 
Yeah this.

Also - An estimated 70,000 women living in the UK have undergone FGM - yet there has not been one conviction.

Anyone would think there really was a deliberate clouding of serious issues for PC reasons. 70,000 is a big number.

Anyway - those who doubt there is a specific problem with integrating certain aspects of hardcore islamic values can take it up with Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation.

“Although there have been some cases of white men being involved in this sexual exploitation of young girls, most of the perpetrators are Muslim. There are some Muslims who think that as long as these sex gangs aren’t targeting their own sisters and daughters the issue doesn’t affect them. It’s a form of racism that’s abhorrent in a civilised society. These people think that white girls ….are less valuable than our girls.”


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 9, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Everyones argument now comes down to rape goes on all the time so the issue is resloved and we shouldn't mention cultural or religious justifications because thats racist. Can we start blaming the victim's now and move on.


 
No. First we start blaming the perpetrators. Not trying to pretend it's only this or that type of sexist moron and not "our" type of sexist moron.


----------



## dylans (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Yeah this.
> 
> Also - An estimated 70,000 women living in the UK have undergone FGM - yet there has not been one conviction.
> 
> ...


It is a big number. Do you have a link to back it up? As far as I am aware, FGM does not occur in Pakistan or in communities of Pakistani origin. It is an African and middle Eastern custom (beduin) and has no basis in Islam


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I've seen builders harassing women loads of time as they walk past. What is the builders community going to do about it!


 
Apparently they will be round next Tuesday to fix it, if the weather's good and they can get hold of the van on time.


----------



## dylans (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> No they don't, though I doubt most rapists know what they are doing is wrong. In another thread you made a very clear point that there are many types of Islam, the type in Pakistan is the most loony form it is pretty much the unadultered medieval one that is promoted by the Saudi's you know more than me on this so correcrt me. I think if you have a community in Britain from rural Pakistan raising their families with this ultra orthodox doctine its going to ferment into some very destructive attidudes as young men battle between the two worlds they live in. It is valid in my opinion to approach the subject without accusing Islam as a whole.


 
You are talking about Deoband Dar-ul-Uloom Islam in South Asia and Salafism (sometimes called Wahabism) in Saudi. This is the pan national Islam of the Taliban and Bin Laden that preaches the rejection of Western and modernist values etc. It Is indeed a growiing force in Pakistan though by no means the only one. Deobandi is indeed followed here by about 45% of British Muslims, though not all Deobandi Muslims follow the extreme Deobandi Dar ul Uloom school. (I don't have the stats but it is a small minority who do)

 I am working on a post about this for the Pakistan thread and will discuss it at more length there.)


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Those Bible texts selected by Mad Dyl were all Old Testament.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I stand corrected.
> 
> What would you say is the political position of Aftenposten?


 
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article190268.ece

In this case the position appears to be that the Norwegian Radio thing you posted is an outright falsehood. Also note that 9 out of 10 cases investigated don't lead to any charges, so without figures for the ethnic make up of those accused and not charged there is the potential suspicion that as much as anything it could be that immigrants are more likely to be charged rather than more likely to be guilty.

Islam In Europe has an interesting look at the stats in more detail.

Ablemesh has an even more disturbing look at the figures showing that if you look at the raw data the much trumpeted 65% figure for non Western immigrants committing sexual offences in Norway is in fact a misprint of 6.5%. Which leads me to suspect that what's actually going on here is more to do with hysterical islamophobia than anything else.


----------



## Fullyplumped (Jan 10, 2011)

A funny from Osama Saeed.



> We need to get the white community to think more clearly about why white bankers have ruined the economy


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Sorry I'm confused - are you two saying that White western nonces holidaying in Thailand to rape children and Catholic paedo-priests are _not _a problem or that they _are _a problem that should be dealt with?


 
What some of us are trying to say is that they are all problems that need to be dealt with, and the way to deal with them is to attack the attitude that women or children can be used as property regardless of what sort of person holds that attitude. Otherwise you simply create a situation where it is assumed that it's only a problem when "they" (Catholics, Muslims, the middle class, aliens) do it, and not when "we" do.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Ablemesh has an even more disturbing look at the figures showing that if you look at the raw data *the much trumpeted 65% figure for non Western immigrants committing sexual offences in Norway is in fact a misprint of 6.5%*. Which leads me to suspect that what's actually going on here is more to do with hysterical islamophobia than anything else.


  That is one hell of a misprint!!!!


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> That is one hell of a misprint!!!!


 
What the fuck??

Seriously? It's 6.5 instead of 65 percent??

LOL, is this a wind up??


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Those Bible texts selected by Mad Dyl were all Old Testament.


 
you buying into this liberal pointyhead shit then ern


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Rape is far far less common in moslem countries than it is in say, South Africa.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> What is ridiculous is to say there is homogeneous pakistani or white community that should take responsibility for it or should do anything about it. They are problems for society as a whole.


 
Sorry - who has said that the homogeneous pakistani or white communities should take responsibility for it?

I know I haven't. This is an issue for parents, schools, teachers, carers, and above all the care services that are funded to ensure the welfare of vulnerable children. The whole entire point of the issue coming to light is to protect further children from suffering this scenario.

Taking responsibility for this is like taking the blame - nobody can be blamed for what these fuckers did apart from themselves.

Regardless of this 65 percent figure that has now by magic shrunk to a mere 6.5, Jack Straw can hardly be accused of being a "weasel" by saying what he has, not when he has the broad support of senior muslim figures in the UK.

My point is and always has been that there are certain cultural reasons where such crimes may be seen as somehow justified. Enabled, even.

And yep, I've probably made a complete mess of the point I was on to begin with, but if anyone really thinks there is not a huge sense of feeling from the indigenous pakistani community, especially the young men, that UK girls are fair game, they are asking for it, and raping them isn't as bad as raping a muslim sister - then you're a mug, and by burying the issue by saying "but white men rape kids too, look at the priests!" - then you are pretty much enabling further abuses of children.

It's that fucking simple.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> you havent come across as the sharpest tool on this thread pk


 
And you haven't come across as the most morally steadfast, Mr "I can name a Bradford muslim hooker, and I'm also mates with loads of pimps".

Perhaps you might like to save some cash up and this time you might procure a muslim 12 year old being sold for sex to make your point, eh?

That's the trouble with pimps. Always some fucking perverted cunt giving them money, so why should they stop recruiting vulnerable women?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> And you haven't come across as the most morally steadfast, Mr "I can name a Bradford muslim hooker, and I'm also mates with loads of pimps".
> 
> ?


 
yeah , my mates ex wife, you got a point poshboy


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> yeah , my mates ex wife, you got a point poshboy


 
This "poshboy" certainly never had to pay for sex in his life, that's my point. You muslim mate selling his wife now?

And don't get all upset if I'm grossly misrepresenting YOUR posts now. Easy to do that when you can't be arsed to argue the point.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> This is an issue for parents, schools, teachers, carers, and above all the care services that are funded to ensure the welfare of vulnerable children. The whole entire point of the issue coming to light is to protect further children from suffering this scenario.
> 
> Taking responsibility for this is like taking the blame - nobody can be blamed for what these fuckers did apart from themselves.



Unfortunately though, many people will be making a connection that rings all kinds of 'bells' in people's heads because most of _this _gang are of Pakistani heritage and, most of their victims White, as it feeds into the long promoted narrative that 'foreigners' can't be trusted, especially around 'our women'!

What struck me about his statement was the point where he said something about most of the sex offenders in English prisions being White. I can't remember him or any other politician making public statements or launching campaigns to address the prevalent problem of White sex offenders.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

this aint about race is it pk, its about class, you cant believe anyone didnt have your middle class tourist trip in our poverty, you want to over intellectualise what is simply shit we have to deal with, you're so desperate to fucking judge but still too liberal too see the truth that some people are just rapist scum, most arent and no amount of your guardinista concerned bollcoks is even fucking relevant to us because we dont need your fucking sort


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> This "poshboy" certainly never had to pay for sex in his life, that's my point. You muslim mate selling his wife now?
> 
> And don't get all upset if I'm grossly misrepresenting YOUR posts now. Easy to do that when you can't be arsed to argue the point.



fuck fucking you poshboy


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Sorry - who has said that the homogeneous pakistani or white communities should take responsibility for it?
> 
> I know I haven't. This is an issue for parents, schools, teachers, carers, and above all the care services that are funded to ensure the welfare of vulnerable children. The whole entire point of the issue coming to light is to protect further children from suffering this scenario.
> 
> ...


 
The point is that it isn't simply an issue that relates to the Pakistani community in the UK. It's an issue that relates to some groups of men of all kinds of backgrounds just about everywhere in the world.

There are two reasons why it's important to stay clear on that point.

Firstly there is currently a huge amount of islamophobia in the Western world at the moment, and a lot of people deliberately stirring it up, as well as many falling for it. That's very clearly shown by the Norwegian stuff where media hysteria has been successfully created by a combination of opportunistic (and unknowing) repetition of a misprinted statistic, and by concentrating on a single controversial headline idea to the exclusion of all the masses of contrary data (such as the simple fact that the highest levels of sex crime in Norway are in the north of the country where immigration is lowest). In itself this should be avoided.

Also there is the problem of concentrating on one group of offenders whilst letting off the hook others who commit the same sort of offence. This is wrong for two reasons. It means some groups will be more likely to get away with their crimes. It also leads to some refusing to accept that people like them can be involved in that sort of crime. It's the crime that has to be targetted and not the racial/ethnic/religious group the criminal can be categorised as belonging to. Race/ethnicity/religion/gender and so on are only relevant if they are clearly and unambiguously a major factor. So it is reasonable to say that rape appears to be more likely to be committed by men than by women. There isn't clear data to suggest that any race or religion commits rape to a disproportionate extent.

So there is something useful to look at. Gangs of young men grooming vulnerable young women and girls to be sex objects. That is a horrific thing that we should all do our best to prevent. However we won't be doing our best to prevent it by solely concentrating on young Pakistani men in the UK. We will only be doing our best to prevent it by looking at all such gangs of men regardless of who they are.

End of.

Can we go home now?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> this aint about race is it pk, its about class, you cant believe anyone didnt have your middle class tourist trip in our poverty, you want to over intellectualise what is simply shit we have to deal with, you're so desperate to fucking judge but still too liberal too see the truth that some people are just rapist scum, most arent and no amount of your guardinista concerned bollcoks is even fucking relevant to us because we dont need your fucking sort


 
Yeah that's right comrade - it's ALL about class.

Yep, I'm a middle class posh boy who decided to work in Bradford for two years instead of the Seychelles or Switzerland.

So clearly your class bigotry shows.

"when I were a lad we couln't afford t'prozzies, we'd fling em tuppence for a glimpse o'tits"

Give me a fucking break.

You're so proud of Bradford and so you should be - seems to me you're part of the fucking problem not the solution, unless paying a pimp to fuck one of his girls counts as "class solidarity" to you.

Fuck you my friend, and fuck your notions of class.

Just keep an eye on your kids if you ever move back to Bradford, eh?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> fuck fucking you poshboy


 
"posh"


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You're so proud of Bradford and so you should be - seems to me you're part of the fucking problem not the solution, unless paying a pimp to fuck one of his girls counts as "class solidarity" to you.



and there you go again, assuming just because ive known people in the sex industry, then i must somehow be a supporter of it, as opposed to the fact they might just have been my fucking neighbours or related to people i was close to

i know its easy when all you ever read about this stuff is in the newspapers, i know that makes you think that you have a right to make judgements about shit you know nothing about, i know you think two years in bradford makes you feel all edgy and down with the proles

but in reality you are the very worst kind of liberal fucking scum, ever vigilant for a way to condemn the horrors you imagined in your brief adventure into poverty tourism


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> And you haven't come across as the most morally steadfast, Mr "I can name a Bradford muslim hooker, and I'm also mates with loads of pimps".


 
This is sloppy thinking.

Actually I know quite a few prostitutes and a couple of pimps. I've never paid for the services of a lady of negotiable affection, but I don't just walk past anyone on the street pretending they don't exist. So I get to know the street girls when I live in an area they operate from (as I do currently). They know me, not as a customer, but as somebody who is generally worth a try at bumming a fag off (Americans please consult a slang dictionary at this point) and as somebody who will stop and have a chat if they are bored or feel like having a moan about the state of the world/the state of their life/the price of drugs. I'd even count some of them as friends rather than acquaintances, though by and large it's best not to become too closely involved with crack whores or their pimps.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> The point is that it isn't simply an issue that relates to the Pakistani community in the UK. It's an issue that relates to some groups of men of all kinds of backgrounds just about everywhere in the world.
> 
> There are two reasons why it's important to stay clear on that point.
> 
> ...


 
If the figure of 65% is in reality 6.5% then there are a serious amount of people out there repeating it, in respectable publications.

It's an horrific figure... and I put my hand up to posting it in good faith - if it's wrong it's wrong and I'll amend my posts accordingly.

Nobody is talking about letting non-muslims "off the hook".

I think the crux of the issue is a generation of young men that have been raised on religious bullshit from the dark ages and have no outlet for that.

But I've seen with my own eyes the attitudes toward overtly Western women from those who profess to be "good muslims".

In the nice guys it is shyness and embarrassment, in the nasty guys it is poisonous talk of sluts and whores that should merely be punished, they are worthless.

Retarded antiquated views of women that should be left behind in the countries they came from.

Surprising how few women there are on this thread too...


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> and there you go again, assuming just because ive known people in the sex industry, then i must somehow be a supporter of it, as opposed to the fact they might just have been my fucking neighbours or related to people i was close to
> 
> i know its easy when all you ever read about this stuff is in the newspapers, i know that makes you think that you have a right to make judgements about shit you know nothing about, i know you think two years in bradford makes you feel all edgy and down with the proles
> 
> but in reality you are the very worst kind of liberal fucking scum, ever vigilant for a way to condemn the horrors you imagined in your brief adventure into poverty tourism


 
"poverty tourism" LOL you crack me up.

You were probably born into more money that I was, you fucking twat. 

Here's some advice - give up on the obsession that I am middle class, never have been and probably never will be.

I don't know which of the resident retards gave you such daft ideas, but I can assure you they aren't true.

Where do you get such ridiculous notions? Do tell...

And besides you admitted it earlier in the thread - paraphrasing, you said: "much to my shame I do know the pimps of Bradford".

So you're not middle class but you still found some pimp money spare, eh? Expensive habit, that...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Nobody is talking about letting non-muslims "off the hook".
> 
> I think the crux of the issue is a generation of young men that have been raised on religious bullshit from the dark ages and have no outlet for that.
> 
> ...



When was the last political statement or campaign to stop huge numbers of Western sex tourists going off around the world to exploit/abuse young women/men in other countries? The underlying narrative in the contradictory position taken is that 'White' women are more valuable and need to be 'protected' from evil foreigners. It stinks of double standards. The same double standards that these men of Pakistani heritage supposedly have.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> "poverty tourism" LOL you crack me up.
> 
> You were probably born into more money that I was, you fucking twat.
> 
> ...



so the only way to know someone in the sex industry is because you are a punter, grow the fuck up

what were you doing in bradford then with your edgy muslim landlord and edgy fucking muslim weed dealer that you felt the need to show off about


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so the only way to know someone in the sex industry is because you are a punter, grow the fuck up
> 
> what were you doing in bradford then with your edgy muslim landlord and edgy fucking muslim weed dealer that you felt the need to show off about


 
Merely the fact that I lived there for two years in Great Horton and never once felt compelled to pay some dodgy muslim pimp to have a go on one of his crack addled "bitches".

Maybe it's a rite of passage for the true working class like you, but for a posh toff like me I don't like the noise their stilettoes make on the walnut panelling of the Rolls Royce. All those cobbles streets played havoc with the leaf-springs as it was, poor Tarquin took two weeks to get the squeak out of my vanity mirror.

"edgy" LOL


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Merely the fact that I lived there for two years in Great Horton and never once felt compelled to pay some dodgy muslim pimp to have a go on one of his crack addled "bitches".
> 
> Maybe it's a rite of passage for the true working class like you, but for a posh toff like me I don't like the noise their stilettoes make on the walnut panelling of the Rolls Royce. All those cobbles streets played havoc with the leaf-springs as it was, poor Tarquin took two weeks to get the squeak out of my vanity mirror.
> 
> "edgy" LOL


 
you can't even see how much you drip with contempt can you


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

what were you doing in bradford again btw


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Funny thing is I probably know you from back then, if you are as right-on as you say, from the 1-in-12 benefit nights or pissing it up at the Queens Hall or the Beehive...


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> you can't even see how much you drip with contempt can you


 
Is it any fucking wonder? You're contempt for my non-existant "middle class" status started this off, so don't be whining now.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

nah,i had no time for effette southern snobs

wheatsheaf, manville arms, sugarcane mebbe


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Fight! Back Ashgrove!


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Is it any fucking wonder? You're contempt for my non-existant "middle class" status started this off, so don't be whining now.


 
no, youre accusation that i slept with prostitutes started this off

what were you doing in bradford anyway


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> no, youre accusation that i slept with prostitutes started this off
> 
> what were you doing in bradford anyway


 
If you didn't sleep with the prostitutes then I apologise for inferring that you did.

I had an engineering job there, but I liked it there so much I stayed when the contract finished, helped run a shitload of community stuff and had a blast doing whatever I fancied, did BFTV at the festival, ran sound systems, that sort of shit, lived on beans & cheap beer, then moved to Manchester with the work.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

how fabulous, did you meet any ethnics?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> how fabulous, did you meet any ethnics?


 
Pimps you mean?

Yes dear, such a jolly time was had before I stepped back into my carriage and trotted back to the palace in Mayfair for a spot of dogging with Penelope.

It was nice to spend time with the oiks.

You'll see it any way you want comrade, it doesn't matter what I say. Your sense of class bigotry is looking far more stark than mine.

It's a shame you refuse to accept what most others in cities like Bradford appear to accept. 
There is a distinct problem, compounded by the fact that nobody wants to address it.
And that's not a "class thing", it's a "children being gang raped" thing... if any community is turning a blind eye to that shit, be they muslim christian or whatever - it needs to be highlighted, names named and prison cells occupied.

We can play games and call names all night, me I can't be arsed, this shit is going nowhere fast for now...


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Hey smokey, are you Porno Steve's mate? 

How long you been in London?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

I guess it is our job as a society to identify and reach out to these people before they act out - not to sanitize the entire culture for the few loons lurking in the shadows.


----------



## dylans (Jan 10, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Those Bible texts selected by* Mad Dyl *were all Old Testament.



I like that. Can we keep it?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 10, 2011)

..


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Lol


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 10, 2011)

Mr L.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Tomas Koner


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 10, 2011)

Julian Assange.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 10, 2011)

Goodbye Lesley!


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Poor Lusty...


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> When was the last political statement or campaign to stop huge numbers of Western sex tourists going off around the world to exploit/abuse young women/men in other countries?



Early Day Motion in Parliament by David Alton

Prosecution for child sex tourism abroad made possible under Sexual Offences Act 2003

Jubilee Campaign for prosecution of child sex tourists

You do seem to have some stereotypical views yourself, i.e. that European societies default to duplicity and double standards in their dealings with other cultures, and that European societies are perhaps the worst in the world for this. It's not always the case.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 10, 2011)

That legislation applies to everyone in the country. But it is overwhelmingly white males from a Christian background who are engaging in child sex tourism.

England has a long history of believing itself and the white race superior to lesser races. The EDL still think that way. 

If we apply the same logic used against the Pakistanis in the gang rape case then it is the Christian/English nationalist background of the sex tourists that plays a major part in their crime.

This is clearly crap.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

rover07 said:


> This is clearly crap.



The first thing to ask, though, would be - is it true?

And if it was found to be true, that there really is a greater-than-average incidence of predatory paedophilia among Europeans, then Thais or Kenyans or anyone else would be well justified in trying to find reasonable explanations for why that might be so.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

Gold Rule of Urban75: A denunciation of white racism must always follow on from news of non-Europeans doing something bad to whites.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> It's an horrific figure... and I put my hand up to posting it in good faith - if it's wrong it's wrong and I'll amend my posts accordingly.


 
It's wrong. Go back and look at the link I posted. It has an analysis done from the original source figures.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 10, 2011)

It's very telling that many here wish to bury their head in the sand to a serious issue.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

TopCat said:


> It's very telling that many here wish to bury their head in the sand to a serious issue.


 
Right TC, where's the proof that "many here wish to bury their head in the sand to a serious issue"?

I see a lot lazy generalisations here myself.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

TopCat said:


> It's very telling that many here wish to bury their head in the sand to a serious issue.


 
I couldn't agree more. It makes me wonder why so many posters want to ignore sexual abuse by anyone other than British Pakistanis.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I couldn't agree more. It makes me wonder why so many posters want to ignore sexual abuse by anyone other than British Pakistanis.



It's possible that we don't want to ignore it at all, or even that we have no beef with Pakistanis or any other ethnic group.

Maybe it's just that we enjoy having a go at the Righteous Ones such as you, when you try to claim the moral high ground through theatrical displays of ethnic self-loathing and by insinuating racism in others.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I couldn't agree more. It makes me wonder why so many posters want to ignore sexual abuse by anyone other than British Pakistanis.


 
I can think of many threads here which have focused on sex abuse by Catholic Priests, teachers, friends, relatives, all sorts. Why should the abuse and rapes carried out by men of a Pakistani origin be ignored in your view?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I couldn't agree more. It makes me wonder why so many posters want to ignore sexual abuse by anyone other than British Pakistanis.


 
As usual this how these threads pan out -- nobody anywhere is in any way at all pretending that other people don't also do these things. Just in this specific case it appears that a certain group are indeed targeting young girls who are not from their own backgrounds.

If even BBC News Look North can recognise this - I doubt they would have run this story if they weren't pretty 100% certain of their facts.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

IMR said:


> Gold Rule of Urban75: A denunciation of white racism must always follow on from news of non-Europeans doing something bad to whites.


 
Rubbish! Where double standards exist they deserve being called.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Just in this specific case it appears that a certain group are indeed targeting young girls who are not from their own backgrounds.



Weren't three of the women from the case in the OP Asian?

Also could it not be the case that the men/scum in question just go for the most vulnerable women they can find and they would go for pakistani women as well if they had easier access?

There could well be racial prejudices as well as them being abusers, as I've known some men from every race I've come across think of "their women" as better than other races, but where is the evidence in this case? And even if it is the case that a minority of men in that community doing it, then why should that community be told to take responsbility for it, rather than society as a whole? Firstly there is no such thing as a pakistani/catholic/asian/white community, and secondly it is the job of the police and the authorities. What are individuals who are from a pakistani background meant to do about it, hire a private detective?

It would be like saying the white christian community has to be responsible for dealing with white christian men who go out to Thailand.

Also no-one has suggested anything in practical terms of what should be done.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Weren't three of the women from the case in the OP Asian?


 
Ah but were they _muslim_...?

Seems there's an issue with Hindu/Sikh girls being groomed too.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Right TC, where's the proof that "many here wish to bury their head in the sand to a serious issue"?
> 
> I see a lot lazy generalisations here myself.


 
I see a lot of lazy rhetoric in your thread title.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

No idea, you tell me? If no-one knows assumptions shouldn't be made about the motivation of people who did this, especially as one of them was white! All we know at this point is that they were scum. The trial judge said racial motivation wasn't relevant and no-one has provided any evidence to the contrary.



> Also no-one has suggested anything in practical terms of what should be done.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Rape is far far less common in moslem countries than it is in say, South Africa.


 
*Reported* rape is, that's for sure.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Firstly there is no such thing as a pakistani/catholic/asian/white community


 
LOL, wut? OK...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

TopCat said:


> It's very telling that many here wish to bury their head in the sand to a serious issue.


 
Grooming and rape _per se_ are serious issues. Problem is that even when people don't bury their heads in the sand, not a lot gets done, whatever the culture of the perpetrators.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> LOL, wut? OK...


 
But there isn't. Talking about the Muslim community is as daft as talking about the disabled community or the driving community. It's bollocks.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> The trial judge said racial motivation wasn't relevant and *no-one has provided any evidence to the contrary.*


 
Except they have. As has been documented throughout the thread.

Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said street grooming was 'probably happening in most towns and cities' and was not confined to the Pakistani community.
'I certainly don't think this is a Pakistani thing. 
*My staff would say that there is an over-representation of people from minority ethnic groups - Afghans, people from Arabic nations - but it's not just one nation.'*

Salim Mulla, chairman of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, admitted there was a problem in the town which was taken ‘very seriously'.

He said: “We have done a lot of work in the Muslim community.

"However, the problem does still exist and it is down to the high level of deprivation in this town and a failure in the system resulting in these young men turning to gang culture and committing crime".


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> 'I certainly don't think this is a Pakistani thing.
> My staff would say that there is an over-representation of people from minority ethnic groups - Afghans, people from Arabic nations - but it's not just one nation.'
> 
> "However, the problem does still exist and it is down to the high level of deprivation in this town and a failure in the system resulting in these young men turning to gang culture and committing crime".


 
How does this quote help your case?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I couldn't agree more. It makes me wonder why so many posters want to ignore sexual abuse by anyone other than British Pakistanis.


 
Sexual abuse of children below the age of consent is historically (notwithstanding the last 15 years of paedophobia) "ignored". Each time it has come to the public eye in the last 100 years or so, it hasn't been because of police work, or even too often because of crusading journalism. Most often it's been because incidents have come to light that are so horrific, the media are forced to pay attention, and therefore the general public get to hear about it.

Like I said earlier in the thread,  the systematic grooming and sexual abuse of children in care has been going on (and being reported on) for as long as I can remember, which is back to the early '70s. That wasn't "British Pakistanis". it was white care-workers and even social workers.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> But there isn't. Talking about the Muslim community is as daft as talking about the disabled community or the driving community. It's bollocks.


 
How is it anything like those examples? This is a community that is self sufficient in terms of people living within it that often never ever venture out into the white areas, never leaving their streets. They shop three streets away, pray three streets away, and all their immediate family members here live within 600 yards. 

Of course there are distinct communities in this cities. Unless your definition of "community" differs from mine.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Ah but were they _muslim_...?
> 
> .


 Oh for pity's sake...you are _obsessed_ 

Most likely none of the victims were Muslim and from all reports the rapist's and their lifestyles don't exactly scream  devout Muslim at me either.

Try again.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> How does this quote help your case?


 
The over-representation from Arabic nations involved in grooming infidel girls...?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Oh for pity's sake...you are _obsessed_:rolleyes
> 
> Most likely none of the victims were Muslim and from all reports the rapist's and their lifestyles don't exactly scream Muslim at me either.
> 
> Try again.


 
"most likely"

Let's see the facts, lets have a look. I'm not "obsessed" you silly girl, it's the thread topic. 

Plenty seem keen to sidestep the issue and treat it like it wasn't a problem at all, and there are no alarming incompatibilities between the dictatorial nature of islamic men and our non-muslim infidel whores. Especially when they are 12 years old.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> How is it anything like those examples? This is a community that is self sufficient in terms of people living within it that often never ever venture out into the white areas, never leaving their streets. They shop three streets away, pray three streets away, and all their immediate family members here live within 600 yards.
> 
> Of course there are distinct communities in this cities. Unless your definition of "community" differs from mine.


 
Awful lot of conjecture and assertion here, not much evidence. You would be hard pushed to find any community in the UK which is wholly Muslim, or wholly Pakistani, or even wholly Asian. And 'the muslim community' is usually used as a euphemism for muslims in the UK. How does that constitute a community? A working class teenager in Bridgend is in the same community as a wealthy pensioner from Kensington?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sexual abuse of children below the age of consent is historically (notwithstanding the last 15 years of paedophobia) "ignored". Each time it has come to the public eye in the last 100 years or so, it hasn't been because of police work, or even too often because of crusading journalism. Most often it's been because incidents have come to light that are so horrific, the media are forced to pay attention, and therefore the general public get to hear about it.
> 
> Like I said earlier in the thread,  the systematic grooming and sexual abuse of children in care has been going on (and being reported on) for as long as I can remember, which is back to the early '70s. That wasn't "British Pakistanis". it was white care-workers and even social workers.


 
3 more nonces banged up today:






I hope they enjoy the boiled sugar and razor blades in the prison food.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> But there isn't. Talking about the Muslim community is as daft as talking about the disabled community or the driving community. It's bollocks.


 
Depends on the context, and depends on what the context-setter is trying to say, surely?

Obviously, talking about a homogeneous "Pakistani community" is as daft as talking about a homogeneous "gay community", but that doesn't stop people who see themselves as part of that "in group" from defining themselves as a member of that not-really-existing over-arching group.
Even when in reality what such supposed communities actually are is loose assemblages of disparate interests whose "membership" is called on most often to support the witterings of some member of an interest group who claims to represent such a community.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> The over-representation from Arabic nations involved in grooming infidel girls...?


 
What about the bit where they said it isn't limited to muslims? Or the bit where they said the cause was social - deprivation, gang culture - rather than religious or cultural?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Awful lot of conjecture and assertion here, not much evidence. You would be hard pushed to find any community in the UK which is wholly Muslim, or wholly Pakistani, or even wholly Asian.



Not that hard pushed. Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley all have examples of such communities.



> And 'the muslim community' is usually used as a euphemism for muslims in the UK.


 
Not the way I use it.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> LOL, wut? OK...



Why is that funny? Do you really think that millions of people are one homogenous community? There will be a myriad of opinions in any of the groups mentioned. Mentioning the pakistani or catholic community is almost meaningless.



> How does this quote help your case?



I'm not sure on that either.



> *Also no-one has suggested anything in practical terms of what should be done.*


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Depends on the context, and depends on what the context-setter is trying to say, surely?
> 
> Obviously, talking about a homogeneous "Pakistani community" is as daft as talking about a homogeneous "gay community", but that doesn't stop people who see themselves as part of that "in group" from defining themselves as a member of that not-really-existing over-arching group.
> Even when in reality what such supposed communities actually are is loose assemblages of disparate interests whose "membership" is called on most often to support the witterings of some member of an interest group who claims to represent such a community.


 
Identity and community are not the same thing though. I have no doubt people identify themselves as belonging to various mythical communities, but they don't.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> "most likely"
> 
> Let's see the facts, lets have a look. I'm not "obsessed" you silly girl, it's the thread topic.


 How about you stop trying to patronise  me you pathetic little man? You are obsessed and it is clear to see.



> Plenty seem keen to sidestep the issue and treat it like it wasn't a problem at all, and there are no alarming incompatibilities between the dictatorial nature of islamic men and our non-muslim infidel whores. Especially when they are 12 years old.



The only thing I am side stepping is your obsession , oh and turning into a head patting, condescending mysoginst doesn't cover you in glory either...

Yeah, yeah I know..._'at least you are not as bad as other men.'_


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> 3 more nonces banged up today:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
1) It's boil*ing* sugar water, not sweets.

2) you're about as likely to find a razor blade in your food as you are to get a blowjob off of the Governor. More likely to find stones and glass.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> What about the bit where they said it isn't limited to muslims? Or the bit where they said the cause was social - deprivation, gang culture - rather than religious or cultural?


 
The causes probably are social, in most cases. But the attitude that white non-muslims = unclean infidel whores is a mindset that enables such crimes to happen far more commonly than they should.

If one or two of the immams stood up and said "Allah will roast your testicles if you rape children" and a comparable attitude towards child rape as we infidels have (i.e. the majority of UK residents would probably like to see predatory paedophiles castrated) you can bet there would be less of this shit going on.

As it is - influential people from the muslim world tend to look the other way and even cover the problem up.

Just like the Catholic priests did. So to me it is a religious/cultural thing.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Not that hard pushed. Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley all have examples of such communities.



No they don't.



pk said:


> Not the way I use it.



So you mean muslim communities not The Muslim Community. Even then, I'd be very surprised if the UK has a single community that is comprised solely of muslims.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Let's see the facts, lets have a look. I'm not "obsessed" you silly girl, it's the thread topic.



This is pathetic.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> How about you stop trying to patronise  me you pathetic little man? You are obsessed and it is clear to see.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You can't accept for a second that there is anything shady going on with regard to non-muslim children and predatory muslim pedophiles egged on by radical beliefs that reduce women to the level of animals.

Fine, you've made your point. I think it's nonsense. Carry on with the ad hominem attacks though, and accuse me of being "obsessed" and "mysoginst", it's really helping your case.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> This is pathetic.


 
Of course it is...I am merely a 'silly girl'.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> The causes probably are social, in most cases. But the attitude that white non-muslims = unclean infidel whores is a mindset that enables such crimes to happen far more commonly than they should.


 
You could apply this reactionary thinking to any ethnic, religious, cultural or social group. What's so special about teh muzlims?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> If one or two of the immams stood up and said "Allah will roast your testicles if you rape children" and a comparable attitude towards child rape as we infidels have (i.e. the majority of UK residents would probably like to see predatory paedophiles castrated) you can bet there would be less of this shit going on.



So you don't think the majority of uk residents of pakistani origin think that they are scum? You think that most imams don't condemn rape? Are you for real?

You still haven't said a single thing of any practical use that can be done either.



> As it is - influential people from the muslim world tend to look the other way and even cover the problem up.



Every muslim organisation I have seen comment on this has totally condemned what these men and men like them have done, what are you talking about?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Of course it is...I am merely a 'silly little girl'.



 sorry I meant to say this is pathetic!



> Let's see the facts, lets have a look. I'm not "obsessed" you silly girl, it's the thread topic.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> 1) It's boil*ing* sugar water, not sweets.
> 
> 2) you're about as likely to find a razor blade in your food as you are to get a blowjob off of the Governor. More likely to find stones and glass.


 
I stand corrected. Lets hope they die in jail either way.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> You could apply this reactionary thinking to any ethnic, religious, cultural or social group. What's so special about teh muzlims?



Exactly. No-one has said that this thinking doesn't go on, it does.

Also in the case of the OP they don't seem like practicing muslims in any real sense at all, in fact the opposite seems the case.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

Still waiting for your pracitical suggestions pk.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So you don't think the majority of uk residents of pakistani origin think that they are scum? You think that most imams don't condemn rape? Are you for real?



Where have I said that? Clearly the MAJORITY consider what these men did as abhorrent, but it's not the MAJORITY that need to have their attitudes towards non-muslim women corrected, is it?



> You still haven't said a single thing of any practical use that can be done either.



Nobody has, though I alluded to better communication between muslim leaders and child protection agencies.



> Every muslim organisation I have seen comment on this has totally condemned what these men and men like them have done, what are you talking about?


 
And so they should. However, look at other issues just as abhorrent, honour killings and the like - there is a sense that such matters should not be dealt with by infidel law courts.

Or maybe I'm just making the whole thing up, there isn't a problem and all those muslim leaders speaking up in support of Straw's comments were just lying...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> sorry I meant to say this is pathetic!


 
 Okay.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Of course it is...I am merely a 'silly girl'.


 
You're acting like one by accusing me of being "obsessed"... and refusing to accept that there is clearly an attitude problem that in all likelihood you would never have encountered.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

Why is it up to 'the Muslim community' to root out this minority of sexual predators who are unlikely to be practising muslims anyway? Why is it not up to 'the Christian community' to root out all the white european nonces and rapists and sex pests (whether they ever go to church or not)?

Should Muslims walk around in t-shirts saying 'we condemn noncery'?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Not that hard pushed. Bradford, Blackburn, Burnley all have examples of such communities.
> 
> 
> 
> Not the way I use it.


 
Nah, they don't. What they have are "communities" where the majority are cultural Muslims, but even the most closed "communities" aren't self-selected ghettos of Islam, they're populated by people from different regions of the same country who share a nominal religious allegiance, plus people from other countries who share a nominal religious allegiance with them.
Thing is, there's often a lot of internal friction that gets missed out on because people are too busy talking about this or that community. There was a lot of aggro, for example, in Watford back in the early '90s, when Afghanis started arriving there and using the mosque, telling the local Ugandan and even northern Pakistani Muslims that they weren't "proper" Muslims.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Where have I said that? Clearly the MAJORITY consider what these men did as abhorrent, but it's not the MAJORITY that need to have their attitudes towards non-muslim women corrected, is it?



So why are you talking about if only one or two immams would condemn this, when in reality the vast majority do?



> Nobody has, though I alluded to better communication between muslim leaders and child protection agencies.



How do you know this doesn't already happen? You seem to have little to say of practical use.



> However, look at other issues just as abhorrent, honour killings and the like - there is a sense that such matters should not be dealt with by infidel law courts.



Again all the UK muslim organisations I've seen condemn honour killings and say it should be dealt with by the police. What are you talking about?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> You're acting like one by accusing me of being "obsessed"... and refusing to accept that there is clearly an attitude problem that in all likelihood you would never have encountered.



So it's ok to be sexist? What is your background? Whatever community you are from needs to act now.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Should Muslims walk around in t-shirts saying 'we condemn noncery'?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You're acting like one by accusing me of being "obsessed"...


 No pk. It is an observation of the way that you 'act'.



> and refusing to accept that there is clearly an attitude problem that in all likelihood you would never have encountered.



1. I do not refuse to accept the problem as I see it.
2. Why do you imagine I would not have encountered this problem?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why is it up to 'the Muslim community' to root out this minority of sexual predators who are unlikely to be practising muslims anyway? Why is it not up to 'the Christian community' to root out all the white european nonces and rapists and sex pests (whether they ever go to church or not)?
> 
> Should Muslims walk around in t-shirts saying 'we condemn noncery'?


 
If it were really up to the "Christian" community or the indigenous community of the UK, people who rape children regardless of colour would be hung drawn and quartered.

Unfortunately, because we have a legal system designed to protect us from ourselves, mostly even the most evil predatory pedophiles are only locked up for a few years, then given new identities and released back into the community to re-offend.

So in light of the conviction and the clear evidence of grooming children for gang rape, why is it up to the muslim community to sort this out?

Because muslim lads will listen to muslim elders. They'll no more listen to Jack Straw as I would listen to Anjem Choudhary.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So it's ok to be sexist? What is your background? *Whatever community you are from needs to act now*.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Nah, they don't. What they have are "communities" where the majority are cultural Muslims, but even the most closed "communities" aren't self-selected ghettos of Islam, they're populated by people from different regions of the same country who share a nominal religious allegiance, plus people from other countries who share a nominal religious allegiance with them.



So you don't see these as being muslim communities?



> Thing is, there's often a lot of internal friction that gets missed out on because people are too busy talking about this or that community. There was a lot of aggro, for example, in Watford back in the early '90s, when Afghanis started arriving there and using the mosque, telling the local Ugandan and even northern Pakistani Muslims that they weren't "proper" Muslims.


 
Agreed, there is a kaleidescope of differing opinion within, and of course various flavours of islamic sects with all manner of set beliefs.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> The causes probably are social, in most cases. But the attitude that white non-muslims = unclean infidel whores is a mindset that enables such crimes to happen far more commonly than they should.


Same or similar mindsets exist everywhere, and don't need Islam as an excuse. In the Portuguese "community" in this neck of the woods back in the 70s, you found exactly that attitude to white non-Portuguese girls, especially if they weren't Catholic. Same in the Polish "community", the Ukrainian "community", and even the "indigenous" "communities". There's always an excuse, and that's all it fucking well is, an excuse.



> If one or two of the immams stood up and said "Allah will roast your testicles if you rape children" and a comparable attitude towards child rape as we infidels have (i.e. the majority of UK residents would probably like to see predatory paedophiles castrated) you can bet there would be less of this shit going on.


What makes you think that they don't? What leads you to believe that paedophilia is any more acceptable to the majority of Muslims than it is to, say the majority of Christians?
(Oh, and please don't trot out the "Mohammed boned and married a kiddy" thing. Very few Muslims use that as a justification for child marriage, let alone child rape.


> As it is - influential people from the muslim world tend to look the other way and even cover the problem up.


Influential people like who?


> Just like the Catholic priests did. So to me it is a religious/cultural thing.


No, it's a sick twisted fuck thing. The religious and cultural issues are excuses, not the reason(s) for such things happening.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> No pk. It is an observation of the way that you 'act'.



What, I'm obsessed because I like to see an argument through? Great logic there.



> 1. I do not refuse to accept the problem as I see it.


You don't apear to see it as much of a problem at all.



> 2. Why do you imagine I would not have encountered this problem?


Because you are a modestly dressed female with darker skin and thus not the usual target of the cultural anti-infidel abuse from the type of men we are discussing.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> If it were really up to the "Christian" community or the indigenous community of the UK, people who rape children regardless of colour would be hung drawn and quartered.



What? Your grasp of history leaves a lot to be desired.



pk said:


> So in light of the conviction and the clear evidence of grooming children for gang rape, why is it up to the muslim community to sort this out?
> 
> Because muslim lads will listen to muslim elders. They'll no more listen to Jack Straw as I would listen to Anjem Choudhary.


 
So the majority have no obligations to police their ethnic/religious/cultural 'communities', but minorities do? The lads who do this would no more listen to 'Muslim elders' (ffs) than they would to anybody else. Will all the white nominally anglican/CoE criminals listen if only the Archbishop of Canterbury told them crime was bad? I'm not sure if you're really naive or just unpleasant.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> So in light of the conviction and the clear evidence of grooming children for gang rape, why is it up to the muslim community to sort this out?
> 
> Because muslim lads will listen to muslim elders. They'll no more listen to Jack Straw as I would listen to Anjem Choudhary.



Both muslim community groups and immams already condemn this behaviour. So what is your point?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Because you are a modestly dressed female with darker skin and thus not the usual target of the cultural anti-infidel abuse from the type of men we are discussing.



Wait a minute we're all over the shop. Just a minute ago they were going for sikhs and hindus. Now women with darker skin aren't the usual target for anti-infidel mob. I'm confused.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Rape is far far less common in moslem countries than it is in say, South Africa.


 
bacha bazi.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Because muslim lads will listen to muslim elders.



As well as pointing out that the vast majority of muslim elders already condemn this behaviour why do you think that the muslim lads, who obviously don't follow the religion in any meaningful way and had never attended the mosque in all the time they were under surveillance would be influenced by them?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> So you don't see these as being muslim communities?


No, I don't.
I spent just over 2 years being fostered by a British Pakistani couple, back in the mid to late '70s. I'm fairly well aware of just how *unintegrated* with each other the various elements of this supposed "Muslim community" are. They spend more time dwelling on their differences than they do on what unites them, and the spectrum of adherence to the faith, even back then, ran from "as unobservant and non-attending as possible" to "pray five times a day at the mosque". Calling British Pakistanis (or indeed any ethnic or cultural minority) a "community" just because they live close/in what's perceived as an enclave doesn't make it so.



> Agreed, there is a kaleidescope of differing opinion within, and of course various flavours of islamic sects with all manner of set beliefs.


 
You better believe it!


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Because you are a modestly dressed female



How do you know this? You're not a stalker are you? It would seem to go hand in hand with your sexism. I still need to know what community you are from, they are clearly giving you some very dodgy views and need to be held to account.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> What? Your grasp of history leaves a lot to be desired.



I am of the opinion the if a full consensus were taken, most would opt to eradicate the problem of predatory pedophilia via surcical means, to put it mildly. Could be wrong.





> So the majority have no obligations to police their ethnic/religious/cultural 'communities', but minorities do? The lads who do this would no more listen to 'Muslim elders' (ffs) than they would to anybody else. Will all the white nominally anglican/CoE criminals listen if only the Archbishop of Canterbury told them crime was bad? I'm not sure if you're really naive or just unpleasant.


 
Your argument is flawed as the majority of UK indigenous people don't consider religious doctrine as the be all and end all of life's principles in the way islamic rules are strictly laid out in the Pakistani communities, that some now say don't exist.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You don't apear to see it as much of a problem at all.


 
I do see a problem, I don't though see the need to make it about something it isn't. 


> Because you are a modestly dressed female with darker skin and thus not the usual target of the cultural anti-infidel abuse from the type of men we are discussing.



An attempt at a diplomatic response, yet very telling about how you think.

1. I am not Muslim.
2. Two of the victims identify the same way as I do.
3. You have no clue how I dress...and by implication your statement suggests that these young girls were targeted because they dress less than 'modestly'. Good going.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Wait a minute we're all over the shop. Just a minute ago they were going for sikhs and hindus. Now women with darker skin aren't the usual target for anti-infidel mob. I'm confused.


 
Not if there's a risk they may be muslim girls, with brothers and fathers that would kill them outright.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

I think they just target vulnerable girls. And they're more likely to find non-muslim girls in shopping malls without their parents than muslim ones.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> As well as pointing out that the vast majority of muslim elders already condemn this behaviour why do you think that the muslim lads, who obviously don't follow the religion in any meaningful way and had never attended the mosque in all the time they were under surveillance would be influenced by them?


 
I think the notion that infidel girls = whores goes largely unchallenged, by certain people, and such a notion is in fact reinforced by extremists. Sexual jihad.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> I think they just target vulnerable girls. And they're more likely to find non-muslim girls in shopping malls without their parents than muslim ones.


 
Maybe it is that simple. I'm merely being honest about my take on it, prepared to be proved wrong and also prepared to be lambasted for opinions that I simply do not hold, as is the way of urban75.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> I think they just target vulnerable girls. And they're more likely to find non-muslim girls in shopping malls without their parents than muslim ones.


 
Stop being so sensible.... Posts like this do nothing to fuel the 'panic' many would like.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

Rapists tend to seek out the vulnerable. Perhaps they do prefer white girls for this kind of thing. Especially ones without fathers or brothers. Maybe they fear being killed if they mess around with their own sisters? Or maybe some of them do mess around with their own sisters. We don't have a complete picture based upon a newspaper article.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> I think they just target vulnerable girls. And they're more likely to find non-muslim girls in shopping malls without their parents than muslim ones.


 
By that logic wouldn't they have stiff competition from all the White, Black, Sikh, Hindu grooming gangs hoovering up the slutty 12year olds?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I am of the opinion the if a full consensus were taken, most would opt to eradicate the problem of predatory pedophilia via surcical means, to put it mildly. Could be wrong.



Whereas you think Pakistani Britons would be broadly permissive about noncing?



pk said:


> Your argument is flawed as the majority of UK indigenous people don't consider religious doctrine as the be all and end all of life's principles in the way islamic rules are strictly laid out in the Pakistani communities, that some now say don't exist.


 
More blind assertion. Do you believe these men are devout muslims? Not just nominally muslim because of their ethnic and cultural background? Do me a favour. They're as likely to be secular as the white men who do exactly the same, prey on the vulnerable.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> By that logic wouldn't they have stiff competition from all the White, Black, Sikh, Hindu grooming gangs hoovering up the slutty 12year olds?


 
Ever been to Blackpool?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> By that logic wouldn't they have stiff competition from all the White, Black, Sikh, Hindu grooming gangs hoovering up the slutty 12year olds?


 
Well I neither think that our streets are filled with paedophile rings, or that Muslims have a monopoly on that particular pastime.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Well I neither think that our streets are filled with paedophile rings, nor do I think Muslims have a monopoly on that particular pastime.


 
In the conext of these places they do and it would be right to look into the causes of it. And its not Muslims its Pakistanis from very poor backrounds.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> How do you know this? You're not a stalker are you? It would seem to go hand in hand with your sexism.


 
Go fuck yourself.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Ever been to Blackpool?


 
Only for rape.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

TopCat said:


> I can think of many threads here which have focused on sex abuse by Catholic Priests, teachers, friends, relatives, all sorts. Why should the abuse and rapes carried out by men of a Pakistani origin be ignored in your view?


 
It shouldn't. It hasn't been. What I am objecting to is the contention that this is specifically a problem related to the British Pakistani community. It isn't. In the case at the root of this one of the perpetrators is white and some of the victims are Muslim. Street grooming of vulnerable young women is something done by gangs from quite a range of cultures. The objectification and abuse of women who are seen as from other backgrounds is something that is done by ignorant neanderthals from just about every cultural group in the UK.

Every attempt in this thread to justify this as a specifically Pakistani problem has completely failed to hold water. So it is clearly a wider problem. My objection is that focussing on a completely false perception of the problem is not going to lead to effective solutions.

However I realise that the intention may not be to find any solutions. It may be more a case of posters wanting to prove their virtue by showing how viciously they would like to treat people they can safely label as evil, thereby assuming they will be counted as virtuous rather than shown to be somewhat bloodthirsty and determined to find fault as far away from themselves as possible.

If there was any evidence of systematic suppression of information by Mosques to protect the perpetrators of these abuses then it would be the same situation as with the Catholic Church. So far all I've seen is evidence that pretty much nobody at all is going to do anything but ensure these vicious bastards face the full weight of the law.

However there is a discussion to be had about the real issues. The resurgence of violently abusive sexism, and the existence of gangs preying sexually on vulnerable girls. Provided we actually discuss the issue rather than take part in a festival of islamophobia promoted by those who don't want to face the real issues and their dupes.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Stop being so sensible.... Posts like this do nothing to fuel the 'panic' many would like.


 
What "panic" ?

It's about 12 year old girls being groomed, and certain people turning a blind eye because they are scared of being labelled racist or islamophobic.

It may have escaped you attention but as we speak the UK forces are involved along with the US in bombing Pakistani villages.

Hardly a great leap of imagination to suggest that certain people of Pakistani heritage might be angry enough to see children as fair targets in a war.

Historically speaking and certainly when looking at specific islamic texts it is not unusual to use rape as a weapon of vengeance, especially when such sentiments are espoused by passionate clerics who see the infidel as crusaders and all the middle-ages shit that goes along with it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> In the conext of these places they do and it would be right to look into the causes of it. And its not Muslims its Pakistanis from very poor backrounds.


 
Poor backgrounds? Have you seen the kinds of cars they use as part of the grooming process?

I'm not from a poor background yet I never had access to a BM or a merc.

I've also read about Iraqis up to this kind of behaviour. It isn't just restricted to Pakistani Muslims unfortunately.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> In the conext of these places they do and it would be right to look into the causes of it. And its not Muslims its Pakistanis from very poor backrounds.


 
So if we accept your premise - and I'm still unconvinced - then it clearly has nothing to do with their faith (or lack of). Perhaps it is like every other social problem - ie has a social cause? Perhaps it is deprivation, isolation from wider society caused primarily by geo-political events beyond the control of yer average muslim, poverty, living in a society that is misogynistic to its core (and I'm not talking about Pakistan)? Just a thought.

What about all those suicides in Bridgend last year? Must mean the Welsh are depressives, they get it from the hymns and the chapels.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

> Do you believe these men are devout muslims? Not just nominally muslim because of their ethnic and cultural background? Do me a favour. *They're as likely to be secular as the white men who do exactly the same, prey on the vulnerable*.



Exactly.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Poor backgrounds? Have you seen the kinds of cars they use as part of the grooming process?
> 
> I'm not from a poor background yet I never had access to a BM or a merc.
> 
> I've also read about Iraqis up to this kind of behaviour. It isn't just restricted to Pakistani Muslims unfortunately.


 
I've known people in hostels own beamers its all image they proberly live with parents.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> What I am objecting to is the contention that this is specifically a problem related to the British Pakistani community. It isn't. In the case at the root of this one of the perpetrators is white and *some of the victims are Muslim*.



And your evidence for the bit in bold is?



> Street grooming of vulnerable young women is something done by gangs from quite a range of cultures. The objectification and abuse of women who are seen as from other backgrounds is something that is done by ignorant neanderthals from just about every cultural group in the UK.



I don't recall any stories of UK white men grooming young muslim girls or chinese or any other cultural group for vicious gang rape.



> Every attempt in this thread to justify this as a specifically Pakistani problem has completely failed to hold water.



Apart from all those muslim leaders who spoke up to applaud Mr Straw's comments that is...



> However I realise that the intention may not be to find any solutions. It may be more a case of posters wanting to prove their virtue by showing how viciously they would like to treat people they can safely label as evil, thereby assuming they will be counted as virtuous rather than shown to be somewhat bloodthirsty and determined to find fault as far away from themselves as possible.



Yeah, so I'm typing all this to show how virtuous I am? Wow. Great insight. Shame it's wrong.



> If there was any evidence of systematic suppression of information by Mosques to protect the perpetrators of these abuses then it would be the same situation as with the Catholic Church. So far all I've seen is evidence that pretty much nobody at all is going to do anything but ensure these vicious bastards face the full weight of the law.



There is evidence that muslim communities like to keep their oddballs quiet and not rock the boat. I gave a prime example earlier in the thread with regard to the Swedish suicide bomber, thrown out of the mosque 3 years ago for his abhorrent beliefs, yet the security services were not informed.



> However there is a discussion to be had about the real issues. The resurgence of violently abusive sexism, and the existence of gangs preying sexually on vulnerable girls. Provided we actually discuss the issue rather than take part in a festival of islamophobia promoted by those who don't want to face the real issues and their dupes.


 
Had there genuinely been muslim victims in this case - then we would not be having this discussion. I've seen no evidence to support the fact that the victims of this gang were anything but vulnerable non-muslim children.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> I've known people in hostels own beamers its all image they proberly live with parents.


 
Right. So people from a poor background have parents with higher range cars?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Poor backgrounds? Have you seen the kinds of cars they use as part of the grooming process?
> 
> I'm not from a poor background yet I never had access to a BM or a merc.
> 
> I've also read about Iraqis up to this kind of behaviour. It isn't just restricted to Pakistani Muslims unfortunately.



I'm sure it isn't. That Iraqi lads are doing it too kinda lends more weight to the idea that there may possibly be an issue with islamic views on western women then, don't you think?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 10, 2011)

> festival of islamophobia


Can i get a ticket for that?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm sure it isn't. That Iraqi lads are doing it too kinda lends more weight to the idea that there may possibly be an issue with islamic views on western women then, don't you think?


 
Muslims have been in the UK for a long time. Why do you think this issue didn't raise its head before, if its because of what is written in the koran?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm sure it isn't. That Iraqi lads are doing it too kinda lends more weight to the idea that there may possibly be an issue with islamic views on western women then, don't you think?


 
Possibly. Or if they're culturally conditioned that women shouldn't leave the house unless fully robed then encounter women that don't follow those codes. But then they're not the only male rapists on the block, are they?


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So if we accept your premise - and I'm still unconvinced - then it clearly has nothing to do with their faith (or lack of). Perhaps it is like every other social problem - ie has a social cause? Perhaps it is deprivation, isolation from wider society caused primarily by geo-political events beyond the control of yer average muslim, poverty, living in a society that is misogynistic to its core (and I'm not talking about Pakistan)? Just a thought.



Thats what I'm getting at and it is significant that the specific political interpration of their religion tied up in this conflict is popular with this demographic.



> What about all those suicides in Bridgend last year? Must mean the Welsh are depressives, they get it from the hymns and the chapels.


I've been to valleys there was only like 20 minutes of daylight.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Muslims have been in the UK for a long time. Why do you think this issue didn't raise its head before, if its because of what is written in the koran?


 
I don't think the levels of unemployment and drug abuse/dealing have been seen before, which is of course a major factor.

We haven't seen young muslim men radicalised to the point of strapping suicide belts before.

Also, I do think this is an issue that has been going on for a lot longer than people are prepared to accept, only now we have Jack Straw addressing it and all of a sudden senior muslim figures welcoming his comments and agreeing that there is a specific problem.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Possibly. Or if they're culturally conditioned that women shouldn't leave the house unless fully robed then encounter women that don't follow those codes.



Ummm, so these immodest children are asking for trouble? Not women. Children.



> But then they're not the only male rapists on the block, are they?



No, but they do appear to be the only ones that prey only on non-muslim children.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Thats what I'm getting at and it is significant that the specific political interpration of their religion tied up in this conflict is popular with this demographic.



Clearly some are going to turn towards radical Islamism, even superficially if not actively. For the same reason that some Catholic youth in NI are going to turn, at least superficially if not actively, towards hardline Irish republicanism, or some black youth in America turn towards black nationalism. Isolation, identity, inequality. It's a consequence not the cause.



IC3D said:


> I've been to valleys there was only like 20 minutes of daylight.


 
I do suspect Bridgend was a major factor in the suicide epidemic.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I don't think the levels of unemployment and drug abuse/dealing have been seen before, which is of course a major factor.
> 
> We haven't seen young muslim men radicalised to the point of strapping suicide belts before.


 
So nothing to do with Islamic views then?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> An attempt at a diplomatic response, yet very telling about how you think.
> 
> 1. I am not Muslim.



I never once inferred that you were.



> 2. Two of the victims identify the same way as I do.



What, being 12 years old?



> 3. You have no clue how I dress...and by implication your statement suggests that these young girls were targeted because they dress less than 'modestly'. Good going.


 
Sorry but I'm sure we have met several times and attended the same parties on at least ten occasions. 
I do have a pretty good idea of what you look like otherwise I would not have commented thus.

Feel free to call me a sexist if it makes you feel like you're achieving anything though.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So nothing to do with Islamic views then?


 
I think it has much to do with the notion that islamic law is the only law, that infidel law in the UK, being that we are engaged at war with Pakistani border towns, should be dismissed.

These rapists are going to try to use every excuse in the book to excuse what they did, but do you not accept that the violent rhetoric towards women in general, specifically non-believers, is going to play a major role in the mindset of these child rapists? 
Especially given the fact that there has been zero evidence offered yet that their victims were occasionally muslim children.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> I think they just target vulnerable girls. And they're more likely to find non-muslim girls in shopping malls without their parents than muslim ones.



Agree.



> I think the notion that infidel girls = whores goes largely unchallenged, by certain people, and such a notion is in fact reinforced by extremists. *Sexual jihad.*





> Hardly a great leap of imagination to suggest that certain people of Pakistani heritage might be angry enough to see children as fair targets in a war.



You are a total tool. Despite no evidence for this at all, and the fact that the people in the OP were never seen at the mosque you come out with this. You're an idiot.



> I don't recall any stories of UK white men grooming young muslim girls or chinese or any other cultural group for vicious gang rape.



Loads of evidence of white men going out to Thailand to abuse women.



> Apart from all those muslim leaders who spoke up to applaud Mr Straw's comments that is...



So on one hand muslim leaders are condemning this behaviour on the other they are calling for sexual jihad. Which is it?

Still not a single mention of anything practical that can be done by the way.


----------



## N_igma (Jan 10, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> Can i get a ticket for that?


 
The tickets cost a bomb I wouldn't waste my money on it.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> What some of us are trying to say is that they are all problems that need to be dealt with, and the way to deal with them is to attack the attitude that women or children can be used as property regardless of what sort of person holds that attitude. Otherwise you simply create a situation where it is assumed that it's only a problem when "they" (Catholics, Muslims, the middle class, aliens) do it, and not when "we" do.


While I don't disagree with what you say, you don't find solutions to specific problems by looking at the issue in a generic way. The reasons why peadophile Catholic priests abuse children is different to the reason some Muslim men abuse young girls (right there you see a difference - young children (mainly boys) as opposed to young girls). Both are real problems that happen and both need to be addressed.

There are clear parallels between both issues which is basically the discouragement of sex - completely against human nature - which is where the problem comes from. However, there are clear differences between the two meaning the solutions will also be different - and you will only identify those solutions by addressing the issues separately.

The paedophile Catholic priest abuses young boys because they are required to remain celibate. The urge is too difficult to overcome for some and they find their outlet with vulnerable children they come into contact in their position of trust. A fairly obvious solution there is to end the celibacy rules (altho I'm sure it's not unheard of, but how many times do vicars appear in the papers for organised mass child abuse scandals?)

But allowing priests to marry is hardly going to address the issue of the sexual exploitation of young girls by Muslim men is it? The culture of Muslim communities in the UK discourages sex before marriage, but more than that, in most cases the marriage will be arranged (meaning you could end up someone you're not even sexually attracted to). Another issue is the fetishisation of virgins (not that all culture don't, but it appears more apparant in Muslim communities - for example, vigins as a reward in Heaven, the rest of us non-Muslims just have to make do with meeting up with our loved ones!). You must be a virgin when you marry, and by 'you', I mean the woman. So, like _some_ Catholic priests, _some_ Muslim men cannot overcome this sexual frustration and it manifests itself by targeting non-Muslim (so I do object to the notion they are targeting just white girls), young girls (they don't appear to be turned on by young boys/girls like Gary Glitter but want what they can pretend is a virgin - that's just my opinion, might not be true). 

The factors above are quite specific (but obviously not confined) to Muslim communities as other cultures won't have the same attitudes towards sex and therefore the frustrations won't be the same. However, I don't think it's possible to tell how widespread this is (define "widespread" for a start!) and obviously this is not as bigger issue as "white"/"traditional" paedophiles but I just don't think they are the same issue due to the reasons and motivations of the offenders. 

Pretty much everyone on U75 acknowledges the problem in the Catholic Church (evident by the sheer number of threads on the issue and the comments, which on this thread would be considered racist by some) yet when it comes to a specific problem within the Muslim community many on U75 seems to have a huge problem recognising the issue and instead have to list every other culture's sex offending problems or simply accuse those commenting as being racist.

Every culture/community has problems, we should feel free to criticise, debate and address those problems without fear of being labelled racist, and sadly, the left live in absolute fear of being called racist (or they just enjoy calling other people racist, one or the other!)


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Despite no evidence for this at all, and the fact that the people in the OP were never seen at the mosque you come out with this. You're an idiot.



Plenty of evidence posted on this thread already. You choose not to see it, that's your problem.






> Loads of evidence of white men going out to Thailand to abuse women.



Loads of evidence Chinese men make up the majority of Thai brothel punters. 
We've done this already, it's irrelevant.
The only reason white pedophiles go there is because of the permissive laws. 
Lending weight to my assertion that a relaxed or don't ask don't tell attitude toward the sexual proclivities of men from certain cultures fosters abuse.



> So one one hand muslim leaders are condemning this behaviour on the other they are calling for sexual jihad. Which is it?



Yeah because the leaders praising straw are the same who bang on about infidels. You're the tool pal.



> Still not a single mention of anything practical that can be done by the way.


 
Go on then - start the ball rolling.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I think it has much to do with the notion that islamic law is the only law, that infidel law in the UK, being that we are engaged at war with Pakistani border towns, should be dismissed.
> 
> These rapists are going to try to use every excuse in the book to excuse what they did, but do you not accept that the violent rhetoric towards women in general, specifically non-believers, is going to play a major role in the mindset of these child rapists?
> Especially given the fact that there has been zero evidence offered yet that their victims were occasionally muslim children.


 
Why do you think these young men are more exposed to Anjem Choudury & co than they are to the TV, to music, to Facebook, to mainstream British culture? Where do you think we live, in some gender equal utopia?

By your own admission this is about poverty, class, alienation, imperialism - why do you insist it is also to do with 'Islamic values'? If 'Islamic values' were the cause then why aren't we reading stories about Catholic or Jewish gangs? Do you think 'Catholic values' or 'Jewish values' are any more progressive? That their religious tracts aren't also communalist, misogynistic, patriarchal, full of venom for outsiders and non-believers? You're entire argument is contradiction and speculation.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Loads of evidence of white men going out to Thailand to abuse women.


You see I just don't understand this logic - are you excusing the sexual exploitation of young girls by some Muslim men just because some white people go to Thailand to sexually abuse children? Or, are you acknowledging that both are a problem, no matter how widespread or not, that need addressing?


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

IC3D said:


> By that logic wouldn't they have stiff competition from all the White, Black, Sikh, Hindu grooming gangs hoovering up the slutty 12year olds?


 
In South London they wouldn't get a look in after the more vicious neighborhood gangs had done their thing. For fucks sake this sort of thing isn't only happening in Blackburn, and if those of you determined to pretend it's only a problem amongst a small group of Pakistanis in the North West got your heads out of the bloody sand you might learn something.

http://www.northwichguardian.co.uk/news/8771104.Businessman__45__denies__grooming__girl__15/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gang-rape-is-it-a-race-issue-1711381.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/14/sex-trafficking-gang-young-virgins

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/boys-convicted-over-mass-rape-by-street-gang-1340839.html

I could go find plenty more. There's no shortage of it. This country is not short of men who treat women as worthless, and they aren't limited to any particular community. It's a serious problem that won't be sorted out by fixating on one single aspect of it.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> While I don't disagree with what you say, you don't find solutions to specific problems by looking at the issue in a generic way. The reasons why peadophile Catholic priests abuse children is different to the reason some Muslim men abuse young girls (right there you see a difference - young children (mainly boys) as opposed to young girls). Both are real problems that happen and both need to be addressed.
> 
> There are clear parallels between both issues which is basically the discouragement of sex - completely against human nature - which is where the problem comes from. However, there are clear differences between the two meaning the solutions will also be different - and you will only identify those solutions by addressing the issues separately.
> 
> ...


 
The main difference between the two is that in the former, it was ordained members of the church abusing kids, which was subsequently covered up by the church at the highest level. Whereas the latter is young lads who think they are gangsters and are, in all likelihood, about as muslim as I am christian. So not similar at all.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> The main difference between the two is that in the former, it was ordained members of the church abusing kids, which was subsequently covered up by the church at the highest level. Whereas the latter is young lads who think they are gangsters and are, in all likelihood, about as muslim as I am christian. So not similar at all.


Whether they 'act' Muslim is not the point. The point is the culture they have grown up in (which IS Muslim)


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why do you think these young men are more exposed to Anjem Choudury & co than they are to the TV, to music, to Facebook, to mainstream British culture? Where do you think we live, in some gender equal utopia?
> 
> By your own admission this is about poverty, class, alienation, imperialism - why do you insist it is also to do with 'Islamic values'? If 'Islamic values' were the cause then why aren't we reading stories about Catholic or Jewish gangs? Do you think 'Catholic values' or 'Jewish values' are any more progressive? That their religious tracts aren't also communalist, misogynistic, patriarchal, full of venom for outsiders and non-believers? You're entire argument is contradiction and speculation.


 
I am speculating for the sake or argument, as are others on the opposite side of the argument.

But I do think that these jihadi romeos (a term you can Google for a far less UK-centric perspective on the issue) are a real problem, and that to deny it is doing a disservice to the children that fall victim.

I think these wannabe gangsters with their BMWs and their bling feel a sense of empowerment that comes with the Choudary "fear us, we iz muslim gangstas innit".

Same way hardcore rap music reinforces the gang mentality, and indeed the sexism.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> You see I just don't understand this logic - are you excusing the sexual exploitation of young girls by some Muslim men just because some white people go to Thailand to sexually abuse children? Or, are you acknowledging that both are a problem, no matter how widespread or not, that need addressing?


 
He's (One_Stop_Shop) just repeating old irrelevant comments that have already been discussed. Not sure why.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Whether they 'act' Muslim is not the point. The point is the culture they have grown up in (which IS Muslim)


 
No it isn't. For a start, what the fuck is 'the muslim culture'? I can safely say their experience of growing up is a lot closer to a non-muslim british youth than it is to a Pakistani in Pakistan. Neither you, nor pk, can provide one single tangible link between Islam and the actions of these secular British youths. Because there isn't one. These kids are taught in state comps, not fucking madrases.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I am speculating for the sake or argument, as are others on the opposite side of the argument.
> 
> But I do think that these jihadi romeos (a term you can Google for a far less UK-centric perspective on the issue) are a real problem, and that to deny it is doing a disservice to the children that fall victim.
> 
> ...


 
So how is that different from "fear us, we iz white/black/Chinese/Maori gangstas innit"? How does it tie in with religion?


----------



## rover07 (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You can't accept for a second that there is anything shady going on with regard to non-muslim children and predatory muslim pedophiles egged on by radical beliefs that reduce women to the level of animals.





So now you think there are gangs of Islamic paedophiles roaming the streets!


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No it isn't. For a start, what the fuck is 'the muslim culture'? *I can safely say* their experience of growing up is a lot closer to a non-muslim british youth than it is to a Pakistani in Pakistan. Neither you, nor pk, can provide one single tangible link between Islam and the actions of these secular British youths. Because there isn't one. These kids are taught in state comps, not fucking madrases.


 
How can you "safely say" anything about these lads? You know nothing about their upbringing. I can see from news reports that they both had arranged marriages for starters, which renders your point about "their experience of growing up is a lot closer to a non-muslim british youth than it is to a Pakistani in Pakistan" completely untrue.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> However I realise that the intention may not be to find any solutions. It may be more a case of posters wanting to prove their virtue by showing how viciously they would like to treat people they can safely label as evil, thereby assuming they will be counted as virtuous rather than shown to be somewhat bloodthirsty and determined to find fault as far away from themselves as possible.



Eric, you can come out of your shell a bit more. Name the evil ones who dare disagree with you.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

rover07 said:


> So now you think there are gangs of Islamic paedophiles roaming the streets!


 
Keep your hand over your face, you may as well, you're clearly blind to any of the issues that have been discussed here.

You clearly don't think there are often racist and sexist attitudes towards UK white women from young impressionable muslim men - keep your eyes shut.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

PK: If was just or mainly about Islam you'd expect similar things to be happening in places like Newham and Tower Hamlets with Bangladeshi men preying on white girls. But afaik there's no sign that's happening.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No it isn't. For a start, what the fuck is 'the muslim culture'? I can safely say their experience of growing up is a lot closer to a non-muslim british youth than it is to a Pakistani in Pakistan. Neither you, nor pk, can provide one single tangible link between Islam and the actions of these secular British youths. Because there isn't one. These kids are taught in state comps, not fucking madrases.


55% of British Pakistanis are married to their first cousin, how exactly does that experience closely mirror that of non-Muslims?

I'm not attempting to link these sex offenders to their religion (I'm sure they are about as Muslim as I am Christian, as you point out) but to the culture they were brought up in - call it British-Pakistani or Muslim or Asian or whatever you want - but it is a specific culture...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> How can you "safely say" anything about these lads? You know nothing about their upbringing. I can see from news reports that they both had arranged marriages for starters, which renders your point about "their experience of growing up is a lot closer to a non-muslim british youth than it is to a Pakistani in Pakistan" completely untrue.


 
No it doesn't. Do you think they live in caves isolated from everybody else? They live in the UK, they are exposed to 'British culture' every single day. This is blindingly obvious. The dominant cultural influences on them will be the same as with the rest of us. Does the bling and the BMW's and the recreational drug use come from their 'Islamic values' ffs?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So how is that different from "fear us, we iz white/black/Chinese/Maori gangstas innit"? How does it tie in with religion?


 
White black chinese etc. don't have specific religious doctrines to back up their sick attitudes towards women. Nor are honour killings a protected aspect of their belief system.
And ten thousand people marching today in Pakistan to uphold the death penalty for blasphemy are not doing so to protect women or non islamic belief.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 10, 2011)

IMR said:


> PK: If was just or mainly about Islam you'd expect similar things to be happening in places like Newham and Tower Hamlets with Bangladeshi men preying on white girls. But afaik there's no sign that's happening.


 
Actually it is to some extent. It's happening in many parts of London, but on a basis of geographical gangs rather than culturally based gangs. I'd be amazed if there aren't any largely Bengali gangs in East London who have been involved. However it isn't a question of the race of the victims (nor is it in the originally mentioned case, where not all the victims were white).


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> 55% of British Pakistanis are married to their first cousin, how exactly does that experience closely mirror that of non-Muslims?



So? Does that mean they don't read the papers, or go to shops, or watch telly, or listen to the radio, or go to work or school or college? Do they only watch Pakistani telly? Do they go weeks or months without seeing a white face in their 'muslim community'?



CyberRose said:


> I'm not attempting to link these sex offenders to their religion (I'm sure they are about as Muslim as I am Christian, as you point out) but to the culture they were brought up in - call it British-Pakistani or Muslim or Asian or whatever you want - but it is a specific culture...


 
So, if it was the culture they were 'brought up in', how come it's a recent phenomenon? How come we have gangs of white and black youths in London and Manchester and all over the fucking place who are repeatedly gang-raping vulnerable young women, using rape as a weapon? I heard all these attitudes about women when I was a young lad, that rape was okay, even funny, that women are not as important as men, that it's a man's world, that taking advantage of drunk vulnerable women was a bit of a laugh - and I went to a school with maybe three or four muslims in it. It's everywhere, not just in asian areas.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No it doesn't. Do you think they live in caves isolated from everybody else? They live in the UK, they are exposed to 'British culture' every single day. This is blindingly obvious. The dominant cultural influences on them will be the same as with the rest of us. Does the bling and the BMW's and the recreational drug use come from their 'Islamic values' ffs?



That would go against the 'availability' explanation, which has a lot going for it, imo. It depends on cultural differences in the way children are brought up and what they're allowed to do.

You don't need to be told this, but the poorer end of the working class has been hammered over the last three decades. A lot of the old community and family structures have all but been destroyed among white working class people living in what were once industrial towns. This makes children in what's left of those communities more vulnerable. In contrast, British Pakistanis have probably fared better at keeping their extended family structures intact. There's likely to be stricter control over what time girls are allowed out until, and more eyes and ears to watch out for them.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So, if it was the culture they were 'brought up in', how come it's a recent phenomenon? How come we have gangs of white and black youths in London and Manchester and all over the fucking place who are repeatedly gang-raping vulnerable young women, using rape as a weapon? I heard all these attitudes about women when I was a young lad, that rape was okay, even funny, that women are not as important as men, that it's a man's world, that taking advantage of drunk vulnerable women was a bit of a laugh - and I went to a school with maybe three or four muslims in it. It's everywhere, not just in asian areas.


 
Fucks sake it IS NOT a recent phenomenon. It's been hushed up for fear of inciting islamophobia.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Actually it is to some extent. It's happening in many parts of London, but on a basis of geographical gangs rather than culturally based gangs. I'd be amazed if there aren't any largely Bengali gangs in East London who have been involved. However it isn't a question of the race of the victims (nor is it in the originally mentioned case, where not all the victims were white).



That's a reasonable and interesting bit of info, thank you. I don't really want to row with you, especially as we actually knew each other a little bit as teenagers (you may be surprised to know: Andy Martin-Foulden Road-LMC scene.)


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Actually it is to some extent. It's happening in many parts of London, but on a basis of geographical gangs rather than culturally based gangs. I'd be amazed if there aren't any largely Bengali gangs in East London who have been involved. However it isn't a question of the race of the victims (nor is it in the originally mentioned case, where not all the victims were white).



Evidence of Bengali gangs doing same please.

And evidence that the victims were sometimes muslim please.

I don't believe a word .


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> White black chinese etc. don't have specific religious doctrines to back up their sick attitudes towards women. Nor are honour killings a protected aspect of their belief system.
> And ten thousand people marching today in Pakistan to uphold the death penalty for blasphemy are not doing so to protect women or non islamic belief.


 
What 'specific religious doctrines' are you thinking of?

Honour killings are not limited to muslims. What about similar or equally vile practices committed throughout the world in non-muslim communities? Why is it Islam when it's muslims but it isn't Christianity, or Hinduism, or Judaism, or whatever, when it happens elsewhere?

And again - their lifestyle seems very secular and a lot closer to mainstream British youth culture than to Pakistani culture.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> What 'specific religious doctrines' are you thinking of?



I've listed several, specifically regarding infidel women as "war booty".



> Honour killings are not limited to muslims. What about similar or equally vile practices committed throughout the world in non-muslim communities? Why is it Islam when it's muslims but it isn't Christianity, or Hinduism, or Judaism, or whatever, when it happens elsewhere?



It's nowhere near as big a problem, and the communities you mention don't have the same presence here.



> And again - their lifestyle seems very secular and a lot closer to mainstream British youth culture than to Pakistani culture.


 
Apart from the arranged marriages and the long beards and robes worn to court.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

IMR said:


> That would go against the 'availability' explanation, which has a lot going for it, imo. It depends on cultural differences in the way children are brought up and what they're allowed to do.
> 
> You don't need to be told this, but the poorer end of the working class has been hammered over the last three decades. A lot of the old community and family structures have all but been destroyed among white working class people living in what were once industrial towns. This makes children in what's left of those communities more vulnerable. In contrast, British Pakistanis have probably fared better at keeping their extended family structures intact. There's likely to be stricter control over what time girls are allowed out until, and more eyes and ears to watch out for them.


 
Yeah, I'd agree with this. I was trying to make the point that if there is a specific social problem with regard to British Pakistanis then the operative word here is British not Pakistani. It's a social problem that has been created here, as a result of all sorts of preceding social problems and cultural influences, the majority of which will be secular, Western cultural influences, hence the imitation of pop-culture gangsters.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah, I'd agree with this. I was trying to make the point that if there is a specific social problem with regard to British Pakistanis then the operative word here is British not Pakistani. It's a social problem that has been created here, as a result of all sorts of preceding social problems and cultural influences, the majority of which will be secular, Western cultural influences, hence the imitation of pop-culture gangsters.


 
With respect, this is simply not true.

It is not a problem unique to the UK. Identical problems are found in every single place where large muslim communities are established within non-muslim ones.

Scandanavia, India, Canada, Australia - all have similar stories of such grooming. Google it!


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So? Does that mean they don't read the papers, or go to shops, or watch telly, or listen to the radio, or go to work or school or college? Do they only watch Pakistani telly? Do they go weeks or months without seeing a white face in their 'muslim community'?


Don't understand your point. You're telling us all that Pakistanis are brought up the same as the rest of the country, but with 55% having an arranged marriage with their cousin (which means that's not even the total amount of arranged marriages) that to me is quite an important difference. I also think it's one of the causes why some Muslim men commit the offences that are the topic of this thread. 

What's your view of arranged marriages, as an aside?



> So, if it was the culture they were 'brought up in', how come it's a recent phenomenon? How come we have gangs of white and black youths in London and Manchester and all over the fucking place who are repeatedly gang-raping vulnerable young women, using rape as a weapon? I heard all these attitudes about women when I was a young lad, that rape was okay, even funny, that women are not as important as men, that it's a man's world, that taking advantage of drunk vulnerable women was a bit of a laugh - and I went to a school with maybe three or four muslims in it. It's everywhere, not just in asian areas.


Maybe I'm from a better upbringing that you but I certainly don't know anyone who thinks rape is ok!

But again, you're bringing up problems associated with other cultures into this debate - I doubt anyone in the Catholic paedo-priest threads brought any other community's problems up to compare against, they just got on with valid criticism without having to resort to that - altho I know you're not, it makes you appear to be doing a Keith Vaz and pretending this isn't an issue when clearly it is.

That's not to say it's also not a problem in other communities/cultures because it is, but, you need to look at the individual communities/cultures to identify the specific causes because otherwise you don't find the solutions.

Let me give you an example...domestic violence...this problem affects all communities no matter what the culture. And women's charities say it occurs in similar proportions in all ethnic groups (meaning no ethic group experiences it more that others). But do you think the causes of domestic violence in Muslim communities are the same causes as in non-Muslim communities? No. In Non-Muslim communities alcohol plays a huge part, but alcohol is not drunk to the same extent by the Muslim community (it at all). The domestic violence there is likely a result of arranged marriages (with the concept of women as property or simply that you got matched with the wrong woman/man to make the relationship work) - altho many causes will be shared but you can see that there are specific factors that affect specific communities.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I've listed several, specifically regarding infidel women as "war booty".



Can you find any in the Bible or Tanakh or fucking Loaded?




pk said:


> It's nowhere near as big a problem, and the communities you mention don't have the same presence here.



Isn't it? Don't they? Do you intend to back up your blind assertion?




pk said:


> Apart from the arranged marriages and the long beards and robes worn to court.


 
My two married brothers both got married in chapels, both christened all their kids. Wow, they must be bible-bashers. Oh, actually, both are secular and probably atheist. Ah.

And a great many defendants find god, I wonder why.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> With respect, this is simply not true.
> 
> It is not a problem unique to the UK. Identical problems are found in every single place where large muslim communities are established within non-muslim ones.
> 
> Scandanavia, India, Canada, Australia - all have similar stories of such grooming. Google it!


 
I'm not sure how much of these claims are realistic and how much are hysteria, but even accepting it for the sake of argument, do you suppose that maybe some of the same social forces in the UK which have served to alienate young muslims might also be at play in 'Scandanavia, India, Canada, Australia'?


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> My two married brothers both got married in chapels, both christened all their kids. Wow, they must be bible-bashers. Oh, actually, both are secular and probably atheist. Ah.


You appear to have difficulty distinguishing between culture and religion...


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm not sure how much of these claims are realistic and how much are hysteria, but even accepting it for the sake of argument, do you suppose that maybe some of the same social forces in the UK which have served to alienate young muslims might also be at play in 'Scandanavia, India, Canada, Australia'?


 
Does that mean they are merely products of their environment? Should we pander more to the hyper-sensitive demands and obligations laid out in islamic law?

You still appear to think this is a new problem - it very clearly isn't - it's been going on for decades.



> On-street grooming is a well-established, lucrative and successful method of coercion of young people that has been around for more than a decade, Gill Gibbons from the Coalition for the Removal of Pimping (Crop), said.
> 
> "I don't think it's particularly new I'm afraid," she said, "I think it's been going on for many, many years; it's just that what's new is that there is an increased awareness that it is going on.
> 
> ...



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ight-growing-list-of-abuse-cases-2178848.html


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Everything Mr Straw said is unfortunately true.
> 
> It needs to be confronted, no matter how uncomfortable, and it needs to be addressed.
> 
> ...



Entirely true I'm afraid

I have known Asian lads from Bradford who were horrified by their Dads suggestion they only fuck white girls, even well off Sikhs who got that advice from their parents here in the south

It is not unusual for this advice to be handed on

Dont blame Straw, its true, its very, very true


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> You appear to have difficulty distinguishing between culture and religion...


 
No, I think you do, hence why I used the example I did. My brothers followed a traditional route into marriage and family not because of any religious conviction but because it was, well, traditional. Do you see?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 10, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> Can i get a ticket for that?


 
No doubt PK will put you on the guest list next to some impressionable poster that he is grooming.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Does that mean they are merely products of their environment?


 
Everything is a product of its environment ffs. What else do you think produces it?


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm not sure how much of these claims are realistic and how much are hysteria, but even accepting it for the sake of argument, do you suppose that maybe some of the same social forces in the UK which have served to alienate young muslims might also be at play in 'Scandanavia, India, Canada, Australia'?



It may not suit your "noble savage" condescension but its an established pattern which I have seen first hand

PK is ENTIRELY correct on this


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No, I think you do, hence why I used the example I did. My brothers followed a traditional route into marriage and family not because of any religious conviction but because it was, well, traditional. Do you see?


Traditional to who?


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No, I think you do, hence why I used the example I did. My brothers followed a traditional route into marriage and family not because of any religious conviction but because it was, well, traditional. Do you see?



So, did yer Dad ever tell them to fuck immigrants?

You know, before they got married to a "decent" English Rose?


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Everything is a product of its environment ffs. What else do you think produces it?



And thats it?

Cant blame the Toffs for shitting on you then eh?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Can you find any in the Bible or Tanakh or fucking Loaded?



I can't see any observed text that is adhered to today by followers of those religions that suggests the rape of muslim women is justifiable in war.

Might be able to find some on a right wing US gun nut forum, but I ain't looking.



> Isn't it? Don't they? Do you intend to back up your blind assertion?



I'm not the one making as many blind assertions as you. 

Still waiting for a scrap of evidence that Bengali gangs are involved in grooming children for rape from you, and also still waiting for evidence to back up YOUR blind assertion that the child victims of this case were sometimes muslim.



> My two married brothers both got married in chapels, both christened all their kids. Wow, they must be bible-bashers. Oh, actually, both are secular and probably atheist. Ah.



Completely irrelevant to the topic, but I wish them both a happy marriage regardless.



> And a great many defendants find god, I wonder why.


 
It's the _type_ of "god" they find that interests me. And the need to kill people who speak ill of this "god".


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm not the one making as many blind assertions as you.


 
Lol.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> No doubt PK will put you on the guest list next to some impressionable poster that he is grooming.


 
And a round of applause for that, really intelligent stuff. Shame you don't have a view yourself, or are too afraid to tell us what that might be...


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol.


 
You can LOL all you like - I'll still be here waiting for you to prove the assertions you have made, after asking you repeatedly. I won't hold my breath.

Here's a reminder:

- Still waiting for a scrap of evidence that Bengali gangs are involved in grooming children for rape from you.

- Still waiting for evidence to back up YOUR blind assertion that the child victims of this case were sometimes muslim.

I've already debunked your myth that this is somehow a new phenomenon.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> It's the _type_ of "god" they find that interests me. And the need to kill people who speak ill of this "god".


 
Lol again. You now claiming that these nonces are also slaying infidels on the streets of the north west? Do you see Islam as more barbaric than other religions?


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You can LOL all you like - I'll still be here waiting for you to prove the assertions you have made, after asking you repeatedly. I won't hold my breath.


Don't hold your breath, PT denies there's such a thing as British-Pakistani culture so I doubt you'll get anything credible out of him (what type of person denies a peoples' culture btw...)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

i think it's game set and match to pk


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol again. You now claiming that these nonces are also slaying infidels on the streets of the north west? Do you see Islam as more barbaric than other religions?


 
than all other religions or than some select competitors?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You can LOL all you like - I'll still be here waiting for you to prove the assertions you have made, after asking you repeatedly. I won't hold my breath.
> 
> Here's a reminder:
> 
> ...


 
You appear to have me confused for somebody else. You are just a rabid little bigot btw, there's my assertion for the night.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Don't hold your breath, PT denies there's such a thing as British-Pakistani culture so I doubt you'll get anything credible out of him (what type of person denies a peoples' culture btw...)


 
No, it was 'muslim culture' and the fact you consider them interchangeable is telling.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol again. You now claiming that these nonces are also slaying infidels on the streets of the north west?



No I'm not. Are you being intentionally thick or is this coming naturally?

I'm saying tens of thousands of Pakistanis marched today in Karachi to ensure the death penalty for blasphemy stays law. 

http://www.rferl.org/content/pakistani_rally_blasphemy_law/2271406.html



> Do you see Islam as more barbaric than other religions?


 
Absolutely 100 percent yes. I do. Do you disagree?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Apart from the arranged marriages and the long beards and robes worn to court.



Have you looked at the pics in the media?...When they were arrested they were not robed or bearded...they were not living a devout Muslim life, PT is right IMO, their behaviour was 'closer to mainstream British youth culture',  that they have chosen to take on this appearance now, during court is completely another thing and you know it!


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> (what type of person denies a peoples' culture btw...)


 
The BNP - in my view. They're the type cruel enough for that nonsense.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it's game set and match to pk


 
Pickman's, have you lost it? We've got three of them now coming out with any old bollocks which boils down to 'oh noes teh muzlims'. The only way they are winning is by sheer volume.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> You appear to have me confused for somebody else. You are just a rabid little bigot btw, there's my assertion for the night.


 
Off you fuck then. Shame. I thought you might be able to back up your rabid assertions.

Edit - my mistake regarding Bengali gangs - that was ericjarvis... the rest stands.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Jan 10, 2011)

Can't really be arsed to read the whole thread, but has anyoneone mentioned the reason why the BNP are not making a meal of this? It's because the white blokes convicted in connection with this are BNP members.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Absolutely 100 percent yes. I do. Do you disagree?


 
Ah now we get your true position. Cunt.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Off you fuck then. Shame. I thought you might be able to back up your rabid assertions.
> 
> Edit - my mistake regarding Bengali gangs - that was ericjarvis... the rest stands.


 
I didn't make the 'assertions' you claimed I did you thick little dickhead


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Have you looked at the pics in the media?...When they were arrested they were not robed or bearded...they were not living a devout Muslim life, PT is right IMO, their behaviour was 'closer to mainstream British youth culture',  that they have chosen to take on this appearance now, during court is completely another thing and you know it!


 
i don't think you know what mainstream british youth culture is, because - hard though it may be to believe - most young people do not go round in flash cars pulling girls on the street, plying them with drink and drugs, passing them round their mates and occasionally raping them.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Pickman's, have you lost it? We've got three of them now coming out with any old bollocks which boils down to 'oh noes teh muzlims'. The only way they are winning is by sheer volume.


 
Really? I thought I was fighting a lone battle here, with all kids of shit being slung my way as you're doing now. "bigot" "sexist" Anything to deflect from the subject at hand.

Head in the sand, that seems to work for you. Let's just hope your daughter or young relatives don't fall prey to this shit. After all it doesn't exist, right?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Can't really be arsed to read the whole thread, but has anyoneone mentioned the reason why the BNP are not making a meal of this? It's because the white blokes convicted in connection with this are BNP members.


 
That's news to me. Unsurprising though, given the huge amount of BNP/EDL people convicted of pedophilia related crime.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Pickman's, have you lost it? We've got three of them now coming out with any old bollocks which boils down to 'oh noes teh muzlims'. The only way they are winning is by sheer volume.


 
i'm not so sure


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Ah now we get your true position. Cunt.


 
Unlike you, I am prepared to explain my position and I think I have done so respectfully here to all contributors. 

You however prefer the relative safety of ignorant bliss. Good luck with that.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Pickman's, have you lost it? We've got three of them now coming out with any old bollocks which boils down to 'oh noes teh muzlims'. The only way they are winning is by sheer volume.


You can't even accept that different cultures have different attitudes and different problems associated with them. How can anybody take you seriously when you can't even see that?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it's game set and match to pk


 
This is far from over.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

I'm just remembering the thread a while ago with pk banging on about Jamaican crack dealers that ended with someone flouncing. This thread has some legs yet


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

Look, nobody is saying this is typical of Muslim men or even widespread, but it is an issue and for me it is an issue associated with the culture of no sex before marriage and arranged marriages, issues that aren't really experienced by the wider public (altho more arranged marriages than the no sex before marriage admittadly).

You haven't made any comment whatsoever on arranged marriages or no sex before marriage - what are you scared of? Or do you support these practices?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> This is far from over.


 
What you waiting for?

I'm interested in your comment on page 2:




			
				DrRingDing said:
			
		

> I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Don't hold your breath, PT denies there's such a thing as British-Pakistani culture so I doubt you'll get anything credible out of him (what type of person denies a peoples' culture btw...)



No it isnt Pakistani, its tribal Kashmiri, the majority of Biritsh Muslims in the north of the UK are from a very small number of valleys in nwhat Pakistan calls Azad (ie liberated) Kashmir - Hindu converts under the Moghuls, where the tribal part is much bigger than than the Muslim part
Most of these peoples did NOT ask their women to wear veils until the Deobandi movement swept Indian Islam in the early/middle 19thC - however, Kashmir, though once under the sway of the Kings of Punjab, have always been hostile towards outsiders.
What you have is bunch of mountain dwelling tribes, basically left alone under the Brit Raj, who then invaded by both India and Pakistan - a shock at best - my main surprise in Bradford was that the English and Asian communties, even tho they had been to school together almost never mixed - the hostility is palpable'
Mountain tribe dropped into another feirce tribal crew, Yorkshiremen - they seem to wish to hurt each other, and it runs deep


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I'm just remembering the thread a while ago with pk banging on about Jamaican crack dealers that ended with someone flouncing. This thread has some legs yet


 
rather than droning on about some thread in the past, perhaps you could contribute something vaguely relating to the topic at hand.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

hipipol said:


> What you have is bunch of mountain dwelling tribes, basically left alone under the Brit Raj, who then invaded by both India and Pakistan - a shock at best - my main surprise in Bradford was that the English and Asian communties, even tho they had been to school together almost never mixed - the hostility is palpable'
> Mountain tribe dropped into another feirce tribal crew, Yorkshiremen - they seem to wish to hurt each other, and it runs deep


 
This.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> What you waiting for?
> 
> I'm interested in your comment on page 2:


 
All in good time. I'm forecasting this will have a half life close to half life plutonium.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> rather than droning on about some thread in the past, perhaps you could contribute something vaguely relating to the topic at hand.


 
Nope.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> All in good time. I'm forecasting this will have a half life close to half life plutonium.


 
that post was from page 2, fucking 29 pages ago. this is the good time.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Pickman's, have you lost it? We've got three of them now coming out with any old bollocks which boils down to 'oh noes teh muzlims'. The only way they are winning is by sheer volume.



Kashmiris guy, Kashmiris


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Nope.


 
so your second page post won't be explained because you're unable to post on topic.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

I think the most telling comment was from pk contrasting his experience of Muslims in Bradford and London.

Social identity is the key here.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Social identity is the key here.



...this is a two way street.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 10, 2011)

hipipol said:


> No it isnt Pakistani, its tribal Kashmiri, the majority of Biritsh Muslims in the north of the UK are from a very small number of valleys in nwhat Pakistan calls Azad (ie liberated) Kashmir - Hindu converts under the Moghuls, where the tribal part is much bigger than than the Muslim part
> Most of these peoples did NOT ask their women to wear veils until the Deobandi movement swept Indian Islam in the early/middle 19thC - however, Kashmir, though once under the sway of the Kings of Punjab, have always been hostile towards outsiders.
> What you have is bunch of mountain dwelling tribes, basically left alone under the Brit Raj, who then invaded by both India and Pakistan - a shock at best - my main surprise in Bradford was that the English and Asian communties, even tho they had been to school together almost never mixed - the hostility is palpable'
> Mountain tribe dropped into another feirce tribal crew, Yorkshiremen - they seem to wish to hurt each other, and it runs deep


Ok fair enough but on diversity questionnaires the answer is British-Pakistani and never (as far as I am aware), British-Kashmiri, hence I will use the term "Pakistani"


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> All in good time. I'm forecasting this will have a half life close to half life plutonium.


 
In other words "I'm waiting until I can get a bunch of people to help me derail the thread by calling pk names so he'll get bored and then I can declare victory".

Pathetic stuff.

Put up or shut the fuck up.

Your opinions regarding Jack Straw's motivations were proved bollocks in the first few pages. Good luck!


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I think the most telling comment was from pk contrasting his experience of Muslims in Bradford and London.
> 
> Social identity is the key here.


 
And??


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

You're making another wild and false projection.

I'm actually waiting for the brickbats to stop flying so there can be something other than chest beating and feet stamping.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> In other words "I'm waiting until I can get a bunch of people to help me derail the thread by calling pk names so he'll get bored and then I can declare victory".
> 
> Pathetic stuff.
> 
> ...


 Sums up their entire argument through this thread pretty well.


----------



## classicdish (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> ...evidence that Bengali gangs are involved in grooming children for rape...



From CIA world factbook entry for Bangladesh
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html

_"Trafficking in persons > current situation > Bangladesh is a source and transit country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and commercial sexual exploitation; a significant share of Bangladesh's trafficking victims are men recruited for work overseas with fraudulent employment offers who are subsequently exploited under conditions of forced labor or debt bondage; children are trafficked within Bangladesh for commercial sexual exploitation, bonded labor, and forced labor; women and children from Bangladesh are also trafficked to India and Pakistan for sexual exploitation"_


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You're making another wild and false projection.
> 
> I'm actually waiting for the brickbats to stop flying so there can be something other than chest beating and feet stamping.


 
Of course you are. That'll be why you're unwilling to put forward any opinions of your own.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Your opinions regarding Jack Straw's motivations were proved bollocks in the first few pages. Good luck!



The blokes a weasel. Always has been, always will be.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

classicdish said:


> From CIA world factbook entry for Bangladesh
> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bg.html
> 
> _"Trafficking in persons > current situation > Bangladesh is a source and transit country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of forced labor and commercial sexual exploitation; a significant share of Bangladesh's trafficking victims are men recruited for work overseas with fraudulent employment offers who are subsequently exploited under conditions of forced labor or debt bondage; children are trafficked within Bangladesh for commercial sexual exploitation, bonded labor, and forced labor; women and children from Bangladesh are also trafficked to India and Pakistan for sexual exploitation"_


 
Ummm, I think the point was that according to eric jarvis - Bengali gangs based in the UK are statistically just as culpable when it comes to grooming vulnerable UK indigenous children for rape.

I see no proof of that in your link.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> The blokes a weasel. Always has been, always will be.


 
That's as may be, but I rather suspect he is way more informed on this issue than you will ever be.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> That's as may be, but I rather suspect he is way more informed on this issue than you will ever be.


 
So, what's the plan big man?

Do you have a solution?.....apart from the chest beating..


----------



## classicdish (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Ummm, I think the point was that according to eric jarvis - Bengali gangs based in the UK are statistically just as culpable when it comes to grooming vulnerable UK indigenous children for rape.
> 
> I see no proof of that in your link.


Looks like the Bangladeshis are mainly being the ones being trafficked? By Indians, Pakistanis and probably into the middle east and europe.

Child abuse, prostitution, pimping, gang rape, trafficking / slavery, etc - goes on all round the world: africa, the americas, the middle east, south asia, south-east asia, europe, the far east... everywhere.

Who happens to be the main local group of thugs, and which group happen to be the main victims - be it by caste, religion, skin colour, refugee status and/or sheer poverty - seems more a factor of chance and geography rather than anything deeper.

Looking back a 100 years or so there were a massive number of "white/european" men around the world taking advantage of local women and girls. Every war / invasion / colonisation sees the same. We can't really deduce anything that deep about any of the main world cultures, geographic regions or religions based on this wider track record (of men fucking over women, of adults fucking over children, of the powerful fucking over the weak, of the rich fucking over the poor).

That you are building so complex a theory based on Bradford seems kind of a narrow viewpoint to make broad-brush claims.

That Bangladesh is a major *global* hub of trafficking suggests that Bengali gangsters are *fully* involved in child prostitution/slavery, but the poorest countries have always found themselves ruthlessly exploited and enslaved. Maybe there are simply less Bengali gangsters in the UK doing anything at all because they are lower down the gangsters pecking here? That the CIA factbook says many Bengalis get shipped to India, Pakistan and the Middle East kind of suggests this to me.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So, what's the plan big man?
> 
> Do you have a solution?.....apart from the chest beating..


 
My plan is to debate the issue on this thread. Something it appears you are not possessed with the courage or the temerity to do.


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah, I'd agree with this. I was trying to make the point that if there is a specific social problem with regard to British Pakistanis then the operative word here is British not Pakistani. It's a social problem that has been created here, as a result of all sorts of preceding social problems and cultural influences, the majority of which will be secular, Western cultural influences, hence the imitation of pop-culture gangsters.



I think they are the result of men who:

- having been reared in families where arranged marriages are common, do not have the skills to be sexually successful in a dating-based culture (as well as just being creeps),

- regard the girls they force into having sex with them as Vicky Pollard-style 'white trash',

- and who have been able, for a while, to get away with it because of social atomisation among the poorer white working class.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Anyways, back in Blighty traditional Britains raise the paedo bar...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-12143586



> The leader of a paedophile ring which sexually abused young children and shared the images has been jailed.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> My plan is to debate the issue on this thread. Something it appears you are not possessed with the courage or the temerity to do.


 
If you're going to shit stir at least find a way forward apart from sickly admiration of a war criminal.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

classicdish said:


> That you are building so complex a theory based on Bradford seems kind of a narrow viewpoint to make broad-brush claims.
> 
> That Bangladesh is a major *global* hub of trafficking suggests that Bengali gangsters are *fully* involved in child prostitution/slavery


 
Yes, it happens everywhere, we know this. The world is a cruel place.

My assertions do not come from my experiences in Bradford alone, though it's a good example.

The issue is regarding attitudes toward infidel children from SOME muslim men, and the distinct possibility that they may be influenced by the religion that issues fatwas upon those who decry it. It is about attitudes towards women and whether or not the problem with child grooming in the UK is disproportionately carried out by muslim men.

Any stats or evidence to support the notion that other religious groups are doing the same thing to non-believers would be interesting to read.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Anyways, back in Blighty traditional Britains raise the paedo bar...
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-12143586


 i see you're as ignorant as you are daft: which is to say, very.

people from britain are called 'britons', like people from germany are 'germans'.

you don't call people from germany germanies, and you don't call people from britain britains.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Anyways, back in Blighty traditional Britains raise the paedo bar...
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-12143586


 
Yeah I posted that link 5 pages ago. With photos. Do keep up.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> If you're going to shit stir at least find a way forward apart from sickly admiration of a war criminal.


 
Irrelevant to the topic as I've come to expect.

Try debating the issue at hand, or leave this thread to those keen to do so.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Any stats or evidence to support the notion that other religious groups are doing the same thing to non-believers would be interesting to read.



So you've got evidence that these cunts have been pimping out girls in the name of Allah?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

IMR said:


> I think they are the result of men who:
> 
> - having been reared in families where arranged marriages are common, do not have the skills to be sexually successful in a dating-based culture (as well as just being creeps),
> 
> ...


 
With this I broadly agree. Amazing that a lot of people find these notions impossible to accept.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Irrelevant to the topic as I've come to expect.



So you think having a proposed solution or even discussing a way forward is 'irrelevant to topic'?

Fuck my old boots.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So you've got evidence that these cunts have been pimping out girls in the name of Allah?


 
I have evidence to suggest it MAY be a factor. Which if you read the thread properly you would see.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So you think having a proposed solution or even discussing a way forward is 'irrelevant to topic'?
> 
> Fuck my old boots.


 
You talking about Jack Straw - shooting the messenger - and calling him a terrorist is irrelevant.

You can't provide solutions for a problem that you claim doesn't exist, so don't try it with me. 

You called Straw a "weasel" in your thread title - seems it's you keen to weasel out of a debate...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So you think having a proposed solution or even discussing a way forward is 'irrelevant to topic'?
> 
> Fuck my old boots.


 
you're not by any chance a cop in co19 are you?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I have evidence to suggest it MAY be a factor. Which if you read the thread properly you would see.


 
You wouldn't get very far in court with "evidence to suggest it MAY be a factor"


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you're not by any chance a cop in co19 are you?


 
Yes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Yes.


 
it was the 'fuck my old boots' which suggested you were a police officer.

that and your over the top arsery


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> You can't provide solutions for a problem that you claim doesn't exist, so don't try it with me.



I've already suggested what is a major part to the problem and the solution is self-explanatory.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it was the 'fuck my old boots' which suggested you were a police officer.
> 
> that and your over the top arsery


 
You're a shit anarchist detective.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You wouldn't get very far in court with "evidence to suggest it MAY be a factor"


 
Good job this isn't a court then. It's an internet forum. Get a grip.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I've already suggested what is a major part to the problem and the solution is self-explanatory.


 
Then you will have no problem explaining it then will you?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

So what's your road map?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You're a shit anarchist detective.


 

you're full of shit. you recall your post on page 2? any chance of expanding on that? no? didn't think so, because it never happened.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So what's your road map?


 
I reckon I've got yours pretty accurate...


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

If you could of been arsed to read my previous posts without prejudice you'll see what I'm getting at.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you're full of shit. you recall your post on page 2? any chance of expanding on that? no? didn't think so, because it never happened.


 
I'm keen to know what that bizarre statement was about too.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you're full of shit. you recall your post on page 2? any chance of expanding on that? no? didn't think so, because it never happened.


 
Do the math inspector model.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You're presuming I'm saying this doesn't go on. It does.
> 
> I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.


 
Come on DrRingDing - let's hear what this was about.

Wouldn't want to be accused of *weaselling* out of the discussion would you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Do the math inspector model.


 
the lights are on but no one's at home ^^


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

You want to share something highly personal in the middle of a prospective bun fight?

Bollocks


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:
			
		

> The Qur'an says if a women gets 'high handed' you should ignore her in bed and slap her.



Do you remember saying this, DrRingDing? Let me jog your memory...

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...es-in-Afghan?p=5577025&viewfull=1#post5577025


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

So angry men what's the way forward?

Are you confused?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Or this??




			
				DrRingDing said:
			
		

> Do we need to go through more sexist and oppresive shite the qur'an spouts?



People in glass houses, eh??

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...es-in-Afghan?p=5577112&viewfull=1#post5577112


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Do you remember saying this, DrRingDing? Let me jog your memory...
> 
> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...es-in-Afghan?p=5577025&viewfull=1#post5577025


 
I do. What's your point?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Or this??
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You're still missing the point.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I do. What's your point?


 
That you are full of shit.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You want to share something highly personal in the middle of a prospective bun fight?
> 
> Bollocks


 
Ah. The *weasel* method. Well done. Carry on.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Keep puffin up that pidgeon chest.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> This is far from over.


 
LOL, let me know when you're ready then DrRingDing.

Anytime this week would be good.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Keep puffin up that pidgeon chest.


 
Keep fluttering those *chicken* feathers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Keep puffin up that pidgeon chest.


 
i'd have thought better a pigeon chest than a bird brain.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd have thought better a pigeon chest than a bird brain.


 


....and we wonder why I don't wish to talk about something personal in this playground.


----------



## classicdish (Jan 10, 2011)

IMR said:


> I think they are the result of men who:
> 
> - having been reared in families where arranged marriages are common, do not have the skills to be sexually successful in a dating-based culture,
> 
> ...


Would it be fair to say that you could use very similar criteria (with a few words changed) to men all round the world who use prostitutes (of whom many are children)? 

- want sex but couldn't be bothered "dating" (or being respectful or giving anything at all beyond the minimum required to the person they use for sexual pleasure or economic gain)
- regard their victims as trash (of whatever 'type')
- take advantage of whichever local atomised / broken / poor / despised / disadvantaged community they can easily find their victims

This logic has been used by men for hundreds (thousands?) of years to justify using and abusing women - obviously targeting the people with the least protection, where the consequences for abusing them are the least severe. Rape the wrong people and local reaction can vary enormously - eg London burnt to the ground in 60 AD to use a local example.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> And a round of applause for that, really intelligent stuff. Shame you don't have a view yourself, or are too afraid to tell us what that might be...


 


pk said:


> And a round of applause for that, really intelligent stuff. Shame you don't have a view yourself, or are too afraid to tell us what that might be...


 
Its a bit difficult whether you think your ego is bigger than your head or the other way around, either way don't let that get in the way of actually reading what i have said on this thread.



You seem to think that this is entirely because they are muslims and that Islam by its very nature says this is ok. You seem to think that once a Muslim always a Muslim and that they are all the same .You make out that this imagined muslim community colludes with all this as it is governed by some sort of elder mafia. In fact you googled the web and found examples ,amongst them Iran ,and this would suggest  that these lads are somehow being kept up to date with Iranian  clerical decisions that justify this sought of behaviour. You claim to have seen more of this little world of ours than many on here and this has included visits to Muslim countries and when not engineering during the day in your role as DJ in Bradford you saw pimps wearing Islamic symbols who also had in their houses tapes ( how quaint in this digital age) of Muslim hate preachers.

The fact that from the 1930s through to the 1950s the Maltese were disproportionately involved in pimping in this country can be dismissed cos they weren't Muslim, the fact that Rasta emblem bearing blacks were involved in pimping and prostitution in the 70s and 80s can be dismissed because they weren't Muslim, the fact that East Europeans have a large stake in human trafficking and organised prostitution can be dismissed because they are Muslim. The fact that gang rape as a punishment and initiation is use by wannabee street gangs ( mainly in London , is it something in the water?) can be dismissed because most of them aren't Muslim gangs.The fact that the percentage  of sex offenders who are Asian ( and lets say that the majority of asians might declare their religion as Muslim)   is half that of the Asian percentage of the population is irrelevant because it doesn't suit the story about street grooming , rape , prostitution being integral to being a Muslim or indeed joinng the sexual jihad against the indigenous citizens of the UK as I think you put it earlier.

There is a history of kids in care being exploited for prostitution, sexual abuse and recruited into crime gangs. Its happened for years , they go missing sometimes they die of drug abuse sometimes they get murdered. 42% of prostitutes have been in care.  Its not often in the press. Who has groomed them over the years ? Well mainly people who can spot someone with low self esteem, easily influenced and flattered to have any attention. it hasn't been a historical criteria that they be Muslim.

The difference here is that so called professionals didn't speak out because they feared being called racist. Griffin and the BNP campaigned on it three years ago , i don't know if it was debated on here but it was discussed on other boards and I and others contributed then on the line that it would be too simple to  dismiss the BNP claims just because they came from the BNP. In the main there was a refusal by many to even consider the possibility .Perhaps you felt it safer to come out when Straw said it,even though your experineces as a night time DJ in Bradford told you all that time ago that this was all linked to Islam?

There is no doubt in my mind that Asian males are disproportionately involved in street grooming at this period in time . The problem is that they see these vulnerbale girls not as equals but inferior beings who can be bought and sold and deserve this sort of abuse. I am sure that someone somewhere in Islam deplores the sexual deparvity of western society but so did Mary Whitehouse . The idea of slags getting what they deserve, of bought sexual favours and threats of violence against the more vulnerable isn't religous based its backward reactionary sexism and in these lads case you can add racist sterotyping.The fact that they targeted those at the bottom of the pile shows where they saw the opportunity to abuse.

Your theory on it comes close to the explanations that some people put on the overepresentation of black youth in some parts of London in mugging as it was called then , some thought it was cultural, some thought it was in their genes and some liberal types thought apparently this was to do with fighting colonialism. Not just picking on those who you think you can frighten with a bit of patois but fighting colonialism.  In this case its picking on those that you can get away with abusing its not fighting a sexual jihad against the kaffir.

You fucking love it.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> ....and we wonder why I don't wish to talk about something personal in this playground.


 
Sigh.... anything of relevance to the topic yet??

You've failed in your bizarre attempt to bring crack dealers into it... I'm guessing the PM's pleading people to help you here have fallen on deaf ears...

Tell me, what happened to the woman who was a friend of yours and was forced into an arranged muslim marriage?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm guessing the PM's pleading people to help you here have fallen on deaf ears...



Don't be paranoid. You been been toking again?


----------



## IMR (Jan 10, 2011)

classicdish said:


> Would it be fair to say that you could use very similar criteria (with a few words changed) to men all round the world who use prostitutes (of whom many are children)?


 
Hmmm . . . you also write 'This logic has used been used by men for hundreds  . . . of years', and I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

Do you mean that explains what they do, or that that's how they reason about it?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> You seem to think that once a Muslim always a Muslim and that they are all the same.



Uh no, that's a lie. Clearly I've been careful to speak only about those who adhere to the more extreme forms of islam.



> You make out that this imagined muslim community colludes with all this as it is governed by some sort of elder mafia. In fact you googled the web and found examples ,amongst them Iran ,and this would suggest  that these lads are somehow being kept up to date with Iranian  clerical decisions that justify this sought of behaviour.



Iran? We're talking about Pakistan/UK



> You claim to have seen more of this little world of ours than many on here and this has included visits to Muslim countries and when not engineering during the day in your role as DJ in Bradford you saw pimps wearing Islamic symbols who also had in their houses tapes ( how quaint in this digital age) of Muslim hate preachers.



I said no such thing. If lying and creating strawmen is going to typify your "argument" then this will be a very dull pointless exercise.

Show me where I said I was DJ'ing on this thread. Show me where I said I saw tapes in people houses. Go on.



> The fact that from the 1930s through to the 1950s the Maltese were disproportionately involved in pimping in this country can be dismissed cos they weren't Muslim, the fact that Rasta emblem bearing blacks were involved in pimping and prostitution in the 70s and 80s can be dismissed because they weren't Muslim, the fact that East Europeans have a large stake in human trafficking and organised prostitution can be dismissed because they are Muslim.



Why should they be dismissed? And it is relevant to today? I could quote you 8th century texts to support my argument but it's not relevant to the issue at all.
What is relevant is the notion that the earlier pimps you mentioned chose ONLY UK British underage girls... I seriously doubt that.



> The fact that gang rape as a punishment and initiation is use by wannabee street gangs ( mainly in London , is it something in the water?) can be dismissed because most of them aren't Muslim gangs.The fact that the percentage  of sex offenders who are Asian ( and lets say that the majority of asians might declare their religion as Muslim)   is half that of the Asian percentage of the population is irrelevant because it doesn't suit the story about street grooming , rape , prostitution being integral to being a Muslim or indeed joinng the sexual jihad against the indigenous citizens of the UK as I think you put it earlier.



Again with the pathetic strawman. Show me where I said "street grooming, rape ,prostitution is integral to being a Muslim" and I'll address it. But I didn't of course.



> There is a history of kids in care being exploited for prostitution, sexual abuse and recruited into crime gangs. Its happened for years ,they go missing sometimes they die of drug abuse sometimes they get murdered. 42% of prostitutes have been in care.  Its not often in the press. Who has groomed them over the years ? Well mainly people who can spot someone with low self esteem, easily influenced and flattered to have any attention. *it hasn't been a historical criteria that they be Muslim.*



Again nobody to my knowledge has said any such thing. Why are you making this shit up?



> The difference here is that so called professionals didn't speak out because they feared being called racist. Griffin and the BNP campaigned on it three years ago ,i don't know if it was debated on here but it was discussed on other boards and I and others contributed then on the line that it would be too simple to dismiss the BNP claims just because they came from the BNP. In the main there was a refusal by many to even consider the possibility .
> Perhaps you felt it safer to come out when Straw said it, even though your experiences as a night time DJ in Bradford told you all that time ago that this was all linked to Islam?



What does it matter. I don't recall it being discussed here before, it may have been. It's being discussed now though... And again with the DJ stuff, where do you get the idea I was a DJ in Bradford? Not from this thread.



> There is no doubt in my mind that Asian males are disproportionately involved in street grooming at this period in time . The problem is that they see these vulnerbale girls not as equals but inferior beings who can be bought and sold and deserve this sort of abuse. I am sure that someone somewhere in Islam deplores the sexual deparvity of western society but so did Mary Whitehouse . The idea of slags getting what they deserve, of bought sexual favours and threats of violence against the more vulnerable isn't religous based its backward reactionary sexism and in these lads case you can add racist sterotyping.The fact that they targeted those at the bottom of the pile shows where they saw the opportunity to abuse.



So you see no link at all with the notion that in certain misapplications of old islamic texts that there is perhaps a religious precedent and justification for their actions?



> Your theory on it comes close to the explanations that some people put on the overepresentation of black youth in some parts of London in mugging as it was called then , some thought it was cultural, some thought it was in their genes and some liberal types thought apparently this was to do with fighting colonialism. Not just picking on those who you think you can frighten with a bit of patois but fighting colonialism.  In this case its picking on those that you can get away with abusing its not fighting a sexual jihad against the kaffir.



I happen to think there is an added "frisson" for these rapists in knowing they are defiling the children of "the enemy". We are at war after all, both geographically and ideologically, with this aggressive form of islam.



> You fucking love it.


 
I do actually.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Don't be paranoid. You been been toking again?


 
Nope. You?

Seems strange to elect to "bide your time" and try to wreck the thread by bringing up ancient threads that have no relevance.

Almost like you're now very disappointed that nobody has bitten - in fact one poster with whom I have a solid history of long running battles is in fact now calling your shit out for what it is.

You're on your own. Deal with it or fuck off.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Uh no, that's a lie. Clearly I've been careful to speak only about those who adhere to the more extreme forms of islam.



Have you fuck


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Have you fuck


 
So what happened with your arranged marriage friend, or was that all just a lie?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Stick on Newsnight. 

It'll  be interesting.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 10, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it's game set and match to pk



so far pk has claimed

that no muslim in britain has ever been pimped by another muslim

that students of a traditional islamic dance who were pimped in the uk were not muslims

that no pakistani woman has ever sold sex in bradford

that any albanians involved in the sex industry are roma

that the hard drinking,drug taking dicks who carried out the crime in the op were devout muslims who acted under the influence of obscure middle eastern clerics (presumably including the alleged bnp bloke)

that there is no pimping of muslim women by other muslims anywhere in the world except for pimping of slaves because theyd never do it to their own (except they probably would but dont)

that any white woman in a mini skirt walking through manningham in bradford will be sexually harrassed

can't say it convinced me


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Have you fuck


 
Interesting how you have stereotyped muslims in the past without a second thought though isn't it, DrRingDing??

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/122429-What-do-you-feel-about-Islam-in-Blighty

A thread of YOURS from way back.




			
				DrRingDing said:
			
		

> I'm frustrated with the backward, oppresive and anal culture that exists.
> 
> Locking women up until you can marry them off so they can be locked up by somebody else until their hubbys die.
> 
> ...






			
				DrRingDing said:
			
		

> Women are treated like dogs



Quite the hypocrite aren't you DrRingDing.

Now fuck off and leave the thread to the grown-ups.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

I hate Islam, not Muslims.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so far pk has claimed
> 
> that no muslim in britain has ever been pimped by another muslim



I made no such claim, though I'm fucked if I'm taking your word for it that it happens regularly.



> that students of a traditional islamic dance who were pimped in the uk were not muslims



Again, you provided fuck all to back it up. Not that dancers who sometimes provide happy endings can be compared to 12 year old children.



> that no pakistani woman has ever sold sex in bradford



Again, seriously lacking in credible evidence. And again, no, your word for it isn't worth anything to me.



> that any albanians involved in the sex industry are roma



I said something along the lines of the Albanian convictions are not of men who have taken islamic names, and as islam isn't as full-on in Albania as you appear to think, the chances are they were not muslim.



> that the hard drinking,drug taking dicks who carried out the crime in the op were devout muslims who acted under the influence of obscure middle eastern clerics (presumably including the alleged bnp bloke)



I haven't said these were devout muslims, but I refuse to believe islam had little influence on their lives, given the arranged marriages they had and the keenness to wear beards long and the robes after they were caught.



> that there is no pimping of muslim women by other muslims anywhere in the world except for pimping of slaves because theyd never do it to their own (except they probably would but dont)



Show me evidence of wide-scale pimping of muslim girls by muslim men and I'll take that on board. You have yet to do so.



> that any white woman in a mini skirt walking through manningham in bradford will be sexually harrassed



I said it was highly likely. Born out of personal experience and the unwillingness of women I knew to walk the streets after dark.



> can't say it convinced me


 
I'd hope your bullshit statements don't convince anyone else.

If you want to quote me, quote me properly *using words I actually typed.*


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Uh no, that's a lie.* Clearly I've been careful to speak only about those who adhere to the more extreme forms of islam.*



How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you tell such outrageous lies? 

You have continuously suggested/implied that the men which carried out these offences did so because they have 'extreme' views because of their Muslim background. Despite this assertion, in their mug shots, we see them as they were arrested, not robed or bearded, that they may have robed/bearded up for court is entirely another matter and you know it. What about the White member of the gang, was he in on it in Allah's name too? Is he a convert?

We also read about what they have done to these young women, and none of it suggests that they were devout, none of it, far from it in fact...yet that doesn't matter to you because in your world *'we are at war after all, both geographically and ideologically' *, and as a consequence,  any reading/comment you have about what is going on will reflect that.




> I do actually.


 Yes, you do, this is clear.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> Plenty of evidence posted on this thread already. You choose not to see it, that's your problem.



You numpty I meant there is no evidence that the people in the OP were practicing muslims and no evidence they were influenced by islamism.



> Loads of evidence of white men going out to Thailand to abuse women.
> Loads of evidence Chinese men make up the majority of Thai brothel punters.
> We've done this already, it's irrelevant.



And the vast majority of nonces in the UK are white. You're a plank.



> Yeah because the leaders praising straw are the same who bang on about infidels. You're the tool pal.



So you acknowledge the vast majority of muslim groups and Imams are condemning this kind of behaviour, yet you still blame the "muslim community" for encouraging it. And again you say nothing practical at all.

In terms of people having a go at catholic priests, the comparison is not the same. If imams were carrying out sex rings and abusing kids in mosques that would be the equivalent. However if some catholic men were forming gangs to abuse young women you wouldn't say that it was a problem for the catholic community, especially if they weren't even practicing catholics.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 10, 2011)

> You see I just don't understand this logic - are you excusing the sexual exploitation of young girls by some Muslim men just because some white people go to Thailand to sexually abuse children? Or, are you acknowledging that both are a problem, no matter how widespread or not, that need addressing?



Of course both are a problem. But I wouldn't say that white men going to a Thailand is a problem for the white UK community anymore than I'd say that the blokes doing this are a problem for the UK pakistani community. The blokes in question were held back by their culture and sexually frustrated as you suggest, they were living a western life style.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Newsnight now


----------



## Grandma Death (Jan 10, 2011)

frogwoman said:


> when I was at uni, there were groups of (mostly asian and east european) men who would hang around our road late at night and ask young women (including me on a couple of occasions) if they wanted to go for drinks etc. A mate of mine once decided to go back there just to see what would happen and she said that they went into this room and she saw all of these drugged up teenage girls and young women lying on sofas and loads of people taking drugs. She said that some of them were asleep or didn't know what they were doing - she made a run for it shortly after that because she was so freaked out.
> 
> I know that this does happen but pretty sure it's not just confined to one community doing this, right?



Course it happens and its not confined to asian men. Until I see hard statistically evidence that this is more prevalent in the asian community than other sections of society I will always take this with a pinch of salt. There is a cultural attitude by some asian men towards white women-I'd argue there's a negative attitude in a lot of young men to women that crosses cultures and this attitude manifests itself in many different ways-this just being one of them.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

I wonder if pk conveniently missed that?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Can't really be arsed to read the whole thread, but has anyoneone mentioned the reason why the BNP are not making a meal of this? It's because the white blokes convicted in connection with this are BNP members.


 
Really? If true it's a great example of the complexities of this kind of thing and why the 'racialising' of it is indeed problematic.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I wonder if pk conveniently missed that?


 I didn't. 

Figures for the last year. 80% White offenders, victims are not disproportionally White.

What was that organisation mentioned?...I missed the name.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you tell such outrageous lies?
> 
> You have continuously suggested/implied that the men which carried out these offences did so because they have 'extreme' views because of their Muslim background.



I have suggested, in the face of absolute denial, that it may have been a factor. Their behaviour was certainly "extreme".



> Despite this assertion, in their mug shots, we see them as they were arrested, not robed or bearded, that they may have robed/bearded up for court is entirely another matter and you know it.



It shows that they were at least linked to a traditional muslim background. Why didn't they wear suits?



> What about the White member of the gang, was he in on it in Allah's name too? Is he a convert?



No idea. You have any idea?



> We also read about what they have done to these young women, and none of it suggests that they were devout, none of it, far from it in fact...yet that doesn't matter to you because in your world *'we are at war after all, both geographically and ideologically' *, and as a consequence, and any reading/comment you have about what is going on will reflect that.



Google "razzia".



> Yes, you do, this is clear.


 
This last quote was in reply to this question:

Do you see Islam as more barbaric than other religions?

----

Can you tell me of another religion that executes people for "blasphemy", and issues death decrees upon cartoonists?

That routinely sentences women (often children forced into marriage) to stoning for adultery?

Honour killings for rejected arranged marriages?

Islamic law forbids Muslim women to marry non-Muslim men, punishable by - yep you guessed it - death.

Islamic law stipulates no penalty for a parent who kills his child. 

It is, in my opinion, more barbaric than other religions.

I'm always happy to be corrected though.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I didn't.
> 
> Figures for the last year. 80% White offenders, victims are not disproportionally White.
> 
> What was that organisation mentioned?...I missed the name.



Engage.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> I have suggested, in the face of absolute denial, that it may have been a factor. Their behaviour was certainly "extreme".



Extreme behaviour of this kind is not evidence of extreme religious views. The majority of sex offenders in prison at present in the UK are White. Does that reflect their extreme religious views?



> It shows that they were at least linked to a traditional muslim background. Why didn't they wear suits?



Perhaps they are trying the old _'I'm reformed, I have found religion' hand_? 




> No idea. You have any idea?


 I have idea's about why you haven't considered it or talked about him on this thread. It doesn't follow your agenda.





> Google "razzia".


 Here we go again, you patronisingly patting my feminine head, thinking that you know and care more than I do whilst simultaneously implying that the behaviour of these men, in the context they have commited these crimes,  reflect their 'extreme Muslim' beliefs.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Really? If true it's a great example of the complexities of this kind of thing and why the 'racialising' of it is indeed problematic.



The ovewhelming prevalence of white girls of victims and the absence of Pakistani girls provides strong evidence for racism. 

In addition, racial taunts directed at the victims have been reported and were given by an interviewee on Newsnight on Jan 7th.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Extreme behaviour of this kind is not evidence of extreme religious views. The majority of sex offenders in prison at present are White. Does that reflect their extreme religious views?



No, that represent the 80 percent majority of white people living in the UK.



> Perhaps they are trying the old _'I'm reformed, I have found religion' hand_?



Perhaps, but they are still clearly identifying with their religious background. Hardly aethiests are they?



> I have idea's about why you haven't considered it or talked about him on this thread. It doesn't follow your agenda.



Believe what you like. I'm sure more facts will emerge, and as I've said throughout I'm prepared to be proved wrong.



> Here we go again, you patronisingly patting my feminine head, thinking that you know and care more than I do whilst simultaneously implying that the behaviour of these men, in the context they have commited these crimes,  reflect their 'extreme Muslim' beliefs.


 
Here you go again - unable to accept that there was any racial or religious element to this crime. I actually hope you are right. I just don't think you are.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

You've been talking out of you arse all the way on this thread. 

Knee jerk reactions straight out of the tabloids.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Local child rape charity kicks your blinkered and backward views into touch.

You've been spanked.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Even the filth says there's no correlation.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> The ovewhelming prevalence of white girls of victims and *the absence of Pakistani girls provides strong evidence for racism.*



I don't doubt that SOME men have these horrifying views of women from 'other' communities and ethnicities. I have no doubt because, as discussed on this thread it is nothing new. I have personally also experienced views like this from men, they have come from a variety of 'communities', I summise that they reflect the attitudes of SOME men, not a specific community. 

Why is this not a question of 'access' though? 
Why do men like this have access to these girls?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Are you going to find some humility or will you continue making a cunt of yourself?


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You've been talking out of you arse all the way on this thread.
> 
> Knee jerk reactions straight out of the tabloids.


 
You've proven to be a racist given your past opinions. You have fuck all credibility, and you're a proven hypocrite.

You don't have the balls to elaborate on your woeful story (lies) that you made up in regards to some muslim woman who turned you down for a shag in favour of an arranged marriage.

And you're resorting to sticking to this thread like a parasitical opportunist with fuck all to say of any consequence.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I don't doubt that SOME men have these horrifying views of women from 'other' communities and ethnicities. I have no doubt because, as discussed on this thread it is nothing new. I have personally also experienced views like this from men, they have come from a variety of communities. Why is this not a question of 'access' though?
> Why do men like this have access to these girls?


 
Nice of you to skip over the main point of that quote... namely that there was DEFINITELY a racial element to the rapes.

Contrary to your assertions earlier.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Are you going to find some humility or will you continue making a cunt of yourself?


 
You really are the one doing that.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Continue being a cunt it is.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Nice of you to skip over the main point of that quote... namely that there was DEFINITELY a racial element to the rapes.



Definitely? So a local charity dealing with sexual abuse of youngsters and the filth dealing directly with rape know fuck all. Certainly not compared to your coke addled noggin.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Nice of you to skip over the main point of that quote... namely that there was DEFINITELY a racial element to the rapes.
> 
> Contrary to your assertions earlier.


 
Given that in my experience, a seeming anti-racist will resort to calling people racially inspired names if there are in a temper or that so called anti-mysogynists will also resort to calling women 'silly girls' when it takes their fancy, I don't think I skipped an important point at all.

Rape is a dehumaninsing and violent crime. That racialised language/epitaphs were used to enforce that dehumanisation and distancing between victim and perpetrator is no surprise to me.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Definitely? So a local charity dealing with sexual abuse of youngsters and the filth dealing directly with rape know fuck all. Certainly not compared to your coke addled noggin.


 
That was the VICTIM speaking you fucking retard.  Unless you know better...

And I've not done coke for well over a year now. And it was probably two years before that. 

Try harder.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Given that in my experience, a seeming anti-racist will resort to calling people racially inspired names if there are in a temper or that so called anti-mysogynists will also resort to calling women 'silly girls' when it takes their fancy, I don't think I skipped an important point at all.
> 
> Rape is a dehumaninsing and violent crime. That racialised language/epitaphs was used to enforce that dehumanisation and distancing between victim and perpetrator is no surprise to me.


 
You deny there's any problem?

You think Jack Straw invented it all, and Scandanavian and Indian and other countries that have expressed similar problems are making it all up for islamophobic reasons?

Then yes - you really are a silly girl. If that makes me a sexist so be it. DrRingDing is a silly little boy, if it makes you feel better.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Its a bit difficult whether you think your ego is bigger than your head or the other way around, either way don't let that get in the way of actually reading what i have said on this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Cracking post


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Then yes - you really are a silly girl. If that makes me a sexist so be it. *DrRingDing is a silly little boy, if it makes you feel better.*



Yes of course that makes me feel better, silly, over sensitive girl that I am. 

Thank you for making me feel better, no _really_.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

pk earlier today.....and still digging.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes of course that makes me feel better, silly, over sensitive girl that I am.
> 
> Thank you for making me feel better, no _really_.


 
Don't be an idiot. Take a look at what you said for me to call you that originally.


----------



## pk (Jan 10, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Cracking post


 
Shame it's addressing statements I didn't actually make though, eh?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 10, 2011)

pk said:


> Shame it's addressing statements I didn't actually make though, eh?


 
You did though. Have you figured out who made the 'assertions' you attributed to me yet?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> pk earlier today.....and still digging.


 
According to you...

So you were just being a silly boy when you said:

"lets await the Islamic apologists and hear their hypocracy"

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...arriages-Law?p=3484907&viewfull=1#post3484907

It's spelt "hypocrisy" by the way. You should know that by now, surely.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

You missed the point completely. Just keep toking, everything is much simpler there.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> pk earlier today.....and still digging.


 
Yep, he's going to keep on digging until he's unearthed the Great Muslim Conspiracy.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> You did though. Have you figured out who made the 'assertions' you attributed to me yet?


 
Yeah, go and find the quotes and post them then, should be simple, right?

You're reading what you want to read. Sorry, I'm not about to make it easy for you.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Yeah, go and find the quotes and post them then, should be simple, right?



Okay



pk said:


> You can LOL all you like - I'll still be here waiting for you to prove the assertions you have made, after asking you repeatedly. I won't hold my breath.
> 
> Here's a reminder:
> 
> ...


 
I have not, at any point, mentioned Bengalis or claimed the victims were muslim, although there is a fair chance some were. You fucked up didn't you.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> If it were really up to the "Christian" community or the indigenous community of the UK, people who rape children regardless of colour would be hung drawn and quartered.
> 
> Unfortunately, because we have a legal system designed to protect us from ourselves, mostly even the most evil predatory pedophiles are only locked up for a few years, then given new identities and released back into the community to re-offend.
> 
> ...


 

thats fucking yahtzee. Anyone who engaged further lost through falling for this.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You missed the point completely. Just keep toking, everything is much simpler there.


 
Right, so you fucked up on the cocaine slander now you're going for spliffs, LOL Wrong again.

Fantastic hypocrisy again though. All this to avoid answering the weird post you made on page 2 of this thread- why you claimed to have the only beef out of anyone with islam on urban75.

You really are a joke.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Okay
> 
> 
> 
> I have not, at any point, mentioned Bengalis or claimed the victims were muslim, although there is a fair chance some were. You fucked up didn't you.


 
Read the thread, fucks sake, I already retracted the Bengali comments. At 8.30 pm!!

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...eat-quot-)?p=11407891&viewfull=1#post11407891


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Read the thread, fucks sake, I already retracted the Bengali comments. At 8.30 pm!!
> 
> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...eat-quot-)?p=11407891&viewfull=1#post11407891


 
Perhaps you can also find the post where I said the victims were muslim?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Read the thread, fucks sake, I already retracted the Bengali comments. At 8.30 pm!!
> 
> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...eat-quot-)?p=11407891&viewfull=1#post11407891



.....and the back pedalling begins.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DotCommunist said:


> thats fucking yahtzee. Anyone who engaged further lost through falling for this.


 
How is it?

These cunts we've been talking about for 36 pages *will be out in 4 or 5 years*.

So there is an issue of "justice".

As to who the muslim men involved in shit like this will listen to - the clerics or the UK government that are bombing the villages of their heritage to shit - I don't think I need to clarify it much better do I?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Perhaps you can also find the post where I said the victims were muslim?


 
I don't believe any of the child victims were muslim.

If you can't be fucked to read the past 4 hours I can't be fucked to help you, whether it was you that claimed it or not.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I don't believe any of the child victims were muslim.
> 
> If you can't be fucked to read the past 4 hours I can't be fucked to help you, whether it was you that claimed it or not.


 
Lol. So you can't find a post where I said the victims were muslim, even though you claimed that was what I said.

You are very shit at this.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

I'm going to post this again:



> “In a briefing paper, researchers at University College London's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science concurred that victims were typically white girls while ‘most central offenders are Pakistani’.”
> 
> “…researchers identified 17 court prosecutions since 1997, 14 of them in the past three years, involving the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by groups of men.”
> 
> ...



If people want to speculate on these stats, or indeed prove them wrong as the 65 percent Norweigan figure that oddly turned out to be only 6.5 percent, that's up to them.

But these figures, as well as witness statements from all over the world, suggest there is a problem that if viewed without the usual hysteria that goes along with the jihadi type stuff, might be seen as a result of imposing on impressionable young men the nastier islamic teachings in regard to women, and certainly female non-believers.

And I stand by every word I've said, and have tried to reply politely to all.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol. So you can't find a post where I said the victims were muslim, even though you claimed that was what I said.
> 
> You are very shit at this.


 
_surely not another one attempting to derail the thread with obfuscating thread pedantry and claim some spurious "victory" because they simply can't make a decent argument!_

I retracted it 4 hours ago. Get reading, or get fucked, I care neither which you choose.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> _surely not another one attempting to derail the thread with obfuscating thread pedantry and claim some spurious "victory" because they simply can't make a decent argument!_


 
DB?

You made the claim, back it up.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> DB?
> 
> You made the claim, back it up.


 
If I got you confused with eric jarvis - that's what happened - and at 8.30 I made that pretty clear when I edited my post to reflect my mix-up.

For you to roll in at pub closing time and try and pick it apart now (not suggesting you're pissed mind!) does seem a bit naff.

Obviously if you didn't say it, you didnt say it.  Any danger of discussing the thread topic now?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I don't believe any of the child victims were muslim.
> 
> If you can't be fucked to read the past 4 hours I can't be fucked to help you, whether it was you that claimed it or not.




....and last night you marvelled at the mistake made by posting that 65% of sex offenders in Norway were Muslim as opposed to the _*correct*_ figure of 6.5%.


Yeah I know, mistakes happen...it's not your fault!!!


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> And I stand by every word I've said





pk said:


> I retracted it 4 hours ago.



sums you up


----------



## classicdish (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Yes, it happens everywhere, we know this. The world is a cruel place.
> 
> My assertions do not come from my experiences in Bradford alone, though it's a good example.
> 
> ...


You are not providing any stats or evidence that support a broad-brush theory about 1.5bn Muslims around the world or even the 1.5m in the UK. You also need to be able to rule out all other likely variables.

I accept that people often persecute, look down on and abuse less powerful groups or 'outsider' - be that based on ethnicity, caste, nationality, religion or poverty. People in every part of the world have been guilty of this. However you are trying to spin some grand meta-narrative out of some guys in Bradford. How about testing how well your theories work in other places and at other times? How about applying your theories to the role of Christianity in european imperialism and colonialism? How about explaining why so many non-muslim men behave in an identical manner - ie exploiting the most vunerable / available / convenient / 'cheapest' and also labelling their victims as 'trash'?

Just to show you where I'm coming from with this, have a quick read towards the end of this recent Economist article where the reporter in India explains how the lower caste women in the village, despite being 'untouchable' due to obligatory contact with dead animals and their neighbourhood being used as the village latrine, are also coerced into providing sex on demand for the village men: 

A village in a million 

_"...There is an exception to the caste divide in Shahabpur, which many Muslim and Hindu men enjoy. For a few rupees or handfuls of rice, they are said to demand and get sex with dalit women, typically just after sundown, when the villagers troop out to the fields to ablute. At an informal gathering of Muslim men outside the house of Anwar Ali—an upstanding clerk, who also housed your correspondent—it was estimated that perhaps 40% of the village’s non-dalit men upheld this ancient tradition. According to Sarju, until Sushila lost her youthful good looks, he suffered near-nightly terrors from drunken patel youths, who came clamouring for her outside his hut..."_

So how does your theory about Islam explain this? By the way Bradford has a population of 300,000. Dalits in south asia number maybe 200,000,000. 

How about testing your theory out on a country with large numbers of Muslims and Christians, for example the 150 million people of Nigeria (50% Muslims, 48% Christian, 2% Other)? I don't know if this would support or contradict your theory but surely it a wider picture is better than taking a tiny sample?

Surely we need to take a far wider view of pimping, prostitution, rape, trafficking, child abuse etc occur, who tends to be victims and who tend to be oppressors. Basing a theory on some vaguely defined 'muslim' guys in Bradford is fairly worthless in drawing any bigger conclusions. To say anything worthwhile you need to look at the patterns in all parts of the world and identify what they have in common. Islam can't be much an explanatory factor if exactly the same things are happening where it is not involved at all. Taking the wider view it looks far more like it just happens to be an "incidental" variable in Bradford. If it wasn't that they would be out doing the same thing and dressing it up as caste or race or class or citizenship (ie. the self-described 'superior' using the 'inferior' for sex, labour, profit or punching practise). Also not only across the modern world but throughout history - how much of an explanation is "Islam" when European (for example) armies have gone on rampages of rape and murder? Surely a safer conclusion is that men throughout history have been doing this, and that they are labelled Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Bhuddist, 'other' or 'none' hasn't stopped them - or made them more or less likely to do so.

In other words, if you genuinely want to work out the role a variable plays you need to look at enough examples of where it is and isn't present. I suggest that there are enough contemporary and historical examples of non-Muslims doing the same thing worldwide that your theory of it's role is very weak, not plausible at all really. I am however willing to be shown differently and will look at your evidence and examples with an open mind.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> ....and last night you marvelled at the mistake made by posting that 65% of sex offenders in Norway were Muslim as opposed to the _*correct*_ figure of 6.5%.
> 
> 
> Yeah I know, mistakes happen...it's not your fault!!!



And I admitted that mistake straight away when it was pointed out - not a difficult mistake to make when the misprinted figure is quoted as fact all over the internet -however there are other comments that may point toward this as an increasing problem.

The full article -

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article190268.ece



> The study is the first where the crime statistics have been analyzed according to ethnic origin.
> 
> Of the 111 charged with rape in Oslo last year, 72 were of non-western ethnic origin, 25 are classified as Norwegian or western and 14 are listed as unknown.
> 
> ...



Unless they're just making this up...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> sums you up


 
Clever. Shame you're unable to give me direct quotes that I said what you summarized I had.

Anyone would think you were just inventing shit.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 11, 2011)

> Cracking post



Agree, it was/is.

pk you still haven't put forward a single constructive point about what to do about all of this.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 11, 2011)

> In other words, if you genuinely want to work out the role a variable plays you need to look at enough examples of where it is and isn't present. I suggest that there are enough contemporary and historical examples of non-Muslims doing the same thing worldwide that your theory of it's role is very weak, not plausible at all really. I am however willing to be shown differently and will look at your evidence and examples with an open mind.



He won't do anything of the sort, he'll just keep going on about sex jihadis, romeo jihadis, and the muslims wearing bling who also have a bluetooth and listen to the words of radical clerics which on one hand has no affect on them acting in a totally western way but on the other hand sends them into crazed rapists. It's hard to keep up, but it's like reading a mad shock jock on speed.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

classicdish said:


> You are not providing any stats or evidence that support a broad-brush theory about 1.5bn Muslims around the world or even the 1.5m in the UK. You also need to be able to rule out all other likely variables.



I agree. I'm not trying to insinuate that "all muslims are rapists" - despite what you might be hearing from other people who can't actually quote me saying that.

I'm saying there is a serious attitude problem rising in the UK.



> I accept that people often persecute, look down on and abuse less powerful groups or 'outsider' - be that based on ethnicity, caste, nationality, religion or poverty. People in every part of the world have been guilty of this. However you are trying to spin some grand meta-narrative out of some guys in Bradford.



Possibly, I'm prepared to accept there's an element of that. I mentioned Bradford because smokedout was commenting on his experiences there - it just so happened I lived there for a while. 



> How about testing how well your theories work in other places and at other times? How about applying your theories to the role of Christianity in european imperialism and colonialism?



To what end? To prove that the invading christian forces will invariably become involved in rape? I'm confused as to which theories you refer to.



> How about explaining why so many non-muslim men behave in an identical manner - ie exploiting the most vunerable / available / convenient / 'cheapest' and also labelling their victims as 'trash'?



Thing is, I don't see non-muslim gangs of men being convicted of grooming and exploiting 11 and 12 year old kids for rape.



> Just to show you where I'm coming from with this, have a quick read towards the end of this recent Economist article where the reporter in India explains how the lower caste women in the village, despite being 'untouchable' due to obligatory contact with dead animals and their neighbourhood being used as the village latrine, are also coerced into providing sex on demand for the village men:
> 
> A village in a million
> 
> ...



Unless I'm missing something here, I don't see how any "theory" I may or may not have can explain this, or is anything to do with the issue at hand.
Which 'theory' do you mean? This has nothing to do with grooming children for rape.



> By the way Bradford has a population of 300,000. Dalits in south asia number maybe 200,000,000.
> 
> How about testing your theory out on a country with large numbers of Muslims and Christians, for example the 150 million people of Nigeria (50% Muslims, 48% Christian, 2% Other)? I don't know if this would support or contradict your theory but surely it a wider picture is better than taking a tiny sample?



Agreed, I'm sure if there are figures for other places they will be looked into. Trouble is - stats for places like Nigeria are sketchy as best.
It seems the overwhelming majority of cases involve the police and security services as the perps.
http://www.codewit.com/democracy-at-risk/2307-nigeria-rape-the-silent-weapon-

However, in September 1999, several of Nigeria's predominantly Muslim northern states began to adopt a strict interpretation of the Sharia law. By late 2002, 12 out of Nigeria's 36 states had done so. 

The new laws impose segregation of the sexes and traditional punishments for the hudud offences. 

Women have been banned from working outside of the home and from sharing taxis and buses with men.

Fornication outside marriage is now punishable by stoning (to death), and theft by amputation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/ihavearightto/four_b/casestudy_art07.shtml


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Agree, it was/is.
> 
> pk you still haven't put forward a single constructive point about what to do about all of this.


 
Still trying to work out the facts from the internet fiction, nobody's claiming to have all the answers.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

> Surely we need to take a far wider view of pimping, prostitution, rape, trafficking, child abuse etc occur, who tends to be victims and who tend to be oppressors.
> Basing a theory on some vaguely defined 'muslim' guys in Bradford is fairly worthless in drawing any bigger conclusions.



Agreed, but I'm not exactly setting up a research commission here.

You can see for yourself a hell of a lot of people angrily dismissing the notion that some muslim gangs of men are specifically targetting non-muslim children, and they are racially abusing them whilst carrying out rape attacks.

Can't really look at anything objectively until people approach a topic rationally.

Also is the issue of censorship and the notion that the BBC and other media institutions are hypersensitive to offending islam, and will edit out news that may be less than flattering to the islamic communities here.



> To say anything worthwhile you need to look at the patterns in all parts of the world and identify what they have in common.
> Islam can't be much an explanatory factor if exactly the same things are happening where it is not involved at all.



I would like to think someone studying statistics would be in a position to study every corner of the globe, and be able to provide detailed statistics.

But it doesn't work that way, for starters most of these types of crimes go unreported, and certainly in the African continents reliable data is rare.



> Taking the wider view it looks far more like it just happens to be an "incidental" variable in Bradford.



Hmmm, the abuses we're talking about happened in Derby...




> If it wasn't that they would be out doing the same thing and dressing it up as caste or race or class or citizenship (ie. the self-described 'superior' using the 'inferior' for sex, labour, profit or punching practise).
> 
> Also not only across the modern world but throughout history - how much of an explanation is "Islam" when European (for example) armies have gone on rampages of rape and murder?
> 
> Surely a safer conclusion is that men throughout history have been doing this, and that they are labelled Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Bhuddist, 'other' or 'none' hasn't stopped them - or made them more or less likely to do so.



Yeah, that's a given, on that basis though, are you saying we should accept it as a human anomaly and disregard what is being reported by Straw and the Blackburn police commissioner? 
Because warfaring Europeans did it first?



> In other words, if you genuinely want to work out the role a variable plays you need to look at enough examples of where it is and isn't present.
> I suggest that there are enough contemporary and historical examples of non-Muslims doing the same thing worldwide that your theory of it's role is very weak, not plausible at all really.



Well then it is really up to you to provide evidence of non-muslim men going out in gangs, and drugging and raping little girls.



> I am however willing to be shown differently and will look at your evidence and examples with an open mind.


 
Basically you're asking that I do my own research in order to prove the contrary to what I believe to be true.



Am I missing something here? I'm not being flippant, but you could be clearer in your wording...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> he'll just keep going on about sex jihadis, romeo jihadis, and the muslims wearing bling who also have a bluetooth and listen to the words of radical clerics which on one hand has no affect on them acting in a totally western way but on the other hand sends them into crazed rapists.


 
And you'll deny that any such stereotype exists, never mind gangs of them who have access to flash cars and drugs.

Combine the hate speeches of the clerics with the "pimp daddy" bullshit of the rap scene that they will undoubtably have been listening to all their lives... and it isn't really looking that unlikely now is it?

Let's put it this way - IF there is a serious issue, then consider this - the society that cares more about not upsetting islamic sensibilities than about protecting its own citizens is a seriously fucked up society indeed, and if true this needs to be tackled before the BNP type scum make the most of it.

Here's another sobering statistic to get your head around - up to 80 percent of women in Pakistani prisons are there because they have been raped.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/17/pakistan.theobserver


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I hate Islam, not Muslims.


 
islamaphobe


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 11, 2011)

hipipol said:


> No it isnt Pakistani, its tribal Kashmiri, the majority of Biritsh Muslims in the north of the UK are from a very small number of valleys in nwhat Pakistan calls Azad (ie liberated) Kashmir - Hindu converts under the Moghuls, where the tribal part is much bigger than than the Muslim part
> Most of these peoples did NOT ask their women to wear veils until the Deobandi movement swept Indian Islam in the early/middle 19thC - however, Kashmir, though once under the sway of the Kings of Punjab, have always been hostile towards outsiders.
> What you have is bunch of mountain dwelling tribes, basically left alone under the Brit Raj, who then invaded by both India and Pakistan - a shock at best - my main surprise in Bradford was that the English and Asian communties, even tho they had been to school together almost never mixed - the hostility is palpable'
> Mountain tribe dropped into another feirce tribal crew, Yorkshiremen - they seem to wish to hurt each other, and it runs deep


 
This is true, and out of the realm of understanding of Trots from outside the area.


----------



## classicdish (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Well then it is really up to you to provide evidence of non-muslim men going out in gangs, and drugging and raping little girls.


Child abuse, sexual abuse, pimping, grooming, prostitution, sexual slavery, trafficking, rape, gang rape and so on - all happen in the americas, europe, the middle east, africa, southern asia, south-east asia and the far east, each of which has roughly 1bn population - so everywhere basically. Obviously the make-up of the criminal gangs (and the victims on which they prey) vary from place to place, but that doesn't seem to make much difference. It's the same kind of shit going on. Obviously there are differences with what people can get away with in some places - for example some really brutal murder sprees in mexico or the systematic rapes linked to the wars in the democratic republic of congo. But even richer, apparently lower-crime or more stable countries often have extensive hidden abuse, trafficking and violence going on.

Historical examples are too countless to list, but the most obvious are linked to warfare or military occupations.

All this is done by people (overwhelmingly men) who are are nominally Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Bhuddist, 'other' or 'none'. Their victims are very often from poorest sections of the population, internal or extrnal migrants fleeing poverty or warfare. So sometimes the exploitation and abuse happens to be 'cross-community' due to sheer opportunism. Sometimes it is 'within-community'. Sometimes it is combined with a high degree of racism or other prejudice, sometimes it is more 'colour-blind' and bound up with general poverty, drug addiction, violence and social breakdown.

You want to make a big thing out of the role of Islam in this by pointing to a handful of examples. I am suggesting that if you are seriously proposing this as a theory then let's apply your idea to the big picture. I am suggesting that it does not work very well as a theory because this abuse is widespread amongst non-muslim populations. Pointing to a tiny handful of cases in one location and ignoring the vast global picture is not very convincing. 

An alternative theory is that many men worldwide go out looking for sex, select their targets opportunistically and if there is nothing stopping them some of them will simply take what they want violently. Or maybe they will be able to pay money instead and a pimp will provide the coercion. This may or may not be overlaid with other prejudices, but that is largely incidental to the more general pattern. My argument is that this theory better fits the current and historical record than yours, but I am willing to keep an open mind.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> islamaphobe


 
It's not a phobia if you know why you hate.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 11, 2011)

That's what Hitler said.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

Yep, that's exactly what Hitler said.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Shame it's addressing statements I didn't actually make though, eh?





But it sums up your position, one based on anecdotes, conjecture, blinkered ego-ism  and a bit of googling.

I admit I may have got confused with your speculation about those recently convicted listening  to extremism tapes and your experiences with Bradford pimps.Sometimes you blur fact and fiction but hey don't we all like to garnish our lives a bit , make them a tad more interesting then say engineering.

But I was ( as I am sure others are)  interested in what your contribution is to this geographical and ideological war we are in that you spoke about against extreme Islam.

Btw I don't want to denigrate your contribution to culture in Bradford but isn't running 'sound sytems' ( which you claimed you did) the same as DJing ?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> But it sums up your position, one based on anecdotes, conjecture, blinkered ego-ism  and a bit of googling.
> 
> I admit I may have got confused with your speculation about those recently convicted listening  to extremism tapes and your experiences with Bradford pimps.Sometimes you blur fact and fiction but hey don't we all like to garnish our lives a bit , make them a tad more interesting then say engineering.



Spot on. 

pk has lost it.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 11, 2011)

Mrs Magpie said:


> Can't really be arsed to read the whole thread, but has anyoneone mentioned the reason why the BNP are not making a meal of this? It's because the white blokes convicted in connection with this are BNP members.


 
They are actually, they had a protest in Oldham at the weekend ( unopposed) and have used it in their by election campaign. Griffin complaining that when he raised it everyone dismissed it and when Straw raises it everyone listens. there is a bit on their TV page.


----------



## Fuchs66 (Jan 11, 2011)

Here we go again (presuming nobody has already linked to this)

Link


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

classicdish said:


> Child abuse, sexual abuse, pimping, grooming, prostitution, sexual slavery, trafficking, rape, gang rape and so on - all happen in the americas, europe, the middle east, africa, southern asia, south-east asia and the far east, each of which has roughly 1bn population - so everywhere basically. Obviously the make-up of the criminal gangs (and the victims on which they prey) vary from place to place, but that doesn't seem to make much difference. It's the same kind of shit going on. Obviously there are differences with what people can get away with in some places - for example some really brutal murder sprees in mexico or the systematic rapes linked to the wars in the democratic republic of congo. But even richer, apparently lower-crime or more stable countries often have extensive hidden abuse, trafficking and violence going on.
> 
> Historical examples are too countless to list, but the most obvious are linked to warfare or military occupations.
> 
> ...


 
So no comment on the 80 percent of women in Pakistani jailed being there because they were raped, and the possible cultural conflicts such attitudes foster - as well as no mention of the grooming of children for rape - grooming of non-muslim children by muslim men, which after all is the thread topic.

You've provided lots of info regarding prostitution, but offered little in terms of the impact on UK society of the picture emerging of decades of organised muslim gangs drugging and pimping children, and the fact that it has been kept out of the public domain.

You appear keen to suggest "everyone else does it not just muslims" but you, like others, seem to be keen to avoid some alarming conclusive figures to suggest there really is a problem here.

And to other posters - yesterday I was asked by Proper Tidy "Do you see Islam as more barbaric than other religions?"

I replied yes, and was called a "cunt" for doing so.

So will anyone now give me an example of a religion MORE barbaric than islam?

Or are people too scared to address the issues at hand?


----------



## Stoat Boy (Jan 11, 2011)

A Muslim pointed out to me yesterday that the men who have carried out this systamatic abuse come from a culture in which their own personal lives have been 'controlled' by others from their childhood and that its possible, whilst not being excusable, that if English people lived in a world in which they were not only promised in marriage to others before they went to School but that there was every likelihood that the person they were being expected to marry was their own cousin that maybe they would grow up with a fucked up attitude towards controlling the personal lives of others.

No specific culture comes out of this one with any credit.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Stoat Boy said:


> A Muslim pointed out to me yesterday that the men who have carried out this systamatic abuse come from a culture in which their own personal lives have been 'controlled' by others from their childhood and that its possible, whilst not being excusable, that if English people lived in a world in which they were not only promised in marriage to others before they went to School but that there was every likelihood that the person they were being expected to marry was their own cousin that maybe they would grow up with a fucked up attitude towards controlling the personal lives of others.
> 
> No specific culture comes out of this one with any credit.


 
So in other words - the strictness of their culture is to blame for the abuses, in a similar manner to the strict abstinence rules imposed upon Catholic priests predisposes them to abuse boys?

I fail to see how UK culture is somehow culpable, other than the failings leading to these vulnerable girls being left on the streets to fend for themselves at a young age.

In the advance of the multicultural age and welcoming arms of our sceptered isle, it is my view that we prefer to turn away from serious mismatches in cultural attitudes, certainly towards women, so as not to offend our ethnic communities. In doing so we enable these child rapes.

I would expect a lot more to be reported now that the silence has been shattered - the question is do we just block our ears and change the subject (much like RingDing is trying to do) or do we accept there may be a real problem and address it for what it is?


----------



## hipipol (Jan 11, 2011)

I cant see what evidence there is for the Koran encouraging the molestation of children. It does accept the prevailing mores of its first adherents in 7thC Arabia - something we would not be happy with today - but those behaviours were pretty widespread at the time. Jinnah, the "Founder" of Pakistan, did not think they would prevail once the Colonial rule of the Brits was removed, seems he was a bit wrong about that.
While we're on about grooming and explotation, anyone remeber this?
'The worst of the 150 or so allegations of misconduct--some of them captured on videotape--include pedophilia, rape, and prostitution. While a U.N. investigation into the scandal continues, the organization has just suspended two more peacekeepers in neighboring Burundi over similar charges. The revelations come three years after another U.N. report found "widespread" evidence of sexual abuse of West African refugees.'
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/081zxelz.asp
In this case the victims were all African, the abusers mainly white, or to be more specific, French (Including one senior nonce the French govt whisked back to Paris and refused to have prosecuted, despite having all his abuse videos!!)
Its got sod all to do commands from deranged claw handed clerics, much more to do with power and the mutual antipathy between communities who view each other with suspicion and distrust. Much easier to target what you already dislike - people rarely attack things they hold in high esteem


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

hipipol said:


> I cant see what evidence there is for the Koran encouraging the molestation of children. It does accept the prevailing mores of its first adherents in 7thC Arabia - something we would not be happy with today - but those behaviours were pretty widespread at the time. Jinnah, the "Founder" of Pakistan, did not think they would prevail once the Colonial rule of the Brits was removed, seems he was a bit wrong about that.



Well with this I agree - and this is why the EDL type cunts who bang on about the muslim prophet being a pedophile are a joke - King Æthebald of Mercia was punished for numerous reasons, including violating holy nuns that were virgins consecrated to God, and accounts of anglo saxons raping children and taking them as slaves are well documented. All happened at roughly the same time - in the dark ages.



> While we're on about grooming and explotation, anyone remember this?
> 'The worst of the 150 or so allegations of misconduct--some of them captured on videotape--include pedophilia, rape, and prostitution. While a U.N. investigation into the scandal continues, the organization has just suspended two more peacekeepers in neighboring Burundi over similar charges. The revelations come three years after another U.N. report found "widespread" evidence of sexual abuse of West African refugees.'
> http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/081zxelz.asp
> In this case the victims were all African, the abusers mainly white, or to be more specific, French (Including one senior nonce the French govt whisked back to Paris and refused to have prosecuted, despite having all his abuse videos!!)
> Its got sod all to do commands from deranged claw handed clerics, much more to do with power and the mutual antipathy between communities who view each other with suspicion and distrust. Much easier to target what you already dislike - people rarely attack things they hold in high esteem



Your example is a good one, and exposes a nasty racial element to the crime.

Seems to be a similarly one way street in these UK cases though - you won't find gangs of UK British white men grooming muslim girls for abuse.

Therein lies the animosity - that UK girls are seen as fair game. "Easy meat" to put it in Straw's distasteful terms... though he merely repeated the comments from his regional police chief.

The reports from the victims that they were racially abused during their ordeals reveals a far more sinister aspect to this type of crime than many are prepared to face up to.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Fuchs66 said:


> Here we go again (presuming nobody has already linked to this)
> 
> Link


 
Be interesting if these lads were subject to punishment according to Sharia law...

Wa'il ibn Hujr: When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. …..he said: Stone him to death”.[viii]  This Hadis is the base of the Sharia law: - The rapist will be punished to death if force on the victim is proven.

Of course in Sharia the victims would need to provide four "reliable" witnesses - i.e. men - who could confirm their allegations.

In Pakistan, under the Zina ordinance, girls as young as twelve have been prosecuted for having extra-marital intercourse under circumstances that would previously have mandated statutory rape charges against their assailant. 

(A)  "Proof of Zina (adultery) or Zina Bil-Jabr (rape) liable to Hadd shall be one of the following:

        (a) The accused makes confession, or

        (b) There are at least four Muslim adult male witnesses”[x] 

(B)    "Proof of adultery or rape liable to Hadd shall be one of the following:

         (a) The accused makes confession, or

         (b) There are at least four Muslim adult male witnesses.”[xi]

(C)    “Punishment will take place when Zina or rape has been proved by witness.”[xii]

(D)    Sharia Law rejects the witness of women in Hudood cases.[xiii]

(E)    “The evidence of women is originally inadmissible on account of their weakness of understanding, want of memory and incapacity of governing.”[xiv]

http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=6157

http://news.lawreader.com/?p=457


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

Are we ready to have a watch of the report on Newsnight regarding this matter??

A very telling piece with inteviews with a charity that works with young victims of sexual abuse and also the filth on the frontline of investigating sexual assault.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00xggg1/Newsnight_10_01_2011/

It starts 30 mins in.

pk, blinkers at the ready!


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Are we ready to have a watch of the report on Newsnight regarding this matter??
> 
> A very telling piece with inteviews with a charity that works with young victims of sexual abuse and also the filth on the frontline of investigating sexual assault.
> 
> ...


 
I'll watch that.

In return you can watch this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00xh4lq/Newsnight_07_01_2011/

Especially the bit where the victims allege racial abuse during their ordeal.

Don't be weaselling out of it will you? The comments in the first 5 minutes alone support what I've been maintaining.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Are we ready to have a watch of the report on Newsnight regarding this matter??
> 
> A very telling piece with inteviews with a charity that works with young victims of sexual abuse and also the filth on the frontline of investigating sexual assault.
> 
> ...


 
OK, so I watched it. What of it? Nothing we didn't already know.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

You really have no humility. How tedious. That coke really fucked with your ego.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You really have no humility. How tedious. That coke really fucked with your ego.


 
You could try asking which aspect I am supposed to have watched that miraculously proves you right and me wrong.

But you won't. You're so hell-bent on saving what little dignity you have left after being torn a new arsehole here.

How about YOU comment on the clearly racially motivated attacks on the episode of Newsnight I linked to - or did you not watch it?

Ad hominem attacks regarding cocaine use are ridiculous considering I am not a cocaine user. 
I am however well aware of your various mental illnesses, you have documented them well over the years including back when you were called DoUsAFavour.
So be careful throwing around accusations of being fucked in the head.

Any chance you could stick to the thread topic, or is that too much to ask?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

So you agree there's not a disproportionate level of rape coming from people with a Pakistani background?

Or are you still too self-righteous to hold your hand up?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

pk earlier today.....


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So you agree there's not a disproportionate level of rape coming from people with a Pakistani background?
> 
> Or are you still too self-righteous to hold your hand up?


 
No I do not agree, and if you have watched the Panorama video I linked to, you would draw similar conclusions unless blinkered.

Tell you what, if your diazepam addled brain is finding a contextual question too hard to handle, how about you find the time code in the video that supposedly backs up your assertions.

In the meantime I'll maintain my own stance - that the STREET GROOMING OF CHILDREN FOR RAPE IS DISPROPORTIONATELY CARRIED OUT BY MUSLIM MEN.


----------



## Garek (Jan 11, 2011)

What do people make of this?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/11/nine-arrested-sex-abuse-rochdale


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing, earlier today.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Garek said:


> What do people make of this?
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/11/nine-arrested-sex-abuse-rochdale


 
Identical case to the one in Derby. Only this one was 13 year olds instead of 12 year olds.

Same methods, same grooming technique, same age range both perps and victims, same drugging and gang-raping of children.

Must be pure coincidence though. These muslim lads must have known the muslim lads who lived 55 miles away and copied their idea. Must have.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

There was some confusion regarding the Norway statistic earlier of 65% or 6.5% ... based on figures from 2004.

Here are some more recent figures, from April 2010.

This short news clip details 41 brutal violent rapes of Norwegian women by “African and Turkish” men, and of the 41 investigated, 100% are committed by immigrants of particular backgrounds while none are committed by the indigenous Norwegian men.

According to the police chief of the Oslo district - "We see that many of them have a view on women, which means that when they want can take control over other people, mostly women".


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> There was some confusion regarding the Norway statistic earlier of 65% or 6.5% ... based on figures from 2004.
> 
> Here are some more recent figures, from April 2010.
> 
> ...


 
A context free clip posted up by a fascist. The Jazz syndrome spreads.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Or are you still too self-righteous to hold your hand up?


 
And when are you going to explain your comment on page 2? Post #33.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> A context free clip posted up by a fascist. The Jazz syndrome spreads.


 
Really? The Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) is a fascist organisation? Funny, I always thought it was Norway's version of the BBC.

Are you able to find up to date rape stats on Norway?

Do you even give a fuck about this issue?

Anything of relevance to say on the topic, eh big man?

Or is this just bluster? I don't see anything in the clips that is fascistic - it may well be used and copied elsewhere to serve the agenda of a fascist blogger, but unless you're calling the link out as incorrect - or calling me a fascist - then you're point is pretty desperate isn't it? As for being context-free, hardly!!!

*The only reason I used the vlad blogger clip is because it was subtitled, genius.* It's OK, I don't expect you to pitch in and apologise for getting your facts wrong.

Here's the same video clip from NRK if it makes you feel better. You can do better than this. Comparing me to Jazzz, LOL!

http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/1.6567955


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Found some more Norweigan stats - that oddly appear to back up the 65% figure that was allegedly a misprint... these are for Oslo alone.
----
72.8% of rapists in 2007 had foreign background, 63.2% in 2004, 53% in 2001.

Considering that 23.8% of population in Oslo area (where most rapes happen) have foreign background, a foreigner is 8.55 times more likely to commit a rape crime.

Men of African background have increased their "share" the most, from 10% in 2001, 19.1% in 2004 and now 30.5% in 2007. This is partly because there are more Africans in gang rapes.

73% of victims in 2007 had Norwegian background.

http://www.politi.no/pls/idesk/docs/...tioslo2007.pdf

https://www.politi.no/

According to the report of rape in Oslo 2007 "72.8% of the perpetrators in the year had a different nationality background than Norwegian. 

In a corresponding survey in 2004 the figure was 63.2%, and in 2001 was 53%. 
These are figures for all rapes. 
The proportion of foreign perpetrators of rape robbery was consistently higher.
----

The reason that most of the stats are only available from dubious sites with clear racist agendas is that the original stat files appear to have been purged from official records.

I would suggest that televised interviews backing up the figures at least go to show that they were available on official sources at one time or another.

Does make one wonder why they were deleted/moved though...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Out of interest - since nobody is bothering to give an example of a religion MORE barbaric than islam - at what point would people accept that the statistics for street grooming and pimp gangs targetting children ARE over-representative?

80 percent?

90 percent?

100 percent?

That's a hell of a lot of kids that are to be messed up for life, if you need such a disproportionately massive figure to accept perhaps there really is a problem with islamic integration into comparably liberal and decadent western cities...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Funny how nobody is able to dig up stats that conclusively prove me wrong either.

Not one person. How odd.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2011)

the old aztec religion was pretty barbaric.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> the old aztec religion was pretty barbaric.


 
As was Christianity before it made some attempts towards reforming. Islam seems very stuck in the Dark Ages.


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Funny how nobody is able to dig up stats that conclusively prove me wrong either.
> 
> Not one person. How odd.


I think it's simply the case that we've reached the point where you've ended up right up your own arse, complete with the 'facts' you've plucked from there. Probably no one can be bothered. I certainly can't


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> the old aztec religion was pretty barbaric.


 
I don't know any Aztecs. Apart from Roddy Frame.

Good start though. Broke the awkward silence.

I get the distinct feeling a lot of people want me to shut up about this, the same type of people that yell words like "sexist" and "bigot" around the place.

The same people that have a problem admitting that perhaps traditional islamist thinking in regards to western women is completely incompatible with UK culture after all. Because they are terrified of being accused of some phobia.

Screw the victims, as long as they look all right-on and PC and culturally aware.

Bit of a shock, this cultural awareness stuff though, sometimes.

I welcome all stats to counter my argument. In fact I would really like to see some, as I am not entirely comfortable with the conclusions mine are pointing to at all.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> I think it's simply the case that we've reached the point where you've ended up right up your own arse, complete with the 'facts' you've plucked from there. Probably no one can be bothered. I certainly can't


 
If you think I've just "plucked" facts from thin air then you should have no problem at all countering them with facts of your own.

Unless you're just going for a weaselly personal attack just because you cannot find any such facts.

You know what's funny is - all the years reading this site, reading all the politicos banging on about strategies to combat the rise of the BNP, the EDL...

I'm here making it fucking easy for you.

If you can't counter my arguments, and you can see I'm addressing every point I possibly can, and shying away from none of the issues here, then you've no chance once the likes of Griffin and his pedophile mates get hold of it and use it for political capital, which it appears they have already (in spite of the two white men involved in the child rape being paid up BNP members).

So maybe it might be a good idea to get a little practice in with someone who has no intention of letting the BNP gain any position of influence? Just a thought.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Funny how nobody is able to dig up stats that conclusively prove me wrong either.
> 
> Not one person. How odd.


 
What a moronic comment.  Did you miss the programme alst night?  Where the copper (in ever so slightly muslim Blackburn) said that 80% of the people targetting and grooming young girls were white?  That means less than 20% were muslim, and as 20% of the town is muslim, that meants muslims men are _less_ likely to partake in such a vile practise.

But dont let tedious things like facts (or, heaven forfend!, thinking) could your burst of mindless bigotry.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> What a moronic comment.  Did you miss the programme alst night?  Where the copper (in ever so slightly muslim Blackburn) said that 80% of the people targetting and grooming young girls were white?  That means less than 20% were muslim, and as 20% of the town is muslim, that meants muslims men are _less_ likely to partake in such a vile practise.
> 
> But dont let tedious things like facts (or, heaven forfend!, thinking) could your burst of mindless bigotry.


 
Yeah but what about Norway? What about Pakistan? I lived in Bradford you know. Love me.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> What a moronic comment.  Did you miss the programme alst night?  Where the copper (in ever so slightly muslim Blackburn) said that 80% of the people targetting and grooming young girls were white?  That means less than 20% were muslim, and as 20% of the town is muslim, that meants muslims men are _less_ likely to partake in such a vile practise.
> 
> But dont let tedious things like facts (or, heaven forfend!, thinking) could your burst of mindless bigotry.


 
Which copper - the copper in the car? Watching it now, again. His figure of 80 percent mentions NOTHING about targetting and grooming.
His figures were regarding child abuse cases in total.

Det Sgt Mark Whelan, Lancashire Constabulary.

*"This is Whitton Park in Blackburn. Again it's an area where people can be taken that's out of public view. It's dark, it's open, and we check down here for example on occasions to see if children are in cars with adults when they shouldn't be.*
_In terms of who you're looking for, is there a profile, is there an obvious?_
*"No there isn't an obvious profile, we look at ... sexual exploitation is just another term for child abuse in my opinion. 
"We don't look for specific types of ethnicity of children or offenders, we don't look for a specific age group of offenders, we look for people who are abusing children"*
_And what is the danger, if indeed you think there is a danger, in this sort of profile that's been built up recently?_
*"In our experience, if we only looked and only dealt with Asian offenders, we would have missed 80 percent of the work that we had to do this year.*
_But in the past you did miss people you think? Because your focus was on asian offenders_
*"No our focus wasn't on Asian offenders, our focus was on the crimes that we were seeing at that time.
But that's because we weren't particularly good at looking for the crimes in the first place."*

So he's actually talking about child abuse on the whole, not specifically the grooming and gang/drug element.

And that figure tallies with the Lancashire statistics:

In the latest year for which we have data, Lancashire police arrested 627 people for sexual offences. 0.3% of these were Pakistanis. That’s two people. 85.5% were white British. 
In Lancashire, there are 1,296,900 white Brits and 45,000 Pakistanis. 
This means that 4.163 per 10,000 white Brits were arrested for a sex crime, compared to 0.44 Pakistanis. 
If you’re a journalist, you might say that the chances of being arrested for a sex crime are nine times greater if you’re white than Pakistani. 
If you’re a statistician, you might say they are 0.037 percentage points greater."


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah but what about Norway? What about Pakistan? I lived in Bradford you know. Love me.


 
Hey - any chance of naming a religion more barbaric than islam, or are you just bottling out of that one having called me a cunt yesterday before flouncing off the thread?

Come on. Just name one. You afraid to answer your own questions?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

So youngsters in Lancashire are much more likely to be nonced by a white man than an asian man. Excellent work pk.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

Buddhism.  Much worse.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So youngsters in Lancashire are much more likely to be nonced by a white man than an asian man. Excellent work pk.


 
yup, i couldn't be arsed to type it all out, so well done that lad.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Hey - any chance of naming a religion more barbaric than islam, or are you just bottling out of that one having called me a cunt yesterday before flouncing off the thread?
> 
> Come on. Just name one. You afraid to answer your own questions?


 
All religions are barbaric. Islam as a doctrine is no more barbaric than any other. You are completely unable to distinguish between a religious doctrine and political interpretations of religion. You thick fuck.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So youngsters in Lancashire are much more likely to be nonced by a white man than an asian man. Excellent work pk.


 
That would include uncles and care homes and all manner of nasty incest shit.

The topic we are discussing is the grooming and of children by asians to facilitate gang rape. Not overall child abuses.

As you well know.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> The topic we are discussing is the grooming and of children by asians to facilitate gang rape.


 
oh well, if that is the specific topic, we can be pretty sure the percentage of asians involved is 100%


Accidentally given yourself away again, pk


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

Cos some types of noncing are worse than others, of course. Especially if it's these dirty foreigners preying on our indigenous youth.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> All religions are barbaric. Islam as a doctrine is no more barbaric than any other. You are completely unable to distinguish between a religious doctrine and political interpretations of religion. You thick fuck.


 
No, you are the thick fuck.

You pose a question - do you think islam is more barbaric than any other religion. I answer yes. 
Now you try and wriggle out of answering the same question with this mealy mouth bullshit and think nobody will notice.

What other religion seeks to murder its critics in the name of god? Which other current religion proscribes laws from medieval ages?

Don't get mad just because you can't answer your own question, it makes you look like a complete cunt.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> What other religion seeks to murder its critics in the name of god?


 
you didnt really just ask that did you?  Jesus!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> No, you are the thick fuck.
> 
> You pose a question - do you think islam is more barbaric than any other religion. I answer yes.
> Now you try and wriggle out of answering the same question with this mealy mouth bullshit and think nobody will notice.
> ...


 
Oh dear.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> No, you are the thick fuck.
> 
> You pose a question - do you think islam is more barbaric than any other religion. I answer yes.
> Now you try and wriggle out of answering the same question with this mealy mouth bullshit and think nobody will notice.
> ...


 
From Buddhists to Christians via Rastas, Scientologists and every other fucker, some exponents of every religion behave like that. Here, have a starting point, first example of a few thousand you could find if you looked.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

Most religions have eased up on barbarism but not so Islam.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> oh well, if that is the specific topic, we can be pretty sure the percentage of asians involved is 100%
> 
> 
> Accidentally given yourself away again, pk


 
Maybe you are too thick to work out the nuances of the stats involved.

The cop you cited as an example from Newsnight was - according to you - talking about 80 percent of the perps caught grooming kids being white.

I've demonstrated that you're talking complete bollocks. None of those figures that have been cited by Jack Straw, or senior cops in a better position to tally the ethnic background and background of the victims has said anything like this.

In fact quite the opposite.

The Times investigation is based around 56 men convicted in the Midlands and north of England since 1997, 50 were from Muslim backgrounds.

No official data exists on the ethnic or religious background of perpetrators of this form of grooming of children by drug gangs for rape, and local charities such as Engage have stated publicly that they do not consider it a race issue.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Most religions have eased up on barbarism but not so Islam.



No they haven't.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> you didnt really just ask that did you?  Jesus!


 
What's Jesus got to do with it? 

Do you have a point?? Do you disagree, that islam is not as barbaric as... erm... another religion that you just can't be arsed to mention right now?

Up to 80 percent of jailed Pakistani women are inside because they were raped, because the application of islamic law means "they were asking for it" in other words.

But no - it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on these latest string of abuse cases, almost all involving muslim men and white non-muslim UK children.

None at all.

It must be all in my head.

What's the view like in there?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> No they haven't.


 
Name one.

And don't say Scientollololology, fuck sake. 

Less than 40,000 members and shrinking daily.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> From Buddhists to Christians via Rastas, Scientologists and every other fucker, some exponents of every religion behave like that. Here, have a starting point, first example of a few thousand you could find if you looked.


 
Fucks sake - the Lords Resistance Army isn't a religion...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Cos some types of noncing are worse than others, of course. Especially if it's these *dirty foreigners* preying on our indigenous youth.


 
Your words not mine, funny how the racism comes out in jest...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> oh well, if that is the specific topic, we can be pretty sure the percentage of asians involved is 100%


 
What have the last 39 pages been discussing, if not the specific topic of grooming children for rape?? Twat.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> That would include uncles and care homes and all manner of nasty incest shit.
> 
> The topic we are discussing is the grooming and of children by asians to facilitate gang rape. Not overall child abuses.
> 
> As you well know.



Oh it's about all _Asians _now?...you see I thought you said it was:




			
				pk said:
			
		

> In the meantime I'll maintain my own stance - that the STREET GROOMING OF CHILDREN FOR RAPE IS DISPROPORTIONATELY CARRIED OUT BY MUSLIM MEN.



Make up your mind...you are posting in circles and it's tedious.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Fucks sake - the Lords Resistance Army isn't a religion...


 
Why?

Why is it Islam's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Islamic, but it isn't Christianity's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Christian? Why, pk, why?

Does the existence of violent secular organisations prove that secularism is inherently violent?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Your words not mine, funny how the racism comes out in jest...


 
Ya see that's the thing pk...it isn't funny, nobody is laughing except for you. 

There is an underlying narrative to this in the way it's being reported, the 'defiling of indigenious youth by evil foreigners'. You are also buying into that and exploiting it to blame this gang's behaviour on the fact that they come from a non-indigenous, Muslim background, despite the things they were doing to these girls and the lifestyle they were living,  not being 'Muslim' in lifestyle,  and considerably,   'Western' in activity. Fast cars, drugs, sex, gangs...


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why?
> 
> Why is it Islam's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Islamic, but it isn't Christianity's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Christian? Why, pk, why?
> 
> Does the existence of violent secular organisations prove that secularism is inherently violent?


 
That.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

Could I mentıon that the greatest atrocıtıes ın hıstory have been carrıed out by avowedly secularıst regımes?

Ta.


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Could I mentıon that the greatest atrocıtıes ın hıstory have been carrıed out by avowedly secularıst regımes?
> 
> Ta.


Except the Nazis weren't avowedly secularist. But I'll give you Stalin, and the USA at a pinch


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> Except the Nazis weren't avowedly secularist.



Yes they were.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

As an aside....does anyone know how to do that post count by users on a thread?...I would like to see the stats for this thread...I think it might make me laugh a little.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> As an aside....does anyone know how to do that post count by users on a thread?...I would like to see the stats for this thread...I think it might make me laugh a little.


 
Posts 275 pk
Posts 77 DrRingDing
Posts 66 smokedout
Posts 56 ernestolynch
Posts 47 Proper Tidy
Posts 42 One_Stop_Shop
Posts 37 Rutita1
Posts 26 ViolentPanda
Posts 25 phildwyer
Posts 23 IC3D
Posts 19 nino_savatte
Posts 17 Pickman's model
Posts 17 rover07
Posts 15 Fullyplumped
Posts 15 littlebabyjesus
Posts 15 ericjarvis
Posts 14 _angel_
Posts 13 IMR
Posts 12 CyberRose
Posts 11 dylans
Posts 11 The39thStep
Posts 10 YouSir
Posts 9 frogwoman
Posts 9 Garek
Posts 9 tbaldwin
Posts 7 hipipol
Posts 7 Citizen66
Posts 6 butchersapron
Posts 6 likesfish
Posts 5 belboid
Posts 5 Kid_Eternity
Posts 5 classicdish
Posts 5 revol68
Posts 5 Captain Hurrah
Posts 5 treelover


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

That is missing vital info.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> That is missing vital info.


 
Fixed


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Fixed


 
275  Thank you!


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Ya see that's the thing pk...it isn't funny, nobody is laughing except for you.
> 
> There is an underlying narrative to this in the way it's being reported, the 'defiling of indigenious youth by evil foreigners'. You are also buying into that and exploiting it to blame this gang's behaviour on the fact that they come from a non-indigenous, Muslim background, despite the things they were doing to these girls and the lifestyle they were living,  not being 'Muslim' in lifestyle,  and considerably, if not more secular and  'Western' in activity. Fast cars, drugs, sex, gangs...


 
For starters - they're not "foreigners" mostly they are second generation British.

But they often carry with them the notion that western women are just kuffar sluts, not to be respected in the same way as muslim girls.

And the notion that underage girls are fair game, another nasty trait from their grandfather's homeland.

You clearly think this has no bearing on the recent spate of cases, and perhaps you have no opinion on the fact that such stories have seemingly been repressed by the news media for a decade until now... why do you think that is?


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Yes they were.


Weird then the SS oath ended with 'so help me god' and that the (1934 revised) wehrmacht oath started off with some reference to god.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> For starters - they're not "foreigners" mostly they are second generation British.



I know!  

But by repeatedly referring to them as Asian/Muslim and going on like their behaviour is inherent to them being Asian/Muslim is exploiting and supporting/promoting an underlying narrative, about the 'defiling of indigenious youth by evil foreigners' and ignoring the fact that  the things they were doing to these girls and the lifestyle they were living, was not particularly 'Muslim' in lifestyle, and considerably, if not 'Western' in activity. Fast cars, drugs, sex, gangs...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> But they often carry with them the notion that western women are just kuffar sluts, not to be respected in the same way as muslim girls.



Blind assertion part 1



> And the notion that underage girls are fair game, another nasty trait from their grandfather's homeland.



Blind assertion part 2



> You clearly think this has no bearing on the recent spate of cases, and perhaps you have no opinion on the fact that such stories have seemingly been repressed by the news media for a decade until now... why do you think that is?



Blind assertion part 3


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why?
> 
> Why is it Islam's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Islamic, but it isn't Christianity's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Christian? Why, pk, why?
> 
> Does the existence of violent secular organisations prove that secularism is inherently violent?


 
Your consistent wriggling to avoid answering your own questions isn't going unnoticed...

But the Lords Army aren't anything to do with Christianity - Thou Shalt Not Kill being one of the central tenets.

Neither is the US Army. They aren't converting people to Christianity or building churches.

Irrelevant point is irrelevant.

The duty of a devout muslim is to propagate islam, and to convert as many people as possible or just disregard them as sinful infidels.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Your consistent wriggling to avoid answering your own questions isn't going unnoticed...
> 
> But the Lords Army aren't anything to do with Christianity - Thou Shalt Not Kill being one of the central tenets.
> 
> ...


 
Ahahahahaha


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Your consistent wriggling to avoid answering your own questions isn't going unnoticed...
> 
> But the Lords Army aren't anything to do with Christianity - Thou Shalt Not Kill being one of the central tenets.
> 
> ...


LOLpost of the thread so far. I love how the LRA is nothing to do with Xtianity, and how the US isn't either, but some waster nonces who happen to be 2nd gen pakistani represent islam.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Nobody has commented on the racial abuse these children suffered along with the rapes...

Seems to me a lot of people keen to derail the thread rather than talk about this stuff...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Ahahahahaha


 
What's funny? You inability to give me an example of a modern religion more barbaric than islam?

Ahahahahaha!!


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> But the Lords Army aren't anything to do with Christianity - Thou Shalt Not Kill being one of the central tenets.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Your consistent wriggling to avoid answering your own questions isn't going unnoticed...
> 
> But the Lords Army aren't anything to do with Christianity - Thou Shalt Not Kill being one of the central tenets.
> 
> ...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

Lords Army - nothing to do with the Lord. Fact.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Nobody has commented on the racial abuse these children suffered along with the rapes...



I did. You ignored it because you had nothing you could counter it with.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lords Army - nothing to do with the Lord. Fact.


 
About as much as Lord's Cricket Ground...


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Maybe you are too thick to work out the nuances of the stats involved.


maybe you're too thick to realsie what you wrote?

You are contradicting yourself all over the place, showing such obvious hypocrisy it is unbelievable, but at least you have a glorious ally - that goold old fashioned non-bigot Lock&Light!  marvellous.

One moment you accept that muslim are under repsresented amongst overall child abuse, and then go on to say they are the most abhorrent religion because of (amongst other things) they're child abuse!

Oh what a mess you are.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I did. You ignored it because you had nothing you could counter it with.


 
I've ignored nothing. Remind me. Fast moving thread is fast. If you wouldn't mind.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> the Lords Army aren't anything to do with Christianity - Thou Shalt Not Kill being one of the central tenets.


 
you are fucking joking arent you?  You are truly, truly mad.

pk just denies that any christian denomination is christian.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

Just to be clear, PK, what grounds do you judge a religion on? Who represents it? You won't accept that cunts using Christianity to justify their actions have anything to do with Christianity, so why does the reverse apply to Muslims?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> maybe you're too thick to realsie what you wrote?
> 
> You are contradicting yourself all over the place, showing such obvious hypocrisy it is unbelievable, but at least you have a glorious ally - that goold old fashioned non-bigot Lock&Light!  marvellous.
> 
> ...


 
You're desperation to misrepresent my opinions is hysterical.

Overall child abuse in an overwhelmingly white majority is majority white. As Straw said regarding prison stats.

Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim.

Do you agree? Yes or no will be fine.


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim.


And the evidence for this is?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Just to be clear, PK, what grounds do you judge a religion on? Who represents it? You won't accept that cunts using Christianity to justify their actions have anything to do with Christianity, so why does the reverse apply to Muslims?


 
Lord's Army are about as representative of mainstream christianity as Jim Jones and the Kool Aid gang.

Need I clarify that any example of a mainstream religion will suffice as an example of one more barbaric than islam.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> And the evidence for this is?


 
Read the fucking thread and find out?


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> You're desperation to misrepresent my opinions is hysterical.
> 
> Overall child abuse in an overwhelmingly white majority is majority white. As Straw said regarding prison stats.


And you argued that child abuse (and surely raping a child in a childrens home, pimping them out from there, is every bit as bad as grooming for gang rape?) is a major reasobn islam is especuially evil.  Even tho figures show it isn't.



> Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim.
> 
> Do you agree? Yes or no will be fine.


 
I have seen absolutely zero evidence to support that argument, no.

What you are trying, very very badly, to do, is to use one single crime that _you think_ (without any real evidence) is 'overwhemlingly' carried out by a single group, and using that to extrapolate absurdly, wilfully ignoring that overall (even if your claim is true) the evidence points clearly in the opposite direction.

It's a very old, lazy, and racist argument that we've heard time and time again.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I've ignored nothing. Remind me. Fast moving thread is fast. If you wouldn't mind.


 
Okay. 




			
				pk said:
			
		

> Nice of you to skip over the main point of that quote... namely that there was DEFINITELY a racial element to the rapes.








			
				Rutita1 said:
			
		

> Given that in my experience, a seeming anti-racist will resort to calling people racially inspired names if there are in a temper or that so called anti-mysogynists will also resort to calling women 'silly girls' when it takes their fancy, I don't think I skipped an important point at all.
> 
> Rape is a dehumaninsing and violent crime. That racialised language/epitaphs were used to enforce that dehumanisation and distancing between victim and perpetrator is no surprise to me.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Lord's Army are about as representative of mainstream christianity as Jim Jones and the Kool Aid gang.
> 
> Need I clarify that any example of a mainstream religion will suffice as an example of one more barbaric than islam.


 
So you think that gang raping kids is a bulwark of mainstream Islamic belief then?


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Lord's Army are about as representative of mainstream christianity as Jim Jones and the Kool Aid gang.
> 
> Need I clarify that any example of a mainstream religion will suffice as an example of one more barbaric than islam.


 
oh do fuck off.

None of the islamic groups that do nasty things are really islamic because the koran is nice.  

Unless pk says otherwise.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Blind assertion part 1
> 
> Blind assertion part 2
> 
> Blind assertion part 3


 
I've provided enough data to back up what I said.

The fact that you're refusing to accept it is not my problem.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Read the fucking thread and find out?


 
we have.  you have none.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I've provided enough data to back up what I said.


 
No you havent.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> So you think that gang raping kids is a bulwark of mainstream Islamic belief then?


 
Seems to be a common trait in cities all over Europe. Bulwark of mainstream belief? If you follow the example of the prophet to the letter then I guess it could be considered so. As is the subjugation of women in general.


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Read the fucking thread and find out?


The thread is not evidence. I expect an expert like yourself to have such evidence to hand. It should be easy for you to provide the evidence for your assertion that: "Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim". So let's see it


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> we have.  you have none.


 
I have plenty. Read it again. Use a bigger font if you need to.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Just to be clear, PK, what grounds do you judge a religion on? Who represents it? You won't accept that cunts using Christianity to justify their actions have anything to do with Christianity, so why does the reverse apply to Muslims?


 
I've already asked this. Apparently it's 'irrelevant'.

Can we just accept that pk isn't naive, neither is he the brave bringer of truth in a world of newspeak. He's just a bigoted little twat.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> What you are trying, very very badly, to do, is to use one single crime that _you think_ (without any real evidence) is 'overwhemlingly' carried out by a single group


 
Rubbish - there are at least 4 crimes that are identical yet unrelated, and plenty more in Europe that I've sourced and provided.

Enlarge that font, maybe you're needing glasses?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

YouSir said:


> So you think that gang raping kids is a bulwark of mainstream Islamic belief then?


 
That's not what pk has said. But I think you know that.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Lord's Army are about as representative of mainstream christianity as Jim Jones and the Kool Aid gang.
> 
> Need I clarify that any example of a mainstream religion will suffice as an example of one more barbaric than islam.


 
So you think a majority of muslims agree that rape and noncing is acceptable, thus making it 'mainstream islam'?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Rubbish - there are at least 4 crimes that are identical yet unrelated, and plenty more in Europe that I've sourced and provided.


 Okay pk...you are obviously right. 

Now, you know all the White men in the world that are involved in child abuse/rape etc....Do they also do it because they have a Muslim heritage? 

Or is it only Muslim men that do it because they are Muslim, but non-muslims do it because they want to be Muslim?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I've provided enough data to back up what I said.
> 
> The fact that you're refusing to accept it is not my problem.


 
You haven't provided any that would back up your repeated and racist assertions.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Rubbish - there are at least 4 crimes that are identical yet unrelated, and plenty more in Europe that I've sourced and provided.
> 
> Enlarge that font, maybe you're needing glasses?


 
wow, a grand total of four examples of the same crime!  (learn how to use words properly pk, it might help you stop making a dick of yourself).  Four is a number any statistician will tell you is meaningless to draw conclusions from. Worthless.  Even if it was a properly controled sample of four, which, of course, it isn't.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> That's not what pk has said. But I think you know that.


 
He's just said exactly that, dumbo.


----------



## YouSir (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Seems to be a common trait in cities all over Europe. Bulwark of mainstream belief? If you follow the example of the prophet to the letter then I guess it could be considered so. As is the subjugation of women in general.


 


Lock&Light said:


> That's not what pk has said. But I think you know that.


 
Actually it is pretty much what he said.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

Anyway, we've established yet again that pk is a vile cunt


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Seems to be a common trait in cities all over Europe. Bulwark of mainstream belief? If you follow the example of the prophet to the letter then I guess it could be considered so. As is the subjugation of women in general.


 
'Common trait'???  Now a grand total of four examples equals a 'common trait'.

As you have smoked weed and snorted coke on at least four occasions (as you've mentined on thisa thread), should we not just dismiss your nonce sense as the workings of an paranoid cokehead fuckwit?  If it works for _the,m_, you really should be consistent and say its true of you too.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> The thread is not evidence. I expect an expert like yourself to have such evidence to hand. It should be easy for you to provide the evidence for your assertion that: "Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim". So let's see it


 
Take it up with Jack Straw, or former Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell, who was East Lancashire’s top detective when he retired from the force last year, or Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Muslim Ramadhan Foundation, or feminist Muslim journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Ann Cryer, former Labour MP for Keighley.

I've posted enough witness testimony, links, transcripts and the like for now. 

Lets see you and others wriggle and squirm some more, anything to avoid the actual issue at hand...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway, we've established yet again that pk is a vile cunt


 
Shoot the messenger, aye.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

If I had a gun I fucking would


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Shoot the messenger, aye.


 
No, we're _laughing at_ the messenger (for the BNP)


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> 'Common trait'???  Now a grand total of four examples equals a 'common trait'.



Far more than four. Read the thread.



> As you have smoked weed and snorted coke on at least four occasions (as you've mentined on thisa thread), should we not just dismiss your nonce sense as the workings of an paranoid cokehead fuckwit?  If it works for _the,m_, you really should be consistent and say its true of you too.


 
By the sound of your desperation to avoid the issue, maybe you were one of the cunts noncing these kids... oh! Ad Hom attacks! Naughty!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> feminist Muslim


 
By your logic, how is this possible?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

belboid said:


> No, we're _laughing at_ the messenger (for the BNP)


 
Go fuck yourself. And you have the nerve to put "hang liberals" as your tagline. You utter joke.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> If I had a gun I fucking would


 
Course you would.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Far more than four. Read the thread.


You are contradicting yourself again.  One minute you refer to a specific crime (carried out four times), then you say it is every crime of that ilk.  unless it is carried out by non-muslims, in which case it is only those earlier specific crimes which count.  You rule evidence in and out solely on the basis of whether it supports your (racist) argument.  That is an old, chrished method, normally used by your best chummy Jazzzzzzzzz.

Are you really so wilfully blind you dont see the hypocrisy?



> By the sound of your desperation to avoid the issue, maybe you were one of the cunts noncing these kids... oh! Ad Hom attacks! Naughty!


 
aah, such charm.  You brought up your drug use, so tough shit if anyopne comments on it in the same thread.  And i am just trying to get you to be consistent.  But you can't be, so you wriggle, squirm and lie to avoid accepting that you are contradicting yourself.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Go fuck yourself. And you have the nerve to put "hang liberals" as your tagline. You utter joke.


 
Do you want me to add 'and pathetic racist apologists', just for you?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway, we've established yet again that pk is a vile cunt


 
.


----------



## IMR (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> . . . and considerably, 'Western' in activity. Fast cars, drugs, sex, gangs...



Sex is Western?


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Take it up with Jack Straw, or former Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell, who was East Lancashire’s top detective when he retired from the force last year, or Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Muslim Ramadhan Foundation, or feminist Muslim journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Ann Cryer, former Labour MP for Keighley.
> 
> I've posted enough witness testimony, links, transcripts and the like for now.
> 
> Lets see you and others wriggle and squirm some more, anything to avoid the actual issue at hand...


Evidence of specific cases is only evidence of specific cases. It does not prove that "Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim". You need stats drawn from all such cases and the perps/victims to prove what you assert. And you clearly don't have that evidence.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> Evidence of specific cases is only evidence of specific cases. It does not prove that "Specific grooming of children for gang rape is overwhelmingly muslim". You need stats drawn from all such cases and the perps/victims to prove what you assert. And you clearly don't have that evidence.


 
I'm trying to bring in stats from wherever I can, regardless of whether they support my assertions, for the sake of debate.

They aren't easy to find (because they've been deleted or hidden from public view to avoid inflaming sensitivities).

Like that Channel 4 programme that was focusing on this very issue 5 years ago - pulled from the schedules by nervous appeasers of a dictatorial ideology.

I thought I made that pretty clear. But no - there are liberal PC retards who would sooner attack me than admit that their notions of multicultural Britain may not smell as sweet as they hoped.

I haven't come here with any particular axe to grind other than, like the OP DrRingDing, I really dislike islamic culture and the manner in which it is imposed on both it's female followers and also non-islamic countries and people.

Moderate muslims? Great, as long as you don't try to fuck our kids.

Extremist islamists? Fuck em all, no better than nazis. If that makes me a bigot then so be it.

But I do believe there is a problem with islamic youth attitudes to non-muslim women, and young girls. I guess there are a few here who agree.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> They aren't easy to find (because they've been deleted or hidden from public view to avoid inflaming sensitivities).



Lol



> Moderate muslims? Great, as long as you don't try to fuck our kids.



Cunt


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I really dislike islamic culture



I don't thınk you know much about ıt.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> But I do believe there is a problem with islamic youth attitudes to non-muslim women, and young girls. I guess there are a few here who agree.


 
This is my interpretation of what you have been saying all along, and I fully agree with you.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> I don't thınk you know much about ıt.


 
I know enough. Where were the wives of these child rapists?

Let me guess... marching for their rights and burning bras?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> This is my interpretation of what you have been saying all along, and I fully agree with you.


 
Not much help I'm afraid. A hindrance if anything.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I know enough.



Have you ever read a book by a Muslım?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Not much help I'm afraid. A hindrance if anything.


 
I am not attempting to help. I am simply commenting. Anyway, every vote counts.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Have you ever read a book by a Muslım?


 
A couple. Wistful novellas I can't be arsed to recall. Not my thing. I'm sure you'll recommend some...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> Cunt


 
Yeah, but that's all you got isn't it?

No evidence to disclaim my opinions and thought, nothing but LOL and Cunt. Like a retard.

Where's your research, your statistics, your opinions?

You got nothing. Dribbling wreck.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> A couple. Wistful novellas I can't be arsed to recall. Not my thing. I'm sure you'll recommend some...



Ibn Khaldun's a good place to start.

Obvıously you know that a couple of novellas ıs not a suffıcıent basıs on whıch to condemn Islamıc culture.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Ibn Khaldun's a good place to start.
> 
> Obvıously you know that a couple of novellas ıs not a suffıcıent basıs on whıch to condemn Islamıc culture.


 
It's not all about books is it, man of letters? It's about direct experiences. Watching boys torture themselves because they can't walk a girl home without risking a kicking from the dad/brothers, watching girls sneaking out the house with several changes of clothes and risking a beating from the old man for wearing infidel tight jeans and a t-shirt. All adds up to a fucked up view of the world, one where as muslims they are the chosen ones and everyone else is fucked come judgement day, like any religion, it's about control and power and denying basic human rights in the name of some myth.
And you can say the same about many religions but islam has the worst of those type of traits. Your wife is lucky marrying a westerner, I'll bet you can rattle off several others who are confined to a hateful marriage of oppression and control.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> It's not all about books is it, man of letters? It's about direct experiences. Watching boys torture themselves because they can't walk a girl home without risking a kicking from the dad/brothers, watching girls sneaking out the house with several changes of clothes and risking a beating from the old man for wearing infidel tight jeans and a t-shirt. All adds up to a fucked up view of the world, one where as muslims they are the chosen ones and everyone else is fucked come judgement day, like any religion, it's about control and power and denying basic human rights in the name of some myth.
> And you can say the same about many religions but islam has the worst of those type of traits. Your wife is lucky marrying a westerner, I'll bet you can rattle off several others who are confined to a hateful marriage of oppression and control.



Yes I can, that's true. And you're not entırely wrong ın what you say.  My objectıon ıs to your tactıc of _generalızatıon._  You're generalızıng from the behavıor of a small mınorıty of Muslıms to condemn ''Islamıc culture'' as a whole.  You're doıng that wıth, I'd guess, a pretty lımıted knowledge of Islamıc lıterature, art, musıc--maybe even hıstory.

So obvıously that doesn't make a lot of sense.  You'd make much more sense ıf you lımıted your crıtıcısm to the cases ın whıch ıt applıes.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Yes I can, that's true. And you're not entırely wrong ın what you say.  My objectıon ıs to your tactıc of _generalızatıon._  You're generalızıng from the behavıor of a small mınorıty of Muslıms to condemn ''Islamıc culture'' as a whole.  You're doıng that wıth, I'd guess, a pretty lımıted knowledge of Islamıc lıterature, art, musıc--maybe even hıstory.
> 
> So obvıously that doesn't make a lot of sense.  You'd make much more sense ıf you lımıted your crıtıcısm to the cases ın whıch ıt applıes.


 
Well, I thought it was pretty clear that I was isolating criticism to only those who deserved it. 
Unfortunately, once the deniers and nay-sayers decide the agenda for you, then it's a game of whack-a-mole which is fun but ultimately futile in terms of debate.
I see it as a defence of preconcieved notions that not many here are prepared to challenge in themselves. 
I always act alone in these things, not ever been interested in dragging in others to shore up my own ideas, so it makes for an easy target when the posts are coming in thick and fast. Especially when I'm trying to other real life shit at the same time and my attention span wanders.

Either way it's an interesting debate, from challenging my own disdain for islam and observing the nervous sidestepping of others who find it easier to demonise the person than address the issues, but that's urban75 all over. It's why I'm here after all. 

And if I'm generalizing then it's right I should be called out on it, I'd do the same if it were someone else. 
All helps in the larger scale of things.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Well, I thought it was pretty clear that I was isolating criticism to only those who deserved it.



Well you say thıs, but then you say thıs:



pk said:


> my own disdain for islam



Whıch ıs a generalızatıon from the partıcular case to whıch you object.

I don't thınk you have a ''dısdaın for Islam.''  Wıhout attackıng you (for I don't have much knowledge on the subject myself), I don't thınk you know enough about Islam to have dısdaın for ıt.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> it's an interesting debate



Agreed, and a cıvıl one too--for whıch, respect.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Well, I thought it was pretty clear that I was isolating criticism to only those who deserved it.



Oh



pk said:


> Moderate muslims? Great, as long as you don't try to fuck our kids.
> 
> Extremist islamists? Fuck em all, no better than nazis. If that makes me a bigot then so be it.


 


pk said:


> Bulwark of mainstream belief? If you follow the example of the prophet to the letter then I guess it could be considered so.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Of course both are a problem. But I wouldn't say that white men going to a Thailand is a problem for the white UK community anymore than I'd say that the blokes doing this are a problem for the UK pakistani community. The blokes in question were held back by their culture and sexually frustrated as you suggest, they were living a western life style.


I'm not saying it is a problem for the Muslim community as a whole, nor am I suggesting that the actions of these offenders are guided by an Islamic belief (clearly it is not).

What I am saying is that there are specific factors, factors not evident in the wider British public, in Muslim/Pakistani communities that for me provides some explanation for the actions of these offenders. Specifically I have mentioned the discouragement of sex before marriage, arranged marriages and the fetishisation of virgins (linked to the discouragement of sex before marriage which effectively mainly applies to women). Don't get me wrong, I am well aware that no sex before marriage, arranged marriages and the fetishisation of virgins is evident in many many cultures but I'm specifically talking about communities in the UK, and in the UK it tends to be those from a Muslim background that have these traditions.

Now above you've criticised the Western lifestyle as being a factor, and far from labelling you a racist for suggesting that (as others have done for those suggesting factors associated with a Muslim upbringing have contributed to the actions of these offenders) I will actually agree with you. Western culture promotes sex. Sex sells and everywhere we are bombarded by sex, be it on TV or wherever. That must have an effect on us (probably the most obvious result is our high rate of teenage pregnancies). But you expose somebody from a culture that discourages sex into a society that promotes sex and to me you will have obvious problems that may manifest itself in the kind of offences that are the topic of this thread (those of us from backgrounds where sex is not discouraged only have our ugly faces as a barrier to finding an outlet for our sexual urges and alcohol is a pretty easy cure for that!)

Let's face it, sex offenders make up a tiny tiny proportion of any community/culture and in no way represent that culture as a whole. That goes for your white Thai peado-tourists, Catholic paedo-priests or these Muslim sex gangs that target vulnerable young girls.

What I'm trying to get at, if we forget anybody who IS trying to use this issue to bash ALL Muslims for a moment, is that the reasons and motivations behind why certain people commit sex offences will be different depending on that person. IMO, the sexual frustration built up in the sex offenders we are discussing in this thread has its roots in their upbringing where they were discouraged from having sex before marriage, there are certainly very few "up-for-it" girls from Muslim backgrounds and they don't even get to choose somebody they are sexually attracted to for a wife because that is arranged for them possibly before they are even born!

Now if people disagree with that then fine, but so far we have 42 pages (at the time of writing!) which has essentially been a discussion over whether or not we are allowed to criticise issues within the Muslim community of this country, rather than discussing this very real problem (no matter how widespread or not it may be). I think most of us will have had to skim through this thread at some point so apologies if I've missed it, but despite asking many times I don't think anybody has commented on the problems associated with arranged marriages (of which prompting some men to form sex gangs is the least of the problems associated with it, the main one being the rights of women, but that's a thread to itself)

So if anyone does care to comment on whether or not arranged marriages etc may have contributed to the actions of these men then I'm happy to hear you...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Oh


 
And? Once again you've fuck all to add. 

I'm reminded of that Lennon dirge...

A working class hero is something to be. 
Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV, 
And you think you're so clever and classless and free, 
But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see...


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> So if anyone does care to comment on whether or not arranged marriages etc may have contributed to the actions of these men then I'm happy to hear you...


 
I've mentioned it as a factor at least twice...


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I've mentioned it as a factor at least twice...


Well that comment wasn't exactly aimed at you!


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Well that comment wasn't exactly aimed at you!


 
Fairy nuff. Good luck!


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> there are certainly very few "up-for-it" girls from Muslim backgrounds


How do you know? An Asian girl seeking sex will be very careful indeed not to let anyone find out. I have known a few people mates who had clandestine relationships with Asian girls who were basically in it for the sex and very much 'up for it'.

A song from my time and place of growing up on the very subject



Anyway, I'm sort of glad you;re back - I need to ask you a question about Sheffield United


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> So if anyone does care to comment on whether or not arranged marriages etc may have contributed to the actions of these men then I'm happy to hear you...


It may have done, but we've also established that Asian men are no more likely to kerb crawl young girls on the street.

Basically it comes down to power. Young men with cars and money try to get young girls to have sex with them. It's common to all ethnicities


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> How do you know? An Asian girl seeking sex will be very careful indeed not to let anyone find out. I have known a few people mates who had clandestine relationships with Asian girls who were basically in it for the sex and very much 'up for it'.


Always have to qualify comments on this forum by saying "obviously that does not apply to every single person from that background and of course there will be exceptions but when compared to the wider British public..." Shame really that we can't have open and honest discussions about certain issues without the fear of being labelled racist, isn't it?



> Anyway, I'm sort of glad you;re back - I need to ask you a question about Sheffield United


Would that question be "why are you so shit these days"?!

Anyway, thank you for sharing your thoughts on the negative affects of arranged marriages, oh wait a minute!! (EDA, got a sneaky second post in there when I wasn't looking!)


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> No evidence to disclaim my opinions and thought, nothing but LOL and Cunt. Like a retard.
> 
> Where's your research, your statistics, your opinions?
> 
> You got nothing. Dribbling wreck.



your assertion, its down to you to provide evidence, you havent yet


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> And? Once again you've fuck all to add.
> 
> I'm reminded of that Lennon dirge...
> 
> ...


 
I've never fucked a peasant, unless kulaks count


----------



## rover07 (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> What I'm trying to get at, if we forget anybody who IS trying to use this issue to bash ALL Muslims for a moment, is that the reasons and motivations behind why certain people commit sex offences will be different depending on that person. IMO, the sexual frustration built up in the sex offenders we are discussing in this thread has its roots in their upbringing where they were discouraged from having sex before marriage, there are certainly very few "up-for-it" girls from Muslim backgrounds and they don't even get to choose somebody they are sexually attracted to for a wife because that is arranged for them possibly before they are even born!


 
That is what Jack Straw was saying. And he's wrong.

Criminal gangs have plenty of access to sex, they are young, have money and go out drinking and taking drugs, chatting up women.

They do not have to resort to rape and prostitution. Any more than any other young men in a similar position.

They do so because they are nasty fuckers! And they make money from it.

Their Islamic background does not come into this.

In fact it is their lack of Islamic values that the guy from the Ramadhan foundation was pointing out. On Newsnight he made it clear that criminals from the Pakistani community should think about what they are doing and treat all women with the same respect they afford their sisters and mothers.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> It may have done, but we've also established that Asian men are no more likely to kerb crawl young girls on the street.


I wouldn't have thought that it would be possible to qualify that statement! (altho my _opinion_ would be to agree with it )



> Basically it comes down to power. Young men with cars and money try to get young girls to have sex with them. It's common to all ethnicities


Define 'young men' and define 'young girls'! 30 year old blokes and their mates targeting vulnerable 13 year old girls and getting them hooked on drugs so they can all have a jump on her isn't exactly "common" to any ethnic communities!!!


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> we've also established that Asian men are no more likely to kerb crawl young girls on the street.



I think the statistics actually show a gross overrepresentation that indicate muslims in certain northern cities are more inclined to hop in the BMW with some cocaine and go find some vulnerable 12 year olds to rape. You just refuse to accept those statistics, is all. Or deny that I have provided them.



> Basically it comes down to power. Young men with cars and money try to get young girls to have sex with them. It's common to all ethnicities


 
Except it isn't, because nobody has provided evidence to suggest similar happening in Bengali or Chinese communities, for example.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

rover07 said:


> That is what Jack Straw was saying. And he's wrong.


There are no negative aspects associated with discouraging sex before marriage and having arranged marriages? You don't think that could have any affect on a man's sexual frustration?



> Criminal gangs have plenty of access to sex


You're confusing organised crime gangs with what the news papers have termed "sex gangs". They are not the same



> Their Islamic background does not come into this.
> 
> In fact it is their lack of Islamic values that the guy from the Ramadhan foundation was pointing out. On Newsnight he made it clear that criminals from the Pakistani community should think about what they are doing and treat all women with the same respect they afford their sisters and mothers.


If you have a problem with the term "Islamic background" then simply swap the phrase for "Pakistani background". It's just semantics you're arguing about because I am NOT saying these people are motivated by religion. I am talking about culture rather than religion...


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Except it isn't, because nobody has provided evidence to suggest similar happening in Bengali or Chinese communities, for example.



happens to young girls on the streets in London all the time sadly


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Moderate muslims? Great, as long as you don't try to fuck our kids.


 
so, you do think that even moderate muslims want to 'fuck our kids.'  And, from that sentence, it doesn't _really_ bother you if they fuck 'their own.'

You didn't really think tha`t post through did you pk?  Just for a change like.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Define 'young men' and define 'young girls'! 30 year old blokes and their mates targeting vulnerable 13 year old girls and getting them hooked on drugs so they can all have a jump on her isn't exactly "common" to any ethnic communities!!!


 
It isn't common amongst muslim youth. And it's hardly unheard of in other 'communities' either. And we also come back to your strange interchanging of muslim/british pakistani/asian. Muslims are not 'an ethnic community'.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

rover07 said:


> That is what Jack Straw was saying. And he's wrong.



I think he's right.



> Criminal gangs have plenty of access to sex, they are young, have money and go out drinking and taking drugs, chatting up women.



Wrong. Muslim gangs do not have this access. To be seen getting drunk in the pub would be an outrage.



> They do not have to resort to rape and prostitution. Any more than any other young men in a similar position.
> 
> They do so because they are nasty fuckers! And they make money from it.
> 
> Their Islamic background does not come into this.



Unless they have been taught from a young age that western women are infidel unbelievers and as such are not to be respected as much as their own sisters and females from their communities.



> In fact it is their lack of Islamic values that the guy from the Ramadhan foundation was pointing out. On Newsnight he made it clear that criminals from the Pakistani community should think about what they are doing and treat all women with the same respect they afford their sisters and mothers.


 
Let's hope that he is listened to.


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> I think the statistics actually show a gross overrepresentation that indicate muslims in certain northern cities are more inclined to hop in the BMW with some cocaine and go find some vulnerable 12 year olds to rape. You just refuse to accept those statistics, is all.


Which statistics?


----------



## Spion (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Wrong. Muslim gangs do not have this access. To be seen getting drunk in the pub would be an outrage.


LOL. You don't know some of the 'muslims' I know then. I live in Bfd, btw


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> happens to young girls on the streets in London all the time sadly


 
Where's your evidence of this? 
Are you suggesting non-muslim gangs roam the streets looking to pimp out 12 years olds to their mates?

Can you back this assertion up?? I doubt it.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> It isn't common amongst muslim youth. And it's hardly unheard of in other 'communities' either. And we also come back to your strange interchanging of muslim/british pakistani/asian. Muslims are not 'an ethnic community'.


How would you like me to refer to them? Or more to the point, how do they refer to themselves?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> LOL. You don't know some of the 'muslims' I know then. I live in Bfd, btw


 
I used to play pool tournaments with the muslim lads, none of them really drank. Maybe a pint or two at the weekend tops, so unless things have changed and it's become suddenly acceptable in ten years (entirely possible) then I say it was pretty rare.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Wrong. Muslim gangs do not have this access. To be seen getting drunk in the pub would be an outrage.


 
Brilliant. Whereas coke and rape are a-ok. Have you ever met a working class british muslim lad? Doesn't sound like it.

Turns out they're a lot like working class british non-muslim lads. I know, amazing. Many of them drink, and eat non-halal meat, and have sex out of wedlock. Incredible.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

Why don't you two list all your Muslim credentials then I'm happy to judge who wins! (Spion if the area of Bradford you live in turns out to be somewhere like Ilkley then I'm disqualifying you from entering!)


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Many of them drink, and eat non-halal meat, and have sex out of wedlock. Incredible.


As much as non-Muslims? And how do you know they are practising Muslims? Doesn't sound like the people you describe above are...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> As much as non-Muslims? And how do you know they are practising Muslims? Doesn't sound like the people you describe above are...


 
Neither do the men who have been found guilty of grooming. Or do you think they are all trainee immans fresh from the madrasa?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Spion said:


> Which statistics?


 
The ones that have been posted throughout this thread.

Again - for the benefit of non-thread readers...

An investigation by The Times into the sexual exploitation of girls has shown an overwhelming number of cases of seduction and serial rape of underage girls carried out by Muslim men of Pakistani origin in the North of England and the Midlands. 

The Times identified 17 court prosecutions since 1997 involving the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by groups of men - 14 of them were during the past three years, including a teenager from Rochdale who was treated as a ‘sex slave’ by nine men. 

The victims came from 13 towns and cities and in each case two or more men were convicted of offences. 

In total, 56 people, with an average age of 28, were found guilty of crimes including rape, child abduction, indecent assault and sex with a child. 

Three of the 56 were white, 53 were Asian. Of those, 50 were Muslim and a majority were members of the British Pakistani community. 

The Times reports that several police sources say the convictions only represent a small proportion of what one detective described as a “tidal wave” of offending that has been uncovered in Yorkshire, Lancashire, Greater Manchester and some Midlands counties. 

http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/51308/calls-for-action-over-sex-gangs


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Brilliant. Whereas coke and rape are a-ok. Have you ever met a working class british muslim lad? Doesn't sound like it.


 
Coke and rape, yeah. Because you can see that happening openly in every street. Just like popping down the pub innit? :ROLLEYES:


----------



## rover07 (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> As much as non-Muslims? And how do you know they are practising Muslims? Doesn't sound like the people you describe above are...


 
I worked as a taxi-driver in Birmingham for 10 years. Many of the muslim drivers i knew drank, smoked weed and had white girlfriends. Some were married and had second 'wives' who they had met while dating English women. 

Some even went to Friday prayers.

On arranged marriages, it always seemed to me that they were less hung up about sex than the white or black drivers as they knew that one day they would be getting married. So the pressure was off to mate!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Coke and rape, yeah. Because you can see that happening openly in every street. Just like popping down the pub innit? :ROLLEYES:


 
According to you, these young men do these things because it is tolerated in 'their culture', whereas they don't drink because it isn't tolerated. So, you gonna have that cake or eat it?


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Where's your evidence of this?
> Are you suggesting non-muslim gangs roam the streets looking to pimp out 12 years olds to their mates?
> 
> Can you back this assertion up?? I doubt it.


 
so where on earth do you think the sex industry comes from, are you now claiming that only young muslim men in northern cities are involved in pimping or underage sex


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> According to you, these young men do these things because it is tolerated in 'their culture', whereas they don't drink because it isn't tolerated. So, you gonna have that cake or eat it?


 
What are you dribbling about now?

The blatant subjugation of women is all too often a part of their culture. Where were all the rapists wives when all this was going on?

I've never said rape or coke was tolerated in their culture - you're making up shit again because you have fuck all to say of any real consequence.

It's a common theme with you I see.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so where on earth do you think the sex industry comes from, are you now claiming that only young muslim men in northern cities are involved in pimping or underage sex


 
You would know better than me. I've made no such claims.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

but would you acknowledge at least that the vast majority of the sex industry is not run by northern pakistani chancers


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> but would you acknowledge at least that the vast majority of the sex industry is not run by northern pakistani chancers


 
The Bradford sex industry? I'd say overwhelmingly that is was run by northern pakistani chancers. I'm prepared to be proven wrong, i.e. with proof.

So you have these pimps with £50,000 cars all blinged up, and the lads without jobs want a piece of that action, but they can't just set up on the corners or they'd be beaten up - so they groom 12 year olds instead.

And the chances are they pick up the vulnerable non-muslims because of a sense that infidels can be defiled without as much remorse, and also because the girls are not muslims, the community will perhaps look the other way if they are discovered in a way they would not be able to were the victims muslim.

That's my speculation, but it isn't a massive leap of logic.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> What are you dribbling about now?
> 
> The blatant subjugation of women is all too often a part of their culture. Where were all the rapists wives when all this was going on?
> 
> ...


 
Fuck me you're thick. Why do you think they are faithful adherents to Islam or their 'culture' when it comes to not drinking and being nonces, but they're not faithful adherents to Islam or their 'culture' when they do loads of gack?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Fuck me you're thick. Why do you think they are faithful adherents to Islam or their 'culture' when it comes to not drinking and being nonces, but they're not faithful adherents to Islam or their 'culture' when they do loads of gack?


 
Fuck me you're a lying cunt. 

Keep inventing shit I never said, you're clearly not worth debating this with anyway... plenty of people here with half a fucking brain even if they disagree with me.

You could give me an example of a mainstream religion more barbaric than islam, y'know, like you asked of me. But you won't.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> The Bradford sex industry? I'd say overwhelmingly that is was run by northern pakistani chancers. I'm prepared to be proven wrong, i.e. with proof.
> 
> So you have these pimps with £50,000 cars all blinged up, and the lads without jobs want a piece of that action, but they can't just set up on the corners or they'd be beaten up - so they groom 12 year olds instead.
> 
> ...


 
We'll be the judge of that.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> You could give me an example of a mainstream religion more barbaric than islam, y'know, like you asked of me. But you won't.



Most of them can be described as 'barbaric'.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 11, 2011)

Epic thread lol. And people ask me why anarchostalinists like me hate Trots so much lol.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 11, 2011)

Quakers are hardly barbarians.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Fuck me you're a lying cunt.
> 
> Keep inventing shit I never said, you're clearly not worth debating this with anyway... plenty of people here with half a fucking brain even if they disagree with me.



No, this is all stuff you've said. Don't make me go back and quote you and make you look like a dick again, like last night.



pk said:


> You could give me an example of a mainstream religion more barbaric than islam, y'know, like you asked of me. But you won't.



I've already answered you, you frothing-mouthed loon.



> All religions are barbaric. Islam as a doctrine is no more barbaric than any other. You are completely unable to distinguish between a religious doctrine and political interpretations of religion. You thick fuck.



How about you answer this:



> Why is it Islam's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Islamic, but it isn't Christianity's fault when repressive regimes call themselves Christian? Why, pk, why?
> 
> Does the existence of violent secular organisations prove that secularism is inherently violent?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> We'll be the judge of that.


 
But you hate islam.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> The Bradford sex industry? I'd say overwhelmingly that is was run by northern pakistani chancers. I'm prepared to be proven wrong, i.e. with proof.



your assertion, your job to provide proof



> And the chances are they pick up the vulnerable non-muslims because of a sense that infidels can be defiled without as much remorse, and also because the girls are not muslims, the community will perhaps look the other way if they are discovered in a way they would not be able to were the victims muslim.



quite the opposite is considered true

according to a study by the NSPCC



> In Gilligan et al (2006), respondents to a questionnaire about awareness of sexual abuse in Asian communities felt that people were aware of child sexual abuse, but that it was often ‘taboo’ or ‘hidden’, that people were unwilling to discuss it



http://www.nspcc.org.uk/inform/research/questions/sexual_abuse_in_bme_communities_wda70518.html


incidentally from the CPS



> For child sexual abuse cases where ethnicity was recorded, there was a higher percentage of White defendants and lower percentages of Black and Asian defendants compared with the population.



http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/equality/vaw/vaw_strategy_annex_b.html#a02


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No, this is all stuff you've said. Don't make me go back and quote you and make you look like a dick again, like last night.


 
Was that whilst you were asleep, dreaming?

Yeah - I think you're now inventing shit.

So go back and find where I said raping children is a part of muslim culture.

It'll keep you occupied until you dribble up yet more bullshit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> So go back and find where I said raping children is a part of muslim culture.


 
Okay



> Seems to be a common trait in cities all over Europe. Bulwark of mainstream belief? If you follow the example of the prophet to the letter then I guess it could be considered so.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> The ones that have been posted throughout this thread.
> 
> Again - for the benefit of non-thread readers...
> 
> An investigation by The Times into the sexual exploitation of girls has shown an overwhelming number of cases of seduction and serial rape of underage girls carried out by Muslim men of Pakistani origin in the North of England and the Midlands.



interesting what the actual authors of that study said



> But Brayley and Cockbaine, whose six-month study was cited as evidence, said they were worried that limited data had been extended "to characterise an entire crime type, in particular of race and gender". They challenged claims that white girls were deliberately sought out by offenders. "Though the majority … were white so too were the majority of local inhabitants." Comparing the percentage of white people in the areas with black and ethnic minorities, their data, they said, showed "black and ethnic minority girls over-represented among the victims".
> 
> They added: "This challenges the view that white girls are sought out by offenders, suggesting instead that convenience and accessibility may be the prime drivers for those looking for new victims."


 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/child-sex-trafficking-racial-stereotyping


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Okay


 
"Could be considered" seems fair to me.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> interesting what the actual authors of that study said
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/child-sex-trafficking-racial-stereotyping


 
But this can't be true, pk assures us this is sexual jihad.



> "Though the majority … were white so too were the majority of local inhabitants." Comparing the percentage of white people in the areas with black and ethnic minorities, their data, they said, showed "black and ethnic minority girls over-represented among the victims".



Oh.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Okay


 
Well he did have a bit of a track record...

Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated that the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, and he consummated her in marriage when she was nine years old. Then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Khadijah died three years before the Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) departed to Madina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.

Urwa narrated: The Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years.

Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

(of course this was all when anglo saxon raping and pillaging was going on, it was the mode of the time I guess, but since he is seen as the perfect man and certainly a role model for the devout followers, it may have been a throwaway flippant comment but it has some resonance)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

You are genuinely a nut


----------



## smokedout (Jan 11, 2011)

so the only piece of evidence youve repeatedly referred to appears to show the opposite of what you were claiming pk


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Well he did have a bit of a track record...
> 
> Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated that the Prophet (may the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) married her when she was six years old, and he consummated her in marriage when she was nine years old. Then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
> 
> ...


 
I say, pk.....when was the Qu'ran written?

I ask because when I read the Bible, old testament especially, as I recall and it spoke of people living to be more than two hundred years old, it got me thinking about how the counting of 'time' was obviously different when it was written. What do you think?


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I say, pk.....when was the Qu'ran written?
> 
> I ask because when I read the Bible, old testament especially, as I recall and it spoke of people living to be more than two hundred years old, it got me thinking about how the counting of 'time' was obviously different when it was written. What do you think?


 
No idea... though the mention of "dolls" is telling.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 11, 2011)

What's the difference?


----------



## Thimble Queen (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so the only piece of evidence youve repeatedly referred to appears to show the opposite of what you were claiming pk


 
This


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 11, 2011)

Fucking hell pk. The amount of digging you've been doing you don't need a spade, you need one of these:


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 11, 2011)

I would however like to praise this thread for some of the most sanely anti-racist anti-sexist posts I've ever seen on urban - in response to one man flailing about like an epileptic with a pickaxe (I thought he'd like a non-PC insult, just so he knows that like every sensible person _I'm on his side really_).


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> But you hate islam.


 
I do...but I don't hate Muslims.

You're yet to work out the difference.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 11, 2011)

It's what Islam does to certain Muslims that I hate.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Neither do the men who have been found guilty of grooming. Or do you think they are all trainee immans fresh from the madrasa?


I was taking the piss out of you for having a go at me for referring to them as "Muslim" when you referred to them as the same. Must have gone over your head. Sorry



rover07 said:


> I worked as a taxi-driver in Birmingham for 10 years. Many of the muslim drivers i knew drank, smoked weed and had white girlfriends. Some were married and had second 'wives' who they had met while dating English women.
> 
> Some even went to Friday prayers.
> 
> On arranged marriages, it always seemed to me that they were less hung up about sex than the white or black drivers as they knew that one day they would be getting married. So the pressure was off to mate!


See above


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

smokedout said:


> so the only piece of evidence youve repeatedly referred to appears to show the opposite of what you were claiming pk


 
I've posted plenty of stuff, some of it supports the original premise, some doesn't. I haven't been cherry picking shit to suit an agenda because in this case I don't have one, I'm not actively trying to paint all muslims as nonces no matter what's been touted here. Typical urban75 innit.

However I still think there is a specific problem with muslim gangs who have no problem with drugging infidel children and raping them.

It's not a new problem by any stretch, but the act of sweeping it under the carpet has meant these rapist cunts have made a lot of money and of course that means more and more little cunts want to try it for themselves.
And it has definitely been swept under the carpet until now.

And I do think that the idea they would do it to muslim girls is extremely unlikely give or take a nominal amount of cases.

It's one of those uncomfortable things that may well put my views on the same horizon as BNP scum but so be it.

I don't like islamic oppression, not here and not anywhere. The Pakistani laws are dominated by Shariah, and well over half the women in jail there are there because they are rape victims who have no means to defend themselves.
It's hardly inconceivable to think that similar attitudes in culture would find themselves permeating Pakistani dominated areas of the UK.

Nothing I have said I consider to be overly outrageous or wrong, and if so I've maintained an open position.

But my opinion remains nonetheless, mostly because nobody has shown evidence to the contrary (i.e. Bengali/Chinese/Sikh gangs doing the same thing)

So there we are.

And I like digging holes anyway. You can't build a good foundation without digging a few holes.

And I've certainly pissed off some of the hypocritical self-righteous PC crowd, which is a win in my book whatever the result.

So it's all good.


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> What's the difference?


 
About six centuries.

Show me a christian country where over half the female prison population is jailed for accusing a man of rape and you might have something.

As it is, you've got fuck all.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> And I like digging holes anyway. You can't build a good foundation without digging a few holes.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> However I still think there is a specific problem with muslim gangs who have no problem with drugging infidel children and raping them.
> 
> It's not a new problem by any stretch, but the act of sweeping it under the carpet has meant these rapist cunts have made a lot of money and of course that means more and more little cunts want to try it for themselves.


I don't think this is a money making scheme like "traditional" pimping and prostitution organised crime. I think it's more a group of friends (or more likely a group of family friends) who keep the girl/s for themselves, rather than pimping them out. I think they use these girls as an outlet for their sexual frustrations rather than a way of making money.



> And I do think that the idea they would do it to muslim girls is extremely unlikely give or take a nominal amount of cases.


If they can get a Muslim girl then bonus! And it happens, but certainly not in the same numbers of non-Muslim girls



> But my opinion remains nonetheless, mostly because nobody has shown evidence to the contrary (i.e. Bengali/Chinese/Sikh gangs doing the same thing)


I don't know about the groups you mentioned, but every ethnic group will commit sex offences and child sexual exploitation. The point I've been getting at is that I believe they all commit these offences for different reasons. Nobody here can tell me that arranged marriages and the discouragement of sex (which is a prevailing tradition in Pakistani communities not experienced by the wider British public) has not had a negative effect on some Muslim men in this country. The White sex offender will offend for different reasons and interestingly, will tend to target much younger children whereas these gangs will target adolescents (which I believe has to do with the fetishisation of virgins). Altho I know very well there are exceptions to both of these "rules"


----------



## pk (Jan 11, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> I don't think this is a money making scheme like "traditional" pimping and prostitution organised crime. I think it's more a group of friends (or more likely a group of family friends) who keep the girl/s for themselves, rather than pimping them out. I think they use these girls as an outlet for their sexual frustrations rather than a way of making money.
> 
> 
> If they can get a Muslim girl then bonus! And it happens, but certainly not in the same numbers of non-Muslim girls
> ...


 
Well clearly we are in agreement. I see no inkling of Bengali/Chinese/whatever gangs doing similar, and as nobody has posted an example of a conviction in comparison to the dozens one can find of Pakistani muslim examples I doubt anyone will provide them.

In Holland it's mostly the Morrocans. In Norway and Denmark too, along with others.

Definitely a pattern, and that pattern points to the same conclusions you and I know to be true...

I have a feeling Straw's comments were a forewarning of many similar cases that are still under investigation...


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 11, 2011)

The sound of an ego jumping on a bandwagon is deafening. Why aren't there more like PK who are not scared ,and haven't been scared since this issue was identified three to five years ago , to speak out on this issue?

Bring forth the war.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 11, 2011)

pk said:


> Funny how nobody is able to dig up stats that conclusively prove me wrong either.
> 
> Not one person. How odd.


 
you in between jobs at the moment or in rehab? You are trying to be busy aren't you?


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> you in between jobs at the moment or in rehab? You are trying to be busy aren't you?


 
LOL keep trying, keep wriggling, I knew this shit would be part of the thread on page one of this motherfucker.

Try harder. Anyone reading this would think it was pub closing time again.

Is that a spillage on your collar? Slurring your words son??


----------



## hipipol (Jan 12, 2011)

PK you are allowing your hatred of Islam to distort your thinking
Aisha may have been been 9 when she 'entered the Prophets house' - which means she was accepted by the other women in purdah - this does not mean she slept with him at this time
12 was generally accepted at the time for the earliest age at which a man could have sex with a girl - oddly the still the age of consent in the Vatican City - also the age of consent in Victorian England.
Its worth pointing out that the Wahabbi school of thought, with its rigorous pursuit of a purist ascetic reading of the Koran is actually an 18thC interpretation - in many ways inspred by Puritan Western thought (also worth noting that the founder of the Deobandi school was a contemporary the same Madrasa as Ibn Whab - the first Jihad declared in the modern erra was what we call the Indian Mutiny, deirectly from the Deobandi school, to the horror most Indain Muslims). Such a reading, fixed, rigid and with compromise was not the way the Prophet saw things
Primarily a mystic, his purpose, as he seems to have seen it, was to bring Gods love to the world.What came after his death - including the pursuit of Ali, his annointed succesor, can not be blamed on him. The same can be said for virtually ever spiritual leader in the history of humans.
Racists exist in every culture, this not some kind of Jihadi sex war, however you chose to perceive it


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

hipipol said:


> PK you are allowing your hatred of Islam to distort your thinking
> Aisha may have been been 9 when she 'entered the Prophets house' - which means she was accepted by the other women in purdah - this does not mean she slept with him at this time
> 12 was generally accepted at the time for the earliest age at which a man could have sex with a girl - oddly the still the age of consent in the Vatican City - also the age of consent in Victorian England.
> Its worth pointing out that the Wahabbi school of thought, with its rigorous pursuit of a purist ascetic reading of the Koran is actually an 18thC interpretation - in many ways inspred by Puritan Western thought (also worth noting that the founder of the Deobandi school was a contemporary the same Madrasa as Ibn Whab - the first Jihad declared in the modern erra was what we call the Indian Mutiny, deirectly from the Deobandi school, to the horror most Indain Muslims). Such a reading, fixed, rigid and with compromise was not the way the Prophet saw things
> ...


 
You're right of course, but look at all the fun I'm having winding up all the UK P&P dorks! Don't deny me!


----------



## Luther Blissett (Jan 12, 2011)

Man tells reporter that limited grasp of Islamic history/culture is sufficient to shape views of entire Muslim world 
http://onion.com/djtvkk


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

About fucking time too!


----------



## Luther Blissett (Jan 12, 2011)

I've been busy


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

You have my seal of approval.


----------



## Luther Blissett (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> You have my seal of approval.


 
Do you have a précis, which includes the origin/main protaganist(s) and an outline of their claims. 
Thanks.


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

Luther Blissett said:


> Do you have a précis, which includes the origin/main protaganist(s) and an outline of their claims.
> Thanks.


 
Not really. I do try to be non-political, but islam is political with all it's ramifications and of course its hysterical response from the media, but others who refuse to accept deep problems and cultural compatibility issues are handing the impressionable young male muslims much ammunition, and they will use it.

It's when they use it against 11, 12, 13 year old children in a racially motivated perception of easy prey that eyes need to be opened and swords unsheathed.

And it is my contention that such a perception exists.

And to deny it and other uncomfortable issues regarding integration is to hand political victory to the likes of Nick Griffin.


----------



## Luther Blissett (Jan 12, 2011)

Sadly, that wasn't the précis I was looking for.
I'll come back to this tomorrow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2011)

Luther Blissett said:


> Sadly, that wasn't the précis I was looking for.
> I'll come back to this tomorrow.


 that's good


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> And to deny it and other uncomfortable issues regarding integration is to hand political victory to the likes of Nick Griffin.


 
naah, its your using almost the exact words of Nick Griffin that makes you sound like him. Not to mention your deliberate mis-reading of facts, data, common english words.

You are like a really really thick, explicitly racist, Jazzzzzzz


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> naah, its your using almost the exact words of Nick Griffin that makes you sound like him. Not to mention your deliberate mis-reading of facts, data, common english words.
> 
> You are like a really really thick, explicitly racist, Jazzzzzzz


 
But it is unfortunate that you have no counter to my premise.

I'm making it easy for you and you've still got fuck all.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

Your 'premise' has been utterly countered, maybe not in your eyes.  But no one cares about your opinion, you are so clearly a wilfully blind, silly little boy who just wants everyone to look at him.

Deeply sad and pathetic.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 12, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> What's the difference?


 
Well, the new testament is _against_ stonings. I'm sure you could have picked a better example of nuttiness in the bible.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

Not really it isn't.  It was against one specific stoning.  St Paul happily took part in stonings later in the same book.


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> Your 'premise' has been utterly countered, maybe not in your eyes.  But no one cares about your opinion, you are so clearly a wilfully blind, silly little boy who just wants everyone to look at him.
> 
> Deeply sad and pathetic.


 
"wilfully blind" is still better than being utterly blind.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> "wilfully blind" is still better than being utterly blind.


 
no it isn't, you thick fuck.  Go and get a couple more lessons from Nick & Jazzzzzzz


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> Not really it isn't.  It was against one specific stoning.  St Paul happily took part in stonings later in the same book.



For whıch he soon repented--whıch ıs the entıre poınt.  Your ıgnorance of the Bıble ıs surpassed only by your ıgnorance of everythıng else.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> no it isn't, you thick fuck.


 
Yes ıt ıs, you moron.

You really have no ıdea what you're talkıng about do you?


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

Oh dear, poor bellend...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> What's the difference?


 
there's a rather obvious swastika in there.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Yes ıt ıs, you moron.
> 
> You really have no ıdea what you're talkıng about do you?


 
aah, good ol' unprincipled phil, happilly joins in with the bigots just for an arguments sake.  even sadder than te bigot.

you are quite wrong phil.  being wilfully blind still leaves you blind.  and those who choose blindness in such a way haven't learnt how to let there other senses compensate for their blindness, as those who are 'utterly' blind have. so they are able to comprehend even less.

stick to your masturbatory threads about your own 'cleverness' phil, there's a good boy


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> Oh dear, poor bellend...


 
lucky you, now your defenders are the boards longest serving right-winger & its most self-obsessed tosspot.  still, a step uo from the EDLers you drew the rest of your 'arguments' from


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> lucky you, now your defenders are the boards longest serving right-winger & its most self-obsessed tosspot.  still, a step uo from the EDLers you drew the rest of your 'arguments' from


 
Yeah, they'll be the arguments you have thus far not been able to counter.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

Except they have been countered.  You have been shown, repeatedly, to have drawn your facts highly selectively.  To have rejected otherr facts that were inconvenient to your argument. To have wilfully distorted research you have quoted. To have contradicted your own argument.

Still, at least you've just admitted your argument is an EDL one.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 12, 2011)

pk you say no-one has provided stats. I believe that 39th step did way back in the thread saying that the people you are trying to tar as sex jihadis are, taking into account the % of the population they form, are 50% less likely to be prosecuted for sex crimes. How does this account in terms of what you are saying in linking islam and the crimes in the OP?

Also Bengalis are overwhelmingly muslim yet there isn't the problem mentioned in the OP. So how is islam the direct link?

Also you still don't seemed to have managed to saying anything of any practicial use. So what use is anything you are saying?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> You're right of course, but look at all the fun I'm having winding up all the UK P&P dorks! Don't deny me!


 
"I'm only joking everybody, I'm not really a racist prick, I'm just on a wind-up! Love me"


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 12, 2011)

smokedout said:


> happens to young girls on the streets in London all the time sadly


 
Ah, but that only appears in this thread in terms of official statistics, academic research, statements by those involved in child protection, and people talking about their direct experience. PK isn't going to believe it until he sees a sensationalist report from a Murdoch newspaper about it.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> Where's your evidence of this?
> Are you suggesting non-muslim gangs roam the streets looking to pimp out 12 years olds to their mates?
> 
> Can you back this assertion up?? I doubt it.


 
Already backed up. I posted links earlier in the thread. Though I don't expect you to have read them, you seem quite determined to refuse to look at anything that might run counter to your prejudices and assumptions.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> What's funny? You inability to give me an example of a modern religion more barbaric than islam?
> 
> Ahahahahaha!!


ALL religions are inherently barbaric, and ludicrous with it.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

Streathamite said:


> ALL religions are inherently barbaric, and ludicrous with it.


 
And none so as much as Islam.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 12, 2011)

IMR said:


> Sex is Western?


 
Yes. Well known fact. Until Western missionaries arrived nobody outside of Europe knew how to do sex. At least not with sufficient guilt and all the right hang ups.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 12, 2011)

islam is exotic and more importantly brown people follow it


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> pk you say no-one has provided stats. I believe that 39th step did way back in the thread saying that the people you are trying to tar as sex jihadis are, taking into account the % of the population they form, are 50% less likely to be prosecuted for sex crimes


 
But we aren't talking about sex crimes, which encompass everything from internet images to grabbing a handful of arse on the tube train.

We're talking about the specific crime of gangs grooming young children for gang rape.

As you well know.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> islam is exotic and more importantly brown people follow it


 
dull attempt to make pk's argument look sophisticated there lusty


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> But we aren't talking about sex crimes


 
except when you are doing.  you're just not talking about the ones that dont suit your racist argument.

as you well know


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

Being critical of Islam is not being racist. As you well know.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

Claiming child rape is an accepted cultural practice for muslims is though


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

I don't know who has suggested that. Certainly not pk.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 12, 2011)

> grabbing a handful of arse on the tube train.



You really are a tool.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I don't know who has suggested that. Certainly not pk.


 
Yes he has.



> Seems to be a common trait in cities all over Europe. Bulwark of mainstream belief? If you follow the example of the prophet to the letter then I guess it could be considered so.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

pk asks a question and replies with 'could be considered so'. Hardly 'claiming child rape is an accepted cultural practice for muslims', is it?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 12, 2011)




----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

No hair splitting required.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 12, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Being critical of Islam is not being racist. As you well know.


 
No, but condemning muslims is bigotted.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

Only if you are condeming them simply because they are muslim. 

There are plenty of muslims, as with any other group, who roundly deserve condemnation.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> Found some more Norweigan stats - that oddly appear to back up the 65% figure that was allegedly a misprint... these are for Oslo alone.
> ----
> 72.8% of rapists in 2007 had foreign background, 63.2% in 2004, 53% in 2001.
> 
> ...


 
They weren't deleted. The statistics are still there. They show that the figure given for 41 rapes committed in Oslo in 2008 all committed by immigrants is actually only a fraction of the total number of rape convictions in Oslo for that year. They also show that the rate of rape in the north of Norway is far higher than in Oslo.

So far as I can see, ALL the reports on high levels of rape committed by Muslims in Oslo seem to use a single quote by one Inspector Gunnar Larsen. This seems to be applied to statistics allegedly from all the years from 2005 to 2009 always attributed as if it's regarding that set of statistics. It first appears in an article by one Jonathan Tisdall in Aftenposten in 2001. In 2010 precisely the same statement is being attributed to him regarding pretty much the same statistics described as being for 2009, and despite being the same as a decade before, still being described as an alarming increase. Inspector Larsen may, of course, always make precisely the same statement to the press several times a year. More likely all these reports are a complete load of bloody toss, which is why they don't link to any official statistics.

Interestingly I've seen the Aftenposten report credited on some blogs and websites as being from 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2010. Maybe Aftenposten prints the report every few years. More likely racists pass it around and, being by nature lying twats, simply claim it was just printed yesterday.

You are being had.

As for Lancashire... http://www.justice.gov.uk/stats-race-criminal-justice-system-07-08-revised.pdf


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Being critical of Islam is not being racist. As you well know.


 
are you saying it cant be?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

If I was saying that, I'd say it.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

well, your comment was entirely pointless then.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> well, your comment was entirely pointless then.


 
The point is clear. Those critisising pk for his critical attitiute to Islam, have no justification for calling him rascist, IMO.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

aah, so you meant you think that _pk's_ criticisms of islam weren't racist.  you should have said so.  you'd have definitely been wrong then


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

So, you mean any critisism of islam has to be rascist. I don't agree.


----------



## belboid (Jan 12, 2011)

If I meant that,I'd say it.  I don't think that at all.  I think pk's criticisms of Islam rest on a racist basis.  And are false.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 12, 2011)

I know that you think that. I simply don't agree.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 12, 2011)

belboid said:


> If I meant that,I'd say it.  I don't think that at all.  I think pk's criticisms of Islam rest on a racist basis.  And are false.


 
I'm not the bloke's biggest fan but I've never thought of him as a racist. It's too easy for Trots such as your good self to dismiss people as racists.

Only I am allowed to do that, being an anarchostalinist.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> anarchostalinist.


 
Have you a synopsis of anarchostalinism Ern?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 12, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Have you a synopsis of anarchostalinism Ern?


 
New thread.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 12, 2011)

The problem when discussing issues like this is inevitably it boils down to an argument over the motives of the people taking part in the discussion rather than debating the actual problem. I don't think anyone here has racist views towards Muslims or Pakistanis but any criticisms will be viewed with much suspicion by many on here due to their involvement with anti-fascist movements. All I ask is that you all think about how many times you were accused of being anti-semitic because you criticised Israel, and how daft you thought those accusations were because you raised a valid point. That's how people on this thread feel when their opinions are cast aside as simply being racially motivated...

(Anyone remeber the Israel Megaphone?! Reminds me of threads like this!)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> All I ask is that you all think about how many times you were accused of being anti-semitic because you criticised Israel, and how daft you thought those accusations were because you raised a valid point.


 
And also how many actual anti-semites use anti-zionism as a cover, of course.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 12, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> And also how many actual anti-semites use anti-zionism as a cover, of course.


If these comments were coming from known racists like the BNP or EDL then of course I'd view their motives as suspicious as well, but I was referring to (regular) posters on U75...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> (regular) posters on U75...


 
PK ffs!


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> They weren't deleted. The statistics are still there.



Where? Can you provide a definitive link? I can't find them, and want to.



> They show that the figure given for 41 rapes committed in Oslo in 2008 all committed by immigrants is actually only a fraction of the total number of rape convictions in Oslo for that year. They also show that the rate of rape in the north of Norway is far higher than in Oslo.
> 
> So far as I can see, ALL the reports on high levels of rape committed by Muslims in Oslo seem to use a single quote by one Inspector Gunnar Larsen. This seems to be applied to statistics allegedly from all the years from 2005 to 2009 always attributed as if it's regarding that set of statistics. It first appears in an article by one Jonathan Tisdall in Aftenposten in 2001. In 2010 precisely the same statement is being attributed to him regarding pretty much the same statistics described as being for 2009, and despite being the same as a decade before, still being described as an alarming increase. Inspector Larsen may, of course, always make precisely the same statement to the press several times a year. More likely all these reports are a complete load of bloody toss, which is why they don't link to any official statistics.



OK well we're getting somewhere. If these figures can be flung around and reprinted as fact - and they are in fact a wrong conclusion reported on official channels by a rogue cop - Inspector Gunnar Larsen - and let's not forget Hanna Kristin Rohde, another police officer, she was the one interviewed on TV by the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) journalist...
... then we have a situation where two serving police have gone on record to grossly distort their own figures. I would really like to see hard stats on these Oslo figures.
The figures & research undertaken was reported on that NRK news clip to be a three year investigation by Oslo police, not Aftenposten by the way. (the 41 rapes claimed to have been all carried out by foreigners).



> Interestingly I've seen the Aftenposten report credited on some blogs and websites as being from 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2010. Maybe Aftenposten prints the report every few years. More likely racists pass it around and, being by nature lying twats, simply claim it was just printed yesterday.



This is a ridiculous assertion. Aftenposten has a long tradition of serious journalism, and is by many considered to be the leading Norwegian newspaper.
It's certainly the most popular newspaper in Norway, and is read by nearly half a million people a day.
It is by no means some sort of Prison Planet style undisciplined agenda-ridden fascist house of lies.

I'm well aware racists will pick up on this sort of stuff and blare it out as evidence to suit their agenda, but if there is nothing solid to disprove them, spelt out in nice simple terms to get through the amount of bone involved, then what's to stop them? It's by no means clearly wrong or misrepresentative of statistics, is it?




> As for Lancashire... http://www.justice.gov.uk/stats-race-criminal-justice-system-07-08-revised.pdf


 
And how do you propose to use that link to prove that anything I have concluded is wrong?

Again, chucking up a link to a 227 page report is simply not good enough. 
If you have found conclusive figures that show a complete contradiction to what Jack Straw and senior muslim figures are saying, then post them up.

Let's fix this, and then we can move on. Let's show that these oft quoted figures are just lies, with hard and specific factual statistics as evidence.
I did accept the possibility of the 63% being a misprint of 6.3%, and edited everything I had previously posted with this figure to reflect the possibility of it being a misprint.
You simply cannot accuse me of ignoring or denying hard facts or sticking my hand up when I've been proven to be wrong, and throw a context free 227 page report up as if it means anything without explaining how you deduce what you have asserted. If you want to play this game, get your shit straight.

Bear in mind it is the _method of abuse_, the car, drugging and pimping young children, that is under discussion. Statistics for ALL rape attacks will obviously be more reflective of the overall population. The unusual practice of taking these children and the manner in which they are pimped are the only rape attacks I want to see statistics for, or failing that - anecdotal evidence from people in the field working.

The policeman in the car on the Newsnight report appeared to do so, but his actual statements were vague, his figure of 80 percent sounded a lot to me like 8 percent.
Have a listen for yourself. I've accepted that he did actually say 80 percent, for the sake of argument, even if it does contradict all the other opinions that led to this media storm.
But he didn't clearly qualify that figure, he did not attribute that 80 percent to the specific method of abuse and rape that is the central topic of this thread.

You can see what I'm getting at, can't you?


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> PK ffs!



Grrrr... I'll get that pk one of these days!!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

You're a fucking loon


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> Aftenposten has a long tradition of serious journalism, and is by many considered to be the leading Norwegian newspaper.
> It's certainly the most popular newspaper in Norway, and is read by nearly half a million people a day.
> It is by no means some sort of Prison Planet style undisciplined agenda-ridden fascist house of lies.








Circulation of some 750,000 I believe


----------



## pk (Jan 12, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> You're a fucking loon


 
I'll big the big bad boogieman if you want, it clearly make it easy for you to dismiss any of the valid concerns here.

Yes, I believe everything in the Daily Mail unquestioningly. Is that better sweetheart?? Bless...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 12, 2011)

pk said:


> I'll big the big bad boogieman if you want, it clearly make it easy for you to dismiss any of the valid concerns here.
> 
> Yes, I believe everything in the Daily Mail unquestioningly. Is that better sweetheart?? Bless...


 
You brave bringer of truth. You're not really some fucking loon spouting ignorant bollocks on the web. You're basically a hero you know. You should meet Mandela.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 13, 2011)

I've done a bit of further digging on the mysterious time travelling Inspector Gunnar Larsen of the Oslo Police's Vice, Robbery, and Violent Crimes Division. Searching Google for his name ONLY shows links to the Aftonbladet report, reprints of it, and a whole load of reports claiming that the very same research is brand new for every damn year from 2001 to 2010. Inspector Gunnar Larsen does not have any presence on the web in any other context. He has clearly made no other statement to the major news media in either English or Norwegian, EVER.

It gets more mysterious though. Whilst Oslo Police have a Vice division and a Violent Crime division, the only situation in which I can find any mention on the web of a Vice, Robbery, and Violent Crime division refers to the same damn quote by Inspector Gunnar Larsen.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I've done a bit of further digging on the mysterious time travelling Inspector Gunnar Larsen of the Oslo Police's Vice, Robbery, and Violent Crimes Division. Searching Google for his name ONLY shows links to the Aftonbladet report, reprints of it, and a whole load of reports claiming that the very same research is brand new for every damn year from 2001 to 2010. Inspector Gunnar Larsen does not have any presence on the web in any other context. He has clearly made no other statement to the major news media in either English or Norwegian, EVER.
> 
> It gets more mysterious though. Whilst Oslo Police have a Vice division and a Violent Crime division, the only situation in which I can find any mention on the web of a Vice, Robbery, and Violent Crime division refers to the same damn quote by Inspector Gunnar Larsen.


 
Ah, turns out its a racist trope...


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I've done a bit of further digging on the mysterious time travelling Inspector Gunnar Larsen of the Oslo Police's Vice, Robbery, and Violent Crimes Division. Searching Google for his name ONLY shows links to the Aftonbladet report, reprints of it, and a whole load of reports claiming that the very same research is brand new for every damn year from 2001 to 2010. Inspector Gunnar Larsen does not have any presence on the web in any other context. He has clearly made no other statement to the major news media in either English or Norwegian, EVER.



Are you saying he doesn't exist?? Maybe he's camera-shy??

I can only find bullshit links too, regarding Gunnar Larsen. So you may have something there. But Hanne Kristin Rohde exists, she's on the video saying exactly the same thing on behalf of her department. She seems to be the go-to officer for the media, in fact. Google her name... but it's Hanne and not Hanna.


No comment on Hanna Kristin Rohde and her televised statement to the same effect, and no link to show the REAL Oslo statistics to counter what Inspector Gunnar Larsen was quoted as saying, and indeed according to you reprinted every year by Aftonbladet.

This really isn't enough. I want to believe it, but you're not coming up with the goods.

No links, just assertions that you expect to be taken as gospel truth.
Precisely what I've been accused of.





			
				Eric Jarvis said:
			
		

> It gets more mysterious though. Whilst Oslo Police have a Vice division and a Violent Crime division, the only situation in which I can find any mention on the web of a Vice, Robbery, and Violent Crime division refers to the same damn quote by Inspector Gunnar Larsen.


 
It may be a translation error, grouping departments like that.

I don't know, but it's hardly the point. As I said, Aftenbladet is a respected news source.
Why would they blindly reprint lies year on year? And where is your proof that they are lies, where are your figures that contradict Larsen and Rohde?

Let's remind ourselves of what Hanne Kristin Rohde had to say, after all:




			
				see link below - EU Times said:
			
		

> She said she was aware that the “statistics are controversial.”
> 
> When she was asked by NRK if the police were not “stigmatising an entire community” by releasing the statistics, Ms Rohde said she “wants to contribute to a better and safe world.
> That’s why the truth needs to be told. I hope the debate will focus on that,” she told NRK.
> ...



http://www.eutimes.net/2010/01/norway-pays-bitter-price-for-mass-immigration/


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 13, 2011)

Oh yes, and how come the grand total of rapes investigated by the Oslo police is 41 over the three years to 2008, and yet there were 161 in 2007 according to the police figures?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Oh yes, and how come the grand total of rapes investigated by the Oslo police is 41 over the three years to 2008, and yet there were 161 in 2007 according to the police figures?


 
What police figures??

Where are you getting this data??

I'm really keen to clear this up now and move on.

I've been straight with you, I've accepted I may have posted a widely circulated misprint.

Come on, surely you can meet me halfway and provide a link to your statistics that show the Larsen/Rohde statements to be utterly false?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

belboid said:


> I think pk's criticisms of Islam rest on a racist basis. And are false.


 
Yet you appear to be having terrible trouble actually proving it. What you "think" is irrelevant, as is what I "think".


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Are you saying he doesn't exist?? Maybe he's camera-shy??



I'm saying I can't find any proof of his existence other than as a quoted police source attributed as saying precisely the same thing about several different sets of statistics for different years. All of them claiming to show a Muslim rape epidemic in Oslo, and none of them backed up with any official statistics beyond a few headline number.



pk said:


> No comment on Hanna Kristin Rohde and her televised statement to the same effect, and no link to show the REAL Oslo statistics to counter what Inspector Gunnar Larsen was quoted as saying, and indeed according to you reprinted every year by Aftonbladet.



I can't view the video on my PC, and I can't find anything in print other than Rohde simply making an assertion that all 41 assault rapes over 3 years were committed by non-Western immigrants. I have already posted a link to an analysis of the real official statistics earlier in the thread. I never said the article was reprinted annually by Aftonbladet, but only that it appears one a large number of web sites variously claiming it to be a newly released report for every year since 2001 when the original article was printed. I'm not saying Aftonbladet reprinted it. I'm saying that the vast majority of the web sites quoting it are LYING about when the report came out.



pk said:


> This really isn't enough. I want to believe it, but you're not coming up with the goods.



I'm doing way better than you are. So far you've basically got two statistically unsupported statements from Norway, and a load of speculation based on a grand total of 4 cases from the UK.



pk said:


> No links, just assertions that you expect to be taken as gospel truth.
> Precisely what I've been accused of.



I've posted links. However you are clearly demanding something impossible, official statistical proof in the form of a short paragraph of words of one syllable. If you aren't prepared to look into the actual data then tough luck, all you'll ever have to go on is tabloid bollocks and racist blogposts.




pk said:


> It may be a translation error, grouping departments like that.



Of course it is. The actual department is the sexual and violent crimes division. My point is that there is a single quote from a single police source attributed to several different sets of statistics over a decade, all of them using precisely the same mistake in translation. It says to me a total lack of interest in fact checking.



pk said:


> I don't know, but it's hardly the point. As I said, Aftenbladet is a respected news source.
> Why would they blindly reprint lies year on year? And where is your proof that they are lies, where are your figures that contradict Larsen and Rohde?


 
I would hardly describe Aftonbladet as a respected news source. It's the Scandanavian equivalent of the Sun. Not quite as bad, but hardly a particularly reputable newspaper. It's a scandal sheet that is apparently running downhill about as fast as it's running out of money.


----------



## treelover (Jan 13, 2011)

another case, this time in Rochdale, expect to see many more prosecutions

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK...tions_Of_Grooming_White_Teenage_Girls_For_Sex


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 13, 2011)

http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/03/05/a_krim_tab_en/tab/tab-2010-12-03-20-en.html

http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/tab/tab-148.html

http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/tab/tab-152.html

http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/03/05/a_krim_tab_en/tab/tab-2010-04-15-01-en.html


----------



## belboid (Jan 13, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> I'm not the bloke's biggest fan but I've never thought of him as a racist. It's too easy for Trots such as your good self to dismiss people as racists.
> 
> Only I am allowed to do that, being an anarchostalinist.


 
I don't think he is a racist tho, ern.  I think I haev been careful to say that he is using racist arguments, not that he is really one.  He's just mouthing off, as is his want.  Main point is, he is talking ludicrously contradictory nonsense.


----------



## belboid (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Yet you appear to be having terrible trouble actually proving it. What you "think" is irrelevant, as is what I "think".


 
Quite.  I have always accepted that you are wilfully blind, and no amount of eivdence will convince you otherwise.  Almost everyone else readng the thread, tho, will know you are talking bollocks.  That'll do me.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I'm saying I can't find any proof of his existence other than as a quoted police source attributed as saying precisely the same thing about several different sets of statistics for different years. All of them claiming to show a Muslim rape epidemic in Oslo, and none of them backed up with any official statistics beyond a few headline number.



I agree, info on him is scant. Worth a deeper search perhaps in case he really is a fake.

But Hanne Kristin Rohde exists.



> I can't view the video on my PC, and I can't find anything in print other than Rohde simply making an assertion that all 41 assault rapes over 3 years were committed by non-Western immigrants.



You can't have tried very hard. About 19,200 results I got, including UNHCR reports and her very own Wikipedia page, which can be translated to English. She was voted Person of the Year or something in 2010 and she is frequently quoted by NRK.




> I have already posted a link to an analysis of the real official statistics earlier in the thread.




You mean that 227 page novel you slapped up, with no passages quoted, no context, not a jot of explanation or even a page number?
I hope not, and if you have posted any link of relevance, "earlier in the thread" isn't good enough. 

You quote stats - you put up link.
I've repeatedly done so with my data.
This thread has well over a thousand posts now.
You do this properly or not at all.



> I never said the article was reprinted annually by Aftonbladet, but only that it appears one a large number of web sites variously claiming it to be a newly released report for every year since 2001 when the original article was printed. I'm not saying Aftonbladet reprinted it. I'm saying that the vast majority of the web sites quoting it are LYING about when the report came out.



Are they lying about the dates? The data? Are they just making numbers appear from thin air?



> I'm doing way better than you are.



You'll be neck and neck if you show me the links to the Oslo cop data that contradicts Hanne Kristin Rohde. 



> So far you've basically got two statistically unsupported statements from Norway



Uh, no - in what way are they "unsupported". Where can you prove they are unsupported? You haven't posted a relevant link yet.



> and a load of speculation based on a grand total of 4 cases from the UK.



A grand total of four cases? Are you kidding me?

Have you even bothered to do a basic Google?

I could probably list 20 cases that appear to be identical on a single Google search, but to what end? It doesn't mean I'm wrong or right.

The premise is very clear, and I want you to disprove it.

Publishing tons of links to these stories in one place would play right into the hands of the undesirables, and this place would get trolled to fuck by boneheads.



> I've posted links. However you are clearly demanding something impossible, official statistical proof in the form of a short paragraph of words of one syllable. If you aren't prepared to look into the actual data then tough luck, all you'll ever have to go on is tabloid bollocks and racist blogposts.


 
Just post the links. Linking to abstract 227 page documents aren't 'proof' of anything, and you know it.



> The actual department is the sexual and violent crimes division. My point is that there is a single quote from a single police source attributed to several different sets of statistics over a decade, all of them using precisely the same mistake in translation.



Ah so it's a translation error? Please explain. 



> It says to me a total lack of interest in fact checking.



You appear to have a lack of interest in relevant link providing.



> I would hardly describe Aftonbladet as a respected news source. It's the Scandanavian equivalent of the Sun. Not quite as bad, but hardly a particularly reputable newspaper. It's a scandal sheet that is apparently running downhill about as fast as it's running out of money.


 
But even if you were correct - which you are not - Aftonbladet in Norway is not the equivalent of the Scum at all - the NRK national broadcast station has been running the same stories.

The Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (Norwegian: Norsk Rikskringkasting AS), which is usually known as the NRK, is the Norwegian government-owned radio and television public broadcasting company, and the largest media organisation in Norway. 

It is a founding member of the European Broadcasting Union.

The source of all this is Hanne Kristin Rohde.

So is she lying or what?

Show us some figures to prove it.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

belboid said:


> Quite.  I have always accepted that you are wilfully blind, and no amount of eivdence will convince you otherwise.



You're absolutely right of course, because thus far, no amount of evidence has been produced.



> Almost everyone else readng the thread, tho, will know you are talking bollocks.  That'll do me.


 
Yeah, but in all likelihood given that we are in UK P&P that'll be all your revolutionary left wing pals who have steered well clear of this thread. 

I note you say "almost" everyone. Don't you think that the "almost" is the entire fucking point here?


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 13, 2011)

I give up pk. You won't read any official statistics because you consider them too much hard work, and you won't accept a precis of them either. It's a complete waste of time. Your reading comprehension is appalling as well. So I'm wasting my time on this thread. I think belboid's got it about right. Anyone with half a brain can by now see that you are completely unwilling to argue on the basis of evidence, because all you've produced is either anecdotal or unsupported assertion, and you refuse to look at anything more complex. You are doomed to a life of ignorance I'm afraid.


----------



## GermanGuy (Jan 13, 2011)

Hi, I'm from Germany and accidently came across this post because there are similar issues in Germany. Turkish men, the biggest muslims community in Germany, that are systematically raping non muslims girls. It's great that in GB people are more advanced than in Germany and openly addressing this racist issue. In Germany almost nobody talks about this, because all people have fear of beeing called a racist or islamophobe. This is going on for a longer time and when my girlfriend was several times called a "christian bitch" I studied islam. Shocking is that even Mohammed already raped non muslims women and justified that. All the harems for that reason consisted only of non-muslim women. I also talked to a turkish friend of mine (he is not religious at all and more an atheist) who said that most of his friends are only "training with christian/german bitches" but later of course will marry a pure muslim girl. And that they despise all the girls they have sex with. I'm glad to have interesting discussions and opinions how you see this in GB.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/03/05/a_krim_tab_en/tab/tab-2010-12-03-20-en.html

ericjarvis - Those links got lost at the bottom of the last page - OK, let's have a look



http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/tab/tab-152.html

According to this - 139 rape cases were committed for trial in 2005 - but that's the whole of Norway. In 2001 there were 63. No specific breakdown for Oslo yet but I'll keep looking.

According to the NRK report, in Oslo *double* the amount of rapes occurred in 2009 than in 2008. In 2009 there were 21 assaults rapes in Oslo. 
It is the most recorded since police began collecting these figures in 2006. http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...n&u=http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/norge/1.6944861
(This report seems to come also from Rohde)


So going back to your stats - I'm finding data that looks like it backs up a huge overall increase in Norway rape cases.

Reported rape offences almost doubled between 2000 and 2008 - http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/2009/tab/tab-148.html



469 incidences of sexual offences reported in Oslo for 2008. - http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/2009/tab/tab-146.html

594 incidences of sexual offences reported in Oslo in 2009. - http://www.ssb.no/english/yearbook/tab/tab-148.html

http://www.ssb.no/politi_statres_en/



No specific figures appear to be available for actual rape offences in Oslo.

Unless I've missed them.

"Sexual offences" is pretty ambiguous, could include a wide range of crimes depending on the Norwegian definition.

I appreciate the fact that you have provided this data, however I have had a good look and there are no figures that directly contradict the figures quoted by the Oslo policewoman Hanne Kristin Rohde.

But the national statistics appear to have shown no "doubling" which does throw a little confusion -


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I give up pk. You won't read any official statistics because you consider them too much hard work, and you won't accept a precis of them either. It's a complete waste of time. Your reading comprehension is appalling as well. So I'm wasting my time on this thread. I think belboid's got it about right. Anyone with half a brain can by now see that you are completely unwilling to argue on the basis of evidence, because all you've produced is either anecdotal or unsupported assertion, and you refuse to look at anything more complex. You are doomed to a life of ignorance I'm afraid.


 
Hey - relax, they fell off the end of the last page - I found them...


----------



## yield (Jan 13, 2011)

GermanGuy said:


> Hi, I'm from Germany and accidently came across this post because there are similar issues in Germany. Turkish men, the biggest muslims community in Germany, that are systematically raping non muslims girls. It's great that in GB people are more advanced than in Germany and openly addressing this racist issue. In Germany almost nobody talks about this, because all people have fear of beeing called a racist or islamophobe. This is going on for a longer time and when my girlfriend was several times called a "christian bitch" I studied islam. Shocking is that even Mohammed already raped non muslims women and justified that. All the harems for that reason consisted only of non-muslim women. I also talked to a turkish friend of mine (he is not religious at all and more an atheist) who said that most of his friends are only "training with christian/german bitches" but later of course will marry a pure muslim girl. And that they despise all the girls they have sex with. I'm glad to have interesting discussions and opinions how you see this in GB.


 
 Vorstellen?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

yield said:


> Vorstellen?


 
Interesting first post...


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 13, 2011)

Trot false flag phoney German.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

GermanGuy said:


> Hi, I'm from Germany and accidently came across this post because there are similar issues in Germany. Turkish men, the biggest muslims community in Germany, that are systematically raping non muslims girls. It's great that in GB people are more advanced than in Germany and openly addressing this racist issue. In Germany almost nobody talks about this, because all people have fear of beeing called a racist or islamophobe. This is going on for a longer time and when my girlfriend was several times called a "christian bitch" I studied islam. Shocking is that even Mohammed already raped non muslims women and justified that. All the harems for that reason consisted only of non-muslim women. I also talked to a turkish friend of mine (he is not religious at all and more an atheist) who said that most of his friends are only "training with christian/german bitches" but later of course will marry a pure muslim girl. And that they despise all the girls they have sex with. I'm glad to have interesting discussions and opinions how you see this in GB.


 
Didn't you guys say something similar about Jews not so long ago. I don't think we need lectures about religious minorities from Germans. How many Turkish people have suffered racist attack in Germany? 
From 2001


> Germany has reported a 40% increase in racist attacks as a new survey shows that almost every second young East German thinks that the Nazi regime "had its good side".
> 
> The system in the GDR has left behind a great trail of spiritual and mental destruction
> 
> ...


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1159888.stm

From 2008


> Germany Ministry of the Interior Affairs in its response to the Left Party's question said that the number of the attacks committed by the extreme right groups reached 14.000 in 2008.
> http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/66180/14-000-racist-attacks-occurred-in-a-year-in-germany.html



From 2011


> BERLIN  — German police said an arson attack on a mosque in the country’s capital left has blackened its entrance door, but nobody was injured http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/2011/01/12/new-arson-attack-on-mosque-in-german-capital/



http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/44/681/8663.pdf


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Can we stick to the topic??


----------



## belboid (Jan 13, 2011)

getting embarassed by the company you're attracting?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

belboid said:


> getting embarassed by the company you're attracting?


 
It's a bit embarrassing to see that nobody has actually been able to prove the Oslo figures as complete lies.

Anyone would think that eric jarvis has just flounced off instead of demonstrating his point. 
I spent at least an hour and a half looking at the official statistics he provided, and none of them can give a definitive indication that Hanne Kristin Rohde is just making this stuff up.

Have a look for yourself. Far from being "completely unwilling to argue on the basis of evidence" - I am being far more generous in giving eric jarvis the benefit of doubt than he is toward me.

He's repeatedly shunned the idea that the Oslo police figures are in any way accurate - but he has yet to show why.

I'm sure a moderator would be able to take a look at the IP for "germanguy" and confirm that he is in fact from Germany...


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

GermanGuy said:


> Hi, I'm from Germany and accidently came across this post because there are similar issues in Germany. Turkish men, the biggest muslims community in Germany, that are systematically raping non muslims girls. It's great that in GB people are more advanced than in Germany and openly addressing this racist issue. In Germany almost nobody talks about this, because all people have fear of beeing called a racist or islamophobe. This is going on for a longer time and when my girlfriend was several times called a "christian bitch" I studied islam. Shocking is that even Mohammed already raped non muslims women and justified that. All the harems for that reason consisted only of non-muslim women. I also talked to a turkish friend of mine (he is not religious at all and more an atheist) who said that most of his friends are only "training with christian/german bitches" but later of course will marry a pure muslim girl. And that they despise all the girls they have sex with. I'm glad to have interesting discussions and opinions how you see this in GB.


 
I see "germanguy" has been banned. After one post.

Seems a bit odd - was he German after all or was he, as has already been speculated, a sock puppet account of someone based here in the UK??

Can a moderator confirm this, or that he was genuinely German at least??


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Trot false flag phoney German.


 
I've flagged it to the moderators. Perhaps if you do the same we can get to the bottom of who "germanguy" really was.

I think it would be very poor form if "germanguy" just turned out to be a made-up person that originated from the very same IP as perhaps another poster here.

The speed in which he was banned and the lack of a decent reason why is more than a little odd...


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 13, 2011)

Are we worried that your stinky opinions have started to attract flies pk?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Are we worried that your smelly opinions have started to attract flies pk?


 
I've already pointed out my unwillingness to post tons of examples from news sources, as it would be a gift to the far right.

However - my suspicion that "germanguy" is a just a made-up person and was banned after one post has been piqued.

Was it you, DrRingDing? I'm sure a moderator will be along to clear it up shortly.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 13, 2011)

There is no indication that the banned account was connected to any other user here.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> I've already pointed out my unwillingness to post tons of examples from news sources, as it would be a gift to the far right.



So, you're magnaminously eschewing winning the arguement by witholding evidence that may fuel the fash?

Best one yet.

Oh my aching sides


----------



## IMR (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Yes. Well known fact. Until Western missionaries arrived nobody outside of Europe knew how to do sex. At least not with sufficient guilt and all the right hang ups.



I think things have maybe moved on a bit here since the days of table-legs being covered up or the belief that masturbation leads to insanity and blindness. (It probably does lead to eye-strain though, given the amount of porn on the internet.)


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> I give up pk.



So it seems. Thanks for being honest about it.



> You won't read any official statistics because you consider them too much hard work



Clearly I have read the statistics you provided, and have gone through at least 20 pages from the same official source, as has been demonstrated in my post above (1207)
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...eat-quot-)?p=11416590&viewfull=1#post11416590



> and you won't accept a precis of them either.



That's hardly fair, seeing as I have been more than willing to accept your conclusion in regards to the alleged misprint earlier in the thread.
And it isn't as if you are prepared to accept any precis that conflicts with yours - Jack Straw, several senior muslim leaders, as well as Hanne Kristin Rohde have all drawn alarming conclusions and gone public with them, and in effect you have stated that they must all be lying without clearly demonstrating why.



> It's a complete waste of time. Your reading comprehension is appalling as well. So I'm wasting my time on this thread.



Sounds like a flounce to me. 
You can't demonstrate Rohde's Oslo figures to be false at all, so you pin the blame on me and accuse me of refusing to look at complex data, which is clearly bollocks.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

FridgeMagnet said:


> There is no indication that the banned account was connected to any other user here.


 
OK thanks - so was he from Germany at all, as a quick check of the source IP would tell you?

Was it you that did the banning? What was the reason cited, if you don't mind?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> So, you're magnaminously eschewing winning the arguement by witholding evidence that may fuel the fash?
> 
> Best one yet.
> 
> Oh my aching sides


 
I don't think my posting a bunch of stories that happen to link muslims with grooming children would in any way count as my "winning the argument", do you?

I really used to think you were smarter than this. You're just coming across as desperate.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 13, 2011)

The account was most likely from Germany though there are proxies and so on. It was banned because people randomly turning up from Google with their first posts being made-up stuff about <group X> rarely turn out to be thoughtful balanced additions to a forum; it's the #1 indicator of a roaming internet bigot, I thought that would be obvious after all this time.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The account was most likely from Germany though there are proxies and so on. It was banned because people randomly turning up from Google with their first posts being made-up stuff about <group X> rarely turn out to be thoughtful balanced additions to a forum; it's the #1 indicator of a roaming internet bigot, I thought that would be obvious after all this time.


 
Fair enough - thanks for the info. If he just drifted in from Google then I would agree, he's not adding anything significant. Interesting you consider that he simply "made-up" everything he said, but still...
Important to state that though - part of the argument here is that authorities and media are turning a blind eye to this stuff... and have been for a long time.

This Times link from 2007 shows clearly alarm bells have been ringing for this upon deaf ears for ages.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2538090.ece




			
				The Times said:
			
		

> A number of families affected by Pakistani pimping gangs have said that police inaction and *the refusal of white liberals to acknowledge the problem has resulted in more girls being at risk than ever before*. “We are still battling to get recognition that what we are dealing with is organised crime against children,” says Aravinda Kosaraju, a researcher at Crop, which has in the past been funded by the Home Office and has recently received a large lottery grant in order to develop its work



It's the blatant running away from rationally discussing difficult issues such as these that is a gift to the wankers at the BNP.

But more importantly - there is a notion not too far-fetched that some on the left would sooner tolerate the prospect of young children being systematically raped than dare to confront what appears to be overwhelming evidence of a nasty cultural attitude by some towards non-muslim women. 

This thread, and the notable and puzzling lack of comments from the many self-styled opposers of the right wing factions who post here, appears to support that notion.

Looks like the white liberal left wing are "easy meat" for the racists, to put it another way... if they can't even attempt to counter my arguments, then they're fucked when the EDL/BNP scum start capitalising on this - and they will.

Still, there's always time to talk fondly about the irrelevant shit, the good old days of the left wing way back in the 1980's, and just ignore the present day if the topic is too difficult to confront...


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

The authors of the report cited in the times warn against the dangers of racial stereotyping in an article in the Guardian today



> Researchers into child sex trafficking within the UK have warned of the dangers of racial stereotyping amid claims of a widespread problem of British Pakistani men exploiting under-age white girls.
> 
> Authors of the first independent academic analysis looking at "on-street grooming", where young girls, spotted outside, including at the school gates, have become targets, said *they were concerned that data from a small, geographically concentrated, sample of cases had been "generalised to an entire crime type".*
> 
> The authors, Helen Brayley and Ella Cockbain, from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science, said they *were surprised their research*, confined to just two police operations in the north and Midlands, which found perpetrators were predominantly but not exclusively from the British Pakistani community, h*ad been cited in support of the claims that such offences were widespread.*



They also disputed claims that non Muslim girls had been deliberately targeted. 



> Brayley and Cockbaine, whose six-month study was cited as evidence, said they were worried that limited data had been extended "to characterise an entire crime type, in particular of race and gender". They challenged claims that white girls were deliberately sought out by offenders. "Though the majority … were white so too were the majority of local inhabitants." Comparing the percentage of white people in the areas with black and ethnic minorities, their data, they said, showed "black and ethnic minority girls over-represented among the victims".
> They added: "This challenges the view that white girls are sought out by offenders, s*uggesting instead that convenience and accessibility may be the prime drivers for those looking for new victims*.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/child-sex-trafficking-racial-stereotyping


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> The authors of the report cited in the times warn against the dangers of racial stereotyping in an article in the Guardian today



I think the dangers of racial stereotyping are pretty clear and obvious. The authors of the research from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science may indeed be surprised and concerned - but they do not actually refute the figures that show that the perpetrators were predominantly but not exclusively from the British Pakistani community. They are effectively calling for further wider studies to be carried out in the crime of "on-street grooming" in order to garner more accurate data. I support this call.



> They also disputed claims that non Muslim girls had been deliberately targeted.



They said "Though the majority … were white so too were the majority of local inhabitants."

According to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, in 2009, the victims were mainly "white British in their mid and late teens" but also Bangladeshi and Afro-Caribbean. In other words - _the victims were all non-muslim_.

If indeed convenience and accessibility may be the prime drivers for those looking for new victims, then that is a factor I would be happy to concede, but that still fails to address the explicit figures made by the same research team at UCL - here's what they said, after all:



> “researchers at University College London's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science concurred that victims were typically white girls while ‘most central offenders are Pakistani’.”
> 
> “…researchers identified 17 court prosecutions since 1997, 14 of them in the past three years, involving the on-street grooming of girls aged 11 to 16 by groups of men.”
> 
> ...



----

And it appears the 3 that were white were apparently members of the BNP.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 13, 2011)

He sure do love Jil dando

Including comments (from the mail) as evidence. Gotcha.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> He sure do love Jill dando



The comments defending the research and expressing doubts about the reliability of the research ALSO come from the Jill Dando UCL Institute.

You can't have it both ways. That's pretty weak.



> Including comments (from the mail) as evidence. Gotcha.


 
The comments were quoted by the Daily Mail - but also the Times. Are you suggesting the figures are incorrect?

I hope you'll be big enough to explain how they are incorrect.

After all - the Oslo statistics are even more alarming and nobody has managed to disprove them yet.

"Gotcha" my arse.

This is a prime example of how head-in-the-sand attitudes only make the problem far worse.



> In 1997, Kamlesh Patel, now Lord Patel of Bradford, produced ground-breaking research which showed without a shadow of a doubt that there was a massive drugs problem in the South Asian communities.
> 
> There was a culture of denial among so-called community leaders and he had to fight to get his voice heard.
> 
> Now, South Asian men and women are being treated for their drug habits when once they would have been sent to the South Asian sub-continent to get better by concerned parents, who didn't realise that not only would they get worse, but they would forge routes and contacts to smuggle in heroin and other Class A substances.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/blog/2011/01/inconvenient-truths.shtml

Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said: 




			
				Mohammed Shafiq said:
			
		

> "Men who groom young teenagers to exploit them sexually are committing a crime against humanity, a crime that Islam totally forbids".
> 
> Shafiq raised the matter himself two years ago, "because I felt that someone needed to speak out from the Muslim community, to take a stance that would, I hoped, protect teenagers from suffering this heinous evil" but was accused of " bringing shame on our community — These people think that white girls have fewer morals and are less valuable than our girls. This is a form of racism that is abhorrent and totally unacceptable in a society that prides itself on equality and justice."



Are you accusing Mr Shafiq of lying, butchersapron?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 13, 2011)

Odd. Ta


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Odd. Ta


 
Eh?


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> According to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, in 2009, the victims were mainly "white British in their mid and late teens" but also *Bangladeshi* and Afro-Caribbean. In other words - the victims were all non-muslim.



Most Bengali's are Muslim


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> Most Bengali's are Muslim


 
I stand corrected on that.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> It's a bit embarrassing to see that nobody has actually been able to prove the Oslo figures as complete lies.
> 
> Anyone would think that eric jarvis has just flounced off instead of demonstrating his point.
> I spent at least an hour and a half looking at the official statistics he provided, and none of them can give a definitive indication that Hanne Kristin Rohde is just making this stuff up.


 
It doesn't work that way. Without any evidence to back it up all you have is a single statement by one police officer. Whether you choose to believe it or not the simple fact is that the Norwegian stats show no significant rise in the rate of rate cases per capita, merely a rise in numbers that keeps pace with the rise in population. Whether you choose to believe it or not the simple fact is that the rate of rape cases is higher in the north of Norway where there are almost no immigrants compared to Oslo where most of the immigrant population live.

So basically you have two unsupported assertions made by Oslo police officers, one of whom seems to be otherwise invisible. That's your entire "evidence". You then go on to claim that the absence of any statistical evidence to back it up is due to the Norwegian government hiding it. It's about as solid a case as that for crop circles being created by aliens.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> I stand corrected on that.


 
This does however raise another issue. Correct me if I am wrong but central to your argument is the idea that non Muslim girls are being deliberately targeted and Muslim girls deliberately avoided not simply for opportunistic reasons but for specifically cultural or religious reasons. You imply that, whether unconsciously or consciously, Muslim girls are avoided because of some kind of cultural taboo and white girls are chosen because of a cultural tendency to look down on non Muslim girls as somehow deserving of abuse or because they are seen as less worthy than Muslim girls. This is your argument right?

Well the example of Bengali girls being mentioned made me think about this. Because as anyone who knows the history of Pakistan knows, Bengalis have historically been treated like shit by West Pakistanis. When Bangladesh was East Pakistan the Bengali people were treated like a colony of West Pakistan and during the war atrocities were committed which came close to genocide in scale and proportions. Including the killing of all Bengali intellectuals and the rape of 300.000 women. 

This is my point. The fact that Bangladesh was predominantly Muslim didn't matter a jot to the killers and rapists. Why then should it matter to these criminal gangs.?

This is what is worrying about your posts. This idea that there is some kind of sexual jihad motive behind these criminal actions . The idea that there is something in Islamic culture that leads these gangs to seek out and abuse specifically non Muslims and that I am afraid is a racist argument


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

It may be wrong, but it is not racist.

Pronouncing someone racist for attacking Islam, even if that attack is misguided or misinformed, is wrong.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 13, 2011)

racism


----------



## Crispy (Jan 13, 2011)

No, "just" bigotry


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> It doesn't work that way. Without any evidence to back it up all you have is a single statement by one police officer.



A very high profile police officer who is frequently asked to give comments to the media, NRK and Aftenbladet. If her stats were wrong then I see no evidence of this in alternative official sources, not do I see anyone come out and call her a liar. Quite the opposite in fact.



> Whether you choose to believe it or not the simple fact is that the Norwegian stats show no significant rise in the rate of rate cases per capita, merely a rise in numbers that keeps pace with the rise in population.



So are you saying the Norwegian population has doubled in ten years? Because that's what the stats say, using your own sources. 



> Whether you choose to believe it or not the simple fact is that the rate of rape cases is higher in the north of Norway where there are almost no immigrants compared to Oslo where most of the immigrant population live.



I do believe this is correct, looking at the figures. There is serious lack of specific data to contradict the statements made by Rohde.



> So basically you have two unsupported assertions made by Oslo police officers, one of whom seems to be otherwise invisible.



Hanne Kristin Rohde is head of the violent crime and vice section of the Oslo police. 

As a senior police officer I would suggest her interpretation of Oslo's statistics is far more informed than yours, given that there appear to be NO statistics for Oslo that contradict her in any of your links.



> That's your entire "evidence". You then go on to claim that the absence of any statistical evidence to back it up is due to the Norwegian government hiding it.



Far from it, Norway's government it seems are very open about the citizenship of it's population and does specify the nationality of those overall committing crime.

Do you think it is unlikely that such inflammatory statistics would be hidden away, for whatever reason?



> It's about as solid a case as that for crop circles being created by aliens.


 
Yet it seems to be more solid than yours. I see no motive for head of the violent crime and vice section of the Oslo police to be lying to the media and making outrageously false claims on the record, with the cameras running.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It may be wrong, but it is not racist.
> 
> Pronouncing someone racist for attacking Islam, even if that attack is misguided or misinformed, is wrong.


 
It's racist not because it is attacking Islam. It is racist because it ascribes to Islam and to Muslims a libellous accusation . That Islam justifies the sexual abuse of non Muslims and as such is the cause of the sexual abuse of non Muslim girls by these gangs. In fact such behaviour is specifically forbidden on threat of death both in Pakistan law (such as it is) and in the Koran. There is nothing in Islam of any interpretation which preaches the sexual abuse of non Muslims. Raping a non Muslim is as much a crime as raping a Muslim. Hence my example from Bangladesh. To claim that Islam allows for the sexual assault of non Muslims is a blood libel as serious as the historical blood libel associated with Jews. And as racist


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> This does however raise another issue. Correct me if I am wrong but central to your argument is the idea that non Muslim girls are being deliberately targeted and Muslim girls deliberately avoided not simply for opportunistic reasons but for specifically cultural or religious reasons. You imply that, whether unconsciously or consciously, Muslim girls are avoided because of some kind of cultural taboo and white girls are chosen because of a cultural tendency to look down on non Muslim girls as somehow deserving of abuse or because they are seen as less worthy than Muslim girls. This is your argument right?
> 
> Well the example of Bengali girls being mentioned made me think about this. Because as anyone who knows the history of Pakistan knows, Bengalis have historically been treated like shit by West Pakistanis. When Bangladesh was East Pakistan the Bengali people were treated like a colony of West Pakistan and during the war atrocities were committed which came close to genocide in scale and proportions. Including the killing of all Bengali intellectuals and the rape of 300.000 women.
> 
> ...


 
So why are there no Pakistani muslim children being groomed and targetted? If as you say, the Bengali people have been treated in an unspeakably atrocious manner, then surely that lends weight to the argument that _the Pakistani men who appear to be most active in this type of crime are rarely, if ever, committing it on girls from their own communities._


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

Crispy said:


> No, "just" bigotry


 
If I accuse Jews of using Christian blood in the Sabbath. Am I being racist or merely bigoted?


----------



## Crispy (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> If I accuse Jews of using Christian blood in the Sabbath. Am I being racist or merely bigoted?


 
Racism is a subset of bigotry (isn't it?)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

What 'Islam allows for' is irrelevant. 

What is true is that many Muslims see the world as divided into Muslims and non-Muslims and they apply different standards to each. Hence the concept of apostasy and that it is something that must be punished. I for one find that idea fucking offensive.

The obvious comparison is with the Catholic church. Does Catholicism allow for paedophilia? No. Is it a problem within the Catholic church? Yes. It is a consequence of the societal structure – a celibate clergy – that Catholics have constructed. 

If there is any truth to what pk is saying, it is similarly a problem of the societal structure that Muslims (at least some of them) have constructed. Nothing directly to do with any abstract concept of 'Islam'.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> So why are there no Pakistani muslim children being groomed and targetted? If as you say, the Bengali people have been treated in an unspeakably atrocious manner, then surely that lends weight to the argument that _the Pakistani men who appear to be most active in this type of crime are rarely, if ever, committing it on girls from their own communities._


 
Yes but Bengalis are Muslim. You could be arguing that these gangs avoid girls from West Pakistan or from Kashmir or don't touch girls from Karachi or you could be arguing they only pick girls from Bradford but not Birmingham or whatever. But you are not. You are saying more than that aren't you? You are saying that _non Muslim _girls are specifically being targeted because they are _non Muslim_ and that the decision to attack non Muslim girls has its basis in the religious or cultural influences of Islam. Or have I got you wrong?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> It's racist not because it is attacking Islam. It is racist because it ascribes to Islam and to Muslims a libellous accusation . That Islam justifies the sexual abuse of non Muslims and as such is the cause of the sexual abuse of non Muslim girls by these gangs. In fact such behaviour is specifically forbidden on threat of death both in Pakistan law (such as it is) and in the Koran. There is nothing in Islam of any interpretation which preaches the sexual abuse of non Muslims. Raping a non Muslim is as much a crime as raping a Muslim. Hence my example from Bangladesh. To claim that Islam allows for the sexual assault of non Muslims is a blood libel as serious as the historical blood libel associated with Jews. And as racist


 
But from a historical perspective, the taking of slaves, particularly women and children, is encouraged.



> the climatic conditions of Arabia the birth-place of Islam, Muhammad’s life-style as a model for Muslims, and injunctions in the Quran and the Hadis, determined Muslim psychology about women. Islam permits polygamy with unbelievable liberality.
> A man can have four wives at any point of time, that is, if he chooses to have a fifth one, he can divorce one of the already at hand and keep the number within the legal limits of four.
> Besides, he can have as many slave girls or concubines as he pleases.





> Women and children were special targets for enslavement throughout the medieval period, that is, during Muslim invasions and Muslim rule.
> Captive children of both sexes grew up as Muslims and served the sultans, nobles and men of means in various captives.
> Enslavement of young women was also due to many reasons; their being sex objects was the primary consideration and hence concentration on their captivity.





> “there is absolutely no limit to the number of slave girls with whom a Muhammadan may cohabit, and it is the consecration of this illimitable indulgence which so popularizes the Muhammadan religion amongst uncivilized nations, and so popularizes slavery in the Muslim religion”





> Slave girls had two main functions to perform, domestic service and providing sex if and when required. In medieval Muslim society sex slavery and concubinage were almost interchangeable terms. For the polygamous Muslim men of means slave girls and maids were as much in demand as kanchanis or dancing girls, concubines or even free born women.



http://www.bharatvani.org/books/mssmi/ch12.htm


----------



## Superdupastupor (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> So why are there no Pakistani muslim children being groomed and targetted? If as you say, the Bengali people have been treated in an unspeakably atrocious manner, then surely that lends weight to the argument that _the Pakistani men who appear to be most active in this type of crime are rarely, if ever, committing it on girls from their own communities._


 
You don't exactly need a degree in sociology to figure out why perps are not grooming within their own communities .... I mean c'mon??.....


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> Yes but Bengalis are Muslim. You could be arguing that these gangs avoid girls from West Pakistan or from Kashmir or don't touch girls from Karachi or you could be arguing they only pick girls from Bradford but not Birmingham or whatever. But you are not. You are saying more than that aren't you? You are saying that _non Muslim _girls are specifically being targeted because they are _non Muslim_ and that the decision to attack non Muslim girls has its basis in the religious or cultural influences of Islam. Or have I got you wrong?


 
I'm saying Pakistani muslims are rarely if ever targeted.

In my ignorance I had always assumed that Bengalis were Hindu, but your own knowledge testifies to the fact that Bengalis were persecuted in a genocidal manner by the Pakistanis.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If there is any truth to what pk is saying, it is similarly a problem of the societal structure that Muslims (at least some of them) have constructed. Nothing directly to do with any abstract concept of 'Islam'.





pk said:


> But from a historical perspective, the taking of slaves, particularly women and children, is encouraged.


 
Lol


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Superdupastupor said:


> You don't exactly need a degree in sociology to figure out why perps are not grooming within their own communities .... I mean c'mon??.....


 
Yet this does not follow when we look at the vast majority of men jailed for child abuse - they do not discriminate in the same manner.

Neither did Catholic priests for that matter. If anything, the reverse was true.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Neither did Catholic priests for that matter. If anything, the reverse was true.


 
Fucks sake.

Which kids did Catholic priests have access to?


----------



## Superdupastupor (Jan 13, 2011)

Yeah I know, but that's flipping it round. If you are part of what is historically an immigrant population you are a subset of the wider population..


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol


 
You flounced off long ago - you've proved you have nothing to say other than pathetic namecalling. This topic is beyond you, clearly.

Carry on with the cheap shots from the sidelines if it makes you feel better, but it only make you look like an impotent cunt.

Like the little kid in the playground who only puts the boot in to the bigger kid when he's being safely held down. That's your style though, eh?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Superdupastupor said:


> Yeah I know, but that's flipping it round. If you are part of what is historically an immigrant population you are a subset of the wider population..


 
It's far from obvious, though, that men from a particular immigrant group would seek out women from other groups to exploit rather than women from within their own group to whom they will have easier access.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

Crispy said:


> Racism is a subset of bigotry (isn't it?)



There is a lot of linguistic gymnastics that goes on when it comes to accusations of racism when people attack religious minorities. The classic argument (used incessantly by the EDL ) is that attacking Islam cannot be racist because Muslims are not a race, they are a religion. But this misses the point. 
Criticism of Islam isn't in itself racist. Islam is a religion that claims a monopoly on truth therefore it invites critique. (I am an atheist and think its all fairy tales fwiw) but this isn't what is going on. What is going on isn't a theological attack on belief. It is a political attack on the _rights _of a religious and ethnic minority and that is racist.

When conclusions are drawn such as "Islam is incompatable with "western values" or when attempts are made to proscribe certain symbols or practices of Muslims, such as complaining about Mosques or demanding a ban on Niqab etc. What those making those demands are saying is that we don't wish to apply the same democratic rights enjoyed by other citizens to Muslim citizens. We enjoy freedom of expression and belief. Attempts to deny those same freedoms to minority cultures are in fact attempts to deny equal rights to those citizens. This is what is racist, and all too often this is carried out under the cloak of legitimate theological critique.

 Make no mistake, the rights of religious minorities (namely Muslim citizens) across Europe are under attack in a way unprecedented since the third reich. Switzerland has banned minarets. France has banned the Niqab, racist attacks are sweeping France and Germany. The far right are enjoying wide support in Holland. And all these attacks are carried out by those who claim not to be racist. They just don't like "Islam.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Superdupastupor said:


> Yeah I know, but that's flipping it round. If you are part of what is historically an immigrant population you are a subset of the wider population..


 
Of course it's flipping it round. You suggested yourself there may be obvious reasons why perps are not grooming within their own communities, it doesn't change the fact that they aren't, and the victims are disproportionately white non-muslim girls. The occasional Bangladeshi child notwithstanding.


----------



## Superdupastupor (Jan 13, 2011)

well I think the point I'm getting at is that in insular inwardly focused groups an offender is probably far more likely to receive some "community justice" than if he looks further afield for victims

sorry if it all been covered before


*this is the obvious reason i've been getting at BTW.

ETA are you suggesting that muslim on muslim child abuse NEVER happens. and it is exclusively outside the community ...... dunno i'm not a criminologist but it seems unlikely .


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

What does any of that have to do with the question in hand?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> You flounced off long ago - you've proved you have nothing to say other than pathetic namecalling. This topic is beyond you, clearly.
> 
> Carry on with the cheap shots from the sidelines if it makes you feel better, but it only make you look like an impotent cunt.
> 
> Like the little kid in the playground who only puts the boot in to the bigger kid when he's being safely held down. That's your style though, eh?


 
If by flounced you mean done things like gone to bed, gone to work, ate, then yes, I have flounced. You've made a right dick out of yourself, everything you've cited has been shown to be bollocks or paper thin, and you've ended up resorting to c&p'ing bits of the Koran that you've found on far right websites. And you think anybody needs to snipe from the sidelines? You're a fucking joke lad.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Of course it's flipping it round. You suggested yourself there may be obvious reasons why perps are not grooming within their own communities, it doesn't change the fact that they aren't, and the victims are disproportionately white non-muslim girls. The occasional Bangladeshi child notwithstanding.


 
That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.


 
Where's the actual evidence that these nonces are specifically not targeting british pakistani girls?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

I don't know. You'd better ask one of the people who've been saying this is what's been happening. Read the thread, perhaps.


----------



## Superdupastupor (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What does any of that have to do with the question in hand?


 
I forget. I got prompted to type something ... 

I'm not sure there is anything definitive to say about the phenomenon maybe . but people will use this story for all sorts of reasons and stances


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Sorry, that was aimed at dylans.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Of course it's flipping it round. You suggested yourself there may be obvious reasons why perps are not grooming within their own communities, it doesn't change the fact that they aren't, and the victims are disproportionately white non-muslim girls. The occasional Bangladeshi child notwithstanding.


 
Then I am a little confused as to what you are saying. I thought that central to your argument was the idea that it was specifically non Muslim girls who are being targeted and that they are being targeted because of some kind of Jihadist perspective that see's non Muslims as being legitimate targets for abuse because and only because they are not Muslim. 

If this is not now your view then fair enough but saying that they are not targeting within their immediate communities is not the same as saying  they are deliberately avoiding Muslim girls and deliberately targeting non Muslims and that there is a specifically religious motivation behind their decisions.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't know. You'd better ask one of the people who've been saying this is what's been happening. Read the thread, perhaps.



I have read the thread, and nothing conclusive has been posted. Yet you see fit to work off the assertion that it does, in fact, happen.



littlebabyjesus said:


> That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> If this is not now your view then fair enough but saying that they are not targeting within their immediate communities is not the same as saying  they are deliberately avoiding Muslim girls and deliberately targeting non Muslims and that there is a specifically religious motivation behind their decisions.



It's not, no. But if there were evidence that there was a religious motivation, you'd have to take that evidence seriously. I would think it at least possible that some of these men frame their decision in this way.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I have read the thread, and nothing conclusive has been posted. Yet you see fit to work off the assertion that it does, in fact, happen.


 
It might help if you didn't part-quote me out of context.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It might help if you didn't part-quote me out of context.


 
Oh he's very good at doing that. Ignore him, it would make for a better debate.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not, no. But if there were evidence that there was a religious motivation, you'd have to take that evidence seriously. I would think it at least possible that some of these men frame their decision in this way.


 
The evidence, both anecdotal, and also the evidence from the research cited, and of course the explicit statements from the senior muslim figures supporting Jack Straw suggests that they do frame their decision that way. That white non-muslim girls are easy meat.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not, no. But if there were evidence that there was a religious motivation, you'd have to take that evidence seriously. I would think it at least possible that some of these men frame their decision in this way.


 
Yes you would. But I don't see any evidence. Any more than there was evidence that West Indian men were predominantly involved in mugging in the 1970's. In that case a similar moral panic rose which in retrospect can only be explained in the context of 1970s racism. I think there are similarities with this issue. I think we are witnessing a moral panic that can only be understood in the wider context of growing anti Muslim racism. 
(which I hope also answers  your question about what my previous post had to do with the subject matter-. I think this is a moral panic driven by Islamophobia and racism against a religious minority)


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> Then I am a little confused as to what you are saying. I thought that central to your argument was the idea that it was specifically non Muslim girls who are being targeted and that they are being targeted because of some kind of Jihadist perspective that see's non Muslims as being legitimate targets for abuse because and only because they are not Muslim.



I don't see these rapists as strictly adhering to islamic beliefs, but I do see a pattern of power that echoes the many tales of victory from the inception of islam and the perception that islam should be applied the world over. They are rapists, it is a power thing when all is said and done, but the evidence of racial abuse of the victims goes some way to further speculation that these rapists saw themselves as some sort of sexual jihadists. I'm sure the cocaine helped fuel such a narcissistic viewpoint too.



> If this is not now your view then fair enough but saying that they are not targeting within their immediate communities is not the same as saying  they are deliberately avoiding Muslim girls and deliberately targeting non Muslims and that there is a specifically religious motivation behind their decisions.



It appears that the Bengali muslims targeted were only a tiny minority of what amounted to over 100 victims of the Derby gang alone.

I do think there is a _cultural_ motivation behind their decisions.

They believe that non-muslims are fair game, worthless, and their opinion of Bengalis is not much better.

They are not targeting Pakistani children for rape. That is the bottom line here.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It might help if you didn't part-quote me out of context.


 
I'd already quoted it in full once, and you responded by telling me to 'read the thread'. But okay.



littlebabyjesus said:


> That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.



'That occasional Bangladeshi' is more likely to point towards nonces noncing vulnerable children regardless of their cultural or ethnic background. Or it might mean they are engaged specifically in some sort of politically motivated sexual ethnic cleansing. Which do you think more likely? Perhaps they do a census before raping?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Superdupastupor said:


> I forget. I got prompted to type something ...
> 
> I'm not sure there is anything definitive to say about the phenomenon maybe . but people will use this story for all sorts of reasons and stances


 
They will, which is why it is imperative to sort the tabloid bullshit from what appears to be born out of factual evidence as soon as possible, and certainly to accept the findings without regard to whom might be offended. 

If I'm the devils advocate for lazy reactionary conclusions, then it's alarming how many of the anti-EDL and anti-BNP campaigners who post here have very little factual weaponry to counteract such conclusions.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

wtf are you on about? @ PT


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Perhaps they do a census before raping?


 
If they do they'll have done more research than you have bothered doing.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> I think this is a moral panic driven by Islamophobia and racism against a religious minority


 
I think much of the overall panic you describe can easily be dismissed as such. But in this story - no.

I think the racism stems from the rapists, deliberately avoiding children from their own communities and racially abusing victims that they do manage to ensnare.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> wtf are you on about? @ PT


 
LBJ, you extrapolated from the fact some of the victims were Bangladeshi muslims that it was racially motivated. On what basis? Surely it is more likely to suggest that they targeted who they could. I've already phrased it simply enough.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> If they do they'll have done more research than you have bothered doing.


 
Ace. How many of your 'sources' have proved to have been bollocks now pk? Five? Six?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Where did I say it was racially motivated? 
Clue: I didn't.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Where did I say it was racially motivated?
> Clue: I didn't.



Here. It's the 4th time I've quoted it now LBJ. Perhaps some bolding will help.



littlebabyjesus said:


> That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, *namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis*, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. *That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.*


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Ace. How many of your 'sources' have proved to have been bollocks now pk? Five? Six?


 
Why don't you point out which sources you believe I have used that are "bollocks" ?

I don't think you have any interest whatsoever in this issue, I think you're just being the token hall monitor calling "racist!" at anyone who appears to be wavering from the rigid line of political correctness.

In fact I'd go so far as to say that it's attitudes like yours, imposing your transparent principles on other people, that led to these children being victimized for far longer than they should have been.

You're so stiff it's as if someone has printed out the equality laws, rolled them up, and rammed them right up your arse.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Why don't you point out which sources you believe I have used that are "bollocks" ?


 
6.5%

Norway

No victims were Muslim

Authors of research you are citing saying 'no racial/religious element'

I could go on


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Is 'pakistani' a race, now? Of course one of the messier aspects of this is the fact that, as dylans has explained very clearly elsewhere, the only real factor that binds Pakistanis together as a nation is Islam.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> You're so stiff it's as if someone has printed out the equality laws, rolled them up, and rammed them right up your arse.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is 'pakistani' a race, now? Of course one of the messier aspects of this is the fact that, as dylans has explained very clearly elsewhere, the only real factor that binds Pakistanis together as a nation is Islam.


 
Oh for fuck's sake. Would it help if I said ethnically motivated instead? Culturally motivated? Just fucking answer what you meant.

And why your assertion that 'the only real factor that binds Pakistanis together as a nation is Islam' has anything to do with the behaviour of some British Pakistani men is beyond me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

I'm going to leave you there. I've reread my post and I think it is very clear what I meant by it. I can only apologise if you don't agree, but I don't think I can make it any clearer.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> ............is beyond me.


 
So much is.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> 6.5%



Not proved to be bollocks at all. Read the thread - 65% tallies with other statistics. I accept that it could be 6.5% but this is by no means conclusive.



> Norway


 How is this bollocks? By you deciding that it's bollocks - even though you've not even glanced at the statistics?
Are you saying Hanne Kristin Rohde is an out and out liar, yet still retains her post as a senior police officer?



> No victims were Muslim


 No victims were Pakistani muslim. Evidence appears to suggest that a tiny minority may have been Bangladeshi muslim but that is hardly the point is it?



> Authors of research you are citing saying 'no racial/religious element'



Name one.



> I could go on


 
You could go on doing whatever you can to disrupt the thread because it's not going your way, yes.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm going to leave you there. I've reread my post and I think it is very clear what I meant by it. I can only apologise if you don't agree, but I don't think I can make it any clearer.


 
Well it isn't.



> That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.



On what basis do you claim that these nonces - incidentally not actually exclusively of a British Pakistani background - have defined and are targeting an 'other'?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm going to leave you there. I've reread my post and I think it is very clear what I meant by it. I can only apologise if you don't agree, but I don't think I can make it any clearer.


 
Like I said, better off ignoring him - he's being willfully blind to all but his own opinions now. I'm supposedly a racist and he's, y'know, right on comrade...


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> these nonces - incidentally not actually exclusively of a British Pakistani background


 
Fucking LOL - what was it - 56 in total - 3 were white BNP members and the remaining 53 were of Pakistani origin.

94.6 percent.

LOL, as if your pedantry will change anything. All you're doing is trolling the thread because you don't like the topic of discussion.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Not proved to be bollocks at all. Read the thread - 65% tallies with other statistics. I accept that it could be 6.5% but this is by no means conclusive.



65% is conclusively wrong.



> How is this bollocks? By you deciding that it's bollocks - even though you've not even glanced at the statistics?
> Are you saying Hanne Kristin Rohde is an out and out liar, yet still retains her post as a senior police officer?



You cited stats that have appeared for every single year since 2001. Do you suppose that by some stroke of fate Oslo has seen exactly the same number of rapes every year since 2001?



> No victims were Pakistani muslim. Evidence appears to suggest that a tiny minority may have been Bangladeshi muslim but that is hardly the point is it?



Yes it is. You have continually claimed that the actions of these young men can be traced back to Islam, and that this was, and I quote, 'sexual jihad' against 'infidels'.





> Name one.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/child-sex-trafficking-racial-stereotyping

_'But Brayley and Cockbaine, whose six-month study was cited as evidence, said they were worried that limited data had been extended "to characterise an entire crime type, in particular of race and gender". They challenged claims that white girls were deliberately sought out by offenders. "Though the majority … were white so too were the majority of local inhabitants." Comparing the percentage of white people in the areas with black and ethnic minorities, their data, they said, showed "black and ethnic minority girls over-represented among the victims".

They added: "This challenges the view that white girls are sought out by offenders, suggesting instead that convenience and accessibility may be the prime drivers for those looking for new victims."'_



> You could go on doing whatever you can to disrupt the thread because it's not going your way, yes.


 
Lol


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Fucking LOL - what was it - 56 in total - 3 were white BNP members and the remaining 53 were of Pakistani origin.
> 
> 94.6 percent.
> 
> LOL, as if your pedantry will change anything. All you're doing is trolling the thread because you don't like the topic of discussion.


 
Knowing the meaning of 'exclusive' isn't pedantry you fantasist fuckwit


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> Yes it is. You have continually claimed that the actions of these young men can be traced back to Islam, and that this was, and I quote, 'sexual jihad' against 'infidels'.



Yes. This is my concern with PKs argument. The claim that has been made is far more than that the victims were simply not from their immediate community. The claim is that "Islam" has justified and encouraged this behaviour and this is what I am questioning.  I can understand LBJ post 



> That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.


and see this as a possibility.  But this is a far cry from PKs claim that these actions are specific to and a consequence of "Islam" (whatever that means)


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> 65% is conclusively wrong.



How do you know? Have you actually checked the stats for yourself? Do you even know what you're looking for?



> You cited stats that have appeared for every single year since 2001.



That's a lie to start with - I also cited stats that were supplied by eric jarvis.



> Do you suppose that by some stroke of fate Oslo has seen exactly the same number of rapes every year since 2001?



LOL, you're now going to show me where I showed exactly the same number of rapes occurring, yes? No, of course you're not. And you're never going to even listen to what Oslo's head of department Hanne Kristen Rohde stated - on camera - as well as published in the newspapers. It doesn't fit your agenda of blind denial.



> You have continually claimed that the actions of these young men can be traced back to Islam, and that this was, and I quote, 'sexual jihad' against 'infidels'.



I have suggested that it could be considered as a contributory factor, given the clear links to the origins of the faith, and I've also cited it as a reason why certain community leaders may have turned a blind eye and perhaps just put it down to normal behaviour, it was you that seized upon it as some sort of proof, and have jumped up and down hysterically ever since.



> http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jan/06/child-sex-trafficking-racial-stereotyping
> 
> _'But Brayley and Cockbaine, whose six-month study was cited as evidence, said they were worried that limited data had been extended "to characterise an entire crime type, in particular of race and gender". They challenged claims that white girls were deliberately sought out by offenders. "Though the majority … were white so too were the majority of local inhabitants." Comparing the percentage of white people in the areas with black and ethnic minorities, their data, they said, showed "black and ethnic minority girls over-represented among the victims"._


_

But NOT Pakistani muslim girls. You omitted this bit. Conveniently.




			They added: "This challenges the view that white girls are sought out by offenders, suggesting instead that convenience and accessibility may be the prime drivers for those looking for new victims."'
		
Click to expand...

_ 
"Suggesting" being the operative word here.

How telling that you cite something "suggested" from these Jill Dando researchers and claim it as hard evidence.

Yet you fail to apply such strict criteria to opinions that do not align with your preconception.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

I don't see any merit in LBJ's post - what evidence is there to claim that they have identified an 'other' on national/ethnic/cultural grounds? All the evidence points towards nonces targeting vulnerable kids, nothing suggests any sort of profiling beyond their vulnerability.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> How do you know? Have you actually checked the stats for yourself? Do you even know what you're looking for?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You're a fucking loon. All of this has been proven time and again on this thread. You're arguing black is white.

Stats are only ever going to 'suggest' something you massive dick. You should stick to stalking, it's the only thing you're any good at.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> But NOT Pakistani muslim girls. You omitted this bit. Conveniently.



But don't you see. The admission that Muslim girls could have been targeted at all, fatally undermines your argument that these attacks  were driven by some kind of "sexual jihad" or in any way driven by a belief that they were following some kind of twisted "Islamic" instruction.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't see any merit in LBJ's post - what evidence is there to claim that they have identified an 'other' on national/ethnic/cultural grounds? All the evidence points towards nonces targeting vulnerable kids, nothing suggests any sort of profiling beyond their vulnerability.


 
I don't know but it seems reasonable to me that people try not to shit on their own doorstep


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> Yes. This is my concern with PKs argument. The claim that has been made is far more than that the victims were simply not from their immediate community. The claim is that "Islam" has justified and encouraged this behaviour and this is what I am questioning.



The victims of the rapes have claimed that they were racially abused   - "white trash" "prostitute" "worthless like a dog" - and this certainly tallies with anecdotal evidence to suggest the rapists had a far lower opinion of their victims, as they were not Pakistani muslim girls and therefore fair game for abuse. 

I would say a large element of this is down to the upbringing, where western women are seen by islamic men and women as prostitutes, white trash, unclean...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> I don't know but it seems reasonable to me that people try not to shit on their own doorstep


 
Absolutely not the same thing as LBJ asserted though


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> The victims of the rapes have claimed that they were racially abused   - "white trash" "prostitute" "worthless like a dog" - and this certainly tallies with anecdotal evidence to suggest the rapists had a far lower opinion of their victims, as they were not Pakistani muslim girls and therefore fair game for abuse.
> 
> I would say a large element of this is down to the upbringing, where western women are seen by islamic men and women as prostitutes, white trash, unclean...


 
Abuse of that nature is always going to be involved, whether the nonces are muslim, hindu, sikh or fucking jehovas. To rape/abuse somebody is to dehumanise them. Fucks sake.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> You're a fucking loon. All of this has been proven time and again on this thread. You're arguing black is white.



Where has the Oslo cop been proven to be incorrect?? Prove it! 
Go on - why not stop all the chest puffing and name calling and do something useful!



> Stats are only ever going to 'suggest' something you massive dick.



Well the stats "suggest" an overwhelming amount of Pakistani men are raping non-Pakistani children and racially abusing them. 



> You should stick to stalking, it's the only thing you're any good at.


 
"stalking" LOL, that old chestnut. That shows just how desperate you are to get one over on me, some 5 year old board war that you lost.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> This idea that there is some kind of sexual jihad motive behind these criminal actions ....is a racist argument


 
I work in Egypt researching relations between the majority Muslim and minority Christian communities.

Among Muslims, the term used for the winning, taking or marrying of a Christian girl by a Muslim man is “fat’h”. The term means “a conquest” or “an opening” or “a victory” (for Allah). It is the same term that is used in Islamic discourse for the conquest and subjugation of non-Muslim states by Islamic arms – i.e. the conquest of the ‘non-Muslim’ by Jihad.

This is not simply a coincidence of nomenclature. The sectarian and supremacist connotation in both the military and the sexual usages are explicit. 

Conquest by Islamic arms is extolled because it leaves the subject population open for (or defenceless to) conversion – and thus serves to expand the dominion of Islam. 

The taking of a Christian paramour or wife is likewise viewed in Islamic discourse and Islamic law as an opportunity to increase the rate of birth of Muslim offspring. (In Islamic law and culture, it is of course obligatory that the offspring of relationship between a Muslim male and a non-Muslim female be raised Muslim. Christian men are forbidden, on pain of death, to marry Muslim women.)


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> The idea that there is something in Islamic culture that leads these gangs to seek out and abuse specifically non Muslims ... is a racist argument



1) Islam denies the legal equality of women with men. It defines them – before and above all else – in terms of their sexual-reproductive roles. In Islam (eg the Quran), the fundamental roles of women are as bed-mates and mothers.

2) Islam explicitly denies non-Muslims (kuffar, dhimma) legal or political or cultural equality with Muslims. In the Islamic doctrine of dhimmitude, non-Muslims are (at best) second-class. Non-Muslims do not have or deserve equality of rights or treatment. They are ‘subject’ to Islam and to Muslims.

Can you do the maths?


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> pk;The victims of the rapes have claimed that they were racially abused   - "white trash" "prostitute" "worthless like a dog" - and this certainly tallies with anecdotal evidence to suggest the rapists had a far lower opinion of their victims, as they were not Pakistani muslim girls and therefore fair game for abuse.



Rapist in misogynistic abuse shock! This only shows that these guys had a low opinion of their victims not that they percieved their actions as being somehow "Isllamic". This is my problem with your claim. It is a huge assumption and one that I see no evidence for.



> I would say a large element of this is down to the upbringing, where western women are seen by islamic men and women as prostitutes, white trash, unclean..



Sorry but that is pure conjecture and without any evidential basis what-so ever. I am sure most British Muslims are as shocked by these crimes as anyone.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Abuse of that nature is always going to be involved, whether the nonces are muslim, hindu, sikh or fucking jehovas. To rape/abuse somebody is to dehumanise them. Fucks sake.


 
Right - so the Catholic priests were calling their victims "fenian bastards" whilst raping them, right?

You're so full of shit it's actually hilarious.

What next? - "they were asking for it, they were out late and were wearing skirts in a muslim area". ??


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> Rapist in misogynistic abuse shock! This only shows that these guys had a low opinion of their victims not that they percieved their actions as being somehow "Islamic". This is my problem with your claim. It is a huge assumption and one that I see no evidence for.



It is an assumption backed up by several senior muslim figures in the UK, several senior policemen, former home secretary Jack Straw, and plenty of anecdotal evidence. These rapists saw these girls as worthless for reasons that ran far deeper than your run of the mill misogyny. In my opinion.



> I am sure most British Muslims are as shocked by these crimes as anyone.


 
I would like to think so too! However it's clear this is not a new problem, and it seems an investigation with such conclusions was perhaps inevitable after years of turning a blind eye by people terrified of causing offence to certain members of an oversensitive and oppressive and misogynist ideology.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Where has the Oslo cop been proven to be incorrect?? Prove it!
> Go on - why not stop all the chest puffing and name calling and do something useful!



I already have. You ignored it. Your stats are a lie. They have been reproduced for every year since 2001. They are a racist trope, you thick little fuck. And now all you can do is cling on to your one copper. Sad.



> Well the stats "suggest" an overwhelming amount of Pakistani men are raping non-Pakistani children and racially abusing them.



No they don't.



> "stalking" LOL, that old chestnut. That shows just how desperate you are to get one over on me, some 5 year old board war that you lost.


 
Look at my join date you knob.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> I work in Egypt researching relations between the majority Muslim and minority Christian communities.
> 
> Among Muslims, the term used for the winning, taking or marrying of a Christian girl by a Muslim man is “fat’h”. The term means “a conquest” or “an opening” or “a victory” (for Allah). It is the same term that is used in Islamic discourse for the conquest and subjugation of non-Muslim states by Islamic arms – i.e. the conquest of the ‘non-Muslim’ by Jihad.
> 
> ...


 
But we're not talking about Egypt, are we? What is it with people, do they think muslims are made on an industrial estate to factory specifications? Like Borg?

They targeted muslim kids as well as non-muslim kids, so any 'conversion' motivation is clearly bollocks. They're nonces.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Those are interesting posts, Thomsy. 

I think it is important not to fall into the trap of thinking that there is such a thing as 'Islam' beyond what is practised by Muslims. The book they use as the basis for their moral and political views is not a straightforward one, and it contains a hell of a lot of ammunition for those who, for instance, wish to subjugate women. And it contains a hell of a lot of stuff that encourages the idea that those who are not Muslims are in some way inferior. There is a lot to detest in Islam, and I don't see any wishy-washy CofE-style equivalent being practised in many places. I don't see any 'gay Muslim' movements, for instance, or 'women-Imman' movements. 

As I said earlier, I don't think anyone should feel reticent in coming forward and condemning such belief systems in a robust and direct manner.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Look at my join date you knob.


 
Are you really such a knob, eh... knoob.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I already have. You ignored it.



No you haven't. You are a liar. You have not proven the statements made by Hanne Kristen Rohde to be incorrect. 



> Your stats are a lie. They have been reproduced for every year since 2001.



They aren't my stats, and you still haven't grasped that fact.



> They are a racist trope, you thick little fuck. And now all you can do is cling on to your one copper. Sad.



That "one copper" is the head of Oslo Rape Robbery and Vice. You want me to believe YOU over HER, after seeing with my own eyes your inability to tell the truth? Bwahahahaha!!!!



> No they don't.


So what's 53 out of 56 mean to you then, you thick little fuck?



> Look at my join date you knob.


So why are you calling me a stalker then you knob? Oh I know - you were "watcyn" for years over on MATB and only joined here when that collapsed. You fucking liar - you ARE trying to stir up a 5 year old spat! How pathetic.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Right - so the Catholic priests were calling their victims "fenian bastards" whilst raping them, right?
> 
> You're so full of shit it's actually hilarious.



Oh my days. Mos sexual assaults etc will involve dehumanising, humiliating insults. Obviously.



> What next? - "they were asking for it, they were out late and were wearing skirts in a muslim area". ??


 
Fuck off you noxious cunt


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The book they use as the basis for their moral and political views is not a straightforward one, and it contains a hell of a lot of ammunition for those who, for instance, wish to subjugate women. And it contains a hell of a lot of stuff that encourages the idea that those who are not Muslims are in some way inferior.


 
Precisely. A mitigating factor in these rapes that unfortunately most here are just too blind to see, or scared to admit to seeing.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> So why are you calling me a stalker then you knob?


 
Because you are.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Oh my days. Mos sexual assaults etc will involve dehumanising, humiliating insults. Obviously.



But not racist insults, according to you.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> ;11419584]I work in Egypt researching relations between the majority Muslim and minority Christian communities.
> 
> *Among Muslims,* the term used for the winning, taking or marrying of a Christian girl by a Muslim man is “fat’h”. The term means “a conquest” or “an opening” or “a victory” (for Allah). It is the same term that is used in Islamic discourse for the conquest and subjugation of non-Muslim states by Islamic arms – i.e. the conquest of the ‘non-Muslim’ by Jihad.



Which Muslims? The Muslim Brotherhood? The followers of Al Azhar Mosque? The Intellectual and secular elites of Cairo? The radicals of Islamic Jihad? The fundamentalists of Takfir wal-Hijra? The killers of  Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya ? 
The writers and intellectuals of the coffee houses who came out in their thousands to condemn the attackers of Naguib Mahfouz and who only last week flocked in their thousands to defend Coptic Christians on their Christmas day? 
Which Islam do  you wish to quote so authoritatively? There is no Islam. There are many. 

I also used to live in Egypt. I lived in Cairo for several years and some of the wisest most tolerant people I had ever met were Egyptian Muslims. your assumption that you can define from a billion people a single and homogeneous culture called "Islam" is ill conceived and racist. There is no Islam, there are many. By claiming to define Islam as a single entity on the terms you do is to surrender the argument to the Salafist fundamentalists . By doing so you are betraying the many many brave Egyptians who risk their lives daily for defending secular values and a multi faith Egypt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

There is the Islam of the Egyptian authorities, which for instance bans all philosophy students from even hypothesising that there is no god.

Dylans, can you show me an imman anywhere who advocates gay rights?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Those are interesting posts, Thomsy.
> 
> I think it is important not to fall into the trap of thinking that there is such a thing as 'Islam' beyond what is practised by Muslims. The book they use as the basis for their moral and political views is not a straightforward one, and it contains a hell of a lot of ammunition for those who, for instance, wish to subjugate women. And it contains a hell of a lot of stuff that encourages the idea that those who are not Muslims are in some way inferior. There is a lot to detest in Islam, and I don't see any wishy-washy CofE-style equivalent being practised in many places. I don't see any 'gay Muslim' movements, for instance, or 'women-Imman' movements.
> 
> As I said earlier, I don't think anyone should feel reticent in coming forward and condemning such belief systems in a robust and direct manner.


 
http://gaymuslims.org/

http://www.lgf.org.uk/gay-muslims-in-the-uk/

http://www.france24.com/en/20081004...imam-woman-eid-ul-fitr-kabylia-algeria-france

So you also think that the actions of these men can be traced to Islam (even though their victims were muslim as well as non-muslim)? Islam is more repressive than other faiths?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Because you are.


 
LOL, whatever. I guess that'll be from when you were posting on the MATB boards then under another name: "watcyn".

"Look at my join date" you fucking liar.

Like I said, you're just dragging up 5-year old irrelevant shite - it makes you look like a complete twat if you need to invoke all that in order to somehow make a point.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Have you read that 'gaymuslims.org' link? It is quite, quite mad, you know.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> LOL, whatever. I guess that'll be from when you were posting on the MATB boards then under another name: "watcyn".
> 
> "Look at my join date" you fucking liar.
> 
> Like I said, you're just dragging up 5-year old irrelevant shite - it makes you look like a complete twat if you need to invoke all that in order to somehow make a point.


 
Lol. People on here know who I am you dick. I am registered at MATB, if it still exists, under the same name I use on here. I can just spot a fucking loon, is all.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Have you read that 'gaymuslims.org' link? It is quite, quite mad, you know.


 
LOL, course he hasn't - or he'd see for himself the hate-filled fundie shite that it was!

LOL, utterly owned!! Self pwnage!!


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol. People on here know who I am you dick. I am registered at MATB, if it still exists, under the same name I use on here. I can just spot a fucking loon, is all.


 
Yeah course. So you weren't bullshitting at all when you called me a stalker and then denied trying to drag up a 5 year old spat.

Owned again you lying cock.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Have you read that 'gaymuslims.org' link? It is quite, quite mad, you know.


 
No, I just posted up the first couple of links of the 36,100 that turned up when I googled 'gay muslims'.

Any chance of you explaining your position at some point?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Yeah course. So you weren't bullshitting at all when you called me a stalker and then denied trying to drag up a 5 year old spat.
> 
> Owned again you lying cock.


 
I know you are a freaky stalker because everybody told me 'pk is a fucking freaky stalker' when I joined here. Amazing, I know.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No, I just posted up the first couple of links of the 36,100 that turned up when I googled 'gay muslims'.


 
Without actually reading any of them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No, I just posted up the first couple of links of the 36,100 that turned up when I googled 'gay muslims'.



Well at least you're honest.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I know you are a freaky stalker because everybody told me 'pk is a fucking freaky stalker' when I joined here. Amazing, I know.


 
"everybody told me"



How old are you? 12?

Anyway - you're fucking the thread up - and I will not allow that to happen.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well at least you're honest.



Why are you so keen to avoid backing up your comments LBJ?



littlebabyjesus said:


> That occasional Bangladeshi might point to an alternative view, though, namely that they are not going for fellow Pakistanis, rather than avoiding fellow Muslims. That they have indeed identified an 'other' to whom they grant less than full human status, but that this other is not just non-Muslims.


 


littlebabyjesus said:


> Those are interesting posts, Thomsy.
> 
> I think it is important not to fall into the trap of thinking that there is such a thing as 'Islam' beyond what is practised by Muslims. The book they use as the basis for their moral and political views is not a straightforward one, and it contains a hell of a lot of ammunition for those who, for instance, wish to subjugate women. And it contains a hell of a lot of stuff that encourages the idea that those who are not Muslims are in some way inferior. There is a lot to detest in Islam, and I don't see any wishy-washy CofE-style equivalent being practised in many places. I don't see any 'gay Muslim' movements, for instance, or 'women-Imman' movements.
> 
> As I said earlier, I don't think anyone should feel reticent in coming forward and condemning such belief systems in a robust and direct manner.


 


Proper Tidy said:


> So you also think that the actions of these men can be traced to Islam (even though their victims were muslim as well as non-muslim)? Islam is more repressive than other faiths?


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There is the Islam of the Egyptian authorities, which for instance bans all philosophy students from even hypothesising that there is no god.
> 
> Dylans, can you show me an imman anywhere who advocates gay rights?


 
The Egyptian authorities are not concerned with Islam they are concerned with maintaining the dictatorship of Muḥammad Ḥusnī Sayyid Mubārak. 

As far as gay rights is concerned. I don't know about Imams but I can show you Muslims who fight for a secular democracy.
http://www.bmsd.org.uk/pages.asp?id=2


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

And Muslim gay rights orgs, female immans...


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> I don't see any 'gay Muslim' movements, for instance, or 'women-Imman' movements.



This is simply not true. In Iran for example there some heroic people organising gay rights movements. 

(sorry I can't find part one but the following doc is well worth watching


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> Anyway - you're fucking the thread up - and I will not allow that to happen.


 
lol


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> their victims were muslim as well as non-muslim


 
This I do not accept. Apart from the overwhelmingly obvious fact that the victims were not Pakistani muslims - not one of them, there is no evidence to suggest any of the victims were muslim.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> The Egyptian authorities are not concerned with Islam they are concerned with maintaining the dictatorship of Muḥammad Ḥusnī Sayyid Mubārak.



This isn't true. For family law – marriage, inheritance, child custody, etc – there is Sharia law for Muslims, Christian law for Christians, no law for atheists – there is no such thing as an atheist in Egypt legally speaking, hence the prohibition on even discussing it at university. The very idea that there is no god is illegal in Egypt. 

And there is no secular law above these. That's it – for matters to do with the family, choose your religious court, or more to the point, as Thomsy alluded to, as often as not have that court chosen for you.


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> lol


 
Proof that the Head of Oslo rape robbery and vice was lying please.

And read your links before posting them won't you?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

That Channel 4 documentary - radio discussion from YouTube...



Full notes in the description section.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> But we're not talking about Egypt, are we? What is it with people, do they think muslims are made on an industrial estate to factory specifications? Like Borg?


 
That is a nothing argument. A cop out. 

The issue under discussion was the influence of Islamic culture, not the character of individuals. If you think there is no such thing as 'Islam', that there is nothing we can meaningfully intend by the term 'Islam', then you have abandoned any possibility of learning. 

Would you say it was wrong to criticise Nazism becaue 'there are all kinds of Nazis'?


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This isn't true. For family law – marriage, inheritance, child custody, etc – there is Sharia law for Muslims, Christian law for Christians, no law for atheists – there is no such thing as an atheist in Egypt legally speaking, hence the prohibition on even discussing it at university. The very idea that there is no god is illegal in Egypt.
> 
> And there is no secular law above these. That's it – for matters to do with the family, choose your religious court, or more to the point, as Thomsy alluded to, as often as not have that court chosen for you.


 
Because Islamic law was offered as a sop to the fundamentalists. The result is that Egyptian law contradicts itself.


> Egyptian law also contradicts itself. Although it borrows heavily from the French legal system and other secular sources, article 2 of the constitution states that Islamic jurisprudence is the principal source of legislation.
> 
> The clause was a fudge used by secularists to appease religious conservatives at a time when Egypt was secularising rapidly, but it is slowly returning to haunt the establishment. This inherent contradiction within Egypt's secular laws, as well as ambiguous laws against "defaming religion" and "sowing sedition", allows reactionary government officials, judges and activists to punish, or at the very least obstruct, people who act in what they perceive to be an "un-Islamic" manner.



http://www.oasiscenter.eu/it/node/6226


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> That is a nothing argument. A cop out.
> 
> The issue under discussion was the influence of Islamic culture, not the character of individuals. If you think there is no such thing as 'Islam', that there is nothing we can meaningfully intend by the term 'Islam', then you have abandoned any possibility of learning.
> 
> Would you say it was wrong to criticise Nazism becaue 'there are all kinds of Nazis'?


 
And I asked you to define this "Islamic Culture" you seem so keen to claim exists. I asked you which one? The term "Islam" has about as much meaning as the term "Christianity"


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 13, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> They targeted muslim kids as well as non-muslim kids, so any 'conversion' motivation is clearly bollocks. They're nonces.


 
Please read more carefully. The issue at discussion was whether Islamic supremacist attitudes to the non-Muslims find expression in the sexual relations between Muslims and non-Muslims.

If you don't realize that they are, I suggest you read a text or two on Islamic law or on the experiences of minorities under Islam.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> And I asked you to define this "Islamic Culture" you seem so keen to claim exists. I asked you which one?


 
Give us a chance! I've only just come back on line.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 13, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> Give us a chance! I've only just come back on line.


 
Too late. dylans has pronounced you a racist. No amount of wriggling will get you off the hook I'm afraid.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Too late. dylans has pronounced you a racist. No amount of wriggling will get you off the hook I'm afraid.


 
no I haven't. I think his assumption that there is a single definable entity called Islam is racist yes. Worse, I think it is effectively surrendering to the political discourse of Salafist fundamentalism. Bin Laden claims there is one "Islamic culture" too


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Too late. dylans has pronounced you a racist. No amount of wriggling will get you off the hook I'm afraid.


 
LOL no he hasn't - in fact dylans contributions have been comparably sane compared to some...


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 13, 2011)

OK then Thelmasy. You have one more chance. Best be good.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 13, 2011)

.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 13, 2011)

> That pk sounds alright but the rest of them are scum. I'd like to see their faces when their kids are raped by islamic pedos.



http://s1.zetaboards.c om/EDL_The_Forum/topic/4058073/1/


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> I think his assumption that there is a single definable entity called Islam is racist yes.



Hmmm. That's not exactly what he said. He said something quite uncontroversial, in fact, that when you say 'Islam', you must mean something by it. 

All Muslims take the Koran to be the word of god as revealed to his prophet Mohammad. That's a minimal condition to being a Muslim. I'd look at this in a Wittgensteinian way, considering the term to be a 'family' of related concepts. In that sense, it certainly has a meaning.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

I see Islam as a culturally diverse phenomenon that can only be seen as a process. One that is fluid and in constant flux. As such it is a broad stream that is open to competing political ideological trends and agendas. A battle ground if  you like. A battle for the spiritual souls of a quarter of the Earths population. No one culture can claim a monopoly of truth within its walls. There is a vast difference between a Muslim from Bihar and a Muslim from Indonesia, a Muslim from Cambodia and a Muslim from East Africa or Jordan or Turkey or Iran or Syria or France (add a myriad of different cultures to this list) Additionally there are class differences, urban rural differences, regional and ethnic differences etc. And the point is, in their worlds they are all valid. 
The rise of Salafist (wahabist) ideology presents a challenge to this. It claims a monopoly on truth and claims to speak for the entire Muslim world. As such it is fighting for that very monopoly. By claiming there is a single Islam (and by defining it on Salafist terms) we are handing victory in this battle to the fundamentalists. 

I have travelled a lot in the Muslim world. I have been to Iran and Pakistan and the middle East and I lived in Cairo in the mid 90s. I remember very well the sense of cultural siege felt by many of my friends in Cairo, and I remember the resentment that the fundamentalist discourse was gaining ground. These guys are on the front line of the fight for the heart and soul of Islam  and across the world they are paying with their lives for standing up against intolerance and fundamentalism. I think it is our duty to at least not make their task harder. That begins by refusing to accept the discourse of the fundamentalists that there is one single valid Islamic culture.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 13, 2011)

B0B2oo9 said:


> http://s1.zetaboards.com/EDL_The_Forum/topic/4058073/1/


 
Waves to Bob Cunt and Dumbo. Commies indeed. Classic.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 13, 2011)

dylans said:


> Which Islam do  you wish to quote so authoritatively? There is no Islam. There are many.


 

As I said, I think this argument is a cop out. 

Are you seriously denying that there is any real sense in which Muslims think of themselves as 'one'? 

Does the variety of something demonstrate that it does not actually exist? 

Yes, of course there are nice Muslims. And there are many people of liberal temper who are Muslims. That absolutely is not the issue. However, and contrary to your suggestion, those liberal-minded individuals seldom stand up to the militants – not least because the militants can quote the Quran and Hadith and then, likely, put a bullet in their heads or drive them into hiding. The secularists themselves are the first to admit this.

You cannot simply ignore a reading of the Quran and the Hadith. The fundamentals of Islam provide a very tough, practical, specific, core which it is excruciatingly difficult for liberals to elide. The liberals can always be outflanked by the literalist, takfiri right-wing – and then face denunciation as apostate. 

Did you see what happened in Pakistan this week, when someone dared question the Islamic blasphemy laws? 

When, as I on occasion have, I see a crowd stoning a church and justifying their actions by quotes of the holy texts, I am minded to judge them by their own expressed motivations. When I visit the site of a pogrom and hear the radicals justify the action by Holy Writ, I find it a little galling that apologists in the West tell me: ‘This is not really Islam’.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Jan 13, 2011)

I went to a gay marriage ceremony part of which was held in a mosque once. Weird I admit, but true, I have no idea what sect of Islam it was under though.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

> Are you seriously denying that there is any real sense in which Muslims think of themselves as 'one'?


 
I think the ummah is a myth as evidenced by the amount of sectarian violence in the "Muslim world".



> Does the variety of something demonstrate that it does not actually exist?


No it just gives the lie to your claim to be able to define Islamic culture" Your claim elicits the reply Which one?



> es, of course there are nice Muslims. And there are many people of liberal temper who are Muslims. That absolutely is not the issue. However, and contrary to your suggestion, those liberal-minded individuals seldom stand up to the militants – not least because the militants can quote the Quran and Hadith and then, likely, put a bullet in their heads or drive them into hiding. The secularists themselves are the first to admit this.



It has nothing to do with "nice Muslims" It has everything to do with competing discourse about what it means to be a Muslim. You are living in Cairo right? Are you aware of the thousands of Muslims who surrounded Coptic Churches on the 7th of January in defence of and solidarity with their Christian brothers and sisters? I was living in Cairo when Niquib mahfouz was stabbed and I remember the wave of solidarity that was shown to him and against the rise of fundamentalism. These people need our support.  Yes they are cowed and intimidated but dismissing their bravery only gives power to the Salafists. 


> Did you see what happened in Pakistan this week, when someone dared question the Islamic blasphemy laws?



I have written extensively on this in the thread in world politics. Take a look. 




> When, as I on occasion have, I see a crowd stoning a church and justifying their actions by quotes of the holy texts, I am minded to judge them by their own expressed motivations. When I visit the site of a pogrom and hear the radicals justify the action by Holy Writ, I find it a little galling that apologists in the West tell me: ‘This is not really Islam’.



I didn't say "this is not really Islam" I said It is the not the only one. I see Egyptian Muslims standing with their Coptic neighbours and I see a competing discourse which deserves our support.


----------



## dylans (Jan 13, 2011)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I went to a gay marriage ceremony part of which was held in a mosque once. Weird I admit, but true, I have no idea what sect of Islam it was under though.


 
In Southern Pakistan, Sindh province. I met ladyboys who were widely respected. (perhaps respected is the wrong word- tolerated perhaps is better) They work as wedding singers (and prostitutes)







They are known as Khwaja Saraa or by the more derogatory term hijra, The third sex.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 13, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> As I said, I think this argument is a cop out.
> 
> Are you seriously denying that there is any real sense in which Muslims think of themselves as 'one'?
> 
> ...


 
Try reading The Islamist for a view on comparative Islam and the fact that Mulims criticise so called Muslim states. either that or get out more, perhaps join the same pool league as PK?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 13, 2011)

pk said:


> "everybody told me"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
is posting someones workplace address really stalking? or just very odd behaviour?


----------



## pk (Jan 13, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> is posting someones workplace address really stalking? or just very odd behaviour?


 
derail the thread... must derail the thread - can't talk about that stuff... do anything but talk about this stuff... run away... don't look at it... don't confront it... attack attack!

You're terrified of being critical of the fastest growing religion in the country, in the entire continent, further. And you accuse me of odd behaviour.

Give yourself a pat on the arse.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 13, 2011)

I accept a lot (most) of what you say, dylans.

However (genuine question), would you say that those Muslims who do not see Islam as an all-encompassing political theory that tells you in a prescriptive manner how to run a state, those who would push for a secular state, do so because their version of Islam tells them that is what to do, or because their views on all and everything are not dictated solely by what they read in the Koran?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> derail the thread... must derail the thread - can't talk about that stuff... do anything but talk about this stuff... run away... don't look at it... don't confront it...


 
Done my bit on here PK. Like to think that in a discussion that I contributed and when push comes shove made my point. Couldn't quite squeeze out of you about this 'war' that you said was being raged ideologically and georgraphically and most importantly what role you were playing in it ( but hugs n kisses to you for even thinking about it when others would rather just walk away) Also max respect for you and you cleaning  up with the Muslim Pool team ( our women are safer now but I am not sure about theirs -just jokin bro) 

Lovin it.

Safe



The world is slighty safer for your contribution


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> In Southern Pakistan, Sindh province. I met ladyboys who were widely respected. (perhaps respected is the wrong word- tolerated perhaps is better) They work as wedding singers (and prostitutes)
> 
> They are known as Khwaja Saraa or by the more derogatory term hijra, The third sex.



There are plenty of less savoury examples to illustrate your point.

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


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> The world is slighty safer for your contribution


 
But in no way wiser for yours.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I accept a lot (most) of what you say, dylans.
> 
> However (genuine question), would you say that those Muslims who do not see Islam as an all-encompassing political theory that tells you in a prescriptive manner how to run a state, those who would push for a secular state, do so because their version of Islam tells them that is what to do, or because their views on all and everything are not dictated solely by what they read in the Koran?


 
most muslims are just normal people, have loads of diffrent views on all sorts of things. Why don't you try and relate to them as such? 

working class mulsims working with and living in an area with working class catholics, agnostics, Jews , aethiests spend more time discussing Coronation street, X Factor and footbal, than what the Koran says.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Done my bit on here PK.


 
Off you fuck then. Didn't think it would be too long. It's not as if you can talk about this stuff is it?? 

Maybe calm down a bit and come back when you've something on-topic to say.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> most muslims are just normal people, have loads of diffrent views on all sorts of things. Why don't you try and relate to them as such?
> 
> working class mulsims working with and living in an area with working class catholics, agnostics, Jews , aethiests spend more time discussing Coronation street, X Factor and footbal, than what the Koran says.


 
But this is the point that fundamentalists would make. And is the point that Thomsy was making. That they are in fact less Muslim than the true dedicated believer. 

However, if you have a Muslim cleric who thinks this, who defends secularism, then you are on to something else – a version of Islam that does not see the religion as an all-encompassing system.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> But in no way wiser for yours.


 
Good to see the big guns being rolled out here.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Off you fuck then. Didn't think it would be too long. It's not as if you can talk about this stuff is it??


 
Quality rather than quantity PK. there is lesson for you there


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But this is the point that fundamentalists would make. And is the point that Thomsy was making. That they are in fact less Muslim than the true dedicated believer.
> 
> However, if you have a Muslim cleric who thinks this, who defends secularism, then you are on to something else – a version of Islam that does not see the religion as an all-encompassing system.


 
as i said read The Islamist. It made me think a bit more about this issue.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> There are plenty of less savoury examples to illustrate your point.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi


 
Does anyone really quote wikipedia?


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Quality rather than quantity PK. there is lesson for you there


 
I'm taking lessons from nobody who hasn't the balls to debate the topic to begin with. What are you, a cleric?


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Does anyone really quote wikipedia?


 
attack ... attack ... don't talk about this stuff!!


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm taking lessons from nobody. What are you, a cleric?


 
I saw The Kings Speech at the weekend.Have you seen it. Think of me as a friend, someone who needs to understand you to help you. 

I am offski 0600hrs start tomorrow so laters


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Good to see the big guns being rolled out here.


 
A pea-shooter would suffice against you, I think.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> as i said read The Islamist. It made me think a bit more about this issue.


 
What you said doesn't come as a surprise to me. As I said, it was a point that Thomsy was making, that those that wish to push a stricter, more thoroughgoing interpretation of the Koran do not find strong opposition from those who do not follow the Koran as closely as they do. 

I think it is misguided to look for solutions to the rise of fundamentalism by looking in the Koran, just as it is a mistake to look for solutions to the rise of fundamentalism in Christianity by reference to the bible. You have to look elsewhere.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> I saw The Kings Speech at the weekend.Have you seen it. Think of me as a friend, someone who needs to understand you to help you.
> 
> I am offski 0600hrs start tomorrow so laters


 
offski you fuck then.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> You are living in Cairo right? Are you aware of the thousands of Muslims who surrounded Coptic Churches on the 7th of January in defence of and solidarity with their Christian brothers and sisters?.. These people need our support.  Yes they are cowed and intimidated but dismissing their bravery only gives power to the Salafists. ... I didn't say "this is not really Islam" I said It is the not the only one. I see Egyptian Muslims standing with their Coptic neighbours and I see a competing discourse which deserves our support.




It was great that Muslims came to protect churches on Coptic Christmas. But let's not overstate the significance of the event. 

Christians are ‘tolerated’ in Islamic law. They are permitted to exist and to practice their faith… so long as they accept legal, political and cultural subordination to Muslims. It's a feudal form of toleration. It's even expressed by the term ‘protection’. Muslims are enjoined to ‘protect’ their subordinate minority communities… so long as those communities don't try to protect themselves.

The Muslims who stood at churches weren't challenging the laws which impose second-class status on Christians. Paradoxically, they were asserting Islamic law by defending the limited rights accorded to Christians under that law. Despite the physical dangers, it was a uniquely ‘safe’ demonstration of support for Christians – in that it accorded with the essence of the Muslim relationship to licit minorities: paternalistic protection.

(I don't mean that this was the personal motivation of the Muslims who attended. I’m sure there were liberals and secularists and others among them. I am only making the point that these demonstrations of sympathy were in no way a challenge to Islamic supremacism. It was ‘politically’ and ‘religiously’ safe to attend.)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

B0B2oo9 said:


> http://s1.zetaboards.c om/EDL_The_Forum/topic/4058073/1/


 
pk - loved by the EDL lol


----------



## chazegee (Jan 14, 2011)

Meh, shouldn't be treated as a race issue this. 
How could it help?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 14, 2011)

It's the only thing trots and fascists know.


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But this is the point that fundamentalists would make. And is the point that Thomsy was making. *That they are in fact less Muslim than the true dedicated believer.*
> 
> However, if you have a Muslim cleric who thinks this, who defends secularism, then you are on to something else – a version of Islam that does not see the religion as an all-encompassing system.


 
Don't you see that to accept this is to accept the discourse of the fundamentalists. Why do you allow them to set the agenda? I will leave you with the words of one wiser than myself. The great Edward Said, writing after 9/11



> What is bad about all terror is when it is attached to religious and political abstractions and reductive myths that keep veering away from history and sense. This is where the secular consciousness has to try to make itself felt, whether in the US or in the Middle East. No cause, no God, no abstract idea can justify the mass slaughter of innocents, most particularly when only a small group of people are in charge of such actions and feel themselves to represent the cause without having a real mandate to do so.
> 
> *Besides, much as it has been quarrelled over by Muslims, there isn't a single Islam: there are Islams, just as there are Americas. This diversity is true of all traditions, religions or nations even though some of their adherents have futiley tried to draw boundaries around themselves and pin their creeds down neatly. Yet history is far more complex and contradictory than to be represented by demagogues who are much less representative than either their followers or opponents claim. *The trouble with religious or moral fundamentalists is that today their primitive ideas of revolution and resistance, including a willingness to kill and be killed, seem all too easily attached to technological sophistication and what appear to be gratifying acts of horrifying retaliation. The New York and Washington suicide bombers seem to have been middle-class, educated men, not poor refugees. Instead of getting a wise leadership that stresses education, mass mobilisation and patient organisation in the service of a cause, the poor and the desperate are often conned into the magical thinking and quick bloody solutions that such appalling models pro vide, wrapped in lying religious claptrap.
> ............
> ...


http://www.counterpunch.org/saidattacks.html


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 14, 2011)

You're so full of hot air. Which foul trot band do you rant with?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2011)

B0B2oo9 said:


> http://s1.zetaboards.c om/EDL_The_Forum/topic/4058073/1/


 
hahahahaha that is Gold


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> You're so full of hot air. Which foul trot band do you rant with?


 
I know you love your labels but I'm not a trot, so fuck off tanky


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 14, 2011)

.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 14, 2011)

Racism


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

offski


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Racism


 
how many divisions does the Pope have?


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

> However, if you have a Muslim cleric who thinks this, who defends secularism, then you are on to something else – a version of Islam that does not see the religion as an all-encompassing system


.

I think you may be interested in this site.
http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_article.php/_c-575/i.html

It contains interviews with and articles about leading Arab and Muslim intellectuals across the Muslim world who put forward the case for modernist interpretations of Islam.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 14, 2011)

racism


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> racism


 
Lustbather, I thought you were banned?


----------



## past caring (Jan 14, 2011)

Fuck him off lusty!!


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 14, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> .



lol.  He left his mark.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> It was great that Muslims came to protect churches on Coptic Christmas. But let's not overstate the significance of the event.
> 
> Christians are ‘tolerated’ in Islamic law. They are permitted to exist and to practice their faith… so long as they accept legal, political and cultural subordination to Muslims. It's a feudal form of toleration. It's even expressed by the term ‘protection’. Muslims are enjoined to ‘protect’ their subordinate minority communities… so long as those communities don't try to protect themselves.
> 
> ...


 
I read what you wrote there and was struck by the tone of self-assurance, like you knew everything that went on at those events and what was going on inside everybody's heads.

Having often dealt with salesmen in my working life, and having been one of sorts for a while myself, I know not to always take such self-assurance at face value.

Here's an excerpt from a journalistic description of the demonstrations at the Coptic churches in Egypt which I found online:



> At the mass Thursday, Egyptian celebrities and media personalities stood at the steps of the cathedral before the service and recited poems about Egypt. “Today, I don't say I'm Muslim or I'm Christian,” one host announced. “I say, I'm Egyptian.”



A variety of different views expressed in another article on the same site:



> Mariam Yassin, a 24 year old video editor, will take Thursday off to travel to Alexandria to attend the mass at the Two Saints Church. “I am not going as a representative of any religion. I am supporting all those who died as a result of ignorance.”
> 
> Yassin’s friend, Mariam Fekry, was killed along with her mother, sister and aunt in the Two Saints Church attack
> 
> ...



Lastly, this account of the demonstrations and the way they were publicised in advance:



> “We either live together, or we die together,” was the sloganeering genius of Mohamed El-Sawy, a Muslim arts tycoon whose cultural centre distributed flyers at churches in Cairo Thursday night, and who has been credited with first floating the “human shield” idea. [. . .]
> 
> “This is not about us and them,” said Dalia Mustafa, a student who attended mass at Virgin Mary Church on Maraashly Street. “We are one. This was an attack on Egypt as a whole, and I am standing with the Copts because the only way things will change in this country is if we come together.”
> 
> In the days following the brutal attack on Saints Church in Alexandria, which left 21 dead on New Year’ eve, solidarity between Muslims and Copts has seen an unprecedented peak. Millions of Egyptians changed their Facebook profile pictures to the image of a cross within a crescent – the symbol of an “Egypt for All”. Around the city, banners went up calling for unity, and depicting mosques and churches, crosses and crescents, together as one.



People can note the differences between those accounts and yours and draw their own conclusions.


----------



## past caring (Jan 14, 2011)

But.....but.....Thomsy's an _academic_ - he _must_ know more about the motivations of those who demonstrated than the actual participants themselves.


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

> *IMR* I read what you wrote there and was struck by the tone of self-assurance, like you knew everything that went on at those events and what was going on inside everybody's heads.
> 
> Having often dealt with salesmen in my working life, and having been one of sorts for a while myself, I know not to always take such self-assurance at face value.



Yes. I am curious about this guys motives and agenda too. He says he is in Egypt "studying relations between copts and Muslims" . It strikes me as rather odd that someone who is working in Egypt and researching relations between the two religions at a time of unprecedented importance for the communities is so keen to downplay the significance of these events. Who exactly are you working for? Are you a fundamentalist Christian missionary by any chance? Sorry to be suspicious but your post sounds a little fishy and frankly your understanding of the dynamics of Egyptian politics is rather flimsy.
 For example. 


> The Muslims who stood at churches *weren't challenging the laws which impose second-class status on Christians.* Paradoxically, they were asserting Islamic law by defending the limited rights accorded to Christians under that law. Despite the physical dangers, it was a uniquely ‘safe’ demonstration of support for Christians – in that it accorded with the essence of the Muslim relationship to licit minorities: paternalistic protection.




Really. Sure about that are you?



> Protestors denounced the New Year’s Eve attack on Al-Qeddissine (Church of Two Saints) in Alexandria — which killed 23 and injured more than 90 — *carrying banners with slogans against Islamic extremism as well as discrimination against Copts, and demanding the establishment of a secular state.*
> The protest is a sign of unity and a message that the Egyptian people were the victims of this attack just as they were victims of the fraud in the parliamentary elections results,"
> 
> "Egypt needs a comprehensive solution that addresses the problems of sectarian tension, poverty, unemployment, political oppression and inflation; and that *can only be achieved through the peaceful change of the current regime,"* Hamden Sabahi of Al-Karama Party, told Daily News Egypt
> http://www.dailyethiopia.com/index.php?aid=936



Not challenging the laws which discriminate against Copts? I think you are too keen to dismiss the voices of the Egyptian people.


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

past caring said:


> But.....but.....Thomsy's an _academic_ - he _must_ know more about the motivations of those who demonstrated than the actual participants themselves.


 
He's a Christian missionary


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

I knew he was in sales.


----------



## past caring (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> He's a Christian missionary


 
There are no Christian missionary academics? He was keen to let us know he's doing "research".


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

past caring said:


> There are no Christian missionary academics? He was keen to let us know he's doing "research".



"Hello? Have you got a minute please? We're doing a survey . . ."


----------



## treelover (Jan 14, 2011)

whatever the motives, the solidarity with the Copts in Egypt is a very positive thing and should be applauded.


----------



## dylans (Jan 14, 2011)

past caring said:


> There are no Christian missionary academics? He was keen to let us know he's doing "research".


 
It just strikes me as very curious that someone researching this very subject should be so dismissive of signs of solidarity between Copts and Muslims and so keen to paint the situation as hopeless.


----------



## past caring (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> It just strikes me as very curious that someone researching this very subject should be so dismissive of signs of solidarity between Copts and Muslims and so keen to paint the situation as hopeless.



The sarcasm of my original post went right over your head then......


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> Don't you see that to accept this is to accept the discourse of the fundamentalists. Why do you allow them to set the agenda? I will leave you with the words of one wiser than myself. The great Edward Said, writing after 9/11



I'm not interested in demonising Islam. And I'm certainly not accepting the agenda of the fundamentalists. But I'm not going to argue with a Christian about gay rights by delving into the Bible to show that it says they should accept gay rights, because I know full well that there is stuff in there that justifies those Christians' bigotry. I don't excuse people's bigotry because they think their religion tells them to be bigots. I don't accept the religious agenda, the discourse that begins with 'We believe that...' People have to take responsibility for themselves.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

treelover said:


> whatever the motives, the solidarity with the Copts in Egypt is a very positive thing and should be applauded.


 
Most certainly, particularly in the context of the rise of fundamentalism in Egypt and the dictatorship's at best equivocal relationship with the fundamentalists.

To defend Thomsy a little, as I understand it, what he says is a reasonably fair reflection of the Egyptian constitution. It appears that he's way off the mark with regards the ordinary folk who turned out to support the Copts, though.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 14, 2011)

racism


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> It just strikes me as very curious that someone researching this very subject should be so dismissive of signs of solidarity between Copts and Muslims and so keen to paint the situation as hopeless.


 
I wouldn't know whether the situation is hopeless or not but it is grim.

I remember once seeing news footage from the earliest days of the Iranian revolution. Islamists weren't the only ones wanting to get rid of the Shah, there were political progressives and secularists of various kinds too.

The footage showed a march of people only identified as 'progressives' many thousands strong. Then they came under attack from a much smaller group of Islamist fanatics, all young men, who hurled stones and debris at them with amazing vigour.

The progressives didn't fight back but instead shrank from the fierce barrage - the long camera shots made the march look like a huge caterpillar squirming helplessly under countless pin-pricks. We all know how that turned out in the long run.

I don't think you can rule out something like that happening to those Egyptian Muslims who have shown solidarity with Copts.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> I read what you wrote there and was struck by the tone of self-assurance, like you knew everything that went on at those events and what was going on inside everybody's heads.


 
Please have the courtesy to read my earlier reply correctly. I specifically and deliberately said that I did NOT know what the motivations of the individuals were. I said that WHATEVER their subjective intentions, their actions in fact in no way objectively contradicted Islamic notions of supremacy.

As for the other cut-and-paste quotes: Read any Egyptian history book and you will find that the same words are used every time there is a sectarian incident.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

past caring said:


> But.....but.....Thomsy's an _academic_ - he _must_ know more about the motivations of those who demonstrated than the actual participants themselves.


 
Same reply as to IMR above. But without the courtesy his commented merited.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> Who exactly are you working for? Are you a fundamentalist Christian missionary by any chance? Sorry to be suspicious but your post sounds a little fishy and frankly your understanding of the dynamics of Egyptian politics is rather flimsy.



That is pretty cheap.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 14, 2011)

Hmmmm....


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> I said that WHATEVER their subjective intentions, their actions in fact in no way contradicted Islamic notions of supremacy.



You did indeed write that, but the news reports I've come across don't back up that view.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 14, 2011)

"Islamic notions of supremacy". That sounds like a very suspicious discourse. In fact, it's one that's current in EDL 'thinking'. It's as if to suggest that other 'faiths' don't see themselves as supreme or superior to others. Xtianity has claimed to be the  "one true faith" for years. Cultural relativity? Oh yes.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> The great Edward Said...




‘Great’? He was certainly a slippery fish!

One minute he condemned anyone who claimed Islam (or the Orient) existed. The next, he condemned Westerners for abusing the same Islam (or Orient). 

In populist forums, he deployed a Gramscian concept of ‘discourse’ – to claim that those who disagreed with him were Machiavellian intriguers complicit in the fabrication of a hegemonic discourse. But whenever anyone demonstrated in print the inaccuracy of his claims, he would retreat into a quite different Foucaultian concept of discourse and suggest that Orientalists were themselves victims of an archive from which they were powerless to escape. 

It seems you have learnt from his style as well as his substance.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> "Islamic notions of supremacy". That sounds like a very suspicious discourse. In fact, it's one that's current in EDL 'thinking'.



Yawn. 

If you can't out-reason a guy, you can always try and smear him, can't you.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Can't see the Islamists being particularly pleased with those Copt-supporting Egypt Muslims. I would guess they regard them as scum.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> He's a Christian missionary


 
I am getting kind of bored with the ad hominems. If you actually want to know where I'm coming from, have the courtesy to read a few of my back posts from years ago. 

My substantive point is: “Essence must appear” – (was it Marx or Hegel said that?) – i.e. essence is made real and manifest in its actual diversity.

As I type this, I am sitting on a wobbly wooden three-legger. As you read it, you are maybe sitting on a blue swiveler, or perhaps a brocaded chaise longe. I say we are sitting on ‘chairs’. You and Said say there is no such thing as ‘chair’. I’ll admit I’m wrong the moment my a**e hits the ground.

Or to pose it as an Aristotelian conundrum:

If , on Christmas Day, one Egyptian Muslim says: “Christians in Muslims areas should be permitted to practice their religion in complete safety – for so long as they accept their subordinate status as demanded by Islamic law”…

.. and another Egyptian Muslim says: “No, we should occasionally bomb the Christian churches in our areas to make sure they know and accept their subordinate status as demanded by Islamic law”…

... would this constitute evidence of the ‘diversity’ or of the ‘essential consistency’ of Islamic discourse? Would it demonstrate that Islam ‘exists’, or that Islam ‘does not exist’? Would it tell us only about Muslims in Egypt on Christmas Day, or would it provide any meaningful information about ‘Islam’?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> Yawn.
> 
> If you can't out-reason a guy, you can always try and smear him, can't you.


 
Stop it, you're splitting my sides.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 14, 2011)

You look familiar "Thomsy". Do you live in Luton by any chance?


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> If , on Christmas Day, one Egyptian Muslim says: “Christians in Muslims areas should be permitted to practice their religion in complete safety – for so long as they accept their subordinate status as demanded by Islamic law”…



That wasn't the message being given out at the demonstrations. The mobilising message was 'Egypt for All'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> "Islamic notions of supremacy". That sounds like a very suspicious discourse. In fact, it's one that's current in EDL 'thinking'. It's as if to suggest that other 'faiths' don't see themselves as supreme or superior to others. Xtianity has claimed to be the  "one true faith" for years. Cultural relativity? Oh yes.


 
The comparison with Christianity is instructive, though, isn't it? 

For instance, I have changed my mind about Sharia courts being allowed in the UK. Until recently, I didn't see the harm in it, given that it would be absolutely no different from the Jewish courts that already exist. 

But then I had a think about why those Jewish courts exist, and it is for the same reason that Christian courts exist in  Egypt. There was a time when British law was indeed Christian in its very nature, and so allowing Jewish courts for family law was a sign of a tolerant Christian state, just as allowing Christian courts is a sign of a tolerant Islamic state. 

Now, in all but its purely symbolic forms, the UK is a secular state, so the reason for Jewish courts to exist is no longer valid. Rather than allowing Sharia courts, I would argue instead for completing the job of fully secularising the state and getting rid of the Jewish court, ridding the UK of the final vestiges of past Christian notions of supremacy. 

That other religions have notions of supremacy isn't a reason not to say that Islam has too.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 14, 2011)

http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=7538



> Keith Vaz is referring to the explicit comment by Judge Head, who said at the conclusion of the trial: ‘It was never the Crown’s case that these offences were racially motivated or aggravated.’





> The authors, Helen Brayley and Ella Cockbain, from UCL’s Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science, said they were surprised their research, confined to just two police operations in the North and Midlands – which found perpetrators in these two cases were predominantly but not exclusively from the British Pakistani community – had been cited in support of the claims that such offences were widespread.
> 
> They added that the real finding of their research is that: “This challenges the view that white girls are sought out by offenders, suggesting instead that convenience and accessibility may be the prime drivers for those looking for new victims.”


----------



## ohmyliver (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not interested in demonising Islam. And I'm certainly not accepting the agenda of the fundamentalists. But I'm not going to argue with a Christian about gay rights by delving into the Bible to show that it says they should accept gay rights, because I know full well that there is stuff in there that justifies those Christians' bigotry. I don't excuse people's bigotry because they think their religion tells them to be bigots. I don't accept the religious agenda, the discourse that begins with 'We believe that...' People have to take responsibility for themselves.


 

The issue is not nessisarily that of demonisation, it's more an issue of false essentialism. Islam isn't a homogenised single entity.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 14, 2011)

> I am getting kind of bored with the ad hominems.





> Or to pose it as an Aristotelian conundrum:





> In populist forums, he deployed a Gramscian concept of ‘discourse’ – to claim that those who disagreed with him were Machiavellian intriguers complicit in the fabrication of a hegemonic discourse.



Do you actually speak like this in real life?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 14, 2011)

> That other religions have notions of supremacy isn't a reason not to say that Islam has too.



That isn't what I'm saying. There is a particular discourse that says that Islam is the only religion to have such notions. It clearly isn't.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

ohmyliver said:


> The issue is not nessisarily that of demonisation, it's more an issue of false essentialism. Islam isn't a homogenised single entity.


 
But neither is it entirely heterogeneous. Islam is the belief that there is one true god and that Mohammad is his prophet. And there are scriptures outlining what that prophet had to say. He said lots of things, but he didn't say everything.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> That isn't what I'm saying. There is a particular discourse that says that Islam is the only religion to have such notions. It clearly isn't.


 
Right, ok, well clearly I agree with that.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> That wasn't the message being given out at the demonstrations. The mobilising message was 'Egypt for All'.


 
I do appreciate that, IMR. I was simply posing a hypothetical query to Dylans' eulogy of Edward Said.

What I was earlier saying was that a Muslim is simply expressing Islamic doctrine when he asserts that Christians should be free to practice their religion. It has about as much political punch as a US student opposing some US military adventure on that grounds that the invasion 'is not in the US interests' or that 'American soldiers might get killed'. 

By contrast, (and to return someway towards the subject of the thread), the laws governing sexual relations in Egypt (and elsewhere in the Muslim world) are not hugely different from the Nuremberg Laws. A Christian or Jew who attempted a sexual relation with a Muslim woman can expect the same fate as a Slav who had relations with an Aryan woman. If someone in Egypt challenged that law, it would really mean something. But no one in Egypt is going to dare oppose that law. And many of the people on this board seem to be apologists for it.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> A pea-shooter would suffice against you, I think.


 
you'd know pea brain


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 14, 2011)

> Originally Posted by *nino_savatte *
> "Islamic notions of supremacy". That sounds like a very suspicious discourse. In fact, it's one that's current in EDL 'thinking'.



How is this a "smear", Thomsy? You're a bit touchy aren't you?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 14, 2011)

racism


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> I remember once seeing news footage from the earliest days of the Iranian revolution. Islamists weren't the only ones wanting to get rid of the Shah, there were political progressives and secularists of various kinds too.


 
There was a brilliant book on the crushing of the Iranian Left by the Islamists by Assef Bayat entitled 'Workers and Revolution in Iran.'  It was published by Zed Books back in the 1980s. It is particularly good at showing how the revolutionary guards liquidated the Leftist factory councils.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> By contrast, (and to return someway towards the subject of the thread), the laws governing sexual relations in Egypt (and elsewhere in the Muslim world) are not hugely different from the Nuremberg Laws. A Christian or Jew who attempted a sexual relation with a Muslim woman can expect the same fate as a Slav who had relations with an Aryan woman. If someone in Egypt challenged that law, it would really mean something. But no one in Egypt is going to dare oppose that law. And many of the people on this board seem to be apologists for it.


 
Could you give a link to something that outlines that law? It is indeed an important point, imo.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 14, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> racism



This isn't really helping your petition to be unbanned


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> What I was earlier saying was that a Muslim is simply expressing Islamic doctrine when he asserts that Christians should be free to practice their religion.



Were the demonstrators expressing Islamic doctrine when they mobilised under what looks to me like a patriotic and secular message?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> Were the demonstrators expressing Islamic doctrine when they mobilised under what looks to me like a patriotic and secular message?


 
Clearly not. Thomsy has possibly worded that badly. If I understand him correctly, his point is that they are not contradicting Islamic doctrine in doing so, whatever their motives.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Islamists believe they've got the right idea when it comes to Islamic doctrine and they wouldn't want a single Coptic church left standing in Egypt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

Do they? 

Even in Iran, that is not the case for religious minorities such as the Zoorastrians, who are officially recognised by the state even now.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do they?
> 
> Even in Iran, that is not the case for religious minorities such as the Zoorastrians, who are officially recognised by the state even now.



They probably think a mortar bomb is a suitable donation to the church roof fund. Public display of any religious belief other than Islam is banned in Saudi Arabia, so no churches, and that's where Wahabbism comes from.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Could you give a link to something that outlines that law? It is indeed an important point, imo.


 
A Muslim man can marry non-Muslim women, so long as the kids are raised Muslim.
A Non-Muslim man cannot legally marry a Muslim woman. It simply cannot happen or be recognized in Egyptian or Islam law. Any Christian who was crazy enough to try and have sex with a Muslim faces a lynch mob and / or imprisonment and / or torture.

A Christian may freely convert to Islam – and are encouraged to do so.
No Muslim may convert away from Islam. Any attempt at apostasy would lead to lynching or else to detention by the state authorities. The very, very few Muslims crazy enough to attempt to convert to Christianity in Egypt are put in loony bins and drugged / tortured / detained etc until they realize the error of their ways. 

Christians are systematically pressured and incentivised to convert to Islam.
A Christian who attempts to proselytise among Muslims faces a lynching. 

Muslims get huge tax breaks to build mosques. Tens of thousands of mosques have been built in Egypt over the past couple of decades. (70,000 was the figure I last read quoted by Muslim judge Ashmawi.)
Christians are forbidden to build new churches unless they get a permission from the President himself. (These as, you may suspect, are not forthcoming.) When, as happens, Christians are discovered using a house or a hall as an unlicensed church, it provokes riots and / or a pogrom – in which the local authorities are often complicit.

I could go on, but I hope the point is made.

I can't, off the top of my head, provide links to specifics of the Islamic jurists or Egyptian code. But it’s not difficult to find on-line reference to these things. If you google / wikie 'Pact of Umar/Omar' it'll give you an idea of the founding ideas upon which the tenets of dhimmitude were established. Alternatively, try ‘jizya’ or ‘dhimmis’. 

Or google ‘Khaybar’ – a conquest in the career of the Prophet which has since provided a canonical model for the treatment of subject non-Muslims. (One of the chants regularly used at anti-Christian demos / church attacks etc is: 

‘Khaybar, Khaybar, ya Yehud!
Jaysh Mohammed sawfa ya’ud!’

‘Khaybar, Khaybar, you Jews!
The army of Mohammed is here again!’)


----------



## ohmyliver (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Clearly not. Thomsy has possibly worded that badly. If I understand him correctly, his point is that they are not contradicting Islamic doctrine in doing so, whatever their motives.


 
I think he's referring to the fact that Islamically speaking Muslims have a duty of care for other believers in monotheism (such as Christians, Jews, um, Sabians, etc) in Muslim lands. So long as they pay taxes to the Islamic state, and abide by various conditions.  However this special 'non-muslim' tax was abolished in Egypt in the first half of the 20th century.

*eta* but clearly the people doing it were using unislamic rhetoric (i.e. appeal to a national identity, rather than the ummah, or the deen)


----------



## ohmyliver (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> Christians are forbidden to build new churches unless they get a permission from the President himself.


 
technically that permission has been devolved to local councils since 2005.  Whether that's made an actual difference to the ability to the Copts and other Christian groups' ability to build churches is a moot point.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

It appears that Thomsy is right about all this. Egyptian identity cards state the bearer's religion, and this dictates which set of laws that person must obey. And the case of Mohammad Hegazi demonstrates how it is not possible to change your 'official' religion from Islam, which is given to you in the vast majority of cases at _birth_. In Egypt, if one is born a Muslim, one must, _by law_, die a Muslim. 

I've been trying to find a non-Christian source for this because I hate linking to Christian sites, but it appears that only Christian news groups have been following the case at all. It is the case of a man who went to court in 2007 for the right to change his religion from Islam (presumably to Christianity). The court refused his request. 

Also, I tend to agree with Thomsy that real progress in Egypt would come with a concerted campaign to end the practice of the state telling you what religion you belong to. That would be a true challenge to the Islamic supremacist assumptions that lie behind much of Egyptian law.

It is hard not to draw parallels with the race laws of Germany and elsewhere. The only difference in this case is that it is possible for those from minority groups to convert to the dominant group. But woe betide anyone who pronounces him or herself atheist. Egyptian law allows for no such thing to exist.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

Hi, ohmyliver,

I do appreciate the change. I was just trying to keep things simple in the list. As you say, the change in the law definitely has not proven beneficial in any way that I can see. Most Christians are scathing about the change - alleging that it simply let Hosni M off the hook when foreign diplomats pressure on him to licence more churches: he can now just blame it on the intransigence of provincial governors. 

And in fact, I did not mean the list to sound narrowly legalistic. I'm guessing you know, but I'll note anyway, that the working of the law on churches actually gives a good idea of the practical functioning of the Islamic hegemony. I spoke to a Coptic priest whose church had been attacked (two dead) and he damned the new law as a law for the 'destruction' of churches. He said that when a licence is granted to re-build a church, the church is duly knocked down. But when the Copts try to build a new church in its place, the protests of local Muslims are so violent that the security forces intervene to 'maintain order' and simply prevent the rebuilding of the church.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Egyptian identity cards state the bearer's religion, and this dictates which set of laws that person must obey. And the case of Mohammad Hegazi demonstrates how it is not possible to change your 'official' religion from Islam, which is given to you in the vast majority of cases at _birth_.



Hi, littlebabyjesus.

To be honest, it's actually even worse than that for Christians. 

It is, of course, the authorities who fill out and print the ID cards. And every year many, many Christians find themselves 'accidentally' registered by the authorties as 'Muslim'. It is almost impossible thereafter to have your card changed to show you are really a Christian. (It would suggest apostasy.) 

It is impossible to 'prove' this is a deliberate policy of the authorities. But every Christian believes it so - partly because Muslims are never accidentally listed as Christian, and partly because it is made nearly-impossible to rectify the obvious 'error'.

This is all particularly hard upon Christian women. If registed on their ID card as a Muslim, they are not legally permitted to marry a Christian. Many spend their lives hoping and waiting for the ID to be changed. Sometimes, once they are past child-bearing age, the 'mistake' is rectified.

Christian men registered as Muslim can, of course, still marry. But their children must registered and raised as Muslim.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 14, 2011)

dylans said:


> I know you love your labels but I'm not a trot, so fuck off tanky



_*Pseudo*_-tanky, if you don't mind. Underneath the bluster and aggression, ern's just another middle-class liberal.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> I do appreciate that, IMR. I was simply posing a hypothetical query to Dylans' eulogy of Edward Said.


Pre-fixing the man's name with "the great" is hardly a eulogy


> What I was earlier saying was that a Muslim is simply expressing Islamic doctrine when he asserts that Christians should be free to practice their religion. It has about as much political punch as a US student opposing some US military adventure on that grounds that the invasion 'is not in the US interests' or that 'American soldiers might get killed'.
> 
> By contrast, (and to return someway towards the subject of the thread), the laws governing sexual relations in Egypt (and elsewhere in the Muslim world) are not hugely different from the Nuremberg Laws. A Christian or Jew who attempted a sexual relation with a Muslim woman can expect the same fate as a Slav who had relations with an Aryan woman. If someone in Egypt challenged that law, it would really mean something. But no one in Egypt is going to dare oppose that law. And many of the people on this board seem to be apologists for it.


Hmmm. The Nuremberg laws were part of a complex of laws aimed at expropriating and criminalising those people whose "racial" lineage was deemed unacceptable.

So, similarity is limited, the Nuremberg laws and the state and religious laws in states where Islam is the majority religion are similar in the same way that a cat is similar to a dog: The former are both laws, and the latter are both animals, but their ambit differs massively.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

If one were to take the view that islam, according to the purist definition, has fascistic leanings, which by anyone's definition of fascism it certainly does, then it follows that those who are living to propagate islam and those who see it as the only way of life, are therefore acting as fascists, to a greater or lesser degree.

I oppose fascism in all it's forms, I despise the subjugation of women - an intrinsic part of islamic laws - and I will not tolerate the intolerant nature of the islamic culture, Danish cartoonists and fatwahs.

In any Gulf state one knows islam is law, and one modifies ones behaviour accordingly, being a guest in an islamic state.

There is little sign of the same aquiescance when islamic people choose to live and work in non-islamic countries.

More often that not, quite the opposite.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> And in fact, I did not mean the list to sound narrowly legalistic. I'm guessing you know, but I'll note anyway, that the working of the law on churches actually gives a good idea of the practical functioning of the Islamic hegemony. I spoke to a Coptic priest whose church had been attacked (two dead) and he damned the new law as a law for the 'destruction' of churches. He said that when a licence is granted to re-build a church, the church is duly knocked down. But when the Copts try to build a new church in its place, the protests of local Muslims are so violent that the security forces intervene to 'maintain order' and simply prevent the rebuilding of the church.



Would you judge those local Muslims to have been inspired by Islamic doctrine?


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> If one were to take the view that islam, according to the purist definition, has fascistic leanings,


 
you'd be thick, even for a moron.

Going to firebomb a mosque pk?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 14, 2011)

Racism


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> If one were to take the view that islam, according to the purist definition, has fascistic leanings, which by anyone's definition of fascism it certainly does


 
Get help


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

Hilarious how the leagues of so-called anti-fash have precisely fuck all to say about the overtly fash leanings of some aspects of islam. Never mind the blatant sexism and inequality. Just avoid the topic at all costs, eh lads?


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Hmmm. The Nuremberg laws were part of a complex of laws aimed at expropriating and criminalising those people whose "racial" lineage was deemed unacceptable.



Do you really mean that "racial" discrimination and "racial" supremacism are a unacceptable, but that "sectarian" discrimination and "sectarian" supremacism are not a problem? 



ViolentPanda said:


> So, similarity is limited, the Nuremberg laws and the state and religious laws in states where Islam is the majority religion are similar in the same way that a cat is similar to a dog: The former are both laws, and the latter are both animals, but their ambit differs massively.


 
Both sets of laws are designed to express, enforce and maintain the supremacy of one community over another.

Both sets of laws deny full benefits of citizenship to the members of the subordinate community.

Both sets of laws employ the threat of imprisonment, violence or death to police sexual relations between the 'inferior' and the 'superior' communities.

Do you seriously wish to repeat your claim that the only things they have in common is that they are both 'laws'?


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Never mind the blatant sexism and inequality. Just avoid the topic at all costs, eh lads?


 
  you really a card peeks. You've played at being Jazzzz, detective-boy, now you're AWL-lite, what are we going to get next?

Nothing that makes any sense, obviously.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

And nobody has answered the prudient question yet - is Hanne Kristin Rohde lying when she says all on-street rapes in Oslo the past few years have been committed by non-domestic residents?

Simple question really. Apparently to be wriggled out of at all costs, eh??


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Hilarious how the leagues of so-called anti-fash have precisely fuck all to say about the overtly fash leanings of some aspects of islam. Never mind the blatant sexism and inequality. Just avoid the topic at all costs, eh lads?


 
Which aspects are 'fascist'?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> And nobody has answered the prudient question yet - is Hanne Kristin Rohde lying when she says all on-street rapes in Oslo the past few years have been committed by non-domestic residents?


 
Yes


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yes


 
So you think she just lied to the TV news cameras and newspapers?

Why do you think she would have done that?

Can you prove that she is lying, yes or no?


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> And nobody has answered the prudient question yet - is Hanne Kristin Rohde lying when she says all on-street rapes in Oslo the past few years have been committed by non-domestic residents?
> 
> Simple question really. Apparently to be wriggled out of at all costs, eh??


 
You are the only wriggler, baby.  What dozy cunt (d-b excepted) simply takes any cops word for anything?  Oh, yes of course, thick wankers with absolutely no other evidence to support their 'argument'.   Even if it is true, you really are scraping the barrel to find _any_ evidence for your claims, and can only do so by ignoring all the other crime stats that explicitly contradict them.  Really fucking pathetic.

Whehn are you going to stop wriggling?


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Can you prove that she is lying, yes or no?


 
you are the one making the claim, so its up to you to prove she is telling the truth.  thats normally how things work.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

belboid said:


> you are the one making the claim, so its up to you to prove she is telling the truth.  thats normally how things work.


 
I agree with this. One copper's word for it is too flimsy to give the claim any consideration.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> Do you really mean that "racial" discrimination and "racial" supremacism are a unacceptable, but that "sectarian" discrimination and "sectarian" supremacism are not a problem?


No, I don't. Please don't put words in my mouth.




> Both sets of laws are designed to express, enforce and maintain the supremacy of one community over another.


Yes.


> Both sets of laws deny full benefits of citizenship to the members of the subordinate community.


The Nuremberg laws denied *any* benefits of citizenship to Jews. They rendered them, if they happened to be German, stateless.


> Both sets of laws employ the threat of imprisonment, violence or death to police sexual relations between the 'inferior' and the 'superior' communities.


The Nuremberg laws didn't employ threats, they allowed legislation to be actioned that made a substantial attempt to end the problem through mass murder.


> Do you seriously wish to repeat your claim that the only things they have in common is that they are both 'laws'?


 
I haven't claimed that "the only things they have in common is that they're both 'laws' ". I said that their similarity is limited (and it is, in scale as in action), and that the ambit of these laws differs massively (which ist does).

Rather than repeatedly misrepresenting what I've said (twice in one post. Well done!), how about constructing an argument that deals with what I've actually said?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> So you think she just lied to the TV news cameras and newspapers?
> 
> Why do you think she would have done that?
> 
> Can you prove that she is lying, yes or no?


 
I have no idea, I'm not an expert on Norwegian filth. Very unlikely though, isn't it? I mean, Oslo is a fairly big city. Not a single rape by a non-muslim? You think that is even remotely likely? Although I note you have now gone from Norway to Oslo to on-street rapes in Oslo.

Expand your fascism theory pk.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I agree with this. One copper's word for it is too flimsy to give the claim any consideration.


 
She's the head of rape robbery and vice in Oslo, her data is used in UNHCR reports, and her statements were made to the media personally. Why would she lie and if she was don't you think there would be a huge scandal that rippled through Brussels across the planet by now??


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

Saint Hanne


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> Would you judge those local Muslims to have been inspired by Islamic doctrine?


 

Unquestionably they believe they are inspired by Islamic doctrine - specifically the doctrine that _dhimma _(subordinate non-Muslims) are forbidden to erect new places of worship or even to repair old ones that have become dilapidated.

More generally, they are inspired by the supremacist notions which underpin the Islamic law on minorities. To give a couple of additional examples:

Most churches and monasteries in Egypt have had a mosque build adjacent or directly opposite. (There are exceptions, particularly in Cairo, but it is the general tendency in Middle and Upper Egypt where most Coptic Christians live.) The purpose is explicitly to assert the supremacy of the mosque over the church and to ensure that the call to Muslim prayer can be broadcast loudly from the loud-speakers of the mosque directly over the church. 

A common feature of attacks on churches is that Muslims will use firearms to shoot at the crosses above the dome or towers of the church. The contention is that the Copts are showing arrogance and contempt of Islam by raising their crosses high.


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> She's the head of rape robbery and vice in Oslo, her data is used in UNHCR reports, and her statements were made to the media personally. Why would she lie and if she was don't you think there would be a huge scandal that rippled through Brussels across the planet by now??


 
What has Brussels to do with anything?  Do you know where Oslo is?  Or what the UNHCR is?  Silly boy, that's where trying to look authoritative based on a quickl google gets you, deeper in that hole.


----------



## Random (Jan 14, 2011)

'On street rapes' are a very small fraction of total rapes. How many are we talking about here? Five? In a given year it's quite possible for all of them that the police know about to be committed by 'non-residents'. I blame the Danish.


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

blimey, so pk _again_ is cherry picking on one particular crime and determining that it is the only one that matters because (according to one copper) it _fits his argument_??!!  Surely not, that be a wholly dishonest and bigotted way of making an argument.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Expand your fascism theory pk.


 
Well there's that whole apostasy = death thing. Infidelity = death. Insulting the prophet = death. Refusal to marry arranged partner = death (an 'honourable' death perhaps). Mainly for women, that one. Or girls.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Well there's that whole apostasy = death thing. Infidelity = death. Insulting the prophet = death. Refusal to marry arranged partner = death (an 'honourable' death perhaps). Mainly for women, that one. Or girls.


 
no, "expand your fascism theory", not "post up some old bollocks".


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

belboid said:


> What has Brussels to do with anything?  Do you know where Oslo is?  Or what the UNHCR is?  Silly boy, that's where trying to look authoritative based on a quickl google gets you, deeper in that hole.


 
Silly me I thought Norway was an EU member state.


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

aah yes, i recall Hitler regularly going on about apostasy


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Well there's that whole apostasy = death thing. Infidelity = death. Insulting the prophet = death. Refusal to marry arranged partner = death (an 'honourable' death perhaps). Mainly for women, that one. Or girls.


 
Dictionary definition of fascism there pk, well done.

I bet you called your teachers fascists. Mum, you fascist! I want nuggets and chips you nazi bitch.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

Random said:


> 'On street rapes' are a very small fraction of total rapes. How many are we talking about here? Five? In a given year it's quite possible for all of them that the police know about to be committed by 'non-residents'. I blame the Danish.


 
Clearly you failed to watch the video interview I linked to several times. Read the thread?


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Silly me I thought Norway was an EU member state.


 
so you don't know much about Norway or the *UN*HCR either, then


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> no, "expand your fascism theory", not "post up some old bollocks".


 


Proper Tidy said:


> Dictionary definition of fascism there pk, well done.
> 
> I bet you called your teachers fascists. Mum, you fascist! I want nuggets and chips you nazi bitch.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> Unquestionably they believe they are inspired by Islamic doctrine - specifically the doctrine that _dhimma _(subordinate non-Muslims) are forbidden to erect new places of worship or even to repair old ones that have become dilapidated.
> 
> More generally, they are inspired by the supremacist notions which underpin the Islamic law on minorities. To give a couple of additional examples:
> 
> ...



So on the one hand there are Muslims inspired by Islamic doctrine who destroy churches and murder Copts.

And on the other there are Muslims who form human shields around churches and show solidarity with the Copts, and you have said that they too are operating within Islamic doctrine.

There is more than one possible interpretation of Islamic doctrine then. But will you try to argue that the pro-Copts are somehow not really proper Muslims compared to the ones doing the killing and destruction?


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> No, I don't. Please don't put words in my mouth.



You put inverted commas around the word "racial" to emphasize that this was your principal grounds for distinction. A bit rich to acuse me of willfully misrepresenting you.



ViolentPanda said:


> The Nuremberg laws denied *any* benefits of citizenship to Jews. They rendered them, if they happened to be German, stateless.



Please read what I wrote. I said: "... the laws governing *sexual *relations in Egypt (and elsewhere in the Muslim world) are not hugely different from the Nuremberg Laws. A Christian or Jew who attempted a sexual relation with a Muslim woman can expect the same fate as a Slav who had relations with an Aryan woman."

You do not seem to be disputing my original point that communal sexual inequality is enshrined in Islamic law.

But I will take this opportunity to add that Muslims in Egypt often call Copts 'khawaja'. The term is a disparaging term for 'foreigner'. It expresses the fact that, in Islamic law, non-Muslims cannot be full citizens. Indeed, Copts often lament that they are 'foreigners' in their own land.)



ViolentPanda said:


> The Nuremberg laws didn't employ threats, they allowed legislation to be actioned that made a substantial attempt to end the problem through mass murder.



Neither the Muslims in Egypt nor Islamic law itself demand that Christians should all be gassed. I clearly never said they did. 

I said that both Muslims in Egypt and Islamic law alike assert that Christians should be culturally, politically and legally inferior - and that this inferiority should be expressed, _inter alia_, in the laws of permitted sexual relations. And that is clearly true.



ViolentPanda said:


> I said that their similarity is limited (and it is, in scale as in action), and that the ambit of these laws differs massively (which it does).



We could go on going round in circles here. I said that Islamic legislation on sexual relations between communities is so inegalitarian as to be 'not hugely different' to the rules of the Nuremberg Laws. I am happy to repeat that. You say the totality of Nazi anti-Jewish legislation, culminating in the acts of the Holocaust, differ 'massively' in 'ambit' from Islamic law. And I have never for a moment disputed that.




ViolentPanda said:


> ...how about constructing an argument that deals with what I've actually said?


 
Hope I've helped.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> So on the one hand there are Muslims inspired by Islamic doctrine who destroy churches and murder Copts.
> 
> And on the other there are Muslims who form human shields around churches and show solidarity with the Copts, and you have said that they too are operating within Islamic doctrine.
> 
> There is more than one possible interpretation of Islamic doctrine then. But will you try to argue that the pro-Copts are somehow not really proper Muslims compared to the ones doing the killing and destruction?


 
For goodness sake, IMR - I tried to answer you question as helpfully as I could, and you are now quibbling about points we made pages back. 

Look, Islamic law says that dhimmi are permitted to retain their 'existing' churches and to pray in them. There is nothing 'unIslamic' in a Muslim defending the right of Christians to use their existing churches.

Islamic law also says that Christians should not build or repair churches. So there is nothing 'unIslamic' in a Muslim attacking Christians when they are found to be building or renovating churches.

That is the narrow legalism.

I have said that the core and essence of Islamic doctrine pertaining to minorities is the assertion of Muslim supremacy.
I have also repeatedly said that there are different interpretations of how that supremacy should be expressed and effected.
The essence is the supremacism. But essence must appear - and does so with various differentia.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

Nazism was a centralised political ideology based upon one party. It's a bit of a daft fucking comparison to (repeatedly) make.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

In this context, the term fascist serves as an emotive substitute for "authoritarian", though it also describes specific analytical functions – such as emphasizing the privileging of order over freedom in an opponent's discourse, and can be used to describe aspects of islamic law.

Such as up to 80% of Pakistan's female prisoners jailed because they were rape victims. The lucky ones that is.

But let's not talk about that! Let's derail the thread with pedantic hair-splitting and refuse to even discuss islamic values and the inherent incompatibility with a free society!!


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

belboid said:


> so you don't know much about Norway or the *UN*HCR either, then


 
So do you think the head of Oslo rape robbery and vice is also lying??

If so, care to tell me why?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> In this context, the term fascist serves as an emotive substitute for "authoritarian", though it also describes specific analytical functions – such as emphasizing the privileging of order over freedom in an opponent's discourse, and can be used to describe aspects of islamic law.


 
Brilliant


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> In this context, the term fascist serves as an emotive substitute for "authoritarian"


in that case you're a filthy cop. cop in this instance being an emotive substitute for wanker. if you can't call a spoon a spoon then you don't have a leg to stand on to have a pop at other people  who spout shit for which they should be held to account.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 14, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> Indeed, Copts often lament that they are 'foreigners' in their own land.)


 
They should seek asylum in the UK and get jobs driving black cabs. They'd fit right in.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

This thread is getting rather stupid now. 

Does anyone have anything to say about the considerable substantive points Thomsy has been making? 

Was Said right in saying that there is not one Islam but many, or is Thomsy right that while there are many different strands to Islam, it retains an essence that is common to all of them. 

I have to say that it seems clear to me that there is an essence common to most strands of Islam if not all. And given that there is no such thing as Islam above and beyond that which Muslims believe and do, it is meaningful to talk about that about which they all (or nearly all) agree – namely that the Koran is the word of god as revealed to Mohammad, and that the Koran is chocker-full of direct instructions about how to live.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 14, 2011)

Why don't you go and ask some muslims what they think rather than a bunch of lefties on the internet?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 14, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Why don't you go and ask some muslims what they think rather than a bunch of lefties on the internet?


 
Might have to meet one rather than post on here


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

What sort of a comment is that?

Shall I take that as a no, then, from you two at least? That you don't have anything substantive to say about it? 

That's a poor response.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What sort of a comment is that?
> 
> Shall I take that as a no, then, from you two at least? That you don't have anything substantive to say about it?
> 
> That's a poor response.


 
They have nothing to say about the topic - essentially the treatment of women by Pakistani men both here in UK and in Pakistan itself.

It's almost as if they are forbidden from speaking out about it. Jack Straw comments? Myth. Senior muslim leaders supporting Jack Straw? Myth.

It just isn't happening at all.


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> So do you think the head of Oslo rape robbery and vice is also lying??
> 
> If so, care to tell me why?


 
why are you avoiding the points?  Is it because you have no answers?  I've already told you my opinion re the views of one single copper.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 14, 2011)

Islam has many good points .
 unfortunately the sort of scum who get into positions of power or want positions of power leave out the good stuff in favour of smiting the unbeliever or the backslider.
 there twisted logic because the Pakistan governor allowed his daughters to go in a swimming pool with boys or dance with boys he had to be killed and so should the rest of his family.
 that sort of Muslim can fuck off and die


----------



## yield (Jan 14, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Was Said right in saying that there is not one Islam but many, or is Thomsy right that while there are many different strands to Islam, it retains an essence that is common to all of them.


 
I agree with Edward Said and think there are problems with Islamic essentialism. Samuel Huntingdon's 'The Clash of Civilisations' was rubbish.

One of my friends from school is Ismaili Indian. They follow the Aga Khan as a descendant of Mohammad and the way they live seems fairly liberal to me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2011)

yield said:


> I agree with Edward Said and think there are problems with Islamic essentialism. Samuel Huntingdon's 'The Clash of Civilisations' was rubbish.
> 
> One of my friends from school is Ismaili Indian. They follow the Aga Khan as a descendent of Mohammad and the way they live seems fairly liberal to me.



Fair enough. I'm very prepared to be persuaded that Said was right – I'd prefer it if he were, clearly. Certainly Islam as it was practised by the Mughals was a long way from Wahabbism. Maybe it is misleading to search for an essentialism.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

belboid said:


> I've already told you my opinion re the views of one single copper.


 
Yes. You, and Proper Tidy, have both declared her videotaped statement to NRK - Norway's equivalent of the BBC - as being completely untruthful. 
In your view Hanne Kristin Rohde is lying in this video. 
The reason you gave is because she is a cop. 
(no prejudice there then, even though you are very keen to highlight similar prejudices in others!!)



So that suggests two possibilities.

Either you are correct, and the head of Oslo's violent and sexual section of the Oslo police has told an outrageous lie, one with massive political ramifications that would provoke loud and furious responses from every corner of the globe - if proven to be a lie.

Or she is telling the truth, and the truth has perhaps been deemed too offensive or inflammatory to be reported widely by the mainstream media. 
It is simply too shocking to be even considered. Ignore it, dismiss it. Attack it. Deny it. Anything but confront it and debate it rationally.

Which conspiracy theory are you going to opt for? The former?

"On Tuesday 21 December 2010 she was named the Citizen of the Year by Oslo Aftenposten's readers, with over half of the votes of the total of eight nominees. Rohde has on several occasions spoken to the media that openness and honesty are important values in her exercise of leadership at the police district."

Seems highly unlikely to me that such an important and renowned figure in Norwegian society would risk everything for such an abhorrent lie.

So I did a little more digging.

It appears NRK followed it up with their own editorial, which includes statistics.

http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...eter/norge/1.6567955&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=ivns

It appears that the translation shows a distinct category of rape - "assault rape" - in other words a brutally violent rape - "it can range from threats of the use of the knife to suffocation and extensive use of punches and kicks".

41 cases of such rape attacks were reported - and all 41 were committed by non-western men - "relatively young men who come from other countries. They are often asylum seekers, and often come from countries or traumatized country with a very different view women than we have in Norway"

Perhaps NRK are lying - or are an unreliable source? 

Hardly. Being the Norsk equivalent of the BBC, this is unlikely. They are a part of Norway's heritage in precisely the same way as the BBC are here.

http://www.newsinenglish.no/2010/08/20/nrk-celebrates-its-50-years-of-tv/

So let's just clarify - do you really think Hanne Kristin Rohde is just a liar?

Seems illogical to dismiss her finding purely because "she's just one cop", even though she clearly has the support of the country behind her.

It's OK, you can refuse to discuss it - maybe pretend I didn't post this at all, it never happened - perhaps it's just too difficult a topic for you to discuss.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 14, 2011)

So they weren't all muslim then?


----------



## belboid (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Yes. You, and Proper Tidy, have both declared her videotaped statement to NRK - Norway's equivalent of the BBC - as being completely untruthful.


 No I haven't. Thatsjust a pathetic lie. You must be fucking desperate to resort to such tactics.

Cherry picking 'facts', wilfull distortion of facts, ignoring contradictory facts, and now downright lying. Well done pk, you've managed the whole shebang now!

You worthless cunt


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

belboid said:


> No I haven't. Thatsjust a pathetic lie. You must be fucking desperate to resort to such tactics.
> 
> Cherry picking 'facts', wilfull distortion of facts, ignoring contradictory facts, and now downright lying. Well done pk, you've managed the whole shebang now!
> 
> You worthless cunt


 
Ah right, good. Now you know how frustrating it is to try and remain on-topic whilst being selectively quoted and generally pissed about with. Great stuff.

Are you now prepared to at least entertain the idea that there may be a teensy weensy element of cultural upringing that leads these tragic lads into stooping to the depraved levels that they have been jailed for?

That perhaps there is a smigeon of nasty islamic rhetoric that states quite clearly that non-muslim women are OK as long as you control - or even elslave - them??

Or will you again avoid discussing the core issue after 60 something pages?


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Are you now prepared to at least entertain the idea that there may be a teensy weensy element of cultural upringing that leads these tragic lads into stooping to the depraved levels that they have been jailed for?



Of course there is, how can anyone doubt it?


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

IMR said:


> Of course there is, how can anyone doubt it?


 
So that's racist? To think that?

This is the crux of the issue, semantics and religion is nothing compared to basic human logic.

The one and the only way to combat racism is simple, plain old logic.

There are stark conclusions and ideas that need to be discussed properly. Not here, I doubt.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> Are you now prepared to at least entertain the idea that there may be a teensy weensy element of cultural upringing that leads these tragic lads into stooping to the depraved levels that they have been jailed for?


 
But that is probably true of any wife-beater, pimp or misogynist.


----------



## pk (Jan 14, 2011)

In terms of a way forward - the key is the wives of these bastards. They knew. They said nothing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> In terms of a way forward - the key is the wives of these bastards. They knew. They said nothing.


 
ah yes. the tactic tried by agent stall in sons of anarchy.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> In terms of a way forward - the key is the wives of these bastards. They knew. They said nothing.


 
Oh, now we see.


----------



## IMR (Jan 14, 2011)

pk said:


> So that's racist? To think that?



That culture influences the actions of individuals? Of course not.

In practical terms the best predictor of whether someone would turn out to be a rapist or not would be their individual character, quirks of temperament and so on. Not what religion they follow, although I just don't see what belligerent religious fundamentalists of any kind have to offer a pretty successful society like that of Norway. They've already got enough Black Metal fans, so why let in more freaks?

It would be racist for the Norwegians to declare that no more Pakistanis or Kurds or whoever would ever be allowed to set foot in Norway again. That would have big repercussions on immigrants and their descendants already living in Norway and would put race or ethnicity to the forefront of political thinking - not a good move.

But it would be sensible of the Norwegians to treat would-be immigrants as individuals and carry out in-depth screening on anyone wishing to live there.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Oh, now we see.


 
What, you saying Pakistani girls are thick? I don't think so matey.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

Lest we forget... they were doing advanced astrology and maths when we were running about with bits of flint on a stick.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Okay Panda K, suppose you're right, and segments of the Koran have provoked men in Norway and the UK to rape. What now?


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

chazegee said:


> Okay Panda K, suppose you're right, and segments of the Koran have provoked men in Norway and the UK to rape. What now?


 
What now? We look at giving these humble good muslim women who raise these boys a voice.

We give them clear lines of communication - within UK law not Sharia - we empower them with the knowledge that they can speak up and give them the confidence to be able to defend themselves against the dark subservient shadow of some way outdated way of life.

This is not Pakistan and we do not accept the way women are treated in strict enclosed communities. 
We do not accept the manner in which boys are taught to fear women, the fear that they will corrupt and deprave goes hand in hand with the need to enslave.

The wives of these rapists must surely have known each other, have confided in each other stories about the cocaine, perhaps the friends dropping by, the smell of these bastards having returned from their little harem.

Do not insult the intelligence of the Pakistani people by presuming the wives of these sick men were completely oblivious to what was going on around them for what was at least a year.

Who can they talk to? What can they do? They suffer, for it is their role in life. They say nothing. They can never betray their husbands, because the penalty is all too often death.

For all we know, it may have been the wives who reported to the police the girls, maybe they found a cellphone, we will never know.

But if there is an agreed "third way" option whereby the womenfolk have an anonymous helpline, for starters, something as simple and as crass as a Freefone number.

I think then these wicked patterns of abuse would at least begin to ripple inward, instead of outward as we are being led to believe.

Don't bother addressing these issues with your Political Science degrees, your 2:1 results from some pissy uni. 
Politics, political peacock feathers, it's bullshit. All the clamouring for re-definition of what amounts to basic human instinct and logic is achieving fuck all.

Times have changed - people, specifically women, can't be as bothered to go to the Polling Booth on vote day, but they'll text a fiver's worth of votes to some ballroom dancer or jungle survivor on TV. 

The over-intellectualising and the fear of being racist - it's usually funny, but not with this issue.

The right wing and the left wing have so much in common it's unfuckingbelievable - both cherish exactly what it is to be British but in different ways.

One side waves the flag and chants dodgy songs at the footie and drinks the lager in memory of grannie's glory days long past in some fucked up monkey island belief that Rule Brittania meant anything other than piracy, rape and miserable wars.

The other side is awkward, over-apologetic, fearful of offending, overly generous, and generally weak and cowardly and asking to be taken advantage of by people with a memory as long as those from all twats from the other countries I just described above.

Both beautiful examples of what it is to be a Brit. 

But we have to set rules. If we didn't have rules where would we be? French!


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

At general tone. 

Ummm, not a bad idea, but I can't see many woman phoning a state line over suspected infidelity (did they really suspect more?) of their spouses though....


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

chazegee said:


> At general tone.
> 
> Ummm, not a bad idea, but I can't see many woman phoning a state line over suspected infidelity (did they really suspect more?) of their spouses though....


 
Does it need to be a state line??

Maybe we can plant some undercover cop like Mark Stone, to drive these women around and listen to all their stories. He'd have to wear the hijab though.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

I also agree that the women need a bit of Pankhurst in their lives, this is the key!

Trouble is, it's not something anyone else can instigate!


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

Anything from the stupidly left wing these days is just ...






Fuck all your little workshops and discussion groups if you can't discuss this issue.

Coz it encapsulates everything the state paid for you to learn, and it scares the shit out of you.



(that wasn't to you chazegee my darling)


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Dam, I now have visions of PK in a Hijab, hyping his Muslim sisters to rise up.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

And everything from the right wing these days is... well - the only people convicted of this crime that were not from the Pakistani community were white.

At least two of the three are apparently BNP members, in the same gang as these muslim men, sharing in harmony like ebony and ivory, raping our white children after plying them with vodka and cocaine. 11 years old you fucking scum.

If that's their definition of white power then perhaps Islam really is the future for the United Kingdom.

I know I'd sooner praise Allah than praise these examples of so-called Anglo Saxon purity.

BNP and EDL can fuck right off. UAF and SWP can fuck right off too. And the rest of the hypocrites.

You're all full of shit and you're helping nobody. 

Grow the fuck up, we're not in Kansas any more, Toto.

The life of one child at risk of this shit is worth more than all your fucking principles, your religions, your shitty little political movements and your general failure at life put together.

And fuck you if you disagree.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> And everything from the right wing these days is... well - the only people convicted of this crime that were not from the Pakistani community were white.
> 
> At least two of the three are apparently BNP members, in the same gang as these muslim men, sharing in harmony like ebony and ivory, raping our white children after plying them with vodka and cocaine.
> 
> If that's their definition of white power then perhaps Islam really is the future for the United Kingdom.



What about atheism? I think even Islam will slowly die out after a few generations in the UK.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Okay then, this has just answered my assertion of why this shouldn't be a race issue, it wasn't, because the BNP were getting theirs too. 
But even if it was, what are the options, trying to influence a culture from outside (never works anyway), or just treating these guys as normal UK scumbags and giving them harsh sentences, far more likely to put off future rapists than a hotline no?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> What about atheism? I think even Islam will slowly die out after a few generations in the UK.


 
Possibly. 

However, if you'd asked me 20 years ago, I would have assumed that second and third generation British Pakistanis would generally be far less religious than their parents and far more secular in their outlook. That hasn't proved to be the case. Large numbers of second and third generation Pakistanis are if anything more religious than their parents, embracing far more conservative brands of Islam.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> What about atheism? I think even Islam will slowly die out after a few generations in the UK.


 
Atheism is still a position that needs defining and defending. And sooner or later we're just back to the same old shit. This is human nature. We will never live in peace because it is against our nature.

We are "el mano conqistadore" or something like that. Born to hunt, compete.

Maybe it's time the gatherers, not the hunters, took charge.

Do I have a simple 24hr solution to providing women embedded within islamic stations a voice? No.

But the people who hand out the money do.

Just think if we could really live that Marxist dream for real.

Only Marx did not invent it. 

None of you thick political student grants had the faintest idea that marxism had already been invented by the British decades before old Karl took to the stage.

I guess they didn't teach that in the pissy universities?

William Glass, now he invented what people now call communism back  in 1816.

And he implemented it - and - it is a arguably a successful society to this day based upon similar principles. And British territory.

Do your homework now, politico twats. What you call marxism was invented by a Scotsman.

LOL!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

chazegee said:


> Okay then, this has just answered my assertion of why this shouldn't be a race issue, it wasn't, because the BNP were getting theirs too.
> But even if it was, what are the options, trying to influence a culture from outside (never works anyway), or just treating these guys as normal UK scumbags and giving them harsh sentences, far more likely to put off future rapists than a hotline no?


 
fwiw my two-penneth would be that we are dealing with two issues that need to be kept separate. 

These men need to be dealt with as common rapists. 

Any issues there might be with the culture that produced them need to be dealt with entirely separately and on their own terms. There needs to be far more moral clarity at, to give one concrete example, universities and the way they treat their Islamic societies, telling them that if they will not treat men and women equally at their meetings, they will not be able to meet on university premises. There is a lot of muddled thinking that is making people turn a blind eye to discrimination.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> What about atheism? I think even Islam will slowly die out after a few generations in the UK.



Could be right, I'm sure lots of recent immigrants cling to the Koran now because the feel totally alienated from UK culture, if and when more integration/acceptance happens, they can throw blanky out the window.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Possibly.
> 
> However, if you'd asked me 20 years ago, I would have assumed that second and third generation British Pakistanis would generally be far less religious than their parents and far more secular in their outlook. That hasn't proved to be the case. Large numbers of second and third generation Pakistanis are if anything more religious than their parents, embracing far more conservative brands of Islam.



I think that's a reaction to having two cultures and not being totally accepted as British by some people. I think time will lessen that. Although there will still be enclaves for fundamentalists like there are for Hassidic Jews. I suppose the global treatment of muslims by the West will also have a big influence.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> I think that's a reaction to having two cultures and not being totally accepted as British by some people. I think time will lessen that.


 
Yes. I think it is that too. You could be right – a few generations after all is quite a few decades. In my more optimistic moments, I actually think that racism generally will die a slow death in the UK even substantially within my lifetime. But it will not die a painless death, unfortunately.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> fwiw my two-penneth would be that we are dealing with two issues that need to be kept separate.
> 
> These men need to be dealt with as common rapists.


 
What?

These men were NOT "common rapists". A common rapist to me is some drunk scumbag who should have been hit by a car years ago.

These men raped CHILDREN.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> What?
> 
> These men were NOT COMMON RAPISTS.
> 
> These men raped CHILDREN.



You're right, they are particularly despicable rapists. Not that any rapist is less than despicable.


----------



## starfish (Jan 15, 2011)

Racism will never die as long as we have races. Someone will always hate someone else because theyre different. Its the nature of people.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> racism generally will die a slow death in the UK even substantially within my lifetime. But it will not die a painless death, unfortunately.


 
When you ignore the bleating from the mindless and scared extremists from both left and right - you remember basic human instinct and logic.

If such logic can be applied in the face of meaningless name-calling and refusal to engage in stormy discussion through fear - then it will ultimately win.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're right, they are particularly despicable rapists. Not that any rapist is less than despicable.


 
All Rapists Are Bad But Some Rapists Are Badder Than Others


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

starfish said:


> Racism will never die as long as we have races. Someone will always hate someone else because theyre different. Its the nature of people.



It's just a question of integration, when the Normans invaded; you bet the indigenous Celts hated the French. But now...But now...

...Hang on.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes. I think it is that too. You could be right – a few generations after all is quite a few decades. In my more optimistic moments, I actually think that racism generally will die a slow death in the UK even substantially within my lifetime. But it will not die a painless death, unfortunately.


 
My great grandparents were Irish immigrants bringing with them all that Catholic bullshit. It's taken 100 years, but I'm a fully fledged atheist who thinks the Pope is a cunt and I get told by cab drivers in Dublin how much they don't hate the English.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> Some Rapists Are Badder Than Others


 
Some Rapists' mothers are Badder than Other Rapists' Mothers.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

starfish said:


> Racism will never die as long as we have races. Someone will always hate someone else because theyre different. Its the nature of people.


 
It's hard to know where to start in answering this. I'll simply say this: I don't hate anyone else because they are different; yet I am a person. How can that be?


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Some other rapists mothers are badder than all.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

I can say this without any hint of irony whatsoever - if there really is any one of you left wing, left behind, left shorty lefties reading this thread thinking that the sexist Pakistani muslim culture had absolutely no role to play in what looks like a long-ignored problem, then y'all are some seriously fucked up niggers.

in B4 "oh no he di'ent!"


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Nope, you've missed the point, I'm saying foremost that it's because they some sexist fucked up men, not because they're Pakistani...
Address Hollywood because of Polanski?


----------



## treelover (Jan 15, 2011)

from the Telegraph, but revealing

Queasy stomachs on the Today programme as the BBC looks into multicultural Britain 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/a...ks-into-multi-cultural-britain/#disqus_thread


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> I can say this without any hint of irony whatsoever - if there really is any one of you left wing, left behind, left shorty lefties reading this thread thinking that the sexist Pakistani muslim culture had absolutely no role to play in what looks like a long-ignored problem, then y'all are some seriously fucked up niggers.
> 
> in B4 "oh no he di'ent!"



If you wrote 'sexist male culture' then more people would agree with you. Singling out one group of men as being more sexist than others is a pretty lame argument.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Fucking hell PK, you like a good spat. 
You remind me of an old drug buddy who had so much appetite for it that we would have to take it on a shift rota basis to keep him company.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

chazegee said:


> Address Hollywood because of Polanski?


 
Most definitely yes.

That's the most perfect example of what the fuck I'm talking about that I could ever imagine.

chazegee you really are a darlin'.

But I have a weekend to get on with.

So I am well and truly offski.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Fair doos, have a good one, and no raping kids.


----------



## starfish (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's hard to know where to start in answering this. I'll simply say this: I don't hate anyone else because they are different; yet I am a person. How can that be?


 
Its because you cant answer it. I know you dont hate. I dont hate, well i hate haters but you know what i mean. There will always be people who hate for hates sake, because they dont know any different.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> If you wrote 'sexist male culture' then more people would agree with you. Singling out one group of men as being more sexist than others is a pretty lame argument.


 
You think dem bitches naa dis der men? Wha fokkin' planet ya live on bwoi? Ya tinkin dem all homely and snug up with the tiger rug up, dem all tuck up and shut up? Ya naa kno nuttin boat da bizniz ov wimmen. Demma chattin and a talkin and plottin and a calculatin since time began, my fren. Ya tink you born a man? 
Naa fren - ya born of a woman. Every boy born of woman. 
Women only women make us, and in return we try to make them.
Ya tink you above da woman yaaa tink all you like to tink but reality dictates when a man borm, im borm under de woman. That bebe come out head firsss upside de head. Boy or gal.
No matter what you think is sexy, is sexist, is nothing, is nature and the law of nature has been defiled by false principles and hypocritical cowards who probably haven't changed their pants for a week. Don't ever call me a racist. The geography of rock formations in fucking Freemont is of more interest to me than your racial make-up or anyone elses. People need to get out more. One day we will all be coffee coloured. We will still argue about racial purity.

Racism will be beaten one day but only with logic.

Luckily we have these gifts of technology, so I can portray it all via the medium of Dr Seuss.


----------



## Davo1 (Jan 15, 2011)

starfish said:


> Its because you cant answer it. I know you dont hate. I dont hate, well i hate haters but you know what i mean. There will always be people who hate for hates sake, because they dont know any different.



I hate you! [fwiw]

I'm drawing a picture of you right now you wet bastard....

I know exactly what you look like as well


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

No, I could have given a long answer but decided not to. If only some people hate others because they are different, then hating others because they are different cannot be 'the nature of people'.


----------



## Davo1 (Jan 15, 2011)

It was a picture of Nick Clegg in a shit hat


----------



## starfish (Jan 15, 2011)

Davo1 said:


> I hate you! [fwiw]
> 
> I'm drawing a picture of you right now you wet bastard....
> 
> I know exactly what you look like as well


 
Like i give a fuck what you think newbie. Fuck you & the horse you rode in on.


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

It's been a blast ladies and gentlemen. I must warn you I am rather drunk. I must go, but I will leave you with this wonderful piece of music that I guarantee you will be singing to yourself for years in idle bliss. May the peace of Allah, of Yaweh, of God, Yehud, and of Jesus Christ Almighty, Mary, Joseph, that bhudda bloke I can't remember the name of, all be with us now and forever more. Be blessed and praise what you have and enjoy.


----------



## starfish (Jan 15, 2011)

Who is Benny Lava?


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

chazegee said:


> Fucking hell PK, you like a good spat.
> You remind me of an old drug buddy who had so much appetite for it that we would have to take it on a shift rota basis to keep him company.


 
That was me, you forgetful cunt


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> Ah right, good. Now you know how frustrating it is to try and remain on-topic whilst being selectively quoted and generally pissed about with. Great stuff.
> 
> Are you now prepared to at least entertain the idea that there may be a teensy weensy element of cultural upringing that leads these tragic lads into stooping to the depraved levels that they have been jailed for?
> 
> ...


 
squirm squirm squirm peeky. lies, distortion and worthless rhetoric,.  truluy you have drunk deeply from jazz's well


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

belboid said:


> squirm squirm squirm peeky. lies, distortion and worthless rhetoric,.  truluy you have drunk deeply from jazz's well


 
And in the absence of logic there can only be this.

This is why. Truluy this is why. Buh bye.  pk


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2011)

answer no questions, tell ye no lies


----------



## pk (Jan 15, 2011)

belboid said:


> answer no questions, tell ye no lies


 
Scared of your own opinions. Do you get scared when you get an erection? Assuming you're a bloke.. never thought to ask.

LOL, offski!


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2011)

you're fucking wierd


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 15, 2011)

Trots are liberals not left-wingers.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 15, 2011)

starfish said:


> Racism will never die as long as we have races. *Someone will always hate someone else because theyre different. Its the nature of people.*



I don't believe that is true actually. Hate is a sentiment that in my experience develops with more than just knowing/observing 'difference'. I think it is natural for people to notice difference, to be cautious/suspicious/curious, but not 'hate' automatically.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 15, 2011)

racism


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 15, 2011)

raCism


----------



## Blagsta (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> Atheism is still a position that needs defining and defending. And sooner or later we're just back to the same old shit. This is human nature. We will never live in peace because it is against our nature.
> 
> We are "el mano conqistadore" or something like that. Born to hunt, compete.
> 
> ...


 
My god


----------



## smokedout (Jan 15, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Trots are liberals not left-wingers.


 
tell that to the kronstadt sailors


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2011)

Blagsta said:


> My god


 
..and they dare suggest that the drugs are getting weaker...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> raping our white children


 
Bingo


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 15, 2011)

BNP are now reporting that this grooming has now spread even to Scotland


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2011)

An interesting thread this one if only because it's highlighted the futility of discussion of Islam with extreme lefties. Peekie's come out with some serious rot but Tidy and Belboids rebuttals to him have been _absolutely useless_. Simply shouting 'you're wrong' and abuse from the sidelines is totally sterile without a substantive back-up argument, which they don't have. 

Also noteworthy is that nobody has attempted to challenge Thomsy's eminently sensible postings on the thread (with the exception of VP, and he failed to overturn a well reasoned position). The usual "defend Islam at all costs" brigade have instead taken the easy option and engaged (poorly) with PK's ramblings instead.


----------



## past caring (Jan 15, 2011)

Nobody here has "defended" Islam you soppy git.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

past caring said:


> Nobody here has "defended" Islam you soppy git.


 
Innit


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 15, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> An interesting thread this one if only because it's highlighted the futility of discussion of Islam with extreme lefties. Peekie's come out with some serious rot but Tidy and Belboids rebuttals to him have been _absolutely useless_. Simply shouting 'you're wrong' and abuse from the sidelines is totally sterile without a substantive back-up argument, which they don't have.
> 
> Also noteworthy is that nobody has attempted to challenge Thomsy's eminently sensible postings on the thread (with the exception of VP, and he failed to overturn a well reasoned position). The usual "defend Islam at all costs" brigade have instead taken the easy option and engaged (poorly) with PK's ramblings instead.


 
Find some non 'extreme lefties'  to discuss Islam with then, what about those who follow it?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2011)

past caring said:


> Nobody here has "defended" Islam you soppy git.


 
Which is why that bit's in quotes. It's outlining a general M.O. rather than what's been argued here (nothing has been by Tidy and Belboid, just a bit of name calling and sniping). 

There has however been a spirited defence from a few other posters of the notion that Pakistani mens shittier actions are influenced by Islamic doctrine. Unarguable by any reasonable measure and well dealt with by Thomsy.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

Is pk's real name ric?

/sniping


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Find some non 'extreme lefties'  to discuss Islam with then, what about those who follow it?


 
You outed yourself as "not worth the bother" with this spectacularly pointless post:



> most muslims are just normal people, have loads of diffrent views on all sorts of things. Why don't you try and relate to them as such?
> 
> working class mulsims working with and living in an area with working class catholics, agnostics, Jews , aethiests spend more time discussing Coronation street, X Factor and footbal, than what the Koran says.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> ASimply shouting 'you're wrong' and abuse from the sidelines is totally sterile without a substantive back-up argument, which they don't have.


 
except no one has simply shouted 'youre wrong' - me n PT have both pointed out how the racist loving liar pk has deliberately lied about data, cherry picked data, ignored other data etc etc etc. The words we used may have been too long for you to understand, but they were all there.  But dont let facts get in the way of your silly argument (every point of which has turned out to be false!)


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 15, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> You outed yourself as "not worth the bother" with this spectacularly pointless post:



why was that pointless?


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> why was that pointless?


 
because it didnt say what spymaster wanted you it say


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> why was that pointless?


 
That was explained to you yesterday in a subsequent post by LBJ, iirc.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> You outed yourself as "not worth the bother" with this spectacularly pointless post:


 
He's spot on though - British Muslims are not isolated from mainstream British culture - they watch the same telly and listen to the same music and, most importantly of all, have more or less the same experiences as non-Muslims in most respects. What, muslims don't watch x-factor?


----------



## Blagsta (Jan 15, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> An interesting thread this one if only because it's highlighted the futility of discussion of Islam with extreme lefties. Peekie's come out with some serious rot but Tidy and Belboids rebuttals to him have been _absolutely useless_. Simply shouting 'you're wrong' and abuse from the sidelines is totally sterile without a substantive back-up argument, which they don't have.
> 
> Also noteworthy is that nobody has attempted to challenge Thomsy's eminently sensible postings on the thread (with the exception of VP, and he failed to overturn a well reasoned position). The usual "defend Islam at all costs" brigade have instead taken the easy option and engaged (poorly) with PK's ramblings instead.



My god  you and pk should get married


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 15, 2011)

Trots must cause more racism than anyone, except for liberals.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 15, 2011)

Is there any point this thread still being open?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 15, 2011)

Cop!


----------



## Crispy (Jan 15, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Is there any point this thread still being open?


 
entertainment value, mostly


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

My favourite bit was when the EDL said pk was alright.

Lol


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> He's spot on though - British Muslims are not isolated from mainstream British culture ....


 
Some are, some aren't. 

I think the same poster (The39thstep) who mentioned that he had read _The Islamist_. Assuming he means the book by Ed Hussain, he'll be aware that this very point is made in the book. That "regular muslims" are being radicalised by clerics who teach that religion and politics are inseperable and *indeed they are* being isolated from the mainstream British culture.

LBJ responded: 





> But this is the point that fundamentalists would make. And is the point that Thomsy was making. That they are in fact less Muslim than the true dedicated believer.
> 
> However, if you have a Muslim cleric who thinks this, who defends secularism, then you are on to something else – a version of Islam that does not see the religion as an all-encompassing system.



He's right.

The39thStep, apologies for the pissy tone I took when I quoted you first. I've just woken up with a bit of a hangover. The Islamist is an excellent read.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 15, 2011)

> The39thStep, apologies for the pissy tone I took when I quoted you first. I've just woken up with a bit of a hangover. The Islamist is an excellent read.


 
I've also read that book and, yes thought it was a good read, but did you get the impression the author was slightly overexagerating his own role? I got the impression an ego was being pandered to...


----------



## dylans (Jan 15, 2011)

Spymaster said:


> Also noteworthy is that nobody has attempted to challenge Thomsy's eminently sensible postings on the thread (with the exception of VP, and he failed to overturn a well reasoned position). The usual "defend Islam at all costs" brigade have instead taken the easy option and engaged (poorly) with PK's ramblings instead.


 
There is nothing original or new in Thomsy's "critique" of "Islam". In fact I am not surprised he reserves such venom for Edward Said as his posts are almost text book examples of the kind of a-historical, stereotypical and essentialist discourse that Said pointed out are evident in stereotyptical and racist Western views of "Islam and Arab cultures. 

Critics of orientalist discourse have long  pointed to several strands to essentialist views of the "Islamic world"and it is instructive to note how Thomsy's arguments mirror them almost exactly. For example. Orientalists tend to



> to focus on traditional culture, overlooking counter trends to it and cultural struggle within it; to examine texts outside their historical and social contexts; and to stick to the explicit and mechanical rather than the implicit and situational or symbolic meanings of cultural concepts.



Thus the authoritarian nature of the Egyptian state and the creeping Islamisation of Egypts institutions is assumed to be fully supported by all Egyptian Muslims. All historical and subjective factors such as Mubaraks cynical attempts to appease Islamist movements over the past 20 years or his personal authoritarianism and desire to retain power. The overwhelming unpopularity of his regime. The dynamics and factors other than Islam that drive Egyptians such as economic or political or national, class or ethnic concerns are all subsumed to an overarching and unchanging Islamic essence shared by all. Thus all examples of state repression or discrimination are not seen for what they are, instruments of repression by an unpopular and authoritarian regime but are paraded as examples of the evils of Islam as a whole. He instructs us about the discrimination of Egypts Copts



> A Muslim man can marry non-Muslim women, so long as the kids are raised Muslim.
> A Non-Muslim man cannot legally marry a Muslim woman. It simply cannot happen or be recognized in Egyptian or Islam law. Any Christian who was crazy enough to try and have sex with a Muslim faces a lynch mob and / or imprisonment and / or torture.
> 
> A Christian may freely convert to Islam – and are encouraged to do so.
> ...



But he does so with no historical context whatsoever and no mention that Mubarak is widely despised and hated by most Egyptians. To read his post you could be forgiven that Mubarak is a hero to Egyptians rather than a man who runs fake elections with less than ten percent voter turnout.

Whilst it is true that the Egyptian state has incrementally watered down the secular and civil state apparatus and that the Egyptian population has become more "Islamist" over the past several decades. Thomsy would have us believe this is a universal and unchanging aspect of the Egyptian Muslim population and not, as is the case, the result of specific and recent political factors. Thus any and all symbolic examples of national or political identity (such as standing with Egyptian copts) are dismissed as "merely within the bounds of Islam" as though Islam were all and everything about the motivations of Egyptians (which is in fact his view)

So determined is he to maintain this essentialist discourse that he has to actively dismiss examples of national or political solidarity between Muslims and Copts. With a wave of his hand he shrugs off as irrelevent the thousands of Egyptian Muslims who have shown solidarity with their Coptic brothers and sisters and hurries to point out that such solidarity can only occur because it doesn't threaten Islamic doctrine (as if a single homogeneous unchanging "Islam" and the confines of an a-historic unchanging doctrine determine every thought and action of every Egyptian Muslim who have no room for national, political, economic or social concerns outside of "Islam". 
Fortunately for the Egyptian working class, the masses across North Africa are on the move and have begun to demand democratic changes. Tunisia has sent shock waves across North Africa and guess what.....

It has nothing to do with Islam.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 15, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Trots must cause more racism than anyone, except for liberals.


 
nah mate, in the racism-causing stakes, we're well below the "overpopulation is killing the planet - but here, have a fair trade basket hand-grown from african children" crowd


----------



## dylans (Jan 15, 2011)

> The usual "defend Islam at all costs" brigade



It has nothing to do with "defending Islam" It has everything to do with opposing a discourse that seeks to reduce the myriad of dynamic ever changing social dynamics of over a billion people to a simplistic and racist stereotype.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 15, 2011)

A thoughtful post (#1592), Dylans.

More later.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 15, 2011)

dylans said:


> There is nothing original or new in Thomsy's "critique" of "Islam". In fact I am not surprised he reserves such venom for Edward Said as his posts are almost text book examples of the kind of a-historical, stereotypical and essentialist discourse that Said pointed out are evident in stereotyptical and racist Western views of "Islam and Arab cultures.
> 
> Critics of orientalist discourse have long  pointed to several strands to essentialist views of the "Islamic world"and it is instructive to note how Thomsy's arguments mirror them almost exactly. For example. Orientalists tend to
> 
> ...


 
racism


----------



## Crispy (Jan 15, 2011)

Could you control your man please, _angel_


----------



## chazegee (Jan 15, 2011)

Well done for understanding it though.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 15, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> I've also read that book and, yes thought it was a good read, but did you get the impression the author was slightly overexagerating his own role? I got the impression an ego was being pandered to...


 
There was quite a debate about his view of his role,.How much of that was generated by those whose noses were cut out when Quillam got the govt counter terrorism money is anyones guess. Never the less I found it a fascinating read especially how they saw off the SWP's traditional approach. The part of the book that I found slower but has stayed with me longer is the last third where he questions those states that some hold up to be bastions of Islam.

On that basis his criticisms of Islamists  ie those who see Islam as providing  a system of politic and religion is spot on. I have attended a few of fringe meetings of Quillam and some of their stuff is really good imo . They tend though to have little support amongst not just Islamists but also much of the anti Islamophobia lobby including the some of the left. 

I  read Maliks from Fatwa to Jihad afterwards and again I would reccomend that if only for understanding some of  how the 'anti imperialist left' ended up in the deadend of political islam.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

dylans said:


> So determined is he to maintain this essentialist discourse that he has to actively dismiss examples of national or political solidarity between Muslims and Copts. With a wave of his hand he shrugs off as irrelevent the thousands of Egyptian Muslims who have shown solidarity with their Coptic brothers and sisters and hurries to point out that such solidarity can only occur because it doesn't threaten Islamic doctrine (as if a single homogeneous unchanging "Islam" and the confines of an a-historic unchanging doctrine determine every thought and action of every Egyptian Muslim who has no place for national, political, economic or social concerns outside of "Islam".


 
This is not what I took Thomsy to mean. Nowhere has he said that he thought the protesters were purely motivated by Islamic feeling. Rather, he is saying that that for which they were protesting – equitable treatment for Copts – was not a challenge to those who see Islam as the rightfully dominant state religion of Egypt. A protest against other issues, such as the frankly disgusting practice of assigning everyone an official religion on their identity papers, would be a direct challenge to the Islamism of the Egyptian state.

And of course, you're right that the democratic movements across North Africa at the moment have nothing to do with Islam. This is of course all to the good, and of course the majority of people don't think 'what would Mohammad have done' before they do anything themselves. Nobody was suggesting otherwise. 

Personally, I have sympathy with Said's position, but it seems to me that it was said in reaction to dangerously simplistic analysis from outside following 911. But I don't think I can go as far as Said to say that there can be no essentialism. You yourself have hinted at why, as have others on this thread – much of the heterogeneous nature of 'Muslims' is due not to their differing interpretations of the Koran, but rather due to the degree to which they defer to the Koran in their everyday lives. That this is also what fundamentalist Islamists say doesn't necessarily make it less true. It does mean that, as you say here, fighting for social justice, tolerance and human rights in predominantly Muslim countries 'has nothing to do with Islam'. You don't fight fundamentalism by delving into the Koran – that truly is to play into their hands.

ETA:

A counter to this might be that not everyone who studies the Koran comes out the other end as a fundamentalist theocrat. But my experience of both Muslims and Christians is that those without a fundamentalist slant are those who throughout their study maintain a position of puzzlement – who don't believe in fact that their holy books are the end of the argument. 

There is no doubt some cognitive dissonance going on here, as they hold that the Koran is the word of god while also recognising that its instructions are very much of their time and place and that transferring them literally from then to now is a problematic thing to do. 

Those with the simplistic fundamentalist bent have no such cognitive dissonance – the Koran is the word of god, therefore every word in it must be taken at literal face value and applied to all times and places equally. 

It is the fact that the fundamentalist position contains no internal contradictions that makes it so dangerous, and so difficult to address. You can't drag people away from fundamentalism by argument – they have to drag themselves away.

EATA:

At risk of repeating myself, I will also add that I don't think Islam is alright at all in any of its forms, just as I don't think Christianity is alright in any of its forms. That doesn't mean that I hate Muslims and wish to prevent them from following their religion. It also doesn't mean that I don't recognise the beauty of much of the art, music etc that has been inspired by the religion. 

It does mean that I would prefer if people didn't follow such belief systems, though. It does mean that, as with Christianity, I consider that their religion has caused a massive amount of pain and suffering to those who do not fit the religion's paradigm of how human beings should be. And it also means that I object very fundamentally to the concept of an 'Islamic state', just as I object to 'Jewish state' and 'Christian state'. If a state is defined by geographical borders, it then represents all who live within those borders regardless of their religious affiliation. I can think of few more objectionable concepts than that of a 'state religion'. 

It is very dangerous to close down discussion by shouting 'racist' at anyone who states the opinion that they don't like Islam. Well I'm not a racist, and I don't like Islam. Mohammad the medieval warlord can fuck the fuck off as far as I'm concerned, and anyone who believes that this man was a prophet is believing something that they have no reason to be believing. Such a mistaken belief can only hold people back.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 15, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> My favourite bit was when the EDL said pk was alright.
> 
> Lol


 
Yer what? Have I missed something?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> Well there's that whole apostasy = death thing. Infidelity = death. Insulting the prophet = death. Refusal to marry arranged partner = death (an 'honourable' death perhaps). Mainly for women, that one. Or girls.


 
That's not fascism, you _nudnik_, it's religious totalitarianism.


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 15, 2011)

past caring said:


> Nobody here has "defended" Islam you soppy git.


Only sought to stifle any criticism of it...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> You put inverted commas around the word "racial" to emphasize that this was your principal grounds for distinction. A bit rich to acuse me of willfully misrepresenting you.


I put speech marks around the word "racial" to denote the fact that it's a loose and problematic concept to deploy. Standard action used to let others know that you're not using an unproblematic piece of terminology.




> Please read what I wrote. I said: "... the laws governing *sexual *relations in Egypt (and elsewhere in the Muslim world) are not hugely different from the Nuremberg Laws. A Christian or Jew who attempted a sexual relation with a Muslim woman can expect the same fate as a Slav who had relations with an Aryan woman."
> 
> You do not seem to be disputing my original point that communal sexual inequality is enshrined in Islamic law.


Why would I? It's a given. I was and am disputing your facile comparison between these religious "laws" and the Nuremberg laws.


> But I will take this opportunity to add that Muslims in Egypt often call Copts 'khawaja'. The term is a disparaging term for 'foreigner'. It expresses the fact that, in Islamic law, non-Muslims cannot be full citizens. Indeed, Copts often lament that they are 'foreigners' in their own land.)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It *is* hugely different, though.
Do Islamic states legislate to check lineage back 4 generations to make sure you're "pure"? The Nuremberg laws did. Potential marriage partners had to be vetted by the state.

Do they legislate so that converts from Christianity and their descendants can retrospectively be stripped of their rights, including being denied marriage? The Nuremberg laws did. Christians who had married spouses who turned out to have Jewish ancestry could be criminalised for having done so, and/or for having had sexual relations with and produced children by that person.

As far as I'm concerned, just those two points make a huge difference.


> You say the totality of Nazi anti-Jewish legislation, culminating in the acts of the Holocaust, differ 'massively' in 'ambit' from Islamic law. And I have never for a moment disputed that.
> 
> 
> Hope I've helped.


 
Well, you've attempted to justify a ridiculously facile comparison, I'm not sure that you've even helped yourself, let alone anyone else.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> In this context, the term fascist serves as an emotive substitute for "authoritarian", though it also describes specific analytical functions – such as emphasizing the privileging of order over freedom in an opponent's discourse, and can be used to describe aspects of islamic law.
> 
> Such as up to 80% of Pakistan's female prisoners jailed because they were rape victims. The lucky ones that is.
> 
> But let's not talk about that! Let's derail the thread with pedantic hair-splitting and refuse to even discuss islamic values and the inherent incompatibility with a free society!!


 
Fascism wasn't a nod to authoritarianism, it was a full-blooded social totalitarianism.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Well, you've attempted to justify a ridiculously facile comparison, I'm not sure that you've even helped yourself, let alone anyone else.


 
fwiw, I don't think the comparison is ridiculously facile. As you say, there is one crucial difference – a Jew in Germany could not convert to 'Aryan'. But in terms of the assertion of the supremacy of one particular group over another in a way that controls who is allowed to have sexual relations with whom, it is a valid comparison, imo.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This thread is getting rather stupid now.
> 
> Does anyone have anything to say about the considerable substantive points Thomsy has been making?
> 
> ...


 
I'd say that one only needs to discuss Islam with a Sufi to understand that commonality is bunkum beyond your last sentence (which isn't an essence, it's an imperative: You wouldn't be a Muslim if you didn't think that, but it's not essentialised enough that there's a common interpretation of the book). The interpretations vary, as much according to geography as to social influence.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> fwiw, I don't think the comparison is ridiculously facile. As you say, there is one crucial difference – a Jew in Germany could not convert to 'Aryan'. But in terms of the assertion of the supremacy of one particular group over another in a way that controls who is allowed to have sexual relations with whom, it is a valid comparison, imo.


 
They're both sets of exclusionary principles.

There's no similarity of scale, and no similarity of severity. 

Therefore, I'll stand by my original point that to state that they're "not hugely different" is ridiculously facile. They are. 

A valid comparison might have been to say that the religious laws around sexual relations with non-Muslims in Islam presaged the far harsher and wider-ranging laws enacted by the Nazis.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


>


 

That pic's a natural for the "up the arse" thread!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

yield said:


> I agree with Edward Said and think there are problems with Islamic essentialism. Samuel Huntingdon's 'The Clash of Civilisations' was rubbish.
> 
> One of my friends from school is Ismaili Indian. They follow the Aga Khan as a descendant of Mohammad and the way they live seems fairly liberal to me.


 
Of course, the Ismailis, just like the Sufis, have the Wahhabites brimming with fury and wanting to convert (or preferably slaughter) them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Of course, the Ismailis, just like the Sufis, have the Wahhabites brimming with fury and wanting to convert (or preferably slaughter) them.


 
Ok, I'll ask these questions.

Do you think there is an essentialism to all those who see Islam as providing a blueprint for _political_ organisation? 

Also, are there any flavours of Islam that do not emphasise the different roles of men and women.

I don't know too much about Sufism beyond the music of Nusrat (and the fact that at Nusrat concerts, women sat at the back and did not get up and dance! Are there any flavours of Islam that do _not_ separate men and women in this way?)


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 15, 2011)

pk said:


> I can say this without any hint of irony whatsoever - if there really is any one of you left wing, left behind, left shorty lefties reading this thread thinking that the sexist Pakistani muslim culture had absolutely no role to play in what looks like a long-ignored problem, _then y'all are some seriously fucked up niggers._


 

What's a 'nigger' pk? I would like to work out if I am one.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

It's a strange argument though lbj - you pointed before to more 'progressive' forms of christianity, for example strands of anglicanism, as evidence that islam has an essentialism which doesn't exist in christianity. But progressive christianity is a fairly modern (and extremely uneven) development, you don't have to go back far to find exactly the same claimed essentialism as exists in islam. I'm still at a loss as to understand how this is distinct to islam, rather than all religions - and there are so many sociological variables that would affect development. For example, progressive christianity is really only rooted in highly developed states, the christianity of the developing world is almost exclusively reactionary* (see anglicanism again) and as prone to misogyny, homophobia, sectarianism etc as anything else. I'm just struggling to understand why you emphasise Islam specifically rather than dogma generally.


*Yeah, I know about liberation theology etc


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 15, 2011)

dylans said:


> It has nothing to do with "defending Islam" *It has everything to do with opposing a discourse that seeks to reduce the myriad of dynamic ever changing social dynamics of over a billion people to a simplistic and racist stereotype.*



Yes! 



pk said:


> And everything from the right wing these days is... well - the only people convicted of this crime that were not from the Pakistani community were white.
> 
> At least two of the three are apparently BNP members, in the same gang as these muslim men, sharing in harmony like ebony and ivory, *raping our white children after plying them with vodka and cocaine.*


 

Our White children. Are the 'other' children that were raped yours' and ours' too? 

Are White paedophiles, which make up the majority of convicted child sex offenders under your scrutiny too? If Pakistani men do it because of Islam, why are White men doing it?



Proper Tidy said:


> Bingo



Yes, bingo indeed. The 'Dirty/Evil Johnny Foreigner' discourse at play. Just like has been suggested on this thread loads of times.

Has anything been suggested about how we can protect vulnerable children in this country? 

Why isn't pk offering up solutions and interventions?

I wonder what pk does to protect children that are vulnerable to this kind of abuse?


----------



## dylans (Jan 15, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's a strange argument though lbj - you pointed before to more 'progressive' forms of christianity, for example strands of anglicanism, as evidence that islam has an essentialism which doesn't exist in christianity. But progressive christianity is a fairly modern (and extremely uneven) development, you don't have to go back far to find exactly the same claimed essentialism as exists in islam. I'm still at a loss as to understand how this is distinct to islam, rather than all religions - and there are so many sociological variables that would affect development. For example, progressive christianity is really only rooted in highly developed states, the christianity of the developing world is almost exclusively reactionary (see anglicanism again) and as prone to misogyny, homophobia, sectarianism etc as anything else. I'm just struggling to understand why you emphasise Islam specifically rather than dogma generally.


 
This is at the heart of Said's argument too. In his book"Covering Islam" he makes the point that when Bosnian Muslims were being killed by Croats and Serbs, hardly anyone in the west reported the killers as "extreme Christians" or used the language of "extremist or moderate" Christianity. although they were both followers of various types of Christian religion. In addition noone seriously expected so called "moderate" Christians to take responsibility for the actions of the Croats or Serbs..This assumption of homogeneity is confined only to critiques of Islam.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

dylans said:


> This assumption of homogeneity is confined only to critiques of Islam.


 
Exactly this. I'm going to have to read The Islamist.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Not a fair criticism of me, though, I don't think. Start a thread about Christianity and its effect on society and I will talk about it there. Generally, I would say that the same cognitive dissonance exists within 'progressive' Christian groups, hence the large number of liberation theologists who ultimately left the Catholic church altogether. 

However, there is not a direct comparison between the Bible and the Koran. CofE types wishing to be inclusive often talk of the metaphorical nature of bible stories. Islam cannot as easily be reduced to metaphor, as Mohammad, unlike Jesus, is a figure rooted in historical fact. Also, the New Testament does not provide a blueprint for the organisation of society – it provides a moral system, but not a political one. 

And again, dylans, you misrepresent me by implying an 'assumption of homogeneity'. Would you care to point to a place that I have said that.


----------



## frogwoman (Jan 15, 2011)

In the case of serbs though, IIRC serbian orthodox christianity was definitely stigmatised and made into a possible "reason" for their behaviour (or their "evil nature" the reason for believing such an "evil" religion) - possible a wrong example to pick as some of the stuff said about the serbs (including in newspapers like the independent etc) in the propaganda floating around at the time was out and out almost nazi-style racism which when i first looked into it i was absolutely horrified by, but you are correct in that there probably wasn't the same emphasis on the religious stuff as there was on other stuff in their "construction" if you see what i mean


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Some people have claimed that people are shouting racist on this thread to shut down debate - but the only person, afaik, who has been labelled a racist on this thread is pk, and some of the stuff he has come out with has been overtly, explicitly racist. I only ever use one other forum on the internet, and it isn't a 'lefties forum' or anything of the sort (it's a football one) - yet if somebody had come out with even half the stuff pk has, they'd have been banned. Not that I'm calling for him to be banned, btw. I'm just making the point that his contributions have been, indisputably, racist. Our white kids ffs. Other kids don't matter.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ok, I'll ask these questions.
> 
> Do you think there is an essentialism to all those who see Islam as providing a blueprint for _political_ organisation?


Insofar as they've essentialised a set of religio-social pr*e*scriptions into a set of socio-political pr*o*scriptions, yes.
The problem with essentialisation, of course, being that it's reductive. It reduces the complexity of life to a set of parameters, with little or no flexibility to accommodate change/evolution.


> Also, are there any flavours of Islam that do not emphasise the different roles of men and women.


I don't believe that there are *any* organised religions or sects thereof, that don't.
If you mean "are there any flavours that don't set women in a subordinate role, then I'd say that if you divorced the religion from the socio-cultural location, then some flavours of Sufism would be the closest to that ideal, but that with the weight of cultural practice also weighing on all believers (whatever their faith), then that divorce is difficult, as is attainmanet of that ideal.


> I don't know too much about Sufism beyond the music of Nusrat (and the fact that at Nusrat concerts, women sat at the back and did not get up and dance! Are there any flavours of Islam that do _not_ separate men and women in this way?)


I can only speak for those I've encountered (Indo-Pakistani Sunna. Iranian "Twelver" Shia and Anglo-Indian Qadiri Sufism), but I'd say that the Sufis, by dint of their aims (mystical union with Allah), tend to *strive* for equality of relations.
I'd also bear in mind that in most counties, even Pakistan, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan's concerts were mostly attended by non-Sufis, so standard social practice for Muslims in the country the concert was in would apply.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And again, dylans, you misrepresent me by implying an 'assumption of homogeneity'. Would you care to point to a place that I have said that.


 
But you have specifically talked about islam's 'essentialism' (and contrasted it with anglicanism). Which is an assumption of homogeneity, although presumably you would dispute that it is assumed.

With reference to the literalism of islam - that's a remarkably abstract and ahistorical way of looking a it. More important is how religion manifests itself as a social, cultural and political system - and again I'll ask, how exactly does islam differ from christianity, or any other established faith, in this respect?

You have specifically argued that islam is more repressive, more homogenous, than other faiths, so it doesn't need a new thread on christianity. Just address the points made. Nobody is arguing that islam is benevolent - what is disputed is that islam specifically is 'worse' than other dogmas.


----------



## dylans (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And again, dylans, you misrepresent me by implying an 'assumption of homogeneity'. Would you care to point to a place that I have said that.


 
Not my intention to misrepresent  you LBJ. the term "assumption of homogeneity" was aimed at the manner in which western discourse in general views the Arab and Islamic world not necessarily at you. FWIW I think you are genuinely struggling with this question and I find your approach quite refreshingly honest.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> You have specifically argued that islam is more repressive, more homogenous, than other faiths, .


 
No I haven't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2011)

oh yes you have


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No I haven't.


 
Why are you being so evasive?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

We may be using terms differently here. I would say that there is an 'essentialism' to Christianity too, in fact. 

All I mean by that is that there is something that all those who follow the religion hold in common, or more specifically, that there is something that all those that teach the religion hold in common. I have already stated that I'm prepared to be persuaded that I'm wrong, that there are exceptions, however, it would still appear to me that there is an 'essentialism' (as I would define the term) to the Islam as practised by most Muslims if not all.

I'm not being evasive at all. As far as I'm concerned, you've misunderstood me. If you read my long post on the previous page, that will tell you more or less what my position is. It is not a _dogmatically held_ position, however.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why are you being so evasive?


 
best not mentioned i'd have thought.

e2a: as you can see from his post above.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> best not mentioned i'd have thought.
> 
> e2a: as you can see from his post above.


 
Are you interested in contributing, or do you just come on here to snipe?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Are you interested in contributing, or do you just come on here to snipe?


 
yes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why are you being so evasive?


 
I have tried to be careful not to make this kind of generalisation. I cannot answer your question directly because I think you have misunderstood my position. You may have misunderstood it because at a certain point I myself inadvertently misrepresented it. If so, all I can do is say that this is my failing, and that the position you outline is most certainly not that which I adopt, nor that which I have been trying to argue. 

I can't really say any more than that. Disagreeing with you about what I have said is not being evasive.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Are you interested in contributing, or do you just come on here to snipe?


 
Pick only snipes, that's his contribution.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have tried to be careful not to make this kind of generalisation. I cannot answer your question directly because I think you have misunderstood my position. You may have misunderstood it because at a certain point I myself inadvertently misrepresented it. If so, all I can do is say that this is my failing, and that the position you outline is most certainly not that which I adopt, nor that which I have been trying to argue.
> 
> I can't really say any more than that. Disagreeing with you about what I have said is not being evasive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

You fucking prick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is not a _dogmatically held_ position, however.


 do you mean you're weak-willed and may change this view depending on the opinions of the last person to whom you speak?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

I let my posts stand for themselves. I didn't start this thread with a fixed set of opinions, as I have indicated by the way I have asked as many questions as made statements. 

I'll leave you there. But thanks for making me feel bad. I really needed that.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We may be using terms differently here. I would say that there is an 'essentialism' to Christianity too, in fact.
> 
> All I mean by that is that there is something that all those who follow the religion hold in common, or more specifically, that there is something that all those that teach the religion hold in common. I have already stated that I'm prepared to be persuaded that I'm wrong, that there are exceptions, however, it would still appear to me that there is an 'essentialism' (as I would define the term) to the Islam as practised by most Muslims if not all.
> 
> I'm not being evasive at all. As far as I'm concerned, you've misunderstood me. If you read my long post on the previous page, that will tell you more or less what my position is. It is not a _dogmatically held_ position, however.


 
Fair enough. So why the earlier comparison to anglicanism, namely 'islam doesn't have a CoE equivalent', if you assign the same essentialism to christianity and presumably all religions? I'm not being arsey, but I re-read all your posts to make sure I haven't misinterpreted you, and you have on more than one occasion singled islam out as compared to other faiths, and you have more than once claimed an essentialism in islam that isn't apparent elsewhere. So to clarify, is this your position? And if so, is it purely down to islam stressing the literalism of the koran? And if not, and I have got completely the wrong end of the stick (which is likely given I can be a bit thick-headed), then what is your position?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 15, 2011)

discourse


----------



## Crispy (Jan 15, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Are you interested in contributing, or do you just come on here to snipe?


 
pickmans model? sniping? say it aint so!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Ok, perhaps it was a mistake to bring Christianity into it at all. There will be many Christians who would hold that a belief that Jesus was the son of god sent here to save us is a minimal condition to being a Christian. However, there are some in the CofE who do not go that far, who barely even insist on a belief in god at all. In that sense, maybe there is disagreement within the Christian church as to whether or not there is an essentialism to it – at the very least, however, you can say that until very recently that was indeed the case. 

However, it seems to me that there is no equivalent in Islam, that there would be universal agreement within that religion that a belief that there is one god and that Mohammad was his prophet is a minimal condition to being a Muslim. I may be wrong and am prepared to accept that I am if a counterexample can be presented. 

There is an important difference between the Christian and Muslim holy texts. The former, to stick to just the New Testament, does not deal with a central figure who is rooted in the historical record. In fact, sensible scholars would certainly doubt most if not all of the facts of his life as presented in the bible, borrowing heavily as it does from previous sun god traditions. There isn't that same space within Islam to treat the holy text as merely representing a metaphorical truth, a mere device for presenting moral teachings. (I am no expert on the Koran, btw, but...) it seems that the Koran is far more prescriptive and specific in its teachings, that there is far less wriggle-room for the equivalent of a liberation theologist. 

But my central argument has been that the central difference between more liberal and conservative strands of Islam is not so much their particular interpretation of the Koran, but rather the extent to which they see the Koran as the final word on all matters moral and political. To give an example, a person I train martial arts with is an extremely devout Muslim who has spent large periods of time studying under a religious teacher. But he is also well-versed in modern philosophy. His intellectual horizons extend far beyond the Koran, and even though he would himself declare the Mohammad was indeed a prophet and that the Koran contains the word of god, I would contend that there is a great deal of cognitive dissonance in his position because he doesn't take all his opinions from the Koran, and in fact takes the greater part of it as no more than guidance rather than law. In that respect, it seems to me that there is a cognitive dissonance within all liberal strands of Islam and Christianity as they attempt to square the circle of ancient texts written for very different times and places to fit with a modern sensibility, informed as it is by a whole millennium or more of subsequent thought.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 15, 2011)

Good post. I'm off out in a bit so I'll have a proper read tomorrow, but cheers for coming back on it.


----------



## dylans (Jan 15, 2011)

> littlebabyjesus;We may be using terms differently here. I would say that there is an 'essentialism' to Christianity too, in fact.
> 
> All I mean by that is that there is something that all those who follow the religion hold in common, or more specifically, that there is something that all those that teach the religion hold in common. I have already stated that I'm prepared to be persuaded that I'm wrong, that there are exceptions, however, it would still appear to me that there is an 'essentialism' (as I would define the term) to the Islam as practised by most Muslims if not al



Ok. a definition may be of use here, at least mine. To me essentialism is a conceptual view and a set of assumptions, namely that Islam has a single true essence. It  is the idea that there is a single "true" Islamic theology which remains true regardless of cultural or historical circumstance. In this view Islam is a single unchanging entity which remains the same regardless of historical or cultural or geographic location. It is a view widely held in the West and is an assumption held by everyone who talks of "Islam" in the abstract. 

On the one hand this idea is assumed by an awful lot of academic and journalist coverage of Islam and is expressed most clearly by the clash of civilisations idea that see's the world as in a cultural conflict between Islam and the West. 

On the other hand the idea is also held by Islamist radicals who see themselves as representing the one and only true Islam. In their view of course Muslims who disagree with them are not "true" Muslims. 

It is interesting that this idea is shared by both the racists of the EDL and Islamic fundamentalists. Both share the same assumptions. 

To the racist of the EDL this essence shows its real expression in Islamic radicalism. To the EDL, there is no difference between Islam and Islamism.

 To the likes of Bin Laden, he  represents the single true essential Islam and all other interpretations are invalid and un-Islamic. To a lesser or greater degree this idea of an essential Islam is shared by all who talk of Islam as a single homogenous entity 

Critics of Islamic essentialism disagree with the idea of a single essence in Islam, and argue there is no a-historical universally agreed essence of Islam shared by all who call themselves Muslims. Instead it is argued that Islam presents a set of texts and that set of texts are open to a wide range of differing interpretations and indeed have been interpreted differently at different stages of history and according to the different cultural  contexts in which it Islam is followed. 

Just a quick example. Much has been made in recent years about Danish cartoons and images of the prophet. It is assumed is blasphemous to show his image, un Islamic in fact, but in past centuries this wasn't the case at all. In fact the prohibition didnt arise until the 16th or 17th century. What is  widely assumed to be essential to Islam is in fact historically contextual. 

History is full of examples of paintings and illustrations of the prophet and, they were not considered blasphemous in their day. Today some will kill over them. 







> Illustration showing Mohammed (on the right) preaching his final sermon to his earliest converts, on Mount Ararat near Mecca; taken from a medieval-era manuscript of the astronomical treatise The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries by the Persian scholar al-Biruni; currently housed in the collection of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris



(edit LBJ I have only just seen your post. good post btw. I will reply to it in due course)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2011)

Good post, dylans. 

I may have been oversimplifying in my approach. We were indeed using the term slightly differently in that I was using it to mean 'that which all Muslims would agree on', which might be a lot, or might be very little, or might be nothing. 

As someone who has never read the Koran (other than short extracts), I cannot really comment on the 'legitimacy' of claims to the 'trueness' of interpretations of it. However, if the book contains contradictory statements, which it appears to – to put it simply, eg: don't kill on one page; kill on another – some may choose to give primacy to one teaching, others to the other. What they are doing, in fact, is applying _their own_ moral sense to their reading of the text.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 16, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> I was and am disputing your facile comparison between these religious "laws" and the Nuremberg laws.


 
ViolentPanda – for all your bluster and insults, I think we’re both intelligent enough to know that this argument is a sterile distraction from the substantive issues of the thread. 

I say:  Islamic law on inter-communal sexual relations is designed to humiliate and subordinate dhimmis.

You say: Yes, but they’re not as bad as the Nazis!

I say:  Islamic law on inter-communal sexual relations is designed to humiliate and subordinate dhimmis.

You say: Yes, but they’re not as... etc., etc.

I say: Life is beautiful and short. Let’s move on.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 16, 2011)

dylans said:


> There is nothing original or new in Thomsy's "critique" of "Islam". In fact... his posts are almost text book examples of the kind of a-historical, stereotypical and essentialist discourse that Said pointed out are evident in stereotyptical and racist Western views of "Islam and Arab cultures.


 

Dylans, I entered this thread in response to one of your earlier posts. 

You wrote that there is nothing "in Islamic culture that leads these gangs to seek out and abuse specifically non-Muslims".

You wrote that it was "racism" to claim there is.

I spent a few posts demonstrating that there obviously is something in that cultural background to so dispose them.  

You could not or did not dispute any of the _evidence _I produced. 

So you now accuse me of being a racist on the basis of my _discourse_.

I must be a grave disappointment to you.

But do us a favour: put the 'R' word back in its holster for a while. You're going to wear it out otherwise.

PS. I’d rather you talked 'to' me than 'about' me when I’m actually on a thread. Your call, but I’d find it more courteous.  

It might also save you time and effort if you just asked me a question, rather than try to guess (and then pronounce upon) my views. You say I have no idea about the changes in Egypt or the unpopularity of the Mubarak regime "over the past twenty years".  I suppose you’re technically correct.  I first asked Hosni Mubarak a question at a press conference back in 1992, when the insurgency by the Gama’at first kicked off. So that’s only 19 years.  

But come next year I’ll have a better idea what I’m talking about.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 16, 2011)

That's two brilliant posts, Thomsy.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 16, 2011)

dylans said:


> In fact I am not surprised he reserves such venom for Edward Said as his posts are almost text book examples of the kind of... essentialist discourse that Said pointed out are evident in stereotyptical and racist Western views of "Islam and Arab cultures.


 
Does anyone else find it curious?

Marx devoted 3,000+ pages to a demonstration that Capital is the necessary _telos _of the commodity.  And yet so many otherwise-sane, sensible and intelligent people – people who profess to stand within a (broadly) Marxist tradition – spend an afternoon wading through _Orientalism _and come out the other side convinced that anyone who utters the word ‘essence’ should be castrated.

I’ve been hiding it so far, but you seem to have smoked me out, Dylans. So I’ll admit it now: Yes, I regard the work of the late Edward Said with a certain ambivalence. 

He had a point. We all know that. But it was a single point. The point itself became tedious after a while. And the rest was just gabble, guilt-tripping and fast forward down a dead-end street. 

If you want a methodological corrective, try Scott Meikle, _Essentialism in the Thought of Karl Marx_. 'Back in the day' when I was in The Party, the book had some vogue as the single most stimulating and revelatory commentary on Marx. Mind you, those were the days when we thought the stoning of unfaithful women, limb amputation for thieves, or a particularly sticky end for apostates*, were acts of medieval barbarism. So our taste in literature then was no doubt woefully insensitive.  (*Is it left leg and right arm, or right leg and left arm? I can simply never remember!)

I do not believe that any doctrine, creed or body of thought is, of itself, a self-activating historical essence. I made reference to ‘Aristotelian conundrums’ and Hegelian aphorisms because even the most formalist, idealist or legalist description of Islamic culture is an advance upon the blinkered, ignorant, relativist, censorious, self-deluding mendacity that currently passes for commentary on Islam in so many liberal and leftist circles.

I say we can talk meaningfully and usefully about ‘Islam’, just as we can talk meaningfully and usefully about Fascism, or Socialism, or Liberalism, or chairs.

Islam is an 'essence' in that it is a collective project which pre-exists those individuals who enter into it and which imposes (as does any collective project) limitations and constraints upon those who enter it. 

Moreover, I say that Islam is particularly (uniquely?) equipped to limit and constrain the freedom of movement of its adherents.

The Quran contains the actual detailed injunctions of God; Mohammed, in his actions, is the ideal model of human behaviour; the two combined provided a collection of fundamental and eternally valid laws; and among those laws is the prospect of death for anyone who questions the eternal legitimacy of the Quran or derides the model of the Prophet. It's a tough cookie to crack.

The holy texts, ideal model and established jurisprudence hang like a ball and chain around the ankle of all reform-minded Muslims.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 16, 2011)

Deleted.

(Didn't add anything useful.)


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 16, 2011)

Ditto.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 16, 2011)

Put the R word back in its holster. 
I'll be stealing that then.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 16, 2011)

Mr Logic lol


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 16, 2011)

The thread as now digressed into a quasi theological debate but, for me was more entertaining when it was muslim pedoes attacking 12 year olds

For anyone who can't be arsed reading 66 pages here's a brief synopsis :

in one corner we had PK basically fighting single handed but with a little support from IC3D Cyberrose hipipol 

in the Liberal Left corner we had Team  Proper Tidy 

                                One_Stop_Shop

                                smokedout

                                Rutita1, (you can rape as many 12 year olds as u like but FFS don't call this one a silly girl U Sexist Bastard )

                                rover07

                                DrRingDing  


Team Proper Tidy came in with the usual Liberal Left Tactics first they try to ridicule PK's arguments that didn't work PK didn't bite then it was the accusations of Racism ( Well it wouldn't be the Liberal Left without someone being labeled a Racist would it?)

Then FFS PK calls Rutita1 a "Silly Girl" so of course the Sexist card comes out. 

And so it went for the next 40 odd pages, There was some classic Irony #1619 page 65 proper tidy states "Some people have claimed that people are shouting racist on this thread to shut down debate - but the only person, afaik, who has been labelled a racist on this thread is pk"

and who the fuck labeled him a racist? 

A well entertaing thread but, It's all gone a little Meh now maybe if PK comes back we can get back on track


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 16, 2011)

Ringsting, Smokey,et al are not 'on the left', they are classic liberals.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 16, 2011)

.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 16, 2011)

jeff_leigh said:


> Rutita1, (*you can rape as many 12 year olds as u like* but FFS don't call this one a silly girl U Sexist Bastard )




How about you quote me on that one?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 16, 2011)

This thread is like some ungodly vortex.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 16, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> This thread is like some ungodly vortex.


 
I dunno, seems pretty godly actually


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 16, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Ringsting, Smokey,et al are not 'on the left', they are classic liberals.


 
Go on out --->


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 16, 2011)

I see Jeff Leigh is another eejit not basing his argument on facts but on gut feelings (i.e. easily twisted base fears) rather than from internal discourse.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 16, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Ringsting, Smokey,et al are not 'on the left', they are classic liberals.


 
You're the Geoff Boycott of the thread.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2011)

Thomsy said:


> The holy texts, ideal model and established jurisprudence hang like a ball and chain around the ankle of all reform-minded Muslims.


 
I have to agree with this. I would also say the same about reform-minded Christians, but the prescriptive nature of the Islamic holy texts makes it doubly true for Islam.

I don't quite agree about Islam 'preexisting those individuals who enter into it', though. The holy texts preexist them, as do the traditions that have made those texts what they are, the traditions that have grown up after Muhammad's death, such as the hajj, etc. But I would resist the idea that it is meaningful to talk about Islam as anything with an independent existence beyond what Muslims do. That said, clearly the holy books say some things but not others, so once you've taken the leap to say that it contains the word of god, of whom Muhammad was a prophet, you are indeed limited by what is actually contained in the scripture. 

The same can be said of anyone holding any work to be 'holy' – you've knobbled your ability to think critically right there.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 16, 2011)

jeff_leigh said:


> Team Proper Tidy came in with the usual Liberal Left Tactics first they try to ridicule PK's arguments


 
Didn't have to try that hard tbf.

Sexual jihad lol.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 16, 2011)

I'm going to dip in (excuse the pun) and state that I think there's an endemic problem with people blaming cunts for being cunts because of their skin colour, ethnic origin, religion etc. Nobheads exist all over the shop, up here in Norf Wayels someone tried to pull a girl into his car the other week by her scarf. The car had two lads in, and the girl told the Uni paper she was in no doubt they were trying to sexually assault her. Guess what? They weren't brown! This 'white men see white girls as easy meat' phenomenonenonenon has got to stop! WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! *insert knee jerk reactionary racist statement here*.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 16, 2011)

Yeah sexual jihad was one of the most classic comments I've seen on here. pk started talking about muslim gangstas getting islamist rhetoric through blue tooth which made them go on a sexual jihad. All very strange.

I worry about the lad to be honest. Not content with sexist rhetoric he then went on to describe sexual assault as "grabbing a bit of arse". I'm all for him defending us all against the sexual jihad but am starting to worry whether the is the man for the job with those kind of remarks.

Also after 67 pages not a single practical suggestion from pk or any of his supporters. Again not very encouraging.


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 16, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> I worry about the lad to be honest. Not content with sexist rhetoric he then went on to describe sexual assault as "grabbing a bit of arse".



TBF when PK described sexual assault as "grabbing a bit of arse" He wasn't dismissing sexual assaults as being no big deal, He was talking about how Crime statistics are gathered and how lesser crimes are lumped in with the more serious one's to make up the numbers. Not that I'm suggesting having your arse grabbed if you don't want it grabbed wouldn't be Annoying or Humiliating for the person concerned.


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2011)

jeff_leigh said:


> TBF when PK described sexual assault as "grabbing a bit of arse" He wasn't dismissing sexual assaults as being no big deal, He was talking about how Crime statistics are gathered and how lesser crimes are lumped in with the more serious one's to make up the numbers. Not that I'm suggesting having your arse grabbed if you don't want it grabbed wouldn't be Annoying or Humiliating for the person concerned.


 
wow, you know a lot about what he was claiming.  

Or, you dont, and are just rather pathetically trying to find a belated justification for his ignorant rantings.  Bit fucking sad that, innit?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 16, 2011)

Crispy said:


> I dunno, seems pretty godly actually



That should have been "unholy" vortex".


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 16, 2011)

belboid said:


> wow, you know a lot about what he was claiming.
> 
> Or, you dont, and are just rather pathetically trying to find a belated justification for his ignorant rantings.  Bit fucking sad that, innit?



I think it's pretty fucking sad and pathetic to quote people out of context on an internet forum.


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2011)

How can it be 'out of context' when I quoted the entire post immediately after you made it?

You're really not very good at this, are you?


----------



## alfajobrob (Jan 16, 2011)

This thread sums up the reason I keep looking at Urban.....I fucking love your little spats....this one's good, but not up with the best, however it does have pk (firebomber) and ern (wet stalinist liberal)...keep flying the flag guys


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 16, 2011)

Who's this cock, Tubversion?


----------



## alfajobrob (Jan 16, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> This thread is like some ungodly vortex.


 
A sensible post from nino as well....I'm going to marry this thread.


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 16, 2011)

belboid said:


> How can it be 'out of context' when I quoted the entire post immediately after you made it?
> 
> You're really not very good at this, are you?


 
FFS u TIT I was talking about the person who quoted PK out of context


----------



## alfajobrob (Jan 16, 2011)

fuck you teacher boy...I just lurk and listen mostly.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 16, 2011)

Gaylord


----------



## alfajobrob (Jan 16, 2011)

Wankstain


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 16, 2011)

Racist.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 16, 2011)

belboid said:


> Bit fucking sad that, innit?


 
It would be if you had come anywere close to reality.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 16, 2011)

alfajobrob said:


> A sensible post from nino as well.....


 
Where?


----------



## YouSir (Jan 16, 2011)

Something about this on Radio 4 now, pretty much disagreeing with everything I've seen PK say in this thread, with facts to back it even.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 16, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Something about this on Radio 4 now, pretty much disagreeing with everything I've seen PK say in this thread, with facts to back it even.


 
So you will soon let us know why you think that?


----------



## YouSir (Jan 16, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> So you will soon let us know why you think that?


 
Why I think what? Why I think the woman on the radio is contradicting everything PK said? Because she is I suppose - check iPlayer and listen yourself, it's fairly obvious.

e2a: Mind you, you'll need to find it first, was only on a compilation show thing, didn't hear when the first broadcast was.


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> So you will soon let us know why you think that?


 
will you let us lnow if you ever actually havbe anythng to say?  I cant remember a post of yours that wasn't a pisspoor sneer at others' supposed failings.


----------



## yield (Jan 16, 2011)

YouSir said:


> Why I think what? Why I think the woman on the radio is contradicting everything PK said? Because she is I suppose - check iPlayer and listen yourself, it's fairly obvious.
> 
> e2a: Mind you, you'll need to find it first, was only on a compilation show thing, didn't hear when the first broadcast was.



I think it's this one starting at 1:45?

More or Less

If it is it's Helen Brayley from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science,


----------



## YouSir (Jan 16, 2011)

yield said:


> I think it's this one starting at 1:45?
> 
> More or Less
> 
> If it is it's Helen Brayley from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science,


 
That'd be the one, apologies for the vagueness.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Seems illogical to dismiss her finding purely because "she's just one cop", even though she clearly has the support of the country behind her.
> 
> It's OK, you can refuse to discuss it - maybe pretend I didn't post this at all, it never happened - perhaps it's just too difficult a topic for you to discuss.


 
The reason for dismissing the finding is that it refers to only 41 rapes over three years that are given a separate definition that isn't explained. It's a tiny fraction of the rapes in Oslo. You've also posted reports showing over a hundred rapes in the city in a single year. This shows that even back in 1987 a single rape crisis centre in Oslo was dealing with over 50 violent rapes by strangers. So the figure of 41 assault rapes (or attack rapes) over three years is dubious at best.

I want to see some reason why that particular set of rapes are different from all the others. Failing that I can't help but wonder if the actual reason they are separated out is that they are the ones commited by immigrants. Because they certainly aren't the grand total of violent rapes by strangers in Oslo over those three years, or all the other statistics are faked.

Now it could be that this one particular statistic is correct and every other statistic published about crime in Norway has, for some reason, been altered. I'd want to see a pretty fucking convincing explanation before believing that though.

You have also studiously avoided any attempt to counter the point that the rate of rapes in the North of Norway, where there is almost no immigration, is higher than the rate in Oslo.

And that's my final post on the subject. From here on any comment you make claiming that your opponents have refused to discuss it, or have failed to post any evidence, simply makes it clear that you are an outright liar.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 17, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The comparison with Christianity is instructive, though, isn't it?
> 
> For instance, I have changed my mind about Sharia courts being allowed in the UK. Until recently, I didn't see the harm in it, given that it would be absolutely no different from the Jewish courts that already exist.
> 
> ...


 
It's a dumb argument. No religious court has any legal validity in the UK unless all parties agree to it. That means that if those involved in a dispute want it settled by Jedi law, a zen buddhist court, or according to the toss of a coin, then they have every right to settle their dispute that way. That's how the Jewish courts operate, and the only way in which Sharia can be applied in the UK. It basically just means that the state stays out of it if people want to settle a dispute on their own.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 17, 2011)

dylans said:


> how many divisions does the Pope have?


 
Coca Cola league two and the Blue Square north.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> It's a dumb argument. No religious court has any legal validity in the UK unless all parties agree to it. That means that if those involved in a dispute want it settled by Jedi law, a zen buddhist court, or according to the toss of a coin, then they have every right to settle their dispute that way. That's how the Jewish courts operate, and the only way in which Sharia can be applied in the UK. It basically just means that the state stays out of it if people want to settle a dispute on their own.


 
Oh no it doesn't. That's a misunderstanding of the legal status of Jewish courts. You try telling a UK court you settled your estate at a Buddhist hearing, or a humanist tribunal. See how long it takes the judge to stop laughing.

Jewish courts have a recognised standing in the UK legal system. A subordinate position, but a position nonetheless. Sharia courts don't at the moment. And the reasons for having such religious courts is as I stated – there are no Christian equivalents because in the past, the main court was taken to be the Christian one. Fully secularising the state will do away with the need for any such subordinate minority courts. A secular court is for all.


----------



## rover07 (Jan 17, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Jewish courts have a recognised standing in the UK legal system. A subordinate position, but a position nonetheless.




 Yes it is a voluntary court.

If one person does not agree then their is no binding agreement nor can any legal sanctions be implemented.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 17, 2011)

belboid said:


> will you let us lnow if you ever actually havbe anythng to say?  I cant remember a post of yours that wasn't a pisspoor sneer at others' supposed failings.


 
I leave the spouting of bollocks to you.


----------



## belboid (Jan 17, 2011)

Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 17, 2011)

If you are that easily pleased.........


----------



## belboid (Jan 17, 2011)

Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 17, 2011)

belboid said:


> Thank you for proving my point.



Must be said that I had never noticed that poster before untill last week. He is an irritating lightweight isn't he?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 17, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> He is an irritating lightweight isn't he?


 
And so you suggest your own heavyweight status.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 17, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Who's this cock, Tubversion?


 
He's definitely a cock.

Anyone who reads your posts knows that you're not a "wet Stalinist liberal".

They know you're a "wet *pseudo*-Stalinist liberal.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 17, 2011)

alfajobrob said:


> fuck you teacher boy...I just lurk and listen mostly.


 
I thought ern was "management boy with a bit of teaching" nowadays?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 17, 2011)

belboid said:


> will you let us lnow if you ever actually havbe anythng to say?  I cant remember a post of yours that wasn't a pisspoor sneer at others' supposed failings.


 
Hey, that's his _oeuvre_. Sneering in a superior way is what he does.


----------



## treelover (Jan 17, 2011)

'If it is it's Helen Brayley from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science,'

The thing is I'm increasingly wary of academic research these days, much of it now has an agenda or is funded directly by interested parties, look at the IPPR which is regulalry used by the Guardian in its ongoing support for multi-culturalism, the IPPR is a neo-liberal thinktank and uses evidence to support its agenda largely on grounds of economic utility, etc.


----------



## Thomsy (Jan 17, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't quite agree about Islam 'preexisting those individuals who enter into it', though... I would resist the idea that it is meaningful to talk about Islam as anything with an independent existence beyond what Muslims do.


 
Hi, Littlebabyjesus.

I meant that anyone today who is born into or converts into Islam is entering a pre-existing collective organization. The new entrant is not simply assenting to a few doctrinal statements which he or she might, with as much intellectual ease, revise the next moment. He or she is entering an organization which has a dynamic and inertia of its own. If the new entrant later comes to disagree with the doctrinal statements, s/he cannot necessarily change those statements. In all probability, s/he will have to leave the organization (where such does not carry the death penalty). 

You wrote that you “would resist the idea that it is meaningful to talk about Islam as anything with an independent existence beyond what Muslims do”. 

But an individual Muslim does confront and experience Islam as something possessing independent existence from him or herself. Indeed, all Muslims (as individuals) confront and experience Islam as something possessing independent existence from themselves. And to that extent, it is legitimate to investigate what this independent thing is, its laws of motion, etc. (Same, of course, goes for any other collective organization.)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2011)

Of course the individual believer experiences their faith as existing independently from them – it wouldn't be a religion otherwise.

That doesn't mean non-believers should agree with them. 

I don't think we're disagreeing about anything important here, though.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> He's definitely a cock.
> 
> Anyone who reads your posts knows that you're not a "wet Stalinist liberal".
> 
> They know you're a "wet *pseudo*-Stalinist liberal.


 

Careful, I called him a Styrofoam, Stannah Stairlift Stalinist once. 

I was hounded around the boards for weeks


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 17, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Careful, I called him a Styrofoam, Stannah Stairlift Stalinist once.
> 
> I was hounded around the boards for weeks


 
Yeah, but it's not like even his hounding is any cop nowadays, it's just an endless vista of single sentence posts pr pictures of irrelevant objects. Now, if it were *vintage* ern, I might be bothered...


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 17, 2011)

Poverty tourist


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yeah, but it's not like even his hounding is any cop nowadays, it's just an endless vista of single sentence posts pr pictures of irrelevant objects. Now, if it were *vintage* ern, I might be bothered...


 
Careful now, you're stirring the wrath of Ern.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 17, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Careful now, you're stirring the wrath of Ern.


 
Really? _Wrath?_


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Poverty tourist


 

I think you could do with a holiday. An Easter trip to DPRK?

http://www.korea-dpr.com/


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

Crispy said:


> Really? _Wrath?_


 
Have the mods neutered the poor old fuck?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 17, 2011)

Poverty tourist


----------



## Crispy (Jan 17, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Poverty tourist


 


ernestolynch said:


> Poverty tourist


 


_angel_ said:


> racism


 


_angel_ said:


> racism


 


_angel_ said:


> racism


 


_angel_ said:


> racism


 


_angel_ said:


> racism


 
Borrowing tactics from _swarthy_ ffs


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 17, 2011)

Spycam


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 17, 2011)

armchair 'activist'


----------



## Crispy (Jan 17, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Spycam


 
 right on cue


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 17, 2011)

Crispy said:


> Borrowing tactics from _swarthy_ ffs


  racism


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 17, 2011)

Asian


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> The reason for dismissing the finding is that it refers to only 41 rapes over three years that are given a separate definition that isn't explained. It's a tiny fraction of the rapes in Oslo. You've also posted reports showing over a hundred rapes in the city in a single year. This shows that even back in 1987 a single rape crisis centre in Oslo was dealing with over 50 violent rapes by strangers. So the figure of 41 assault rapes (or attack rapes) over three years is dubious at best.



OK, first off, I'll agree it is all a bit odd. And it's important to point out that these aren't my stats, these were given to NRK by Rohde, in the link that breaks them down over the three years to give the total of 41.
I have a theory that is by no means definitive that may explain the odd variation of figures.

In 1987 specialized trauma centres to deal specifically with rape attacks were not found as commonly as they are today, so it might, and I stress MIGHT be the case that many of the admissions were as a result of referrals from outside Oslo. Hence the larger number. As the stats show, many of these crimes occur in the north of the country, it may be that specialist treatment and counselling would have taken place after the event, in Oslo's crisis centre. So naturally the stats you have for admissions may not necessarily mean all took place in Oslo itself. I can't readily check national stats now as I'm posting from a phone, but 50 seems a very high number for one city in a year, one would have to compare those with similar Scandanavian cities of comparable size and population.



> I want to see some reason why that particular set of rapes are different from all the others. Failing that I can't help but wonder if the actual reason they are separated out is that they are the ones commited by immigrants. Because they certainly aren't the grand total of violent rapes by strangers in Oslo over those three years, or all the other statistics are faked.



The criteria for "assault rape" was defined by Rohde in the NRK link I quoted. I think your certainty might be a little premature given what I have just posted above. Another factor is the percentage of assault rapes that were subsequently investigated, after all, the police stats are only based upon attacks that were given a crime number, not the total which may include those where the victim refused to persue with the police. I think that's a fair assessment of the data. Correct me if I'm wrong though, it's been known.



> Now it could be that this one particular statistic is correct and every other statistic published about crime in Norway has, for some reason, been altered. I'd want to see a pretty fucking convincing explanation before believing that though.



Well, as I pointed out, the criteria of the data you have found does not match the data provided by the Oslo police.
If there were definitive 1987 stats that counted only victims attacked in Oslo, as opposed to being referred to what may have been the only crisis centre equipped to handle such an evil crime in Norway. More speculation from me, yes, but it's hardly a huge leap of logic.



> You have also studiously avoided any attempt to counter the point that the rate of rapes in the North of Norway, where there is almost no immigration, is higher than the rate in Oslo.



Well, I have to take exception to the notion that I have deliberately avoided it, but it makes no difference to Rohde's statistics.
If I were to speculate I'd say the reason the figures in Finnmark are so high may be to do with the tourism, aren't all the ice hotels and vodka bars up there for the tourists? Not sure on that, needs more research, but the fact that the figures are higher than those in Oslo don't invalidate Rohde's claims.



> And that's my final post on the subject. From here on any comment you make claiming that your opponents have refused to discuss it, or have failed to post any evidence, simply makes it clear that you are an outright liar.


 
On this point, you are indeed correct. You have very diligently researched and countered as best you can the figures from Rohde.
The opponents I referred to were of course Proper Tidy, Belboid and a few other no-marks. But it was ungracious of me not to acknowledge the time and effort you have put in in looking closer at these alarming claims. Believe me, I would prefer to see them proven wrong and if evidence that the cop was lying emerged, press for a more public investigation. Sadly, it seems unlikely that Rohde would have made such claims without concrete evidence as to their validity. 

Hope that clears that up. Hope you can ignore the infantile bleatings of "racist" and see where I'm really coming from on this. 
Oh and I'm sober today. Friday night was a different matter...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

"Our white children". I'd give up drinking.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> "Our white children". I'd give up drinking.


 
You of course are far too thick to work out that the context in which that was said was directly aimed at the right wing boneheads that were apparently cheering me on. But since you have contributed nothing of any conclusive substance to this debate, your only means of getting attention is to misquote people out of context and snipe from the sidelines like a small and inconsequential rodent.

Read into my posts whatever you like, you're clearly an idiot incapable of even voicing a proper argument or an intelligent opinion.


----------



## belboid (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Hope that clears that up. Hope you can ignore the infantile bleatings of "racist" and see where I'm really coming from on this.


 
the fact that you are a backtracking weasel doesn't make you any less of a weasel.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

belboid said:


> the fact that you are a backtracking weasel doesn't make you any less of a weasel.


 
And you are another one. I've not backtracked an inch.

This shit is too serious for you and Proper Tidy, urban75's very own Chuckle Brothers, to trivialise with your pathetic sniping and wilful misquoting. You are clearly verboten from commenting on the issue at hand, and instead resort to cheap lazy smear tactics in order to try to make such a difficult topic disappear.

Shame it hasn't worked, eh?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> You of course are far too thick to work out that the context in which that was said was directly aimed at the right wing boneheads that were apparently cheering me on.



No it wasn't.



pk said:


> And everything from the right wing these days is... well - the only people convicted of this crime that were not from the Pakistani community were white.
> 
> At least two of the three are apparently BNP members, in the same gang as these muslim men, sharing in harmony like ebony and ivory, raping our white children after plying them with vodka and cocaine. 11 years old you fucking scum.
> 
> ...


----------



## belboid (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Shame it hasn't worked, eh?


 
it did.  Other than one or two right wing pricks, it's been very clearly pointed out how you have lied, distorted and been utterly disingenuous throughout.  

You've rolled around in your own shit and have finally worked out how bad it smells.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> No it wasn't.


 
Clearly it was... the line "you fucking scum" is adequate proof of your inability to read.

I was talking directly to the BNP/EDL types and you fucking know it too.

Still, anything to avoid the topic, yet again...


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

belboid said:


> it did.  Other than one or two right wing pricks, it's been very clearly pointed out how you have lied, distorted ....


 
Where? This is just empty smearing. Grow up and debate the issue - or it'll be clear to everyone that you have nothing but shit to fling. By admitting that you think your "tactic" actually worked you've merely confirmed what your role here really is.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

So when talking to racists you feel its best to use racist language?

'Our'. We're kin.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Where? This is just empty smearing. Grow up and debate the issue - or it'll be clear to everyone that you have nothing but shit to fling.


 
shit famously sticks.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> shit famously sticks.


 
Yeah coz you're really emerging from all this smelling of Dove soap ain't ya?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

Our white doves


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> shit famously sticks.


 
Even inside great sewers of the mind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Yeah coz you're really emerging from all this smelling of Dove soap ain't ya?


 
i do hope not. i can't abide the scent of dove.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So when talking to racists you feel its best to use racist language?
> 
> 'Our'. We're kin.


 
It's called 'paraphrasing'. Look it up you poor uneducated little fool.

How did you get on researching William Glass by the way?

Surprised to get a little history lesson from me were you?

I suppose you'll claim you knew it all along... and you've still failed to give me an example of a mainstream religion that in your view is more barbaric and unforgiving than islam.

Anyway, thread wrecking is no substitute for debate, and you've offered none of the latter in 70 pages.

Well done that twat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Even inside great sewers of the mind.


 
you're a bit lock tonight. nothing new, of course.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

Is this William Glass who, according to you, not only invented Marxism but implemented it in the Democratic People's Republic of Scotland? Lol.

What were you paraphrasing?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Is this Williams Glass who, according to you, not only invented Marxism but implemented it in the Democratic People's Republic of Scotland? Lol.
> 
> What were you paraphrasing?


 
he set up glass's, a firm of car valuers types: http://www.glassguide.co.uk/Content/?ContentID=54


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> he set up glass's, a firm of car valuers types: http://www.glassguide.co.uk/Content/?ContentID=54


 
Lol.

It was a commune pk, not knocking it but it's hardly fucking Marxism.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Is this William Glass who, according to you, not only invented Marxism but implemented it in the Democratic People's Republic of Scotland? Lol.



More desperate lies and utterly pathetic attempts to misquote me. Do you really think everyone else is as retarded as you? Where did I say he implemented it in Scotland?

Go on - find my quote that says that. When you've done that come back and tell us all which of the world's current mainstream religions is more barbaric than islam. Go on, off you fuck.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> When you've done that come back and tell us all which of the world's current mainstream religions is more barbaric than islam. Go on, off you fuck.


 you've moved the goalposts significantly since you first asked 'is islam the most barbarous religion' or words to that effect. back then you weren't asking about current or mainstream religions. is this because some authentically barbarous religions were mentioned, eg that of the aztecs?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

Christianity has arguably committed more acts of 'barbarism' than any other.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Christianity has arguably committed more acts of 'barbarism' than any other.


 
yes. but any religion which hands out wine at services can't be all bad.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol.
> 
> It was a commune pk, not knocking it but it's hardly fucking Marxism.


 
William Glass set up the rules for the people living on Tristan da Cunha. 

They are still the basis of the Tristan da Cunha society of today. 

The council decides how to spend the communal money earned from the crayfish exports, and ensures that a member of the family with the lowest income gets the next job to come up. 

Everybody works for the common good. Everybody helps each other. Everything is shared; there is no private property.

This was three decades before Marxist theory was invented.

You learn something every day, eh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> William Glass set up the rules for the people living on Tristan da Cunha.
> 
> They are still the basis of the Tristan da Cunha society of today.
> 
> ...


 
what did this william glass say about all previous history?


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> is this because some authentically barbarous religions were mentioned, eg that of the aztecs?


 
No, it's because some twat was bound to cite some long dead religion knowing full well that was irrelevant. The question was which religion "is" the most barbaric. Not "was" the most barbaric.

As you well know. I'm sure Proper Tidy will be happy to provide one, after calling me a "cunt" when I opted for islam.

And "authentically" ?? So you don't consider that it does have extremely barbaric characteristics? LOL


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> No, it's because some twat was bound to cite some long dead religion knowing full well that was irrelevant. The question was which religion "is" the most barbaric. Not "was" the most barbaric.
> 
> As you well know. I'm sure Proper Tidy will be happy to provide one, after calling me a "cunt" when I opted for islam.
> 
> And "authentically" ?? So you don't consider that it does have extremely barbaric characteristics? LOL


could you point me to where islam requires human sacrifices to propitiate allah?


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> No, it's because some twat was bound to cite some long dead religion knowing full well that was irrelevant. The question was which religion "is" the most barbaric. Not "was" the most barbaric.
> 
> As you well know. I'm sure Proper Tidy will be happy to provide one, after calling me a "cunt" when I opted for islam.
> 
> And "authentically" ?? So you don't consider that it does have extremely barbaric characteristics? LOL



Radical Islam does. Just like Radical Catholicism, Radical Protestantism, Radical Sikhism etc etc


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> Radical Islam does. Just like Radical Catholicism, Radical Protestantism, Radical Sikhism etc etc


 
Radical Catholicism??


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Radical Catholicism??


that's fucking nothing.






that's more like it


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Radical Catholicism??


 
You know, raping disabled children?


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Hmmm. I think I'll sit this crap out until eric jarvis returns. At least someone here is capable of rationally debating this issue against what may well be unfounded assertions.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> William Glass set up the rules for the people living on Tristan da Cunha.
> 
> They are still the basis of the Tristan da Cunha society of today.
> 
> ...


 
So? It's not marxism you dick. And Glass was a bible-basher btw.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> So? It's not marxism you dick. And Glass was a bible-basher btw.


 
It was communism by any definition and you know it.

In the 1800's it wasn't exactly ripe for those of an athiest persuasion in Scotland.

Just a minor point of interest for the know-it-all politico twats, to prove nothing other than your own blinkered ignorance.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Hmmm. I think I'll sit this crap out until eric jarvis returns. At least someone here is capable of rationally debating this issue against what may well be unfounded assertions.


 
So in other words, you lack the intelligence to be a proper Islamophobe, so you're waiting for someone cleverer?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> It was communism by any definition and you know it.


 
It was patriarchal, with Glass as the patriarch. That you think one isolated commune is equivalent to the primary influence on working class struggle over the past two centuries just demonstrates how completely fuckwitted you are.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> So in other words, you lack the intelligence to be a proper Islamophobe, so you're waiting for someone cleverer?


 
I remain open minded. Someone has to play devils advocate though, there are too many cowards like you here that could never dream of critically analysing the fastest growing religion on Earth without getting your knickeres in a right old PC twist.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> It was patriarchal, with Glass as the patriarch. That you think one isolated commune is equivalent to the primary influence on working class struggle over the past two centuries just demonstrates how completely fuckwitted you are.


 
Again with the bullshit quotes - you can't find a position to attack so you just make one up.

Fuck me you really are a silly little fool.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Again with the bullshit quotes - you can't find a position to attack so you just make one up.
> 
> Fuck me you really are a silly little fool.


 
I quoted your whole post


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> I remain open minded. Someone has to play devils advocate though, there are too many cowards like you here that could never dream of critically analysing the fastest growing religion on Earth without getting your knickeres in a right old PC twist.


 
Nope, I'm massively opposed to radical Islam. Unfortunately, for cowards like you, I've actually spoken to Muslims and got their opinions on radical Islam, as opposed to looking at brown people with a backpack and panicking.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> I quoted your whole post


 
Yep. Same as you managed to find the quote where I claimed Glass had installed communism in Scotland.

You're just a lying little cunt not worth the bother.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> Nope, I'm massively opposed to radical Islam. Unfortunately, for cowards like you, I've actually spoken to Muslims and got their opinions on radical Islam, as opposed to looking at brown people with a backpack and panicking.


 
I'm sure you have. And I'm sure you'll presume to tell me that I haven't.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Yep



Yep



pk said:


> Atheism is still a position that needs defining and defending. And sooner or later we're just back to the same old shit. This is human nature. We will never live in peace because it is against our nature.
> 
> We are "el mano conqistadore" or something like that. Born to hunt, compete.
> 
> ...


 
Marxism - invented by the British. Brit Power!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:
			
		

> I can say this without any hint of irony whatsoever - if there really is any one of you left wing, left behind, left shorty lefties reading this thread thinking that the sexist Pakistani muslim culture had absolutely no role to play in what looks like a long-ignored problem,* then y'all are some seriously fucked up niggers*.



What's a 'nigger' pk? 

I would like to work out if I am one.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:
			
		

> And everything from the right wing these days is... well - the only people convicted of this crime that were not from the Pakistani community were white.
> 
> At least two of the three are apparently BNP members, in the same gang as these muslim men, sharing in harmony like ebony and ivory, raping *our white children* after plying them with vodka and cocaine.



Our White children? Are the 'other' children that were raped yours' and ours' too?

Are White paedophiles, which make up the majority of convicted child sex offenders under your scrutiny too? If Pakistani men do it because of Islam, why are White men doing it?


----------



## CyberRose (Jan 17, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Our White children? Are the 'other' children that were raped yours' and ours' too?
> 
> Are White paedophiles, which make up the majority of convicted child sex offenders under your scrutiny too? If Pakistani men do it because of Islam, why are White men doing it?


Nobody is interested in reasons why...


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

CyberRose said:


> Nobody is interested in reasons why...


 
It's like arguing with the fash over their utter refusal to acknowledge the six million that perished in the holocaust.

No amount of logic and evidence is enough, silly people will just resort to smear tactics, anything, rather than address the issue.

And the so-called big guns remain silent on the issue for fear of compromising their carefully constructed facade of right-on bullshit...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 17, 2011)

18 million of which 6 million were Jewish


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> And the so-called big guns remain silent on the issue for fear of compromising their carefully constructed facade of right-on bullshit...



I think you'll find that you've hoisted yourself on your own petard.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

Just keep taking that rope.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I think you'll find that you've hoisted yourself on your own petard.


 
I think you're the weasel, not Jack Straw.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)




----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

Keep going...


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> In the 1800's it wasn't exactly ripe for those of an athiest persuasion in Scotland.


 what wasn't exactly ripe and some evidence for this pls.


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> what wasn't exactly ripe and some evidence for this pls.


 
Sorry I'll make it simpler for you - Scotland was a very religious place back then so it stands to reason Glass would have been one of the devout. Find your own evidence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Sorry I'll make it simpler for you - Scotland was a very religious place back then so it stands to reason Glass would have been one of the devout. Find your own evidence.


 
you may think it stands to reason but it's a fucking stupid assumption. fucking sixteenth century italy was supposed to be a rather religious place, but if you look at machiavelli's views on religion, you'll find they weren't devout or those of much of a believer. can you produce evidence to substantiate your assertion about glass's religious views?

rather than saying "nineteenth century scotland was a very religious place" you might at least try to imbue your post with meaning. can you produce evidence that all of scotland for all of the nineteenth century was a very religious place? i think not.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> rather than saying "nineteenth century scotland was a very religious place" you might at least try to imbue your post with meaning.



Don't be ridiculous.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2011)

pk said:


> Sorry I'll make it simpler for you - Scotland was a very religious place back then so it stands to reason Glass would have been one of the devout. Find your own evidence.


 
if you can't produce evidence to support your assertion, your assertion falls


----------



## pk (Jan 17, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> if you can't produce evidence to support your assertion, your assertion falls


 
Fine, then according to you it fails. Hardly on-topic anyway is it? I don't give a fuck about Glass's beliefs, TBH, it doesn't matter shit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 18, 2011)

Come on, you were claiming he was the original Marx a few pages back


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Come on, you were claiming he was the original Marx a few pages back


 
Well, he had the communist theory down pat when Marx was still shitting in whatever passed for nappies in early 19th century Prussia... what does his being a "bible-basher" have to do with anything?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk;11432783[B said:
			
		

> ]It's like arguing with the fash over their utter refusal to acknowledge the six million that perished in the holocaust.
> 
> No amount of logic and evidence is enough, silly people will just resort to smear tactics, anything, rather than address the issue.[/B]
> 
> And the so-called big guns remain silent on the issue for fear of compromising their carefully constructed facade of right-_wing_ bullshit...



Yes, I hear you, that's infuriating,  so please, answer the questions you have been asked, namely:




			
				pk said:
			
		

> I can say this without any hint of irony whatsoever - if there really is any one of you left wing, left behind, left shorty lefties reading this thread thinking that the sexist Pakistani muslim culture had absolutely no role to play in what looks like a long-ignored problem, then *y'all are some seriously fucked up niggers.*



What's a 'nigger' pk?
I would like to work out if I am one. 




> And everything from the right wing these days is... well - the only people convicted of this crime that were not from the Pakistani community were white.
> 
> At least two of the three are apparently BNP members, in the same gang as these muslim men, sharing in harmony like ebony and ivory, *raping our white children after plying them with vodka and cocaine.*


Our White children? Are the 'other' children that were raped yours' and ours' too?

Are White paedophiles, which make up the majority of convicted child sex offenders under your scrutiny too? If Pakistani men do it because of Islam, why are White men doing it?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

She waits, that's what she does, and I'll tell you what...tick followed tock, followed tick followed tock.... 




Here's to waiting...


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Silly girl. You've had this silly row before. And you ended up looking very silly. And I'm not about to get embroiled in your silly hysteria.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/293712-Nigaz-move-in-on-the-Nigerian-Oil-trade


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

Nice try Pk, you _ big, straping, intelligent, important, powerful man_....now, show the courage of your convictions and answer the questions. 




> embroiled in your silly hysteria.


 Wow...that is actually quite funny TBH, given your stance and assertions on this thread.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Take it up with the OP, DrRingDing.

He seems to like the word.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/230007-N-gger


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Take it up with the OP, DrRingDing.



I asked you about your usage! 

Why are you trying to pass the buck? Or do you prefer to pass something else?


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I asked you about your usage!  Please answer.


 
I've already told you, I'm not interested in your silly hysteria. You've got form in this area, as seen in the thread link 4 posts up, and you are just looking to derail the thread just like the Chuckle Brothers are.

If you can't see the context for yourself then you're just silly, and I'm not playing your silly games.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> I've already told you, I'm not interested in your silly hysteria. You've got form in this area, as seen in the thread link 4 posts up, and you are just looking to derail the thread just like the Chuckle Brothers are.



I have form? Physician heal thyself!!! 

Answer the questions please. I am not derailing, I am asking you to qualify some of the things you have said on this thread.

 If you are not prepared to do that because you actually don't have the courage of your convictions, fine...but don't try passing the buck 



> If you can't see the context for yourself then you're just silly, and I'm not playing your silly games.



Gutted, seriously!


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/context

Tell you what though - keep posting tons of YouTube videos - that might derail the thread!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chickenshit


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I would like to work out if I am one.


 
If you don't already know, then you are not.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chickenshit


 
No, that's just too easy. Fact is, I think you're a silly little girl and I can't be bothered to argue with you on any point.

Anyone with any common sense reading my posts will know there was no malice intended in that word, you just want to climb once again on that high horse you keep parading around.

If you're too silly to figure out the context, then nothing I say will be able to divert you from your preconceived silly ideas, and it'll just derail the thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Well, he had the communist theory down pat when Marx was still shitting in whatever passed for nappies in early 19th century Prussia... what does his being a "bible-basher" have to do with anything?


 
yes, and i've asked you what his views were on all previous history. i await an answer with interest.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 18, 2011)

PKs posts are a master class in how to blow up your own argument.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> PKs posts are a master class in how to blow up your own argument.


 
I don't have a specific argument per se... I'm just stunned at the reluctance of any of the usual self declared opposers of tyranny and sexism to touch this issue with a bargepole, eric jarvis being a notable exception...


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Fact is, I think you're a silly little girl and I can't be bothered to argue with you on any point.



I'll just quote that for future reference.

pk, as a great man on here once said, 'it's time to take a ride on de chill bus'.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I'll just quote that for future reference.
> 
> pk, as a great man on here once said, 'it's time to take a ride on de chill bus'.


 
Why? Because you can't face talking about this stuff?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> If you don't already know, then you are not.


 
What? Why are you speaking in code? 

I've asked PK to say what he means when he uses the word. If he's going shout 'context' I think he should at least have the courage to explain the meaning behind his usage.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 18, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> blow up


 
racism


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> No, that's just too easy. Fact is, I think you're a silly little girl and I can't be bothered to argue with you on any point.
> 
> Anyone with any common sense reading my posts will know there was no malice intended in that word, you just want to climb once again on that high horse you keep parading around.



Equally pk, the fact is I think you are a *bigot*, but the worst kind. 

1. One that has no courage, one that refuses to engage on points that will expose his true feelings. One that hides behind 'logic' and feigns intellect.

2. One that calls people 'niggers' and then shouts 'context' and says _'I meant no malice_' to avoid explaining what makes someone a nigger. There was no context for you calling anyone a nigger on this thread afterall,  you say you meant no malice yet you were clearly trying to insult people. 

3. One that in the context of this discussion has used the phrase '_our White children'_ yet refuses to answer these questions:

Our White children? Are the 'other' children that were raped yours' and ours' too?

Are White paedophiles, which make up the majority of convicted child sex offenders under your scrutiny too? If Pakistani men do it because of Islam, why are White men doing it? 

Why won't you answer them? Clearly because your answers will expose the value you place on children of one particular ethncity above others, oh just like you are claiming the rapists do/did in the context of the OP.

Yeah, yeah, I know you are not a rapist though, which makes it alright because you are not as bad as them! Well done big pat on the back!




> If you're too silly to figure out the context,...


 
4. One that defers to casual sexism and disengenous claims of 'context' because you are too chicken shit to say what you really mean.



> ...then nothing I say will be able to divert you from your preconceived silly ideas, and it'll just derail the thread.



5. One that lacks the self awareness to question his own preconceived ideas, or have them questioned by others,  yet uses such claims in an attempt to undermine the valid points that other posters are making.



pk said:


> Why? Because *you can't face talking about this stuff?*



 Oh the irony! You have been repeatedly engaged on the points you have made but you  have set boundaries about what YOU will or won't talk about because to do so dilutes your arguments, and exposes your own agenda/position. An agenda/position which you seem to be uncomfortable exposing fully, with conviction.

Yet, despite all that I am a _'silly little girl_'. 

Like I said, chicken shit.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> I don't have a specific argument per se... I'm just stunned at the reluctance of any of the usual self declared opposers of tyranny and sexism to touch this issue with a bargepole, eric jarvis being a notable exception...


 
The problem is you don't exactly help yourself combating sexism by repeatedly calling Rutita a 'silly little girl' etc.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> The problem is you don't exactly help yourself combating sexism by repeatedly calling Rutita a 'silly little girl' etc.


 
If she'd read my posts she'd see what I meant, but I refuse to have my words contexualised by her silly OTT hysteria and deliberately warped. She can think what the fuck she likes about what I have to say, it's not as if anything she's assumed has anything to do with the thread topic.

Just another transparent attempt to divert the issue because vocalising an opinion would again show her to be a hypocrite.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> I've already told you, I'm not interested in your silly hysteria.


 
aaah, dont we justy love pk's rank hypocrisy.  big hard pk, resolute defender of womens rights (but only against 'pakis')

What a worthless human being he is.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

treelover said:


> 'If it is it's Helen Brayley from UCL's Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science,'
> 
> The thing is I'm increasingly wary of academic research these days, much of it now has an agenda or is funded directly by interested parties, look at the IPPR which is regulalry used by the Guardian in its ongoing support for multi-culturalism, the IPPR is a neo-liberal thinktank and uses evidence to support its agenda largely on grounds of economic utility, etc.


 
I'll say to you what I say to anyone who says what you've just said:

Don't rely on abstracts, don't rely on the published paper, check the references after you've read the paper. It's the quickest and easiest way to see whether someone has an agenda.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Careful now, you're stirring the wrath of Ern.


 
Which is of much the same horribleness as being stabbed with a lettuce leaf.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> aaah, dont we justy love pk's rank hypocrisy.  big hard pk, resolute defender of womens rights (but only against 'pakis')
> 
> What a worthless human being he is.



Why did you put the word 'pakis' in quotes?

Is that an attempt to make it look as if I have used that word myself in this thread?

You dishonest little cunt. Smear tactics are all you have.

Go one - quote one post from me where I have used that word. You won't be able to.

This is precisely the sort of shit I expected. Well done.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

Dont blame me for how your brain fantasises cuntchops.  Nor for your very limited ability with the use of english


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Sorry I'll make it simpler for you - Scotland was a very religious place back then so it stands to reason Glass would have been one of the devout. Find your own evidence.


 
Sorry, but you're talking shite.
*Parts* of Scotland may very well have been "devout", but no more so than England, Wales and Ireland in the same period. They had exactly the same tensions between secularism and observance as were had elsewhere, the same falling away from religion of the newly-industrialised "lower orders", the same decrease in people working on the land (with the added impetus of the ongoing clearances).


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> Dont blame me for how your brain fantasises cuntchops.  Nor for your very limited ability with the use of english


 
Don't put fucking quotes around words in a shitty attempt to attribute them to my posts, you deceitful little fuckball.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sorry, but you're talking shite.
> *Parts* of Scotland may very well have been "devout", but no more so than England, Wales and Ireland in the same period. They had exactly the same tensions between secularism and observance as were had elsewhere, the same falling away from religion of the newly-industrialised "lower orders", the same decrease in people working on the land (with the added impetus of the ongoing clearances).



Firstly what does this have to do with the topic, apart from the ongoing derail attempts, and secondly where did I say it was comparable or not to England??

Don't YOU start misquoting me as well VP!


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Don't put fucking quotes around words in a shitty attempt to attribute them to my posts, you deceitful little fuckball.


 
they weren't quotes dear boy.  Really, learn something about the english language, then you might stop making quite such an absolute cock of yourself.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> they weren't quotes dear boy.  Really, learn something about the english language, then you might stop making quite such an absolute cock of yourself.


 
Don't wriggle out of it, you tried to imply that I had used that word.

You now accept that I did not, yes?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Firstly what does this have to do with the topic, apart from the ongoing derail attempts...


You tell me. You're the one that brought it up originally!


> and secondly where did I say it was comparable or not to England??


You didn't. I made the comparison to establish that your claim that "Scotland was *a very religious place back then* so it stands to reason Glass would have been one of the devout" was a load of bollocks. Scotland was no more and no less a "religious place" than anywhere else in the UK.



> Don't YOU start misquoting me as well VP!


 
I haven't "misquoted" you, I *directly* quoted the point I replied to.

Catch a hold of yourself, sunshine. If you talk shite you get pulled up. You know the score.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Don't wriggle out of it, you tried to imply that I had used that word.
> 
> You now accept that I did not, yes?


 
fuck off dickwad, dont blame me for you ignorance.  Go and look after "our white children"


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'll say to you what I say to anyone who says what you've just said:
> 
> Don't rely on abstracts, don't rely on the published paper, check the references after you've read the paper. It's the quickest and easiest way to see whether someone has an agenda.


 
Indeed. Also, while it is clearly important to know what agenda someone has, the fact they have that agenda doesn't mean their research is worthless. In reality, of course, everyone has some kind of agenda – otherwise they would not know how to decide what to research or how to research it.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> You didn't. I made the comparison to establish that your claim that "Scotland was *a very religious place back then* so it stands to reason Glass would have been one of the devout" was a load of bollocks. Scotland was no more and no less a "religious place" than anywhere else in the UK.



Fucks sake, nowhere did I say it was MORE religious than anywhere else in the UK, only more religious back in early 19th century than today. On a side point with no relation to the thread topic.

What Glass's religion had to do with the fact that he pre-empted Marx in communist practice is also a bit of a mystery to me, but there we are.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> fuck off dickwad, dont blame me for you ignorance.  Go and look after "our white children"


 
So you don't even have the integrity to concede that I did not use that word, instead you're just happy to apply a smear and wriggle out of it when caught. Fuck you and your "debating" tactics.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

sorry, _you_ talking about integrity??  oh the irony.  fuck off back under your rock


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 18, 2011)

asian


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> So you don't even have the integrity to concede that I did not use that word, instead you're just happy to apply a smear and wriggle out of it when caught. Fuck you and your "debating" tactics.


 
He obviously put it in quotes to avoid it looking like he was being a racist cunt himself, to clear any confusion. However, I don't see why you're so uppity about it, being happy to throw 'nigger' and 'our white...' phrases about. You haven't got any moral high ground you sewer rat, so stop trying to claim it.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> sorry, _you_ talking about integrity??  oh the irony.  fuck off back under your rock


 
Why can't you be a man and accept that I did not use the word your post appeared to attribute to me?

Is it that difficult? You think I wouldn't do that if it were the other way around?


----------



## IC3D (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> sorry, _you_ talking about integrity??  oh the irony.  fuck off back under your rock


 
As ern points asian would be better but Paki isn't an acceptable term for Pakistanis


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Just another transparent attempt to divert the issue because vocalising an opinion would again show her to be a hypocrite.







pk said:


> I don't have a specific argument per se...





> ....our white children....







> ... *I'm just stunned at the reluctance of any of the usual self declared opposers of tyranny and sexism *to touch this issue with a bargepole, eric jarvis being a notable exception...







> Fact is, *I think you're a silly little girl *and I can't be bothered to argue with you on any point.





> I refuse to have my words contexualised by *her silly OTT hysteria and deliberately warped*.








pk said:


> So you don't even have the *integrity *to concede that I did not use that word, instead you're just happy to apply a smear and wriggle out of it when caught. Fuck you and your "debating" tactics.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Why can't you be a man and accept that I did not use the word your post appeared to attribute to me?



Are you less of a 'man' because you refuse to explain what you meant when you called people 'niggers' earlier in the thread and why, even though you used it as an insult, you meant no _malice_?


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> He obviously put it in quotes to avoid it looking like he was being a racist cunt himself.


 
No, he put it in quotes to make it appear that I had said it.

You clearly approve of such wanker tactics.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Are you less of a 'man' because you refuse to explain what you meant when you called people 'niggers' earlier in the thread and why, even though you used it as an insult, you meant no _malice_?


 
He also called people 'pakis' too


----------



## IC3D (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> No, he put it in quotes to make it appear that I had said it.
> 
> You clearly approve of such wanker tactics.


 
This was clearly the case.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> No, he put it in quotes to make it appear that I had said it.
> 
> You clearly approve of such wanker tactics.


 
Did he really? Because "pakis" is putting it in QUOTES. 'pakis' is emphasising it as different from the rest of the sentence. Therefore, you're a reactionary cunt with no weight to his main argument, so drags it off on a tiny little point. Classic right-wing tactic. Now get back to frothing about "pakis".


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Why can't you be a man and accept that I did not use the word your post appeared to attribute to me?
> 
> Is it that difficult? You think I wouldn't do that if it were the other way around?


 
Fuck off you worthless hypocrite.  You carry on thcreaming and thrceaming and thcreaming until you're thick tho


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> Fuck off you worthless hypocrite.  You carry on thcreaming and thrceaming and thcreaming until you're thick tho


 
i don't think you need to undermine your criticism of pk by taking the mickey out of people with lisps.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> Fuck off you worthless hypocrite.  You carry on thcreaming and thrceaming and thcreaming until you're thick tho


 
Why did you make a post refering to Paki's?


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think you need to undermine your criticism of pk by taking the mickey out of people with lisps.


 
Whilst I agree with you, it's worth noting the voice in my head read "lisps" as 'lithpth'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Why did you make a post refering to Paki's?


 
'pakis'

are you a greengrocer or something?


----------



## IC3D (Jan 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> 'pakis'
> 
> are you a greengrocer or something?


 
God your at it too now!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2011)

IC3D said:


> God *your* at it too now!


 it gets worse


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think you need to undermine your criticism of pk by taking the mickey out of people with lisps.


 
I'd have thought you'd recognise such a classic quote from english literature.  Should have used the quote marks I guess


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Are you less of a 'man' because you refuse to explain what you meant when you called people 'niggers' earlier in the thread and why, even though you used it as an insult, you meant no _malice_?


 
In the context, not isolated as you have presented it, a term of endearment that only a silly girl would take offence to... and only someone too scared to approach the topic would seize upon and leap up and down in a pathetic false display of outrage in order to divert away from the topic that dare not speak its name.

I suggest Mark Twain or Iceberg Slim for context, but no doubt you will state that I am the wrong skin colour to use such a word even in obvious jest, as it clearly was in the context.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 18, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it gets worse


 
I was refering to the cricket team.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

IC3D said:


> This was clearly the case.


 
I'm glad you noticed.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> a pathetic false display of outrage in order to divert away from the topic that dare not speak its name.


 
pot meet kettle


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> I'd have thought you'd recognise such a classic quote from english literature.  Should have used the quote marks I guess


 
i recognised the 'fuck off you worthless hypocrite', a quote from a lovely and touching short story by graham greene.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

atta boy


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> What? Why are you speaking in code?


 
I wrote my comment in perfect English. Is that not your first language?


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> pot meet kettle


 
So, no acknowledgement that you deliberately made it look as though I'd used that word then.

And still nothing on topic.

Typical fuckwit tactics.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> aaah, dont we justy love pk's rank hypocrisy.  big hard pk, resolute defender of womens rights (but only against 'pakis')
> 
> What a worthless human being he is.


 

No spic will get near his chick


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> No spic will get near his chick


 
No way in hell you're even capable of entertaining the notion that muslim pedophile gangs tend not to go for muslim children.

(the thread topic, if you recall)

Neither you or bellend or Floppy Snidey have done so yet, at any rate.

There is still hope, but not much.

Be interested to read eric jarvis' take on my interpretation of his statistics too.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

how many times have you changed your mind about what "the thread topic" is now pk?  It seems to change every time your 'argument' gets trashed.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> In the context, not isolated as you have presented it, a term of endearment that only a silly girl would take offence to... and only someone too scared to approach the topic would seize upon and leap up and down in a pathetic false display of outrage in order to divert away from the topic that dare not speak its name.



Oh and I suppose only an amazing, worldly, open, empathetic, big, strong, intellectual male such as your self would conclude that:

1. We can not read that there was no context for you calling posters on this thread niggers and you meant to insult with it. You were not endeared. Liar.

2. My pulling you up on it and asking you to explain your usage means that I am jumping up and down outraged as opposed to not letting you wriggle out of it.

3. That myself or anyone on this thread is in the least bit fooled by you song and dance, casually sexist, disengenuous and reactionary attempts to feign superiority whilst simultaneously and repeatedly refusing to engage on aspects of this discussion which have shown you to have an agenda/position that you are clearly uncomfortable exposing with conviction or in full.

Here I refer again to 'our White girls' and highlight the fact that although you have made this comment you lack the gumption or the courage to answer the questions asked of you or explain the comment itself.




> I suggest Mark Twain or Iceberg Slim for context, but no doubt you will state that I am the wrong skin colour to use such a word even in obvious jest, as it clearly was in the context.



...and if all of the above were not enough you are now attempting to give yourself context where their is none by alikening your usage here to be literary.  

Ah yes and your claim to have been jesting has been noted too, plus you quick-step reverse tactic of claiming that I am in some way attacking you because of your skin colour, nothing new, and true to form with _your_ type. You are a pompus disingenuos bigot.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Indeed. Also, while it is clearly important to know what agenda someone has, the fact they have that agenda doesn't mean their research is worthless. In reality, of course, everyone has some kind of agenda – otherwise they would not know how to decide what to research or how to research it.


 
Yup, "value-free", in academic terms, is an ideal rather than a reality: Worth striving for, but unobtainable.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Oh and I suppose only an amazing, worldly, open, empathetic, big, strong, intellectual male such as your self would conclude that:
> 
> 1. We can not read that there was no context for you calling posters on this thread niggers and you meant to insult with it.



You've managed to use the word several times. Does that mean YOU are a racist?



> 2. My pulling you up on it and asking you to explain your usage means that I am jumping up and down outraged as opposed to not letting you wriggle out of it.



Your pulling me up on it is in keeping with your hypersensitive reaction to the word, as if it were aimed at you. It wasn't.



> 3. That myself or anyone on this thread is in the least bit fooled by you song and dance, casually sexist, disengenuous and reactionary attempts to feign superiority whilst simultaneously and repeatedly refusing to engage on aspects of this discussion which have shown you to have an agenda/position that you are clearly uncomfortable exposing with conviction or in full.



No dear, quite clearly several people have seen for themselves the desperate smearing that has been employed to divert from the fact that they don't have the courage to discuss it. I'm perfectly comfortable with my position and have been more than honest about my own take on it all. It is YOUR agenda and YOUR determination to paint me as a racist, along with others, that is particularly telling. Nothing I say will steer you from your own entrenched opinions of me, but since I care little about what you think, owing to your previous ridiculous behaviour in similar matters, I do not feel that I am obliged to jusgify anythibg to you, and I will not allow you to contextualise what I have said when you have demonstrated such a need to see what is not there that you practically invent it. You are not alone in doing this.



> Here I refer again to 'our White girls' and highlight the fact that although you have made this comment you lack the gumption or the courage to answer the questions asked of you or explain the comment itself.



See this is where you need to go back and actually read the thread - I qualified that last night, in the proper context.






> ...and if all of the above were not enough you are now attempting to give yourself context where their is none by alikening your usage here to be literary.



What??



> Ah yes and your claim to have been jesting has been noted too, plus you quick-step reverse tactic of claiming that I am in some way attacking you because of your skin colour, nothing new, and true to form with _your_ type. You are a pompus disingenuos bigot.



You might be right, I appear to have developed a bigoted attitude toward silly girls.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Fucks sake, nowhere did I say it was MORE religious than anywhere else in the UK, only more religious back in early 19th century than today. On a side point with no relation to the thread topic.


Pity you didn't make that clear earlier in your claims about Glass, then.


> What Glass's religion had to do with the fact that he pre-empted Marx in communist practice is also a bit of a mystery to me, but there we are.


Glass didn't "pre-empt Marx in communist practice".
What we know about Glass (R4 did a very good biographical feature on him a couple of years back, btw. Doesn't look like it's available for iplayer yet, though) is that his "commune" was originally a shared possession of the three original *male* inhabitants of the island, and that Glass assumed ownership rights from the other two original *male* (and I'm emphasising that word deliberately) inhabitants when they left Tristan de Cunha. New (male) settlers arrived, and wives were purchased from another island. Glass acted as the patriarch of the settlement up until his death.

So, we have a few VERY salient points that reveal that what Glass practiced wasn't and couldn't have been communism, those being:

Women as subservient to men.
Himself as the unelected final arbiter of everything on the island.
Women treated as the property of the males.
Private property still existed.

Now, I'm sure you've read the Communist Manifesto, and I'm sure you'll admit (probably after a lot of blustering) that what Glass practiced wasn't even "primitive communism" such as the diggers wanted 150 years previously, let alone anything akin to Marx. It was a plain, old-fashioned "tribal" hierarchy.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

I think that this thread has been irretrievably derailed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I think...



Don't exaggerate.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

I don't exaggerate your derailing tactics.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Pity you didn't make that clear earlier in your claims about Glass, then.



Utter cop out. Why should I provide clarity on an irrelevant point I didn't even make?



> Glass didn't "pre-empt Marx in communist practice".
> What we know about Glass (R4 did a very good biographical feature on him a couple of years back, btw. Doesn't look like it's available for iplayer yet, though) is that his "commune" was originally a shared possession of the three original *male* inhabitants of the island, and that Glass assumed ownership rights from the other two original *male* (and I'm emphasising that word deliberately) inhabitants when they left Tristan de Cunha. New (male) settlers arrived, and wives were purchased from another island. Glass acted as the patriarch of the settlement up until his death.
> 
> So, we have a few VERY salient points that reveal that what Glass practiced wasn't and couldn't have been communism, those being:
> ...


 
So the old man had 1800's values. So sue him. Times have changed. His form of communism survives, Marx's pretty much died in 1990.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 18, 2011)

Lol. How the fuck was it communism? You may as well say the Amish are communists.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I think that this thread has been irretrievably derailed.


 
No, unless a moderator takes it away from the naughty kids and locks it (the intention of the likes of belboid and Proper Tidy).


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol. How the fuck was it communism? You may as well say the Amish are communists.


 
Another thread.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol. How the fuck was it communism? You may as well say the Amish are communists.


 
The historical ignorance of millennia old communism - thrown into peoples faces in 1816. Is there nothing this kid can do right? Why is lock and light on these boards?


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol. How the fuck was it communism? You may as well say the Amish are communists.


 
well, Engels did say that the Anabaptists (from whom the Amish sprung) were basically communists. A mere two hundred years befoe this Glass bloke


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Another thread.


 
ie, you've lost the argument again


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> No, unless a moderator takes it away from the naughty kids and locks it (the intention of the likes of belboid and Proper Tidy).


 
Perhaps the thread-starter can get us back on track by answering the often-posed question; what did he mean by this:



DrRingDing said:


> I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Why is lock and light on these boards?


 
You also have a history of banning and return. 

Perhaps you should drop those stones, as you are standing in a glass-house.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You also have a history of banning and return.
> 
> Perhaps you should drop those stones, as you are standing in a glass-house.


 
Over his head go those stones.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Over his head go those stones.


 
So what do you reckon big man?

Pakistani muslim gangs deliberately avoiding non-Pakistani children?

Or you deliberately avoiding giving your opinion on the matter?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> Utter cop out. Why should I provide clarity on an irrelevant point I didn't even make?


You missed the point.

Again.




> So the old man had 1800's values. So sue him. Times have changed. His form of communism survives, Marx's pretty much died in 1990.


It's not a form of communism in any way, shape or form, except in some delusion you appear to be currently experiencing, where "communal" suddenly means "communist".
As for Marx, it's great that you can trot out (no pun intended!) the media line about "Marx's form", but it doesn't really reflect reality, which is that Marxism provided little of the basis on which the Soviet bloc was run, and that Marx's ideas are still extremely useful in analysing modern economics.

Sorry to gainsay you with reality, like.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lol. How the fuck was it communism? You may as well say the Amish are communists.


 
Patriarchal and exclusivist communists, obviously!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Why is lock and light on these boards?



Because every board needs one sententious, self-regarding ignoramus on it, and he's ours.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> So what do you reckon big man?
> 
> Pakistani muslim gangs deliberately avoiding non-Pakistani children?
> 
> Or you deliberately avoiding giving your opinion on the matter?


 
There's an old adage that many people engaged in criminal activities (from burglary to paedophilia) tend to stick to:

"Don't shit on your own doorstep".

Are you claiming that these scum were motivated entirely by an utter contempt for the wider culture of the land they live in, or could it be that they knew they were *more* likely to get caught if they shat on their own doorsteps?

After all, we hear so much about "honour killings", don't we?


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> There's an old adage that many people engaged in criminal activities (from burglary to paedophilia) tend to stick to:
> 
> "Don't shit on your own doorstep".
> 
> ...


 
Motivated partly, yes, I believe.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 18, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Because every board needs one sententious, self-regarding ignoramus on it, and he's ours.


 
When it comes to sententious and self-regarding, you're mine, mate.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> So what do you reckon big man?
> 
> Pakistani muslim gangs deliberately avoiding non-Pakistani children?
> 
> Or you deliberately avoiding giving your opinion on the matter?



Thought I'd just repeat this for the benefit of the selectively blind...


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

oh the irony


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> oh the irony


 
Not like you're ever going to engage with the thread topic is it?


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

which thread topic is that pk?  you've changed your mind about it several times.  one minute it's islam is the most despicable religion on the planet, then it's why some cops wonderful, now its limited to do Pakistani muslim gangs deliberately avoiding non-Pakistani children? 

Make your mind up, or we might start to think you are constantly shifting the goalposts, every time you let another goal in.  

I suppose the fact that you have clearly copied these tactics so well from Jazzzz shows you are capable of learning. Shame it's the only evidence so far.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> which thread topic is that pk?  you've changed your mind about it several times.  one minute it's islam is the most despicable religion on the planet, then it's why some cops wonderful, now its limited to do Pakistani muslim gangs deliberately avoiding non-Pakistani children?
> 
> Make your mind up, or we might start to think you are constantly shifting the goalposts, every time you let another goal in.
> 
> I suppose the fact that you have clearly copied these tactics so well from Jazzzz shows you are capable of learning. Shame it's the only evidence so far.


 
You think the cop from Norway is lying. Or at least, you're too scared to put forth your opinions on her reported figures.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 18, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I don't exaggerate your derailing tactics.



And what tactics are those, O sagacious one?


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 18, 2011)

Right. More reality. But first an answer to a point made earlier by pk. Actually in 1987 there were at least two rape crisis centres in Oslo, one at a major hospital (for which I linked to statistics) and the DIXI centre.

The detection rate for rapes fell by a third from 1994 to 2006. So the Norwegian police in fact manage to collect the evidence to prosecute successfully in 13% of cases. Just to give some idea of the likely accuracy of their statistics.

Amnesty have some serious concerns about how rape in general is dealt with by the police and courts in Norway.

Here is a good analysis of how rape is reported/misreported in the press, including a section on how many press reports play on stereotypes that encourage xenophobia and racism.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

So that's both butchers and bellend fleeing the thread rather than actually clarify their position on all this. Again.


----------



## past caring (Jan 18, 2011)




----------



## IMR (Jan 18, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Here is a good analysis of how rape is reported/misreported in the press, including a section on how many press reports play on stereotypes that encourage xenophobia and racism.



Interesting stuff on Norway, eric. Unfortunately the link above doesn't work for me.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> You think the cop from Norway is lying. Or at least, you're too scared to put forth your opinions on her reported figures.


 
so, you wont answer the question then.  what a surprise.  wriggle away little weasel


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2011)

pk said:


> So that's both butchers and bellend fleeing the thread rather than actually clarify their position on all this. Again.


 
dont respond for half an hour and i've fled!  wow, you are desperate.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Right. More reality. But first an answer to a point made earlier by pk. Actually in 1987 there were at least two rape crisis centres in Oslo, one at a major hospital (for which I linked to statistics) and the DIXI centre.



Were there any others in Norway apart from in the capital?



> The detection rate for rapes fell by a third from 1994 to 2006. So the Norwegian police in fact manage to collect the evidence to prosecute successfully in 13% of cases. Just to give some idea of the likely accuracy of their statistics.



Which explains the discrepancy in the figures you found and those of Oslo's department headed by Rohde... perhaps.



> Amnesty have some serious concerns about how rape in general is dealt with by the police and courts in Norway.



Does the data support Rohde's figures in any way? Can Rohde's figures be considered potentially accurate?



> Here is a good analysis of how rape is reported/misreported in the press, including a section on how many press reports play on stereotypes that encourage xenophobia and racism.


 
I can't see Rohde risking everything by going public with those stats without triple checking and verifying them... but I'll have a read of that data, ta.

It's possible, but unusual to say the least, to suggest that she would risk such a senior position with such bold stastistics if they were proven to be lies...


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

> Historically, undocumented migrants have not been a concern for Norway. The country's geographic location is one reason, but the structure of its labor market has made it difficult for the undocumented to get jobs or benefit from the health and education systems without a national ID number. However, undocumented migrants have become a larger problem in the past decade, in part due to the opening of borders as a result of the Schengen accord.
> 
> Though little data is available on undocumented migrants in Norway, many undocumented migrants in Norway today are rejected asylum seekers who have yet to leave the country. In January and February of 2004, 233 illegal immigrants were stopped in Norway, as opposed to 109 interventions in the same period in 2003.
> 
> Smugglers or criminal networks may be involved in the transfer of as many as 80 percent of asylum seekers, and Norway has also become a transit country for migrants aiming to reach the United Kingdom or the United States.



http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=307


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

belboid said:


> dont respond for half an hour and i've fled!  wow, you are desperate.


 
Yep. You fled. Turned on your heels. Scarpered. Vamosed. Hopped off.

And now you will doubtless return with some pithy insult and fail to say anything whatsoever of any relevance to the motivations of these gangs, because you simply cannot muster the balls to do anything else.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 18, 2011)

Jer, babyjesus


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Jer, babyjesus


 
Where once was a shark floats now a flounder...


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Right. More reality. But first an answer to a point made earlier by pk. Actually in 1987 there were at least two rape crisis centres in Oslo, one at a major hospital (for which I linked to statistics) and the DIXI centre.
> 
> The detection rate for rapes fell by a third from 1994 to 2006. So the Norwegian police in fact manage to collect the evidence to prosecute successfully in 13% of cases. Just to give some idea of the likely accuracy of their statistics.
> 
> ...


 
Yeah, so about that "reality"...


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 18, 2011)

Racialising crime lol

They were male and they were rapists. 

Oooh, muslim rapists no less! Pakistani origin? Extra special ones. Especially for folk who pull themselves off over Murdoch's 'family' publications.


----------



## pk (Jan 18, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Racialising crime lol
> 
> They were male and they were rapists.
> 
> Oooh, muslim rapists no less! Pakistani origin? Extra special ones. Especially for folk who pull themselves off over Murdoch's 'family' publications.


 
Not racialising. A cultural mishap? A misplaced manner that needs addressing, redressing, or at the very least discussing.

You're not fucking thick, C66, don't tell me you're actually swallowing all the pissant accusations of racism.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

pk said:


> Not racialising. A cultural mishap? A misplaced manner that needs addressing, redressing, or at the very least discussing.
> 
> You're not fucking thick, C66, don't tell me you're actually swallowing all the pissant accusations of racism.



Of course not. I'm not a huge fan of either rape or the more extreme interpretations of religion. I'm not a fan of religion at all particularly; but it can be used for a cause for good with some people. But, whatever.

But you can't deny that since year dot not all animals are equal. And a black rapist is much worse than a white one?

Because if not, then you haven't studied enough far right propaganda. So it's no surprise that when the daily mail relishes in stories like these that it's doing the BNP's job as a recruitment agent.

That isn't to say that it shouldn't be discussed because it should. But how many other rapists get the generalisation patter?

If you can admit out loud that all thieves in Liverpool reflect upon Liverpool, all slimey bankers ripping off the rest of the country somehow represent White bank workers, rapist taxi drivers are what all taxi drivers are like really - you know, the chats they have in the greasy spoon, yeah? - then you're onto a winner.

But taxi drivers weren't brought into the spotlight because of Worboys. All farmers weren't under suspicion because of West and his associates. Fuck, he fell into more brackets didn't he? He was white. He was from Gloucester. He was a builder. Why not look into sex crimes by builders or white men?

The reason is because you've racialised the victim. And perhaps rape is more horrifying if a experienced by a young white girl at the hands of a Pakistani man than any other scenario. Because that's what people are irate about. Perhaps some Muslim men _do_ despise white women to the extent that they will treat them as sexual meat. But it makes them no different to any other rapist from any other culture throughout the world. Including, of course, that - race and religion aside - they're all men.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 19, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> *The reason is because you've racialised the victim.* And perhaps rape is more horrifying if a experienced by a young white girl at the hands of a Pakistani man than any other scenario. Because that's what people are irate about. Perhaps some Muslim men _do_ despise white women to the extent that they will treat them as sexual meat. *But it makes them no different to any other rapist from any other culture throughout the world. Including, of course, that - race and religion aside - they're all men.*


 
Bingo. As pk said, you are not thick.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 19, 2011)

Straw


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Perhaps some Muslim men _do_ despise white women to the extent that they will treat them as sexual meat.


 
The acceptance of this simple statement is what differentiates you from the silent lemmings. 

The operative word being "perhaps". I guess the question is how much worse is the issue and how many young girls could have been protected from these gangs had the powers that be not been cowering under illogical constraints of political correctness and instead looked at the picture without prejudice nor a falsely imposed blindness.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 19, 2011)

IMR said:


> Interesting stuff on Norway, eric. Unfortunately the link above doesn't work for me.


 
Try this.


----------



## belboid (Jan 19, 2011)

pk said:


> Yep. You fled. Turned on your heels. Scarpered. Vamosed. Hopped off.
> 
> And now you will doubtless return with some pithy insult and fail to say anything whatsoever of any relevance to the motivations of these gangs, because you simply cannot muster the balls to do anything else.


 
No dear, try and stop making nonsense up, there's a good boy.  You have yet to prove the existence of 'these gangs,' and (whether they exist or not) you never will.  All your facts have been shown to be - at best - highly partial - and often simply false, they are cherry picked and ignore the figures that might lead a sane person to a different conclusion to you.  Most impressive


----------



## belboid (Jan 19, 2011)

pk said:


> The acceptance of this simple statement is what differentiates you from the silent lemmings.


 
woo hoo! Nearly 100 pages but we've now established the ost important thing - _some people dont like other people and personify them_.  Amazing, truly you are the new William Glass


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Steady on, it's not 1816.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 19, 2011)

> A recent focus on the ethnicity of abusers risks putting more children in danger, said Carrie. "I am not going to say that ethnicity is not an issue in some geographical areas, it clearly is. But to think of it as the only determining factor is misleading and dangerous."
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/17/child-trafficking-uk-rise



The keywords here are "local" and "demographic".


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

belboid said:


> woo hoo! Nearly 100 pages but we've now established the ost important thing - _some people dont like other people and personify them_.  Amazing, truly you are the new William Glass


 
So just how widespread do YOU think this issue is? A common mentality among these muslim gangs or what?

Oh hang on, you think these gangs don't exist??


----------



## belboid (Jan 19, 2011)

What gangs?  Groups of mainly muslim men?  Are they one of your 'gangs'?  Or are you solely referring to this supposed 'gang of muslim men who go around drugging and prostituting _our_ white girls?'

You cant make your mind up what you're talking about, which is (one of the reasons why) you keep contradicting yourself?


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

belboid said:


> What gangs?  Groups of mainly muslim men?  Are they one of your 'gangs'?  Or are you solely referring to this supposed 'gang of muslim men who go around drugging and prostituting _our_ white girls?'
> 
> You cant make your mind up what you're talking about, which is (one of the reasons why) you keep contradicting yourself?


 
You want me to list some specific names of gangs before you acknowledge that such gangs exist?? Fuck, you really are determined not to even look at what's actually happening out there aren't you??


----------



## belboid (Jan 19, 2011)

just trying to get you to be consistent, rather than carrying out your jazzite tactic of changing the terms/goalposts as and when it suits you

Not that you will, of course


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

belboid said:


> What gangs?  Groups of mainly muslim men?  Are they one of your 'gangs'?  Or are you solely referring to this supposed 'gang of muslim men who go around drugging and prostituting _our_ white girls?'
> 
> You cant make your mind up what you're talking about, which is (one of the reasons why) you keep contradicting yourself?


 


belboid said:


> just trying to get you to be consistent, rather than carrying out your jazzite tactic of changing the terms/goalposts as and when it suits you
> 
> Not that you will, of course


 
Show me where you've even engaged with the topic in any way at all and I'll take your pissweak critique seriously.

You don't believe these gangs exist? LOL


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

There is just uncomfortable silence around this issue, from the usually forthright left, which is pretty disappointing.

It is precisely the same silence that concerned MP's and mothers of young girls were met with when they tried to be heard years ago. And even now there is blind denial of anything wrong, no attempt to engage with or confront what may be unpalatable truths.

This silence creates a vaccum within which sexual violence against women and children, honour killings, and all manner of nasty shit can continue, with the perpetrators knowing full well that the politically correct powers that be will probably never even permit themselves to recognise the issue, never mind try to deal with it.

Exactly the same silence that led to Catholic priests getting away with raping kids for so long.

I hope those who remain tight-lipped about this stuff take their share of the blame if future avoidable cases such as this come to light.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2011)

why should people engage with you, when you're a proven liar?

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...!?p=5835886&highlight=leave+posts#post5835886

your very presence here demonstrates your mendacity.


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

You think posting up a 4 year old joke post changes anything?

You lash out because you know I'm right, the deafening silence from your "comrades" tells me all I need to know, the shitty racism accusations, and the fear of having even an opinion on this issue in case you're shown to be an absolute hypocrite.

Pickmans, you've always been a little mongrel, only now you've nobody's arse to kiss, you're just treading water. You are nothing.

It's the more genuine people I'm referring to who know I'm not wrong here, that refuse to engage with anything that might compromise the fake image they have of themselves.

This is why the extreme left are laughed at just as much as the extreme right. At least you could say the fash are too thick to know any better.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 19, 2011)

pk said:


> There is just uncomfortable silence around this issue, from the usually forthright left, which is pretty disappointing.


 
Yeah, it's the kind of silence that might tell you that many here have now deemed that your pathology is beyond reason. All of your points have been countered yet you still dilly-dally and dance around your own prejudices and subjective, reactionary response to this case. You also refuse even an inch of self reflection with regard your own bigotry and turn tail like a squirting skunk, attacking anyone who doesn't share your tunnel-vision-understanding .



> It's the more genuine people I'm referring to who know I'm not wrong here, that refuse to engage with anything that might compromise the fake image they have of themselves.



Anyone who disagrees with you is deluded or silly or in denial or over sensitive or, or, or, or...not once have you shown any level of maturity by acknowledging the valid points made by others, or acknowledged the wider issues involved in this type of case.

I suggest pk that you stop posting on this thread and head off out into the real world to actually do something to protect 'our White children'. Why not address the reasons why some young girls are vulnerable? Do something to prevent them becoming prey to paedophiles, support them once they have been preyed on even. My fear is, that you couldn't actually handle engaging on that level and any time they disagreed with you or didn't tow your line you'd declare them 'silly little girls'.

The time you have spent on this thread in the last week or so could have really made an impact somewhere, yet you are here flogging the proverbial dead horse and smugly revelling in a 'perceived' victory over the 'forthright left', this victory exists only in your imagination.

Being more than a 'keyboard warrior' by taking your skills and energy into the real world where this crap happens would be something to respect, you may even develop a sense of self-pride and perspective, which I truly believe would help you stop being so very angry with _yourself_ and blaming others as a consequence.


----------



## pk (Jan 19, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah, it's the kind of silence that should tell you that many here have realised your pathology is beyond reason.



It isn't "pathology" at all. Do you understand what "pathology" is? I'm not in the medical profession.  



> All of your points have been countered



Oh have they? Which ones? By whom? I don't see where any of the fundamental points I have been trying to make have been countered at all!

Nobody apart from a few have even made counterpoints for me to tackle. Have I not been civil to eric jarvis, who is one of the very few to actually engage with the topic and try to untangle what is clearly an easy set of presumptions to set apart? You have made no point, you've done the lazy fingerpointing and name calling like all the other saps, but you don't really appear to have any position to speak of on this issue. In fact you clearly haven't even read the thread properly.



> yet you still dilly-dally and dance around your own prejudices and subjective, reactionary response to this case.



Yes! Of course I do! I live to question my own reactions, my own prejudices. I have as many as you do. 
Can you honestly say you are without prejudices of any kind? If you can then you really need to say so.



> You also refuse even an inch of self reflection with regard your bigotry



I give plenty of honest self-reflection. That is precisely what pisses people off about my posting style... I genuinely don't give a fuck what people think about me personally, as long as I get to the truth of the matter and counter the daily arguments I have with my own conscience. I'm not here for fluffy friendships, I'm not here to score drugs, I'm not here on some mission to lead people into some stupid political activity. I'm here for purely selfish reasons, I got all the friends I need. 
Not one person here in the 11 or so years I've been posting and drinking and partying with others here whilst typing out my rambling bollocks words can ever say I have betrayed their confidence - unless of course they betrayed mine first.



> and turn tail attacking anyone who doesn't share your tunnel-vision-understanding like a squirting skunk



Yes dear. Take a good read of the thread and see for yourself where the attacker side of things has come from. Even Pickmans was declaring me the thread winner in the first 10 pages, then he realised quickly that none of the "comrades" were about to back me up, LOL, so he switched horses like a cowboy in a spaghetti western (oh noes is that wacist!). Have you ever smelled a real skunk? The smell permeates your every being for days, you can't ignore it. I quite like the comparison. It means some of my shit is actually getting through to you. 
And there's no "tunnel vision" going on. Or maybe there is. But that's for me to decide though, not you young lady.



> Anyone who disagrees with you is deluded or silly or in denial or over sensitive or, or, or, or...



Well clearly that is incorrect. I hereby cite eric jarvis as a prime example. Being the only one in the last 15 pages or so to have the courage to at least try to disprove what is undoubtedly a pretty mainstream opinion in the world of the Daily Mail reader, i.e. the majority of the voting public - like it or not - you will no doubt be able to demonstrate to everyone exactly where I have called him "deluded" or "silly" or "in denial" or "over sensitive" won't you?

Go on. I challenge you to find where I have treated eric jarvis with anything other than the respect he has shown me.  Off you pop.



> not once have you shown any level of intellectual maturity by acknowledging the valid points made by others



Which valid points. List them please. If they are indeed valid and I have failed to acknowledge them, then, quite seriously, I'd like to redress that mistake straight away.



> or acknowledged the wider issues involved in this type of case



Such as????



> I tell you what pk...stop posting here



I tell you what - I'll post here as long as I like. 



> and head off out into the real world



LMFAO!! Foolish comment.



> and do something to protect 'our White children'



So clearly you appear to be wilfully or ignorantly under the impression that when I typed "our white children" I meant it. 

Instead of clearly seeing from MY post, not the contextless quotes you feed from,that I was speaking directly to the little nazi twats and reminding them not to shout too loudly about evil gangs of foreign pedophiles - seeing how reliable sources are reporting that the only non-muslim child rapists were in fact BNP members. Forgive me if that went over your head, but it's hardly my fault.



> address why some young girls are vulnerable, do something to prevent them becoming prey to paedophiles



That is precisely my motivation for being such a bloody minded nutter on this thread. 
I won't let it go, and I 'm sure you're terribly cross about that, but it's not to score cheap points on a little internet forum.



> support them once they have been preyed on even. The time you have spent on this thread in the last week could have really made an impact somewhere, yet you are here flogging the proverbial dead horse and smugly revelling in a 'perceived' victory that exists only in your imagination..



You have no idea what I do. You probably think what everyone else does - that I'm some sort of pilled up DJ working in the dodgiest dingiest clubs the world has to offer. I prefer you to think that.
You have no idea what I actually 'do' at all, and if you did you probably wouldn't believe it anyway.



> Being more than a 'keyboard warrior' and taking your skills and energy into the real world where this crap happens would be something to respect



Oh dear. The concerns I have in the "real world" and the practical and demonstrable changes my involvement brings would shut you up in a split second, my dear.

I just learned not to brag about them a long time ago. I help people who really need help, and I don't care how trite that sounds, most of my work is in support of people in the most unimaginable poverty. You don't have a. fucking. clue. what I do or who I am or what I represent in myself. You don't know me, we've barely met. 
Where do you think all this contempt for the "left" comes from? You think I sit around reading "Class War" and picking my arse all day? No - you probably think I'm some sort of jackbooted hiccup. Your ignorant little prejudices are far more overt than mine, clearly. I'm perfectly happy with the very real contribution I make to the global village on a daily basis. That's why I have nothing to hide or fear from a bunch of opinionated arseholes who seem to whine more about their late social security payments than be concerned that most others have none at all.



> you may even develop a sense of self-pride and perspective which I truly believe would help  you stop being so very angry with yourself and blaming others as a consequence.


 
Spare me the cod psycho-analysis, I'm actually finding it rather funny now, and that is not the desired effect I'm sure. Go back and read the thread properly, ignoring the terrified cawing jackdaws who quote me like the demented pointless little parrots who think that their anti-depressant/booze-scheduled lives mean anything more than the squawking noises they make.

You might learn something.

Oh and bear this in mind - if you were a bloke I would have called you a myopic fuck-pond or something by now. 

So in that respect, I am definitely a sexist, and proudly so. 

What do YOU do for a living that makes YOU such the Virgin Mary anyway?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 19, 2011)

I'd just like to refer to my post some pages ago mentioning this thread and pk has the half life of plutonium.


----------



## pk (Jan 20, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I'd just like to refer to my post some pages ago mentioning this thread and pk has the half life of plutonium.


 
I'd just like to refer to your thread you posted some years ago simply entitled "Nigger". It was sensibly censored by the moderators, I believe.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/230007-N-gger

I believe you are precisely the type of tragic hypocrite I have been talking about for the last few pages.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 20, 2011)

If only you tried half as hard at questioning your own 'gut instincts'.


----------



## pk (Jan 20, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> If only you tried half as hard at questioning your own 'gut instincts'.


 
Feeling a bit 'gutted' are we?

Never mind, why don't you just have some more valium?

Oh - speaking of which...

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...fooked?p=6115689&highlight=valium#post6115689


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 20, 2011)

Well, at least it would be if you tried a little harder.


----------



## pk (Jan 20, 2011)

Do us a favour. Fuck off.


----------



## pk (Jan 20, 2011)

Yeah I thought as much. Same time tomorrow then?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 20, 2011)

Thread called Nigger. Edgy.


----------



## pk (Jan 20, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Thread called Nigger. Edgy.


 
Kombat cacking, it seems.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 20, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Thread called Nigger. Edgy.


 
I'd have thought you would say "racist" or "asian" or some other words of idiocy. Are you slipping below your own low standards?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 20, 2011)

Clown shoes


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 20, 2011)

When you're being accused of bigotry by Baroness Warsi you know you've crossed a line...



> Prejudice against Muslims has "passed the dinner-table test" and become socially acceptable in the UK, a senior Conservative is to say.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12235237


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 20, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> When you're being accused of bigotry by Baroness Warsi you know you've crossed a line...
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12235237


 

What is this non story exactly? "Some people are racist" just about sums it up. _Who_ is being accused of racism exactly. It is almost as if she wants to police people's private conversations.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 20, 2011)

dp


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 20, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> What is this non story exactly? "Some people are racist" just about sums it up.



Yes, we _should _accept that some people are racist, is that the end of the conversation then? Is there nothing to be gained from further discussion about why and how it is impacting society?



> _Who_ is being accused of racism exactly. *It is almost as if she wants to police people's private conversations*.



 It appears  to be more wanting to engage _honestly_ with the growing trend of 'Muslims' being characterised as the 'bogeyman' and how socially acceptable it has become to discriminate against them on account of them being 'Muslim'.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 20, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes, we _should _accept that some people are racist, is that the end of the conversation then? Is there nothing to be gained from further discussion about why and how it is impacting society?
> 
> 
> 
> It appears  to be more wanting to engage _honestly_ with the growing trend of 'Muslims' being characterised as the 'bogeyman' and how socially acceptable it has become to discriminate against them on account of them being 'Muslim'.


 
What was she saying exactly, that's what I mean, it was so woolly I don't get it. Also, why exactly did Dr Ringding post this up and how does it have anything to do with the thread (apols if I've missed the point here)

Of course racism should be fucking challenged, but exactly what has all this dinner party stuff got to do  with it? People being abused racially on the street, or at work, or turned down for jobs is actually racism in action, I don't think there's any shortage of cases that like unfortunately. Maybe I'm saying she could have picked a better example quite easily but she is so very far away from the experiences of ordinary people that she couldn't do that.

In terms of people being characterised as bogeymen she could also have mentioned single mums, disabled people on benefits and so on, but to be honest I'm not too worried about what people in dinner parties say about them either, it's more about our media and politicians attitudes.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 20, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes, we _should _accept that some people are racist, is that the end of the conversation then? Is there nothing to be gained from further discussion about why and how it is impacting society?
> 
> 
> 
> It appears  to be more wanting to engage _honestly_ with the growing trend of 'Muslims' being characterised as the 'bogeyman' and how socially acceptable it has become to discriminate against them on account of them being 'Muslim'.


 
You're racist. What should we do about you?


----------



## pk (Jan 20, 2011)

Rutita1, I would hope you have taken the time to read my responses to your post above... it would be a shame if you failed to show any intellectual maturity by failing to acknowledge the valid points I made in it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 21, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> You're racist. What should we do about you?


 
I think you should _show_ me in which way I am racist .


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> You should _show_ me in which way I am racist .


 
You should show me some of these "valid points" you have accused me of ignoring here.


----------



## chazegee (Jan 21, 2011)

Meanwhile in Barnsley...


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

chazegee said:


> Meanwhile in Barnsley...


 
I think the original point has all but burned out. And yeah I've been a tenacious little shit throughout this dumb thread but I think I have had a right to be.

Someone let me know if there are any "valid points" that I appear not to have registered yet, it seems Rutita1 has taken the night off, gawd bless her.

I just think people who just beat themselves down into silence over issues they fear to speak up about are not the kind of people that are equipped to represent the sort of decent society the planet needs right now.

It also seems to me that very few people on this forum have any friends or relatives or loved ones in the armed forces fighting in deserts against this very shit.

When a land is ruled by tribal people who spend all the money blowing up schools just because they teach girls.

It's as if we are not even, as a country, at war at all. Hello!!

Very depressing stuff if people can't even talk about this stuff. Basic human issues of justice and freedom. All off limits apparently. Wow, how wonderful.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> When a land is ruled by tribal people who spend all the money blowing up schools just because they teach girls.



'They' spend 'all the money blowing up schools'?

So, you're a tubthumper for the Afghan war?

....and yes I have a couple of mates that regularly end up there but I don't translate my fears for their safety into hate for Muslims.


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> I think the original point has all but burned out. And yeah I've been a tenacious little shit throughout this dumb thread but I think I have had a right to be.
> 
> Someone let me know if there are any "valid points" that I appear not to have registered yet, it seems Rutita1 has taken the night off, gawd bless her.
> 
> ...


 
what a massive pile of steaming horseshit.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Very depressing stuff if people can't even talk about this stuff. Basic human issues of justice and freedom. All off limits apparently. Wow, how wonderful.


 
And here it is. The inevitable moronic moan that it's an attack on freedom of speech if anyone criticises ridiculous prejudiced garbage. We can discuss it. We just have. What you can't expect is to spout bigoted bullshit and not to be called on it. If you don't like that then tough shit.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

belboid said:


> what a massive pile of steaming horseshit.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> And here it is. The inevitable moronic moan that it's an attack on freedom of speech if anyone criticises ridiculous prejudiced garbage. We can discuss it. We just have. What you can't expect is to spout bigoted bullshit and not to be called on it. If you don't like that then tough shit.



YOU have yet to show anything that disproves the figures from Norway, in fact you've only sered to cloud the issue by mumbling about detection rates and "reality", then completely ignoring my reply to your utterly inconclusive post.

I fail to see what is "ridiculous prejudiced garbage" in a set of statistics that you have utterly failed to prove are just lies made up by some senior Norwegian cop.

In fact the only bigotry here is against said cop, she must be lying if she's a cop, right??


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> 'They' spend 'all the money blowing up schools'?
> 
> So, you're a tubthumper for the Afghan war?
> 
> ....and yes I have a couple of mates that regularly end up there but I don't translate my fears for their safety into hate for Muslims.



Neither do I you twat, this is about islam. You remember - you said you hate islam, right?

Why is that? Why did you say you're the only one here with a real reason to hate islam on page 2 of this thread??

Why are you too scared to answer that?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> YOU have yet to show anything that disproves the figures from Norway, in fact you've only sered to cloud the issue by mumbling about detection rates and "reality", then completely ignoring my reply to your utterly inconclusive post.
> 
> I fail to see what is "ridiculous prejudiced garbage" in a set of statistics that you have utterly failed to prove are just lies made up by some senior Norwegian cop.
> 
> In fact the only bigotry here is against said cop, she must be lying if she's a cop, right??


 
Is this the figures that 100% of rapes commited in Oslo are by Johnny Foreigner?


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Is this the figures that 100% of rapes commited in Oslo are by Johnny Foreigner?


 
What do you think, genius?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

I think you need to engage your brain before putting your mouth in gear.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

Perhaps you've completely changed your tune about the first sentence of your post here, and totally bottled out of elaborating on the second. 



DrRingDing said:


> You're presuming I'm saying this doesn't go on. It does.
> 
> I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

You lack of logic is disapointing but predictable.

Do 100% of rapes in Oslo come from effniks?


----------



## hipipol (Jan 21, 2011)

Islam, like every single one of the Abrahamic liar cults, iis utter tosh
Same for Judaism and Christianity, all utter tosh
All have used their 'faith' as excuses to perpetrate the vilest horros ever known on the other group
They all be stupid
No one book, whichever lying cunt wrote it, is total truth


----------



## hipipol (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You lack of logic is disapointing but predictable.
> 
> Do 100% of rapes in Oslo come from effniks?



Quite possibly

Have you ever been to Norway?

Went there once for 2 days by7 accident

Awful, awful place


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> You lack of logic is disapointing but predictable.
> 
> Do 100% of rapes in Oslo come from effniks?


 
According to police figures that nobody has yet disproved, they do.

Your lack of clarity in what you meant when you said "I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values" is disappointing but predictable.


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> According to police figures that nobody has yet disproved, they do.


 
not even the figures you quote claim that. Stupid boy


----------



## Random (Jan 21, 2011)

belboid said:


> not even the figures you quote claim that. Stupid boy


 
PK is a well known drama queen/king and attention seeker. Why people keep on arguing and feeding him is beyind me. He's not even witty and amusing, like phildwyer or spymaster.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

belboid said:


> not even the figures you quote claim that. Stupid boy


 
Clearly in the category of "assault rapes" they do. But you don't give a toss and you haven't even read the relevant links.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

hipipol said:


> Quite possibly
> 
> Have you ever been to Norway?
> 
> ...


 
I've not been there either... but I went all over Finland... it's a very odd and depressing part of the world, massive suicide rates, near permanent darkness for much of the year, wouldn't wanna live there in a million years.


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Clearly in the category of "assault rapes" they do. But you don't give a toss and you haven't even read the relevant links.


 
So, not what you just claimed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> It also seems to me that very few people on this forum have any friends or relatives or loved ones in the armed forces fighting in deserts against this very shit.


Oh for fuck's sake.
Plenty of us have friends or comrades serving there. They're not "fighting against this shit". They're being sacrificed to fig-leaf the USA's attempt to dominate the region. My regt alone (now known as "the Rifles") has suffered more than 30 fatalities in the 'stan.


> When a land is ruled by tribal people who spend all the money blowing up schools just because they teach girls.


Inaccurate crap. Afghanistan isn't ruled by any such people, more correctly it isn't rules *as a country* at all, which allows the people who call themselves "the Taliban" to range through *parts* of the country at will, conducting profitable smuggling operations between Pakistan and Iran (fuel and consumer goods to Pakistan, opium products and "banned" technologies to Iran).


> It's as if we are not even, as a country, at war at all. Hello!!


We're not "at war". There was never any official declaration of war, just an attempt to justify the invasion through reference to (IIRC) article 51 of the UN charter. There's no actual legal basis with even the threadbareness of the Iraq justifications.
Our armed forces are *engaged* in a military situation, but it's not a "war", it's the policing of insurgency. It's them that are being required to do this, NOT "the country".


> Very depressing stuff if people can't even talk about this stuff. Basic human issues of justice and freedom. All off limits apparently. Wow, how wonderful.


Stop playing the martyr. It pisses on the memories of the people you're  pretending to have respect for.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> 'They' spend 'all the money blowing up schools'?
> 
> So, you're a tubthumper for the Afghan war?
> 
> ....and yes I have a couple of mates that regularly end up there but I don't translate my fears for their safety into hate for Muslims.


 
Me neither. I don't like that they're there, or that our arsehole government keeps them there to lend legitimacy to the US's need for strategic control in  that part of the world, whatever the cost in lives, but what I like even less is people who try to justify their prejudices through reference to a conflict that many of them refuse to look beyond the surface of.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

pk, you think NATO forces invaded Afghanistan in order to end the human rights abuses of the Taliban? 

You think the continuation of this war has anything to do with justice or freedom?

Fuck!

I don't have any friends or relatives there, thank fuck. If I did, I'd just be even more angry about the war than I already am.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

belboid said:


> So, not what you just claimed.


 
I've claimed nothing of the sort, I've pointed to figures provided by people who deal with this sort of thing in an official capacity.

You're just too fucking thick too see the difference.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2011)

> "The Iranians are doing this because they fundamentally disagree with our way of life," he said. "At some point we have got to get our head out of the sand and understand Iraq is one part of a far bigger picture right across the region. People are going to have to face that struggle."


.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Your lack of clarity in what you meant when you said "I'd wager that I'm the only one on this thread to have really suffered at the hands of 'traditional' islamic values" is disappointing but predictable.



If you hadn't stooped to petty ad hominem remarks and kept it civil then maybe I'd want to talk openly. 

Seeing as you obviously want to exploit my shitty experience, you, my old chestnut, can fuck right off.


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> I've claimed nothing of the sort,


 
oh yes you did.  Really, cant you remember what you write from one second to the next?



DrRingDing said:


> Do 100% of rapes in Oslo come from effniks?





pk said:


> According to police figures that nobody has yet disproved, they do.



And this is all you are left with, one highly dodgy figure from one cop.  Pretty much worthless


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

hipipol said:


> Quite possibly
> 
> Have you ever been to Norway?
> 
> ...


 
I've been to Norway a few times. 

Good waffles and jam.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> pk, you think NATO forces invaded Afghanistan in order to end the human rights abuses of the Taliban?


 
I think it was a factor, and certainly played a role in the PR spin that led UK forces to head over there.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> I think it was a factor.


 
I'm sorry, but that is extraordinarily naive.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> If you hadn't stooped to petty ad hominem remarks and kept it civil then maybe I'd want to talk openly.



Oh you have to be fucking kidding me, you hypoctitical fuckwit.



> Seeing as you obviously want to exploit my shitty experience, you, my old chestnut, can fuck right off.



I don't want to "exploit" anything, you made a bold claim and then you ran away when asked to expand on it.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm sorry, but that is extraordinarily naive.


 
I'm not being naive, everyone here knows full well it was about fuel pipelines dressed up as 9/11 revenge, plus a huge push from military contractors to sell more weapons... but you think there was no use of human rights abuses in convincing the public that we should join the fight??


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

That's not what I asked. Do I think that the repressive nature of the Taliban and a desire to free the Afghan people from their rule was a factor in the decision to invade? Absolutely not. Has it been a factor in the propaganda campaign? Yes, but that is a different question, and in fact, it has only been used to justify the war since the invasion took place. When it took place, the only justification given was the 'need to deal with al Qaida'.

I believe the phrase apologists for this kind of thing use is 'mission creep'.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

If pk claimed that all rapes in Oslo were perpetrated by non-Western immigrants that is patently false. I'm guessing what s/he refers to is a widely debated statistic that was put out by the top police chief of Oslo last year where she showed that all 41 _reported_ rapes _involving GBH or threats thereof _had NWIs as defendants. The latest figure I've heard is that an estimated 16000 rapes happen in Norway every year. I strongly doubt that NWIs are responsible for all of those, whether in Oslo or elsewhere.


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

TruXta said:


> If pk claimed that all rapes in Oslo were perpetrated by non-Western immigrants that is patently false. I'm guessing what s/he refers to is a widely debated statistic that was put out by the top police chief of Oslo last year where she showed that all 41 _reported_ rapes _involving GBH or threats thereof _had NWIs as defendants. The latest figure I've heard is that an estimated 16000 rapes happen in Norway every year. I strongly doubt that NWIs are responsible for all of those, whether in Oslo or elsewhere.


 
I think you're right, but what he _actually_ said was... as above.

Of course what else he is doing, is cherry picking a single type of crime, the one, and seemiongly only one, that supports his daft argument, and using that as proof. Without really meaning to he has written off those other 15959 rapes as much less important than the ones committed by _foreigners_, which is also pretty shitty.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

It's a bit like when ethnic whiteys kill and maim each other that's just ya know, everyday violence. But when the ethnic peeps are at it, well that's gorra be honor killings then m'lord!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

belboid said:


> I think you're right, but what he _actually_ said was... as above.
> 
> Of course what else he is doing, is cherry picking a single type of crime, the one, and seemiongly only one, that supports his daft argument, and using that as proof. Without really meaning to he has written off those other 15959 rapes as much less important than the ones committed by _foreigners_, which is also pretty shitty.



To look sensibly at the stats, you need more information. You can make a distorted case by choosing your data carefully. For instance, in the period preceding the three years the copper chose, it may not have been the case that the majority of such crimes were committed by ethnic minorities. This is a very low figure, after all, so it will be subject to a fair bit of random variation. Did she choose this period to look at and then find this statistic? Or did she notice the statistic and choose the period to report accordingly? These are two very different things to do.

Also, you have to look at other factors. For instance, is it the case that rapes involving GBH are generally committed more by people from certain socio-economic groups than others? The ethnic groups concerned may be a small minority overall, but what percentage are they of lower socio-economic groups that are over-represented anyway in this kind of crime? 

In short, this statistic is pretty worthless on its own even if it's true.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

belboid said:


> oh yes you did.  Really, cant you remember what you write from one second to the next?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I'd be prepared to take her word over yours any day.

Not as if you've said anything worth a shit here in 70+ pages anyway.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

There's a lot more statistics out there, but stated very very simply, it is true that NWIs are over-represented in the sexual crime stats for *OSLO*, and have been for some time. In 2000 65% (72 of 111) of all accused of rape in Oslo were NWIs. In 2004 the proportion was 50%, whereas overall the proportion of NWIs in Oslo's population was about 18%. OTOH, while 80% of victims in 2000 were white, in 2004 34% were non-white (I can't find any newer numbers there).


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Not as if you've said anything worth a shit here in 70+ pages anyway.


pot/kettle


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

So, pk, are you prepared to admit that you were wrong about the rape stats in Oslo?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

TruXta said:


> There's a lot more statistics out there, but stated very very simply, it is true that NWIs are over-represented in the sexual crime stats for *OSLO*, and have been for some time. In 2000 65% (72 of 111) of all accused of rape in Oslo were NWIs. In 2004 the proportion was 50%, whereas overall the proportion of NWIs in Oslo's population was about 18%. OTOH, while 80% of victims in 2000 were white, in 2004 34% were non-white (I can't find any newer numbers there).


 
These are tiny figures from which to spot trends, though. Also, while overall NWIs in Oslo may be 18 per cent, what percentage are they of the lowest socio-economic groups, and how does violent rape relate to social class. And how do other factors, such as the experience of racism and its alienating effect, fit in?

You've got to be so careful drawing conclusions from this kind of stat. It could be that further investigation and comparisons with elsewhere show a strong correlation between the racist attitudes of the majority population and violent rape stats. In other words, it could be shortcomings in the culture of white Norwegians that is the problem.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

I should add that in the groups that are violent, NWIs in Norway as a whole are less likely to perpetate sexual violence than ethnic Norwegians (data from 98-02). Source


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> These are tiny figures from which to spot trends, though. Also, while overall NWIs in Oslo may be 18 per cent, what percentage are they of the lowest socio-economic groups, and how does violent rape relate to social class. And how do other factors, such as the experience of racism and its alienating effect, fit in?


 
Those are all very pressing points. Young, poor men from Iraq and Somalia (particularly, but not exclusively) are a lot more likely to perpetrate violent sexual assault against both ethnic Norwegians and fellow NWIs than older more affluent NWIs from less traumatised countries. So, it's a mix of the usual structural causes of crime that apply to all groups of criminals, added to the fact that the alleged perpetrators have typically newly arrived from extremely violent places.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

Yep, that's another point. They are clearly damaged individuals but that damage is more likely to be the result of their experiences of war than their experiences of Islam. Add to that their experience of racism in Norway... The role Islam plays in all this is far from clear.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

Exactly. Even the term NWIs is misleading in some ways - ethnic Chinese and Filipinos in Norway which (to my admittedly scant knowledge) don't come from cultures that are known to be particularly philogynic, are _under-represented_ in the crime stats.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The role Islam plays in all this is far from clear.



I can't think of a worse explanation tbh. It's a bit like saying NW Europe prospered because they were Protestant, or that the Med countries are corrupt because they're Catholic. Culture does need to be in the causal mix, but culture does not equal religion or the other way around.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

I agree. I think between us, we've probably come up with half a dozen more important factors.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

<beats chest>*yay*</thinks of booze>


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> According to police figures that nobody has yet disproved, they do.


 
They are NOT police figures so far as I can see. There is nothing official on record about them other than a statement by a police officer in a TV interview. They are contradicted by the official police statistics. Which I admit doesn't completely disprove them since Inspector Rohde didn't define what constitutes an "assault rape" in the interview, however it doesn't tally with the official statistics from the Oslo police, the Oslo rape crisis centres, and the Norwegian government, regarding aggravated rape. So I can't see how the statement stands up to scrutiny without further evidence.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> They are NOT police figures so far as I can see. There is nothing official on record about them other than a statement by a police officer in a TV interview. They are contradicted by the official police statistics. Which I admit doesn't completely disprove them since Inspector Rohde didn't define what constitutes an "assault rape" in the interview, however it doesn't tally with the official statistics from the Oslo police, the Oslo rape crisis centres, and the Norwegian government, regarding aggravated rape. So I can't see how the statement stands up to scrutiny without further evidence.


 
I do think it's clear that they are police figures, inasmuch as the internal analysis team in the Oslo police force came up with them, as they have done on previous occasions. Whether you want to call that official or not is another matter, but insofar as the same data is fed into national statistics I don't see how the fact that they're not "official" (whatever you mean by that) has any bearing on their veracity.


----------



## Random (Jan 21, 2011)

TruXta said:


> I can't think of a worse explanation tbh. It's a bit like saying NW Europe prospered because they were Protestant, or that the Med countries are corrupt because they're Catholic.


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


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

What is your opinion of Weber's thesis? Is it convincing, do you think? How does it explain the rise of France? Cantoni's analysis of Germany appears to contradict the thesis. 

It seems likely to me that Protestantism was a convenient religion to use to promote the values of capitalism, but that the values of capitalism owe little to Protestantism itself. It seems more likely that capitalism influenced Protestantism than the other way round. Certainly the thesis that Protestantism was a precondition for the development of capitalism is one that would need _a lot of _justification. Far more likely that the Enlightenment was a necessary precondition, bringing about a new belief in the power of empiricism, but as the article you link to points out, the simple fact of enclosure seems the most likely explanation for the rise of capitalism in England. Before a place can industrialise, it needs to find a way to feed the factory workers, and that means more efficient farming. Enclosure may have been a terrible injustice, but it did lead pretty directly to more efficient farming methods. 

I think Weber's looking in the wrong place.


----------



## Random (Jan 21, 2011)

I think there's certainly something in it, but that commercialisation can also be seen as involved in the role of protestantism, especially in the Netherlands and England.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

You could say that the Protestant emphasis on reading the bible for yourself was an advance on the monolithic Catholic doctrine whereby the secrets of the faith were guarded by the clergy. That is an advance in thought that was possibly in a very general way a precondition for the rise of capitalism as it happened. 

I find the argument that the specific work ethic emphasised by Protestantism was a driver for capitalist development far less convincing. More likely to me that the Protestant work ethic grew in importance as a result of capitalist pressure to produce an ever-growing economy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> You think posting up a 4 year old joke post changes anything?


could you tell me how telling a lie makes you not a liar?

on this thread you've changed the parameters of the argument to suit yourself, been as pedantic as you've ever accused others of being, been viciously rude to people and throughout there's been a general taint of dishonesty. someone who told lies four years ago is a proven liar, and this thread shows you're still at it. i ask again, why should people engage with you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> You lash out because you know I'm right, the deafening silence from your "comrades" tells me all I need to know, the shitty racism accusations, and the fear of having even an opinion on this issue in case you're shown to be an absolute hypocrite.
> 
> Pickmans, you've always been a little mongrel, only now you've nobody's arse to kiss, you're just treading water. You are nothing.
> 
> ...


 oh - and wasn't there a rather famous lie you told, something about being the epsom arsonist. you've rather a record of dishonesty, pk. so you can't be one of the 'genuine people', not if you're a lying little shit. actually, let's just look again at what you say about the genuine people. 





> It's the more genuine people I'm referring to who know I'm not wrong here, that refuse to engage with anything that might compromise the fake image they have of themselves.


this seems to me to say that these 'genuine people', in your view, refuse to engage with anything that might compromise the fake image they have of themselves.

is this really what you wanted to say?


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> could you tell me how telling a lie makes you not a liar?



You post a thread from 4 years ago where I stated I was fucking off from these boards, which I did for a year or so, then again last year, and you cite this as proof of a lie? You were the one who flounced off after being caught reposting private dinner conversations in an attempt to smear the owner of this website, so don't give me your moral high-ground, get back to your anti-depressants and alcohol problems.

The only emotion you elicit from anyone is abject pity.


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You could say that the Protestant emphasis on reading the bible for yourself was an advance on the monolithic Catholic doctrine whereby the secrets of the faith were guarded by the clergy. That is an advance in thought that was possibly in a very general way a precondition for the rise of capitalism as it happened.
> 
> I find the argument that the specific work ethic emphasised by Protestantism was a driver for capitalist development far less convincing. More likely to me that the Protestant work ethic grew in importance as a result of capitalist pressure to produce an ever-growing economy.


 
My impression was that protestantisms attack on the old hierarchies (and not only religious ones), ones which were inherently tied up in the whole economic/political system, paved the way for the new merchant class to play a bigger role in society, neither capital nor protestantism caused the other, but they each greased the wheel that allowed them to become more dominant (if that makes sense).


----------



## Random (Jan 21, 2011)

dialectics


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> You post a thread from 4 years ago where I stated I was fucking off from these boards, which I did for a year or so, then again last year, and you cite this as proof of a lie? You were the one who flounced off after being caught reposting private dinner conversations in an attempt to smear the owner of this website, so don't give me your moral high-ground, get back to your anti-depressants and alcohol problems.
> 
> The only emotion you elicit from anyone is abject pity.


you're lying again. and i don't think you can say anything about four years ago this time.

but this thread from 2007 - in what way is that not proof of a lie? are you saying it wasn't always your plan to leave after 20,000 posts?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

@ belboid

That makes more sense, yes. Weber's specific argument concerned the work ethic, however, although as that wiki link states, he himself called it merely one 'elective affinity' among many. I simply question whether or not that ethic itself developed in response to capitalism – Weber is suggesting that capitalism developed as a response to the ethic, which is the bit I have trouble with.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

Random said:


> dialectics


 
Indeed


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you're lying again. and i don't think you can say anything about four years ago this time.
> 
> but this thread from 2007 - in what way is that not proof of a lie? are you saying it wasn't always your plan to leave after 20,000 posts?


 
What on earth are you waffling on about? So he changed his mind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> You post a thread from 4 years ago where I stated I was fucking off from these boards, which I did for a year or so, then again last year, and you cite this as proof of a lie? You were the one who flounced off after being caught reposting private dinner conversations in an attempt to smear the owner of this website, so don't give me your moral high-ground, get back to your anti-depressants and alcohol problems.
> 
> The only emotion you elicit from anyone is abject pity.


 oh - i note you're not disputing this bit: 





Pickman's model said:


> on this thread you've changed the parameters of the argument to suit yourself, been as pedantic as you've ever accused others of being, been viciously rude to people and throughout there's been a general taint of dishonesty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What on earth are you waffling on about? So he changed his mind.


let's give him the benefit of the doubt.

but the lies he's told about his so-called anti-fascist activities? i suppose he just 'changed his mind' about those.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 21, 2011)

Moving the goalposts yet again, Pick?


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What on earth are you waffling on about? So he changed his mind.


 
It's his definition of "proof". Fuck him, he has mental health issues I'm not remotely interested in confronting.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

TruXta said:


> I do think it's clear that they are police figures, inasmuch as the internal analysis team in the Oslo police force came up with them, as they have done on previous occasions. Whether you want to call that official or not is another matter, but insofar as the same data is fed into national statistics I don't see how the fact that they're not "official" (whatever you mean by that) has any bearing on their veracity.


 
Precisely this, and I do think that you and littlebabyjesus have indeed come up with interesting factors that may have a bearing on the figures stated. Certainly more of an intelligent approach than the moronic efforts of belboid's "I don't trust coppers, I'm an anarchist, me"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> I think it was a factor...


It wasn't. 
"We" don't do altruistic intervention. What "we" do is protect our interests: In this case, giving the USA some spurious cod-legitimacy when it decided to invade.


> ...and certainly played a role in the PR spin that led UK forces to head over there.


It's an excuse as old as warfare itself.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm not being naive, everyone here knows full well it was about fuel pipelines dressed up as 9/11 revenge, plus a huge push from military contractors to sell more weapons... but you think there was no use of human rights abuses in convincing the public that we should join the fight??


 
We know that the excuse of "human rights abuses" was deployed to establish some spurious "humanitarian" element to the invasion, but that's all it was. There was no *actual* humanitarian reasoning behind the invasion, just a combination of half thought-out neocon policy aims, such as  establishing US footholds in the region to counterbalance the Russian and Chinese presences.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Y....so don't give me your moral high-ground, get back to your anti-depressants and alcohol problems.



This thread has been in pretty good humour so far so let's keep it from going nuclear. There's no excuse for using someone's mental health against them, what's next taking the piss out of someone for having cancer?


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> It wasn't.
> "We" don't do altruistic intervention. What "we" do is protect our interests: In this case, giving the USA some spurious cod-legitimacy when it decided to invade.
> 
> It's an excuse as old as warfare itself.



I'm not disagreeing with this, however I am of the belief that the only good taliban fighter is one in a bodybag.

Fuck them and their backward oppressive regime, and fuck anyone trying to impose that shit.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> This thread has been in pretty good humour so far so let's keep it from going nuclear. There's no excuse for using someone's mental health against them, what's next taking the piss out of someone for having cancer?


 
Right, so you'll be making the same complaints when I get accused of doing coke or generally being some sort of drug addict... laughable really when the only drugs I do these days are the odd ale or bottle of wine, or coffee and cigarettes...


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Right, so you'll be making the same complaints when I get accused of doing coke or generally being some sort of drug addict... laughable really when the only drugs I do these days are the odd ale or bottle of wine, or coffee and cigarettes...


 
Hoovering coke recreationally really isn't the same as having to take a drug for medical reasons. You know this.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Hoovering coke recreationally really isn't the same as having to take a drug for medical reasons. You know this.


 
Luckily I don't need to partake in either.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> It's his definition of "proof". Fuck him, he has mental health issues I'm not remotely interested in confronting.


 
The only one who comes across as having mental health issues is you. I mean, come on, who feels the need to write an enormous, back-slapping, self-important post to state they're stopping posting on the internet? Fucking pathetic, especially considering you went back on it a year later. Perhaps because your brand of trying to wind people up got you twatted too many times.

Still, nice and safe behind your computer screen eh


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 21, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> The only one who comes across as having mental health issues is you. I mean, come on, who feels the need to write an enormous, back-slapping, self-important post to state they're stopping posting on the internet? Fucking pathetic, especially considering you went back on it a year later. Perhaps because your brand of trying to wind people up got you twatted too many times.
> 
> Still, nice and safe behind your computer screen eh



I think that's enough.

Back on track.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> The only one who comes across as having mental health issues is you. I mean, come on, who feels the need to write an enormous, back-slapping, self-important post to state they're stopping posting on the internet? Fucking pathetic, especially considering you went back on it a year later. Perhaps because your brand of trying to wind people up got you twatted too many times.
> 
> Still, nice and safe behind your computer screen eh


 
As long as it winds you up, it's clearly accomplishing its aims then isn't it? 

You've been here a month. People come and go all the time, only to re-appear again later.

And if you think that was a serious post instead of the pisstake it was then perhaps you need to learn a bit more about how the internet works, either that or fuck off and find another website where everyone agrees and there's no deviation from the cult-like approved method of debating online.

Like I'd give a fuck either way.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 21, 2011)

Racism


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> As long as it winds you up, it's clearly accomplishing its aims then isn't it?
> 
> You've been here a month. People come and go all the time, only to re-appear again later.
> 
> ...


 
Self important prick... no-one cares that much about your opinion, just like they don't care about mine, or anyone else's. It's the internet, get over yourself lad.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> It's his definition of "proof". Fuck him, he has mental health issues I'm not remotely interested in confronting.


 
you're lying again.

if you have one iota of proof that i am taking anti-depressants or have been at any point since i first posted here, or that i have an 'alcohol problem', let's see it now. and the same thing goes for mental health issues - put up, or apologise.

so, in brief - apology please.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

PlaidDragon said:


> Self important prick... no-one cares that much about your opinion, just like they don't care about mine, or anyone else's. It's the internet, get over yourself lad.


 
Sigh... precisely the same point I was trying to make to you. I guess the "mental health issues" thing touched a nerve, eh?

Fuck off new boy, don't come here telling me how to post.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you're lying again.
> 
> if you have one iota of proof that i am taking anti-depressants or have been at any point since i first posted here, or that i have an 'alcohol problem', let's see it now. and the same thing goes for mental health issues - put up, or apologise.
> 
> so, in brief - apology please.


 
LOL yeah, as soon as I've had my sides stitched back together...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> LOL yeah, as soon as I've had my sides stitched back together...


is that a yeah, you'll post up the evidence or a yeah, there's an apology on its way?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 21, 2011)

Anyway, I wonder how this would have played out if it was the other way around. White men preying on vulnerable muslim girls. We might have been asking why these young muslim girls were so vulnerable, out on the streets, going back with these older men to take drugs and get abused. We might have been asking where were their protectors, their families, their social support networks. Of course, nobody would be suprised that white men brought up in a post-Christian society were abusing women. Sickened and disgusted, yes, surpised, not really.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Anyway, I wonder how this would have played out if it was the other way around. White men preying on vulnerable muslim girls. We might have been asking why these young muslim girls were so vulnerable, out on the streets, going back with these older men to take drugs and get abused. We might have been asking where were their protectors, their families, their social support networks. Of course, nobody would be suprised that white men brought up in a post-Christian society were abusing women. Sickened and disgusted, yes, surpised, not really.



Of course such a scenario is unlikely given what happens to the muslim girls from large Pakistani communities who dare to go out with non-muslim boys...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> *Of course such a scenario is unlikely* given what happens to the muslim girls from large Pakistani communities who dare to go out with non-muslim boys...


 
that's so often the problem with hypothetical scenarios, isn't it.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Of course such a scenario is unlikely given what happens to the muslim girls from large Pakistani communities who dare to go out with non-muslim boys...


 
Is this a reference to Bend it Like Beckham?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 21, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Anyway, I wonder how this would have played out if it was the other way around. White men preying on vulnerable muslim girls. We might have been asking why these young muslim  Of course, nobody would be suprised that white men brought up in a post-Christian society were abusing women. Sickened and disgusted, yes, surpised, not really.


 

Some of these questions have been asked on this thread about the victims in this case:



> girls were so vulnerable, out on the streets, going back with these older men to take drugs and get abused. We might have been asking where were their protectors, their families, their social support networks.



Apparently, these questions are not important.


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Some of these questions have been asked on this thread about the victims in this case:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, these questions are not important.



Well apparently my questions to you aren't important either. You conveniently forgot to answer them anyway.

Muslim girls all too often face very serious consequences for daring to date infidel boys.

But everyone knows that anyway.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> The acceptance of this simple statement is what differentiates you from the silent lemmings.
> 
> The operative word being "perhaps". I guess the question is how much worse is the issue and how many young girls could have been protected from these gangs had the powers that be not been cowering under illogical constraints of political correctness and instead looked at the picture without prejudice nor a falsely imposed blindness.


or you could just drop this whole macho "protect" bollocks. you could ask why so many kids growing up in care end up abused, which is the more accurate representation of this whole farrago? the idea of you protecting young women sends a shiver down my spine tbf.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 21, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> or you could just drop this whole macho "protect" bollocks. you could ask why so many kids growing up in care end up abused, which is the more accurate representation of this whole farrago? *the idea of you protecting young women sends a shiver down my spine tbf*.



He doesn't, unless they do what they are told and agree with him. If not, the are 'silly little girls'. He doesn't give a flying fuck.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Well apparently my questions to you aren't important either. You conveniently forgot to answer them anyway.


 I didn't forget. I had more important things to do.I would tell you what I do or what I was doing but hey like you I don't like to brag. 



> Muslim girls all too often face very serious consequences for daring to date infidel boys.
> 
> But everyone knows that anyway.



Whoosh! 



> Some of these questions have been asked on this thread about the victims in this case........Apparently, these questions are not important.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Well apparently my questions to you aren't important either. You conveniently forgot to answer them anyway.
> 
> Muslim girls all too often face very serious consequences for daring to date infidel boys.
> 
> But everyone knows that anyway.



Like Hassidic Jewish girls. What can be done?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> *This thread has been in pretty good humour so far* so let's keep it from going nuclear.


 
Eh?  Hardly! 

Racism
Islamaphobia
Sexism
 ...and now reinforcing the stigma of having mental health issues...


----------



## Riklet (Jan 22, 2011)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-12248091

Guys you disappoint me, why are you not arguing about this story yet, and Islamic theology vs south Asian culture's role in it?

It's got...

Harry Potter (!!!)
Muslims
Bengali domestic violence
Prison sentences
Lots of room for speculation about family/socio-cultural pressure and oppression (woman pleeding for her brother not to be jailed)

Surely it's a winner?


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Eh?  Hardly!
> 
> Racism
> Islamaphobia
> ...


 
He was saying PK had a drug problem first tbf, and I see your Islamophobia and raise you an Islamofascism


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 22, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Like Hassidic Jewish girls. What can be done?


if my daughter goes out with a wrong un, there's fucking big trouble!!!!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

IC3D said:


> He was saying PK had a drug problem first tbf, and I see your Islamophobia and raise you an Islamofascism


 
Yet you haven't challenged me on the racism or sexism...Some types of bigotry is more acceptable than others?


----------



## Riklet (Jan 22, 2011)

Islamofacism is a fucking lame term and just makes anyone who uses it sound like a moron.

_"God, the Jesusofacists and Judeofacists are almost as bad as the Islamofacists ffs!"_


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

Riklet said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-12248091
> 
> Guys you disappoint me, why are you not arguing about this story yet, and Islamic theology vs south Asian culture's role in it?
> 
> ...


 
Well lets roll with it, its fair to say that a significant group in this country live by this crap and should be exposed whenever possible for the vile twats they are


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yet you haven't challenged me on the racism or sexism...


 
well I could have some sexist symapathies but I think Islamophobia is a crap term


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> or you could just drop this whole macho "protect" bollocks. you could ask why so many kids growing up in care end up abused, which is the more accurate representation of this whole farrago? the idea of you protecting young women sends a shiver down my spine tbf.


 
You can blame the social services for a raft of things, but the truth is they're underfunded, under-resourced, and all too oftem blamed for failings by the press without any consideration for their impossible work load.

Asking where these kids come from is a very portent question, but I don't think you would like the answers.

Vulnerable children are all too often the result of crack/smack abusing parents, alcoholics, and after they begin absconding from the care centres they are often just criminalised and left to their fate.

Never enough money for councils to provide local care networks for these kids, but always enough money for business centres and economic initiatives. Varies from city to city but look at where the money is really going...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

IC3D said:


> well I could have some sexist symapathies but I think Islamophobia is a crap term


 
So, you don't like the terminology? What about the concept? Does it exist? Is there evidence of it on this thread?

By the way, IMO sympathy is a _crap_ pat on the back that acknowledges something but suggests that others should accept the way it is, empathy however...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Well lets roll with it, its fair to say that a significant group in this country live by this crap and should be exposed whenever possible for the vile twats they are


 
What's most shocking to me about that case is that brother, mother and father all agreed with each other. You have to pity girls born into such families. They must conform or have the strength to disown their families. The very idea that you can be born a Muslim, that it is something that you don't choose but is chosen for you, is abhorrent. 

There clearly is a problem with such a culture. It _is_ ridiculous to deny that.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I didn't forget. I had more important things to do.I would tell you what I do or what I was doing but hey like you I don't like to brag.
> 
> 
> 
> Whoosh!


 
Let's see a list of all these "valid points" you keep harping on about and accusing me of ignoring, then. Off you pop.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> So, you don't like the terminology? What about the concept? Does it exist? Is there evidence of it on this thread?


 
I don't like it either. I think it's an ill-conceived and poorly defined concept. It implies that Islam is more than it is – just a belief system.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What's most shocking to me about that case is that brother, mother and father all agreed with each other. You have to pity girls born into such families. They must conform or have the strength to disown their families. The very idea that you can be born a Muslim, that it is something that you don't choose but is chosen for you, is abhorrent.
> 
> There clearly is a problem with such a culture. It _is_ ridiculous to deny that.


 
But try to talk rationally about it and look what happens!!


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> So, you don't like the terminology? What about the concept? Does it exist? Is there evidence of it on this thread?


 
I think if your faced with bigots you fight them and don't ignore it because its dictated by liberal society, PK is not a bigot he's trolling but the essential point stands that that culture conditions our behaviour and some people have conditioning that comes from a pretty bigoted version of religion where thay can be sexists and not have the guilt that I might feel treating someone in a certain way. The concept of Islamaphobia doesn't exist (like the rape gangs) its a silly made up media word.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What's most shocking to me about that case is that brother, mother and father all agreed with each other. You have to pity girls born into such families. They must conform or have the strength to disown their families. The very idea that you can be born a Muslim, that it is something that you don't choose but is chosen for you, is abhorrent.
> 
> There clearly is a problem with such a culture. It _is_ ridiculous to deny that.


 Yeah totally you read it thinking OK the mums going to step in now and then oh no she didn't


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Off you pop.



Page 82 



pk said:


> I'm bowing out of this thread now, made my point, in danger of over-egging the cake.



Page 13. 




> .... this is about islam.


 Page 78


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

IC3D said:


> I think if your faced with bigots you fight them and don't ignore it because its dictated by liberal society, PK is not a bigot he's trolling



_Islamaphobia_ is a made up media word with no 'meaning' but _trolling _isn't? I understand why you don't like the term but don't make excuses or ignore it.

Some serious double standards at play there IMO. You are suggesting that pk doesn't really think in the way he does but is posting here to only get a rise?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

Define Islamophobia.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Page 82


 
Oh I was going to leave it alone. Then I saw it was attracting fools like you and thought I'd have a little fun instead.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Define Islamophobia.


It's Baroness Warsi getting sworn at by some tacky-chavs apparently.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Oh I was going to leave it alone. Then I saw it was attracting fools like you and thought I'd have a little fun instead.


 
Yeah, it's all a laugh and a fun winding 'fools' up exercise for you eh?

You are not a convincing liar btw.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Islamaphobia is a made up media word with no meaning but trolling isn't?
> 
> Some serious double standards at play there IMO. You are suggesting that pk doesn't really think in the way he does but is posting here to only get a rise?


 
Islamophobia is Muslims and Trots trolling critics of said religion. The roots of the argument that Pakistani rape gangs are influenced by cultural and religious hairy gonads have not been callenged in any significant way on this thread really have they,I can't speak for PK I'm sure he believes what he says.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah, it's all a laugh and a fun winding 'fools' up exercise for you eh?
> 
> You are not a convincing liar btw.


 
And you are not a very convincing feminist.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

IC3D said:


> I can't speak for PK I'm sure he believes what he says.


 
I appreciate the fact that you're one of the few people not putting words into my mouth and sittingg back and saying "told you so!" which seems to be a popular method of what passes for debate.

I'm not sure what I believe but I'm prepared to entertain the notion that religion and culture had a massive part to play in these rapes.

And I've yet to be meaningfully convinced otherwise.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

It seems to me that Islamophobia is an attempt to define a racist attitude, but that it does so with reference to a belief system, which is a muddled approach. 

All racism involves cultural stereotyping, ie aspects beyond mere physical appearance, but difference in physical appearance is central to the racist to define who belongs to which group. Those who might be branded 'Islamophobes' are likely to be confused by the fact of a Muslim convert. This is an affront to their simplistic racist reasoning – but she looks like us! Putting myself in their place, I would imagine them thinking that 'their' girl had been 'stolen' by 'them', or some such bollocks. But however their confusion manifests itself, it is at root because they are racist, not because of some concept called 'Islamophobia'. 

The term racism is sufficient. There is no need for the term Islamophobia, nor is it a coherent concept, in that it is (has to be) fear/hatred of a _belief system_. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with fearing or hating a belief system. Adopting this term in fact plays into the hands of those who would say that you can be born a Muslim, those like that actress's family. This is nonsense and must be called such.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

I'm a Jehovah's Witness O' Phobe.

I hate those cunts, they'd sooner see their kids die than allow a blood transfusion.

I'm a Scientolophobe too. L Ron was a child abuser who got his kicks trying to force abortions with wire coathangers.

Islamophobe? Yeah I'll take that. In its most "pure" form it is a backward system.

I prefer the moderate version, such as that found in Albania, where women don't have to dress like postboxes and they can enjoy a beer and date or marry people from outside their community without causing huge issues.

I say if you want to live in a strict islamic society - fuck off to Saudi Arabia.

It'll never be tolerated in the UK, and only a complete cunt would turn a blind eye to the sort of cunts trying to install it here.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm a Jehovah's Witness O' Phobe.
> 
> I hate those cunts, they'd sooner see their kids die than allow a blood transfusion.
> 
> ...


fear appears to frame your life.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> fear appears to frame your life.


 
your life,


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

I have some sympathy for pk's point of view. 'It'll never be tolerated in the UK' is not necessarily true, though, is it? Hasidic Judaism has long been tolerated, and it has similarly fucked up attitudes. It's a difficult thing to legislate against. If people choose to live that way, trying to stop them may have worse consequences than taking no action at all.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have some sympathy for pk's point of view. 'It'll never be tolerated in the UK' is not necessarily true, though, is it? Hasidic Judaism has long been tolerated, and it has similarly fucked up attitudes. It's a difficult thing to legislate against. If people choose to live that way, trying to stop them may have worse consequences than taking no action at all.


it's not a religious thing tho, it's gender. simple as. and power imbalances.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> it's not a religious thing tho, it's gender. simple as. and power imbalances.


 
I don't know what you can do, though. In a primary school in Clerkenwell  I was standing opposite the other day (fuck that sounds bad doesn't it – I was just escaping for a fag), it was playtime and there were three girls no more than seven or eight with these extraordinary head bibs on that just showed their faces. They were playing quite enthusiastically, but being forced to only appear in public in that way from childhood is a big thing to do. I have some sympathy for the French attitude, which bans such things from state schools. These contraptions have to restrict the ways in which these girls can interact, both physically and emotionally, with the outside world – when does such treatment become unacceptable?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't know what you can do, though. In a primary school in Clerkenwell  I was standing opposite the other day (fuck that sounds bad doesn't it – I was just escaping for a fag), it was playtime and there were three girls no more than seven or eight with these extraordinary head bibs on that just showed their faces. They were playing quite enthusiastically, but being forced to only appear in public in that way from childhood is a big thing to do. I have some sympathy for the French attitude, which bans such things from state schools. These contraptions have to restrict the ways in which these girls can interact, both physically and emotionally, with the outside world – when does such treatment become unacceptable?


I don't disagree, but its still a fundamental gender-based inequality primarily. The fact that it happens under the auspices of "fundamental islam" (which is a cultural lie anyway), is something of a diversionary factor imo.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> fear appears to frame your life.


 
Concern. Not to be confused with fear.

Fear is where you essentially agree with someone but are frightened to let it be known.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have some sympathy for pk's point of view. 'It'll never be tolerated in the UK' is not necessarily true, though, is it? Hasidic Judaism has long been tolerated, and it has similarly fucked up attitudes. It's a difficult thing to legislate against. If people choose to live that way, trying to stop them may have worse consequences than taking no action at all.


 
Thing for me is I hate our homegrown culture as much as any religion, I fantasize about being a Frenchman drinking red wine whilst the the midday sun melts my cheese and petit pierre and chantelle play le dog bull englaise around my feet.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have some sympathy for pk's point of view. 'It'll never be tolerated in the UK' is not necessarily true, though, is it? Hasidic Judaism has long been tolerated, and it has similarly fucked up attitudes. It's a difficult thing to legislate against. If people choose to live that way, trying to stop them may have worse consequences than taking no action at all.


 
I don't see the hasidim murdering their own daughters in the name of their god these days very often.

I think they cut that shit out back when Aramaic was still a spoken language.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

IC3D said:


> Thing for me is I hate our homegrown culture as much as any religion, I fantasize about being a Frenchman drinking red wine whilst the the midday sun melts my cheese and petit pierre and chantelle play le dog bull englaise around my feet.


 
I'll take the cheese the wine the language and the lovely powerful women but I'll never be French.

 merde non.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> I don't see the hasidim murdering their own daughters in the name of their god these days very often.
> 
> I think they cut that shit out back when Aramaic was still a spoken language.


 
They do butcher babies cocks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

They separate the sexes, a woman's place is in the home, shaving your head and wearing a wig has certain echoes of the hijab. There are similarities.

I don't have a good answer to this. I don't actually want to say to anyone 'you must live like us'. But at the same time, the rest of us do have some duty towards those that grow up in repressive cultures and are trapped in unhappy lives.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They separate the sexes, a woman's place is in the home, shaving your head and wearing a wig has certain echoes of the hijab. There are similarities.


 
Islam is as diverse asthe Jewery, anyway push comes and we all get religion its lasted a long time so like a bad habit it takes strenth to resist.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Concern. Not to be confused with fear.
> 
> Fear is where you essentially agree with someone but are frightened to let it be known.


i agree with you on very little, even if you have the odd moment of clarity.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The rest of us do have some duty towards those that grow up in repressive cultures and are trapped in unhappy lives.


 
Quote of the thread that. 

Applies equally to the victims of religious abuse, or the 11/12 year old victims of shit parents who have been taken away from home, and then just been dumped by "the care system".

All these graduates of social sciences everywhere and studies show nothing that might offend.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Fear is where you essentially agree with someone but are frightened to let it be known.


 
I essentially agree with you raising these questions, and am not frightened to let it be known.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I essentially agree with you raising these questions, and am not frightened to let it be known.


 
Well that's true. Bless you.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> And you are not a very convincing feminist.


 
What on earth makes you think that _your_ personal defintion of what a 'feminist' is, or should be/think holds any weight?


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 22, 2011)

TruXta said:


> I do think it's clear that they are police figures, inasmuch as the internal analysis team in the Oslo police force came up with them, as they have done on previous occasions. Whether you want to call that official or not is another matter, but insofar as the same data is fed into national statistics I don't see how the fact that they're not "official" (whatever you mean by that) has any bearing on their veracity.


 
What I mean by it is that they aren't available from an official source backed up by the raw data and a proper explanation of what the categories mean and how the data was collected. Given that the numbers given conflict dramatically with other figures given for essentially the same data, I don't consider it reliable enough to use as a reason to ignore all the other evidence.

I believe there's a fundamental point here. The real argument is about whether you treat a crime according to the nature of the act or according to the nature of the perpetrator(s). Some of us on this thread primarily see the idea of a sexually predatory gang in terms of their actions, others look first at the gang. I consider the latter approach to be fundamentally flawed.

Firstly it can lead to a concentration on a particular type of criminal as if others committing the same crimes are a completely different thing. That's particularly dangerous in a situation where a group of people (in this case Muslims) are being subjected to a barrage of criticism in the media. There's a perfect example from those bringing up examples of Muslim women being attacked for being involved with non-Muslim men. This again isn't actually something specifically Muslim. It's classic fear of miscegenation and is something engaged in by the violent and ignorant of all backgrounds, races and religions. Here's an article giving a more general view.

Secondly, and in my view more importantly, it supports a very basic error in moral philosophy. So far as I am concerned any action has the same morality regardless of who takes it. Unfortunately for many people that's too difficult and uncomfortable an approach to take. They want to divide the world into "good people" and "bad people" so that they don't have to make a moral judgement about all their own actions, they simply want to be able to define themselves as being one of the "good people". To do so they need to create labels that can be attached to others in order to categorise them as "bad people". That way a gang of Muslims committing rape are doing so because they are Muslim and thus can be labelled as "bad people". Whereas a gang of mixed black and white youths in London doing precisely the same thing are doing so for completely different reasons and due to them having different labels attached in order to categorise them as "bad people".

The simple fact is that ALL the bad things Islam is used as an excuse for are also done allegedly for a whole load of other reasons. Which I consider makes it a complete waste of time to look at the excuses, and means that whereever the solutions lie they aren't going to be found by looking at Islam and Muslims exclusively.

In fact I think it's doing precisely the same thing as is being criticised. Treating "them" as inevitably worse than "us".


----------



## TruXta (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> Precisely this, and I do think that you and littlebabyjesus have indeed come up with interesting factors that may have a bearing on the figures stated. Certainly more of an intelligent approach than the moronic efforts of belboid's "I don't trust coppers, I'm an anarchist, me"


 
You do realise that I stated not long before that post that your claim that all rapes in Oslo were perpetrated by NWIs was wrong? And that I asked you whether you were prepared to retract that patently false statement? Just because I disagreed with ericjarvis on this minor point doesn't mean I agree with you.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 22, 2011)

ericjarvis, good points there. One quibble I have is this "fundamental flaw" you argue regarding whether we should look at actions or perpetrators. From a law enforcement perspective it makes perfect sense to at least check whether certain geographical, ethnic, cultural or ideological groups are disproportionally more or less likely to engage in various unlawful activities. Profiling as such - whatever the criteria used (place, race, gender, religion, culture, politics), isn't morally wrong I believe - if it was social sciences would be as immoral an exercise as it could get.

In terms of the rape statistics in Oslo it's of very little importance what religion the perpetrators confess to - after all about 4/5ths of the global population belong to one of the Big 4 (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism), so to put it in statistical terms, regressing on religion won't have much explanatory power.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 22, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Anyway, I wonder how this would have played out if it was the other way around. White men preying on vulnerable muslim girls. We might have been asking why these young muslim girls were so vulnerable, out on the streets, going back with these older men to take drugs and get abused. We might have been asking where were their protectors, their families, their social support networks. Of course, nobody would be suprised that white men brought up in a post-Christian society were abusing women. Sickened and disgusted, yes, surpised, not really.


 
Hasn't there already been sly finger pointing at the victims via their families already in this case?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm not disagreeing with this, however I am of the belief that the only good taliban fighter is one in a bodybag.
> 
> Fuck them and their backward oppressive regime, and fuck anyone trying to impose that shit.


 
There is no "regime".
Even at their most powerful, "The Taliban" didn't even control half of Afghanistan's territory, and even what they did control wasn't a single contiguous bloc. There's no real impetus to govern Afghanistan as a theocracy, merely to de-stabilise the region, and always in ways that serve Pakistan (and whoever is their "new best friend") best.

It's not about religion, at base.
it's about old-fashioned warlordism, the Taliban just as much as "the Northern Alliance", or even Karzai's government. Religion merely provides an excuse to invade territory, and to rape, pillage and plunder.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 22, 2011)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> or you could just drop this whole macho "protect" bollocks. you could ask why so many kids growing up in care end up abused, which is the more accurate representation of this whole farrago? the idea of you protecting young women sends a shiver down my spine tbf.


 
As I've said many times on Urban, abuse in care was pretty much a given back in the '70s. It wasn't SOP, but it was fairly widespread, physical and/or sexual. 
Then, as now, there was an almost perceptible consensus among the providers that kids in care were 2nd-class citizens, that they shouldn't *expect* the same level of protection as the mythical "ordinary child", and that perhaps it didn't really matter if staff were beating and/or fucking them, or pimping them out.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> You can blame the social services for a raft of things, but the truth is they're underfunded, under-resourced, and all too oftem blamed for failings by the press without any consideration for their impossible work load.


It's not just to do with underfunding, it's to do with central government _diktat_ that constantly shifts the goalposts on the aims of social services policy, and on the idiotic assumption that it's more efficient (it isn't) to commission services rather than to directly provide them.


> Asking where these kids come from is a very portent question, but I don't think you would like the answers.
> 
> Vulnerable children are all too often the result of crack/smack abusing parents, alcoholics, and after they begin absconding from the care centres they are often just criminalised and left to their fate.


"All too often"? Only if you watch "The Bill".
In reality, parental addiction is a factor in a minority of cases.


> Never enough money for councils to provide local care networks for these kids, but always enough money for business centres and economic initiatives. Varies from city to city but look at where the money is really going...


This is another issue caused by central government. Budgets are segregated into blocks, so much for social services, so much for environmental (street cleansing etc) services, etc etc. If you don't build the business centre, you can't use the money elsewhere in the local authority budget, you have to hand it back to central government.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> Hasn't there already been sly finger pointing at the victims via their families already in this case?


 
As far as I can see people have been desperate to point just about anywhere but at the real issues, i.e. the men who spent their evenings in the car they dubbed the "rape rover" looking for children.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

TruXta said:


> You do realise that I stated not long before that post that your claim that all rapes in Oslo were perpetrated by NWIs was wrong? And that I asked you whether you were prepared to retract that patently false statement? Just because I disagreed with ericjarvis on this minor point doesn't mean I agree with you.


 
All "assault rapes" carried out in Oslo in the last three years, I believe is the core claim being made by Rohde.

And of course I'm prepared to unequivocally retract false claims once they have proven to be false.

Let's see your take on it. eric jarvis didn't seem too interested in my take on his more recent stats unless I missed his post on it (possible I did).


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> What on earth makes you think that _your_ personal defintion of what a 'feminist' is, or should be/think holds any weight?


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Exactly. Even the term NWIs is misleading in some ways - ethnic Chinese and Filipinos in Norway which (to my admittedly scant knowledge) don't come from cultures that are known to be particularly philogynic, are _under-represented_ in the crime stats.


 
I dispute your assertion that ethnic Chinese and Filipinos in Norway are from cultures that display anything like the attitude towards women that those from strict islamic regimes do.

Perhaps this may be why they are under-represented in the stats.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

TruXta said:


> You do realise that I stated not long before that post that your claim that all rapes in Oslo were perpetrated by NWIs was wrong? And that I asked you whether you were prepared to retract that patently false statement? Just because I disagreed with ericjarvis on this minor point doesn't mean I agree with you.


 
Let's recap - have a look at this page, where the figures are expressed in year by year figures for the period concerned that led to Rohde's claim.

If you can demonstrate that these figures are wrong, then I'll be happy to see that.

http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...eter/norge/1.6567955&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=ivns


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 22, 2011)

So we're on to page 84 now.

pk any luck in stopping the sexual jihad?

Also there still doesn't seem to be a single practical point, I'm a bit worried about how you're going to put a stop to it all.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 22, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> Also there still doesn't seem to be a single practical point, I'm a bit worried about how you're going to put a stop to it all.


 
If there's any truth in the theory then bringing it to the surface and having it discussed will already be doing a lot towards putting a stop to it.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 22, 2011)

Also I'm still slightly disturbed by you talking about "grabbing a bit of arse" on the tube. It's not a good sign if one of the people fighting sexual jihad comes out with something like that. I hope you're not undercover in the sexual jihad community and are suffering from stockholm syndrome.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 22, 2011)

> If there's any truth in the theory then bringing it to the surface and having it discussed will already be doing a lot towards putting a stop to it.



Hows that then?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 22, 2011)

Are you being serious? How can anything be done about changing attitudes if all remain in denial of existing attitudes?


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 22, 2011)

So how do you change the attitudes of the sexual jihad? What practical suggestions do you have?

I'm also slightly worried by the fact that 39th_step pointed out ages back that Asian men are actually half as likely to commit sexual offences than the proportion of the population they make. Given that is the case then are all these other people subconsciously becoming part of the sexual jihad too?

I know pk said that included only grabbing a bit of arse on the tube, but none the less I think it's something that needs to be looked into in the fight back.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So how do you change the attitudes of the sexual jihad? What practical suggestions do you have?
> 
> I'm also slightly worried by the fact that 39th_step pointed out ages back that Asian men are actually half as likely to commit sexual offences than the proportion of the population they make. Given that is the case then are all these other people subconsciously becoming part of the sexual jihad too?
> 
> I know pk said that included only grabbing a bit of arse on the tube, but none the less I think it's something that needs to be looked into in the fight back.


 
Quoting stats for "sexual offences" is useless, it's an ambiguous term which could include everything from lewd behaviour to doing a Fritzl. 

This is about systematically raping children, and as I see it - the indoctrination of young UK based muslim men into the idea that woman are generally inferior, and that infidel women are barely even human.

What needs to happen is happening, as I see it moderate muslims are standing up and saying "fuck you" to the jihadis.

Also - we need to see Choudary and Hamsa and people like this disappearing and never being seen again.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 22, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So how do you change the attitudes of the sexual jihad? What practical suggestions do you have?


 
Firstly I have still to be convinced that this is in fact a serious problem, but pk's evidence has not yet been disproved, and if we accept the theory as fact, then I would hope that publication of the facts would shock the so-called moderate muslims into insisting on a change of teaching by the imans.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> pk's evidence has not yet been disprove


 
It's not "my evidence" it's a position adopted for the sake of argument.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 22, 2011)

I was primarily referring to the links you provided to the Norwegian situation.


----------



## pk (Jan 22, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I was primarily referring to the links you provided to the Norwegian situation.


 
No I know, but you can see how easily people attribute false premise in order to evade the more pertinent points that might have been made.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 22, 2011)

*Some background*

VADODARA: Four persons were injured in a communal riot that broke out in Devgadh Baria town of Dahod district over an incident of eve teasing at the weekly market there on Friday. Police officials said a group of persons had picked up a quarrel with another over the issue of a girl of a particular community being eve teased, leading to exchange of fisticuffs between them. 

Later, larger groups of the two communities gathered at the Tower area in the city. They indulged in pelting of stones and arson. Two cabins were charred during the riot. The mobs also set a six-seater auto-rickshaw ablaze and damaged a bicycle, officials said, adding that both the groups filed cross complaints against each other. Police have arrested 16 persons for violence. 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...dh-Baria-riot-16-held/articleshow/7293798.cms



'Eve teasing is a euphemism used in India and sometimes Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal[1] for public sexual harassment, street harassment or molestation of women by men, with Eve being a reference to the biblical Eve.'

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

Generally chaps from the subcontinent have a VERY opinion of Western women ref their need to get their kit off

Its common in ALL the countires there to be reped by cops if they report a rape - well provided they are poor

'Marry a Muslim or die' threat to Harry Potter actress

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/en...otter-actress/comments-e6frewyr-1225992775330

Seem they have a fairly low opinion of their own too


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2011)

Fwiw, I don't think pk is bigotted, but nor do I think he is trolling exactly. I disagree with quite a bit of what he's said, but in part, it seems to me that he's been playing devil's advocate not for its own sake, but in an attempt to provoke good counterarguments. 

For my part, while I have no desire for the state to tell people how to live, I have come to the conclusion that it is the state's proper role as lawgiver to provide a framework of dos and do nots within which everyone has to remain. Without such limitations, there is merely the tyranny of the strongest, not any kind of freedom. 

In order to do that effectively, the UK state needs to reinvent itself. Not in any revolutionary way, but in a way that will not affect the lives of most people at all. Constitutional reform is vital if we are to have a clear-headed view of how to deal with issues such as women's rights within minority groups. The only way to do that, imo, is with a written constitution that forms the highest law of the land. In order for that to happen, first the state needs to fully secularise, removing the established church.

This constitution would, among other things, lay out explicitly the ways that it would be illegal to discriminate – on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation or religious belief as the fundamental four categories, allowing very carefully worded exceptions: where you can provide a specific reason for your discrimination, for instance you need a woman to work at a women's refuge, etc. Crucially, these would form the highest law and in return for the inclusion of religious belief in the protected categories, religious groups would not receive any kind of exception to those categories. 

A constitution is always a compromise, and that would be the compromise I would offer religious leaders: receive legal protection for your religion and its followers in return for accepting the full equality of others regardless of their race, gender or sexual orientation. 

This could be painful for certain religious groups to accept. Tough. That pain would only be caused by the fact that they currently do discriminate. Those of us with a firm conviction of the rightness of such universal legal protection need to stand firm.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 22, 2011)

pk said:


> I dispute your assertion that ethnic Chinese and Filipinos in Norway are from cultures that display anything like the attitude towards women that those from strict islamic regimes do.
> 
> Perhaps this may be why they are under-represented in the stats.


 
Yeah, no such thing as forced marriage and prostitution mafias in these countries is it? Or trafficking and so on.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 22, 2011)

> Quoting stats for "sexual offences" is useless, it's an ambiguous term which could include everything from lewd behaviour to doing a Fritzl.
> 
> This is about systematically raping children, and as I see it - the indoctrination of young UK based muslim men into the idea that woman are generally inferior, and that infidel women are barely even human.
> 
> ...



So do you think the koran makes people child rapists but doesn't affect people in terms of lewd behaviour and "doing a fritzi"? Why is that?

Not sure the phrase "doing a fritzi" will stand you in good stead in your role of taking on sexual jihad.

Why is the koran having this affect on Pakistani men but not Bangladeshi men. Not that long ago they were the same country.

There is a muslim bloke down my road. Should I knock on his door and ask him if has done enough to take on the sexual jihadis. Not sure he knows any but as a muslim he should take responsibility don't you think?

Have you gone down to your local mosque yet to ask them what they are doing about it? I think you should take a lead on this, people are waiting for someone like you to stand up and be counted.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 22, 2011)

> Firstly I have still to be convinced that this is in fact a serious problem, but pk's evidence has not yet been disproved, and if we accept the theory as fact, then I would hope that publication of the facts would shock the so-called moderate muslims into insisting on a change of teaching by the imans.



So are there imans in the UK telling muslims to go out and rape women and children? Where is this happening?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 23, 2011)

pk said:


> And you are not a very convincing feminist.






			
				Rutita1 said:
			
		

> What on earth makes you think that your personal defintion of what a 'feminist' is, or should be/think holds any weight?





pk said:


>


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 23, 2011)

News in earlier today....






pk said:


> Come now Rutita1. Don't worry your 'silly' little head with all this politics stuff.
> 
> Why not fetch the men some grub, hey luv?
> 
> *slaps arse*


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 23, 2011)

> *slaps arse*



As long as he was grabbing a bit of arse on the tube, lets not make too big a deal with it. There is a sexual jihad going on, get things in perspective.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 23, 2011)

pk said:


> Let's recap - have a look at this page, where the figures are expressed in year by year figures for the period concerned that led to Rohde's claim.
> 
> If you can demonstrate that these figures are wrong, then I'll be happy to see that.
> 
> http://translate.google.co.uk/trans...eter/norge/1.6567955&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=ivns


 
There's the health service version of how many rapes are by strangers and involve violence.

The DIXI rape crisis centre in Oslo reports well over a thousand referrals from the city alone in 2004.

Tell me how that squares with a total of 41 violent rapes by strangers over three years in Oslo. It simply doesn't. So what is Rohde talking about? Simply endlessly repeating the same set of dubious numbers isn't an argument, it's bloody childish. Either show a link to something that describes the methodology and definitions that apply to the statistics, or shut the fuck up because it's just a single somewhat dodgy statement by a single police officer in a department that is accused by the medical services of categorising sexual offences with no congruence to the victim's statements, that has faced criticism for its use of racial profiling, and which has managed to stop a black youth 17 times in 3 weeks on suspicion of stealing his own bike.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 23, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So are there imans in the UK telling muslims to go out and rape women and children? Where is this happening?


 
So, you're not being serious.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 23, 2011)

> So, you're not being serious.



How can anyone not be serious when we are in the midst of a sexual jihad. I want to know where these imans are. If they are preaching sexual jihad all over the country they shouldn't be too hard to find. I say we send out pk as a roving reporter.


----------



## One_Stop_Shop (Jan 23, 2011)

> and which has managed to stop a black youth 17 times in 3 weeks on suspicion of stealing his own bike.



Did he steal his own bike though?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 23, 2011)

pk said:


> Quoting stats for "sexual offences" is useless, it's an ambiguous term which could include everything from lewd behaviour to doing a Fritzl.


You're vocalising through your anus again.
All the (admittedly, compiled by professionals and/or academics, rather than by newspapers) stats for sex offending that I've ever studied all differentiated between type and severity of offence.


> This is about systematically raping children, and as I see it - the indoctrination of young UK based muslim men into the idea that woman are generally inferior, and that infidel women are barely even human.


So, not much different to some variants of Mormonism and Protestantism, then?
Because let's be plain here: You can't pin "woman are generally inferior"  and  "...infidel women are barely even human" on Islam as a totality, nor on the Muslim population in general, only on the perverts who systematically rape children in the first place. There may be attitudes in Islam-at large" about the inferiority of women, but then, there were in the mostly-secular UK, up until we legislated sexual equality less that 40 years ago.


> What needs to happen is happening, as I see it moderate muslims are standing up and saying "fuck you" to the jihadis.


They do.
Even in situations where saying "fuck you" to them earns them a bullet in the head, they still fuck the fanatics off. Even in Afghanistan, where you appear to believe that the entire country is awash with "the Taliban".


> Also - we need to see Choudary and Hamsa and people like this disappearing and never being seen again.


Yes, because violating the due process of law is so very sensible, isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2011)

IC3D said:


> He was saying PK had a drug problem first tbf, and I see your Islamophobia and raise you an Islamofascism


 
if you're right then you'll have no trouble providing either the post number or a link.

and if you aren't able to i've no doubt you'll say sorry.


----------



## pk (Jan 24, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> There's the health service version of how many rapes are by strangers and involve violence.



Oh good. A study from 1993 that has no relevance whatsoever to the figures quoted by Rohde, especially since the manner in which data collected has changed significantly in the 18 years since that paper was published. This neither proves nor disproves anything.



> The DIXI rape crisis centre in Oslo reports well over a thousand referrals from the city alone in 2004.



Oh look, again you throw up an 18 page document, an annual report of a crisis centre. Do you even read your own links?
I can't see anything in there that disproves Rohde's figures. Citing the number of enquiries, mostly via telephone, is a ridiculous way to try to form a definitive figure of actual "assault rapes" committed.

This is not good enough. Show me where this annual report contradicts Rohde.



> Tell me how that squares with a total of 41 violent rapes by strangers over three years in Oslo. It simply doesn't. So what is Rohde talking about? Simply endlessly repeating the same set of dubious numbers isn't an argument, it's bloody childish. Either show a link to something that describes the methodology and definitions that apply to the statistics, or shut the fuck up because it's just a single somewhat dodgy statement by a single police officer in a department that is accused by the medical services of categorising sexual offences with no congruence to the victim's statements, that has faced criticism for its use of racial profiling, and which has managed to stop a black youth 17 times in 3 weeks on suspicion of stealing his own bike.


 
I already provided links that explain quite clearly the criteria for a case to be defined as "assault rape" as opposed to the more common attacks that take place between spouses or date rape attacks.

Your habit of slinging up irrelevant documents and then claiming you've proven Rohde's figures are dodgy is as laughable as your attempts to prove that the Oslo police are racist because of a complaint about a push-bike.

Do this properly or not at all.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

*chortle*


----------



## pk (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> *chortle*


 
Chortle away - it's clear you're too chicken to explain what you meant on page 2 by saying you were the only one to have truly suffered at the hands of islam - and nothing you've posted since has been above remedial snipes and retarded grunting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

pk said:


> Chortle away - it's clear you're too chicken to explain what you meant on page 2 by saying you were the only one to have truly suffered at the hands of islam - and nothing you've posted since has been above remedial snipes and retarded grunting.


 
yeh. fucking 83 pages on and still no explanation.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 24, 2011)

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/country-by-country/norway/nor-cbc-iv-2009-004-eng.pdf

Here is a 2008 report on Norway by the The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/country-by-country/norway/nor-cbc-iv-2009-004-eng.pdf
> 
> Here is a 2008 report on Norway by the The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.


 
so it is. there's 76 pages there. are there any individual pages you'd like to highlight as relevant?


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 24, 2011)

racism


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. fucking 83 pages on and still no explanation.


 
51 by my count.

What's up? Can't you handle a few most posts on yer page?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> 51 by my count.
> 
> What's up? Can't you handle a few most posts on yer page?


 
what's up? can't explain your fucking post after 51 (or 83) pages?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

pk said:


> Chortle away - it's clear you're too chicken to explain what you meant on page 2 by saying you were the only one to have truly suffered at the hands of islam - and nothing you've posted since has been above remedial snipes and retarded grunting.


 
speaking of chortling away, where's an apology given your complete inability to produce any evidence of my alcohol problem or my taking anti-depressants - or, indeed, the 'mental health issues' you refer to above?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> so it is. there's 76 pages there. are there any individual pages you'd like to highlight as relevant?


 
Well, I think seeing as though I have done the research and produced the document I have pretty much done my bit. 

I don't have time to read it all now, just thought i'd share it. 

I am not particularly interested in Norway but seeing as though this thread is now focusing on whether or not the police there are _racist_ the document I have produced should be of benefit to those arguing for or against this point.

No need to thank me.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> what's up? can't explain your fucking post after 51 (or 83) pages?


 
I can just not to the likes of yourself.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

The Rutita1's report...



> Civil society actors agree that Islamophobia has been on the rise since ECRI’s
> third report. Political, and more generally public debate has been characterised
> by frequent associations made between Muslims on the one hand, and
> terrorism and violence on the other, and by generalisations and stereotypes
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> I can just not to the likes of yourself.


 
or indeed anyone else on this site


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> or indeed anyone else on this site


 
No, some others know. Some even on this thread. You won't though.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 24, 2011)

.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> The Rutita1's report...


 
I didn't write that report.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> No, some others know. Some even on this thread.


so you say





> You won't though.


and that's because you're talking bollocks in the post under discussion.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I didn't write that report.


 
I know. 

Although, I should of be more explicit for the numpties that need spoonfeeding on this thread.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> so you sayand that's because you're talking bollocks in the post under discussion.



You're gunna lose your Anarchist Detective stars if you're not careful.

Do try harder or maybe you need some garden leave?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> maybe you need some garden leave?


you what?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 24, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> racism


 
You trying to get your missus banned, swarthy?


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> so it is. there's 76 pages there. are there any individual pages you'd like to highlight as relevant?


 
I would suggest the following paragraph is particularly relevant, though all the section on racism and the law is interesting.

"Since its last report , ECRI has continued to recieve information indicating that racial profiling, notably in stop and search operations carried out by police and customs and immigration officials is still common in Norway. While the Norwegian authorities are aware of the problem - ECRI notes for instance that provisions to clarify the legal framework for the exercise of general immigration checks have been introduced in the new Immigration Act - it does not appear to ECRI that measures commensurate to the problem have yet been taken. In its third report, ECRI encouraged Norwegian authorities to proceed with plans to introduce a system for monitoring the frequency of police checks on individuals. It recommended that such a system be evaluated and that civil society actors participate in the evaluation of this system with a view to its possible extension. However, ECRI understands that although this system was piloted in 2003 in one geographical area, in February 2004 the Parliament decided it should be discontinued. Instead, a scheme using clearly visible identification numbers on police uniforms was introduced."

Which backs up the point I was making earlier in the thread about the Norwegian police being mired in political controversy about their use of racial profiling. Very important as the context in which some senior police officers are making press comments effectively trying to justify racial profiling.

The problem here is that pk is using short bits of journalism that contain little or no detail to back up his case. The only way to point out the errors in those pieces is to refer to more detailed information. That means reading longer documents in more detail because the sad fact is that nobody in the mass media would print a short and punchy piece showing that other journalists are pandering to racism by cherry picking from the statistics and highlighting anything that can appear both controversial and appeal to prejudices and bigotry. Meanwhile pk is effectively saying that the only way he will accept that his argument is countered is if somebody can produce a short article that disproves a single statement in a TV interview directly. Even if such a thing existed it wouldn't disprove anything. It would merely be a contradiction with no more substance than the statement it counters.

I realise that many people prefer political debate to be on the level of a playground argument between 10 year olds. However the only way to really understand what is going on is to dig into the detail. That means reading and trying to understand long articles. It means trying to put together a complete picture from a wide range of statistics covering a long period.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 24, 2011)

No need to thank me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> No need to thank me.


 
that's good


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 24, 2011)

pk said:


> Oh good. A study from 1993 that has no relevance whatsoever to the figures quoted by Rohde, especially since the manner in which data collected has changed significantly in the 18 years since that paper was published. This neither proves nor disproves anything.



The fucking figures collected by Rohde are simply three bloody numbers with no definitions, no context, and with no official document quoted as a source. My question is do you have any reason to believe that the proportion of rapes that involve violence, and the proportion of rapes by strangers has changed significantly since 1993. If it hasn't we then come to the second point.



pk said:


> Oh look, again you throw up an 18 page document, an annual report of a crisis centre. Do you even read your own links?
> I can't see anything in there that disproves Rohde's figures. Citing the number of enquiries, mostly via telephone, is a ridiculous way to try to form a definitive figure of actual "assault rapes" committed.



Yes. It is an 18 page document. It has all the information on the organisation that collected the statistics, and shows references so that you can go and check the methodology and the raw data. That's how it is supposed to be done. Not a short article in a tabloid newspaper describing a TV interview, but properly validated data.

So. Do you question the figure of over 1,400 referrals to the rape crisis centre from Oslo alone? If so on what basis? If not, then how can you square a figure of 41 rapes by strangers involving violence with the data from the two reports I have linked to. It makes no sense. Either things changed astoundingly since 1993 and in comparison to then only a tiny proportion of rapes involve violence, and the proportion of rapes by partners and acquaintances has increased astronomically, or there are one hell of a lot more than 41 assault rapes in Oslo over any three year period.



pk said:


> This is not good enough. Show me where this annual report contradicts Rohde.



Can your tiny mind not deal with combining two separate pieces of data?



pk said:


> I already provided links that explain quite clearly the criteria for a case to be defined as "assault rape" as opposed to the more common attacks that take place between spouses or date rape attacks.



Yes, and that's why I posted evidence that shows:

A: In 1993 more than 2/3 of rapes reported to the rape trauma centre were by an unknown assailant. A quarter were by more than one assailant.

B: Nearly a third of those rapes involved the use of weapons.

C: Over half involved visible physical injuries.

and

D: The DIXI centre had over 1400 referrals of rape victims in 2004.

So explain how it's possible for Rohde's statistics to be accurate and complete. They don't tally with the evidence from victims and those treating them medically and psychologically. So what are they based on?



pk said:


> Your habit of slinging up irrelevant documents and then claiming you've proven Rohde's figures are dodgy is as laughable as your attempts to prove that the Oslo police are racist because of a complaint about a push-bike.
> 
> Do this properly or not at all.


 
I'm doing this properly. It's hardly my fault if you are too stupid or lazy to make any effort to read anything longer than a paragraph or that has more than four or five numbers in it. Basically your argument appears to consist of saying nobody has posted a sensationalist tabloid article about Norwegian police trying to spin their way out of accusations of racism and therefore nobody has contradicted you.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 24, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> No need to thank me.


 
Thanks. I hadn't seen the ECRI document until you posted it. Only press reports of concerns about racial profiling by the Norwegian police and an Amnesty International report on racism and human rights in Norway.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 24, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you what?


 
I only heard the meaning of the term Friday.


----------



## IMR (Jan 24, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> How can anyone not be serious when we are in the midst of a sexual jihad. I want to know where these imans are. If they are preaching sexual jihad all over the country they shouldn't be too hard to find. I say we send out pk as a roving reporter.



There was one imam in Australia who came out with stuff along the lines of 'women are asking for it if they go around immodestly dressed':



> Australia's top Muslim cleric rationalized a series of gang rapes by Arab men, blaming women who "sway suggestively," wear make-up and don't cover themselves in the tradition of Islam.
> 
> Sheik Taj el-Dene Elhilaly's comments in a Ramadan sermon in a Sydney mosque have stirred a furor in the country with even Prime Minister John Howard weighing in with condemnation.
> 
> ...



From here: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=38561

A senior member of the Muslim Council of Britain defended Sheik Taj el-Dene Elhilaly's comments:



> ONE of Britain’s most senior Muslims has defended as “a great scholar” the Australian imam who likened scantily clad women to uncovered meat that draws predators.
> Abduljalil Sajid, a senior figure in the Muslim Council of Britain, offered support for Sheikh Taj Din al-Hilali’s views, saying that “loose women like prostitutes” encouraged men to be immoral. Dr Sajid, visiting Australia, said that Sheikh al-Hilali was attacking immodesty and loose dress, or “standing in the streets, inviting men to do these bad acts”.



From here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article616185.ece

Those examples aren't of imams actively urging rape campaigns for sure, but they are non-productive God-crazed parasites making excuses for rapists nonetheless.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 24, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> No, some others know. Some even on this thread.


 
I do!


----------



## TruXta (Jan 24, 2011)

IMR said:


> There was one imam in Australia who came out with stuff along the lines of 'women are asking for it if they go around immodestly dressed':
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
It's not like ethnic Europeans don't espouse the very same "she deserved it" crap, so what's your point? His was a particularly odious example (meat, cats?? WTF), but the sentiment is the same.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 24, 2011)

One_Stop_Shop said:


> So how do you change the attitudes of the sexual jihad?



There is of course no "sexual jihad."  It is a fantasy produced by weird imaginations.  I think you know this, so maybe use quote marks around the term?


----------



## IMR (Jan 24, 2011)

TruXta said:


> It's not like ethnic Europeans don't espouse the very same "she deserved it" crap, so what's your point? His was a particularly odious example (meat, cats?? WTF), but the sentiment is the same.



You find people with reactionary attitudes to women everywhere. But I think they're probably less common among Europeans because of the longer existence of things like women's rights and Christianity no longer being treated with such awe-struck deference as in earlier times. There are big reputational penalties for coming out with crap like that.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 24, 2011)

That's simply not true for pretty damned large proportions of the population. To continue with the Norway-bashing (I'm allowed, being a Weegie'n all), about 1/3 of respondents in a survey from last year(?? recent anyway) thought that girls who dressed in a certain way or were in the wrong place at the wrong time or combinations thereof were at least partly to blame for being sexually assaulted. This in a country which is putatively one of the most gender-egalitarian in the world.


----------



## IMR (Jan 24, 2011)

TruXta said:


> That's simply not true for pretty damned large proportions of the population. To continue with the Norway-bashing (I'm allowed, being a Weegie'n all), about 1/3 of respondents in a survey from last year(?? recent anyway) thought that girls who dressed in a certain way or were in the wrong place at the wrong time or combinations thereof were at least partly to blame for being sexually assaulted. This in a country which is putatively one of the most gender-egalitarian in the world.



Might you have been thinking of this survey? http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1786827.ece

The survey took place among male high school students in Sor-Trøndelag County - what's it like there?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 24, 2011)

I'd say that county's pretty average for Norway, it has the 3rd biggest city within its boundaries as well as rural and coastal areas. The same guy did a survey of adults in the same area in 2005 and said that it showed the same tendencies.

There was another survey by Amnesty and TNS Gallup where over a fourth blamed women for rape if she "dressed provocatively". One in four thought that if she was in a desolate stretch she was also to blame, one fifth thought that a woman with multiple partners (real or imagined) was partly or fully to blame for rape. Fully 48% believed the woman was partly or fully responsible if she was flirting prior to the sexual assault. Source

It has to be said that there's a great deal of cognitive dissonance on display here. Three of four in this survey also opined that violence against a female partner (relevant because most rapes happen in relationships or friendships) can never be justified, while 2/3rds said they would intervene to stop violence against women. Still, fairly scary attitudes on display there.


----------



## IMR (Jan 24, 2011)

I wonder how similar those results would be to Britain. It's a shame to see those attitudes, but at least they're in the minority. And despite them Norway comes top of this worldwide index for equality between the sexes in terms of health, earning power, education and other factors:

http://bigthink.com/ideas/24565

So it's not all bad news.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 24, 2011)

As I said, there's a lot of cognitive dissonance, with both "you reap what you sow" type of thinking as well as "it's never right to sexually assualt" around this topic.


----------



## pk (Jan 25, 2011)

eric jarvis - your "referral" numbers are not relevant.

If you are trying to say that the only "assault rapes" that were investigated by police were those suspected to have been carried out by men not from Norway then say so. That is a pretty alarming conclusion, especially if you are effectively saying the cops ignored over a thousand "assault rapes" by Norwegian men.

It is worth pointing out at this stage that Rohde's cause celebre appears to be ensuring that asylum seekers who are jailed remain under lock and key until they can be deported.

If manipulation of rape statistics is really just a wedge to secure an act of Norway's parliament to make the above happen, then that is a matter for further investigation.

I have no doubt the police in every country use racial profiling, we do it here, IC1, IC2, IC3 indexing.

But if you are suggesting that Rohde's department only bothers with non-Norwegian cases, we should all be asking why, then proving it, then taking them to task over it in a very public way.

Agreed?


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 25, 2011)

Why has the tag changed on this thread?


----------



## pk (Jan 25, 2011)

TruXta said:


> As I said, there's a lot of cognitive dissonance


 
Dissonance maketh the heart grow fonder. Or is it fungus, I can never remember


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 25, 2011)

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring...09-004-eng.pdf

Here is a 2008 report on Norway by the The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.

Reposted for the _selective_ readers of the thread.


----------



## _angel_ (Jan 25, 2011)

ernestolynch said:


> Why has the tag changed on this thread?


 
There were no tags before? Where do they come from and who puts them there?


----------



## pk (Jan 25, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring...09-004-eng.pdf
> 
> Here is a 2008 report on Norway by the The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.
> 
> Reposted for the _selective_ readers of the thread.



utter fail



> Page not found.
> 
> We cannot locate the page you are looking for.
> Maybe it is an outdated link.
> ...


----------



## Crispy (Jan 25, 2011)

_angel_ said:


> There were no tags before? Where do they come from and who puts them there?


 
Thread creator, or editor (cos he's the only mod who cares about them )


----------



## belboid (Jan 25, 2011)

pk said:


> utter fail


 
you're not very good at using the internet are you?  this is why you are making such a pisspoor 'case'

http: //hudoc.ecri.coe.int/XMLEcri/ENGLISH/Cycle_04/04_CbC_eng/NOR-CbC-IV-2009-004-ENG. pdf - took me two seconds to find.

It's pretty fuicking pathetic isn't it, you are desperately trying to hang on to your one cherry picked example, trying to get people to distinguish between good rape and rape to defend yourself. How many pages on such a non-issue?  Truly you have drunk deeply from the well of jazzzzzz


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 25, 2011)

Where's Thomsy?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 25, 2011)

pk said:


> utter fail


 
Yes, *you* failed to read/address any of the quotes already made from the 2009 report...or take a couple of seconds to find it yourself when the link failed for you today (it was working fine yesterday).

You have built an argument that has gone on for many pages now around what may or may not be going on in Norway. I found some relevant literature and you can't be asked to read it. I wonder why that is....

ECRI....

First report 1998:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/50546917/Report-on-Norway

Second report 2000:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/50546610/SECOND-REPORT-ON-NORWAY

Third report 2003:

http://hudoc.ecri.coe.int/XMLEcri/ENGLISH/Cycle_03/03_CbC_eng/NOR-CbC-III-2004-3-ENG.pdf

Fourth report: 2009:

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/Country-by-country/Norway/NOR-CbC-IV-2009-004-ENG.pdf


From a press release for the 2009 report:



> In Norway, the legal and institutional framework against racism and discrimination has been strengthened and the vast majority of the measures foreseen in the National Plan of Action to Combat Racism and Discrimination (2002-2006) have been implemented. *However, the situation of persons of immigrant background remains worrying in sectors such as employment and school education, as well as the situation of Roma and Romani/Taters. Political discourse sometimes takes on racist and xenophobic overtones, and the police still have important challenges to take up, including in the field of addressing racial profiling. *



http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/library/pressreleases/54-24_02_2009_en.asp

Oh look, there's more:



> [For the Norwegian case, the emphasis on a number of important steps to improve the legal framework against racism and racial discrimination and its implementation has also been made by the ECRI report. The prosecuting authorities and the police, despite much work still to do, are the ones are in progress in monitoring incidence. The negativities mentioned in the Report begin with the immigrants, as usual, lagging behind in vital areas. The unemployment rate among young people of an immigrant background is reported to be twice that registered among the rest of the same age group, and a disproportionately high drop-out rate from secondary education is registered among students of an immigrant background. The main cause of the mentioned imbalances is also reported as racial discrimination. In relation with racial discrimination, more data seems to be required to find out positions of minority groups in a number of fields. What is more, the ECRI emphasizes on the public sector’s piecemeal approach. Such an approach is harmful to combat racial discrimination on a common ground and is an obstacle to promoting equal opportunities at the same time. Once more, the ECRI points out a better awareness and acknowledgement among the public sector of the different forms of racial discrimination.



http://www.turkishweekly.net/column...ts-lack-of-awareness-is-a-common-concern.html

Happy reading.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 25, 2011)

Crispy said:


> Thread creator, or editor (cos he's the only mod who cares about them )


 
hhhmm... I didn't edit them to start off with and some wind up merchant stuck 'asian' in there. I suspect that wasn't editor.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 25, 2011)

It has gone really quiet on this thread.....


----------



## pk (Jan 25, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes, *you* failed to read/address any of the quotes already made from the 2009 report...or take a couple of seconds to find it yourself when the link failed for you today (it was working fine yesterday).
> 
> You have built an argument that has gone on for many pages now around what may or may not be going on in Norway. I found some relevant literature and you can't be asked to read it. I wonder why that is....
> 
> ...


 
Read the entire lot. Good to see you are capable of posting a link that actually works.

All that you have provided is a load of huge pdf. files that are ECRI recommendations.

In fact they show significant progress in all parameters in the efforts to reduce racism and xenophobia in Norwegian life.

The data shows that Norway suffers no more or no less instances of institutional racism than any other comparable country.

It is also interesting to note that no mention appears of Rohde's statement, odd given the wide distribution of these figures and the manner in which they are often cited.

What conclusions do YOU draw from these studies, if any, and how are they useful in highlighting your point?

If anything - the studies contradict themselves - they frown upon police identifying and publishing the ethnic identity of criminals, yet they also state that :



> more data seems to be required to find out positions of minority groups in a number of fields. What is more, the ECRI emphasizes on the public sector’s piecemeal approach. Such an approach is harmful to combat racial discrimination on a common ground and is an obstacle to promoting equal opportunities at the same time.



If I didn't know better I'd say you were just posting up links to huge documents without really understanding them, in an effort to dilute the issue.

After all, there is nothing whatsoever in these reports that appears to address the inherent intolerance that certain religious groups manifest toward those who do not share their beliefs.

One might even say you are posting up these huge documents in an attempt to shut down the debate by claiming something simplistic and false as the entirety of Norwegian society is in fact racist, which none of your documentation actually proves at all. It's not like you've ever tried to win an argument by crying "racist" before now is it? Oh wait...


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

I notice with interest that Proper Tidy STILL hasn't managed to give an example of a religion that is "more barbaric" than islam.

And nobody else has either.

It's an interesting word, "barbaric". 

Stemming from the Greeks, the verb βαρβαρίζειν (barbarízein) in ancient Greek meant imitating the linguistic sounds non-Greeks made or making grammatical errors in Greek.

The Berbers of North Africa were among the many peoples called "Barbarian" by the Romans, in their case the name remained in use, having been adopted by the Arabs (see Berber) and is still in use as the name for the non-Arabs in North Africa (though not by themselves). 

The geographical term Barbary or Barbary Coast, and the name of the Barbary pirates based on that coast (and who were not necessarily Berbers) were also derived from it.

The term has also been used to refer to people from Barbary, a region encompassing most of North Africa. The name of the region, Barbary, comes from the Arabic word Barbar, possibly from the Latin word barbaricum, meaning "land of the barbarians".

Which brings us to a very interesting point in British history.

Did you know that there once flew an islamic flag over UK territory?

Neither did I until last summer, sailing back from Ireland I was puzzled by the large granite island between the Welsh and Cornish coastlines, which turned out to be Lundy Island.

And upon that island once did indeed fly the islamic standard.

In the 17th century Barbary Pirates from the Republic of Salé occupied Lundy, around 1645.

The North African invaders, under the command of Dutch renegade Jan Janszoon, flew an Ottoman flag over the island. 

Captured Europeans, including English, Scottish and Irish men women and children, were held on Lundy - before being sent to Algiers as slaves.

The Barbary Slave Trade refers to the slave markets which flourished on the Barbary Coast, or modern day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Western Libya between the 16th and 19th centuries.

Their notoriety as white slavers reached a crescendo in the mid 17th century England when a series of daring slave raids seized captives from St Micheal's Mount in Cornwall and from the little fishing village of Baltimore in County Cork, Ireland as well as intercepting the cod fishing fleet off Iceland, as well as raids reported as far north as Scotland.

The boasting verses in Rule Britannia about Britons never shall be slaves could certainly not have been written in those years. 

It has been calculated that in this period that there were more Britons labouring away as slaves and concubines in North Africa than as settlers in all of the colonies of North America put together. 

In the summer of 1625, the mayor of Plymouth estimated that a thousand people had been taken as slaves from his area by the Barbary Corsairs.

On June 20, 1631, they captured 108 English settlers, who worked a pilchard industry in the village, and some local Irish people. 

The attack was focused on the area of the village known to this day as the Cove. 

The villagers were put in irons and taken to a life of slavery in North Africa. 

Some prisoners were destined to live out their days as galley slaves, while others would spend long years in the seclusion of the Sultan's harem or within the walls of the Sultan's palace as laborers. At most three of them ever saw Ireland again.

The incident inspired Thomas Osborne Davis to write his famous poem, The Sack of Baltimore.

This went on for virtually two centuries. 

For almost 200 years the British state either sat on its hands or wrung them impotently while the Islamic jihad seized, enslaved and butchered its people. And then it appears, this staggering onslaught was all but airbrushed out of our history.

I'm sure that the Corsairs of the time certainly saw white girls as easy meat. 

And in answer to the earlier posed question asked by Proper Tidy "Do you see Islam as more barbaric than other religions?" - my answer is still unequivocally "yes". Especially given the "barbaric" nature in this context.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2004/jun/27/historybooks.features

http://www.anti-slaverysociety.addr.com/haf-general.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2004/jun/27/historybooks.features

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/white_slaves_01.shtml


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> For almost 200 years the British state either sat on its hands or wrung them impotently while the Islamic jihad seized, enslaved and butchered its people. And then it appears, this staggering onslaught was all but airbrushed out of our history.


you ignorant fucker. you've clearly never heard of ship money, the tax levied by charles i in the 1630s specifically to raise money to build ships to combat the slavers. you witter of baltimore, but ignore the rather greater number of irish people who were sent to barbados and other places by, er, the english. and of course not only irish people felt the bitter lash of the slave master's whip - many of monmouth's (english) army were dispatched to the west indies as slaves following the failure of his 1685 rebellion. as for barbary slavers being air-brushed out of history, i think you rather mean out of the history you recall. as you indicate from your links at the bottom of the page, they are by no means obscure. the internet resources you mention are complemented by a wide range of other sources, both printed and virtual, such as those listed here on copac: 

http://copac.ac.uk/search?&ti=barbary+corsairs&sort-order=rank
http://copac.ac.uk/search?&ti=barbary+slaves&sort-order=rank

and these in google scholar:

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=barbary+slavers&as_sdt=0,5&as_ylo=&as_vis=1

incidentally, the principal threat from islam in the seventeenth century came not from the abstraction of slaves from the atlantic archipelago, but from the rather more well-known ottoman empire and its periodic irruptions into central europe, most notably the famous 1683 siege of vienna. 

but the questions you fail to answer - or even ask - include:

* to what extent was islam responsible for the slaving expeditions - that is, were the barbary corsairs slavers because they were moslem?
* was 'islamic slavery' more barbaric than the atlantic slave trade?
* how did christians justify their enslavement of other christians, let alone the enslavement of 'infidels' (a word, i need not remind you, from the latin)?

given what the english were doing to their own citizens at this time, i don't think you can say that islamic slavery was more barbaric, especially as you admit some of the people taken from baltimore did make it back to ireland. people taken by the corsairs could be ransomed. expeditions could be mounted to rescue them. i don't believe that many slaves taken from africa to america and the west indies were afforded the opportunity for ransom or rescue and the number who saw africa again as free men and women, before the nineteenth century, can probably be numbered on the fingers and toes of one person.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> *Read the entire lot.* Good to see you are capable of posting a link that actually works.


 I don't believe you.



> All that you have provided is a load of huge pdf. files that are ECRI recommendations.


ECRI reports that provide greater context to the discussion you are insisting on having about Norway.



> In fact they show significant progress in all parameters in the efforts to reduce racism and xenophobia in Norwegian life.



Progress eh? As compared to what exactly? Ah there is progress so there isn't a problem right?



> The data shows that Norway suffers no more or no less instances of institutional racism than any other comparable country.
> 
> It is also interesting to note that no mention appears of Rohde's statement, odd given the wide distribution of these figures and the manner in which they are often cited.



Who is comparing Norway to other countries? Oh look, it's you who is holding Norway up as an example to prove something, as such you are the one doing the comparing.

From the 2009 report:



> Civil society actors agree that Islamophobia has been on the rise since ECRI’s
> third report. Political, and more generally public debate has been characterised by frequent associations made between Muslims on the one hand, and terrorism and violence on the other, and by generalisations and stereotypes concerning perceived cultural features of persons of Muslim background.
> Although many have stressed that such a debate has had a negative impact on the general public’s perception of Muslims, generally speaking it does not seem that these perceptions have translated into acts of violence against this part of Norway’s population, at least not to any visible extent. Instances of discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived Muslim background have however been reported. For instance, there are reports of women wearing the Islamic headscarf having been refused employment or having been dismissed from their jobs. Persons with names revealing a possible Muslim background are also widely reported to experience difficulties in securing job interviews. Furthermore, plans to build Mosques have sometimes been met with unjustified resistance among the general population and local authorities.



Article:



> In Norway, the legal and institutional framework against racism and discrimination has been strengthened and the vast majority of the measures foreseen in the National Plan of Action to Combat Racism and Discrimination (2002-2006) have been implemented. However, the situation of persons of immigrant background remains worrying in sectors such as employment and school education, as well as the situation of Roma and Romani/Taters. *Political discourse sometimes takes on racist and xenophobic overtones, and the police still have important challenges to take up, including in the field of addressing racial profiling.*



http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring...02_2009_en.asp




> What conclusions do YOU draw from these studies, if any, and how are they useful in highlighting your point?




My conclusion is, if you are going to hold Norway up as an example and to derail the thread you really should have thought it through a bit better. 

The reports and articles I have posted give a much more detailed representation of the situation in Norway and the climate/context in which Rohdes gave her interview. More than you have been able/willing to offer BTW.




> If I didn't know better I'd say you were just posting up links to huge documents without really understanding them, in an effort to dilute the issue.


 ...and if I didn't know better I would say you are ignoring the things that don't support your argument in an effort to keep it going.



> After all, there is nothing whatsoever in these reports that appears to address the inherent intolerance that certain religious groups manifest toward those who do not share their beliefs.
> 
> *One might even say you are posting up these huge documents in an attempt to shut down the debate by claiming something simplistic and false as the entirety of Norwegian society is in fact racist*, which none of your documentation actually proves at all.



Oh yeah, where did I post any of that? You keep banging on about Norway and I have provided information that goes some way to represent the context of Rohdes' statement. Thats what you were asking for wasn't it?



> Do this properly or not at all.



Oh see, yes it was.

It's not my fault you don't like it.




> It's not like you've ever tried to win an argument by crying "racist" before now is it? Oh wait...



I'll tell you what, why not entertain us with more _nigger_ jokes eh? That will help.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> given what the english were doing to their own citizens at this time, i don't think you can say that islamic slavery was more barbaric, especially as you admit some of the people taken from baltimore did make it back to ireland. people taken by the corsairs could be ransomed. expeditions could be mounted to rescue them. i don't believe that many slaves taken from africa to america and the west indies were afforded the opportunity for ransom or rescue and the number who saw africa again as free men and women, before the nineteenth century, can probably be numbered on the fingers and toes of one person.


 
But, but, but, there is good slavery, and bad slavery...obviously! Innit pk?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 26, 2011)

.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Ah yes, the old "but white folk did it too!".

To be expected from idiots missing the point.

Point is, as if you didn't know, that there is an interesting context in the word "barbaric" used here, and for all the slavery lessons taught in schools and universities, very little is told of the Ottoman occupation of Lundy and the raids upon churches and villages at the time for "easy meat".

Of course, you knew all about the muslim flag flying over Lundy Island didn't you Pickmans...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Ah yes, the old "but white folk did it too!".
> 
> To be expected from idiots missing the point.



I think you'll find it's more a case of 'everyone was at it' to some degree of another so what makes the example you give so special? Is it because the slaves were White, just like the majority of the girls in the case from the OP are White? It's about the value you place on that fact and the meaning you make of the perpetrators not being White.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I don't believe you.



No point in having a discussion then.

I waded through all that crap to try to find any examples pointing to serious institutionalised racism and found very little to show that this is a problem that is more prevalent in Norway than anywhere else.

If you think Rohde is lying or manipulating stats or only opening assault rape investigations when they involve non-Norweigan men, then say so. If you can prove it then we can all look into getting it seriously investigated.

Spare me your fuckwitted hysteria though, and don't try to insinuate that I am in the habit of making "nigger jokes", it undermines anything you have to say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Ah yes, the old "but white folk did it too!".
> 
> To be expected from idiots missing the point.
> 
> ...


 
your entire point above appears to be how nasty the barbary slavers were. but it's hard to make that argument convincing when you recall that the government of this country was enslaving members of its own population and working them to death for profit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> No point in having a discussion then.
> 
> I waded through all that crap to try to find any examples pointing to serious institutionalised racism and found very little to show that this is a problem that is more prevalent in Norway than anywhere else.
> 
> ...


 as far as i'm concerned you've already undermined what you have to say because of the clear lies you tell.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> I think you'll find it's more a case of 'everyone was at it' to some degree of another so what makes the example you give so special? Is it because the slaves were White, just like the majority of the girls in the case from the OP are White? It's about the value you place on that fact and the meaning you make of the perpetrators not being White.


 
I'd say there were interesting comparisons with modern events and little known about events occurring in the 17th century.

You can disagree if you like, it doesn't change the fact that neither you or anyone else can name another religion as "barbaric" as islam.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> I'd say there were interesting comparisons with modern events and little known about events occurring in the 17th century.
> 
> You can disagree if you like, it doesn't change the fact that neither you or anyone else can name another religion as "barbaric" as islam.


 
before it was 'no one can name a religion more barbarous than islam'. now it's no one can name a religion on a par with islam. why the change? incidentally, the standard seems to be less 'who can name a religion more (or as) barbaric as islam' but 'who can name a religion more (or as) barbaric as islam and which pk can agree is so barbaric'.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> No point in having a discussion then.
> 
> I waded through all that crap to try to find any examples pointing to serious institutionalised racism and found very little to show that this is a problem that is more prevalent in Norway than anywhere else.
> 
> If you think Rohde is lying or manipulating stats or only opening assault rape investigations when they involve non-Norweigan men, then say so. If you can prove it then we can all look into getting it seriously investigated.










> Spare me your fuckwitted hysteria though, and don't try to insinuate that I am in the habit of making "nigger jokes", *it undermines anything you have to say.*



No it doesn't. The fact that you saw fit to make a nigger joke and then justify it  on this thread speaks for itself.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> before it was 'no one can name a religion more barbarous than islam'. now it's no one can name a religion on a par with islam. why the change?


 
Aye, because tedious pedantry is always a substitute for addressing the question.

Go on, have a go at naming one, using either "more than" or "on a par with".


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Aye, because tedious pedantry is always a substitute for addressing the question.
> 
> Go on, have a go at naming one, using either "more than" or "on a par with".


i have done.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> No it doesn't. The fact that you saw fit to make a nigger joke and then justify it  on this thread speaks for itself.


 
I didn't make a nigger joke, you silly lying little girl. You know this too, it's just easier for you to run away from answering any of the issues raised so you can get to play the race card. Or the sexist card. Or whatever.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Aye, because tedious pedantry is always a substitute for addressing the question.
> 
> Go on, have a go at naming one, using either "more than" or "on a par with".


 speaking of not addressing the question, i asked you above to provide evidence of me having an alcohol problem, of me taking anti-depressants, and of me having mental health issues. you've failed to do so. that could of course be because there is no such evidence. which begs the question, why you made those allegations. the only answer seems to me to be because you're a piece of shit with no redeeming features. 

returning to the topic, there's three questions above i've asked i don't expect you to be able to provide an answer to. but it would be entertaining to see your fumbling attempt.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i have done.


 
Oh you did? Remind me what your answer was...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Oh you did? Remind me what your answer was...


 
the aztec religion. of course i could also say christianity. but i think i'll stick with the aztec religion, which was a contemporary of islam for some hundreds of years.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> speaking of not addressing the question, i asked you above to provide evidence of me having an alcohol problem, of me taking anti-depressants, and of me having mental health issues. you've failed to do so. that could of course be because there is no such evidence.



You have stated on here that you used to have a chronic alcohol problem.

Were you lying??

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...ime-a-salute?p=3864927&viewfull=1#post3864927


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 26, 2011)

So a former alcohol problem not a current one will be his response.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> You have stated on here that you used to have a chronic alcohol problem.
> 
> Were you lying??
> 
> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...ime-a-salute?p=3864927&viewfull=1#post3864927


 
no, i asked you to provide evidence of me *having* a drinking problem, not 'post up some shit from five years ago'. incidentally, the post you quote was written when i was a couple of weeks shy of three years since i'd had a drink: hardly evidence of me knocking back six pints before lunch and a similar number after. as i said in that post i had been a chronic alcoholic: not that i was then (or now) one.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> I didn't make a nigger joke, you silly lying little girl.


 Liar.



> I can say this without any hint of irony whatsoever - if there really is any one of you left wing, left behind, left shorty lefties reading this thread thinking that the sexist Pakistani muslim culture had absolutely no role to play in what looks like a long-ignored problem, then y'all are some seriously fucked up niggers.





> In the context, not isolated as you have presented it, a term of endearment that only a silly girl would take offence to





> You know this too, it's just easier for you to run away from answering any of the issues raised so you can get to play the race card. Or the sexist card. Or whatever.



What I know is that you are the one doing the running, this way and that. 

You made a nigger joke, tried to pass it off as being endeared and consistently address me in a condescending, sexist manner yet when I call you on it I am playing the race/sexism card. Pathetic.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> you silly lying little girl.



Kerching!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> I didn't make a nigger joke, you silly lying little girl. You know this too, it's just easier for you to run away from answering any of the issues raised so you can get to play the race card. Or the sexist card. Or whatever.


 you are andy gray and i claim my £5


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i asked you to provide evidence of me *having* a drinking problem, not 'post up some shit from five years ago'. incidentally, the post you quote was written when i was a couple of weeks shy of three years since i'd had a drink: hardly evidence of me knocking back six pints before lunch and a similar number after. as i said in that post i had been a chronic alcoholic: not that i was then (or now) one.


 
Of course Picky, when you said yourself that you used to be a chronic alcoholic that doesn't count as evidence of your having a drink problem.


----------



## Random (Jan 26, 2011)

Rutita1 said:


> You made a nigger joke, tried to pass it off as being endeared and consistently address me in a condescending, sexist manner yet when I call you on it I am playing the race/sexism card. Pathetic.


 PK is a black man, deep down in his soul, so it's ok for him to call random people on the internet niggers.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> So a former alcohol problem not a current one will be his response.


 
Bingo!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Of course Picky, when you said yourself that you used to be a chronic alcoholic that doesn't count as evidence of your having a drink problem.


 i think it was raymond chandler who said it took about three years to recover from the booze. after eight years trying to play the 'you're an alkie' card is certainly more than tired. but there's a clear difference between 'having' and 'had'  and if you can't see it then it's not just history you missed while you were at school.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Bingo!


let's not forget that you claimed that i am an alcoholic, not that i was once an alcoholic.

now, about those anti-depressants...


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> now, about those anti-depressants...



http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/82850-Sleeping-pills?p=1972618&viewfull=1#post1972618

I think sleeping pills count... would you like me to quote where you describe having to hide them to keep them out of temptation's way??


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> let's not forget that you claimed that i am an alcoholic...



Liar. I said "get back to your alcohol/sleeping pills".


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 26, 2011)

Former alcoholic or not, it's a cunt's trick to use it as an arguing tool.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Liar. I said "get back to your alcohol/sleeping pills".


 


pk said:


> You post a thread from 4 years ago where I stated I was fucking off from these boards, which I did for a year or so, then again last year, and you cite this as proof of a lie? You were the one who flounced off after being caught reposting private dinner conversations in an attempt to smear the owner of this website, so don't give me your moral high-ground, get back to your *anti-depressants* and alcohol problems.
> 
> The only emotion you elicit from anyone is abject pity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

*taps watch*


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Former alcoholic or not, it's a cunt's trick to use it as an arguing tool.


 
I agree - I wouldn't have mentioned were it not for the numerous mentions of my alleged past by people on this thread... everythings fair game here these days though it seems...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> I agree - I wouldn't have mentioned were it not for the numerous mentions of my alleged past by people on this thread... everythings fair game here these days though it seems...


 
yeh cos obviously there's an equivalence between me calling you a liar about a broken promise to leave 4 years ago and your alleging stuff about me drinking, taking anti-depressants and having mental health issues. you lying fuck.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

I think the point is clear enough. You asked for evidence and I provided it, you kept pushing the point, so...

Back on topic, you mentioned Aztec (as far as I know there is no such religion) and you said you could also have said christianity.

Which disregards the fact that christianity has undergone massive reform to keep up with present times.

Can you elaborate on why you see christianity as being equally or more barbaric than islam?

Seems like a weak argument to me.

Oh and bear in mind the year is 2011, we are far from living in the dark ages. So modern context would be more relevant, thanks.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 26, 2011)

This is the thread that keeps on giving.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> I think the point is clear enough. You asked for evidence and I provided it, you kept pushing the point, so...
> 
> Back on topic, you mentioned Aztec (as far as I know there is no such religion) and you said you could also have said christianity.
> 
> ...


 
yeh so you were lying because i made you 

you know fuck all about christianity - indeed, as much as you do about islam - if you think 'christianity has undergone massive reform to keep up with present times'. when was the reformation in the copts or the greek orthodox have their 'massive reform' - not to mentio the amish? 

christianity being equally or more barbarous than islam: can you name me an islamic country which has slaughtered so many people in so many different ways in the last hundred years as christian germany?

we can't be living far from the dark ages if someone from a developed country comes out with the guff you do.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> I agree - I wouldn't have mentioned were it not for the numerous mentions of my alleged past by people on this thread... everythings fair game here these days though it seems...


 
You began the ad hominem spat.


----------



## belboid (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> You can disagree if you like, it doesn't change the fact that neither you or anyone else can name another religion as "barbaric" as islam.


 
well thats a simple lie, plenty have been named, but you dismiss them out of hand - for the simple reason that they're not muslim!  But considering the rest of your lies, distortions and evasions throughout the thread, this is hardly surprising.  

Nigh on 100 pages watching pk roll around in his own shit, it's a pretty fucking unedifying spectacle.  But at least you are thoroughly covered in it now


----------



## belboid (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Which disregards the fact that christianity has undergone massive reform to keep up with present times.


 
Yup, the catholic church whose last head demanded a cover up of systematic child abuse being carried out at thatr very time. The catholic church which is so full of paedophiles we almost forget its current head was a nazi.  

Yay massive reform!

Still, thats obviously the _good_ paedophilia, not the bad kind those muslims carry out.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

belboid said:


> well thats a simple lie, plenty have been named


 
No, "plenty" haven't. You haven't named one, all you've done is flung shit and kept your opinions well and truly hidden.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

F'kin hell, this thread is now just bizarre. And for pk to be slinging accusations of mental instability about is proper lol.

Never ague with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with years of experience.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> No, "plenty" haven't. You haven't named one, all you've done is flung shit and kept your opinions well and truly hidden.


 
The Catholic Church has been raised loads of times, I've seen Christian Nazi Germany in there, and yet you fail to answer these points? Is it any wonder people aren't trying to argue with you properly?


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 26, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Never ague with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with years of experience.



This is why it's best to just let him keep taking more rope.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

The contemporary Catholic/Fundamentalist stance on child abuse, contraception and abortion is way more barbaric than islamic practices in regards to the same issues. And trying to deny the rich history, past and present, of violence, genocide and oppression done at the hands of Christian actors is ludicrous.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> This is why it's best to just let him keep taking more rope.


 
If you put all the rope pk has had in a continuous line, it would go around the world three times. Like intestines.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 26, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> This is why it's best to just let him keep taking more rope.


 
I don't think there's a gallows tall enough...


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 26, 2011)

How do you generate stats about how many times each poster has posted on this thread?

Should be good for a chuckle.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

> Posts 556 pk
> Posts 148 Proper Tidy
> Posts 127 DrRingDing
> Posts 92 littlebabyjesus
> ...



Crap, I'm 2nd


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Crap, I'm 2nd


 
How did you do that? e2a get the stats I mean.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 26, 2011)

Where it says "replies" in the thread's row, it's a link.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

Click on 'Replies' on the forum bit


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Intewesting! cheers peeps.


----------



## belboid (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> No, "plenty" haven't. You haven't named one, all you've done is flung shit and kept your opinions well and truly hidden.


 
I've just named (another) one - in that last post!  You really are desperate aren't you?  Even your EDL allies are probably getting a bit embarassed at the pisspoor nature of your argument.


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> No point in having a discussion then.
> 
> I waded through all that crap to try to find any examples pointing to serious institutionalised racism and found very little to show that this is a problem that is more prevalent in Norway than anywhere else.



Nobody is saying it's MORE prevalent in Norway, just that it is seen as a serious problem within the Norwegian police by the EC and Amnesty International as well as the Norwegian government itself. Could you leave those goalposts where they are please.



pk said:


> If you think Rohde is lying or manipulating stats or only opening assault rape investigations when they involve non-Norweigan men, then say so. If you can prove it then we can all look into getting it seriously investigated.


 
I've said so several times, with supporting evidence from numerous other sources of relevant statistics which clearly show that in order to be true she must be using a very odd definition of "assault rape" or that the Oslo police only investigate a tiny fraction of such crimes. Without having access to the details of all the rape accusations the Oslo police decided not to investigate the only thing we can do is look at statistics from other jurisdictions. Since it's clear from the links to Statistics Norway that the highest rate of rape is in the part of Norway with the least immigration, and that in the UK the vast majority of aggravated rapes are committed by white men, the obvious conclusion is that for some reason the Oslo police are enormously more likely to classify a rape as "assault rape" or investigate it if the perpetrators are non-Western immigrants. There have been questions asked in the Norwegian Parliament, and by the ECRI and Amnesty, about institutional racism in the Norwegian police and their use of racial profiling.

I think that shows a very clear picture. I'm glad that finally, after beating you around the head with it, you can see it.

The Norwegian police are already under scrutiny from the Norwegian government, the ECRI, Amnesty, and for all I know some other organisations. In fact the only person who seems to see them as impeccable is you.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Every one I've come across are twats, altho I'll say that the plural of anecdote is not data. Whether that makes them racist twats is a different question, but it's not like they've got a great track-record recruiting from minority groups. Wonder why that is.......


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

belboid; said:
			
		

> your EDL allies


 
Go fuck your mother.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

I wonder if the EDL would still think you are 'alright' if they knew about your alleged habit of firebombing their comrades' pubs lol


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Eh, pk, Islam vs Catholics/Fundies on child abuse, contraception and abortion? A telling silence I'd have to say.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

It is true though that you're making exactly the same argument, in exactly the same terms, as the EDL.  You can't be surprised that they're praising you.  You're helping them.


----------



## pk (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Eh, pk, Islam vs Catholics/Fundies on child abuse, contraception and abortion? A telling silence I'd have to say.


 
I don't see catholic priests deliberately seeking non-catholics to rape, nor jewish men going after goyim kids.

I see news articles and senior politicians and muslim leaders accepting there is an issue that needs addressing.

And I see urban75's politico dickwads harking from the Scargill-era of 1980's dead lefty ideas refusing point blank to engage with the issue because they're terrified of being seen to be in any way politically incorrect.

And sadly it's exactly what I expected to see. Makes me laugh though, if it wasn't such a tragic issue it would be even funnier.

Bunch of fucking lemmings.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Has the issue of scale ever brushed your dwarfish mind? We're talking about millions and millions of people who are told that no you can't use contraception, no you can't abort your pregnancy. We're talking about the head of the world's largest organized religion telling his minions to keep pervasive kiddy-fiddling (also known as rape) within the ranks of the consecrated. And you're trying to tell us that a bunch of fucknuts up in Bradford going about raping young white girls are somehow worse than this?

You're out of your fucking mind.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

It's the stonings, chopping off hands, and the like that make Islam the most barbaric. All religions are in some way barbaric, but Islam is more so than others.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> It's the stonings, chopping off hands, and the like that make Islam the most barbaric. All religions are in some way barbaric, but Islam is more so than others.


 
Have no other tyrants claiming divine approval ever stoned anybody or chopped off hands? Only muslim ones?


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> trying to deny the rich history, past and present, of violence, genocide and oppression done at the hands of Christian actors is ludicrous.



Is it just Mel Gibson or are there others?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> It's the stonings, chopping off hands, and the like that make Islam the most barbaric. All religions are in some way barbaric, but Islam is more so than others.


 
Yeah, and those electric chairs and poison injections they have in the Bible Belt are oh so humane.


----------



## LiamO (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> Go fuck your mother.


 
Is english your first language? Cos that sounds like it came straight from a non-english speaking person - like say an arabic islamic fundy.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Is it just Mel Gibson or are there others?


 
Fuck off dwyer, you apologist cunt.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Fuck off dwyer, you apologist cunt.


 
Was that really called for?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Yes, yes it was. That'll be all from me I think, you don't deserve any more energy expenditure.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Yes, yes it was. That'll be all from me I think, you don't deserve any more energy expenditure.


 
What a strange, angry little person you are.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 26, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> It's the stonings, chopping off hands, and the like that make Islam the most barbaric. All religions are in some way barbaric, but Islam is more so than others.


 
That is governments taking that action, not every adherent to the religion itself. And of course America doesn't put anyone on the electric chair so they certainly arent in the barbaric camp being denounced by your sanctimonious self.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Yeah, and those electric chairs and poison injections they have in the Bible Belt are oh so humane.


 
I concur.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

pk said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/82850-Sleeping-pills?p=1972618&viewfull=1#post1972618
> 
> I think sleeping pills count... would you like me to quote where you describe having to hide them to keep them out of temptation's way??


 
in terms of this thread, what i'd like you to do is to quote a post where i indicate i have taken sleeping tablets since april 2003. not something from 2004 where i said i did take them but no longer did. i'd like you to advance your argument, not confirm what i've already said.

oh - and sleeping pills are not anti-depressants, certainly not as i understand the term. anti-depressants are drugs you take for depression, in other words things you take for a fairly long time (months and not weeks) whereas sleeping pills are not supposed to be taken for that sort of period, or indeed cause. lots of people take sleeping pills, including people who are not in fact depressed.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Have no other tyrants claiming divine approval ever stoned anybody or chopped off hands? Only muslim ones?


 
Not still to this day.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> That is governments taking that action, not every adherent to the religion itself. And of course America doesn't put anyone on the electric chair so they certainly arent in the barbaric camp being denounced by your sanctimonious self.


 
The electric chair, (hardly used anymore, by the way, but all executions can be classed together) is certainly a form of barbarism. I still see stoning as a degree worse.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Ever heard of the Lord's Resistance Army, L&L?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Ever heard of the Lord's Resistance Army, L&L?


 
Most certainly. A short-lived terror compared with Islam.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

There you go, pretending that Islam is a monolithic group or entity where everyone agrees on everything. Are you really that ignorant?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

And talking about Islamic jurisprudence - it's only Iran and Saudi Arabia that uses sharia as a basis for all aspects of law and jurisprudence. The largest predominantly Muslim countries - Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh - do not. Furthermore, where sharia forms part of law, it's typically only those parts relating to domestic and inheritance matters. Criminal law tends overwhelmingly towards secular frameworks.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> There you go, pretending that Islam is a monolithic group or entity where everyone agrees on everything. Are you really that ignorant?


 
If I thought you were an idiot I wouldn't bother asking you first. 

I'm not asking.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> If I thought you were an idiot I wouldn't bother asking you first.
> 
> I'm not asking.


 
So you stand by your implied point that Islam is everywhere and at all times a monolithic cultural entity?


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> So you stand by your implied point that Islam is everywhere and at all times a monolithic cultural entity?


 
He has made no such claim, as you know.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> So you stand by your implied point that Islam is everywhere and at all times a monolithic cultural entity?


 
I implied no such thing. Nor would I want to stand by anyone who did suggest such a thing. But stoning is and remains an Islamic tradition while it's died out almost everywhere else.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> He has made no such claim, as you know.



Not in so many words, but he's certainly implying it by writing ignorant shit like "A short-lived terror compared with Islam", "It's the stonings, chopping off hands, and the like that make Islam the most barbaric" to use just two recent examples. He's certainly unwilling to concede that Islam and Islamic law isn't the same everywhere anymore than Christianity is.



Lock&Light said:


> I implied no such thing. Nor would I want to stand by anyone who did suggest such a thing. But stoning is and remains an Islamic tradition while it's died out almost everywhere else.


 
There you go again, sonny. It's not an Islamic tradition anymore, just like burning witches isn't a Christian tradition anymore. It simply doesn't happen in the places where the majority of muslims live, despite what you believe.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> sonny.


 
Now I know and will never need to ask.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> burning witches isn't a Christian tradition anymore.



Plenty of witches are still being burned by Christians.


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> sonny.



If you refer to L&L in this manner, you must be about 100 years old.  That explains much.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Plenty of witches are still being burned by Christians.


 
Where does that happen, phil?


----------



## phildwyer (Jan 26, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Where does that happen, phil?


 
In Africa.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

I suppose you're right. But I never hear Christian leaders say that it's acceptable.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

phildwyer said:


> Plenty of witches are still being burned by Christians.


 
I wish I could say you're wrong, but you're probably to some extent right. I take it you're referring to ongoing actions by Christians in parts of Africa? I'd debate whether that constitutes a Christian tradition as much as it reflects syncretic beliefs. After all Pope Benedict denounced this in Angola in 2009.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2011)

It's apparently quite common in Kenya

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8119201.stm


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's apparently quite common in Kenya
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8119201.stm


 
That's only one region of Kenya. But, yeah, still.


----------



## Streathamite (Jan 26, 2011)

TruXta said:


> And talking about Islamic jurisprudence - it's only Iran and Saudi Arabia that uses sharia as a basis for all aspects of law and jurisprudence. The largest predominantly Muslim countries - Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh - do not. Furthermore, where sharia forms part of law, it's typically only those parts relating to domestic and inheritance matters. Criminal law tends overwhelmingly towards secular frameworks.


absolutely; sharia's main purpose is in settling civil disputes.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 26, 2011)

There can be no doubt that Sharia Law has a lot of wisdom behind it. The wisdom fails when it comes to condoning stonings.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I implied no such thing. Nor would I want to stand by anyone who did suggest such a thing. But stoning is and remains an Islamic tradition while it's died out almost everywhere else.


 
i think you could have put that better - saying stoning's died out almost everywhere else is somewhat tasteless.


----------



## LiamO (Jan 27, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Former alcoholic or not, it's a cunt's trick to use it as an arguing tool.


 
But one PK uses because he is, indeed, a cunt.

let me get this straight PK. You are on _this_ thread calling people on alcohol/drug dependency whilst on another you cheerfully proclaim...




			
				pk said:
			
		

> Well, it was all a long time ago, and yes I would have been drunk at all times if not ripped to the tits on whatever I could lay my hands on.



You really are a loathsome wretch, aren't you?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you could have put that better - saying stoning's died out almost everywhere else is somewhat tasteless.


 
Did you watch the BBC TV News at Ten tonight? They had film of another stoning, this time a couple who had to die for loving each other, which took place only six months ago. Leading members of the Taliban commented that Islam can not be inhuman, as it is the voice of God, and anyone thinking differently deserves to die.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Did you watch the BBC TV News at Ten tonight? They had film of another stoning, this time a couple who had to die for loving each other, which took place only six months ago. Leading members of the Taliban commented that Islam can not be inhuman, as it is the voice of God, and anyone thinking differently deserves to die.


 
no, saying stoning's *almost died out* is tasteless.


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Yeah, and those electric chairs and poison injections they have in the Bible Belt are oh so humane.



Yeah and you get the Electric Chair for stealing in the Bible Belt don't you ? And Poison Injections if you refuse an arranged marriage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

jeff_leigh said:


> Yeah and you get the Electric Chair for stealing in the Bible Belt don't you ? And Poison Injections if you refuse an arranged marriage.


and you think things like the spanish conversion of latin america, the crusades, the various european empires - all works performed with christian support - were civilized? let alone the mass slaughters of the middle of the last century, in the second of which german soldiers (among others) were reminded god was on their side by the motto on their belt buckle. and that's before you get onto institutional paedophilia and other matters...

you talk about lopping hands off and topping people for refusing arranged marriages. out of curiosity, in how many countries in the world does that occur with the blessing of the judiciary?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Did you watch the BBC TV News at Ten tonight? They had film of another stoning, this time a couple who had to die for loving each other, which took place only six months ago. Leading members of the Taliban commented that Islam can not be inhuman, as it is the voice of God, and anyone thinking differently deserves to die.


 
I saw that. Let's hope those vermin are hunted down and exterminated pretty sharpish.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

Stoning doesn't take place in Turkey (and many other places) so the idea that stoning is _universal_ in countries where Islam is practised is a myth.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Stoning doesn't take place in Turkey (and many other places) so the idea that stoning is _universal_ in countries where Islam is practised is a myth.


 
quite


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Are women executed with the electric chair in the bible belt?


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

LiamO said:


> But one PK uses because he is, indeed, a cunt.
> 
> let me get this straight PK. You are on _this_ thread calling people on alcohol/drug dependency whilst on another you cheerfully proclaim...
> 
> ...


 
Loathsome.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Are women executed with the electric chair in the bible belt?


 
YEs. The last female to be executed by EC was in 2002 in Alabama. Lethal injections are more common tho.

What's your fucking point again? That you're a fucking racist twat?


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> YEs. The last female to be executed by EC was in 2002 in Alabama. Lethal injections are more common tho.
> 
> What's your fucking point again? That you're a fucking racist twat?


 
What's so racist about asking if women are executed with the electric chair in the bible belt?


----------



## jeff_leigh (Jan 27, 2011)

LiamO said:


> But one PK uses because he is, indeed, a cunt.
> 
> let me get this straight PK. You are on _this_ thread calling people on alcohol/drug dependency whilst on another you cheerfully proclaim...
> 
> ...



What's so loathsome about Drinking and Drugging ( consuming yourself rather than spiking someone else I mean) ? Are you a fucking Quaker or summat ?


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

jeff_leigh said:


> What's so racist about asking if women are executed with the electric chair in the bible belt?


 
Being critical of an oppressive religion is the new racism, donchaknow.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Being critical of an oppressive religion is the new racism, donchaknow.


 
Being a hypocrite is the same old hypocrisy.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Stoning doesn't take place in Turkey (and many other places) so the idea that stoning is _universal_ in countries where Islam is practised is a myth.


 
Of course it's not universal. Has anyone suggested that it was?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

Wtf is your problem? Do you exist solely to make non-contributions and snide remarks?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

It's a simple question. Has anyone suggested that stoning is universal in Islamic countries?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> It's a simple question. Has anyone suggested that stoning is universal in Islamic countries?


 
You, a little while ago: "stoning is and remains an Islamic tradition". Which is fucking bollocks, as well as implying it's universal. You're a twat and fucking stupid to boot.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

That is a very strange way to interpret the word tradition. Perhaps it would be useful for you to know that I don't tend to imply things. What I say is what I say, and the way you translate it into your own brand of stupidity is not my responsibility.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

You're either a shit troll or a shit writer. Imagine if I wrote "football is and remains an English tradition". Do you think you'd be justified in interpreting that as me making a generalisation about all English folk? That's a rhetorical question, in case you didn't get it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 27, 2011)

Smoking super strong skunk is a Dutch tradition.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

Nah, they like their hash there IME.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Do you exist solely to make non-contributions and snide remarks?


 
have you not met L&L before?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Smoking super strong skunk is a Dutch tradition.


 
I prefer Thai.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> You're either a shit troll or a shit writer. Imagine if I wrote "football is and remains an English tradition". Do you think you'd be justified in interpreting that as me making a generalisation about all English folk? That's a rhetorical question, in case you didn't get it.


 
Why make such a song and dance about universality? Isn't one example of barbarity enough for you?


----------



## ericjarvis (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Why make such a song and dance about universality? Isn't one example of barbarity enough for you?


 
Obviously not. Otherwise we would be up in arms demanding that all doctors should be sentenced to life imprisonment for murder because of Harold Shipman.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Why make such a song and dance about universality? Isn't one example of barbarity enough for you?


 
oh dear, you dont understand your own argument, do you?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

ericjarvis said:


> Obviously not. Otherwise we would be up in arms demanding that all doctors should be sentenced to life imprisonment for murder because of Harold Shipman.


 
That is quite simply stupid. IMO, of course.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> That is quite simply stupid. IMO, of course.


 
Well spotted; now for a little reflection.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

You can take your patronising tone and shove it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 27, 2011)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Well spotted; now for a little reflection.
> 
> Louis MacNeice


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> have you not met L&L before?



I have and he was always trailing me around the boards. A couple of days ago, he said he was going to "ignore" me. He's truly a man of his word.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I don't see catholic priests deliberately seeking non-catholics to rape, nor jewish men going after goyim kids.


Different sets of social dynamics are in play. In Catholic communities, the  idea of "sin" has played a strong role in inducing shame and silence in victims of abuse by the clergy, which has actually made it *safer* for the clergy to abuse their own than to look elsewhere for prey.
As for Jewish men preying on the _Goyim_, I'd suggest that you look at the issue of child sexual abuse in the state of Israel. There's not a great deal of *evidence* for sexual abuse of Jews by Jews, but plenty to support claims that paedos in Israel have "imported" children for sex for at least 3 decades.


> I see news articles and senior politicians and muslim leaders accepting there is an issue that needs addressing.
> 
> And I see urban75's politico dickwads harking from the Scargill-era of 1980's dead lefty ideas refusing point blank to engage with the issue because they're terrified of being seen to be in any way politically incorrect.
> 
> ...


 
Whereas they see you flailing around, spewing abuse.

Hmmm.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> It's the stonings, chopping off hands, and the like that make Islam the most barbaric. All religions are in some way barbaric, but Islam is more so than others.


 
Islam as a religious and cultural force, or some of the followers of Islam who believe that a 1300-year old take on justice is rational?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Wtf is your problem? Do you exist solely to make non-contributions and snide remarks?


 
A rhetorical question, I take it?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

For all those who  harbour the misguided belief that only Islam is capable of barbarous acts, I would advise you to have a good, long look at Hinduism.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> A rhetorical question, I take it?


 
Aye. L&L, plus ca change.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Wtf is your problem? Do you exist solely to make non-contributions and snide remarks?


 
That is a question better suited to the likes of belboid, though I suspect he and his cohorts are just trying wreck the topic - to appease his al muhajiroun allies...


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> For all those who  harbour the misguided belief that only Islam is capable of barbarous acts, I would advise you to have a good, long look at Hinduism.


 
Maybe you should start a thread on how barbaric Hinduism is then?


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

violent panda said:
			
		

> In Catholic communities, the  idea of "sin" has played a strong role in inducing shame and silence in victims of abuse by the clergy, which has actually made it *safer* for the clergy to abuse their own than to look elsewhere


 
Political incorrectness = the new "sin" ??


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Maybe you should start a thread on how barbaric Hinduism is then?


 
It won't be as huge as this one...


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Maybe you should start a thread on how barbaric Hinduism is then?


 
why? if the argument is that islam is uniquely evil, showing hinduism can be just as bad is obviously relevant.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

As usual, you are putting words into other people's mouths. The argument is NOT that Islam is uniquely evil.


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> It won't be as huge as this one...



Maybe not, but I'd be intrigued to find out nino's analysis on comparative religion in this respect.

Very odd thing to do. To deflect the failings in one set of beliefs by comparing them to the failings in another set of beliefs. I never knew world religion could be reduced to a popularity competition for westerners on a bulletin board.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Maybe not, but I'd be intrigued to find out nino's analysis on comparative religion in this respect.
> 
> Very odd thing to do. To deflect the failings in one set of beliefs by comparing them to the failings in another set of beliefs. I never knew world religion could be reduced to a popularity competition for westerners on a bulletin board.


 
There's a lot of "deflection" going on in this thread... anyone would think it was engineered so as to avoid the core issue...


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> There's a lot of "deflection" going on in this thread... anyone would think it was engineered so as to avoid the core issue...


 
Indeed, it is something I've noticed following this thread and I think it reflects a general malaise in society not to call a _spade a spade_ (as it were.)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> As usual, you are putting words into other people's mouths. The argument is NOT that Islam is uniquely evil.


 
It precisely is yours and pk's argument you incoherent fool


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> There's a lot of "deflection" going on in this thread... anyone would think it was engineered so as to avoid the core issue...


 
naah, we've comprehensively ripped your pisspoor excuse for an argument apart, till you are left with nothing. apart from a hug from L&L.


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> why? if the argument is that islam is uniquely evil, showing hinduism can be just as bad is obviously relevant.


 
Where does nino "show it" ?


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

I didn't say he did, I am pointing out that it is obviously relevant, something you seemed to deny.

Have you actually got anything to say? cos you haven't had so far.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> Have you actually got anything to say? cos you haven't had so far.


 
That's basically all you ever say, belboid. Very boring.


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> I didn't say he did, I am pointing out that it is obviously relevant, something you seemed to deny.
> 
> Have you actually got anything to say? cos you haven't had so far.


 
Nino showed no examples. So my definition of "showing" is (obviously) a little more demanding then yours.

And I have made a statement that I believe is relevant to (specifically) ninos contribution above



> Very odd thing to do. To deflect the failings in one set of beliefs by comparing them to the failings in another set of beliefs. I never knew world religion could be reduced to a popularity competition for westerners on a bulletin board.



Do keep up.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Nino showed no examples. So my definition of "showing" is (obviously) a little more demanding then yours.


i made no such definition, you seem to be (wilfully?) misundersdanding the point



> And I have made a statement that I believe is relevant to (specifically) ninos contribution above
> 
> 
> Do keep up.


 
fair do's.  It is a rather stupid point in the context of the thread tho, considering it is the basis of pk's position.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 27, 2011)

Nobody is arguing that Islam doesn't have 'failings'. Nobody is arguing from an Islamic viewpoint. Most if not all are arguing from a firmly secular position. People are making the entirely reasonable case that a) Islam, as a religious doctrine, does not appear to be any more repressive, or specifically no more likely to condone noncing, than other religions, and b) muslims are not some uniform Borg-like entity. Do keep up robot.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> It precisely is yours and pk's argument you incoherent fool


 
No it isn't at all you illiterate twat. Nobody has suggested other religions are not repressive and intolerant.

Just not to the same degree as islam. And given its expansion in Europe & UK worth a discussion.

But that isn't possible when people like YOU are determined to yell "racist!!" from the sidelines - whilst contributing nothing.

Anyway, it's all kicking off at work for me, Mandela is about to die. 
Now there's a man who knew about resisting oppressive regimes...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No it isn't at all you illiterate twat. Nobody has suggested other religions are not repressive and intolerant.
> 
> Just not to the same degree as islam. And given its expansion in Europe & UK worth a discussion.
> 
> ...


 
So your position is that Islam is _uniquely repressive_ then? So what I said.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> As usual, you are putting words into other people's mouths. The argument is NOT that Islam is uniquely evil.


 
Yes it is; PK is explicitly stating that Islam is unique in it's degree of repression and intolerance. Are you with him on this?

Louis MacNeice


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Where does nino "show it" ?



Do I have to "show" _anything_? I could have easily have said "Scientology" instead of Hinduism. I take it you're aware of what's happening in India _vis a vis_ the Muslim population and the violence that has been visited on them by gangs of Hindu thugs?


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> naah, we've comprehensively ripped your pisspoor excuse for an argument apart, till you are left with nothing. apart from a hug from L&L.



If you get support from L&L, you know you're fucked.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 27, 2011)




----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No it isn't at all you illiterate twat. Nobody has suggested other religions are not repressive and intolerant.
> 
> Just not to the same degree as islam. And given its expansion in Europe & UK worth a discussion.
> 
> But that isn't possible when people like YOU are determined to yell "racist!!" from the sidelines - whilst contributing nothing.


you dont even remember your own argument, you've explicitly argued that, unlike christianity, islam's repressiveness & intolerance is inherent, which does actually make it unique.  Now you're watering down your argument a tiny bit cos of the way you've been systematically ripped apart.



> Anyway, it's all kicking off at work for me, Mandela is about to die.
> Now there's a man who knew about resisting oppressive regimes...


 
and now there's your excuse for fucking off.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

I don't think the derailers will ultimately succeed with their diversions.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> naah, we've comprehensively ripped your pisspoor excuse for an argument apart, till you are left with nothing. apart from a hug from L&L.


 
LOL, yeah, course you have. Not been flinging shit from the bars of the zoo compound and calling people names at all have you?

I'm sure your ally Choudary will be pleased, perhaps he'll let you nonce his kid.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 27, 2011)

"Derailers" he says.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm sure your ally Choudary will be pleased, perhaps he'll let you nonce his kid.


 
Oh for fucks sake. Fuck off.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> you dont even remember your own argument, you've explicitly argued that, unlike christianity, islam's repressiveness & intolerance is inherent, which does actually make it unique.  Now you're watering down your argument a tiny bit cos of the way you've been systematically ripped apart.



More lies. I've said essentially that islam has failed to reform, and followers don't generally protest againt the more extremist elements - unlike christianity where Westboro and similar freaks get counter-demos and ridiculed.

The silence of the wider muslim communities in the face of nutters like Choudhary, Hamsa, etc and when they jeer returning troops, implies tacid compliance and agreement.

But you aren't interested in actually reading my point of view, you're just running that good old secular mindset and showboating in front of your "brave" yet silent comrades.



> and now there's your excuse for fucking off.



Yeah, because clearly this thread is full of examples of my running away from this debate isn't it?? 

Try harder, fuckhead, I'm not going to give a opinionless scared little fool like you the satisfaction. 

You seem fine with the idea of bigoted, sexist, homophobic ideology being allowed to grow unchecked on the bizarre grounds that "other religions do it too!" even though far, far less commonly and certainly less overtly.

But if you want to declare yourself "winner" in this little game, I'll not stop you, especially if it stops your petulant fucking whining.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

oh look, he's changed his argument _again_.  don't worry pk, no one will notice, you've been magnificently consistent throughout.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> your petulant fucking whining.



Face, meet palm. Fantastic illustration of the Dunning-Kruger effect right there.


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Do I have to "show" _anything_? I could have easily have said "Scientology" instead of Hinduism. I take it you're aware of what's happening in India _vis a vis_ the Muslim population and the violence that has been visited on them by gangs of Hindu thugs?


 
Well yes you do. This thread's not about Muslims in India. This thread is SPECIFICALLY about Muslims in THIS COUNTRY.

Now where's that thread on Hindus in this country then? I'd be interested to compare to the subject of this thread.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Well yes you do. This thread's not about Muslims in India. This thread is SPECIFICALLY about Muslims in THIS COUNTRY.



That's not my impression of the thread at all. While it started out as that, we've lately shouted at each other about stoning and sharia laws, none of which has much to do with UK muslims in particular.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Well yes you do. This thread's not about Muslims in India. This thread is SPECIFICALLY about Muslims in THIS COUNTRY.


did you not notice all that stuff about Norway?


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> That's not my impression of the thread at all. While it started out as that, we've lately shouted at each other about stoning and sharia laws, none of which has much to do with UK muslims in particular.


 
It's about the dynamic between western women and Muslim men/boys in the North of England

Straw wasnt talking about Muslim gangs in Lahore was he?


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> did you not notice all that stuff about Norway?


 
Ok tell me about Hindus in Norway and how they are just like the Muslims in that country.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Oh for fucks sake. Fuck off.


 
Oh what's up, don't like your shitty arguments thrown back at you??

Get over it...


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Ok tell me about Hindus in Norway and how they are just like the Muslims in that country.


 
are you being deliberately dense?  But if you want to stick with what the thread began as, 100 pages ago, then fine.  But I think it's mostly been covered


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Oh what's up, don't like your shitty arguments thrown back at you??
> 
> Get over it...


 
when did he call you a paedophile?


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> are you being deliberately dense?  But if you want to stick with what the thread began as, 100 pages ago, then fine.  But I think it's mostly been covered


 
Really I didnt read your post countering Islamic actions in Norway by highlighting Hindu actions in that country.

Give me a link to that (must have missed it). I'd be very interested to read it.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

okay, you havent got anything to say, have you?


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> okay, you havent got anything to say, have you?


 
LOL

I reiterate. 

I thinks it's very bizarre to attempt to deflect the heinous crimes of a section of our community which (I believe) is fueled through their religion to a loathing of the lifestyles of another section of the community by stating that another religion is just as worse, and then giving absolutely no examples to back up this "statement"

Fucking shite argument and does absolutely nothing to address why gangs of young Muslim men feel it's ok to rape, kidnap drug and murder young white girls.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Proper Tidy said:


> Islam... does not appear to be any more repressive, or specifically no more likely to condone noncing, than other religions


 
Here I disagree.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> when did he call you a paedophile?


 
I was told I was "allied" with EDL - amounts to the same thing in my book when you look at their leadership and the only non-muslim members of the Blackburn rape gang being BNP members...


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

Age of consent in SA.



> Saudi Arabia
> 
> Any kind of sexual activity outside marriage is illegal in Saudi Arabia, but there is no restriction on the age of marriage.[50] For instance, in 2008 a Saudi court refused to annul a marriage between an 8 year old girl and a 58 year old man.[51] A prohibition on marriage under the age of 14 was being considered by the Ministry of Justice in late 2008. According to cleric Ahmad Al-Mu’bi, the appropriate minimum age for sex "varies according to environment and traditions."



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Saudi_Arabia


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> LOL
> 
> I reiterate.
> 
> ...


 
Precisely the point, now prepare to be accused of racism by the PC arseholes who can't seem to get their heads around that simple point... and note to complete lack of counter arguments provided.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

Great example, iRob, what with SA being so terrifically representative of modern Islamic thought and practice.


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> LOL
> 
> I reiterate.
> 
> ...


 
there have been examples throughout the thread, sorry if you missed them. the catholic church pisses all over anything these men did. horrific child abuse is not limited to gangs of young muslim men, so to single them out does nothing to address that issue. 

do you think it is something specific to islam that encourages its adherents rape, kidnap drug and murder young white girls (and black, and muslim ones too)


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I was told I was "allied" with EDL - amounts to the same thing in my book when you look at their leadership and the only non-muslim members of the Blackburn rape gang being BNP members...


 
pisspoor argument, cuntchops


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Great example, iRob, what with SA being so terrifically representative of modern Islamic thought and practice.




Quite an important country Saudi Arbia in the Muslim world you know (?)

However for your placation, I'll see what the other Islamic countries age of consent is on that wiki link and report back.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> pisspoor argument, cuntchops


 
Well I know that, perhaps the next cunt who thinks it might be clever to lump me in with the fucking EDL might take note.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Quite an important country Saudi Arbia in the Muslim world you know (?)
> 
> However for your placation, I'll see what the other Islamic countries age of consent is on that wiki link and report back.


 
Yeah, they're generally the most hated. Most muslim countries have ages of consent comparable to western nations, bar a few where you have to be married before you can legally engage in sexual relations.


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> there have been examples throughout the thread, sorry if you missed them. the catholic church pisses all over anything these men did. horrific child abuse is not limited to gangs of young muslim men, so to single them out does nothing to address that issue.
> 
> do you think it is something specific to islam that encourages its adherents rape, kidnap drug and murder young white girls (and black, and muslim ones too)



I would like to see a bit more statical evidence. But from my own experience and reading the various reports of Muslim men gangs I feel there might be a link.


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> Yeah, they're generally the most hated. Most muslim countries have ages of consent comparable to western nations, bar a few where you have to be married before you can legally engage in sexual relations.


 
Ok, like I said. I'll look into this and report back. Words have to be backed up.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 27, 2011)

http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm


----------



## iROBOT (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm


 
Cheers (I have mine own link too above). I'll report back tomorrow. Beer/pub comes first eh?


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Well I know that, perhaps the next cunt who thinks it might be clever to lump me in with the fucking EDL might take note.


 
but you are (or were at various points) arguing the same as them, remember that linky from one of their boards.  if you can show choudary or any other islamist doing the same to us, then fair enough, you're not a wholly worthless cunt


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> I would like to see a bit more statical evidence. But from my own experience and reading the various reports of Muslim men gangs I feel there might be a link.


 
you do like being vague, dont you? 

How does islam encourage its adherents to rape, kidnap drug and murder young white girls? Why is that viler than other kinds of child abuse?


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> but you are (or were at various points) arguing the same as them, remember that linky from one of their boards.  if you can show choudary or any other islamist doing the same to us, then fair enough, you're not a wholly worthless cunt


 
And you are arguing at times in alignment with Abu Hamsa and those cunts.

See how shit your position is yet, or are there more crappy analogies you'd like to spew forth?

I notice their weblink went silent once I'd made a point of addressing them over the issue of BNP members being the only non-muslim child rapists in that Blackburn gang...


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

http://www.ageofconsent.com/pakistan.htm

Interesting and very sad link.

Age of consent in Pakistan is basically "whenever the man says so", because girls who complain are all too often jailed... or worse...


----------



## belboid (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> And you are arguing at times in alignment with Abu Hamsa and those cunts.


 where?


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> where?



You're in utter denial that islam is - at it's most extreme and unchallenged form - the most barbaric, intolerant and bigoted ideology of all the modern religious institutions.

Do you have a hook hand??


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Well I know that, perhaps the next cunt who thinks it might be clever to lump me in with the fucking EDL might take note.


 
quite. why would the edl want anything to do with you? you'd give them a bad name.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model;11458367][QUOTE=pk said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/82850-Sleeping-pills?p=1972618&viewfull=1#post1972618
> 
> I think sleeping pills count... would you like me to quote where you describe having to hide them to keep them out of temptation's way??


 
in terms of this thread, what i'd like you to do is to quote a post where i indicate i have taken sleeping tablets since april 2003. not something from 2004 where i said i did take them but no longer did. i'd like you to advance your argument, not confirm what i've already said.[/quote]*taps watch*


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> *taps watch*


 
Oh dear, you really can't let it lie can you. Poor little man.

I'm really pleased for you, if you've kicked your chronic alcohol problem and sleeping pill addiction.

Really, I am. I'm sure you're even more dull and desperately tedious under the influence of such destructive yet perfectly legal poison.

Here's a hint - next time you want to try to derail a thread by dragging up old irrelevant shit from years ago, don't cry into your Cornflakes when the same tactic is applied in turn. 

Because you more than most should know by now I'm pretty good at it when I need to be.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. why would the edl want anything to do with you? you'd give them a bad name.


 
I give love a bad name, baby...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Because you more than most should know by now I'm pretty good at it when I need to be.


 
no you're not, you're shit:





Pickman's model;11456802][QUOTE=pk said:


> Liar. I said "get back to your alcohol/sleeping pills".


 


pk said:


> You post a thread from 4 years ago where I stated I was fucking off from these boards, which I did for a year or so, then again last year, and you cite this as proof of a lie? You were the one who flounced off after being caught reposting private dinner conversations in an attempt to smear the owner of this website, so don't give me your moral high-ground, get back to your *anti-depressants* and alcohol problems.
> 
> The only emotion you elicit from anyone is abject pity.


 [/quote]you can't even keep your lies straight.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> no you're not, you're shit:you can't even keep your lies straight.


 
No but I can keep my eyes straight. Not had a drink since Friday, and I've never had a sleeping pill in my life!

I'll sleep when I'm dead, life is far too short as it is...

Look fool, you practically begged me to find evidence of your past addictions, I knew you'd spoken of them before, and after your indignant demands for evidence, I simply tapped you up on the search engine for the keyword "alcoholic". It's not rocket science.

Yeah, maybe it was a bit cold, but here you are trying to paint me as a liar and yet I've proved you really did have an issue with the booze and the night-night tablets.

Don't hate me just because I called your bluff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No but I can keep my eyes straight. Not had a drink since Friday, and I've never had a sleeping pill in my life!
> 
> I'll sleep when I'm dead, life is far too short as it is...


 
if that's the best you can come up with, you should reconsider your claim that





> I'm pretty good at it when I need to be.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Political incorrectness = the new "sin" ??


 
What does that even mean?

I mean, are you trying to set yourself up as a martyr who gets slagged off because of his "politically incorrect" views? Are you trying to establish some kind of comparison of degree of fucked-upness between being "politically incorrect" and being made by your religion to feel guilty because some pervert priest assaulted you, what?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> What does that even mean?
> 
> I mean, are you trying to set yourself up as a martyr who gets slagged off because of his "politically incorrect" views? Are you trying to establish some kind of comparison of degree of fucked-upness between being "politically incorrect" and being made by your religion to feel guilty because some pervert priest assaulted you, what?


 it sounds better than 'the inability to put together an argument that holds together is the new sin'.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Maybe not, but I'd be intrigued to find out nino's analysis on comparative religion in this respect.
> 
> Very odd thing to do. To deflect the failings in one set of beliefs by comparing them to the failings in another set of beliefs. I never knew world religion could be reduced to a popularity competition for westerners on a bulletin board.


 
Surely what he did wasn't to deflect the failings of one by comparing them to another, but to state that Islam isn't the only religion with a long and inglorious record of cuntishness?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Surely what he did wasn't to deflect the failings of one by comparing them to another, but to state that Islam isn't the only religion with a long and inglorious record of cuntishness?


 
yeh because islam hasn't undergone a reformation in the same way that the catholic church did (leaving aside the fact that the hussite wars and the wars prompted by the lutheran and calvinist reformations killed many millions of people).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Indeed, it is something I've noticed following this thread and I think it reflects a general malaise in society not to call a _spade a spade_ (as it were.)


 
Some examples of this "general malaise", please?

Given that it must be widespread if it's general.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No it isn't at all you illiterate twat.



Bit of a foolish line to use when corresponding with someone who is required to be literate in order to read the reply you make to them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I don't think the derailers will ultimately succeed with their diversions.


 
So why keep derailing?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

iROBOT said:


> Quite an important country Saudi Arbia in the Muslim world you know (?)


Only in terms of wealth and in terms of historical significance, otherwise, it's just a backwater where people practice a backward version of Sunni Islam. 
Of course, that wealth has meant it's been able to export that backward rite to places where more tolerant rites hold sway. Ain't it wonderful what wealth and the possession of natural resources can do?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

TruXta said:


> That's not my impression of the thread at all. While it started out as that, we've lately shouted at each other about stoning and sharia laws, none of which has much to do with UK muslims in particular.


 
There are none so blind as those who think they see.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> did you not notice all that stuff about Norway?


 
Did you not notice all that stuff about yet another case of stoning in Afganistan?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No but I can keep my eyes straight. Not had a drink since Friday, and I've never had a sleeping pill in my life!
> 
> I'll sleep when I'm dead, life is far too short as it is...
> 
> ...


 
Embarrassing. Have you asked for help or are you still in denial?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> are you being deliberately dense?  But if you want to stick with what the thread began as, 100 pages ago, then fine.  But I think it's mostly been covered


 
You are thick enough to think that saying it makes it true.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> There are none so blind as those who think they see.


 
Banality, thy name is Lock&Light.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

belboid said:


> okay, you havent got anything to say, have you?


 
BORING, Belboid.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> BORING, Belboid.


 
I suspect he already nows you are, without needing you to describe yourself to him.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> There are none so blind as those who think they see.



See post 2287.

Louis MacNeice

p.s. why so silent on the question of whether or not your with pk and his assertion of Islam's unique intolerance and repressiveness?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 27, 2011)

This thread's gone seriously rubbish now.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> What does that even mean?
> 
> I mean, are you trying to set yourself up as a martyr who gets slagged off because of his "politically incorrect" views? Are you trying to establish some kind of comparison of degree of fucked-upness between being "politically incorrect" and being made by your religion to feel guilty because some pervert priest assaulted you, what?


 
I was responding to your post, the post where you said:



> the idea of "sin" has played a strong role in inducing shame and silence in victims of abuse



It seems quite clear to me if you replace the word "sin" with "political correctness" then one could quite easily demonstrate that there is an equally strong role there in inducing shame and silence in victims of abuse.

Both involve a fear of offending uptight quasi-religious principles.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Did you not notice all that stuff about yet another case of stoning in Afganistan?


 
What all stuff was this? that a group of backward peasants who were Muslim stoned a couple for adultury and whose actions were  condemned by other Muslims or were you just looking at the pictures and big print? 

 I suppose  you could be worried that your  sexual  Jihad is merely the next step to groups of wannabe gangsters driving around looking for known or alleged adulturers to be stoned over here?

drugs don't work.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> Bit of a foolish line to use when corresponding with someone who is required to be literate in order to read the reply you make to them.


 
Fucking hell VP, you're normally better than this...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No but I can keep my eyes straight. Not had a drink since Friday, and I've never had a sleeping pill in my life!
> 
> I'll sleep when I'm dead, life is far too short as it is...
> 
> ...


 
could you fucking finish with the fucking editing already? fucking five or six times now, and each time it's even shitter than the fucking first time. i practically begged you to find evidence of my past addictions? you are thick as pigshit, in lenin's immortal phrase. you suggested i had *current* addictions. and i asked you to provide proof of that. which you have signally failed to do, relying instead on posts from the best part of seven years ago which refer to a time before i posted here.

do you hate a dog's loose turd or some dried vomit you see on the street? the feelings you have for that puddle of loose shit or dried vomit are what i have for you.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I was responding to your post, the post where you said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not in the case of sin.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

ViolentPanda said:


> So why keep derailing?


 
You are not really that stupid. You won't get away with it.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You are not really that stupid.



You on the other hand...

Louis MacNeice


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

The39thStep said:


> Embarrassing. Have you asked for help or are you still in denial?


 
In denial of what, mr stupid username?

I see you're still clinging on to this runaway thread, without really bothering to read or comprehend it, just hopping on for the ride and chucking in what passes for a witty retort when you can.

Why don't you have a drink? Calm the nerves and all that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You are not really that stupid. You won't get away with it.


 
no, he asked 'why keep derailing' not 'post up some utter wank'


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Louis MacNeice said:


> You on the other hand...
> 
> Louis MacNeice


 
Louis, do yourself a favour. Grow some originality.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Fucking hell VP, you're normally better than this...


 
Not for a while now, I fear.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Not in the case of sin.
> 
> Louis MacNeice


 
Why do you feel the need to sign all your posts with your user name?

I'm not having a dig, I'm genuinely curious.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I see you're still clinging on to this runaway thread, without really bothering to read or comprehend it, just hopping on for the ride and chucking in what passes for a witty retort when you can.


there's more chance of a witty rejoinder from ian gow or airey neave than there is of one from you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 27, 2011)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

...


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm not having a dig, I'm genuinely curious.


 
I've wondered about that too. Mind you there have been other idiots who did it as well.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 27, 2011)

.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Not in the case of sin.
> 
> Louis MacNeice


 
"Sin" is so subjective though. Is it a "mortal" sin, or an "original" sin which according to the folklore we are all born with anyway, so we may as well sin away because we're fucked unless we beg for forgiveness from the great sky pixie.

In other words - life and all it's worldly gains is to be handed over, a bit like taxes. It's for the greater good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

...


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> there's more chance of a witty rejoinder from enumbers than there is of one from you.


 
VERY TASTEFUL- NOT!


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I've wondered about that too. Mind you there have been other idiots who did it as well.


 
I'm not about to call dear Mr MacNeice an idiot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> VERY TASTEFUL- NOT!


fuck off.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 27, 2011)

.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Louis, do yourself a favour. Grow some originality.


 
Still lacking that insight I see. And still ducking the issue of Islam's supposed uniqueness, which you seemed to think was important point until it turned out pk really does think Islam is uniquely intolerant and repressive. I can see your 'thinking' though; it is easier to post glib emptiness than actually sustain a line of argument (which isn't what you're here for anyway).

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> I'm not about to call dear Mr MacNeice an idiot.


 
Call him what you like. I'll never call him early in the morning.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> VERY TASTEFUL- NOT!


 
Did he really just post that?

Fucking hell Pickman's - there was I thinking this was just a bit of banter. 

That was truly cunt's work. Maybe you do need those sleeping pills after all.

For my part - I miss his contributions far more than I would ever miss yours.

You fucking twat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

...


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> "Sin" is so subjective though. Is it a "mortal" sin, or an "original" sin which according to the folklore we are all born with anyway, so we may as well sin away because we're fucked unless we beg for forgiveness from the great sky pixie.
> 
> In other words - life and all it's worldly gains is to be handed over, a bit like taxes. It's for the greater good.


 
Do you know what quasi means?

Louis McNeice


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Did he really just post that?
> 
> Fucking hell Pickman's - there was I thinking this was just a bit of banter.
> 
> ...


my point was - and it's a point proven by your post here - that there's more chance of getting a witty rejoinder out of a dead man than there is out of you.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll bring up what the fuck i like in my posts where and when i like.


 
You are filth.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> my point was - and it's a point proven by your post here - that there's more chance of getting a witty rejoinder out of a dead man than there is out of you.


 
And with that level of low stooping, you just managed to excavate the true nature of your fucked up character.

And you wonder why people speculate as to your mental health.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> And with that level of low stooping, you just managed to excavate the true nature of your fucked up character.
> 
> And you wonder why people speculate as to your mental health.


at least in my case they only speculate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> You are filth.


 
you don't like the allusion to airey neave and ian gow then.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you don't like the allusion to airey neave and ian gow then.


 
Lock and Light has quoted you, you low-life tit.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Lock and Light has quoted you, you low-life tit.


 
Aye - but look at the way he shit himself and deleted everything and is now denying it.

Stand by what you say, and catch the shit for it. Delete it after the fact and look like twice the surplus cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Lock and Light has quoted you, you low-life tit.


 yes, i know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Aye - but look at the way he shit himself and deleted everything and is now denying it.
> 
> Stand by what you say, and catch the shit for it. Delete it after the fact and look like twice the surplus cunt.


pls point to where i deny anything. you can't stop it, can you, lying - seems pathological. all i deleted were posts relating to an abortive spat with littlebabyjesus.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, i know.


 
You know nothing. Mozaz was twice the man you'll ever be and ever were.

Fuck you. Fuck you and your sister.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you don't like the allusion to airey neave and ian gow then.


 
Naaa, that's not denial is it? Changing the names in an edit, then trying to feign false allusion - too late...

You sad cunt. I feel worse because I thought you'd changed or perhaps I'd imagined your past cuntitude. 

I was more than prepared to let the old shit fly - as the early bits of this thread prove. More fool me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> You know nothing. Mozaz was twice the man you'll ever be and ever were.
> 
> Fuck you. Fuck you and your sister.


and he was thrice the man you'll ever be


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> at least in my case they only speculate.


 
No, they don't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Naaa, that's not denial is it? Changing the names in an edit, then trying to feign false allusion - too late...
> 
> You sad cunt.


 
nothing you're posting invalidates my point, though. and that's what's doubtless got your goat, that in death as in life he's wittier than you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> pls point to where i deny anything. you can't stop it, can you, lying - seems pathological. all i deleted were posts relating to an abortive spat with littlebabyjesus.


 
This is true fwiw. Nothing wrong with changing a post when you've made a mistake imo.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> No, they don't.


 
every time i see you post i think of the daily mail







a paper whose politics you appear to share and whose less intelligent readers you resemble.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is true fwiw. Nothing wrong with changing a post when you've made a mistake imo.


 
I'm sure Andy Gray would like to agree with you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> I'm sure Andy Gray would like to agree with you.


 
Too late now anyway, hey.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> every time i see you post i think of the daily mail
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You really have lost it, Pick, haven't you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You really have lost it, Pick, haven't you?


 
it would surprise me if you weren't a closet - or even an open - daily mail reader.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> nothing you're posting invalidates my point, though. and that's what's doubtless got your goat, than in death as in life he's wittier than you.


 
No. What gets my goat is that you refer to a fondly regarded poster here who hasn't even been dead for a week, then when nobody laughs you claim to possess some form of higher wit.

Your enduring legacy if you died tomorrow would be one of pedantic tiresome fuckwittery, a friendless snitch who failed to ingratiate himself with either side of the factions you betrayed and tried to cling to. You're a dirty odious little fart in a cracked jam jar nobody even cares about anymore. I just hope your real life is more rewarding, that by some miracle you are somehow loved. You don't even earn my pity, and I'm a relatively soft touch.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it would surprise me if you weren't a closet - or even an open - daily mail reader.


 
There's more than that will surprise you, Pick.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Your enduring legacy if you died tomorrow would be one of pedantic tiresome fuckwittery, a friendless snitch who failed to ingratiate himself with either side of the factions you betrayed and tried to cling to. You're a dirty odious little fart in a cracked jam jar nobody even cares about anymore. I just hope your real life is more rewarding, that by some miracle you are somehow loved. You don't even earn my pity, and I'm a relatively soft touch.


 
If you hadn't said that, pk, I hope I would have.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You really have lost it, Pick, haven't you?


 
Ignore it. Hopefully the call of the booze and the zopiclone will lead him into some form of self reflection.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No. What gets my goat is that you refer to a fondly regarded poster here who hasn't even been dead for a week, then when nobody laughs you claim to possess some form of higher wit.
> 
> Your enduring legacy if you died tomorrow would be one of pedantic tiresome fuckwittery, a friendless snitch who failed to ingratiate himself with either side of the factions you betrayed and tried to cling to. You're a dirty odious little fart in a cracked jam jar nobody even cares about anymore. I just hope your real life is more rewarding, that by some miracle you are somehow loved. You don't even earn my pity, and I'm a relatively soft touch.


a fondly regarded poster? he wasn't by you: you described him as a tosser and being delusional and irrational. hardly words of amity, i suggest.

yeh, i've no doubt many people will recall him fondly. but the only reason you're championing him now - to judge by your attitude to him expressed in your posts while he was alive - is as a stick to beat me with.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> If you hadn't said that, pk, I hope I would have.


 
no you wouldn't. for all his pisspoor repartee, pk's still a thousand times more articulate than you.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> is as a stick to beat me with.


 
You provided the stick and have been well beaten by it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You provided the stick and have been well beaten by it.


 
no, you brought it up after i had edited it when littlebabyjesus pulled me up on it. it's quite clear - my edit time is before your post time.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

So, you hoped no one noticed. You've always underestimated me, Pick.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> there's more chance of a witty rejoinder from ian gow or airey neave than there is of one from you.


 
If you want to list the dead, why exclude yourself, loser.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> No. What gets my goat is that you refer to a fondly regarded poster here who hasn't even been dead for a week, then when nobody laughs you claim to possess some form of higher wit.
> 
> Your enduring legacy if you died tomorrow would be one of pedantic tiresome fuckwittery, a friendless snitch who failed to ingratiate himself with either side of the factions you betrayed and tried to cling to. You're a dirty odious little fart in a cracked jam jar nobody even cares about anymore. I just hope your real life is more rewarding, that by some miracle you are somehow loved. You don't even earn my pity, and I'm a relatively soft touch.


 i've not claimed i possessed a higher form of wit. i said a dead man has more wit than you. anyone who reads this thread from beginning to end will see you displayed in all your fecal glory, with your dalliance with the 'n' word, your dishonesty, your inability to string together an argument that doesn't unravel at the slightest tug. it's by no means your finest hour. and it's made even worse by your attempt to defend e19896, a poster who, as i've mentioned, you displayed little but contempt for when he was alive. you've shown yourself to be a hypocrite as well as all your other -isms revealed in the course of your 600 posts in this thread.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Desperation. It's sad to see.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> If you want to list the dead, why exclude yourself, loser.


 
it's not a list of the dead, is it. you say (post 2438) i've always underestimated you. i don't underestimate you. i think you're an annoying little shit who can't post on topic to save his life. you've certainly not shown any ability to estimate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Desperation. It's sad to see.


 
quite. you should go to bed unless you can post something with some meat on.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not a list of the dead, is it. you say (post 2438) i've always underestimated you. i don't underestimate you. i think you're an annoying little shit who can't post on topic to save his life. you've certainly not shown any ability to estimate.


 
As I say. Sad.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> As I say. Sad.


 as i say, dull. you may be able to vomit out shit all night long, some of us have work in the morning.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> no you wouldn't. for all his pisspoor repartee, pk's still a thousand times more articulate than you.


 
Ahh, trying to drive a wedge between people who agree on your depraved levels of idiocy... plumbing even further depths now... you really do have no idea how fucking stupid you look right now do you? You think I'll be pleased to read this shit? You think bigging me up now excuses what you just said? 

Lock&Light I'd buy a pint - but you, nope. I'd buy it and tip it over your head.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> your attempt to defend e19896, a poster who, as i've mentioned, you displayed little but contempt for when he was alive


 
Oh we had many a row, but I never, ever had anything like the contempt for him that I have for you.

He was often a tosser, and was clearly typified by being delusional and irrational. That was part of his charm.

He wasn't a fucking skulking little coward like you, he had passion and was gifted with an artistic nature that your likely autistic nature could never comprehend.

I never showed anything like contempt for him, once I understood where he was coming from. And I understand where you are coming from, and you have nothing but my contempt.

And one day you will die, and I will maintain my position, that you were a miserable fuck whom I would hope had something resembling a half decent life in the real world.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> as i say, dull. you may be able to vomit out shit all night long, some of us have work in the morning.


 
Some opinions are known to have swayed
By concision and points that are made,
But contrary thought
Can bring all to naught
When there’s only a face to be saved.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Ahh, trying to drive a wedge between people who agree on your depraved levels of idiocy... plumbing even further depths now... you really do have no idea how fucking stupid you look right now do you? You think I'll be pleased to read this shit? You think bigging me up now excuses what you just said?
> 
> Lock&Light I'd buy a pint - but you, nope. I'd buy it and tip it over your head.


when it comes to looking stupid, i don't suppose anyone on this thread can compete with the pair of posts where you muddle up your lies. 
i'm not bigging you up, i'm belittling you. i've said you're less witty than a dead man. newsflash: that is not bigging you up. you are stupid. that is not bigging you up.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> a fondly regarded poster? he wasn't by you: you described him as a tosser and being delusional and irrational. hardly words of amity, i suggest.


 
You mean to tell me you actually searched for incidences where myself and mozaz argued on here?

To prove some kind of point?

Why don't you show us all your findings then?

In fact why not start a new thread! Show everyone just how much "contempt" I had for him!

You utter low-life. I really, really won't be able to trust myself if ever we meet, and I hope you are now aware of that. 
But of course - by cracking your skull, in your fucked up world I would only validate your pitiful life, and you don't even deserve that much. 
Truth is I wouldn't even acknowledge you, as I'd likely be among friends and enjoying myself, why would a streak of piss like you get in the way of that even for a second?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> Oh we had many a row, but I never, ever had anything like the contempt for him that I have for you.
> 
> He was often a tosser, and was clearly typified by being delusional and irrational. That was part of his charm.
> 
> ...


 i don't know why you have to continue lying. 'you had many a row'? what fucking bollocks. there are only 10 posts where you quote him. 10. there are fucking at least three times that on this thread where you quote me. so don't fucking lie again, you always get caught out.

i'm a coward? yeh, right. tell me one time i've run, and i'll tell you another time you're lying.


----------



## pk (Jan 27, 2011)

You've actually counted where and when I've quoted him?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

You are aware that as "mozaz" he and I were actually friends?? Right?

Fuck you. You are nothing. Get back to your chronic alcoholism and sleeping pills, that was the only time I recalll having any type of affinity with you.

You are more dead to me than he'll ever be.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> You mean to tell me you actually searched for incidences where myself and mozaz argued on here?
> 
> To prove some kind of point?
> 
> ...


 
it would be unfair not to try to find instances of you showing your affection for your great friend e19896, wouldn't it? especially after you've gone to such great lengths on his behalf. 

yeh, i suppose i am a lowlife for showing your hypocrisy. but i'd rather be a lowlife than someone with all the flaws you've displayed on this thread. and i'd rather be a lowlife than some walter mitty shitfer like your good self.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> You've actually counted where and when I've quoted him?
> 
> What the fuck is wrong with you?


 
no, the computer counted, i just read the number.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> You've actually counted where and when I've quoted him?
> 
> What the fuck is wrong with you?


 
Pick is sick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> Pick is sick.


 
with a name like yours you don't want to go down the rhyming path.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

I'll take you on in rhyme any time. Except when I can't be bothered.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 27, 2011)

cock&shite?


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

So original, Paulie.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2011)

pk said:


> You've actually counted where and when I've quoted him?
> 
> What the fuck is wrong with you?
> 
> ...


 
i edited the reference to e19896 from my post before Lock&Light posted. it is rather daft to do it the other way round and edit it after you've been quoted. 

as for my alcoholism, i've pointed out i had my last drink before joining urban. we have, from my perspective, never had any affinity.

if as 'mozaz' he and you were friends, why did you dislike him in his later incarnation? even if i was well disposed towards you, i couldn't believe you. unless you were lying when you said you thought he was a tosser and delusional and irrational. because you can't be trusted. you lie and lie and lie. and it's fucking useless lies, like tony blair saying he'd gone to see newcastle when he was 2, the sort of thing that's so easily disproved. and if you were mates with e19896 / mozaz, why are you only bringing it up now? fuck knows you haven't before.


----------



## Lock&Light (Jan 27, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i edited the reference to e19896 from my post before Lock&Light posted. it is rather daft to do it the other way round and edit it after you've been quoted.
> 
> as for my alcoholism, i've pointed out i had my last drink before joining urban. we have, from my perspective, never had any affinity.
> 
> if as 'mozaz' he and you were friends, why did you dislike him in his later incarnation? even if i was well disposed towards you, i couldn't believe you. unless you were lying when you said you thought he was a tosser and delusional and irrational. because you can't be trusted. you lie and lie and lie. and it's fucking useless lies, like tony blair saying he'd gone to see newcastle when he was 2, the sort of thing that's so easily disproved. and if you were mates with e19896 / mozaz, why are you only bringing it up now? fuck knows you haven't before.


 
You've often dug, Pick, but never yet so deep.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> You've often dug, Pick, but never yet so deep.


 
yeh? there's no fucking evidence to support pk's claims of friendship. no quote saying what a wonderful picture, nothing to say 'you're quite right, mozaz / e19896'. the record's fucking silent on this alleged friendship, when there should be at least one post where pk quotes mozaz. there are none.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 28, 2011)

Lock&Light said:


> So original, Paulie.


i forgot the *boom tish* didn't i?


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh? there's no fucking evidence to support pk's claims of friendship. no quote saying what a wonderful picture, nothing to say 'you're quite right, mozaz / e19896'. the record's fucking silent on this alleged friendship, when there should be at least one post where pk quotes mozaz. there are none.


 
Try when he was 0742. 

You know - before you ever even heard of urban75, never mind posted here... you utterly sad little man.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2011)

Wow. You've had yourself a nice little bunfight haven't you all? Plenty of great substance over the last 4-5 pages I see.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 28, 2011)

It was all going so well too.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2011)

Yeah wasn't it just


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> Try when he was 0742.
> 
> You know - before you ever even heard of urban75, never mind posted here... you utterly sad little man.


 
what, you mean this one time you refer to 0742: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...-disappeared?p=7813330&viewfull=1#post7813330

i must say that if you're trying to show after the fact you were mates with someone, it does help if there was some friendship there.


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Fucking lowlife. Well done, at last, after 99 pages one of the "comrades" found a way of wrecking the thread, by invoking a dead man who used to post here. I hope you all are very proud of Pickman's Model. He's your "ally" after all. Wonderful stuff.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> http://www.ageofconsent.com/pakistan.htm
> 
> Interesting and very sad link.
> 
> Age of consent in Pakistan is basically "whenever the man says so", because girls who complain are all too often jailed... or worse...


 
Where does it say that? The bit I read states that sex outside of marriage is illegal and a male must be 18 and a female 16 to get married.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> Fucking lowlife. Well done, at last, after 99 pages one of the "comrades" found a way of wrecking the thread, by invoking a dead man who used to post here. I hope you all are very proud of Pickman's Model. He's your "ally" after all. Wonderful stuff.


 
you mean, you've got caught out lying *again* and you're trying to wriggle out of it once more. i think it's disgraceful to claim friendship with someone you had no time for when he was alive. i've always been honest about my dislike for e19896, you're quite happy to invent a friendship simply to get one over another poster. that's being a lowlife.


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> you mean, you've got caught out lying *again* and you're trying to wriggle out of it once more. i think it's disgraceful to claim friendship with someone you had no time for when he was alive. i've always been honest about my dislike for e19896, you're quite happy to invent a friendship simply to get one over another poster. that's being a lowlife.


 
Lowlife.

There are plenty here who will no doubt recall the many conversations, rows, and laughs we all had with 0742/mozaz back in the early days.

The fact that you cannot find them in the search engine is irrelevant - you were not even here back then.

Most of the pre-2003 stuff vanished in the move from the old server.

That you would stoop this low in an attempt to call me a liar says a lot more about you than me.

You fucking lowlife.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> Lowlife.
> 
> There are plenty here who will no doubt recall the many conversations, rows, and laughs we all had with 0742/mozaz back in the early days.
> 
> ...


 there's no 'attempt' to call you a liar. you are a liar.

you're claiming a friendship with e19896. yet there is no evidence of you being friends with him, quite the opposite in fact. and if you were mates before 2003, there's bugger all evidence of amity from recent years. on the thread about him from the other day, your post about how he was 'wise enough' to take what you said as 'banter' comes across - to me - quite sinister instead of quite friendly. while friendship doesn't have to involve meeting - for example, h.p. lovecraft conducted many friendships exclusively by letter - it's rather difficult to see your claim that you and e19896 were mates when there are a) so few times you've replied to him, and b) you're hardly using the language of friendship when you do. at best this could be considered a lapsed friendship: and i'd like to take this opportunity to ask that, should i die before you, you don't suddenly find you've been my best mate all along.

e2a: if there was any friendship, surely you'd have congratulated him on at least one of the pictures he took in the past couple of years? yet there is no obvious evidence you did.


----------



## belboid (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> You're in utter denial that islam is - at it's most extreme and unchallenged form - the most barbaric, intolerant and bigoted ideology of all the modern religious institutions.
> 
> Do you have a hook hand??


 
so you can't provide any quotes, or evidence to back up your assertion.  Yet again.  Poor pk, not even good at lying.  And even your latest 'ally' iROBOT has fucked off cos he cant be arsed supporting your bigotry, 

Oh, and dont thinik it hasn't been noticed that you've changed your opinin on the 'problwem' with Islam, yet again!

You keep sucking on that EDL cock, while L&L taps your ass


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 28, 2011)

belboid said:


> so you can't provide any quotes, or evidence to back up your assertion.  Yet again.  Poor pk, not even good at lying.  And even your latest 'ally' iROBOT has fucked off cos he cant be arsed supporting your bigotry,
> 
> Oh, and dont thinik it hasn't been noticed that you've changed your opinin on the 'problwem' with Islam, yet again!
> 
> You keep sucking on that EDL cock, while L&L taps your ass


 
_Hanging off the back of it_ is i believe now the phrase.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:
			
		

> Age of consent in Pakistan is basically "whenever the man says so", because girls who complain are all too often jailed... or worse...



The interesting aspect to this particular point here is that after arguing for an eternity that targeting young girls from other cultures for sex as opposed to their own is a uniquely islamic thing, you have taken the time to point out that muslim girls also get the same treatment.

You've basically destroyed your own argument.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 28, 2011)

Stunning.


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> The interesting aspect to this particular point here is that after arguing for an eternity that targeting young girls from other cultures for sex as opposed to their own is a uniquely islamic thing, you have taken the time to point out that muslim girls also get the same treatment.
> 
> You've basically destroyed your own argument.


 
Not really. Age of consent in Pakistan is subject to two laws - regular law and islamic law - it's a reference to the general treatment of young women, relevant in this topic no?


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd like to take this opportunity to ask that, should i die before you, you don't suddenly find you've been my best mate all along..


 
I'd laugh. Seriously. I'd piss on your gravestone sooner than claim any kind of retrospective friendship.

You have no friends, you sad cunt. Kill yourself.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> I'd laugh. Seriously. I'd piss on your gravestone sooner than claim any kind of retrospective friendship.
> 
> You have no friends, you sad cunt. Kill yourself.



There's two more lies for a start; see if you can spot them.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> Not really. Age of consent in Pakistan is subject to two laws - regular law and islamic law - it's a reference to the general treatment of young women, relevant in this topic no?



So you're now admitting that young muslim girls get targetted for sex by male muslim predators too?

Yes, it destroys your earlier claims that they somehow target white girls as their own were off limits. As i pointed out, the problem is one of gender, not culture or race.


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Louis MacNeice said:


> There's two more lies for a start; see if you can spot them.
> 
> Louis MacNeice


 
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...to-rl-scraps?p=5598423&viewfull=1#post5598423

Here's at least one post that shows mozaz and I were on pretty good terms, the 2001/2 years when he was 0742 notwithstanding.

Someone desperate enough to search through the Wayback archives might find more.

I won't expect an apology from Prickman, he doesn't have the spine.

And yes, I would sooner piss on ol' Picky's slab than claim he and I were anything approaching friends. 

He's a fucking worm, always was, and you know it too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> Not really. Age of consent in Pakistan is subject to two laws - regular law and islamic law - it's a reference to the general treatment of young women, relevant in this topic no?


 
i suppose the dutch age of consent, 12, has already been mentioned on this thread.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2011)

This _thread _should be killed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2011)

pk said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/th...to-rl-scraps?p=5598423&viewfull=1#post5598423
> 
> Here's at least one post that shows mozaz and I were on pretty good terms, the 2001/2 years when he was 0742 notwithstanding.
> 
> ...


 so your argument is that 8 years ago you and e19896 were mates but that you rather let it slide to the extent you felt he was an irrational and delusional tosser. which doesn't smack of friendship to me, although from you those may indeed be terms of affection.

e2a: have you anything FROM YOU indicating affection for e19896 since 2007?


----------



## Crispy (Jan 28, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> fuck off.


 
No, you fuck off. Using a recently dead member of this community to make a snipe from the sidelines? Low, even for you.


----------



## pk (Jan 28, 2011)

Pickman's model said:


> so your argument is that 8 years ago you and e19896 were mates but that you rather let it slide to the extent you felt he was an irrational and delusional tosser. which doesn't smack of friendship to me, although from you those may indeed be terms of affection.
> 
> e2a: have you anything FROM YOU indicating affection for e19896 since 2007?


 
Put it this way - I never felt anything apart from abject pity for you.

That has turned over the years into utter contempt.

Do it Picky. Do it and see how many people give a fuck.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 28, 2011)

That's a cunt's trick too, pk.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2011)

Kill it, mods? Really, noone seems to give a fuck about the topic anymore, so what's the fucking point of this slomo car-crash?


----------



## Crispy (Jan 28, 2011)

Good point. Hasn't been on topic for pages and has just been an exhibition slagging match for some of our special community members.


----------

