Child grooming gang found guilty

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Russ

I just asked her if all Pakistanis are Muslim, she said some are but not all. It's like saying all British people are Christian.

A very significant chunk but by no means all of them.

Religions:

Muslim (official) 96.4% (Sunni 85-90%, Shia 10-15%), other (includes Christian and Hindu) 3.6% (2010 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/pk.html

Of course I'd imagine the proportions of people not following the official religion would drop outwith the country.

[Nidge41]

Originally Posted by Russ

Maybe, maybe not but that's not what you said is it? You said:



Let me tell you how I know that's not right. My OH is Indian (that's her in my avatar), as her family are as well, obviously.

None of them is Muslim.



In the same way you're dodging all my issues and questions?



Thank you - so now you finally agree that it's *some* Muslims, not all as you previously said.

---------- Post added at 16:05 ---------- Previous post was at 15:59 ----------

I just asked her if all Pakistanis are Muslim, she said some are but not all. It's like saying all British people are Christian.

You may need to check your facts in this topic a bit more thoroughly, it's starting to become as informative as an EDL forum.

Never said Indians were Muslims did I? Please show me where I said it if I did.

Indians are Hindu Sieks like I stated well back in the thread.

Again like I mentioned well back Asia covers a massive area and just doesn't take in Pakistan and India.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Nidge41

Never said Indians were Muslims did I? Please show me where I said it if I did.

I asked you:

So to you, Asian = Muslim?

You replied:

Muslims are Asian yes

In the links you've provided many have said Asian, not Muslim yet you've assumed that they are.

Originally Posted by Nidge41

Indians are Hindu Sieks like I stated well back in the thread.

See there you go again. No, they're not. My OH and her family are not "Hindu Siek(sp)".

Originally Posted by Nidge41

Again like I mentioned well back Asia covers a massive area and just doesn't take in Pakistan and India.

Yes I know, one of the few correct facts you've post.

[Pierre]

FFS.

Give up will you two.

You know the point Nidge is making. These Asian sex rings would appear to be predominantly Muslim.

Unless you have records as to the religion of every man implicated you cannot assert that it is 100% an Islamic issue.

But I think we can all agree, it certainly seem to slant that way. So Nidge has a valid point.

Until we have such information, we cannot say for certain that all the men are Muslims so you also have a point.

Both points are valid. Give it a rest. The last several pages of this thread have been trivial, childish, and very dull.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Pierre

You know the point Nidge is making. These Asian sex rings would appear to be predominantly Muslim.

That's not in doubt, in fact I've argued that point several time in this thread.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Unless you have records as to the religion of every man implicated you cannot assert that it is 100% an Islamic issue.

But I think we can all agree, it certainly seem to slant that way. So Nidge has a valid point.

Not at all - he has this view that just because they are Indian, Pakistani etc then they must be Muslim.

Also apparently "all" Muslims consider British white women to be 'trash' - that's also BS.

[Nidge41]

Originally Posted by Pierre

FFS.

Give up will you two.

You know the point Nidge is making. These Asian sex rings would appear to be predominantly Muslim.

Unless you have records as to the religion of every man implicated you cannot assert that it is 100% an Islamic issue.

But I think we can all agree, it certainly seem to slant that way. So Nidge has a valid point.

Until we have such information, we cannot say for certain that all the men are Muslims so you also have a point.

Both points are valid. Give it a rest. The last several pages of this thread have been trivial, childish, and very dull.

Obviously everything has got to be 100% correct with Russ.

---------- Post added at 18:17 ---------- Previous post was at 18:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

I asked you:



You replied:



In the links you've provided many have said Asian, not Muslim yet you've assumed that they are.



See there you go again. No, they're not. My OH and her family are not "Hindu Siek(sp)".



Yes I know, one of the few correct facts you've post.

Oh FFS get a grip man will you.

[Osem]

"Absurd" secrecy rules applying to children in care homes may have helped paedophiles target them, Education Secretary Michael Gove has said.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Mr Gove described a "wall of silence" when he tried to get information about homes.

The regulator Ofsted was not allowed to pass information to the police because of data protection rules and what Mr Gove called other "bewildering regulations".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24075588

"In the name of 'protecting children' by officially 'protecting' their information, we had ended up helping the very people we were supposed to be protecting them from.

"We shielded the children from the authorities who needed to be looking out for them. An 'out of sight, out of mind' culture developed."

I recall thinking that the Data Protection Act would have unintended consequences and this seems to be one such. The police cited data protection law for serious failures relating to information regarding Ian Huntley years ago and now there's this which is very probably just another example of how well intentioned laws can have massive implications which weren't thought through at the time.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Osem

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24075588




I recall thinking that the Data Protection Act would have unintended consequences and this seems to be one such. The police cited data protection law for serious failures relating to information regarding Ian Huntley years ago and now there's this which is very probably just another example of how well intentioned laws can have massive implications which weren't thought through at the time.

There were 2 main problems with the Ian Huntley situation. First, he was never convicted of anything, second it was his girlfriend, Maxine Carr, that provided the link to the school. He worked at the building next door to the school. That next door building just happened to be another school. It could have been a factory etc or he could have worked in another building, even in another town. They went to the house to see Maxine Carr, not him. If CRB checks had been in place at that time, it wouldn't have changed anything, as it was his girlfriend Maxine Carr who was the teaching assistant and she would have passed the checks.

[Osem]

IIRC the police involved deleted records they held about Huntley because they believed they would be in breach of the DPA if they were retained. The problem with laws like the DPA is that they have far reaching ramifications and the more complex they are the more there is the chance that they will be misinterpreted as was the case with Huntley. When I started my own business I presented my case for not requiring registration to the DPR office and, in view of their uncertainty, was asked if I'd like to be a test case. Laws like the DPA have very far reaching effects and it's clear (as with health & safety) that not enough is done to educate those bound by these laws in the scope of the law and their responsibilities. It's all become hugely complicated and when various groups, people and organisations are not completely clear about the rules, there's a very strong likelihood that things will go wrong and laws designed to protect people wind up having the opposite effect.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Osem

IIRC the police involved deleted records they held about Huntley because they believed they would be in breach of the DPA if they were retained. The problem with laws like the DPA is that they have far reaching ramifications and the more complex they are the more there is the chance that they will be misinterpreted as was the case with Huntley. When I started my own business I presented my case for not requiring registration to the DPR office and, in view of their uncertainty, was asked if I'd like to be a test case. Laws like the DPA have very far reaching effects and it's clear (as with health & safety) that not enough is done to educate those bound by these laws in the scope of the law and their responsibilities. It's all become hugely complicated and when various groups, people and organisations are not completely clear about the rules, there's a very strong likelihood that things will go wrong and laws designed to protect people wind up having the opposite effect.

The records only contained accusations and suspicions. Still doesn't change the fact that Ian Huntley could have been working anywhere. The problem was that his girlfriend worked at a school, not whether he did.

[Osem]

I'm not arguing about Huntley's prosecution or the murders he committed, merely pointing out that Data Protection issues, specifically confusion by the police relating to the rules, caused a serious mistake to be made. It may not have affected the outcome in the Soham case but it could have in many other cases we don't and may never know about. It appears these 'unintended consequences' are still coming to light as highlighted by Gove's statement referred to above in relation to data protection and secrecy regarding children's welfare.

---------- Post added at 14:18 ---------- Previous post was at 13:39 ----------

Two east London men found guilty of raping an 18-year-old woman who they pretended to help have been jailed.

Car salesman Naeem Ahmed, 25, of Barking, was jailed for 14 years while mechanic Nabeel Ahmed, 24, of Romford, was jailed for eight years.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-22793664

A girl in local authority care has told a jury she was raped and prostituted to "three or four men a day".

The girl, aged 17 and from Benfleet, was giving evidence at Snaresbrook Crown Court where five men from east London are on trial.

She is one of six alleged teenage victims, two of whom were in "supported living flats" in east London, under the care of Essex County Council.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24079667

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

http://thebackbencher.co.uk/white-gi...-sexual-abuse/ . It's not just white non muslim girls being groomed by asian/muslim men

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

http://thebackbencher.co.uk/white-gi...-sexual-abuse/ . It's not just white non muslim girls being groomed by asian/muslim men

Any lack of comment from the media, BNP, or, EDL, as criticised in the article, will be down to the report only coming out a few days ago and that there are no court cases involved. When court cases are involved there is an element of evidence and not just hearsay. They would be better asking why Muslims that are in the know about it, don't come forward.

“There are young men that I’ve spoken to – a lot of them are in the know,” she said. “It’s not just men in the know, it’s women too. There are enough women that know about it.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

http://thebackbencher.co.uk/white-gi...-sexual-abuse/ . It's not just white non muslim girls being groomed by asian/muslim men

I don't think anyone is saying they target only whites.

Have you noticed how in these cases of gangs the vast majority (usually all) of the men are Asian?

[nomadking]

The main factor will be, are there any white girls available to them? If not, then they will have to choose others.