Child grooming gang found guilty

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

I was making the point that Asians got a rough deal with the constant invoking of their race as an important point while white people don't have their race mentioned at all.
.

And that has exactly what bearing on this case or what these men were found guilty of?

---------- Post added at 13:09 ---------- Previous post was at 13:07 ----------

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

I think he did mention more than once that paedophile victims are in the main white.

In this country "in the main" everything is white.

If you went to India or Pakistan I think you'd find most paedophiles were asian.

If yoe went to Nigeria I think you'd find most paedophiles where black.

again I fail to see the point

---------- Post added at 13:12 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

The use of race.

What use of race?

apart from stating that the gang were asian, which is a statement of fact I see no use of race.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Damien

I was making the point that Asians got a rough deal with the constant invoking of their race as an important point while white people don't have their race mentioned at all.

Are you serious?!

When white people are convicted of an attack on non-whites their race is always a factor (as it should be).

Originally Posted by Russ

Are you serious?!

When white people are convicted of an attack on non-whites their race is always a factor (as it should be).

I am not playing the game of 'if it were a white person'. You can have crimes which are motivated by race and you can't have crimes they are not. If a white person robs a Asian person I don't assume it's a race-related incident unless there is evidence for it. I don't make those assumptions so I am not going to be forced to abide by that line of thinking for a Asian person.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Pierre

In this country "in the main" everything is white.

If you went to India or Pakistan I think you'd find most paedophiles were asian.

If yoe went to Nigeria I think you'd find most paedophiles where black.

again I fail to see the point

---------- Post added at 13:12 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

The point is - are they selecting their victims because they specifically preyed on white girls for racial motives, or whether their race had anything do do with it because the majority of paedophile victims tend to be white anyway. I am refering to the colour of the victims - your comparisons above are talking about the paedophiles themselves.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Damien

I am not playing the game of 'if it were a white person'. You can have crimes which are motivated by race and you can't have crimes they are not. If a white person robs a Asian person I don't assume it's a race-related incident unless there is evidence for it. I don't make those assumptions so I am not going to be forced to abide by that line of thinking for a Asian person.

I apologise if I made it sound like a 'game' - that's not my intention. The point I'm making is if a white person attacks a non-white it always seems to be approached as a racial crime however the reverse does not seem to be so. In either case I can accept it might not be racial - maybe the victim got beaten because they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

But when a gang of one race targets victims of a different race, I cannot see how you could fail to recognise the racial significance of that.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Pierre

In this country "in the main" everything is white.

If you went to India or Pakistan I think you'd find most paedophiles were asian.

If yoe went to Nigeria I think you'd find most paedophiles where black.

again I fail to see the point

If you were actually referring to the victims colour here's a question.

If a group of white expats in India, formed a paedo gang and started grooming young kids, it would probably be right to assume that most of not all their victims would be asian- even though there must be young white girls in India.

Would they be deemed as being racist, or just exploiting the vunerable area of the society in India. Would their race actually have anything do do with their motives?

Originally Posted by Russ

I apologise if I made it sound like a 'game' - that's not my intention.

Cheers, I didn't mean to imply you were making it sound like a game. It's just a phrase I used.

But when a gang of one race targets victims of a different race, I cannot see how you could fail to recognise the racial significance of that.

Because there are enough white people in the country that it's not statistically significant that all the victims were white. Nor is it uncommon for people to associate with people from the same community therefore it wouldn't be wise to draw conclusions from the fact all the men were Asian.

The point I'm making is if a white person attacks a non-white it always seems to be approached as a racial crime however the reverse does not seem to be so. In either case I can accept it might not be racial - maybe the victim got beaten because they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

If it is the case that any crime committed by a White British Person on a member of a ethnic minority is treated as a race crime regardless of the context then I don't that is right. It is not a view I hold or encourage. So neither will I apply it when it's the other way around. If you think it's wrong then you shouldn't apply it the other way around either. Two wrongs don't make a right.

So in this case. Is there evidence that race as a big factor? Did the Asian men target white girls exclusively because of a racial element or hatred? Was it simply they went after 'at risk' children and these just happened to be white? Did they want to stay out of their community? Is there statistical (not anecdotal) evidence that Asian communities have a higher proportion of these kinds of offenders?

If they just happen to be paedophiles that are Asian then why is there race important at all? I think the focus on race without these answers risks harming an entire community.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Damien

Because there are enough white people in the country that it's not statistically significant that all the victims were white. Nor is it uncommon for people to associate with people from the same community therefore it wouldn't be wise to draw conclusions from the fact all the men were Asian.

Had the crime occurred in somewhere like Port Talbot that has a very very low non-white population then you'd have a point.

But Rochdale? Really?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

If you were actually referring to the victims colour here's a question.

If a group of white expats in India, formed a paedo gang and started grooming young kids, it would probably be right to assume that most of not all their victims would be asian- even though there must be young white girls in India.

Correct, they would go for the easy target.

The young white girls in Rochdale, most of which were in care or other vulnerable situations were the easy target.

Would they be deemed as being (a) racist, or (b) just exploiting the vunerable area of the society in India.

B

Would their race actually have anything do do with their motives?

Their motives are to abuse vulnerable young girls.

Their race has nothing to do with it.

However, the fact of the situation is that it was a gang of asian men, and it will be reported as such.

Whether anyone wants to make it a racial crime, is matter for them, and/or the courts to decide.

My point of view is, I suspect, the same as yours which is that they targeted the most vulnerable girls they could, and they happened to be white. But I don't know I've never asked any of them.

But does it make the crime any less terrible?

Originally Posted by Russ

Had the crime occurred in somewhere like Port Talbot that has a very very low non-white population then you'd have a point.

But Rochdale? Really?

According to the 2001 census 78% of people are white: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale

Granted the number has probably gone down but not by a massive amount.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Damien

According to the 2001 census 78% of people are white: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale

Granted the number has probably gone down but not by a massive amount.

Without knowing the current figures it's hard to comment but I understand that in the last 10 years the number of non-whites in the UK has jumped up.

Rochdale is close to Oldham and not far from Blackburn, both with high non-white areas. This would suggest that the general location would have had plenty of non-white girls to choose from.

Originally Posted by Russ

Without knowing the current figures it's hard to comment but I understand that in the last 10 years the number of non-whites in the UK has jumped up.

Rochdale is close to Oldham and not far from Blackburn, both with high non-white areas. This would suggest that the general location would have had plenty of non-white girls to choose from.

It would have jumped up but it's relative. I don't think anywhere in the UK would have massive percentage point jumps in 10 years, just because of the sheer numbers of people already living in those locations.

Also didn't they use one or two girls to draw others in?

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Damien

It would have jumped up but it's relative. I don't think anywhere in the UK would have massive percentage point jumps in 10 years, just because of the sheer numbers of people already living in those locations.

Also didn't they use one or two girls to draw others in?

Exactly. One of the women who bought girls to the gang hung around with other white girls and got victims involved that she already knew. Was she brainwashed into only bringing non asian girls? Or is it that she bought people to the gang that she knew or could associate with, fit in with? I'd say the latter.

Originally Posted by Pierre

My point of view is, I suspect, the same as yours which is that they targeted the most vulnerable girls they could, and they happened to be white. But I don't know I've never asked any of them.

But does it make the crime any less terrible?

Not at all, the crime is just as bad. We both suspect that the gang targeted the most vunerable girls who happened to be white. My argument in this whole thread is that it's not a racist crime, and shouldnt be painted as a racist one. I also think the race element was overly over played, and the "racially motivated" tone the commentators/media were using has probably set race relations a lot further back in that area of England.

I think in the Rochdale case the reason why many people said it was a racial case is because the defendants said it was ..........no guess work needed .

It would have been perfectly possible for the rochdale gang to pick on children in their own community just as easily as white peodo's pick on children that are close to them i.e nephews, neices ,close friends .Instead they actively chose white vulnerable children outside their own community.

A issue in both cases seems to be that the children where in care which i find deeply disturbing and one i'm surprised the guardian or any other paper hasn't mentioned and investigated more thoroughly .If children in care are so easily preyed upon by perverts then doesn't anyone think we have a bigger problem ?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Not at all, the crime is just as bad. We both suspect that the gang targeted the most vunerable girls who happened to be white. My argument in this whole thread is that it's not a racist crime, and shouldnt be painted as a racist one. I also think the race element was overly over played, and the "racially motivated" tone the commentators/media were using has probably set race relations a lot further back in that area of England.

I don't think it was a "racist" crime either.

The "racially motivated" tone may have been overplayed by the media.

But even when that's all said and done, you can't ignore the racial element to the story.

In so far that the men were all asian. It's bound to be brought to the fore and it's bound to be a sensitive issue. To pretend otherwise is to be naive.

It would be the same if the gang was all black, or all Serbian, or all Polish etc etc.