[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

99 individuals, yet all sources say there were thousands of perps - see the problem?

Not to worry there's at least 180 more cases coming between now and Christmas from Manchester alone. We've yet to hear how many more are coming from elsewhere.

There's going to be lots of data real soon.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... alone.html

Suzy's report is going to look dumber every day.

[ccga3359]

andyt andyt:

99 individuals, yet all sources say there were thousands of perps - see the problem? You're not really claiming there were only 99 perps in all of Britain in the last 16 years, are you? Because you claimed this figure applied to all of Britain, when in fact it seems to apply to only one small part of the entire number. And that is exactly how things get distorted, and how hysteria is built up that we have to do something about Pakistani grooming gangs, when it fact what we - they - have to do is something about all the grooming gangs, no matter what their ethnicity.

Again based on convictions. Wait for the other shoe to drop now that the problems of Rotherham have been made public. Still then I expect that percentage to remain sickenly high.

[andyt]

It's out of proportion to their numbers, but nowhere near the 95% you claimed. Far from it. So it becomes a problem of stopping grooming gangs. And individual groomers and internet lurers. Full stop. Not a problem of stopping Pakistani grooming gangs. My only point all along really.

[andyt]

Posted this before:

$1:

A report for the children's commissioner in 2012 found there were 1,514 perpetrators. Of these, 545 were white, 415 were Asian and 244 were black. The ethnicity of 21% of perpetrators was not recorded. Attempts to analyse the Asian figure further runs into problems. Just 35 of the 415 Asians are recorded as having Pakistani heritage and thus highly likely to be Muslim, and only five are recorded as being from a Bangladeshi background. The heritage of 366 of the Asian group is not stated in those figures.

So despite the insistence of some here, it seems in England as well, Asian means Asian, not just Pakistani.

And these words of wisdom:

$1:

However, the view in different parts of law enforcement is that it is wrong to take these figures and cases and say the race or religion of the perpetrator leads to them committing these crimes.

A more credible link, says one senior source involved in bringing the criminals to justice, are their occupations. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source said the demography of certain areas and the makeup of the night-time economy explained the over-representation of Asian offenders.

The source said: "Young vulnerable girls migrate to the night-time economy, where they come across taxi drivers and people working in takeaways, who are more likely to be Asian. It is better to focus on the professions of offenders, not their race or religion."

And this again:

$1:

Court cases later this year will see allegations against mixed race sex gangs, including one with Asian and white suspects, and another with Asian and African men. Cases involving white suspects did not gain the same media attention as those where Asian gang members were convicted.

And

$1:

The idea that these are criminals striking when the opportunity arises, regardless of race, is given credence by the leader of the grooming gang in Rochdale. Shabir Ahmed was jailed for attacking a young Asian female as well as young white females. His case suggests opportunity, not race, was the major factor in whom he attacked.

[andyt]

http://www.channel4.com/news/ceop-warns ... ming-study

That shows what kind of bullshit the media gets up to. Compare the headline to what's actually reported in the body of the piece, immediately below the pics of those scummy Asians. Out and out contradict each other, the headline claim is not supported. A significant minority is not a majority.

[andyt]

Maybe this explains it:

$1:

Thus far the majority of convictions obtained against the child sex grooming gangs have been against men of Pakistani origin that have exploited, repeatedly gang-raped and sexually tortured vulnerable young girls over long periods. However, according to the Independent "on-street grooming is not the sole preserve of Asian men" and "the most detailed research on the phenomenon so far found that, in 43 per cent of cases, the abusers were white." Figures cited by the deputy children's commissioner also state that 28 percent of victims are from ethnic minority groups.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/3 ... z3C6eviwJd

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

It's out of proportion to their numbers, but nowhere near the 95% you claimed. Far from it. So it becomes a problem of stopping grooming gangs. And individual groomers and internet lurers. Full stop. Not a problem of stopping Pakistani grooming gangs. My only point all along really.

And what I and others have heard him trying to pound into your overly meaty head, over and over again has been this.

ccga3359 ccga3359:

andyt andyt:

So what now? You go from claiming 95% of the child pimps in Britain are Muslim, now you're reduced to bringing up Rotherham again, as if this proves it...

Since the main topic of discussion is about the attacks and failings in Rotherham then, yeah, Rotherham will be brought up again and again. The fact remains that of all grooming gangs like that of Rotherham, Rochdale, Derby, Oxford and a all that have recently been prosecuted were also Pakistani moslem groups shows a pattern. This pattern also raises the spectre to those of us actually concerned, given the facts, that the Rotherham breakdown may be wider spread across all of Britain.

He also told you if what you were actually more concerned about all round child abuse you should open a thread for that. This one is about the Rotherham child abuse scandal. And yeah, I agree with him on his guesstimate for that one. In fact I think it's being kind to say just 95% of the perps were South Asian Muslim gangs in that one. My impression was the figure was just a guess, but personally I haven't seen any kind of credible data to contradict it. For God's sakes don't shame yourself further by posting the Guardian's old mention of that bogus report again.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

http://www.channel4.com/news/ceop-warns-against-focus-on-race-after-major-grooming-study

That shows what kind of bullshit the media gets up to. Compare the headline to what's actually reported in the body of the piece, immediately below the pics of those scummy Asians. Out and out contradict each other, the headline claim is not supported. A significant minority is not a majority.

It's from 2011.

2011 is out of date on this issue. Reporting agencies were refusing to acknowledge the data coming in by way of hard complaints. Many (including some who worked out of such agencies) claimed it was out of fear of being thought racist. Personally I think it was more just far left politically correct group think, but whatever the reason the data was not there back then, so anything said back then is based on bad data and must be disregarded.

And I'll keep saying it until you hear me. Suzie's report was bogus. Her data was useless to the level of non-existence. The report is meaningless as reference to anything.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

So despite the insistence of some here, it seems in England as well, Asian means Asian, not just Pakistani.

You impossibly thick bonehead. I showed you mathematically why those figures were meaningless, and you seem to think that simply repeating the claim disproves the math.

Are you for real?

I think I might understand your problem though. Go back and read what you quoted. Understand that when they say "heritage of the Asian group" is "not stated" what they mean is "not known". That fact was already shown in previous critique. The perps could be Pakistani, Bangladeshi or some other variety of South Asian Muslim. Suzy doesn't know what they are. She told you she didn't know. It's in the colored quote on the previous page. Seriously? What does it take to get you understand, common sense?

[ccga3359]

Rochdale: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -rape.html

Derby grooming gang: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... 0-sex.html

Oxford: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 77159.html

Telford: http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/crim ... se-ordeal/

Rotherham: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ng-12.html

High Wycombe: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 34929.html

[andyt]

A good long look at the situation. Including how it gets distorted by the BNP.

$1:

"There has been a shift from the men selling children in ones or twos to something that is much more organised in groups and networks. The networks of men come from different backgrounds: in the North and Midlands many have been British Asians; in Devon it was white men; in Bath and Bristol, Afro-Caribbeans; in London, all ethnic mixes, whites, Iraqis, Kurds, Afghans, Somalis.

"The danger with saying that the problem is with one ethnicity is that then people will only be on the lookout for that group – and will risk missing other threats." The gifts given to girls in grooming are breathtakingly trivial. Often the presents involved are nothing more than a bag of chips, a cigarette or two, or a few illicit swigs of vodka. "Gifts such as mobile telephones are far less common," say Ella Cockbain and Helen Brayley. Attention, affection and excitement are often enough....

This is not to buy into the British National Party's "Our Children are Not Halal Meat" anti-Muslim agenda. The BNP refers to this type of offending as "Muslim paedophilia", but, as Ella Cockbain and Helen Brayley point out: "This is misguided for two reasons. First, it is not paedophilia since the victims are not pre-pubescent.

"There is also no indication that the offenders are exclusively or preferentially sexually attracted to minors. Secondly, religion seems to be a red herring here, in that many offenders seem to be Muslim only in a nominal sense. Prior to arrest many drank alcohol, took drugs, did not have beards, and all engaged in extramarital sex with underage girls. Hardly the hallmarks of a strict Muslim."...


The evidence that the Jill Dando Institute of Security and Crime Science has gathered suggests that victims are targeted not because they are white but rather in a haphazard opportunistic manner – with the perpetrators cruising the streets for whatever girls they happen to see hanging about there. Convenience and accessibility, rather than race, appear to be the primary drivers. The men go for the easiest targets.


"Indeed, though most of the victims are white British," the researchers say, "the proportion of black and minority ethnicity victims was actually higher than what might be expected, given the local demographics." Martin Narey agrees. "I have never subscribed to the view that these men have some sort of moral code and would not abuse Asian girls," he says. "They'd abuse any child over whom they could exert power. The reality, however, is that the girls who make themselves vulnerable on our cities, particularly at night, are generally white. Asian girls, more strictly parented, are at home."


Even so, it is clear that some Asian men do target underage schoolgirls and attempt to groom them for sex. The exact proportion may be unclear because the statistics on these crimes are so incomplete and inconsistent. But there is a serious problem within parts of the British Pakistani community.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/cr ... 29068.html

[ccga3359]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

andyt andyt:

It's out of proportion to their numbers, but nowhere near the 95% you claimed. Far from it. So it becomes a problem of stopping grooming gangs. And individual groomers and internet lurers. Full stop. Not a problem of stopping Pakistani grooming gangs. My only point all along really.

And what I and others have heard him trying to pound into your overly meaty head, over and over again has been this.

ccga3359 ccga3359:

andyt andyt:

So what now? You go from claiming 95% of the child pimps in Britain are Muslim, now you're reduced to bringing up Rotherham again, as if this proves it...

Since the main topic of discussion is about the attacks and failings in Rotherham then, yeah, Rotherham will be brought up again and again. The fact remains that of all grooming gangs like that of Rotherham, Rochdale, Derby, Oxford and a all that have recently been prosecuted were also Pakistani moslem groups shows a pattern. This pattern also raises the spectre to those of us actually concerned, given the facts, that the Rotherham breakdown may be wider spread across all of Britain.

He also told you if what you were actually more concerned about all round child abuse you should open a thread for that. This one is about the Rotherham child abuse scandal. And yeah, I agree with him on his guesstimate for that one. In fact I think it's being kind to say just 95% of the perps were South Asian Muslim gangs in that one. My impression was the figure was just a guess, but personally I haven't seen any kind of credible data to contradict it. For God's sakes don't shame yourself further by posting the Guardian's old mention of that bogus report again.

I quoted my source being an article that appeared in the Times January 5th 2011 (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/c ... 863078.ece). For those that can't access it Shariaunveiled quoted it in its entirety. I was loath to include that link because of the obvious bias of the site.

http://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/201 ... y-muslims/

This is based on convictions, given that we acknowledge the rule of law and presumed innocent and all that, these number are definitive and not conjecture.

[ccga3359]

Andy, I am not, nor have I ever been a supporter of the BNP or their racist oaf of a leader Nick Griffin. I refuse to post data compiled by them in this thread as it will be obviously biased. You may accuse me of being a supporter of UKIP and yes, even despite me being a quarter Roma Gypsy, I will gladly admit that I do support them. So know you know where I'm coming from. The figure I quoted is accurate when given and when new, accurate and up to date data is compiled I will go with that. Given the information I am seeing I expect that data to remain at such a disgustingly high level. I'll admit that in my years there I never traveled north of London but I'm well aware that the socioeconomic climate in the North Country, like that of the equally depressed parts of London and other big cities are rife with conditions that make our young victims easy prey for these nonces.

[Xort]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09 ... 1409650724

$1:

Rotherham Whistleblower 'Sent On Diversity Training For Saying Most Abusers Were Asian'

...

She recalled the reaction of one official to it, saying: "She said you must never refer to that again. You must never refer to Asian men.

"And her other response was to book me on a two-day ethnicity and diversity course to raise my awareness of ethnic issues."

She also told the programme that data backing up her report, stored by Risky Business, went missing just after it was submitted.

"They'd gained access to the office and taken my data, so out of the number of filing cabinets, there was one drawer emptied and it was emptied of my data. It had to be an employee of the council," she said.

Clearly not an issue of being fearful of being branded a racist. Just a big misunderstanding.

[Zipperfish]

Wente: The unspeakable truth about Rotherham

Edit: Should add the credit. Courtesy of the Globe and Mail

$1:

The reports are almost unbelievable – and certainly not for the squeamish. They describe a ring of vicious sex traffickers who preyed on adolescent girls and operated with impunity for years, as authorities deliberately ignored and even covered up the evidence.

Among the victims was Amy, a young girl who was groomed for sex by some exciting new friends she’d made in the big city. They showed her a good time and made her feel special. By the time she was 14, she had been raped and abused repeatedly by at least six adults in their late teens and early 20s. She went to the police, who ignored her. Her parents begged for help, in vain. Social workers and police treated her like a “stupid, naughty girl,” she told the Times of London.

Amy was just one of at least 1,400 girls who were groomed and raped over two decades in Rotherham, a grim postindustrial town in northern England. Most of the victims were working-class. They were typically 12 to 14 when they were lured into a life of drugs, alcohol and abuse. Nearly all the abusers were Muslim men of Pakistani origin.

Britain has had more than its share of sex scandals lately. But this one is by far the most disturbing. It has shaken the country to the core, and prompted searching questions about the role of “cultural sensitivity” in covering up the abuse. And it has raised wider issues about Muslim integration into British life.

"Men of Pakistani heritage treated white girls like toilet paper,” columnist Allison Pearson wrote in The Telegraph. But authorities tried to bury the problem because they were afraid of being labelled racist, or that it might cost them votes. Front-line workers who tried to get police and bureaucrats to act were repeatedly harassed and intimidated. One researcher who had gathered extensive evidence was told she must “never, ever” refer to the ethnicity of the abusers. Her report was suppressed, and she was sent on a diversity course.

But now, the truth is impossible to ignore. A damning independent report, released last week, has confirmed all this and more. It identifies a “deep-rooted problem of Pakistani-heritage perpetrators targeting young white girls.” Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of men. Some children “had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next.” Some returned to their abusers because they thought that was the only way to keep their families safe. But instead of arresting the perpetrators, police and senior social work managers blamed the victims. One mother of an abused girl, when asked why the authorities did nothing, replied: “They thought they were dirty little slags.”

Rotherham is not an isolated case. Alexis Jay, the author of the independent report, says similar abuses have taken place in towns and cities across England. The abusers are not pedophiles, but groups of men who enjoy having sex with young girls, and have no problem with violence. As former home secretary Jack Straw once said, they regard young white girls as “easy meat.” (He caught hell for saying that.)

Yet even now, few liberal politicians are willing to speak out. One exception is Simon Danczuk, a Labour MP from the Rotherham area. He describes the typical attitude of constituents who ask him to get a family member off the hook for similar abuses. “When I refuse, I frequently receive a tirade of abuse,” he wrote in The Telegraph. “ ‘These girls are prostitutes,’ one man shouted at me, and warned that I would pay a heavy price for not supporting him.”

Andrew Norfolk, the Times journalist whose investigative reports prompted this inquiry and others now under way, has explained why this travesty is so toxic to Britain’s liberal elites. “The suggestion that men from a minority ethnic background were committing sex crimes against white children was always going to be the far right’s fantasy come true,” he wrote. “Innocent white victims, evil dark-skinned abusers. Liberal angst kicked instinctively into top gear.”

But no amount of liberal angst will make this story go away. Current Home Secretary Theresa May has acknowledged that “institutionalized political correctness” has inflicted appalling damage on the innocent. And the broader failures of Muslim integration are now too obvious to ignore. It’s not just all the young men who run off to join the caliphate and saw off people’s heads. It’s the Birmingham school scandal, where it was discovered that dozens of secular schools had been targeted for Islamization by Muslim radicals. It’s the imported culture of violence and misogyny.

As Dan Hodges (a professed liberal) wrote this week in The Telegraph: “We can’t carry on like this. We just can’t.”