here discuss nicely.

Paging whitegoodman….

No lets leave this. Mind a guy from the times has won an award for reporting on this subject and his interview on Radio 4 programme this morning was interesting. See what I done now.

“good” muslim men molesting kuffar girls. Nothing new but unfortunately because the racist BNP were only only people who acknowledged it’s very existence it was angrily denied by the vocal Left and seen as radioactive by those with the power to stop it.

Personally I thought the piece in the Guardian was spot on.

If the press had been asking “What aspects of white culture leaves their children exposed to paedophiles” There would have been total outrage

enfht – Member
“good” muslim men molesting kuffar girls. Nothing new but unfortunately because the BNP were only only people who acknowledged it’s existence it was angrily denied by the vocal Left and seen as radioactive by those with the power to stop it.

Examples?

[/quote]it was angrily denied by the vocal Left

i missed that, got a link?

From the article:

how come it doesn’t seem to involve anyone of African or Middle Eastern origin?

If the Guardian is a newspaper, how come it doesn’t know where Eritrea is ?

The piece in the grauniad was childish, obvious crap that was insulting to the readership. If anyone who read that suddenly threw their hands in the air and exclaimed “my God, he’s right, I can’t believe I’ve been so stupid” I would be surprised. Anyone who had an epiphany as a result of that article is probably too thick to read.

If any observable patterns exist with regard to any race, culture, sex or age in correlation with any crime the authorities must not discount this for the sake of upsetting a few bleeding heart liberals.

This is not about prejudice, it is about crime and prevention.

it seems to me that some paedophiles are experts at using their communities to shield them from the law

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFEZkoJQ4DA[/video]

im not sure that race or culture makes it easier for them to hide in plain sight

If any observable patterns exist with regard to any race, culture, sex or age in correlation with any crime the authorities must not discount this for the sake of upsetting a few bleeding heart liberals.

That’s quite a conclusion you arrived at there from the article, when what it’s saying is how the media portrays offenders by mentioning race. Race is irrelevant.

Grauniad and bleeding heart liberals, not too right-wing now are we? 😆

This is not about prejudice, it is about crime and prevention

its also about the way certain sectors of the media selectively report crimes, no?

Yes, and that is not on.

It should have no bearing on crime prevention, though.

It should have no bearing on crime prevention

lets hope it doesn’t, the article ain’t about that tho, its about how crime is presented to us via the media

I would like to thank the Guardian for insulting my intelligence. Ask the wrong questions and you’ll get meaningless answers.

No mention of the long list of white (sometimes christian) 60s/70s stars clogging up the press which mean most people will think of at least half a dozen cases before Rochdale.

Or the Guardian guilty of selectively reporting to support its own “all non-Guardian-reading-whites-are-racist agenda”.

Examples?

I wouldn’t expect much.

enfht’s alarm bell’s start ringing as soon as there’s an opportunity for a bit of casual racism, so he logs out of his normal account and logs back in as one of those without whom the forum would be a nicer place, lights his racist touchpaper and flees to jerk himself off in the knowledge that he might have wound up a “leftie”.

It’s an interesting article, not at least because it’s worth drawing attention to serious crimes which need reporting. And of course, “media” and “bias” are always happy bedfellows and pulling them up for dangerous sensationalism should be applauded.

But, whilst I think on the whole I largely agree with a good chunk of it, nut some of his logic and conclusions are questionable, IME. Let’s see.

though they were not working as a gang, their methods were similar

You’re comparing an organised group with a bunch of men who coincidentally were committing the same crimes. So it’s not “similar” at all, is it.

analysis of the case focused on how big a factor was race, religion and culture

Of course it does. A group of Asian men got together to abuse white girls. Even if the answer to the question as to whether this was racially motivated turns out to be “no it isn’t”, it would be very, very remiss not to ask that question.

Even the Child Protection and Online Protection Centre (Ceop), which has also studied potential offenders who have not been convicted, has only identified 41 Asian gangs (of 230 in total)

I’m not sure I follow this. The CPO has identified 18% of Asian gangs as potential offenders (whatever the hell that means, but anyway) and this is presented as a defence that there isn’s a problem?

we know that abuse of white girls is not a cultural or religious issue because there is no longstanding history of it taking place in Asia or the Muslim world.

Sure, cos that world has been just running over with young white girls for years. Lets conveniently ignore centuries of female oppression, and the sentiments often expressed about the West by extremists in the name of religion.

This is an issue of what men can do when away from their own families and in a position of power over badly damaged young people.

Well, no, it’s not, it’s an issue of what men can do when they’re wrong in the head. Plenty of men are away from their families and in positions of authority and the vast, vast majority quite easily manage not to gang-rape anyone.

I am also certain that, if the tables were turned and the victims were Asian or Muslim, we would have been subjected to equally skewed “expert” commentary asking: what is wrong with how Muslims raise girls?

Certain or not, this is opinion, not fact. And a bollocks one, in mine.

What is also at play here is the inability of people, when learning about a different culture or race, to distinguish between the aberrations of a tiny minority within that group, and the normal behaviour of a significant section.

I don’t think it is. It’s the inability of people to identify sensationalist newspaper reporting. It’s the tendency for people do believe what their told when being informed by people of (perceived) authority.

knife crime, which is literally the sharp end of a host of problems affecting black communities

Only black communities? Are white communities unaffected by knife crime? Or for that matter poverty, or any of the other social maladies listed?

Imagine if, after Anders Breivik’s carnage in Norway last year, which he claimed to be in defence of the Christian world, British people were repeatedly asked whether they supported him?

This is a good one. Breivik claimed to be Christian but was critical of most organised Christian faiths. So right off the bat, he’s not representing any of them so there’s no-one to ask.

The bombings weren’t in the name of Christianity at all, they were anti-Islam. Subtle but critical difference. Plus, y’know, he was a lone nutcase rather than a large terrorist organisation claiming to represent the views of billions.

And the icing on the cake? There’s a belief that he was a Christian terrorist because that’s how the media reported it. Brilliant.

Cougar – Moderator
I’m not sure I follow this. The CPO has identified 18% of Asian gangs as potential offenders (whatever the hell that means, but anyway) and this is presented as a defence that there isn’s a problem?

I read it as out of 230 gangs that are being monitored as potential offenders 41 are asian.

I don’t think it is. It’s the inability of people to identify sensationalist newspaper reporting. It’s the tendency for people do believe what their told when being informed by people of (perceived) authority

isn’t that the whole point about media bias? shouldn’t the media (people perceived authority) use their high and mighty position a bit more fairly? i don’t have any ideas how this could be achieved tho..

One thing we do know about Breivik is that he was a shoot-’em-up video game fan. Like many STW posters, who’ll leap to their feet and cry “no causal link”. Go on then, find me a shoot-’em-up killer from the last five years who wasn’t a religious fanatic, a shoot-’em-up gamer or both.

I read it as out of 230 gangs that are being monitored as potential offenders 41 are asian.

Ah, I did wonder. Fair enough, cheerfully withdrawn.

isn’t that the whole point about media bias? shouldn’t the media (people perceived authority) use their high and mighty position a bit more fairly? i don’t have any ideas how this could be achieved tho..

No arguments here.

find me a shoot-’em-up killer from the last five years who wasn’t a religious fanatic, a shoot-’em-up gamer or both.

I can find you billions of gamers and religious people who manage not to go on killing sprees quite happily, if that helps you any?

The problem in that situation isn’t games or religion, it’s nutters. And if you’re a nutter capable of going on a mass murdering spree then you’re eventually going to do that anyway, whether you’ve just played Doom or watched Die Hard or listened to Black Sabbath or whatever.

Cougar – Moderator
“though they were not working as a gang, their methods were similar”

You’re comparing an organised group with a bunch of men who coincidentally were committing the same crimes. So it’s not “similar” at all, is it.

Selective quoting:

And though they were not working as a gang, their methods were similar – often targeting children in care and luring them with, among other things, cuddly toys.

And it is similar, they were raping underage girls.

“analysis of the case focused on how big a factor was race, religion and culture”

Of course it does. A group of Asian men got together to abuse white girls. Even if the answer to the question as to whether this was racially motivated turns out to be “no it isn’t”, it would be very, very remiss not to ask that question.

So white rapists are just sexual deviants but Asian rapists must have some other motive/catalyst for their crimes? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a discussion on the motives of rape for white men in terms of their culture, race or religion.

“we know that abuse of white girls is not a cultural or religious issue because there is no longstanding history of it taking place in Asia or the Muslim world.”

Sure, cos that world has been just running over with young white girls for years.

Not really sure what you’re trying to say, does the white population have to reach a certain % before rapists start preying on them?

Lets conveniently ignore centuries of female oppression, and the sentiments often expressed about the West by extremists in the name of religion.

I hope you don’t ignore it, I’d love to hear your thoughts on the connection between that and this case.

“Imagine if, after Anders Breivik’s carnage in Norway last year, which he claimed to be in defence of the Christian world, British people were repeatedly asked whether they supported him?”

This is a good one. Breivik claimed to be Christian but was critical of most organised Christian faiths. So right off the bat, he’s not representing any of them so there’s no-one to ask.

But Islamic terrorists represent the muslim faiths?

Edukator – Member
I would like to thank the Guardian for insulting my intelligence. Ask the wrong questions and you’ll get meaningless answers.

No mention of the long list of white (sometimes christian) 60s/70s stars clogging up the press which mean most people will think of at least half a dozen cases before Rochdale.

Or the Guardian guilty of selectively reporting to support its own “all non-Guardian-reading-whites-are-racist agenda”.

It’s time to face up to the problem of sexual abuse in the white community

Which I enjoyed.

And it is similar, they were raping underage girls.

They were raping underage girls of a different race.

So white rapists are just sexual deviants but Asian rapists must have some other motive/catalyst for their crimes?

That isn’t what I said, but I don’t know. Should we not check to find out?

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a discussion on the motives of rape for white men in terms of their culture, race or religion.

I don’t think I recall a case in recent years of an organised gang of white men grooming underage Asian girls for sex. Of course, that could just be selective reporting (or my own failing), but in that situation I’d absolutely expect the racial aspect to be investigated. Can you cite an example where that’s happened and race was ignored?

The reporter says it himself; he speculates that in that instance the media would blame the girls. You’d think he’d have looked to see if it’d happened in order to back up his point, no?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the connection between that and this case.

I’m not connecting it with this case, I’m questioning his reasoning.

But Islamic terrorists represent the muslim faiths?

They claim to. Whether they actually do or not, we don’t know unless we ask those faiths what their opinion is. But according to the reporter we can’t do that.

Don’t you see the difference here? If a terrorist organisation claims to represent the views of a much, much larger demographic, and that demographic don’t actually agree with their views, wouldn’t you think that group might ask them to knock it off?

In contrast with Breivik who wasn’t claiming to represent anyone but himself, which was the point I was getting at.

Edukator you are spot on with grauniad insulting your intelligence. On the same day there was another childishly simple article, this time by old crackpot himself, George Monbiot. The entire point of which was ‘money can’t buy you happiness’.

So there you have it folks, a day in the life of the grauniad. ‘Money can’t buy you happiness’ and ‘you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover’ (courtesy of Joseph Harker).

With headlines like that, it’s no wonder the graun is feted so much!

I actually like the graun most of the time, but sometimes it is just as blatant as that disgusting comic, the mail.

Monbiot in particular has good things to say on his home topic, the environment. Most of the rest of his stuff is just laughable unfortunately.

Not sure quite how you found out that I jerk off to your posts DeadlyDarcy but now it’s out in the open may I have a recent photo to help light up my happy endings in technicolor?

Examples you say?

http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/grooming-racialising-crime-tradition

If my posts are indeed racist then I’d be banned. But they’re not, it’s simply your bigoted bias getting in the way.

Maybe some pics showing your manly arms?

Wow. You came back. Well, there’s a change.

Considering how you are on here under your cowardly cloak of anonymity enfht, I shudder to think what you’d be like in real life. Jerking off to my posts? No…only to your own imagined fantasies of winding up lefties. I don’t report your posts because they’re best left there for everyone to see what kind if a contributor you are. You add **** all but bigotry and prejudice to this forum. It would be a nicer place without you.

Pics?

Ray guns?

Bans?

Thanks, sometimes he needs reining in.

Not sure quite how you found out that I jerk off to your posts DeadlyDarcy

Did you leave the webcam on?

One of my chief worries when reviewing certain sites on the web.

El-Bent.

It’s also a bit of a leap to claim I am right wing just because I am not in favour of pandering to dinner-party spokespeople for ‘liberal’ values. The number of times I’ve seen the police decried on this forum, for example, by people trying to be a bit ‘street’ or a bit trendy. The same people who would expect a police presence whenever they might need it themselves, though.

Most sex offenders are male. I am male. If that means parents of my children’s friends look me up and down a bit more than my wife when their kids come round for tea, then so be it. I am not in the least offended by this. This is just the way the world is. It’s a pity, but there you go.

By your standards, though, I should be calling anyone who points out that most sex offenders are male a sexist right winger.

IF any correlation can be demonstrated between ANY group of people and a type of crime, then it should not be deliberately disregarded just to appear impartial. That is all.

It is very to pontificate about being completely liberal. Less easy to square it with wanting effective policing.

The media is a different thing, though. They don’t have to make a salient point of race. David Starkey’s comments following the riots were grossly unnecessary at the time, for example. Even if some of what he said was true, he did not help anyone by saying it. He enjoys the sound of his own voice, and saw an opportunity to grandstand whilst promoting a nakedly racial view. This was opportunism, plain and simple.

So you see, not so much right wing as realistic.

And referring to the guardian as the grauniad is just an amusing anachronism, harking back to a time when the paper was littered with typos. A sort of nostalgic joke.

If that means parents of my children’s friends look me up and down a bit more than my wife when their kids come round for tea, then so be it. I am not in the least offended by this.

Is that how you suss out a nonce……….by looking at them “up and down” ?

Do you know what the detection rate using this system is ?

No, that’s not how you ‘suss-out a nonce’. Don’t be flippant.

I’m merely pointing out that if you asked 100 people to imagine what a typical sex offender looked like, 99 of them would PROBABLY be thinking of a male.

I was also pointing out that this pre-conception is based on something that is demonstrably true and that I don’t plead that my human rights are being infringed as a result.

I’m merely pointing out that if you asked 100 people to imagine what a typical sex offender looked like, 99 of them would PROBABLY be thinking of a male.

Yeah but you said that the parents of your children’s friends might look at you up and down, what’s all that about ?

Why would they think you might be a nonce ? And how would looking at you up and down help them to determine whether you are one ?

It’s not ‘about’ anything real. It’s a pre-conception that has no grounds OTHER THAN the statistics would say a male is more likely to be a sex offender than a female.

Looking at anyone ‘up and down’ obviously cannot determine whether someone is a criminal of any kind.

Do you deny that most people would be more comfortable with a female babysitter than a male – assuming all other things were equal?

Do you deny that most people would be more comfortable with a female babysitter than a male – assuming all other things were equal?

Well you’re moving the goalposts about, just now you were referring to the parents of your children’s friends looking at you up and down because you might be a pedeophile, now you’re asking me about babysitters.

Yes, a 17 year old girl, for example, might be expected to have a stronger affinity with a someone’s baby than a 17 year old boy, so it would be reasonable for a mother to feel more comfortable with a girl babysitter than a boy babysitter.

I doubt whether the threat of sex crime comes into the equation though.

Nor does it explain why the parents of your children’s friends might suspect you of being a nonce.

Or another example.

Why is it that some taxi firms can make a unique selling point of only using women drivers to pick up female customers?

Does this mean that every male taxi driver is a rapist? No. It doesn’t.

Does this mean that male taxi drivers should take firms that employ women drivers only to some sort of tribunal on the basis of prejudice? In my opinion. No.

It simply reflects probability.