Gang member Ibrahim Giwa rapes 11 year old- this time at least not pakistani

There is nothing in the article which tells me how many of the convicts were Muslim.
There is nothing in the article for me to click on, which will take me to a page which tells me how many of the convicts were Muslim.
There is nothing in the article specifying the name of the survey for me to Google, to find out how many of the convicts were Muslim.

So 14 posts later, you still haven't been able to source your claim. I wonder why that could be...



In fact, what I do see in your article is this:

i.e. the explanation for why the statistics are what they are, which doesn't need bring Islam or religion into it.

the link i gave you states clealry "Last week the Times published its own survey into the ethnicity of those convicted of on-street grooming." The word "Times " is a hyperlink, in red for the dimwitted to understand.

Have you tried clicking on the red hyperlink yourself?



Even if I Google those exact words, no survey from either the Times or from UCL comes up.
If you got your information from a UCL study, why not post a link directly to that study - rather than to an article in the Week which doesn't even say the same thing you're saying?

How do I know the UCL study or Times survey actually said 50 out of 56 were Muslims? I haven't heard this 50/56 from anybody other than yourself

I think you are tryng to redirect the question - i iddint say a tiny proportion were commiting these crimes - i said muslims form a tiny proportion of the UK but muslim males are being found responsible for efffectively all of these sorts of rape cases, far more than jews, hindus, sikhs, buddhists, christians, proportionalty speaking. That is a disparity that will attract attention - not just simple streotypes. Sterotypes will be the travel advice you get going to muslim countires like morroco to be aware of rapists as a women. These reports are based on actual fact and statistics.
I dont know waht the stats are in india, as i doubt do you accuratley either so they are not relevant to us here. Even so , i know india is not a muslim country and does have a legally stipulated age of consent of 18 (or at least 16 as we do i think) Whereas, in the first muslim country and where mohammed came from Saudi arabia, there is no age of consent- a middle aged man can choose to have sex with an 8 year old child if he wants and wont be charged with any crime ( as has happened)
Clearly the fact that mohammed 'married' aisha is not relevant here - a 9 year old is not old enough to make that sort of decision mindfully, becuase she has the mind of a child - also is too young in reality to be having sex, particulalry with a 49 year old man. But if it was acceptable to mohammed, then can you really critise a muslim man in the uk for doing the same?

I cannot believe that the country I live in gives child rapists only five years in prison. The sooner I emigrate out of this ****hole of a country the better.

&

I'm not sure what you're confused about. Were you under the impression that Pakistanis are the only people who rape, or something?
Yes, in this particular case, the rapist is not Pakistani, but looks more like an African. So?

mashallah ukhti

& where on earth have you got those stats from? Muslims involved in majority of the rape cases here? There's no point just sitting and inventing statistics.

& like ive said before, I dont quite get what point you are making.
If non muslim men rape girls, does this mean their religion allows them too?
I'll tell you one thing, a muslim who carries out the act of rape is no muslim from the start. If he was he would abide by the laws of Shariah and that would teach him rape, pre marital sex and adultery is forbidden.

The Indian statistics are completely relevant in this discussion. Recently there was a documentary which showed how many girls are forced into prostitution and the high number of child brides in hindu families in India. Though India may have a legal age for marriage, these things still happen. My point is, in different cultures different things are deemed acceptable.
Referring to Aisha and Muhammad (Peace Be upon them both), we are talking back 1400 years ago.
If the british culture has changed so dramatically over the course of 100 years relating to attitudes towards women, homosexuals etc, then we are talking back 1400 YEARS AGO IN A COUNTRY FAR AWAY FROM THE UK.
Society and norms were different. It was common in those days for a man to have more than one wife, yet today in the same country theres appropriately only 2% who have more than one wife. With time, attitudes and norms change.
It was common in the times of the Ancient Greeks for young girls to be married at the age of 11-14 to men much older than them.
Girls would have a separate ritual where they would throw away their toys after their marriage.
In those days, this was NORMAL. It was common, it was accepted.
We can't sit here thousands of years after pointing fingers at what those people did. Likewise, it'll be the same case 1000 years from now.

Aisha (PBUH) reached the age of puberty much faster than others and she was alot mature than the girls today.

British scholar Colin Turner suggests that such marriages were not seen as improper in historical context, and that individuals in such societies matured at an earlier age than in the modern West.

It was acceptable in those days. If it was so wrong, why did nobody speak up? Why did the mother and father of Aisha (PBUH) prepare so happily for this marriage? Why did the women at that time not say anything?
BECAUSE IT WAS A COMMON CULTURAL NORM.
Many men at that time would marry girls much younger than them MUSLIM or NON MUSLIM. Yes, non muslim. In Arabia 1400 years ago this was accepted. It was society. The same way this society accepts things.
Homeosexuals are accepted in todays society yet just a few years ago they were seen as "mentally ill". Homesexuality was regarded as a mental disorder! This was only a few years ago. Im talking back 1400 years ago.
Later, Aisha developed into one of the most important figures in Islamic history and is responsible for narrating 1000's of hadiths. Never has she complained about Muhammad (PBUH) or her marriage at a young age.

I can understand why Saudi Arabia would not put a certain age for marriage. We follow the teachings of Muhammad (PBUH) and if he did something, who are we to put a ban on something? Yet it is rare and not practised any more as society changes over time.

You can't compare a 45 year old man in todays world with Muhammad (PBUH). Please, that is an insult.
There has never been any person to walk this earth with the characteristics of Muhammad, with his mercy, kindness, affection and love and nor will there ever be.
I LOVE MUHAMMAD (PBUH)

Islam doesn't encourage rape/sexual assault, its so damn obvious just looking at the culprits.

HOW MANY of these so-called Muslim sex gang members are practising Muslims? As in they have beards, pray, don't drink, do NOT COMMIT ADULTERY (which carries a death penalty in Islam might I add) etc..Not to mention they were offering alcohol to these girls...

Surely if it was an Islamic teaching, the most practising of Muslims would be committing these crimes?

you are probably not aware then of the principle of muta, which was an islamic one and also allowed to be practiced by mohammed - to get around the problem of 'adultery'

Loloololol this shows how much you know about Islam. Ask any mainstream Muslim scholar and they'll denounce mutah. Only the Shia scholars support it

I somehow get the feeling the guy wasn't actually raping her because the grand mufti said it was okay...