Rochdale grooming trial: Nine found guilty of child sex charges

Original post by Florrick

Incorrect. Look here:
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?p=37338401&highlight=aisha

He did consummate the marriage at 9, this is widely accepted. He also personally raped women of the Banu Qarazya tribe, among others (all this information is easy to find and verifiable if you care to look). It was on this basis, for example, that Ayatollah Khomeini lowered the legal age of marriage of girls in Iran to 9, and I think Khomeini is a more reputable authority on Islam than you or any other resident TSR Islam apologist (I mean, why would he have done this otherwise? Is he an Islamophobe?)

Surely, if you hated the ''other culture'', you would not go near this. For example, alcohol, drugs and being described as easy. It's not particularly hard to notice that this view is hypocritical. Therefore, I do believe that these groups of men used this view to interpret their perceived reality of white girls differently to suit their attitude towards justifying rape rather than it being a reflection of the community they were brought up from. This can also apply across all rapists too, i.e. the attitude ''she deserved it''.

You're saying that if they perceived the other culture to be degenerate they wouldn't go near it? I don't find that at all convincing.

Basically, there are two serious issues with the debate on this matter. Firstly, as a society we have a problem discussing race and religion (and by religion we really mean Islam), and secondly (and closely related to the first) we have a problem with judging people as groups. So whenever crimes like these spring up we are simply incapable of viewing them for what they really are, because to even contemplate that there might have been racial/religious/cultural, that is, group motives, is to intimate that people ought to be treated as such first and foremost. That is to say, people seem to believe that if we start interpreting crimes in terms of groups we might end up 'discriminating' against individuals for belonging to such and such a group, thus undermining our 'liberal' political order which (rightly) treats people as individuals under law.

In other words, I am insisting that extending our liberal political and legal priorities to social analysis yields seriously misleading results. Since we say people cannot be judged according to groups according to law the logical consequence of this mindset is that people therefore do not act in terms of groups. To say otherwise is immoral and tantamount to Nazi racism, fascism, and so on. But what if people are acting in terms of group mentality and perception? It seems completely obvious to me that in these cases the perpetrators must be. I am not saying that I have a definite answer and unfortunately the problem of these grooming gangs have been little explored outside of journalism (there are no definitive books that I know of, and it's unlikely there will be any time soon). But what I am saying is that we are approaching the problem on faulty premises, by simply assuming a priori that race, religion or culture isn't a factor and that we must judge people as individuals, because to do otherwise is immoral. We just need to inject a bit of common sense into the debate; I do not think this problem is really that hard to intuit if we detach ourselves from 'liberal' political dogma.

EDIT: on a side note, people always accept group analysis when it comes to social categories like class (or gender), but not race, religion or culture. Could it be a residual Marxism that has caused this? Marxism holds that class is the only 'true' social category, in that economic class is the only 'true' expression of one's economic and social interests, and that all other forms of identity are illegitimate, indeed a creation of the 'capitalist' order, designed to protect that order by hiding the oppressed class's true interests, and instilling 'false consciousness'. People are so reluctant to recognize race, religion or culture as legitimate categories for analysis, and I imagine this is at least in part due to residual Marxism.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 262

Florrick

Original post by Harmonic Minor

He did consummate the marriage at 9, this is widely accepted. He also personally raped women of the Banu Qarazya tribe, among others (all this information is easy to find and verifiable if you care to look). It was on this basis, for example, that Ayatollah Khomeini lowered the legal age of marriage of girls in Iran to 9, and I think Khomeini is a more reputable authority on Islam than you or any other resident TSR Islam apologist (I mean, why would he have done this otherwise? Is he an Islamophobe?)

I know he did consummate the marriage at 9. So did her family, so did Mohammed's tribe- the people who hated him in fact never presented this as a source of dispute, simply because, in the past, age was not distinguishing factor in marriage as it is today, however, what the individual looked like, including the ability to be financially independent being indicative of emotional maturity in Islam.

It's the intention and the context that counts for Muslims. As a non-Muslim, you don't have a background to draw judgement on and hence you can call Aisha's husband anything you feel appropriate whereas a Muslim doesn't have the ability to do that.

I'm not going to entertain this discussion any longer because there is no relevance. I suggest the D&D ask about Islam thread.

You're saying that if they perceived the other culture to be degenerate they wouldn't go near it? I don't find that at all convincing.

Personally speaking, I do. Quite logical to me. I don't like being in an environment where people are drinking alcohol, hence, I don't go out in pubs, clubs etc.

Basically, there are two serious issues with the debate on this matter. Firstly, as a society we have a problem discussing race and religion (and by religion we really mean Islam), and secondly (and closely related to the first) is that we have a problem with judging people as groups. So whenever crimes like these spring up we are simply incapable of viewing them for what they really are, because to even contemplate that there might have been racial/religious/cultural, that is, group motives, is to intimate that people ought to be treated as such first and foremost. That is to say, people seem to believe that if we start interpreting crimes in terms of groups we might end up 'discriminating' against individuals for belonging to such and such a group, thus undermining our 'liberal' political order which (rightly) treats people as individuals under law.

In other words, I am insisting that by extending our liberal political and legal priorities to social analysis yields seriously misleading results. Since we say people cannot be judged according to groups according to law the logical consequence of this mindset is that people therefore do not act in terms of groups. To say otherwise is immoral and tantamount to Nazi racism, fascism, and so on. But what if people are acting in terms of group mentality and perception? It seems completely obvious to me that in these cases the perpetrators must be. I am not saying that I have a definite answer and unfortunately the problem of these grooming gangs have been little explored outside of journalism (there are no definitive books that I know of, and it's unlikely there will be any time soon). But what I am saying is that we are approaching the problem on faulty premises, by simply assuming a priori that race, religion or culture isn't a factor and that we must judge people as individuals, because to do otherwise is immoral. We just need to inject a bit of common sense into the debate; I do not think this problem is really that hard to intuit if we detach ourselves from 'liberal' political dogma.

Their attitude towards justifying rape is a problem here and of course the rape itself. I believe to blame an entire community for their actions based on race, religion and culture is shallow and unfair.

Reply 263

Ben Butler

Original post by badcheesecrispy

why is edl and bnp at the forefront of your rant?

also, bib, the judge disagrees with you there. I suspect he knows more about the case than you. Is he now a bnp/edl member?

The BNP and EDL are mentioned because they were outside the Liverpool courts protesting with flags about fighting grooming gangs, they wouldn't have been protesting if the men in the trial weren't Asian, so they totally missed the point and made out this case was about racism because they are so obsessed in their deranged beliefs. In other words, they tried to influence the outcome of this trial. The judges words were Nick Griffin's words in the tweet he sent on his phone. I read about it in the Guardian.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 264

Ano1

11

Original post by SpongebobSquarepan

Good to see the mulsim leader of that community saying it is a race issue, as it is only pakistani men and 9/10 times they are targetting white girls.

Fair play to him, shame you clueless ****wits on here can't see it.

We do see it!

Reply 265

Original post by Ben Butler

The BNP and EDL are mentioned because they were outside the Liverpool courts protesting with flags about fighting grooming gangs, they wouldn't have been protesting if the men in the trial weren't Asian, so they totally missed the point and made out this case was about racism because they are so obsessed in their deranged beliefs. In other words, they tried to influence the outcome of this trial. The judges words were Nick Griffin's words in the tweet he sent on his phone. I read about it in the Guardian.

Simply not true. The judge said, quite correctly, 'All of you treated (the victims) as though they were worthless and beyond respect. One of the factors leading to that was the fact that they were not part of your community or religion'. Nick Griffin's tweet was 'News flash. Seven of the Muslim paedophile rapists found guilty in Liverpool'.

So even the legal judge of this case has basically affirmed what me and many others have been saying all along.

Reply 266

Original post by Florrick

I know he did consummate the marriage at 9. So did her family, so did Mohammed's tribe- the people who hated him in fact never presented this as a source of dispute, simply because, in the past, age was not distinguishing factor in marriage as it is today, however, what the individual looked like, including the ability to be financially independent being indicative of emotional maturity in Islam.

It's the intention and the context that counts for Muslims. As a non-Muslim, you don't have a background to draw judgement on and hence you can call Aisha's husband anything you feel appropriate whereas a Muslim doesn't have the ability to do that.

I'm not going to entertain this discussion any longer because there is no relevance. I suggest the D&D ask about Islam thread.

You're right; it generally wasn't considered abnormal or abhorrent in his day (though one might still make the argument that any civilized man, in any time or place, especially one purporting to be a 'messenger of God', ought to feel natural revulsion at sexual intimacy with a 9 year old. In Christian Europe during the middle ages, the Church mandated that marriage could only occur once a girl had come of age, which practically speaking meant earliest at 14, though if I recall correctly it was 16).

For sure, we ought to be careful judging historical figures by our modern-day moral standards. But it is still relevant, because Muhammad is taken by all Muslims as the excellent standard of conduct, for all time. Hence why Khomeini lowered the legal age of marriage for girls to 9 on his example. So for you to dismiss his example as 'irrelevant' in the modern day is not only incorrect, but an insult to all the poor girls suffering from Muhammad's ignominious example not only in places like Iran, but all over the Middle East.

This is not to say that those involved in the grooming gangs consciously acted on Muhammad's specific example, or did it whilst holding a Qur'an in their hands and reading from it. Matters aren't so clear cut - religion and culture doesn't always offer an exact guide or blueprint to behavior; rather, it orients general conduct and attitudes. And it seems entirely reasonable to infer that Islam's disparaging attitude towards women and towards non-Muslims (kaffir), and especially women deemed 'immoral' (for instance by 'immodest' dress) played a role in these abhorrent crimes.

Their attitude towards justifying rape is a problem here and of course the rape itself. I believe to blame an entire community for their actions based on race, religion and culture is shallow and unfair.

I'm not blaming the entire community, just the sick and twisted values which influence a significant portion of that community's actions.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 267

SpongebobSquarepan

11

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18045244

second case, what a surprise

Reply 268

nju

4

Original post by SilverSurfer22

the rapists were all asian and the victims were all young white girls, they were targeted, but this is not a hate crime or racism according to the police.
if it was asian girls raped by a white gang this would be a gigantic story and the media would be screaming racism.

The rapists were Pakistani and one Afghanistani. None of them were from other parts of Asia so it is unfair to refer to them as Asians

Reply 269

Original post by SpongebobSquarepan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18045244

second case, what a surprise

Quite sickening. Just when are the 'Muslim community' going to answer for these horrific crimes? Melanie Phillips on the ball as usual:

http://www.melaniephillips.com/the-horrific-consequences-of-the-islamophobia-witch-hunt

Reply 270

marcusfox

16

Original post by Brutal Honesty

Yes, 28% of street grooming of young girls is done by Asians. Why don't they care about the rest? Why don't they care about rape generally which is extremely common? Why don't they protest outside football stadia when footballers are charged with rape? They're more than happy to walk around with the jerseys on all day. It's because the perpetrators aren't Pakistani so they can't push their anti-Muslim/racist/xenophobic agenda with those cases.

Just in case you were interested, I have an update on the Oxford news article I posted before and you came out in full denial mode.

(Paraphrasing, as your originial post has been deleted, along with the 'BBC admits 28% of street grooming of young girls is done by Asians' thread )

'It's only in the north, look at London...'
'How do you know they are Asian, the article doesn't say...'
'How do you know they didn't travel from the north to Oxford...'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-18019122

Kamar Jamil, 26, of Aldrich Road, Oxford, faces two more counts...

Mohammed Karrar, 37, of Cowley Road, Oxford, is charged with...

His brother Bassan Karrar, 32, of no fixed address, is charged with...

The other three men facing charges are Anjum Dogar, 30, and his brother Akhtar, 31, both of Tawney Street [Oxford], and Zeshan Ahmed, 26, of Palmer Road [Oxford].

Nine other [presumably unnamed] men remain on police bail and one woman has been released without charge.

So, that's definitely Oxford, not the north of England, and although it doesn't give their ethnicity, I think we can hazard a guess...

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 271

the fact that Muslims are disproportionately represented among the perpetrators of this particular crime means inescapably that a cultural Muslim issue is involved. If this is not acknowledged, this terrible pattern of abuse will simply continue. And those who shriek ‘racist’ or ‘Islamophobe’ at all who point this out in order to stifle proper debate thus make themselves also complicit in these outrages.

A Muslim community disproportionately involved in criminal behaviour targeted at non-Islamic people but which refuses to acknowledge any communal responsibility and claims instead to be the victim of a conspiracy; a society that refuses to acknowledge the religious and cultural wellspring of that behaviour and which condemns instead those who express concern about its consequences; where have we heard all this before? Whether in response to threats to life and liberty from within or without, Britain is still sleepwalking off the edge of a cliff.

Couldnt have put it better

Reply 272

Original post by marcusfox

Just in case you were interested, I have an update on the Oxford news article I posted before and you came out in full denial mode.

(Paraphrasing, as your originial post has been deleted, along with the 'BBC admits 28% of street grooming of young girls is done by Asians' thread )

'It's only in the north, look at London...'
'How do you know they are Asian, the article doesn't say...'
'How do you know they didn't travel from the north to Oxford...'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-18019122

So, that's definitely Oxford, not the north of England, and although it doesn't give their ethnicity, I think we can hazard a guess...

well done, you owned the atypical muslim apologist there, with their strawman excuses.

Reply 273

Original post by Florrick

Their attitude towards justifying rape is a problem here and of course the rape itself. I believe to blame an entire community for their actions based on race, religion and culture is shallow and unfair.

Why do apologists like you always try and stifle any debate on this by saying anyone who mentions the cultural reasons are blaming the whole community? They arnt, why cant you see that, are you that bone idle?

Everyone knows that OBVIOUSLY it isnt the whole pakistani or muslim community doing this, it is disproportionally pakistani muslims and their imported cultural beliefs contribute to their attitude to women, especially those they see as immoral and dirty, which in turn has contributed to this organised abuse by so many of them.

To be honest, I think the tide is coming in and its only so much longer muslim pakistanis and their apologists can carry on denying this with any feeble attempt possible.

Reply 274

I-Am-A-Tripod

Original post by marcusfox

Just in case you were interested, I have an update on the Oxford news article I posted before and you came out in full denial mode.

(Paraphrasing, as your originial post has been deleted, along with the 'BBC admits 28% of street grooming of young girls is done by Asians' thread )

'It's only in the north, look at London...'
'How do you know they are Asian, the article doesn't say...'
'How do you know they didn't travel from the north to Oxford...'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-18019122

So, that's definitely Oxford, not the north of England, and although it doesn't give their ethnicity, I think we can hazard a guess...

How can you hazard a guess - all their names demonstrate is that they were muslim, muslims can be any ethnicity and colour, and come from europe, asia and africa.

Reply 275

Cricnec

If your a parent of a young girl and live in an area with a large Asian population then you will be well advised to tell your daughters to have nothing to do with Asian boys.There could well be a very nice young boy but he might introduce her to his older uncle,brother,cousin or even grandfather!!! I wonder why if this isn't a race issue then why do these men,many lifelong friends or even from the same family are all prepared to be pedophiles it seems to be socially acceptable in this community,like it is in there homeland. The bleeding heart liberals have imposed this danger on are children with there multiculturalism experiment.

Reply 276

marcusfox

16

Original post by I-Am-A-Tripod

How can you hazard a guess - all their names demonstrate is that they were muslim, muslims can be any ethnicity and colour, and come from europe, asia and africa.

That's blatantly giving all Muslims a bad name when we know that is not the case. :rolleyes:

My point (and this is the article I originally posted - which does not give details about ethicity and religion, is that those accused of perpetrating the Oxford case would undoubtedly have the same demographic as those in Rochdale (and similar cases in Leeds, Manchester, Derby and Birmingham)

And do you want to know how we know? Because the police were keeping a lid on it. There's was no information at all, nobody named or no ethnicity mentioned. There was obviously some ulterior motivation for that, the police routinely release the details of people arrested for more mundane offences.

Before their names were released, if we were to assume the men were white, as most people in the UK are after all, then for the police to have told the the press "No, it's not another Asian gang, the arrested men are all white British nationals" would surely not allow anyone to be identified.

If they had been white, surely the police would be at pains to point that out so that 'evil racists' would stop speculating.

What isn't in the article is the most telling of all.

If they are found guilty, I predict pretty much the same, in six months to a year's time.

The girls were sluts, the men are the victims of racism of course, the wailing and gnashing of teeth in the media, 'lessons will be learned' by police and social services, articles about how X% of grooming crimes committed by asians, the usual suspects on TSR fully identifying with the perpetrators and the rest in full on 'No True Scotsman' tilt mode.

Reply 277

Theoneoranro

Original post by marcusfox

That's blatantly giving all Muslims a bad name when we know that is not the case.

My point (and this is the article I originally posted - which does not give details about ethicity and religion, is that those accused of perpetrating the Oxford case would undoubtedly have the same demographic as those in Rochdale (and similar cases in Leeds, Manchester, Derby and Birmingham)

And do you want to know how we know? Because the police were keeping a lid on it. There's was no information at all, nobody named or no ethnicity mentioned. There was obviously some ulterior motivation for that, the police routinely release the details of people arrested for more mundane offences.

Before their names were released, if we were to assume the men were white, as most people in the UK are after all, then for the police to have told the the press "No, it's not another Asian gang, the arrested men are all white British nationals" would surely not allow anyone to be identified.

If they had been white, surely the police would be at pains to point that out so that 'evil racists' would stop speculating.

What isn't in the article is the most telling of all.

If they are found guilty, I predict pretty much the same, in six months to a year's time.

The girls were sluts, the men are the victims of racism of course, the wailing and gnashing of teeth in the media, 'lessons will be learned' by police and social services, articles about how X% of grooming crimes committed by asians, the usual suspects on TSR fully identifying with the perpetrators and the rest in full on 'No True Scotsman' tilt mode.

Why are all you guys wasting your breath talking about whether or not there is an issue with Pakistanis or Muslims? Anyone with the meanest knowledge about Pakistanis in Britain will know that it's a Mirpuri issue (Kashmiris). Pretty much all British Pakistanis in Bradford and all the other backward British Pakistani areas are Mirpuri. All these groomers are Mirpuri, most of the british pakistani criminals are mirpuri. However, on the other hand Punjabis have intergrated very well into British society, they are much more liberal etc, you will see this in the south of england where pretty much all the British Pakistanis are Punjabis, check out this article on wikipedia and scroll down to 'Assimilating into British society' and read about the two different ethnic groups:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Pakistanis#Kashmiris

Don't mistake Mirpuri culture with Punjabi culture, they are very different. The reason why Mirpuris in the UK are like this is because the 1st generation Mirpuris came from a really backward area in pakistan full of villages, they were almost all illterate and poor with a rural lifestyle. However, Punjabis came from cities and they were literate and more liberal. The media needs to learn about this issue, people dont know about it. In the US pretty much all of the British Pakistanis are Punjabis and guess what? 60% of them have degrees (one of the highest rates for an ethnic minority in the country), the average Pakistani American earns twice the amount that a normal american earns and they have intergrated so well that today there are more bi racial Pakistanis than full Pakistanis in the country.

People are way too ignorant on this issue. I'm not hating on mirpuris, it's all fact.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 278