[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Elipsis)
The majority of those Asians are Pakistani. I don't care how you want to bend or distort things, they are commiting many more attrocious acts solely on whites, and that is a big problem and something that should be factored into our countries thinking when it can be seen that the number of Pakistanis in this country has been allowed to double in the last decade. Do we really want the most troublesome community in the country, where the majority of terrorism, childgrooming and forced marriage comes from, to expand so much faster than say the Chinese community who pose no such problems? We have the power to choose which types of people come to this country based on our experience of the other million we let in.

If every time you let a cat in your house it took a **** on your floor, would you keep letting cats in your house?

It's hardly every time. If you disagree, present evidence to corroborate your assertion that 100% of Pakistani persons engage in child-grooming, terrorism and/or forced marriages.

The minority of Pakistani individuals engage in this behaviour, just like the minority of Britons in Thailand, Cambodia, the Phillipines, etc. engage in child exploitation. There is no reason or justification for banning everyone due to the acts a minority of people commit.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
It's hardly every time. If you disagree, present evidence to corroborate your assertion that 100% of Pakistani persons engage in child-grooming, terrorism and/or forced marriages.

The minority of Pakistani individuals engage in this behaviour, just like the minority of Britons in Thailand, Cambodia, the Phillipines, etc. engage in child exploitation. There is no reason or justification for banning everyone due to the acts a minority of people commit.

If it's higher than any other group, and they bring less economic benefit than other immigrants as well, then we'd have to be nuts to let them in when we could let in better immigrants. At least in Thailand etc. That pedophillic element European tourists bring comes with massive economic benefit. Most Pakistani's are on benefits and barely pay any tax. Almost all of the women don't work, and the men that do do so in industries where tax avoidance is the norm (takeaways, taxis etc.), and an awful lot of them barely work too.

[Phantom_X]

(Original post by Elipsis)
The majority of those Asians are Pakistani.
Sure, I wasn't questioning your powers of observation, brilliant as they may be. I just said that to apply them within a national demographic while ignoring other factors is a bit dumb.

I don't care how you want to bend or distort things,
I pointed out that your use of a statistic was distorting the debate

they are commiting many more attrocious acts solely on whites,
Just as many whites commit acts of violence on coloured people in some areas of this country.
and that is a big problem and something that should be factored into our countries thinking when it can be seen that the number of Pakistanis in this country has been allowed to double in the last decade.
Pakistan and Britain have a close relationship, its still theoretically in the commonwealth of nations and most Pakistanis speak some english. Many voluntarily come here- not a state conspiracy.

Do we really want the most troublesome community in the country, where the majority of terrorism, childgrooming and forced marriage comes from, to expand so much faster than say the Chinese community who pose no such problems?
One terrorist attack =/= majority, beyond that all those involved were British born, one was orginally Jamaican etc. The article already tells you that childgrooming isn't something that is strictly a 'pakistani' problem either. It happens in white communities, and in fact, isn't totally uncommon in white middle class areas, where a lot of men make quite a handsome moonlighted profit from being complicit, or an organiser. The Chinese community also has its own problems- just because it hasn't hit your doorstep, dosen't mean that they automatically love you or love Britain.

We have the power to choose which types of people come to this country based on our experience of the other million we let in.

Literally laughed at this- without adopting a quite frankly, rather racist policy of banning certain people from immigrating, on the grounds that they happened to be born on another piece of land, is not only morally reprehensible, but disgusting in a way that actually shames the history of Britain.

If every time you let a cat in your house it took a **** on your floor, would you keep letting cats in your house?

^ dumb analogy- really, really dumb analogy.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Elipsis)
The majority of those Asians are Pakistani. I don't care how you want to bend or distort things, they are commiting many more attrocious acts solely on whites, and that is a big problem and something that should be factored into our countries thinking when it can be seen that the number of Pakistanis in this country has been allowed to double in the last decade. Do we really want the most troublesome community in the country, where the majority of terrorism, childgrooming and forced marriage comes from, to expand so much faster than say the Chinese community who pose no such problems? We have the power to choose which types of people come to this country based on our experience of the other million we let in.

If every time you let a cat in your house it took a **** on your floor, would you keep letting cats in your house?

out of 230 potential child sex gangs only 41 were asian. There are 1.2 million pakistanis in the UK and only 50 have been convicted of such crimes as quoted from the actual article that's just "1 in 24000". It says it in the article


The majority of recent terrorism in the UK hasn't been carried or planned out by muslims, the Irish still make up for the most amount of terrorism. Forced marriages do happen but on what scale? Probably not anywhere near as big as the tabloids make out.

Claiming we have a problem with muslims/pakistanis and implying they shouldn't be allowed in based on a very small minority of criminals that came from their "community" is nothing but clear cut unjustified prejudice.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by Phantom_X)
^ dumb analogy- really, really dumb analogy.

One massively successful terrorist attack... plenty of failed attempts though. Many many failed attempts in fact, thanks to us having to spend billions of pounds monitoring the Pakistani community to keep ourselves safe. See all those billions we're spending on security for the olympics that previous countries didn't need to spend? That's because of our high Muslim/Pakistani population and the threat they pose.

White child groomers groom almost indiscriminately. Pakistani groomers target solely people from white backgrounds, because they wouldn't do something so horrible to people they see as their own. Chinese people don't behave like this. There is reason to believe that if we replaced every Pakistani with a Chinese person, our economy would be stronger because they actually work, terrorism and the bill for preventing terrorism would go down, and so would child grooming, forced marriages, and honour attacks. I literally see very little benefit to this country in letting in Pakistanis when there are so many other groups of people who would love to come here too, who would cause us far less trouble. I don't care if it's because of their religion or their culture, or both, other countries have better religions and better cultures, so why not let them in first?

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Elipsis)
If it's higher than any other group, and they bring less economic benefit than other immigrants as well, then we'd have to be nuts to let them in when we could let in better immigrants. At least in Thailand etc. That pedophillic element European tourists bring comes with massive economic benefit. Most Pakistani's are on benefits and barely pay any tax. Almost all of the women don't work, and the men that do do so in industries where tax avoidance is the norm (takeaways, taxis etc.), and an awful lot of them barely work too.

Evidence for all of these claims?

You weigh up the acceptability of paedophilia according to other unrelated economic benefits by the rest of the law-abiding population? None of your claims appear to be grounded in sensibility. People cannot enter this country with the express purpose of living on benefits.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
out of 230 potential child sex gangs only 41 were asian. There are 1.2 million pakistanis in the UK and only 50 have been convicted of such crimes as quoted from the actual article that's just "1 in 24000". It says it in the article


The majority of recent terrorism in the UK hasn't been carried or planned out by muslims, the Irish still make up for the most amount of terrorism. Forced marriages do happen but on what scale? Probably not anywhere near as big as the tabloids make out.

Claiming we have a problem with muslims/pakistanis and implying they shouldn't be allowed in based on a very small minority of criminals that came from their "community" is nothing but clear cut unjustified prejudice.

There hasn't been an Irish terrorist attack on our soil for ages. That problem has largely been solved. How do you propose we solve the problem of anywhere from 1-20% of all Pakistani's being beardy fanatic fundamentalist Islamists? They are always going to want to commit terrorist attacks. They commit terrorist attacks whatever country they are in (Muslims that is), and they only go up as their numbers do...

What you are referring to is earlier research, not the most current research. They do not deny there is a trend in the Pakistani community for grooming, and that they commit almost all their grooming on whites. It is justified prejudice, based on terrorism, economic inactivity, and generally criminality, to say we don't want the Pakistani population of this country to keep on expanding at it's current rates. Very few normal white people on the ground that have to put up with Pakistani expansionism in the UK will disagree with this. If you had to put up with Pakistanis, or weren't one yourself (I don't know if you are, but I don't think you are), you would think the same. When I lived away from them, and didn't have to deal with them on a daily basis and see that this country is becoming more third worldish and they are dragging us down rather than us dragging them up, then I woud agree with you.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
Evidence for all of these claims?

You weigh up the acceptability of paedophilia according to other unrelated economic benefits by the rest of the law-abiding population? None of your claims appear to be grounded in sensibility. People cannot enter this country with the express purpose of living on benefits.

30% of Pakistanis and Bangadeshis are in employment compared to 72% of whites:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/emag/what-we-d...in-the-labour/

I'm not saying what the British do is acceptable by any measure, but what I am saying is that at least they bring some benefits with them. Pakistanis have shown themselves to be nothing but a burden in so many ways it's unbelievable. Not only do they bring a significant amount of fanatic Islamists with them, they also bring a significant amount of paedos, and they barely work. Great. Let's let their numbers double again in the next decade. Sounds like a great plan.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Elipsis)
There hasn't been an Irish terrorist attack on our soil for ages. That problem has largely been solved. How do you propose we solve the problem of anywhere from 1-20% of all Pakistani's being beardy fanatic fundamentalist Islamists? They are always going to want to commit terrorist attacks. They commit terrorist attacks whatever country they are in (Muslims that is), and they only go up as their numbers do...

What you are referring to is earlier research, not the most current research. They do not deny there is a trend in the Pakistani community for grooming, and that they commit almost all their grooming on whites. It is justified prejudice, based on terrorism, economic inactivity, and generally criminality, to say we don't want the Pakistani population of this country to keep on expanding at it's current rates. Very few normal white people on the ground that have to put up with Pakistani expansionism in the UK will disagree with this. If you had to put up with Pakistanis, or weren't one yourself (I don't know if you are, but I don't think you are), you would think the same. When I lived away from them, and didn't have to deal with them on a daily basis and see that this country is becoming more third worldish and they are dragging us down rather than us dragging them up, then I woud agree with you.

Erm I'm not pakistani but I do come from glasgow which has one of the largest pakistani communities in the UK and have many pakistani and muslim friends. Not one of them are terrorists, not one of them are sex pests, they all work to my knowledge none of them are on any sort of benefits. The pakistanis I see day in day out in glasgow seem like decent human beings like the rest of us so no I would not agree with you, and I could guarantee that the majority of glasgwegians would not agree with you either. If you have personally had a problem with pakistanis then that is unfortunate, but your can't demonise a whole nationality based on your closed experience.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Elipsis)
30% of Pakistanis and Bangadeshis are in employment compared to 72% of whites:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/emag/what-we-d...in-the-labour/

I'm not saying what the British do is acceptable by any measure, but what I am saying is that at least they bring some benefits with them. Pakistanis have shown themselves to be nothing but a burden in so many ways it's unbelievable. Not only do they bring a significant amount of fanatic Islamists with them, they also bring a significant amount of paedos, and they barely work. Great. Let's let their numbers double again in the next decade. Sounds like a great plan.

No the study says 30% of pakistani women are employed compared to 73% of the general population.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
Erm I'm not pakistani but I do come from glasgow which has one of the largest pakistani communities in the UK and have many pakistani and muslim friends. Not one of them are terrorists, not one of them are sex pests, they all work to my knowledge none of them are on any sort of benefits. The pakistanis I see day in day out in glasgow seem like decent human beings like the rest of us so no I would not agree with you, and I could guarantee that the majority of glasgwegians would not agree with you either. If you have personally had a problem with pakistanis then that is unfortunate, but your can't demonise a whole nationality based on your closed experience.

The Glasweigan Pakistani community is totally different to the Pakistani communities everywhere else. Glasweigans won't put up with their **** in the same way other areas of the country have. In Glasgow you either fit in and work, start talking in proper dialect and accent and integrate, or you piss off.

I have already provided stats that show only 1/3 of Pakistani's eligible for work actually do work. Not every Pakistani is a terrorist, so don't twist my words. Most terrorists or wannabe terrorists are Pakistani though. That's just a fact in this country.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
No the study says 30% of pakistani women are employed compared to 73% of the general population.

My mistake, lets look at more updated stats anyway:

http://www.ioe.ac.uk/45857.html

15% unemployment among Pakistani men, almost 3x normal rates. 17% employment among Pakistani women. Sweet, I definitely want their numbers to double again in the next decade. They are a real asset to the country

[Phantom_X]

(Original post by Elipsis)
One massively successful terrorist attack... plenty of failed attempts though.

Statistically there were more threats posted by the IRA, as well as 'political terrorists' in the 70s and 80s- all of whom were white. Yet, for some reason, we didn't ban the Irish fron England, nor did we forcibly remove any anti-tory 'terrorist' etc etc.
Many many failed attempts in fact, thanks to us having to spend billions of pounds monitoring the Pakistani community to keep ourselves safe.
Yeah, lets ignore all the false alarms, people under rendition for no real reason, the abject rule of law when it comes to individual soveriegnty, those damn muslims, they should all be circled up and caged in camps....oh wait.
See all those billions we're spending on security for the olympics that previous countries didn't need to spend? That's because of our high Muslim/Pakistani population and the threat they pose.
No other country, besides the US, has basically infiltrated the middle east, been complicit with dictatorships and torture regimes, has had its army in serious disrepute thanks to torture and such. How one can think that its totally okay to bomb the hell out of Pakistan, while expecting British pakistanis to support it, is absolutely beyond me. Alongside that, the security isn't designed for domestic citizens, its to monitor foriegn threats- you know- from the countries that were invaded.


White child groomers groom almost indiscriminately. Pakistani groomers target solely people from white backgrounds, because they wouldn't do something so horrible to people they see as their own.
Wow, thats horrifically wrong. Where are you getting this from, the daily mail? White girls are easier to find- but that dosent mean that brown kids or black kids are not privy to abuse from such men.

Chinese people don't behave like this. There is reason to believe that if we replaced every Pakistani with a Chinese person, our economy would be stronger because they actually work, terrorism and the bill for preventing terrorism would go down, and so would child grooming, forced marriages, and honour attacks.

Well, the Chinese do actually have an honour system, very similar to that of India's. They havent committed terrorist acts on UK soil, no- but imagine, for example, if Europe decided it wanted to invade China and ariel bomb hundreds of its citizens. Do you think the game might change then? Furthermore,Indians and Pakistanis do work- a lot harder than your average british person as well. Opening up shops/restraunts etc isn't something that your average joe down the pub can just do.

I literally see very little benefit to this country in letting in Pakistanis when there are so many other groups of people who would love to come here too, who would cause us far less trouble. I don't care if it's because of their religion or their culture, or both, other countries have better religions and better cultures, so why not let them in first?

Well, there are lots of people coming into the UK, and there are still complaints? The eastern europeans/chinese take your jobs, the Indians/Pakistanis take your kids, the blacks take your women, all sponge off the state blah blah blah. So now that youve basically eliminated most of the world, perhaps you'd enjoy it if only americans and australians came to the UK ? :/ yeah, somehow that sounds a bit silly to me too.

It still dosen't adress however, (a) your selective use of statistics, which is horrifically miscalculated, and (b) the even more horrific assumptions you lay onto other comunities and cultures, all of which it seems you know very little about

[Phantom_X]

(Original post by Elipsis)
My mistake, lets look at more updated stats anyway:

http://www.ioe.ac.uk/45857.html

15% unemployment among Pakistani men, almost 3x normal rates. 17% employment among Pakistani women. Sweet, I definitely want their numbers to double again in the next decade. They are a real asset to the country

again, why havent you considered the extremely small demographic of Pakistani people in the UK, and then applied the figure? (which, when applied, shows more about economics than it does about any ridiculous pseudo-biology you seem to be advocating?)

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Elipsis)
The Glasweigan Pakistani community is totally different to the Pakistani communities everywhere else. Glasweigans won't put up with their **** in the same way other areas of the country have. In Glasgow you either fit in and work, start talking in proper dialect and accent and integrate, or you piss off.

I have already provided stats that show only 1/3 of Pakistani's eligible for work actually do work. Not every Pakistani is a terrorist, so don't twist my words. Most terrorists or wannabe terrorists are Pakistani though. That's just a fact in this country.

Glaswegians would not tell anyone to piss of for not speaking the dialect and accent. Pakistanis have integrated very well in glasgow not by force but because they wanted to and glaswegians accepted them, in the same way the rest of the UK, barring a few secluded places and incidents, has.


PhantomX said it better than I could.

[whyumadtho]

(Original post by Elipsis)
30% of Pakistanis and Bangadeshis are in employment compared to 72% of whites:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/emag/what-we-d...in-the-labour/

What has been invalidated in that link:

• Most Pakistani's [sic] are on benefits
• Almost all of the women don't work
• and an awful lot of them barely work too [sic] [depends on what you mean by 'a lot']

What has yet to be evinced:

• Most Pakistani's [sic] [...] barely pay any tax
• they bring less economic benefit than other immigrants as well
• and the men that do do [sic] so in industries where tax avoidance is the norm (takeaways, taxis etc. [sic]) [You also need to present evidence that Pakistani people in particular are engaging in tax avoidance.]

Furthermore, not being formally employed/in the labour force does not mean somebody is

1. claiming benefits
2. without an economic role

"Over half of the Bangladeshis and Pakistanis who are outside of the labour force are taking care of the family or home."

I'm not saying what the British do is acceptable by any measure, but what I am saying is that at least they bring some benefits with them.

So do Pakistani people. There are some bad eggs, but most are law-abiding, productive citizens. The British people who engage in child exploitation are not economically beneficial, just like the Pakistani people who engage in child-grooming. You cannot claim the economic benefit of the law-abiding majority justifies the behaviour of the criminal minority in the case of British people and simultaneously pretermit the economic benefit of the law-abiding majority in the case of Pakistani people whilst accentuating the criminal minority. I'd also like evidence that there would be no/an insignificant economic impact of removing this section of society; you are presupposing there is a pending supply of people who want to and will fill this vacuum. By this logic, why are you not arguing a ban on British people to those countries because there are other 'groups' who do not engage in child exploitation to the same degree? Why don't we extrapolate this to everything?

I don't consider taking the initiative in the form of self-employment to be something that is undesirable. They are clearly providing a desired service that was not present beforehand and people appreciate them for this and demand the service (hence, the continued business).

Pakistanis have shown themselves to be nothing but a burden in so many ways it's unbelievable. Not only do they bring a significant amount of fanatic Islamists with them, they also bring a significant amount of paedos, and they barely work. Great. Let's let their numbers double again in the next decade. Sounds like a great plan.

This is still the very small minority and in no way justifies a ban on the unrelated majority. Being of the same nationality does in no way intimate psychological homogeneity. The British paedophiles have no relation to the ordinary British tourists and the Pakistani child-groomers have no relation to the law-abiding citizens who are of Pakistani descent.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by Phantom_X)
again, why havent you considered the extremely small demographic of Pakistani people in the UK, and then applied the figure? (which, when applied, shows more about economics than it does about any ridiculous pseudo-biology you seem to be advocating?)

Nothing to do with biology, it's to do with facts. There are 1.2 million Pakistanis here now, that's enough to decide whether or not we want more, or if we want more from other groups of people who want to come here. We have Chinese people queing up round the block to get into this country, why not let them in instead?

[Elipsis]

(Original post by whyumadtho)
What has been invalidated in that link:

• Most Pakistani's are on benefits
• Almost all of the women don't work
• and an awful lot of them barely work too [depends on what you mean by 'a lot']

What has yet to be evinced:

• Most Pakistani's [...] barely pay any tax
• they bring less economic benefit than other immigrants as well
• and the men that do do so in industries where tax avoidance is the norm (takeaways, taxis etc.) [You also need to present evidence that Pakistani people in particular are engaging in tax avoidance.]

Furthermore, not being formally employed/in the labour force does not mean somebody is

1. claiming benefits
2. without an economic role

"Over half of the Bangladeshis and Pakistanis who are outside of the labour force are taking care of the family or home."

So do Pakistani people. There are some bad eggs, but most are law-abiding, productive citizens. The British people who engage in child exploitation are not economically beneficial, just like the Pakistani people who engage in child-grooming. You cannot claim the economic benefit of the law-abiding majority justifies the behaviour of the criminal minority in the case of British people and simultaneously pretermit the economic benefit of the law-abiding majority in the case of Pakistani people whilst accentuating the criminal minority. I'd also like evidence that there would be no/an insignificant economic impact of removing this section of society; you are presupposing there is a pending supply of people who want to and will fill this vacuum. By this logic, why are you not arguing a ban on British people to those countries because there are other 'groups' who do not engage in child exploitation to the same degree? Why don't we extrapolate this to everything?

I don't consider taking the initiative in the form of self-employment to be something that is undesirable. They are clearly providing a desired service that was not present beforehand and people appreciate them for this and demand the service (hence, the continued business).

This is still the very small minority and in no way justifies a ban on the unrelated majority. Being of the same nationality does in no way intimate psychological homogeneity. The British paedophiles have no relation to the ordinary British tourists and the Pakistani child-groomers have no relation to the law-abiding citizens who are of Pakistani descent.

They are a massive burden, end of. It has been shown by the previous link that 1/4 of all Pakistanis that actually bother to work do so in takeaways, where most of them are in my experience paid cash in hand. As taxi drivers, they report the minimum amount possible like all taxi drivers.

I can't be bothered to entertain the stupid argument that we have British economically inactive pedos, so we should put up with loads from Pakistani backgrounds. It's stupid logic.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

(Original post by Elipsis)
Nothing to do with biology, it's to do with facts. There are 1.2 million Pakistanis here now, that's enough to decide whether or not we want more, or if we want more from other groups of people who want to come here. We have Chinese people queing up round the block to get into this country, why not let them in instead?

Really where's this block then with chinese people trying to get in, I don't see it.

You seem to think the govt favours pakistanis more than other immigrants I don't think that is the case in the slightest. We have seen an increase in pakistanis because they were the largest group to want to come to the uk, just like the black people before them and the eastern europeans most recently.

[Elipsis]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
Really where's this block then with chinese people trying to get in, I don't see it.

You seem to think the govt favours pakistanis more than other immigrants I don't think that is the case in the slightest. We have seen an increase in pakistanis because they were the largest group to want to come to the uk, just like the black people before them and the eastern europeans most recently.

Haha you are pathetic. Why am I even talking to someone so pedantic they try and argue off of the basis that I was talking about a real block and not a metaphorical one? Bwahaha.

We have seen an increase in Pakistanis because of:
a) The majority of them use marriage as a way to rope in a cousin. You'd think this would benefit our olympic swim team with all the webbed feet, but nope.

b) They breed like crazy compared to everyone else.

We can't stop them breeding like mad, but we can stop them using marriage as a tool in the way that they do, or counter balance it by saying that for every backward villager who comes in via marraige comes from the quota of Pakistanis allowed in, so no more after that.