Religious hate-speech in the UK or fearless speaker of truth?

King Mob

Which part is the hate speech exactly?

recedite

Odhinn wrote: »

he's a bigoted scum bag

smacl wrote: »

this guy is a hate mongering bigot.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The man's a convicted fraud, a forger... stupid

King Mob wrote: »

racist

Recedite, The All-Hearer

Odhinn

recedite wrote: »

O(......................)Recedite, The All-Hearer

That's all true, so I'm not sure what you're on about.

recedite

Odhinn wrote: »

That's all true, so I'm not sure what you're on about.

Even if it was true (which it isn't) it would still be hate speech.


Recedite, The Knower of Subtleties

Odhinn

recedite wrote: »

Even if it was true (which it isn't) it would still be hate speech.


.........

It most certainly is true, as listed here.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108482908&postcount=21

recedite

Odhinn wrote: »

It most certainly is true, as listed here.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108482908&postcount=21

That's just dumping links.
Allegations have been made here in the thread, so its really up to the alligators to go into more detail.
But as they have declined to do so, I will try to match up the hate speech and the allegations in the links...

he's a bigoted scum bag

Well, hate is an emotion, and you either hate somebody or you do not. Its a subjective thing. No rationale or reason is needed. so lets move on to more objective matters.

this guy is a hate mongering bigot.

The irony of this piece of hate speech is apparently lost on its author.

The man's a convicted fraud, a forger... stupid

I would assume that "forger" refers to leaving the country on somebody else's passport. Not the same as forging a passport at all at all.
Anybody who has a conviction will have a difficulty getting into the USA, and the UK authorities made sure Tommy had a conviction, even if it meant trumped up charges against him. Recently he has been invited by a group of US Congressmen to speak on Capitol Hill, but it remains to be seen how he will get into the country. Wheres the Free Speech in that?



I already posted the video of Tommy's amazing flying kick directed against the ISIS poppy burners. To their credit, the Islamists did not press charges, but somebody in authority had already decided that Tommy was going to be imprisoned one way or the other, and so he was. Some policeman was persuaded to complain of a mysterious headache afterwards.



I assume that "fraud" refers to his giving the phone number of a mortgage broker to a third party. Any fraud committed then by exaggerating the earnings of that third party is committed by the mortgage broker and/or the mortgage applicant who signs the mortgage application forms. I'm sure peregrinus is well aware of this. The charge of "fixer" levelled against Tommy is therefore a very spurious conviction, but unlike his more recent conviction and unlawful imprisonment for "contempt of court" it was never appealed and quoshed.

stupid

Well, that's somebody who does not understand these things, but instead thinks whatever they are told to think.

racist

Here's an interesting read.https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/04/britains-hated-man-isnt-hateful/

He’s intelligent, quick, articulate, well-informed, good-mannered — and surprisingly meek in his politics for a man so often branded a fascist. Many of his home friends are black, some are Muslims; he’s not obviously racist or anti-Semitic. He only got into activism and street demos because he happened to be a white working-class English lad in exactly the wrong place at exactly the wrong time. It was Luton, unfortunately, that Islamist proselytiser Anjem Choudary chose as the base for his various proscribed organisations.

Now, about little Daisy.
I assume when all you virtue signallers are finished spewing hate against Tommy and his friends, you will donate a little something towards her wheelchair?


Recedite, The Impartial Judge

Odhinn

recedite wrote: »

That's just dumping links.

No, thats a series of things that a court has found him guilty of.

ancapailldorcha

recedite wrote: »

That's just dumping links.
Allegations have been made here in the thread, so its really up to the alligators to go into more detail.

Does this includes the claims that Robinson/Yaxley-Lennon/Harris/McMaster is correct or are they somehow exempt?

recedite wrote: »

Now, about little Daisy. I assume when all you virtue signallers are finished spewing hate against Tommy and his friends, you will donate a little something towards her wheelchair?

Do you not think that it is more than a bit sick to use a disabled child as a pawn for your agenda? Robinson's just spent nearly a million on a brand new house. Surely a few per cent of that would sort out that wheelchair. Unless of course the money's not actually for her at all which would fit into a convicted fraudster and thug's M.O.

recedite

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Do you not think that it is more than a bit sick to use a disabled child as a pawn for your agenda? Robinson's just spent nearly a million on a brand new house.

If you only look for sick things, that's all you will find.
So where is this house, and have you seen the invoice?
I know nothing about it, but please enlighten me.


Recedite, The Clement One

ancapailldorcha

recedite wrote: »

If you only look for sick things, that's all you will find.
So where is this house, and have you seen the invoice?
I know nothing about it, but please enlighten me.


Recedite, The Clement One

If you are determined to ignore sick things, none shall appear.

There's a link above in one of my earlier posts.

King Mob

Well for one, he of the many silly titles, you are misquoting me.

Peregrinus

Stephen15 wrote: »

Making me out to be some sort of Nazi for not agreeing with the left wing consensus

I am making you out as somebody who repeatedly tells people what to think, but despite repeated invitations fails or refuses to offer any reasons why they should think that.

ancapailldorcha

Stephen15 wrote: »

Making me out to be some sort of Nazi for not agreeing with the left wing consensus

That word literally appears once in this thread. In this post of yours no less.

I don't understand what you get out of this victimhood narrative.

recedite

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There's a link above in one of my earlier posts.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

More likely to be going to Tommy's new million pound dream pad...

Article starts off with "Tommy Robinson says he has sacked his lawyers and intends to get himself sent back to jail when he appears in court this week for a contempt hearing " which, with the benefit of hindsight, we can say is absolute nonsense. Tommy put forward a robust defence, and as a result The Recorder of London chucked the case out of the Old Bailey and would have nothing more to do with it.
I can't read the article any further because I am unwilling to enter my details to subscribe to this nonsense.



Recedite, The Magnificent One

ancapailldorcha

It's a key part of his victimhood narrative. If he doesn't get sent to prison, he can't peddle his "Poor me" schtick. In fairness, there are plenty of morons willing to give him sufficient funds to buy a house in a gated community for nearly a million pounds. He's making bank doing this and the same idiots funding him don't see it.

Former assistants to Robinson said he scooped a “massive payday” when he was jailed for contempt in May, earning huge public visibility and hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations.

Source.

Of course it doesn't suit your confirmation bias and you can't have that.

recedite

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's a key part of his victimhood narrative. If he doesn't get sent to prison, he can't peddle his "Poor me" schtick. In fairness, there are plenty of morons willing to give him sufficient funds to buy a house in a gated community for nearly a million pounds. He's making bank doing this and the same idiots funding him don't see it.

Source.
Of course it doesn't suit your confirmation bias and you can't have that.

It doesn't matter how many times you link to the same article. We're still waiting to see where this million pound house is.

And its still a nonsense article (and its still not publicly available without subscription).
The "massive payday" refers to the fact that worldwide opinion recognised that he had been unlawfully imprisoned yet again, but this time a crowdfunding campaign raised enough money to pay his legal bills.

As a result he was able to take an appeal all the way to the UK Supreme Court where the Lord Chief Justice quoshed the unlawful conviction and ordered his immediate release. That effectively disgraced the judge who had originally ordered police to snatch him off the street and imprison him.

What does this tell us? It tells us that despite coming from a humble background, Tommy is intelligent and learns all the time. With every legalistic stitch-up perpetrated on him, it becomes harder for the authorities to lock him up next time.

With every lying media report it becomes harder to maintain the fake narrative that he is a common criminal.

He now has enough experience and enough money in his legal defence fund to ensure that he will never again be unlawfully locked up.



Recedite, The Sustaining One

King Mob

recedite wrote: »

It doesn't matter how many times you link to the same article. We're still waiting to see where this million pound house is.

And its still a nonsense article (and its still not publicly available without subscription).
The "massive payday" refers to the fact that worldwide opinion recognised that he had been unlawfully imprisoned yet again, but this time a crowdfunding campaign raised enough money to pay his legal bills.

As a result he was able to take an appeal all the way to the UK Supreme Court where the Lord Chief Justice quoshed the unlawful conviction and ordered his immediate release. That effectively disgraced the judge who had originally ordered police to snatch him off the street and imprison him.

What does this tell us? It tells us that despite coming from a humble background, Tommy is intelligent and learns all the time. With every legalistic stitch-up perpetrated on him, it becomes harder for the authorities to lock him up next time.

With every lying media report it becomes harder to maintain the fake narrative that he is a common criminal.

He now has enough experience and enough money in his legal defence fund to ensure that he will never again be unlawfully locked up.



Recedite, The Sustaining One

So why, oh self-titling-one, does the media do this?
Please outline your conspiracy theory here.

ancapailldorcha

Ahhhh... Everything that doesn't suit recedite's confirmation bias is fake news. Such a shocking twist.

One would think Stephen/Paul/Andrew/Tommy could simply sue for libel and use the proceeds to buy many chairs for disabled kids.

Mutant z

Criticising crazy superstitious religions is not hate speech especially one as totalitarian as islam freedom of speech must not be stiffled for religious and cultural sensitivities.

Odhinn

Mutant z wrote: »

Criticising crazy superstitious religions is not hate speech especially one as totalitarian as islam freedom of speech must not be stiffled for religious and cultural sensitivities.

There's a difference between criticism of a religion and the demonisation of its followers. In short, no yaxley lennons thanks.

Mutant z

Odhinn wrote: »

There's a difference between criticism of a religion and the demonisation of its followers. In short, no yaxley lennons thanks.

Pointing out the less than reasonable behaviour of some of its followers is not demonisation this sort of shyte needs to be called out for what it is not buried because it may be seen to be offensive to a particular group.

Odhinn

Mutant z wrote: »

Pointing out the less than reasonable behaviour of some of its followers is not demonisation this sort of shyte needs to be called out for what it is not buried because it may be seen to be offensive to a particular group.

Unfortunately lennon does indeed indulge in demonisation, and has a long history with far right groups. Once is a mistake, twice and three times?

AllForIt

The more ppl complain about Tommy the more media attenion he gets. Thanks guys. Usefull fools.

smacl

AllForIt wrote: »

The more ppl complain about Tommy the more media attenion he gets. Thanks guys. Usefull fools.

Nah, the more people that are reminded about his past activity the more they will know exactly what type of person they're dealing with. Given that Yaxley-Lennon changed his name to that of a famous LGBT activist pop-star, people could get confused. Really, what was he thinking?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLc-bh_DrKw

ancapailldorcha

AllForIt wrote: »

The more ppl complain about Tommy the more media attenion he gets. Thanks guys. Usefull fools.

The useful fools are the people bankrolling him.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

I assume when all you virtue signallers are finished spewing hate against Tommy and his friends, you will donate a little something towards her wheelchair?

In the context, referring to your fellow posters as "virtue signallers" does not amount to civil discourse.

Please read the charter which has been update today.

recedite

Its a Brave New World when the label "virtue signaller" is unacceptable but "bigoted scum bag" is perfectly fine.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

Its a Brave New World when the label "virtue signaller" is unacceptable but "bigoted scum bag" is perfectly fine.

Can you please point out, or better still, report the post in which one forum poster has referred to another forum poster as a "bigoted scum bag"?

thanks.

eyerer

Imo there's a large section of society that just wants to bury its head in the sand.

AllForIt

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The useful fools are the people bankrolling him.

I have no idea what your talking about. I find it interesting that you as a TR detractor know more about him than your do about all the ppl who are involved in Pakistani paedofille rape gangs.

Can you tell me one name of the hundreds of Pakistanis men who were convicted. Probably not but Mohammah Islam would be a good guess.

Yet you seem to know Tommy Robbinsons life inside out which I find peculiarly odd. You appear to find a bitta social prejudice to be even worse than the Pakistani paedofille rape gangs. How odd that that would be your major concern. Weird even.

It is my opinion ppl like you that are directly responsible for these Pakistani paedofille gangs getting away with what they did for so long.

The only way to counter these Pakistani Paedophille gangs is first to recognise they exist and then we can do something about it. But nutters dont want to recognise they exist so they continue on.

Utterly disgusted with this thread the way it has gone. Intellectual discusion forum my ass.

Odhinn

AllForIt wrote: »

I have no idea what your talking about. I find it interesting that you as a TR detractor know more about him than your do about all the ppl who are involved in Pakistani paedofille rape gangs.

Can you tell me one name of the hundreds of Pakistanis men who were convicted. Probably not but Mohammah Islam would be a good guess.

Yet you seem to know Tommy Robbinsons life inside out which I find peculiarly odd. You appear to find a bitta social prejudice to be even worse than the Pakistani paedofille rape gangs. How odd that that would be your major concern. Weird even.[................................] discusion forum my ass.

When you're involved in as many court cases as he is, details filter out.

ancapailldorcha

AllForIt wrote: »

I have no idea what your talking about. I find it interesting that you as a TR detractor know more about him than your do about all the ppl who are involved in Pakistani paedofille rape gangs.

Can you tell me one name of the hundreds of Pakistanis men who were convicted. Probably not but Mohammah Islam would be a good guess.

The pretending to care about raped girls routine has been falling flat for some time now, I'm afraid.

AllForIt wrote: »

Yet you seem to know Tommy Robbinsons life inside out which I find peculiarly odd. You appear to find a bitta social prejudice to be even worse than the Pakistani paedofille rape gangs. How odd that that would be your major concern. Weird even.

Google exists.

AllForIt wrote: »

It is my opinion ppl like you that are directly responsible for these Pakistani paedofille gangs getting away with what they did for so long.

It is my opinion that this is one of the stupidest things I have ever read and the fact that there are many people who sign up to this sort of anti-intellectual, hateful stupidity just illustrates that they resemble the sort of snowflakes they claim to deride.

AllForIt wrote: »

But nutters dont want to recognise they exist so they continue on.

I'd ask for proof but it's obvious to anyone who hasn't fallen hook, line and sinker to the sort of US identity politics you're excreting that this is just drivel.

ohnonotgmail

AllForIt wrote: »

I have no idea what your talking about. I find it interesting that you as a TR detractor know more about him than your do about all the ppl who are involved in Pakistani paedofille rape gangs.

Can you tell me one name of the hundreds of Pakistanis men who were convicted. Probably not but Mohammah Islam would be a good guess.

Yet you seem to know Tommy Robbinsons life inside out which I find peculiarly odd. You appear to find a bitta social prejudice to be even worse than the Pakistani paedofille rape gangs. How odd that that would be your major concern. Weird even.

It is my opinion ppl like you that are directly responsible for these Pakistani paedofille gangs getting away with what they did for so long.

The only way to counter these Pakistani Paedophille gangs is first to recognise they exist and then we can do something about it. But nutters dont want to recognise they exist so they continue on.

Utterly disgusted with this thread the way it has gone. Intellectual discusion forum my ass.

You're right, it is very odd that people seem to know so much about the life of the notoriously publicity shy Stephen Yaxley Lennon.

AllForIt

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The pretending to care about raped girls routine has been falling flat for some time now, I'm afraid.

Uggh what a disgusting conment but hardly surprising coming from someone who is quite happy to conceal the nationality of the rape gangs cause ya think it the right-on thing way to proceed. I feel physically sick reading your right-on garbage.

ancapailldorcha

AllForIt wrote: »

Uggh what a disgusting conment but hardly surprising coming from someone who is quite happy to conceal the nationality of the rape gangs cause ya think it the right-on thing way to proceed. I feel physically sick reading your right-on garbage.

Can you quote me where I said I was happy for rape gangs' nationalities to be concealed?

smacl

AllForIt wrote: »

Utterly disgusted with this thread the way it has gone. Intellectual discusion forum my ass.

You seem to have entirely missed the point of this thread. Nobody is anyway forgiving of the crimes that these gangs have committed, and I for one certainly would like to see all involved prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The fact that these particular men are all Pakistani and Muslim however doesn't suggest that all other Pakistanis or Muslims should be held to account for their actions. If you look at Dublin gangland killings in the last decade, the bulk of the criminals involved are Irish Catholics. Does that make all Irish Catholics criminal scumbags? Does being a Catholic from the North of Ireland make you an IRA gunman or bomber, or a Protestant from the North a UVF a loyalist gunman? Clearly not, yet Tommy Robinson has used the crimes of a very small minority of the English Pakistani Muslim community as an excuse to publicly attack and demonise Muslims living in the UK. To this extent he's been permanently banned from twitter for hateful conduct. That's why I and many others label him as a hate monger. In my opinion his actions seek to polarise and divide communities in such a way that will lead to an increase rather than decrease in violent crime between these communities. I think he's well aware of this and is willing to accept the harm he's doing to further his own agenda, which in turn is why I think he's a scumbag.

robindch

AllForIt wrote: »

It is my opinion ppl like you that are directly responsible for these Pakistani paedofille gangs getting away with what they did for so long.

In many years of moderating this forum, that comment misses the mark as wildly as any I can recall. And we've had creationists in the forum!

AllForIt wrote: »

Intellectual discusion forum my ass.

Mod: A conversation is only as high as you bring it yourself, so if you're finding it intellectually unrewarding, you might try raising your game a little beyond "your ass".

I would hate to have to take out the moderator's clue stick if this proves too hard for you.

4068ac1elhodqr

smacl wrote: »

You seem to have entirely missed the point of this thread.

You seem to have entirely missed the point of this thread. Nobody (of any sense) is calling 'all' the folks who have similar cultural backgrounds as the folks in the..
(Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford, Telford, Leeds, Birmingham, Norwich, Burnley, High Wycombe, Leicester, Dewsbury, Middlesbrough, Peterborough, Bristol, Halifax or Newcastle 'gangs')

I.e. Mostly pakistani-muslim males, with (each) gang, having hundreds (if not thousands) of victims, that are all specifically (young) (white) girls.
...As all bring 'of the same ilk', that would be silly. But it would also be silly to ignore that there is a trend 'above average' for these type of incidents to have certain profiles of perpetrators.

Generally, people are only bringing to light this distinct trend, ideally to address the issue, ideally with better prevention, education and integration.
Is it also wrong also to bring attention to the fact that there is about 300% more Muslims are in prisions in Eng & Wales, that Christian white folks?

If it's a fact, then how can it be wrong, to even mention it? Should this also be brushed under a carpet, and never mentioned again?

smacl

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

You seem to have entirely missed the point of this thread. Nobody (of any sense) is calling 'all' the folks who have similar cultural backgrounds as the folks in the..
(Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford, Telford, Leeds, Birmingham, Norwich, Burnley, High Wycombe, Leicester, Dewsbury, Middlesbrough, Peterborough, Bristol, Halifax or Newcastle 'gangs')

I.e. Mostly pakistani-muslim males, with (each) gang, having hundreds (if not thousands) of victims, that are all specifically (young) (white) girls.
...As all bring 'of the same ilk', that would be silly. But it would also be silly to ignore that there is a trend 'above average' for these type of incidents to have certain profiles of perpetrators.

Generally, people are only bringing to light this distinct trend, ideally to address the issue, ideally with better prevention, education and integration.
Is it also wrong also to bring attention to the fact that there is about 300% more Muslims are in prisions in Eng & Wales, that Christian white folks?

If it's a fact, then how can it be wrong, to even mention it? Should this also be brushed under a carpet, and never mentioned again?

Wrong, a famous quote of Robinson / Yaxley-Lennon is as follows;

Every single Muslim watching this... on 7/7 you got away with killing and maiming British citizens... you had better understand that we have built a network from one end of the country to the other end... and the Islamic community will feel the full force of the English Defence League if we see any of our British citizens killed, maimed, or hurt on British soil ever again.

What he's doing here is taking the crimes of a tiny minority and pinning them on a vast population to suit his own highly bigoted narrative. I take your point that Muslim men are over represented in prisons in the UK, but that begs the question why? You would seem to be asserting, and correct me if I'm wrong, that is is primarily because of their religious and racial background, as opposed to socioeconomic background or another of many other possible correlations. If this is not your assertion, why highlight it? Similarly, you have to ask how much the actions of the far right increase racial and societal tension to such an extent that they're causing violent crime. You're right that these things need to be studied and understood, but that doesn't seem to be what's going on here so much as opportunism by the right wing to cause division and conflict for their own selfish gain.

4068ac1elhodqr

smacl wrote: »

Wrong, a famous quote of Robinson

Not familiar with Robinson, and wouldn't have any time to conisder his ramblings, he's probably not the smartest not the smartest cookie in the jar.

Meant that the average poster (here), or anywhere else, wouldn't tar them all with the same sweeping generalisation. But...

...they would recongise there is an 'alarming statistic' amongst the typical profile of the hundreds of the many grooming gangs in Eng, that prety exculsively on thousands upon thousands of white girls as has been shown.

smacl wrote: »

I take your point that Muslim men are over represented in prisons in the UK, but that begs the question why? You would seem to be asserting, and correct me if I'm wrong, that is is primarily because of their religious and racial background, as opposed to socioeconomic background or another of many other possible correlations...

Yes, they are overpresentated by about 300%, and also for specific crimes against the person also. Why indeed?

Likely economics plays a factor. Afterall how many young pakistani child-bearing women go to University, or are allowed career enhancement. It's more likely they are discourged, that is a 'cultural fact'. Their husbands would most likely prefer them to stay hidden away and bring up their offspring.

So it all goes back to integration, but you can't force that. So instead education, but that's not easy. So alas all you can do is discuss it (not brush it under a carpet), with the hope of social education, and then better social integration, later (maybe generations later).

robindch

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

If it's a fact, then how can it be wrong, to even mention it?

There's nothing wrong with mentioning or discussing the implications of the fact that certain groups might be overrepresented or underrepresented when it comes to criminal convictions.

What is wrong is standing up in front of a crowd and implying to a mob with the clear intent to inflame, that the entirety of some group is guilty by association for the crimes of a minority of that group.

It's for the same reason that moderators on this forum have frequently asked people to edit or retract comments like "all catholic priests are pedophiles", "all religious people are stupid" and so on. Neither statement is true and the discussion is not advanced by making false statements for wayward rhetorical reasons.

recedite

Tommy Robinson rights another wrong.
The strange case of some trainee soldiers who were being disciplined and even discharged after certain people learned that the lads were TR supporters.
That of course, automatically made them "bigoted scum bags" and so an Islamic organisation decided it was time to pull a few strings.


TR was not having it though...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ohDE-JmJRE

Recedite, The Guarding One

smacl

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

Not familiar with Robinson, and wouldn't have any time to conisder his ramblings, he's probably not the smartest not the smartest cookie in the jar.

Meant that the average poster (here), or anywhere else, wouldn't tar them all with the same sweeping generalisation. But...

... they would jump to his defense in droves, point out his charitable donations and how he was mistreated by the law. To me this strongly suggests that they're sympathetic to his position. Glad to hear that you're not.

Why indeed?

Likely economics plays a factor. Afterall how many young pakistani child-bearing women go to University, or are allowed career enhancement. It's more likely they are discourged, that is a 'cultural fact'. Their husbands would most likely prefer them to stay hidden away and bring up their offspring.

So it all goes back to integration, but you can't force that. So instead education, but that's not easy. So alas all you can do is discuss it (not brush it under a carpet), with the hope of social education, and then better social integration, later (maybe generations later).

Another possible reason to consider is the long history of Paki-bashing in the UK and the inevitable backlash. The sentiments expressed by those of the far right today are a clear extension of the racist rhetoric of Powell in the late 60s. If you look at education levels among Pakistanis in the UK they tend be in and around the national average at secondary level and third level while earning a fraction of the money. I take your point about the anti-egalitarian nature of Islam, and very much agree with it, but don't see it's relevance in this particular context.

4068ac1elhodqr

robindch wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with mentioning or discussing the implications of the fact that certain groups might be overrepresented or underrepresented when it comes to criminal convictions.

What is wrong is standing up in front of a crowd and implying to a mob with the clear intent to inflame, that the entirety of some group is guilty by association for the crimes of a minority of that group.

It's for the same reason that moderators on this forum have frequently asked people to edit or retract comments like "all catholic priests are pedophiles", "all religious people are stupid" and so on. Neither statement is true and the discussion is not advanced by making false statements for wayward rhetorical reasons.

Can agree with that, no one should ever say all '___' are '___'.

However, has there been serious problems, and issues with the behaviour of many catholic priests? Including the prevention, administration and a general unhelpful ingrained secretive cultural fabric within their organisation?

Certainly Yes.

Can the same be said of pakistani-muslim gangs in England?

Certainly Yes, also.

Only by the exposure of these abnormalaties, is there hope for any redress.

If anything, Robinson and his groupings are 'not' helping address the issue with extremist views. But even the most balanced of viewers, can agree there is a serious issue at hand. Will brushing it under a carpet help? No.

ancapailldorcha

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

Can agree with that, no one should ever say all '___' are '___'.

However, has there been serious problems, and issues with the behaviour of many catholic priests? Including the prevention, administration and a general unhelpful ingrained secretive cultural fabric within their organisation?

Certainly Yes.

Can the same be said of pakistani-muslim gangs in England?

Certainly Yes, also.

Only by the exposure of these abnormalaties, is there hope for any redress.

The "All X are Y" sort of sentiments are never said aloud. Rather, they are heavily implied. The main reason I think a lot of people who go down this road get perceived a certain way, rightly or wrongly is that many of them tend to use any sort of incident to get on the same soapbox and wheel out the same racist tropes like "Welcome to the new France", "Multicultural enrichment", "Religion of peace", etc...

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

If anything, Robinson and his groupings are 'not' helping address the issue with extremist views. But even the most balanced of viewers, can agree there is a serious issue at hand. Will brushing it under a carpet help? No.

I'm not denying the issue's existence nor am I advocating silence on the matter. I think a lot of people tire of the tropes and as a result see people who keep bringing it up as being one and the same.

smacl

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

Can the same be said of pakistani-muslim gangs in England?

Certainly Yes, also.

But does this reflect in anyway on the much larger UK Pakistani Population of who the gangs make up such a tiny minority? For some perspective, we're talking about the actions of what are probably ~100 individuals from a population of 1.17 million (according to the 2011 UK census), so roughly 0.0001% of that population or one person out of every 10 thousand. To talk about Pakistani Muslims in the UK on the basis of these numbers is patently ridiculous, yet this appears to be what many from the far right are doing in pursuit of their anti-immigration agenda. It is not a fair or reasonable way to judge any group of people.

recedite

smacl wrote: »

For some perspective, we're talking about the actions of what are probably ~100 individuals from a population of 1.17 million..

Are you joking or just deluded? There are nearly that many mugshots displayed on the first page of this thread. And that's just the tip of a very large iceberg.

Thanks to the activism of TR and a few others we are starting to see some of them belatedly being brought to justice in the last year or two, but we still don't yet know how many are out there.


Recedite, The Reckoning One

4068ac1elhodqr

smacl wrote: »

... so roughly 0.0001% of that population.

And roughly 0.00000000001 % of the white Christians, Jewish, Buddist, Pagans etc etc... are involved in large organised grooming gangs that prey exclusively on young white girls.

Sorry, but your argument sounds like a ploy from the extreme far-left, playing around with statistics, presented incorrectly, to suit some sort of agenda.

Many researchers show 84% of grooming gangs, are British-Pakistani.

12% of convicted rapists in Eng & Wales are Muslim (whether or not they're mostly British-Pakistani isn't specified).
15% of the prison population E&W is also Muslim (crimes against the person is the largest classification).

The issue is, thats a severe over-representation within the actual population. By roughly 300%.

That does not mean, 'everyone' from this specific group is 'at it' it means there is an irregularity, that is all.

Why try to hide this simple fact?
Why not discuss what can be done, to reduce it?

smacl

recedite wrote: »

Are you joking or just deluded? There are nearly that many mugshots displayed on the first page of this thread. And that's just the tip of a very large iceberg.

Thanks to the activism of TR and a few others we are starting to see some of them belatedly being brought to justice in the last year or two, but we still don't yet know how many are out there.


Recedite, The Reckoning One

Ok, so on the basis that I'm deluded, I assume that you can put better numbers on it then from a qualified source. From my reading, the moral panic surrounding this issue is largely manufactured. See Grooming and the ‘Asian sex gang predator’: the construction of a racial crime threat for some studied insight on the subject. From the conclusion of that study

The image of the Asian groomer has proved a seductive and enduring one, yet, as this article has demonstrated, the idea of a uniquely Asian crime threat is ill founded, misleading and dangerous.

As for the notion that the actions of these gangs somehow reflect on the broader community from which they're drawn, even the Quilliam report notes the following

to say that the Asian population living in the UK has a CSE problem, or even that the British Pakistani community has a CSE problem is wholly inaccurate and a misrepresentation of the facts. It is more correct to say that there is strain of Asian men, mostly confined to towns and cities in the North of England, that have developed an unfortunately successful method of identifying and grooming young, vulnerable girls to engage in sexual activity with them. (Rafiq and Adil, 2017: 13)

The article from Youth and Culture is probably one of the more balanced ones out there on the subject. But then the haters like Yaxley-Lennon have no interest in balance unless it entirely coincides with their agenda.

smacl

Alfredo Prehistoric Tendon wrote: »

Many researchers show 84% of grooming gangs, are British-Pakistani.

As per my previous post, perhaps you'd like to link your sources for 'many researchers' because I've looked and all I see the Quilliam report sitting on top of a two previous CEOPs reports which it uses in a rather dubious manner and a bunch of newspaper articles. The Quilliam report has been accused of being flawed and biased, see Grooming Gangs: Quilliam & the Myth of the 84 Percent. Which of the articles and studies surrounding this topic do you find more compelling and why?