Predicting the likehood that the Muslim next door is a terrorist?

donaldtramp wrote: »

Not sure if you're having a mental breakdown or what. Can we please stay on topic here?

We don't have a formula, and as such we are being cautious right now.. I wanted to develop a formula but you seem to think we should just outright ban them all from public places. A bit radical, but understandable, hey maybe using your logic we can ban black people too, what?????

Anyway, lets devise a formula so that we can figure out if someone is radical or not.

But Donald you've come up with the solution in real life also, ban all muslims.
If you are going to use your bias you might as well openly hate them all instead of pretending you don't.

Just like many English openly hated all Irish people in our past, you know, those racists English people.

donaldtramp wrote: »

Consider the fact that the UK, a country with a fair amount more Muslims than us, have a statistic that 97% of all crimes against children are committed by Muslims. I believe there were a few Muslim pedophiles arrested a few months ago in Ireland too, so the trend obviously continues.

Thats a pretty mad statistic, now, care to back it up with peer reviewed reliable data?
Or are you just pulling it out of thin air?

Lets look at one example.https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/14/child-grooming-sexual-abuse-race

A 2011 study by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre looked at the 2,379 potential offenders caught grooming girls since 2008. Of 940 suspects whose race could be identified, 26% were Asian, 38% were white and 32% were recorded as unknown. Asians are roughly 7% of the population.


A report for the children's commissioner in 2012 found there were 1,514 perpetrators. Of these, 545 were white, 415 were Asian and 244 were black. The ethnicity of 21% of perpetrators was not recorded. Attempts to analyse the Asian figure further runs into problems. Just 35 of the 415 Asians are recorded as having Pakistani heritage and thus highly likely to be Muslim, and only five are recorded as being from a Bangladeshi background. The heritage of 366 of the Asian group is not stated in those figures.

Of course Asian doesn't always equal Muslim, just like Irish doesn't mean Catholic

donaldtramp wrote: »

It's like you think that you're really clever but you make absolutely no sense. Stop trying to sound smart and read everything you write because I'm getting tired of your meaningless similies. Stop comparing things which have nothing in common.

And you're calling me racist now.. Good argument! Can we stop this stupidity and focus on the actual question in the thread OP: What formula can be used to predict their terroristic tendencies?

Clearly I did not call you a racist,

As I said, English people that liked to label all Irish people as terrorists were racist, you can come to your own conclusion about those that like to label all Muslims as terrorists. But given that a religious faith is not a race they can't be racists of course.

donaldtramp wrote: »

Well, here's a slightly different statistic, which is a bit older.

Studies have found that 84% of all people convicted since 2005 for the specific crime of gang grooming in the UK were Asian, primarily British Pakistani men of Muslim origin.

2005 there were nowhere near the same amount of Muslims, if we're talking just 2018, it's closer to 97%. I need to find that statistic though, but for now the statistic above is still scary. Look into the Rotherham scandal.

Care to link to these studies?

You made a claim of "97% of all crimes against children are committed by Muslims", now backup that claim with proper data or retract the claim and admit you made it up.

One scandal does not give you a proper picture, if we used scandals as a picture we'd assume every single catholic priest is a child rapists and every nun dumps children in septic tanks....we know this not to be the case.

donaldtramp wrote: »

Nope, I won't redact the claim. 97% of Muslims in the UK are responsible for pedophilia. If you don't believe me then use Google, it's not my job to babysit you.

You made the claim, its your job to prove the claim.

Given you are now refusing to do so we can all safely know you pulled it out of thin air.
Good man yourself.

I'll cite the above 84% statistic once for you, I won't be citing anything else so don't ask me. https://news.sky.com/story/grooming-gang-convictions-84-asian-say-researchers-11164589

Did you even read the story you linked to?

The article states:

84% of all people convicted since 2005 for the specific crime of gang grooming were Asian.

The above article just relates to grooming gangs, not individuals...individuals actually commit the most abuse against children when you look at the stats.
Also, Asian does not always equal Muslim. Asian's populate a very large area of the world and its insulting to just label them all as muslim.

But your claim is:

"97% of all crimes against children are committed by Muslims"

So even if you wanted to backtrack and change your claim to say 84% of all crimes against children are committed by Muslims would still be 100% false.

Your claim of either 84% or 97% is false and you refuse to back it up with peer reviewed reliable data. To remind you, your claim was

"97% of all crimes against children are committed by Muslims"

Now back it up or retract it and admit you made it up.