Muslims Marrying Mentally Handicapped Girls To Stay In UK

sphinx wrote:OK then lets reverse this - if culture has nothing whatsoever to do with any aspect of crime explain to me the frequency and reasoning of White British men paying the fathers £20,000 to marry their mentally disabled daughters

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:OK then lets reverse this - if culture has nothing whatsoever to do with any aspect of crime explain to me the frequency and reasoning of White British men paying the fathers £20,000 to marry their mentally disabled daughters

Again some people will place the value of money over their own children, in other words greed.

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Again some people will place the value of money over their own children, in other words greed.

Uh frequency and reasoning of white British men paying fathers of mentally disabled daughters to be able to marry the daughters please.  I did not ask for either frequency or reasoning of the fathers in accepting the money.

Sassy wrote:Just read part of the case, obviously they cannot give the womans name, but they do say:

The judge said that days after the marriage ceremony the man had claimed asylum because 'he feared he would be killed by his family who disapproved of his marriage to a white British woman'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532274/Muslim-students-married-mentally-handicapped-women-stay-UK-one-deported-fights-human-right-family-life-baby.html#ixzz2pKPpgoJR
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

As she was a white British woman, and they talk about her marrying a Pakistani man, can we infer from that, that her stepfather is more likely to be white?

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:Just read part of the case, obviously they cannot give the womans name, but they do say:

The judge said that days after the marriage ceremony the man had claimed asylum because 'he feared he would be killed by his family who disapproved of his marriage to a white British woman'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532274/Muslim-students-married-mentally-handicapped-women-stay-UK-one-deported-fights-human-right-family-life-baby.html#ixzz2pKPpgoJR
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

As she was a white British woman, and they talk about her marrying a Pakistani man, can we infer from that, that her stepfather is more likely to be white?

Really?

How do you figure that, so are you saying there are not mixed relationships now in this country?
There is no way to tell if he is white or not based upon an assumtpion

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Really?

How do you figure that, so are you saying there are not mixed relationships now in this country?
There is no way to tell if he is white or not based upon an assumtpion

Calm down.   Sphinx has made the assumption that he is Pakistani, there is no proof of that is there, as she is white there is a chance he is as well, thats all.   Good good, what did you have for breakfast.

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Uh frequency and reasoning of white British men paying fathers of mentally disabled daughters to be able to marry the daughters please.  I did not ask for either frequency or reasoning of the fathers in accepting the money.

Frequency?
Are you saying that many children in this country do not end up in care now?

Yes lets look at frequency on that shall we?

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Frequency?
Are you saying that many children in this country do not end up in care now?

Yes lets look at frequency on that shall we?

Oh trying to bring care back into it now are we?

The crime in the opening post was the paying a father to marry his mentally disabled daughter.

So how many British white men are paying fathers to marry their mentally disabled daughters and why are they doing so.

Forget sex abuse and children being abused for a second - the question is not about that.  The question is about paying fathers to marry mentally disabled daughters.  A very specific crime.

Sassy wrote:NOBODY KNOWS WHAT COLOUR OR RACE THE STEPFATHER IS.   You two are having a bloody great ding dong based on no facts at all.

Sassy wrote:Oh very adult debate, when Sphinx is basing her theory on the stepfather being Asian, and nobody knows, it hasn't been established.    Jeez!

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:Oh very adult debate, when Sphinx is basing her theory on the stepfather being Asian, and nobody knows, it hasn't been established.    Jeez!

Of which we are debating thanks, you also made an insinuation based on the girls ethnicity with her step father, so please do not deny that you did  

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Oh trying to bring care back into it now are we?

The crime in the opening post was the paying a father to marry his mentally disabled daughter.

So how many British white men are paying fathers to marry their mentally disabled daughters and why are they doing so.

Forget sex abuse and children being abused for a second - the question is not about that.  The question is about paying fathers to marry mentally disabled daughters.  A very specific crime.

What a daft question, the point is as seen parents will place men things over their own children, and you are quibbling over how many make money out of them?
Seriously is that your point when many we place their own needs over their own children on countless problems the point you are missing.

So do you have the evidence on how many sell for marriage?

So why are you asking me something there may not be any data on again making your counters absurd to say the least. What we do know is that many children are being failed by parents who dont give a care in the world about them, the point you should be getting

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Of which we are debating thanks, you also made an insinuation based on the girls ethnicity with her step father, so please do not deny that you did  

No I didn't, I specifically said THERE WAS A CHANCE he was white, as there is, nobody knows.   He could be white, he could be Pakistani, he could be Dutch, etc etc etc etc.   IT HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED..   Booooooooooorrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggg!

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:

No I didn't, I specifically said THERE WAS A CHANCE he was white, as there is, nobody knows.   He could be white, he could be Pakistani, he could be Dutch, etc etc etc etc.   IT HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED..   Booooooooooorrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggg!

No you said this:

As she was a white British woman, and they talk about her marrying a Pakistani man, can we infer from that, that her stepfather is more likely to be white?

Rumbled, again i would argue nobody can know the ethnicity of a step father and not make assumptions poorly as you did

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


No you said this:

As she was a white British woman, and they talk about her marrying a Pakistani man, can we infer from that, that her stepfather is more likely to be white?

Rumbled, again i would argue nobody can know the ethnicity of a step father and not make assumptions poorly as you did

My god you are hard work.   You didn't even get that I was pointing out the flaw in Sphinx's supposition that he was Asian and that if she was white CAN WE? infer from that the stepfather was white.   CAN being the operative word.   You really need to understand what is written before you jump.

BigAndy9 wrote:None of the assumptions were "poor" - we can be sensible adults and assume with confidence that the muslim is brown and the British handicapped girl is white.

Thank you, now you can continue your debate.

Catman wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:None of the assumptions were "poor" - we can be sensible adults and assume with confidence that the muslim is brown and the British handicapped girl is white.

Thank you, now you can continue your debate.

The assumption is right that you are a 

BigAndy9 wrote:2nd January 2013

Well I knew some foreigners were raping British women to stay here but this is a new one - I guess we shouldn't be surprised.


Two Pakistani students married mentally handicapped British women so they could stay in the UK with one being deported but the other now claiming he has a human right to family life with his young son, High Court judges have heard.  


The first man, who is in his 20s, began a relationship with a woman in her late teens two months after exhausting his rights of appeal.


They were married in a Muslim ceremony in June 2012, but last month the judge declared that marriage a sham and the man was deported.

The second man, who is in his 30s, married a woman, also in her 30s in a Muslim ceremony in late 2011 about six weeks after his application to stay in the UK was refused by immigration authorities.


An anonymous informant had called to tell officials that the woman's stepfather had received £20,000 'in consideration' of that marriage.

The woman became pregnant 'almost immediately' and gave birth to a son in the summer of 2012.

The man is now demanding to stay in the UK, basing his claim on his right to family life enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.

But in both cases, it has been claimed that the women's disabilities meant they did not have the capacity to consent to marriage.

Details have emerged in written rulings published on a legal website following separate hearings in the Court of Protection in London. Judges said no-one involved in either case could be named.

In the first case, a local authority had asked Mr Justice Keehan to make rulings about whether the teenager had the mental capacity to make decisions about her life - including the capacity to decide about entering into a 'contract of marriage'.

Ruling: Mr Justice Keehan today dissolved the sham marriage at the High Court after he decided that the victim lacked the mental capacity to make the decision to marry
Mr Justice Keehan concluded that one of the women had the capacity to consent to sexual relations but said she did not have the capacity to enter into a marriage contact


He said social workers became aware that she had begun a relationship with a Pakistani man in his 20s.


Local authority officials and police had warned that the man might commit an offence because the woman was unlikely to have the capacity to consent to sex and marriage.


Nevertheless the couple had 'entered into a purported Islamic marriage ceremony' at the man's home about 18 months ago.

Mr Justice Keehan said the man had arrived in the UK to study in 2009 but an application to stay was refused after an immigration tribunal concluded that he had submitted forged documents and attempted to deceive officials.

'His rights of appeal were exhausted in June 2011,' said the judge. 'It is in this context that he began a relationship with (the woman) in August 2011.'

The judge said that days after the marriage ceremony the man had claimed asylum because 'he feared he would be killed by his family who disapproved of his marriage to a white British woman'.


He said the man had been refused asylum and deported in August 2012.

Mr Justice Keehan concluded that the woman had the capacity to consent to sexual relations but said she did not have the capacity to enter into a marriage contact. And he ruled that the wedding ceremony she had been involved in was a 'non-marriage'.

In the second case, a local authority had asked Mrs Justice Parker to make decisions about whether the woman in her 30s had the capacity to consent to marriage and sexual relationships.

'A Muslim marriage, not recognised in this jurisdiction, was performed between them,' said Mrs Justice Parker.


'An anonymous informant had telephoned to state that the (woman's stepfather) had received £20,000 in consideration of the marriage.'

She said six weeks earlier the man's application to stay in the UK following the expiry of a two-year student visa had been refused.


He had subsequently applied for 'leave to remain on the grounds of his marriage'. The judge said 'immigration proceedings' were 'as yet unresolved'.

The judge concluded that the woman lacked the capacity to consent to sexual relations and lacked 'sufficient understanding' to consent to marriage.

Mrs Justice Parker said the man was basing a claim to remain in the UK on his right to family life enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.

'The reality is that he is now relying on his married and fatherhood ... in support of his claim to remain,' said the judge. 'So, the reality is that whatever his original motivation, (the woman) is being used.'

She added: '(The man's) position is bound to be self- serving.'


Mrs Justice Parker said the case had been about the woman - not her son. She was told that man wanted stay in England with the baby. She said plans for the little boy's care would need 'rigorous evaluation'.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2532274/Muslim-students-married-mentally-handicapped-women-stay-UK-one-deported-fights-human-right-family-life-baby.html#ixzz2pC8qzkvz

sphinx wrote:Again anyone want to come in with the frequency with which white British men "buy" mentally disabled adult women to marry.

sphinx wrote:No you are trying to change the subject of the thread because you cannot answer my point.
What point, a point you made up knowing there is no stats to, bravo on that stupidity, as then nobody has a point on, how daft can you get


The opening post consisted of men paying fathers to marry their daughters.
Bravo

A complaint was made about the story describing the nationality and religion of the men paying.
Incorrect, a statement was made how there is an imbalance of reporting the nationality and religions of such events

I stated that for cultural reasons people would guess the general culture of the men involved anyway because the behaviour had cultural overtones.
Gobbledygook when said fathers nationalities are not known

You have insisted I was talking bull.
You are as seen

Having tried to explain my reasoning to you  while you insisted on staying on your own track which had nothing to do with what I was saying I turned the question around and asked you for the frequency and reasoning of white British men showing the same behaviour - you have been unable to do so.
Which nobody has the details to thus a moot point

So I return to my original statement that the behaviour seen in some crimes is highly indicative of cultural background.

veya_victaous wrote:@catman
please don't call him a 'racist cunt', if he has displayed that nature on other forum please don't bring it up here.

I would call Andy Xenophobic anyway.      

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:No you are trying to change the subject of the thread because you cannot answer my point.
What point, a point you made up knowing there is no stats to, bravo on that stupidity, as then nobody has a point on, how daft can you get


The opening post consisted of men paying fathers to marry their daughters.
Bravo

A complaint was made about the story describing the nationality and religion of the men paying.
Incorrect, a statement was made how there is an imbalance of reporting the nationality and religions of such events

I stated that for cultural reasons people would guess the general culture of the men involved anyway because the behaviour had cultural overtones.
Gobbledygook when said fathers nationalities are not known

You have insisted I was talking bull.
You are as seen

Having tried to explain my reasoning to you  while you insisted on staying on your own track which had nothing to do with what I was saying I turned the question around and asked you for the frequency and reasoning of white British men showing the same behaviour - you have been unable to do so.
Which nobody has the details to thus a moot point

So I return to my original statement that the behaviour seen in some crimes is highly indicative of cultural background.

Thus you were as seen talking bull

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Thus you were as seen talking bull

For the last time didge I am not talking about the fathers.

I am talking about the men who "bought" the mentally disabled women as wives.  The men we know are Pakistani Muslims.

Now can you tell me how often white British men "buy" mentally disabled women to have as wives or do you want to concede that such behaviour has strong cultural indicators.

Or of course you can continue side stepping the issue and trying to pretend I am talking about something else entirely.

veya_victaous wrote:@catman
please don't call him a 'racist cunt', if he has displayed that nature on other forum please don't bring it up here.

I would call Andy Xenophobic anyway.      

BigAndy9 wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:@catman
please don't call him a 'racist cunt', if he has displayed that nature on other forum please don't bring it up here.

I would call Andy Xenophobic anyway.      

Incorrect.

I'm all for seeing different cultures in the UK - I remember as a child how fascinating it was when I saw an African lady in all the garb, or an Arab and going abroad on holiday seeing it was so special.

And now again, I would love to see some British people, I will be very welcoming and appreciative if that ever happens.

Thank you for warning him about the abuse again.

I won't be so nice next time, and i'm sure others have reached the anger point and will fight back, just as Stonewall did all those years ago.

 :D 

PhilDidge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Incorrect.

I'm all for seeing different cultures in the UK - I remember as a child how fascinating it was when I saw an African lady in all the garb, or an Arab and going abroad on holiday seeing it was so special.

And now again, I would love to see some British people, I will be very welcoming and appreciative if that ever happens.

Thank you for warning him about the abuse again.

I won't be so nice next time, and i'm sure others have reached the anger point and will fight back, just as Stonewall did all those years ago.

 :D 

So you are not xenophobic about Islam then or those from islamic cultures then Andy?

BigAndy9 wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

So you are not xenophobic about Islam then or those from islamic cultures then Andy?

I'll go and look it up to make sure i'm correct, but no.

But... there are some muslims who want to kill white Brits and will kill anybody who is in the vicinity.  You may say there are others who murder people but they don't terrorise.

I have children who go to major shopping areas, town centres, the cinema - I want them to be safe.

muslims have brought corruption on a greater scale than we used to have to our public services - according to our government - I don't like that.

I have also been to muslim towns which I remember being beautiful - they are now absolutely disgusting.

BigAndy9 wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:@catman
please don't call him a 'racist cunt', if he has displayed that nature on other forum please don't bring it up here.

I would call Andy Xenophobic anyway.      

Incorrect.

I'm all for seeing different cultures in the UK - I remember as a child how fascinating it was when I saw an African lady in all the garb, or an Arab and going abroad on holiday seeing it was so special.

And now again, I would love to see some British people, I will be very welcoming and appreciative if that ever happens.

Thank you for warning him about the abuse again.


I won't be so nice next time, and i'm sure others have reached the anger point and will fight back, just as Stonewall did all those years ago.

 :D 

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

For the last time didge I am not talking about the fathers.

I am talking about the men who "bought" the mentally disabled women as wives.  The men we know are Pakistani Muslims.

Now can you tell me how often white British men "buy" mentally disabled women to have as wives or do you want to concede that such behaviour has strong cultural indicators.

Or of course you can continue side stepping the issue and trying to pretend I am talking about something else entirely.

Side stepping what, that you are talking garbage, do you have the stats yourself, again if you do not then your point is utterly moot.

Are you saying British men do not buy women or even children for sex?

Again there are men, white British men that pay for Russian Brides, are you denying this also?

How about Thai brides also then?

Please spare me your babble here Sphinx, as you clearly have not thought this one through

Hence you are the one missing the point, these two tried to scam the law into staying into the country and you are trying to make a cultural connection to them buying wives, even though the issue here is about them breaking the law because they wanted to stay in the country  

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Side stepping what, that you are talking garbage, do you have the stats yourself, again if you do not then your point is utterly moot.

Are you saying British men do not buy women or even children for sex?

Again there are men, white British men that pay for Russian Brides, are you denying this also?

How about Thai brides also then?

Please spare me your babble here Sphinx, as you clearly have not thought this one through

Hence you are the one missing the point, these two tried to scam the law into staying into the country and you are trying to make a cultural connection to them buying wives, even though the issue here is about them breaking the law because they wanted to stay in the country  

You nearly have it there phil.

White British men do buy women for sex - but not marriage.

White British men do pay agencies to find them their idea of the perfect wife - which generally involves women from other cultures whose cultural background leads them to behave in a subservient manner to their husband something women from white British culture are less likely to do.
However the rate of "paid for" brides in marriages of white British males is low because culturally they are raised with the concept of marriage between equals for love.
Other cultures including but not limited to some areas of the Muslim faith, and the Hindu faith have a much much higher rate of "paid for" brides because they are raised to see marriage in a different light.  It may be seen as a form of business relationship, or that male and female are unequal with the females being seen as possessions.
Therefore when  a crime involves the buying of women for marriage (not sex) it is highly probable that it will not be white British males doing the buying.

Different cultures have different behaviours.  Some behaviours are indicative of different cultures whether those behaviours occur during criminal or non criminal activities.  It is useful to recognize such behaviours and their indications in formulating response whether that be in law enforcement or business.

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

You nearly have it there phil.

White British men do buy women for sex - but not marriage.

White British men do pay agencies to find them their idea of the perfect wife - which generally involves women from other cultures whose cultural background leads them to behave in a subservient manner to their husband something women from white British culture are less likely to do.
However the rate of "paid for" brides in marriages of white British males is low because culturally they are raised with the concept of marriage between equals for love.
Other cultures including but not limited to some areas of the Muslim faith, and the Hindu faith have a much much higher rate of "paid for" brides because they are raised to see marriage in a different light.  It may be seen as a form of business relationship, or that male and female are unequal with the females being seen as possessions.
Therefore when  a crime involves the buying of women for marriage (not sex) it is highly probable that it will not be white British males doing the buying.

Different cultures have different behaviours.  Some behaviours are indicative of different cultures whether those behaviours occur during criminal or non criminal activities.  It is useful to recognize such behaviours and their indications in formulating response whether that be in law enforcement or business.

 :/pwn://: 

Yes they do pay direct to Russian women and thai to marry

Oh dear back to the drawing board Sphinx

Again you are as batty as anything claiming a case on two people's goals was to obtain staying in the country, the two women were just a means to get this done, thus again your claim on cultures have no standing and us again utterly daft    

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


 :/pwn://: 

Yes they do pay direct to Russian women and thai to marry

Oh dear back to the drawing board Sphinx

Again you are as batty as anything claiming a case on two people's goals was to obtain staying in the country, the two women were just a means to get this done, thus again your claim on cultures have no standing and us again utterly daft    

So So close - nearly there - in fact you yourself have just written the answer you just dont see it.

They pay direct to the women - so the women are (as single women) in charge of their own fate and capable of making their own decisions.  

Yes the 2 peoples goal was to stay in this country - the women were the means.  The type of means they chose was indicative of culture.  Men from other cultures seeking the same goal would have been more likely to choose different means because their cultural background was different.

There is a goal.  There is multiple ways to aim for that goal.  Choice of preferred way indicates background.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Sphinx does have a Point though Didge.

The OP doesn't surprise me at all. Guys who live in Pakistan and India have this mentality that women are beneath them and they have 'power' over them to do as they please.

Not all obviously but most do.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Sphinx does have a Point though Didge.

The OP doesn't surprise me at all. Guys who live in Pakistan and India have this mentality that women are beneath them and they have 'power' over them to do as they please.

Not all obviously but most do.

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

So So close - nearly there - in fact you yourself have just written the answer you just dont see it.

They pay direct to the women - so the women are (as single women) in charge of their own fate and capable of making their own decisions.  

Yes the 2 peoples goal was to stay in this country - the women were the means.  The type of means they chose was indicative of culture.  Men from other cultures seeking the same goal would have been more likely to choose different means because their cultural background was different.

There is a goal.  There is multiple ways to aim for that goal.  Choice of preferred way indicates background.

No the game was over when you tried to manipulate the motive when the motive was aiming to stay in the country and by any means.
And money talks, you have tried ever so poorly to base a reason they chose this reason when there is no evidence is sheer comical to say the least as you have no understanding of the caste system within asian countries I guess.

So your point has no evidence but pure speculation and again the motivating factor to stay in the country. Which as seen Brits have paid to have wives themselves something you stupidly tried to deny .

 :/pwn://: 

sphinx wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Sphinx does have a Point though Didge.

The OP doesn't surprise me at all. Guys who live in Pakistan and India have this mentality that women are beneath them and they have 'power' over them to do as they please.

Not all obviously but most do.

Thank you sexy - have massive hugs and this huge bottle of virtual champagne.

I have stated at some point in this thread about my use of the word culture being specific and that I do not use it to mean religion.  I am glad you get it.

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:



No the game was over when you tried to manipulate the motive when the motive was aiming to stay in the country and by any means.
And money talks, you have tried ever so poorly to base a reason they chose this reason when there is no evidence is sheer comical to say the least as you have no understanding of the caste system within asian countries I guess.

So your point has no evidence but pure speculation and again the motivating factor to stay in the country. Which as seen Brits have paid to have wives themselves something you stupidly tried to deny .

 :/pwn://: 

My point has enough strength that our Muslim friend has recognized its validity.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Sphinx does have a Point though Didge.

The OP doesn't surprise me at all. Guys who live in Pakistan and India have this mentality that women are beneath them and they have 'power' over them to do as they please.

Not all obviously but most do.

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:



No the game was over when you tried to manipulate the motive when the motive was aiming to stay in the country and by any means.
And money talks, you have tried ever so poorly to base a reason they chose this reason when there is no evidence is sheer comical to say the least as you have no understanding of the caste system within asian countries I guess.

So your point has no evidence but pure speculation and again the motivating factor to stay in the country. Which as seen Brits have paid to have wives themselves something you stupidly tried to deny .

 :/pwn://: 

My point has enough strength that our Muslim friend has recognized its validity.

Sassy wrote:Think of all the con men who marry women and then abscond with their money etc.