Muslims Marrying Mentally Handicapped Girls To Stay In UK

First topic message reminder :

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

NemsAgain 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.

That is an attitude we are seeing more and more in Britain too Sexy.

God afternoon Nems.

And it's an attitude that drives me f---ing bonkers.It's rare for me to lose any control of my emotions but when I see examples of blokes treating women like s--t I lose control quickly.

Shady wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

That is an attitude we are seeing more and more in Britain too Sexy.

God afternoon Nems.

And it's an attitude that drives me f---ing bonkers.It's rare for me to lose any control of my emotions but when I see examples of blokes treating women like s--t I lose control quickly.

Good afternoon Shady
Pees me off when they do it to me to be honest!

NemsAgain wrote:

Shady wrote:

God afternoon Nems.

And it's an attitude that drives me f---ing bonkers.It's rare for me to lose any control of my emotions but when I see examples of blokes treating women like s--t I lose control quickly.

Good afternoon Shady
Pees me off when they do it to me to be honest!

Look I know that white & black British guys don't have a brilliant record with their treatment of women but Asian/Arab guys just take the mistreatment to another level.

Shady wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

Good afternoon Shady
Pees me off when they do it to me to be honest!

Look I know that white & black British guys don't have a brilliant record with their treatment of women but Asian/Arab guys just take the mistreatment to another level.

I agree. I try not to react and put it down to ignorance.

sphinx wrote:So I ask again how many white British men decide to "buy" mentally disabled adult women to marry.

OK, so this thread appears to have devolved into which ethnicity of men is more likely to "buy" women out of Pakistanis and British.

Let me ask this: who were the fucking sellers of these women? Jawas?

Is it worse to buy a person than to sell your own child?

Personally I think the Jawas are better than all of us.

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.

You must have missed all those Phillippino and Thai brides bought by British White Men.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:So I ask again how many white British men decide to "buy" mentally disabled adult women to marry.

OK, so this thread appears to have devolved into which ethnicity of men is more likely to "buy" women out of Pakistanis and British.

Let me ask this: who were the fucking sellers of these women? Jawas?

Is it worse to buy a person than to sell your own child?

Personally I think the Jawas are better than all of us.

Study the small to the exclusion of the big.

The opening post of this thread was about the buying of mentally disabled women for marriage - hence why that behaviour has been used as an example.

My point is and always has been that certain behaviours are more common in some cultures than others and just as awareness of this can be useful in business it can be useful to crime detection and prevention.

In this case the indication was of "foreign" culture - there are far more crimes where the indication is of "native" culture and natives are looked at before immigrants.

As to the balance of reporting those who report the news are always more interested in the rare than the common place - which can give a skewed presentation of commonality. Take car crashes or parking tickets- papers tend to only report the ones involving super cars because they are rare. If you counted the reports of crashes you could be forgiven for thinking that Fords Vauxhalls Hondas etc rarely crash and never get ticketed because you never hear about them but Ferraris Lamborghinis etc are forever crashing and getting ticketed. If the majority of crime was actually committed by foreigners (incidentally these statements apply to any and all countries - they are just as valid in countries where I am a foreigner as where I am native) it would be far less reported while odd incidents by natives would receive far more press - it is fairly safe to assume that whatever you hear about in the news is not the normal - because if its normal its not new.

Then I think British authorities better keep in mind that British native-born men are prone to selling their mentally disabled daughters.

Sassy 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.

 
You must have missed all those Phillippino and Thai brides bought by British White Men.

No I have simply observed that British men buying brides is far less common than buy brides is in other countries.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Then I think British authorities better keep in mind that British native-born men are prone to selling their mentally disabled daughters.

I think it may be a good idea to also keep in mind where the market for such a thing may be.

You would think that Britain as a developed country would be a role model to people coming here from developing nations but at times we're anything but that. We have battered wives homes all over the country and child abuse taking place in all sectors of our society. We even have sick men flying out to places like Thailand where they can get the pick of the crop of under age girls for just a few quid with no comeback.

What is this need to "prove" non discrimination by every time a minority is found committing a sickening crime coming out with a long list to demonstrate white men are even worse?

Yes de white man he commit nasties - but so does the black man, the brown man, the yellow man, the red man. It is no good minimizing the crime of others because we have failed to get our own house in order.

sphinx wrote:What is this need to "prove" non discrimination by every time a minority is found committing a sickening crime coming out with a long list to demonstrate white men are even worse?

Yes de white man he commit nasties - but so does the black man, the brown man, the yellow man, the red man.  It is no good minimizing the crime of others because we have failed to get our own house in order.

They do and I think that's the point others have been trying to make.

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:What is this need to "prove" non discrimination by every time a minority is found committing a sickening crime coming out with a long list to demonstrate white men are even worse?

Yes de white man he commit nasties - but so does the black man, the brown man, the yellow man, the red man.  It is no good minimizing the crime of others because we have failed to get our own house in order.

They do and I think that's the point others have been trying to make.

I have never denied that white man does nasties - I do deny he is worse than any other group and I deny he is any better than any other group.  He is just different the same way each group is itself different.

Making white man the whipping boy is racist and I dont like racism.

Sphinx, you were trying to say that it was the culture of Pakistani men to marry these girls. So what is the 'culture' of white men that makes them go to Thailand etc and buy and marry them?

It isn't culture, its the opposite of culture. Its because there are men that are quite happy to use women, and that cuts across every single culture in the world.

sphinx wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

They do and I think that's the point others have been trying to make.

I have never denied that white man does nasties - I do deny he is worse than any other group and I deny he is any better than any other group.  He is just different the same way each group is itself different.

Making white man the whipping boy is racist and I dont like racism.

Neither do I which is why I think it is important to show balance in discussions of this nature.

Yes men abuse women, but the point that Sphinx made is a valid one
This crime wouldn't have been committed by an indigenous Brit.

Many Brit men, as has been, said go to Cambodia Thailand etc. Is that cultural?

Well, seeing as the intent of this thread appeared to be to drive across the message, "Pakistani foreigners here in Britain are bad!!!!" I think a little balance is due. The fact of the matter is that singling out one or a few groups of people to report on the bad things some members do is just as racist.

As I've pointed out on another thread, here in the States, black people attack white people slightly less often than white people attack black people (in terms of violent crime). Yet conservatives would have us think that it's all black people assaulting white people. (And they'd have us believe it's all black people on welfare, and all white people who work. And it's all black people on drugs, and all white people ... you get the picture.)

I find it very telling that in this thread, I'm nearly the only one bringing up that whoever sold these women into their situation is at least as bad as whoever bought them. We want to work people up into a fury over Pakistani men buying English women but overlook the English people selling their children.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Well, seeing as the intent of this thread appeared to be to drive across the message, "Pakistani foreigners here in Britain are bad!!!!" I think a little balance is due. The fact of the matter is that singling out one or a few groups of people to report on the bad things some members do is just as racist.

As I've pointed out on another thread, here in the States, black people attack white people slightly less often than white people attack black people (in terms of violent crime). Yet conservatives would have us think that it's all black people assaulting white people. (And they'd have us believe it's all black people on welfare, and all white people who work. And it's all black people on drugs, and all white people ... you get the picture.)

I find it very telling that in this thread, I'm nearly the only one bringing up that whoever sold these women into their situation is at least as bad as whoever bought them. We want to work people up into a fury over Pakistani men buying English women but overlook the English people selling their children.

Nothing is being over looked. I said at the time that these cases of Pakistani grooming gangs started hitting the news that as well as tackling the paedos we need to get a grip of all the factors that make these kids so vulnerable.
The parents that allowed this to happen should be shot. But then I think all the parents that allow forced marriages, fgm and honour killing should be shot too.
A concern in this country is that some crimes are not investigated as they should be for fear of causing anti Islamic feeling as stirred up by certain newspapers etc.
My position is that I dont give a monkeys who gets offended the victim is the one that matters. Whilst of course what the parents did in allowing this was despicable, so were the actions of the men who abused these women in order to get leave to remain in Britain.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Well, seeing as the intent of this thread appeared to be to drive across the message, "Pakistani foreigners here in Britain are bad!!!!" I think a little balance is due. The fact of the matter is that singling out one or a few groups of people to report on the bad things some members do is just as racist.

As I've pointed out on another thread, here in the States, black people attack white people slightly less often than white people attack black people (in terms of violent crime). Yet conservatives would have us think that it's all black people assaulting white people. (And they'd have us believe it's all black people on welfare, and all white people who work. And it's all black people on drugs, and all white people ... you get the picture.)

I find it very telling that in this thread, I'm nearly the only one bringing up that whoever sold these women into their situation is at least as bad as whoever bought them. We want to work people up into a fury over Pakistani men buying English women but overlook the English people selling their children.

No Ben.

As I have told you many times before, the thread has been hijacked, and you are a very willing participant.

Most of my threads get hijacked and it is I whom then gets attacked.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Well, seeing as the intent of this thread appeared to be to drive across the message, "Pakistani foreigners here in Britain are bad!!!!" I think a little balance is due. The fact of the matter is that singling out one or a few groups of people to report on the bad things some members do is just as racist.

As I've pointed out on another thread, here in the States, black people attack white people slightly less often than white people attack black people (in terms of violent crime). Yet conservatives would have us think that it's all black people assaulting white people. (And they'd have us believe it's all black people on welfare, and all white people who work. And it's all black people on drugs, and all white people ... you get the picture.)

I find it very telling that in this thread, I'm nearly the only one bringing up that whoever sold these women into their situation is at least as bad as whoever bought them. We want to work people up into a fury over Pakistani men buying English women but overlook the English people selling their children.

I find it very telling that the first person to stand up and recognize I had a point was a Muslim Immigrant.

You were not the only one bringing up the father - there were several repeated bringing it up to try and distract from the point I was making.

There was a question somewhere about what would people like to see done about it which I answered clearly with the book thrown at the fathers as well as the men "buying" the women. They are all equal scum bags in my eyes and trotting out a million British scumbags is not going to cause me to think these 2 men are not scumbags.

Of course they are scumbags, but you are saying they are scumbags because of their 'culture'. I say they are scumbags because they are men that want to use vunerable women, and ever single culture in the world has that.

Sassy wrote:Of course they are scumbags, but you are saying they are scumbags because of their 'culture'.  I say they are scumbags because they are men that want to use vunerable women, and ever single culture in the world has that.

No sassy I am not saying they are scumbags because of their culture. I am saying the way they chose to express their scumbaggedness was influenced by their culture. Had they come from a different culture the would still be scumbags it would just have expressed itself differently. Maybe if they had been brits they would be the ones beating their wives and children or travelling abroad to abuse others - still scum just of a different variety.

By the way does anyone think I stand a chance of getting scumbaggedness into the dictionary?

sphinx wrote:By the way does anyone think I stand a chance of getting scumbaggedness into the dictionary?

I do hope so its a very good word for a very good point.

NemsAgain wrote:Yes men abuse women, but the point that Sphinx made is a valid one
This crime wouldn't have been committed by an indigenous Brit.

Many Brit men, as has been, said go to Cambodia Thailand etc. Is that cultural?

So are the points being made by others on here. That bad things happen across all sectors of our society is true and that the vast majority of Muslims don't commit the sort of crimes as shown in the thread title just as the vast majority of people from other cultures don't go to Thailand or batter their wives or partners either.

Just balance.

sphinx wrote:No sassy I am not saying they are scumbags because of their culture.  I am saying the way they chose to express their scumbaggedness was influenced by their culture.  Had they come from a different culture the would still be scumbags it would just have expressed itself differently.  Maybe if they had been brits they would be the ones beating their wives and children or travelling abroad to abuse others - still scum just of a different variety.

Glad to hear you say that, because as I said, the intent of this post seemed to be to single out a minority for criticism. I don't think there's one ethnic group or religious group or whatever in the world that deserves to be singled out for criticism, because there are bad people, as others have said, from all walks of life.

Now, are these people scum? Yes, most definitely, as are the people who sold victims to them. There's ample scumbaggedness to go around ( :D ), but they didn't do it because they're Muslims or brown or foreigners, they did it because they're pieces of shit who and are willing to do horrible things to others in order to meet their own needs or desires.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:No sassy I am not saying they are scumbags because of their culture.  I am saying the way they chose to express their scumbaggedness was influenced by their culture.  Had they come from a different culture the would still be scumbags it would just have expressed itself differently.  Maybe if they had been brits they would be the ones beating their wives and children or travelling abroad to abuse others - still scum just of a different variety.

Glad to hear you say that, because as I said, the intent of this post seemed to be to single out a minority for criticism. I don't think there's one ethnic group or religious group or whatever in the world that deserves to be singled out for criticism, because there are bad people, as others have said, from all walks of life.

Now, are these people scum? Yes, most definitely, as are the people who sold victims to them. There's ample scumbaggedness to go around ( :D ), but they didn't do it because they're Muslims or brown or foreigners, they did it because they're pieces of shit who and are willing to do horrible things to others in order to meet their own needs or desires.

All I have been trying to say is that their choice of horrible things is influenced by back ground - Just like how white scumbags may choose a swastika or white hood as their horrible thing depending on cultural background. If I see guys in white hoods I think north American origin - I dont go looking at the local Afro Caribbean population (which of course plays into the hand of the odd scum bag who does have the intelligence to play on such things but hear hooves think horses not zebra)

sphinx wrote:

Sassy wrote:Of course they are scumbags, but you are saying they are scumbags because of their 'culture'.  I say they are scumbags because they are men that want to use vunerable women, and ever single culture in the world has that.

No sassy I am not saying they are scumbags because of their culture.  I am saying the way they chose to express their scumbaggedness was influenced by their culture.  Had they come from a different culture the would still be scumbags it would just have expressed itself differently.  Maybe if they had been brits they would be the ones beating their wives and children or travelling abroad to abuse others - still scum just of a different variety.

Tel me Sphinx. Do you think that a typical Scotsman is someone who wouldn't pay 10p to save a child from a paedophile‎ and if anyone said they were would that be a cultural thing and also would it be racist to say they are. Is it typical?

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:

No sassy I am not saying they are scumbags because of their culture.  I am saying the way they chose to express their scumbaggedness was influenced by their culture.  Had they come from a different culture the would still be scumbags it would just have expressed itself differently.  Maybe if they had been brits they would be the ones beating their wives and children or travelling abroad to abuse others - still scum just of a different variety.

Tel me Sphinx. Do you think that a typical Scotsman is someone who wouldn't pay 10p to save a child from a paedophile‎ and if anyone said they were would that be a cultural thing and also would it be racist to say they are. Is it typical?

It is a behaviour typically found in some English due to cultural background. I would assume the person making such a statement was English as opposed to Pakistani. Would research show grudge holding to be typically found in some Scots?

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:

No sassy I am not saying they are scumbags because of their culture.  I am saying the way they chose to express their scumbaggedness was influenced by their culture.  Had they come from a different culture the would still be scumbags it would just have expressed itself differently.  Maybe if they had been brits they would be the ones beating their wives and children or travelling abroad to abuse others - still scum just of a different variety.

Tel me Sphinx. Do you think that a typical Scotsman is someone who wouldn't pay 10p to save a child from a paedophile‎ and if anyone said they were would that be a cultural thing and also would it be racist to say they are. Is it typical?

Absolutely exactly, it's judging an individual by the stereotypes the media has inprinted in your brain. What about all Welshmen are in choirs singing Men of Harlech.

Sassy wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Tel me Sphinx. Do you think that a typical Scotsman is someone who wouldn't pay 10p to save a child from a paedophile‎ and if anyone said they were would that be a cultural thing and also would it be racist to say they are. Is it typical?

Absolutely exactly, it's judging an individual by the stereotypes the media has inprinted in your brain.   What about all Welshmen are in choirs singing Men of Harlech.

No it is judging behaviours by stereotype.

Would you like to explain to me why and how stereotypes come into being?

sphinx wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Tel me Sphinx. Do you think that a typical Scotsman is someone who wouldn't pay 10p to save a child from a paedophile‎ and if anyone said they were would that be a cultural thing and also would it be racist to say they are. Is it typical?

It is a behaviour typically found in some English due to cultural background. I would assume the person making such a statement was English as opposed to Pakistani.  Would research show grudge holding to be typically found in some Scots?

You don't have to assume the person making the statement was English - you know it was. So, is it true? Is it cultural to Scots and is it racist to make such a statement?

It depends on context - its use as a personal insult does not automatically indicate racism towards scots - but hey you want to play the victim go ahead its no skin of my nose. Go ahead and tell the world how awful I am hell you can tell em all I am in to being spanked if you like - after all isnt that a typical english pastime?

Irn Bru wrote:You would think that Britain as a developed country would be a role model to people coming here from developing nations but at times we're anything but that. We have battered wives homes all over the country and child abuse taking place in all sectors of our society. We even have sick men flying out to places like Thailand where they can get the pick of the crop of under age girls for just a few quid with no comeback.

And the same can be said for most countries in the world.

Exactly the point Shady.

Good evening Sassy,Irn Bru & Ben.

You're defending the indefensible for arguments sake & arguments sake alone.Again you are making contrary posts purely to oppose other posters who you don't favour.

Stop being so obviously contrary & think about what you are saying as it's so plain that you are lying.

OK, handle on it now, it's Shady the troll trying to stir tonight.

The one that makes my hand itch to give him a good slap.

Sassy wrote:OK, handle on it now, it's Shady the troll trying to stir tonight.

The one that makes my hand itch to give him a good slap.

You & Catty always resort to the troll gag when you don't like or can't give sensible replies......You're so obvious it's starting to bore me.

I hope you're not going to revert back to type & get all nasty Sassy.

Shady, you can be really interesting, and then you can do this. When you do this its pointless even reading your posts. So I won't any more for tonight. You might have returned to some semblance of a reasonable human being by tomorrow.

Sassy wrote:Shady, you can be really interesting, and then you can do this.   When you do this its pointless even reading your posts.   So I won't any more for tonight.   You might have returned to some semblance of a reasonable human being by tomorrow.

Dear oh dear oh dear.It's time to get you tucked up in bed isn't it.

It's always tears before bedtime with you,you silly thing........Tired & teasy I know.

Too many late nights & you get all moody.Come on give Shady a kiss good night & you'll soon be in the night garden.

Night night xxx

sphinx wrote:It depends on context - its use as a personal insult does not automatically indicate racism towards scots - but hey you want to play the victim go ahead its no skin of my nose.  Go ahead and tell the world how awful I am hell you can tell em all I am in to being spanked if you like - after all isnt that a typical english pastime?

I'm not playing the victim Sphinx, I'm just interested in following up your opinions on cultures and whether you thought that such a statement was a legitimate observation of a typical Scot. You didn't see any problem with it and you absolutely refused to allow any discussion on it to the extent that you deleted any posts that attempted to do just that so it was not unreasonable to believe that you didn't have a problem with it being typical.