Muslims Marrying Mentally Handicapped Girls To Stay In UK

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:05 am

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

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:15 pm

NemsAgain wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

I agree the failings of the police and social services due to fears of racism are wrong and a crime should be taken on the facts of the case and not the race Nems, so very much agree on that and this was a massive failing in the grooming cases.

And its still continuing Didge. Some of these children are so incredibly vulnerable and continue to be.

Agreed again, what worries me is so many are falling into care, what is happening within our society where children are being let down by families?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:20 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
NemsAgain wrote:

And its still continuing Didge. Some of these children are so incredibly vulnerable and continue to be.

Agreed again, what worries me is so many are falling into care, what is happening within our society where children are being let down by families?

Ah now, that is a massive question.
The demise of the traditional family unit? The demonising of the single parent? People treating their kids as accessories? A mobile population?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:25 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
NemsAgain wrote:

Yes it does JD but does it happen in different ways? To protect children we have to understand child abuse in all its forms. To say it happens every where may be true but its not going to help any child?

No it does not help the problem, but what is being pointed out is that if the criminal is a Pakistani, then a claim of culture is offered as to a reason, when they are British, no such claim is made, why?

The claim of culture may be offered as a reason to explain the form the crime took not that it took place in the first place.

Culture is offered because culture is essential in understanding how a person thinks (someone from an Islamic culture would see pork as unclean, someone from a Hindi culture may see beef as sacred) and how a person thinks affects how that person behaves.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:25 pm

NemsAgain wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Agreed again, what worries me is so many are falling into care, what is happening within our society where children are being let down by families?

Ah now, that is a massive question.
The demise of the traditional family unit? The demonising of the single parent? People treating their kids as accessories? A mobile population?

That would be getting into the realms of another massive problem

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:27 pm

NemsAgain wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Agreed again, what worries me is so many are falling into care, what is happening within our society where children are being let down by families?

Ah now, that is a massive question.
The demise of the traditional family unit? The demonising of the single parent? People treating their kids as accessories? A mobile population?

Judges being forced to resign for expressing support for marriage and daring to highlight independent factual research showing that marriage or lack of does have a definite affect on the long term well being of children.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:27 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

No it does not help the problem, but what is being pointed out is that if the criminal is a Pakistani, then a claim of culture is offered as to a reason, when they are British, no such claim is made, why?

The claim of culture may be offered as a reason to explain the form the crime took not that it took place in the first place.

Culture is offered because culture is essential in understanding how a person thinks (someone from an Islamic culture would see pork as unclean, someone from a Hindi culture may see beef as sacred) and how a person thinks affects how that person behaves.

yes but what you fail to see is the same logic is not applied to our own culture, again there is no legal age of consent within the Bible for example, and even again treats women as second to men, and this is a country still firmly in the belief and traditions of Christianity is it not?

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:29 pm

As others have pointed out, the lengths the article goes to points at an agenda besides reporting the news -- in this case, making people scared of Muslims and foreigners. Here's a simple exercise with the first few paragraphs that illustrate my point:

"Two Canadian 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 Presbyterian 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 Presbyterian 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.

Yeah, now it sounds weird. We never hear newspapers reporting about Christian white people the way some of them do about brown-skinned people of different religions.

Hold on, something's waving a red flag in my mind ... what was it ... oh yeah!

the woman's stepfather had received £20,000 'in consideration' of that marriage

Let's hear his name, nationality and religion, then! If it was fair for the bastards who took advantage of these women to have their names, nationality and religion paraded about, surely we can do the same for the man who sold his own daughter out for 20,000 pounds, right?

I just think what you report shows your biases. I report a lot of Republican corruption, business corruption and science articles, because I think Republicans are corrupt, businesses are by and large corrupt, and science is cool. Not that Muslim crimes should go unreported, but if all you ever report is Muslim and foreigner crime stories, you're obviously a xenophobic bigot. Pretty easy logic.

But then again, we're all terrible in our own ~~special~~ not-at-all-special way:

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:30 pm

Great post Ben which proves further my point on how the media can manipulate people using fear based stories and how they would not print the same if white British, the point I stated from the start.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:31 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

The claim of culture may be offered as a reason to explain the form the crime took not that it took place in the first place.

Culture is offered because culture is essential in understanding how a person thinks (someone from an Islamic culture would see pork as unclean, someone from a Hindi culture may see beef as sacred) and how a person thinks affects how that person behaves.

yes but what you fail to see is the same logic is not applied to our own culture, again there is no legal age of consent within the Bible for example, and even again treats women as second to men, and this is a country still firmly in the belief and traditions of Christianity is it not?

Uh did you miss the bit where I noted that present Islamic culture is very different from the original Islamic culture? Cultures and religions develop and change over time. I have not at any point claimed my own culture does not commit crimes or have criminal elements I have just stated that those crimes and elements are likely to express themselves differently than crimes and elements from a different culture do. Not definitely will either just more likely to.

It is important for the limitation of crime and criminal elements for us to accept the effect of culture on crime and criminal elements and not shy away from it and pretend it does not exist.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:37 pm

PhilDidge wrote:Great post Ben which proves further my point on how the media can manipulate people using fear based stories and how they would not print the same if white British, the point I stated from the start.

Then you would be better doing it on a story that would be equally likely to involve white British people wouldnt you?

That is my point - it would be highly unlikely for a white British person to pay a man to be allowed to marry the mentally disabled daughter. It would be highly unlikely for a white British father if so propositioned to accept the . The story would be highly unlikely to involve white British people. Even if colour faith nationality had been left out of this story readers would be filling them in and with a high chance of being right.

But not because of any moral superiority, just because he wouldn't find himself in that situation. British people do awful things all the time. And the issue of bias isn't so much with this one individual story, as has also been pointed out -- it's the original source of the article's pattern of reporting like this, and the original poster's pattern of repeating them.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:40 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

yes but what you fail to see is the same logic is not applied to our own culture, again there is no legal age of consent within the Bible for example, and even again treats women as second to men, and this is a country still firmly in the belief and traditions of Christianity is it not?

Uh did you miss the bit where I noted that present Islamic culture is very different from the original Islamic culture? Cultures and religions develop and change over time. I have not at any point claimed my own culture does not commit crimes or have criminal elements I have just stated that those crimes and elements are likely to express themselves differently than crimes and elements from a different culture do. Not definitely will either just more likely to.

It is important for the limitation of crime and criminal elements for us to accept the effect of culture on crime and criminal elements and not shy away from it and pretend it does not exist.

I think you missed the point Sphinx, that is what you perceive to be because of their religion, because of the way it is reported, as per Ben's post.

Give you a case in point, although a different subject. The Mail today has pages on Keith Vaz meeting the Romanians at Luton Airport yesterday. Nowhere does it say that anyone else was with him. Anyone reading the Mail who didn't read anything else, would think it was the agenda of the Labour Party to meet the Romanians.

However, as already done on a link in a different thread, this was the truth:

Labour MP Mr Vaz, who was accompanied at Luton Airport by Tory MP Mark Reckless, said the 180-seat aircraft from the central Romanian city of Targu Mureș had only 140 passengers on board, most of whom already live and work in the UK.

You see, just a little different, but a whole new ball game.

So it is with the reporting of crime. If one thing is emphasised over and over again, and one thing isn't, you mind will register that that is emphasised as the most important thing.

It's very subtle, but insistant and pernicious and ongoing, and so far, it appear to be achieving it's aims with some people.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:41 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

yes but what you fail to see is the same logic is not applied to our own culture, again there is no legal age of consent within the Bible for example, and even again treats women as second to men, and this is a country still firmly in the belief and traditions of Christianity is it not?

Uh did you miss the bit where I noted that present Islamic culture is very different from the original Islamic culture? Cultures and religions develop and change over time. I have not at any point claimed my own culture does not commit crimes or have criminal elements I have just stated that those crimes and elements are likely to express themselves differently than crimes and elements from a different culture do. Not definitely will either just more likely to.
Present Islamic culture is a broad sweeping statement when it will differ greatly within each Muslim majority nation sphinx hence why such a view holds little validity.
The point is when debates centre around cultures of which I am pointing out the same is never applied to our own, and what happens is what you do now is then make a view point the culture is the reason behind the exploitation and not the fact within alls societies there are those that exploit those vulnerable. Your view point can in fact detract from others who commit these types of crimes and can allow also people to then centre a fear soley onto just one culture allow people to be led into a false sense of security within our own, that is the danger, when all aspects should be given the fullest attention

It is important for the limitation of crime and criminal elements for us to accept the effect of culture on crime and criminal elements and not shy away from it and pretend it does not exist.

It is important to look at everything and not centre on 3% of child sex crimes within this country when the other 97% are as important

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:46 pm

The issue I'm trying to point out here is the "othering" of the subjects of the story, sphinx. Here's another example -- first, how a real news report read, then how it would read if the subject were "othered" as the subjects of the OP were:

REGULAR:

BALTIMORE, MD—David Ralph Fisher, age 43, of Baltimore, pleaded guilty today to producing child pornography and attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexually explicit activity. His ex-wife, Lori Fisher, age 46, of St. Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography.

The guilty pleas were announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner Anthony W. Batts of the Baltimore Police Department; and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein.

According to their plea agreements, after repeated requests from David Fisher, Lori Fisher produced multiple sexually explicit photographs of two minor females, on at least two occasions between August and December of 2008. Lori Fisher took the photographs with her cell phone and then sent the images electronically to David Fisher via text message.

"OTHERIZED"

BALTIMORE, MD—American national David Ralph Fisher, age 43, of Baltimore, pleaded guilty today to producing child pornography and attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexually explicit activity. His ex-wife, Lori Fisher, age 46, of St. Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography. The Fishers are Caucasians, and neighbors said both were regularly seen attending services at St. John's Methodist Church in Baltimore and were practicing Methodists.

The guilty pleas were announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner Anthony W. Batts of the Baltimore Police Department; and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein.

According to their plea agreements, after repeated requests from David Fisher, Lori Fisher produced multiple sexually explicit photographs of two minor females, on at least two occasions between August and December of 2008. Lori Fisher took the photographs with her cell phone and then sent the images electronically to David Fisher via text message.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:51 pm

Exactly, and if that went on day after day, week after week, people would be calling for the Methodist Church to be investigated, and what was wrong with it.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:53 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

Uh did you miss the bit where I noted that present Islamic culture is very different from the original Islamic culture? Cultures and religions develop and change over time. I have not at any point claimed my own culture does not commit crimes or have criminal elements I have just stated that those crimes and elements are likely to express themselves differently than crimes and elements from a different culture do. Not definitely will either just more likely to.
Present Islamic culture is a broad sweeping statement when it will differ greatly within each Muslim majority nation sphinx hence why such a view holds little validity.
The point is when debates centre around cultures of which I am pointing out the same is never applied to our own, and what happens is what you do now is then make a view point the culture is the reason behind the exploitation and not the fact within alls societies there are those that exploit those vulnerable. Your view point can in fact detract from others who commit these types of crimes and can allow also people to then centre a fear soley onto just one culture allow people to be led into a false sense of security within our own, that is the danger, when all aspects should be given the fullest attention

It is important for the limitation of crime and criminal elements for us to accept the effect of culture on crime and criminal elements and not shy away from it and pretend it does not exist.

It is important to look at everything and not centre on 3% of child sex crimes within this country when the other 97% are as important

My god you really cannot get it can you.

Statement Present Islamic Culture is very different from original Islamic culture gets you raving about how it is a sweeping statement because different areas will be different from each other and you still miss the simple point - the present whole is different from the original whole. It does not matter how it is different just that it is. You tried throwing the idea that original Christian culture may have had a lot in common with some areas of todays Islamic culture I simply pointed out I have already observed that todays Islamic culture is different from original so judging todays Christian culture by original Christian culture was equally as pointless.

I am not focused on any particular % of any type of crime - I am simply observing that cultural background has an effect on a persons behaviour whether that behaviour be law abiding or criminal and that therefore in any attempt to limit criminal behaviour it is essential to take into account cultural background.

I do not state one culture is superior to another

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:59 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:The issue I'm trying to point out here is the "othering" of the subjects of the story, sphinx. Here's another example -- first, how a real news report read, then how it would read if the subject were "othered" as the subjects of the OP were:

REGULAR:

BALTIMORE, MD—David Ralph Fisher, age 43, of Baltimore, pleaded guilty today to producing child pornography and attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexually explicit activity. His ex-wife, Lori Fisher, age 46, of St. Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography.

The guilty pleas were announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner Anthony W. Batts of the Baltimore Police Department; and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein.

According to their plea agreements, after repeated requests from David Fisher, Lori Fisher produced multiple sexually explicit photographs of two minor females, on at least two occasions between August and December of 2008. Lori Fisher took the photographs with her cell phone and then sent the images electronically to David Fisher via text message.

"OTHERIZED"

BALTIMORE, MD—American national David Ralph Fisher, age 43, of Baltimore, pleaded guilty today to producing child pornography and attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexually explicit activity. His ex-wife, Lori Fisher, age 46, of St. Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography. The Fishers are Caucasians, and neighbors said both were regularly seen attending services at St. John's Methodist Church in Baltimore and were practicing Methodists.

The guilty pleas were announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner Anthony W. Batts of the Baltimore Police Department; and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein.

According to their plea agreements, after repeated requests from David Fisher, Lori Fisher produced multiple sexually explicit photographs of two minor females, on at least two occasions between August and December of 2008. Lori Fisher took the photographs with her cell phone and then sent the images electronically to David Fisher via text message.

My point is that even when you leave the othering out I assume that that particular story referred to white Caucasians. Being a Brit I assume British without regular worship habits but still white Caucasian.

To prove your point you need to find a story that leaves people not assuming anything about the people involved simply from the behaviours described.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:00 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

It is important to look at everything and not centre on 3% of child sex crimes within this country when the other 97% are as important

My god you really cannot get it can you.

Statement Present Islamic Culture is very different from original Islamic culture gets you raving about how it is a sweeping statement because different areas will be different from each other and you still miss the simple point - the present whole is different from the original whole. It does not matter how it is different just that it is. You tried throwing the idea that original Christian culture may have had a lot in common with some areas of todays Islamic culture I simply pointed out I have already observed that todays Islamic culture is different from original so judging todays Christian culture by original Christian culture was equally as pointless.
Oh my someone who knows nothing about Islamic cultures which differs vastly within a nation let alone with in different Islamic nations as well, being as different interpretations are held on Islam. Seriously I study theology and know there is such variance within the many different societies let alone that it would still be wrong in any of these cultures to rape, something you clearly miss the point over. The point on Christinaity is to show i can make daft associations as you are doing when you have no idea what in fact you are talking about. So please point to me where in any Islamic culture it is okay to rape?

I am not focused on any particular % of any type of crime - I am simply observing that cultural background has an effect on a persons behaviour whether that behaviour be law abiding or criminal and that therefore in any attempt to limit criminal behaviour it is essential to take into account cultural background.
Yes you are though as seen by making religious connections to now rape it seems, though this is a punishment within Islam itself. You do realise that this is the issue here of rape?

I do not state one culture is superior to another

But you are making the view point one is worse than the other based on gobbledygook.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:02 pm

sphinx wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:The issue I'm trying to point out here is the "othering" of the subjects of the story, sphinx. Here's another example -- first, how a real news report read, then how it would read if the subject were "othered" as the subjects of the OP were:

REGULAR:

BALTIMORE, MD—David Ralph Fisher, age 43, of Baltimore, pleaded guilty today to producing child pornography and attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexually explicit activity. His ex-wife, Lori Fisher, age 46, of St. Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography.

The guilty pleas were announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner Anthony W. Batts of the Baltimore Police Department; and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein.

According to their plea agreements, after repeated requests from David Fisher, Lori Fisher produced multiple sexually explicit photographs of two minor females, on at least two occasions between August and December of 2008. Lori Fisher took the photographs with her cell phone and then sent the images electronically to David Fisher via text message.

"OTHERIZED"

BALTIMORE, MD—American national David Ralph Fisher, age 43, of Baltimore, pleaded guilty today to producing child pornography and attempting to coerce and entice a minor to engage in sexually explicit activity. His ex-wife, Lori Fisher, age 46, of St. Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty to distribution of child pornography. The Fishers are Caucasians, and neighbors said both were regularly seen attending services at St. John's Methodist Church in Baltimore and were practicing Methodists.

The guilty pleas were announced by United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod J. Rosenstein; Special Agent in Charge Stephen E. Vogt of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner Anthony W. Batts of the Baltimore Police Department; and Baltimore City State’s Attorney Gregg L. Bernstein.

According to their plea agreements, after repeated requests from David Fisher, Lori Fisher produced multiple sexually explicit photographs of two minor females, on at least two occasions between August and December of 2008. Lori Fisher took the photographs with her cell phone and then sent the images electronically to David Fisher via text message.

My point is that even when you leave the othering out I assume that that particular story referred to white Caucasians. Being a Brit I assume British without regular worship habits but still white Caucasian.

To prove your point you need to find a story that leaves people not assuming anything about the people involved simply from the behaviours described.

But many people are from vast different ethnicities even though they are white and many have different religious or non religious beliefs of which this is always stated if muslim, Asian, but not when it is white etc.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:12 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

My god you really cannot get it can you.

Statement Present Islamic Culture is very different from original Islamic culture gets you raving about how it is a sweeping statement because different areas will be different from each other and you still miss the simple point - the present whole is different from the original whole. It does not matter how it is different just that it is. You tried throwing the idea that original Christian culture may have had a lot in common with some areas of todays Islamic culture I simply pointed out I have already observed that todays Islamic culture is different from original so judging todays Christian culture by original Christian culture was equally as pointless.
Oh my someone who knows nothing about Islamic cultures which differs vastly within a nation let alone with in different Islamic nations as well, being as different interpretations are held on Islam. Seriously I study theology and know there is such variance within the many different societies let alone that it would still be wrong in any of these cultures to rape, something you clearly miss the point over. The point on Christinaity is to show i can make daft associations as you are doing when you have no idea what in fact you are talking about. So please point to me where in any Islamic culture it is okay to rape?

I am not focused on any particular % of any type of crime - I am simply observing that cultural background has an effect on a persons behaviour whether that behaviour be law abiding or criminal and that therefore in any attempt to limit criminal behaviour it is essential to take into account cultural background.
Yes you are though as seen by making religious connections to now rape it seems, though this is a punishment within Islam itself. You do realise that this is the issue here of rape?

I do not state one culture is superior to another

But you are making the view point one is worse than the other based on gobbledygook.

No I have stated that they are different.

There is little difference for the victim of the crime what the cultural origin of their attacker is but for those investigating the crime and those seeking to reduce the chances of it happening again cultural influences can make a huge difference.

Included in this statement is the need for those investigating and preventing crime to know in what if any areas are criminals likely to try and claim cultural origins as an excuse.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:16 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

My point is that even when you leave the othering out I assume that that particular story referred to white Caucasians. Being a Brit I assume British without regular worship habits but still white Caucasian.

To prove your point you need to find a story that leaves people not assuming anything about the people involved simply from the behaviours described.

But many people are from vast different ethnicities even though they are white and many have different religious or non religious beliefs of which this is always stated if muslim, Asian, but not when it is white etc.

Would that have anything to do with the stories being written for a predominantly white culture?

If you read/hear news in predominantly Asian cultures do their stories state white Christian and not include Asian or Muslim?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:24 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

But you are making the view point one is worse than the other based on gobbledygook.

No I have stated that they are different.

There is little difference for the victim of the crime what the cultural origin of their attacker is but for those investigating the crime and those seeking to reduce the chances of it happening again cultural influences can make a huge difference.

Included in this statement is the need for those investigating and preventing crime to know in what if any areas are criminals likely to try and claim cultural origins as an excuse.

Eh, so in reducing crime they need to see if there is a connection between a religion or not, so show me where in any Islamic culture rape is allowed?
So by your conclusion, being as there is a Christian culture in this country we must look to Christianity as the cause and cultural problem of child abuse, being as I can like yourself make daft associations on the groups, there is no age of consent and the deity orders the rape of virgins?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:26 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

But many people are from vast different ethnicities even though they are white and many have different religious or non religious beliefs of which this is always stated if muslim, Asian, but not when it is white etc.

Would that have anything to do with the stories being written for a predominantly white culture?

If you read/hear news in predominantly Asian cultures do their stories state white Christian and not include Asian or Muslim?

EH?

We are talking here about how a media can whip up and incite people to believe there is something wrong with people based on their culture or religion and in doing so they never do the same with anything not of that culture, then there is an imbalance behind the media reporting as they are trying to make connections when there could be none.
As seen is the ethnicity of the offender in the cases presented by Ben a factor, yet when it is a Muslim, it is always centred on the fact they are Muslim.

Can you not even see the difference?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:41 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

No I have stated that they are different.

There is little difference for the victim of the crime what the cultural origin of their attacker is but for those investigating the crime and those seeking to reduce the chances of it happening again cultural influences can make a huge difference.

Included in this statement is the need for those investigating and preventing crime to know in what if any areas are criminals likely to try and claim cultural origins as an excuse.

Eh, so in reducing crime they need to see if there is a connection between a religion or not, so show me where in any Islamic culture rape is allowed?
So by your conclusion, being as there is a Christian culture in this country we must look to Christianity as the cause and cultural problem of child abuse, being as I can like yourself make daft associations on the groups, there is no age of consent and the deity orders the rape of virgins?

No not see if there is a connection with a religion but accept the affect cultural background has on behaviour.

Rape is a crime in Islam (although for instance marital rape is not recognized in some cultures) so you cannot say that because it was rape it must be someone claiming to be a Muslim. However the way the rapist behaves, the language used etc will contain indications of cultural (not necessarily religious) background. For instance cultural upbringing regarding ritual cleanliness will impact victim selection.

As far as child abuse goes I will repeat as I have always done so that all races colours religions and cultures have people who abuse children. What differs between the cultures is the way of the abuse. There are cultures (cultures not religions note - please remember I can be precise in my language use and if I am saying culture I mean something different from religion) where girls are considered adult at first menses and so attacks on a young girl past her first period would not be seen as abuse. It may still be seen as a crime but would not be child abuse.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:53 pm

Here's the thing, you can't judge a culture very well when you're outside it. You can identify when people are actually being harmed, of course, but let's imagine you didn't know a thing about Christians or cultures with historical Christian roots.

Then someone told you, "In the Christian marriage ritual, women swear, before their God, ultimate honor and obedience to their husbands."

Sounds pretty backward, right? And we as members of Christian-rooted nations would say it doesn't work like that at all in real life. But it is technically true.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:56 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Eh, so in reducing crime they need to see if there is a connection between a religion or not, so show me where in any Islamic culture rape is allowed?
So by your conclusion, being as there is a Christian culture in this country we must look to Christianity as the cause and cultural problem of child abuse, being as I can like yourself make daft associations on the groups, there is no age of consent and the deity orders the rape of virgins?

No not see if there is a connection with a religion but accept the affect cultural background has on behaviour.

Rape is a crime in Islam (although for instance marital rape is not recognized in some cultures) so you cannot say that because it was rape it must be someone claiming to be a Muslim. However the way the rapist behaves, the language used etc will contain indications of cultural (not necessarily religious) background. For instance cultural upbringing regarding ritual cleanliness will impact victim selection.

As far as child abuse goes I will repeat as I have always done so that all races colours religions and cultures have people who abuse children. What differs between the cultures is the way of the abuse. There are cultures (cultures not religions note - please remember I can be precise in my language use and if I am saying culture I mean something different from religion) where girls are considered adult at first menses and so attacks on a young girl past her first period would not be seen as abuse. It may still be seen as a crime but would not be child abuse.

WTF so in any of the grooming cases was it marital rape then Sphinx?

Seriously your answers are getting dafter by the minute, so you place marital rape as a reason behind kiddy fiddlers now?

Is that your stance?

So again why you believe there is a cultural problem being 1 in 2000 have committed such crimes and who are White British what is the cultural problem in this country that is creating this and also incest also?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:06 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:Here's the thing, you can't judge a culture very well when you're outside it. You can identify when people are actually being harmed, of course, but let's imagine you didn't know a thing about Christians or cultures with historical Christian roots.

Then someone told you, "In the Christian marriage ritual, women swear, before their God, ultimate honor and obedience to their husbands."

Sounds pretty backward, right? And we as members of Christian-rooted nations would say it doesn't work like that at all in real life. But it is technically true.

Again I am not judging cultures I am observing that cultural background affects behaviour including criminal behaviour and therefore people working in the investigation and prevention of crime need to be aware of culture as a possible cause of trends.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:10 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

No not see if there is a connection with a religion but accept the affect cultural background has on behaviour.

Rape is a crime in Islam (although for instance marital rape is not recognized in some cultures) so you cannot say that because it was rape it must be someone claiming to be a Muslim. However the way the rapist behaves, the language used etc will contain indications of cultural (not necessarily religious) background. For instance cultural upbringing regarding ritual cleanliness will impact victim selection.

As far as child abuse goes I will repeat as I have always done so that all races colours religions and cultures have people who abuse children. What differs between the cultures is the way of the abuse. There are cultures (cultures not religions note - please remember I can be precise in my language use and if I am saying culture I mean something different from religion) where girls are considered adult at first menses and so attacks on a young girl past her first period would not be seen as abuse. It may still be seen as a crime but would not be child abuse.

WTF so in any of the grooming cases was it marital rape then Sphinx?

Seriously your answers are getting dafter by the minute, so you place marital rape as a reason behind kiddy fiddlers now?

Is that your stance?

So again why you believe there is a cultural problem being 1 in 2000 have committed such crimes and who are White British what is the cultural problem in this country that is creating this and also incest also?

Again didge I am not the one who bought up sexual crimes of any type and my remarks from the start have referred to any and all crimes except when I have dealt specifically with the single incidence in the opening post.

My stance is that cultural background affects behaviour including criminal behaviour and that therefore some forms of criminal behaviour will be more common in people from certain cultural backgrounds.

You are the one obsessed with kiddy fiddling and seem to want to force all my comments to apply only to kiddy fiddling - even though the crime in the opening post has nothing to do with kiddy fiddling either.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:10 pm

sphinx wrote:Again I am not judging cultures I am observing that cultural background affects behaviour including criminal behaviour and therefore people working in the investigation and prevention of crime need to be aware of culture as a possible cause of trends.

I would actually prefer the exact opposite. I would prefer that law enforcement focus only on the facts at hand rather than have them making some conjecture about what role a person's culture might have played in connection to suspicion of having committed a crime. What about the outwardly devout Muslim who doesn't actually believe in Islam at all but is simply going along to get along? We know there must be a significant number of such individuals in the world.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:33 pm

Why is there this horror at the idea our background influences our behaviour only when it comes to crime?

On another thread it is quite openly being stated that a small number of British people are lazy and workshy due to having grown up in a culture where that sort of behaviour is acceptable.

Yet the suggestion that the way a person commits a crime could have connection with their background brings shrieks of horror.

You would prefer law enforcement focused on facts? So would I including the nasty unpleasant facts that sound unfair.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:37 pm

sphinx wrote:Why is there this horror at the idea our background influences our behaviour only when it comes to crime?

On another thread it is quite openly being stated that a small number of British people are lazy and workshy due to having grown up in a culture where that sort of behaviour is acceptable.

Yet the suggestion that the way a person commits a crime could have connection with their background brings shrieks of horror.

You would prefer law enforcement focused on facts? So would I including the nasty unpleasant facts that sound unfair.

So, you're cool with the notion that white people who grow up wealthy should be considered as more likely to bend or break the law? There is research that suggests this. I would be horrified if any stereotype, regardless of whether it has any truth in a general, collective sense, was used against an individual accused of having committed a crime.

You do realize that we're all free to act in ways that defy our cultural upbringing, right?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:42 pm

And so it begins...

I start a thread about a serious crime, because I have seen it in the major UK newspaper - others hijack the thread and turn it in to some race, religion argument.

And in time those very same people will say I start threads to do with race and religion.

They may even say I have "racist tendencies".

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:49 pm

I don't see it as hijacking, Andy -- we're still talking about the issues raised by your article.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:52 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:I don't see it as hijacking, Andy -- we're still talking about the issues raised by your article.

Good.

So what are we to do with these Muslims?

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:57 pm

What would you do with anybody who committed this crime?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:05 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
sphinx wrote:Why is there this horror at the idea our background influences our behaviour only when it comes to crime?

On another thread it is quite openly being stated that a small number of British people are lazy and workshy due to having grown up in a culture where that sort of behaviour is acceptable.

Yet the suggestion that the way a person commits a crime could have connection with their background brings shrieks of horror.

You would prefer law enforcement focused on facts? So would I including the nasty unpleasant facts that sound unfair.

So, you're cool with the notion that white people who grow up wealthy should be considered as more likely to bend or break the law? There is research that suggests this. I would be horrified if any stereotype, regardless of whether it has any truth in a general, collective sense, was used against an individual accused of having committed a crime.

You do realize that we're all free to act in ways that defy our cultural upbringing, right?

I am very cool with the fact that white wealthy people will be more likely to break the law particularly in certain ways. I would question whether the research is or even could be accurate on a world wide basis simply because the cultures where bribery is seen as far less a crime and far more a way of life are nearly all non white. However I am not saying this is a case just observing a possible area for deeper study.

I am not suggesting using stereo types against individuals I am simply saying uncomfortable facts that may form some of the basis for stereotypes should not be ignored because they are unfair or fail to fit in with our desperate desire to see the world as equal.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:11 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:What would you do with anybody who committed this crime?

Are you asking that taking into account that the men guilty had already been found to be in the country illegally?

I ask because what I would do is affected by that.

If the person committing this crime was entitled to residency I would want to see him imprisoned for the maximum sentence for rape, the marriage annulled, and the women provided with full support and counselling to heal the damage done. I would further like to see the womens father prosecuted for aiding a criminal and immoral earnings (I am not fully familiar with the law in these areas)

If the person committing the crime was not entitled to residency I would like to see them removed to their proper country of residency and then imprisoned for the maximum sentence for rape etc etc.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:14 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:What would you do with anybody who committed this crime?

Well, this crime has been committed by foreigners who for some reason, want to stay in the UK, so how about we try and identify why they want to come here and prevent this from happening.

We only want desirable people coming here surely - those who contribute.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:40 pm

BigAndy9 wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:What would you do with anybody who committed this crime?

Well, this crime has been committed by foreigners who for some reason, want to stay in the UK, so how about we try and identify why they want to come here and prevent this from happening.

We only want desirable people coming here surely - those who contribute.

OK, how about this -- criminal background checks for immigrants. Seems stupid not to do it in the first place, really.

Then again, every criminal is a law-abiding citizen until he or she is not. Other than the immigration thing, which seems to be what we have to be obsessed with in this case, punish them the exact same way you'd punish a white kid born and raised in London, or it's not fair, right?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:47 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
BigAndy9 wrote:

Well, this crime has been committed by foreigners who for some reason, want to stay in the UK, so how about we try and identify why they want to come here and prevent this from happening.

We only want desirable people coming here surely - those who contribute.

OK, how about this -- criminal background checks for immigrants. Seems stupid not to do it in the first place, really.

Then again, every criminal is a law-abiding citizen until he or she is not. Other than the immigration thing, which seems to be what we have to be obsessed with in this case, punish them the exact same way you'd punish a white kid born and raised in London, or it's not fair, right?

lol how amusing Ben - criminal background checks for people entering the UK - you have a lot to learn about our border controls then. Yes, I agree that's a good idea.

Hmmm immigration and we should treat those from Pakistan who want to come here and use our NHS, schools and walk amongst us the same as we treat somebody born in London? No, certainly not.

If you are born here you have the right to be here. If you are born somewhere else we only want the best to come here.

Also, there are certain countries whom we must keep a good eye on - if you work in a bank in the UK you will automatically do a damn sight more checks on the Nigerian man who wants to open an account than the American man who wants to open one.

Same at the airports, same at the US airports and it's the same in many other walks of life.

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:48 pm

The British criminal is easier to catch, easier to deal with.

We also can't kick the British criminal out, ever.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:58 pm

BigAndy9 wrote:Hmmm immigration and we should treat those from Pakistan who want to come here and use our NHS, schools and walk amongst us the same as we treat somebody born in London? No, certainly not.

So you let them into your country but want them to be a second class of citizen? Doesn't sound very fair. Either let them in and treat them the same as native-borns or don't let them in.

Are there any people who immigrate to the U.K. from Pakistan and start businesses, create jobs, cure sick people or do other good things, or are they uniformly rotten criminals?

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 6:31 pm

by Guest Thu Jan 02, 2014 6:43 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
BigAndy9 wrote:Hmmm immigration and we should treat those from Pakistan who want to come here and use our NHS, schools and walk amongst us the same as we treat somebody born in London? No, certainly not.

So you let them into your country but want them to be a second class of citizen? Doesn't sound very fair. Either let them in and treat them the same as native-borns or don't let them in.

Are there any people who immigrate to the U.K. from Pakistan and start businesses, create jobs, cure sick people or do other good things, or are they uniformly rotten criminals?

The problem is Ben we do not have the power to say whether they come in or not. The British people do not have a say in this mind you. The were given a vote nearly 40 years ago on joining what was presented as a trading bloc and since that time subsequent governments have signed more and more agreements with that bloc (without every offering the public another chance to express their feelings on these new agreements) and as our government insists on biding by those agreements we do not have control over our borders and cannot refuse to let them in

Oh and before someone leaps on me saying that only applies to the EU bloc the reality is that people from all over the world can and do get into the UK by getting into other EU countries first. Technically if they are seeking asylum they are supposed to seek it in the first safe country they land in but what actually happens is they make their way to the UK and then apply for asylum. When the UK courts deny them asylum on various legal grounds they use the human rights laws of the EU to gain right to residence. This means that someone foreign born with a long criminal record can come here break the law and we cannot deport him.

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:46 am

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

WTF so in any of the grooming cases was it marital rape then Sphinx?

Seriously your answers are getting dafter by the minute, so you place marital rape as a reason behind kiddy fiddlers now?

Is that your stance?

So again why you believe there is a cultural problem being 1 in 2000 have committed such crimes and who are White British what is the cultural problem in this country that is creating this and also incest also?

Again didge I am not the one who bought up sexual crimes of any type and my remarks from the start have referred to any and all crimes except when I have dealt specifically with the single incidence in the opening post.

My stance is that cultural background affects behaviour including criminal behaviour and that therefore some forms of criminal behaviour will be more common in people from certain cultural backgrounds.

You are the one obsessed with kiddy fiddling and seem to want to force all my comments to apply only to kiddy fiddling - even though the crime in the opening post has nothing to do with kiddy fiddling either.

No I am afraid you are coming out with the most absurd nonsense I have ever heard. Basically you cannot supply me with a reason why people in this country commit child sex crimes and yet seem to be an expert on cultures who have never even witnessed yourself. In other words you are trying to make connections, when the fact is within any society there are sick perverse individuals that prey on the vulnerable.

So in other words what you are also doing is applying your own view to something which has nmot been shown that could have any connection. For example in many societies rape is a crime, but you then come back with marital rape being allowed even though it was only recently made against the law in this country, but try to state this as a reason why some men from Asia would prey on vulnerable people. In other words you cannot say what makes people commit such crimes from this nation but are positive a cultural reason is behind people from other ethnic groups.

Can you not see how daft that is?

All your points also next point to guilt by association, that some people who come here commit crimes, thus we should not allow anyone into this country, daft again, what is needed is better prevention and to see if any have criminal backgrounds, as what you are saying is lets not allow anyone to let alone move to another nation but also have a holiday.

Again absurd and playing on fear and scaremongering bull

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:57 am

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

Again didge I am not the one who bought up sexual crimes of any type and my remarks from the start have referred to any and all crimes except when I have dealt specifically with the single incidence in the opening post.

My stance is that cultural background affects behaviour including criminal behaviour and that therefore some forms of criminal behaviour will be more common in people from certain cultural backgrounds.

You are the one obsessed with kiddy fiddling and seem to want to force all my comments to apply only to kiddy fiddling - even though the crime in the opening post has nothing to do with kiddy fiddling either.

No I am afraid you are coming out with the most absurd nonsense I have ever heard. Basically you cannot supply me with a reason why people in this country commit child sex crimes and yet seem to be an expert on cultures who have never even witnessed yourself. In other words you are trying to make connections, when the fact is within any society there are sick perverse individuals that prey on the vulnerable.

So in other words what you are also doing is applying your own view to something which has nmot been shown that could have any connection. For example in many societies rape is a crime, but you then come back with marital rape being allowed even though it was only recently made against the law in this country, but try to state this as a reason why some men from Asia would prey on vulnerable people. In other words you cannot say what makes people commit such crimes from this nation but are positive a cultural reason is behind people from other ethnic groups.

Can you not see how daft that is?

All your points also next point to guilt by association, that some people who come here commit crimes, thus we should not allow anyone into this country, daft again, what is needed is better prevention and to see if any have criminal backgrounds, as what you are saying is lets not allow anyone to let alone move to another nation but also have a holiday.

Again absurd and playing on fear and scaremongering bull

Will you forget the sex crimes for 5 minutes and go back and read what I have actually put not what you think I have put.

People from all cultures commit crimes - including white British people.
People from all cultures commit all different types of crimes - including white British people

The methodology with which they commit the crimes will be influenced by their cultural background the same way non criminal behaviour is affected by cultural background.

Being aware of these cultural affects can in come cases be a useful investigative and/or preventative tool - not the only tool and not massively useful in all crimes but a tool of varying use in some crimes all the same.

This will apply just as much to white British people as middle eastern people or Asian people or afro Caribbean people. Choice of victim, any ritualization, language used etc can all be indicative of cultural background.

This applies the world over - not just to this country.

I am not and have not said any one culture is better or worse than any other culture. I have not said one culture is any more likely to be criminal than any other. I have simply said that the way some crimes are committed is indicative of particular cultural back grounds. This means that for some crimes I would expect the offender to be White British for others I would expect Asian far east, for others Middle eastern, etc etc.

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:18 am

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

No I am afraid you are coming out with the most absurd nonsense I have ever heard. Basically you cannot supply me with a reason why people in this country commit child sex crimes and yet seem to be an expert on cultures who have never even witnessed yourself. In other words you are trying to make connections, when the fact is within any society there are sick perverse individuals that prey on the vulnerable.

So in other words what you are also doing is applying your own view to something which has nmot been shown that could have any connection. For example in many societies rape is a crime, but you then come back with marital rape being allowed even though it was only recently made against the law in this country, but try to state this as a reason why some men from Asia would prey on vulnerable people. In other words you cannot say what makes people commit such crimes from this nation but are positive a cultural reason is behind people from other ethnic groups.

Can you not see how daft that is?

All your points also next point to guilt by association, that some people who come here commit crimes, thus we should not allow anyone into this country, daft again, what is needed is better prevention and to see if any have criminal backgrounds, as what you are saying is lets not allow anyone to let alone move to another nation but also have a holiday.

Again absurd and playing on fear and scaremongering bull

Will you forget the sex crimes for 5 minutes and go back and read what I have actually put not what you think I have put.
I Have and it was complete bull

People from all cultures commit crimes - including white British people.
People from all cultures commit all different types of crimes - including white British people
bravo

The methodology with which they commit the crimes will be influenced by their cultural background the same way non criminal behaviour is affected by cultural background.
Really, this coming from the fact you have no idea in regards to our cultures and are playing off the back of the religion itself to forming a view that again has little validity of which if it did we would see an endemic problem within people from this culture

Being aware of these cultural affects can in come cases be a useful investigative and/or preventative tool - not the only tool and not massively useful in all crimes but a tool of varying use in some crimes all the same.
Can they? I think most physiologists look at what drives people to perversions which has little to do with religion but how they can hide behind religion being as they are not religious people themselves drinking and raping etc

This will apply just as much to white British people as middle eastern people or Asian people or afro Caribbean people. Choice of victim, any ritualization, language used etc can all be indicative of cultural background.
Which it seems you have not provided reasons for a culture you know well, ie our own, but seem to be an expert now on a culture you have never seen yourself, do you not see how absurd that is?

This applies the world over - not just to this country.
Yet you cannot apply your own logic to reasons why with our culture

I am not and have not said any one culture is better or worse than any other culture. I have not said one culture is any more likely to be criminal than any other. I have simply said that the way some crimes are committed is indicative of particular cultural back grounds. This means that for some crimes I would expect the offender to be White British for others I would expect Asian far east, for others Middle eastern, etc etc.
yes but you are coming out with extreme bull and that is putting this politely when as seen you cannot even comprehend anything in regards to our own culture on this issue.

So to sum up, you have tried to make something fit which may have no connection to any of the cases

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:38 am

You are still not listening.

I have not said the culture causes the crime or drives the perversion I have said it affects the way the criminal behaves.

You might want to look at bit closer at the work of those who work is known as profiling in the popular press. They are highly trained and educated and will make calls on the background of the person who committed a crime before there is even a suspect based upon the behaviour surrounding the crime.

It works the other way as well - the cultural background of the victims is not mentioned in the OP but I would bet that they were of Pakistani Muslim extraction - 3rd or 4th generation or even longer but with Pakistani Muslim ancestors.

So I repeat the committing of crime has nothing to do with any culture race religion or nationality.
The behaviour surrounding the crime will be affected by the above. The way people do their jobs and spend their leisure time is influenced by their cultural background - so why would criminal behaviour not be influenced?

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:44 am

sphinx wrote:You are still not listening.
That is because people read what is written and do not hear and of course what you are posting is nothing more than utter garbage.

I have not said the culture causes the crime or drives the perversion I have said it affects the way the criminal behaves.
Really and what have you proven to show this is the case within all cultures, as surely if this pattern was occurring it would fit within many cultures of which you have failed to show

You might want to look at bit closer at the work of those who work is known as profiling in the popular press. They are highly trained and educated and will make calls on the background of the person who committed a crime before there is even a suspect based upon the behaviour surrounding the crime.
://?roflmao?/: who also have an untold bias in reporting to make the shoe fit to a story also, sorry that was woeful sphinx

It works the other way as well - the cultural background of the victims is not mentioned in the OP but I would bet that they were of Pakistani Muslim extraction - 3rd or 4th generation or even longer but with Pakistani Muslim ancestors.
There are plenty of Asian victims in child abuse, I suggest you look at the Ceops report which goes onto great detail showing the victims are not selected based on ethnicity but vulnerability. All you are doing again is providing no evidence but clearly making speculative claims based on nothing more than a view you have, that again is balderdash

So I repeat the committing of crime has nothing to do with any culture race religion or nationality.
The behaviour surrounding the crime will be affected by the above. The way people do their jobs and spend their leisure time is influenced by their cultural background - so why would criminal behaviour not be influenced?
Does it? I see no evidence that it does, especially when you provide no evidence to suggest that it does

Sorry you have some interesting ideas sphinx, but the above was utter garbage

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:58 am

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

by Guest Fri Jan 03, 2014 10:02 am

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.

by Sponsored content