Another Grooming Scandal - Aylesbury

[Halibut 12]

One of the six men was not of Moslem origin.

The other 5 are.

In the interest of balance I am posting this here.

 

I don't think you're really interested in balance Ron.

[mafya 243]

One of the six men was not of Moslem origin.

The other 5 are.

In the interest of balance I am posting this here.

 

Heres a list of sex offenders in Buckinghamshire, most are non Muslims= http://theukdatabase.com/category/buckinghamshire/

Why focus on one case? Let's focus on Bukinghamshie county to get a broader picture eh.

Edited September 8, 2015 by mafya

[natjack 10]

How do you know they were not difficult and vulnerable before being taken into care?

You don't know so don't post like you know for a fact it was the grooming that made them vulnerable and difficult.

You don't think that being raped by scores of men, drugged, drunk, threatened, tortured and beaten would make the average 12 yr old girl difficult and vulnerable, then? But if you don't, then read the Jay Report, the Risky Business report, claims by parents, teachers and other unbiased parties, the various articles and pleas for help over the past 20 years (or more) that this has been going on. Parents even put their girls into care, in an attempt to save them from those men, and they still weren't left alone. Read and learn, mafya. Stop making excuses for these evil people.

 

And even if they were, difficult and vulnerable, how is that a reason for pimps and nonces to target them and take advantage of their troubles, and the rest of the local community, police and social services, to overlook it, like it's somehow the kids fault?

 

Sometimes you post things that I can agree with and sometimes things that disgust me as a fellow man. This post is one of them things.

 

ETA: Sorry got a bit carried away and reverted to the Rotherham CSE, rather than the Aylesbury one which is the topic here. Yes, in Aylesbury it seems Child A was extremely vulnerable, which makes the abuse of her even worse.

Edited September 8, 2015 by natjack

[Plain Talker 11]

Well can you tell us what the common denominator is between the latest bunch of abusers and those in Rotherham is?

 

Yes. They are all, to a man (or woman) simply perverts.

( remembering that 68% of the abusers in Rotherham werent Muslims)

[mafya 243]

You don't think that being raped by scores of men, drugged, drunk, threatened, tortured and beaten would make the average 12 yr old girl difficult and vulnerable, then? But if you don't, then read the Jay Report, the Risky Business report, claims by parents, teachers and other unbiased parties, the various articles and pleas for help over the past 20 years (or more) that this has been going on. Parents even put their girls into care, in an attempt to save them from those men, and they still weren't left alone. Read and learn, mafya. Stop making excuses for these evil people.

 

And even if they were, difficult and vulnerable, how is that a reason for pimps and nonces to target them and take advantage of their troubles, and the rest of the local community, police and social services, to overlook it, like it's somehow the kids fault?

 

Sometimes you post things that I can agree with and sometimes things that disgust me as a fellow man. This post is one of them things.

 

ETA: Sorry got a bit carried away and reverted to the Rotherham CSE, rather than the Aylesbury one which is the topic here. Yes, in Aylesbury it seems Child A was extremely vulnerable, which makes the abuse of her even worse.

 

Nobody said it was the children's fault so don't make out like that's what I'm saying.

These children were vulnerable in the first place and that's why they were targeted by these sex offenders, some were difficult and ended up in care homes.

[WiseOwl182 10]

Yes. They are all, to a man (or woman) simply perverts.

( remembering that 68% of the abusers in Rotherham werent Muslims)

 

Even if true, that means 32% were Muslims. 4% of the Rotherham population is Muslim. Simple maths means that they're therefore 8 times more likely than other sections of society to be involved in grooming.

 

Why do you think they're over represented for this type of crime in Rotherham?

 

And Aylesbury?

 

And Bristol?

 

And Oxford?

 

And Telford?

 

And Rochdale?

 

And Derby?

 

And Peterborough?

 

Oh, and Banbury?

 

 

Genuine question, because I don't know. But when there is such a common theme in the type of crime, the perpetrators, and the victims, difficult questions need to be resolved in order to find solutions for the future.

Edited September 9, 2015 by WiseOwl182

[Halibut 12]

Even if true, that means 32% were Muslims.

 

No it doesn't.

[Mister M 1,609]

Even if true, that means 32% were Muslims. 4% of the Rotherham population is Muslim. Simple maths means that they're therefore 8 times more likely than other sections of society to be involved in grooming.

 

Why do you think they're over represented for this type of crime in Rotherham?

 

And Aylesbury?

 

And Bristol?

 

And Oxford?

 

And Telford?

 

And Rochdale?

 

And Derby?

 

And Peterborough?

 

Oh, and Banbury?

 

 

Genuine question, because I don't know. But when there is such a common theme in the type of crime, the perpetrators, and the victims, difficult questions need to be resolved in order to find solutions for the future.

 

Well - as said earlier, the former Children's Minister pointed out that 'street grooming' is but one mode of child sexual exploitation - other modes, such as 'online grooming' has an over representation of white perpetrators.

In the immediate aftermath of the publication of the Jay Report, some serious commentators put forward the view that those responsible for street grooming had something to do with those that staffed the night time economy, and those that knew them. For example: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/03/nazir-afzal-there-is-no-religious-basis-for-the-abuse-in-rotherham

Edited September 9, 2015 by Mister M

[WiseOwl182 10]

No it doesn't.

 

Well, if 68% weren't Muslims, that leaves 32% that were, unless you can explain otherwise, or, better still, actually address the point raised in my post, rather than just metaphorically putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "nahhhh nahhh nahhh".

[ricgem2002 11]

Yes. They are all, to a man (or woman) simply perverts.

( remembering that 68% of the abusers in Rotherham werent Muslims)

 

have you read the report in the star pt the dates it talks about only covers the years between oct 2012-oct2014 and yes it looks like these were commited by white males and truly shocking these perverts need locking up. I wonder what the percentage would show of the years between 1997-2013 and the ethnicity of the offenders

[redfox 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34204340

 

Just a group of seriously sick individuals/criminals - end of

[LeMaquis 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34204340

 

Just a group of seriously sick individuals/criminals - end of

 

Ah but these paedophiles are called John Denham, Matthew Stansfield, Adam Toms, Matthew Lisk, Robin Hollyson, Christopher Knight and David Harsley. You wouldn't expect WiseOwl182, RonJeremy and ricgem2002 to rush to denounce them as quickly as they would Muslim paedophiles.