Male student gang raped by muslim youth

[quote=tragicomedy;1286916]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

It's not bogus at all. Have you decided to look at any of the recent statistics on child sex grooming in England before declaring them bogus?

I surely have. When you look at the cases of children being trafficked by groups of men, Muslims are over represented by a large margin. But you just decided to discount them as bogus. Reactionary p.c. type that you are.

What is your point about Catamites? Seeing that you said everything I gave you before is not relevant and that I'm smearing Muslims. Go ahead and tell me why that is relevant? Where are your links by the way....I can't wait to see news that British soldiers are actually okay with them raping little boys.

Are you confusing that with a misguided portion of a recent field manual?

No of course not. Go ahead Stavros, my dear p.c. zealot. Let's see what you've got.

---

Once again, you select the stats that suit your argument, whereas I am suggesting that the issue at its core is about the failure of men to build relationships with women, and the dynamcs of power within gang cultures -if you step back from your obsession with grooming to relocate these dynamics within the perspective of gang culture, you would appreciate how it is relations between men that drive their behaviour and that 'being a man' is part of that discourse. This dynamic works for gangs of Asian men who groom young women as it does for urban gangs -black, white, Latino, mixed black and white and so on- within which behaviour is driven by a dynamic set by the controlling member(s) of the gang, and in which the availability of women -often girls aged below 16- is not only taken for granted, but where her 'rite of passage' into the gang may often be through gang rape in which the men/boys are obliged to rape the girl in order to prove that they have what it takes to be part of the gang. Cultures of belonging, symbolised by tattoos are just one part of this. It can be hard, if not impossible to break up the gang from the outside, even girls who suffer what you and I call abuse cannot see a way out of the gang/family to which they belong, and this makes it much harder for the police to prosecute even when they know what is going on.

Numerically, I would expect their to be more 'regular gangs' than gangs of Asian men grooming young women, but you need to ask why it is that in 2013 so many men show such disrespect to women -and for that matter, as it started this whole thread -why some men go berserk if they see another man in a frock, particularly if we are talking about someone who chooses to walk around in drag or is transexual, rather than a group of lads in frocks on a pub crawl. Why are such men so insecure in themselves that they feel their only 'natural' response is a violent one?

Just today there has been a report of the verbal abuse of women at the Glasgow University Union where a UK wide debating competition of many years pedigree was held, and at which students from Glasgow University heckled the women speaking (one from Cambridge, the other from Edinburgh) for no apparent reason except that they were women -Glasgow University Union (like the Unions in Cambridge and Oxford these are private clubs) didn't even admit women members until 1980 and after the debate women continued to receive verbal abuse from GU students.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...-heckling.html

Look at the continuum and follow it through from verbal disrespect for women to gang rape, it is not only pervasive in modern society, it happens without being driven by Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism.

On the specifics of 'Fun boys' the point is that what you condemn in the UK has to be tolerated in Afghanistan because the perpetrators of the crimes are the people we are training and supporting; -the rights of those young boys not to be abused may be universal human rights, but you are not going to have a government that is right now trying to trash human rights legislation in the UK deal with it in Helmand.

Have a look at Losing Small Wars: British Military Failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, by Frank Ledwidge (Yale University Press, 2011). Ledwidge served in an intelligence capacity in both Iraq and Afghanistan and discusses the mess the British got into when they arrived in Helmand province-
The problems of the reputation of the British, derived from their unfortunate history in the area, were compounded by the perception that they were supporting a chronically corrupt, totally incompetent and thoroughly discredited government. The police, who had replaced the warlords in preying on those who used the roads, were arguably the worst aspect of government. Most police posts had their 'fun boy' -child catamite- and the British estimated that over 80% of policemen were regular smokers of hash, with 67% using opium either additionally or instead. Rape by police officers on children was common. When I visited a very senior police officer in Lashkar Gar as part of my job, I asked, only half-seriously, whether it was true that the police were responsible for 90% of the crime in the province: "That is an appalling lie- a ridiculous idea. I think it is only about 85%" replied the Commander'. (p71).

Across the world, in different cultures, sexual behaviour that we consider shameful and damaging is taking place; I know you condemn it as I do; but it is not about being politically correct or reading The Guardian or the Daily Mail but thinking seriously about what it is that is going on here. I can't stop you from being obsessed with one aspect of the problem, you can at least admit it is not exclusive to young Muslim men -some, if not all are not exactly living what most Muslims or you and I would consider an 'Islamic' way of life; and ask some tougher questions about the relationship between power and sexuality.

Jeez... I think this guy is actually totally obsessed.
He has even spilled his warped obsession and delusions about the left into other threads now.

Calm down dear or you'll get spittle all down your nice shirt.

This can't be true. it is only Muslims who commit atrocities - not Europeans!


Has Holocaust history just been rewritten? Astonishing new research shows Nazi camp network targeting Jews was 'twice as big as previously thought'
Researchers have now catalogued more than 42,500 institutions used for persecution and death.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-8518407.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

Jeez... I think this guy is actually totally obsessed.
He has even spilled his warped obsession and delusions about the left into other threads now.

Calm down dear or you'll get spittle all down your nice shirt.

---

Did you notice that the person below you actually asked for some links about incidents in Pakistan?


See, I actually try to back up what I'm saying unlike you.

You're the guy who doesn't read anything, but declares an article "Neo-Nazi" anyway.


It took me bringing up a nasty and long running series of events in YOUR home of Britain to get you to acknowledge anything.


Partially because folks like you pressured the media to keep quiet about it several years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prospero

This can't be true. it is only Muslims who commit atrocities - not Europeans!


Has Holocaust history just been rewritten? Astonishing new research shows Nazi camp network targeting Jews was 'twice as big as previously thought'
Researchers have now catalogued more than 42,500 institutions used for persecution and death.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-8518407.html

---

I said many, many times that this is actually a world-wide phenomenon. The thing that makes this different is that gangrape as a supremacist exercise or as intimidation is mostly seen in warzones. Not in developed countries.

It's also odd in that it's a vulnerable, visible minority doing it to members of the host population.


Lastly, it stand out in that it has been sanctioned in Islam by some jurists and
as a historical phenomenon by the Prophet's companions. This reinforces it as legitimate in the eyes of enough conservative Muslims that the phenomenon has been carried out of the Middle East and Pakistan and has appeared in Australia, Britain and some mainland European countries.


Now, it's strange that they are perpetrating this against the majority population, but not as strange as your fellow multiculturalists acting as enablers by making people in authority feel they needed to be quiet about it for several years.

[quote=Stavros;1286980]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tragicomedy

Once again, you select the stats that suit your argument, whereas I am suggesting that the issue at its core is about the failure of men to build relationships with women, and the dynamcs of power within gang cultures -if you step back from your obsession with grooming to relocate these dynamics within the perspective of gang culture, you would appreciate how it is relations between men that drive their behaviour and that 'being a man' is part of that discourse. This dynamic works for gangs of Asian men who groom young women as it does for urban gangs -black, white, Latino, mixed black and white and so on- within which behaviour is driven by a dynamic set by the controlling member(s) of the gang, and in which the availability of women -often girls aged below 16- is not only taken for granted, but where her 'rite of passage' into the gang may often be through gang rape in which the men/boys are obliged to rape the girl in order to prove that they have what it takes to be part of the gang. Cultures of belonging, symbolised by tattoos are just one part of this. It can be hard, if not impossible to break up the gang from the outside, even girls who suffer what you and I call abuse cannot see a way out of the gang/family to which they belong, and this makes it much harder for the police to prosecute even when they know what is going on.

Numerically, I would expect their to be more 'regular gangs' than gangs of Asian men grooming young women, but you need to ask why it is that in 2013 so many men show such disrespect to women -and for that matter, as it started this whole thread -why some men go berserk if they see another man in a frock, particularly if we are talking about someone who chooses to walk around in drag or is transexual, rather than a group of lads in frocks on a pub crawl. Why are such men so insecure in themselves that they feel their only 'natural' response is a violent one?

Just today there has been a report of the verbal abuse of women at the Glasgow University Union where a UK wide debating competition of many years pedigree was held, and at which students from Glasgow University heckled the women speaking (one from Cambridge, the other from Edinburgh) for no apparent reason except that they were women -Glasgow University Union (like the Unions in Cambridge and Oxford these are private clubs) didn't even admit women members until 1980 and after the debate women continued to receive verbal abuse from GU students.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...-heckling.html

Look at the continuum and follow it through from verbal disrespect for women to gang rape, it is not only pervasive in modern society, it happens without being driven by Islam, or Christianity, or Judaism.

On the specifics of 'Fun boys' the point is that what you condemn in the UK has to be tolerated in Afghanistan because the perpetrators of the crimes are the people we are training and supporting; -the rights of those young boys not to be abused may be universal human rights, but you are not going to have a government that is right now trying to trash human rights legislation in the UK deal with it in Helmand.

Have a look at Losing Small Wars: British Military Failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, by Frank Ledwidge (Yale University Press, 2011). Ledwidge served in an intelligence capacity in both Iraq and Afghanistan and discusses the mess the British got into when they arrived in Helmand province-
The problems of the reputation of the British, derived from their unfortunate history in the area, were compounded by the perception that they were supporting a chronically corrupt, totally incompetent and thoroughly discredited government. The police, who had replaced the warlords in preying on those who used the roads, were arguably the worst aspect of government. Most police posts had their 'fun boy' -child catamite- and the British estimated that over 80% of policemen were regular smokers of hash, with 67% using opium either additionally or instead. Rape by police officers on children was common. When I visited a very senior police officer in Lashkar Gar as part of my job, I asked, only half-seriously, whether it was true that the police were responsible for 90% of the crime in the province: "That is an appalling lie- a ridiculous idea. I think it is only about 85%" replied the Commander'. (p71).

Across the world, in different cultures, sexual behaviour that we consider shameful and damaging is taking place; I know you condemn it as I do; but it is not about being politically correct or reading The Guardian or the Daily Mail but thinking seriously about what it is that is going on here. I can't stop you from being obsessed with one aspect of the problem, you can at least admit it is not exclusive to young Muslim men -some, if not all are not exactly living what most Muslims or you and I would consider an 'Islamic' way of life; and ask some tougher questions about the relationship between power and sexuality.

---

I see that we can agree on the motivations. I will take a radical step and say that religion is a social construct by humans to organize their societies. If that's the case, it's entirely possible that Islam organized (and it's own history bares this out) as a supremacist ideology and this is born out by the mistreatment of non-Muslims. Both in Europe and the Middle East.


How does this differ from Christianity or Judaism? Actually both have mutated into rationalizing subjugation, humiliation and annihilation of competing groups. Though neither seem to legitimize it in the modern era.


I think that this phenomenon is simply an extension of Muslim supremacist culture and activity. We have seen in studies of warzones that gangrape of "lesser" people is a group bonding exercise that militias or tribes engage in.

The men assert their dominance (sometimes with the approval of their female counterparts) over the lesser or vanquished foe and rape them.

But if religion is a social construct, that means Islam can change.


Some multiculturalists don't understand that by trying to deflect direct discussion or criticism of Islam, they are slowing the arrival of that time period when Muslims confront and denounce Muslim supremacism.

Tragicomedy I have no idea what you are talking about. I note you have moved away from the core issues of grooming your kept banging on about, to make general remarks about religion and violence, a subject with a depressingly rich history and beyond the scope of this thread.

Some poisonous little gems from the odious tragicomedy..." Partially because folks like you pressured the media to keep quiet about it several years ago."

"not as strange as your fellow multiculturalists acting as enablers by making people in authority feel they needed to be quiet about it for several years."

Is this idiotic and unfounded assertion, worthy of comment? I don't think so. We're talking about civilised values versus the sort of racist rabblerousing of your posts...

I do read - widely and deeply. Almost certainly more than you do on these topics... otherwise you would not make your ludicrous assertions and generalisations about Islam.

And finally this "But if religion is a social construct, that means Islam can change."

The word here is IF.... which from a Western post-Christian viewpoint might be an argument. But it is debatable if it actually is a social construct. Ask a Rabbi, a Bishop, an Imam, a southern Baptist minister, the Pope, a Hindu Sadhu or any other representative of a faith community and they will argue otherwise - conceding that, perhaps, the community that flows from the revelations of their faith, is a culture and a society... but not that faith is a social construct.

Your suggestion that all those bad Muslims, globally, be sat down and schooled in the error of their ways by us enlightened western folk, is absurd and incredibly arrogant. And if they don't follow your re-eduation programme? Send them out to work in the fields with cadres to keep them in line until they accept their re-education? Pol Pot style?

I know certain monoculturalists here like to throw around the epithet “multiculturalist” as if it were an insult. It’s not. They also assume that it actually applies to everyone who opposes their monochromatic point of view. It doesn’t. When asked, I am more inclined to number myself among those who would encourage immigrants to join the melting pot, add their own unique insights, stir in their beliefs and customs, and imbibe the brew. The melting pot idea is not exactly a favorite among American “multiculturalists.” But how is the melting pot possible when the majority monoculturalists in our society immediately flee to the suburbs as soon as their neighborhood acquires a hint of foreign flavor? How is the melting pot to sustain itself if the majority monoculturalist is bent on demonizing every spice foreign to his palate, accusing every color clashing with his palette and asserting his own moral superiority at every turn. When it comes to immigration I am not a multiculturalist. I would prefer that people not live in isolated ghettos and conclaves. But I am not a monoculturalist either. We should 'schooch' to the side and make a space for others to join us. Share our cultural values and beliefs. It’s natural. It will eventually happen. It has almost always happened in the past when two cultures met. But the majority monoculturalists do not make it easy when they drag their smug version moral supremacy into every conversation and every corner of public life. But in the end, all monocultures (majority or minority) dissolve together into the world around them.

I think you can rest easy Trish. I don't think we'll e heating from tragicomedy in a while. He was banned after he called the site owner "scum" in a different thread.