So who's correct?

gunner said:

So can provide actual examples? I mean, actual gangs who act in the very same way? It should be evidenced, yes?

Click to expand...

FFS, 'the very same way'...again??? You know that you are arguing against the very academic practice that you have been claiming to uphold, don't you? Did you even read the wiki page that you quoted to me?

Why don't you start with Adam Johnson, like Pete?

Click to expand...

Why on Earth would I? Why don't you try the Bristol and the Norfolk gangs? Grooming? Check. Intimidation? Check. Targeting the vulnerable? Check.

William Rea said:

He doesn't want you to make a reasonable comparison, he wants you to attain an unreasonable level of comparison so that he can maintain an unreasonable position. The game is obvious.

Click to expand...

So true. His inability or unwillingness to confront my questions tells us that he is not debating in good faith or with intellectual honesty.

Andalublue said:

So true. His inability or unwillingness to confront my questions tells us that he is not debating in good faith or with intellectual honesty.

Click to expand...

I don't have to answer your questions, prior to your attempt at offering anything that may resemble evidence; or you've attempted to disprove the simple premise. I could list all the Muslim gangs who behaved in the very same way, as all the other Muslim gangs. Can you offer anything?

William Rea said:

He doesn't want you to make a reasonable comparison, he wants you to attain an unreasonable level of comparison so that he can maintain an unreasonable position. The game is obvious.

Click to expand...

You have evidence for reasonable examples Will? That would be a start.

gunner said:

I don't have to answer your questions,

Click to expand...

Of course you don't. No one's forcing anyone to do anything, but it's quite telling to anyone that you refuse to do so.

I could list all the Muslim gangs who behaved in the very same way, as all the other Muslim gangs. Can you offer anything?

Click to expand...

I already have done. Numerous times. In your refusal to answer my questions however you demonstrate that your motivation in drawing comparisons are completely rhetorical. You are only interested in comparisons that highlight the evil of Muslims and exonerate the comparable actions of non-Muslims. That's the extent of your dishonesty on this matter.

gunner said:

I don't have to answer your questions, prior to your attempt at offering anything that may resemble evidence; or you've attempted to disprove the simple premise. I could list all the Muslim gangs who behaved in the very same way, as all the other Muslim gangs. Can you offer anything?

Click to expand...

gunner said:

You have evidence for reasonable examples Will? That would be a start.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, one nevertheless gets the impression that you're not really following the exchange.

Or not grasping its logical conclusions as posted so far.

Regardless of what Trump said or didn't say... my guess is that there is indeed a problem due to a false sense of solidarity of law-abiding Muslims with their radical and violent fellows in their midst.

Happens all the time ... moderate Christians oftentimes defend fundamentalists, even though the latter give them all a bad name. During the times of leftist terrorism in West-Germany in the 70s, ca. 25% of the left-leaning Germans, albeit moderate themselves, had a false sense of solidarity with the terrorists.

That said, the way Trump said it, it's false, of course. Of course the authorities work with informants among the Muslim communities, and of course there are enough Muslims willing to give information for whatever reason.

What can you do when some bloated ass of a politicians believes that a people incapable of hating is incapable of self-defense, and a broad brush is always preferable to a smaller one?

Andalublue said:

And I agree with that too. I'm not sure why you'd imply I'd have a problem with it.

Click to expand...

Well it seems you agree with it in mind (apparently), but then have a problem with what it actually means 'in practice'. I mean, the 'specific' problems within the Pakistani community are demonstrated by their actions, in ALL cases highlighted: Rotherham, Bristol, Leeds, Birmingham, Derby, Oxford etc.

gunner said:

There you go. I accept (in isolation) it does not address the OP explicitly. But you can still address (refute) if you're so inclined. I mean, it's very simple to refute, no?

Remember, you FULLY agree with this:

"The Muslim community must accept and address the fact that Asian and Pakistani men are disproportionately involved in “localised, street grooming” of vulnerable girls, one of the UK’s most senior prosecutors has said[...]

"We do have an issue with people of our ethnicity – it’s not the issue but an issue – and we have to take care of it, we have to deal with it. The solution comes from within. It comes from you,” he told the group of councillors, community workers and campaigners."

Muslim community must address issue of street grooming, says Nazir Afzal | UK news | The Guardian

Click to expand...

Andalublue said:

Of course you don't. No one's forcing anyone to do anything, but it's quite telling to anyone that you refuse to do so.

I already have done. Numerous times. In your refusal to answer my questions however you demonstrate that your motivation in drawing comparisons are completely rhetorical. You are only interested in comparisons that highlight the evil of Muslims and exonerate the comparable actions of non-Muslims. That's the extent of your dishonesty on this matter.

Click to expand...

Then you continually babble on saying it is unfair to draw out 'specific' problems:doh

You can't have it both ways.

Chagos said:

With all due respect, one nevertheless gets the impression that you're not really following the exchange.

Or not grasping its logical conclusions as posted so far.

Click to expand...

Wrong on both counts.