in the Rochdale case, the young women are largely from in care or other seriously disadvantaged backgrounds. Low self esteem and a culture of loose sexual morality makes them easy pickings.

All accurate analysis but let's not ignore the uncomfortable part; All of the perpetrator were of asian ethnicity and all of the victims were white. I don't know what conclusion to take from that but we shouldn't ignore it. Religion may play a part but that is also too simplistic; by any western moral or value, much of Muhammeds activities are completely incompatible. But one read of the King James bible will turn up some pretty objectionable stuff too, I assure you.

What I'm not prepared to do is fall inot the same trap as Tony G and tar the entire Muslim population of the UK with the brush of a tiny majority of their number.

Unfortunately for the millions of reasonable muslims, their religions nutcase intake is a bigger minority than most. But why? I mention the King James bible - which has no problem with slavery - yet Christians have moved on from the literal text. Catholocism, Judiasm and Christianity all have examples of horrific early writings which although reflected the finest wisdom of their time, their followers have moved on to a modern standard.

Most 'muslim countries' haven't reached this stage yet and it's no co-incidence most such countries lack democracy. They are therefore an ideal vehicle for the sort of religious extremism which inhabited much of our own somewhat barbaric distant history. Tony G mentioned Hindu's not being involved as heavily in certain crimes which I feel must be related to India being a functioning democracy with common law where as Saudi Arabia for instance is not.

Remember the ridiculous fuss over that YouTube video? Was I the only one thinking they should all have heads bashed together and told to grow up? I was talking to a muslim - reasonable chap - and asked him why people are protesting in Birmingham against an internet video and he explained how it's deeply offensive to his religion. I then asked if he'd seen the video - because I had - and he said he hadn't, but supported action against it.

I put it to you less than 5% of the people we saw setting fire to stuff in protest had actually seen that dreadfully made load of indecipherable cobblers. They merely heard someone was being mean about them and took to the streets with pitchforks. Some people do need to grow up.

Bromptonaut, You sound like an apologist for these criminal exploiters of children ,you describe the victims as having low self esteem and a loose sexual morality . .Theyre children who are entitled to be protected from these perverts . If you troubled to read my post you will see that I don't tar the whole of the Muslim population .What I do say is that the perpetrators are largely Muslim . The victims are predominantly white and British . To often the Muslim communities are aware of the behaviour of some of thier community but don't report it .By not reporting it they allow it to continue . ( It doesn't mean that all members of that community are involved ,but they do tolerate drugs ,paedophila etc in there own community . )

No sort of apologist at all. Those girls deserved to be supported and protected. They were not and the liability for that rests squarely with Social Sercvices who cast them adrift at an early age.

The perpetrators were men and the victims were women. That the men were from a particular (quite small) part of Asia and that they profess to adherrence to Islam is interesting but ultimately of peripheral relevance. A failure to turn in your own criminals is common in many white areas too - it's 'shameful' to be a grass. And incidentally abusing women is widesppread in all communities. It's only the particular MO in these grooming cases that makes them exceptional.

And since yo go out of your way to differntiate Muslims from Sikhs or Hindu I take the 'not tarring' bit with a large pinch of salt.

Martin Narey's point was that street traficking or 'grooming' of teenage women in some parts of England was caried out by men of Pakistani/Afghan origin. The fact that people from that part of the world profess to follow Islam is incidental.

Well no it's not incidental actually. Pakistan and Afghanistan are muslim-majority countries so there's a very high chance somebody from those countries will be Islamic. We should be asking whether such attitudes are more prevalent in muslim-majority countries compared to countries dominated by other religions and secularism. If it's rife in muslim countries yet not anywhere else, then why?