Posted on 08/03/2011 6:33:17 AM PDT by SanFranDan
agreed.
...less than 2% commit more than 25% of underage pimping, rapes, etc.
sadly, the Hindus and Sikhs, get lumped in, even when they commit much less crime than average.
kind of like in the USA calling both hispanics and orientals, “minorities”, when there are huge differences.
and the Muslim sex crimes, are the same all over the world.
in Oslo, the Police themselves report, that last year, 100% of the violent rapes were by Muslim immigrants. which make up less than 4% of the population.
Islam is the root of all of this. not genetics.
Peaceful Hindus and violent muslims, with the same genes.
in Thailand, peaceful buddhist Thais, have their heads cut off, by violent Thai muslims.
I realize it’s pathetic PC trash.
I can’t help but call them on the stupidity of it.
Exactly, which is why I have gone back to using “Oriental” to describe the “Yellow” peoples-—usually Buddhist-—you described.
“Oriental” may not be PC but at least it doesn’t mix them up with damnable muzzies.
Technically, Pakistan, et.al. are in Asia. So is all of Russia.
It’s not geographically incorrect!
Interestingly, I was just thinking of this. I was driving and saw a delivery truck with “Purveyors of Fine Oriental Foods” on the side. It made me wonder why we don’t still call Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, etc...Oriental any more. There are quite a few diverse countries located in Asia, after all!
I think “Oriental” became a non-PC term at some point.
I have no idea why, because those people groups are generally seen in a positive light.
It’s usually the people groups who have high negative social factors that want to keep changing what they are called.
no wonder Indians in the UK want the term “Asian” to stop being used and call these folks wht they really are: Pakis or Moslems....
No, "Asian" means someone from South Asia, i.e. the Indian sub-continent and Iran.
An ME not from Persia is a Turk or Arab.
The Pakis in the UK are from the days when the UK imported them to work in the textile mills in the 60s. They are not well educated, in contrast to the Indian Hindus, Sikhs and Christians.
Shut up, c***. Your time to sob was before you committed this henuous setup.
Not really.
The majority of the Russian population is in European Russia west of the URals
Also, sometimes Armenians and Georgians are called Europeans.
I consider it more of a term of culture rather than geography -- Europeans are shaped by Judeo-Christianity and Graeco-Romanism and that includes Georgia and Armenia to an extent, and Turkey at a pinch, but Albania and Bosnia, both majority Moslem ARE also European by that definition
Asia has 3-4 distinct regions: the Indian sub-continent is technically, culturally and religiously (based on Hinduism) a separate continent from China and East-Asia.
the ME is shaped by Islam now, and Persia is on the border between South Asia and the ME and S-E Asia is on the border between South and East Asia while Central Asia is at the confluence of South, ME and East Asia -- the peoples there are culturally Irani (an Indo-European culture) with a Turkic language and strong pull from Russia)
A good number of these people are of Nordic ancestry. The "Rus" were Scandinavian Varangian invaders and colonizers.
The Ukrainians are more "pure Slav" as a Białorus and Poles and Slovaks
The Czechs, in my non-scientific opinion are heavily germanic.
Britain has never friend of the Hindus or Jews. IMO the Brits like to keep up the confusion and ambiguity provided by the term “Asian†so the whole community from the sub-continent earn a bad name for the actions of a the Pakistani community. If these criminals had been Indians or Hindus instead, I don’t think British press would have any qualms calling them such.
In Great Britain they call middle easterners Asian.
you are wrong. The few incidents where Indian Hindus/Sikhs/Christians have been involved (mostly white-collar crimes), they are referred to as "Asian". I've lived in the UK for years so I talk about that from experience
It may depend on whether or not there is a war on. I don't think any culture is devoid of aberrant behaviour.
There aren’t that many opportunities provided by Hindus and Sikhs for you speak from experiences. If Hindus and Sikhs start committing crimes in the numbers that we see the Muslims doing then that distinction will very quickly become evident.
That is the reason why Indian Hindus, Christians, Sikhs do not want to be labelled "Asian" and clubbed with Moslems -- would you want to be clubbed with these in a pc term? I doubt it
They want to be called "Indians" -- the few numbers of Indian-origin criminals are, as you said the exception,
Doesn’t matter what incidents and how many Hindus and Sikhs were involved. Its irrelevant to the argument.
The reason why the Hindus and Sikhs ARE bring clubbed with Muslims IS because Britain does not want to offend Muslims by singling them out as such. The “Asian” term keeps up that ambiguity and conceals the “Muslim” association. Hindus and Sikhs can protest as much as they want, their sentiments are worth nothing in a Britain that panders only to Muslim sentiments.
Just imagine if the roles had been reversed. If the terrorists and criminals had been Hindus, the Muslims had been the nice ones, and the Muslims had taken offense to being clubbed as “Asians” alongside Hindus.... you would see Britain bending over backwards to appease Muslim sentiments. Something they would never do for the Hindus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.