Monday, February 13, 2012

47 Alleged Paedophiles, All Muslim Men, in Liverpool Crown Court

Strangely, these alleged paedophiles were shipped in from other parts of the country. The real reason for this is unclear but it is rather bizarre, considering some of the offences were committed as far afield as Rochdale, Burnley and Bolton.

This is the first time in British history that forty seven (47) alleged paedophiles have been in court together. This is THE biggest news story in Britain since the Yorkshire Ripper. And yet, for months the news and front pages have been dominated by a ridiculous argument about what names two overpaid footballers allegedly said to each other on a football pitch.

But, the REAL NEWS that innocent little children are being repeatedly raped by gangs of evil paedophiles, especially in the North of England, goes unreported.

So why hasn’t it been front page news for twelve months? Where are all the investigative journalists?

The answer to this conundrum is that ALL of the defendants (the accused) are Muslim males, and ALL of the victims were little white girls, under the age of sixteen, and very often as young as 10, 11, 12 and 13 years of age.

Do you think the media would have kept this quiet, if these 47 alleged paedophiles had been white? Of course not.

The media was there yesterday, and their mantra was “It wouldn’t be right to report on this yet, as nobody has been convicted. These 47 Muslims are only alleged to be guilty.” My answer to this was “Neither has John Terry been convicted of any charge, but you people have hung drawn and quartered him already and forced him out of his job. Why treat Muslims or other foreigners better than English people?”

If the establishment let this particular cat out of the bag, their lies about a so-called “multi-cultural dream” would be well and truly dead. The questions that need to be asked are;

Q: How would I feel if MY daughter had been molested, drugged and raped by paedophiles?

Q: How would I feel if MY grand-daughter had been repeatedly raped by gangs of men?

Q: How would I feel if my niece had been coerced, threatened and blackmailed into sex acts with adults?

Your child may have had her life destroyed by these evil perverts; she may be hooked on drugs; she may be so traumatised that she has gone from being a happy-go-lucky innocent child, into a cowed, drugged, defiled and terrified young woman. Worse still, your child may have gone to an early grave, as 14 year old Charlene Downes did. Your whole family may spend the rest of their lives traumatised by these shocking experiences. How would YOU feel about this?

I have no doubt that the media will say that those of us that were there to draw attention to this case, are ‘extremists’ and ‘trouble makers’. But, the truth is getting out and soon every British person will be aware of what is happening to our children.

We understand that not all Muslims are paedophiles and we realise that this type of behaviour is present in all races and religions but what concerns us is that the men on trial in the Crown Court are following the example of their prophet Mohammed.

The Koran teaches that the Infidels (us) are not worthy of respect and that we must be conquered at all costs. Unfortunately for some of our children this cost is the suffering they experience at the hands of gang rapists who believe that it is totally acceptable to groom, drug and rape at will.


Christianity under attack: Anger as major court rulings go against British worshippers

A landmark legal ruling banning the tradition of saying prayers at council meetings was denounced last night as an ‘assault on Britain’s Christian heritage’. The High Court controversially backed an anti-religious campaign to abolish official acts of worship.

Christians and politicians reacted with dismay after a judge overturned centuries of custom by outlawing a town hall in Devon from putting prayers on the formal agenda.

It prompted concern that it would pave the way for Parliament to abandon prayers before Commons and Lords business, mark the end of hospital and Forces chaplains, and could even lead to the abolition of the Coronation Oath, pledged by Kings and Queens taking the throne.

The ruling means prayers will not be allowed at the start of council meetings across England and Wales, though they may still be said before the official start.

Atheist former councillor Clive Bone started the case against Bideford town council in July 2010, claiming he had been ‘disadvantaged and embarrassed’ when religious prayers were recited at formal meetings.

Backed by the National Secular Society, he insisted that the ‘inappropriate’ practice breached the human right to freedom of conscience and discriminated against non-believers, making them feel ‘uncomfortable’.

The society claimed council meetings should be ‘equally welcoming to everyone in the local community’ and should therefore be ‘religiously-neutral’.

Mr Justice Ouseley, sitting in London, rejected the human rights and equality challenges. But he ruled that formal prayers at council meetings were unlawful because of a technicality in the Local Government Act 1972.

He said local authorities had no power to ‘say prayers or to have any period of quiet reflection as part of the business of the council’. Acknowledging the widespread importance of the case, Mr Justice Ouseley gave Bideford council permission to appeal.

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles described the ruling as ‘very illiberal’. He said: ‘The ruling is surprising and disappointing. Christianity plays an important part in the culture, heritage and fabric of our nation.’

He vowed to override the High Court ruling by bringing in the Government’s Localism Act, which would give councils the power to hold prayers at the start of meetings, as early as next Friday.
Verdict: Justice Ouseley, pictured, found the practice did not breach human rights but was unlawful

Simon Calvert, of the Christian Institute, said: ‘Prayers have been a part of council meetings for centuries, and many people, either for religious reasons or cultural reasons, see them as a positive part of our national life.

‘It’s a shame the courts have taken sides with those whose goal is to undermine our Christian heritage. It is high time Parliament put a stop to this assault upon our national heritage.’
‘This has got nothing to do with intolerance towards religion. Religious freedom is an absolute right and so is freedom from religion an absolute right, in my view.’
Clive Bone, the atheist former councillor who brought the case

Harry Greenway, a former Tory MP and ex-chairman of the National Prayer Breakfast, said: ‘If people do not want to attend prayers of this nature, they can stay away instead of meddling and busybodying with other people’s beliefs.

‘Non-believers are not harassed in this way by believers. Why cannot the non-believers show the same kind of tolerance?’

Mr Bone, who left Bideford council because of its ‘refusal to adjust’ its prayers policy, said: ‘I’m delighted. I’m not surprised, I expected to win.

‘This has got nothing to do with intolerance towards religion. Religious freedom is an absolute right and so is freedom from religion an absolute right, in my view.’

Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society said: ‘We’re very pleased with the judgment.’

Officials at Parliament said the 1689 Bill of Rights meant the Commons and Lords decided their own business, so a legal challenge would fail.


Fury over moves to hold more British court cases in secret which will 'sweep away centuries of fair trial protections'

Radical changes to the justice system will sweep away centuries of fair trial protections, senior lawyers and civil liberty campaigners warned yesterday. Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke wants ministers to have the power to withhold evidence they deem ‘sensitive’ from civil court hearings.

But critics say the reforms will lead to a rise in the number of secret hearings and would deny defendants the right to challenge evidence used against them.

There would be more ‘Closed Material Procedures,’ where evidence is only disclosed to a judge, minister or ‘Special Advocate’ – a barrister authorised to work on national security cases.

Often, the minister exercising this new power would be a party to the case in a move which campaigners argue is an extraordinary conflict of interest.

The reforms, set out in a Green Paper, also give greater protection to government agencies in civil cases, meaning it would be easier for organisations like M15 and M16 to hide any wrongdoing.

Civil rights group Liberty has launched a ‘secret justice’ campaign to fight the plans, which it warns will have a damaging effect on investigative journalism.

It says the reforms could have led to evidence in high profile court cases such as the Paddington rail crash or the inquest into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube station being withheld from lawyers and the public.

Liberty’s director Shami Chakrabarti said: ‘The worst scandals in any democracy are often uncovered by a combination of open courts and investigative journalism.

‘This Green Paper proposes to end a centuries’ old principle that no one – even a public body – is above the law. Future ministers would be granted sweeping powers to lock down embarrassing inquests and civil claims against the powerful. Victims of gross abuses of power, the public and the Press could be left in the dark forever. ‘It was bad enough when criminal courts were replaced with secret commissions in the name of national security. ‘Now the entire civil justice system might go the same way in the name of the “public interest”.’

In a blow to the Government’s plans, 57 of the country’s 69 Special Advocates have written to ministers describing the proposals as ‘unsupportable’.

They said: ‘Closed Material Procedures represent a departure from the foundational principle of natural justice that all parties are entitled to see and challenge all the evidence relied upon before the court and to combat that evidence by calling evidence of their own. ‘They also undermine the principle that public justice should be dispensed in public.’

Despite the opposition, Mr Clarke has described the reforms as ‘common sense proposals’ which would merely ‘better equip our courts to pass judgment in cases involving sensitive information’.


Amnesty on truth

Comment from Australia below. Despite its pretensions, Amnesty has been a far-Leftist organization for a long time -- JR

Sara Hudson

I’m ashamed to admit I was a member of Amnesty International in high school. Back then I proudly wore an Amnesty badge on a black beret. Now I cringe at the memory of my naive self lapping up their hyperbole.

The Sydney Morning Herald recently reported that Amnesty International is urging a parliamentary human rights watchdog to investigate the federal government’s plan to crack down on school truancy by linking welfare payments to school attendance. The article claimed that a recent evaluation of SEAM (Improving School Enrolment and Attendance through Welfare Reform Measure) found that suspending welfare payments did not improve school attendance.

However, that is not what the evaluation actually found. According to the report, attendance rates improved in the two communities where SEAM was trialled – from 74.4% to 79.9% in the Northern Territory and from 84.7% to 88.7% in Queensland.

Where an enrolment notice was sent, 82% of families in the Northern Territory and 84% in Queensland provided enrolment details without the need for a welfare suspension. Of the 4,688 parents in the SEAM communities, only 85 had their welfare payments suspended under the enrolment component and seven under the attendance component.

When critics complain about government’s actions to improve remote Indigenous school attendance, what is it that they expect government to do? Let parents get away with not sending their children to school?

Quarantining people’s welfare because their kids don’t attend school may seem heavy handed, but the consequences of not enforcing school attendance are worse. Already there are tens of thousands of young people in remote communities who are unable to read and write. Do we want this cohort to grow exponentially, or do we want to nip it in the bud?

A recent ad campaign by the Australian Literacy and Numeracy Foundation (ALNF) asked the question: ‘If 80% of kids in Sydney couldn’t read would you lend a hand?’ The same question could be asked about school attendance.

Granted, low school attendance is not the only reason for educational failure in remote Indigenous schools. Education departments across the country, with their separate curricula for Indigenous children, are also to blame.

In one Homeland School, an activity book based on a children’s picture book by Mem Fox is used for all the children aged 5 to 18 (or whatever age children decide that school is boring and stop going altogether).

Instead of complaining about government’s efforts to improve Indigenous school attendance, Amnesty should be complaining about what Indigenous children are being taught when they are at school!



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine). My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.


No comments: