Sunday, October 27, 2013

Today's installment of multiculturalism in Britain

A woman subjected a five-year-old boy to a two month campaign of abuse in which she sprayed corrosive bathroom cleaner in his face and doused him in boiling coffee.

Tennesh Massaquoi, 29, inflicted a series of injuries, and attacked him by punching and kicking him to the back, legs, torso and chest.  He was also found to be suffering severe bruising and swelling to his genitals.

Massaquoi, of Greater Manchester, was found guilty after a trial on four counts of child cruelty.  She was jailed at Manchester Crown Court for five years.

Police said the boy was taken to hospital on Monday 9 July 2012, for treatment to a burn-like injury to his face.  Staff had been told that he had sprayed a bottle of bathroom cleaner onto his cheek, and were even shown the bottle.

Further examination however uncovered a catalogue of injuries to the boy, who initially was reluctant to answer any questions.

Massaquoi was later arrested and the boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was admitted to Manchester Children’s Hospital for a detailed examination.

In all, the boy suffered a black eye, a full thickness burn to the back of his neck, serious bruising to his back, bruising to his legs, torso and chest, severe bruising and swelling to his genitals, as well as the chemical burns to his face.

Analysis by four independent medical experts concluded the injuries could not have been caused accidentally, despite what the authorities had been told throughout the investigation.

The experts also said that the bruising on his body was likely to have been caused by trauma, more specifically by punches and kicks, and the burn to the back of the neck was most likely to have been from hot liquid being poured onto him deliberately.

They concluded that in all, the abuse spanned over a matter of months.

The boy initially refused to speak about how the injuries were caused, but after days of careful questioning by specially trained officers, who were working closely with Children's Services, he revealed that Massaquoi had kicked him.

He also confirmed that she poured hot coffee on him and said it was done 'on purpose'.

Other disclosures followed, and further inquiries lead to witnesses also putting the injuries down to Massaquoi’s actions.

Detective Constable Kate Burrows of the North Manchester Child Protection Team said: 'Not only was this boy severely injured, he was also a terrified and traumatised child, who has been through more than any five-year-old should ever have to endure.

'The process of treating him and offering support to him needed to be a joint effort between the NHS, Children’s Services and the police. The response to this incident by Children’s Services in particular was outstanding.

'Specially trained police officers needed to not only support the boy through the investigation and subsequent court case, but also ensure there was enough evidence against the person responsible.

'The fact that after a seven-day trial a jury unanimously returned a guilty verdict in less than two hours is a testament to our efforts.

'As for the child, the excellent partnership working between all of the agencies concerned will ensure he has a safe future, and he can get on with enjoying his childhood.'


BBC attacked for giving George's historic christening bottom billing on flagship news broadcast

Sour old Leftists don't understand the widespread affection for the monarchy in Britain -- and the pleasure that great royal occasions give.  They lift people out of the humdrum and the routine

The BBC yesterday came under fire for treating the christening of Prince George as a ‘tail end afterthought’ on its flagship news programmes.

While the historic occasion was featured on front pages around the world, BBC1’s half-hour News at Six and Ten gave it bottom billing.

Both programmes devoted just two minutes and 20 seconds to the ceremony on Wednesday. BBC2’s current affairs show Newsnight failed to mention it at all.

Yesterday, Tory MP Andrew Rosindell said he was ‘appalled’ an event of national importance had been given such scant attention.

He added: ‘The BBC is the national broadcaster. An event such as that should have been given greater prominence.

‘People will be very surprised to see  that it was an “and finally” item bearing in mind that it is a slot usually reserved for non-serious items.’

The BBC’s News at Six found time only  for a short pre-recorded clip about the christening which was narrated by royal correspondent Nicholas Witchell.

Instead of exploring the historical significance of the event or seeking comment from royal experts, he restricted his report to a brief rundown of the guests as they left the Chapel Royal at St James’s Palace.

The short clip was placed last in the news agenda, just before the weather at 6.30pm.

It was deemed even less important than the story of a venomous spider outbreak in a school in Gloucestershire and a segment on proposals to give motorists a five-minute grace period after parking tickets run out.

The News at Ten recycled the same Witchell clip, and also gave it bottom billing. On Newsnight at 10.30pm, the christening was omitted altogether.

Instead, presenter Jeremy Paxman interviewed controversial comic Russell Brand, giving him a platform to espouse his desire for a political revolution.

Tory MP Michael Ellis said: ‘I’m disappointed with the BBC’s coverage on the royal christening, which is an important occasion in the life of the nation. The monarchy is a cherished institution in this country. It attracts more support than almost any other aspect of our national political life.

‘This is the first, formal occasion on which three heirs to the throne are in one place for well over 100 years. The public want to see and hear as much of this as possible.

‘It’s disappointing that the BBC have chosen to relegate this to a tail end afterthought.’

The royal christening was featured on the front pages of seven of the UK’s national newspapers, and on the front pages of newspapers around the world.

ITV News at 6.30pm and 10pm both devoted three minutes to the christening story, giving it top billing in the second half of each programme.

The slot is typically reserved for major stories as the channel needs to regain the attention of its viewers after the advert break.

Tory MP Rob Wilson said: ‘The royal christening was an important national event which newspapers have given huge coverage to in response to their readers’ desire to properly commemorate the event.

‘After a very difficult year, it’s probably fair to suggest that the BBC is struggling to stay in touch with what its audience wants.’

The BBC said it had received four complaints that its news coverage of the royal christening was insufficient.

A spokesman added: ‘The BBC provided extensive coverage of the royal christening across all platforms yesterday, including live coverage on the BBC News Channel, as well as a range of reports across our television bulletins and radio and online.

‘The christening was in the BBC1 bulletin headlines at both 6pm and 10pm, with a full report by our royal correspondent Nick Witchell.

'There were several major news stories yesterday, including the loss of many jobs following the shutdown of Scotland’s biggest industrial site, and David Cameron’s announcement that day that the Government will review green taxes in response to rising energy prices. All our reports are there because we judge them important and of audience interest.’


British council threaten Christmas tree switch on over health and safety fears

A council threatened to ban the switching on of a Christmas lights display due to health and safety fears.  Brighton and Hove City Council threatened to pull the plug on the event over fears that children would have to cross a small road between their local church and the square in order to enjoy the festivities.

Even with a lollipop lady to assist the children it was considered too dangerous, organisers have revealed.

Traditionally the council has taken responsibility for the event in Palmeira Square, Brighton, but have turned their back on it this year.

A local charity decided to step into the breach, but was warned that they could not organise an identical event due to health and safety.

The charity, Brunswick in Bloom, had planned to put on the same show that the council have run for many years - a children's choir performing in St John's Church followed by the switch on of the lights by the Mayor at the tree.  But there were fears that children would have cross the road between the local church and the Christmas tree.

They were told that the lights would be switched on and left on by the workmen installing the tree instead.

The charity, which consists of four volunteers, went back to the drawing board and said they would arrange a lollipop lady to cross the adults and children from the church to the Floral Clock in the Square.  They were told this was still too much of a risk and the chairperson has started to organise plans for local police to be present on the day.

Trisha Gaskell-Watkins, who runs Brunswick in Bloom, said: 'Initially we were very disappointed and upset. “We use the Christmas lights display in our portfolio for the In Bloom so we really need it. The children love watching the lights get switched on as well.”

The council have now agreed to let the event go ahead on their insurance, she said, and police have indicated that they will come and help the children cross the road.

“To be honest if they can't cross that road with their parents they shouldn't be going to school, where they have to cross lots of roads,” she added.  “I suppose when it is an organised event this is what you have to do.

“The road was the main issue for the council I think they said I needed a certified lollipop person, or a registered road safety member or the police.”

Conservative councillor Ann Norman said: “One of the reasons for the council reaching this decision was that there were health and safety concerns that children had to cross a small road.

“The school children are always accompanied by a number of teachers and numerous parents and there are a good number of us councillors who will attend the whole event, carol singing and switching on the lights and are also available to assist with road safety.  “I am pleased this has now been resolved and that common sense has prevailed."


AFA: 'God' Already Gone...

Getting it partially right, Fox News reported this week that the Air Force Academy is contemplating the removal of “so help me God” from its Cadet Honor Oath. However, on the facing page in Contrails, the Cadet handbook, “so help me God” has already been removed from the Cadet and Officer oaths.

As first reported by Mark Alexander last May in “The DoD's Frontal Assault on Faith,” up until 2011, the Cadet Contrails handbook contained the words “so help me God” in bold letters, after the Cadet and Officer oaths. However, those words were removed from the Class of 2016 handbooks. When Alexander inquired with the AFA's Public Affairs Office as to whom removed “so help me God” in the 2011-2012 Contrails, and why, the PAO dodged the question and tersely responded that he could file a “Freedom of Information Act” request. In other words: “Take a hike.”

While Obama's top military appointees at the AFA are claiming its review of “so help me God” in the Honor Oath is the result of a challenge by ultra-leftist Mikey Weinstein's so-called “Military Religious Freedom Foundation” (MRFF), in fact, Weinstein is little more than an atheist proxy for the Obama administration – a surrogate doing the bidding of the most faith-intolerant regime in the history of our Republic. (Of course, if any military officer suggested this was their CINC's agenda, they would be civilians the next day.) The MRFF is dedicated to freedom from religion, not freedom of religion.*

The Obama/MRFF strategy: Given that AFA administrators have already removed “so help me God” from the Contrails Cadet and Officer oaths, they have, in effect, made Weinstein's legal case. It will be difficult for the AFA to argue for retaining “so help me God” in the Honor oath, if they have already started removing it from the Cadet and Officer oaths. Thus, if Weinstein “wins” his case against the AFA, their will be a domino effect eradicating oaths in the other Service Academies – and by extension throughout the Service Branches.

So the question remains, who exactly ordered the removal of “so help me God” from the 2011 Cadet handbook?

Under the pretense of “religious tolerance,” Barack Hussein Obama's administration has been quietly advancing his mandate to remove any expression or manifestation of faith, particularly Christianity, from government forums – first and foremost, the U.S. military. His civilian “leaders” at DoD have ramped up that eradication, even threatening UCMJ charges against military personnel whose expression of faith might be interpreted as “proselytizing.”

Alexander's colleague, Lt. Gen. (Ret.) William “Jerry” Boykin, notes, “The very troops who defend our religious freedom are at risk of having their own taken away. The worst thing we can do is stop soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, especially for the chaplains, from the free exercise of their faith.”

Eradicating references to God in military oaths, is part of Left's larger objective to replace Rule of Law with the rule of men – because the former is predicated on the principle of Liberty “endowed by our Creator.” Obama's administrators constantly look for ways to undermine Rule of Law by driving wedges between our Liberty and its inherent foundational endowment.

Obama and his Leftist cadres should heed this formative advice regarding faith and our Armed Services: “While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.” –George Washington (1778)

*(For example, in 2011, Weinstein, an AFA graduate ('77), demanded and received an apology from the AFA for its cadet support of “Operation Christmas Child,” which assembles and fills millions of shoe boxes with toys, school supplies and other gifts for impoverished children in 130 countries! Weinstein objected because OCC places a Christian tract in those boxes.)



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, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: