Friday, November 01, 2013
A religion that rots the brain
Father who started fire in attempt to stop daughter 'dishonouring family' by marrying for love is found guilty of murdering wife and three other daughters
Mohammed Riaz Inayat, 56, flew into a rage when his daughter, Kalsoom Bibi, told him she planned to move to Dubai to marry a policeman. He said she had brought ‘dishonour on the family’ before pouring gallons of petrol over his family home and setting it alight.
On the night of April 17 Inayat killed his wife Naika and injured his three daughters in a blaze that took seconds to engulf the house.
Naika died of carbon monoxide poisoning and one of his daughters, 16-year-old Saimah, who jumped from a bedroom window, suffered 50 per cent burns.
He was found guilty at Birmingham Crown Court of murdering his wife and arson but was cleared of attempted murder of his three daughters.
During his trial the court heard how the father-of-six soaked seven parts of his home in petrol at about 5am as his family slept - only hours before Miss Bibi, 28, was set to fly to Dubai to marry the CID officer.
After initially telling police the fire was started by ‘a gang led by a white middle-aged woman’, he admitted one count of manslaughter.
Philip Bennett QC, prosecuting, told the court: ‘For this defendant a love marriage was not appropriate. ‘He was traditional in his beliefs that marriage should be arranged.’
Miss Bibi, who is already divorced from a marriage arranged by her father, met her lover in 2011 but had to travel in secret to see him in Dubai.
When her family discovered the affair in December last year, they disapproved, and her father became increasingly angry and upset, the jury heard.
Miss Bibi, who works for World Duty Free, told the court: ‘He told me he would kill me and that he would poison himself if I married him. ‘He said I would bring disgrace to the family. He was not happy with it. I understand why he wasn’t happy, it was because he had never met the man. ‘It took him a long time to accept it, but he did in the end because he could see it was what I wanted.’
On the night of the fire Miss Bibi woke to find flames coming under her bedroom door.
While his wife, three daughters and a family friend slept upstairs, Inayat used petrol as an accelerant both upstairs and downstairs in the family home and then set it on fire, trapping his family upstairs.
Neighbours called the emergency services and they tried in vain to rescue the occupants of the house.
The three daughters and family friend jumped from the first floor bedroom windows resulting in them suffering broken bones.
When the fire service arrived they entered the house and the found the body of the defendant’s wife in one of the upstairs bedrooms. She had died as a result of smoke inhalation.
Miss Bibi suffered a broken arm and three broken vertebrae after leaping from the window of the terraced house in Tyseley, Birmingham.
Inayat, who is originally from Pakistan, told the jury he tried to kill himself on the night of the fire, using three kitchen knives.
After the verdict, Zafar Siddique, Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor from West Midlands Crown Prosecution Service, said: ‘Crimes committed to supposedly defend a family’s honour will not be tolerated in our society and today’s conviction of Mohammed Inayat demonstrates that. ‘Honour-based violence and forced marriages are ultimately about men policing the behaviour of women.
‘This can include rights as fundamental as a choice of partner, as in today’s case, and this abuse can escalate frighteningly quickly from controlling behaviour to murder.
‘Inayat committed a dreadful crime, a crime which he committed because he was unable to accept the fact that his daughter wanted to get married to someone that she loved, cared for and wanted to spend the rest of her life with. ‘This he felt brought dishonour to him and his family, but today’s conviction has shown that the shame is his to bear.
‘The CPS will not shy away from tackling honour-based violence. It is a fundamental abuse of human rights and should not be tolerated in any civilised society. ‘Our thoughts are today with the family and friends of Naika Inayat.’
Frightening scale of reoffending revealed: 148,000 criminals caught this year in Britain had at least FIFTEEN previous convictions
Almost 150,000 criminals convicted or cautioned last year had committed 15 or more previous offences, figures revealed last night. The ‘frightening’ re-offending rates mean this group alone have been responsible for more than two million crimes between them. And shockingly, the number of such career criminals has increased by 14 per cent in just five years.
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said the figures exposed the abject failure of the criminal justice system to get to grips with repeat offenders and showed the desperate need for action to tackle persistently high reoffending rates.
Mr Grayling said the public – and the Government – were ‘fed up with crooks doing their time and going straight back to crime’. The Justice Secretary has proposed radical reforms to the Probation Service aimed at reducing recidivism among hardened criminals.
Charities and private firms will be paid ‘by results’ to engage with criminals and help them turn their lives around.
But his reforms have faced fierce opposition from unions – who are planning strike action next week – and probation chiefs.
Last night Mr Grayling said: ‘People should stop and think about what these bleak figures represent – too many devastated victims, too many wasted lives and broken families, and millions in taxpayers’ money squandered. ‘Simply put, the situation is grim and it will only get worse by sitting on our hands and doing nothing.
‘Our reforms will help us put a stop to this, for the first time making it possible for every offender coming out of prison to receive at least 12 months’ support and supervision.
‘And we will only pay for services in full where they are proven to cut reoffending, making sure public money goes further.’
The statistics also show that more than half a million offenders with at least one previous conviction or caution committed a further crime in the same period.
That includes 95 per cent of those given short jail sentences of less than 12 months.
In addition, more than 350,000 of those convicted or cautioned in the same period had served some kind of community sentence.
Justice officials said the statistics exposed the ‘frightening scale’ of reoffending.
Experts say crime is increasingly committed by a small group of hardened offenders who return to crime again and again.
Peter Cuthbertson, director of the Centre for Crime Prevention think-tank, said: ‘These are appalling figures. Thugs are going through a revolving door of probation and soft justice and then reoffending time and again. ‘We need to do far more of what works – tough prison sentences. Locking up serious, repeat offenders cuts crime and protects the public.’
Under the new reforms Mr Grayling’s department will award contracts worth £450million to private and voluntary groups who will supervise some 225,000 low and medium-risk offenders.
The remaining rump of 31,000 high-risk offenders, including dangerous violent and sexual criminals, will remain under State control.
Criminals given short-term jail sentences, who currently are not supervised at all after their release from jail, will be given at least 12 months supervision and rehabilitation on release from prison. This ‘Rehabilitation Revolution’ will, it is hoped, make a significant dent in reoffending rates.
The figures expose how reoffending remains persistently high – despite some recent falls – and tens of thousands of criminals continue to offend after completing community service or probation programmes.
Members of the National Association of Probation Officers (Napo) union are due to strike next Tuesday over the policy.
And yesterday the Guardian reported that the chairmen of the Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Warwickshire probation trusts have told the Justice Secretary the plans will risk public safety.
The Ministry of Justice has said that more than 700 organisations worldwide have expressed an interest in carrying out the work, including hundreds of British firms.
In a letter to the Justice Secretary, Jane Wilson, chairman of the Leicestershire and Rutland probation trust, said the current timetable had ‘serious implications for service delivery and therefore increases the risk to public safety’. [Increases their workload, more like it]
More Twisted Tales From the Pink Rainbow
The cases of the homosexual wrecking crew are mindnumbing in their frequency and insanity. While I have offered plenty of recent examples of this, the following story certainly does take the cake. Just how utterly mindboggling. You would almost think it has to be a joke.
But tragically it is the real deal. It comes from California, a land known for its fruits and nuts. And behind it all is Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown. He has long been known to be lost in space, but this one removes him from the galaxy altogether. Read and weep:
“The governor of California has signed into law a bill that mandates insurance companies in the state to provide coverage for infertility treatments for homosexuals. As previously reported, AB 460 was proposed this past spring by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano of San Francisco, whose partner died of AIDS in 1994. He asserts that some insurance companies are discriminating by denying coverage to homosexuals because they did not have ‘an opposite sex married partner in which to have one year of regular sexual relations without conception.’
“Current law requires that spouses try to conceive for one year, and may claim coverage if they remain barren after that time. ‘Reproductive medicine is for everybody’s benefit,’ Ammiano wrote in a statement following the signing of the bill this month by Governor Jerry Brown. ‘To restrict fertility coverage solely to heterosexual married couples violates California’s non-discrimination laws. I wrote this bill to correct that’.”
Wow, I am still trying to recover from that one. So let me get this straight: those who deliberately choose to engage in a sterile lifestyle are being discriminated against and thus need taxpayer-funded fertility treatment. Ol’ Jerry might as well pass a bill requiring those who have taken a vow of silence to be eligible for voice lessons.
Umm, has anyone informed these meatheads in the California government that two men can’t reproduce, just as two bowling balls can’t reproduce? Will they mandate fertility treatment for bowling balls as well to overcome “unjust discrimination”?
I am not sure which has reached rock-bottom the most: our moral freefall or our utter stupidity. Can it get any worse? Sadly yes: wait – there’s more. Check out this headline: “A couple who rake in a staggering £53k a year in benefits are demanding a bigger house from the council because they are lesbians.”
The story opens: “Civil partners Lisa and Carrie-Ann Beaney currently live in a single B&B room with their four children, and claim that they are too stressed to work because of homophobic bullying. Lisa, 30, quit her job in McDonald’s after just three months because it made her too anxious, while Carrie-Ann, 23, has never worked at all.
“And due to tough new benefit cap rules their housing payments were slashed and the pair were evicted from their £850-a-month rented home. However, their £608-a-week B&B room is paid for by the taxpayer, and makes up a £53,000-a-year benefits handout on top of income support and child benefit. The pair now want the council to give them a bigger house for their brood.”
Yeah right. Hey, I get bullied all the time: can I demand a bigger house as well? I get subjected to so much heterophobic and Christophobic bullying, that by their standards the government ought to be offering me at least a mansion – and maybe a castle in Bavaria as well. Hey, I deserve it after all.
And the sporting world is not even exempt from gross moonbeamosity. Get a load of this homo-baloney: “U.S. athletes who want to participate in the Olympics must now take a vow that they will not engage in ‘discrimination’ based on ‘sexual orientation.’ USOC CEO Scott Blackmun said the committee changed the rules last week ‘to address the legislation in Russia prohibiting advocacy of non- traditional relationships among minors,’ its anti-gay propaganda law.”
So the IOC is throwing a hissy fit over Russia, yet this same body did zippo when the Olympics were held in Beijing. China’s reprehensible human rights violations mean nothing to the IOC, but pro-sodomy activism means everything to it, it seems.
Not everyone is keen about this idiocy: “Steve McConkey, a Christian pastor who ministers to top track and field athletes, says he worries that the new USOC rules may set the stage for discrimination against those whose religious beliefs oppose homosexuality and other non-traditional sexual orientations.
“‘The policies are set-up for discrimination against gay athletes, but there could be reverse discrimination in the future,’ McConkey said in a statement, adding that it ‘is a matter of time’ before traditional morality is discriminated against by ‘the law of the land.’ McConkey said he found it disturbing that the Olympic Committee took no similar action in 2008, when the games were held in Beijing, where Christians are jailed or even executed for their beliefs.
“‘The IOC allowed the Olympic Games to be in China in 2008 while hundreds were in prison for being Christian and the country has 100 million underground Christians,’ McConkey said. ‘They did not speak up about this, but now a sin category is added to non-discrimination policies.’ McConkey summed up the difference in public reaction to the two host nations in one word: ‘Hypocrisy’.”
So what’s new? Just another example of blatant hypocrisy and double standards on the part of the homosexualist lobby and their many cronies in positions of power. We expect such nowadays. Just part of a world turned upside down by the militants and their supporters.
But keep your moonbat-o-metre handy. I will soon be back with more twisted tales from the culture wars crypt.
More Military Political Correctness
Another U.S. Army briefing and yet another incident of Christians and Tea Party members cast as a threat to America. This time, the briefing took place at Fort Hood, where, as you'll recall, an Islamic fanatic killed 13 people and an unborn child in a murderous rampage based solely on his religion. Earlier this month, we noted that soldiers at Camp Shelby in Mississippi were told that the American Family Association is an extremist group. The same thing happened at Fort Hood. And last year, Army Reserve troops were briefed about Evangelical and Catholic “religious extremism.”
In each case, the Army insisted that the soldiers responsible for the presentations did their own research on the Internet and that these were isolated incidents. Once is isolated and twice might be coincidence, but three times is a pattern. Combined with the restriction of chaplains, and the mysterious removal of “so help me God” from Cadet and Officer oaths at the Air Force academy, there is obviously a more widespread effort to undermine our tradition of faith in the military.
In what we fear is a related note, the list of senior military commanders fired by Barack Obama continues to grow, including nine more this year. Active duty senior commanders are keeping their heads down. Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely notes, “Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama's ideology. The White House protects their own. That's why they stalled on the investigation into Fast and Furious, Benghazi and ObamaCare. He's intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”
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.