Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Multicultural con-man in Britain
A pensioner duped out of £300,000 of his life savings by a conman who told him he had won the Spanish Lottery was so convinced by the scam that he continued to pay even after police launched an investigation.
Chris Chidi Dinneya, 40, who told his victims they had to pay money into an overseas account to release their winnings from the lottery, has been jailed for three and a half years.
The trusting 81-year-old, from Cambridge, lost the most money in the worldwide scam. The pensioner was so taken in by the fraud he continued trying to send more cash after the police investigation began. Police and Cambridgeshire County Council were forced to apply for a court order to take control of his bank accounts to prevent any further losses.
Dinneya, of New Cross, South East London, was traced to a number of the payments. He denied a sample charge of fleecing more than £6,100 from the elderly victim. He also denied his involvement in hoaxing more victims around the world in similar lottery scams totalling £179,725.
He was convicted on money laundering charges following a trial at Cambridge Crown Court and jailed for a total of three-and-a-half years on March 4.
Detective Constable Sharon Garrett said: ‘This is a very sad case involving many people who have effectively been scammed out of their life savings.
‘The Cambridge victim was so convinced that he was set to receive a large payout if he kept sending the money transfers, that we had to take action to protect him.
‘This should serve as a warning to others who are contacted by people claiming they have won prizes in return for money transfers or bank details. 'Remember, if something sounds too good to be true, it often is.’
Atheists want the 'miracle cross' from Ground Zero removed from 9/11 museum
A group of atheists have launched a legal challenge against the inclusion of the 'miracle cross' from the Twin Towers in the National September 11 Memorial and Museum.
The 17-foot cross that emerged from the rubble at Ground Zero was seen by many rescue workers as a symbol of hope, but now other groups fear that it violates the constitutional divide between church and state.
The group, called American Atheists, says that the cross should not be displayed at all in the museum, and went on to say that if it is included, then there should be a similar panel to represent the atheists who perished at the site.
'We’re arguing for equal treatment in some way, whatever that might be,' the group's lawyer Edwin Kagin said last week.
The specifics have yet to be released, but it was suggested that the group would want a plaque to be posted near the cross which would remind viewers that atheists died as well as people of religious faith.
'This is part of religious history. It’s an act of religious symbolism. It is a shrine now,' New York City Atheists spokesman Ken Bronstein told CBS.
'That miracle cross should be moved back to St. Peter’s where it was for five years.'
Museum organizers have argued that just because it has a religious context does not mean that it makes the entire 10,000-square-foot site a religious one.
'This was a sign of consolation. It’s was never meant to hurt anyone, hurt the atheists or anything like that,' former Ground Zero chaplain Father Brian Jordan said.
'It is an artefact that should be included in the museum because it’s a history museum. This is a part of the memory of 9/11.'
The judge presiding over the case in New York's Supreme Court appeared to agree with museum officials, saying that it would be an over-reach to remove the object, which was found amid the rubble and made from steel beams from the towers.
'There are countless cases of museums including religious artifacts among their exhibits and it’s going to be described in a way that talks about the history of the object, what is the problem here?' Judge Reena Raggi said, according to Fox News.
'An argument has been made that you are trying to censor history.'
The cross, which was kept at a memorial near the Ground Zero site for years before being taken into the protection of museum organizers, is one of the 1,000 objects due to be on display when the museum opens in May.
The ruling is expected in the next few months.
Liberals Love Racism
by LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD
Racism has been such a successful political and money-making tool for the left that liberals are willing to invent it where it does not exist, conceive new forms of racism when it is in decline, and to sustain it, even become racists themselves.
In regard to race, there are two inhabitants of Liberal Land: (1) the white liberal ethno-masochist , whose self-hatred manifests itself politically by identifying with groups that he or she deems equally hated as a desperate plea for acceptance and love and (2) the race opportunists, whose ethnocentric positions are simply an element of a political campaign or business plan, where there are votes to be had or money to be made by prolonging an imaginary problem.
Liberals practice the politics of pretense, the inventors of facts, whose intellectual dishonesty and pathological guilt hustling about race began in earnest with the vilification of Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1965 Moynihan Report). He was berated as a "racist" for suggesting that liberal policies would weaken the black family and lead to social chaos.
A long misused measure of alleged "institutional" racism is the large black prison incarceration rate relative to whites. In actuality, it is an indictment of the fifty years of liberal race policies, when black crime should be falling to the levels of white crime, but we find the opposite (National prison census data):
Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder reiterated his 2009 claim that Americans are a "nation of cowards" on racial issues.
"Certain subjects are off-limits and that to explore them risks at best embarrassment, and at worst, the questioning of one's character."
Indeed, Mr. Holder, as John T. Bennett describes, the topic of race and crime, for example, is off-limits, unless you want to be called a racist by a liberal.
"The trend of racial "flash mob" violence by black teens against "random" non-black victims has gone relatively unnoticed, when it should be a national scandal. Several people have died in separate incidents of the "knock-out game," a race-based and unmentioned disgrace. As for crime rates overall, the picture is stark: the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control lists the homicide rate per 100,000 as 23.1 for blacks, 7.8 for Native Americans, 7.6 for Hispanics, 2.7 for whites, and 2.4 for Asians. The reality of crime in America is that the white and Asian homicide rate is on par with Finland's. The American black homicide rate is on par with those of Zambia and Rwanda (22.9 and 26.6 per 100,000, respectively)."
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 93% of black American murders are in fact perpetrated by other blacks.
The problems of Black America are not caused by white racism, but by the soft racism of low expectations perpetrated by liberals. More often than not, it is the wealthy and fortunate that are the prime purveyors of white guilt, but who seldom repent of "white privilege" by giving up their jobs to minorities or "celebrate diversity" in their own lives.
It is the same misplaced racial hypersensitivity, hypocrisy and liberal racism that can, at once, ruin Paula Deen for a thirty-year-old racial slur, but unfailingly label black conservatives as "Uncle Toms".
Contrary to the protestations of liberals, Daniel Patrick Moynihan was right - the weakening of the family structure does lead to social chaos, regardless of race, as a recent French study of two- and one-parent families found:
But evidence is irrelevant in Liberal Land because they think with their glands rather than their brains, mistaking emotionally-satisfying opinions for facts.
And, after all, blame whitey has been a thriving business for them.
Four in five serial burglars let off with soft sentences: British judges ignoring three-strikes law that imposes three-year jail terms
Judges were accused of a ‘failure of duty’ last night after it emerged that four out of five serial burglars are escaping with a soft sentence.
Under supposedly tough laws passed by the last Government, housebreakers should be jailed for a minimum of three years if they have three or more convictions.
But figures unearthed by the Civitas think-tank show the ‘three strikes and you’re out’ punishment is being administered in only 22 per cent of cases.
Judges are either slashing the length of the sentence given in return for a guilty plea, or simply ignoring the guidelines.
Incredibly, one in ten of these burglars were not sent to prison at all. They instead received a suspended sentence or other ‘slap on the wrist’ sanction.
Of the 993 serial burglars who were dealt with by the courts in 2011, only 214 were jailed for three years or more. Dr David Green, director of Civitas, said: ‘Judges are rightly allowed to use discretion in “exceptional circumstances” but this reasonable stipulation has been abused by some judges who are failing in their duty to protect the public.’
The report also highlights how only half of all burglars are given a prison term when sentenced by the courts.
This is despite the fact that, in 2009, then Lord Chief Justice Igor Judge urged judges to recognise the seriousness of burglary.
Lord Judge said: ‘Something precious is violated by burglary of a home and those who perpetrate this crime should be sentenced and punished accordingly.
‘The principle which must be grasped is that when we speak of dwelling house burglary we are considering not only an offence against property, which it is, but also, and often more alarmingly and distressingly, an offence against the person.’
But recently one judge even said that burglary needed ‘a huge amount of courage’.
Judge Peter Bowers made the comment at Teesside Crown Court when he gave Richard Rochford, 26, from Redcar, a 12-month suspended jail sentence for burglary. He told Rochford: ‘It takes a huge amount of courage as far as I can see for someone to burgle somebody’s house. I wouldn’t have the nerve.’ He added: ‘I think prison very rarely does anybody any good.’
In December 2012 the judge was given an official reprimand.
An investigation led by the Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice found the use of the word courage was a ‘serious error of judgment’ and ‘damaged public confidence in the judicial process’.
According to the Civitas study, based on Ministry of Justice figures, only a quarter of convictions for all indictable offences – crimes so serious they can be dealt with by the Crown Court – result in an immediate custodial sentence from the courts.
When police cautions given for indictable offences are included, the figure slumps to only 19 per cent.
Only 37 per cent of violent crime convictions ended in a custodial sentence in the year to June 2013.
Even the most prolific criminals are being let off by the courts. Only 32 per cent of offenders with 11-14 previous convictions or cautions were given immediate custody for an indictable offence.
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.