Monday, May 25, 2015
Multicultural Poisoner in Britain
A cleaner who was angry with a worker for walking in on the canteen while she was there took revenge on him by spraying toxic chemicals over his sandwiches.
Sharon Edwards was cleaning the kitchen in an office building when she was disturbed by Mohammed Omar Islam, who wanted to put his lunch in the communal fridge.
When he left the room again, she muttered 'mind how you go' and then sprayed telephone cleaning fluid and air freshener over his food.
Islam later noticed a smell of chemicals coming from his sandwich, and spat them out after a single bite because of the disgusting taste of the air freshener.
Edwards, 44, from Aston in Birmingham, today pleaded guilty at Birmingham Crown Court to administering a poison with the intent to injure, aggrieve or annoy.
The cleaner, described as a 'decent and hard-working woman' by her lawyer, was given a 26-week suspended jail sentence.
Joanne Barker, prosecuting, said both Edwards and her victim were working at an office block in Hagley Road, Birmingham on February 16 when the incident happened.
'Mr Islam entered the canteen to put his food in the fridge and the defendant was inside cleaning,' she said. 'Ms Edwards was clearly unhappy with him entering the area as she tried to clean and, in fairness to her, had put a chair against the door.
'There was a verbal altercation - Mr Islam told the defendant she was rude, and put his food in the fridge and left.' Ms Barker added: 'But as he left, the defendant muttered something along the lines of "watch how you go".
'Ms Edwards then opened the fridge door and opened the lunch-box with Mr Islam's food inside, and sprayed it several times.'
At lunchtime, Mr Islam, a customer service worker, collected his food but noticed 'a strong chemical smell' coming from his sandwiches, Ms Barker said.
He passed the food around colleagues for them to inspect then took 'a small bite', which he immediately spat out.
The Selsafe telephone sanitiser had a label on the bottle saying, 'Warning: Harmful. May cause lung damage, if swallowed.'
Mr Islam went to hospital after vomiting, but did not suffer any long-term effects.
Edwards was identified thanks to CCTV footage and confessed as soon as she was arrested, telling police she did not intend to hurt Mr Islam.
Her barrister Henry Spooner described the affair as 'unfortunate and foolish', adding: 'This incident occurred from what she perceived, at the time, as his arrogant and in-her-face behaviour.
'He accused her of being rude, and she, him. Whatever the truth - and maybe they're both right - it didn't excuse her complete overreaction to that.
He added his client had been 'very angry' and accepted she 'behaved in a way that was totally inappropriate for what was, when all is said and done, a very trivial incident indeed''
Judge Francis Laird QC said: 'That spiteful moment and the potential consequences, had he consumed all the food, make this a serious offence which crosses the custody threshold.'
The equality tyranny of the ‘gay cake’ judgment
“Equality as an aim in itself through government action is doomed not merely to defeat but to totalitarianism.” So observed the Archbishop of Canterbury earlier this year at the Trinity Institute symposium ‘Creating the Common Good’. His context was wealth creation and disparity, and the needs and means of redistribution. But his principle holds for the extremist pursuit of all equality: as a political vision and civil imperative, it inclines toward totalitarian injustice because it denies liberty to difference.
The court ruling in the case of the ‘gay cake’ against the McArthur family and Ashers Bakery is really quite astonishing (if not at all surprising). It appears that by refusing to make a cake with a political slogan agitating for a change in the law of Northern Ireland to permit same-sex marriage, Ashers Bakery discriminated against Gareth Lee by on the grounds of his sexual orientation, despite the fact that they would have declined an order to make such a cake for a heterosexual. And so, once again, we see gay ‘hurt feelings’ targeting a Christian business, and a court ruling which diminishes religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
Ashers’ decision was never about the Gareth Lee’s sexuality (if the McArthurs ever knew it: can’t heterosexuals order pro-same-sex-marriage cakes? Isn’t it possible to be gay and opposed to the redefinition of marriage? Can’t those inclined to same-sex attraction choose to marry a person of the opposite gender?): it was about a political slogan which offended against their Christian beliefs. Are businesses now to be compelled to produce materials or convey messages which are incompatible with their owners’ deeply and reasonably held beliefs?
Peter Lynas, a former barrister and Northern Ireland director of Evangelical Alliance (and guest writer on this very matter), commented:
“This judgment will cause great concern for all those in business. It turns out the customer is always right and businesses have no discretion in deciding which goods and services to produce. The law rightly protects people from discrimination, but it has now extended that protection to ideas. While it’s absolutely vital to keep this case in perspective, this ruling will come as a shock to the vast majority of people who, polling shows, supported Ashers. While the case will hopefully be appealed, that will lead to a prolonged period of uncertainty and nervousness among business owners. It will no doubt lead to further calls to change the law.”
It is important to note that the McArthurs discriminated not only on the grounds of sexual orientation, but also on the basis of religion and political opinion. Presiding District Judge Brownlie was very clear on this in her ruling (which merits reading very carefully in its entirety). As Peter Lynas further observes:
“With respect to religion, a law designed to protect the belief of the customer or employee had been extended and used against a business owner. Mr Lee’s beliefs were not relevant to the decision not to produce the cake – they were and remain unknown. To extend the law to include the religious beliefs of the supplier is we believe a significant change in the law that will have wider implications. It seems that religion has been effectively banished from the commercial sphere. Even the right to freedom of religion under the European Convention of Human Rights could not save the McArthurs.”
“It is important to remember there was no mention of political opinion in the original letter of claim. The Equality Commission, which supports same-sex marriage and is by definition a political organisation, added this ground later. Will it now regulate which political opinions are allowed under equality law and which are unacceptable?”
And this is the very crux of the matter. We are dealing with ‘protected characteristics’ and political campaigns which agitate for a change in the law. What are the limits of these? If a gay man asks a Christian baker to make him a cake iced with the slogan ‘Abolish the Gay Age of Consent’, is the Christian baker now obliged by statute to become complicit in the propagation of pederasty? If a Christian man asks a Muslim printer to produce leaflets declaring ‘Jesus is Lord; Mohammed is a false prophet’, is the Muslim obliged by statute to become complicit in blasphemy?
How can it be, as District Judge Brownlie decrees, that the exercising of the Christian conscience must be restricted to ‘religious institutions’? How, then, is the Christian supposed to ‘walk in the spirit‘ (Gal 5:16) or ‘worship in spirit and in truth‘ (Jn 4:24)? Is our worshipping to be confined to Sunday church? Is our walking to be restricted by the walls of a ‘religious institution’?
If Joseph & Son had their carpenter’s shop not in first-century Nazareth but 21st-century Belfast, would they be obliged by statute to produce a wooden sign saying: ‘Support Gay Marriage’? If so, isn’t it clear that the law must now be changed so that people may not be coerced into supporting political causes to enact laws which offend against the religious conscience? The @HolyVote campaign is embryonic, but if there is to be no reasonable accommodation of religious belief, we are indeed being increasingly subject to a statist totalitarian equality.
Christian-owned bakery found to have discriminated against gay marriage will now only make cakes for 'birthday and baby-related celebrations'
The Christian-owned bakery which was found to have discriminated against a gay man has announced it is limiting its services - and will only bake birthday and baby cakes.
Ashers Baking Company will only provide birthday and baby-related celebration cakes, according to the firm's general manager.
Daniel McArthur said: 'Due to the recent legal developments we have decided to limit our celebration cake range to certain birthday and baby-related celebration cakes while we consider our policy and talk with our lawyers.'
The decision comes after a judge at Belfast County Court ruled that Ashers had acted unlawfully by declining an order from gay rights activist Gareth Lee last year.
Mr Lee, a member of the LGBT advocacy group Queer Space, wanted a cake featuring Sesame Street puppets Bert and Ernie with the slogan Support Gay Marriage.
It had been ordered for a private function in Bangor, County Down, to mark International Anti Homophobia Day last May.
Mr Lee, who paid in full when placing the order at Ashers' Belfast branch, said he was left feeling like a 'lesser person' when he was told his request could not be fulfilled.
The publicly funded Northern Ireland Equality Commission - which has a statutory duty to monitor the region's anti-discrimination laws - brought the legal action on his behalf.
Ashers, which is owned by the McArthur family, employs almost 80 people across six branches and delivers throughout the UK and Ireland.
The family said they opposed same sex marriage on religious grounds and could not produce the cake with a message that was contrary to their deeply held Christian beliefs.
In her judgement delivered on Tuesday District Judge Isobel Brownlie found the bakers had discriminated against Mr Lee on grounds of his sexual orientation and his political beliefs.
Ashers was ordered to pay agreed damages of £500.
Mr McArthur said the firm's website was being re-worked to reflect the changes. He added: 'The department represents a small part of the business and no jobs will be impacted.'
The high profile case has divided public opinion in Belfast and beyond.
Throughout the case, the McArthurs, who are considering an appeal, were supported by the Christian Institute which paid their defence costs.
Why I love 'hate speech'
By Mallory Millett, sister of the deranged feminist Kate Millet
I love Pamela Geller. I have known and loved her for years. She is a great American! If only everyone who has the honor of calling himself American could grow courage like hers we would be un-terrorizable as a nation. Pamela gets that we are at war and stands as an example for those of us who have lost our way.
Many of you under fifty have been educated by the whackerino indoctrinators crowding reality out of our High Schools and Universities. These liars and fantasists are so busy obliterating, truncating or revising history (when they're not entirely ignoring it), that our true history has drifted out the window like so much smoke wafting in the wind. As a consequence there are few Americans left to say, "Hey, whoa, that's not the way it goes...that's not the way it is"; especially when it comes to our Constitution.
The First Amendment is in the Constitution because not one scintilla of it could be taken for granted; it's an anomaly which needed to be boldly, emphatically, unequivocally stated due to it's being nonexistent in all of the places from which we ran to reach sanctuary on this continent. There seems to be some grand misunderstanding that human rights or free speech has ever existed anywhere else
But, the thing is...it didn't!
Forget about Greece. I'm talking post-ancient.
The first time such rights came to be was the English Magna Carta, which mildly inspired such thinking. (Remember, many in 16th Century England lost their heads over "thought crimes.") It was America which took rights from that document and others and greatly elaborated on them. For this reason, the First Amendment needed to be drawn out most carefully so as not to be misconstrued.
The entire point is that we have freedom of thought which flowers into freedom of speech. Otherwise, if my speech can be curbed then so may my thought be curbed and then, of necessity, we will have "thought police." America is where one comes to escape "thought police" who, to this day, predominate in the world.
Millions have died over this exact amendment. And here's the kicker: the whole point is to cover detestable speech, the most hateful speech. There would be no reason for its formation, were it just to cover acceptable speech. It had to be put in there first and laid out meticulously as all the other freedoms are dependent upon it.
Jonah Goldberg says, "She (Pamela) is contending that in America people are allowed to say offensive things (i..e. hate speech) without risking execution. I am at a loss as to why anyone would disagree with that".
I wholeheartedly stand behind that along with Judith Miller and Alan Dershowitz. As Jeanine Piro says, "The First Amendment is "an ABSOLUTE". This is contrary to Leftists, who would re conform our culture of liberty to please the tastes of savage, knife-wielding hordes. According to a report, one-half of Democrats and one-third of Republicans want to ban "hate-speech". Whaaaa? Let’s just get rid of our sacred free thought amendment?
Has everyone forgotten Nazis are allowed to march in Skokie? The KKK has the right of assembly and, by the way, Broadway just hauled in millions and many awards ridiculing, mocking and mercilessly pillorying The Book of Mormon. If we harbored constraints against such stuff Don Rickles would have been separated from his head before we knew of him (wouldn’t you love to hear his riff on this?)
What is this new idea being put out by that wrecking-ball throng of teachers that anything is all right except hate speech! Hate speech is the most protected speech. We're at liberty to spew hate-speech at anyone or anything.
Except the Muslims? ...because they are threatening to murder us because we object to their murdering us? You are kidding me! We are free to object to whatever we wish and to hate whomever we wish. Because some primitives are holding a knife to our throats we should just throw it in and say, "Aw, shucks, guys, we never really meant free-free?
The smartest thing to get rid of these clowns and their love of menace would be regularly to hold a "Mohammad cartoon contest" in every town in the USA with every newspaper and outlet publishing them. They will either go away and show themselves so we can dispatch them; or develop an ability to laugh at themselves and their shibboleths like every other person living in this motley nation. We've had the foul-mouthed "Book of Mormon", the infamous piss-Christ, the Polish jokes, the Irishmen jokes, the Jewish and Catholic jokes. It's an all-inclusive culture. Everyone and everything is fair game in America.
We should become a nation of Pamela Gellers. "Je sius Pamela Geller" needs to be our battle cry just as "Je suis Charlie Hebdo" came out of Paris in the same fashion as the Danes in WWII, who, to the one, put on The Star of David to stymie the Nazis. Oops! I forgot history's been erased from our mind-screens. Look it up. Denmark, WWII, Star of David. Google it, millennials.
Pamela sussed these beasts out of the woodwork. They were here and planning horrific violence. Let us drag the "lone wolves" and “terror-cells” who have come to invade and butcher us out into the open so we can weed them from our garden.
They came to kill and got killed. Perfect!
Pamela saved each life of those they would have massacred in whichever mall, theatre, school, hospital, church or gathering they had in their sights. These men were planning a big hit like the ones in Australia or Paris; the bazaars, mosques and schools where they've wreaked havoc on their fellow Muslims. Never forget: they are murdering Muslims by the hundreds of thousands. But Pamela brilliantly provoked them and voila! they showed themselves. She deserves a medal.
That's well-executed warfare.
Where are the men? Where are the Christians? Where are the Jews? Where are the sane non-homicidal Muslims about whom we hear? The war is upon us now and we have no choice but to win. Who, in this nation, is ready to face losing to these cutthroats? They are already secreted among us. Daily, hourly, we are being infiltrated...Ann Arbor, Florida, Minnesota, Idaho, the more innocent the place the better for entrenchment.
To win we must become inventive and clever like Pamela.
We need to stand shoulder to shoulder with her just as the Obamaless heads of state marched shoulder to shoulder through Paris. And anyway, this has nothing to do with speech. These radicals are here for the express purpose of murdering every one of us at random regardless of who we are, what we have done or what we say!
What has happened to Americans? You listened to the liberals for forty years and now you have Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore and the radical jihadists. Oh, yeah, you liberals, you "free thinkers" who never saw provocative art you didn't worship...you now have the gall to denounce Pamela? Yeah, we want you governing us as we face marauders...we want to stand shoulder to shoulder through the Revolutionary, Civil, and WWs I & II with such as you?
An Imam, in defending the fatwa on Pamela, had the gall to say, "You have to know that when you say such things there will be consequences!" Pamela exploded, "Not in America, sir! There are no punishing consequences for speech here." She was forced to talk over his incessant shrieking to be heard. "I am an American, sir, and, in America, you don't threaten my life over something I say." The Imam was covering her words because the very idea of such freedom makes him hysterical. He can't stop chattering as it's unbearably threatening to him. Terrorists are terrified people.
There is only one thing we tolerant Americans absolutely will not tolerate and that is the startling intolerance of these religious radicals. We are in the throes of a great war, perhaps one of the last great wars on Earth and we must win it at all costs...but never at the cost of our consciences, standards or souls.
We, every man and woman, must be ready to rise to the occasion, well-armed, to defend our dear land. We got relaxed; brain-washed by fools in our Universities and Media which opened up voluminous vacuums and, of course, the rapacious invaders have arrived. It's a simple law of physics: "Nature abhors a vacuum." Nothing new! Millennia old! Are we really so ignorant as to insist on turning a blind eye to this monstrous assault? We owe it to everyone who’s given life or limb in preserving this exact same liberty to close ranks against our predators.
The other day a Japanese statesman was quoted as saying that the thing the Japanese most feared about America throughout WWII was that so many individuals were armed. They said they believed they could never conquer a country where every citizen was armed and ready. Nuff said!
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.