Sunday, May 29, 2016
Jealous multiculturalist who stabbed his ex-girlfriend to death, knifing her 26 times in the face and chest, is jailed for life
A British soldier stabbed a Bupa nurse to death, knifing her 26 times in the face and chest and left her for dead in her neighbour's garden.
Father-of-one Josphat Mutekedza, 36, a private in the Territorial Army, killed his 37-year-old ex-girlfriend Miriam Nyazema as he lay in wait for her to arrive home with her new boyfriend.
As Miss Nyazema lay dying with the blade still lodged in her back, Mutekedza battered her around the head with a stool shouting: 'She's caused this mess. 'I can't believe what she's done to me, it's all her fault'.
He was also seen waving a handgun and called police saying: 'She's been cheating on me - sleeping with another man. Where's that man, I'm going to f*****g kill him.'
Miss Nyazema, who worked at a nursing home in Shaw near Oldham, Greater Manchester, was taken to hospital but died just over an hour later.
Her boyfriend Jacob Chigombe, who had been visiting her from his native Zimbabwe, was found hiding nearby.
At Bolton Crown Court, Mutekedza was found guilty of murder after just an hours deliberation by a jury and was ordered to serve a minimum 26 years.
The army private, from Eastbourne, East Sussex, had been engaged to the mother of his baby son but began an affair with the victim who lived in Rochdale, Greater Manchester.
He would refer to his mistress as 'Boo Boo' and began spending time away from home.
Mark Kellet prosecuting said: 'His partner realised he was having an affair and in early 2014 they separated. On one occasion she checked his phone and saw a number of Miriam Nyazema and that was entered in the directory as 'Boo Boo'.
'He seemed to want to increase his commitment to Miriam Nyazema but it was clear Miriam did not feel the same. 'She told work colleagues that the relationship had ended and she was now more interested in Jacob Chigombe.
'She said she had hit the jackpot. WhatsApp messages make it clear that their relationship, if not sexual, was certainly romantic. Messages of love and desire were exchanged.'
During a Valentine's Day text exchange Miriam told Chigombe: 'When I woke up I had a big smile on my face because I dreamt I had a baby. Can't wait daddy.' He would also refer to her as 'juicy lips'.
On July 24 last year, Mutekedza who planned to marry Miriam went to visit her - one day before Chigombe was due to arrive in the UK - only for his mistress to end their relationship. The following morning she called police to her home saying he was still in the house and had refused to leave.
He left after being spoken to by the officers but over the next two days the pair exchanged numerous text and Whatsapp messages - with him saying he missed Miriam whilst she said 'needed time to sort her head out.'
During a phone call to police Mutekedza told an operator: 'I'm in the house, she's outside lay down, I don't know who she's with. I stabbed her myself. She's got the knife.
'She's been cheating on me, it was when I came home, she was with another man. He ran away. She's lay down on the street. I don't know where I stabbed her, I didn't check. I'm making violence.'
Police dashed to the scene to find Chigombe in a side street and arrested Mutekedza on the foot path outside Miriam's home.
Tests showed the victim had stab wounds to her chest which collapsed both her lungs.
Mutekedza denied murder but admitted manslaughter by reason of a loss of self control claiming he acted in self defence. He pleaded guilty to a firearms offence.
The betrayal of our boys: They’re falling behind girls in almost every way
And, says SARAH VINE, the feminisation of society, especially our schools, is to blame
The numbers are unequivocal. In every respect, today's girls seem to have the advantage over boys.
Boys are less likely to go to university. If they do get there, they are statistically much more likely to drop out. And all but the most high-flying have fewer job prospects when they leave.
The stark evidence comes in a report published by the Higher Education Policy Institute.
Boys To Men: The Underachievement Of Young Men in Higher Education and How To Start Tackling It, tells us that girls have 35 per cent more chance of entering higher education - a staggering figure that translates into almost 100,000 more young women than men applying to university this year.
But it gets worse. The poorer you are, the more dire the situation. Among pupils on free school meals, girls are 51 per cent more likely than boys to continue their studies after school.
And the group that fares worse than any other is low-income white boys. Just 8.9 per cent of them make it to college.
It's no coincidence that so many of this group are represented in our justice system, in young offender institutions and prisons. Young men from deprived backgrounds with very few opportunities to start off with, but whose options now seem narrower than ever.
So not only are we failing our boys; we're failing those who need our help the most.
Nick Hillman, co-author of the report and a Higher Education Policy Institute director, calls this a national scandal. 'Nearly everyone seems to have a vague sense that our education system is letting young men down,' he says. 'But there are few detailed studies of the problem and almost no clear policy recommendations on what to do about it.'
He suggests more male teachers, combined with other incentives designed to appeal to poor working-class males, would help redress the balance - and save future generations of men from terminal marginalisation.
Meanwhile, Mary Curnock Cook, chief executive of UCAS, the body that processes applications to higher education, issues a warning.
'If this differential growth carries on unchecked,' she writes in her foreword to the report, 'then girls born this year will be 75 per cent more likely to go to university than their male peers.'
That is an imbalance every bit as skewed as the one that existed towards women in the first half of the 20th century - only that it's men who are suffering now.
Predictably, the truths of this report have ruffled some hard-line feminist feathers.
Sorana Vieru, the vice-president of the National Union of Students, said that the report 'takes a complex and nuanced issue and turns it into a 'battle of the sexes'.'
In particular, there was outrage at the suggestion that gender imbalance in the teaching profession - with classrooms dominated by female teachers - was part of the problem. But such knee-jerk, politically motivated defensiveness is pointless.
For the mother of a small boy such as myself, this is grim news. And although my son does not, thankfully, belong to the group most at risk, he is nevertheless growing up in a world where masculinity and male traits in general are increasingly devalued.
It's the same everywhere in the Western World, from the beaches of California to the barbecues of Western Australia - man's place in society is no longer clear.
Of course, some kind of shake-up was long-overdue. But, increasingly, it's starting to look as though society has overshot itself in its eagerness to even up the odds.
The truth is that over the past few decades the common-or-garden male has been in slow but steady decline. Men such as my father, who grew up working on building sites during school holidays - and who, when I came along, knocked up a cot and a set of cupboards from a few bits of plywood - are all but extinct.
Their unashamed male-ness - a sense of responsibility for their families, an expectation of being the main bread-winner, the ability to change a plug - has long been mocked in modern culture as a neanderthal throwback.
New man, the strange, sandal-wearing creature that emerged from the feminism of the Seventies and Eighties saw to that, joining the women at their coffee mornings, eager to discover his feelings and making a virtue of his inadequacy in all areas of traditional masculinity.
It became impossible to open a door for a woman, or pay her a compliment without being accused of rampant sexism.
But a number of factors - all of them interlinked - since then have combined to accelerate the emasculation of men into a full-blown cultural crisis which, as this new report makes plain, could be disastrous for us all.
Key was the arrival of complex technology in the workplace and the advent of the internet.
It meant working became less about brawn (a natural male advantage) and more about brain - opening up all sorts of previously male-dominated areas to women.
In my own newspaper trade, for example, it was the male compositors and printers who went by the wayside; in heavy industries, it was the coalminers and steelworkers. From the farmlands to the shipyards, men began to lose their grip on the labour market. As these changes progressed and demand for skilled male labour fell away, many men were left economically and socially redundant. At the same time, opportunities were opening up for women everywhere.
For the first time ever, the scales started to tip in our favour.
Of course, men don't do all that badly today. The white middle-aged male still dominates at the top of the tree, in the professions and politics. But that is not true of the younger generations.
And among the working-class communities that this report highlights, things are much tougher for your average male.
Heavy industries that require muscle and stamina are in terminal decline. In their place, the creative and service industries - all areas in which women thrive - are booming.
This changing economic landscape has devalued traditional male characteristics that for centuries have been highly prized - physical strength, aggression, determination, grit - in favour of a 'softer' more feminine approach. There is even talk of James Bond becoming Jane Bond.
Thanks to the internet, working from home is much more common -and this, too, favours women over men. Research published this week by the TUC shows that more than 1.5 million workers are now based in their homes, and that the biggest increase in homeworkers is among women - up by 157,000 since ten years ago.
Now we women can run our homes, have babies AND run the world. It's not easy, of course. But plenty can, and do - as the rise and rise of the so-called 'mum-preneur' shows.
In fact, several generations of boys have grown up now with working mothers who not only contribute substantially to the family income, but are in many cases pivotal to financial survival as the pool of traditionally male-dominated jobs dwindles.
Boys and young men look around them and what do they see? A world they can no longer expect to inherit. A world where women not only have the same opportunities as men, but in some cases more.
This is no bad thing; but equality should not come at the expense of the losing side.
Our boys and young men desperately need to find their feet in this brave new world. And to do that they need support, a new set of goals to which they can aspire - and modern role models.
Mr Hillman's point about more male teachers is very important. Women make great teachers; but the fact remains that boisterous young boys of a certain age and stage will not respect a woman teacher in the same way they will a man.
They need strong males they can fear and respect - and on whom they can model their own behaviour.
But it's not just at school where the problem lies. Generations of boys are now growing up with an entirely different perspective on the role of men in the world.
Many see their mothers fulfilling roles that their fathers would have taken in the past. This cannot help but change their view of themselves as males.
Some will become apathetic and directionless; others introspective and depressed.
The social group that the recent survey identifies as being most at risk - the white working classes - has witnessed more than any other the erosion of their own fathers' identities as traditional working-class male jobs have disappeared.
But while no end of thought and effort has gone into helping women and girls get better access to education and opportunity, little has been given to helping boys adapt to this shift - and to the loss of the certainties their grandfathers enjoyed.
Past generations of men never had it easy; but their roles were at least clearly defined. They would become protectors and providers, defenders of the traditional family.
Academic success and ambition were, therefore, important to them. It was drummed into them from a young age that they would be responsible for the financial welfare of the next generation. There was strength in that certainty. On top of all this, there is another factor fatally undermining young men. The rise of a highly toxic and vindictive form of radical - some might say sadistic - feminism in colleges and on campus makes being a boy ever harder.
Today's male students must negotiate a minefield of extreme political correctness in schools and universities. At a crucial time when they are developing their all-important sense of self, they are being overwhelmed by negative messages about masculinity.
You see it all the time: the all-must-have prizes approach of so many in the liberal teaching establishment who frown on competitive achievement in academia and sport; the university undergraduate accused by the sorority of being a foul rapist when in fact the sex was consensual; the 'silencing' of anyone who dares challenge the destructive feminist status quo.
As a woman, I don't know what to make of these things; as a young man it must be nigh on impossible. How can they possibly know which way is up?
What we are witnessing here, it seems to me, is a form of revenge.
What right have men to whine? For centuries they had the upper hand - surely it's only fair now that they get a taste of their own medicine? Shouldn't they just - if you'll pardon me - man up and accept that all this has been a long time coming?
Part of me rather agrees with this view. There was a huge imbalance in society and it needed to be redressed. But once the scales start to go the other way, there is a real risk that the entirely legitimate fight for freedom and equality can turn sour, and become every bit as nasty as the one it seeks to overthrow.
The fact is that our boys are being punished by a society so anxious to atone for the sexism of the past that it cannot see how it is destroying innocent lives. They are quite genuinely paying for the sins of their fathers.
Boys such as my son have done nothing wrong. They shouldn't have to deal with all this baggage being heaped on their young shoulders.
And it's clear that it is starting to effect their so-called 'life chances'.
Garth Stahl, a sociology and literacy lecturer, spent a year researching the educational aspirations of 23 white working-class boys aged between 14 and 16 in three London schools.
He found that in all cases, the schools they attended worked hard to promote the idea of university education. But the problem wasn't the schools; it was the boys. They were culturally worried about the idea of academic success. In fact, the idea seemed to make them rather uncomfortable.
As Stahl wrote: 'One participant, George, said: 'I do want to be someone that stands out, but I don't want to at the same time ... I want people to see me as a smart person, but I don't want to be like someone who's embarrassing.'
If the past few decades of post-feminist cultural domination have taught boys and men anything, it's this: to be embarrassed and ashamed of who they are. To suppress their natural instincts, to run less, fight less, shout less - to just be less like themselves.
Granted, no one wants a return to the bad old days; but neither do we want to see half the population reduced to a quivering, snivelling puddle. It's time to stand up for our boys, and teach them how to live in the modern world - as proud, unabashed men.
The absurd WHO
An Israeli delegate lashed out this week at the World Health Organization for politicizing its annual assembly by singling out his country – the only one on earth condemned at the meeting for violating health rights.
Confronting what he called “the ritual of naming and shaming Israel,” Omer Caspi on Wednesday criticized member states which he said “turn their eyes, ears and hearts away from real health emergencies and devote precious time and resources to politics.”
“So, since you want politics, I will give you politics,” he told the gathering in Geneva, going on to recount some facts and statistics arising out of the civil wars in Syria and Yemen, as documented by the U.N. itself. Among them:
--360 attacks on medical facilities in Syria, at the cost of the lives of more than 730 medical personnel. A U.N. commission of inquiry has called the attacks war crimes
--the closure of 600 health centers in Yemen and the deaths from preventable diseases of 50,000 children under the age of five over the past year
-- 19 million people in Yemen lacking access to clean water and 14 million in urgent need of health care.
Neither Syria nor Yemen – nor any other country around the world – is the subject of a country-specific resolution at this year’s WHO assembly, which runs through Saturday.
The sole country-specific resolution, introduced by the Arab states and the Palestinian Authority, condemns Israel for “health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan (sic)”.
It commissions the WHO to carry out a “field assessment,” focusing among other things on “the impact of prolonged occupation and human rights violations on mental, physical and environmental health.”
Notwithstanding Caspi’s appeal for member-states to reject the resolution it was adopted by a large margin – 107-8, with 8 abstentions.
The eight “no” votes came from the United States, Canada, Australia, Israel, Guatemala, Paraguay, Micronesia and Papua New Guinea. Every member of the European Union voted in favor.
During his short statement Caspi contrasted the situation in Syria and Yemen to that in the Palestinian territories and the Golan Heights.
Among Palestinians, under-five mortality rates are down and life expectancy rates up, he said, claiming that the results were “far better” than the average for the Arab states’ group at the U.N.
Despite terror attacks by Palestinians against Israelis, Caspi said, almost 100,000 Palestinians from the West Bank were treated in Israeli hospitals over the past year.
And on the Golan Heights, he said, all residents including Druze “enjoy the same health care as all Israelis.”
He added that Israeli hospitals have treated almost 3,000 Syrian victims of the civil war.
Caspi concluded by saying the WHO should leave politics to the U.N.’s political institutions.
“It is absurd that we should sit here year after year, listening to a political harangue against my country as well as to my rebuttal,” he said. “This theatre of the absurd must come to an end.”
The Australian Federal election is shaping as a battle between the two most politically correct leaders in Australia’s history
Mark Latham, below, was a terrible leader of the ALP but is always outspoken, a rare virtue
IN this era of political correctness and gender fluidity, Mother’s Day is lucky to survive. Under the guidance of the Safe Schools program, it’s only a matter of time before the second Sunday in May becomes an UN-sanctioned International Day For People Who Identify As Being Mothers. It will be open to men and women alike.
This is the logical extension of Leftist identity politics: a belief that capitalist social conditioning has fried our brains so badly that none of us can figure out our true gender role.
I’m a 55-year-old man who has spent the past 40 years admiring attractive women and, along the way, fathering three children.
But if only they had taught Safe Schools in the 1970s, I could have broken free from capitalist indoctrination, signed up for neo-Marxist gender politics and emerged as Australia’s answer to Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner.
At Sunday’s lunch in the splendid La Vigna Restaurant in Camden, my kids could have had two mothers, not just one.
On Father’s Day we wouldn’t have to bother, staying home to read our gender fluidity lecture notes from La Trobe University.
Not surprisingly, in my state of false consciousness, I’m not alone. As I looked around the restaurant two days ago, all the mothers appeared to be women and all the fathers appeared to be men. They too missed the Safe Schools lesson where you arrive from outer space without a penis or vagina and then sort out what to do.
Undeterred by our lack of formal education, we dug into the veal scallopini and seafood ravioli instead.
It says something bizarre about Australian politics that in this election campaign, both major parties are committed to keeping Safe Schools and the equally Goebbelesque Building Respectful Relationships program. As a duo, Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten are the two most politically correct leaders in our history.
They have formed an elitist bipartisanship around the things the Australian people aren’t allowed to hear.
Think of it as the great silence swindle of election 2016.
Over the next eight weeks there will be no talk of how welfare dependency in places like Auburn, Parramatta and Merrylands has become an Australian breeding ground for Islamic terrorism.
There will be no talk of how the nation’s 200,000 per annum immigration program is adding daily to congestion and urban sprawl, making large parts of Sydney unlivable. There will be no talk of amending section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act to restore genuine freedom of speech.
There will be no talk of curbing the thought-police powers of the Human Rights Commission, which has declared its right to name and shame “racists”, even when there is no evidence of racial malice.
There will be no talk about the true extent of domestic violence in Australia: the ABS statistic showing an annual rate of domestic assault against women of 1.06 per cent. Instead, we’ll be bombarded with more taxpayer-funded propaganda about an “epidemic” and “national emergency”.
From Bill Turnbull and Malcolm Shorten, there will be no talk about the importance of teaching strength and resilience in our schools.
Their education policies will add to the Age of Sookery — where children are encouraged to play the victim, seeking quotas and other nanny-state interventions to succeed in life. There will be no talk of ending Australia’s pill-pop culture, where newly invented ailments such as “anxiety depression” have become an all-purpose alibi for errant footballers, welfare slackers and those claiming to be freaked out by the prospect of a democratic national vote on same-sex marriage.
Most of all, there will be no talk exposing the fraud of identity politics: the Leftist obsession subdividing our nation on the basis of race, gender and sexuality.
By encouraging people to focus on their individual identity, the Left is atomising society and destroying our sense of community, no less than the individualistic Right.
How fitting for this election to have been called on Sunday. It’s the mother of all politically correct charades.
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.