Friday, September 30, 2016

A multicultural pedophile

The religion of the offender is not mentioned, for some unknown reason. The surname Bhatti comes both from Northern India and Pakistan but people named Hamid are almost invariably Muslims. It is an Arab religious name

A teaching assistant was caught having a fling with a 15-year-old schoolgirl after her mother found his love note saying, 'You were amazing last night as always', a court heard.

Hamid Bhatti, 24, allegedly slept with the pupil 14 times after grooming her while on a work placement at her school.

He lavished her with love notes and jewellery before having sex with her on his bedroom floor, jurors were told.

The girl, who was studying for her GCSEs, had developed a 'crush' on him and thought he was 'good looking' after spotting him in an art lesson, it was said.

They crossed paths between lessons at the school in Yeovil, Somerset, and swapped numbers via Facebook after she messaged him from a friend's account.

Concerns were raised when the girl was spotted blowing the maths assistant a kiss out of the classroom window - and he caught it and 'threw' it back, it was said.

When challenged, the two conspired together and claimed it was just a 'joke', denying there was anything untoward going on, Taunton Crown Court heard.

But they were already in a sexual relationship and over the next eight months, Bhatti allegedly slept with the girl - who he met when she was just 14 - at least 14 times, the court was told.

On one occasion, Bhatti slept with the girl - who was drunk after going to a party - on his bedroom floor while her teenage friend slept in his bed, prosecutors claim.

He also told her he loved her and gave her a necklace, money and a cushion with 'I love you' written on it, the court heard.

Bhatti and the girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were questioned multiple times by police but she lied to stop him from getting into trouble, it was said.

The defendant, who has a thick black beard and long hair, denies five counts of sexual activity with a child at least 14 times between May 2014 and February 2015.

He also denies abducting a child after he allegedly ignored an order made by police banning him from having any contact with the girl.

Lee Bremridge, prosecuting, said: 'The Crown says that he knew full well how old the girl was.

'A sexual relationship between them started in May 2014 when he worked at the school and she was a pupil.

'That sexual relationship continued throughout later 2014 into 2015, which is why she was prepared to lie to the police and tell them that nothing happened when she was interviewed.

'It was because they were in a relationship together and she was protecting him.'

Concerns were first raised by a fellow teacher at the school after Bhatti, then 22, was seen escorting the girl to class and they blew each other a kiss, the court heard.

He was sacked from his job the following month, in June 2014, and social services got involved.

The girl and Bhatti, who got a new job in a restaurant, maintained that they had never slept together, with Bhatti claiming the girl was 'pestering' him.

But a jury was told on Monday that he initiated intimacy with the youngster after inviting her on a date while he was still employed by the school.

They kissed and cuddled and allegedly had sex for the first time later that week, in May 2014, after arranging to go on a second date.

The girl was questioned by police in July 2014 after she turned up at school with a 'black eye' and her mother was called in, the court heard.

But she was 'less than truthful' about what had happened and said she and Bhatti had not had sex, and that the black eye was from tripping over, it was said.

Mr Brembridge said: 'She said that although she had a crush on Hamid Bhatti and had stayed at his house, they never had sex.

'The girl was clearly protecting them because the two of them were having a sexual relationship and they didn't want anyone, particularly the police or her parents, to find out.'

In October 2014, the girl's mother called police after finding a handwritten note among her daughter's belongings.

Bhatti, who now lives in Rochdale, Yorkshire, allegedly wrote: 'Hey baby, I'm sorry I had to leave this morning for work. You were amazing last night as always. 'I hope you get this message and leave me a note. Plan to see you soon. I love you. P.s. don't forget to go to the doctors.'

The couple still denied they were having an affair, but the note prompted police to issue Bhatti with an anti-abduction notice, prohibiting him from contacting the child.

The court heard that the teacher ignored the warning and was finally caught out after the teenager went missing in February 2015. Police went to Bhatti's house to enquire about the girl's whereabouts and he told them he had not seen or spoken to her for a long time.  Suspicious, they returned later that day and officers standing at the back of the property in Yeovil, Somerset, caught the teenager trying to flee.

Police discovered a used condom with the pupil's DNA on it in his bedroom.

Bhatti was arrested and charged with sex with a minor in June 2015, after the girl, who by that time had turned 16, finally told police the 'whole truth'.

He admits sleeping with the girl in February 2015 but denies knowing she was underage at the time.


'Favors' to Blacks

Thomas Sowell

Back in the 1960s, as large numbers of black students were entering a certain Ivy League university for the first time, someone asked a chemistry professor — off the record — what his response to them was. He said, “I give them all A’s and B’s. To hell with them.”

Since many of those students were admitted with lower academic qualifications than other students, he knew that honest grades in a tough subject like chemistry could lead to lots of failing grades, and that in turn would lead to lots of time-wasting hassles — not just from the students, but also from the administration.

He was not about to waste time that he wanted to invest in his professional work in chemistry and the advancement of his own career. He also knew that his “favor” to black students in grading was going to do them more harm than good in the long run, because they wouldn’t know what they were supposed to know.

Such cynical calculations were seldom expressed in so many words. Nor are similar cynical calculations openly expressed today in politics. But many successful political careers have been built on giving blacks “favors” that look good on the surface but do lasting damage in the long run.

One of these “favors” was the welfare state. A vastly expanded welfare state in the 1960s destroyed the black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and generations of racial oppression.

In 1960, before this expansion of the welfare state, 22 percent of black children were raised with only one parent. By 1985, 67 percent of black children were raised with either one parent or no parent.

A big “favor” the Obama administration is offering blacks today is exemption from school behavior rules that have led to a rate of disciplining of black male students that is greater than the rate of disciplining of other categories of students.

Is it impossible that black males misbehave in school more often than Asian females? Or Jewish students? Or others?

Is the only possible reason for the disparities in disciplining rates that the teachers and principals are discriminating against black males? Even when many of these teachers and principals in black neighborhoods are themselves black?

But Washington politicians are on the case. It strengthens the political vision that blacks are besieged by racist enemies, from which Democrats are their only protection. They give black youngsters exemptions from behavioral standards, just as the Ivy League chemistry professor gave them exemption from academic standards.

In both cases, the consequence — unspoken today — is “to hell with them.” Kids from homes where they were not given behavioral standards, who are then not held to behavioral standards in schools, are on a path that can lead them as adults straight into prison, or to fatal confrontations with the police.

This is ultimately not a racial thing. Exactly the same welfare state policies and the same non-judgmental exemption from behavioral standards in Britain have led to remarkably similar results among lower-class whites there.

The riots of lower-class whites in London, Manchester and other British cities in 2011 were incredibly similar to black riots in Ferguson, Baltimore and other American cities — right down to setting fire to police cars.

One of the few bright spots for black children in American ghettos have been some charter schools that have educated these children to levels equal to, and in some cases better than, those in affluent suburbs.

You might think that this would be welcomed by those who are so ready to do “favors” for blacks. But you would be dead wrong. Democrats who have been in charge of most cities with sizable black populations, for decades, are on record opposing the spread of charter schools. So is the NAACP.

That is a de facto declaration of moral bankruptcy in both cases, just as in the case of the Ivy League chemistry professor. In all three cases, it is a question of promoting one’s own special interests, while offering “favors” to blacks.

The Democrats' special interest is in serving the teachers' unions, which oppose charter schools and support Democrats financially. The NAACP’s special interest is in serving the same donors — and in keeping ghetto schools controlled by racial activists, as part of their turf.


Australia 'should go in to bat for China'

This may be the first and last time I agree with a U.N. official but I think the lady below is right.  I have previously argued that China now has a perfectly legal right to the islands it has built in the East China sea: The right of first settlement

Australia is well placed to make the case to Washington to try to reform international organisations to accommodate China's rise, according to a senior EU advisor.

Nathalie Tocci, a special advisor to the European Union's High Representative, says as Europe is doing some soul searching about giving up some of its own power, other countries need to do the same.

"Unless we start doing that we may end up in a situation where other organisations pop up," Dr Tocci told AAP on Wednesday.

China needed to be told the world understood it was growing and needed more space, within rules and limits.

"It's also about telling Americans, you've got to make that space, otherwise they are going to take it and it's not going to be pretty," she said.

The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, set up in opposition to the US-based International Monetary Fund and World Bank, was the "first warning signal", she said.

Other bodies such as the World Trade Organisation and even parts of the UN could also need reform.

"In order to ensure that multilateralism survives into the future, we have to transform it," Dr Tocci said.

She urged Australia to take a leadership role because it understands China's rise is inevitable.

"I think, given Australia's relationship with the United States, it has a huge role to play in making the case," Dr Tocci said.

On the prospects of an EU and Australian free trade deal, Dr Tocci, who helped draft the new global strategy on foreign and security policy after Britain voted to leave the bloc, said politicians needed to start laying the ground work early in order to win over a hostile public.

"These are not easy times. What we are seeing is a backlash against globalisation," she said.

"A lot of explaining needs to be done about why these agreements are actually good." She predicts the deal could be finalised by 2018.


The Labor Party's anti-plebiscite drive reflects audacity of hate

Jennifer Oriel writes from Australia on the wish by Australian conservatives to let the homosexual marriage issue be settled by a popular vote

There is something rather dangerous about the gay marriage debate — and it is not homosexuality or marriage.

It is the view widely held by our political Left that ­liberal democratic precepts can be overridden whenever they interfere with politically correct ideology.

Not content merely to deny the democratic mandate of millions who endorsed the same-sex marriage plebiscite by voting the Coalition into power, Labor is sowing civil hatred as social order.

The abysmal and divisive new ethos of Labor is the audacity of hate.

I think it would be fair to surmise that the opposition’s legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus doesn’t suffer from an excess of modesty.

But even so, his idea that the government should “win over” Labor by compromising on the plebiscite bill is remarkably arrogant. The government has an election mandate to hold a plebiscite on same-sex marriage. Labor’s ­denial of it constitutes a repudiation of the will of the people.

Having lost its election campaign to deny people a vote on marriage reform, Labor has swung into attack.

It is reframing the plebiscite ­debate by exploiting fear and manipulating emotion. In one short week, Labor has succeeded in re­framing the founding principles of liberal democracy as manifestations of hatred — all in the name of love, of course.

In Labor’s grand lexicon of doublespeak, public reason, active citizenship, and the human rights to free thought and speech, freedom of association and religion are mistranslated into forms of ­hatred. And the citizen who seeks active participation in democracy by advocating for the same-sex marriage plebiscite is, by extension, hatred personified.

Increasingly it is the case that whenever a question of social reform arises, the political Left reverts to the audacity of hate to coerce people into conformity. Its default position is to mob and vilify dissenters.

It acts as though Australia were a country under democratic socialism rather than liberal democracy.

Like revolutionary socialism, the democratic model holds socialism as the only end of democracy, but its tenets are introduced using the state and associ­ated institutions rather than militant revolution.

During the past week, the socialist Left position on gay marriage has been promulgated by Labor, the Greens and the state media institutions that consistently follow the Left party line: SBS and the ABC.

In news and on current affairs programs, the ABC has so aggressively campaigned for the socialist Left’s anti-plebiscite position, it appeared there was no alternative. And that is perfectly consistent with the one-party-rule ethos of democratic socialism.

But it just happens to run counter to the Australian people’s will — namely, the democratic mandate for a plebiscite endorsed at the federal election.

Whenever a pro-plebiscite voice is raised, the Left howls it down in a chorus of contempt. Predictably, Christians and conservatives are the principal victims of the Left’s pre-emptive moral infallibility.

For example, when it looked as though Stephen O’Doherty, chief executive of Christian Schools Australia, was winning the plebiscite debate on ABC’s The Drum, host Julia Baird interrupted to promulgate an anti-plebiscite line in unison with the other panellists.

Tony Jones, the host of ABC’s Q&A, so routinely interrupts politically incorrect panellists that the online forum Catallaxy Files holds bids for “interruption lotto” before each show.

The tendency of the political Left to contort democracy whenever it conflicts with politically correct ideology is evident also in its main counter-argument to the plebiscite, which actually constitutes a rationale for it.

Anti-plebiscite politicians and commentators believe they can relieve Australia of the people’s will by appeal to representative democracy.

Yet the zenith of representative democracy — the popular democratic election under a system of universal suffrage — yielded a yes vote for the plebiscite as a central feature of the Coalition’s election platform.

In recent years the appeal to representative democracy has been fashioned into a rhetorical tool of convenience to justify everything from policy reversals to unseating prime ministers. It is the default defence of those who seek a ready rationale for acting against the will of the people expressed in federal elections.

And it seems that appeals to representative democracy strip­ped of both genuine representation and democracy are especially popular among the members of left-leaning factions in both major parties.

Such appeals were used to unseat Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd and Liberal prime minister Tony Abbott.

However, hollow appeals to representative democracy threaten its future by subordinating the people’s will to party politics and replacing election mandates with polls.

They are the source of the growing democratic deficit — the vast gulf between the people and the elites — producing political instability across the West.

The government has a mandate to pass the bill for a plebiscite on same-sex marriage. The mandate was provided by millions of Australians who voted for the Coalition in the July election.

Labor would have liked to win the election with its opposing campaign to legislate for same-sex marriage in parliament. But it did not win. Having lost the popular vote, Labor seeks to subvert democracy by blocking the plebiscite.

The worrying implication is that the Left may actually loathe the people and mistrust democracy as much as its anti-plebiscite propaganda suggests.



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: