Sunday, July 13, 2008

The evil British police again

Retired Briton arrested for chasing away youth gang

A pensioner who used a piece of wood to chase away a gang of teenagers who had been throwing stones at his home is facing a jail term after being arrested and charged with possessing an offensive weapon.

Sydney Davis, 65, a father-of-two, dialled 999 when his home in the Pinehurst area of Swindon, Wilts, came under attack. But when police failed to turn up over the next two hours he decided to take action himself. He grabbed a section of wood from a broken-up sofa lying in his front garden and chased the youths down the street - just as police officers finally arrived.

Mr Davis, a retired builder, was astonished when police arrested him while allowing the gang to run to safety. The householder now faces a court appearance and a potential prison term of six months if convicted. Mr Davis, whose windows have been smashed five times in the last eight months, branded the law "a colossal ass". He went on: "This is Britain gone mad. Just what in the world is this country coming to when the police arrest people like me for protecting their own property?

"The police say they want to reduce crime, yet they let evil little toe-rags like this off. Then they prosecute hard-working, upstanding residents like me. "There is simply no way we can shake off this problem of 'Yob Britain' if the legal system fails to protect the everyday person".

Mr Davis' difficulties began on July 2 when a gang started throwing stones, stick, mud and eggs at a number of homes. His wife, Pauline, 42, and their sons, Peter, seven, and James, five, cowered behind the sofa as the windows were hit by a flurry of missiles. "My wife called the police at 6pm, but they just kept on throwing stones through my back gate. "I left the back door open to stop them smashing it. Suddenly a really big rock came crashing into the kitchen. I just grabbed the wood, which was the nearest thing I could find, and chased them off. "The police turned up just as I was chasing them. As a result I was arrested, but they didn't arrest any of them."

Mr Davis was handcuffed, taken to a local police station and later charged. Wiltshire Police confirmed both the charge against him and the fact that no one else had been arrested in connection with the incident. The householder is expected to appear before local magistrates later in the month.


British mother prevented from taking own son to school because of criminal record checks

A woman was prevented from taking her own son to school because she hadn't been screened for a criminal record. Jayne Jones had been escorting 14-year-old severely epileptic Alex each day by taxi, taking specialist equipment with her in case he had a fit. But the mother-of-two was told she would not be allowed to continue doing so until her details had been run through a Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) check..

The case came to light only days after it emerged that hundreds of innocent people were branded criminals by the CRB, which was set up to vet people working with children. Figures seen by The Daily Telegraph showed that in the year to February 2008, 680 people were issued with incorrect information on their background checks by the CRB.

Last week a woman who was wrongly labelled a violent alcoholic and drug addict by the CRB was told she would have to allow police to take her fingerprints if she wanted to clear her name. Amanda Hodgson, 36, a law-abiding mother-of-three, learned of her "criminal past'' when applying for a post as a welfare assistant at her local primary school. She was told she had a criminal record stretching back 18 years, including three convictions for assaulting police officers, and the only way to clear her name was to get her fingerprints checked against every unsolved crime in the country.

Mrs Jones, from Aberfan in south Wales, said stopping her taking her son - who has cerebral palsy - to school was "political correctness gone mad". "It's crazy that I have to be CRB checked before I can ride in a taxi with my own son," she said. "I have to be checked to go in a taxi with him, but if I was able to drive him myself they wouldn't care and even offered to pay me expenses. "The taxi company is great and they carry Alex's medication but they won't use it and they wouldn't know how to put him in the recovery position if needs be."

Alex, who takes a combination of 32 anti-convulsant tablets a day, is currently travelling to his special needs school five miles away in Merthyr Tydfil with no one trained to cope if he has an attack. He has been fitted with the Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) therapy system under the skin, which works like a pacemaker to help control electrical signals which can malfunction and cause him to seize. But his parents are the only ones trained to use and understand the therapy. His 42-year-old father Malcolm has a full-time job and Mrs Jones is the boy's full-time carer.

A spokesman from Merthyr Tydfil Council said: "The CRB checking is a requirement of our transport provisions in relation to adults travelling on home-to-school transport in the capacity of an escort. "This is a standard requirement and has been for several years. "Any adult acting as an escort will, in the public gaze, be viewed as acting with the full acquiescence of the council and hence with its implied authority. "For the protection of the council and all vulnerable persons in its care it's essential all those endowed with an authority, implicit or explicit, should meet the security requirements within the transport contract provisions."


When They Came for the Philadelphia Christians: Marcavage update

Tyranny is a lot like cancer. Early detection is a great thing.Stopping cancer and tyranny in the early stages can prevent a world of hurt, pain and death down the road. In America, we enjoy a measure of freedom. However, we are not nearly as free as we think we are. Our liberty is under assault from multiple directions every day. This assault is not being waged by some dorko in a cave in Afghanistan and his scary brown minions. Rather, it is being waged by our own government. Already, "the land of the free" has the world's highest incarceration rate. There is so much creeping tyranny and so little time to address it all. And millions of Americans are in total denial.

On October 6, 2007, Michael Marcavage, who heads up a group called Repent America (RA), was arrested right in front of the Liberty Bell Center in downtown Philadelphia while preaching. Park Ranger Alan Saperstein approached Marcavage and asked him if he had a permit. Marcavage replied that, under the First Amendment, no such permit was required. Saperstein then issued Marcavage a "verbal permit" and demanded that he relocate to a "free speech zone" some distance away. Marcavage continued to preach and was led away in handcuffs. Watch the YouTube video of the arrest right here. The following is from the RA press release detailing Marcavage's arrest and conviction.
"Under the direction of Ian Crane, chief ranger of Independence National Historical Park, supervising ranger Alan Saperstein repeatedly approached Marcavage to demand that he and the ministry team move to a 'free speech zone' on the other side of the Liberty Bell Center, which was nowhere near those entering or exiting. Adding insult to absurdity, Saperstein stated that in the future that RA would need to obtain a written permit to even speak in the 'free speech zone,' but given a 'verbal permit' to go there for the day, which Marcavage refused, citing that constitutional protections were sufficient. When it became apparent that Marcavage was not going to yield to the unconstitutional demands, Saperstein arrested Marcavage and ordered the other members of the ministry team off the public sidewalks. Ironically, Marcavage was then physically escorted into the Liberty Bell Center for questioning and charged with violating the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36,  1.6 Permits (g)(2), which states that he violated the terms and conditions of a 'verbal permit'-a permit that Marcavage never accepted, nor is such a permit even listed under the regulations. Subsequently, Marcavage was issued a citation nearly six months later by certified mail concerning the same matter for violating the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36,  2.32 (g)(1) + (2), which states that he was 'interfering with agency functions' by preaching and ministering to people on the public sidewalk.

"On June 13, 2008, Judge Rapoport found Michael Marcavage 'guilty' on both charges under the Code of Federal Regulations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Goldberg argued that Marcavage's defense was 'propaganda' and that he was a 'clear and present danger' and asked the judge to send a message not only to Marcavage, but to anyone who would dare stand on public property and share their beliefs without government permission. In response, Judge Rapoport fined Marcavage $445, including costs, and placed him on probation for one year, which restricts his travel to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and bars him from entering the park or being on the public sidewalks surrounding the park for any reason without first notifying park authorities. He also cannot return to engage in free speech activities without first obtaining a permit, and only then in the designated 'free speech zone'. Directly following the trial, Marcavage was escorted by U.S. Marshals to be booked for his 'crimes'.
A German proverb states that "Freedom dies in little pieces." When someone else's liberty is attacked, your liberty is placed at risk. I recently did a mass e-mailing urging people to oppose the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine. You don't have to agree with Fox News or Rush Limbaugh. I certainly don't. You just have to realize that the same First Amendment that protects them protects you and me.

And if Uncle Sam can get away with violating Michael Marcavage's God-given and constitutionally protected rights, then he can get away with violating anyone's rights anywhere. And it isn't just the rights of evangelical Christians. The "free exercise" clause of the First Amendment protects the rights of Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians, Shintoists, New Agers and believers in Mungabunga. It protects atheists too.

The Old Testament prophet Daniel was thrown into the lion's den for defying the decree of King Darius against praying to any god other than King Darius-Daniel 6. I once heard someone say that way too many contemporary preachers would respond such a decree by saying things like "you can still pray in your heart" or "it is only for 30 days." Indeed, the Bible is full of civil disobedience. Daniel knew what so many contemporary Christians refuse to acknowledge: when you give your government an inch, they take a mile.

America is not Nazi Germany. At least not yet. However, millions of people are in total denial about their vanishing liberty. The case of Michael Marcavage is not an isolated incident. Indeed, in 2004 RA activists were threatened with 47 years in prison under a "hate crimes"statute for publicly preaching against homosexuality.

There is a big fat lie going around nowadays about how Romans 13 commands blind obedience to secular authority. NO IT DOES NOT! (1) This is America. Power does not lie in Washington or Harrisburg or in the whims of every petty functionary sporting a badge and leeching off of your and my tax dollars. The "supreme Law of the Land" is the Constitution. Under our Constitution power resides in "We the People." As John Marshall wrote in Marbury v. Madison, "All laws repugnant to the Constitution are void of law."

Actually, America has two constitutions. One was ratified in Philadelphia in 1787. The other resides in the hearts and minds of the people. And if "We the People" are nonchalant about our liberty, our written Constitution becomes just a piece of paper. We can either act now in defense of Michael Marcavage when the cost is quite minimal. (2) Or we can act later when the stakes will be much higher. Marcavage is appealing the discrict court's decision. Always remember the words of Pastor Martin Niemoller:
"When the Nazis came for the communists, I did not speak out because I was not a communist. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Catholics, I did not speak out because I was a not a Catholic. When they came for the Jews, I did not speak out because I was a not a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."
Are you going to remain silent because they are coming for the Christians and you are not a Christian? Are you going to remain silent because Michael Marcavage is a Philadelphia Christian and you are, say, a Colorado Christian? I hope not.


Muslim woman deemed too submissive to be French

It seems that at least in France there are some remaining shreds of respect for their own identity

France has denied citizenship to a veiled Moroccan woman on the grounds that her "radical" practice of Islam is incompatible with basic French values such as equality of the sexes, a legal ruling showed on Friday. The case will reignite debate about how to reconcile freedom of religion, which is guaranteed by the French constitution, and other fundamental rights, which many in France feel are being challenged by the way of life of some Muslims.

Le Monde newspaper said it was the first time a Muslim applicant had been rejected for reasons to do with personal religious practice. "She has adopted a radical practice of her religion, incompatible with essential values of the French community, particularly the principle of equality of the sexes," said a ruling by the Council of State handed down last month and sent to Reuters on Friday to confirm a report in Le Monde. The Council of State is a judicial body which has final say on disputes between individuals and the public administration.

Married to a French national, the woman arrived in France in 2000, speaks good French and has three children born in France. She wears a black burqa that covers all her body except her eyes, which are visible through a narrow slit, and lives in "total submission" to her husband and male relatives, according to reports by social services. Le Monde said the woman is 32. The woman's application for French nationality was rejected in 2005 on grounds of "insufficient assimilation". She appealed to the Council of State, which last month approved the rejection.

In the past, nationality was denied to Muslims who were known to have links with extremist circles or who had publicly advocated radicalism, which is not the case here.


The ruling comes weeks after a heated debate over whether traditional Muslim views were creeping into French law, prompted by a court annulment of the marriage of two Muslims because the husband said the wife was not a virgin as she had claimed to be.

In the case of the Moroccan woman, Le Monde suggested the Council of State had gone to the opposite extreme by rejecting the woman's beliefs and way of life rather than accommodating them. "Is a burqa incompatible with French nationality?" the newspaper asked.

The legal expert who provided a formal report on the case to the Council of State wrote that the woman's interviews with social services revealed that "she lives almost as a recluse, isolated from French society," Le Monde reported. "She has no idea about the secular state or the right to vote. She lives in total submission to her male relatives. She seems to find this normal and the idea of challenging it has never crossed her mind," Emmanuelle Prada-Bordenave wrote.

Le Monde quoted Daniele Lochak, a law professor not involved in the case, as saying it was bizarre to consider that excessive submission to men was a reason not to grant citizenship. "If you follow that to its logical conclusion, it means that women whose partners beat them are also not worthy of being French," Lochak 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, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here. For times when is playing up, there are mirrors of this site here and here.


No comments: