Sunday, December 01, 2013



Paedophile who sexually abused five-year-old girl is given permission to adopt a child in Sweden

There are a very small number of headlines that so disturb me that I have to get up and walk away from the article concerned for a while.  This is one such.  Leftist amorality is triumphant in Sweden and this story tells some of the fruit of that.  Almost everything is permitted in Sweden -- praise of Israel excepted, of course.  Having Muslims rape your daughter?  No problem!  What a sick society   

A convicted paedophile has been given permission to adopt a child in Sweden despite sexually abusing a five-year-old girl.

Swedish authorities say the man, aged in his sixties, is now not in danger of reoffending.

The man, from the town of Helsingborg, has committed more than 90 crimes (mostly fraud-related charges) including molesting a young girl from his neighbourhood in 2004 according to The Local.

He was also suspected of raping a young teenage girl.

He now wishes to adopt his 10-year-old stepson following the death of the boy’s mother, whom the man married in 2009.

The mother and biological father were reported to consent to the adoption application.

A municipality social affairs committee deemed the man’s risk of reoffending as low, with nine of the 10 panel members voting to allow the application.

The committee did not however have access to information about the suspected rape according to Helsingborgs Dagblad.

Despite not being charged for rape, social services ruled that the man needed to be supervised around his own children.

Then in 2007 he was allegedly considered at high risk of sex offending again, with his ‘probable victims’ were underage girls. Treatment was again recommended as well as parenting classes.

According to local media reports, the 10-year-old boy is disabled and allegedly has no relatives willing to care for him.

The town’s head of social services has decided to file a complaint about the investigation into the man’s behaviour after the case made headlines in Sweden.

According to The Local, Dinah Abinger said: ‘I should have stopped it… it was a weak investigation. There are questions that aren't described in depth and the investigation should have been resubmitted to family court even before it reached the committee. Because of that I'm reporting us to the Health and Social Care Inspectorate.’

Back in 2007 paedophile David Mason, who is in his 50s, was allowed to foster a child despite his history of abusing young boys. He did not have his identity checked by Kent County Council, which permitted the placement.

The council were heavily criticised by a High Court judge after formal checks on Mason's application may have exposed his true identity and a history of sexual abuse, said Mr Justice Baker

SOURCE






Brutish British bureaucracy:  Father told to tear down steps he built to make road SAFER

This is just territoriality.  Subordinating the lives of children to speculation is unforgivable.  If the bureaucrat had proper concern for children he would have taken out a small insurance policy to cover eventualities.  But protecting his turf was all that mattered to the scum

Father of four Charlie Howard laboured long and hard in his own time to try to make his children's walk to school safer.

Giving up three weekends, he built a set of steps down a muddy embankment to keep them off a busy road.

But his good deed failed to impress the health and safety police...?who ruled the creation was a hazard in itself and ordered him to demolish it.

Without the steps, the children must scramble down the slippery bank or cross the road at a bend further along the road and walk 100 yards with no pavement to reach the bus stop.

Mr Howard went to work without complaint to try to eradicate the danger, taking his nine-year-old son Tommy with him to help build the steps.

But two weeks later he received a letter from Magna Housing Association which owns the embankment in Bridport, Dorset.

He was told that should anyone fall and hurt themselves while using the steps the association would be liable for any litigation.

Mr Howard, who also has a seven-year-old son and two daughters aged six and four, has taken the steps down but described the authority's reaction as 'ridiculous' because it has made the children's journey to Salway Ash primary school more hazardous.

The 37-year-old, who owns a vehicle restoration company, said: 'I only spent about 10 pounds doing it because a lot of the materials I had left over from work.

'It was much safer than what was there before. The school bus stops directly opposite the steps, so the children and my wife just have to walk down the steps and cross the road at a straight point.'

Mr Howard added: I have reluctantly taken them down now but it is a ridiculous thing to have to do - now they are far more dangerous.'

Bob Roberts, of Magna Housing Association, said: 'The steps are on Magna's land and if anyone were to be injured we may be liable.  'We cannot risk this and this is why we asked the residents to remove the steps.'

SOURCE





Oh Joy: The New York Times Changes the Definition of a Nuclear Family

America’s Thanksgiving tables yesterday may have looked a bit different than, say, the 1950s. The changing family dynamics is a fact the New York Times is applauding in a new piece glorifying the increasing diversity of American households, be it blended families, same-sex partnerships or cohabitation.

From “The Changing American Family”:
The typical American family, if it ever lived anywhere but on Norman Rockwell’s Thanksgiving canvas, has become as multilayered and full of surprises as a holiday turducken — the all-American seasonal portmanteau of deboned turkey, duck and chicken.

While diversity is something to encourage, I believe in the home there is still no greater institution than the traditional family. It provides stability and comfort – especially for children growing up in uncertain climates.

Granted, the Times piece did begin to suggest family was still a cherished institution. But, that suggestion was quickly clarified.
“It’s the backbone of how we live,” said David Anderson, 52, an insurance claims adjuster from Chicago. “It means everything,” said Linda McAdam, 28, who is in human resources on Long Island.

Yes, everything, and sometimes too many things. “It’s almost like a weight,” said Rob Fee, 26, a financial analyst in San Francisco, “a heavy weight.” Or as the comedian George Burns said, “Happiness is having a large, loving, caring, close-knit family in another city.”

A large part of this “weight” or burden, according to the Times, is the cost of raising a child.
The nation’s birthrate today is half what it was in 1960.

One big reason is the soaring cost of ushering offspring to functional independence. According to the Department of Agriculture, the average middle-class couple will spend $241,080 to raise a child to age 18. Factor in four years of college and maybe graduate school, or a parentally subsidized internship with the local theater company, and say hello to your million-dollar bundle of oh joy.

To wrap up, the Times has encouraged the breakdown of the traditional family and put a price on children.

What, pray tell, is wrong with the white picket fence? America is founded on tradition and our strong families are a major part of our country’s success. Family is something to strive for, not avoid.

The moral implications notwithstanding, broken or nontraditional families can also have a negative impact on the country’s economic growth. Children without fathers, for instance, are much more likely to grow up in poverty, abuse drugs and alcohol or go to prison.

But, the New York Times is only concerned with diversity and making the Thanksgiving table as “multilayered” as possible.

SOURCE





Women must not touch bananas!

Egypt's Latest Fatwas from Salafis and Brotherhood

As the full ramification of the Muslim Brotherhood's year in power continues to be exposed, a new study by Al Azhar's Fatwa Committee dedicated to exploring the fatwas, or Islamic decrees, issued by the Brotherhood and Salafis -- the Islamists -- was recently published.

Al Azhar, in Cairo, is considered by many to be one of the oldest and most prestigious Islamic universities in the world. The study, written by Al Azhar's Dr. Sayed Zayed, and entitled (in translation), "The Misguided Fatwas of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis," reveals a great deal about how Islamists view women.

The Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Al Youm summarized some of the Al Azhar study's main findings and assertions on November 15 in a article entitled (in translation), "Muslim Brotherhood fatwas: A woman swimming is an 'adulteress' and touching bananas is 'forbidden.'"

According to the report, "fatwas issued by both groups [Brotherhood and Salafis] regard women as strange creatures created solely for sex. They considered the voices of women, their looks and presence outside the walls of their homes an 'offence.' Some went as far as to consider women as a whole 'offensive.'"

The study addressed 51 fatwas issued during the rule of ousted president Mohamed Morsi. Among them, the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis "permitted wives to lie to their husbands concerning politics," if the husband forbids her from being supportive of the Islamists or their agenda; she may then, through taqiyya [dissimulation] -- a Muslim doctrine that permits deceit to empower Islam -- still be supportive of the Islamists while pretending to be against them.

The study similarly revealed that some of these fatwas decreed that women who swim in the sea are committing "adultery" -- even if they wear a hijab: "The reason behind this particular fatwa, from their point of view, is that the sea is masculine [as with many other languages, Arabic nouns are gender specific, and "sea" is masculine], and when the water touches the woman's private parts she becomes an 'adulteress' and should be punished."

Moreover, "Some of these fatwas also forbade women from eating certain vegetables or even touching cucumbers or bananas," due to their phallic imagery, which may tempt women to deviate.

Other fatwas decreed that "it is unacceptable for women to turn the air conditioning on at home during the absence of their husbands as this could be used as a sign to indicate to neighbors that the woman is at home alone and any of them could commit adultery with her."

One fatwa suggested that marriage to ten-year-old girls should be allowed to prevent girls "from deviating from the right path," while another prohibited girls from going to schools located 25 kilometers away from their homes.

Another stated that a marriage is annulled if the husband and wife copulate with no clothes on.

These fatwas also sanctioned the use of women and children as human shields in violent demonstrations and protests, as these are considered jihads to empower Islam.

Even slavery was permitted, according to the study: "the people who issued these fatwas demanded the enactment of a law allowing divorced women to own slaves," presumably to help her, as she no longer has a man to support her.

An earlier report (summarized in English here) listed some other fatwas issued by the Brotherhood and Salafis during Morsi's tenure: advocating for the destruction of the pyramids and sphinx; scrapping the Camp David Accords; killing anyone protesting against ousted Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi (which happened and is one of the main charges against the imprisoned Brotherhood leadership); forbidding Muslims from greeting Christians; forbidding Muslim cab drivers from transporting Christian priests (whose clothing makes them identifiable); forbidding TV shows that mock or make light of Islamists; and forbidding women from marrying any men involved with the former Mubarak government.

Predictably, the Al Azhar study criticizing the Brotherhood and Salafi fatwas concludes by saying that only al Azhar, which styles itself as a moderate institution, is qualified to issue fatwas. Of course, one of the most sensational of all fatwas -- "adult breastfeeding," which called on women to "breastfeed" male acquaintances, thereby making them relatives and justifying their mixed company -- was issued by Al Azhar, but later retracted. It is apparently this retraction that makes Al Azhar seemingly more moderate than the Brotherhood.

Meanwhile, the Salafis -- who, in light of the Brotherhood's ouster have become Islam's standard bearers there -- continue successfully to push for strict interpretations of Sharia law in Egypt's new constitution.

SOURCE

*************************

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: