Friday, July 18, 2014

The latest false rape claim from Britain

Internet dater who cried rape when a man crept out of a hotel room after they had sex because she didn’t match her online profile is jailed for 18 months

I'd walk out on her too

An internet dater who cried rape when a man crept out of a hotel room after they had sex because she didn’t match her online profile has been jailed.

Emily Pike, 23, met Tom Mills online before they arranged to meet in person at a Premier Inn at Cribbs Causeway in Bristol to spend the night together.

However, after deciding Pike didn’t match the description on her dating profile, Mr Mills fled the hotel and later sent her a text to say he was helping a friend in an emergency.

Pike then contacted the police and claimed the 24-year-old had raped her in the hotel and car park .

However, CCTV images proved she was lying and she was jailed for 18 months at Bristol Crown Court for perverting the course of justice.

In sentencing yesterday, Judge Julian Lambert told her: ‘You know it is wrong to lie and it is wrong to lie and get somebody into trouble. Lie about rape and you are getting somebody into big trouble.

‘Whether you couldn’t learn, or you didn’t learn, your web of falsehoods led to a young man being arrested for rape.  ‘He was at risk of many years of prison and he spent 12 hours in custody.’

The court heard how the pair had initially arranged to meet in Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, for a sexual tryst in October 2011.

But when they couldn’t find a room they checked into the Premier Inn at Cribbs Causeway, Bristol, to have sex.

However, Pike awoke after the encounter to find Mr Mills had vanished.

Anna Midgley, prosecuting, said: ‘After he left Miss Pike alone she tried to call him. He sent her texts, saying he had to help a friend in accident and emergency.

‘After, she called the police. She made an allegation he raped her.  ‘She said she had consensual phone sex and when she arrived at the Premier Inn he forced himself on her.

‘She said they left together and he raped her a second time in the passenger seat of his car.’

Mr Mills was arrested and subjected to medical samples, swabs and hours of questioning, the court heard.

But when police looked at the hotel CCTV, they saw the pair did not leave together and telephone messages did not back up Pike’s claims.

The court heard Pike, from Caerphilly, south Wales, has 15 previous convictions which include an earlier false rape claim which she had apologised for.

James Tucker, defending Pike, said she had a history for telling ‘fantastic lies’ and also claimed to have married a man in Iraq.

‘She understands what she is doing is intended to pervert the course of justice. Why she is doing it is seemingly lost upon her,’ he said, adding she had a personality disorder issues.

‘She is an incredibly vulnerable person.

‘She is acutely vulnerable at her own hands. Prison will punish her and open her eyes as to understanding why she is offending in the way she is.’

After the court hearing, Detective Constable Richard Worrin said: ‘We take all reports of sexual assault and rape very seriously and this case should not deter people with genuine complaints coming forward to us.

‘In this case, the allegations of rape were proved untrue through CCTV evidence and not by Emily Pike’s own admission.

‘I would like to stress that prosecutions such as this are extremely rare but false allegations of rape undermine the experiences of actual victims and can have a devastating impact on those who are wrongly accused.’




At the original source there are a heap of photos showing what is alleged

As Hamas Rockets continued to rain down on Israeli population centers, a large anti-Israel rally took place in Seattle’s Westlake Center this Saturday, July 12. Protesters screamed anti-Israel slogans calling for the destruction of the Jewish state while waving signs and marching through the downtown sidewalks. But this was more than a rally in opposition to Israel or her defensive operations.   The signs being waved and the chants hollered  constituted a shocking public display of shameless Jew hatred right  in the heart of Seattle.

Signs comparing Jews to Nazis were commonplace

This sign (below) compares Jews defending themselves to the Nazi slaughter of Jews. “It would be my greatest sadness to see Zionist Jews do to Palestinian Arabs much of what the Nazis did to Jews“.

Comparing Israel's defense against a rain of rockets to the systematic gassing and murder of European Jewry.

The truth was in short supply.  Many posters asserted that Israel had halted food and medicine to Gaza during the current Hamas provoked conflagration.

While supplying one’s enemy in a time of war seems to The Mike Report to border on insanity,  according to Ynet “Israel has allowed some 200 trucks to cross into the strip, including some 200,000 liters of fuel daily, in an attempt to prevent a humanitarian crisis in Gaza”. Israel continues to provide medical services to Gaza residents. “Over 20 Palestinians, including eight Gazan children were treated at Haifa’s Rambam Medical Center, as part of Israel’s longstanding cooperation with the Palestinian Authority”.

Classic anti-Semitic themes of Jewish greed were on display.

While you may have thought that  blood libel accusations are a relic of the past, in fact the slander was alive and well in downtown Seattle this past Saturday. The below poster depicts a Jew eating a gentile child along with a cup of blood to wash it all down.

Another common theme at Seattle’s pro-Hamas rally was the accusation that Jewish organizations support murder.  (below).

This sign (below) accuses Israel of Genocide “Genocide is not justice” and then promotes genocide  “From the River to the Sea Palestine will be free“. The river is the Jordan, the sea is the Mediterranean and the goal is a Jew free Middle East.

This sign accuses Israel of genocide and then advocates for the extermination of the Jewish state. 

This Hamas sympathizer hauling a sign advocating non violence at an anti-Semitic hatefest wins the 2014 irony award.


The maddest reshuffle in living memory

David Cameron, Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, has just changed whom he will have in charge of various governmental matters.  And in the  new Cabinet, biology seems to count for more than conviction:  A triumph for feminism

Given the big-name repute of the various political carcasses UK prime minister David Cameron has been either unceremoniously chucking out of the Cabinet or casting down the ministerial food chain, many observers have been quick to christen it Cameron’s ‘night of the long knives’. (A reference not to the murderous Nazi purge of 1934, but to Tory prime minister Harold Macmillan’s sudden decision in 1962 to replace a third of his cabinet, including chancellor Selwyn Lloyd, his friend and one-time confidant.)

So out have gone perma-leadership candidate Kenneth Clarke; Damian Green, the policing minister; Dominic Grieve, the attorney general; and David Willetts, the universities and science minister. And, more striking still, down have gone William Hague, demoted from foreign secretary to leader of the Commons, and Michael Gove, shunted from education secretary to chief whip. In the place of these ‘old lags’, as Tory sources described them to one broadsheet, stand Cameron’s new(ish) guard – a mixture of men whose main appeal is that no one really knows them yet, and, far more PR-worthy in government eyes, some women whose main appeal, apart from the fact that no one really knows them yet (sometime TV presenter Esther McVey excepted), is that they are, well, women.

But this was not another night of the long knives. The historical analogies do not do Cameron’s Cabinet reshuffle the justice it deserves. For this kicking out of might-as-well-be-dead white men in favour of slightly younger men, and a few women whose main selling point thus far seems to be what’s between their legs, is historically unprecedented. It’s unprecedented in its fatuousness; it’s unprecedented in its superficiality; and it’s unprecedented in its cowardly kowtowing to the prevailing wind of commentariat sentiment.

Previous Cabinet reshuffles, as baffling as they might have appeared to those outside the Palace of Westminster, were at least motivated by a degree of political principle. Macmillan rid himself of his old lags because he felt they lacked ‘fire in their bellies’. Tory prime minister Margaret Thatcher was in perpetual conflict with the ‘wets’ in her cabinet, who felt, in the words of the sacked Ian Gilmour, that Thatcher’s ‘economic liberalism’, ‘because of its starkness and its failure to create a sense of community’, was likely to ‘repel’ people. Even the mind-numbing ministerial churn of the New Labour years was by and large driven by the imperatives of office politics – of who was in favour, and who was out.

But Cameron’s decision, less than a year before the next General Election, is almost entirely devoid of any party-political principle, indeed of any principle at all. Instead, this new, flashier, leggier cabinet was motivated by little more than a desire to appease liberal media opinion. Cameron and his cronies have, effectively, caved in. So to the countless commentators who have lined up to lambast the Conservatives for creating a government composed of privately educated men – or ‘Etonian toffs’, as today’s class-war-lite perception has it, Cameron has bowed down. Out went some old-ish poshos, and in came some younger men and women, a couple of whom, we are told a little too keenly, even went to state school.

And, in a move as spectacularly shallow as any this most skin-deep of politicians has made, Cameron has even taken on board the hyped-up loathing of education secretary Michael Gove and got rid. It didn’t matter that Gove had been in the post for four, committed years; it didn’t matter that the supposed animosity towards Gove emanated from what Gove himself called the blob – a coagulation of unions, teacher trainers and bien pensant commentators – and not from the public at large. It didn’t matter that Cameron no doubt thought, somewhere in the recesses of his mind untouched by the imperatives of PR, that what Gove was doing was probably right. The bad vibes coming Gove’s way were too much. So, just like that, Cameron got rid of him. Today’s papers are even suggesting that Gove was shunted into the parliamentary shadows on the basis of advice from Lynton Crosby, the Tories’ election campaign director, who apparently has been doing some polling. Which is more than many thought he was doing.

What’s interesting about the demotion of Gove is that Gove himself is that rare thing among contemporary politicians. He actually believes in something beyond the needs of the party-political machine. For Gove, it really did look as if the end of party politics is not to be elected (or re-elected); that is merely the means to change something. Politics here was, incredibly, more of a vocation than a career. He had a vision of how things ought to be, and in his role as education secretary, he sought to realise that vision. He wanted to put a bit of subject-based knowledge back into education; he wanted to restore to exams a little bit of credibility; he wanted, in short, to improve the lives of the nation’s young. Whether you agree with him or not, there is no doubting the depth of his commitment.

And yet, in a near comic inversion of the way things ought to be, Gove’s commitment to his brief, his willingness to put his political beliefs above the parapet, is precisely what has cost him his job. Cameron couldn’t stand the moderate heat of the media kitchen, so he whipped Gove out and plonked someone called Nicky Morgan in his place. It’s a profoundly telling switch. Gove was demoted because he represented ‘ideas’; Morgan has been promoted because she represents something non-ideological. That is, she represents her gender. She is not being heralded as a great believer in the importance of teaching chronological history or of getting to grips with difficult literature; she is being heralded because of something she had no control over – her biology.

In this, one can glimpse the debasement of the concept of political representation, of what it means, in a democracy, for elected politicians to represent something. It used to mean that a politician represented people’s aspirations and interests. In the words of that old Tory Edmund Burke, it used to mean that ‘[the people’s] wishes ought to have great weight with [the politician]; their opinion, high respect; their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs; and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own.’ It used to mean that a politician represented the ideas of conscious social constituency. But, as this most bizarre of Cabinet reshuffles reveals, political representation no longer refers to the intentional representation of ideas in the work of government; no, it now means the representation of the mere facts of one’s life, from one’s gender to one’s ethnicity. In the dread words of Cameron, ‘Parliament needs to be more representative of our country – so we need more women in parliament’.

Cameron’s Cabinet reshuffle is nothing short of the triumph of identity politics over a politics of ideas.


British supermarket apologises after Muslim checkout worker refused to sell customer ham and wine because it was Ramadan

Tesco has issued an apology after a Muslim worker refused to sell a customer ham and wine because of Ramadan.

Mother-of-three Julie Cottle went into her local store to stock up, but was left stunned when a checkout employee insisted he couldn't serve her.

Muslims worldwide are currently fasting for Ramadan - the holy ninth month of the Islamic calendar where devotees abstain from eating and drinking during daylight hours.

Ms Cottle was forced to use the self-service checkout in the Tesco Express in Neasden, north-west London, after the worker reportedly 'walked off'.

She told the Brent and Kilburn Times: 'He pointed at the ham and wine in my basket and said "I can't serve you that because I'm fasting".

'When I told him he should be serving customers not turning them away he still refused telling me to go to the self-service. I was furious.'

In a statement, a spokesman for Tesco said: 'We don't have a specific policy and take a pragmatic approach if a colleague raises concerns about a job they have been asked to do.

'We apologise to our customer for any inconvenience on this occasion.'

The supermarket giant confirmed 'the colleague would be spoken to' but refused to say if any further action would be taken.



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: