Thrown to the wolves?

The baby P case was indicative of just how badly a bureaucracy of the state at local level can get things wrong. Peter Connelly - known as Baby P - was 17 months old and had been on the “at risk” register for months when he died at the hands of his mother, her boyfriend, and their lodger, after suffering more than 50 injuries back in August 2007, it emerged at the trial that Baby P had been seen by a string of social workers, police and health professionals who failed to take him into care.
Naturally heads had to roll and naturally this is where the state at local level bodged things up... again.
Telegraph.

Sharon Shoesmith, who was director of children's services at Haringey Council when Baby P was killed, has been awarded almost £680,000 for her unfair dismissal claim.
The north London council’s accounts reveal that Ms Shoesmith, who earned £133,000 a year, was awarded £679,452 in compensation following an agreement between their legal teams.
The council has previously revealed it had spent £196,000 trying to fight Ms Shoesmith's case for unfair dismissal, which culminated in the Appeal Court ruling in 2011 that she had been unfairly sacked and “scapegoated” over the death of Peter Connelly.

Now it may well have been that Haringey didn't follow the rules when sacking her, but this sort of obscene payment is an utter abomination when you consider that it was with Shoesmith that the buck should have stopped. A more honourable person would of course have fallen on their sword so to speak, but in local government lala-land honour is an alien concept. Others of course should have followed her into oblivion, every single one of the string of social workers and police save perhaps the first ones (unless they visited more than once) should have been sacked or rigorously retrained.
Naturally of course lawyers got involved and Shoesmith ended up with an obscene amount of public money for her failure because she fought it on the grounds of wrongful dismissal. The judge agreed with her, but this is where the minimum of 1p could have and should have been awarded with costs not given. The Council however negotiated a secret deal and Shoesmilth got a small fortune.
There was no justice for Baby P, in the end even his memory has had its metaphorical face rubbed into a pile of poo by the likes of the legal system and Sharon Shoesmith, may god damn their souls to an eternity of suffering.

This is another reason we hold the system in contempt

Legal aid, it's supposed to assist those who can't afford it access to the legal system for redress if they think they have been cheated or to provide a defence for them if they have been accused of a crime. All in all a pretty good idea, though like most things involving lawyers expensive and used for things the original writers of it never envisaged.
Mail.

An Ethiopian farmer has won permission to use taxpayers’ money to sue the British Government ... for sending aid to his homeland.
The case, branded ridiculous by MPs, will be funded entirely by the public even though the farmer has never set foot in this country.
The 33-year-old Ethiopian – granted anonymity to protect his family – says ministers are funding a one-party state in his country that has breached his human rights. He says foreign aid helped the regime inflict ‘brutal treatment’ on thousands of farmers driven from their land, against the International Development Act 2002.
Taxpayers will pay for both the farmer’s lawyers and a defence team from the Department for International Development, in a case that could cost tens of thousands of pounds. This is in addition to the £1.3billion Britain has sent to Ethiopia since 2010.

In fairness to the government the guy got his case in before they changed the rules, yet even so you have to wonder other than greed what the hell the legal profession were thinking even allowing such a case.
It does throw up two issues though, the legal profession throwing away our cash on frivolous cases and the government throwing away our cash on foreign kleptocracies who basically use it to line their own pockets as very little seems to manage to get down to helping ordinary people.
Essentially we don't need to be spending taxpayers cash on things that are of no benefit to taxpayers. If people want to assist the downtrodden of the Earth that's their choice and should be done via real charities, not the government deciding which foreign potentates pension fund they are lining. Nor should legal aid be for anyone other than UK citizens, not EU citizens and definitely not foreigners who have never set foot here. Granted a barrister or solicitor should be available as court appointed should you need a defence, but only if you're here in person other than that, no. Nor was the no win, no fee idea such a great one either, it's just hiked up insurance premiums across the UK and made organisations risk averse.
As to what we should do? I don't know, but there's a reason a lot of revolutions begin with a massive cull of lawyers...

Guilty until proven innocent

Her Majesties Revenue & Customs don't seem to like the idea that people for a variety of legal reasons (some admittedly obscure) do not pay the tax that they believe they should and so have come up with another wizard wheeze to get their hands on cash they believe is theirs...
Telegraph.

Taxpayers will be treated as “guilty until proven innocent” as HM Revenue & Customs gets the power to force them to pay up front if officials suspect them of tax avoidance.
Under plans announced in the Queen’s Speech, people using tax avoidance schemes will be made to make “accelerated payments” as part of plans to raise around £2 billion.
Treasury figures suggest that 65,000 people could be affected by the new powers. HMRC could raise a more than £2bn in all.
The most controversial aspect of the new plans is for the new rules to apply to a “legacy stock” of pre-existing cases, where people invested money in contentious schemes several years ago.
George Osborne earlier this year announced a major Government crackdown on tax avoiders following a series of high-profile cases involving celebrities including Gary Barlow, the Take That singer.
Experts have warned that it will lead to tens of thousands of potentially innocent British citizens being forced to pay their taxes before they are even due.
The all-party Treasury Select Committee last month expressed concerns about the plans for up-front payments to HMRC.
Neal Todd, corporate tax partner at Berwin Leighton Paisner, warned that the HMRC are acting as “judge and jury”.

Yep, they decide you owe them and force you to hand it over and they hold onto it until you prove it's not theirs. It's a bit like a shop grabbing your wallet before you go in and deciding how much you're going to spend.
HMRC of course have form for getting it wrong and being extremely slow to put things right, it appears once they have our cash in their hands they're very reluctant to actually let go of it again under any circumstances whether its a mistake or incompetence on their part. And what we have with this proposed legislation is the equivalent of letting a fox into the chicken coop with instructions to go after specific chickens, you know it's going to be messy and mistakes are going to be made.
No doubt the leftards out there who bleat about avoidance as if it's a crime will be pleased that companies and individuals will be targeted, yet avoidance isn't a crime, evasion is and it needs to be proven, not simply suspected before you paid up or paid back.
Well you'd hope...

Arrested for quoting Churchill

Truly the UK is doomed if you can be arrested for quoting Winston Churchill. You'd think it almost impossible, however you'd be wrong, it can and has happened to Paul Weston the Liberty GB candidate for the South-East in the EU elections...
Liberty GB

Today Paul Weston, chairman of the party Liberty GB and candidate in the 22 May European Elections in the South East, has been arrested in Winchester.
At around 2pm Mr Weston was standing on the steps of Winchester Guildhall, addressing the passers-by in the street with a megaphone. He quoted the following excerpt about Islam from the book The River War by Winston Churchill:
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith."
Reportedly a woman came out of the Guildhall and asked Mr Weston if he had the authorisation to make this speech. When he answered that he didn’t, she told him "It's disgusting!" and then called the police.
Six or seven officers arrived. They talked with the people standing nearby, asking questions about what had happened. The police had a long discussion with Mr Weston, lasting about 40 minutes.
At about 3pm he was arrested. They searched him, put him in a police van and took him away.

Now granted Churchill's message would be granted as beyond the pale in today's climate of political correctness, particularly by the likes of the political classes who have sought to emasculate the indigenous populations right to have opinions they deem subversive and frankly there's few more subversive than Churchill who was decidedly anti-establishment until they discovered they needed him after the establishment totally misjudged Hitler.
That said, giving a direct quote of Winston Churchill and finding yourself under arrest is likely to cause those who arrested you and complained about you to strongly backfire in their faces as I simply cannot see any judge or magistrate wanting to touch this one with a bargepole. Nor would I expect if it did go further any jury save one stuffed with muslims to convict.
Liberty GB are of course the same party whose member Tim Burton was arrested (and then found not guilty) of offending the Tell Mama organisations leader when he called him a ‘mendacious grievance-mongering Taqiyya artist’ and who do appear to be able to upset the authorities and get away with it simply by keeping to just this side of the law unlike some muslim preachers and demonstrators who hold sign up to behead anyone disrespecting islam and get away with it.
Still, it remains to be seen if charges will be brought, as it is if they aren't then the police have broken up a lawful and legitimate political gathering on the say so of someone who was offended by a Churchill quote. If charges are brought, it appears that quoting a great wartime leader of the UK is no longer legal in the eyes of the authorities or powers that be.
Freedom of speech? When it comes to quoting Churchill, apparently not...

Convenient

How I am coming to loathe the Human Rights Act, it seems to contain a get out clause for any criminal looking to be deported and a license to make money for the legal establishment. Two cases caught my attention this morning, Haroon Aswat can't be deported to the USA on charges of setting up a terrorist training camp because he has paranoid schizophrenia and the court want to ensure he will be sent to a psychiatric facility, not a prison, paranoid schizophrenic being the default position for most jihadi's these days. And then there was this...
Mail.

An illegal immigrant who stabbed a 15-year-old schoolboy to death less than a year after arriving in Britain cannot be deported because he claims to be gay, judges ruled yesterday.
The 29-year-old Jamaican was jailed for life aged 16 when he and another schoolboy knifed Abdul Maye to death over a £10 debt outside his school in east London.
A judge at the Old Bailey ordered that he be kicked out of Britain once he had served a minimum of eight years.
Judge Paul Focke told the thug, who cannot not be named for legal reasons: ‘You are a Jamaican national and within months of coming to this country you committed murder.
‘I am of the view that your continued presence in this country will be detrimental to its citizens.’
But yesterday, the Court of Appeal ruled that he could not be sent back to Jamaica because he could face degrading treatment for being homosexual that would breach his human rights.
In an extraordinary judgement which has provoked outrage, Lord Justice Kay said he believed his mother’s evidence that he was gay – even though the Home Office said he ‘had made no mention of it’ until his first appeal against deportation failed.

 Well wasn't that bloody convenient, he hid the fact that he was gay until he was about to be deported and was only believed because his mum said so
What a joke the Human Rights Act is, it's supposed to protect our rights and yet all it seems to do is allow murderers, rapists and thieves to remain amongst us often illegally and most definitely unwelcome by the population as a whole.
Frankly I don't care what the Jamaicans do to him if he's returned, I have a sneaking suspicion that if he managed to hide the fact that he's gay this long, he would manage OK in Jamaica. If not, who cares? (well his mum obviously)
The HRA ought to be renamed the Criminal Rights Charter as all it seems to do is allow those who we don't want to remain amongst us posing a threat to the individuals of this country and the vast mass of law abiding people here.
The only way to rid ourselves of it would be to leave the EU, what's not to like?

Nothing changes

Rochdale, the town where children of all genders were at risk because institutional blindness, corruption and fear of racism or the authorities had child abuse happening on almost an industrial scale.
Mail.

In May 2012, nine men were jailed for horrific abuse committed against teenage girls in the town. It made headlines all round the world.
When the father of one of the victims called me to tell me how his daughter’s cries for help had been ignored by the authorities I started to make my own enquiries. I spoke to the director of children’s services, Cheryl Eastwood, and was staggered by her attitude. She implied that young girls who were being systematically raped were making lifestyle choices and said that this kind of abuse was ‘a new phenomenon’ on which they [social services] hadn’t received guidance. You don’t need guidance from central government to know that when someone is reporting being raped it’s seriously wrong, I told her.
A few weeks earlier, a police officer had told me fellow officers had suggested the victims on council estates should have been drowned at birth. It also emerged that when one of the girls reported her abuse to a police officer, the officer yawned.
The cover-up of abuse by Cyril Smith (former Rochdale MP), the failed police investigations into his crimes, had ensured the public cry of outrage that needed to be heard was silenced.
For Smith’s young victims it was because they were bad boys from troublesome backgrounds who needed disciplining.
For the young girls who were victims of grooming gangs it was because they were bad girls from troublesome backgrounds who were making lifestyle choices.

This is what happens when the people in power decide that they know best, this is what happens when dogma trumps decency. When protecting the perpetrators because of their position or religion or colour of their skin became far more important than protecting the victims of their abuse.
Yet not one single prosecution will be brought against the council, its social services department, the Liberal Democrat Party who connived with the police to cover up Smith's crimes, the police or anyone else connected to the wholesale abuse who ignored it or actually hid it deliberately because to them the victims were lesser breeds and deserved (somehow) what was happening to them.
Even today Rochdale and those in power there are in denial of what happened, there has been no apologies and there are still ongoing attempts to sweep things under the carpet. Those who ignored the victims were even allowed to leave taking golden handshakes with them and are still at work elsewhere in the same business.
These people ruined kids lives as much as their abusers did, yet they've gotten away scot free, the next scandal comes along and they hope we forget. The corruption goes all the way to the top and won't stop until we hang them all.

Another reason to end foreign aid

And legal aid for non UK people too...
Apparently an Ethiopian farmer is using legal aid to sue the British government for giving foreign aid to the Ethiopian government because as with many African governments they are a bunch of thieving despots and have forced him to give his crops and land to them...
Mail.

An Ethiopian farmer has been given legal aid in the UK to sue Britain – because he claims millions of pounds sent by the UK to his country is supporting a brutal regime that has ruined his life.
He says UK taxpayers’ money – £1.3 billion over the five years of the coalition Government – is funding a despotic one-party state in his country that is forcing thousands of villagers such as him from their land using murder, torture and rape.
The landmark case is highly embarrassing for the Government, which has poured vast amounts of extra cash into foreign aid despite belt-tightening austerity measures at home.
Prime Minister David Cameron claims the donations are a mark of Britain’s compassion.
But the farmer – whose case is set to cost tens of thousands of pounds – argues that huge sums handed to Ethiopia are breaching the Department for International Development’s (DFID) own human rights rules.
He accuses the Government of devastating the lives of some of the world’s poorest people rather than fulfilling promises to help them. The case comes amid growing global concern over Western aid propping up corrupt and repressive regimes.

And that pretty much sums up foreign aid as both the UK public see it (mostly) and the idiot compassion bit that the political classes use to salve their conscience and big themselves up in the press. We should not be giving a penny to foreign governments, unless it's a bribe to buy our stuff, we should at least be honest about it. If we are to give aid, it should be done directly for those we are aiding and cut out the thieving kleptocratic governments en route. Mostly though I believe that whilst we have problems here, we should not be trying to sort out problems there...
As for getting legal aid, sorry, no, he's not a UK citizen and should not be given the cash to do so, if a lawyer wants to take on the case pro bono, fine, but you do not get our cash to sue us.
This is the system that the undisciplined leftards and libtards have saddled us with, full of faux compassion for anyone who wishes enrich themselves at the taxpayers expense and absolute hell for an ordinary person to fathom or deal with. This is why they need to be brought down and denied access to the levers of power. Common sense has left the UK and all we have are idiots like Cameron with their compassion and a system that gives cash to those who don't work here nor have paid into the system.
Some days you just despair.

Gosh, that's surprising... not

Getting tough is apparently not the same for the government as it is for the rest of us, in fact getting tough appears to be simply a matter of words then back to normal. Mind you, when it comes to deporting foreign criminals, their hands are tied, if only because they lack the guts necessary to remove the Human Rights Act.
Mail.

Almost 4,200 foreign rapists, killers and other criminals who should have been kicked out of the UK are walking the streets after a surge in failed deportation cases.
The number of overseas convicts who are being released from jail without being deported has soared by a fifth in the past year, despite a series of promises by ministers.
More than 30 are walking out of jail and into the community every week.

Yep, they talk the talk but can't walk the walk as the lawyers will hold up any deportation for years if necessary and no doubt will even demand that a child molester ought to have his right to a family life, despite his family often enough being the ones that turned them in.
Yes the legal system only applies the laws, but often enough stretches them beyond recognition at times with precedent. Yet mostly that is down to badly written law and there's no doubt in my mind that the HRA is an unnecessary badly written law.
A society run by ordinary people wouldn't tolerate any foreigner who had committed a crime that led to imprisonment being allowed to remain afterwards, they'd be out before they'd even had a chance to place a foot outside prison.
But sadly the political classes are not ordinary people and rarely if ever come into contact with these scum.
Until we rid ourselves of the political classes, we won't get a decent society, it really has become that simple.

Seems there's hope for the young

One of the odd maxims around which I think goes back to Churchill says that “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.” mostly based around the view that real life and having to pay your way soon knocks the idea of paying for someone else's follies or life style out of all but the most brain dead leftard.
Still as with a lot of things a generation will look at what their parents or grandparents did or do and change their ways... if only at times to be contrary.
Mail.

Young people want to see tougher punishments for convicted criminals, a new poll has revealed.
More than seven out of ten of those aged between 18 and 30 want early release for those serving life sentences to be scrapped, while six in 10 believe prison conditions are not tough enough.
Surprisingly, they are also more likely than older people to support hard-line sentences for teenagers.

Seems a lot of the young are actually catching up with us so called right wingers, if only because they see where the idiocy of libtard/leftard thinking has brought us. Granted they'll mature, however it may just be that their views harden and veer more towards a true just system rather than the namby pamby all must have prizes and no one must lose idiocy that has pervaded the thinking of the left to the utter detriment of society as a whole save for certain pets of theirs who get all the best deals anyway and are ignored as it's a 'cultural' thing.
As to whether it will do a great deal for the UK in the long term, only time will tell as more and more young people are divorcing themselves from the political system and wish nothing to do with the chancers who seek their votes.
This could lead the way to some sort of extremist demagogue leading us to an even worse society, but that's a chance we'll have to take and it would probably be better than some sort of left wing anti-paradise.
Either way I foresee interesting times ahead.

Justice? I think not

So the murderers of Lee Rigby got their sentences yesterday and some believe justice was done.Michael Adebolajo got a whole life tariff and Michael Adebowale got 45 years. Essentially they'll be kept, fed and looked after by the prison system for the rest of their lives.
Telegraph.

The Islamist killers of Drummer Lee Rigby erupted into violence in an Old Bailey courtroom as they were sentenced for murder.
Michael Adebolajo, 29, and Michael Adebowale, 22, had to be manhandled out of court by security guards after being told by Mr Justice Sweeney that their crime was a “betrayal of Islam”.

I don't know where the judge got his definition of islam from, but it's definitely not the one in the quran, hadiths or surahs. What those barbarians did was islam pure and simple.

Angered by the judges’ comments about Islam, Adebowale stood up and shouted: “That’s a lie. It’s not a betrayal of Islam. You don’t know what Islam is.”

Yup and they'd know.

After the defendants had been removed Mr Justice Sweeney resumed his sentencing to give Adebolajo a “whole-life” tariff, meaning he will spend the rest of his life in jail.
Adebowale was given life with a minimum term of 45 years.

Justice would have been those two taken out of court, given a sex change (to turn them into something islam hates), hung and left for more than 24 hours (because this is dishonourable in the quran) and buried under a crossroads along with several pigs carcasses just to ensure of the final humiliation and 'pour encourager les autres' as the saying goes.

I'm sure there's going to be a lot of bitching from the left and civil liberties morons about the length of the sentences and probably a good few wastes of taxpayers cash to lawyers to get them overturned and reduced. Frankly I feel my solution would work better and save us all a lot of money spent on those who simply don't deserve it.

Plus if other barbarians know what we'll do if we catch them, well perhaps they'll learn the lesson.

You don't pander to barbarians, you crush them before they crush you.

Rather disquietening

One of the areas of trust in society (for given values of trust) is that doctors are trustworthy in general and apart from the odd few and far between rogues, our lives are safe in their hands. We also trust that those who fail the rigorous standards we expect from the medical profession are weeded out and removed.
Telegraph.

More than one in five disciplinary cases against doctors which is dropped without a full investigation is botched by regulators, a major review has found.
Ministers on Thursday night described the findings as “very concerning” while patients groups’ called for an urgent review of the way the General Medical Council (GMC) handles concerns about rogue medics.
More than 9,000 cases are referred to the GMC each year, but just over 200 are considered by full tribunal hearings, with the rest closed at an earlier stage.
The national audit examined 100 cases which were closed - and found that in 22 per cent of cases, blunders were made - suggesting that more than 2,000 medics a year may be being allowed to continue working even though allegations against them have not been properly investigated.

This sadly is one of the problems of a culture monitoring itself, the tendency to brush under the carpet or in this case botch the job and allow the possibility of further malpractice. No, this is about trust and the fact that those who monitor the doctors cannot be trusted to do a proper job. It may actually be that those who 'got away with it' as it were are innocent, but now, guilt is presumed because their cases haven't been examined properly and action (if necessary) taken.
When dealing with professionals, we expect professional standards, unfortunately in a lot of cases that appears to be exactly what we aren't getting where those in positions of authority over the likes of professionals are simply not doing their jobs properly or being very lenient on miscreants.
Trust has to be earned, once it's lost it can never fully be recovered as there will always be a nagging suspicion that something isn't quite right.
Doctors are now joining the likes of the police in losing public trust.
They only have themselves to blame.

One law for us...

I wonder what a judge would say to most people if they were accused of a crime yet attempted to get the judge to set up a gagging order to prevent anyone knowing they were on trial for breaking the law? I rather suspect that if we weren't a muslim/politician/policeman/lawyer then we'd get pretty short shrift, the legal people looking after their own and in the case of a muslim, falling for the 'cultural' reasoning that they seem to come out with to keep their names out of the press...
Mail.

A judge allowed two Muslim solicitors accused of trying to cheat the legal system to hide behind a cloak of secrecy for ‘cultural reasons’, the Daily Mail can disclose.
He banned reporting of the case of Asha Khan, 30, and her brother Kashif, 34, to prevent them allegedly being shamed in the eyes of their community.
In the latest farce involving secret justice, the pair were told they could enjoy the court’s protection because members of their family would pass judgment if the case was reported.
It is a privilege rarely bestowed on defendants in the justice system, which has operated on the principle of transparency for centuries. However, following a challenge by the Daily Mail, the restriction was lifted – enabling the case to be reported.
Judge Peter Hughes reversed his original ban after deciding that the principle of open justice was more important than saving the embarrassment of a defendant.

One wonders just what kind of judgement their families would pass on a speeding fine... although the real killer charge was perverting the course of justice, neither of which I suspect would faze their community, it's not like they doodled the paedo-prophet now is it?
Not that points swapping is entirely unknown either, just ask Vicki Pryce the ex-wife of ex-MP Chris Huhne and the ludicrous lengths he went to, to cover up his misdemeanour.
No, I suspect most of this was simply personal to try and keep their names out of the press and perhaps... just perhaps not give muslims in general another bad news day.
Yet it does strike me that if the ruling had not been overturned, this would have set a precedent, with all ethnic and cultural groups saying their trials should not be reported for fear of shaming them in their community? After all, precedents are the basis of most new legal decisions with regard to dealing with points of law.
Then again I rather doubt a Christian Lawyer or a Jewish Lawyer would have had the stones to attempt something so blatant to keep their names and their communities names out of the press. I rather suspect this was an attempt to try and tag 'muslim' onto a submission in an attempt to avoid publicity, it's not like judges have not attempted to block publicity on muslim trials in the grooming cases ongoing within the country after all.
Still, kudos to the Daily Mail (for once) in getting this precedent removed, God alone knows what would have happened if it was allowed to stand.

A damning indictment of racism against the white working class

It seems that our police fearful of being racist against certain scum whose religion has become a byword for extremism, intolerance and criminal behaviour decided to ignore the victims of the grooming scandal in Rochdale, because... they were from council estates.
An excuse that is only part of the truth I suspect.
Mail.

One of Britain's worst child sex-grooming gangs was allowed to flourish in Rochdale because police ignored their victims when they found out they were from council estates, the local MP has said.
Labour's Simon Danczuk said officers' class snobbery was one of a catalogue of failings by Greater Manchester Police and other agencies in their handling of the scandal, highlighted in the Serious Case Review published today.
According to its findings, a 'significant part' of the sexual exploitation committed against young girls should have been predicted and prevented.
Five of six victims on whom the report focused were 'clearly in need of early help and at times intervention' by safeguarding agencies for several years before they were abused.
The abuse centred around nine men, eight of Pakistani origin and one from Afghanistan, who worked for or were connected to taxi firms and takeaway food outlets.
Part of the report which showed that, of 40 child protection conferences, for one of the victims there is no record of police attendance or involvement.

You'll note that the racial part of the scandal has been pretty kept under wraps, but has been reported in the press elsewhere that muslim males of Pakistani descent have a major problem with civilised behaviour where it comes to other cultures, particularly women. It's reinforced by their barbaric tribal customs and exacerbated by the religion of the paedo-prophet who had no problems raping, enslaving and deflowering girls at the age of nine. Plus we know that muslims see Mo as the most perfect of men and to be emulated by muslims, so there is a major problem when islam runs up against civilised values.
Where it really goes wrong though is where the political correctness culture becomes a roadblock in the way of treating all victims equally as the police, social services and the CPS were all afraid to act due to having to deal with a minority culture and were afraid of accusations of racism.
Not that this excuses the Pakistani community, they bloody well knew what was going on and condoned it because it wasn't their women being raped and abused!
There is simply no place for islam in a civilised society, we need to be rid of this evil in our midst as soon as possible.

Human wrongs

The Marxist ethos in the Human Rights System can cause all manner of problems in that it normally is used to allow the guilty to avoid the consequences of their actions. There are those out there who believe that even if scum have rights then so do the rest of us and can make a compelling case for such, however in most cases, only the bad get to make headlines...
However for the servants of the state, the rights of some can be over=ridden when they decide that a danger is posed, the current scandal with the family courts held in secret, sometimes even from those who are being judged by one is one of them, however there are also the actions of social workers and local councils to be considered too...
Mail.

Social services forcibly removed a pregnant woman's unborn baby by caesarean section and put it up for adoption after obtaining a high court order on the grounds the mother had suffered a mental breakdown.
Essex council obtained an order allowing them to sedate the woman against her will before taking her daughter and placing it into care.
The Italian woman, who was in Britain on a work training course, claims she had not even been warned that she would be given a caesarean. It is not believed a natural birth would have posed a risk to her or the child's health.
Social workers argue they were acting in the best interests of the baby, who is now 15 months old, and are refusing to hand her back to the mother despite claims that she has made a complete recovery,
The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, reportedly suffered a panic attack while staying at a hotel which her relatives believe was a result of her failing to take medication for a pre-existing bi-polar condition.
She called the police and was taken to a psychiatric hospital where she was sectioned under the mental health act.
The baby was born five weeks later after which the mother returned to Italy.
The case has since escalated into an international legal row with an Italian High Court judge questioning whether British care proceedings should have been applied to the child of an Italian citizen.

Now I'm pretty sure bi-polarism should not be grounds for removing a child from a parent unless they are refusing to take medication, I'm also pretty sure in this case that forcibly removing a child by caesarian breaches so many human rights that I'm amazed a High Court Judge even sanctioned it. after all, first the Council would first have to find that she was basically unfit to make any decision herself and then shown there was an acute risk to the mother if a natural birth was attempted.
Or rather I would be if this weren't the UK and the courts have been kidnapping children via the family courts and putting them up for adoption wholesale.
I do have a horrible suspicion that a caesarian was used to prevent any emotional bonding between mother and child as it's known the mother was rendered unconscious during the process, but that's simply my opinion.
In this case the power of social workers and the courts appears to be based not on facts, but on fear, misjudgement and abuse of power.
I hope the Lady gets her child back, but knowing how the system is played in this country, I'm not going to hold my breath.

Caveat Emptor

Caveat emptor is basically the principle that the buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made. However with pre-packaged goods and gift wrapped goods, a level of trust is required on the part of the buyer. However if the goods are faulty, then the buyer usually has the option of a refund, the best of establishments particularly at Christmas, don't even require a receipt. However there are some who seem to have not taken the old maxim that 'the buyer is always right' to heart...
Mail.

A businessman sold a lump of clay instead of an iPad by Tesco was arrested on suspicion of fraud when he complained to the supermarket giant.
Colin Marsh, 47, paid £470 for the Apple tablet computer in Whitstable, Kent, as a Christmas present last year for his young daughters - but he opened the box to find it contained three lumps of clay.
The father, who runs two bakeries, immediately took it back to the store for a refund - but instead of reimbursing him, Tesco staff became suspicious and reported him to Kent Police.
Two days later Mr Marsh, father to Maddie, 11, and Daisy, eight - got a call asking him to report to his local police station where he was held for three hours, and accused of trying to scam Tesco.
He spent two months on bail before being told he faced no further action. The iPad that should have been in the box was tracked down to Wales, more than 200 miles from where he had bought it.

Now Tesco have of course apologised and the errant iPad has been found some 200 miles away in Wales, though how it somehow managed to have been registered to him, Tesco have yet to explain, nor have they explained just how the supposed tamper proof seals were bypassed. I'm still not entirely sure whay a story of last Christmas has eventually turned up at the Mail some 11 months later.
Still, you do have to wonder at just what the hell the police and Tesco were thinking, tracking an iPad isn't too difficult as they have a unique registration IP for each pad which means one can be located to a server within hours and presumably a call to the address in question would have given them answers including who sold it too them (assumption on my part) or what link they have to Whitstable Tesco's in Kent.
Still I suppose the police can congratulate themselves on another addition to the DNA database...
After all, 'Every little helps' as a certain consumer giant is known to say.

Justice today

Let's face it, British justice is a joke, it's arbitrary, two tiered and has the oddest set of values where theft is regarded far less tolerable than violence. Nor has the Human Rights Act helped where the legal profession has brought itself into disrepute several times owing to cases brought and judgements made.
Still, this is a new low.
Mail.

In 2011, Lucy Walsh was abducted by three men after a night out
They raped her repeatedly, laughing when she cried out
Two were convicted and sentenced; police are looking for the third attacker
But the two successfully appealed and were given less prison time
And one of them was granted British citizenship while in jail
Fearful for her safety with an attacker still at large, Lucy has fled to Canada
Lucy Walsh woke up in a dimly lit, grubby room she didn't recognise. She quickly realised, to her horror, that she was naked, and that she was not alone.
A man was on top of her, pinning her to the floor, while another raped her. There were others there, too, talking in a foreign language, and laughing when she screamed in terror and pain. The 24-year-old was subjected to a horrific two-hour attack, as the men took it in turns to rape her.
But the repercussions for Lucy went far beyond the physical injuries she sustained that night. It would destroy her faith in her country and its legal system, which she'd always trusted to protect her, but which seemed to her to favour the rights of her attackers above hers.
Her ordeal was described by a judge as 'among the worst to have come before this court in recent years' - yet in a sick irony, one of her attackers was granted British citizenship as he awaited trial.

A case of rape jihad, where muslim males believe that any woman not a muslim is fair game (and some muslim women too who dress western style) However that is by the bye, I would be disgusted and outraged had the men been white Anglo-Saxons, though I have a sneaking suspicion that they at least would have been given a much tougher sentence and certainly would not have had their sentence reduced to a mere 12 years on appeal.
A true justice system would have had these men (though clearly they are not real men) castrated or hung for doing this, but as we only have custodial sentencing, then life would probably have been far too short, by life meaning remaining under lock and key until they die.
This woman has had her life ruined, she's fled the country and our legal system has decided to rub salt into her wounds.
Words cannot express just how disgusted in our legal system I am today...

You pay peanuts, you get...

Care home workers apparently, though I have to admit I do know of some care workers in old peoples homes who are absolute gems so this isn't an attempt to tar them all with the same brush.
Telegraph.

Residents were left thirsty and malnourished and staff falsified medical records at Orchid View care home in West Sussex
Nineteen elderly patients died amid "institutionalised abuse" at a care home where residents were left thirsty and malnourished and staff falsified medical records, a coroner has ruled. In five cases, the neglect suffered by residents at Orchid View care home in Copthorne, West Sussex, was deemed to have contributed directly to their deaths. Lawyers representing the families of residents said evidence uncovered during the inquest "showed signs of profits being out before the well being of residents". They also claimed that the Care Quality Commission had questions to answer over why it gave Orchid View a "good" rating in 2010, and why no steps were taken to intervene after serious failings were identified by a second inspection four months before its closure in October 2011. The home, which was operated by the Southern Cross group, has since reopened under a new name and management.

I've always believed that one of the measures of a civilisation in the modern world is how we treat our elderly, our infirm and our disabled and frankly it does appear that the UK is slipping into a form of barbarism where the elderly are farmed off to the cheapest institutions to care for them rather than families taking care of their own as happened in the past. Not that society makes it easy for the looking after of such, the push towards both adults in a family to have jobs has not made care of the older folks an easy task rather than only one breadwinner as was the norm in the past. The consumer society does have a lot to answer for, though that certainly does not excuse the actions of the staff at the care home.
Neither I or Lady QM have had to place any of our parents in care for which we are truly grateful, nor am I criticising those who do. But if you have no choice then it really does look like a case of caveat emptor with many of those involved in the systematic abuse still working in the industry as no charges have ever been brought to staff or management.
It does appear the UK is slipping slowly into barbarism bit by bit as money is placed before decent care and compassion.

Someone else we don't really need here

Just what is it about this country that makes it the target for every islamic loonjob as a safe haven to spout their bile?
Actually I think we know what it is, it's called the Human Rights Act and a bunch of extreme legalists lawyers who have schemed to keep the most undesirable people from being booted out to their just deserts.
Telegraph.

The new spiritual leader of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood is living in hiding in London in fear of state-sponsored assassination, it can be disclosed.
Gomaa Amin is understood to have been made head of the Islamist organisation last week following the arrest of his predecessor in Cairo by Egypt’s military rulers. Mr Amin, 79, had flown to London about two months ago for medical treatment and as a result escaped detention when the army seized power in a bloody coup. He is now residing at an undisclosed address from which he is trying to orchestrate the Muslim Brotherhood’s response to the coup. The presence of Mr Amin in London is a potential headache for British authorities who may be obliged to provide protection for such a senior and controversial figure. The Muslim Brotherhood supports a caliphate, a unified Islamic state under Sharia law, and has been accused of fuelling religious tensions in the Middle East, particularly with the Christian minority.

So exactly why is he being allowed to stay here? I don't want anyone who has influence over people who want a new caliphate or sharia law implemented over none muslims to be anywhere near my country. The man is a dangerous fanatic and should have been denied entry to the UK simply because of who he is. He will be a magnet for islamic extremists throughout Europe and the World  many of whom thanks to the Foreign Office (Aka the camel corps) were invited here under an open door policy tso they could avoid being offed by their countries governments. Abu Qatada, Abu Hamza and Omar Bakri Mohammed the well renowned hate preachers were all allowed here under such a policy and all caused this country far more problems than their entry justified... if indeed there was any justification for allowing a pack of rabid loons into the UK.
Perhaps we should do the Egyptian people a favour and hand him back or allow him to be 'offed' anyway... pour encourager les autres... as the saying goes.

So which communities would these be then?

Apparently our counter terrorism people are concerned over silent communities, believing that they are increasing the threat of terrorism.
Telegraph.

Silence in communities over potential terrorists will lead to more atrocities in the UK, the outgoing counter-terrorism chief has warned.
Fanatics and “lone wolf” terrorists will be free to carry out more deadly attacks on Britain’s streets if the public do not come forward with more tip-offs, Metropolitan deputy assistant commissioner Stuart Osborne said. He warned the attack threat is becoming smaller and less complex which means they are harder to detect but are still deadly. He said every major plot in recent years has involved innocent people who knew something about the plan but never tipped off the police. In a major foiled plot to attack the UK with eight suicide bombers, some sections of a community in Birmingham knew some members of the cell had gone to Pakistan for terror training but did not raise the alarm. Counter-terrorism police have also warned of a growing threat from far right extremism.

Aha! There we go, the terrorists went to Pakistan to train as suicide bombers. Yet completely fails to mention the fact that they were religiously fanatical of the worlds biggest threat to peace aka islam.
The mention of right wing or far right extremism is also thrown in there to try and tar groups like the EDL who are far more popular than the government would like us to believe. However as far right groups don't tend to be suicide bombers, fly off to terrorist training camps or behead people in the streets you have to wonder why they get a mention... other than the fact that the government live in fear of the growing reaction to their bringing in of an incompatible culture to the UK.
The interesting thing is that muslims are only mentioned when it comes to talk of a backlash against them. Whilst ignoring the events that led to the backlash as caused by muslims... indeed though the death of Lee Rigby is mentioned, there was no mention of who actually did it.
Essentially it's all the buzzwords of would, could and should with a remarkable dearth of actual facts to back up the fact that the silent communities are the muslim ones and the fact that groups like the EDL are feared because of this...
The far right aren't the problem, but try telling a government numpty that, they are determined to tar those who protest against extremism with those who actually do it.

Ban the victims! Ban, ban ban!

Now what would you say if you had legally according to your rights organised a march. That you had consulted with the local police and that there were no problems with the route you'd chosen. However there is are a few organisations that oppose you, well funded by union subscriptions and a notable disregard of the law save only when it's used upon themselves. say one of these groups attacks your march and ten of its supporters are arrested compared to none of your own.
What would you expect the reaction of an ex-police authority chief?
Yep, probably the one that the protest group got...
Yorkshire Post.

A FORMER police authority chairman has accused the English Defence League (EDL) of “fascist street thuggery” after a march in Hull that led to 10 arrests.
Trouble flared when about 75 people took part a march along Spring Bank on June 8, although those arrested were protesting against the event.
Police said the men were held for public order-related offences when a “small disturbance” happened just after 1.15pm. Eight were released without charge, while a man aged 19 received a police caution for possession of a class B drug, and a 23-year-old was charged with possession of an offensive weapon in public.
Hull councillor Colin Inglis has now called on police to ban any further marches.
In a motion going before a meeting of the authority tomorrow, Coun Inglis, a former chairman of Humberside Police Authority, wrote: “Council notes the so-called ‘English Defence League’ march along Spring Bank.
“It further notes the deliberately provocative nature of this event with participants engaging in crude and racist behaviour clearly intended to elicit a response from local residents in a typical display of fascist street thuggery.

Astonishing is it not? The people behaving legally are the ones being accused of being fascists, the police arrested no one in the EDL tribute march (yes, that's correct it wasn't even a demo) yet they are the ones being accused of fascist thuggery.
If there's one organisation in the UK who behave like fascists, it's Unite Against Fascism, the organisation is union funded and has a number of convicted felons operating in a manner similar to the Nazi Brownshirts of infamous memory.
Indeed it was Winston Churchill who said 'The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists' The guy seems to have major powers of prophesy.
It's notable that Councillor Inglis has very little support in the few comments in the article so far. Seems the people on the ground know just who the real thugs operating out there are not the EDL.
Just a shame that Councillor Inglis can't bring himself to acknowledge this...