November 26, 2008 - 6:30AM
A man who fathered nine children after raping his daughters has been jailed for life in England.
The 56-year-old Sheffield man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, admitted raping his two daughters over 25 years.
His terrified daughters fell pregnant 19 times and gave birth to nine children, seven of whom survived.
The case has disturbing parallels with that of Austria's Josef Fritzl, who fathered seven children with the daughter he locked in a dungeon for 24 years.
While Fritzl is still awaiting trial, the Sheffield man was on Tuesday ordered to serve 25 life sentences behind bars in England.
His daughters, whose identities remain secret, expressed relief that their harrowing ordeal was now over.
"His detention in prison brings us only the knowledge that he cannot physically touch us again," they said in a statement.
"The suffering he has caused will continue for many years and we must now concentrate our thoughts on finding the strength to rebuild our lives."
Sheffield Crown Court judge Alan Goldsack said the case was "the worst I have come across" in nearly 40 years.
"I have little doubt that many members of the public hearing the facts of this case will consider either you should never be released from prison or only when you are old and infirm," he said as he handed down his sentence to the man, who had refused to leave his prison cell to attend the hearing.
"I agree with that view."
The man, a self-employed businessman who liked to call himself the "gaffer", was arrested after social workers learned in June about the decades of abuse his daughters suffered.
He admitted 25 rapes and four indecent assaults during a hearing last month.
The court heard the abuse began when the man's daughters were aged eight and 10 and that he "took pleasure" in the harm he knew he was doing to them.
The eldest sister fell pregnant seven times, the youngest 12.
Of their 19 pregnancies, 10 babies were lost because of miscarriage or abortion, while two died on the day they were born.
Prosecutor Nicholas Campbell QC said when either of the sisters tried to end the abuse, their father threatened to kill them and their children.
They tried offering him 100 pounds ($233) a month from their child benefits to stop the abuse and tried to give him as much whisky as they could in the hope he would drink himself to death.
To ensure the abuse remained secret, the man repeatedly moved house with his family, including his wife and son. His wife left in the early 1990s.
"All the family were frightened of him," Campbell said.
"His younger daughter told of the frightening habit her father had of putting her head next to the flames of their gas fire and that when she struggled to get away on certain occasions she burnt her eyes."
In 1998 one of the sisters called a helpline run by the charity Childline and asked for a guarantee that she could keep her children if she came forward about the abuse.
But no guarantee was granted and the sisters' suffering went unreported.
Police and social services have launched an independent review into the case and why the abuse was not detected sooner.
Ian Keates, for the Crown Prosecution Service in South Yorkshire, described the abuse the sisters had been subjected to as "beyond comprehension".
"In his treatment of his victims the defendant sank to the most profound depths of depravity," he said.
AAP
Source
Showing posts with label Articles of Interest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Articles of Interest. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
'Go to hell' - Digger bashing accused's message
By Gemma Jones
November 21, 2008 12:00am
A DAY after war veteran Ernest Evans was laid to rest the alleged 50 cent thug who is accused of bashing him has shown his contempt, declaring: "Go to hell."
Kristopher Cowie, 30, today said the six weeks of hell Mr Evans endured, including a return of horrific post war trauma and injuries which never healed before his death last Friday, was "not my problem.''
He then raised his middle finger to a news photographer and shoved him in the chest outside Downing Centre Local Court.
Ernest Evans' funeral: Bashed digger laid to rest.
Cowie is accused of punching Mr Evans, 83, as he sat on a park bench outside St Vincent De Paul at Miranda, where his wife was shopping for a war history book for him last month.
"My apologies for their loss, it has got nothing to do with me,'' a slurring and unsteady Cowie said as he prepared to face Downing Centre Local Court on unrelated charges.
"Not my problem.''
When asked if he had a drug problem, Cowie shot back, "No, none of your business and no I don't so you can go to hell.'' He then expressed his dismay at featuring on the front page of The Daily Telegraph minutes after he had thanked a magistrate for releasing him on bail last month. He had already been on bail for other offences. "Putting me on the front page of The Daily Telegraph....you are a bitch,'' he said.
This tragic story has generated huge amounts of reader feedback - while we thank everybody for contributing, because the case is ongoing we are legally limited as to the comments we can post. If you wish yours to be posted, please refrain from mentioning the accused man.
Police allege Cowie demanded 50 cents from Mr Evans before returning with girlfriend Tracey Prater, 29 and punching him, sending him flying over the bench.
She allegedly threatened Mr Evans elderly wife Una.
Mr Evans died, six weeks after the attack, with the leg lacerations he suffered never healing and tormented from nightmares in which he would yell: "The bastard wants 50 cents.''
The night terrors he had suffered after the war in which he would jump up and try to shield his mates from Japanese fire also returned.
Cowie was appearing on unrelated charges relating to an airport offence and Sheriffs had to come to the court while he appeared.
When he saw them, Cowie began barking at them.
Read the original story about Ernest Evans' bashing and Cowie in court
Source
November 21, 2008 12:00am
A DAY after war veteran Ernest Evans was laid to rest the alleged 50 cent thug who is accused of bashing him has shown his contempt, declaring: "Go to hell."
Kristopher Cowie, 30, today said the six weeks of hell Mr Evans endured, including a return of horrific post war trauma and injuries which never healed before his death last Friday, was "not my problem.''
He then raised his middle finger to a news photographer and shoved him in the chest outside Downing Centre Local Court.
Ernest Evans' funeral: Bashed digger laid to rest.
Cowie is accused of punching Mr Evans, 83, as he sat on a park bench outside St Vincent De Paul at Miranda, where his wife was shopping for a war history book for him last month.
"My apologies for their loss, it has got nothing to do with me,'' a slurring and unsteady Cowie said as he prepared to face Downing Centre Local Court on unrelated charges.
"Not my problem.''
When asked if he had a drug problem, Cowie shot back, "No, none of your business and no I don't so you can go to hell.'' He then expressed his dismay at featuring on the front page of The Daily Telegraph minutes after he had thanked a magistrate for releasing him on bail last month. He had already been on bail for other offences. "Putting me on the front page of The Daily Telegraph....you are a bitch,'' he said.
This tragic story has generated huge amounts of reader feedback - while we thank everybody for contributing, because the case is ongoing we are legally limited as to the comments we can post. If you wish yours to be posted, please refrain from mentioning the accused man.
Police allege Cowie demanded 50 cents from Mr Evans before returning with girlfriend Tracey Prater, 29 and punching him, sending him flying over the bench.
She allegedly threatened Mr Evans elderly wife Una.
Mr Evans died, six weeks after the attack, with the leg lacerations he suffered never healing and tormented from nightmares in which he would yell: "The bastard wants 50 cents.''
The night terrors he had suffered after the war in which he would jump up and try to shield his mates from Japanese fire also returned.
Cowie was appearing on unrelated charges relating to an airport offence and Sheriffs had to come to the court while he appeared.
When he saw them, Cowie began barking at them.
Read the original story about Ernest Evans' bashing and Cowie in court
Source
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Muslims more disadvantaged
Dewi Cooke
November 18, 2008
AUSTRALIAN Muslims are more socially and economically disadvantaged than their non-Muslim counterparts, despite being, on the whole, better educated and more youthful.
Research to be presented at a Melbourne conference tomorrow shows Australian Muslims have significantly higher rates of high school completion and are also more likely to go to university than are non-Muslims.
But only 15% own their homes compared with 30% of non-Muslims, twice as many live in public housing and unemployment among Muslim youth is double that of non-Muslim Australians.
"One would expect that they should be able to participate in the economic and social life as other educated people are and they are not doing so, and I think that's nothing to do with their religious beliefs," Flinders University sociologist Riaz Hassan said.
"That's something to do with the larger community, whether it's discrimination, or prejudice or exclusion prompted by other factors."
Analysing 2006 census figures, Professor Hassan found that of 340,391 Muslims recorded on census night (1.7% of the population), 38% were born in Australia and the rest born overseas in countries including Lebanon, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Despite their higher rates of high school and tertiary education — 24% of Muslim men and 26% of Muslim women had completed year 12 compared with 15% and 17% of non-Muslim men and women respectively — Professor Hassan found Muslims were not equally represented in well-paying white-collar professions.
However, they had higher rates of work in skilled blue-collar and labouring jobs.
Overall, 52% were in rental accommodation — private or public — more than 20% higher than other Australians.
Average household incomes also tended to be lower and Muslim children were twice as likely to live below the poverty line.
Professor Hassan said the findings were significant because of public concern about religious radicalism. He argued that radicalism was more likely to rise out of socio-economic inequality, negative stereotypes and discrimination.
Source
November 18, 2008
AUSTRALIAN Muslims are more socially and economically disadvantaged than their non-Muslim counterparts, despite being, on the whole, better educated and more youthful.
Research to be presented at a Melbourne conference tomorrow shows Australian Muslims have significantly higher rates of high school completion and are also more likely to go to university than are non-Muslims.
But only 15% own their homes compared with 30% of non-Muslims, twice as many live in public housing and unemployment among Muslim youth is double that of non-Muslim Australians.
"One would expect that they should be able to participate in the economic and social life as other educated people are and they are not doing so, and I think that's nothing to do with their religious beliefs," Flinders University sociologist Riaz Hassan said.
"That's something to do with the larger community, whether it's discrimination, or prejudice or exclusion prompted by other factors."
Analysing 2006 census figures, Professor Hassan found that of 340,391 Muslims recorded on census night (1.7% of the population), 38% were born in Australia and the rest born overseas in countries including Lebanon, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Despite their higher rates of high school and tertiary education — 24% of Muslim men and 26% of Muslim women had completed year 12 compared with 15% and 17% of non-Muslim men and women respectively — Professor Hassan found Muslims were not equally represented in well-paying white-collar professions.
However, they had higher rates of work in skilled blue-collar and labouring jobs.
Overall, 52% were in rental accommodation — private or public — more than 20% higher than other Australians.
Average household incomes also tended to be lower and Muslim children were twice as likely to live below the poverty line.
Professor Hassan said the findings were significant because of public concern about religious radicalism. He argued that radicalism was more likely to rise out of socio-economic inequality, negative stereotypes and discrimination.
Source
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Legalised polygamy a good option
By Anne Taylor
The Courier-Mail
November 18, 2008 04:25am
WITH the introduction of "alimony payments" to mistresses, the comedy of equality of the sexes is turning into a farce.
There can be no equality; the sexes are simply different. During sex, a woman sometimes conceives; that's her downside. Her upside is that while she's bearing and rearing her infant(s) she and her infant may legally demand protection and financial support from the biological father. That's his downside.
Monogamy suits a wife and her children for practical reasons, but modern middle-class and upper-class women have gone beyond the practical. They want continuing romance, excitement, and a fulfilling career.
The women in the lower echelons have no choice but to work, as they have done since the Industrial Revolution. No flowers and wining and dining, boardrooms and glass ceilings for them.
Let me relate a "true confession".
I was deserted by my husband in 1970, and left with two infant sons. I was a middle-class housewife, totally naive about my rights and about government benefits. Unaware that I was entitled to a Deserted Wives' Pension, I went to work.
First I obtained factory work, but the meagre wage was impossible to live on with rent and child care to pay. It probably still is for single-income parents. Spare a thought for factory workers, you politicians and feminists.
I battled my way back into the clerical workforce I'd been in before my brief marriage, but I didn't have the equal pay and the childcare subsidy working mothers have today. The stress carried me off to a psychiatric hospital.
Those institutions were not what they are today. I came out hardened and bitter and wanting only to protect and nurture my sons at all costs.
I accepted the advances of the first presentable man who offered me his protection and became his mistress. Until my sons were of an age for me to go to work with ease of mind, I then had a succession of "protectors" who all told me the same story.
I could have been sceptical, except that my own husband had been a genuine cad. These men said their wives had lost interest in sex, criticised them, nagged them, constantly tried to "change" them.
I am reminded of a quote: "A man marries a woman thinking she won't change, and she does. A woman marries a man thinking he will change, and he doesn't."
I'd grown up in a household of men who never said a word if I left the toilet rim down, and explained to me once patiently that if I didn't like wet towels on the floor, it only took me a moment to pick them up as opposed to five minutes to find the culprit and complain. Thereafter they turned deaf ears to my complaint.To me, these men whose wives nagged about their thoughtlessness and laziness were gems. They provided for their wives, and most of them still loved them despite being mystified and disillusioned.
One of them asked me plaintively: "What does she want from me? She told the marriage guidance counsellor that I never remember wedding anniversaries and never give her flowers, so I got a standing order at the florist to deliver her flowers on our anniversary and Valentine's Day. The very first bunch of flowers she got she threw them at me."
Do you see what you're dealing with here, you fluffy-headed females? You're dealing with brains that are programmed differently from yours.
In the meantime let's just accept it, the way our mystified menfolk accept and are enchanted by us.
Women talk a lot about "communication" and "empathy". But it's men who communicate concisely and precisely, and I suspect women have an airy-fairy idea of empathy, or there would be far fewer divorces.
Once upon a time I put forward the idea of legalised polygamy as the answer to broken marriages, fatherless children, and women wanting to have children and still be part of the workforce.
The idea was that working wives could help provide financially, while the stay-at-home mums could provide child care.
With the present madness of Family Law legislation upon us, I put forward the suggestion again as being more sane. If all the wives, mistresses, de factos and girlfriends of any particular Lothario were to co-operate for the sake of their mutual children, instead of pulling against each other and the father, we might get some stability back into society.
Source
The Courier-Mail
November 18, 2008 04:25am
WITH the introduction of "alimony payments" to mistresses, the comedy of equality of the sexes is turning into a farce.
There can be no equality; the sexes are simply different. During sex, a woman sometimes conceives; that's her downside. Her upside is that while she's bearing and rearing her infant(s) she and her infant may legally demand protection and financial support from the biological father. That's his downside.
Monogamy suits a wife and her children for practical reasons, but modern middle-class and upper-class women have gone beyond the practical. They want continuing romance, excitement, and a fulfilling career.
The women in the lower echelons have no choice but to work, as they have done since the Industrial Revolution. No flowers and wining and dining, boardrooms and glass ceilings for them.
Let me relate a "true confession".
I was deserted by my husband in 1970, and left with two infant sons. I was a middle-class housewife, totally naive about my rights and about government benefits. Unaware that I was entitled to a Deserted Wives' Pension, I went to work.
First I obtained factory work, but the meagre wage was impossible to live on with rent and child care to pay. It probably still is for single-income parents. Spare a thought for factory workers, you politicians and feminists.
I battled my way back into the clerical workforce I'd been in before my brief marriage, but I didn't have the equal pay and the childcare subsidy working mothers have today. The stress carried me off to a psychiatric hospital.
Those institutions were not what they are today. I came out hardened and bitter and wanting only to protect and nurture my sons at all costs.
I accepted the advances of the first presentable man who offered me his protection and became his mistress. Until my sons were of an age for me to go to work with ease of mind, I then had a succession of "protectors" who all told me the same story.
I could have been sceptical, except that my own husband had been a genuine cad. These men said their wives had lost interest in sex, criticised them, nagged them, constantly tried to "change" them.
I am reminded of a quote: "A man marries a woman thinking she won't change, and she does. A woman marries a man thinking he will change, and he doesn't."
I'd grown up in a household of men who never said a word if I left the toilet rim down, and explained to me once patiently that if I didn't like wet towels on the floor, it only took me a moment to pick them up as opposed to five minutes to find the culprit and complain. Thereafter they turned deaf ears to my complaint.To me, these men whose wives nagged about their thoughtlessness and laziness were gems. They provided for their wives, and most of them still loved them despite being mystified and disillusioned.
One of them asked me plaintively: "What does she want from me? She told the marriage guidance counsellor that I never remember wedding anniversaries and never give her flowers, so I got a standing order at the florist to deliver her flowers on our anniversary and Valentine's Day. The very first bunch of flowers she got she threw them at me."
Do you see what you're dealing with here, you fluffy-headed females? You're dealing with brains that are programmed differently from yours.
In the meantime let's just accept it, the way our mystified menfolk accept and are enchanted by us.
Women talk a lot about "communication" and "empathy". But it's men who communicate concisely and precisely, and I suspect women have an airy-fairy idea of empathy, or there would be far fewer divorces.
Once upon a time I put forward the idea of legalised polygamy as the answer to broken marriages, fatherless children, and women wanting to have children and still be part of the workforce.
The idea was that working wives could help provide financially, while the stay-at-home mums could provide child care.
With the present madness of Family Law legislation upon us, I put forward the suggestion again as being more sane. If all the wives, mistresses, de factos and girlfriends of any particular Lothario were to co-operate for the sake of their mutual children, instead of pulling against each other and the father, we might get some stability back into society.
Source
Friday, July 18, 2008
France closes ranks against burka
Emma-Kate Symons, Paris July 18, 2008
FRANCE has taken a united stand against the burka and the veil with a leading Muslim minister in Nicolas Sarkozy's Government condemning head-to-toe Islamic dress as "a prison and a straitjacket".
Following a landmark appeal court ruling denying French citizenship to a Moroccan woman who wore a burka at the behest of her French husband, Urban Affairs Minister Fadela Amara said all Islamic coverings for women, including the popular head and shoulder veil or hijab were "symbols of oppression".
"The burka is a prison; it's a straitjacket," she told Le Parisien.
"It is not a religious insignia but the insignia of a totalitarian political project that advocates inequality between the sexes and which is totally devoid of democracy."
The words burka and niqab are used interchangeably in France, although burka normally refers to the head-to-toe covering including a screen over the eyes that is popular in parts of Afghanistan. The niqab generally leaves a small slit for the eyes.
Ms Amara did not stop with her denunciation of the most extreme forms of Islamic dress for women and their incompatibility with French values such as secularism, democracy and sexual equality.
"The veil and the burka are the same thing. The only difference is a few centimetres of fabric," she said. "We have to fight against this obscurantist practice which endangers equality between men and women."
In 2005, France banned the veil in all schools, a decision that was met with only small pockets of brief resistance. It is now broadly accepted, including by most of France's estimated five million Muslims, Europe's largest Muslim minority.
A campaigner for women's rights and equality for Muslim women in France's fractious immigrant-dominated housing estates, Ms Amara said she hoped the court ruling would "dissuade certain fanatics from imposing the burka on their wives".
In a rare show of unity, prominent figures across the political spectrum applauded the court decision refusing citizenship to 32-year-old Faiza Mabchour, on the grounds she had failed to integrate. After moving to France in 2000, following her marriage to a French citizen of North African origin, the Moroccan mother of three converted to hardline Salafism, the fundamentalist strand of Islam originating in Saudi Arabia. According to her husband's wishes, she began wearing a burka with only a slit opening at the eyes.
Despite speaking good French, Ms Mabchour demonstrated an ignorance of basic French values and rights during interviews with state officials.
In her ruling, state commissioner Emmanuelle Prada-Bordenave said Ms Mabchour came for interviews "clothed from head to toe in the clothing of women from the Arabian Peninsula, with a veil covering her hair, forehead and chin and a piece of cloth over her face. Her eyes could only be seen through a small slit".
"She lives virtually as a recluse, disconnected from French society. She has no concept of laicite (the secular state or secularism) nor the right to vote. She lives in total subservience to the men in her family."
The appeal ruling was welcomed after controversy surrounding the annulment of a marriage in the northern city of Lille, on the grounds that the Muslim bride had lied about her virginity.
The head of France's Muslim Council, Mohammed Mousaoui, was cautious in his reaction to the burka decision.
"It should not serve as a pretext to stigmatise the majority of Muslims or to the point the finger at the practise of Islam," he said. "In the majority of Muslim schools ... the wearing of the burka is neither an obligation nor a recommendation".
Source
FRANCE has taken a united stand against the burka and the veil with a leading Muslim minister in Nicolas Sarkozy's Government condemning head-to-toe Islamic dress as "a prison and a straitjacket".
Following a landmark appeal court ruling denying French citizenship to a Moroccan woman who wore a burka at the behest of her French husband, Urban Affairs Minister Fadela Amara said all Islamic coverings for women, including the popular head and shoulder veil or hijab were "symbols of oppression".
"The burka is a prison; it's a straitjacket," she told Le Parisien.
"It is not a religious insignia but the insignia of a totalitarian political project that advocates inequality between the sexes and which is totally devoid of democracy."
The words burka and niqab are used interchangeably in France, although burka normally refers to the head-to-toe covering including a screen over the eyes that is popular in parts of Afghanistan. The niqab generally leaves a small slit for the eyes.
Ms Amara did not stop with her denunciation of the most extreme forms of Islamic dress for women and their incompatibility with French values such as secularism, democracy and sexual equality.
"The veil and the burka are the same thing. The only difference is a few centimetres of fabric," she said. "We have to fight against this obscurantist practice which endangers equality between men and women."
In 2005, France banned the veil in all schools, a decision that was met with only small pockets of brief resistance. It is now broadly accepted, including by most of France's estimated five million Muslims, Europe's largest Muslim minority.
A campaigner for women's rights and equality for Muslim women in France's fractious immigrant-dominated housing estates, Ms Amara said she hoped the court ruling would "dissuade certain fanatics from imposing the burka on their wives".
In a rare show of unity, prominent figures across the political spectrum applauded the court decision refusing citizenship to 32-year-old Faiza Mabchour, on the grounds she had failed to integrate. After moving to France in 2000, following her marriage to a French citizen of North African origin, the Moroccan mother of three converted to hardline Salafism, the fundamentalist strand of Islam originating in Saudi Arabia. According to her husband's wishes, she began wearing a burka with only a slit opening at the eyes.
Despite speaking good French, Ms Mabchour demonstrated an ignorance of basic French values and rights during interviews with state officials.
In her ruling, state commissioner Emmanuelle Prada-Bordenave said Ms Mabchour came for interviews "clothed from head to toe in the clothing of women from the Arabian Peninsula, with a veil covering her hair, forehead and chin and a piece of cloth over her face. Her eyes could only be seen through a small slit".
"She lives virtually as a recluse, disconnected from French society. She has no concept of laicite (the secular state or secularism) nor the right to vote. She lives in total subservience to the men in her family."
The appeal ruling was welcomed after controversy surrounding the annulment of a marriage in the northern city of Lille, on the grounds that the Muslim bride had lied about her virginity.
The head of France's Muslim Council, Mohammed Mousaoui, was cautious in his reaction to the burka decision.
"It should not serve as a pretext to stigmatise the majority of Muslims or to the point the finger at the practise of Islam," he said. "In the majority of Muslim schools ... the wearing of the burka is neither an obligation nor a recommendation".
Source
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Virtual Caliphate: Islamic extremists and their websites
James Brandon - Centre of Social Cohesion (UK)
Virtual Caliphate shows how Islamic extremists in the United Kingdom have established dedicated websites in order to circumvent British anti-terrorism measures introduced after July 2005. It is the first report to catalogue the content of these websites and to analyse how British extremists use these sites to spread jihadist ideologies, co-ordinate their activities and win new recruits.
Report
Virtual Caliphate shows how Islamic extremists in the United Kingdom have established dedicated websites in order to circumvent British anti-terrorism measures introduced after July 2005. It is the first report to catalogue the content of these websites and to analyse how British extremists use these sites to spread jihadist ideologies, co-ordinate their activities and win new recruits.
Report
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Are there some people we shouldn’t invite onto WHYS?
Interesting discussion taking place here.
Ed Hussain has declined to appear on the BBC World Service 'World Have Your Say' program because a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir was also invited to appear on the same program.
The program in question was to designed to discuss stategies to 'fight Islamist extremism', a theme of exestintial importance to the chaps at Quilliam.
It appears the empty posturing by Ed and co have proven just that - empty posturing, not that it was ever in any doubt.
As one contributer, Andrew, points out:
"I find this very strange. I was under the impression that Ed was all in favour of debating with the radicals. Now it seems that we must hear him only, or nothing!"
But how did supporters of this fraudelent outfit react to this somewhat negative turn of events? Gracious in the face of defeat? I think not. Maria, another contributor, could not resist one last dig at HT:
"Ed Husain had a ripe opportunity to confront, debate and prove wrong his opponents before the world and he squandered it. That is a profound shame. By denying himself the airtime he continues the impression that “moderate Islam” lacks the moral authority and fortitude to influence their murderously insane theological cousins."
So much for objectivity!
P.S. - Note how the BBC perpetuates the insidious illusion regarding its own objectivity!
Ed Hussain has declined to appear on the BBC World Service 'World Have Your Say' program because a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir was also invited to appear on the same program.
The program in question was to designed to discuss stategies to 'fight Islamist extremism', a theme of exestintial importance to the chaps at Quilliam.
It appears the empty posturing by Ed and co have proven just that - empty posturing, not that it was ever in any doubt.
As one contributer, Andrew, points out:
"I find this very strange. I was under the impression that Ed was all in favour of debating with the radicals. Now it seems that we must hear him only, or nothing!"
But how did supporters of this fraudelent outfit react to this somewhat negative turn of events? Gracious in the face of defeat? I think not. Maria, another contributor, could not resist one last dig at HT:
"Ed Husain had a ripe opportunity to confront, debate and prove wrong his opponents before the world and he squandered it. That is a profound shame. By denying himself the airtime he continues the impression that “moderate Islam” lacks the moral authority and fortitude to influence their murderously insane theological cousins."
So much for objectivity!
P.S. - Note how the BBC perpetuates the insidious illusion regarding its own objectivity!
Morality and political violence
All praise is due to Allah (swt), for if I was a proponent of philosophical relativism, I could never ascribe with certainty the veracity of any personal or political persuasion.
I guess it's a case of 'lakum dinakum, waliya deen' ... 'to you your way, and to me mine'!
Related: 1. Terrorism: What's Morality Got To Do With It?, 2. The philosophy of war and 3. Post-modern politics
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Morality and political violence
War, rebellion and terrorism - together, they constitute a major challenge to the world today. But they also constitute a challenge to morality itself. This week, we talk to the Melbourne philosopher C.A.J. Coady about morality and political violence ...
Full Transcript
I guess it's a case of 'lakum dinakum, waliya deen' ... 'to you your way, and to me mine'!
Related: 1. Terrorism: What's Morality Got To Do With It?, 2. The philosophy of war and 3. Post-modern politics
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Morality and political violence
War, rebellion and terrorism - together, they constitute a major challenge to the world today. But they also constitute a challenge to morality itself. This week, we talk to the Melbourne philosopher C.A.J. Coady about morality and political violence ...
Full Transcript
Tania Hayes - I am a carer
Below is the transcript from a recent moving episode from Radio National's Perpespective program.
Identity politics has been, and will always continue to be, one of the most contentious phenomena behind our collective existence. Whilst the program challenges our basic values constructions, particularly in relation to the role of work in the construction and affirmation of individual worth, the lessons from this deeply personal account can very readily be applied to our Muslim lives.
I always find it disconcerting when Muslim sisters, particularly Muslim mothers, feel obliged to validate their motherhood by reference to some extraneous criteria. How many times have we heard the phrase 'I am a stay at home mum, but ...', and the individual in question then proceeds to outline the countless other facets of their existence whose worth they believe society would recognise? The reality is that such a thought process is in fact an indictment of society's devaluation of the role women and of motherhood. On the flip side, how sad it would be if we were to likewise measure the worth of a man based upon his vocational considerations.
What is of value is your contribution to the betterment of this world, a fact that is manifested in both your view of mankind and the construction of transcendent relations between mankind. Muslims, both males and females, by virtue of their Islam, are uniquely placed to offer leading contributions to this goal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tania Hayes - I am a carer
Eleven years ago when I was just 22, my life changed in an instant. Just a few months short of our wedding day, my fiancé Warren, was struck down with a life threatening 8 cm Acoustic Neuroma Brain Tumour. All of a sudden our hopes and dreams disappeared and I found myself embarking on an uncertain new life of responsibility. That new life was called being a carer. I was now one of the 2.6 million Australians who devote their life to become full time carers.
As we walked this journey together we were confronted by a hospital stay of a total of 446 days, the majority of which were spent within the intensive care department clinging to life support. From the first day that the nightmare began, I made the brave decision to give up my job and everything in my life to be by Warren's side.
His life from one day to the next had altered beyond recognition, and as a result my life was changing too. One minute he was young, he was healthy and he was vibrant - the next he was barely alive, trapped in the isolation of his illness, unable to eat, speak or move. The carefree young life that we had lived side by side had disappeared and suddenly I found myself at Warren's beck and call as I taught him to do the simplest of tasks in order to rebuild his life.
My role as a carer is a full-time job, it's 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with little time off to be myself, no time to be sick, or time off for annual leave. I am on call around the clock providing help with the simplest of tasks that most people in life take for granted, like feeding, toileting, showering, dressing, transferring, rehabilitating and mobility.
For many of us, we are called into this role of becoming a carer unexpectedly. We don't have the experience to deal with the life changing moments that are presented to us. We stumble and we fall and we get back up again as we walk this windy and scary road alone. It is a road that is sometimes beyond our capabilities, but we are given little choice but to hold on tight and hope that we can make it through.
As I look back on my life and the caring role I began at just twenty-two, the one thing that sticks out in my mind the most has been the adjustment to the loss of my identity. Who was I now? My old life had disappeared and now I was 'just' a carer. Society places such a high importance on what we do in life. When people meet you, one of the first questions they ask is, 'So, what do you do for a living?' And if you fall into the right category, you are pigeon-holed as being someone of importance. When I first became a carer and was asked that question, I felt more judged than ever before. It seemed as though what I was doing was of little importance. I felt I wasn't valued, despite having gone through more suffering than most people experienced in a lifetime, and coming out the other side.
I think it is wrong the way society values people not by who they are but by what they are. So many people live their life by the suit they wear or the car they drive. And these materialistic possessions become their identify. And it is only when they are forced to step outside of their comfort zone that they realise that they are living a life that is not true to themselves.
After many years I have come to realise that it is not what you do in life that matters but how much love you put into what you do. My caring journey has allowed me to develop some amazing qualities in myself that I never knew that I had. I found an incredible strength deep inside that has supported us to this day. I found the courage to never give up, despite all the fear and suffering. And I have developed a ferocious determination that has managed to conquer every obstacle in my path.
Being a carer may not be the most recognised job in the world, but it is by far the most rewarding. Now when people ask me what I do, I am proud to say that I am a carer, knowing that by doing this job I am giving Warren the greatest gift of all - a life worth living.
Source
Identity politics has been, and will always continue to be, one of the most contentious phenomena behind our collective existence. Whilst the program challenges our basic values constructions, particularly in relation to the role of work in the construction and affirmation of individual worth, the lessons from this deeply personal account can very readily be applied to our Muslim lives.
I always find it disconcerting when Muslim sisters, particularly Muslim mothers, feel obliged to validate their motherhood by reference to some extraneous criteria. How many times have we heard the phrase 'I am a stay at home mum, but ...', and the individual in question then proceeds to outline the countless other facets of their existence whose worth they believe society would recognise? The reality is that such a thought process is in fact an indictment of society's devaluation of the role women and of motherhood. On the flip side, how sad it would be if we were to likewise measure the worth of a man based upon his vocational considerations.
What is of value is your contribution to the betterment of this world, a fact that is manifested in both your view of mankind and the construction of transcendent relations between mankind. Muslims, both males and females, by virtue of their Islam, are uniquely placed to offer leading contributions to this goal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tania Hayes - I am a carer
Eleven years ago when I was just 22, my life changed in an instant. Just a few months short of our wedding day, my fiancé Warren, was struck down with a life threatening 8 cm Acoustic Neuroma Brain Tumour. All of a sudden our hopes and dreams disappeared and I found myself embarking on an uncertain new life of responsibility. That new life was called being a carer. I was now one of the 2.6 million Australians who devote their life to become full time carers.
As we walked this journey together we were confronted by a hospital stay of a total of 446 days, the majority of which were spent within the intensive care department clinging to life support. From the first day that the nightmare began, I made the brave decision to give up my job and everything in my life to be by Warren's side.
His life from one day to the next had altered beyond recognition, and as a result my life was changing too. One minute he was young, he was healthy and he was vibrant - the next he was barely alive, trapped in the isolation of his illness, unable to eat, speak or move. The carefree young life that we had lived side by side had disappeared and suddenly I found myself at Warren's beck and call as I taught him to do the simplest of tasks in order to rebuild his life.
My role as a carer is a full-time job, it's 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with little time off to be myself, no time to be sick, or time off for annual leave. I am on call around the clock providing help with the simplest of tasks that most people in life take for granted, like feeding, toileting, showering, dressing, transferring, rehabilitating and mobility.
For many of us, we are called into this role of becoming a carer unexpectedly. We don't have the experience to deal with the life changing moments that are presented to us. We stumble and we fall and we get back up again as we walk this windy and scary road alone. It is a road that is sometimes beyond our capabilities, but we are given little choice but to hold on tight and hope that we can make it through.
As I look back on my life and the caring role I began at just twenty-two, the one thing that sticks out in my mind the most has been the adjustment to the loss of my identity. Who was I now? My old life had disappeared and now I was 'just' a carer. Society places such a high importance on what we do in life. When people meet you, one of the first questions they ask is, 'So, what do you do for a living?' And if you fall into the right category, you are pigeon-holed as being someone of importance. When I first became a carer and was asked that question, I felt more judged than ever before. It seemed as though what I was doing was of little importance. I felt I wasn't valued, despite having gone through more suffering than most people experienced in a lifetime, and coming out the other side.
I think it is wrong the way society values people not by who they are but by what they are. So many people live their life by the suit they wear or the car they drive. And these materialistic possessions become their identify. And it is only when they are forced to step outside of their comfort zone that they realise that they are living a life that is not true to themselves.
After many years I have come to realise that it is not what you do in life that matters but how much love you put into what you do. My caring journey has allowed me to develop some amazing qualities in myself that I never knew that I had. I found an incredible strength deep inside that has supported us to this day. I found the courage to never give up, despite all the fear and suffering. And I have developed a ferocious determination that has managed to conquer every obstacle in my path.
Being a carer may not be the most recognised job in the world, but it is by far the most rewarding. Now when people ask me what I do, I am proud to say that I am a carer, knowing that by doing this job I am giving Warren the greatest gift of all - a life worth living.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)