From the desk of Jos de Man on Wed, 2011-08-10 19:50 Maybe there is a simple explanation for the riots. In Great-Britain crime is easy and almost risk-free. In his startling book ‘A Land fit for Criminals’ insider David Fraser demonstrates it with figures and facts. Detection rate of crimes is 5 per cent. Of these cases only 2 per cent are processed in court. Only a mere 0.3 per cent of all crimes result in prison sentence. Offenders deem themselves untouchable. Fines are seldom paid. In 2002 it was reported that tens of millions of pounds in unpaid fines were written off. From the desk of Jos de Man on Wed, 2011-08-10 19:50 Maybe there is a simple explanation for the riots. In Great-Britain crime is easy and almost risk-free. In his startling book ‘A Land fit for Criminals’ insider David Fraser demonstrates it with figures and facts. Detection rate of crimes is 5 per cent. Of these cases only 2 per cent are processed in court. Only a mere 0.3 per cent of all crimes result in prison sentence. Offenders deem themselves untouchable. Fines are seldom paid. In 2002 it was reported that tens of millions of pounds in unpaid fines were written off. Even persistent offenders with a long record of previous convictions and a complete lack of motivation to reform are granted probation and put back in the community. The evidence shows that for them this means business as usual. The reconviction rate for all male offenders in 61 per cent; for offenders given community service 67 per cent. ‘Offenders are not corrupted by prison but by the unchallenged success of their criminality’, concludes Fraser, who served in the National Probation Service for twenty-six years, and was an analyst with the National Criminal Intelligence Service. He blames the criminal justice system for putting consideration for the criminal first and the safety of the public second: ‘The bizarre fact is that all governments since the sixties have gone out of their way to introduce policies that have encouraged criminals to become more criminal. Numerous obstacles have been placed in the way of finding, arresting and convincing them.’ Young offenders enjoy special protection. The use of imprisonment against them is severely limited. In 2000, males under 18 committed 80,600 offences. Eleven years later, one suspects that they have improved on this statistics. Police doing their job are frequently faced with accusations of racism by their superiors. Prosecutors are motivated by budgetary considerations to discontinue more and more cases. Judges grant bail even when the accused has re-offended while on bail. Was the government ever disturbed by such dire situations? Not in the least. The government simply lied. In 2004 the Home Secretary stated that crime had fallen from 18 million in 1997 to 12 million. A report produced by his own department in 2002 showed that the figure of 60 million was more accurate. The empathy with the criminal, the contempt for the victim, the neglect of public security, the lies and manipulations are not typical British phenomena. They are but symptoms of the plague of multiculturalism that slowly eradicates all forms of decency in the Western post-democracies. From the desk of Svein Sellanraa on Wed, 2011-08-10 00:57 In recent weeks, Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik and the authors he cites as his influences have often been described as "right-wing extremists." But as I pointed out not too long ago in a Norwegian-language post onDispatches from the North, that term is largely useless, having devolved into a meaningless slur with no clear, objective definition. Its purpose at present seems to be to tarnish everyone on the non-establishment Right with the stain of Breivik's atrocities. Those atrocities came about, the reasoning goes, because Breivik's views were on the "extreme Right," i.e. to the Right of accepted political opinion, and thus, anyone who holds views that are to the Right of accepted opinion, whether or not they advocate terrorism, has an indirect culpability for Breivik's actions. Right-wing terrorism, it seems, is not abhorrent because it is terrorism, but because it is right-wing. From the desk of Tiberge on Wed, 2011-08-10 00:47 You may be interested in an article that appears at the Arab website Asharq Alawsat, by Ibrahim Kalin, senior adviser to Turkish premier Recep Tayyib Erdogan. Kalin warns the West about the dangers of "Islamophobia" and proposes that it be designated a crime against humanity. This was bound to happen. The massacre in Norway has been a boon to Arab and pro-Muslim activists. And the Gayssot Law, in France, that criminalizes holocaust denial, racist speech and discriminatory actions, will soon be invoked again in defense of Muslims. Thus, anyone critical of Islam or of immigration could be guilty of a crime against humanity. Crime Is Easy
Crime Is Easy
Who Is An Extremist?
"Islamophobia" - A Crime Against Humanity
Thursday, 11 August 2011
Ibrahim Kalin
Posts
