Crimes

Crimes (12)

Our article today is not so much one of words as of images. Many of you will recognise the display photo, which has even been acknowledged by the BBC. It is of Hudea, the four-year-old Syrian girl who instantly raised her hands up in fear when she thought that a camera was yet another dangerous weapon. Hudea and those like her, be they in Syria, Iraq or Palestine are usually described as "Children of war". The reality is that most people in these "war-torn" nations do not have any means of fighting back against the Western Governments' sophisticated weaponry, so it would be more apt to call it Genocide; and unlike in historical Britain, these children have no safe space to which they may be evacuated while the adults handle the terrors of large-scale attacks. These children are in our thoughts and prayers, and if we care to bring about justice, they must be in our sociopolitical activities and charity-giving efforts too. As we discover every time Palestine comes under a worse than usual attack, there are people who have no idea this is going on. It can often be hard to know what best to do in this situation and an easy step is to raise awareness by Liking, Tweeting and sharing this article so that as many people as possible are at least aware of the reality for too many of today's children - Yamin Zakaria and the Team @ Radical Views


 Another Syrian child starving in the Siege of Homs 

A traumatised Palestinian crawling through post-explosion rubble 

A Palestinian child hospitalised due to Israeli weaponry - this is a milder injury

The REAL results of the US-UK led attack on Iraq based on the WMD pretext.

America's chemical warfare on the Iraqis also causes long-term injury in other ways.

An Afghan child killed by US NATO airstrikes

Afghan children not peacefully sleeping but killed for being the enemy

“I hate getting punishments so I’m gonna make sure I change. Amma (mummy) loves me but she does not LIKE me!” were the last words written by eight-year-old Ayesha Ali on a piece of paper found after she had been battered to death in her own home, by her mother, Polly Chowdhury and Polly’s lesbian lover Kiki Muddar.As though it was not shocking enough that Polly Chowdhury, described by her former husband as a ‘perfect mother’, had systematically abused her own daughter to the point of death, simply on the demands of her new lover, Muddar’s own motives, or lack thereof, which led her to participate in the abuse, are also highly perplexing.

This is not the typical crime where motives such as money, greed, jealousy, lust, revenge are at play. The 8-year-old posed no threat to anyone, and the recording of Kiki Muddar’s hate-filled rant against Ayesha is inexplicable. Such cases where the motive of the perpetrator is difficult for us to comprehend often get classed as acts of insanity, where the person in question needs psychiatric help. Some would say that this is an example where the causes are supernatural. It is the epitome of evil and only humans are capable of doing this, despite being the most highly evolved species. Thus, such examples are not seen in the animal kingdom. Rather, we see the protective mother becoming ferocious when she senses danger posed to her offspring.

Of course, this has nothing to do with either of the women’s anthropological backgrounds. While Kiki’s religious beliefs, whatever they may be, drew no attention whatsoever, the usual tabloid paper headlines mentioning the ‘Muslim’ killer lesbian or the monstrously abusive ‘Muslim’ mother do not detract from the fact that instances of child abuse take place in all communities and are not the reserve of any religion, race or gender. Why not simply regard Polly and Kiki like any other British criminal? Taking this cheap shot at Islam by selectively referring to Polly’s Muslim heritage conforms to the current fad of Islamophobia, it makes a case for good business, and papers like the Daily Mail are keen to get lots of UKIP like readers. And besides, does the fact that Polly was a Muslim make her worse than Kiki, who was not, but who appeared to be the actively manipulative one?

This having been said, nobody will dispute the guilty verdict passed on the two culprits, and commentaries made by members of the public on various news sites, comprise disgust at the fact that the two women got off lightly with manslaughter, instead of murder. They even go so far as to demand tougher punishment for these crimes than ‘mere’ imprisonment, with demands for public hanging and executions. But isn’t that what they do in ‘Muslim countries’ like Saudi Arabia? It is an axiom that when serious crimes are not punished adequately, this implicitly endorses the crime, and reflects how society values such matters, and the sort of punishment that these two women have received sends out an implicit message of encouragement to other child abusers.

Many also make the pertinent query as to why the father was absent. He should have been there to protect his child. It is said that he initially moved home with his wife and child when he heard of Kiki Muddar’s ‘interferences’ but that the crazed and evil Kiki, who had multiple alter egos, followed the family to their new home and ‘evicted’ him.After this fact, one would hope that, while his wife was lost to him, that he would still be in regular contact with his daughter. It is not permissible in Islam for a father to be denied access to his own children, and many would say, this is commonsense and does not require a religious edict or a fatwa. Yet, this gross concoction of impermissibility which created Ayesha’s suffering continued on, sadly facilitated by the courts of law, which lie apathetic and indifferent to situations where mothers deny fathers access to their children, removing a layer of protection.

Instead of doing what is best for the child, i.e. to legally enforce shared parenting by default in cases where the mother and father are apart, the situation is such that fathers must fight a hard battle within an expensive court system in order to gain even minimal access. To gain adequate access to children via the court system takes time, and mothers with residency rights (or custody) are empowered to make this very difficult.

Many feel that we live in a culture where fathers are simply discarded. They are like an optional add-on for the children, and, very often, are given limited access, sometime through contact centres, as if they pose some threat to the child, despite providing it with half of its DNA. Strangely, this exclusion is frequently justified as being “in the interest of the child”. Even more obscene is the fact that many loving fathers are forced to pay for maintenance of their children, and yet they cannot see them. Such is the situation in the 21st Century, where these fathers are treated like the African slaves who had their children snatched away with only the most selfish of intentions.

The problems of not providing shared parenting by law are far-reaching, as witnessed in the situation of little Ayesha. Separation alone is traumatic, particularly when the child does not understand why one parent is absent. More significantly, in cases where one parent is abusive, the child can seek shelter with the other, and that parent will probably notice the signs of abuse and can contact the Social Services and police as a means of further protecting the child. If Ayesha’s father had had regular contact with her, instead of being purposefully eliminated from the lives of his ex-wife and her new lover, then she may well have still been alive and the abuse discovered and dealt with at a much earlier date. He was distraught at her death, which shows that he clearly loved and cared for his daughter a good deal, but sadly, by law, it was near impossible for him to see her when she most needed it.

It is high time we should stop assuming that mothers are always the victims and that they need protection. They are heavily empowered to make fathers’ lives hell, and to remove them entirely from the lives of their own children. Having such a position, they can also cause harm to their children without being detected. The research [1] shows that both genders commit infanticide almost in equal proportion and in some countries the mothers’ brutality exceed that of fathers. This should not replicate itself within the UK due to a skewed or lazy British justice system. We consider ourselves a civilised nation and should take it for granted that the law adequately protects our children, but as long as shared parenting cannot be taken for granted, this will not be the case.

Yamin Zakaria (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)
Published on 10/3/2015
London, UK


[1] http://www.dewar4research.org/docs/chom.pdf

Last Friday, Imams in various mosques around the country delivered a political sermon (khutba) for a change - it was not about the awful situation in Syria or Burma, but on the domestic issue of street groomers; the men in question entice vulnerable young girls with gifts, drugs and alcohol for sexual exploitation, and if necessary employ violence to keep them in chains. Imams do not need to deliver sermons or pass a fatwa, it is common knowledge that adultery, rape, prostitution, drugs, and alcohol are explicitly forbidden in Islamic law, and the jurists are unanimous on this. The sermon sent out a political message - it implied some level of collective guilt on the wider Muslim community, as if they have to bear some responsibility for the actions of the street groomers. One is naturally compelled to ask the simple question: what’s the connection between the street groomers and the wider Muslim community? Is it simply their Muslim names and heritage? Had the street groomers committed armed robbery or murder, would a similar sermon be delivered?

“Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure.” (Jeremy Bentham, the utilitarian philosopher)

About 15 to 30 % of the World Wide Web’s traffic is porn and that is quite substantial when you think in terms of sales revenue from a global product, for example Coca Cola. In this case, the profit margin is far greater, because unlike a perishable item, a porno film is like a piece of software that can be consumed multiple times as new, and does not need to be reproduced after consumption. This lucrative income makes Internet moguls like Google reluctant to curtail the easy access to porn that the Google Search Engine is renowned for. As the old adage says, money makes the world go round; accordingly it makes the World Wide Web spin faster. And it becomes a tornado when combined with the catalyst of sex.

The seven convicted men in the Oxford grooming case were identified by their ethnicity. In contrast, similar cases involving white men are rarely scrutinised along the same line, provided the case is given any media coverage in the first place. This sends out a crude racist message: when white men rape white girls it’s bad, but when non-white Pakistani men do it, it is so bad that it becomes unbearable to remain politically correct, and their ethnicity is identified. What is the difference between the discrimination of racially segregated America in the 1800s and the attitude towards Pakistani men in the united kingdom of 2013? Naturally, the discussion that ensued from the media headlines is how the ethnic mindset is shaped by their religion and culture; the driving force behind the crime. Alternatively the media could have simply treated the case as it is, a group of criminal men acting on opportunities and exploiting vulnerable young girls. This is a clear example of how the main media is stoking Islamophobic culture as the norm which the far right amplifies using vulgar and crude language.

Last week seven men from Oxford were found guilty of various sexual offences, including rape, for ‘grooming’ young girls and ultimately raping and allowing other men to rape them. Many of them were in local authority care and others (as in Rochdale) were placed in care by their parents in an attempt to stop the abuse that they were complaining about, but carers refused to listen to the girls’ and their parents’ complaints, in one case telling one of the victims that it was ‘inappropriate’ to talk about the issue at that time. On Wednesday’s Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio 2, he had two guests: John Brown of the NSPCC’s sexual abuse programme, and Taj Hargey, an “imam” that the media commonly wheels out to issue sweeping negative generalisations about Muslims. The programme can be listened to here until next Wednesday and is the first feature (which starts after Michael Jackson’s Thriller ends).

Editor's Comment Although I have endorsed articles from Ajmal Masroor in the past, however on this occasion, the article reinforces the hostile anti-Islamic propaganda that emanates from the mainstream media. My comments are further elaborated below the article

It is gut-wrenching, stomach-churning and sickening to hear how a bunch of British Pakistani men have sexually exploited young girls and groomed them for sex in various cities in our country including Rochdale, Derby, Manchester, Telford and Oxford. Their activities pose many questions that the Muslim communities in general, and the Pakistani community in particular need to ask themselves. This may be seen as a colossal failure on the part of the Pakistani Muslim community; however, it must not be generalized to the whole Pakistani or Muslim community.

It’s not often that I’m exercised enough about something that I feel compelled to write more than 140 characters on the subject. Yesterday morning I read a lengthy tract by Ajmal Masroor on the issue of sex, sexual exploitation and Pakistani men – it was probably in response to Tuesday’s news of the conviction of seven men in Oxford in the latest prosecution of sexual exploitation of young, vulnerable girls. The post was entitled ‘Sex grooming – whats (sic) gone wrong with Pakistani men?’ After a wave of criticism, the original post (the link is to a screenshot of the now-deleted post) was removed, edited, and reposted. But the gist of it remained the same – he simply added more brown people to have a go at.

The different ways the media covered two cases of men grooming children for sex show how shockingly easy it is to demonise a whole community

By now surely everyone knows the case of the eight men convicted of picking vulnerable underage girls off the streets, then plying them with drink and drugs before having sex with them. A shocking story. But maybe you haven't heard. Because these sex assaults did not take place in Rochdale, where a similar story led the news for days in May,

Editor's comments - Articles like this really drive home the impact of the Islamophobic Media; the author uses this case and other promininent ones like JImmy Savile to paint a picture of the white community, in a similar way, they do to the Muslims. Is that because they want to compete for UKIP votes? I wonder after reading this article, MP’s like Jack Straw would reflect on their earlier words and feel contrite. The article can be summerised in the following statement made by the author: “If you think the claims about white people are wrong, then so is the stereotyping of Britain's Muslims, and the widespread questioning of their culture and their religion, because of the perverted actions of a few”.

Every day across Britain, it seems, there's a new and horrific revelation of sexual abuse: last week we had the guilty plea of veteran TV presenter Stuart Hall, who confessed to 14 cases of indecent assault against 13 girls, the youngest only nine years old.

Days earlier the possible scale of child abuse in north Wales children's homes was revealed. We now know there were 140 allegations of historical abuse between 1963 and 1992. A total of 84 suspected offenders have been named, and it's claimed the abuse took place across 18 children's homes.