FGM
Society and Social Structures

West Midlands Police: FGM parents/cutters only prosecuted “if in the child’s best interests”

It has long been a cause of puzzlement why thousands of recorded cases of female genital mutilation (FGM) in the UK result in so few prosecutions and zero convictions. Now we know.

West Midlands Police have confirmed that they only refer the matter to the CPS “if it’s in the child’s best interests”. Quite how punishing those who slice off a clitoris isn’t in the girl’s best interests is unclear. But West Midlands Police are quite emphatic:

FGM West Midlands Police 3a

It’s all about child safeguarding, you see. Parental child abusers (for FGM is indeed a barbaric mutilation) aren’t prosecuted in case they might be imprisoned, and to deprive a young girl of her parents is to deny her the right to a family life, so far better to turn a blind eye and let them go on living happily ever after than to break up the loving family unit, which might affect her GCSE results, or something.

Presumably the abusive parents don’t even get issued with a caution.

But there’s something a little odd here.

If this were rape, sexual abuse, torture, incest… well, we know what would happen: the police wouldn’t hesitate to investigate, make an arrest and pass the file hastily to the CPS.

But such crimes are common (or not so common) to all racial-religious cultures.

FGM, however, tends not to be practised in the UK by Quakers and Methodists: it is peculiar to certain immigrant communities, and so West Midlands Police shuffle and skirt and pussyfoot on eggshells. God forbid they might be accused of institutional racism, or worse, Islamophobia. And so there is a conspiracy of silence, and conspiracy it is.

Good grief, parents can be prosecuted if a teacher spots a bruise these days; smacking may be deemed physical and mental abuse. How can it not be in a girl’s best interests to prosecute those who cut out her clitoris?

The Female Genital Mutilation Act was passed in 2003, but the paucity of prosecutions in the face of the c7,000 girls per annum who suffer this procedure is a national scandal. Where is the feminist outrage? Where are the demands for a wholesale review?

Are we really so squeamish about offending against minority cultural sensitivities that “the child’s best interests” must embrace tolerance of FGM? Why, if such disfigurement is a blatant breach of the FGM Act, is the law not applied equally to all, irrespective of sex, race or religion? Why do the police leap to prosecute ‘hate speech’ but not ‘clit hate’?

Or is it like sex-selective abortion, where prosecution is deemed not to be in the public interest? So with FGM the public interest trumps the child’s interests, so as not to inflame racial-religious tensions?

If those who cause little children to stumble should be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their necks, how much greater should the punishment be for those who worship at the altar of multiculturalism and turn a blind eye to child sacrifice?

  • Anton

    And why does the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is fond of inviting leaders of religions that deny Christ’s divinity to Lambeth Palace, not speak out?

    • Sarky

      Because he went through something similar when his balls were removed.

      • morbidfascination
    • Manfarang

      These leaders will give him their views on issues of concern for example the stringent penalties for female genital mutilation that were approved by Egypt’s parliament on 31 August, 2016,which are a big step toward eliminating the practice.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Did the ABC protest when those Bishops from Syria were banned from the UK when invited by some in Parliament or did he breathe a quiet sign of relief?

  • IanCad

    No surprises YG. WMP are at least being consistent:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/burka-police-force-muslim-officers-west-midlands-ethnic-minority-a7234246.html

    Our police need less diversity and more commonsense.

    • David

      Well said Ian. Reminding us of the “Nine Principles of Policing” is most appropriate.

    • ecclesiaman

      I refer to item 6. Unfortunately the followers of Sharia do not accept UK law and want to replace it. FGM is only one, albeit horrendous, instance of laws they want to ignore. It should be borne in mind that “Sharia” is a system and body of law itself and cannot co-exist with anything that disagrees. TM seems to think a parallel system of laws is possible. One wonders why she thinks this is possible let alone desirable. I don’t think she is being tolerant but suspect something worse. Observation indicates that UK law is creaking under all sorts of pressures, as well as from our overseas and immigrant populations. Comrade Corbyn has his replicas in many places too close to home.

  • Anton

    Prosecuting and jailing parents is unlikely to benefit their own already mutilated daughters. But it is, of course, likely to benefit the daughters of others who would think twice before having their young daughter raped with a knife. It is impossible to believe that the Police are unaware of this fact, which is called deterrence in every other part of police work.

    Authorities who will not enforce the law are not merely useless; they are far worse than useless. We need changes so that police are made more accountable to local communities rather than to Whitehall. Then the evil that is political correctness can be got rid of.

    • David

      I agree with the overall thrust of your comments but would making the Police “accountable to the local communities” be an own goal, for Team Justice ?

      • Anton

        In communities where there is a majority community that practices FGM, you mean? That might be true at street level but hardly at the level of an entire city.

        • David

          Maybe, but in an immigrant majority city like Luton or Leicester it may not be so cut and dried perhaps.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      I disagree. Taking children away from parents who would inflict this barbaric practice on their daughters is an eminently sensible and humane thing to do.

      • James Bolivar DiGriz

        Indeed. If they are willing to do this then what other barbarity might they inflict on their children. Assaulting or even killing them for acting immodestly?

        Also, a parent that mutilates (or arranges the mutilation of) one daughter is pretty likely to do the same to any other daughters. What about their best interests?

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          Ah, yes, honour killings, another blessing of the ROP.

          • Merchantman

            As others have said before and elsewhere; if you invented the ROP today it would be banned and the promoters jailed.

  • Dominic Stockford

    I believe that Baroness Cox has this on her list of matters she brings up, starting with Sharia Law, and moving on. Interesting that in fact it takes a conservative Christian to actually make the attempts to protect women from the depredations of Islam, whilst the liberal feminists keep pretty silent about it.

    • morbidfascination

      Even more interesting that it takes an “amateur” Christian to do this, whilst those who are paid to promote Christianity (like the increasingly useless ABC and many of his fellow bishops) would rather indulge in angst about Brexit and a “quixotic” vote for Leave, and ponder how Sharia might be accommodated within UK law.
      I had relatively high hopes of Welby at the beginning, but he now seems to have outed himself as being the “moist, church-emptying” kind of bishop – as Letts put it so well.

  • David

    As Mrs Proudie reminded us a week or two ago, deep indeed is the swamp of political correctness needing to be drained, before we can once again start to move towards a true equality based on justice. The perfidy, hypocrisy and moral degeneracy of many in positions of authority, as well as of those who purport to campaign for “women’s rights”, is quite simply breathtaking.

  • chefofsinners

    And the Oscar for least supportive police force goes to La La Land. Er, sorry, West Midland.

  • Dreadnaught

    As the OP correctly states, there is ample evidence of the countries from where immigrants are likely to subscribe to ‘cultural’ FGM. If there was a genuine will for this Country to take action it would be simple enough to implement.
    FGM is a global issue and not for us alone to try and eliminate. In this respect West Midlands Police or the CPS are not the ones that should be singling out for admonishment.
    The laws we have enacted in this respect are bad law in that they are impractical to enforce.
    Child abuse including male circumcision for non-medical reasons, is in my opinion, still child abuse – no exemptions.
    Unless the mandarins of power are prepared to follow up what is entailed in being an autominous, post-Brexit Great Britain with the ability to enforce the primacy of our own cultural expectations via the immigration/asylum rules, this one-shot issue will be a waste of time and resouces.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      I think you’ve missed the point. In 2003 Parliament specifically passed legislation to ban this appalling practice. It is not the police’s job to decide whether or not they will enforce the law, their job is to catch and hand over for prosecution any malefactors, otherwise the police are becoming both investigators and judges. If you wish to see male circumcision banned on non medical grounds, by all means campaign for it. You might get quite a lot of support.

      • James60498 .

        So will the Home Secretary be taking action?

        My guess is NO.

      • Dreadnaught

        I think you have missed my points entirely, 1642. FGM has been a criminal offence in the UK since 1985 btw.

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          No, you seem to think it fine not to enforce the law. The 2003 Act was brought in to re-enforce FGM’s illegality. The police have no discretion in this matter.

          • Dreadnaught

            There have been no prosecutions as far as I am aware – anywhere. The Law is unenforcible

          • Anton

            It would be interesting to know how many cases were referred by the police to the CPS and what happened next.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Of course it is. The will is lacking. How many young girls go to hospital each year? How many GP’s or teachers must sens something’s wrong.

          • Dreadnaught

            The will is lacking I have already said this in my first post.

          • James Bolivar DiGriz

            There has, AFAIUI, been one prosecution that, quite rightly, ended in an acquittal.

            A pregnant woman who had been mutilated years earlier (in Somalia) was treated by a surgeon. Some tissue that had been damaged by the mutilation tore during the birth and the surgeon sewed this up.

            Technically he had reinstated the FGM but no sensible person would have regarded this as FGM. Alison Saunders (head of the CPS) approved this case for trial (the CPS having had it for 11 months) and this was announced three days before Saunders was due to appear before a Commons select committee to be grilled over the lack of action on this subject.

            The surgeon went to trial and the jury acquitted him in 30 minutes.

          • Dreadnaught

            Which really underlines how bad the Law on the books is. 1642 and others seem to think (if that’s the correct word) that its up to teachers and medics alone to carry the responsibility of reporting on suspicion, which I am sure is already happening, but securing conviction is a little more problematic.
            As its the women who organise, it’s the woman i.e. the mother who would be sent to jail (was she under pressure from her own kind to conform etc?) and all the kids at home would suffer. The State would no doubt have to foot the bill for their care and there is still the Human Rights laws to contend with.
            As I have stated, making the law, is the easy bit.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            We used to hang those who burnt widows. General Napier was quite clear – if a widow burns, the elders involved hang. It was pretty much stamped out in short order. Lock up the parents of the daughters involved and then deport them on release.

  • The Explorer

    The one good thing about FGM is the damage it does to the multicultural assertion that all cultures are equal. Hence the silence.

  • Royinsouthwest

    So, West Midlands Police do not believe in deterring crime, do they?

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Depends on the cultural background. Child sacrifice was mandated in some cultures, perhaps plod would look the other way on the grounds of cultural sensitivity?

      • William Lewis

        You mean like sex-selective abortion?

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          The analogy has crossed my mind.

          • Deimos

            What this issue needs is a nicely emotive and acronym friendly new name ! Something to get the Sisters and Guardianistas out in howling tie-dyed mobs.
            As this may be quite a jape I would like to get my “entry” in first …

            “Female Enforced Clitoris removal” as said on Father Ted or perhaps
            “Insane sexual limitation amongst muslims” as in “Yes officer our daughter has been forcibly ISLAM’d but its for her own good.”

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            The mind boggles at the effort!

      • The Explorer

        There was that case a few years back in which the headless torso of a young boy was fished out of the Thames. It turned out he’d been imported so he could be sacrificed in some Ghanaian ceremony to ensure a good harvest back in the old country.

        By the strict tenets of multiculturalism, that should have been the end of the matter: respect other ways of doing things. But the police treated it as murder.

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          Wrong culture then?

  • I expect police forces across the country are under political pressure to make it look as though multiculturalism is a success story. The West Midlands being blessed with a large Muslim community, the hapless Plods at West Midlands Police have that much more to sweep under the carpet.

    Ten years ago, it was the Undercover Mosque fiasco, where West Midlands Police, instead of charging the hate preachers, lodged a complaint against the television production company.

    Then, in 2015, it was revealed that West Midlands Police had known ‘five years ago that Asian grooming gangs were targeting children outside schools across the city—but failed to make the threat public.’ Police were ‘worried about community tensions if the abuse from predominantly Pakistani grooming gangs was made public.’

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Good point. I’m no BNP supporter, but I believe that Nick Griffin was the first to highlight what was going on and what the local Labour establishment’s were trying to keep secret.

      • @ 1642+5thMonarchy—As I remember, it was in the early 2000s that Griffin began to talk about grooming and, by extension, Islam itself. For his trouble, he was sent for trial twice in 2006 on charges of racial hatred. Without the jury system he would surely have been imprisoned.

        • Maalaistollo

          Did he not describe the ROP as ‘a wicked, vicious religion’?

          • @ Maalaistollo—Yes. Nick Griffin’s trouble was that he was years ahead of his time, and probably still is.

    • David

      Close to, if not spot on target, I’d conjecture.
      Rather than upholding the law equally across all belief systems and cultural practices, it is far easier to attempt to create a facade that all is well. But like many facades the material behind it is all too visible, resulting in a massive loss of credibility for the police, politicians and trendy cultural commentators alike. It is no surprise that we now have a widening credibility gulf between the public and authority.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Look at Sweden to see how it develops. Freedom of speech seems to be dying there.

        • David

          Yes right, although it has long been a very regulated, conformist country. But now it is far, far worse of course.

      • @ David—The Jay report into child sexual exploitation in Rotherham makes clear that the police ditched basic human decency in order to preserve ‘community cohesion’:

        ‘8.1 Certainly there is evidence that police officers on the ground in the 1990s and well beyond displayed attitudes that conveyed a lack of understanding of the problem of CSE and the nature of grooming. We have already seen that children as young as 11 were deemed to be having consensual sexual intercourse when in fact they were being raped and abused by adults.’

        The report can be downloaded from the link on this page.

  • The Explorer

    Interesting how what used to be FGM has become FGC. To use the word ‘mutilation’ rather than ‘cutting’ is, presumably to be guilty of hate speech.

    Wording’s a tricky thing. Sweden wanted to end the practice of genital whatever; so it declared it illegal in Sweden. So the parents took their girls abroad to have operation (or whatever) done.

    That meant the parents were behaving perfectly legally, but it still wasn’t what the Swedes had had in mind. They had to rephrase it to make it illegal for any girl resident in Sweden.

    Whether they’ve had any more success than we have, I don’t know. If it starts being done to indigenous Swedish girls (the way that Scandinavian women with blonde hair are being advised to die it black) the Swedes will know they’ve culturally arrived.

    • William Lewis

      “Interesting how what used to be FGM has become FGC. To use the word ‘mutilation’ rather than ‘cutting’ is, presumably to be guilty of hate speech.”

      One wonders if it makes it easier to segue from FGC to MGC?

      • The Explorer

        Excellent point!

  • Sybaseguru

    The whole legal system in this country needs flushing out – it stinks – from judges who ignore laws that don’t suit them by using the catchall human rights legislation, the CPS who makes decisions that they claim are “in the countries interests”, the police who are like chocolate fireguards when faced with Islamist fundamentalism or LGBT issues, but heaven help you if you so much read from the bible. And parliament who can’t specify laws tightly enough to keep the legal profession snouts out of the trough.
    Is it really “right wing” to ask for parliament to make laws that can be understood and are orthogonal, for a police force to follow them through, CPS to prosecute and judges to follow the will of parliament?

    • Merchantman

      This is the real deep issue. Judges and the Police and others in the legal profession, are routinely fixing matters to suit PC culture, their promotion prospects and their own preferences. It’s corruption and needs stamping on before it spreads.
      This is rapidly undermining public trust in the state and because of this should have very severe penalties attached. Parliament needs to get its act together.

    • chiaramonti

      What is your evidence that judges ignore laws that don’t suit them? It is absolutely essential that judges comply with the law, but they can only deal with cases that appear before them. They have no control over matters that never reach court.

      • Sybaseguru

        You only have to look at the priority given to rights – but not all rights, only the ones the judges fancy. By law religious rights have equal stature with any other right, but the judges always place them lowest when deciding between conflicting rights. Have you looked at the Manchester courts record vs say London on amounts awarded to partners vs children in inheritance cases. The law says “maintenance” is allowed. Manchester courts are extremely liberal in their interpretation of that and give far more than the governments definition of maintenance. How is it that 2 different judges can produce 2 different results? its clearly not the law (which is the same in both cases) but personal preference of the judge.

        • chiaramonti

          Is that the best you can do? These are not examples of judges ignoring the law, simply instances of judges applying judicial discretion which is what they are supposed to do. There is no evidence that inheritance cases are decided differently in Manchester than they are anywhere else. The facts of each case are specific and quite different.

  • The Explorer

    FGC/M removes the capacity for sensation, and hence the pleasure potentially taken in the sex act. That makes the female less likely to stray, and so assists pre-marital chastity and marital fidelity and obedience.

    By the tenets of our sex-obsessed culture, chastity and fidelity are deadly sins. How can anything that will promote them in the future possibly be in the interests of the child?

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      That’s a joke right?

      • The Explorer

        Not really. One of the key arguments advanced in favour of homosexuality is that everyone’s entitled to sexual pleasure. (Except paedophiles: although allow that exception, and the whole argument unravels.) It’s one of the givens of our society. So anything that diminishes the possibility of sexual pleasure (like chastity, or FGC/M) has to be bad.

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          So you disapprove of sexual pleasure between man and wife, and argue that only the husband should take pleasure?

          • The Explorer

            I’m arguing from Muslim and PC perspectives, not from my own.

            Muslim perspective. The wife’s purpose is to produce children, not to enjoy sex. If she doesn’t enjoy sex she’ll be less likely to be unfaithful. Hence FGC/M.

            PC perspective. Everyone (except a paedophile) is entitled to sexual pleasure. So anything that diminishes it (like FGC/M) is wrong. Except we can’t say so because we’ve committed ourselves to the equality of cultures.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            I ‘m really not interested in their perspectives. They’re both evil.

          • The Explorer

            They’re both relevant, however, to the current discussion. Ms Dick is now Britain’s most senior police officer, and she’s out and out PC. What starts at the top can spread downwards.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            A little (well a lot) less understanding and a little more (well a lot) smiting is the approach we need.

          • The Explorer

            It would be interesting to ask the British public what the reason is for FGC/M and to see hoe many of them know. It’s also important to understand the contradiction at the heart of PC that renders it unable to criticise in this instance what it disapproves of.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Most people find it abhorrent and simply wring their hands pathetically in despair.

          • Dreadnaught

            There is a massive cadre of Feministas who never attack this.

          • Hi Explorer

            Yes and no. The PC people I encounter often ignore genital mutilation,but hate infant male circumcision with a passion , probably more so than female mutilation. They equate the two for tactical reasons and on my blog the same liberals who hate Brexit and Israel are the most venomous & borderline antisemitic about it (infant male circumcision that it ).

  • ecclesiaman

    HG rightly makes a point here but there are many underlying issues that arise from this one. We don’t appear to be locking the stable door after the horse has bolted but rather encouraging directly or otherwise, our counter culture to become mainstream.

  • Merchantman

    If there is a law and the Police or any other persons don’t enforce it they are complicit in any crime that takes place due to their negligence in the same way social workers would be in child abuse. Anfield is another example but in a different sphere. The Home secretary needs to see the law upheld in equal measure; not suspend it for third worlders but enforce it against Christians.
    The children should be taken into care and educated to understand the authentic British way of behaviour.

    • Badger

      A prime minister that wears a hijab will criticise islam? – dream on.

  • Arden Forester

    I honestly thought West Midlands Police had decided to take proper action at last. I was obviously wrong. The chief constable should get a grip. As you say, it can NEVER be in a girl’s interests to have her private parts mutilated whatever the craven desires of political correctness may dictate.

    This is barbarism without any requirement for weasel words to explain it away.

  • Badger

    I have nothing but contempt for the British police.

    • Sarky

      Dont blame the bobbie on the beat. Blame the PC idiots in charge.

      • William Lewis

        Fair point.

  • It’s standard child safeguarding practice, enshrined in English law, to regard the child’s best interests as paramount. Recommendations will be made to the police at a multi-agency child protection conference at which the parents are present. The police are free to act, or not, on such recommendations. It would be unusual for the police not to consult with the CPS in such circumstances, and often a representative will be present at these conferences and will certainly be members of the Child Protection Committee where policy and procedures are established.

    • chefofsinners

      The child protection conference is about the child. It does not make recommendations on whether the parents should be prosecuted.

      • Yes it does.

        • chefofsinners

          I have attended many. The question has never arisen.

          • Jack has chaired many and where crimes have been committed, it was always discussed. Wherever you live, they are not following recommended practice.

  • len

    Given the police intervention in other cases of child abuse (‘Rotherham’ springs to mind) and where’ the religion of peace’ is involved I would say don`t expect too much?.

    • Merchantman

      Ah yes the Rotherham Spring!

  • Inspector General

    Looks like the pragmatic approach, dear Cranmer.

    7000 cases a year (are you sure that’s right?) is truly astonishing, but frankly not that surprising. The rate of coloured immigration over the decades has been as horrific as FGM itself and it has overwhelmed us. The UK prison population is still less than 100,000 (just about) so where are we going to hold these miscreants? One personally would favour repatriation of the entire family. “We don’t want that kind of business here, so out you go”. It was, is and will happen to their girls, but we’d all feel better if it happened in the ghastly places these wretches originated from, would we not? Not Birmingham, for pity’s sake!

    What you are seeing now is the police accordingly doing a Pontius Pilate. And just like the man of two thousand years previous, they too have little choice over the matter…

    Oh, by the way. The police are washing their hands on behalf of all us civilised indigenous. You do realise that? No private prosecutions then, if you please…that would be somewhat awkward…

    {Running down the corridor}

    “Cranmer! Come back here right now!!!”

    • Here’s a copy of Government Guidance to Health Service professionals. It starts:

      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/525390/FGM_safeguarding_report_A.pdf

      “FGM is not an issue that can be decided on by personal preference – it is an illegal, extremely harmful practice and a form of child abuse and violence against women and girls …

      It must always be remembered that fears of being branded ‘racist’ or ‘discriminatory’ must never weaken the protection that professionals are obliged to provide to protect vulnerable girls and women.”

      The guidance recommends a sensitive approach of prevention and changing attitudes.

      “Health care professionals need to be sensitive to the fact that women and families may have been under intense cultural/social pressure from within their country of origin to practise FGM.

      Professionals need to consider how to discuss FGM without being judgemental and whilst being sensitive.”

      The overall approach recommended is prevention, working with the community to change attitudes and responding sensitively to children who have been abused in this way. Multi-agency guidance states these principles:

      “FGM is a criminal offence – it is child abuse and a form of violence against women and girls, and therefore should be treated as such. Cases should be dealt with as part of existing structures, policies and procedures on child protection and adult safeguarding. There are, however, particular characteristics of FGM that front-line professionals should be aware of to ensure that they can provide appropriate protection and support to those affected.

      The following principles should be adopted by all agencies in relation to identifying and responding to those at risk of, or who have undergone FGM, and their parent(s) or guardians:
      – the safety and welfare of the child is paramount;
      – all agencies should act in the interests of the rights of the child, as stated in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989);
      – FGM is illegal in the UK (see Chapter 3);
      – FGM is an extremely harmful practice – responding to it cannot be left to personal choice;
      – accessible, high quality and sensitive health, education, police, social care and voluntary sector services must underpin all interventions;
      – as FGM is often an embedded social norm, engagement with families and communities plays an important role in contributing to ending it; and
      – all decisions or plans should be based on high quality assessments (in accordance with Working Together to Safeguard Children (2015)5 statutory guidance in England, and the Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need and their Families in Wales

      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/512906/Multi_Agency_Statutory_Guidance_on_FGM__-_FINAL.pdf

      One size doesn’t fit all – unless we want to adopt a Cromwellian approach and eliminate or incarcerate all offenders and potential offenders.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Yep we do, the old General Napier approach to widow burning. This is England, not some semi third world crud-hole.

        • Inspector General

          hmmm “Crud-Hole”

          Wonder if the Welcome to Birmingham roadside signs…no probably not…

          • Hi inspector

            I have, for various reasons, a certain fondness for Brum ( Israelis incidentally love the local indigenous accent as “sexy” ) . And in any case the current student president called the university of Birmingham a “Zionist outpost ” (as it has one of the largest and coolest J-Socs in the country).

          • Inspector General

            Not sure what a J-Soc is Hannah, but one is sure it’s something we could live better without…

          • Hi inspector

            J-Soc: the university Jewish society! Like you also had Cath-socs (Roman Catholic society) ,Angsoc (Anglicans) and Methsoc (Methodist). Plus the CU (Christian Union) which was ultra evangelical – fundamentalist.

          • Sarky

            I was a member of the male chicken society. Ahem….

          • Pubcrawler

            You mean one of those items of footwear that some lonely adolescent chaps use for ‘containment’?

          • Pubcrawler

            Give it time… (I’ll be back there in a couple of weeks. Must remember to pack spray paint.)

        • betteroffoutofit

          For ages I’ve claimed that the UK has been setting new standards in lower worlds; I’m not even sure that 5th world goes low enough to express it nowadays.

          We were blessed with the explanation long ago. The trouble is that ptb (and are going to be) can no longer read, learn, or inwardly digest:

          Sonnet 94
          They that have power to hurt, and will do none,
          That do not do the thing they most do show,
          Who, moving others, are themselves as stone,
          Unmoved, cold, and to temptation slow;
          They rightly do inherit heaven’s graces,
          And husband nature’s riches from expense;
          They are the lords and owners of their faces,
          Others, but stewards of their excellence.
          The summer’s flower is to the summer sweet,
          Though to itself, it only live and die,
          But if that flower with base infection meet,
          The basest weed outbraves his dignity:
          For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
          Lilies that fester, smell far worse than weeds. (WS)

          • Merchantman

            Thanks.

        • Yep, the good old fundamentalist approach. Hang the welfare of children. Eliminate the practice. Wipe it out. How? Imprison and deport all Muslims who do not formally renounce it.

          The point is:“This is England, not some semi third world crud-hole. We have the capacity to address this situation over time and in ways that will benefit children now and in the future.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            It’s getting worse, not better. The liberal approach has been tried for forty years and failed miserably. The more the Muslim population grows the more assertive and barbaric they become, the longer we leave it, the worse it will be. So yes deport all those who won’t renounce their third world practices.

          • There was a failure to recognise and respond to the issue until about 10 years ago.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            They don’t want to integrate or adapt, but to colonise and dominate. They’re quite open about it.

          • Who ” … don’t want to integrate or adapt, but to colonise and dominate.”?

            As pointed out by Dreadnaught above, this is more of an African issue than a Muslim one.

            Female genital mutilation (FGM) or (FGC) is practised in 30 countries in western, eastern, and north-eastern Africa, in parts of the Middle East and Asia, and within some immigrant communities in Europe, North America and Australia …

            According to a 2013 UNICEF report based on surveys completed by select countries, FGM is known to be prevalent in 27 African countries, Yemen and Iraqi Kurdistan, where 125 million women and girls have undergone FGM.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Deport the lot then.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Now it is recognised and the policy is not to respond to it. Is that an improvement?

          • Inspector General

            We are overwhelmed by third worlders, Jack. Still in the Labour party are you…

          • Nope, left them years ago. Jack is a left leaning Conservative but cancelled his membership when the new leader of the party was elected in Scotland. However, he doesn’t necessarily always vote for their candidate.

      • Inspector General

        Deportation is the way. Unless you want FGM to become an established ‘British’ custom.

        • Go to it then. Round up all Muslims, intern and deport them. The “final solution” – ethnic cleansing.

          • Merchantman

            Not all Muslims, Jack. Just the criminals.

          • By definition, all those Muslims and Africans ,whose communities still adhere to the practice, are criminals.

          • Merchantman

            Probably. Everything should be after due process and justice should be seen to be done. However there should some sort of limit to appeals, etc.

          • Inspector General

            They adhere to criminal practices in the eyes of the West. It is no ones fault, Jack. There are better and worse races on the planet. That is how it is. End of.

          • Dreadnaught

            It is essentially and African thing and not directly an Islamic one.

          • Yes, thank you for reminding Jack of this.

          • Inspector General

            Don’t be childish, Jack.

          • It’s what some commenters are advocating, Inspector.

      • Anton

        Some kind of penalty that other people fear must always be enacted on the parents, provided that FGM on their daughter has taken place since they took up residence in Britain. That is all.

        • Fear, in this situation, being the enactment of what penalty?

          • Anton

            That’s up for discussion, but it must be something that parents fear in order to act as a deterrent.

          • Yes, but such as? You must have an opinion. What will work?

          • Anton

            I’d need to study the community that does this in more detail to know what would be a deterrent that they fear. Not fines. I might open a discussion by pointing out that lex talionis has divine precedent.

          • Well you’ve been fairy free with your opinions thus far without such knowledge.

            “I might open a discussion by pointing out that lex talionis has divine precedent.”

            Mutilated genitalia for a mutilated genitalia. Is that what you’re suggesting? Most mothers will already have experienced FGM – so how do you propose mutilating the men concerned? Cruel and unnatural punishment springs to mind.

          • Anton

            If you don’t like lex talionis take it up with God and don’t waste my time. It was in Mosaic law for its deterrent value.

          • Mosaic law in a community required to be Holy because dwelt with them. And, as you point out, one that voluntarily accepted the Mosaic law and agreed to live by it.

          • Anton

            God would not offer them bad laws, would he?

          • A time and a place for specific reasons – as Jack pointed out – and we are no longer subject to Mosaic law or its penalties.

          • Anton

            Which you well know is not the point. What better precedent than divine?

      • Royinsouthwest

        What you call a Cromwellian approach is the only effective one. As I said in reply to a comment by Sarky above, when we ruled India we succeeded in stamping out suttee by cracking down on it hard. There was absolutely no nonsense about being “non-judgemental” in those days.

        • And as Jack responded earlier, Britain in the 21st century has the resources to adopt different approaches.

  • Inspector General

    A bit more research by your Inspector has revealed that these sad females won’t be getting married unless it’s done. And we can be fairly certain that for them, marriage outside the tribe would not be allowed. Bearing in mind, with simple savage peoples, the arrival of a baby girl isn’t exactly welcomed with a champagne reception, so perhaps we should be grateful that they made it thus far to be cruelly disfigured.

    Now, an interesting point which must be raised. Over the years, the Inspector has been accused of racism by the so called righteous who post on this site, but get this – he accepts the situation as it be. It is part of the miserable existence that lesser achieving races who go out of their way to make life even more miserable for themselves (not to mention others) put up with. However, said Inspector suspects that there are plenty here who would see both parents and granny put in jug for what they’ve done. And of course, that isn’t a racist position at all, is it!!

    • Dreadnaught

      …these sad females won’t be getting married unless it’s done.

      The solution is simple – if the men demand that it is not necessary, then it would all be over.

      • Inspector General

        Oh dear, Dredders. We are talking about an embedded stone age culture here. Homo Sapiens Africanus. The outlook is not bright…

        • Dreadnaught

          Our Country – our rules.

          • Inspector General

            How quaint of you, Dredders, as Mrs Proudie would surely put it…

          • Dreadnaught

            I’m all for enforcing our rules; our politicians are the ‘quaint’ ones thinking they can pass laws andassume they have done enough to qualify their existence. What they won’t do is anything draconian or deemed to be discriminatory or overtly racist.
            No one commentig here today including yourself, has offered anything remotely constructive or realistic.

          • Inspector General

            You think deportation isn’t realistic. As soon as Trump starts, we can get going…

          • Dreadnaught

            And How would you you get to that point?

          • Inspector General

            We are there. The whole of the West has swung or will swing to the right, as anticipated.

          • Dreadnaught

            Please dont make up words and ascribe them to me.

          • Inspector General

            Apologies, old fellow. Unintentional if it happened.

          • Dreadnaught

            Thanks IG.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Le Pen up to 45% in latest poll.+1% on last week. A few more immigrant riots should do it, I’m sure les flics can provoke them…

          • True. They should have to live by our laws.

          • Dreadnaught

            WE should be enforcing them.

  • CliveM

    I do wonder if the WMP have formal guidelines for deciding when it is in the child’s best interest. I wonder if a FOI request would obtain a copy.

    • betteroffoutofit

      Oh. So the police are now ‘judge, jury, and executioner’? How odd …. Oh, but wait. That’s how most cultures have operated, isn’t it? Silly of the Brits to imagine that an even smaller island (Runnymede) could produce a better way!

      • CliveM

        In not altogether certain I understand your point.

    • Royinsouthwest

      No doubt they would claim that each case is treated on its merits and it is a pure coincidence that in FGM cases they always reach the same decision.

      • CliveM

        Certainly, but deciding the merit would reward guidelines.

        Or at least it should.

  • Martin

    Is the prosecution of the offender in the best interests of the victim?

    Perhaps they’re asking the wrong question. The reason a criminal trial takes place is not because of the victim but because the Queens Peace has been broken.

  • Inspector General

    Some years ago, a Birmingham councillor wrote an open letter to the police and BBC local news there. It concerned the discharging of firearms, which could be heard somewhere in the usual suspect communities just about every night. What was being done about it, and why isn’t it being reported. The BBC replied and said if it happens all the time, it’s no longer strictly news, and damn them for it, they are right.

    Expect FGM in the West Midlands to be the same…

  • Inspector General

    This year, next year, the year after that or 2020 will see the death of the Labour party as an effective entity in England, God willing. As surely as the Liberal party went under a hundred years ago. THEY are and would be again, the great immigrators, and deserve to reminded about that on a daily basis. FGM is one of their chickens coming home to roost, and there’s a whole crowd of other chickens similar too.

    In the meantime, we must deal with THEIR problems. We have to be harsh.

    • Dreadnaught

      And do what?

      • Inspector General

        Be effective. The people are with us on this…

        • Dreadnaught

          Not really say that much are you – I’m surprised.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      I sometimes wonder IG that if the Pope really wants to foster church unity the best thing he could do, other than take Jack and Albert’s computers away to stop them winding up Protestants all the time, would be to proclaim a Crusade to recover three of the five lost Patriarchal Seats – Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria. What think you? The Jews can have Jerusalem as long as they maintain the Christian populations.

  • Fines, big hefty fines for the parents who allow this to be done to their daughters. Who actually carries out the procedure? Is it done by a doctor or an unqualified person in the living room?

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      Fines don’t work, they’re not sufficient punishment anyway. Prison then deportation for the extended family is the only way.

      • Dreadnaught

        My sentiments exactly. But pass the specific legislation first and no legal aid.

      • I was thinking our prisons are already overcrowded and understaffed and money is tight to build more prisons. Realistically deportation would be the best solution then.

        • Dreadnaught

          Its the only practical solution.

          • Merchantman

            The women usually do this; the old crones. The men go off and boast about it over a mint tea or a strong black coffee after friday prayers. The whole family ( even the extended one) except the victims should be sent packing. This right to family life is a red herring. Who would want parents like that anyway in 21st century Britain? That would end it so smartly it would be in the history books. Failure to act by the authorities should be a criminal offence.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Yep, levy the punishment on the extended family as a whole.

          • Merchantman

            The need to stop this creeping corruption is absolutely vital. Those who are complicit though omission to act should be criminally liable.

    • Dreadnaught

      Closing the gate when the horse has bolted – not the best idea.

      • Sarky

        As FGM is a cultural, more than a religious practice, the answer has to be education. A carrot and not a stick approach might also work.

        • Inspector General

          Do you know, that is the very answer the militant homosexuals give. Educate people. Thus, an Inspector so educated will be able to sit at a table on a train and completely ignore two men queering opposite him…

        • Anton

          You are partly right that it is cultural but I wholly disagree about the carrot.

          FGM goes on outside Islam in parts of Africa. Within Islam, some Muslim communities do FGM and and some don’t, because the hadith advocating it is not attributed with certainty to Muhammad. It is telling that Muslims have not uniformly adopted a “better safe than sorry” attitude; those who believe Muhammad did not advocate it are strongly against it, meaning that they recognise its cruelty. I don’t know whether most British Muslims come from a community where it is widely practiced or one where it is not; can anybody say?

          But you can stick the carrot; the practice is barbaric and British society should adopt a zero tolerance approach to it. A penalty that people fear must be applied to parents who have this done to their daughters while they are resident in this country, even if it is done elsewhere. The police must be told to be strongly pro-active and that they have no discretion in the matter.

          • Female Genital Mutilation occurs in non-Muslim societies in Africa and is practiced by Christians, Muslims and Animists alike. In Egypt, where perhaps 97 percent of girls suffer genital mutilation, both Christian Copts and Muslims are complicit ….

            Thus, it has long been concluded to be a cultural practice, not connected to religion.

            However, on the village level, those who commit the practice offer a mix of cultural and religious reasons for the practice. Christians and Muslims alike believe that circumcision of girls prevents them from vice and makes them more attractive for future husbands; mothers fear that their daughters can’t get married if they have not been cut ….

            While there is no mention of FGM in the Quran, a Hadith (saying about the life of the prophet) recounts a debate between Muhammed and Um Habibah (or Um ‘Atiyyah). This woman, known as an exciser of female slaves, was one of a group of women who had immigrated with Muhammed. Having seen her, Muhammad asked her if she kept practicing her profession. She answered affirmatively, adding: “unless it is forbidden, and you order me to stop doing it.” Muhammed replied: “Yes, it is allowed. Come closer so I can teach you: if you cut, do not overdo it, because it brings more radiance to the face, and it is more pleasant for the husband.”[2]

            Most clerics use this hadith to say circumcision is recommended, but not obligatory for women. But some say it is obligatory. While others who take a position against FGM call this hadith weak in relation to the “do no harm” principle of Islam or interpret the intention of the prophet differently …

            Therefore, official statements from prominent religious leaders – e.g. fatwas condemning FGM and declaring it “unislamic“ – are an essential part of the struggle against the practice. But it is not enough and it will not work alone.

            The cultural aspect can’t be neglected. As interviews show, FGM is considered essential for proper marriage and family honour. Where it is practiced, it is inflicted on nearly all girls within the group. Mothers find themselves in the dilemma of either having to harm their daughters or not being able to get them married later on….

            http://www.stopfgmmideast.org/background/islam-or-culture/

            Imagine coming from this religious and cultural background and raising a daughter in our sex obsessed culture. Most “Christian” parents protect their daughters by teaching them about contraception and “safe sex” and, let’s be honest, have abortion as the fall-back position. No pregnancies; no diseases; and certainly no children.

          • Anton

            FGM shows an obsession with sex in its own way, Jack.

          • Yes, I agree. It’s not a method consistent with a healthy or civilised response. It’s both physically and emotionally harmful. Its a barbaric and defensive reaction to lust – mainly male – to prevent pre-marital sex. However, the Western response to protecting the young from the consequences of pre-marital sex are no more moral and its effects are arguably as damaging, even if less immediately apparent.

          • Anton

            Yes. And abortion is the mote in our culture’s eye. But two cultural wrongs don’t make a right.

          • Abortion is the logical outcome of a disintegration of sexual morality and our claims for personal freedom. We accept sex is okay for all, the young included, if the consequences can be avoided. This has led to attempts to prevent conception and sexually transmitted diseases, with abortion as the backup.

        • Royinsouthwest

          Suttee, the former practice of burning the widows of Hindu men on their husband’s funeral pyres was stamped out by us, the evil British imperialists in India by means of the stick, not the carrot. Suttee would still exist if we had not threatened to hang all the men responsible.

          • Anna

            For the sake of accuracy, there was more to it. Please read –

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)

            The practice was banned in the Mughal empire (and therefore not widespread in their regions), and it was also not prevalent in many parts of India (princely state of Travancore). It was practised by the Rajputs – the vast majority of the Rajput kingdoms did not come under the British Raj, but they passed laws to discourage Sati soon after as the British governor general William Bentinck banned it in British India.

            There was already a movement led by Hindu reformers to have Sati banned; so it was controversial even in Hindu society at the time. Furthermore, not all widows ‘chose’ Sati – and they did have a choice – when a Maharaja died, 2 or 3 of his many wives might choose Sati, while others might not. The reason some widows chose Sati, was that it was considered ‘noble’ to be so ‘devoted’ to their husbands.

            True, Napier’s threat to hang the men involved was effective in the district he governed, and but it was a long time before Sati actually died away – there were cases in the 20th century. The real reason it stopped in most parts of India was that it gradually grew unpopular among people who previously practised it. A very important lesson for the NGOs who are now trying to get FGM banned in Africa and the ME.

            Moreover, Napier was known to have a lot of respect for the Indians themselves. “The Eastern intellect is great, and supported by amiable feelings’, he wrote, ‘and the Native officers have a full share of Eastern daring, genius and ambition…” So he did approach the problem with more humility than his often quoted words suggest. Humility is helpful in all such situations.

          • Royinsouthwest

            Thanks for your interesting comments.

  • Mark

    This is astonishing, disgusting, worrying, but then when it sinks in, not at all surprising.
    In the words of Charles Walker MP, “I want to know what is going on in this country, because I no longer understand the rules”. Someone bring it up in PMQs this week please.

  • Ray Spring

    Will we have a Royal Commission in 40 years time trying to unravel this lot.
    Plus, when will we have a victim suing the police for very substantial damages for not protecting her when she was a child?

    • Inspector General

      Damn good point. The compo cost will be enormous. Perhaps enough to close down WMP and let the ethnics sort their own problems out….

    • Royinsouthwest

      They should not just sue the police force because even if the victims win their case it would be the taxpayer that would pay the compensation. They should also sue named individuals, like the chief constables in office at the time, and the officials who were running the Criminal Prosecution Service. The prospect of Nuremberg type trials in future might help to make the WMP think again

  • Hi

    Female mutilation is a widespread cultural and not a commanded religious practice in Africa, middle east and parts of Asia. There are three major types of female mutilation :

    Type 1 – Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).

    Type 2 – Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are “the lips” that surround the vagina).

    Type 3 – Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, or outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.

    All of which to my mind is mutilation, anti Torah and not part of British culture .

    Female “circumcision” it is not mentioned, commanded or taught in Judaism and females are not to have any of this done to them . Especially , given the procedure , as in Judaism, sexual intercourse between a couple is an absolute woman’s right , not a man’s and is supposed to provide for pleasurable love making, indeed , a man not giving enough quantity and quality sex to his wife so our Rabbis taught , is grounds to divorce. Female mutilation , in all forms above, removes any pleasure in love making.

    For Britain, there is absolutely no tradition or historical rationale in Britain for this practice to be legal and it is rightly outlawed in the UK. If immigrants wish to be British citizens or live here , then they should obey the law of this land and adhere to it. My grandparents were, when they came to the UK , poor middle eastern immigrants, as they’d been stripped of their wealth, but they were Jewish and Judaism says , with a few exceptions – Dina d’malkhuta dina – the law of the land is the law . So they kept their orthodox faith and middle eastern food, but adapted to English life , so the Fez was replaced by the top hat during Shabbat and they contributed to Britain, as the prophet Jeremiah said to Jews in exile :

    “Thus saith the L-rd of hosts, the G-d of Israel, unto all who are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon: Build ye houses and dwell in them, and plant gardens and eat the fruit of them. Take ye wives and beget sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters, that ye may be increased there, and not diminished.And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it; for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace” (Jeremiah 29).

    One other comment I’d make is the disgusting juxtaposition of female mutilation and infant male circumcision take up with zeal by some leftists , liberals and the old far right , who never need an excuse to attack Jews, which is such an old a way attacking Jews, so we’re used to it . While I wouldn’t give that up without question fight, if the UK decided to abolish infant male circumcision , then Jews would be forced to leave the UK, as it is an integral part of the Jewish faith .

    The divine commandment to undertake male circumcision (as correctly defined, the removal of the flap of skin covering the penis , i.e. the foreskin) is given to Jews in Genesis 17:7, “And I will establish a My covenant between Me and between you and between your seed after you throughout their generations as an everlasting covenant, to be to you for a G‑d and to your seed after you.” and in Leviticus 12:2, “On the eighth day, the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.” For Christians I would note that Jesus- god’s son and god himself to Christians- was also circumcised (Luke 2:21).

    • Inspector General

      For those of us Christians who don’t believe in a literal Adam and Eve, Hannah, original sin is a nonsense. But what if it is more subtle than that. The sin that these simple folk who practice this abomination – are they not living the original sin passed down to them from their antecedents…

      • chefofsinners

        For those of us Christians who don’t believe in a literal pile of shite, this comment is a challenge.

        • Inspector General

          It’s not such a challenge with our understanding and experience.

          • chefofsinners

            …of piles of shite.

          • Inspector General

            Ask yourself this. Why is it that our understanding of what is has to stop 2000 years ago…

          • CliveM

            The Orthodox Church has a different understanding on original sin. Check it out.

          • Come now.

            After any years of deep contemplation, aided by the spirit of Saint John (the) Walker, our Inspector has reached a higher understanding.

            We were created for god’s amusement. He just leaves us to get on with it. (He must have been bored.) The Old Testament was written by an uneducated tribal lot. (What did they know?) Jesus was an angel sent by God to assist us Nordic types. (Quite why he had to die the way he did is something of a riddle. Just those squabbling lesser races. Bit of a mistake sending him to Jerusalem) There’s no physical resurrection. (Quite what happens is another riddle.)

            We have a prophet in our midst.

          • Anton

            That’s quite unfair, Jack. The Inspector drinks only single malts.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        If by that Inspector you mean that we are not born into Sin but will inevitably Sin because we are flawed then I won’t call you a heretic, for otherwise new born babies that die are damned in their innocence, something that our Father could not do.

        Likewise if by not a literal Adam and Eve, but rather an allegory based on folk memory taken from the Sumerians’ ancestors about the first humans to receive sentience from God, then again I can’t term you a heretic.

        • CliveM

          There are some on this blog who hold that very view with regards new born babies.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            [shudders]

      • Anton

        Where in the genealogies in Genesis do you believe that mythical figures cease and historical figures begin, and why at that point?

      • IanCad

        You may be giving Hannah the impression that it is only those who consider the Creation story to be myth who reject the fallacy of Original sin.
        Not so – Not at all, at all.

    • Don’t believe anyone is suggesting male circumcision is detrimental or harmful, Hannah.

      The real issue is how to respond in Britain to FGM given it is deeply embedded in some cultures and has a religious dimension for some, not all, of those who subject girls to it.

      Consider if Jews were forbidden to practice male circumcision. Would those who could not leave the country comply? Isn’t it true compliance is required in civil and economic matters but that in forbidden or religious matters gentile laws can not be heeded against the Torah? Christians also subscribe to this approach – “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s”

      • Hi happy Jack

        “Don’t believe anyone is suggesting male circumcision is detrimental or harmful, Hannah.”

        No not on this thread, but I’ve encountered the argument that infant male circumcision is exactly the same as female genital mutilation and should therefore be made illegal. So I thought I’d clarify that one, as to my mind they are separated matters.

        • To sensible people who believe in religious freedom, agreed.

        • Dominic Stockford

          You’re correct, Hannah. Many people DO say male circumcision is harmful and detrimental. My parents for instance, so I wasn’t! I know, too much information – but with a purpose. In fact, unless there is a medical reason for it (which is not infrequent) there is no purpose to it. The continuation of the Jewish practice is not one that Christians can agree with – see Philippians 3 and Acts 15.

          I would also say that chopping off bits of your body without purpose has to be, in some way, harmful. But that’s another debate entirely.

          • Hi

            “The continuation of the Jewish practice is not one that Christians can agree with – see Philippians 3 and Acts 15.I would also say that chopping off bits of your body without purpose has to be, in some way, harmful. But that’s another debate entirely.”

            So jesus shouldn’t have been circumcised?

          • DS clearly doesn’t believe male circumcision serves a justifiable purpose for a Jew.

          • Good point. The answer should be interesting, if there is one.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Jesus was a Jew, and was brought into this world according to their religious practices. He brought in a NEW covenant which does not circumcise the body, but the heart. As to your question, let me ask you one, after which I will answer yours: Should he have been crucified?

        • len

          Never heard of FGM being used to alleviate a health problem as with male circumcision?.

      • Dreadnaught

        Circumcision on babies based on the actions of a delusional desert dweller millennia ago if ever, is no good reason to be doing it now. If it was such a good idea why did Abraham not do it to himself at the same time as Isaac? Was Abe even a Jew if he still had his foreskin?

        By any means It is child abuse; an assault upon the person given a free pass as it is dressed up as a religious rite which is disingenuous at best.

        If the child wishes it at a later date when it has the mental capacity to make an independent decision, that’s his business.
        I would have thought it rather grand for anyone to display the temerity to insist on a bit of DIY improvement on the work of their Creator.

        • Anton

          Judah, after whom the Jews are named and from whom they descend, was Abraham’s great-grandson; so Abraham is hardly likely to have been a Jew.

          Abraham did get himself circumcised on the same day as his older son Ishmael, who was Isaac’s half-brother: see Genesis 17.

          • Dreadnaught

            And Abraham died when he was 175 years old.
            Genesis 25:7 – Not to mention Methusla and the rest; such a load of unsubstantiated rubbish.

          • Anton

            Why ask the question about Abraham being a Jew if you distrust the only possible source of information that can give an answer?

          • Dreadnaught

            That is precisely the point.

    • IanCad

      Thanks Hanna. Very informative.

    • Dreadnaught

      More cut and paste. You could have at least referenced the source. You are totally fraudulent.

      • IrishNeanderthal

        totally fraudulent?

        Aren’t you overdoing it a bit? I often cut-and-paste on matters I know a lot about (mostly scientific), because I never was good at essay writing.

        • Dreadnaught

          I have read this bloke for many years through name changes , multiple avatars and genders. I have never known anyone who constantly claims a brother, nephew, niece and so on in some sort of supposed familial credibility to authenticate his posts. No one in thus age writes in the coloquial vernacular of the 1980s – dead giveaway ‘Dudes’.

        • Dreadnaught

          I meant to add that it is a convention in witing to reference the source of any text other than your own, to differentiate it from your own words and opinions; otherwise its regarded as plagiarism, and fraudulent to infer by omission, that it is your own original work with which you are signing off. On line it a given that words not your own are usually in itallics.

      • Hi dreadnaught ,

        Maybe you should go and huff and puff at someone else as I’m just not interested in a conversation. I will rectify my account to block you, as you are supposed to be blocked as I have no desire to waste my time on pointless discussions with you.

  • chefofsinners

    I am afraid the suspicion here is that West Midlands Police only prosecutes when it is in the best interests of West Midlands police to prosecute.

    • Royinsouthwest

      I would imagine there are some ordinary policeman who think cases of FGM should be prosecuted. The problem is probably the careerists who run the force or who are hoping to climb the greasy pole.

      • chefofsinners

        Indeed; most or all of the ordinary policemen probably think it should be prosecuted.
        We have a remarkable form
        of democracy nowadays. Parliament makes laws and then the police decide which ones they will enforce.

        • Manfarang

          Smith and Hogan give examples of laws under which there are few prosecutions. It doesn’t mean those laws are ineffective.

  • Inspector General

    All will be explained shortly when Jack is at the Inspector’s throat, Hannah…

    • “original sin is a nonsense”

      Jack will leave you to the Calvinists and Puritans – and all other bible believing Christians – to take that up particular heresy with you, Inspector. If any can be troubled to, that is.

      • Inspector General

        Get on to Frank. Sure he’ll like the truth. Original Sin isn’t about a couple of ape likes at all. It’s racial profiling!

        • Where has the Holy Father ever stated original sin is nonsense?

          • Inspector General

            Nonsense! Let’s see. The Inspector is tainted by original sin because some broad ate an apple on the advice of a talking snake…

          • Not what Jack asked, Inspector. You claimed the Pope would agree with you. Where’s the proof?

          • Inspector General

            What are you on about?

            All this man here is interested in is what is our living Christianity in the 21st century. You ghouls and your incredible stories have had their time.

          • Original sin is uninformed superstition and its support in scripture – Old and New – is an incredible story?

            As Jack said, he’ll leave you to bible believing Christians.

          • Inspector General

            Go on, clear off, you relic…

          • … as he lights a cigarette and pours another drink.

          • William Lewis

            Poor Inspector. Educated by nuns. Lubricated by whisky. No wonder the chap invented his own religion.

          • It was Brothers who “educated” the Inspector. He slept through religious studies. One can take a horse to water ….. some choose whisky.

      • CliveM

        The Orthodox don’t agree with the concept of original sin.

        • Slightly different emphasis but not hugely different. As Jack understands it, they see the first sin as Adam’s alone and not inherited by us. Nevertheless, this sin wounded all humanity and is passed down the generations.

          • CliveM

            Yes, however we are also not born with inherited sin, but are subject to the price of Adams sin; death.

            Completely undermines Calvinism!

          • Yes it does. We are not born “dead in our sin” but are born with an inherited attraction to sin. It can however, be reconciled with Catholicism. Orthodoxy also places a greater emphasis on interior spiritual growth and development that Western Christianity and far less on our rational and legalistic approach.
            Jack prays for the day when the Eastern Church and Western Church is once again reunited.

          • CliveM

            As an understanding of sin it seems more just to me.

          • Jack can see it from both Catholic and Orthodox sides. Adam represented man and so the decision he made and its consequences effected all of us. We were mortally wounded and drawn to sin. On that both Churches are agreed. We also agree that Baptism and the sacraments free us from guilt, collective and/or individual, and restore our relationship with God and assist our spiritual growth.

          • CliveM

            I can’t pretend expertise in the Orthodox Church. I am aware of the differences with regards their view on the nature of Christ and original sin. I would have thought their view on the first of these issues would still be an obstacle to unification.

          • No fundamental differences over our Christology and even the differences on the Holy Spirit are not insurmountable. The most significant issue of division is the nature and degree of Papal and Magisterium authority.

          • CliveM

            But wasn’t it the nature of Christ that caused the rift originally? Has that now been resolved?

    • Hi

      Oh…. yes well I don’t buy original sin either, but I’m confused as to how this relates to the topic?

      • He has a mixture of higher understandings. Interestingly, his views about human free will are close to Judaism’s understanding, once one rules out all the silly nonsense of scripture, of course.

        • Hi

          Yes , I have sensed inspector manages to blend bits of stuff with British nationalism into a potpourri of a philosophy.

          • Yes, a “potpourri of a philosophy”. That’s one description of his higher understandings. There are others.

  • Steven Carr

    According to this document no offences of FGM were recorded by WMP . You can’t prosecute when no crime has been recorded

    foi.west-midlands.police.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/7536_attachment_01.pdf

    • chefofsinners

      Fascinating. It appears that over 100 incidents were noted and all but four of them were recorded as a non-crime. The four that were crimes were categorised as crimes other than FGM.
      Are the police fiddling the crime category to avoid having to prosecute for FGM? They need to be careful: coppers aren’t popular in prison.

      • Steven Carr

        There is another document published by West Midlands Police showing 377 incidents from 2009 to 2016, all classed as ‘non-crime’.

        This is weird. It looks like fiddling the figures to me, until I see an explanation of how every single incident turned out to be a ‘non-crime’

        • chefofsinners

          The crimes were probably people like us stirring up racial hatred by mentioning FGM.

      • Anton

        Ah, but it was recorded as a non-crime by a non-police force.

  • Well, Your Grace, you’ve succeeded in awakening the Christian spirit. Deny benefits unless a woman’s vagina is first inspected; get parents to sign a Test Act renouncing FMG; lock them up; deport them and their entire families; and/or genitally mutilate the men in retaliation .

    Wonderful suggestions, one and all.

    • Anton

      And meanwhile hundreds of young British girls get raped by a razor blade.

      • But you’ve come up with no solution thus far other than mutilating men’s genitals.

        • Anton

          Which is the solution proposed by god in the one time and place in which he set the laws. He did so as a deterrent. Very quickly there would be no FGM and no castration. Effective, wouldn’t you say?

          God doesn’t bother convening committees of “experts”.

          • Quell that Puritan barbarism. God doesn’t want us to inflict such gross punishments on people, nor stone women and children in the street. Are you insane?!

          • CliveM

            Not only that, but if we are going to discuss an issue our comments should have some connection to what is realistic.

          • Anton

            As insane as the author of Mosaic Law. Are you ashamed of scripture?

    • chefofsinners

      How about simply enforcing the law, in accordance with the will of parliament?

      • For children, the will of Parliament is expressed in Government’s child safeguarding policies and in various Children’s Act. These lay out the statutory framework on how we should give paramountcy to promoting the immediate and long-term best interests of children.

        • Anton

          That’s not an answer to Chef’s question. However much supplementary verbiage is put out by Westminster, the fact is that FGM is a criminal offence. Do you believe that (a) the law should not be enforced, or (b) the law should be changed?

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            A law that is unenforceable is a bad law and should be struck down. Having said that, it is not in the remit of the police to interpret the law as it suits. I agree with those who say this is a cultural issue, and would point out one of the inevitable consequences of multi-kulti is there will be a kaleidoscope of conflicting cultural practices which do not ‘fit in’ with the host culture. If ‘all cultures are equal’ (and I for one do not believe so) then all are acceptable and legitimate. On the subject of ‘what is best for the children,’ I note this did not come into play when some council or other decided to take away the children of UKIP (?) parents and put them into care, even though it was a temporary measure soon overturned.

          • Anton

            It is not unenforceable; there is simply no will to enforce it among those who have the capability. If you repeal the anti-FGM legislation then, quite apart from the appalling moral defeat which this indicates, it will still be illegal under legislation banning assault with a bladed weapon – unless you wish to make that legal too…

          • CliveM

            You would also risk sending out the message that it was now viewed as acceptable.

          • Do you believe the Children’s Act and the law should be applied or changed?

        • chefofsinners

          If a parent harms a child in any other way and causes s permanent injury, that parent will be prosecuted. How is FGM different?

          • Cressida de Nova

            If it is different then it is the fault of the law makers. Demand that it should be changed immediately.

    • Dreadnaught

      Which of course would end FGMUK and spare thousands of girls extreme pain, abuse and denial of sexual enjoyment for life. You appear to offer nothing or even show Christian charity for their stolen childhood.

      • Jack follows the principles of our government’s child safeguarding policies and the various Children’s Act. These lay out the statutory framework on how we should give paramountcy to promoting the immediate and long-term best interests of children.

        • Dreadnaught

          So you can’t think for yourself but preach morality when it suits you.

          • That’s the law, based on research and evidence of how best to promote a child’s best interests. It’s not perfect and has to be implemented in difficult circumstances, but Jacjk has thought about it and supports these approaches.

          • bluedog

            ‘… but Jack has thought about it and supports these over the alternatives.’ In which case Jack has acute tunnel vision and needs to see a good specialist who will help him see and think laterally.

          • Jack is a divergent and lateral thinker and has certificates to prove this. Top 93rd percentile, by all accounts.

          • bluedog

            Wow. Mug and t-shirt too?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            LOL.

          • Of course. Plus high status and professional recognition. Not to mention the office, personal secretary and other benefits. Jack is still awaiting his Knighthood or Peerage.

          • bluedog

            Disappointed by your support for the medieval trappings of hierarchy with their implications of sexual disparity and hereditary privilege. A true progressive would eschew such fetishism and be content to be known as ‘citizen’.

          • Lord Jack has a certain ring to it.

          • Anton

            One ring to rule them all and in the darkness bind them?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            The new left and liberals decried privilege and wealth only in those who are were not themselves. As Archbishop Tutu said of the ANC, “They only stopped the gravy train long enough to jump aboard.”

          • bluedog

            Yes, the Left under Blair’s New Labour started an ugly rush for the Red Benches, having chucked out the Hereditaries. Such hypocrisy. Cameron proved himself the continuing heir to Blair too. Constitutional reform should have preceded Brexit but can wait.

          • Anton

            If They read this blog then you probably won’t have to wait long, but could you bear the company? The upper house is now a bunch of spivs.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Doddles darling…give it a rest…you are starting to sound like that bragging loony 1642:)

          • True ….

          • Ps …. who is this “Doddles darling” person?

          • Cressida de Nova

            Ca suffit !

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Do you need to ask by now?

    • bluedog

      Pathetic. Invoking the Test Acts in order to provoke feelings of guilt and thus distract from the issue at hand should fool nobody. What you propose for the Muslims is a reverse Test Act, pursuant to which they are licensed to break British law at their absolute discretion. Allow that and the Rule of Law collapses, because suddenly everyone is a special case with well argued cultural justification for their right to do as they please. Are you really too dim not to anticipate this outcome?

      • Sarky

        “What you propose for the muslims”

        Except that its a cultural not religious practice. Try getting your facts straight.

        • bluedog

          Try reading my post before allowing your preconceptions to get in the way.

          ‘…because suddenly everyone is a special case with well argued cultural justification for their right to do as they please.’

      • No one is being given the right to break the law with absolute discretion and there is no acceptance of any justification for FGM. Have you considered the outcome of the approach you’re advocating and its wider consequences?

        • bluedog

          Yes.

  • Anton

    As it has the Inspector!

  • You must sit at his feet and learn, Hannah.

  • Anton

    The Twitter exchange was as follows: someone moved by the BBC drama Call The Midwife, about FGM, asked West Midlands Police, “why have there been no prosecutions? It’s the parents who arrange this, so it’s easy enough to track them down if reported”. This elicited the reply shown by Cranmer above, “education and safeguarding vulnerable girls is the focus. Prosecuting parents unlikely to benefit child.” This politically correct twaddle elicited a Twitter storm and Detective Constable Jill Squires, the Force’s FGM expert and someone who is clearly against the practice, then tried to cover up for her Force in the tweet shown in Cranmer’s main pic above.

    Here is Jill Squires in Africa, trying to persuade African women not to do it:

    https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/news.aspx?id=5380

    In Africa, persuasion is all she can do. Over here, the gloves should come off. We cannot know her private views but her boss has proven himself unfit.

    UKIP spokeswoman Suzanne Evans tweeted to West Midlands Police, “You are an utter disgrace. How can you NOT prosecute abusive parents who take razor blades to their child’s genitals?” Two UKIP MEPs have spoken robustly, too:

    http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/emergency-services/2017/02/27/police-force-sparks-anger-with-fgm-comment/

    West Midlands is the police force that withheld a report about gangs of Muslim men grooming children ahead of the last General Election but one:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3138984/Police-withheld-bombshell-report-revealing-gangs-Muslim-men-grooming-100-schoolgirls-young-10-case-inflamed-racial-tensions-ahead-General-Election.html#ixzz4Zvt3VWik

    • “Over here, the gloves should come off.”

      And do what, exactly? All you’ve come up with is mutilating men’s genitals – for which gloves must surely be worn.

      It’s not “politically correct twaddle” It’s based on research and experience about how to end this barbaric practice and is part of our law as expressed in the various Children’s Act to give paramountcy to a child’s immediate and long term interests.

      UKIP shouldn’t let Brexit go to its head.

      • Merchantman

        HJ it seems you are or were chair(man) of a child care tribunal or whatever. Please sharpen up and stop the crap. This is in freefall. There has been one prosecution so far in the UK. It is not abuse to call this non-action crap. You know it.

        • So come up with a realistic alternative to ending FGM that is consistent with the best interests of children who it is discovered have been abused in this way, both immediately and in the future. A life in the care system, separated from their parents and isolated from their community?

          • bluedog

            So, the British state surrenders its principles and its laws, creating a precedent that allows a raft of illegalities.

            What you suggest gives the green light to honour killing, child marriages, first cousin marriages and other Sub-continental Islamic practices. Of course, your proposal is entirely reasonable in the circumstances that you define. But FGM is an entirely unreasonable proposition, cannot possibly be compared with male circumcision except by the dishonest, and should have the feminists out in the streets. But no, they are silent, and like others on the Left such as yourself, happy to appease Islam. Tell us how that ends.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Well said. I had a moment of epiphany when Jack made that revelation about himself. It explained his addiction to regurgitating screeds of verbiage from the Vatican website etc. He’s a bureaucracy addict, it’s all about process, policy, procedure, rules, authority… Nothing ever gets done of course…

          • Anton

            On a minor point, first-cousin marriages have long been legal in Britain.

          • bluedog

            Dearie me. One reads shocking things about the level of disabilities within the valued Pakistani community as a result of consanguinous breeding.

          • Anton

            Which, sadly, are probably true, since a lot has been learnt about genes and disabilities. I’m not willing to divert into whether 1st cousin marriage *should* be illegal; I’m just saying that it is legal here, and has long been.

          • CliveM

            Queen Victoria married her first cousin.

          • bluedog

            All in the family, it seems. Having divorced Prince Albert’s mother, his father married his own niece.

          • Darter Noster

            Indeed. One or two consanguinous, or even outright incestuous, marriages you may well get away with without genetic consequences. It’s when families inbreed consistently for generations that you end up with Prince Charles.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Very selfisn and very sad for the descendants. The wages of sin etc.

          • William Lewis

            I can confirm it’s a problem. I have a family member who works as a paediatrician close to a Pakistani community.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Oh I am so sorry Anton. !
            I will be much nicer to you in the future..

          • Anton

            You and I are both descended from Adam and Eve, madam.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Adam and Eve were not relatives.Legal does not mean it is moral. The progeny of Incestuous relationships suffer adverse genetic consequences.

          • Anton

            I now that. Each of us carries on average five recessive lethal genes, but the genome is so big that the chance of man and wife having the same is small… unless they are related. You took my comment that we are related (via Adam and Eve) a bit too seriously!

          • Cressida de Nova

            I’m not related to Adam and Eve. My grandmother told me I was an angel !

          • Jack’s granddaughter is one too.
            Jack’s grandmother told him he was a “diabhal beag”.

          • Cressida de Nova

            I’ll take a guess and say
            ” cheeky little devil”

          • Cressida de Nova

            Not me…..my grandmother told me I am an angel:)

            Would you marry a first cousin?

          • Honour killings are always prosecuted because the victim is … er …. dead.

            Child marriages and first cousin marriages are not colluded with and the law is applied.
            This is not left-wing appeasement. Its sensible, pragmatic governance that give legal paramountcy to a child’s best interests once all relevant factors are weighed.

          • David

            Sounds like a surrender !

          • William Lewis

            If a man will surrender his national sovereignty then what else is he prepared to give up?

          • Not a surrender. Just not using the nuclear option.

          • Sarky

            Never thought you’d be the sane voice on here Jack!!
            The ‘hang ’em all’ voices on here will not solve the problem, they’ll just force it further underground.
            Like i have mentioned on here, whats needed is a cultural change and that won’t happen overnight.
            Taking a child from a bad situation and putting them in a worse one will not help.
            To me, its a question of education, which unfortunately wont change things overnight.

          • bluedog

            Of course it won’t change things overnight. Education is completely ineffective where Islam is concerned. Who trumps whom? The British state, or Allah. Confine you answer to one side of one sheet of paper.

          • Sarky

            Except, like I’ve said below it’s a cultural problem not an islam problem.

          • bluedog

            Which is exactly what I have said at least twice. Except that the culture is reinforced by the belief that Allah commands it.

          • Anton

            That’s true but fairly irrelevant. That point is that it is going on right here and it shouldn’t be.

          • bluedog

            Why are the vast majority of perpetrators Muslims?

          • Sarky

            Because islam has become the dominant religion, but cultural practices have been kept.
            Same thing happened here with Christianity.

          • bluedog

            It follows that if the cultural practices have been wrapped in the mantle of Islam they have become part of Islamic practice. So, both cultural and Islamic by virtue of their syncretic adoption by Islam.

          • Mrs Proudie of Barchester

            Indeed. Whom do we seek to educate? The parents (if so, how?) or the children? (in which case we are talking long-term, and in the meantime…).

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Given Mrs Proudie that an increasing number of such are barely exposed to the state schooling system and live in self segregated communities, many hardly speak English, one wonders if the liberals will make any even notional attempt to educate? It goes in the ‘too difficult’ file.

          • bluedog

            If one looks at the levels of English language competency among migrant women of Pakistani or Bangladeshi background, two points can be made. In the first instance most of them are uneducated. Secondly most of them cannot be educated. As we know, they keep being admitted as migrants.

          • IanCad

            It could be argued that removing a child from a criminal parent would be a benefit.
            Or should I say; removing a parent from a child by the act of deportation?

          • Anton

            Same question to you, Sarky. Imagine if your daughter married a man from these communities and you found your granddaughter was slated for FGM in a few years time.

          • Sarky

            When have i said FGM is ok??

            All ive said is that the approaches offered on here are doomed to failure. All ive done is offer an alternative way of dealing with it.

          • Anton

            I believe that your approach is doomed to failure. At some point and over some issue the authorities have to be prepared to escalate when an immigrant community flouts the law, and do whatever it takes to obtain compliance; otherwise anarchy beckons, or worse. I could not think of a better cause than FGM.

          • Couldn’t agree with you more, Sarky.
            Jack’s comments are always sane – on this and all other matters.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Not every single matter….not the ones you disagree with me on anyway:)

            I think those who have religious connections to religions of violence advocating hatred of Jews Christians Hindus and female mutilation would best be excluded as immigrants for everyone’s sake. The freedom of religion act needs to be reviewed with a view to excluding religions advocating the breaking of the law . If Henry V111 got rid of all the Catholic monasteries what is the problem with removing the mosques?
            It is a historically English and cultural practice . I don’t understand why this is all of a sudden a problem.

          • William Lewis

            Deport the family or incarcerate one of the parents. Apparently, we will be deportorting one or two of the Rotherham rapists. Good job too.

          • Merchantman

            You are in denial HJ. Have a think about what I’ve said.
            The Guantanamo terrorists found a country or so to take them in. Same procedure writ large.
            That’s all I have to say to you on the subject.

          • Deported back to country of origin.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Let’s all have a hand wringing multi-agency seminar with lots of tea, biscuits, working papers and oodles of verbiage, and then … nothing, as always. It’s just symptomatic of the pathetic failure that is the modern liberal bureaucratic state that erects bureaucracies and spends billions on problems imported from inferior cultures and new ones home grown which just get worse and multiply, and not never resolved. And as for sociological studies, don’t make me laugh. There’s a bogus discipline if ever I saw one.

        The Victorians knew exactly how to deal with these sort of problems. Time to learn from them.

        • Royinsouthwest

          When the Victorians tackled social problems they did it with energy. When we tackle problems we do it for show and to provide jobs for the people employed in (supposedly) tackling those problems.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Exactly my point. Widow burning, thugee, slavery, child labour, water supply, sanitation, railways and on and on and on. People today just commission interminable reports from the usual suspects, prevaricate, pass another law/regulation and pretend the job’s done, Jack illustrates the mentality perfectly for me before our own eyes.

        • Yeah, wield the sword and rid the land of this pestilence once and for all.
          Meanwhile give kids contraceptives, provide them with condoms for “safe sex”, allow boys to be corrupted by men, and abort children.

          • Anton

            So that makes FGM alright then? Two wrongs make a right? Where’s that in the Sermon on the Mount?

          • Mote and beams ….

          • Anton

            Applies to individuals in interaction, not cultures.

          • Individuals in interaction are the culture.

          • Anton

            Are you playing dumb or the real thing?

          • What do you think “culture” is?

          • Anton

            The collective has characteristics that no individual can have. You know, like the church does (or should have). The Sermon on the Mount is specific to interactions between individuals. A culture cannot forgive, for instance.

            This is obvious stuff. You know it, Jack. Why waste time testing me out on a thread about FGM?

          • But what is a “culture”?

          • Anton

            I’m probably not so ignorant of it as you suppose but it’s not the point. Stop pretending that you don’t understand the difference between cultures in interaction and individuals in interaction.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Yep, I would. I also find the other things abhorrent so don’t try to muddy the waters as usual.

          • You are a true son of Cromwell.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Thank you. That’s the nicest thing you’ve said to me yet.

      • Royinsouthwest

        Could you tell us exactly, or even approximately, how many girls have been saved from having their genitals mutilated as a result of this wonderful research and experience? Who conducted the research? Was it influenced by their political views? Was the research performed with the aim of justifying a policy of doing nothing?

        • Anton

          Ask it again, Roy…

      • Anton

        You have always spoken well about the exceedingly difficult tightrope-walking which churches have to do when one person accuses a deceased cleric of sexual abuse long ago. You have clearly felt the acute tension which such accusations bring in their wake, and are wise enough not to summarily dismiss somebody who might be telling the truth while appreciating that it might yet be a fantasy. I regret that you are not showing the same wisdom in this situation. What we are talking about is a vile form of child abuse, namely rape by razorblade in a way that impairs for life. Why, why, why do you not go for a zero tolerance approach?

        • Jack is applying wisdom based on his understanding of the law, research and over 30 years direct experience in this field, including senior managerial positions and in an advisory capacity to government.

          • Anton

            You ask good questions on this thread, presumably because of this experience, but avoid the hard ones asked of you.

          • Jack has answered these hard questions as best he can. Now you reflect on the hard questions that arise from adopting an aggressive, repressive strategy, the way it will change our nation, the harm it will cause children and the resources of state it will demand.

          • Anton

            Better sooner than later is my view. And you can’t know that it will turn into the low level civil war that you obviously have in mind. We are dealing with a community that goes in for cultural bullying, and bullies back off when they see resolution and power arrayed against them. It is a lot more likely to be sortable now than in 20 years time – and that would be 20 years of more FGM.

            I am ashamed of my country for not dealing with this. I want to look foreigners in the face and say, “We showed the world how to sort this out.”

            What would you say to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, by the way? She knows more about the subject than she would like:

            http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/ayaan-hirsi-ali-fgm-was-done-to-me-at-the-age-of-five-ten-years-later-even-20-i-would-not-have-8534299.html

          • Like the Irish Catholics were treated?

          • Anton

            Grow up. We are talking about FGM. If you want to talk about that subject, please raise it another time.

  • …. and denying fulfilling a basic and fundamental requirement and mark of the Covenant?

    Genuine question ….

  • CliveM
    • The Explorer

      Interesting. There does seem to be a trend, and the trend is admission of defeat.

      It began with the refusal to allow Geert Wilders into the country in case there were riots. The threat to free speech mattered less than the threat to community relations.

      FGC/M may be wrong, but it must be ignored because of the threat to community relations. Honour killings must be kept hush hush because of the… you guessed it.

      Child porn may be wrong, but there’s so much of it the bulk of it must be ignored. Paedophile sex rings must be kept under wraps for as long as possible because of the, wait for it, threat to community relations.

      I don’t blame the police. The threat to community relations is presumably completely genuine. And they’ve never recovered from the fallout of the Stephen Lawrence case.

      • CliveM

        I’m not sure that this is about community relations. It’s interesting (and horrifying) that he says that men with little risk of actually abusing children shouldn’t be prosecuted for viewing abuse!

        Does he not see that these men are creating the market for abuse?

        I’d be interested in Sarky’s view.

        • bluedog

          Sarky’s view. ‘Mate, we all dunnit, back then. I mean, what other way to pull a chick than to put a video in the slot, tehehe. Know what I mean?’

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            LOL.

          • CliveM

            Actually that wouldn’t be his view.

          • bluedog

            Give it a go then. Double dare you.

          • CliveM

            Something a while back suggested that he may work in this area.

            Sarky maybe an atheist, but that doesn’t mean he is devoid of morality.

          • bluedog

            Chicken

          • CliveM

            I’m not really certain of the point you’re making!

          • bluedog

            Not that hard. You were invited to draft a Sarkyesque reply but circumnavigated the issue by praising Sarky’s morality.

          • CliveM

            Oh! Your right I’m not going to try to do that.

            My interest is in his possible professional knowledge.

          • Sarky

            You really are a twat.

          • bluedog

            What’s a twat, Sarky. Do tell us.

          • Sarky

            A dog that is blue.

        • The Explorer

          Agreed. The article you cite is about admission of defeat. I was making the further point that the authorities in this country have been defeated by community relations.

          • CliveM

            Ok understood.

          • bluedog

            This is the fundamental point. If ‘community relations’ trump the Rule of Law, adherence to the law becomes optional. Unless of course you happen to be ‘White British’. Once enough people work this out, the nation dissolves as there is no longer any shared social compact.

          • Anton

            A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand (Mark 3:24).

        • Sarky

          Totally agree with you. Take out the demand and you take out the supply. The man is a fool.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        We are know that high level paedophile rings have been operating here and abroad. For a fascinating parallel looking at the growing Pizzagate scandal around Podesta and his associates – when it was first mooted I dismissed it as fake news to incriminate the Democrats but since Trump has been elected over 1400 child sex ring arrests have been made, including some of those in implicated in the Pizzagate scandal, something quite unprecedented. The Don did pledge to go after paedophiles hard from his first day in office and the FBI have taken him at his word.

        The victims over here are already complaining that the current Child Sex Abuse enquiry has been set up to drag on forever, to fail and to avoid naming names, but of course ‘lessons will be learnt’. A few dead molesters will have their reputations thrown under the bus, some innocent people will be accused, then found not guilty and the whole thing wound down as ‘to difficult’, and on it will go with the guilty carrying on beyond the reach of justice and the Harman/Hewlett/Chakabati tendency etc constantly pushing for more ‘liberalisation’. The age of consent will be chipped away at with the support of the ghey lobby, it will become an ‘unenforceable’ offence ad we know the rest…

        And meanwhile the likes of Jack will go round in bureaucratic circles.

        • Anton

          Re paedophilia in high places, have one of your beers with Wilfred Wong if you can, a barrister who clearly knows much about it. His articles in recent issues of Sword magazine say a lot and hint a lot more. I don’t know him personally but he and I have mutual friends, and he is a serious Christian.

      • Anton

        I don’t agree that Wilders was barred because of the threat of riots. That was an excuse. Wilders was barred because the Labour government of the day didn’t like his message.

        • The Explorer

          A good point, and very true. But if he had been allowed in, and had shown ‘Fitna’, and had called for the banning of the Quran as a fascist book, do you think there would have been riots?

          One has to bear in mind the reaction to Salman Rushdie, and to the Danish cartoons, and the firebombing of the London office/home of the publisher who agreed to print the book about Muhammad’s wives after the American publisher had taken fright and withdrawn.

        • Dreadnaught

          I seem to remember it was Mrs May as Home Sec that barred Wilders.

  • len

    To intervene or not in FGM cases?. ?. That’s seems to be the issue on so many things nowadays?.This is the dilemma that’ a liberal society’ faces on so many fronts.
    If we agree with the liberal concept of there being ‘no absolutes’ in anything, who can Judge another person when there are ‘ no clearly defined boundaries.’
    Have Muslims a right to decide what happens to their children even if another culture calls this ‘mutilation’.?.

    I do not make a case for FGM but point out that when we destroyed our Judeo /Christian culture we entered an area where anything can, and sometimes does, become ‘acceptable’.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      You’re quite correct Len, this is the inevitable consequence of the glorious liberal permissive society ushered in in the sixties. And it will get worse, and more innocents ruined and destroyed by the corrupt, crooked, mad and powerful. The churches need to get up off their knees on this as on so many issues.

      Jesus clearly endorsed the death penalty for child abuse. Time to follow his teaching.

  • Anton

    The outrage over this issue is not so much over abuse of infants as abuse of hospitality. And, of course, complicity of the very authorities who should be stamping on it hard.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      It is about the abuse for me Anton. Please give most of us on here some credit.

      • Anton

        Perhaps I should have said “abuse of hospitality in order to abuse infants”. Outrage is wider than on this blog.

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          Better, but this is about outrage over the state’s unwillingness to enforce it’s own laws to forestall a backlash from a hostile wilfully unintegrating culture. It’s a horrible tip of an appalling iceberg.

          • Anton

            That’s what my second sentence above said! Can we agree to agree?

  • Anna

    People performing FGM should certainly be prosecuted. It is also necessary to impose some penalty on parents who break the law, but jailing them or separating a young girl from her family can hardly be in her best interests. Instead the parents could be forced to undergo special counselling at their own expense.

    Unlike the Jewish male circumcision which is a safe practice, the FGM is dangerous as well as traumatising for the girl concerned; yet, the sentiments behind the parents’ decision are often similar. It is difficult for parents to break with tradition, if they hold the (admittedly incorrect) belief that this is necessary for the sexual health of a woman or if being ‘uncircumcised’ could ruin their daughter’s future marriage prospects in her own culture. To change such strongly held beliefs, it is necessary to work with influencers within the communities concerned.

    • 1642+5thMonarchy

      It’s akin to branding a slave as a sign of ownership, only worse as it is designed to discourage a girl from straying beyond the authority of her father/husband. Honour killings are just another iteration of the same impulse.

      That we have allowed this to take root here, ignored it, and are not wringing our hands about it is a utter disgrace and those expressing these sorts of shillyshallying witterings and arguing against stamping it out are a disgrace as well.

      • Merchantman

        Utter disgrace is an understatement. Lord Shaftesbury and all the other Great Reformers will be turning in their Graves.
        What has happened to our great nation?

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          People subscribing to Jack’s (and others) view that it’s all too complex to do anything effective for a start. We need some moral courage and willingness to confront evil unapologetically. Even in our present decayed state our culture is miles superior to those that practice these things.

          • Anna

            “That we have allowed this to take root here, ignored it, and are now wringing our hands about it is a utter disgrace…”

            I would agree. It always makes sense to ensure that people coming into a country are mostly from cultures likely to adapt to the host culture. The Gulf countries which require a huge foreign labour force – and where foreigners outnumber the nationals – tend to be very careful in this regard. They actually prefer Filipinos to fill their low skilled labour market over their fellow Arabs or Muslims. Foreigners who live and work in these countries are left in doubt about the need to comply with Muslim norms in public, but the authorities rarely interfere with what families do behind closed doors, or in their home countries.

  • David

    The law should be upheld, but our “gloriously” liberal, dysfunctional society covers up the activities of those who break our own laws, because they have no interest in integration, but see life as all about controlling others, staring with the female of the species. Our political and judicial leadership is a disgrace to the democratic ideals that they purport to support; moreover it is appalling that they treat so lightly the deposit of freedom that many generations have strived to achieve and bled to defend. This dangerous path can only lead to heightened future tensions. We need a Trump plus !

  • Obvious really

    Parents do not need to be put in prison, they can be fined, perform community service etc. Strong action should be taken against those who perform the act who are not the parents, with prison sentences of appropriate length. This should be the aim of the Police Service regardless of race. They can take action against Priests who have molested children FGM should be no different.

    • Dominic Stockford

      If the parents don’t send them to have it done it won’t happen. The parents are responsible.

      • Obvious really

        They may be responsible but if you destroy the family you harm all the children in the family, both male and female. There are other sanctions that can be applied.

        • Dominic Stockford

          It is the family who is responsible for harming the children, yet you think that leaving the children there is going to help? The most likely outcome is that the children will be indoctrinated, in turn, to then do it their own children. This is obvious, really.

          • Obvious really

            Come up with a constructive answer that resolves the problem.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Apply the law, protect the children, and remove them to somewhere safe. It is done regularly for children of parents with far less issues in the family than such physical torture.

  • IanCad

    To keep things simple, would it not be wise to require all immigrants from the barbaric lands where such mutilations are routine, to be required to sign an undertaking that they will not subject their daughters to being branded by such a ritual.

    No sign – No entry. Immediate deportation and loss of benefits for any violation, whether performed here or overseas.

    • David

      That would only work IF there were annual inspections and, where the law had been broken, prosecutions. Without an enforcement regime promises are worth nothing.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        You’ve got to start somewhere David. We have the law, now it needs to be enforced rigorously. We supposedly investigate and prosecute every other case of child abuse so why not this category?

  • len

    The Inspector has everyone confused Hannah.

  • Anton

    Let’s hear from one of the victims. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a well-known writer who was born in Somalia and brought up Muslim, but is now secular. She suffered this barbarism aged 5.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/ayaan-hirsi-ali-fgm-was-done-to-me-at-the-age-of-five-ten-years-later-even-20-i-would-not-have-8534299.html

    Let Jack argue with that.

    • Dreadnaught

      He can only argue his own brand of RC liturgy, which to me is as valid as being expert in the characters and convolutions of The Rings Trilogy or Harry Pottter stories. Then he will shift the topic.

      • len

        Sounds about right Dredders…

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          It’s noticeable that his normal lieutenants haven’t shown up for this fight. I’ve never seen him floundering so badly, and his moral credibility has been severely damaged. It’s very revealing indeed. It’s all about process and authority, not purposes or ends, with him.

          • Dominic Stockford

            The source is also missing, which is why the direction of travel is inaccurate.

          • The direction of travel is the same – the nature of the journey is different.

          • carl jacobs

            It’s Jack’s professional bias. It was his job to deal with this stuff but not as an enforcer of the law. You have to control for that. He sees the problem through a narrow lens and he prioritizes that view.

          • CliveM

            Which also means that what he says is based in experience, so even if disagreed with, his position is deserving of some respect.

          • Anton

            He’s showing some of that experience and wisdom in asking some hard questions on this thread, but he’s ducking the hard ones being asked back at him, such as what he would say to Ayaan Hirsi Ali who suffered this barbarity aged 5 and has concrete proposals to wipe it out; what if his daughter married someone from these communities and he then learnt his granddaughter was down for FGM in a few years time; and should FGM not be a criminal offence, and should the law not be enforced?

          • CliveM

            Well give him time. He may have had other commitments.

          • Jack has met with many of the Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s of this world and has always listened intently to them and had very constructive conversations with them. He also met with the parents of women like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, generally accompanied by women like her, and held some disagreeable discussions with them too.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            No, he’s so deep in the rut he can’t see over the sides. Myopic doesn’t begin to describe it.

          • Not a narrow lens because he is informed of all sides of the problem having listened to arguments from a wide variety of groups and professionals, and considered the implications of different courses of action. That’s how pluralism works. It’s not driven by ideology.

          • Your intellectual and moral myopia is what Jack sees.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Fortunately my Puritan Christianity corrects them to give me 20/20 vision, at least on this issue.

          • How did that pan out in Ireland and England?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Changing the subject as per your usual practice?

          • Not at all – we wouldn’t want to repeat the errors of the past.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Well you never seem to learn from being asked not to constantly change subject when under pressure.

          • It’s a pertinent point.

    • Why would Jack argue with her? She makes some sensible and practical suggestions and sees the problem in all its dimensions. Listening to her experiences and others is how the system develops and becomes more effective over time.

      • Anton

        You railed against the equivalent of her suggestion of annual inspections. You are shifting without saying so. I’m glad you are shifting, anyway.

        • No Jack didn’t. That’s a part of the current strategy and the government has given guidance to professionals on this for children from high risk communities. Jack posted the link to this earlier. It was inspection prior to and as a condition of receiving giving benefits that Jack objected to.

          • Anton

            You spoke of Test Acts.Only those who didn’t show up at CoE services were ‘tested’. Just like what you call high-risk communities.

  • carl jacobs

    The law of course is not intended to, and is not capable of, producing the optimal social outcome in every individual case. There are children who suffer severely when their parents commit crimes because the courts do not say “Oh, we must not prosecute the parents because their children will end up in state care.” The parents are imprisoned, and the children suffer consequences. But in this case, the crime is against the child, and suddenly we excuse the crime for the “best interests” of the child? No, that doesn’t pass the laugh test. So what’s the problem? I suspect the police fear this practice is so widespread they would effectively be criminalizing an entire community. And how do they address that problem? They don’t have a clue. Hence, all the bleating about “education”.

    When girls intersect with the system, they can be inspected. The crime is obvious, and the prima facia guilt falls to the parents who must have known and should have reported the crime if they are innocent. So prosecute the parents. Does not the state prosecute when a child is beaten bloody with a fist? This is what the state should do when a girl is cut with a blade. Being cut is the more severe crime after all. A victim can recover from a beating whereas the cut is permanent.

    The crime demands punishment regardless of the collateral impact. This isn’t about social services after all. It’s about law.

    • Sarky

      The problem with FGM is that to us it is a barbaric act (which it is)
      However, to the parents of the child it is a cultural practice going back generations and is not carried out through anger or hate.
      Comparing it to beating a child bloody with a fist is misleading at best, as the parents are under the impression they are doing right by their child and are probably good parents otherwise.

      • Anton

        I don’t care. If they want to behave barbarically they can go back to the land of their fathers and lives their lives their way there. Here, they should live our way.

        • Sarky

          Yes they should live our way, but the argument is about how best to achieve this.

          • Enforce the law, a novel idea eh! Good God what sort of mad cesspit of a country are we becoming. If the police wont then I’m sure vigilante groups can easily form to do it for them.

          • Sarky

            Yeah, and we could sew yellow stars on their jackets.

            Arent you supposed to learn from the past??

          • They are mutilating their girls and breaking the law in doing so. Badges aren’t appropriate.

          • Sarky

            Stupid is as stupid does.

          • Anton

            What a specious analogy!

          • chefofsinners

            Not by ignoring the problem. Not by flagrantly disregarding the will of parliament. Not by sacrificing the welfare of children to the gods of multiculturalism.

          • The evils of FGM and how it’s practice breaks our law should be widely publicised. More awareness campaigns, TV documentaries and dramas, ads, more marketing material around town and in Dr’s surgeries stating doing it breaks the law and carries a prison sentence. It and other barbaric practices should be as vilified as drink and drug driving is.

          • Sarky

            Did you not see call the midwife lsst week?

          • No, not my thing.

          • Anton

            That’s what started this; somebody who saw it made a tweet to West Midlands police asking how come no arrests. Their reply was politically correct drivel and led to a twitter storm, and they then wheeled out their FGM expert, D/C Jill Squires, to try to damp it down. As she is patently against FGM she might have had conflicting loyalties, but the fact is that the problem didn’t go away for the West Midlands force – partly on this blog.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Not breaking the law is not much to ask. They should retain their customs providing they are socially acceptably ( not butchering goats for eid in the back yard for example) and not breaking the law. Other migrant groups dont have a problem with managing
            these enforcements
            Not all are Christians either.

        • This is now their country. Ethnic cleansing is a bit outdated.

          • Those who live here whether it’s their country or not have to abide by our rules and laws.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Who of sound mind could argue with this?

          • Well nobody. Pity the government find it so difficult to enforce.

          • Anton

            They choose to segregate while living here.

          • Muslims maybe; but not necessarily all African peoples. Its not just a Muslim issue – and is not consistently practiced or required across this religion.

          • Anton

            I freely admit to being bigoted against FGM. I don’t care why anybody does it. Anybody who has it done to their daughter should face a severe penalty – because they deserve it, and to discourage others. If that means a big fight within society, better now than later. Please note that I am not calling for civil disobedience by anybody. I am calling for no more than that the law be actively enforced. That’s what it’s there for, isn’t it?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            “Ah, but you need to be culturally sensitive Anton, their culture is inferior and backward and therefore they shouldn’t be judged by our standards, but lesser ones, those of their own benighted places of origin. Don’t you understand? That’s why we need to allow Sharia to be established as a parallel legal system in the UK.”

            Isn’t that the reality of what people like Jack are saying? One might call it racist even.

          • Anton

            Yes, you are absolutely right, I am a barbarian for being so intolerant as to wish to deny these people the freedom to take razor blades to their daughters’ private parts.

          • The Explorer

            Look at a map of where FGC/M is practised (and it’s been done to over 200 million females globally) and it seems to be a tranche of 27 or so countries between two lines of latitude. Primarily Africa, but not exclusively so, because Yemen is also involved but southern Africa is not.

          • Jack is aware of that and has referenced this information.

          • The Explorer

            Yes. Aimed less at you than at the general reader.

          • The Explorer

            Since it is their country they are, like everybody else, subject to the laws of this country. If they don’t agree with the laws they can vote for the party that will implement FGC/M, honour killing, hand and foot amputation for theft etc.

            And if they can get that party elected, then those will become the new laws for the country and be applicable across the board. But until that time, they are subject to existing laws.

          • Yes, they are subject to existing law – criminal and child care law.

          • The Explorer

            Sobering statistic. Muslims are currently 10% maximum of the French population, but they are 60%+ of the French prison population. Why the mismatch?

          • Cressida de Nova

            The French imprison those who break the law.It is an egalitarian society with no special concessions for the Islamic minority.

          • Anton

            Knife crime and child rape law. That’s the truth of FGM.

          • Yes, Jack agrees, and …..

          • carl jacobs

            Ethnic cleansing? You are reaching on this thread, Jack. There was no suggestion of ethnic cleansing.

          • Deportation is being strongly advocated, Carl.

          • Dreadnaught

            We deport criminal aliens and gate-crashers whenever we can: its not ethnic cleansing, it does not include mass murder. You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel by inferring the parallel.

      • carl jacobs

        Yes, but I don’t care. They don’t get to bring their laws with them. And I am more than willing to judge them whether they think it good or not. If a child came to school missing a hand we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. The motivation doesn’t matter.

        Me, I would march them to the city center and hang them by the neck. But I have daughters so perhaps I am radicalized. Anyways, that should get Jack’s heart bleeding.

        • But we all know you’d want to that if a male touched or looked at your daughter lustfully. Less messy than shooting a shotgun too.

          It’s not about parental motivation; it’s about achievable objectives and realistic options. Not an American strongpoint. . And, as a rule, children don’t turn up at school missing limbs.

    • It’s about the best interests of children, now and in the future. That is the law.
      The flaw in your analysis is that the child beaten by a parent remains in a situation of predictable peril. Parents who beat their children’s to satisfy and/or meet their own needs, or through lack of control, tend to repeat the behaviour and, depending on the degree of harm and other factors, will be removed from their care either temporarily or permanently, regardless of the criminal justice process or its outcome.

      Parents, who for cultural/religious reasons, conspire to have their children undergo FGM will be doing it for what they and their communities consider to be those in the best interests of those children’s. The child safeguarding system monitors, as best it can, the health of children in these communities and engages with them to get them to understand it is a harmful and illegal practice. It is acknowledged this is a slow, delicate and arduous process. The key groups targeted for intervention are women and religious authorities because they have influence and can change attitudes. When girls are identified who have undergone FGM, they are subject to a multi-agency process which weighs and balances all the factors in their situation before deciding on a course of action. Paramountcy, according to the law, must be given to the best interests of those children. It doesn’t exclude other factors but, all things considered, it must be the first consideration and given primacy. There is considerable case law defining these terms. For instance, a child thriving with parents who offer loving care, will not be helped by separation from her parents and community. The physical harm has been inflicted and can receive medical attention but, at this point, the emotional harm will be minimal. Removing a child in this scenario will cause great trauma and compound any future problems. In addition, she will be isolated from and rejected by her community and extended family who will be hostile towards the authorities.

      These are the factors being weighted. So far as imprisonment of other offenders, by comparison, this is fairly straightforward. Jack doesn’t need to spell all this out. However, the impact on the family of the parents is taken into consideration at the sentencing stage. The criminal fraternity understand and accept the risks and consequences and some children will grow up with their fathers spending time in and out of prison without their welfare being significantly impaired. Again, there is case law defining these concepts.

      The approach being adopted with immigrant communities is the same as the one used to address physical harm and neglect of children generations ago. Jack recalls working on estates in London in the 1970’s when the child protection system was first being introduced. We directly intervened in very few situations and removed very few children. The focus was on prevention and community intervention and the “system” was not overly defensive and preoccupied with protecting itself from risk. Now it’s risk averse and paranoid about error. Jack likes to think it was driven initially by care, that’s why he joined it; today its driven by fear.

      These traditional approaches may be ineffectual with immigrant communities and a radical shift in approach might be required. If so, resources will need to be put in place to implement this and manage the predictable consequences and these will be considerable – at all levels. Aggressive intervention in these communities will generate a severe reaction and the children will not be the victors in the contest, they will be the casualties. And “managing” these communities will be seen as repressive and exacerbate their separation from our culture and radicalise it further. Our culture doesn’t see pre-marital sex for the young as a huge problem and actually encourages it through selling “safe sex”, contraception and abortion for children as young as 14 years of age. A culture that teaches young people that homosexual sex is healthy and perfectly normal. A culture that accepts couples living together and women having children by several fathers. A culture where adultery and divorce and remarriage in fine. And they are “harming” their children!

      • Dreadnaught

        The system you represent has failed and continues to fail.
        The relatavistic observations you mention are not forced on anyone and a by-products and not the absolute norms of living in a free society.

        • So now you accept there are “absolute norms” for living in society. Jack’s approach is not relativistic. It is based on the unconditional unacceptability of FGM. Where we differ is on how beat to eradicate it using the law and the resources available.

          • Dreadnaught

            No; you’re wrong. FGM is the ‘absolute’ norm of a foreign culture. The only absolute norm we have I think, is The Rule of Law.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Wasn’t the Inquisition originally set up to deal with those from this sort of culture that practised these foul things? Thought you’d be all in favour of it starting up again?

        • Times change and approaches get adapted to the prevailing terrain.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            And old problems and menaces return.

          • In different guises and forms and they have to be tackled differently.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            The Spanish had 700 years of learning the hard way how to deal with it. We’ve just forgotten but more are remembering all the time.

          • So now you agree with the Spanish Inquisition against Muslims and Jews?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            I was thinking more along the lines of conversion or expulsion.

          • Both Muslim and Jew?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Do Jews practice FGM and other practices incompatible with our law? If they do and won’t comply with our law then yes, but they do comply with our laws don’t they so, it’s not an issue? Twisting and turning, blowing off smoke again Jack?

          • No. You said you supported the Spanish Inquisition. This involved Jews as well as Muslims.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            No I did not, I just reminded you that it was the RCC that set up the Inquisition to investigate Muslims who had only notionally converted to Christianity following the completion of the Reconquista. That’s quite clear from my wording. Stop twisting please.

          • This is what you wrote:

            “The Spanish had 700 years of learning the hard way how to deal with it. We’ve just forgotten but more are remembering all the time.”

            And:

            “I was thinking more along the lines of conversion or expulsion.”

            Given the methods of “conversion” used, and ways to test this, on both Muslim and Jew, you were agreeing with the approach of the Inquisition should be replicated.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Er, no. That comment did not mention the Inquisition and the context was clearly the expulsion of Islam after 1492. The Jews are not an existential, indeed any sort of, threat to our civilisation. Stop twisting: I know you won’t because it’s your default position.

          • bluedog

            Recall that in the Fifteenth century the Roman Church was highly anti-semitic. What advice did Ferdinand and Isabella, Los Reyes Catolicos, receive from the Church?

          • Different times; different circumstances; different responses.

          • bluedog

            But where Islam is concern, nothing has changed. There has been no Reformation and no Enlightenment. The preferred option of the Islamists is to revert to Islam in its early form, they specifically reject progress as heretical. One can see a certain inevitability here, among many. Just as we have been going through a re-appraisal of the Crusades, so that the post-modern view of white cut-throats seeking dominance over brown scholars and thinkers is being rejected, so we are going to be looking at the entirety of the Reconquista for precedents in dealing with the Islamic threat to our own society. In a sense, the Monty Python joke has reversed, you may find there is a large number of people who would welcome a British Inquisition.

      • chefofsinners

        Wrong at the start, Jack. A parent who beats their child WILL be prosecuted. The courts decide an appropriate punishment.
        A parent who beats another adult will be prosecuted.
        A parent who cuts the child of another will be prosecuted.
        But a parent who mutilates their own child will not.
        Why?

        • For the reasons Jack has given above.

          • chefofsinners

            They just aren’t reasons, Jack. You have not addressed the question of why parents are prosecuted for other crimes but not this one. Or why the courts cannot decide a suitable punishment taking the child’s welfare into account.
            This is a no-go area for our police, a lawless Wild West Midlands, where no-one dares fight the Injuns. And you just ponce about in yer ten gallon hat spouting excuses.

          • Jack did address that issue.

          • chefofsinners

            You seem to say that enforcing the law would cause trouble. Is that it? Fear of the criminals?

          • We would compound the harm already inflicted on children, is what Jack is saying.

          • carl jacobs

            That’s not a relevant consideration when it comes to punishing the crime.

          • Yes it is because we also have a string of laws that mandate we give paramountcy to the immediate and long term best interests of children. If punishing the crime compounds the harm already inflicted, and results in additional trauma, then it is relevant.

          • bluedog

            ‘we give paramountcy to the immediate and long term best interests of children.’

            This is your cue to say, ‘In this context I believe that permitting FGM is the lesser of two evils and a desirable outcome’.

          • Not a desirable outcome and all is being done that realistically can to stop it.

            Your approach would harm children and unleash other evils. It is the law that requires us to give paramountcy to a child’s best interests when considering whether to prosecute and to punish and deter.

          • bluedog

            You’ve made a number of judgements here, citing the law as your authority. You do of course have the option of declaring that in the long term the interests of the child and other children are best served by prosecuting those who undertake FGM. Without being specific, you allude darkly to the possibility of other evils. So what greater evil do you have in mind other than your own willingness to flout the criminal law?

          • You’ll have to work that out for yourself. Jack has said enough and already pointed these out on this thread.

            The law is not being flouted.

          • bluedog

            The criminal law is being flouted by paid agents of the state who arrogate for themselves the right to determine which laws to apply. It would appear that you are, or have been, one such agent.

            I’ll repeat the question in abbreviated form that you have avoided answering, ‘So what greater evil do you have in mind…?’

            You know the answer, hence your reticence, please share your answer with me.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            It’s been a very revealing and worthwhile exercise. I will never view Jack in the same way again.

          • bluedog

            Agreed. So much for the endless moral posturing. One cannot avoid the conclusion that while acting as a paid officer of the British state HJ has been involved in a widespread conspiracy to flout the criminal law. Hopefully he and others like him will be brought to account. It’s an extremely serious matter that goes right to the heart of maintaining the Rule of Law.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            That’s the inevitable conclusion to draw from his evasive moralising and hand-wringing.

          • Anton

            Don’t forget that even if the anti-FGM legislation contains politically correct caveats, assault on the genitals of a minor and attack with an edged weapon remain absolutely illegal.

          • Anton
          • Anton

            And this is what the criminal law says, clear as a bell:

            http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/31/pdfs/ukpga_20030031_en.pdf

            All this crap about guidelines has been tacked on by politically correct people inside and outside government, but it is not the law. The FGM Act 2003 is the law, as set out in the link.

          • Jack has already answered that on this threads. Seek and you shall find.

          • bluedog

            If you are talking about civil unrest, stare them down and call their bluff. It won’t be easy but in the long term there is no alternative. What you and your colleagues have done is encourage the perpetrators to think they are above the law. A grossly irresponsible move.

          • Maybe, maybe not, time will tell, but its the way we are mandated do things.

          • bluedog

            Illuminating to note the shift in your position. Initially you took ownership of the policy to acquiesce to FGM, with pride.

            Now, under pressure, you resort to the Eichmann Defence, ‘I was only following orders’.

            Did that work for Eichmann? Will it work for you?

          • No, Jack agrees with the policy but you have been accusing him of flouting the law.

          • bluedog

            You avoid use of the descriptor ‘criminal’. Do you deny that what you have done contravenes the criminal law?

          • Anton

            Well said.

          • Anton

            The law is not being flouted?

            You are lying, Jack. You are knowingly saying something that is untrue. I don’t say that lightly.

          • The Children’s Acts are being followed and give paramountcy to the best of interests of children over prosecution. That is not a lie. Jack awaits your apology.

          • bluedog

            You miss the point. The children are not subject to the criminal law as victims of a barbaric crime. It is the parents who have committed the crime, and their assistants such as imams and any other religious functionaries. Granting these actors immunity from prosecution under the Children’s Act seems to be at the least, a gross dereliction of duty and a misconception of the interests of the child. How many children must suffer as a consequence of your judgement?

          • Not Jack’s judgement but the guidance from government about how to implement the law pertaining to children.

          • bluedog

            Evidence?

          • Jack has already linked government guidance on FGM. Guidance on the Children’s Act are online too.

          • Anton

            Attack with an edged weapon. Attack on the genitals of a minor. Absolutely illegal. Keep awaiting.

          • Not big enough to apologise to Jack for accusing him of lying?

          • Anton

            You surely know and knew that attack with an edged weapon and attack on the genitals of a minor are and were unconditionally illegal. Yet you said that the law was not being flouted.

          • Are you being wilfully dense?

            The Children’s Acts are being followed and give paramountcy to the best of interests of children over prosecution. That is not a lie.

            Jack awaits your apology.

          • Anton

            See response to same issue above.

          • Anton

            Here is the FGM Act 2003:

            http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/31/pdfs/ukpga_20030031_en.pdf

            It contains no caveats whatsoever. The guidelines to which you have been working appear to have been cooked up by politically correct persons within and outwith government to try to dilute its meaning and application. Where guidelines conflict with primary legislation, the latter takes priority because it is the law of the land.

          • *sigh*
            The Children’s Acts are also primary legislation and following guidance is obligatory. Go research them, it will give you something useful to do and stop you pestering Jack.

          • Anton

            You mean this stuff which you posted earlier:

            https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/525390/FGM_safeguarding_report_A.pdf

            It is patently as I said: cooked up by politically correct persons within and outwith government to try to dilute the meaning and application of the FGM Act 2003 (and the minor modifications to it in Part 5 of the Serious Crime Act 2015). Fortunately, whoever drafted the 2003 Act had the sense to keep it brief. I recognise that when guidelines drawn up by politically correct wafflemongers who support multiculturalism conflict with crisp legislation, social workers etc face tough decisions. But you know what 99% of social workers will do, because they’d lose their job or face years of tribunals if they prioritised what the law actually says.

            Please cite any primary legislation which you believe negates the meaning of the FGM Act 2003. A link is fine provided you specify the exact paragraphs involved. In case you want to tell me to do my own research again, please remember that this is a public forum, not just a private conversation. Meanwhile, girls keep getting raped with razors and everybody says its very bad and nothing ever changes. Have you read Kafka?

          • Google the various children’s acts – the guidance is based upon them. Here’s a start:

            http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/section/1

            There are argument against the paramountcy principle which call for its amendment and repeal.

            “The paramountcy principle is at the heart of the Children Act; it has been described variously as the ‘golden thread’ running through the Children Act” and ‘the bedrock of the Act’. It would not be an exaggeration to characterize the paramountcy principle as the most widely accepted principle within Child Law, and indeed Bromley and Lowe have characterized it as ‘the cornerstone of the current law’.

            https://oup.silverchair-cdn.com/oup/backfile/Content_public/Journal/clp/49/1/10.1093_clp_49.1.267/3/49-1-267.pdf?Expires=1488810139&Signature=IvGI37QAjbkwKfZbMYbpQ4iCOha3TUsVVY56PwxG6MUHBab3oPg~2mh-2X3m-SToM5DTApoc8Z~ame-WfZKGidntaL9fhtaZah0EbtoKo6tCS7jXb4SUqOgMNSCgrIHyZyfx2p4IO2~e8pKpHdTFIlmchDH~aNh7jkppBZw-SUMMg51sBxoUNvU7Rp4P~ELAwiEwns5w43p9s24GXvmneEPEYdTHU6gIF-~8GbPO~yL3Jf4ypWiypznXJ51OL7na4bZ2asnxBgV667NJvgfk4HmNbrikV6i0ffzfzKc9ryBI88upj4b6hDDtCUzfqnTV4SXo0FyDyd1yMM2peC5rPg__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIUCZBIA4LVPAVW3Q

            Whether it should apply in child protection/safeguarding, i.e. before a child is the subject of care proceedings and should not, therefore, impede criminal prosecutions, is another matter. However, it does and agencies, including the police and CPS, are obliged to follow it.
            Here’s the government guidance, based on a raft of legislation, concerning safeguarding and child protection.

          • Anton

            But it is not about the welfare of the child. It is about whether a serious criminal offence has been committed. We don’t let murderers remain at large for the sake of their children, do we, so why the difference here? (I know the answer; do you?)

          • Yes and Jack has already provided an answer elsewhere on the thread. He’s not going to constantly repeat points.
            Your still not “getting it”, Anton.

          • Anton

            No Jack, it is you who are not getting it, and I do not agree that you have covered the difference from murderers, which is a more specific issue than others you have been asked about on this thread. Is that difference not dangerous to your generic argument; and if not, why not?

          • The answer is on the thread – seek and ye shall find.

          • Anton

            I have sought. Why the reluctance to repost your own words?

          • Jack isn’t going to encourage your laziness.

          • Anton

            I don’t mind if readers believe that you have no reply.

            But here’s another argument: These guidelines are for healthcare professionals. Well, I’m not a healthcare professional. What if I, or any other private citizen, learn (by legal means) that FGM has taken place in a family and report it to police as a crime under the FGM 2003 Act?

          • Go away …. you’re too dense to grasp this. Did you not read the guidelines for all agencies?

          • Anton

            I’m not an agency. It suits me if you refuse to argue back; many might consider that you are unable to.

          • Go pester someone else.

          • And many might think you’re boring ….

          • Anton

            I can handle that.

            Another question: were similar guidelines in existence before or published simultaneously with the 2003 Act, or before that to prevent social workers from treating it as knife crime/sexual assault; and if not, why did not prosecutions take place then?

          • Research the legislation and guidelines. Perhaps you’ll learn something.

          • Anton

            Evasion by others is no skin off my nose.

          • Anton

            Realistically, tosh. Some issues are worth escalating on and some aren’t. This one is.

          • And you know this from experience, do you? Perhaps some shift in emphasis in the current strategy is called for but this is a matter for government and Parliament. They pass the legislation.

          • Anton

            And the police ignore it. Disgraceful.

          • The police are complying with the law by working in partnership with other agencies under the terms of the Children’s Act.

            If you want to change this situation then you need to understand it not just express uninformed outrage.

          • Anton

            Attack with an edged weapon and attack on the genitals of a minor have long been serious criminal offences. Setting aside the demerits of your moral compass, more than one piece of legislation may apply to a situation.

          • And if the law requires paramountcy in one set of laws over the other? What then?

          • Anton

            It is perfectly possible to be acquitted of one charge but guilty of another committed in the same action. One Bill does not cancel another merely because they might apply to the same situation. But this is legalism and you may declare yourself the winner in that business, if you can bear the odour of self-righteousness.

          • carl jacobs

            What you are saying is that people who agree with you have made it relevant when in fact it should not be relevant. What has been done can be undone.

            My point is that these kinds of social welfare concerns should have no bearing on whether a crime is punished. It shouldn’t matter if the individual case is made worse. You don’t punish crime only when punishment achieves a better social outcome. The point is to impose vicarious retribution on the criminal.

          • Well then, in a democracy, the proper channel for changing that is Parliament which would have to amend the Children’s Act. If this ever happens then the focus will be exclusively on the crime and inflicting a suitable punishment. The welfare of the child will not be considered and the approach to ending this practice will not focus on the child, the victim, or changing the culture of the groups inflicting FGM. It’s certainly an alternative approach. The state will also need to ensure it has sufficient resources in place to deliver this approach and manage the predictable consequences.

          • carl jacobs

            I assume the predictable consequences involve riots and people slapping clips into AK47s. If only this crime was predominant in a more docile subgroup.

          • Jack was thinking more of alienating communities from health, education and social care services and reinforcing separation and, yes, the radicalising of young people whose girls are taken from them. How has that approach been working in America with black people?

          • Anton

            Carl, edged weapon attack and assault on the genitals of a minor are serious criminal offences here under other legislation than the PC stuff Jack is spouting legalistically back at you. Stand firm!

          • carl jacobs

            I believe he is telling the truth about the state of the law. These are the kinds of laws people like Jack don’t want brought to public attention. You have to possess a certain professional mindset to accept this nonsense. Most people will say “What?!” And Jack will say “Trust us experts”. He did the same sort of thing with the Bishop Bell story. The common thread is that “Professionals know best and the masses should just shut up and listen.”

            To me it just proves the law is an ass.

          • chefofsinners

            How is it different to when a parent commits any other crime?

          • Jack has repeatedly answered that.

          • chefofsinners

            No-one understands you.

          • Anton

            But Jack ignores the point of deterrence acting in the minds of the fathers of other girls.

          • No, he has a realistic understanding of how deterrence in the situation will work and who it will harm.

          • Anton

            I think that your expertise, which I respect, is not relevant to that inference, which I don’t.

          • Merchantman

            HJ, you’re in a hole; so stop digging.

        • Cressida de Nova

          The answer is because they are only girls….if it were happening to boys I am sure it would be viewed differently.Shameful to be confronted with this truth in a first world country.

          • Actually, it’s because their welfare does matter. If punishing the crime compounds the harm already inflicted, and results in additional trauma, then it is relevant and has to be taken into account. Taking these girls from their homes, isolating them from their communities, placing them in care and locking up parents will not help them. Those girls identified as being at risk are monitored by health, education and social care services.

      • Anton

        What part of “deterrence” do you not understand?

        • It’s only deterrence if you’re prepared to push the nuclear button and accept the fall-out and collateral damage.

          • carl jacobs

            That’s a ridiculous srgument. Deterrence does not imply the possibility of nuclear war.

          • Metaphor, Carl. And deterrence demands a willingness to carry out the threat.

          • bluedog

            With bureaucrats who think like you there is clearly no institutional support for British Values at a practical level. Just words without meaning.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            It’s an illuminating spectacle isn’t it, to see such a way of thinking pinned under the spotlight, unable to twist or turn out of the light which exposes every evasion, dissimulation and self-deception? With such are we dealing in the new establishment. Learn from the spectacle.

          • There’s been no evasion, dissimulation and Jack is not deceiving himself. You have no answers to the issues Jack raise so simply resort to insults. Outrage about third world practices is being expressed. It’s not British. Jack has heard from no one expressing any insight about the impact on children. Just lock their parents up and place the girls in the care system, or deport the lot of them. Why not simply remove children at birth and have them adopted?

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            Lol. More excuses why it’s to difficult to do anything effective. The modén bureaucrat speaks.

            I’m very clear. Get Victorian.

          • Ad hominem.

          • Merchantman

            And in this instance so it can be, since you are an actual live part of the problem. The problem is child abuse. I am surprised you can’t recognise your terrible neglect.

          • Ad hominem.

          • bluedog

            Not so. According to Ofsted, ‘fundamental British values’ comprises:

            democracy.

            the rule of law.

            individual liberty.

            mutual respect for and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs and for those without faith.

            What you have been complicit in doing through acquiescing to FGM is to undermine the rule of law in the name of tolerance for different faiths. You have persuaded yourself that this is the right thing to do by way of following the mandate demanded by the government. You have not offered any suggestion that you may have protested or resisted implementation of this mandate.

            If there is a ranking implicit in this list, tolerance comes last. The rule of law is absolutely critical in a multicultural and multi-ethnic society and is predicated on equal opportunity before the law. By waiving the criminal code as it applies to FGM, the government and its agents have undermined the credibility of the rule of law.

          • carl jacobs

            You implied that responding to this issue with punishment would be the equivalent of starting a nuclear war. Metaphor or not, it’s ridiculous.

          • Is it?

          • Anton

            Taking this as metaphor, I am. Cultural appeasement should stop right now. You remind me of Neville Chamberlain, you know.

          • Chamberlain agreed to German expansion. Where is Jack agreeing with FGM?

          • Anton

            Where did Chamberlain agree with Nazism?

            It’s called appeasement.

          • He didn’t agree with Nazism. He agreed they could take over certain sovereign states without legitimate cause, hoping it would satisfy them. That was appeasement. It doesn’t apply to the responses to FGM.

          • Anton

            O Yes It Does

          • Appeasement is seeking to pacify or placate by acceding to their demands. It doesn’t apply.

          • Anton

            Their demands are to be left alone. I’m not interested in playing games of legalism. By all means go to the mirror and crown yourself the victor if you want to play legalistic word games. I’m not interested.

          • Maybe but the state isn’t acceding to this.
            Jack takes it you have no further arguments.

          • Anton

            If you can stand the stench of self-righteousness, you may declare yourself the winner.

          • Ad hominem.

          • Anton

            I couldn’t care less. I’m happy to let the reader decide.

      • carl jacobs

        I don’t care about any of that finely-crafted social welfare bullsh*t, Jack. Hang the bastard. This is a serious crime. Treat it like a serious crime to be punished and not a condition to be managed.

        • No answers then? Just an ill-informed, unintelligent response devoid of any awareness of the ability to implement it or the consequences.

          • bluedog

            No. What you proscribe is surrender to moral blackmail.

            You are saying, ‘we know FGM is wrong but we can’t stop it for two reasons. Firstly doing so is culturally insensitive and that is a crime, ‘cos we say so. Secondly, there will be societal implications that are too expensive and too much like hard work to manage.’

            Now if the parents of children who inflict FGM on their daughters were jailed, or deported, with the child being raised as a ward of the state it would send a powerful message. The miscreants need to know that the state will apply extreme sanctions on those who perform FGM. Only then will FGM stop. Sometimes you have to pay a price to achieve Good in the face of Evil. You condone Evil.

          • That’s actually not the argument Jack presented. You really believe it will help girls to jail and/or deport parents and have them raised as a ward of the state?

          • bluedog

            As this writer understands it, you claim that the paramount interest is the Children’s Act. This is wrong. The paramount interest is that of the United Kingdom. One can presume that the Children’s Act is one of those pieces of legislation dreamed up in Brussels in a fit of self-righteous self-congratulation, replete with unintended consequences. And of course, the EU in Brussels had no interest in the UK which it regarded as an obstacle to its pan-European ambitions of empire. So it would come as no surprise if a Remainer were to put the interests of the UK behind those of the EU.

            Pursuing the interests of the UK, which have been explained to you earlier, may mean that the parents and associates of FGM offenders are jailed and deported and if the child is not a co-deportee, raised as a ward of the state. Unfortunate as the child is the meat in the sandwich, caught between the criminality of the parents and the power of the British state. It is the choice of the parents, further illustrating their irresponsibility, that this may be so.

          • carl jacobs

            You may think those issues are important. I don’t. I’m not obligated to respond to irrelevant points. I’m certainly not obligated to fight on your chosen terrain. This is a simple issue for me. There is crime. There is punishment. You haven’t given one reason why the crime shouldn’t be punished.

            Oh, and your argument about the child not being in any further danger is also wrong. If they will do it to daughter A they will do it to daughter B.

          • Points you consider irrelevant and if you are unwilling/unable to engage the points raised then what are you left with? You want to “hang the bastards” responsible. Jack gave reasons for promoting the child’s welfare over using the criminal justice system. You just want to ignore this as “finely-crafted social welfare bullsh*t”.

      • Anna

        Excellent comment!

      • William Lewis

        “Aggressive intervention in these communities will generate a severe reaction and the children will not be the victors in the contest, they will be the casualties.”

        This seems like special pleading. There is no need for aggression unless people start resisting arrest.

  • Dreadnaught

    FGM
    Multiple wives
    Arranged marriage
    Gender based abortion
    Second class staus of women:
    These practises and more, are an assault on our own open cultutre that successive governments have failed to address. This is Multiculturalsim, unchallenged, divisive and now so deeply rooted could argualbly be seen as the new British Culture.

    This must be approached in the opposite manner in which it came in – through the Exit door with maximum public exposure. Jailing is not the solution as it affects only one or two people and they are likely to be the childrens’ providers. The penalty has to be necessarily harsh by our standards. The law provides rights that argue for a family life: I am not advocating against that, but prposing the expusion ofl the entire family and the message will not be missed, here or in Africa.

    • I’m from Barcelona

      If certain so-called cultures wish to adhere to their barbaric customs in their own countries it is none of our business, however, when they import it into our culture then there should be no hesitation whatsoever in returning them to wherever they came from. Any mealy-mouthed tolerance is rightly perceived as weakness and interpreted as acceptance.

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        Well said.

      • Dreadnaught

        This is also a cultual practise – how would the bleeding heart social worker approach this in the UK?
        http://www.cvltnation.com/tribal-scarification/

        • 1642+5thMonarchy

          Apply the laws applying to tattoos, it’s a direct comparison.

          • Dreadnaught

            If they are forced on kids – yes.

  • An off the wall question here:

    If the technology was developed for a safe and unharmful devise that effectively prevented sexual intercourse with young girls (and even boys), would its use be deemed acceptable by those parents who sought to use it for religious and/or cultural reasons? What balance would be struck here between the rights of the child, the rights of parents, implementing the law and the need to stop FGM?

    • The Explorer

      When Augustine (or Aquinas, I forget which) was asked whether monopods with one leg and one giant foot had souls, he said we could worry about it when we knew monopods existed.

      I know we must anticipate trends, but I’m happy to worry about the technology you cite as and when it comes on stream.

      • It already is feasible.

        • The Explorer

          Being feasible and actually existing are not the same thing.

    • Dreadnaught

      The chastity belt is sooo last season.

      • William Lewis

        LOL

      • 1642+5thMonarchy

        But the Burqa is the coming thing darling!

        • Dreadnaught

          Suit you Sir… Suit you.

    • chefofsinners

      Could I use it on your keyboard?

    • Sarky

      My friend cleans his shotgun when his daughters boyfriend comes round…….seems to do the job.

    • Suburbanbanshee

      FGM is not about preventing premarital sex. It is about ensuring that marital sex is not fun.

  • Politically__Incorrect

    There was a time I’d have said how bizarre this is. In the modern world of the PC-PC it is of course commonplace, though dishonourable and deplorable, to turn a blind eye to crimes merely because they are committed by one particular group who are considered above the law because of their ethnicity and religion. One day this will all have to stop.

  • chefofsinners

    Today we have seen another retreat by the police, this time a senior officer saying people should not be prosecuted for viewing child pornography. And the reason? There are so many people doing it.
    At the same time, our prisons are overrun with drugs and officers can no longer prevent assaults on inmates.

    What a relief that there is still money for a highly efficient system of speed cameras, bobbies to arrest Christian street preachers and court time to prosecute bakers.

    • Then that officer is wrong and hasn’t grasped the harm it causes and the threat it poses. The only way to tackle paedophilia and those who stir and feed the perversion, is to identify and prosecute perpetrators. The police have to prioritise who they target but to ignore it is a dereliction of the law and their duty.
      This is not equivalent to the approaches adopted towards FGM.

      • chefofsinners

        Why not?

        • Work it out. Jack has explained already.

    • CliveM

      Yes I posted a link to this earlier. He appeared to believe that simply viewing child abuse, didn’t make you complicit to the abuse.

      The man is an idiot.

      • Cressida de Nova

        I think a stronger critical term would be more appropriate. Some Islamic countries ban pornography on the internet. I agree with this. It is too easy to access. It should be returned to the sleazy rain coat brigade group and housed in decrepit buildings in back lanes.

  • len

    The writer of Hebrews says: “…Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven… that [only] those things which cannot be shaken may remain” (Hebrews 12:26-27).
    Western civilization is being shaken.
    Hows it doing?.

    • Merchantman

      Running.

      • len

        ??

        • Merchantman

          Running with no place to hide because the liberals left the door open.

          • len

            Not sure where you are coming from,or going to?.

          • Maalaistollo

            Could just be a case of the runs.

          • len

            Hopefully not…

          • chefofsinners

            Hopefully not, len len 8.

  • chefofsinners

    Just a little further North, police are busy dealing with the things that really matter:
    Woman in Stoke-on-Trent prosecuted for theft for picking up a £20 note in a shop.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-39119990

    • Cressida de Nova

      Circumcision is not an equivalent to a clitorectomy. If young males were being subjected to a penectomy which is the equivalent of a clitorectomy, for religious reasons or whatever ,the response by the police ,law makers, and society would be different. Girls still don’t matter too much.

      • Dominic Stockford

        It isn’t that it is girls that means nothing is done, it is that they come from (cross out the wrong ones, for each individual case) immigrant/muslim/black communities. We are getting more like Sweden every day, in our collusion with evil.

      • Anton

        Actually I think that women get priority in our feminised society today. The reason FGM gets a free pass is that the militant feminists are silent on the topic. They prefer to ally with Islam, as it is a deadly enemy of the society they hate so much, Western civilisation – even at cost of betraying their own sisters inside Islam. If they had done the right thing and mounted a campaign against it to match the suffragettes, I very much doubt it would be so prevalent here today.

        The most prominent feminist of the postwar era, Germaine Greer, referred to opposition to FGM as an “attack on cultural identity”! (See her Wikipedia page.)

        • Cressida de Nova

          Why would Feminists support Islam the most brutal regime to women? Nonsense. What woman could ever support this barbarous behaviour? I think everyone is too afraid of Islamic terrorism and reprisals . I have met Germaine Greer. I cannot say it was a memorable experience.

          It IS an attack on cultural identity…That is a good thing. FGM is a disgusting cultural practice like cannibalism. These practices must be condemned. She does not support FGM.

          In her favour she coined the term ‘ mutilation ‘ for clitoridectomy and does not recognise transgendered men as being women.

          • Cressida de Nova

            Oh and women are certainly not prioritised in society today. Society is not feminised …not by a long shot. !

          • Anton

            Open your eyes. Forty years on from Women’s Lib, women have won the battle of the sexes. This is obvious in children’s books and TV soaps and adverts, which are a barometer of our culture. Female characters are mainly smart, confident and attractive, whereas men are shabbily dressed losers and wimps, or evil. Educational psychologists have warned for some time that the educational system has become geared to female rather than male strengths, which is why girls now out-perform boys at school. The British government pressed ahead with the Human Fertilisation And Embryology Bill, ending the child’s need for a father to be considered when granting women access to NHS in vitro fertilisation treatment. Lord Darzi, a Health Minister, stated in 2008 that it was “unnecessary, inappropriate and out of step with practice in society” to take into account the need of a child for a father, and that “retaining the need-for-a-father provision… would be inconsistent with the wider Government policy of promoting equality” (an incoherent statement, since government acknowledges the need for a mother). In divorce settlements the norm is now for the wife to keep any young children regardless of her behaviour or the fact that the man has supported the family financially and is likely to continue doing. The Welfare State now subsidises single women who get pregnant without ever marrying, yet penalises the men who fertilise them.

          • Cressida de Nova

            This is a very interesting topic and one I enjoy discussing. Sadly I am strapped for time to give it the attention it merits. You have made a few good isolated points but they need to be addressed in the context of the whole. I don’t think this is the forum to discuss this issue as this site is comprised of 99% conservative males (even Jack) I have no intention of being the lone mermaid in the dinghy facing a fleet of battle ships I am not or have ever aspired to be Danielle in the Lion’s Den.

          • Anton

            I agree that my comments were not set in any context; that is because I pasted them in from an essay of mine on the subject. I agree also that this is not the forum for the subject, albeit for different reasons from those you give. It is not a Reformation issue, at least.

          • Anton

            Well, we agree about Greer and about FGM, anyway. Militant feminists prioritise multiculturalism over the wellbeing of their sisters in Islam. I’ve suggested why, and I don’t think they are frightened of Islam (yet), but I welcome all comments about their motivation.

  • carl jacobs

    So what we have is a subgroup using an implicit threat of violence to carve out an exemption from the law in order to allow that subgroup to continue a customary yet barbaric practice that is otherwise illegal. And we have social workers justifying it according to the “best interest” of the child. What could go wrong?

    • Except, African communities, where the practise is greater than Muslim communities, are not using implicit nor explicit threats of violence. Even in those Muslim communities where it happens there is a division of opinion. It takes time to change deeply embedded cultural attitudes without alienating people. And, yes, Jack would defend the best interests of children in these situations. Not to justify their parent’s behaviour but to protect them from further more significant psychological harm.

      • carl jacobs

        You are the one who said …

        If so, resources will need to be put in place to implement this and manage the predictable consequences and these will be considerable – at all levels. Aggressive intervention in these communities will generate a severe reaction and the children will not be the victors in the contest, they will be the casualties. And “managing” these communities will be seen as repressive and exacerbate their separation from our culture and radicalise it further.

        It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to read between the lines. Not that you have been terribly specific about these terrible unnamed consequences to which you keep alluding. They must be terrible since you are basically arguing that the law should overlook this practice until you can convince people to voluntarily stop it. Meanwhile it goes on and on and on with no end in sight, and the victims just keep stacking up. Count me among those who are not confident in the efficacy of your solution.

        • The central thrust of Jack’s argument is minimising harm to individual children who have been abused and promoting their best interests. Why not comment on that aspect? You have an Old Testament framed political response to this problem – eradicate it by using force, fear and punishment. Jack repeats, for the umpteenth time: the law is not overlooking this practice. It’s called a multi-faceted response.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            That does nothing. Pathetic, cowardly, and not in the best interests of the children in these benighted ‘communities’.

          • 1642 – working undercover now?

          • Pontius Jack

            Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery they say.

          • William Lewis

            You are appeasing a practice which IS harmful to children on the basis that punishing the criminals MAY have an adverse affect on their children. If we are all to be equal under the law then we should never send criminals with children to prison unless they are a threat to their offspring.

          • 1642+5thMonarchy

            There is an ‘icky’ obsessive quality to Jack’s defence of the indefensible.

          • len

            Its called looking the other way.

          • carl jacobs

            I advocateforce, fear, and punishment because it will work. You are in effect sacrificing an entire generation on the hope that you can convince a culture to change itself by gentle persuasion. That does not seem an effective plan.

            What is worse is that you are mostly reacting to the size of the community in question out of fear for its reaction. If you were dealing with a small community, I do not think you would give this council.

          • Anton

            Exactly. Let Jack answer this question: Would he treat the problem differently if it was done by a community of 50 and 50,000, and if so why?

        • Dominic Stockford

          There is no spiritual or human excuse for not seeking to prevent the barbaric chopping up of the bodies of young girls in this awful way. Neither is their any spiritual or human excuse for failing to prosecute in order to save others from the immeasurable harm, physical and mental and social, that this does to the girls for the rest of their lives.

      • The Explorer

        It seems from what you are saying that there’s a global issue and a British issue, and I’m not clear how far the pattern for the one reflects the pattern for the other.

        Globally, there appear to be four groups:
        1. African Muslims who practise it.
        2. Non-African Muslims who practise it.
        3. African non-Muslims who practise it.
        4. Muslims who don’t practise it.

        The question then is, what are the percentages of these groups in Britain. The Yemenis, for instance, practise it and are non-African, but how large is the Yemeni population in the UK, and is it statistically significant?

        I take you to be saying that the largest group in Britain in which it happens is non–Muslim Africans, and the second largest is Muslim Africans (eg Somalis). But it’s primarily a non-Muslim problem. Is that correct?

        • Dominic Stockford

          The Somalis also practice it.

      • bluedog

        ‘Not to justify their parent’s behaviour but to protect them from further more significant psychological harm.’

        This statement begs a number of questions, not the least of which is what constitutes psychological harm and what are the triggers for psychological harm.

        Here’s a tangential situation that seems relevant to this debate. There were newspaper reports of a debate in the House of Lords last year (I think), principally conducted by three peeresses on the subject of polygamy in Britain. No prizes for guessing which demographic featured prominently, almost to the exclusion of all others. It was suggested that with Muslims allowed four wives a racket had developed in which three wives were parked in social housing as single mothers and one wife cohabited with the husband, the whole arrangement being structured to milk maximum benefits. It follows that in a society that quaintly believes that a marriage only has two participants, the children of a polygamous marriage must feel alienated by virtue of their parents’ arrangement. Indeed, one can almost hear the victims’ claims claims of psychological harm and demands for compensation.

        Going further, if there was to be a prosecution for FGM in a polygamous marriage, and if the father was deemed to be the instigator, his subsequent conviction would not make a great difference. In the arrangement above, a Muslim child only has a one in three chance of living with their father anyway.

        One is tempted to suggest that the perpetuation of FGM in Muslim societies is analogous to the Roman Church’s policy of a celibate priesthood. In both cases nobody wants to admit they’ve missed out on the joys of life, and the calumny continues on the basis that if it was good enough for me it’s good enough for them. The difference being that a celibate priesthood is not a criminal offence, although the consequences may be.

    • David

      On target !

    • I’m from Barcelona

      This is just one of many examples of the particular section of society that deems themselves to be outwith our rule of law. It’s not even the thin end of the wedge; they’re well past that by now. Encouraged by the spineless social workers, police, politicians, and judges et al. they continue to push the boundaries at every opportunity. The likes of Happy Jack have an awakening coming that will be worse than rude.

      • Pontius Jack

        That’s very unfair. The multi-disciplinary and very multicultural agencies only want what’s best for the young girls involved, i.e. leave them with the communities that love them by applying skilled community surgery to maintain well established cultural customs. This makes it much harder for these girls to stray in later life and therefore reduces the risk that they be subject to community discipline, termed ‘honour killings’ by the vulgar press, in later life. So it’s in their long term best interest see?

        • I’m from Barcelona

          Remiss of me not to look at it like that. Thanks for the guidance. Sarc.

        • Dominic Stockford

          Of course it isn’t. Giving yourself yet another avatar doesn’t make any difference to the truth. This is an encultured practice of serious physical harm and abuse, and yet you want to leave the children amongst those who did this harm, where the most probable outcome (regardless of the ‘well-meaning chats’ from ‘professionals’) is that they will be taught to do the same to their children in turn.

          You’ll be defending the chopping off hands of thieves next.

          • Pontius Jack

            I’m sure you mean well in your confused non-Apostolic Successive state, but you clearly can’t appreciate that this is not an issue of black and white, but rather of greys. I can refer you to the relevant sections of the Magisterium if you like.

          • IrishNeanderthal

            But is that HJ, or a mimetic troll?

          • CliveM

            It’s 1642 not HJ.

          • Dominic Stockford

            Is it? I shall go into a cupboard where my head quietly explodes with confusion. When I come out I expect everyone to be using their own names, and get rid of the ridiculous nicknames they use!

        • Anton

          Dear 164*,
          I’m continuing the dialogue with Jack about this below – please see my comment that mentions Kafka, and subsequently.

  • CliveM

    Reading the below comments I think some people aren’t clear in their own minds whether they want to stop FGM, or punish it from happening or simply ensure it doesn’t happen here and wash our hands of the problem.

    If people are sincerely concerned about this issue then the first has to be the priority. Frankly shipping them out, even if you separate them from their daughters won’t resolve the problem. It simply ships it elsewhere.

    Blood curdling punishments may also sound very muscular, but frankly proposing them is grandstanding. Hanging, mutilation, amputation or whatever are not going to happen, however attractive they may appear.

    I would certainly advocate a more proactive approach, with a greater number of prosecutions, but as HJ and Sarky both talk from experience, their views need to be listened to.

    Personally I would target the father, as it is reasonable to assume he will be the main decision maker. That would also ensure that the daughter still has the mother for emotional security.

    Long prison sentences for the fathers, the loss of any children (particularly the boys as that will hurt the most) and education, may just produce the pressure to change.

    • IrishNeanderthal

      Now we’re getting somewhere.

    • Anton

      Respectfully, Clive, I disagree that If people are sincerely concerned about this issue then the first has to be the priority. Frankly shipping them out, even if you separate them from their daughters won’t resolve the problem. It simply ships it elsewhere. Shipping a few of them out will deter many others who remain here.

      • CliveM

        I’m more than happy that people disagree with me!

        I’m not convinced however. I think targeting the main decision maker and causing real cost to them will be more quickly effective.

    • Suburbanbanshee

      Mothers and grandmothers usually do the FGM and insist on it. They had it done to them, so who is the daughter to be spared? (Footbinding persisted by women enforcing it, too.) This is not to say that fathers and other male relatives are not part of it, but mothers certainly will not tend to keep their daughters safe.

    • Jon of GSG

      Yes indeed! It strikes me, reading the comments below (or the small fraction I can wade through) that HJ is in a tiny minority in even taking the welfare of the child seriously. I daresay everyone else does, but they hide it well and don’t seem to think it’s worth discussing how the welfare of already damaged children is balanced against the rule of law (and the rights of future children) as opposed to just punishing the perpetrator regardless of anything else and thinking that’s the matter fully dealt with.
      I can’t say I completely know what I think the right answer is, but I do know that no-one I’ve read below seems to have any direct counter to what HJ says in terms of the welfare of the mutilated children, despite all the self-righteousness sloshing around. The general tone almost makes me expect to read the phrase “collateral damage” in relation to them.
      Your idea of targeting the main decision-maker sounds to my untutored mind a very sensible avenue to go down, taking both the welfare of the child and the rule of law seriously – if it can be done. What, though, if FGM is such an expected course of action that no main decision-maker can be identified?

  • Anton

    Here is the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003:

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/31/pdfs/ukpga_20030031_en.pdf

  • WimsThePhoenix

    What about the best interests of FUTURE muslim children? WHERE is the deterrent?

    Why prosecute a parent for murdering a child? It’s not in THAT child’s “best interests”…

    • Anton

      Please scroll down for an extensive and at times heated discussion between several of us and a retired gentleman who used to work in social services and took the line that you rightly deplore.

  • WimsThePhoenix

    Where is the feminist outrage?

    • Anton

      Ask Germaine Greer, she disgracefully condoned FGM in the name of multiculturalism some years ago (as mentioned in her Wikipedia entry).