Sunday, 31 October 2010
Nov 1, 2010
MUMBAI: Melody queen Asha Bhosle is 77 now. When she was still in her teens, she and her two children including son Hemant, then a toddler, were left penniless and homeless by husband Ganpat Bhosle who illtreated her.
Almost 60 years later, one of her daughters-in-law Sajidah aka Rama Bhosle, who is 58 now, says she is facing a similar situation.
Sajidah moved the family court in Bandra alleging that her 61-year-old husband Hemant Bhosle has "ill-treated" her "since the inception" of their marriage in 1985. She wants a divorce from him on grounds of cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act. "He humiliated and finally deserted me in 2003," says her petition. Sajidah has made no allegations against her mother-in-law though.
Sajidah retired as an airhostess from Air India last year. She had converted to Hinduism to marry Hemant. It was her first marriage and his second. Alleging that he left her to fend for herself on her meager pension, she is now seeking a monthly interim maintenance of Rs 5 lakh.
Gay rights laws are 'a danger to our freedoms': Bishops speak out after Christian couple barred from fostering children because of their views on homosexuality go to court in UK
31st October 2010
Gay rights laws are eroding Christianity and stifling free speech, Church of England bishops warned yesterday.
Senior clerics, including former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, spoke out ahead of a High Court ‘clash of rights’ hearing over whether Christians are fit to foster or adopt children.
The test case starting today involves a couple who say they have been barred from fostering because they refuse to give up their religious belief that homosexuality is unacceptable.
Supporters hope their legal challenge will set a precedent for the rights of Christians to foster children without compromising their faith.
But senior bishops fear that if the ruling goes against them, it could have devastating consequences for those with religious beliefs.
Either way, they believe the case will determine whether Christians can continue to express their beliefs in this country.
In an open letter, they warned that Labour’s equality laws put homosexual rights over those of others, ‘even though the Office for National Statistics has subsequently shown homosexuals to be just one in 66 of the population’.
The letter is signed by Lord Carey, the Bishop of Winchester Rt Rev Michael Scott-Joynt, the Bishop of Chester Rt Rev Peter Forster, and Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester.
They wrote: ‘The High Court is to be asked to rule on whether Christians are “fit people” to adopt or foster children – or whether they will be excluded, regardless of the needs of children, from doing so because of the requirements of homosexual rights.
‘Research clearly establishes that children flourish best in a family with both a mother and father in a committed relationship.
‘The supporters of homosexual rights cannot be allowed to suppress all disagreement or disapproval, and “coerce silence”.’
The couple in the High Court test case, Eunice and Owen Johns, said Derby City Council’s fostering panel rejected them as carers because they would never tell children a homosexual lifestyle was acceptable.
Mrs Johns said: ‘The council said: “Do you know, you would have to tell them that it’s OK to be homosexual?”
‘But I said I couldn’t do that because my Christian beliefs won’t let me. Morally, I couldn’t do that. Spiritually I couldn’t do that.’
The Pentecostal Christian couple from Derby, who have fostered almost 20 children, are not homophobic, according to the Christian Legal Centre, which has taken up their case.
But they are against sex before marriage and do not recognise as marriage civil partnerships between gay couples.
Their beliefs are at odds with Derby City Council’s equality policy, which was drawn up under the terms of the Sexual Orientation Act brought in by Labour.
The Christian Legal Centre, which campaigns for religious freedoms, said in a statement: ‘The case will decide whether the Johns will be able to foster without compromising their beliefs.
‘The implications are huge. It is no exaggeration to say that the future of Christian foster carers and adoptive parents hangs in the balance.
‘It may not be long before local authorities decide that Christians cannot look after some of the most vulnerable children in our society, simply because they disapprove of homosexuality.’
However Ben Summerskill, chief executive of gay rights charity Stonewall, said: ‘Too often in fostering cases nowadays it’s forgotten that it is the interests of a child, and not the prejudices of a parent, that matter.
‘Many Christian parents of gay children will be shocked at Mr and Mrs Johns’s views, which are more redolent of the 19th century than the 21st.’
The case is due to be heard in the High Court sitting at Nottingham Crown Court.
Thursday, 28 October 2010
Men’s Rights Organisations hail Supreme Court’s Landmark judgment against maintenance to live-in partners and say, “Men are not Economic Slaves”.
Oct 28, 2010
MUMBAI: An hour after the police pressed murder charges against Deepika Parmar (26), accused of flinging her girl child to death from a bathroom window in KEM Hospital, Deepika looked indifferent to the scores of prying eyes as she sat in the corridor of the city's busiest hospital guarded by a woman constable. Earlier, she had only been charged with abandoning a baby in an infectious environment.
Bhoiwada police officials on Wednesday confirmed that she has been booked for murder. The intention behind the act, though, is still hazy. "Her statement says that she was fed up of seeing her child suffer so much," said Vikram Patil, senior inspector of Bhoiwada police station. He said that the possibility of female infanticide was still being probed though it "seemed unlikely".
Deepika's distraught father-in-law Chandulal said financial hardship could have driven her to throw the baby and not any dislike for a girl child. "We wanted a girl as much as a boy. The baby was like our ghar ka lakshmi ," he said. minutes after finishing the final rites of his grandchild. He recollected how He said that the couple had a girl child about five years, but she succumbed to a congenital heart defect within four days of birth. " She had a hole in her heart. Though her chances of survival were bleak, we admitted her to the Nair Hospital and did everything possible to save her," he said. The Parmars also had a boy a few years back but he too did not survive for more than a day.
Interestingly, after lot of probing, Chandulal did admit that Deepika suffered from bouts of 'unexplained anger' at times. "We never took it seriously as there was nothing unusual," he said. as there was nothing unusual," he said. His daughter-in-law apparently did not show any signs of depression or change in behaviour during pregnancy or post delivery. But, questions on why she could have possibly done it drew blank answers. "We haven't spoken much after the incident. She has been crying constantly and has refused to eat anything since yesterday," he said. Nurses too said Deepika was not breastfeeding the boy child as she was not lactating. "She also has a sleep disorder," a nurse said
The family is also worried about the financial burden. "So far, we have borrowed more than Rs 1.5 lakh from our friends and neighbours. We were planning to mortgage our house in Dahisar to fund the treatment of my two grandchildren," he said. The family had spent around Rs 10,000 per day to treat the premature twins in a private nursing home in Borivli after their breathing problems persisted.
Deepika's husband Manish was in the dark about why she committed the act. A family member said that Manish was so scared of the police and the ensuing legal action on his wife that he had run away to Surat on Tuesday night. "He came back only when the police threatened to arrest his parents," a relative said
A team of psychiatrists from the hospital who evaluated Deepika remained dissatisfied with her answers. "She drew a blank whenever we questioned her about the incident and insisted that she remembered nothing about throwing any baby," said head of psychological medicine Dr Shubhangi Parkar.
Her neighbours at Shetty Chawl in Dahisar (east) said that the Parmars did not socialize much. "They were blessed with twins after five long years," said Sunanda Shetty, owner of Shetty Chawl, where the couple lives.
Wednesday, 27 October 2010
Several Bangaloreans welcome the SC judgment against maintenance for women in live-in relationships, say it’s high time government amended the Domestic Violence Act
October 28, 2010
Men’s rights groups in the city have welcomed the recent supreme court judgment that women in live-in relationships cannot demand maintenance from their male partners. They have also come out against additional solicitor general Indira Jaisingh who has criticised the judgment.
Kumar V Jahgirdar, a social activist fighting for gender-neutral laws and family harmony, said, “I welcome the supreme court judgment. The concept of women demanding money from men to maintain their lifestyles is completely unacceptable in this era. Men are not economic slaves that they have to keep giving money and gifts every month to concubines and part-time lovers for decades or their whole life even after the end of the relationship.”
Virag Dhulia, liaison officer (India) for the National Coalition for Men (NCFM), said, “It is outrageous that Indira Jaisingh argues in a non-government case and demands that a man pays Rs 500 every month to one of his sexual partners for many decades in future just like a free ATM machine. Given a chance, she can also push courts to order men to pay maintenance to their female colleagues at work, citing some imaginary office romance. We are heading towards a society where women are independent and men are no longer treated as free ATM machines.”
“Today, sexual relationships between men and women are mostly mutual. Lawmakers must put an end to this practice of maintenance, alimony and compensation to women just due to some mutual sexual or emotional relationships for short or long periods of time,” says Jahgirdar.
Women welcome judgment
Some women have welcomed the supreme court judgment which went against the Domestic Violence Act 2005. Roshni Mathan Pereira, family counsellor and mediator at Children’s Rights Initiative For Shared Parenting (CRISP), said, “The Domestic Violence Act is very biased. It does not include the role of husbands and children within the framework of a family. It reads like a set of rules on how to break a marriage. Jaisingh, who is one of the architects of the Act, does not look into the importance and role of the women in the family.
“The Act deals with jargon like concubine and is more worried about such women than the wife. It is not pro-family. The act has become a magic wand in the hands of dominatrix wives who misuse it to break their families because of their own intolerance and manipulations leading to alternative character roles like live-ins, keeps, concubines and spouse thieves.
Though the supreme court has said it is not for them to legislate or amend the law, the government should revamp the act as soon as possible.”
Letter to Rajya Sabha
The Save Indian Family Foundation has also come out against the Act. In a letter to the Rajya Sabha secretariat, it has called for its amendment, saying, “Although the name of the act is Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, almost all the cases are filed only by wives or daughters-in-law. The foundation has called for making the Act ‘gender neutral’, rewriting sections and punishing false complainants.
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
The mother of Austrian Natascha Kampusch, who was held in a dungeon for more than eight years before escaping, has been accused of masterminding her ordeal.
Retired judge Martin Wabl told the State Court in Graz, Austria, that Ms Kampusch's mother Brigitte Sirny hatched the plot with Wolfgang Priklopil, the Daily Mail reported.
Priklopil held Ms Kampusch captive and committed suicide hours after she escaped in 2006.
Mr Wabl said Mrs Sirny had wanted to cover up the sexual abuse of her daughter when she was ten.
He made similar allegations after Ms Kampusch's disappearance in 1998 but was fined for defamation, the paper said. He had now returned to court to have his criminal record erased.
Witnesses told the court Mrs Sirny had known Priklopil well with one saying she often hit her daughter.
Neighbour Anneliese Glaser, who also worked at a delicatessen owned by Mrs Sirny, said Mrs Sirny had little time for her daughter, the paper said.
"I never saw her abuse the child but she would come to me often and the red fingerprints of Sirny would be clearly visible in her face where she hit her," she told the court.
"When Natascha resurfaced in 2006, I saw the picture of Priklopil and I recognised him instantly. He was at her shop with another man when I was there repairing the electrics."
Ms Kampusch disappeared on her way to school in March 1998.
Shortly after her disappearance, a Vienna newspaper published photographs found in Mrs Sirny's flat that showed Ms Kampusch wearing lipstick and riding boots, brandishing a whip and showing her private parts.
Mrs Sirny dismissed the photographs as "harmless horseplay", although a psychiatrist described them as "highly sexually charged and taken for the sexual delectation of the person behind the camera" , the paper said.
No charges were ever brought against Mrs Sirny.
Ms Kampusch testified for 30 minutes in a closed courtroom due to the sexual nature of the evidence. She refused to answer questions from reporters outside the court, the paper said.
Judge Juergen Schweiger has said she was not sexually abused as a child. He will deliver a written verdict in a fortnight, the paper said.
Four years ago, Natascha Kampusch shocked the world when, after being held captive for 3,096 days, she showed empathy with her kidnapper. It was the only way she could have escaped, she says
11 September 2010
It is a freezing late-August afternoon in a not particularly Mozartian part of Vienna. Natascha Kampusch stands before me in her agent's office, shaking my hand. To her left is her agent, Wolfgang Brunner, to her right her translator, Jill Kreuer. Her mouth is very firmly shut, her lips squeezed hard together. I notice a small, discoloured patch of skin on her hand, a wound from a beating that will never completely heal.
"Thank you for meeting me," I say.
She nods, still keeping her mouth tightly closed.
Twelve years ago, when Natascha was 10, she was walking to school (it was the very first occasion her mother had allowed her to walk alone) when she noticed a man standing by a delivery van. He looked neat, conservative. As she passed, he grabbed her and threw her in.
Eight years later, in August 2006, Natascha miraculously reappeared, running terrified through the Vienna suburbs, pale and gaunt, like a beautiful child from a Brothers' Grimm fairytale, having escaped the clutches of the monster. An astonished, infatuated public awaited her first words. They turned out to be complicated and unsettling and not fairytale-like at all.
"I mourn for him," she said of her kidnapper Wolfgang Priklopil.
The admiration turned to disgust and confusion and she began getting hate mail.
And so she has now written a memoir, 3,096 Days, explaining everything. It is a brilliantly insightful dissection of her years in captivity. She's agreed to talk to me about it. But, unnervingly, her mouth is still tightly closed. I glance anxiously at it. Have I flown to Vienna to meet a woman who is psychologically incapable of speaking? And then, to my relief, she says, "Hello."
"Do you find this hard?" I ask her.
"It's difficult," she says.
"Then why do you do it?"
"I want to reclaim the interpretation of my own story," she says.
Natascha Kampusch was born in a council estate on the edge of Vienna. "I was used to dealing with disturbed people," she says. "There were people in the neighbourhood who were alcoholics, some were mentally disturbed. They liked to talk about conspiracy theories. They had failed at life."
Her divorced parents would slap and insult her. By the age of 10 she was a compulsive eater, depressed and lonely. In fact, her last moments of freedom were spent fantasising about suicide. She would throw herself in front of a car and then her mother would be sorry. That was what she was daydreaming about as she walked in the direction of the man standing by the delivery van.
"How do your parents feel about the memoir?" I ask her. "You're quite honest about their cruelty."
There's a small pause. "They haven't read it yet," she says. Still, she adds, she hopes 3,096 Days will dispel the impression people have "that my mother was a very brutal person and that I had a better time of it in the dungeon." However hard her mother was, she was nothing like Priklopil.
Her first words to her kidnapper as she lay in the van: "What size shoes do you wear?"
"What was his shoe size?" she says. "How old was he? Was he married with children? Why didn't he have children? I fired these questions at him."
"Why?" I ask.
"I knew from watching Aktenzeichen XY… ungelöst [Austria's version of Crimewatch] that you must get as much information about a criminal as possible." She smiles, remembering her naivety with fondness.
He drove her to his home in a prosperous suburb called Strasshof and carried her into a tiny cellar room he'd evidently spent a long time preparing. It was beneath a trapdoor in the garage, down some stairs, through a hollowed-out concrete wall hidden on the other side of a small metal hatch concealed behind a cupboard. It was so clandestine and fortified, it took an hour to get inside. It was five by five metres, bare, soundproofed, windowless and filled with the constant irritating rattle of a plastic ventilator fan.
He made to take away her schoolbag. When she asked if she could hold onto it, Priklopil's response was startling. "You could have hidden a transmitter," he said, "and you could use it to call for help."
It was a strange and paranoid statement – 10-year-olds tend not to hide transmitters in their schoolbags. But still, she says, "I was used to grown-ups doing and saying strange things I didn't understand."
She asked him to tuck her in, read her a story and give her a goodnight kiss. All of which he cheerfully did.
In the beginning, their relationship was relatively uncomplicated. Or as uncomplicated as things can be when one half of the duo is locked in a dungeon and the other has to keep the whole convoluted setup a secret from the outside world, including his mother and his best friend, Ernst Holzapfel, both of whom regularly visited the house. He brought her fancy croissants and expensive toys, like train sets. As a coping mechanism, she says, she regressed psychologically to the age of a dependent toddler.
But then things started to get odder. His gifts to her became less thoughtful. "He began giving me presents like mouthwash and scotch tape," she says. "Still, I was very happy to get those presents. I was happy to get any present, even if it was orange juice."
He told her he was an Egyptian god and she decided that the easiest thing to do would be to go along with it.
"In situations when I was being bathed," she says, "I pictured myself being at a spa. When he gave me something to eat, I imagined him as a gentleman, that he was doing all this for me to be gentlemanly. Serving me." She pauses. "I thought it was very humiliating to be in that situation."
By her early-teenage years, she found being a compliant character in his psychotic delusions more difficult, so began fighting back with small acts of rebellion. She adamantly refused, for instance, to call him "Maestro". It was a weirdness too far.
"I thought it was ridiculous and silly," she says. "But I recognised similar behaviour from preschool. One child would say, 'I'm the ruler. I'm the king.' Or, 'I'm a princess. You have to listen to me, you have to do as I say.' This was a similar kind of megalomania."
And so now it was Priklopil's turn to adapt to a new situation. His captive was no longer a docile plaything. Unfortunately, he decided the solution was to break her completely and then remould her.
"He wanted to show more and more that he was stronger than I was, that I was someone who had to obey without question."
He began persistently and violently beating her up, denying her food, keeping her in darkness for long stretches, and on and on. He constructed an intercom so he could lie awake all night yelling insults at her from his bedroom upstairs. He had trained as an engineer at Siemens, hence his technical abilities.
"When we ate together, he always allowed himself a much bigger portion," she says. "I saw that I had no rights. Also, he began to see me as a person who could do a lot of hard manual labour."
He started bringing her upstairs to clean his house. She had to do this half naked, her gaze lowered. She was only allowed to speak when spoken to, or he'd beat her up. She writes in 3,096 Days that the one thing she won't discuss is the sexual abuse, but that it was minor, and even when he began manacling her to his bed all he wanted to do was cuddle.
She puts her survival down to a moment that occurred when she was 12. There being no sane, solid adults in her life, she decided to become her own adult. Her 18-year-old self appeared to her in a vivid vision. She told her, "I will get you out of here, I promise you. Right now you are too small. But when you turn 18 I will overpower the kidnapper and free you from your prison."
The beatings continued over the next six years. Sometimes the only way to avert them was to repeatedly, almost mockingly, punch herself in the face, until he begged her to stop. There were suicide attempts, too. She tried to slit her wrists with a knitting needle when she was 14. But there were also moments of warmth. Sometimes he would apologise to her, buy her gifts, tell her his dreams of their life together.
"I think he really trusted me," she says. "He was able to communicate with me, to act out his illness. I think he wanted to create his own little perfect world with a person who could be there just for him."
His vision was for her to be a kind of beautiful Aryan servant and adoring companion. He told her the Jews were responsible for 9/11, he dyed her hair blonde and – after convincing her that any escape attempt would mean death for her and him and scores of bystanders – he took her skiing. The Aryan girl skiing down a hill at his side, "like Leni Riefenstahl had been the director of the film", she laughs.
In fact, he took her on 13 day trips in all, to a chemist, a hardware store, but mostly to empty rental flats he was renovating for his friend, Ernst Holzapfel. He made her do the manual work. She was too scared to run away, to say anything to the various strangers she encountered – the chemist, the policeman who stopped the car at a roadblock.
Then she turned 18. And when she did she looked at him and said, "You have brought a situation upon us in which only one of us can make it through alive. I really am grateful to you for not killing me and for taking such good care of me. That is very nice of you. But you can't force me to stay with you. I am my own person with my own needs. This situation must come to an end."
She closed her eyes expecting a beating, but it didn't come. Instead, she opened them to see him looking sad, defeated.
"I think he understood that I was at the end of my strength," she says. "He had brought me to the brink, I had no energy left, but in a way that empowered me. He had nothing to counter it with."
And then, a few weeks later, he left her alone in the garden for a moment while he took a telephone call, and she just walked out of the gate.
Then she started running, frantically. She pleaded with passers-by to help her, but they ignored her. Finally she found someone who was willing to call the police.
"Do you think he'd resigned himself to you escaping?" I ask.
"It's possible he saw it coming," she says. "It's possible he wished it would happen."
Of course it must have all become a terrible burden for him: the stress of keeping a secret slave. He went to his friend Ernst Holzapfel. They drove around Vienna for three hours and he confessed everything. "I am a kidnapper and a rapist," he told him.
And then Holzapfel let him out of the car and Priklopil lay down on some railway tracks, until a train ran over his head.
At first Natascha was inundated with offers of help, albeit sometimes odd ones: "You could live with me and help with the housework. I'm offering board, wages and lodging. Although I'm married, I'm sure we'll find an arrangement," wrote one.
But the offers stopped, she says, when she refused to play the role of a victim – a weak girl in need of help – and instead tried to explain to interviewers the nuances of their relationship. That wasn't the story people wanted to hear, so they dismissed her as suffering from Stockholm Syndrome – a label intended, she says, to deny her the ability to judge her own experiences.
"I find it very natural that you would adapt yourself to identify with your kidnapper," she says. "Especially if you spend a great deal of time with that person. It's about empathy, communication. Looking for normality within the framework of a crime is not a syndrome. It is a survival strategy." She pauses. "But people get annoyed when I say this. Some say I should be locked up again, that it isn't really special to have been locked up like that, that I liked it, that it was good for me."
Natascha has bought the Strasshof house to prevent it from becoming a shrine for crazy fans. She says she finds her sort of fame "bothersome and disturbing. I knew, when I was in the dungeon, that the story would make me famous, but I thought it would be a more positive experience, like winning the Olympics. You're in the media once, people admire you, and then it's over and done with. I never thought I'd meet so many unpleasantly curious people who refuse to keep their distance from me, who are uneducated. I have many personal complexes as well, so being such a well-recognised figure just adds to that."
"What kind of complexes?" I ask.
"Insecurities. Why are people staring at me so strangely and treating me so weirdly? And then I remember, oh yeah. People recognise me."
For a while she, unexpectedly, became a TV chatshow host. "I always wanted to interview people," she says. "When I was imprisoned, I listened to the radio and I admired the interviewers." She pauses and smiles. "And I have certainly learned how to engage with people one on one. I was forced to listen to him, which I think was very positive, because a lot of people my age are not good at listening."
"It must have been a good lesson in human nature," I say. "So are you going to be a journalist?"
"A psychologist," she replies. "Although before I do that I would like to learn two trades: goldsmith and shoemaker."
"Everything a girl wants," says her agent from across the table.
I ask if she gets flashbacks. She shrugs. "I don't forget it, but right now it's not important. I want to live in the now. But sometimes, yes, I have flashbacks."
"What brings them on?"
"When I've been troubled by a situation where somebody acts in a similar way. Like in my private life. I see men put women down and act possessively towards them. I get flashbacks when people try to make me eat something when I'm not hungry. In the dungeon, food was withheld from me, but when they do the opposite it robs me of my dignity."
Does she tell them, "You're acting like the kidnapper"?
"Sometimes," she says.
Does that make them back away?
"Yes," she smiles.
And now there's the memoir. Did trying to get inside his head help her psychologically?
"I like to do it very much," she replies. "In fact, I probably like to do it too much, which is why I've gone back to a therapist. I like to put myself in people's shoes and try to feel what they feel. For instance, if I'm in love with someone, I constantly think, 'Why did he say it that way? Did he mean it that way? What happened in his childhood? Why is he acting that way?'"
"But, of course, in your kidnapper's case, you're trying to get inside a head that's completely jumbled and disordered," I say.
"But he trusted me. He was able to open himself up to me and show me his ideas and visions, even though they were sick visions and ideas."
She pauses. "I don't want to engage in talk-show psychology, but I think it all happened because he was too conservative on the outside, too well-adjusted and conformist, and I think that's why he committed the crime. He had this border between what was permitted by society and what his personal desires were, and he was unable to reconcile the two."
And then – tired of talking about it all – she plays everyone in the room a song on her iPhone and sprays some of her new perfume in the air.
Necromancy in the Bible
In the Bible necromancy is mentioned chiefly in order to forbid it or to reprove those who have recourse to it.
The Hebrew term 'ôbôth (sing., 'ôbh) denotes primarily the spirits of the dead, or "pythons", as the Vulgate calls them (Deuteronomy 18:11; Isaiah 19:3), who were consulted in order to learn the future (Deuteronomy 18:10, 11; 1 Samuel 28:8), and gave their answers through certain persons in whom they resided (Leviticus 20:27; 1 Samuel 28:7), but is also applied to the persons themselves who were supposed to foretell events under the guidance of these "divining" or "pythonic" spirits (Leviticus 20:6; 1 Samuel 28:3, 9; Isaiah 19:3).
The best known case of necromancy in the Bible is the evocation of the soul of Samuel at Endor (1 Samuel 28). King Saul was at war with the Philistines, whose army had gathered near that of Israel. He "was afraid and his heart was very much dismayed. And he consulted the Lord, and he answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by priests, nor by prophets" (5, 6). Then he went to Endor, to a woman who had "a divining spirit", and persuaded her to call the soul of Samuel. The woman alone saw the prophet, and Saul recognized him from the description she gave of him. But Saul himself spoke and heard the prediction that, as the Lord had abandoned him on account of his disobedience, he would be defeated and killed.
Monday, 25 October 2010
25th October 2010
A baby died when family of 12 leaped from their second floor balcony in France claiming they were fleeing the devil yesterday morning.
Eight more people were injured, some seriously, in the bizarre tragedy when they jumped 20ft in to a car park in Paris suburb of La Verriere.
The incident occurred when when a wife woke to see her husband moving about naked in the room, police said.
She began screaming 'it's the devil! it's the devil!', and the man ran into the other room where 11 others adults and children watching television.
One woman grabbed a knife and stabbed the man before other family members pushed him out through the front door.
When the man forced his way back in, they all began screamed in terror and leapt from the balcony screaming 'Jesus! Jesus!'
The naked man also leapt from the balcony after them, detectives said.
A four-month old baby died in his mother's arms, while a two-year-old was critically injured.
Police said they had found no evidence of hallucinogenic drugs being used or any signs of unusual religious rituals.
Versailles assistant prosecutor Odile Faivre said: 'The incident happened in the early hours of Sunday when a group of 11 people were watching television in an apartment.
'A wife in the next room saw her husband moving around naked and began screaming that he was the devil.
'In the confusion following this apparent case of mistaken identity, the naked man's sister-in-law stabbed him in the hand and he was ejected through the front door of the flat.
'When he attempted to get back in, panic erupted and the other occupants of the flat fled by jumping out of the window.
'A baby died and seven of those who jumped were taken to hospital, some with multiple injuries.
'A number of points surrounding this incident remain to be cleared up.'
When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee.
25th October 2010
The wife of Robert Mugabe has been having a secret affair with one of her husband’s best friends, it was claimed yesterday.
Grace Mugabe – who is 41 years younger than Zimbabwe’s 86-year-old president – has spent the past five years cuckolding him with Gideon Gono, head of the country’s central bank.
The couple would meet as often as three times a month either at her dairy farm or in expensive hotels in neighbouring South Africa.
Mugabe finally found out about the affair in July when his sister Sabina revealed the scandal on her deathbed,
it was reported.
Since then his most-trusted bodyguard Cain Chademana – who is said to have told the furious president that he knew of the affair but thought it best to keep quiet – has lost his life amid suspicions that he was poisoned.
Gono, 50, is now said to fear for his safety. ‘Once he (Mugabe) hears something like that, I think someone will go to meet God,’ said one Zimbabwean intelligence official.
It is not the first time Mrs Mugabe, who is widely reviled inside Zimbabwe for her lavish tastes and expensive shopping sprees, has conducted affairs behind her husband’s back.
One former lover, Peter Pamire, died in a mysterious car accident. Another, James Makamba, fled the country.
Gono has known Mrs Mugabe, who married the president in 1996, for at least 15 years and they are partners in a number of business enterprises.
He is a pillar of the Zanu PF party that has held on to power in Zimbabwe since its 1980 independence from Britain.
As one of Mugabe’s most trusted friends, he has served since 2003 as head of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe – a period that saw the country’s currency suffer hyperinflation of more than a billion per cent a year.
While many of Zimbabwe’s desperately poor people struggle to find enough food to eat, Gono lives in a 47-bedroom mansion with swimming pool, gym and its own mini theatre.
Yesterday a source close to the banker confirmed that he and the first lady were lovers and claimed they had planned a life together after Mugabe’s death.
The senior official in Gono’s office told South Africa’s Sunday Times newspaper: ‘Mugabe trusted Gono. He even thought our boss was taking care of the first lady, keeping a protective eye on her so that she could not again be adulterous.’
Mugabe’s relationship with Grace, his former secretary, is itself founded on infidelity.
Two of their three children were born when Mugabe was still married to his popular first wife, Sally, who was battling a kidney disease from which she died in 1992.
Saturday, 23 October 2010
Twilight star Robert Pattinson is related to Vlad the Impaler (blood-thirsty Romanian ruler who inspired Vampire Dracula legend)
For the legions of fans who have swooned over his pale skin and ghostly pallor, it might not come as such a surprise:
Robert Pattinson, star of the wildly successful teen bloodsucker series Twilight, is related to a real-life vampire.
OK, that’s stretching it a bit far, but after trawling through thousands of records, genealogists at Ancestry.co.uk have concluded that the 24- year-old actor is a distant relative of 15th-century Romanian ruler Vlad III — aka Vlad the Impaler.
Fast-forward 113 years and Twilight has become one of the most successful franchises on the planet, due in no small part to Pattinson’s portrayal of Edward Cullen, a chivalrous vampire who falls in love with a human girl.
Fortunately, that’s where the similarities end, unless the British actor secretly executes his enemies by thrusting wooden stakes through their bodies, which was Vlad’s favourite past-time in the 15th century.
Legend has it that he also liked to skin the feet of rebels, coat them in salt and let goats lick it off.
‘Without any myth or magic, we find vampires and royalty lurking in Pattinson’s life — making his story just as supernatural as the one he’s playing on screen,’ says genealogist Anastasia Tyler.
The researchers also discovered that Prince Harry and Prince William are Pattinson’s distant cousins on Prince Charles’s side, through a Yorkshire family called the Pickerings in the 1500s. Of course, that means that Vlad the Impaler is also their distant relative.
Is it time to start putting garlic in the State banquets?
Protest against misuse of Domestic Violence Act
23 Oct 2010
BANGALORE: Two non-governmental organisations — Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF) and Children Rights Initiative for Shared Parenting (CRISP) — will hold a protest in the city against the misuse of the Domestic Violence Act on Saturday.
Founder of CRISP Kumar Jahgirdar, who was earlier married to Chetana Kumble, who is now married to cricketer Anil Kumble, said the Act violated human rights.
“The Act is a tool misused by the cosmopolitan and misguided wives who want to avenge themselves on their husbands and in-laws if their demands are not fulfilled,” said Jahgirdar.
“We decided to hold a protest in Bangalore demanding amendment of the Act.”
In a press release, SIFF has said it demanded that maintenance laws be separated from the domestic violence laws and that maintenance be granted based on the length of marriage and must be gender neutral.
Recently, the High Court ruled that female members of the husband’s family cannot be made party in a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
The court had held that the Act, which was meant to protecting women, could not be used against women.
Extracts of News-9 Interview with Roshni Mathan: Debate about Cruelty as a Ground for Divorce (Too much Sex as Cruelty)
“Unlike vitamins, there are no daily minimum requirements,”
Fewer than 10 times a year is considered a sexless marriage, having sex once or twice a week is considered average. But, there is no definition for too much Sex.
1Cor 7:3-4 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
1Cor 7:5 Do not refuse one another, unless perhaps it is just for a time and by mutual consent...
News-9 Television conducted a debate about Too much Sex as a ground for Cruelty in a Marriage.
Section 13 of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, provides for dissolution of a Hindu marriage by a decree of divorce on 13 grounds. One of them is cruelty.
Section 27 of The Special Marriage Act, 1954, provides for 12 grounds for divorce. One of them is cruelty.
Section 2 of The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, provides for 8 grounds on which a woman married under the Muslim law is entitled to obtain a decree for dissolution of her Marriage. One of them is cruelty.
Section 32 of The Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936, provides for 11 grounds for divorce. One of them is cruelty.
Section 10 of The Indian Divorce Act, 1869, provides for 7 grounds of dissolution of marriage of Christians. One of them is adultery coupled with cruelty.
The idea, the meaning and the concept of cruelty changes from time to time, varies from place to place and differs from individual to individual. It is not the same for persons situated in different economic conditions and status.
Perhaps this is the reason why the Legislature has not, in any of the Acts, defined as to what cruelty is and has left it to the best judgement of the Judiciary to decide as to what amounts to cruelty to a particular person in a particular set of circumstances.
Out of 100 cases of divorces, in 95 cases, the ground for divorce is cruelty and in the majority of them the cruel conduct complained of is physical violence. However, cases of mental cruelty are also not unknown to our Courts and, at times, complaints are made of a spouse afflicting cruelty upon another, without physical violence, just by his or her conduct of saying something or refraining from doing something.
- humiliating her husband in the presence of family members and friends,
- taunting her husband on his physical incapabilities,
- denying him access to physical relationship,
- coldness and insult,
- deliberately wearing clothes which her husband dislikes,
- purposely cooking food which her husband is not fond of,
- visiting her parent's family off and on against her husband's wishes,
- undergoing an abortion despite her husband asking her not to do so,
- threatening to commit suicide,
- refusing to do household work,
- keeping husband outside the door of house,
- complaining to husband's employer,
all these are not acts of physical violence but yet it has an effect on the husband's mind and due to this, the husband's health suffers and therefore these acts can be termed as cruel.
Similarly, a husband's conduct of:
- humiliating his wife,
- calling her frigid or cold fish, making excessive sexual demands,
- comparing her with the maid servant,
- taunting her for not having any child or giving birth to female children,
- demanding dowry,
- asking her to bring money or articles from her parents,
- objecting to her visiting her parents, insulting her relatives when they visit her,
- deliberately removing all servants and making her do all household work,
- denying any medical treatment when she is ill
are also acts of mental cruelty by the husband upon the wife.
Demand for too much sex is cruel, grounds for divorce: SC
Oct 21, 2010
NEW DELHI: Persistent demand for excessive sex causing injury can be ground for seeking divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Dealing with the undefined term "cruelty" under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which provides grounds for divorce, a Bench comprising Justices P Sathasivam and B S Chauhan said the onus was on the one seeking divorce to prove with evidence that a particular conduct of the other partner had caused him/her cruelty.
The ruling came on a plea by an aggrieved husband.
While dealing with the whole gamut of what can be called "cruelty", entitling a spouse to move court for divorce, the Bench said even a single act of violence which was of grievous and inexcusable nature could fit the definition.
"Persistence in inordinate sexual demands or malpractices by either spouse can be cruelty if it injures the other spouse," said Justice Sathasivam, who wrote the judgment for the Bench.
However, a few isolated instances of cruelty over a certain period of time would not amount to cruelty as married life should be assessed as a whole, the Bench said while rejecting one Gurbux Singh's appeal seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty.
"Making certain statements on the spur of the moment and expressing displeasure about the behaviour of elders may not be characterised as cruelty. Mere trivial irritation, quarrels, normal wear and tear of married life which happens in day to day life in all families would not be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty," the Bench clarified.
Having failed to prove cruel behaviour of his wife, Singh tried to impress the apex court to grant him divorce saying the marriage had broken down irretrievably as he and his wife were living separately since 2002 and there was no chance of their reunion.
The Bench said divorce has to be granted strictly under the grounds provided in Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act though the apex court might have dissolved marriage on account of irretrievable breakdown in one case.
Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) too biased: Four NGO’s come under one fold to hold a protest on October 23rd
All India Daughter Protection Forum
The Domestic Violence Act 2005 was authored by people like SC Advocate Indira Jaising, who are unmarried and not in committed relationships. Unfortunately, they planned the DV Act for Keeps and Concubines, not for Families, Marriages and Spouses.
Roshni Mathan Pereira (AIDPF), Kumar Jahgirdar (Founder CRISP) and Lokesh (CRISP member) in Protest against DV Act 2005 in Bangalore 2010
- Protection for men and children under the domestic violence act
- Suo-moto prosecution for false cases of domestic violence
- Separate the maintenance laws from domestic violence laws, maintenance should be granted based on length of marriage and must be gender neutral
- Trials under the act should be strictly subject to the CPC and the Indian evidence act and criminal suggesting terms like jail, bail etc... be removed from its text
- Create a men’s welfare ministry and child welfare ministry
- Reform the antiquated judiciary and rewrite DV act with limitation clause
- Judiciary must implement RTI Act in right earnest to provide important statistical data
- Responsible, accountable and a credible judiciary - make judiciary accountable for unjust adjudications (which are blatantly violating established law and internationally recognised human rights)!
- Responsible and accountable legislations and governance and police should be kept away form the family matters. Stop counselling in police stations
- Government to appoint and get research report on present family stresses and trivial disputes which are exaggerated
- No immunity and suo-moto prosecution of women filing false cases.
- Reform the NCW which is a PARTISAN WIFE CENTRIC ORGANIZATION. Ensure that NCW takes complaints from elderly women, mothers-in-law and not just wives. Otherwise, CLOSE DOWN THE NCW! They are unfit to redress women’s issues.
- The Domestic Violence Act is a “get rich quick” tool for criminal minded women to USURP husband and in-laws property. In the west, such women are termed “gold diggers”! No in-laws & husband should be forced to leave their own home on domestic violence complaint of daughter-in-law.
- Don’t treat mother-in-law as vamps and restrain TV serials depicting mother-in-law as evil in the society.