Baroness Deech, who is a member of the House of Lords and a professor, has called for greater awareness about the impact of first cousin marriages on children of said unions:

Fifty-five per cent of British Pakistanis are married to first cousins and in Bradford the figure is 75 per cent. British Pakistanis represent 3 per cent of all births in Britain but one third of children with recessive disorders.

The problem is not cousin marriages per se, as one off cousin marriages don’t have much of a genetic impact on children, but rather repeated intermarriage between first cousins:

Lady Deech calls for measures short of a ban to prevent the genetic problems arising from cousin marriage.

She says: “There is no reason, one could argue, why there should not be a campaign to highlight the risks and the preventative measures, every bit as vigorous as those centring on smoking, obesity and Aids.” While there was reluctance to “target or upset Muslims over cousin-marriage issues” the practice was not mandated by religion, only permitted, so it is not at heart a religious issue, she argues.

A campaign of education needs to start in schools so they understand about genetics and what it means to carry a mutant gene.

The Baroness’ suggestions seem sensible, though I am not sure about her plan to test genetic defects in those who have arranged marriages. It makes sense, but how would you differentiate between arranged and love marriages?

The problem is that, like in Europe a few centuries ago, first marriages are still an attractive prospect for families: they help to solidify alliances and keep property within a family. This is an issue that needs to be discussed a great deal more.

I got this highlighted to me while travelling and thought it was worth flagging up. Expose the BNP points out what happened in Bolton and how the media help and aid fascists from the BNP and EDL:

Video on the Bolton News website makes it clear, however, that the violence was not coming from the anti-fascists. It shows an elderly veteran of World War 2 who had joined the protest, and UAF stewards can be heard urging protestors to stay calm in the face of apparent police efforts to provoke a riot.

The Bolton News had a reporter in Victoria Square who described on Twitter how EDL members had broken away from the square to cause violence: “Number of demonstrators intent on causing disorder have broken away from protest site. Large numbers of officers deployed to address.” The journalist saw “missiles flying” as the EDL tried to get out of its enclosure.

The BBC also lets the English Defence League people describe themselves as “a peaceful, non-political group” — which is of course pure rubbish. But this isn’t challenged at all. In the interests of “balance”, UAF spokespeople were not quoted.
Read the full report here

The English Defence League (EDL), which is a far-right group that claims to be anti-extremist but not anti-Muslim, has seen a dozen of its members arrested yet again after a street brawl involving UAF (Unite Against Fascism). UAF are right to oppose the EDL, but too often they just seem to end up in street battles with them, which just hands more ammunition to the EDL and their ilk.

The EDL has tried to cover its tracks in the past by only taking about Islamist extremists in order to garner wider public support, but their imagery and some of their language (including from their leadership) betrays their true feelings, as ordinary Muslims and Asians in general are targeted and insulted.

The EDL seems to be a different beast from the BNP. It is less outwardly hostile to non-whites (and probably is in reality as well, though that is not saying much), and is defined by its Islamaphobia more than anything else. It has no noticeable political ambitions, and would probably struggle to pick off votes that would normally go to the BNP of the National Front.

How best to combat it? Firstly, we need to continue the excellent work done by Richard Bartholomew and others in order to expose their unsavoury links and views: the EDL must not be allowed to become seen as a genuinely anti-extremist group. Their inconsistencies and bigotry needs to be publicised so they can’t get away with their public pronouncements of only being anti-extremist, not anti-Muslim/Asian.

Secondly, continue the protests against it, but don’t under any circumstances get involved in a conflict. Innocent people get hurt and it just makes UAF protestors look like a bunch of thugs to the general public, thus undermining any anti-EDL campaign.

This debate on the 25th March looks interesting:

Class has traditionally shaped the identity in the UK, but does faith now predominate? It is certainly the case that politicians, academics and popular media now focus more on the latter.

This debate raises this pivotal question at a time when the UK public is about to decide on its next government and thus make important choices about who best reflects and appeals to their increasingly complex and diverse senses of identity. At such times, we first need to reflect on who we are and what primarily defines us and drives our choices…

To register, please e-mail rsvp.events[at]britishcouncil.org by 20th March.

Class has certainly played a part in shaping some people’s identities, but, as with so many issues, how do you define it? When does someone move from being working class to middle class, or upper class, or vice versa? What tips the balance- wealth, income, job, connections, location, mentality, race or something else?

I don’t doubt that faith (or rather religion) has re-emerged as a more important issue than it was before. Centuries ago religion was one of the most, if not the most, important issue in this country. Men and women were prepared to die for their beliefs, laws were put in place to both help and hinder religious minorities, and a change in your faith might turn you from a community leader to a community outcast (or, as Alexandra Walsham has shown, it might not). By the end of the 19th century though, religion on the British mainland (i.e. excluding Ireland) mattered a lot less, with the non-conformist test acts repealed and the introduction of Roman Catholic emancipation. The gradual post-war drift away from organised Christian worship merely exacerbated this.

It is only in the last ten years or so that religion has remerged as a really noticeable feature of political debate, thanks in part to terrorism and the influx of people from more religious societies. The internet too has helped to spread information. Yet has this identity become more important than class? Can we generalise? I’m not sure.

You need to book your place today for the debate next week.

(Hat-Tip: Jai and BMSD)

This is a guest post by David Dyke

Why did I set up England Left Forward?

Mainly because I got fed up with the intransigence of the other members of the Left over the issue, and the hypocrisy in allowing three out of the four nations within the Union to have self-government whilst denying the same opportunity to the fourth.

I am English; that is because I was born in England, pure and simple. Like many of my fellow countrymen I take pride in my country, especially as to how the England Football team, Rugby team and Cricket team perform, and the mix of local traditions and culture and communities that make up the country. But I am also on the Left, and to me one of the central tenets of the Left is equality of opportunity. Thus England should have the same opportunity as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – recognition of itself as its own political entity.

When Scotland and Wales gained devolution after New Labour came to power in 1997, I was hoping that eventually, the same due process would be extended to the people of England.

David T of Harry’s Place is being sued by George Galloway and one of Mr. Galloway’s collegues, Kevin Ovenden. They are demanding £50,000 for a comment left on another blog. The comment he made wasn’t nice or correct, but as Richard Bartholomew put it:

The legal threat seems to me to be badly conceived. I’m sure that Galloway and Overden are against the anti-Jewish hadith in Hamas Covenant, but while it’s there anyone who meets a Hamas governmental official risks being tarnished by association. Blame Hamas for that. And of course it’s annoying when a political opponent extrapolates a supposedly logical chain from one’s activities or position to the conclusion that in some deeper “objective” sense one is in fact supporting something else, but that’s life and to be allowed to do it is essential to public debate.

A lot of people have a lot of criticisms to make of David T and Harry’s Place. Fine. However, it is irrelevant in this context. The comment was clearly a joke, and should in no way be the cause of a libel action. Bloggers are only able to operate because of a modicum of freedom of speech, and for every frivolous libel action we fail to stand against, our future as bloggers becomes that bit grimmer.

Action for a Progressive Pakistan carries a post called ‘Left of the Taliban: A critique of the Left from the Left’ which contains an email written in the light of the Amnesty International/Gita Sahgal controversy.  Madiha Tahir gives a particularly thoughtful analysis of Pakistan and Pakistani’s relationship with the Taliban, with a particular focus on Balochistan.  Part of this post is below but the whole piece is well worth reading (More from Madiha Tahir here on video and her website  and blog):

The larger issue, however, is this: why do our so-called allies constantly demand that we articulate our disavowal of the Taliban? Do they perhaps believe that in some deep dark religious corner of our lefty Pakistani hearts, we nurture a secret love for the ruthless brutish bearded circus called the Taliban?  Why are we being constantly asked to prove our bona fides as secularists and as humanists (in the sense that we believe in the dignity of *all* humanity)?  And that too by those who appear to have little qualms about retracting dignity from a man whose words and appearance unsettle us but who has done nothing – in terms of his actions – but run a girls’ school in Afghanistan and, now, defend the rights of precisely those that the American empire has reduced to ‘bare life.’ [1]  Does the problem lie in the fact that he “has championed the rights of jailed Al-Qaeda members and hate preachers…” as the Sunday Times puts it? But isn’t the selective granting of rights precisely what the Left is critical of in general?  Or is it that he stated in his memoirs that the Taliban were “better than anything Afghanistan has had in the past twenty-five years.” Yes, these views are abhorrent, but by no means unique. I heard much the same thing from the Afghans I met when I traveled to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border town of Chaman (in Balochistan) over a month ago.  These were Afghans who all hated the Taliban now (among them were ex-Taliban fighters).  To them, the Taliban had seemed like an answer to the corruption, chaos and random murders that had afflicted Afghanistan for decades when they first rose to power. They left when they realized that this was not the case or that the price they were being asked to pay was too high.  … (more…)

The shadow children’s minister, Tim Loughton, has called for the harsher treatment of children under sixteen who have sex:

‘[It is] against the law to get pregnant at 14. How many kids get prosecuted for having underage sex? Virtually none. ‘Where are the consequences of breaking the law and having irresponsible underage sex? There aren’t any.’

Asked if was advocating more prosecutions, Mr Loughton said: ‘We need to be tougher. Without sounding horribly judgmental, it is not a good idea to be a mum at 14. ‘You are too young, throwing away your childhood and prospects of developing a career.’

This seems like a counterproductive and wrong-headed idea. Better sex education and more males using condoms is the way forward. We have laws in this country that prohibit sex with those under sixteen because we don’t believe they are able to give consent. So what would be the point in prosecuting two, say, fourteen year olds? It won’t stop people doing it, and will just criminalise teenage girls (especially). Note too how the focus of Mr. Loughton’s criticism is on teenage girls, despite the fact that it takes two to tango and plenty of teenage girls suffer sexual-related abuse at the hands of their boyfriends.

It is telling that the only person the Daily Mail quoted in support of the plan is discredited ‘parenting expert’ Patricia Morgan.

Bella Gerens has posted a wonderfully splenetic rant against Ed Balls, the education secretary. Mr. Balls attacked Latin as a ‘useless subject’, presumably as a way to appeal to the Labour left in the battle for supremacy in the party. Mr. Balls’ support for the workers is well known, such as when he claimed £27,000 for his second home (money of course collected from some of the lowest paid in society). Bella laments the crassness of Mr. Balls, and muses on why he attacked her subject:

It would be a pointless waste of time to allow you to observe the teaching of such an elegant and complex subject. Not only would you be incapable of understanding the material, much less appreciating it, the superior knowledge of the students would show you up in a Tennessee heartbeat. Could you even begin to grasp the idea of an ablative absolute, or listen with any light of comprehension in your eyes to a discussion of the sexual puns in a poem by Ovid? Students can. Could you find in your shrivelled soul an inclination to laugh at the comedy of Aristophanes or experience a pang of sympathetic horror at the tribulations of Oedipus? Students can.

It is a light-hearted rant in some senses, but Bella highlights the fact that it is dangerous to judge subjects solely on what some perceive to be their immediate utility to the world of work. The skills required to master a subject like Latin (or classics generally) are valuable. And before anyone asks, my Latin is virtually non-existent and I could never master the subject.

Last weekend the odds shortened from 12/1 to 3/1 on a Papal resignation. This follows revelations from the current scandals being uncovered in Germany (over 300 cases of abuse reported since January) and on Saturday the Vatican was forced to speak to the media. 

The Vatican spokesman said that Pope Benedict XVI was so so sorry:

• for continually reacting to victim’s suffering by accusing them of an evil plan to destroy the Church.  He regrets doing this publically for the last eight years and wishes to express his guilt and sorrow that his actions have allowed children to be abused.  He admits that his only concerns have always been about the image and coffers of the Church.

• for personally allowing a proven sexual predator ‘H’ (identified as Peter Hullerman) to freely access children in Germany for more than 30 years including hisChurch role as a school teacher.  In 1980 Benedict (in his former gig as Archbishop Ratzinger of Munich and Freising) found out that Hullerman had drugged and sexually abused an 11 year old boy.  Benedict can’t believe that he then moved Hullerman onto another lair instead of ensuring he was ‘defrocked’, and accepts full responsibility for the pain and suffering of all the children that Hullerman inevitably went on to sexually abuse.   Hullerman should of course have been turned over to the police.  Benedict promises to rectify the fact that this evil predator Hullerman is still employed by the Church in Germany, and warns of a strange chap called Gerhard Gruber who is trying to take responsibility for Benedict’s gross errors outlined above.  (Hullerman was suspended from his duties as Parish Priest on Monday).  (more…)

Narenda Modi, the chief minister of Gujarat, has been summoned to yet another investigation into the 2002 massacres in the state which he rules. Mr. Modi, who is a member of the BJP, has long escaped any criminal charges for his widely alleged role in the 2002 massacres, where Gujarati authorities were thought to have helped Hindu mobs massacre thousands of Muslims after a train carrying Hindu pilgrims accidently caught on fire, killing fifty of them:

Last year, the court ordered that the role of Mr Modi, a leading member of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), should be investigated, particularly in connection with the murder of Mr Jafri and nine other specific cases.

The court was acting on a petition filed by Mr Jafri’s widow. Narendra Modi is one of more than 60 people who have been named as co-accused. In the past the Supreme Court has criticised the government of Gujarat for failing to protect its Muslim citizens.

Given the lamentable record of bringing important figures to justice for the 1984 massacres of Sikhs to justice however, it seems likely that those involved in co-ordinating the massacre of Muslims in 2002 will continue to remain at large.

This weekend’s polls showed another drop in tory support, further denting Cashcroft’s plans for the Dawn of Dave and making a ‘hung parliament‘ more likely:

The Conservatives (38 per cent) are seven points ahead of Labour (31 per cent) in the ICM survey for The Sunday Telegraph, down from a lead of nine points last month. The Liberal Democrats are up one point to 21 per cent … the Tories would be the largest party in the House of Commons but still 30 seats short of an overall majority.

Research by YouGov for The Sunday Times found the Tories’ lead narrowed from five points to four over the past week.  They were down one point on 37%, while Labour and the Lib Dems were unchanged on 33% and 17% respectively … the results would leave Labour as the largest party with 302 seats, against 277 for the Tories, according to the newspaper. However, no party would have an overall majority.

Nick Clegg has tried to distance himself from ‘the role of kingmaker in a hung parliament, telling the Liberal Democrats’ pre-election conference that the party “could lead the next government” if it upped its share of the vote from one in four to one in three.’ and he and Vince Cable have criticised the Conservative plans to make early cuts to public spending calling this “economic masochism”.

So, what do you think?  Minority government or a coalition government or something else entirely?

Tom Shakespeare in the Guardian highlights the disgraceful abuse of the disabled in today’s society:

Later, I asked several colleagues who work as advocates and supporters of people with intellectual disability about what they knew. They confirmed immediately that harassment was a constant feature of the lives of every person they worked with. They told me about conferences and gatherings where people had shared horrific experiences, which to them were commonplace. People being sellotaped to trees while people laughed, people being urinated on, people who had dog faeces put through their letter boxes, people who were beaten up. Faced with this constant exposure to the risk of abuse and violence, people with intellectual disability remained stoical and uncomplaining. Sometimes they were unable to make a complaint. Often, they were disbelieved, or were not taken seriously as witnesses. In most cases, the police were unwilling or unable to take effective action.

Is this a new phenomenon? Sadly not. For some, people with disabilities, whether mental ones, physical ones or a combination of both, have long been an easy target. That is not to say that everyone with disabilities is weak and incapable of defending themselves. That would be a gross generalisation and patronising. Millions of Britons have some sort of disability, ranging from mild to severe ones.

But some of those with very visible and/or severe disabilities, particularly learning ones, are at great risk. Bullies like to target those they believe are the weakest, and they know the victim could be less likely to come forward for support, whether because they lack a support network or don’t know how to access it.

(Hat-tip: KJB)

Hi all,
just a quick message from the wonderful city of Ho Chi Minh, aka Saigon, where I’ve temporarily stopped by an internet cafe. As you can see, I’m not making a habit of it. HCM City is, to my mind, amazing for its sheer craziness and vitality. I hired out a scooter and have been driving it around everywhere. The thing about the roads here is that there are no rules at all – people regularly ignore traffic lights, cross roads whereever they want, and een drive straight into incoming traffic while expecting others to give way (and people generally do). It’s reckless and crazy but very exhilirating. I’ve not driven into incoming traffic yet but may do so in Hanoi – where I’m headed tonight.

From there it’s a bus to Laos, and then somehow into Burma. After that it’s back to Thailand. Today I spent so long driving in the hot baking sun that I may actually have a tan and look brown. I can’t wait to see Hanoi. Right, I’m off to eat my mango.

Via Madre:

Flashlights & Whistles: Help Guatemalan Women Organizing Against Femicide

In the past decade, nearly 4,000 women and young girls have been murdered in Guatemala. Many of them, including girls as young as 10, were tortured and raped, their bodies left in public places.  As a result, women have coined the term “femicide” to describe these widespread, gender-based killings committed with impunity. Of the 383 women’s murder cases in 2003, more than 300 are still awaiting results from police investigations today.

In response to the murders, women in Guatemala are organizing to protect each other. MADRE’s sister organization, the Women Workers’ Committee in Guatemala, has created neighborhood watch groups in their communities. Sandra Gonzales of the Women Workers’ Committee describes the violence as “getting worse every day.” However, she says “with your help we can continue to defend human rights for all women.” (more…)

[Background here]

A potential BNP applicant has a screening interview with a BNP spokesman over some ironically non-indigenous tea and samosas.

Applicant: “So, how long have you guys been here ?”

BNP spokesman: “‘Guys’ is a foreign American term representing an alien culture and we’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t pollute Britain’s traditional culture and values by using such genocidal words. But to answer your question, we’ve been here since the end of the last Ice Age.”

Applicant: “When was that ?”

BNP: “17,000 years ago.”

Applicant: “The Ice Age actually ended 12-13,000 years ago.”

BNP: “That’s what I said.”

Applicant: “No you didn’t.”

In an amusing judgement today, a court ruled that the BNP was still discriminating against ethnic minorities who wish to join the BNP after their new rules were rejected:

[The BNP] said members had to sign up to maintaining the “integrity of the indigenous British” and be interviewed for up to two hours by BNP officials.

So to join the BNP you have to agree to have two party members (perhaps Lee John Barnes and a mystery guest) come round and grill you. I can imagine it now:

White bigot 1: “Are you a racist?”

Non-white bigot: “Yes I’m a racist.”

White bigot 2: “Are you sure you are a racist?”

Non-white bigot: “Bugger off whitey.”

White bigot 2 (turns to white bigot 1) “Does that mean we can let him join?”

…

And so on.

The Maurice Smith Review, charged with carrying out ‘a full and detailed review of the provisions which prevent the promotion of racism in schools’  has reported back to Government and it’s findings have been accepted by Ed Balls in full.  Apparently the review was so full and detailed that the investigations  included a meeting with a National Front press officer, as reported by the Daily Mail. 

The DCSF press release * about the report outlines six recommendations made by Smith including monitoring by Ofsted and annual Government review states:

The current safeguards in place to protect children and young people in maintained schools from discrimination or political indoctrination include:

- a requirement for schools to have equal opportunities policies
- a duty to promote racial equality
- a statutory duty to promote community cohesion
- a duty on governing bodies, head teachers and local authorities to forbid the teaching of partisan political activities
- disciplinary powers of the GTCE

  Maurice Smith adds:

Although police and prison officers are banned, to ban more than half a million teachers – or six million public servants – from joining a legitimate organisation would take this to a different scale of magnitude. Additionally, there is no consensus on this matter, and no agreement on where to ‘draw the line’. [my emphasis] (more…)

On Tuesday evening I attended the UK book launch of Jaswant Singh’s biography of Jinnah, founder of Pakistan. The buzz around the book had been created by the reaction to it in India. One state banned it (no prizes for guessing who runs that state) and Jaswant Singh was expelled from the BJP as a result of writing it, despite being a former defence minister and a current MP.

Mr. Singh’s crime? To have absolved Jinnah from some of the blame for partition and instead criticised Nehru and Vallabhai Patel. Not that this was a one-sided book, as the British, Jinnah, and Congress rightly all come in for plenty of criticism. Mr Singh bemoans the failure of all sides to step back from the detail and take in the bigger picture, which is fair to a certain extent, but fails to take into account that at this point the devil really was in the detail.

The book was well sourced and contained some material I hadn’t come across before. It calls for both India and Pakistan to have a greater understanding of one another’s ‘growing pains’ in the immediate aftermath of partition. It is written in a nice style, but I was disappointed with his reluctance to only briefly touch on the impact Jinnah has had on India’s psyche today. As we have seen with the treatment of minorities in India (such as the Sikh massacres of 1984), India in some senses still hasn’t come to terms with minorities who are aggressively or confidently pushing for reform or more autonomy. Somewhat of a generalisation perhaps, but with ongoing conflict in areas like Kashmir and the Naxalite heartlands, it is still an important topic.

In the midst of the current hysteria surrounding the internet and children, and given the tragic murder of Ashleigh Hall; the Mail obviously thought it would be a good time to tap into the fear of thousands of ‘predators’ posing online. Facebook in particular has come under attack as unfortunately it was the site where Ashleigh Hall first met her killer.

There has been a mass slaughter of a tribe in Nigeria, with hundreds dead. The killers were from a rival tribe, with the two tribes also being separated by religion. As the two groups had both tribal and religious differences, a single, clear motive has yet to emerge. The authorities are suspected of complicity:

Funerals began taking place for victims of the three-hour orgy of violence on Sunday in three Christian villages close to the northern city of Jos, blamed on members of the mainly Muslim Fulani ethnic group. While troops were deployed to the villages to prevent new attacks, security forces detained 95 suspects but faced bitter criticism over how the killers were able to go on the rampage at a time when a curfew was meant to be in force.

Newspapers reported that Muslim residents of the villages in Plateau state had been warned by phone text message, two days prior to the attack, so they could make good their escape before the exit points were sealed off. Survivors said the attackers were able to separate the Fulanis from members of the rival Berom group by chanting “nagge”, the Fulani word for cattle. Those who failed to respond in the same language were hacked to death.

(Hat-Tip: Chairwoman)

The Economist this week carries an excellent and in-depth look at gendercide, the term coined to describe the impact that the deliberate attempt to favour male babies over female ones has had on the male-female sex ratio throughout the world. It looks at the statistics, and what has caused such a skewing to occur, and what its impacts are and may be.

There is a natural imbalance between boys and girls, with nature ensuring roughly 5% more boys are born than girls in order to compensate for boys being more susceptible to diseases as infants. Yet in many parts of the developing world, there is too much of a numerical gap between the sexes for it to be a natural phenomenon.

The increasingly availability of ultrasound and abortion has played a big part in the skewing of the sex ratio, as it is easier to abort a female foetus then to kill a female baby, especially if you know the sex of the foetus. Indian doctors once advertised the ‘benefits’ of ultrasound technology with the slogan:

“Pay 5,000 rupees today and save 50,000 rupees tomorrow” (the saving was on the cost of a daughter’s dowry).”

Hello! I’m writing from somewhere deep in the middle of Cambodia! It’s not entirely jungle territory as I’m in a small town which has a fair bit of tourism, but it was a bit of a hair-raising ride here. Tomorrow off to the capital of Cambodia – Phnom Penh – and then to Vietnam in a few days (which I can’t wait to see).

Oh, also did anyone see my letter in the Guardian to save the Asian Network? Yes, well, they didn’t credit me but I drafted that thing and set up the publication before I left. I love creating trouble while on holiday. Well done to Ammo Talwar from Punch records for getting most of the signatures sorted.

See you folks in a few weeks time. I’m only online here because the internet is free and it’s hot as hell.

The Independent today carries a very strongly worded opinion piece by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown – a self confessed ‘Muslim lite’.  In a piece well worth reading Alibhai-Brown writes about state sanctioned Islamophobia including the sentencing of young Muslims demonstrators:

Meanwhile at Isleworth Crown Court, Judge John Denniss is industriously sentencing demonstrators who gathered near the Israeli embassy to rail against that state’s attack on Gaza, one of the worst acts of state terrorism in recent history. Our government said nothing then, and were therefore complicit. Protesters came from all backgrounds but the vast majority of those arrested were young Muslim men. Dozens are being sent down for insignificant acts of bravado. Some were about to go to university, to train as dentists and the like. Their homes were raided, families cowed and terrified. Joanna Gilmore, an academic expert on public demonstrations, says never before have such disproportionate sentences been handed out, not even with the volatile anti-globalisation protests. Denniss intends his punishments to be a deterrent. To deter us from what? Having the temerity to believe we live in a democracy and are free to march? [H/T Ten Percent]

Seumas Milne has previously written the following in a piece for the Guardian: (more…)

A terrorist today pleaded guilty to plotting acts of terrorism and manufacturing weapons to carry out his aims:

Ian Davison’s home in Myrtle Grove, Burnopfield, County Durham, was raided by anti-terror officers who found the killer substance in a jam jar in his kitchen. At Newcastle Crown Court he admitted producing a chemical weapon – ricin – and preparing for acts of terrorism.

He also admitted three charges of possessing a record containing information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing acts of terrorism.

(Via Brett at Harry’s Place)