The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

Head of government-backed victims-of-crime charity 'took armed gang to settle long-running land row in Pakistan' 

  • Javed Khan reported to have arrived in the village of Haveli Bagal last week 
  • Head of Victim Support 'joined by eight men armed with automatic rifles'
  • Witnesses claim one woman was threatened by charity chief
  • Events could embarrass charity, which receives £38m from government

By IAN BIRRELL

Leading British Muslim: Javed Khan has been accused of taking an armed gang to settle a dispute in Pakistan

The head of Victim Support, the Government-backed charity for people affected by crime, has been accused of taking an armed gang to settle a long-running land dispute in his native Pakistan.

Javed Khan is reported to have arrived in the village of Haveli Bagal last week with about eight men armed with automatic rifles.

Witnesses claim that one middle-aged woman who tried to stop the gang from bulldozing a contested wall of the village graveyard was threatened by the charity chief and that shots were fired in the air.

Mr Khan spent several hours at a local police station as officers tried to resolve the row. Yesterday, a contempt of court notice was said to have been served, as the dispute was already before a civil court.

The events threaten to embarrass Victim Support, which receives £38 million a year from the Government. They may also tarnish the reputation of Mr Khan, 50, who has been cited as one of the most influential British Muslims and is set to begin a new role as chief executive of the children’s charity Barnardo’s later this year.

Mr Khan left Pakistan as a small boy when his father brought the family to Britain, but they still own a house and land there.

Witnesses in the remote village in the Kashmir region say they saw Mr Khan and his party arrive in two Toyota Land Cruisers.

Several of the men were openly carrying automatic weapons, said one shopkeeper.

Tempers frayed after the group began using a bulldozer to demolish the disputed boundary wall, which Mr Khan’s family believe encroaches on their land.

‘The community tried to halt them,’ said Ziarab Hussain, one of the village elders leading the protests against the Mr Khan. ‘By the time I reached them, half of the wall was bulldozed. One man was holding a gun against me. I was not aggressive and told them to stop and respect the court order.’

Witnesses say that as tempers rose, the order was given to shoot a middle-aged woman. ‘Her husband stood against the gun, saying let Javed Khan do it himself,’ said a villager. Shots were then fired in the air, the source claimed.

Mr Khan in due to start a new role as chief executive of children's charity Barnardo's this year (library image)

Mr Khan in due to start a new role as chief executive of children's charity Barnardo's this year (library image)

The confrontation, which was confirmed yesterday by police, was defused after officers arrived at the scene. Inspector Khawaja Qayyum said there had been a dispute but it was now resolved, with a new wall erected on the correct boundary. He added that both sides accused the other of brandishing guns but police did not see any firearms or gunshot wounds. ‘In this area, it is the custom that everyone shows guns in disputes,’ he added.

Both Mr Khan and Mr Hussain spent several hours with police.  Villagers allege they were told the matter would be resolved the following day, but instead officers helped Mr Khan, a prominent local figure, rebuild the wall along the lines he wanted the same day.

His brother is understood to have visited Haveli Bagal last summer regarding the contested plot. Afterwards, villagers took action in a civil court and it is understood summons were served on the brothers.

Mr Khan refused to comment this weekend, although he admitted to being in the village. A Victim Support spokesman said Mr Khan was in Pakistan in a personal capacity, adding: ‘We are making inquiries into local media reports but cannot comment further at this time.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2546033/Head-government-bac...

Tags: Charities, Hijacked, Watchmen:, barnardo's, group, javed, khan, support, victim

Views: 67

Replies to This Discussion

Here's a straw man argument in defence of charitites:

X: I don't give to charities because they are corrupt.  Many small ones give their directors salaries over £100k /year.  The Islamic ones, based on Zakat, often funnel funds to anti-democratic or even terrorist activities, but in any case, only give to the Muslim, ignoring the inferior Kaffir.  Again, the Charities Commission aren't interested, and it seems that in many case, its a convenient way for what is effectively a political body, to operate under charitable status.  And the Christian charities, in their gormless attempt to be even handed, give money to Islamic people while their own constituency is being brutally raped and exterminated in Northern Nigeria, Iraq, Syria, etc. You can't depend on the Charities Commission because they don't do anything about any of these issues, so clearly the rot in that organisation is so deep it's beyond my abilities to fix it.  

Y: That's ridiculous.  Its simply not true that all charities are corrupt.  Oxfam for example is fully ISO accredited, received a glowing report from the charities commission, and has done marvelous work for many years.

The reply by Y addresses none of X's points.  Instead, it inflates his claim that basically "You can't trust charities because too many have been shown to be corrupt", to the far wider claim that "All charities are corrupt".  Having put up that straw man of the larger claim, Y then proceeds to show that it isn't true (it doesn't hold for all charities).

{This may be an example of another fallacy about quantification, but haven't time to check now :-) }

Saul Alinsky is Alive and Well and Working in Britain's Thriving Fake Charities Sector
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/09/Saul-Alinsky-i...

Children’s Leukemia charity sued for $9.7 million in fraud

http://www.rt.com/usa/310622-childrens-leukemia-charity-sued-over/

RSS

Muslim Terrorism Count

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Mission Overview

Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them. 

At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.

Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.

We need to capture this information before it is removed.  The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.

We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.

The 4 Freedoms

These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper). 
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom of Movement
The government can import new voters - except where that changes the political demographics (i.e. electoral fraud by means of immigration)
4. SP Freedom from Over-spending
People should not be charged for government systems which they reject, and which give them no benefit. For example, the government cannot pass a debt burden across generations (25 years).
An additional Freedom from Religion is be deducible by equal application of law: "Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight - except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"

© 2017   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service