Rape & murder - shame on us all, shame on mauritius !

[Rafic Soormally]

RAPE & MURDER - SHAME ON US ALL, SHAME ON MAURITIUS !

FIRST and foremost, let me convey my condolences to the family of rape victim Sateewantee Jangtoo, a fine hardworking lady, and let the family know that my thoughts and prayers are with them in such very sad and most difficult times.

From left to right : Me Yatin Varma (Minister of Justice), Rape victim Sateewantee Jangtoo, Alleged rapist Jean-Maxwell Gopal

49 year old Sateewantee Jangtoo, an onion field labourer, was attacked on her way to work on Friday 8th June 2012 by 19 year old Jean-Maxwell Gopal, raped and killed. Jean-Maxwell Gopal allegedly confessed to the crime. This brutal crime happened on the very day the Mauritian Parliament was debating the provisions to legalise abortion in specific cases, one of the case being to give the victim of rape the choice to have the foetus or unborn baby aborted, however innocent the baby may be, should the victim become pregnant. This law was « piloted » by none other than Me Yatin Varma, Attorney General and Minister of Justice in Mauritius. He even claimed to be « fier d’avoir piloté ce projet de loi » (l’Express 2 June 2012).

The Mauritian government is obsessed with the killing of foetuses and innocent unborn babies in specific cases in very badly drafted legislation with loads of ambiguities, in which its Attorney General Yatin Varma boasts of his « pride » in « piloting » such legislation, when it should have tackled the numerous crimes committed by Mauritians both at home and abroad, both on Mauritians and on foreigners, with the view to drastically reducing, even, eliminating such crimes.

When Yatin Varma says he feels « PROUD » to introduce (amongst other specific cases) legislation for women, victims of rape, to have the choice to kill the innocent unborn baby, is he not making it easier for men to rape in the knowledge that it will be easier for the women to get rid of the unborn babies well before they are convicted of rape, if at all, many years later, or if they are ever caught? Should not the government, through appropriate laws, make it much more difficult for any man to even think about raping any woman or child rather than feeling « proud » of legalising abortion of the innocent after the rape has occured? What will Yatin Varma say to the families of the victim Sateewantee Jangtoo in this rape case? Had she not been killed, it would have been much easier, thanks to his « historic », « audacious » and « courageous » legislation which he is so « proud » of, for her to decide if she wanted to keep the unborn baby or not had she become pregnant as a result of the odious crime? The logical question would therefore be whether Mauritians are really proud to have such a Minister of Justice.

The same reasoning applies to the abortion of the baby diagnosed of a handicap or malformation, which is discrimination against the handicapped. Can’t anyone see that? How can one possibly be « PROUD » of such legislation? Who does Yatin Varma think the para-Olympics are for? Who has the right to decide whether or not an innocent unborn baby is killed or not if it is not to save the mother’s life? It is indeed very « audacious » and « courageous » to kill anyone, born or unborn!

The Mauritian government would have taken credit if crimes were reduced. Government politicians would have produced all sorts of statistics to show how their policies helped achieve low crime rate and made a meal of it all round the country. Similarly, when crimes are on the rise, especially such odious crimes, the government must bear responsibility and take the blame accordingly. It cannot use the proposed legislation in favour of abortion in cases of rape and other specific cases to deviate attention from a very sick society. Those proposed badly drafted abortion laws will never cure such a sick society except make it more permissive, given that Mauritius has been turned into a Pleasure Island.

M Rafic Soormally
London
11th June 2012

[boispignolet]

Envoyé par Rafic Soormally

RAPE & MURDER - SHAME ON US ALL, SHAME ON MAURITIUS !

FIRST and foremost, let me convey my condolences to the family of rape victim Sateewantee Jangtoo, a fine hardworking lady, and let the family know that my thoughts and prayers are with them in such very sad and most difficult times.

From left to right : Me Yatin Varma (Minister of Justice), Rape victim Sateewantee Jangtoo, Alleged rapist Jean-Maxwell Gopal

49 year old Sateewantee Jangtoo, an onion field labourer, was attacked on her way to work on Friday 8th June 2012 by 19 year old Jean-Maxwell Gopal, raped and killed. Jean-Maxwell Gopal allegedly confessed to the crime. This brutal crime happened on the very day the Mauritian Parliament was debating the provisions to legalise abortion in specific cases, one of the case being to give the victim of rape the choice to have the foetus or unborn baby aborted, however innocent the baby may be, should the victim become pregnant. This law was « piloted » by none other than Me Yatin Varma, Attorney General and Minister of Justice in Mauritius. He even claimed to be « fier d’avoir piloté ce projet de loi » (l’Express 2 June 2012).

The Mauritian government is obsessed with the killing of foetuses and innocent unborn babies in specific cases in very badly drafted legislation with loads of ambiguities, in which its Attorney General Yatin Varma boasts of his « pride » in « piloting » such legislation, when it should have tackled the numerous crimes committed by Mauritians both at home and abroad, both on Mauritians and on foreigners, with the view to drastically reducing, even, eliminating such crimes.

When Yatin Varma says he feels « PROUD » to introduce (amongst other specific cases) legislation for women, victims of rape, to have the choice to kill the innocent unborn baby, is he not making it easier for men to rape in the knowledge that it will be easier for the women to get rid of the unborn babies well before they are convicted of rape, if at all, many years later, or if they are ever caught? Should not the government, through appropriate laws, make it much more difficult for any man to even think about raping any woman or child rather than feeling « proud » of legalising abortion of the innocent after the rape has occured? What will Yatin Varma say to the families of the victim Sateewantee Jangtoo in this rape case? Had she not been killed, it would have been much easier, thanks to his « historic », « audacious » and « courageous » legislation which he is so « proud » of, for her to decide if she wanted to keep the unborn baby or not had she become pregnant as a result of the odious crime? The logical question would therefore be whether Mauritians are really proud to have such a Minister of Justice.

The same reasoning applies to the abortion of the baby diagnosed of a handicap or malformation, which is discrimination against the handicapped. Can’t anyone see that? How can one possibly be « PROUD » of such legislation? Who does Yatin Varma think the para-Olympics are for? Who has the right to decide whether or not an innocent unborn baby is killed or not if it is not to save the mother’s life? It is indeed very « audacious » and « courageous » to kill anyone, born or unborn!

The Mauritian government would have taken credit if crimes were reduced. Government politicians would have produced all sorts of statistics to show how their policies helped achieve low crime rate and made a meal of it all round the country. Similarly, when crimes are on the rise, especially such odious crimes, the government must bear responsibility and take the blame accordingly. It cannot use the proposed legislation in favour of abortion in cases of rape and other specific cases to deviate attention from a very sick society. Those proposed badly drafted abortion laws will never cure such a sick society except make it more permissive, given that Mauritius has been turned into a Pleasure Island.

M Rafic Soormally
London
11th June 2012

Il faut être gonflé et surtout avoir un esprit tordu pour mêler le viol puis le meurtre de cette femme et la préparation d’une loi relative à l’avortement.
Si la société mauricienne vous paraît malade, à la lecture de vos posts, j’ai l’impression qu’il n’y a pas qu’elle.
Même l’islam permet l’avortement sous certaines conditions restreintes (dont le viol).
Il paraît qu’en islam, l'avortement est une décision grave et dangereuse, car la vie en islam est sacrée, c'est un don d'Allah.
Mais si la vie en islam est sacrée, au regard de ce qui se passe dans certains pays, Allah doit se retourner dans sa tombe.

[Rafic Soormally]

Envoyé par boispignolet

Il faut être gonflé et surtout avoir un esprit tordu pour mêler le viol puis le meurtre de cette femme et la préparation d’une loi relative à l’avortement.
Si la société mauricienne vous paraît malade, à la lecture de vos posts, j’ai l’impression qu’il n’y a pas qu’elle.
Même l’islam permet l’avortement sous certaines conditions restreintes (dont le viol).
Il paraît qu’en islam, l'avortement est une décision grave et dangereuse, car la vie en islam est sacrée, c'est un don d'Allah.
Mais si la vie en islam est sacrée, au regard de ce qui se passe dans certains pays, Allah doit se retourner dans sa tombe.

Your understanding of the English language is very poor indeed. You are using too much of google since you are so thick. You completely missed the gist of the article. As usual, you are obsessed with Islam and Muslims and misuse the term “Allah”. You better think of your tomb or of your cremation – there is no such thing which is surer than this. Why don’t you look into the religion of the rapist, his beliefs, the Church (if any) he goes to, etc? Are you scared that he may very well be a reflection of your own self? It is clear that you appear to sympathise with the rapist and more concerned with the abortion of the unborn baby had the victim not been killed and became pregnant. You are a very sick and disgusting man. But I will not allow myself to be distracted by scumbags like you.

If you are « proud » of legislation which gives the choice to a woman or child who got pregnant as a result of rape in order to kill an innocent unborn baby, don’t you have to wait for such rapes to happen and hope the victim opts for an abortion and then feel proud of it. If there are no rapes because the law is so tough that no one will even think of raping anyone, your law will be useless, hence nothing to feel proud of. The same applies to the unborn baby diagnosed with malformation.

There is no doubt that you are very « proud » of the sort of scumbag you are. There are many like you around.

[boispignolet]

Envoyé par Rafic Soormally

Your understanding of the English language is very poor indeed. You are using too much of google since you are so thick. You completely missed the gist of the article. As usual, you are obsessed with Islam and Muslims and misuse the term “Allah”. You better think of your tomb or of your cremation – there is no such thing which is surer than this. Why don’t you look into the religion of the rapist, his beliefs, the Church (if any) he goes to, etc? Are you scared that he may very well be a reflection of your own self? It is clear that you appear to sympathise with the rapist and more concerned with the abortion of the unborn baby had the victim not been killed and became pregnant. You are a very sick and disgusting man. But I will not allow myself to be distracted by scumbags like you.

If you are « proud » of legislation which gives the choice to a woman or child who got pregnant as a result of rape in order to kill an innocent unborn baby, don’t you have to wait for such rapes to happen and hope the victim opts for an abortion and then feel proud of it. If there are no rapes because the law is so tough that no one will even think of raping anyone, your law will be useless, hence nothing to feel proud of. The same applies to the unborn baby diagnosed with malformation.

There is no doubt that you are very « proud » of the sort of scumbag you are. There are many like you around.

Vous êtes un maître de la digression, mais l’ennui c’est que la ficelle est trop grosse pour tromper les lecteurs.
En France, l’islam est la deuxième religion, je ne suis donc pas obsédé par celle-ci, mais intéressé. Mais comme vous vous prénommez sur certains forums Muhammad Rafic Soormally et que vous critiquez tout sauf l’islam, il m’est apparu nécessaire de mettre le doigt sur vos nombreuses contradictions.
Mais au fait, qu’avez-vous à dire sur la position de l’islam vis-à-vis de l’avortement ?
http://stcom.net/news/?tag=muhammad-rafic-soormally
N’étant pas comme vous un exilé permanent à Londres, mon maniement de la langue de Shakespeare n’atteint de ce fait évidemment pas le vôtre.
Seulement, dans le monde, il n’y a pas que Rafic Soormally qui maîtrise l’anglais. En cas de besoin, j’ai à mes côtés suffisamment de personnes compétentes en la matière.
Je fais le choix de répondre exclusivement en français, car ce forum est destiné entre autres à tous les Mauriciens et à Maurice, les Mauriciens ne maîtrisent pas tous cette langue, loin de là.
Un peu de décence s’il vous plaît à l’égard de tous vos compatriotes qui ont souhaité, mais n’ont pas eu la possibilité pour diverses raisons (financières le plus souvent), de poursuivre comme vous à l’étranger le cours de leur existence.