The man police say was responsible for the Westminster attack has been formally identified as 52-year-old Khalid Masood. He is believed to have had at least three children. The Metropolitan Police says he was born as Adrian Russell Ajao - but the story appears to be more confusing still, because of a string of alternative names or aliases he used. He was entered onto the birth registry in the Dartford district of Kent as Adrian Russell Elms, in the weeks after he was born on Christmas Day 1964. Elms was his mother's maiden name, but two years after he was born she married a man with the name Ajao. The future killer used the surnames interchangeably before he converted to Islam and became Masood. 'Ostracised in village' His mother and her husband lived for a long time in Tunbridge Wells, Kent, where the young Masood, then called Adrian, attended Huntleys School for Boys, before moving to Wales. Their Carmarthenshire home has been searched by detectives from the Wales Extremism and Counter Terrorism Unit. Neither of them have been treated as suspects. Police say that Masood was known to them, and had a string of previous convictions, including grievous bodily harm and public order offences. Masood's first conviction came when he was 18 years old, in November 1983, for criminal damage. In 2000, when he was living in Northiam in East Sussex, the then Adrian Elms was jailed for two years after admitting attacking a man with a knife following a row in a pub.
He lost his temper with Piers Mott, with the local press reporting that Elms slashed him on his face, leaving an 8cm gash on his left cheek. Mr Mott has since died, but his widow Heather recalled the incident and said: "My husband was defending someone who was working for him. "I don't know how it happened. Piers was just defending this guy." The trial heard that Elms had reacted to racist provocation and had been ostracised in his village. In 2003 - after leaving prison and moving to Eastbourne - he was back in court. He was convicted of possession of a knife, after being initially charged with stabbing a 22-year-old man. He was then returned to prison for another six months. In total, he was held at three different jails - HMP Lewes, Waylands, and Ford. That last spell in jail came when he was approaching 40 years old. In general terms, that's quite late on in life for your average angry young man stuck in a world of petty criminality, violence and robbing. Did he then go straight because, like many criminals, he settled down with a family? Or was this when he found religion - which then became a tempering factor on his aggression, as it has been for many other ex-offenders? The circumstantial, unconfirmed evidence suggests his conversion to Islam may have come following his last conviction, because he did not give a Muslim name at his trial. What's not clear is why and how he then became the man who attacked Westminster. 'Nice guest' In 2016, he was living in east London under the name Masood - his partner at that time is among the ten people arrested - and his final address was in Birmingham. The 39-year-old woman, who still lives in east London, was released on bail on Friday. Masood hired the car used in the attack from the Spring Hill branch of Enterprise in north Birmingham earlier this week. There, he described his profession as a "teacher" - although the BBC has been able to confirm that he never worked as a qualified teacher in English state schools. We now believe he may have trained to teach English to foreigners in private colleges and classes - possibly in Luton where he lived at two separate addresses between 2010 and 2011. Within an hour of hiring the Hyundai, he is thought to have contacted the company to say he no longer needed the car. What happened next is completely unclear. We now know that before the attack he stayed in a hotel in Brighton.
Preston Park Hotel manager Sabeur Toumi told the BBC that he checked in under the name Khalid "Masoud" and paid by credit card. He was "friendly and smiley" and explained he had come from Birmingham and was visiting friends. The receptionist noted on their system that he was a "nice guest". Police have now visited the hotel and removed the trouser press, linen, towels, kettle and toilet roll holder from the room - presumably to obtain DNA to verify it's definitely the same man. 'Peripheral figure' On Wednesday he left the hotel and later that day carried out his attack. Masood has never been convicted of a terrorism offence and the prime minister told Parliament he had not been subject of any current investigations. However, Mrs May added that "some years ago" he was "once investigated in relation to concerns about violent extremism". She went on: "He was a peripheral figure [in that investigation]. The case is historic - he was not part of the current intelligence picture. There was no prior intelligence of his intent - or of the plot." We don't know at this stage what that particular investigation was and how he was connected to it. Here are just some of the possibilities of what that could mean: He was an associate or friend of a main suspect who was being monitored in some form - but turned out, at the time, to not apparently have any extremist leanings He could have been closer to an inner circle of aspiring extremists - but he personally was not considered to be a risk and so the operation was focused on others There could have been more concerning intelligence about his ideology and intent - but there was nothing that could make a criminal charge - and in time he was discounted as a serious threat He could, at the highest end, have been arrested in the past as part of an operation and later released without charge.
In a high-stakes closed-door huddle with Republican lawmakers late on Thursday, White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney essentially issued an ultimatum from Trump after House Republican leaders postponed the vote amid the realisation it would not pass without key changes. ... See MoreSee Less
President Jacob Zuma receives a courtesy call from Ms Ontlametse Phalatse, one of the two South African young women living with Progeria. The courtesy call was on her wish list. She wished to meet the President before her birthday on the 25th March 2017.
Parliament passed an anti-Islamophobia motion Thursday by a 201-91 margin, but it may be some time before the bitterness that led up to the vote dissipates.
The motion is non-binding but the use of the word “anti-Islamophobia” and not other religions led to protests for and against the motion in cities across Canada.
It also incited more than 50,000 threatening telephone calls and e-mails against Liberal Member of Parliament Iqra Khalid, a Muslim, who introduced the motion. Police were forced to guard her office, CTV News reported in February, a month before the vote Thursday.
Many of the correspondences and calls were “direct hate, direct discrimination and direct threats,” Khalid said.
The motion passed because the Liberal Party has a majority and its members, along with the New Democrat Party, voted for it. But the official Opposition Conservative Party voted solidly against it, with only two member exceptions. Critics feared singling out Islam and not other religions – Jews, Sikhs and Hindus for example – was itself discriminatory and the word “Islamophobia” was not defined and that could lead to a negative impact on free speech, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) reported.
The motion asks the government to do three things: condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination; take action against a rising tide of hate and fear of Islam; and direct a committee to come up with initiatives that would reduce racism and discrimination.
“I’m really happy that the vote today has shown positive support for this motion and I am really looking forward to the committee taking on this study,” Khalid said, as reported by the CBC.
The vote came the same day results were released of a new poll on the motion.
The survey of 1,511 adults conducted between March 13-17 found 42 percent of those asked would vote against the motion, and only 29 percent for it, according to the Angus Reid Institute website.
“Three-in-ten say the motion is a threat to Canadians’ freedom of speech and should not be passed,” the institute reported.
Muslim marriages allow for up to four wives, but come with the responsibility of providing equally to each spouse. It is not commonly practiced because of the difficulty in maintaining this, research has found. ... See MoreSee Less
“It was a serious meeting in which members emphasised the dangers of social media, as well as the impact the Zille tweets had on the DA because of the perceptions it created. People are concerned about what the fall-out will be for the party” ... See MoreSee Less