We tried on the VR goggles Manchester police are using to train 2,000 officers in tackling hate crime

Thousands of police officers in Greater Manchester are experiencing what it's like to be a victim of hate crime through the use of VR headsets.

The brand new training project, which is the first of its kind in the UK, is designed help officers understand and emphasize with victims by transporting them into their shoes.

They experience three different scenarios from three different victims - which are all based on real-life incidents that took place in Manchester and weren't reported to the police.

The three videos focus on disability hate crime, anti-Semitism with features of misogyny, and gender-based hate crime.

The Manchester Evening News went along to GMP's training centre in Prestwich to try on a pair of the virtual reality goggles.

The anti-Semitism video begins in a synagogue where a young woman, the hate crime victim, gives you her first-hand experience of what happened and how it made her feel.

It feels incredibly real and you can move your head to see all around the room. But with the woman looking directly at you, and being so close up, there's no way anyone taking part in this experience could turn their attention elsewhere.

The video then moves on to actors playing out the incident, and as the wearer of the headset, you become the victim.<

All of a sudden you take on their height and stance. And in the case of the disability hate crime incident - their visual impairment too.

This allows officers to fully immerse themselves in how it feels to be a victim of such an abhorrent and impactful crime.

The third section of the virtual reality training shows two different responses from police officers – one which victim feedback said was a good response and one that victims felt could be improved.

Inspector May Preston said that previously, officers were educated about hate crime in the classroom.

"We wanted something much more interactive where the victim's voice can really be heard," she said.

Officer Marcos Ennau trying out a police training VR headset (Image: Manchester Evening News) Inspector Preston, who was the hate crime lead, said that that transgender and anti-Semitism hate crimes were chosen for the VR experience because of a spike in numbers; whereas disability-based hate crime was focused on because it's so underreported.

"Most often victims don't realise they're victims of hate crimes," she said.

She said that she hopes this new form of training will help officers to understands victims of hate crime and in turn - that those victims will be more willing to come forward if they know that they will be listened to and believed.

Although the three VR videos focus of three different specific types of hate crime there is overlap into other perspectives too that officers can benefit from.

"One senior officer said he never knew what it was like to be a 5'4 female before. He had never had that perspective before," Inspector Preston said.

Greater Manchester Police worked closely with the non-profit Mother Mountain Productions to develop the VR training.

Gary Clifford, the operations director, said "Most people are telling us that they benefitted from the experience, like they were living in the shoes of the victim."

GMP and Mother Mountain Productions took guidance from partners such as The Proud Trust, The RNIB, The Campaign Against Anti -Semitism, Trans Forum and The Community Safety Trust, to ensure that the training encompassed real victim’s experiences and was an effective and relevant tool of learning for officers.

GMP’s ACC Chris Sykes said: “The impact of hate crime on the victim can be wide-ranging and life-changing. We know that hate crime is still under-reported, but by equipping our officers with the empathy and understanding towards victims, we can ensure that we take the correct actions when dealing with these incidents, sending a message to victims that they will be supported and treated with respect and showing offenders that there is no room for hate or discrimination in our vibrant and diverse city.

Source: 18 Aug 21

Ed- Not much about anglophobic attacks there is there?. 'Vibrant and diverse' - you ae welcome to it. My advice - head for the hills.

Equipping Readers with The Truth

The moment that local governments in the Western world began to issue guidance or full-on mandates for religious gatherings in the early days of the pandemic, many were concerned that society had stepped onto a slippery slope.

Fast-forward 15 months later, and we’re seeing pastors arrested in front of their children after their “underground” church services were discovered by a police helicopter.

This is the stuff of tyranny and totalitarianism, not Western-style democracy. Yet here we are.

This week, Pastor Tim Stephens of Fairview Baptist Church was arrested outside his home as his distressed children cried, all for holding a church service discovered the day before by a police helicopter.

The conservative Canadian website Rebel News reported that it is unclear if the helicopters were searching for unauthorized church services or just happened to notice the gathering. The outlet said that while police vehicles were later seen circling the service, which included group worship and a sermon from Pastor Stephens, they did not move in and attempt to stop the gathering.

The minister was arrested the following day for violating a court order that restricted him from holding services. Rebel News notes that the weekend prior, the church was effectively seized by Alberta Health Services for failing to adhere to local regulations regarding attendance, social distancing, and masks.

Stephens is being represented by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.

Jay Cameron, a lawyer for the firm, blamed Jason Kenney, premier of the Canadian province of Alberta, for the arrest, according to the Calgary Herald.

“It appears that Premier Kenney’s government is targeting its enemies, those who are speaking out against lockdown restrictions and for Charter freedoms,” Cameron said, according to the newspaper.

“Locking out Fairview Baptist congregants and arresting Pastor Tim Stephens has everything to do with punishing dissent, and nothing to do with public safety.”

Stephens has had several run-ins with the law for holding services in violation of local COVID-19 restrictions (as have other Canadian pastors). After Stephens was arrested in May, Alberta Health Services was forced to drop the charges after discovering the health order he had been accused of violating had been served to someone else by mistake, The Calgary Herald noted.

Now, he is being held in prison until June 28 for refusing to agree to bail conditions that would have hindered his ability to hold services.

Rebel News noted that despite efforts on the part of local authorities to prevent Stephens’ flock from gathering, services have only grown larger.

And now we can only assume that, as this man’s commitment to the Gospel of Christ is so emboldened by persecution, the men he is now locked up alongside will be hearing it, too!

That said, it is all the more chilling that we’re reading about a Canadian pastor who has not only been forced to conduct underground church services, but was arrested and put in prison after a police helicopter located the illicit gatherings.

“I just got a tip that the police may be on their way to arrest me,” Stephens tweeted Monday before police arrived at his house. “Why? I continue to lead our church to worship Jesus as Lord over every earthly power.”

“More to come… Pray brothers and sisters. Stand firm, keep the faith,” he added.

This incident is close to home for us Americans, yet it sounds more like something that would happen in China or North Korea.

Our respective nations have long professed a commitment to defending God-given rights to gather and worship, yet after a century of diminishing respect for this deity who gives us these rights, we see an undeniable diminished respect for the rights themselves.

The damage this cultural trend has done to our governments’ commitment to defending these freedoms may have reared its ugly head amid the pandemic, but this has been in the making for a long time.

Let this be a very, very stern warning to us. It’s not as though we’ve been gathering and worshipping freely as our Canadian brothers and sisters live in fear — our churches have been targeted by earthly authorities who prioritize the mitigation of a virus over the inherent rights of Christians to worship.

The most disturbing behavior we saw from leaders here at home was the arbitrarily discriminatory restrictions on religious gatherings even as big box stores and abortion clinics enjoyed more freedom to conduct regular operations.

Again, this highlights how little our leaders regard both our God-given rights and our God himself.

They will answer to Him one day for what they have done — and we will also answer for our commitment to obeying His laws over man’s.

We have a duty to ensure that our First Amendment is protected, because the threats against it are no longer hypothetical. They’re very real, they’re here right now, and the more we get used to it, the sooner we can kiss them goodbye for good.

This incident is close to home for us Americans, yet it sounds more like something that would happen in China or North Korea.

Our respective nations have long professed a commitment to defending God-given rights to gather and worship, yet after a century of diminishing respect for this deity who gives us these rights, we see an undeniable diminished respect for the rights themselves.

Source:
Western Journal- unauthozised church gathering

Biden administration pressed by lawmaker to label white supremacists overseas as terrorists

Fri Apr 9, 2021

House Homeland Security Committee member Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) questions witnesses during a House Homeland Security Committee hearing about 'worldwide threats to the homeland' on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., September 17, 2020. Chip Somodevilla/Pool via

WASHINGTON - President Joe Biden's administration is being pressed by a key Democratic lawmaker, Rep. Elissa Slotkin, to consider designating white supremacist groups overseas as foreign terrorists subject to U.S. government actions.

If Biden's administration were to take the unprecedented step of listing such groups as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs), or even a less-stringent designation, it would help curb dangerous white supremacist organizations, Slotkin argued in the letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, which was reviewed by Reuters.

"It would also give the United States Government more tools to engage and flag the Americans who contact, support, train, and join these (white supremacist extremist) groups," said Slotkin, a former CIA analyst who chairs a U.S. House subcommittee focusing on intelligence and counterterrorism.

The State Department declined comment. Slotkin's request has not been previously reported.

Slotkin asked the State Department to consider listing over a dozen organizations including the neo-Nazi National Action Group, founded in Britain and banned there in 2016. It was described in a 2018 U.S. counter-terrorism report as a terrorist group promoting violence against politicians and minorities.

She also named the neo-Nazi Nordic Resistance Movement, which the report described as an anti-Western transnational organization behind violent attacks, including against Muslims and left-wing groups. Slotkin has a unique perspective on the threat posed by violent extremism. She served three tours in Iraq as a CIA militia expert and was a senior Pentagon official before being elected to Congress in 2018. As a lawmaker, Slotkin's has turned her focus to domestic extremism.

Her Michigan district saw law enforcement disrupt a plot last year to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat.

"These plotters weren't affiliated with al Qaeda or ISIS. They didn’t hail from a war-torn region halfway around the world - they were Americans. They were white. And they were radicalized right here at home," Slotkin said at a recent hearing.

MOST LETHAL THREAT

The Biden administration has signaled it is prepared to take a stronger approach to combating violent domestic extremists - specifically white supremacists, which the FBI sees as the top threat within that group.

Department of Homeland Security chief Alejandro Mayorkas told lawmakers last month that domestic violent extremism "poses the most lethal and persistent terrorism-related threat to the homeland today."

Since 2018, white supremacists have conducted more lethal attacks in the United States than any other domestic violent extremist movement, the department said in an October report here

Particularly concerning are the international connections among white supremacist here groups, with members drawing inspiration from each other for attacks around the world, said Ryan Greer, national security director at the Anti-Defamation League, an organization opposing anti-Semitism and other discrimination.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in a report here last month that "a small number" of U.S. racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists "have traveled abroad to network with like-minded individuals."

Phil Stewart - Reuters

Source:White Supremacists

Criminalising ‘hate speech’ in homes in England and Wales proposed by Law Commission

5 Nov 2020

Private conversations in the home about controversial issues such as same-sex marriage or transgender ideology could result in police intervention under new hate crime proposals for England and Wales.

In a 540-page consultation document, the Law Commission has laid out its plans to lower the threshold for hate crimes to be committed, including criminalising so-called “hate speech” even in private dwellings.

There is currently a ‘dwelling defence’ in law which protects conversations in the home from police intervention. The Law Commission, which advises the Government, believes this should change.

‘Sowing division’
Similar plans have also been put forward in Scotland, where Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf has come under fire for the extreme proposals.

Free speech campaigners have warned that the Scottish Government’s hate crime Bill leaves out the dwelling defence currently included in legislation in England and Wales, but Yousaf insists that ‘hateful speech’ in the home deserves to be criminalised.

The Christian Institute’s Deputy Director for Communications Ciarán Kelly commented: “The Scottish Government has drawn criticism from all corners for its sinister hate crime legislation, but the Law Commission for England and Wales appears to have paid no notice.

“Restricting free speech, and policing ‘acceptable’ and ‘unacceptable’ views, sows division and resentment. The Government would do well to ignore this report.”

Rights binned
Harry Miller, a former police officer who founded Fair Cop, which opposes hate crime legislation, said: “If the private home law is adopted by Government, a comment over the dinner table about a huge range of people could lead to a prison sentence.”

He said human rights laws protecting privacy and family life would be “in the bin” adding that the proposed changes “will generate unfriendliness between different communities where there is none”.

Family law barrister Sarah Phillimore agreed: “I cannot believe the Government is being asked to consider surveillance of citizens in their own home. How will the evidence of such hate crimes be collected? Will we have an East German-style secret police like the Stasi?”

“Freedom of speech is obviously a cornerstone of our democracy, and a right that we must all defend.”

Source - The Christian Institute:-
Criminalising 'Hate Speech' in the home

Greece’s far-right Golden Dawn party declared criminal organization in historic ruling as crowds gather in Athens

7 Oct, 2020

In a landmark court ruling, Greece’s far-right Golden Dawn party has been found to be operating as a criminal organization. The five-year trial had 68 defendants and included the murder of a rapper and cases of violent attacks.

Protesters held banners comparing the political party, which is controversial for its fiercely anti-immigrant views, to Nazis as they stood outside the Athens courthouse. Videos show the massive crowd filling the main roadway and side streets surrounding the building. Fights broke out in the crowd, with police using tear gas and a water cannon to restore order.

In its decision, the court ruled that seven of the party’s former lawmakers, including party leader Michaloliakos, were guilty of running a criminal organization. In total, 68 defendants were involved in the case, including 18 former parliamentarians.

The trial considered four separate criminal charges involving the murder of Greek rapper Pavlos Fyssas in 2013, attacks on migrant fishermen, attacks on left-wing activists and whether Golden Dawn was involved in criminal activity.

The trial began in 2015, after a supporter of Golden Dawn was accused of murdering Fyssas, who was known for his anti-fascist views. As a result, Michaloliakos and more than a dozen party members were arrested and charged with participating in a criminal enterprise. Golden Dawn claims that the trial is a political witch-hunt.

At its peak, Golden Dawn was Greece’s third-most popular party as voters looked for radical change during the nation’s crippling financial crisis. The far-right party lost its remaining seats in parliament in last year’s elections.

Source: RT News

Trump Tells Agencies To End Training On 'White Privilege' And 'Critical Race Theory'

   

   

The Trump administration has instructed federal agencies to end racial sensitivity trainings that address topics like white privilege and critical race theory, calling them "divisive, anti-American propaganda."

In a letter to federal agencies Friday, the director of the Office of Management and Budget said the president recently became aware of the racial sensitivity programs, which encourage frank conversations about race in the workplace and discuss potential actions to combat systemic racism.

The memo, issued by OMB Director Russell Vought, reads in part:

"All agencies are directed to begin to identify all contracts or other agency spending related to any training on 'critical race theory,' 'white privilege,' or any other training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either (1) that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or (2) that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil."

The memo said agencies "should begin to identify all available avenues within the law to cancel any such contracts and/or to divert Federal dollars away from these un-American propaganda training sessions."

Citing "press reports" of training sessions at which employees were allegedly told "virtually all white people contribute to racism," Vought wrote that these sorts of trainings [sic] perpetuate misguided views and contribute to racial division. It was not clear which specific agencies or training sessions he was referring to.

Trump's Base Is Shrinking As Whites Without A College Degree Continue To Decline The directive was issued against the backdrop of the ongoing national conversation around police brutality and systemic racism. It's a debate in which Trump has sided with law enforcement over advocates for racial justice and supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement. As demonstrations were at their peak earlier this summer, an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll found that two-thirds of Americans believed the president has made race relations worse.

Racial sensitivity training has long been conducted on college campuses and across much of corporate America. It's unclear how long it's been going on at federal agencies. But its existence has gotten more attention in conservative circles in recent months.

One of the more prominent critics, Christopher Rufo, director of the Center on Wealth and Poverty at the conservative Discovery Institute, argued on Fox News this week that Trump should end the programs immediately.

"It's absolutely astonishing how critical race theory has pervaded every institution in the federal government," Rufo told host Tucker Carlson. "What I have discovered is that critical race theory has become, in essence, the default ideology of the federal bureaucracy and is now being weaponized against the American people."

On Saturday, Trump retweeted Rufo's appearance on Fox, arguing that diversity training is a threat to American unity. In response to a person who wrote that "critical race theory is the greatest threat to western civilization and it's made its way into the US federal government," Trump responded: "Not any more!" In another tweet, Trump called critical race theory "a sickness that cannot be allowed to continue."

While many conservatives applauded the move, others decried the continuing racism that they see pervading many aspects of American society, including the awarding of government contracts.

"If we are going to live up to this nation's promise — 'we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal' — we have to see each other as human beings, and we have to do whatever it takes, including taking whatever classes make that possible," M.E. Hart, an attorney who has run hundreds of diversity training sessions for businesses and the federal government, told The Washington Post. "These classes have been very powerful in allowing people to do that, and we need them more than ever. There's danger here."

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/05/910053496/trump-tells-agencies-to-end-trainings-on-white-privilege-and-critical-race-theor

The City of Seattle held a segregated training session for white staffers last month in which they instructed workers on how to ‘undo their whiteness’

• The City of Seattle held a segregated training session for white staffers last month in which they instructed workers on how to 'undo their whiteness'
• Titled 'Interrupting Internalized Racial Superiority and Whiteness', the training session was reportedly held by the Office of Civil Rights on June 12
• One handout distributed in the two-and-a-half hour session reportedly read that 'racism is not our fault but we are responsible' Another said white staffers must give up 'the land' and their 'guaranteed physical safety' in order to be an 'accomplice' for racial justice
• The Seattle's Office of Civil Rights has not yet returned a DailyMail.com request for comment on the alleged training program
  

The City of Seattle held a segregated training session for white staffers last month in which they instructed workers on how to 'undo their whiteness' and affirm their 'complicity in racism', reports suggest.

Titled 'Interrupting Internalized Racial Superiority and Whiteness', the training session was reportedly held by the Office of Civil Rights on June 12, the same day protesters took part in the CHOP zone demonstrations in the Capitol Hill district.

Christopher F. Rufo, an editor for City Journal and director of the Discovery Institute’s Center on Wealth and Poverty, unearthed the session’s existence after filing a Freedom of Information request last week, which was approved Monday.

One handout distributed in the two-and-a-half hour session reportedly read that 'racism is not our fault but we are responsible.'

Another said white staffers must give up 'the land' and their 'guaranteed physical safety' in order to be an 'accomplice' for racial justice.

Titled 'Interrupting Internalized Racial Superiority and Whiteness', the training session was reportedly held by the Office of Civil Rights (above) on June 12

The session took place on the same day that protesters took part in the CHOP demonstrations in the Capitol Hill district

In an email inviting employees to the event, the office asked 'city employees who identify as white to join this training to learn, reflect, challenge ourselves, and build skills and relationships that help us show up more fully as allies and accomplices for racial justice.'
'We’ll examine our complicity in the system of white supremacy – how we internalize and reinforce it – and begin to cultivate practices that enable us to interrupt racism in ways to be accountable to Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) folks within our community,' the email continued.

The name of the email's author was redacted, Rufo said, as the City of Seattle 'refused to provide the names of the diversity trainers, the budget for the program, or the video of the session'. a thread posted to his Twitter account, Rufo outlined the various stages of the training session.

He said that first of all 'diversity trainers informed white participants that “objectivity”, “individualism,” ;“intellectualization,” and “comfort” are all vestiges of internalized racial oppression.'

In an email inviting employees to the event, the office asked ‘city employees who identify as white to join this training to learn, reflect, challenge ourselves, and build skills and relationships that help us show up more fully as allies and accomplices for racial justice.’

Rufo outlined the various stages of the training session. He said that first of all 'diversity trainers informed white participants that "objectivity," "individualism," "intellectualization," and "comfort" are all vestiges of internalized racial oppression'

According to Rufo, the goal of the session was to teach white workers how they have been 'complicity in the system of white supremacy’ and must be held 'accountable to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color'

Diversity trainers also encouraged staffers to cultivate 'networks with other white people who are practicing antiracist accomplicehood so you can talk through your struggles in the work of undoing your own whiteness.'

In such networks, the trainers urged participants to practice 'self-talk that affirms our complicity in racism.' They were also instructed to give up ‘niceties from neighbors and colleagues', 'the certainty of your job,' and 'accepting jobs and promotions when we are not qualified, including racial equity jobs.'

White employees were also issued a flowchart outlining the cycle of racism that whites perpetuate through 'superior' justification, 'self-righteousness,' 'fear, shame and guilt' over 'harmful actions' toward 'people of color,' and 'smallness and inauthenticity.'

White people are unable to 'imagine a way forward' that stems from a 'place of humanity and empowerment.' Thus, the 'status quo is reinforced', the chart concluded.

For any employees questioning their ethnicity, the instructors handed out an information sheet titled 'Assimilation to Whiteness', which noted those of Arab, Jewish, Finnish, German, Italian, Armenian or Irish descent identify as white.

White employees were also issued a flowchart outlining the cycle of racism that whites perpetuate through 'superior' justification, 'self-righteousness,' 'fear, shame and guilt' over 'harmful actions' toward 'people of color,' and 'smallness and inauthenticity'

For any employees questioning their ethnicity, the instructors handed out an information sheet titled 'Assimilation to Whiteness', which noted those of Arab, Jewish, Finnish, German, Italian, Armenian or Irish descent still identify as white.

'Other white people may be angry,' but white accomplices must let go of 'operating as individuals' to adapt to this collective mindset, one handout says

Employees were also taught how to 'interrupt' their whiteness by being 'honest and implicate yourself either in the moment or in past experiences in which you acted or thought similarly.'

'Don’t blame others. Don’t distance. Don’t make yourself seem “better.” None of us is,' a handout said. 'You are also white and what someone else did today you may do tomorrow.'

According to Rufo, the goal of the session was to teach white workers how they have been 'complicit in the system of white supremacy' and must be held 'accountable to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color.'

The Seattle's Office of Civil Rights has not yet returned a DailyMail.com request for comment on the alleged training program. It’s unclear if the training was mandatory or optional.

Piles Of Corpses At Dachau And Buchenwald Were Dead German Soldiers Staged There For Propaganda Purposes

Christians for Truth - MAY 1, 2020

We are all familiar with the pictures and film footage of piles of dead “Jews” discovered at the liberated “death camps” Dachau and Buchenwald at the end of World War II, but what we were never told is that most of those corpses were actually dead German soldiers that were dumped there as part of an elaborate psy-op by British Intelligence, and many of those ghastly images were filmed by none other than horror film master, Alfred Hitchcock.

The following is an excerpt from the corroborated eye witness testimony of a captured German soldier:

In 1977, during a visit to New York and Cape May, I recounted the story of the trainload of dying German prisoners to two former US officers. They had both been stationed in Heidelberg shortly after the war and they knew all about it. They agreed that the cattle cars were filled with captured German soldiers who were infected with typhus and dysentery.

…On a sunny day in mid-June 1945, I hopped on a freight train and went to Erfurt. The train stopped about a kilometer and a half before the station, so I shouldered my rucksack and began walking toward the station. I soon noticed a freight train of about 20 cattle cars sitting on a side track. A bad odor was coming from that direction. As I came closer I saw hands protruding from ventilation holes and heard sounds of moaning, so I crossed several tracks and approached the cattle cars. The people inside noticed me and began crying “Water, comrade, water!” Then I reached the train and recognized the terrible stench of feces and rotting corpses. The sliding doors and ventilation holes were crisscrossed with barbed wire securely nailed. Urine and partially dried feces oozed from under the sliding doors and between the boards.

…They were in fact unwitting extras in a movie being made by Alfred Hitchcock, the Hollywood horror-film specialist. He had been awarded a contract to make a movie about concentration camps for the Nuremberg tribunal.

At night the dead prisoners would be unloaded at Buchenwald, Dachau and other concentration camps by those who were still alive. Hitchcock would then film them, depicting the heaps of corpses as victims of German atrocities. A large number of corpses were dumped at Buchenwald at night, and next day the citizens of Weimar were forced to walk past the heaps of rotting corpses and smell the sickening stench.

Some of them actually believed the American propaganda, that the corpses had been concentration-camp inmates. It was all filmed as part of Hitchcock’s movie. Afterwards the corpses were shoved into mass graves in the vicinity. That too was part of the script. This is the explanation that the two former officers of the US Army gave me concerning the trainload of dying German prisoners that I witnessed on June 16, 1945.

I certify that my testimony is a true account of what I myself have personally seen and experienced.

[Note: Alfred Hitchcock was persuaded by his friend and movie producer the British Jew, Sidney Bernstein, to leave Hollywood to assist on project “F3080.” F3080 was the name British Intelligence gave to a project to compile a documentary film on German atrocities.

The project originated in February 1945 in the Psychological Warfare Division of SHAEF (Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force). Hitchcock was recorded expressing his primary concern that “we should try to prevent people thinking that any of this was faked.”]

The testimony of the German soldier can be verified by multiple other witnesses, including British Ministry Of Information, which admitted that the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) would be involved in an ongoing anti-German propaganda campaign to distract the public from the horrifying atrocities committed by the Soviet army.

And Victor Cavendish-Bentick, the Head of British Psychological Warfare Executive (Propaganda), in a handwritten note, written on Aug 27th, 1943, confirmed that the alleged mass murder of Jews in the so-called ‘death camps’ was indeed a psy-op:

“We have had a good run for our money with this gas chamber story we have been putting about, but don’t we run the risk eventually we are going to be found out and when we are found out the collapse of that lie is going to bring the whole of our psychological warfare down with it? So isn’t it rather time now to let it drift off by itself and concentrate on other lines that we are running.” [Public Record Office Document F0371/34551 revealed by Stephen Mitford Goodson, Inside the South African Reserve Bank]

Of course, it would be very easy to confirm the ethnicity of the bodies in the mass graves at Dachau and Buchenwald simply by exhuming some of the bodies and running DNA tests on them. Any simple DNA test could confirm that the remains were Jewish or German. But as we know from all over Europe, Jewish groups have absolutely forbidden any of these “Jewish mass graves” to be disturbed because to do so would allegedly violate their “religious” beliefs, except where it’s convenient to them.

And now governments in America and Europe are spending tens of millions of dollars every year to make sure each and every impressionable school-age child is shown these faked images for one simple purpose: to transform the victimizers of World War II into the victims, to essentially illicit sympathy for the devil.

And here’s Hitchcock’s infamous fake-u-mentary:

Source: https://christiansfortruth.com/piles-of-corpses-at-dachau-and-buchenwald-were-dead-german-soldiers-staged-there-for-propaganda-purposes/

Fears of being accused of racism slowed the Italian government’s initial response to the coronavirus epidemic.

An Italian virologist has said that fears of being accused of racism slowed the Italian government’s initial response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic:-

Dr. Giorgio Palù is a Professor of Virology and Microbiology at the University of Padova, and he was formerly the President of the European and Italian Society for Virology. In an interview with CNN, he said that the reason the disease has struck Italy so fiercely is because the government delayed imposing travel restrictions on people coming from China until it was too late. He said the country’s response was “lazy in the beginning” because of “too much politics.”

“There was a proposal to isolate people coming from the epicenter, coming from China,” Palù told CNN. “Then it became seen as racist, but they were people coming from the outbreak.”

Since then, Italy has become the hardest-hit country in the world after China, and has had the most victims in Europe by far. The first confirmed cases of the infection in Italy were found in two Chinese tourists in January. As of now there have been nearly 36,000 confirmed cases, and nearly 4,000 people have died from the disease.

The shortsightedness of Italy’s government regarding the virus as a result of political correctness has not been limited to the national government. Dario Nardella, the Mayor of Florence, who is from the Left-wing Democratic Party, was urging Italians to “hug a Chinese” in early February out of concerns that coronavirus fears were leading to racism against the Chinese. Nardella even tweeted a video of himself hugging a Chinese man.

Other videos from February show Chinese people getting hugs from Italian passersby.

https://voiceofeurope.com/2020/03/italy-virologist-says-fears-of-racism-slowed-italys-coronavirus-response-florence-mayor-urged-italians-to-hug-a-chinese/

Shrewsbury MP criticised by Jewish leaders for appearance with far-right politicians

First Published 4 February 2020

Speakers at a National Conservatism conference in Rome included Hungary’s far-right prime minister Viktor Orban - Tory MP Daniel Kawczynski speaking.

Jewish leaders have condemned Tory MP Daniel Kawczynski for speaking at a conference alongside “some of Europe’s most notorious far-right politicians”.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews called on the Conservatives to discipline the backbencher, and struck out his defence of his appearance on Tuesday as “specious”.

The MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham was to speak on Tuesday afternoon at a National Conservatism conference in Rome, where speakers included Hungary’s far-right prime minister Viktor Orban.

Mr Kawczynski had sought to defend appearing alongside Mr Orban, and Italy’s Matteo Salvini, by arguing they “represent serious ideas and concerns, some of which are shared by many citizens of the UK”.

If the Conservative Party fails to discipline Mr Kawczynski, it runs the serious risk of the public assuming that they share his views on association with such people Board president Marie van der Zyl. The group representing Jews in Britain joined veteran Labour MP and leading anti-Semitism critic Dame Margaret Hodge in criticising him, while the Muslim Council of Britain said his behaviour was “unacceptable”.

Board president Marie van der Zyl said: “We condemn the decision by Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski to speak at a conference alongside some of Europe’s most notorious far-right politicians.

“Mr Kawczynski’s defence, that ‘it is only common sense to talk with parties and politicians that are either leading their respective countries, or will perhaps take power in the next few years’, is a specious one, for the simple reason that the MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham is not any sort of Government representative.

“If the Conservative Party fails to discipline Mr Kawczynski, it runs the serious risk of the public assuming that they share his views on association with such people.”

Mr Salvini is an anti-immigration hardliner while fellow speaker Ryszard Legutko is a Polish Law and Justice MEP who has reportedly described homophobia as a “totally fictitious problem”.

Also on the line-up was Marion Marechal, the niece of far-right leader Marine Le Pen. Ms Marechal has described France as becoming “the little niece of Islam”.

Mr Kawczynski, a Polish-born Brexiteer, had written to the Shropshire Star saying he would defy those who had “deplored” him by speaking at the conference regardless.

“Clearly, Messrs Orban and Salvini are not to everyone’s tastes,” he wrote.

“But they represent serious ideas and concerns, some of which are shared by many citizens of the UK.

“They have certainly proved electorally attractive in their own countries and have every right to speak at a conference on the subject of national sovereignty, the very thing they have pledged to defend and which accounts for their popularity with voters.”

Muslim Council of Britain spokesman Miqdaad Versi said: “It is unacceptable that anyone holding the position of MP speaks at a nationalist conference alongside Islamophobes and anti-Semites.

“It is even more disturbing that the Conservative chief whip appears to have known that Daniel Kawczynski MP was going to speak at a nationalist conference alongside far-right, racist politicians, and yet chose to take no action.”

Dame Margaret and the Jewish Labour Movement wrote to Tory chief whip Mark Spencer calling for the party to withdraw the whip from Mr Kawczynski.

In a letter alongside Labour MP Alex Sobel, she said Mr Kawczynski was “sharing a platform with a number of far-right European politicians who have made deeply offensive and dangerous comments”.

“The Conservative Party now has a choice. It can demonstrate that there are lines that should not be crossed by Conservative MPs,” they wrote.

Andrew Gwynne MP, Labour’s Shadow Communities Secretary, said: “It’s disgraceful that just one week after Holocaust Memorial Day Daniel Kawczynski has shared a platform with anti-Semites, Islamophobes and homophobes.

“He should be immediately suspended from the Conservative Party and Boris Johnson must answer questions about whether or not he was given permission by the Tories to attend.”

I guessed the Tory wasn't of 'Anglo-Saxon origin' - there are none with any courage or respect for free speech left in the House of Commons - or if there are one two left they are deep under cover. - Ed.

Source: Shropshire Star - Tory MP criticised by Jewish Leaders

Jewish groups praise and decry Trump’s executive order to protect Jewish college students

December 11, 2019

Immediately after President Donald Trump signed an executive order today meant to safeguard Jewish college students against discrimination, controversy ensued.

The order mandates the inclusion of Jewish college students among groups protected from discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Some Jewish community leaders said it was a bold step in fighting anti-Semitism, while others viewed it as a cynical ploy that could backfire.

Until now, Title VI has addressed discrimination based on race, ethnicity and country of origin, but not religion. A day before the signing, the New York Times and other outlets reported that the executive order would redefine Judaism as a nationality, which ostensibly would protect Jewish students under Title VI.

Those reports were inaccurate, but spread across the internet and opinion pages. Once the signed order was released, it showed that the main change was defining anti-Semitism as discrimination under the Title VI umbrella. It uses language from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, whose definition of anti-Semitism includes denying Jews the right to self-determination, claiming the State of Israel is “a racist endeavor” and “drawing comparisons with contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

Reaction from Jewish community leaders came swiftly.

Some focused on the rise in anti-Semitic speech and hate crimes on American campuses, lauding the president’s initiative for attempting to stem that tide. Others, even as they welcomed the added protection for Jewish students, expressed concerns about the possible suppression of free speech on campus. Still others criticized the timing of the executive order, coming on the same day as the White House Hanukkah parties, and criticized Trump for ignoring the very real anti-Semitism of the extreme right.

Here is a sampling of Jewish reaction:

The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations came out solidly in favor of the initiative:

“We welcome the historic executive order… With a dramatic rise in antisemitism at home and abroad in recent years, particularly on college campuses, the Jewish community has persistently advocated for the protections this measure provides against Jew-hatred. Jewish students are now included in the groups protected under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, meaning US institutions of higher education risk federal funding if they fail to act against antisemitic discrimination on their campuses. We hope this will abate the increasingly virulent Jew-hatred on display at some colleges and universities across the country. The Anti-Defamation League also praised the order, writing that “today’s announcement that the U.S. will adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of anti-Semitism is an important step acknowledging the growing concern about anti-Semitism on American college campuses. In a climate of rising anti-Semitism, this Executive Order provides valuable guidance on anti-Semitism, giving law enforcement and campus officials an important additional tool to help identify and fight this pernicious hate. It also reaffirms protection of Jews under Title VI without infringing on First Amendment rights. These are all important steps forward.”

The Republican Jewish Council called the signing “a truly historic and important moment for Jewish Americans. President Trump has extended to Jewish students very strong, meaningful legal protection from anti-Semitic discrimination. Sadly, every day, Jewish students on college campuses face outrageous attacks on their Jewish identity and beliefs. The rapid increase in such incidents in recent years is of great concern.”

The American Jewish Committee also welcomed the executive order, writing in a statement, “To date, responses to antisemitism on many campuses have often fallen short, leaving Jewish students vulnerable. Existing federal policy has not been fully enforced and today’s order merely gives Jews what other groups have long enjoyed—the right not to be subject to a hostile environment on campus. There is nothing inconsistent with protecting freedom of expression and providing Jews the same protections accorded other minorities.”

The group added a cautionary tone, however: “AJC does not consider the EO, or longstanding Department of Education guidance, to be designed to suppress rational criticism of Israel or its policies, and we will speak out against any attempt to do so. AJC also recognizes that there will be hard cases where it will be necessary to decide whether the speech in question is constitutionally protected or not.”

J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami led the opposition: “This executive order, like the stalled congressional legislation it is based on, appears designed less to combat anti-Semitism than to have a chilling effect on free speech and to crack down on campus critics of Israel. We feel it is misguided and harmful for the White House to unilaterally declare a broad range of nonviolent campus criticism of Israel to be anti-Semitic, especially at a time when the prime driver of anti-Semitism in this country is the xenophobic, white nationalist far-right.

“Kenneth S. Stern, the expert who drafted the definition of anti-Semitism adopted by this executive order, has publicly opposed its application to college campuses. In opposing the legislation that forms the basis for this executive order, Stern wrote in the New York Times that ‘If this bill becomes law…students and faculty members will be scared into silence, and administrators will err on the side of suppressing or censuring speech.’”

The Jewish Democratic Council of America also focused on the danger to free speech represented by the executive order, but had harsher words for Trump himself: “The day after yet another attack on Jewish Americans, and just days after President Trump characterized Jews as money-hungry ‘killers,’ President Trump has zero credibility to take meaningful action to combat the scourge of anti-Semitism for which he is partially responsible.

“If President Trump truly wanted to combat anti-Semitism, he would accept responsibility for his role in perpetuating anti-Semitic stereotypes and conspiracy theories, and emboldening white nationalism. … we’d prefer Trump stop inciting the flames of hatred against Jews as opposed to feigning his concern with a political stunt timed to correspond with the White House Hanukkah party.”

Comment: It's never enough for some of these groups, but looks like 'holocaust denial' legislation will be next. If Trump has not managed to start a war in the meantime - Ed

Source: https://www.jweekly.com/2019/12/11/jewish-groups-praise-and-decry-trumps-executive-order-to-protect-jewish-college-students/

Boris Johnson to pass anti-BDS - [Boycott, Divest, Sanctions] -Law

By Lahav Harkov December 16, 2019

"Official says "Antisemitism is an attack on the British way of life and British identity," he said. "Without our Jewish citizens we would be a lesser nation."

The new Conservative government in the UK will pass a law making it illegal for public bodies to engage with BDS, UK Special Envoy for post-Holocaust issues Eric Pickles said at the International Institute for Strategic Dialogue’s conference in Jerusalem on Sunday night.

Queen Elizabeth will read the traditional "Queen's Speech" – prepared for her by the prime minister and his cabinet, which outlines the government's agenda for the next year – at the opening of the new parliament on Thursday. A UK news website called "i" reported that Johnson will write the anti-boycott law into the speech.

The Conservative Party’s platform in the UKs general election last week included a commitment to "ban public bodies from imposing their own direct or indirect boycotts, disinvestment or sanctions campaigns against foreign countries. These undermine community cohesion."

The move is meant to bloc local councils controlled by the Labour Party from using taxpayer funds to boycott foreign countries, including Israel.

Pickles, who is also the chairman of the Conservative Friends of Israel, said that Labour's historic defeat in last week's election showed that the British people reject antisemitism.

"Antisemitism is an attack on the British way of life and British identity," he said. "Without our Jewish citizens, we would be a lesser nation."

-----------

Ed: At least it's clear who is running this government, and they still insist on calling 'anti-Zionism' anti 'Antisemitism'

Source: http://m.jpost.com/International/Boris-Johnson-to-pass-anti-BDS-law-official-says-611044

I fear that Labour's abortion law plans could lead us to a very dark place

26 November 2019

Amid all the eye-catching largesse of Labour’s manifesto — free broadband for all, the council house-building programme, and renationalisations — its radical proposals on abortion seem to have slipped through unnoticed.

However, it is vital we examine the party’s declaration that ‘we will uphold women’s reproductive rights and decriminalise abortions’. Decriminalising abortion would mean you could have one for any reason; you wouldn’t even be asked why you wanted it.

Right To Life campaigners say the plan has the potential to allow unlimited abortions right up to birth, well beyond the present 24-week limit, which is already around twice the average time limit on abortions in Europe.

Labour says there would be ‘wide public consultation on the detail of new laws and regulations’. Legislatively, it would mean scrapping the existing 1967 Abortion Act, which says you have to give a reason for an abortion and that two doctors have to sign it off.

It would involve repealing the relevant sections of the 1861 Offences Against The Person Act, which currently bans abortion. (The 1967 Abortion Act was brought in to allow wide-ranging exceptions, which is why it would become redundant.)

These are seismic changes concerning deeply important ethical issues — and they simply cannot go unremarked.

Moral

They could mean that abortion happens without constraints. If you don’t have to get the procedure signed off by two doctors independently, you could even choose to have one because you did not like the sex of the baby.

How deeply ironic that the party that makes a big deal about being pro-women would make it possible to abort girl foetuses on the basis of gender.

I do realise that, by comparison with Brexit, the economy, jobs and policing, decriminalising abortions may not be first among voters’ concerns. Fair enough.

But the character of a party can be determined by just these sorts of issues, which aren’t mainstream, but still matter.

Abortion is, whatever your view, a desperately serious moral question. It is, quite literally, a matter of life and death. And many people who, for pragmatic reasons, are pro-choice and think it best that abortion be legal in order to be safe will draw the line at what is tantamount to infanticide: late abortions up to birth.

Labour says there would be ‘wide public consultation on the detail of new laws and regulations’. Legislatively, it would mean scrapping the existing 1967 Abortion Act, which says you have to give a reason for an abortion and that two doctors have to sign it off, writes MELANIE MCDONAGH

I accept that the present abortion law doesn’t count for very much. That’s why there are more than 200,000 a year, most relatively early in pregnancy.

I can’t think of anyone who has ever been turned down for an abortion, even though they don’t come anywhere near qualifying for one under the existing legal criterion that continuing with the pregnancy would involve a serious risk to physical or mental health.

Two years ago, a Daily Mail investigation revealed that Marie Stopes, which has 60 clinics across England, signed off abortions for women they had never even met.

Undercover reporters were approved for abortions based on a brief phone conversation with a call centre worker and told there was no need to meet a doctor because they filled out the necessary forms ‘behind the scenes’, based on reasons given to staff over the phone. The discussions could be as short as 22 seconds.

At the time, Marie Stopes said: ‘We would like to reassure women our services comply fully with UK abortion law.’

If the proposal does mean doing away with the upper time limit, that would mean aborting foetuses at the same age as much-wanted premature babies, which we go out of our way, quite rightly, to keep alive. We can keep a baby alive at 23 weeks, which is already less than the existing limit. It is abhorrent to be countenancing increasing the limit — we should surely be thinking of decreasing it.

There is a real danger that Labour’s plans would make Britain’s abortion law one of the most radical in the world.

As I say, most EU countries have laws that restrict abortion to the first 12 weeks of life, the first trimester, which is when most British abortions happen. This isn’t to say that the foetus becomes human only then — ask any woman who’s been for her first pregnancy scan at 12 weeks — but it acknowledges that the foetus becomes more palpably human from that point.

More fundamentally, making abortion easier risks treating it as if it’s just another form of birth control — no more problematic than contraception — which means that we wouldn’t any longer acknowledge that it’s morally on a different level. To my mind, abortion means taking away a life.

And that’s where the British Medical Association seems morally astigmatic in backing the move. It has argued that ‘abortion law is out of step with the emphasis on patient autonomy found elsewhere in medicine’.

Likewise, Labour MP Stella Creasy, who has long campaigned for decriminalisation, remarks: ‘At the heart of this is: do we want women to have the same equal rights over their bodies that men have?’

Except that it’s not just about autonomy, and equal rights with men, is it? There are two lives here: abortion isn’t like having your tonsils out. It’s not just another medical procedure.

Dogmatic

It is this insistence on choice and equality that seems to override every other concern. Labour and the medical establishment may claim the procedures will be regulated and ethical, but the pressure from pro-choicers is to make them increasingly accessible to more and more women.

Abortion is a sensitive, highly charged issue, which divides people of all parties.

This move by Labour to decriminalise the procedure takes us into a very dark place where the humanity of the foetus isn’t acknowledged and prenatal human rights count for nothing. It’s also at odds with developments in neonatal care that make it possible to keep premature babies alive at younger ages.

And it is not supported by most women: a poll by Survation in 2017 suggested that 70 per cent of women favoured reducing the time limit on abortion; only 1 per cent were in favour of extending it.

That’s the rational approach, not this extremist, dogmatic policy. For me, it’s a reason not to vote Labour.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7725445/MELANIE-MCDONAGH-fear-Labours-abortion-law-plans-lead-dark-place.html

The Great Hate Crime Hoax

By Douglas Murray For The Mail On Sunday
26 October 2019

Do you feel ten per cent more hateful than you did this time last year? Do you think the British public as a whole are ten per cent more unpleasant in 2019 as compared to 2018?

If you believe the latest ‘hate crimes’ stats, then you may come to such a ludicrous conclusion.

Figures compiled by the Home Office claim that there were 103,379 hate crimes committed last year. A record number, and up ten per cent on the year before. Various campaign groups disguised as charities insist that this is merely ‘the tip of the iceberg’.

To which one might say simply: ‘Of course they do.’ For if you are sane and reasonable you will realise that all of this is nonsense – nonsense, in fact, of the purest, most disgraceful kind: professional nonsense, cooked up to serve a political purpose.

It is time that purpose was identified and named.

The foundations of the hate crime hoax started 20 years ago with the Macpherson Report on the murder of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence. As well as its good effects, that inquiry had a number of negative consequences. Two stand out. The first was that an offence against a person of sexual or ethnic minority became a crime of greater seriousness than a crime against someone of no minority group.

So if an old woman was hit over the head for her purse, that was just a crime. But if someone who was gay or black was hit over the head then that was not just a crime but a hate crime. A two-tier system of offence was created in which some crimes (with an identical effect upon the victim) were deemed worse than others.

But the second development was more damaging, still: Macpherson stated that a crime was a hate crime if it was ‘perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by malice or ill-will towards a social group’.

So if I get hit over the head I might be the victim of a bog-standard crime. But if I am hit over the head and think, or pretend to think, that it is because of my homosexuality, then we are in the realm not just of crime but of hate crime. And that means the sirens of the modern police force can really go off.

In the years since the Macpherson Report, the British police have done everything they can to prove that they are on the beat with this new orthodoxy.

They don’t just want to find hate crimes. They need to find hate crimes. Some years ago a friend of mine was accosted on a train late at night by a couple of rowdy drunks. Reporting the matter to police at the next station, the officers positively begged him to report it (once they found out he was gay) as a ‘hate crime’. He insisted that there was no such element to their abuse. The police seemed desperate to persuade him otherwise.

That is just one of the reasons why the statistics on hate crimes keep going up and up. The police want them. They want to be able to report them. They positively advertise for them.

In case anyone thinks that is an exaggeration, consider the pathetic video released by DCC Julie Cooke of Cheshire Constabulary. It took the form of an online message for ‘pronoun day’, which she described as ‘a day which is particularly important to people who identify as transgender or gender non-conforming’. Cooke wittered on: ‘Being misgendered can have a huge impact on somebody and their personal well-being. It can also be used as a form of abuse.’

And here is one of the problems of this form of touting for business. The Home Office’s statistics claim that, in the past year, ‘transphobic hate crimes’ rose by 37 per cent. That is a pretty horrific number – like all the other rising hate crimes numbers. Until you dig one centimetre beneath the surface. What exactly constitutes a transphobic hate crime? Murder? Mugging? Burglary? Well, once again we have to remember that these crimes are in the eye of the beholder. And consider just one such beholder from only a few days ago.

Ria Cooper is a glamour model based in Hull, who ten years ago (at the age of 15) became Britain’s youngest transgender woman. Other than that, there is no reason why the nation at large should have heard of her. Except that earlier this month it emerged that Ms Cooper recently contacted Humberside Police to tell them of a set of WhatsApp messages she had received she was reporting as ‘transphobic’. What were these messages? Well, they were from a photographer whom Cooper accuses of trying to scupper her modelling career.

The photographer reportedly pointed out that Cooper has a penis, which was not the sort of lady he was after. Cooper calls this ‘f****** disgusting behaviour’ and deemed it ‘transphobic’. So there is another ‘hate crime’ just there.

Of course, campaigning groups long-ago cottoned on to the fact that all of this suits their interests. I suspect that sometimes that interest is commercial.

The remaining LGBT organisations in Britain have relatively little to do with their time. Their battles are largely won, and presumably their careers and pension plans are at risk from this success.

So ‘rising hate crimes’ must provide a massive business opportunity for these groups. Other groups also benefit from this marketplace of grievance.

Last month, when Parliament returned to spend a couple more days bickering about Brexit, Labour MPs used the opportunity to attack the Prime Minister. On what? Why hate crimes of course. The ridiculous, fulminating MPs kept pretending that Britain is in the midst of a hate crimewave and that the PM himself is responsible.

Labour MP Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi and others insisted that Boris’s column last year defending the right of Muslim women to wear the burka (a column his opponents deliberately misrepresented) in fact caused a ‘spike’ in anti-Muslim hate crimes. They claim that such hate crimes rose 375 per cent in the week after his column.

Which sounds impressive until you realise this is a rise from eight reported incidents in a week to 38 reported incidents. Scepticism has been poured on these figures.

Labour MPs who were attacking the Prime Minister with these bogus statistics were only using the favoured tactic of recent years.

For the fact is that since the Brexit vote there has been a huge number of ways in which people opposed to the result have assailed the British public.

We have been called stupid, ignorant, gullible and more. But perhaps the favourite claim of all has been the claim that the Brexit vote unleashed a tidal wave of hate in the British public. Anti-Brexit campaigners repeatedly pretended that the tragic murder of a Polish man called Arek Jozwik in Harlow in August 2016 was a result of the referendum. The resulting trial found that the murder was a squalid and mundane event with no link whatsoever to Brexit. But that is par for the course.

In the wake of the referendum there have been claims that British voters celebrated the result by a wave of hate crimes against ethnic and sexual minorities. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is no country in the world more tolerant than this one. Yet time and again in the past 20 years – and never more so than since the referendum – we have been slandered and smeared.

Political campaigners have used bogus statistics to push their own political and sectarian interests. It is time that people named and shamed the smear-merchants. There are bigots out there, as there are in every country. But this is not a bigoted country. And we have the right to vote how we want to vote without being defamed as such.

If there was one wave all sensible people should wish for in the near future it should be a wave of scepticism about the claims of campaigners whose only interest is in doing down this country.

A country which has justifiable pride in our tolerance and should exercise a healthy dose of scepticism towards our critics.

Source: The Great Hate Crime Hoax

Now trans and gay hate crime will mean SIX months in jail after judges are ordered to crack down with harsher sentences than those that are given for domestic burglaries

By Steve Doughty / Daily Mail

Transgender hate offences to get harsher sentences than domestic burglaries Judges ordered to hand out tough jail terms in a crackdown on hate crimes

Figures revealed that transgender hate crimes up 37 per cent on the year before Sentencing Council denies the guideline is 'politically influenced or motivated'

Judges have been ordered to hand out tough jail terms in a crackdown on transgender and homophobic hate crimes.

Offenders found guilty of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexuality should get at least six months in prison, new sentencing guidelines state.

And there should be a six-year jail sentence for those convicted of the worst cases of intolerance against gay or transgender people.

The instructions, released yesterday by the judge-led Sentencing Council – the statutory body that recommends punishment levels – mean transgender hate offences will receive harsher sentences than domestic burglaries.

It comes after police figures revealed reports of hate crimes soared last year, with transgender hate crimes up 37 per cent on the year before.

Mr Justice Julian Goose, of the Council, said the guidelines would help the courts take a ‘consistent approach’ to sentencing the offences, adding: ‘Public order is essential for the safe-functioning of society and the law seeks to protect the public from behaviour which undermines this.’

The instructions, which will come into effect on January 1, follow a series of cases in which police have been accused of launching heavy-handed investigations into transgender hate crime allegations.

This year Surrey Police quizzed a Catholic mother-of-five after she was accused of ‘misgendering’ the trans daughter of an activist on social media by using the pronoun ‘him’.

Last week Thames Valley Police launched an inquiry into possible public order hate crimes by demonstrators who put up stickers in Oxford with messages such as: ‘Woman: noun. Adult human female.’

The guidelines, which judges and magistrates must follow unless they can show doing so would run against justice, are the first to apply to public order offences – which include the offence of ‘stirring up hatred based on race, religion or sexual orientation’.

This is the only public order offence for which offenders can be convicted for what they say, write, broadcast or post on the internet or social media.

Most cases of hate crime sentenced in the courts are convictions for ordinary offences – considered aggravated – because the criminal targeted a victim from a minority group.

The Sentencing Council said the least serious offences of stirring up racial hatred, in which people spread hate ‘recklessly’ without intending to do so, should be handed community punishments rather than jail time.

But the same does not apply to spreading hatred on religious or sexual orientation grounds.

The number of hate crimes reported to police has reached 100,000 a year for the first time.

Home Office figures showed a 10 per cent increase this year, with a surge in allegations of homophobic and transphobic abuse.

Police must record an incident as a hate crime if a victim believes they were targeted over their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.

There were 103,379 such reports in England and Wales in 2018/19, up from just over 94,000 in the previous 12 months. Transgender hate crimes jumped 37 per cent, to 2,333, and there were 14,500 cases involving sexual orientation, an increase of 25 per cent.

The number of incidents has more than doubled since 2012/13 when just 42,255 hate crimes were logged.

The Home Office said the rise was partly down to improvements in recording methods, but admitted it could also reflect a ‘real rise’ in crime levels.

There were 79,000 reports of race hate crimes, up 11 per cent, and incidents involving religious hate rose 3 per cent to 8,500.

For these offences, the new rules say the least serious offences should attract a six-month jail sentence.

For those who commit the hate crime from a position of authority, or plan to incite serious violence or whose activity was persistent and widespread, the typical jail sentence should be three years and as much as six.

By contrast, the Council’s rules mean burglars can avoid jail with a community sentence.

The Council said it wanted to reassure ‘concerned respondents the guideline is not politically influenced or motivated’.

But prison charity The Howard League criticised judges for advocating short jail terms.

It told the Council’s consultation: ‘The guidelines should be encouraging the use of effective community programmes rather than expensive, ineffective short-term prison sentences.’

Offenders found guilty of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexuality should get at least six months in prison, new sentencing guidelines state. And there should be a six-year jail sentence for those convicted of the worst cases of intolerance against gay or transgender people.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7577477/Now-trans-gay-hate-crime-mean-SIX-months-jail-judges-ordered-crack-down.html

Holocaust Denial Not Protected by Human-Rights Law, Court Says

By Hugo Miller October 3, 2019,

Photographs of [alleged] holocaust victims at the Auscwitz-Birkenau concentration camp museum in Poland.

Denying that the Holocaust ever happened isn’t a form of freedom of expression protected under the European Human Rights Convention, a top court has ruled in a case that stretches back nearly a decade.

Udo Pastoers, a German who suggested in a 2010 speech that the Holocaust never occurred, was fairly convicted under the country’s laws against the intentional defamation of Jewish people, the European Court of Human Rights ruled while rejecting his complaints.

Pastoers’ argument that his statements were protected by Article 10, which protects freedom of expression, was “manifestly ill-founded,” given that he “had intentionally stated untruths in order to defame the Jews and the persecution that they had suffered,” the Strasbourg, France-based court ruled on Thursday. His complaint that he was denied a fair trial in Germany was also rejected by the ECHR.

Pastoers had given a speech a day after Holocaust Remembrance Day in 2010, saying that the “the so-called Holocaust is being used for political and commercial purposes” and also referring to a “barrage of criticism and propagandistic lies” and “Auschwitz projections.” He was first convicted in 2012 by a German district court, and then a regional court rejected his appeal of the verdict less than a year later.

Anti-semitism has again been on the rise in Europe, statistics show, with France reporting a rise of 74% last year in acts motivated by such religious hatred. In Germany where some of the strongest rules against hate speech were designed to discourage such behavior, anti-semitic offenses climbed by 10% in 2018 with violent acts climbing by 60%.

The ECHR noted in its Thursday ruling that the German court had been thorough in its examination of Pastoer’s comments and hadn’t taken his remarks out of context. The tribunal said the German had deliberately obscured some of his remarks to try to get his message across more subtly.

“The impugned part had been inserted into the speech like ‘poison into a glass of water, hoping that it would not be detected immediately,’” the court said.

Source: www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-03/holocaust-denial-not-protected-by-human-rights-law-court-says

Police arrest Camborne man in connection with “Holocaust denial” broadcasts

Police have arrested a Holocaust denier from Camborne because of his anti-semitic broadcasts and social media posts.

Graham Hart, 67, was held for several hours before being released. To date, no charges have been brought. Earlier this year Cornwall Reports detailed how the Cornish Pirates rugby club had stopped playing Hart’s music after complaints about anti-semitism.

According to the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism: “A dossier provided by Campaign Against Anti-semitism has led to the arrest by Devon and Cornwall Police of a 67-year-old man from Camborne on Thursday as part of a pre-planned policing operation.

“The man was arrested on suspicion of producing a racist internet radio broadcast that could incite racial hatred under the Public Order Act 1986. He has since been released but remains under investigation pending further enquiries.

“Campaign Against Antisemitism’s Director of Investigations and Enforcement, Stephen Silverman, said: “The ease with which the internet has been harnessed in recent years by extremists as a vehicle for hate speech is a growing cause for alarm. Campaign Against Antisemitism commends Devon and Cornwall Police for its prompt response and diligent handling of this matter, and will be watching developments with interest.”

Hart is a Cornish nationalist whose anti-Jewish sentiments have brought run-ins with the police before. His latest arrest followed a campaign initiated by Penzance councillor Tim Dwelly, who runs a Facebook page called Cornwall Antisemitism Watch.

Hart has been a regular broadcaster on an internet radio station called “Revolution Radio.” A co-host, called Brizer, apparently based in Ireland, has now defended Hart and criticised Mr Dwelly.

Graham Hart's song "Hoax Train" is a clearly anti-semitic expression of Holocaust denial

In a torrid rant of anti-semitism, Brizer claims to know details of the arrest, alleging that eight police officers arrived at Hart’s house before taking him, and his computer and mobile phone, to the police station. Brizer has followed-up his initial claims with a further anti-semitic rant against Mr Dwelly today (Tuesday.)

Devon and Cornwall police have been asked to comment. The 1986 Public Order Act has for many years been the main law available to combat hate speech, but the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act has brought new offences before the courts. It is not immediately clear if Brizer’s social media posts, which are clearly anti-semitic, might be grounds for further police action.

Holocaust denial is a specific crime in 16 European countries, and in Israel, but not in the UK, which relies on more general race and hate laws.

Source: Anne North - Cornwall Reports - 4th June 2019

https://cornwallreports.co.uk/police-arrest-camborne-man-in-connection-with-holocaust-denial-broadcasts/

[Ed.] This article is hysterical in tone, but it is true that that 1986 Public Order Act has been the main weapon to combat free speech in the UK on the spurious grounds of alleged race 'hate'. Conviction under this legislation is virtually inevitable, as someone somewhere is always going to be offended. The 'Campaign against Antisemitism are attempting to further bend the law following the conviction of Alison Chabloz, using the 'malicious communications act', which was modified in 2002 to cover electronic communications. This is with the aim at protecting the dead from defamation - only not the gentile dead.

The truth will out, however hard the apparatchiks of the Media and the State fight to prevent it, as happened after the Chernobyl disaster.

The May Withdrawal Treaty would be a Disaster and could not be Renogotiated

Rodney Atkinsonon: April 24, 2019

There are those who have immaculate credentials as Brexiteers but who have recently decided to support the disastrous May Withdrawal Agreement (W/A). They nearly all agree that the Agreement is totally unacceptable but say that it does “at least mean we leave” and we can re-negotiate the terms later. International Treaty Law and the Withdrawal Agreement’s horrendous weakening of our economic and negotiating position make such an idea dangerously naive.

As Martin Howe QC has rightly stated this is not like a game of football where we can with a new leader make a strong recovery “in the second half”. Howe rightly says it is like a game of chess where all the key pieces have been lost (in the Withdrawal Agreement) and even the best Brexiteer can no longer win (in the trade negotiations to come).

Equally disastrous is the incorporation of this “deal” into an International Treaty with the EU from which it is virtually impossible to escape. Those who think this view wrong – like Professor Patrick Minford – say that the “letter of the law” will not prevail because “states can always withdraw from treaties”.

But revoking a treaty is not at all easy since most of the grounds for revocation refer to the State in question being “misled” or “corrupted” in some way. We know of course that in this case it is the people of Britain who have been misled by their own State throughout these 46 years of EU treaties and are being misled now by May pretending that this Withdrawal Agreement gets us out of the EU when it does not. Indeed it binds us more strongly, with no votes or power and it does so potentially indefinitely.

The Vienna Convention on Treaties does not care at all whether people and voters of a State have been misled. These treaties are between States and we cannot say that our Government has been misled – they are themselves the misleaders!

Treaties are either signed after a war when one side has been subjugated (that is how Britain got Gibraltar at the Treaty of Utrecht) or when there is simply a mutual desire and respect between two States with no existing bonds or controls or power relationship which disadvantages one party before they even start negotiating a treaty.

This is not the case here. We are not negotiating a treaty as a sovereign power with another sovereign power but as a supplicant prisoner of an empire which has legislated for us, regulated us and taxed us for 46 years to their advantage and whose power the May W/A continues to enforce after we have “left”.

Professor Minford says of the Treaty with the EU which May would sign:

It is not sufficient to say that because it has been signed it is indefinitely binding; this would only be sufficient if there was a supranational power that could enforce this.

But the WA establishes the supranational power – the EU itself – and we are bound by it in so many ways that they could legally attack our interests as soon as we seek fair trade, no freedom of movement, fair mutual tariffs and mutual recognition of standards for instance. EU countries are already threatening we can’t trade with them if we re-claim our fishing grounds!

In other words it is precisely our lack of sovereignty at the start of negotiations which weakens us irredeemably. Only the No Deal WTO option gives us that sovereignty.

In such circumstances we cannot negotiate, as an equal, a totally different economic, legal and constitutional relationship after we have signed an international treaty implementing May’s deal. Professor Minford says the EU State can see its economic interest in renegotiating this deal after we have signed it! But this deal is a comprehensive prison for the UK in which we are prey to every possible blackmail and dirty economic deal or laws directed at our industries, agriculture, finance and fishing.

Indeed in the transition period (which could turn out to be indefinite) the EU can sign us up to trade deals with other countries with tariffs and market access which could disadvantage our industries – and we would have no say in those terms! At the same time they prevent us from concluding our own free trade deals with third countries!

The balance of advantage after 46 years of EU regulatory and legislative power is decisively against us before we even sign a new treaty and the WA binds us possibly indefinitely to it – even threatening to remove N Ireland from our territory. Imagine we agree to WA and seek to overturn its provisions by negotiating a trade agreement with the USA and the Commonwealth. Would those countries be happy to help us break treaty law?

WA also gives the EU at least 2 more years to export more EU citizens to the UK who 1. could become UK citizens and gradually outvote Leavers 2. Give (in the WA) the EU sovereign power by increasing EU case law over these “supercitizens” whose social privileges in the UK are protected whereas UK citizens’ rights will not be!

REVOKING A TREATY UNDER THE VIENNA CONVENTION

I quote here from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties:

Article 45: Loss of a right to invoke a ground for invalidating, terminating, withdrawing from or suspending the operation of a treaty

A State may no longer invoke a ground for invalidating, terminating, withdrawing from or suspending the operation of a treaty under articles 46 to 50 or articles 60 and 62 if, after becoming aware of the facts:

it shall have expressly agreed that the treaty is valid or remains in force or continues in operation, as the case may be; or

(b)(it must by reason of its conduct be considered as having acquiesced in the validity of the treaty or in its maintenance in force or in operation, as the case may be.

(The UK could hardly negotiate over 3 years, pass domestic legislation and sign an International Treaty and claim it was “not aware of the facts”)

Article 50: Corruption of a representative of a State

If the expression of a State’s consent to be bound by a treaty has been procured through the corruption of its representative directly or indirectly by another negotiating State, the State may invoke such corruption as invalidating its consent to be bound by the treaty.

(But as we noted above it is the British people – not the British State which is the signatory – who have been misled and corrupted and there the Convention is silent)

Article 60 – ONLY a breach by the other party is a reason for termination..

(The EU, given such power over us, will certainly not break the terms of this unequal treaty)

Article 62: Fundamental change of circumstances

A fundamental change of circumstances which has occurred with regard to those existing at the time of the conclusion of a treaty, and which was not foreseen by the parties, may not be invoked as a ground for terminating or withdrawing from the treaty unless:

the existence of those circumstances constituted an essential basis of the consent of the parties to be bound by the treaty; and

(b) the effect of the change is radically to transform the extent of obligations still to be performed under the treaty.

(It is difficult to see any change of circumstances – apart from the break up of the EU itself – which would fit this description)

Finally of course this would be a Treaty which – unlike the Lisbon Treaty’s Article 50 permission to leave the EU – would contain no automatic power for the UK to leave. The EU would itself hold the key to the prison. And International Treaty Law would bind us to the terms we had signed.

In the Houses of Parliament we have Labour and Liberal Parties and Tory Remainers who think these disastrous terms do not bind us enough to the EU and scores of Tory Brexiteers who think they can sign a disastrous treaty and then get out of it!

Those whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad.

Source: - The May Withdrawal would be a Disaster and could not be Renogotiated