Watching the Donald Trump baby blimp fly over London as the US president visited us, his fans had an idea. Why not get a blimp and fly it over London? And why not make it the likeness of a leading politician? It was a bold, innovative and original idea. And so the creative minded Trumpers have bought a blimp of London Mayor Sadiq Khan. It’s dressed in a yellow bikini, to make his absurd decision to ban a ‘Beach Body Ready’ advert in 2016.
Sadiq Khan sees the balloon and quips: “If people want to spend their Saturday looking at me in a yellow bikini they’re welcome to do so – I don’t really think yellow’s my colour though.”
The thing is that it looks a lot like Manchester United manager Jose Mourinho.
Minted tax-exile Bono, aka Paul Hewson, aka the stately Mr G21, has not been wasting his bath time. He’s thought up a new way to irritate everyone: the U2 singer will wave the EU flag on stage when the band begin their European tour in Berlin. It’s “provocative”, says Bono in Germany’s Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper.
“I’m told a rock band is at its best when it’s a little transgressive: when it pushes the bounds of so-called good taste, when it shocks, when it surprises,” he writes. “Well, U2 is kicking off its tour in Berlin this week, and we’ve just had one of our more provocative ideas: during the show we’re going to wave a big, bright, blue EU flag.
With a rebel yell, Bono will wave the EU flag that pokes a finger in the eye of those elitist, conformist swine in Catalonia, Greece and Portugal. Waving the flag of those lands’, let’s call them the oppressors is, says Bono, a “radical act”, something akin to buttering your bread only on one side and taking one bottle into the shower.
Stop Press: In other news, the EU plans to keep the same flag after Brexit, with the UK’s star being adopted by planet Bono.
The Green Party has issued a statement on the sentencing of David Challenor, 50, father to the Green Party equalities spokesperson Aimee Challenor. He has been convicted of torturing and raping a 10-year-old girl in the loft of the family’s home in Coventry. Aimee is transgender, having been born a boy and transitioned at age 16. Those are the facts all media shares.”The Green Party was not aware of any of these allegations until the case concluded and Mr Challenor had been sentenced,” says the statement. Which seems a bit remiss.
Mr Challenor has not held any elected positions in the Green Party although Aimee appointed him as her election agent for the General Election in 2017 and local election in May 2018.
But he was a member of the Green Party until his sentencing. The Party did know who he was. And reports say those appointments to help his daughter took place after his arrest. Again, the Greens seem a little less than thorough when it comes to checking things.
Innocent until proven otherwise, of course. But some of the reporting seems to be targeting innocent Aimee as much as her disgusting father and the slapdash Greens.
Aimee Challenor, 20, planned to become the party’s deputy leader. The Guardian says ‘she had had no idea about the crimes but was withdrawing from the race to prevent the election process becoming “dominated by what my father has done”.’
“I did not know about the full details of the crimes my father has been found guilty of until very recently. It is also very difficult to believe that a parent can be guilty of such abhorrent acts. That might be hard for you to understand, or to believe, but it is the truth. I was taken into care a few years ago and have also lived in independent supported housing. There were sustained periods where I did not live in the family home.
“But I cannot be held responsible for the actions of my father. I am not to blame for his behavior. Yes, he was my election agent. This was one of a number of ways I was seeking to reconcile my relationship with my father after coming out of care. On reflection, I can understand that it was unacceptable for me to appoint my dad as my election agent when he had been arrested. I can now understand the potential risks of that decision. For that I am sorry.”
The Times is a little less sympathetic, saying “she had used her father as her election agent even though he faced charges of raping and torturing a 10-year-old girl”. Readers are told “Aimee lived with him in a small two-up, two-down house”. Why mention the size of the family home if not to cast aspersions? And this:
On both occasions she appointed her father as her election agent, legally responsible for running her campaign, even though he had been accused of or charged with the crimes, which were reported to police in late 2015. By the time of May’s elections he had a trial date.
Candidates’ election campaign leaflets are legally required to include the name of their agent or promoter. Challenor’s leaflets for both campaigns, seen by The Sunday Times, did not show her father’s correct name, instead giving it as “Baloo Challenor”.
Baloo, a character from Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book, was a nickname used by Challenor’s father in his work as an assistant Scout leader and volunteer with children’s gymnastics. He used his proper first name on the election nomination forms as Challenor’s agent.
The Mail is doubting, headlining the story: “Top Green Party star quits the party after hiring her father as her election agent despite knowing he was about to stand trial for rape and torture of a child.” The story begins:
“A transgender politician campaigning to be deputy leader of the Green Party hired her father as her election agent – despite knowing he was facing trial for the rape and torture of a child.”
Aimee Challenor’s gender is given top billing. She has condemned his “abhorrent crimes”, as anyone sane must. But the story of a depraved crime is being given a whiff of conspiracy. And over in the Sun, it’s pornographic: “ATTIC OF HORRORS Inside grotty torture den where sick rapist whipped girl, 10, and gave her electric shocks while dressed as a BABY.” Want to see where a child was tied to a beam, electrocuted and raped by man wearing an adult nappy? Maybe not.
Want to use a man’s sick crimes to cast a shadow of an innocent woman? Go ahead…
RIP John McCain (August 29, 1936 – August 25, 2018). Victor in six elections to the US Senate, McCain was the US navy pilot who crashed twice. He was was on the aircraft carrier USS Forrestal when his A-4 Skyhawk jet caught fire. He was hit by shrapnel by the plane’s exploding bombs. The accident cost 134 men their lives. He was shot down during the Vietnam War, bayonetted, beaten badly and held for five-and-a-half years as a prisoner in inhuman conditions at the infamous Hoa Lo prison. The admiral’s son survived months in solitary confinement and torture. When he ran for Congress in Arizona, he told a journalist who accused him of not being local:
“Listen pal. I spent 22 years in the Navy. My father was in the Navy. My grandfather was in the Navy. We in the military service tend to move a lot. We have to live in all parts of the country, all parts of the world. I wish I could have had the luxury, like you, of growing up and living and spending my entire life in a nice place like the First District of Arizona, but I was doing other things… The place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi.”
It’s entirely possible to be concerned about Brexit, the costs and pains of leaving the European Union. I think anything is worth the joy of doing so but am aware that not all share that view. However, there’s less to worry about when the pound falls because everyone thinks that it’s going to be more terrible than we all thought it was yesterday. Because the pound falling is the very cure for it all being more terrible than we thought it was going to be yesterday.
Thus Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England, says that a Hard Brexit has become more likely. The pound falls – this is good, this is the correct reaction to, the solution to, a Hard Brexit becoming more likely:
Sterling dropped against the dollar in early Friday trading after Bank of England boss Mark Carney said he believes the chances of a no deal Brexit are “uncomfortably high” and warned the government needs to do all it can to avoid leaving the EU with no agreement in place.
Contained within that reaction to the news is the solution to the news:
The pound declined on the currency markets in the wake of Mr Carney’s comments, falling below the $1.30 mark, but had recovered by early afternoon.
Mr Carney said that if a no-deal Brexit were to happen, it would mean disruption to trade and economic activity, as well as higher prices for a period of time.
Well, yes, a Hard Brexit would make Britain’s trading position more difficult. The cure for that is a lower pound:
Sterling went as low as $1.2975, or down 0.3%, following the comments, while British government bond prices rose.
Britain would be forced to revert to trading under World Trade Organisation rules it fails to reach an agreement on the terms for its exit from with the EU in March 2019.
WTO rules would mean that British exports would face tariff barriers when exported into the EU. That makes it more difficult to export and presumably, prices having this sort of effect, mean that we’d export less.
So, what do we want to happen in such circumstances? We’d like some method of making our exports cheaper even though they face those tariff barriers. A decline in the value of the pound does that nicely, it makes our exports cheaper. That is, a fall in the value of the pound is the cure for a no deal Brexit and the imposition of WTO barriers to our exports. The cure is in the very reaction to the news.
It’s worth pointing out that the pound has fallen, since the referendum vote, by more than we would need to compensate for a no deal Brexit. The reaction to the possibility has already taken place.
When Boris Johnson criticised Denmark’s absurd decision to ban the wearing of the burka in a to-deadline article for the Telegraph, he went on to liken women wearing the niqab to “letter boxes” and “bank robbers”. This, said many, was Johnson “fanning the flames of Islamophobia”. We’re with Johnson on his view that it’s wrong to tell “a free-born adult woman what she may or may not wear in a public place when she is simply minding her own business”. Denmark’s move to ban an item of clothing follows burqa bans in France, Austria and Belgium. The problem is that he’d ask a constituent visiting him at his MP surgery to to remove her veil – “If a female student turned up at school or at a university lecturer looking like a bank robber then ditto: those in authority should be allowed to converse openly with those that they are being asked to instruct.”
Reactions are many:
“They are absolutely demonising, misogynistic, hurtful comments and they are fanning the flames of Islamophobia. As a result, the thugs who are already snatching the headscarves of Muslim women will feel empowered that someone who is part of the establishment, who has been our foreign secretary, is giving them licence.” – Imam Qari Asim, an imam who sits on the government’s Anti-Muslim Hatred Working Group, in The Times.
“We’re still waiting for that to happen, which is not lost on a community that still feels vulnerable … My own congregation are increasingly reporting Islamophobic abuse, from having their headscarves removed to facing racist chants.” – Finsbury Park imam Mohammed Mahmoud.
Naz Shah – yep, her – wants the Conservative chair, Brandon Lewis, to send Johnson for mandatory equalities training. Shah, who once called for all Jews for be deported from Israel (she later went on a “journey” and apologised) is Labour’s shadow equalities minister. She calls Johnson’s comments “ugly and naked Islamophobia”.
An extract from Naz Shah’s letter
“Muslim women are having their burkas pulled off by thugs in our streets and Boris Johnson’s response is to mock them for ‘looking like letter boxes’. Our pound-shop Donald Trump is fanning the flames of Islamophobia to propel his grubby electoral ambitions.” – David Lammy MP.
Nothing to do with Jews, then. Right? No. Because on Twitter, Channel 4 News anchor Krishnan Guru-Murthy is introducing Jews:
Channel 4 News anchor Krishnan Guru-Murthy wonders about Jews
Why bring the Jews into it? Is the argument that Jews get more protection? Are Jews too powerful? Is it supposed Jewish privilege he’s wafting into the debate? What’s Guru-Murty’s point? The language around anti-Semitism has become nuanced, vague, deceptive and downright dishonest. Would a criticism of a Jew’s kippah or a woman’s sheitel (a wig be worn by very religious married Jewish women) be anti-Semitic? Is it racist to call orthodox Jews living in North London ‘Stamford Hill Cowboys’? We live in a time when many anti-Semites don’t like to make their hatred too explicit. You’re left looking for the verbal wink. And you get to the point where comparing a woman in a burqa to a letter box is presented as anti-Muslim – an assault on all Muslims and the religion of Islam – and not a lazy joke about an item of clothing worn by a relatively few Muslims.
It always comes back to the Jews
Over on the BBC, it’s all about Jews. On Newsnight – ” In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day’s headlines with Evan Davis -we get this:
A crass comment about women in burqas and you “have to ask” a question about Jews? To the knowing, sensitive and caring everything is about those pesky Jews, a group now portrayed as underserving of that ultimate 21st accolade: victimhood.
“I will root antisemites out of Labour – they do not speak for me,” says Jeremy Corbyn, whose “friendship” with those who would see all Jews dead is finally riding high on the news cycle. Having spent an age denying accusations of anti-semitism in Labour (and rewarding those who agreed with him), Corbyn says Jew hatred is rife in Labour but it’s got sod all to do with him, its leader.
Jez does not “for one moment accept that a Labour government would represent any kind of threat, let alone an ‘existential threat’, to Jewish life in Britain, as three Jewish newspapers recently claimed.” There is no threat to Jews from Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour. Zis ist vy he now tells readers of der Guardian zat Juden vill not be forcibly deported and / or shot:
That is why I want to make it absolutely clear that any government I lead will take whatever measures are necessary to guarantee the security of Jewish communities, Jewish schools, Jewish places of worship, Jewish social care, Jewish culture and Jewish life as a whole in this country.
As Jews sleep easy in the knowledge that a British Government led by Corbyn (as seen on Press TV!) will not seek to exterminate them, let no-one deny that the Labour leader is deeply commited to protecting Jews, including many of the wrong kind of Jews (see ‘Zios’, ‘baby killers’, blood-munchers, confident Jews, Tories, ‘Jew-Nazis’, Trump-ists, Jew bankers enslaving the other races, the uniquely barbaric Jews who never learn, Jews in the mainstream media and possibly the bloke with the drum at the front of Spurs’ Yid Army, although he might be Greek). Jeremy is not just trotting out any old guff. He means it. Just as he meant it when he said it on April 24 in the Evening Standard.
In today’s Guardian
In April’s Standard
“I am not antisemitic” says Jeremy Corbyn over and over and over. And if you don’t believe him, you can read his words and ask his friends…
Or so the claim is from David Campbell Bannerman, a Tory MEP, that those excessively loyal to the European Union should be charged with treason. Some of us Leave types would say that this could be a little extreme but there’s merit to the idea – then we’ll recall who it is suggesting it:
British people undermining the country through “extreme EU loyalty” must be tried for treason, a Tory MEP says.
David Campbell Bannerman has been accused of “putting the knife into free speech” after demanding the revival of an archaic law to prosecute strong allegiance to the EU.
The background here is a report out today suggesting that the offence of treason itself should be brought up to date. The current law dates from the time of Edward III and isn’t exactly attuned to modern circumstances. For example, none of the varied jihadis and terrorists have been charged under it even though they were quite obviously taking up arms against the Queen and her army. So, logically, change the law so that people like the Beatles can be charged with something which carries a significant sentence. Like life in prison, not the current maximum 10 year stretch.
David Bannerman, who represents the East of England constituency, was responding to a new report by the Policy Exchange think tank calling for an overhaul of treason laws. The Treason Act 1351 remains in force in the UK, but no longer provides secure ground for prosecuting terrorists who conspire to attack the UK, the group said.
Campbell Bannerman’s addition is that this should apply to those who would undermine the British state by excessive accordance with the EU’s wishes. And there’s certainly a theoretic possibility of such being treason, of course there is. If we pass a law stating such and such, then you conspire with foreign powers to undermine that law then arguably that really is treason. Despite it being fun to dream of hanging Peter Mandelson it’s unlikely that anyone has quite reached that stage as yet though.
All most fun and arguably entirely correct as well. Then we recall who it is that is making the suggestion:
Campbell Bannerman was a former Conservative Special Adviser to Northern Ireland Secretary Patrick Mayhew in the 1990s, before defecting to UKIP in 2004, and writing the bulk of their 2010 manifesto as Deputy Leader, which advocate limiting immigration down to 50,000 people a year, and included a five year freeze on permanent settlement.
Campbell Bannerman returned to the Conservatives in 2011, and has been an MEP for the East of England since 2009.
I was working for Ukip back then as a press officer. I saw that manifesto creation process – saw, sadly, some parts of the manifesto. We had to take it down rather swiftly – C-B had posted it up on the internet before anyone else had read it – because it was littered with truly bad ideas. Having met the man a number of times I don’t take this as an aberration either.
So it is with this idea of extending the definition of treason. I’m entirely minded to agree with it but considering the source there must be some appalling problem with it even if I can’t, as yet, work out what that problem is.
Billy Joel, the singer, thought it a good idea to wear a yellow Star of David stuck to his jacket during a concert to remind President Trump that “Nazis aren’t good people”. The stars are not yet official tour merchandise but give it time.
In the meanwhile, should all people who don’t like Trump wear the yellow stars Jews were forced to wear on pain of enslavement and death under the laws of the Third Reich? Or might it be that if you keep evoking Nazis, turning the horror of the Holocaust into a live event, you demean what went before, you reduce the horror and turn genocide into a routine happening?
Joel told CBS News that the president’s comments after a woman was killed last August when a suspected white supremacist struck a crowd of counterprotesters with a car “enraged” him.
“The president said, you know, ‘There’s some good people on that side …’ No, Nazis aren’t good people,” Joel told CBS in an interview that aired Sunday.
“It really enraged me, actually. My old man, his family got wiped out. They were slaughtered in Auschwitz. Him and his parents were able to get out. But then he was in the U.S. Army during the war and fought with Patton and was shot at by Nazis. My family suffered. And I think I actually have a right to do that.”
You don’t need murdered relatives to advertise your opinion that Nazis were bad dudes. Plenty of Germans whose family were Nazis – real ones – agree with you. But you do need to wonder how calling a prat like Trump a Nazi serves the victims of the greatest crime? Is Trump gassing people to death in industrial ovens? Are racial laws banning untermensch from marrying Gentiles and owning property on account of their race? Are we so needy and lacking in direction and moral purpose that we eye the Holocaust with envy, and invest huge power in every act of racism by some dickhead so that the knowing are elevated to the rank of saviours? It looks like it.
This crass, historically illiterate narcissism destroys the past. It undermines the truth. It buys into the nastiness that wonders why the Jews and the gypsies and the gays didn’t just fight harder. It makes the dead weak and complicit and the living their betters. It turns the Nazis into something eternal and magic, an anti-human that can be summoned at any moment and never beaten. What a low opinion of humanity that is.
“Wow! This has made my week,” says Richard Littler. “This is from the government’s *own* publication about the history of government communications. They mistakenly included a Scarfolk poster which encourages the killing of children. Clearly, nobody thought it was too extreme.”
The original Government pamphlet
UK Government says ‘shoot yer kids’
“You can download your own copy of this Scarfolk/UK government ‘collaboration’ from the government’s own site: quarterly.blog.gov.uk/download-a-pdf… (Hurry before they realise!).” They did realise that the fictional town of Scarfolk created by Richard as “a dystopian satire of the 1970s that somehow leaks into and reflects on current affairs” had become Government approved. And chances are whoever compiled the collection realised, too. The image has now been removed.
The advice to shoot your children appears in the July edition of Civil Service Quarterly. Produced by the Cabinet Office ‘A century of government communications’ , the publication tells us that top-down communiqués have “helped to shape modern Britain and have themselves been shaped by the changing media landscape and changes in society”.
In an era when the spread of social media and the proliferation of digital information sources makes us question the very nature of news and what constitutes a ‘fact’, it is worth remembering two things. First, we have been here before: communications can, often deliberately, distort and mislead. A royal proclamation in 1688 specifically referred to tackling the spread of ‘false news’ (echoing the ‘fake news’ of today). And, second, at their best – honest, open, informative and effective – communications can help to shape, improve and even save lives.
As we continue to listen, we are more likely to act appropriately on what people are telling us about what they need – and earn their trust – if we understand the public we serve. The Civil Service’s ambition to be the most diverse and inclusive employer in the UK by 2020 supports this aspiration.
Excellent communication that people trust is essential to a properly functioning democracy. That trust, built on the dialogue between public and state, is the touchstone of modern government communications.
It’s all about trust.
Detail from James II’s 1688 proclamation “to restrain the spreading of false news”
“I have never seen the government move so quickly in my life (and certainly not because of me)!” says Richard. ‘From my announcement of their error to them deleting and editing the documents was about 5 mins.”
Richard adds: “On the last page of Discovering Scarfolk (2014), I warned about the dangers of a Scarfolk-based, apocalyptic cult infiltrating the civil service… You’re welcome.”
The original Government pamphlet
Discovering Scarfolk – 2014
To prevent unnecessary bloodshed, Scarfolk Council has issued the following cease and desist letter to HM Government:
“The Government has tried replacing the Scarfolk poster with something patriotic. Is this some kind of photoshop challenge?”
Now updated – don’t shoot yer kids; shoot Germans instead
But it’s not gone. You can download the original pamphlet here.
Labour did adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA’s) definition of anti-Semitism. But it made a few tweaks. Corbyn’s Labour says it is not necessarily anti-Semitic to say Jews are more loyal to Israel than the UK. Jews are all Israelis, then – the country Corbyn and his fans hates above all others. And saying Jews / Israelis / Zionists are like Nazis is only bad if “anti-Semitic intent” can be proven. Not content with goading living Jews, Cobyn’s Labour attacks the dead ones too, especially the 6 million Jews murdered by actual Nazis. His Labour makes the murdered deserving of genocide. It is revolting. But the Left can’t see it – or doesn’t want to.
Under Labour’s rules criticising a Muslim, a woman or a transsexual requires no proof of intent to label the speaker a bigot? Labour adheres to the Macpherson definition of racism: an act perceived by the victim to be racist is racist. Unless your a Jew in which case: prove it. Macpherson is a bizarre rule that necessitates the ability to read minds and judge another’s thoughts. It can make you an unwitting racist. It’s an absurd, anti-democratic ruling that makes us all potential racists. But Labour supports it. Criticise the London mayor, a Muslim, and you are Islamophobic, says Labour. Abuse the Windrush Generation and you are a racist, says Labour. But go for a Jew and Labour says its all about free expression and free speech.
Why is it different for Jews? Labour says it’s about freedom of speech, the need to be able to criticise Israel, which, after all, is one of its pet hobbies and a cornerstone requirement of being a caring and sensitive Corbynista. Fair enough. But why aren’t Muslims or blacks treated the same way? Why is freedom of speech vital to Labour when it comes to lambasting Jews and the world’s one Jewish State but unimportant when criticising Islam? Why-oh-why are Jews singled out? Is it because, you know, Labour is a haven for anti-Semites?
Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour turn things upside for Jews. So here’s a message for those contortionists.
Dame Margaret, the MP for Barking, wrote in The Guardian that she “confronted Jeremy Corbyn in Parliament and told him to his face what I and many others are feeling”. Labour was “so distrusted by the Jewish community, we are the last people on earth, at this time, who should think about amending a widely accepted definition of anti-Semitism.” No Jew should vote Labour. I’d like every Jewish MP to become an independent. The idea that voting for a Jew and thus helping Corbyn become Prime Minister
To Corbyn’s Labour, Jews are ok to demonise. They are the useful Other, the uniquely barbaric enemy within against which everyone of a sound mind and good morals can rail and mass.
The BBC reports:
Labour MP Margaret Hodge faces “action” by the party after reportedly swearing at Jeremy Corbyn and calling him an “anti-Semite”. A spokesman for the Labour leader said what had happened was “clearly unacceptable between colleagues”.
Sod the Jew hatred in Labour. Just clamp down on anyone who dares to speak out. So much for freedom of expression…
Nigel Farage, former leader of UKIP and now LBC radio opinion jock, says the photo above is an “insult” to “victims of sexual abuse and rape in Malmo”. He adds for good measure: “These people are sick.” Which people is a little unclear when it’s pointed out that the photo is clearly a fake to all but the most monocular tweeters and was taken in Saskatoon, Canada, back in September 2015.
In 2017, a Syrian refugee told local media about her plight: “We lived five years within the war there, so it’s too hard for us to talk again. It’s always the same story. People die every day by different ways, but they die every day.”
Also in 2017, the BBC did a “reality check” in claims that Malmo is the “rape capital of Europe”.
Reality Check verdict: Malmo, along with other urban centres in Sweden, has one of the highest levels of reported rapes in proportion to population in the EU, mainly due to the strictness of Swedish laws and how rape is recorded in the country.
The rate of reported rapes in Malmo has not dramatically risen in recent years and has in fact declined from its peak in 2010, before the recent large increases in refugees.
It is not possible to connect crimes to the ethnicity of the perpetrators as such data is not published.
Here’s the bottom line: We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening. We’ve got to keep our country safe. (Applause.) You look at what’s happening in Germany. You look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden? Who would believe this? Sweden? They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.
And what of the alleged victim’s identity? The Local noted:
The number of rapes reported to authorities in Sweden increased by 10 percent in 2017, according to new preliminary figures from the country’s National Council on Crime Prevention (Brå)…
The number of sex crimes reported in Sweden increased by eight percent (1,600 reports), with the number of reported rapes in particular increasing by 10 percent – 663 reported rapes more than 2016 and reaching a total of 7,230.
What can we learn from the stats?
Mid Sweden University Criminologist Teresa Silva told The Local that the statistics should be treated with care.
“We always have to be careful with analyzing reported crimes. We don’t know from the reported crime statistics whether the crime has actually occurred more, or if it’s just that people report it more. They are always tricky, you have to think beyond the statistics themselves. Years ago these kind of crimes, sex crimes, were not spoken about and had stigma attached to them.”
“So what do these stats not tell us? Detailed characteristics of the victims for example – we don’t know their demographic and social profile, or if more immigrants are reporting these crimes after becoming more integrated in Sweden and aware that they can report them.”
Police do not record the ethnicity of either criminals or victims. But there is a problem. How bad is it and how much of it is down to refugees? In January 2018, The Times wrote:
Statistics published last week revealed the percentage of women who reported being victims of sex crimes rose from 1.4% in 2012 to 4.1% in 2016. In 2014 a study on the geography of outdoor rape in Stockholm found two-thirds of the suspects were non-Swedish citizens.
“Our government declared itself the world’s first feminist government, yet they have quietly abandoned women,” [Paulina] Neuding said. “There is mounting evidence that large-scale migration of men from extremely patriarchal cultures is limiting women’s freedom.”
And the police? In January 2016, Swedish police and media were accused of covering up a spate of sexual offences involving young migrants at We Are Sthlm, a free summer youth festival in Stockholm. When truth gets censored and mangled, you only see what you want to see. Andrew Brown notes:
…the Stockholm police failed to report the sex assaults at the festival for fear of worsening ethnic tensions. And it was understood by all parties that this would lead to an electoral advantage for the Sweden Democrats…
So teenage girls were systematically assaulted and robbed by gangs of young foreign men because too many powerful people found their suffering was inconvenient. The result of this cover-up will be far more damaging than the truth could have been.
On Twitter, Jeremy Corbyn, Labour Party leader and Prime Minister in waiting, tells his followers that Donald Trump should not be on a State visit to the UK because: “When we divide ourselves by racism, misogyny and hate, we all lose. When we are united in hope, with common goals, we can all win.#TrumpProtest #TrumpVisitsUK.” Wise words. But is Corbyn listening to them?
As Charlie Peters tweets, Jezza might be a bit of hypocrite:
Hamas and Hezbollah: had tea with them in Parliament
The IRA: had tea with them in Parliament
Anti-Semite Raed Salah: had tea with him in Parliament
President of the United States: “I wouldn’t have invited him”
Corbyn then followed this up with a wonderful tweet:
The #DurhamMinersGala shows the strength of our movement. History teaches us that those at the top never conceded anything without it being demanded from those below.
So that’s why he supports Brexit – which the nuanced and slippery Corbyn sort of does and sort of doesn’t.
Doubtless Corbyn will also be supporting Iranian women defying their totalitarian regime – the one he worked for when fronting shows for Press TV. Corbyn was paid £20,000 by the broadcaster described by one Guardian writer as “a platform for the full fascist conspiracy theory of supernatural Jewish power”. Not that Corbyn’s all that good at spotting such nastiness. He thinks he is, however, because Labour has rewritten the rules on what anti-Semitism is, deciding that it knows better than Jews what constitutes Jew hatred.
Over in Iran women are dancing to show their disgust for the country’s absurd laws on chastity and modesty. How absurd? Well, Maedeh Hojabri, 18, was arrested for the apparent crime of posting on Instagram videos of herself dancing – without her headscarf! Banged up by the hijab police, Hojabri soon apologised in public. What brought about her change of mind can only be guessed at. But other Iranian women are inspired by her bravery. They’re posting videos under the hashtag #dancing_isn’t_a_crime and #dance_to_freedom.
As Corbyn’s retweets those hashtags (not yet – but he’ll get round to it, we’re sure), here’s the good news: lots of people in the UK like to protest against racism, misogyny and assaults on human autonomy. Many were doing just that when they formed The Stop Trump Coalition and created the ‘Carnival of Resistance’ to President Trump’s visit to the UK. Unless it was just self-aggrandizing, monocular tosh. Nah! Hundreds of thousands of these good people who tell us we’re heading back to the 1930s and Hitler is among us once more will surely march against the rampant rise and rise of Jew hatred. And Corbyn will be marching at their head – just as soon as he’s finished his tea with the people whose charter calls for all Jews to be killed. And you know who else liked genocide and wanted all Jews to be murdered…
Situations Vacant: Brexit Secretary – the one person in the country who can’t just shout just “get the **** on with it” at the telly. David Davis, who was leading negotiations to leave the EU, has resigned from the government, a man “unpersuaded” that the UK’s negotiating approach “will not just lead to further demands for concessions” from the wonks in Brussels. Good news, then, for Leavers who don’t fancy Theresa May’s plans for a soggy Brexit; and good news for Remainers who want to talk about Brexit “chaos” and demand a second referendum (oh, save us).
Who gets the job? Thrusting Michael Gove, maybe. How about Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary who says May’s Brexit plans are like a “big turd”? So selfless is Johnson that he won’t do a Davis and resign when invited to sell a steaming pile of crap to the majority of us who voted to leave the EU, but back it to the hilt, as he has done. “I hate this,” said Andrea Leadsom during a big meeting Cabinet meeting at the PM’s country pile in Chequers, but “I’ll support you no matter what decision you take.” The EU’s negotiators don’t stand a chance against these principled pillars of public service.
After the excitement and decisiveness of the Referendum result, we’ve been told that there are multiple Brexits. The UK is leaving the EU. Unless there’s an appetite for a second referendum – which away from Gina Miller’s white stuccoed salon and Tony Blair’s bankers’ orgy there isn’t – we’re heading out. The details will then be sorted out, which was ever the way. Brexit has come to resemble less a divorce than one of the aforesaid Blair and David Cameron’s attacks on Iraq and Libya: identify the useful enemy, champion ‘regime change’, blow the whole thing up and let god knows who sort out what happens next.
What unites the factions behind Jeremy Cobyn’s Labour? In a word: Jews. Obscurantist theories about Jews are now back in the mainstream. Jew baiting and Jew hatred never went away, of course. Overt anti-Semitism in the West became unfashionable, the stuff of far-right goons and governments in the Middle East. But now thanks to Corbyn and his fans, Jew hatred is the done thing in the left wing. They say it’s all “smears“. It isn’t. Labour has rejected the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s [IHRA] definition of antisemitism. Its working definition is accepted by thousands of public bodies. But not the British Labour party.
The IRHA defined anti-Semitism thus:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
That definition is adopted by the current UK government, the Crown Prosecution Service and many other nations. But Labour has written its own rules. And it’s one so to help itself deal with members accused of Jew hatred. You might suppose that Jews know anti-Semitism when they hear it. Corbyn’s Labour knows best. Board of Deputies President Marie van der Zyl and Jewish Leadership Council Chair Jonathan Goldstein can’t work out why Labour has move to rework the definition of Jw hatred. “It is for Jews to determine for themselves what antisemitism is. they says. “The UK Jewish community has adopted in full the IHRA definition of antisemitism, as have the British Government, Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament, 124 local authorities across the country and numerous governments around the world… (Labour’s) actions only dilute the definition and further erode the existing lack of confidence that British Jews have in their sincerity to tackle antisemitism within the Labour movement.”
Recently departed Labour staffers describe as a “political project” the party’s decision to make Jews the only ethnic minority Labour denies the right to define the racism they face.
Why Jews? A study found that “more than half of Muslims (55%) held at least one anti-Semitic attitude”. It’s absurd and insulting to think all Muslims are Jew haters. But Corbyn – formerly a presenter on Iran’s Press TV – courts the Islamist vote. And Corbynist do so love a conspiracy theory. Jews, you know, are behind anything and everything, including the Salisbury chemical weapons attack.
It ought to be notorious that antisemitism is an anti-democratic project built on almost two millennia of religious prejudice. The Tsarists and fascists used it to dismiss human rights and free elections as tricks the Jews used to hide their secret power. The old Marxist-Leninists who surround Corbyn were not so different. They also believed human rights and democracy were shams – only in this instance they hid the machinations of corporate capitalism. It’s only a small leap to say the capitalists are Jews – or “Rothschilds” as Corbyn’s supporters so tellingly call them – and you have reached the other side.
Conspiracy theorists toss up all manner of oddities. Corbyn’s supporters deride those who say climate change is hyped or ‘fake news’ but can buy a Left-wing magazine that shows this on is front page:
And what of the letter written to the Guardian by find minds worried that “the debate on anti-Semitism has been framed…to weaponise it against a single political figure just ahead of important elections”?
How can it be that so many self-proclaimed anti-racists on the Left have a problem with Jews? And why can’t they see what anti-Semitism looks like?
Owen Jones is such a wag really, isn’t he? Apparently flying a hot air balloon that looks like a caricature of Trump over London during his upcoming visit is going to say something. Even that it will upset, possibly shock, Americans.
That blimp will be the perfect mascot for the mass demonstrations that will form Donald Trump’s welcoming party next week. Trump is hoping to use Britain as a perverse PR exercise, to show that he has indeed made America “great again”, that the country is now respected. Instead images will be broadcast across the globe of thousands of the citizens of America’s closest ally ridiculing the most powerful man on Earth, accompanied by a giant balloon of the president in a nappy.
You see, the Americans have that First Amendment to their Constitution. And they believe in it, they really believe:
A giant balloon dubbed “Trump baby” has been given the green light to fly near parliament during the president’s UK visit.
London mayor Sadiq Khan’s Greater London Authority has approved a request for the flight after thousands signed a petition and a crowdfunding campaign raised more than £16,000 to get the six-metre inflatable off the ground.
Strict rules are in place for the flight from Parliament Square Gardens, with the balloon being tethered to the ground and restricted from floating higher than 30m (98ft).
That First Amendment giving an absolute right to free speech. They’ve even got a system of determining what is free speech that is unlimited and what can be limited for reasons of security – causing a riot isn’t something anyone wants for example – called the Supreme Court:
Campaigners raised almost £18,000 to pay for the inflatable, which they said reflects Mr Trump’s character as an “angry baby with a fragile ego and tiny hands”
Trump baby blimp is ‘biggest ever insult to a sitting president’, Nigel Farage claims
I used to work for Nigel but will disagree with him here. He and I have said far worse about Obama to each other for example.
And Americans really, really, believe in that free speech stuff. It was noted that burning the American flag is likely to cause a riot – and it is, it’s their equivalent of trying to grope the Queen or something. You’ll not survive trying it unharmed. But the Supreme Court considered it – there was a law banning flag burning sa a result of the likely outrage of doing it – and decided that burning the flag is political speech. Which it is of course. And as such people were free to do it. And to accept the consequences of doing so as well.
And again, Americans really, really, believe in free speech. Sure, what you can say is limited by the libel laws. Politicians aren’t protected by the general libel laws. They’ve got to prove malicious libel – not just that what you said is untrue, that it’s untrue and damaging, but also that you said it to deliberately harm them. A tough set of tests to pass.
By American standards a balloon of Trump in a nappy is small beer indeed. Actually, the likely response is for them to say :
“Gee, These Brits, they too have this free speech thing. They’re almost as free as us I guess. Almost.”
The cretinous rule that led to 12-year-old Billy Caldwell’s medicine being confiscated at Heathrow airport has not been undone. It’s been paused. The matter of how Billy’s mother, Charlotte Caldwell, can best care for her ill and suffering son reached the desk of the Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, who in his wisdom granted a licence for cannabis oil to be administered to the boy at home. Javid’s never met the lad but as a former banker he is ideally placed to know what’s best for Billy.
A doctor in Northern Ireland thought he knew what was best for Billy. In 2017 that GP saw the improvement in Billy after Charlotte had taken him to America to see paediatric neurologists. They had prescribed cannabis oils. And these drugged helped. The GP continued the treatment, prescribing medicinal cannabis oil on the NHS. It continued to work. Billy went 300 says without an epileptic seizure. Then the Home Office spotted the horror and ordered the GP not to renew the prescription. The GP was breaking the law. Give Billy the medicine and be disbarred. But now the Home Secretary says the law can be bent and Billy can get a medicine that helps him.
Javid has been advised, of course. He’s listened to experts, considered the options and the evidence, and, as an adult, made up his own mind about medical cannabis. The problem is that he and other politicians get to make up your mind as well, or at least turn you into a social pariah if you consider the laws they pass and leave unchallenged wrong, and decide that medical cannabis is helpful.
The Government has issued a statement to celebrate its humanity. “The Department of Health yesterday received an emergency licence application from Belfast Trust clinicians regarding medicinal cannabis use for Billy Caldwell. An emergency licence has today been issued by the department, replicating the licence issued last month by the Home Office for treatment at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in London. We have also been in discussions with the Home Office to finalise arrangements for the immediate transportation of Billy’s medicine from London to the Belfast Trust.”
Funny, no, how the sight of an ill child having his medicine confiscated by the uniforms can change minds. As TV crews broadcast images of Billy hugging his careworn mother, the Home Office was telling us there is “no recognised medicinal benefit” to cannabis. Anyone using cannabis to dull the pain and the symptoms of MS, cancer, epilepsy and more was a fool and a criminal. Now, a few weeks later, the politicos think there might be something useful in cannabis. No new findings have been made in that time but there has been lots of bad Press for the Government.
So will all parents have to fight the law as hard as Billy Caldwell’s mum to improve the lives for their flesh and blood? The Government is investigating laws around medical cannabis. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs is musing on the “balance of harms and public health needs”. But this is about who knows what’s best for the sufferer: their loving mum or the authoritarian State?
Remember Nick? Of course you do. He was the whistleblower who knew all about VIP peadophiles abusing and murdering children in Westminster. He’s heading to court. No, no to confront the perverts. He’s in count to answer 12 counts of pervert6ing the course of justice and one count of fraud.
The People had the scoop
Sunday People – Nick
Thanks to Nick’s allegations – which one leading copper called “credible and true”; detective superintendent Kenny McDonald, the man heading Operation Midland, knew everything was true before the investigation was over and any trial had even begun – police, who had taken to calling accusers “victims” investigated former Prime Minister Ted Heath (who was stubbornly dead at the time and unable to help police with their enquiries), former Home Secretary Leon Brittan (also dead – his accuser said he pointed the finger at him for a ‘joke’), Field Marshall Lord Bramall (alive and innocent) and former Tory MP Harvey Proctor (also alive and innocent). All four innocent men had their names dragged through the mud and reputations brutally damaged.
“Named’? Surely “innocent” or “accused”
The story was popular with the Daily Mirror and associated titles. But whilst the Daily Mail gives an entire page to the story of Nick’s trial, the Mirror buries it on”NAMED: EX-PM Ted Heath”, the page 7. In a small and short column headlined “VIP sex gang accuser Nick faces 13 raps” and a photo of Ted Heath captioned “NAMED: Ex-PM Ted Heath”, we read that Nick is heading to court and that “detectives said his claims…were ‘credible’.” Not quite. They said Nick’s allegations which sparked Operation Midland were “credible and true”. The Mirror’s sister title The People called it a “sensation”. Fiction was treated as fact.
Of course, anyone into conspiracy theories will roll their eyes and think Nick the accuser morphing into Nick the defendant was always going to happen. The rest of us should wonder about due process and how claims of historical sex abuse came to define policing and bind a nation.
Compare and contrast the following news on Clean Bandit (the soundtrack for Marks & Spencer – the bands rider is Marks & Spencer mozzarella salads and quinoa) – fronted by a couple of poshos, including Grace Chatto. In 2017, Chatto wore a pro-Jeremy Corbyn t-shirt for a BBC broadcast. In a bid to retain its commitment to political impartiality, the Beeb blurred out the slogan championing ‘Jeremy Corbyn’, theformerstar of Iran’s Press TV. Chatto, a keen Corbynist, talked about that and the band’s headlining of Jez Fest. Chatto told the Huffington Post:
“Well, I think the BBC has shown, you know, they showed a really terrible bias against Jeremy Corbyn in the run-up to the general election, and that [censorship] was just part of it…
[Labour] had that huge triumph in the election, and I think the media’s been a bit different [since the election result]. But now the BBC bias is kind of like creeping back a little bit. I think, anyway…
“For me, I’m not that interested in reading newspapers, for example, so the Labour Live event is a really good way for me to engage in party politics and hear speeches and have discussions. It’s all changing.”
In 2015, Clean Bandit were at another politically infused festival: the European Olympic Games in enlightened Azerbaijan. That’s the country where “dissenting voices are practically absent from mainstream media and critical journalists risk arrest and imprisonment”.
“President Ilham Aliyev has been waging a relentless war against his remaining critics,” Reporters Without Borders said in 2017. It said “independent journalists and bloggers are thrown in prison if they do not first yield to harassment, beatings, blackmail, or bribes.”
Emin Milli had something to say about the The Games:
UK band Clean Bandit, the supposed stars of the closing ceremony, did not even mention their appearance to their thousands of social media followers…
The regime decided it would target the messengers, banning journalists and human rights activists from the Guardian, Platform and Amnesty from entering Azerbaijan during the games.
t seemed like a public relations disaster but perhaps Aliyev doesn’t care anymore. His people have even started issuing threats to Azerbaijanis abroad.
Last week, I received a message from Azad Rahimov, Aliyev’s sports minister: “We will get you wherever you are and the state will punish you for this smear campaign against the state that you have organised. You will get punished for this. You will not be able to walk freely in Berlin or anywhere else. You must know this.”
It would appear that Azerbaijani journalists and activists are not safe at home or abroad.
Something else for censorship-busting Chatto not to read about in the papers she doesn’t read.
One of the long running shouting matches out there is over the legalisation of cannabis. It’s worth remembering that it’s only just over a century since it was actually legal. Actually, back in Victorian England everything was legal, yes including the morphine and opium. It was concern over people being able to enjoy themselves which led to both the drugs bans and that idiot Prohibition over in the US.
Given that cannabis doesn’t harm anyone why not undo that historic mistake and make it legal again?
The report from the Institute of Economic Affairs has valued the UK’s black market in cannabis at £2.6bn.
OK, there’s quite a lot of it going on already then.
A report from the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) says decriminalising the Class B drug would also lead to savings for the police and other public services.
Well, yes, there’s an awful lot of idiocy that we’ll be able to stop doing.
Margaret Thatcher’s favourite free-market thinktank has called on the government to legalise cannabis, arguing that the move could save more than £1bn generated from extra taxes and other savings in public services.
The thing is though that we don’t really want to do it for the tax take. The point being that we’re only here talking about consenting adults. And it’s a basic matter of freedom and liberty that consenting adults should be allowed to get up to what adults consent to. Sure, some of these things will be wasteful – say, Simon Cowell – some will be damaging – Simon Cowell – and yet that’s the whole point of freedom itself. We get to do as we wish, even Simon Cowell. The only truly moral constraint is when our activities prevent others from enjoying those same rights.
So, legalise cannabis just in order to legalise cannabis.
As the report itself notes, if we do legalise it then we can tax it. Actually, we could tax it pretty highly and still have it being cheaper than the illegal stuff is today. And we’ve got to gain our tax revenue from somewhere. So, yes, tax it and collect some money.
But the reason for the legalisation is because there’s no reason it should be illegal.
It is possible – gosh, it might even be – that Donald Trump is a little over the top in his rhetoric and beliefs. It’s also entirely true that he doesn’t quite grasp the right end of the stick on a number of points. But that doesn’t mean that everything he says is wrong. Such as this, that the European Union was set up to be in opposition to America:
During the President’s speech in Fargo, North Dakota, he blasted the EU for taking “advantage” of the US.
He said: “We love the countries of the European Union.
“But the European Union was set up to take advantage of the United States, to attack our piggy bank.
“And you know what? We can’t let that happen.”
Yes, over the top and all that. But there is still much more than just a grain of truth to it. For the EU really was set up in order to be against the US.
Not in the sense of being in a shooting war with them of course. But to be an alternative power in an economic war, most certainly. Much of what the EU does only makes sense if it is all about building up the continent into being a global power. The euro, for example, is meant to weld the various economies together. We’ve got the EU diplomatic service which is meant, over time, to take the place of the various national ones. That we’ve five – count ’em, five – Presidents of Europe might be overshoot but it’s all part of that building a Federal Government of Europe.
This isn’t, despite the fact that I am, froth mouthed anti-EUism. This is what the founders of the thing, the current defenders of it, all insist is true. They want Europe to be that global power, so as to be in opposition to what they see as that gauche Americanism.
Whether we all think this is a good idea r not is another thing. But Trump is right here. The EU always was meant to be a counterbalance to the US.
Why this is relevant to sufferers and stoners is that on June 22 Taoiseach Leo Varadkar told the British-Irish Council in Guernsey that legalising marijuana is on his agenda:
“We’re conscious that Portugal has done it and has had some success in moving it from a criminal justice matter to a health and addiction issue and I’m very conscious that cannabis has been decriminalised in every state on the west coast of the United States. Colorado, most recently Canada and the sky hasn’t [fallen] in, so it’s something that’s under consideration”.
To Belfast, then, where strident sectarianism will be replaced by an altogether more apathetic Peace (and Love) Movement.
PS: In December 2016, a bill to make cannabis legal for medicinal use was passed in Ireland’s lower house without a vote. That could be good news for not only Ireland’s ill whose symptoms might be alleviated by cannabis but also for Teresa May and her family investments.
The People’s Vote March was about walking for another referendum – this one intended to upset the result of the EU referendum. On June 23, 2016, 17.4 million voted for Britain to end its membership of the EU; 16.1 million wanted Britain to remain. How many people were on the streets of London in support of giving us another go? The number matters to the protestors because – get this – this was a march for populism:
Just heard that the Met said there were more like 500,000 in #PeoplesVoteMarch today. Can anyone confirm this? If it's true surely @theresa_may can't ignore so many and get away with it…….
Looks like ‘Hitler’ had a rethink. President Donald Trump has rescinded a policy that separates children from their undocumented parents in migrant detentions. The outcry was understandable over children being isolated in “cages” and “tender age shelters” while their parents were jailed and prosecuted for illegal border-crossing. US immigration officials tell us 2,342 children were separated from 2,206 parents between 5 May and 9 June.
“It’s about keeping families together,” said Mr Trump as he put his big felt tip to the latest decree. “I did not like the sight of families being separated.” The “zero tolerance policy” of criminally prosecuting anyone who crosses the border illegally remains.”I think anybody with a heart would feel very strongly about it,” he added. “We don’t like to see families separated.”
We especially don’t like to seem them split up by uniformed men and women on the telly. This was cruelty manifest. The pressure built and Tump blinked.
And what of the view we’ve seen? Brendan O’Neill watched TV anchor Rachel Maddow shed a tear as she told her MSNBC views of children in tender-age shelters in South Texas:
Maddow began to weep. She turned away from the cameras and asked her producers to flash up some graphics while she regained her composure. Cue an outburst of social-media solidarity. ‘I’m weeping too’, virtually everyone said, for what’s the point in weeping these days if you don’t tell everyone about it? The unrecorded tear is a wasted tear in our narcissistic era.
…Ms Maddow and the army of online emotionalists who live-tweeted their weeping alongside hers somehow managed to maintain eyes as dry as the Sahara during far worse things done by previous administrations.
Where were their sobs when Obama and Clinton’s misadventure in Libya not only killed… 27 women and children but also contributed to the destabilisation of Libya and to the exodus of more than 600,000 Libyans? … Why didn’t they cry when Obama ramped up the deportation of Haitians in 2016? ‘Natasha Joseph’s almond-shaped eyes brim with tears as she cradles her pregnant belly’, started one report about a Haitian woman who was thrown out of the US while her husband was imprisoned in Arizona. Her husband would not witness the birth of their child. Shattered Haitian families don’t deserve public weeping, it seems. Because the shattering was done by politicians these people admire.
The children deserve compassion. The oneupmanship is nasty. It’s not the Holocaust. Right? Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force general who ran the National Security Agency as well as the CIA, is no historian:
The story is worked into a frenzy. Swathes of people are monstered. Fact are blurred. Idiocy prevails. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, an architect of the “zero tolerance” policy, told us why Hayden is wrong. “It’s a real exaggeration,” says Sessions said on Fox News, “because in Nazi Germany they were keeping the Jews from leaving the country.”
Did anyone in the US study history?
But the Nazi analogy is apposite, right? MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough says the Trump administration is “just like the Nazis”.
To miss the parallels in what our government is doing today, you would have to be blind. It’s there in the way that Donald Trump invokes the boogeyman of MS-13 to justify the imprisonment of children too young to tie their shoes. It’s there in the stories of detainees who have no idea where Homeland Security has taken their children, and have no way of finding out.
Yes, our government is only rounding up human beings, not executing them or burying them in mass graves. But the roots of that evil are there — they have, to an extent, always been there. Does it need to flower into something truly monstrous before we recognize it for what it really is? Hitler also did things by degrees, nipping away at freedoms and piling one small indignity on top of another. That has been the strategy of the Trump administration: first racial insults, then stepped-up enforcement, then the wall, then the cage.
Meanwhile… immigration. What are you going to do about it? “They could be murderers and thieves and so much else,” the president said on Monday. “So we want a safe country, and it starts with the borders. And that’s the way it is.”
The New York Timessaid this year: “Some migrants have admitted they brought their children… because they believed it would cause authorities to release them from custody sooner… Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.”
’Eurydice Dixon was 22 years old. She was an aspiring comedian. Smart, funny. She lived in the inner north. Surrounded by friends.
She had a phone.
She was using it: “I’m almost home safe.”
She was keeping an eye on her surroundings. Looking out for herself. Being responsible. Doing everything we expect.
But Eurydice did not make it home safe.
In a few days, women across Melbourne will gather in Princes Park for a vigil of her life.
And they will do so firm in the knowledge that Eurydice died because of her attacker’s decisions – not because of her own.
They’re right. And we need to accept that fact, too.
We’ll never change a thing until we do.
We’ll never change this culture of violence against women. All women.
We’ll never change the fact that one woman in this country dies every week at the hands of a partner or former partner – someone they loved, in the safety of their own home.
We’ll keep asking “Why didn’t she leave him?” instead of asking “Why did he hurt her?”.
We’ll keep asking “Why was she alone in the dark?” instead of asking “Why was he?”.
We’ll keep ignoring the real problem, instead of actually fixing it.
So our message to Victorian women is this: Stay home. Or don’t.
Go out with friends at night. Or don’t.
Go about your day exactly as you intend, on your terms.
Because women don’t need to change their behaviour.
If male Australians really think violence against women is ok, and all men must accept their share of the blame for the heinous crime, why is there so much upset among men at the death of Eurydice Dixon? Why can men be blamed – millions and millions of them – for the actions of one man? You begin to wonder who has the problem. Andrews is at pains to be the wokiest bloke in the chamber. But laying the blame for this appalling crime at the hands of all men and a country’s culture only excuses the actual criminal and recasts all women as victims.