Archive | June 2, 2015

UK Schools Are Making Muslim Children Take ‘Counter Extremism’ Tests*

UK Schools Are Making Muslim Children Take ‘Counter Extremism’ Tests*

In recent days, images of a ‘counter extremism’ test set specifically for Muslim school children by UK schools have been shared widely across social media. The case highlights a deepening prejudice towards the Muslim community across the Western world which echoes the hysteria of McCarthy era America.

At the height of the “Red Scare“, an anti-Communist mania in the United States, people were propagandised into a pathological hatred/fear of Russia, Russians and ‘Sympathisers’. Images like those below were commonplace. A mass hysteria was whipped up that there was a ‘Red’ under every bed, behind every tree, and lurking around every corner, just waiting to destroy America.

The terror led to some of the most repressive laws ever to pass through the United States legislative systems.

Prime among them was The Internal Security Act of 1950 (often referred to as the McCarran Act or the anticommunist law). President Truman immediately vetoed the bill, calling it:

“the greatest danger to freedom of speech, press, and assembly since the Alien and Sedition Laws of 1798,” and stating that it “would make a mockery of our Bill of Rights [and] would actually weaken our internal security measures.”

Nevertheless, the bill was passed by a crushing 89% majority vote and became law. The central provision of the Act included:

  • The fingerprinting and registration of all “subversives” at large in the United States.
  • Americans could have their citizenship revoked for five years.
  • The construction and operation of concentration camps “for emergency situations”
  • Set up the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security which proceeded to hold trials for 27 years
  • Authorized the President to “apprehend” and “detain” each person as to whom there’s “reasonable ground to believe” that he or she “probably will engage in, or probably will conspire with others to engage in, acts of espionage or of sabotage.”

It facilitated the rise of tinpot totalitarian Senator Joseph McCarthy, who became chair of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security and led the infamous McCarthy trials against liberal America.

To most who look back at that period now, outside of the trappings of propaganda-induced paranoia, it looks as absurd as the Salem Witch Trials of the late 17th century. But today we are witnessing the resurgence of that mentality, with a new target. We have moved from the “Red Scare” to the so-called “Islamist Threat”.

Again, there is a widespread, cultivated belief in a global network of ‘evil doers’ – simultaneously presented as savage barbarians and evil geniuses, bent on the destruction of life as we know it. They are everywhere. In a recent Gallup poll, 89% of Americans believed ISIS was the greatest threat to the United States. A militia group operating on another continent, without an airforce, a navy, a network of allies or guaranteed supply lines. But then, more than half of Republicans in the U.S. (and a quarter of the general population) believe weapons of mass distraction were found in Iraq, despite there never having been a single such weapon unearthed. Such is the level of disinformation and cultivated paranoia.

In the time of the ‘Islamist Threat’, every Muslim is a latent terrorist, prone to ‘radicalization’ at any moment. And if you think I’m laying it on a bit thick, just look at the comments in this recent comments by Britain’s most senior Muslim police commander Mak Chishty.

In a recent interview with the Guardian, Chishty said there was now a need for “a move into the private space” of Muslims to spot views that could show the beginning of radicalisation from the age of five-years-old. Asked to define what sort of behaviour would be worthy of suspicion, Chishty responded with a list of activities which included:

  • Not drinking alcohol
  • Dressing in non-western clothes
  • Not shopping in Marks and Spencers
  • Voicing criticism of politics or foreign policy

Chishty would not doubt fall into the ‘House Negro’ category expertly outlined by Malcolm X in this 1963 speech at Michigan State University.

Certainly, Chishty is enforcing the will of his political masters, and this goes right to the top.

Speaking to the National Security Council earlier this month about the introduction of his new Counter Extremism Bill, British Prime Minister David Cameron spoke perhaps the most anti-democratic words uttered by a British Prime Minister in history, saying:

“For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.”

“This government will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.”

Within this mindset, the core principles of democracy are forgotten. Worse, actively twisted into authoritarianism. Dissent becomes treason. Protest becomes extremism. And at the centre, every Muslim becomes suspect – right down to school children. In this paranoid context, the interrogation of children with this ‘counter extremism test’ is accepted as prudent and appropriate. People don’t ask questions about the racism, the invasion of privacy, or indeed the long term impacts. As CageUK rightly asks of the ‘surveys’:

‘what happens to names and information held about individuals. Are they removed from any Police and intelligence lists if there is no threat, or are all those referred destined to be on security lists forever, considered a potential radical and threat to national security?‘ – The Prevent Strategy: A Cradle to Grave Police-State

It is simply unacceptable for anyone who claims a shred of fidelity to the principles of democracy to back these measures. How many times must we go through this process before we become immune to the efforts of political and media propagandists bent on dividing us into opposing camps? One need only pick up a history book to find several examples from living memory – Japanese Americans during World War II, the Red Scare, the Nazi holocaust, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine…I could go on. All done in the name of protecting and expanding freedom and democracy, all of which merely trashed the principles of both. The price of democracy is sharing space with people who look, sound and believe different things to you. In democracy, we win the battle of ideas through inspiring greater numbers of people to follow our way than the others on offer.

There is a certain irony at play here, because Democracy is absolutely at threat today. But the threat does not come from Islamic Extremists with Kalashnikovs and Korans. It comes from politicians with censorship and propaganda.


Related Topics:

Scottish Primary School Kids Given Terrorism Homework*

Top 10 Ways Islamic Law Forbids Terrorism

David Cameron Takes on Sukuk*

Islamic Wills Become Legal in the U.K.*

Fears of a British Policed State Rising Midst the Elite Paedophile Scourge*

Religious Schools Face Closure if they don’t Promote Homosexuality*

How the British Empire aka New World Order Sowed Seeds of Destruction towards Islam*

Muslims Arrested for Joining Terror Group That Doesn’t Exist*

22 Years of Fake “Islamic Terror”*

Four Million Muslims Killed and Counting since 1990*

Anti-racist Masses Advance on German Islamophobes*

China orders Muslim Businesses to Sell Cigarettes and Alcohol*

Apology to German Muslims from the PEGIDA Movement*

NSA Phone Surveillance Program Takes a Set-back Courtesy of the Senate*

The Enduring Hunt for Personal Value*

Brits Out in Thousands against Another 5 More Years*

Soros, the Puppet Master of Ukraine*

Soros, the Puppet Master of Ukraine*

Just days after George Soros warned that World War 3 was imminent unless Washington backed down to China on IMF currency basket inclusion, the hacker collective CyberBerkut has exposed the billionaire as the real puppet-master behind the scenes in Ukraine.

In 3 stunning documents, allegedly hacked from email correspondence between the hedge fund manager and Ukraine President Poroshenko, Soros lays out

“A short and medium term comprehensive strategy for the new Ukraine,” expresses his confidence that the US should provide Ukraine with lethal military assistance,

“with same level of sophistication in defense weapons to match the level of opposing force,” and finally explained Poroshenko’s

“first priority must be to regain control of financial markets,” which he assures the President could be helped by The Fed adding

“I am ready to call Jack Lew of the US Treasury to sound him out about the swap agreement.”

The hacking group CyberBerkut claims it has penetrated Ukraine’s presidential administration website and obtained correspondence between Soros and Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko. It has subsequently posted all the intercepted pdfs on line at the following location. More details as RT earlier reported:

The hacktivists have published three files online, which include a draft of “A short and medium term comprehensive strategy for the new Ukraine” by Soros (dated March 12, 2015); an undated paper on military assistance to Kiev; and the billionaire’s letter to Poroshenko and Ukraine’s Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk, dated December 23, 2014.

According to the leaked documents, Soros supports Barack Obama’s stance on Ukraine, but believes that the US should do even more.

He is confident that the US should provide Ukraine with lethal military assistance, “with same level of sophistication in defense weapons to match the level of opposing force.”

“In poker terms, the US will ‘meet, but not raise,” the 84-year-old businessman explained, supposedly signing one of the letters as “a self-appointed advocate of the new Ukraine.”

The Western backers want Kiev to “restore the fighting capacity of Ukraine without violating the Minsk agreement,” Soros wrote.

Among other things, the leaked documents claim that the Ukrainian authorities were also asked to “restore some semblance of currency stability and functioning banking system” and “maintain unity among the various branches of government” in order to receive assistance from foreign allies.

Soros believes that it’s up to the EU to support Kiev with financial aid, stressing that “Europe must reach a new framework agreement that will allow the European Commission to allocate up to $1 billion annually to Ukraine.”

As for the current state of economy, the billionaire wrote that former Chilean finance minister, Andres Velasco, after visiting Ukraine on his request, returned with “a dire view of financial situation.”

“The new Ukraine is literally on the verge of collapse” due to the national bank’s lack of hard currency reserves, Soros warned Poroshenko.

The correspondence shows that the billionaire has been in constant touch with the authorities in Kiev and consulting them.

Digging into the details of the documents, we find one intriguing snippet:

“As you know, I asked Andrés Velasco, a prominent economist who was Chile’s very successful minister of finance from 2006-2010 to visit Kyiv where he met the Prime Minister; the President was in Warsaw at the time. Velasco came back with a dire view of the financial situation. The National Bank of Ukraine has practically no hard currency reserves. That means that the hryvnia has no anchor. If a panic occurred and the currency collapsed as it did in Russia, the National Bank could not stabilize the exchange rate even if only temporarily as Russia did by injecting $90 billion.

“Your first priority must be to regain control over the financial markets—bank deposits and exchange rates. Unless you do, you will have no way to embark on deeper reforms. I believe the situation could be stabilized by getting the European Council to make a commitment in principle that they will pull together the new $15 billion package that the IMF requires in order to release the next tranche of its original package at the end of January 2015. Based on that commitment the Federal Reserve could be asked to extend a $15 billion three months swap arrangement with the National Bank of Ukraine. That would reassure the markets and avoid a panic.

“I am ready to call Jack Lew of the US Treasury to sound him out about the swap agreement.”

One wonders what other matters of national importance involve George Soros getting on the line with the US Treasury Secretary to arrange virtually unlimited funds courtesy of the US Federal Reserve just to promote one person’s ulterior agenda?

And just like that, conspiracy Theory becomes Conspiracy Fact once again.

The full documents are below:

Ironically, the first document laying out the “short and medium-term comprehensive strategy for new Ukraine” and signed by George Soros, “a self-appointed advocate of the New Ukraine”, was ironically created by Tamiko Bolton, the 40 year old who became Soros’ third wife several years ago.

Soros Ukraine Strategy


Related Topics:

George Soros: The Hidden Hand behind Social Unrest*

Ukraine Snapped up by the Rothschilds*

Ukraine’s Oligarchs Eradicating Each Other*

Ukraine’s Campaign of Political Assassinations of Critics*

After Ukraine, Macedonia*

You’re not a ‘Hitler’ if you Kill Ten Million Africans*

You’re not a ‘Hitler’ if you Kill Ten Million Africans*

By Liam O’Ceallaigh

Take a look at this picture. Do you know who it is?

Most people haven’t heard of him.

But you should have. When you see his face or hear his name you should get as sick in your stomach as when you read about Mussolini or Hitler or see one of their pictures. You see, he killed over 10 million people in the Congo.

His name is King Leopold II of Belgium.

He “owned” the Congo during his reign as the constitutional monarch of Belgium. After several failed colonial attempts in Asia and Africa, he settled on the Congo. He “bought” it and enslaved its people, turning the entire country into his own personal slave plantation. He disguised his business transactions as “philanthropic” and “scientific” efforts under the banner of the International African Society. He used their enslaved labour to extract Congolese resources and services. His reign was enforced through work camps, body mutilations, executions, torture, and his private army.

Most of us – I don’t yet know an approximate percentage but I fear its extremely high – aren’t taught about him in school. We don’t hear about him in the media. He’s not part of the widely repeated narrative of oppression (which includes things like the Holocaust during World War II). He’s part of a long history of colonialism, imperialism, slavery and genocide in Africa that would clash with the social construction of the white supremacist narrative in our schools. It doesn’t fit neatly into a capitalist curriculum. Making overtly racist remarks is (sometimes) frowned upon in polite society, but it’s quite fine not to talk about genocides in Africa perpetrated by European capitalist monarchs.

Mark Twain wrote a satire about Leopold called “King Leopold’s soliloquy; a defense of his Congo rule“, where he mocked the King’s defense of his reign of terror, largely through Leopold’s own words. It’s 49 pages long.

Mark Twain is a popular author for American public schools. But like most political authors, we will often read some of their least political writings or read them without learning why the author wrote them (Orwell’s Animal Farm for example serves to reinforce American anti-Socialist propaganda, but Orwell was an anti-capitalist revolutionary of a different kind – this is never pointed out). We can read about Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, but King Leopold’s Soliloquy isn’t on the reading list. This isn’t by accident. Reading lists are created by boards of education in order to prepare students to follow orders and endure boredom well. From the point of view of the Education Department, Africans have no history.


as with the Rothschilds, much of the palatial wealth, riches, & power of Belgian King Leopold II (seen here as young prince standing next to his father, Leopold I) of the house of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was gained from WARS… or from BRUTAL EXPLOITATION of labor, in this case, the ENSLAVEMENT of MILLIONS of ‘Belgian’ Congo Africans, and genocidal extermination of up to 40% of the population… in the late 1800s just before turn of century!

When we learn about Africa, we learn about a caricaturized Egypt, about the HIV epidemic (but never its causes), about the surface level effects of the slave trade, and maybe about South African Apartheid (which of course now is long, long over). We also see lots of pictures of starving children on Christian Ministry commercials, we see safaris on animal shows, and we see pictures of deserts in films and movies. But we don’t learn about the Great African War or Leopold’s Reign of Terror during the Congolese Genocide. Nor do we learn about what the United States has done in Iraq and Afghanistan, potentially killing in upwards of 5-7 million people from bombs, sanctions, disease and starvation. Body counts are important. And we don’t count Afghans, Iraqis, or Congolese.

There’s a Wikipedia page called “Genocides in History”. The Congolese Genocide isn’t included. The Congo is mentioned though. What’s now called the Democratic Republic of the Congo is listed in reference to the Second Congo War (also called Africa’s World War and the Great War of Africa), where both sides of the multinational conflict hunted down Bambenga and ate them. Cannibalism and slavery are horrendous evils which must be entered into history and talked about for sure, but I couldn’t help thinking whose interests were served when the only mention of the Congo on the page was in reference to multi-national incidents where a tiny minority of people were eating each other (completely devoid of the conditions which created the conflict no less). Stories which support the white supremacist narrative about the sub-humanness of people in Africa are allowed to be entered into the records of history. The white guy who turned the Congo into his own personal part-plantation, part-concentration camp, part-Christian ministry and killed 10 to 15 million Conglese people in the process doesn’t make the cut.

You see, when you kill ten million Africans, you aren’t called ‘Hitler’. That is, your name doesn’t come to symbolize the living incarnation of evil. Your name and your picture don’t produce fear, hatred, and sorrow. Your victims aren’t talked about and your name isn’t remembered.

Leopold was just one part of thousands of things that helped construct white supremacy as both an ideological narrative and material reality. Of course I don’t want to pretend that in the Congo he was the source of all evil. He had generals, and foot soldiers, and managers who did his bidding and enforced his laws. It was a system. But that doesn’t negate the need to talk about the individuals who are symbolic of the system. But we don’t even get that. And since it isn’t talked about, what capitalism did to Africa, all the privileges that rich white people gained from the Congolese genocide are hidden. The victims of imperialism are made, like they usually are, invisible.


Related Topics:

The Zionist Holocaust of 66 Million Russians*

St. Patrick’s Day*

Israel, Ebola and Black Genocide*

Crime against Humanity: Providing Clean Water in Africa*

Black Wall Street*

Saudi Blood Money for Mass Slaughter in Yemen*

Four Million Muslims Killed and Counting since 1990*

Eugenics of the UN, WHO and World Bank in Mexico*

The West Exports Porn, Casual Sex, and the Blood of the pre-born not Freedom*

The Three World Wars of Albert Pike*

Military Admits ‘Martial Law’ Training in the U.S for to Imposed around the World*

Israel, Organized Crime, White Slavery, and the Sex Trade*

To be Fully Human*

From Child Trafficking to Head of U.N. Ops. in Haiti

Bishop Badejo: U.S. won’t fight Boko Haram because of their Eugenics Agenda in Africa*

Eugenics: Kidnapping of the Indigenous Sioux in South Dakota*

France’s Debt to Haiti Remains Despite Hollande’s and Martelly’s Attempt to Rewrite History*

For the First Time Since 9/11, Congress Checks the Security State*

For the First Time Since 9/11, Congress Checks the Security State*

By Dan Froomkin

Sunday night marked the first time that Congress has limited the executive branch’s surveillance authority since the terror attacks in 2001 set off a dystopian explosion in the government’s ability to spy on people inside and outside its borders.

But it was not so much a glorious moment of constitutional rebalancing for the legislative branch as it was parliamentary farce as usual. Faced with the long-planned expiration at midnight of three contentious provisions of the Patriot Act, the Republican-controlled Senate was simply unable to get it together and vote to renew the surveillance powers.

That failure to act was consequential. One of the three provisions had been used — improperly, it turns out — as legal justification for a National Security Agency program that collected phone records on millions of Americans without a warrant or any probable cause, along with other business records.

So as of today, for the first time in 14 years, you can make phone calls without the NSA hoovering up the records of who you called and for how long.

Of course, it wasn’t until two years ago, when NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden released a trove of top-secret documents to journalists, that Americans even knew this was happening.

The domestic bulk-collection program, which quickly emerged as an outlier among the programs Snowden revealed, rested on a legal interpretation of a statute that redefined the word “relevant” as meaning “everything.” It was ostensibly authorized by the Patriot Act despite the fact that the law’s author, who didn’t know it was being used that way, vociferously objected as soon as he found out. It has repeatedly been determined to be illegal, not only by legal experts and blue-ribbon panels, but just last month by a federal appellate court. It has had no documented positive impact on national security. And it represented a wildly unprecedented leap into domestic spying by an agency whose mandate has historically been foreign.

Its end was inevitable ever since milquetoast compromise reform legislation, called the USA Freedom Act, passed the House in an overwhelming bipartisan vote on May 13. That bill puts in place a replacement program that leaves phone records in the possession of the telecom companies until the NSA comes with a specific request. It also reauthorizes two other expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, one of which makes it easier to track suspects who frequently change phones; the other, which has never actually been used, allows the government to begin surveillance on individuals without asserting a connection to a specific terrorist group.

In a reflection of how viscerally opposed hardliner Senate Republicans are to doing anything that would officially vindicate Snowden, however,  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell engaged in epic legislative theatrics right up to the eve of the sunset, even going so far as bringing the Senate back early from its Memorial Day recess for an extraordinary Sunday night session, with the goal of somehow reinstating the program in full.

But you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

McConnell finally caved to reality with just hours to go, dropping his opposition to the USA Freedom Act, and allowing a vote on whether to proceed with it. That vote was 77-17.

By that point, however, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was on a tear, his opposition to Fourth Amendment violations supercharged by a need to call attention to his flagging presidential campaign.

Paul prevented the Freedom Act from passing before the midnight deadline — but with the cloture vote a done deal; a final vote is expected mid-week.

Some privacy advocates celebrated the rollback, even briefly, of the three provisions in their entirety.

The Internet advocacy group Fight for the Future and progressive nonprofits CREDO and Demand Progress declared in a joint statement:

“The expiration of key Patriot Act provisions — even if only temporary — is a victory for the countless civil liberties activists in every congressional district in the country who, since Edward Snowden blew the whistle on government surveillance, have fought for real reform. It demonstrates that the public can win battles in Congress that just a few years ago we were barely able to fight at all.”

The groups said the “fake-reform” Freedom Act is “an attack on civil liberties and codifies some of the worst mass surveillance abuses of the Patriot Act.”

By contrast, the White House, which saw the Freedom Act as “a reasonable compromise balancing security and privacy,” called on the Senate “to ensure this irresponsible lapse in authorities is as short-lived as possible.”

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., split the difference.

“Tonight the collection of phone records of millions of innocent Americans will end,” he said in a statement.

“The demise of this dragnet surveillance is a victory for the principle that Americans do not need to sacrifice liberty to have security.”

Now, he added, Congress “has the opportunity to build on this victory by making meaningful and lasting reforms” by passing the Freedom Act.

Leading Democratic surveillance hawk Dianne Feinstein was hyperbolic.

“The need for investigators to collect intelligence on known or suspected terrorists can’t be overstated,” she said in a statement that exaggerated the impact of the provisions.

“Our national security — not to mention the safety of all Americans — is at stake.”

Sunday night featured open warfare between Paul and the current leaders of his party, particularly McConnell and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

“We shouldn’t be disarming unilaterally as our enemies grow more sophisticated and aggressive, and we certainly should not be doing so based on a campaign of demagoguery and disinformation launched in the wake of the unlawful actions of Edward Snowden,” McConnell said.

Paul may have burned some bridges when he said of his critics:

“Some of them I think secretly want there to be an attack so they can blame it on me.”

Stanford legal scholar Jennifer Granick wrote before Sunday’s vote that the Senate shouldn’t rush to pass the Freedom Act as is. It

“was negotiated at a time when straight reauthorization was a real danger” and before the appellate court decided bulk collection is illegal. The bill is “now rather anemic,” she wrote.

And, she noted,

“there’s a clear and present danger that if [the Freedom Act] passes, everyone will pat themselves on the back for a job well done … and it’ll be suspicionless spying as usual until the next big surveillance provision, section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act sunsets at the end of 2017, and we’re in the same position again.”

Her proposal:

“Let’s have hearings, really understand all the spying being done in our name, how the information is being used. Let’s set up real, comprehensive, robust checks and balances, starting with declassifying interpretations of law and changing the role of the FISA judges.”

More likely, however: McConnell will try to water it down some more before a final vote.


Related Topics:

The U.S. Expanding its Domain to Space and Cyberspace*

NSA Phone Surveillance Program Takes a Set-back Courtesy of the Senate*

NSA Phone Surveillance Ruled Illegal, but will that Stop Them*

Smartphone + Google Account = Your Every Move Tracked for a Month*

Breaking: Google gives new meaning to “Orwellian”

Wi-Fi from Space – Don’t get Excited Google and Co Just Dumbing You Down*

Escaping the NSA Twitter Moves non-U.S. Accounts to Ireland*