Last night the BBC aired a documentary about the anti-Islamic English Defence League. Due to the length of that program a You Tube user has edited the highlights and added some valid information that the program should have revealed.
This user has a fantastic anti-racist channel and we highly recomend that you check it out. BNPInfo
Thursday, 20 May 2010
Extremists could take over police - warning
Extremists could seize control of the police under controversial government plans for elected commissioners, a North-East watchdog has warned.
Cleveland Police Authority condemned the US-style proposal for the public to choose their police chief - alleging there would be “disastrous consequences for one of our most important public services”.
The attack came as new Home Secretary Theresa May - in her first major speech - vowed to press ahead with introducing elected leaders, despite acknowledging police “concerns”.
The measure will be included in a policing Bill in next week's Queen's Speech, which will set out the first priorities for the new Conservative-Liberal coalition.
But Councillor Dave McLuckie, the chairman of Cleveland Police Authority, said the idea was opposed by local politicians of every party, as well as by “bobbies on the beat”.
And he added: “It is a very bad idea which will do nothing to improve either accountability or the quality of service to the public, but could cause enormous damage to the principles which make British policing the envy of the world.
“The Home Secretary must think again about a proposal which could have disastrous consequences for one of our most important public services.”
Cllr McLuckie said Sir Hugh Orde, the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), had warned of policing falling into the hands of “lunatics, or extreme interests”, adding: “It could result in chief constables resigning.”
The Association of Police Authorities (APA) plans to meet Mrs May next week, to add its voice to the protests.
Under the plans - which were included in the Conservative manifesto - the new elected leaders would have the power to set budgets and policing strategy, but not be allowed to interfere with operational independence.
Similar Labour plans for every borough to have a directly-elected representative on police authorities were dropped in the last parliament, after a near-identical outcry.
Yesterday, speaking to the Police Federation, Mrs May tried to win over the rank-and-file, deliberately not using the phrase “police commissioner” and saying: “I want to put your mind at rest.”
However, she vowed to press head with the policy, describing the idea of elections as a “giant step in the right direction” that would ensure a community’s wishes were carried out.
Speaking to reporters afterwards, the Home Secretary denied there was a risk of extremists taking control, saying: “I believe and trust in the people in electing these individuals.
“Just as the people made sure they did not elect any BNP members of parliament at the election, I do not think you would see any individual elected as a police commissioner, or whichever word we wish to use.”
Some police forces have raised fears of a repeat of the crisis that hit the Metropolitan force, in London, when Boris Johnson, the elected mayor, sacked its chief, Sir Ian Blair.
Northern Echo
Cleveland Police Authority condemned the US-style proposal for the public to choose their police chief - alleging there would be “disastrous consequences for one of our most important public services”.
The attack came as new Home Secretary Theresa May - in her first major speech - vowed to press ahead with introducing elected leaders, despite acknowledging police “concerns”.
The measure will be included in a policing Bill in next week's Queen's Speech, which will set out the first priorities for the new Conservative-Liberal coalition.
But Councillor Dave McLuckie, the chairman of Cleveland Police Authority, said the idea was opposed by local politicians of every party, as well as by “bobbies on the beat”.
And he added: “It is a very bad idea which will do nothing to improve either accountability or the quality of service to the public, but could cause enormous damage to the principles which make British policing the envy of the world.
“The Home Secretary must think again about a proposal which could have disastrous consequences for one of our most important public services.”
Cllr McLuckie said Sir Hugh Orde, the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), had warned of policing falling into the hands of “lunatics, or extreme interests”, adding: “It could result in chief constables resigning.”
The Association of Police Authorities (APA) plans to meet Mrs May next week, to add its voice to the protests.
Under the plans - which were included in the Conservative manifesto - the new elected leaders would have the power to set budgets and policing strategy, but not be allowed to interfere with operational independence.
Similar Labour plans for every borough to have a directly-elected representative on police authorities were dropped in the last parliament, after a near-identical outcry.
Yesterday, speaking to the Police Federation, Mrs May tried to win over the rank-and-file, deliberately not using the phrase “police commissioner” and saying: “I want to put your mind at rest.”
However, she vowed to press head with the policy, describing the idea of elections as a “giant step in the right direction” that would ensure a community’s wishes were carried out.
Speaking to reporters afterwards, the Home Secretary denied there was a risk of extremists taking control, saying: “I believe and trust in the people in electing these individuals.
“Just as the people made sure they did not elect any BNP members of parliament at the election, I do not think you would see any individual elected as a police commissioner, or whichever word we wish to use.”
Some police forces have raised fears of a repeat of the crisis that hit the Metropolitan force, in London, when Boris Johnson, the elected mayor, sacked its chief, Sir Ian Blair.
Northern Echo
Banned Hungarian Guard members reportedly join civil guards by the hundreds
Members of the Hungarian Guard, the banned uniformed arm of the radical nationalist Jobbik party, are joining civil-guard organisations by the hundreds, daily Nepszabadsag said on Wednesday.
The court has ruled that anyone contributing to the operation of the banned organisation may be punished by up to one year in prison.
The guard is planning a large meeting in the middle of the summer where they plan to publish details on how to survive the ban, the paper said.
The guard's local organisation in Baranya County in southern Hungary voluntarily took down their internet homepage before the court ruling was published.
"Despite all statements that show the contrary, we are trying to abide by the law," captain Norbert Horvath told Nepszabadsag.
Chief captain Robert Kiss declined to comment on reports about growing tension between the Hungarian Guard and Jobbik. At the same time, he said that many guard members have also been members of civil guards for years.
politics.hu
Deportation Likely for Ex-Nazi After Supreme Court Declined Appeal (USA)
The Justice Department now can petition an immigration judge to have Anton Geiser, 84, of Sharon removed from the United States -- a process complicated because Geiser's native country, Yugoslavia, no longer exists. His former hometown now is in Croatia.
"The Supreme Court's decision to deny Mr. Geiser's request effectively ends the denaturalization process against him," said Justice Department spokeswoman Laura Sweeney.
Geiser, drafted into the German army in September 1942, was trained in the Waffen SS to be a prison guard. He was stationed at Sachsenhausen and Arolsen, a sub-camp of the Buchenwald concentration camp.
Geiser said in court records that he never killed or harmed anyone
Geiser came to the United State in 1956 and became a citizen in 1962.
U.S. District Judge David S. Cercone in September 2006 revoked Geiser's citizenship through a civil process brought by the government. He was not convicted of any crime.
Irene Szulman, 80, of Shadyside spent four years imprisoned in a ghetto in Poland and later in concentration camps. She doesn't know if deporting Geiser now will do any good but said she is grateful for the government's efforts.
"They should make their lives as miserable as possible because they deserve it," Szulman said. "But as far as deporting him, what are they going to do with this old bag of bones?"
Moshe Baran of Squirrel Hill also had little compassion for Geiser's plight.
"He can't complain. He had a good life until he got caught," said Baran, 88, who lived in a ghetto in Horodok, Poland, now part of Belarus, before escaping from a Nazi labor camp in 1943 and joining Russian liberation forces. "I can't feel any sympathy for those who were part of this murder machine."
vosizneias.com
French politicians urged to reject ban on full face veils
The proposal, which is being put forward by the French government after a prolonged public debate on the wearing of Islamic face veils, would prohibit the wearing anywhere in public of any form of clothing intended to conceal one's face.
"A complete ban on the covering of the face would violate the rights to freedom of expression and religion of those women who wear the burqa or the niqab in public as an expression of their identity or beliefs," said John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International's expert on discrimination in Europe.
Breach of the law would be punishable by a fine of up to €150 and/or the requirement to complete a community rehabilitation programme.
The move comes only a few weeks after the lower chamber of the Belgian parliament voted overwhelmingly in favour of a similar ban.
The Council of State (Conseil d'Etat), France's top legal advisory body, has already expressed serious reservations about the compatibility of such a general ban with the French constitution and the country's obligations under international human rights law.
"To ignore the advice of the Council of State on this issue would be to betray an indifference to human rights law in general and the rights of Muslim women who choose to wear full face veils in particular," said John Dalhuisen.
The French government has argued that the ban is necessary for public safety and to protect women from being pressurised into wearing full face veils.
"Legitimate security concerns can be met by targeted restrictions on the complete covering of the face in well-defined high risk locations.
"Individuals may also be required to reveal their faces when objectively necessary, for instance for identity checks. French law already allows for such limited restrictions," said John Dalhuisen.
States do have an obligation to protect women against pressure or coercion in their homes or communities to wear full face veils.
They should do this by taking steps to combat gender stereotypes and discriminatory attitudes and, where appropriate, by intervening in individual cases through criminal or family law.
A generally applicable ban would restrict the rights of those who freely choose to wear full face veils, while punishing those who do so against their will.
"For those women who are being coerced into wearing full face veils, the ban means they will either face state punishment if they go out in public – or more likely – they will be confined to their homes. This is counter-productive." said John Dalhuisen.
"Some people may well find the wearing of full-face veils objectionable, or contrary to established social customs.
However, human rights law is quite clear on this – the disquiet of one person cannot be used to justify a restriction on the freedom of expression of another," said John Dalhuisen.
"Much of the public debate in France on the wearing of full face veils has focused on the need to defend French Republican values. Amnesty International does not believe that such important values as liberty, equality and fraternity can be advanced by such a discriminatory restriction," said John Dalhuisen.
Amnesty International
White Supremacist Linked to Mail Bombing Imprisoned (USA)
A firearms and explosives expert suspected of involvement with two white supremacist brothers in the sending of a bomb to the office of a municipal diversity officer was sentenced to 6½ years in prison in Missouri on Tuesday.
Robert Joos Jr., an antigovernment zealot and pastor of a church of “apocalyptic Christians,” was convicted in January of being a felon in possession of firearms and a felon in possession of explosives. He had a prior conviction for unlawful use of a weapon.
Joos, 56, was indicted last year along with twin brothers Dennis and Daniel Mahon, following a lengthy investigation into the delivery of a mail bomb to the office of Scottsdale, Ariz., diversity officer Don Logan in 2004. Logan, who is black, needed extensive surgery for injuries to his hands and arms. His secretary suffered injuries to her face and eyes. The Mahons are awaiting trial.
Investigators began looking at Joos after phone records the morning of the bombing showed that the first telephone call that Dennis Mahon made after the attack was to a cell phone in Joos’ name. During the subsequent investigation, the brothers allegedly said that Joos’ 200-acre property in rural McDonald County, Mo., was used as a training facility for white supremacists.
Joos told undercover agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that he had caches of weapons, food and water in caves on his property where he would go to avoid capture or attack, authorities said. One undercover agent told Joos he was having trouble with “Kenites” — a word that is apparently used to denote Jews by some anti-Semitic Christian Identity pastors — and Joos mailed him instructions for making a homemade bomb, along with a detailed drawing, according to federal prosecutors. (Most Christian Identity adherents maintain that Eve had sex with Satan and produced a child, Cain, from whom Jews are descended.)
Five shotguns, five hunting rifles and five pistols were recovered from Joos’ property, along with more than 19,000 rounds of ammunition and bomb-making components such as fuses and blasting caps.
SPL Centre
Robert Joos Jr., an antigovernment zealot and pastor of a church of “apocalyptic Christians,” was convicted in January of being a felon in possession of firearms and a felon in possession of explosives. He had a prior conviction for unlawful use of a weapon.
Joos, 56, was indicted last year along with twin brothers Dennis and Daniel Mahon, following a lengthy investigation into the delivery of a mail bomb to the office of Scottsdale, Ariz., diversity officer Don Logan in 2004. Logan, who is black, needed extensive surgery for injuries to his hands and arms. His secretary suffered injuries to her face and eyes. The Mahons are awaiting trial.
Investigators began looking at Joos after phone records the morning of the bombing showed that the first telephone call that Dennis Mahon made after the attack was to a cell phone in Joos’ name. During the subsequent investigation, the brothers allegedly said that Joos’ 200-acre property in rural McDonald County, Mo., was used as a training facility for white supremacists.
Joos told undercover agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that he had caches of weapons, food and water in caves on his property where he would go to avoid capture or attack, authorities said. One undercover agent told Joos he was having trouble with “Kenites” — a word that is apparently used to denote Jews by some anti-Semitic Christian Identity pastors — and Joos mailed him instructions for making a homemade bomb, along with a detailed drawing, according to federal prosecutors. (Most Christian Identity adherents maintain that Eve had sex with Satan and produced a child, Cain, from whom Jews are descended.)
Five shotguns, five hunting rifles and five pistols were recovered from Joos’ property, along with more than 19,000 rounds of ammunition and bomb-making components such as fuses and blasting caps.
SPL Centre
FRANCE HAS FIRST 'BURKA RAGE' INCIDENT
A 60-year-old lawyer ripped a Muslim woman's Islamic veil off in a row in a clothing shop in what police say is France's first case of "burka rage".
The astonishing scene unfolded during a weekend shopping trip after the woman lawyer took offence at the attire of a fellow shopper resulting in argument during which the pair came to blows before being arrested. It came as racial tensions grow in the country as it prepares to introduce a total ban on burkas and other forms of religious dress which cover the face. A 26-year-old Muslim convert was walking through the store in Trignac, near Nantes, in the western Loire-Atlantique region, when she overhead the woman lawyer making "snide remarks about her black burka". A police officer close to the case said: "The lawyer said she was not happy seeing a fellow shopper wearing a veil and wanted the ban introduced as soon as possible." At one point the lawyer, who was out with her daughter, is said to have likened the Muslim woman to Belphegor, a horror demon character well known to French TV viewers. Belphegor is said to haunt the Louvre museum in Paris and frequently covers up his hideous features using a mask. An argument started before the older woman is said to have ripped the other woman's veil off. As they came to blows, the lawyer's daughter joined in. "The shop manager and the husband of the Muslim woman moved to break up the fighting," the officer said. All three were arrested and taken to the local gendarmerie for questioning.
A spokesman for Trignac police said that two complaints had been received, with the Muslim woman accusing the lawyer of racial and religious assault. The latter, in turn, had accused her opponent of common assault. The French parliament has adopted a formal motion declaring burkas and other forms of Islamic dress to be "an affront to the nation's values." Some have accused criminals, from terrorists to shoplifters, of wearing veils to disguise themselves. A ban, which could be introduced as early as the autumn, would make France the second country after Belgium to outlaw the Islamic veil in public places. But many have criticised the anti-burka lobby, which includes the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for stigmatising Muslim housewives. Many French woman from council estates are forced to wear the veils because of pressure from authoritarian husbands. The promise of a ban has prompted warnings of racial tensions in a country which is home to some five million Muslims – one of the religion's largest communities in Europe. Mr Sarkozy's cabinet is to examine a draft bill which will impose one-year prison sentences and fines of up to £14,000 on men who force their wives to wear a burka. Women themselves will face a smaller fine of just over £100 because they are "often victims with no choice in the matter", says the draft. The law would create a new offence of "incitement to cover the face for reasons of gender". And it would state: "No one may wear in public places clothes that are aimed at hiding the face."
The Telegraph
The astonishing scene unfolded during a weekend shopping trip after the woman lawyer took offence at the attire of a fellow shopper resulting in argument during which the pair came to blows before being arrested. It came as racial tensions grow in the country as it prepares to introduce a total ban on burkas and other forms of religious dress which cover the face. A 26-year-old Muslim convert was walking through the store in Trignac, near Nantes, in the western Loire-Atlantique region, when she overhead the woman lawyer making "snide remarks about her black burka". A police officer close to the case said: "The lawyer said she was not happy seeing a fellow shopper wearing a veil and wanted the ban introduced as soon as possible." At one point the lawyer, who was out with her daughter, is said to have likened the Muslim woman to Belphegor, a horror demon character well known to French TV viewers. Belphegor is said to haunt the Louvre museum in Paris and frequently covers up his hideous features using a mask. An argument started before the older woman is said to have ripped the other woman's veil off. As they came to blows, the lawyer's daughter joined in. "The shop manager and the husband of the Muslim woman moved to break up the fighting," the officer said. All three were arrested and taken to the local gendarmerie for questioning.
A spokesman for Trignac police said that two complaints had been received, with the Muslim woman accusing the lawyer of racial and religious assault. The latter, in turn, had accused her opponent of common assault. The French parliament has adopted a formal motion declaring burkas and other forms of Islamic dress to be "an affront to the nation's values." Some have accused criminals, from terrorists to shoplifters, of wearing veils to disguise themselves. A ban, which could be introduced as early as the autumn, would make France the second country after Belgium to outlaw the Islamic veil in public places. But many have criticised the anti-burka lobby, which includes the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, for stigmatising Muslim housewives. Many French woman from council estates are forced to wear the veils because of pressure from authoritarian husbands. The promise of a ban has prompted warnings of racial tensions in a country which is home to some five million Muslims – one of the religion's largest communities in Europe. Mr Sarkozy's cabinet is to examine a draft bill which will impose one-year prison sentences and fines of up to £14,000 on men who force their wives to wear a burka. Women themselves will face a smaller fine of just over £100 because they are "often victims with no choice in the matter", says the draft. The law would create a new offence of "incitement to cover the face for reasons of gender". And it would state: "No one may wear in public places clothes that are aimed at hiding the face."
The Telegraph
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)