BEE charities: Segregation is back

Charities could face ruin over a government proposal that firms could lose black economic empowerment (BEE) points if they donate to charities that do not have 100 percent black beneficiaries.

Some charities believe the proposal means that any firm that donates to a charity that helps a white, coloured or Indian person may not be able to claim points for its BEE scorecard.

It could also mean that if just one white child or person is among a group of black people the charity is helping, the firm that donates to it could lose it points.

A BEE scorecard is used by the government to measure a company’s BEE compliance. Those that comply do business more easily with other companies also wanting to increase their scorecard and are favoured by the government in all aspects relating to business.

Despite repeated attempts since Monday for a response and clarity from the Department of Trade and Industry, all it would say was: “All stakeholders who have concerns and objections are requested to make use of the 60-day period to make their submission… We will not be in a position to comment/respond to the questions as we do not want to pre-empt the process.”

The amended changes to the BEE Codes of Good Practice are on the department’s website and up for public comment until December 2.

Legislation that is in place allows for charities to assist all races, but lower points are scored when companies assist organisations where less than 75 percent of the recipients are black.

Bridget Brun, a Durban BEE agency head, said she hoped the proposed amendment was an error.

“I don’t think they [the department] have realised what they have done. Think of organisations such as Girls’ and Boys’ Town or Childline,” she said.

“This amendment will have a huge effect. It means if the charity benefits any Indian, white, coloured or even a Mozambican or Zimbabwean child, companies will not be able to claim points on their BEE scorecard. We are now going to have segregated facilities.

“Charities will not help white children if the companies which support them withdraw support because they can’t claim the points.”

Erika Petersen-Holmes, a partner in the commercial and corporate law department at Shepstone and Wylie in Durban, agreed, saying: “Almost all charities have at least one white beneficiary.

“This could result in those charities receiving no corporate donor funding, or those charities rejecting white beneficiaries.”

Karen Hatton-Jones, of retail giant Spar, which gives many charities, orphanages and NGOs large cash and food donations every year, said she was “distressed and disgusted” by the proposed change.

“It’s not going to change what we do. Since when do we put a colour to those in need?” she asked.

Childline head Joan van Niekerk said BEE laws were going from difficult to ridiculous.

“We don’t know the race of the child who phones us. It’s inappropriate to ask, ‘Are you black, and how black are you?’ This is a different kind of apartheid. It’s extremely distressing,” she said.

Van Niekerk said charities were pragmatic about funding.

“There is no such thing as a free lunch. We have to be practical and realistic about funding now. This corporate social responsibility money is something companies are obligated to give and we know the rules up front. If this goes through it will now be far more difficult to deal with.”

Jackie Branfield, of child crisis organisation BobbiBear, said it was the first that she had heard of it.

“Yes, 99 percent of the children we help are black, but we are certainly not going to turn away that 1 percent who could be a white or Indian child. Where’s our democracy, where is our new South Africa?”

Durban Chamber of Commerce CEO Andrew Layman said worthwhile social upliftment projects would suffer. “The implications could be severe,” he said. IOL

Britain will be going after racists

This season, the stench of racism emanating from English football has been contagious. Barely a weekend has gone by in which the game has not been overshadowed by a distressing tangle of accusations, handshake snubs, T-shirt boycotts and monkey-chants. Players, referees, and fans alike have become sullied by its toxic stink.

The ugliness of these incidents may yet conceal a societal truth. While each occurrence has been grating to witness, their collective effect may ultimately prove positive.

As Piara Powar, executive director of the London-based Football Against Racism in Europe Network, explains, “What we are watching is progress,” he said. “This is not a dive back to the bad old days when racism occurred on a mass scale. [If this were] a few years ago, the Luis Suarez and Patrice Evra incident would have simply been swept under the carpet and there certainly would have been no investigation into John Terry’s abuse of Anton Ferdinand. These two incidents have established a standard that sparked off all the events that followed because English society now sees this behavior as wrong. It has decided there is a clear line that people cannot cross.”

Hard to believe? Just ask anyone who entered an English football stadium in the 1980s and ’90s. Back then, the sight of a black player setting foot on a professional sports field could cause hundreds of grown men to grunt monkey sounds with abandon, an occurrence so common, the media did not consider it newsworthy. Last week, when a single Chelsea fan, Gavin Kirkham, was accused of abusing Manchester United’s Danny Welbeck, the offender was named and shamed across the backpages in howling coverage, replete with photos of the wrongdoer in a “Borat mankini.”

When I started watching English football in the 1970s, there was only one black player in the top flight, Clyde Best, a forceful Bermuda-born striker who played for West Ham (and ended up in NASL with the Portland Timbers.)

The intelligent defender Viv Anderson became the first black player to represent the senior England team in November 1978, playing before English travelling support that had been infiltrated by far-right factions that routinely chanted, “Ain’t no black in the Union Jack.” Then England-coach Ron Greenwood offered the debutant an ill-advised yet well-intentioned vote of confidence, “Yellow, purple or black,” he said, “if they’re good enough, I’ll pick them.”

Anderson had grown up in Nottingham, the son of a hospital porter father and nurse mother who had immigrated from Jamaica in 1954. When making his debut for local club Nottingham Forest in 1974, fans had welcomed him with a barrage of fruit. A traumatized Anderson sought refuge in the team dugout, only to have his own coach, the iconic Brian Clough, command him to “Get your f****** arse back out there then and fetch me two pears and a banana!

In 1978, the year of Rio Ferdinand’s birth, a fluent West Bromwich Albion side made history by becoming the first team to field three black players. Dominant striker Cyrille Regis, artful defender Brendon Batson and deft winger Laurie Cunningham were talent-soaked footballers who inadvertently became game-changing pioneers. At the time, bawdy manager Ron Atkinson belittled their achievement, naming his charges “The Three Degrees” after a Philadelphian female soul trio. (Atkinson would later be forced to resign as a broadcaster in 2004 when his racially abusive language toward Chelsea’s Marcel Desailly was picked up live on a mic.)

For all the abuse black players received from teammates, opponents and fans alike, they lacked any obvious form of redress. Welsh striker Nathan Blake withdrew from the national squad in 1997 after racially abusive comments from then-coach Bobby Gould. The player complained to the South Wales Echo: “We’re in international football. I’m an established striker and I should not have to listen to it [racism] from my own people, especially a manager I play for.”

Gould scoffed in response, “Perhaps Nathan Blake has finer feelings than other people. In future I will take that on board.”

Arsenal’s talented midfielder Paul Davis quite literally took matters into his own hands in 1988, when he responded to on-field abuse from Southampton’s Glenn Cockerill by shattering his opponent’s jaw with a right hook. Davis, who received a nine-match ban, and was never able to shake the resultant “bad boy” stigma during his career. But he was moved by Luis Suarez’s 2011 eight-match suspension for racially abusing Patrice Evra to the point that he wrote, “25 years ago … a player would not have been banned, because a black player wouldn’t have been brave enough to make the accusation.”

Liverpool’s English international John Barnes, who once told the BBC, “there wasn’t a game in the ‘80s when you didn’t get racial abuse as a black player,” took another route. When recording Liverpool’s infamous 1988 Hip Hop parody, “Anfield Rap,” the wondrous winger made light of his shocking experiences, famously half-rhyming, “I come from Jamaica, my name is John Barnes, When I do my thing the crowd go bananas.”

There was little that could be considered funny about the punishment Barnes received from Everton fans in which the England player was showered with enough bananas to stock a greengrocers. Worse, perhaps, was the collective chant, “EFC are white, EFC are white, Hello, Hello, EFC are white,” which would occasionally tumble from the terraces when one of Everton’s black opponents had the temerity to score.

As late as 2001, a report commissioned by the Premier League, grappled with the cause of such seething, open hatred. The FA Premier League National Fan Survey 2001 still makes for fascinating reading. It revealed that 97.3% of Premier League fans were white. Only 0.8% were black or Asian. Racism aimed at players was reported by a colossal 27% of supporters, a side-effect perhaps of the 64% who thought it was possible to “let off steam at football matches.”

“Letting off steam” appears to have been a euphemism for the racial antagonism that began to plague the United Kingdom after the Second World War. In 1945, England’s minority population numbered in the low thousands. By 1970, it had exploded to 1.45 million as immigrants decamped from across the British Empire’s colonies.

As British comedian, novelist and television presenter David Baddiel explained, football became an outlet for this tension. “This is not football’s problem, it’s a wider problem facing English society,” he said. “Football remains one of the last uninhibited spaces in our culture which is a good thing. People need to get out the shouting and swearing but it makes it hard to police.”

The recent controversies surrounding John Terry, Mark Clattenburg, and the monkey-chanting Gavin Kirkham have allowed Stamford Bridge to become perceived as the epicenter of contemporary racism, but in the Premier League era, even Chelsea are a team transformed. Thirty years ago, Paul Canoville became the first black footballer to play for Chelsea. As he entered the game to his own fans screaming racial epitaphs. Last season, six of the Chelsea starting 11 who kicked off the Champions League final were black.

Baddiel is a Chelsea season ticket holder, who attended his first game in 1975. “You cannot overestimate how bad it was when Paul Canoville was playing,” he said. “When people say John Terry is bad, they need to understand the racism that occurs now is isolated and the situation is not as doom and gloom as the newspapers are making it seem.”

Baddiel reveals he moved his season ticket from the raucous Matthew Harding Stand after Marcel Desailly became team captain and was barraged by the N word from his own fans. “I could not stand to watch the game amongst unreconstructed racists,” he said. But the well-known football fan has become a noted anti-racism advocate, enlisting the support of players like Frank Lampard, in a campaign to stamp out anti-semitic chanting during games.

“There is a line and it needs to be the same for everyone,” Baddiel said. “We have been putting up with it for 20 years. The only reason we did not act before was because the mechanisms were not in place to do anything about it. The big difference now is that there is ‘zero tolerance.’ When someone is racist, people no longer shrug. You can do something about it.” – ESPN

A racist application form

White, English and racist

CAPE BAR COUNCIL

 NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS AND APPLICANTS FOR PUPILLAGE IN 2013

TRANSFORMATION BURSARIES

SCHOLARSHIPS FOR AFRICAN WOMEN

2013

Applications are hereby invited for the Cape Bar’s transformation bursaries and scholarships for African women for 2013.

Transformation bursaries

The persons who are eligible for the transformation bursaries are financially needy black or female persons (a) who have been accepted for pupillage at the Cape Bar in 2013, (b) who are currently pupils and will be commencing practice at the Cape Bar in late 2012 or early 2013 or (c) who are juniors at the Cape Bar and will have less than 2 years’ standing on 1 January 2013.  The value of each bursary will be determined by the Cape Bar Council.  It will be up to R7 500 per month for twelve months depending on the person’s financial needs.

Scholarships for African women

The persons who are eligible for the scholarships for African women are suitably qualified African women who have been accepted for pupillage at the Cape Bar in 2013, who are committed to practising as advocates at the Cape Bar and who require financial assistance during the term of pupillage and during their first year of practice.  The value of each scholarship is R7 500 per month during 2013.  Thereafter, each scholarship holder who has successfully completed the National Bar Examination and taken up chambers at the Cape Bar, receives a contribution, determined by the Cape Bar Council, towards the running expenses for the first year of practice. It will be up to R7 500 per month for twelve months depending on the person’s financial needs.

Application form

All applications must be made using the accompanying application form.

Applications must be made by 30 November 2012.  They must be sent to:

Andrew Breitenbach SC

16th Floor Huguenot Chambers

40 Queen Victoria Street

CAPE TOWN 8001

Email: breitenb@law.co.za

Fax: 021 424 4919

If you have any queries, please contact Adv. Breitenbach on 021 424 3906.

SHELLEY WITTEN

Secretary

Cape Bar Council

 

Chaos and violence on the rise in UK

British police in Croydon, South London on August 8, 2011

Chaos and violence are on the rise in the UK a year after the PM declared a war on gang culture, a study revealed. Police aggression and a refusal to tackle the root causes of delinquency are reportedly the main issues hindering the initiative.

On Monday, the Center for Social Justice (CSJ) released a damning report titled ‘Time to Wake Up.’ The study criticized the steps taken by the UK’s coalition government over the last year to curb the problem of rising social unrest and delinquency.

The investigation roundly condemned the government’s heavy-handed approach as exacerbating the problem, citing a perception in the government of the riots as a “random one-off” that can be managed by an elevated police presence.

“They could not be more wrong. The alarming fact is that many streets across the country are besieged by anarchy and violence. There is no control in such neighborhoods,” the report said. It also notes an increase in violence among younger gang members, and in the number of women joining gangs.

In the wake of the mass rioting that swept the UK last summer, PM David Cameron launched an “all-out war on gang culture,” maintaining that gangs were at the root of the social unrest. The CSJ report cited statistics showing that “individuals who have links to gangs are believed to be responsible for 16 percent of London’s total drug supply, nearly a fifth of stabbings, half of all shootings and 14 percent of all rapes.”

The CSJ argued that the 10 million pounds the Home Office allotted last year to combating gang culture had been poorly distributed. Some organizations designated for funding did not receive money due to a lack of awareness, which the report describes as indicative of a “complete disconnect between what goes on at the policy level to what goes on on the ground.”

The CSJ said that aggressive policing could be one of the main drivers of the increase in gang crime over the past year.

“Negative, discriminatory and aggressive police behavior, if not perpetuating gang culture, actively hinders attempts to tackle it,” the study said, adding that according to a CSJ survey, 57.7 percent of respondents believed the police’s relationship with young people had not changed since the riots, while 13.5 percent said it had worsened.

The organization expressed particular concern with the police policy of targeting gang leaders. Referencing the arrest of over 200 ringleaders in London over the past year, CSJ said their removal had led to the creation of volatile power vacuums, potentially paving the way for chaotic power struggles between younger gang members.

The UK government’s attitude towards gang violence will only yield short-term results, the CSJ argued, adding that the underlying issues need to be addressed if there is to be any long-term resolution of the issue.

The study described the current strategy as ignoring the root causes of the violence, such as family breakdown and dysfunction, drug addiction and unemployment: “It takes years to work with gang nominal. Preventative work to discourage young people from joining gangs has ‘fallen off the radar.’

The growing gang culture in the UK hit the headlines last year when thousands of young people took part in riots across the country, looting shops and damaging property.

Mass riots in London were triggered by the police shooting of suspected criminal Mark Duggan, The circumstances surrounding the incident are highly controversial: Some claim Duggan was unarmed when he was gunned down by an officer. The government attributed the ensuing violence and social unrest to a degraded youth culture.

Hate crime hoax

Sharmeka Moffitt

Two days after multiple law enforcement agencies began an investigation into the attack and burning of a Winnsboro woman at Civitan Park, authorities now believe the wounds were self-inflicted.

According to Winnsboro Police Chief Lester Thomas, evidenced gathered at the scene of the incident shows 20-year-old Sharmeka Moffitt’s initial claims that she was attacked and set on fire turned out to be false claims made up by Moffitt.

“This is a case in which the investigators had to pursue the facts that were presented,” Thomas said. “It’s been a very disturbing case for everyone involved.”

On Sunday, officers responded to a 911 call around 8 p.m. near the walking trail at Civitan Park to find Moffitt with burns covering her body. It was less than a minute from the time the call from Moffitt came into the 911 center that officers from the Winnsboro Police Department and the Franklin Parish Sheriff’s Office were on the scene at the park located on Hwy. 15.

Moffitt could not identify the race of her attackers, but said three men wearing “T-shirt hoodies” doused her in a flammable liquid and set her on fire at the park. The responding officers found no suspects or vehicles at the park where the attack allegedly occurred.

Moffitt was taken to Franklin Medical Center in Winnsboro and then transported to LSU Medical Center in Shreveport, where it was determined she had burns on over 60 percent of her body.

State Police arrived by helicopter with its crime lab team to gather evidence shortly after Moffitt was taken for medical assistance. Law enforcement officials gathered evidence from the scene all night, finishing its scaling of the crime scene by Monday morning.

After analyzing the evidence at the State Police Crime Lab, it was discovered Moffitt’s fingerprints were on the cigarette lighter and the lighter fluid recovered near the wooded area around the crime scene.

“There is more physical evidence along those lines that back this up,” Thomas said.

At a news conference held at LSU Medical Center on Monday evening, Moffitt’s mother, Edna Moffitt said her daughter was in critical condition with third-degree burns on her arms and other areas and would undergo surgery Tuesday.

False rumors regarding the incident were spread on various social media outlets Sunday night just hours after the incident took place. On many of the Twitter and Facebook posts, users speculated the attack was a hate crime and Moffitt was attacked for wearing a President Obama t-shirt when she was “raped and burned alive”.

Moffitt’s mother and Thomas confirmed Monday that the Obama T-shirt rumor was false and there was no evidence of sexual assault.

A racial slur and the letters, KKK, that were written in toothpaste on Moffitt’s vehicle were linked to female DNA, authorities said.

“All of the evidence is pointing back to the victim inflicting this upon herself,” Thomas said. “No evidence has shown any other person was involved.”

Thomas said that no matter the outcome of these types of tragic events, it’s always a heavy burden on law enforcement and the victim’s family.

“My heart truly goes out to the Moffitt family, who are more than just members of our community, they are my friends,” Thomas said. “I hope we can come together as a community and pray for their wellbeing and a quick recovery of Sharmeka.”

Candlelight vigils for Moffitt were held Monday night around Winnsboro before the facts of the case were revealed.

Franklin Parish Sheriff Kevin Cobb said the unity shown by the community on the heels of the incident was inspiring.

“I want to thank the community, who under these stressful times they allowed law enforcement to do their job to seek information, collect evidence and follow the facts,” Cobb said. “Although I think what she did was wrong and had major consequences not only for her, but throughout our community and our country. There’s something wrong here, and we need to help individuals like this. In the same way our community came to support her as a victim, I still hope the community will support her emotional and physical recovery.”

While Thomas and Cobb said no charges have been filed against Moffitt at this time, the case evidence will be turned over to the 5th Judicial District Attorney’s Office for review.

Thomas and Cobb said the collaborative efforts by their departments with the State Police and FBI helped in solving the case in a timely manner. – The Franklik Sun

Ann Coulter’s Mugged, a review

Ann Coulter and friend

Many in the Dissident Right/ Right Opposition have criticized Ann Coulter as the epitome of the cable news partisanship. However, next to Pat Buchanan, she probably speaks more taboo truths than anyone else with Main Stream Media [MSM] access.

Coulter calls for cuts in legal immigration, ending birthright citizenship, speaks frankly about the Bell Curve, defends groups like the Council of Conservative Citizens (with some qualifications), and even quotes VDARE.com and Peter Brimelow .

So I was excited when I heard of her latest book, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama.

But, as she began promoting it, the controversy seemed to be limited to her attacking liberals and the Democrats for racism and indifference to blacks.

So I got worried that the book would be more partisan Jonah Goldberg-type “Democrats-are-the-real-racists, Martin Luther King-is-a-conservative” platitudes than an actual, much-needed indictment of racial demagoguery.

Fortunately, however, the vast bulk of Coulter’s book focuses on exposing liberal and black hysteria and lies about race.

Coulter notes several actions that now inspire accusations of racism in the Age of Obama:

“not electing Obama president”
“requesting documents from Attorney General Eric Holder” in Fast and Furious
“references  to Obama playing basketball”
“the word ‘the’”. The last charge, she notes, was inspired by Donald Trump referring to “the blacks.”

Her book’s subtitle is Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama, and Coulter systematically documents racial demagoguery from the 1970s on. She does a great job telling the true story behind supposed acts of racism such as the justified Rodney King beating, the tragic (but not racist) shooting of Amadou Diallo, and the Willie Horton Ad. She exposes the little-known fact that Jim Jones People’s Temple mass suicide was led by a fanatical left-winger driven by “anti-racism” and Marxism, who also had close ties to the Democratic Party.

Perhaps the best part of Coulter’s book is her discussion of hate crime hoaxes. She devotes an entire chapter, amusingly titled “Hey, whatever happened to that story…” to hate crime hoaxes and how the MSM always accepts the lies, only to deep-six the stories when they prove false. In addition to rehearsing well-known hoaxes such as the Tawana Brawley case, she goes into great detail about lesser-publicized frauds, like the non-existent epidemic of black church burnings during the Clinton years. More importantly, she notes that many of these fake hate crimes stirred up actual hate crimes against whites—which were all ignored by the MSM.

Coulter covers the Duke Lacrosse mess later in the book.  This is one of the few Hate Crime hoaxes that most people still remember, but Coulter brings up facts often ignored (outside of VDARE and a few other sources) that put it in perspective. She reports DOJ crime statistics noting that there has not been a single case of an actual white-on-black gang rape, while thousands of black-on-white rapes (including gang rapes) occur each year. As Coulter barbs:

  If there were a single unequivocal example of a white on black rape in modern times, a lesbian folk singer would have written a song about it and won an Oscar for the accompanying documentary.

There are, however, a few areas where I believe Coulter’s partisanship gets in the way of her otherwise excellent analysis.  Like many Conservatism Inc. publicists, Coulter argues the Democrats are in fact the real racists, and that the Republican Southern Strategy was non-racial.

Coulter has occasionally made some statements suggesting that she is sympathetic to Bell Curve arguments. [See her column Murdering The Bell Curve, June 27, 2002 at 2:50 PM]But she concludes her book by asserting

if all black people woke up tomorrow morning with the cultural predilections of Korean Americans, all sociological disparities—income, crime rates, out of wedlock births—would vanish within ten years.

Coulter’s general point that most of the problems in the black community will only improve through cultural change is no doubt true. But the unfortunate fact of average genetic differences means that most of those disparities will never vanish.

These quibbles aside, Coulter’s Mugged ranks with Jared Taylor’s Paved with Good Intentions and Thomas Sowell’s The Vision of the Anointed  as one of the best indictments of American minority and liberal hypocrisy and hysteria on race. – Alexander Hart, VDARE.com

Don’t laugh please, we’re black(face)!

Blackface not funny

Administrators in the Waverly Central School District have been fielding complaints all weekend after students involved in a Friday pep rally staged a skit critics say was racist and made light of domestic violence.

The issue is getting some national attention after a Waverly High School graduate posted a story on the CNN iReport website early Monday.

Three white students wearing blackface put on the skit, according to the post by 2006 graduate Matt Dishler, with two of the students representing singer Rihanna and her former boyfriend, entertainer Chris Brown, who were involved in a highly publicized domestic violence case in 2009.

A photo posted with the story shows one male restraining another male, with a student portraying Rihanna cowering on the floor. Students and others sitting on the bleachers in the background appear to be smiling and laughing as they watch the skit.

Dishler said he didn’t attend the rally, but heard about it from friends. After confirming the information, he decided to post an opinion piece.

“I can testify there’s not a lot of racial diversity in that school whatsoever. We’re not really exposed to that at that school,” Dishler said. “I felt like something should have been done about this. I don’t believe the kids had any vicious intentions, but the administrators should have said that’s not exactly OK.”

Waverly Superintendent Joseph Yelich said he was not aware that the students were planning to do the skit, but he has received plenty of complaints since then.

“The Waverly School District is committed to creating a positive atmosphere through all activities,” Yelich said. “I’ll be working with building administration, staff and students to develop future activities consistent with that commitment.

“There is a set of concerns that a number of individuals have had, and we want to address those concerns,” Yelich said. “I want to be sure administration and staff and students know what our expectations are.”

Yelich did not indicate what if any specific actions would result from Friday’s pep rally.

A New Hope Center, an Owego-based agency that assists victims of domestic and sexual violence, hate crimes, rape and other abuse, is already working with the Waverly School District on bullying issues, according to Assistant Director Francis J. Bialy.

Bialy wasn’t aware of Friday’s pep rally, but he said, in general, it’s disturbing to try to find humor in grave issues such as domestic violence.

“If it’s intended to be humorous or putting down people, it further perpetuates permission to engage in such behavior,” Bialy said.

“When you look at issues with race, the same thing holds true. If people act in racist ways or support racist behavior, they tell other people it’s OK to act racist.

“I hesitate to judge the intent of something,” Bialy said.

“There’s also a dynamic that well-intentioned actions are done without a full sense of understanding that also end up being damaging as well. I think it should be looked at.”

Dishler said he is still proud of his former high school and didn’t want to be too critical.

“I believe they will take steps to cure it. I just think sometimes things need to be brought to light,” Dishler said.

“(Domestic violence) is nothing to joke about. I wanted people to know this mistake was made and can we please rectify it so it doesn’t happen again.”  – stargazette.com

‘Racist’ comedian suing for libel

A British comedian, Frankie Boyle is suing the Mirror newspaper for libel, over an article which labelled him racist.

He is complaining about a story published on 19 July 2011, saying he was in talks for a new Channel 4 show.

The first sentence read: “RACIST comedian Frankie Boyle could soon be returning to TV despite upsetting thousands of viewers”.

The Mirror said it will defend itself “on the basis of truth and fair comment”.

The trial, which is taking place at the High Court in London, is expected to last a week.

Boyle’s lawyer told the court that the newspaper had also defamed his client, by asserting he had been “forced to quit” the BBC comedy show Mock The Week.

His barrister, David Sherborne, said that to call someone “racist” was “obviously defamatory”.

Mr Sherborne said Boyle’s humour was “deliberately challenging”.

Controversial humour

He said the comic did not object to being criticised but did object to being described as racist.

“Saying ‘vile’ or ‘offensive’, or his material is ‘vile’ or ‘offensive’, is one thing,” Mr Sherborne told the jury.

“He realises that that goes with the territory, so to speak. But accusing him of being a racist is an entirely different matter.”

Mr Sherborne added: “You can call him ‘offensive’, you can call him ‘tasteless’. That’s fine. But he is not racist.”

The Glasgow-born comedian’s humour has often proved controversial with audiences.

Last year, broadcasting watchdog Ofcom upheld more than 500 complaints about his Channel 4 show Tramadol nights, during which he joked about Katie Price’s disabled son, Harvey.

Ofcom ruled that the joke appeared to “target and mock the mental and physical disabilities” of the then eight year-old.

In 2008, the BBC apologised when Boyle made a joke about Palestine on the Radio 4 comedy show Political Animal.

Break from Twitter

A year after that, BBC Two’s Mock The Week was criticised by the BBC Trust over comments Boyle made on the show about swimmer Rebecca Adlington’s appearance.

As yet, The Mirror has not removed the article about Boyle from its website.

A paragraph added to the top of the story reads: “Frankie Boyle is taking legal proceedings against us for the description of him as a ‘racist comedian’. He claims it is untrue and defamatory. We are defending this claim on the basis of truth and fair comment.

“We are also defending his claim that we libelled him by suggesting that ‘he was forced to quit Mock the Week’ in 2009.”

Boyle’s lawyer said any suggestion his client was forced to leave the show was “completely untrue”.

Boyle has taken a temporary respite from Twitter. “I’m afraid I must disappear from Twitter for a while. See you on the other side of this thing.” – BBC

Racism worse for whites, study shows

American Freedom Fighters

The study polled roughly 200 white people and 200 black people drawn at random from a national census and asked them to rate racist attitudes against blacks and whites in each decade from 1950 to 2000.

Both groups felt racism against black people was substantial in the 1950s and both groups agreed the situation had markedly improved.

However, white respondents to the survey indicated that racism is now on the rise against white people. Eleven per cent of people responding to the survey even gave anti-white racism a maximum rating of ten points.

The authors said the research showed America has not yet reached a “post-racial” era, despite the election of Barack Obama as the country’s first black president.

Instead, they said there are still “several legal and social controversies” highlighting “reverse racism” against white people, and that the white respondents to the survey felt that racism is now a “zero-sum game” – the less racism that is directed against black Americans has been accompanied by a rise in perceived biases against white Americans.

“Whites believe the pendulum has now swung way beyond equality in the direction of discrimination,” it added.

“It is a pretty surprising finding when you think of the wide range of disparities that still exist in society, most of which show black Americans with worse outcomes than whites in areas such as income, home ownership, health and employment,” said Samuel Somers, an associate professor of psychology at Tufts who co-authored the study.

David E. Berstein, a professor of law at George Mason university, told the New York Times that the US policy of affirmative action, which sees universities and employers overtly favour black candidates over whites, had led many whites to complain about the unfairness of the system.

“It is not terribly surprising that whites subjectively perceive discrimination against members of their own group as an especially significant and growing problem, even though, objectively speaking, bias against blacks is far more pervasive, problematic and ill-intentioned,” he said. – The Telegraph

 

Black racists at school ‘sickening’

Hindu traditions maintained

A report that pupils were being racially abused at a Boksburg school is disturbing, the Inkatha Freedom Party in Gauteng said on Thursday

“We are sickened by the reported racial discrimination doing the rounds at schools in Gauteng,” provincial leader Bonginkosi Dhlamini said in a statement.

The Star reported on Thursday that several parents of pupils at the Parkdene Primary School in Boksburg claimed the children suffered racial abuse and discrimination.

This was apparently because they wore red strings around their wrists as part of the Hindu faith.

A Grade 3 pupil was reportedly discriminated against by his music teacher, who is the principal’s wife, for wearing red strings on his wrists.

His parents claimed he was called a “coolie” several times in front of his classmates and told to take the string off.

After complaining, the parents were told the pupil had to wear a red jersey to hide the string.

The principal refused to comment, saying the department was dealing with the matter.

Dhlamini said the teacher’s alleged behaviour “demonstrates the dwindling humanistic culture in our society”.

“This unendurable action by the teacher is a regressive sign of racial battles still protruding in our society, and strict measures needs to be taken against those who… blatantly attack innocent children because of their race and religion.”

Education spokesperson Charles Phahlane was not immediately available for comment. – Sapa

Jared Taylor makes plea for White Student Union in Towson

Member of Youth for Western Civilization

by Kyle Rogers of examiner.com

Pro-American activist Jared Taylor spoke at Towson University near Baltimore to argue for the need for a White Student Union on campus.

Taylor is the author of Paved With Good Intentions, and the president of New Century Foundation. Local Charleston residents may recognize his name as he has been a repeat guest on the Rocky D radio show.

Several groups at Towson, most notably the Black Student Union, are advocating racial discrimination against whites. They say the University should not allow a White Student Union, even though it provides lavish funding for every other racial group to organize. The University tried to keep Taylor from coming by charging him $1,600 for “security.” The University lets all manner of radical left-wing and black power activists use campus facilities and provides them with security free of charge.

The Black Student Union organized against the speech. That group packed the conference room early, causing many supporters of Jared Taylor to be shut out. Only two hundred people were allowed in the room. A large number of supporters of Jared Taylor who came from out of town were denied entry.

The Towson Black Student Union takes a militant stance on campus. The official facebook page for the group shows two of its leaders giving black power salutes. They also have a black panther painted on the wall of their University-funded Black Student Union facility. Their official website displays the black power flag emblem used by the New Black Panther Party.

The speech was organized by a student named Matthew Heimbach. He has run an official campus group in the past. It was called “Youth For Western Civilization.” Heimbach, and other members of the group were viciously harassed on campus. They were bombarded with death threats and threats of being gang raped. Campus police turned a blind eye. Their faculty sponsor was harassed into withdrawing his sponsorship.

Jared Taylor made an eloquent half-hour presentation and then answered questions for an hour. The entire event was recorded. Click the video in this article to watch it.

Don’t poke fun at a black man!

The Pot Smokers

Credit R. Wallace “Wally” Hudson, chairman of the Mecklenburg County (Va.) Republican Committee, with demonstrating how new social media platforms can broadcast ancient hates.

The Post reported this week that the county GOP’s Facebook page had displayed for months photos portraying President Obama as a witch doctor, a caveman and a drug dealer.

Virginia’s Republican Party chairman, Pat Mullins, ordered the offensive photos be taken down. But Hudson, who acknowledged posting most of the images, stood his ground, saying he didn’t see what all the fuss was about. “We know our regular readers, who are good conservatives,” he told The Post on Tuesday. “They’re gonna get a kick out of it.”

Sadly, the Mecklenburg GOP’s disgusting images—which have since been removed—are not an isolated case of ugliness.

Baylor University assistant professor Mia Moody did a study of social media stereotyping of Barack and Michelle Obama; her findings appeared in the journal New Media & Culture.

Moody researched hundreds of Facebook groups and pages. She found numerous examples of the president and the first lady being targeted with racist and sexist rhetoric that, not surprisingly, also indirectly spread hatred toward women and blacks.

Moody found that some Facebook pages build on ideas that black people are different from members of the dominant group. Several photos showing Michelle Obama dancing drew comments about her “always jigging.”

One group called “Obama Sucks” primarily served as an outlet to post fake photos of the president. One picture featured him wearing a bandanna and gold teeth. The caption: “OBAMA Going For The African American Vote.”

Moody found that many Facebook hate pages also focused on cultural narratives. Some photos depict Obama or his family as animals, particularly apes. One picture showed male and female apes holding an infant ape with Obama’s face superimposed on it.

Tasteless. Disrespectful. – Colbert King, Washington Post

Chasing non-white votes

Trying very hard

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney says he would honor temporary work permits for young illegal immigrants who were allowed to stay in the U.S. because of a decision by President Barack Obama.

Romney told The Denver Post, in an interview appearing in Tuesday’s edition, that people who are able to earn the two-year visas to stay and work wouldn’t see them revoked under a Romney administration.

“The people who have received the special visa that the president has put in place, which is a two-year visa, should expect that the visa would continue to be valid. I’m not going to take something that they’ve purchased,” Romney told the Post, promising to put a comprehensive immigration reform plan into place before those visas expire.

In June, Obama issued a new policy that allows some young illegal immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children to avoid deportation. Romney criticized Obama for circumventing Congress to make the change a few months before the presidential election.

During the Republican presidential primary, Romney said he would veto legislation to provide a path to citizenship for some of the young people who benefited from Obama’s new policy.

The Denver Post interview comes as Romney and Obama are fighting a heated battle for Colorado, whose significant Hispanic population could determine which candidate receives the state’s nine electoral votes.

Obama’s other race speech

The Entitlement Crowd

In a video obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama tells an audience of black ministers, including the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, that the U.S. government shortchanged Hurricane Katrina victims because of racism.

“The people down in New Orleans they don’t care about as much!” Obama shouts in the video, which was shot in June of 2007 at Hampton University in Virginia. By contrast, survivors of Sept. 11 and Hurricane Andrew received generous amounts of aid, Obama explains. The reason? Unlike residents of majority-black New Orleans, the federal government considers those victims “part of the American family.”

The racially charged and at times angry speech undermines Obama’s carefully-crafted image as a leader eager to build bridges between ethnic groups. For nearly 40 minutes, using an accent he almost never adopts in public, Obama describes a racist, zero-sum society, in which the white majority profits by exploiting black America. The mostly black audience shouts in agreement. The effect is closer to an Al Sharpton rally than a conventional campaign event.

Obama gave the speech in the middle of a hotly-contested presidential primary season, but his remarks escaped scrutiny. Reporters in the room seem to have missed or ignored his most controversial statements. The liberal blogger Andrew Sullivan linked to what he described as a “transcript” of the speech, which turned out not to be a transcript at all, but instead the prepared remarks provided by the campaign. In fact, Obama, who was not using a teleprompter, deviated from his script repeatedly and at length, ad libbing lines that he does not appear to have used before any other audience during his presidential run. A local newspaper posted a series of video clips of the speech, but left out key portions. No complete video of the Hampton speech was widely released.

Obama begins his address with “a special shout out” to Jeremiah Wright, the Chicago pastor who nearly derailed Obama’s campaign months later when his sermons attacking Israel and America and accusing the U.S. government of “inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color” became public. To the audience at Hampton, Obama describes Wright as, “my pastor, the guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me. He’s a friend and a great leader. Not just in Chicago, but all across the country.”

By the time Obama appeared at Hampton, Jeremiah Wright had become a political problem. Wright told The New York Times earlier that year that he would no longer be speaking on the campaign’s behalf because his rhetoric was considered too militant. And yet later in the Hampton speech Obama explicitly defends Wright from unnamed critics, a group he describes as “they”: “They had stories about Trinity United Church of Christ, because we talked about black people in church: ‘Oh, that might be a separatist church,’” Obama said mockingly.

There was an article in the US World Report regarding the orderly behavior of the Japanese citizens and the absence of looting after the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear nightmare.

Social scientists were baffled by the total non-existence of looting and savage behavior in Japan considering the magnitude of this catastrophe. They conferred with human study organizations as well as sociology experts throughout the United States. Japan lacks diversity, was the conclusion.