Mick Hartley

Rowling again:

When I was young all the football managers were straight, white, middle-aged blokes, so it's fantastic to see how much things have changed. https://t.co/jx9zp0hRyU

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) May 11, 2024

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Yep – Chase Strangio finally gets it:

Astounding how often militant trans activists tell the rest of us, ‘so what you’re saying is, trans girls aren’t real girls’. Yes, that’s exactly what we’re saying. Girls are being robbed of honours and opportunities by mediocre, uber-privileged, establishment-enabled boys. pic.twitter.com/3iPOmpO5s4

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) May 11, 2024

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Another Jewish student at Oxford speaks out:

Growing up, I had a strong Jewish upbringing celebrating festivals such as Passover and learning about my own family’s history of persecution in Egypt, Holland and Russia. I take great pride in my heritage (Harry Hatwell, 26, studying for a masters in civil law at St John’s College, Oxford, writes).

This week at Oxford University, one of most prestigious university in the world, I felt I have had to hide who I am.

My accommodation is two streets away from the camp. If I walk to the end of my road I can see the tents, the signs, and hear chants of “from the river to the sea” and “Israel is a terror state”. Even outside the camp, it emboldened people — I watched as my friend, who wears a kippah, was told “Zionist crazies should go back to America”.

My final exams start next week and my commute to the faculty takes me past the protesters. I cross the road before I walk past them, I’ve avoided doing my normal running route. My partner is anxious about me wearing my kippah in public. We’ve been scared. It feels like a hostile environment.

However, the protesters claim that this “liberated zone” is inclusive for all. So, on Wednesday I and a group of Jewish students attended a “teach-in” at the camp on the difference between anti-Zionism and antisemitism.

I have family in Israel and believe in the right to a Jewish homeland. This makes me a Zionist. But at the talk, a protester told me the camp’s purpose was to “defeat Zionism”. For me this was antisemitic, she was denying Israel’s legitimacy as the only Jewish state, denying the Jews alone a homeland, and calling for its destruction. That isn’t a call for peace.

Given the microphone, I told the 40-strong crowd my experience of antisemitism. But after I spoke, I was shouted at and the panel said I was mistaken. They said she’d just made a political statement and denied my experience of antisemitism. I was being gaslit.

Earlier in the talk, a speaker had said that the British Jewish community had been fed a lie by “powerful forces within British Jewry” to convince them that anti-Zionism was antisemitism. It was antisemitic trope on antisemitic trope.

For these people, their personal experience of victimhood cannot be questioned and is used to show the world what antisemitism means, whereas when I stand up to give my experience, I’m made to feel it doesn’t exist. They could easily define what antisemitism wasn’t but never what it was. It was one of the most uncomfortable moments of my life.

Oxford University is allowing its space to be used to teach and instruct people on how to be antisemitic through anti-Zionism on campus. Its own academics are signing letters of support — one of them is my own tutor.

The university’s idea of what the camp is there for and what it is trying to achieve — reminding us of tolerance — is pure fantasy. By allowing the camp on its property, Oxford is implicitly endorsing it.

I emailed my college on Thursday to tell them the situation is intolerable. I’m a student at this university and I’ve been made to feel there isn’t a place for me here.

An idiosyncratic historical take from Lebanese University Professor George Harb:

"After the so-called annihilation of the Zionist Jews by Hitler – which is in doubt to begin with – they gained the sympathy of all the people in Europe, and fled to France, and when Hitler entered France, most of them went to Britain.

"The so-called Balfour Declaration, which promised the Jews a state… During World War II, Balfour was Britain's Home Secretary. Balfour oppressed the Jews much more than Hitler and Nazism did. He threw them in prison. Why? Because when the Jews arrived in Britain…

"What have the Jews been doing throughout history when they arrive somewhere? They join the banking and media sectors, and take control of them, and then they turn against their religious institutions, because historically, the Church fought the Jews. The Jews do not believe in the Church and want to destroy it, and wait for the Messiah. This is a long story and I do not want to get into it.

"So the Jews turned to destroying the Church in Britain – both the Protestant church and the Catholic church – and they moved to destroy the banking sector and control the media. They urged the British media to start a war against Hitler, in order to get rid of him. The Jews live off the European conflicts.

"Balfour was smart, so he senses this danger. He said to them: 'The best thing is for us to found a state for you.' This is because he was on his way to annihilate them again. So they promised them a state in South Africa. They took them to South Africa, but at the time, there were savages there, and they said that Israel could not survive there. Nobody mentioned the historic and religious roots of Israel or whatever.

"Then they checked out Palestine, and found a sect of Jews living in Jerusalem, and thought that since they had holy places there, they could use them as a emotional basis and bring the Jews there. In short, they brought them to the East in order to get rid of them."

Classic.

Nadia Murad, a Yezidi girl, was 19 years old when lSlS kidnapped and held as a slave for 3 months, tortured and raped.
lSlS kiIIed her mother and 6 brothers.

Nadia's book event was cancelled in Canada because organizers felt 'her story could promote Islamophobia' pic.twitter.com/5GW6ZEaFXK

— Azat Alsalem (@AzzatAlsaalem) May 10, 2024

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

A depressing report in the Times from Eliana Silver:

When I was accepted last year to do a master’s degree at a prestigious university in London I was excited. Being the daughter of a diplomat I had spent my life travelling and had never felt particularly linked to my Jewish identity. There is a thriving Jewish community in London and I was thrilled with the prospect of making some Jewish friends. Along with being ready to connect with my fellow students, I was also enthusiastic about the film course that I had been accepted on to. Then, the week after I started, Hamas perpetrated the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust.

While the events of October 7 unfolded, I was glued to the television, tears rolling down my face. As the death toll rose and before Israel even began to think of retaliating, thousands of people spilt on to the streets of London celebrating “the Palestinian resistance”. And so instead of seeing empathy for those who lost their loved ones, I found myself at an epicentre of hate in London.

When I opened Instagram I saw students I had met the week before on my course posting messages in support of Hamas: “Resistance is justified”, “Free Palestine”, “Freedom fighters”. It was surreal.

I deleted them all right away because I didn’t want to be connected to the hate they were promoting. In addition, I was terrified that they would learn from my account that I was Jewish or, God forbid, a Zionist. But I was so furious that a few days later I brought a “F*** antisemitism” sticker to class on my laptop. It was then that I saw a shift in their attitude towards me. Our conversations went from amicable to none at all. I noticed the eyerolls every time I spoke in class, and I could hear their voices drop as I passed by….

One friend was cornered by another student after a seminar and questioned if she claimed Israel as a Jew. This student then went on to call her a baby-killer. The same friend was also spat at on campus while speaking about Israel on the phone.

A friend from a different university in London told me how she was shunned by her peers and kicked out of the class group chat. She had not shared her views on Israel — she was ostracised for simply being Jewish. She was told later that students she had considered her friends had celebrated her departure from the group chat with images and emojis.

I wish I could say things quietened down over time, but they didn’t. Students wore keffiyeh scarves and displayed “Free Palestine” phone cases and pins. Many of my classmates, despite having no personal stake in the conflict, adopted this new fashion trend in solidarity.

A new fashion trend. Yep. The new fashionable antisemitism.

Autistic children are believed to be particulalry vulnerable to the siren song of trans activists, so this is not good news:

A school for severely autistic children has signed up to a controversial LGBT charter pushing “pseudoscientific” transgender ideology.

Experts accused Kaimes School in Edinburgh, which takes children from age five, of “breathtaking” recklessness over how it teaches concepts of biological sex and gender to vulnerable pupils.

There is a strong, but as yet poorly understood link between autism and young people reporting gender identity issues.

Studies suggest “transgender and gender-diverse individuals” are up to six times more likely to be autistic, as reported in the Cass Review.

Documents show that Kaimes School has overhauled its curriculum to become “trans inclusive” in a bid to win “charter status” from activist charity LGBT Youth Scotland (LGBTYS).

Examples include the Spanish language being adapted to become gender-neutral in lessons, to address what was seen as an “unfortunate” grammatical dependence on masculine and feminine terms.

Messages on school notice boards dedicated exclusively to LGBT issues tell pupils to “come out for LGBT”. Other slogans include: “LGBT+ matters, be a part of us”. Statements such as “trans women are real women” have also been put on display.

Pupils have been shown an image of a “gingerbread person” in assemblies, designed to teach them about the difference between gender and sex, and are told it is “fine and valid” if they do not match.

Reading materials in the school include a book titled Are You a Boy or Are You a Girl? written by the trans activists Sarah Fisher and Fox Fisher and endorsed by LGBTYS and Stonewall.

Carolyn Brown, a retired former educational psychologist who helped the Scottish Government draw up a national autism strategy, described the approach taken by the school as grossly irresponsible.

“This is the opposite of what a specialist school in autism should be doing,” she said. “These youngsters will interpret things very literally and see the world in black and white.

“If you tell them they can be a member of the opposite sex, then they will really believe that. Showing them nonsense like the gingerbread person, which is highly regressive and misleading, is only going to make them very confused.

“You would expect schools, especially ones that specialise in autism, to respond very cautiously and with great care in this area. Instead, youngsters are being fed pseudoscience, presented as fact, and so are the staff. It is shocking and breathtaking.”

LGBT Youth Scotland, as we've heard, are Scotland's answer to Stonewall, infiltrating Scottish primary schools with gender woo. Infiltrating a school for autistic children marks a new low.

Baroness Falkner, head of the Equalities and Human Rights Commision, has long been a target for trans activists in general, and Stonewall in particular, for her stubborn insistence on the importance of women's rights. She's been accused of bullying and harassment by senior staff, and, it was claimed, took a “determinedly anti-trans stance”. Oh dear.

And she wins again:

Britain’s human rights watchdog has accused “activist” trans rights campaigners of attempting to “unduly influence” its legal independence after successfully resisting an attempt to strip it of its international status.

Stonewall and other LGBTQ+ organisations made a formal complaint against the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) last year. They claimed that the commission was “trans-hostile” and “not fit for purpose”, criticising its decision to back new legal protections for biological women.

However, the international body that accredits human rights organisations concluded that the EHRC had fulfilled its obligations and was independent.

Baroness Falkner of Margravine, the chairwoman of the EHRC, said: “We always believed there were inaccuracies in the submissions made against us. I can reassure all those we work with, and the British public we serve, that we take great pride in our independence from government.

“But it is important too, to maintain our independence from activist organisations wishing to unduly influence our legal opinions and policy. We routinely demonstrate our impartiality through our willingness to challenge both robustly.

“We also take seriously our obligation to protect and promote equality and human rights for everyone. That includes considering, carefully and impartially and on the basis of evidence, how the rights of one person, or group, might be affected by the rights of another.

“The role of the referee is not always appreciated, but as the human rights regulator for England and Wales, it is one we accept with steely determination.”’

Well said.

In May last year Stonewall and other LGBTQ+ bodies claimed that the EHRC was “actively harming” trans people. They highlighted the commission’s support of plans by Kemi Badenoch, the women and equalities minister, to introduce legal protections for biological women.

Thereby acknowledging that trans rights are indeed in conflict with women's rights. 

A strange story:

MI5 has apologised for failing to promptly disclose information to a woman who was attacked with a machete by one of its agents.

The woman, known by the alias Beth, has complained to the watchdog which considers complaints against the intelligence services.

In 2022 a BBC investigation revealed the man – who cannot be named for legal reasons – had used his role to coercively control Beth, his ex-partner.

He was physically and sexually abusive, and was filmed threatening to kill her and then attacking her with a machete.

Two years ago, the government took the BBC to court to block the story being broadcast.

It failed to do so, but succeeded in gaining him legal anonymity, having argued that the man – a right-wing extremist known publicly as X – would be in danger if publicly named. The BBC argued he should be identified so that women could be warned about such a predatory and violent man….

The original BBC investigation exposed how X was able to leave the UK while under police investigation to work for a foreign intelligence service, and showed how MI5 had then obtained X’s belongings from the police.

X also abused and threatened to kill another former female partner and her child, and he then used the woman’s name as a form of cover while working for MI5. He also threatened to kill and sexually abuse young girls and written down his cannibal fantasies about eating children.

What delightful people they get to work for MI5.

Arthur Siegel, February 1942. "Detroit, Michigan. Looking towards downtown from the slum area in the early morning. These are conditions under which families lived before moving to the Sojourner Truth housing project."

{Photos: Shorpy/Arthur Siegel for Life magazine]

Named after the abolitionist and activist for African-American civil rights, the Sojourner Truth project didn't quite go according to plan:

As a strikingly controversial project in 1941, Sojourner Truth Project set precedents for Detroit housing project policy through the next decade. Created by the Detroit Housing Commission (DHC) and United States Housing Authority (USHA), the proposed 200 units would alleviate housing shortages caused by the wartime climate of World War II. However, the project was met with extreme backlash from white residents and middle-class black homeowners in Conant Gardens. Violence erupted in 1942 when black families moved into the project housing. More than a thousand black supporters and white opponents crowded streets culminating in violent displays later characterized as the Sojourner Truth riot….

The continual pressure from opposing sides influenced the federal government to switch positions on the racial profile of those occupying the project three times. Original proposals of black occupancy resulted in the Federal Housing Administration's (FHA) refusal to insure mortgage loans for the Seven Mile-Fenelon because of its proximity to the public housing. The racist FHA policy instilled in white residents fears that black residence would directly result in their inability to finance new construction on vacant lots or personal improvement projects.

Bending to white pressure, in January 1941, the DHC designated the Sojourner Truth as a project of white occupancy. After a subsequent eruption of two week long protests, city officials promised the project to black war workers. However, this resulted in opposing picketing and protesting by white residents of Seven Mile-Fenelon who demanded "Rights to Protect, Restrict and Improve [their] Neighborhood." Black families moved into the newly constructed housing on February 28, 1942.

On February 28, 1942, as the first black families moved into their houses, black supporters and white opponents flooded the streets by the thousands. Passionate protest turned to visceral violence as 40 people were injured, 220 arrested, and 109 held for trial—all but three were black. White segregationists utilized this violent eruption as an established precedent to detrimentally affect Detroit's public housing for decades. Influenced by the riot, DHC established a viciously oppressive mandate for racial segregation in all public housing projects. Utilizing the language of the National Associate of Real Estate Boards, city officials vowed that their projects would "not change the racial pattern of a neighborhood". White community groups maliciously utilized threats of a repetition of Sojourner Truth riots as ammunition to shoot down political support of public housing. City officials strongly wanted to avoid bloodshed and therefore surrendered to their elitist demands.