Written by Ketlan Ossowski
England team members Jack Butland, Andy Carroll, Wayne Rooney and
Joe Hart walk through the gate at Auschwitz. Photograph: Michael Regan/AP
There's an interesting article in today's Independent about a visit the England footballers are making to Auschwitz. A group will travel from Krakow, where they are currently based for Euro training. Fair enough, but should they be going at all?
The English team will not be alone in having taken the opportunity of being in the vicinity of Auschwitz to pay it a visit: the German, Italian and Dutch teams have also been. Indeed, the England team itself went once before, back in 1997, followed by some particularly cretinous England fans who then photographed each other sieg-heiling at the gates.
The 2012 Euro championships seem set to be notorious mostly for racism, with co-host country Ukraine being the target of some scathing articles about the overt racism of local fans, but the problem is not confined to the Ukraine. This was highlighted by a training session last Wednesday by the Dutch team, coincidentally following their return from a visit to Auschwitz, who were greeted on the pitch with monkey chants by about five hundred Polish fans.
So angry has this made the teams that some have threatened to walk off mid-game if subjected to racist abuse. Others have gone further still: former Arsenal defender Sol Campbell last week told supporters to avoid the tournament completely because of the threat of racism and violence.
So is the visit to Auschwitz intended to make a point about racism and its possible consequences? If so, fine, though it didn't help the Dutch team much. Or is it to cock a snook at the racists among the Ukrainian fans, who I suspect won't give a shit? Or is it simply that a number of members of the England squad feel a duty to visit the hellhole that is Auschwitz because they are training within a reasonable distance?
If the latter, fair enough and I hope they get something from the visit, but I suspect this is yet another moment when sport is tipping over into politics. The continuing controversy over the jailed Ukrainian opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko and her treatment at the hands of the government have led to diplomatic boycotts across Europe, with many senior government figures such as Angela Merkel, José Manuel Barroso and Viviane Reding, the EU commissioner for justice, stating that they are staying away until the human rights situation under Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych has improved.
The UK government has boycotted the Euro championship for the same reason, though it's likely that the PM and other senior government figures will attend in a personal capacity should England be skilful enough to get to the semi-final or, Gawd 'elp us, the final. We should be so lucky.
As you can see, there are two separate issues here - the continuing racism of the supporters from the Ukraine and the human rights abuses of the Ukrainian government. As far as I can see, there is a simple response that UEFA could have made to the former and that is to have massively fined and then banned the Ukrainian team until their fans learn to behave like civilised humans. Ukraine being the host country, this would be awkward, but there are other countries that would happily stand in for one that's either gone out of favour or been kicked out. The human rights record of the host country is different. That requires a government response that makes the point, like a removal of all diplomatic, business and sporting links with the relevant country until it gets its act together. That won't happen, of course, since commerce rules the world and football is just another business.
So what's left? A cynically publicised visit to Auschwitz to make a not so subtle point about human rights abuses? Well, okay. It's not ideal but it does make the point as long as people are listening. Or as long as they can hear over all the racist chanting.Add a comment
Last Updated on Sunday, 10 June 2012 04:44
Written by Ketlan Ossowski
From the EDL's Mission Statement:
'HUMAN RIGHTS: Protecting And Promoting Human Rights
The English Defence League (EDL) is a human rights organisation...'
Here's a poster that was recently placed on Facebook by longtime BNP supporter Karen Downes, mother of missing Blackpool schoolgirl Charlene Downes. Karen Downes is also a strong supporter of that well-known human rights organisation, the EDL and its offshoot, the football hooligan division Casuals United.
Add a comment
Last Updated on Sunday, 03 June 2012 03:26
Written by Ketlan Ossowski
The first couple of snippets here have been taken from far-right sites, where gossip tends to have a bit of an edge to it, but, if true, both could have far-reaching consequencies - for the BNP at least.
'The Crown Prosecution Service has dropped all charges against Richard Barnbrook and Griffin in relation to the election expenses case for the general election in Barking in 2010...'
I've snipped off the potential libels but this is referring to a number of the BNP's unpaid bills for the election in that year, many of which were, it was claimed, paid within the very strict time limit (28 days) imposed by electoral law, but then turned out to have not been paid after all.
If it's true that this case has been abandoned by the CPS, it would seem that a scapegoat has been found and it's likely that it is the late David Hannam, former treasurer and best buddy of the creepy Mark Collett.
With Hannam's sudden death at the end of September last year, he can (and probably will) be blamed for any financial disaster that afflicts the BNP for the next five years.
Talking of disasters that afflict the BNP, it seems that Pat Harrington (pictured, left), leader of the party's fake and useless union Solidarity, has finally got around to joining the party he has leeched off for the past few years. Rumour suggests that Harrington joined up last week and speculation has already begun over the reasons behind this apparently sudden decision.
One poster on the British Democracy Forum suggests;
'...that this is due to his union failing, his EU work being cut in half and a desire to safeguard his position as Nicks right hand man. I can only guess that now his is a member a party position will be opened up for the former National Liberal Party chairman.'
By way of loose confirmation, this post is immediately followed by this:
'I can confirm that Patrick Harrington is no longer a member of the National Liberal Party.
NLP National Secretary'
Assuming this actually IS Glen Marley confirming that Harrington has left the NLP, we can relatively safely assume that the original post is correct and the chances are that the latter has joined the BNP. If so, this will be a shock for Clive Jefferson, currently seen as the most likely man to be kicked out of the BNP in the near future, following yet another election debacle earlier this month.
Jefferson has spent months complaining about Harrington's influence in the party despite his never becoming a member, and has repeatedly urged Griffin to break from him. Now, with Harrington a member, Jefferson is looking increasingly insecure and with the half-million pounds the party recently received via some insane supporter's will either spent or tucked away for Griffin's Euro election campaign, there's no reason for Clive Jefferson to be kept employed.
This is an irritation to us on this side of the fence because Jefferson is, while a complete moron, a master at failing to win elections. Still, given Harrington's penchant for fucking up everything with which he comes into contact, we've no doubt he'll do his best to emulate Clive's lack of success.
Given the far-right's inclination to call a demo at a moment's notice whenever a paedophile appears in court, we wondered why the likes of the BNP, National Front, EDL and the idiotic Combined Ex-Forces chose not to attend the trial of Matthew Woodward, who on Friday received a community service and residential order for possession of smutty images and video of kids as young as ten.
Is it because he's white or is it possibly because Woodward was a known member of the EDL who regularly attended their demo's? Ironic or what?Add a comment
Last Updated on Monday, 21 May 2012 10:59
Written by Ketlan Ossowski
One of the more ludicrous claims by the English Defence League and associated riff-raff, was that made following the so-called March For England demonstration in Brighton back in April. This demo, claims the EDL, saw marchers pelted with bottles and allegedly resulted in injuries to a ten year old girl.
As you can see from the screenshot below, the image has elicited some angry responses. Which would be understandable, if there was any truth to the claim.
The image actually comes from the Epilepsy Association of Central Florida (EACF) site, which is dedicated to improving the quality of life for children and adults with epilepsy. It appears as an illustration to an article posted on March 8th of this year which discusses issues around mild traumatic brain injury and youngsters. The image can be seen in situ here.
It's not clear whether the image is stock - meaning it is supplied from an agency or company providing images for specific use - or one supplied by the author of the article. What IS clear however, is that the child is not who the EDL claims.
Eventually, the liar is outed, which forces him to go on the offensive.
And here is the liar himself: Chris Howard (who posts on Facebook as Laughing at the Muslim Defence League 2). Lying scum, the lot of them.
Thanks to EDL News for much of the info above.Add a comment
Last Updated on Friday, 25 May 2012 23:12
Written by Ketlan Ossowski
Well, well, look who's popped his head up again. Eddy Morrison, or 'Unsteady Eddy', as he is more commonly known due to his close relationship with cheap booze, has emerged from the wilderness of the far-right to treat us all to his meandering thoughts on whatever holds his interest for more than five minutes.
Eddy, who has been a stalwart of the far-right since Nick Griffin was merely a worrying twinkle in Edgar's eye, has set himself up with a new blog from which he can, to quote himself;
'give regular and personal commentary on the issues of the day as they pertain to White Nationalism'
'give some extra Internet presence to my support for the National Front'.
Fair enough, though I wonder what makes him think that his incoherent ramblings might be of interest to anyone apart from his old drinking pals in the zillion or so nazi grouplets into which he has inserted himself.
In fact, Eddy's career has followed something of a dismal trajectory despite his, on occasion, being assumed to have rather more political nous than he actually possesses. Former BNP star Sharon Ebanks once courted him for her then new (and extremely short-lived) offshoot from the BNP, the New Nationalist Party, though she hastily backed off when Morrison, always the racist, immediately began questioning her on her 'racial ancestry'.
Morrison's ever-wavering interest in the numerous groups to which he has belonged has been noted and frowned upon by those he would assume to be his allies. Apparently, being a pissed nazi is one thing but being inconsistent is something else entirely. One comment on a nazi blog had this to say about him and his political meanderings;
'Eddy Morrison has indeed had a remarkable career. He has been fighting for 'Nationalist Unity' in the National Front, the National Democratic Freedom Movement (his own), British National Party (his own) circa 1977, National Front again, British Movement, National Action Party (his own), National Front (again), New National Front, British National Party, National Front (again), Aryan Unity, White Nationalist party, Spearhead Support group, Spearhead Group, Nationalist Alliance and finally British Peoples Party...'
And now, of course, the National Front (yet again).
Morrison, you may recall, stood in council elections in Bramley back in 2007, duping a pensioner into signing his nomination form by telling her it was a petition against the closure of a local shopping centre. When this ruse was uncovered a complaint was made to the local police but the case was dropped when Morrison got such a dismally low vote that it made absolutely no difference to the outcome.
I have a bit of a soft spot for Unsteady Eddy, mainly because he is one of the people who inhabit the far-right and inevitably cause chaos wherever they go, but also because he once described Hitler-worshipper Mark Collett, Nick Griffin's once blue-eyed boy, as 'odious'. Who can argue with that?
Despite his (rare) good points, Morrison's main fault is that he talks utter bollocks most of the time. Take this article from his new blog, in which he states;
'White Nationalists today are in exactly the same position as was Galileo Galilei when he was persecuted by the Inquisition for his assertion that the Earth went around the Sun and not the other way. He was forced under the threat of extreme torture to recant his views despite every piece of scientific evidence being in his favour and spent the remainder of his life under a sort of house arrest.'
Well, no. The story that the problem was that Galileo's claim that the Earth went around the Sun rather than vice versa (heliocentrism) was a heresy was just a part of the problem. I quote (as no doubt Morrison did) from Wikipedia;
'Earlier, Pope Urban VIII had personally asked Galileo to give arguments for and against heliocentrism in the book, and to be careful not to advocate heliocentrism. He made another request, that his own views on the matter be included in Galileo's book. Only the latter of those requests was fulfilled by Galileo. Whether unknowingly or deliberately, Simplicio, the defender of the Aristotelian Geocentric view in Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, was often caught in his own errors and sometimes came across as a fool. Indeed, although Galileo states in the preface of his book that the character is named after a famous Aristotelian philosopher (Simplicius in Latin, Simplicio in Italian), the name "Simplicio" in Italian also has the connotation of "simpleton". This portrayal of Simplicio made Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems appear as an advocacy book: an attack on Aristotelian geocentrism and defence of the Copernican theory. Unfortunately for his relationship with the Pope, Galileo put the words of Urban VIII into the mouth of Simplicio. Most historians agree Galileo did not act out of malice and felt blindsided by the reaction to his book. However, the Pope did not take the suspected public ridicule lightly, nor the Copernican advocacy. Galileo had alienated one of his biggest and most powerful supporters, the Pope, and was called to Rome to defend his writings.'
'In September 1632, Galileo was ordered to come to Rome to stand trial, where he finally arrived in February 1633. Throughout his trial Galileo steadfastly maintained that since 1616 he had faithfully kept his promise not to hold any of the condemned opinions, and initially he denied even defending them. However, he was eventually persuaded to admit that, contrary to his true intention, a reader of his Dialogue could well have obtained the impression that it was intended to be a defence of Copernicanism. In view of Galileo's rather implausible denial that he had ever held Copernican ideas after 1616 or ever intended to defend them in the Dialogue, his final interrogation, in July 1633, concluded with his being threatened with torture if he did not tell the truth, but he maintained his denial despite the threat. The sentence of the Inquisition was delivered on June 22. It was in three essential parts:
Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy", namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.
He was sentenced to formal imprisonment at the pleasure of the Inquisition. On the following day this was commuted to house arrest, which he remained under for the rest of his life.
His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he might write in the future.'
I would have expected Morrison to have supported the Inquisition. According to Wikipedia;
'Most of Medieval Western and Central Europe had a long-standing veneer of Catholic standardisation over traditional non-Christian practices, with intermittent localized occurrences of different ideas (such as Catharism or Platonism) and constantly recurring anti-Semitic or anti-Judaic activity and conspiration.'
As our readers will know, the idea of a nebulous and generally undefinable Jewish conspiracy runs deep within the nazi movement. However, getting back to Galileo, it is clear that, for his heresy, he merely served a loose form of house arrest - and this is a man who questioned the central tenets of an all-powerful Catholic Church. This is NOT, in any way, to be confused with a racist pisshead who somehow determines, using flawed research, that blacks are inferior to whites.
Morrison, who isn't half as stupid as he would lead us to believe, states the following;
'Today's Liberal Oligarchy which has dictated - again in the face of every bit of scientific evidence - that there is no difference between racial groups are carrying out a constant inquisition against us. Although we do not face the rack - we do face up to seven years imprisonment for telling the truth about race - not matter that what we say is the truth.'
Morrison knows what he is doing here. His written texts, as opposed to his drunk and slurring speechifying, compare with those of Lee Barnes, the BNP's former legal beagle, where fiction is crowbarred into fact and everything is distorted by selecting a few words that mean something into a phrase that means nothing at all.
His assertion that those who state that racial differencies are clear and visible are liable to serve seven years in prison is an attempt at self-aggrandisment and mean nothing. Arthur Kemp's tedious March of the Titans, which makes the same claim, has led to nothing, despite making the same erroneous point for years.
Nobody gets brownie points for claiming that blacks are mentally or physically inferior to whites, and frankly, when put up against the likes of Eddy Morrison, a drunken, incoherent buffoon, they shouldn't.
Morrison may believe he is part of the master race because he is white. Well, I'm white, too, and I'm ashamed to belong to any group of which he is a part.Add a comment
Last Updated on Thursday, 17 May 2012 11:57