What's going on in Brazil? The same thing that is happening in the whole Western World?

The similarities this piece brings up to America's 2020 election fall-out and what is happening in Brazil are eerily close. 

 

Brazil authorities link Supreme Court bomb attack

to extremist discourse

Americas

A Brazilian Supreme Court justice linked Wednesday's failed bomb attack on the court with far-right hate speech while the country’s police chief said it is being investigated as an act of terrorism. The police director also said the Supreme Court has received fresh threats since the blasts.

A Brazilian Supreme Court justice said Thursday that he believes the explosion outside the court in capital Brasilia was the consequence of frequent far-right attacks and hate speech targeting the country’s institutions.

“It grew under the guise of a criminal use of freedom of speech. To offend, threaten, coerce," Justice Alexandre de Moraes said at an event in Brasilia.

Federal Police are investigating the explosions on Wednesday as terrorism and a violent attack on the democratic rule of law, its director, Andrei Passos Rodrigues, said at a news conference later. 

He said that the man had attempted to enter the Supreme Court and that it appeared that he acted alone, though the police official indicated he also was viewing the attack in the broader context of extremism. 

“Even if the visible action is individual, behind that action there is never just one person. It's always a group, or ideas of a group, or extremism, radicalism, that lead to committing those crimes,” Passos Rodrigues said. “The action, in fact, was an individual action, but the investigation will tell if there are other connections, if there are other networks, what's behind it, what drove it.”

The government (read - de Moraes) seems determined to use this event to crack down on free speech. Does that sound familiar to the Democrats actions in the past 4 years, or Canada's Trudeau's actions for the past 9 years? Or, legacy media in Canada, the USA and Europe for the past 10 years?

The police director also said the Supreme Court has received fresh threats via email, without specifying when.

Security camera footage provided by the Supreme Court shows the suspect approaching a statue outside the building. As a guard nears, the man throws an explosive and retreats a few steps, then throws a second device and an explosion follows. Finally, the suspect ignites a third device near to himself, causing his death.

Passos Rodrigues said that the man was a native of southern Santa Catarina state where he previously ran for city council, and had been in Brasilia several months. Police went to his Brasilia residence Thursday and used a robot to open a drawer that triggered “a very serious explosion,” he said.

Celina Leão, the lieutenant governor of Brazil’s federal district, said Wednesday night that the man first detonated explosives in a car in a Congress parking lot, which didn't cause injuries. Then he went to Three Powers Plaza, where the Supreme Court, Congress and presidential palace are located.

Local media identified the man as being a member of Brazil’s Liberal Party, the same as former President Jair Bolsonaro. 

Bolsonaro has railed against the Supreme Court in the past and specifically focused his ire on de Moraes. 

Bolsonaro supporters consider de Moraes their chief enemy. He has led a five-year investigation into fake news and threats against Supreme Court justices, which has led to the ban of some far-right allies and supporters from social media and even some imprisonments. He also presided over the nation’s top electoral court when it ruled Bolsonaro ineligible for office until 2030, finding that he had abused his power and cast unfounded doubts on the validity of the 2022 election result.

Bolsonaro condemned the attack on social media.

“It is high time for Brazil to once again cultivate an environment suitable for different ideas to confront each other peacefully, and for the strength of arguments to be worth more than the argument of force,” he wrote.

Some accuse de Moraes of overstepping in the name of protecting Brazilian democracy from political violence and disinformation. Others view his brash tactics as justified by extraordinary circumstances. 

Months after Bolsonaro lost his 2022 election bid, his supporters stormed the main government buildings in Brasilia, seeking to oust his leftist successor, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, from power. It was widely seen as an echo of the insurrection in the U.S. Capitol two years earlier. 

This is where the mystery lies. Why would somone copy the tactics that were a complete failure? On the other hand, the Washington establishment seemd to bend over backwards to allow the Jan 6th uprising to happen. They then had opportunity to demonize Trump and the American right, just as they have done to Bolsonaro. It makes more sense for de Moraes to have copied the Jan 6th scenario than Bolsonaro.

The Supreme Court has since convicted hundreds of those involved in the uprising for crimes such as criminal association and attempted coup.

De Moraes said Thursday that the explosions outside the Supreme Court appeared to be the most serious attack on the institution since then. 

“The country’s pacification is only possible with the accountability of all criminals. There is no possibility of pacification with amnesty for criminals,” de Moraes said. 

Earlier this year, de Moraes ordered a nationwide ban of X after clashing with its billionaire owner, Elon Musk, over free speech, far-right accounts and misinformation. Musk had disparaged de Moraes, calling him an authoritarian and a censor, even though his rulings, including X’s suspension, were repeatedly upheld by his peers. The platform was reinstated in October.

Brazil will host the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro next week. Passos Rodrigues said that the bombing shouldn’t raise any concerns, given that authorities are already implementing the highest level security possible, including with support of the armed forces. 

“I am going this afternoon, shortly, to Rio de Janeiro, where I will personally accompany all actions so we can have the absolute guarantee of security,” he added.

(AP) 

Arrest Warrant should keep Yulia Navalnaya out of Russia for awhile

 

Moscow court issues arrest warrant for

Navalny widow Yulia Navalnaya

By Clyde Hughes

July 10 (UPI) -- A Moscow court issued an arrest warrant against Yulia Navalnaya, the widow of late Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

The Basmanny District Court of Moscow approved the petition by the Main Investigative Directorate to issue the arrest warrant for Navalnaya for "participation in an extremist community," said Moscow's Court of General Jurisdiction in a translated message on Telegram.

"The court granted the investigation's request and chose a preventive measure in the form of detention for a period of two months," the court said, noting that Navalnaya was not on a wanted list.

"The period is calculated from the month of extradition to the territory of the Russian Federation or from the moment of detention on the territory of the Russian Federation."

The charges brought in absentia against Navalnaya, who lives outside of Russia, mean she would be arrested if she returned to the country.

Therein lies the message. The point is to keep Yulia out of Russia. Hopefully she will never return as it is unlikely that she would survive two months in custody. 

Navalnaya bristled at the news of the Moscow arrest warrant, targeting her criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"When you write about this, please do not forget to write the main thing: Vladimir Putin is a murderer and a war criminal," Navalnaya said on X. "His place is in a prison, and not somewhere in The Hague, in a cozy cell with a TV, but in Russia -- in the same colony and same 2-by-3-meter cell in which he killed Alexei."

Navalny, one of Putin's harshest and most prominent critics died while serving a 19-year sentence on extremism charges in a Russian penal colony in February, with international leaders including U.S. President Joe Biden blaming Putin for his death.

Navalnaya charged that her husband had been tortured and starved before he died, but Russian officials said he died of natural causes.

Russian officials designated several organizations run by Navalny, including his Anti-Corruption Foundation, as "extremist" groups. That designation put all its workers and volunteers at risk of criminal prosecution.

===============================================================================================

Russian-Led Organization Deploys Peacekeepers to Kazakhstan at Their Request

..

Kazakhstan intervention sees Russia set a new precedent

Foreign actors may not have started the unrest, but they’ll play the deciding role in how it ends

By Fyodor Lukyanov,

the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club.

Protesters take part in a rally over a hike in energy prices in Almaty on January 5, 2022.

© AFP / Abduaziz Madyarov

The sudden outbreak of violence in Kazakhstan has taken analysts and international observers by surprise. Now, the decision to deploy a regional peacekeeping force has become the latest major milestone for the post-Soviet space.

In the early hours of Thursday morning, the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which joins the armed forces of six former republics of the USSR, including Kazakhstan, announced that it would send a peacekeeping force to help maintain order as unrest spread across the vast Central Asian nation. 

This is the  first I have ever heard of this organization. But it changes the dynamics of NATO's efforts to recruit old Soviet countries. 

The move represents a blurring of the line between internal and external processes – the reasons that the Kazakh government is teetering on the brink of collapse are domestic in nature, and are related to the prolonged and increasingly weird transfer of power after the almost three-decades-long rule of veteran leader Nursultan Nazarbayev.

However, the street protests, which were sparked by fuel prices and have seen government buildings torched and troops surrender to demonstrators, have been immediately presented as an act of outside aggression on the part of foreign “terrorist groups.” From now on, it seems, the enemy always comes from the outside, even if it is actually inside. That claim gives formal grounds to declare the country is under attack and call in the CSTO.

This was not the case in the past, when similar recurring events were seen frequently in Kyrgyzstan, nor in Armenia three and a half years ago. Back then, the CSTO – Moscow mainly, but also the other members themselves – highlighted the internal nature of the unrest, saying there was no need for a foreign intervention.

However, this time it’s different, and the lines between foreign and domestic affairs are getting blurred across the globe. Several decades ago, liberals and human rights activists were the driving force behind the increasing confusion between home and abroad, advocating that national sovereignty could be set aside when human rights and freedoms were at stake. Today, the given justifications are about protection and preservation: a threat to the national security of the country in question and its neighbors justifies the intervention.

It is worth noting that, this time, the request for peacekeepers came from a government with undisputed legitimacy – even the protesters themselves have only publicly demanded the departure of Nazarbayev, who maintains a hold over domestic politics, and not the current president. This is what makes it different from the events of 2010 in Bishkek, when acting Kyrgyz president Roza Otunbayeva tried to call the CSTO in after his predecessor, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, was ousted by mass protests. 

Kyrgyzstan’s entire government system collapsed, which made any intervention highly questionable from a legal perspective. The legal grounds for the current decision are also stronger than those for the West’s so-called “humanitarian interventions” that resulted in toppling governments recognized at the international level, no matter how dubious their reputation.

In the future, we will probably learn more about how everything happened – the decision-making process in both Kazakhstan and Russia and who suggested involving the CSTO. For now, though, it’s clear that the Russian government chose to stay one step ahead instead of waiting for the kindling flame to turn into a blaze. This is the evolution of the approach used a year and a half ago in Belarus, when it was enough for President Vladimir Putin to warn that Russian forces were ready to intervene if the worsening domestic situation required it. This time, Moscow skipped the warnings and jumped straight into action, probably thinking that the Kazakh government might not hold out on its own.

But the lines must not fade away completely. The important question now is whether or not deploying the CSTO peacekeepers would spell the end of clan rivalry in Kazakhstan, as manifested by the “transition of power,” and instead lead to consolidation of power (and in whose hands?). Moscow has every chance to benefit from this, as it will now have a military presence in the state, central to its policy as a guarantor, whose actions might determine how the situation will unfold. This is similar to what happened in Armenia after the 2020 war. It’s only a temporary solution, but it provides an effective set of tools for the near future. 

Many analysts urge that Russia should follow the example of the US and the EU, approaching “all stakeholders,” placating the opposition and shaping the balance of power favorable to Moscow in key states, but they do not take into account the fact that each political culture has its own strengths and weaknesses. In reality, Moscow does not know how to do this – it never did – and when it tried, it always failed. The ideal scenario for Russia is to have a military safeguard there that could spare it the headache of having to deal with complex local political life. In other words, no matter who wins, they would have to act with Russian military presence in mind and not disregard the country’s long-standing partner altogether.

About four or five years ago, what we call the post-Soviet space entered a crucially important stage when these countries had to prove that they were fully functional sovereign states. Back in 1991, they were recognized as such simply because the USSR collapsed rather than for any other reason. While their respective comings of age took different forms, the wider context was the same, with significant interest both from Russia and the West, and some on the regional level, but to a lesser degree. External players fighting over the post-Soviet space became a destabilizing factor, but it lent a certain logic to the developments and made them part of larger international processes.

However, at a certain point, political heavyweights started losing interest in whatever was happening in the “new independent states,” as they were referred to in the 1990s. Amid global shifts, international powers became more and more focused on their own ever-growing list of problems. They didn’t exactly turn away from the former Soviet states, but they started spending much less of their time and resources on them. This goes for Russia too, even though it has a special status in this configuration, and it was looking for optimal forms of influence in the context of its shrinking sphere of interests.

So the political landscape in the former Soviet states has been shaped through internal processes that reflected the interactions between the various actors involved, the local political culture and social structure.

There is also the fact that a new political generation is entering politics across the post-Soviet space and in some cases challenging older leaders.

These changes are not brought about by external influence. Foreign players have to react to them, intervene or threaten to intervene, as they did in Belarus, adapt and try to make it all work in their favor, but the final result depends on how mature and efficient a country’s new social and political systems are rather than on any foreign patrons.

This is an acid test, and not all countries will pass it. Armenia’s case shows that the consequences for a nation can be dire (and it’s not quite over yet), even though the dominant idea there was that, some glaring problems aside, the country had a strong identity and could successfully mobilize its resources and survive when faced with an old adversary. Kazakhstan might also turn out to be an example of how a long-cultivated façade of success is actually hiding a deeply problematic and twisted core. And this case is definitely not going to be the last.

This is the first time Russia is using an institution it controls to pursue its own political goals. Until now, it seemed that such structures were purely ornamental. It’s clear that the CSTO peacekeepers deployed to Kazakhstan will be made up mainly of Russian troops. First of all, that guarantees an effective response. Secondly, while Kazakhstan can agree to have Russian troops on its soil, Armenian or, say, Kyrgyz forces are absolutely out of the question. Still, using the coalition brand gives Moscow more opportunities and additionally justifies the existence of this alliance. Time will tell whether any other CSTO member states will face a Kazakh scenario, but the precedent has been set. 

With Russia-US talks on security issues around the corner, this is a timely reminder that Moscow can make swift and unorthodox military and political decisions to influence the events in its sphere of interests. The larger this construct, the bigger the shouldered responsibility becomes, of course, including the responsibility for the developments in the countries where troubles are far from over. Of course, Moscow would have to deal with any fallout from these troubles anyway, and it’s easier to do so proactively and through a variety of tools at hand.

What is clear is that while branding the demonstrators foreign “terrorists” has allowed the Kazakh government to bring in heavyweight support from abroad, it has booted the conflict firmly into the international arena. It’s not yet clear what consequences this could have for the post-Soviet space, or for the world.

Islam - Current Day > Austria's New Extremism Laws; Afghan Envoys Daughter Kidnapped; CJEU Allows Headscarf Ban; 430 Migrants in 1 Day; Islamic School Book and Gays

..

“Austria Bans Muslim Brotherhood and Sets New Standard

In the Fight Against Islamist Extremism,” 

EU-Policies, July 13, 2021:

Last week, the Austrian National Assembly passed an act targeting the activities of ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood. Under the new law, released terror offenders will be monitored through electronic ankle bracelets, and imams leading religious services in the country will be required to register with the government. The new regulations also make Austria the first European country to ban the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities outright, as the country takes a firm stance against a growing phenomenon of political Islam.

The new legislation is only the most recent in a series of efforts by the conservative government of Sebastian Kurz to try and curb Islamist extremism in the country. While Austria is currently going further than any other government in Western Europe in targeting suspects, its model for preventing extremist activities might soon be taken up in other EU countries….

Founded in 1928 by Egyptian scholar Hassan al-Banna as an “Islamic revival” organisation, the Brotherhood came to worldwide prominence as a wave of Islamism rose up to challenge secular governments across the Arab World in the second half of the 20th century. Over the past several decades, the transnational constellation of organisations that make up the Brotherhood has also given rise to paramilitary wings which have engaged in campaigns of bombings and assassinations.

The movement’s primary goal has long been to create Islamist states ruled in accordance with sharia, or Islamic law. In the wake of the Arab Spring, branches of the Brotherhood emerged as a dominant political force in several countries, and even managed to obtain power in Egypt with the election of Mohammed Morsi to the presidency and in Tunisia through the Ennahda movement. After being democratically elected, Morsi took a sharp turn towards authoritarianism, acting to cement Islamist rule over Egypt until furious protesters and the Egyptian army forced him out of power a year into his term.

While mainstream branches of the Brotherhood often present themselves as democratising forces and compete in elections, their offshoots and sister organisations include a number of violent terrorist organisations such as Hamas or Liwa al-Thawra. For many years, the Muslim Brotherhood has been seen by scholars as a “gateway” organisation for religious extremists who are initially radicalised by its strong Islamist message and subsequently move on to more overtly extremist groups. No less than Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current leader of al-Qaeda, started out as a member of the Brotherhood….

Afghanistan recalls ambassador, top diplomats from Pakistan

in wake of envoy’s daughter kidnapping and torture

18 Jul, 2021 21:17

FILE PHOTO: Pakistan's capital Islamabad is seen in an aerial view. ©  Reuters / Adrees Latif

Kabul has called back its ambassador and senior diplomats from its embassy in Islamabad, citing security threats days after the Afghan ambassador’s daughter was briefly kidnapped and tortured by unknown assailants.

“The Leadership of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan called back Afghanistan’s Ambassador and senior diplomats from Pakistan until all security threats are addressed including the arrest and trial of the perpetrators of abduction,” the Afghan Foreign Ministry said in a brief statement on Sunday.

An Afghan delegation will be sent to Pakistan to monitor the investigation of the kidnapping, the ministry said, without specifying the day when the delegation will arrive in the neighboring country. Any further actions would be based on the findings of this group, it added.

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry called the decision “unfortunate and regrettable.” It also said that “security of the ambassador, his family and personnel of the Embassy and Consulates of Afghanistan in Pakistan has been further beefed up.” The Pakistani foreign secretary met with the ambassador before his leave and assured him that Islamabad would fully cooperate with Kabul in this case.

Silsila Alikhil, the daughter of the Afghan envoy to Islamabad, Najib Alikhil, was abducted on Friday as she was returning to her home in the Pakistani capital. She was coming back in a taxi after visiting a bakery when the driver picked up another man, who then verbally abused and assaulted her, Pakistan’s Dawn newspaper reported.

The unknown assailants allegedly held her captive for several hours and tortured her. She was then found with injuries and rope marks on her body and was taken to a hospital.

“The abduction of [the] Afghan ambassador's daughter & her subsequent torture has wounded the psyche of our nation. Our national psyche has been tortured,” Afghanistan’s Vice President Amrullah Salen said in a Twitter post on Sunday.

Islamabad said that the case is under investigation. Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan designated the probe into the kidnapping as a top priority issue and demanded the perpetrators be found within 48 hours, Pakistani Interior Minister Sheikh Rasheed Ahmad said on Saturday.

Relations between the two neighbors have long been rather tense. Kabul previously accused Islamabad of providing safe havens to the Taliban while Pakistan accused Afghanistan of harboring some other militant groups that launched attacks on Pakistani territory.

Islamabad was commended for helping to bring the Taliban militants to the negotiating table in Qatar last year when Afghan peace talks began. Yet, those negotiations have yielded no substantive results so far. The Taliban has massively ramped up its offensive in Afghanistan and captured significant swathes of territory in the country’s north amid the US pullout that is scheduled to be finished by September 11.

‘Fascism spread to courts’: Erdogan’s spokesman berates top EU court

for allowing employers to ban headscarves in workplace

18 Jul, 2021 10:56

FILE PHOTO. ©REUTERS / Francis Mascarenhas

The spokesman for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has accused the EU of “embracing” the fascist past of the European continent, after a top court ruled that employers can ban religious symbols, including the headscarf.

The ruling passed this week by the European Court of Justice (CJEU) is “wrong” and “an attempt to lend legitimacy to racism,” Fahrettin Altun, the communications director for the office of President Erdogan said on Twitter on Saturday. He said it was “unbelievable that fascism just spread to the courts” of the EU, adding that “instead of denouncing its dark past, Europe now seeks to embrace it.”

It seems what goes around, comes around. Anti-Semitism is growing at a much faster rate than anti-Islamism in Europe. Of course, it has partly to do with the growing Islamization of Europe since 2015.

The CJEU on Thursday passed a landmark ruling that stated employers who have a genuine need to maintain religious neutrality have the right to prohibit workers from wearing visible religious symbols.

The court reviewed two separate cases brought by two Muslim women from Germany, a drugstore cashier and a caregiver, who alleged their employers discriminated against them by not allowing them to wear headscarves. The CJEU confirmed that employers can have legitimate reasons to enforce a religion-neutral dress code and are allowed to do so as long as they treat symbols of different faiths equally.

Law-mandated religious neutrality in workplaces in some European nations has long been a contentious issue, with defenders of Muslim rights arguing that Islam worshipers are disproportionally affected by such restrictions.

Erdogan, whose AK Party has Islamist origins, is one of the most vocal critics of what it perceives as European bias against Muslims. The Turkish Foreign Ministry condemned the CJEU ruling on Sunday, calling it “a new example of efforts to give Islamophobia and intolerance towards Muslims an institutional and legal identity in Europe.”

Ties between Brussels and Ankara, which for decades aspired to become a member of the EU, have been deteriorating for years. The relationship is aggravated by a plethora of issues, from territorial disputes between Turkey and Greece to the complex situation with migrants trying to reach Europe through Turkey.

===========================================================================================

Britons shocked by new migrant crisis as 430 arrive

on English shores in 1 day, a new record

20 Jul, 2021 14:45

British Border Force staff bring migrants into Dover harbour, in Dover, Britain,

(FILE PHOTO) © REUTERS/Paul Childs

Many Britons have questioned why the country is facing another migrant crisis after 430 asylum seekers landed on British shores on Monday, just months after the UK finally took back control of its borders from the EU.

The Home Office has said that at least 430 migrants crossed the English Channel from France on Monday with Britain’s heatwave providing ideal crossing conditions. 

The figure marks a new daily record for migrant crossings in a single day and sees the total number of crossings this year nearly surpass the number registered in the entirety of 2020. The near 8,000 crossings so far in 2021 are around four times more than what was seen in all of 2019.

Continuing its tough rhetoric on Channel crossings, the Home Office told the BBC it was taking “substantial steps to tackle the unacceptable problem of illegal migration.” 

Home Secretary Priti Patel has vowed to make illegal migration a thing of the past. The Nationality and Borders Bill, which has completed its second reading in the House of Commons, seeks to make illegal entry to the UK a crime punishable with four years in prison. 

Government plans could also see asylum seekers sent to third countries to be processed. Denmark has already announced similar plans, with Rwanda being a potential processing location. 

In late 2020 and earlier this year, the UK Home Office came under intense scrutiny after reports in the media about plans to send asylum seekers to far-flung British territories, including Ascension Island and even disused oil rigs. 

However, Britain’s plans to take back its borders, a slogan and policy enabled by Brexit, is yet to come to fruition, angering many in the UK. Some took to Twitter to register their dismay at the number of dinghies landing on British shores on Monday. 

“For all those looking to immigrate to the UK. It is a lot cheaper and faster to simply cross the channel,” one person wrote ironically on Twitter, adding that they could bypass NHS fees and other requirements for migration. 

Another person asked why the government was ‘taking away her freedom’ with the introduction of vaccine passports, but these migrants could illegally enter Britain with “impunity.”  

However, not everyone was angry, some pointed out that the UK had the capacity to care for these people while another said she felt sorry for them, coming all the way to the UK to find they’re “treated like animals.”  

Speaking on Monday evening during his first-ever show on GB News, Brexiteer Nigel Farage said that migrant crossings would once again become the biggest non-coronavirus story in the news this summer.

Farage struck a foreboding tone, warning once again about the costs and risks of illegal migration to the UK and the need for reform in the asylum system.

Britons angry as Ofsted finds anti-gay book in Islamic school’s library

saying gays must be ‘slained’

22 Jul, 2021 10:54

(FILE PHOTO) © REUTERS/Athar Hussain

The findings of an Ofsted inspection of the Institute of Islamic Education private boarding school have caused outrage in the UK – notably, the discovery of a book in the school’s library that promotes the killing of homosexuals.

On Tuesday, Ofsted, the UK’s standards authority for education, published a report about the religious boarding school in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire. 

The report, which concerned its inspection visit in May, claimed the school did not meet the standards required of an independent school or a boarding school, but more worrying still, deemed that “fundamental British values [were being] undermined by leaders’ failings.”

During their visit, inspectors came across a library book titled ‘Islam on Homosexuality’, which contained content considered “unsuitable for pupils.”

A section of the book read: “The participants of the homosexual act should be slained (sic) whether they are married or unmarried, because in filth and mischief this act surpasses adultery.” Another section proclaimed that the “evil doers should be put to death.”

While the headteacher admitted the book should not have been stocked in the library, other leaders and trustees of the school said it should remain on the shelves. 

In response, several commenters online called for the school to be closed down. 

One social media user said there was simply “no excuse” for such practices, declaring that the school management should be replaced immediately and asking why the school’s status as an educational institution hadn’t been revoked. 

Others accused the school of “teaching medieval values,” while another called on people to imagine the outrage if “a Church of England school had a book recommending killing Muslims.”  

“They’ll never integrate into our society – they are here to live in their own society,” one person wrote on Twitter. These are just “indoctrination centres,” another railed, adding that such schools were brainwashing the next generation of Muslims and preventing assimilation.

Several people made a comparison with an incident that happened earlier this year, when a teacher from a school in Batley, also in West Yorkshire, was forced into hiding after members of the Muslim community protested and threatened to kill him after he showed a caricature of the Prophet Mohammed to pupils during a lesson.

“Hmmm, wonder if there will be … any protests by the gay or LGTBQ community at this school demanding the book be removed?” one asked ironically, claiming that sector’s silence on the matter said a lot.  

Others made the usual doom-laden comments, claiming, “this is only the beginning!” and that you soon wouldn’t be able to get a bacon roll in Britain. 

While most people condemned the school, some hit back at Ofsted. One person claimed the Bible contained exhortations that were just as extreme, and another questioned what was meant by “fundamental British values.” “Xenophobia. Murder. Colonialism. Genocide. Invasion. Exceptionalism,” one asserted. 

Earlier this year, people from West Yorkshire’s Muslim community staged a protest at a school less than four miles away from Dewsbury, after a teacher showed images of the Prophet Mohammed to his class. Ministers condemned those involved in the protest and said threats made against his life were “very disturbing.” Nearly £80,000 has been raised on the Go Fund Me website for the teacher, who remains in hiding. 

The book will certainly be removed from the library if it hasn't already, but it won't change the attitude Muslims have toward gays. 

Putin on Religion - An Interesting Look at the President's Outlook on Religion and Society

..

Love thy neighbor? Putin says religious values of ‘mercy’ & support for vulnerable underpin Russian civilization through history

8 Jun, 2021 15:07

Russian President Vladimir Putin holds a meeting with representatives of social organizations on Social Worker's Day

via video conference at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence outside Moscow, Russia. © Sputnik / Sergei Ilyin

Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared that brotherly love and care for those in need are the values shared by citizens in his country, and are essential to maintaining the essence of its traditional culture and society.

In a speech to social workers on Tuesday, marking the profession's national day of recognition, Putin emphasized the importance of helping the vulnerable. “The very values of mercy, love for one's neighbor, and support for those in need bind and consolidate the entire centuries-old history of our people. They constitute the spiritual basis of the traditional religions of Russia,” he said.

Except, of course, the 70 years of communism.

Insisting that “people of various classes” understand the fundamental aim of life should be to do good, the president said that charity and being a good neighbor were of paramount importance.

Last December, as Europe grappled with a brutal attack that saw a Parisian schoolteacher beheaded over claims he had showed cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad to his class, Putin launched a spirited defense of traditional values and the rights of believers. “It is well known that where one man’s freedom begins, another’s must end,” he said. As a result, those who “act thoughtlessly, insulting the rights and feelings of religious people, should always remember there will be an inevitable backlash. But, on the other hand, this shouldn’t be an aggressive one,” he added.

He cited the case of Samuel Paty as evidence that “multiculturalism has failed,” and also instructed the country's Foreign Ministry to prepare a report on “issues relating to those insulting the beliefs of religious people, and inciting inter-religious hatreds and conflict."

Despite frequently associating himself with Orthodox Christian rituals and emphasizing the role that religious values play in Russia, Putin has been reticent on questions of his personal faith. Asked in 2018 about when he started to believe in God, the politician said that it was “a very personal question, and it is hard to talk about it in public.”

At the same time though, he added that even “confirmed atheists going over the trenches during World War II thought about God,” and that “extreme situations bring out the faith in everyone.”

Russia is consistently ranked as one of the most religious nations on the continent. In 2018, a Pew Research Center survey found that more than half of Russians say it is important to be a Christian in order to truly belong in the country, and 42% believe that the government should actively promote religion.

However, in practice, Russian society diverges from many positions traditionally held by Christians abroad. According to data from 2016, the country's divorce rate far outstrips the rate at which new marriages are being registered. At the same time, the nation has one of the highest abortion rates in the world, despite opposition to the medical intervention from the Orthodox Church. Research and anecdotal accounts have also consistently found that while the bulk of Russians consider themselves to be Christians, a far smaller percentage regularly attend church services.

That, unfortunately, is true of almost every country when it comes to Christianity. Most Christians are Christian in name but not in Spirit.

Subjects avoided by the writer here are homosexuality and transgenderism. Russia has unashamedly pushed back against the hard lobbying of the LGBTQ etc. They are protective of children being exposed to either whereas western countries put such people in charge of children's education. The consequence being great confusion in children and a much higher rate of attempted suicide.

The Media is the Message - BBCs influence in the demonizing of Russia exposed by Anonymous

..

Leaked files indicate UK state media engaged in anti-Moscow information warfare operations in Eastern Europe

11 Mar, 2021 09:10

FILE PHOTO: The main entrance to the BBC headquarters and studios in Portland Place, London, Britain, July 16, 2015

©  REUTERS/Peter Nicholls

By Kit Klarenberg, an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions.

New documents raise serious questions about how well-deserved British state broadcaster BBC’s 'unimpeachable' reputation is, and also what impact its relationship with the UK government has on its supposedly ‘impartial’ output.

Within a tranche of secret UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) papers, recently leaked by hacktivist collective Anonymous, are files indicating that BBC Media Action (BBCMA) – the outlets ‘charitable’ arm – plays a central role in Whitehall-funded and directed psyops initiatives targeted at Russia.

American journalist Max Blumenthal has comprehensively exposed how, at the FCDO’s behest, BBCMA covertly cultivated Russian journalists, established influence networks within and outside Russia, and promoted pro-Whitehall, anti-Moscow propaganda in Russian-speaking areas.

However, the newly released files reveal BBCMA also offered to lead a dedicated FCDO program, named 'Independent Media in Eastern Partnership Countries' and targeted at Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. This endeavor forms part of a wider £100 million ($138.9 million) effort waged by London to demonize, destabilize and isolate Russia, at home and abroad.

A Whitehall tender indicates that under the auspices of the project, set to cost a staggering £9 million ($12.5 million) from 2018 to 2021, participating contractors are charged with crafting “innovative… media interventions” targeting individuals throughout the region, via “radio, independent social media channels, and traditional outlets.”

Further detail was offered by FCDO Counter Disinformation & Media Development (CDMD) chief Andy Pryce at a June 2018 meeting with prospective suppliers.

He made it clear that the effort’s ultimate goal was to “weaken the Russian state's influence,” via the co-option of journalists and media organizations in target countries via funding, training, and surreptitious production of anti-Russian, pro-Western content. “Girls on HBO… but in Ukraine” was, bizarrely, one suggested example of such activity.

In response, BBCMA submitted extensive proposals, in conjunction with Thomson Reuters Foundation (TRF), the global newswire’s “non-profit” wing, and since-collapsed veteran FCDO contractor Aktis Strategy.

The project was to be managed and coordinated directly by BBCMA from BBC Broadcasting House headquarters in London, with local support provided by Reuters newswire offices in Kiev and Tbilisi, and Ukraine’s Independent Association of Broadcasters.

A dedicated board, comprised of representatives of the contractors involved, the FCDO’s CDMD program, and British embassies in the target countries, would also meet privately every quarter to discuss the operation’s progress. Publicly, Whitehall’s funding and direction of the vast project was intended to be completely hidden.

The consortium boasted of having an existing “strong profile” in Eastern Partnership countries, and conducting “broad consultations” with a number of major news outlets, media organizations and journalists in the region in advance of its pitch.

For example, the National Public Broadcasting Company of Ukraine (UA:PBC) had been approached and offered “essential support,” aimed at “improving its existing programs” and “developing new and innovative formats for factual and non-news programs.”

BBCMA was moreover said to be “already” working on building the capacity of Kiev-based Hromadske TV, and wished to use the FCDO program to extend this assistance to “co-productions” and “building support to Hromadske Radio.”

Launched with initial funding from the American and Dutch embassies in Ukraine, Hromadske began broadcasting in November 2013 on the very day Viktor Yanukovich’s administration suspended preparations for the signing of an association agreement with the European Union, and went on to extensively cover the resultant Euromaidan protests, which eventually unseated the government the next year.

It subsequently received support from Pierre Omidyar, billionaire founder of The Intercept, who bankrolled a number of opposition groups in the country prior to the coup. In July 2014, Hromadske anchor Danylo Yanevsky abruptly terminated an interview with a Human Rights Watch representative after she consistently refused to blame Russia for civilian casualties in the Donbas conflict, despite his repeated demands.

Beyond dedicated news platforms, the consortium also pledged to enlist “local” and “hyperlocal” media outlets, as well as “freelancer journalists,” bloggers and “vloggers” for its information warfare efforts.

BBCMA argued “journalism education” locally would be a “long-term investment” – in other words, the identification, cultivation, and grooming of a network of reporters in the countries who could be relied upon to take the Whitehall line in future.

As such, the organization sought to establish a journalism training center in Gagauzia, Moldova in collaboration with NGO Media birlii – Uniunia. The autonomous region, bordered by Ukraine’s Odessa Oblast, was said to be home to “six TV companies, four radio stations, six newspapers and five web portals” potentially ripe for influence and infiltration by BBCMA – and in turn, the FCDO.

In Georgia, BBCMA visited the offices of Adjara TV“to discuss training priorities and possible co-productions.” The station was reportedly interested in developing “youth programming,” which represented “a gap in the market” in the country.

In June 2020, Georgia’s Coalition for Media Advocacy slammed Adjara for its “persecution” of “outspoken journalists expressing dissenting opinions,” after it fired newsroom chief Shorena Glonti.

Strikingly, the Coalition is funded by US regime-change agency, the National Endowment for Democracy, which supports numerous anti-Moscow initiatives worldwide. Perhaps Glonti had been too well-trained in “weakening the Russian state” for the broadcaster’s liking.

The consortium furthermore proposed to tutor and support “independent” online Georgian news outlets, including Batumelebi, iFact, Liberali, Monitor, Netgazeti, and Reginfo.

Estonia’s Digital Communications Network – financed by the US State Department – would be central to these efforts, offering lessons in “building online audiences, innovative business models and reaching out to breakaway regions susceptible to Kremlin narratives.”

The importance of “target audiences in breakaway regions” is outlined in another file, which explicitly states that the consortium would work closely with “independent outlets in proximity of non-government-controlled areas of Donbas in Ukraine, Transnistria in Moldova and Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia.”

This undertaking aimed to counter the output of “separatist” media, and thus manipulate “hard-to-reach audiences,” which was “critical to achieving the project’s objectives.”

Any and all support covertly provided under the program was to be thoroughly intimate indeed, with “mentors” from the consortium “embedded” in target organizations, in order to provide “bespoke support across editorial, production and wider management systems and processes as well as on the co-production of content.”

These “mentors” include current and former BBC journalists.

“Our ability to recruit talented and experienced BBC staff is a great asset which will be harnessed for this initiative,” BBCMA promised.

These individuals may have been central to program efforts, if BBCMA’s pitch to the FCDO was accepted. For instance, UA:PBC was said to be “very interested” in receiving help from BBCMA to develop a “new debate show” and “discussion programming” to “enable audiences to think critically about the process and choices,” “counter disinformation” and “dispel rumors.”

Lofty objectives indeed, although commitments to nurturing analytical skills, thinking and debunking propaganda ring rather hollow when one considers the station’s output was perceived to be so overwhelmingly biased in favor of the government, opposition candidate Volodymyr Zelensky boycotted the channel’s official election debate during the 2019 presidential election.

BBCMA also proposed to establish an “independent” news platform in Ukraine, “timed for the run up to the 2019 election,” which would publish “vetted news content” freely syndicated to local and national media.

If the approach in Kiev was “successful,” the consortium would replicate the exercise in Georgia for the country’s 2020 election. Strikingly, the proposal brags of TRF’s experience establishing such platforms elsewhere, for example “the award-winning Aswat Masriya” in Egypt.

Other leaked files indicate the endeavor, founded after the 2011 revolution in Cairo, was secretly funded by the FCDO to the tune of £2 million ($2.8 million) over six years, and run out of Reuters’ Egyptian offices.

Over its lifespan, Aswat Masriya “became Egypt’s leading independent local media organization” and one of the most-visited websites in the country, providing news in English and Arabic, which was syndicated widely the world over. Its true, clandestine purpose seems to have been granting London a degree of narrative control over news coverage as events unfolded in the country, during its difficult and ultimately ill-fated transition to democracy.

That BBCMA likewise intended to use news coverage to influence politics in Eastern Partnership countries is amply underlined in the newly leaked files, with the organization pledging to “encourage” local news outlets to meet with “local stakeholders,” including lawmakers and community leaders, in order to “cement the media as a key governance actor.”

The organization furthermore sought to “foster a debate” in target nations, by producing wide-ranging analysis of the media environment therein. Its “long track record” of comparable efforts in “diverse” countries, including those “experiencing Arab uprisings,” had allegedly “shifted government policy.”

One objective of these lobbying efforts was achieving “a more enabling operating environment” for “independent” media in the target countries – i.e. ensuring regulations in the region were suitably conducive to and protective of the FCDO’s secret army of information warfare agents, to allow them to prosper for the duration of the consortium’s three-year offensive, and “post intervention.”

It’s not yet clear if BBCMA was successful in its pitch, and if so, which BBC journalists contributed to the program and as a result are implicated directly in cloak-and-dagger attempts to shape politics and perceptions in Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine for London’s benefit.

It’s also unknown whether their commitment to fulfilling the FCDO’s objective of undermining Moscow, and furthering Whitehall’s interests, truly ends when they return to their day jobs as “objective,” “neutral” purveyors of news.

As BBCMA boasts in its pitch, the BBC is “well-known and highly regarded” in the Eastern Partnership countries, and provides “millions of viewers, listeners and online users in the region with world-class news on a daily basis.” At the very least, the leaked files make clear that neither the British state broadcaster, nor its FCDO paymasters, has any qualms about exploiting that standing and perceived credibility for malign ends.