Had to laugh at LBC Radio's Facebook posting earlier today boasting about how Nick Ferrari ridiculed a caller for daring to say it was wrong for police to shoot to kill the terrorists in France and Germany.
And, incidentally, I actually believe that Nick Ferrari is far and away the best and most objective of all LBC's regular hosts (which is why he needs to be called out when he gets it so wrong).
If
World War 2 had been conducted the way Western Governments are now
conducting the Jihad war being fought against them we might have had the
following kind of behaviour:
The Scene: May 1940. We have just gone through the 254th
consecutive night of German bombers blitzing London. The British
Government announces its total surprise that on this particular night
London should have been chosen to be attacked. The PM goes on the radio
and makes the following statements about the current "War on Airplane
bombers":
Nobody should jump to conclusions about who might be responsible for
this particular bombing, especially as we have no conclusive evidence
yet that any of the previous 253 bombing raids were in any way related.
In fact, our intelligence on previous raids reveals they were
carried out by men from different cities with nothing whatsoever in
common other than the fact that the cities all happened to be in
Germany. What we must not do is infer from this that the German people
mean us any harm whatsoever especially as their Government adheres to
the Nazi philosophy which we know seeks worlds peace.
At present we have no idea what the motive was for any of these
attacks but we must treat each one as a separate crime with separate
motives. We do not yet know the names and nationalities of the men who
carried out tonight's bombing raid. They are just as likely - indeed
more likely - to be right-wing British men with a grudge against the London-based Government as men of any other nationality. There is
certainly no reason to be believe this is in any way connected with
Germany.
And just because we have been bombed now for 254 consecutive nights
there is no reason to believe that this will happen again. Obviously
citizens should be extremely vigilant as they go about their nightly
activities tomorrow - be especially on the look out for right-wing British men
complaining about foreigners or income tax who are known to have access to bomber
planes.
Above all else what we will not tolerate are those racists who
assert that if we spot German bomber planes entering UK airspace
tomorrow that we should assume anything other than purely peaceful
intent. Attempting to stop such planes flying over London would be
considered by us to be unacceptable racial profiling.
In the extremely unlikely event that bombs are dropped again we will
treat each individual bombing as a separate criminal act and will spare
no expense in attempting to track down the individual pilot responsible
in each case. In the unlikely event that such a pilot is found to be
from a foreign country (which is just as likely to be Honduras, New
Zealand, or Zaire as it is to be Germany) we will expect the government
of that country to help us track down the criminal. Indeed we now have
reason to believe that a man named Fritz Schmidt of Hamburg was a pilot
involved in a previous bombing and as a result I have asked Herr Hitler
the German Chancellor to consider bringing this man into custody.
Moreover, because several men from German towns have been previously
implicated My Majesty's government is hereby donating 15 billion pounds
to Herr Hitler's Germany to ensure that they have the resources to find
and punish the guilty men.
Someone on Facebook posted this image (I understand the original artwork is called "Loss" by Lyceum) but with Israel as the big dog and France the small dog. A commenter said it needed to be the other way round, so here it is:
Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu today issued the following statement in
the light of the tit-for-tat violence in France which yesterday in Nice claimed the lives
of a Muslim truck driver, along with a number of Muslim civilians and French colonialists.
I strongly condemn the ongoing cycle of violence in France and call
on both sides to show restraint. We mourn the loss of life on both sides. While I believe that France has a right
to exist, our continued support for France's sovereignty cannot be
guaranteed if the French continue with their disproportionate response
and suppression against its Muslim citizens.
I deplore the French Government decision to impose a State of Emergency that disproportionately hurts millions of French
Muslims who are trying to see their families over the holiday weekend. The French government has to understand that there is no military
solution to this conflict. They should immediately abide by the UN
resolution we proposed last week to evacuate all non-Muslim French from cities such as Paris, Nice and Marseilles handing it over to the elected representatives of the
moderate wing of ISIS.
*Satire: but this is exactly how the media and France has reacted to similar attacks against Israel. Thanks to Mark Honikberg for idea on the State of Emergency (this is exactly how the EU and media reacted when Israel imposed travel restrictions after the Sarona attack).
With news of a major terrorist attack in Nice just coming in I was just watching some of the rolling news channels and can confirm that they are following the script that I described several months ago (the words 'Islam' and 'Muslims' are now officially banned in favour of 'radical ideologies' and 'radicals'):
With Theresa May appointed Leader of the Conservatives and PM without a
vote, what exactly divides the mainstream views of any of these parties? Remember it was May who coined the phrase "The Nasty Party" for the Conservatives- and describes calls herself as a Liberal. So it makes perfect sense to merge them into the new unified FTP (F*ck the Plebs) Party.
The new FTP Party will have a built in Commons majority of 649-1. And the single opposition MP (UKIP member Douglas Carswell) can be expelled as he is officially a racist xenophobe according to the new legislation.
It is important to note that Theresa May who - according to just about everybody - is shortly going to become the next British Prime Minister, is the person who was responsible for this decision as Home Secretary (and the Board of Deputies lobbied for the ban). Who needs Jeremy Corbyn......
The EU and USA could stop the terrorism immediately by simply cutting off their
multi-billion dollar payments to the PA (which are used not just for incitement
but also to pay the salaries of terrorists and their families). They won't of course*. But while they refuse to provide any deterrents, I don't understand why, for all his strong words, Netanyahu doesn't either. All I can see - as far as the Palestinians are concerned - are incentives to keep it up.
* The reason they won't was given to me by the British Foreign Office when
I complained about the use of British taxpayer money to fund terrorist
salaries. They said that 'cutting off such funds would lead to more
violence'. Aso remember that neither the EU nor USA ever criticise Mahmoud Abbas who this week spewed antisemitic blood libels to
the rapturous applause of the European Parliament while his side-kick
demanded that Palestinians 'slit the throat of every Israeli they find'.
As usual after a major terrorist attack in Israel those media outlets and commentators who bother to report at all are careful to make clear why such attacks have nothing in common with ISIS, which the following chart clearly proves.
But just when you were convinced they have nothing in common, the following chart should quell your concerns!!!
Exactly as I expected from the Evening Standard. This was the only item they had on the massacre in Tel Aviv. The poor Palestinians who cannot travel to commit further terrorist attacks are the real victims, not Jews murdered while drinking coffee.
Following on from the recent articles here, here, here. and here, a friend has sent this excellent letter to Julie Holness (CEO of Speakers' Trust):
Dear Julie
I cannot imagine how stressful it must be for you right now to find yourself drawn into conflict.
I love the idea of the Speakers’ Trust and believe in the right to free speech. However, in terms of lies and misrepresentation, I’m not a fan of defamatory language intended to spread hatred against any individual, group or other such entity existing in this world within which we are so fortunate to live. Therefore, I want to suggest a couple of changes to the statement issued by Speakers’ Trust and the Jack Petchey Foundation.
I am naturally relieved to hear that Leanne Muhammed will not be going forward in the Speak Out Competition. However, my concern is that I’m unsure if you realise that allowing Leanne to retain the title of “winner" positions anyone in opposition of her diatribe as “perpetrator" and Leanne as "victim”. I am alarmed at your statement clearly indicating that the only reason she is not being put forward is due to “abuse”. Such statement denies any responsibility on your part clearly laying the blame for failing to be selected at the door of those who have expressed their objections.
"As a Regional Final winner the speech was posted online. Following vile and hateful comments posted online during this Bank Holiday weekend Speakers Trust removed the video of Leanne’s speech. We will not tolerate trolling of young people. As a small charity without the capacity to moderate comments 24 hours a day it was considered essential to protect Leanne by temporarily suspending the regional video until we were able to consult fully with her school and family.”
As you are aware a "social media war" ensued where jews and non-jews expressed their deep hurt at the distortion of the behaviour of the Jewish State. Bloggers had discovered Leanne’s twitter feed containing propaganda and other associations she has made via social media tools. Voicing their discoveries and objections utilising social media, they were themselves subject to a torrent of antisemitic abuse. Therefore, in order for the Speakers’ Trust and Jack Petchey Foundation to take responsibility and “stop the war” created, I want to invite you to rethink this statement and reword along the lines of:
“As a Regional Final winner the speech was posted online. Following objections to the content of Leanne’s speech we temporarily suspended the regional video until we were able to consult fully with her school and family and investigated the concerns of those who had objected so strongly [feeling hurt, frightened and angry] to the content."
I wonder if I can help you think through what Leanne is really saying? The subtle nuances contained in Leanne’s video can be tricky for individuals to spot. The “subliminal message” passively received by viewers is antisemitic, i.e., that a bunch of thieves, oppressors [land-grabbers] and baby-killing jews are responsible for her claim of “refugee” status.
With regard to such status alongside Leanne’s “identity achievement”, i.e., as a “British Palestinian”, I wonder if it may help to give you an illustration of how strange these words are to the rational mind. Let me explain. On my father’s side I am a third generation person of European jewish descent. I identify as British. In the last century my father’s father was forced to flee persecution in Russia just part of the longest hatred forcing the human movement of jewish people across the world for no other reason than being a jew. Although jews in many parts of the world are still subject to extreme prejudice, we now have the safe space of the Jewish State. What I want you to do is to imagine if I called myself a “British Russian”, or a “Ukrainian Russian”? Or a “ Third Generation Soviet Union refugee"? Can you imagine how credible I would sound if I made a speech ending with “free Kiev” [from the Soviet aggressors]?
The British public are being brainwashed by the Palestinian narrative. May I respectfully refer you to the research of David Collier. I provide a link to a piece by David that also draws attention to the investigations and explanations of the narrative by Edgar Davidson and Brian John Thomas. Due to incidents such as affording Leanne Muhammed a stage to promote antisemitism, I concur with their view that the future of British Jewry in the UK is hard to imagine. I respectfully refer you to David Collier’s article to help deepen your understanding of the reasons behind why we share such a view. http://david-collier.com/?p=2058
In terms of the words:"Both the Jack Petchey Foundation and Speakers Trust which runs the Challenge have a primary duty of care to the young people we work with and we cannot accept any form of abuse against them."
I agree and echo such sentiment. However, perpetuating the cycle of abuse is emotive language. The complex forces at play contain a multitude of variables and prove difficult for most individuals to grasp. Meaning and the cause of the upset is lost. Society is “triangulated” into conflict. We see individuals drawn into choosing a side based on rhetoric. A current example, amplified by media reporting, is the abuse directed at supporters of Depp and Heard. However, to my mind if you had understood the destructive intention of Leanne’s speech and how instead of achieving her own identity, she has been groomed, exploited and radicalised into becoming a weapon of war, perhaps you may not have given her the opportunity to enter the competition in the first place. Therefore, I invite you to reconsider and remove this inflammatory sentence delivering the meaning that there are people [those opposed to Leanne’s speech] who do not want to live in peace:
"We are determined that all of our young speakers, irrespective of background, race or religion, should be able to speak out in a safe and supportive environment. In our society people have the right to hold and express different views or perspectives. It is important that young people can express these, challenge and question in an appropriate manner and learn to live with each other in peace."
For clarity, Leanne’s speech works directly against the notion of peace. Leanne’s indoctrinators have simply abused the good intentions of your competition to offer a safe supportive environment. Allowing this 15 year old girl to keep her title means that society will hold her up as a martyr. As such, the mechanism under which antisemitism thrives clicks into place thereby rendering the road to peace increasingly invisible.
My final point is that after having been subject to Leanne’s misrepresentation of Israel, a country that has always striven for peace, I was horrified to hear Leanne state: “Islam is perfect. I am not”. This is an extremist view and the reason why individuals like Leanne are so susceptible to radicalisation. When a religion is set up as “perfect” there is no ability to question, no personal power, no growth or development from reform available. Therefore I invite you to think about this final point. As a British citizen who doesn’t follow Islam where am I positioned? Where are you? I feel uncomfortable enough. Do you?
In light of the above, I call for you to remove Leanne’s status as Regional Final winner.
Best wishes
******************************
Below is the response video by Brian John Thomas (which includes the original video of Leanne Mohamad's speech):
This is an update to the posts here, here, and here.
When a non-political charity - against its own rules - awarded first prize in the Redbridge finals of its speaking competition for youngsters to a virulently anti-Israel speech full of lies and blood libels, I was one of the first to complain. Not to demand the speech be censored, but simply to point out that this speech should not have won the competition and that the charity should set the record straight by allowing a proper response to the speech (which had been met with enthusiastic applause at Wanstead High School). I also noted that the student in question had been extensively re-tweeting hateful material from a well-know terrorist supporter called Abbas Sarsour.
Because the antisemites (of whom there are far more than Israel supporters) decided that I had played a role in 'silencing a child' I have now been abused, threatened in many ways - including being reported to the police - and accused of being a child molester and paedophile. I am currently receiving, for example, hundreds of abusive tweets per hour (even though I only joined twitter a few months ago and before the weekend had received less than a dozen tweets in total). You can see them on my twitter feed and comments on my recent blog postings. There is also a campaign to 'ban' me (whatever that means):
@Support Please ban @EdgarDavidson81 for online threats to @LeanneMohamad #LetLeanneSpeak
David Collier has a brilliant report on the same thing here.
Based on her retweets, 'Peace loving' Leanne Mohamad gets all her information about 'Palestine' from Hamas supporter Abbas Sarsour, who glories in the murder of 'Zionists'. Above are some screenshots from his twitter feed
The story of schoolgirl Leanne Mohamad's award-winning anti-Israel speech, full of ignorant lies and blood libels, keeps getting more interesting. I don't normally 'do' twitter but I posted about the story there today and got back a torrent of abuse. Some of it was of this sort:
But most of it was accusing my of 'censoring' Leanne (an interesting accusation given that my letter to the CEO of the Speakers Trust specifically said I was not asking for the video to be removed or censored, and in any case the Trust had already unanimously decided she could not be put through to the Grand Final as the speech broke their fundamental rules). And Leanne herself started re-tweeting these tweets to me, e.g.:
So I decided to have a look at Leanne's twitter feed. And, unsurprisingly, there was this kind of propaganda and lies:
But then I noticed that there were far more offensive re-tweets and they were all from Abbas Sarsor, who is a well-known Hamas supporting propagandist and inciter of violence (the website Canary Mission has found many anti-Israel/antisemitic student activists and academics in the USA use his work). I present below some further examples of Sarsour's work, which Leanne is so keen to re-tweet. It was lucky I took some screenshots because just a few minutes later I discovered that Leanne had blocked me (and I suspect she may also be in the process of removing tweets).
What I would like to know (and will ask her Head Teacher) is if anybody from the School bothered to check her twitter feed before deciding that she was the best student to speak**(UPDATE see below). I will ask the local MP the same question given the Government's determination to identify and eradicate extremism targeting school children.
Anyway here are some more of Sarsour's tweet. All his tweets fall into one of the following categories:
**UPDATE: Here is a screenshot taken minutes ago from Wanstead High School:
Update: As you can see from clicking the link, the video has now been removed from the Speak Out Challenge website but here is a screenshot below I saved, and the whole video is actually interspersed with the response video from Brian of London at the bottom of this page. Also worth mentioning that the antisemites on twitter are apoplectic at my actions that they say have led to this girl being 'censored'. In fact, the Speakers Trust had already decided not to send the girl through to the Grand Final and, moreover, in my letter to the CEO I specifically said I was not asking for the video to be removed. I was asking for the right to respond to the lies (and specifically have the School hear the response). Brian's video does this. Another Update: This explain the 'Peace loving' schoolgirl's perverse views on 'Palestine'.
The good news is that I have had a response** (see below) from the CEO of the Speakers Trust (who run the competition on behalf of the Jack Petchey Foundation); she states that the judging panel have now decided unanimously against sending Leanne Mohamad through to the Grand Final. The reason is that they had the same concerns to those I raised. Note, in particular, how the speech was in breach of the two 'fundamental rules made explicit during training'.
The bad news is that the more I think about Leanne Mohamad's speech, and the jubilant reaction to it, the more it is evident that there is no long-term future for British Jewry (and it seems Brian of London agrees with me). Here we have a very well-educated child in an affluent suburban school who has been groomed and brainwashed into accepting a 'Palestine'
narrative that is even more extreme than that proposed by Hamas. Yet, she seems to have had the full support of all the school's teachers and pupils as well as the local authorities
who clearly bought into, and supported, the same narrative because so much of Britain's political and academic class is controlled by the Islamic/leftist alliance that deems 'Palestinians' as the ultimate victims of our age and Israelis as the ultimate villains.
A very large proportion of schoolchildren are being brought up with the same extreme views as Leanne Mohamad. People with these views are already dominant in Britain's Universities with their "Israel apartheid" weeks and their closing down of any pro-Israel speech on campus. Things are clearly going to get a lot worse with the influx of immigrants who have been fed the same antisemitic propaganda from birth. In 5 years time Leanne Mohamad may be intimidating Jewish students on a University campus with her lies and in 15 years time it is highly likely that Leanne Mohamad will be a member of Parliament (she is after all just a younger version of many like her now in the Labour party). Judging by the comments yesterday of Teresa May someone like her would be welcome in the Conservative party and could even become Prime Minister.
Leanne's narrative is driven by hateful antisemitism that refuses to acknowledge any rights of the Jewish people, and completely ignores the reality of Palestinian terrorism and rejectionism, the fact that the 'poor Palestinians' are the recipients of more aid per person than any other people in the world, and that most of the billions of dollars given in aid that have not ended up in terrorist bank accounts has been spent on terror tunnels and weapons. It is a narrative that is clearly promoted not just in Leanne's mosque, but also by the BBC, Sky News and almost every main stream newspaper. That is why not a single person in authority at Wanstead High School or on the various Redbridge committees even questioned the legitimacy of what Leanne was saying or noticed that her speech was in breach of both of the competition's fundamental rules.
The 'official' Jewish leadership of the UK ultimately bears some responsibility for allowing this narrative to take hold, when the simple truth was all that it needed to expose it. Now Jewish parents in the UK are having to send their children to schools and colleges where the Leanne Mohamads dominate all debate, while the Jews cower in silence. That is the future for Jews in the UK.
**Response from Julie Holness, CEO
Thank you very much for your email, which my colleague Rebecca Griffiths
has this morning forwarded to me. We take your concerns very seriously.
Every year thousands of young people are trained in the art of public
speaking. They are encouraged to speak out on something they feel
passionately about and of course they bring with them their history and
culture and beliefs.
There are, however, two fundamental rules that are made explicit during the training:
- the speech must have a positive and uplifting message - in fact this
is one of the core terms of the agreement with the Jack Petchey
Foundation.
- a speaker should never inflame or offend the audience or insult others
and this, by definition, means that propaganda is ruled out absolutely
from the outset.
It is, however, the school that votes through its most talented speaker
in an Assembly final and an independent panel of judges from the local
community who select their regional winner. Speeches at this level will
have been further developed and even rewritten, with the training
guidelines but without our input on content. Judges do not mark a
speaker down because they disagree with a point of view but they are
clearly briefed on the those guidelines. Unfortunately, with over 18,000
young people trained annually, a speech that does not observe these
ground rules may very rarely get through on passion and delivery.
Last Saturday a Speakers Trust and Jack Petchey Foundation judging panel
decided unanimously against sending Leanne Mohamad through to the next
stage and she will not be speaking at the Grand Final. These were
precisely our concerns.
As a Speakers Trust trainer I was responsible for managing the schools
in Redbridge and I have a close affinity with the region. Please let me
know if you would like me to forward your email to Wanstead High School
so that your comments and reservations may be heard.
If you wish to discuss this further you have my home office number below, which you are welcome to use at any time.
Kind regards,
Julie Holness
Chief Executive Officer
Speakers Trust
Getting the Public Speaking
And here is my follow-up:
Dear Julie
Thank you for your very fast response to my letter, which is greatly appreciated.
I am pleased to hear that the judging panel found that the speech by
Leanne Mohamad was in breach of both of the fundamental rules you cited
and that, as a result, she will not be speaking at the Grand Final.
What I do not understand is that if, as you say, these "two fundamental
rules are made explicit during the training" how on earth was it
possible for a speech like this not only to be accepted in the first
place but to actually win the Redbridge Final? It seems that there must
have been a complete breakdown of the competition processes at many
levels. It also seems to me that political activists in Redbridge and
the School have hijacked the competition to promote what is, ultimately,
a deeply antisemitic narrative.
What I would like to know is how the damage done is going to be
redressed. The lies and blood libels in Leanne's speech, which went
totally unchallenged, actually go far beyond what even the terrorist
organisation Hamas claims. To say these blood libels are deeply
offensive to me and my many family members in Israel (some of whom have
been murdered by the Palestinian terrorists whose narrative Leanne
presents) is an understatement. Yet I see that the video is STILL on
your website
http://www.speakoutchallenge.com/leanne-mohamad-winner-jack-petcheys-speak-challenge-redbridge-regional-final-2015-16/
on a page which congratulates Leanne as the Redbridge winner.
I am not, incidentally suggesting that the video must be taken down or
censored. But if it is left there must be a clear statement about how it
has breached the rules, why it is so offensive and why nothing like
that can ever be accepted in the future. There must also be a proper
video response.
As far as the School is concerned I have already written to the Head
Teacher, but I think you should also seek answers from them to the above
questions. It frightens me to know how such extreme, hateful and
ignorant views have not only become main stream in such a school, but
have become a mark of excellence with apparently unanimous support.
UPDATE: The Jewish Chronicle has picked up the story, although curiously (given that it failed to cover the story first time when the child won the competition) it headlines with the good news that the Panel unanimously voted the speech out of the final.
