Who We Are

Our intention is to inform people of racist, homophobic, religious extreme hate speech perpetrators across social networking internet sites. And we also aim to be a focal point for people to access information and resources to report such perpetrators to appropriate web sites, governmental departments and law enforcement agencies around the world.

We will also post relevant news worthy items and information on Human rights issues, racism, extremist individuals and groups and far right political parties from around the world although predominantly Britain.

Sunday, 6 February 2011

NPD banned from taking Frankfurt census (German)

Members of the National Democratic Party (NPD) have been banned from taking the census in the state of Hesse, following the far-right party's call on its members to volunteer and collect data.

The Hesse branch of the NPD called on its members to sign-up for census-taking duties so they could "draw conclusions about the mental state, the social problems and the political mood" of the people of that state.

Director of Frankfurt's census office Waltraud Schröpfer said NPD members had now been banned because the law did not allow census data to be used for political reasons.

On the NPD's website, the party said they would use the data to "lay the foundation of a national-democratic 'market research' for the best way to address voters." The NPD also called on members to donate to the party the expense allowances of between €250 and €1,000 that census interviewers receive.

The NPD has attempted similar census-based campaigns in Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia in the past.

According to Saturday's edition of the Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper, the local statistics office in Wiesbaden will try to prevent NPD members from taking the census by giving priority to volunteers who work for public authorities.

Hesse's census begins on May 9. The state will send out 7,000 interviewers to 12 percent of the population to collect data.

The Local Germany

Cops probe link between Loughner, white supremacists (USA)

An official familiar with the Arizona shooting investigation said Sunday that local authorities are looking at a possible connection between accused gunman Jared Loughner and an online group known for white supremacist, anti-immigrant rhetoric.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the ongoing investigation, said local authorities were examining the American Renaissance website for possible motives for Saturday’s shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz.

American Renaissance is connected to the white supremacist New Century Foundation, according to an analysis by the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based group that tracks hate crimes. New Century Foundation founder Jared Taylor has called racial, ethnic and religious diversity “one of the most divisive forces on the planet,” according to the Anti-Defamation League.

Taylor on Sunday denied any connection to the accused gunman. “No one by the name of Loughner has ever been a subscriber to American Renaissance or has ever registered for an American Renaissance conference,” Taylor wrote on the website.

“American Renaissance condemns violence in the strongest possible terms,” Taylor wrote.

Capitol Hill Blue

David Cameron's attack on multiculturalism divides the coalition (UK)

The language of Cameron's speech resembles that of Blair in the wake of the 7/7 bombings. But the issue still threatens to divide his party as badly as it did Labour.

David Cameron's speech attacking multiculturalism may seem to have come out of a clear blue sky, but its genesis can be traced back to long before he became prime minister. Indeed, in its tone and content it shares many similarities with a key speech made by Tony Blair in 2005, shortly after the London bombings.

Blair argued that the roots of violent Islamism were not "superficial but deep" and could be found "in the extremist minority that now in every European city preach hatred of the west and our way of life".

Those who perpetuated such an ideology, Blair claimed, play "on our tolerance and good nature … as if it is our behaviour that should change, that if we only tried to work out and act on their grievances, we could lift this evil … This is a misunderstanding of a catastrophic order."

But even though Blair returned to this argument recurrently, the Labour government was unable to resolve its internal battles over how best to combat violent extremism. The rows engulfed the government's chief response to the threat, articulated in its "Prevent" strategy, which originally sought to counter the spread of Islamism by empowering moderate voices in the Muslim world.

The Home Office and the Department for Communities vied with each other for cash and resources as they attempted to implement the strategy. Behind the scenes, ministers clashed over who should own the policy. A number of Muslim groups flagged concerns that senior civil servants were in thrall to Islamist organisations that preached non-violence in the UK but endorsed violent extremism abroad. There were even accusations that Prevent itself had been hijacked by extremist groups.

"There was this belief that supporting and reaching out to the non-violent extremists would prevent violent extremists from committing acts of terrorism," said Haras Rafiq, a founder of the Sufi Muslim Council and a director of Centri, an anti-extremism organisation. "It is clear that Cameron now believes that approach was muddled."

Cameron's speech signalled just how muddled he felt the approach had become. In the future, he pledged, only groups that would encourage integration would receive funding. "Let's properly judge these organisations," Cameron said. "Do they believe in universal human rights – including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law?"

These questions will become increasingly important over the next few weeks as the government redrafts the Prevent strategy. Originally due to be unveiled in January, it now looks unlikely to appear until the summer.

As with Labour, the coalition is divided. Insiders say Cameron, along with education secretary, Michael Gove, the home secretary, Theresa May, and the security minister, Dame Pauline Neville-Jones, accept there has been too much of what the prime minister calls "passive tolerance" of extremist groups in recent years, while Nick Clegg and Baroness Warsi, the Tory party chairwoman, prefer a more multicultural approach.

Signs of the tension between both sides were evident last year when Warsi was due to attend the Muslim Global Peace and Unity conference in east London but pulled out under pressure from Tory party officials, who were alarmed at claims the event was to be attended by Islamist sympathisers.

Warsi was understood to be distraught at being unable to attend and used a speech last month at Leicester University – rumoured to have not been cleared by Tory party HQ – to warn that "Islamophobia has now crossed the threshold of middle-class respectability".

She said: "The drip-feeding of fear fuels a rising tide of prejudice. So when people get on the tube and see a bearded Muslim, they think 'terrorist' … when they hear 'halal', they think 'that sounds like contaminated food' … and when they walk past a woman wearing a veil, they think automatically, 'that woman's oppressed'. And what's particularly worrying is that this can lead down the slippery slope to violence."

As for the Liberal Democrats, many of their MPs and members will feel uneasy at Cameron's claim that multiculturalism has failed. The party has seen itself as distinct because of the way in which it embraces diversity. Nick Clegg was even prepared to stick his neck out in the election campaign in support of an amnesty for illegal immigrants, seeing it as an important badge of liberalism. Many Lib Dems will find being associated with Cameron's approach difficult.

Muslim groups were quick to voice fears that Cameron's speech was putting the UK on the same slippery slope, coming on the day the far-right English Defence League staged its largest ever rally in Luton.

"The prime minister chose to deliver his speech on a day when the extremists of the English Defence League will be marching on Luton to sow discord among our communities," said Farooq Murad, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain. "We find it very disappointing that, at a time when we should seek to stand together to fight violence and extremism, Mr Cameron omits any reference to this extremist group spreading hate and bigotry against British Muslims in towns and cities up and down this country."

But Cameron did use his speech to acknowledge the relationship between Islamophobia and the far right. "On the one hand, those on the hard right ignore this distinction between Islam and Islamist extremism and just say: 'Islam and the west are irreconcilable'," he said. "These people fuel Islamophobia. And I completely reject their argument."

Anti-fascist campaigners point out the EDL was formed in response to the rise of al-Muhajiroun, the now proscribed extremist organisation that glorified suicide bombers and influenced several British-born al-Qaida sympathisers jailed for terrorism. A mix of football hooligans, far-right supporters and disaffected white workers, the EDL lacks a common identity but is united in its target: Islam.

"The rise of the EDL can be seen as a failure by the British government to get to grips with Islamist extremism," said Maurice Cousins of the anti-far-right campaign group Nothing British.

Multiculturalism has, according to Cousins, helped Islamism flourish.

"We take the view that multiculturalism hasn't been the best way to integrate people in society," he said. "It ghettoises people into minority and majority groups with no common identity. You can argue in favour of pluralism, but multiculturalism says there's no one overriding culture and that causes divisions and makes society less cohesive."

Cameron signalled he had come down on the side of this argument. "The speech was an attempt to bring everything together," said James Brandon of Quilliam, the counter-extremism thinktank. "When they got into power, the government tried to draft anti-extremism policy in piecemeal form, but they've realised they need a bigger-picture approach to make sure every department is on the same page."

Insiders suggest it is likely Cameron's speech will trigger a further redrafting of the Prevent strategy. What eventually transpires will be radically different. "A lot of things were wrong with Prevent," Brandon said. "People were being loose with who the money was going to; they were working with the wrong people."

Having rejected the previous government's strategy, Cameron is now reverting to his default position, outlined in a speech he made in 2005 when shadow education minister. In the speech Cameron likened Islamist extremists to Nazis. "Just like the Nazis of 1930s Germany, they want to purge corrupt cosmopolitan influences," Cameron said.

Meanwhile, the EDL's website also invokes the Nazis. It carries a quote from Albert Einstein, a "refugee from Nazi Germany": "The world is a dangerous place to live in; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."

Indeed, at the march, several EDL members were quick to claim Cameron's speech reflected their own views. By waging war on one form of extremism, Cameron may unintentionally have given succour to another.

The Observer

Coogan blasts three 'racist' amigos (UK)

Comedian Steve Coogan has laid into Top Gear presenters Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond and James May, saying the trio were guilty of "casual racism" and describing them as "three rich, middle-aged men laughing at poor Mexicans".

The Mexican ambassador complained to the BBC about the "outrageous, vulgar and inexcusable insults" made on the show after Hammond joked that Mexican cars reflected national characteristics, saying they were "just going to be lazy, feckless, flatulent".

But Coogan said the adjectives better described Hammond's comic approach.

And he also criticised the BBC for, saying its "initial mealy-mouthed apology was pitiful" and it defence of the presenters amounted to "tolerance of casual racism".

The corporation wrote to His Excellency Eduardo Medina-Mora Icaza to say it was sorry if the programme, broadcast on January 30, caused offence.

But it claimed that national stereotyping was part of British humour and the remarks were akin to labelling Italians as disorganised and over dramatic, the French as arrogant and the Germans as over-organised.

Writing in the Observer, Coogan said: "All the examples it uses to legitimise this hateful rubbish are relatively prosperous countries full of white people. How about if the Lads had described Africans as lazy, feckless etc? Or Pakistanis? The Beeb's hand-wringing suggested tolerance of casual racism, arguably the most sinister kind."

Coogan said he was a "huge fan" of Top Gear and normally regarded the presenters' irreverence as part of the "rough and tumble" that goes with having a sense of humour, but he said there was a "strong ethical dimension" to the best comedy which actively challenges prejudices rather than reinforcing them, laughing at hypocrisy and narrow mindedness.

He said the presenters wore their offensiveness like a "badge of pride" and mistakenly believed it gave them an "anti-establishment aura of coolness" when in fact it was "uber-conservative".

Coogan, who admitted he was now unlikely to be invited back on the show, said the comments were all the worse because with its high viewing figures Top Gear was often the "public face of the BBC".

Google Hosted News

Police report massive rise in Scottish gay hate crime (UK)

Hate crimes against homosexuals in Scotland have risen almost fivefold in the past five years, shock new statistics have revealed.

The statistics - gathered by a freedom of information request to Scotland's eight police forces - show a disturbing rise in reports of violent attacks, indecent assaults, abuse and vandalism against people targeted just because of their sexual orientation.

Figures show there were 666 incidents of homophobic abuse in 2009-10, almost double the 364 incidents reported in 2007-8, and almost five times the 114 incidents reported in 2004-5.

In Strathclyde, reported incidents have risen from 50 in 2004-5 to 286 last year, while in the Lothian and Borders area there was a rise from 45 to 167 over the same period.

Rights organisation Stonewall Scotland revealed that two thirds of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people had been verbally abused in the past year, while a third had been physically attacked. The overall number of incidents is likely to be much higher as Stonewall said 61 per cent of victims did not report the crime to police.

The freedom of information statistics show that homosexuals have been abused or assaulted in their own homes, while eating in a restaurant, on public transport and while on a night out.

In one case, in the Central Scotland area, a lesbian and gay centre was set alight.

After a Stonewall Scotland campaign, police have been required to separately report incidents since March 2010.

However, the FoI figures pre-date the new laws. Carl Watt, director of Stonewall Scotland, said: Over a quarter of the people attacked told us they accept abuse and attacks as part of being LGBT in Scotland.

"Having said that we have a strong message from our police forces that crimes committed against people simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity will not be tolerated."

Ian Latimer, chief constable of Northern Constabulary and spokesman on diversity for the Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland, said: "Hate crime in any form is unacceptable."

And a Scottish Government spokesman added: "There is no room for complacency in this fight."