2010:The Sarwar Dynasty in Central Glasgow – Anas Sarwar – Son of Mohammad Elected to Holyrood
Sarwar was selected for and elected to the safe Labour Glasgow seat previously held by his father.
His rise to the top echelons of the Labour Party was spectacular, but not unexpected.
He was the head co-ordinator of the, “No” campaign in the 2014 Scottish Referendum. How’s that for nepotism!!!! No end to it, as yet.
2011: Sarwar appointed Deputy leader of the Labour Party in Scotland.
In his address to Party loyalists he said: ” I will never define my politics by allegiance to the Scottish flag but rather to the values and principles of the Labour movement”.
2014: Sarwar relinquishes MSP status transferring his allegiance to the Unionist Labour Party in England taking up the post of shadow spokesman at international development.
Clearly a diehard, “Red Labour” unionist supporter intent on furthering his career in England, piggybacking on his Glasgow constituency.
2013: Sarwar attacked the Scottish Government for its alleged failure to mitigate the worst effects of the Bedroom Tax.
But , during a vote on the said tax being repealed in Westminster on 13 November 2013, Sarwar along with 45 other Labour MPs abstained, with the subsequent vote being lost by 252 to 226 – fewer than the number of Labour MPs who had failed to vote.
The bill was carried with the assistance of the labour party and the Bedroom Tax was imposed upon Scotland. And it was the Labour party that had called for the debate and vote.
Sarwar disgracefully misrepresented the findings of an impartial, non-political research study which found that an independent Scotland would be far better placed to reduce inequality. Full report here: (https://wingsoverscotland.com/lying-liars-tell-more-lies)
2014, Sarwar came under criticism for choosing to send his son to Hutchesons’ Grammar School
the same exclusive independent school that he himself attended, rather than a state school highlighting the hypocrisy of Labour Party politicians who preached social justice and public services while sending their own children to private schools.
Feb 2015: Jackie Baillie, ever willing to claim credit for the good works of others
Had the audacity to make claims in the press that it had been her intervention that had saved the day for Scots forcing the SNP government to find recurring finance cancelling out the effects of the Bedroom Tax. The brazen bid for glory exposed her to the ridicule of the Scottish electorate who were well aware that £30m had to be diverted away from the Scottish health Service to fund the new tax burden. the Scottish electorate.
Nov 2015: Ousted MP Sarwar buys himself a safe seat in Holyrood
Plotting his political comeback, Sarwar, who lost his Glasgow Central Westminster seat in May, contacted MSP’s, councillors and activists with an invite to hear his “views on the recovery of the Labour Party in Scotland”. Guests were treated to an expensive free dinner at the Riverside Palace, one of Scotland’s leading banqueting venues which can cater for up to 500 people and boasts of its high degree of elegance and grandeur.
A Scottish Labour parliamentarian said “The future of the Labour Party in Scotland isn’t about an individual’s view. It’s a collective approach, a team approach. Do the people on the street really want to commit to supporting one person’s vision for the party? People are apprehensive about the ambitions of Sarwar. I think he is looking to make a comeback in Scotland”
Feb 2016: Sarwar tops the Labour Party list for Glasgow and is guaranteed a seat through the back door
Scottish Labour’s list for the Glasgow region was topped by former MP Anas Sarwar, followed by former leader Johann Lamont, current MSP James Kelly and former MSP Pauline McNeil.
This Is Anas Sarwar
Sarwar was shown the exit door from Westminster in 2014 by his Glasgow constituents who judged him to be a sleazy disingenuous individual who sought to further his political career by feigning concern about his constituent’s misery with the goal of attaining for himself the fleeting glory of political stardom and personal gain.
His popularity in the Party is not mirrored in the community who rejected him when became clear he was a charlatan who enjoyed a life of capitalist excess whilst representing many of his constituents whose existence was dependent on food banks.
Sarwar’s parliamentary register of interests previously revealed he accepted £40,000 from a non-family firm ultimately controlled from the tax haven of the British Virgin Islands.
Mar 2019:Nuclear weapons Doon the Clyde
Sarwar clarified the Labour Party in Scotland and his own position on the continued harbouring of Polaris submarines and many hundreds of nuclear weapons. He stated: “The Labour party in Scotland took a policy position that we didn’t support the renewal of Trident, but the UK party takes a different view.” So that’s it then?
The Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 was an Act of the Scottish Parliament passed on 19 February 2014. The legislation was part of the SNP Government’s “Getting it right for every child” policy implementation. The scope of the act made provision for the rights of children and young people. The provision of services and support for or in relation to children and young people. Children’s hearings, detention in secure accommodation and consultation on certain proposals in relation to schools.
The provisions of the act gained the support of parents, professionals involved in childcare provision, childrens organisations and charitable institutions and implementation of the new measures was scheduled to be implemented from 2015.
But the public became increasingly concerned about the wisdom of a “Named Person” when press coverage revealed the propensity for the abuse of children.
Press Report:
Dayna Dickson-Boath was appointed one of the first Named Persons in Scotland, but is now banned from working with children for the rest of her life. She had held a senior position at a secondary school in Moray, but yesterday consented to being struck off by the General Teaching Council for Scotland on the charge that, between 8 August 2014 and 10 September 2014, she “did send, by means of a public electronic communications network, messages to another person that were grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character, in that you did converse regarding the sexual abuse of children”. Dickson-Boath was placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register and ordered to undergo treatment when she was convicted in Elgin Sheriff Court.
A trickle of protests reached tsunami strength at the start of 2015 as concerns were raised about aspects of the legislation which were draconian, poorly drafted and “Big Brother State”.
The SNP government ignored requests for a dialogue and forced the new measures through. But the public would not be denied and a number of Scots parents and Christian organisations took the SNP government to court in an effort to get parts of the act repealed. They failed in their efforts and all appeared to be lost. But they gathered strength from increasing support of Scots who had been alerted to what the SNP government was seeking to impose on the nation. They appealed to the UK Supreme Court.
2016: The Supreme Court Judgement – The Named Person Scheme
In their summary ruling against the introduction of the scheme the Supreme Court judges noted that the appropriateness of the novel new legislation hinged on the government’s assertion of a need to ensure the “wellbeing” of the child.
But “wellbeing” was not defined and reliance on SHANARRI indicators (standing for Safe, Healthy, Achieving, Nurtured, Active, Respected, Responsible and Included) were also not defined and were in some cases notably vague.
A unanimous ruling of Supreme Court judges also stated: “The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get at the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world.
They were also agreed that the idea that parents must comply with any advice given “could well amount to an interference with” Article 8 of the ECHR (the right to respect for private and family life). The Court also held that the legislation’s data sharing provisions, which they held were central to the role of the named person, “are not within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament”.
And yet, In his 2016 speech to the Scottish Parliament following receipt of the judgement Swinney insisted that the judgment itself did not require current policy to change. His message to local authorities and health boards was to continue to develop and deliver the named person service. Encouraging the disregard of the Supreme Court ruling set a dangerous precedence since in continuing the development of the named person provision, its information gathering and sharing processes the Deputy First Minister encouraged unlawful practice by state bodies.
Dr Jenny Cunningham, a recently retired community paediatrician from Glasgow said that the named person scheme was “illegitimate and illiberal” and argued that an open democracy depended on the principle that “parents ought to be autonomous in relation to their own families”. he continued saying: “The underlying assumption by the SNP government is that adults are unable to identify vulnerable children – so the state has to intervene! This belittles parents. She concluded: “We should strongly resist and argue against this idea that parents are incapable of assessing children’s wellbeing needs and accessing services – parenting is about establishing good relationships with children and establishing parental authority.”
Maggie Mellon, an independent social work consultant said: “It’s important that we understand the rationale and the ideas underpinning the legislation. The SNP government has made it clear it thinks the Supreme Court judgment is purely technical and they’re going to plough on regardless. But there is no duty under the Act to consult or collaborate with parents. It’s just not there. We’ve been treated to flights of complete fancy about the voluntary nature of the scheme. We were told it was in response to parents’ demands – then we were told it was to save children from their parents. A Named Person can’t provide a hot meal, a pair of shoes, a warm home but they can spend time doing SHANARRI somersaults with 300 wellbeing outcome signifiers and 200 risk indicators! It wont work.”
Aug 2018: Plan B to by-pass MSP’s and implement the Named Person Scheme by the Backdoor
The SNP Scottish Government is considering controversial proposals to implement the detested named person scheme “by the back door” even if MSPs refuse to support changes to the law. Discussion of a so-called “Plan B” is revealed in documents which were only made public, after a Freedom of Information (FoI) request was submitted. The papers were produced following a meeting of unnamed top level government officials and advisors in February 2018. An annex under the headline “CONTINGENCY” stated: “Contingency plan? What if the legislation is not passed?” And adds: “Plan B for if Bill fails to make sure parts 4&5 can be implemented without information sharing.”
The scheme has been riddled with problems and last month a further delay was revealed. Swinney set up a panel to produce a Code of Practice by September 2018, after Holyrood’s Education and Skills Committee said it would not pass the legislation without one. But Professor Ian Welsh, chair of the panel, wrote to Mr Swinney to inform him that the panel would not be able to meet this deadline.
Lesley Scott of the TYMES Trust, said: “These worrying documents show the focus is clearly on implementing Named Person Scheme by the back door, regardless of whether the new Bill gets through Parliament. Clearly, we are now dealing with a Government which is ignoring the UK Supreme Court, has no regard for the elected representatives of the Scottish people and is determined to shun public opinion. They are riding roughshod over the democratic system in pursuit of a flawed, failed and discredited project.”
Lesley asked to be provided with details from three key meetings of the Statutory Guidance Framework Group tasked to review the named person scheme in October and December 2017 and in February 2018. Subsequently only one set of minutes was released and was useless since the names of all persons in attendance had been redacted. An appeal was submitted to the Information Commissioner’s Office seeking a review of this decision to withold the documentation.
Maggie Mellon, former chair of the Scottish Child Law Centre, said: “The names of all present including the chair are all redacted. So much for open government. There is no way of identifying which agencies are providing wrong advice or whether the persons present represent their colleagues and agencies properly. Is it now so toxic to be associated with the named person scheme that people are not willing to have their names made known”? Adding: “These are presumably many of the same people who advised the government so badly first time round, that breaching confidentiality is ok even when any concerns fall well below the proper threshold. What is so important about this flawed scheme that it has to be pushed through” ?
Sep 2019: Named Person Scheme Scrapped?
Deputy First Minister John Swinney announced in the Scottish Parliament: “We will now not underpin in law the mandatory named person scheme for every child. We will withdraw the Children and Young People (Information Sharing) (Scotland) Bill and repeal the relevant legislation. Instead, existing voluntary schemes that provide a point of contact for support will continue, under current legal powers, when councils and health boards wish to provide them and parents wish to use them.” Swinney’s announcement led to widespread media coverage, with some containing misleading content. So here we set the record straight.
Summary
The July 2016 UK Supreme Court judgment stated: “the sharing of personal data between relevant public authorities is central to the role of the named person scheme” and concluded that the information-sharing provisions:
Were incompatible with the rights of children, young persons and parents under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights:
May in practice result in a disproportionate interference with the article 8 rights of many children, young persons and their parents, through the sharing of private information:
Were “not within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament”, deeming the legislation “defective” and blocking it from coming into force:
Bizarrely, Swinney responded to the ruling at the time saying: “I welcome the publication of today’s judgment and the fact that the attempt to scrap the named person service has failed”. But three years down the line he was forced to admit that the mandatory Named Scheme, with legal powers to grab and share private information at the low level of wellbeing, cannot work without breaching the human rights of children and families. It had to be scrapped.
So, where do we go from here? Swinney, in his statement yesterday said: “Instead, existing voluntary schemes that provide a point of contact for support will continue, under current legal powers, where councils and health boards wish to provide them and parents wish to use them.” A voluntary single point of contact. So if you still see a Named Person service being offered, it will now be on a strictly voluntary basis. It will be up to councils and health boards to decide if they wish to offer a voluntary named person or some kind of voluntary single point of contact for parents, and it will be up to parents to decide if they want to use the service.
The ‘voluntary single point of contact’ will not be able to share information on “wellbeing” concerns at will. Instead it will have to adhere to current data sharing frameworks. There will no longer be a statutory Named Person service imposed on every child in Scotland. Parents can feel confident that when they are given advice or offered a service by a voluntary “Named Person” or “voluntary single point of contact”, they do not have to accept it. As the 2016 Supreme Court judgment stated: “Care should therefore be taken to emphasise the voluntary nature of the advice, information, support and help which is offered”.
BBC bias is well capable of swinging an election or referendum
The BBC is an immensely powerful organisation and the way it presents news significantly impacts election/referendum results. In 2017 economists of the Columbia Business School, analysed 18 countries’ news media markets and developed a “power index”.
Across all countries, the UK had the most concentrated media sector, mainly due to the BBC. Over all mediums, the BBC influences 81% of people who consume news and has the most power to affect public opinion of any news organisation worldwide.
According to the researchers, it required just 5% of the BBC’s audience to be completely trusting of its output to give it the power to swing a close election by 1%. It could swing an election by 2% if 10% of consumers were naïve. This makes it much more powerful than, any major UK newspaper.
To achieve the same result a major newspaper would require in excess of 38 % of its readers to be trusting of its content. Poll after poll suggests that the BBC is the most trusted news source in Britain, and therefore the combination of its reach and reputation means its output substantially impacts elections and public opinion.
The trust in the BBC has been cultivated by the Westminster government, over many years and the perception of trustworthiness is easily maintained since newspapers have editorial viewpoints and priors, and the BBC claims to be absolutely impartial.
But with great power comes great responsibility and the issue of bias is critical, as it only requires a small proportion of people to question the impartiality of the presentation of a news item to reduce the impact on public opinion. (Cato Institute)
Comment:
The Westminster government influences the bias of the content of news and current affairs presentation of BBC (Scotland) ensuring Scottish affairs eg independence and SNP Scottish governance are presented in a negative format or not reported on at all. The financial share of the distribution of the compulsory annual licence fee is very unfavourable to Scotland since only about 20% of money collected from Scot’s for the BBC coffers finds it’s way back to Scotland and this is only transitionary since the bulk of programming is contracted out to Menthorn, a concern whose controlling company is based offshore in a tax haven. Broadcasting policy is retained by the Westminster government which is unfair to Scotland and this needs to change so that a balanced output can be achieved. Without change the outcome of any independence referendum in the future could be prejudiced against “Yes” by between 2% – 4% massively distorting the outcome as it did in 2014.
In January 2018 a number of independence minded friends decided to form the “Aberdeen Independence Movement” (AIM) to campaign for Scottish independence concentrating their efforts in the North East of Scotland. The headquarters is located in Aberdeen. It is an umbrella organisation whose membership is made up of WOKE minded independence activists of any political persuasion (so long as your are SNP). It is not affiliated to any political Party.
Aberdeen Independence Movement Executive Committee:
Co-Chairs: Fatima Joji: Nigerian-Scot from Westhill, Aberdeenshire, tops the SNP’s north-east regional list for the Scottish Parliament elections. Kenny Anderson: Long time SNP supporter. Managing Director and Majority Shareholder, Anderson Buchan Properties Ltd.
Finance Team: Virginia Dawod: Manager, Robert Gordon University. SNP activist. Danny Forbes: Robert Gordon University – SNP activist.
Joshua Mennie: (media consultant), SNP, NEC member. List candidate North East Scotland
Theo Forbes. Graphic Media And Communications Officer for the Aberdeen Independence Movement (AIM). Post occupied from 17 Jun 2017. Before that from 2015, Graphic Customer Advisor in the employ of B&Q. Just to confuse matters was a member of the National Executive Committee and the the National Events and Fundraising Officer for the SNP group “Young Scots for Independence” from 2016-2018. But just to be really clear was also the Graphic National Events and Fundraising Officer. Being at a loose end for some time he attended Aberdeen University between 2017-2021 studying Politics & International Relations. Oh!! And he has been employed by the SNP as an intern from September 2020.
Aberdeenshire Independence Movement (ASIM) launched January 2020. Team leaders:
Neil Baillie, SNP Councillor Vicky Harper, SNP Councillor Andy Stuart, SNP Convenor Aberdeenshire West Fatima Joji, SNP List Candidate
Comment: Clearly an SNP funded organisation. Why so secret ?
Rhys Crilley, is a native of Wakefield in West Yorkshire who lives in Glasgow. He is a gifted academic, prolific writer and university lecturer. His primary interests are in war, militarism, scandals and outrage.
His partner is leading WOKE activist, Councillor Rhiannon Spear and through her he maintains close political relationships with senior SNP leaders and actively supports the policies they espouse. To that end it is important that readers of his political articles give due deference to his situation as it is in April 2021.
Election 2021: Why is Alex Salmond’s Alba Party polling poorly? By Rhys Crilley
Rhys Crilley (WOKE) supporter and guest columnist for the Herald asked the question of readers but produced no evidence to support his claims. Very poor journalism. But he did get a response from some readers.
David P S****:
Why? Total failure on the part of the media to print anything but abuse, innuendo and personal attacks, and the cowardice of the same media in failing to hold the SNP government and NS to account in any way whatever for their actions in attempting to frame an innocent man.
Crilley’s remarks about support for trans rights infer that he alone is sufficiently well informed and humane to pontificate on this. In fact I’d suggest that very few people regard trans rights as an issue which will affect their vote, but as far as this opinion piece is concerned it gives him another stick to hit Alba with. Really if this wasn’t written by Crilley, it could as well have been scrawled by some overheated youth in Nic’s office.
As a long term (now former) member of the SNP I experienced the lean days when we had little support. We routinely struggled to get a quorum for branch meetings. So Crilley’s observations that Alba is struggling to make an impact is disingenuous. Alba will grow, in time for the election. and, where I am now is vastly preferable to being a supporter of a party which oversaw the shambles of the Salmond trials, the internal gerrymandering of the rules to eliminate dissenters, the alleged disappearance of £600,000 of funds, secret unrecorded meetings with donors who were subsequently awarded preferential treatment. So don’t waste my time or Alba’s with your pseudo intellectual (“tropes” indeed, Dr Crilley, pretentious or what?) tripe.
Zander T***
And to be expected, Rhys Crilley, the author of this piece is at the forefront of Trans Rights, the GRA and gender self-ID. He is all for and 100% behind and in support of Trans men, who have self-ID as a woman, free rein to enter Ladies toilets, everywhere in Scotland. Here’s what he wrote on June 6th 2019:
“The Scottish government’s ongoing review of the Gender Recognition Act has also brought bathroom politics to the fore. Some politicians and pundits have suggested that allowing transwomen to use women’s toilets threatens the safety of women. But research shows that places with trans-inclusive bathrooms have no recorded instances of harassment or assault from transgender people.”
So to all women of Scotland, if you are unhappy with the idea of men dressed as women coming into a public toilet whilst you are there, do not vote SNP and do not vote GREEN. In fact whatever you do, if you find this disturbing, say nothing, because the SNP and the GREENS will send you to jail via the Hate Crime Bill. Scotland has truly become a most unpleasant wee country in which to reside. (The Herald, today)
Oct 2019: The National Parent Forum of Scotland (NPFS) conducted an online meeting to discuss matters arising from John Swinney’s new curriculum for Scottish children.
Right from the start parents expressed anger at his addition without discussion and agreement of a new relationship, sexual health and parenthood programme to the curriculum.
Providing graphic descriptions of what was being taught to kids a father said:
“Right from the beginning of primary school they are teaching that sex is assigned at birth and gender is a subjective factor. I think that is a very dangerous and confusing message for young people. Masturbation is being positively promoted in schools. Children as young as 6yo are getting compulsory sex education lessons on ‘self-stimulation’ and touching themselves.”
NPFS chair Joanna Murphy reminded the father that the session was being streamed online. To which the father replied:
“If what I am raising is not suitable for discussion among a group of adults how can it possibly be suitable to talk about in schools?”
He continued:
“The curriculum features links to video content directing older pupils to erogenous zones in the anus. And one lesson plan explains that in some cultures male masturbation is seen as a waste of semen, which is supposed to be about creating life. And transgender life is introduced between P5 and P7. One lesson plan encourages kids to be whatever kind of girl or boy they want to be, free from stereotypes and gender-biased expectations”.
Swinney replied:
“A lot of care has been taken to ensure that the contents of the material are truly age appropriate. That involved extensive dialogue with a number of organisations whose confidence I have wanted to make sure are in place around these materials. It is promoting nothing. It is equipping young people with a knowledge and an understanding of what they can make their judgments about as responsible citizens. It simply deals with the world as it is and makes sure that young people will be equipped to handle that. I understand that there will be parental opinion that will not like this, and that should be a source of dialogue with schools to resolve that issue. I repeat my commendation for the materials . . . I don’t think we should allow our young people to be able, without context, to see things and experience things in our society that we have not properly equipped them for.”
Comment: End of discussion. But I am wondering, as I am sure you are also, just who were the “organisations” Swinney dialogued with!! Stonewall!!! for one I bet.
An American teacher warns about the invasion of WOKE orthodoxy in the education sector
I have been a teacher for nearly two decades. My awareness of WOKE ideology started about five years ago when our schools began to be consumed by “WOKE ideology”. The schools became obsessed with sophomoric and divisive notions of diversity, equality, and justice; increasingly hostile to freedom of expression; addicted to cancelling anything that offended the WOKE movement and prioritised activism over understanding as the goal of education.
The purpose of this letter is to alert the “sleep-wokers”. A sleep-woker is one who has not taken the WOKE creed to heart, but tacitly complies with the linguistic, pedagogical, political, and moral imperatives of wokeness. Sleep-wokers go through the motions; they are like religious folk who say prayers without thinking, attend worship services without engaging, and perpetuate dogmas without believing. I was a sleep-woker. In some ways, due to a combination of timidity and tiredness, I still am.
Sleep-woking, like sleepwalking, is very dangerous. While sleep-woking, an English teacher can unwittingly help cancel Chaucer, Keats and Conrad in the name of decolonisation. A biology teacher might find herself obliged to deny important differences between the sexes. A football coach will not be able to cheer on a player after a strong tackle, as strength and physical violence smack of toxic masculinity.
Wokeness has proven to be oppressive and totalitarian rather than inclusive and liberating
Most of my sleep-woking colleagues are good people. Like me, they were lulled into complacency by a WOKE take-over that was slow and subtle. What’s more, some changes were initially promising and even corrective — of course we should pay more attention to marginalised voices and overlooked narratives, and I am glad that we now do. To bemoan an expanded curriculum is simple chauvinism. In the end, however, wokeness has proven to be oppressive and totalitarian rather than inclusive and liberating.
My objection is to the effect of WOKE ideology on education, not to liberal politics. My grievance is that teachers are increasingly under pressure to adopt the WOKE agenda or be ostracised.
I empathise with the difficult situation that top school officials find themselves in. As wokeness takes over culture, schools face enormous pressure to follow suit. That said, those with the power to stop the degradation of education have a special responsibility to do so, and those of us with less power have a responsibility to remind our superiors of their duty. Here is some of what wokeness introduces:
Offence in is the Eye of the Offended
Schools are required to teach that if one feels offended, one has been offended. For example, if a student or colleague claims to have been offended by your words or actions, it does not matter if you intended no offence. More troubling is the fact that it does not matter if your words and actions were not those that a rational person should find offensive — you are an offender merely by virtue of the fact that someone claims to have been offended. Since legal norms follow ethical norms, if schools (and societies) succeed in changing the ethical norms of speech and offence, they will eventually have a basis upon which to change the legal norms. As soon as they can show that a normal or typical person is offended by certain language or certain ideas, they will be able to argue that a person presenting such language and ideas is failing to abide by the reasonable ethical cultural expectations. In essence, we are training students how to be offended so that their perceived offence can be used to eliminate anti-woke expression.
Elimination of Non-Woke Student Clubs
Any student group that resists WOKE orthodoxy is forcibly disbanded or prevented from forming with the outcome that free thinking students have trouble officially meeting and inviting speakers. If a non-woke speaker is invited, the wokes mobilise to deny them a platform and they feel righteous for doing so. Few free thinking students openly identify as such because they are afraid of repercussions from teachers and other students. Not only is this unfair, but it is also dangerous. Alienated free thinking students are being pushed away from moderate disagreement towards political extremism.
No Resisting WOKE Slogans
Opposing WOKE slogans or voicing contrary slogans is not tolerated. Since opposing wokeness is thought to be motivated by hate, voicing opposition to WOKE slogans is tantamount to hate speech. A student who challenges a WOKE slogan is bullied and harassed by the WOKE majority. Meanwhile, WOKE slogans and images are hung in school buildings and cannot be removed.
Cultural Appropriation
White or Western students are told not to participate in cultural traditions of non-white, non-Western people — the oppressors cannot participate in the culture of the oppressed. For example, several white students who wore shirts with African designs were reprimanded and forced to change their clothes. The fact that the shirts were a gift from their teacher, a black African man, made no difference. The students wore the shirts to show affection for their teacher and to honour his gift, but that was still cultural appropriation. In another instance, a musician was reprimanded for blending a western and non-western musical style into a new artistic expression. The musician was accused of cultural imperialism.
Cancelling Curriculum
Shakespeare, Homer and other canonical authors are being eliminated from the curriculum. In some cases, schools and teachers boast about cancelling these patriarchal racists. Even at schools that do not officially cancel canonical Western texts, the texts are subtly replaced in the name of anti-racism. The result is that many students move on to university never having read Homer or Shakespeare, though they will have been required to read many texts and attend many lectures on intersectionality and gender identity. They can speak at length about toxic masculinity and a panoply of so-called phobias, but they would not recognise the terms “iambic pentameter” and “dactylic hexameter”, let alone recognise actual examples of the meter.
Normalising Fallacies
Ad hominem attacks are presented as the cornerstone of critical thinking rather than as a fallacious form of argumentation. Teachers educate students to evaluate texts and arguments by primarily attending to the author’s race, gender, and sexuality.
Mandatory Training
Students attend mandatory training sessions in which experts teach them how to identify and report microaggressions. And since to a student with a hammer everything looks like a nail, the students begin informing on each other and on their teachers. White teachers are told to attend racial-political re-education workshops in which they strive to overcome their whiteness in the classroom. (It has long been accepted that “whiteness” is a meaningful category.) Teachers who claim to not be a racist are seen as the worst, most unredeemable kind of racist and labelled heretics who will not admit heresy. Suffering from something called “white fragility”.
Trigger Warnings
Before introducing any new activity teachers are required to compile lists of trigger warnings for it. The warnings which are shared with students alert them to any and all things in the subject that could cause them stress, frustration, anger, or sadness.
Manners and Dress Codes
A side-effect of the WOKE attacks on tradition, authority, and hierarchy has been the revocation of dress codes. So long as their genitals are covered and no profane words are visible, students can and do wear anything they like. Many students eat meals with headphones in their ears while watching videos on their phones. The less respectful students don’t bother with headphones. “Sir” and “Ma’am” have long since disappeared as too authoritarian and gendered. The terms “master” and “headmaster” cannot be used as master might connote slavery.
Elimination of Objective Assessments
Exams are being eliminated for two reasons: first, because exams are apparently inherently racist, sexist, classist, heteronormative, or otherwise unfair; second, because exams cause students stress, and stress makes students feel bad, and feeling bad negatively impacts their well-being. Additionally, some students do poorly on exams, and this has the potential to result in a situation that is inequitable.
Pronouns
Schools are increasingly pressured to identify their pronouns. Failure to identify one’s pronouns is seen as transphobic or cis-centric or both. Students can reassign their own pronouns at will. If a teacher mistakenly does not use the student’s preferred pronoun, the teacher is accused of misgendering. Misgendering a serious offence, even a kind of violence.
In Summary
The unchecked advance of wokeness results in two major failures. First, teachers and students lose the ability to freely read, write and speak as pupils and teachers. Second, the education provided becomes unrecognisably impoverished. The second effect is probably the hardest to accept. In place of free-thinking young scholars, the education system churns out generations of woke activists who believe that feelings matter more than facts, that perception is reality, and that it is more important to judge a text than to understand it — where “judging” means anachronistically interpreting the author’s words in light of the most recent WOKE orthodoxy.
Students claim to be proud practitioners of social justice yet they have only an elementary command of grammar and geography. They struggle to write complete sentences and are unable to locate Turkey on a map. Some question the need to take maths seriously given that maths is apparently grounded in Western patriarchal rationalism. Wokeness has been achieved at the expense of education. Reason has been subordinated to passion. Plato’s charioteer has been replaced by the horses he was meant to reign in. To not be woke is to be asleep: unconscious or ignorant of what is really going on.
Perhaps some of you are disturbed by some of the woke excesses at your schools and in your communities, even if, like me, you readily support appeals for greater diversity, genuine inclusion, and a multicultural curriculum.
There are some who instinctively to dismiss the excesses as isolated incidents with sayings like “The pendulum will swing back” or “That will never happen at my school.” But the pendulum will not swing back because the WOKE movement is not a pendulum; it is a steamroller.
One of the canniest bits of WOKE linguistic manipulation has been appropriation of the term “WOKE” itself. To not be WOKE is to be asleep: unconscious or ignorant of what is really going on. Either one is Woke or one is not aware of reality. Or, as in the words of a WOKE student “if you are not WOKE, it must be because you are uneducated or hateful — or both. Such is the WOKE reality. (The Critic)
President Sarkosy’s Legacy – Recruiting the Southern Mediterranean Countries to the EU Cause
Oct 2007: In a major speech near to the start of his term of office President Sarkosy proposed the setting up of a “Union of the Mediterranean” mirroring the EU but including only states with the Mediterranean as a common border. The group would be led by France. Although not rejected immediately the proposal was recognised as having the potential to create major difficulties. If taken forward it would replace the 1995 Barcelona Process & Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and place at risk many of the major policy initiatives implemented from that date. Turkey, whose application to join the EC was well advanced, rejected the proposal claiming it to be a subterfuge designed to deny Turkey it’s place within Europe. Chancellor Merkel, who had not been consulted on the matter said the idea was non-starter so far as Germany was concerned since it would force Germany to turn to Eastern Europe for expansion of markets and France would be drawn to the Mediterranean for the same purpose. Effectively bring the EU to an end. Other members of the EU also rejected the concept on the basis that the change would result in a massive expansion of the number of administrative institutions and associated costs. The outcome of prolonged discussions was to remit the Sarkosy idea to the 1995 Barcelona Process & Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) group for development within that structure. The group’s initial response was that the absence of any tangible moves towards democracy in the states to the south of the Mediterranean precluded any significant expansion of the existing agreement but every effort would be made to develop the policy.
Jul 2008: Major Progress on EU & Mediterranean Cooperation
The Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) was created by 43 Euro-Mediterranean Heads of State and Government on 13 July 2008 at the Paris Summit for the Mediterranean. The Secretariat of the Union for the Mediterranean, based in Barcelona and the first permanent structure dedicated to the intergovernmental Mediterranean partnership, is the operational institution that empowers this regional dialogue between the UfM Member States and stakeholders, fostering synergies among them and promoting cooperation projects and initiatives with a direct impact on the lives of people. The UfM constitutes a framework for political, economic and social relations between the European Union and the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries and is inspired by the goals set out in the Barcelona Declaration, namely working towards the creation of an area of peace, stability, security and shared economic prosperity, as well as full respect for democratic principles, human rights and fundamental freedoms and promotion of understanding between cultures and civilizations in the Euro-Mediterranean region.http://ufmsecretariat.org/who-we-are/
Will the UK be Excluded From Membership after Brexit Bites??
The EU has invested in excess of 20billion Euro’s in the partnership since 1995 and there is tangible evidence of a positive outcome in the future. But the UK will play no part in it. An negative is the loss of financial investment, to date and in the future.
Whitehall mandarins, Unionist politicians and their Luddite supporters will tell you it will be a long and torturous process over many years and it must be this way because the relationship Scotland has with the rest of the UK is too complex to untangle in a shorter period. But if Czechoslovakia could be split up in six months in 1992, why should the process of establishing an independent Scotland be such a hardship?
The Velvet Revolution
World War 1 lasted four years, World War 2 lasted six. So is it easier to conquer then lose an entire continent than to separate two jurisdictions peacefully? Czechoslovakia, not only transformed from a socialist republic and a Soviet satellite to liberal democracy, but it also successfully split peacefully into two nations in 6 months.
The pivotal elections that took place in 1992 saw an even split of voters in both of the constituent parts of Czechoslovakia. Tensions arose and the leaders of both constituent regions agreed the federation should be split.
An agreement was signed on 26 August 1992. By 13 November 1992, a law had been enacted as to how the federal assets were going to be divided and twelve days later, an act was passed that set the dissolution date on 31 December 1992.
Complex matters such as the continuity of government, laws, and arrangements for courts and so on were all swiftly determined by December 1992.
A new Czech Constitution was passed on 16th December 1992. Czechoslovakia was dissolved at midnight on 31 December 1992. When people woke up on 01 January 1993, they had new nationalities.
Within a mere six months, a comprehensive settlement had been agreed and activated. Immobile assets were distributed to the country where they sat, mobile assets and assets abroad were distributed according to the rough population ratio.
Amendments to international treaties signed by Czechoslovakia were negotiated and signed very quickly by both new republics, confirming the continuation of such treaties.
In 1996, the two countries signed a protocol specifying the distribution of duties enshrined by treaties signed as Czechoslovakia.
All of this happened whilst Czechoslovakia and its constituent countries were undergoing a massive economic transformation. Czechoslovakia was privatizing on an unprecedented scale and at an unprecedented pace.
In a way, it was like Brexit and the UK’s 1980s privatizations combined, only a lot more complicated. Whereas the 1980s UK privatized two companies a year, the early 1990s Czechoslovakia privatized two companies an hour.
Taken together, these companies’ accounting value was a big share of GDP. The voucher privatization alone (there were other methods of privatization) privatized companies worth one-third of Czechoslovak GDP.
And let us not forget the fact that Czechoslovakia was also a currency union. The original idea was that the currency would continue after the separation, but the Czechoslovak koruna outlived Czechoslovakia by a mere six weeks. All of this was taking place at the exact same time the republics were being separated. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Two things made this possible:
The leaders’ insistence that it must happen fast before organized business interests and/or government could mount a successful defence of the status quo.
Then the fact that the two newly-created governments, for all the tension between them, successfully worked together to apply current or previous arrangements in good faith.
Wherever questions or differences arose, they sought an amicable solution where none of the parties would score a win for their side but rather one where future cooperation would be maintained.
Nobody was proposing divorce bills or ridiculous notions of planes not flying, trucks stuck at the border, licenses not being recognized, or one country continuing to have jurisdiction over the other for the next 100 years.
Time and good faith were of the essence. If Czechs and Slovaks were able to separate in six months, surely Westminster and Holyrood will be able find a way to extract one the other in a similar time period?
Credit this article (paraphrased a wee bit here and there) to Martin Pánek, Director of the Prague-based Liberal Institute.
Prince Philip – Salem School – Hitler Youth – Universal Fascism – Dr Hahn and Gordonstoun
During World War I, Prince Max von Baden was chancellor, while the Oxford-trained Dr Kurt Hahn first served as head of the Berlin Foreign Ministry’s intelligence desk, then as a special adviser to the Prince in the Versailles Treaty negotiations.
Von Baden and Hahn went on to set up a school in a wing of Schloss Salem, employing a combination of monasticism and the Nazis’ “strength-through-joy” system.
Hahn, an ardent supporter of Nazi ideals, was part Jewish but embraced the more centrist elements of the Nazi Party. Ownership of the school transferred to Prince Berthold, Margrave of Baden, (Queen Elizabeth’s uncle) in 1932. And, through the influence of his sister Theodora, (Prince Berthold’s wife) 12yo Philip, who had been exiled from Greece following a revolution when he was an infant, arrived at Schloss in the autumn term of 1933. At the time of Prince Philip’s arrival, it was controlled and directed by the Hitler Youth and the Nazi Party, and the curriculum was centered on Nazi “race science”.
In 1933 Hahn’s influential Nazi connections allowed him to leave Germany. He left not long after Prince Philip’s arrival and established a new school in Scotland which he called Gordonstoun.
One of his first pupils was homeless 13yo Philip, who was sent there from Germany in 1934 by his good friend Princess Theodora, Philip’s sister.
More on Hahn
Before the outbreak of war he was regularly consulted by the Foreign Office in London and urged the government to introduce appeasement policies that would appeal to the “centrist” Nazi’s in Germany. MI5 agents in Edinburgh and the Secretary of State for Scotland were convinced in 1940 that Hahn should be interned. But MI5 in London and the Home Office said he was free from suspicion.
But rumours of Hahn’s close ties to the Nazi’s continued to circulate including claims of photographs of Hahn with Hitler and there allegations that during the First World War Hahn “connived in measures calculated to break British morale”. He was also accused of spreading propaganda, blaming the 1919 Treaty of Versailles for the Second World War and advocating the return of colonies to Germany.
Gordonstoun, near Elgin, housed 150 boys and refugee German teachers and inevitably came under suspicion. The school was strategically sited between two RAF aerodromes, ran navigation courses for pupils and had a look-out post over the Moray Firth. In the summer of 1940, the school was evacuated and 5 masters and 11 boys were interned by order of the Home Secretary but not Hahn who was allowed to set up a similar establishment in Wales. Gordonstoun re-opened after the war.
Years after the war had ended confidential records were released by the Scottish Office under an Open Government initiative passed by parliament. They revealed that Hahn, the German-born founder of Gordonstoun, attended by Prince Charles, Andrew and Edward was a suspected Nazi spy.
Hahn was the father figure Philip modelled himself on. He adored Hahn and enthusiastically embraced all of his ideals and was determined his sons would benefit from Hahn’s methods which had been the mainstay of German youth from 1932 when Hahn first promoted the concept to the Nazi’s.
caltonjock 