Friday, February 19, 2021
Bristol University sociology professor who quit Labour party amid anti-Semitism row calls for an 'end' of Zionism in online debate - sparking calls for him to be sacked
This is the Leftist "underdog" obsession at work. Sociology is full of far Leftists and sympathy for Palestine can lead them into the usual Leftist truth denial
A Bristol University professor called for the 'end of Zionism' and said Israel is 'trying to exert its will all over the world' during an astonishing Zoom tirade that sparked calls for him to be sacked.
Professor David Miller, who was suspended from Labour last year and later quit after an antisemitism row sparked by his claims that Sir Keir Starmer had taken 'Zionist' money, made the comments at an online campaign event.
The sociology lecturer was accused of 'Soviet-style antisemitism' and 'proselytising hatred towards Jews' with his assertion that there is a 'global Zionist conspiracy against the left'.
In the video, filmed on Saturday, he also complained about being 'attacked and complained about' by Bristol University's Jewish Society and the Union of Jewish Students.
Professor David Miller, who was suspended from Labour last year after accusing its leader Sir Keir Starmer of taking 'Zionist' money, made the comments at an online campaign event +4
Professor David Miller, who was suspended from Labour last year after accusing its leader Sir Keir Starmer of taking 'Zionist' money, made the comments at an online campaign event
Professor Miller, speaking to an online audience on the weekend, said: 'This is an all-out onslaught by the Israeli government on the left globally.
How conspiracy theorist was suspended from Labour for claims Keir Starmer was swayed by 'Zionist money'
Bristol University lecturer David Miller was suspended from Labour last year after he claimed Sir Keir Starmer did not want to conduct a proper probe into a leaked antisemitism report because he was 'he was in receipt of money from the Zionist movement'.
The report slamming the party's handling of antisemitism complaints under Jeremy Corbyn was leaked to the media prior to being submitted to an inquiry by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
In a YouTube video, Professor Miller said: “We are obviously not going to get a proper investigation of this by Comrade Starmer or by Lisa Nandy – who have been in receipt of money from the Zionist movement, from Trevor Chinn.
“And connections between the Zionist movement and the current leadership of Labour Party – it’s not the only people they have connections with.
“Many other super rich people have given them money, hedge fund owners and the like – but a significant element of support has come from the Zionist movement.”
He was suspended from Labour and later quit.
'It's not just something that's happened in Britain. It's also happened in France and Germany before it got to the UK, and also in the US.
'The Labour Party is a mere detail in this attempt by Israelis to impose their will all over the world.
'It's not enough to say Zionism is racism, Israel is a settler colonial society...
'The aim of this is not only to say things but to end settler colonialism in Palestine, to end Zionism as a functioning ideology of the word.'
The comments - which were made at a Campaign for Free Speech event on Saturday - immediately provoked an outcry.
'This is Soviet antisemitism, the assertion that there's a global Zionist conspiracy against the left,' one Twitter user wrote.
David Glover Roberts tweeted: 'Racism! This person is proselytising hatred towards Jews. If his employer has any moral fibre, they will fire him immediately.
'If they fail to fire him, then this becomes an institution profiting on racism.'
Meanwhile, a third Twitter user wrote: 'This would not be out of place in a 1930 antisemites playbook. It's utterly abhorrent - is this hatred spread in your name?'
Professor Miller also went on to complain about students who had complained to Bristol University about his comments, the Jewish Chronicle reported.
'Those kind of complaints are being made over the country – one against me in Bristol and there's been one made in Warwick, again by UJS [university Jewish society] and several others.
'We will continue to see this drive to stop anyone speaking out against Palestine or having any critical account of Zionism as racism, as settler colonialism.…'
In 2019, he was criticised by an antisemitism charity after giving a lecture to students which identified the 'Zionist movement (parts of)' as one of the 'five pillars' of Islamophobia.
A University of Bristol spokesman said: 'We are committed to making our University an inclusive place for all students. We have been working closely with Jewish students to understand their specific concerns and worries.
'A key outcome from these discussions was the adoption, in full, of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism.
'We also seek at all times to abide by both our Free Speech Policy and our Public Sector Equality Duties. Specifically, we are steadfast in our commitment to freedom of speech and to the rights of all our students and staff to discuss difficult and sensitive topics.'
********************************
Historic Christian university drops Crusader mascot due to 'negative connotation'
Valparaiso University, an historic Christian institution in Valparaiso, Indiana, is dropping its Christian "Crusader" mascot out of concerns that retaining it might promote violence and other undesirable associations.
The school finalized the decision this week "after what has been a decades-long debate that has intensified during the past several years," the university said in a blog post.
"The negative connotation and violence associated with the Crusader imagery are not reflective of Valpo’s mission and values, which promote a welcoming and inclusive community,” school Interim President Colette Irwin-Knott said of the decision.
The school "will retire its Crusader imagery and logos over the coming months, while simultaneously forming a committee to engage the campus community in considering and adopting a new mascot," the blog post announced.
Referring to the decision—supported by resolutions from the faculty and student senates—Student Body President Kaitlyn Steinhiser said: “The Student Senate feels that the purpose of a school mascot is for school spirit and to represent Valpo values, and the Crusader does not do that effectively.”
Black female civil servant was paid £52,000 more than white male colleague for same job because Home Office was concerned about 'reputational damage'
A senior civil servant has accused the Government of seeking to avoid 'reputational damage' by paying a black female colleague £52,000 more than him.
Matthew Parr is suing the Home Office for sex and race discrimination after discovering he was earning less than his counterpart for doing the same job.
He claims that being a white man meant he was paid a £133,983 salary, plus £7,904 living allowance, while Wendy Williams took home £185,000.
Both are one of five HM Inspectors of Constabulary (HMIs) who act as watchdogs for the UK's police forces.
Mr Parr, a former rear admiral, was appointed in 2016 during Theresa May's tenure as Home Secretary when Whitehall was driving down the salaries of top officials.
An employment tribunal heard that at the time of Ms Williams' appointment 15 months earlier, the Treasury was also trying to reduce pay packets.
But it heard that mandarins agreed she would be paid the top £185,000 salary as awarding her less than existing HMIs could open the Government up to a discrimination challenge.
Mr Parr said in a witness statement: 'Documents disclosed by the Respondent make clear that Wendy Williams was paid the top of the band then in force, because of concern that to pay her less than her fellow HMIs presented the Government with a risk of legal challenge on the grounds of discrimination and of reputational damage.'
He claims his 'race and sex had a clear influence' on the decision to pay him the substantially less £133,983 when he came into post.
The Government denies sex and race discrimination and maintains that plans to lower salaries were always going to come into force regardless of the person who took the position.
Mr Parr, is responsible for police forces in London, Bedfordshire, Northern Ireland, the National Crime Agency, the Counter Terrorism Policing Network, national forces such as British Transport Police and forces in Overseas Territories.
He also looks after the London Fire Brigade and five other services, while Ms Williams oversees forces in Wales and the west of England.
Mr Parr said it was 'a question of fairness' that he should be paid the same as Ms Williams.
He told the Central London Employment Tribunal said: 'The Respondent, upon my appointment, and after an appeal, has refused to extend to me the same favourable treatment.
'I am a white man. I recognise that I am not the typical claimant to the Employment Tribunal in cases of equal pay and discrimination.
'I also recognise that I am paid a relatively high salary. Indeed, were all HMIs to be paid the salary currently paid to me I would be entirely satisfied.
'This is, for me, principally a question of fairness. 'I have been a public servant for more than 35 years and have, until now, worked in organisations determined to treat people equitably.
'But the Respondent has a different approach: it is fundamentally unfair to pay people wildly different amounts for doing what is, by any measure, identical work.
'I understand that the Respondent has a responsibility for prudent stewardship of public money.
'The consistent and long-term aim of the Respondent, in concert with HM Treasury, has been to reduce the pay of HMIs; I do not assert that this is an unreasonable or illegitimate aim.
'But the means by which the Respondent has attempted to drive down pay have been ham-fisted and badly thought through; they have involved treating people unfairly and, I assert in this claim, unlawfully.
'They have involved defending some indefensible positions, and, on occasion, behaviour which reflects badly on some senior people.'
The tribunal was told that in January 2016 Ms May wrote to Sir Thomas Winsor HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary to introduce a scale of £134,000-£191,000 with 'an explicit presumption that any increase beyond the bottom has a considered justification'.
A few weeks later Mark Sedwill, the permanent secretary at the Home Office, now Sir Mark, wrote to Sir Nicholas Macpherson, his counterpart at the Treasury, who now sits in the house of Lords as Baron Macpherson of Earl's Court, proposing the £134,000-£191,000 scale.
The tribunal was told that the letter acknowledged that during Wendy Williams' appointment the Home Office was under pressure from the Treasury to apply downward pressure on salaries.
The Treasury had advised that appointments should be made on a scale of £165,000-£186,000 and that a salary at the lower end of the scale should be negotiated.
Ms Williams was appointed at the top of the range because, according to the letter: 'The Home Office was concerned that to pay her less than her fellow HMIs presented the government with a risk of a legal challenge on the grounds of discrimination.'
At the request of Ms Williams and the Home Office, the tribunal had asked to keep details of her pay negotiations secret - but the tribunal refused, saying the salaries were a matter of public record and the machinations behind them should also be public.
Current Home Secretary Priti Patel took the case to an Employment Appeal Tribunal to try to get the decision overturned. But her case was rejected by Mr Justice Griffiths on the grounds of open justice.
The full tribunal hearing heard that Mr Parr only accepted the pay in June 2016 because he was concerned the Brexit referendum would cause government upheaval and disruption to the hiring process.
It was only when he entered the position that he became aware of discrimination, he alleges, and that the pay of a Deputy Assistant Commissioner in the Metropolitan Police was £1,447 higher than his salary including allowances despite his role being responsible for inspecting many forces.
Mr Parr claims that, from May 2014, the Treasury advised Ms May to lower salaries for pay packets of HMIs. Appointment terms are between three to five years and can be re-appointed.
As Ms Williams' previous pay as a high-ranking official in the Crown Prosecution Service was £107,000, it was first considered that her pay as an HMI would be £165,000 - which she appeared to be happy with according to tribunal evidence.
Sir Thomas Winsor, Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary, said at the tribunal that this pay was 'unjustifiable' considering a white man had been appointed at £185,791 in a similar position only six months earlier.
The judge is expected to announce his verdict in a few weeks.
*************************************
Australia: Governor General's staff to be asked to do woke 'privilege walk' so they can identify how entitled they are
Encouraging humility in people is fine and dandy. It's an important part of Christian teachings. But centering it on race is obnoxious. It is our personal characteristics we need to feel humble about. Making us feel humble about our race is a distraction. Like people, races can have both their good and their bad sides but no individual is responsible for either
It seems like only yesterday that Leftists were loudly condemning racism. Now they seem determined to bring it back. Condemning a person solely because of his/her skin colour was always stupid and obnoxious and it still is, whether the colour is black, white or brindle
The bureaucrats have been signed up to do bizarre activity which may require them to identify how privileged they are, but it has been criticised by previous participants as being too personal.
The exercise will require staff to step forward or backwards depending on their answers to prompts such as whether their parents have been arrested or addicted to drugs.
The training is run by Charles Sturt University (CSU), with over 330 staff at the Australian institute completing the exercise in 2019 and offering mixed feedback, reported The Daily Telegraph.
One participant remarked 'facilitators need to acknowledge some people may find the issues raised in the privilege walk (and open disclosure) too personal'.
Another said 'I think the walk of privilege needs more work - questions should be contextualised a little more'.
Some staff members described it as 'confronting but valuable', 'very effective', and 'interesting and revealing'.
In variations of the activity, attendees have been asked whether parents told them they were 'beautiful, smart, or successful', if they feel comfortable with others knowing their sexuality or if they worry about crime or drugs in their neighbourhood.
Questions around family may include whether parents have been incarcerated, been addicted to drugs or alcohol or are still married.
The exercise was developed from a 1998 essay by academic Peggy McIntosh titled 'White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack'.
The article used a backpack full of tools and maps as a metaphor for the advantages Ms McIntosh said white people have over others.
Psychologist Michael Mascolo wrote in Psychology Today that the activity can backfire and make people at the front of the 'privilege line' feel defensive.
He said while some people 'experience an enhanced awareness and appreciation of how they have been advantaged' others are offended and feel 'personally blamed'.
The exercise is one component of unconscious bias and inclusivity training run by CSU.
A spokesperson from the Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General told The Daily Telegraph the 'training is not mandatory.'
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com TONGUE-TIED)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://john-ray.blogspot.com (FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)
*****************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment