RACE WAR London University Students Want White Lecturers Out, Ban Newspapers From Campus

[Dennis Olson]

London University Students Want White Lecturers Out, Ban Newspapers From Campus

Home World

By Lukas Mikelionis | 3:15 am, November 18, 2016

Students from City, University of London gathered on Thursday evening to pass motions banning top British newspapers on campus and slammed the university for “reproducing this ideology of whiteness”, pledging to “start discussion around the hiring of lecturers and start asking where are our Black lecturers.”

A motion titled “Opposing Facism & Social Divisiveness in the UK Media” claimed British newspapers The Daily Mail, The Sun, and The Daily Express “actively scapegoat the working classes” and “publish stories that are inherently sexist.”

It added: “freedom of speech should not be used as an excuse to attack the weakest and poorest members of society.”

Despite the university reputedly being the top school for journalism in Britain and many of its students going on to work for the newspapers which were singled out, students passed the motion which resolved that “there is no place for [the mentioned newspapers] on City, University of London campuses or properties.”

After one student asked during the meeting whether there would be any sanctions for possessing any of the newspapers on campus, the students replied: “we would discourage it.”

The motion also pledged to use the university’s resources to combat the papers’ opinion and organize direct action against them.

Wow. City Uni's SU has voted to ban Mail, Sun and Express on campus and now campaigning against them – probably their biggest grad employers pic.twitter.com/uSRQshhRjH

— Scott Campbell (@scottcampbell) November 17, 2016​

Another motion titled “Why Is My Curriculum White?” was passed attacking so-called “white Euro Centricity” in the curriculum and urged the university to combat “the ideology of whiteness” in order to “build genuinely inclusive and progressive places of learning.”

The motion resolved that the Student Union will “take an active role in decolonising our curriculum” and “start discussions around the hiring of lecturers and start asking where are our Black lecturers.”

But some students reported hearing that the motion in the meeting actually read “less white lecturers” rather than talking about increasing diversity among university’s staff.

http://heatst.com/world/london-univ...te-lecturers-out-bans-newspapers-from-campus/

 

[Possible Impact]

The EU is trying to help those poor British 'students' too...



European Union Orders British Press
Not To Report when Terrorists Are Muslims

by Tyler Durden
Nov 18, 2016 2:50 PM
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...-press-not-report-when-terrorists-are-muslims

Submitted by Yves Manou via The Gatestone Institute,

This is the moment where hate speech laws become a greater threat
to democracy and freedom of speech than hate speech itself.

In France, Muslim terrorists are never Muslim terrorists, but "lunatics,"
"maniacs" and "youths".

To attack freedom of the press and freedom of speech is not anti-hate
speech; it is submission.

By following these recommendations, the British government
would place Muslim organizations in a kind of monopoly position:
they would become the only source of information about themselves.
It is the perfect totalitarian information order.

Created to guard against the kind of xenophobic and anti-Semitic
propaganda that gave rise to the Holocaust, national hate speech laws
have increasingly been invoked to criminalize speech that is merely
deemed insulting to one's race, ethnicity, religion, or nationality.

It is disturbing to wonder how long the EU will strongly engage its experts
and influence to cut through existing legal obstacles, in a quest to
criminalize any type of criticism of Islam, and to submit to the values
of jihad.

​

According the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI)
-- part of the Council of Europe -- the British press is to blame for increasing
hate speech and racist violence. On October 4, 2016, the ECRI released
a report dedicated only to Britain. The report said:

some traditional media, particularly tabloids... are responsible for most
of the offensive, discriminatory and provocative terminology.
The Sun, for instance, published an article in April 2015 entitled
"Rescue boats? I'd use gunships to stop migrants", in which the columnist
likened migrants to "cockroaches"...

The Sun newspaper has also published inflammatory anti-Muslim
headlines, such as its front page of 23 November 2015 which read
"1 in 5 Brit Muslims' sympathy for jihadis", along with a picture of
a masked terrorist wielding a knife...

​

The ECRI report establishes a direct causal link between some tough headlines
in British tabloids and the security of the Muslims in the UK. In other words,
the British press is allegedly inciting readers to commit "Islamophobic" acts
against Muslims.

ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under
the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS-related terrorist acts around the
world, fueling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not
only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom,
but also for their safety.

​

ECRI is basing its report on a recent study from Matthew Feldman, Professor at
Teesside University. This study compiled anti-Muslim incidents before and after
terrorist's attacks.

In the seven days prior to the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, where 12
people were killed, there were 12 reported (anti Muslim) incidents, but in
the seven days following, there were 45. This pattern was similar in
relation to the terror attacks in Sydney, in December and Copenhagen,
in February.
​

So, according to the ECRI and scholars of Teesside University, when Muslim jihadists
murder people and the press reports that killers are Muslims, the press, and not
Islamists, is encouraging "Islamophobic incidents" in Britain. According to ECRI Chair
Christian Ahlund, "It is no coincidence that racist violence is on the rise in the UK
at the same time as we see worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in
the newspapers, online and even among politicians."

For the ECRI, the biggest problem is:

"... where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of
terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash
against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the
perpetrators' motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative
explanations."

​

The report does not explain what could be "alternative explanations." But we can find
examples in French press: when a Muslim attacks a soldier and tries to take his gun,
he is not an Islamist terrorist, but a "lunatic." Such attacks by "lunatics" are very
common in France.

The French press downplays attacks by deciding not to name Muslim
perpetrators: incriminating a "Mohamed" could, in the minds of French
journalists, incite retaliations against Muslims. In another example,
Muslim gangs cannot be connected to any form of violence, so they
become "youths." In France, Muslim terrorists are never Muslim terrorists,
but "lunatics", "maniacs" and "youths."

But that is France. In Britain, tabloids are not so polite, and they understand perfectly
the intentions of the ECRI report: to ban the word "Muslim" when it is associated
with "violence or terrorism."


The ECRI Report Marks a U-Turn in Free Speech

This is the moment where hate speech laws become a greater threat to democracy
and freedom of speech than the hate speech itself. Prohibiting journalists from
naming "Islamic terrorism," and encouraging them to hide the association of Muslims
with terrorism, is an attempt to misrepresent the truth in the same way the former
Soviet Union censored the truth.

Taking advantage of some real racist articles in tabloids -- not many, because
not many are quoted in the report -- to attack freedom of the press and freedom
of speech is not anti-hate speech; it is submission.

The proof of submission lies in ECRI's recommendations to the British government:

"establish an independent press regulator";

"rigorous training for journalists to ensure better compliance with ethical
standards";

"review the provisions on incitement to hatred with a view to making them
more effective and usable";

"establish a real dialogue with Muslims in order to combat Islamophobia.
They should consult them on all policies which could affect Muslims";

amending the Editor's Code of Practice to ensure that members of groups
can submit complaints as victims against biased or prejudicial reporting
concerning their community"

​

By following these recommendations, the British government would place
Muslim organizations in a kind of monopoly position: they would become
the only source of information about themselves. It is the perfect totalitarian
information order. If a breach of that kind would open in the future, no doubt
all the lobbies would rush into the breach: political parties, Protestants,
Catholics, Jews, multinationals, everyone.


The British government did not fall into the trap, and firmly rebuffed
ECRI's demands. It told the European council body:

"The Government is committed to a free and open press and does not
interfere with what the press does and does not publish, as long as
the press abides by the law."

​

In Great Britain, and in all countries of European Union, anti-hate laws already exist.
Created to guard against the kind of xenophobic and anti-Semitic propaganda that
gave rise to the Holocaust, national hate speech laws have increasingly been invoked
to criminalize speech that is merely deemed insulting to one's race, ethnicity, religion,
or nationality.

These laws have also been invoked often by Islamists to sue against anti-Islamist
speech (cartoons of Muhammad, blasphemy against Islam, etc.) as manifestations
of "racism" -- fortunately with little success. Most court cases that Islamists
have initiated have failed because Islam is not a race.

Agnes Callamard, expert on human rights, writes in reference to the United Nations
Charter:

"ARTICLE 19 recognises that reasonable restrictions on freedom of
expression may be necessary or legitimate to prevent advocacy of hatred
based on nationality, race, religion that constitutes incitement to
discrimination, hostility or violence. The organisation does not extend
such legitimate restrictions to offensive and blasphemous expressions."

​

It is disturbing to wonder how long the EU will strongly engage its experts
and influence to cut through existing legal obstacles, in a quest to
criminalize any type of criticism of Islam, and to submit to the values of jihad.

 

[LightEcho]

These kinds of motions don't happen spontaneously. They are nurtured by devils and then led by instigators.

 

[Buick Electra]

"We want reality out of our sight NOW!!! Just leave us to live in our own La-La-Land!"

 

[Adino]

'I say we take off and nuke the whole site from orbit......its the only way to be sure'

 

[Richard]

Cut taxpayers funding..........of whom overwhelming are the who are white....

yeah all lecturers should be non-white how racist is this

all of this is probably crap and I'm rising to the bait

no point in arguing, get it off your chest.......

 

[mzkitty]

Cut taxpayers funding..........of whom overwhelming are the who are white....

They will kick white people in the face all over the world, all the while taking their money. England USED to be white.

 

[Richard]

They will kick white people in the face all over the world, all the while taking their money. England USED to be white.

98% percent of students are white in the UK..........

 

[mzkitty]

98% percent of students are white in the UK..........

Obviously in their hearts they are not white anymore.

 

[Terriannie]

I don't know why the parents don't take away the tuition funds to support these students who aren't "students" but anarchists?

Common sense and actual studying is being replaced with STUPIDITY in the most dangerous of agendas and this action, immediately discredits that "college" from being a COLLEGE!

As far as the EU goes, since when do they STILL control England after Brexit?

 

[Richard]

I don't know why the parents don't take away the tuition funds to support these students who aren't "students" but anarchists?

Common sense and actual studying is being replaced with STUPIDITY in the most dangerous of agendas and this action, immediately discredits that "college" from being a COLLEGE!

As far as the EU goes, since when do they STILL control England after Brexit?

Brexit has not happened yet.......

 

[Dozdoats]

Better to just export the so-called university, its faculty an all its students.

Kenya should be nice for them.

 

[Richard]

Better to just export the so-called university, its faculty an all its students.

Kenya should be nice for them.

London University has long been Marxist crap......in fact ALL British redbrick universities should be non-politicised and dedicated only to learning, but no leftist would support that................

 

[Richard]

OK this is my view 80% of the white or other races students at said university are incapable of passing degrees, all of them should be failed............

 

[Terriannie]

Brexit has not happened yet.......

That must be so frustrating for them!! So close, yet so far and until they break away, the EU has control?

Methinks the wrong people are protesting.

 

[Garryowen]

Better to just export the so-called university, its faculty an all its students.

Kenya should be nice for them.

No, Kenya doesn't need them. The Kenyan president stood up the Obama when he tried to get them to approve homosexual behavior.

 

[Orion Commander]

Another motion titled “Why Is My Curriculum White?” was passed attacking so-called “white Euro Centricity” in the curriculum and urged the university to combat “the ideology of whiteness” in order to “build genuinely inclusive and progressive places of learning.”

Do you suppose there is a lot of white ideology in merry old England because that's traditionally where white people have lived for millennia?

 

[ainitfunny]

They are RENOUNCING TRUTH and branding truth, along with white people as "the enemy", because the truth does not defend, justify, or flatter them.
That means they have posited GOD, who is TRUTH, as their enemy, which not an enviable, safe, or winning side to be on.

They say it is "hate speech" and seek to forbid it when they really mean TRUTH, because they cannot defeat truth with their reasoning or arguments!

If they (Muslims) think it is so difficult living in a land of white people, God, and Truth, just imagine the HELL they will have created when there are no more white people (to support them), No more God to hear, help, heal, forgive and protect them from evil, No more legal standing for Truth to defend and decide between them or against injustice, and No (white, western, free, democratic) place left to run to, in order to escape as refugees from the Hell they themselves create around themselves, wherever they go.

Those (white) people whose FEAR of the invaders is so mind numbing that all they can think to do is parrot whatever lies the invaders and "progressive" leftists tell them to believe, think and say will share the historic fate that cowardly collaborators, Quislings, and traitors have Globally, throughout all history, nations and cultures have met.
Muslims have no hesitation cutting off the head of those who SUPPORTED AND DEFENDED THEM, whom they see as cowardly traitors (to their own people, nation and God ) !

 

[Now-Later]

Any time blacks control anything they eventually destroy it, look around
If they get rid of the whites how will they ever learn anything