“The List” Artwork of dead refugees and migrants disappeared or destroyed

Earlier versions of The List have been posted in other locations including Amsterdam. pic from the Guardian

An artwork featuring a list of the 34,361 refugees and migrants who have lost their lives trying to reach Europe has disappeared or been destroyed in Liverpool.

The List was created for World Refugee Day.  Compiled and updated each year by United for Intercultural Action – an anti-discrimination network of more than 560 organisations across Europe – The List traces information relating to the deaths of 34,361 refugees and migrants who have lost their lives within or on the borders of Europe since 1993.

Since 2007, in collaboration with art workers and institutions, Istanbul-based artist Banu Cennetoğlu has produced up-to-date and translated versions of The List using public spaces such as billboards, transport networks and newspapers.

The List was posted on hoardings outside a building site in Liverpool’s Chinatown as part of Liverpool Biennial art festival.  But now it has disappeared!  On Wednesday the festival tweeted this message:

The List was posted on hoardings on Great George Street with the permission of the site owners.  The city council has stated that it was not removed by its workers, whether deliberately or by accident – it had been suggested that council workers might have taken it down, misidentified as illegally fly-posted.  The council and the developers who own the site have been examining CCTV for clues as to who removed it on Sunday.

What is the List?

Since 1993, activists at the network United for Intercultural Action have made a record of every reported instance in which someone has died trying to migrate into Europe. In all, 61 deaths were recorded in 1993; 3,915 were recorded in 2017.

What sources did they use?

The small team, based in the Netherlands, drew on reports in the local, national and international press, as well as NGO records. Though the vast majority of people died during en route for Europe – most of them at sea – the List also points out that hundreds died in custody, and hundreds more took their own lives. Most deaths recorded on the List are anonymous.

How many deaths have been recorded?

As of 5 May 2018, the figure stood at 34,361. But activists acknowledge that the List is neither definitive nor comprehensive. The real number is likely to be far higher, as many thousands of people will have died without trace during sea and land journeys over the years.

[from the Guardian]

United for Intercultural Action, faced with a lack of official data, gathered newspaper articles, NGO records and coastguard reports to collect details of the deaths of migrants travelling to Europe since the early 1990s.  While most of the deaths happened at sea, more than 1000 happened in detention blocks, asylum units and town centres.  400 died at their own hand, over 600 violently killed by someone else. Cause of death is described quite graphically: such as “tortured by Turkish border guards near Iskenderun (TR) while trying to cross Syrian-Turkish border” and “drowned, bodies found in advanced state of decomposition 20 miles north of Zurawa LY)”.

In a statement the Liverpool Biennial said: “It is timely and important to make The List public during a global refugee crisis. We were dismayed to see it had been removed on Saturday night and would like to know why. The List has been met with critical acclaim and we are doing everything we can to reinstate it.”

To help assimilate The List across the internet, I have uploaded a pdf format copy of The list here. (The Guardian are also hosting a copy here – they’ve got a lot more available bandwidth than me, so it’d only be fair to try them first, but I’m here as a back-up if required!  Happy to help!)  Feel free to reproduce this link as widely as possible.  Please mention ihatehate.wordpress.com and www.unitedagainstracism.org.

2 days to save the internet!!

On 5 July, the European Parliament is voting on a copyright directive that, if passed, threatens the existence of the internet as we know it.  This isn’t hyperbole:

• It will force online platforms to vet uploaded content for copyright violations.  Sites such as Youtube are able to automate this work, which results in a lot of false positives.  Smaller platforms might have to sort uploads by hand, which would be impossible for most sites
• Artists and others who remix content, share it or create parodies of others’ material will be criminalised by this directive
• Mining of text and data-sets will be legal only for scientific research institutions; other people, such as journalists, librarians and independent scientists will no longer be allowed to data-mine, regardless of their legitimate interest

These are only a few of the harmful effects of the copyright directive.  We all need to protest this bill as it threatens the open internet, not only in Europe but world-wide.  Changecopyright.org are helping us oppose the directive, by giving us all free telephone calls, to call the European Parliament and tell them to vote against Article 13.  They even provide callers with a script, if you don’t know what to say.  Go to changecopyright.org for information.  And don’t delay: the European Parliament votes on this on 5 July!!

Should Boris Johnson succeed Cameron as prime minister?

Since David Cameron resigned as prime minister after the Brexit vote, Boris Johnson is one of the favourites to replace him.  Some people say “Not Boris!  He’s a liar!”  And indeed he is a bullshitter of great renown.  Here are some of his lies:

“As Mayor of London he promised to totally eradicate rough sleeping by 2012; it doubled under his leadership. His 2008 manifesto promised there would be manned ticket offices at every station; he closed all of London’s ticket offices. He aimed to reduce transport fares; they increased by 4.2 per cent.”

But why should this disqualify him?  All politicians are liars (I think… name one high-ranking politician who has never lied and I will accuse you of fibbing…)

I can think of other reasons why he shouldn’t be prime minister.  If he does turn out to be a serious contender, I might list some of these to you.  But for now: stop flapping!

 

Gove: “You’re a liar, Boris!”
Johnson: “Aren’t we all…?”

Britain First a terrorist organization? (No.)

After the shocking murder of Labour MP Jo Cox, shot to death in the street outside her constituency office in  Birstall, people are beginning to wonder: is Britain First a terrorist organization?

Several witnesses to the murder have confirmed that the killer, a 52 year old man named locally as Tommy Mair, shouted “Britain First!” as he slew her.  According to The Guardian, Graeme Howard, 38, who lives in nearby Bond Street, told the Guardian he heard the man shout “Britain first” before the shooting and during the arrest.  A second eyewitness, Clarke Rothwell, claimed that the man shouted “Britain First, Britain First.”

Tommy Mair: allegedly shouted “Britain First” while murdering MP

Aamir Tahir, of the Dry Clean Centre, said the gunman was heard shouting “Britain first”.

He said: “The lady I work with heard two loud bangs but I wasn’t there, I was stuck in traffic at the time. I wish I was there because I would have tried to stop him.”

And, perhaps the most damning allegation:

Witness Daniel Blyth, 38, a company director from the town, told the Yorkshire Post newspaper that the assault was “unusual”. He added: “I saw seven police cars racing up Leeds Road towards Morley. They were unmarked BMWs,” he said.

“There are two helicopters flying overhead. It all seems very dramatic. I have heard that two people have been shot but I’m not who are why. It’s all very unusual for Birstall.”

So, was “Tommy Mair’s”attack a Britain First plot?  Britain First, a far-right political party campaigning for Britain to leave the EU, deny this, saying the reports were “pure hearsay”. It described the attack as a “despicable crime” and added: “We are nothing to do with it.”(“though they would say that, wouldn’t they,” ha ha bonk).  Maybe “Mair” was pissed off about the chance that Britain may vote to stay in the EU… but that still makes “Britain First!” an odd choice of warcry.  Incidentally, Jo Cox was pro-Europe.

The suspect in the MP’s death is believed to have had long-term links to the Springbok Club, a hard-right group that has campaigned against the EU.

He also purchased a gun-making manual from a far-right neo-Nazi group, new documents suggest.

So is Britain First a terrorist organization that should be proscribed, like the Islamist groups that have preached jihad against the West?  Probably not.  But if I shouted “Allahu Akbar!” while shooting politicians, I’m sure the security services would be looking for any link, no matter how tenuous, between me and ISIL etc.

Just let me make it clear: I’m not claiming that Britain First is a terrorist group, nor that there’s any link between this murderer and the organization.  I’m just asking questions.  Which is one of the rights I get living in democratic Europe rather than Syria or the USA.  So don’t get mad at me.  I didn’t invent these stupid bastards.

 

 

Who cares who is sending Europe referendum propaganda to whom?

There’s been some moaning recently that the government is sending pro-European leaflets to potential referendum voters.  And I understand that it’s not on that the government is spending £9 million of our taxes on this propaganda.

But we need to think more clearly about this for a moment.  The official government position is that espoused by prime minister David Cameron: although individual Tories are free to campaign however their conscience or shadowy paymasters tell them to, the official party line is that Britain should remain in the EU.  So isn’t it okay for the government to spend money telling us what it thinks?

Strangely, I have received no pro-European leaflets in the post.  Whereas I have so far been sent two leaflets telling me NO!  We’re BETTER OFF OUT!!  One bore an awful photo of Angela Merkel, and posed the interesting (yawn) message:

 

Q: What EU concessions will David Cameron win for Britain?
A: Whatever Angela Merkel lets him have.

HAHAHA!!!  Oh no, hold on – that wasn’t a joke, it was a serious political message.  Honestly, it’s hard to tell with some of these people.  Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson… who’s got his hand up whose bottom?  Anyway, about the concessions thing: that could be a really good point, if Cameron was still doing the rounds, asking other EU leaders what they’ll let him have.  But he isn’t asking Merkel, or any other European leaders, for concessions.  He’s already done that, achieved what he considers to be good concessions, and that’s what he’s bringing to us to vote for in the referendum.  And I’ll be pleased to receive some info on that, as I haven’t received my £9 million leaflet yet.

Nigel Farage, nut-job and venerable leader of Ukip

This nasty anti-Merkel leaflet was paid for by something called “Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy Group in the European Parliament”, “Sovereign Draw (A sovereign draw for a sovereign nation)” and UKIP.  Of those groups, the only one I’ve heard of is UKIP.  My guess would be that the others (with websites at efddgroup.eu and sovereigndraw.co.uk) are a small group of right-wing anti-Europe parties that (like UKIP) have no real reason to be in the European Parliament except to filibuster and waste time (so much for direct democracy, huh?) and a bunch of rich businessmen who want out of the EU so they can deal with sweatshop, slave-labour type countries that the EU want nothing to do with because of their hatred of human and workers’ rights.  They say they will “restore sovereignty to the UK Parliament” (which is where it is, has always been, and always will be), will “save the British people £55 million a day” (which sounds quite good, if a little surprising – I had no idea that I would be a multi-millionaire if Britain wasn’t in the EU) and “make sure we never join the disastrous Euro (which is a complete red herring – no one has any intention to get Britain into the Euro; it’s like saying “Vote for me and I won’t make you eat dog turds”).  “SAY NO, BELIEVE IN BRITAIN” they go on (and on and on); “Join the winning team SIGN UP TO SAY NO” – and a website (cos they’re really tech-savvy) http://www.saynotoeu.com – to add to efddgroup.eu, ukip.org and sovereigndraw.co.uk.  They seem to own most of the internet; and their backers probably do own a sizable chunk of the infrastructure.  Cos these one-minute-they’re-noty-there-then-suddenly-out-of-nowhere-puff-there-they-are groups are made up largely of businessmen who vomit when they hear the word “ethical” and people who say stuff like “I’m not racist but my town has been invaded by Romanian Poles who’ve stolen all the jobs and claim billions of pounds in benefits too!”  In other words, nazis and idiots.

Vote “Leave” or Boris will go home and take his ball with him!

The other leaflet is from the “Better Off Out” group. They claim “Your household could be £933 per year better off if the UK left the European Union” – not quite as good as the UKIP-Nazi-Idiot Alliance’s promise of “£55 million a day”.  And that’s the only “fact” on their leaflet – the only reason they think we’d be better off out of the EU.  But they’re awfully tech-savvy too, as everyone knows the “young voters” will only abandon their sofas and box-sets of Game Of Thrones if there’s tech-savviness involved.  Better Off Out say “You can follow us on Facebook at ‘Better Off Out’ or on Twitter ‘@BetterOffOut'” (if you feel the desperate urge to get even more anti-European propaganda spam thrown at you). “Better Off Out” is apparently promoted by “Better Off Out of HMS President (1918)”, whatever that is… I didn’t know were in HMS President (1918) in the first place…  Fortunately you can send them email at rupert@tfa.net and regular hate mail to:

 

Rupert Matthews
Better Off Out
HMS President (1918)
Victoria Embankment
London EC4Y 0HJ

Seriously though, don’t send hate mail or spam to Rupert – that’d be naughty, and I would never condone naughtiness in any way.

Oh yes, my point.  Cos there is a point to this blog post.  It’ll be nice to get some pro-EU propaganda.  You know, a varied diet and all that.  Who cares if it’s paid for with our taxes?  It’s only £9 million FFS!  We’re gonna be spending £100 zillion on Trident missiles that we will never use, so the bill for these leaflets is a mere drop in the ocean.

“Stop and search” powers are illegal, rules European Court of Human Rights

It’s a victory for freedom! The European Court of human Rights ruled today that the British police’s powers to stop and search people whenever they feel like it are illegal.

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 gives police the power to stop and search people in “designated areas” without needing any grounds for suspicion. Police officers have been using these powers routinely to harrass photographers all over Britain, often citing the possibility that the photographer might be a terrorist on a reconnaisance mission. You might think that’s quite reasonable – until you realise that officers have repeatedly stopped and searched professional photographers covering demonstrations and tourists caught taking pictures of tourist attractions like Westminster Abbey and Trafalgar Square. And countless amateur photographers have been detained and harrassed thanks to the far-reaching powers.

So, now these powers have been ruled unlawful, I suppose the government will immediately order the police to stop using them, and will redraft the Terrorism Act as a matter of urgency. Right? Well, actually no. The government intends to appeal against the ruling. And you can be damn sure that in the meantime the police will continue to use and abuse their illegal powers. This despite the fact that the Court said the stop and search powers amounted to a violation of article eight of the European Convention on human Rights – the right to respect for private and family life. The Court recognised that the power to search a person’s clothing and belongings in public included an element of humiliation and embarrassment which was a clear interference with the right to privacy. And they expressed concern over the arbitrary nature of the powers, under which a police officer needs to offer no justification for his decision to detain and search anyone he feels like harassing. So the UK government is basically saying: “We don’t care that our agents are detaining and humiliating innocent people as a matter of routine. We will continue to encourage our agents to abuse members of the public for as long as we can get away with it.”

I think that the judges were especially concerned that the powers are being used against demonstrators who are clearly not terrorists, and to block the work of journalists trying to cover demonstrations. The case was brought by Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton, who were stopped by police while their way to a demonstration outside the annual arms fair at the Excel centre, in London’s Docklands, in September 2003. Gillan was stopped and detained for 20 minutes without good cause; Quinton, a journalist, was ordered to stop filming the protest even though she had shown her press card to officers. How can these police actions be justified? Remember, the police were using powers granted to them by the Terrorism Act, but there was no suggestion that Gillan or Quinton were in any way involved in terrorism. This is a clear example of the police abusing their powers. And there is also clear evidence that the police are going to continue abusing their powers, under government orders, for as long as they can get away with it.

The police are breaking the law. The police are the criminals. Let’s fight crime!

_gos=’c4.gostats.com’;_goa=354450;
_got=2;_goi=2;_goz=0;_gol=’Free hit counter’;_GoStatsRun();

Free hit counter