‘Structural sexual abuse in Dutch Roman Catholic Church’

This video says about itself:

Catholic Church’s systematic abuse cover up in USA

16 November 2014

The Pope [John Paul II] played a leading role in a systematic cover-up of child sex abuse by Roman Catholic priests.

Translated from Dutch NOS TV:

24 October 2016

The [Dutch] Roman Catholic Church has paid victims of abuse cases so far nearly thirty million euros in damages, reports daily De Limburger.

A complaints committee that investigates the abuse in the Catholic Church received 3678 reports of abuse. …

Certainly three hundred people have had to deal with exceptionally serious abuse. They will be compensated up to 100,000 euros.

Structural abuse

Stevens, chairman of the complaints committee, says in De Limburger that most provincial superiors of religious orders will pay the compensation. “Two or three provincial superiors do not want to pay. We are still working on a solution.”

According to Stevens one may speak of structural abuse in the Church. “Not all church officials have done wrong. But the fact that there are so many perpetrators does justify to speak of structural abuse at that time.”

Holocaust-denying pseudo-historian Irving, new film

This video says about itself:

DENIAL Official Trailer (2016) Rachel Weisz, Andrew Scott Movie

Based on the acclaimed book “History on Trial: My Day in Court with a Holocaust Denier,” DENIAL recounts Deborah E. Lipstadt‘s (Academy Award winner Rachel Weisz) legal battle for historical truth against David Irving (Cannes Award winner Timothy Spall), who accused her of libel when she declared him a Holocaust denier.

In the English legal system, the burden of proof is on the accused, therefore it was up to Lipstadt and her legal team to prove the essential truth that the Holocaust occurred. Also starring two-time Academy Award nominee Tom Wilkinson, the film is directed by Emmy Award winner Mick Jackson (“Temple Grandin”) and adapted for the screen by BAFTA and Academy Award nominated writer David Hare (THE READER). Producers are Gary Foster and Russ Krasnoff.

Release Date: Coming Soon
Genre: Biography, Drama, History
Director: Mick Jackson
Writers: David Hare (screenplay), Deborah Lipstadt (book)
Stars: Rachel Weisz, Andrew Scott, Timothy Spall, Tom Wilkinson, Mark Gatiss

From daily The Guardian in Britain, 3 February 2000:

Mr Rampton, questioning Mr Irving on his various “utterances both in public and private on the subject of Jews, blacks etc”, accused him of teaching his daughter aged nine months a “racist ditty” when he took her out for a walk.

The QC read out a September 1994 extract from Mr Irving’s personal diaries in which the historian referred to a poem he had sung to his daughter when “half-breed children” were wheeled past:

“I am a Baby Aryan,

“Not Jewish or Sectarian.

“I have no plans to marry-an

Ape or Rastafarian.”

By Joanne Laurier in the USA:

Denial and the assault on historical truth

22 October 2016

Directed by Mick Jackson; screenplay by David Hare, based on Deborah Lipstadt’s History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving

British-born filmmaker Mick Jackson’s new movie, Denial, is based on the book by US academic and author Deborah Lipstadt, History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving. The 2005 work chronicles the struggle pursued by Lipstadt and her legal team with Irving, the right-wing British pseudo-historian and Holocaust denier, in a London courtroom in 2000.

It was Lipstadt’s 1993 book, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory, that prompted Irving to target the professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University in Atlanta. In her work, Lipstadt called Irving “one of the most dangerous spokesmen for Holocaust denial.” In 1996, Irving sued Lipstadt and her British publisher, Penguin Books, alleging they were part of an “organised international endeavor” to destroy his reputation and livelihood as a historian.

According to Denial ’s production notes, veteran British playwright and screenwriter David Hare proceeded with considerable care in defending “objective historical truth.” Hare crafted the scenes in court by using verbatim portions of the trial’s official transcript. The screenwriter explains that “I had to be historically accurate myself, so that enemies of the film, the people who agree with David Irving, couldn’t accuse me of distorting the record.”

Hare was further motivated by the insidious character of Irving’s attempt to give anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial a respectable veneer. “Irving dressed like an English gentleman,” notes the scriptwriter. “He lived in Mayfair. John Keegan, an extremely distinguished military historian, said that David Irving was a first-rate historian who happened to take Hitler’s point of view and that there was a significant historical value in looking at history from the side of the loser.” Irving contended that no Jews were gassed at the Auschwitz concentration camp and that Hitler and the Nazis were innocent of genocide.

When the film opens, Lipstadt (Rachel Weisz), has just published her earlier book. As she is delivering a talk promoting the work to a room full of students in Atlanta, Irving (Timothy Spall) appears with two associates, who videotape the proceedings. He attempts to disrupt the event by waving $1,000 in the air and yelling, “I’ll give it to anyone who can prove Hitler ordered the killing of the Jews!” Deborah refuses to engage with Irving, insisting that one can have different opinions about the Holocaust, but it is not possible to dispute whether or not it happened: “That isn’t an opinion. That’s a fact.”

In Denying the Holocaust, Lipstadt argues that following World War II, “Nazism in general and the Holocaust in particular had given fascism a bad name. … Consequently Holocaust denial became an important element in the fabric of their [neo-fascist] ideology.”

Deborah is then shocked to learn from her British publisher, Penguin Books, that Irving is suing her and Penguin for libel. She quickly discovers that libel laws in Britain differ from those in the US: in the UK, there is no presumption of innocence in such a case. Consequently, Deborah, as the defendant, must prove that her assertions were true and, furthermore, that Irving’s falsifications were deliberate.

While Irving chooses to represent himself in court, a top legal team headed by solicitor Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott) and barrister Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson) acts on behalf of Lipstadt and Penguin. Julius and Rampton insist that Deborah place complete confidence in her legal representatives. This leads to various conflicts (and a share of the film’s drama). Rampton refuses her request to put British Holocaust survivors on the stand so as to avoid subjecting them to Irving’s abusive and humiliating tactics––and he will also not allow his client to testify.

When Deborah demands “my right to stand up against someone who wants to pervert the truth,” her attorney counters that “these things are happening to you, but the case is not about you … What feels best is not necessarily what works best.” Rampton and Julius are convinced their “atom bomb defense” involves keeping the focus on Irving’s falsehoods rather than putting the Holocaust on trial. Towards this end, eminent British historian Richard Evans (John Sessions)––renowned for his research on the history of Germany in the 19th and 20th centuries, particularly the Third Reich––is brought on board.

In History on Trial, Lipstadt observes: “After detailing numerous examples of Irving’s historical malfeasance regarding the Holocaust and the bombing of Dresden, Evans wrote: ‘If we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past and to give us as accurate a representation as possible, then Irving is not a historian … Irving is essentially an ideologue who uses history … in order to further his own political purposes.’”

In one telling scene, Deborah, seeking financial backing for legal fees, meets with leading figures in Britain’s Jewish community. To her surprise and dismay, they advise her to settle with Irving out of court and, generally, not rock the boat.

In preparing for the trial, Deborah accompanies her lawyers to what remains of Auschwitz-Birkenau. The no-nonsense Scotsman Rampton is doing forensic work in what the equally no-nonsense New Yorker Lipstadt considers a disrespectful manner. Only in the course of the trial does she learn to appreciate the efficacy of Rampton’s seemingly callous methods.

The dust jacket of History on Trial explains that Lipstadt’s lawyers “gained access to Irving’s personal papers, which exposed his association with neo-Nazi extremists in Germany, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, and the National Alliance, which wanted to transform America into an ‘Aryan society.’ In the course of the trial, Lipstadt’s legal team stripped away Irving’s mask of respectability through exposing the prejudice, extremism, and distortion of history that defined his work.”

One of the trial’s pivotal moments, which gives the defense considerable momentum, occurs when Rampton proves that Irving manipulated the call logs of leading Nazi Heinrich Himmler to whitewash Hitler’s role in the annihilation of the Jews.

Rampton also produces a 1991 video clip in which Irving spews out his reactionary poison for the benefit of an audience in Calgary, Alberta: “I say quite tastelessly in fact that more women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy’s car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz.”

The trial lasts from January 11 to March 15, 2000. Ultimately, Judge Charles Gray (Alex Jennings) rules that “Irving’s treatment of the historical evidence is so perverse and egregious that it is difficult to accept that it is inadvertence on his part.” Lipstadt and Penguin win the day, and Irving is liable to pay all the substantial costs of the trial.

Irving was a notorious reactionary, with an extensive history of sympathy for fascism. In the 1980s he spoke to meetings of the anti-immigrant German Peoples Union (DVU). At least one audience included skinheads chanting “Sieg Heil!” In his final argument, Rampton observed (not included in the film) that “Mr. Irving is a Hitler partisan, who has falsified history on a staggering scale in order to ‘prove’ Hitler’s innocence, which like Holocaust denial is obviously very appealing to his fellow travellers. After all, if the Holocaust were a ‘myth’, then, obviously, Hitler could have no responsibility for it.”

Jackson’s Denial is a conscientious reconstruction of the libel trial. However, it was a commentary on the British legal system in general and its anti-democratic libel laws in particular, as the WSWS noted in 2000, that despite Irving’s history, “the High Court did not summarily dismiss Irving’s claim and instead provided him with a platform from which to propound his extreme right-wing views.”

The historical issues, along with Hare’s intelligent script, no doubt helped inspire the remarkable performances of Wilkinson, Weisz and Spall. Scott as Julius also deserves special mention.

In an interview, director Jackson (The Bodyguard, Temple Grandin) suggested that his film was “about historical truth … All the interactions between the characters, the tension between Deborah Lipstadt and the legal team, everything that happened is what actually happened.”

Denial has its weaknesses. The acting and the courtroom sequences, which are tightly and tautly done, are relatively subtle; other elements and scenes are not. The complacent and idyllic picture of Lipstadt’s suburban life in the US seems out of place. There is no hint of a connection between the historical issues, the emergence of neo-fascist forces and the state of contemporary society (including American society). The Irving trial itself demonstrated, for those who cared to see, that as long as the system responsible for the fascist barbarism continued to exist even such an apparently “settled” question as Nazi guilt for mass murder of the European Jews remained unresolved.

The filmmakers do not help their artistic cause by including a corny and unconvincing moment when, following her legal victory, a jogging Deborah (the recurring jogging scenes themselves are tedious and a distraction) stops––apparently to make common cause––with the statue of Queen Boadicea located on London’s Embankment, near the Houses of Parliament. The sequence seems to imply that like Boadicea, an early Briton who led an uprising against the Roman occupiers in 60-61 AD, Lipstadt is a female warrior leading her people.

More significantly, like virtually every film on the Holocaust that has come out over the past several decades, Denial is entirely silent as to the origins and sources of fascism. Unfortunately, one does not expect anything different.

Nonetheless, within its limited scope, Denial is valuable, particularly as an antidote to the efforts in Germany to relativize the crimes of Hitler and fascism, spearheaded by Professor Jörg Baberowski of Humboldt University in Berlin.

Which Libyan government kills refugees?

This video says about itself:

Drowning for Freedom: Libya’s Migrant Jails (Part 1)

17 March 2015

As Libya descends further into civil war and lawlessness, migrants from Africa and the Middle East continue to journey to the country’s coast in search of smugglers to take them across the Mediterranean Sea and into Europe.

Search and rescue operations by Libya’s coast guard are restricted due to diminishing resources, and have to contend with dangerous gangs of armed traffickers.

Those rescued at sea by the coast guard are brought to detention centers, where they face deplorable conditions and are forced to remain for long periods of time. In some instances, migrants are detained by militias in unofficial prisons outside of government control.

In part one of a three-part series, VICE News is given access to chilling footage filmed by the Libyan coast guard, who have witnessed an influx of migrants trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea, recovering hundreds of bodies of those who’ve drowned on their journey to Europe.

These two videos are the sequels.

Translated from Dutch NOS TV:

Libyans attack, kill refugees

Today, 16:04

At about twenty kilometers from the Libyan coast a boat with refugees tonight was attacked by a ship which said it was Libyan coast guard. The private charity Sea Watch reports this. At least four refugees were killed, 15 to 25 people are still missing.

The drama took place while a ship of the rescue organization Sea Watch was trying to help the dinghy with refugees. The crew handed life jackets to the approximately 150 refugees when a ship appeared, which was, according to Sea Watch, Libyan coast guard.


The Libyans tried, according to Sea Watch, to steal the motor of the boat with refugees. They climbed aboard the boat and struck the refugees with batons. Panicked refugees jumped off the boat into the Mediterranean.

Sea Watch crew managed to rescue about 120 people from the water. Four people were dragged dead out of the water, while at least 15 and possibly 25 people remained in the sea.

It is unclear how the attack finished and whether it was indeed a Libyan coast guard ship.

There is not one government in Libya. There are several paramilitary groups claiming to be the government, killing each other and civilians. Possibly, several of these militias have their own ‘coast guard’.

Sea Watch is a German aid organization founded by private individuals and has been active since a year and a half with one ship in the Mediterranean. According to their own statement, Sea Watch this year has saved thousands of refugees.

‘British police teaching Bahraini regime to whitewash torture deaths’

This video from the European Parliament says about itself:

4 February 2016

Alyn Smith MEP speaks on the institutional reform in Bahrain and raises the case of Mohamed Ramadan who is one of five people facing the death penalty in Bahrain.

By Paddy McGuffin in Britain:

British guns for hire ‘teach Bahrainis to whitewash deaths’

Friday 21st October 2016

BRITISH police have advised their Bahraini counterparts on how to “whitewash” deaths in custody, international human rights group Reprieve alleged yesterday.

The guidance was part of a widely criticised multimillion-pound training deal with the Gulf kingdom, where security forces routinely rely on torture and the death penalty, both banned under international law.

The revelations adds to growing concerns about the use of Britain’s police and security forces as “guns for hire” to despotic regimes.

Bahrain’s poor human rights record has been highlighted recently by the case of Mohammed Ramadan, who has been held on death row since 2014. His lawyers allege that he was tortured into making a false confession.

Reprieve, which specialises in such cases and represents Mr Ramadan, argues that an investigation into his mistreatment, launched earlier this year, has been “deeply flawed and failed to meet international standards.”

An email unearthed by Reprieve shows that senior Bahraini police officers asked Northern Ireland’s police ombudsman in January for advice on how to present its handling of police complaints.

The visit focused on investigations involving deaths or serious injuries caused by police and how to liaise with families in these cases, according to emails obtained by Reprieve through freedom of information requests.

Reprieve director Maya Foa said: “It is shocking that Britain paid for Bahrain’s police to learn how to whitewash deaths in custody.

“Bahrain’s police have tortured innocent people like Mohammed Ramadan into confessing falsely to crimes that carry the death penalty and intimidated relatives who try to complain.”

Are white terrorists not terrorists?

This video from the USA says about itself:

Why Isn’t There Wall-to-Wall Coverage of The Kansas Crusaders?

17 October 2016

Thom compares the media coverage of the arrest of three men in Kansas who were plotting to harm immigrants with coverage of previous events perpetrated by Muslims. Is the difference in coverage a reflection of the media’s views on race?

By Chauncey DeVega of Salon in the USA:

The Right Wing

White Privilege Wages Jihad: Kansas ‘Militia Members’ Aren’t Considered ‘Terrorists’ Because They’re Not Muslim

The three white men planned to unleash a killing spree and to bomb a house of worship—what should we call them?

October 19, 2016

On Friday, the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced that it had arrested three white men, Curtis Allen, Gavin Wright and Patrick Stein, who as part of a militia group called the Crusaders planned to bomb a housing complex and mosque in Garden City, KansasAllen, Wright and Stein had stockpiled 2,000 pounds of ammunition and numerous homemade bombs to conduct the attack.

Their intended victims were Somali immigrants. In information gathered by the FBI, Stein, the apparent ringleader, told his followers, “If you’re a Muslim I’m going to enjoy shooting you in the head.” Stein also wanted his confederates to “if you start using your bow on them cockroaches, make sure you dip them in pig’s blood before you shoot them.”

The destruction and murder would have been total. Allen, Wright and Stein planned to spare no one from their hateful wrath; babies and children would be killed along with adults. Stein told his fellow militia members, “When we go on operations there’s no leaving anyone behind, even if it’s a 1-year-old. I’m serious. I guarantee if I go on a mission those little fuckers are going bye-bye.”

Their ultimate goal was to “send a wake up call” to (white) Americans about the “threat” posed by Muslims. Stein said “the only fucking way this country’s ever going to get turned around is it will be a bloodbath and it will be a nasty, messy motherfucker.”

In this political moment, the Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s tendrils are everywhere: Stein is an avid supporter of Trump and was organizing a “security detail” to protect his hero and champion when he visited Pennsylvania and Ohio in late October.

The bomb plot by Allen, Wright and Stein is part of a larger pattern. As reported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, 79 mosques were attacked last year. The Southern Poverty Law Center has documented how the number of hate crimes against Muslims has increased this year.

The murderous actions planned by Allen, Wright, and Stein are the very definition of terrorism: politically motivated violence against a vulnerable civilian population.

The headlines from major American news outlets, however, described Allen, Wright and Stein as “militia members” instead of “terrorists.”

White privilege takes many forms in America. Terrorists are nebulous brown “Arabs” and “Muslims.” White privilege deems that such a label not be applied by the mainstream news media and in the popular discourse to white Christians such as Allen, Wright and Stein.

On these matters, white privilege also imperils public safety. Since 2002 more Americans have been killed by white Christian right-wing terrorists than by Muslims or Arabs. As reported by Duke University’s Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security in 2015, “Law enforcement agencies in the United States consider anti-government violent extremists, not radicalized Muslims, to be the most severe threat of political violence that they face.” In its announcement about the arrest of Allen, Wright and Stein, the FBI also referred to the Crusaders as “domestic terrorists.”

But the right-wing media and the Republican Party has chosen to actively suppress that information — as was the case with West Point’s Combatting Terrorism Center’s findings about the threat posed by right-wing anti-government groups, which were met with protests, derision and threats to cut research funding. In all, the image of the Muslim-Arab bogeyman with a suicide vest hiding under the beds of white middle America does more political work for conservatives than a mature discussion of the significant dangers posed by white right-wing radicals and terrorists in the “sovereign citizens” and militia movements.

White privilege also deems that certain questions will not be asked about the Crusaders and its nefarious plans to kill Somali immigrants in Garden City, Kansas.

What are people like Allen, Wright and Stein learning in their churches and other places of worship? Are the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security monitoring those sites?

Who radicalized Allen, Wright and Stein?

What role does Fox News, the Republican Party and the right-wing media play in teaching white Christians like Allen, Wright and Stein to hate Muslims?

Where were Allen, Wright and Stein’s family members and neighbors? Are they aiding and abetting them? Why didn’t they call the police earlier?

Given that 2016 Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is openly hostile toward Muslims, should he be held responsible for encouraging violence and terrorism against that community?

It is no coincidence that the Crusaders’ terrorist attack was planned for Nov. 9 — the day after the election. The political movement of fascist Donald Trump has normalized political violence in contemporary American politics. Allen, Wright and Stein’s plan to kill Somali immigrants in Garden City is a reflection of that reality.

At his rallies, Trump extols the virtues of such behavior. Like a political thug in a banana republic, Trump threatens to put Hillary Clinton, his Democratic rival, in prison if he wins the presidency. Moreover, Trump’s supporters have even been recorded as threatening Clinton’s life. Trump’s foot soldiers have attacked Black Lives Matter and other protesters and sucker punched an elderly woman in the face at a rally in North Carolina. Armed Trump minions have also pointed guns at protesters.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the question is not “will there be blood on Election Day and thereafter?” but rather how much blood will be spilled by Trump and the basket of human deplorables — a rabble that includes terrorists — over which he wields control like a political Rasputin.

At least, in the Netherlands, when a gang of Islamophobes (also admirers of Adolf Hitler) firebombed a mosque in Enschede, the public prosecutor did call them terrorists.

German right-winger shoots police

This video about nazi Germany is called The Fall of the Third Reich.

Translated from Dutch NOS TV:

German extremist shoots cops down

Today, 11:06

In the German state of Bavaria four police officers were injured when they wanted to take away weapons from a man. The 49-year-old resident of the town Georgensgmünd had been allowed to own such weapons, but police doubted whether that was wise. The man opened fire when police came for them.

The man considers himself a “Reichsbürger”. Reichsbürger do not recognize the current German polity because they say it was imposed by the Allies after World War II.

They say that the Allies did not have the right to abolish Adolf Hitler‘s, and his appointed successor Admiral Dönitz‘s, German empire, the ‘Third Reich’.

The movement emerged in the eighties and, according to the Interior Ministry, has a few hundred supporters. The German security service considers the Reichsbürger to be a far right-wing movement.

One of the police officers’ life is still in danger. The neo-fascist culprit Wolfgang P. was a hunter and owned thirty firearms. The Reichsbürger are anti-Semites. They have injured police officers before; see also here.

UPDATE 20 October 2016: the most critically wounded policeman has died.

At least one Reichsbürger leader, Volker S., is an ex-policeman.