Ethics and Oligarchs in Tel Aviv

Roman Abramovich (above left) with his close ally Vladimir Putin

One of Israel’s leading academics has admitted lobbying in defence of sanctioned oligarch Roman Abramovich, saying: “When someone offers you $50m, you sign their letter.”

Abramovich – former owner of Chelsea Football Club – was hit by UK and later US sanctions soon after his close ally Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine.

The tycoon was already controversial for reported links to organised crime as well as his role as Putin’s international financial fixer, but had been welcomed as a big donor to Israeli institutions as well as to international campaigns against ‘racism’ and ‘anti-semitism’.

Just two days before the invasion of Ukraine, Abramovich and the Israeli ‘holocaust’ memorial Yad Vashem announced a “strategic partnership” in which the oligarch would donate tens of millions of dollars. He had acquired Israeli citizenship in 2018.

Professor Ariel Porat (above left) with Nadhim Zahawi, Secretary of State for Education in Boris Johnson’s ‘British’ government. Porat has defended lobbying Western governments on behalf of $50m donor Abramovich.

Perhaps it was unsurprising therefore that soon after the invasion Yad Vashem’s chairman Danny Dayan was among signatories to a letter from influential Israelis to the US Ambassador in Jerusalem, calling on the American authorities to refrain from sanctioning Abramovich.

These distinguished Jews, including Israel’s Chief Rabbi, wrote:
“We are examples of institutions that have benefited from Roman Abramovich, and have long-standing ties with him. We implore you warmly to consider Roman Abramovich’s position and importance to the community and to Israel. We warn that any action against him will not only be unfair, but will also negatively impact the Jewish world and Israel.”

Roman Abramovich with Rabbi Alexander Boroda, President of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, at the opening of Moscow’s Garage Museum of Contemporary Art, which Abramovich co-founded

After the appeal failed and Western governments proceeded with sanctions, a few of these institutions belatedly distanced themselves from the disgraced oligarch. Yad Vashem suspended their receipt of his largesse, but has not handed back his earlier gifts.

One of the senior Israelis who co-wrote the letter and remains unabashed is Professor Ariel Porat, president of Tel Aviv University, which had received $50 million from Abramovich.

Last week in a secret meeting with senior academics, Porat – one of Israel’s leading legal scholars – defended the university’s links with Abramovich. He admitted: “Unfortunately there is a legal impediment to taking money from [Abramovich]. After the war is over, I imagine the sanctions will be lifted.”

And he told his colleagues: “When someone offers you $50m, you sign their letter.”

One of Porat’s critics pointed out: “No one is disputing the necessity of donations — but not at all costs and at any condition. It is embarrassing that an academic institution is willing to sell its prestige and social standing for money.”

Embarrassing, but in the case of Tel Aviv University and Roman Abramovich not surprising.

Woke censorship of UK Latin teaching

The tide of ‘woke’ political correctness has finally reached one of the final bastions of traditional British education – the small number of schools that still teach Latin.

Classical education was fundamental to many generations of Britons, including those who built and ruled the British Empire (often in conscious emulation of the Romans). Now that traditional education is deemed to have transgressed against the holy commandments of ‘woke’.

At the centre of the row is the Cambridge Latin Course, a series of books first introduced in 1970 and now used in the vast majority of those British schools that still teach Latin. (Although when I was taught Latin from 1978-1984, we used much older textbooks, and until this row developed I knew nothing of these Cambridge books.)

The books teach children their first simple Latin phrases by introducing the household of a Roman called Lucius Caecilius – a real man who lived in Pompeii, the city largely destroyed by volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD. Caecilius himself had probably died seventeen years before this eruption, but his home can still be seen in the ruins of Pompeii and some of its contents are in the Naples archaeological museum.

The problem for modern politically correct censors is that Caecilius – like all wealthy Romans of his era – owned slaves. These slaves were probably White, but the racial politics of our own era means that any mention of slavery requires all White people to grovel in apology, however absurd, ahistorical or otherwise meaningless such apologies are.

The teaching of history is no longer an end in itself – still less is it allowed for Europeans to have any pride in their classical ancestry. Rather, it is compulsory to search for aspects of the past that lead to denigration of our own civilisations.

In addition, the school and university curriculum must be purged of anything that might cause offence to any protected group. The league table of protected groups is headed by Jews, then extends via ethnic minorities, the infinitely expanding variety of sexual minorities, and eventually to women in general. The only group without a victim card to play in this game are White men.

And the problem with the Cambridge Latin Course is that the slaves in Caecilius’ household are portrayed as going about their daily tasks in a normal and even happy environment.

A nuanced approach to teaching Latin (and Ancient History) would have to accept that there were many brutal realities, or just very strange aspects of life in the ancient world that are not suitable for young children, so inevitably when they are introduced to this world it will be in a sanitised and incomplete form.

But for the woke generation of teachers, the whole point of teaching any subject is to instil wokeness. So the Cambridge Latin Course seems likely to be scrapped, and replaced by something that better suits the brainwashing agenda of the 2020s.

Perhaps one of Roman history’s traditional villains will be reinvented as a hero for the 2020s?

Publius Clodius was a vicious gangster and pervert whose murder by a rival gangster in 52 BC led to one of the great speeches by Cicero, the most famous legal orator in history, who successfully defended Clodius’ murderer Titus Annius Milo.

In this speech (Pro Milone) Cicero refers to Clodius’ part in one of the greatest scandals of Ancient Rome some ten years earlier, when Clodius disguised himself as a woman in order to infiltrate the traditional women-only religious rite of the Bona Dea.

This was an all-night festival conducted at the home of Rome’s ceremonial chief priest (on this occasion Julius Caesar), but in an environment that was not only all-female but which had to be ritually cleansed of all male associations before the ceremony (even of male animals or works of art portraying men).

So when Clodius dressed as a woman and attended the event, it was a major scandal, inevitably involving rumours of sexual perversion involving Caesar’s then wife and even Clodius’ own sister. Modern readers are perhaps most familiar with the case because of the phrase Caesar used when divorcing his wife: although there was no proof that she had connived with Clodius, “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”.

The scandal of Publius Clodius at the rite of the Bona Dea, as depicted in 1810 in an engraving by Silvestre David Mirys

Clodius was prosecuted for incestum (which in Roman law meant ‘sacrilege’ rather than what we would now call ‘incest’, though one of the allegations was that he had indeed committed incest with his sister).

He was eventually acquitted because a powerful political ally bribed the jury. In 2022 the verdict of woke historians does not need to be bought. After all in our world, we are no longer permitted to recognise biological differences between men and women, so the Bona Dea ceremony itself would be unacceptable and Clodius would be judged a pioneering transsexual hero!

Perhaps the cross-dressing adventures of Clodius will replace the now-unacceptable Cambridge Latin Course as a means of introducing children to the classical world?

Or more likely the entire history of that world will be scrapped, and replaced by something more suitable for teaching European children that they must bow down before Africans.

British historian condemns ‘moronic’ wokeness of US National Archives

British historian Andrew Roberts has ridiculed the US National Archives for its latest display of wokeness, after Washington officials placed a ‘trigger warning’ notice next to its historic copy of the 1776 Declaration of Independence.

‘Trigger warnings’ and ‘safe spaces’ have become commonplace in academic and public institutions in recent years as wokeness has taken over. The idea is that minority groups (or just people with ultra-woke ideas) might be offended by any contact with people or writings that convey different ideas, even in a historical context.

As Roberts (biographer of the wartime British Ambassador to Washington, Lord Halifax, and more recently of King George III against whom the Declaration was written) pointed out last weekend to an audience at the Oxford Literary Festival: “Anyone who thinks an 18th century document is not going to be outdated, biased and offensive is frankly a moron. When you go to see the Declaration, you read what it says about Native Americans and so on, you won’t be so offended that you can’t stand up.”

The really interesting thing about this row is what it tells us about American notions of ‘freedom’ and ‘equality’. While liberals like to parrot the Declaration’s phrases about “all men” being “created equal” with “inalienable rights”, they ignore that in practice this meant White men.

The rotunda of the US National Archives in Washington, where the Declaration of Independence – and now the absurd ‘trigger warning’ – are displayed

Hence the words that are now found objectionable, where the Declaration complains that King George:
“has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

Rather than focus their complaint on the word “savages”, the woke brigade might do better to reflect on what this tells us about American values than and now, and about the broader values of liberalism.

Red Indians – now known as Native Americans – supported the British Crown because they knew that the Empire offered them a better deal than they would get under liberal capitalism. The same applied half a century later to the British working-class, exploited as footsoldiers by the liberal middle-class in their campaign for ‘reform’, but then left worse off then ever under the ‘free’ capitalism of early and mid-Victorian England.

As for ‘racism’, Americans might find it uncomfortable to reflect on the fact that their famous Olympic athlete Jesse Owens was treated far better by Adolf Hitler in national-socialist Berlin in 1936 than he was by his fellow Americans!

And the American “rule of warfare” – despite the implication of their own Declaration of Independence, has turned out to be truly destructive “of all ages, sexes and conditions”, from Dresden to Hiroshima to Baghdad.

What this ridiculous fuss about ‘trigger warnings’ really tells us is that it is absurd to try to force history into our 21st century preconceptions. In Washington this absurdity takes the form of placing warning notices next to the Declaration of Independence, in modern Germany it takes the form of locking up 93-year-old Ursula Haverbeck for expressing forbidden historical opinions and daring to ask forbidden questions.

American Olympic gold medallist Jesse Owens (above right) with fellow long jumper Luz Long, a German who won silver at the same 1936 Olympics in National Socialist Berlin. Luz Long was killed while fighting with the Germany Army in Sicily in July 1943, aged 30.

Spot the criminal – Germany seeks to jail 93-year-old publisher while ‘Holocaust’ museums hang on to billionaire gangster’s donations

Ursula Haverbeck at the Berlin appeal court, 18th March 2022

Ursula Haverbeck – the extraordinarily courageous German patriot and educator now aged 93 – was back in court earlier today in Berlin, appealing against convictions for ‘Holocaust denial’ and a 12-month prison sentence.

This is a combined appeal against two convictions and sentences for similar ‘crimes’, one in 2017 involving a speech to an audience of 80 people in Berlin; the other in 2020 relating to a YouTube interview conducted by Nikolai Nehrling, known in German nationalist circles as the Volkslehrer.

Mainstream German press reports see nothing wrong in dragging a 93-year-old lady through the courts for the ‘crime’ of doubting and asking questions about the alleged murder of six million Jews by a mysterious unique mass murder weapon – the alleged homicidal gas chambers.

H&D’s assistant editor has met Ursula several times, and she could not be further from the stereotype of an ‘inciter of hate’. She is a polite, very well-educated lady who expresses her views in reasonable terms. And it should be noted that she is one of the last generation of Germans who experienced the horrors of fleeing with her family from the invading barbarians of Stalin’s Red Army in 1945.

Ursula Haverbeck knows what it means to be a genuine refugee.

Ursula Haverbeck (above centre) with her Berlin attorney Wolfram Nahrath (above right) at today’s hearing

A very different type of human being is Roman Abramovich, chief financial fixer for the bloodstained tyrant Vladimir Putin.

BBC’s Panorama broadcast a detailed investigation of Abramovich’s criminal career on Monday evening. It is crystal clear that – aided and abetted by both Boris Yeltsin and in particular Putin – Abramovich built his fortune on defrauding the Russian people of literally billions of pounds worth of their national assets.

The beneficiaries of Abramovich’s loot include two of the world’s leading ‘Holocaust’ museums. A few days ago we discussed his links to Yad Vashem in Israel. Now it has become clear that the Imperial War Museum in London has no intention of returning the money given by Abramovich for its vastly expensive new ‘Holocaust’ gallery.

The museum has not disclosed quite how much Abramovich donated, but the total budget for the exhibition is at least £30.5 million.  In addition to his personal contribution (or should we say the contribution of the long-suffering Russian people, since Abramovich’s wealth comes from assets stolen from them) Abramovich also staged a fundraising event for the project at Stamford Bridge, the home of Chelsea Football Club, which he owned until his London assets were frozen this week.

London’s world-famous Imperial War Museum, founded in 1917, bends over backwards to avoid any association with ‘racism’ or ‘slavery’ – yet shamelessly hangs on to millions donated from the ill-gotten fortune of Roman Abramovich

At the time of the donation in October 2018, the Imperial War Museum’s director gushed that: “This donation will enable IWM to reinterpret these galleries, which will present critical insights into the Holocaust as well as integrate the devastating events of the Holocaust into the broader history of the Second World War, revealing why this often overlooked dimension is so important.”

Quite shamelessly – given that it is one of the world’s leading military museums so ought to be taking a close interest in the world-changing events currently under way in Ukraine – the IWM says it will be “retaining the funds from Roman Abramovich”, and in the sly tradition of the barrack room lawyer insists: “This is compliant with all government regulations regarding sanctions”.

Meanwhile Yad Vashem has said only that it is “suspending its strategic partnership” with Abramovich and has yet to confirm whether it will hand back any of the stolen money.

While the Kremlin dictator Putin attempts a real genocide, valiantly resisted by Ukrainian patriots, his gangster henchman Abramovich has funded several prominent examples of a one-sided view of history – exploited for the benefit of yesterday’s Soviet butchers, today’s Russian imperialists, and the shameless Zionist pirates of both yesterday and today.

Those like Ursula Haverbeck who face trials across Europe for the ‘crime’ of ‘denying the Holocaust’ doubtless appreciate the irony that official ‘Holocaust history’ is funded by one of the world’s worst fraudsters, whose career of theft and brutality has been protected by a genuine war criminal.

On Monday Ursula Haverbeck’s latest court ordeal continues in Berlin. H&D will carry further updates throughout the case, both here and in forthcoming issues of our magazine.

Secret tapes show politicians once dared to speak about race

President Richard Nixon (above left) in conversation at the White House with Prof. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

In July this year the US National Archives released a previously secret tape recording of then President Richard Nixon and future President Ronald Reagan speaking frankly about racial differences.

Today two American scholars writing in The Atlantic reveal that these forbidden views were not held only Reagan and Nixon, a man who of course has long been demonised by the political establishment, but by an ultra-respectable academic.

The President was conversing in October 1971 with Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Harvard professor who had previously been an adviser to Nixon but was more closely associated with the Democratic Party. Indeed despite his bipartisanship, Moynihan was for decades an icon of America’s liberal intelligentsia.

Yet on this White House tape and in an earlier memorandum, Prof. Moynihan explicitly recognised racial realities. Commenting on an article on race and IQ by Richard Herrnstein published earlier that year, Moynihan wrote: “Herrnstein is, of course, very much worth reading. The findings of intelligence testing, which he summarizes, have profound implications for social policy. …Psychologists now think they know something of the ranking of the major races. Asians first; Caucasians second; Africans third.”

Prof Richard Herrnstein was co-author of The Bell Curve, a book that pointed out the differences between black and white IQ.

Moynihan agreed with the President that in implementing federal programmes to promote black education, he had to bear in mind their fundamental weaknesses – that because of their IQ blacks would basically be at a disadvantage “when you get to some of the more, shall we say, some of the more profound, rigid disciplines”.

His memo to Nixon concluded with pragmatic advice that no doubt influences even those few politicians today honest enough to address racial realities: “Finally, may I plead that you say nothing about this subject, nor let anyone around you do so. There is no possibility of your concern being depicted for what it is, a desire to respond to knowledge in a responsible and prudent manner.”

Moynihan died in 2003, but he would not be surprised that 21st century journalists and scholars are using these newly revealed tapes not to challenge their own liberal multiracialist dogmas, but to demonise Moynihan himself.

Hoax papers expose academic corruption

Three American academics have exposed the intellectual corruption prevalent among their colleagues, in what Niall Ferguson (writing in today’s Sunday Times) describes as “one of the greatest hoaxes in the history of academia”.

As Dr Ferguson reveals: “In the space of ten months they dashed off twenty spoof articles and submitted them to established journals in the fields of cultural studies, identity studies and critical theory.”

All of these fake papers were “outlandish or intentionally broken in significant ways”, including “some little bit of lunacy or depravity”.

Nevertheless numerous papers were accepted for publication by officially recognised academic journals. For example, an article titled ‘Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon’ written in the name of a fake author called ‘Helen Wilson’ was accepted and published in February this year by Gender, Place & Culture, which describes itself as “a journal of feminist geography”.

Two of this journal’s editors – Katherine Brickell of Royal Holloway, University of London, and Kanchana Ruwanpura of the University of Edinburgh – have research positions at UK universities, state-funded via the Economic and Social Research Council. The editorial board of Gender, Place & Culture includes Professor Patricia Daley, who is ‘Professor of the Human Geography of Africa’ at Oxford and a Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford.

‘Gender. Place & Culture’ has now retracted a hoax article, but these and other politically correct journals now have a serious credibility problem.

Thought-crime in today’s Europe

DeckertStolzRenouf-672pxWide

German lawyer Sylvia Stolz (centre) after her release from an earlier presence sentence, seen here with human rights activists Günter Deckert (left) and Lady Michèle Renouf.

 

German lawyer Sylvia Stolz has been given a 20 month prison sentence for comments she made during a speech at a conference in Switzerland.  She has already served more than three years in prison from 2008 to 2011 for her defence of client Ernst Zündel.

Several European countries have laws that ban any questioning of the history of the ‘Holocaust’, turning the alleged murder of six million Jews in homicidal gas chambers during the Second World War into a form of religious ‘truth’ that cannot be challenged.

Normal historical analysis and debate is thus condemned as a form of blasphemy, and punished by long prison sentences.  For example Horst Mahler, another German lawyer who dared to challenge established historical legends, has been imprisoned since 2009.

Sylvia Stolz’s latest ‘crime’ was committed at the Anti-Censorship Coalition Conference in Switzerland in November 2012.  A video of this ‘criminal’ speech, with English subtitles, can be viewed below:

While sentencing Frau Stolz to prison, the judge in her latest case indicated that he fully expects her to appeal, and she will not begin her sentence until the appeal process has ended.

In fact it is likely that the German authorities have created a serious embarrassment for themselves, by prosecuting Frau Stolz for pointing out facts that were actually accepted by German courts themselves when sentencing former Auschwitz guards at trials during the 1960s.  During those cases the German courts themselves admitted the absence of evidence regarding the locations of the alleged crimes of the ‘Holocaust’; the lack of any judicial findings regarding corpses or traces of the murders concerned; the lack of judicial assessment of witness statements, or of the documents or other evidence; and the lack of any documentary proof establishing the National Socialists’ intention to destroy the Jewish people in part or in whole (i.e. to commit genocide).

Yet to make these very same observations – even in the very same terms as used by the German courts themselves during the 1960s – is now a criminal act in 21st century Germany.

Though here in the UK we have not yet descended into such a Kafkaesque nightmare of bizarre criminal trials, there are attempts to extend our own notorious ‘race laws’ to encompass the criminalisation of ‘Holocaust denial’.  Moreover the British authorities have signed up to the Stockholm International Conference on the teaching of the ‘Holocaust’, which instructed schools as follows:

“Care must be taken not to give a platform for deniers – do not treat the denial of the Holocaust as a legitimate historical argument, or seek to disprove the deniers’ position through normal historical debate and rational argument.”

Trotskyist councillor caught up in far left turmoil: rape allegations against comrade

Poster displayed by militant feminists at Liverpool Hope University. H&D does not know and cannot verify the truth or falsehood of these allegations, but reports the ongoing dispute as a matter of public interest.

Britain’s most successful far left organisation – the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) – is falling apart because of rape allegations against one of its leaders, who had also been the key organiser of the ‘anti-racist’ campaigns Unite Against Fascism and Love Music Hate Racism.

Internal SWP reports refer to the accused party official only as Comrade Delta, but he has been widely identified by fellow leftists as Martin Smith, long serving national secretary of the party who was convicted in September 2010 of assaulting a police officer at an ‘anti-fascist’ demonstration against BNP leader Nick Griffin’s appearance on the BBC’s Question Time.  Detailed rape allegations dating back four or five years were made against Smith by a female SWP member.  She was 17 at the time: Smith was almost 50.

Smith’s colleagues on the party’s central committee held an enquiry chaired by the Manchester trade union activist Karen Reissman.  They voted 6-1 to dismiss the allegations, but the party membership was more evenly split, voting 231-209 in his facour.  Most importantly, many prominent activists were so disgusted by the SWP’s handling of the affair that they quit, and in some cases leaked important documents about the case to rival leftist factions.

A few months ago Smith bowed to the inevitable and resigned his party positions, though retaining the support of his cronies at the top of the SWP.  The latest twist in the case is that Smith has been awarded what (in today’s much cut back educational world) is a rare funded place to study for a doctorate at Liverpool Hope University.

Feminists and anti-rape campaigners in Liverpool are outraged, and have directed their anger not only at Smith but at his fellow SWP activist Michael Lavalette, who heads the social work department at the university.  Several left-wing blogs have alleged that Lavalette was involved in arranging his comrade’s placement at Liverpool Hope (formerly known as the Liverpool Institute of Higher Education).

Obviously we have no way of knowing the truth of these charges, but here at H&D we have encountered Lavalette many times.  He is a councillor on Preston City Council, one of the very few Trotskyists ever to enjoy electoral success, having defeated Labour three times in the heavily Asian ward known as Town Centre.

Who will win this titanic battle between Trotskyists and Feminists?  How will Cllr Lavalette’s many Muslim voters react, as they probably have little sympathy with either of these Western bourgeois ideologies?  Will Comrade Delta become Doctor Delta and win back his position in the vanguard of the revolution?

Only one thing remains certain: the SWP and its myriad far left rivals will continue to offer no hope for the betrayed workers of 21st century Britain.

Michael Lavalette (centre) in happier days after winning re-election to Preston City Council in 2012.

Martin Smith speaking at an ‘anti-fascist’ demonstration in Amsterdam in 2010.

The great passport giveaway

citizenship

While the British press gets into a flap over the trivial row between two Cabinet ministers over an illegal immigrant and a cat, two far more significant stories received less attention.

It has now been confirmed that during New Labour’s years in power more than 1.5 million foreign nationals became British citizens.  One immigrant every three minutes was given a passport during Gordon Brown’s last year in office.

Even more serious in its long term implications for the future of our country is the revelation by new research that there are more than twice as many “mixed race” people in the UK than previously thought.  Almost 2% of adults in the UK (rather than the 0.9% previously estimated) are of mixed race.  Moreover while it had been thought that 2.9% of UK children were of mixed race, it is now reported that 8.9% of children live with parents from different ethnic groups or in mixed race households.

This latter figure would of course include white children whose parent now lives with someone else of a different race.

Official statistics also imply certain consequences from racial differences.  British schools test children at the age of 10 to find out whether they have reached the appropriate educational standard.  77% of white children have done so; 63% of blacks; and 73% of those of mixed race.

Unsurprisingly to all except the politically correct, a racial mix between Whites and Asians produces higher pass rates (79%) than between Whites and Blacks.

Racial differences are even more marked when looking at statistics for single parent families.  65% of Black Caribbean children in the UK are brought up in single parent households, compared to 51% of children from mixed White and Caribbean ethnicity; 23% of White British children; but only 10% of Indian children in the UK and 15% of UK Pakistanis.

It would be illegal for me to make the obvious deduction from these figures!

UK population to reach an unsustainable 70 million – immigration will be the cause

A Texan CPA crunches the numbers on the UK’s immigration crisis…

BLOGOSPHERE, 23 Dec 2009: First, on the government’s own figures, the population of the UK is likely to hit 70m by 2030. Immigration would account for 70 per cent on the increase, directly and via births from immigrant parents.

The assumption here is that the net inflow would continue at 190,000 a year. It might be higher: government actuaries have, in the past, tended to underestimate the immigration rate. …

Third, net immigration from outside the European Union, which is, in principle, subject to control, has dominated the net inflow: this has been running at around 200,000 a year since 2000. Asylum seekers have become a small part of the total. … Already, just over half of inner London school pupils have a first language other than English.

Continuing immigration will transform populations in many areas. Such changes are significant. Are they desirable?

Read full article [external link]

Next Page »

  • Find By Category

  • Latest News

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Follow us on Instagram

  • Exactitude – free our history from debate deniers