Facebook fires worker who protested Mark Zuckerberg’s inaction over Trump’s inflammatory posts

Employee backlash was sparked by the president's infamous "looting" remark

Katie Paul

Facebook fired an employee who had criticised Mark Zuckerberg's decision not to take action against inflammatory posts by Donald Trump this month, citing his tweet challenging a colleague's silence on the issue.

Brandon Dail, a user interface engineer in Seattle, wrote on Twitter that he was dismissed for publicly scolding a colleague who had refused to include a statement of support for the Black Lives Matter movement on developer documents he was publishing.


Mr Dail sent the tweet a day after joining dozens of employees, including the six other engineers on his team, in abandoning their desks and tweeting objections to Mr Zuckerberg's handling of Mr Trump's posts in a rare protest at the social media company.

“Intentionally not making a statement is already political,” Mr Dail wrote in the tweet, sent on 2 June. He said on Friday that he stood by what he wrote.

Facebook confirmed Mr Dail's characterisation of his dismissal, but declined to provide additional information. The company said during the walkout that participating employees would not face retaliation.

Read more

Facebook employees say they're in an 'abusive relationship' with Trump

Facebook helped the FBI hack an online child predator

Facebook relaxes rules about coronavirus advertising

Mr Dail did not respond to a request for comment.

Mr Trump's posts which prompted the staff outcry included the racially charged phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” in reference to demonstrations against racism and police brutality held after the 25 May killing of George Floyd, a black man who died in police custody in Minneapolis.

Twitter affixed a warning label to the same post, saying it glorified violence. Facebook opted to leave the post untouched.

Mr Zuckerberg defended his decision at a tense all-hands meeting with employees that week. During the meeting, Mr Dail tweeted that it was “crystal clear today that leadership refuses to stand with us”.

Mr Dail again voiced objections this week after both Facebook and Twitter declined to take action against a Trump post that contained an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory about Martin Gugino, a 75-year-old protester who was critically injured by police in Buffalo, New York.

“Trump's attack on Martin Gugino is despicable and a clear violation of Facebook's anti-harassment rules. It's again extremely disappointing that we (and Twitter) haven't removed it,” he said.
e advice and analysis you need


Internal dissent is often encouraged at Silicon Valley tech giants, but the companies have been accused of penalising workers who organise and air complaints publicly.

Alphabet's Google fired at least five workplace activists late last year, while Amazon dismissed critics of its warehouse conditions during the coronavirus pandemic.

Both companies denied firing employees for speaking out.

Reuters

SNL star Jay Pharoah says police officer knelt on his neck during LA incident: ‘I literally could have been George Floyd’

Comedian posted an Instagram video where he recounted his experience of being stopped and held at gunpoint by police

Roisin O'Connor @Roisin_OConnor

Comedian Jay Pharoah has shared an Instagram video in which he reveals he was recently stopped and handcuffed by police in Los Angeles while out exercising.

The former Saturday Night Live actor said the incident took place around a week before Ahmaud Arbery was shot and killed by two white men in Georgia. He also said that one of the officers knelt on his neck in a similar way to the office charged in the killing of George Floyd.

Security footage included in Pharoah’s video shows him walking down a street when an officer runs up pointing his gun at him.


That officer is joined by another on foot, and two more officers who exit from a police cruiser that arrives on the scene. Three of the officers have their guns drawn and pointed at Pharoah.

“They tell me to get on the ground, spread my arms out,” Pharoah said in the video. “They put me in cuffs. The officer takes his knee, puts it on my neck. It wasn’t as long as George Floyd, but I know how it feels.”

Pharoah said he told the officers to look him up on Google: “You will see that you made a big mistake.” The officers released him “a minute later”.

The 32-year-old said the officers told him he fit the description of “a black man in this area, with grey sweatpants and a grey shirt”.

He later went on CBS show The Talk to discuss his experience, where he described the moment the officer knelt on his neck as “totally gratuitous”


“I was just trying to exercise,” he said. “It could have easily turned into another situation if I wasn’t who I am. And the point is that being black in America is just that, being black in America.

“Other people can’t level with the same fears I have. Leaving the house, we should not have to fear going to the grocery store, going to get some gas, running down the street. It’s called human civility. That’s what it is. It’s called being a human. That’s why everyone is out protesting. Corona put us in the house, and George Floyd took us out of it.”

Pharoah ended his video by urging all black men to educate themselves on the law in case they were ever stopped by police.

“Be in the know,” he said. “I’m Jay Pharoah, and I’m a black man in America. And my life matters. Black lives always matter.”

An LAPD spokesman said: “The person in the Instagram post was detained as a possible suspect of a crime. It was determined to be the wrong suspect and he was let go. The incident is being investigated.”

KOO-KOO FOR CO-CO PUFFS 

Donald Trump has claimed police chokeholds sound “so innocent and so perfect” during a bizarre Fox News interview in which he compared his administration's achievements to the work of Abraham Lincoln.

Mr Trump said he did not like chokeholds and would “generally speaking” support ending the practice, although he suggested there were scenarios where he would back their use.
Trump offers mixed message on police chokeholds

WHILE YOU WEREN'T LOOKING
Trump administration rolls back Obama-era healthcare protections for transgender people and abortion access with HHS ruling

Move comes in middle of Pride month


Alex Woodward New York

Donald Trump‘s administration has rolled back nondiscrimination healthcare protections for women and transgender people by reversing a rule that would prevent healthcare workers and insurance companies that receive federal funds from refusing to provide services like abortion or gender-affirming care.

The rule changes could allow health providers to deny coverage and care to women and transgender people, as the nation is in the grip of the coronavirus pandemic.

They also arrive in the middle of Pride month on the anniversary of the Pulse massacre, when 49 people were gunned down inside a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida.

Invoking “religious freedom”, the Department of Health and Human Services had revised a rule under the Affordable Care Act to revert to “the government’s interpretation of sex discrimination according to the plain meaning of the word ‘sex’ as male or female and as determined by biology”.

The changes revoke discrimination protections on the basis of ”gender identity” and sex, including patients seeking an abortion.
https://www.thefader.com/2017/09/08/church-of-satan-missouri-supreme-court

New Trump appointee suggested America is a ‘homo-empire’ on Twitter

Crossing state lines for an abortion while America locks down

Transgender woman at centre of civil rights case dies before ruling

What trans people want you to learn this Transgender Day of Visibility

They are likely to be challenged in court: the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and the Human Rights Campaign and other groups have already announced plans to sue the administration.

“In the middle of a global pandemic, with our nation in uproar over a systemic devaluing of Black lives, this administration chose to prioritise a rule change attempting to roll back anti-discrimination protections in health care,” said LGBT+ legal advocacy organisation Lambda Legal. “Despicable doesn’t begin to describe it.”

Human Rights Campaign president Alphonso David, said: ”LGBTQ people should not live in fear that they cannot get the care they need simply because of who they are. It is clear that this administration does not believe that LGBTQ people, or other marginalised communities, deserve equality under the law.”

Initial rules under former president Barack Obama‘s administration established civil rights protections in healthcare, barring discrimination on the basis of race, colour, national origin, age, disability or sex as well as gender identity. Health providers and insurers, under those anti-discrimination rules, would have to cover costs associated with gender-affirming care.

U.S. health agency reverses Obamacare transgender protections

Reuters•June 12, 2020

A sign on an insurance store advertises Obamacare in San Ysidro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a rule on Friday that would lift anti-discrimination protections under Obamacare for transgender people and women seeking abortions, drawing condemnation from Democratic lawmakers.

The rule reverses some provisions of the Affordable Care Act passed during President Barack Obama's administration, also known as Obamacare, that extended civil rights protections in healthcare to cover areas including gender identity and the termination of a pregnancy.

LGBTQ rights groups, Democratic lawmakers and Democratic-controlled states have decried efforts under the administration of Republican President Donald Trump to erode protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer citizens. One group said it planned to sue the administration over the new rule.

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the decision a "shocking attack on the health and well-being of countless vulnerable communities, including women, LGBTQ individuals, and people of color."

The Trump administration has also sought to restrict access to abortion.

The Health Department, or HHS, said a regulation issued by the Obama administration in 2016 to implement the anti-discrimination Section 1557 of Obamacare had "redefined sex discrimination to include termination of pregnancy and gender identity, which it defined as 'one's internal sense of gender, which may be male, female, neither, or a combination of male and female.'"

That regulation was struck down by a federal court in October 2019.

"HHS will enforce Section 1557 by returning to the government’s interpretation of sex discrimination according to the plain meaning of the word 'sex' as male or female and as determined by biology," the department said on Friday.

The Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ advocacy group, said it planned to "sue the Trump administration for exceeding their legal authority and attempting to remove basic health care protections from vulnerable communities including LGBTQ people."

(Reporting by Mohammad Zargham; Editing by Tom Brown and Sonya Hepinstall)

Boris Johnson book depicts Jews as controlling the media

AND HIS TITLE IS ISLAMOPHOBIC

The 2004 novel Seventy Two Virgins, written by the Tory leader, is full of questionable portrayals of ethnic minorities
Jon Stone Monday 9 December 2019 

Boris Johnson depicted Jews as controlling the media and being able to “fiddle” elections in a little-known 2004 novel written while he was a Tory MP, it has emerged.

The Conservative leader was branded “unfit to be prime minister” over passages from Seventy Two Virgins, which also includes numerous other questionable portrayals of ethnic minorities.

While telling the story of a fictional terror attack on Westminster Mr Johnson deploys descriptions of Kosovan Muslims as having “hook noses” and describes a mixed-race character as “half-caste”.

The now prime minister also repeatedly uses racial slurs in authorial voice, introducing a group of characters as “pikeys”, an ethnic slur for travellers, and another as a “Chinaman”.

The context of the passage regarding Jews is a part of the story in which all the countries of the world are made to vote country-by-country on whether the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay should be released.

Describing the situation, Mr Johnson wrote: “And the news from the voting was still bad for America, though not as bad as it had seemed at first. Some countries, such as Saudi Arabia were reporting almost 100 per cent insistence that the prisoners be sent home. But there were odd pockets of support for the President. He might have thought that Russia, after her humiliation in the Cold War, would take the chance to put her boot on the neck of the old adversary. But no, the Russians had their problems with Islamic terror. Maybe there was some kind of fiddling of the figures by the oligarchs who ran the TV stations (and who were mainly, as some lost no time in pointing out, of Jewish origin), but it seemed that Russia, one of the most populous countries in the world, was voting heavily for America."


The passage is just one of dozens of racially-charged and questionable parts of the novel. In a separate part introducing one of the terrorists, named Jones, Mr Johnson also appears to suggest that having “brown skin” is not compatible with being Welsh.

Mr Johnson wrote: “‘Quickly,’ said the one called Jones, coming back from the toilets. ‘The traffic wardens will be here.’ There was certainly something lilting and eastern about his accent; but if you shut your eyes and ignored his brown skin, there were tonic effects – birdlike variations in pitch – that were positively Welsh.” Notably, Jones’s ethnicity is referred to as an “Arab-type thing” by another character, a vague description that is largely unclarified by the end of the novel.


In 2016 Boris Johnson suggested that “part-Kenyan” US president Barack Obama had an “ancestral dislike” of Britain because of his ethnicity. His novel also makes repeated use of this line of thinking when discussing its ethnic minority characters.
The book was written while Mr Johnson was a Tory MP (Jon Stone)

Near the beginning of the book Mr Johnson uses an extended metaphor to depict a traffic warden working in Westminster as a “hunter-gatherer” because he is an African immigrant.

“He went down Horseferry Road, past the obelisks with their odd pineapple finials, past the bearded stone Victorians who had conquered the continent from which he came, and he, the colonial, became to hunt in the former imperial metropolis,” Mr Johnson also wrote of the character.

This theme continues in other parts of the novel. One of the main characters in the book is Roger Barlow, a bicycle-riding tussle-haired Tory MP who saves the day and who reviewers have interpreted as being a transparent cipher for Mr Johnson himself. In one bizarre racialised description of a phone call between the fictional MP and a journalist “with an Asian name”, Mr Johnson wrote:
Maybe there was some kind of fiddling of the figures by the oligarchs who ran the TV stations (and who were mainly, as some lost no time in pointing out, of Jewish origin)Boris Johnson, Seventy Two Virgins

“The reporter was a woman with an Asian name, and from the minute she introduced herself, Barlow feared her. He feared her as British soldiers on the Northwest Frontier once feared the Afghan daughters, and their knives, and their traditional knowledge of how to cut a live human being.”


Continuing, and apparently trying to approximate a stereotyped South Asian accent in eye dialect, Mr Johnson wrote: “‘I’m reely sorry,’ she said, after his initial evasions, ‘but I reely do feel you are going to be better off talking to me”.

In a separate section describing one mixed-race character’s thoughts about himself, Mr Johnson wrote: “The interesting thing about his half-caste looks, he decided, was that he didn’t look Negroid.” On another occasion Mr Johnson describes the same character as “the faintest coffee colour”.

One of the heroes of Mr Johnson’s book is a former Serbian paramilitary who Johnson introduces as having been a member of “Arkan's Tigers”, a real-life group whose commander was indicted for crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing against Muslims. The character is one of the first in the book to realise the terror attack is taking place because of his instinctive distrust of Muslims, who he describes as “sneaky bastards”.


In a scene with the character, Mr Johnson wrote: “As soon as he had gasped ‘Where is the police?’ he saw their burning eyes, hook noses and hairy black eyebrows that joined in the middle. He knew who they were. They were Skiptars. They were Muslims, almost certainly from Pristina. And they knew who he was. He was a Serb.”

One recurring theme of the novel is that the terrorists carrying out the attack repeatedly get away with their attack because of political correctness and a refusal to racially profile them.

In one instance the French ambassador’s partner, described as a “Palestinian Arab” is nearly banned from the event where the terror attack takes place because of racial-profiling, but is ultimately allowed to attend after someone stands up for her – she later turns out to be a terrorist after all.

In another episode, an MP lets a group of terrorists through a locked door because he does not want to be seen as racist. On another occasion, a military sniper hesitates and misses his chance to shoot the terrorists because he is momentarily worried he might be racist.

"If these extracts from this novel are as they appear, this adds to the long list of people that Boris Johnson has insulted,” Christine Jardine, the Liberal Democrats’ equalities spokesperson, told The Independent.

“The rise of anti-Jewish hatred must be condemned, wherever and whenever, and in all its forms. Boris Johnson has once again demonstrated that he is not fit to be Prime Minister.”

Approached for comment on this story, Downing Street said the issue was for the Conservative party to address. The Conservative party has been contacted for comment but has not issued a response.

Boris Johnson said colonialism in Africa should never have ended and dismissed Britain's role in slavery

Jon Stone The Independent 13 June 2020

Boris Johnson will come out of the crisis a diminished figure following the Cummings scandal: Getty

Boris Johnson said colonialism in Africa should never have ended and downplayed Britain's role in the slave trade, an article written by the prime minister while he was a Tory MP reveals.

Critics are urging Mr Johnson to explain whether he still holds the views expounded in the 2002 piece, where he argued that Africans would not have grown the right crops for export without British direction.

"The continent may be a blot, but it is not a blot upon our conscience," he wrote. "The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we are not in charge any more."

The prime minister this week argued for the retention of controversial statues of slavers and British colonialists in UK cities, which he said should stay up because they "teach us about our past with all its faults".

But the article, written while Mr Johnson was editor of the Spectator magazine, reveals that the prime minister in fact has held an active admiration for Britain's colonial activities on the continent.

"Consider Uganda, pearl of Africa, as an example of the British record. Are we guilty of slavery? Pshaw. It was one of the first duties of Frederick Lugard, who colonised Buganda in the 1890s, to take on and defeat the Arab slavers," Mr Johnson says in the piece.

"And don't swallow any of that nonsense about how we planted the 'wrong crops'. Uganda teems, sprouts, bursts with vegetation. You will find fruits rare and strange, like the jackfruit, hanging bigger than your head and covered with green tetrahedral nodules. Though delicately perfumed, it is, alas, more or less disgusting, and not even Waitrose is pretentious enough to stock it.

He continues: "So the British planted coffee and cotton and tobacco, and they were broadly right. It is true that coffee prices are currently low; but that is the fault of the Vietnamese, who are shamelessly undercutting the market, and not of the planters of 100 years ago.

"If left to their own devices, the natives would rely on nothing but the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain ... the colonists correctly saw that the export market was limited."

Suggesting that one way to boost the economy of African countries would be for British tourists to holiday in them, Mr Johnson wrote: "The best fate for Africa would be if the old colonial powers, or their citizens, scrambled once again in her direction; on the understanding that this time they will not be asked to feel guilty."

Boris Johnson's spokesperson declined to comment on the article when approached by The Independent.

Opposition MPs urged the prime minister to consider his comments and explain whether they still represented his views today.



The continent may be a blot, but it is not a blot upon our conscience. The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we are not in charge any more."

Boris Johnson

"Boris Johnson is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. The history of the UK, Windrush, empire, colonialism should be told with sobering accuracy," Labour MP Dawn Butler told The Independent.

"In order to make sustainable progress we need the current PM who has power and privilege to reflect on what he has said and written.

"I urge the PM to review his previous articles, books and statements and to re-examine them through the brutal lynching that he watched of George Floyd and say whether he regrets anything of what he has said, done or written in the past."

Ms Butler said it was important not to "misrepresent or whitewash history", adding: "This Etonian attitude affects everyone who is not in that inner circle, no matter your colour. Instead of viewing history through rose tinted glasses maybe it is time to look at history through the lenses of a very visible modern day lynching."

Labour's shadow secretary of state for women and equalities, Marsha de Cordova said: "Boris Johnson's past comments are an example of why we need to educate people about the impact of colonialism.

"The legacy of British colonialism and its role in the slave trade is a scar on our society. To infer this is something to be proud of, and that African countries are worse off because they are no longer ruled by the empire, is an insult to millions."

Christine Jardine, Liberal Democrats' equalities spokesperson said: "It is vital that the Prime Minister today makes clear that the language he may have used and comments made in the past are no longer reflective of his views.


"Across the UK there is a collective discussion happening on how as a nation we deal with our history and the racism and prejudice that is part of that. It is the Prime Minister's duty to show leadership on this.

"We need to do more to tackle racism in the UK and if we truly want to change society, we must eradicate the existing injustice. Liberal Democrats are clear that we want to see a government-wide plan to tackle BAME inequalities be so that we can finally enact change for all those fighting for justice and equality."

New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows profound disagreements between younger and older Americans on racial issues, police

Christopher Wilson Senior Writer, Yahoo News•June 12, 2020


New Yahoo News/YouGov poll finds support for Black Lives Matter has doubled among Americans

There are pronounced differences of opinion between older and younger Americans when it comes to the protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death, trust in the police and the prevalence of racism, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll.

Overall, Americans are far more supportive of Black Lives Matter than they were four years ago. They’re also much more supportive of former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s silent, bent-knee protests during the national anthem, which at the time were broadly unpopular.

But the support for the protests differs by age, with those 18-29 more likely to have a positive opinion of the demonstrations that have convulsed the nation in recent weeks than those 65 or older. And one of the starkest divides between the two groups is on trust in the police and how they’ve handled the protests.

Just 8 percent of the younger group said they had “a great deal” of trust in the police, versus 36 percent for the older group. Overall, 56 percent of the 18-29 group said they had little or no trust in the police versus 21 percent expressing the same sentiment from the 65+ group. 

Sixty-five percent of the younger group disapproved of the police response to the protests, compared to 39 percent disapproval from the older group. A majority of the older group also didn’t think police had been violent in response to peaceful protests: Just 31 percent said most or many officers had responded with violence, versus 60 percent of the younger group, who said most or many officers did get violent with peaceful protesters. 

WHERE ARE ALL THE ANTI VIETNAM WAR PROTESTERS,  FREEKS, HIPPIES, YIPPIES, FROM THE SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES 
WE ARE BOOMERS TOO 

Protesters in Salem, Mass., on Wednesday. (Matthew J. Lee/Boston Globe via Getty Images)

A narrow majority – 52 percent – of the 18-29 cohort said that police had been more violent than protesters over the last two weeks. Among the older group, meanwhile, 52 percent said the protesters had been more violent.

While videos of police violence against protesters racked up tens of millions of views on social media platforms beloved by younger American, traditional outlets like cable and local news focused on the looting, particularly in the early days of the demonstrations.

The younger group was far more likely to say their minds were changed on the issue recently, with 71 percent saying they had become more concerned about racial injustice in America since the protests began versus 46 percent of the 65+ group.

The older group was more likely to be against violent protests in general, with 81 percent agreeing with the sentiment “Violent protest is never justified in the U.S. as a way for a group to accomplish its goals,” versus just 48 percent of the younger group.

A recent protest against police brutality in Boston. (Barry Chin/Boston Globe via Getty Images)

When asked whether systemic racism in policing was a bigger problem than vandalism and violence during, 68 percent of the younger group said racism. For the older group, it was a slim majority (53 percent) saying vandalism and violence were a bigger problem.

A few other areas with a large divide:

· 67 percent of the younger group said it was OK for NFL players to kneel for the anthem to protest police killings of African-Americans, while 54 percent of the older group said it was not OK.

· Just 11 percent of the younger group said police departments don't need to be reformed, versus 28 percent of the older group.· Majorities of both groups either strongly or somewhat agreed with the statement “Racism is built into American society. The assumption of white superiority pervades schools, business, housing, and government.” However, the size of those majorities differed, with 72 percent of the younger group concurring versus 55 percent of the older group.

· 40 percent of the older group said it was appropriate to forcibly remove peaceful protesters away from the White House, versus 23 percent of the younger group.

· 57 percent of the younger group said the protests were motivated by a genuine desire to hold police officers accountable, while 50 percent of the older group attributed it to a long-standing bias against the police.

· 7 percent of both the 18-29 and 30-44 age groups replied yes when asked "Are you racist?" Just 1 percent of the 65+ group responded in the affirmative.
The numbers in this poll represent only a few hundred Americans in each group, but they are in line with the massive gap polls found in the Democratic presidential primary, where the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders attracted younger voters and older voters tended to prefer the more centrist former Vice President Joe Biden.

ABOLISH THE POLICE! 

ABOLISH THE STATE! 

DIRECT DEMOCRACY! 

MUNICIPAL SOCIALISM!

CONFEDERATION NOT FEDERATION!

Disorder at far-right linked UK protest to counter anti-racism rally

AFP 13 June 2020

A march by several hundred Black Lives Matter activists through the British capital went ahead at lunchtime Saturday, ending in Trafalgar Square near where counter protesters had gathered and amid a heavy police presence


Protesters at a demonstration linked to far-right groups clashed with police in central London on Saturday, after gathering to counter an anti-racism march despite officials urging people not to turn out due to coronavirus restrictions.




Thousands of people appeared to have defied the rules in and around Parliament Square, with footage on television news channels showing violent scuffles with police as some agitators threw punches and objects at officers.

Interior Minister Priti Patel called the chaotic scenes of violence and bottles, cans and smoke bombs being hurled at police "throughly unacceptable thuggery".

"Any perpetrators of violence or vandalism should expect to face the full force of the law," she said on Twitter, as footage of the disorder was shared widely on social media.

"Violence towards our police officers will not be tolerated," she added, noting COVID-19 remained "a threat to us all" and those assembled should "go home".

A protest by the Black Lives Matter group planned for Saturday had instead been held on Friday to avoid clashes with self-styled "patriots", who had vowed to turn out to protect memorials damaged at anti-racism demonstrations last weekend.

Paul Golding, the leader of fringe far-right political group Britain First, which has seen its members jailed for hate crimes and been banned from Facebook, was among the first to assemble in Parliament Square.

He told the domestic Press Association news agency they had turned out to "guard our monuments".

"Anyone who comes along today to try and vandalise them will probably be dealt with by all of these Englishmen that turned up, and they're fed up as well," he said.

A march by several hundred Black Lives Matter activists through the British capital still went ahead at lunchtime Saturday, ending in Trafalgar Square near where the counter protesters had gathered and amid a heavy police presence.

London's Metropolitan Police had said those who had ignored the pleas not to protest must comply with conditions imposed, including keeping to separate designated areas and dispersing by 1600 GMT.

"We are asking you not to come to London, and let your voices be heard in other ways," Bas Javid, a Met commander, said in a statement ahead of the events.



- 'Hijacked by extremists' -

Britain has seen a wave of protests prompted by the death during a US police arrest of George Floyd, an unarmed African-American, which has triggered outrage around the world.

The majority have been peaceful, but demonstrations in London last weekend latterly turned violent while crowds in Bristol, southwest England, toppled a statue to a 17th century slave trader Edward Colston and threw it into the harbour.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Friday said the protests had been "hijacked by extremists" while criticising the targeting of statues as "absurd and shameful" and also urging people not to rally.

The comments drew criticism from some opposition MPs, with Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokeswoman Christine Jardine accusing him of "stoking division and fear in our communities by suggesting they have been hijacked by extremists."

Several central London memorials were boarded up as a precaution ahead of Saturday, including one of World War II leader Winston Churchill -- which was defaced with the word "racist" last weekend -- and the Cenotaph war shrine.

Former Conservative lawmaker Nicholas Soames, Churchill's grandson, said the "very, very small, extremely explosive group of people" responsible for the vandalism were "behaving in an unspeakable and cowardly manner".

But he told the Daily Telegraph: "The idea that the hard right should stand guard over Churchill is absolutely repulsive.

"It feels like a society that has lost its compass."

Anti-racism group Hope Not Hate warned ahead of Saturday's protests that hooligan gangs attached to some English football clubs intent on violence were planning to attend.

"For those in central London today, please be care(ful). Football hooligan gangs and far right activists are still planning to descend on the capital," said Nick Lowles, of the organisation.





London protests – live: Demonstrators attack police in violent clashes as thousands gather in capital

Chiara Giordano The Independent 13 June 2020



A man kicks a barrier as activists from far-right linked groups clash with police on Parliament Street, in London, on 13 June 2020: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Demonstrators have attacked police during violent clashes in central London, as football hooligans, veterans and far-right groups descended on the capital vowing to “defend” memorials.

People have reportedly hurled bottles and fireworks and attempted to storm through barriers as police hold them back, while footage showed others throwing punches at officers dressed in riot gear.

Home secretary Priti Patel condemned the “unacceptable thuggery” of protesters, while London mayor Sadiq Khan warned ”perpetrators will feel the full force of the law”.
Pictures are coming in of Black Lives Matter protests and activists surrounding memorials across the country
 
Pictures are coming in of Black Lives Matter protests and activists surrounding memorials across the country
 https://uk.news.yahoo.com/black-lives-matter-protests-live-101631851.html

Black candidates and political groups see a surge of support amid US protests

Daniel Strauss The Guardian 13 June 2020

Photograph: Bruce Schreiner/AP
African American candidates and political groups focused on racial justice have experienced a surge of donations and support amid ongoing national protests about police reform and anti-racism.

The country has been wracked by protests since the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Floyd’s death has also triggered an intense introspection on race relations and police brutality, especially against African Americans, and it seems black political candidates are getting more attention as a result.

Related: ‘Long overdue’: lawmakers declare racism a public health emergency

In Kentucky, state representative Charles Booker, said he’s raised $1m over the past month. Roughly over that same period he’s also been endorsed by top progressive Democrats: Vermont senator Bernie Sanders and New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

In New York, Democrat Jamaal Bowman, who is challenging New York congressman Eliot Engel in a tough primary, has surpassed fundraising benchmarks since the beginning of June, as he’s tried to capitalize on missteps by the incumbent congressman – including a hot mic incident at a Black Lives Matter event. Sanders has endorsed Bowman as well.

The Real Justice Pac, a group that works to boost progressive “reform-minded prosecutors”, said it had seen an influx of support amid the ongoing national discussion of reforming the police.

“Real Justice Pac is seeing a significant increase in the frequency and amount of donations – large and small,” said Chris Lazare, the group’s organizing director, in a statement. “We think people across the country are realizing that electing reform minded prosecutors is an integral part of achieving the change we want and holding police accountable.”

Real Justice Pac officials declined to give exact figures on their fundraising numbers.

Multiple factors are at play in each individual race and strategists are hesitant to attribute money flows to one single subject or force but the timing suggests that the general unrest throughout the country is an active factor.

“We know anecdotally that people across the country and in the district are moved by how Jamal has talked about this moment,” explained a Democratic operative involved in Bowman’s campaign. The operative added: “This period coincides with all of these other activities.”

A renewed and intense focus on race relations stretches all the way up to the presidential level where both Donald Trump’s reelection campaign and Joe Biden’s presidential campaign have attacked each other on their positions on policing and racial justice.

Biden also continues to face strong pressure to pick an African American woman as his running mate and vice presidential nominee.

Kentucky’s Booker, the underdog Senate candidate competing with Amy McGrath for the Democratic nomination to face Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, said in an interview on Friday his campaign raised $1m in the first week of June.

“With all the racial tension that has been growing in [not only] my state but across the country I think what you’re seeing is people are looking to ‘who’s going to lead in this moment,” Booker said.“We have seen a big surge in our fundraising. We’ve seen an outpouring of support from across Kentucky and across the country. And we have a very real shot to win this race.”

Booker added: “It’s come from this energy, this sense of resolve, this fire, this aggressive urge and plea from regular folks to [say] we gotta do things different and make sure that we don’t keep playing the status quo.”