Tuesday, January 14, 2020

Will Flight PS752 victims be remembered differently than those killed in the Air India bombing?


January 13, 2020 

There’s been an incredible outpouring of grief across Canada since Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS752 was shot down by Iran, killing all 176 passengers and crew on board.

We have learned that among the 57 Canadians killed, there were beloved students, professors, doctors and engineers. Children, newlyweds and entire families perished. Many of them have been described by Canadian news media and leaders as “exceptional.” They belonged to Canada’s vibrant Iranian communities and are being remembered as such in tributes and memorial services across the nation.

“Your entire country stands with you tonight, tomorrow, and in all the years to come,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told about 2,300 people who attended a memorial service in Edmonton on Sunday. “We share your grief,” he said on the day of the crash.

Trudeau called it a “moment of national pain” and recounted stories he’d heard from impacted families over the past few days, including one of a 10-year-old “who was confident he’d one day be prime minister of this country he loved so much.”


I’ve spent more than a dozen years researching public memory of another air disaster that resulted in an even greater number of Canadian casualties — the Air India tragedy.

Indeed, news of PS752 is triggering memories of June 23, 1985, when Air India Flight 182 fell into the Atlantic Ocean near Cork, Ireland, after a bomb hidden among the luggage exploded. All 329 passengers and crew on board that flight were killed. Among them were 280 Canadians, the majority from Indian-Canadian families, as reported by the official inquiry by Public Safety Canada.
‘I felt gutted’

Winnipeg resident Nicky Mehta was 13 at the time that her uncle, aunt and two young cousins were killed on the Air India flight. On the day after Flight PS752 crashed, she woke up to an abbreviated list of “deadly plane crashes that killed Canadians” published in the Winnipeg Free Press that did not include Air India. “I felt gutted,” she told me. “It was re-traumatizing to see that Air India was not even worth a mention here.” The article has since been removed.

Back in 1985, there was no collective outpouring of grief or statement of national solidarity for the victims of Air India Flight 182. Were these victims not “exceptional” enough? In fact, they too were beloved students, professors, doctors and engineers, as well as homemakers, teachers, civil servants and more.

Notoriously, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney offered his condolences to Prime Minister of India Rajiv Gandhi for India’s loss instead of addressing his own citizens.

 
A member of the Iranian community in Calgary lights a 
candle during a memorial for the victims of Flight PS752 crash.
 THE CANADIAN PRESS/Todd Korol

It is clear that for many Canadians (not just Mulroney) the Air India bombing was unthinkable — and thus unmemorable — as a tragedy of national consequence due to the dominant assumption that Canadian identity is synonymous with whiteness. Indeed, critics as well as relatives of the dead have raised the obvious question: would there have been such trouble recognizing the bombing as a national tragedy if the majority of those killed were white rather than brown Canadians?
Crucial evidence lost

Now well-documented as the result of criminal trial proceedings and a long-awaited federally appointed Commission of Inquiry into the Investigation of the Bombing of Air India 182 are repeated instances where government officials, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the RCMP and Canadian airport authorities ignored, disbelieved, erased and lost crucial evidence — including surveillance tapes of eventually acquitted suspects and warnings by the Indian government and Air India officials of an attack on the airline.

Relatives of those killed in the bombing of Flight 182 also testified to how the government failed to provide them with the most basic, practical supports in the days, months and years following the deaths of their loved ones, many citing compounded grief as a result of being treated like second-class citizens for their “Indian-ness.”

Sociologist Sherene Razack has said that although “there is evidence that some Canadian officials acted heroically,” systemic racism played a role in Canada’s pre- and post-bombing response or lack thereof. In her expert witness report for the inquiry, she observed:


“When police, political and media elites all consistently treated the Air India bombings as a foreign event, it is not surprising that Canadians do not recall June 23, 1985. As a nation, we were not shaken, transformed and moved to change our own institutional practices for a tragedy we considered had little to do with us.”

It would take 25 years of lobbying by Air India families before the government of Canada would publicly claim their loved ones, as well as the suspected perpetrators, as Canada’s own.
Has Canada changed?

Does the national mourning as a result of the tragedy of PS752 mean then that Canada has since changed? Are we befittingly shaken this time around? Other news reports are citing diversity and multiculturalism experts who think so, some claiming that there has been a “180-degree shift.” But I am curious to see how the victims of this tragedy (and those of the Air India bombings, for that matter) continue to be remembered in time.

Despite the fact that the Air India bombing is now referred to by public authorities as “the worst encounter with terrorism Canada has experienced,” or even “Canada’s 9/11,” most of my undergraduate university students have never heard of the incident.

The 35th anniversary of the Air India bombings approaches this coming June. It remains to be seen how long it will take for the Flight PS752 victims to be forgotten.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Indian
 Prime Minister Narendra Modi visit the memorial
 honouring victims of the 1985 Air India bombing at a 
ceremony in Toronto in 2015.
 THE CANADIAN PRESS/Michelle Siu

It also remains to be seen if the deaths of these passengers will be mobilized in the interests of increased western military involvement in the Middle East. Again I can’t help but think of the Air India bombings, and the ways in which the government of Stephen Harper strategically used the memory of its victims to bolster support for conservative anti-terrorist legislation; or more recently, conservative pundits who invoked the bombings over and over again to bait NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh before last fall’s federal election.

Nor am I convinced that Canada’s response to this recent air tragedy and the loss of so many Iranian-Canadian lives means racist reactions won’t still emerge.

Often during times of national crises and heightened political tensions, race-based fears and anxieties about foreign and/or domestic terrorism result in the intensified stereotyping of particular people and places as inherently threatening — as exemplified in President Donald Trump’s latest characterization of Iran as a “rough neighborhood.” To be sure, the potential for rising anti-Iranian sentiment in Canada also exists.

And so as further details of the tragedy in Tehran unfold and political players in and beyond Canada negotiate their stakes, I expect that public memory will shift along with it, including how the incident and its casualties are remembered and understood.

This is how public memory works: when new information and investments become present, we tend to revise how we make sense of the past.

The best we can hope for is that our practice of collective remembrance might become the grounds upon which those of us who were not immediately affected by the downing of PS752 — or the Air India bombings — join in memory and mourning with those who were. In doing so, we learn to live alongside one another in the aftermath of loss with renewed connection.


Author

Angela Failler

Canada Research Chair in Culture and Public Memory, University of Winnipeg
Disclosure statement
Angela Failler receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Canada Research Chairs Program..
Partners



University of Winnipeg provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation CA.

Transgender hate crimes are on the rise even in Canada





People participate in the 2016 Trans Pride March in Toronto. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Eduardo Lima

Canada has a good reputation for LGBTQ rights. Federal political leaders, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and federal NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, attend pride parades across the country. But a rising tide of violence against transgender people raises the question: what will Canada do to protect trans and nonbinary people from targeted violence?
I am a security and surveillance doctoral researcher and recently received a Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation scholarship to further look into anti-transgender trolls and digital vigilantes.
On a personal level, the hostility I’ve faced in the year and a half of transitioning as a trans woman has been immense. I’ve been aggressively harassed several times on Ottawa streets. I’m subject to constant weird looks, angry glares and misgendering. For these reasons, I battle anxiety as I leave my apartment, obsessing with how I look. If I look out of place it might provoke someone to lash out. This vortex of hostility and fear makes it challenging for me to trust strangers in my own community.
Our institutions and public spaces have historically ignored the basic rights and dignity of trans folk. At best, we are invisible in our institutions and in the daily grind of most Canadian lives, at worst, we are subject to hatred, suspicion and disgust.
On July 22, Statistics Canada published police-reported nationwide crime statistics for 2018. The report includes a table on hate crime that includes sexual orientation. Although the “gender identity and expression” category was recently adopted in the federal hate speech legislation, it does it not have its own category in the charts for the official Statistics Canada report. Statistics Canada says those hate crimes are reported as “transgender” and “agender” but gets put into the “other” category within “sex.”
Before the new wording in the legislation, police had not kept an official record on the hate crimes against trans and nonbinary folks. This invisibility had troubling implications for our criminal justice system. With no record of the violence we experience, there was no need for the government to act.
Now that there is an official federal category, will we start to see changes in the reporting of the violence? It seems like we still have a ways to go.

Climate of fear

The vitriolic national debates around Bill C-16 which proposed that the Canadian Human Rights Act be amended to include trans and nonbinary folks set the tone for transgender rights in Canada. The legislation was successful, but the language of hatred used by far-right politicians and residents around the legitimacy of transgender and nonbinary identities had a chilling effect on our feeling of public safety and security.
This climate of fear for trans and nonbinary folks has been distilling for years. The category of “sexual orientation” was officially added to the Canadian Human Rights Act in 1996 after a former Canadian Armed Forces captain, Joshua Birch, was discharged for publicly identifying as gay. Birch and his team argued that the exclusion of sexual orientation from human rights legislation constituted a form of discrimination.
Roughly two decades later, transgender folks became recognized as a protected class. Up until recently, trans folks have not been protected by Canadian human rights legislation.

Permission to hate

Recently in Ontario, Premier Doug Ford and his government meddled with how transgender issues are taught in the primary educational curriculum. The Ford administration decided the topic of “gender identity” was not “age appropriate” for grade school and removed it from the curriculum, postponing this lesson to Grade 8. Ford’s move reinforces the negative idea that being transgender is inappropriate and exceptional.
In a journal article published in Critical Criminology, researchers Barbara Perry and Ryan Scrivens from the Centre on Hate, Bias and Extremism at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology make the argument that hate crimes grow substantially in “enabling environments” where people are given a tacit “permission to hate.”
Another example of this can be found in the United Kingdom, where the police do keep a record of anti-transgender hate crimes. In a recent article, the BBC reported that there had been an 81 per cent increase in crimes against transgender and nonbinary folks in just one year.
This increase in violence has thrived in the context of growing public hostility towards trans people. The BBC article reports: “Transgender people have their existence debated on a near daily basis across U.K. media, and several activists believe this negative attention reinforces the poor treatment they receive on our streets.”

Community data

Despite the lack of police data, there has been some research into the struggles faced by trans Canadians. In 2013, the Trans PULSE Project published results of a survey of 433 trans Ontarians. Their report said, “experiences of transphobia were nearly universal among trans Ontarians, with 98 per cent reporting at least one experience of transphobia.”
Another survey conducted by Egale in 2011, which surveyed 3,700 LGBTQ students across Canada, reported that 74 per cent of trans students in Canada faced verbal harassment and 37 per cent have faced physical harassment.

 
People cheer on participants of the 2016 Trans Pride March in Toronto. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Eduardo Lima

By not explicitly naming the violence, the state demonstrates complicity in the invisibility and violence that trans and nonbinary folks face.
When police institutions ignore the existence of hate crimes, it sets up an environment that enables more violence and harassment. Analyzing a series of police interviews, Perry and Scrivens found police were generally apathetic around the rising threat of far-right hate crimes.
They wrote: “In addition to the neglect paid to any known right-wing extremism presence, some police personnel deny — at least publicly — that there is any risk associated with the extreme-right. They trivialized their potential for growth and violence.”

Federal election

Election season is just around the corner, there is no better time to put the fire under the feet of our elected representatives.
In the meantime, Trans PULSE is conducting another large survey into the experiences of transgender and nonbinary folk. Share, and if applicable, participate. This is an opportunity to build a record of our experiences in the vacuum left in the wake of our exclusion from the institutional memory.
We need to have a collective conversation about the consequences of the widespread oppression and persecution many of us face when general anti-trans hostility is allowed to fester unacknowledged.

Author
Abigail Curlew
PhD Sociology, Carleton University
Disclosure statement
Abigail Curlew receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) doctoral fellowship and the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation (PETF) Doctoral Scholarship. She is affiliated with Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation.

LABOUR VICTORY FOR DIVERSITY IN PUTNEY, UK

'Every single day of the next parliament, 
I will fight for a better and more equal country'

By Sian Bayley 


Rosena Allin-Khan, Fleur Anderson and Marsha de Cordova,
who all won their seats for Labour in Wandsworth tonight.
Credit - Wandsworth Labour/Simon Hogg.

It’s been a dark and difficult night for the Labour Party who lost a number of seats in the General Election last night [December 12].
But Putney, on the banks of the Thames in the borough of Wandsworth, bucked the trend with a Labour gain to see three female Labour MPs elected in the borough.

Fleur Anderson took the seat for Putney, storming home with 22,718 votes compared to the Conservatives’ 18,006.
In her victory speech she thanked staff at the count and said her win was a “bright light in a dark night.”
Her victory saw the London borough of Wandsworth turn red after a huge campaigning effort that saw more than 700 volunteers out canvassing one night this week to win the constituency from the Conservatives.
She praised a “people powered campaign,” but acknowledged “Brexit will be damaging for Putney.”
She added: “We want to remain. Brexit will not be done by Boris Johnson, it will take years and years of negotiation.
“The Labour party must not stop in our efforts to block Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit. We could now be facing five more years of austerity, and that’s heartbreaking for all the people who supported us and all the people who voted for Labour.”

Marsha de Cordova was up next for Battersea, praising “one of the most energetic, organised and dynamic campaigns.”
She said: “Every single day of the next parliament, I will fight for a better and more equal country.”
However, she quickly lost her voice from the amount of talking she had been doing on the night.
She croaked to the Local Democracy Reporting Service that it had been a “good campaign,” in Wandsworth.

Dr Rosena Allin-Khan concluded the night by holding on to Tooting for Labour, shouting “we have three red ladies in Wandsworth.”
She applauded the “unprecedented numbers of people of voting,” and said people were voting “with their heads and hearts against the division being stirred up by the Prime Minister.
“Tonight the message was read loud and clear, Tooting went out in the cold and in the rain to reject division and elect a pro-remain member of parliament. I am very grateful to everyone that put their faith in me.”
But acknowledging Labour’s defeats nationally, she said: “Tooting is disgusted with the cuts the NHS have seen, which is why they have voted for their local doctor. Tooting doesn’t want to lose more lives to violent crime, we want proper policing. Tooting needs genuinely affordable homes, not a government in the pocket of developers. The harsh reality is that tomorrow the food banks will be open. Record numbers of parcels will be handed out, and on Christmas Day, 3,000 children in Wandsworth will wake up homeless.
“Apart from Tooting electing the local woman who is willing to fight for them, there is little to celebrate tonight.”

Speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service at the end of the evening Ms Anderson said she hoped that having Labour MPs will force through change at Conservative-led Wandsworth council.
“It means something for the council. The Conservative council are being held to account even more now with three Labour MPs,” she said.
“The people of Wandsworth have said they prefer to have Labour.”
She added: “I will do everything to serve and to honour their vote. I will also be looking at the issues on Putney High Street, including air pollution.
“I can’t wait to start being an MP and to tackle some of the inequalities in our area. I will be working very much on Roehampton and opposing some of the worst parts of the regeneration.
Turnout was very high at 77.41 per cent compared to 72.1 per cent in 2017.
Battersea and Tooting also saw a high turnout, with 75.83 per cent and 76 per cent respectively.
Conservative candidates left swiftly after the results were announced. The Local Democracy Service has contacted them for comment.

 ---30---

VIDEO: Barrister arrested at St George's University during security guard strike

SOLIDARITY FOREVER 
AN INJURY TO ONE IS AN INJURY TO ALL
By Riley Krause cavemankrause Reporter - Croydon & Merton Wandsworth Times:

A barrister was arrested just hours into a protest outside St George's University of London on Monday morning.

Security guards at St George’s went on strike in protest at what their trade union has described as an “antiquated and discriminatory regime of outsourcing.”

During the industrial action, music was playing, horns were being blown and members from the union were handing out flyers outside the building.

But less than two hours into the first day of protests, police arrived at the scene.


Officers told the group that if they didn't move away from the building's entrance that they would "start nicking people" as they were "causing a nuisance."

At this point the music had stopped playing.

That was when lawyer Franck Magennis - who was part of the group protesting - stepped in to ask what was going on.

He questioned police about their right to stop the protest at the site and after a short discussion, was arrested.

"We are taking lawful industrial action as the security guards are in a dispute with their employer," Mr Magennis told the Wandsworth Times following his arrest.


"When I arrived on the scene there was no music and the police were trying to say, pursuant to legislation that we were trying to commit some specific crime that takes place on NHS property and they were threatening to arrest everyone.

"As a lawyer I stepped in and asked them to explain this and we were in the process of talking it through and one of the three elements of the offence requires you to be on NHS property without a reasonable excuse and committing a nuisance.

"So I was saying why do you think workers taking industrial action is not a reasonable excuse, he said ‘I’m not discussing it with you’ and I was saying they need to explain the offence and so he put his hand on my arm and arrested me."

Shortly after he was taken to a police van and after talking a bit more to the officers, he was taken out of the cuffs.

The group of protesters were however forced to leave the site less than two hours after the protest began.




So why are they protesting?

The workforce is outsourced to Noonan Services Group UK. Trade union United Voices of the World (UVW) are demanding that the workers be made direct employees of the university.

The workers currently only receive the statutory minimum in sick pay, annual leave allowance, maternity pay, paternity pay, and pension contributions.

Among those striking today was Cetin Avsar who has worked at the hospital for nearly two years.

He told the Wandsworth Times: "They treat us as if we’re nothing, like we're not human beings.

"All we want is to go in-house and we want he same benefits as the SGUL staff. "We want equal pay, respect, equality, everything because we don’t get any sick pay, no other benefits.


"The management haven’t even had the decency to sit down and listen to us. The duty of care is being ignored."

Another member of the security staff who was out protesting was Denis B M Darboh.

He echoed those same sentiments.

"It makes you feel down," he added.

"We work longer hours, we don’t get sick pay at all, if we’re ill we have to struggle to get in.

"We have to argue to get holidays. We get treated differently. We want to come in-house so that we are on the same level."



While the university has not yet responded to a request for comment, a letter obtained by the Wandsworth Times was handed out during the police action.


The letter was from Jenni Doman, deputy director, estates and facilities at St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

It read: "I wanted to write to confirm the Trust's position on any strike and demonstration activity on site.

"As the site is private land including the perimeter road no industrial action can take place directly on any part of these areas.

As the landlord for your occupation this also includes the SGUL areas of occupation and all entrances and exits.

This is consistent with all Trust procedures in these instances.

"If this action is due to take place then this must be off site and all those participating in this must also be respectful to all those patients, visitors and staff/students visiting the site.

"If this is not followed them the Trust may take more formal action to remove anyone found not to be adhering to this."

A further 13 days of strikes had been planned throughout January and February.

POSTMODERN PAGANISM Scotland's largest puppet, a ten-metre tall sea goddess called Storm,

13 January 2020 

2/50 13 January 2020

Puppeteers from Vision Mechanic rehearsing with Scotland's largest puppet, a ten-metre tall sea goddess called Storm, in the grounds of the Museum of Flight, East Lothian. Made entirely from recycled materials, it was unveiled ahead of its debut at the Celtic Connections Costal Day celebrations in Glasgow this weekend
'Absolute unit': Escaped Highland cow delays trains after walking onto tracks
A Highland cow on the railway line
Commuters held up for around an hour after trespasser escapes country park


Jon Sharman

A hulking Highland cow held up train passengers near Glasgow after escaping from a country park, leading rail staff to dub the beast an “absolute unit”.

The disruption also set off a deluge of bad puns, with ScotRail pledging to get the escaped livestock “moooooved as soon as we can”.

Glasgow City Council, whose workers were dispatched to help, also got in on the action early on Tuesday morning after a number of the animals escaped from Pollok Country Park.

“The coos have been retrieved and moooved back to Pollok Park. Our cooncil team are working with rail staff to check where the breach in the fence is,” the local authority tweeted.

ScotRail released a still image from one of its CCTV cameras, and tweeted: “Absolute unit spotted on the track at Pollokshaws West. Sorry if you’re being delayed due to this.”

Video later posted by Network Rail Scotland showed the cow being led away from the tracks by a person holding a bucket of feed.

Commuters were delayed for about an hour.

The “absolute unit” meme originated on Twitter, when in 2017 a user posted an image of Goring Hotel managing director David Morgan-Hewitt alongside Queen Elizabeth II with the caption, ”in awe at the size of this lad. absolute unit”.

The phrase has since been used to describe any animal, person or even cuddly toy that is deemed remarkably large.



A Highland cow caused rush-hour delays to trains around Glasgow after escaping from a country park.

Rail operator ScotRail initially tweeted about “reports of a couple of Highland Cows on the railway line at Busby”, in East Renfrewshire, at 8.48am on Tuesday.

However, at least one of the animals, described as an “absolute unit”, was spotted on the tracks at Pollokshaws West, which is on the same line and near Pollok Country Park.

In a series of tweets, ScotRail said: “We’ve had reports of a couple of Highland Cows on the railway line at #Busby. We think they’re on the run from Pollok Park… We’ll get them moooooved as soon as we can. Thanks for your patience.

“Absolute unit spotted on the track at Pollokshaws West. Sorry if you’re being delayed due to this.

“@NetworkRailScot track staff on their way to attempt to encourage these coos to mooove back to the park.

“It’s not safe to attempt to pass the area at the moment. In this picture, you can see trains on both tracks are being held. We really appreciate your patience if you’re on board either train or at a station waiting.”


We've moved the animal clear of the railway assisted by @GlasgowCC staff. @ScotRail services are returning to normal, though there is some disruption ongoing at Glasgow Central while trains which were unable to depart are moved from the station. pic.twitter.com/13Imucs0h1
— Network Rail Scotland (@NetworkRailSCOT) January 14, 2020
The firm also said “services are being disrupted into Glasgow Central High Level at the moment due to several line issues across the Network”.

Network Rail said: “Our teams are beginning to arrive on site to deal with this issue and mooove this Highland Coo so trains can run again safely.”

The organisation then posted a video showing the animal being enticed off the line with a bucket of food.

A Glasgow City Council spokeswoman said the cow had been “retrieved safely” by staff from the park just before 10am.

She added the council was in contact with ScotRail to determine where the creature “breached the fence” and was also checking if it was more than one animal, with reports of a cow’s appearance in Busby.

---30---


Indonesian mayor orders anti-LGBT+ police raids amid wall-to-wall coverage of UK serial rapist case

The plans will increase the risk of persecution, human rights official warns


Adam Withnall Asia Editor @adamwithnall

Reynhard Sinaga is described as Britain's most prolific rapist ( GMP/PA )

Police are to be sent on anti-LGBT+ raids in an Indonesian city after a man was jailed for drugging and raping dozens of men in Britain.

Responding to the convictions against Manchester-based Indonesian student Reynhard Sinaga, the mayor of Depok in West Java said he wants officers to prevent “the spread of LGBT” and “protect the children”.

British police believe Sinaga attacked 195 men and prosecutors described him as “the most prolific rapist in British legal history”.

The student is reported to have family ties to Depok and the case has received widespread coverage across Indonesian media.

Plans to storm the homes of LGBT+ people, announced by Depok mayor Mohammad Idris, have been condemned by the national human rights commission.

Reynhard Sinaga: Most prolific rapist in UK history jailed
Show all 11





Mr Idris, who is reportedly known for his anti-LGBT+ statements, said he had sympathy for Sinaga’s family and wants to set up centres to assist those he called “victims” in his community.

After the plans were published on the city’s official website, they were criticised by the head of the National Commission on Human Rights, Beka Ulung Hapsara.

Mr Hapsara said such raids would “increase the risk of persecution and other law-defying acts”. The commission said it had also written to the Depok government to express its concerns.

Watch more
 
Mother of Britain’s most prolific rapist says ‘he’s still my baby’
 
















 














More victims of UK’s most prolific rapist come forward, police say

Amnesty International condemned what it called “the latest vicious campaign against LGBT+” people in Indonesia, and said there “can be no justification for these hateful raids”.

“The authorities in Indonesia repeatedly launch humiliating crackdowns on suspected same-sex activity, and misuse laws against loitering or public nuisance to harass and arrest [LGBT+] people,” said Usman Hamid, Amnesty International Indonesia’s director.

Homosexuality is not regulated by law in Indonesia, except in Aceh province where Islamic law bans same-sex relations.

But the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation has recently seen a rise in hostility towards the LGBT+ community. Nearly 90 per cent of Indonesians who understand the term LGBT+ feel “threatened” by the community, and believe their religion forbids same-sex relations, according to a 2018 survey.

Such sentiment has been fuelled in part by government officials and public figures. A study last year found almost 50 anti-LGBT+ statements were made on record by authority figures in a single month.

Dede Oetomo, an Indonesian LGBT+ activist, said the community was braced for hysteria over the Sinaga case, with media often ignoring requests to avoid making the convicted rapist’s sexuality the focus of their coverage.

A 22-year-old Depok resident who identifies as bisexual said the planned raids would “violate private spaces” and waste public money.

The Nazi shame of the first ever Best Actor winner at the Oscars   
Emil Jannings with his Best Actor statuette, 1928

Emil Jannings with his Best Actor statuette, 1928 ( Rex )

Martin Chilton delves into the hidden history of the very first Academy Awards @MartinChilton

When the ballot results came in to decide the first winner of the Oscar for Best Actor, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences realised they faced a tricky problem. The “actor” who had collected the most votes was actually a dog called Rin-Tin-Tin, who had starred as Rinty in popular films such as A Dog of the Regiment and Jaws of Steel. The film board were concerned that awarding the first statuette to a canine would hardly give credibility to their new awards. To avoiding appearing to be barking mad, they diverted the 1929 Oscar to Emil Jannings.

The academy awarded some honours in their inaugural year for performances in more than one film. Jannings won for his portrayal of both a bank clerk in 1927’s The Way of All Flesh, and for playing Grand Duke Sergius Alexander in the 1928 film The Last Command.

Looked at through the long lens of history, the decision backfired. A committee who were so worried about the embarrassment of honouring a dog ended up commemorating a man whose career ended in ignominy as a reviled propagandist for Adolf Hitler. The Oscars snubbed a German shepherd and got a Nazi poodle instead.


At the end of the Second World War, with Hitler and his minister of propaganda Joseph Goebbels dead, Jannings is said to have rushed towards the allied troops marching into Berlin, clutching his golden statuette and yelling: “Don’t shoot, I have won an Oscar!” He was not imprisoned, but his reputation was in tatters. The man once considered the world’s greatest actor never worked again. Ninety years on from that historic award, it’s no surprise that the academy don’t talk much about their first Best Actor winner


The strange story of Jannings began in Rorschach, Switzerland, with his birth on 23 July 1884. His father Emil, a well-to-do American businessman from St Louis, died when the future actor was a child. His mother, Margarethe, moved the boy, who was christened Theodor Friedrich Emil Janenz, to Görlitz, in the far east of Germany.

Jannings ran away from home at 16 to become a sailor, but quickly decided that he wanted to be an actor. His first break came when he joined Max Reinhardt’s theatre company in Berlin in 1906. He landed his first film role in 1918 when, using the name Emil Jannings, he starred in Die Augen de Mumie Ma (The Eyes of the Mummy). He quickly established himself as one of the talents of the German silent film industry, starring in acclaimed films such as Othello (1922), The Last Laugh (1924) – which Alfred Hitchcock described as “almost the perfect film” – and Variety (1925).

His work attracted the attention of Hollywood and, in 1927, he was lured to America with a lucrative contract from Paramount Pictures. Paramount gave him extraordinary control over scripts, roles and choice of directors. In the next two years, he made six silent films in America, including Betrayal with Gary Cooper. Betrayal, along with The Patriot and Street of Sin, is considered lost forever. He was popular with American movie fans, and he sought to overcome any doubts about his place in American society by dissembling, telling the press he was born in Brooklyn.

Jannings fitted in with the social whirl of Hollywood – there are pictures of him sitting with a swimsuit-wearing Greta Garbo – but to some of the actors with whom he worked closely, he was a moody despot. German-born Fritz Feld, who appeared in 140 films including Hello, Dolly! and Herbie Rides Again, told film writer Michael Dobbs that during the making of The Last Command Jannings took him aside and said he wanted to sack director Josef von Sternberg and put Fritz in his place. Fritz declined to behave treacherously and Jannings screamed “You fool! You god-damn fool!” at him.

When The Last Command was made, Jannings was 44 and carried the baggage of three short-lived marriages that had ended in divorce. He was estranged from his two children. Although he wed again, to a former Berlin cabaret performer and actress called Auguste Maria Holl (who was always known as “Gussy’), it didn’t stop him from making advances towards other actresses.

Evelyn Brent played William Powell’s love interest in The Last Command. In her biography, The Life and Films of Hollywood’s Lady Crook, she recalls that after being snubbed, Jannings went round telling the film crew that Brent “wasn’t his type”. When she heard about his slurs, the 32-year-old, who had been appearing in films since 1917, confronted him. When he asked why she was not interested in a love affair, she replied coolly, “because you’re 10 years too old and 40 pounds too fat”.  



Brent said he was a temperamental and spoilt man. “Emil Jannings could get sulky over trifles,” Brent said. “He didn’t like the fur coat I was wearing in one scene, and when I took it off and laid it aside on the set, he used to go over and kick it, for all the world like a petulant kid.”

His bizarre behaviour extended to male colleagues. Paul Henreid, the Austrian-born actor who played Victor Laszlo in Casablanca, was a teenager when he acted with Jannings that year. In Michael Druxman’s book Hollywood Snapshots, Henreid said he had a minor role as a character who was killed.

In a subsequent scene, Jannings was scripted to stand beside a closed casket supposedly containing the remains. Jannings told Henreid that it was essential he got the “right feeling” to play the scene and ordered the nervous novice to lie in the coffin with the lid closed. Henreid remained there for half an hour before finally summoning the nerve to look out. Jannings had gone to lunch and left him in the coffin.

Oscar nominations for Best Picture announced

Jannings won his Oscar for his performances in The Last Command and 1927’s The Way of All Flesh, another film that is presumed lost, apart from five minutes of extant footage that is held at the UCLA Film Archive in Los Angeles. When the first Oscars were officially presented, on 16 May 1929, the winners were revealed three months ahead of the ceremony, by which time Jannings was already back in Germany. A photograph showing him holding the statuette had been taken months before by the Paramount publicity department.

The Oscars night he missed was a very different affair to the global extravaganza of modern times. There were only 270 guests in the Blossom Ballroom of the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel that first year, and the ceremony was not broadcast on radio or television. Janet Gaynor, the 22-year-old winner of the first Best Actress award (she was nominated again in 1937 for her role in the original A Star is Born), wore an off-the rack dress she had purchased months before. Gaynor, incidentally, had her own sad postscript when she died in 1984 from abdominal injuries suffered in a collision with a drunk driver.

When he posed with his Oscar, Jannings seemed to have a bright future. His commanding stage presence and skills as a wonderfully expressive actor had made him an acknowledged great of the silent era. Even Brent conceded that he was “a splendid actor”. But many of the actors eating their broiled chicken that first Oscars party knew that storm clouds were gathering.

All the gossip was about the success of The Jazz Singer, which had won two Oscars, and what the first talkie would mean for the industry. It was clear that actors would now be required to talk on screen. Although Paramount screen-tested Jannings, they quickly decided that his thick German accent was not what they wanted. He rejected their offer to over-dub his voice.

Emil Jannings and Evelyn Brent in the Josef Von Sternberg’s ‘The Last Command’ (Getty)

Sensing that his career in America was doomed, Jannings returned to make films in Germany. In an article in April 1929 in the Los Angeles Times, film critic Edwin Schallert described him as “the king of the European film stars”, adding that “his going marks the close of a picturesque phase of Hollywood’s history”.

At first, it seemed as though things might turn out well in his homeland. In 1930, Jannings made Der Blaue Engel (The Blue Angel) with Marlene Dietrich. He earned plaudits for playing an elderly professor who is destroyed by his infatuation for a cabaret singer called Lola-Lola. In the book Modern Times, Stanley Kubrick says that one of the greatest moments in film history was “the way Emil Jannings took out his handkerchief and blew his nose in The Blue Angel”. Dietrich, however, came to loathe Jannings and dismissed his acting skills as that of an “old ham”.

Hitler’s inexorable rise to power in the early 1930s coincided with a decline in demand for Jannings’s services. In March 1933, by which time Hitler had assumed a grip on Germany, Goebbels was appointed as Reich minister of public enlightenment and propaganda. Goebbels believed that Jannings would be a useful tool for the Nazis and suggested he work on propaganda films. The first to come to fruition was 1935’s Der alte und der Junge König (The Old and the Young King), in which Jannings portrayed Prussian King Friedrich Wilhelm I. This historical biopic was intended to extol the idea of Führerprinzip, which, simply put, is the concept of blind obedience to the leader (Führer).

The Berlin-born director Veit Harlan was in Goebbels’s good books after divorcing a Jewish actress called Dora Gerson (who was later killed at Auschwitz, along with all her family) and he was chosen to draw a strong performance from Jannings in 1937’s Der Herrscher (The Ruler), another film aimed at promoting Führerprinzip.

Jannings was still considered an actor of renown in Europe and The Ruler was shown in England. Graham Greene, who was working on his novel Brighton Rock, reviewed the film for The Spectator and mocked the star actor’s depiction of the loyal boss of a munitions firm. “In Der Herrscher, Herr Jannings has the meaningless gaze of a sea lion with huge sloping shoulders and watery whiskers to whose emotions we apply for want of anything better, such human terms as pity, anger, terror, though we cannot tell, on the evidence of those small marine eyes, whether he is really registering anything more than a dim expectation of fish,” wrote Greene.

Back in the Fatherland, though, the film pleased the Führer, who had previously gone out of his way to praise Jannings’s performance in Traumulus (The Dreamer). The close ties between actor and dictator were sealed when Jannings campaigned for Hitler in the 1938 elections, the final ones for the Reichstag during Nazi rule. His show of loyalty earned him a lavish lifestyle and career advancement.

Goebbels placed Jannings on the board of Tobis Films and gave him “overall artistic control” of the state studio’s films. His first project for Tobis was to produce and act in a biopic about the German microbiologist Robert Koch, who experimented on colonial African subjects.
A portrait of Emil Jannings, circa 1930 (Getty)

The 1941 wartime film Ohm Krüger (Uncle Krüger) was to prove the most controversial of all Jannings’s films. Goebbels wanted something to stir up German audiences in advance of a possible invasion of Britain. He allocated a budget of around 6 million Reichsmark (around £22m now) for a film celebrating the life of Paul Kruger, the man who led the Second Boer War fight against the British at the end of the 19th century.

Jannings, who was the producer, launched a press campaign to promote his portrayal of Kruger. He described British imperialism as “a pernicious disease” and put his name to the forward of a reissue of Kruger’s diaries. “President Kruger was the first conscious champion against England, he is an example for us Germans who are now leading the fight against British imperialism. I played him because he was chosen to start a struggle which shall be concluded in our lifetime,” Jannings is quoted as saying in David Welch’s book Propaganda and the German Cinema, 1933-1945.

Hitler and his cronies adored the film and Goebbels named Jannings “Artist of the State”. Jannings was also awarded the “Ring of Honour of the German Cinema”. Further afield, Italy’s fascist leader Benito Mussolini praised the film and Ohm Krüger won the Mussolini Cup for best foreign film at the 1941 Venice Film Festival.

In the next release, Bismarck’s Dismissal, Jannings played the 19th century Prussian leader Otto von Bismarck who, in 1871, helped unify the German empire. Hitler admired the so-called “Iron Chancellor” and was delighted by Jannings’s flattering comparison of the two leaders.

Hitler was just like Bismarck, said Jannings, because they both “represented the same historical situation – one man against the world”. Jannings had become a full-blown propaganda gun for hire. Fritz Hippler, who ran the film department in the Propaganda Ministry, directed the antisemitic film Der Ewige Jude (The Eternal Jew). When Hippler published his book Contemplations on Filmmaking in 1942, Jannings wrote the preface.

German historian Frank Noack, who wrote a biography of Jannings in 2012, says that Jannings’s Russian-born mother, who was living in Berlin during the war, had Jewish origins. Although this was never openly discussed in the German press, he speculates that keeping his mother safe was perhaps a factor in his willingness to work for the Nazis.

British and allied military officials who quizzed Jannings after the war rejected claims that he had worked reluctantly for Hitler. Jannings was not helped in his pleas of innocence by the contents of Goebbels’s diaries. The minister for propaganda specifically praised the actor’s commitment to the Nazi cause. “He works as though possessed on his Boer film. Jannings outdoes himself. Kruger is as much of an anti-England film as one can only hope for,” Goebbels wrote in April 1941. The allied command in Berlin halted the shooting of his last film – Wo ist Herr Belling? (Where is Mr Belling?) – and decreed that he was subject to “denazification”. He was officially banned from making another film.

Jannings retreated to live in Austria, where he was interviewed by a New York newspaper, The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle. The interview was carried out by staff writer Klaus Mann, who had known him in his Hollywood days, and was published on 25 June 1945. Mann described the actor’s “picturesque Lake Wolfgang home” and said that Jannings had “flourished under the Nazis”. When he asked him directly about his involvement with the Nazis, Jannings replied: “Open resistance would have meant a concentration camp”. He claimed he was “ordered” by Goebbels to make the propaganda films.

In his autobiography Life and Me, published by Zimmer and Herzog in 1951, Jannings devoted only 72 words to an oblique defence of his work for the Nazis. “There are things one cannot talk about – things that pull us in opposite directions at the same time, as they appear to the head in a different way from the way they appear to the heart, which would like to be in unison with the soul. As my heart and soul belonged to the art of acting, they ordered my head not to worry about things that were none of its concern.”

It took some years for the full truth about his propaganda role to become clear to people outside Germany. Even in February 1960, he was still highly enough regarded in America to earn a star on the Hollywood walk of fame, although their present-day website makes no mention of his Nazi past. In November 2004, his Swiss birthplace of Rorschach honoured him with their version of the star. His past was brought up and the subsequent outcry ended with the commemoration being removed a few days later. The official academy website has a section dedicated to their inaugural 1929 awards. They include a picture of Best Actress Gaynor but not of Jannings. In the place where the best actor photograph would seem to naturally sit, there is instead a photograph of Joseph Farnham, winner of the “title writing” Oscar.

Jannings has not been entirely airbrushed from history, though. He features as a character in Quentin Tarantino’s war film Inglourious Basterds, played by Hilmar Eichhorn. Jannings appears in a scene in which Goebbels gets him to show the “Ring of Honour” he was awarded for Ohm Krüger to soldier Fredrick Zoller.

Tarantino’s fictional Jannings is killed during an attack on the Nazi leadership. In reality, the actor’s final days on earth were painful, dismal and drawn out. He had taken Austrian citizenship and converted to Catholicism, but nothing seemed to bring him peace. He sought solace in heavy drinking, a factor in his death from liver cancer on 2 January 1950 at the age of 65. “He died alone, bitter and in disgrace,” said his biographer, his body ravaged and his legacy tainted forever as a salesman for the Nazis.

“The joys and the infinite sorrows, they all end,” reads the epithet on his grave. His Oscar, meanwhile, is on exhibit at the Berlin Film Museum.

---30---