Archive for the ‘UK News Censor’ Category

Read more pc_news.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Zulu DVD More than 12,000 people have hit out at 28 complainers who tried to get a screening of classic movie Zulu scrapped.The 28 who signed the anti-Zulu petition – accusing it of being racist – have been attacked by thousands of angry fans.

Organisers are standing by their decision to screen the beloved 1964 classic which will be shown at Folkestone’s Silver Screen Cinema on Saturday to raise aid for armed forces charity SSAFA.

A poll on this website attracted an astonishing 13,000 votes – with 92% voting in favour of showing the film.

kentonline.co.uk writes:

Whilst the film has caused some discussion in more recent times, it is important not to gloss over parts of our history that make us feel uncomfortable. Rather than censoring a subject, a viewing could form a basis for discussion about the deeper themes in the film.

Despite detractors claiming the film is racist, there are only three slight racial epithets used in the entire 130-minute-long show – and one is directed against the Irish. Another slur was quickly slapped down by another character, while the third was a soldier being called a dozy Welshman because he forgot his rifle.

The classic movie portrays the Zulu warriors as honourable combatants, whose overwhelming numbers are only narrowly defeated by the indefatigable British Empire forces.

The film has a bit of a history of being censored and banned. BBFC cuts were required for the original ‘U’ rated cinema release in 1964. Then when released in Apartheid South Africa in 1964 the film was banned for black audiences (as the government feared that its scenes of blacks killing whites might incite them to violence), apart from a few special screenings for its Zulu extras in Durban and some smaller Kwazulu towns.

Advertisements
Read more parl.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

house of lords red logoTheresa May today vowed to overturn a disgraceful bid by peers to muzzle the press.The House of Lords yesterday voted to force the vast majority of papers – including the struggling local press – to pay all legal costs in data protection cases even if they win.

Peers voted by 211 votes to 200, a majority of only 11, to introduce the new legal fees costs on the media.

Critics have pointed out that it will hamper the media’s ability to investigate wrongdoing and corruption as criminals could drag the press through expensive courts without having to pay a penny themselves.

The PM said:

I think that the impact of this vote would undermine high-quality journalism and a free press.

I think it would particularly have a negative impact on local newspapers, which are an important underpinning of our democracy.

I believe passionately in a free press. We want to have a free press that is able to hold politicians and others to account and we will certainly be looking to overturn this vote in the House of Commons.

The Lords also voted by 238 votes to 209 for a new probe effectively mirroring the second part of the Leveson inquiry. This also attempts to punish the press by denying them justice by making them pay regardless of the merits of the case.

New Culture Secretary Matt Hancock also weighed in against the lords saying that the proposed changes would be a hammer blow to the local press and made clear he would seek to overturn the changes in the elected House of Commons

Read more parl.htm at MelonFarmers.co.uk

House of Commons logoThe Government has rejected for a second time amendments from peers seeking press cenorship.Solicitor General Robert Buckland insisted it would be simply not appropriate to include within the Investigatory Powers Bill changes designed to ensure costs are awarded against newspaper and media organisations in press censorship cases.

Pro-censorship peers have repeatedly sought to amend the Bill so it implements a key part of the Leveson Inquiry report forcing newspapers and the media to submit to censorship.

MPs voted to reject the latest Lords amendments by 295 votes to 245, a majority of 50.

Ministers are currently conducting a ten-week consultation which includes examining whether to implement legislation which would force newspapers to pay all of the costs of libel or privacy actions brought against them — even if they win their case. This injustice would not apply to publications which sign up to a new state-backed press censor.

Labour is inevitably supporting this censorship attempt with Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott saying:

Labour fully supports this set of amendments to the Investigatory Powers Bill and on this side of the House we have consistently and genuinely called for the Leveson recommendations to be implemented in full.

SNP justice spokeswoman Joanna Cherry also supported the injustice and censorship saying:

Those who have not hacked, do not hack phones and do not intend to hack telephones or indeed emails have nothing to fear from these provisions.

But Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg said:

This is an absolutely dreadful amendment. It should be thrown out, rejected, sent back to the House of Lords. It is fundamentally wrong. It seeks to punish those who may be innocent, to fine them for telling the truth, for saying things that people in power do not like. It goes to the heart of our free press and it should be thrown in the bin.

Read more UK News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

deadpool bad ass A Devon cinema has censored the word ‘ass’ from posters advertising newly released superhero film Deadpool . The Reel cinema in Plymouth used black tape to censor the lines: Bad Ass, Smart Ass, Great Ass, Deadpool. One cinema goer commented to the newspaper:

I kind of think they were right to censor it, but also think it’s probably overkill. Surely it’s pretty tame in this day and age, but if your kids are outside queuing for Chipmunks it’s a different matter.

The article writer adds a good riposte:

But Alvin and the Chipmunks, Road Chip itself features one use of the word crap and extensively uses the song Baby Got Back by Sir Mix a lot – a track about women with large backsides.

Read more Diary at MelonFarmers.co.uk

sexual freedom partyt Charlotte Rose is standing as a  Sexual Freedom party candidate at the Clacton by-elections on 9th October 2014.

Sexual Freedom Party Manifesto 2014

What we stand for

  • – Freedom from sexual ignorance due to poor, or denial of, sex education

  • – Freedom from control by others

  • – Freedom from governmental control

We stand for knowledge, tolerance and respect, whatever a person’s ability, preferences, identity, orientation, or job, so long as neither abuse or unwanted control is involved.

Why constituents might vote for us

We alone cover one aspect of life which people really care about: sex. Sex is the second biggest human drive, after survival, and yet it is ignored in politics. Most politicians pretend it is not important, and simply promote family values.

What we bring

Having a Sexual Freedom Party politician in the House of Commons will help towards the sex and relationship wellbeing of British citizens.

The Sexual Freedom Party will bring a new awareness to Parliament and society and work towards ridding this country of the stigma and bigotry which prevents some of our citizens from being sexually free. We will be doing this in these eight pressing areas:

  • Disabled people and older people in care need to be free to enjoy the same pleasures as everybody else enjoys in the privacy of their own homes. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 makes this law, but it is rarely adhered to in practice.

  • People with sexual diversities still live restricted lives, for fear of stigma. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people have achieved some social acceptance but this does not often extend to situations like visiting the doctor or going into hospital, where stigma exists, and gay people actually avoid going asa result! There is still little acceptance of people into BDSM (bondage, domination sado-masochism), fetishism, swinging, dogging, and polyamory.

  • Those who provide sexual services are currently forbidden by law to work together, which limits their capacity and renders their working lives unsafe. No other profession is limited in this way. So long as no control is involved, sex workers should be free to work in pairs or groups, or as a community.

  • Striptease artists and sex workers are being targetted by religious and anti-sex feminists. They claim that sex work is violence to women, yet do not listen to the strippers and sex workers themselves. The professional ones actually claim they like their work and are in charge of what they do. Striptease establishments are being unnecessarily closed down around the country, and sex workers demonised. In fact, striptease is a delightful, aspirational form of entertainment, and sex workers provide pleasure, teaching, necessary human contact and satisfaction for millions of men and women across the country.

  • FGM Female Genital Mutilation — thousands of young girls and women in this country are forced to have their genitals mutilated: the clitoris and labia are cut off, so that they experience pain instead of pleasure, Sometimes the vagina is sewn up so that entry is so restricted that the man can only masturbate on her in order to impregnate her! FGM is illegal but only one prosecution has been made* since the law was passed over 25 years ago, and nothing really effective is being done because of “cultural sensitivity”.

  • Grooming of young girls — the recent scandal in Rotherham of muslim gangs grooming and raping young girls, was covered up for 14 years. Those trying to expose it were ignored by the press and authorities, which demonstrates the ignorance and the PC cultural sensitivity of our government.

  • Forced marriage — also ignored thanks to PC cultural sensitivity, where situations such as a young, learning disabled person being forced to marry a relative abroad in order for the spouse to live in the UK. Then they are encouraged to produce a large inbred family, with perhaps more disabled children. This is illegal under the Forced Marriages Act 2008, and Forced Marriage etc. (Protection and Jurisdiction) (Scotland) Act 2011

but the laws are rarely enforced and do not go far enough.

Sex and Relationship Education (SRE)

SRE could do much to improve the sexual wellbeing of British citizens. This sex education needs to include everything mentioned above, i.e. sex and disability, all sexual diversities, striptease and sexual services and practices which threaten personal freedom.

Many brilliant campaigns have failed to get anywhere, and still schools are not obliged to teach SRE, and parents can ban their children from classes in school, so children are growing up in the 21st century, without sexual health knowledge, and often without the skills to enjoy a happy sex life.

Campaigns against porn use the argument that porn teaches people inaccurate information which corrupts their minds. This misses the point that porn is about fantasy. What young people need is education on reality. Sex education is necessary to prepare young people to look at porn. For example, in porn, anal sex looks as easy as vaginal sex but anal sex requires the recipient to open up, otherwise it is very painful and can be damaging. Many young porn viewers without this education are currently experiencing such difficulties.

Considering the above, the level and quality of sex education required is much higher than the “school nurse” or biology teacher is likely to deliver. Experts need to be brought in. A disabled man**, just out of school, declared that the best people to be teaching sex in schools are sex workers, as only they really know the full extent of human sexual needs and practice.

SRE needs to give people the confidence to enjoy the sex they want without being controlled or stifled. Some women, disabled people and shy people may need more support and there are experts out there who offer appropriate services. Sadly they mostly work underground and are largely unsupported.

Allies:

Read more UK Government Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from independent.co.uk

David CameronDavid Cameron has warned Britain’s newspapers that they should sign up urgently to the Royal Charter passed by Parliament earlier this year.

Cameron claimed a less liberal, enlightened government in the future might play hard ball and enforce legislation. Translation? Do a deal with the Tories or Labour will bring out the big stick.

According to the editor of The Spectator, Fraser Nelson, who interviewed Cameron a while ago, this threat was thought up in the back seat of the prime ministerial Jaguar.

Nelson published the quotes on his blog only today, claiming there wasn’t enough space in his magazine’s lavish coverage of its big prime ministerial interview to include a mention of press censorship. In teh interview Cameron raises the spectre of a heavy-handed Labour administration saying: \

I think I’ve done my bit. But it’s up to you guys now — and, as I say, I think you might be at risk if you don’t do it. Not from me, but from a less liberal, enlightened government in the future. Remember, everyone else wanted to legislate.

Read more PCC Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from telegraph.co.uk

House of Commons logoThe Government’s proposal for a Royal Charter on the future of news censorship has been put on hold after newspaper editors put forward an alternative plan.

The Royal Charter was due to be signed by the Queen when she chaired the next meeting of the Privy Council on May 15, but it has now been taken off the agenda for the meeting so the Government can hold more talks with editors.

Editors are unhappy with an element of statutory underpinning in the Government’s proposal, and last month they published their own proposal for a Royal Charter, which would remove Parliament’s proposed power to make changes to the regulatory system without the agreement of the industry.