King visits Jewish community in Krakow ahead of Auschwitz commemorations
Heads of state and world leaders will gather at the site later to remember those who perished at the hands of the Nazi regime.
Ahead of the ceremony, Charles met Holocaust survivors at the Jewish Community Centre (JCC) Krakow he opened in 2008 and greeted dozens of well-wishers outside the building.
Some people held out their hands for the King to shake, while others held up their smartphones to capture his visit.
During a Buckingham Palace event earlier this month to mark Holocaust Memorial Day, held annually on the day Auschwitz – which was in German-occupied Poland – was liberated, the King said: 'I feel I must go for the 80th anniversary, (it's) so important.'
Commemorations at the former death camp began earlier when Poland's president Andrzej Duda joined Auschwitz survivors laying wreaths and candles at the site.
Their tributes were left at a reconstruction of the Death Wall, the site where several thousand people, mainly Polish political prisoners, were executed.
In a speech, Mr Duda said 'we Poles are the guardians of memory today' and had a duty to maintain the life stories of the survivors.
More than a million people, mostly Jews but also Poles, Soviet prisoners of war and other nationalities, were murdered by the Nazis at Auschwitz-Birkenau during the Second World War as part of the Holocaust in which six million Jewish men, women and children were killed.
The camp was liberated by soldiers of the 60th Army of the First Ukrainian Front who opened the gates on January 27 1945.
The ceremony will be held in front of the gates of the former Nazi death camp which had the words Arbeit Macht Frei – work sets you free – above it.
Auschwitz survivors will address the invited guests who are expected to include France's president Emmanuel Macron, German chancellor Olaf Scholz, King Willem-Alexander and Queen Maxima of the Netherlands and Spain's King Philip VI and Queen Letizia.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has also been confirmed as attending.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
6 hours ago
- Reuters
Israeli fans cause outrage in Poland with 'murderers' banner
WARSAW, Aug 15 (Reuters) - Israeli soccer fans held up a banner reading "Murderers since 1939" during a match against a Polish team on Thursday, causing outrage in Poland as the president said it insulted the memory of Poles, including Jews, killed in World War Two. Poland was occupied by Nazi Germany in World War Two. The country's 3.2 million Jewish population was the largest in Europe at the start of the war. Almost all were killed, many of them in Nazi German death camps, and a further 3 million non-Jewish citizens also died during the occupation. Historical disputes over World War Two and the Holocaust have strained relations between Poland and Israel in the past. Studies have shown complicity by some Poles in the killing of Jews by Nazi Germany, but many Poles reject such findings, saying they are an attempt to dishonour a country that suffered immensely during the war. The "Murderers since 1939" banner was displayed prominently across a row of seats by fans of Israeli club Maccabi Haifa during their Europa Conference League match against Rakow Czestochowa, which was played in Debrecen in Hungary for security reasons. "The scandalous banner displayed by Maccabi Haifa fans insults the memory of Polish citizens - victims of World War Two, including 3 million Jews," Polish President Karol Nawrocki, a former head of the country's Institute of National Remembrance, wrote on X. "Stupidity that no words can justify." Polish Interior Minister Marcin Kierwinski said "Anti-Polonism and the scandalous distortion of Polish history by Israeli hooligans demand strong condemnation". The Israeli Embassy in Warsaw also condemned the banner. "There is no place for such words and actions, from any side, neither at the stadium nor anywhere else. Never!" the embassy wrote on X. "These shameful incidents do not reflect the spirit of the majority of Israeli fans." The banner may have been made in response to one displayed in last week's first leg by fans of the Polish club which read: "Israel is killing and the world is silent," referring to the conflict in Gaza. The war began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages, according to Israeli figures. Israel's offensive against Hamas in Gaza since then has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians, according to local health officials. Europe's soccer governing body UEFA said disciplinary proceedings have been opened against both clubs for "transmitting a message not fit for a sports event". Maccabi Haifa have also been charged with improper conduct. Rakow Czestochowa won the second leg 2-0, giving them a 2-1 victory on aggregate to qualify for the playoffs later this month.
The Herald Scotland
12 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Sex Matters warns National Library over book ban law breach
The charity said the decision 'creates a hostile environment for gender-critical staff' and 'discriminates against members of the public who share those beliefs'. They added: 'By April 18, 2026, when the exhibition closes, you could be facing thousands of claims under the Equality Act.' READ MORE In their letter to National Librarian and NLS chief executive Amina Shah, and to board chair Sir Drummond Bone, Sex Matters chief executive Maya Forstater, director of advocacy Helen Joyce and director of campaigns Fiona McAnena said many of the chapters in Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht were "personal testimonies to the harassment and discrimination faced by women who express this belief in Scotland today'. 'Gender-critical belief is covered by the protection against belief discrimination in the Equality Act under Section 10. 'As an employer and service provider you have a legal obligation not to subject your staff to harassment or discrimination on the basis of their beliefs, and not to subject members of the public who may use the library or visit its exhibitions to direct or indirect discrimination based on their belief.' The letter says the exclusion could also breach the law on unlawful harassment under Section 26, which covers unwanted conduct 'that violates a person's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment' linked to a protected characteristic. 'Displaying books that individuals may disagree with or even find offensive is not harassment; it is core to the job of a library,' they wrote. 'However, refusing to display a book in an exhibition of books nominated by the public because it relates to a protected belief is an action that could well meet the test for harassment in relation to your gender-critical staff.' NLS is celebrating its 100th year (Image: National Library of Scotland) They also warned it could meet the threshold for direct discrimination under Section 13. 'The internal documents about the decision released under Freedom of Information reveal that this is exactly what you did: you decided to exclude this book, which was nominated by four members of the public, from the exhibition after a group of staff claimed — without evidence — that there were groups behind it that were 'exclusionary', and that including it would cause those staff 'severe harm'. "They threatened 'to notify LGBT+ partners' if you went ahead with the original plan to include the book in the exhibition.' The letter continues: 'Imagine if a small group of staff complained about the inclusion of a book by black authors about their experience of racism, a book by gay authors about their experience of homophobia, or a book by Jewish authors about their experience of antisemitism. "You would have had no difficulty recognising this as a call to discriminate based on a protected characteristic.' It accuses library management of capitulating to threats and of using 'a tool that is meant to help you identify and mitigate risks of undertaking unlawful discrimination as a device for discrimination', calling the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) a 'sham' because it omitted the protected characteristic of belief. The charity has called on the NLS to reinstate the book 'without denigrating it with a sign calling it divisive', meet editors Susan Dalgety and Lucy Hunter Blackburn, apologise to authors and nominators, and 'consider what other reasonable steps, such as training, you could take to prevent future harassment based on gender-critical belief and to build a true culture of inclusion.' Read more: Judicial guidance on discrimination cases, the charity added, gives a range of £1,200 to £12,000 for injury to feelings in less serious cases — meaning thousands of claims could lead to multi-million pound exposure. Members of the public were invited to nominate 'books that shaped people's lives' for the Dear Library exhibition. After securing four public nominations, two more than the others that made the display, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht — which features more than 30 essays from contributors including JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry KC and Ash Regan — was initially confirmed for inclusion on May 14 with 'safeguarding measures' in place. FOI documents show the same day, an internal note described it as 'a book that calls for exclusion of a section of society' and suggested 'calling it divisive [might] minimise the harm caused by including it'. In an email, the staff LGBT+ network said it was 'disappointed' and alleged 'the group behind it are explicitly exclusionary in nature.' The network compared the book's stance to 'racist, homophobic and other discriminatory and exclusionary viewpoints', warning of a 'detrimental' impact on staff, visitors and relationships with marginalised communities. On May 15, the network met urgently with managers. The EqIA, completed on May 21, cited perceived harm, asserted increases in hate crime, risks of being seen to endorse 'anti-trans ideology', a 'detrimental impact on staff', visitors feeling 'emotionally impacted', potential backlash from external partners, losing trust, and the risk of protests. It also warned of the risk of accusations of censorship and that it would be the only book from that perspective in the exhibition. On May 28, Ms Shah wrote to Sir Drummond recommending exclusion 'not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library". "There is a risk that they will withdraw their support for the exhibition and the centenary,' she added. Sir Drummond agreed. FOI records show no equivalent review was carried out for any other book, and no suggestion that titles presenting the opposite perspective should be reassessed. READ MORE Joanna Cherry KC said she was 'appalled' the NLS had 'bowed to pressure from a small group within their staff to censor a book written by feminists, sex abuse survivors and lesbians, about their experiences during an important period in Scottish recent history'. Bathgate and Linlithgow MP Kirsteen Sullivan called the decision 'absolutely ridiculous — censoring a book that gives detailed accounts of women who have been unjustly censored!' In July, Ms Shah told a colleague the episode showed 'training on intellectual freedom is required' within the NLS. Following the backlash, Ms Shah told staff: 'It's important to note that the Library is not banning or censoring this or any other book. Anyone can visit our reading rooms and access it or any other title.' Dr Hunter Blackburn pushed back against that. 'This is unprofessional," she tweeted. "Anyone can see from the FoI, WWWW was not just another book that was left out. "There are 30+ pages of internal consideration about whether to accede to internal activist complaints about the initial decision to include it. The Chair was consulted.' An NLS spokesperson told The Herald: 'We will examine the contents of the letter and will respond in due course.'
Telegraph
21 hours ago
- Telegraph
Now we have proof free speech is a joke in two-tier Britain
After Labour councillor Ricky Jones stood at a demonstration in Walthamstow decrying 'disgusting Nazi fascists' and telling a crowd through a microphone that 'we need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all', a jury of Mr Jones's peers cleared him of any offence. When Lucy Connolly – married to a Tory councillor – posted on social media 'set fire to all the f-----g hotels full of all the b------s for all I care… if that makes me racist so be it', she chose to plead guilty under apparent pressure from the state. Ms Connolly is currently serving a 31-month prison sentence, at times on a 23-hour lockdown confined to her cell with no privileges, for her ill-tempered words. Others, who stood their ground, walked free. The results were still unpleasant – the process is in part the punishment – but better than they might otherwise have been. It is hard not to feel that the difference between the two cases is less a matter of law than politics. Lucy Connolly was denied bail as Sir Keir Starmer and the judiciary worked on their 'shared understanding' that anyone expressing sentiments that could have encouraged last year's riots needed to be made an example of. Sir Keir himself told the nation that individuals would be held on remand. The Home Office openly risked prejudicing trials by labelling those arrested, charged but not yet convicted as 'criminals'. If there's a lesson here, it may well be that people can say stupid things without the world collapsing around them. And that the public – which did not visibly respond to either exhortation – can be trusted, for the most part, to recognise the distinction between genuinely threatening language and idiocy, both on the streets and in jury deliberations. Unlike our American cousins, British people have only a very qualified right to free speech. While the human rights system appears to go out of its way to undermine attempts to control borders or crack down on crime, protection of speech is heavily caveated. And the British state makes full use of these carve-outs in its attempt to maintain its fragile grip on the country it has built. Its most important aim is to prevent tensions between groups. Speech that might inflame them is subject to stringent oversight and exacting scrutiny by officials terrified of what might spiral out from a frank examination of the country as it is. People on the Left, however, can speak with relative security. The result, in the words of Reform's Zia Yusuf, appears to be 'a country in which those who have the correct 'regime' political views can openly call for their political opponents to be brutally murdered, be filmed doing so, and face no criminal consequences'.
