Latest news with #KKK
Deccan Herald
4 days ago
- Politics
- Deccan Herald
Censors and their ridiculous cuts
In 2010, the Indian government undid one of their more contentious decisions. They 'unbanned' the Satyajit Ray documentary, Sikkim. This film, commissioned in 1971 by the Chogyal (king) of Sikkim and then cast aside since he was not happy with its final cut (too much reality … err… poverty!) had been banned in 1975 by the Indian government in the light of Sikkim's controversial accession to India that year. Over the years, the film had vanished from public view and only in 2010 was it screened in Kolkata to a rapturous response. By then, the context had changed, and it was deemed 'safe'. .As far as films were concerned, 1975 (the year of the infamous Emergency) was annus horribilis. That year also witnessed the government come down on Aandhi, directed by Gulzar. The lead character's look and the plot were deemed much too close to Indira Gandhi and her life. And then there was the case of Kissa Kursi Ka (KKK), submitted to the Censor Board in 1975, blacklisted (without due process) owing to its spoofing of Indira and Sanjay Gandhi and their flunkies like Dhirendra Brahmachari and Rukhsana Sultana. Its prints were then secreted away and burnt on the express instructions of V C Shukla, the then I&B minister. This, despite the fact that the movie was directed by Amrit Nahata, who was a Congress MP. The movie was subsequently reshot and released in was common to all of these films was their politics. Sikkim made the larger Indian state uncomfortable. Aandhi and KKK made political leaders calling the shots in the government uncomfortable. That state of affairs continues. .'Superman' can't save Hollywood from superhero one were to list the films that have found themselves in the crosshairs of the Censor Board in recent times, the same terms and conditions apply. Panjab '95 and Santosh question the role of the state and its enforcement wing, the police. L2: Empuraan with its depiction of the 2002 Gujarat riots was skating close to the brings us to the case of 'Janaki V v/s State of Kerala'..State as 'sanskari'.Janaki V v/s State of Kerala is about sexual assault. And that its eponymous victim-character bore the name of the goddess who was the epitome of Indian womanhood was what waylaid the film for a while. Why even a kissing scene from 'Superman' had the censor authorities' knickers in a twist and was cut. .This cultural dimension to censorship wasn't always a thing. British-era censorship rules came down mostly on politics. Gandhi, the freedom movement, revolution — it was these that were on their proscribed list. .But it didn't always work. For all their attempts to curb political messaging, the British were daft enough to pass the song 'Door hato, ye duniyawaalon' in the 1943 movie, 'Kismet'. Since it was World War II, they read it as a warning to the Germans and Japanese to stay away from India. All of India knew that the song was aimed at our then-rulers. And it is they who were being asked to leave. .As for the 'sanskari' angle, movies of the 1920s and 30s were decidedly more uninhibited. Kissing was common with movies featuring both many, many kisses (1932's 'Zarina' — 42!) and long, long ones (1933's 'Karma' — allegedly four minutes). But somewhere along the line, the powers that be deemed it necessary to 'save' the Indian public from overtly sensual displays and began to come down hard on what they deemed was 'vulgar' and against 'family values'. These categories, fuzzy as they were, gave the censor authorities a lot of leeway and power. We were then ushered into the era of negotiation as filmmakers and pen-pushers argued, often maddeningly, about art and the 'national interest' and struck deals. The public, who were both to be fed these films and 'protected', were mute spectators. .Is all hope lost? .Are we, the public, then condemned to be patronised and hoodwinked eternally? Are we going to be 'protected' from risqué content because of our 'tender' sensitivities on the one hand and denied political content and ushered into a state of blind obedience, on the other? .Well… yes! If we continue to be so thin-skinned and demand 'bans' on all and sundry on the basis of the dodgy 'hurt sentiments' argument, this is how things are likely to be. In fact, it will probably get worse. A scenario where someone calls for a ban on the cooking or eating of non-vegetarian food on screen is not unimaginable. Equally, another might want to have a say in the 'naming' of characters. Villains cannot bear 'good' names may be the it is time we healed ourselves. Committing to free expression and a willingness to tolerate contrary opinions (political, artistic, whatever) is de rigueur for good citizenship. That is the need of the hour. The state must be held accountable for livelihoods, health and education rather than focusing on censorship..(The author is a well-known writer and editor)
Fox News
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
NYC Mayor Eric Adams isn't gagging speech – his mask ban protects New Yorkers
In a bold, but constitutionally sound move, New York City Mayor Eric Adams has announced a new policy banning the wearing of face masks in certain public spaces. Predictably, the usual critics have begun to hyperventilate—equating this common-sense public safety measure with an assault on civil liberties. But reports that some Jewish groups are not on board have been greatly exaggerated. Many, if not most, mainstream groups do support the bill, and in fact, the very groups named by anonymous sources have actually come out publicly in support of mask bans generally, and in one case this mask ban in particular. A sober review of the facts and the law reveals an initiative far less scandalous and far more important than the haters would have you believe: a responsible effort to protect not just Jewish citizens but all New Yorkers while staying well within the bounds of constitutional jurisprudence. The Constitution does not guarantee a right to anonymous public demonstrations via concealed identity. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit explained in Church of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kerik, 356 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2004), "The Supreme Court has never held that freedom of association or the right to engage in anonymous speech entails a right to conceal one's appearance in a public demonstration. Nor has any Circuit found such a right." That case involved the KKK—an organization notorious for exploiting anonymity to intimidate and terrorize. And yet the principle applies universally: in a civil society, especially one dealing with rising crime, antisemitic threats, and politically charged tensions spilling into our streets, the state has a compelling interest in being able to identify individuals in public spaces. New York, like many major cities, is facing a crisis of rising masked violence. From antisemitic mobs vandalizing Jewish businesses to coordinated flash mob robberies, bad actors are abusing face coverings—not for public health, but to evade accountability. Mayor Adams' policy isn't about targeting peaceful protestors. It's about stopping those who hide behind the veil of anonymity to harm others or break the law. That's not just smart policy — it's basic governance. And the law is squarely on his side. Mayor Adams is not banning speech. He is not targeting any viewpoint. He is simply saying that in a free society, public protest must be public. That's a narrow, content-neutral regulation of conduct, not a restriction on expression—and well within the constitutional framework laid out by the Supreme Court. It is well established that the government can impose reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on speech and association—especially when public safety is at stake. In fact, during the COVID-19 pandemic, courts made clear that even mandatory mask laws could be constitutionally enforced. Surely the inverse—a prohibition on masks in contexts where they pose a public safety threat—is just as lawful. When demonstrators march with masks, they hinder law enforcement's ability to maintain order and investigate crimes. And that's not just theoretical- both NYPD and DA officials have cited multiple instances where masked agitators used anonymity to provoke violence, destroy property, or evade arrest. Even the ACLU, when it's being honest, will admit that the First Amendment is not a suicide pact. Rights exist in balance with responsibilities. And the right to speak does not automatically translate to a right to conceal one's identity in a public square during a moment of high tension. To those worried about a possible chilling effect: there are better ways to protect speech than encouraging lawlessness. People have every right to voice dissent. They do not have a constitutional right to do so while dressed for anonymity in a way that frustrates law enforcement and endangers the public. The best remedy for offensive speech is more speech, not more masks. Civil disobedience has always required courage—and that includes the willingness to stand behind your convictions, quite literally, with your face uncovered. From Martin Luther King Jr. to Soviet refuseniks, the history of protest is a history of public witness, not masked mobs. Mayor Adams has done what responsible leaders must: balance liberty with security, transparency with protection. He has not banned protests. He has not censored speech. He has merely said that if you want to speak in public, you must do so with your face uncovered—just like millions of brave Americans have done throughout our history, marching for justice without hiding who they are. The reality is this: When people feel unsafe walking the streets or riding the subway, the whole idea of an open society begins to crumble. Order is not the enemy of liberty. It is its precondition. We live in a democracy, not a masquerade. And it's time we start acting like it.
Euronews
10-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Euronews
Slovakian music festival featuring Kanye ‘Ye' West cancelled
This year's edition of the Slovak Rubicon Festival, which was scheduled to feature controversial American rapper Kanye 'Ye' West next week, has been cancelled. Organizers announced the news on Instagram, with the Rubicon Festival Team saying: 'This was not an easy decision. Due to media pressure and the withdrawal of several artists and partners, we were unable to deliver the festival at the standard of quality you deserve. We are truly grateful for your support and trust. For those who have purchased tickets, please be patient – all refund information will be sent via email within 14 days.' They added: 'This is not the end of Rubicon. We are not giving up. We're already working to come back stronger.' Une publication partagée par RUBICON FESTIVAL (@rubiconfestival) The festival cited unspecified and unforeseen circumstances, including logistical challenges and external pressures – which could refer to the petition that was launched last month opposing Ye's performance. Their petition described the Ye booking as 'an insult to historic memory, a glorification of wartime violence and debasement of all victims of the Nazi regime'. The Rubicon festival, which bills itself as a cultural event of 'vision and provocation,' had previously revealed plans for an exclusive mid-July performance by what it called a 'hip-hop visionary, cultural icon, and controversial genius.' They claimed the Bratislava show would be Ye's only European performance in 2025. Last week, we reported that Ye had his Australian visa cancelled, following the release of the rapper's song titled 'Heil Hitler'. In an interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, the country's home affairs minister Tony Burke said: "If someone argued that anti-Semitism was rational, I would not let them come here. (...) [West] has been coming to Australia for a long time… and he's made a lot of offensive comments. But my officials looked at it again once he released the Heil Hitler song, and he no longer has a valid visa in Australia." The rapper's song, released on 8 May - coinciding with the 80th anniversary of Nazi Germany's defeat - has been widely condemned and banned on most music streaming platforms. Ye has previously identified as a Nazi and his anti-Semitic comments have been numerous over the years. This year alone, he made a shocking string of antisemitic posts, which included comments like 'I love Hitler' and 'I'm a Nazi.' He has also come under fire for selling a white t-shirt with a large swastika emblem on the chest – an item listed as 'HH-01' on his website, a reference to the 'Heil Hitler' chant. Following the online rampage and the posting of a KKK photo, he was dropped by his talent agency.
BBC News
09-07-2025
- BBC News
Alfie Coleman tells Old Bailey terrorism trial he was lonely
A man accused of buying a gun for a terror attack told jurors he was "lonely and isolated" when viewing extreme right-wing material in his Coleman was arrested in an MI5 sting moments after sourcing a Makarov pistol and 188 rounds of ammunition in September was a white supremacist who "idolised Hitler" and dreamed of "sparking a race war", prosecutors at the Old Bailey have 21-year-old, of Tailors Close in Great Notley, Essex, admits possessing a firearm, ammunition and 10 offences of having a document useful to terrorism, but denies preparing an attack. He was aged 19 when counter terrorism police arrested him at a Morrisons car park in Stratford, east Coleman's barrister, Tana Adkin KC, asked him on Wednesday: "Did you ever intend to commit an act of terrorism?"The defendant denied it, insisting he never intended to hurt anyone. Giving evidence, Mr Coleman said he struggled with his mental health as a teenager but refused help because he "didn't feel like anybody would understand".He told the court about feeling "very lonely, isolated" just before the Covid-19 pandemic Coleman said he would spend hours a day in his bedroom viewing content about conspiracy theories on TikTok and playing Call of Duty on told jurors he could not remember searching online for the Ku Klux Klan when he was aged 14, but said it could be linked to a documentary he Coleman was also asked about writing down the Lord Mayor of London's address, believing it was the Mayor of London's, in a note entitled "Important Stuff".It followed the prosecution alleging he identified the "Mayor of London house" as a target in an early abandoned attack Mr Coleman told the court he probably found the address on a TikTok video about Ulez in why he made a note of it, the defendant replied: "I don't know. I don't remember doing it myself. It was so long ago." Mr Coleman explained his school year was cancelled in March 2020, adding: "I didn't really like school at that time. I was not attending often. I was pretty lonely."By early 2021, he admitted spending "a lot of time" on the internet and had discovered initially deleted it because the content about extreme right-wing views and firearms "was a bit strong", he Mr Coleman soon returned to it, explaining: "Mainly I was just looking, I wasn't interacting at that point."He described his mental health at that point as "pretty bad". Mr Coleman told jurors from then on the content he was viewing "snowballed", as he watched material about the Nazis, knives and previously said he became inspired by Thomas Mair, who murdered the MP Jo Cox in defendant does not dispute going on to write a text bearing similarities to other "manifestos" written by convicted extreme right-wing trial continues. Follow Essex news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
Kareena Kapoor clicks Saif Ali Khan lost in a book during their stylish London getaway
Kareena Kapoor Khan posts pictures from her London vacation. Saif Ali Khan is seen reading. This follows Kareena playfully showing off her Kolhapuri chappals. Earlier in 2025, Kareena faced a stabbing incident. Saif also encountered legal issues concerning his ancestral property. On the work front, Saif was last seen in 'Jewel Thief'. A day after playfully shading Prada by flaunting her Kolhapuri-style chappals, Kareena Kapoor Khan shared fresh snapshots from her London holiday. Known for her love of the British countryside, Kareena offered fans another peek into her family getaway—this time featuring a stylish photo of husband Saif Ali Khan looking effortlessly dapper. On her Instagram story, Kareena first showcased 'her things': a pair of chic sunglasses, a playful water ball (likely for sons Taimur and Jeh), and a personalized jute tote embossed with 'KKK.' The next snap featured her 'very busy' husband, Saif Ali Khan, lost in a book—sporting a crisp pale-blue shirt paired with vibrant orange shorts that set some serious holiday style goals. Check out the photos here: The year 2025 began on a turbulent note for the couple and their families. In a shocking incident, Kareena was stabbed by an intruder at their Mumbai home. Soon after, Saif faced a major legal blow regarding his claim to the family's Rs 15,000 crore ancestral estate in Bhopal. The Madhya Pradesh High Court overturned a decades-old ruling that had upheld the Pataudi family's ownership of the royal properties passed down from the Nawab of Bhopal. This decision has reopened a long-dormant legal battle steeped in the complexities of princely succession, post-Partition migration, and the contentious Enemy Property Act. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Top 7 All-Inclusive Destinations That Accept Credit Card Rewards Liseer Learn More Undo On the work front, Saif was last seen in the Netflix film Jewel Thief, following his role as the antagonist in Jr NTR's Devara: Part 1. While an official announcement is still awaited, buzz suggests he may reunite with Akshay Kumar after 17 years for a Priyadarshan-directed thriller titled Haiwaan, which translates to 'beast' in English.
