Right-Wingers Branded Danger to Children
A former Royal Marine claims he has been blacklisted from working with children for speaking out on illegal migrants. The Telegraph has the story.
Free speech campaigners said spurious safeguarding concerns were increasingly being deployed to “silence” people with “patriotic views” in a “scandalous abuse of the system”.
One campaign group has identified more than a dozen cases in which laws intended to keep children safe from harm from adults are being used to crack down on Right-wing views.
Concerns have intensified over the treatment of Jamie Michael, an Iraq war veteran, who has been barred from coaching his daughter’s football team.
His plight also threatens to increase tensions between London and Washington following repeated warnings from Donald Trump’s administration that free speech is being eroded under Sir Keir Starmer’s premiership.
Mr Michael, 47, from Penygraig, South Wales, was charged with inciting racial hatred after describing some migrants as “scumbags” and “psychopaths” in a 12-minute video posted on Facebook following the murders of three children in Southport, which sparked riots around the country.
Mr Michael was cleared by a jury after just 17 minutes, but his local safeguarding board, which is responsible by law for protecting vulnerable children, has ruled that he is not “suitable” to work with youngsters.
The father of two was told less than a fortnight after his acquittal that a “child protection concern” made against him had been “substantiated”.
As a result, the Football Association of Wales barred him from coaching his daughter’s team after a meeting held in private with the local authority’s safeguarding officer and South Wales Police. …
Safeguarding boards were established in 2004 following the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in Soham by Ian Huntley, a school caretaker. …
But the Free Speech Union (FSU), the campaigning body crowdfunding Mr Michael’s legal case, believes the boards are increasingly being used to crack down on Right-wing views.
It has discovered more than a dozen cases in which people have been referred to safeguarding boards for holding allegedly extreme views. The cases have risen dramatically in the wake of the Southport attacks.
The FSU dossier includes teachers reported over comments made in the classroom and staff room who are now facing school bans, as well as a charity worker reported about a row over grooming gangs.
Lord Young, the FSU’s founder and director, said: “Citing safeguarding concerns to silence people you disagree with is a scandalous abuse of the system. Those protocols have been put in place to protect children from abusive parents and sexual predators, not people with patriotic views.
“Jamie’s case is particularly egregious, but it’s by no means isolated. At the Free Speech Union, we’ve come across this again and again. We have 15 people on our books who’ve been branded a risk to children because of their political views.” …
Mr Michael had been coaching a girls’ under-15s football side in the Rhondda Valley and another team in which his daughter played on a voluntary basis, giving up a day a week. He had also taken over the running of his home town’s Penygraig Boys and Girls Club a decade ago, when it had been in danger of shutting. …
At a meeting last week, during which he tried unsuccessfully to revoke his ban, Mr Michael said the safeguarding authorities had told him that neither politics nor religion should play any part in sport.
Mr Michael asked why footballers were allowed to “take the knee” in support of Black Lives Matter. “The safeguarding officer didn’t want to get into that,” he recalled. “It seems to me if you are on the Left, you can say what you like. But if you are on the Right, anything you say is branded far-Right like you’re some kind of terrorist.”
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: The Express reports that Richard Tice has hit back at claims that Right-wingers are a “danger to children” in a row on TalkTV.
Stop Press 2: On GB News, Toby calls Jamie Michael’s blacklisting “a weaponisation of protocols”.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
When I see the word ‘safeguarding’ I know immediately that whoever it refers to is not going to be safe in any sense I understand.
Aha.
People with right wing views are dangerous to children.
In contrast, drag queens and trans propagandists are totally safe around children and are welcome in primary schools. So are members of the Pakistani community. Oh, and let’s not forget some members of the rainbow community who have, shall we say, an acute interest in young people. Because, after all, “love is love”, isn’t it?
A sort-of scandal which occurred recently in Berlin was that the authorities enaged someone whose stage name is Jurassica Parka for “drag shows for children” despite he is a convicted paedophile (possession child porn). The authorities knew about this and kept employing the guy even after this knowledge became public. After all, only “right wing extremists” could find anything wrong with that (my statement, not theirs).
It’s like how Lucy Connolly’s daughter was denied a place at a new school ( when she’d originally been accepted ) just because the headteacher found out who her mother was and didn’t agree with her political views. Something about “racism”, blah blah…
How dare people in authority abuse their positions in such a way, often ensuring the child is the one losing out. Disgusting and unethical abuse of power.
The trouble is those of us on the right play too nice. Once in power we need to start building the camps on day one and then fill them with people like the head teacher etc.
If there is one section of the community that could be considered to be safe with children it would be those labelled ‘far right’ by anybody working for the authorities, or to put it another way, paid by the taxpayers. The last people children need are DEI Lefties and anybody WOKE.
Those establishments inflicting drag acts on children are in my view seriously disturbed people who need a blunt talking to and a process beloved of the left – re-education.
They probably suspect that “right wing extremists” might publically claim that girls are female and thus, cause all children to kill themselves, which they – as Mermaids and Stonewall very well now – always do when accused of having a sex.
wink
“…the safeguarding authorities had told him that neither politics nor religion should play any part in sport.”
Egregious Hypocrisy! The entire “Trans” movement is political lobbying, and a clear danger to all children, by schools allowing males posing as females to enter female private spaces, even to expose their intact genitals while getting dressed in locker rooms, and females posing as males to do the same in male private spaces.
Who is “safeguarding” the children from that?
At a meeting last week, during which he tried unsuccessfully to revoke his ban, Mr Michael said the safeguarding authorities had told him that neither politics nor religion should play any part in sport.
Well, then, if “politics” should play no part in sport, how can Mr Michael be excluded because someone disapproves of statements he made about illegal immigrants? Isn’t that a political decision?
They didn’t exclude him because he made political statements during coaching.
Here is the link to the support giving page:
https://freespeechunion.org/join-jamie/
Wouldn’t it be great if everyone else in football stopped being involved and bring the whole thing to a halt. Those responsible on the safeguarding team should be named and shamed for causing it.
Humza Yousaf has joined the ‘right wing are dangerous’ bandwagon, saying he’s afraid for his daughters. He needs to look closer to his own political persuasions.
Pedos and other ghouls work very hard to get themselves into positions of authority over vulnerable children and other people through lying and dissembling. The safeguarding theatre does nothing to safeguard them. Only ongoing vigilance by those with responsibility for their wellbeing can do anything to stop them. In fact I think it’s worse than that. Many good people refuse to get involved with caring or teaching as they don’t want to go through the rigmarole and intrusion to get ‘certified’ plus it gives a spurious sense that the wrong ‘uns have been weeded out. Now also it’s used as a weapon against ideological enemies.
ENVIRONMANTAL AND SCIAL GOVERNANCE (ESG) means all must be ideologically aligned or they will be forced out, excluded and silenced.