Radical Islam

The growing dangers of the Sanctimonious Society

IMG_0820.JPG

Welcome to the sanctimonious society. Social media has taken this to new levels. Given the superficiality of much of today’s internet posts, memes and rants, what it has done is destroy the need for serious debate over contentious issues. Before discussing the likes of Twitter or Facebook censoring certain bloggers, the discourse is self-evident. How often do you read a credible rebuttal to a topical post? Hardly ever is the answer. Usually the criticism is laced with sanctimony, expletives and ridicule. The aim of trolling is none other than to shut down debate and make fun of the person who makes the statement. The intensity of cyber-bullying is chronic. In some respects it is none too surprising we are dealing with words like snowflake, trigger warnings and safe spaces these days.

Take cyber bullying stats from the Association of Psychological Science in the US. In 2015 more than 16,000 young people were absent from school daily because of bullying. 83% of young people say cyber bullying has a negative impact on their self-esteem. 30% of young people have gone on to self-harm as a result of cyberbullying. 10% of young people have attempted to commit suicide as a result of cyberbullying. People who have been bullied are at greatest risk for health problems in adulthood, over six times more likely to be diagnosed with a serious illness, smoke regularly, or develop a psychiatric disorder compared to those not involved in bullying. In the US alone, suicides per 100,000 head of population since 2000 are up 38% according to WHO.

However the WiFi world is quickly escalating unreasoned stupidity in the real world. The internet is awash with so much ill-considered social media activity that if one chooses to breathe for 10 minutes the story will likely have changed 180 degrees from the initial knee jerk. Take the terrible events of Charlottesville this week. The driver that plowed into the crowd was initially reported as a white supremacist before other media reported he was Antifa. Regardless of his affiliation his actions were repugnant. Anyone with common decency can see that. Trying to justify the legitimacy of masked Antifa (many who were carrying baseball bats) staging a ‘peaceful’ protest was somehow morally superior to alt-right torch bearers or vice versa is almost like trying to say watering your lawn with gasoline is less harmful than diesel to kill off weeds.

While the tragedies of the lost lives and depraved acts of violence from both sides is impossible to ignore, the (social and mainstream) media was awash with one sided views. There was no debate and balanced reasoning was next to non existent. One could argue the media has always been biased and to some extent that is true however in the social media world clickbait means revenue and the more sensational and less accurate the reporting the higher the likely ‘hits’ which only exacerbates the problem. We only need to look at CNN’s admission that the ‘Russiagate’ story has been a fabrication for ratings. Integrity be damned. Sadly that is becoming almost an all too common thread of today’s society. Selfish, narcissistic and insensitive bullying.

The other problem nowadays is that almost everyone carries a video camera. It is as if many think they are behind the safety of their own computer screens, oblivious to what is going on. Only a few months ago, an armed SWAT team boarded a Malaysian Airlines flight to suppress a crazed passenger. Despite the screams to get down, multiple people could be seen standing as tall as possible trying to improve the angle of the altercation on their iPhones. There is a sick surrealism to it. Yet if we take this clickbait of someone’s footage at Charlottesville, disseminated to an audience already prejudiced, it only adds to the hysteria. The instant it hits the mobs’ feed it can lead to incorrect assumptions to what is actually going on, even worse hampering emergency services efficacy in controlling the situation. Yet, 10 minutes later, the unedited version of the same scene or one shot from a different angle can completely undermine that biased view. It might show how the violence really escalated rather than the deliberately cut version showing the evil of the unhinged. If we managed to get all of the collective footage from 1,000s of smartphones and objectively analyzed it all it wouldn’t be surprising to see both sides fueling the violence in different areas. Yet because it fits the picture of the ‘divided’ country narrative no attempts are made to seek balance which only fires up the misinformation.

Did Trump take too long to condemn the KKK, Neo-Nazi and White Supremacists? Perhaps. Was he waiting for a full debrief on what went on? Perhaps. Are all 63 million odd Trump voters that don’t openly condemn these acts of violence guilty of being white-supremacists by association? No. Are all Democrats responsible for what Antifa does? No. Internet trolls seem less intent on getting tacit admissions of guilt from their enemy. Think of the campaign which has identified some of the torch bearers leading several to get fired by their employers. Where was the campaign to identify the baseball bat wielding Antifa thugs? Was it because they were masked? Some might cynically claim they don’t have jobs to be fired from. However this idea that only one side is guilty serves no purpose and risks further division.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Both extremes are so caught up in their own views there is little scope for reasoning much less any desire to consider the alternative argument. This idea that Trump is all of a sudden responsible for unleashing this division is preposterous. Hate doesn’t surface in 6 months. It brews over longer periods of time. If anything Trump is a catalyst to it. His caustic manner is tipping an apple cart of decades of political correctness and walking on eggshells legislation that has sought in many cases to promote victimhood. The President’s actions now threaten many of these altruistic views and socialist ideals. They are upset. This isn’t to debate the rights and wrongs of policy set by previous administrations, rather seek to identify why this scourge is happening. It doesn’t justify any forms of violence but it highlights how tightly sprung things are. Just think of why a p*$$y grabbing vulgarian was able to defy all the odds in the election? Could it be that the underbelly of division has existed in America for so long? It finally reached breaking point and delivered him to the White House? The idea he has created this division is a complete falsehood. One might argue his tweets are stirring this hornet’s nest but the sad fact of the matter is that the problems have been brewing way before his inauguration. Ask yourself why hasn’t the mainstream media worked out the best way to cripple Trump is to ignore him? 18 months on since he won the GOP ticket they have not stopped hyperventilating which gives him more airtime than he deserves and ultimately makes them look foolish.

This bullying behaviour is only likely to get worse. The ever worsening cesspit of social media will only exacerbate the problem. Behind a keyboard, people feel they can afford to be 10 feet tall but seldom do they realize their actions could carry (un)intended negative reactions.

More laws are being created to clamp down on what is called ‘hate speech’ or discriminatory language. However we are witnessing more countries shut down free speech and innocent people are having their lives destroyed for expressing points of view that are completely acceptable and not even the slightest bit racist or bigoted (Australians will know the secret trial held by the AHRC of several QUT students expressing a fact). Seeking prescriptive measures to shut people up will invite exactly the sort of behaviour it seeks to prevent. One can call former EDL leader Tommy Robinson a bigot but he has two best selling books in the UK. Could it be there are more people in the UK that share his views than politicians are willing to admit because political correctness is easier for them to dodge discussing pertinent issues? Whether Tommy is right or wrong in his analysis is beside the point. He obviously represents a larger mindshare of the community. Shutting them up forces the movement underground. Do we ban his book? It doesn’t seek to address the problem which in his case is Islam. In some cases he has a point. The exposure of predominantly Bangladeshi/Pakistani rape gangs who have groomed 100s of innocent women across 18 British cities is an issue. Listening to Newcastle City Mayor Nick Forbes, one of the places impacted by this depravity, spent an entire interview dodging the question of these grooming gangs not wanting to discuss the M word. All it does is alienate more people against an optically biased system.

One can debate till the cows come home about whether the M word is the main factor but if it is not openly debated, it is not hard to see why some will grow prejudiced. It is hardly desirable. It doesn’t mean the thinking is right rather a growing number of people feel ignored. It doesn’t automatically make them racists or bigots. Some feel politicians are hiding from speaking openly of jihadi attacks on home soil, dismissing them as lone wolf attacks or the community’s fault for forcing them to commit such atrocious acts. If indeed the left leaning media is so assured of bigotry by Anglo Saxon Brits why not show the other side of the debate and broadcast hours of footage showing Muslim clerics speaking out against these attacks, everyday Muslims integrating with their non-Muslim communities and how they are actively working with authorities to weed the radicals that are demonizing their faith? No, it’s easier to point fingers at bigoted Brits who see no comfort offered by their elected leaders in what they see happening to their community. Once again bullying people for expressing what they perceive as legitimate concerns doesn’t solve the problem.

To put the shoe on the other foot, Robinson posted a video link of the start of an Oldham (a borough of Manchester) Council meeting. It showed the majority of Anglo-Saxon councillors with their heads bowed as the elected Muslim Mayor requested his imam to say prayers. Of course it easy to see why some might draw conclusions to the decline of centuries of British culture however looking deeper into the matter yielded interesting findings. Voter turnout at the last election in the 25% Muslim borough was around 30%. It was a fairly held election. Democracy. Whether local politics is too petty for some, if the residents of Oldham are so incensed by the idea of an imam saying prayers in Arabic and English after following the Serjeant at Arms carrying a mace bearing a Christian cross it is hard to have sympathy. If one is truly in fear of the cultural upheaval, why not use their democracy to change it? Expressing outrage at something that is controllable seems ridiculous.

Australia is in the midst of bullying as well. Same sex marriage (SSM) is on the table. A postal plebiscite is set to occur. Many argue that parliamentarians should vote on it and get it over with. Indeed there are far more pressing economic issues to deal with. Yet the Turnbull government lacks any moral authority and is beholden to so many internal factions to be able to pass so called marriage equality.

Still regardless of one’s views on SSM, the bullying is in full effect. Musician Nick Minchin created one of his hallmark curse-ladened parodies of a Peter Allen song called, “I still call Australia homophobic”. Sadly he is part of the problem, not the solution. One doesn’t have to be homophobic to be against SSM. Yet Minchin thinks it is ok to call these people ‘bigoted c*nts’. Such words have all the same traits of ridiculing Trump or Brexit voters in the lead up to the vote. It has the opposite impact at the polling booth.

A Tasmanian archbishop is being hauled before a tribunal for expressing his anti-SSM views on the grounds of spreading hate. Are his views old fashioned or just part of millennia of religion? A hotel was forced to cancel a lawful gathering of anti-SSM campaigners through intimidation. Is this the sort of behaviour (albeit at the fringe) that unites a nation on a subject?

Some argue it is a waste of $122mn to hold a SSM plebiscite for a government in a $750bn hole. Maybe it is but to many out there, they want a democratic vote to take place. Some feel lobby groups that ignore their concerns (however backward, ancient or stiff) on issues they hold dearly are the exact reason why a vote should be held. It doesn’t matter to them whether a Catholic country like Ireland passed gay marriage, these people don’t want to be brow beaten, attacked or pilloried for expressing an alternative view. I am quite certain that should ‘Yes’ get up in the plebiscite people will have had their say. Shouting down the views of others is wrong. Let their voices be heard and allow the marketplace for free speech settle the differences. Sadly this is not the case. Any polling done by Get Up which shows an emphatic victory should be discounted. Indeed if they are so sure of a ‘Yes’ outcome then they should be over the moon to let democracy back its findings. Secretly they think otherwise. What they view as a waste of money won’t be to others.

Some people fear (again we’re not debating the rights and wrongs of it) that should lobby group bullying win the fight for SSM by an act of parliament then what comes next? We only need to look at the Safe Schools Programme in Victoria which is nothing more than a way to enforce gender indoctrination under the guise of anti-bullying. Cross dressing/role playing, whichever bathrooms and other ‘progressive’ programs are not necessary for 6 year olds. Boys playing with Tonka trucks and Matchbox cars or girls playing with Barbie dolls is not something that requires the school system to enforce boys and girls to reverse toy box selections. When I was a baby my mother recalled I had a love for cars. Even from my pram I knew more car names than English words. I’m sure she wasn’t wheeling me around the Warringah Mall car park trying to force me to do male things. By the same token my daughters weren’t chained to the Bratz corner of Toys’R’us in order to force them to be girls. Seeing her mother apply makeup was something she wanted to do.

What this all boils down to is society’s growing intolerance for free and open debate. We do not lack the ability to talk but we’re incapable of listening. That alternative views must be mocked or banned. There are some with such inability to accept alternative views who suggest prison sentences for climate skepticism. Are the arguments for climate change so weak that alarmists believe the only way to force the end game is to legally ban freedom of opinion?

One imagines that if we put an Antifa and a KKK supporter in the same room unbeknownst to them both and asked a standard questions on a variety of topics they probably would agree on more than they would if within their representative groups. These experiments have been conducted before where complete strangers meet and by the end when identities are revealed there is an awakening. It isn’t forced but occurs naturally through cordial conversation.

I make no apology for my conservative views. One friend is an unabashed socialist. We debate intensely on a variety of issues we have polar views on. I recently wrote to him privately to thank him for broadening my understanding of his views. While I might disagree with him I certainly respect his right to debate his points, which he often does insightfully. Some points are indeed valid and on certain issues we see eye to eye. Others less so. However we listen.

Sadly sanctimony is becoming ever more firmly entrenched into our culture and it can have nothing but bad outcomes. Perhaps to end with a Jewish proverb – “slander slays three people: the spoken by, the spoken to and the spoken of”

 

Pauline Hanson TV special in Japan tomorrow

IMG_0371.JPG

TV Tokyo will broadcast a Pauline Hanson special tomorrow. Interesting to see how they portray her. The blurb is as follows:

いまオーストラリアでホームレスが増加しているという。シドニーでは1年で25%も急増、200人に1人がホームレスなのだ。その原因が移民だという。そんな移民を排斥しようという極右政党まで現れた。ポーリン・ハンソン率いるワンネーションだ。ポーリンはその過激な発言から「オーストラリアのトランプ」の異名を持つ。反移民・反イスラムを訴え、2016年の選挙で60万票を獲得した。

“Australia is witnessing an acceleration in homeless. Sydney has seen a 25% increase over the last year with 1 person in 200 now homeless. The reason is said to be immigration. There is now a extreme right wing party which seeks to boycott immigrants. It is the One Nation Party led by Pauline Hanson.  Due to her strong rhetoric she is being named the “Aussie Trump”. Her anti-immigrant anti-Islam stance won her 600,000 votes in the 2016 election.”

It will be interesting to see how she is portrayed by the Japanese media. It is quite rare to see Aussie politics make it to Japanese TV but it is telling to see that her views are making waves enough for it to be broadcast. If only Turnbull had such impact – well to tell the truth the only impact he had was sinking the Japanese subs deal which brought widespread negative press. This is how he was pilloried.

Poland would happily trade in its EU membership to save its culture

IMG_0772.JPG

An IBRiS poll conducted for the liberal and pro-EU weekly Polityka was published on July 5. The two questions posed to 1,000 people polled was essentially to gauge loyalty to the EU or Poland. Poland would seemingly be happy to trade in EU membership than sell out their culture. This is not a debate about the rights and wrongs of taking in asylum seekers rather to point out what is happening on the ground.

Q1: “Should Poland refuse to accept refugees from Muslim countries even if this should lead to the loss of European funds?”
– YES: 56.5%
– NO: 40.4%

Q2: “Should Poland refuse to take in refugees from Muslim countries even if this should lead to the obligation to leave the European Union?”
– YES: 51.2%
– NO: 37.6%

This opposition to the relocation of asylum seekers arriving in Greece and Italy is reflected in the popularity of the Polish conservative PiS party. The PiS hit 41% in a June IPSOS poll for the first time (against Donald Tusk’s Liberal party PO at 26%). The poll was conducted at the same time the European Commission had announced the launch of sanctions against Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary for their refusal to accept immigrant relocation quotas.

It was only last week that Italy threatened to issue 200,000 refugees with EU travel documents that would legalize their movement around Europe (i.e. encourage their departures from Italy to the desired destination of Germany).

In response to Italy’s threat, Austria is now looking to shut its border with Italy at the Brenner Pass. Bild newspaper has said that Vienna was ready to close the Brenner Pass within a day if migrant arrivals increased. Tensions are already high. Austria has threatened to send armoured vehicles and 750 soldiers to stop migrants crossing.

Whether we like it or not, for all of the altruism in the world, it seems that a growing number of citizens want their governments to prioritize them first. Failure to do so is being typified by what is happening in Greece.

According to the annual survey by the firm Adecco titled “Employability in Greece,” the brain drain phenomenon has been increasing over the last three years. In 2005 only about 11% of unemployed respondents said that they were actively looking for a job abroad. This figure increased to 28% in 2016 and reached 33% so far this year.

The responses show that the unemployed have different reasons to seek work abroad. Whereas in 2005, the main reason was the prospect of a better wage, in 2016 and 2017 the main reason given were better career opportunities abroad. Greeks are giving up on Greece. EU fiscal thuggery is leaving a public system (especially health) under so much strain that it is buckling. 36% of Greeks live below the poverty line. That means many can’t access affordable healthcare because it is generally provided by corporates and when you lose a job you lose the healthcare. This means many are forced to use A&E of major hospitals which are now overcrowded and understaffed as more doctors are leaving to seek better fortune for their services.

If that wasn’t enough, mothers who had given birth were being restricted from taking their new-borns home if they couldn’t pay the fees. While the government has banned this practice they have introduced new laws to allow the seizure of assets (e.g. homes) if debts are not settled.

Forced refugee quotas on countries that plainly don’t want them is a bad strategy. Economic conditions are clearly not in the EU’s favour with poverty and youth unemployment at record high levels. For refugees, most do not want resettlement in either economically weak zones or those that are openly hostile toward them. That is completely understandable. For the citizens of member states to be threatened with sanction or penalty for failing to comply is the wrong way to go. By the EU’s own statistics bureau, 80% of asylum seekers are ‘economic’, not fleeing war zones. It is understandable that citizens become concerned when public services that are already under strain become overburdened.

Some can scream at these people for being bigoted, racist or intolerant till the cows come home but ignoring their views, much less ridiculing them has the opposite effect of winning hearts and minds. As a grandchild of refugees, helping those in dire need is basic human decency. One can be sure that many in real ‘need’ will give back to those that have given them a second chance. Those who have come to help themselves at the expense of others who have worked hard to attain it should hardly be surprised when they are not given the same level of sympathy.

What we are seeing in Poland, Italy, Greece and Austria is ‘actions’ over ‘words’. Unless concerns are addressed by political leaders, altruistic lip service will be ignored and sadly people will increasingly take the law into their own hands.

Egyptian TV host defends the West’s attitudes toward Islamic terror

IMG_0716.JPG

Not many will have seen this video because the mainstream media is loathe to publish anything remotely balanced these days. Egyptian TV host Youssef Al-Husseini launched a scathing attack on Islamic terrorism post the Finsbury Park mosque attack and said “The terror attack that unfortunately took place [in London] was a vehicular attack. This time, it was near a mosque, if you follow the news. How can anyone decide to carry out a terror attack near a place of worship – near a mosque, a church, or any temple where God is worshipped? In all the previous vehicular attacks, at least in 2016 and 2017, the “heroes” were, unfortunately, Muslims. And then people wonder why they hate us. Why do they hate us?! If they didn’t, there would be something mentally wrong with them. [We] use weapons all the time, slaughter people all the time, flay people all the time, burn people alive all the time, run people over all the time, and plant explosive devices and car bombs all the time. Why do you still expect them to love you?”

As written on the day of the London mosque attack, it was an unquestionably despicable act. This tit-for-tat terrorism serves no purpose other than to trigger further escalation on both sides. No sooner had a white terrorist run down a group of worshippers outside a mosque than another depraved individual tried to detonate a suicide vest in Brussels’ Central Station supposedly yelling “Allahu Akbar“. The sad aspect of terrorism in the West today is that it is happening on such a regular basis that many people are becoming numbed to it.

However the mosque attack was the such a bad turning point. The UK government is ill equipped to deal with it now. Should they mobilize the full compliment of 80,000 British Army soldiers and 27,000 reservists to guard the 2,000-odd mosques in the UK? Is putting barricades on footpaths a real solution? Do Brits want to see tanks parked outside Westminster or Trafalgar Square? Should x-ray machines be installed at every train or bus station? Is that a sustainable solution to the problem giving birth to vigilantes? People want action, not politically correct hand-wringing. They are sick of being told to suck it up and embrace ‘stronger together’ and ‘diversity is our strength’ or ‘terrorism is a fact of any big city’ style pandering. The majority of people are tolerant but there is a tipping point of common sense where they stop believing we win acceptance from jihadis by denying our own identities. Governments prefer to take the soft approach which only offers a safe haven to the activities that end up devastating even more innocent lives.

The idea peddled by limp wristed governments that Muslims need special protection only makes it worse. ALL citizens of any denomination, race or background deserve to feel safe. Yes, everyone knows it is a radical minority that is causing the problems. There is a paramount need to work with the Muslim community to root out those that only bring more distrust. No, it isn’t a license to condone bigotry either. However unless they feel we are ‘truly’ standing behind them rather than virtue signaling from the safety of a smartphone nothing will get better. That is an absolute. The further governments repress  the freedom of people to openly express their feelings the worse it will get.

We are taught from the earliest age that two wrongs don’t make a right. The rise of vigilantism is a natural reaction to governments that stick to the politically correct dialogue and skirt around the issues by trying to gag people whether by law (Canada’s M-103) or threat. Politicians cannot win the will of the people by shutting them up. They have to listen. Because the government isn’t listening militia will spawn and do what they deem necessary for the public interest, The last thing government needs is the widespread growth of people taking the law into their own hands. There are two things that ran through the mind of truck attacker Darren Osborne – he’d either be killed or be locked up for a long time after committing his terror. That is a pretty big price to pay but one he obviously thought worth paying.

To quote Al-Husseini again,

What have the Muslims shown [the West] other than the bombing of their capital cities? What have the Muslims shown them other than vehicular attacks? What have the Muslims shown them other than shooting at them? What have the Muslims shown them other than burning them alive in cages? They burn other Muslims alive as well. They all claim to have a monopoly over Islam. What have the Muslims shown [the Westerners] to make them love them, and welcome them in their countries?…

…The Muslims are constantly whining, lamenting, and wailing: The West is conspiring against us. Fine, let’s assume that the West is conspiring against you and only sees your negative image. Where is your positive image? The Muslims of the Abbasid state presented a positive image. They exported scientific research through the so-called “Muslim” scholars, most of whom, by the way, were not from the Arabian Peninsula. None of them were from the Arabian Peninsula. They were all from North Africa, and from what are now called the former Soviet Islamic republics of central Asia…

…What have the Arab countries contributed to the world? Nothing. What have the Islamic countries contributed to the world? Nothing. What have they contributed in the field of scientific research? Two, three, four, or ten scientists in the course of 1,435 years? C’mon, man! Let’s forget about 435 years and keep just one millennium. Ten important scientists in 1,000 years?! Who invented the airplane? The missile? The space shuttle? Centrifuges? Quantum mechanics? The Theory of Relativity? Who? Where did the most important philosophers come from? Not from here. And you still expect them to love us?! And then you say: “Terror-sponsoring countries like Britain deserve…” Nonsense! People do not deserve to be killed, slaughtered, or run over by a car.”

Al-Husseini makes some very valid points yet why does the media not choose to highlight his stance? The irony of those who have seen his video clip is the social media comment section. Even those who take quite a strong stance on diversity and tolerance joked along the lines of  “is he still alive?” Doesn’t that sort of truly reveal the inner feelings of people rather than the public perception they seek to portray openly for fear of recrimination? We should applaud Al-Husseini’s bravery to speak out like this. His comments are exactly the type of bold response that throws the West’s constant rolling over into the dustbin. We can be sure Al-Husseini’s comments are heartfelt and a wish for all to climb out from behind the protection of identity politics and embrace ‘reality’.

Since Osborne’s truck attack, Tommy Robinson’s book ‘Enemy of the State’ is now the number one selling book on Kindle and paperback. So UK government, are you sure you understand the mood of the nation? They are more than likely to back Mr Al-Husseini’s views than yours.

4 things that struck me including lightning that attacked the wrong Bolt

IMG_9130.JPG

4 things struck me this week about the depths we are allowing our society to plunge to. Reading much of the social media feeds it seems more people are prepared to defend the indefensible. That people are happy for the state to put forward bills that take away more freedoms, some who complain at the correct application of asylum policy and some willing to resort to physical violence on those who merely express free speech because they can’t win the debate in the marketplace for open debate.

1) All week we have been subject to the news in the aftermath of the London terror attack. If anything the tide seems to be shifting toward those that are wanting a more heavy handed response. The argument that the majority are peaceful Muslims is a reason to go soft on the violent minority is preposterous. Yet politicians including Australian opposition leader Bill Shorten, think words like “Islamic” are mutually exclusive alongside “extremist” or “terrorist.”

Whether one wants to debate the Quran verse for verse to justify separating these words is irrelevant. When such people scream in crazed tones about “Allah” as they carry out their evil deeds their interpretation is crystal clear. Some truly think that we win acceptance from those supporting caliphates by denying our own identity. Why give up on our culture for those beings who have no interests in enjoying the freedoms we provide much less reciprocating our kindness? Moreover the fate of most jihadists is generally so short they aren’t around long enough to benefit from our weakness.

It’s getting ever more ridiculous too. Countries  like Canada passed M-103 to ban Islamophobia forgoing every opportunity to include other religions by name. Germany now fines people who express concerns on social media over such Islamic extremism. Who could forget the cover up on rapes and sexual assault in Cologne on New Years Eve in 2016? Instead of taking a zero tolerance approach to the problem, honest citizens are gagged and threatened for raising a concerned voice because it is politically more acceptable.

I’ve just been in Victoria where a jihadi, who had terrorist links, murdered someone while on parole the other day. He died in the encounter. Instead of the Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews admitting fault for allowing him to roam the streets he turned the shortcomings of his own state’s legal decision making process into a blame game on the federal government for not dictating more powers over such rulings using the intelligence of ASIO and the Australian Federal Police. Well he has access to all that information and cooperation from these bodies yet still decided to let a jihadi out in general population. For a Premier that relishes government control over almost everything, how ironic that he tries to pass the buck when it is about subjects that may offend his voter base. Lame.

2) Ontario – how can people sit there and accept a law which allows the government to take children away from parents who refuse to accept their child’s gender identity or expression? Perhaps the parents should be tortured for good measure? If any parent was confronted with such a discussion with their kids most would be very concerned and want to be absolutely sure of the reasons behind such a decision. My kids have changes of mind over what they want for dinner. If dealing with sexual identity or expression most parents would naturally want to investigate the facts of why their child would seek to switch genders. It’s not just common sense but hard on parents too. It’s a serious topic. If we’re going to allow children to be able to overrule their parents on such decisions about their body, why not let them vote or drive at age 9? This is not saying they don’t have a voice. Why not suggest family counseling to help parents and children better understand the situation rather than threaten to snatch their kids for non compliance? Totalitarianism anyone?

Don’t forget that no matter what, parents are legally responsible for their kids. They have the stresses when they are sick, when they break bones in a park, come home late without phoning in, not to mention putting them thru schools, pay down a mortgage and so on. I wonder how many of the Ontario lawmakers are parents themselves?

3) I attended a speech given by the Australian Immigration Minister Peter Dutton earlier this week. Get Up had decided in its infinite wisdom to protest and try to prevent the forum. Instead of allowing others to express different views they wanted to shut it down in fine totalitarian fashion. Dutton gets a lot of rough treatment in the press although he is one of the few conservatives left in the Liberal Party. It’s a tough portfolio because opinions are so divided. His department cancelling the visas of seven Iranians who claimed asylum on grounds their lives were in danger only to be caught flying back to Iran for holidays. Not only did they deliberately lie to the government authorities and Aussie taxpayers they schemed our highly valued citizenship inappropriately. It doesn’t matter what race or ethnicity applicants are, we shouldn’t tolerate those scamming the system. We still have 5,000 asylum seekers who refuse to give up their identity or background. They have a deadline this year to do that but most are still refusing. What do they have to hide? Surely they’ve come here as a safe haven and if they’re truly escaping danger their stories should check out. Otherwise one has to assume they’re here illegitimately. Is this the image of a future model citizen? Is citizenship to be given away like confetti or is it a privilege worth cherishing? Yet all we hear is racist, bigot or worse if we raise any objection, sometimes with violent repercussions. The government has fast tracked the visas of 700 Yazidi women who have seen the males in their households murdered in front of them while they’ve been raped and made sex slaves by their medieval ISIS captors. Women from the Dept of Immigration have volunteered to go to these hot zones to accelerate their evacuation. So for all the flak Dutton cops, where are the feminists and progressives applauding such humanitarianism? They only want to focus on the gripes, red tape and protests to hinder the department’s efficiency to process the needy versus the selfish.

4) Which brings up the final strike. Conservative news columnist and TV presenter Andrew Bolt was physically attacked by leftist protesters yesterday for no other reason than to shut him down. Not only did he admirably defend himself in the unprovoked attack several media outlooks tried to turn it against him, suggesting he was a party to it. I’m sorry but what a slur. First, they were protesting his long held beliefs. I can guarantee you wouldn’t find Andrew Bolt initiating violence much less plotting to attend and disrupt a book signing event of a Marxist author. One he fervently believes in  free speech and secondly wouldn’t waste his time going out of his way to attend it. If these bullies of free speech can’t win an argument in the market place of open debate one has to assume their position is fatally weak to begin with. Having to ambush and spray glitter at a person who has completely fair and defendable positions is frankly pathetic. I dare them to ask to go on his show and debate their positions vs his. They would be forced to turn the glitter gun on themselves to hide their embarrassment one would imagine.

Be thankful we have people like Andrew Bolt not afraid to stand up for their beliefs. That stunt yesterday only makes Andrew Bolt look more right. At the same time all they’ve really done is kick an own goal by drawing even more attention to his number one rated blog, editorials, TV and radio programmess while they’ve attracted the attention of the North Melbourne Police.

Remember the Guardian Angels? Expect vigilantes like them in the UK

IMG_9120.JPG

At 3:40 into her press announcement on the London terror attack PM Theresa May called it what it is – Islamic Terrorism. Too often leaders in the West tip-toe around the words, hiding behind the spinelessness of political correctness. Even listening to Sky News this morning the commentators were trying to soften the images when there are dozens of ambulances, police vans and policemen changing into full tactical response kit. How stupid do the media and politicians take people for?

For once, Theresa May spoke with authority. She came straight to the point. “Enough is enough!”  She talked of an evil ideology and how we need to have the embarrassing conversations regardless. She didn’t hide behind politically correct statements.

Former EDL leader Tommy Robinson made an empassioned video about the state of what is going on in the U.K. It is full of expletives. He advocates laws of internment – like that conducted when the IRA was running amock – be introduced to get 3,500 monitored jihadis off the streets. He mentioned 19,355 people were detained (fact checked – 32% of Asian descent, Whites 31%) last year suspected of starting, plotting or being involved in suspicious activity surrounding terrorism. That’s over 50/day. You can fact check in the following document.

Looking at the March 2017 report by the U.K. Government ‘Operation of police powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 and subsequent legislation: Arrests, outcomes, and stop and search, Great Britain, quarterly update to December 2016′ it notes 

1) Arrests for terrorism-related offences fell by 8% in the year ending 31 December 2016 compared with the previous year (from 282 to 260 arrests). Although the number of arrests has fallen, it is still relatively high when compared with other recent years.

2) There has been an increase in the proportion of people arrested of ‘White’ ethnicity, from 25% in the year ending December 2015 to 35% in the latest year. [note that 50% are Asian]

3) The number of persons in custody for terrorism-related offences has been rising; as at 31 December 2016, there were 183 persons in custody in Great Britain for terrorism-related offences an increase on the 143 persons in custody as at 31 December 2015.

Robinson made one point that I mentioned earlier this morning. If politicians keep turning a blind eye and chanting “love will always win over hate” vigilante groups will spawn. People hit a threshold. Remember when the Guardian Angels sprung up in NY in the 1980s when crime on trains was getting out of control and authorities weren’t containing it. Apart from the natural embarrassment of law enforcement being shown up for restrictive response capabilities they’ll be forced to adapt.

We can’t believe in this hug one hug all hashtag, social media avatar nonsense because it clearly has no effect. The West’s current policies are a reflection of the idea that taking the moral high ground is the way to stop it. However there is no point in trying to lie down and give up cultural and legal freedoms for those who have no interest in respecting it much less appreciate it let alone reciprocate such good will. Those conducting terror attacks may not represent the majority but how many people need to be stabbed, run over, bombed to realize these radicals want a caliphate?

The people who should most abhor these villains are everyday Muslims who must resent the extra scrutiny placed upon them. Having said that, how much cooperation and assistance is being provided to weed the radicals out. Are they too afraid to speak out against the crazed jihadis within their ranks? A lot of information gathering for intelligence agencies must come from these communities already but more is needed. There are many factors at grass roots level where we can pontificate all we like but the reality is repeated incidents like Westminster, Manchester and London Bridge prove the current state of play is untenable. Action not words. Zero tolerance is not an extreme response. Sitting back and lighting up monuments doesn’t change a thing.

What is this obsession with crowd funding?

IMG_0690.PNG

I get where crowd funding the plight of some poor starving tribe in Africa hit by a devastating famine, or a Bangladeshi child who needs emergency surgery to save her might have merit but to dig deep for Katie Hopkins takes some convincing. Her ‘final solution’ comments in the wake of the Manchester bombing got her fired from LBC. I’m not here to debate the radio station’s internal staff policies or how they execute them. Katie’s views are always strong, especially with regards to radical Islamic terrorism. I actually thought Janet Albrechtson’s article in the Weekend Australian was a far more eloquent summation of how to put a case forward to fix the problem.

Katie chose her words poorly (even if deliberately) and even if she expresses her views under the banner of ‘free speech’ she has to accept the consequences of those actions of the sponsor that pays her wages. In a sense LBC has the right (mostly for concerns to its advertisers) to make a call on that. Just like those US government agencies who were told to cease criticizing their President-elect on taxpayer funded websites. It was not a ban on free speech but a question of insubordination. To those that couldn’t see that view I suggested they send a message to their boss with the rest of the company CC’d about how stupid you thought he was. The LBC decision stands.

Still one has to wonder why there is a need to crowd fund Katie? Surely she will resurface again. I am surprised Breitbart hasn’t posted an applicaton form to join. Her darkest hour? Are they serious? I am sure she has had many darker. Though who is it for me to determine who wishes to give her money? After all it is charitable. I wonder though whether the tax authorities must have a good, hard look at such crowdfunding and deem whether there is a legitimate tax deductibility case to be had…

Having said that, what a sign of the times that crowd funding tells us about how deeply certain issues affect others. The flip side is they only think she is worth 100,000 pounds. If I ever get crowdfunded I can only hope the figure is far higher.