Monday, September 03, 2012

Don't risk your safety by flying on a racist airline

Pilots should be chosen on skill levels, not skin color

The old SAA was pretty good.  It's not really relevant to much but I liked the way the stewardesses said "Dankie" even in response to English

Cadet pilot training course applications from white men are no longer being accepted by South African Airways (SAA), it was reported on Friday.

SAA spokesperson Kabelo Ledwaba told Beeld that the cadet programme was being advertised online as an initiative to bring pilot demographics in line with the country's broader demographics.

"Only 15% of SAA's pilots are currently black, and this includes Indians and coloureds. The rest are white, and 91% of them are men."

Ledwaba said the airline would appoint male, white pilots when there were vacant posts for which applicants of other races could not be found.

Beeld had asked why white applicants were being rejected across the board.

An irate father had called the newspaper to complain that his son, who had a commercial pilot's licence and met the educational and physical criteria, had been rejected on the grounds of race.

By filling out several dummy applications, Beeld established that the online form had been programmed to reject any white applicants.


1001 Lies to Propagandize Children: A wildly popular exhibit tells children of a glorious Islamic past that never was

J. Christian Adams' article "Fact or Fiction?: 1001 Muslim Inventions Comes to Washington D.C. [1]" sheds light on an important but little-noted weapon of the Islamic propaganda machine in the U.S.: the whitewashing of the ghastly Islamic present by creating a fictional glorious Islamic past.

1001 Muslim Inventions, a traveling museum exhibit [2], has appeared all over the West to huge acclaim (Adams points out that Prince Charles and other luminaries have praised it; 500,000 visitors attended it in Los Angeles alone). It has indoctrinated hundreds of thousands of children into a rosy and romanticized view of Islam that makes them less appreciative of their own culture's achievements and more complacent about Islamization in the West.

Sharia enforcement extends far beyond the obvious attempts to silence critics of jihad and sharia. The scrubbing of the 270 million victims of jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations, and enslavements from academic texts has been going on for well over a decade.

The demonization and smearing of politicians who dare speak against the most extreme and radical ideology on the face of the earth is virtually automatic at this point, as is the self-enforcing sharia compliance of the mainstream media.

And now we see historical revisionism take on a new life, as history is scrubbed and manufactured Muslim myths are presented as fact. Adams shows how effective it is, recounting in his piece that the exhibit presents a Muslim inventor, Abbas Ibn Firnas, as one who "dared to dream man could fly 1000 years before the Wright Brothers." Firnas didn't actually succeed in flying, of course, or come close to inventing the airplane. Adams writes:

"Notice all of the tricks of language. He was the first "who tried to fly," and "passed into legend," "more or less unharmed," the "flying machine," (implying moving parts), and "apparently gliding for some distance."

But Adams' eight-year-old daughter seeing the exhibit, did not notice all the weasel words:

"She was convinced that the Wright Brothers were not the first to fly, and instead it was Firnas launched from the mosque at Cordoba a millennium ago. This would not be the only instance when thought corrupted the language of the exhibit, which in turn corrupted thought, at least among the more impressionable."

By creating a children's attraction, the exhibit is fostering a subliminal brainwashing that will move into the public schools as well.

The exhibit is almost unfailingly dishonest. As Adams explains, even if everything it says about Muslim inventions were true, it does not and cannot explain why Muslims never followed up on these inventions. If Firnas was really the first to fly, why did it fall to the Wright Brothers 1000 years later to follow up on what he supposedly discovered about how to do it? Why weren't Muslims flying around in airplanes centuries before the Wright Brothers were born?

If, as Adams also recounts, Muslims really invented the camera as the exhibit claims, why don't we have snapshots of Saladin and Suleiman the Magnificent? Why did we have to wait for Daguerre and Niepce?


British paedophile who downloaded sickening child porn is spared jail because prison 'could make him more dangerous'

A paedophile who downloaded child porn has been spared jail after a judge said locking him up could be more dangerous to society in the long term.

Jason Fairfax, 35, of Bargoed, south Wales, had amassed a collection of around 2,700 indecent images when police raided his home earlier this year.

The photographs and videos were later graded from one to five - with the higher the category, the more serious the offence.

Cardiff Crown Court heard almost a third of the images were at the higher end of the scale - with 786 level four and 29 level five images.

The details of the photographs were so serious, Judge David Wyn Morgan asked the media not to publish their details.

He said: 'When the police investigated your computer, they found a staggering number of images that were indecent.   'There was a very large number of them at the top end of the scale, at level four and five.  'The natural reaction of any decent human being would be that you should go to prison for as long as possible.

'But when the revulsion has subsided, the court must consider precisely what that would achieve.  'You would go into prison as sex offender and still come out as one - just as dangerous if not more so than you are at the moment.  'And the protection of the public must be of paramount concern to the court.'

Defending barrister Andrew Jones said his client was deeply ashamed of his actions - but said Fairfax had accessed the images when he was suffering with severe depression.  Mr Jones told the court the cause of the depression had been due to the defendant’s difficulty in coming to terms with his sexuality.

In mitigation, he added Fairfax had also not distributed the images and had no previous convictions.

Judge Morgan decided to make the defendant the subject of a sex offenders treatment programme for three years. He will also have to sign the sex offenders' register until at least 2017 and undertake 250 hours of unpaid work.

Furthermore, Fairfax is not allowed to have any contact with any children under the age of 16 - either in person, on the telephone or via the internet - without the approval of their parents.

He is also banned from deleting the browsing history on his computer as well as erasing any images from a digital camera or camera phone without permission from the police.

Judge Morgan said: 'This is not a soft option. It is a particularly difficult one.  'Everybody now knows about you and your reputation has been exploded.

'Should you fail to comply with any of the court’s orders then you will wind up in custody.'


House of Lords staff banned from bantering with colleagues in case it is deemed offensive

It prides itself on being the home of independent thought and robust free speech.  But now the House of Lords has been branded ‘Orwellian’ after it advised its staff to avoid office banter on the grounds that it can  be offensive.

Employees of the second chamber have been advised that even seemingly harmless chat can lead to other colleagues feeling left out and alienated.

The advice has been issued to hundreds of staff as part of a series of taxpayer-funded equality and diversity sessions on ‘cultural awareness’.

During the two-hour sessions, staff are told that the ‘golden rule’ of treat others as you would like to be treated has been replaced by the ‘platinum rule’ of treat others as they would like to be treated.

Participants are advised that individuals can be defined by their body size, place of birth and even their hobbies and interests just as much as by their race, gender or ethnicity.

It is therefore important to ‘see beyond’ a person’s membership of a particular group and to treat them all as individuals.

A subsequent section on ‘effective communication’ advises participants to ‘avoid banter’, ‘to allow  people to self-identify’ and ‘to make minority groups visible using inclusive terms’.

Details of the House’s training programmes have been obtained by this newspaper under Freedom of Information laws. During the past 12 months, almost 300 House of Lords employees have been on equality and diversity courses at a cost to taxpayers of just over £18,000.

The House’s clampdown on banter has infuriated campaigners and writers, who insist it is part and parcel of office life. Chrissie Maher, founder of the Plain English Campaign, said: ‘I thought the House of Lords is  supposed to be a place where people can speak their minds.

‘I think it’s healthy to have banter and I don’t think it isolates people. People can always join in, and if they don’t want to take part they can always listen and learn.’

Australian novelist and avowed feminist Kathy Lette said: ‘The greatest thing about the English is your wit, and banter is your lifeblood.

'British self-deprecation and love of wordplay is what sustained you through the Blitz. And now they want to ban banter in the workplace. Where are we suddenly? A Russian gulag? A sci-fi Orwellian nightmare of robotic people? Remove office banter and it will be a case of the bland leading the bland.’

A ban on banter would be unsustainable on the floor of the House of Lords, where members delight in trading insults.

Last year, veteran Tory peer Baroness Trumpington, 89, was caught on camera giving a two-finger salute to Lord King after he made an unflattering reference to her age during a debate on war veterans.

Her gesture became an instant internet hit. In 2004, Lord Higgins accused former Pensions Minister Malcolm Wicks of being ‘generally confused’ during a discussion.

A spokesman for the House of Lords last night insisted that banter could be ‘misunderstood’ and ‘cause offence even where none was intended’.

She said: ‘The House of Lords values diversity and provides training to enable its staff to explore and understand issues, such as behaviour and language sensitivities, that may arise from working with a broad range of people.

‘It is important all staff are treated with dignity and respect, and we offer training to ensure this is the case.’

Diversity Dynamics, the company that provides the training sessions for the House of Lords, last night declined to comment.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCHAUSTRALIAN POLITICSDISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL  and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine).   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  For readers in China or for times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site  here.


No comments: