Wednesday, February 17, 2016

A straight talker

A 23-YEAR-OLD American television host has launched a scathing attack on millenials and their parents, arguing young people are “babied” and spend too much time on social media.

Tomi Lahren is a conservative political commentator and host of Tomi on The Blaze, a news network founded by former Fox News host Glenn Beck.

Lahren is famous for her ‘Final Thoughts’ segment, where she rants about politics and current affairs. Clips of her rants often clock-up millions of views and go viral.

She has previously criticised President Obama’s Middle East policy, describing his approach as a “halfway, half-baked, tiptoe, be-friendly-to-Jihadis mentality”.

Lahren, who comes from a military family, added: “I care this S.O.B killed four of our United States Marines. And I care that our commander in chief is more concerned with Muslim sensitivity than the honour and sacrifice made by these Marines.”

She accused Beyonce of “ram-rodding an aggressive agenda down our throats” during her Superbowl halftime performance of her new single Formation, which references the Black Lives Matter movement.

She has also gone on the record to imply that Hillary Clinton is a man.

Now, she’s launched a scathing attack on millenials after the hashtag #MillenialBillofRights began trending on Twitter last week, in a video that’s received almost two million views.

Lahren criticised the issues young people were complaining about on social media.

“Millennial Bill of Rights is trending - gotta love Twitter - so what rights do we as young people demand?” she asked.

“The right to complain when our parents make us spend the Christmas money they gave us. The right to blame the free market and the bank for making us take on student loan debt. Or the right to whine all day on social media that we aren’t rich and famous?

“Meanwhile, sitting on Instagram, instead of being productive? Is that really the so-called Bill of Rights we petitioned for? We are better than this.”

Lahren says millenials should have a right to be “ticked off”, but not for the reasons she’s read people complaining about.

“We should be ticked off that unlike like our grandparents, our parents are babying us,” she said.

“Welcome to 2016 where tough love has become harassment and losing has become participation, where teachers are more worried about what red pens do to self esteem than what mediocre effort does to the future.

“We don’t have ‘failure to launch’ syndrome because we’re lazy, we fail to launch because with no foot in the butt, the butt stays on the couch.”

Lahren then goes on to claim her upbringing was different to that of other young people.

“Listen, my parents never had to push me. No one is harder on me than I am, trust me. My mum and dad think I was born a go-getter, maybe there is some truth to that, but I learnt how to work hard by watching them.

“Guess what? Neither one of my parents finished college. I discovered from an early age a piece of paper doesn’t equal intelligence, or experience or wisdom. It’s a dead tree. Values are alive. Resilience is alive.”

She continued: “Millenials, that little voice inside your head that tells you to keep going? Listen. Don’t listen to Bernie or Hillary tell you free things are your incentive to apply for college or vote.

“Your incentive doesn’t come from the government. It comes from your brain, your heart, your family and your creator. It’s something we all have in common.

She concluded: “Don’t distribute my wealth. Distribute my work ethic. And hey, I will be on Twitter and Instagram today, but that will be after I go to work.

“Life’s not easy and it’s not free. But it’s worth it. Those are my final thoughts.”

Earlier, Lahren criticised Beyonce for “politicising” the Superbowl with her widely-praised performance of new her single.

“First it was hands up, don’t shoot. Then it was burning down buildings and looting drug stores, all the way to #OscarsSoWhite and now even the Superbowl halftime show has become a way to politicise and advance the notion that black lives matter more,” she said.

“This isn’t about equality. This is about ram-rodding an aggressive agenda down our throats using fame and entertainment value to do so.”

Lahren then directly called out Beyonce directly and questioned her political message.

“What is it you are trying to convey here? A salute to what? A group that uses violence and intimidation to advance not racial equality, but an overthrow of white domination?

“Beyonce didn’t reference the Black Panthers to bring about some kind of positive change. She did it to get attention.

“Good for you. You made headlines! You, just like President Obama, Jada Pinkett Smith, El Sharpton and so many others, just can’t let America heal.

“Keep ripping off the historical Band Aid. Why be a cultural leader, when you can play the victim, right?”

She continued: “Guess what Beyonce? White people like your music too. White people buy your songs on iTunes, memorise your lyrics, admire your talent and beauty. Little white girls want to be like you, just as little black girls do. But instead of recognising that, you would rather perpetuate the great battle of the races.

“Your husband was a drug dealer. For 14 years he sold crack cocaine. Talk about protecting black neighbourhoods. Start at home.”

That video has been viewed more than eight million times.


We must defend these 'rapists' - or YOU may be locked up next

By Peter Hitchens

This is the way we lose our freedom, through the semi-secret decisions of boot-faced bureaucrats and the slavish obedience of over-zealous policemen.

Almost nobody cares about the presumption of innocence until it affects them personally, but it is actually far more important to British liberty than the freedom to vote, let alone the miserable Human Rights Act.

As long as the State has to prove you are guilty before throwing you into prison, you are safe. As soon as you have to prove you are innocent, a nasty government or a raging mob can have you locked away for years and you can do nothing about it.

Our current national frenzy about sex crimes has caused us to forget this. Surely, the worse the crime of which you are accused, the more you need to be sure you will get a fair trial.

So there should have been the most enormous row when Sir Thomas Winsor, Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary, declared on November 18, 2014, referring to cases of rape: ‘The police should immediately institutionalise the presumption that the victim is to be believed.’

There wasn’t any row at all. In fact, I fear I didn’t even notice it when it happened.

But no wonder, after that, that those accused of such crimes found themselves subjected to heavy-handed punishment without trial.

From a person of such authority, this shocking rubbish was far worse than the recent crass remark by an individual police officer that an allegation was ‘credible and true’ before it had seen a courtroom, or promises to accusers that ‘you will be believed’. If this is so in sex cases, how long before it is so in cases where people are charged with breaches of political correctness? There is no shortage of accusers.

And so I applaud the Metropolitan Police chief, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, for his plan to pull back from this nasty, prejudiced and unBritish point of view. I hope he succeeds and is copied all over the country.

It is not the job of the police to believe or disbelieve. It is their job to investigate, where it seems likely that a crime may have happened. And that rarely means descending in platoons on the homes of elderly military men, subjecting them to humiliating searches in which their homes are turned over by prying fingers, and interrogation about events that supposedly happened 30 years ago. As the experienced lawyer and former prosecutor Alison Levitt QC has rightly asked: ‘What are they expecting to find in these searches?’

Long before the accused person is questioned, the police should have investigated the claim itself, searched for corroboration and witnesses, established that the alleged crime was physically possible, that the location actually existed and the accused could have been there at the time.

Isn’t that what you would have thought happened all along? But it hasn’t been happening. And it all changed while we weren’t looking.

But if you care more about football or the Lottery than you do about freedom, then you will lose that freedom.


Now British movie awards are hit by race controversy as group pickets awards in protest against lack of black and Asian faces in the movies

That mainly white actors might reflect what British audiences want to watch is not mentioned

The British Academy Film Awards ceremony was today hit by a race controversy as a group picketed in protest against a lack of black and Asian faces in showbusiness.

‘Creatives of Colour Network’ demonstrated outside London’s Royal Opera House as the movie awards season faces continued debate about why the industry remains dominated by white men.

Competing with the screams of excited fans, the group chanted 'cameras, lights, action, diversity and satisfaction' to promote their message.

And members held a banner which read: 'The TV and film industry are male, pale and stale. In fear of diversity, opportunity and inclusion. We want a quota system.'

Beasts Of No Nation star Idris Elba, who was nominated for best supporting actor, and Star Wars actor John Boyega, who won rising star, were the only black actors on this year's Bafta shortlist.

When asked on the red carpet tonight about the protest, Boyega told reporters: 'I just think a larger conversation's being had, and that's a very positive thing, so it's good to see that that's happening.'

The protesters handed out leaflets stamped with the hashtag #BaftaBlackout, which they have been using on social media. Among the onlookers was 48-year-old consultant Chidi Ejimofo.

Mr Ejimofo, from Bromley, Kent, said he was supporting the protest on behalf of one of his daughters, who wants to get into the creative industries.

He said: ‘I have a real problem with the fact that the film industry, as I see it, at present doesn't actually represent the groupings that you already have in society.

‘I find it astonishing that in a country that has so many talented actors and directors and people within the industry from ethnic minorities, you have such a gross under-representation when it comes to handing out awards, and I think that stems from the voting committee that they have in place.

‘While I can see, with this campaign, that they are asking for a quota system, personally I don't think that is the way to go.


Veteran homosexual rights campaigner Peter Tatchell is branded racist and transphobic

Peter is a lovely chap but he is just not insane enough for some these days

Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has been called racist and 'transphobic' by a student union officer ahead of a debate the pair were both invited to speak at.

Fran Cowling, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) representative for the National Union of Students, has refused to appear at Canterbury Christ Church University tomorrow, unless Mr Tatchell does not attend.

Ms Cowling stated in emails to event organisers that she could not share the stage with Mr Tatchell, because he signed an open letter in the Observer last year supporting free speech and against no-platforming, the practice by some universities to ban speakers because of their views.

According to the NUS officer, the letter supports inciting violence against transgender people. Cowling has also made an allegation against Mr Tatchell of racism or using racist language.

Speaking to the Observer, the political activist, who will soon celebrate 50 years of campaigning for gay equality, called the incident another example of 'a witch-hunting, accusatory atmosphere' at university campuses today.

Mr Tatchell's stance on free speech was questioned earlier this month when he surprisingly came out in support of a Christian bakery company that refused to sell a cake with a gay rights slogan.

Ashers Bakery in Belfast were found to have broken anti-discrimination laws when they declined an order for a cake with the slogan ‘support gay marriage’.

Mr Tatchell said: ‘Much as I wish to defend the gay community, I also want to defend freedom of conscience, expression and religion.’

As a result of the court ruling against the bakery, far right agitators could force Muslim printers to publish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, or Jewish printers to reproduce Holocaust denial material, he added.

‘Will gay bakers have to accept orders for cakes with homophobic slurs?’ he asked.

‘The law against political discrimination was meant to protect people with differing political views, not to force others to further political views to which they conscientiously object.’

Australian-born Tatchell, 64, first sprang to fame as a left-wing Labour candidate, when he lost the party’s once safe Bermondsey seat in 1983.

During the 1990s, he campaigned for LGBT rights through the direct action group he co-founded, OutRage!

The group grabbed the headlines by outing establishment figures it claimed were homophobic in public and homosexual in private.

In 1999 and 2001, he attempted a citizen's arrest of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe for his anti-gay stance, the latter resulting in a vicious beating by Mugabe's thugs.

Six years later in 2007, Mr Tatchell was among dozens of people assaulted by Russians shouting 'death to homosexuals' against protesters demanding the right to hold a gay pride parade in Moscow.

The veteran campaigner says both these incidents have left him with lasting brain injuries.

Unafraid to put across his point of view, Mr Tatchell said he would share the stage with Ms Cowling at tomorrow's event, despite their difference of opinion.

He said: 'I'm prepared to share a platform with people I profoundly disagree with, precisely in order to challenge and expose them.' 

The NUS said Tatchell had not been 'no-platformed' by the entire union and that Ms Cowling's decision whether to appear is her own.


Australian Labor Party adopts motion encouraging Israel trips

In what can be seen as a counter-move to an anti-Israel motion, a state convention of Australia's Labor party on Sunday approved a motion encouraging party members to spend time in both Israel and Palestinian areas when visiting the region, Haaretz reported.

The resolution, adopted by the New South Wales Labor convention, came a week and a half after it was reported that the party was mulling a proposal by pro-Palestinian lawmakers to ban its members from participating in sponsored trips to Israel.

The anti-Israel motion was proposed by Labor Friends of Palestine and would have precluded state MPs from New South Wales, party officials and Young Labor members from joining paid trips to Israel if passed.

New South Wales, where Sydney is located, is Australia's most populous state. On a national level, the party has been in opposition since its loss in elections in 2013, noted Haaretz. 

Reacting to the pro-Israel resolution, New South Wales Board of Deputies president Jeremy Spinak told the Australian Jewish News the resolution that passed was a "sensible outcome" that “rejects the anti-Israel bias and discrimination” that had been pushed by a few party members.

“When organizing our study missions to the region, we always encourage members to visit both the Palestinian territories and Israel in order to get a thorough understanding of the reality on the ground,” he said.

The Labor Party in Australia has a history of anti-Israel bias, and it agreed this past summer on a resolution that should the party come to power, it would consider recognizing Palestinian statehood.

The motion stipulated such course of action on a lack of progress in the currently stalled peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA).

In addition, Bob Carr, a former foreign minister in Australia who was a founder of the Labor Friends of Israel in 1977 and has recently become a patron of the Labor Friends of Palestine, has in the past blamed the "pro-Israel lobby in Melbourne" for wielding “extraordinary influence” on the Australian government.



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, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: