Monday, November 06, 2017

‘It Scares The Hell Out Of Me’; Another Person Attacked By Group Of Black Teens In Baltimore

A high rate of black on black violence is normal in largely black cities like Baltimore but it is usually associated with some form of altercation.  That the violence is now spreading to uninvolved people is probably traceable to the high levels of black alienation and anger that were fostered under the Obama administration

Another brazen assault, and another mother left in awe. It’s a story that is only being shared with WJZ. “These attacks, these assaults, someone is going to get killed,” said Kia Martin, whose daughter was attacked at the Inner Harbor on Halloween.

For the third time in just days, a group of teens strike yet again at the Inner Harbor. This time, Kia Martin’s daughter is one of the victims.

“The group of teens surrounded my daughter and her friends,” she said. “My daughter was stomped, kicked, punched, thrown to the ground, beat with a baseball bat.”

Martin says her daughter and friends – students at Digital Harbor High – were pounced on near the science center on Halloween night. Forced to walk a mile to the hospital for help.

“She has three staples in her head, both of her hands are broken. I’m pissed. I’m pissed,” she said. “I just don’t understand why a group would want to go around and terrorize innocent people. My daughter walks that path to and from school every day, and to think that this can happen, it scares the hell out of me.”

Just days ago, two families were bombarded by a group of the teens on the same night. One attack left an 18-year-old hospitalized, the other left a family from New Jersey scarred for life.

“I can’t sleep at night, seeing what happen over and over again in my head, seeing my family attacked,” one victim said.

The victims are outraged that officers were nowhere to be found.

Police have said the Inner Harbor is already flooded with cops on a daily basis, but they can’t have officers on every corner.

“I’m certainly aware of those two assaults and our presence is very, very important, specifically at the Inner Harbor,” said Baltimore PD Commissioner Kevin Davis.

Trashel Maye says her son went through a similar harrowing experience. Her 18-year-old was bombarded by a group of teens. “I am disgusted and I’m upset because my son got hurt,” Maye said.

Outside the incidents at the Inner Harbor authorities now looking into other reported attacks around the city each one more severe than the last.

From a possible pistol-whipping in the Homeland neighborhood in North Baltimore, a robbery on Calvert Street, and at least one robbery in Federal Hill where the suspects were armed with a bat and wooden boards.

“We’re not going to make excuses for that type of behavior we can’t we can’t continue to do that it’s not fair to the victims of these crimes who mainly were just minding their business,” said BPD spokesperson T.J. Smith.


Most People Are Not Afraid of Robots Taking Their Jobs

More than half think automation could make their work easier or more efficient in the future.

Most Americans believe their jobs, and the jobs of those they live with, are safe from automation — at least for the next decade, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll.

And more than half think automation could make their work easier or more efficient in the future.

The findings suggest that while Americans express concern about how automation technology might cause some other people to lose jobs, they are less worried about its effect on themselves.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents said they thought it unlikely that they or someone in their household will be replaced at work by automation within the next 10 years, the survey found. A nearly identical proportion — 56 percent — said they consider it at least somewhat likely that their job will be improved by automation. Many think, for example, that such technology has made jobs safer.

The poll's key findings echo those of other recent surveys. The Pew Research Center found in a survey released earlier this month that 70 percent of Americans believe it unlikely that they will lose their jobs to automation.

Those assessments may well prove accurate, according to recent analyses that foresee far fewer job losses resulting from automation compared with studies several years ago that had suggested that up to half of U.S. jobs could be replaced over the next two decades.

A report released this month by the education company Pearson, Oxford University and the Nesta Foundation found that just one in five workers are in occupations that will likely shrink by 2030.

Still, the AP-NORC survey found that many Americans worry about the effects of new technologies on their daily lives and the job market. Three-quarters of respondents said they think it at least somewhat likely that "people will be more isolated from one another."

And most say robots have cost jobs in factories — a view supported by academic research and data showing that factories are now producing more with fewer employees. Three-quarters foresee at least some likelihood that many retail workers will be replaced by automation.

A wide gap also exists in how people with different levels of education respond to such questions. Americans without college degrees are twice as likely as those with degrees to say it's very likely automation will cost them or someone in their household a job. That is in line with studies that have found that lower-skilled work is more likely to be automated.

Among the poll's other findings:

— Americans vastly prefer dealing with people, rather than machines, when they order food at a restaurant. But in most other settings, many don't particularly care. Seventy percent of respondents said they preferred ordering food from a person. Nineteen percent said it made no difference. Just 10 percent said they preferred self-service. But at a supermarket checkout line, roughly half preferred the self-service option or had no preference. That may partly explain why the small automated restaurant chain Eatsa, which sold food without cashiers or waiters, had to close five of its seven restaurants last week.

— Most Americans still aren't using the latest technologies, some of which could introduce ground-breaking automation in the future. Uber, for example, is testing self-driving cars, which could over time eliminate work for its drivers as well as taxi drivers. Yet just a quarter of Americans use Uber or Lyft, the survey found. And barely 30 percent use a voice-activated personal assistant such as Apple's Siri or Amazon's Alexa. Just 29 percent at least occasionally pay for goods or services with their phones, rather than with cash or credit cards.

— The likelihood of whether someone has used online services and other technology tends to breaks down along educational lines. For example, 63 percent of Americans with at least a college degree have purchased goods or services online, while just 34 percent without a degree have.

The AP-NORC poll of 1,038 adults was conducted Aug. 17-21 using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.

Respondents were first selected randomly using address-based sampling methods and were later interviewed online, by phone or in person.


Australia: Pro and anti marriage equality campaigners clash outside Sydney University

"Yes" voters vilify Christians to the bitter end

With only two days left to return the same-sex marriage postal survey, the campaign ended the way it began — with rainbow fascists silencing dissent and demonising Christians.

The latest display of “tolerance” comes from The Rose Hotel in Chippendale, which has banned a group of young Christians from holding their monthly meeting in the pub’s beer garden because patrons complained that gay marriage was being discussed.

A Theology on Tap meeting, titled Listening as a Form of Love, was cancelled after organiser Natalie Ambrose received an email on from The Rose Hotel licensee George Kanellos.

“I’m terribly sorry to inform you that we can no longer let you host your event with us in the beer garden,” the email said.

“We’ve experienced some backlash from customers, and within these complaints they have threatened not to return if these events continue… I was told by staff yesterday that worked the previous event that 4 different groups of people got up and left and, out of the two groups, we were told that they might not ever come back.

“It was about the debate of marriage equality that had frustrated these groups and our locals.”

Kanellos refused to comment when contacted, but confirmed he had cancelled the Theology on Tap booking on the first Monday of every month, which attracts 200 to 300 people.

The event which so antagonised Rose Hotel patrons was a talk last month by American nun Sister Mary Patrice Ahearn titled, ironically enough, Resilient Faith: How to Survive When Under Attack.

The talk, organised by the University of Notre Dame’s Catholic chaplaincy, was not about gay marriage, but how to cope with being attacked for your faith.

Sister Patrice quoted the Gospels: “If the world hates you know that it has hated me before it hated you.” She mentioned gay marriage as one issue, along with euthanasia, for which Christians would be persecuted.

“Most of us are feeling… tension, conflict, disruption in relationships, because of these issues,” she said.

She urged her audience to find “common ground between the two sides… I’m sure most of us in this room know or love someone who’s gay. Persons with same-sex attraction desire love, friendship and intimacy as much as you or I do.”

In other words, she could not have been more loving or charitable.

But for the “tyrants of tolerance”, anything a nun says has to be hate speech, and discrimination against Christians is the highest sign of virtue.

It’s part of what former High Court justice Dyson Heydon describes as “the new de-Christianisation campaign… the tyrants of tolerance pay lip service, but only lip service, to freedom of ­religion as a fundamental human right,” he said in a speech last month.

“Modern elites do not desire tolerance. They demand uncondi­tional surrender”. There’s no way an LGBTIQ group would be treated so shabbily as Theology on Tap, not least because sexual orientation and every other permutation of human diversity — except religious belief — is protected under anti-­discrimination laws.

Freedom not to serve people with whom you disagree only cuts one way. It is perfectly lawful for a pub to hang a “No Christians” sign in its window, which effectively is what The Rose Hotel has done.

Vilifying Christians has been a hallmark of the same-sex marriage campaign.

Rainbow bullies have physically attacked No volunteers, spat on them, stolen their placards, vandalised their churches, racially vilified them, blockaded their meetings. They abused Catholic students at Sydney University as “homophobes”, “bigots”, “neo-Nazis” and “gay-bashers”. “Go wank yourself off at home with your f ... ing Jesus picture”, they screamed, on video.

They graffitied “Crucify No voters” on church walls, and stormed a Coalition for Marriage launch, chanting “crucify Christians”, and brandished a banner reading: “Burn Churches not Queers”.

The frightening intolerance of the rainbow fascists has been on display for everyone to see during the plebiscite process.

But disappointingly few high-­profile people stood up to defend traditional marriage — not one member of Cabinet, few religious leaders, no business leaders or sports bodies, almost no one in the media — even those regarded as conservatives.

So cowed is the business community that it is refusing to be associated with the Catholic Church.

One bank, which previously had donated to an archdiocesean annual appeal, this year grudgingly agreed to donate a smaller amount but on the condition its name was kept secret.

Any wonder that “No” voters have kept their opinions to themselves, and that published polls are wildly out of kilter with the reality that No campaigners have found on the ground?

No voters “feel like dissidents in their own country”, as the ACL’s Lyle Shelton puts it.

For all the criticism, with voter turnout at 80 per cent the process has been a success, and most importantly has galvanised a new generation of social conservatives, as Tony Abbott said last week.

Shelton says they are part of a “dissident movement against the elites and the celebrities and the media”.

“Win or lose, they’re determined to keep fighting for freedom.”

If the Yes vote gets up, religious freedom will be the battleground.


Australia: Pub ordered to pay anti-Islamic political party founder $2,500 for discrimination - after they told her she wasn't welcome inside the hotel

A pub has been ordered to pay an anti-Islamic political party founder $2,500 compensation after they told her she wasn't welcome inside because of her views.

Beach House Hotel and its general manager Paul Robins were found to have discriminated against Love Australia or Leave founder Kim Vuga on the basis of her political beliefs.

Mr Robins initially showed discrimination against Ms Vuga when he told her he did not want anything to do with her political party, the day before she wanted to attend drinks there, the Courier Mail reported.

Beach House Hotel and its general manager Paul Robins were found to have discriminated against Love Australia or Leave

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal member Jeremy Gordon said in his decision the manager also discriminated against Ms Vuga and her supporters by saying they were not welcome at the hotel or the car-park.

'A substantial reason for these things happening was Ms Vuga's political belief,' he said.

The hotel and Mr Robins claimed their exclusion was due to health and safety concerns, which Mr Gordon did not accept.

A party representative had initially been informed two weeks before Ms Vuga planned to hold a meeting in Hervey Bay that the hotel was available for drinks only.

Mr Robins then became concerned on August 8 when he saw a party flyer advertising a 'meet for drinks' and was worried people would be turning up for a meeting the next day.

He then said, in a phone conversation with Ms Vuga, that they could not meet at the hotel or in the carpark and said: 'Sorry, I don't want anything to do with your association'.

In an email, the manager later told Ms Vuga: 'We do not want to get involved or have the name of our business associated with the party'.

Ms Vuga's request for $25,000 was turned down as Mr Gordon didn't believe she had severely suffered from the incident.

He also dismissed her application for the hotel to publish apologies or undergo anti-discrimination training.

Ms Vuga believed from the start that she had a discrimination case which she thought was important to stand up for.



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


No comments: