Tuesday, July 31, 2018



High-flying career women are refusing to 'marry down' despite struggling to find a Mr Right with similar earning power and intelligence

Ho hum! This story again.  We have heard it from Britain and now we hear it from the USA.  Its basic premise is faulty.  There is no shortage of bright men.  To the contrary, the distribution  of female IQ is leptokurtic so there are many more men in the top range than women.  So the problem is with the women not with the men.  The "stranded" women are just too snooty I expect.  Let them test themselves and their female friends by answering what "leptokurtic" means.  I think they will be deflated by finding that far more men can answer that, despite women generally being good with words 




Career-focused women are struggling to meet men with a similar level of education and financial income - but refuse to ‘marry down’.

A generation of high-flying women cannot find eligible men that they would consider marrying, and this is down to their lack of degrees and high incomes, a US academic study claims.

For women marriage often involves ‘marrying up’ but as personal fortunes have increased, expectations have failed to adjust.

The study said: ‘Unmarried women, on average, are looking for a man who has an income that is about 66% higher and a likelihood of having a college degree that is about 49% higher than what is available.’

The lead author Daniel Lichter, professor of sociology at Cornell University, and co-author Joseph Price of Brigham University, think they’ve created a formula for working out what unmarried women desire in a potential partner.

Analysing data from 10.5million households surveyed for three years from 2010 by the US Census Bureau, they established the traits of married couples aged between 25 and 45-years-old.

In their working paper, Mismatches in the Marriage Market, they assume that unmarried women are searching for men similar to those already married.

Price said the findings were relevant to Britain due to the similar trends, the Times reported.

Lord Willetts, chairmen of the Resolution Foundation think tank, added: ‘This American research is telling us that the days of the conventional male breadwinner are disappearing and this changes relationships between the sexes.’

Fifty-five per cent of women enter higher education by the age of 30 compared to 43 per cent of men and the amount of couples where only one adult works has nearly halved in the past 40 years, according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies.

Susanna Abse, a psychoanalytic psychotherapist, said both sexes are to blame and that people should be more satisfied with ‘ordinary’ partners and not hold onto a fantasy idea.

The academics said this could lead to many career-focused women deciding to stay single or if they do marry, it will be poorly matched economically.

Harry Benson, research director at the Marriage Foundation, said: ‘The marriage market may be further skewed against high-flying women because potential male partners are still predisposed to “marrying down”.’

But he added that what makes a marriage work isn’t usually anything to do with income or education but instead commitment and interests along with friendship and kindness.

SOURCE









Child Brides in Turkey

Where would you like your daughter to be when she is 13? In school, or in bed with a grown man? The answer to this question is largely beyond argument in much of the world. In Islamic societies, however -- including non-Arab and theoretically secular Turkey -- the answer is anyone's guess. Usually in such states, the police power of the government does not fight the patriarchal tradition; instead, it supports it.

Turkey's former president, Abdullah Gül, incumbent Islamist strongman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's former ally and co-founder of the party that has ruled Turkey since 2002, was a 30-year-old man when he married his wife Hayrünnisa when she was 15. Gül, nominated for the presidency by Erdoğan, was Turkey's first Islamist president.

Conservative Turks, instead of questioning Gül's marriage to a child, cheered his rise to the presidency. This author was privately -- but not politely -- warned several times by senior politicians against bringing up the issue in his column in another newspaper.

According to Turkish Philanthropy Funds (TPF), 40% of girls under the age of 18 in Turkey are forced into marriage. TPF found that the Turkish national average of female high school dropouts was 56%. It further found that early marriage is seen in families with a low education level. "Low education" means almost all of Turkey: The average schooling in the country is a mere 6.5 years. In 45 Turkish provinces, the schooling rate is below the national average.

The Islamist rule in the once secular country has added to the problem of child brides instead of combating it. In November 2017, President Erdoğan signed the "mufti law," which allows state-approved clerics (or simply imams) to conduct marriage ceremonies, "despite concerns from civil society that this could have an impact on child marriage."

In January 2018, the Directorate of Religious Affairs (Diyanet) -- a government body under Erdoğan's jurisdiction -- suggested that according to Islamic law, girls as young as 9 years old and boys as young as 12 could marry. Diyanet is responsible for administering religious institutions in Turkey. Its website reaffirmed that, according to Islamic law, whoever had reached the age of "adolescence" had the right to marry. This "fatwa" prompted the country's main opposition party, a secular group, to call for an investigation into child marriages.

The arrival of around three million Syrian refugees to Turkey since civil war broke out in the neighboring country has made things worse. For instance, a social worker at the Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Training and Research Hospital in Istanbul's Küçükçekmece district revealed that the hospital treated 115 pregnant underage girls, including 39 Syrian nationals, between Jan. 1 and May 9, 2017. The social worker complained to prosecutors that the hospital tried to cover up the pregnancies and did not notify the authorities, as is a legal requirement for the treatment of all pregnant girls younger than 18 in Turkey. Such examples are only the "tip of the iceberg," according to Canan Güllü, head of the Turkish Women Associations Federation.

A recent case of Syrian refugee-related child abuse is an embarrassment not only for the Turkish political culture that has nurtured the malady but also for the Turkish judiciary:

Fatma C., a Syrian child refugee arrived in Ankara, the Turkish capital, with her family four years ago. In 2017, according to an indictment, she was forced at the age of 13 to marry her relative, Abdulkerim J. The marriage was not civil but religious (made legal under Islam by an imam). Fatma C. got pregnant and was taken to a local health center where, because she was younger than 18, authorities informed law enforcement authorities.

Prosecutors decided that the girl's husband and her mother, Emani B., should stand trial for forcing an underage girl into marriage. So, stand trial they did. But a court in Ankara ruled during the first hearing of the case to acquit them. The defendants maintained that they did not know the Turkish law on marriage and that the girl had married "under Syrian law." An unusually tolerant Turkish prosecutor ruled that the "marriage took place not with the intention of committing an offense."

"It is universal rule that not knowing the law is not an excuse when one offends," said Ceren Kalay Eken, a lawyer from the Ankara Bar Association. "The appropriate place for a 13-year-old girl is on the school bench, not tending to the cradle."

It is amazing how soft and tolerant Turkish law enforcement can be when the offenders act from motives derived from austere Islamic values and traditions. Around the same time as the child bride's abusers went free during their first hearing, another Ankara court arrested four university students for exhibiting at their graduation ceremony a placard that the court deemed insulting to President Erdoğan. In Turkey, you may abuse a 13-year-old and walk free, but you may not tease the president.

SOURCE






5 Ugly Truths About Women That Young Men Need to Recognize

I love women. Not in the social justice warrioresque “We must praise women as strong, capable CEOS and STEM graduates who can do anything men can do, but in heels” way, but in an old-school way. It’s easy to respect a mother who watches out for her children, a wife who is loyal to her husband, or a sister who cares for her brother. I love a beautiful woman. I love a sexy woman. I love a woman who gives off that amazing feminine energy. As a man, being around a woman like that is just good for your spirit.

All that being said, this is not about the more wonderful traits of women. To the contrary, it’s the kind of warning about women that fathers used to give their sons, but that’s frowned upon today. You see, in our society we can hammer home the faults of men until they become stereotypes, but we’re not supposed to point out the similarly damaging, but often very different flaws of women that young men need to worry about.

I think lions are extraordinarily beautiful and powerful creatures, but I also know if you make a wrong move around one, you can lose an arm. Women are much the same. They are magnificent but dangerous and since men pursue them, they need to understand what they’re getting into.

1. Beauty fades

Men don’t like to admit this, but the first thing they think about when it comes to women is beauty. Not only are we drawn to it, but it’s a status symbol. When a man has an attractive woman, other men think more of him. In fact, it can become such a powerful draw that some men put beauty first and second — and whatever comes third doesn’t matter. This is a mistake if you plan to be with her beyond a date or three because beauty fades for all of us, but it fades faster and harder for women. Moreover, beauty in and of itself only attracts for so long. As the old saying goes, “No matter how good she looks, someone out there is tired of her sh*t.” Point being, make sure you judge a woman on a lot more than beauty alone because the time is going to come when one way or the other, that beauty is going to fade in your eyes.

2. After your relationship ends, you may be surprised at the ruthless treatment you get

Men tend to be famously ruthless about relationships a few dates in when women fall for them way too early and the men only care about sex. On the other hand, women tend to be much more ruthless than men when a relationship is ending. This is hard for a lot of men to believe because they can’t imagine the sweet, uplifting, nurturing woman they were in a relationship with is taking them to the cleaners in divorce court or using their kids as a bargaining chip after the divorce.

3. Women are much more status-oriented than men

Women tend to put the same kind of emphasis on status that men put on beauty. That doesn’t mean it’s the end all and be all of everything, but it does mean status is a lot more important to women than it is to men. What that means is that as a man, if you ever stop performing at the level your woman is accustomed to, you may lose her regardless of everything else. Lose your job, get demoted, take a big pay cut, lose your moxie somehow and women are much more likely to walk away than a man would be with a woman in the same situation. That doesn’t mean it’s a given, but it does mean that going backward in status as a man risks your relationship with a woman.

4. Women are not as stable as men

There are exceptions to every rule, but the most stable woman is as emotional as an unstable guy. Women are more emotional, more hormonal than men. Women are, at best, more tolerant of drama than men and at worst, they seek it out. They will become upset for no good reason, act irrationally, and are more prone to things like anxiety than men. The point of this is not “women are unstable and bad,” it’s that women are very different in this area and you need to be ready to deal with it. At times there’s going to be crying, no matter what you do. At times, your girlfriend / lover / wife is going to become angry at you even though you’ve done nothing wrong. Wise men learn that there are times to ignore things women say rather than get in a fight because ten minutes later, their mood will improve. To men who aren’t used to it, all of this can be freaky, but it can also help keep things fresh and exciting once you learn to navigate it.

5. Women may come to hate you for your weakness

If your woman is stronger than you, she may still date you. She may love you. She may even marry you one day. However, on a fundamental level, she will not be able to respect you if you are not strong and competent enough to lead her. Women don’t want to be the ones who make all the decisions and wear the pants in the family and if you force her to do that, it will wear on her and she will come to resent you. How will that resentment play out? At best, probably unhappiness and at worst, cheating, divorce or contempt that’s so bad that you wish you were divorced. I’m not telling you to be a jerk, but I am telling you that if you are not a stronger person than your woman, you will ultimately be sorry.

SOURCE







Australian navy nailed to the wall for PC post

A bearded Australian naval officer holding up his painted pinky finger­nail in hot lolly pink was an absolute money shot for the 100 Days For Change campaigners.

Yet when the Australian navy posted photos of the unlikely poster boy across social media, it didn’t go down well with the troops.

Navy was pilloried for being ­focused on a “politically correct” campaign rather than focusing on the defence of the realm.

The 100 Days For Change campaign was launched this month by Women and Leadership Australia to promote a ­nationwide push among companies for gender ­equity in the workplace. Journalist advocate Tracy Spicer is the public face of the campaign.

NSW RSL president James Brown said last night the navy should never have been dragged into such a loaded political exercise.

“Navy has made great progress in making sure women aren’t unfairly treated,” he said. “But ordering uniformed personnel to join social-activism campaigns is a step too far and risks politicising the defence force.”

Lauding the aims of the campaign on the official navy website, Deputy Chief Mark Hammond said 21.3 per cent of the navy’s workforce was female, “a statistic navy can be proud of, but more needs to be done”.

Rear Admiral Hammond said the navy needed to look at a range of measures — from supporting women’s sporting events to ­reviewing procedures for unconscious gender bias.

“We must do this as one navy, regardless of age, rank, race, ­religion, sexual orientation, ability or gender,” he said. “We cannot afford to leave anyone behind.”

The Defence Department tweeted that the navy had recently become involved in the campaign. “To encourage gender equality and diversity in the workplace, personnel in Sydney painted their pinky fingernails pink as a visual indication of support,” the department said.

The campaign partners include the not-for-profit Australian Gender Equality Council and the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, an Australian government statutory agency.

“What I love about this campaign is the focus on practical change, from the grassroots to the top end of town: action, not words. It will be exciting to see what we are able to achieve,” Ms Spicer said of the campaign.

There are various pledges for change on the campaign website, including from Warrant Officer Gary Wight of the Royal Australian Navy. “I will focus on the strength and increased capability we gain from a truly diverse and inclusive workforce,” he said.

Former Labor leader Mark Latham let loose yesterday. “THIS WILL SCARE THE ENEMY,” he screamed on his Facebook and Twitter feeds. “Sadly, this is not a joke. It is the Australian Defence Force under Marise Payne and Malcolm Turnbull.”

On Mr Latham’s Outsiders Facebook page, it was open ­season. Phil said: @Bullshit! Really! This is the limit! … The services (navy, RAAF, army) need men and women who will fight for our country with devotion and guns, not dresses and hair dryers.”

Rob said: “When I was in the army 30 years ago we thought the navy wore pink nail polish anyway.”

Mr Latham told The Australian the 100 Days For Change campaign was another doomed “PC project”. “These guys are fighting for their country … why engage in pathetic virtue signalling?” he said.

The office of Defence Minister Marise Payne did not respond to inquiries.

SOURCE 

*************************

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

***************************



Monday, July 30, 2018






Poisonous Jewish far-Leftists

A 20-year-old supporter of President Donald Trump resigned from her position as a counselor at a summer camp known as “Commie Camp,” she told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an exclusive interview.

Gabriella Mamet said she resigned as a counselor at Camp Kinderland in Tolland, Massachusetts, after nearly a month of Trump-bashing, Black Lives Matter chants and hostility from campers. Progressive film director Katie Halper coined Kinderland “Commie Camp” in a 2013 documentary.

“They didn’t really mention how political of a camp it was in the phone interview or anything,” Mamet told TheDCNF. “I went on their website and I thought it was pretty much a normal camp and when i got there during orientation it was kind of surprising at how political it was.”

The 20-year-old worked at the camp from the June 28 orientation until she quit July 22. Camp Kinderland assigned her to 14- and 15-year-old campers. Her campers allegedly wanted to know the Trump supporter’s views on political issues, but Mamet was not comfortable sharing them.

Camp Kinderland is a “multicultural summer camp and community that honors our progressive secular Jewish roots through our commitment to economic, racial, and social justice,” according to its mission statement. “Kinderland’s summer programming and year around activities integrate progressive values with arts, recreation, and activism in a compassionate and caring environment.”

Campers were “attacking me for my political views and just saying that they would feel threatened with me as their counselor,” Mamet said. “They were saying that they felt threatened by me as a counselor and not knowing my views on gun control … they said to my face all Trump supporters are bad people. They’re racist, homophobic and we don’t want them at our camp.”

She said the staff had a meeting following a July 20 article in TheDCNF showcasing the nearly 50 Antifa flags campers had designed. Mamet said staff members were instructed not to use social media at the meeting.

Aside from Antifa flag-making, Mamet said campers participated in an event called “Peace Olympics.”

There are “five teams and every team gets an issue and my particular team was Black Lives Matter,” she said. “We would have to make chants about Black Lives Matter and chants in favor of that particular thing. … Some of the chants they made were attacking Trump. ‘No more Trump, no more Pence. We don’t need a bigger fence.'”

Campers “were justifying the police officers being shot [in Ferguson],” Mamet, whose father is a police officer, explained to TheDCNF. “They were basically saying that it was okay for the police officers to be shot because people were so angry.”

Mamet was supposed to switch bunks on the day she resigned, due to what she felt was hostility from her campers.

“The program director came and talked to the campers about why I was moving and I wanted it to be clear that I was moving because the way they were treating me. But the program director told the campers it was just because I was needed somewhere else,” Mamet said. “They weren’t doing anything to hold [the campers] accountable because they were obviously just trying to keep their money.”

Camp Kinderland did not respond to a request for comment.

SOURCE






Alberta man legally changes sex for cheaper car insurance

An Alberta man has legally changed his gender purely to benefit from the lower car insurance rates offered to women.

“I didn’t feel like getting screwed over any more,” the man, identified only as “David,” told CBC this week.

For more than three years, Alberta has been among several provinces in which residents can legally change the sex on their birth certificates without providing evidence of genital surgery.
  
Under a 2015 reform brought in by Alberta’s Progressive Conservatives, to change the gender on a birth certificate applicants need only provide a note from an accredited physician or psychologist indicating that they identify as a different sex.

“It was pretty simple. I just basically asked for it and told (the doctor) that I identify as a woman, or I’d like to identify as a woman, and he wrote me the letter I wanted,” David told CBC.

Once a birth certificate is amended, it’s then a simple process to have the change applied to an Alberta driver’s licence.

David noted in a post to Reddit last April that he would have paid $4,517 if he had insured his car as a man, but the cost dropped to $3,423 once he became a woman.

“I am now a woman … I now pay $1,100 less for auto insurance. I won. The end,” he wrote.

Alberta’s sex change requirements weren’t intended to help Albertans welch on their insurance premiums, of course, but rather to cut red tape for the transgender community. A statement at the time called it “a major step forward in supporting transgender individuals and their families.”

In the United States, data from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has concluded that men are roughly twice as likely to die in fatal car crashes as women.

Part of this is because more men are employed in jobs that require time behind the wheel. However, rates of speeding, impaired driving and reckless driving are also higher among males.

Indeed, David’s insurance rates were particularly high in part because, despite only being in his early 20s, he already has a collision and several tickets on his driving record.

SOURCE






Just more of the global outbreak of mental illness. Move along

On Sunday night, a Muslim named Faisal Hussain strolled calmly down Danforth Avenue in Toronto’s Greektown, a popular area known for its restaurants and cafes. Hussain pulled out a weapon and started firing into some of those restaurants, murdering two people and injuring another 13.

The most obvious explanation for this is that Hussain was answering the call of the Islamic State (ISIS) and al-Qaeda for individual Muslims to murder civilians in Western countries. The Islamic State issued this call in September 2014:

"So O muwahhid, do not let this battle pass you by wherever you may be. You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawaghit. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European — especially the spiteful and filthy French — or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be….If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him…."

Hussain’s family, on the other hand, was ready with a different explanation. His parents issued a statement saying: “Our son had severe mental health challenges, struggling with psychosis and depression his entire life….While we did our best to seek help for him throughout his life of struggle and pain, we could never imagine that this would be his devastating and destructive end.”

This might be more convincing had we not heard it so many, many times before. Just a few of many available examples:

Last week in Paris, a Muslim hit a 69-year-old Jewish man, knocking him to the ground, and then dragged him by the hair, all the while screaming “Allahu akbar, long live Hitler, death to the Jews.” The attacker was sent for a psychiatric evaluation; French authorities are apparently not even considering the possibility that he is a jihad terrorist with Islam’s special hatred for Jews.

Likewise in June 2017, a Muslim who stalked through a Jewish area of London screaming “Allah, Allah” and “I’m going to kill you all” was not a jihadi. A police spokesman explained: “He was detained by officers under the Mental Heath Act. No one was injured. This is not being treated as terror-related.”

Also in June 2017, a Muslim in a Metro station in Lausanne, Switzerland began screaming “Allahu akbar,” causing commuters to run away in terror. But there was nothing to be concerned about: the prosecutor explained that “this is a person who was afraid his life was in danger. At the height of his crisis, he began to face paranoia. Then he called to God for help. This is what he did last Friday in the subway shouting Allahu akbar.”

In March 2017, a Muslim in Germany attacked a 59-year-old man riding his bicycle, bashing his skull with a hammer. Police announced: “The suspect may have a mental illness” and stressed that this was not a jihad attack, as the attacker was simply  “mentally ill.” Another Muslim in Germany who wounded nine people with an axe in a train station was also not a jihadi; he had “mental health problems.”

In May 2016, a Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” and “Infidel, you must die” stabbed four people, killing one, at a train station near Munich. Nonetheless, Bavarian security officials immediately denied that he “had an Islamic extremist motive.” Then what caused the attack? Bavaria’s state interior minister Joachim Herrmann said that the attacker had “mental disorders.”

A Muslim was arrested in June 2016 for a jihad plot to attack tourists and police. He was found with a knife and a machete. According to the Telegraph, “the suspect has a history of psychiatric problems and has been diagnosed as schizophrenic, but is considered nonetheless ‘truly radicalised’ with a ‘serious profile.’”

In August 2016, a Muslim stabbed six people in London, murdering one of them. The BBC reported that “the Met Police’s assistant commissioner for specialist operations, Mark Rowley, said the investigation was increasingly pointing to the attack being ‘triggered by mental health issues.’”

That was also the verdict in the case of Gyulchehra Bobokulova, the Muslim woman who in May 2016 beheaded a four-year-old girl and then paraded her severed head through the streets of Moscow. She screamed “Allahu akbar” while brandishing the girl’s head and said that Allah had ordered her to behead the girl. She seems to have had an Islamic State boyfriend. She had become religious not long before the beheading, and started wearing hijab. She says the beheading was revenge for Russian airstrikes on Muslims in Syria. She told her son to pray five times a day and live in accord with Sharia. Despite all that, however, she was declared insane and not brought to trial.

In Uruguay, a Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” stabbed a Jewish man to death, and later explained that in committing this murder, he had “followed Allah’s order.” But a judge ruled that he was “suffering from chronic psychosis of schizophrenic type” and “was not able to appreciate the wrongfulness of his actions.”

In the same way, a Muslim who was shouting “Allahu akbar” outside a Brooklyn synagogue in July 2016 and had two knives in his car was, according to the New York Daily News, nothing to be concerned about: “investigations by the NYPD and FBI showed Joudeh, 32, was emotionally disturbed and not a terrorist threat.”

Mental illness is also the cause of anti-Americanism among Muslims. Military Times reported that in November 2015, “a Jordanian police captain opened fire in an international police training facility, killing two Americans and three others. The government subsequently portrayed the police captain as troubled.”

Of course. What else could he be?

What those who dismiss jihad activity as mental illness never consider is that it could be both. If Faisal Hussain really struggled with mental health issues throughout his life, as his family claims, he may have considered himself to be under a curse from Allah, and decided to do something great in order to get into the deity’s good graces. And Islam teaches that there is no deed greater than jihad: a hadith has a man asking Muhammad, “Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” Muhammad replied, “I do not find such a deed.” (Bukhari 56.4.2785)

If Faisal Hussain was tormented by the idea that he had sinned, he also might have been trying to make sure the scale holding his good deeds outweighed the scale holding his evil deeds (cf. Qur’an 21:47) by performing what is, in Muhammad’s view, the greatest deed of all.

There is, in sum, no reason why an act of jihad terror cannot be performed by someone who is on the psychically marginal edge, and plenty of reasons why someone who is psychically marginal might opt for jihad.

But we are certain to hear even more the same old excuses in the coming days, along with admonitions that only by rejecting “Islamophobia” can we prevent future Faisal Hussains. The mental health of would-be Islamic jihadis will be, like everything else, made the responsibility of non-Muslims, just as it is the responsibility of non-Muslims to bend over backward to accommodate Muslim demand so as to prevent “radicalization.”

The jihad imperative in the Qur’an and Sunnah, however, is open-ended. Jihad is to be waged against all infidels, not just to those who are “Islamophobic” and not appeasement-minded. And so all the claims after this latest jihad attack that Muslims are the real victims of jihad and require special accommodation may well result in that accommodation in Justin Trudeau’s Canada, ostensibly to prevent more Faisal Hussains from going round the bend, but it will do nothing to blunt the force of the advancing jihad.

SOURCE





Germany: Rise of the Salafists

The number of Salafists in Germany has doubled over the last five years and now exceeds 10,000 for the first time, according to Germany's BfV domestic intelligence agency. BfV estimates that Germany is home to more than 25,000 Islamists, nearly 2,000 of whom pose an immediate threat of attack.

The new figures are included the latest annual report of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV), and presented by Interior Minister Horst Seehofer and BfV President Hans-Georg Maaßen in Berlin on July 24.

The report, considered the most important indicator of internal security in Germany, draws a bleak picture. The BfV estimates that the number of Islamists in Germany increased to at least 25,810 by the end of 2017, up from 24,425 in 2016.

Strangely, the report does not provide any estimates for the number of followers of the Islamic State or al-Qaeda living in Germany. As a result, the actual number of Islamists in Germany is undoubtedly higher than 25,810.

According to the report, Salafists comprise the single largest Islamist group in Germany. The number of Salafists in Germany jumped to 10,800 in 2017, up from 9,700 in 2016; 8,350 in 2015; 7,000 in 2014; 5,500 in 2013 and 4,500 in 2012.

The BfV report states:

"Salafists see themselves as defenders of an original, unadulterated Islam. They model their religious practice and lifestyle exclusively on the principles of the Koran, the Prophet Mohammed and the first three Muslim generations, the so-called righteous ancestors (Al-Salaf al-Salih in Arabic). As a consequence, Salafists want to establish a 'theocracy' according to their interpretation of the rules of sharia, one in which the liberal democratic order no longer applies.

"Political and jihadi Salafists share the same basic ideology. They differ primarily in the means by which they wish to achieve their objective, the 'Salafist theocracy.' Political Salafists spread their Islamist ideology through intensive propaganda activities — which they describe as 'missionary work' (Dawa) — to transform society, through a long-term process, according to Salafist norms.

"Many political Salafists position themselves as being against terrorism. They emphasize the peaceful nature of Islam and reject open calls for violence. Nevertheless, it should be noted that political Salafism has an ambivalent relationship to violence because in principle it does not exclude religiously inspired violence as a means to achieve its goals.

"In their interpretations of Islam, political Salafists make selective use of the classical works of the Islamic legal literature, which affirms a strong affinity to violence when dealing with non-Muslims. Salafists believe that the universal claim of Islam, due to its superiority as the divine plan of salvation for all of humanity, must be imposed by force if necessary. Therefore, the fundamental affirmation of violence is an intrinsic part of Salafist ideology.

"The two Salafist currents have different but easy-to-bridge views on under which prerequisites violence may be used. This explains why the transition from political to jihadist Salafism is fluid."

The BfV report states that Salafists are focusing their proselytizing and recruiting efforts on migrants seeking refuge in Germany:

"Under the guise of humanitarian aid, Islamists succeed in radicalizing migrants. In the past, Salafists in particular tried to reach out to migrants. They visited refugee shelters for this purpose and offered assistance. The target group was not only adult migrants, but also unaccompanied adolescents, who, due to their situation and age are particularly susceptible to Salafist missionary activities.

"The diverse propaganda activities of Salafists, which they play down as 'proselytizing' or 'inviting people to Islam' — it is in truth a systematic indoctrination and often also the beginning of radicalization — are successful: Salafism is the fastest growing Islamist trend in Germany.

"The Salafist scene represents the essential recruitment field for Jihad. Almost without exception, all persons with a German connection who have joined the jihad were previously in contact with the Salafist scene."

According to BfV, the growth of Germany's Salafist movement is being fueled in part by migrants from Chechnya:

"Within the Salafist scene in Germany, actors of North Caucasian origin — especially from the Russian Republic of Chechnya — have gained importance. Particularly affected are federal states in Eastern and Northern Germany, as well as North Rhine-Westphalia.

"The North Caucasus Islamist scene is characterized by sprawling, Europe-wide networks and characteristics. It is largely sealed-off to the outside. A critical factor for radicalization is the personal contact spectrum, which connects elements from the religion and the traditional clan structure. The North Caucasus Islamist has established contacts with Middle Eastern jihadi groups due to the 'successes' of the North Caucasus fighters in Syria or Iraq."

The BfV report makes a direct link between the increase in anti-Semitism in Germany and the rise of Islamist movements in the country:

"Islamist propaganda often combines religious, territorial and/or national-political motives with an anti-Semitic worldview. The 'enemy image of Judaism' therefore forms a central pillar in the propaganda of all Islamist groups....

"The BfV recorded a large number of anti-Semitic incidents in 2017. The spectrum of incidents ranged from anti-Israeli banners at public events and anti-Semitic sermons to anti-Semitic posts on social media and verbal or physical attacks against individual Jews.

"The BfV has found that all the Islamist groups active in Germany spread and nurture anti-Semitic ideas. This poses a significant challenge to the peaceful and tolerant coexistence in Germany."

According to BfV, the second-largest Islamist movement in Germany is Millî Görüş (Turkish for "National Vision"), which has around 10,000 members in the country. The movement is strongly opposed to Muslim integration into European society:

"The movement believes that a 'just' political order is one founded on 'divine revelation' while those systems designed by humans are 'vain.' At present, the 'vain' Western civilization dominates, based on violence, injustice and exploitation of the weak. This 'vain' system must be replaced by a 'just order,' based exclusively on Islamic principles, rather than man-made ones and thus 'arbitrary rules.' All Muslims should contribute to the realization of the 'just order.' To do this, Muslims must adopt a certain vision (Görüş) of the world, namely a national/religious ('Milli') vision, a 'Millî Görüş.'"

In addition to the Salafists and Millî Görüş, BfV estimates that Germany is now home to 1,040 members of the Muslim Brotherhood, 950 members of Hezbollah and 320 members of Hamas.

After presenting the BfV report Interior Minister Horst Seehofer demanded that the government speed-up deportations of Islamists. "We do not have anything under control in any area," he concluded.

SOURCE

*************************

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

***************************





Sunday, July 29, 2018



Court Drops Bogus Charges Against David Daleiden for Exposing Planned Parenthood Baby Part Sales

A court has dropped some of the bogus charges against pro-life advocate David Daleiden, who exposed the sales of body parts from aborted babies at Planned Parenthood abortion clinics and throughout the abortion industry.

The National Abortion Federation (NAF) dismissed seven out of eleven claims on Friday against Daleiden and his organization, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), in court on Friday. In 2015, NAF sued David and CMP after they began releasing undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s trafficking of baby body parts. Buying and selling fetal tissue is illegal under federal law.

Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund attorney Charles LiMandri said NAF successfully obtained a “gag order” from the court preventing Daleiden and CMP, during the course of litigation, from releasing the undercover videos recorded at NAF abortion conferences.  Although dropping seven of the charges is a positive step, by dismissing the seven claims NAF is trying to speed up the case so it can secure a permanent gag order against David and CMP, which would block the release of the videos regardless of the case’s outcome, he said.

“NAF’s latest litigation maneuvering shows that this case has only ever been about one thing—an unconstitutional silencing of a pro-life hero. As the Trump Administration continues its investigation of NAF’s gruesome actions, we expect their lawyers to do everything they can to permanently silence David. After all, NAF realizes just as much as we do that criminal indictments for many of NAF’s members are only a matter of time,” LiMandri said in a statement.

NAF’s remaining claims accuse David and CMP of fraudulent misrepresentation, promissory fraud, breach of contract, and civil conspiracy. For instance, NAF complains that David broke the law because he allegedly violated the purported confidentiality agreements he signed at NAF’s annual conference.

LiMandri said: “NAF is using these purported confidentiality agreements to hide their criminal deeds. But the public has a right to know about the true nature of the abortion industry. We hope that as this case moves forward, the court concludes that NAF’s remaining claims are meritless.”

FCDF attorneys and co-counsel at the Thomas More Society will be filing a motion to dismiss NAF’s remaining claims.

LiMandri added: “Seven down; four to go.”

Daleiden tweeted the good news late Monday from his Twitter account.

SOURCE






Rep. Gohmert: Hate Crime Laws Will Be ‘Used to Persecute Christians'

At a conference for young conservatives on Wednesday, House Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said that he knew “hate crime legislation … would one day be used to persecute Christians.”

At the Turning Point USA High School Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C., Gohmert said, "I knew 10 years ago, when hate crime legislation was being pushed, that it would one day be used to persecute Christians, and that is coming about – U.S. Commission on Civil Rights talks about this hate group, evangelical Christians."

Gohmert was referring to the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, which includes additional penalties to criminal violent acts that are motivated by hate.

In a commentary he wrote on the hate crime law, Gohmert gives an example where someone who shoots a homosexual after hearing a religious leader preach “that homosexuality is wrong and leads to the ultimate destruction of moral society,” it could be argued that “the teaching of the minister/rabbi/imam is what ‘induced’” the shooter to commit the crime.

He also mentioned his commentary during his speech Wednesday, saying, “The message of the federal hate crime bill, that is still in law, is if you are going to hurt me, shoot me, brutalize me, but please don't hate me.  Make it a random, senseless crime of violence instead.  You’ll walk free from the federal charges under the new Hate Crimes bill if you do.”

SOURCE






Nude Customer Reveals a lot about Gym

If you think you’ve had a rough month, try being in the PR department for Planet Fitness! First, the gym was slammed for revoking the membership of a woman who complained about a biological man sharing her locker room. Then, in an ironic twist, the same argument they used to defend that outrage came back to haunt them when a 34-year-old man decided to visit a Massachusetts chain and workout in the nude!

I thought it was a “judgment-free zone,” 34-year-old Eric Stagno told police. That is, after all, what Planet Fitness told the woman in Florida (and another in Michigan) about sharing private spaces with the opposite sex. If it’s okay to let men undress in front of women in their locker rooms, why not out in the open?

“The story we got from witnesses,” police captain Brett Morgan said, “was that the guy walked in, stripped down right there in front, left the clothes and belongings at the front desk, walked back and forth across the gym a couple of times and then settled in over at the yoga mats.” Other exercisers said they felt “sick,” “unsafe,” and “disgusted” — the same words that could have been used by women who were shocked to find out that Planet Fitness’s unposted policy was to let men expose themselves in the women’s showers or locker rooms any time they wanted!

Unlike Jordan Rice, who was supposedly justified in horrifying “Mrs. H” in Florida, Eric Stagno was charged with “indecent exposure, lewdness and disorderly conduct.” Apparently, Planet Fitness isn’t always judgment-free — just when it comes to political correctness. And that’s where their logic breaks down. Extremists, like the ones at Planet Fitness, who think it’s okay to put women in dangerous situations because “tolerance,” don’t seem to understand that once you abandon millennia of moral values, it’s impossible to draw a line. How can you say to one person that public indecency is wrong if you allow it behind locker room doors?

SOURCE






Diversity worship only divides us further

“BBC CHIEF STUNNED BY SECRET SEX SURVEY.” The headline blaring from Britain’s Mail on Sunday one balmy morning in London a few weeks ago was irresistible. And the news report didn’t disappoint. “Can someone have a guess at how many people we’ve got who have disclosed they are transgender at the BBC? Ten? Anyone else? Twenty?” asked the BBC’s director of diversity at a social policy forum last month.

“I’ll put you out of your misery. We’ve got 417 people within the BBC who have said they are transgender, almost 2 per cent of the ­organisation.”

Using personal information from staff, diversity bean counters at Britain’s national broadcaster found 11 per cent of its employees are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Diversity executive Tunde Ogungbesan says that while the number of transgender people is “very, very high”, the broadcaster needs more lesbians.

The real misery is that we count this stuff at all. Extrapolating from the diversity director’s comment that “what gets measured gets done”, the next advertisement for a BBC job will logically need to seek a candidate with the following qualifications: must be able to write, have proven reporting skills, work effectively in a small team and be a lesbian. And how do they check the veracity of a candidate meeting that last stipulation? If only this were a facetious ­scenario.

A few days later, on July 4, former US president Bill Clinton tweeted: “E pluribus unum — out of diversity comes a deeper strength and unity rooted in the timeless ideals that we celebrate today. It’s ‘We the People,’ not ‘Us vs Them’…”

If only that were true. Instead, we are being sold a lemon every time someone says diversity makes us stronger and unites us.

Diversity, the new buzzword, has much in common with its older sibling, multiculturalism. The celebration of diversity and the daily condemnation of white male privilege has morphed into a project that divides us. When anchored to group identities, this new diversity project becomes the antithesis of the liberal model that emerged from the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment. The timeless ideal that all individuals are revered as equal regardless of colour, creed and gender is being turned on its head.

To be fair to the BBC, by crunching the numbers about the sexual identity of its staff, the diversity bean counters are simply doing their bit, as disciples of this new project. But it didn’t need to unfold this way. Respecting diversity is admirable because it unifies us. Worshipping diversity as some kind of new age god in a secular world is destructive.

The more we label and encourage people to join smaller identity groups defined by being transgender or black lesbian or Muslim gay, the “other” — the outsiders — grow larger in number. There are more people outside the group to be suspicious of, to fear and even loathe.

People gathering in groups, associating with tribes, preferring their own kind, is as old as the history of mankind. As English philosopher Roger Scruton said as he watched the 1968 Paris protests — when middle-class students turned out to protest without really knowing what they supported — craving membership is “a deep adaptation of the species”.

Whereas people in previous centuries joined or were born into religious communities, in the modern secular West the search for meaning is leading people to seek out different group identities. It raises the real threat of a new and different form of sectarianism as politics and policies, even if well-meaning, encourage people to be defined by smaller and smaller group identities, fracturing along sex, sexual identity, race, colour, creed or other such traits.

Group identities don’t unify people, they build walls between people. Loyalty to the tribe, for example, means members are less likely to publicly countenance divergence from group orthodoxy even if they disagree in private. Tribal loyalty explains why it’s harder for an indigenous man, such as Warren Mundine, or an indigenous woman, such as Bess Price, to diverge from indigenous orthodoxy on anything from welfare to family violence to education and employment.

It explains why feminists within the #MeToo movement cling together, even if they harbour private reservations about trivial complaints about bad sex that have formed part of the ­movement.

Tribal loyalty explains why so few Muslims will say what Ayaan Hirsi Ali dares to say about aspects of Islam. Only the bravest speak up, understanding that they will be cast out as apostates, joining the ranks of “other” — people beyond the group — who are treated with suspicion, and worse.

Tribal loyalty explains how the heartbreaking case of Nia Wilson has given identity politics a new battleground. Last weekend the teenager was changing trains with her sister in Oakland, California, when a white man stabbed her in the throat. Police are exploring a race-hate motive. When I typed Wilson’s name into Google, up popped actress Anne Hathaway’s thoughts on white privilege. Not a news piece about what happened to Wilson.

Rachel Cargle, who describes herself as the “Beyonce of Academia” created an Instagram post exclusively for people of colour to share their feelings about Wilson. “No white women, no men,” she wrote. She asked people to tag their favourite white feminists who had yet to talk about Wilson.

The misguided Beyonce of Academia is building walls. Separating feminists according to skin colour creates more otherness, more fear, more suspicion. It does not help black women. It creates “us vs them”.

Worshipping diversity also has led to more victimhood, not empowerment. Just as tribes compete, grouping people according to sex, sexual identity or other human traits fuels a marketplace of outrage. Different groups vie for top billing as the biggest victims, to attract public attention or policy responses or both.

Over at Meanjin, a left-wing artsy publication, a few indigenous women were outraged when, on the last cover, editor Jonathan Green decided to cross out the indigenous title of the magazine, replacing it with #MeToo. How dare white feminists trump indigenous women. Green confessed his sins and apologised profusely for his white, male privilege.

The diversity cult is not breaking down barriers by encouraging intellectual sharing of ideas and experiences between people. Instead, it’s constantly searching for malfeasants guilty of the new sin of for cultural appropriation.

This month, Scarlett Johansson pulled out of playing a transgender man in Rub & Tub, a movie about Dante “Tex” Grill, who ran brothels in 1970s Pittsburgh. Her first response to claims that a “cisgender” woman should not play a transgender man was to direct the complaints to media representatives of Jeffrey Tambor, Jared Leto and Felicity Huffman, three cisgender actors who won rave reviews, awards and nominations for playing transgender women.

Inevitably, Johansson succumbed, saying she was grateful that the casting decision sparked a conversation about diversity. But it wasn’t much of a conversation. It came down to a stifling and one-dimensional, simplistic story that only a transgender man can play the role of a transgender man. And when journalist Daniella Greenbaum wrote a piece for the website Business Insider defending an actress who was hired to act in a role as a transgender man, her column was spiked by editors for “violating editorial standards”.

Respecting diversity should encourage us to step into the shoes of someone else, to empathise with their stories that define them as human beings. Instead, in the Age of Diversity, we are told a single story about people premised on their sex, sexual identity or skin colour.

In a TED talk some years ago, Nigerian writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie spoke superbly about the danger of the single story. She recalled one of her professors telling her that one novel “was not authentically African”.

“Now I was quite willing to contend that there were a number of things wrong with the novel,” said the author of Half of a Yellow Sun. “But I had not quite imagined that it had failed at achieving something called African authenticity. In fact, I did not know what African authenticity was. The professor told me that my characters were too much like him, an educated, middle-class man. My characters drove cars, they were not starving. Therefore, they were not authentically African.”

Adichie confessed to falling for single stories about others. Growing up in Nigeria, she saw the family’s house boy only through a prism of poverty. When she visited the boy’s home she was startled to see a beautiful multi-coloured basket woven by his brother. “It had not occurred to me that anybody in his family could make anything,” she said. “Their poverty was my single story about them.”

When people choose to define themselves according to a single identity, they encourage a single story about their sex, or their sexual identity or their skin colour with a focus on negatives. Black Lives Matter tells a tiny, incomplete, story about black people in America. A dance performance last month, Where We Stand, suffered the same flaw because a dance student thought it clever to force whites to stay in the lobby while people of colour, brown people, indigenous people and members of the Asian diaspora were invited to enter the theatre.

Revering diversity encourages an ugly backlash, too, attracting opportunist grandstanders such as Canadian woman Lauren Southern, who arrived in Australia wearing a T-shirt that read “IT’S OK TO BE WHITE”. It’s not smart to answer toxic identity politics with tit-for-tat toxicity, where people treat their pale skin as a badge of honour. Southern’s white identity politics marks a low point of the new sectarianism. We are regressing further and further from the liberal project that treats all ­humans as equal regardless skin colour.

As Adichie said, telling one story based on negatives about people flattens their experience. “The consequence of the single story is this: it robs people of dignity — it makes recognition of our equal humanity difficult. It emphasis how we are different rather than how we are similar.”

In a recent podcast, Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, recalled the 1934 experiment by American psychologist Richard LaPiere when he researched whether people were more racist in practice or theory. LaPiere took a Chinese student to a restaurant that had a sign saying they did not serve Chinese. At a time of growing American resentment towards Chinese, the student and the psychologist ordered and ate their meal without a hitch. LaPiere took the Chinese student, and his young Chinese wife, on a road trip across America, visiting 251 establishments, bars, bowling alleys, hotels and ­restaurants. The couple was denied service once. When LaPiere returned to his campus office, he sent questionnaires to each place — “would you serve members of the Chinese race?” More than 90 per cent said no.

Defining people according to race elicits divisive reactions, whereas a name and a face is a human story that attracts respect and empathy. As Brooks said: “Stories unite. Identities divide.”

Remember that next time an overpaid corporate executive or public bureaucrat champions diversity using a set of numbers based on gender or sexual identity or race.

SOURCE 

*************************

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

***************************



Friday, July 27, 2018




Out of control British police again: Police officer described as 'bully in uniform' used knife to saw through innocent man's windscreen after mistaking him for drug dealer

A police officer who was caught on video smashing a driver's windscreen after mistaking him for a drug dealer is a "bully in uniform", a court heard.

PC Joshua Savage, 28, pounded on the Ford Fiesta before sawing his way through the glass with a lock knife during the attack in north London, jurors were told.

The driver, Leon Fontana, filmed from inside the car as Savage shouted "get out of the car" and "you're not allowed to drive it", jurors heard.

Prosecutor Jonathan Polnay told Southwark Crown Court: "It's not unfair to say that he [Savage] comes across in that clip as a bully in uniform."

Mr Fontana was left with glass in his eye and had to fork out £175 for a new windscreen. The police officer had mistakenly identified him as a local gang member well-known to the police.

Mr Polnay added: "PC Savage knows perfectly well how to behave. In two minutes of footage that you have just seen did he once say please? Did he once call Leon Fontana sir or mister or show him any degree of courtesy?

"When he [Mr Fontana] was saying 'I have a licence and insurance', he was telling the truth. No one is above the law - not you, not me, not even the judge for that matter nor is PC Savage.

"The law says that you, as a person driving the car, must stop if they are asked to by police. There's absolutely no obligation for the driver to get out of the car.

"Having said that, in reality what was happened here, as well as being unlawful, he's absolutely lost his temper. He has lost it.

"This behaviour was against the very laws he was there to uphold."

Mr Fontana, 27, was pulled over in Weedington Place, Camden, at around 5.45pm on 16 September 2016 because police mistook him for a known local gang member, TJ Dixon.

On the mobile footage, Mr Fontana can be heard saying "I'm not TJ, I'm not TJ," referring to the gang member he had wrongly been mistaken for.

Savage received an incorrect radio message that the driver only had a provisional licence, he shouted: "Get out the car, you're not allowed to drive it. You're disqualified, you're not allowed to drive."

The prosecutor told the jury that there is "no power for police to force entry" to a car in this scenario.

But Savage then took out his baton and began attempting to smash the passenger window. When that failed, the officer started sawing a hole in the windscreen using a Swiss Army knife.

Mr Fontana finally got out of the car through the passenger door and was wrestled to the ground while saying: "I'm recording for my safety".

The driver told the court he thought his life was in danger when PC Savage started smashing the windscreen.

Mr Fontana told jurors: "He came straight up to my window and he looked like he was in an emergency to talk to me or something."

"I didn't want to get out of the car - I wasn't doing anything illegal. I felt threatened and very frightened, I definitely wasn't leaving the car.

"I thought if I left that car I would be in danger certainly. I was not getting out to a police officer with a cosh and a knife so I got out the other side."

Mr Fontana told the court he was in handcuffs for "15 to 20 minutes". In his police statement, Savage claimed he was acting in self-defence. "I formed the belief that the male may have access to firearms, offensive weapons or drugs," he said. "There was a real and immediate risk that the male could cause harm or risk to me or my colleagues."

Mr Polnay questioned why Savage was not heard warning his colleagues on the video if he was truly concerned he had a weapon. "The prosecution say this is simply not true," he added.

Savage, of Hermon Hill, Wanstead, east London, denies common assault, possession of a bladed article and destroying property.

The trial continues.

SOURCE







Colonel removes Bible from POW/MIA memorial because atheists were offended

Todd Starnes of Fox News reports the commander of F.E. Warren Air Force Base in my hometown of Cheyenne, Wyo., removed the Bible from a POW/MIA memorial. The commander was responding to demands by a one-man, left-wing, anti-religion organization. F.E. Warren has a storied legacy in the American West and has been the way station for generations of military leaders who served their country.

Col. Stacy J. Huser, by removing the Bible and by mouthing the offended group’s politically correct, bumper sticker, psychobabble nonsense, brings dishonor on this country’s uniform, those who served on the base before her, and those venerated by the memorial. President Trump, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, or Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson should remove Huser and restore the Bible to its rightful place.

I was born in Cheyenne; my father, mother, and brother are buried there; and my family has a lifelong connection to Warren. As a brash young man, Uncle Joe Wyrick fled the harsh hill country of Harlan County, Ky., enlisted in the U.S. Army, and ended up at Fort Francis E. Warren. My mother soon followed, met my railroader father who chased Depression Era jobs from the Arkansas Ozarks to Wyoming’s capitol, married, had my brother Barry and me, and, after jobs waitressing, became a nurse at “the base.” In the quiet of the graveyard shift, she watched over newborns and their mothers, most of whom were the wives of young, naive, and far-from-home enlisted men.

First called Fort D.A. Russell, after Civil War Brig. Gen. David A. Russell who was killed at the Third Battle of Winchester in the Shenandoah Valley, it was established by the U.S. Cavalry in 1867 near Crow Creek Crossing, later Cheyenne, on the treeless high plains at the far western edge of the Great Plains to protect those working on the Union Pacific Railroad. It was home to three black regiments, including the 24th Infantry, the famous “Buffalo Soldiers,” and by the turn of the century, it was one of the largest cavalry bases in the United States, with its men fighting the Indian Wars, sent to war in the Philippines, and deployed along the Mexican border. In 1930, its name was changed to honor Wyoming’s first governor Francis E. Warren, who was awarded the Medal of Honor for battlefield gallantry in the Civil War.

In 1949 it became an Air Force base and, in 1958, part of the Strategic Air Command. In 1961, it became headquarters for the 90th Strategic Missile Wing, which controlled more than 200 intercontinental ballistic missiles, with their nuclear warheads buried deep in silos at the end of dusty dirt roads across southeastern Wyoming. With those ICBMs the likely target of incoming Soviet missiles, Paul Harvey labeled Cheyenne “Bull’s Eye, USA.” We were proud to be noticed, but, in the era of the “duck and cover” campaign and films of nuclear testing in the Nevada desert, it generated nightmares of a nuclear blast sweeping through my father’s windbreak outside my window at our home east of Cheyenne.

The base was not just named for heroes; warriors who became heroes once called it home. One of them, World War I fighter ace and Medal of Honor recipient Captain Eddie Rickenbacker, crash-landed his plane on its dirt strip and survived. Other hereos include Gen. Mark W. Clark, who saw action in WWI, WWII, and the Korean War and was the youngest Army four-star general in WWII; Maj. Walter Reed, M.D., the U.S. Army physician who first postulated and confirmed the connection between mosquitoes and yellow fever (Walter Reed Army Medical Center is named after him); Maj. Gen. William L. “Billy” Mitchell, the military aviation visionary and father of the U.S. Air Force; and Gen. Carl A. Spaatz, who successfully commanded the Strategic Air Forces over Europe in 1944 and became chief of staff of the newly formed U.S. Air Force in 1947.

Most significant for me, however, was General of the Armies John Joseph “Black Jack” Pershing; after all, we drove Pershing Boulevard from our home to school, town, and the base where he served.

Fast forward to days ago, when Col. Huser acceded to the demands of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which claims to fight “virulent religious oppression” waged by “incredibly well-funded gangs of fundamentalist Christian monsters who terrorize their fellow Americans by forcing their weaponized and twisted version of Christianity upon their helpless subordinates in our nation’s armed forces.” According to Starnes, MRFF President Mikey Weinstein says he has “36 unnamed clients” at Warren who were offended by the Bible at a POW/MIA table. To increase “the sense of belonging for all our Airmen,” Col. Huser announced the Bible will be replaced by a “book of faith” with “spiritual writings and prayers from the five [U.S. Department of Defense] Chaplain appointed faith groups and a sixth set of blank pages to represent those who find solace by other means.”

Gen. Pershing removed the Germans from Allied territory and, days ago, Col. Huser removed the Bible from a memorial. It is not your grandfather's Air Force anymore. What say you, Mr. President, Secretary Mattis, and Secretary Wilson? Is it yours?

SOURCE






The Great British Foreign Office Fantasy

According to the British Foreign Office, the Golan Heights are 'occupied'. They have been 'occupied' -- according to the logic of the UK Foreign Office -- since 1967, when Israel took the land from the invading forces of Syria. Ever since then, the Israelis have had the benefit of this strategic position and the Syrian regime has not. This fact, half a century on, still strikes the British Foreign Office as regrettable, and a wrong to be righted in due course.

Of course, since the onset of the Syrian civil war in 2011, the official position of the UK government has become ever-harder to justify. For example, if the Israeli government were at some point over the last seven years suddenly to have listened to the wisdom of the Foreign Office in London and handed over the strategic prize of the Golan, to whom should it have handed it? Should Israel be persuaded to hand over the territory to the Assad regime in Damascus? It is true that, throughout the course of the Syrian civil war, the one bit of territory to which the Syrian regime has laid claim and which it has not been able to barrel-bomb and otherwise immiserate the people there has been the Golan Heights. Only in the Golan has anybody in this 'Greater Syria' been able to live free from the constant threat of massacre and ethnic, religious or political cleansing.

Other candidates for the territory naturally presented themselves across the same time-frame. The armies of ISIS came right up to the villages on the Syrian side along the borders of the Golan. There, they were able to bring that form of peace-through-barbarism which the world has come to know well. If ISIS had triumphed in the Syrian conflict rather than suffering repeated set-backs, would the UK Foreign Office have handed them the territory by way of reparational justice, or victor's prize? If not them, then perhaps the armies of Iran or Russia could have been the recipients of this feat of restorative diplomacy? Perhaps anyone who wished to lay claim to the Golan could have had it. So long as it was not the Israelis.

The ongoing madness of the British Foreign Office's position has been highlighted in recent days thanks to a request which came from the British government, as well as the governments in other European capitals and in Washington. A request which also involved the Golan.

Over the weekend, it emerged that the British government was among foreign governments to have made a dramatic request of the Israelis. As the war in Syria appears to be clarifying towards its end-point, a group of around 800 members of the 'White Helmets' and their families had reportedly become trapped near the southwestern border near the Golan Heights. The White Helmets only operate in 'rebel areas' and are despised by the Assad regime. With Syrian government forces moving in, a massacre may well have been about to occur.

At the request of these foreign governments, the Israelis just carried out an extraordinary and unprecedented mission. In recent days, a reported 422 of the intended evacuees and their family members were saved by the Israelis. The other -- almost half -- of the intended number appears already to have been cut off by other forces. Nevertheless, those who did make it out were transferred by Israeli forces across the Golan and have now reportedly arrived safely in Jordan where their future status will be determined. Some may stay in Jordan; others will be moved abroad to Western countries.

The painful irony of this situation should be clear to all observers. If the Israelis did not lay claim to the Golan, there would have been no means to have got the White Helmets and their families out of Syria. Had Israel not made the Golan the peaceful and thriving area it is, it would simply be another part of Syria in which different sectarian groups were slaughtering other sectarian groups.

As it is, the area is in the control of Britain's most reliable ally in the region. An ally which -- even as it is lectured by Britain -- agrees to requests from the British government that takes advantage of a strategic reality, one which the British government still refuses to accept.

The Israeli government has given the British government what it wanted. Perhaps now would be a good time for the British government to reciprocate in some way? There could be no better means of doing so than by admitting that the British policy of the last half a century has been a Foreign Office fantasy and a wholesale dud of 'realist' regional thinking. The Foreign Office will have to back out of its self-imposed corner regarding the Golan at some point and accept the reality on the ground. How much better it would be if it did so now in a spirit of goodwill and reciprocity, rather than later on in a spirit of inevitable and grudging defeat.

SOURCE







Ireland's Anti-Israel Bill and the Muslim Brotherhood

On July 11, the Irish Senate approved a bill criminalizing local companies that engage in commerce with Israeli firms based in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Introduced in the body's Upper Chamber by independent member Senator Frances Black, the bill passed initial muster, in a 25-20 vote with 14 abstentions. The Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill, 2018 would prohibit any import of goods or services from "occupied territories," with financial penalties of a quarter million euros in fines and up to five years imprisonment for violators.

Israel's reaction to the Irish Senate's vote was swift. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu summoned Ireland's ambassador, Alison Kelly, for a reprimand. Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman called for the immediate closure of the Israeli Embassy in Dublin. It is unlikely, however, that Israel will follow through on Lieberman's threat, as Ireland's governing party, the Fine Gael, is opposed to the bill, which in any case must pass in Ireland's Lower house of Parliament, the Dáil, before becoming a law.

A U.S.-based litigation outfit, The Lawfare Project, which fights anti-Israel discrimination -- with the help of UK Lawyers for Israel -- has initiated legal action against the proposed legislation. The litigators say that the Irish bill could have a negative impact on American companies with subsidiaries in Ireland: it is illegal under US anti-boycott laws to cooperate with a ban on commerce with Israeli settlements. Compliance with US boycott laws would, in turn, cost US companies a good deal in fines for violation of the Irish boycott.

What, then, is behind the proposed bill? One possible explanation is the prominent role played by Islamic institutions and organizations in Ireland, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood's influence in Dublin, the nation's capital, is evidenced by the easy access its key personnel have to Ireland's government.

There is evidence to suggest that the Muslim Brotherhood has established its European headquarters in the Emerald Isle. The Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland (ICCI), which hosts several Muslim institutes affiliated with the international Sunni group that many view as a terrorist organization, is located in Clonskeagh, a suburb south of Dublin. The ICCI complex includes the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR), a prestigious institute of Islamic jurisprudence, which was founded by the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE), itself a Muslim Brotherhood institution.

Dubai's ruling al-Maktoum family, a key Muslim Brotherhood financier, donated the money to erect the ICCI complex, which also houses Ireland's largest mosque. Furthermore, the ICCI's Campus Dean, Imam Sheikh Hussein Halawa, is a former colleague of the Muslim Brotherhood's spiritual guide, Qatar-based Egyptian cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Al-Qaradawi, the chair of the ECFR, was denied entry into Ireland in 2011, after he expressed support for the suicide bombing of Israelis. Since then, he has not been allowed into Ireland.

Sheikh Halawa, in addition to being the dean of the ICCI, also chairs the Irish Council of Imams, made up of at least 35 Sunni and Shia Muslim scholars in the Irish Republic. As a result, he maintains a high public profile, which has awarded him invitations to state events with Ireland's prime minister and president, and with the mayor of Dublin.

Despite popular support in Ireland for same-sex marriage and other liberal causes, Halawa openly sanctions the death penalty for gays, and the ICCI has a record of hosting radical Islamic speakers. One such speaker, Saudi Mullah Aed al-Qarni, told Iqra TV in 2004 that the "brothers of apes and pigs" (i.e. Israelis and Jews) killed arch terrorist Hamas leaders Abd al-Aziz al-Rantisi and Sheikh Ahmad Yassin. In 2005, al-Qarni sermonized about Jews "that throats must be slit and skulls must be shattered."

Another Saudi firebrand, Salman al-Ouda, delivered sermons at the ICCI in 2007. Egyptian imam Wagdy Ghoneim, who visited the center in 2006 and 2007, denounced Jews as pigs and apes at a conference of the American Muslim Society in May, 1998 at Brooklyn College. He was eventually banned from the UK and the US for having issued a fatwa urging Muslims to kill American troops fighting in Muslim lands, specifically to kill American soldiers in Iraq.

Classified cables exchanged in 2006 between the State Department and the US Embassy in Ireland -- and published by Wikileaks in 2011 -- revealed that the administration of George W. Bush was trying to find out whether the European Council for Fatwa and Research and other such groups were working to legitimize Sharia (Islamic) law in Western Europe.

According to James Kenny, the American ambassador to Ireland at the time, a certain journalist claimed that outside of Qatar, Ireland had the strongest Muslim Brotherhood presence, and that al-Qaradawi "runs Islam in Ireland."

The White House's concern may have been warranted concerning some Muslim Brotherhood zealots in Ireland. But there are other Irish Islamic leaders who are more willing to compromise with Ireland's values, if not assimilate. In his 2014 book, Islam and Education in Ireland: An Introduction to the Faith and the Educational Challenges It Faces, Dr. Ali Selim -- the ICCI spokesman and secretary general of the Irish Council of Imams -- called for a reform of Ireland's education system, to make it more "inclusive" for Muslims. Among the changes he advocated was gender segregation in gym, music and art classes, where there could be "a clash of values" with Islam. Selim was interviewed in the Irish press and asked whether he favored Sharia to be implemented in Ireland. He responded that only in the case where Muslims are a majority is Sharia likely to be enacted.

Nor is Islamic extremism in Ireland limited to the ICCI campus alone. The leaked US Embassy cables also indicated that even some Irish Muslims refer to a certain mosque in Dublin as "Tora Bora," a cave complex on Afghanistan's border with Pakistan. One of the mosques imams, Yayah al-Hussein, originally from Sudan, is a member of Hamas, and many of its congregants are Bosnian and Afghan jihadists.

That jihadist groups feel comfortable in Ireland is understandable, given the country's genuine societal openness to Islam in general and Muslim immigrants in particular. In addition, Irish politics tend to favor the narrative of Palestinian Arabs in their conflict with Israel. This is due, in part, to their viewing -- inaccurately -- the plight of the Palestinians through the prism of their own history of occupation by England. But the Irish never aspired to displace Great Britain.

Even so, in Northern Ireland's Province of Ulster, still part of the United Kingdom, Palestinian flags can be seen flying from private homes.

Meanwhile, the recently-replaced Lord Mayor of Dublin Mícheál Mac Donncha is a member of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, which supports the global boycott effort against products made in Israel.

Politics aside, the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood -- and its use of Ireland as a friendly base from which to spread its doctrine throughout the rest of Europe -- should be a cause of great concern not just to Dublin, but to democracies everywhere. Former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi summed up the Muslim Brotherhood creed while running for election in 2012:

"The Koran is our constitution;
The Prophet Muhammad is our leader;
Jihad is our path and death for the sake of Allah is our most lofty aspiration;
Above all, Allah is our goal."

Is it any wonder, then, that chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat welcomed the Irish Senate's bill? In a statement quoted by the official Palestinian Authority news agency Wafa, Erekat said, "This courageous step builds on the historic ties between Ireland and Palestine, [and] shows the way forward for the rest of the European Union."

SOURCE

*************************

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

***************************


Thursday, July 26, 2018



In Chicago, Police Are Not the Problem

Will anyone in Chicago be embarrassed by this? Will any of the perpetually and professionally outraged say, “Gosh, maybe we were too quick to judge”? Will any of them look at the police body camera footage and say, “Yes, the guy had a gun and was trying to pull it out on the officers, so they had to shoot him”?

When Michael Brown was shot and killed by a police officer in Ferguson, Mo., nearly four years ago, the fable quickly spread that he had presented no threat, that he had said to the officer, “Hands up, don’t shoot” just before he was mercilessly cut down. Investigators learned this was false within an hour of the shooting, yet the myth of Michael Brown as martyred hero was allowed to persist, and even when it was proven false beyond any doubt by the local investigation and that conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice (headed by Eric Holder, remember), the roots of the myth had grown so deep that, sadly, there are many who still believe it.

Despite the myth’s foundation on a lie, riots and protests continued for months in Ferguson and throughout the St. Louis area, with similar protests occurring across the country. Those protesters, I said at the time, were deluded fools, and I pointed out that a march in downtown St. Louis passed along a route that took them within a block of the scenes of two recent murders, both of which had claimed the lives of black victims. In St. Louis, it seemed, the only black lives that mattered were those taken by the police.

Which brings us to recent events in Chicago, where foolish delusion appears to have reached new heights (or lows, if you prefer). On Saturday, Chicago police officers on foot patrol in the South Shore neighborhood approached Harith Augustus, whom they suspected was carrying a gun. What happened next followed a script that has been repeated over and over, with only the details changing from one incident to the next. Augustus refused the officers’ commands and ran away while trying to pull the gun out of a holster. To protect himself and his partners, an officer shot and killed him.

And what then followed also conformed to a familiar script: Protesters gathered at the shooting scene and pelted the police with various projectiles, including bottles filled with urine. “He was unarmed,” they said. “He was a nice guy . . . He didn’t bother anybody . . . He was a good father,” and on and on and on.

In the initial absence of reliable information there is always speculation about what happened, with people of a certain mindset ready to believe even the most phantasmagorical tales about how the police may have transgressed. So, yes, people have the right to protest no matter how uninformed they might be on the issue, but they don’t have the right to do it violently.

But, even after being informed, even after being offered irrefutable evidence that Augustus was indeed armed and attempting to draw the pistol he was carrying, even after seeing the video which shows exactly what happened and how close one or more of those officers came to being shot, when you still take to the streets and call the shooting “murder,” it is not the least bit unfair to call you, yes, a deluded fool.

On Sunday, police released body camera footage captured by the shooting officer. The video, which was released without audio, shows the shooting officer and three others approach Augustus on the sidewalk outside the Jeffrey Big Market at 2016 E. 71st Street (Google street-view image is here). Absent the audio we don’t yet know what was said, but it’s clear that the officers were attempting to detain Augustus and had focused on what he had in his right waistband. The officers surrounded Augustus and tried to grab him, but he pulled away and walked quickly backward toward the street. As he did so his T-shirt was raised to reveal a holstered pistol on his right side and two extra ammunition magazines on his left. He turned to run into the street while reaching for the pistol, but it appeared he wasn’t able to draw the gun before he fell mortally wounded in the street. We haven’t yet been told where the police rounds struck Augustus, but it’s possible one or more of them hit him in the back. If this turns out to be the case, does it make it a “bad” shooting?

Of course not. An officer presented with a deadly threat, as Augustus plainly was, has no obligation to wait until that threat is facing him before defending himself. As the video shows, Augustus turned toward the officers in an instant while still trying to draw his gun. Had he not already been shot, he may have pulled it out and shot one or more officers.

And yet, as if none of this were now widely known, there were more protests Monday evening. Indeed, even in the face of clear evidence, there are those who insist the video shows Augustus was complying with the officers. “You can see [in the video] that he has what looks like a wallet in his hand,” said Maria Hernandez of Black Lives Matter Chicago. “He was trying to comply and he was shot in the middle of complying. Roughed up and shot,”

Maybe Hernandez was watching some other video, but it’s plain that’s not what was depicted in the one released by Chicago police on Sunday.

But again, to Hernandez and her fellow travelers in the grievance industry, it’s not all black lives that matter, only those lost to the police, no matter how justifiably those lives may have been taken. The Chicago Tribune informs us that in 2017 there were seven murders within a few blocks of where Augustus was killed, and that so far this year there have been two more. There have been seven non-fatal shootings in the same area in just the last 30 days. I searched in vain on the Internet for news on protests over even one of these crimes.

And now Harith Augustus will be placed on his pedestal alongside Michael Brown and all the other “victims of police violence,” and as people march in his name and pretend he didn’t bring on his own demise, violence on the streets of Chicago will continue as always while people ask why the police aren’t doing anything about it.

In Chicago, as elsewhere, the police are not the problem.

SOURCE






Who Knew? A Bad Marriage Can Damage Health

It should be obvious that a bad marriage can damage your health and that it is especially bad for men but here is the latest:

Psychologists monitored 373 couples over 16 years and found that couples who disagree often have poorer health – especially for men.
A bad marriage with frequent conflicts could have a serious detrimental impact on your health, according to psychologists.

The researchers at the universities of Nevada and Michigan monitored 373 heterosexual couples to investigate whether disagreeing about multiple topics – such as children, money, in-laws and leisure activities – had negative health implications.

“We followed married couples over the first 16 years of marriage and compared the subjective health of wives and husbands who reported a greater number of conflict topics to those who reported fewer,” said Rosie Shrout, who presented the preliminary results at the International Association for Relationship Research conference in Colorado.

The researchers found that marital conflict negatively affected health for both husbands and wives, although there was a greater impact of conflict on men than women. Couples who agreed with each other more experienced health benefits early on in their relationships, but this protective effect wore off in the later years of marriage....

“It’s not the act of walking down the aisle or signing a marriage licence that is beneficial for health – it’s what spouses do for each other throughout the marriage.”

The study also looked at the number of marital conflicts and the health impacts this had on wives and husbands individually. Whereas for wives the specific number of disagreement topics was unrelated to their health, the decline in husbands’ health was driven by the number of disagreement topics.

It is hard not to have disagreements with someone in a marriage who tends to be disagreeable and defensive and externally blames others. Women are taught now to blame men for everything and in a relationship, this can often lead to stress and health problems. It is best to stay away from "woke" women in relationships or those who externally blame others.

SOURCE 






Fighting for Faith

The House of Representatives passed an appropriations bill on a narrow vote of 217 to 199. Tucked inside that bill is legislation that effectively guts the Johnson Amendment, thereby allowing pastors to speak freely from the pulpit about public policy without fear of the IRS.

To give you some idea of why this legislation is necessary, just consider what happened recently to Catholic bishops in Texas.

They were sued by abortionists challenging a state law requiring that abortionists respectfully dispose of the bodies of aborted babies. The Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops had offered to provide “free or low-cost burials.”

In their legal challenge to the law, the abortionists demanded all the bishops’ documents and communications regarding abortion, miscarriages, the law, and any communications with Texas officials and legislators in the past two years. Incredibly, a left-wing judge ordered the bishops to comply.

Thankfully, a panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2 to 1 that the lower-court judge had violated the First Amendment rights of the Texas bishops. Judge Jim Ho wrote, “It is hard to imagine a better example of how far we have strayed from the text and original understanding of the Constitution than this case.”

This isn’t the first time religious leaders in Texas have been threatened by leftist politicians and activists for speaking out on matters of faith and public policy.

My friends, there is no question that religious freedom is under fire from the Left.

Thankfully, President Trump and his Senate allies are making tremendous progress appointing conservative judges to the courts. In fact, they have set a record. But there are still many more vacancies to fill.

We must expand our majority in the Senate this year in order to confirm Trump’s judges and defend religious liberty!

SOURCE






The figures that lay bare the African gang crisis in Victoria: Sudanese-born people are 57 times more likely to commit a robbery than Australians and 33 times more likely to riot

Sudanese-born people in Victoria are far more likely to be charged with aggravated robbery and riot and affray than their Australian-born counterparts, according to recent crime figures.

Victorian Crime Statistics Agency figures to the end of March reveal they are 57 times more likely to be charged with aggravated robbery and 33 times more likely charged with riot and affray than Australians ,The Australian reported.

Sudanese-born offenders ­accounted for 8.5 per cent of ­aggravated robbery offences and 6.9 per cent of riot and affray ­offences in the year to March - despite only accounting for 0.15 per cent of the state's population.

The highly politicised debate regarding African crime has reignited in recent days following the alleged stabbing murder of Melbourne woman, Laa Chol, who was at a party gatecrashed by African-Australian men early Saturday.

Federal Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton declared Victoria has a major law and order problem following the teenage girl's death, accusing Premier Daniel Andrews of failing to acknowledge the issue of Sudanese gangs.

Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs Minister Alan Tudge also entered the debate, claiming the shocking crime levels in Victoria were not seen in Sudanese communities in NSW and Queensland.

'Basically the crime data is kept by country of origin, and what it shows is that typically the Australian-born commit most of the crime, naturally, because three-quarters of Victoria are Australian-born,' Mr Tudge told Sky News.

'But often now, Sudanese-born is No 2 or No 3, despite them being a tiny proportion of the population, so there clearly is an issue going on there, and the Victorian public know this.'

Mr Andrews was reluctant to respond to Dutton's comments on Monday. 'In relation to the very tragic death of Laa Chol, I don't think her family will be getting much comfort from this sort of discussion,' he told ABC Radio. 'I don't think her family, I think they deserve fundamentally better than what they've been given these last 12 or 24 hours.'  

But the head of police taskforce set up to investigate violent gang crime in Melbourne slammed Mr Dutton for suggesting the stabbing death of a young woman was related to the city's problem with South Sudanese gangs.

Commander Stuart Bateson said the death of Ms Chol, 19, had nothing to do with violent gangs or ethnicity. 'This is not to do with warring factions,' he said. 'The suggestion that Laa Chol, the victim, was a member of a gang just not true.'

3AW's Neil Mitchell agreed, saying that politics needed to be 'taken out of it' and said 'What Peter Dutton has said overnight is just wrong.'

Waleed Aly launched a scathing attack on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull over his views on African gang violence in an eight minute segment on The Project last Thursday.

He admitted that while crimes committed by those of African descent were 'over-represented' and 'unacceptable' in some areas, they account for one per cent of crime, compared to 71 per cent of crime committed by Australian-born people.

'I'm not saying that African-Australians don't commit crime. And I'm not denying that victims of those crimes have a right to feel afraid,' Aly said.

'But it's just a fraction of the crime being committed, and to suggest a city is gripped by a fear of African gangs is just untrue.'

SOURCE 

*************************

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

***************************