If You Live in Freedom, Thank the British Empire



A most "incorrect" video






A "caring" human rights lawyer


Lawyer Simone O'Broin. The Irish take their drinking seriously

A 50-year-old woman has been arrested for abusing Air India staff on a flight from Mumbai to London after she was denied alcohol on the plane.

The business class passenger, who is believed to be Irish, demanded to speak to the pilot after cabin crew denied her another bottle of wine due to her level of intoxication.

Video shows the blonde-haired barefoot woman, who claims to be a human rights lawyer, swearing at crew, threatening to 'p*** on them' in court, and calling a female staff member an 'Indian f***ing money-grabbing b*****d'.

The shocking incident took place on an Air India flight from Mumbai to London Heathrow last Saturday.

The footage sees the woman, hurling abuse at a crew member who is believed to be one of the pilots, shouting:'I work for all you f***ing people...

'The f***ing Rohingyas, the f***ing people of all Asia, for you, I'm an international criminal lawyer.

'Don't get any money for it by the way. But you won't give me a f***ing glass of wine, is that correct?'

She also claims to be a 'leader of the f***ing boycott movement', clapping in the air in front of the crewmember, before adding: 'If I say "boycott" - f***ing Air India, done.

'Do you understand me? You can't give me a wee bottle of wine?'

The man remains calm throughout her shocking tirade, after which she turns on another crew member, asking them if they are writing a report about her.

'F*** off! I'm a f***ing international criminal lawyer and a barrister. You will be p***ed on in court!'

She then calls the female crewmember an 'Indian f***ing moneygrabbing b*****d' before walking off back to her seat, shouting that she will 'turn you inside f***ing out, you f***ing stupid c***s! 'Give me a bottle of wine and game over!'

Otherwise, she claims, she will cause issues for the staff member upon landing, however the woman appears to be too inebriated to remember where they are flying to.

The video clip ends with the 50-year-old having a rant at her fellow business class passengers for not 'standing up against injustice'.

Another video showing the continuation of the argument, which has been shared on social media by local journalist Tarun Shukla, captures the woman claiming to be the lawyer 'for the Palestinian people'.

'So, you think I'm scared when you threaten me with lawyers? Also, Irish Republican Army. You'll be f***ing shot. All you had to do was to give me a f***ing drink.'

London Metropolitan Police has confirmed that the woman was taken into custody at Heathrow Airport upon landing.

'At approximately 1.30pm on Saturday, 10 November, a 50-year-old woman was arrested after an Air India flight had landed at Heathrow Airport,' a police spokesperson told MailOnline.

'She was arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated public order, common assault and drunk and disorderly and taken to a west London police station. 'She was subsequently released under investigation.'

SOURCE







Trump: 'There's a Limit to How Many People a Nation Can Responsibly Absorb Into Their Societies'

As companies return to the United States, they need workers, but those workers must be in the country legally, and they must come into the country based on merit, President Donald Trump said in an address to the nation Thursday afternoon.

And there have to be limits, said Trump:

Mass uncontrolled immigration is especially unfair to the many wonderful law-abiding immigrants already living here who followed the rules and waited their turn. Some have been waiting for many years. Some have been waiting a long time. They've done everything perfectly, and they're going to come in. At some point they are going to come in. Many cases very soon.

We need them to come in because we have companies coming into our country, they need workers, but they have to come in on a merit basis, and they will come in on a merit basis. The communities are often left to bear the cost and the influx of people that come in illegally. We can't allow that. There's a limit to how many people a nation can responsibly absorb into their societies.

Trump said roughly 1,500 to 2,000 people try crossing into this country illegally every day, and the Border Patrol does a "good job of catching them," despite flawed laws.

The laws are old and "just bad," "and we can't get any Democrat votes to change them," Trump complained. "It's only the Republicans that are in unison, they want to change them. They want to make strong borders. They want to get rid of any crime because of the borders."

Trump said the border jumping is a "perilous situation, and it threatens to become even more hazardous as our economy gets better and better." He said the strong U.S. economy is drawing job seekers.

Trump also said he will take "every lawful action at my disposal" to seal the border and deal with the overwhelming number of asylum claims, most of which eventually are rejected.

"No nation can allow itself to be overwhelmed by uncontrolled masses of people rushing their border. That's what's happening."

Trump said "there's nothing political" about what he's doing. He said his crackdown is in response to the caravan now coming and others now forming. "We have no idea who they are. All we know is they're pretty tough people when they can blast through the Mexican military and Mexican police. They're pretty tough people. Even Mexico said, wow, these are tough people."

SOURCE






Gov’t Should Not Punish People for Disagreeing with State-Mandated Sexual Orthodoxy

It’s a tactic followed by all totalitarian regimes: To control people’s thoughts, begin by controlling their speech. Require them to verbally affirm the regime’s dogmas—even if they disagree with those dogmas.

Anyone who has read books like George Orwell’s 1984 is familiar with the technique of coerced speech. But maybe you did not expect it to be used by the American government.

Welcome to the Orwellian world of sexual politics, where state universities are compelling professors to use the language of transgender ideology.

Fortunately, a few brave souls are fighting back. A philosophy professor is suing Shawnee State University in Ohio after the university punished him for refusing to use a transgender student’s preferred pronoun.

It started in January 2018, when Nicolas Meriwether called a student “sir” in his political philosophy class. (He calls all his students “sir” and “ma’am.”) Afterward the student confronted Meriwether, demanding the use of female pronouns. When the professor did not immediately acquiesce, the student became verbally abusive and threatened to get him fired—then promptly filed a complaint with the university.

Administrators accused Meriwether of creating “a hostile environment” and placed a written warning in his personnel file. They also threatened “further corrective actions” unless he capitulated to the student’s demands.

But compelled speech is a violation of liberty. Words express a worldview. To be forced to use transgender pronouns like “ze” and “zir” is to be forced to affirm the underlying transgender ideology—that gender is a social construction divorced from biological sex. Gender is reduced to a mental state, a question of how much you feel like a girl or a boy.

Transgender people are clearly biologically male or female from birth. They have typical sex markers—e.g., genetics, gonads, genitals—that all align with each other (unlike intersex people, whose biology is ambiguous). Gender dysphoria means their feelings are in opposition to their biological sex.

A BBC documentary says at the heart of the transgender debate is the idea that your mind can be “at war with your body.” And in that war, it’s the mind that wins.

A Princeton university professor wrote a book offering a philosophical defense of transgenderism, yet even she admits that it involves “disconnect,” “disjunction," "self-division," "self-estrangement"—the mind in opposition to the body. Her solution is to deny that the body has any relevance or significance: The physical body “tells us nothing … . It has no meaning at all.”

Compelled speech forces professors to affirm that the body gives no clue to our identity, that it is not part of our authentic self.

Where did such a negative view of the body come from? Transgender ideology rests on the assumption that human life is a product of mindless, purposeless forces. The implication is that the body has no intrinsic purpose that we are morally obligated to respect—and the mind is free to use it any way it wants.

But such an extreme devaluation of the body ultimately dehumanizes all of us. For if our bodies do not have inherent value, then a key part of our identity is devalued.

In his lawsuit, Meriwether states that he holds a Christian ethic, one that honors the body by calling people to live in harmony with their biological sex. This is a wholistic ethic—our mind and emotions are meant to be in tune with our body. Christianity presents the human body as fundamentally good, with intrinsic dignity and purpose. And we respect that purpose by taking it into account when discerning our gender identity.

That gender philosophy has as much right to be heard in the classroom as the social constructivist view.

Meriwether’s suit against Shawnee State was filed by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). “This isn’t just about a pronoun; this is about endorsing an ideology,” said ADF Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer. “Public universities have no business compelling people to express ideological beliefs that they don’t hold.”

The lawsuit charges that Shawnee State is engaging in viewpoint discrimination, which the Supreme Court has held to be unconstitutional: Professors who endorse social constructivism in regard to gender are permitted to express their views, while professors who do not profess that philosophy are punished.

A small number of people suffer genuine gender dysphoria, and in our public spaces we should be sensitive to the difficulties they face. But the state should not seek to regulate other people’s perspectives or punish them for disagreeing with a state-mandated sexual orthodoxy.

Words reflect worldviews. A free society will remain free only when people have the liberty to use the terms that express their own worldview.

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. 

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