The left is infected with a moral rot: anti-Semitism
It's actually worse than that. They lack not only morals but also any genuine feelings for others. As communists they murdered millions without a second thought. So what Hamas does is nothing to them. They have no feelings for the innocent victims of Hamas barbarism. Their occasional moral claims are an empty pretence for propaganda purposes only
Following Hamas' heinous and unspeakably evil terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, which resulted in the death of 1,400 innocent Israelis, protests erupted across the country and around the world, with pro-Hamas protesters siding with the terrorists, excusing the atrocities or outright denying them.
At college campuses and even some high schools, woke students chant, "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." A call for the genocide of the Jewish people and the destruction of the only Jewish state.
Pro-Palestinian supporters are tearing down posters of missing and abducted Israelis. As Matt put it in his recent VIP column detailing these despicable actions, "If you rip down these posters, you're with [Hamas]."
Thanks to 21st-century technology, a light is being shined on this anti-Semitism through some of our reporting, and these terrorist sympathizers are paying the consequences. Some have lost their current jobs, and some have seen their cushy careers lined up post-graduation disappear.
Not only has this anti-Semitism crept into the Ivy League universities and workplaces across the country, but it has also infected Congress and the Biden administration.
Democrat Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar are notorious for their pro-terrorist anti-Semitism. They'd rather side with Hamas. They've even spread terrorist propaganda, blaming Israel for an explosion at a hospital in Gaza that was later confirmed to be from a failed rocket attack by Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Instead of condemning Hamas for using innocent Palestinians as human shields, they call Israel an apartheid state and say it's carrying out genocide, despite Hamas' own charter calling for the eradication of Israel.
And just yesterday, when asked what the Biden administration is doing to combat anti-Semitism across the country, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre had this atrocious response:
We have not seen any credible threats, I know there's been always questions about credible threats, and so just want to make sure that that's out there. But look, Muslims, and those perceived to be Muslim, have endured a disproportionate number of hate-fueled attacks. And certainly, President Biden understands that many of our Muslim, Arab-American, and Palestinian-American loved ones and neighbors are worried about the hate being directed at their communities.
Jean-Pierre made a question about the dangers of anti-Semitism all about "Islamophobia."
Of course, the White House communications team is backtracking after facing severe backlash, with Jean-Pierre posting on X, "To be clear: the President and our team are very concerned about a rise in anti-Semitism, especially after the horrific Hamas terrorist attack in Israel."
If the administration's position is so clear, why couldn't she have said this from the beginning?
Here at Townhall, we will not stop shedding light on this moral rot that's spreading across our great country. We will expose these Hamas supporters and never stop supporting the nation of Israel's right to defend its people from 7th-century savages and their barbarism.
https://townhall.com/columnists/townhallcomstaff/2023/10/27/the-lefts-moral-rot-n2630295
***************************************************California Spent $110M to Stop Asian Hate Crimes. Where Did It Go?
Two years ago, amid a national wave of violent crimes against Asian immigrants and Asian Americans, the state of California awarded $110 million over 3 years to non-profit organizations to provide services to victims and to develop programs to prevent anti-Asian hate crimes. “In response to the visible rise in anti-Asian hate, both locally and nationally,” the California Department of Social Services wrote on the program’s website, the state legislature provided those funds “to address the rise in hate against Asian and Pacific Islander Californians.”
What was that money spent on? Through a public records request, Public recently obtained grant applications from close to 50 grantees in the San Francisco Bay Area region, through two rounds of funding. The programs proposed by most of these groups, which typically received hundreds of thousands of dollars each, have little obvious connection to the goal of protecting Asians from violent attacks.
Collectively, the applications provide a glimpse into how much of the activist non-profit sector sustains itself by exploiting high-profile crises to raise funds that are then diverted into barely related or entirely unrelated causes. It also indicates how little the actual victims of those crises — in this case, Asian hate crime victims — actually benefit from these ballyhooed government spending sprees, which keep non-profit workers employed but do little for the communities they purport to serve.
“I have questions about the effectiveness of this program,” Carl Chan, a leader in Oakland’s Chinatown community who was once the victim of an anti-Asian assault, told Public. “Some of the organizations are getting millions of dollars to ‘stop AAPI hate,’ but it doesn’t look like they’re doing anything to actually stop it. That money isn’t going where it was supposed to.”
Per their answers to a question on the application asking them to describe what services they intend to provide with the funding, 16 of the groups described what many might expect from a program designed to protect Asians from violence: self-defense training, safety patrols, escort services for elderly Asians, legal services, “know your rights” workshops and psychotherapy for crime victims.
But the majority of the groups that received funding proposed programs that have little obvious direct impact on the lives of Asian hate crime victims or potential victims.
The Oakland Asian Cultural Center was awarded $90,000 for the 2021-22 fiscal year to produce an anti-racism podcast. (For the second fiscal year, the same organization received $168,000, though the documents that the California Department of Social Services provided to Public did not include the group’s application for its second round of funding.)
Richmond Area Multi-Services, Inc. received $100,000 in the first round to provide mental health services for a group of children the organization took on an anti-racism road trip. (RAMS received $375,000 in the second round, but again, its application for continued funding was not provided to us.)
One group received funding to combat “anti-Blackness in the PI (Pacific Islander) community,” as if the reason Asians were victims of hate crimes was because of their own racism. Likewise, a group that represents Asian nail salon workers boasted of publishing a statement “condemning anti-Black racism in nail salons.” Another group aimed to “address biases against individuals who are houseless, formerly incarcerated, or Black/African American” — presumably biases held by Asians in the Oakland Chinatown community that the organization serves. Yet another group described its work educating the Asian community about the “connections” between anti-Asian violence and “anti-Black racism and white supremacy.”
Other groups didn’t pretend to serve Asians at all. Six groups proposed programs to protect LGBT people but made no mention of Asians. One of those groups, the Positive Resource Center, received $620,000 to produce “an anti-racism and anti-hate film that highlights the experiences of Black transgender folx through interviews.” Another worked on behalf of Latino LGBT immigrants. Yet another puts up posters against “hate,” without specification of any group in particular.
For some of the applicants, the language describing what they would do with the funding was impenetrable. “Through cross-racial dialogue and exchanges as well as stakeholder briefings,” read one, “we will gather and disseminate lessons and best practices to develop and strengthen system-wide wellness practices and program offerings to better serve youth in community as well as schools.”
“We cannot make change until we move away from operating in our traumatized selves and into power; we cannot fully heal until we dismantle the oppressions of the systems around us,” read another. “Therefore our approach includes supporting through a blend of traditional, ancestral and western evidence-based healing practices, as well as restoring a sense of self, voice, and power through curricula that addresses identity, inequity, and root causes.”
It isn’t even clear that the organizations that purport to provide meaningful services to Asians are actually fulfilling those roles. In February, Anthony Morales, a Filipino-American private investigator whose work extracting minors from sex slavery we’ve reported on at Public, called and emailed 17 of the Bay Area groups that received funding, posing as the nephew of an elderly Asian woman who was violently attacked. Only three of them offered any specific service. One was a non-profit law firm that offered to do an intake session. Another provided counseling services, but never called back as they promised they would. The third also offered counseling and made an earnest effort to serve the victim.
The rest either did not return Morales’ calls or emails, referred him to another organization, or told him they had no help to offer.
“As much as we would love to help, we aren’t currently set up to offer assistance to victims of hate crimes,” responded one organization that received over $1 million in state funding. Another group, which received $140,000, told him they don’t provide “services” and focus only on “environmental justice” and “organizing.”
If most of these organizations aren’t even trying to provide real services to victims or direct interventions to prevent future hate crimes, why is California giving them tens of millions of dollars to “stop Asian hate?”
https://public.substack.com/p/california-spent-110m-to-stop-asian ?
******************************************************
White Residents Sue City Over Racially Discriminatory Human Rights Policy
Residents of Asheville, North Carolina, are suing the city in federal court over allegedly unconstitutional racial discrimination at the local human rights board.
The residents argue that the city’s discriminatory treatment runs afoul of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That provision forbids governments from discriminating against individuals on the basis of their membership in a racial group.
Asheville has a history of alleged racial discrimination. In January 2022, the city settled a federal civil rights lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch over a racially discriminatory city-funded scholarship program. At the same time, the city agreed to erase racially discriminatory eligibility provisions from a related program that hands out grants to educators.
Racial criteria are used in the selection process to fill positions on the Human Relations Commission of Asheville (HRCA), which was created in 2018.
The HRCA initially enforced quotas, requiring the city council to fill the 15-member board with specific numbers of people from specific classifications of people, such as African Americans, Latinos, LGBT members, “professionals with influence,” youth members, a representative from each of the city’s geographical areas, public housing residents, and individuals with disabilities.
“Under the HRCA’s membership criteria, the City Council will not endeavor to appoint white residents unless they also satisfy a separate category, such as being a member of the LGBTQ+ community, a youth member, disabled, living in public housing, or recognized as a community leader. On the other hand, the City Council will automatically prefer minority applicants without requiring those applicants to satisfy a separate category,” the legal complaint states.
In 2022, as it struggled to fill vacancies and reach a quorum, the city revamped the HRCA, reducing the number of seats to nine. The city also removed the numeric race quotas from the HRCA’s membership requirements but replaced them with equally discriminatory race-based membership preferences.
What remains is a de facto race quota in which the city prefers individuals from certain races, according to Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), a public interest law firm that challenges government abuses and that represents the plaintiffs in the legal action.
Andrew Quinio, a PLF attorney, said, “The opportunity to serve your local community should not depend on your race. “Asheville’s candidates for public service should be treated as individuals, instead of mere members of arbitrary racial groups. Asheville needs to stop making assumptions about people’s experiences and qualifications based on arbitrary and offensive racial classifications.”
One HRCA candidate, plaintiff John Miall, is a white man and lifelong resident of Asheville. He spent almost 30 years working for the city, including as its director of risk management. He co-founded The Asheville Project, a community-based health care program for the city’s workforce in 1997 that became a national model for improving patient care at lower costs, evolving into what’s known today as value-based insurance design.
He felt his decades of municipal experience and continued service to his community would be a natural fit for the HRCA. But when he applied for one of the vacant seats, Asheville turned down his application because of his race and re-advertised the open positions, according to PLF.
But there is a new wrinkle in the lawsuit, Mr. Quinio told The Epoch Times in an Oct. 25 interview.
After the lawsuit was launched, the city appointed Mr. Miall to the HRCA. “It may be an attempt by them to get rid of this lawsuit,” the lawyer said.
But there are still four other plaintiffs in the lawsuit who have been harmed by the city’s discriminatory policy, he said. All of the plaintiffs are white.
“This lawsuit moves forward until the city changes its ordinance and agrees not to use race as a criterion in making appointments to this commission.”
“If you’re running a race and you get tripped along the way, even if you’ve crossed the finish line, well, someone’s got to answer for tripping, for you not being to compete fairly.”
The other plaintiffs whom the city failed to appoint to the HRCA are Robyn Hite, David Shaw, Willa Grant, and Danie Johnson.
Ms. Hite serves on the North Buncombe Elementary Parent Teacher Organization board and is a past president of the North Windy Ridge Parent Teacher Organization.
Mr. Shaw is a sales manager for a construction company. He earned an MBA from Western Carolina University and is working towards a master’s degree in social work. He also interns in the women’s behavioral health unit at a local hospital, where he provides group therapy and support to patients.
Ms. Grant taught at Asheville-Buncombe Technical Community College and Blue Ridge Community College. She currently serves the Western North Carolina Rescue Mission, mentoring homeless citizens and helping them obtain housing.
Mr. Johnson is an architect who started his own firm in Asheville in 1974. He designs commercial and residential buildings throughout the city and across North Carolina.
Attorneys have asked the court to certify the lawsuit as a class action.
Asheville spokesperson Kim Miller told The Epoch Times the city will continue to contest the lawsuit.
“The City vehemently denies any allegation of discrimination. It is our intention to defend the City’s interests in the suit vigorously. Beyond this, it is our policy not to comment on active litigation,” Ms. Miller said by email.
*****************************************************
Australian government effort to nip toxic masculinity in the bud.
I cannot even imagine how they might do that. Talk is cheap and kids are already preached at from dawn to dusk. To change behaviour you have to change the needs that drive it and that will rarely be possible.
Andrew Tate is a symptom, not a cause. Disrespect for women comes naturally to meny men and feminist preaching will only magnify that. Being constantly told that women are so much more admirable and worthy than men will usually provoke defiance and an attitude opposite to that desired.
The one faint hope of change would be to replace the currently pervasive valorization of women with a much more balanced message but that is not going to happen. The idea that men too have problems seems to stick in the throats of feminists
Even a heavy legal assault on domestic violence would achieve little. Bashing women is clearly something impulsive and done out of anger -- and laws are unlikely to restrain that.
The only preaching that might help would be to stop mindless praise of women and demonization of men and replace it with lessons about the needs that the respective sexes have. At its simplest, both sexes could be told that men have needs for adventure and women have a need for security. Men often say that they don't understand women at all but explanations of what drives female behaviour are posible and could be widely deployed.
I long ago wrote an explanation of female behaviour -- unlikely though that may seem. I have four women calling on me regularly these days despite my frail old age so maybe I do know something. My explanation below:
https://johnjayray.com/women.html
To end violence against women and children, the federal government aims to reshape young male attitudes toward healthy, respectful relationships as “extremist influencers” like Andrew Tate influence minds.
The initiative, known as the “Healthy Masculinities Project,” is poised to launch next year as a three-year trial, supported by $3.5 million in funding.
This innovative project will tackle the insidious impact of social media messaging targeting young men and boys, with the primary aim of eradicating gender stereotypes perpetuated online and promoting a culture of respect and supportive relationships among peers.
The project will engage the target school-age male audience through face-to-face interactions at sporting clubs, community organisations, and on social media.
Recent research has revealed 25 per cent of teenage boys in Australia look up to social media personalities who propagate harmful gender stereotypes and endorse violence against women.
The government has channelled funding through the First Action Plan Priorities Fund, an $11.9 million fund which is part of the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-32.
Minister for Social Services Amanda Rishworth said there is a need for young men to develop supportive relationships with their male peers and marked the project as a critical first step towards fostering healthy male attitudes.
Ms Rishworth cited the links between harmful forms of masculinity and the perpetration of violence against women.
“Research shows there are strong links between harmful forms of masculinity and the perpetration of violence against women,” she said.
“Educating boys about healthy masculinity and providing them with positive role models are important steps to ending cycles of violence.”
The grant round for this trial will open its doors in early 2024 and will offer an opportunity for organisations equipped with specialist expertise to sign on.
Ms Rishworth emphasised the necessity of addressing violent behaviour at its roots.
Andrew Tate is a controversial kickboxer and reality TV star turned content creator who has amassed billions of views among tens of millions of followers despite being de-platformed by most social media platforms.
He has been known to preach troubling views regarding women, including that rape victims “must bear some responsibility” for their attacks; or that women should be choked by their male partners and stopped from going out.
But Mr Tate, who often flaunts his lavish life, is seen by many young men as an authority on what it is to be successful.
In August, he was released from house arrest in Romania and placed under judicial control, a lighter restrictive measure, while he awaits trial on charges of human trafficking.
As National Director of White Ribbon Australia, Allan Ball, previously explained to news.com.au, “the use of gaming, extreme bravado and music [in the videos of Tate] overlays his deplorable actions with a filter of normalcy”.
“Impressionable young minds are drawn in by money, power and unwavering confidence to become part of a tribe,” he said.
Mr Tate created the Real World Portal in recent months, after closing his subscription-based “Hustler’s University”, an online academy for his fans, promising to assist them in making big money while helping his videos on social media go viral.
Real World, which bills itself as an anti-university, promises members will make over $10k a month online.
A joint statement from Dr Stephanie Wescott and Professor Steven Roberts, two leading experts in the education field from Monash University, broadly welcomed the government’s initiative while highlighting the hazardous influence of misogynistic influencers like Mr Tate on impressionable boys and young men.
The pair are currently conducting research on the impact of Mr Tate’s content on boys in Australian schools, and have already revealed its far-reaching consequences on girls and women in classrooms across the country.
The research further highlighted that boys consuming Mr Tate’s content were more likely to harbour unhealthy views on relationships — an alarming finding given the high rates of family violence in Australia.
Dr Wescott and Prof Roberts raised a critical concern about the potential pitfalls of implementing short-term, “quick-fix” programs and interventions that might lack the capacity for sustained engagement with young men.
They cited mixed evidence regarding the effectiveness of such approaches and emphasised the absence of a uniform strategy for evaluating their impact.
The experts recommended long-term, direct, and targeted initiatives that challenge detrimental social norms affecting boys’ mental health and emotions while adopting a “gender-transformative” approach based on best practices.
“We also challenge the assumption that boys need only to hear from other men about how to develop positive masculinity, and note that the inclusion of only male role models in healthy masculinity programs are not backed by robust evidence,” they wrote.
They argued boys benefit from interacting with individuals of diverse gender identities at all life stages.
The experts warned that featuring only male role models may reinforce negative aspects of healthy masculinity programs.
“The reasons boys and young men find extremist influencers like Andrew Tate appealing are complex and multifaceted, and so must be the approaches we use to address them,” they said.
The pair urged the federal government and the Minister for Social Services to consult widely with experts in the field and lean on established research.
****************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment