Labels

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Cultural Enrichment

Melbourne has been the 'Most Livable City in the World' for many, many years. It has never suffered like, say, Warsaw. It is a 'Multicultural' city. It is rich in the many cultures that jostle for supremacy in its streets. And Australia has just experienced the 5th cultural enrichment incident, of the fatal kind, in a span of 4 years. 3 of those incidents have happened in Melbourne. But is a good thing we have the diversity bollards in our streets, lest we be overwhelmed by drive-by acts of enrichment.

But we tend, with every atrocity inflicted by mentally challenged muslims, to forget that 'twas ever thus.  Bodies have littered Melbourne's street since the gold-rush days. Not that history diminishes the current day.  I shall get to this in a moment.

The bollards of Bourke Street did not prevent a refugee the other day expressing his delight in being put amongst so many Infidels just when he had his ute stacked with gas bottles, nor the opportunity for stabbing random infidels in the street.

Sophie York, a Sydney candidate for the Australian Conservatives and a good Catholic gal, reminded us of the glaring contrast between the latest Muslim murderer and one of his victims, Sisto Malaspino:
Never was there a more stark presentation of the difference between migrants to Australia in past generations, and migrants in more recent decades, than in this tragedy in Melbourne. 
One migrant, from the predominantly Catholic country of Italy (Sisto Malaspino, hard-working cafe owner, who came to Oz in the 1970s) who rushes to help a person whom he believes has been in a car crash. That’s simply the type of person Sisto is. 
This is not him
The car-driver, in contrast, turns out to be Hassan Khalif Shire Ali, from a Muslim migrant family (from Somalia), who reportedly arrived here in the 1990s. 
By 2015, Hassan Khalif Shire Ali has his passport cancelled, because he wants to fight for Islamic State in Syria. 
Instead of gratitude towards the country that gave his family reprieve (from the hardship of life in Africa), and contribution towards Australia, there’s instead a 4WD full of gas-bottles & wild stabbing. 
And Australians get to gasp & cover their mouths, get to mourn a now-deceased much-loved cafe owner. And then there’s the poor people who have needed surgery after being attacked: brave retiree Rod Patterson & a security guard. 
What will it take, before serious lessons are learnt by Australian authorities, about ONLY allowing immigration of people with backgrounds which indicate a very high prospect of cultural assimilation and respect? Our immigration policy should not be a PC-driven game of chance! It is about facing up to the reality of the world, right now. 
I would not in any way contradict Sophie, nor all those who have expressed outrage at this atrocity. But as I said, we tend to lose sight.

Another chap I have a lot of time for, Bill Muehlenberg had things to say too.
Let’s Get Real About Islamic Terrorism
Face it folks: we have a Muslim problem. We have an Islam problem. And the problem is not with “extremists” but with the religion itself. The religion commands its followers to kill the infidel. Its founder led the way here, leaving all Muslims a perfect example of what they should be do.
Most Western politicians and most of the Western media just do not get this. Indeed, they refuse to get this. They are apologists for Islam, and every time another Muslim goes on a jihadist rampage, killing innocent men, women and children, every excuse in the book is dragged out for them.
One of the most common excuses is to simply claim the killer was mentally ill. Hmm, so we have many thousands of Muslim attackers, and they are all mentally ill? Well, if Islam can only produce people who are mentally ill, then it seems we still have a massive problem with this political ideology.
Some of the most recent 'enrichers' include:  Ezzit Raad (MCG plot), Abdul Nacer Benbrika (plots vs Aust – various); Amer Hadarra, Aimen Joud, Fadl Sayadi, Abdullah Merhi, Ahmed Raad (plots vs Aust – various); Saney Aweys, Nayef El Sayed, Yacqub Khayre, Abdirahman Ahmed and Wissam Mahmoud Fattal (Holsworthy plot); Abdul Numan Haider (attacked Melb police); Talal Alameddine (supplied gun for Curtis Cheng murder in Sydney), Farhad Mohammad (killed Curtis Cheng), Man Haron Monis (Lindt Cafe, Sydney), Hassan Khalif Shire Ali (this week in Melb) – this is an incomplete list. 

And sadly, the list keeps growing.
On occasion however a few brave politicians and leaders get it right – or nearly right. Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison said this after the latest Melbourne jihad attack: “The greatest threat of religious extremism in this country is the radical and dangerous ideology of extremist Islam.” 
And for saying this the lamestream media and Labor have attacked him big time. But he was simply speaking the truth – or most of it. It is not in fact a case of Muslim extremists committing acts of terror. 
It is the devout, loyal and true follower of Islam who does this.
Those Muslims who shrink back from killing infidels are the ones who are not the real deal.
The simple truth is this: if a Christian kills in the name of Christ, he does so in total opposition to the life and teachings of Christ, and the entire New Testament. However, if a Muslim kills in the name of Allah, he has full justification to do so from the life and teachings of Muhammad, from the Koran, and from the hadith and sira.
Yet the clowns amongst us continue to make ludicrous excuses every time another Muslim sheds innocent blood. On the social media one fool actually said this about the Melbourne attack: “It wasn’t a terrorist attack, if you listen to the news report the guy was angry at the treatment of Muslims in Australia. If you wanna blame someone for this, blame yourselves.”
Good grief. Um no, I am not to blame for this attack. No one is to blame for this attack except the Somali migrant who committed the attack, and the repugnant ‘faith’ that encouraged him to do so. So yes, I sure will blame Hassan Khalif Shire Ali and the hate-filled ideology called Islam.
And  Malcolm Smith made the point...
There are more Buddhists than Muslims in Australia, and one presumes they are just as prone to mental illness. But I have yet to hear of any mentally ill Buddhists running amok and killing people. In fact, by far the largest number of potentially mentally ill people would be of Christian or irreligious backgrounds, but for some reason they don’t seem to be running around killing people.
Again, no arguement from behind this bar. I would rather Oz had no Muslims at all, as they do insist that fellow Australians, who have been here a lot longer, are Infidels and fodder for their knives. But..... 

Melbourne has even recently been more reminiscent of Chicago than of Mogadishu, to be sure, but that is feint praise for architecture and an acknowledgement of crude, murderous criminals. Our immigrant population over the years has brought many an appalling thug and lunatic and long before they had dark skins and anti-Christ religion.

Take just a couple from a very long, long list. And I will not go back far. I won't go back to Ned Kelly who is a popular hero murderous scumbag, but of a pre-Federation time.

Take Andrew "Benji" Veniamin (b1975 – d2004). 

He was an Australian criminal from Melbourne.  A convicted car thief, Veniamin is recognised as being a key figure in the Melbourne underworld killings, suspected of both murdering seven underworld figures, and being a hit-man for the Williams crime family

Veniamin was killed by Domenic "Mick" Gatto at a La Porcella Italian restaurant in Carlton in self-defence following a heated argument.

Veniamin was born to Greek Cypriot immigrant parents, and was raised in the Western Melbourne suburb of Sunshine. From a child to his early teens, Veniamin was an altar boy at the Greek Orthodox Church in the neighbouring suburb of Sunshine West, where his funeral would later be held.

He was also a known associate of Dino Dibra who was murdered at his home in October 2000, and of Paul Kallipolitis, who was shot in similar circumstances two years later. Victoria Police say Veniamin was one of the most dangerous and feared men connected to Melbourne's crime scene, and by the time of his death in 2004 they had connected him with several of Melbourne's underworld murders.

Veniamin met with Nik Radev on 15 April 2003, the day Radev was murdered in Coburg. Veniamin associated with an underworld group known as The Carlton Crew and after 2003 was connected with the Williams Family, and was a close friend of Carl Williams.

Not many mohammedans amongst his 'known associates'.

Or take Alphonse John Gangitano (b1957 – d1998). 

He too was an Australian criminal from Melbourne, Victoria. Nicknamed the "Black Prince of Lygon Street", Gangitano was the face of an underground organisation known as the Carlton Crew. He was also an associate of alleged organised crime bosses Tom Domican (Sydney) and John Kizon (Perth).

Gangitano is considered to be the second of the thirty Melbourne gangland killings between 1995-2010, when he was murdered in 1998. 

It is some small consolation that the killings were generally of people who richly deserved their demise.

Gangitano was born on 22 April 1957. He attended De La Salle College and Marcellin College. In later years through the 1980s and 1990s Alphonse had been alleged a co-owner of a King Street nightclub and numerous fight promotions and other ventures that went on to include horse racing and protection rackets. 
Spot the future murderer.
At the height of Gangitano's criminal career he was earning an estimated $125,000–$200,000 a month as a high profile member of The Carlton Crew. Unlike other criminals, Gangitano purely wanted to be a criminal from a young age.

King Street nightclub attack
Gangitano, Moran and associate Tony Rapasarda were charged over serious assaults on several patrons at the Sports Bar nightclub in King Street, Melbourne on 19 December 1995.

Moran later said of Gangitano: "He's a fucking lulu ... if you smash five pool cues and an iron bar over someone's head....you're a fucking lulu". The attack was portrayed on Underbelly (A TV entertaindoco)

On the day of his death 16 January 1998, Gangitano was reported to have had a telephone conversation with Kizon. That same day, Graham Kinniburgh drank at the Laurel Hotel in Ascot Vale with associate Lou Cozzo before driving to Gangitano's home in Templestowe. At a subsequent coroners' inquest, evidence was presented that Kinniburgh and Jason Moran were in Gangitano's home that night. Both were exempted from giving evidence at the inquest, on the grounds that their evidence might incriminate them. Hah !

Kinniburgh left Gangitano's house shortly after 11 pm to purchase cigarettes. Upon his return 30 minutes later, he found that Gangitano had been shot several times in the head in the laundry. Gangitano's de facto wife, Virginia, was with the body. Traces of Kinniburgh's blood were later discovered on the back flyscreen door at Gangitano's home.
Kinniburgh reportedly respected the code of silence, frustrating police investigating the murder. Gangitano's pallbearers included Mick Gatto and John Kizon. 

Gangitano is survived by his wife and two daughters, and was widely believed to have had another child with which he had no contact to an unidentified woman.

Moran allegedly pulled out a gun after an argument with Alphonse and shot him in the head. The murder may have led to as many as 75 revenge assaults on underworld members. Gangitano was charged with shooting petty criminal Gregory John Workman dead in 1995, at 1 Wando Grove, St Kilda East; however, Gangitano never went to trial over the shooting after two witnesses retracted their statements.

Kinniburgh and Moran were both later murdered themselves.

Immigrants? 

Nope. Born here, from European Immigrants. 

Islamic? 

Nope. Nominally 'christian', but by the Lord Harry long fallen and deep. In thrall to Satan as any 'radical muslim'. 

Did they and their ilk enrich our culture ?  Nope.

Were they 'mentally' challenged? 

You had better believe it. 

Morally bereft too.

Whilst the current crop of lunatic muslims rampage and rent space in our cranial rage-rooms, we tend to overlook the tens of thousands of criminals that roam amongst us, un-distinguished by black faces and unpronouncable names. They are mentally amd morally challenged. They hate rather than love. They steal, they kill, they attack. They would knock over a granny given an order by a more powerful evil sod.

We have home-grown criminal organisations: Russian Mafia: Italian Mafia: Vietnamese whatevers. You name a nation's group here and we have their crims and lunatics.

That of course does not excuse Muslims. 

Muslims are not 'more of the same'.

Personally, I take the view that all 'cultures' which have arrived amongst the predominantly 'Anglo' population here have brought some colour and fragrance that has 'enriched' us, despite the few wicked ones amongst them that we have coped with. 

Except the Muslims.

There is nothing that I can see or hear from Islam that adds anything positive. 

Italians, Greeks, even Vietnamese, Koreans and the Irish do not hate us. To them we are not 'Infidels' to be converted, enslaved or killed. In our entire history as a Nation, ONLY the ordinary, everyday Muslim bears us undisguised ill-will.

I would like to see every one of them deported.

Oh, and Politicians. We have many a politician who hates Oz.

Many of those could do with a one-way ticket out too.

It is enough to drive a chap to drink.

So choose your drink wisely.

Pax




Sunday, November 11, 2018

The 11th Hour....

....of the 11th Day of the 11th Month. We shall Remember Them. Well, some of us will. Many have forgotten already as is inevitable after 100 years. It is a long time and distant even from the parents and grandparents of today's young people who are rarely taught about it in our woeful schools. But in the Tavern we still weep at the horrors of war.  It is a day of Sadness and Gratitude. We do not glorify war but raise our glasses to those Warriors who did their bit gloriously, defending our culture, homelands, homes, hearths, families and friends. And those that still do.

For those of us who have History and Heritage and a keen knowledge of facts, the ghosts are not laid but are remembered. Wars have to be fought. There are wicked peoples, wicked leaders, wicked nations out there who would bring war upon the innocent. Defensive war is thrust upon us. They must be repulsed. They must be defeated. Lest we are forgotten too.

Added. Exactly a century ago - on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month - the guns fell silent on Europe's battlefields. The belligerents had agreed the terms of the peace at 5am that November morning, and the news was relayed to the commanders in the field shortly thereafter that hostilities would cease at eleven o'clock. 


And then they all went back to firing at each other for a final six hours. 

On that last day, British imperial forces lost some 2,400 men, the French 1,170, the Germans 4,120, the Americans about 3,000. The dead in those last hours of the Great War outnumbered the toll of D Day twenty-six years later, the difference being that those who died in 1944 were fighting to win a war whose outcome they did not know. 

On November 11th 1918 over eleven thousand men fell in a conflict whose victors and vanquished had already been settled and agreed.



Make War upon the Infidel innocent .

Outside the hedges though, many of the people in the brave world that was so hard fought for and sought are resolutely ungrateful. They disparage at every opportunity.


Many who have replaced the long dead and their heirs, actively hate us. They remain foreign even when born on the western, anglophile world's soils, bringing in a heritage completely at odds with the values so hard defended.

War changes societies, often drastically. One only has to consider the numbing numbers. Take Britain as just one example.

At the outbreak if the War to End All Wars, Britain had a little over 30 million people. Half, 15 million, were males. Of those there were old men who were unfit for battle and youngsters, children, to be protected and nurtured by the women - who were not sent to the trenches. The actual number of fighting age men was more like 6-7 million. Initially the volunteers came in droves going off to war with the usual British cheerfulness, and it was not until 1916 that conscription brought more.  Those went more with dread.

Most of these men were of 'marriageable' age. 

Many had families.  They were well known members of their local communities. Many were the sons. 

At war's end over one million were dead. 

Another million and a half were wounded , many severely. Maimed. Limbs blown off. Blind. 

Maybe a half a million more were mentally and emotionally shattered. Entire streets of men were lost in every town and city, every village and hamlet. 

3 million of 7 million. 

Over 1 in 3.  Let that sink in. 

Women achieved the vote: at least 40% of the men died vote-less. The vote that the women gained was little compensation for the loss of their marriage prospects. The social change was dramatic, with woman obliged to remain unmarried and having to support themselves. Get work. Learn skills. Forge a career. Do as men have always had to do. Grow up. 

They competed with one another for a husband: many missed out on a family future. They resented: they felt cheated. They blamed men of course. Feminism was born, and festered ever since.

The culture they were left was misappropriated very quickly. Gavin Mortimer, back in Oz was at hand in the bar to bring home to us his observations and of just how far that misappropriation has gone.
The cultural appropriation of the first world war

Last week I was in the Somme, visiting the first world war battlefields before the great and the good descend on the region this week to mark the centenary of the Armistice.
In one cemetery I found propped against the headstone of Captain Frank Morkill a plastic folder, left two months earlier by a relative. Inside was a facsimile of his last letter home, written three days before he was killed in action on September 15 1916.
‘I can truly say without any mock heroism that I am only too thankful to have seen the dawn of Germany’s downfall,’ wrote Morkill, a Canadian, who had been wounded twice in previous fighting. ‘Also, that on the anniversary of my first year of war I am here to help in that overthrow, and here with several of my best friends.’

Such buoyant letters from the trenches were the norm during the war, a fact that surprised the Duchess of Cambridge last week during a visit to the Imperial War Museum. 
Shown letters written from the front from three of her great-great-uncles, all of whom were subsequently killed, she commented: ‘What really struck me was the positivity, they are writing home with such positivity. It is a side you don’t really see reflected.’

Her Royal Highness is right; it is rare in this day and age to hear the authentic voice of the first world war Tommy. 
Facebook and Twitter BANNED this image.

Thanks to the left’s cultural appropriation
of the conflict, what we have been force fed for decades is the idea that the men who volunteered in 1914 were all hapless victims of a cold-hearted Empire. 
The 14-18 Now Centenary Art Commission is a case in point. Government-funded to the tune of £50m, the Commission’s website boasts that its 325 artworks open up ‘new perspectives’ on the war. Among the perspectives are ‘Dawn’, a play about three soldiers convicted of mutiny and desertion; ‘Furious Folly’, a sound and light show that rails against ‘the madness of the battlefield and the futility of WW1’, and ‘Bloodyminded’, an interactive feature film about conscientious objectors and the morality of war.
The Commission’s latest initiative is Danny Boyle’s ‘The Pages of the Sea’, in which portraits of soldiers will be etched into the sand of British beaches on Sunday. Wilfred Owen will adorn Folkestone beach, explains Boyle, because ‘he, and the other poets, brought the war home in a way that the newspapers and newsreels could not’. 
That is simply not true. 
Ivor Gurney, Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen didn’t publish their first poems until the penultimate year of the war and outside London literary circles they were virtually unknown. According to Owen’s biographer, Dominic Hibberd, he continued to be regarded ‘as a fairly minor poet’ until the 1960s when he became the voice of students protesting the Vietnam War.

If the Commission had wanted a genuinely fresh and edgy perspective on the conflict, it could have honoured the courage and resilience of our armed forces in winning a brutal war, perhaps featuring some of the 627 men who were awarded the Victoria Cross, as opposed to remembering the 306 who were shot at dawn, many for murder, mutiny and desertion.

But that would have meant confronting an unpalatable truth: that a great many men enjoyed the war. That’s not to diminish the dread they experienced during battle, or the misery of life in a frontline trench, but these were hard men who had led tough civilian lives and while combat was terrifying it was also exhilarating.
For many Tommies the war was a step-up in life. Raised in poverty, enlisting in the army gave them a regular wage, medical care and a sense of identity in a hitherto deprived existence. Within months they were on troopships heading to faraway places with exotic names and even more exotic young ladies. They were happy.

The film director, Peter Jackson, recently made this point when discussing his new film, They Shall Not Grow Old, for which he colourised original footage of the conflict. 
‘It was their lack of self-pity that surprised me,’ 
admitted Jackson. ‘We think that we sent these men into this industrial grinding machine. But they certainly didn’t think that was what was happening to them – there was no feeling sorry for themselves.’

Charles Carrington fought in some of the bloodiest battles of the war and in the preface to his memoir, he wrote: ‘Like so many young men [I] enjoyed being a soldier on the whole…most of the war books, which attained such popularity ten or twelve years later were written by non-combatants who observed war externally from behind.’
Far from being blinded by jingoist naivety, Carrington and his comrades 
‘welcomed danger and we expected the worst… 
rightly or wrongly, wisely or foolishly, we did these things with our eyes open.’

Carrington’s book appeared in 1929, the same year Frederic Manning published Her Privates We, a novel which drew on his experience in the trenches. One of the first books written from the ranks, it shocked its readers with its gritty realism, portraying the average Tommy as brave, brutal, libidinous and sardonic. 
There was, wrote Manning of an attack on a German trench, ‘some strange intoxication of joy in it… the extremities of pain and pleasure had met and coincided.’

In 1964 the BBC broadcast its brilliant 26-part series, The Great War, in which veterans recalled without rancour or self-pity their experience of gas attacks, bayonet charges, artillery barrages and the death of their pals.
But as the number of veterans dwindled, so the cultural appropriation of the conflict quickened, and films such as Oh! What A Lovely War, Gallipoli, The Monocled Mutineer, Regeneration and comedies like Blackadder Goes Forth reinforced the spurious narrative of a war of ‘Lions led by Donkeys’.

The perspectives of Boyle and the 14-18 Now Centenary Art Commission are those of modern artists whose only affinity with their subjects is nationality. 
Culturally, morally and temperamentally, the Briton of 2018 bears no resemblance to the one of 1918, 
...and the Commission’s artists are guilty of seeing the war through the lens of 21st century victimhood with their minds closed to the idea that many young men found a fulfilment in war, in spite of the ordeal of battle.

In judging the first world war by today’s values we are guilty of what the historian E. P. Thomson in his book, The Making of the English Working Class, called the ‘enormous condescension of posterity’ whereby history is rewritten to suit contemporary middle-class mores. 
By all means let us commemorate the fallen but let us also... 
be proud of the bravery, loyalty, belligerence and sheer bloody-mindedness of our Tommies
they didn’t see themselves as idealistic victims but as obdurate victors.

 People who keep alive in their hearts and heads the struggles of ten centuries find little difficulty holding just 100 years fresh. But such folk are few in an age when last week is old news and to be thrown out with the daily news-cycle.

But here in the Tavern we put their portraits on the wall, recount their tales of heroism and raise our glasses.

We Remember.

To Everyday Heroes.

Pax

Friday, November 9, 2018

#MeToo

I, too, have shared the same boots as Harvey Weinstein. Metaphorically speaking of course. Following on from the last post I have to make my confession.  So many rich and famous ladies of stage and screen and casting couch stepped forward last year to bow to the audience and claim sexual victimhood, there was barely enough gaslights to illuminate them all and much jostling for position sent some falling off the stage.  Many in the audience fell over laughing / groaning too. The same is happening now to the less famous ladies in the workplace. And chaps like m'self have to step up too.

The talk in the bars brought me to this confession. The aspiring actresses of the world are often subject to the phenomenal Power of  the decision makers - the Producers and Directors.  Their sexual charms become currency.

Very little is spoken of the aspiring actor chaps who have to submit to the make-up ladies and the wardrobe mistresses (an apt title!), with their tape measures up the inside leg, 'innapropriate touchings' and their power to make a chap look like say, Jim Carrey if he doesn't 'give' for his art. 

But I digress.

During a lull in Battles many years ago I whiled away some of my time in the Flamingo Theatre Group, an impromptue gathering of forced-troubadorism, where I acted, treasurered, marketed, and yes, Produced and Directed plays and other such frivolous entertainments. For the troops you understand. I was in a position of terpsichorean Power. The ladies formed a line to get my assent to their rise to stardom.

One such offered to sleep with me in order to have a 'line' to speak. A first step for her, and for me a first slip down that road to perdition.

It was a time of youthful vitality, hornyness even, although somewhat at the early stages of our modern abandonment of Morals. 

Ever the Leader, I allowed her seductions effect, took off my armour and let her to take me to bed. There, we negotiated. All night, this Knight negotiated every position at her ever more demanding ploy. 

By morning, over breakfast, the agreement was struck and she glowed.

(Er... No. It wasn't Sharon Stone, yer 'Onour !)

I hazard that the Weinstein stories bear some similarity. 

Whatever the facts and who did what to whom and with what seductive ploys, I shall await the verdict of the Courts. Not for me, of course.
  
For the long lines of ladies of the screen and Mr Weinstein.  Many others are not so willing to wait. They have joined the long cast-list seeking fame and some reflected glory from 'outing' some scumbag. 

Or innocent but equally randy chap as they.

It must be remembered, you see, that the seduction game has long been a Ladies' Match. Few men have the talent for it, regardless of all the protests that this lady of that was 'swept off her feet' or 'fell for his charisma', or 'could not help herself'. 

Yeah, right! 


It is not confined to the stage. It is a battle out there in the ordinary business world.  The increased ease for women in the 'male dominated' workforce may just be coming to the 'rapids and waterfalls' interruptions. Where up until recently the flow of many men, quite happy to 'mentor' women and otherwise help them achieve their potential, was virtually assured - especially by 'female-dominated HR Departments - the opportunity for biting the hand that feeds has put dangers in the way for most men.

Men are holding back. They do not want to be compromised or even put in a position where compromise might occur. It is all too easy for a man's career to be shattered on the rocks of false allegation. 

As Morgan Foster was mentioning:
Risk for Men in Mentoring Women at Work
Why would any legitimate businessman risk humiliation to mentor a young woman?
Regarding “Don’t Avoid Women, Mentor Them” by Rachel Thomas and Stacy Brown-Philpot : My family physician, a woman, always has a witness in the room when she examines me, her male patient. She doesn’t do this to make me feel comfortable but because she and her partners understand that even one false accusation of sexual abuse from any of her patients could damage or destroy her medical career and harm the entire partnership.
Every large corporation must now consult with risk managers, lawyers and, chillingly, insurance companies to calculate the risks and costs of each accusation of sexual abuse, whether genuine or false. The costs are rising.
A rational approach, if one not socially desirable for all sorts of reasons, is for companies to forbid male and female employees not married to each other to be alone together in the office or at outside events. 
There must always be witnesses. 
Not because men and women as a general rule cannot be trusted, but because 
some men and some women cannot be trusted, 
and everyone must now be treated with the same elevated level of caution. 
Shareholders may soon demand it.
The willingness of women - in particular - to sell sex, bargain with their bodies and blackmail a man has been with us for millenia.  Men  (have been) are often all too easily seduced by a pretty face and an offer of rumpy pumpy. Today it is epidemic. 

The horrendous decline in morals has not 'liberated' men. It has not liberated women. 
Back in my younger day it was an unwritted rule that sexual activity was confined to adults who were married to one another.  

The idea that a chap should never be alone with a woman who is not his  wife is derided, but is nonetheless sound advice.

 The 'stud' was rebuked by most women and most men: the slut was rebuked by most women and some men. Women have always been treated better and given the benefit.

Men at work - or at play - should seriously consider recording his interactions with women with a 'spy pen' at work or a GoPro camera. False accusations are rife in our world and the cry goes out to 'Believe all Women'.

Ah, yes, that instance in my younger day, in the exotic climates of the Mediterranean with the scent of Frangipani and such in the air  .... My confession.

The lady, aspiring actress, (and exotic, well.. antipodean too) was my fairly new wife. She was cast as a maid in my play. Her line, that she seduced so well for, was delivered memorably.

It was her accent you see. As the maid, she had to offer some cake to some guests of the Lady of the House, with "Would you care for some cake? 

The closing word came out in a broad bogan-Oz 'Cyke'.

It brought the house down.

Have a drink.

Pax

Monday, November 5, 2018

War on Women # 69

That there is a war on women is beyond doubt. On men too. And children. And families. In fact on the western civilisation, sense, morality and pretty well everything that has raised western civilisation from poverty and backwardness (as exists pretty well everywhere else). It was a fine if short run of a civil system  that actually benefitted most while it lasted. But we still only ever hear of the 'War on Women'.

One could be forgiven for thinking that 'Women' were the be-all and end-all that deserved everything and the Moon. But they do have their enemies - and it isn't men. 

OK, one did hear of those Men's Rights Activists for a while but their heart was never really in it and they focussed their attention on Feminists rather than 'women' and the main activity has been removing themselves from the firing line as best as they can, refusing to play misandric games. And they count marriage, families, healthy man-woman relationships amongst those games.

Bit of shooting own feet, if you ask me.

But the real shooting of women's feet has been and continues to be an activity of .... Women. Yes, they are their own worst enemy.

Most men actually like women. It is not just a matter of lust. But they are tired of the invective, the ingratitude. They seek that nurturing and empathy that has declined disastrously

The 50's and 60's woman never had it so good, and the feminists ruined it.

But women really hate other women. They know that women fight dirty. Men 'compete' for women and accept competition as a natural aspect of men's relationships with other men, with some sneaking enjoyment and even comraderie. Women don't like competition. 


They hate competitors.

It shows these days in the Political sphere, largely I suspect because Feminism is political. 

Dr. Jennifer Oriel was in the Oz room sipping on a fine ladies' drink and holding forth on what she sees in the political hotbeds of the USA. 

I was in agreement with much of what she said (apart from the odd contentious and un-essential points and an urge to be terse occasionally) but then I am a most agreeable chap.
Fire-breathing sisters just Trump their own gender
Stupid, brainless and servile. It’s how the American sisterhood describes women who vote Republican. 
Ahead of the US mid-term elections, left-wing sexism has reached fever pitch. 
While claiming to support women’s right to vote, the Left has subjected women who vote right to dehum­anisation, public shaming and mis­ogyny. White women are bearing the brunt of the Left’s hate speech as desperate Democrats try to coerce conformity among female freethinkers.
Shortly after the 2016 US election, pundits revealed a shocking truth: millions of women had voted freely, and had freely chosen Donald Trump for president. Exit polls revealed white women were the culprits. 
Supposed progressives responded with vile speech about Republican women the content of which rivalled the sexist diatribes 19th-century men used to silence the suffragettes.
Er.... references? Who were these men? What did they say? Was there a 'movement' anywhere near as large or as vocal as the feminist's anti-men brigade of today?
Like the suffragettes, women who vote conservative are deemed too stupid to vote rationally.
Hmmmm. How far of right or wrong is that? 
Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton plays a swift hand of blame-shifting and held white women culpable for her subpar performance during the election campaign. She suggested married white women voted “the way your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should”.
Sophia (left) is clearly an intellectual

Left media loves the dumb girl meme because it plays into its bigoted beliefs about female conservatives. On news and opinion website Salon, deputy politics editor Sophia Tesfaye wrote: “Too many white women in 2016 … were focused on the backs of men still ahead of them.”
Academics joined the swelling ranks of leftists trying to explain how freethinking women got off the reservation. Stanford University sociologist Marianne Cooper opined that married white women lacked “gender-political consciousness”.
During the 1970s, feminist consciousness-raising sessions were used to convert women to the cause. Women who didn’t believe they were victims of men were corrected by the collective in a process of struggle that culminated in conversion or exclusion. 
Coercion, she means, I think. 
Lenin believed correct thought, or class-consciousness, was indispensable to revolution. He advocated for ...........“the vanguard of the proletariat, its class-conscious section, the Communist Party, to resort to manoeuvres, arrangements and compromises … The whole point lies in knowing how to apply these tactics in such a way as to raise, and not lower, the general level of proletarian class consciousness, revolutionary spirit, and ability to fight and to conquer.” 
The PC sisterhood is raising feminist consciousness by stamping a jackboot on the face of dissent.
In a nurturing, empathetic way of course !!


No men. No coloured women either. Diversity?? 

At the Huffington Post, academic Jessie Daniels wrote a bitter tract on women working in the Trump administration. It read like barely concealed schoolgirl envy: “........And then, of course, we come to Ivanka Trump herself. Her photogenic appearance makes it easy for her to run interference for her father’s hateful policies … her glamorous lifestyle … her ‘elegant’, soft-focus Insta-life has sailed on, unimpeded by criticism. The groomed exterior Ivanka presents to the world, and the things she gets away with as a result, are wrapped up in her whiteness.”
The hate Ivanka theme went viral. 
Like other members of the Hollywood sisterhood, Scarlett Johansson joined many stars at the Women’s March. In a video for Saturday Night Live, Johansson portrayed Ivanka Trump and a voice­over said: ......“A feminist, an advocate, a champion for women. But, like, how? … Complicit: the fragrance for the woman who could stop all this, but won’t.” 
Saturday Night Live is a great champion of women who conform. Dissenters from the PC party line are not treated so favourably.
In one skit Alec Baldwin played Donald Trump phoning an African head of state who said to him: “You think you are big tough dictator? I will rip out your spine and drink from your skull, you cannot even walk downstairs you little white bitch.” Cue the mob applause. 
Replace the word white with black and imagine the outrage. 
But it’s open season on women born with politically incorrect skin colour. 
At this year’s White House Correspondents’ dinner, self-described comedian Michelle Wolf demonstrated PC comedy at its dullest: ......“Ivanka cleans up nice. She’s the diaper genie of the administration. On the outside, she looks sleek, but the inside, it’s still full of shit.”
Full Frontal host Samantha Bee called Ivanka Trump a “feckless c..t” on television. Bee didn’t like Donald Trump’s border policy, so apparently it made absolute sense to sexually objectify and degrade his daughter: .....“Put on something tight and low-cut and tell your father to f..king stop it.”
The PC sorority shames Republican women in the most mis­ogynistic terms imaginable. 
The climax of their hate campaign is open war on female dissenters. For example, in June, restaurant owner Stephanie Wilkinson ordered White House press secretary Sarah Sanders to leave the premises because she worked for the President.
Feminism is Cretinous.
Anything a man can do, a woman can do better, eh?
The Left alternates between stereotyping right-leaning wom­en as Stepford wives or gender traitors. The first stereotype invites humiliation and ridicule. The second attracts hatred and mob aggression. 
To get some measure of how radical the Left’s rage against freethinking women has become, consider a New York Times article published last month. Alexis Grenell unleashed a torrent of vitriol against women who vote Republican. Grenell specified that she was “talking about white women”. She claimed a “blood pact between white men and white women is at issue in the November mid-terms”.

True to PC form, she described white women in degrading terms. She made reference to Trump’s comments about women objecting to the treatment of Brett Kav­anaugh:..... “I have men that don’t like it, but I have women that are incensed at what’s going on.” Grenell’s conclusion? “I’m sure he does ‘have’ them …”
If you cannot tolerate women who disagree with your politics, don’t call yourself a feminist. 
Today's woman? Are we to put up with this awfulness?

In fact, ladies, stop demeaning yourselves by calling yourselves Feminists altogether.  Sort yourselves out. All that above is what Feminists do. They have been practicing hatred, sharpening their claws on men for two generations now. 

If you sexually degrade women who vote for the other team, don’t talk about equality. 
Equality was never on the agenda of Feminists. Even the suffragettes did not seek the equal opportunity to die on the banks of the Somme in their tens of thousands. Indeed, the suffragettes did not want  'lower-class' women to have the vote.
If you use race as a weapon to silence dissent, don’t speak of human rights.
If you really truely want to speak of human rights, do it outside of an abortuary and speak for the babies. 
The PC sisterhood has perfected the dull art of sexually humiliating women who vote conservative. 
With sisters like them, feminism has no future.
If Jennifer is correct on that final point then bring it on. 

I have known many a feminist woman and cannot recommend them. Awful, traitorous, immoral, liars, the lot of them.  Thieves too. They have no honour depite holding Professorships and Editorships. And I have known - and continue to, now - many a fine Lady, normal women, nice gals, pleasant company.  Those I do recommend.

It is high time Feminism rotted and fell off the tree.

Men would be far happier. Women would be too. Both could bandage their wounds and start working together to reapair the damage.

But as yet, the Left stands in the way.

Maybe the ladies of the right will stop denigrating men for a while - well, for good and all - and fight their nasty sistas.

It is not even a 'gender' thing, either. Nor simply 'political'. It is all a wholesale attack on the Soul of human beings.  Just the latest round.

Think on that.

Meanwhile (1) the anti-male malice continues on.
Meanwhile (2), another Jennifer drink and.... one for yourself?

Drink up.

Pax