Labels

Monday, February 27, 2017

The Chasm

"What ails thee, Uncle".  That was one of the two Fundamental Questions that needed to be asked to cure the Old King's wounds. We may go through life thinking we are in charge of what happens, but like great tectonic movements,  life, like the land, can be rent in two and those that should exist, live, love in harmony, are seperated. 

Pain and tears flow in the chasm between.

After waiting for many years, one day a miracle happened: and I wait upon the day when another comes.

That first was the birth of my beloved daughter. I waited a long time for her. My Supplier knew her long before she was knitted together in her mother's womb, and I knew her too. If ever a child, this child, was wanted, it was her.

I helped deliver her. 'Twas my eyes that first saw her.

On the way to my tasks after the long night of her slowly making her way into the light, I rode through countryside in the sunrise, singing. This....



My heart was bursting with joy. 

She was my Sweet Caroline. My Little Petal. 



Life was good. We grew and played together. We were best together.

I adored my little girl.

But the earthquake came, unbidden, and we were dragged away from one another. The cries from both still echo. 

The tears still flow.

I pray. She is silent.

The wound weeps. 

I await a second miracle, patiently. Painfully. A Cross to Bear.

Pax.

Well Deserved ?

What did I do to deserve this? I asked m'self as I sat by the sand at Kingston Beach this morning.  The world is sliding down into depravity and my Supplier lifts my soul with this day. "It is Gratis. Free". His voice whispers from deep down in the Tavern's Crypt and I hear it all this way off.

Some things in life are free. Really. He gives me Liquid Sunshine.

I am not a man to get depressed anymore. Seen too much. And while the world outside the hedges of the Tavern seems dark and full of anger and despair, I 'fear no evil', as they say. Perhaps it comes with old age as well as Faith.

The view I get from my cave, I was reminded today by the telecoms chap who came to fit me up with even faster broadband, is worth a million bucks. He stood and gazed out of my window for a full minute, just soaking it in, before he pulled himself together to do the work he came to do. But My Supplier gives me more.

This place, Tasmania, and my small part of it, is quiet, civilised and beautiful. But above all, quiet. Near me are beaches that were they anywhere else they would be crowded. Here just a few stroll.

With their dogs.

This is just one of several that I spend at least half an hour at or on several times a week.  Kingston Beach. I say a Rosary as I smoke a pipe.

It is just about 10kms south of Hobart. I have a beach much closer. Just 400 metres away. It too is beautiful. Perhaps not quite so quiet as it is so much closer to the city and more folk come to it. Not too many more though. It is also more civilised in that it is more 'tended'. Kingston Beach is largely left to its own.


















Snaps are fine but not enough. Sharing the ambience needs a little more life and movement. So for those who bore quickly, just select one or two. For those who want to slowly savour the days, the dawns, the sunsets and rainbows, leap right in.

I shall pull a drink for you while you drink your fill of my small paradise.

Beautiful one day: perfect today. Even when it rains 

Dawn. Quiet. Calm. 


The rising of the Sun.

 A Double Rainbow.





From the Yacht Club end. There is a rock shelf here where one can sit with the waters slopping and the pools filling and emtying.

 The 'Dog Beach' end. I have seen 30 dogs at a time down here and in 15 years never a fight. It is a place to play.

The 'village' itself sits just outside of Kingston, the fastest growing suburb in Tasmania (unfortunately) but the village is largely unaffected as there is little room to add houses. 

So it remains quiet. 

You can chase up more for yourself. You tube is a fine store.

Meanwhile we are just about due an influx of visitors and no-one will be telling them about this place. Boatloads of them come and we send them to the markets and the vinyards - and keep the beaches secret.

All that was not to make you envious. You did not have to do anything to deserve the tour. It's free. Gratis.

On the House.

The sun shines on the rich and the poor alike: the good and the bad alike. 

Pax.

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Subverting the Australian Military

The Australian Military 'ethos' is under severe attack. From inside and above.  Its Integrity is compromised. A systematic emasculation and racially driven crippling of its effectiveness has been underway for some years now and it has to stop.  It will not be stopped politically in the present climate of poor civilian 'leadership' (almost an oxymoron these days)  and the only recourse is a strong protest by the more 'junior' ranks. 

The Australian Fighting Man is likely to become a rarity and a long history of  efficient and fierce warrior action is likely to disappear into the history books.
Soon to Fade Away
I recall many years ago the shock of having the three Service Chiefs going to see the British PM, Harold Wilson. In Uniform.  Hats on. They made it clear that unless he backed off  from his disasterous actions against the military there would be tanks outside No 10 in the morning. His career and his government were soon gone. But I cannot see the Oz Service Chiefs doing that. 

They lack the guts.

I also recall that every unit had a 'War Book' in their safe. It detailed the replacement of many senior officers in the event of hostilities, including  their Airships, the Generals and the Admirals, by more proven Warrior officers of less auspicious rank.  Peacetime forces have diplomats, administrators and pen-pushers in place to do the day to day peacetime management, but hostilities need men of far more severe character.

The Oz fighting man has an enviable reputation. Pretty well every nation's soldiers know of the Australian Warrior. Battles have been won because Oz's men were there. There is little 'fancy' about him. He is Tough. 

Tomorrow's military is unlikely to develop such men unless the current policies are thrown out along with the 'philosophers' and consultants that permeate, insidiously, the higher levels.

Miranda Divine was in to blow the whistle. Let us hope that there are still some men around to climb into the trench and charge the enemy sitting on their comfortable arses.
By promoting diversity over fighting ability the Army is alienating its warriors
THE “diversity” revolution that Lieutenant General David Morrison inflicted on the Australian Army now threatens to diminish our war fighting capability.
I have had folk in the Tavern pointing the bone at Morrison before. He was and remains a disaster. He never in his long career saw battle. A true 'desk soldier'. But perhaps that is what is behind his white-anting. He dislikes real men; men with battle experience; men who have demonstrated courage and tenacity, loyalty and self-sacrifice. Morrison is a coward. 

And Spiteful. 
Soldiering determined by HER ?? 
Five years after the former Army chief and former Sex Discrimination Commissioner Liz Broderick launched a social engineering experiment aimed at stamping out the male “Anglo Saxon” warrior culture, the troops are unimpressed.
The top brass might have drunk the feminist Koolaid of “Pathway to Change” and its mutant offshoots, but most of the people they command are sceptical about gender fluidity, appeasement of radical Islam, and promotion by chromosome as payback for 116 years of military patriarchy.
“People just think it’s crap,” said one young officer.
To overcome such common sense thinking, diversity experts have designed a $30,000 program effectively to brainwash young leaders in the Army to become “champions of change” and stamp out the... 
“white Anglo-Saxon male” 
...culture they are told no longer has a place in the military.
In October, a handpicked group was taken to Sydney and Canberra for the “Junior Leaders Shaping Future Army”, and subjected to five-days of diversity indoctrination.
Back in my 'Junior' day we had the JCSS, the Jesus Christ Super Star programme. But look at that programme title. Have anyone of you noticed that the 'the' disappeared some time ago? It is no longer the Army, but just 'Army'.  I noticed this creeping distortion of language the other day when an advert for joining the local authority workforce came on. It showed 'ordinary' folk extolling the wonderful work of their local Council. Only they referred to 'Council', not 'the council'.  
On day one was a three-hour session from an imam explaining his “Islamic conversion testimony” and proselytising the benefits of Islam, according to one participant who took detailed notes.
The lecture went down so badly that a planned mosque visit on the schedule the next day was cancelled without explanation.
Effing amazing !!  An Imam. A friggin' mosque: where the imam was standing the day before telling his mob that they were going to take over the country and kill every infidel. !! And they invited him to lecture OUR troops !! The mind boggles.  

You cannot make this stuff up.

Robert Wood. Too knackered to hold a friggin' rifle

Gender diversity expert Professor Robert Wood
introduced the latest politically correct inanity, “unconscious bias”, and criticised the predominance of “Anglo-Saxon males” and the “banter culture” of the Army.
The next day Qantas diversity and inclusion manager Zak Hammer spruiked the airline’s same sex marriage campaign and LGBTI network for staff.
“Gender diversity no longer refers to male and female, because there are people within our community now who don’t identify with these,” one presenter told them.
In one exercise they were asked how they would “inclusively” manage a diversity scenario in which a digger under their command converts to Islam, requiring him to pray five times a day, eat halal food and fast at Ramadan.
“I felt like I was sitting in a North Korean indoctrination camp,” recalls one insider.
Recall too that a Catholic Major was dismissed  a year or two ago for refusing to go along with having soldiers in uniform marching alongside prancing nancies in the Gay Mardi Gras. 
“Concepts such as bias and unconscious bias have been constantly harped on to try and change the way we think and speak. 
The soldiers are hating it.”
“It was an extreme politically correct environment for people who are dead set into war fighting,” said another participant.
A psychologist classified the students as “champions” or “skeptics”. However, in the Army, “champ” is an insult. “It’s the worst thing you can call someone. It means you’re a d---head.”
The ADF’s diversity orthodoxy decries a military comprising mainly “males of Anglo-Australian background”, Christians and “third-generation-plus” Australian.
You do not have to be a rocket scientist or even the chap who lights the blue touch-paper to see where the military is going. Consigned to the past, to be forgotted.  
“Such a demographic profile is no longer desirable or sustainable”, says one of the ludicrous diversity reports which now clog the minds and in-trays of generals.
“The typical Defence hero is a hero in uniform from an Anglo-Australian background who performs acts of bravery in battle and models the values of courage and sacrifice... This type of hero is unnecessarily exclusive and works against the desire for Defence ‘to represent the community it serves’,” writes education academic Dr Elizabeth Thomson in her 2014 report: “Battling with words”.
If words were swords she would cut herself.  Why such 'education' half-wits as she and the psychologist spoken of above are allowed anywhere near a fighting unit beggars belief.
“Casual conversation in Defence is dominated by the kind of talk characteristic of the Aussie bloke... “Humour, banter, practical jokes and nicknaming are language practices (which) marginalise and exclude people (and must be) controlled”
If all this sounds frighteningly Orwellian, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Campbell. Disgrace. Cannot look  a proper man
 in the eye

Defence Force Recruiting is where crackpot theory first meets reality and Army chief Lt Gen Angus Campbell is frustrated with the slow progress to achieve his goal of doubling the proportion of women from 12 to 25 per cent.
In a speech to recruitment officers last August he criticised an unnamed dissident who had informed Defence Force Chief Mark Binskin’s “Gender Adviser”, Julie McKay, that he would resist diversity targets because he “needed to protect the Army from Canberra”.
Biskin. Another Bloody Disgrace
“You need to understand that I will have no humour if my directions are ignored,” Campbell told the recruiters. “The number one priority I have with respect to recruitment is increasing our diversity.”
Since Campbell’s rocket, Defence Force Recruiting has pulled out all stops to entice women into the Army. One whistleblower says they run “female only information sessions, female only fitness assessments, female only job assessment days, have a dedicated female Specialist Recruitment Team... (and) free fitness training.”
Female recruits can ask to be posted with friends and to a location of their choice, and are offered reduced periods of service — one year while men have to serve at least four.
“Defence Force Recruiting has stopped males joining particular jobs which are open only to females,” he says. 
“Infantry, artillery, key jobs. Where does it stop?”
There is a new program at Kapooka for female recruits too out of shape to pass basic fitness requirements of eight push ups, 45 sit ups, and 7.5 on the Beep test. The Army Pre-Conditioning Program for unfit women offers seven weeks of intensive physical training, yet by the end almost half still flunk the entry test.
Women comprise 12 per cent of the Army, yet Broderick’s goal is 35 per cent of senior positions to be filled by women, 
so females have a three times better chance of promotion.
Army hasn’t met recruitment goals for ten years, and the exodus of men disillusioned about their promotion prospects won’t help.
At a time when our Army is being called on to step up the war against Islamic State, the deleterious effect of social engineering is clear.
As one former soldier puts it: “They’re messing with our war-fighting DNA”.

Perhaps, with promotion prospects limited to women, the men should simply declare themselves to be women under the bizarre gender bender regime that is 'Army's' new ethos.  Perhaps some Lt Col with balls can order his troops onto the parade ground in tutus and have them mince around infront of some reviewing General.

Something has to be done to get rid of the current top brass who lack even basic decency, have no military Integrity, no balls and no place in the military.

I think even I need a pint now.

Pax.



Friday, February 24, 2017

War on Boys: Life in Ruins

From time to time some matter arises that just makes a chap's blood boil. The hand itches for the sword. There is much awfulness, crime, sheer wickedness for the 'authorities' as well as you and I to confront, yet all too often we see sheer SPITE being deployed against the hapless and the innocent. Ordinary, basically fine boys so often bear the brunt but get overlooked amid the other matters that command attention. Not overlooked by careerist SJWs though.

A somewhat silly girl, exploring her own budding sexuality sends photos of herself to a boy. He did not ask for her to do so. He had never even met her. He is faced with an horrendous punishment. She is not even taken aside for a sound talk. The photo was of such that anyone from 2 to 92 can see at anytime, published in women's magazines and sales brochures and on public display.

A picture like this, which I put here not out of purience: not to encourage perversion, is of a normal human girl wearing normal girl's clothing and taken from a normal brochure from a fashion house. You do not have to peer through some girl's window to see this.


You can see similar on any beach.

Lenore Skenazy was as incenced as any reasonable adult would be. Not at the photo, but at the reaction of the gratuitously spiteful prosecutor who is trying to destroy a young fellow.  she and I would agree with Jess, who said:
Why do prosecutors go after these cases? Why did the counselor feel the need to report it? Why do they think it’s okay that Zachary will likely never hold a decent job, be able to finish college, or be around his own children if he has them, and will add, unnecessarily, to the workload of already stretched police resources?
This has got to stop.
Despite having done nothing, the boy now says....
“I know I’d never do it again because I don’t want to go back to jail again in my life,” 
“And if nothing else, this has given me a fear of women.”
So to Lenore:
Teen Girl Sends Teen Boy 5 Sexts. 
His Choice: 350 Years in Prison, or Lifetime Registered as “Violent Sex Offender”

Zachary X, now 19, is in jail awaiting sentencing for five pictures his teenage girlfriend sent him of herself in her underwear. He faced a choice between a possible (though unlikely) maximum sentence of 350 years in prison, or lifetime on the sex offender registry as a “sexually violent offender”—even though he never met the girl in person. Here’s what happened.

About two years ago, when Zachary was a 17-year-old high school senior in Stafford County, VA, a girl in his computer club invited him over to visit. She introduced him to her younger sister, age 13. This younger sister told Zachary he reminded her of a friend: this friend, also a 13-year-old girl, shared Zachary’s love of dragons and videogames.
The two 13-year-olds started skyping Zachary together. Eventually Zachary and the dragon-lover struck up a online friendship, which developed into a online romance. By the summer, a month after Zachary turned 18, the girl sent him five pictures of herself in her underwear. 
Her face was not visible, nor were her private parts.

Even so, Zachary was arrested and charged with 20 felonies, including indecent liberties with a minor, using a computer to propose sex, and “child porn reproduce/transmit/sell,” even though he did not send or sell the pictures to anyone. All this, from five underwear pictures. If convicted, Zachary’s father told me, he faced a maximum sentence of 350 years.
Instead, he took a plea bargain. This is what prosecutors do: scare defendants into a deal. Zachary agreed to plead guilty to two counts of “indecent liberties with a minor.” For this, he will be registered as a violent sex offender for the rest of his life.
Yes, “violent”—even though he never met the girl in person.
Zachary’s dad wrote to the authorities asking about this, and got a letter back from the Virginia State Police reiterating that, “This conviction requires Zachary to register as a sexually violent offender.”
The letter added that in three years, “a violent sex offender or murderer” can petition to register less frequently than every three months.
“How do you like that?” said the dad in a phone conversation with me. 
“Same category as a murderer.”

As part of the plea, Zachary also agreed never to appeal. He will be sentenced on March 9. Until then, he remains in jail.
If this sounds like a punishment wildly out of whack with the crime, welcome to the world of teens, computers, and prosecutors who want to look tough on sex offenders. 
The girl did not wish to prosecute Zachary, according to his dad. He told me the pictures came to light because she had been having emotional issues, possibly due to her parents’ impending divorce. 
Eventually she was admitted to a mental health facility for treatment, and while there she revealed the relationship to a counselor. 
The counselor reported this to her mother, the police, or both (this part is unclear), leading the cops to execute a search warrant of Zachary’s electronic devices where they found the five photos and the chat logs.

Until that day, Zachary had never been suspected of, or charged with, any criminal activity other than one count of distracted driving, which he paid off with 15 hours of shelving library books. He was, at the time of his arrest, attending community college in computer graphics and delivering Domino’s Pizza. He was also, by his account, a virgin.
The family hired two psychologists to evaluate Zachary, which I read. One psychologist, Mike Fray, found him to be “not a physical threat to this girl or to any other young girls.” The other, Evan S. Nelson, summed up this case and what is wrong with all the cases Zachary’s story represents:
    ""This psychologist cannot count the number of adolescent sex offenders I have met who have a sense that what they are doing is ‘wrong’ but were ignorant that their conduct was criminal, let alone a felony, or actions which could put them on the Sex Offender Registry. In the teenage digital social world, if both parties want to talk about sex, that seems like ‘consent’ to them. Ignorance does not excuse this conduct, but it does help to explain why he did this, and to the degree that ignorance was an underlying cause of his crime, this problem can be easily fixed with education.""
Zachary’s not a sexual predator, in the psychologist’s view. He’s a teen who did something stupid—that he quite plausibly didn’t understand was illegal. And yet the state of Virginia, and in particular prosecutor Ryan Frank, has chosen to pretend that the only way to keep Zachary from feverishly preying on young flesh is to destroy his life.
Did something stupid? He did nothing. The girl was the initiator, the sender of photos. It was she who 'produced and transmitted' photos that the law does not allow anyone but a Publisher to send: 
and the publisher can put them on billboards!! 
This is so obviously flawed that Virginia Speaker of the House of Delegates William J. Howell has written a letter on Zachary’s behalf:

    ""Based on the information I have, I believe Zachary was unaware of the magnitude of impropriety in his behavior…
His behaviour?? 
It is my understanding that the local sheriff’s office performed a forensic analysis on Zachary’s computer and found zero incidents of pornography or trolling for females. While the aforementioned incident was highly inappropriate, it appears that there are no signs of general deviance in his character but rather immaturity and naivete….

    As my record indicates, I am certainly not soft on crime and I am not suggesting that Zachary be spared any consequence of his actions. That said, I do believe this may be more of an incident of adolescent immaturity and poor judgment than of inherently deviant behavior and thus may not warrant being placed on the sex offender registry.""
Outraged readers should root for two things. First, that this case prompts the Virginia legislature to review the laws that enable draconian persecutions like the one against Zachary.
Second, that Zachary be given a punishment that truly fits the “crime.” If you recall the case of another Zach—Zach Anderson, a 19-year-old who had sex with a girl he honestly believed was 17 (because she said so) but was actually 14—he was originally sentenced to 25 years on the sex offender registry. But after public outcry, he got two years’ probation instead, on a “diversion program.” A program like this is sometimes available for first-time offenders. It sounds far more reasonable. Or maybe Zachary could do some community service—like speaking at high school assemblies to warn students that what seems like consensual teenage shenanigans could land them on the registry for the rest of their lives.
“I know I’d never do it again because I don’t want to go back to jail again in my life,” Zachary told Nelson during his psychological evaluation. 
“And if nothing else, this has given me a fear of women.”
This is all too typical. The boy is punished for something minor and the girl is not.

Fear of women, though? 

That is the hidden objective of all this strife. Getting boys and men to distrust and fear women and what they can do.  

The 'game' is "Let's you and him fight".  The Law, the police, the courts are set upon the hapless man and he stands no chance. It is a psychotic game.

The 'counsellor' would be better employed assuaging that fear. It is prosecutorial morons one needs to fear. Silly, immature girls are simply par for the times and not to be extrapolated to all women.

It is all of a piece with the view that when a drunk man/boy has sex with a drunk woman/girl only he is held to be at fault. Not her. Only he is taking advantage, not her. Only he should gain consent, not her. Only he should be hounded and jailed for a 'crime', not her.


It has to stop.


Take a long drink.

Pax


Men's Work

All quiet in the Tavern today, except for Camille who dropped by.

We shared a few fine bevvies.


Now I must go to the cellars.

Funny how there are so few women in the dirty and difficult, physically dangerous jobs, but they clamor for the Boardroom - for 'equality'.

Hmmmm. Not funny. 

Pax

Thursday, February 23, 2017

The Protected Perverts.

There are two sorts of perverts. Those that are villified and those that are lauded.  OK, a third too: those that are simply ignored.  The past year and the past week has shown what the media can do to perverts. Priests and pederasts, paedophiles and poofters are all treated quite differently.  Child abusers come under particular scrutiny, depending on which other non-pervert factors get taken into decisive consideration. Really nasty - nay wicked - ones have been consistently ignored. 

We spent some time in the Tavern talking of the priests a week or two back.  A chap spoke of them, almost in passing, just yesterday. We shall come to Mr Kelso in a moment.   We also spoke of the complete ignoring of politician and public servant child abuse. But first.....


The past week has seen a media orgy of gluttony over a rather charismatic but flawed fellow, Milo by name. He recognises  and acknowledges his flaws but nonetheless calls out the flaws of others with some relish and a great deal of wit and barb. Were he a left-wing bigot he would be lauded by the media, but instead he is a bigot-slayer from a clearly right-wing position. 

Hense the efforts made by the media which is by and large left wing to bring him down. Seemingly the mass ranks of snowflakes with masks and clubs who attempt to shut down free-speech whenever he shows up at A.N. Other University had not succeeded. Hail stones were needed.

Milo is a homosexual with a penchant for grown men, as long as they are black. Clearly not a racist queer.  But as a homosexual the media can't touch him for that, as homosexual people are protected perverts. Nevertheless they gave it a go last week. Their hypocricy banner flew high. And while left wing politicians can endorse and advance paedophilia without media outrage, Milo who was abused as a youth has denied ever abusing underage boys himself. Even Mr Sulu, George Takei who has in the past revealed his own early experiences in excusing and lauditory terms does not get tarred with the Milo brush. But then Takei is a lefty. He is a protected pervert.

But the conversations only brought Milo in as an aside. The real meaty stuff was about Institutionalised abuse. 

No-one in the right mind could say that the Catholic Church advocates child abuse. As the original and leading christian institution it consistenly preaches goodness, kindness, love of ones neighbour, just as all christian institutions do. It and they do however have some - a very small proportion - of flawed people in their ranks. They are not the norm, and Mr Kelso who has been at the forefront of chasing them down is quick to acknowledge. 

He had some things to say about the one institution in Australia (and elsewhere) that gets quite ignored. Whether this is by accident or design, I cannot say for certain, but one way or another it is 'Protected'. Mr Kelso had this to say:

We are 50 hearings into the Royal Commission into Child Abuse......... 

without a single hearing into child abuse within the Islamic community of Australia.
With systemic abuse uncovered in a number of religious organisations across the country – some sections of the public are asking questions of Muslim institutions.

Scores of underage Muslim girls are married off to older men. Many are forced to join polygamous marriages. Worse still, some women within the Islamic faith are forced to endure genital mutilation. Some Middle Eastern groups find this practice culturally acceptable – it is even commonplace in some communities.

The thought of defenceless young girls being forced to have sex with grown men is horrifying.
For any female to have their clitoris sliced off with a sharp knife is impossible for most of us to imagine. Australians cannot condone this practice.
Why is female genital mutilation (FGM) happening in Australia?
FGM is, of course, illegal – and specifically outlawed by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is also illegal to take a child out of Australia to have the procedure.
Yet, genital mutilation is happening in our country.
In fact, instances of genital mutilation in Australia have doubled in the past year.
According to the ABC’s analysis of ABS and UNICEF data: “around 5,640 girls under the age of 15 may be in danger, and 1,100 girls are born every year to women who may have had FGM. This means that three girls a day are born in Australia who are at high risk of being subjected to FGM.”
A recent report conducted by researchers at the Australian Paediatric Surveillance Unit at Westmead Children’s Hospital in Sydney found evidence of children as young as five months old enduring genital mutilation procedures.

Whilst the practice of FGM is not a religious one, some Islamic communities persevere with the illegal procedure in Australia. In June 2016, Islamic sect community leader Shabbir Mohammedbhai Vaziri became the first person imprisoned for female genital mutilation in Australia.
So far, the ONLY one. 

FGM is a cultural practice in some regions within Malaysia, Indonesia, The Middle East and South Asia. We cannot allow FGM to happen in our country. The Royal Commission must use its powers to help make sure this horrific procedure never happens again on Australian shores.
Why hasn’t The Royal Commission investigated forced child marriage within the Muslim community?
Child welfare agencies have received 70 calls for help in the last two years.
Girls in Australia as young as nine have been sent overseas and forced to marry Muslim men.
The Australian Federal Police have investigated 69 complaints of child marriage in the last year alone.
Child marriage is outlawed in Australia.
State police forces have prosecuted Muslims participating in child marriage here.

The Royal Commission is an inquiry into ‘institutional responses to child sexual abuse’. It is not an Inquiry into child abuse in families. In order to classify as ‘institutional abuse’ and to attract the jurisdiction of the Royal Commission there must be an institutional connection.
Any child sexual abuse with the involvement or approval of an Islamic cleric would pass as institutional abuse.
Therefore the Royal Commission may investigate victim stories of underage child sex, forced child marriages, and genital mutilation of girls under 18.
So why hasn’t the Royal Commission done anything about this?

This is why.
 
The Christian Churches are hounded as though the 'systematic (as he calls it) incidents of child abuse were 'approved' or taught as a Christian thing to do.  It is not; they were not. But Muslim preachers advocate it, preach it, oblige it. It is little use to do even as Mr Kelso does, of offering protection by saying it is not 'Institutional' or not 'Muslim'.


Of course it is. 

But no Royal Commission has demanded an Immam front the court.

Why not?

Perhaps they have no interest in the 'whole truth'.

Bill had something to say about that:
Here are some truths you can bank on:
-Truth number one: Islam treats women as second class citizens.
-Truth number two: Much of the West treats Islam as a protected species.
-Truth number three: Much of the mainstream media will always rally to the defence of Islam.
We see this occurring every day. It is infuriating of course. The real mind-bender is the near universal silence of the leftists and the feminists whenever these cases of Islamic misogyny and sexism take place. Indeed, they will almost always defend Islam at all costs instead of denouncing it.

Meanwhile the media focuses on Milo.

I pulled a pint for Mr Kelso and for Bill for their points.

Pax










Saturday, February 18, 2017

Islam and Feminism

The ABC (the Oz one) got itself into a bit of strife the other evening. On its 'flagship' debate programme, Q & A, the host Tony Wossname was trapped between two Super-Victims who went for one anothers throats. One was a part-aborigine, a usually favoured minority group that the ABC just loves to promote for 'virtue-signalling' kudos: while the other was a rising star Islamic woman that they actually employ, for the same purpose. And it was a 'Compleat' chaos as it was over yet another favourite cause, Feminism.
For once the ABC had the entire public in stitches 
without a comedian in sight.
Do not talk to women who wear ice-creams on their heads.
We get Feminists in the Tavern from time to time. Often they behave and can be quite pleasant. Most women who claim to be feminists do so because it has been 'trendy' for such a long time and they lack a sound grasp of historical fact. I happily serve them drinks as their small ignorances are not a crime so long as the carpets stay dry. The many who do get thrown out are quite mad and often bad too.

But few are as batshyte mad as Yassmin Abdel-Magied who said:
"Islam to me is the most feminist religion: we got equal rights well before the Europeans. We don't take our husbands last names because we ain't their property. We were given the right to own land.

I can't recall hearing Jackie Lambie calling herself a feminist and any Muslim woman calling herself one would be too ludicrous for belief. But here one did just that. Talk about 'having it all' !! Delusion, fantasy, mendacity and sheer lying ability is included in 'all'. 

Islamists 'follow the law of the land they live in', eh? 
And she says it with a straight face !

Unfortunately there is ample proof that women are considered sub-human in Muslim countries and must never stand - or even sit - equal to men. As Mz Wynne, a Canadian State Premier discovered when she visited a mosque the other day.
She had to sit at the back, alone.

LIBERAL CANADIAN POLITICIAN VISITS MOSQUE TO PREACH EQUALITY, GETS PUT IN CORNER FOR BEING A WOMAN
Canadian liberal politician Kathleen Wynne’s recent visit to a Toronto mosque is making headlines – but probably not for the reasons she was hoping for.
Wynne – known in Canada for being an outspoken lesbian and feminist – reportedly visited the mosque in an effort to show solidarity with Canada’s Muslim community after an attacker shot and killed six people at a Mosque in Quebec.
Prior to her visit, according to The Toronto Star, Wynne addressed a crowd on the topic of immigration.
.......“We’re not different. We’re the same; except for indigenous peoples, every one of us came from somewhere else. We came from another country, another place, to build this open society.”
Unfortunately for Wynne, men at the mosque she visited later that day didn’t seem to share her view of equality.
According to LouderWithCrowder.com, as the men began praying, Wynne – the highest ranking politician in the province of Ontario – was made to sit in a back corner.
JihadWatch.org explains this with the following.
This was simply in accord with Islamic law, as several hadiths have Muhammad saying that if a woman is in front of a man as he is praying, this prayer is invalidated.
The site goes on to state, “Wynne didn’t complain about degradation of women. Nor did she, although gay, say a word about the statements of the imam at the mosque she visited.”
What statements, you ask? Well, according to a Toronto Sun article, Imam Wael Shehab said:
......."Homosexuality is a sinful act in Islam. I’d cite the following fatwa of Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Fiqh Council of North America.
..... "We should consider them people who get themselves engaged in a sinful act. We should deal with them in the same way we deal with any people who are involved in alcoholics, gambling or adultery. We should have deep repugnance to their acts and we must remind and warn them."
Interestingly enough, Wynne had no problem crying homophobia when people got upset about her attempts to revise Ontario’s sex ed curriculum to teach gender as a social construct.
If ridicule was enough we could say no more. But it is not enough.  An officially  'promoted' islamist woman raised and living in this the free-est nation in the world (Hah!)  can say whatever shyte she wishes  but what do women who live in Islamic countries say?

Let us listen. I am pleased that my friend Maryse Usher brought this in.
Fleeing Islam: My house was a jail, my brother murderous

Seeking asylum in the US: Moudi Aljohani  

Those who publicly renounce their religion often find themselves shunned by family and friends. Women from Saudi Arabia who renounce Islam find loved ones can morph into mortal enemies — with the law on their side. In defiance of a male guardianship system that places strict limits on their movements, a small band of Saudi women has fled to the West. They have adopted the label “ex-Saudi”, alongside “ex-Muslim”. 
Four shared their stories.

SARA

Fled to Britain in 2016

Four years ago I renounced Islam. In Saudi Arabia there is no freedom of religion so you cannot expose what you actually think, which is extremely hard, especially because I’m a woman. You have to wear a veil, you have to wear a niqab, you have to pray five times a day, you are forced to go to Mecca to do Umrah (pilgrimage). You have to live and pretend to be Muslim and it kind of caused an identity crisis. You know if you ever reveal anything you could end up in jail, for how long you don’t know, or you could lose your life from relatives.
I let my family know. I told them that I had left and that this is a decision that they should respect but I think that what they did is that they reported me as an escapee, which is an offence in Saudi Arabia. It’s only an offence for women, if they escape from a male guardian.

I received some threats from them. That’s when I cut all contact. Honour killings are very prevalent in the Middle East and what I have done is a dishonour not only to the family but to the tribe. I don’t see it as a dishonour but they do and the culture does.

Renouncing Islam is very difficult. You alter your life completely because basically you want to live, to seek refuge, somewhere else. It hasn’t been easy. You always have these doubts. You always try to look for a better life, but when I compare it (with life in Saudi Arabia) it is nothing, literally nothing: I was depressed all the time, I was very close to committing suicide. I don’t have any suicidal thoughts since I’ve been here and I’m very grateful.
I kind of find it appalling that people find sharia law is just. Especially to women, because fundamentally it’s not. It calls for polygamy, it permits having female slaves ... and if you receive an inheritance it should be half of the male, which is also unequal. It’s just not fathomable that people think it is equal.

MOUDI AJOHANI, 26

Seeking asylum in US 

I graduated from law school in Saudi Arabia. I studied the Saudi legal system and sharia law. I knew so much detail that I refused it: that’s how I can identify myself as an unbeliever. I studied the Koran since I was seven and also sharia, and every single human violation is justified by sharia. I cannot accept it because it’s just cruel, harsh laws that are violating women and minorities.
ABC Favoured, Yassmin.

I got a scholarship from the government. It took me two years to convince my family to let me study in the US. I am a woman: how can I just go and be independent and leave the house and go to another country? Eventually I did and I studied in the US for 1½ years. Then I went to visit them in Saudi and they just blocked me and kept me as a prisoner in my house and forced me to leave my studies. They said “you’re not going back to America, you’ve become too Americanised’’.

I was locked for almost eight months inside Saudi and the only way to leave the country is to try to gain their trust again, so for the last three months there I just tried to act and lie, to make them believe that I don’t really want to leave the country so they went more soft on me. I eventually succeeded with that so I told them I wanted to visit my high school friend in Bahrain (but flew to the US). I ran away almost three months ago now.
Stoned  to death for being pregnant

I tried to contact many organisations in the US and every organisation tried to refer me to somewhere else and I have, like, zero support. Not just financially, also emotional support, especially after many traumatic events that I’ve been through before in Saudi.

After I came out publicly I am getting tens, hundreds of stories daily from Saudi women. I knew that it’s bad but after getting these stories I realised I was wrong: it is worse than bad. It is terrible. The common things are a lot of sexual assault and domestic violence. The world doesn’t really talk about it or know that it’s going on, because it’s a very powerful and rich country and that’s how they influence other countries.

MARWA, 25

Escaped to the US in 2013 
I was raised as a girl who is going to bring shame to the family the minute they turn their backs. My family is so religiously fanatic that I was not allowed to leave the house except for college, and if I need to go to the supermarket or the hospital, I must be escorted by my mother, but sometimes even my mother is not enough. My room that I shared with my sisters had windows that were covered by black wrapping, so people outside can’t even see our shadows.
Saudi women need their male guardian, or a man in general, in their life — and not because she cannot do it by herself. No, the reason behind that is that Saudi law promotes this kind of relation of women to male guardians. She needs her guardian’s signature in every single step she might take in her life.

The only job my father could give me a permission for was being a teacher because teaching girls does not involve any kind of communication with men. That nine months was the hardest period of my life. I realised I mean nothing to my family and I have never been loved. How could they lock me up in their house for no reason but that the religion says so? Or people will talk bad about us if they see you going out a lot?
Wife beheaded inthe street. Cops watch.

I know very well that my problem is that I am a Saudi and the only way to solve this is by leaving everything behind and start from nothing. The plan was to have a summer vacation for the first time in my life outside the country. The minute our flight landed in the US and we got inside the airport, I took my veil off. I told them, “I am not good, I am not OK. I am not even a happy person. You impose on me every single thing in my life. Now it is time to put an end to this.”

HAJER ALANAZI, 23

Seeking asylum in Scotland. Left Saudi Arabia for Scotland with her family when she was 13, and returned briefly when she was 21

My male guardian was the man who was supposed to be taking care of everything so I had to take his permission for everything. My brother, who is one year older than me, he became my male guardian. He was quite bossy and controlling, but at the time I didn’t have a problem with Islam because it’s debatable whether this comes from Islam or whether it’s a cultural thing.
Mum and I started having a lot of conflicts and then I went back to Saudi Arabia to live with my father for five months, even though he really didn’t want me to. He was very bad and irresponsible and cruel, and so I think at that point I didn’t pray at all.

Leaving Islam was horrible. I mean it set me free, obviously, but I remember having all these questions about what is going to happen to me after I die.

It kind of frightened me because Islam was kind of more like an identity, so I felt like I lost everyone in my life and I couldn’t tell anyone except my boyfriend at the time.
I made a Twitter account, and somehow by accident I linked it to my phone number and I posted one tweet about questioning religion, that they are all incorrect and invalid.

My sister saw it and then she asked me, “Is this you?” I even swore by God it was not me but then she told my mum and it was a big, big problem.

I moved out because my life got threatened by my brother. He found out that I had a boyfriend. I was out at the time and my brother followed me to find out if I was meeting him and then I looked behind me and he was there. He told me that if I come home he’s going to slit my throat. I just took whatever I was wearing and my bag and went straight to the citizens advice bureau.
The tales are harrowing.


I sometimes hear people asking why Feminists do not march and protest the appalling treatment of women in Islamic countries.

Well we now know.

Islamic countries are best at being Feminist.




Yassmin says so. 

That woman needs all the Grace she can get.

Pax