Charity Theft.

The Tavern dispenses its fine sustenance for a modest fee. Most pay nothing at all but a simple contribution to the conversation. We, and they, are Charitable and actually think (shock, horror!) that Charity begins at home. Indeed, what I and my devoted staff and all (OK, mostly all, perhaps) of the customers call charity is personal and are happy to lend a hand and hand over a buck to the needy, personally.

The Churches have always attracted charitable people. The mandate that forms the basis of action in Christian Churches, started by the Catholic Church, includes Charity. Love they neighbour. The Good Samaritan etc. You know it as well as I do. Crikey, even atheists know that.

So how are we churchy folk doing?

Several customers raised the issue and questioned just what 'Charity' is these days.

It was a BIG discussion, so take a seat and fill your glass.

I had a lady phone me up just a few minutes ago. She was from the Red Cross. Now we all recognise that laudable Institution, and almost automatically accede to requests for a 'small donation'. I did not. And for good reason. Her reason for asking was fine enough..."we help the poor"....but do they?

Do any, many, most people actually know what happens to their donation?

Allison Shelly raised a red flag.

‘Where’s the $500 million?’ 

Red Cross promises houses for 130,000 Haitians, ’builds only 6’

An investigation has found that the American Red Cross wasted $500 million in its bid to help Haiti, underperformed in its programs, and then tried to cover it up. 

Despite the NGO’s celebrated success, insider accounts point to failures.

http://rt.com/usa/264933-red-cross-haiti-money/ 

When a devastating earthquake struck the Western hemisphere’s poorest country in 2010, the American Red Cross was one of the organizations at the forefront of the humanitarian effort to rebuild it a year later, launching a multi-million-dollar effort.

The main program – LAMIKA (a Creole acronym for ‘A Better Life in My Neighborhood’) – was to build hundreds of permanent homes to house some 130,000 people living in abject poverty after the quake.

Now, in 2015, the Port-au-Prince neighborhood of Campeche is as dilapidated as ever, with hardly any new buildings, trash strewn around, animals walking the streets, and people enduring sub-standard conditions in self-made shacks.

“Many residents live in shacks made of rusty sheet metal, without access to drinkable water, electricity or basic sanitation. When it rains, their homes flood and residents bail out mud and water,” an introduction to a report says.

An investigation by NPR and ProPublica gained access to “confidential memos, emails from worried top officers, and accounts of a dozen frustrated and disappointed insiders” familiar with how the NGO broke its promises, misspent millions of dollars, and then issued self-congratulatory progress statements.

The ensuing report reveals very different results to the ones outlined in CEO Gail McGovern’s project plan for Haiti, which promised “brand new communities” that would make “donors proud” and “help the people in Haiti.” She claimed her experience had made her more “flexible during emergencies.”

The investigation pointed to a series of systematic blunders and untruths surrounding the Haiti effort, however.

The Red Cross’s internal proposal put the number of houses to be built at 700 by January 2013. 

In reality, only six houses were actually constructed.

“We asked the Red Cross to show us around its projects in Haiti so we could see the results of its work. It declined,” the report reads.

Part of the reason behind the failure is that the Red Cross “didn’t have the know-how” and “they had no development experience,” former employees said.

In some cases, the NGO would give millions to other groups. Poor supervision and lack of proper oversight allowed these subcontractors to rack up inordinate bills for management and overhead costs.

Another issue that could have hindered the Red Cross’s work in Haiti is trouble with the country’s “dysfunctional” land title system.

Other groups, which the report does not name, had similar problems but, according to the data, “ultimately built 9,000 homes compared to the Red Cross’s six.”

Some $140,000 was spent on housing, food, and R&R for a foreign project manager, who also enjoyed four paid leaves a year. That comes to more than $100,000 more than would have been spent on a local equivalent.

“A lot of money was spent on those people who were not Haitian, who had nothing to do with Haiti. The money was just going back to the United States,” one Haitian who coordinated expat housing for the Red Cross confessed.

There are people who are quite skilled in 'helping'. Many do a fine job but frankly there are somewho do it and line their own pockets at the same time. 

Some do it ('help') in order to line their own pockets. 

Some don't even do it, but line their own pockets. 

Christopher Hope put his oar in the water.....

30 charity chiefs paid more than £100,000

The leaders of some of the biggest charities risk bringing “the wider charitable world into disrepute” by taking large pay rises while donations are falling, according to the regulator.

One has to do a bit of exchange rate calculation to put that UKP100k in proper context. The average UK wage is around 25k. 

Some of the executives were paid more than the Prime Minister’s £142,500 a year in 2013, which is used by ministers as a Whitehall high water mark.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10224104/30-charity-chiefs-paid-more-than-100000.html 

William Shawcross, the chairman of the Charity Commission, warned that charities were risking their reputations if they were not being seen to get a grip on boardroom excess.

He told The Daily Telegraph: “It is not for the commission to tell charities how much they should pay their executives. That is a matter for their trustees.

“However, in these difficult times, when many charities are experiencing shortfalls, trustees should consider whether very high salaries are really appropriate, and fair to both the donors and the taxpayers who fund charities.

“Disproportionate salaries risk bringing organisations and the wider charitable world into disrepute.”

The analysis also shows these charities are heavily reliant on public funds, having received more than £1.1billion of public money over the past three years from a range of sources, including the Government, the European Union, United Nations and councils.

And therein lies another problem. 

Is 'charity donation' enforced through taxes and just what role does the government take away from you, the donor? 

Despite receiving these large amounts of money, the charities are not subject to the same level of scrutiny or accountability as government departments or quangos.

"Ah, but", I hear a voice from the corner say. " Us Cafolics ain't like that". 

Oh? 

The Catholic Church is the Most Prolific Charitable Organisation in the entire World.

The problem with that is that it was never meant to be.

Sure, it's role is to be charitable and to promote the idea of being charitable, and of course, actions lead the way, but...... what of the Prime Directive? Bringing the Word. What has happened to that?

What does happen to that when Catholic Charity becomes an Industry?

I have railed before about the Catholic Church taking taxpayer monies from Government to 'provide services'.... needed services to be sure.... but accepting all the nasty anti-Catholic, anti-Christian strings attached. Not just anti-Catholic but policies of a nanny, socialist, interfering sort as well. Like affirmative action; anti-smoking; 'tolerance' and 'diversity' etc. Things that have nothing to do with housing the destitute, feeding the hungry or tending to the sick, lame  - and increasingly, at the Government's mandate, 'comforting' the downright lazy. Most govenment policies these days actually forbid this religion or that actively prozletizing or even displaying a crucifix. 

But that 'external' opression is just one part of the problem. It is the internal corruption that is even more of a concern.

Michael Hichborn revealed some uncomfortable truths.

Charity as Industry

How the Church abandoned its mandate and outsourced its mission

Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Matthew 28:18-20

The Great Commission, which is the primary act and purpose of the Catholic Church, has never changed. The conversion of peoples and nations to the Teachings of Our Blessed Lord is the charge given to the Church, and everything done by the Church is done to this specific end. 

And anything done without this specific end is empty and without purpose.

 http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/cchd/charity-as-industry/ 

Why, therefore, in recent years have the great acts of charity which have always belonged to the Church, been handed over to those who do not seek first the conversion of sinners? 

Until the 20th century, the Catholic Church had worked through religious orders to provide aid to the poor, health care to the sick, and education to the ignorant. 

Catholic hospitals were filled with nuns and priests well educated in the healing arts, and the cost of health care was quite low. 

Catholic school classrooms were led by nuns and priests, and even the poorest kids in the neighborhood could afford a world-class education there. 

And the care of the world’s poorest was done by missionaries who sought first the salvation of the souls they served, while also working to provide food, housing and clothing … and it didn’t cost billions of dollars to do it.

The first charitable institution to be industrialized was healthcare. 

One by one, Catholic hospitals went from being staffed by priests and nuns to private doctors with families to house and feed, cars to drive, and college tuitions to pay. As a result, health care costs went up, and the Church’s influence went down. 

Suddenly, what had been a corporal work of mercy was now an industry.

 Catholic education soon took a hit, as nuns and priests were replaced by private teachers and administrators, who also required salaries for their families. 

And as Catholic education became more of an industry, the influence of the Church declined there as well.

That the works of charity are now an industry is completely undeniable. Catholic charitable organizations compete with other organizations for large government grants, and in the name of helping the poor, executives in these organizations are raking in the cash. 

For instance, the tax form 990 for fiscal year 2014 for Catholic Charities USA shows the top eight paid employees all making over six figures each. 

In fact, for working a logged 35 hours per week, 

Fr. Larry Snyder made $381,080 

and his Chief Operating Officer raked in $412,439.

That’s two individuals working to help the poor, pulling in nearly half-a-million dollars EACH. 

It has to be asked, just what does a priest do with $381,000?  

He had better be giving most to charity!!  

All told, with benefits included, the top eight executives at Catholic Charities USA account for $2,027,680.

It’s no different at Catholic Relief Services. 

The latest tax form 990 shows that CRS’s president, Dr. Carolyn Woo, is earning $445,426 in salary and benefits in order to do “charitable” work.

Dr Woo. Not at all worried by the female 'Pay-Gap'. 

And the obscene salaries paid to the top eight of CRS’s executive leadership comes to $2,180,935. In fact, 27.5% of the Rice Bowl collection for 2014 (see page 18 of CRS’s 2014 Annual Report) paid the salaries and benefits of these eight individuals ALONE. 

That’s one of every three dollars collected from pew-sitting Catholics across the country going to pay the salaries and benefits of eight people … all in the name of helping the poor.

Worse than executives at Catholic charitable organizations getting rich in the name of helping the poor, much of the actual work is being outsourced to organizations who have no interest in maintaining the integrity of Catholic moral teaching. 

For example, the Catholic Campaign for Human Development doesn’t actually do ANY of its own work; all it does is dispense grants to community organizing groups (many of whom are acting in direct opposition to Catholic moral teaching) who do the work CCHD claims it does. 

Catholic Relief Services applies for and obtains large government grants that require it to pass some of the money along to organizations 

that are attacking the Gospel of Life. 

In 2012, CRS provided $64.65 million to organizations that are themselves dispensing contraception, committing abortions and performing sterilizations.

And while all of this is going on, the Mandate of the Church has taken a back seat. 

In September of 2014, CRS’s Vice-President for Government Relations and Advocacy Bill O’Keefe said in a CNN interview, “We assist people of all backgrounds and religions and we do not attempt to engage in discussions of faith.” He added, “We’re proud of that. We like to say that we assist everybody because we’re Catholic, we don’t assist people to become Catholic.” 

This statement is not dissimilar from what CRS’s Chief Operating Officer Sean Callahan said to Michael Hichborn in a November 2012 meeting. Callahan told Hichborn that CRS works to convert people’s minds to how to treat people and how to do things, but not to the Catholic Faith. When Hichborn reminded Mr. Callahan that Catholics have an obligation to proclaim the Gospel and bring all souls to Christ, his response was to equate feeding people and preaching the Gospel with “bribing the poor.”

We shouldn’t be surprised, however, that the charitable works of the Catholic Church have turned to industry, and thereby abandoned the evangelistic mark of the Church. 

Pope Paul VI, in his 1975 apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi, predicted this very thing. In paragraph 32, he said:

 We must not ignore the fact that many, even generous Christians who are sensitive to the dramatic questions involved in the problem of liberation, in their wish to commit the Church to the liberation effort are frequently tempted to reduce her mission to the dimensions of a simply temporal project. 

They would reduce her aims to a man-centered goal; the salvation of which she is the messenger would be reduced to material well-being. Her activity, forgetful of all spiritual and religious preoccupation, would become initiatives of the political or social order. But if this were so, the Church would lose her fundamental meaning. Her message of liberation would no longer have any originality and would easily be open to monopolization and manipulation by ideological systems and political parties. She would have no more authority to proclaim freedom as in the name of God. This is why we have wished to emphasize, in the same address at the opening of the Synod, “the need to restate clearly the specifically religious finality of evangelization. This latter would lose its reason for existence if it were to diverge from the religious axis that guides it: the kingdom of God, before anything else, in its fully theological meaning….”

The meaning of the word “charity” is Love. There is no love in mere philanthropy, and certainly not in an industry masquerading as a charity. 

As the Venerable Fulton J. Sheen would say, “If souls are not saved, nothing is saved.” CRS, CCHD, and Catholic Charities USA are Catholic in name, but do very little (if anything) to bring souls to Christ. 

If the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is truly interested in reducing poverty throughout the world, the poverty it must begin with is 

the poverty of the soul. 

So, drink deep of the Grace of God.

Without it we are sliding further down into the Abyss.

Be Charitable. Please. But YOU do the Charitable works. 

Otherwise Charity is being stolen from you by greedy, unscrupulous people and you simply give away your ability to Do Good.

Beams and Motes. Remember?


Pax.

The Day London Bridge Collapsed

Bridges are not just structures that 'enable' us to traverse obstacles: they also serve as metaphors. They are a mark of mankind's development and civilisation, and have been since man first walked upon the earth.  I have it on good speculative authority that Adam had to build a bridge within a month of leaving Eden.

He probably got the idea of 'bridge' from the Nature that had been provided for his benefit.  

I was reminded by a lady who came into the Tavern the other day; a chap, (not Adam) she told us, was stranded when London Bridge fell down. Not the famous bridge in London but its natural namesake on the south-west coast of Victoria on the big Island to the north of us.

Victoria has a stunning coastline; varied, wild and long. The 'jewel in the crown' was once an inaccessible place until the soldiers who returned from WW1 were set the task of building The Great Ocean Road. It opened up and 'civilised' the region and has since allowed millions to enjoy its beauty.

The 12 Apostles are a feature of that landscape. A beach and sea-scape and cliff-scape. There nature has eroded the land to produce rock formations of outstanding beauty.  Not, of course, that it looked like that in eons past, as eons have a way of changing both landscapes and civilisations. 

Big lumps and towers of rock are not what they once were. They used to be attached to the land but the sea eroded them through.  What were headlands became eroded through to form bridges and the most famous one along that coast was London Bridge.

'Twas many years ago, just over 25 in fact, that not quite so old King Amfortas the Tavern-Keeper took his Queen on a trip to see the Whales. (That was back when there was a queen you understand.  She has long since left the Palace we shared. 'Twas before the Tavern). 

I knew of a spot where one could take a helicopter out to see the whales much closer-up than from the whale watching spots on-shore.

On the way back we stopped to look out over London Bridge and contemplated walking out upon it to its seaward edge. But time was pressing and so we left after a cuppa and a short stroll. 

Two hours later it fell down.

Whew !

Not so fortunate was the chap who was stranded: Dave Darrington. He was on it at the time. But fortune did not desert him entirely and he did not crash down to the seas below along with the several thousand tons of rock.

Margaret Burin told us about it.

25 years since London Bridge came falling down

One well known children's nursery rhyme refers to the damaged structure across the River Thames in London.

The London Bridge, an appropriately named tourist site at Port Campbell on the south-west Victorian coast, fell while Dave Darrington and his cousin were standing on it.

"I thought I saw a little bit fall off and then a little bit more fell off," he said.

"And then all of a sudden the whole lot just fell down in front of our eyes."

Mr Darrington recalls hearing a huge crack as thousands of tonnes of rock plummeted into the ocean, separating them from the mainland.

"It was like a big old tree falling - just a massive crack," he said.

"We were just waiting for a splash to wash us off but thank goodness the wind was going the other way."

Shortly after, other visitors noticed the pair on the newly formed island.

It was three hours before they were airlifted by helicopter to safety.

Now a tour guide in Kakadu National Park, Mr Darrington re-visited the site for the first time in 2013 as part of a documentary filmed by National Geographic.

He says it is incredible to be a part of the Great Ocean Road's history.

"To see it 24 years later was absolutely amazing," he said.

Now, another arch threatens collapse

 

For thousands of years, the limestone and sandstone cliffs along this coastline have been shifting.

One of Victoria's most popular scenic views, the Twelve Apostles, was permanently altered in 2005 when a 45 metre stack near the visitor platform collapsed.

Five years ago, one of nearby Three Sisters formations crumbled away.

Darren Shiell is part of a team of Parks Victoria rangers that monitors coastal erosion along the Shipwreck Coast.

He says another popular natural formation is at risk of caving in.

"In the last few months at the site that's known as The Arch, a chunk of rock has fallen away from the cliff-face into the ocean," he said.

"It's probably not going to be too much longer before the arch itself perhaps collapses."

While the changing shape of these wave-sculpted cliffs largely comes down to nature, Parks Victoria is part of a master plan to address human impacts along the Great Ocean Road.

In partnership with Corangamite Shire, Moyne Shire and Tourism Victoria, the project is looking at a long-term plan to protect the 28km stretch of coast from Princetown to Boat Bay, as well as enhancing the local economy through sustainable tourism.

Mr Shiell says the master plan proposes shifting some car parks and viewing platforms away from the cliff-face, including the visitor area at Gibson Steps.

"It's quite a popular site and it's quite a small car park and it's right on the edge of the coast," he said.

The proposal also suggests new trails and upgraded look-outs - including at London Bridge - to meet the expectations of foreign visitors.

As I said, bridges are natural, man-made and metaphorical.  The man-made are metaphors for civilisation.

Adam was stranded and mankind along with him. Christ became a bridge for us and upon Him we were able to change the landscape of 'civilisation'. 

We were doing quite well with His help, defying the forces of the eroding tides and storms. We had found a certain Freedom, even a little Justice amid the tribulations. And a Way to forgiveness. But....

But now the sea of corruption threatens to cause our civilisation to collapse. 

That civilisation is made not of Rock but of sandstone and limestone. The limestone is the crushed bones of millions of our ancestors who have struggled against the darkness, the storms, the corruptions of the soul. They built what we enjoy ... and are so easily letting slip through our fingers like sand.

Erode a our civil world a little bit here, a little bit there: a same-sex marriage impost, bakers and florists fined and bankrupted: an abortion-on-demand law leading to millions of babies a year being killed for 'lifestyle' reasons, and doctors and nurses who refuse to kill a baby in the womb and anyone else speaking out in a 'bubble-zone' get fined $9750 and get a year in jail: single parents (that is, mothers mainly) raising waving and foaming and twerking kids throwing stones and molotov cocktails and looting stores: and all of a sudden..... collapse. 

It will be sudden, quick and devastating when our civilisation falls. 

Soon there will just be a few Towers on the beach.  The Church is one such. Perhaps it will soon be the only one left.  It is after all the only part of our civilisation that was established on a Rock.

Make sure you are on it. 

The seas have marauding pirates. Just as once were on the Barbary Coast. Fall in and they will not rescue you.

It is time for some more Apostles.

Drink deep of Grace, not sea water.

Pax.

WAR

It is the 6th of June, the Anniversary of D-Day, the re-invasion of Europe in 1944. 

“You are about to embark upon the Great Crusade, toward which we have striven these many months. 

The eyes of the world are upon you. 

The hope and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere 

march with you.”

— Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower

It marked the 'beginning of the End' of the greatest, most destructive war in history.

Rather than 'celebrate' in the Tavern as we have for many years, we look today at War and it's 'simple' human cost. Not just WW2 but all wars before and since.

It’s difficult to conceptualize excessively large numbers, particularly when they pertain to human tragedies. But the highly-engaging animated data visualization below, made by and narrated by Neil Halloran makes WWII-related deaths all too comprehensible.

The 15-minute video (it’s well worth the time to watch), titled “The Fallen of World War II,” is divided into three sections. 

The first is an analysis of soldier fatalities by nation, while the second tackles civilian deaths (including the Holocaust). 

The final section provides a fascinating and illuminating overarching perspective of WWII in the context of previous conflicts and those that followed.

Soldiers and civilians died in the millions during the 6 years of the war. It was one of the shortest wars in history, but by far the most costly. 

99% of the soldiers - 

that is, those in uniform - 

were MEN.

Among the more jaw-dropping moments in the video — of which there are many — are the charts showing total Soviet losses during the war (~ 6 minutes into the video). Many of those loses can be attributed to the professional state of the Wehrmacht and its superior application of tank warfare. But these staggering loses can also be attributed to Josef Stalin, who purged many of his top generals before the war and who had no qualms about throwing a seemingly endless supply of men into the Nazi meat-grinder.

China did the same.


The visualizations showing civilian losses is equally terrifying, especially as it pertains to Poland whose civilians (arguably) suffered the most during the 6-year conflict.

Click on the link that follows as it is not a 'You Tube' video, but Vimeo.

Watch, weep, perhaps take heart. 

But Remember.

I shall pull the pints.

http://io9.com/this-animated-data-visualization-of-world-war-ii-fatali-1709065880

Now, the question remains. Is war a thing of the past? 

It has been thought so before. After the 30 Years War, for instance. And after the Hundred Years War. 

Since WW2 we have had Korea, Vietnam and a handful of small wars, mostly quite localised.  Have we done yet?

I am not an optimist.

 Drink deep of Grace.

There is the prophesy of Armageddon yet.

Until then,....

Pax.

Want to go to Jail? It's EASY.

Few want to. Not one person in the Tavern raised a hand to the question. And it was not one asked by an advert that has caused a small squall in the harbour in Hillary's Village. But the question just has to be a sub-text, shirley?

In a society where even a 'look' can be considered assault and having a young woman wait for 45 minutes while a chap finds his car can result in his arrest on Rape charges, one has to wonder just where the cosmetics industry keeps its collective brain.

And just what do you have to do to stay out of jail?

Avoid Jail Bait and totally disregard the message in this advert for a start !!

Yeah, sure, lady.
You think we are as stupid as you are?

Students from a Melbourne girls school have started a campaign against an Australian cosmetics company over an ad campaign they say indirectly supports sexual assault against women.

Indeed, a kiss, even when demanded, can be considered sexual assault. Against women, of course. Not against men. Even a kick to the goolies is not considered sexual assault if a woman does it to a man.  That would be considered 'humour'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3106762/Just-kiss-don-t-ask-Students-girls-school-start-campaign-against-vulgar-sexist-lipstick-ad-tells-men-kiss-girls-without-consent.html

Alexandria Mourelatos, a 19-year-old former student at Fintona Girls' School in Balwyn, and current students started a Change.org petition asking Klara Cosmetics to take down a lipstick ad that features the tagline 'Just kiss me don't ask'.

Ms Mourelatos said the company's 'abhorrent' tag lines – which also include 'Be passionate and leave no evidence' – promoted beauty in an irresponsible way.

'The ads essentially tell impressionable young girls (10-12) that you're only attractive if someone can't help but launch at you and kiss you without consent,' she said in her change.org post.

Hmmmm. Just impressionable young girls of 10-12? So, girls of 18 are not going to be impressed? How about a 25 year old female teacher of 10-12 year old boys?  Will she get the message?

'It encourages them to define female attractiveness in the most vulgar way possible.

Have you ever asked yourself just what 'attractiveness' there is in painting your face to give a false impression? One can (and all too often many do) take 'enhancement' too far.

A spokeswoman for the school said the campaign was being led by the school co-captain Smita who had encouraged all staff and students to sign the petition - which has received more than 13,000 signatures.

Klara Cosmetics marketing director Daniel Jacob said the ad was nine months old and the company did not aim to target teenage girls with its marketing. 'Our target audience ranges from 21 to 45 year old women who are 

independent, bold and want to make something of themselves.

He does not spell out just what that something is, but I can suggest a term. 

Jail Bait. 

Mr Jacob said the ad was intended to promote the brand's 'kiss proof' lipstick.

He said the ad was nine months old and the company did not aim to target teenage girls with its marketing.

'Saying it's a new ad is quite misleading, it's a false declaration, and [teenage girls] are not our target market at all,' Mr Jacob told Daily Mail Australia.

'Our target audience ranges from 21 to 45 year old women who are independent, bold and want to make something of themselves.

I see. Of course. Young teen girls are not to look.  

I notice too that it is to be a 'criminal offence' to procure sex by false pretences.

 Only for men of course.

Procurement of woman by false pretences
(1)It is an offence for a person to procure a woman, by false pretences or false representations, to have unlawful sexual intercourse in any part of the world.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/4-5/69/body/enacted

That's  'Patriarchy' for you.

Women 'procure' sex by whatever means she wishes including pretending to be far more physically attractive than she is in 'reality'. There is no criminal sanction. Even little girls are taught the 'art' of cosmetics from an early age.

But even forbidding teenage girls to look at an advert or take in its message of 'how to be a grown-up modern, bold, independant woman who wants to make something of herself by inviting a man to spend a few years in jail block 5 with the other rapists', is not enough.

Young girls do need to be told from time to time that being a modern, bold, independant woman means arranging your own taxi home and not calumnising a man all the way to a jail cell.

Presumably the mother of Comfort Yinusa didn't pass on this gem of advice and she didn't get to see an advert about it. Perhaps there should be such adverts.

A London Underground worker is facing jail for accusing an accountant she met at a nightclub of rape after he left her waiting for a lift home outside McDonald's for 45 minutes.

Hah! Facing jail? Not a chance. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3106047/London-Underground-worker-falsely-accused-accountant-met-nightclub-rape-left-waiting-lift-home-outside-McDonalds-45-minutes.html

Comfort Yinusa, 23, from Tilbury, Essex, became angry after the victim - who cannot be named - was late returning to give her a lift back to her hotel following a night out.

You won't get Comfort here.

When he finally arrived to pick her up from outside the fast food restaurant in Liverpool Street, central London, she stormed off and called her boyfriend Kenneth Umezie to pick her up instead.

The boyfriend needs some advice too, it seems. Take steps, young man. Frigging big ones as fast as your legs can go, away. 

On the drive home, she then told her partner that she had been raped by the accountant and sexually assaulted by his friend.  She later called 999 to report the alleged incidents and the two men were arrested and held in a cell for at least 14 hours before being released on bail.

It took five further weeks of investigations - including for forensic evidence, mobile phone data and CCTV footage to be studied - for Yinusa's allegations to be proved false.  However, she refused to admit her lies until just before the trial at the Old Bailey last month. 

Heather Stangoe, prosecuting, said: 'She left with him and his friend. She had been offered a lift home.  'All three went to McDonald's and they ordered some food and CCTV showed them there laughing at the tills.'

The accountant, who was carrying Yinusa's bag, left her with his friend while he went to collect his car - only to realise he could not remember where he had parked.

Yinusa told police that she was sexually assaulted by the friend while they waited outside McDonald's and the Lord Aberconway pub.

She claimed that when the accountant returned, he took off his trousers and raped her while his friend watched.

Miss Stangoe said: 'She said she did not know whether he was using a condom.'

Officers described her as 'coherent and calm' while she was making the allegation via the 999 call.

Her boyfriend, who she has since split from, told police that she called him and asked him to pick her up in the early hours of the morning.

Just a small pedantic point here. 'Who she has since split from' should have been written, 'from whom she has since split'.  It will leave the split infinitives to someone else. Remember this is modern journalism.

Miss Stangoe said: 'It seems there was a bit of an atmosphere when he arrived. CCTV shows them having a remonstration.

'He says that after about a minute of her being in the car she told him she had been raped.  'She told him she had made several attempts to contact the police but had been unsuccessful. She was with him when she made the call to 999.'

Yinusa was taken to the Haven centre – a specialist establishment for people who have been sexually assaulted - at 8.30am and surprised staff by falling asleep while waiting to be examined.

She also insisted that she did not want to be examined and instead wanted to go home.

The court also heard how when she was driven back to the scene, which had been cordoned off by police, she claimed she could not remember where exactly the attack happened.

Yinusa also failed to turn up for a police video interview and instead sent a text message to officers which said: 'I can't make it, please can I call you later, I'm sorry for wasting your time.'  She then called police on November 1, 2013 to say she did not want to go ahead with the complaint.

At a meeting three days later, Yinusa told police that the rape happened after they left McDonald's but did not know where. Two weeks later, she backtracked again and said she did not want to go ahead with the allegation.

Yinusa was finally arrested on December 2, 2013 and confronted with the CCTV and phone evidence proving she had lied. However, she made no comment during her police interview.

The following day, the victim and his friend were told they would not be charged, having spent five weeks on bail.  Miss Stangoe said that the incident 'had affected him very severely'.  

Both men had to provide intimate samples, surrender their clothing and undergo a medical examination. They were kept in custody for over 14 hours before being released on bail.

Two police officers and two paramedics were called to meet Yinusa after the 999 call and CCTV from 16 locations had to be trawled through by investigators.  Miss Stangoe said that the complaint wasted more than 100 hours of police time and the forensic investigations alone cost £3,216.

Yinusa's barrister Neville Rudston described her as 'desperate' and said: 'It is popularly seen as a monstrous act. The enormity of the consequences should have been clear. The reality is they weren't.  'It was an outburst of anger, albeit she had a great deal to be angry about, it's an outburst.

A great deal to be angry about ?? What? Waiting for someone else to fetch and carry for her??? 

'She says it and then she was stuck with it, she didn't have the robustness or strength to say 'no I take it back' and that's why it turned out as badly as it did.'

Please make a note of this when next you venture into the London Underground. Lying about why the train is late is not all their employees can do.

The Underground is a favourite spot for adverts too. Perhaps some of these could well do with display.

Meanwhile for the sane, the moral and the wannabe sane and moral, have a drink of something that goes your soul some good.

Teens can drink safely here too.

Pax

Words that offend

Sitting in the bar surrounded by admirers the other day (including m'self, of course) my friend Lana was telling an anecdote.  This is getting to be quite a dangerous pastime these days, out there in Hillary's Village, where any number of words that have been used frequently in the past are now either not acceptible, 'offensive' or actually turn knees to water.

This anecdote alluded to the latter.

I saw a comment from an elderly Englishman on a thread some time ago.

I remembered it yesterday when I came across a feminist claiming that someone called her a bitch. She said it was the worst thing anybody had ever said to her and it had left her feeling “demeaned” and “powerless” and “intimidated” ever since. 

I laughed out loud when I realised that this comment had been made to her by someone she didn’t know on the internet.

The man recalled a conversation he had had with his grandfather when he had been a boy, and here’s how it went. 

“Granddad what’s the worst thing anybody ever said to you?” 

The old man thought carefully for a few seconds.

“Fix bayonets” came the reply, “and I pray to God nobody ever says that to you.”

http://antimisandry.com/rant-room/58579.htm#post358882 

My goodness. Indeed. 

A fine custommer here, J J Ray collects instances of 'words that offend' and he joined in with some examples.

 http://snorphty.blogspot.com.au/

UK: "Sweaty" is a bad word?

Controversial television personality Katie Hopkins has been cleared by police following a series of tweets that referred to Scots as 'sweaty jocks'. 

The Sun columnist made the comments after Pauline Cafferkey, from Cambuslang, in South Lanarkshire, contracted Ebola.

Ms Cafferkey - who had volunteered with Save the Children at a treatment centre in Kerry Town, in Sierra Leone - was diagnosed with the deadly virus on December 29, after returning to Glasgow via London.

Remarking on the case, Ms Hopkins wrote on Twitter: 'Sending us Ebola bombs in the form of sweaty Glaswegians just isn't cricket.'

Another tweet said: 'Glaswegian ebola patient moved to London's Royal Free Hospital. Not so independent when it matters most are we jocksville?' 

Within hours of the post, James Gilchrist from Glasgow had launched a petition calling for Ms Hopkins to be arrested on the internet.

I am sure a small finger-wag would do, but heck James Gilchrist has his opinion.

UK:  Must not celebrate colonial times

Another self-righteous attempt to erase history

The elite Oxford Union has been accused of 'unforgivable' racism after its bar devised a new 'colonial comeback' cocktail advertised on posters showing a slave in chains.

The decision by the world's most famous debating society, which was discussing whether Britain owes former colonies reparations, has caused widespread revulsion.

Images of the poster advertising the £2.50 mix of brandy, peach schnapps and lemonade, have spread worldwide. 

The incident led to an apology by the Union, whose alumni include Boris Johnson and Tony Blair.

But students at the university are not satisfied claiming it reflects 'deeper' racism and there were protests in the chamber during last night's debate.

Annie Teriba, founder of Oxford’s Black Students’ Union said afterwards: 'Apparently, it's okay to kick back in the union bar relishing in a 'Colonial comeback' cocktail. I am horrified that the Union thinks it's okay to trivialise centuries of oppression and racist violence in the form of a refreshing drink'.

I have better drink suggestions but would not describe any as 'Unforgivable Racism'.  But hey, maybe I should make one.

Australia: "Girly" is a bad word

Another "incorrect" footballer.  In dissatisfaction with his own team's performance, he called it "girly"

OLLIE Wines has come under fire on social media for describing Port Adelaide’s first quarter effort against Melbourne as “girly”.

 

The flippant remark came during a half-time interview and sparked outrage on Twitter with fans accusing the 20-year-old of being sexist.

“To be honest, that first quarter of football was pretty pathetic by us,” Wines said. “Playing a bit girly and not hitting the ball hard and winning the contested ball.”

Of course, describing a football side as a 'Bunch of Sheilas' in their tight little shorts, is quite in order.

And then there are those occasions where no words are needed at all, to set some neurotic harpy off.

USA: A sexist statue?

Feminists can tell what a statue is saying, apparently.  That must be pretty close to mental illness.  It's neurotic at least

A photo of a sculpture on a Texas college campus has gone viral after it was shared on Twitter and labeled as 'mansplaining'.

Cathy de la Cruz, 34, posted a tweet with the photo of the sculpture, Classmates, writing the caption '#Mansplaining The Statue' after she received the photo from her friend last week.

Hernandez, 34, who attended a high school with de la Cruz that is operated by the Texas university, was taking a teacher's certification test when she saw the sculpture.

She wrote in an email to Women in the World that the sculpture 'just screamed mansplaining'.

Mansplaining is described as when a man tells a woman, while in a condescending manner, how to do something she already knows how to do or tells her she is wrong about something she is actually right about, according to ScienceBlogs.

Nah. Never. Pictures may be better than a thousand words but statues usually say very little. And take notice that the 'complainant' is about to become a teacher !! 

At least she could have complained that he was holding his legs apart. Apparantly that is so offensive to some people that they have fainting fits.

 No doubt it will soon be illegal for a chap to sit at all, let alone have 'parts' that closed legs tend to squash.

Now, that drink. Let me have a ponder. Perhaps you might suggest a mixture.

Pax

Show Someone You Care

Have you ever had that feeling, retained past lunchtime from the first time about ten seconds after you woke up?  The urgent desire. The absolute need to tell the Government to 'shove it'?

There is such a demand these days. Twas ever thus, but perhaps never before have so many wanted to do so much to so few as today.

And they are 'few'.  It only takes the taking down of a few to send all the minions running.

And what can we do?

I am reminded of Pollock.

Young Alan had a wonderful adventure.

He woke up thoroughly 'annoyed' one day and I was reminded of his epic 'shove it' while leafing through some old diaries. By lunchtime he was really annoyed.

The Hawker Hunter Tower Bridge incident 

occurred on 5 April 1968 when an RAF Hawker Hunter pilot performed unauthorised low flying through Tower Bridge, London, and others, to mark the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Royal Air Force and as a demonstration against MOD (Air) for not recognising it.

It IS a very tasty target, after all, and 'demos' are so boring these days.

In the 1960s, the British defence industry saw a shifting emphasis from manned aircraft towards guided missiles, originating from the 1957 Defence White Paper by British Defence Minister Duncan Sandys. The British aircraft industry had slipped into general decline and morale in the aerial services of the British armed forces was low. 

Flight Lieutenant Alan Pollock, a flight commander in No. 1(F) Squadron RAF, was further displeased that no aerial displays had been planned to mark the RAF's fiftieth anniversary.

On 1 April 1968, Pollock and other members of No. 1 Sqn took part in anniversary leaflet raids on other RAF stations and on 4 April visited Tangmere, where they performed a display.

On 5 April 1968 Pollock decided on his own initiative to mark the occasion of the RAF anniversary with an unauthorised display. His flight left the soon-to-be-closed RAF Tangmere, Sussex to return to RAF West Raynham in Norfolk; a route that took them over London. 

Immediately after take-off,Pollock left the flight and flew low level. Having "beaten up" Dunsfold Aerodrome (Hawker's home airfield), he then took his Hawker Hunter FGA.9 (XF442) ground-attack, single-seater jet fighter over London at low level, circled the Houses of Parliament three times as a demonstration against Prime Minister Harold Wilson's government, dipped his wings over the Royal Air Force Memorial on the Embankment and finally flew under the top span of Tower Bridge. 

He later wrote of the decision to fly through Tower Bridge:

Until this very instant I'd had absolutely no idea that, of course, Tower Bridge would be there. It was easy enough to fly over it, but the idea of flying through the spans suddenly struck me. I had just ten seconds to grapple with the seductive proposition which few ground attack pilots of any nationality could have resisted. My brain started racing to reach a decision. Years of fast low-level strike flying made the decision simple . . .

Knowing that he was likely to be stripped of his flying status as a result of this display, he proceeded to "beat up" several airfields (Wattisham, Lakenheath and Marham) in inverted flight at an altitude of about 200 feet en route to his base at RAF West Raynham, where, within the hour, he was formally arrested by one Flying Officer Roger Gilpin.

Although other pilots had flown under the upper span of Tower Bridge, Pollock was the first to do so in a jet aircraft.

By the Lord Harry, you have to like the lad.

In the immediate aftermath of the incident his unit was posted to North Africa without him while he remained on a charge. He was subsequently invalided out of the RAF on medical grounds. This avoided a court martial and the embarrassment to the government of Pollock giving a reason for his stunt and garnering public support.

Others, too have noted his almost unique achievement .... This from

http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/hunter/history.php

In 1968 it was the RAF's 50th birthday, yet the top brass did not see fit to mark this with any flypast, choosing instead for mere parades on the ground. Many RAF personnel were less than impressed and one Flt Lt Alan Pollock of 1(F) Squadron decided to mark the occasion in style - first with toilet-roll bombing missions against rival squadrons, and then on April 5th, while suffering from the beginnings of pneumonia which no doubt had some affect on his decision making processes, he flew his Hunter over London and at the last second decided to fly under the top span of Tower Bridge! 

Knowing of the consequences of his unauthorised trip, he proceeded to beat up several airfields and landed to meet his fate. It would be the end of his RAF career (he went on to run a successful exporting company), with political influences making sure he was treated incredibly unfairly - thrown out of the RAF with no right to appeal, no court martial at which he could present his case, medical evidence ignored, unable to meet with his superiors, etc. 

It took until 1982 for his case to be fully heard, and only then was he exonerated. 

Coincidentally, that same year the Hunter he had flown (XF442, which had been sold to the Chilean Air Force) was written off in an accident.

I don't have a handy Hunter. Neither do you more's the like. But we must find our ways to show the buggers just how far they have pushed us. 

And 'demos' by people with decent haircuts are called-for.


Paxfully, of course.

After a few pints of Grace. .... to keep the pneumonia away.

The Climate IS Changing

Yes, winter is upon us at the Tavern and the days as well as the nights are cooler. Cold evenings in most pubs. And a cold wind is blowing through the Public Opinion too regarding Climate Change.

The several decades-long scare about the world's climate changing so that everyone can have more of the sort of 

'Beautiful one day, Perfect the next', 

that Queenslanders enjoy and seem to thrive in, has recieved more than enough critique and scoffing to put any other political policy out of the door.  

But it hasn't.

Many of the Tavern's customers enjoy the sunshine and would welcome a few more degrees. Some dropped by to tell.

One can take a more rational approach and since all of the scandals and data-mugging that have been going on since the University of East Anglia fiasco several good tries have been made.

Bjorn Lomborg, for example published his 'Skeptical Environmentalist' quite a few years back and has built up a sound reputation in Europe. He has a fine Research Centre and his string of Asscoiates include Nobel Prize winners.

Bit of a wrong choice of words by his publisher.

When he offered to provide his and his colleagues' expertise to Oz he met with fierce resistance from the usual suspects, all 'Tolerance' and' Diversity' claimants, of course, but not really as open to enquiry as one would hope.

This below from a pay-walled 'Australian'.

Uni backs out of $4m Lomborg-led research unit

The University of Western Australia is backing out of its commitment to establish an Australian Consensus Centre with $4 million of Commonwealth funds, announcing the strength of opposition from its own staff to the involvement of controversial academic Bjorn Lomborg made the venture impossible.

The Abbott government had committed to the funding over four years, about one-third of the cost of the centre.

In a statement of “deep regret” on the university’s website tonight, UWA vice chancellor Paul Johnson said he believed the centre would deliver robust, evidence-based knowledge and advice and the involvement of Professor Lomborg was appropriate.

Perhaps if he had been a Muslim.....

“Despite all this, there remains strong opposition to the Centre. Whilst I respect the right of staff to express their views on this matter, as all universities should be places for open and honest sharing and discussion of ideas, in this case, it has placed the University in a difficult position,” he said.

“Therefore, it is with great regret and disappointment that I have formed the view that the events of the past few weeks places the Centre in an untenable position as it lacks the support needed across the University and the broader academic community to meet its contractual obligations and deliver value for money for Australian taxpayers.”

Professor Lomborg has been labelled a climate sceptic by the Greens and his involvement with the centre was opposed by the UWA student guild and by academics within the UWA Business School where the centre as to be established.

Professor Lomborg accepts the science of human-induced climate change

He has attracted controversy because he argues the risks of climate change have been overstated and that problems such as malaria deserve priority.

Lomborg has been accused of cherrypicking data to understate the threat of climate change, most recently saying the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report was alarmist citing the IPCC’s Representative Concentration Pathway 2.6 degrees, a measure for projected emissions, which predicts as little as a 1-degree rise by the end of the century.

However, that scenario is based on governments implementing greatly enhanced emissions reduction policies - such as widespread carbon pricing - for which Lomborg has argued against.

Lomborg actually believes in Climate Change, but not 'enough', it seems. There is far too much money and far too many academic reputations at stake to permit even a hint of skepticism or seeking a 'diverse' approach. They would not 'Tolerate' him. 

Now another even more high-powered voice has come along. Rafe Champion, who occupies a seat at the Catallaxian table in the P&B told us of a new book that a senior member of Obama's own Environmental Protection Agency has just finished writing.

Alan Carlin, “Environmentalism Gone Mad”. 

A must read

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2015/05/31/alan-carlin-environmentalism-gone-mad-a-must-read/

In case people missed this link in a recent Roundup, and the reference to Carlin's book that went with it, I read most of the book on the train to Melbourne and it is a stunning contribution to the climate science debate. He retired a few years ago and this book is the first fruits of that time spent out of the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 

He has a bundle of credentials that make him very hard to sideline.

He took on first rate academic training in physical science to doctoral level (Caltech) and training in economics (MIT) with publications in both economics and climate/energy science. As a lifelong environmentalist (and active camper, hiker and white water rafter) he was in the Sierra Club in the 1960s as an activist and Chapter Chairman. 

He always thought that there could be win/win outcomes for the environment and economic development if scientific and economic analysis and good will came together at the negotiating table. He applied those principles in 39 years as a manager and senior analyst at EPA.

After the turn of the century (and the millennium) he began serious investigation of the idea that the release of carbon dioxide by modern civilization will lead to catastrophic global warming. He brought to bear his scientific knowledge, his skills in economic analysis and his decades of experience in the bureaucratic procedures of the EPA. 

In recent times he observed how the EPA (loaded with environmental activists) took up President Obama's agenda to decarbonize (and impoverish) the US with an impending tsunami of regulations on CO2, ozone and any other emissions that might be controlled to hamstring energy intensive industries.

This is his account of his personal journey of discovery that concluded that the claims are based on invalid science and are being pushed by a far left wing conspiracy that tolerates no skepticism, that their solution will result in disastrous price increases and reduced reliability for electricity in the US, as it already has in Western Europe, and reductions in economic growth and living standards around the world, particularly for the less affluent.

One of his most telling criticisms of the alarmists is the way they do not practice the scientific method of rigorous testing (attempted falsification) of their hypothesis. 

As Richard Feynman explained, channeling Karl Popper, science works by guessing at a law, then deducing what you should be able to observe, then checking to see whether the expected actually happens. And if it does not happen, the guess is problematic or suspect and you need to rethink, refine, revise and re-test. 

In contrast, the climate alarmists practice "confirmation bias", taking account of anything that appears to support their position but refusing to take seriously evidence that points the other way. That is most apparent in the response to the 18 year halt to warming and the way that the dozens of models used to predict ongoing warming have been clearly falsified but are still used to frighten the horses and the politicians and the gullible mass media.

The book has many strengths: his clear commitment to protecting the environment (in reasonable ways), his combination of qualifications in hard science and economics, his experienced at the sharp end of analysis and his intimate exposure to the ever-increasing unreality of the warming fundamentalists. Plus his wide-ranging knowledge of the full range of possible explanations of climate change, notably solar activity and several other influences apart from CO2 which much more adequately account for the modest variations in global temperature of recent times.

As he looks at the way the climate debate has gone, driven by tens of billions of dollars of government funds, 

fed to "normal" (opportunistic but docile and uncritical) climate scientists and passed on to the pubic by scientifically illiterate journalists in the mass media, he wonders whether this should be seen as a false alarm, a hoax or an outright scam of epic dimensions. 

Maybe a bit of all three.

Meanwhile  that has not stopped President Obama, of course, who has told the American Coastguard's up-and-comers that they are on the front line of defence.



As for the rest of us, a nice cool pint is in order.

Or even a wee dram.


Pax.