Who is Running the Asylum

As in any Tavern, customers are likely to cast a broad eye over the mundane as well as the important. That eye is increasingly sceptical and often bemused by the antics engaged in by those who are supposedly in charge of important aspects of daily life.

A Landlord catches bits of conversations as he moves from one end of a long bar to the other. I keep an eye on things in a far better manner than many 'officials', and like my customers I am amazed at the way our civil society is deteriorating with the help of incompetence and Incompetents.

Here are four snatches of conversations. Draw conclusions as you will. As I will.

Let us look at who gets into our Universities these days. And just how they get to stay there sucking on the taxpayer teat.

We are all painfully aware that bright young men are being sidelined in the chase for University places by young woman being given 'preference' under 'affirmative action' that goes right through the education system. But just what does artificial 'empowerment' produce?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2595891/Law-student-cried-rape-11-times-university-exams-court-hears.html 

Trainee barrister cried rape 11 TIMES landing her boyfriend behind bars for 30 days in bid to get out of taking law exams, court hears 

• Rhiannon Brooker claimed she was raped and assaulted by Paul Fensome

• But when police investigated they found Mr Fensome had 'cast iron alibis' 

• All claims against him were dropped after detectives found no evidence 

• Experts said her injuries, which she showed to friends, were self-inflicted. 

• She sat four law exams and failed them, then missed eight more, court told 

• The 30-year-old claimed 'extenuating circumstances' for those she missed  

• Brooker withdrew the allegations and confirmed they were false, court told 

• She said she made up the claims because of 'unresolved feelings of anger' 

• Prosecutors told jurors Brooker has a 'need to be the centre of attention' 

• She denies 20 charges related to perverting the course of justice

" 'Onest, yer 'Onner'. I deny it even though I've admitted it. Don't make me angry"

Drinkers also had some 'unresolved feelings of anger' and asked just how is it she is considered future-fit to even consider a career in Law, representing people?

(Just to make it clear....None of my customers falsely accused anyone of rape despite their unresolved feelings of anger).

How is it that she was permitted to continue studying despite clear evidence that she just could not grasp the subject matter. She failed her exams. Repeatedly. She missed exams. Repeatedly.

Hello !!

'Empowering' women can be taken too far. Some women (like some men) are simply not worth the effort 'empowering', and certainly not from your pocket and mine.

Thankfully, although in this instance her 'word' was simply taken as Gospel as is so often the case with false accusations of rape, someone actually looked for corroboration. We are all used to the mantra that.....

'Women never lie about Rape'. 

Yeah. Pull the other one.   I hope her lawyer does not try that well worn defence in Court.

And what of the hapless boyfriend? How come he spent time in jail AT ALL.

Just what genius decided that injustice? Are we not innocent until proven guilty?

Just who is going to provide compensation to the chap? You?

As sure as Hell is hot, it won't be her or the police people who banged him up on her accusation doing the paying from their pockets. It is fortunate and perhaps a slight mitigation that they actually investigated at all.

No. If any compensation is forthcoming for the chap, it will be the abused Taxpayer footing the bill. And you know what that means.

Less money to spend in the Tavern. That's what.

And to show that this Tavern does not get 'gender' biased in its views, another group were chatting about an old lady similarly accused by a vicious thug.... of being a vicious thug!

Justice Turned on its Head.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597387/The-granny-branded-racist-judge-traveller-living-green-belt-land-justice-turned-head.html 

Former Sunday School teacher Jose Hampson’s fall from grace happened virtually overnight. The 78-year-old widow was reduced from highly-respected ‘stalwart of the community’ to complete pariah in the blink of an eye. 

The everyday righteous person is fair game these days.

One minute the church-going, grandmother-of-three was a popular toyshop owner of 50 years’ standing in the Lancashire town of Chorley; the next, some people she’d known for decades were crossing the road to avoid her. 

Where once the local newspaper proudly carried smiling photos of Jose receiving an award from the mayor for ‘Making Chorley Smile’, now it carried the banner headline  ‘Racism Shame of Local Shopkeeper’. 

Even the local police force, with whom Jose had worked closely and amicably during her 20 years as honourable secretary of the Chamber of Trade,.....  

suddenly seemed willing to believe the worst of her. 

Why? Because a family of 'travellers' who’d illegally established themselves on a patch of Green Belt land they’d bought near Jose’s converted barn complained that this mild-mannered OAP — locally renowned for her ‘tact and sensitivity’ — had launched a torrent of foul-mouthed racist abuse calling them ‘dirty f****** gypos’. 

When this accusation was made against her 11 months ago, officers wasted little time finger-printing and DNA-testing. 

So. Get this right. An outlandish complaint is made and the police simply accept it and take DNA and fingerprints?  Again, where is this 'innocent until proven guilty' idea?

Questioned under oath at a police station, Jose placed a hand on a Bible and insisted time and again it was simply not true, but in May last year she was charged with racially aggravated harassment.  

Just how on earth can the Police reach such a conclusion, enough to charge and send the lady to court? Have they no brains?

Of course!  They were dealing with a complaint from a 'protected' class. And one against a God-loving old lady.

I have spoken recently about 'Hate Speech' always being used against good people by bad people.

Accusing someone of hate-speech when they have spoken no such thing

IS HATE SPEECH.

‘The allegations against me were so ridiculous, I really thought the case would be laughed out of court,’ says Josie, whose good name was finally restored this week when her conviction was quashed on appeal.

‘I was shaking with disbelief and almost fainted with shock when I was found guilty. There were no independent witnesses, it was their word against mine and yet they were believed without a shred of real evidence against me. 

Mrs Hampson was recovering from a shoulder operation and suffered from spinal problems, rendering her incapable of leaping from a car, let alone waving her arms around. She stands 5ft tall and weighs just 8st. 

In contrast, burly Mr Linfoot is involved with a local boxing club, yet it was he who allegedly felt so upset and intimidated by the tiny OAP that he lodged a complaint with the police.

It was his version of events that the district judge believed.

Just what sort of brain does that 'district judge' have? Is he as looney as the rape-accusing woman in the previous conversation?  Did he get a free pass at his law exams? How many times did he fail?

Do not expect hate-speech charges to be brought against the thug who made the false complaint though.

Although the judgment has now been overturned and her reputation restored, Jose still struggles to make any sense of her ordeal. 

After what happened to Jose, will residents now feel too intimidated to oppose this travellers’ site, fearing they might also end up in the dock accused of racism? 

‘It is very sad if local residents are deprived a voice because they fear being falsely branded racists. This has nothing to do with race, it’s about whether we allow anyone to set up home wherever they like on Green Belt land without permission which would be setting a worrying precedent,’ says Jose. 

‘I care about British justice more than anything,  

but it seems using the word racist allows certain people to open doors and put innocent people in the dock.’

Talking of loonies. And back to the ladies to show our impartiality.... The Australian newspaper carried a tale the other day which excited a bit of comment...

A medical student who suffers an “extreme” fear of exams ...

 .....has won the right to continue her degree after a tribunal ruled the university discriminated against her because of her mental health disability.  

The woman, who has a borderline personality disorder and bipolar disorder, had failed to sit written exams and avoided some clinical assessments, particularly in paediatrics and surgery, because of ‘‘extreme anxiety in relation to sitting exams [and] performance assessments’’.  

Yes, not just a student by one wanting to be a medical Doctor. !!

The University of Newcastle declined to grant the woman an extension of time to complete her Bachelor of Medicine after she had only completed three-and-a-half years of course work in an eight-year period, the maximum time allowed.  

A Great Place to Learn 

Quite right too. Good for the University. But why did it take them so long?

How many bright young people missed out on the extra study places she took up each year?

The Dean of Medicine, Professor Ian Symonds, felt there was a significant risk that she would not be able to safely work as a doctor, even if she ultimately managed to graduate, because of her psychiatric illnesses.  

But the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal upheld the woman’s claim

...that the university discriminated against her on the grounds of disability and directed the university to grant her an 18-month extension…

The dreaded, misused, calumnious, mendacious accusation of 'Discrimination'!

More Hate - Speech.

(The Tribunal are mostly Lawyers, of course)

The Tribunal heard she ... had a panic attack while driving to an exam and couldn’t bring herself to attend. Her psychiatrist, Dr Elizabeth O’Brien, said the woman suffered “an intense fear of failure and the shame of this at times paralyses her ability to apply herself consistently to her studies’’ 

 This young woman has been diagnosed as having a Borderline Personality Disorder. With all the compassion I might muster for the mentally ill, I still would likely side with the ....

Patients who would likey suffer a similar 'fear of her failure'.

The mind just boggles. Here is a Tribunal supposedly staffed by intelligent professionals. But what sort of judgment do they reach?

They fall for the 'Discrimination' card being played by an obvious cheat and liar.

Several chaps at the bar called for refills. They needed it.


But wait ! Another conversation pointed to complete lunacy from the bureaucracy

Father-of-three Wassim Assafiri, 35, has been rejected for citizenship a third time because of his criminal history…  

But isn't this a good decision though, I heard someone ask.

He was on Centrelink benefits when arrested in 2005 after a bank officer noticed the driver’s licence he was using to send $200,000 to Lebanon was false…

Red flag right there. How come he was claiming 'benefits' but had $200,000 to send off-shore?

Assafiri arrived­ in Australia from Lebanon in July 2002, with wife Ghazwa Baltaji, a Lebanese-born Australian citizen. He was granted residency in March 2005.  

In 2006 he was jailed for three years and nine months — reduced on appeal to one year and five months — after pleading guilty to ..

three counts of money laundering, possessing money believed to be the proceeds of crime and making 19 false statements…  

Ms Toohey said “at some point” after being released from jail in February 2008, he was assessed by Centrelink as eligible for a disability support pension on the grounds of depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms  

“although he did not meet the diagnostic criteria for this condition"…

 He is still on a disability support pension — which begins at $577.40 a fortnight — while working part-time as a driver with a kitchen company and doing voluntary work at a mosque.

Depressed and Anxious and Post-Traumatic Stress
Pull the other one as you pull the 'chute, mate.

The mind continues its boggely way onward.

This is just the sort of fellow that 'asylum seeker supporters' want here.

Andrew Bolt asks, quite reasonably...

Who let him in?  

Who failed to throw him out?  

Who gave him benefits the first time, when he was fit and able to indulge in criminal activity?  

Who gave him benefits this time, when he is fit and able to work as a truck driver and volunteer - and did not meet the eligibility criteria?  

Whose interests are being protected here?

To which I would add, just who are these lunatics that get into public positions where they can make such ludicrous decisions? 

 

 

 

OK. I will pull a few more pints for you. Just sit a while and weep.

 

Pax