How was it for you?

An old question that can be applied to quite a few circumstances. " How was it for you?".  Not that the obvious circumstance is usual in the Tavern unless between loving couples who come down for a drink from their private rooms.


It is a question asked by Carolyn Moynihan just today. The magic didn't happen for her when she was confronted by the artificial bit of social engineering thrust upon us in New Zealand.

Carolyn is usually to be found working hard at Mercatornet, a splendid source of conversation and fine wine. I am always pleased when some of their folk pop in for a bevvie.

This is what she had to say:

Hi there King Amfortas, our Beloved and Revered Tavern Keeper. Give me a glass of pure kindness and I will tell you what I saw.

(Actually, I made that bit up. What she DID say though was....)

A man with a woman holding a baby boy stepped off a plane in Wellington, New Zealand, on Monday to a rock-star welcome. British royals Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, and nine-month-old Prince George arrived for a visit, the first state visit anywhere for the youngest "Cambridge".  

Polls indicate that monarchism here is likely to die a natural death and that New Zealand will become a republic, but that doesn't stop Kiwis going gaga over a glamorous princess, Diana's eldest son, and their little Prince Charming.

It is the same in Oz, of course. The ubiquitous 'Polls' also engineered to try to convince disbelieving skeptics that the Lefty plans for getting rid of tradition - in this case the Monarchy - is desired by the majority.

Tell a lie once and only the gullible are likely to believe. Keep telling it, and tell everyone that everyone else thinks it, and you have a lefty tactic.

A man, a woman and a baby - a man and a woman married to each other, with a child who is the fruit of their committed, mutual self-giving.  

This is the most natural thing in human society, 

....if not in the world, and how beautiful it looks to us, whether the wife and mother is svelte and dressed in bespoke outfits, or a little rounder and softer and dressed in what a young family can afford off the rack; whether the dad has royal blood or is just a salt-of-the-earth honest bloke.

Now, speaking of honesty, I have to say that I cannot feel the same or think the same about the picture presented by two gay men and the baby girl they brought to a playdate with Prince George on Tuesday.

The Royal New Zealand Plunket Society, a Kiwi institution which looks after the health of young children, was entrusted with the task of inviting 11 representative sets of parents with babies around George's age to the intimate event, and I suppose it was inevitable, given our legislature's embrace of same-sex marriage last year, that gay parenting would be endorsed in this way.

Representative? Of what?

The homosexual proportion is - every time there is a Census - about 3%. The proportion of those who 'adopt' are less than 5% of the 3%. That is so tiny a group to 'represent' that one wonders which identifiable group was left out.

The media, instructed not to "make an issue of it", naturally gave the trio a special mention in the news.  

They were two decent looking men with a healthy looking baby girl, one of them bouncing her mother-like in his arms,  

but no, the image did not work the intended magic for me.  

It made me sad and indignant.  

Why should this little child be deprived of her mother?  

The same goes for two women with a little boy, or indeed two of either sex with a child of either sex.

A child NEEDS a Mother and a Father.

No 'ifs', no 'buts'.

It is tragic when a child loses a parent, to illness or accident or desertion, but why oh why is our society Hell-Bent on creating tragedy where it did not occur?

Whose interests does it serve?

Nothing those men can do for her can replace the intimate bond between a mother and baby, or the uniquely maternal love for a child of whatever age. Is one of the men her natural father?  

If not she is doubly orphaned, and doubly wronged.  

She has been treated as an object of adult desire, not as a subject with the right to exist in a natural family.

Prince William at a state reception last night spoke of New Zealanders' warm-heartedness, generosity, progressiveness and modesty.  

I'm afraid one of things is subverting the others, at the expense of our children.

Carolyn was especially keen on having some of my customers here sample her offerings at Mercatornet.  And I do not mind her speaking of them.

Good folk help one another.

The same spirit of "improving" on nature drives scientific experiments such as three-parent embryos, as Jill Burcham highlights in her intriguing exegesis of a Nathaniel Hawthorne tragic story of obsession, "Rappacini's Daughter".  

Oh, but, the designer embryos are for the greater good of society, the scientists say.

Well, for an answer to that line of argument, read Michael Cook's article on horrendous experiments carried out by Japanese doctors at Harbin, during World War II - and the way they were excused.  

Once we start seeing other human beings as means to an end there is no limit to the evil any of us can do, and justify.
 

http://www.mercatornet.com/

I thoroughly recommend readers here pop over to Mercatornet from time to time. Take my good wishes with you. They are a fine bunch.

Pax.

Equality: What a difference an 'e' makes.

I do not believe in Equality. In my many decades here on Earth I have never observed it 'in the full'. It appears to me to be un-Natural. It seems rare and confined, where found, to the 'Particular'.

Yet voices shout out for it and Laws get rammed through to 'force' it, 'in General', upon us.

One shudders to think just how far some will take it.

I own and operate a Tavern. I serve. I employ people to serve. I am enjoined by my Supplier to serve Fine Ale from the shoulder-flask of Angels. It is an unequal relationship all through. It is based on Quality, not Equality. Anyone can aspire to owning my fine establishment, but no-one can 'force' it and remain consistent with free choice and free will .... in which we ARE all equal.

That is NOT to say I do not accept and desire 'Equality before the Law' with everyone judged equally by a 'standard'.  It is NOT to say that I do not accept that all people are equally valuable, especially in the eyes of God. At least, we start out that way.

It also NOT to say that all people should be able, as best they can, to gain for themselves a reasonable life, AND that some people may need some help. But to be forced to help such lesser-able is to do a serious harm to free-will and Charity.

Our society has made it a 'sacred duty' to Force people to 'cause' equality to be brought about, and it has done serious damage to our Quality in so doing.

 

The sinister forces that swirl through humanity take expression in different ways in different periods.

Entire 'demographic' sections of society get artificial 'privilege' that automatically denies the same to others. Deliberately. Unthinkingly. Mindlessly. Affirmative Action is one means. Denigration of other sections, such as the 'Married' and unborn babies is another.



Unless you dumb-down the wise and laud hate.

Anthony Daniels was in the bar giving a similar view, so I will let him put it more clearly.

A More Sinister Equality

by Theodore Dalrymple  

Patriotic effusions, whosever they may be, seldom please citizens of other nations, because they are generally so self-congratulatory; and self-congratulation, which is no doubt an inescapable part of the human condition, is best kept to oneself even when justified.  

Occasional outbursts may be acceptable, as after a triumph in a just war—but just wars are themselves infrequent events in human history. Ignorance of and disdain for others are often the corollaries of noisy patriotism; it was with good reason that Doctor Johnson said that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Quite often it is the first refuge as well.  

On the other hand, some kind of collective self-belief is necessary, for otherwise effort would be in vain and achievement impossible.  

A country completely without patriotism, even if this state remained implicit rather than explicit, would be an unhappy place. As in most things human, a balance must be struck.  

I mention this because I recently came across a description of Americanism by Theodore Roosevelt. Among American virtues, he said, were  

respect for the rights of others; 

freedom of opinion; religious tolerance;  

equality under the law; and  

“at least a measurable quality of opportunity.”  

This last was important: Roosevelt wisely did not employ a shibboleth of our time, equality of opportunity. 

“Those who believe in equality of opportunity must want, if they take the idea seriously, to make the world not only just but fair.”

The addition of an 'e' to 'quality',  

makes a world of shameful difference.

Roosevelt was not a political philosopher, and no doubt his statement can be criticized for its inconsistencies (but so can the statements of most political philosophers).  

He says that “all privileges based on wealth are un-American,” by which he must have meant legally inscribed privileges, for in the imperfect, sublunary world wealth will always have, or buy, its privileges.  

For example, an accused wealthy man will generally have a better legal team to defend him than an impoverished accused man. And Roosevelt added that “all enmity to honest men merely because they are wealthy” is equally un-American; in which case one can only surmise that either America is fast becoming un-American, or no wealthy man in America is honest.  

But to return to the question of opportunity versus equality of opportunity: Roosevelt can hardly have failed to notice that, as the scion of a rich family, his opportunities were greater than those of the majority of his fellow citizens.  

On the other hand, he made the most of them by fierce efforts in many different fields of endeavor; indeed, he was famously in favor of the strenuous rather than the easeful life.  

He did not content himself with frittering away his inherited fortune as many a young sprig has done (and as I think I might well have done, had I had a fortune to fritter).  

Nor was Roosevelt the kind of man to deny anyone his chance merely because he was not well-born.  

Opportunity, yes, then;  

equality of opportunity, no.  

But to oppose the notion of equality of opportunity these days is to be thought some kind of monstrous ultramontane reactionary, a Metternich or Nicholas I, who wants by means of repression to preserve the status quo in amber.  

Members of young audiences to which I have spoken have almost fainted with shock when I have said that I not only did not believe in equality of opportunity, but to the contrary found the very idea sinister in the extreme, and much worse than mere egalitarianism of outcome.  

To say to a young audience today that equality of opportunity is a thoroughly vicious idea is like shouting “God does not exist and Mohammed was not his prophet” at the top of one’s voice in Mecca. 

Those who believe in equality of opportunity must want, if they take the idea seriously, to make the world not only just but fair. Genetic and family influences on the fate of people have to be eliminated, because they undoubtedly affect opportunities and make them unequal.  

Ugly people cannot be models; the deformed cannot be professional footballers; the retarded cannot be astrophysicists; the small of stature cannot be heavyweight boxers; I don’t think I have to prolong this list, as everyone can think of a thousand examples for himself. 

Of course, it might be possible to level the field a little by legislating for equality of outcome: by, for example, insisting that ugly people are employed as models in proportion to their prevalence in the population.  

English novelist L.P. Hartley, author of The Go-Between, satirized such envious suppression of beauty (and, by implication, all egalitarianism other than that of equality under the law) in a novel called Facial Justice.  

It’s not a very good novel, as it happens, but the idea is very good; Hartley envisages a state in which everyone ...

aspires to an “average” face,  

...brought about by plastic surgery both for the abnormally ugly and the abnormally good-looking. Only in this way can the supposed injustice (actually it’s unfairness) of the genetic lottery be righted.  

Hartley’s novel is a reductio ad absurdum of a pernicious idea.  

By contrast, Roosevelt’s “measurable quality of opportunity” is roughly achievable by human design: only roughly, of course, because some (though few) will still be excluded biologically, and there are (again few) upbringings so terrible that they preclude opportunity for the person to become anything much.  

But the aspiration to deny no one a “measurable quality of opportunity” is not intrinsically nasty, as is the insistence on equality of opportunity.  

On the contrary; our problem is, however, that the political arrangements needed to bring this about already exist in most Western countries, and still we are unhappy or discontented.  

Thus we—many of us, that is—attribute our unhappiness to inequality of opportunity for fear of looking elsewhere,.....  

including inward.  

Politicians love equality of opportunity as an ideal precisely because it is impossible—barring arrangements that would make North Korea seem like a libertarian paradise—to bring about.  

And because it is impossible, it is a permanent promise of employment for them, as they try to square the circle or construct a perpetual motion machine.  

It guarantees their importance, and the attainment of importance is probably the most powerful motive of all politicians. 

There is only one country in the developed world, as far as I know, in which politicians are accorded no importance whatever: Switzerland.  

All the same, I am not sure I would like to live there. Perfection is not of this world, and if it existed it would be horrible.  

http://takimag.com/article/a_more_sinister_equality_theodore_dalrymple#axzz2yM2vd0ry

I hasten to add that Anthony makes his living by thinking such difficult matters through, observing the darker sides of humanity, and writing about it. So please do go to the Taki Magazine to see his views in full.

Meanwhile, ask me for a drink.  Nicely.

Pax

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

HATE Speech

Updated.
We don't get much hate-speech in the Tavern. But that will not stop the stupid hordes in Hilary's Village down the hill condemning folks here for acknowledging tried and tested, old-fashioned, hard-won values.

Here folks drink deep of Grace and seek forgiveness for their own failings and those souls out there.

It is fashionable these days to nail and glue ....

false compassion

....to banners and carry it through the streets. 

It is a con.

It is fashionable to claim to Love, when in fact it is Lust that drives.

But we refuse to play that nasty game.

And nasty it is.

It is fashionable to not simply overturn our society but even to overturn the meaning of words.

Their mantra is......

Hate is Good

People who hold sound values and act accordingly are routinely vilified.

The other day a CEO of an internet company 'lost' his job at the demand of 'compassionate' homosexuals who 'love' and want to enjoy their 'love' free from objection.

But the Homosexual lobby have no idea what Love is. They steal the word and apply it to their own perversion.

They howled for his dismissal. Threatened his company.

THAT is Hate Speech.

My good mate Bernard had some reasoned words to say about the matter. Bernie is a psychologist who is just as measured and concerned as any patron in the Tavern.

Firefox Down

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ELdIBnA6qA

Update
Dennis had a few words too: He sees the 'Hate' as a 'general' Leftist feature.

During the 2012 presidential campaign, when the left attempted to destroy Chick-Fil-A for its owner's views on same-sex marriage, I suggested on my radio show that the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, stand in front of a Chick-Fil-A restaurant while enjoying some Ben and Jerry's ice cream.  

In that way, I argued, he could show one of the 

great moral differences between the right and the left.  

Though Ben and Jerry are leftists, we conservatives do not believe that company owners' views should matter to consumers. We believe that products should speak for themselves. If the ice cream is good, despite whatever repugnance we might feel regarding the views of the makers of that ice cream, we will still purchase it. 

 The left does not see things that way. The left is out to crush individuals and companies with whom it differs. This is especially so today on the issue of same-sex marriage. 

 Perhaps the most dramatic example of this took place last week. The governing board of the widely used browser, Firefox, forced the company's CEO, Brendan Eich, to resign.  

The Firefox board had learned that in 2008, Eich donated $1,000 to the Proposition 8 campaign in California. Proposition 8 amended the California Constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. In classic Communist fashion, gay rights organizations demanded that Eich publicly recant. When Eich did not, gay rights and other leftist organizations called for a boycott of Firefox. Firefox immediately forced Eich out. 

 All these years, the left, after coining the term "McCarthyism" in order to disparage the right, had fooled most people into believing that it is the right that suppresses liberty.  

The truth, of course, has been the opposite. Worldwide, with the exception of Nazi Germany (which was a uniquely race-based totalitarianism, neither left nor right -- while it rejected Marxist class-based struggle, it supported socialism ("Nazism" was short for National Socialism),  

every genocidal totalitarian regime of the 20th century was leftist.  

And domestically, too, the left has much less interest in liberty than in forcing people to act in accord with its values.  

A totalitarian streak is part of the left's DNA.  

How you think matters and what you do away outside of work matters: More than 20 states prohibit judges from being leaders in the Boy Scouts -- because the left deems the Boy Scouts homophobic. 

http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2014/04/08/uninstall-firefox-n1819985/page/full

Bakers and flower arrangers and Bed & Breakfast proprietors are driven into Courts and out of business by 'compassionate', loving', 'gay' people who exhibit anything but Gayness or love or compassion. Their victims are hauled before an engineered 'Public Opinion' replete with smears and vicious condemnation simply for exercising a choice not to contribute to a 'gay marriage' 'ceremony'.

THAT is Hate Speech.

Hate speech legislations are rammed through Parliaments and Congresses to limit free speech that 'offend' the wicked, the corrupt and the con artists, but not it seems to be applied to destructive speech that ruins good people's lives and livelihoods.

In Oz the good folk who years ago tried hard, at great personal expense, to give safety and hygiene to distressed, neglected and abused Aboriginal children have been condemned by faux-compassionate villagers and accused of engineering a 'Stolen Generation'. Even of genocide. Their efforts are deliberately misinterpreted in order that the deceivers get 'Compensation'. White is a Blight to the real haters.

THAT is Hate Speech.

Gillard called Tony Abbott a Misogynist, for looking at his watch !

Good people speak out against the murder of babies in the womb. They Love Life. They value humanity. So they are forbidden' by legislations and threats of jailing and huge fines, brought in by people who claim 'freedom of choice'.  No choice for the babies. No choice of opinion. The Good people are labelled as 'Hating Women's Rights', even of 'Hating Women'.

THAT is Hate Speech.

No Court charges for these lefty wreckers.
They didn't refuse to bake a wedding  cake for a pair of homosexuals.

Good people speak out against the destruction of Marriage; that noble Institution that recognises, acknowledges and Honours the love between a male and a female and their sole ability to bring forth new life and nurture the new human being.  Such good and normal people are condemned and vilified. They are called homophobic.

THAT is Hate Speech.

Prominent Feminist nonebrities can hold forth on our televisions demeaning and dismissing 'White, Male Heterosexuals' and blaming them for all the ills of the world. They can call for men to be reduced to 10% of the population. They can 'Twitter' with a hashtag #killallmen.

THAT is hate Speech.

The faux-compassionate can condemn a Government Minister who stops a disgusting trade in human trafficking that leads to people drowning at sea.  Those same faux-compassionate agitators can call for the reintroduction of the old policies that not only drowned over 1000 people but attracted many more 'drowning-fodder' for them to wail over. They call his policy 'Evil'. They call for him to be sacked.

THAT is Hate Speech.

EVIL loves Misery and Mayhem.

It 'loves', in the same way that the faux-compassionates, the homosexuals, the Radical screeching Feminists, the  'Black-armband' compensation demanders, the 'asylum-seeker' 'supporters' who revel in the drownings, 'love'. 

It is NOT love.

It 'loves' to distort and destroy and blame; to lie and twist and condemn; to take people's jobs and livelihoods.

It is anything BUT love.

I will let RamzPaul have a last parodying word to see who is next to be fired. You can guess..... it may well be YOU.

Mozilla's Gay Star Chamber





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOLr_jhoD9k

The Princess of Lies strides and struts in our world, suborning souls, destroying reputations and lives.

The Good can Pray for them.

Drink deep of Courage and Fortitude.


Pax

Fracking Children's Minds

One does not usually think of teachers or politicians as being paedophiles. Nor parents. But some are of course. 'Interfering' with children is abhorrent, but it seems only when someone interferes with their bodies. Sexually. Such was the starting to the conversation in the P&B about what else of children is interfered with these days, and with what trauma.

Arguably of more importance is a child's mind.

The paedophile will 'satisfy' his/her grubby urges and fantasies and 'Use' children like an African or Arab state will use children as cheap mine-field clearers or bomb-carriers, but what of the more 'civilised' teachers, politicians and parents who frack a child's mind, pouring sludge into them and forcing sense right out of them.

What of the teachers, politicians and parents who 'use' children as front line troops in their grubby battles?

Battle for Bentley -  

Holly gets it and she's only 10 years old

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04XmMhpXaEc 

Steve was looking deeply and darkly into his pint in the Catallaxy corner today:

I suppose there’s a reason for such juvenile arguments from a ten year old, but what excuse is there for the others?  

Yet these are not juvenile arguments but force-fed anti-capitalist, anti-growth, anti-common-sense sentiments that would  

never cross the mind of a ten year old.  

Even the slightest notion of where the clothes she wears, the food she eats, the heating for her home, the electricity that runs her TV, where any of these come from and what is required to bring them to her doorstep, would be a start.

But given the adults who surround her, what chance is there that she will find out herself?  

I tried to think of it as funny but I’m not in the mood. It is just part of that massive juggernaut of ignorance that I no longer think we can defend ourselves against.

They are not the sentiments and arguments of a ten year old encouraged to discover the world for herself and BE a ten year old.

They are the sentiments and arguments of politicians, greenies, teachers and parents who feel themselves free to impose their green-creed on a child and put her out there on You Tube to take the flack.

She is the mine-clearer, stepping out into the mine-field with the adults standing back urging her on, satisfying their grubby urges.

Steve despairs. Is he right? Have we finally put the nails in the coffin of western civilisation by the deliberate ruination of our children?

Perhaps as they grow up they will see the error of their parent's and Teacher's ways and reach adulthood without further molestation. The evidence for that is not good though.

Tim brought this to the table.

ASIC to look into prank Metgasco email  

from schoolgirl Kudra Falla-Ricketts

http://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/asic-to-look-into-prank-metgasco-email-from-schoolgirl-kudra-fallaricketts-20140402-35yy7.html 

Sixteen-year-old Kudra Falla-Ricketts didn't realise how much of a stir her April Fools' prank had caused until she was hauled into her school principal's office. 

Kudra, of Lismore, had emailed out a fake press release claiming that the gas drilling company Metgasco was pulling out of northern NSW.  

But in the tense atmosphere surrounding gas drilling, and with thousands attending anti-coal seam gas protests in parts of the state, Kudra's fake statement wasn't taken as a joke.

Metgasco chief executive Peter Henderson said Kudra's fake press release could have had a ''devastating'' effect on shareholders.  

Her prank has now been referred to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. 

Under corporations law, false or misleading statements can attract a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail, a $765,000 fine, or both. 

One might think that such a law might be more widely applied.  Perhaps Mz Gillard might have been jailed for 10 years for her misleading the Australian people with her 'There Will Be NO Carbon Tax under a Government Oi Lead".

Just what part of N.O. did that feminist liar not understand?

Kudra wrote a statement on Tuesday purporting to be from Mr Henderson, claiming that the company would cease its gas operations in the Northern Rivers region after intense community opposition.
Metgasco would instead start planning for a ‘‘solar thermal plant near Casino’’, the false statement said.  

Metgasco was forced to release a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange stating the email was a hoax and there was no change to its operations in the Clarence-Moreton Basin. 

The prank is reminiscent of the case of Jonathan Moylan,  who is being prosecuted by ASIC for sending a fake media release last year. The hoax temporarily  

wiped $314 million off Whitehaven Coal’s share value.

Some joke !

Those 'shareholders' considered by the Greenies and probably by most thick teachers to be parasites 'ripping' hard-earned money from 'ordinary' people, are millions of 'ordinary' mums and dads investing through their superannuation and insurances. Teachers' super too. Young Kudra's mum and dad perhaps too.

(Just who names a child 'Kudra'??)

 

The document by Kudra bore the Metgasco logo and contained several  typographical errors. It was emailed  to  local journalists using her school email address. She said gas mining threatened water supplies and Metgasco is ‘‘not listening to the people who are telling them to stop’’. The  implications only dawned when she was summoned by her principal. 

Her father, Aidan Ricketts, a coal seam gas activist, said 

 Metgasco’s referral to the regulator was ‘‘humourless and bullying’’.  

But Mr Henderson made no apologies. 

‘‘We understand it’s a practical joke,’’ he said. ‘‘We don’t wish any bad things to the young lady, we understand she’s made a mistake, but it was fraudulent.’’ 

He said a drop in share price would have been ‘‘devastating’’ for shareholders. No trading took place before the ASX statement was issued and the company’s share price was not affected. 

University of Melbourne  law expert Ian Ramsay said Kudra’s young age ‘‘would complicate the situation’’ for ASIC. ‘‘Given that it’s a minor and it appears as though there was no harm caused to the market ...   [it might be considered] appropriate to speak to the person to make sure that they understand what they’ve done, rather than move towards any sort of enforcement action,’’ he said.
 

Heaven forbid we have any 'enforcement' action. The poor little flower might have her self-esteem damaged.  All I can say here is that it is a good job she is not a 16 year old boy.

And can we hope for any sense from the Education establishment that have mandatory power over the minds of our children?

Let Bill show us....

  How PC Moonbattery Harms Children  

and Society
by Bill Muehlenberg

http://billmuehlenberg.com/2014/04/04/how-pc-moonbattery-harms-children-and-society/

We are creating a generation of precious spoiled brats who think that the whole world owes them everything, and on a silver platter. They must be protected from every unpleasant reality in life, and must be taught that they are the centre of the universe, and nothing amiss or untoward must ever come their way. 

The curse of Political Correctness has ensured that we now have pampered zombies walking our streets, who think that they must be immune from anything and everything negative, distressing or difficult. They want assurances that they can float through life untouched, unscathed and un-contaminated by any un-pleasantries the world might throw their way. 

These mealy-mouthed wimps make life miserable for everyone, and in fact are putting us all at risk. And this mollycoddling starts when we are quite young. Children are being cocooned from real life, whether because of over-zealous parents, or PC-bound bureaucrats. 

As one American discussion of this problem said, "School authorities punish kids for hugging a friend, pointing a finger as a pretend gun, or starting a game of tag on the playground. Congress bans starter bikes on the chance that some 12-year-old might chew on a brass valve. Police arrest parents for leaving a sleepy kid alone in the back seat of a car for a few minutes. Yet overprotectiveness creates perils of its own. It robs kids not only of fun and sociability but of the joy of learning independence and adult skills, whether it be walking a city street by themselves or using a knife to cut their own sandwich." 

Examples of this are all around us, and two recent ones which caught my eye are worth mentioning. The first has to do with a medical student in Australian who is afraid of exams. But the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal sided with her against the medical school. As one news item reports:

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’’. 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.

Hello !! I want any doctor of mine to be of sound mind. I may sympathise with someone with a mental disorder but I ain't going to take their advice, pay them or let them anywhere near my innards.

Not even an 'Empowered, sassy, independent, Professional woman who can do anything a man can do and better'. But who is scared of exams!

Bill continued....

 Or consider another moonbat example of this, also from Australia. Now kids cannot win or lose at sport. Really: 

Children will be banned from playing to win, keeping score and best and fairest awards under Australia-wide changes to junior football ¬developed by the AFL. Thousands of junior footballers in up to 150 leagues will be forced to play with no scoreboard, ladders or match results under the shake-up designed to promote participation rather than competition.... AFL national development manager Josh Vanderloo said the new rules had been drafted in consultation with leagues to give children “an enjoyment philosophy rather than a winning philosophy’’.  

Yeah right. The article ends this way: " Laurimar Junior Football Club tried the changes on Sunday, putting under-10 player’s through their paces with revised rules. Club vice president Andrew Jamieson said children were 'not very happy'. The AFL drafted the new guidelines in conjunction with Deakin University research."
 

Of course they wouldn't have been very happy. What a joke. And all so typical here: some eggheads at a university dreamed all this foolishness up. Guess they were having a quiet day. The good news is, not everyone was thrilled with this PC moonbattery. 

Many spoke against it. 

Lauren Rosewarne for example wrote this: "God forbid that we allow a ball game to subtly teach kids anything about the pain of loss, the thrill of victory or the necessity for improvement. Adults, as they get ever-close to the grave, have a tendency to idealise their childhoods to the point of farce. I have an uncle, for example, whose own youth apparently involved nothing other than cheap lollies, yabbying and whittling cricket bats out of old planks of wood."

Many in the Tavern speak against it too.

Our children are CHILDREN. Not experiments. Not cannon-fodder. Not ventriloquist's dummies given to us to spout fractious and factitious nonsense at the behest of parents, Teachers and Politicians getting their rocks off.

Pray for our children.

A final hypnotic word from RamzPaul on Education.

2014 White Privilege Conference -

In their own words 

Pax.