New Zealand University uses "mental harm" to block free speech

David Seymour is condemning Massey University's new free speech policy, saying it "protects feelings not speech".

On Monday, Vice-Chancellor Professor Jan Thomas released the University's new policy covering academic freedom, free speech and freedom of expression, as well as a code of practice for external speakers.

Writing in The Spinoff, Massey University provost Giselle Byrnes defended the policy as an attempt to balance free speech with the challenges of hate speech.

However the ACT Party leader calls it "lip service" to freedom of expression and academic freedom.

"Massey University's new free speech policy shows it is more concerned with protecting the feelings of a small number of students and creating safe spaces for them than it is with defending a central pillar of Western civilisation," Seymour said in a press release on Tuesday.

"Massey has been rightly condemned for its recent approach to freedom of expression. These new documents provide no reason to believe that approach will change."

Since 2018, Massey University has made headlines after staff ripped down posters supporting protesters in Hong Kong, Don Brash was banned from speaking, and a radical feminist event was cancelled.

Under the new policies, if people want to speak at a Massey University event, university officers will consider if they will cause "mental harm" to students and if the event will create "negative media coverage".

"Mental harm is deeply subjective and will allow small, vocal groups to block an event from taking place by claiming that they are likely to be psychologically hurt by the mere presence of a speaker on campus," Seymour says.

"Mental harm should never be used by an important public institution as a reason to prevent free exchange from taking place."

SOURCE  

It sounds like those who are behind the policy are the mentally harmed ones

British students turn against free speech amid ‘culture of conformity’

Fewer than half of students consistently support freedom of speech and two fifths favour censorship and no-platforming of controversial speakers, research has shown.

A “culture of conformity” may also be having an effect on undergraduates, who are often too intimidated to espouse unpopular views on campus, according to a report by the centre-right think tank Policy Exchange.

Deep-rooted reform is needed at universities, which should establish academic freedom champions reporting directly to the vice-chancellor, it says.

The research exposes the extent to which a significant number of students value safe spaces for disadvantaged groups above freedom of speech.

A higher number of women were in favour of censorship and men were more likely to support academic freedom, polling found. Gender differences had a bigger impact on attitudes than whether respondents had backed Leave or Remain in the EU referendum.

However, Leave supporters were much less likely than Remainers to feel confident in voicing their view among classmates. Only two in ten said that they would be comfortable espousing their beliefs in tutorials, compared with nine in ten of those on the other side of the Brexit divide.

Policy Exchange polled more than 500 undergraduates aged between 18 and 25, weighted by gender to conform to the 57-43 female-male ratio of students. It found that the proportion of students consistently supportive of academic freedom ranged from three tenths to a half. The number could be skewed by narratives read before polling that emphasised the importance of protecting vulnerable students, or of protecting an exchange of ideas.

Students were asked their opinions on blocking speeches by Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of the House of Commons; the Canadian academic Jordan Peterson; and the feminist writer Germaine Greer.

The questions came after Cambridge University rescinded its offer of a visiting fellowship to Professor Peterson in March after a backlash from the faculty and students. The women’s officer at Cardiff University called for Greer to be no-platformed in 2015 for her “transphobic” views.

In the research more than half opposed a ban on [popular] Mr Rees-Mogg, with just over a quarter in favour and more than a fifth saying they did not know.

Support for freedom of speech dwindled in the other situations: more than two fifths said that Cambridge had been right to treat Professor Peterson as it did. Only a third agreed that Cardiff should have allowed Greer to speak. In each case at least three tenths backed free speech and at least a fifth supported censorship.

The report said: “The danger is that academic freedom is being significantly violated due, in particular, to forms of political discrimination.”

SOURCE 

Irish academic calls for the term 'Anglo-Saxon' to be DROPPED from modern speech because it has 'links with white supremacists'

"Anglo-Saxon" is simply history. Post-Roman Britannia was successfully invaded in about 500AD by Germans from Jutland.

Most of Jutland is now Denmark.  It was originally German. The Danes came South from Norway, immediately North of Jutland.  They were early Vikings. They pressed hard on the Germans, forcing many of them to relocate to Britannia. 

Jutes came from North Jutland, Angles from central Jutland and Saxons from South Jutland.  Saxons were never overrun by the Danes but were busy pushing South in Germany so came to Britannia in only small numbers. So the invasion of Britannia was dominated by Angles -- who therefore gave the new domain their name -- England.  We still speak a derivative of their language.

Slightly later, the Danes also came to what was by then England.  The Danes never conquered the Saxons in Saxony and were also eventually driven out of England by Saxons.  The Saxons were the tough guys.

So the term "Anglo-Saxon" is accurate testimony to great historical events in the ancestry of many people reading this blog.  But Leftists hate history

There is a sense in which England is still ruled by Saxons.  The historic surname of the present British monarchy is Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha, where "Sachsen" is the German spelling of Saxony


The term Anglo-Saxon is 'bound up with white supremacy' and should be replaced with 'early English', academics have argued.

Anglo-Saxon traditionally refers to groups from Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands who settled in Britain at the end of Roman rule.

However, early medieval England specialist Mary Rambaran-Olm, an independent scholar and author, claimed the term is used by white supremacists to refer to white British people and should be banned.

The academic – raised in Canada and now based in Ireland – says previous objections to the term Dark Ages sets a precedent.

She told The Times: 'Generally, white supremacists use the term to make some sort of connection to their heritage (which is inaccurate) or to make associations with 'whiteness' but they also habitually misuse it to try and connect themselves to a warrior past.'

Miss Rambaran-Olm said people in early England – or 'Englelond' – did not call themselves Anglo-Saxons but tended to refer to themselves as 'Englisc' or 'Anglecynn'.

The academic said the term became more popular in the 18th and 19th century and was used to link white people to their 'supposed origins'.

Hitler wrote of the 'Anglo-Saxon determination' to hold India, while imperialist Cecil Rhodes also regularly used the term.

John Overholt, curator of early books and manuscripts at Harvard's Houghton Library, backed a ban on the term.

'The term Anglo-Saxon is inextricably bound up with pseudohistorical accounts of white supremacy, and gives aid and comfort to contemporary white supremacists,' he wrote on Twitter. 'Scholars of medieval history must abandon it.'

Earlier this year the International Society of Anglo Saxonists took a poll of its 600 members, and 60 per cent of the group agreed to remove the reference to 'Anglo-Saxon' from its name.

But Tom Holland, author of books including Athelstan: The Making of England, said the term was 'inextricably bound up with the claim by Alfred ... to rule as a shared Anglian-Saxon identity'.  'Scholars must be free to use it,' he said.

In a tweet, he wrote of the idea to ditch the term Anglo-Saxon: 'Mad as a bag of ferrets, as they say in Deira [a former kingdom].'

SOURCE  

Outraged customers call for a boycott of a politically correct cafe serving 'gender neutral' gingerbread 'people'

A cafe has sparked a heated debate by removing gingerbread men from its menu, replacing it with 'gingerbread gender neutral person' instead.

A gingerbread man biscuit is a Christmas staple around the globe and dates back to the 15th century.

However, a cafe named The Tannery, in Auckland, New Zealand, changed the name to be more inclusive.

Owner Andre Cettina told Stuff the name change after a number of customers questioned why they had been called gingerbread men in the first place.

'It started off a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it's actually become a focal point and started a bit of a discussion at the counter with a lot of people taking photos,' she said.

Since the name change, she said more adults have been reaching for the tasty treat.

'It used to be that 90 per cent of the time we sold [the gingerbread biscuits], it was to kids. There's a lot more people buying them now, which is quite funny,' she said.

Some customers were upset at removing the gender from the gingerbread snack.

'PC gone mad, always been ginger bread man, why change now. It's a biscuit, not a living creature. I find this all so sad,' one person wrote.

The New Zealand cafe is not the first to change the name of gingerbread men. In 2018, the coffee shop at the Scottish parliament changed the name of the biscuit as well. 

SOURCE  

Student suspended amid row over LGBTQ ‘rainbow poppy’

A Canadian high school student has been suspended after refusing to wear a “disrespectful” rainbow poppy for Remembrance Day.

The rainbow poppy is a variant of the traditional red poppy worn to commemorate fallen soldiers on November 11, intended to honour the LGBTQ community.

In a post on Twitter yesterday, Cyara Bird described the incident involving her cousin Natalie, 17, a student at Stonewall Collegiate Institute in Manitoba.

“My 17-year-old cousin was suspended today … want to know why?” wrote Ms Bird, who ran as a Conservative candidate in last month’s federal elections.

“Her choir teacher was demanding that the choir wear rainbow poppies during their performance in the Remembrance Day ceremony. She and another student rejected that idea, and both were suspended for ‘hate speech’.”

But a reporter from Global News later said the broadcaster had “looked into” the claim and found the student was “not suspended for refusing to wear the rainbow poppy, she was suspended for putting up a poster”.

The poster consisted of a series of quotes pulled from the internet criticising the rainbow poppy.

“Never seen something so disrespectful in all my days,” one of the quotes said.

“What does LGBTQ have to do with the war? Red represents blood, black represents widows and loved ones, green represents land the blood was spilled on. Never change the poppy.”

One quote accused the rainbow poppy proponents of undoing “centuries of blood, sweat and tears all because you needed to do the dishes”.

Another said, “Keep it in your pants, nobody needs or wants to see it.”

“You’ve got a whole month dedicated to the LGBTQ community, but the people who legitimately made a difference and died so that we could live decent lives have one day,” one quote said.

In a statement to The Post Millennial website, Natalie said it “all started when teachers, counsellors, and some students said we should wear the rainbow poppy”.

“I typed up papers on a computer, printed them off, and taped them up in the halls,” she said. “As I was putting them up, teachers were taking them down. I watched as they took them to the office and gave them to the secretary.”

She went to class but soon after was called to the principal’s office, where the principal and vice principal, Jason Calissis and Bryce Baldwin, were waiting.

She said they began to yell at her. “They accused me of hate speech and endangering the physical safety of the group of individuals (LGBT students),” she said.

“They asked me what I was thinking, and I told them everything. I said I was just voicing my beliefs and morals.”

The student said she was scared by the two male administrators.

“I got to the point of almost crying but I didn’t,” she said. “I had to be the voice for all those families who were greatly disrespected and offended.”

SOURCE  

Woman whose patchwork quilt of 24 Golliwogs won top prize at a country show has no idea she's been slammed as a racist



The woman whose patchwork quilt of 24 Golliwogs won top prize at a country show has no idea she's been slammed as a racist, because she's off making more quilts.

The design by quilter Helen, which depicted golliwogs from 24 countries around the world, won first place in the Whittlesea Show's quilt category in northern Melbourne last weekend, and was widely criticised.

Helen's design was called 'offensive' by the chairman of the Anti-Defamation Commission Dr Dvir Abramovich, but Helen's husband said she received 'only comments of praise of the work' at the show.

Some of the dressed up golliwogs on the quilt include a a Spanish matador, an English Beefeater, a golliwog doing the haka and an Egyptian pharaoh. 

Dr Abramovich suggested the quilt was celebrating racist images, but Michael said that wasn't the intention of the artist.

Michael said that Helen was over the moon to have won the top prize at the show, but hadn't been able to speak with his wife about the criticism of her work because she was busy with another piece. I haven't spoken to her 'cause she's quilting!' Michael said.

The golliwog was originally a character in an 1895 children's book but has since been associated with the racial stereotyping of black people. The word 'golliwog' has also increasingly been seen as racist due to the term 'wog' being used as a racial slur for foreigners.

SOURCE  

Blackface bonfire society updates its ‘Zulu’ image

A Bonfire Night society that has paraded in blackface through the streets of Lewes for 160 years dressed as Zulu warriors has changed to more colourful makeup after discussions with modern Zulus.

The Borough Bonfire Society has been wearing Zulu costumes with dark face paint since about 1860 and in recent years some locals have grown uneasy with the tradition.

Organisers said that there were some boos but it overall it received a “very positive” response from crowds who attended the annual parade in the East Sussex town.

Mick Symes, 69, a captain for Borough, said: “We had a very good response from the crowd. You had the odd person who wants to put their finger up but we had such a warm welcome. We have to look at the overall event not just the odd person who might boo or hiss — whether because they didn’t like the make-up I don’t know. Maybe they didn’t like my face.”

The decision to use colourful makeup was made in 2017 when the parade was joined by dancers from Zulu Tradition. Thandanani Gumede, a member of the Zulu people, told the Bonfire society that it was not offensive to pay tribute to Zulus but suggested that colourful makeup might replace black or brown.

Mr Gumede did not attend this year but his agent said that “he would be delighted” that members of the society had “coloured up” rather than blacked up.

Mr Symes said that the crowd were excited to see the society’s bonfire, which included a display of televisions being dropped onto a television licensing vehicle as a statement about changes to free licences for people over 75.

SOURCE  

YouTube Won’t Let a Medical Doctor Say This Sentence

“See, if you want to cut off a leg or an arm, you’re mentally ill, but if you want to cut off healthy breasts or a penis, you’re transgender.”

Those are the words of Dr. Michelle Cretella, a pediatrician with many years’ experience and the executive director of the American College of Pediatricians, in a Daily Signal video published in 2017.

It’s a sentence YouTube will not allow the doctor to say about children and gender identity issues.

The Daily Signal recently learned that our video of Cretella had been removed from YouTube. In its place, YouTube displayed this message: “This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on hate speech.”

Over the past few months, The Daily Signal worked with YouTube to try to reach a resolution. Ultimately, we were told the only way we could get the video back on YouTube was to delete the previously mentioned sentence.

In other words, we had two choices: censor the doctor’s words or have no video on the world’s biggest video platform.

This should horrify every YouTube user—and anyone who values the importance of a public square featuring a variety of perspectives.

Cretella is a doctor. She is making a point in that sentence that may not be popular but remains true: There is no society-wide push right now to allow patients suffering from Body Integrity Identity Disorder to amputate limbs.

But as of July, Cretella’s sentence—which did not even state transgenderism was a result of mental illness, but simply pointed out that our culture sees amputation of body parts differently depending on the body parts in question—is apparently so outrageous YouTube can’t fathom allowing it on its platform.

That is unbelievable.

We are especially disappointed with YouTube’s decision because other social media platforms have allowed the video on their platforms. In fact, the video has more than 70 million views on Facebook. It might have even more if Facebook hadn’t temporarily removed it in July 2018. After our appeal to Facebook, it was quickly restored and remains on The Daily Signal’s page today.

SOURCE  

Cantuar demands action on campus "intimidation" and "lack of free speech"

The Archbishop of Canterbury has called on the Government to put pressure on universities over reports of "no-platforming, intimidation and lack of free speech".

The Most Rev Justin Welby told ministers at Westminster that "mere exhortation" was not working.

The leading Anglican made the intervention as peers heard just five universities were known to have adopted an agreed definition of anti-Semitism.

The archbishop, who is President of the Council of Christians and Jews (CCJ), said: "We hear numerous reports of no-platforming, of intimidation and lack of free speech.

"I accept fully that the universities are autonomous but will the minister look for ways in which pressure can be applied to ensure these standards are kept? "Because mere exhortation, would she agree, is not really working."

Government frontbencher Baroness Berridge pointed out the Lords has legislated to ensure the independence of universities.

She said: "Although the secretary of state can issue guidance, that guidance has to take into account the autonomy of our academic institutions."

SOURCE  





University of Minnesota threatens faculty for ‘repeated misuse of pronouns’ in new policy

Gender pronouns have flummoxed the University of Minnesota for more than a year.

A draft policy released in summer 2018 stated that “university members and units are expected to use the names, gender identities and pronouns specified to them by university members, except as legally required.” The Star Tribune said failure to comply could get a person punished, “up to firing or expulsion.”

Sanctions were removed from the proposal early this year, following massive negative feedback, and faculty approved the relaxed language.

The taxpayer-funded university is now on the cusp of approving the “Gender Identity, Gender Expression, Names and Pronouns” policy, and the language is … the same.

More worrisome for those who care about academic freedom and the First Amendment, the FAQ document for the policy makes clear that sanctions are on the table for conscientious objectors to the new regime.

University members and units are expected to use the names, gender identities, and pronouns specified to them by other University members, except as legally required. University members and units are also expected to use other gendered personal references, if any, that are consistent with the gender identities and pronouns specified by University members.

The FAQ document puts the onus of learning this information about “colleagues, classmates, and peers” on everyone, but it particularly focuses on administrative leaders and faculty:

The point of the policy is to make explicit “the University’s commitment to non-discriminatory programs, activities and facilities and promotes a respectful University community free from discrimination based on gender identity or expression.”

It dubiously claims: “This policy is designed, and will be implemented, to uphold free speech and academic freedom principles.”

SOURCE  

In "No Safe Spaces", an Odd Couple Teams Up to Fight Free-Speech Bans

The pro-free-speech documentary No Safe Spaces doesn’t have its nationwide debut until November 15, but it’s already breaking box-office records in Phoenix and San Diego, where it rolled out early.

That’s because many Americans realize that efforts to muzzle free speech are spreading from college campuses into the wider world. In 2017, a national poll of 2,300 U.S. adults, conducted for the Cato Institute, found that 71 percent of Americans think political correctness has silenced important discussions our country needs to have. And an astonishing 58 percent of Americans say that the political climate prevents them from sharing their own political beliefs.

“Colleges don’t protect students from 90 percent of the professors who teach them the following: Your past was terrible, and your future is terrible. You are victims,” commentator Dennis Prager, who teamed up with comedian Adam Carolla to make the film, told me. The two make a bit of an odd couple. Prager is a highly trained Jewish religious scholar, and Carolla is a college dropout and atheist who was raised by a single mom on welfare. “Where we agree is that more debate is better, more diversity of opinion is helpful, and our First Amendment is a unique gift to America,” says Carolla.

SOURCE  

JetBlue worker slammed for ‘racist’ homeless person Halloween costume

The spooky season has more than just scares, sometimes it has some extremely inappropriate costumes.

An airline worker in the United States who dressed as a homeless person “trying to get back to Puerto Rico or Cuba” is being slammed on social media for what some are calling a “racist and highly offensive” depiction.

The JetBlue employee dressed down as a homeless person wearing tattered and soiled clothing, with a homemade cardboard sign around her neck that read “Homeless. Need help trying to get back home to Puerto Rico or Cuba,” an image of the worker posted to Twitter shows.

“This was the costume of a JetBlue employee at the airport in Fort Lauderdale, FL,” Twitter user @nats2548 captioned a shot of the worker standing in the JetBlue terminal in the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport. “I want to read your opinions.”

Criticism swelled quickly, with some calling for the worker to be fired.

“@JetBlue needs to fire her a – and issue a public apology for her costume because I find it highly offensive and … I personally won’t be flying JetBlue until they issue an apology … ” Twitter user @dominopr777 seethed.

Others said the costume was tone-deaf to survivors of Hurricane Maria, the worst natural disaster in Puerto Rican history. The 2017 storm left over 3,000 people dead and thousands more homeless.

JetBlue is the largest airline carrier in Puerto Rico, while Fort Lauderdale is nearly 20 per cent Latino, according to NBC News.

SOURCE  

Police station is banned from displaying 'divisive thin blue line' flag after complaints it's 'dismissive' of the Black Lives Matter movement

It was an American flag, not specificaly a police flag so  I don't get this

Montgomery County 5th District tweeted thank you to resident James Shelton on Wednesday, who presented officers with a wooden American Flag.  Shelton had made it in recognition of National First Responders Day and police said the flag would be displayed in the 5th District Station in Maryland

On Wednesday, cops shared their intention to display the gift, with a tweet that included a picture of three cops, who appear to be white, accepting the flag from a resident and his son.

'Thank you to resident James Shelton, who presented Montgomery County 5th District officers with a wooden American Flag that he had made in recognition of National First Responders Day,' the picture was captioned. 'The flag will be displayed in the 5th District Station.'

However they were stopped in their tracks after many community members responded with negative reactions.

'This flag, the symbol of 'Blue Lives Matter,' excuses police violence against black residents, and mocks those who affirm that #BlackLivesMatter,' one person tweeted. 'That is not what @MontgomeryCoMD stands for. Take down this tweet, and do not hang up that flag!'

For another, it evoked memories of 2017's Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia where one person died and dozens of others were injured when a man deliberately rammed his car into the crowd of counter-protesters.

'This is unacceptable. This flag was carried by the white supremacists in Charlottesville and has a meaning far beyond what you intend. (I hope!) Please do not raise this in a public building,' one woman responded.

SOURCE  

UK: Theatres will BAN the phrase 'ladies and gentlemen' under new guildelines from actors' union Equity

Audiences will no longer hear the words, 'ladies and gentlemen', while performers should not have 'backhanded compliments' or be described as 'brave', under new gender-neutral guidelines from actors' union, Equity.

Published last week, the advice is aimed at people and venues working with LGBT performers.

Campaigners for LGBT rights say that such phrases as 'ladies and gentlemen' exclude people who do not identify as male or female, but rather as non-binary, such as singer Sam Smith.

Equity's guide also advises against compliments on 'appearance, clothing, voice, quality, identity or the performer being brave', the Sunday Times reports.

Following the publication of the guide, the National Theatre pledged to phase out 'ladies and gentlemen', while the Royal Shakespeare Company said it would, 'strive to create environments which welcome and support trans people and people who identify their gender as fluid'.

Meanwhile Nica Burns, co-owner of Nimax Theatre, said: 'Coming to the theatre is a shared and communal experience in one single auditorium and we want to please our audience and give them a great evening. We wouldn't want anyone to feel offended or annoyed.'

SOURCE  

'Little White Town' in Devon changes signposts over claims of racism

With rows of tiny houses bleached by the sea, Bideford in North Devon has been known as 'The Little White Town’ for more than 150 years.

Yet the longstanding nickname is now under threat over complaints it could be seen as a “racist slur”.

The original tagline was given by the author Charles Kingsley, who wrote of "the little white town of Bideford” in his swashbuckling 1855 novel Westward Ho!

The name stuck, and for decades has appeared on signposts outside the town.

At a council meeting earlier this month, however, a motion was heard to remove the tagline completely. Tabled by Conservative group leader Dermot McGeough, the motion read: “Following a number of complaints from parishioners, I propose that the words 'Little White Town' are removed from all signs within the town and at the town entrances.

"The wording 'Little White Town' can be perceived as causing a racist slur and not politically correct.  Therefore this issue should be rectified immediately. "If this wording is not removed, the town council could be classed as a racist white supremacist."

The idea provoked a lively discussion, with some members of Bideford Town Council describing it as “political correctness gone mad”, but eventually a compromise was agreed.

To clear up any confusion, every signpost will now read: “Charles Kingsley's Little White Town (1855)”.

SOURCE  

Mark Zuckerberg attacks Twitter over ban on political adverts

Mark Zuckerberg  has stood by his company's decision to run political adverts after Twitter announced that it would block campaigning ads from its social network.

The Facebook chief executive, who in recent weeks has set out a defence of free expression on the social networking site, attacked calls to block or take down political adverts on the site.

Mr Zuckerberg said: “Right now, the content debate is about political ads. Should we block political ads with false statements? Should we block all political ads?

“In a democracy, I don't think it's right for private companies to censor politicians or the news.”

The Facebook boss’s statement during the company’s financial results came just minutes after rival boss Jack Dorsey, chief executive of Twitter, announced his website would be blocking adverts with political content in an effort to battle disinformation and election interference.

SOURCE  

Should a job application include a photo?

A Michelin-starred chef has stirred controversy by asking applicants to send a photo with their CV when applying for a job at his restaurant - but he insisted: 'I don't want to f*** them, just carry plates for me.'

Michael O'Hare sparked a backlash on Twitter when he announced he was looking to hire someone to join the front-of-house team at The Man Behind the Curtain in Leeds on a full-time contract for around £24,000 a year.

But he was accused of running a 'vanity project' after asking prospective candidates to send in a recent picture of themselves with their application.

O'Hare, who became prominent following his colourful appearances on The Great British Menu and MasterChef, rebutted the accusations and said it was a common practice in top European restaurants.

Explaining himself, he tweeted: 'For the record photos with a CV is a popular euro thing and it makes it easy to identify people afterwards.

'It's not a discrimination thing I don't care about colour gender or looks ..I'm not trying to f**k them I just want them to carry plates for me.'   

His response prompted further criticism and prompted a fresh debate over whether candidates should be asked to provide a photograph when applying for a job.

On Sunday evening O'Hare tweeted: 'I'm looking for a career driven person to join my front of house team. 45 hrs per week. Package circa 24k Xmas and New Years off... and an opportunity to do cool stuff with us .. email ... with CV, cover letter and recent photo pls rt.'

Twitter users were split over whether O'Hare was justified in his request.
 
Paul Main tweeted in response to O'Hare's defense of his advert, posting: 'I just want them to carry plates for me' that's worse.

'How about I want to teach them the finer art of hospitality. I want them to understand my philosophy of hard work to get where you want to go to. '

Many jumped to the defence of the chef, suggesting that the hours and wages were ideal for someone trying to break into the hospitality industry.

Lucinda Hardman tweeted: 'Jesus people! Leave the man alone! He's given valid reasons and is offering an amazing opportunity to someone who wants to thrive in the hospitality industry! The hours and salary are amazing too!'

Martha McKinley, an employment law expert at Stephensons LLP said: 'While there is no specific legislation preventing an employer requesting a picture of a candidate before an interview, it is heavily frowned upon.

SOURCE  

Crime victim who called female police officer 'fatty' and 'useless' in emails is cleared by jury of sending offensive messages

A victim of crime, who was himself prosecuted by police for sending 'grossly offensive' emails in which he used four-letters words and called a female police constable 'fatty', has been cleared.

William Beswick, 50 was cleared of being offensive to PC Julia Acaster by a crown court jury in just 40 minutes.

Beswick branded the case a 'farce' and claimed that prosecuting him was a complete over-reaction and a waste of taxpayers' money - and that she should be more 'resilient' as a police officer of 20 years' service.

The Humberside Police officer's objections to the words were branded 'nonsense' and she was told that surely she had regularly heard far worse language at football matches and on rowdy Saturday nights.

Beswick, of Barrow-upon-Humber near Grimsby, pleaded not guilty to sending PC Acaster emails which were grossly offensive between March 4 and 30.

He was cleared by a jury of nine men and three women at Grimsby Crown Court after barely 40 minutes of deliberations.

The speedy decision to reject the officer's complaint came as no surprise to anyone in court, especially as some of the jury had been seen grinning and trying to suppress smiles during the case.

One court stalwart asked if it had really taken that long to reach a verdict and wondered if the jury had insisted on having a break and eating some sandwiches before returning to court.

Laura McBride, prosecuting, said that PC Acaster was asked to investigate claims from Beswick that he was the victim of harassment but he later became unhappy with the way the matter was progressing and blamed PC Acaster.

He sent what the prosecution claimed were abusive and grossly offensive emails calling her a 'fat fool' and a 'useless ****' as well as making veiled threats.

In one message, he asked her: 'Do you like being abused, fatty?'

The prosecution claimed that the purpose of the emails was to cause PC Acaster distress and anxiety but Beswick did not accept that they were grossly offensive.

Defence barrister Craig Lowe asked PC Acaster how long she had been in the police and whether she had ever had to attend football matches or disturbances in towns on Saturday nights when people were 'kicking off' when they were coming out of pubs.

She said she had been in the police for about 20 years and had experience of these situations.

After the jury's decision to clear him after only a short period of deliberation, Beswick told the jury: 'May God bless you all. Thank you very much.'

SOURCE  

Amazon Deletes New Releases by Two Christian Authors

Amazon has deleted two books by two different Christian authors. Glorified, by Jon Del Arroz and Deus Vult, by Declan Finn were set to be released the first week in November. Both are strong traditional Christian science-fiction novels. According to the authors and publisher, Amazon has not been responsive to inquiries.

Not only are the new releases gone from the site, but all of their pre-orders have been deleted and they cannot be restored. The only communication Silver Empire publishing received from Amazon claimed they had not uploaded the manuscripts on time, Russell Newquist, publisher, told Bounding into Comics. "Amazon’s claiming I didn’t get the final files uploaded in time, but that’s total B.S.," he said. "I had the files for both uploaded weeks ago.” Unfortunately, he can't log into his account to screen-grab the evidence that the files are there.

Del Arroz posted on his website;

My publisher is getting a runaround right now. He’s lighting up the customer service phones and emails trying to get anything done. One employee told him if this gets resolved the pre-orderers will get a “link” to purchase new ones emailed to them — which we’ll see if that happens and if it gets the same amount we had before. We’ll see. There’s no clear answer right now nor commitment to any remedy.

Glorified has been up for pre-sale for two months. "I'll never get those back," Del Arroz told PJ Media. "Readers pre-order the book usually when they finish the last one. Many of these readers will not be back and will forget that they ordered it. There is also no way to tell them that their order was deleted and that it wasn't my fault." Amazon does not provide the authors with lists of customers. Del Arroz was expecting the first revenue from the pre-orders to be recorded on November 1, on All Saints Day.

Milo Yiannopoulos wrote an ironic endorsement for the first book in the series, Justified, that said, "Could be the most dangerous sci-fi novel of my lifetime. Read it before they ban it." Strangely, Justified is still available for purchase on Amazon. The description for Del Arroz's banned book is hardly what anyone could call objectionable.

"A devastating superweapon…
…in the hands of galactic tyrants.

The Sekaran fleet is gathering, and they’ve got a weapon that can destroy worlds. Drin and his Templar brothers on the Justicar must face their deadliest battles yet, as the entire Elorian fleet is called into action to meet this threat. But more than one planet killer awaits them. Deadly secrets from ancient races are hidden amongst the stars, and Drin must uncover the power of the mysteries of faith before it’s too late."

Del Arroz believes that he is being censored by big-tech leftists. "My resolve is not shaken. I will not silence or quiet myself. I will continue to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ through my fiction in order to change the world for His divine kingdom," said Del Arroz.

Declan Finn smells a rat too. "I'm usually not paranoid, but in this case, the timing is too suspicious," he told PJ Media. Del Arroz and Finn share the same publisher, Silver Empire. Finn's book, Deus Vult is described as a thriller.

"God wills it. A Saint must find a way.

All Tommy Nolan wants is some peace to enjoy his family. He’s been to hell and back, and now he needs a break. But evil doesn’t need to take a breather, and now the Vatican is back on his doorstep asking for help. A nearby monastery has been desecrated and the exorcist monks murdered in the most brutal ways imaginable. A legion of demons is gathering for something big, and Tommy’s the saint they need to help. An old enemy is the ally he needs, but can Tommy trust him? Can they track down all of the demons in time? And what does the Necronomicon have to do with it all? Read Deus Vult today and find out!"

Newquist, founder of Silver Empire publishing, told PJ Media, "It’s bad enough that Amazon throws its monopolistic weight around against the little guys all the time. But when the 800-pound gorilla brings the hammer down on religious speech, we should all be up in arms.”

Amazon requires that authors settle disputes through arbitration. Del Arroz has filed to start the process. "I'm demanding they restore my book and pay me the pre-order sales they owe me," he said.

Both books are for sale through the publisher's website. PJ Media reached out to Amazon and was told to expect a response by 2:30 p.m., which never came. If they do respond, we will update. We have specifically asked for evidence that Newquist did not upload the files, which is the only excuse made by Amazon so far. A pre-order customer called customer service to ask what happened to his book and was told that it was removed by the publisher. Newquist denies that unequivocally.

Update 5:26 p.m.: Amazon has now allowed the ebooks to be re-uploaded, but the pre-sales are lost permanently. The deletion did not affect the paperback or hardcover books, however, most Amazon authors including Del Arroz and Finn rely on e-book sales for more than 90% of their revenue. The deletion of the e-book has hampered the launch of these books significantly. To date, Amazon has not responded to PJ Media's inquiry

SOURCE  

PayPal De-Platforms Conservative Street Artist Sabo, Holds His Funds for Six Months

On Monday evening, Sabo, the conservative street artist who is mostly known for his street posters that randomly pop up in California, reported on his Facebook page that he has now been kicked off of PayPal. "Today Paypal canceled my account with all of my money in it," he announced. "They are holding my funds for the next 6 months."

PayPal is the money exchanging platform Sabo used to earn income, and this de-platforming hits him hard financially. "I explained to them that I live in a city with 60,000 homeless people and that they are about to make me and my wife join their ranks."

Last year, Sabo was also de-platformed from Twitter without being given a reason. He gave an exclusive interview to PJMedia's Megan Fox when it happened.

"My wife had warned me about doing business with PayPal," the artist told PJM. "I'd constantly tell her that they provided a great service which makes starting an online store easy."

"I trusted them," he explained. "I worked in the start-ups for many years and it sucks to see what they've become. The people of PayPal obviously haven't taken note of how many once-giants are less than memories now. Their time will come soon as well. When it comes to the transfer of money, trust is paramount."

"They've lost that trust with me," he added. "We are living in Orwellian times."

Sabo insists in his Facebook post that he will keep fighting to be able to earn a living. "We'll find an alternative way to generate income and I'm sure they will work to hit that as well. And then we'll find another." He also said he expected this would happen. "2020 is right around the corner and they are doing everything they can to silence our side. At least they finally did it so now I can move on."

SOURCE  

Former Obama Official, Journalist Calls for 'Guardrails' on Free Speech
  
Richard Stengel, a former editor of Time and Obama State Department undersecretary for public diplomacy and public affairs, used free speech and the press... to attack free speech and the press in a truly pathetic op-ed published in the Washington Post Tuesday.

Stengel wrote he noticed in his travels that the U.S. is an "outlier" and other countries don’t have our First Amendment freedoms but, instead of thinking they should, he wants us to lower ourselves to their standards. He cited “the most sophisticated Arab diplomats” not understanding why it’s legal for someone to burn the Koran and he apparently wasn’t unable to articulate an explanation. I’d be interested to hear more of these Arab diplomats’ thoughts on our laws allowing gay marriage, abortion, and women going out in skimpy outfits.

He, of course, brought up the Russia boogeyman, as if dank memes that only a handful of people saw or retweets on social media are what turned the election, and blamed the U.S. media for repeating Putin’s lies in their reports. Little does he know, weakening our free speech laws would only make our media more Pravda-like.

I never thought I’d see the day when the same arguments for getting rid of the Second Amendment – the Founders lived in a different time, they never could have imagined the powerful, modern technology in our country today – were used to overturn the First. Stengel said: “[T]he intellectual underpinning of the First Amendment was engineered for a simpler era” and “in the age of social media, that landscape is neither level nor fair.”

He thinks because teens can’t distinguish between real stories, ads, and fake sites, we need to protect everyone from the latter two. Where does this leave comedy and sarcasm? The satirical conservative site The Babylon Bee has already been caught up in fact-checkers’ attempts to police articles numerous times. I suppose he wants to ban the tabloids in the supermarkets as well. How else are we supposed to know that Bigfoot isn’t real and Elvis isn’t still alive?

He claimed hate speech is “nearly as damaging” as violence:

It diminishes tolerance. It enables discrimination. Isn’t that, by definition, speech that undermines the values that the First Amendment was designed to protect: fairness, due process, equality before the law? Why shouldn’t the states experiment with their own version of hate speech statutes to penalize speech that deliberately insults people based on religion, race, ethnicity and sexual orientation?

Suddenly federalism and allowing states to be “laboratories of democracy” is popular on the left! But I’m not sure Hollywood would be so happy to be punished for all the hatred they espouse towards Christians. And how would this apply to historical works, like speeches by Adolf Hitler or even Louis Farrakhan?

“[W]here truth cannot drive out lies, we must add new guardrails,” Stengel proposed. But who decides what is “the truth” and who decides what counts as “guardrails?” If it’s the government, then it’s Trump’s Administration, is Stengel really ok with that?

SOURCE