Sunday, May 31, 2009

Britain: "Hitler" image turns out to be Lenin

One hopes that somebody learned something from that:
"A customer complained that the image on the underwear resembled the Nazi leader saluting as planes passed overhead. Next said that it had investigated the complaint and found the image, among a series of cartoons, was inspired by a picture of Lenin, the former Soviet leader.

But a spokesman told The Sun it was withdrawing the remaining 5,200 pairs of the underwear anyway. He said: "The complaint came in today and by the end of the day all 5,200 will be withdrawn. "We have checked with the designer who confirmed the image was inspired by Lenin. Nonetheless, if even one customer is offended or upset we are happy to withdraw the range."


There are pictures of Stalin using the "Fascist" salute too. Scroll down here

Must not joke about homosexuality

This is from Australia. I doubt that this would ever have been broadcast in America:
"A Gay activist suing Channel Nine is demanding The Footy Show apologise on-air for an anti-gay segment... The demand comes after the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board (ADB) accepted a complaint lodged by gay activist Gary Burns against The Footy Show over a May 7 episode, which featured Johns... playing a character called 'Elton Johns'.

The documentary-style skit featured Johns's brother, Andrew, telling the audience he was "so ashamed" of his gay sibling, who was taken to hospital for being gay. Hospital staff in the skit were told "it's faulty" when presented with 'Elton'.


PA: College threatens student over gun rights group

We read:
"A student who wants to form a gun-rights group at the Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) has been threatened with disciplinary action for her efforts. Student Christine Brashier has turned to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help after reporting that administrators banned her informational pamphlets, ordered her to destroy all copies of them, and told her that further "academic misconduct" would not be tolerated.

"CCAC has demonstrated a shocking lack of respect for the rights of free speech and free association," FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. "Across the country, students are increasingly denied the First Amendment right to debate the Second Amendment. At CCAC, this censorship trend has reached a new low."

In April, CCAC student Christine Brashier created pamphlets to distribute to her classmates encouraging them to join her in forming a chapter of the national Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC) organization at CCAC. The handbill states that the group "supports the legalization of concealed carry by licensed individuals on college campuses." She personally distributed copies of the flyer, which identified her as a "Campus Leader" of the effort to start the chapter.

On April 24, Jean Snider, Student Development Specialist at CCAC's Allegheny Campus, summoned Brashier to a meeting that day with Snider and Yvonne Burns, Dean of Student Development. According to Brashier, the deans told Brashier that passing out her non-commercial pamphlets was prohibited as "solicitation." They told Brashier that trying to "sell" other students on the idea of the organization was prohibited.

CCAC also told Brashier that the college must pre-approve any distribution of literature to fellow students, and that pamphlets like hers would not be approved, even insisting that Brashier destroy all copies of her pamphlet.


Arrogant Leftist "educators" ignore TWO constitutional amendments, 1st and 2nd.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

A new pretext for an attack on Christianity

A home used for a Bible study is being equated with a church
"Pastor David Jones and his wife Mary have been told that they cannot invite friends to their San Diego, Calif. home for a bible study — unless they are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars to San Diego County.

"On Good Friday we had an employee from San Diego County come to our house, and inform us that the bible study that we were having was a religious assembly, and in violation of the code in the county." David Jones told FOX News. "We told them this is not really a religious assembly — this is just a bible study with friends. We have a meal, we pray, that was all," Jones said. A few days later, the couple received a written warning that cited "unlawful use of land," ordering them to either "stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit," the couple's attorney Dean Broyles told San Diego news station 10News. But the major use permit could cost the Jones' thousands of dollars just to have a few friends over.

For David and Mary Jones, it's about more than a question of money. "The government may not prohibit the free exercise of religion," Broyles told FOX News. "I believe that our Founding Fathers would roll over in their grave if they saw that here in the year 2009, a pastor and his wife are being told that they cannot hold a simple bible study in their own home." "The implications are great because it’s not only us that’s involved," Mary Jones said. "There are thousands and thousands of bible studies that are held all across the country. What we’re interested in is setting a precedent here — before it goes any further — and that we have it settled for the future."

The couple is planning to dispute the county's order this week. If San Diego County refuses to allow the pastor and his wife to continue gathering without acquiring a permit, they will consider a lawsuit in federal court.


A clear 1st Amendment violation

Arabs slam bill to criminalize 'nakba'‏

This bill is certainly an attack on free speech:
"Arab activists and politicians are slamming proposed legislation that would criminalize commemorating the establishment of the State of Israel as a day of mourning. The bill, which has been submitted by MK Alex Miller (Israel Beiteinu), would punish citizens with jail terms of up to three years for commemorating what Palestinians and Arabs consider their nakba or catastrophe. The bill, which is still in a preliminary stage, is expected to be discussed by the cabinet in the coming weeks, Miller said.

"We think this is another step to limit freedom of speech and political activity" of Arab citizens, said MK Hanna Swaid of the Arab-Jewish party Hadash. Such a proposal, he said, was an attempt to deny Arab citizens their right to commemorate a very important chapter in their history and identity. While it is considered unlikely to pass, Swaid said he feared that such a bill could stir up a "dialogue of hate" against Arabs in Israel.

Similar proposals have been introduced into the Knesset in previous sessions but have not passed. However, Jafar Farah, director of the Haifa-based Arab advocacy organization Mossawa, said he would not be surprised if the law did pass given the current political climate vis a vis Arabs in Israel. "The ongoing efforts of extremists in the government to complicate the Middle East conflict with confrontations with our community are alarming," Farah said. "Thoughts and feelings will soon be forbidden in the State of Israel," he said. "It reminds us of the McCarthyism in the US and it's about time to show the leaders of the extreme right wing how humanity treats civilians."


It should be noted that this idea comes from a political party which represents mainly Jewish emigrants from Russia. In a number of ways they do seem to have brought Russian attitudes with them.

Sotomayor not so bad after all?

She gives an excellent defense of free speech in the excerpt from one of her judgments below:
"One of her more controversial cases was Pappas v. Giuliani, involving an employee of the New York City Police Department who was terminated from his desk job because, when he received mailings requesting that he make charitable contributions, he responded by mailing back racist and bigoted materials. On appeal, the panel majority held that the NYPD could terminate Pappas for his behavior without violating his First Amendment right to free speech. Sotomayor dissented from the majority's decision to award summary judgment to the police department. She acknowledged that the speech was "patently offensive, hateful, and insulting," but cautioned the majority against "gloss[ing] over three decades of jurisprudence and the centrality of First Amendment freedoms in our lives just because it is confronted with speech it does not like."

In her view, Supreme Court precedent required the court to consider not only the NYPD's mission and community relations but also that Pappas was neither a policymaker nor a cop on the beat. Moreover, Pappas's speech was anonymous, "occur[ring] away from the office on [his] own time." She expressed sympathy for the NYPD's "concerns about race relations in the community," which she described as "especially poignant," but at the same time emphasized that the NYPD had substantially contributed to the problem by disclosing the results of its investigation into the racist mailings to the public. In the end, she concluded, the NYPD's race relations concerns "are so removed from the effective functioning of the public employer that they cannot prevail over the free speech rights of the public employee."


But maybe she just doesn't like the NYPD, which would not be hard. She comes from NYC so frustrating them a bit could well appeal to her. It does appear that feelings are an important criterion for her in the judgments she hands down.

Sotomayor rules against free speech for blogger

We read:
"President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill a Supreme Court vacancy has yet another tie to Connecticut. She sided against a student in the infamous “douche bag” case, and that has upset some free-speech advocates.

In August 2007, Judge Sonia Sotomayor sat on a panel that ruled against an appeal in Doninger v. Niehoff. Avery Doninger was disqualified from running for school government at Lewis S. Mills High School in Burlington after she posted something on her blog, referring to the superintendent and other officials as "douche bags" because they canceled a battle of the bands she had helped to organize.

The case went to court and in March 2008, Sotomayor was on a panel that heard Doninger’s mother’s appeal alleging her daughter’s free speech and other rights were violated. Her mother wanted to prevent the school from barring her daughter from running. Sotomayor joined two other judges from the 2nd Circuit in ruling that the student’s off-campus blog remarks created a “foreseeable risk of substantial disruption” at the student’s high school and that the teenager was not entitled to a preliminary injunction reversing a disciplinary action against her

The ruling in this case has come under heavy criticism from some civil libertarians. Some say this case presents a solid rationale for rejecting Judge Sonia Sotomayor of New York’s Second Circuit Court of Appeals to fill the seat of retiring Justice David Souter.

“The continual expansion of the authority of school officials over student speech teaches a foul lesson to these future citizens,” Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, told the New Britain Herald. “I would prefer some obnoxious speech [rather] than teaching students that they must please government officials if they want special benefits or opportunities.”


So she only upholds free speech when it suits her.

Friday, May 29, 2009

A flag fight is brewing in southern Florida

We read:
"Members of the Miami-Dade branch of the NAACP want the Confederate flag banned from the Homestead-Miami Motor Speedway, and they will meet Thursday to decide whether to boycott a NASCAR race slated there for November...

But officials at NASCAR and the raceway say there's little they can do to prevent spectators from displaying or waving the Confederate flag. NASCAR spokesman Ramsey Poston told that NASCAR's "longstanding policy" prohibits displays of the Confederate flag on its cars, uniforms, licensed merchandise or in advertisements....

Homestead-Miami Motor Speedway President Curtis Gray said spectators are not permitted to wave large flags of any sort in the stands because of safety concerns, and to prevent them from obstructing the view.

He said Confederate flag items are not sold or officially displayed throughout the 65,000-seat raceway, but there's no official ban on spectators bringing miniature flags to the track, or wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the symbol. "... we don't regulate the lawful behavior of our fans or prohibit free speech and expression of our guests," Gray told "We can't tell people what to wear. Where do you start? Where does it end, as far as individual expression?"

Brandon Hensler, a spokesman for American Civil Liberties Union's Florida chapter, said bringing a Confederate flag to the race or any public event would be protected speech. "If someone wants to show up with a shirt like that, there'd be no legal recourse for that," Hensler said. "Unless there's a specific threat, all speech is protected."...

Chuck McMichael, commander in chief of Sons of the Confederate Veterans, a Tennessee-based group that promotes Confederate heritage, said the flag fight stems from last year's Veterans Day parade when some attendees objected to Confederate Army uniforms and flags displayed by participants. As a result, some Greater Homestead/Florida City residents sought to have the organization banned from future events, McMichael said.

But any attempts to block Confederate flags at Homestead-Miami Motor Speedway will be met with "some action," McMichael said, including the possibility of counter protests. "Any time somebody starts talking about that, of course there's cause for concern," McMichael told "The bottom line is I don't think they should ban [Confederate flags] because there's nothing wrong with them. It's just people showing pride in their heritage."


Interesting to see the ACLU on the right side for once.

Old Glory in office not OK?

Publicity brings big backdown:
"Is it okay to show your patriotism at the office? For one Arlington woman, the answer was "no" after she hung an American flag in her office just before the Memorial Day weekend. Debbie McLucas is one of four hospital supervisors at Kindred Hospital in Mansfield. Last week, she hung a three-by-five foot American flag in the office she shares with the other supervisors.

When McLucas came to work Friday, her boss told her another supervisor had found her flag offensive. "I was just totally speechless. I was like, 'You're kidding me,'" McLucas said. McLucas' husband and sons are former military men. Her daughter is currently serving in Iraq as a combat medic.

McLucas said the supervisor who complained has been in the United States for 14 years and is formerly from Africa. McLucas said that supervisor took down the flag herself.

"The flag and the pole had been placed on the floor," McLucas said. But McLucas also said hospital higher-ups had told her some patients' families and visitors had also complained. "I was told it wouldn't matter if it was only one person," she said. "It would have to come down." ...

Several dozen people protested outside the Mansfield hospital Wednesday. And a receptionist at Kindred's headquarters told us they received many phone calls. Then, late Wednesday morning, Kindred posted on its website a statement about the incident. It reads, in part: "The disagreement was over the size of the flag and not what it symbolized. We have invited the employee to put the flag back up."

We talked to McLucas Wednesday afternoon. She says the hospital's local CEO called and apologized. And McLucas says the woman did tell her she could put the flag back up, which she has done. But she says when she was first told the flag had to go, nobody mentioned anything about its size being the root of the problem.


Looks like the company felt initially that it had to support the black b*tch who took the flag down. Hard to understand all this happening in Texas otherwise.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Must not mention an Hispanic background?

An Hispanic businessman who was hired to run Australia's biggest telecoms company and who walked away from the job that had paid him over $30 million in four years is still not happy:
"After slipping out of Australia ahead of his June 30 resignation date and just days after boasting of his achievements at Telstra at a conference in San Diego, Mr Trujillo told the BBC that being in Australia was like "stepping back in time''.

In the BBC interview, the American claimed Australians were racist, including Kevin Rudd, who greeted news of Mr Trujillo's departure with the word, "adios''.

"Many Australians have come up to me and they've apologised, because they're embarrassed by that kind of behaviour,'' Mr Trujillo, who talks proudly of his Hispanic heritage, told the BBC in the interview.

But Mr Brumby said he did not accept Mr Trujillo's comments. "I think there was a bit of sour grapes in them actually,'' he said. "He's an example, he came here from overseas and he had a great job, he was awarded that job, there was no discrimination or prejudice against him. I don't know what he's talking about frankly.''

Telstra shares performed woefully during Mr Trujillo's four-year reign. From the day of his appointment in mid-2005 to his departure this month - before the end of his five-year "transformation'' plan - Telstra shares underperformed the wider market by about 20 per cent.

During his time in Australia, media commentators and cartoonists repeatedly made reference to Mr Trujillo's Hispanic background. The gang of American executives he recruited to work at Telstra, who have all returned to the US, were referred to as Mr Trujillo's "amigos''.

But Mr Brumby insisted people from all walks of life were accepted and welcomed into Victoria, where Telstra is based, and Australia. "I couldn't agree with his comments at all. Our country is the multicultural capital of the world. In our state we've got 44 per cent of our population born overseas, or one of their parents overseas. We are the land of opportunity.''

A spokeswoman for Mr Rudd told the ABC that Mr Trujillo's statements were "ridiculous comments which will disappoint Australians who welcomed him to this country".


Australia is said to be second only to Israel for the percentage of the population not born in the country so Senor Trujillo is talking through his anal orifice. If he himself was treated badly in any way, that does not reflect how Australians treat immigrants generally.

He ran the company in a way that gave offence to just about everybody (including me) so I imagine that some of the people he angered might have called him a "wog" or the like in the heat of the moment but he was in a position of power when few of his critics were -- so people do tend to get back at arrogant people in power however they can.

Other commentators also trace Senor Trujillo's gripes to his own personal failures. And there are some details here of the appalling treatment Australian phone users got from Mr Trujillo. Another writer points out that Senor Trujillo made some racial slurs of his own. The cartoonists have been having fun with Senor Trujillo too. An example below:

Justices to decide if vets can be honored with cross

We read:
"Some see it as the universal symbol of sacrifice in World War I, others see it as the undisputed sign of Christianity, but it will be up to the Supreme Court to make a final determination as to whether a 7-foot cross remains standing in a California desert to memorialize war veterans. The cross was first erected in 1934 in what is now the federally protected Mojave Desert Preserve by a group of veterans whose doctors advised them that the desert heat would help them recover from shell shock.....

"People of every faith have fought and died for this country," says Peter Eliasberg, counsel for the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. "Yet we will have veterans divided about the idea of how you reflect the sacrifice of American veterans." "For us to choose the principal symbol of one religion that says Jesus is the Son of God and He is divine and say that is an appropriate way to reflect the sacrifice of people who don't believe that ... is excluding by its very nature," Mr. Eliasberg said.

At a gathering last week at the National Press Club, just before the Memorial Day weekend, several veterans organizations made their case for why the Supreme Court should rule in their favor during its next session, which begins in October. "This Memorial Day is more than just a three-day weekend at the beach," Mr. Davis said. "This is about remembrance."


I wonder what symbol the ACLU has in mind as representing all faiths? A combination of a cross, a Star of David and an Islamic crescent could be quite a mess -- and please no-one. A lot of Indians fought in WWI and WWII on the allied side and their most favoured symbol is a swastika. You can see swastikas all around Bombay. How would that go?

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

"Bush=Hitler" OK but must not joke about Obama

We read:
"Canada's public broadcaster was wrong to show a skit that joked about the possible assassination of US President Barack Obama and suggested he could be a thief, an industry panel ruled today. The New Year's Eve Bye Bye comedy program - shown by the French-language Radio Canada network - generated more than 200 complaints.

In one segment, two hosts discussed Mr Obama's election in November 2008.

"We're not racists. It will be good to have a Negro in the White House," one of the show's hosts remarked. "It will be practical. Black on white, it will be easier to shoot him."

The Canadian Broadcasting Standards Council said it found "nothing redeeming in the allegedly comedic notion that an American president should be shot, still less that this would be easier to achieve because of the colour of the president's skin". "It was a disturbing, wounding, abusive racial comment."



Clare Werbeloff, the girl who claimed to have witnessed a minor shooting in Sydney's nightclub district and used the word "wog" in the course of her decsription of it has now said that she made it all up and did not witness the shooting at all. She retracted as soon as the police asked her to make a statement. The retraction may however have been because she did not want to get involved in any litigation. Her description had many hallmarks of accuracy.

Her retraction does however seem to have unleashed a remarkable wave of hatred against her:
"Across Facebook, sites are popping up attacking Clare for being racist over her "wog" remarks, and she has been described as a bitch, liar and a moron and with plenty of people saying they want to "Chk Chk Boom" her.

People are saying they would like to take her on, see her get smashed and that she makes them ashamed that this could have happened in Australia...

"The Clare Werbeloff is a liar and a moron" Facebook page had one woman Louise ask: "Why the f*** does my country worship idiots like this? It makes me really sad." Other comments on the site included:

* I agree with all the girls who want to smash her bimbo head in

* I would love to take this bitch on one on one. Aussie vs Aussie racist bitch... Whose out to watch it!!!!

* Clare, i hope you can see this, cause i would love you to know what an absolute f***head i think you are!!!!!!!

* WHITE TRASH... Hope she cops s*** over it now!!


The hatred certainly does no credit to the haters. They display far more hatred in what they say than she ever displayed in what she said. The usual Leftist pattern, of course.

I am rather pleased to see one Sydney newspaper blogger satirizing the haters.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

The Brits are at it again

Trying to criminalize criticism of homsexuality:
"Church of England bishops are on a collision course with the government over its plans to amend the incitement to hatred laws, claiming they will stifle what they believe is legitimate criticism of homosexual lifestyles. In what is being portrayed in some parliamentary quarters as a battle for free speech, a coalition of Anglican bishops, Conservative peers, Labour malcontents and leading crossbenchers have united to block the proposals.

Last year’s Criminal Justice and Immigration Act created the criminal offence of “incitement to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation”. But a group of peers, led by the Tory Lord Waddington, forced the government to accept an amendment stipulating that people should not be taken to court for stating that homosexual sex is wrong or for trying to persuade gay people to remain celibate. The clause read: “The discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or intended to stir up hatred.”

Now a new clause inserted in the Coroners and Justice Bill would see this defence dropped. The majority of the Church of England’s bishops are believed to oppose dropping the defence, although there have been dissenters. “Our view is, if it isn’t broke don’t mend it,” a church spokesman said. “This is about freedom of speech and avoiding unnecessary police investigations.”

The Lord Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham, the Right Rev George Cassidy, told parliament last week “that people should be protected from inflammatory and intimidating behaviour towards them on the basis of their sexual orientation”. However, he added: “Our concern is with the potential application of the law to restrict legitimate discussion and expression of opinion about sexual ethics and sexual behaviour.”

Christian groups complain the current laws have already resulted in people being investigated for criticising homosexual lifestyles and claim more will be prosecuted if the amendment becomes law. They point to cases such as that of Kwabena Peat, a north London history teacher, who was dismissed for complaining that a staff away day was used to promote homosexual lifestyles...


Facebook on the frontline of free speech

We read:
"Facebook was under increasing fire tonight for allegedly hosting pages promoting hatred against Jews after a report found that militants and hate groups were increasingly using social networking sites as propaganda tools to recruit new members. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, the Jewish human rights group named after the renowned Nazi-hunter, said it has found a 25 per cent rise in the past year in the number of "problematic" social networking groups on such sites as YouTube. A third of the new postings were on Facebook alone...

Facebook has seen growing protests over a number of groups on its site. It has removed two Holocaust denial groups, on the grounds that comments from members violated the site's terms of service by promoting hate. The two groups "Holocaust is a Holohoax" and "Based on the facts ... there was no Holocaust" were taken down over the weekend after protests from bloggers.

Facebook said that it was allowing other Holocaust denial groups to remain up because it did not want to restrict free speech over a controversial issue and they did not cross the line into hate speech. A spokesman said that "the mere statement of denying the holocaust is not a violation of our terms". The company said it had consulted experts but keeping the world more open was better than censorship as a way of combating ignorance or deception. It said it was monitoring Holocaust denial groups carefully.

Facebook's statement of rights and responsibilities says that users may not "post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic, or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence". Under these rules Facebook has removed numerous pictures of breastfeeding babies if the mother's nipple is showing, a decision which has also provoked controversy.


I deplore all censorship but the moderate approach taken by Facebook is probably the best that can be expected.

Monday, May 25, 2009

Leftists can sure dish it out but can't take criticism back

British Leftist politician (above) threatens to sue critic:
"A Labour MP was accused of ‘bullying’ yesterday for threatening to sue a 21-year-old student who criticised him for not backing the Gurkhas. Warren Clegg, a member of the Territorial Army [Army reserves], received the threat in a letter from his MP Brian Jenkins.

Mr Jenkins, writing on House of Commons notepaper, said: ‘You have damaged my good name. It is my intention to seek legal redress unless you able [sic] to prove your allegations or are prepared to fully retract the offending comments and apologise unreservedly.’

In a letter two weeks ago to his local newspaper, Mr Clegg said: ‘I wrote to Mr Jenkins in support of the Gurkhas; as usual, my opinion as one of his constituents did not warrant a response.’ He said Mr Jenkins had ‘voted to keep the Gurkhas in poverty’ by not agreeing to let them settle in the UK.


As you can see, the letter that got the Leftist bully fired up was not even abusive, just disgusted: A long way from "Bush=Hitler"

Must not call a black, black??

From Australia:
"Cronulla [football] captain Paul Gallen landed himself and his club in an ugly racism row last night after an altercation with St George Illawarra prop Mickey Paea [pic above].

An aggrieved Paea went after Gallen in the 73rd minute with stunning accusations picked up on the Fox Sports microphones. Paea confronted Gallen after a tackle and was heard to say, "he called me a black ... he's a racist''.

And even when the two referees, Tony Des La Heras and Jason Robinson, tried to separate the players, Paea continued to rage at the Sharks captain. He added: "Don't ever say that again''.

Dragons skipper Ben Hornby and Paea approached the referees, with Hornby clearly saying "he wants to make a complaint''. But when the whistle-blowers pressed the matter, Paea decided not to go on with it.


OK. I'll put my anthropologist's hat on: Technically Paea is a Melanesian but few people would even have heard that word. There are some VERY black Melanesians. They are one of the two major races of the Pacific islands. The other race are the Polynesians, who look like large Japanese, VERY large, often. The Polynesians originated from S.E. Asia or Taiwan. The Melanesians originated in New Guinea.

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Must not speak ill of prostitutes??

From Australia:
"The Salvation Army has apologised over an advertisement published in newspapers on Friday which has outraged sex workers.

The Australian sex workers association, the Scarlet Alliance, was protesting over the Salvos' ad in newspapers that drew attention to its rehabilitation efforts. The ad told the story of 'Rick', saying, "To get Rick out of prostitution, we had to resort to smuggling.''

Scarlet Alliance president Elena Jeffreys said the Salvation Army had exploited the sex worker involved and was encouraging community discrimination against legal prostitution. "The Salvation Army has shamefully chosen to capitalise on stigma against sex workers in its advertising for their Shield doorknock,'' Ms Jeffreys, who was allowed to speak at the event, said before the apology was announced.


It seems that nothing is wrong any more. Will discrimination against pedophiles be outlawed next? I think I might live to see it. I can hear it now: The pedophile was born that way. He can't help it. It's a medical problem, not a criminal one. And then after a while it won't even be a medical problem and we might even see "Pedophile Pride" marches in our streets.

Local ACLU branch loses the plot

They seem to have forgotten that Christians are the enemy:
"An incident at the Breaux Bridge Crawfish Festival in which ministers were prohibited from distributing religious literature has caught the attention of the American Civil Liberties Union. Marjorie Esman, executive director of the ACLU of Louisiana and a part-time Breaux Bridge resident, wrote a letter May 15 to Breaux Bridge Mayor Jack Delhomme and city leaders to do what it takes to ensure that all expression, including religious expression, be allowed in public places.

The letter was prompted by reports that several ministers were stopped from distributing religious literature outside the Crawfish Festival in a public park earlier this month, she said. “The sidewalks of Breaux Bridge, as any other city, are public spaces open to everyone. They cannot be preempted by a private group for private purposes,” Esman wrote. “Neither religious nor any other speech on public streets or in public spaces may be curtailed to benefit a private group.”

Delhomme, the ministers and others are expected to meet next week to discuss the incident and determine how to avoid a similar situation in the future, City Attorney Chester Cedars said. "There is no ordinance that prohibits these individuals from doing what they were doing,” Cedars said. “Even if there was such an ordinance, it would be unconstitutional.”

In her letter to Delhomme, Esman notes that the ACLU “has a long history of supporting religious freedom and expression.” [First time I have heard of it]

Cedars said he finds that statement ironic since the ACLU threatened to sue the city of Breaux Bridge several years ago for displaying a nativity scene in a public park.


Saturday, May 23, 2009

Richard Branson won't ditch his bikini babes

And he gets in a good zinger as a reply to an embittered feminist:
"Sir Richard Branson has defended his penchant for posing with and using scantily clad women in promoting his Virgin Group, saying it's what keeps him in the news.

Responding to a column last week by The Advertiser's Amber Petty, which attacked Virgin's overtly sexual advertising, Sir Richard said using attractive women to sell products was an age-old practice. "The problem, I believe, with her argument is that if the next time I promote a product I line up with three male models the photo won't get into your paper and the new business won't get talked about," he wrote to The Advertiser in response to the article.

Petty also wrote that Sir Richard was "about as sexy as a pair of those socks you get on international flights" and questioned whether he was too old to be the face of the brand. "As to being an 'old man', yes I am approaching 60, but using someone's age to attack them is perhaps as bad as accusing someone of sexism," Sir Richard wrote in his response.


Australia: Sometimes "wogs" are OK

There is a video here in which a young woman who was a bystander to a shooting uses the term "wog" to refer to what were probably a couple of Lebanese. "Wog" is a common Australian term for whites who are not of British or Northern European ancestry and is generally considered derogatory.

But in this case the speaker seems not to have been condemned, but praised instead. I am not sure of why but I suspect that it was recognized that she was simply talking in the way a lot of normal Anglo-Australians do talk among themselves and a lot of normal Anglo-Australians were glad to hear it in public. I myself use certain wicked words in private conversation too. I think it is quite obnoxious that we have to have different standards for public and private speech, though.

I learn something everyday. From the girl's imitation of what the participants said, I thought initially that the dialogue sounded Maori but where the expression "fully sick boys" came from I had no idea. It is certainly not normal Australian slang. But one of the commenters said it is most likely Lebanese. And it is certainly more likely that Lebanese would have guns than Maoris would. Despite Australia's gun bans, handgun ownership and use seems to be common among Lebanese Muslims in Sydney. That is part of the reason why the Sydney police have a special "Middle East Crime Task Force".

Another report of the story here, noting that the video concerned has been hugely popular. A Leftist blogger has a big dummy-spit about the popularity of the lady here

I suspect that "dummy spit" might be solely Australian slang: If you have ever seen a baby spit out its dummy (pacifier) and start howling at the top of its lungs, you will get the idea of what is meant. It means a bad-tempered tantrum (roughly).

There is a picture of one of the "wogs" here.

Friday, May 22, 2009

Prosecution of Wilders to go ahead in the Netherlands

We read:
"Geert Wilders, leader of the anti-Islam party PVV, will definitely be prosecuted for inciting hatred against Muslims and Islam, news agency ANP writes on Wednesday.

A request by Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moscowicz to have the decision to prosecute quashed has been rejected by the Dutch supreme court.

Amsterdam appeal court said in January Wilders should stand trial for hate speech and discrimination. The public prosecution department had said earlier there were not sufficient grounds to prosecute the MP.

The anti-immigration MP said he expected ‘a political trial’. ‘I am being prosecuted for something millions of Dutch people are thinking... Freedom of speech is being sacrificed on the altar of islam. But I am ready to fight back with my head held high’, he added.


I doubt that anybody expects much to come out of the trial. It is just a "show trial" in a modern version of that expression: Its aim is to show the Muslims that the weak-kneed Dutch government is "doing something".

OK to "out" allegedly homosexual politicians?

There seems to be a bit of a furore about an NPR review of a TV "documentary" which aims to expose various GOP politicians as secretly homosexual. NPR cut out of the review all mention of the more weakly substantiated claims in the film and that has provoked much criticism from the Left -- who claim it as a breach of free speech etc. See a summary of the matter by computer industry groupie Robert X Cringely.

I don't see that the Left have any reasonable cause for complaint, however. What Cringely and his ilk seem not to see is that NPR was obviously just protecting itself against lawsuits. Any politician identified as a homosexual who turned out not to be one could obviously sue for a very large sum in damages over the defamation. I don't think any court (except perhaps the 9th Circus) could have failed to find that a false allegation of homosexuality would be very damaging to a conservative politician.

The movie maker probably has too few assets to be worth suing but NPR is a different proposition. As we know, it seems these days that you don't sue the guy who actually did the harm but rather someone who is somehow connected to him. And NPR just didn't want to get involved.

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Re-branding madness consumes Washington

We read:
"‘Global War on Terror’ is out — ‘overseas contingency operation’ is in. ‘Terrorist attack’ is out — ‘man-caused disaster’ is in.

Since the new administration took office, Washington has been consumed, on both sides of the aisle, by a kind of re-branding madness. This marathon in semantics has had a variety of tactical purposes, depending on who’s got his Sharpie on the dictionary.

The Obama administration, through a string of delicate shifts in terminology, has softened — or at least obfuscated — the essence of the war against Islamic extremism. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, arguably the Washington equivalent to Madonna of re-branding, delivered an entire set of testimony without using the word ‘terrorism.’ She says she prefers ‘man-caused disasters.’”


Leftist hate speech against Catholics in Wisconsin

We read:
"In Monday's Baraboo News Republic, political commentator Bill Press crossed the line between commentary and hate speech with reference to Catholics who objected to President Obama speaking and receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame.

Press referred to 74 bishops and 350,000 petition signers as "a bunch of small-minded, ignorant and intolerant religious zealots ..." because they pointed out to the University's president and Board that they were violating a direct order of the church by giving an ardent abortion supporter a scandalous speaking platform.

This "bunch" Press refers to is comprised of good Catholic citizens who are faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church, and they number far more than Press counted.


Wednesday, May 20, 2009

BBC 'biased in favour of BNP'

We read:
"The BBC was last night plunged into a row over claims of "disgraceful" bias in favour of the British National Party.

Anti-fascist campaigners Searchlight launched a formal complaint with BBC director general Mark Thompson after a series of broadcasts which, the organisation said, broke strict election rules on impartiality. Searchlight said the BBC was claiming the BNP were the main beneficiaries of the "anti-politics" sentiment caused by the MPs expenses scandal, when in fact the UK Independence Party and the Greens were ahead of the far-right party in the polls.

A BBC spokesman said the corporation "is obliged to treat all political parties... with due impartiality" and said the BBC "strongly contest" Searchlight's allegations.


"Searchlight" are far-Leftists of a generally Trotskyist persuasion. It takes someone that mad to see the BBC as favouring an anti-immigrant group. One of them had a go at me back in the '80s, on similarly superficial grounds. See here

King of the hate business is a Leftist

A good comment from a Leftist about the SPLC:
"What is the arch-salesman of hate-mongering, Mr. Morris Dees of the Southern Poverty Law Center doing now? He’s saying that the election of a black president proves his point. Hate is on the rise! Send money!

Without skipping a beat, the mailshot moguls, who year after year make money selling the notion there’s been a right resurgence out there in the hinterland with massed legions of haters, have used the election of a black president to say that, yes, hate is on the rise and America ready to burst apart at the seams, with millions of extremists primed to march down Main Street draped in Klan robes, a copy of Mein Kampf tucked under one arm and a Bible under the other, available for sneak photographs from minions of Chip Berlet, another salesman of the Christian menace, ripely endowed with millions to battle the legions of the cross.”


Cockburn often takes a different line from other Leftists. He is a global warming skeptic, for instance. I wonder if he was known as "HotC*ck" at school? Pretty likely. His surname is usually pronounced as "Cobern", however, and you do sometimes see people who spell it that way too.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Must not connect dog races and sex

Some nonsense from Australia:
"Brisbane Greyhound Racing club has defended its use of a sexual pun to promote a series of race meets featuring rugby league [football] greats Arthur Beetson and Tommy Raudonikis, the morning after NRL boss David Gallop apologised to victims of sexual abuse by players.

In a press release titled 'Tommy and Artie do it Doggie Style for Origin', Brisbane Greyhound Racing Club (BGRC) says Beetson and Raudonikis will host several dog race meets pitting Queensland against New South Wales in a series named Birth Of Origin - Doggie Style.

"I can't really see it being too damaging or inappropriate, really," Mr Millican said of the doggie-style promotion. "We've been planning this campaign for a while. "This is a greyhound racing campaign to help promote our sport and the tag line is a bit of tongue and cheek and we have used this one before for our Uni Night promotions out here."

But a spoksewoman from the Brisbane Rape and Incest Survivors Support Centre, Karin Cheyne, described the publicity stunt as "degrading".


What's rape and incest got to do with doggie sex? Just about everyone does doggies at times as far as I know.

The cheek of the fool!

This is enough to outrage anyone of Scottish descent!
"The principal of a Utah middle school has been asked to apologize for forcing a kilt-wearing student to change his clothes. Weber School District spokesman Nate Taggart says Craig Jessop has been asked to extend an apology to 14-year-old student Gavin McFarland of Hooper after the school official's comments Wednesday.

Gavin says he wore the kilt twice in the past two weeks to Rocky Mountain Junior High as a prop for an art project. Jessop told the boy that the outfit could be misconstrued as cross-dressing.

Taggart says the district recognizes the kilt as an expression of the boy's Scottish heritage and that the kilt was not inappropriate. Kilts are traditional Scottish apparel generally worn by men for formal or special occasions.


When Nathan Warmack was forbidden to wear his kilt to the school dance in late 2005, the school not only ended up apologizing but sent the relevant employees to cultural sensitivity training!.

Monday, May 18, 2009

Ruling lets team keep Redskins' trademark

A victory over the whiners for once:
"The Washington Redskins won another legal victory Friday in a 17-year fight with a group of American Indians who contend that the football team's trademark is racially offensive. The decision issued Friday by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington doesn't address the main question of racism at the center of the case. Instead, it upholds the lower court's decision in favor of the football team on a legal technicality.

Redskins attorney Bob Raskopf said millions have been spent on the Redskins brand, and the team would have suffered great economic loss if it had lost the trademark registrations. "It's a great day for the Redskins and their fans and their owner Dan Snyder," he said.

The court agreed that the seven American Indians waited too long to challenge the trademark first issued in 1967. They initially won - the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office panel canceled the trademarks in 1999 - but they've suffered a series of defeats in the federal courts since then.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly overturned that decision in 2003 in part because the suit was filed decades after the first Redskins trademark was issued. The U.S. Court of Appeals then sent the case back to Judge Kollar-Kotelly, noting that the youngest of the plaintiffs was only 1 year old in 1967 and therefore could not have taken legal action at the time.

Judge Kollar-Kotelly issued a new ruling last summer that rejected that argument. She wrote that the youngest plaintiff turned 18 in 1984 and therefore waited almost eight years after coming of age to join the lawsuit.

The judge did not address whether the Redskins name is offensive or racist. She wrote that her decision was not based on the larger issue of "the appropriateness of Native American imagery for team names." A three-judge panel of the appeals court upheld that decision Friday.


Accusations of effeminacy wrong?

British TV star Jonathan Ross is in trouble again:
"Ross was involved in a light-hearted discussion about prizes in a competition themed around the fictional teen pop star when he joked: ‘If your son asks for a Hannah Montana MP3 player, you might want to already think about putting him down for adoption before he brings his...erm...partner home.’

A spokeswoman for Ofcom was unable to say how many people had complained but said: ‘We have had complaints. We are assessing those complaints against the broadcasting code.’

Listener Karen Mills told Pink News: ‘How can these people earn such huge sums of public money to come out with this discriminatory rubbish?

The BBC insisted there was no link to any specific individual and that the joke was part of a light-hearted exchange.

Known for his irreverent humour and flamboyant fashion sense, Ross also presents a chat show, Friday Night with Jonathan Ross on BBC1, featuring music from 4 Poofs and a Piano. ["Poof" is British slang for an effeminate homosexual]


He obviously implied that a parent might be disappointed if their son brought home a homosexual lover but that is probably a pretty accurate judgment about how most parents would react. But truth-telling is a low priority in Britain.

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Must not call probable homosexuals "gay"???

Batty Britain again. Isn't homosexuality supposed to be wonderful there?
"A man and a 14-year-old boy have been banned from attending football matches for three years for shouting homophobic chants at Portsmouth and former England defender Sol Campbell [pic above]. Ian Trow, 42, from Milton Keynes in southern England, and the boy – who cannot be named for legal reasons – pleaded not guilty to indecent chanting but were convicted by magistrates in Portsmouth overnight.

The chants were aimed at Campbell during a match against his former club Tottenham at Portsmouth's Fratton Park stadium in September last year.

After a three-hour trial, Georgette Holbrook, chairwoman of the magistrates' panel, found the two defendants had chanted: “Come on gay boy, that's my gay boy.” She said: “We find that the words used were in extremely bad taste, they were inappropriate, shocking and disgusting, and as such they were indecent.”

In a statement read to the court, Campbell said he had felt “totally victimised and helpless by the abuse I received.

Both Trow and the boy were banned from watching football matches for three years, while Trow was also fined STG500 ($1000) and ordered to pay STG400 ($800) costs.

The prosecuting authorities in England said that while cases of racist chanting have been prosecuted before, this was the first case of indecent chanting to be brought to the courts.


"gay" is "indecent"? Whatever happened to "gay pride"? Some very confused thinking there.

Note that Campbell does not deny being homosexual above but that he has never "come out". The fact that he is black may account for that. The view that he is homosexual is widespread because of a number of unusual things about him -- such as an interest in fashion, an inability to bond with fellow footballers and a high level of emotionality.

Muslims are a race??

Alan Jones could be called Australia's Rush Limbaugh. In the third paragraph below Jones was referring to a gang of Lebanese Muslim rapists who were sentenced to long jail terms for their crimes. They admitted that they set out to rape non-Muslim girls:
"A tribunal has heard recordings of top-rating Sydney broadcaster Alan Jones refer to "Muslim trash" live on air before reading a letter that referred to Muslims as "vermin" who "simply rape, pillage and plunder a nation that's taken them in".

The NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal will now hear expert testimony from two Sydney University academics arguing Muslims are an "ethno-religious grouping" and that such comments constitute racial vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act......

Later that morning, he read aloud one such piece of correspondence on air. The piece, which came from an unnamed listener, was in response to footage of several men - "Remember, these people announced themselves as Lebanese Muslims," Jones said - on a Channel Nine program the night before. "They have no connection to us," Jones read. "They simply rape, pillage and plunder a nation that's taken them in. "I can't believe what I'm seeing. What did we do as a nation to have this vermin infest our shores?"


You will always be able to find Leftist academics to argue that black is white if it suits them.

Crime by Lebanese Muslims is such a big problem in Sydney that the police have a separate "Middle Eastern crime task force" so I think Jones was amply justified in calling some members of that group "trash".

Lawmakers would label satellite providers as terrorists

We read:
"Two U.S. congressmen have proposed legislation to label satellite providers of incendiary television stations as terrorist organizations — the latest attempt by lawmakers to prevent radical anti-American propaganda from hitting the airwaves, even abroad. The bill, authored by Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and Rep. Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., seeks to punish satellite companies that carry channels that are mouthpieces for known terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas — stations they say incite their audiences to commit acts of terrorism against the United States.

But some free speech advocates question the constitutionality and consequences of the legislation, arguing that such modes of communication are a useful tool in monitoring terrorist movements. ‘The constitutionality of such a statute is uphill,’ said Harvey Silverglate, a civil-liberties attorney with the Boston-based law firm Zalkind Rodriguez Lunt & Duncan LLP.”


Saturday, May 16, 2009

No fight left in the "Fighting Sioux"

We read:
"North Dakota's Board of Higher Education has agreed to drop the University of North Dakota's Fighting Sioux nickname and Indian head logo, a move intended to resolve a decades-long campus dispute about whether the name demeans American Indians.

The name and logo, which is a profile of an American Indian man with feathers and streaks of paint on his face, could still be saved if North Dakota's Standing Rock and Spirit Lake Sioux tribes agree by Oct. 1 to give the university permission to use them for at least 30 years. However, tribal officials say that possibility is remote. Unless the name and logo receive tribal endorsement, they will be retired for good on Aug. 1, 2010.

"What this permits the University of North Dakota to do is to start a marketing initiative," Kelley said. "Over time, I think we would see enhancement of our revenue structure for athletic programs. I think we would see the enhancement of fan interest."

UND sports teams have been known as the Fighting Sioux since 1930, when the moniker replaced Flickertails. Arguments against the nickname's racial origins have flared regularly for decades. Its supporters say the name is intended to honor North Dakota's Sioux tribes, while critics say it is demeaning and fosters racial tension on the university's campus in Grand Forks, in northeastern North Dakota.

The debate came to a head in September 2005, when the NCAA declared Fighting Sioux as "hostile and abusive" to American Indians and said UND would be barred from hosting NCAA postseason tournaments if the school continued using it...

American Indian backers of the nickname, who have been campaigning on the reservations to garner support for it, asked the Board of Higher Education before Thursday's vote to back the nickname and logo. Many residents of both reservations take pride in "Fighting Sioux," they said.


When the team chose its name it was obviously an expression of admiration for the brave Sioux warriors of the old West. It should be obvious that teams don't names themselves after something they think ill of. But asking the Left to see the obvious is a big ask. They don't want to see it. All they want to do is destroy and disrupt -- and any excuse will do for that.

Nurse uniforms incorrect

Humorless feminists get their bloomers in a knot in Australia:
"The company behind one stand at CeBIT Australia struck the wrong chord with women in the technology industry this week. Web hosting company NetRegistry used women in nurse uniforms and men dressed as doctors to stand out from the crowd at the show. The outfits were accompanied by posters reading: "Want longer lasting server up-time?"

The stunt, which the company said was directed by "women and a gay guy", has been slammed by some women in the industry as demeaning. IT worker Kate Carruthers said NetRegistry's depiction of women at a trade show was unacceptable. "I was there and didn't like what I saw," Ms Carruthers, who is a member of Females in the Information Technology and Telecommunications, told

However NetRegistry chief Larry Bloch defended his company against claims the stunt was distasteful. "I think there are some people out there that just need to relax," he said. "It was a bit of harmless fun," he added.


Beware the Hate Crimes Bill!

Comment from a Leftist source:
"A statute’s words do not tell how the law will be interpreted and applied. All laws are expansively interpreted. For example: The Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) was directed at drug-lords. Nothing in the law says anything about divorce; yet it soon was applied in divorce cases. ….

With this in mind, consider the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Opponents criticize the bill for adding a second punishment to existing punishments for acts of violence. Assault, murder, rape are crimes regardless of motivation. The penalties are sufficient, or can be made so, without applying a new crime of motivation that creates specially protected classes, such as homosexuals and minorities. To commit a violent act against a member of a specially protected class will carry a heavier punishment.

How will a court know whether a violent act was committed because of hatred or because of sexual lust or the need for money? As case law is made, the likely direction will be to eliminate intent.”


Friday, May 15, 2009

Southerners must not be "insensitive"

I thought that Perez Hilton was exceedingly insensitive and terminally offensive in his comments about Miss California but that is OK, apparently. Only certain people have to be "sensitive"
"A white fraternity that traces its roots to the Civil War and Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee is again facing complaints over its antebellum-themed events.
This time, University of Alabama alumnae are upset after Kappa Alpha Order members wearing Confederate uniforms and carrying battle flags paraded past a historically black sorority as the women celebrated the group's 35th anniversary.

The fraternity has been forced to halt its "Old South" festivities on some campuses because of claims of racial insensitivity, and Alabama members have apologized for pausing in front of Alpha Kappa Alpha's sorority house during this year's parade.

Alpha Kappa Alpha members said there was no confrontation or taunting, but they were shocked to see fraternity members in rebel uniforms and white women from another sorority in hoop skirts.

"I don't believe these young folks were in any way trying to be racist," said Joyce Stallworth, an Alpha Kappa Alpha alumna who saw the April 29 parade in Tuscaloosa and is an associate education dean at Alabama. "But they were being insensitive. I don't think they understood the broader implications of what they were doing."


“Thought crimes” bill advances

We read:
"Why is the press remaining mostly silent about the so-called ‘hate crimes law’ that passed in the House on April 29? The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act passed in a 249-175 vote (17 Republicans joined with 231 Democrats). These Democrats should have been tested on their knowledge of the First Amendment, equal protection of the laws (14th Amendment), and the prohibition of double jeopardy (no American can be prosecuted twice for the same crime or offense). If they had been, they would have known that this proposal, now headed for a Senate vote, violates all these constitutional provisions.”

This bill would make it a federal crime to willfully cause bodily injury (or try to) because of the victim's actual or perceived "race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability" - as explained on the White House Web site, signaling the president's approval. A defendant convicted on these grounds would be charged with a "hate crime" in addition to the original crime, and would get extra prison time....

Corey adds that the state "hate crime" law - like the newly expanded House of Representatives federal bill - "does not apply equally" (as the 14th Amendment requires), essentially instead "criminalizing only politically incorrect thoughts directed against politically incorrect victim categories."

But James Madison, who initially introduced the First Amendment to the Constitution, had previously written to Thomas Jefferson on the passage of the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom: "We have in this country extinguished forever ... making laws for the human mind." No American, he emphasized later, would be punished for his "thoughts."...

As for the 14th Amendment's essential requirement that no person be denied "the equal protection of the laws," there is carved above the entrance to the Supreme Court: "Equal Justice Under Law." This legislation, certain to be passed by the Senate, will come to the Supreme Court. I hope the Justices will look up at the carving as they go into the building.

They should also remember that the Fifth Amendment makes clear: "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy." But the House "hate crime" bill allows defendants found innocent of that offense in a state court to be tried again in federal court because of insufficiently diligent prosecutors; or, as Attorney General Eric Holder says, when state prosecutors claim lack of evidence. It must be tried again in federal court!


Britain: Sales of black dolls rocket despite race row

We read:
"Shoppers from across the country have rushed to buy golliwogs at a store which was criticised for selling the dolls. Thing-Me-Bobs has been flooded with orders from scores of customers after the row made national headlines.

Joint manager Wendy Jee said sales of the £1.99 black-faced dolls on sticks had rocketed sincethe Ipswich and Suffolk Council for Racial Equality demanded they were pulled from shelves for being highly offensive.

But Mrs Jee said they had received a sackful of letters from supporters across the UK urging them to 'stand firm' and to 'stick to their guns'. "They have been selling very well. We had 39 come in on Friday - we put them out first thing on Saturday morning and by the end of the day they had all gone. Normally we would have expected to sell two or three a week," said Mrs Jee.

Margaret Dean, who also manages the store in Sudbury, Suffolk, said: "We have had a letter from a lady who has been to Africa where they are making and selling them. It seems to me it is the white people complaining who are going over the top being politically correct. "Everyone wants them now because they know where they can get them from."

Margaret Thatcher's daughter Carol was axed from BBC1's The One Show for using the term golliwog in a chat with a fellow presenter to refer to tennis ace Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.


Thursday, May 14, 2009

Lawmaker defends imprisoning “hostile bloggers”

We read:
"Rep. Linda Sanchez responded Wednesday to Threat Level’s tirade against her proposed legislation outlawing hostile electronic speech. Her answer: ‘Congress has no interest in censoring.’ Sanchez, with the introduction of the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, clearly has a great interest in censoring.

Still, the Democrat from Los Angeles makes several valid points that cyberbullying has lasting consequences on our nation’s youth. The 13-year-old Meier’s suicide is clearly a tragedy. But how she characterizes the measure is simply untrue. ‘Put simply, this legislation would be used as a tool for a judge and jury to determine whether there is significant evidence to prove that a person ‘cyberbullied’ another,’ she wrote in the Huffington Post. ‘That is: did they have the required intent, did they use electronic means of communication, and was the communication severe, hostile, and repeated?

So — bloggers, e-mailers, texters, spiteful exes and those who have blogged against this bill have no fear — your words are still protected under the same American values.’

But that’s not what the proposal says. It goes way beyond youth cyberbullying. As we said the other day, the measure seemingly outlaws logging onto the internet.”


The intent of a law, the wording of a law and the interpretation of a law handed down by the courts are three different things so utmost caution is needed before a law creating new offences is passed. This one seems wide open to misuse.

The P-word

"The ABC has dumped a segment of its hit television show The Gruen Transfer which joked about the Holocaust, Jews, black people and homosexuals.

The corporation's lawyers stepped in and canned half of the segment in which two ad agencies compete to sell the unsellable, in this case obesity. The part of the segment made by Sydney agency, The Foundry, was found to be racist and discriminatory, and will not go to air on tonight's show.

The Foundry's entry - which was judged to breach ABC editorial standards - sold the idea of "fat pride" by saying that if it was offensive to make jokes about "blacks, poofters, Jews" then why should it be acceptable to make jokes about "fat people"? Host Wil Anderson will direct viewers to a website to view the ad.


The question asked seems entirely reasonable to me so I gather that use of the word "poofter" was behind the ban. In Australia, "poofter" is similar in meaning to the American "faggot" but is mocking rather than hostile.


Video link and many more details here

Must not blame blacks and Hispanics for anything

We read:
"Tennessee-born beauty Cybill Shepherd definitely isn’t one to waste words -- and had she no qualms in speaking out about who she thought was to blame for the passing of Proposition 8 in California's last election, which led to gay and lesbian marriage rights being overturned.

"The Mormons and Catholics," she told Tarts at the recent L.A Gay & Lesbian Center’s "An Evening With Women" celebration in Beverly Hills. "Most of the money came from Utah, it’s very unfortunate."


Blind Freddy knows that blacks and Hispanics overwhelmingly dislike homosexuality and that they together form a huge proportion (43%) of the California population -- so there is no mystery about where the anti-homosexual vote in fact came from.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Attempted coverup: Obama laughs at offensive "jokes" on Fox news but not on MSNBC

From Fox news, we get the following report (excerpt) of the hate-speech about Rush Limbaugh uttered by black "comedian" Wanda Sykes:
"He's not saying anything differently than what Usama bin Laden is saying," she continued, before addressing the guest of honor, President Obama. "You know, you might want to look into this, sir, because I think maybe Rush Limbaugh was the 20th hijacker. But he was just so strung out on OxyContin he missed his flight."

The crowd groaned, Obama smiled and Sykes may have noticed a little discomfort in the room. "Too much?" she asked. But then she piled it on:

"Rush Limbaugh, 'I hope the country fails' -- I hope his kidneys fail, how about that? ... He needs a good waterboarding, that's what he needs."

Obama joined the crowd in laughing at the crack about Limbaugh's "kidneys."


Below is the full MSNBC report
"The White House is keeping its distance from an entertainer's joke comparing conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh to a terrorist.

On Monday, presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked for President Barack Obama's reaction to Wanda Sykes' comedic performance Saturday at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner.

"I don’t know how guests get booked," said Gibbs. "That’s a White House Correspondents' Association thing."


Anything missing from the MSNBC report? To the bigoted mainstream media, a black man can do no wrong. He can certainly not laugh at hate speech. So they cover for Obama in their usual way.

Will Sykes have to apologize the way golf analyst David Feherty had to? Both wished death on someone.

And will Obama condemn her hate speech? I hope I am wrong but I think we already know the answers to both questions. There are reports that "The White House" (a talking house?) has distanced itself from the remarks but as at the time of writing we had heard nothing from Obama himself

Whites cannot be called African (Unless you are a Democrat)

Even though there are several million African whites:
"A former student claims in a lawsuit that the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey discriminated against him for the way he described his background in classroom discussions on cultural diversity. Paulo Serodio said that in 2006, he told a professor and classmates that he was "white, African, American," which he says accurately reflects the fact that he was born in Mozambique but later became a U.S. citizen.

He said some classmates and staff members at New Jersey Medical School found it offensive that a Caucasian man would call himself "African-American" and that the fallout led to harassment and eventually his suspension from the school. Serodio, who lives in Newark, said some school employees and students told him not to describe himself as "African-American." In the aftermath of his comments, flyers were hung around the school mocking him, he was assaulted and his car was vandalized, Serodio said

His lawyer, Gregg Zeff, said Serodio eventually was suspended for "conduct unbecoming" a student. The suspension came directly from his remarks in class, Zeff said.

Serodio filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Newark on Monday. He is seeking damages from the university and several faculty members and administrators.


In South Africa, the whites have been there (in an ancestral sense) longer than most of the blacks have. Both major groups are descended from migrants but the whites got there first. So it is not history or place of birth that defines "African" to the Leftists above but race. We see here therefore an explicit example of Leftist racism.

Teresa Heinz, wife of 2004 Presidential contender John Kerry, was also born in Mozambique (of Portuguese ancestry) and she was touted at the time as likely to become the first African-American first lady -- but there was no outrage about that. See also here

And who can forget the absurd proclamation of Bill Clinton as the first African-American president? White skin certainly did not hold up that proclamation!

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

The new morality: You can say what you like but nobody must be upset

Particularly if they can afford to sue:
"Oscar-winning British actress Kate Winslet is suing a UK tabloid newspaper for the "unpleasant and nasty way" in which it reported about her fitness regime. Winslet, 33, claims that the Daily Mail article "injured her personal and professional reputation". She is suing the paper for libel damages of 150,000 pounds ($298,240).

In the feature article, headlined Should Kate Winslet win an Oscar for the world's most irritating actress?, it was claimed that the star had underplayed the amount of exercise she needed to stay in shape. It disputed a quote given to Elle magazine, in which Winslet said: "I don't go to the gym because I don't have time, but I do Pilates workout DVDs for 20 minutes or more every day at home."

According to the court papers, Winslet said she was particularly upset by the "very unpleasant and nasty way" in which the article was written."


I never thought I would agree with Perez Hilton on anything but I do on this

A real truth teller

We read:
"CBS Sports golf analyst David Feherty apologized Sunday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for a morbid joke that went bad in a Dallas magazine. Feherty, one of the most popular golf analysts for his sharp wit and self-deprecating humor, was among five Dallas residents who wrote for "D Magazine" on former President George W. Bush moving to Dallas.

"From my own experience visiting the troops in the Middle East, I can tell you this though," Feherty wrote toward the end of his column. "Despite how the conflict has been portrayed by our glorious media, if you gave any U.S. soldier a gun with two bullets in it, and he found himself in an elevator with Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Osama bin Laden, there's a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would get shot twice, and Harry Reid and bin Laden would be strangled to death."

Feherty, a former Ryder Cup player who grew up in Northern Ireland, has gone to Iraq over Thanksgiving the past two years to visit with U.S. troops, and he created a foundation to help wounded soldiers.


Military men do tend to have characteristic attitudes and I am perfectly sure that Feherty described correctly what many of them would like to do. As a former army psychologist, I think I have some small basis for that opinion but from his work with the troops I am sure that Feherty has EVERY basis for that opinion.

Monday, May 11, 2009

The Internet saved my tongue

Says the voluble and courageous Ezra Levant:
"Early on the morning of February 13, 2006, nearly 40,000 copies of the Western Standard rolled off the presses in Edmonton, Alberta. Tucked inside that week’s issue of Canada’s only national conservative magazine, on pages 15 and 16, was a story about the international controversy over a Danish newspaper that had printed a dozen satirical cartoons featuring the prophet Muhammad. Our article, which was illustrated by eight of the cartoons, would soon trigger a three year government investigation of whether I, as the Western Standard’s publisher, had violated the rights of Canadian Muslims by ‘discriminating’ against their religion.

The investigation vividly illustrated how Canada’s provincial and national human rights commissions (HRCs), created in the 1970s to police discrimination in employment, housing, and the provision of goods and services, have been hijacked as weapons against speech that offends members of minority groups. My eventual victory over this censorious assault suggests that Western governments will find it increasingly difficult in the age of the Internet to continue undermining human rights in the name of defending them.”


Ezra summarizes his experiences with Canadian soft Fascism and how he defeated it. Worth reading.

US lawmaker targets Viagra ads

We read:
"Democratic Representative Jim Moran doesn't want to hear about erectile dysfunction -- at least not on television between 6:00 am and 10:00 pm. Moran introduced legislation in late April aimed at banning as "indecent" the radio or television broadcast of advertisements for treatments or medication -- like Viagra or Cialis -- to fight the ailment.

The measure would instruct the US Federal Communications Commission to treat such commercials, which typically feature fully dressed couples nuzzling, as indecent. It would also cover treatments for "male enhancement," according to the text off the bill by Moran, from the state of Virginia.


Homosexuality is a reproductive disorder too. Should we ban all mention of that before 10pm?

I wonder what Rep. Moran's problem is? Did he try Viagra and find that it didn't work for him?

Moran is also an antisemite so I suspect that he is a pretty sick puppy. "Displacement" is a well known process in psychology -- whereby one removes ones emotions from their real object and onto some other object. And displacing anger about one's own sexual inadequacies onto "The Jews" has long been proposed by psychologists as one of the causes of antisemitism.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Must not make judgments of female attractiveness

This is pure reality-denying feminism
"A New Jersey high school student has been suspended for organizing a contest in which boys voted on the school's best-looking girls in a bracket modeled on the NCAA basketball tournament. Mike Butrym, of Towaco, says he was continuing a Montville High School tradition and believes his five-day suspension is too harsh.

The contest was called "May Madness." Teenage boys chose 16 female students from each grade. Each day, they paired off the girls and judged them on their appearance. Winners advanced to the next round. The 18-year-old says many girls in the school think of the contest as a joke. He says they even started their own version judging boys.

He was suspended for "intimidation, harassment and insubordination."


I wonder why women spend so much on "beauty" treatments, cosmetics, boob jobs etc. if it is so unimportant?

Louisiana cops detain man for half an hour because he displayed “Don’t Tread on Me” Bumper Sticker

Conservative bumper sticker "subversive" and "extremist", apparently:
"A Louisiana driver was stopped and detained for having a "Don't Tread on Me" bumper sticker on his vehicle and warned by a police officer about the "subversive" message it sent, according to the driver's relative.

The situation developed in the small town of Ball, La., where a receptionist at the police department told WND she knew nothing about the traffic stop, during which the "suspect" was investigated for "extremist" activities, the relative said. A man identifying himself as a police officer from Ball called WND later to report that the town's records of traffic stops did not include this situation. He suggested it might have involved one of several other agencies that work in the area.

It followed by only a few weeks the release of a Department of Homeland Security report, "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment", which prompted outrage from legislators and a campaign calling for the resignation of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.

The report, which cites individuals who sport certain bumper stickers on their vehicles as suspect, was delivered to tens of thousands of local law enforcement officers across the nation.


Coverup in full swing, of course. Background on the sticker here

Saturday, May 09, 2009

Facebook defends free speech

We read:
"Facebook has again come under fire for ignoring racism on the site after it refused to ban controversial groups that deny the Holocaust. It will instead attempt to block the groups from being viewed by users in countries where Holocaust denial is illegal.

The social networking site says it will remove groups that are sponsored by recognised terrorist organisations or that "express hatred towards individuals", but it will not take down groups that "speak out against countries, political entities or ideas".

However, months after Facebook said it would remove groups with racist content - including "F--- Islam", "I Hate Israel", "You're in Australia ... SPEAK ENGLISH!!!", "Aussie Pride!!! Love it or GET THE F*CK OUT" and "I cannot tolerate SOUTH AFRICAN ACCENT" - all of those groups, and many more, are still open and continue to spread their message.

The latest controversy relates to the Holocaust denial groups on the site including "Holocaust: A series of lies", "Holocaust is a Holohoax" and "Holocaust is a myth". A US attorney had complained that the groups violated the site's terms of service and would leave Facebook legally liable in countries where Holocaust denial is a crime, such as in Germany and Israel.

The groups are still accessible in Australia, where there are no specific laws prohibiting Holocaust denial. However, our courts have made it clear that the practice is a form of racial vilification.

Gollan said there were limits to "free speech" and likened the Holocaust denial groups to similar groups that deny the existence of the stolen generations. [The "stolen generation" is a myth concocted by Leftist Australian historians -- so we can see that Mr Gollan is at least as dangerous as those whom he attacks]

Facebook said in a statement that it had to "strike a very delicate balance" between giving Facebook users the freedom to express their opinions and ensuring people do not feel threatened when using the site. The social networking site said it had blocked the Holocaust denial groups in some parts of Europe but refused to delete the groups altogether.

"For example, homosexual content is illegal in some countries, but that does not mean it should be removed from Facebook," it said. [Touche!]


Australian neo-Nazi mother banned from talking politics to her son

We read:
"The Family Court has banned a pro-Nazi mother from taking her six-year-old child to political rallies or encouraging the child to share her ultra right-wing views.

In a case known as Hoover and Hoover, Deputy Chief Justice John Faulks ordered the woman be banned from viewing Nazi websites when the child is in her care and that she be restrained from inciting racial hatred.


It would be interesting to hear the mother's side of this. As long as she is not inciting violence or targeting any individual, her views are legal. Nazism preached hate but many present-day Leftists literally bubble over with hate. Any conservative blogger can tell you how much hate gets poured out at them. Should the Leftist haters be forbidden from discussing politics with their children too?

Friday, May 08, 2009

Fascism comes to America

Courtesy of the ObamaLeft, of course. Quote from the legal experts at The Volokhs:
"Federal Felony To Use Blogs, the Web, Etc. To Cause Substantial Emotional Distress Through "Severe, Repeated, and Hostile" Speech?

That's what a House of Representatives bill, proposed by Rep. Linda T. Sanchez and 14 others, would do. Here's the relevant text:
"Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both....

["Communication"] means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received; ...

["Electronic means"] means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.

1. I try to coerce a politician into voting a particular way, by repeatedly blogging (using a hostile tone) about what a hypocrite / campaign promise breaker / fool / etc. he would be if he voted the other way. I am transmitting in interstate commerce a communication with the intent to coerce using electronic means (a blog) "to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior" -- unless, of course, my statements aren't seen as "severe," a term that is entirely undefined and unclear. Result: I am a felon, unless somehow my "behavior" isn't "severe."

2. A newspaper reporter or editorialist tries to do the same, in columns that are posted on the newspaper's Web site. Result: Felony, unless somehow my "behavior" isn't severe.

3. The politician votes the wrong way. I think that's an evil, tyrannical vote, so I repeatedly and harshly condemn the politician on my blog, hoping that he'll get very upset (and rightly so, since I think he deserves to feel ashamed of himself, and loathed by others). I am transmitting a communication with the the intent to cause substantial emotional distress, using electronic means (a blog) "to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior." (I might also be said to be intending to "harass" -- who knows, given how vague the term is? -- but the result is the same even if we set that aside.) Result: I am a felon, subject to the usual utter uncertainty about what "severe" means.


I imagine SCOTUS would strike it down but the more people Obama appoints to SCOTUS, the weaker that protection will become. If I were an American blogger, I would be headlining this story, writing to my Senator, my House Rep., the Governor of my State and politely writing to the supporters of the bill and raising the sorts of issues that the Volokhs identify. Even if an exemption for all political speech were inserted, that would be worthwhile.

If "emotional distress" is prohibited in this context, will it eventually be prohibited in other contexts too -- such as relationship breakups? Fancy going to court if your girlfriend gets upset by something?

Dog's name in Dambusters remake causes headache for filmmakers

We read:
"It is not the full-scale replica of a Lancaster bomber nor the special effects that are causing problems for the makers of a multimillion-pound remake of the classic British war movie The Dam Busters.

The Lord of the Rings trilogy director Peter Jackson is producing the £21 million movie, to be filmed in Britain and New Zealand, and he has promised to be true to the original story. However RAF hero Guy Gibson, head of the mission that destroyed German dams during the Second World War, had a dog called N*gger and filmmakers are now wondering whether they dare utter in N-word in 2009.

The canine with the politically incorrect name, who featured in the 1951 book The Dam Busters, was mentioned 12 times in the 1954 film starring Sir Michael Redgrave.

RAF Squadron 617 used revolutionary "bouncing bombs" to target the dams of the Ruhr valley in May, 1943....

When the Dambusters project was announced in 2006, Jackson said: "It is not our intention to offend people. But really you are in a no-win, damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don't scenario. If you change it, everyone's going to whinge and whine about political correctness. And if you don't change it, obviously you are offending a lot of people inadvertently."


Thursday, May 07, 2009

Named and publicized: The 16 barred from Britain

We read:
"Sixteen people banned from entering the UK were "named and shamed" by the Home Office today. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she decided to make public the names of 16 people banned since October so others could better understand what sort of behaviour Britain was not prepared to tolerate. The list includes hate preachers, anti-gay protesters and a far- right US talk show host.

"I think it's important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here, the fact that it's a privilege to come and the sort of things that mean you won't be welcome in this country," Ms Smith told GMTV. "Coming to this country is a privilege. If you can't live by the rules that we live by, the standards and the values that we live by, we should exclude you from this country and, what's more, now we will make public those people that we have excluded.

"We are publishing the names of 16 of those that we have excluded since October. We are telling people who they are and why it is we don't want them in this country." She said the number of people excluded from Britain had risen from an average of two a month to five a month since October.

The list of the 16 "least wanted" includes radio talk show host Michael Savage, real name Michael Weiner. "This is someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country," Ms Smith told BBC Breakfast.

Also named are American Baptist pastor Fred Waldron Phelps Snr and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper, who have picketed the funerals of Aids victims and claimed the deaths of US soldiers are a punishment for US tolerance of homosexuality. Hamas MP Yunis Al-Astal, Jewish extremist Mike Guzovsky, former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard Stephen Donald Black and neo-Nazi Erich Gliebe are also on the list released today.


There is nothing wrong with this in principle. If I am entitled to say who is allowed to enter my house, surely a nation has a right to say who will enter it.

That the aim seems to be to suppress certain speech is however disturbing, but not as disturbing as it once would have been. I would guess that this ban is the best free advertising these guys could have got. Young people are inherently rebellious and many will resent attempts to hide things from them. And these days it takes only a few minutes on the net to find out all that these guys stand for. The British government has just given them all a huge boost towards getting their ideas out.