"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"
This document is part of an archive of postings on Tongue Tied, a blog hosted by Blogspot who are in turn owned by Google. The index to the archive is available here or here. Indexes to my other blogs can be located here or here. Archives do accompany my original postings but, given the animus towards conservative writing on Google and other internet institutions, their permanence is uncertain. These alternative archives help ensure a more permanent record of what I have written. My Home Page. My Recipes. My alternative Wikipedia. My Blogroll. Email me (John Ray) here. NOTE: The short comments that I have in the side column of the primary site for this blog are now given at the foot of this document.
****************************************************************************************
30 September, 2019
'OK' hand gesture, 'bowl-cut' hair style worn by white supremacist killer Dylann Roof, and Moon Man are now added to civil rights group's database of racist symbols
The 'OK' hand gesture, a mass killer's bowl-style haircut and an anthropomorphic moon wearing sunglasses are among 36 new entries in a Jewish civil rights group's online database of hate symbols used by white supremacists and other far-right extremists.
The Anti-Defamation League has added the symbols to its online 'Hate on Display' database, which already includes burning crosses, Ku Klux Klan robes, the swastika and many other of the most notorious and overt symbols of racism and anti-Semitism.
The New York City-based group launched the database in 2000 to help law enforcement officers, school officials and others recognize signs of extremist activity.
It has grown to include nearly 200 entries.
'Even as extremists continue to use symbols that may be years or decades old, they regularly create new symbols, memes and slogans to express their hateful sentiments,' Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement.
Some of the new entries started as trolling campaigns or hateful memes on internet message boards such as 4chan, 8chan and Reddit, before migrating to Facebook, Twitter and other mainstream platforms, and to public forums and fliers.
The ADL has updated its database to include the 'OK' hand symbol, which became fodder for a 4chan trolling campaign to dupe viewers into thinking the fingers formed the letters 'W' and 'P' to mean 'white power.'
Brenton Tarrant, the Australian man arrested for killing 51 people at mosques in New Zealand earlier this year, is seen right making the gesture in court in March
But the ADL says extremists also are using it as a sincere expression of white supremacy.
Oren Segal, director of the ADL's Center on Extremism, said context is key to interpreting whether an 'OK' symbol is hateful or harmless.
He said the ADL had been reluctant to add it to the database 'because 'OK' has meant just 'OK' for so long.'
'At this point, there is enough of a volume of use for hateful purposes that we felt it was important to add,' Segal said.
An earlier addition to the database was Pepe the Frog , a cartoon character that became hijacked by online extremists who superimposed the frog with Nazi symbols and other hateful imagery.
The ADL branded Pepe as a hate symbol in September 2016 and supported cartoonist Matt Furie's efforts to reclaim the character he created.
The ADL also added the 'Dylann Roof Bowlcut,' an image of the hairstyle worn by the white supremacist who shot and killed nine black people in 2015 at a church in Charleston, South Carolina.
Roof's bowl-style hair became an avatar for extremists, including a Washington, D.C., man whose relatives contacted the FBI to report concerns about his behavior and far-right extremist rhetoric after last year's Pittsburgh synagogue massacre.
SOURCE
'Outrage has become a commodity': Joker director Todd Phillips criticizes backlash to his film amid fears it will incite violence - and says 'the far left can sound like the right when it suits their agenda'
Todd Phillips has come out swinging in defense of his new film Joker, amid fears its depiction of a depraved murderer could incite real-life violence.
In an interview with The Wrap, which took place on September 20 and was published on Wednesday, the director scoffed at such suggestions, saying he believes people are simply searching for something to be angry about as 'outrage has become a commodity' in American society.
'I think it's something that has been a commodity for a while,' Phillips mused during his chat with the publication.
Joker - a psychological thriller that traces the origins of Batman's nemesis as he becomes a depraved killer - is set for national release on October 4.
But before it has even hit cinemas, the film has already sparked criticism from some critics, as well as Twitter users, for its depiction of gun violence.
Phillips told The Wrap that he believes such critiques are coming from the 'far-left' who are starting to sound the same as conservatives when they complain about 'immoral' films made by Hollywood.
'What's outstanding to me in this discourse... is how easily the far left can sound like the far right when it suits their agenda. It's really been eye opening for me,' he stated.
SOURCE
29 September, 2019
Why A “Politically Incorrect” Sign A Business Owner Posted On Door Has Liberals Going Crazy
The Kewaskum Dairy Queen posted a sign on the door calling the restaurant ‘politically incorrect’ is generating business and conversation.
The sign reads: “This restaurant is politically incorrect.” It warns potential customers that staff may say things like “Merry Christmas,” “Happy Easter,” and will also offer free sundaes to veterans on Veterans Day. It also says “In God We Trust.”
“I felt the sign was appropriate to hang in terms of being transparent about the views of the owner and staff supporting God and country,” said owner Kevin Scheunemann.
“It just seems that those kinds of values and principles are becoming controversial in society,” he said.
The sign was posted close to four years ago after a customer was upset when he heard Christian music inside the restaurant. Scheunemann decided to post the warning and said he hasn’t had many problems since then.
One time, a customer was upset at the offer of free ice cream for veterans, but Scheunemann said he is open to talking with anyone who may have concerns about the sign. He says he’ll even make arrangements for a customer to come in without witnessing any expression of God or country.
Other business owners in town say they support Scheunemann’s right to run his business the way he sees fit.
SOURCE
Australia shows that it is possible to kill hate speech without killing free speech
Flawed ‘hate speech’ laws are a threat to free speech. The best way to protect minorities – while also properly protecting free speech – is to ensure the criminal laws prohibiting incitements and threats of violence are effective.
Inciting and threatening violence has long been against the law. Liberal democracies, such as Australia that have strong traditions of valuing free speech, accept speech that endangers the safety of others should be illegal.
However, there has been a push to expand legislation to ban anything deemed ‘hate speech.’ The United Nations has said they want to ‘scale up [their] response to hate speech.’ Although wanting to stop hatred and bigotry is admirable, such statements should be viewed with caution.
‘Hate speech’ is a broad, vague, and ill-defined notion that would simply catch in the legal net the kinds of contentious speech that some people find offensive or hurtful — or simply do not like.
There is a fundamental difference between speech that criticises ideas and threats of violence.
But as my research shows, protecting community safety and free speech is possible. Most state and territory governments are reviewing their vilification laws — they should adopt the model NSW introduced last year.
The NSW parliament passed the Crimes Amendment (Publicly Threatening and Inciting Violence) Act, which criminalises incitements and threats of violence against an individual or group who possess a protected attribute.
In addition to setting a high threshold for proving an offence, these laws vest investigative powers to the police as opposed to the anti-discrimination board of NSW. This allows for a more thorough investigative process, minimising the risk trivial complaints will be brought.
These laws passed with bipartisan support, and the support of community and ethnic lobbies, satisfying an objective of these laws that they are required to ensure minorities feel safe in their community.
Any law that restricts speech needs to be scrutinised and the NSW approach is obviously not perfect. But it presents a workable model — akin to the old criminal laws against incitements and threats of violence.
Free speech cannot be sacrificed by flimsy and unnecessary ‘hate speech’ laws.
SOURCE
27 September, 2019
Weirdo says people’s feelings more important than first amendment rights
The campus newspaperat the taxpayer-funded University of California, Berkeley has published an op-ed by a student senator declaring that First Amendment rights are “a tactic used by the state” to preserve a “white supremacist, capitalistic and patriarchal” society which has elected “an openly racist, queerphobic, Islamophobic/xenophobic and anti-poverty adminstration[sic].”
The title of the May 1 op-ed in The Daily Californian is: “Campus must prioritize safety of marginalized over free speech.”
Juniperangelica Xiomara Cordova-Goff is the student senator who penned the 811-word jeremiad against free speech.
“Free speech has always been a tactic used by the state to grant the illusion that all voices in this nation are valued, yet there is a reason why Black female senators are discredited and why there is a white supremacist in the Oval Office,”Xiomara Cordova-Goff writes.
“I want to say that I do not feel safe on this campus,”he also declares.
“On the morning students woke up to Sproul Plaza flooded with fully armed police officers last Thursday, I was shocked and traumatized,”the junior says.
The mention of Sproul Plaza is a reference to the latest demonstrations organized by far-left and far-right agitators over a scheduled campus speaker. This time the speaker was going to be Ann Coulter.
“Walking through Sproul reminded me of every bad encounter I’ve had with police,”Xiomara Cordova-Goff writes. “It reminded me off the afternoons I visited my parents in jail.”
SOURCE
Beer Money Guy Donates $1 Million to Children's Hospital, Gets Cancelled for Bad Tweets
Recently, a young Iowan named Carson King went viral after being photographed at a football game while holding up a sign asking people to send him money, via Venmo, to buy more Busch Light beer. He succeeded beyond his wildest dreams, bringing in more than $1 million. Instead of keeping the money, King decided to give it to a children's hospital.
And for that amazing act of charity, Carson King had to be destroyed.
The Des Moines Register is facing backlash for exposing the years-old racist tweets of an Iowa man who raised $1 million for charity. Des Moines Register reporter Aaron Calvin profiled Iowa native Carson King...
Towards the end of the profile, Calvin mentioned that the paper had uncovered two racist jokes from King’s Twitter account dating to 2012, when King was 16 years old and still in high school...
King expressed shock over the tweets and apologized for them.
To recap: A guy donated $1 million to a children's hospital, so his local newspaper dug up some bad tweets from when he was a teenager. He did a good thing and gained national attention for it, and our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters in the press had to put him in his place.
And don't let any of these scumbag journalists tell you that King's old tweets "resurfaced." The tweets didn't just float up to the top of the Internet on their own. Somebody got paid to dig them up. Someone made the decision to publish them. It was a choice. The Des Moines Register chose this.
But here's where it gets interesting. Some keen-eyed Internet sleuths decided to do their own routine background check on Aaron Calvin, the Des Moines Register reporter who wrote the story:
The reporter who “exposed” Carson has his own skeletons.
This doesn’t seem very tolerant of you, Aaron.
I won’t post any more of his tweets. But this cancel culture is a terrible game. You live by it, and you will die by it. It helps no one. It isn’t journalism.
There was a lot more where that came from. Seems fair, right? If you can dig up some old tweets to humiliate a guy who's helping sick children, why can't people dig up your old tweets? Either these rules apply to everybody or they don't.
So now this is happening:
The Register is aware of reports of inappropriate social media posts by one of our staffers, and an investigation has begun.
Sounds like the Des Moines Register should've run a routine background check on this guy before hiring him. Oh well!
The moral of the story: Don't do anything good for anybody else, because some bag of garbage with a press pass will try to destroy you for it. The reporter who goes after you will probably have even worse skeletons in his closet, but that won't help you get your reputation back.
And if you absolutely insist on doing good deeds, if you feel the need to put other people before yourself, first you must delete everything you've ever posted to the Internet.
SOURCE
26 September, 2019
Some truths are too much even for Fox news
Michael Knowles, the Daily Wire contributor whose blank book Reasons to Vote for Democrats became an Amazon bestseller two years ago, will no longer be a guest on Fox News after calling Greta Thunberg a "mentally ill child" during an appearance on The Story with Martha MacCallum Monday evening.
Knowles had been discussing the absurdity of "meatless" diets and environmentalism. "The climate hysteria movement is not about science,” Knowles said. “If it were about science, it would be led by scientists rather than by politicians and a mentally ill Swedish child who is being exploited by her parents and by the international left.” This didn't go over well with the show's liberal guest.
Fellow guest and Democrat Chris Hahn audibly remarked “how dare you” as Knowles continued and said this is a “political movement and a religious movement” on the left, to which Hahn responded, “You’re a grown man and you’re attacking a child. Shame on you.”
“I’m not, I’m attacking the left for exploiting a mentally ill child,” Knowles said.
“Relax, skinny boy!” Hahn shot back. “I got this, okay? You’re attacking a child, you’re a grown man. Have some couth.”
Thunberg and her family have long been open about her Asperger’s Syndrome, which is a “developmental disorder characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, along with restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests.”
Hahn refused to let Knowles' comments go and demanded he apologize for calling Thunburg "mentally ill."
"She is mentally ill," Knowles responded. "She has autism, she has obsessive-compulsive disorder, she has selective mutism, she had depression..."
Hahn didn't seem to care and called Knowles despicable. Knowles then noted that Thunberg's mother wrote about all this in a book.
Guest host Harris Faulkner quickly changed gears and moved on to another topic.
One thing is certain: Everything Knowles said was correct and easily verifiable. Thunberg has Asperger syndrome, selective mutism, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and suffered from depression. In 2018, she described her own illnesses in a TEDx Talk, where she explained that she fell into a depression and became ill when she was eleven years old. "I stopped talking. I stopped eating. In two months, I lost about ten kilos of weight. Later on I was diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, OCD, and selective mutism—that basically means I only speak when I think it's necessary."
Any single one of these would be described as a mental illness. Calling them such is not attacking a child, but acknowledging the fact that this girl is being thrust into the spotlight despite her numerous problems. While may on the left cheer this, because Thunberg is the latest human shield they've found to champion their causes, many on the right see it for what it is: child exploitation and abuse. That Fox News was so quick to cut ties with Knowles for acknowledging this fact is just bizarre.
SOURCE
Dems Demand Ben Carson Resign After Media Twists His Words on Trans Issues
He showed proper concern for the safety of real women
Last week, media reports twisted remarks from Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Ben Carson. Carson had told HUD staff that some women's shelters expressed concerns about "big, hairy men" who identified as women and tried to enter the shelters.
The Washington Post reported Carson's remarks as "dismissive," quoting a staffer who called Carson "disrespectful" and going on to list the secretary's history of politically incorrect comments on transgender issues. Democrats responded with outrage and demands that Carson resign.
"Secretary Carson's transphobic remarks are completely unacceptable," Warren tweeted. "Trans women who experience homelessness are already disproportionately more likely to face violence. If Secretary Carson is not willing to do his job and protect all Americans experiencing housing insecurity then he shouldn't have his job.
SOURCE
25 September, 2019
An Indirect Chilling of Free Speech?
It's about time these Maoist groups were reined in. They are just Leftist thought police
A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the University of Michigan could be dampening free speech on campus by allowing a group that helps students who have experienced potentially prejudicial acts to operate at the institution.
Speech First, a Washington, D.C.-based civil liberties watchdog, sued Michigan last year, asking for an injunction to halt the activities of the university’s Bias Response Team, which helps investigate incidents deemed racist, sexist, hostile to LGBTQ students or otherwise offensive to certain groups of people. Similar teams are common at other colleges and universities, but their functions vary.
Speech First claimed in its lawsuit that the Bias Response Team is illegal because it could potentially deter students from making statements or engaging in protests that some on campus might find offensive but might be protected under the First Amendment.
A U.S. District Court judge initially denied the injunction last year.
Michigan officials had successfully defended the response team, saying it could not discipline students who were behaving in ways perceived to be prejudicial. The group merely provides support for those on campus who felt they had been the targets of biased acts, the university argued in court filings. For instance, the team may reach out to an affected student to discuss an incident and discuss if the student wants to file a formal complaint with the university or campus police.
Team members can ask a student who engaged in the potentially offensive speech to voluntarily meet with them, but they cannot force the student to do so, the university stated in court filings.
Speech First noted, however, that the team can refer incidents to campus law enforcement, the Office of Student Conflict Resolution or the mental health counseling center.
In a 2-to-1 decision, the three-member U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit determined the team’s ability to make these referrals “is a real consequence that objectively chills speech.”
The case will now be returned to the lower court, which will once again consider Speech First’s injunction.
“The referral itself does not punish a student -- the referral is not, for example, a criminal conviction or expulsion. But the referral subjects students to processes which could lead to those punishments,” Judge David McKeague wrote for the majority. “The referral initiates the formal investigative process, which itself is chilling even if it does not result in a finding of responsibility or criminality.”
SOURCE
Trump promotes religious freedom in UN speech
President Trump on Monday decried religious intolerance during a speech at the United Nations in which he called on world leaders to not persecute people over their faith.
“The United States is founded on the principle that our rights do not come from government, they come from God. This immortal truth is proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence and enshrined in our First Amendment to our Constitution, Bill of Rights,” the president said.
“Our founders understood that no right is more fundamental to a peaceful, prosperous and virtuous society than the right to follow one’s religious convictions. Regrettably, religious freedom enjoyed by American citizens is rare in the world,” he continued.
Trump said it was an “urgent moral duty” for world leaders to stop crimes against faith, release prisoners of conscience and repeal laws restricting religious liberty.
“Approximately 80 percent of the world population live in countries where religious liberties are threatened, restricted or even banned. When I heard that number I said, ‘Please go back and check because it can’t possibly be correct.’ Sadly, it was: 80 percent,” Trump told the Religious Freedom Summit at the UN.
“As we speak, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, many other people of faith are being jailed, sanctioned, tortured and even murdered even at the hands of their own government simply for expressing their deeply held religious beliefs,” he said, calling on world leaders to be more tolerant.
The president then cited a number of cases of terrorism and violence in which targets have been chosen because of religion, such as the mosque shootings in New Zealand, and he announced that the United States will contribute $25 million to help protect religious relics and promote religious freedom.
Trump’s speech extends a long-running focus on international religious freedom that speaks to a key priority of his evangelical base. His administration has hosted annual meetings on the topic in Washington, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced during this year’s event that he would create an international alliance on the issue.
One prominent evangelical backer, Dallas-based pastor Robert Jeffress, lauded Trump for focusing on religious freedom instead of climate change.
“What president in history would have the guts to do what President Trump is doing?” Jeffress said on Fox News.
“And it’s this kind of leadership that is absolutely infuriating the president’s enemies, but it’s also energizing his base, especially his religious base of voters.”
SOURCE
24 September, 2019
Accommodating free speech in Millennium Park
There are many lovely parks in Chicago and its suburbs, but there is only one Millennium Park. It’s among the most popular tourist destinations in the entire Midwest, attracting some 25 million visitors a year. Many of those people take time to gaze at the iconic Cloud Gate sculpture, affectionately known as The Bean.
Among the visitors has been a group of Wheaton College students who think the park, and the area around The Bean, is a good place to do something they see as a duty: sharing their Christian faith by talking to people and handing out literature. But when they tried it last year, park employees told them they were violating park rules. Those rules allow “the making of speeches and the passing out of written communications” in only one small part of the park, as well as on the sidewalks.
Since then, the students have done their evangelizing elsewhere. But they have also filed a lawsuit against the city of Chicago, which they say is violating their First Amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of religion. “The Bean is one of the highest tourist attractions in the United States ... that’s where you want to get your message out,” the plaintiffs’ attorney, John Mauck, told the Tribune.
The students have a plausible case — up to a point. Public parks, the Supreme Court noted in 1939, “have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions.”
In such spaces, you don’t need to get a permit, pay a fee or rent a hall. You can just show up and convey your message to anyone who is open to it. Others in the park are free to ignore you, argue with you or walk away.
The city, however, has tried to seal this site off from such activities. It divides Millennium Park into 11 sections — and tolerates free communication in just one of them, in the northwest corner. So some 90% of the space, including The Bean — is off-limits to anyone with a message to share.
The city’s policy, in seeking to ban speech activity in nearly all of the park, is too strict and appears to run afoul of the First Amendment. The city already bans loudspeakers and bullhorns, and it certainly has the right to police noise and conduct in spaces where musical or other performances are taking place. Before the city can forbid free expression in a public space, it needs a good reason — and it needs to “leave open ample alternative means for communication of the information,” as the Supreme Court has stipulated.
SOURCE
H&M comes under fire for 'disrespectful' ad that features a young Black model with 'messy' hair pulled into an undone ponytail
H&M has once again come under fire for a new ad that features children with messy hair.
One of the photos from the ad showed a young Black girl with her natural hair pulled into an undone ponytail as she modeled a floral printed sweatshirt.
The controversial ad for H&M's clothing line for kids also featured other children with messy hairstyles.
Photos of the young girl began making its rounds on social media last Thursday, but it was celebrity hairstylist, Vernon François, who called out H&M for the problematic image.
'This post is just an assessment based on all my years of seeing situations like this happen time and time again. And its got to stop.
Though most people seemed upset that the child's hair wasn't styled better, others pointed out that all of the children had messy hair and it is very telling that out of all of them, people picked out the Black girl to 'ridicule'.
SOURCE
23 September, 2019
Trump and Zuckerberg hold 'constructive meeting' about internet regulation
Sounds like a start. Trump is keeping the pressure up
President Trump and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg held a meeting at the White House to discuss internet regulation.
"Mark is in Washington, D.C., meeting with policymakers to hear their concerns and talk about future internet regulation. He also had a good, constructive meeting with President Trump at the White House today," Facebook said in a statement Thursday.
Zuckerberg and Sen. Josh Hawley also met Thursday to talk about tech regulation. Hawley said the Facebook head refused his demands to sell Instagram and WhatsApp as well as to submit to independent audits on censorship.
The Missouri Republican has taken a hard stance against tech companies, such as introducing the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act, a bill that would drastically reshape how they would function.
Trump has also spoken out against tech censorship, saying they are "sooo on the side of the Radical Left Democrats."
SOURCE
Football club "Old Bar" ordered to destroy ‘disgusting’ shirts
Just bravado. Not seriously intended
A NSW rugby league club has been ordered to destroy its end of season footy trip shirts following outcry over an offensive phrase on the top.
Group 3 rugby league club Old Bar Beach Pirates, from the NSW Mid-North Coast, has confirmed its players are facing disciplinary action when they return from their end-of-season holiday after a backlash on social media forced the league to take action immediately.
A group of around 20 men were pictured at Newcastle Airport sporting the offensive shirts, which included a naked cartoon mermaid and the phrase “‘Rape and pillage Tour”.
NSW Country Rugby League officials took swift action on Friday announcing the players will be disciplined following an investigation.
The Old Bar club is expected to escape sanction because the club was not involved in the players’ end-of-season trip and had no knowledge of the plan to print offensive shirts for the group holiday.
CRL Chief Executive Officer Terry Quinn released a statement on Friday, announcing the players involved will be “sanctioned accordingly”.
“The behaviour of these persons is inexcusable and it is extremely disappointing,” Quinn said.
“The Old Bar Club denies having any involvement in producing the T-shirts, which was an action of individuals.
“We have been in contact with the club and the individuals have been instructed to destroy the T-shirts immediately. “The club is part of the Tackling Violence program and is taking this matter very seriously. “Once we find out the names of these said individuals they will be sanctioned accordingly.”
The T-shirts were widely condemned on social media, led by Channel 9 commentator Peter FitzSimons.
SOURCE
22 September, 2019
Facebook's strange new 'supreme court' is an example other tech giants should follow
Facebook's long-awaited "supreme court" is beginning to take shape. If that seems like a strange sentence, it’s only because social networks have been dictatorships for so long.
On Tuesday, Facebook published a draft charter for its “Oversight Board”, a new independent body which will serve as a final court of appeals for Facebook users who are punished by the company’s moderators. Facebook claims that it will treat the Board’s decisions as binding: if it says your sexually suggestive selfie should be restored, then restored it will be, no matter what Mark Zuckerberg thinks.
Thanks to the charter we now know that the Board will have around 40 members and hear cases in panels of five.
SOURCE
Oxford dictionary definition of ‘woman’ sexist, petition claims
Almost 30,000 people have signed a petition calling for Oxford dictionaries to change the “sexist” definition of “woman”, but not everyone agrees.
The petition, created by London women’s rights advocate Maria Beatrice Giovanardi, points out that when you search the word woman online, sites powered by Oxford list synonyms such as “bitch, besom, piece, bit, mare, baggage, wench, petticoat, frail, bird, bint, biddy and filly”.
“These are the words which the Oxford’s English Dictionary online tells us mean the same as woman,” Ms Giovanardi wrote.
It also points to some “patronising” examples of common usage, which include “Ms September will embody the professional, intelligent yet sexy career woman” and “I told you to be home when I get home, little woman”.
“These examples show women as sex objects, subordinate and an irritation to men,” Ms Giovanardi said.
But Deborah Cameron, a language and communications professor at Oxford University, cautioned against “sanitising” dictionaries in the hope of making “a better world”.
“Modern dictionaries are descriptive: Their purpose isn’t to tell people how words should be used but rather to record how words actually are used by members of the relevant language community,” she wrote in an online response to the petition.
“The dictionary is essentially a record of what the lexicographers have found out by analysing a large … corpus of authentic English texts, produced by many different writers over time.”
While some racist and homophobic words have been culled from dictionaries and thesauruses in the past, rewriting the Oxford English Dictionary, which is a historical text meant for scholars, would be wrong, she argued.
SOURCE
20 September, 2019
Fitness instructor claims obese people SHOULD be fat-shamed because it encourages them to 'keep their mouths shut and lose weight'
There's no mystery about how to lose weight. What is missing is the motivation. And fat-shaming could provide that
Good Morning Britain viewers were left horrified as a guest on the programme argued obese people should be fat shamed because it encourages them to lose weight.
Danielle Levy, from Essex, clashed with actor Christopher Biggins on the breakfast show, as she exclaimed that 'being fat is bad'.
The fitness instructor argued that fat shaming would actually encourage people to lose weight, saying: 'The more we fat shame, the more people would keep their mouths shut and stop overeating.'
Viewers were left shocked by the segment, with many taking to Twitter to slam the fitness instructor for her argument.
One wrote: 'Definitely bullying. Fat people know they're fat, they don't need a reminder in the form of a derogatory remark. People will lose weight when they are ready to, positive help is needed.'
Another commented: 'Not all fat people overeat. Some have conditions that make them big. Don't tar everyone with the same brush.'
Danielle appeared on the programme alongside actor Christopher Biggins, who argued that fat shaming is hurtful and cruel.
SOURCE
Joke fuels free speech debate
“All this ICE but no detention centers in sight,” read the caption, beneath an Instagram photo of a Yale junior smiling amid a backdrop of snowy mountains.
Was the gaffe a distasteful joke or an affront to undocumented immigrants? Yale administrators and faculty disagreed. Screenshots of the post — a play on the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and ice itself — quickly went viral on social media.
Students denounced the junior for joking about the plight of undocumented immigrants, who sometimes spend weeks and months in border detention facilities. Tweets criticizing the post received thousands of likes and more than 900 retweets. One student said he is “glad to see that Yale is still prepping for the future generations of Kavanaughs.” Others urged their peers to email the head of the junior’s residential college, psychology professor Laurie Santos and demanded consequences for the junior.
As emails requesting the student to be held accountable for his Instagram post inundated Santos’ inbox, the Silliman Head of College responded to at least one student’s call for action against the junior.
“I have now heard about this incident from many, many students,” Santos wrote in the email, which was obtained by the News. “I’m upset that a member of my community would post something like this and I will take action on it. I will be bringing this up with the proper channels.”
While some students said they appreciated Santos’ note, many members of the University community voiced concerns about the email’s implications on whether administrators and faculty members have the jurisdiction to regulate students’ speech.
English professor David Bromwich said the idea that the junior “should somehow be punished, or cited to justify a reprimand, seems a clear overreach of authority.”
“[Of] course the result [of Santos’ email] would be to chill speech generally,” Bromwich said. “People say silly things like this all the time, on campus and in everyday life elsewhere. Will you install microphones in the potted plants and try to catch them all?”
In an interview with the News, Chairman of the Institute for Free Speech Bradley Smith said Santos’ email is “absurd and anti-liberal.” The email sends a message that students now have to be extra careful to not upset others and “gives a license to social justice warriors to pick on students they don’t like,” Smith said. He added that free speech is not only about a lack of censorship, but also about an open attitude of accepting controversial ideas.
SOURCE
19 September, 2019
A sign of the times: Australian butcher is forced to take down THIS notice outside his shop after it was found to be offensive and 'inciting hatred' of Muslims
A local butcher has been forced to take down a sign on its front window declaring that its meat is 'non halal certified'.
Muslims complained Valley Butchers was mocking Islam with the prominent sticker, which included pictures of kangaroos and emus, at its Adelaide shopfront.
'It pokes fun of a specific group of people based on religious belief. It is very intentional and obvious,' the complaint read. 'Jokes like this on a public shopfront perpetuate a culture of vilification towards religious minorities, that results in harm towards them.'
Valley Butchers defended the sign to the Advertising Standards Board as merely an answer to a frequently asked question. 'The sign is only stating that we are not halal approved. In no way is it meant in a malice way,' it said.
'We where getting asked quite frequently whether we are halal approved so I am just stating that we are not and that saves a lot of wasted time.'
However, in a split decision, the board upheld the complaint, and noted the sign would have been fine if it was just one letter different.
'Had the sign stated 'Not Halal approved' or 'Unfortunately, non Halal' this would be less likely to have been considered discriminatory or vilifying signage,' it said.
Instead, it decided the sign was ridiculing of halal certification and that this was offensive and demeaning to 'people who are of that faith or are of Muslim ethnicity'.
SOURCE
Fishermen's boasts now incorrect
And you are not even allowed to keep your catch. And will fishermen be banned from drinking beer soon? That would cut short a lot of fishing
Three fishermen have been trolled online after they shared a photo boasting about a 'record breaking' shark they caught.
The trio started a Facebook page which now boasts more than 100,000 followers where they share their catches from their home town of Pilbara in Western Australia.
On Sunday the men posted three photos alongside a tiger shark which was 'at least five metres in length'.
'We used a tape measure to get a size of the shark,' they captioned the pictures on their Sharky-Pilbara Land Base Shark Fishing page.
'She was bigger than the tape, measuring 4.8 metres from tail to gills, so we guess 5m or even 5.2m.'
'That's our new personal best life time catch,' the men added.
While they were clearly proud of their haul, the pictures attracted thousands of comments - primarily from people who were worried about the shark's welfare.
The page claims they always 'catch and release' the fish they find, but one observant viewer said the shark 'looked very dead' in the photos. 'I think you'll find this is not catch and release,' the man said. 'There is a rope attached to its tail which would mean it's been dragged backwards at some stage.
Others said the inhumane treatment of the shark didn't give the men any bragging rights.
'All in the name of a selfie to brag to your friends. Where is your heart and compassion? Please think about this animal as another living being to respect.
'Absolutely disgraceful! There should be no pride in this whatsoever, how dare you take a precious species from the ocean just for a 'pb' and for pleasure. What is wrong with you!'
SOURCE
18 September, 2019
Facebook Bans Two Italian Right-Wing Parties And Dozens Of Their Followers For 'Spreading Hate'
Mark Zuckerberg interfered in Italy's democracy once again this week by shutting down two "far right" political parties' accounts on Facebook and Instagram and banning many of their followers -- all to cheers from their far left opposition.
From The Local:
The official accounts of dozens of Italian far-right activists and the neo-fascist parties CasaPound and Forza Nuova were shut down on Monday for violating hate speech policies.
The parties have also been kicked off Instagram, which is owned by Facebook.
"People and organizations that spread hatred or attack others based on who they are, have no place on Facebook and Instagram," Facebook said in a statement.
Rome-based CasaPound’s official Facebook page had almost 240,000 followers.
The Facebook and Instagram accounts of dozens of activists belonging to both far-right groups were also reportedly blocked.
It’s not the first time the two groups have had accounts closed down, Italian news agency Ansa reports. Last April, shortly before the European elections, Facebook closed down the profiles of several high-profile members of both movements.
A tiny clique of Big Tech oligarchs living in Silicon Valley get to decide who is allowed to have a voice throughout the entire planet.
The parties' chiefs - who also had their personal accounts shut – slammed the move as anti-democratic.
Gianluca Iannone, president of CasaPound, protested that the move was "an unprecedented attack", telling Ansa the group would be filing an "urgent class action law suit against an act of disgraceful prevarication."
The move was hailed as “exemplary” and “a correct and courageous choice” by the leader of Italy’s Democratic Party, Nicola Zingaretti.
“We must share and spread these important words to put an end to the season of hatred,” he told local media. “These are people who would deny others the right to exist.”
Nothing quite says "democratic" like criminalizing your opposition and cheering their being censored by foreigners halfway across the world.
SOURCE
Victory for creative professionals at AZ Supreme Court!
Just like the beautiful custom artwork they create, Joanna and Breanna are one of a kind.
They are two of the most passionate, loving, and faithful people you will ever meet. With a quiet strength and grace, they have endured unbelievable hate, threats, and vitriol these past few years.
And it’s all because of one thing: They took a stand for the right to live consistently with their religious beliefs.
For the past three years, Joanna and Breanna have faced government threats and court battles. But it didn’t stop there. They’ve also been the subject of vicious personal attacks online and in the media.
Thankfully, today their stand was rewarded. Joanna and Breanna have received some wonderful news. The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled in their favor!
The court ruled that a city of Phoenix ordinance violates Joanna and Breanna’s freedom of speech and religion when applied to their custom wedding invitations. Phoenix can no longer force Joanna and Breanna to create art that conveys messages contrary to their consciences.
This is a huge victory. No one should be forced to choose between their faith and their livelihood. And now, the Arizona Supreme Court has affirmed that.
Alliance Defending Freedom
17 September, 2019
The Leftist censors have grabbed another social media site: imgur.com
Imgur.com is the biggest image-hosting site that there is these days. It is very easy to use so has left other image-hosting platforms -- such as Tinypic and Photobucket -- for dead. It also offers permanence. It says that pictures you have uploaded there will stay up.
But that has now fallen by the wayside. Some pictures I have housed there have been replaced by an angry and unpleasant looking cartoon, presumably under the pretext that my pictures were "offensive"
One of the pictures I had up was of General Pinochet, who is/was a great Leftist boogeyman. He did solve Leftist terrorism in Chile by killing off a couple of thousand of the livelier Chilean Leftists. So I can understand his image being "disappeared". But for most of the pictures no offensiveness is obvious. A table of statistics that disappeared would seem inoffensive. But it WAS a table of IQ statistics -- and IQ is as unpopular among the Left as General Pinochet.
But the deletion that really amuses me is that they have taken down a picture I had up of myself! I make no claim to being good-looking but I didn't think I was that bad! They have also taken down images of my discharge certificate from my time in the Australian army and photocopies of my university degrees. So they have been rather systematic.
Anyway, I keep very comprehensive backups so have simply rehoused all deleted images on another site so all images I had up are now back up.
So the question arises of what to do about this latest transmogrification. In my case, I can't see any form of protest as being needed. It is simplest just to replace the lost images from backups. And I do have archive copies of all my blogs online which already include self-hosted picture backups. My practice of putting up backup copies of my blog entries has probably seemed like overdoing conservative caution but it has clearly now come into its own.
Nonetheless, I will have to think in future about where I house pictures online. I will probably host the more incendiary ones on one or another of my own sites and use imgur for the more mundane ones
It is something of an irony that I have a regular blog devoted to coverage of censored content -- only to be censored myself -- JR
"Live Action" defended
When Lila Rose posted two videos insisting abortion isn’t medically necessary, they were labeled “false” and censored.
In a pointed letter to Zuckerberg, Senators Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), and Mike Braun (R-Ind.) explain how interesting this is, since Facebook’s “fact-checkers” are supposedly “certified” through a nonpartisan group. If that’s the case, how does Zuckerberg explain putting two pro-abortion activists with “significant ties to abortion-rights advocacy organizations” in charge of Live Action’s content?
“…No reasonable person would describe [these activists] are neutral or objective when it comes to the issue of abortion,” they write, “yet Facebook relied on their rating to suppress and censor a pro-life organization with more than three million followers. These are clear violations of the IFCN principle and of Facebook’s supposed commitment to nonpartisanship.”
Like Twitter, Google, Pinterest, and other platforms, Facebook insists these are “glitches.” That’s funny, these senators would say, since these “glitches” only seem to affect conservatives. The political optics must not have been lost on Facebook, who contacted Live Action within hours of the letter and informed the group that its posts had been restored. In a tweet, Senator Hawley celebrated the news that Zuckerberg had also asked the company’s “‘independent’ fact check organization to open investigation into how pro-abortion activists got certified as ‘neutral’ fact checkers.”
And that’s a problem, Hawley knows — not just because they’re a major corporation, but because they get special protections that other companies don’t get.
“Facebook gets a special immunity from [law]suits — immunity from accountability, really. So groups like Live Action, they can’t sue Facebook under the law. They can’t pursue any kind of remedy under the law because Facebook is immune. That’s because of the federal government. The federal government has given them this special deal. It’s worth billions of dollars to Facebook. I mean, it’s really a massive subsidy for the American taxpayer. And that’s why I say Facebook if [they’re] going to censor, if they’re going to discriminate, why are we being forced to subsidize it? Why are we being forced to protect them with the power of the law and taxpayer money? That needs to stop.”
SOURCE
16 September, 2019
A Great Win for a Conservative Consulting Firm and Free Speech!
We have great news! The city of Ann Arbor, Michigan, declared that it will not force Grant Strobl and Jacob Chludzinski to promote political beliefs that go against their own.
You might be surprised that such government coercion was even a possibility. But that is exactly what the text of a city law threatened.
Grant and Jacob knew this wasn’t right. After all, the right to speak freely transcends political beliefs—that’s at the heart of the First Amendment! So, Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit on their behalf.
Thankfully, the city of Ann Arbor has agreed not to apply this law to Grant, Jacob, and their political consulting business, ThinkRight Strategies.
The law makes it illegal for businesses to “discriminate” based on “political beliefs.” If Ann Arbor were to apply this law to ThinkRight, then advocacy materials ThinkRight creates for Republican candidates to promote limited government, lower taxes, and the sanctity of life, must also be created for Socialist candidates to promote government control, higher taxes, and abortion on demand.
That would contradict the entire purpose of Grant and Jacob’s mission to promote conservative ideals! Not only that, but it’s a blatant violation of their freedom of speech.
SOURCE
Fishmonger claims social media posts are being censored as 'disturbing' after they were reported by vegans
When celebrity fishmonger Rex Goldsmith laid his row of glistening, freshly-caught fish out on the counter and proudly took a photograph to post online, he hoped customers would be enticed to his shop.
Instead, he fell victim to a trend of Instagram censoring photographs of meat and fish - and labeling them as "disturbing".
Mr Goldsmith, who owns The Chelsea Fishmonger in London, serves many well-heeled customers including Nigella Lawson and Henry Blofeld.
This week, those who looked on his page were presented with a warning - placed there by Instagram. It read: "This video contains sensitive content that many may find offensive or disturbing."
This has happened twice so far to Mr Goldsmith, who told The Telegraph: "I think it's a bit ridiculous really. "I don't know whether the post has been reported by vegans or whether Instagram censored it as they thought it would be offensive to vegans."
He added: "If they're going to pick on me, why don't they pick on one of the big companies who use the methods of farming that are bad for the environment and fish welfare."
I guess someone complained. Why the monkey don’t they report pictures of burgers, sausages and bacon too? Ridiculous. And shame on you @instagram for censoring it. People are so detached from reality.
Mr Goldsmith added: "I have no idea why a vegan would follow a fishmonger on social media in the first place."
If this censorship continues, the fishmonger said he may get his friends in the industry to stop posting on the site. He explained: "There's a massive food community out there and we could start a big movement with everybody I know to stop posting their pictures."
Celebrity chef Richard Corrigan, who runs seafood restaurant Bentley's in Mayfair, supported Mr Goldsmith, and said that pictures of fresh fish are not disturbing, adding: "I myself am disturbed by vegans".
A spokesperson for British Meat Producers Association said: "What is the world coming to? The majority of people don't mind pictures of meat.
"The social media companies should not be pandering to vegans. At the end of the day, this is something that any of us walking to the supermarket can see, it's part of the shopping experience. "How can it be 'disturbing content'?"
After this newspaper contacted the social media giant, the fish counter posts were uncensored. Instagram said in a statement: “This content was marked as sensitive in error and has now been reinstated. We apologise for the mistake.”
SOURCE
15 September, 2019
A "violent silence"? I love it!
No longer can we say that the Left never have an original thought. The improbable expression "violent silence" has popped up in a Warmist headline from far-Left Australian e-zine "New Matilda". The headline reads: "Australia Burns While We Maintain A Violent Silence On The Climate-Ecological Crisis"
How can a silence be violent? It's another example of constant Leftist misuse of words
The article is just pure anecdote with no scientific merit whatsoever so I won't reproduce any of it here, but you can read it here
You've Been Warned: Western Table Manners Are Now Racist
Heads up, everyone! There are new rules again, so I want everyone paying attention. Eating your food the way you've been taught to with forks and knives (because this is the West and it's what we do) is racist and it hurts people who are still upset about colonization from hundreds of years ago. Writing in "Today's Parent," Joshana Maharaj is outraged, I tell you, just outraged that some teacher somewhere in Canada told a little girl not to eat rice with her hands.
This prompted her to write about learning how to eat around the world, where using hands is acceptable and how the West is just racist by using utensils, or something:
"Recently, I chatted with someone who told me a story about her young niece, who goes to a prestigious preschool and was eating rice with her hands at lunchtime. The feedback her parents received was that this child needed to work on her table manners and use proper cutlery to eat.
I immediately felt a rush of anger bubble up inside me when I heard this. The message that eating food with your hands is an unmannered way to eat is a real problem for me because it is dripping with the control and shame of colonization, which is particularly dangerous in an educational context.
Suggesting that a child who eats with her hands has no manners is an echo of European colonial powers looking to tame the wildness out of the people they controlled. These European table manners were imposed on conquered people in an attempt to “civilize” them.
It’s a damaging message about right and wrong ways to do things. It positions the technique as superior and the people who practise it as setters of the standard, leaving those with a different approach to eating with a status of inferiority. The idea of a single standard of acceptable table manners is just one of a host of strategies used to grow and promote racism. It’s a subtle message but one that is reinforced three times a day, every day, which makes it quite powerful"
Oh for crying out loud! For the most part in her essay, she explains that certain manners are for certain foods: chopsticks for sushi, and hands for naan, which makes sense and we do that in my house. But if you're in a Western prep school, you need to use the table manners of the West. It's not racist. It's giving respect to the culture you're in.
You're not in China. We eat rice with forks here in the West. If you are in China, then you probably want to put the fork down. I don't think this has anything to do with colonialism, but with respecting the culture you're in. "Recognizing diversity in cultural backgrounds and food traditions is essential, especially in a country as multicultural as Canada," wrote Maharaj, totally unironically.
The West has a culture. Forks are a big part of that. Isn't it funny how all cultures are "diverse" and worthy of respect except Western, European, Canadian, and American cultures?
I can't keep up with these people anymore and I don't want to.
SOURCE
13 September, 2019
Odd Allies Are Coming Together to Defend Free Speech
It’s amazing to see who comes to the defense of freedom when you least expect it.
In July, 12 leading philosophy scholars from around the world signed on to a statement supporting freedom of thought and speech in academia, specifically as those freedoms are being undercut by gender identity ideology.
These scholars warned of a dangerous movement within academia to sanction and silence people who express support for a biologically based understanding of gender and sexuality. All 12 philosophers denounced this trend and called for a restoration of academic freedom.
That the statement exists is remarkable in itself, given the backlash academics are prone to face when they so much as question the current orthodoxy of gender identity ideology. But what’s even more remarkable is who signed the document.
The signers include philosophers who, in all frankness, hold a wide range of radical positions. One signer is Peter Singer, the Princeton University professor who defends infanticide as a morally permissible option.
When Singer speaks, it’s usually a signal that defenders of life need to push back. But on this issue of free speech in higher education, Singer aligns perfectly with his typical opponents in arguing for civil discourse and a classic view of free speech.
In standing up for free speech, he is directly rejecting the toxic tactics of not just fellow academics, but groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the ACLU, who endlessly deploy ad hominem attacks against any who disagree with them.
This is a rare moment indeed—when people we don’t see eye-to-eye with suddenly jump to our side of an argument.
The simple reality is that truth is truth, no matter who advocates it. And when a coalition as diverse as this one spontaneously speaks out in defense of free speech, it’s worth taking a closer look.
The signers of this statement don’t pull their punches. They insist people with gender dysphoria should be allowed to live free from harassment and discrimination, but then they state, with equal force, that the same respect must be given to those who advocate biologically based views of sex.
SOURCE
Fireman Sam axed as fire service mascot 'because he is not inclusive enough'
Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue Service said it made the decision after receiving negative feedback about the mascot, which is based on the popular children's TV show.
Now the force's other mascots - fire extinguisher-shaped Freddy, Filbert and Penelope - will be used in place of Fireman Sam.
According to Government statistics, 5.2% of firefighters in England were women in 2017.
Lincolnshire's Chief Fire Officer, Les Britzman, said the mascot was "outdated" and did not help sell the fire safety message.
He said: "Firefighters nationally and residents locally have raised some concerns that Fireman Sam doesn't reflect the fire service today, in terms of both the job itself and our workforce.
"It's important to us that our open days and community events don't make anyone feel excluded and therefore we took this decision.
SOURCE
12 September, 2019
It’s Now “Incendiary” To Say There Are Two Genders
Republican Congressman Ralph Abraham of Louisiana is running for Governor in his state and his team recently released their first television ad. If Abraham was looking to get the left up in arms, he certainly succeeded. Take a look at the list below and see if you can guess which of the truths he’s promising to speak has liberals setting their hair on fire
Here’s the full list:
“Here’s the truth. Life begins at conception. Government is too big. Our taxes are too high. And our car insurance is too expensive. President Trump is doing a great job. Facts matter more than feelings. The Second Amendment is self-explanatory. And as a doctor, I can assure you there are only two genders.”
If you guessed it was the last one, saying that there are only two genders, give yourself a cookie. Of course, as a medical doctor, Abraham probably knows a thing or two about the subject.
As you might expect, this prompted an immediate reaction
MSNBC anchor Chris Jansing addressed this topic during a panel discussion about the GOP’s relationship with women and the LGBT community. (Specifically, a national LGBT group, the Log Cabin Republicans, had just endorsed Trump for a second term.)
An indignant Jansing told viewers she found Abraham’s remarks to be “incendiary.” Here’s what she had to say.
We’ve got an important question now. What does it mean to be a mainstream Republican? It is the question that some Republicans have been asking in the age of Donald Trump, and increasingly, it seems the answer might be to make incendiary comments about women and members of the LGBT community.
So it’s apparently now simply gospel at MSNBC to say that a medical doctor stating the human race is composed of two genders by design is “incendiary” rhetoric. Of course, for the entire history of the human race, there have been two genders (with the thankfully rare exceptions of intersex people born with anomalous chromosomal structures). It’s how we reproduce. This really isn’t rocket science.
SOURCE
Sweden Bans 'Trump' License Plate, Declaring It 'Offensive'
Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a worldwide malady that causes leftists to behave in irrational and childish ways. While not necessarily advisable during the workday, it's easy to waste hours laughing at YouTube videos of leftists losing it after the news broke that Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. Since then, TDS has gotten worse and spread. A recent case of TDS involves an entire governmental agency. A Swedish man was denied his application for a license plate that reads "Trump" because the Swedish Transport Agency deemed it offensive.
In an article published by the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet, it's explained that the man was drunk and thought it would be funny to have a license plate bearing the U.S. president's last name on his American-made car. Swedish authorities, though, didn't find the idea as humorous as the man and denied the online application.
Swedish authorities told the Associated Press that it does not allow political letter combinations. Saaf was informed that the decision could not be appealed.
SOURCE
The guy should have got a medal for bravery
11 September, 2019
Black academic pushed out for hate speech
There is no end of instances when conservatives are fired or otherwise sanctioned for hate speech, but when it is a Leftist being fired it suddenly becomes an issue of legitimate free speech
The recent resignation of the University of Alabama’s dean of students over a series of tweets about racism threatens to chill academic speech, PEN America said in a statement today.
On September 5, Dr. Jamie Riley, assistant vice president and dean of students at the University of Alabama, resigned from his position “by mutual agreement” with the university. His resignation occurred the day after right-wing media outlet Breitbart published an article featuring a series of tweets Riley wrote in 2016 and 2017, in which he commented on the issue of race in the U.S.
In one such tweet, from September 2017, Riley wrote, “The [American] flag represents a systemic history of racism for my people. Police are a part of that system. Is it that hard to see the correlation?” In a tweet from October 2017, Riley wrote that he was “baffled about how the 1st thing white people say is, ‘That’s not racist!’ when they can’t even experience racism? You have 0 opinion!” and in October 2016, Riley wrote, “Are movies about slavery truly about educating the unaware, or to remind Black people of our place in society?”
“Dr. Riley’s tweets were related to his area of academic expertise and his speech on political subjects is of precisely the type that a university must vigorously defend,” said PEN America’s Friedman. [Can we quote Mr Friedman on that?]
SOURCE
Australian university's student representatives try to censor conservative speech about sexual issues
A Deakin University student club says it has been censored over social media posts criticising gender ideology and a new Victorian law that makes it easier for transgender people to alter their birth certificates.
Members of the Deakin University Liberal Club have accused the university’s student association of curtailing free speech after it requested they delete Facebook posts deemed to be a breach of its social media policy.
One of the posts, from the Liberal club’s Geelong branch last month, referred to the Victorian government passing of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Amendment Bill as failing to “stack up with scientific fact”.
The post included a quote from George Orwell’s 1984 and linked to a news report in The Age.
Another allegedly offending post contained a short video titled “There Are Only Two Genders” by US author Ashley McGuire, which challenges gender ideology and the increasingly popular push for self-identified gender to supersede biological sex.
The club opted to remove the posts after being threatened with disciplinary action.
However, the Deakin University Liberal Club at the Burwood campus has declined to delete an August 31 post in which it wrote about meeting Liberal MPs at Victoria’s Parliament House.
“Fantastic conversations were had particularly about the disastrous births, deaths and marriages registration bill, allowing people to change the sex recorded on their birth certificate on a 12-month basis simply through self-selection,” the post said.
While the new law and its potential consequences have been the subject of widespread public debate, the club was contacted by the Deakin University Student Association on Tuesday advising that the post had sparked complaints and requesting its removal.
“The post has been deemed in breach of DUSA’s social media policy,” wrote DUSA clubs support officer Sophie Elizabeth.
While no specific reason was provided, Ms Elizabeth referred to a clause within the policy that states “examples of unacceptable social media conduct include posting commentary, content or images that are defamatory, pornographic, proprietary, harassing … or that can create a hostile environment”.
Deakin University Liberal Club Burwood president Luke Dalle Nogare described the association’s censorship bid as “frivolous and arrogant”.
“There aren’t many conservative views on campus, so it’s important for us to be strong and represent those voices,” he said.
“Sure it’s a somewhat contentious issue but we’re not making any extremist views in any sense.”
Liberal senator James Paterson described the student association’s actions as an “outrageous attempt at censorship”.
“Topical public policy issues on which good people can disagree surely must be free for university students to debate on campus and on social media,” he said.
SOURCE
10 September, 2019
Google BANS café owner's advert for traditional faggots after deeming post 'inappropriate and offensive content'
Faggots are just a type of rissole in Britain
A woman advertising faggots at her café called Fanny's says Google removed the post - because it was deemed 'offensive'.
Jo Evans-Pring, 63, was promoting her award-winning funky retro music diner 'Fanny's Rest Stop Café' in Newport, Wales. Within just a few weeks, the mum-of-four, found that her business sales were soaring once again.
But one day after Ms Evans-Pring posted a picture of faggots with peas and onion gravy on her website, she got an email from Google stating the advert had been removed.
In the email, Google cited their content policy explaining not to post anything that could be construed as 'inappropriate and offensive content'.
Ms Evans-Pring said that she was 'absolutely startled by what's happened' and claims 'the world's gone totally mad if people are getting worked up over that'.
She claimed: 'People need to spend their time dealing with real problems, not things like whether or not the word 'faggots' when selling that meal is hateful.
'Fanny's has been doing really well because of the Internet campaign. We've noticed a big change in the past couple of weeks. 'People have been coming from a little further afield because we're paying for adverts when they google for places to eat. 'They've loved coming to Fanny's because it's fun and retro.
'I posted an advert on the website for Fanny's faggots with peas and onion gravy, a pretty traditional meal and one of my favourites, on the 27th.
Faggots is a traditional dish, long popular in the English Midlands and South and Mid Wales, made from minced off-cuts and offal.
But the word 'faggot' was misconstrued by Google administrators to refer to the pejorative term of abuse referring to gay men.
SOURCE
Haters target Australia's favourite horse race
Must not speak well of the Melbourne cup
A former Miss Universe Australia has been heavily criticised for her new role as ambassador for the Melbourne Cup Carnival, with cruel trolls calling her involvement in the horse racing industry 'disgusting'.
Tegan Martin shared her exciting news on Sunday, posting a photo of herself dressed in a designer outfit by Australian brand Torannce.
'The Carnival has always been a favourite time of year for me and with only 55 days to go it's going to be an amazing season! Big thanks to Flemington for this incredible opportunity,' she wrote on Instagram.
The 27-year-old Sydneysider, who was 'thrilled' by the appointment, couldn't have foreseen the hate comments her single post would generate.
'Such an awful industry that use horses as business commodities,' one person commented.
'Educate yourself about the "sport" you're being an ambassador for. This race and all horse racing is disgusting. So many horses are murdered and abused and here you are all proud thinking this is oh so glamorous - it isn't,' said another.
'This horror show is my least favourite day of the year! I can't help but think if these "celebrities" just stopped being ambassadors and throwing their support behind it - it may just lose its appeal entirely,' a third added.
Many of the comments took aim at Tegan for not 'understanding' what the horse racing industry does to its champions
The Melbourne Cup Carnival begins on November 2 and runs until November 9 with Derby Day, the Melbourne Cup and Oaks Day included.
In her role Tegan will be expected to attend all of the major day events dressed in designer wear.
SOURCE
9 September, 2019
Selective prosecution of "hate"
Hate is only wrong when it is not dangerous, apparently. The Left never stop expressing their hatred of conservatives and Christians but I have yet to hear of any of it being prosecuted. And because of the wide following Leftists have, their hate is surely the most dangerous. Yet a guy who likes Hitler and therefore has only negligible influence is prosecuted. Haywire priorities. The Hitler lover was NOT prosecited for hate, He was prosecuted for being unfashionable
A white supremacist who owned boxer shorts emblazoned with Nazi swastikas has been found guilty of stirring up racial hatred.
Nathan Worrell, 46, from Grimsby had denied 11 race hate offences after being accused of distributing stickers and posters with slogans including "Diversity is White Genocide" and "Refugees Not Welcome".
He was arrested in November 2017 but denied having done anything wrong saying if people did not like the slogans they could ignore them.
During the trial Worrell described himself as an "ethno-nationalist" and said he did not believe in diversity or multiculturism.
When police searched his home they found shirts, jumpers and underwear bearing Nazi symbols as well as swastika fridge magnets and a large amount of Nazi propaganda.
The prosecution said the material was threatening, abusive or insulting and Worrell’s intention was to stir up racial hatred around Grimsby by distributing or displaying the stickers.
Prosecutors also said that he had also stirred up racial hatred by publishing, distributing and displaying the racist stickers on lamp posts, signs and notice boards.
He was convicted of eight charges but cleared of three others at Grimsby Crown Court.
Worrell was remanded in custody and will be sentenced on Thursday.
Jenny Hopkins from the Crown Prosecution Service said: “Nathan Worrell is a committed neo-Nazi with a hatred of people who are not white.
“From the time he gets up to the time he goes to bed, he surrounds himself with images of Hitler, the SS and the Third Reich.
“The CPS will prosecute right-wing extremists who stir up racial hatred in communities and help keep the public safe.”
SOURCE
NFL player Drew Brees Is Being Attacked As ‘Anti-Gay.’ All He Did Was Promote The Bible
While the country suffered through a season opening game so boring it might as well have been a soccer match, the real NFL drama unfolded off the field. Drew Brees became the latest target of the LGBT pitchfork mob for recording an allegedly "anti-gay" video.
Before we take a look at the offensive clip, here's how some of the headlines described it:
"Drew Brees Appears In Video For Gay Conversion Therapy Sickos, Doesn't Understand What The Big Deal Is"
"Drew Brees Records Video for Anti-LGBT Religious Organization"
"NFL Quarterback Appears in Commercial for Anti-Gay Extremists"
"Fans are freaking out over NFL star Drew Brees partnering with antigay hate group"
"Drew Brees Hasn’t Commented on Why He Created a Promo Video for an Anti-Gay Religious Group That Believes in Conversion Therapy & Fights Against Any Anti-Discrimination Laws; Wants Kids to Bring Bible to School to Convert Other Kids"
That last article originally described it as a "promo video for an anti-gay religious cult." Cult has been changed to group without any explanation or apology.
Now, if you didn't know any better, you'd think that this all seems pretty bad. Based on the headlines alone, it sounds like a star NFL quarterback joined some sort of backwoods religious cult and recorded a video bashing gays and calling for forced conversions. But the truth is somewhat less dramatic. In reality, Brees filmed a 20-second video for the advocacy group Focus on the Family encouraging kids to bring their bibles to school. Here's a full transcript of his remarks:
“One of my favorite verses in the Bible is 2 Corinthians 5:7, ‘For we live by faith, not by sight.’ So I want to encourage you to live out your faith on Bring Your Bible to School Day and share God’s love with friends. You are not alone.”
That's it. Nothing about homosexuality. Nothing about gay conversion or any other kind of conversion. Nothing political. Nothing ideological. Nothing remotely controversial or divisive. The word "gay" is not mentioned at all. The words "love," "share," and "friends" are mentioned. These were thoroughly inoffensive comments coming from one of the most thoroughly inoffensive figures in all of professional sports. In the same week that a different star player gets suspended from his team for being an unhinged jerk and pathological narcissist, it's the polite and mild Drew Brees who catches the flak for telling kids to read the Bible to their friends.
This should be a clarifying moment for anyone who hasn't yet figured out how things work in our culture. "Anti-gay" is now code for "Christian," providing anti-Christian trolls cover as they launch their bigoted attacks. The website Queerty was particularly open on this point, claiming in its headline that Brees and Focus on the Family have partnered "to promote hate." But what they have really partnered to promote is the Bible. To the gay radicals over at Queerty, the Bible and hatred are synonymous.
Far be it for me to offer advice to those gay radicals, but this strategy seems counterproductive. Gays have already achieved full legal equality in this country. Public opinion of homosexuality is, for the most part, pretty libertarian. Most Americans don't care about the sex lives of other people. "Do what you want," seems to be the general attitude these days. Pointless, vitriolic outbursts against guys like Drew Brees can therefore only have the effect of moving public opinion in the other direction. The gay rights movement had most people on its side. But now that the movement has become so intently focused on petty vengeance and anti-Christian propaganda, some of those allies might start to question their allegiances. Drew Brees won't be much hurt by this controversy — he'll go on to make his millions and score his touchdowns. It's the anti-Christian bigots who stand to lose, in the end.
SOURCE
8 September, 2010
Parents should stop using euphemisms like 'front bottom', 'bits', 'flower', 'tuppence', and 'fairy' with their daughters, gynaecological charity urges
This is a curious turnabout. Most political correctness considts of using euphemisms -- short people are "vertically challenged", for instance -- but here we are urged to STOP using euphemisms. You can't win with Leftists. Whatever exists is wrong
Eve Appeal, a UK-based gynaecological charity, believes that girls need to use the right words about their bodies 'from the start'.
It said opening up conversations across generations about women's health 'gives women the best chance of living healthy lives'.
Eve Appeal's comments comes as data found 44 per cent of parents regularly use such euphemisms instead of the correct terms.
A fifth (19 per cent) claimed they frequently say 'vagina' in front of their daughters, while only one per cent often use the word 'vulva'.
The vulva is the external part of female genitalia, which includes the labia, clitoris and both outer and inner 'lips'.
Little more than a fifth (22 per cent) of parents said they never refer to female body parts in front of their daughter.
The survey also found almost a third felt it was only appropriate to use anatomical language when their daughters were aged 11 or older.
SOURCE
Furious face-tattooed diner labels Melbourne restaurant 'racist' after being turned away at the door because of eatery's 'strict policy'
Criminals often sport heavy tattoos so the restaurant had reasonable fears that this guy would make them look bad. They were wise to turn him away
A man sporting a traditional Maori face tattoo was turned away from a restaurant due to its 'strict policy'.
Gary Harding, a Maori man now living in Melbourne, tried to enter the hotel in St Kilda, Melbourne, on Saturday when the bouncer stopped him at the door.
Mr Harding told RNZ the bouncer told him he couldn't let him into the establishment due to his facial tattoos. 'He quickly says, ''I can't let you in with all those facial tattoos all over your face'',' Mr Harding said.
'And I was pretty shocked by his response, and I say ''are you for real mate?'', and he's like ''yeah, it's not a good look, we've got a strict policy around facial tattoos''.'
After attempting to explain his Ta moko tattoo was different from other facial tattoos Mr Harding was still refused entry and started to leave the premises.
Mr Harding also spoke with ABC News about the cultural significance of a Ta Moko facial tattoo.
'It talks about your lineage, it talks about your heritage, it talks about your rank within your community and what you've done for your community,' he said.
SOURCE
6 September, 2019
Outraged guests slam Nigloland theme park’s ‘racist’ Africa Cruise ride
Must not show black men with bananas
One of the most popular theme parks in France has been forced to shut down a popular ride after guests accused the attraction of being racist.
The Africa Cruise ride at Nigloland in north eastern France has been at the park for several decades, having first been installed in 1987.
However, the popular attraction was embroiled in a race row after a video of the ride surfaced last week. A park guest who goes by @Astrotoujours on Twitter posted a video of his experience, with a series of comments. He said: “I went to Nigloland and saw that. I wanted to know if you found it normal??”
The footage showed a section of the cruise where two people climbed up a tree while an angry rhino was just beneath them.
One of the figures was white and wearing a colonial-style safari outfit while another, who was visibly black, was wearing a fez and holding a bunch of bananas.
The ride also featured problematic dialogue according to France 24 — the black character apparently spoke in an audibly African accent and called the white person boss.
The viral post sparked a backlash against the park, with many accusing it of being racist. One person wrote: “@Nigloland caricatured accent, banana? Do you find that normal.” Another said: “It’s shocking it looks like the racist jokes of the colonial era.”
In response, the park decided to close the ride last weekend. In a statement on Twitter, the park apologised to the public for any offence it had caused.
The park also took steps to modify the ride — by removing the banana and the speech.
Since changing the ride, however, many have come out in support of the park. One wrote on Twitter: “Serious. … where it will stop!!! Must be stupid to see racism there.”
SOURCE
Facebook Blocks Bridget Phetasy's Podcast with Glenn Beck: 'Against Community Standards'
Popular podcast host Bridget Phetasy was very excited yesterday: this week's guest on her podcast was Glenn Beck. She could share the podcast with all her followers, who could then listen to it... and who would undoubtedly be very happy to hear the two talk about the most important issues. One problem: when she tried to share the podcast on Facebook, the social network blocked it.
"I have firebrand Glenn Beck on the podcast this week and we delve into the value of struggle and overcoming hardship," Bridget wrote in her introduction to the episode. "The cultural celebration of 'victimhood,' how tribalism and the culture wars trick people into thinking that the problem is outside themselves, and the dangers of buying into your own fame."
She went on: "They explore the importance of being able to say 'I don't know,' the loss of compassion that occurs when we stop seeing the humanity of the people we disagree with, Glenn's surprising conversion to Mormonism, and what he found in the depths of his most recent dark night of the soul."
That sure sounds great -- and not even extremely political in nature. Absolutely no reason for the Trump-hating social media powerhouse to ban it, right? Well, guess what happened:
"WTF," Bridget said on Twitter, "Facebook blocked my podcast with Glenn Beck for going 'against community standards.'"
Glenn Beck responded with shock, outrage, and a kind of fatalism very prominent on the right these days:
"What?! By banning this podcast, Facebook is confirming that their community standards are simple: no opinion or voice of common sense is allowed," Beck wrote. He finished his tweet with an ironic "welcome to my world Bridget" and the hashtag #whostheFascist?
And still, there are those on the right who argue that no action should be taken against Facebook. It has a monopoly position, it routinely abuses its power in an effort to silence conservatives and libertarians, and (with a little help from its friends in high places) its legally protected so those who are silenced can't do anything about it.
Something needs to be done about these crackdowns.
SOURCE
5 September, 2019
Australia: Fair Work Commission upholds BP sacking of worker over Hitler parody
No free speech for extreme abuse
BP’s sacking of a technician for sharing a Downfall parody video the company said compared its managers to Nazis has been upheld by the Fair Work Commission.
Process technician Scott Tracey said the video was intended to be a humorous parody of long-running enterprise bargaining negotiations at the BP’s Kwinana refinery in Western Australia.
The video is an extract from the German language film Downfall which portrays the final days of Adolf Hitler’s life. Hitler responds in a highly agitated and aggressive manner to advice from his generals that the Nazis have lost the Second World War.
Mr Tracey said his wife used the Caption website to create the “Hitler Parody EA Negotiations”, adding subtitles that referenced comments made by BP management during the negotiations.
Mr Tracey shared the video with a private Facebook group whose members included refinery employees and also showed it to BP nightshift employees.
A BP investigation found Mr Tracey had been “involved in creating, and made available, shared and distributed an offensive and inappropriate video depicting BP representatives involved in the current …. negotiations as Nazis”. He was sacked and paid four weeks’ notice.
Rejecting his unfair dismissal claim, commission deputy president Melanie Binet said she was satisfied the video was “objectively inappropriate, offensive and “did cause offence to a number of BP employees”.
“The Hitler Video had the potential to undermine, demean and denigrate the BP senior management team amongst an audience which they were charged to lead,’’ she said.
SOURCE
Hollywood Leftists Blacklist Conservatives
The double standard is astounding as calls for silencing and doxing political opponents spread
If you want a look at just how bad the situation has become regarding freedom of speech, just look at the former stars of the NBC show “Will and Grace,” Eric McCormack and Debra Messing. Over the holiday weekend, both urged the prepublication of attendees to a Donald Trump fundraiser.
Why would they want that? Well, McCormack made it clear it wasn’t to praise these folks for involvement in the process of governing our country by supporting a political candidate they felt would represent them. This is something that has, until recently, been accepted as the right of every single American. McCormack made it clear that the intention of his request was “so the rest of us can be clear about who we don’t wanna work with.”
To put it bluntly, McCormack wanted to know who supported a politician he opposed so that he could use his power and influence to ruin their professional lives at the very least. This is nothing short of a revival of the tactics of Joseph McCarthy. The big difference between McCarthy and the McCormack/Messing combination is the target selection.
Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis stated recently that America’s tribalism is what worries him most. Well, we’re seeing the symptoms, and while Messing and McCormack are two of the more prominent, we have noted this pattern before — both private efforts and efforts by the state of New York under the Andrew Cuomo-Letitia James regime.
To compound the problem of tribalism is the fact that there is a clear double standard being applied. If you back the NRA, you are painted as a child-killing domestic terrorist who believes in white supremacy. Efforts to ruin your life through blacklisting are practically celebrated by the Leftmedia. But suppose a Second Amendment supporter in office tried to utilize the same tactics that Cuomo is using on the NRA. We’d never hear the end of how America faces a grave threat to “democracy.”
We noted the same double standards in effect with some recent actions by Rep. Joaquin Castro last week. Doxing Trump supporters? It was practically a non-event that got little, if any, mention — much less condemnation — from mainstream media outlets. This was an action by a sitting congressman, someone who wields no small amount of influence in DC, including with regulatory agencies.
Similarly, when Federal Election Commission chairwoman Ellen Weintraub slammed President Trump for making claims about voter fraud in New Hampshire, we couldn’t help but notice her silence regarding Stacey Abrams’s 10 months of unsubstantiated claims of vote suppression in Georgia. By the way, Weintraub applied her double standard while being responsible for the enforcement of campaign-finance laws.
This also comes as James Comey again skates despite another damning report on his behavior from the Justice Department’s inspector general. This is in addition to the other issues that emerged from Spygate — questions Americans deserve the answers to, not to mention the need for accountability.
The frustrating thing is the fact that the double standards that could destroy any confidence in the Rule of Law are perpetrated not just by the legal system but by the studious lack of comment from the Leftmedia. While America can survive when Americans have deep divisions, it cannot survive if legal and moral double standards exist. And if free speech is successfully quashed — whether by Hollywood, academia, or Big Tech — our republic is in serious danger.
SOURCE
4 September, 2019
Ruling in filmmaking/marriage case is a win for free speech
According to Minnesota officials, the State’s Human Rights Act mandates that if the Larsens make films celebrating marriage between one man and one woman, then they must make films celebrating same-sex marriages as well.
By Carl Larsen
My wife and I are professional storytellers. Through our family business, Telescope Media Group, we produce short films, commercials and documentaries. And we direct live events.
We serve everyone. We just cannot express every message or celebrate every event through our custom films.
To our dismay, several years ago we learned about a Minnesota law — or rather, the unusual application of one — that sought to interfere with our filmmaking choices. According to state officials, this law would force us to create films promoting messages in conflict with our deepest beliefs.
The state’s position put us to a terrible choice. We could bend to the state’s interpretation of the law and compromise our faith; we could follow our faith and risk severe penalties, including fines, damages, or even jail time; or we could ask a court to vindicate our fundamental rights before we entered the wedding film industry.
We opted for court, but only as a last resort. The issue was simple but huge: Can the state compel filmmakers’ speech — that is, can it force filmmakers to create content that violates their core beliefs — just because they offer to create films for a living?
Minnesota said “yes”; we said “no.” On Aug. 23, a federal appeals court issued a strong ruling in favor of our free-speech rights.
That’s a big win — not only for us, but for everyone.
This mandate would pose a problem for any filmmaker, religious or not. The state shouldn’t be able force you to speak messages that contradict what you believe.
SOURCE
Count on Trump to defend free speech from global censorship
President Trump deserves enormous credit for his exceptional and unwavering commitment to free speech at the recent Group of Seven summit in France. Foreign leaders, like liberal activists in the United States, are chomping at the bit to introduce more online censorship.
At the meeting of the leading democracies, European leaders introduced a new measure that would draft technology companies into the role of government censors, forcing them to police online content and remove anything that bureaucrats deem to be insensitive. Emmanuel Macron struggled in vain to conceal his disappointment as he announced the United States had refused to sign on to his crackdown on online speech, which would have institutionalized the exact same kind of discriminatory treatment that American conservatives are fighting against here at home.
By refusing to sign on to the repressive accord, President Trump took a crucial stand in defense of one of the basic tenets of democracy. The traditional conception of free speech, that governments cannot prevent citizens from expressing their opinions or punish them for doing so, once reigned supreme across the Western world. From its roots in the Magna Carta, to its refinement in the works of John Locke, to its codification in the First Amendment of the Constitution, freedom of speech could be the greatest contribution Anglo Americans have made to human civilization.
In the aftermath of the totalitarian horrors of the 20th century, freedom of speech was embraced by all of the countries that now make up the G-7. It was even enshrined in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Unfortunately, freedom of speech has come under siege, especially in Europe, as governments seek to eradicate “hate” and “offensiveness” at the expense of the right of their own citizens to express themselves.
SOURCE
3 September, 2019
Pennsylvania man's 'gunlike hand gesture' toward neighbor was a crime, court rules
A Pennsylvania court ruled Tuesday that making a "gunlike hand gesture" is a crime after a man made the hand motion during an argument with his neighbor — an act which reportedly made several nearby residents nervous and prompted a call to police.
Stephen Kirchner, 64, made the gesture toward his neighbor in Manor Township in June 2018, according to surveillance video. Kirchner, walking alongside a female neighbor, "stopped, made eye contact with [the male neighbor] and then made a hand gesture at him imitating the firing and recoiling of a gun," according to court documents.
The action made one neighbor feel "extremely threatened" and he called 911. Another neighbor said she saw Kirchner “put his finger up like he was going to shoot [the neighbor]", "insecure," prompting her to call 911.
Kirchner and the female neighbor Kirchner had been walking with previously had issues and confrontations, sparking the neighbor to install six security cameras on his property. At the time of the incident in 2018, the female neighbor had a "no contact" order against the neighbor who felt threatened, court documents indicate.
Kirchner was issued a citation for disorderly conduct following the incident. He said in district court he made the "gunlike" gesture after his neighbor gave him "the finger with both hands."
The 64-year-old was found guilty, but appealed, arguing the hand gesture didn't "create a hazardous or physically offensive condition." Kirchner said he didn't mean to cause public alarm, and there wasn't really any harm done to the neighbor or others.
On Tuesday, however, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania found the gesture "served no legitimate purpose, and recklessly risked provoking a dangerous altercation."
Kirchner was ordered to pay a $100 fine and court costs.
SOURCE
Man considers legal action against Starbucks following claims of racism in store
A Philadelphia man is considering legal action against Starbucks after an employee labelled his drink order “ISIS” instead of his Islamic name.
Niquel Johnson, 40, told the Washington Post he had used his Islamic name, Aziz, “countless” times before, but this time the three drinks he ordered came back with “ISIS” — the acronym for the Islamic State terror group — printed on the receipt.
“I was shocked and angry,” Mr Johnson told the Washington Poston Friday. “I felt it was discrimination.”
In a statement to the Post, Starbucks spokesman Reggie Borges said: “After investigating, we don’t believe this was a case of discrimination or profiling.
“The customer approached and provided the name Aziz. The barista mistakenly spelled it incorrectly. We have connected with Mr. Johnson and apologised for this regrettable mistake.”
Mr Johnson, who was wearing Islamic dress, didn’t notice what the cashier had printed on the cups until after he had left the store.
SOURCE
2 September, 2019
Google Defends YouTube Restrictions on PragerU’s Educational Videos in Federal Court
A lawyer representing PragerU in federal court says Google’s reasons for denying some viewers access to videos produced by the conservative education organization on the tech giant’s YouTube subsidiary defy belief.
“To suggest that PragerU’s content is obscene, violent, hate speech is an absolute insult to the intelligence of the American public and people like yourself, who are willing to enter the important political dialogue,” Peter Obstler, PragerU’s lead attorney, told reporters and others at a press conference Tuesday in Seattle.
Obstler spoke to reporters after both sides presented oral arguments in Prager University v. Google LLC before the Seattle-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The legal battle by the organization co-founded by commentator and talk radio host Dennis Prager began in October 2017. Prager University, known as PragerU, filed a lawsuit against Google after YouTube placed more than 100 of its videos in “restricted” mode, flagging them as “dangerous” or “derogatory,” according to a press release from PragerU.
“‘Restricted’ means that families that have a filter to avoid pornography and violence cannot see that video,” Prager told a Senate subcommittee in a July hearing.
PragerU said in the press release that it filed the suit because Google and YouTube have restricted 10% of its video content and “maintains that the organization’s videos have been restricted, not because they are explicit, vulgar or obscene in nature, or inappropriate for children in any way, but rather because they promote conservative ideas.”
The videos categorized as restricted cover a range of topics, including the Ten Commandments, tolerance, climate change, free speech, and fake news, and tend to be three to five minutes in length.
Obstler said the organization, which focuses on teaching America’s founding principles and institutions and has more than 2 million YouTube subscribers, is ready to take the case as far as the Supreme Court.
“We will be back, but I am optimistic that we got a very fair hearing with three very able judges today,” Obstler said. “I believe they will do the right thing, and I believe that we will survive in federal court.”
SOURCE
Cyclists group demands 'appalling' AAMI commercial be taken off screens immediately - even though there's NOT a bicycle in the ad
A new term: Cycling is now "active transport"
An Australian cyclist group has slammed an AAMI Insurance advertisement and demand it be taken down, even though there are no bikes in the video.
Members of the Australian Cycle Alliance (ACAi) say the advertisement is 'appalling' and are calling for the insurance company to take it off screens immediately.
The video shows a family who have to use scooters - a form of active transport - to get to school as their car is in the repair shop.
While the father is eager to use scooters as a mode of transport, the children are reluctant as they are humiliated by what their friends may think.
The ad then suggests AAMI Comprehensive Car Insurance will provide a hire car for families while their car is out of action.
President of ACAi, Edward Hore, told Daily Mail Australia the alliance finds the video discouraging as it makes active transport look like a last resort.
SOURCE
1 September, 2019
Dior pulls its 'tone deaf' Johnny Depp advert for its 'Sauvage' cologne after it is sparks outrage over its 'racial insensitivity' to Native Americans
Dior has deleted ads from its social media accounts promoting its Sauvage fragrance after it faced a backlash because of its use of Native American culture.
A video on Twitter featuring a Native American dancer and an Instagram post explaining the campaign that was crafted with Native American consultants was deleted hours after the fashion house was called out for cultural misappropriation and being insensitive.
As part of the Sauvage campaign, Johnny Depp stars in a film called 'We Are the Land' that is described in marketing materials as an 'ode to Mother Earth'.
In the ad, the narrator says, 'We are the land', as a Native American man performs a traditional dance before the screen goes black.
It also featured Johnny Depp wearing a multi-colored poncho while playing guitar, and a dark-haired model with long hair in Native American dress.
Hours after it was posted on Friday, the video was deleted from the luxury designer brand's social media accounts.
Soon after posting the video on Twitter and Facebook on Friday, users were quick to criticize the designer brand.
One user called @AmyBertrand: 'if you wanted to be authentic you should of made a perfume called "colonizer," a journey deep into the colonial soul , in a stolen territory.
SOURCE
Australian PM slams new transgender toilet notices in his offices and orders them REMOVED - calling them 'over the top political correctness'
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has slammed a toilet sign encouraging staff to use the bathroom which 'best fits your gender identity'. The sign was installed at the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet's office in Canberra.
'PM&C is committed to staff inclusion and diversity. Please use the bathroom that best fits your gender identity,' the sign read.
Mr Morrison has slammed the sign as 'political correctness over the top'. 'Honestly this is why we call it the Canberra bubble, it's ridiculous ... It will be sorted out,' he told 2GB Radio.
'I don't think this is necessary. I think people can work out which room to use, 'It is political correctness over the top.'
He has spoken to the department officials about the sign and said he expects the note to be taken down. It is unknown when the sign was put up.
The PM&C's website said 'promoting diversity and inclusion is critical' in order 'to achieve our goal of best supporting government and improving outcomes for all Australians'.
SOURCE
BACKGROUND NOTES
This is Tongue-Tied 3. Posts by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.)
HOME (Index page)
Is the American national anthem politically incorrect? From the 4th verse:
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
Mohammad
The truth can be offensive to some but it must be said
The war on "cultural appropriation" is straightforward racism
"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."
Even some advocacy of violence is protected by the 1st Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that speech advocating violent illegal actions to bring about social change is protected by the First Amendment "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."
The double standard: Atheists can put up signs and billboards saying that Christianity is wrong and that is hunky dory. But if a Christian says that homosexuality is wrong, that is attacked as "hate speech"
One for the militant atheists to consider: "...it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg" -- Thomas Jefferson
"I think no subject should be off-limits, and I regard the laws in many Continental countries criminalizing Holocaust denial as philosophically repugnant and practically useless – in that they confirm to Jew-haters that the Jews control everything (otherwise why aren’t we allowed to talk about it?)" -- Mark Steyn
A prophetic comment on Norwegian hate speech laws: As Justice Brandeis once noted, repressive censorship “breeds hate” and “that hate menaces stable government,” rather than promoting safety; “the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies.”
Voltaire's most famous saying was actually a summary of Voltaire's thinking by one of his biographers rather than something Voltaire said himself. Nonetheless it is a wholly admirable sentiment: "I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it". I am of a similar mind.
The traditional advice about derogatory speech: "Sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never hurt you". Apparently people today are not as emotionally robust as their ancestors were.
The KKK were members of the DEMOCRATIC party. Google "Klanbake" if you doubt it
A phobia is an irrational fear, so the terms "Islamophobic" and "homophobic" embody a claim that the people so described are mentally ill. There is no evidence for either claim. Both terms are simply abuse masquerading as diagnoses and suggest that the person using them is engaged in propaganda rather than in any form of rational or objective discourse.
Leftists often pretend that any mention of race is "racist" -- unless they mention it, of course. But leaving such irrational propaganda aside, which statements really are racist? Can statements of fact about race be "racist"? Such statements are simply either true or false. The most sweeping possible definition of racism is that a racist statement is a statement that includes a negative value judgment of some race. Absent that, a statement is not racist, for all that Leftists might howl that it is. Facts cannot be racist so nor is the simple statement of them racist. Here is a statement that cannot therefore be racist by itself, though it could be false: "Blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites". If it is false and someone utters it, he could simply be mistaken or misinformed.
Categorization is a basic human survival skill so racism as the Left define it (i.e. any awareness of race) is in fact neither right nor wrong. It is simply human
Whatever your definition of racism, however, a statement that simply mentions race is not thereby racist -- though one would think otherwise from American Presidential election campaigns. Is a statement that mentions dogs, "doggist" or a statement that mentions cats, "cattist"?
If any mention of racial differences is racist then all Leftists are racist too -- as "affirmative action" is an explicit reference to racial differences
Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? "You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." -- Spoken at the White House to a group of black community leaders, August 14th, 1862
Gimlet-eyed Leftist haters sometimes pounce on the word "white" as racist. Will the time come when we have to refer to the White House as the "Full spectrum of light" House?
The spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." and "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -- Judge Learned Hand
Mostly, a gaffe is just truth slipping out
Two lines below of a famous hymn that would be incomprehensible to Leftists today ("honor"? "right"? "freedom?" Freedom to agree with them is the only freedom they believe in)
First to fight for right and freedom,
And to keep our honor clean
It is of course the hymn of the USMC -- still today the relentless warriors that they always were.
It seems a pity that the wisdom of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus is now little known. Remember, wrote the Stoic thinker, "that foul words or blows in themselves are no outrage, but your judgment that they are so. So when any one makes you angry, know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away."
"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates, and hearing all manner of reason?" -- English poet John Milton (1608-1674) in Areopagitica
Hate speech is verbal communication that induces anger due to the listener's inability to offer an intelligent response
Leftists can try to get you fired from your job over something that you said and that's not an attack on free speech. But if you just criticize something that they say, then that IS an attack on free speech
"Negro" is a forbidden word -- unless a Democrat uses it
"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper
Why are Leftists always talking about hate? Because it fills their own hearts
Leftists don't have principles. How can they when "there is no such thing as right and wrong"? All they have is postures, pretend-principles that can be changed as easily as one changes one's shirt
When you have an argument with a Leftist, you are not really discussing the facts. You are threatening his self esteem. Which is why the normal Leftist response to challenge is mere abuse.
The naive scholar who searches for a consistent Leftist program will not find it. What there is consists only in the negation of the present.
The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) could have been speaking of much that goes on today when he said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
I despair of the ADL. Jews have enough problems already and yet in the ADL one has a prominent Jewish organization that does its best to make itself offensive to Christians. Their Leftism is more important to them than the welfare of Jewry -- which is the exact opposite of what they ostensibly stand for! Jewish cleverness seems to vanish when politics are involved. Fortunately, Christians are true to their saviour and have loving hearts. Jewish dissatisfaction with the myopia of the ADL is outlined here. Note that Foxy was too grand to reply to it.
Foxy
Email me here (Hotmail address).
DETAILS OF REGULARLY UPDATED BLOGS BY JOHN RAY:
"Tongue Tied"
"Dissecting Leftism" (Backup here)
"Australian Politics"
"Education Watch International"
"Political Correctness Watch"
"Greenie Watch"
Western Heart
BLOGS OCCASIONALLY UPDATED:
"Marx & Engels in their own words"
"A scripture blog"
"Recipes"
"Some memoirs"
To be continued ....
Coral Reef Compendium
IQ Compendium
Queensland Police
Australian Police News
Paralipomena (3)
Of Interest
Dagmar Schellenberger
My alternative Wikipedia
BLOGS NO LONGER BEING UPDATED
"Food & Health Skeptic"
"Eye on Britain"
"Immigration Watch International".
"Leftists as Elitists"
Socialized Medicine
OF INTEREST (2)
QANTAS -- A dying octopus
BRIAN LEITER (Ladderman)
Obama Watch
Obama Watch (2)
Dissecting Leftism -- Large font site
Michael Darby
Paralipomena (2)
AGL -- A bumbling monster
Telstra/Bigpond follies
Optus bungling
Bank of Queensland blues
There are also two blogspot blogs which record what I think are my main recent articles here and here. Similar content can be more conveniently accessed via my subject-indexed list of short articles here or here (I rarely write long articles these days)
Alt archives
Longer Academic Papers
Johnray links
Academic home page
Academic Backup Page
General Backup
General Backup 2
My alternative Wikipedia
Selected reading
MONOGRAPH ON LEFTISM
CONSERVATISM AS HERESY
Rightism defined
Leftist Churches
Leftist Racism
Fascism is Leftist
Hitler a socialist
What are Leftists
Psychology of Left
Status Quo?
Leftism is authoritarian
James on Leftism
Irbe on Leftism
Beltt on Leftism
Critiques
Lakoff
Van Hiel
Sidanius
Kruglanski
Main academic menu
Menu of recent writings
basic home page
Pictorial Home Page
Selected pictures from blogs (Backup here)
Another picture page (Rarely updated)
Note: If the link to one of my articles is not working, the article concerned can generally be viewed by prefixing to the filename the following:
http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/42197/20151027-0014/jonjayray.com/
OR: (After 2015)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160322114550/http://jonjayray.com/
