The Left is so tolerant and loving that ‘Jenna Curren from Law Enforcement Today reports, On Tuesday, November 3rd, Californians decisively passed a ballot measure that will let convicted felons who are still on parole the ability to vote in their state.’https://republicanpost.net/wow-california-voters-just-authorized-unreal-measure-for-criminals-to-take-part-in/
Laws
All posts tagged Laws
If the fraudster and his team make it into the WH this is how his Presidency or should I say Kamala’s will look.
‘First of all, Biden is running for president in name only. He has never been that bright. He has accomplished little in his almost fifty years in public service. He is physically frail and clearly suffering acute cognitive decline.
If Joe Biden does win, he’ll be 78 years old when sworn in and 82 years old at the end of his first term. Both marks are the oldest in U.S. history for a president. Some individuals are still sharp in their late 70s. Biden is not one of them.
The result is that Biden will never be president de facto. With Trump out of the picture, Democrats wouldn’t need him anymore. Steps would be taken at some point to remove him from office on the grounds of mental incapacity under the Twenty-fifth Amendment. Nancy Pelosi recently proposed legislation to set up a commission to do just that as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.
But while he remains in office, who will be the real president in a Biden administration?
There are three camps contending for power:
The first camp is the Biden family led by Joe Biden’s wife Dr. Jill Biden, his son Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden’s brothers Jim Biden and Frank Biden. These are the individuals who have been enriched through association with Joe Biden by using or selling access to Biden’s power to win lucrative investment management roles, consulting engagements, construction contracts and other remunerative pursuits.
The Biden family will want to keep Joe in power (with Jill Biden pulling the strings) in order to keep their shakedown operation intact and avoid scrutiny.
The second camp is led by Kamala Harris and those who control her, including the Obama crew and the Resistance. If Biden is removed under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, Harris becomes Acting President. If Biden resigns under threat of removal, Harris becomes the president.
She would be a front for the Obamas and Valerie Jarrett who would operate through a cabinet consisting of Obama family retainers including Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Sally Yates and Eric Holder.
The third camp is led by the extreme left wing of the party including Bernie Sanders, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (and The Squad), Elizabeth Warren and radical organizations such as BLM. This group is already embedded in the Biden campaign as part of a deal whereby Bernie Sanders agreed to end his primary campaign and endorse Joe Biden in exchange for Biden adopting most of the Sanders platform.
The most likely outcome is that the Obama crew and the Bernie Bros will join forces and run the Biden family off the road. The Bidens will be allowed to keep their Chinese and Russian money and will not face any scrutiny or prosecution in exchange for going away quietly.
The Obama crew will take charge of foreign policy (to preserve Obama’s deals on Iran, the Paris Climate Accord and the Trans-Pacific Partnership), while the Bernie Bros will get domestic policy including much higher taxes, free healthcare, free tuition, forgiveness of student loans, guaranteed basic income, Modern Monetary Theory and the Green New Deal.’https://www.zerohedge.com/political/life-under-biden?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter
“We all know why Joe Biden is rushing to falsely pose as the winner, and why his media allies are trying so hard to help him: they don’t want the truth to be exposed. The simple fact is this election is far from over. Joe Biden has not been certified as the winner of any states, let alone any of the highly contested states headed for mandatory recounts, or states where our campaign has valid and legitimate legal challenges that could determine the ultimate victor. In Pennsylvania, for example, our legal observers were not permitted meaningful access to watch the counting process. Legal votes decide who is president, not the news media.
“Beginning Monday, our campaign will start prosecuting our case in court to ensure election laws are fully upheld and the rightful winner is seated. The American People are entitled to an honest election: that means counting all legal ballots, and not counting any illegal ballots. This is the only way to ensure the public has full confidence in our election. It remains shocking that the Biden campaign refuses to agree with this basic principle and wants ballots counted even if they are fraudulent, manufactured, or cast by ineligible or deceased voters. Only a party engaged in wrongdoing would unlawfully keep observers out of the count room – and then fight in court to block their access.
“So what is Biden hiding? I will not rest until the American People have the honest vote count they deserve and that Democracy demands.”
– President Donald J. Trump’ https://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/statement-from-president-donald-j.-trump/
It may not be the way I would put it but ‘The possibility that the Democrats could get away with this grand theft and install Joe Biden’s handlers in the Oval Office reminds me of an old joke: a man dies and goes to hell. Satan greets him at the gates and says, “You know, we get such bad media coverage. Hell really isn’t as bad as you’ve probably heard. In fact, you get to choose the eternal torment you prefer.” The miscreant was taken aback, and said, “All right, show me what you’ve got.” Satan showed him a room in which people were being tortured in fire, and another where they were encased in ice, and a third where they were sitting at tables drinking coffee and chatting pleasantly, although knee-deep in excrement. “This room doesn’t seem as bad as the others,” the man tells Satan. “I’ll take this room.” But as soon as the man enters, sits down, and orders his coffee, he hears: “Coffee break’s over. Back on your heads.” That’s Joe Biden’s presidency in a nutshell.
After a four-year coffee break, the Biden victory would mean that it’s time to get back on our heads. It would signal a return to the failed policies of the past: high taxes, crushing regulations, and the managed decline of the American economy as American jobs and industries are steadily outsourced to Joe’s pals in China and to other countries where workers are willing or forced to work more cheaply. It would mean a return to open-borders internationalism, with the repeal on the new administration’s first day (if old Joe and/or Kamala keep their promises) of what they call Trump’s “Muslim ban,” that is, his prohibition of entry from thirteen countries, Muslim and non-Muslim, that cannot or will not provide adequate information about those wishing to enter. So who will be coming in? Who knows? And who cares, as long as their names can be entered on a ballot if our new masters deign to go through the charade of allowing us to vote again?
President Biden would also return the U.S. to the self-defeating accords that impinge upon American sovereignty and weaken our nation in the face of international foes and competitors, such as the Paris Climate Accord. His victory would herald the restoration of the disastrous Iran nuclear deal, which emboldened and empowered the Islamic Republic of Iran to develop nuclear weapons at home and engage in jihad adventurism abroad.
Biden’s victory would, of course, also be a victory for The Squad and their Green New Deal, which the candidate repudiated while advertising on his website; it would be a victory for the Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups that Biden repeatedly signaled he would empower. It would be a victory for the Antifa and Black Lives Matter goons who have made Portland unlivable and rioted in other cities as well against an imagined “systemic racism,” but more precisely against a President who was not a Marxist or Marxist enabler.
Also rejoicing at Biden/Harris/Rice/Rhodes in the White House would be Palestinian jihadis, as the Biden camp has pledged to restore the aid to the Palestinian Authority that President Trump stopped because of Palestinian leaders’ manifest lack of interest in sincerely working toward peace with Israel. Money is fungible: “humanitarian aid” for the Palestinians would mean more money freed up for rockets to lob into Israel: your taxpayer dollars will finance the Palestinian jihad.
The First and Second Amendments will be dead letters after Biden packs the Supreme Court so as to ensure that his destruction of the freedom of speech and right to bear arms will not be contested.’https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/11/a-biden-presidency-coffee-breaks-over-back-on-your-heads?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the_2020_11_07_jihad_watch_daily_digest&utm_term=2020-11-07
When the Devilcrat/Marxist/Socialist/Communists fraudulently take this 2020 election it is not only ridding the government of President Trump but also the rights of its citizens. This means that the Bill of Rights which the American people have or had will no longer be worth the paper it is written on.
It has to be admitted that this hate is not only of President Trump but also of the average freedom loving conservative minded American and ‘From the moment he was declared the winner of the 2016 US presidential election, Donald Trump’s occupation of the White House has been viewed by his opponents as illegitimate.
First, it was argued that his rival, Senator Hillary Clinton, won 2.2 per cent more popular votes. Moreover, the people who voted for Trump were mainly the less-educated from the outer suburbs and smaller towns: Clinton’s ‘basket of deplorables’.
For Washington’s self-appointed czars, these labourers and hayseeds had put their natural order of things at risk. A crass outsider had been elected without their permission. Conservative commentator, Kurt Schlichter, described their condescending reaction as, ‘you want to have a say in our government and… look what happens when you do. You elect the wrong people. People like Trump.’
Clearly, Donald Trump is an outsider. His shrill tweets and blunt exchanges with world leaders embarrass DC elitists. His effective, if unconventional, negotiating style makes them cringe. It’s also an easy target for an ‘insider’ media which unreasonably characterises his successes as ‘more pain than gain’. Even when he outed 24 Nato members for failing to honour their 2006 financial commitments, he was labelled ‘disrupter in chief’. Perhaps. But at least Nato members will now pick up a larger share of the tab saving Washington nearly $300 million a year.
Needless to say, in Beijing, Brussels, Geneva and Paris, Trump’s ‘America First’ approach makes him persona non grata. In particular, his withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement sent rent-seekers everywhere into panic mode, worried their $1.5 trillion climate change cartel was under serious threat. Efforts were redoubled to ensure no other country followed.
Whatever his critics at home and abroad say, his supporters see him as a president who finally stands up for the United States of America. Despite unremitting distractions, he delivered record high employment for minorities. Nearly four million people were lifted off food stamps. He introduced better, more affordable health care through a transparent, lower cost, patient-focused system. He even brokered peace between the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan and Israel, any one of which would have assured President Obama another Nobel Peace prize. Yet, Trump’s feat was dismissed because ‘those countries already communicate and engage with Israel’. And, despite the Democrats initially downplaying Covid and accusing Trump of racism for his early imposition of travel restrictions with China, it is he who is blamed for mishandling the coronavirus response, not incompetent governors and mayors.
But his achievements don’t count. Only his missteps do. As he says, he is the victim of ‘the greatest political witch hunt in history’ and, since the day he ran against Hillary Clinton, his opponents have been determined to get rid of him.
Gregg Jarrett, in his book, The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump, describes the FBI as ‘an all-powerful, out of control, rogue agency’. In corroborated testimony, FBI Special Agent William Barnett exposed how the bureau’s investigation of Donald Trump was based on nothing more than ‘supposition on supposition’.
Worse, FBI director, James Comey and his colleagues knew the bureau’s sources were not credible. It has also been revealed that the General Service Administration secretly gave protected Trump Transition Team records to the FBI and the Mueller investigation. Yet after nearly three years of intense probing, orchestrated leaks and unending damaging headlines for the president, Robert Mueller finally conceded there was no evidence.
By contrast, a story in the New York Post, releasing damaging emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop, which support a ‘pay for play’ arrangement involving the former vice president and his son, was buried. Acting like arms of an authoritarian state media, Twitter and Facebook blocked readership. Most major networks similarly censored the revelation, despite Hunter Biden’s former business partner verifying authenticity.
Regardless of whether or not President Trump enjoys a second term, the real story of his presidency (and re-election?) is the emergence from the shadows of a well-organised, powerful movement, largely aligned to the radical Left. Until Trump, it had tolerated marginal political change, confident that control of the bureaucracy and the judiciary was an effective brake. Having failed to contain Trump, the Left is determined under a Biden administration to stack the Supreme Court with socialist judges.
Whatever Donald Trump’s flaws and however much he is hated for interrupting the onward march of socialism, his election was, after all, constitutional. It fulfilled, possibly for the last time, the promise outlined in the Declaration of Independence that governments derive ‘their just powers from the consent of the governed’.
For the last four years that promise and others within the Declaration have been under attack from those who view America’s history and social structure as basically bad. They spurn the system which allows people like Trump, who presidential historian Jon Meacham describes as ‘anguished, nervous white men with a lizard brain’, to vote.
Unsurprisingly a growing number of Trump supporters have become shy about openly declaring their allegiance. Attacks on them are all over Twitter and Youtube. They have been punched, pelted with eggs and had their Make America Great Again hats ripped off and burned.
Unlike those who reject American exceptionalism, Trump supporters collectively embrace traditional libertarian values and are concerned by the growing coalition of big government, big business and the radical green Left, which continues to marginalise them. They watch with alarm donations to the Biden campaign from finance leaders on Wall Street and across the country, running at five times the rate going to Trump.
To them a Trump loss means the surrender of even more precious freedoms as government’s reach – already far broader than the Constitution ever intended – becomes more and more intrusive. Whatever else this election is about, it may finally determine whether the US Bill of Rights is worth the paper it’s written on.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/10/people-like-trump/
This isn’t something a conservative or a person with an IQ above 1 did not already know but ‘American journalism has lost its bearings, and we are all paying the price. For the past four years, egged on by President Trump, mainstream news swiftly descended past the first circle of hell — subtle partisanship — and reached a far darker, hotter one: blatant favoritism, stories killed for purely partisan reasons and occasional propaganda masquerading as solid news.
Journalism’s decline mirrors that of other American institutions, but it has compounded the social damage. A thriving democracy depends on free and open debate and informed debate depends on trustworthy news. For most Americans, that trust has evaporated.
The Washington Post is exactly right when it says, ‘Democracy dies in darkness.’ It is ironic, then, that the Post is part of the problem, not the solution. It is the reliable mouthpiece for Washington’s entrenched establishment when the country is angrily debating how well that establishment has served them. The Washington Post, like the New York Times and other major news organizations, is not a neutral observer in that debate. It is a protagonist on a mission.
Before turning to the latest story killed by the mainstream media, consider their abysmal performance on the two biggest stories from 2016 to 2019. (In 2020, the biggest story was different. It was COVID-19 and the many facets of the pandemic.) During the first three years of the Trump presidency, however, the biggest stories were Donald Trump’s alleged collaboration with Russia to win the White House and the efforts of Barack Obama’s administration, led by the FBI and CIA, to spy on Trump’s campaign and then impede his transition to office and presidency.
America’s mainstream media didn’t just make a few mistakes on those stories. It didn’t just give them some partisan spin. It missed both stories completely. It got them utterly wrong, and it did so for years.
Failure #1: The media bought the Russia collusion story and retailed
Except for Fox News, all the major TV networks and national newspapers adopted the Russia collusion narrative and drove it forward. They relied almost entirely on leaked stories from anonymous sources, deeply opposed to Trump, mostly at the FBI and CIA, plus some Democrats on Capitol Hill. The main drivers were James Comey and Andrew McCabe at the FBI, John Brennan and James Clapper at the intelligence agencies and Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. They not only got a Special Counsel appointed but got him free rein. Robert Mueller’s prolonged investigation, managed by his deputy, Andrew Weissmann, hamstrung the presidency and helped the Democrats win the House in 2018.
All this time, Schiff was a media darling, repeating his claim that he had proof positive that Trump actively worked with the Kremlin. In fact, Schiff was sitting on secret testimony, given by all Obama’s top officials in national security and law enforcement. Under oath, all of them said they had no evidence of Trump working with Russia. Schiff knew that, of course, but he repeatedly told the press the opposite. Not surprisingly, he refused to release the testimony since it betrayed his lies. Schiff’s secrecy allowed the Obama-era officials to go on CNN and MSNBC and tell viewers Trump was a Russian asset who had worked with Putin to win the White House. When the deception was finally revealed, the media yawned.
When Special Counsel Mueller began work, his team had all this information, plus the FBI investigations that failed to find collaboration between Russia and the Trump campaign. Knowing that, he could have double-checked the work, done some additional interviews, and reassured the public with an interim report after a few months. The public deserved that, but Mueller and Weissmann chose to stay silent, hoping to trap Trump or his aides into making a false statement. This partisan team was determined to take down Trump and they kept at it for over two years. It all ended with a report that found no collusion and failed to indict any American for working with Russia on the presidential campaign. Nada. Bupkes.
There may not have been collusion between Trump and the Kremlin, but there surely was between the mainstream media, elected Democrats and anti-Trump activists within the FBI, Department of Justice and CIA. They worked together to delegitimize the President, bring down him and his administration and, failing that, to impede them from making policy. The press shared that goal, eagerly swallowed the ‘inside stories’, and readily granted anonymity to anyone who leaked damaging information. It was all for a good cause, they knew, but it hasn’t held up well.
This week, we learned, once again, how badly journalists misused the cover of anonymity to advance their agenda. It came when we finally learned who wrote the anonymous 2018 New York Times opinion piece saying key members of the administration were working actively against President Trump, whom they considered dangerous. Publishing an anonymous op-ed is extremely rare, but the Times explained the secrecy by saying it was essential to protect a high level official working inside the administration to undermine it. It was all very high-level, hush-hush stuff. Only after the author finally ‘outed’ himself did we learn he was actually a low- to mid-level official at the Department of Homeland Security. He wasn’t senior, like the New York Times said. He wasn’t someone who worked closely with the president or his White House team. They didn’t know him. He was a worker bee, not the Queen Bee. The Times knew the truth when it originally published the piece and it deliberately deceived its readers. It was all for a noble purpose, of course, to damage the President and beguile the readers who hate him.
The larger point here is that anti-Trump animus was so strong it overrode basic standards of journalistic integrity and judgment. That animus, coupled with disgruntled officials eager to destroy Trump, led to three years of dreadful reporting, spinning up flimsy tales of foreign contacts into an ominous-but-false suggestion of treason.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/10/the-american-media-is-failing-you/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WORL%20%2020201106%20%20AL&utm_content=WORL%20%2020201106%20%20AL+CID_9d4b076a5f4ee5f8dfeaee0fb26acb06&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Australia&utm_term=The%20American%20media%20is%20failing%20you
In the Australian state of New South Wales the Woodhen of Lord Howe Island is worth more than an unborn baby! Yes, you read that right! I too could not believe it but in a way I could. Our politicians are dull of hearing when it comes to killing babies but not when it comes to the climate scam or protecting birds. Well, anyway at NSW Right to Life one of their members recently ‘…phoned in to chat and share ideas as many of our members do.
This gentleman was telling me how he visited Lord Howe Island recently and was struck by how the Lord Howe Woodhen is protected while our unborn are not.
Noting that the Lord Howe Island Group is administered by a local board which comes under the state of NSW, I thought this was an excellent point so I decided to look it up in more detail. Here is what I found:
This is just another reminder that our unborn here in NSW receive less protection than many of our animals. All legal pretence and protection was stripped away last year and we must not forget this.’https://righttolifensw.org.au/the-lord-howe-woodhen-vs-nsw-unborn-humans/
The China virus has not only affected the Presidential election via mail-in ballots but allowed Australian state dictators to rule without opposition. ‘For the first time since self-government was granted by the British in the nineteenth century, Australia has become a series of rolling tin-pot dictatorships.
What was truly appalling this year was than not one of the checks and balances we rely on to protect us from any rampant Mussolini class actually worked.
Not one.
Most of the dictatorships were installed by ministerial subordinate legislation.
Like a tsunami, nothing stopped them. Not disallowance by a second chamber, which exists in all states except Queensland. And even where there is a second chamber, the disallowance power has too often been deleted by a compliant chamber.
Nor the courts where the prime minister does not see a sacred duty to maintain the federation and our open borders, where there have been few other plaintiffs who stay, and which anyway did not show the urgency the High Court did when it once rushed to get rid of John Howard’s attempt to block electoral fraud. Some of the viceroys may have expressed their concerns, but too often the making of subordinate legislation has been taken away from and not reported to the executive councils. And rather than a check and balance, much of the mainstream media has preferred to act as the panic adjunct of the relevant premier relaying endlessly the dictatorial mantra to ‘do the right thing’.
Thus, Australian democracy collapsed before a tsunami of power-crazed politicians and their armies of advisers.
And yet we are one of the half-dozen oldest continuing democracies in the world.
The point is that if anyone doubts Lord Acton’s dictum that power tends to corrupt, an objective analysis of the politicians’ response to the Wuhan virus should settle the matter. Decisions were too often taken for political advantage rather than on medical grounds, often exhibiting blatant inconsistencies.
The decision to impose a lockdown which so seriously damaged the lives, businesses liberties and freedom of hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Australians necessitated great care and attention to the question whether it was justified.
But instead, the politicians revealed an incompetence that was breathtaking, suggesting that attention was concentrated on political considerations rather than on the question of absolute necessity.
In place of the requisite judgement Edmund Burke suggested is the only point in choosing a parliamentary representative, Australia’s political leaders substituted flawed and exaggerated modelling. As mentioned before, and which should never be forgotten, this contained a key error so astronomical and so glaring (the projection of a daily need of 35,000 intensive care units) that the humblest tradesman, farmer or small businessperson would have surely questioned it had they been allowed to lay eyes on it
Neither our leaders noticed it, nor did the bureaucratic supremos privy to the modelling.
They want you to forget this outrage. You shouldn’t.
The result was that what in many ways is a trial dictatorship was imposed, and especially in Victoria, the state appropriately in some embryonic relationship with communist China.
The nation, to a greater or lesser degree, was subject to a brutal and wholly unnecessary lockdown. The number who died from the virus was well over 125 times higher than it should have been had the politicians disobeyed Beijing’s wishes and followed Taiwan, home of world’s best pandemic practice.
To recall the corollary of Acton’s dictum about power, a constitutional system must provide checks and balances against the corruptive nature of power.
This experience has become an evil precedent for the politicians and not only about pandemics. Already there are calls to use the concept of dictatorship to impose the imagined cure to global warming, no doubt another way for the communists to undermine the West which among Western leaders President Trump alone has noticed.
Now in determining what should be the question du jour, how to ensure checks and balances always operate to prevent the abuse of power, it is appropriate to recall that the federation of Australia was achieved not by the politicians alone, but by the direct involvement of the people under the Corowa Plan.
This required the direct election of a convention with its conclusions being put directly to the people for decision by referendum. Our ancestors designed a constitution for a country, put it to the people, changed it, put it again, took it to London and put it through the Westminster parliament. All in four years without air travel and the internet. This is a precedent worth following for the first people’s review of the constitution in over 120 years, particularly of course to reinstall protections against the abuse of power.
To do this, some formal changes to the Constitution should be made consistent with the Corowa Plan. As argued here, we should constitutionalise Alan Jones’ Pub Test, that is, ensure that the common sense with which the rank-and-file are liberally endowed, can always prevail.
There are six points which should be encompassed in this approach:
– either House, or three state Parliaments or the people by a petition of, say, 5 per cent of electors nationally and in a majority of states, shall be able to call an elected convention to sit for a maximum of three years.
– each state and territory shall be entitled to elect a number of unpaid delegates equal to one half the total of their senators and MHRs.
– no candidate shall in campaigning be entitled to claim endorsement or affiliation with a registered political party.
– where possible the convention shall operate through committees and with electronic communication.
– after wide consultation, the convention may put a constitutional referendum or referendums.
– Yes and No cases for all voters will be prepared for each referendum question by the appropriate delegates, with federal funding for reasonable advertising expenses.
This of course will only occur if there is an overwhelming demand from Australians to take back their country. The solution is in our hands.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/11/trial-dictatorship/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=OZWH%20%2020201107%20%20AL&utm_content=OZWH%20%2020201107%20%20AL+CID_3b76ec7e531d74e43d3c90137e6fe1ab&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Australia&utm_term=Trial%20dictatorship
Political Islam is NOT compatible with freedom and liberty loving people. For those who love liberty and true freedom of speech ‘Counseling Muslim children to commit murder in response to insults to Muslim sensibilities constitutes severe psychological abuse by Western standards. One can only imagine the horror and outrage if any Western teacher did something similar in her classroom. It is worthwhile to remember the obvious: barbaric practices sanctioned by Sharia do not magically stop with migration into Western countries.
“A Teacher At Islamabad Islamic School Beheads Effigy Of Macron In Front Of Students,” MEMRI, October 30, 2020:
A video posted on social media outlets on October 30, 2020, shows a teacher at Islamabad’s Jamia Hafsa Madrassa beheading what was described as an effigy of French President Macron with a sword in front of her students. The scene is accompanied by a song stating that “this is the punishment for the Prophet’s slanderer” and pledging to crush to dust the makers of the [Charlie Hebdo] cartoons.
Music: “This is the punishment of the Prophet’s slanderer. The head chopped off from the body. This is the punishment of the Prophet’s slanderer. The head chopped from the body. The makers of the cartoons. We shall crush them to dust…
“Pakistani girls’ school stages mock BEHEADING as cleric vows vengeance on France for ‘insulting the Prophet,’” RT News, November 2, 2020:
A girls’ religious school in Islamabad staged a mock beheading in front of its young students as a cleric preached that Muslims would exact vengeance on France – and on the West in general – for “insulting” Prophet Mohammed.
A woman in full face veil uses a scimitar to behead an effigy in front of hundreds of assembled students, many holding signs sporting protest slogans, in video posted to the official Facebook account of Jamia Syeda Hafsa, a Pakistani girls’ seminary, last week.
The disturbing scene and excerpts of a fiery sermon that accompanied it have since been picked up by Muslim-skeptical English language outlets, at least one of which claimed the effigy is of French President Emmanuel Macron, though there is no evidence in the video that this is the case. Macron has come under fire from Muslims around the world for his government’s recent efforts to crack down on Islamic extremism following the beheading of history teacher Samuel Paty last month by a Chechen Muslim immigrant.
Video of the beheading is set to a song that lyrically vows to “grind into dust” those who draw the Prophet Mohammed and declares beheading to be the only fitting punishment for insulting him. The grisly pageant was accompanied by a sermon in which the female cleric vowed vengeance on the enemies of Islam, especially France.
“So far only one of your brethren has gone to hell,” the cleric declared, adding that “we will never stop until we exact vengeance for your insult” – presumably the obscene cartoon drawing of the Prophet that Paty reportedly showed his class as part of a lesson on free speech….’https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/11/pakistan-teacher-at-islamic-school-beheads-macron-effigy-this-is-the-punishment-of-the-prophets-slanderer?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=the_2020_11_05_jihad_watch_daily_digest&utm_term=2020-11-05
The following is from an email I received from Family Voice Australia. It is scary how far down the Marxist path Australia has gone and continues on. Free speech is under attack and if this continues there will soon be no turning back!
It has been on Sky after dark here in regional Australia concerning ‘…Queensland University student Drew Pavlou. The university suspended him in July to the end of the year so he could not sit his final exams or take up his elected university senate seat.
His crime? He led a peaceful protest against the Chinese government’s undue influence on university policies. He is seeking to appeal in Queensland’s Supreme Court, but this can take a very long time.
You may also have heard of Dr Peter Ridd, formerly a physics professor. James Cook University sacked him after he pointed out serious flaws in Great Barrier Reef research by some of his colleagues. He is currently seeking to appeal his unfair dismissal in the High Court.
Dr Peter Ridd & Drew Pavlou
Then there is Senator Claire Chandler. She was accused of offending transgender people in a newspaper column last July and a subsequent email. The Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commissioner said she was potentially guilty.
Chandler had said, correctly, that biological women are up to 30% more at risk of injury when competing against transwomen. She wanted to keep women’s sports, toilets and change rooms for those born female.
Senator Claire Chandler
The complaint against her was ultimately dropped when she refused to sign a confidentiality agreement. Others who lack the protection of parliament may not be so lucky.
Free speech in this country is under threat today as never before. The Weekend Australian reported yet another case on 24 October. The University of Tasmania Law Review has rejected a paper by Professor Patrick Parkinson, Dean of Law at the University of Queensland.
Professor Patrick Parkinson
He was critical of the Tasmanian transgender laws that caused Senator Chandler such grief.
The Tasmanian University Law Review chose referees who said Professor Parkinson’s paper should be rejected. They claimed he used “offensive” terms such as “biological female” and “opposite sex”, and he failed to consider activist and social sciences research.
One reviewer even wanted the paper rejected because it would not “advance human rights”!
James Allan, another law professor, read the two reviewers’ reports. “Both, in my view, failed to do the job expected of referees,” he said (The Australian, 27/10/20).
“Politics trumped the open expression of views that were presented well above the usual standards required to have a paper accepted by a law review.”
James Allan went on: “The core problem then is that as our universities have become increasingly politicised, and faculties of social science, arts and law ever less ‘viewpoint diverse’ … the whole peer review process has become less and less trustworthy. Put more bluntly, this amounts to yet another inroad into free expression.
“… If Parkinson’s experience were a one-off, we could all shrug and move on. But it is not,” he said.
If Professor Parkinson – a respected legal expert – cannot say that the Tasmanian laws are flawed, how can any of us speak the truth publicly about harmful legislation? You, your friends and your pastor are increasingly at risk.’ https://familyvoice.org.au/
