"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"


The primary site for this blog mirror is HERE. Dissecting Leftism is HERE (and mirrored here). The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email me (John Ray) here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing) See here or here for the archive index of this site
****************************************************************************************





8 December, 2014

Former England footballer Michael Owen is slammed on social media after comparing women to luxury cars



Former England footballer Michael Owen has been inundated with critical messages after starring in a 'sexist' new car ad.

In the ad, which was made on behalf of his local car dealership, Owen, who is married to childhood sweetheart Louise Bonsall, compares women to luxury cars and goes on to boast about the 'dozens' of Jaguars he owns.

 'You've got to go for looks to start with,' said the star in the clip, before adding: 'Then you look inside. It's probably similar to girls isn't it?

'The look attracts you to start with and then you get to know them a bit more, I think it's the same with cars.'

Andrew North, a director at Alexanders Prestige, the dealership behind the ad, defended Owen's statement when contacted by MailOnline.  'I think it's a fair comparison,' said Mr North. 'You are attracted to the outside but ultimately, it's what's on the inside that counts and that's what he was trying to say.

Defending his star, Mr North added: 'Michael was a pleasure to work with. We have known him for years and he have previously worked with him and his family through the equestrian side of the business. 'He was very happy to take part in the advert and we will be working with him again.'

SOURCE



California college settles First Amendment suit with student

A California community college has settled a lawsuit with a student who claimed it violated his First Amendment rights when an administrator threatened him for collecting petition signatures outside of a small, designated "free speech zone."

Student Vincenzo Sinapi-Riddle, with help from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, sued Glendora, Calif., Citrus College after the incident, which occurred on Sept. 17, 2013 - the day designated as "Constitution Day." Sinapi-Riddle was collecting signatures for a petition condemning the federal National Security Agency's domestic surveillance activities.

When he left the area for a lunch break and headed to the student center, he and another student discussed the petition, prompting an administrator to intervene, according to FIRE. Claiming that a political discussion could not take place outside of the free speech zone, the unidentified school employee threatened to eject Sinapi-Riddle from campus for violating the policy.

After a suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the school agreed to pay Sinapi-Riddle $110,000 in damages and attorneys' fees, as well as to revise its free speech policies. In a statement, the school noted the settlement figure was far less than the anticipated cost of fighting the lawsuit and defended its policies as in compliance "with a long line of U.S. Supreme Court cases relating to speech activities in public places, including college campuses." But the school affirmed its support for free speech and agreed to change some campus regulations.

SOURCE 




7 December, 2014

Australia:  Eccentric parishioner denied right to pass out leaflets inside church he was criticizing

The Court of Appeal has refused a "free speech" bid by a Yepoon parishioner to permit pamphlet distribution criticising the theology being preached by the pastor of his local Wesleyan Methodist Church.

The parish considered his brochures that connected the 9/11 twin towers attacks to imperfect religious instruction and praised Russian president Vladimir Putin "as an exemplar of Christian values", to be objectionable.

Removed by police on two occasions after being denied entry, Ron Gallagher filed a claim against parish board members requiring he be permitted "to pass freely without let or hindrance into the sanctuary" of their premises and for an order disallowing their "edict of suppression made in disregard of the God-given privilege of freedom of speech".

Of historical interest was the court ruling that article 9 of the English Bill of Rights of 1688 on which Gallagher relied - that applies in Queensland by virtue of the Imperial Acts Application Act 1984 - contained no speech freedom guarantee as argued.

Such freedom and the limited "implied constitutional right to communicate on government and political matters" recognised by Australia's High Court were irrelevant, so ruled the court, to his ouster. No one had taken steps to prevent Gallagher's pamphlet distribution elsewhere, they objected only to him so doing on their own premises.

As a regular member of the church's congregation (but not a member of the church itself), he was merely a licensee whose right to enter could be revoked - at will - by the property owners or the parish board as the owner's representative.

And in the case of a place or worship, a person's right to enter was in any event subject to a legally recognised qualification that he or she must "behave in reasonable conformity with the requirements of the religion in which he was participating".

Gallagher simply had no legal or equitable right to be on the church's property for any purpose once informed he was no longer welcome.

The court also noted the somewhat obscure Criminal Code offence of engaging in conduct that "caused disquiet or disturbed" persons assembled for religious worship, was punishable by a $10 fine and in more serious cases, by imprisonment.

SOURCE




UK: Businesses must not seek to hire "good-looking girls"

A job advertisement by Pizza Hut which said it was looking for "decent, good-looking girls" has been removed after complaints it was sexist.

The advert for the chain's Leatherhead branch was posted on the website Gumtree but was removed after people reported it to Pizza Hut's head office.

It read: "Pizza Hut Leatherhead looking for full and part time drivers. Need to have your own car.  "We are also looking for a decent good looking girls for Reception. That role is just part time."

Jackie Quinn, the president of Leatherhead's Chamber of Commerce president said the advert was sexist and claimed Pizza Hut had "let itself down".  "It's not acceptable to be sexist, they could have put good-looking girls or boys but they didn't even do that," she said.

SOURCE




5 December, 2014

Twitter Mass Suspends Conservatives Who Posted NYT Address #Ferguson

What's OK for the NYT is not OK for conservatives, apparently

The People's Cube is reporting that their Twitter account with over 4000 followers has been suspended for retweeting a post with the addresses of New York Times reporters Julie Bosman and Campbell Robertson.

The Times reporters had posted the address of unindicted Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson and his wife shortly after the verdict.

The popular conservative art humor website is not alone among conservative Twitter accounts that have been targeted.

It has also been reported that the Cube is not alone, indicating that Twitter is targeting conservative reaction to the outing of Wilson. Wilson has received multiple death-threats and the FBI has arrested Jaleel Tarik Abdul-Jabbaar for plotting to kill Wilson.

GotNews Editor-in-Chief, Charles C. Johnson was suspended by Twitter for posting the reporters addresses on the GotNews website and merely mentioning it on Twitter. Bosman has complained to the Chicago police and demanded V.I.P. protection though the Chicago Police say there's no credible threat against her.

Conservative twitters have been emailing Johnson trying to reinstall their own accounts after they were mass suspended.

UPDATE: As of 11:40 December 3, 2014 Twitter has reinstated the The People's Cube Twitter account.

SOURCE




"Ghetto" is a naughty word

James Delingpole appeared on a BBC TV Programme ...

"I have experienced immense obtuseness from BBC audiences on two occasions recently. One was Free Speech - a youth debate programme redolent of that old Not The Nine O'Clock News sketch where Griff Rhys Jones tries unsuccessfully to get down with the kids on a show called Hey, Wow! - in which I made the H.M. Batemanesque mistake of pointing out that, thanks to the failed experiment of multiculturalism, there were now parts of inner-city Britain which were effectively Muslim ghettos.

Rather than dispute the premise - not an easy task, given the widespread evidence from Birmingham and Bradford to Luton - the young audience and most of my fellow panellists decided to attack me for my choice of terminology. `Ghetto' was a racist word, they told me. Islamophobic too.

The more they hissed and jeered and showed their disapproval of my vile bigotry, you could tell, the more warm and gooey they felt inside. See what good, sensitive, caring, non-judgmental people they all were: uniting as one against the language of hatred and intolerance! (But if you go to Birmingham and Bradford and Luton, I suspect the sectarian problem I've described won't have gone away)".

SOURCE




4 December, 2014

Must not mention racial details of Egyptians


A famous ancient Egyptian -- with hat

News Corp chairman Rupert Murdoch has come under fire on social media after making a racially insensitive tweet.

Mr Murdoch struck a wrong note minutes ago after offering his opinion on the casting controversy surrounding the 2014 film 'Exodus: Gods and Kings'.

Under his authenticated Twitter handle @rupertmurdoch, the media mogul wrote: "Moses film attacked on Twitter for all white cast. Since when are Egyptians not white? All I know are."

Predictably, the tweet went down like a tonne of bricks, but still determined to get his point across Mr Murdoch followed the original tweet with: "Everybody-attacks last tweet. Of course Egyptians are Middle Eastern, but far from black. They treated blacks as slaves."

After a barrage of criticism, which included some users telling Mr Murdoch to "drop dead", the News Corp chairman relented, tweeting: "Okay, there are many shades of colour. Nothing racist about that, so calm down!"

SOURCE

Rupert was perfectly right.  Arabs ARE white -- a little swarthy, like most Mediterranean people, but a long way from black.

I suppose the issue is whether the ANCIENT Egyptians were white but we have rather a lot of paintings from ancient Egyptian tombs which show Egyptians as light brown (suntanned?) and many of their slaves  -- Nubians -- as black -- as black as modern Africans.  So there definitely was a color divide and it was not favorable to blacks.

 So the ancient Egyptians may have been a bit darker than modern-day Arab Egyptians but they were sun-worshippers in part so it may have been religiously correct to portray them with suntans.  In which case what we see in the tomb paintings may simply be suntanned versions of a Mediterranean skin.  Tanned skin does after all have a following to this day.

Note also that the ancient world seems to have been very little concerned about race.  People from all over the empire became Roman emperors, for instance.  There may therefore have been some occasions when the ancestors of African blacks rose to positions of influence in ancient Egyptian society.  If Obama is good enough  for modern-day America, why not another black for Pharaoh?

It was of course religion, not race, that mattered most to the ancient world and that was true up until fairly recently.  The first set of writings that obsessed about race that I know of is the correspondence between Karl Marx and his disciple Friedrich Engels.  And the obsession of America's Democrats with race also goes back to around the mid-19th century.


A 19th century election poster

Even Houston Stewart Chamberlain, writing in the late 19th century, who is sometimes claimed as the main theorist behind Nazism, in fact thought that it was only out of racial mixture that the gifted could be created. He considered that the evidence of this was provided by the Prussian, whom he saw as the superman, resulting from a cross between the German and the Slav. From this Chamberlain went on to argue that the sum of all these talented people would then form a "race," not of blood but of "affinity."  Not very racist in the modern sense.




UK: Calling Ukip candidate by Turkish name seen as fanning prejudice

UKIP is an anti-immigration party. There can be little doubt that directing attention to the man's partly Turkish ancestry was intended to damage him in the eyes of potential voters

A controversial Tory leaflet referring to a Ukip candidate by his Turkish name is not racist and will probably "do him a favour", according to the Conservative MP who will fight him at the next election.

Jackie Doyle-Price told The Telegraph the flier calling Tim Aker "Timr" in an apparent attempt to remind voters of his foreign root would give him "credibility" with the electorate.

She admitted the move was "childish" but rejected the comment was racist, saying: "Frankly, I don't consider this a big deal at all."

James Forsyth, a political commentator, accused the Tories in the Mail on Sunday of "diving headfirst into the gutter" with the "attempt to remind voters of his Turkish roots" in the leaflet.

While Mr Aker was born "Timr", he refers to himself as Tim and appears on the ballot paper in the council by-election under that name.

SOURCE



3 December, 2014

Must not criticize Obama's daughters



The Republican spin doctor who scolded Barack Obama's teenage daughters for lacking "class" in their attitude and dress sense has resigned amid a fierce backlash.

Elizabeth Lauten, the communications director for a Tennessee congressman, said that she was quitting after earlier apologising for her "hurtful words".

The firestorm of controversy reflected a long-standing consensus that the children of presidents should be spared from the partisan and often highly personal invective that characterises US politics.

For a senior political operative whose role was to spread the message of her boss Stephen Fincher, Ms Lauten's taunt that the girls should "try showing a little class" is also being touted as a case study in how not to do the job.

She launched her tirade in a Facebook posting about the appearance of 13-year-old Sasha and her sister Malia, 16, at the annual White House turkey pardoning - normally an uncontroversial event even in the partisan world of Washington.

Several media outlets noted that the girls looked distinctly underwhelmed and were casually dressed as their father spoke on the eve of Thanksgiving. But Ms Lauten went much further.

"Dear Sasha and Malia, I get you're both in those awful teen years, but you're a part of the First Family, try showing a little class," she wrote. "Rise to the occasion. Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at a bar."

SOURCE





Black British footballer faces investigation over 'racist and anti-Semitic' Instagram post

His blackness will protect him, of course

Mario Balotelli, the Liverpool striker, faces a Football Association investigation and possible five-match ban for an inflammatory social media message that has earned him a public rebuke from his club and an angry response from the Jewish Leadership Council.

Balotelli posted and then swiftly deleted an image on his Instagram page depicting the computer game character `Super Mario' alongside a racial stereotype and anti-Semitic remark - "jumps like a black man and grabs coins like a Jew".

Simon Johnson, the former FA executive and now chief executive of the Jewish Leadership Council reacted angrily to post on Monday night.

"We abhor all forms of racism, wherever it is found," Johnson said. "We call upon the FA to investigate this offensive social media post and to take action if appropriate if we are to succeed in kicking racism out of football."

The provocative language in Balotelli's post, even if he claims it to be an ironic anti-racist message, leaves the Italian open to a breach of the FA's social media guidelines. If charged, the minimum ban on race-related breaches is five games.

At the very least, the striker has had to explain his intentions to his club and the swiftness with which it was removed demonstrated Liverpool concerns. The FA is sure to explore it further.

SOURCE



2 December, 2014

I've lost my lawsuit. But I'm going to appeal. Here's why

Ezra Levant
       
Today I lost the lawsuit against me brought by Khurrum Awan, the former youth president of the Canadian Islamic Congress.

You can read the full ruling here. The judge awarded Awan a whopping $80,000 plus legal costs.

I am reviewing the technical aspects of the ruling with my lawyer. But there is something terrifying, buried in this ruling, that I already know I simply must appeal - all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.

On paragraph 166 of the decision, the judge ruled that calling Awan an anti-Semite is defamatory, and that's one of the reasons I lost, and have to pay him so much money.



But Awan was, at one time, the youth president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, an anti-Semitic organization. At the time Awan was its youth president, the CIC was led by a notorious anti-Semite, Mohamed Elmasry. Elmasry famously went on national TV to state that any adult in Israel is a legitimate target for terrorism. The CIC has publicly called for the legalization of anti-Semitic terrorist groups.

And yet the judge ruled that it is defamatory to call the former youth president of an anti-Semitic organization, anti-Semitic. Because he denied it in court, and said he never knew about his organization's infamous misconduct.

This should concern anyone who is worried about radical Islam, the right to criticize it, and the right to call out anti-Semitism in the public square.

If this judgment stands, anyone who dares to challenge members of Muslim extremist groups on the basis of their affiliation with such groups is at risk of costly lawsuits - and all the member of the anti-Semitic group needs to do is to deny that they share the beliefs of their organizations that they work hard to promote, or say they had no clue their anti-Semitic group was anti-Semitic.

If this ruling is allowed to stand, it will hinder anyone who campaigns against anti-Semitism - any Jewish group, any pro-Israel group, even anyone who criticizes radical Islam.

This ruling doesn't just affect my rights. It's a setback for freedom for everyone.

The comments in question were written on my personal blog six years ago, and so I'm footing the legal bills for this fight myself.

SOURCE





SCOTUS verdict on threatening speech due soon

Anthony Elonis claimed he was just kidding when he posted a series of graphically violent rap lyrics on Facebook about killing his estranged wife, shooting up a kindergarten class and attacking an FBI agent.

But his wife didn't see it that way. Neither did a federal jury.

Elonis, who's from Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, was convicted of violating a federal law that makes it a crime to threaten another person.

In a far-reaching case that probes the limits of free speech over the Internet, the Supreme Court on Monday was to consider whether Elonis' Facebook posts, and others like it, deserve protection under the First Amendment.

Elonis argues that his lyrics were simply a crude and spontaneous form of expression that should not be considered threatening if he did not really mean it. The government says it does not matter what Elonis intended, and that the true test of a threat is whether his words make a reasonable person feel threatened.

SOURCE





1 December, 2014

Did the Department of Defense Just Go All Politically Correct in Describing Captured Enemies?

The Department of Defense just changed the wording of their categories for detainees. It's a subtle adjustment with real implications.

This is a screen shot from the May 30, 2008 version of their Joint Publication 3-63 on Detainee Operations:



Note that of the three categories, the ones actively involved in fighting are referred to as "enemy combatants."

Now this is a screen shot from the November 13, 2014 version:



Note the change from "enemy combatant" to "privileged belligerent and unprivileged belligerent."

Apparently, the word "combatant" was no longer acceptable and was replaced with "belligerent."

To give some context, the words "privileged" and "unprivileged" basically mean people who are members of regular armed forces and fight under traditional rules of combat, versus those who fight with non-traditional groups or in non-traditional manners.

Even so, the wording seems soft. Is this an example of finely-tuned language, or a submission to the politically correct notions that would rather avoid negative labels?

SOURCE




Kids must not see a Christmas tree

It's a Christmas miracle! An elementary school in a Boston suburb that was going to cancel its annual trip to see The Nutcracker has decided allowing kids to see a Christmas tree on stage will not destroy the non-Christians in the audience. According to whdh.com:

    "The trip to see the famous ballet has been a tradition at the school for years, but apparently some felt the trip was improper because there is a Christmas tree on the stage.

    The issue came to a head at a [Butler Elementary School] PTA meeting Tuesday night. A source said some people were told they were being discriminatory if they supported their kids going to "The Nutcracker."

The controversy was so white-hot, the PTA apparently worked in secret to cancel the field trip:

    Some parents of the second graders, who didn't want to appear on camera, told 7News that they're also upset because PTA leaders secretly cancelled the field trip without telling anyone, but word spread.

    PTA Co-President Barbara Bulfoni said, "In the past years there were parents complaints as 'The Nutcracker' has a religious content."

You know what? The Nutcracker does indeed have religious content. Everyone in the ballet is celebrating Christmas, a Christian holiday commemorating Christ. Same thing happens in A Christmas Carol, How The Grinch Stole Christmas, A Christmas Story, A Charlie Brown Christmas, White Christmas, Black Christmas (a slasher movie) and-heck-Handel's Messiah.

Are these a terrible influence, one and all? How about all those Renaissance paintings of Mary and Jesus? Should the PTA ban trips to the art museum?

Kids can be exposed to ideas and cultures different from their own and not immediately feel offended. In fact, I'm betting Christian kids could probably survive seeing Adam Sandler's Eight Crazy Nights without insisting afterward that mom burn the tree and leave Santa a bowl of liver and onions.

The Nutcracker is a ballet, not fundamentalist propaganda. I'm glad the Butler School PTA figured that out.

SOURCE








This is Tongue-Tied 2

Posts by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.)



Alternative (monthly) archives for this blog are here





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

"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"


"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 arent 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.


Thomas Jefferson on free speech: It does me no injury for my neighbors to say there are 20 gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my legs.


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"?


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.


Email me here (Hotmail address).









Index page for this site


DETAILS OF REGULARLY UPDATED BLOGS BY JOHN RAY:

"Tongue Tied"
"Dissecting Leftism" (Backup here)
"Australian Politics"
"Education Watch International"
"Political Correctness Watch"
"Greenie Watch"
GUN WATCH is now mainly put together by Dean Weingarten.



BLOGS OCCASIONALLY UPDATED:

Coral Reef Compendium
"Marx & Engels in their own words"
"A scripture blog"
"Recipes"
"Some memoirs"
Paralipomena 3
To be continued ....
Queensland Police -- A barrel with lots of bad apples
Australian Police News
Of Interest


BLOGS NO LONGER BEING UPDATED


"Immigration Watch International" blog
"Food & Health Skeptic"
"Eye on Britain"
"Paralipomena" 2
"Leftists as Elitists"
Socialized Medicine
Western Heart
OF INTEREST (2)
QANTAS -- A dying octopus
BRIAN LEITER (Ladderman)
Obama Watch
Obama Watch (2)
Dissecting Leftism -- Large font site
Michael Darby
AGL -- A bumbling monster
Telstra/Bigpond follies
Optus bungling
Vodafrauds (vodafone)
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)



Main academic menu
Menu of recent writings
basic home page
Pictorial Home Page
Selected pictures from blogs
Another picture page (Best with broadband. 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/42197/20121106-1520/jonjayray.comuv.com/