Friday 31 May 2013

Bravery personified

This is one very brave girl standing up for truth. She shames the majority in Western nations who cower behind politically correct ideologies or who refuse to see Islam for what it is.
 “Sabatina James is perfectly aware just how dangerous her work is. Still, she says what needs to be said: Europe has to stand up for the values that built the Western world. What we are experiencing now is a clash between two widely different civilizations.
“Islam is not compatible with democracy and freedom of expression. That was understood in Europe, and thus you separated the church from the state. This caused Europe to continue its development while the Arabic / Muslim world is still stuck in the 7th century,” says Sabatina James.
“Because the Muslim world is ruled by holy books, it will never get anywhere, she believes. It is impossible to create a healthy society with rational individuals, when the moral idol is a 7th century warlord. An idol who even took a 9-year-old girl as his wife, and considered it his absolute, holy duty to kill ‘infidels’. ‘It might have been acceptable in the 7th century, but as it remains a demand to view Mohammed as the perfect human being – which lots of Muslims do – then it doesn’t work,’ says Sabatina James.”

Wednesday 29 May 2013

The end is nigh

Welcome to Isiah chapter 5:
"There are quite a few organizations in this country that would prefer that our elected officials not hire bigots that hunt down and file erroneous charges against young women because of their sexual orientation. The fact is, the puritanism you practice doesn't have a place in this world any longer."
 
This is about a young female 'peadophile' caught having sexual relations with a 14 year old.
Many campaign that changing the marriage laws to accommodate the homosexual activists is not a big deal, it is merely a live-and-let-live issue, whats the harm?
It is merely the thin edge of the wedge with which these activists want to bash the heads in of those they disagree with.
Many of these activists were violently opposed to marriage not ten years ago, now they are fighting for it, why? Because it suits their campaign to have homosexuality 'normalised' in fact more than normalised because they want those who think it a deviation to be locked up, persecuted, pilloried, including those who think that peadophilia is a crime.
Note if you will in the short excerpt above, the phrase; "...the puritanism you practice doesn't have a place in this world any longer"...we are entering the period of Sodom and Gomorrah.
http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2013/05/27/kate-sex-lies-and-the-truth/

Green greed

For those who would assert that the 'Greenies' stand atop the moral pyramid please take note of the greed and lust that actually drives them:
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/green_carpetbaggers_load_up_in_labors_last_four_months/

Tuesday 28 May 2013

Make peace or I'll kill you!

84% of Egyptians support the DEATH penalty for apostasy. One in eight American Muslims support the DEATH penalty for ANY American who publicly criticizes Islam.
 
A very small insight into the famous tolerance of the 'religion of peace'.
Why oh why are we tolerating these haters without complaint.
Immigrants should fit into the culture of their host countries rather than using violent means to change the culture to fit their narrow interpretation of Sharia.

Monday 27 May 2013

art trashed

Difficult territory is a cornerstone of the visual arts – so artist Mikala Dwyer knew it would be confronting last night when she invited Balletlab dancers to empty their bowels as part of a performance at the Australian Centre for Contemporary Art.
The two-hour act saw the six dancers, masked but naked beneath sheer garments, move around a room in the gallery before sitting on transparent stools and performing – only if they were moved to do so – what is usually one of our most private and rarely discussed daily acts.
 
As a practising artist I take umbrage at the assumption that art has to confront/repel/alienate/disgust. That idea is very, very new in the history of art and is the product of philosophical rather than artistic motivations. A large part of the blame must fall squarely on the establishments 'artist of the 20th Century' Marcel Duchamp; a post modern artist/philosopher before his time and an aesthetic cancer.

The above sort of trash art serves to alienate more and more reasonable people in the 'real' world while feeding into the unfortunate politics of philistinism vs. elitism which inhabits the 'artworld', where the 'emperors clothes' myth holds centre stage. Just read The Painted Word by Tom Wolfe to grab a handle on that reality.

In keeping with our litigationary society I am tempted to sue someone, after all I have been severely insulted and my profession has been traduced by some talentless hack living on government handouts? Oh yes, I forget...I am a white, baby boomer male who paints in a traditional mode...sorry I am one of Western society's new untouchables and therefore unable to sue, complain, or even expect sympathy from the chattering classes who run the arts and media.
In fact if I dared to even speak out publicly on such a thing I would probably end up in jail.
In our case there is no such thing as 'good' publicity.

Zombie apocalypse

If this sounds like an obscene exaggeration to you:
Professor Myles Allen tells the Daily Mail of classic lefty blathertalk:
If you suppose that the annual UN climate talks will save us, forget it. I met a delegate at the last talks in Doha in December who told me he had just watched a two-hour debate that culminated in placing square brackets around a semi-colon.
 
I can tell you from experience that such things are not only possible but are happening as we speak.

I attended a three day Arts conference in Durban some twenty years ago...that's right twenty years...
and I experienced exactly the same inertia. Hours were spent 'debating' over the most trivial of details and in the end ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WAS ACHIEVED.

I experienced the same again in academia after being elected as the lecturers representative to the Academic board of the Institution I worked for. After time wasted on pre-meeting cocktail party rituals the subsequent meetings consisted of trivial 'debates' where a few narcissistic individuals who never seemed to tire of the sound of their own voices rabbited on and on about 'points of order' and how to increase their power/influence/remuneration.  In all the time I attended these meetings nothing was ever achieved until a crisis made decisions inescapable. I resigned because I felt like I was going to explode at the inanity and sheer wastefulness of it all.

I realised that this is why private enterprise for all its human frailties like greed, manipulation and assorted ills, can still achieve so much more than a government bureaucracy even when corporate leaders fall into the traps of a bureaucracy. I experienced deja vu in the form of a company director (who had been an academic) who ran his board in the same way as an academic institution (politics vs. economics).

Needless to say the business was unsuccessful and collapsed, which marks the enormous difference between private enterprise and taxpayer funded bodies, the one dies while the other lurches on like a zombie draining funds and stultifying brains.

The cycle of history

For those who believe that Islamicism is not a threat take heed of these statistics:
Thereligionofpeace.com keeps a monthly list of bloody incidents [of Muslim violence] and during the past 30 days it records 222 incidents, in 25 different countries, including much of the Arab world and North Africa, and Britain, France, Russia, Nigeria, Thailand, the Philippines and China… Seventy per cent of these 222 incidents in the past month took place in four countries - Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Syria - all battlefields in the ancient religious civil war between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, a civil war more violent now than it has been for decades.
The existence of this violent sectarian schism, and the systemic repression of religious dissent throughout the Muslim world, demolish the absurd claim that Islam is ‘’a religion of peace’’.

Most Muslims are peaceful, like most non-Muslims, but the Koran groans under the weight of its own contradictions, with entreaties to kindness co-existing with exhortations to merciless war. If the Koran were only a text of peace and mercy, tens of thousands of Muslims could not invoke its verses to engage in violence.... Apologists argue that those who use the Koran to justify violence are not Islamic. And in the West there is fearfulness to trigger the belligerent victimology that extreme Muslims use to cloak intransigence, separatism and special-pleading.

The most disturbing aspect of the record of violence of Muslims invoking the name of Islam in violence is that the public record understates, not overstates, the problem. Not included in the log of violent crimes are the outbreaks of civil violence such as the riots that have rocked Stockholm over the past week, where an urban underclass of predominantly Muslim immigrants, refugees and asylum-seekers and their children has erupted in violence, vandalism and attacks on police. You will not find the word ‘’Muslim’’ in media reports. 
And note the fact that the 4th estate's 'useful idiots' are making the problem worse not better with their refusal to face reality, because the Internet has made many of the 'facts' accessible. Unfortunately these 'facts' are not always correct and are often used by other radicals to inflame and exacerbate an already tense situation thus leading to more sectarian violence which in turn leads to revenge attacks and so on ad infinitum until we find ourselves and our country embroiled in a 'civil/tribal war' on numerous fronts, leading to anarchy and a situation where the strongest/most ruthless 'tribe' fronts up and takes control.
Welcome to totalitarian rule folks, and if you think its not possible in the West, just consider how close the Gillard government came to closing down democratic debate and dissension with their 'press reforms', which is the first step into a totalitarian reign, followed closely by violence and mob destruction...the Nazi take-over of Germany in the 1930's is a classic historical model wherein you can view the process. 

Friday 24 May 2013

Scientia sit potentia

I have attached an entire article by Melanie Phillips on the education debacle in England. I have done so because the same thing is happening/has happened here in Australia.
I believe awareness is vital if we are to redress this terrible imbalance. I have brought the ball into my own court, so to speak, in that I now homeschool my youngest.
The causes are many but in particular I believe (excuse my harping on this) it is the Gramscian view of  the destruction of a civilisation from within (the long march...), and this educational attack contains within it a cancer aimed at the Judeo-Christian worldview foundation of western civilisation. Sadly it has almost succeeded to the point of no return...however; like England teetering on the brink during and shortly after the French revolution...what prevented it from going the same way as France were the revivals that erupted....this too can happen.
Knowledge is power....Gloria in excelsious deo.
...........................................................................................................
The flak flying at Michael Gove shows he's bang on target
Sometimes, you can gauge someone’s quality from the enemies they make. By that standard, the embattled Education Secretary, Michael Gove, is a person of the highest quality.

He has been attracting unprecedented amounts of flak from the teaching profession on account of his education reforms.

And while on one or two occasions he may have given the odd careless hostage to fortune, the flak flying in his direction shows that he is bang on target.

At the weekend, he came under fire from head teachers at their annual conference. He was heckled, subjected to a vote of no confidence and compared by Bernadette Hunter, president of the National Association of Head- teachers, to a ‘fanatical personal trainer, constantly urging teachers to jump higher and higher’.

Previously, some hundred academics from university departments of education had complained that the new draft national curriculum entailed teaching a ‘mountain of data’ which would ‘not develop children’s ability to think’and demanded ‘too much too young’.

And what exactly was being demanded of these deeply oppressed children? Why, that they should be taught to spell and punctuate, know their times tables and start learning algebra and geometry by the time they leave primary school.

The kind of knowledge, in other words, that once was taken for granted because we all knew that children needed it so that they could, indeed, learn to think.
Mr Gove also found himself in hot water over his proposals to rewrite the history curriculum to inject some chronological order and knowledge about Britain.

In recent weeks he was further attacked for a passionate speech denouncing low expectations in the classroom. He suggested it was more valuable for a teenager to be reading George Eliot than a vampire novel, and tore savagely into infantilised history teaching.

He ridiculed a suggestion in the Historical Association’s journal that teachers might compare King John to a Disney cartoon animal, and mocked a lesson plan for 15 and 16-year-olds depicting the rise of Hitler as a ‘Mr Men’ story.

This brought accusations of ‘manipulating and distorting’ the Historical Association article, and an angry riposte from the ‘Mr Men’ teacher who said the idea was merely intended as a revision tool.

Mr Gove stood his ground; but subsequently, after it seemed that other parts of his speech had been misunderstood, he was forced to clarify that the history curriculum would cover not just Britain but the rest of the world.

Such rows show how careful he needs to be with the detail, to ensure that he provides no ammunition to his opponents which might obscure the validity of his overall message.

And goodness, how desperately important that message is. For more than any government minister in recent memory, Mr Gove has grasped the point about Britain's truly dire and terrifying educational decline.
He has understood that the core reason for this decline is what is being taught — or rather not taught.

This has developed from a pernicious culture of low expectations and ideological fads, which has simply collapsed the very idea that education entails the transmission of knowledge.

Many teachers have no understanding of how so much teaching became — as Mr Gove himself so memorably commented in another context — ‘bonkeroony’.

The cause is the doctrine — which has been the education orthodoxy for at least four decades — of equality of outcomes, that no one must be seen to fail and that all must have prizes instead.

Paying lip-service to championing pupils from the wrong side of the tracks, this ruthlessly enforced orthodoxy could hardly be bettered as a system of keeping children at the bottom of the heap trapped in ignorance, illiteracy and disadvantage.

Assuming that such pupils were irredeemably stupid, it held that everything in the classroom had to be made to seem '
‘relevant’ to their own experience — thus ensuring that such children were never able to progress beyond the limitations of their own backgrounds.

When it came to history teaching, this orthodoxy ordained that teachers must not teach Britain’s national story. To do so was ‘racist’ and ‘imperialist’ — indeed, fashionable historians decided the very idea itself of the ‘nation’ was merely a manufactured, artificial and colonialist invention.

No surprise, then, that some of those historians who created this theory figured prominently among Mr Gove’s complainants.

Richard Evans, the Regius Professor of History at Cambridge, further condemned Mr Gove for planning to introduce ‘rote learning of patriotic stocking fillers so beloved of traditionalists’.

It wasn't clear which was the worst crime — rote learning, tradition or patriotism, by which he seemed to mean (heaven forfend) learning about Britain.

Others were terribly upset that children could be taught that one set of historical events may actually have contributed to a subsequent set of historical events.

One commentator frothed that chronological history was a ‘strangely messianic’ Conservative approach which went along with believing in ‘manifest absurdities such as national destiny and unimpeded sovereign power’.

Gulp. Who knew?

Well, actually, some of us have followed this madness for decades, watching the progressive dismantling of the story of Britain — which was all of a piece with dismantling the very identity of Britain through mass immigration, the erosion of self-government by the EU and its replacement by ‘universal’ values such as human rights.
At a deeper level still, the very idea of teaching was also being steadily dismantled. Instead, child-centred education became the rule, with the teacher taking a back seat on the grounds that the adult world can only constrain a child's innate creativity.

Now this has developed into a further fad, ‘child-led learning’. One primary school website announces accordingly that ‘children democratically choose their own learning topic each week’.

According to this head teacher, pupils would thus have ‘greater freedom to self-initiate (sic) the way in which they could access literacy and numeracy learning opportunities’.
But, of course, there are many ‘learning opportunities’; children won’t know they might ‘access’ because they are children. They need teachers to guide them.

Yet Ofsted gave this school a glowing report, and seems to promote ‘child-led learning’ with enthusiasm.

Which all goes to show that the belief that Ofsted would guarantee teaching standards failed to recognise that Ofsted itself would be subject to exactly the same ‘bonkeroony’ mindset.

It is impossible to exaggerate the grip of this mindset, its depth and destructive power. It has not just undone teaching and education; it has not just perpetuated high levels of illiteracy and innumeracy among school leavers; it has also undone knowledge itself and the ability to think.

We can see the baleful results everywhere — the serial incompetence of public servants, the growing inability to process evidence in a rational manner, the vacuity and degradation of so much public debate.

Last year the Chief Inspector of Schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw — who needs to look very hard at the quality of some of his own inspectors — said that 5,000 head teachers were not doing a good enough job.

Put that fact together with the heads’ whingeing that the Education Secretary was making their lives a misery and you may conclude, as Mandy Rice-Davies might have said: ‘Well, they would, wouldn’t they?’

The shocking decline in education standards has left many teachers and inspectors not knowing what it is they don’t know.

Attempts to remedy this have been repeatedly undermined because virtually the entire education establishment now dances to the same anti-education tune.

Overcoming that is the Herculean challenge Michael Gove has set himself. All who care about the future of Britain must hope against hope that he will succeed.

Consequences

This is an excerpt from Chris Berg's War on Democracy  article, and it is a piece which captures with precision, the current state of the 'authority's' in Australia. Unfortunately such contempt for the common man usually results in rebellion and judging by some of the more extreme views being blogged about in digi-land I fear we are entering into a time of unrest:
In 1953 a bitter Bertolt Brecht wrote, 'Would it not be easier / In that case for the government / To dissolve the people / And elect another?'
With these lines, Brecht brilliantly captured the dripping contempt that some purportedly 'democratic' leaders have for those below them.
This contempt has only become more acute in recent decades. Brecht's words were rich in irony. He was a citizen of the German Democratic Republic—a state democratic in name only—and wrote his poem in the aftermath of the Uprising of 1953, which was crushed by Soviet forces stationed in Germany.
By contrast, in 21st century Australia we enjoy all the trappings of a mature, well-functioning democracy. But our liberty makes the persistence of such contempt starker.
That contempt is a thread joining a huge number of recent debates. It ties the Gillard government's proposed anti-discrimination changes with the brief furore over compulsory voting and paternalistic controls over what we eat and drink.
The belief—widespread but never stated boldly—is that it is the job of democratic politicians to change the character of the people they govern. In the 21st century, with all the cutting edge findings of behavioural economics, public health and organisational psychology, politicians no longer dream of electing a new people. They can just change them. With the judicious application of legislation and rule-making, Australians can be made better.
It's hard to think of anything more undemocratic than that.
 
Read the full article, it will chill you to the very marrow of your being.
http://ipa.org.au/publications/2180/the-war-on-democracy

To reflect on the political mindset that is Labor and which almost raised to power Mark Latham who is I am sure a borderline psychopath (imagine that man with serious power!!!!), gave us the woefully inadequate Rudd, and then foisted upon us the destructive and impossibly inept Gillard gang, is to come to the conclusion that the social engineers of the left are, (in the absence of an intrinsically motivated morality based on a religious impulse) intent on legislating our morality by force.

Totalitarianism show thy face!

Thursday 23 May 2013

Tares

Bill Meuhlenberg blogs about two 'Christians' who have gone mad, (or rather who call them selves Christian) and whose worldview obviously disagrees with what the bible teaches. I wonder how long such people will retain their 'Christian' stance when the penalty for doing so becomes severe?
http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2013/05/22/theological-moonbattery-and-moral-inversion/

Wednesday 22 May 2013

Exit closet left...

Sorry Kevin-oh-heaven you have now exposed your sorry heart for all to see. Bill Meuhlenberg catches it nicely in his article about your unsurprising shift, this is the end bit:
Rudd also informs us that part of his change of heart was due to a homosexual Pentecostal staffer! Oh great, so if you have an adulterous Baptist staffer, or fornicating Catholic staffer, will you ditch the biblical position on those sins as well?
And he has the gall to tell us his change of heart and why he wrote his piece is because “it is the right thing to do”. No it is not at all the right thing to do: it is the politically correct thing to do, the men-pleasing thing to do, and the anti-biblical thing to do.
All of which is expected of atheists and homosexual militants. But when people try to cloak this deception and immorality under the guise of Christianity, then you know we simply have yet another wolf in sheep’s clothing. But given that this is always how I felt about the guy, I for one am not the least bit surprised.

Tuesday 21 May 2013

ενοδοχείο Καλιφόρνια

Big κυβέρνηση ανέγερση κράτους panopticon που βλέπει τα πάντα, και θα ρυθμίζει τα πάντα. Είναι μεγάλη "εξυπηρέτηση πελατών", εκτός από το ότι μπορείτε να πάρετε ποτέ έξω από το κατάστημα.
 "Big Government is erecting a panopticon state — one that sees everything, and regulates everything. It’s great “customer service,” except that you can never get out of the store."
Don't ask me why I translated Mark Steyn's quote, it just happened and I went with the moment.
The qoute does however remind me of the situation in the Eagles song 'Hotel California' (what the Greek of the heading means) as well as what the Labor government has been attempting to do in Australia.
Living in an Obama Echoland...........what bliss(sarc).

Appreciation felt towards digiland dwellers

Thank you to all those who take the time to link with this blog.
It began as a 'venting valve', a place where my frustrations could be literally expressed to a small audience and I had hoped for responses to challenge or correct my biases.
Unfortunately there have been few written responses, a lack that I fully understand given that I rarely respond to blogs myself.
I am however particularly chuffed that this modest little digital protest has topped the ten thousand page-view mark and for that I have to thank you out there in digital land.

Monday 20 May 2013

Fools gold

This little gem of an extract illustrates perfectly the absurdly mono-optical perspective of the left-tilted commetariat. If it were not that these ponces are in the powerful positions that they have achieved as a result of the 'long march through the institutions' and the subsequent hiring of like minded comrades, such a worldview would be quaintly amusing. As it is, it is extremely disturbing:
Australia’s Politifact is headed by ex-SMH editor Peter Fray, whose crack fact-checking team last week probed a statement from Liberal Jamie Briggs: “Labor can’t claim to be reining in government spending when they are buying gold-plated coffee machines for their growing public service workforce.”
Most people would have instantly recognised the phrase “gold-plated” as a way of illustrating Labor excess in purchasing several $15,000 coffee machines for two government departments.
Politifact, however, took the phrase literally. The site “checked a tender for this essential equipment. No mention of gold-plating. We telephoned Cosmorex, the supplier to the Department of Industry. They’ve never heard of ‘gold plated coffee machines’.”
Forensic investigation over, Politifact concluded: “We think there should be some form of modifier, a marker, when referring to gold-plating to ensure everyone knows it is not real gold.” Everybody besides Politfact already knew that, but this didn’t stop the site awarding Briggs a “pants on fire” dishonesty rating.
Wait a minute … “pants on fire”? Should there not be some form of modifier, a marker if you will, when referring to blazing trousers to ensure everyone knows they aren’t really on fire?

Friday 17 May 2013

Sublime & ridiculous

Do you need some light relief from your daily grind, then read this: http://www.steynonline.com/5536/the-bickering-genocides 
It is Mark Steyn's humorous take on the deeply serious subjects of Justin Beiber and genocidal frenzy.
It is also a perspicacious twist on the current human comedy that is political correctness.

Thursday 16 May 2013

A huge crock of....

Watching the news last night it came to a time when the presenter announced that Julia Gillard cried in Parliament at the introduction of the NDS scheme. I immediately switched channels before I was forced to witness the unedifying spectacle of crocodile tears by a lying, deceitful and corrupt politician.
I am aware that James 3 gives a warning about holding our tongues, but the mendacity, proven corruption and the evil schemes of this woman prevent me from curtailing my disdain.
I apologise in advance to those who are offended by the strength of my feelings.

Philippa Martyr expresses the truth behind this sentimental garbage:
But no: Julia Gillard started crying when she introduced a piece of legislation. This is absolutely the lowest point of this government. I never thought I’d say this, but I think we might be looking at the very bottom now.
It’s very nice that the Prime Minister chose to shed a few tears in Parliament over the fact that, theoretically, in a couple of months’ time, a disabled person might be able to access a tiny trickle of leftover money from an unplanned, unstructured, uncosted, and unaccountable scheme, where most of the money will probably be soaked up into the giant sponge of administration.
And I’m sure that when the people at the bottom of the pile – the severely disabled and their carers – realise that in fact they are only going to get a trickle of extra help, those tears shed by the Prime Minister are going to mean a great deal.
Julia Gillard will retire as Prime Minister in September this year on a handsome parliamentary payout. K-Rudd will be on around $600,000 when he finally goes, so we can use that as a ballpark figure. Gillard is also entitled to superannuation, a gold air pass -- Tim will enjoy that, unless he’s been replaced by then -- a car, some personal staff, and her own CBD office space in the city of her choice.
And sitting next to her, our incompetent and unapologetic Treasurer Wayne Swan will be on an annual, indexed, cool $166,400 if he loses his seat in September. There’s no performance management here; no deductions for incompetence, no decisions about whether he is sufficiently disabled to access this scheme. Just a nice generous payout.
I will tell you who should be crying, and that’s the rest of us, faced with (and this is just a selection):
I can assure you that, even though she may experience a personally embarrassing electoral defeat, the Prime Minister has nothing to cry about. A mother with a severely disabled child who is exhausted and poor has something to cry about, but Gillard is very happy to remind us at regular intervals that she is not married and does not want children, so she’s unlikely to be in that position.
We’ve seen this public sentimentality over and over, notably since Rudd’s time and his empty ‘apology’ to Aboriginal people. Sentimentality is the soft currency of our age, but it’s also the guaranteed hallmark of an utterly ruthless person. Sentimentality makes for bad laws and very bad financial management. And sentimentality crudely harnessed to desperate political point-scoring is the worst form of all.

Tuesday 14 May 2013

Unintended consequences

we are confronted almost on a daily basis with some new, perverted peccadillo by some old twisted (possibly famous) pervert. In an age where morality is seen as defunct, and sexual depravities of all forms are not only accepted but loudly promoted the most obvious question that should be asked is; what did we expect?
https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/13e9dfc254d8a04e

Historica revisionem

The zeitgeist of this age as expressed through those who have successfully completed their Gramscian  'long march through the institutions' reflects a dramatic revision of history in much the same way as Big Brother did in Orwells' 1984.

For example most would say today that colonialism was the attempt by the British to 'civilize the savages' by converting them to Christianity. Many of these same people also, now believe in Darwin's evolutionary explanation of the world as we know it. What most of them do not know nor is it ever taught in the repositories of education (private or public) is that much of the negative colonial 'urge' was as a result of an imperialist worldview predicated on the belief that evolution had delivered to certain people a 'higher' biological imperative; that is the ability, the ambition and indeed the moral nous to enlighten and rule. 
Heart of Darkness reveals not just the wide gap between the official doctrines of colonialism’s aspirations and its actual practices, the truth about those ‘bearers of a spark from the scared fire (p.35) whose actions prove them to be merely ‘sordid buccaneers’ (p.67). It furnishes us also with a telling analysis of the obfuscations fundamental to the mechanics of imperialism. Because biological notions such as natural selection and survival of the fittest were translated into the social Darwinism of influential thinkers such as Herbert Spencer, the competitive economic expansion of the European powers came to be justified on ‘natural’ evolutionary grounds. Thus, by technological advantage Europe’s domination of the colonies was seen as proof of the formers fitness to not only survive but to rule, evidence of its inherent racial superiority. To cloak the often coercive brutality of the system imperialism necessarily relied on the creation of linguistic duplicities; behind words such as civilisation and enlightenment, Heart of Darkness reveals barbarism, exploitation and death.

 

Suck on that!

It has been said that when America sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold...something to look forward to:
The decline of America's human capital is not pretty. And, indeed, there is something sad about a crusade for individual liberty over the right to waddle down the street slurping sickly sweet children's drinks out of giant plastic cups with oversized straws, as poignant an image of societal infantilization as anything.
 
'Societal infantilization', as always Steyn's grasp of the decline in Western culture is summed up perfectly by a disturbing metaphor. 

Unintended consequences

To those who do not believe that changing the marriage contract will affect them in any way...think again!
But, some argue, “Changing marriage will not impact you”. But it does of course. Anyone who disagrees with the new law changes will be regarded as discriminatory under the law and subject to prosecution of various types. And that is happening already wherever such changes have taken place. Everyone is put at jeopardy if they do not accept the redefinition taking place.

Monday 13 May 2013

A philosophical cataract removal is needed.

We desperately need to unshackle ourselves from the mad deep green ideology's that bind this nation  in chains of steel and are bringing it to its knees commercially.
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2013/05/this-forest-peace-deal-is-anything-but

I support conservation and caring for the planet and have always done so in practical as well as philosophical ways. Often we and many others have quietly gone about the business of environmental stewardship, yet the activists, the professional noise-makers are the ones who have infiltrated and established power blocks within the main-stream-media over the past 40 years and now have the influence to manipulate the debate; with the result that we are drowning in their ideological claptrap. This tiny minority has seized effective power.

Martin Durkin writes eloquently (if not disturbingly) of the deep green roots within the Nazi party and how this totalitarian strain still reaches through the Green ideology today. http://www.martindurkin.com/blogs/nazi-greens-inconvenient-history

Australia's Greens have been infiltrated by ideology's foreign to its founding spirit (even one of the founders of Greenpeace understands this and resigned as a consequence: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/02/19/a-review-of-confessions-of-a-greenpeace-dropout-by-patrick-moore/)
...and these worldviews are being used to drive wedges into our society. read Antonia Gramsci's vision of neo-Marxism and you will see what I mean.

Let us be done with these divisive war mongers for that ultimately is what they are. Division causes conflict not peace. Calling themselves peace makers is like calling Hitler a kindly grandfather.

I implore well meaning but naive people to not be taken in by the illusion of  'peace-loving, tree hugging, community oriented lovers of humanity' that is sold to the public via the 'useful idiots' of the fourth estate. read the Green manifesto, read Gramsci, read the Fabian manifesto and you will see that the divisive, tribal ideologies that drive the Greens and the socialist arm of the Labor party are destined to create an environment of anarchy, divisiveness and tribal warfare that makes the country unstable, violent and ripe for a totalitarian future, because as Francis Schaeffer said; people will give up everything to preserve their personal peace and prosperity, even their freedoms.

UPDATE
The problem with these extreme ideological positions is that when they are exposed for what they actually are, the damage that is done to the true, original position such as for example in the case of conservation; that there is indeed a need for strong leadership to prevent rampant materialism and greed from ruining the natural environment,...makes most people react with extreme aversion to all aspects of environementalism thus causing evil to triumph in both instances. A case of heads I win tails you lose!

Sunday 12 May 2013

Slippery dip morals

It has long been argued that the homosexual activists pursuing the 'equal rights' marriage agenda are not interested in true equality at all. It is about power, the power to change society and in particular "Christian values'. These activists are ideologically opposed to the age-old definition of the 'nuclear family', their desire is to deconstruct (Western) society  by destroying bourgeoisie behaviour and then build a new Utopian culture in their image. Many of the foremost activists have made statements to that effect on numerous occasions.

What has also been said (and vociferously shouted down by the pro-homosexual lobby), is that this change of societal values will not stop at legalizing homosexual marriage but will extend to the multiple marriage partner agreements (Islam/Sharia), the weakening (abolishment) of sexual laws in general and even to bestiality...shock horror!!!! A member of the opposition Parliament lost his position when he suggested that this might indeed be an inevitable conclusion but just listen to the statements by 'eminent' philosopher Peter Singer or read his writings and you will find that he advocates for all sorts of perversions.

Read this article to see how the paedophiles are now getting into the game: http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2013/05/10/time-for-equal-love-with-children/

Thursday 9 May 2013

"This is for your good!"


This is an excerpt from an article about municipal madness in Britain but could easily be descriptive of almost any council in Australia. The madness that has taken hold of the bureaucratic drones that live to populate town and city councils has become blight on all who seek to live with minimum 'Big Brother' interference.
Time was, too, that most parish councillors saw themselves as servants, not masters, of their community.
Today, the majority of those who work in every level of ‘public service’ seem to regard the public, at best, as an inconvenience and, at worst, as the enemy.
OK, admittedly the Jobsworth mentality has always been with us, but the ubiquitous urge on the part of so-called ‘public servants’ to bully and punish their fellow citizens has never been more prevalent.
There are few things more totalitarian than the often career stunted, power obsessed, moralistic (whose 'morals' are probably relativistic in the first place) wowser who somehow is elected to a position that few aspire to but then believes that it is his/her duty to impose the latest politically correct fads on all within her/his municipal jurisdiction.
Fads which are all-to-often communicated as being for the unfortunate recipients 'well-being'.

UPDATE
In Australia we see the 'Human Rights Commission' (LoL) perpetrating more pain on the unsuspecting population and indeed seeking for new ways in which to do this:
In 2001, for instance, Equal Opportunity Commission Victoria’s chairman admitted: “I am not aware of any conclusive evidence that suggests that discrimination is increasing.”
But instead of celebrating a good job well done, the EOCV decided it needed to find more customers…
It pushed the then Labor Government to pass absurdly wide new laws against racial and religious vilification that would define even more Australians as racists and bigots.
It worked brilliantly, catching people you’d never have dreamed would be hauled before the thought police.
They included a Salvation Army prison chaplain who handed biblical literature to a sex offender who was a witch, two Christian pastors who’d made their congregation laugh by accurately quoting passages from the Koran urging jihad, and a humble Herald Sun columnist who had outraged a One Nation supporter by praising Asian students generally for their study ethic — a comment that apparently “demeaned” Anglo Saxons.
Sure, the complaints in each case were eventually dismissed, but at what cost? What worry?
Our federal race commissioners have lusted for the same solution.
One, Zita Antonias, admitted a decade ago that complaints of racism had fallen by more than a third, but we couldn’t possibly be that nice: “The figures are incongruent with anecdotal evidence.”

Tom Calma, who succeeded her, was so frustrated at being unable to prove we had many (white) Australian racists that he asked the Rudd government to boost the supply by changing the law, so that people accused of being racists now had to prove they were not, a reversal of the burden of proof that makes us all racists until we can show otherwise.
 
 Shameful and disturbing that we, the Australian population have allowed the bureaucratic 'hitlers' of this world to so dominate the national conversation.

Wednesday 8 May 2013

What to think?

The real tragedy of this unfortunate communique which was sent to my email address is that as far as my reading of the three books of Islam and assorted research goes; it appears to be true.
If one calls himself a good Muslim then these strictures do apply and it is all rather disconcerting.
I resist the PC tolerance brigade's attempts to manipulate my thinking into such criticism being somehow 'racist' (an inaccuracy of definition to begin with) and I hold to the idea of loving all people with an agape love irrespective of race, creed or disposition, but the fact is that we are called to be as wise as serpents whilst striving to be a gentle as doves.

..........................................................................................................................................

CAN MUSLIMS BE GOOD AMERICANS????? [or Australians?]

Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities.

Can a good Muslim be a good American?

This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon god of Arabia .

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam. (Quran,2:256)(Koran)

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically - no. Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.


Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him. (Quran 4:34)

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran does not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim

government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' The Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in the Quran's 99 excellent names.

Therefore, perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and 'good' Americans. Call it what you wish it's still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future.


Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within. SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.

Turn or burn

When activists and their tame scientists use 'scientific statistics' to scare people into doing what they (the activists) want, it is nothing less than political manipulation. http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/05/the-great-barrier-reef-have-we-really-lost-half-of-it-part-1-water-quality/
These 'snake-oil sale persons' establish themselves on top of the moral pyramid (by implication) and then speak down to the rest of us that if we do not listen to their dictates then we are all going to die.
Turn or burn; sounds quite fundamentalist doesn't it?
The truly distressing result of all of this manipulation, lying, cheating and narcissism is that the 'ordinary' (see powerless) person begins to trust no-one.
Scientists have been proven mendacious time and time again lying and manipulating to further their careers or too prove some activist theory and thus science itself ceases to be an argument. Philosophers argue that there is no truth and everything is up for interpretation. Politicians are worse than lawyers even though in the labor party most are both, and no-one believes anything any politician says.
What does all of this lead to?
Chaos, destabilisation, anarchy.
When a morally relativistic judiciary hand out slaps on wrists to the most callous of criminals it means that soon the afore mentioned 'ordinary' people will start taking the law into their own hands as they did in South Africa as a result of the politicisation of the police force.
That led to terrible things...if you are old and knowledgeable enough you might remember the 'necklace' a demonic system of 'justice' if ever there was one.
The question that looms large is; are the coalition any better than the current lot or have all sold out to expediency and the will to power?
Only time will tell, but one thing is for sure, they can't be any worse...if Australia is to survive.

Tuesday 7 May 2013

Nuts in a shell.

Here is the left-wing ideology summed up in a nutshell:
As someone of the Left, you apparently assume this monoculture is so normal as to be beyond ideology. You apparently comfort yourself with the fond belief that the rest of us don’t notice how your ideological leanings and assumptions – whether on global warming or the benign nature of government controls on free speech - actually do inform your work. Indeed, you may even assume as Marr famously did - that to be “soft Left” is the “natural” position for a journalist, and thus conclude that to allow a conservative in the door is to betray journalism itself. This might lead you to pooh-pooh critics as just ideologues themselves. Unlike you, of course.
 
Well put sir!

Monday 6 May 2013

A newly despised minority.

I have published parts of this before and spoken on it many times but I believe it to be so important that I shall post it once more. Christians be aware of what is happening.

Michael Snyder American Dream  April 8, 2013

Are evangelical Christians rapidly becoming one of the most hated minorities in America? Once upon a time such a notion would have been unthinkable, but these days things are changing dramatically. All over the United States, evangelical Christians are being called “extremists” and evangelical Christian organizations are being labeled as “hate groups”. In fact, as I will detail later on in this article, a U.S. Army Reserve training presentation recently specifically identified evangelical Christians as “religious extremists”. This should be extremely chilling for all evangelical Christians out there, because as history has shown us over and over again, when you want to persecute a particular group of people the first step is always to demonize them. And that is exactly what is being done to evangelical Christians today. Just look at how evangelical Christians are being portrayed on television and in the movies. Just look at how much hate is being spewed at Christians on the Internet. The Southern Poverty Law Center and the ACLU, both of which are considered to be among the most prominent “civil rights” organizations in the United States, are seemingly obsessed with attacking evangelical Christians. It has become trendy to bash Christians, and that is a very frightening thing. After they have finished demonizing evangelical Christians, what will the next step be?

A U.S. Army Reserve equal opportunity training presentation entitled “Extremism and Extremist Organizations” actually included “Evangelical Christianity” as an example of “Religious Extremism” in a list that also included al-Qaeda, Hamas and the Ku Klux Klan. You can find a copy of the entire presentation right here.

Is this how evangelical Christians will be treated in the future? Will evangelical Christians be treated like members of the Ku Klux Klan or like members of al-Qaeda?

The following is how a Christian Post article described this chilling report…

A U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training brief describes “Evangelical Christianity” and “Catholicism” as examples of “religious extremism,” according to the Archdiocese for the Military Services and the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, who shared a copy of the documents with The Christian Post.

“The number of hate groups, extremists and anti‐govt organizations in the U.S. has continued to grow over the past three years, according to reports by the Southern Poverty Law Center. They increased to 1,018 in 2011, up from 1,002 in 2010 and 602 in 2000,” reads the first page of the slide presentation labeled “Extremism & Extremist Organizations.”

Listed alongside “extremist” groups and organizations like the Klu Klux Klan and al-Qaida, the U.S. Army slideshow has “Evangelical Christianity” as the first bullet, followed by the Muslim Brotherhood, Ultra-Orthodox Judaism and farther down on the slide, Catholicism.

Friday 3 May 2013

To lie or not to lie...

Left-wing academics (oxymoron??) live in such ivory towers that they do not necessarily ignore evidence contrary to their own opinions, THEY ARE PROBABLY NOT EVEN AWARE THAT SUCH DIFFERENCES COULD POSSIBLY EXIST.

For example the latest storm in a teacup that necessitates their attention is that the Australian government(s), the RSL and other nefarious ANZAC 'spirits' have 'militarised' the entire Australian population.

These desk-bound pacifists champ at the bit about how our youth are being 'led down the military garden path' and vociferously decry the 'spectacle' of the Anzac parades.

How brave of them to speak truth to power. Note these same academics supporting Islamic sexism, violence, Anti-Jewish boycotts, the banning of free speech on college campuses etc etc.

However the saddest thing about their latest whingeing about the Anzac's is not so much their rampant hypocrisy as it is that these so-called 'scholars' fail the basic standard of factual objectivity required for an academic pursuit of truth.
If you had to sum up the authors' attitudes to wars, one observation is relevant: they concentrate on those wars that suit their pacifist and peace-march assumptions. Thus the ultimate opposition by a host of Australians to the Vietnam War is discussed, often vividly, but World War II is neatly skipped over and the Korean War is ignored. A section on Australia in the years 1939-42 should have been absolutely essential in the planning of this book. Instead the authors dwell on Australia's attitudes to Japan in the years 1904-14.
The authors even scorn the fears -- sometimes expressed in parliament and the press -- that a combined Japanese force might endanger Australian shores. But they are silent on the fact those forecasts came close to the bone in 1942. You could read this book and not learn that Japan invaded New Guinea and bombed Darwin. Japan's record in World War II is not really mentioned. Do the authors support Australia's participation in World War II? This book leaves readers in some doubt.
So it is unusual to see the RSL being singled out as an enemy of national values, while wartime Japan and Nazi Germany are essentially exempt from criticism.

Read the full exposure of their claims: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/books/we-werent-that-dumb/story-e6frg8nf-1225848127735

Thursday 2 May 2013

Tasmaniacs & Vicmaniacs

Welcome to basket-case Tasmania's new wild world of legislature. Legalise prostitution, legalise drugs, homosexual marriage, legalise any new  moral travesty you can  imagine but criminalise free choice to oppose these perversions.
Who woulda thunk it?
Legislation enabling abortion is common enough. But the Tasmanian law could be the first in the world to penalise doctors, counsellors and protesters with draconian fines and even jail sentences if they oppose abortion. Health minister Michelle O’Byrne says that the bill has been modelled on 2008 legislation in the nearby state of Victoria. But she also seems to have been inspired by the peculiar interpretation of democracy invoked by Vladimir Putin when the Russian government jailed the punk rock group Pussy Riot.
Here is what the bill proposes.
A doctor with a conscientious objection to abortion must refer a woman to another doctor. No penalty is specified, but non-compliance might lead to deregistration. A counsellor who refuses to refer a woman to an abortion clinic could be fined A$32,500. A protester who exhibits a placard or utters negative words about abortion within 150 metres of a clinic could be fined $65,000 and jailed for one year. (The two busiest churches in Hobart are located within 150 metres.)
 
UPDATE
I wrote yesterday (above) about the new law about to effect Tasmania, not realising that a similar one has existed in Victoria for some time, note this story:
A Melbourne doctor has defended his decision to refuse to refer a couple for an abortion because they did not want a girl. Dr Mark Hobart acknowledged that under Victorian law if a doctor has a moral objection to a woman's choice to abort a pregnancy, that doctor must refer the woman to a doctor who does not object.
He also admitted that he may face suspension or possibly be deregistered for refusing to give the couple a referral when he discovered their reasons for abortion.
"But just because it's the law, doesn't mean it's right," Dr Hobart was quoted by the Herald Sun as saying.
The unnamed coupled reportedly asked Dr Hobart to refer them to an abortion clinic after discovering at 19 weeks they were having a girl when they wanted a boy.
A Medical Practitioners Board spokeswoman said doctors were bound by Victoria's Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 as well as a professional code of conduct.
"The board expects practitioners to practise lawfully and to provide safe care and to meet the standards set out in the board's code of conduct," she said.
In January the Medical Board cautioned a doctor for airing his views against abortion and warned he could be deregistered if it happened again.

The god of this world

We do not often hear the full title of Darwin's paean to evolutionary theory:  On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.

Nor do we hear how his ideas, with a little help from Frederick Nietzsche, and Margaret Sanger reached their fruition in Nazi Germany.

The fact that Barak Obama now calls on 'God' to bless Planned Parenthood (Margaret Sanger's paean to murder, and to the eradication of black folk) makes one wonder how intelligent this man really is and calls into question which god he serves, although given his track record I would think that this is fairly obvious.