This page contains a complete list of all blog entries, starting with the most recent posts.
If you see one of these dudes, please don’t panic.
And no, that is not the new unit logo for one of the Australian Army’s combat units.
It is nasty. But not in a good way. It contravenes the value of respect.
So upon contact with Mr Tickle, please find a safe space and immediately dial your nearest Human Rights branch on the emergency line.
Because he is sexist.
Can’t you just that sexism oozing? Actually, I can’t either.
But someone else can. Madeleine Pownall to be precise.
She goes to the University of Lincoln and has made a living counting the number of words that each of the Mr Men say and comparing them with the syllables uttered by the Little Miss characters.
And that is how we know that the image above is sexist.
Mr Tickle’s likely to have been given eight more words than Little Miss Bossy, which would probably mean that she’s not so bossy after all. But it does mean, apparently, that the bloke who wrote the books hates women.
At this point, I will remind you that the entire anti-discrimination industry is made up of depressing people who don’t like jokes, as I wrote here last week.
Somehow we’ve ‘progressed’ to the point where these sad sacks control pretty much the smallest details of our lives and even who we can boo at the footy.
And now kids, who have been deprived of Biggles and Enid Blyton because someone somewhere is offended, are to be deprived of Mr Nosey because Little Miss Sunshine should not need saving.
The good news is that I am reliably informed that carrying around an image of Mr Tickle will ward off femo-nazis.
You never know when they may strike, so keep one on you at all times.
And maybe Mr Tickle should be made the new logo of the Australian Army after all. He will probably do more to preserve the Army’s warrior culture than anything Marise Payne will ever manage…
The New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board (ADB) is out of control. It is now ignoring April’s High Court decision which upheld a previous decision in the Court of Appeal that it was unconstitutional for the ADB to refer Garry Burns’ complaints against me to the tribunal.
This is what the New South Wales Court of Appeal ruled in February 2017:
It follows that there is no operative power to refer such a complaint from the Anti-Discrimination Board to NCAT, nor for NCAT to determine a complaint which has been referred, nor for NCAT’s order purporting to determine such a complaint to be enforced.
In other words, the Anti-Discrimination Board has broken the law every time it has referred one of Garry Burns’ complaints against me to the NCAT (Civil and Administrative Tribunal). It has done that 22 times.
And this is what the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board wrote to me recently:
I have decided to refer [three more] complaints to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal…
This letter came exactly one month after the High Court of Australia’s decision. The President of the ADB has just given the finger to the highest court in the land.
As a result, I have instructed my legal team to take any and all steps necessary to force the President of the ADB to comply with the rulings of the courts.
To do that I must go back to court. Again.
In fact, I’ll probably be party to 17 separate legal matters before the end of June:
- Four new complaints from Garry Burns have been referred to the NCAT.
- Three old complaints from Garry Burns have been ‘resurrected’ and transferred to the Local Court.
- Seven further old complaints from Garry Burns are set to follow the same path.
- And Garry Burns is now suing me for defamation for comments made by unknown third parties on Facebook.
- Plus I must take my own legal action against Burns and the ADB to enforce the High Court ruling.
The New South Wales taxpayer has now funded more than 60 court cases in the ADB, NCAT and New South Wales court system for matters that the High Court has found to be unconstitutional.
Plus they’ve also forked out for the State of New South Wales to defend its unconstitutional system as well.
This four year saga would have cost taxpayers well into the millions by now. And the Thought Police are demanding that it continue.
So I need help again.
Firstly, please sign this petition calling on the New South Wales Attorney General to hold the ADB to account. It needs to be subjected to an inquiry that will scrutinise its culture, operations, activism and failure to abide by the law.
Secondly, don’t just sign the petition. Write to the Attorney General as well. Here are some things you can mention:
- The ADB has ignored the High Court and Court of Appeal rulings that it cannot refer Burns’ complaints against me to the Tribunal.
- The ADB refuses to examine whether Burns’ complaints are vexatious even though it has the power to do so.
- The ADB refuses to act on evidence that Burns has offered my address to Islamic organisations.
- The ADB refuses to act on evidence that Burns has lodged complaints to harass me and others.
- The ADB refuses to act on evidence that Burns has lodged complaints for economic purposes and to avoid bankruptcy.
- The ADB refuses to act on evidence that Burns has lodged complaints about his own comments on my Facebook page.
- The ADB has admitted in writing that it does not keep respondents informed of its investigations, despite being required to do so by law.
- The ADB does not ‘investigate’ complaints as required to do so by law but instead ‘rubber stamps’ activist complaints.
- The ADB aids and abets political activists seeking to silence conservative and Christian Australians.
- The ADB operates beyond its powers by accepting complaints against people who live and act outside New South Wales.
- The ADB fails to send respondents’ evidence to the NCAT when it refers complaints and provides the NCAT with false and misleading statements about that evidence.
- The ADB is demonstrably biased in that it marches in the Mardi Gras, has pledged allegiance to ‘Wear it Purple Day’ and advocates for homosexual marriage while accepting and ‘investigating’ complaints against those who oppose such things.
- The ADB holds meetings with an organisation that campaigns to legalise sex in public.
- The ADB accepts complaints against those who condemn homosexual men who stand naked in front of children.
The Attorney General’s address is:
The Hon. Mark Speakman, SC MP
GPO Box 5341
Sydney NSW 2001
Thirdly, I need financial support again. I know so many have donated so generously and I am humbled by that support. I cannot do this part by myself, as much as I wish I could. It is humiliating to have to keep asking, but I cannot get around it, so ask I must again:
- BSB: 084 134
- A/c: 85 137 5337
- Name: Get Real Australia Trust
- Address: PO Box 766, Park Ridge, Qld, 4125
- Name: Get Real Australia Trust
And fourthly, if you can pray, please do. As always, this is the prayer that has sustained me throughout this four year ordeal:
O God, who has appointed Mary, Help of Christians; St Francis Xavier, and St Teresa of the Infant Jesus Patrons of Australia; grant that, through their intercession, our brethren outside the Church may receive the light of faith, so that Australia may become one in faith under one shepherd, through Christ our Lord. Amen.
- Mary, Help of Christians, pray for us.
- St Francis Xavier, pray for us.
- St Teresa of the Infant Jesus, pray for us.
Finally, I cannot describe how frustrating it is to be forced into this situation by the ADB. It might have declared war on me four years ago but its latest actions show that it has now decided to do so illegally, willfully and with full knowledge of the courts’ rulings.
But the Anti-Discrimination ‘Thought Police’ don’t rule this nation yet and I am prepared to fight again. And I remain confident that we can win.
The ADB has completely over-reached and now it is time for a strong, sustained and focused counter-attack against its bullying. That is what I will do.
But, regardless, I will also know at the end of this battle that I have given everything for what is right. I thank all of you who have allowed me to do that.
Hold an inquiry into the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination BoardRead the petition
|7,371||Courtney R.||Jul 21, 2018|
|7,370||Jill D.||Melbourne||Jul 21, 2018|
|7,369||Katie L.||Rowsley||Jul 20, 2018|
|7,368||Phillip S.||Wangaratta||Jul 18, 2018|
|7,367||Maureen C.||Melbourne||Jul 18, 2018|
|7,366||Sonia D.||Sydney||Jul 17, 2018|
|7,365||Cheryl S.||Sydney||Jul 17, 2018|
|7,364||Pholip W.||Jul 15, 2018|
|7,363||Wendy D.||Maryville||Jul 14, 2018|
|7,362||Roslyn D.||Brisbane||Jul 14, 2018|
|7,361||Ivan B.||NEWTOWN||Jul 12, 2018|
|7,360||Susan A.||Seymour||Jul 11, 2018|
|7,359||Graeme W.||Moss Vale||Jul 09, 2018|
|7,358||Keith Y.||Sydney||Jul 08, 2018|
|7,357||PJ & DF R.||West Ryde||Jul 08, 2018|
|7,356||Donna A.||Kurrajong||Jul 07, 2018|
|7,355||Ashley P.||Jul 07, 2018|
|7,354||Katy K.||Theodore||Jul 06, 2018|
|7,353||Julian F.||Docker||Jul 05, 2018|
|7,352||Philip B.||Newhaven||Jul 04, 2018|
|7,351||Mark B.||Kewdale||Jul 04, 2018|
|7,350||Peter C.||Taylors Lakes||Jul 04, 2018|
|7,349||Anthony C.||Southporty||Jul 04, 2018|
|7,348||larry h.||perth||Jul 04, 2018|
|7,347||Alex K.||North Epping||Jul 03, 2018|
|7,346||Timothy B.||Beresfield||Jul 03, 2018|
|7,345||Rhonda F.||Sydney||Jul 03, 2018|
|7,344||Paul B.||Coffs Harbour||Jul 03, 2018|
|7,343||Richard J.||Subiaco||Jul 03, 2018|
|7,342||William O.||Euroa||Jul 03, 2018|
|7,341||Mary M.||Brisbane||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,340||David W.||Port Macquarie||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,339||Rachelle G.||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,338||Catherine T.||Melville||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,337||simon g.||coffs harbour||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,336||Juanita A.||Cammeray||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,335||Max and Marilyn B.||Wherrol Flat||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,334||Richard C.||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,333||Marie G.||Middle Ridge||Jul 02, 2018|
|7,332||Sue C.||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,331||Daniel E.||Bentlaigh||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,330||David G.||SOUTH LAUNCESTON||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,329||Leigh W.||Mackay||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,328||Garry O.||Cairns||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,327||Chris W.||OAKDALE||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,326||Richard P.||Pacific Pines, Gold Coast||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,325||Nellie C.||Sydney||Jul 01, 2018|
|7,324||Stuart C.||East Geelong||Jun 30, 2018|
|7,323||Shelley S.||Perth||Jun 30, 2018|
|7,322||Linda R.||Gold Coast||Jun 30, 2018|
I wish I was making this up.
But I’m not.
A document published by the Army for incorporation into future policy and capability planning states that between 2020 and 2050 the threats Australia faces are likely to be female led and female dominated. In response, the Army should enable the emergence of a Xena warrior cult within Australian women.
And consideration should be given to reducing special forces’ fitness standards to enable ‘Xena’ to thrive as a warrioress of the new frontier.
Like I said, I wish I was making this up.
Teaming: optimising military capability for the coming Era of Equality: 2020 to 2050 is 237 pages long and was first released in March 2017. More than a year after this drivel first made light of day it still sits proudly on the Army website.
And, worse, it appears that senior leaders are taking it seriously.
The author, Major Liz Boulton, thanks Mick Ryan for facilitating her return to the Army in a research capacity. Mick Ryan is a Major General and is the Commander of the Australian Defence College.
Boulton also gives credit to Brigadier Dan McDaniel for authorising and encouraging her work.
McDaniel’s LinkedIn profile lists him as the Director General Capability Investment Analysis at the Australian Defence Force. He previously served as the Commanding Officer of the Special Air Service Regiment and was the Special Operations Commander from 2013-2014.
The document calls for commanders to consider forming female infantry battalions, companies or platoons. And now we find that all female infantry soldiers in the full-time Army are being posted to 1 RAR.
This front line combat unit has not been mechanised. Instead, it has been feminised. No doubt, it will soon be known as 1 RAR (Fem) and will be graphically displayed on military maps with this symbology:
The document is based on a premise that the world is soon to experience an ‘Era of Equality’ that will unleash a return of Amazonian female warriors (considerable effort is made in this document to rewrite the ‘myth’ that combat was not predominantly a male-oriented hobby in the past):
It is not inconceivable, considering the trends described above, that in the 2020 to 2050 period, the Australian Army may face a female organised or female dominated type of adversary. The emergence, or return, of a female warrior type identity may pose an external threat, but also could be something Army harnesses from within its own society.
In response, the document urges the military to prepare for Australia’s ‘Xena’ personalities:
Army should aim to be the home of ‘Xena’ personalities, (no matter what they look like on the outside and what form their strength comes in – which of course is not always physical). Army could, through working with Xena personalities, lead Australia in its understanding and demonstration of excellent female leadership.
Commanders are then told not be scared of Xena, but to enable her and get out of her way.
When developing future Army strategy and capability, senior Army leaders are advised to consider these questions:
If society is on the cusp of a wave of women starting to reach their full potential, or of a ‘Xena-Return,’ Army should move quickly to exploit this advantage first.
– So What?
– How would Army do this? Are male leaders capable of activating and enabling ‘Xena’ or will they be threatened and seek to diminish such people? Will they ‘cramp women’s style’ and, thus, dampen the possibility of creating new tactical, operational and strategic approaches to Operations? Should Xena development occur through some type of FET construct which, potentially, all serving women have the option to experience through a posting to such a unit? Should such a unit have its own physical entry standards? Should a future female-heavy capability be modeled on the existing infantry Battalion; Company or Platoon construct, or be something different? Should the physical standard be lowered for women seeking to join the Special Forces (SF) or should a female only SF capability be established?
If I am to understand this correctly, the only thing standing between the return of Xena after millennia of male chauvinistic opporession are fitness standards. So they’ve gotta go.
Bizarrely, when the document was launched on the Army website, references were made to comic book movies, Batman versus Superman, Justice League and Suicide Squad:
In the movie Batman versus Superman, Batman concludes that the era of a single superhero is over. To face the threats of the future, he realises he needs to assemble a super team, people with widely different skills but who, in common, are good and strong of heart. Reinvigorated by the example of Superman’s purity, Batman sets off to create the Justice League. DC Comics continue this theme in the related film Suicide Squad. Here we see an eclectic bunch of oddballs and societal rejects, who – despite their flaws – each have unique strengths. A US special forces officer is tasked to bring them together, as they are the only ones capable of defeating evil meta-humans.
What does this have to do with the Army? When futurists scan the horizon, they universally agree that the future Army faces significant complexity, far greater than has been experienced to date. Much thought and resources have been applied to preparing the Army technologically – but what about Army’s approach to teamwork? What sort of teams will thrive in such an environment? How is the ‘human dimension’ changing? What socio-cultural forces are in play? Certainly, one of them is the shift in gender identity – for both men and women.
Gender? Again? While many may understandably feel a sense of ‘issue fatigue’ with the word gender, one argument is that rather than ‘leaning away’ from what has at times been a painful discussion, at this particular moment in history, Army needs to ‘lean in’ further.
I’m sure that someone, somewhere will lodge a complaint that this analysis did not incorporate the work of Wonder Woman.
Of course, this document did not just build upon the lessons from comic book movies or focus only on gender. All of the politically correct boxes were ticked:
Turning to Aboriginal Australia, there are many stories of strong women in Indigenous culture. Given protocols about who may tell these stories, I note that I do not have the authority to know or to convey any of these stories here.
Among women, weariness with all-white-male leadership teams is reflected through phenomena like the widespread adoption of the slogan “God, give me the confidence of a mediocre white man,” originally coined by Sarah Hagi…
Today people are impacted by legacy cultural influences, such as patriarchal and hegemonic masculinity notions, which view women as lesser than and the opposite of men…
The ridicule of safe spaces, for example, denies the reality of high rates of suicide among the GLBTIQQA community and the unique ways they can be exposed to greater harassment or violence compared to other demographic groups.
The percentage of women in Iran’s Parliament reached 6% in 2016 and, while this is still low representation, it was significant in that it was the first time in which women outnumbered Clerics. Many other countries and political parties have goals for 50% representation of men and women. The UAE has established a Ministry for Tolerance. They describe ‘tolerance’ as being “a supreme value and one of the universal principles connecting all of us.” Their aim is to operationalise the concept, to “make tolerance a strategy for the present and the future.”
Perhaps this excerpt from the Epilogue is the best quote of all:
Worried, she heads to a specialist gardening bookshop to find out more information. A new book, Oak Studies, advises that, when growing oak trees, lower branches do not always need to be shorn off – this is a remnant practice from days when the timber was needed for ship building. Oaks grow differently. Sometimes, their lower branches extend so far out horizontally, that their ends droop and connect with the soil. Apparently this allows the tree extra nourishment, but also to play a different role in the forest ecosystem. “Hmmm” she thinks.
Rummaging further, she finds herself drawn to a high shelf, at the back of the store. She discovers a heavy and dusty book titled, Xena Phytology. It has information on plants like Amazonians; Boudiccans; Joan-of-Arcians and Nancy Waklings. Suddenly, the Gardener laughs out loud. The strange shoots aren’t weeds, she realises, they are Xena-variants! A type of plant, which it turns out, was an intrinsic part of the forest ecosystem all along, before modern forest management techniques took hold. Further, the Gardener learns, some Xena-variant only sprout during particularly stormy weather, and are known to thrive in turbulent conditions.
The Gardener returns to the forest. Dark storm clouds loom overhead. She goes straight to her gardening shed. She boots up her ruggedized laptop. Lightning flashes in the windows. She knows she needs a new plan: to grow the new shoots, but also, to replenish and strengthen the whole forest…
You would expect to find this fanciful nonsense coming from La Trobe University’s gender studies department.
Unfortunately, these words come from a document designed to inform future policies on Defence strategy and capability.
So let’s hope that Donald Trump manages to secure world peace. Because if he doesn’t, we are screwed.
That’s what his Twitter handle says.
And that’s what will be happening in August when his term as ‘Race Discrimination Commissioner’ ends.
I hope people with a fierce commitment to combatting racism will apply. Whoever the next Commissioner is, they must speak up for those who experience discrimination, defend racial equality, and do the job without fear or favour https://t.co/5aXWfS0PRZ
— Tim Soutphommasane (@timsout) April 25, 2018
And he’s done such a good job of being a Commissar of Race Discrimination that at the end of last year he was able to boast that racists were now freely roaming our streets.
Well done to Tim. He clearly used the first four of his five years on $346,000 to meet all his KPIs.
True, according to Tim some of the racists were merely those who want immigration cut. I guess they’d be labelled political racists. And others just don’t like Islam. They’re the religious racists.
And although he didn’t mention them specifically, there are probably others who just enjoy Western civilisation.
I guess they’re the middle-aged white-Anglo supremacists, or plain old bigots for short.
Anyway, thanks to Tim, in all these categories number are up.
As he stated so well in the Sydney Morning Herald on 29 December 2017, last year was the year ‘racism surged’, gaining new credibility and potency.
It kind of indicates that it’s not such a great idea to pay someone fistfuls of cash to go around being a Race Discrimination Commissioner.
Get rid of Tim. Then get rid of his position. And the racism will go too.
The government would be far better scrapping this Leftist rort altogether and putting the money towards something useful: like new police cars…
By the way, Tim’s not so sure we need them. This is what he had to say on 22 April this year:
The panic about African youth crime has undoubtedly done significant damage to racial harmony in Melbourne and Australian society more generally.
Obviously, according to Tim, there’s far more important issues to worry about. Like the diversity of board members at Australia’s major banks…
Melbourne launch at ANZ Bank HO of #AsianLeadershipProject founded by Julie Chai with CEO @ElliottShayne and Racial Discrimination Commissioner @timsout Asian leaders under represented in senior management & board level #diversity #inclusion pic.twitter.com/hImOkF2IcB
— David Cooke (@drdavidcooke) February 19, 2018
What were they thinking? Not bloody much.
Documents obtained via freedom of information show that an unnamed male officer at Army Headquarters ‘badgered’ a female officer on operations to write an article canvassing taxpayer-funded prostitutes, sex toys and masturbation rooms for Diggers on operations.
And that they were surprised it became a media story.
The article and the emails about it can be read here. The final version of the article is towards the end of the FOI.
The documents also show that the female officer wrote an email after the article was published, stating that she was misquoted and that she was:
…not in support of using sex workers in the ADF, never have been and never will be…
However, in the article the female officer stated that she:
…initially considered whether the Army could contract Australian male and female sex workers to service troops in forward operational bases and air bases…
That does not sound like ‘never’ to me, although her article did go on to say that she:
…quickly realised there were too many moral, legal, practical, medical and logistical barriers for this concept to be entertained.
I’m not sure how much research is normally required before one arrives at the conclusion that they are not in support of the idea of taxpayer-funded prostitutes. But most people who hold that position don’t need research at all.
In contrast, this article was researched for almost two and a half months before the unidentified bright spark at Army Headquarters decided it should be published on the Army’s Landpower Forum website.
The article also added this:
Opinions on the subject will undoubtedly vary, but the conversation about sexual activism and regulation on deployment is worth having.
And this is the point: even if the author was always opposed to the idea of Army prostitutes, she was still throwing it out there for the Army to ‘discuss’, which – by its very nature – implies that there is some merit in it somewhere. And, worse, the Army published it on its website to generate that discussion.
The emails also show that after this article started a media frenzy, the author received numerous congratulations for showing moral courage.
Support was given by Army Headquarters, Joint Operations Command and the Australian Army Research Centre for the contribution to the ‘debate on the profession of arms’.
That’s all well and good. But it is entirely hypocritical.
We all know the answer to these questions, but I will ask them anyway because they are the discussions that the Army should be having.
Will sexual tensions in infantry units as a result of the corps being opened to females affect morale and unit cohesion?
Should Defence be marching in uniform at a parade where other participants engage in explicit sexual embraces in various states of undress?
Ask those questions and no one will talk about moral courage. Instead you’ll be given a lecture about diversity and a notice to show cause.
So the Army only applauds moral courage when it involves discussing taxpayer-funded prostitutes, sex toys and masturbation rooms. Apparently that kind of moral courage builds the profession of arms.
There is one other point to make about this shenanigans.
When the topic was first raised, the only concern that the unidentified male officer in Army Headquarters had was that the initial draft of the article needed a better ‘balance of genders’.
It’s good to see that gender diversity has taken such a hold on Defence thinking that when articles are written for Defence webpages about masturbation rooms, all Army HQ cares about is whether the sentiment demonstrates unconscious gender bias.
It’s about all the evidence you need to nuke the Army’s diversity program.
And I’ll leave this tip for young players: if you are going to write an article titled ‘Sex and War – a conversation the Army has to have’ to generate discussions about how taxpayers can fund sexual satisfaction for soldiers, expect it to end up on the front page of every newspaper in town.
That is exactly what happened.
And the fact that officers in Army Headquarters are surprised about this shows just how little thinking goes on in there…
Last year, after more than 13,000 Australians signed a petition launched by this webpage, the Defence imam resigned.
Sheikh Mohammadu Nawas Saleem had called for Sharia law and publicly backed the radical Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir.
Now the Australian Defence Force has confirmed via Senate Estimates that Saleem passed a ‘baseline security check’. As a result, he was cleared to access classified information up to ‘Protected’ ratings.
Defence has also refused to detail whether Saleem had access to any Defence bases but has informed Senate Estimates that one purpose of security clearances is to ensure that measures are taken to ‘mitigate the threat of malicious trusted insiders’.
One can only wonder how Defence actually plans to mitigate against the threat of insider attacks when a known public supporter of an organisation that has called for an army to impose Sharia law in Australia can be granted a security clearance.
The wonder can only grow when it is clear that Defence’s use of the English language tends to indicate that it has the exact opposite understanding of what words actually mean.
Here’s just one example: Defence was also asked by Senator Fraser Anning whether there were any special recruitment processes underway to increase Islamic recruitment.
The answer was no.
However, the very next question asked Defence whether it was true that the Navy recruitment website promoted a ‘devout Muslim’.
The answer was yes, with a protestation that advertising a ‘devout Muslim’ was not a specific program to recruit Muslims but an initiative to ‘encourage a diverse range of candidates to consider applying to join the Navy’.
Defence also droned on that this showed it ‘embraces religious and cultural diversity, and has an equal opportunity policy for all’.
Please. Give me a break.
And for the record, I cannot find Defence advertising devout adherents of any belief system other than Islam.
Despite its claim that there are no special programs to recruit Muslims, Defence has also told Senate Estimates that there are now 93 full-time personnel and another 62 reservists who are Islamic.
When Stuart Robert announced the appointment of the Defence imam in 2015 there were only 96 Muslims in the entire Defence Force.
So that’s an increase of 161%, which seems a rather extraordinary coincidence. This denial is even more ludicrous given the statement made by then Assistant Minister for Defence, Stuart Robert, linking the appointment of the Defence imam with recruitment:
Capability through Diversity is all about enhancing the combat power of the ADF by widening the national recruitment pool and tapping into the tremendous latent resources that a culturally and linguistically diverse workforce brings to Defence.
Meanwhile, Defence has also informed Senate Estimates that it is looking for a new imam to replace Saleem. I’ll keep you informed as this madness unfolds…
According to the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board, saying something that someone may find offensive about Islam can land you in hot water.
A lot of it.
As Sonia Kruger is now discovering.
And this is so, even though there are no religious vilification laws in New South Wales. There are, however, racial vilification laws.
For those of you whose brow is now busy furrowing, let me try and explain what is going on.
When we don’t have religious vilification laws (as we mostly don’t in Australian states), Islam is protected because it is a race.
And when we do have religious vilification laws (which will soon be another unwanted consequence of the legalisation of homosexual marriage) Islam will be protected because it is a religion.
And pretty much everyone else can go to hell (I say this with an ironic caveat that will be addressed later in this article).
If you think the anti-discrimination industry will use racial or religious vilification laws to protect a middle-aged white man who expresses a conservative Christian view from being sacked, or vilified, or having his bank account shut down or being told he can’t apply for a uni course then you clearly don’t understand what the purpose of this industry is.
The whole reason it exists is to legalise discrimination against those who express views that support our Western Christian society. It champions the opposite of Christianity, which is man-centred morality enforced by the High Priests of the State.
To make my point a little clearer, answer this: what type of person would derive job satisfaction from sitting in some bureaucratic office all day and processing complaints from activists about people like Sonia Kruger.
Or this: who in their right mind would go home to their boyfriend feeling chuffed that they’ve achieved something useful after rubber stamping the 100th complaint of a serial homosexual activist?
It takes a special person to do this job. One who not only feels that they are the new moral enforcer of Australian society but that they were born for this role.
I can absolutely guarantee you that the Anti-Discrimination Board and every other taxpayer leeching organisation like it is not filled with people like me. Or you. Or Sonia Kruger. Or the plumber who likes to have a beer at the pub on a Friday night.
Normal people would rather gouge their eyes out than burden themselves with determining whether a gay man who called a transgender man ugly has crossed some line (and that, my friends, is exactly what the anti-discrimination industry does).
Ordinary Australians don’t work in these places.
Extraordinary Australians do. You know the type.
They are vegans with stickers of rainbows on the back of their electric scooters and they have Twitter accounts so they can hashtag social justice.
They wear turtlenecks and depressing frumpy clothes and analyse tampon ads for unconscious male bias. The ones who are male carry handbags and shave their legs, while the non-male types don’t.
They use their Facebook page to raise awareness about ‘Invasion Day’ and tune in to the news to watch the protest at the Adani mine.
They believe that it’s kind-hearted that almost all babies with Downs Syndrome are aborted in Australia even as they put anti-discrimination posters of Down Syndrome people up in workplaces and then boast about how they are helping our society become more compassionate.
They spend their lives worrying about whether someone will apologise to someone else for something that happened before any of us were born. And how big the taxpayer-funded compensation cheque will be.
They’re the kind of people who work in the anti-discrimination industry.
So if you think you will ever get a fair hearing from this lot then you are as deluded as they are.
To them, fairness has nothing to do with facts and everything to do with factors.
If you have been assigned an attribute at birth that they don’t like then its bad luck. You’re stuck with it until you kick the bucket unless you are so willing to humiliate yourself that you purposefully look absolutely freakin’ ridiculous by attempting to ‘authentically’ live an attribute that you clearly don’t possess.
And people willingly degrade themselves this way.
Now that’s real power. And that is really what all of this is about.
There never has been and there never will be an institution of state that believes it has the power to make morality that does not also believe it needs more power.
And what may start out with the best of intentions is always perverted. Originally power is required to enforce anti-discrimination laws. But, inevitably, anti-discrimination laws are required to enforce more power.
The real purpose of this industry is not about making sure that gay people don’t call transgender people fat. It’s about making sure that all of us are under its control.
I might have been caught in the crosshairs of this industry. But, in the long run, it is just as likely to wind up executing Penny Wong as me. We’ve seen the Thought Police in action before. That’s where they always end up and that’s what they do, whether it be in Russia in 1917 or France in 1789.
Both Trotsky and Robespierre, the High Priests of their respective nations’ anti-discrimination industries succumbed to the blade. Or the ice axe. Or whatever happened to be handy at the time.
That might not yet be the fate awaiting Sonia Kruger. She’s one of the early runners who will just be harassed and told to shut up. She’s there to become an example of what not to say.
And what, exactly, did she say. Well, this:
By the way, I do note that only a few days ago an Islamic convert peacefully killed a number of people in Belgium, two of whom happened to be armed female police officers. I could go there today but I won’t – so just read this (later).
However, I will make this point: it’s unlikely someone will convert to Islam unless there are other Muslims around.
So Sonia may be onto something here.
But wait, there’s more.
Islam is based around the life of Mohammad. If he did it, Muslims should do it too.
Mohammad was both peaceful and aggressive.
He was peaceful when Islam was in the minority. And he was aggressive when it was not.
He also taught that all Muslims should strive to see Islam rule the world. This includes taking all measures that are lawful according to Sharia law to overthrow and replace governments that are not Islamic. And it is lawful to do this by violence because Mohammad did just that when he went to war and defeated the Meccans.
True, in Islamic law there are some qualifications about when violence is justified. One of them, interestingly, is that the violence has to be permitted by a lawful authority.
This is the primary reason many in the Islamic world condemned the Islamic State. The problem was not that that it used violence, but that it did so while there was dispute over its legitimate authority.
Another caveat is that the violence must not cause greater discord than the injustice it seeks to destroy. This is a very subjective matter, which is why some get a rush of blood to the head and others don’t.
And it is also true that of the others who don’t, most of them won’t.
They don’t Islam seriously enough. That is good for us but it is not an argument supporting Islamic immigration.
Out of all of this, one thing is clear. The more Muslims there are in a community, the closer the conditions are to being met justifying violence.
So Sonia may be onto something here as well. Perhaps Islamic immigration is not such a brilliant idea after all.
Unfortunately, the Thought Police don’t care about any of this. All they care about is their power and making sure people live their lives in accordance with its maniacal decrees. Even if it means promoting gay marriage and a religion which condemns homosexuality to death at the same time.
Which is why, as I said earlier, when it comes to religion it will protect Islam and tell the rest of us to go to hell.
Well, almost the rest of us.
The Australian Capital Territory’s anti-discrimination mob have made an exception for Satanists, as reported recently by the Canberra Times:
A NSW-based blogger has been ordered to take down material from his site that described a small and mysterious religious order as a “satanic paedophile cult”. A Canberra tribunal found that the material was archetypal hate speech…
… At the hearing, Mr Bottrill said the Ordo Templi Orientis was about 100 years old and that it had been created out of a collection of Masonic rights in Europe.
“Since about 1912 it’s been the main vehicle for promoting the religion of Thelema … It’s a religion based on revelations given to and then published by Aleister Crowley.”
The UK Guardian also ran an article in 2011 mentioning followers of Mr Crowley. It read somewhat differently:
A former security guard who led a cult from a cul-de-sac in a Welsh seaside town was told he might spend life in jail for committing a series of sex attacks on boys and girls…
… The cult is said to have been inspired by Aleister Crowley, the late mystic and magician nicknamed the Great Beast who in 1904 published a text called the Book of the Law extolling permissive sex.
During the five-week trial the prosecution claimed “the book” formed the basis for Batley’s organisation and he would read from a laminated copy of it while dressed in hooded robes at the start of orgies.
And now, after homosexual marriage has been legalised, it is likely that the Commonwealth will create a federal religious vilification body similar to the one in operation in the nation’s capital. Heaven help us all. Literally. And soon.
Sonia Kruger should not be the focus of the state. Instead, there should be a detailed investigation into the anti-discrimination industry before things get any worse.
It should be put under the spotlight. And then it should be bulldozed into the ground.
Yesterday I spoke with Ben Fordham on 2GB regarding the failed plan to place females in the infantry:
And I chatted with him last night on Sky News’ Bolt Report:
Defence Commentator @BernardGaynor on females in the army: Almost 90% of females who are recruited to infantry roles in the army cannot get through their basic infantry training.
— The Bolt Report (@theboltreport) May 30, 2018
Defence Commentator @BernardGaynor on females in the army: The quota of jobs offered to females first is at 100% for at least the next six months.
— The Bolt Report (@theboltreport) May 30, 2018
Thank you all for your encouragement, donations, support and tips. Without you, this would never have made it into the media.
I saw this tweet today from Major General Gus McLachlan:
My good mate @RodgerShanahan will relate to this story. Not many know that it could also be describing @ChiefAusArmy in his younger days. Duntroon Rugby developed character during some cold Canberra Saturdays. https://t.co/AxoLjwgAHA
— COMDFORCOMD (@comdforcomd) May 30, 2018
Given the female infantry fandangle that has taken off in recently, I was rather curious. So I wanted to know if any females had been selected to play rugby with the blokes:
I wonder how many Defence rugby teams select females…
…but you’d think that they’d open up the sporting field to gender equality before the battlefield…
— Bernard Gaynor (@BernardGaynor) May 31, 2018
That was when the bloke who runs the Army for the Chief of Army let us all know what he thinks. And it’s bad news for the men he commands. According to their boss pretty much all of them are weaker than the women:
We have 5 women playing in the national ruby union program and one NRL jillaroo. They are fitter and stronger than the vast majority of male soldiers in Forces Command. I am immensely proud to be their boss. Take your ill informed biases somewhere else.
— COMDFORCOMD (@comdforcomd) May 31, 2018
The good news for the dudes inside Forces Command is that I can guarantee none of them will ever be asked to play against the girls on the footy field…
…and as for ‘ill informed’, a phrase the good general brought up, I remind him of this recent statement by his boss. Major General McLachlan might like to direct his fire at the correct target:
Here it is: the Chief of Army admits that no study has been conducted into whether placing females in the infantry is a good idea.
When females are injured at far higher rates than men it won’t be the Chief of Army who foots the legal/medical bills. It will be the taxpayer… pic.twitter.com/Aoi9m5vEQP
— Bernard Gaynor (@BernardGaynor) May 30, 2018
Regular readers of this website know that I wear my Catholic faith on my sleeves. I do so for a good reason: it is the central force that has built and preserved Western civilisation.
Many readers also have no interest in the Catholic faith, Christianity or even religion in general. I acknowledge that. But I do not write this article for you.
I write it in honour of Our Lady and to mark the month of May, which is dedicated to her.
In particular, I once again ask Mary Help of Christians, the great patroness of Australia, to watch over our nation.
And I thank her for protecting me. And my family.
It has taken more than one miracle for this website to continue. Without her intercession, it would have been silenced many times over.
And I leave you with two articles to consider. It would seem that one of the benefits of praying the rosary is the retention of common sense.
From the New York Tiimes last October:
WARSAW, Poland — Polish Catholics clutching rosary beads gathered at locations along the country’s 2,000-mile border on Saturday for a mass demonstration during which they prayed for salvation for Poland and the world.
Many participants described it as demonstration against what they see as the secularization of the country and the spread of Islam’s influence in Europe.
The event, “Rosary at the Borders,” commemorated the 1571 Battle of Lepanto between Christian and Muslim fleets. Credit Wojtek Radwanski/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
The event, “Rosary at the Borders,” was sponsored in part by several state-owned companies and was timed to coincide with the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary. It also commemorated the 1571 naval Battle of Lepanto between Christian fighters, under orders from the Pope, and the Ottoman Empire.
Organizers noted that in the battle, “the Catholic fleet defeated the much larger Muslim fleet, saving Europe from Islam.”
“Rosary at the Borders” took place in 320 churches near Poland’s border and 4,000 so-called prayer zones, including the biggest international airport in Poland, a nation moving increasingly to the right.
And from the Daily Express two weeks ago:
The Polish leader said: “Here in Poland, it’s we who decide who will come to Poland and who will not.
“Proposals by the European Union that impose quotas on us hit the very foundations of national sovereignty.”
He reiterated his commitment to help those affected by war or poverty but said Poland’s assistance would take the form of providing aid where the problems are, not accepting refugees.
Our Lady Help of Christians, pray for us!