Displaying posts published in

October 2019

COMPULSORY GUIDE TO EXPLICIT SEX IN AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY

While officials in Bali have been busy threatening to prosecute those who engage in sex outside marriage, the University of Technology Sydney has pursued the opposite goal. Its administration wants to make sure students are instructed in explicit sexual material whether or not one consents to such an education.

The irony underlying this latest leftist scheme, is that under the guise of highlighting the importance of “consent” when one has sex, people are being exposed to depictions of sexual activity without their consent. What’s more, UTS is not alone in pursuing this approach. Sydney University has adopted a similar strategy. According to the UTS website:

Consent Matters training

Consent Matters is a compulsory online training about appropriate behaviour and positive intervention.

Every single staff and student will complete it once during their time at UTS to ensure that all members of our community have a shared understanding of healthy relationships and can help if they see unacceptable situations.

This training is one part of our program to reduce unwanted sexual behaviour and encourage healthy relationships.

Deadline for completion

The deadline for coursework students to complete Consent Matters training is the results release date of your first session at UTS.

Failure to complete Consent Matters

You will only be able to view your results if you have completed the four modules and received 100 per cent in the quiz at the end.

If you fail to do this, you will receive a Consent Matters sanction and will not be able to view your results.

Who’s Afraid of Scandinavia’s Crime Statistics? by Judith Bergman

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14911/scandinavia-crime

“Most immigrants are not criminals, but when the immigrant population is overrepresented in almost every crime category, then there is a problem that we must dare to talk about.” — Jon Helgheim, immigration policy spokesman for the Norwegian party Fremskrittspartiet (FrP).

“In the more than thirty years that the surveys cover, one tendency is clearer than all others, namely that the proportion of the total amount of crimes committed by persons with a foreign background is steadily increasing….” — Det Goda Samhället (“The Good Society”), Invandring och brottslighet – ett trettioårsperspektiv (“Immigration and crime – a thirty-year perspective”). All statistics for the report were supplied by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention.

Unless Scandinavian political leaders begin actively to engage with the facts that these statistics describe, the problems are only going to become more intractable — to the point where they may be entirely unsolvable.

In Sweden, discussing who is behind the current crime epidemic in the country has long been taboo. Such a statistic has only been published twice by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (BRÅ), in 1996 and in 2005. In 2005, when BRÅ published its last report on the subject, “Crime among people born in Sweden and abroad,” it contained the following note:

“Critics have argued that new results can be inflated, taken out of context and misinterpreted and lead to reinforcing ‘us and them’ thinking. There is every reason to take such risks seriously. However, BRÅ’s assessment is… that a knowledge-based picture of immigrant crime is better than one based on guesses and personal perceptions. The absence of current facts about the crime among the foreign-born and their children facilitates the creation and consolidation of myths. If crime is a problem in certain groups of the foreign-born, then the problems do not disappear unless you highlight them and speak openly about them. A correct picture of the extent and development of the problems should instead be the best basis for analyzing conditions and improving the ability of all residents to function well in Sweden, regardless of ethnic origin.”

Democrat Cities Are Sanctuary Nightmares Brian Lonergan

amgreatness.com/2019/10/02/democrat-cities-are-sanctuary-nightmares/

In the age of 24-hour news cycles where virtually everything has been politicized, a strange phenomenon has developed. Propaganda—described more accurately as “lies”—believed by many and challenged by few, is carrying the day. Only after a preponderance of evidence to the contrary accumulates over time does the public begin to question whether, let alone realize they have been sold a bill of goods.

Examples of this are ubiquitous, and nowhere seen more clearly than on the immigration issue.

Anti-borders politicians loudly proclaimed that there was no crisis at our southern border, until the undeniable facts caused them to reverse course and admit the obvious. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) once suggested that even members of the notoriously violent Central American gang MS-13 have “the spark of divinity” in them and hence deserve a chance here. We haven’t heard that talking point in a while, as details of the gang’s penchant for rape, drug trafficking, and murder have become known.

The latest talking point to wither and die in the light of truth is that sanctuary policies make communities safer, and that they protect immigrant communities. This can no longer be stated with any credibility. Sanctuary laws are poison for communities, and immigrants disproportionately are suffering as a result of them.

The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) recently compiled a list of America’s Worst Sanctuary Communities, and the details that emerged should act as a disturbing wakeup call to all Americans. Illegal aliens given “sanctuary” and protected from deportation have been charged with heinous acts.

The Anesthetic Effect of Ukrainegate by Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2019/10/03/the-anesthetic-effect-of-ukrainegate/

There’s a good chance the manufactured scandal already has softened Barr’s expected body blow to the Russiagate culprits by setting up a false equivalence. Justice might finally be served, but a weary American public might not care.

Wary political commentators on the Right have noted that the ginned up outrage over President Trump’s call with the Ukranian president serves two political purposes: One, to supply the impeachment goods that Special Counsel Robert Mueller could not deliver and two, to obfuscate the ongoing investigations led by Attorney General William Barr into how the Obama White House unleashed the country’s most powerful government agencies against the Trump presidential campaign in 2016.

There is, however, a third motive behind the nonstop cacophony over Trump’s call and subsequent “whistleblower” report: To anesthetize the American public when the verdicts of Barr’s inquiries, currently underway by multiple authorities at the Justice Department, are rendered.

“Ukrainegate” is another way to numb the collective shock when Americans finally learn the details of the international sting operation concocted to sabotage Trump’s presidential campaign and later, derail his presidency. The reaction from the Left and NeverTrump Right will be, “So what if President Obama’s CIA, FBI and State Department prodded foreign governments to investigate his political foe and influence an election? Trump did the same thing! Who cares if Obama wanted to damage the Trump campaign? Trump is doing the same thing to the Biden campaign!”

Impeachment Comments Democrats Would Rather You Forget Written by Thomas McArdle *****

https://issuesinsights.com/2019/10/04/impeachment-comments-democrats-would-rather-you-forget/

More than 20 years ago, when President Bill Clinton was being impeached for lying to a grand jury – then as now a documented fact that no one can credibly dispute – some Democrats who today want to impeach and have the Senate remove President Donald Trump from office ASAP, were whistling a very different tune.

Back then they strongly argued:

There was no bipartisan consensus.
An impeachment would be traumatic for the country and distract Congress from solving major domestic and foreign policy problems.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi:

“We are here today because the Republicans in the House are paralyzed with hatred of President Clinton. And until the Republicans free themselves of this hatred, our country will suffer.”

Former Vice President Joe Biden (then a U.S. senator):

“It would have been wrong for Richard Nixon to have been removed from office based upon a purely partisan vote. No president should be removed from office merely because one party enjoys a commanding lead in either house of the Congress …

“It is our constitutional duty to give the president the benefit of the doubt on the facts …

“Brett Kavanaugh, who was associate independent counsel in Ken Starr’s office for three years, put this argument most succinctly in a recent article he published in the Georgetown Law Journal: ‘The President is not simply another individual. He is unique. He is the embodiment of the federal government and the head of a political party. If he is to be removed, the entire government likely would suffer, [and] the military or economic consequences to the nation could be severe’ …

“To remove a president is to decapitate another branch and to undermine the independence necessary for it to fulfill its constitutional role … To remove a duly-elected president clashes with democratic principles in a way that simply has no constitutional parallel …

ICNA’s Violent Islamist Relations in Kashmir The ‘American arm’ of Jamaat-e-Islami. Joe Kaufman

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/10/icnas-violent-islamist-relations-kashmir-joe-kaufman/

On September 22nd, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi took to the stage with President Trump, at NRG Stadium in Houston, Texas. 50,000 attendees, including this author, watched in awe, as Modi told of the changes that have taken place in India: changes to India’s economy and infrastructure, changes to Indian hygiene, and changes to how India deals with the terrorists in Kashmir. This last subject drew the most emotions and not just inside the arena, but outside as well, as busloads of protesters took to the streets decrying human rights violations in Kashmir. Yet, the group leading the demonstration has numerous links to the terrorists.

Kashmir or more properly Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) is a state located in India. However, Article 370 of the Indian Constitution gave a special status to Kashmir, granting autonomy to those residing in the state and disallowing non-citizens of Kashmir the ability to purchase property within the state. As a result, the Muslim-majority of Kashmir, which stands today at around 70%, was protected and others were rendered second-class citizens. This special status was always deemed a temporary one; though, for decades, Indian authorities have been reluctant to alter it. That is, until now.

In August, following action in both houses of Parliament, Indian President Ram Nath Kovind declared the abrogation of the provisions of Article 370. For years, discrimination and terrorism against Kashmir’s non-Muslim minorities have engulfed the region, forcing people to flee their homes. This has been a fully legitimate concern, but it seems not enough of a concern for radical Muslims, who have used the issue as an excuse to voice their outrage. One such group, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), has organized rallies around the US calling for 360 to be reinstated. The group’s motives for doing so are tainted by their ties to the terrorists.

The Streets of San Francisco By Heather Mac Donald

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-streets-of-san-francisco-11570143083

The city made a choice to tolerate vagrancy and encourage drug use, with dire consequences.

This city has been conducting a three-decade experiment in what happens when society stops enforcing bourgeois norms of behavior. It has done so in the name of compassion for the homeless. The result: Street squalor and misery have increased, while government expenditures have ballooned. Yet the principles guiding city policy remain inviolate: Homelessness is a housing problem, it is involuntary, and it persists because of inadequate public spending. These propositions are readily disproved by talking to people living on the streets.

“Everyone’s on drugs here . . . and stealing,” an ex-convict named Shaku explains from an encampment of tents, trash and bicycles across from Glide Memorial Church in the heart of the Tenderloin district. A formerly homeless woman living in a city-subsidized hotel, asked if she does drugs, replies: “Is that a trick question?” Jeff, 50, slumps over his coffee cup at 7:30 a.m. A half-eaten muffin sits next to him on a filthy blanket. “I use drugs, alcohol, all of it,” he tells me, his eyes closed. “The whole Tenderloin is for drugs.”

The city sends the message relentlessly that drug use is not only acceptable but expected. The Health Department distributes 4.5 million syringes a year, along with alcohol swabs, vitamin C to dissolve heroin and crack, and instructions on how to tie one’s arm for a hit. Officials have installed 17 needle-disposal boxes and kiosks throughout the city, signaling to children that drug use is a normal part of adult life.

Only 60% of the city’s free needles are returned; the rest end up on the sidewalks or in the sewers. Users dig for veins in plain view. At the corner of Hyde Street and Golden Gate Avenue, steps away from the UC Hastings College of the Law, I was easily able to purchase a 2-gram pellet of fentanyl for $16, a new-customer discount.

Charter Schools Ace Another Test Minority students do better overall as charters gain market share.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/charter-schools-ace-another-test-11570143771

Is the success of charter schools an illusion? Critics claim charters merely skim the best students, whose parents care enough to apply, while pushing out troublemakers. So it’s worth noting a new study showing that often test scores improve for all students when charters increase their market share.

The Thomas B. Fordham Institute examined 21 urban school districts with at least 2,500 black students per grade from 2009-2015. As the “black charter market share” rises in the study to 50% from zero, the associated educational gain is 0.8 grade level in English and 0.7 in math. This bump is for all black students in the district, whether they attend a charter or not.

Results are similar for the 27 urban districts with at least 2,500 Hispanic students per grade. As the “Hispanic charter market share” rises to 35% from zero, it’s associated with a gain of 0.7 grade level in English and 0.7 in math. For comparison, the overall racial achievement gap is roughly “two to three grade levels,” the study says.

Other results in the paper aren’t as dramatic. After adding more than 200 smaller urban districts, those with at least 100 minority students per class, the gains are 0.3 or 0.4 grade level, although Hispanics show no bump in English. In large suburban districts, the data show mostly null results for minority pupils.

Also noteworthy: “There is no evidence that higher charter market share is associated with achievement gains for white students.” There are even some declines as charters build market share. The largest drop, about 0.4 grade level, is in white suburban math scores. The reasons aren’t obvious. Maybe suburban charters are more likely to be Montessori or Waldorf schools less focused on testing. In any case, most of these students turn out fine. But for students in poor urban districts, solid English and math scores can be a ticket to the middle class.

Schiff’s Shifty Timeline What did the House Intel Committee chairman know and when did he know it? By Kimberley A. Strassel

https://www.wsj.com/articles/schiffs-shifty-timeline-11570143046

If the latest impeachment push continues to backfire, Democrats can thank their duplicitous House Intelligence chairman, Adam Schiff.

The New York Times reported this week that the “whistleblower” who set off the latest inquisition provided an “early warning” to Mr. Schiff’s committee that he or she was filing a complaint over Donald Trump’s July 25 call to Ukraine’s president. The media is now at pains to stress that whistleblowers do sometimes reach out to Congress, that all “procedures” were followed, and that what really matters is the accusation that Mr. Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden.

Actually, it matters a great deal that Mr. Schiff knew about this early and withheld it deliberately from both the public and his House colleagues. He used his advance information to lay the groundwork steadily for later exploitation of the issue. He went so far as to charge the White House with a coverup—of a complaint he already knew about. The timeline of this orchestrated campaign is another knock to the legitimacy of the so-called impeachment inquiry. If the public can’t trust Mr. Schiff to be honest about the origins of his information, why should they trust his claim that the information itself is serious?

Mr. Schiff on Sept. 13, a Friday night, issued the explosive news that he had been alerted a few days earlier by the intelligence community’s inspector general of an “urgent” yet unspecified whistleblower complaint. But the complaint is dated Aug. 12, and news reports now say the whistleblower interacted with Mr. Schiff’s staff prior to then. So Mr. Schiff knew about the topic of the complaint for more than a month—while the public did not. It is now clear why the intelligence chairman in that month suddenly developed an interest in all things Ukrainian, and began aggressively previewing his impeachment mantra.

On Aug. 23, for instance, Mr. Schiff tweeted that Mr. Trump tried to “get dirt on a political opponent” via personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s interaction with the office of the Ukrainian president. On Aug. 28, the chairman tweeted his newfound concern that Mr. Trump was “withholding vital military aid to Ukraine.” And on Sept. 9, Mr. Schiff suddenly announced his committee would launch a full-fledged investigation into whether Mr. Trump was trying to “pressure Ukraine to help the President’s re-election campaign.” All this was priming the public and the media for what was to come—the better to take full advantage of the whistleblower “news.”

Yet even after news broke of the complaint, Mr. Schiff played dumb. On Sept. 17, he flatly (and falsely) stated on MSNBC: “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower.” Two days later, he thanked the inspector general, Michael Atkinson, without whom “we might not have even known there was a whistleblower complaint.” Really? Mr. Schiff wanted to make it sound as if the Trump administration was muzzling the complainant, when in fact the process was working and Mr. Schiff knew all about it. CONTINUE AT SITE

Scholars Disappointed by Decision Upholding Harvard Discrimination Press Release from National Association of Scholars

New York, NY (October 3, 2019) — The National Association of Scholars (NAS) reacted with disappointment to the decision by a United States District Court upholding racial discrimination in admissions by Harvard University. NAS had previously filed an amicus brief in the case, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, in favor of the plaintiff. We noted that Harvard’s race-conscious admissions process discriminates against Asian applicants in order to achieve racial balancing.

 
“Racial discrimination is wrong,” said NAS President Peter Wood. “Unfortunately, Judge Allison D. Burroughs engaged in mental gymnastics to find Harvard’s behavior legal. Burroughs acknowledged that Harvard considers race ‘as a positive attribute’ for some races, but refused to admit that this results in intentionally negative outcomes for non-favored races.”
 
Wood continued, “Race should play no role in college admissions. Colleges and universities should concern themselves with life of the mind, not the color of their students’ skin. Academic achievement, proven ability, ambition, and commitment to learning should form the basis for college admissions decisions.”