Displaying the most recent of 90901 posts written by

Ruth King

Tony Abbott: Australia is prepared to offer asylum to persecuted Pakistani mum

Tony Abbott: Australia is prepared to offer asylum to persecuted Pakistani mum

Former prime minister Tony Abbott says the Australian government is prepared to offer a persecuted Pakistani Christian mother asylum.

Asia Bibi spent eight years on death row in Pakistan for blasphemy against Islam.

The mother-of-five was recently acquitted in the country’s supreme court, sparking major protests.

Asia has faced ongoing threats and her family fears attacks.

Several countries have offered her asylum and Mr Abbott says “of course” Australia should too.

“It was very disappointing to me that the British government, who you’d think would be the first Western government to take this matter on, squibbed it because of ridiculous concerns about what local Muslims might think,” he tells Ben Fordham.

The New Patriarchy: How Trans Radicalism Hurts Women, Children—and Trans People Themselves

“I knew by the time I was eight that I didn’t want to be a boy,” says Melissa. “But I didn’t know what I wanted to be.” Born in a provincial English town in the early 1970s and brought up by evangelical Christians, the boy had never heard of a transsexual (a term that was widely used in the decades before “transgender” entered common usage in the 1990s). As for gay men, “they were all going to hell.” As soon as he could, he moved to London and “experimented,” presenting himself as a man at work and a woman in the evenings. In the early 2000s, his gender dysphoria—the distress caused by the feeling that your body is the wrong sex—came to a head. “The thought of being buried as an old man became simply unbearable.”

But even as Melissa came to that bleak realization, a new future for her was opening up. Britain, like many other countries, was planning to grant gender-dysphoric people a route to legal recognition as members of the opposite sex. Under the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) of 2004, after a psychological evaluation and two years presenting themselves in their preferred sex role, they could change the sex on their birth certificates. Melissa, who takes female hormones and has undergone surgery to refashion her genitals into a female form, is now legally a woman. “People take me for what they see,” she says. “That’s all I’ve ever wanted.”

The motive for such laws was largely compassion. Gender dysphoria was viewed as a rare and distressing condition that could be alleviated by accommodating sufferers as legal exceptions to the rules of biology. But a decade and a half later, a more radical notion is sweeping across the Western world, with English-speaking countries in the vanguard. The brainchild of a few sexologists, trans-activists and academics, it has spread via lobby groups and the internet, and on liberal campuses. It is now becoming consolidated in practice and codified into law, with profound consequences—not just for people who wish they had been born the opposite sex, but for everyone.

That notion is the deceptively simple, quasi-mystical idea that everyone is born with a “gender identity”—an innate sense of being a man or woman that usually, but not always, aligns with biological sex. If the two are in conflict, the person is “transgender” and it is their gender identity, not their biological sex, that indicates who they truly are. The theory has been expanded to include people who regard themselves non-binary, “agender,” gender-fluid or a host of other terms, meaning that they belong to neither sex or feel located at some indeterminate (and possibly shifting) point between the two. According to this theory, no one can determine a person’s gender identity except that person, and no one else can challenge it. As with religious belief, it is entirely subjective. A simple declaration—“gender self-identification”—is all it takes to override biology.

One consequence is a huge increase in the number of people who say they do not identify with their natal sex. In Britain, for example, since the GRA came into force, just 5,000 people have used its provisions. Now the government reckons that approximately 1% of the population is transgender—around 650,000 people.

Civic Virtues and the Future of the Centre-Right :Tony Abbott

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2018/12/civic-virtues-and-the-future-of-the-centre-right/
Anthony John Abbott is an Australian politician who served as the 28th Prime Minister of Australia from 2013 to 2015 and Leader of the Liberal Party from 2009 to 2015. He served as Leader of the Opposition from 2009 to 2013. Abbott was first elected Member of Parliament for Warringah in 1994.

As our ideas have multiplied, our beliefs have diminished. That’s the big gap in Centre-Right politics which former Canadian PM Stephen Harper knows we must strive to fill. People crave a moral purpose, and if we don’t offer them any inspiration, others will fill that vacuum, but not necessarily to our countries’ good.

This is the age of disruption, in politics as much as in business, and political parties must respond or fail. In France and Italy the long-established big parties, of the Left and of the Right, have largely been swept away. In Germany, the main parties, of the Right too but especially of the Left, are much diminished. In the United States, Donald Trump smashed the Republican establishment to grab the nomination, and then smashed the Democrat establishment to grab the presidency—after the Democrat establishment had itself been rocked by Bernie Sanders. In Britain, the governing Conservatives are convulsed over Brexit; while an out-and-out Marxist has taken over the Labour Party, and quite conceivably could become prime minister. Even here in Australia, more than a quarter of the electorate is refusing to support the two main parties that, in one guise or another, have always held office.

Post-GFC low economic growth and quantitative-easing-induced asset price inflation have meant stagnant wages, less affordable housing—and more cranky voters. The big political fights are now about cultural and identity issues, not just economic ones; and the fights within political parties are becoming just as intense as those between them. On the Left, the supporters of bigger government and the opponents of tradition seem everywhere ascendant. Even on the Right, there seem to be fewer economic liberals; and, at least among the establishment, more social progressives. The decline of traditional media and the rise of social media make it easier than ever to live in echo chambers of the Left or the Right, so that anyone who doesn’t share your view seems not just wrong but alien, even immoral. In this fragmented and polarised discourse, antagonists advance alternative facts, not just competing interpretations. “Things fall apart”, so it seems, and “the centre cannot hold”. Our challenge is to re-create some common ground, as did the generations after Yeats.

Back in the Reagan–Thatcher era, it was easy enough to know what characterised the Centre-Right of politics, at least in the English-speaking world: lower taxes, smaller government and winning the Cold War. In the face of suffocating officialdom and punitive tax rates, it seemed that the conservative side of politics had become free marketeers. Only now, we conservatives can’t decide whether it’s more important that trade is free or that it’s fair. Then, there was near unanimity on the need to oppose communism; and few things unite people like a common enemy. Today, even an increasingly cold peace with China and with Russia has yet to reproduce that glue. Fading memories of “real existing socialism” plus the excesses of big business, the perceived limitations of markets, and declining trust in institutions have sapped enthusiasm for limited government. In these more trying times, what might the Centre-Right collectively stand for?

Young minds filled with green mush Tony Thomas

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2018/12/young-minds-filled-with-toxic-green-mush/
The original Children’s Crusade, if it actually happened, didn’t end well for the pre-pubescent zealots, who are said to have ended up as slaves. Today’s kids would know as much if their brainwashers, also known as ‘teachers’, focused on fact rather than getting them into the streets to demonstrate against nasty weather.
I avoid driving locally from 3.30 to 4pm weekdays. That’s because parents chauffeuring kids home from school create congestion equal to evening peak hour. Kids today are a pampered lot. With their forays into climate-strike activism last week, these same kids have become truly insufferable, posing as climate martyrs and lionised by the Fairfax/ABC media and renewables lobbyists. Kids unwilling to unstack the dishwasher after dinner are now condemning their parents for climate criminality.

Five-year-olds are exhorted by adult trainers to dump pre-school and go on strike to combat the global warming that began 150 years ago, following the Little Ice Age. Older kids can skive off for a week with a clear conscience.[1]

Did I say five-year-olds? Well yes, for progressives, indoctrination begins at four.[2] At Brunswick Kindergarten Inc. in The Greens’ bicycle-infested Melbourne heartland, teacher Catherine Sundbye, “with a passion for early learning” runs “Kids Off Nauru lessons” for the four-year-olds, with parents’ approval. The kids come dressed in blue symbolising their sadness , as in #BlueForNauru. Her newsletter chronicles the four-year-olds’ responses to “What would you say to the politicians who won’t let the refugees in?” She clarifies, “It’s not about running a scare campaign” and says most of her tots don’t think the Coalition refugee policy is fair. Ms Sundbye sums up, “That was beautiful to see: how they got it on a deep level. It’s never too early to get them to be part of the conversation.”

A conversation with a four-year-old about national policy? I’ll be waiting with bated breath for sand-box set’s perspective on franking credits.

On the climate strike, parent “Trent” was interviewed with his eight-year-old climate-protesting son by a credulous ABC Radio reporter. Trent pere claimed, risibly, that his eight-year-old had “a pretty incredible understanding of the science.”

The kid strikers virtue-signalling about their “sacrifice” had merely skipped school for a fun day out, having memorised a few hand-me-down slogans and lies about the extent, rate and impacts of global warming.[3] As Year 12 student Marco Bellemo put it on ABC QandA on Monday:

“I see the Liberal Party still wanting to build new coal, when we should clearly be transitioning to renewable energy to help save lives… climate change is killing people, it’s causing so many natural disasters.”

Marco happens to be a student organiser/activist at Northcote High, in the heart of Melbourne’s progressive-voting inner belt.[4] I wish him well in further exploring the issues. For example, the IPCC itself fails to establish links between global warming and natural disasters such as drought.[5] Prima facie, warming lets the air hold more water vapour and hence promotes rain.

Vienna’s empty streets Douglas Murray

http://standpointmag.co.uk/outsiders-diary-december-2018-douglas-murray-vienna

The Sappho Prize is an award given annually by the Free Press Society of Denmark, and as I remarked on receiving it recently, it has sometimes seemed as though I am the only person I know who hasn’t received it. But it is a terrific honour, awarded by a very brave and stalwart group of Danes who got together to uphold the principles of free expression in their country after these came under attack in 2005. One of the upsides about free-speech wars is that you can never particularly predict where your heroes will break out. And for me a whole collection of them showed up in Scandinavia.

Apart from being friends, the list of previous recipients is also a list of some of my favourite people. Mark Steyn received it some years ago and gave a brilliant speech, the only downside of which was that he used up every available joke that a chap can make on receiving a prize named after history’s most famous lesbian. When Flemming Rose and Roger Scruton received the award they made no lesbian jokes, Melanie Phillips even fewer. But since the award was named after Sappho for her voice as a poet, I was proud to quote her own words during my acceptance speech. As it happened, I had picked up a copy of her works between visiting refugee camps during the migration crisis. Since I had inscribed my copy “Molivos, Lesbos, 2016”, and the award was in part a recognition of the book I wrote as a result of those travels, the ceremony in the Danish Parliament really did feel meant. As there was a cash component to the prize, I quoted Sappho’s fragment 120: “Wealth without virtue is / a harmful companion; / but a mixture of both, / the happiest friendship.”

***

This past month also took me back to Vienna — one of my favourite cities, in part because of the mixture of emotions it provokes. The first is obviously the layer of feeling that nowhere is better than this, and that this is as good as any built city can get. Then there are the whiffs of the scene that was once there. A couple of years ago I was going with a friend around an exhibition with some Schiele, Klimt and others. Did she ever wonder, I asked, whether things couldn’t get as good as this again? I remember her almost laughing. Of course they couldn’t. A city which had Mahler, Freud and Zweig around at the same time — just for starters — seemed unlikely to be bettered in any conceivable future.

Europe’s destiny Daniel Johnson

http://standpointmag.co.uk/manchester-square-december-2018-daniel-johnson-europe-destiny

Emerging from the summit that set the EU seal on Theresa May’s deal, Angela Merkel described Brexit as “tragic”. Normally a tragedy implies some kind of necessity or inevitability. Yet there was nothing unavoidable about the predicament in which the United Kingdom now finds itself. The EU leaders insist that it was the British people, manipulated by lying populists, who chose Brexit and must now face up to the “exorbitant” cost of their decision. But in reality the British were left with little choice, after the EU ignored their concerns and set a course that can only make the “democratic deficit” burgeon into bureaucratic bankruptcy.

The European project was always a perpetual motion machine for the insatiable accumulation of powers, whose engineers jealously watch over the acquis communautaire like dragons guarding their hoard. In the absence of British influence, the stage is set for a display of full-scale Euro-triumphalism in the Valhalla of Brussels — followed in due course by Götterdämmerung, as the euro goes up in flames and they are overwhelmed by a flood of migration.

Lest such Wagnerian metaphors seem extravagant, consider the case of Angela Merkel. Not only are the German Chancellor and her husband votaries of the Master, but she has lately begun making repeated references to Schicksal (“Fate” or “Destiny”) in her speeches about Europe. Most recently, in her address to the European Parliament, she implicitly warned against dependence on the United States in defence and security: “The times when we could rely on others without reservation are over.” She went on, in more mystical vein: “That means we Europeans have to take our destiny in our own hands if we want to survive as a community.”

What exactly “destiny” signifies here is still obscure, but Mrs Merkel has reiterated this sentiment so many times that it clearly means a great deal to her. Europe, for those who love its history and culture, really does have a cosmic importance that goes far beyond politics.

In some profound sense, the cityscapes and landscapes of this continent belong to all of us who adhere to the civilisation of the West. A cultural memory is embodied in the stones of Venice, the ruins of Athens, the boulevards of Paris that is not exclusively the property of those who happen to live here and now, but rather connects past and future generations too. It has become more fashionable to denounce the legacy that we may bequeath than to reflect at what cost our forebears fought to preserve our civilisation. When we ponder the plight of posterity, we ignore at our peril the ordeals of our ancestry.

Israel’s Arrow By John J. Miller

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2018/11/17/israels-missile-defense-system-iron-dome/

Uzi Rubin’s missile-defense system comes of age

Tel Aviv

Nobody knew the day or hour the strike would come — and when a Syrian missile blasted into the sky and headed toward Israel last year, the man who had spent much of his life preparing for that moment slept through the whole thing. “I read about it the next morning,” Uzi Rubin tells me.

Here’s what happened, as best as anyone without an Israeli security clearance can determine: On the night of March 17, 2017, an Israeli jet penetrated Syrian airspace. Although these scouting missions were known to occur, Israeli officials had rarely discussed them — and this was the first one they ever confirmed. Syria responded by launching a Russian-made SA-5 anti-aircraft missile. The Israeli pilot probably took evasive action. Fooled, the SA-5 zipped past the plane. Many surface-to-air missiles will self-destruct when they miss their targets. This one didn’t. It continued to fly southwest.

Radars in Israel detected the rocket, plotted its trajectory, and predicted a point of impact. Although their calculations couldn’t have established exactly where the missile would hit, they implied that it would come down somewhere in the Jordan Valley, within the borders of Israel. At least that’s what General Zvi Haimovitz, head of the Israeli Air Defense Command, said three days later at a press conference. The area in question, between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea, includes a lot of empty desert, but also concentrations of people, from the sparse settlements of the Bedouin to the city of Jericho.

For more than 16 years, Israel’s Arrow missile-defense system had stood guard, waiting for such a situation. Confronted by the incoming SA-5, an Israeli officer made a snap decision: The threat was real. Israel fired a missile at the missile — a bullet at a bullet, to borrow the common metaphor. In a hypersonic inter­ception, somewhere over the borders of Israel, Syria, and Jordan, the Arrow obliterated the SA-5.

It might not have happened but for Rubin, the man who slept. For years, he had called on Israel to defend itself against missile attacks, overseeing the construction of the system that finally sprang to life last year. Its performance, raved the former general and prime minister Ehud Barak, “demonstrated our awesome capability.” Looking back on the incident, Rubin is more reserved, even deadpan: “I was satisfied with the results.”

The 81-year-old Rubin has every reason to feel more than satisfaction. He has devoted his life to his nation’s security. He might even be called the founding father of Israeli missile defense. Without him, it’s possible that Israel wouldn’t have had the ability to shoot down that SA-5, let alone to protect itself from the graver threats now posed by Iran and perhaps others in the future.

Feds Discover Largest Oil, Natural-Gas Reserve in History By Mairead McArdle

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/feds-discover-largest-oil-natural-gas-reserve-in-history/

The federal government has discovered a massive new reserve of oil and natural gas in Texas and New Mexico that it says has the “largest continuous oil and gas resource potential ever assessed.”

“Christmas came a few weeks early this year,” Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke said of the new reserve, which is believed to have enough energy to fuel the U.S. for nearly seven years.

In all, the new reserve is said to contain 281 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, 46.3 billion barrels of oil, and 20 billion barrels of natural-gas liquids, the Interior Department’s U.S. Geological Survey said.

Almost a third of the U.S.’s total crude-oil production comes from the Permian Basin where the reserve was found, making it the biggest shale-oil-producing region in the U.S.

“American strength flows from American energy, and as it turns out, we have a lot of American energy,” said Zinke. “Before this assessment came down, I was bullish on oil and gas production in the United States. Now, I know for a fact that American energy dominance is within our grasp as a nation.”

A Tax Revolt in France By Michael Brendan Dougherty

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/a-tax-revolt-in-france/

The democratic peoples of the West have tired of the politics of the sensible center and are demanding change.

Finally, France has a bona fide working-class riot. Rather than the usual, a riot of bourgeois students on behalf of a notional working class.

They are wearing the yellow vests that all motorists are required to possess in case their car is disabled. The protest began with outrage against the imposition of new fuel taxes that hit those outside the metropolis particularly hard. The government has already delayed the taxes, but people are still in the streets, and their grievances are multiplying.

French truckers and farmers are calling a strike in support of the Yellow Vests. The Macron government is seeking out “leaders” who can speak for this movement, and with whom it can negotiate. This is French politics as we know, love, and fear it; where faith in the efficacy of democratic institutions is low, and faith in demotic anger somewhat higher.

Finally, a Color Revolution comes to a Western government, one that is definitely not supported by or coordinated from the U.S. State Department.

Oh, I know that is quite a thing to say. But what else to call the Yellow Vest protest? Like the Color Revolutions of Eastern Europe, it is now a catch-all brand for a variety of causes being advanced against a centralized state that is felt to be unresponsive. You can get a sense of the panic from a Guardian editorial that begins, “For Europe’s sake, Emmanuel Macron needs help.”

What was the real point of the Mueller investigation? Since the beginning, it’s been an investigation in search of a crime rather than an investigation of a suspected crime Roger Kimball

https://spectator.us/special-counsel-robert-s-mueller-iii/

Will wonders never cease? Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III is recommending that General Mike Flynn serve no jail time. Isn’t that nice of him? Of course, Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III first destroyed Mike Flynn’s career and essentially pauperized him through legal fees (‘the process,’ as they say, ‘is the punishment’).

In making his recommendation, Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III cited Gen. Flynn’s ‘substantial assistance’ in the long-running soap opera that is his campaign against the president of the United States. The centerpiece of that ‘special assistance’ are the 19 interviews with the Office of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III for which Gen. Flynn sat.

But what was the original sin here? Why was Gen. Flynn targeted in the first place?

The real answer is twofold. First, former President Obama and his national security team had a special dislike for Mike Flynn. He put America first. He was not one of them. Second, Gen. Flynn, as Donald Trump’s national security adviser, was a convenient proxy for the President. Damaging Flynn would damage the President. Damaging Flynn would also send a message to other people thinking about joining the President’s team. Flynn was forced from his office just weeks after Donald Trump was inaugurated. The atmosphere in Washington was acrid with shock bordering on panic. The impossible had just happened. Donald Trump had been elected. But would anyone who was anyone actually work for the administration? Destroying so emblematic a figure as Gen. Flynn, a conspicuous patriot, would also send a message to others contemplating joining the administration: Here Be Monsters, though as it turned out the monsters were not in the President’s entourage but rather in the office of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III, the FBI, the Department of Justice, and the media industrial complex.

Those are the real reasons Gen. Flynn was targeted. The supposed answer, however, was that he lied to the FBI about a phone call he had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak before Trump’s inauguration. Problem: the two FBI agents who interviewed him did not think he was lying. But Flynn pleaded guilty to just that. Why? Again, it’s the process-being-the-punishment issue. The heavy hand of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III had essentially bankrupted Flynn with legal fees and here was the DOJ dangling the possibility of prosecuting him for violating the Logan Act, a never-enforced 18th-century law that criminalizes negotiations between unauthorized persons and a foreign government. As Byron York noted earlier this year, to many observers, ‘it appears the Justice Department used a never-enforced law and a convoluted theory as a pretext to question Flynn — and then, when FBI questioners came away believing Flynn had not lied to them, forged ahead with a false-statements prosecution anyway.’ That’s about the size of it. Which is why, as York concluded, ‘the Flynn matter is at the very heart of the Trump-Russia affair, and there is still a lot to learn about it.’