The Remains of an Administration
By Victor Davis Hanson
National Review Online
Obama’s policies are in tatters, and the worst scandals of his White House are coming to light.
“One is not struck by the truth until prompted quite accidentally by some external event.”
— Kazuo Ishiguro, The Remains of the Day
Each day that the Obama administration fades into the past, its wrongdoings manage to wander back into the present.
After years of suppression, all sorts of strange events keep popping up to remind us of what little is left of the Obama years — the Susan Rice memo, Christopher Steele deleting his computer records, FBI-doctored and lost 302s, text messages wiped clean, the bizarre Obama January 5, 2017, Oval Office meeting, the ambush interview of Michael Flynn, the unmasking and leaking of redacted names swept up in reverse-targeting surveillance operations, the administration fraud perpetrated on the FISA courts. The list is so overwhelming and bizarre that it ensures that anything at any time can now appear. And the result keeps reminding Americans of how corrupt were the years between 2009 and 2017 and how untruthful was the coverage of such institutionalized wrongdoing.
Feet of Clay
Emeritus Barack Obama now and then ventures out to go through the motions of an enfeebled defense for what is becoming an increasingly discredited administration. But his heart is not in it. His mind is elsewhere. His cause is no longer social activism and community organizing, if it ever was, but lucre and the perceived well-earned good life. The arc of his moralizing universe is long, but for the anointed like him, it apparently bends toward the just deserts of riches and material bounty.
Saturday 30 May 2020
EU Doomsaying Comes Unstuck
Nissan Backs Britain as It Pulls out of EU
Victoria Friedman
Breitbart London
Japanese carmaker Nissan has announced that it will retain its plant in Sunderland, England, but will be closing its factories in Spain, signalling that it may pull out of more locations across the European Union.
Project Fear mongers have, since the before the vote to leave the EU in 2016, claimed that leaving the bloc would result in Britain’s car manufacturing base being decimated. However, in the years following the referendum, the opposite has proven true with Aston Martin, Toyota, Jaguar Land Rover, among others, committing to Brexit Britain, with the Institute of the Motor Industry saying in 2018 that new technology could add 320,000 jobs to the domestic car industry by 2030.
A Nissan spokesman said, according to Sky News, on Thursday: “Sunderland remains an important part of our plans for the European business. The new Juke was recently launched, and the plant is now preparing for the arrival of the new Qashqai.”
The Sunderland plant employs some 6,700 people and is Britain’s largest car plant. It produces the Qashqai, which is the best-selling British-made car, the Juke, and the Leaf, which is the world’s best-selling electric car. Nissan is also reportedly in talks to build two models for Renault — part of the French-Japanese alliance along with Nissan and Mitsubishi — in Sunderland.
Responding to the news, Brexit campaign veteran Nigel Farage said: “For over 20 years we were told if we join the Euro and then left the EU that Nissan would close, a common BBC headline. Here is the happy reality.”
Victoria Friedman
Breitbart London
Japanese carmaker Nissan has announced that it will retain its plant in Sunderland, England, but will be closing its factories in Spain, signalling that it may pull out of more locations across the European Union.
Project Fear mongers have, since the before the vote to leave the EU in 2016, claimed that leaving the bloc would result in Britain’s car manufacturing base being decimated. However, in the years following the referendum, the opposite has proven true with Aston Martin, Toyota, Jaguar Land Rover, among others, committing to Brexit Britain, with the Institute of the Motor Industry saying in 2018 that new technology could add 320,000 jobs to the domestic car industry by 2030.
A Nissan spokesman said, according to Sky News, on Thursday: “Sunderland remains an important part of our plans for the European business. The new Juke was recently launched, and the plant is now preparing for the arrival of the new Qashqai.”
The Sunderland plant employs some 6,700 people and is Britain’s largest car plant. It produces the Qashqai, which is the best-selling British-made car, the Juke, and the Leaf, which is the world’s best-selling electric car. Nissan is also reportedly in talks to build two models for Renault — part of the French-Japanese alliance along with Nissan and Mitsubishi — in Sunderland.
Responding to the news, Brexit campaign veteran Nigel Farage said: “For over 20 years we were told if we join the Euro and then left the EU that Nissan would close, a common BBC headline. Here is the happy reality.”
Serious Corruption
Obamagate Is Not a Conspiracy Theory
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
There’s no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that Obama administration officials were corrupt in their handling of the Trump–Russia investigation.
Those sharing #Obamagate hashtags on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.
Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Obama’s only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the DOJ withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, actually — were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration, who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations, repeatedly unmasked Trump’s allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going.
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
There’s no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that Obama administration officials were corrupt in their handling of the Trump–Russia investigation.
Those sharing #Obamagate hashtags on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.
Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Obama’s only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the DOJ withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, actually — were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration, who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations, repeatedly unmasked Trump’s allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going.
Friday 29 May 2020
The Day the Police State Came
They Have Made Us All Prisoners
The new authoritarian State’s dream has come true thanks to the repulsive word 'lockdown'
Peter Hitchens
Mail on Sunday
We will never get out of this now. It will go on for ever. We will not be free people again. Even when we seem to be free we will be like prisoners on parole, who can be snatched back to their cells at a moment’s notice.
I think I now understand why this period has come to be known by the repulsive word ‘lockdown’, an American term which describes the punishment of rioting convicts in a penitentiary, by confining them in their cells for long periods. I hate this word, because it does not seem to me to be fitting to describe free people in a free country.
But we are no longer such people, or such a country. We have become muzzled, mouthless, voiceless, humiliated, regimented prisoners, shuffling about at the command of others, stopping when told to stop, moving when told to move, shouted at by jacks-in-office against whom we have no appeal. We are learning, during this induction period, to do what we are told and to become obedient, servile citizens of a new authoritarian State. We are unlearning the old rules of freedom.
The new authoritarian State’s dream has come true thanks to the repulsive word 'lockdown'
Peter Hitchens
Mail on Sunday
We will never get out of this now. It will go on for ever. We will not be free people again. Even when we seem to be free we will be like prisoners on parole, who can be snatched back to their cells at a moment’s notice.
I think I now understand why this period has come to be known by the repulsive word ‘lockdown’, an American term which describes the punishment of rioting convicts in a penitentiary, by confining them in their cells for long periods. I hate this word, because it does not seem to me to be fitting to describe free people in a free country.
But we are no longer such people, or such a country. We have become muzzled, mouthless, voiceless, humiliated, regimented prisoners, shuffling about at the command of others, stopping when told to stop, moving when told to move, shouted at by jacks-in-office against whom we have no appeal. We are learning, during this induction period, to do what we are told and to become obedient, servile citizens of a new authoritarian State. We are unlearning the old rules of freedom.
Another Sign of Europe's Dying Civilization
Eat Bugs: New EU Food Policy
Promotes Less Meat, More ‘Alternative Proteins’
Virginia Hale
Breitbart London
Europeans must move to a “more plant-based diet”, according to new EU food policy, which also revealed the bloc will promote “insect-based proteins and meat substitutes”.
The European Commission’s Farm to Fork (F2F) Strategy for creating a “fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly” food system insists that such a transition “will not happen without a shift in people’s diets”. “Moving to a more plant-based diet with less red and processed meat and with more fruits and vegetables will reduce not only risks of life-threatening diseases, but also the environmental impact of the food system,” asserts the strategy, which was unveiled Wednesday.
In order to promote such a diet, the strategy said research in Europe will focus on “increasing the availability and source of alternative proteins such as plant, microbial, marine, and insect-based proteins and meat substitutes.” A change in eating habits is “critical” to reducing obesity, according to the Commission, which also acknowledges in its F2F Strategy that Europeans want food that is “fresh [and] less processed”.
It is unclear how promoting a move to eat less meat will address these concerns, however, as plant-based meat substitutes are considered to be “ultra-processed” foods, which research has linked to weight gain as well as poor health and early death.
Some activists were disappointed with the strategy, an earlier draft of which reportedly suggested that the Commission would propose to “stop stimulating production or consumption of meat”.
The Good Food Institute Europe (GFI Europe), which lobbies on behalf of the plant-based meat substitute industry, hailed the strategy as a “significant step forward”, claiming so-called alternative proteins “play a critical role in Europe’s transition to a more sustainable, healthy and just food system”.
According to the EU document, the F2F Strategy is “at the heart of” the European Green Deal, the Commission’s “roadmap” to making Europe “the first climate-neutral continent by 2050”.
“It maps a new, sustainable and inclusive growth strategy to boost the economy, improve people’s health and quality of life, care for nature, and leave no one behind,” boasts the unelected EU executive.
Many scientists are sceptical about plans to drastically slash carbon emissions, however, with Cambridge engineering professor Michael Kelly warning that scrapping reliable energy sources such as coal and nuclear in favour of renewables would be an act of “total madness” that would necessarily result in a collapse of living standards.
“In energy terms the current generation of renewable energy technologies alone will not enable a civilized modern society to continue,” the Hughes Medal-decorated physicist wrote, in a 2016 paper which noted that renewables supplied only seven per cent of global electricity needs while “the rate at which fossil fuels are growing is seven times that at which the low carbon energies are growing”.
“The call to decarbonize the global economy by 80 per cent by 2050 can now only be described as glib in my opinion, as the underlying analysis shows it is only possible if we wish to see large parts of the population die from starvation, destitution or violence in the absence of enough low-carbon energy to sustain society,” he warned.
Promotes Less Meat, More ‘Alternative Proteins’
Virginia Hale
Breitbart London
Europeans must move to a “more plant-based diet”, according to new EU food policy, which also revealed the bloc will promote “insect-based proteins and meat substitutes”.
The European Commission’s Farm to Fork (F2F) Strategy for creating a “fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly” food system insists that such a transition “will not happen without a shift in people’s diets”. “Moving to a more plant-based diet with less red and processed meat and with more fruits and vegetables will reduce not only risks of life-threatening diseases, but also the environmental impact of the food system,” asserts the strategy, which was unveiled Wednesday.
In order to promote such a diet, the strategy said research in Europe will focus on “increasing the availability and source of alternative proteins such as plant, microbial, marine, and insect-based proteins and meat substitutes.” A change in eating habits is “critical” to reducing obesity, according to the Commission, which also acknowledges in its F2F Strategy that Europeans want food that is “fresh [and] less processed”.
The Bug Burger
It is unclear how promoting a move to eat less meat will address these concerns, however, as plant-based meat substitutes are considered to be “ultra-processed” foods, which research has linked to weight gain as well as poor health and early death.
Some activists were disappointed with the strategy, an earlier draft of which reportedly suggested that the Commission would propose to “stop stimulating production or consumption of meat”.
The Good Food Institute Europe (GFI Europe), which lobbies on behalf of the plant-based meat substitute industry, hailed the strategy as a “significant step forward”, claiming so-called alternative proteins “play a critical role in Europe’s transition to a more sustainable, healthy and just food system”.
According to the EU document, the F2F Strategy is “at the heart of” the European Green Deal, the Commission’s “roadmap” to making Europe “the first climate-neutral continent by 2050”.
“It maps a new, sustainable and inclusive growth strategy to boost the economy, improve people’s health and quality of life, care for nature, and leave no one behind,” boasts the unelected EU executive.
Many scientists are sceptical about plans to drastically slash carbon emissions, however, with Cambridge engineering professor Michael Kelly warning that scrapping reliable energy sources such as coal and nuclear in favour of renewables would be an act of “total madness” that would necessarily result in a collapse of living standards.
“In energy terms the current generation of renewable energy technologies alone will not enable a civilized modern society to continue,” the Hughes Medal-decorated physicist wrote, in a 2016 paper which noted that renewables supplied only seven per cent of global electricity needs while “the rate at which fossil fuels are growing is seven times that at which the low carbon energies are growing”.
“The call to decarbonize the global economy by 80 per cent by 2050 can now only be described as glib in my opinion, as the underlying analysis shows it is only possible if we wish to see large parts of the population die from starvation, destitution or violence in the absence of enough low-carbon energy to sustain society,” he warned.
Thursday 28 May 2020
"It's All About Me" Says The Atheist
Christians Receive a Back Handed Compliment
Harvard sociologist, Steven Pinker jumped to the heart of the matter. Claiming the high moral ground for atheism, he removed all doubt when he argued that Christianity was a malignant religion.
It took us about ten minutes to stop laughing. What a dumb position to take!
Harvard psychology professor Steven Pinker said Thursday that the push for reopening society from lockdowns comes from Christianity’s “malignant delusion” of belief in an afterlife. Atheists who believe in this life alone are more concerned with health and safety, Professor Pinker suggested in a Tweet, while Christians tend to devalue “actual lives” and live a riskier existence. [Breitbart]Of course Pinker had to disclose the underlying principles of his world view in order to reach such a bizarre conclusion. He has to acknowledge that selfish preoccupation with one's own life and existence is the true and reasonable starting position for atheistic morality. Because of this selfist view he is able to argue that the only ground for true happiness and fulfilment is to go through life with a world-view that reads something like:
Get all you canIn other words, it's all about ME.
Can all you get,
Poison the rest.
Pinker was responding to an article this week in the Washington Post, which examined findings that Democrats take the virus “more seriously” than Republicans and are more willing to support restrictive government edicts in response to the pandemic.Consequently, government edicts can justify all sorts of abuse and neglect of the elderly, the weak, the sick, and the bereft.
But Christian march to the beat of a very different Drummer. Their hope is not to be found in this world, but in the one to come. As a result, Christians are far more caring and concerned about the welfare of others than chaps like Pinker.
Therefore, while we are warned that it profits a man nothing if he gain the whole world and lose himself, the expectation of a new earth must not weaken but rather stimulate our concern for cultivating this one. For here grows the body of a new human family, a body which even now is able to give some kind of foreshadowing of the new age.
Study after study has found that such “theory” is borne out in practice as well, with religious people proving far more generous with their time and money than atheists.
In one of the largest studies of its kind, the massive Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey in 2000 found that religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money and 23 points more likely to volunteer their time.
A Plague In Its Own Right
Trump Derangement Syndrome
By now we are all be familiar with what is known as "Trump Derangement Syndrome" [TDS]. It designates a state of affairs where reflexively anything which President Trump says or does immediately becomes verboten or subject to ridicule.
If, for example, Trump were to say on national TV, "I believe it is important for humans to breathe" a phalanx of dedicated Trump Derangement Syndrome types would mock, ridicule, and reject breathing. In other words whatever Trump says or does, it is is immediately rejected. Well, hyperbolically at least.
What follows is a classic example of TDS First, the story:
Wednesday 27 May 2020
It’s About Time
Thousands Of Churches Are About To Defy Lockdown Orders.
Churchgoers across the country are reasserting their fundamental rights of conscience—rights that too many political leaders have forgotten or denied.
John Daniel Davidson
The Federalist
On Friday, President Trump said churches and houses of worship are “essential” and called on governors nationwide to allow them to open this weekend. If they don’t, Trump said he would “override” governors, citing forthcoming guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In remarks Thursday, the president criticized some governors who have “deemed liquor stores and abortion clinics as essential” but not churches. “It’s not right. So I’m correcting this injustice and calling houses of worship essential.”
Trump is right, but churches are already taking action on their own. This week in Minnesota, thousands of Catholics and Lutherans will gather in their churches in defiance of the governor, whose plan for reopening the state relegates churches and houses of worship to the status of tattoo parlors and hair salons.
It’s about time.
Churchgoers across the country are reasserting their fundamental rights of conscience—rights that too many political leaders have forgotten or denied.
John Daniel Davidson
The Federalist
On Friday, President Trump said churches and houses of worship are “essential” and called on governors nationwide to allow them to open this weekend. If they don’t, Trump said he would “override” governors, citing forthcoming guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In remarks Thursday, the president criticized some governors who have “deemed liquor stores and abortion clinics as essential” but not churches. “It’s not right. So I’m correcting this injustice and calling houses of worship essential.”
Trump is right, but churches are already taking action on their own. This week in Minnesota, thousands of Catholics and Lutherans will gather in their churches in defiance of the governor, whose plan for reopening the state relegates churches and houses of worship to the status of tattoo parlors and hair salons.
It’s about time.
The Spirit of Timothy Lives On . . .
The World is Not my Parish
Matt Scheffer
We quote our heroes for inspiration. Or we sometimes mis-quote them, but nevertheless, still feel inspired. Sometimes the quote of a well-known Christian helps add clarity or meaning to a sermon or Bible study. Maybe it gives us a sense of inspiration so we stick it on our wall, or on a mug, or on Facebook.
“The world is my parish” is one of these quotes. Depending on which biographer you read, the quote either comes from the 18th century evangelist, John Wesley, or from Wesley’s friend and colleague George Whitefield. Either way, the quote is intended to inspire us to see the whole world as needing to hear the proclamation of the gospel, not just our parochial ‘patch’.
For Whitefield and Wesley, this quote meant outdoor preaching, since they were not allowed to preach in established church pulpits (not only because of the chaotic emotional effects displayed by those converted in their gatherings, but because they were not licensed to other churches). So Whitefield (or Wesley’s) response was, I will preach outdoors, since the whole world is my parish.
The quote appears on memes, mugs and inspirational posters. Sometimes it’s hung on church office walls, alongside quotes from the likes of Jim Elliot, or Corrie Ten Boom, etc.
Yet, as inspiring as it sounds, I think it’s wrong. “The world is not my parish”. By all means, yes, let us be passionate for the Great Commission. By all means, let us plant new churches and ‘re-pot’ or revive established churches and ‘do the work of an evangelist’ (2 Tim. 4:5). By all means, yes! But at the same time, the world is not my parish.
As inspiring as it sounds, I think it’s wrong. ‘The world is not my parish’ … my job is to be faithful to the Lord Jesus in the place he has put me, with the gifts he has given me: to serve the people he’s given me to love.
For most of us, the part we have to play in the Great Commission is to be faithful in the place where God has placed us; either in the church or fellowship group we happen to belong to (whether that’s a church or AFES group, etc).
Matt Scheffer
We quote our heroes for inspiration. Or we sometimes mis-quote them, but nevertheless, still feel inspired. Sometimes the quote of a well-known Christian helps add clarity or meaning to a sermon or Bible study. Maybe it gives us a sense of inspiration so we stick it on our wall, or on a mug, or on Facebook.
“The world is my parish” is one of these quotes. Depending on which biographer you read, the quote either comes from the 18th century evangelist, John Wesley, or from Wesley’s friend and colleague George Whitefield. Either way, the quote is intended to inspire us to see the whole world as needing to hear the proclamation of the gospel, not just our parochial ‘patch’.
For Whitefield and Wesley, this quote meant outdoor preaching, since they were not allowed to preach in established church pulpits (not only because of the chaotic emotional effects displayed by those converted in their gatherings, but because they were not licensed to other churches). So Whitefield (or Wesley’s) response was, I will preach outdoors, since the whole world is my parish.
The quote appears on memes, mugs and inspirational posters. Sometimes it’s hung on church office walls, alongside quotes from the likes of Jim Elliot, or Corrie Ten Boom, etc.
Yet, as inspiring as it sounds, I think it’s wrong. “The world is not my parish”. By all means, yes, let us be passionate for the Great Commission. By all means, let us plant new churches and ‘re-pot’ or revive established churches and ‘do the work of an evangelist’ (2 Tim. 4:5). By all means, yes! But at the same time, the world is not my parish.
As inspiring as it sounds, I think it’s wrong. ‘The world is not my parish’ … my job is to be faithful to the Lord Jesus in the place he has put me, with the gifts he has given me: to serve the people he’s given me to love.
For most of us, the part we have to play in the Great Commission is to be faithful in the place where God has placed us; either in the church or fellowship group we happen to belong to (whether that’s a church or AFES group, etc).
Tuesday 26 May 2020
NZ's Disproportionate Response
The Value of a Life
[A guest post by Alwyn Poole. This was reprinted in Kiwiblog. We reproduce it below:]
It is astonishing how quickly key foundations of education and society can become twisted or subverted. A genuine proponent of education advocates important foundations; question everything, critique everything, suggest and evaluate counter scenarios (and other “experts”), ask who gains and who loses from particular actions, attack the argument and not the person. Children, youth and indeed all citizens need to apply these principles to current events and what appears to be deep moral confusion.
Everyone dies. It is maybe the least digestible fact of life but the rate of death in every generation is 100%. I complained about this to my mother once and she placated me by saying that it wouldn’t happen to me. I was 8 years old and, at that stage accepted my immortality. In NZ in 2018 33,225 human-beings died. That is a little over 91 people per day. Apart from reporting on road deaths and murders these deaths, by and large, pass unnoticed except for those close enough to attend the funeral.
In 2020 we have suddenly decided, as a society taking part in a global emergency, that these lives are more important than ever before. We have decided this to the extent that we have destroyed significant sections of the economy, drastically restricted human rights, and allowed a very small sector of government to create edicts without due process or challenge.
[A guest post by Alwyn Poole. This was reprinted in Kiwiblog. We reproduce it below:]
It is astonishing how quickly key foundations of education and society can become twisted or subverted. A genuine proponent of education advocates important foundations; question everything, critique everything, suggest and evaluate counter scenarios (and other “experts”), ask who gains and who loses from particular actions, attack the argument and not the person. Children, youth and indeed all citizens need to apply these principles to current events and what appears to be deep moral confusion.
Everyone dies. It is maybe the least digestible fact of life but the rate of death in every generation is 100%. I complained about this to my mother once and she placated me by saying that it wouldn’t happen to me. I was 8 years old and, at that stage accepted my immortality. In NZ in 2018 33,225 human-beings died. That is a little over 91 people per day. Apart from reporting on road deaths and murders these deaths, by and large, pass unnoticed except for those close enough to attend the funeral.
In 2020 we have suddenly decided, as a society taking part in a global emergency, that these lives are more important than ever before. We have decided this to the extent that we have destroyed significant sections of the economy, drastically restricted human rights, and allowed a very small sector of government to create edicts without due process or challenge.
Dumb and Dumber
Trump Hate Is Making It Harder to Study Hydroxychloroquine
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
Yesterday, I pointed out the potential consequences of having an overwrought, childish, partisan debate over a lifesaving drug that’s used by millions of Americans. Today, I see, Joe Biden is comparing hydroxychloroquine to poison. “It’s like saying maybe if you inject Clorox into your blood it may cure you,” Biden said of Donald Trump’s admission that he takes the drug. “C’mon, man! What is he doing? What in God’s name is he doing?”
Now, I get that Biden thinks it’s cute to merge the myth that Trump wants Americans to inject themselves with bleach and the president’s unproven prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine. It’s worth noting, however, that the presumptive Democratic Party nominee is also now telling Americans — including those who need this low-risk prescribed drug that has been approved for all public use for over 70 years — that taking hydroxychloroquine is tantamount to injecting yourself with bleach.
Listen to this NPR interview with some doctors trying to conduct tests of hydroxychloroquine effectiveness. Dr. John Giles, a rheumatologist at Columbia University, who says that the partisan fight over hydroxychloroquine has made it virtually impossible for him to find people to test the effectiveness of the drug against coronavirus. Why would anyone want to swallow Clorox, right?
“We are hearing now from some participants that the study and the drug feel too political and they just don’t want to participate at all,” says Dr. Christine Johnston at the University of Washington.
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
Yesterday, I pointed out the potential consequences of having an overwrought, childish, partisan debate over a lifesaving drug that’s used by millions of Americans. Today, I see, Joe Biden is comparing hydroxychloroquine to poison. “It’s like saying maybe if you inject Clorox into your blood it may cure you,” Biden said of Donald Trump’s admission that he takes the drug. “C’mon, man! What is he doing? What in God’s name is he doing?”
Now, I get that Biden thinks it’s cute to merge the myth that Trump wants Americans to inject themselves with bleach and the president’s unproven prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine. It’s worth noting, however, that the presumptive Democratic Party nominee is also now telling Americans — including those who need this low-risk prescribed drug that has been approved for all public use for over 70 years — that taking hydroxychloroquine is tantamount to injecting yourself with bleach.
Listen to this NPR interview with some doctors trying to conduct tests of hydroxychloroquine effectiveness. Dr. John Giles, a rheumatologist at Columbia University, who says that the partisan fight over hydroxychloroquine has made it virtually impossible for him to find people to test the effectiveness of the drug against coronavirus. Why would anyone want to swallow Clorox, right?
“We are hearing now from some participants that the study and the drug feel too political and they just don’t want to participate at all,” says Dr. Christine Johnston at the University of Washington.
Monday 25 May 2020
Asinine "Debate"
The Hydroxychloroquine Meltdown
The president claims he’s taking it as a prophylactic. The media met that with hysteria instead of conscientious coverage.
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
President Donald Trump claims that he’s taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventive measure against contracting coronavirus, and that he has taken zinc and antibiotic azithromycin as well.
There’s no consensus that hydroxychloroquine is an effective therapeutic treatment for COVID-19 (early studies have yielded different results, and the NIH recently began a controlled clinical trial). Few people I’ve read argue that it’s a useful prophylactic. Nevertheless, the frenzied and childish reaction to Trump’s championing what amounts to a commonly used prescription drug is more destructive than his annoying habit of bringing it up.
A CNN columnist warns of “the danger in Trump’s decision to self-medicate.” If Trump is taking the drug, it’s been prescribed and presumably he’s being monitored, yet the CNN piece tries to create impression that the president is popping hydroxychloroquine tablets like mints to soothe his anxieties.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer called Trump’s remarks about hydroxychloroquine “dangerous,” though for the general public, the drug itself is no more dangerous than a vast number of pharmaceuticals used every day by millions of Americans to help them live with less pain or to keep them alive.
“Side effects of hydroxychloroquine include paranoia, hallucinations and psychosis,” notes the New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, reading one of the many rare side effects of the drug. Wait until she reads the warning labels on the abortifacients that she wants the government to subsidize.
For that matter, we’re often lectured that killing an unborn baby is a decision made solely by a woman in conjunction with her doctor. Yet taking hydroxychloroquine is apparently a joint decision between a man, his doctor, every Democrat in congress, all the anchors on CNN, and an entire slate of New York Times op-ed columnists.
The president claims he’s taking it as a prophylactic. The media met that with hysteria instead of conscientious coverage.
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
President Donald Trump claims that he’s taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventive measure against contracting coronavirus, and that he has taken zinc and antibiotic azithromycin as well.
There’s no consensus that hydroxychloroquine is an effective therapeutic treatment for COVID-19 (early studies have yielded different results, and the NIH recently began a controlled clinical trial). Few people I’ve read argue that it’s a useful prophylactic. Nevertheless, the frenzied and childish reaction to Trump’s championing what amounts to a commonly used prescription drug is more destructive than his annoying habit of bringing it up.
A CNN columnist warns of “the danger in Trump’s decision to self-medicate.” If Trump is taking the drug, it’s been prescribed and presumably he’s being monitored, yet the CNN piece tries to create impression that the president is popping hydroxychloroquine tablets like mints to soothe his anxieties.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer called Trump’s remarks about hydroxychloroquine “dangerous,” though for the general public, the drug itself is no more dangerous than a vast number of pharmaceuticals used every day by millions of Americans to help them live with less pain or to keep them alive.
“Side effects of hydroxychloroquine include paranoia, hallucinations and psychosis,” notes the New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, reading one of the many rare side effects of the drug. Wait until she reads the warning labels on the abortifacients that she wants the government to subsidize.
For that matter, we’re often lectured that killing an unborn baby is a decision made solely by a woman in conjunction with her doctor. Yet taking hydroxychloroquine is apparently a joint decision between a man, his doctor, every Democrat in congress, all the anchors on CNN, and an entire slate of New York Times op-ed columnists.
EU In A Fit of Pique
UK Slams EU’s ‘Low-Quality’ Deal
No ‘Democratic Country Could Sign’
Victoria Friedman
Breitbart London
In a scathing letter to Brussels bureaucrat Michel Barnier, David Frost criticised the European Union’s offer of a “low-quality trade agreement” which contains provisions that no “democratic country could sign”.
The UK’s chief EU adviser wrote to his Brussels counterpart, Mr Barnier, on Tuesday, calling for the EU to deal with the UK in trade negotiations as a partner on equal terms. He also criticised the bloc for trying to pressure Brexit Britain into accepting worse deal conditions than it had offered other nations around the world in a forensic, four-page breakdown of Europe’s offer.
Mr Frost said that the UK has been clear and consistent in its intentions in seeking a free trade agreement with the European Union. However, he said he found it “perplexing” that Brussels treats the UK as an “unworthy” partner, forced to accept restrictive provisions as a precondition for a deal despite Brussels not making similar demands when negotiating FTAs with countries like Mexico, New Zealand, or South Korea.
No ‘Democratic Country Could Sign’
Victoria Friedman
Breitbart London
In a scathing letter to Brussels bureaucrat Michel Barnier, David Frost criticised the European Union’s offer of a “low-quality trade agreement” which contains provisions that no “democratic country could sign”.
The UK’s chief EU adviser wrote to his Brussels counterpart, Mr Barnier, on Tuesday, calling for the EU to deal with the UK in trade negotiations as a partner on equal terms. He also criticised the bloc for trying to pressure Brexit Britain into accepting worse deal conditions than it had offered other nations around the world in a forensic, four-page breakdown of Europe’s offer.
Mr Frost said that the UK has been clear and consistent in its intentions in seeking a free trade agreement with the European Union. However, he said he found it “perplexing” that Brussels treats the UK as an “unworthy” partner, forced to accept restrictive provisions as a precondition for a deal despite Brussels not making similar demands when negotiating FTAs with countries like Mexico, New Zealand, or South Korea.
Saturday 23 May 2020
Spurious Genderism: Stupid Is As Stupid Does
Hungary Defines Sex as Biological
Media, NGOs Outraged
Virginia Hale
Breitbart News
Activists and the media claim Hungary is being driven “back towards the dark ages” after the country voted to define gender based on biological sex.
According to the latest wave of establishment fury against the central European nation, transgender people will “flee” Hungary or else be driven to suicide by the law, which passed on Tuesday after a 134 to 56 parliamentary vote.
Minister of the Prime Minister’s Office, Gergely Gulyás, had responded to attacks with a letter last month insisting that Hungary “guarantees everybody’s fundamental rights”, adding that the measures relating to gender would ensure “legal clarity in harmony with the constitution”. NGOs and mainstream media outlets characterised the country’s right-wing populist leader, Viktor Orbán, as an “autocrat” in pushing through the legislation, which defines gender as “biological sex based on primary sex characteristics and chromosomes”.
Media, NGOs Outraged
Virginia Hale
Breitbart News
Activists and the media claim Hungary is being driven “back towards the dark ages” after the country voted to define gender based on biological sex.
According to the latest wave of establishment fury against the central European nation, transgender people will “flee” Hungary or else be driven to suicide by the law, which passed on Tuesday after a 134 to 56 parliamentary vote.
Minister of the Prime Minister’s Office, Gergely Gulyás, had responded to attacks with a letter last month insisting that Hungary “guarantees everybody’s fundamental rights”, adding that the measures relating to gender would ensure “legal clarity in harmony with the constitution”. NGOs and mainstream media outlets characterised the country’s right-wing populist leader, Viktor Orbán, as an “autocrat” in pushing through the legislation, which defines gender as “biological sex based on primary sex characteristics and chromosomes”.
"Dumb and Dumber" Taking A Hit
The Tide Is Turning Back
Biological Definitions Of Gender Regain Support
David Marcus
The Federalist
In 2014 Kevin Williamson wrote a column in the Chicago Tribune titled “Laverne Cox Is Not A Woman.” The premise of the piece, focused on the actor, was that trans women are not women but rather individuals who believe they are women. In what was at the time one of the biggest victories of the trans advocacy movement the Tribune retracted the piece for misleading facts and a poor tone. The message had been sent. Saying trans women are not women was forbidden and style guides were changed across the country.
But in the past week or so events in a Connecticut courthouse have ushered in a dramatic change to this rule. Mainstream outlets like the New York Post and Newsweek published pieces explicitly advocating the position that got Williamson’s piece banned six years ago. Both are written by women and both make clear that the authors believe in a biological definition of sex. An article from February in the Wall Street Journal also took this stance even earlier. What is emerging is a more concerted effort to defend biological gender in the news media space.
This is really pretty remarkable. Progressives and trans advocates had every reason to believe that the arc of history could only move in their direction. After all, once defining gender based on biology became offensive, even a slur, how could it ever make its way back into polite society? But what they didn’t understand was just how massive the gap was between their beliefs about the nature of gender and those of the American people.
What was always bound to happen, and was predicted for years in these pages, was that public policy was going to intersect with the fiction that men can become women in entirely untenable ways.
Biological Definitions Of Gender Regain Support
David Marcus
The Federalist
In 2014 Kevin Williamson wrote a column in the Chicago Tribune titled “Laverne Cox Is Not A Woman.” The premise of the piece, focused on the actor, was that trans women are not women but rather individuals who believe they are women. In what was at the time one of the biggest victories of the trans advocacy movement the Tribune retracted the piece for misleading facts and a poor tone. The message had been sent. Saying trans women are not women was forbidden and style guides were changed across the country.
But in the past week or so events in a Connecticut courthouse have ushered in a dramatic change to this rule. Mainstream outlets like the New York Post and Newsweek published pieces explicitly advocating the position that got Williamson’s piece banned six years ago. Both are written by women and both make clear that the authors believe in a biological definition of sex. An article from February in the Wall Street Journal also took this stance even earlier. What is emerging is a more concerted effort to defend biological gender in the news media space.
This is really pretty remarkable. Progressives and trans advocates had every reason to believe that the arc of history could only move in their direction. After all, once defining gender based on biology became offensive, even a slur, how could it ever make its way back into polite society? But what they didn’t understand was just how massive the gap was between their beliefs about the nature of gender and those of the American people.
What was always bound to happen, and was predicted for years in these pages, was that public policy was going to intersect with the fiction that men can become women in entirely untenable ways.
Friday 22 May 2020
The Truth Versus The Lie
Not Very Much Feck At All
Douglas Wilson
Blog & Mablog
Introduction
What have we learned in the COVID panic? Or, closer to the point, what have some of us learned, and what should the rest of us be learning shortly?
We have learned that the establishment is bankrupt. We have seen that the scientific establishment is bankrupt. The public health system is bankrupt. The media is bankrupt. The educational system is bankrupt. Our politicians are bankrupt. The end result is that the general public has been fed the most shameless lies, and (thus far) are still largely willing to have it so.
There was a time, early on, when the lies had at least a veneer of plausibility, but now, the whole mendacious scam is out in the open, naked and covered with goose bumps. The falsehoods are now so apparent that we are in a position to count the goose bumps.
The stupidity has grown to epic proportions, and I believe that as time goes on, we will discover that we are just now beginning to catch a glimpse of merely the half of it.
It is time to drop all references to coronavirus or COVID-19, but not because the virus was imaginary. It was really there, but it was not really doing what the authorities said it was going to do. Rather, we should start referring to this tangled series of events as simply the Panic of 2020. What set everybody off is not the central item of interest right now. The main thing is for us to recognize that it was in fact an irrational panic, and not an apocalyptic pandemic. What set the chain of unreason off in the first place is a matter of lesser importance. This is because the real story is found in why we were all so spookable — when a people are that spookable, pretty much anything might do it.
A Climate of Lies
I think we all understand what goes into the making of an individual lie. Someone does something he ought not to have done, the voice of authority asks an awkward question, and the easiest way out appears to be that of lying about it. But what are the ingredients when we find ourselves living in a climate of lies? When lying appears to be as natural as eating, or sleeping, or walking? When lies and lying are the very air we breathe?
Douglas Wilson
Blog & Mablog
Introduction
What have we learned in the COVID panic? Or, closer to the point, what have some of us learned, and what should the rest of us be learning shortly?
We have learned that the establishment is bankrupt. We have seen that the scientific establishment is bankrupt. The public health system is bankrupt. The media is bankrupt. The educational system is bankrupt. Our politicians are bankrupt. The end result is that the general public has been fed the most shameless lies, and (thus far) are still largely willing to have it so.
There was a time, early on, when the lies had at least a veneer of plausibility, but now, the whole mendacious scam is out in the open, naked and covered with goose bumps. The falsehoods are now so apparent that we are in a position to count the goose bumps.
The stupidity has grown to epic proportions, and I believe that as time goes on, we will discover that we are just now beginning to catch a glimpse of merely the half of it.
It is time to drop all references to coronavirus or COVID-19, but not because the virus was imaginary. It was really there, but it was not really doing what the authorities said it was going to do. Rather, we should start referring to this tangled series of events as simply the Panic of 2020. What set everybody off is not the central item of interest right now. The main thing is for us to recognize that it was in fact an irrational panic, and not an apocalyptic pandemic. What set the chain of unreason off in the first place is a matter of lesser importance. This is because the real story is found in why we were all so spookable — when a people are that spookable, pretty much anything might do it.
A Climate of Lies
I think we all understand what goes into the making of an individual lie. Someone does something he ought not to have done, the voice of authority asks an awkward question, and the easiest way out appears to be that of lying about it. But what are the ingredients when we find ourselves living in a climate of lies? When lying appears to be as natural as eating, or sleeping, or walking? When lies and lying are the very air we breathe?
The Curse of Rising National Debt
Rishi's "Free Furlough" Billions
Just a Giant Payday Loan in YOUR Name
Peter Hitchens
Mail on Sunday
Think of Chancellor Rishi Sunak as a smiling salesman of payday loans, and you will begin to get the picture. ‘Yes, of course you can have the money. Happy to help!’ he says as he hands over the wads of notes.
But it will not be the cheery face of Mr Sunak that you see when the time comes for repayment, but the hard and relentless agents of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.
We cannot know the exact details of what lies ahead, though I would not rule out a sudden raid on savings as well as severe local and national taxation, direct and indirect, and inflation of the currency.
And don’t think that the repayment boys will only be going after those who have accepted the various forms of government handout during the throttling of the economy. Even if you have yourself kept working and stayed above water, they’ll still be after you.
It is time the media began to ask Mr Sunak exactly when he plans to announce his first emergency budget (the first of many, I fancy) to a stunned nation. As my much-esteemed Daily Mail colleague Alex Brummer, a man who understands the national finances better than most, said last week: ‘The hugely expensive decision to turn an emergency measure, designed to see UK Plc through the peak of Covid-19, into a commitment that could stretch to six months suggests a public health crisis and economic meltdown far worse than first imagined.’
Just a Giant Payday Loan in YOUR Name
Peter Hitchens
Mail on Sunday
Think of Chancellor Rishi Sunak as a smiling salesman of payday loans, and you will begin to get the picture. ‘Yes, of course you can have the money. Happy to help!’ he says as he hands over the wads of notes.
But it will not be the cheery face of Mr Sunak that you see when the time comes for repayment, but the hard and relentless agents of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.
We cannot know the exact details of what lies ahead, though I would not rule out a sudden raid on savings as well as severe local and national taxation, direct and indirect, and inflation of the currency.
And don’t think that the repayment boys will only be going after those who have accepted the various forms of government handout during the throttling of the economy. Even if you have yourself kept working and stayed above water, they’ll still be after you.
It is time the media began to ask Mr Sunak exactly when he plans to announce his first emergency budget (the first of many, I fancy) to a stunned nation. As my much-esteemed Daily Mail colleague Alex Brummer, a man who understands the national finances better than most, said last week: ‘The hugely expensive decision to turn an emergency measure, designed to see UK Plc through the peak of Covid-19, into a commitment that could stretch to six months suggests a public health crisis and economic meltdown far worse than first imagined.’
Thursday 21 May 2020
More Idiocy From UK Police
Police Hunt Driver For Sexual Assault
Kissed Elderly Woman on Cheek
Jack Montgomery
Breitbart London
Derbyshire Police are trying to hunt down a lorry driver who gave a woman in her seventies a thank-you kiss on the cheek after she helped guide his vehicle out from under a bridge.
The police force, which drew criticism in recent months for deploying a special drone team to harass lone ramblers and dog-walkers for taking socially-distanced exercise in the middle of nowhere, tweeted that the gesture “would be classed as a sexual assault as the woman did not [ask] the man to kiss her on the cheek.”
“We want to speak to anyone who was in the area at the time and may be able to help our enquiries into the incident. Of particular interest are any drivers who were in the area at the time and may have captured the lorry on dashcam,” they wrote in an online appeal for information — now deleted, as a result of the public derision which they received.
“We issued an appeal for information this morning after a woman was kissed on the cheek in an unwanted gesture from a man she did not know,” the force said in a statement quoted by the Telegraph. “The social media post drew a significant number of comments that were counterproductive to the nature of the appeal and as a result, the decision was made to remove it,” they confirmed.
They were clear that they have not given up the hunt for the driver, however, adding: “It is important to note that people with information related to the incident can still get in touch with us if they can help.”
Derbyshire Police are alleged to have been less zealous in their pursuit of other criminals, such as “Asian” grooming gang rapists — with a 2011 report by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) suggesting that their crimes were not properly investigated.
Kissed Elderly Woman on Cheek
Jack Montgomery
Breitbart London
Derbyshire Police are trying to hunt down a lorry driver who gave a woman in her seventies a thank-you kiss on the cheek after she helped guide his vehicle out from under a bridge.
The police force, which drew criticism in recent months for deploying a special drone team to harass lone ramblers and dog-walkers for taking socially-distanced exercise in the middle of nowhere, tweeted that the gesture “would be classed as a sexual assault as the woman did not [ask] the man to kiss her on the cheek.”
“We want to speak to anyone who was in the area at the time and may be able to help our enquiries into the incident. Of particular interest are any drivers who were in the area at the time and may have captured the lorry on dashcam,” they wrote in an online appeal for information — now deleted, as a result of the public derision which they received.
“We issued an appeal for information this morning after a woman was kissed on the cheek in an unwanted gesture from a man she did not know,” the force said in a statement quoted by the Telegraph. “The social media post drew a significant number of comments that were counterproductive to the nature of the appeal and as a result, the decision was made to remove it,” they confirmed.
They were clear that they have not given up the hunt for the driver, however, adding: “It is important to note that people with information related to the incident can still get in touch with us if they can help.”
Derbyshire Police are alleged to have been less zealous in their pursuit of other criminals, such as “Asian” grooming gang rapists — with a 2011 report by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) suggesting that their crimes were not properly investigated.
Britain At Its Worst
At the Anti-Lockdown Rally I Saw the Best – and Worst – of Britain
James Delingpole
Breitbart London
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
That’s how it felt at the anti-lockdown rally in Hyde Park, London, yesterday, where I was threatened with a fine and arrest for the crime of doing my job. It’s also where I got to see Britain at its best – and worst.
There weren’t many protestors but those who were made me proud to be British. We were a very mixed crowd, very representative of the melting pot that London has become – and definitely considerably less white and middle class than the crowd you’d find at an Extinction Rebellion rally.
I met a black working-class couple who were both bus drivers; several smartly dressed, well-spoken elderly people; an American former US diplomat and former Democrat voter; a very distressed French-sounding girl distraught that she’d been harassed by police simply for remaining in the same area for more than 45 minutes; a woman who had grown up in 70s Czechoslavakia and recognised the symptoms of Communism all too easily. There were anti-vaxxers, yes, and people who felt that all the world’s current ills could be traced back to Bill Gates, yes. But mostly this was a rally about freedom, where everyone present could not quite believe just how easily so many British people had surrendered willingly to the most flagrant assault on liberty in centuries.
This ought not to be a weird, eccentric thing to want to protest.
James Delingpole
Breitbart London
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
That’s how it felt at the anti-lockdown rally in Hyde Park, London, yesterday, where I was threatened with a fine and arrest for the crime of doing my job. It’s also where I got to see Britain at its best – and worst.
There weren’t many protestors but those who were made me proud to be British. We were a very mixed crowd, very representative of the melting pot that London has become – and definitely considerably less white and middle class than the crowd you’d find at an Extinction Rebellion rally.
I met a black working-class couple who were both bus drivers; several smartly dressed, well-spoken elderly people; an American former US diplomat and former Democrat voter; a very distressed French-sounding girl distraught that she’d been harassed by police simply for remaining in the same area for more than 45 minutes; a woman who had grown up in 70s Czechoslavakia and recognised the symptoms of Communism all too easily. There were anti-vaxxers, yes, and people who felt that all the world’s current ills could be traced back to Bill Gates, yes. But mostly this was a rally about freedom, where everyone present could not quite believe just how easily so many British people had surrendered willingly to the most flagrant assault on liberty in centuries.
This ought not to be a weird, eccentric thing to want to protest.
Wednesday 20 May 2020
Gathering Together Is Essential To The Gospel
The Whole Truth
Douglas Wilson
"As the people of God, we are being gathered. But we cannot be gathered without being gathered together. And once we are gathered together, we face the glorious calling of life together. But in order to maintain this, we have to keep emphasizing the basics—gospel, love, forgiveness, truth. And the fact is that in the time of the coronavirus scare, these truths about koinonia must be prioritized by us, and not placed on the back burner.
"One of the things that has happened over the last couple of months is that we have started to accept some unbiblical definitions of words like "essential". The only way to say that our gathering, our worship, our singing, is unessential is by saying that the church is unessential.
"We cannot invite Christ to accompany us without inviting His bride to accompany Him."
Douglas Wilson
"As the people of God, we are being gathered. But we cannot be gathered without being gathered together. And once we are gathered together, we face the glorious calling of life together. But in order to maintain this, we have to keep emphasizing the basics—gospel, love, forgiveness, truth. And the fact is that in the time of the coronavirus scare, these truths about koinonia must be prioritized by us, and not placed on the back burner.
"One of the things that has happened over the last couple of months is that we have started to accept some unbiblical definitions of words like "essential". The only way to say that our gathering, our worship, our singing, is unessential is by saying that the church is unessential.
"We cannot invite Christ to accompany us without inviting His bride to accompany Him."
The Church Punished By Inconsistent, Prejudiced Politicians
Invercargill Reverend Calls For Ability to Worship Together
Damian Rowe
Stuff
First Presbyterian Church Reverend Nyalle Paris says people should now be able to worship in churches together. Under Covid-19 Alert Level 2, the Government has restricted public gatherings of groups larger than 10 people, which will reviewed by Cabinet on May 25.
However, cinemas, bars, restaurants and shops can operate and earlier this week the Government raised the limit of people able to attend funerals. Rev Paris said while the pandemic meant people were living in unprecedented times there had been no new coronavirus cases in the Southern District Health Board catchment area for weeks and it was time to allow some form of worship.
It seemed ironic that cinemas, cafés, bars and schools could open but the church could not, Rev Paris said. It was also against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights regarding the freedom to religion, he said.
Damian Rowe
Stuff
First Presbyterian Church Reverend Nyalle Paris says people should now be able to worship in churches together. Under Covid-19 Alert Level 2, the Government has restricted public gatherings of groups larger than 10 people, which will reviewed by Cabinet on May 25.
However, cinemas, bars, restaurants and shops can operate and earlier this week the Government raised the limit of people able to attend funerals. Rev Paris said while the pandemic meant people were living in unprecedented times there had been no new coronavirus cases in the Southern District Health Board catchment area for weeks and it was time to allow some form of worship.
It seemed ironic that cinemas, cafés, bars and schools could open but the church could not, Rev Paris said. It was also against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights regarding the freedom to religion, he said.
Tuesday 19 May 2020
Roiling and Boiling in the UK
Going Through the Motions
Has our mad mass house arrest during Covid-19 saved even a single life?
Peter Hitchens
Daily Mail
We will not escape from this misery until the Government has been forced to admit that it made a foolish mistake and over-reacted wildly to Covid-19. The Prime Minister is like a man who sets fire to his own pyjamas, while he is wearing them, to cure himself of hiccups. Now he stands naked and scorched, as his house burns around him, and exults that his hiccups have indeed gone away. This is what I mean by getting things out of proportion.
Above all, he must stop pretending that his actions saved us from deaths that never happened, and people must stop believing this evidence-free bilge. Till that moment comes, months and perhaps years of costly, painful stupidity will follow.
The belief that the Panic Policy worked means it can never fully end. If, and when, you go back to your job – if you still have a job – you will be compelled to abide by ludicrous, impractical rules. You will be forced to wear pointless muzzles on trains and buses. Normal life will be virtually impossible. Previously simple actions will be endlessly complicated and expensive. And while this farce continues, businesses will continue to close and jobs continue to vanish, visiting misery and sickness on millions.
I have seen this before in the old Communist world, a mad, fixed idea pursued by dense men relentlessly and without opposition or thought, until the whole thing collapses or explodes. Now I see it here.
Has our mad mass house arrest during Covid-19 saved even a single life?
Peter Hitchens
Daily Mail
We will not escape from this misery until the Government has been forced to admit that it made a foolish mistake and over-reacted wildly to Covid-19. The Prime Minister is like a man who sets fire to his own pyjamas, while he is wearing them, to cure himself of hiccups. Now he stands naked and scorched, as his house burns around him, and exults that his hiccups have indeed gone away. This is what I mean by getting things out of proportion.
Above all, he must stop pretending that his actions saved us from deaths that never happened, and people must stop believing this evidence-free bilge. Till that moment comes, months and perhaps years of costly, painful stupidity will follow.
The belief that the Panic Policy worked means it can never fully end. If, and when, you go back to your job – if you still have a job – you will be compelled to abide by ludicrous, impractical rules. You will be forced to wear pointless muzzles on trains and buses. Normal life will be virtually impossible. Previously simple actions will be endlessly complicated and expensive. And while this farce continues, businesses will continue to close and jobs continue to vanish, visiting misery and sickness on millions.
I have seen this before in the old Communist world, a mad, fixed idea pursued by dense men relentlessly and without opposition or thought, until the whole thing collapses or explodes. Now I see it here.
Bilateral Bullying Called Out
Australian Union Wants Global Push Back Against Chinese Communist Party
Simon Kent
Breitbart London
The traditionally left-wing Australian Workers’ Union (AWU) has put partisan politics to one side and joined calls for China’s efforts at global supremacy to be defeated. It wants a “trade NATO” bloc powerful enough to take on “China’s preferred approach of bilateral bullying” as a preferred means of keeping free trade a reality.
AWU National Secretary Daniel Walton has sent a letter to Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison urging him to not capitulate to the Communist state’s threats of trade retaliation over the coronavirus pandemic, telling the conservative coalition leader the union is backing him.
“The integrity of Australia’s trading regime is paramount to sovereignty,” Walton wrote. “We note with concern the pressure being placed upon the Australian government with respect to the integrity of its trade regime.”
The letter comes after after China targeted Australia’s beef and barley producers this week before threatening to cut off Australia’s $63 billion iron ore export pipeline to Beijing following the Morrison Government’s calls for an international inquiry into the origins of the deadly coronavirus.
The AWU, which was founded in the 1880s and has over 100,000 members, says Australia must stand firm against the Chinese government. “Australia should resist any attempts to be bullied,” Walton’s letter continued, as News.com reports. “It is critical the Australian government holds its nerve against such pressure and enforces its international and domestic rights.”
The AWU show of public support for the Australian government came within hours of China slapping an import ban on four Australian abattoirs in an escalation of Beijing’s warning of a widening consumer boycott in retaliation for Canberra’s push for an independent coronavirus probe.
Simon Kent
Breitbart London
The traditionally left-wing Australian Workers’ Union (AWU) has put partisan politics to one side and joined calls for China’s efforts at global supremacy to be defeated. It wants a “trade NATO” bloc powerful enough to take on “China’s preferred approach of bilateral bullying” as a preferred means of keeping free trade a reality.
AWU National Secretary Daniel Walton has sent a letter to Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison urging him to not capitulate to the Communist state’s threats of trade retaliation over the coronavirus pandemic, telling the conservative coalition leader the union is backing him.
“The integrity of Australia’s trading regime is paramount to sovereignty,” Walton wrote. “We note with concern the pressure being placed upon the Australian government with respect to the integrity of its trade regime.”
The letter comes after after China targeted Australia’s beef and barley producers this week before threatening to cut off Australia’s $63 billion iron ore export pipeline to Beijing following the Morrison Government’s calls for an international inquiry into the origins of the deadly coronavirus.
The AWU, which was founded in the 1880s and has over 100,000 members, says Australia must stand firm against the Chinese government. “Australia should resist any attempts to be bullied,” Walton’s letter continued, as News.com reports. “It is critical the Australian government holds its nerve against such pressure and enforces its international and domestic rights.”
The AWU show of public support for the Australian government came within hours of China slapping an import ban on four Australian abattoirs in an escalation of Beijing’s warning of a widening consumer boycott in retaliation for Canberra’s push for an independent coronavirus probe.
Monday 18 May 2020
The Biggest Political Scandal Of Our Time
‘Obamagate’ Isn’t A Conspiracy Theory, It’s An Actual Conspiracy
And the media know it.
John Daniel Davidson
The Federalist
When former president Barack Obama told supporters last week that the Justice Department’s decision to drop the case against former White House National Security Adviser Mike Flynn is a “threat to the rule of law,” he was relying wholly on the fiction, willingly propagated for years by a pliant media, that the Russia-Trump collusion probe launched by his administration was lawful and legitimate.
But of course it wasn’t. A string of recently released documents have confirmed that the entire Russia-Trump investigation, which eventually entrapped Flynn and forced then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself, was an unprecedented abuse of power that amounted to organized effort by the Obama administration to nullify the results of the 2016 presidential election. It was in effect an attempted coup.
If you haven’t picked that up from the news media, it’s not your fault. Instead of grappling with the implications of newly released details about what Obama officials were doing to undermine the incoming Trump administration during the transition, the mainstream media have fixated on Trump’s use of the term “Obamagate,” dismissing it as a conspiracy theory.
A Brief History of the Flynn Case
This is to be expected. For years now the media have done everything they can to push the Trump-Russia collusion hoax—even after a years-long special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller turned up nothing—using the complexity of the scheme to hide the greatest political scandal of our time in plain sight.
And the media know it.
John Daniel Davidson
The Federalist
When former president Barack Obama told supporters last week that the Justice Department’s decision to drop the case against former White House National Security Adviser Mike Flynn is a “threat to the rule of law,” he was relying wholly on the fiction, willingly propagated for years by a pliant media, that the Russia-Trump collusion probe launched by his administration was lawful and legitimate.
But of course it wasn’t. A string of recently released documents have confirmed that the entire Russia-Trump investigation, which eventually entrapped Flynn and forced then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself, was an unprecedented abuse of power that amounted to organized effort by the Obama administration to nullify the results of the 2016 presidential election. It was in effect an attempted coup.
If you haven’t picked that up from the news media, it’s not your fault. Instead of grappling with the implications of newly released details about what Obama officials were doing to undermine the incoming Trump administration during the transition, the mainstream media have fixated on Trump’s use of the term “Obamagate,” dismissing it as a conspiracy theory.
A Brief History of the Flynn Case
This is to be expected. For years now the media have done everything they can to push the Trump-Russia collusion hoax—even after a years-long special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller turned up nothing—using the complexity of the scheme to hide the greatest political scandal of our time in plain sight.
New Zealand's Future
Mind Altering Debt Enslavement
Here is something to gladden your day. It's what we all wanted--gazillions of public debt, growing by the second.
There is only one target to blame: the New Zealand Government of 2020, headed by the Right Honourable Ms Ardern. Here is a piece published in Stuff.
Here is something to gladden your day. It's what we all wanted--gazillions of public debt, growing by the second.
There is only one target to blame: the New Zealand Government of 2020, headed by the Right Honourable Ms Ardern. Here is a piece published in Stuff.
Much More Debt
If there is not enough revenue to cover the increased spending, how will the Government cover year after year of deficits? Debt. Much more debt.
Just like cash ordinary New Zealanders borrow from a bank, the debt the Government takes on is real. It has to be paid back.
Although somewhat crude, it is possible to roughly show how quickly the debt is climbing.
The debt clock above is calculated by taking the known net debt value at July 1 2019, and the projected net debt value at June 30 2021. The debt clock shows how the debt would be rising between those two values if it increased at an even rate over that time.
It suggests that every second, $1137.64 is added to New Zealand’s public debt until it reaches $129.5 billion in June 2021.
Andy Fyers, Senior Data Journalist, Stuff
Saturday 16 May 2020
Well Beyond the "Conspiracy" Charge
Obamagate Is Not a Conspiracy Theory
A Corrupt Presidency And Its Useful Idiots
David Harsanyi
National Review Online
There’s no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that Obama administration officials were corrupt in their handling of the Trump–Russia investigation.
Those sharing #Obamagate hashtags on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.
Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Obama’s only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the DOJ withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, actually — were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors.
A Corrupt Presidency And Its Useful Idiots
David Harsanyi
National Review Online
There’s no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that Obama administration officials were corrupt in their handling of the Trump–Russia investigation.
Those sharing #Obamagate hashtags on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.
Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Obama’s only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the DOJ withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, actually — were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors.
Worship And Its Detractors
Keeping The Right Perspective
Our secularist overlords, pagan to the core, have no regard, let alone respect, for Christian public worship. According to our government's moral abacus, shopping at a mall amidst hundreds of fellow consumers, is close to the sacrosanct. But if more than ten gather to worship they are Verboten.
This does not make us angry. We Christians can easily work around this. After all, the promise of our Lord remains firm: "where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst" (Matthew 18:20)
We also realise that the run of the mill secularist politician is largely ignorant of spiritual realities. For most, their awakening to these realities must await their passing in this life into the world to come.
Luke 16:19-31 English Standard Version (ESV)So, let us press on. The government may hold us in contempt, but our Lord does not. And that, dear friends, makes all the difference in the world--at least to us.
“There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’ And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house— for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”
Friday 15 May 2020
Weaponised Expectorate
London Railway Worker Dies
'Infected’ Man Spat in Her Face
Kurt Zindulka
Breitbart London
A 47-year-old mother died weeks after a man who claimed to have the Chinese coronavirus spat and coughed at her while she was working at a railway station in London.
On March 22, Belly Mujinga, a railway ticket office worker, was assaulted alongside her colleague by a man while the two were on duty at London Victoria station. The two women fell ill with symptoms of the coronavirus days after the attack.
Describing the horrific attack, her husband, Lusamba Gode Katalay said per ITV: “The man asked her what she was doing, why she was there, and she said they were working. The man said he had the virus and spat on them. They reported it to their supervisor. Belly came home and told me everything.”
Mujinga was hospitalised on April 2 and was put on a ventilator, yet tragically died three days after being admitted to the hospital.
'Infected’ Man Spat in Her Face
Kurt Zindulka
Breitbart London
A 47-year-old mother died weeks after a man who claimed to have the Chinese coronavirus spat and coughed at her while she was working at a railway station in London.
On March 22, Belly Mujinga, a railway ticket office worker, was assaulted alongside her colleague by a man while the two were on duty at London Victoria station. The two women fell ill with symptoms of the coronavirus days after the attack.
Describing the horrific attack, her husband, Lusamba Gode Katalay said per ITV: “The man asked her what she was doing, why she was there, and she said they were working. The man said he had the virus and spat on them. They reported it to their supervisor. Belly came home and told me everything.”
Mujinga was hospitalised on April 2 and was put on a ventilator, yet tragically died three days after being admitted to the hospital.
The Socialists Display of Arrogance is a "Tell"
Are These the First Signs?
Third Term Arrogance From a First Term Government?
Tracy Watkins
Sunday Star Times
Finance Minister Grant Robertson's budget this week will loom over generations to come; it's no exaggeration to say it's the most important budget in decades. There will be intense debate about whether he has got it right; so it's unfortunate that as we head into budget week the government is exhibiting premature signs of the affliction known as third-termitis.
That was most evident in the emergence of a leaked memo this week in which ministers' offices were advised not to waste any time defending themselves to the media - not because they had anything much to hide but because (to paraphrase) people love us anyway, so why bother?
It's the assumption behind that advice that is so alarming; it speaks of supreme confidence at the moment that this government can do no wrong in the eyes of the public.
And to a point they're right; the backlash to any criticism of Jacinda Ardern or her Government in the current environment is a constant weight on the media's shoulders.
Third Term Arrogance From a First Term Government?
Tracy Watkins
Sunday Star Times
Finance Minister Grant Robertson's budget this week will loom over generations to come; it's no exaggeration to say it's the most important budget in decades. There will be intense debate about whether he has got it right; so it's unfortunate that as we head into budget week the government is exhibiting premature signs of the affliction known as third-termitis.
That was most evident in the emergence of a leaked memo this week in which ministers' offices were advised not to waste any time defending themselves to the media - not because they had anything much to hide but because (to paraphrase) people love us anyway, so why bother?
It's the assumption behind that advice that is so alarming; it speaks of supreme confidence at the moment that this government can do no wrong in the eyes of the public.
And to a point they're right; the backlash to any criticism of Jacinda Ardern or her Government in the current environment is a constant weight on the media's shoulders.
Thursday 14 May 2020
Facile Discrimination By Government Body
Ignorant UK Education Office
Argues Christians Should Limit Their Beliefs to Church
Dr Thomas Williams
Breitbart London
The United Kingdom’s Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted) argued before the High Court that Christian groups should not allow their religious beliefs to influence their professional activities.
After an inspection and review in March 2019, Ofsted, a non-ministerial department of the British government, downgraded the Christian-run Cornerstone Adoption and Fostering Service from “good” to “requires improvement” because it only places children with married Evangelical Christian couples.
Challenged by Cornerstone before the High Court, Ofsted lawyer Sir James Eadie said that Ofsted “does not prevent Cornerstone and their carers manifesting their religious beliefs as they wish – outside the professional sphere,” adding that fostering “is essentially a secular act.”
Argues Christians Should Limit Their Beliefs to Church
Dr Thomas Williams
Breitbart London
The United Kingdom’s Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted) argued before the High Court that Christian groups should not allow their religious beliefs to influence their professional activities.
After an inspection and review in March 2019, Ofsted, a non-ministerial department of the British government, downgraded the Christian-run Cornerstone Adoption and Fostering Service from “good” to “requires improvement” because it only places children with married Evangelical Christian couples.
Challenged by Cornerstone before the High Court, Ofsted lawyer Sir James Eadie said that Ofsted “does not prevent Cornerstone and their carers manifesting their religious beliefs as they wish – outside the professional sphere,” adding that fostering “is essentially a secular act.”
Women Must Be Believed--Except This One!
Democrats’ Desperation about Tara Reade Is Growing. So Is Their Hypocrisy.
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
Sufficient evidence that Joe Biden somehow mistreated Tara Reade has emerged for the double standard to become obvious.
There aren’t a ton of synonyms for the word “hypocrisy.” I’ve become aware of this problem ever since I began writing about the Tara Reade–Joe Biden situation. I keep gravitating towards phrases such as “despicable hypocrisy,” or “partisan hypocrisy,” or “unconscionable hypocrisy,” but you can only go to the well so often. Really, though, I’m not sure how else to describe the actions of someone like Senator Dianne Feinstein.
You might recall that it was Feinstein, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who withheld Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh from the Senate so that it could not be properly vetted, in a last-ditch effort to sink the nomination.
Feinstein knew that Ford’s credibility was brittle — the alleged victim could not tell us where or when the attack occurred, hadn’t mentioned Kavanugh’s name to anyone for over 30 years, and offered nothing approaching a contemporaneous witness.
At first, Feinstein did not want to provide Ford’s name, or a place or time of the alleged attack, or allow the accused to see any evidence against him, denying him the ability to answer the charges. . . .
When finally asked about Reade yesterday, Feinstein responded: “And I don’t know this person at all who has made the allegations. She came out of nowhere. Where has she been all these years? He was vice president.” To put this in perspective, when Ford came forward “out of nowhere,” Feinstein said: “Victims must be able to come forward only when they are ready.” [Emphasis, ours]
What’s changed?
During the Kavanaugh hearings Feinstein noted that “sharing an experience involving sexual assault — particularly when it involves a politically connected man with influence, authority and power — is extraordinarily difficult.” Is Biden not a politically connected man with influence, authority, and power? Feinstein is now arguing the opposite: She is saying we should dismiss Reade’s allegations because she failed to come forward against a powerful man earlier.
By David Harsanyi
National Review Online
Sufficient evidence that Joe Biden somehow mistreated Tara Reade has emerged for the double standard to become obvious.
There aren’t a ton of synonyms for the word “hypocrisy.” I’ve become aware of this problem ever since I began writing about the Tara Reade–Joe Biden situation. I keep gravitating towards phrases such as “despicable hypocrisy,” or “partisan hypocrisy,” or “unconscionable hypocrisy,” but you can only go to the well so often. Really, though, I’m not sure how else to describe the actions of someone like Senator Dianne Feinstein.
You might recall that it was Feinstein, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, who withheld Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh from the Senate so that it could not be properly vetted, in a last-ditch effort to sink the nomination.
Feinstein knew that Ford’s credibility was brittle — the alleged victim could not tell us where or when the attack occurred, hadn’t mentioned Kavanugh’s name to anyone for over 30 years, and offered nothing approaching a contemporaneous witness.
At first, Feinstein did not want to provide Ford’s name, or a place or time of the alleged attack, or allow the accused to see any evidence against him, denying him the ability to answer the charges. . . .
When finally asked about Reade yesterday, Feinstein responded: “And I don’t know this person at all who has made the allegations. She came out of nowhere. Where has she been all these years? He was vice president.” To put this in perspective, when Ford came forward “out of nowhere,” Feinstein said: “Victims must be able to come forward only when they are ready.” [Emphasis, ours]
What’s changed?
During the Kavanaugh hearings Feinstein noted that “sharing an experience involving sexual assault — particularly when it involves a politically connected man with influence, authority and power — is extraordinarily difficult.” Is Biden not a politically connected man with influence, authority, and power? Feinstein is now arguing the opposite: She is saying we should dismiss Reade’s allegations because she failed to come forward against a powerful man earlier.
Wednesday 13 May 2020
Secularistic Government Stomps Down on Churches
Covid 19 Coronavirus: Parties Clash Over Funerals
Jacinda Ardern is like 'Muldoon with slogans', say National Party
Derek Cheng
NZ Herald
Political consensus in the fight against Covid-19 is on the verge of falling apart, with the Opposition slamming the Government for its "inhumane" limit on funeral and religious gatherings under alert level 2. One senior National MP last night described Jacinda Ardern as being like "Muldoon with slogans".
But Ardern has defended the 10-person limit at funerals because of public health concerns, citing mass gatherings at services overseas that had led to new coronavirus outbreaks. Those concerns increased for funerals and tangi, she said, because of people's tendencies to hug each other for comfort when they are grieving.
National Party leader Simon Bridges said today it was time Kiwis were treated like adults and trusted to do the right thing. "It's not just unkind. it's inhumane. If you can socially distance at a movie theatre with 99 other people you can do the same at a funeral or a church," Bridges told Mike Hosking on Newstalk ZB.
Jacinda Ardern is like 'Muldoon with slogans', say National Party
Derek Cheng
NZ Herald
Political consensus in the fight against Covid-19 is on the verge of falling apart, with the Opposition slamming the Government for its "inhumane" limit on funeral and religious gatherings under alert level 2. One senior National MP last night described Jacinda Ardern as being like "Muldoon with slogans".
But Ardern has defended the 10-person limit at funerals because of public health concerns, citing mass gatherings at services overseas that had led to new coronavirus outbreaks. Those concerns increased for funerals and tangi, she said, because of people's tendencies to hug each other for comfort when they are grieving.
National Party leader Simon Bridges said today it was time Kiwis were treated like adults and trusted to do the right thing. "It's not just unkind. it's inhumane. If you can socially distance at a movie theatre with 99 other people you can do the same at a funeral or a church," Bridges told Mike Hosking on Newstalk ZB.
New Zealand Contemplates Cannabis Legalization
Bad Ju Ju
Systemic cannabis use is a self-inflicted long, drawn out death sentence.
Click on Family First's presentation on what's at risk if New Zealand legalizes pot.
https://mailchi.mp/familyfirst.org.nz/the-government-calls-it-cannabis-control-do-you?e=aea432a468
Systemic cannabis use is a self-inflicted long, drawn out death sentence.
Click on Family First's presentation on what's at risk if New Zealand legalizes pot.
https://mailchi.mp/familyfirst.org.nz/the-government-calls-it-cannabis-control-do-you?e=aea432a468
Tuesday 12 May 2020
Ardern Reflects a Clear and Present Danger
New Zealand at a Crossroads
By Dr Muriel Newman
NZCPR Weekly
“Marxists get up early in the morning to further their cause. We must get up even earlier to defend our freedom.” – British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, 1978
New Zealand is at a crossroads. This is the moment that will define the next generation. Will our future embrace freedom and liberty, or are we staring down the barrel of increasing Sate control.
Some say we are already on a totalitarian path – our personal freedoms taken away by ever more powerful politicians and organs of the State. Defined by the Oxford Dictionary as a system of government that is centralised, dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the State, ‘totalitarianism’ certainly describes the actions of Jacinda Ardern’s Government since mid-March.
At that time, the Prime Minister used the extraordinary powers reserved for use when the nation is under threat, to lock down the economy and confine people to their homes. The decision to abandon the protocols of the Pandemic Management Plan – last used by John Key to guide the country through the Swine Flu pandemic – appears to have been taken capriciously on the basis of grossly exaggerated modelling.
In his article What Price Liberty and the Virus, the former Judge and Law Lecturer Anthony Willy, explains that ‘For the first time in our history inalienable liberties and freedoms set out by the New Zealand Bill of Rights – freedom of association, freedom of movement, the liberty of the person, and the right to live in a Parliamentary democracy – have been suspended.’
“In a sinister twist, loss of these rights is backed by an apparently highly popular government encouraged scheme of dobbing in one’s neighbour for possible infractions.
By Dr Muriel Newman
NZCPR Weekly
“Marxists get up early in the morning to further their cause. We must get up even earlier to defend our freedom.” – British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, 1978
New Zealand is at a crossroads. This is the moment that will define the next generation. Will our future embrace freedom and liberty, or are we staring down the barrel of increasing Sate control.
Some say we are already on a totalitarian path – our personal freedoms taken away by ever more powerful politicians and organs of the State. Defined by the Oxford Dictionary as a system of government that is centralised, dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the State, ‘totalitarianism’ certainly describes the actions of Jacinda Ardern’s Government since mid-March.
At that time, the Prime Minister used the extraordinary powers reserved for use when the nation is under threat, to lock down the economy and confine people to their homes. The decision to abandon the protocols of the Pandemic Management Plan – last used by John Key to guide the country through the Swine Flu pandemic – appears to have been taken capriciously on the basis of grossly exaggerated modelling.
In his article What Price Liberty and the Virus, the former Judge and Law Lecturer Anthony Willy, explains that ‘For the first time in our history inalienable liberties and freedoms set out by the New Zealand Bill of Rights – freedom of association, freedom of movement, the liberty of the person, and the right to live in a Parliamentary democracy – have been suspended.’
“In a sinister twist, loss of these rights is backed by an apparently highly popular government encouraged scheme of dobbing in one’s neighbour for possible infractions.
Inheriting the Worldwind
Blasphemy Revisited
How Scotland’s New Moral Orthodoxy, and Blasphemy Laws Are a Mortal Danger to Us All
By Edward Persimmon
The BFD
Justice Minister Andrew Little declared back in March that a review of New Zealand’s hate speech law was in its final stages. It is only the COVID-19 outbreak which has prevented it from being enacted.
In order to usher in any new religious blasphemy legislation the old must first be set aside. This was done on 11 March 2019 with the repeal of section 123 of the Crimes Act 1961, which parliament voted for unanimously. This means that all National MPs voted for it and one can only wonder how they could have been so stupid.
The Nats surely are to Labour as an ‘enabler’ is to a fattie, causing her to go on gorging herself. In Labour’s case, with ‘progressive’ socialism.
The idea that is always peddled by progressives when sweeping away the old order is that it ‘no longer reflects the kind of society we live in,’ and everyone generally says, ‘fair enough,’ and acquiesces – unaware of the new and untold horrors which are about to unfold. You would think that the National Party would learn. You would think that we all would learn.
Section 123 of the Crimes Act was an entirely harmless relic of the past. Its successor which, make no mistake about it, will be introduced and subsequently passed, represents the greatest threat to liberty this country has seen since the last great act to eradicate liberty – the Labour lockdown.
First, some background. The offence of blasphemy in its developed form was not intended to defend God. A 1917 English legal case established the principle of decorum injuriae diis curae – that God can look after himself. This is indeed true. The law was rather intended for the protection of society against ‘provocative rhetoric’ and other ills.
The law relating to blasphemy was received into New Zealand in 1840 along with all other English common law offences.
How Scotland’s New Moral Orthodoxy, and Blasphemy Laws Are a Mortal Danger to Us All
By Edward Persimmon
The BFD
Justice Minister Andrew Little declared back in March that a review of New Zealand’s hate speech law was in its final stages. It is only the COVID-19 outbreak which has prevented it from being enacted.
In order to usher in any new religious blasphemy legislation the old must first be set aside. This was done on 11 March 2019 with the repeal of section 123 of the Crimes Act 1961, which parliament voted for unanimously. This means that all National MPs voted for it and one can only wonder how they could have been so stupid.
The Nats surely are to Labour as an ‘enabler’ is to a fattie, causing her to go on gorging herself. In Labour’s case, with ‘progressive’ socialism.
The idea that is always peddled by progressives when sweeping away the old order is that it ‘no longer reflects the kind of society we live in,’ and everyone generally says, ‘fair enough,’ and acquiesces – unaware of the new and untold horrors which are about to unfold. You would think that the National Party would learn. You would think that we all would learn.
Section 123 of the Crimes Act was an entirely harmless relic of the past. Its successor which, make no mistake about it, will be introduced and subsequently passed, represents the greatest threat to liberty this country has seen since the last great act to eradicate liberty – the Labour lockdown.
First, some background. The offence of blasphemy in its developed form was not intended to defend God. A 1917 English legal case established the principle of decorum injuriae diis curae – that God can look after himself. This is indeed true. The law was rather intended for the protection of society against ‘provocative rhetoric’ and other ills.
The law relating to blasphemy was received into New Zealand in 1840 along with all other English common law offences.
Monday 11 May 2020
What Freedom of Religion "Looks Like" in Practice
Trump Nominates Justin Walker to D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
Bob Adelmann
New American
On April 3, President Trump nominated District Judge Justin Walker (shown) to fill a vacancy on the Washington, D.C., U.S. Court of Appeals. On April 11 Walker proved in spades why he is qualified for the promotion.
His credentials are impressive: He earned his Bachelor of Arts, summa cum laude, from Duke University; he earned his Juris Doctor, magna cum laude, from Harvard University; he interned for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell; he served as a law clerk to then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh while he served on the same court to which Trump has just appointed him; and he defended Kavanaugh during the travesty of his confirmation “hearings,” giving 119 interviews to a hostile media.
But Walker showed his true mettle when he ruled that the Mayor of Louisville, Kentucky, stepped way out of line in his efforts to quash the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
On the Tuesday before Easter, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer banned all religious services, even if worshippers remained in their cars. On that Thursday, Fischer expanded on his edict:
Walker noted that his issuance of the temporary restraining order would enrage some people, and hoped that his lengthy review of America’s history as a Christian nation would provide some explanation and background for it. But the Christians of On Fire, however,
Photo: AP Images. An Ivy League graduate and former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American, writing primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at badelmann@thenewamerican.com.
Bob Adelmann
New American
On April 3, President Trump nominated District Judge Justin Walker (shown) to fill a vacancy on the Washington, D.C., U.S. Court of Appeals. On April 11 Walker proved in spades why he is qualified for the promotion.
His credentials are impressive: He earned his Bachelor of Arts, summa cum laude, from Duke University; he earned his Juris Doctor, magna cum laude, from Harvard University; he interned for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell; he served as a law clerk to then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh while he served on the same court to which Trump has just appointed him; and he defended Kavanaugh during the travesty of his confirmation “hearings,” giving 119 interviews to a hostile media.
But Walker showed his true mettle when he ruled that the Mayor of Louisville, Kentucky, stepped way out of line in his efforts to quash the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
On the Tuesday before Easter, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer banned all religious services, even if worshippers remained in their cars. On that Thursday, Fischer expanded on his edict:
We are not allowing churches to gather either in person or in any kind of drive through capacity. Ok so, if you are a church or you are a churchgoing member and you do that, you’re in violation of the mandate from the governor. You’re in violation of the request from my office and city government to not do that. We’re saying no church worshiping, no drive-throughs.In case that wasn’t clear enough of a threat, Fischer continued on Good Friday:
In order to save lives, we must not gather in churches, drive-through services, family gatherings, social gatherings this weekend. If there are gatherings on Sunday, Louisville Metro Police Department will be there on Sunday handing out information detailing the health risks involved, and I have asked LMPD to record license plates of all vehicles in attendance.
We will share that information with our public health department, so they can follow up with the individuals that are out in church and gathering in groups, which is clearly a very, very unsafe practice.On Fire Christian Center filed suit, asking for a decision before Easter. On the day before Easter, Walker granted a temporary restraining order:
On Holy Thursday, an American mayor criminalized the communal celebration of Easter.Walker’s 20-page memorandum is worth reading in its entirety. But here are the salient parts:
That sentence is one that this Court never expected to see outside the pages of a dystopian novel, or perhaps the pages of The Onion. But two days ago, citing the need for social distancing during the current pandemic, Louisville’s Mayor Greg Fischer ordered Christians not to attend Sunday services, even if they remained in their cars to worship — and even though it’s Easter.
The Mayor’s decision is stunning. And it is, “beyond all reason,” unconstitutional.
The COVID-19 pandemic has upended every aspect of our lives: how we work, how we live, how we celebrate, and how we mourn. We worry about our loved ones and our nation. We have made tremendous sacrifices. And the Constitution is not “a suicide pact.”...
Constitutional rights still exist. Among them is the freedom to worship as we choose.
The brief history at the outset of this opinion does not even scratch the surface of religious liberty’s importance to our nation’s story, identity, and Constitution. But mindful of that importance, the Court believes there is a strong likelihood On Fire will prevail on the merits of its claim that Louisville may not ban its citizens from worshiping — or, in the relative safety of their cars, from worshiping together.
Walker noted that his issuance of the temporary restraining order would enrage some people, and hoped that his lengthy review of America’s history as a Christian nation would provide some explanation and background for it. But the Christians of On Fire, however,
owe no one an explanation for why they will gather together this Easter Sunday to celebrate what they believe to be a miracle and a mystery.The D.C. Circuit court is often referred to as the “second-highest” court in the land and a stepping-stone to the Supreme Court. In fact, four of the current Supreme Court Justices — John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Brett Kavanaugh — all served on the D.C. Circuit court bench before being nominated to the Supreme Court.
True, they can attempt to explain it. True, they can try to teach. But to the nonbeliever, the Passion of Jesus — the betrayals, the torture, the state-sponsored murder of God’s only Son, and the empty tomb on the third day — makes no sense at all. And even to the believer, or at least to some of them, it can be incomprehensible as well.
But for the men and women of On Fire, Christ’s sacrifice isn’t about the logic of this world. Nor is their Easter Sunday celebration. The reason they will be there for each other and their Lord is the reason they believe He was and is there for us. For them, for all believers, it isn’t a matter of reason; finally, it’s a matter of love.
Photo: AP Images. An Ivy League graduate and former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American, writing primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at badelmann@thenewamerican.com.
"The Lord Is My Portion"
The Steadfast Love of the Lord Never Ceases
These days, it would seem, provide many reasons for discouragement. And so it was as we read through the book of Lamentations.
Jeremiah had suffered much. He had been called to accompany the final rebellious element of Jerusalem as it sought refuge in Egypt. Jeremiah's duty was to be present with this rebellious minority. He was to testify to this remnant as they made their way back to Egypt (with all that such a rebellion implied). As a consequence he shared in their experience of God's wrath and anger, through no fault of his own.
But, against all expectation, Jeremiah did not lose his trust and hope in God. And in so doing he becomes an example to us who have been called to live in a Covid-19 world. He writes:
Remember my affliction and my wanderings,
the wormwood and the gall!
My soul continually remembers it
and is bowed down within me.
But this I call to mind,
and therefore I have hope:
The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases;
his mercies never come to an end;
they are new every morning;
great is your faithfulness.
“The Lord is my portion,” says my soul,
“therefore I will hope in him.”
The Lord is good to those who wait for him,
to the soul who seeks him.
[Lamentations 3:19-25 English Standard Version (ESV)]
Indeed--God's mercies are new every morning. May all His people throughout our nation and the world find this to be the true.
These days, it would seem, provide many reasons for discouragement. And so it was as we read through the book of Lamentations.
Jeremiah had suffered much. He had been called to accompany the final rebellious element of Jerusalem as it sought refuge in Egypt. Jeremiah's duty was to be present with this rebellious minority. He was to testify to this remnant as they made their way back to Egypt (with all that such a rebellion implied). As a consequence he shared in their experience of God's wrath and anger, through no fault of his own.
But, against all expectation, Jeremiah did not lose his trust and hope in God. And in so doing he becomes an example to us who have been called to live in a Covid-19 world. He writes:
Remember my affliction and my wanderings,
the wormwood and the gall!
My soul continually remembers it
and is bowed down within me.
But this I call to mind,
and therefore I have hope:
The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases;
his mercies never come to an end;
they are new every morning;
great is your faithfulness.
“The Lord is my portion,” says my soul,
“therefore I will hope in him.”
The Lord is good to those who wait for him,
to the soul who seeks him.
[Lamentations 3:19-25 English Standard Version (ESV)]
Indeed--God's mercies are new every morning. May all His people throughout our nation and the world find this to be the true.
Saturday 9 May 2020
Corrupted Sages; Hypocritical Compliance Officers
The Fall of a Philosopher King and the Attack on Liberty
Dennis Behreandt
The New American
You may have heard of Professor Neil Ferguson. He’s the expert in the U.K. that predicted COVID-19 would infect and kill everyone and whose doomsday scenarios resulted directly in the lockdown in his own country and contributed to the knife in the the back of freedom that was wielded by mostly liberal-progressive governors and their quisling compatriot technocrats here in the United States.
It turns out that Professor Ferguson decided he didn’t need the lockdown he demands for everyone else. According to the Telegraph, Ferguson figured he could have his married consort visit him at his house despite the lockdown in London.
According to the Telegraph, “The revelation of the ‘illegal’ trysts will infuriate millions of couples living apart who the government has banned from meeting up during the lockdown, now in its seventh week.”
The paper reported that Ferguson’s married girlfriend “travelled across London from her south London home to spend time with the government scientist, nicknamed Professor Lockdown.”
“I deeply regret any undermining of the clear messages around the continued need for social distancing to control this devastating epidemic,” Ferguson said in response to having been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Naturally, in keeping with modern liberal-progressive radicals, Ferguson’s paramour apparently disdains the tenets of traditional, boring old marriage, preferring a more hipster alternative “lifestyle.”
Dennis Behreandt
The New American
You may have heard of Professor Neil Ferguson. He’s the expert in the U.K. that predicted COVID-19 would infect and kill everyone and whose doomsday scenarios resulted directly in the lockdown in his own country and contributed to the knife in the the back of freedom that was wielded by mostly liberal-progressive governors and their quisling compatriot technocrats here in the United States.
It turns out that Professor Ferguson decided he didn’t need the lockdown he demands for everyone else. According to the Telegraph, Ferguson figured he could have his married consort visit him at his house despite the lockdown in London.
According to the Telegraph, “The revelation of the ‘illegal’ trysts will infuriate millions of couples living apart who the government has banned from meeting up during the lockdown, now in its seventh week.”
The paper reported that Ferguson’s married girlfriend “travelled across London from her south London home to spend time with the government scientist, nicknamed Professor Lockdown.”
“I deeply regret any undermining of the clear messages around the continued need for social distancing to control this devastating epidemic,” Ferguson said in response to having been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Naturally, in keeping with modern liberal-progressive radicals, Ferguson’s paramour apparently disdains the tenets of traditional, boring old marriage, preferring a more hipster alternative “lifestyle.”
Getting Things Right
Legal Challenge Over Coronavirus Lockdown
Cutting Corners, Even With the Best of Motives and Intentions, Is Unacceptable. It results in Governments Breaking the Law.
Thomas Coughlan
Stuff
Ashley Bloomfield might be heading to court to defend the lockdown after a legal challenge alleging he used powers he didn't have. Andrew Borrowdale, who formerly drafted laws for the Government at the Parliamentary Counsel Office has filed for a judicial review of Bloomfield's actions.
Borrowdale told Stuff that the "bringing the application is not in any way intended to impugn Dr Bloomfield personally or to decry his admirable work". He's asked for a court to declare that some of the powers triggering the lockdown were outside the law, and for the court to order those actions be quashed.
The main issue at stake is whether Bloomfield used powers that were in excess of the ones given to him by the Health Act. Bloomfield used section 70 of the Health Act to issue notices, which set out some of the rules that we know as the level 4 lockdown.
Borrowdale alleges that the notices overstep the powers that are given to Bloomfield by the Health Act. A Ministry of Health spokesperson said "The Ministry is satisfied that the section 70 powers have been exercised lawfully. "It would be inappropriate for the Ministry to comment further where the matter is before the courts".
Otago law professor Andrew Geddis said the case was asking the High Court to make a "determinative ruling on whether the Health Act gave the director-general the power to issue the notices that it did". Geddis said police had then arrested and charged people with breaching the order. [Emphasis, ours] “If the health act didn’t give the director-general that power, then all of those people who have been charged with those offences shouldn’t have been," he said.
Cutting Corners, Even With the Best of Motives and Intentions, Is Unacceptable. It results in Governments Breaking the Law.
Thomas Coughlan
Stuff
Ashley Bloomfield might be heading to court to defend the lockdown after a legal challenge alleging he used powers he didn't have. Andrew Borrowdale, who formerly drafted laws for the Government at the Parliamentary Counsel Office has filed for a judicial review of Bloomfield's actions.
Borrowdale told Stuff that the "bringing the application is not in any way intended to impugn Dr Bloomfield personally or to decry his admirable work". He's asked for a court to declare that some of the powers triggering the lockdown were outside the law, and for the court to order those actions be quashed.
The main issue at stake is whether Bloomfield used powers that were in excess of the ones given to him by the Health Act. Bloomfield used section 70 of the Health Act to issue notices, which set out some of the rules that we know as the level 4 lockdown.
Borrowdale alleges that the notices overstep the powers that are given to Bloomfield by the Health Act. A Ministry of Health spokesperson said "The Ministry is satisfied that the section 70 powers have been exercised lawfully. "It would be inappropriate for the Ministry to comment further where the matter is before the courts".
Otago law professor Andrew Geddis said the case was asking the High Court to make a "determinative ruling on whether the Health Act gave the director-general the power to issue the notices that it did". Geddis said police had then arrested and charged people with breaching the order. [Emphasis, ours] “If the health act didn’t give the director-general that power, then all of those people who have been charged with those offences shouldn’t have been," he said.
Friday 8 May 2020
Panic On a Global Scale
Controllable Chinese Coronavirus Pandemic an ‘Unnecessary Pandemonium’
Thomas D. Williams
Breitbart News
Prof. John Rao of St. John’s University in New York City has come out swinging against the “fraudulent” experts who counseled the shuttering of the world “for the sake of creating an antiseptic, barren, soulless world unfit for human beings to live in.”
In his May 4 message, the Oxford-educated Dr. Rao writes that “a controllable pandemic has been transformed into a totally unnecessary pandemonium,” allowing “a painfully hollow modern society to titillate itself with the ‘feel’ of living through the Bubonic Plague without actually doing so.”
“I do not feel competent to discuss the initial cause of a disease that has affected the entire globe, nor would I in any way wish to minimize the real suffering and loss that this malady has entailed for many people,” Rao acknowledges.
That being said, “the reasoning man does not have to be an expert in a given field to be able to make a competent judgment regarding whether he is dealing with leaders whose advice he should heed or reject as fraudulent,” he notes.
Thomas D. Williams
Breitbart News
Prof. John Rao of St. John’s University in New York City has come out swinging against the “fraudulent” experts who counseled the shuttering of the world “for the sake of creating an antiseptic, barren, soulless world unfit for human beings to live in.”
In his May 4 message, the Oxford-educated Dr. Rao writes that “a controllable pandemic has been transformed into a totally unnecessary pandemonium,” allowing “a painfully hollow modern society to titillate itself with the ‘feel’ of living through the Bubonic Plague without actually doing so.”
“I do not feel competent to discuss the initial cause of a disease that has affected the entire globe, nor would I in any way wish to minimize the real suffering and loss that this malady has entailed for many people,” Rao acknowledges.
That being said, “the reasoning man does not have to be an expert in a given field to be able to make a competent judgment regarding whether he is dealing with leaders whose advice he should heed or reject as fraudulent,” he notes.
Chinese Government Hardens Its Heart Against The King of Kings
China Attacks Christian Church
Orders It to Discontinue Online Worship
Thomas Williams
Breitbart News
The Chinese communist party has ordered the Early Rain Covenant Church (ERCC) to cease all online worship services, in its latest crackdown on Christianity in the country.
In late 2018, Chinese authorities carried out a series of tightly coordinated raids on the 5,000-member Early Rain Covenant Church in the city of Chengdu, arresting more than 100 members, including Pastor Wang Yi and his wife.
The government cut the phone line to the church and Chinese police reportedly tracked down church members using the location signals from their mobile phones. Pastor Wang later received a sentence of nine years in prison for “inciting subversion” and running an illegal “business.” China’s state-run Global Times newspaper argued at the time that Wang was not a true Christian but an agitator “brainwashed by Western values.”
Since the shuttering of their church, Early Rain members have had to resort to online streamed worship services, but now the government wants to stop those as well, the Christian Post reported Monday.
Orders It to Discontinue Online Worship
Thomas Williams
Breitbart News
The Chinese communist party has ordered the Early Rain Covenant Church (ERCC) to cease all online worship services, in its latest crackdown on Christianity in the country.
In late 2018, Chinese authorities carried out a series of tightly coordinated raids on the 5,000-member Early Rain Covenant Church in the city of Chengdu, arresting more than 100 members, including Pastor Wang Yi and his wife.
The government cut the phone line to the church and Chinese police reportedly tracked down church members using the location signals from their mobile phones. Pastor Wang later received a sentence of nine years in prison for “inciting subversion” and running an illegal “business.” China’s state-run Global Times newspaper argued at the time that Wang was not a true Christian but an agitator “brainwashed by Western values.”
Since the shuttering of their church, Early Rain members have had to resort to online streamed worship services, but now the government wants to stop those as well, the Christian Post reported Monday.
Thursday 7 May 2020
Fast and Loose With Summary Justice In the UK
Police In Breach of the Law
UK to Review All Coronavirus Criminal Cases After Reports of Wrongful Convictions
Kurt Zindulka
Breitbart News
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) of the United Kingdom will begin reviewing every charge, conviction, and sentence that has been brought under emergency laws following reports that overzealous police have wrongfully charged people during the pandemic.
Police forces throughout the country have been using the powers granted to the (sic) under the act — specifically with the clause dealing with potentially infected people — to charge people that they felt were outdoors without a good excuse.
“These are exceptional powers. We need to make sure they are being applied consistently and lawfully,” a CPS spokesman told The Times. We are working with all police forces and prosecutors to make sure the new Coronavirus Act and Regulations are being correctly applied. Unlawful charges are being withdrawn by prosecutors in court, and we are asking for any wrongful convictions to be overturned,” he added.
The decision by the CPS to review came shortly after civil liberties watchdog Big Brother Watch published a review of what it termed the “staggering incompetence” that has occurred during the national lockdown.
The group highlighted the case of Marie Dinou, who was arrested and fined £660 for refusing to tell British Transport Police her reason for travelling. Ms Dinou was charged under Schedule 21 of the act which criminalises “failing without reasonable excuse to comply with any direction, reasonable instruction, requirement or restriction”. This section of the law only grants the police to take such actions against “potentially infectious persons”.
The conviction against Dinou was later overturned, with police admitting: “We fully accept that this shouldn’t have happened and we apologise.”
UK to Review All Coronavirus Criminal Cases After Reports of Wrongful Convictions
Kurt Zindulka
Breitbart News
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) of the United Kingdom will begin reviewing every charge, conviction, and sentence that has been brought under emergency laws following reports that overzealous police have wrongfully charged people during the pandemic.
Police forces throughout the country have been using the powers granted to the (sic) under the act — specifically with the clause dealing with potentially infected people — to charge people that they felt were outdoors without a good excuse.
“These are exceptional powers. We need to make sure they are being applied consistently and lawfully,” a CPS spokesman told The Times. We are working with all police forces and prosecutors to make sure the new Coronavirus Act and Regulations are being correctly applied. Unlawful charges are being withdrawn by prosecutors in court, and we are asking for any wrongful convictions to be overturned,” he added.
The decision by the CPS to review came shortly after civil liberties watchdog Big Brother Watch published a review of what it termed the “staggering incompetence” that has occurred during the national lockdown.
The group highlighted the case of Marie Dinou, who was arrested and fined £660 for refusing to tell British Transport Police her reason for travelling. Ms Dinou was charged under Schedule 21 of the act which criminalises “failing without reasonable excuse to comply with any direction, reasonable instruction, requirement or restriction”. This section of the law only grants the police to take such actions against “potentially infectious persons”.
The conviction against Dinou was later overturned, with police admitting: “We fully accept that this shouldn’t have happened and we apologise.”
Pity For One's Own Sick
Christian Charity and Joy Amidst Suffering
It is one of the evils of rapid diffusion of news that the sorrows of all the world come to us every morning. I think each village was meant to feel pity for its own sick and poor whom it can help and I doubt if it is the duty of any private person to fix his mind on ills which he cannot help. (This may even become an escape from the works of charity we really can do to those we know.)
A great many people do now seem to think that the mere state of being worried is in itself meritorious. I don't think it is. We must, if it so happens, give our lives for others; but even while we are doing it, I think we're meant to enjoy our Lord and, in Him, our friends, our food, our sleep, your jokes, and the birds' song and the frosty sunrise.
From The Collected Letters of C. S. Lewis, Volume 2.
Wednesday 6 May 2020
Darkness Beckons
Destroying the Nation’s Wealth . . . And The Health . . . Of Millions
By Peter Hitchens
The Mail on Sunday
Why do I bother? For six weeks now I have been saying that the Government’s policy on Covid-19 is a mistake. Most people do not agree with me, and many are angry with me for saying so. Others, bafflingly, don’t care about the greatest crisis I have seen in my lifetime, and regard the debate as a spectator sport.
Let me say it again: the coronavirus is not as dangerous as claimed. Other comparable epidemics have taken place with far less fuss, and we have survived them.
The death rate is lower than the Government believed. It passed its peak in this country on April 8, well before the crazy measures introduced by the Government on March 23 could possibly have affected matters. The actions we are taking against it are gravely out of proportion and will destroy the lives of thousands and the prosperity and health of millions. This is not life versus money. It is life versus life.
It has not been much fun fighting this. In fact, it has been exhausting and dispiriting. I feel as if I am in a nightmare where I can see a terrible danger approaching but when I cry out in warning, nobody can hear me. Can’t you see? I yell in the dream.
If you don’t defend your most basic freedom--the one to go lawfully where you wish when you wish--then you will lose it for ever.
By Peter Hitchens
The Mail on Sunday
Why do I bother? For six weeks now I have been saying that the Government’s policy on Covid-19 is a mistake. Most people do not agree with me, and many are angry with me for saying so. Others, bafflingly, don’t care about the greatest crisis I have seen in my lifetime, and regard the debate as a spectator sport.
Let me say it again: the coronavirus is not as dangerous as claimed. Other comparable epidemics have taken place with far less fuss, and we have survived them.
The death rate is lower than the Government believed. It passed its peak in this country on April 8, well before the crazy measures introduced by the Government on March 23 could possibly have affected matters. The actions we are taking against it are gravely out of proportion and will destroy the lives of thousands and the prosperity and health of millions. This is not life versus money. It is life versus life.
It has not been much fun fighting this. In fact, it has been exhausting and dispiriting. I feel as if I am in a nightmare where I can see a terrible danger approaching but when I cry out in warning, nobody can hear me. Can’t you see? I yell in the dream.
If you don’t defend your most basic freedom--the one to go lawfully where you wish when you wish--then you will lose it for ever.
Vital Importance of Reaching "Herd Immunity"
Sweden Bucked Conventional Wisdom
Other Countries Are Following
By John Fund & Joel Hay
National Review Online
No lockdown, no shuttered businesses or schools, no stay-at-home. And no disaster, either.
Spring is in the air, and it is increasingly found in the confident step of the people of Sweden.
With a death rate significantly lower than that of France, Spain, the U.K., Belgium, Italy, and other European Union countries, Swedes can enjoy the spring without panic or fears of reigniting a new epidemic as they go about their day in a largely normal fashion.
Dr. Mike Ryan, the executive director of the World Health Organization’s Emergencies Program, says: “I think if we are to reach a new normal, I think in many ways Sweden represents a future model — if we wish to get back to a society in which we don’t have lockdowns.” The Swedish ambassador to the U.S., Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter, says: “We could reach herd immunity in the capital” of Stockholm as early as sometime in May. That would dramatically limit spread of the virus.
A month ago, we first wrote about Sweden’s approach, which we said “relies more on calibrated precautions and isolating only the most vulnerable than on imposing a full lockdown.”
A fortunate constellation of circumstances ensured that Dr. Anders Tegnell, the chief epidemiologist of Sweden, was in charge of that country’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the misgivings of many Swedish politicians and foreign observers. Tegnell heroically bucked the conventional wisdom of every other nation and carefully examined the insubstantial evidence that social-isolation controls would help reduce COVID-19 deaths over the full course of the virus.
As Tegnell told NPR in early April: “I’m not sure that there is a scientific consensus on, really, about anything when it comes to this new coronavirus, basically because we don’t have much evidence for any kind of measures we are taking.”
Well, a month later we now know more.
Other Countries Are Following
By John Fund & Joel Hay
National Review Online
No lockdown, no shuttered businesses or schools, no stay-at-home. And no disaster, either.
Spring is in the air, and it is increasingly found in the confident step of the people of Sweden.
With a death rate significantly lower than that of France, Spain, the U.K., Belgium, Italy, and other European Union countries, Swedes can enjoy the spring without panic or fears of reigniting a new epidemic as they go about their day in a largely normal fashion.
Dr. Mike Ryan, the executive director of the World Health Organization’s Emergencies Program, says: “I think if we are to reach a new normal, I think in many ways Sweden represents a future model — if we wish to get back to a society in which we don’t have lockdowns.” The Swedish ambassador to the U.S., Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter, says: “We could reach herd immunity in the capital” of Stockholm as early as sometime in May. That would dramatically limit spread of the virus.
A month ago, we first wrote about Sweden’s approach, which we said “relies more on calibrated precautions and isolating only the most vulnerable than on imposing a full lockdown.”
A fortunate constellation of circumstances ensured that Dr. Anders Tegnell, the chief epidemiologist of Sweden, was in charge of that country’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the misgivings of many Swedish politicians and foreign observers. Tegnell heroically bucked the conventional wisdom of every other nation and carefully examined the insubstantial evidence that social-isolation controls would help reduce COVID-19 deaths over the full course of the virus.
As Tegnell told NPR in early April: “I’m not sure that there is a scientific consensus on, really, about anything when it comes to this new coronavirus, basically because we don’t have much evidence for any kind of measures we are taking.”
Well, a month later we now know more.
"Most Popular Prime Minister"
Can Simon Bridges Tear Down the Careful Crafting?
Damien Grant, Columnist
Stuff
The National Party leader has dismissed any questions over his leadership saying none of his MPs have raised it with him, and it's a distraction when the country should be focusing on how to rebuild the economy.
The beatification of our Prime Minister belies a darker truth; her Government is in trouble and faces the risk of annihilation come September. The challenge for the Opposition is to present a coherent economic plan to get this country back to work.
The scale of the economic collapse has been masked by the $10 billion Grant Robertson has gifted to - among others - big city lawyers, Australian-owned retail chains and, in the interests of disclosure, some of my businesses. Thanks to Robertson, the prospect of my wife getting that larger pool has increased and the prospects of me retiring before 70 have decreased, as that $10b paid out in the wage-subsidy scheme is going to have to be paid for by someone - and I am picking it is going to be people like me.
This was a massive waste of cash as most of the employers who took it, including me, didn’t need the subsidy and were going to retain their staff anyway. Most firms that were going to fail before they got $7000 per employee are still going to fail.
I’ve already administered one company where the director took the $70,000 wage subsidy and spent all but $3000 on various bills in the space of an afternoon. His company then fell into receivership and his staff were left out in the cold; one of many such stories that I expect will emerge.
Damien Grant, Columnist
Stuff
The National Party leader has dismissed any questions over his leadership saying none of his MPs have raised it with him, and it's a distraction when the country should be focusing on how to rebuild the economy.
The beatification of our Prime Minister belies a darker truth; her Government is in trouble and faces the risk of annihilation come September. The challenge for the Opposition is to present a coherent economic plan to get this country back to work.
The scale of the economic collapse has been masked by the $10 billion Grant Robertson has gifted to - among others - big city lawyers, Australian-owned retail chains and, in the interests of disclosure, some of my businesses. Thanks to Robertson, the prospect of my wife getting that larger pool has increased and the prospects of me retiring before 70 have decreased, as that $10b paid out in the wage-subsidy scheme is going to have to be paid for by someone - and I am picking it is going to be people like me.
This was a massive waste of cash as most of the employers who took it, including me, didn’t need the subsidy and were going to retain their staff anyway. Most firms that were going to fail before they got $7000 per employee are still going to fail.
I’ve already administered one company where the director took the $70,000 wage subsidy and spent all but $3000 on various bills in the space of an afternoon. His company then fell into receivership and his staff were left out in the cold; one of many such stories that I expect will emerge.
Tuesday 5 May 2020
Sown To the Wind . . . and Now Comes the Whirlwind
Democrats Are Reaping The ‘Whirlwind’
The media and Democrats were enraged when Brett Kavanaugh warned that their unethical behavior against him might have consequences. They should have listened.
By Mollie Hemingway
The Federalist
Brett Kavanaugh was a very difficult Supreme Court nominee for liberals to oppose. He had a stellar reputation, an impeccable record, and a genial disposition. While members of the Resistance held a protest on the steps of the Supreme Court minutes after President Trump announced him as the pick to replace retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, their early efforts to keep him off the bench showed little promise.
All that changed in mid-September 2018, when the Washington Post carefully packaged and presented Christine Blasey Ford’s claim that Kavanaugh had tried to rape her when she was in high school. The media and Democrats immediately latched onto the accusation in a desperate attempt to keep Kavanaugh from being confirmed.
It wasn’t the quality of the allegation that led to this reaction. Blasey Ford had no evidence she had ever met Kavanaugh, much less that he had tried to rape her. She wasn’t sure about any detail related to the event other than that she had precisely one beer and that Kavanaugh had tried to rape her.
She didn’t know how she got to the alleged event, where it was, how she got home, or whose house it was. None of the four witnesses she identified to reporters as having been at the event in question supported her claim. That included her close friend Leland Keyser, who was pressured by mutual acquaintances to change her testimony that she had no recollection of the event in question. Kavanaugh had an army of close friends and supporters who testified to his character throughout his adolescence and adulthood.
Nevertheless, over the next ten days, thousands of articles were published in newspapers and online while broadcast and cable news outlets devoted their entire schedule to covering the accusation.
The media and Democrats were enraged when Brett Kavanaugh warned that their unethical behavior against him might have consequences. They should have listened.
By Mollie Hemingway
The Federalist
Brett Kavanaugh was a very difficult Supreme Court nominee for liberals to oppose. He had a stellar reputation, an impeccable record, and a genial disposition. While members of the Resistance held a protest on the steps of the Supreme Court minutes after President Trump announced him as the pick to replace retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, their early efforts to keep him off the bench showed little promise.
All that changed in mid-September 2018, when the Washington Post carefully packaged and presented Christine Blasey Ford’s claim that Kavanaugh had tried to rape her when she was in high school. The media and Democrats immediately latched onto the accusation in a desperate attempt to keep Kavanaugh from being confirmed.
It wasn’t the quality of the allegation that led to this reaction. Blasey Ford had no evidence she had ever met Kavanaugh, much less that he had tried to rape her. She wasn’t sure about any detail related to the event other than that she had precisely one beer and that Kavanaugh had tried to rape her.
She didn’t know how she got to the alleged event, where it was, how she got home, or whose house it was. None of the four witnesses she identified to reporters as having been at the event in question supported her claim. That included her close friend Leland Keyser, who was pressured by mutual acquaintances to change her testimony that she had no recollection of the event in question. Kavanaugh had an army of close friends and supporters who testified to his character throughout his adolescence and adulthood.
Nevertheless, over the next ten days, thousands of articles were published in newspapers and online while broadcast and cable news outlets devoted their entire schedule to covering the accusation.
Will NZ Seize The Moment?
Dr Oliver Hartwich's Speech to the Epidemic Response Committee
Oliver Hartwich
23rd April, 2020
The New Zealand Initiative’s Executive Director Oliver Hartwich presented to the Epidemic Response Committee today. He outlined his vision for New Zealand’s social, political and economic future. You can read his full speech below:
Mr Chair,
Thank you for the invitation to speak to you. And thank you for the work of this Committee over the past weeks. While Parliament was suspended, you have ensured that Parliamentary scrutiny continued. In this time of extraordinary executive powers, we must uphold and defend our liberal democratic values. You and your parliamentary colleagues of all parties have done that, and New Zealanders thank you for it.
You invited me to present a vision for New Zealand’s social, political and economic future. So it is appropriate to begin with a word about our present.
New Zealand and the world are facing a crisis like none before. This crisis is like a war in which we mourn our dead and care for the sick. It is like a recession in which many of us lose their jobs and livelihoods. It is like a natural disaster in which the world we knew is crumbling before our eyes.
I have not come here to deny the severity of our situation. It is grave. But I have come here to offer a ray of hope. No matter how dark our predicament, a brighter future is always possible. Because our future is always up to us. As an economist, for me a bright future will deliver “Prosperity for all”.
You may think I am dreaming. Forecasters warn us of rising debt, bankruptcies and mass unemployment. So how can I have the audacity to imagine a future bringing “Prosperity for all”?
Oliver Hartwich
23rd April, 2020
The New Zealand Initiative’s Executive Director Oliver Hartwich presented to the Epidemic Response Committee today. He outlined his vision for New Zealand’s social, political and economic future. You can read his full speech below:
Mr Chair,
Thank you for the invitation to speak to you. And thank you for the work of this Committee over the past weeks. While Parliament was suspended, you have ensured that Parliamentary scrutiny continued. In this time of extraordinary executive powers, we must uphold and defend our liberal democratic values. You and your parliamentary colleagues of all parties have done that, and New Zealanders thank you for it.
You invited me to present a vision for New Zealand’s social, political and economic future. So it is appropriate to begin with a word about our present.
New Zealand and the world are facing a crisis like none before. This crisis is like a war in which we mourn our dead and care for the sick. It is like a recession in which many of us lose their jobs and livelihoods. It is like a natural disaster in which the world we knew is crumbling before our eyes.
I have not come here to deny the severity of our situation. It is grave. But I have come here to offer a ray of hope. No matter how dark our predicament, a brighter future is always possible. Because our future is always up to us. As an economist, for me a bright future will deliver “Prosperity for all”.
You may think I am dreaming. Forecasters warn us of rising debt, bankruptcies and mass unemployment. So how can I have the audacity to imagine a future bringing “Prosperity for all”?
Monday 4 May 2020
Chariots of Fire
Is Folau a Modern Day Eric Liddell?
Australian Presbyterian
He’s only played a few games since being dumped by the Wallabies for paraphrasing a passage from the Bible but, according to Fox Sports, Israel Folau is already being feted as the top contender to take out Super League’s Man of Steel. Lee Radford, the coach for Hull, said recently:
Australian Presbyterian
He’s only played a few games since being dumped by the Wallabies for paraphrasing a passage from the Bible but, according to Fox Sports, Israel Folau is already being feted as the top contender to take out Super League’s Man of Steel. Lee Radford, the coach for Hull, said recently:
He’s an absolute talent, he could be Man of Steel. He’s multi-talented, at league, union, AFL, you can tell he’s played AFL by how he jumps, he jumps like Michael Jordan.While following Christ doesn’t necessarily guarantee success in every endeavour in life, Folau’s example is strikingly similar to that Eric Liddell, whose story is recorded in the classic movie Chariots of Fire. Both men refused to compromise their biblical convictions when the world around them was pressuring them to compromise and cave in. The Lord has honoured both men for their courage and faith.
What's Sauce For the Goose Must Be Sauce For the Gander
The Hypocrisy on Tara Reade Is a National Disgrace
By The Editors,
National Review Online
We do not know whether the accusations that Tara Reade has leveled against Joe Biden are true or false. That is a question of evidence and of inquiry that might be answered as time rolls on. We do know, by contrast, that the double standard that has been exhibited by Biden’s campaign and by the political press in tandem is a national disgrace. Both culturally and legally, due process must be habitually applied to nobody or to everyone. If, upon the most frivolous and protean of pretexts, it is routinely accorded to one faction while being denied to another, it is effectively lost.
Though he has not deigned to address it directly, Joe Biden insists that he is innocent of the charge that he digitally penetrated an intern back in 1993. “It is untrue,” his communications director says. “This absolutely did not happen.” If so, we hope that this incident has taught Biden that his previous approach toward accusations of sexual assault was dangerous, illiberal, and ultimately untenable.
By The Editors,
National Review Online
We do not know whether the accusations that Tara Reade has leveled against Joe Biden are true or false. That is a question of evidence and of inquiry that might be answered as time rolls on. We do know, by contrast, that the double standard that has been exhibited by Biden’s campaign and by the political press in tandem is a national disgrace. Both culturally and legally, due process must be habitually applied to nobody or to everyone. If, upon the most frivolous and protean of pretexts, it is routinely accorded to one faction while being denied to another, it is effectively lost.
Though he has not deigned to address it directly, Joe Biden insists that he is innocent of the charge that he digitally penetrated an intern back in 1993. “It is untrue,” his communications director says. “This absolutely did not happen.” If so, we hope that this incident has taught Biden that his previous approach toward accusations of sexual assault was dangerous, illiberal, and ultimately untenable.
Saturday 2 May 2020
Gross Exaggeration, Or . . . ?
Is It Possible That COVID-19 Isn’t as Bad as We Have Been Told?
Guest Post
The BFD
Alex Davis
theemperorsrobes.blogspot.com
Alex Davis is a business executive and director of several companies in New Zealand and overseas.
He has included a lot of links to substantiate his opinion. In particular, this Swiss site which contains a large selection of articles on COVID-19. Alex originally offered his opinion piece to the NZ Herald and then Stuff. Both declined to publish it. He speculates that they may not have not published it because “they are afraid of not toeing the government line because they are hoping to get a bail out post the collapse of Bauer media”.
In January when stories of a new virus were emerging from China, global politicians barely reacted. Fast forward just two months and the world has seen the most rapid erosion of civil liberties in history. We have gone from liberal democracies with full freedom of movement and association to economy shattering lockdowns unimaginable just weeks before
The science we were (and are) being told was clear: lockdown now or millions will die. Except that the science and particularly the data are far from clear.
Guest Post
The BFD
Alex Davis
theemperorsrobes.blogspot.com
Alex Davis is a business executive and director of several companies in New Zealand and overseas.
He has included a lot of links to substantiate his opinion. In particular, this Swiss site which contains a large selection of articles on COVID-19. Alex originally offered his opinion piece to the NZ Herald and then Stuff. Both declined to publish it. He speculates that they may not have not published it because “they are afraid of not toeing the government line because they are hoping to get a bail out post the collapse of Bauer media”.
In January when stories of a new virus were emerging from China, global politicians barely reacted. Fast forward just two months and the world has seen the most rapid erosion of civil liberties in history. We have gone from liberal democracies with full freedom of movement and association to economy shattering lockdowns unimaginable just weeks before
The science we were (and are) being told was clear: lockdown now or millions will die. Except that the science and particularly the data are far from clear.
Home Schooling Attacked Falsely
Insecurity Coupled With Ignorance
How Does a Harvard Professor Think It’s ‘Authoritarian’ to Allow Parents to Teach Their Kids?
Katherine Timpf
National Review
A Harvard University law professor has called for a “presumptive ban” on homeschooling — claiming that the freedom to do so under our current laws is “authoritarian.”
“The issue is, do we think that parents should have 24/7, essentially authoritarian control over their children from ages zero to 18? I think that’s dangerous,” Elizabeth Bartholet said in an interview with Harvard Magazine. “I think it’s always dangerous to put powerful people in charge of the powerless, and to give the powerful ones total authority.”
Bartholet stated that there is “an essentially unregulated regime in the area of homeschooling,” with “very few requirements that parents do anything. [P]eople can homeschool who’ve never gone to school themselves, who don’t read or write themselves,” she said.
Bartholet also stated that homeschooling can make it easier for parents to get away with abusing their children and/or indoctrinating them with white supremacy and misogyny:
Unfortunately, however, it’s also true that abuse is hardly something that can occur only in a child’s home. In fact, as Harvard grad and homeschooler Kerry McDonald pointed out in a letter to Harvard Magazine in response to its article, “many parents choose to homeschool their children to remove them from abuse at school, whether it’s widespread bullying by peers or, tragically, rampant abuse by teachers and school administrators themselves.” [Emphasis, ours.]
How Does a Harvard Professor Think It’s ‘Authoritarian’ to Allow Parents to Teach Their Kids?
Katherine Timpf
National Review
A Harvard University law professor has called for a “presumptive ban” on homeschooling — claiming that the freedom to do so under our current laws is “authoritarian.”
“The issue is, do we think that parents should have 24/7, essentially authoritarian control over their children from ages zero to 18? I think that’s dangerous,” Elizabeth Bartholet said in an interview with Harvard Magazine. “I think it’s always dangerous to put powerful people in charge of the powerless, and to give the powerful ones total authority.”
Bartholet stated that there is “an essentially unregulated regime in the area of homeschooling,” with “very few requirements that parents do anything. [P]eople can homeschool who’ve never gone to school themselves, who don’t read or write themselves,” she said.
Bartholet also stated that homeschooling can make it easier for parents to get away with abusing their children and/or indoctrinating them with white supremacy and misogyny:
[I]t’s also important that children grow up exposed to community values, social values, democratic values, ideas about nondiscrimination and tolerance of other people’s viewpoints.I do not, of course, want to minimize the absolute horror of child abuse. It’s disgusting; it’s heartbreaking; and anyone who isn’t a sociopath agrees that it’s necessary to protect our children.
Unfortunately, however, it’s also true that abuse is hardly something that can occur only in a child’s home. In fact, as Harvard grad and homeschooler Kerry McDonald pointed out in a letter to Harvard Magazine in response to its article, “many parents choose to homeschool their children to remove them from abuse at school, whether it’s widespread bullying by peers or, tragically, rampant abuse by teachers and school administrators themselves.” [Emphasis, ours.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)