Australian hospitals have become dangerous for Jews

Australian hospitals have become dangerous for Jews. By Megan Goldin in The Australian.

Weeks before first responders fought valiantly to save lives at Bondi Beach in Sydney in December last year, an international medical conference on the latest battle-tested techniques to treat gunshot wound victims in the critical minutes after injury was to be held in Perth.

Among the speakers was the former head of the Israeli military’s medical corp, Dr Elon Glassberg, who was to share how the Israeli army reduced battlefield mortality rates from gunshot and blast injuries to the lowest in history of any army in the world.

Anti-Israel doctors and nurses groups threatened to picket the conference with large-scale protests if the Glassberg session went ahead. The organisers capitulated and the conference was cancelled.

For protesting healthcare workers, it was a victory to be celebrated. “Thank you to everyone who wrote letters, made phone calls and made their concerns known. Free Palestine,” the Instagram account @hcw4palestinewa said. …

The Australian medical establishment has become actively antisemitic and pro-Hamas:

Many of the more than 30 doctors, nurses, midwives and allied health professionals interviewed for this article cite this incident as one of many examples of how anti-Israel activism by healthcare workers since the October 7, 2023, massacre by Hamas has shaken the 2500-year-old bedrock principle of medicine, dating from Greek physician Hippocrates and his oath, which is that the best interests of patients always comes first. …

Using the exalted mantle of their medical professions, activist doctors and nurses routinely are amplifying anti-Jewish blood libels propagated by Hamas as well as adopting dehumanising anti-Jewish hate speech while often expressing support for proscribed terror groups such as Hamas that advocate mass slaughter of Jews.

By doing so, they are turning hospitals and medical clinics into ideological war zones instead of safe spaces where patients can be assured of getting the best possible medical care by empathetic healthcare providers. …

October 8:

Anti-Israel activism began almost immediately after the October 7 massacre when the protests that unfolded in Australian cities spilled into the wards and staffrooms of hospitals in Melbourne, Sydney and other capital cities.

Doctors and nurses wore “From the river to the sea” protest symbols to work and covered hospital toilet stalls and corridors with stickers that included a Star of David with a red line drawn through it.

At The Alfred Hospital in Melbourne, which has received tens of millions of dollars from Jewish philanthropists, such stickers were stuck to the bedside wall of an elderly Jewish patient in the hours before he died.

Meanwhile, a war of words was waged online. Social media posts by pro-Palestine doctors and other healthcare professionals veered into hate speech, antisemitism, Holocaust inversion and support of proscribed terror groups.

“Doctors and nurses were posting Nazi symbols and little caricatures of Jewish people but using the word ‘Zionist’ instead of ‘Jews’,” Jewish pediatric neurologist Dr Carly Debinski says. “They were so virtuous and obsessive about vilifying Jewish people.”

Almost three years later, it’s still going on virtually unabated:

Facebook groups where doctors and nurses had discussed mundane topics such as childcare became venomous in the aftermath of October 7, with Jewish members attacked or booted off if they mentioned the 200-plus Israelis held hostage in Gaza at the time, or the mutilations, rapes and slaughter of 1200 Israelis by Hamas on October 7.

At a major hospital in Melbourne, a Jewish intensive care unit nurse resigned after more than a decade in the job because management refused to tackle “online hate speech” by staff.

“If these people are willing to share these things on social media, imagine how they treat a (Jewish) patient face-to-face,” she says, requesting that her name be withheld. …

Hostile to Jewish patients:

Hospitals became hostile environments for Jewish patients and employees.

A Jewish health worker at a Melbourne teaching hospital was shirtfronted by a colleague from Ireland, where antisemitic incidents are at record highs, who demanded she apologise for the Gaza war. The same hospital HR department that weeks earlier transferred a staff member in the same unit for mimicking a foreign accent refused to take action when a complaint was lodged.

That pattern was repeated across the country as hospitals and healthcare regulators tolerated conduct against Jews that would have triggered disciplinary action if the conduct had targeted any other minority group, say numerous medical professionals who experienced this double standard. …

“Oops, sorry”:

For Charlotte Frajman, 64, the daughter of an Auschwitz survivor, having her religion listed in her medical records is a litmus test. “If I can’t have my Jewish religion on my medical records then it’s time to leave Australia because we are no longer safe here,” she says.

Frajman worries she was targeted during monthly appointments at a Melbourne hospital day clinic where she receives intravenous post-cancer treatment. During a session last year, a Muslim nurse, with whom she’d previously exchanged smiles, lost his kind demeanour when he saw Frajman’s religion on her hospital records while verifying her details.

“When it came to putting in the cannula, he took four attempts. It was incredibly painful,” Frajman recalls. “I was bruised for weeks. You would have thought he was a trainee nurse, not the senior nurse in charge.” When the same nurse again took four attempts to insert cannulas during subsequent visits, Frajman didn’t know what to think. “Then the Bankstown nurses thing came out, and my husband and I looked at each other and we said: ‘Oh my God.’ ”

Israeli-born Orit Brand begged a hijab-wearing radiographer to stop after the eighth failed attempt to insert a cannula into her vein at a radiology clinic at a Melbourne hospital. At her insistence another staff member was called and inserted the cannula at the first attempt “with no pain and no bruising”.

It’s nearly impossible to prove malice when it comes to painful needle insertion. However, in both cases, the hospital protocol of a maximum of two attempts by the same practitioner was breached, according to nurses who work at the hospitals in question.

“The needles, it is a story that keeps repeating,” says Nurit Hadad, a NSW-based mental health nurse counselling victims of antisemitism. “This is the easiest way to hurt people. They say: ‘I’ve done my best but I just couldn’t find a vein.’ ”

Midwife Sharon Stoliar has heard many horror stories since October 7. Among them, a Jewish woman who cried in agony for hours the night after a C-section at a Sydney hospital where she was “left to lie in a pool of blood with no pain relief” while her baby screamed in its cot alongside hers. When the nurse eventually arrived, she treated her roughly and with no compassion. …

While hospitalised in the ICU ward of an Adelaide hospital, Julia, a Jewish patient who asked that her family name be withheld, sobbed after being given a bedside lecture by her nurse denying the events of the Holocaust and the October 7 massacre.

Sounds like 1920s Germany:

Jewish medical students and trainee doctors have been ostracised by fellow students. Some have been verbally attacked by patients and taunted by superiors. They are too afraid to go public because of concerns that it will affect their chances at getting accepted in highly competitive specialist training programs. Indeed, many of those interviewed for this article asked for their names to be fully or partially withheld because of safety or job concerns. …

Slurping up Hamas lies:

It is a testament to the effectiveness of Hamas’s propaganda machine that two days later, hundreds of medical workers dressed in hospital scrubs protested in Sydney and Melbourne chanting “stop hospital bombings”, even though the only Gazan hospital that had been bombed was al-Ahli and it had been hit by a misfired Palestinian rocket.

The same protesters outraged by what they claimed was Israel’s targeting of healthcare workers in Gaza were silent about Hamas firing rocket-propelled grenades at Israeli ambulances on October 7, killing paramedic crews, as well as murdering many Israeli first-aid workers during the massacre including a doctor and paramedic slaughtered as they treated the injured at Kibbutz Be’eri’s clinic.

Mental health crazies:

The medical specialty that seems to be most infested with antisemitism is mental health. Calling on Israelis to commit suicide, a Queensland-based psychotherapist posted on X, “You aren’t fit to live”. An academic working in the psychiatry department of a prominent Australian university put up a Holocaust inversion post on X comparing queues at food distribution centres in Gaza to concentration camp gas chambers during the Holocaust.

Mental health counsellor Hadad had a panic attack in the regional NSW Headspace office where she worked at the time when after October 7 a colleague draped her adjacent desk with a keffiyeh.

“If someone is coming with a keffiyeh to a workplace, Australian people who have nothing to do with Middle Eastern culture … it’s a statement of violence,” says Hadad. “It represents the people trying to kill me.”

Her managers refused Hadad’s request to ban protest symbols at work. After months of feeling unsafe at work, Hadad quit her job. …

Antisemitic double standard:

As for the doctor who posted the Hitler quote and a post describing Jews as “loathed slime”, health oversight boards closed the complaint without taking action, as they did for complaints about numerous other doctors who posted antisemitic, terror idealisation and pro-Hamas content online.

“Regulators have shown clear double standards in the handling of complaints,” says Stoliar. She says sometimes the same AHPRA staff have acted against Jewish health practitioners targeted by baseless complaints, while ignoring complaints about blatantly antisemitic and terror idealisation posts by pro-Palestine healthcare workers by claiming these posts were made in personal capacities. …

Some Jewish and pro-Jewish doctors and nurses received letters from AHPRA accusing them of Islamophobia for posting think-tank reports debunking genocide claims or for posts suggesting that the writing had been on the wall for the Bondi attack. …

Honorably setting a good example:

For Melbourne pediatrician Debinski, Australia became so toxic for Jews after October 7 that she is happy she moved to Israel, where she works at Sheba Medical Centre, one of Israel’s largest hospitals near Tel Aviv.

She is part of a team of Jewish, Arab, Muslim, Christian and Druze doctors and nurses, treating children from all communities, including Gazan children brought to Israel for medical treatment.

Israel, she says, could teach Australia lessons about cultivating a culture of collaboration by medical teams from many walks of life whose creed is that patient care is paramount and personal baggage stays at home. For Debinski, the post-October 7 activism in Australian healthcare might have been done “under the guise of humanitarianism but it was really just a poisonous hatred of Jews”.

This is an example of where multiculturalism fails. On many issues, we cannot afford to have multiple cultures. We shouldn’t have to ask whether this a proper Western hospital or a hospital where the culture is to harm people the staff don’t like. We need a monoculture on issues like free speech, good medical care for all, and liberty — which are incompatible with Sharia and antisemitism.

Of course, the advocates of multiculturalism always try to confuse the picture by obsessing on irrelevant trivialities like food and skin color, because it makes them feel so superior and enlightened. (Talk about the Dunning-Kruger effect!)

Debt Tsunami and a dying paper currency: The Alan Greenspan Legacy

Debt Tsunami and a dying paper currency: The Alan Greenspan Legacy. By Jeffrey Tucker.

Alan Greenspan, Fed chair from 1987 to 2006, embodies a striking ideological shift from gold-standard advocate to architect of the modern easy-money, debt-fueled financial system. He has now died at the age of 100, and this marks a good time to assess his legacy and explain why it matters.

 

In the 1960s, as a young economist influenced by Ayn Rand and Objectivism, Greenspan strongly supported the gold standard. In his 1966 essay “Gold and Economic Freedom,” he argued that gold-backed money was essential for laissez-faire capitalism. It restrained governments from inflating the currency to fund welfare states or deficits, preventing the erosion of savings and the boom-bust cycles caused by fiat money manipulation. He viewed central banking and unbacked currency as tools for hidden wealth confiscation through inflation. …

Once in power, however, Greenspan operated within the fiat system that he once criticized. He became known for discretionary, flexible monetary policy that prioritized short-term economic stability and growth over rigid rules.

Rescued the market every time with fresh paper money (the “Greenspan put”):

Markets came to expect the Fed to cut interest rates and inject liquidity during crises to cushion asset price declines. This started with the 1987 stock market crash (Black Monday [Dow fell 25% in a day]), during which Greenspan quickly affirmed the Fed’s readiness to provide liquidity.

This was the beginning of what later became known as Quantitative Easing, or money printing, as the method to deal with market upheavals. It represented a wholesale repudiation of the policies of Paul Volcker from 1979 to 1982, the last time this country permitted an economic downturn to take its normal course rather than use artificial methods of stimulating demand. It was a test of the theory of the Austrian School, which argued that recessions serve a purpose of cleaning out malinvestments to prepare the ground for new prosperity. …

Sound money:

With sound money and a free market, the interest rate was a reflection of the savings rate. Investors would only borrow what was available, while savers were rewarded for their thrift with high interest rates. The rate of return for financial capital would tend toward an equilibrium identical to industrial output levels. That means that you are always better off saving than taking risks unless you have an eye toward entrepreneurial speculation. That was the balance: save, invest, grow.

Unsound money — the formula for riches since 1982 has been to borrow as much money as possible, buy assets, and wait:

Greenspan’s efforts turned the table over. The Fed embarked on a new experiment that would reward debt more than saving through one simple trick. He would push down rates to the point that saving paid less than investing in stocks, such that anyone could go into serviceable debt and invest and make more money with financial markets. Thus began what is called financialization. It overthrew the traditional workings of capitalism for a new calculation that stopped rewarding thrift and started rewarding leverage above all else.

Quite the achievement for a man who decades earlier had condemned this very system!

This strategy was repeated with responses to the 1998 LTCM/Russia crisis, the dot-com bust (2000–2001), and post-9/11. Investors priced in this implicit downside protection — like a put option — encouraging greater risk-taking, leverage, debt service, and wild speculation. …

The result was moral hazard and a wild culture of risk-taking at the expense of financial prudence. The combination of bailouts for markets (not necessarily individual firms) and low rates fostered the belief that the Fed would always “clean up” after bubbles.

This reduced the perceived downside of speculation, leading to higher leverage in finance, exotic mortgages, and a broader “debt finance” era in which credit expansion outpaced productive growth. Greenspan himself spoke of “irrational exuberance” in 1996 but didn’t act decisively to prick bubbles.

Greenspan’s tenure coincided with (and helped enable) a structural shift toward higher public–private debt levels, financialization of the economy, and repeated asset bubbles. The housing bubble and 2008 crisis are the clearest examples — easy money post-dot-com contributed to over-leveraged households and banks. …

In later years, Greenspan reflected on gold favorably (e.g., calling it the premier global currency and admitting in conversations with Ron Paul that the Fed tried to mimic gold-standard signals). He acknowledged the welfare state’s incompatibility with hard money but pragmatically worked within the system.

Fine talk, but look at how he walked. Greenspan’s successors at the Fed only intensified his apostasy, especially Ben Bernanke, who went one better and slammed rates to zero while protecting against inflationary consequences by filling up bank vaults with fake money. This created innumerable zombie institutions, even as the Fed held the overvalued fake assets on its books. It still does. …

We are still paying a huge price for this mismanagement.

Gold is the only financial asset that has no counterparty risk and does not rely on a third party’s promise to pay. Hence, it is a good basis for money.

1 in 3 French are foreign origin. You racists have lost.

1 in 3 French are foreign origin. You racists have lost. By Angelo Plume.

In France, you can just stand in the parliament and celebrate the genocide of your own people while your fellow party members applaud your moral superiority.

“1 in 3 French are foreign origin. You racists have lost.”

 

Raw Egg Nationalist:

The French left are openly appropriating “the Great Replacement” — indeed, actually using that term — to describe demographic change in the country. Mask off.

Commenters:

The evolution was simple and rapid: when the term “Great Replacement” first came up, they screamed that it didn’t exist and that talking about it was racist. Then, it became: “Well, okay, it does exist, but it’s actually great! and if you’re against it, you’re racist.”

I’m scared: 14 yo British schoolgirl

I’m scared: 14 yo British schoolgirl. By Wall Street Apes.

14 year old school girl in the UK says every day her and her friends live in fear from the Muslim migrant rape gangs

“I’m scared that whenever I come out of school, they’re going to be across the road watching everyone come out — I feel like one day me or other people my age are just going to be watched by these men and that feeling gives you a sense of insecurity”

Reporter “And you’re at the age where you want that bit of freedom to go out and enjoy yourself. You can’t do that”

“No, I can’t. I have to walk It’s a longer way to school now. I can’t walk into the town much anymore by myself. I have to really go with friends or parents, and I can’t even really go to the park unless there’s my friend’s parents there”

What if she wears a burka?

Commenters:

These people [young white girls] should be able to come to America as refugees. This is the definition of the legit scenario for America accepting people from other countries! They are not safe in their country anymore! …

You realize that when you’ve hired a horde of barbarian mercenaries you’ve got to provide them with not just money, food, clothing, weapons, and housing, but you also have to provide them with whomever will satisfy their sexual appetite The government’s in the UK are complicit in this. …

British pop star Duffy recently opened up about being drugged at her birthday dinner and taken out of the country for a month by a group of migrants that repeatedly raped her [in 2010]. If this kind of thing is happening to celebrities, how on earth are we going to protect ordinary girls? [Duffy has been snapped out in public for the first time in over 15 years …The 41-year-old singer was spotted visiting a cafe in North Wales]

A society that cannot or will not protect its young women is not long for this world.

How did we fall so far behind the Americans?

How did we fall so far behind the Americans? By Stephen Green at PJ Media.

All that is my long-winded way of getting to our delight these last few weeks with FIFA tourists like Freddy the German — a common European fellow learning the common joys of American life far from the usual tourist destinations.

You know, like our gas stations.

Freddy loved Buc-ee’s, by the way.

And Another Thing: Not quite germane, but there’s also video of Australian tourists visiting Buc-ee’s, one of whom says, “Only America can make a gas station an attraction that everyone wants to come and see.” We build it, they come.

Then there was the whole Ranch dressing craze, which admittedly got an unfair start because a chesty Swedish OnlyFans star named Elsa decided she loved it. … Kraft responded by almost instantaneously ramping up production of TSA-sized bottles of Ranch, something only possible because the company didn’t have to first get permission from the E.U.’s Directorate-General for Condiment Packaging. Besides, the Permanent Undersecretary for Three-to-Seven Ounce Containers is on holiday this month. …

Seriously:

As awesome as Freddy is, and as weirdly attractive as Ranch dressing suddenly became, behind their touristy delights lies an uncomfortable question that our cousins will take back with them to the Old Country, provided they have the guts to ask it.

“How did we fall so far behind the Americans?”

The difference isn’t scale. The EU has 449 million people living in a single market, compared to 342 million Americans.

The difference is the explosion of wealth, abundance, and experiences that come from a regulatory climate where innovation is still (mostly) prized.

Hardly anything happens in Europe without getting permission first. That’s why Europe can’t build a social media platform like X, but Brussels can slap a record-setting $140 million fine on the firm for ignoring Europe’s censorship mandates.

Brussels and the whole “European project” smothered innovation almost out of existence in the name of unity, safety, and homogeneity — and the scale of Europe’s failure shocked even me.

Instead of teasing this out, let me show you right now the single chart that blew me away.

 

 

So a “from scratch” company is a startup, not the result of a merger, acquisition, or spinoff. Think of Apple, with Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs hiring a few friends to build computers in a garage. …

What you see on the left side of that chart is an explosion of creativity and wealth perhaps unparalleled in human history, all since 1976. What you see on the right is an entire continent just limping along — a continent that used to be the wealthiest and most sophisticated on Earth, but is now blown away by our easy access to Ranch dressing. …

And I singled out tech because tech is innovation.

Want to know why Freddy can buy 57 varieties of jerky at a truck stop chain the likes of which Europe doesn’t even have a single location? That’s why, right there.

Back in April, you and I looked at Britain’s sad decline vis-à-vis the U.S. “30 years ago, Britain would have ranked fifth among U.S. states, just behind Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey,” I wrote then, but today Britain would rank 51st behind Mississippi.

But here’s the thing. When polled on where their island nation ranks among U.S. states, Britons guessed “seventh” on average. Europoors don’t know they’re poor until they’ve stepped inside an air-conditioned Costco on a steamy afternoon in Nowhere, Texas.

Europeans ought to ask themselves, “Where is our Costco? Where is our Buc-ee’s? Why does America have more and better stadiums than we do, even when they barely play Fußball? How come they have SpaceX, Apple, Facebook, and Nvidia, and we don’t?”

Simple. Europe collectivized decision-making and handed it to unelected bureaucrats. We have that problem, too, but we’re still decades behind Europe in that regard.

The thing about collectivism — or its pan-European equivalent, multinationalism — is that the collectivists always want you to believe that it’s inescapable. Here in the U.S. more than a century ago, our homegrown collectivists took old-school European collectivism and renamed it “Progressivism,” to signal that moving backwards from our founding principles was somehow progress.

Australia is more like the US, but our ruling class and our current government admire the Europeans and want to be like them — with them in charge.

On the big government versus liberty spectrum, Australia used to be up the liberty end — but now we are plummeting towards the big government end. By weird coincidence, we also have mass immigration and many new voters from the third world. Hmmm. No wonder immigration is the one special issue that the left will absolutely not discuss rationally or consider compromising on.

“The dancing days of the dirtbag left” in NY

“The dancing days of the dirtbag left” in NY. By Chris Nesi at The New York Post.

Democrats were shocked when a trio of anti-Israel, socialist candidates backed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani swept Tuesday’s New York House primary races, warning that their ascendance represents a changing of the guard for the party as voters embrace the far left.

“The roof is collapsing on the Democratic Party establishment tonight,” progressive political activist and CNN commentator Van Jones told Kaitlan Collins as election results rolled in. …

US Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), whose independent streak has rankled his own party since his own surprise victory in 2022, didn’t hold back in voicing his consternation about Tuesday’s results when speaking to Fox News’ Sean Hannity.

“This has become the dancing days of the dirtbag left,” he said. “Some of these candidates are outrageous. You have candidates, they [want to] abolish ICE, abolish police, abolish the border.”

Monica Showalter in American Thinker:

Democrat voters chose extremists of the most repulsive sort over establishment-endorsed candidates, to win three New York primaries, driving their party to the farthest left it’s ever been. …

It’s so bad the winners are from the kind of left that makes Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez look like a moderate.

They’re calling for the death of Western Civilization:

[Newly elected condidate] Darializa Avila Chevalier says she converted to Islam because of the “grace and love and passion” that her Muslim friends had for “social justice” …

Darializa Avila Chevalier says she’s hoping to reflect Islam in the halls of Congress. The quiet part out loud. She just won the Democratic primary for NY-13. They’re conquering us before our eyes.

Bill Melugin:

Their positions are some of the most extreme and far left Dems have seen:

Darializa Avila Chevalier (NY-13): Abolish prisons, abolish ICE, abolish borders, defund the police, and “all deportations are wrong”, including for violent criminals. She has called the U.S. an “effing disgrace”, and said in a prior social media post “I forgot to get napkins so I just wiped my hand on the American flag behind me.”

Claire Valdez (NY-7): Grant citizenship and voting rights to illegal aliens, use taxpayer funds for all transgender treatments, and eliminate private health insurance.

Brad Lander (NY-10): Abolish ICE, forgive all student loans (almost $2 trillion worth), expand the Supreme Court.

Mamdani gets a clean sweep, a bad night for Hakeem Jeffries, and big questions for where the Democratic Party is heading.

Just Loki:

Normie libs were so obsessed with “getting” Trump that they let their party get taken over by Islamic communists.

Logan Hall:

We imported a ton of third world foreign communists and allowed them to participate in our elections and run for office and then they all vote for third world foreign communism. Doesn’t take a genius to realize this was never going to be anything other than a recipe for disaster.

Jon Levine — overproduction of would-be elites:

NYC election results reflect highly educated yet downwardly mobile white people who are angry that their expensive degrees are worthless and people in jobs they find demeaning (electricians, plumbers) are making more than them.

The Undercurrent:

This is the DSA [Democratic Socialists of America] co-chair. Let me summarize what he says in this video:

“We’re using the Democratic Party as a ballot-access vehicle, not because we share its goals. We build our own organization, get elected under the Democratic label, caucus with Democrats when it’s useful, and push our own agenda from the inside. We see the Democratic establishment as an obstacle, not a home.”

 

Auron MacIntyre:

You need to understand that democracy in the US is over.

Handing power to the left even one time means the end of the country as tens of millions pour in and permanently change the electorate forever.

We have to be perfect, they need just one win.

John Carter:

Their presence is not legitimate, because they were brought in under false pretenses, and naturalized by hostile subversives looking to pack the electorate.

Yet still the western ruling class is just focused on their good government jobs, on their status and money. They refuse to see what is happening around them, possibly because they are responsible and it is just too stupid and awful to contemplate.

How Israel Became the Biggest Litmus Test in American Politics

How Israel Became the Biggest Litmus Test in American Politics. By Mark Halerpin at The Free Press.

A political earthquake shook New York City on Tuesday night, and it is about to reverberate throughout the entire Democratic Party.

Democratic Socialist candidates won a trio of House primaries, each backed by Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Senator Bernie Sanders. More than any other issue, these upstarts are united by their opposition to Israel and to U.S. support for the Jewish state. …

How did opposition to Israel become the toxic litmus test in Democratic Party politics — so rapidly, so emotionally, and so completely? …

For most of the postwar era, support for Israel was one of the least controversial positions in Democratic politics. Israel was welcomed as a true ally of America and the West: modern, tolerant, open-minded, generous, and stalwart. Israelis — the government and the people — were considered evolved, formidable, and brave.

That consensus has not merely weakened; it has collapsed. Key elements of the Democratic coalition — young voters, female voters, black voters, urban voters — have all undergone this total shift in attitude. …

Ethnic hatred and communism rear their ugly heads in NY:

The visceral explanations are harder to measure and more piercing to contemplate. They mirror centuries — and even millennia — of instinctive antisemitism, a raw dislike and distrust of Jewish people.

The left media:

In our 21st-century incarnation, traditional media has played a role. Not by inventing Palestinian suffering, which is real, or by making criticism of Israel illegitimate, which it is not. But by creating a daily rhythm of coverage in which Israel is almost always framed as the active agent and Palestinians almost always as the passive victims. The New York Times and its imitators waited only a beat or two after October 7 before returning to their familiar posture: Israel is the problem to be interrogated, the actor to be doubted, and guilty until proven innocent.

Social media and YouTube have done the rest, faster and with even fewer restraints. A generation of influencers, streamers, podcasters, and algorithmically rewarded stars has discovered that anti-Israel certainty performs beautifully. Complexity does not go viral. Layered ambiguity does not build a following. A tragic conflict between two peoples becomes, in the hands of the platforms, a simple morality play: oppressor and oppressed, colonizer and colonized, villain and victim.

Muslim and Chinese money:

Then there’s the foreign money and foreign influence. Qatar has spent years investing in American institutions, from universities to media to political networks, shaping the atmosphere in which elite opinion is formed. China’s role is different but no less consequential. Beijing does not need to care deeply about the Middle East to understand that TikTok and related information flows can amplify narratives that divide Americans, weaken confidence in Western institutions, and turn young Americans against their own country’s allies.

Qatar and China did not create every sentiment now coursing through Democratic politics. We don’t know exactly how much they have done to sow anti-Israel feeling on the left. But we can be confident that, with remarkable dexterity and efficacy, they have created some of the content and helped build and fuel the pipes through which those sentiments travel. …

The toxic result:

There has developed around Israel a kind of Pavlovian disgust association that now seems wired into many otherwise thoughtful people.

Jew. Jew. Jew. Jew. AIPAC. Dead children. Netanyahu. USS Liberty. Epstein. Weinstein. Occupation. Apartheid. Christ killers. NYPD trainers.

On and on and on.

Some of those associations involve serious subjects. Some are distortions. Some are outright nonsense. But the human mind is not a courtroom. It is an associative machine.

The mind can take only so much repetition before it is affected by it. And once the psychological ground has been softened, permeability to newer facts, factoids, allegations, images, and narratives rises dramatically. Almost everything flows in one direction.

The result is not necessarily hatred. It is something in some ways more powerful: a presumption.

A presumption that Israel is wrong. A presumption that Israel is lying. A presumption that Israel is acting in bad faith.

Leftist’s lack of principle makes them more vulnerable:

Years ago, I worried that parts of the progressive movement were dismantling some of the intellectual guardrails against bigotry. The principle used to be simple: Judging people based on immutable characteristics is wrong.

Increasingly, the argument became that some groups deserved less protection than others because of their perceived power. That shift has consequences. …

The evidence suggests that the anti-Israel litmus test inside Democratic politics is not weakening. It is growing stronger. And at the moment, no outside force capable of reversing, or even slowing that movement, is anywhere in sight.

Perhaps third world immigration has brought old ethnic hatreds into the West. Once in power, the haters will act on them.

According to Solzhenitsyn, something similar happened after the Russian revolution. Foreigners (in this case Jews, Georgians, etc.) who hated the Russian people seized control using the sweet promises of communism — and then proceeded to slaughter Russians:

The Voice will be back

The Voice will be back. By Noah Yim in The Australian.

Trade unions have broken with Anthony Albanese’s decree that the Labor movement move on from the failed Indigenous voice, declaring a legislated or constitutional Aboriginal decision-­making body is vital to ending racism in Australia. …

The ACTU is the umbrella ­organisation for unions in the country and often front-runs policy that ends up on the Labor Party’s national platform. The most recent suite of industrial relations reform, Mr Albanese’s recognition of Palestine, and key elements of the government’s latest controversial tax package were all strongly advocated for by the ACTU.

By breaking with Mr Albanese’s policy of listening to voters and never again pushing for an ­Indigenous voice, the ACTU is the first major public institution to re-embrace the Uluru Statement on a national level. The move could ­ignite Indigenous leaders and ­activists who still believe an ­Aboriginal-only decision making body is necessary.

Another referendum perhaps? The ruling class is delusional if they think they will succeed in their second attempt to install a racist governance structure in Australia’s constitution. Unless, perhaps, they first change the electorate.

Leftist activists push Channel 9 into sacking Karl Stefanovich because he interviewed Pauline Hanson and Tommy Robinson

Leftist activists push Channel 9 into sacking Karl Stefanovich because he interviewed Pauline Hanson and Tommy Robinson. By Savanna Young in The Daily Mail.

Karl Stefanovic is reportedly set to resign from Nine following late-night talks amid the fallout from his controversial interview with Tommy Robinson.

The Today show star uploaded a controversial chat with the British far-right activist to his YouTube channel podcast, The Karl Stefanovic Show, on Tuesday, only to delete it hours later after facing widespread backlash [from his political opponents].

On Wednesday evening, The Sydney Morning Herald confirmed Stefanovic’s departure from Nine, indicating the decision was made in part to ‘defuse a major advertiser boycott.’ …

Meanwhile, activist group Mad F**king Witches (MFW) announced that it had launched a campaign against Stefanovic over the podcast with Robinson.

The grassroots organisation is known for launching advertising boycotts against media figures, having previously targeted Kyle Sandilands [who has just come out as a One Nation supporter]. …

The left don’t want us talking about certain topics:

Stefanovic — who has been branded ‘Joe Bogan’ thanks to his attempt at replicating the success of Joe Rogan’s podcast – sparked controversy when he published the interview with Robinson which discussed Islam, immigration and Australian politics.

By Wednesday morning, the interview had vanished from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and The Karl Stefanovic Show YouTube channel.

Marta Jay at The Daily Mail:

Pauline Hanson has assured Karl Stefanovic that he has a job with One Nation should he want it, after the Today host was dropped by Channel Nine on Wednesday. …

Hanson slammed Nine, saying the network would be ‘bloody stupid’ to sack Stefanovic.

‘They’ve gone so far to the left, Channel Nine, they’re making a big mistake,’ the senator said. …

Hanson had earlier backed her ‘good friend’ Karl by uploading his pulled interview with Robinson to her own YouTube channel.

Pauline Hanson put up one minute from the Tommy Robinson interview on her X account:

And put the full interview on her YouTube channel:

Karl has been cancelled by Australia’s ruling class. Welcome to the outsiders, Karl.

UPDATE: The Confidential Daily:

Karl Stefanovic interviewed the wrong bloke, on the wrong subjects, in the wrong tone, and Nine decided he had crossed the line.

Not a legal line. Not even a journalistic line, really. A cultural one.

Karl Stefanovic committed wrongthink.

Stefanovic’s great sin was not simply interviewing Tommy Robinson. Journalists have interviewed all sorts of people over the years. Dictators, terrorists, murderers, fraudsters, extremists, fanatics and every variety of political nutter have been given airtime when it suited a newsroom’s purpose.

No, Karl did something much worse. He treated Robinson like a guest. …

The interview covered immigration, Islam, multiculturalism, free speech and the media. In other words, the list of topics ordinary Australians are allowed to talk about at the kitchen table, in the ute, at work, or over a beer, but only in the correct way in public.

The approved script (as if you didn’t know): …

Mass immigration must always be a blessing. Multiculturalism must always be a triumph. Free speech must always be defended in theory and restricted in practice. Islam can be discussed only with trembling caution. And the media, naturally, must never be accused of being part of the problem.

Karl didn’t follow the approved script:

He didn’t scowl on cue. He didn’t perform the required denunciation before allowing his guest to speak. He didn’t treat Robinson like a radioactive parcel left on the studio floor.

Worse still, he apparently praised his “tenacity” and “courage”. Promotional footage showed the two men looking friendly in London.

That was the real outrage.

Not that the interview existed. Not really. The outrage was the tone. Karl was supposed to cross-examine, condemn, interrupt and posture. Instead, from what we’re told, he had a conversation. …

Cancelled, a high flier’s career up in smoke, and let that be a lesson to everyone else in the Australian media:

Nine did not have to endorse Robinson. Karl did not ask Nine to endorse Robinson. By Nine’s own account, this was an independent podcast. Yet once the right people were offended, independence suddenly counted for nothing.

This is how cancellation works now. It rarely comes with an official stamp. Nobody walks in wearing a black hood. There’s no formal announcement saying, “This man has been punished for unacceptable views.” …

Only Pauline Hanson called them out (i.e. showed leadership):

Pauline Hanson said plainly what plenty of others would only mutter once the door was shut. She accused Nine of trying to sack Stefanovic, called its management weak, and reposted the deleted interview herself.

That, naturally, annoyed the media class even more. The deleted thing was not supposed to reappear. The whole point of pulling it down was to make it disappear into the digital memory hole, where awkward material goes when powerful people decide the public cannot be trusted to watch and make up its own mind.

That is the trick now. They don’t ban interviews. They just pressure people until interviews vanish.

They don’t censor conversations. They just make sure anyone who has the wrong conversation pays a price.

Chalmers’ war on capitalists: Investors are abandoning Australia

Chalmers’ war on capitalists: Investors are abandoning Australia. By Dimitri Burshtein and Peter Swan.

How many Australian businesses must fail before another generation of politicians learns one of the oldest lessons in economics? State-directed planning and political capital allocation is a path to poverty not prosperity.

Capital is one of the most misunderstood things in our public debates. Politicians treat it as a fixed pile in a vault, waiting to be redistributed by the clever and the caring. It is nothing of the sort. Capital is patient money placed at risk on a promise about the future; a bet that the rules will still be the rules in ten years, that a contract signed today will be honoured tomorrow, that the government will not move the goalposts the moment an investment begins to pay off. Remove that confidence and the capital does not get redistributed. It just does not show up.

This is why sovereign risk matters, and it is the quiet catastrophe unfolding in Australia. Not a crash, just a slow bleeding away of the willingness of investors to commit their money.

The Albanese government’s record follows a clear pattern. The superannuation system: Division 296, arriving 1 July, levies an extra impost on larger balances. A tax the government was forced to redesign after first proposing to tax unrealised gains. Negative gearing and capital gains: perennially placed on the table, lifted off, modelled, leaked, denied, now hanging over every investment decision in the country. Each intervention is sold as fairness. Together they deliver one message to anyone with capital: whatever you build here, the government reserves the right to return for a larger slice once you have finished building it.

Then there is gas. Investors sank tens of billions into Australian projects on the understanding that they could sell what they produced at the price the market set. The government changed the terms after the fact with price caps, a mandatory code, rewriting the economics of projects already in the ground. You can argue the politics. What you cannot argue away is the signal. In Australia, the deal you struck is provisional. …

Say goodbye to investment and the capital for productivity improvements — because of sovereign risk caused by left wing government:

Foreign investors do not read Hansard. They do not follow which faction won which preselection. They run a screen across forty countries and flag Australia as elevated risk.

They remember that Australia keeps changing its rules: that signed contracts get reopened, that tax treatment shifts, that the government reserved the right to impose domestic reservation and price caps on gas projects already operational. So they file Australia alongside the economies where political caprice outranks the rule of law.

There will be no single moment of reckoning and no headline that captures it, and that is precisely the danger. A government can preside over the slow flight of capital and never see its own fingerprints on the wreckage, because the damage takes the form of things that simply never happen. The factory not built. The founder who took the idea to Singapore. The pension fund in Toronto that quietly trimmed its Australian weighting and moved on without a word.None of it bleeds in the quarterly figures. None of it can be undone by the next ministerial press release.

Confidence, once a country starts spending it, turns out to be the one form of capital no treasurer can borrow back. Somewhere on a screen in Tokyo or Seoul, Australia has already moved a few places down the list. No announcement. No media conference. Just a lower number beside a country that should know better.

Australia is going to get relatively poorer for several years ahead, because the big government team is ascendant — high taxes to pay for all those jobs and welfare for its supporters.

The current government makes the Hawke and Howard years look brilliant in comparison. We’re back at Whitlam-level craziness. Like many third word rulers, the Whitlam Government apparently didn’t understand sovereign risk.

Good Riddance to Tucker Carlson

Good Riddance to Tucker Carlson. By John Hinderaker at Powerline.

Carlson says he is leaving the Republican Party …::

“I’m out,” Carlson said on an episode of the “Can’t Be Censored” podcast … “And if I’m out, then I think a lot of other people are out.” … “I would not support the Republican Party. There’s no chance I would support the Republican Party,” Carlson said, adding that the GOP has “betrayed” voters by prioritizing Israel’s national security over America’s.

Carlson apparently thinks we have no national security interest in degrading the military power of an adversary whose mantra for decades has been “death to America,” that refers to us as “the Great Satan,” that has killed hundreds if not thousands of American servicemen, that has sought for many years to acquire both nuclear weapons and ICBMs to deliver them to our shores.

Not to mention that Iran is the principal — almost the only — source of instability in the Middle East. Has any American president in the last 50 years questioned that we have a national security interest in peace in that region? …

Prediction: he’ll switch to the party of antisemitism:

Carlson said in the same interview that “he also won’t support Democrats and is unsure how he’ll vote moving forward.” I say: go ahead, Tucker, take the plunge. If anti-Semitism is the defining feature of your political philosophy, you have a natural home in the Democratic Party. “Right wing” commentator and fellow anti-Semite Nick Fuentes has already announced that he has become a Democrat. It is the natural next step. Watch for Carlson to take it before long.

Rabbi Michael Barclay at PJ Media:

Tucker has spent almost three years pushing an agenda of anti-Semitism, justifying Iran and Qatar, claiming that Qatar is safer for Christians than Israel (churches are not even allowed in Qatar), and attacking President Donald Trump, the MAGA movement, and America itself. Carlson has given platforms on his show to people who are conspiracy theory nuts, promoters of some of the worst hate in America, and those on the very outside fringe of society, such as white supremacist Nick Fuentes, Holocaust denier Darryl Cooper, and Ian Carroll, who believes that Jews are responsible for every evil in the world from 9/11 on.

Carlson has also repeatedly and increasingly demonstrated distinct signs of clinical mental illness during this time, and been disavowed and distanced by President Trump, who has called Tucker a “fool” and a “low IQ person”. …

As he has sunk into the realm of being a bad propaganda outlet, it has also become clear that Tucker’s attitudes havechanged subsequent to his interviews and visits to Iran and Qatar (where he has now bought a home).

Laura Loomer has written about Tucker being paid by Qatar, and calls him Tucker Qatarlson, a nickname picked up all over social media. Mark Levin calls him a “desperate man” who leaks and makes up stories; and that is really the best description of the current Tucker Carlson: desperate. Desperate for money, popularity, relevance, and obedience to his Islamic financiers (in addition to potential Qatari money he may currently be receiving; the Tucker Carlson Network was initially funded by an American Muslim), Tucker has become a caricature of himself and has lost credibility in the eyes of all but the most extreme in our society.

A shame. The man used to be brilliant at analyzing US political trends. As we noted several times, however, his feet turned to clay whenever he commented on things outside the US.

The left have a newfound love of Tucker now.

Aussie Judges Issues Secret Order Protecting Muslims Who Threatened to Kill Jews

Aussie Judges Issues Secret Order Protecting Muslims Who Threatened to Kill Jews. By Daniel Greenfield at Front Page.

You may remember this story of Muslims working in Australian hospitals threatening to kill Jews. …

Asked what would happen if an Israeli patient came into the hospital, [female nurse] Abu Lebdeh says: “I won’t treat them, I will kill them.”

 

 

This happened at Bankstown hospital. After the Muslim terrorist attack aimed at a Chanukah party at Bondi Beach, a Jewish victim was checked in under a fake name so she wouldn’t be harmed by the Muslim employees.

She was struck in the head by shrapnel and began bleeding heavily before she was admitted to Liverpool Hospital under her real name, with her surname and Jewish religion recorded.

“Next day, just before the operation, some administration staff came and she said, ‘We have to change your name’,” she said.

“They cut my (wristband) and put my new band on with ‘Karen Jones’ without any religions,” Ms Shikhverg told Sky News.

“In my opinion, they were afraid of staff (confronting me). They can’t trust their own staff,” she said.

“Now do Jewish people have to be afraid to go to (a) public hospital?”

So what happened to the nurses who made those threats on camera?

But if you assumed the system would give the Muslims a pass, you guessed correctly. It’s happened by way of a secret order which falsely classified the public social media interaction as an illicitly obtained ‘private conversation’ and blocked the video, and therefore the evidence, for holding them accountable. …

Why? Well, as the Australian op-ed correctly notes (and as much of the media misreported) the answer is secret. …

Why can’t it be published? This isn’t a judgement involving some classified information, but a widely published social media interaction. And yet it must be kept secret from us while ensuring that the case against them collapses. …

Consequences? Not for the Muslim nurses:

Patients will continue hiding out and hoping not to be murdered by Muslim hospital workers.

Bimini Plesser in The Australian:

Sarah Abu Lebdeh and Ahmad Rashad Nadir made global headlines last year after Israeli influencer Max Ilinski recorded their conversation in an online chatroom, in which Mr Nadir suggested he had sent Israeli patients to “hell” while Ms Abu Lebdeh allegedly told Mr Ilinski he was going to “die the most disgusting death”.

In an extraordinary ruling, NSW District Court judge Michael McHugh on Tuesday declared the viral video was inadmissible and could not form part of the evidence against the former nurses, as it was unlawful for Mr Ilinski to have recorded and shared the private conversation.

The lawyer who successfully argued a video of two Sydney nurses allegedly threatening to kill Israeli patients should be thrown out of evidence has warned prosecutors that any bid to have the evidence reintroduced would be “doomed to fail”.

Chris Merritt in The Australian on the secrecy

Normally, when judges make important decisions, they hand down judgments outlining their reasoning so everyone can see, hopefully, that justice has been done. But not so in this case. ….

Section 138 also says illegally obtained evidence can be still be used if “the desirability of admitting the evidence outweighs undesirability of admitting the evidence”.

Rule of law? Our ruling class override it with their prejudices and self-interest.

hat-tip Matthew T.

Mixed race couples relentlessly displayed is social enforcement leading to demographic decline

Mixed race couples relentlessly displayed is social enforcement leading to demographic decline. By Cellina101.

Before reading further, open a new browser tab and type the search term “married white woman” into Google Images. Scroll through the first several rows of results. What do you see?

The output which is consistently replicated across different devices and geographic locations is a deluge of mixed-race couples. The output is overwhelmingly dominated by images of white women intimately paired with black or non-white men. To the casual observer passively consuming this digital output, the presentation establishes an immediate baseline for normalcy. The volume and priority of these specific demographic pairings create the distinct impression that such relationships are the standard, ubiquitous, and foundational reality of modern Western society.

 

 

Lies, lies, lies:

Yet, when we contrast this algorithmic simulation with reality, a massive discrepancy emerges. … Out of over 51 million married white women in the United States, less than 1% are married to black men.

Propaganda:

Despite this statistical rarity, the digital simulation feels entirely “normal” to the modern consumer because media giants like Google, alongside massive stock photography conglomerates like Getty Images and Shutterstock, consciously and relentlessly curate it that way. …

Deliberate:

It is an intentional act of social enforcement, by artificially elevating specific demographic pairings, media platforms execute a subtle but pervasive socio-cultural engineering project.

It can thus be argued that this engineered visual output serves a distinct ideological purpose: pushing European women toward demographic change and eroding the visual primacy of the homogeneous nuclear family that built and sustained Western nation-states for centuries. …

The native majority is conditioned to view their own demographic decline as an organic, inevitable, and morally righteous progression.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Standing armies lead to high-taxing bureaucracies, which squash liberty, innovation, and capitalism

Standing armies lead to high-taxing bureaucracies, which squash liberty, innovation, and capitalism. By Martin Durkin.

The best big picture explanation for today’s politics. An eight out of ten on the political incorrectness scale.