“Because I am a Muslim”: Media cover-up in Germany as Afghan smashes up church

“Because I am a Muslim”: Media cover-up in Germany as Afghan smashes up church, by Diversity Macht Frei.

Afghan who ripped up church

It happened a week ago, but the police kept quiet about the incident and the church management did not file a complaint, it has only just come out: last Friday a 19-year-old Afghan stormed into the Versöhnungskirche [Church of Reconciliation] at around 7.20 pm in an open community evening in the Eilbek district of Hamburg.

He threw chairs and benches around, kicked over a Bible stand, splintered the glass and threw hymn books onto the ground. According to an eye-witness, the church-goes present were very afraid and let him continue his destruction. No wonder, he was wearing swirling Islamic dress, which might have hidden a suicide belt.

The Muslim did not speak during his destructive rage and also had no connections to Salafists, therefore the State Protection department of the state criminal prosecution agency assumes there was no “Islamist” motive.

…Eyewitness Peter H, who sent PI the photo of the Afghan attacker, reports that he asked the Muslim in front of the church why he had done it as he ended his affray. The Afghan then screamed the answer: “Because I am a Muslim!”

hat-tip Stephen Neil

California to proclaim August “Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month”

California to proclaim August “Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month”, by Robert Spencer.

This is being done at the behest of Hamas-linked CAIR. … CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements.

Meanwhile, when do the families of the victims of jihad get their moment in the sun? When is Victims of Jihad Appreciation and Awareness Month?

And will there be special celebrations of Muslim Appreciation and Awareness Month in San Bernardino?

Difficult to believe that the California Democrats could be so insensitive and dopey.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Nice Attack Remembrance March Banned Due To Islamist Threat

Nice Attack Remembrance March Banned Due To Islamist Threat, by Liam Deacon.

A remembrance march for victims of the Islamic State truck attack in Nice, France has been banned because of continuing safety concerns and stretched security services. …

More than 10,000 people indicated on Facebook that they would attend the “white march” to remember the 84 who died and the dozens still in hospital.

Christine WIlliamson comments:

Jihadist enemies of Western freedoms and democracy remain smug and emboldened. Following the slaughter in Nice, France when 31-year-old Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel mowed through a crowd going zigzag with his truck to kill as many possible while shouting “Allahu akbar”, a remembrance march for the 84 people he murdered and the dozens he wounded — many of whom are still in the hospital — was banned because of safety concerns.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Reports Turkish troops have sealed off Incirlik US/NATO nuclear air base

Reports Turkish troops have sealed off Incirlik US/NATO nuclear air base, by Jamie Seidel.

TURKISH citizens and police have ‘surrounded’ the Incirlik air base it operates with the United States — and where a large stockpile of NATO nuclear weapons is held — ahead of a visit by a senior US official tomorrow.

Reports out of Turkey suggest all entrances to the air base have been blocked by heavy vehicles and police sent to secure its peremiter.

The unusual night-time move sparked rumours of a second coup attempt on Turkish social media, with concerned citizens rushing to the air base to join the blockade.

The move comes less than a week after a top US Army general was accused by Turkish media of ‘leading’ the uprising against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan earlier this month.

But Turkish Minister for European Affairs has since reportedly sought to reassure local media, stating the mission was just a “safety inspection”.

German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck is famously supposed to have said “Never Believe Anything Until It Is Officially Denied.” That safety inspection statement smacks of official denial.

Election Justice USA Study Finds that Without Election Fraud Sanders Would Have Won by Landslide

Election Justice USA Study Finds that Without Election Fraud Sanders Would Have Won by Landslide, by Joynter. We don’t normally source stories from the hyper-left site “The Daily Kos,” but they report an interesting claim with some justification.

Election Justice USA finds that Bernie Sanders lost an estimated 184 delegates to Election Fraud.

Well, 184 is only the upper estimate considering election fraud. Not even counting in the immense MSM bias, lack of debates, DNC bias/shenenigans outside of fraud, Hillary’s huge funding thanks to corruption… It should have been a landslide for Bernie!

Cruise and Hillary Clinton, the truth!

Snopes Caught Lying About Lack Of American Flags At Democratic Convention

Snopes Caught Lying About Lack Of American Flags At Democratic Convention, by Peter Hasson.

Myth-busting website Snopes flagrantly lied about the lack of visible American flags on the first day of the Democratic Convention, claiming an image from the second day of the convention was actually from the first day in an attempt to debunk a factual story from The Daily Caller.

Shame on them. Even the debunking site Snopes feels it has to bend the truth to help Hillary. There is a widespread throwing of principles out the window as US politics goes tribal.

Hillary Lead Over Trump Surges After Reuters “Tweaks” Poll

Hillary Lead Over Trump Surges After Reuters “Tweaks” Poll, by Tyler Durden.

Over the past week, there was a troubling development for the establishment: Trump was soaring in the polls. In fact, in the widely watched, Reuters/IPSOS poll, for the first time Trump had taken an inexcusable 1 point lead following the Republican National convention.

So, as we reported last night, something had to be done. And something was done: Reuters “tweaked” its polling methodology. …

[A]ccording to Reuters “the inclusion of the word “Neither” is capturing Soft Trump supporters who, if given such an option, prefer not to make a choice. Here it is important to note that the soft supporter phenomenon also affects Clinton, but to a much lesser degree.”

As a result, the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll – pre Friday evening – had Trump 40.2%, Clinton 38.5%, but, on a “pro forma” basis, eliminating “Neither” from the “Neither/Other” answer produced a different result. In that case, Clinton was ahead, 40% to 36%.

In other words, the real reason for the “tweak” was to push Hillary back in the lead simply due to a change in the question phrasing methodology.

With the first new poll under the new polling “approach” due to be released last night, we predicted that it would show a dramtic rebound for Hillary, just as Trump was picking up steam, and in doing so changing the entire frontrunner narrative from the ground up.

Hillary won the Democrat nomination over Sanders in large part because of the appointed “super delegates” and because the supposedly-neutral DNC was pushing strongly for her. Now the “umpires” in the larger race are bending the rules for her. A more attractive candidate is hard to imagine.

Yes, boys, you CAN have sex slaves: Outrage as British Muslim cleric at mosque where Cardiff jihadis were radicalised tells teenagers that ‘captives’ are permissible under Islam

Yes, boys, you CAN have sex slaves: Outrage as British Muslim cleric at mosque where Cardiff jihadis were radicalised tells teenagers that ‘captives’ are permissible under Islam, by Nick Craven.

A hardline Muslim preacher suspected of radicalising three British jihadis told teenage disciples that it is ‘permissible’ under Islam to have sex slaves.

Ali Hammuda, an Imam at a Cardiff mosque where three young jihadis from the city worshipped before travelling to Syria to join Islamic State, also told the group of boys as young as 13 that the ‘day of judgment is close’.

The cleric’s extraordinary preachings were recorded secretly at a halaqa, or religious study circle, at the Al-Manar mosque by an undercover reporter.

The New Ruling Class: the Hereditary Elite Formed by Meritocracy

The New Ruling Class: the Hereditary Elite Formed by Meritocracy, by Helen Andrews.

A problem with meritocracy is that some of  the qualities that allow people success in life are hereditary, the most controversial one being IQ. Universal education and a meritocratic system has led to a hereditary elite, where members of the elite marry each other, make good money, then buy great educations for their kids. This phenomenon has become quite marked among the better schools in the US — the Ivy league universities plus a handful of others. This is where the elite meet, marry, and find future jobs.

Many influential major organizations in the US  now basically only hire from these top universities, ignoring the bulk of state universities, and most all the members of these organizations went to such schools and only hire from such schools. The US is now increasingly run by graduates of these same few schools. The same happens in Australia to a lesser extent, but it is less obvious. It seems to the elite that this caste system is based on merit and is therefore the natural order of things. But is it the best way to run society? Best for whom?

Yale Univesity

Vanderbilt Hall, Yale University

Toby [Young] is the son of Michael Young, the British sociologist and Labour life peer whose 1958 satire The Rise of the Meritocracy has been credited with coining the term. … If meritocracy creates a new caste system, “the answer is more meritocracy.” To restore equality of opportunity, he suggested subsidies for intelligence-maximizing embryo selection for poor parents “with below-average IQs.”

His outlandish resort to eugenics suggests that Toby Young found himself at a loss for solutions, as all modern critics of meritocracy seem to do. The problems they describe are fundamental, but none of their remedies are more than tweaks to make the system more efficient or less prejudicial to the poor.

[O]ur authors fail as critics of meritocracy because they cannot get their heads outside of it. They are incapable of imagining what it would be like not to believe in it. They assume the validity of the very thing they should be questioning.

But what would it be like not to take meritocracy for granted? The basic idea — that we should rank candidates for power according to some desirable quality, then pick the best of them — seems too obvious to have needed inventing, but invented it was, and (at least in the West) not so long ago. If we go back to the occasion of its first appearance in the English-speaking world [in 1854, as a way of selecting entrants into the then-incompetent British public service], we will find a group of men who opposed it, not just because they did not think it would work in practice, but because they disagreed with it in principle. …

When the idea of meritocratic exams for entry to the British bureaucracy was first proposed in 1854:

… it is remarkable how unanimously the educators favored the plan and how unanimously the mandarins opposed it. The report’s finely phrased ideas would collapse in practice, the latter warned. For instance, replacing promotion by seniority with more subjective “promotion according to merit” would give free rein to favoritism. In departments that had experimented with qualifying exams, supervisors found that the tests put money in the pockets of “crammers” but did little for productivity. To its opponents, the whole thing smelled like a schoolmasters’ scheme.

There was also worry about what throwing competition open to all comers would do to the service’s social tone. “The more the civil service is recruited from the lower classes, the less it will be sought after by the higher,” warned the MP Edward Romilly. This was not mere snobbery. If the government wanted civil servants who could stand up to MPs, financiers, and foreign statesmen, it had to recruit men of comparable social standing. …

Other objections approached closer to the principle. There were, first of all, questions of democratic accountability. Civil servants who felt they owed their jobs to no one and nothing but their own merit would be independent, which was also to say impervious to checks and balances. They would not derive their power from the people even by so remote a means as a parliamentary patron. … the voters of England were used to treating office as among “the legitimate prizes of war” after elections, “not merely for its emoluments, but also for the sake of influencing administration.” It was almost a kind of direct democracy.

A greater concern was that meritocracy would produce an overweening centralized state.

The reforms were adopted by the British in 1870, and are arguably at the root of today’s problems with oversized and activist government:

There is no question that the size of government did explode. The staff of the civil service tripled in fifty years and then doubled in ten, hitting 281,000 on the eve of World War I. Obviously, this was mainly because the government had taken on so many more tasks — but one reason for that was that the public had come to trust that the government was full of people who knew what they were doing. Interference that would have never been tolerated in the bad old days of jobbery was now justified by the national government’s (largely meretricious) mystique as a repository of intelligence.

[I]intelligent people who are bored by their jobs will make their jobs interesting as far as possible — which, when civil servants do it, is not necessarily to the public good.

Meritocracy called into being an entirely new class, partly taken from the old gentry, partly from the new commercial class, and loyal to neither. Between 1870 and World War I, this new class took possession of all the former pillars of the old aristocracy’s power, not just the civil service but the army, the bar, local government, party associations, and the church.

Well that explains a lot about our current woes. So what are we to do?

Meritocracy began by destroying an aristocracy; it has ended in creating a new one. …

But the solutions on offer never rise to the scale of the problem. Authors attack the meritocratic machine with screwdrivers, not sledgehammers, and differ only in which valve they want to adjust. Some think the solution is to tip more disadvantaged kids over the lip of the intake funnel, which would probably make things worse. … has anyone asked working-class families if being sucked into a frantically achievement-obsessed rat race is a benefaction they are interested in? …

[U]nless families are abolished, successful parents will always pass on advantages to their children, which will compound with each generation. It does not matter how merit is defined; the dynamic of meritocracy remains the same, its operations inexorable.

The author offers a novel solution:

My solution is quite different. The meritocracy is hardening into an aristocracy — so let it. Every society in history has had an elite, and what is an aristocracy but an elite that has put some care into making itself presentable? Allow the social forces that created this aristocracy to continue their work, and embrace the label.

By all means this caste should admit as many worthy newcomers as is compatible with their sense of continuity. New brains, like new money, have been necessary to every ruling class, meritocratic or not. If ethnic balance is important to meritocrats, they should engineer it into the system. If geographic diversity strikes them as important, they should ensure that it exists, ideally while keeping an eye on the danger of hoovering up all of the native talent from regional America.

But they must give up any illusion that such tinkering will make them representative of the country over which they preside. They are separate, parochial in their values, unique in their responsibilities. That is what makes them aristocratic.

A tough sell, I realize. Not since the Society of the Cincinnati has a ruling elite so vehemently disclaimed any resemblance to an aristocracy.

Ah, now we get to a serious flaw in the current arrangement, one that is distressingly obvious to one who has seen it close up:

Here [is] the meritocratic delusion most in need of smashing: the notion that the people who make up our elite are especially smart. They are not — and I do not mean that in the feel-good democratic sense that we are all smart in our own ways, the homely-wise farmer no less than the scholar.

I mean that the majority of meritocrats are, on their own chosen scale of intelligence, pretty dumb. Grade inflation first hit the Ivies in the late 1960s for a reason. Yale professor David Gelernter has noticed it in his students: “They are so ignorant that it’s hard to accept how ignorant they are. It’s very hard to grasp that the person you’re talking to, who is bright, articulate, conversable, interested, doesn’t know who Beethoven is. Looking back at the history of the twentieth century, just sees a fog.”

It was the meritocratic ideology that paved this road to ignorance. Being open to all comers, with intelligence the only criterion, meant that no particular body of knowledge could be made mandatory … , lest it arbitrarily exclude students conversant only with their own traditions. This has predictably yielded a generation of students who have no body of knowledge at all.

Unlike meritocracies, aristocracies can put actual content into their curricula — not just academically, but morally. Every aristocracy has an ethos, and a good ethos will balance out the moral faults to which that aristocracy is prone.

The task of reforming our present elite ought to be entrusted to someone with a feeling for what is good in it. For all its flaws, this elite does have many virtues. Their moral seriousness contrasts favorably with the frivolousness of certain earlier generations, and their sense of pragmatism, which can sometimes be reductive, can also be admirably brisk and hard-nosed. What is needed is someone who can summon a picture of the meritocratic elite’s best selves and call them to meet its example. But this process can begin only when this new ruling class finally owns up to the only name for what it already, undeniably is.

Apologies for such a long post, but it grapples quite directly with several of the biggest problems of our age. Almost no one questions the dominance of good test takers. Almost no one ponders how our bureaucracy became so large and activist, beyond noticing the obvious connection with taxes. And no one is thinking about how to make our permanent government of bureaucrats, academics and media accountable to the people whom they govern. Chucking them out after an election is a bit much, but it would probably be an improvement on the current mess!

By the way, the author (whom I do not know) and I both attended top US schools. I can vouch from first hand experience that the phenomenon is very real and obvious in the US, and presumably only slightly less so in Australia.

Koch brothers network rules out anti-Clinton ads, denied meeting requests from Trump

Koch brothers network rules out anti-Clinton ads, denied meeting requests from Trump, by Theodore Schleifer.

David Koch

The powerful political network helmed by Charles and David Koch is ruling out running advertisements intended to hurt Hillary Clinton, another sign of their insistence on avoiding the presidential race.

The Koch network has previously said they will not back Republican candidate Donald Trump, but on Saturday officials told reporters that they would not run negative Clinton spots, a position taken by some Republican groups that are uneasy with the controversial GOP standard-bearer. …

The Kochs have assembled a political operation some consider to be on par with the Republican National Committee, using a constellation of nonprofit organizations to drive elections and policy fights in recent years. They today have 1,200 paid staff members in 38 states.

Yet their refusal to back Trump — whose language on immigration and trade is found to be too incendiary by the libertarian-inspired Kochs — is a leading reason why Trump is expected to be massively outgunned by Clinton and her allies in the advertising wars.

The left may have to find new bogey men. They currently trace everyone they wish to smear back to the Kochs (David Koch pictured), and claim their vast money is behind all right wing causes. It’s not, and George Soros funds far more, but don’t let that stand in the way of the leftist story about how they are really underdogs oppressed by a vast right wing conspiracy.

Christians pay price as Turkey turns to Islam after attempted coup

Christians pay price as Turkey turns to Islam after attempted coup, by Marco Giannengeli.

[The night of the coup] presented different opportunities as hardline Muslim Sunnis, whipped up to a frenzy, targeted Turkey’s Christian community.

In Matalya, a sprawling city in Anatolia, once the heartland of Christianity in the East, they targeted a Protestant church. … Gangs chanting “Allahu akbar” rounded on it to smash its glass frontage. “The attack on the church was light. But it’s significant that it was the only shopfront attack in those three days,” said its minister, Pastor Tim Stone, last night. “We were the only targets.”

In the Black Sea city of Trabzon others attacked the Santa Maria church, smashing windows and using hammers to break down its door. …

A year earlier Father Andrea Santoro, a 61-year-old Roman Catholic priest, was murdered in the Santa Maria Church. Father Santoro was shot from behind while kneeling in prayer in the church. Witnesses heard the murderer, aged 16, shouting “Allahu Akbar”….

Turkey, which once boasted two million Christians, has barely 120,000 now, fewer even than Iran. But what shocked people most about July 15’s attacks was how much hatred still remains after almost 10 years.

Though it is nominally a secular republic there can be little doubt that the government and Turkey’s 117,000 Sunni imams work together. …

“Turkey is like Iran in 1975,” said one Iranian in Istanbul. “I’m sure we will see it become an Islamic Republic very soon.”

Turkey is switching from nominally secular to an Islamist state, and presumably it will not join Europe or continue in NATO.

Free speech against abortion hasn’t got a prayer

Free speech against abortion hasn’t got a prayer. Angela Shanahan exposes the simple hypocrisy of the left and its right to dissent.

When is free speech and peaceful protest in a free society against the law? Apparently only when it is about, abortion. In Tasmania, Victoria and the ACT, exclusion zones have been put in place to prevent any anti-abortion demonstration, and in NSW the Greens are advocating similar zones.

If you think these protestors were holding up dismembered and blood covered baby dolls, or graphic images, like other protestors like to do, think again.

On Wednesday, Graham Preston was the latest person to be fined for such a protest. Preston was arrested in Hobart in April last year for standing peacefully near an abortion clinic, holding a sign saying: “Everyone has the right to life, Article 3 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” The back said: “Every child has the right to life, Article 6 Convention on the Rights of the Child.” Another sign held by someone else showed an unborn child eight weeks from conception. Preston was fined $3000.

What a terrifying public spectacle. But wait, it gets worse. That was in Hobart. Just look at what those crazed Christian fundamentalists got up to in the ACT.

Kerry Mellor is part of a group that has been assembling to pray outside 1 Moore Street every Friday for 18 years. In the past they had a sign that said “pray to end abortion”, some “choose life” signs and holy pictures. They were essentially religious protests and didn’t have any material to give out. Most people wanting abortion went in the side door. A few people looked askance or spat at the group, and sometimes people joined in the prayers. But there was never any great confrontation. The group became a sort of Canberra institution, “the people outside the abortion clinic”.

After the exclusion zone around the ACT abortion clinic run by Marie Stopes International was put into place in March, Mellor was fined $750, in April. However, he was able to contest and it was withdrawn because he wasn’t in the exclusion zone but on an opposite corner. So then the ACT government changed the zone.

The zone now includes most of the street and a good portion of other streets to make it difficult for anyone to see any of the group.

However, recently on Friday morning, Mellor was within the zone accompanied by others. There were six police and three vehicles including a paddy wagon. Other members of the group moved on. Mellor claims, “I was alone … I prayed silently, the sergeant greeted me and asked me did I know I was within the protected area. Was I aware I was engaged in prohibited behaviour? I replied that prayer is not prohibited. He said it was in that area.”

Mellor continued to pray silently with his hands in his pockets. He didn’t display his rosary but they continued to ask what he was doing. Mellor asked what was the evidence of protest. Then, according to Mellor, the policeman said he saw him “bow his head and make sign of the cross” and this was evidence of his offence of protest in protected area. Prayer was the defining element of the offence. Mellor has been issued a criminal infringement notice. He does not intend to pay a fine because he feels his religious liberty, his right to peaceful silent religious expression, is being infringed. He says the only way to resolve this is in a court.

“Prayer was the defining element of the offence”.  What I find amazing is how brittle and thin-skinned our brave cultural victors are (the left has won the culture war, right Mike?) when faced merely with the image of a bowed head and a silent signing of the cross.

What does it matter if he prays, if you don’t believe in his god or his moral convictions? You won the war, you are a free secular state that bows to no god. He is one man, standing on a street corner, thinking silent thoughts.

What right have you to tell him what to think, and where to think it? If you are comfortable with your actions, your legality and your morality, why are you offended by his silent presence in our public square?

You do not have to share Right to Life’s view about abortion to be concerned about this dangerous development.

Indeed. But those who do share this view must take heed. Merely holding these views is dangerous to your legal status, security, employment and social standing.   It has become civil disobedience merely to think the wrong thoughts in a public place.

Hedge-Fund Money: $48.5 Million for Hillary Clinton, $19,000 for Donald Trump

Hedge-Fund Money: $48.5 Million for Hillary Clinton, $19,000 for Donald Trump, by John Carney.

Owners and employees of hedge funds have made $122.7 million in campaign contributions this election cycle, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics—more than twice what they gave in the entire 2012 cycle and nearly 14% of total money donated from all sources so far.

Rich people vote Democrat nowadays. The post-modern left is the home of the global elite, not the worker.

Venezuela’s new decree: Forced farm work for citizens

Venezuela’s new decree: Forced farm work for citizens, by Patrick Gillespie.

A new decree by Venezuela’s government could make its citizens work on farms to tackle the country’s severe food shortages.

That “effectively amounts to forced labor,” according to Amnesty International, which derided the decree as “unlawful.”

In a vaguely-worded decree, Venezuelan officials indicated that public and private sector employees could be forced to work in the country’s fields for at least 60-day periods, which may be extended “if circumstances merit.”

Talk about reproducible results. This often happens when socialism gets excessive. It’s a complete mystery to those on the left with no understanding of economics or people.

Emasculated West Primed For a Muscular, Muslim Takeover. Why western girls travel to join ISIS fighters.

Emasculated West Primed For a Muscular, Muslim Takeover. Why western girls travel to join ISIS fighters. Hana Mercer.

Programed as they are in feminist myth-making, journalists, young and old, often ask incredulously, “Why would western girls travel to join ISIS fighters?” “ISIS men don’t believe in equality between the sexes.”

At heart, neither do women. Not when hormones rage.

Islamic State projects strength. Strength is an aphrodisiac. Women are biologically programmed to be attracted to powerful men. That’s one reason some girls willingly put on black nose bags and flock to become ISIS brides.

Brainwashed to think biology is incidental, and that men and women are essentially interchangeable; younger readers will likely find it harder to grasp something as primordial and important as the male-female biological category.

Sheikh Muhammad Ayed has no such problem. Speaking in a deep, sonorous voice; in what sounds like classical Arabic, this imam can be observed on YouTube delivering a sermon from East Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque. The object of Sheikh Ayed’s coruscating derision is the emasculated West. It is primed for a muscular, Muslim takeover, he argues.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

We Should Not Accept Scientific Results That Have Not Been Repeated

We Should Not Accept Scientific Results That Have Not Been Repeated, by Ahmed Alkhateeb.

A few years ago, I became aware of serious problem in science: the irreproducibility crisis.

A group of researchers at Amgen, an American pharmaceutical company, attempted to replicate 53 landmark cancer discoveries in close collaboration with the authors. Many of these papers were published in high-impact journals and came from prestigious academic institutions. To the surprise of everyone involved, they were able to replicate only six of those papers—approximately 11 percent.  …

The institutionalization of science in the early decades of the 20th century created a scientific sub-culture, with its own reward systems, behaviors, and social norms. The rest of society sees this sphere a bit differently: Scientists are portrayed as selfless individuals who are solely motivated by curiosity and a hunger for knowledge. However, the existence of the irreproducibility crisis implies that other motives may also exist. …

Sociologists of science have consistently identified “public recognition” as scientists’ primary motivating factor. …The inconvenient truth is that scientists can achieve fame and advance their careers through accomplishments that do not prioritize the quality of their work. If recognition is not based on quality, then scientists will not modify their behaviors to select for it. In the culture of modern science, it is better to be wrong than to be second. …

Objective quality should be based on the concept of independent replication: A finding would not be accepted as true unless it is independently verified.

Most people still don’t seem to realize that the carbon dioxide theory of global warming is based entirely on a model, which is to say it is theoretical. There is no empirical evidence to back it up, let alone reproducible evidence. In fact there is considerable empirical evidence to say it is dead wrong, namely the missing hotspot — and also the pause in warming for the last 15+ years isn’t exactly supportive. Yet the global elite is fully supportive of the theory … perhaps because regulating emissions of carbon dioxide requires a global bureaucracy.

hat-tip Matthew

IMF admits disastrous love affair with the euro and apologises for the immolation of Greece

IMF admits disastrous love affair with the euro and apologises for the immolation of Greece, by Ambrose Pritchard-Evans.

The IMF’s chief Christine Lagarde is presiding over an organisation that is almost out of control.

Christine Lagarde

The International Monetary Fund’s top staff misled their own board, made a series of calamitous misjudgments in Greece, became euphoric cheerleaders for the euro project, ignored warning signs of impending crisis, and collectively failed to grasp an elemental concept of currency theory.

This is the lacerating verdict of the IMF’s top watchdog on the fund’s tangled political role in the eurozone debt crisis, the most damaging episode in the history of the Bretton Woods institutions.

That’s what happens when a bunch of PC people take over a technical institution. They trade off its past good reputation, but of course the political hacks ruin it shortly thereafter.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Why the alt-right isn’t wrong The Trump-supporting vigilantes of conservatism dismiss the mainstream as spineless cuckolds

Why the alt-right isn’t wrong. The Trump-supporting vigilantes of conservatism dismiss the mainstream as spineless cuckolds. James Delingpole recognizes the political re-alignment.

I got told off this week by a presenter on BBC radio for using a four-letter word live on air. In my defence, I was merely quoting a tweet from a black Hollywood comedy star called Leslie Jones which said: ‘Lord have mercy… white people shit’  [as an example of]: one rule for progressives and accepted victim groups; quite another for everyone else.

This is why I took very strong exception to a piece written by Brendan O’Neill on Coffee House condemning Milo and his Twitter followers as ‘alt-right angries, convinced the world is one big lefty, feminist plot to ruin your average white dude’s life’ and ‘as anti-PC, bedroom-bound fans of Trump and strangers to sexual intercourse’. It seems to me that if you’re going to campaign for fairness and free speech — as Brendan frequently and heroically does — then you need correctly to identify the true enemy.

A new kid on the political block, still vaguely defined, is the Alt-Right.

Western cilivization, some icons

For years, from America to Europe to Australia, on a whole range of social issues from the environment to gay marriage to multiculturalism, diversity and gender, mainstream conservatism has far too eagerly conceded territory to the progressive opposition in order to demonstrate its caring, fluffy side. Even when conservative administrations have been in office they have failed to arrest the leftwards drift of the culture.

Clearly something had to give and just recently it has. Possibly it had some influence on the Brexit vote; definitely it helps explain the rise and rise of Donald Trump.

For most voters it’s just a feeling — the sense that they don’t recognise their own country anymore; that they’re being bullied and constrained just for being who they are — but for a certain kind of red-meat conservative intellectual it has coalesced into a movement (albeit loosely defined and fissiparous, mostly existing only in internet chat rooms and on social media pages) known as the alt-right.

This is not that old anti-Semitic and racist nonsense. Maybe another label was needed? Maybe just anti-PC?

Part of me feels uncomfortable defending the alt-right because it has been associated with anti-Semitism and racism. Yes, most of this stuff is confected and insincere — just mischievous internet kids experimenting with irony, knowing that if there’s one way absolutely guaranteed to rile the grown-ups it’s a hideously tasteless Holocaust joke. But undeniably for some of the alt-right’s more extreme exponents, it’s a sincere expression of their philosophical core.

Ultimately … it’s about the idea that white culture (which they identify interchangeably with western civilisation) is under threat and must be preserved for the future of the race.

Hence the alt-right’s violent objection to immigration; hence the nationalistic ‘America first’ theme of Trump’s campaigning: it all appeals to that increasingly popular impulse, from northern England to middle America to Angela Merkel’s immigrant-friendly Germany, that this represents ordinary white folks’ last chance to preserve their culture and traditions before they’re overwhelmed by the dusky hordes.

Mainstream conservatism, of the kind that has existed for the last 40 years, is not good enough anymore. It has been roundly defeated by political correctness, acquiescing and eventually kowtowing to every PC whim.

Should more mainstream conservatives be worried by this? Well yes, of course, but they have largely themselves to blame. It’s why the alt-right refers to them disparagingly as ‘cuckservatives’ — that is, cuckolds whose spinelessness, compromise and me-too virtue signalling has enabled the social justice warriors of the progressive left to take so much territory.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

‘Islam is now front & center of Turkey’s foreign policy’

‘Islam is now front & center of Turkey’s foreign policy’, by RT.

In Turkey, an anti-US rally has been held at the NATO airbase in Incirlik. People waved Turkish flags and chanted anti-US slogans. The base is a crucial US facility, home to 2,000 American troops as well as 250 German soldiers, and most importantly, the base houses nuclear warheads. …

Because so many Turks have become Islamists because Erdogan has become their president, because Islam has become the front and center of their foreign policy. And in times of crisis people don’t think logically. They think culturally, if you will. For 500 years, Ottomans and Europeans were at odds with one another.

For 50 years there was no war. During NATO times, Turkey joined the Western alliance. And now that there is no Soviet Union, Turkey feels that the whole West is against it.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Trump & Religious Conservatives

Trump & Religious Conservatives, by Rod Dreher.

Democrats see [religious liberty] as a code phrase for anti-gay bigotry, which they are determined to stamp out, no matter what.

The Democratic Party is the enemy of religious conservatives. … Religious conservatives now find ourselves in the same relationship to the GOP as gays were to the Democrats in the Clinton era: they’re not really our friends, but they’re not our enemies either, so we’ll take what we can.

But … Trump? I am not going to recite again the litany of reasons why he is unacceptable to religious conservatives like me.

This is not a happy election for the conservatively religious:

If you want to know how traditional Christians are going to be treated in law and policy under Democratic rule, consider that they believe we are no different from racists. All of society is moving this way, of course, but Republicans more slowly than Democrats.

?

The Democrats view religious liberty as on par with racism. What will their policies therefore be?

Good points about Reaganism:

I let go of Reaganism a long time ago, because it really does have very little to do with the world we live in now, and the challenges facing us. Religious conservatives who allow their thinking to be conditioned by Reagan nostalgia are doing themselves no favors. He left office nearly 30 years ago! The world has changed.

One big reason the GOP finds itself in the terrible mess it does with Trump is that the Republican establishment could not bring itself to think beyond Reaganism, which had degenerated into platitudes.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Dealing with Islamic supremacists: Italy expels imam who named daughter “Jihad”

Dealing with Islamic supremacists: Italy expels imam who named daughter “Jihad”, by Christine Williams.

Italian authorities have deported, on national security grounds, Moroccan cleric Mohammed Madad, who named one of his own daughters “Jihad.” The country has also expelled “close to 100 terrorism suspects since the beginning of 2015.” …

All Western nations need to be enacting a zero-tolerance policy toward Islamic supremacists on grounds of national security. It should be implemented against imams, mosques and Muslims who promote stealth and/or violent jihad in open sermons, open rallies such as those on al-Quds day; and unindicted-conspirators to terrorism who espouse stealth jihad and even the violent form (secretively), in accord with Muslim Brotherhood doctrine.

The guy who names his daughter “Jihad” is too unsubtle and should clearly be asked to leave, but there is a diabolical slippery slope problem. Here is what the Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Al-Banna said:

“All Muslims Must Make Jihad. Jihad is an obligation from Allah on every Muslim and cannot be ignored nor evaded. Allah has ascribed great importance to jihad and has made the reward of the martyrs and the fighters in His way a splendid one. Only those who have acted similarly and who have modeled themselves upon the martyrs in their performance of jihad can join them in this reward. Furthermore, Allah has specifically honoured the Mujahideen {those who wage jihad} with certain exceptional qualities, both spiritual and practical, to benefit them in this world and the next. Their pure blood is a symbol of victory in this world and the mark of success and felicity in the world to come.”

Here is one possibility: Testing Loyalty to Sharia Law Might Soon be Practical and Widespread.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Hillary Won’t Win Presidency, DNC and Clinton Exposed for Rigging Democratic Primary, Economic Update and Global War Heating Up

Hillary Won’t Win Presidency, DNC and Clinton Exposed for Rigging Democratic Primary, Economic Update and Global War Heating Up, by Greg Hunter. There is quite a lot of commentary like this floating around on quality websites, with a point of view that is not making it into the media.

It’s now been totally exposed the Democratic National Committee (DNC) rigged the primary in favor of Hillary Clinton. This is a turning point that says no way Clinton can be elected without nearly half the Democrat voters that supported Bernie Sanders.

A WikiLeaks email dump at the beginning of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia showed clear evidence the DNC committed fraud and collusion against all candidates and rigged the Primary in favor of Hillary Clinton.

Outraged and disenfranchised Sanders voters are protesting by the thousands, and yet, the mainstream media, by and large, will not cover the protests taking place outside the DNC convention.  These are mostly young people who voted or worked diligently for the Sander’s campaign.  …Clinton will get only a small percentage of Sander’s voters, and the rest will vote for Donald Trump, another candidate or simply say home.  Hillary is toast and will not become the President of the United States.

The narrative presented by the US media, distilled for us nightly on the ABC News at 7 pm, is that this is historic because Hillary is a woman, and the other lot are a bunch of reactionary old losers. News that does not support this narrative is not reported in the media, like this point of view:

Lion of the Blogosphere on Hillary’s convention speech:

Way too much grrlpower stuff, gloating in her sex’s victory over men. Lots of rambling about stuff that has nothing to do with anything important. Lots of talk about leftwing causes like global warming, gun control, minorities, LGBT, “immigration reform” (euphemism for amnesty and open borders). I don’t see how she gets any benefit from this speech.

As I predicted, a huge departure from Bill Clinton’s 1992 speech focusing on the economy and jobs, with lots of patriotism and Republican-sounding themes to appeal to middle-class white America.

And you will never see this in the media: Dramatic shift, Democrats now the party of the rich:

When I first started posting that the rich supported Democrats and supported Obama in 2008, I got a lot of hostile and disbelieving comments.

But let’s move ahead eight years. Does anyone now doubt that Hillary Clinton is going to win the rich vote? She will certainly win the top 1% rich by a really huge margin, and probably the top 5% rich by a smaller margin.

The shift of the rich from the Republicans to the Democrats has been going on for decades. It accelerated in the 2012 election, and because of Trump will massively accelerate in this upcoming election.

On media bias in reporting Obama’s convention speech:

Obama’s speech made the mainstream media news commentators gush like teenage girls at a Justin Bieber concert. Never before have I seen such a display of partiality.

The difference on the face of the ABC reporter for the 7 pm News, Zoe Daniels, when reporting the DNC and RNC was very marked. Dour and unsmiling at the RNC, she could hardly contain her smiles and ebullient mood at the DNC. I know she tries to be professional and not say anything too blatantly biased,  but it was too obvious and no doubt led to some choice omissions of material.

Some French media ban IDs of ISIS attackers to stop “hero” effect

Some French media ban IDs of ISIS attackers to stop “hero” effect, by AP.

Some leading French media outlets say they will stop publishing the names and images of attackers linked to the Islamic State group to prevent individuals from being inadvertently glorified.

The decisions come after the truck attack on a Nice fireworks display and the killing of a French priest in a church in Normandy, events in a spate of attacks France has seen since last year.

On Wednesday, leading newspaper Le Monde pledged to stop publishing photographs of attackers and avoid “possible posthumous glorifying effects.” The newspaper already has a ban on publishing extracts of IS propaganda.

Wow they must think we are stupid. Any possibility that the PC media are deeply embarrassed by the reality of Islamic violence and their unpopular views on immigration?

merica is being ‘pulled apart’ in ‘clash of visions’ between GOP, Dems

America is being ‘pulled apart’ in ‘clash of visions’ between GOP, Dems, by Pat Buchanan.

Obama’s America is a country of all races, creeds, colors, lifestyles, a kumbayah country to be made more wonderful still when Clinton takes the helm. …

Fifty-six percent of Americans believe Clinton should have been indicted; 67 percent believe she is neither trustworthy nor honest. And 75 percent of Americans think that, under Obama, the nation is headed in the wrong direction. …

From the podium in Philadelphia, we hear the word “love.” But in interviews, Democratic Party activists invoke terms of hate, such as racist, fascist, homophobe, misogynist and sexist to describe the Cleveland Republicans. …

Barack Obama believes the more diverse a country we become – religiously, racially, ethnically, culturally, linguistically – the greater, better and stronger a nation we become. And with his immigration policies, he has put us, perhaps irretrievably, on that road.

Yet, outside that [Democrat’s convention center] where such sentiments seem to enrapture Democratic delegates, Europe, Africa, the Mideast and South Asia are all being pulled apart, right along those same fault lines.

And the US, like much of the West, is also being pulled apart along the divisions the left is opening up.

A World Without Western Civilization

A World Without Western Civilization, by Jim Goad. An old white man, Steve King, a Republican congressman from Iowa, recently said:

This “old white people” business does get a little tired, Charlie. I’d ask you to go back through history and figure out, where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you’re talking about, where did any other subgroup of people contribute more to civilization? …

You go back and Google “old white people,” “old white men,” [and] you’ll find that that comes out of the mouth of leftists constantly. They have decided it’s open season on white people in America from an ideological standpoint. And I hope it stops there, but somebody needs to stand up for the contributions that have been made by Western Civilization. And if we disparage our roots, if we disparage what makes this a great nation, then we’ll lose the formula for being an even greater nation. So I stood up for our foundation, for our history, for our culture, of Western Civilization.

King of course was gas-lighted by his cultural opponents, who were apoplectic but notably did not address the issue he raised. Jim Goad goes on the rhetorical attack — lots of easy targets.

The oniony-looking Rebecca Onion of Slate asserted that it made “no sense” to judge groups by their historical inventions, despite the fact that a given racial group’s level of technological innovation is tightly correlated with its relative success and prosperity.

Writing for Salon, a certain Sarah Watts didn’t appear to be joking when she credited Africans for inventing “humanity.” (I suppose other inventions were hard to come by.)

There are reams of evidence of technological innovations by the ancient Chinese, the ancient Indians, and the ancient Semites—emphasis on the “ancient.”

Zinger! Then this:

Most uncomfortable for egalitarians and their ilk is that there are vast landmasses—sometimes entire continents—where the indigenous inhabitants have invented virtually nothing. Sub-Saharan Africans are not known for contributing much to rocket science, and black Americans are so underrepresented as inventors that everyone has heard a gazillion times about the mulatto who improved blood-storage methods and George Washington Carver’s wondrous dalliances with the magical peanut. The so-called “Native Americans” are credited with inventing the spinning top, which somehow proved incapable of defending them against the white man and his guns. And Australia’s aborigines? Well, let’s not talk about them, because they’d be embarrassed.

Ouch! Then this crushing observation:

If you were to note every manmade item within your field of vision, chances are that nearly every last gadget and trinket was invented by a white [or North Asian – ed] man. According to Charles Murray’s book Human Accomplishment, whites have historically dominated the fields of physics, math, chemistry, medicine, biology, and technology.

silicon chip technology

What’s grossly ironic is the specter of people using white computers hooked up to white electricity sent across white power grids to criticize the very white people who made their whining possible. Even worse is the ubiquity of white people pejoratively using the word “white people” as if it somehow doesn’t apply to them. That right there is a collective mental illness for the ages.

And the finale:

Slate’s Rebecca Onion warns that “the idea of white technological superiority has often served as justification for oppressing or displacing nonwhite people.”

But flip that around — denying white technological contributions and distilling all of white history into one massive blood libel of torture and enslavement of nonwhites can serve as justification for displacing white people.

Cancer-fighting bacteria: Engineers program E. coli to destroy tumor cells

Cancer-fighting bacteria: Engineers program E. coli to destroy tumor cells, by Anne Trafton.

Researchers at MIT and the University of California at San Diego (UCSD) have recruited some new soldiers in the fight against cancer — bacteria.

In a study appearing in the July 20 of Nature, the scientists programmed harmless strains of bacteria to deliver toxic payloads. When deployed together with a traditional cancer drug, the bacteria shrank aggressive liver tumors in mice much more effectively than either treatment alone.

The new approach exploits bacteria’s natural tendency to accumulate at disease sites. Certain strains of bacteria thrive in low-oxygen environments such as tumors, and suppression of the host’s immune system also creates favorable conditions for bacteria to flourish.

hat-tip Matthew

Antibiotic resistance: ‘Snot wars’ study yields new class of drugs

Antibiotic resistance: ‘Snot wars’ study yields new class of drugs, by James Gallagher.

A new class of antibiotics has been discovered by analysing the bacterial warfare taking place up people’s noses, scientists report. Tests reported in the journal Nature found the resulting drug, lugdunin, could treat superbug infections.

The researchers, at the University of Tubingen in Germany, say the human body is an untapped source of new drugs. The last new class of the drugs to reach patients was discovered in the 1980s. Nearly all antibiotics were discovered in soil bacteria, but the University of Tubingen research team turned to the human body.

hat-tip Matthew

Leftist politics and damned outcomes on matters of principle

Leftist politics and damned outcomes on matters of principle, by Gary Johns.

Labor is good at fighting culture wars with public money.

It wants to make the Safe Schools project compulsory for all Victorian children and to exclude parental objection to having their children exposed to the struggles of a tiny minority who are coming to terms with an indeterminate sexuality, or to those whose sexuality is definite but not conducive to begetting children. Empathy surely, but to have everyone question their sexuality to make these few more comfortable, hardly.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Xi’s China: Smothering dissent

Xi’s China: Smothering dissent, by Tom Mitchell.

The chill that has descended across Chinese civil society, especially over the past 12 months, has become one of the defining aspects of Xi Jinping’s presidency, alongside his own rapid consolidation of power over the party, government and military. As China’s most powerful party and state leader since Deng Xiaoping, Mr Xi has presided over a crackdown without precedent since the repression that followed the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.

Even academics and businessmen who thought themselves immune to politics provided they did not wade into sensitive areas are having to reassess their vulnerability.

“Since Xi came to power, China’s situation has become more and more worrisome,” says Murong Xuecun, a prominent author and commentator. “Things that we could openly discuss before, such as the Cultural revolution, are now considered sensitive or even forbidden. In the past there was some room for non-governmental organisations and rights lawyers. Now all of them have been suppressed.” …

“The biggest threats to state security, in the party’s view, are those seen as posing a direct challenge to its narrative and concept of what China is,” says Samantha Hoffman, who researches Chinese social controls at the UK’s University of Nottingham. “Groups and individuals that have the potential to offer alternative visions of China are seen as a threat to the party state.

“That puts NGOs, journalists, activists, researchers at a much higher risk.”

Not good. Together with their diplomatic aggression and growing military muscle, this does not bode well for anyone outside the  Chinese Communist Party.

Muslim migration to Australia: the big slowdown

Muslim migration to Australia: the big slowdown, by Caroline Overington.

[T[he Australian government is pursuing a migration strategy that makes it extremely difficult for large numbers of Muslims from the Middle East to settle here, even if that is not the policy’s aim.

While governments of all stripes insist Australia’s migration program is non-discriminatory, an analysis of available data by The Australian suggests that the migration of Muslims from Lebanon, in particular, has slowed to a trickle, with no sign of a rush coming anytime soon.

Immigration officials tell The Australian that the low number of Muslim immigrants from the Middle East arriving in recent years has nothing to do with their religion, since applicants are not asked to state their faith when they apply to settle.

Instead, they say, it’s an unintended consequence of a migration policy that is almost entirely focused on attracting skilled and family reunion migrants from countries such as India (now Australia’s No 1 source of permanent migrants, with 34,874 arrivals last year) and China (27,874).

The strategy, which both major parties insist is not deliberate, means that while Islam was once the fastest growing religion in Australia, there are now more Buddhists (2.5 per cent of the population) than there are Muslims (2.2 per cent), and the Hindus are rapidly catching up.

How about we select immigrants for their skills and their cultural compatibility?

Eric Abetz applauds ‘great’ call for crackdown on Muslim immigration, by Jared Owens.

Liberal senator Eric Abetz has applauded a prominent Liberal activist’s call for a crackdown on Muslim immigration to protect women and gays from abuse.

The author, ACT Young Liberal president Josh Manuatu, today argued that celebrity Sonia Kruger, who last week called for a ban on Muslim immigration, was “right” and that Australia should “carefully consider” her proposal.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Free Michelle Obama’s Slaves: Michelle’s lifestyle is built by slaves

Free Michelle Obama’s Slaves: Michelle’s lifestyle is built by slaves, by Daniel Greenfield. Somewhat facetiously, this article brings up a very important issue that burns many.

At the DNC, Michelle Obama put on her victimhood hat one more time and declared, “I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves.”…

But that’s too past tense. Michelle’s house continues to be built and maintained by slaves. Her lavish lifestyle of endless vacations, parties and public appearances is funded by millions and millions of slaves. …

It’s the taxpayers who have to pay for it all who are forced to be her unwilling slaves. Michelle’s house, her luxurious lifestyle, is built by taxpaying slaves who are forced to turn over their money to fund her pleasures. She spent more money on one night in Morocco than the average American family will see in five years. …

Obama’s White House parties cost anywhere from $200,000 at the cheap end to over $500,000. Americans have no more freedom to decide whether to pay for another Obama vacation or event than slaves did in deciding how to serve their masters and mistresses.

All they can do is watch from a distance while their masters stuff their faces, gallivant cheerfully on tours through foreign countries while staying at posh hotels and then make them work to pay for it ….

There are too many structural similarities between slavery then and tax slavery now. There is some fierce rhetoric in this argument.

Slaves built the Obama lifestyle.  Slaves who struggle to get by. Who scrimp and save to have a few hundred dollars on hand in case of an emergency. That’s the cost of a single dish at a dinner to their masters in the White House. Slaves who fear losing their jobs and being unable to provide for their families watch their hard-earned money being squandered on another vacation and another party.

Government, like slavery, is an institution. Like slavery, it claims to civilize its dependents. In reality it exploits them. It promises them security in exchange for freedom. It takes away the products of their toil and then tells them that they didn’t build that. It claims a false moral authority to exploit them.

white house lawn

Slave owner’s house: “You didn’t build that” – Obama.

Michelle Obama is a slave-owner lecturing her slaves about slavery. Her moral authority to enslave Americans is based on a slavery that took place 150 years ago. And Michelle and Barack are the tip of a very large institution which is built on depriving Americans of their political and economic freedoms.

Slavery was based on the notion that some people are superior to others. That same idea runs through Obama’s speeches. It is the lifeblood of the twisted thing that the left has turned liberalism into.

The Obamas have the right to enslave us because they are on “the right side of history”. They can exploit us because they know what is better for us. They can take the work of our hands from us because we didn’t build that, they and all the rest of our government masters did the real building.

So what are we going to do?

It is time to end slavery all over again. It is time to free Michelle Obama’s taxpaying slaves.

The first step to ending slavery is to recognize its fundamental injustice. It is unjust that a working family ought to work its fingers to the bone so that Michelle Obama can enjoy yet another sightseeing tour. It is unjust that a class of parasites claiming to be public servants can draw unlimited amounts of money on the credit of people trying to make ends meet. It is unjust that Michelle Obama can own hundreds of millions of people as slaves.

hat-tip Stephen Neil