British school that won’t settle for second best

Michaela is a private school in northwest London. It has an almost militaristic style of teaching, but teach they do. 

For this is a happy school. At lunch, 14-year-olds talked enthusiastically about reading Oliver Twist. “What I love here is the quiet,” said one. “At home there’s so much noise I have to go to the public library to do my homework, but here I can actually concentrate.”


Michaela acts as a surrogate family for children who don’t have those advantages. The children are not only given the intellectual tools to fulfil their potential. They are also loved, taught to love other people and shown how to love their country.

The British education system seems to be about engineering attitudes to conform to prevailing (left-wing) social orthodoxies. Michaela is bringing back education in the true sense of the word, where children love learning and learn they do.


Dr Carland says you can have Islamic Feminism

Dr Susan Carland believes that you can have Islamic feminism. In a western country like Australia, maybe!

Dr Carland, … said feminism existed within Islam and defended sharia law as a tool for fighting persecution of women in countries such as Pakistan, where women who are raped can be punished for “adultery”.

“You can have secular feminism, you can have Islamic feminism, you can have all different types of feminism,” she said.

And you can have Islamic Domestic Violence against women, male Islamic ownership of women, Islamic subjugation of women, Islamic second class women, fewer rights of women, lower inheritance by women, intercourse with pre-pubescent girls, fewer divorce rights, frowned upon leadership by women, deemed lacking faith and intelligence, and can be raped if held captive.

You can have all different types of female discrimination.

Dr Carland and her husband are the most dangerous public intellectuals in Australia. They present a beautiful picture of an Islamic couple and make smooth and deceitful arguments for Islam. Because of their high profile and platform to voice their apologia for Islam, too many progressives and young impressionable people will drink their kool-aid. And we all know where that ends. It will be a long slow death of Australian culture with a slow, migratory take-over of this country by a barbaric ideology that will destroy Australia as we know it if we let it. Western Europe is in the early stages of decline. The writing is on the wall.

Harsh words but don’t be a frog boiled in water. We all need to take a cold shower of rationality and get out of the pot.

Is Obama pro Shi’ite and pro Iranian

Arab TV Commentators Claim Obama Supports Iran Because His Father Was a Shiite.

Commentators on two different Arabic television programs claimed that President Barack Obama is pushing a nuclear deal with Iran because his father, Barack Obama Sr.,  was a Shiite Muslim, and President Obama apparently wants the Shia-run government of Iran to be victorious in the region.

This all makes sense now. Obama’s father was a Shi’ite Muslim and so Obama is either a Shi’ite Muslim or has Shi’ite Muslim sympathies. This is why he made the ridiculous Iranian deal for them to develop weapon’s grade material and gave them hundreds of millions of dollars and allows them access to supposed frozen funds. With these funds, Iran is the largest funder of terrorism on the planet.

Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran that will eventually let them become a nuclear power and it’s putting billions of dollars back into a country that’s the world’s largest supporter of terrorism. We are actually giving them the money to fund the terrorists that are killing us and our allies.

says Rudi Giuliani.

Shorten blocks Mother’s Day ban

Bill Shorten has managed to reverse a decision by Moonee Ponds West Primary School principal to cancel Mother’s Day in favour of some UN PC rubbish day.

Instead, principal Jeff Lyon ­revealed, the school would ­celebrate UN International Day of Families. “I believe celebrating International Day of Families is a more inclusive way of celebrating the richness, diversity and complexity of living and loving as a family in the modern world,” Mr Lyon wrote. “The day highlights the importance of all caregivers in families, be it parents, grandparents or siblings and the importance of parental education for the welfare of children.”

These words are obviously code for “I am pro Same Sex Marriage” and we should not highlight the shortcomings of SSM. Oh yes we should.

The problem with SSM is that two people of the same sex cannot conceive a child organically. For a SS couple to have a child then one of them will have had to go outside their relationship to conceive that child. This of course would break the marriage vows of “to the exclusion of all others.”

If a SS couple has done this and they are raising a child, then they have made a deliberate decision from the outset of that child’s life that the child will either be without a mother or father, and this is the problem that SS relationships create. Yet they don’t want to be confronted with this shortcoming. They don’t want their sins highlighted. They want their sins accepted and atoned for by state sanctioned same-sex marriage.

I don’t believe that children should be deliberately brought in to this world excluding from them their natural mother or father. While people are not perfect and children are often conceived and then one of the parents (usually the father) does a runner or is not committed to the other and goes their separate way, at least they did not deliberately set out to bring a child in to the world without one or other of their natural parents.

Great that Bill Shorten has stepped in and managed to reverse Principal Lyon’s decision. However, if that is what Principal Lyon believes then I think other beliefs of Mr Lyon need to be divulged and perhaps he needs standing down as unfit for being a principal of an Australian school.

We shouldn’t leave it at that though. We need to address the reason for the decision and that is a perverted ideology. Shorten won’t go that far though as he is a progressive and is in favour of SSM. But now Shorten has really exposed the fruit and consequences of his beliefs and ideology. He is without excuse.

Qantas CEO gets pie in face. Not on.

Qantas CEO Alan Joyce has had a pie shoved in his face at a business meeting in WA.

I am not sure of the person’s motives (an elderly gentleman apparently. Or perhaps not. Perhaps merely an elderly man!) for doing this. I too have disagreed with Alan Joyce’s use of Qantas to make political comments around Same Sex Marriage recently, but I don’t agree with shoving a cream pie in his face.

With all the violent demonstrations around the world lately, most of which seems to be by left-wing Social Justice Warriors (SJW), this action may seem very tame in comparison. Never-the-less, I don’t approve. I think a message of disapproval needs to be done without any physical contact or extreme embarrassment.

At the end of the day, the person will have done himself and his cause no favours. Most would immediately feel for Mr Joyce and take offence at such a personal stunt. Whatever his cause, he would not have won any converts today.

Let alone the fact that it is not appropriate to assault someone like this just because you disagree.

Toxic Bad Girls fb Group Under Fire

Inside the 200,000 member, female-only secret Australian Facebook group Bad Girls Advice

Aww, let ’em, I say. Girls just wanna have fun.

We cannot regulate people’s behaviour in private, despite what Gillian Triggs might want to do. If people want to do and say toxic things, then they are free to do so (unless they are planning terrorism or other violent crimes.)

If people say things in private, then they are owed privacy. If those things are said where it is believed they are private, then no public disclosure should have any negative impact on those people who said things in private. They are private conversations and others who were excluded from the conversation and have no rights to being privy to them.

It’s like police evidence collected illegally; it is inadmissible and for very good reasons. You have no rights to that evidence or conversation.

This applies whether it is a closed facebook girls group  or US politicians.

If you are committing a crime though, well… that’s different. But the collection of material still needs to be collected IAW the law.

Youths? Anything else you can tell us about these youths?

Youths - Adelaide break in 20170427.png

Youths Arrested After Dramatic Police Chase

Officers arrested four teenagers at about 2am Thursday morning after a dramatic car chase — involving a police helicopter — which ended in Woodville.

Hours earlier, at about 11.55pm, the gang of youths allegedly broke into a home on Seaview Rd, Tennyson, and snatched up items including a handbag and mobile phones before being scared off by homeowner Jane.

A full story and images show shady characters running from police. What is conspicuously absent from this report is the fact that these ‘youths’ appear African. Of course, this is now a racial crime and we don’t want to unfairly label African youths as little criminals, however there is certainly a significant disproportionate number of crimes from this small section of society.

We should know if a particular people are significantly more likely to commit certain crimes, and not for just public safety reasons. It is so the truth can be known to policy makers so some form of corrective action can be taken. Political correctness and potential racism needs to take a back seat to our safety. We must deal with the problem that is at hand and not one that could be. Indeed, if certain Australians were to adopt a negative and racist attitude towards a group of people who are over-represented in certain crimes, that is a lesser evil than the crimes being committed.

Quite frankly, I think there is a real problem with accepting immigrants from problematic areas of the world as they always bring their problems with them. I would not like to see any further acceptance of refugees or immigrants from African hot spots as they are importing their problems to Australia. Our politicians have a right first to Australians to protect us from violence and danger before we import problems while trying to be humane.

If certain peoples need to refuge or protection, then there needs to be a better way of providing it than imposing dangerous social problems on others.


ANZAC Day Football Is Not The Exclusive Right Of Collingwood And Essendon

ANZAC Day football is denied to sixteen teams in our competition. Bruce McAvaney said the ANZAC Day game was iconic. Matthew Richardson said that Collingwood and Essendon were lucky as every other AFL footballer would be sitting on their couches wishing they could be playing in this particular match on this particular day. And they are correct. It is iconic and Collingwood and Essendon are lucky that the AFL has accepted their arguments to award them the exclusive rights to this iconic match. It’s not fair on all the other teams and every other AFL footballer and it’s not right.

The AFL has a responsibility to be fair and endeavour to make the competition as even as possible. Andrew Demetriou confirmed that The AFL is socialistic with completely unashamed socialistic equalisation and distribution policies. Unlike American professional sports or European soccer whose obscene salaries enable wealthy clubs to maintain competition domination of their leagues, our egalitarian culture is represented in our sports with salary caps, priority draft picks and other equalisation measures. What Collingwood and Essendon’s monopoly on the ANZAC Day match does is entrench fan base and financial domination of the league by two of the strongest clubs by exclusively providing the greatest exposure outside of the Grand Final. This is not the intended outcome of socialism.

Eddie McGuire may be one we all love to hate. It’s that unfortunate tall poppy syndrome we probably inherited from our Irish background. We can appreciate why all Collingwood supporters love him. He has been great for their club and good for the game, and he has the right to promote his club and get them the very best deal he can. However, the AFL has the self-declared socialist responsibility to not drink Eddie’s kool-aid. Rather, they have the responsibility to arrive at the best and equal outcome for all clubs. Certainly the best outcome for all clubs would be that every club and every AFL footballer has the equal opportunity to play in this particular match and not be satisfied with a conciliatory medal offered for Best on Ground and an envelope full of cash.

Under The AFL’s socialistic equalization policy argument, Collingwood and Essendon have argued that they will bring in the crowds and provide the spectacle and The AFL can distribute some funds to the poorer clubs as compensation. This argument should not be accepted by The AFL as it is simply erroneous. Other clubs can also pull massive crowds. Monday night ANZAC Day eve match 2017 between Richmond and Melbourne with 85,657 in attendance proved that.

The other argument against financial compensation to other clubs is that it simply shuts them up and does nothing toward building up their membership and fan base. This is the worst of socialism. It is short sighted and only weakens a club.

The biggest argument to break the Collingwood and Essendon monopoly of the ANZAC Day game is fairness and equity of outcomes to all players and clubs. Just because Collingwood and Essendon were persistent enough to pursue a game on ANZAC Day does not give them the right to maintain a monopoly over this match. Eddie’s mantra of ‘Collingwood and Essendon tradition’ is simply insufficient and the AFL should not buy it.

So too is John Worsfold’s argument that it would be (only) a little bit insulting and a disservice to Kevin Sheedy for his vision. While Sheedy might like this argument, I believe that in his heart of hearts, if the game was opened up to all other clubs, he would probably smile inwardly and say to himself, “We had a darn good run.”

The teams to face each other in the prime game on ANZAC Day should be rotated in a way that is earned. Teams can fight for the right to participate in this game. As it is so close to the start of the season, what better spectacle and what better way to earn the right to play in this match than to award it to last year’s grand finalists. In this way, every team has equal right and opportunity to play in this iconic match.

If Collingwood and Essendon were not last year’s grand finalists, they can still play each other on this weekend, but not on this day. How can they honestly complain against that?

Eddie won’t go down fighting though. His endless promotional mantra of Collingwood and Essendon tradition is simply insufficient. So would be the argument that they were the first two teams and that they pioneered this very popular match and therefor deserve the exclusive rights to it. This is not the Collingwood and Essendon Football League. They do not have the right to demand exclusive rights to this very popular match.

Collingwood especially receive more favourable concessions in the form of big games than any other team. They get exclusive exposure to the Queen’s Birthday public holiday. They invariably get the opening round Friday night match and more Friday night matches than most other teams. For a socialistic football league, it obviously sees money as the means of distributing equality rather than exposure. While Friday nights are limited and are an earned privilege, lower performing teams like Carlton have satisfied the argument that Friday night games should be awarded to better teams. This is fair. Western Bulldogs have earned the right for Friday night football and so too have Greater Western Sydney. What Gold Coast, GWS, Brisbane and other clubs with struggling membership need is exposure, not a financial incentive to give up fighting for the right for big games.

If the 2017 ANZAC Day game was between the Bulldogs and Swans, they would still have achieved an attendance of 87,000 but those clubs would have received what they really need; valuable TV exposure. GWS are not far away from a Grand Final birth. Win or lose, what a simple yet fair and effective way to capitalise on that success by them also playing in the following year’s ANZAC Day game. This would also be far more economically efficient way of supporting a club as opposed to massive financial incentives to keep them financially viable. What GWS and other struggling clubs need more than financial support is membership and fan base support. This is the Australian Football League and Collingwood and Essendon do not have the right to monopolise this match. For the sake of fairness and equity, all teams should have the right to play on this day.

Turnbull’s “Divisive” Immigration Policy

David Crowe writes in The Australian, Malcolm Turnbull has produced a paltry political dividend from a divisive migration policy.

It maybe divisive, but wholly necessary and in the right direction. The ones who are divided are the same ones that would have lost the US election and voted for Britain to Remain. These globalists think that importing peoples with incompatible cultures is racist, that all cultures are equal and that Western culture is responsible for all the world’s ills. Well it is not, they are not and we are not.

What is needed is someone to stand up and effectively say so. So well done Turnbull and the Libs for putting forward a strong immigration policy that most informed Australian loving Aussies can agree with.

Waleed Aly called this immigration policy a dog whistle. A dog whistle is a populist call out to an ignorant sub-group. We Aussies who agree with this strong immigration stand are not an ignorant sub-group. We are informed, rational Australians who can plainly see some things wrong with the world and our immigration policy. We understand what the problem is and the politically incorrect solution. We are sick and tired of being labelled ignorant racists by apologists for terrorists and fools who thing that all cultures are equal. We are not deceived by his globalist leftist rhetoric and love Australia as it is and want to keep it Australian.

Universities Are Becoming Hotbeds of Totalitarian Violence

UC Berkely demonstrations        Milo Yiannopoulos - fabulous

Universities in Western civilized nations are becoming hotbeds of totalitarian violence. University of California, Berkely is no stranger to violence. Recently, students demonstrated violently against right wing conservative Milo Yiannopoulos and effectively had his speaking engagement terminated. Ann Coulter 03

More recently, left-wing students contacted the university administration to warn of impending violence around the scheduled immigration talk by conservative author, Ann Coulter.

Carly Vendeiro, 22, says she would prefer that Coulter and Milo don’t speak. Well, I’d prefer that liberal Democrats didn’t say all their nasty, ignorant and venomous comments either, however it is (supposedly) a free country with the (supposedly) freedom of speech. Which Carly Vendeiro, 22, obviously doesn’t agree with. Vendeiro is at odds with the US constitution.

Milo had the right to speak. People have the right to demonstrate peacefully. People do not have the right to use force to prevent people from speaking freely. That is undemocratic and unconstitutional and is supposedly protected by constitutional law but is not enforced by law let alone campus police.

As for Coulter, she does not come to deliberately provoke a violent reaction. Her comments are simply different in opinion to the rabid left and would only seem provocative to the violent, rabid left. It is all people’s responsibility to be civilized and not be violent unless your human rights are being forcefully taken from you.

Milo and Coulter have had their human and US constitutional rights forcefully removed from them. It would be their social right to forcefully take them back.

Vendeiro and the rabid, violent campus Left are on the wrong side of the constitution and historical freedoms.

All the demonstrators need to be rounded up and be forced to take re-education lessons about freedom and liberty afforded by the constitution.

And the violent demonstrators need do be jailed and expelled from college.

Simples, isn’t it?