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?

 

Robert Kennedy Jr. on Vaccinations

Robert Kennedy Jr w Tucker Carlson

Robert Kennedy Jr was on Tucker Carlson Tonight (Fox News) on 20 April, 2017 talking about some issues with vaccines. He said one problematic ingredient was the presence of mercury, which is the most potent, non-radioactive neurotoxin known to man.

To demonstrate this point, Kennedy said that if the vaccine vile was broken, it would have to be removed as hazardous waste. And it was being injected into babies!

While mercury has been removed from US flu vaccines, it remains in vaccines administered all over the world.

One very credible Danish research study found that babies who had received the most widely vaccinated DPT (diphtheria, pertussis & tetanus) vaccine were ten times as likely to die within the next 2 months.

Kennedy went on to say that the pharmaceutical companies had government sanctioned legal immunity from lawsuits. He also went on to say that Big Pharma spent a lot of money in Washington and the media. He said they gave $5.4bn to the media per year and believed that these negative reports were not covered by the mainstream media. He said that Tucker Carlson’s show was only the second media opportunity he had in 10 years to discuss problems with vaccines. The other show was with Bill Maher on HBO that doesn’t take advertising.

(BTW and FYI, Robert Kennedy Jr has a rare condition that effects his voice, so he is a little difficult to listen to initially. Kennedy’s condition is called spasmodic dysphonia, a specific form of an involuntary movement disorder that affects only the voice box. Great to hear what he has to say though.)

Bill O’Reilly Sexual Harassment Allegations

Bill O'Reilly.jpg

So now it is alleged that Bill O’Reilly has been sexually harassing women. While sexual harassment is not on, I wonder at the amount of times famous and wealthy men are accused of this. Exactly what is the sexual harassment that O’Reilly is being accused of? The term conjures up perverted actions and touching in an overtly sexual way. Let’s look at some of the accusations of Bill O’Reilly;

Documents detail complaints about verbal abuse, unwanted advances, offensive comments and phone calls from the anchor that sounded as if O’Reilly was masturbating.

Let’s look at some of these.

Yesterday, an African American receptionist alleged she was harassed by O’Reilly claiming he used to leer at her and call her “hot chocolate”.

Hot chocolate, eh? Terrible. Maybe just an off-colour compliment. Is this really so bad? So you sue for millions of dollars? Whatever happened to going to a senior and complaining and having some reconciliation? Could it have been possible to go to a manager and complain, saying that you found it offensive? O’Reilly could be brought in, informed, and asked not to do it again. Did any of this happen?

Lawyer Lisa Bloom helped the woman report her alleged harassment, telling The Hollywood Reporter, “He would never talk to her, not even hello, except to grunt at her like a wild boar”.

Adding: “He would leer at her. He would always do this when no one else was around and she was scared.”

Never talk to her except to call her, “Hot chocolate?” But leered at her? When no-one was around. Could it have been a corny smile? A silly male grunt? How exactly did this grunt go? Wild boars can make quite a noise. Sure it wasn’t a squeal like a domestic pig? Definitely a wild boar? Sounds overly dramatic to me like a mountain could be being made out of a molehill. Not sure.

Bloom is also representing radio host Wendy Walsh, who alleges she was forced off the show after she refused an invite to O’Reilly’s hotel room in 2013.

So the same lawyer is acting for another woman who was forced off the show for not accepting an invite to his hotel room. Good that she declined the invite if she didn’t want what sounds like a date. Does that constitute sexual harassment? I don’t think that it does.

Is it unfair dismissal if it could be found to be that she truly was dismissed simply for refusing his invite. Yes, but probably a bit hard to prove too, I’m sorry. But worthy of a sexual harassment charge? I don’t think so.

Here’s a nice slipper of an irrelevant comparison;

O’Reilly’s lawyer Marc Kasowitz, who has also worked for Donald Trump for years, has since condemned the allegations in a statement.

 Of course, we all know what Trump said, so the inference is that O’Reilly really did say something outrageous worthy of sexual harassment.
And here is a response from O’Reilly’s lawyer;
“It is outrageous that an allegation from an anonymous person about something that purportedly happened almost a decade ago is being treated as fact, especially where there is obviously an orchestrated campaign by activists and lawyers to destroy Mr O’Reilly and enrich themselves through publicity driven donations,” it read.

This sound like a very fair call and an unfair allegation by those alleging harassment.

The phone calls that sounded like O’Reilly was masturbating? Well, we just don’t have any evidence and this is what really is wrong; if you don’t have the evidence, it is very wrong to accuse someone of sexual harassment as the accusation will stick even if innocent. (There were no other details of these telephone calls in this particular article and I haven’t researched further – Ed)