Abe’s support slips to 32%



Support for Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has slipped to just over 30% and a majority oppose the planned restart of a nuclear reactor that went offline after the 2011 Fukushima disaster, a poll by the Mainichi newspaper showed on Monday.

The three-point decline to 32% – the lowest since Abe returned to office in December 2012 – comes as voters fret over a shift in security policy that would end a ban on the military fighting overseas to defend a friendly country. That could let Japan’s troops fight abroad for the first time since World War Two.

Abe’s ratings began dropping sharply after scholars told a parliamentary panel in June the legislation would violate Japan’s post-war, pacifist constitution. Abe says the change will boost deterrence and make war less likely but critics fear Japan could get embroiled in a U.S.-led conflict.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents to the weekend survey opposed Kyushu Electric Power Co’s restart of a reactor at its Sendai plant in Kyushu, set for Tuesday. Thirty percent supported the reboot, the first in nearly two years, which will reopen the nuclear sector.

Opposition to Abe was higher among women than men. Only 26% of female voters backed his government compared to 40% of men.

Japan’s fragmented opposition parties, however, are not benefiting from Abe’s woes. Support for the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was flat at 28% but that of the main opposition Democratic Party was just 9%.

Nor has any LDP rival so far indicated a desire to challenge Abe in a party leadership election that must be held next month.

Why Mulcair has lost my vote


The Western world’s flaccid response to threats posed by the forces of Islamism is best described by the British author Theodore Dalrymple in his book, The New Vichy Syndrome: Why European Intellectuals Surrender to Barbarism.

Referring to the Danish cartoon controversy of 2005, Dalrymple writes, we are “virtually giving in to demands that certain important subjects (like Islamism) henceforth be placed, de facto, off limits for discussion.”

Dalrymple writes it was obvious that for the West, “the quiet life was clearly preferred to the costs of securing a free one; if only we appeased enough, there would be peace in our time.”

This political cowardice within the Left, camouflaged in a burka of anti-war rhetoric, is visible right here in Canada as well.

Both NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair and Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau have demonstrated the symptoms of appeasement

In an interview with Maclean’s on June 29, Mulcair criticized Canada’s role in the coalition now fighting Islamic State (ISIS), claiming, “This is not our fight.”

That may be true for Mulcair, but other Canadians have a more global view of our tiny planet.

We feel for the families of bloggers beheaded in Bangladesh and the Kurds slaughtered in Kobani.

Imagine telling the parents of the girls kidnapped by Nigeria’s Boko Haram jihadis that their fight “is not our fight.”

For someone like myself who has been on the Left all my life, spent time in prison as a socialist, fought for gay rights in hostile Islamic communities and who lives under death threats, Mulcair’s words were a betrayal.

At one time, internationalism was the hallmark of democratic socialists. Today many on the Left have become Sharia Bolsheviks.

It wasn’t just Mulcair’s Maclean’s remark that was offensive to many of us who have suffered the indignities of Islamism.

During the leaders’ debate, the NDP leader quipped:

“(W)e know that a lot of the horrors that we are seeing are the direct result of the last misguided war (U.S invasion of Iraq) …”

I was stunned. Here was a man vying to be Prime Minister of Canada reading a script whose logic could have been taken straight out of the Muslim Brotherhood hymnbook.

In effect, Mulcair was saying it was the fault of America that ISIS was beheading fellow Muslims, pushing homosexuals off the roofs of buildings and making sex slaves out of captured, non-Muslim female prisoners.

Nonsense. Jihadis have been doing this since the dawn of Islam.

I doubt Mulcair knows the recent bloodbath by ISIS in an Iraqi city was not the first such action by jihadis.

On April 21, 1802, 200 years before the United States invaded Iraq, jihadis from the first Saudi state ravaged the Iraqi city of Karbala, killing 5,000 fellow Muslims, plundering the city and destroying the 1,000-year-old tomb of the grandson of Prophet Mohammed.

As for that other man seeking to replace Stephen Harper, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau’s positions on Canada’s and the West’s national security reflect his fear of offending Islamofacists.

When CBC’s Terry Milewski asked Trudeau, “If you don’t want to bomb a group as ghastly as ISIS, when would you ever support real military action?”, Trudeau’s response was shocking. “That’s a nonsensical question,” he retorted.

In 1988, I put up my federal NDP sign, “This time it’s Ed” on my front lawn and voted for Ed Broadbent and his party.

This time, I will not vote NDP.

`I’m worst ever Legco chief at least in CY eyes’

Kenneth Lau

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Jasper Tsang Yok-sing said he believes the government probably regards him as the worst president the Legislative Council has had.

This is because of the filibustering that prevented several government requests from being met, he told Straight Talk host Michael Chugani on TVB last night.

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying had earlier blamed filibustering for slowing down the territory’s economic development.

“If you ask him, he would probably say: `Well, Tsang Yok-sing is the worst Legco president because he allowed the pan-democrats to disrupt the proceedings,”‘ Tsang said.

“I wouldn’t be surprised,” he said twice when asked for his reaction in the event Leung actually labels him as such.

“I know CY and some of his colleagues are very unhappy with the way, you know, the filibustering is being conducted,” he said.

On his younger brother Tsang Tak- sing’s resignation as secretary for home affairs, Tsang said his sibling would have been happy to resign if Leung told him that Lau Kong-wah would succeed him.

The Legco president added that blaming one official for a poor performance in handling the 79-day Occupy movement is absurd.

“It was such a large scale, a large movement. I think it is absurd to simply point the finger at one official and say you did a bad job. I mean it is neither fair to the official himself nor to the students,” he said.

Tsang Tak-sing had been arrested during the 1967 riots. But Jasper Tsang said his brother was different from the University of Hong Kong students who recently stormed an HKU council meeting.

“Tsang Tak-sing never disrupted any schoolwork,” he said.

“My brother never disrupted any lesson in the school. My brother did not rush into the staffrooms, stopping the teaching staff from doing their work.

“He was polite, very, in an orderly way, handing out leaflets.”

HKU council member Arthur Li Kwok-cheung had earlier accused the students of acting like Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution.

Tsang said Li’s condemnation of the students was a bit excessive.

“Maybe it was a bit, you know, excessive, especially the comparison,” he said.

“But though I disagree with Arthur’s remarks, it doesn’t mean I condone what the students did.”

Feminist Tumblr: Justifying Hatred With Radical Ideology and Also, Witchcraft


Feminism justifies anti-male attitudes by promoting an ideological belief that I call feminism’s Patriarchal Thesis:

  1. All women are victims of oppression;
  2. All men benefit from women’s oppression;
  3. Whatever.

Believing that normal human life is a system of injustice in which all women (collectively) are victimized by all men (collectively), feminists can justify anything they say or do as part of their struggle against historic oppression. Even hate is not a bad thing, according to Feminist Tumblr:

Society hates women. Misogyny is the societal norm. Society justifies men’s rape and abuse towards us, society lets men tell themselves that “boys will be boys” and their gender gives them the right to harass us, rape us, treat us as if we are their property.
Our society is founded upon a history of the destruction of women’s culture and heritage during the witch hunts, our society is founded on the institution of marriage as a system of property ownership whereby women are expected to use their time and effort to the benefit of males, to use their bodies to the benefit of males by bearing them children. . . .
This society we live in devalues the labor of women, that devalues our physical athletic ability, that devalues our minds and thoughts. It does not view us as complete people, it does not view us as whole humans without attachment to men.
After all that women have endured in this society, we deserve to hate those who have made it like this — especially lesbian women, who have no want or need of men yet society subjects to compulsory heterosexuality, as this patriarchy can not conceive of women who live full rich lives without male influence.
The anger of the oppressed is not the same as that of the oppressor.

There are several things to notice here, including the blogger’s claims about “the destruction of women’s culture and heritage during the witch hunts.” No matter how many times feminists repeat this, it is still false. The myth of witch hunts as “the destruction of women’s culture” was created largely by two 1970s radical feminists, Andrea Dworkin and Mary Daly. Dworkin and Daly promoted a mythology of medieval witches as wise healers, depicting them as victims of a Catholic conspiracy to destroy these bearers of ancient wisdom and thus suppress an incipient revolution against the patriarchal order.

This feminist myth, which sometimes depicts witches as inheritors of an authentic pagan tradition of goddess worship that allegedly survived for more than a thousand after the advent of Christianity in Europe, was constructed from diverse elements. Among these were the 19th-century French anti-Catholic academic Jules Michelet, whose 1862 book La Sorciére (“The Sorceress,” available in English as Satanism and Witchcraft) was an imaginative work that waxed poetic about these allegedly wondrous women:

She is born a creature of Enchantment. In virtue of regularly recurring periods of exaltation, she is a Sibyl; in virtue of love, a Magician. By the fineness of her intuitions, the cunning of her wiles — often fantastic, often beneficent — she is a Witch, and casts spells, at least and lowest lulls pain to sleep and softens the blow of calamity.

Michelet’s hatred of the Catholic church — he hoped for nothing less than the “death of Christianity” — inspired him to depict witches as having been victimized by an ignorant clergy who were envious of the witches’ knowledge of nature and miraculous healing powers. This interpretation (witches good, Christians bad) was seized upon by an eccentric American suffragette, Matilda Joslyn Gage, whose 1893 book Woman, Church and State became the source for the oft-repeated feminist claim that 9 million witches were killed in Europe in a 300-year span between the 14th and 18th centuries. This preposterous figure (which, by simple math, would require the deaths of 2,400 witches per month, every month, year after year for three hundred years) is not merely a ridiculous exaggeration, but a gross libel against Christianity. As strange as it is to modern minds that anyone could be executed for witchcraft, in fact the total number of such executions in Europe during that era, according to the best historical estimates, was less than 100,000, and perhaps as few as 40,000, and fully a quarter of the victims were male. However, because feminists are willing to believe anything that depicts men as evil oppressors and women as innocent victims, this myth of the witch-hunts as a patriarchal atrocity continues to be recited even after it has been completely debunked by historians. (I recommend The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft, a 1999 book by Professor Ronald Hutton of the University of Bristol in England.)

Daly’s celebration of witchcraft in her 1973 book Beyond God the Fatherrelied heavily on the British academic Margaret Murray, whose books The Witch Cult in Western Europe (1921) and The God of the Witches (1931) depicted witchcraft as benevolent paganism. Daly also cited Witches, Midwives, and Nurses: A History of Women Healers (1973) by feminists Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English, who claimed to show that the modern “medical establishment” was a system of male-dominated oppression that originated from European witch-hunters.  British historian Hugh Trevor-Roper’s The European Witch-Craze (1969) was added as a source for Daly’s 45-page chapter on witches in her 1978 bookGyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Dworkin, meanwhile, repeatedly cited British author Pennethorne Hughes (Witchcraft, 1952) in the 33-page chapter on the subject in her 1974 bookWoman Hating.

Beyond their bogus claims about witches as intuitive healers, millions of whom had been martyred in a European “gynocide,” as Dworkin called it, feminists also promoted the false idea that witchcraft was a vestigal remnant of the worship of the “Great Goddess,” which was alleged to have been the religion of a neolithic matriarchal society. British writer Jaquetta Hawkes popularized this myth of a peaceful, nature-loving prehistoric culture ruled by women which, alas, had been conquered by violent adherents of patriarchal religion. This feminist myth of ancient matriarchy and pagan witchcraft functioned as propaganda against both Christianity and modern science, which were portrayed in feminist literature as elements of the male-supremacist conspiracy against women. Feminism thus not only promoted mystical superstition, in terms ofneopagan Wicca as practiced by Z. Budapest, Starhawk, Ruth Barrett and others, but also encouraged belief in dubious (and possibly also dangerous) “alternative medicine” practices.

Feminist Tumblr blogger Wit Witch’s claims about “the destruction of women’s culture and heritage during the witch hunts” show how this myth fosters a belief in the oppression of women as systematic and historical. The young feminist — today’s 20-something woman born decades after Daly, Dworkin and others created this mythology in the 1970s — is encouraged to think of herself as inheriting the suffering of ancient witches as her legacy. This in turn helps the most privileged college-educated woman to believe she is victimized by a “society” that the feminist blogger declares “hates women,” a society that “justifies” rape and violence against women, “devalues the labor of women” and treats women as “property” to be used for “the benefit of males.” Because she thinks about the oppression of women is historical terms, it does not matter to the young feminist that she herself is extraordinarily privileged. She has inherited her victim status.

This sense of kinship with the victims of witch-hunters, and the rejection of Christianity as oppressive to women, is encouraged by academic feminists in university Women’s Studies programs. In the textbookWomen’s Voices, Feminist Visions (fifth edition, 2012), Oregon State University professors Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee blame “religion’s oppressive function” (p. 596) for promoting the “underlying assumption . . . that men are more Godlike than women,” so as to “maintain women’s oppression very directly through church laws that . . . regulate women’s sexuality, and create highly defined gender performances” (p. 597). Professors Shaw and Lee portray this oppression as historical:

In the “burning times” (between the 11th and 14th centuries), millions of w2omen in Europe were murdered as witches. for many of these women, “witchcraft” was simply the practice of traditional healing and spirtuality and the refusal to profess Christianity. For other women, the charge of witchcraft had nothing to do with religious practices and everything to do with accusations rooted in jealousy, greed, and fear of female sexuality. But in the frenzy of the times, defending oneself against an accusation of witchcraft was practically impossible, and an accusation alone generally meant death. (p. 598)

Having offered this condensed version of the Daly/Dworkin feminist witch myth (Daly is cited by name on pp. 608 and 635 of Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions), Professors Shaw and Lee provide students this encouragement on page 602:


In the early twenty-first century, many women participate in revivals of ancient women-centered religions and have become empowered through the revaluing of the feminine implicit in this spirituality.Wicca, or witchcraft (although not the witches we popularly think of at Halloween), is a Goddess- and natjure-oriented religion whose origins predate both Judaism and Christianity. Current Wiccan practice involves the celebration of the feminine, connection with nature, and the practice of healing. As Wiccan practicioner Starhawk suggests, witchcraft encourages women to be strong, confident, and independent and to love the Goddess, the earth, and other human beings. This notion of witchcraft is very different from the cultural norms associated with witches that are propagated in society.

This praise of Wicca — contrasting sharply with the professors’ condemnation of Christianity — is amplified by a quiz on page 603 of Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions, “How Well Do You Know the Goddess?” Here students are asked to identity 15 different female deities including Asherah (Mesopotamia), Astarte (Assyria), Demeter and Artemis (Greece), Freyja (Scandinavia) and Kali (India).

Feminism has become a sort of 21st-century pagan cult whose high priestesses are Women’s Studies professors like Susan Shaw and Janet Lee, who declare on page 170 of their textbook that sexual relationships are political “because they occur in the context of a society that assigns power based on gender and other systems of inequality and privilege . . . reflected in the concept of heteropatriarchy, the dominance associated with a gender binary system that presumes heterosexuality as a social norm.” This academic ideology is echoed by the Tumblr feminist’s claim that lesbians are victimized by “compulsory heterosexuality.” Hateful anti-male beliefs that are taught in the classroom are repeated by the blogger who argues that, because of “all that women have endured in this society, we deserve to hate those who have made it like this” — men.

Readers who are shocked to encounter a Tumblr blogger justifying anti-male hatred as the “anger of the oppressed” may be tempted to dismiss this as an expression of fringe extremism. However, we see how this blogger’s rant expresses the same beliefs found in Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions, a textbook published by McGraw-Hill, which calls it a “leading introductory women’s studies reader.” The back cover of this textbook is emblazoned with endorsements by Utah State UniversityProfessor Camille Odell (who is affiliated with the university’s Center for Women and Gender), and by Profesor Maria Bevacqua, a lesbian activist who is chairwoman of the Department of Gender and Women’s Studies at Minnesota State University. In academia, radical anti-male ideology is not “fringe” feminism or “extreme” feminism, it is simply feminism, and no one on the 21st-century campus dares to criticize the feminist cult for fear of being accused of sexism and misogyny.

“[T]here is simply no substitute for the intact traditional family. Meaning, when children are removed from the protection of an intact traditional family, the chances of bad things happening to them, of being mistreated and abused in whatever situation they find themselves placed in, go way, way up. . . .
“Leftists hate this sort of talk. They absolutelyhate it. It just drives them into psychosis.”
Oregon Muse, AOSHQ (hat-tip: Ed Driscoll)

Despite the Tumblr feminist’s assertion that society “justifies men’s rape and abuse” of women — because “their gender gives them the right to harass us, rape us, treat us as if we are their property” — such abuse is harshly punished by society. In fact, these crimes are in some ways abetted by feminism. In July 2008, a Connecticut judge sentenced Adam Gault to 50 years in prison after he was convicted of kidnapping a teenage girl and sexually assaulting her while keeping her captive for more than a year. Gault, 41, was assisted in his crimes by two women, Ann Murphy, 41, and Kimberly Cray, 27, who both pleaded guilty and were sentenced to prison. In addition to the help of his female accomplices, Gault also got assistance from Planned Parenthood. After impregnating his 15-year old captive, he forced her to get an abortion at Planned Parenthood in West Hartford, which did not report the procedure to authorities. The non-profit group Life Dynamics has reported more than 50 criminal cases in which sexual predators took their minor victims to abortion clinics that failed to notify police:

  • In May 2012, Vincent Gregory Wallace was arrested in Sarasota, Florida. Wallace was accused of sexually assaulting his two stepdaughters. When the oldest girl got pregnant at age 12, her mother took her to get an abortion at a clinic that failed to notify police.
  • Steven Rivas was 23 when he began molesting his girlfriend’s 12-year-old sister. When she became pregnant at age 16, Rivas took the girl to an abortion clinic in San Bernardino, California, which did not notify authorities. The girl became pregnant twice more before she turned 18, and each time Rivas took her to have an abortion, but the clinics never made any report. It wasn’t until 2007, when the victim was 20, that police learned of Rivas’ crimes. In 2009,Rivas was sentenced to 18 years in prison.
  • John Szorady was released from an Ohio prison in 2004 after serving 14 years for sexually assaulting a nine-year-old girl. Four months later, Szorady began raping his girlfriend’s 13-year-old daughter. When the girl became pregnant, Szorady took her to an abortion clinic that failed to notify authorities, so that Szorady was able continue raping her for several more months before a school counselor learned about the situation and called police. In 2010,Szorady was sentenced to 74 years in prison.
  • In 2011, a Florida judge sentenced Jermaine Jones, 34, to 15 years in prison for sexually assaulting the daughter of Janet Marshall, a woman he was dating. The girl was only 12 years old when the abuse began and she soon became pregnant. When her mother took the girl to an abortion clinic in Gainesville, however, it was learned that the girl was already almost six months pregnant. The Gainesville clinic could not perform such late-term abortions, but after contacting the hotline of the National Abortion Federation, the mother was directed to another clinic 300 miles away near Fort Lauderdale that could do the procedure. Neither of these clinics notified police of having treated a pregnnant 12-year-old, and it was not until after the girl was taken for a checkup by a pediatrician, that police investigated and Jones was arrested.

These are among dozens of cases documented by Life Dynamics that demonstrate how the abortion industry turns a blind eye to the sexual abuse of minors. Feminists oppose all efforts to regulate clinics or to hold abortion providers accountable for their criminal negligence that enables sexual predators to victimize minors. Even when undercover video showed Planned Parenthood officials casually discussing illegal traffic in the organs of babies killed in their clinics, feminists defended Planned Parenthood and instead demanded prosecution of those who produced the videos! When Republicans in Congress sought to eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood — which gets more than $500 million annually from U.S. taxpayers — Hillary Clinton called this “a full-on assault on women’s health” and declared: “I’m proud to stand with Planned Parenthood, I’ll never stop fighting to protect the ability and right of every woman in this country to make her own health decisions.” Of course, the only “health decision” feminists care about is abortion, even when Planned Parenthood is helping sexual predators.

Contrary to what any feminist may claim on her Tumblr blog, it is not “society” which “devalues” women and “justifies” their abuse, it is their friends in the abortion industry who do this. Enraged by an ideology that can justify any evil, feminists celebrate the death of unborn children and defend this gruesome business as “women’s health.” Feminists hate babies and they hate men, but they hate God even more. If medieval witches really were feminists, no wonder people wanted to burn them all.