The ruling Liberal Democratic Party and its coalition partner, the Komeito party, have agreed to make a fresh start on talks to study ways to reduce the burden on consumers when the government further raises the consumption tax rate.
The move comes as the two parties remain apart over the Finance Ministry’s proposed tax refund scheme aimed at mitigating the impact on spending for daily goods when the 8 percent tax rate is raised to 10 percent in April 2017.
At their meeting on Friday, the Komeito party expressed opposition to the tax refund plan supported by the LDP, calling for the consideration of reduced tax rates for a range of food and other daily necessities as widely adopted by European countries.
“We see difficulties in adopting” the tax refund plan, said Komeito tax panel chief Tetsuo Saito.
“We’d like to resume discussions as early as mid-October after marshaling issues” for discussion, LDP tax panel chief Takeshi Noda told a press conference.
Despite the differences over the issue, the parties confirmed they will continue studying the feasibility of both plans and have an agreed measure included in tax reform proposals for fiscal 2016 to be compiled in mid-December.
The proposed tax refund plan would see a 10 percent tax rate levied on all items, with the government providing 2 percent tax refunds for all food and beverage purchases excluding alcoholic drinks.
Under the program, customers would be asked to carry personal identification cards bearing “My Number” codes, which will be distributed next month, allowing the government to keep track of purchases eligible for tax refunds.
The proposed plan has been criticized as consumers would have to carry the cards at all times and file tax refund requests themselves, while applying multiple tax rates would also increase the clerical burden on businesses.
“We will continue our efforts to reach a realistic conclusion that satisfies both consumers and businesses,” Noda said.
MACAO, Sept. 28 (Xinhua) — Macao’s Tourist Office has organized a series of events with brand new elements to celebrate this year’s traditional Chinese Mid-Autumn Festival and the World Tourism Day, both of which fell on Sunday.
A small dragon boat race was held for the first time, attracting 126 local and non-local teams to compete, while a tray race, which involved running holding drinks on a tray, saw more than 200 participants.
At night, an international fireworks display contest was held. About 5,000 local residents and visitors watched the spectacular sight.
On Sunday morning, the tourist office presented welcome souvenirs to this year’s “Lucky Tourists” at Macao Ferry Terminal, who were a group of four from Australia.
“It’s like being in a dream,” one of the tourists said after receiving the unexpected gifts, adding that they will never forget this wonderful experience on arriving here.
The Australians said they had watched a movie about Macao before, which aroused theircuriosity to decide to take a look in person.
Apart from activities organized by the tourist office, local communities also held various garden parties featuring traditional Chinese lantern riddles and lantern making crafts to celebrate the festival.
Libertarianism is being infiltrated by feminazis posing as libertarian women
Libertarianism has been unable to deal with the fact that the primary supporters of big government are women. The only way to get small government is to deal with this fact yet like with Republicans, most Libertarians refuse to deal with it. They will come up with excuses like “the libertarian movement needs to grow first”, which is an admission that Libertarians will not reduce government if a woman complains. Or they will say, “women were tricked into supporting big government because men didn’t respect women”, which is avoiding the issue by blaming men.
It’s clear that for many Libertarian women, Libertarianism isn’t about small or minimal government, but removing competing government programs that draw money away from government programs that give money to women. (This is a reason why we need Geolibertarianism or Geoanarchism because even Libertarians can’t be trusted to be Libertarian when it counts.) One way in which this happens is attacks on Libertarian men (or men “accused” of being libertarian despite not actually being libertarian) such as this article by Elizabeth Nolan Brown at reason.com where she says that libertarianism is being invaded by “misogynists” from #GamerGate, the MRM/MHRM, the MGTOW community.
Brown’s article is filled with minor lies such that GamerGaters commonly have Gadsden flags in their twitter profiles. In reality, GamerGaters are more likely to use anime characters or Vivian James, the #GamerGate mascot, in their profiles. Also, most GamerGaters are liberals/leftists or they started out that way but became (more) libertarian later when they realized that talk about alleged sexism in video games was Jack Thompson with breasts . The biggest lie in Brown’s article is that #GamerGate/MRAs/MGTOW secretly want a big government program to dictate gender norms. The is the exact opposite of the truth. Feminists have already setup a multitude of big government programs to benefit women at the expense of men. What the so called “misogynists” invading Libertarianism want is those government programs eliminated. They don’t want government programs.
What Brown has done with her article is a case of DARVO (deny, attack, reverse victim and offender), a common tactic used by feminists. She starts out with the assumption that big government programs that benefit women at the expense of men don’t exist (outside of a few minor cases, maybe). Then she accuses the so called “misogynists” of wanting big government programs against women. Brown reversed the victim and offender exactly since it’s feminists that created a multitude of government programs to hurt men, and her so called “misogynists” that want them removed.
As we know most GamerGaters aren’t Libertarians, so why is #GamerGate being lumped in with Brown’s so called “misogynists”. It’s impossible to legitimately be a Libertarian and not in principle support #GamerGate. The obvious endgame for the feminist war on video games is for the government to control what video games can be created since feminist infiltration of the video game industry is a failure and so is their attempt to replace video games with choose your own adventure stories. No legitimate Libertarian can support this, but many Libertarian women can’t admit this since doing so would expose them as fake libertarians who just want to remove government programs that block the expansion of government programs for women. In other words, #GamerGate by doing nothing but existing threatens to expose many Libertarian women for the frauds they are.
A hospital has apologised after an injured Royal Air Force sergeant was moved out of a waiting room because staff thought his uniform would “upset” other patients. His family was allegedly told it was because they “have lots of different cultures coming in.”
Reports suggest the Mark Prendeville, 38, was asked to sit behind a wall. His farther, Jim, told BBC News 24 that he was “dumfounded.” He said: “I’ve spoken to his wife, he was absolutely disgusted.”
Sergeant Prendeville was attending the Accident and Emergency department at Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother Hospital in Margate, Kent, after chemicals from a fire extinguisher got in to his eyes during a training exercise.
“Patients of the brand new Reinier de Graaf Hospital in Delft, Netherlands are angry that a separate prayer room is built for Muslims but not for Christians, Jews and Hindus. Those non-Muslim patients should all share a common prayer room.
The separate prayer room for Muslim patients is met by resistance from other patients. ‘There is not a single Christian cross in the whole hospital’ says Job Duijndam. The resident of the city of Delft is talking about a ‘serious case of discrimination.’
The hospital received so many complaints from patients that it has decided to adjust the common prayer room with ‘appropriate religious symbols.’ But it will not create separate prayer rooms for other religions. ‘Muslims have a great need for a separate prayer room. We don’t think patients with a different religious background have the same need.’”
Bulgaria’s Orthodox Church has called on its government not to let any more Muslim refugees into the country to prevent an “invasion”.
The Balkan EU member has largely been bypassed by the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing conflict and poverty, many of whom set off from Greece through neighbouring Macedonia and Serbia towards northern Europe.
My Emma ‘Mattress Girl’ Sulkowicz award for services to third wave feminism goes this week to Caroline Starmer – a breast-feeding mother whose baby was viciously snatched from her bosom by a security guard at a budget clothing store in a clear case of criminal assault.
Except, of course, it didn’t happen.
Caroline Starmer was not assaulted by the security guard in much the same way as “Jackie” (the anonymous victim of the UVA campus rape story) was not raped as part of an initiation rite during a chapter house party, as actorvist Lena Dunham was not raped at Oberlin College by a Republican called Barry and, indeed, as Sulkowicz herself was almost certainly not raped at Columbia university.
What is it with these crazy chicks?
Well I think I know the answer and it’s one, I’m pretty sure, that all the crazy chicks out there are going to agree wholeheartedly: basically it’s all the fault of men.
Up until recently, you may recall, we lived in a universe entirely run in the interests of the oppressive patriarchal phallocracy. Men made all the rules, men started all the wars (because they think fighting’s cool), men would insist on showing off in that pathetic male way of theirs by writing most of the best literature, composing the best music, painting the best paintings, inventing all sorts of ostentatious blokey toys like the internal combustion engine, the television, the internet, the aeroplane, the printing press and so on. And frankly it just wasn’t fair.
So something had to be done to correct the hideous gender imbalance. And if you buy into the above analysis of historical male domination – as how dare you not? – then there can only be one possible explanation as to why things have since shifted so markedly in women’s favour. It happened because men allowed it to happen.
Some of you may disagree. Not it wasn’t men who were responsible for this: it was manginas (or manginae, for you Latin scholars) who are another thing altogether.
I hear what you say but I still call that nitpicking. Yes it’s true that the kind of hipster-bearded pussy or agonisingly worthy comedy writer on Twitter who dedicates his miserable, spavined, testicle-free life to waving his limp penis on behalf of porcine female social justice Amazons with studs through their lower lip (and God knows where else besides) in the belief that this will ingratiate himself with the opposite sex ought theoretically have abandoned all claims to being a man.
But biologically he is still a man in the same way that Caitlyn is, au fond, still Bruce. And the same goes, I’m afraid, for all those other manginae in positions of authority who sold the pass over the years by doing suicidal things like appointing Alison “yes, he probably raped you” Saunders as Britain’s Director of Prosecutions or failing to fact check highly tendentious rape stories in Rolling Stone or neglecting to give a fair hearing – that’ll be you, Michael Arthur, provost of University College London – to distinguished Nobel-prize-winning scientists viciously maligned by feminazi harpies on false charges of “sexism.”
In allowing the terms of the debate to be set by vengeful and hysterical extremists, these men have not served the cause of ordinary women one jot. Rather they have done the equivalent of what PJ O’Rourke calls “giving whiskey and car keys to a teenage boys.” And it’s women who stand to suffer most in the resulting crash.
As an example, let’s examine in more detail the story of this Caroline Starmer, the mother who went into her local branch of Primark with her baby daughter, and there concocted the allegation that she had been assaulted by a “sneering” security guard who had supposedly objected to her public breast-feeding. She reported the incident to the police claiming it had left her in “excruciating pain.” Had this been true, of course, it would have caused costly reputational damage to Primark and almost certainly resulted in a custodial sentence for the offending security guard.
But it has since emerged in a court case that Starmer made the whole thing up.
And it wasn’t the first time, either. For some reason, this doesn’t appear in the Telegraph’s online report of the case, only in the print version. But here are the details:
Starmer had made a similar allegation on Facebook against her local swimming pool. She wrote “disgusted that they tried to remove me from the premises for breast feeding my twins” in a one star review of the Leicester Leys leisure centre.
Leicester council strongly denied that Starmer had ever made a formal complaint about the incident. Leicestershire police also confirmed that the incident had not been reported to them.
You might argue that besides Primark, Leicester Leys leisure centre, and that unnamed security guard, the other victim of this sorry saga is Starmer herself.
At the risk of judging a book by its cover, I’d say that she doesn’t look like the brightest tool in the box. And the fact that it seems never to have occurred to her that security camera footage might subsequently be used to verify her allegations probably confirms it.
So here we have a not very bright mother-of-four facing a possible jail sentence for perverting the cause of justice as a result of being goaded and encouraged by the prevailing culture of feminist grievance and hysteria into committing a crime which a few years ago would have been literally unthinkable.
A generation ago she might have chained herself harmlessly to the fence at Greenham Common; three generations ago, perhaps she would have chained herself harmlessly to some railings in support of the Suffragette movement. (Or perhaps not. She wouldn’t have stood the chance of being compensated for assault, would she? Also, no men would have been hurt).
No. The crime Starmer committed was entirely a product of our “rape culture” culture where vengeful feminists stalk the land like tyrannosaurs with a bad case of PMT looking for some new non-cause to screech about, some hapless fall-guy (scientist, security guard, student, solicitor: anything in trousers will do) to eviscerate, while the manginae responsible for creating this Jurassic World III: Revenge of the Terratrixes look on with a mix of awe, fear, and smug, “I’m a white knight, me” satisfaction.
I suggested earlier that Starmer was stupid but maybe she isn’t. Maybe, as with semi-celebrity feminist crusaders Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn, her appallingly dishonest behaviour was in fact a perfectly rational response to a world where the rules have now been skewed so grotesquely in the feminazis favour that it scarcely matters whether the claims they make are true or false: the authorities would hardly dare question the world of a wronged woman for fear of being deemed sexist.
It’s just as well that closed circuit TV was working in Primark that day. Otherwise who knows what might have happened. An innocent man could be in prison right now. Which is more than reason enough, it seems to me, for the judge in this trial to give Caroline Starmer a sentence the sisterhood won’t forget in a hurry.
The Muslim insurgency in Thailand has already caused more than 5,000 deaths in the last decade.
It’s a religion of peace, and if you disagree they’ll kill you! via In talks, Muslim rebels seek independence in south Thailand – StarTribune.com h/t NER
Muslim militant leaders in talks with Thai authorities to end a deadly insurgency said Thursday they are seeking an independent state and are ready to negotiate a solution.
Six insurgent groups, united in a coalition called the Pattani Consultative Council, participated in three days of informal peace talks ending Thursday in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
“We want to stress that we did not drop our demand for independence. That will be the final aim for the Pattani struggle, but we are ready to sit at the negotiation table to find a solution that will give Muslims the right to determine their own future” in the predominantly Buddhist country, council representative Abu Hafez Al-Hakim told a news conference.
He said the Pattani people will ultimately decide whether the solution will be an independent state or autonomy under the Thai government for the three southernmost provinces. More than 5,000 people have been killed in the insurgency since 2004.
Occasionally the subject of a post leaves me speechless. This is one of those posts. Dildos for 4 year old girls, marketed by a “genderqueer” woman in San Francisco named Den Kirkwood Tucker.
It would appear this project has some affiliation with Gender Spectrum, the organization involved in public school programming to elementary school children. See for yourself below. Read the article that brought this campaign to my attention here: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/parenting/more-than-just-undies-the-smallest-details-are-the-most-important-for-parents-of-transgender-kids/story-fnet08ui-1227539339418
A prominent secularist and activist has been barred from speaking at a student union event due to fears her speech would “incite hatred” against Muslim students.
Maryam Namazie had been booked by the Warwick Atheists, Secularists and Humanists (WASH) group to speak about secularism to Warwick University’s Student Union on 28 October.
However, the group was notified last month that Ms Namazie’s speech had been cancelled. The decision has led campaigners to raise concerns about student bodies across the UK thwarting freedom of speech on their campuses.
The union said that “after researching both [Ms Namazie] and her organisation, a number of flags have been raised. We have a duty of care to conduct a risk assessment for each speaker who wishes to come to campus”.
Articles written by Ms Namazie indicated she was “highly inflammatory” and “could incite hatred on campus”, according to the union.
Ms Namazie, who fled Iran with her family in 1980 after the revolution, said she was likely to have spoken about apostasy, blasphemy and nudity in the age of Isis. She told The Independentshe was “angry” her talk had been blocked.
“They’re basically labelling me a racist and an extremist for speaking out against Islam and Islamism,” she said.
“If people like me who fled an Islamist regime can’t speak out about my opposition to the far-right Islamic movement, if I can’t criticise Islam… that leaves very [few] options for me as a dissenter because the only thing I have is my freedom of expression.
“If anyone is inciting hatred, it’s the Islamists who are threatening people like me just for deciding we want to be atheist, just because we don’t want to toe the line.”
Ms Namazie, who considers herself an anti-racist campaigner, added: “To try to censor me, does a double disservice to those people who are dissenting by denying people like me the only opportunity we have to speak.”
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Friday a new ministerial post will be created for an initiative to better cope with pressing social issues such as a declining population and an aging society, as part of efforts to shore up Japan’s economic growth.
“I want to make a fresh start to build a society in which we can take on the challenge to tackle the structural problem of a low birthrate and an aging population,” Abe said, announcing at a press conference the creation of the new cabinet post.
Abe made the announcement at the news conference to mark the end of the 245-day extended Diet session, the longest in postwar history, through Sunday, focusing on social welfare and economic issues that are close to home for the public amid declines in his cabinet’s support ratings after last week’s enactment of controversial security legislation.
Abe said he will appoint the new minister when he reshuffles his cabinet after returning to Japan from his visit to New York and Jamaica for six days from Saturday to attend the U.N. General Assembly and hold talks with other leaders.
He said the new post will be established to help achieve his government’s new goal of creating a society in which every citizen realizes his potential, as he pushes forward his new pillars of economic expansion, support for child-rearing and improved social security.
The cabinet reshuffle is likely to take place in early October. The new minister is expected to lead relevant government agencies to draft detailed plans of the initiative to be carried out through 2020, according to a government official.
Abe also said Japan is “only a few steps from getting out of deflation,” after unveiling a day before that the nation is moving to the next stage of “Abenomics,” a term referring to his economic policy mix that originally featured bold monetary easing, fiscal stimulus and growth-oriented reforms.
Abe, who became prime minister for the second time in December 2012 with a pledge to end Japan’s deflationary trend, stressed his government’s economic goals and said the government will keep “close tabs on the economic trends” and act flexibly.
But the prime minister said he is “not thinking at the moment” of compiling an extra budget to stimulate the economy.
While devoting time to talk about his vision for Japan’s continued recovery, Abe was also adamant in defending the security laws aimed at expanding Japanese troops’ role overseas, saying it was “irresponsible” for some critics to label the laws as “war legislation.”
“A strong foundation was built which makes (Japan’s) pledge, upheld for the past 70 years, never to wage war and not to repeat the horrors of war all the more firm,” Abe said, reiterating that he will continue to carefully explain the laws and gain public understanding.
The security laws, which would enable Japanese troops to fight overseas for the first time since World War II, passed the parliament despite stiff protests by opposition lawmakers and some voters.
On the diplomatic front, Abe vowed to double efforts to improve ties with China, South Korea and Russia, and said he hopes to meet with leaders of China and South Korea possibly in late October. When that happens, he said he wants to hold talks separately with South Korean President Park Geun Hye and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang.
Abe has never held one-on-one talks with Park or Li.
In a report released yesterday, entitled “Cyber Violence Against Women And Girls: A Global Wake-up Call,” UN Women, the group behind last year’s risible “He for She” campaign, called on governments to use their “licensing prerogative” to ensure that “telecoms and search engines” are only “allowed to connect with the public” if they “supervise content and its dissemination.”
In other words, if search engines and ISPs don’t comply with a list of the UN’s censorship demands, the UN wants national governments to cut off their access to the public.
So, what sort of content does the UN want to censor? ISIS recruitment videos, perhaps, which lure women into lives of rape and servitude? Live-streamed executions from Syria? Revenge porn or snuff videos? There’s no shortage of dangerous and potentially traumatising content on the web, after all, much of it disproportionately affecting women.
Alas not. The UN is hung up on “cyber violence against women,” a Kafkaesque term that is apparently shorthand for “women being criticised on the internet.” At least, that’s how at least two attendees at the launch of the UN report, published by the United Nations Broadband Commission, explained it yesterday.
According to feminist culture critic Anita Sarkeesian, who spoke at the event, online “harassment” doesn’t simply consist of what is “legal and illegal,” but “also the day-to-day grind of ‘you’re a liar’ and ‘you suck,’ including all of these hate videos that attack us on a regular basis.”
Unable to prove that they are the victims of a wave of “misogynistic hate” – no bomb threat against a feminist critic of video games has ever been deemed credible and there are serious doubts about threats supposedly levelled at transsexual activist Brianna Wu – feminists are trying to redefine violence and harassment to include disobliging tweets and criticisms of their work.
In other words: someone said “you suck” to Anita Sarkeesian and now we have to censor the internet. Who could have predicted such a thing? It’s worth noting, by the way, that if Sarkeesian’s definition is correct, Donald Trump is the world’s greatest victim of “cyber-violence.” Someone should let him know.
Sarkeesian’s comments were echoed by former video game developer, feminist activist and professional victim Zoe Quinn, who told the United Nations: “There are individuals on YouTube who have made a living off of [sic] abusing Anita and I.” Quinn does not name any specific YouTubers, and we are left guessing as to who these mysterious “abusers” really are.
Hmm. Quinn makes more than $3,000 a month on donation site Patreon as she travels around the world talking about her “harassment” story. If anyone is turning a profit from alleged “online abuse,” it’s not the YouTubers.
The message from the UN seems to be: “cyber-violence” against women, at least according to their invited guests, is somehow equivalent to getting thumped, or bullied, or abused in real life, and it’s worth clamping down on basic free speech provisions to insulate these delicate first-world feminist wallflowers from the consequences of their own purposefully provocative statements.
The UN ignores the fact that both of their high-profile invitees are professional wind-up merchants who have capitalised on a media environment in which it has become acceptable to say almost anything about “straight white males” and which women, no matter how preposterous their opinions, can get column inches for saying they’ve been “threatened.” (No journalist will ever check their claims.)
Sarkeesian and Quinn are perhaps the finest living examples of what I call quantum superstate feminism, whose figureheads are at once aggressor and victim; trolling, provoking and ridiculing their ideological opponents while at the same time crying foul when their provocative language is returned in kind.
Somehow, I doubt women in actual peril outside Europe and the US will have much time for this self-regarding baloney.
The UN report itself contains a number of bizarre attempts to equate critical tweets on the internet with physical violence. “A cyber-touch is recognised as equally as harmful as a physical touch” says the report. In their press release, UN Women claim that “cyber violence … places a premium on emotional bandwidth.”
It doesn’t tell us what “emotional bandwidth” means, so we are left to guess. It sounds like “emotional quotient,” which girls say their boyfriends are lacking despite their higher IQs. Nonetheless, the concept of “emotional bandwidth” raises interesting questions. Is it a crime when Netflix starts buffering during a romantic comedy?
Inventing nebulous terms is a speciality of the UN. It allows them to “take action” (that is: issue reports no one reads) on something that doesn’t exist, which disguises their impotence when dealing with real human rights abuses. Needless to say, not everyone agrees that “cyber-violence” and “emotional bandwidth” are urgent humanitarian issues.
Tyler isn’t alone. As the Washington Post’s Caitlin Dewey points out, the UN’s grand plan to censor the web fights against the rising tide of cultural libertarianism. If UN Women think they have civil society on their side, they are mistaken. Everyone from academics and Hollywood actors to gamers and reddit users are sick of mendacious, sinister and profoundly anti-intellectual attempts to attack free expression with bizarre concepts like “cyber-violence” and “safe spaces.”
Even Dewey, a critic of unfettered free speech on the web, thinks the UN’s recommendations are “several steps too revolutionary.”
The UN report’s ham-fisted attempt to equate unwelcome words with violence isn’t its only problem. Its explicit focus on women is never justified, and runs contrary to the data. Research from the Pew Centre has found that “men and women are equally likely overall to have experienced “severe” [online] harassment.” (The research also found that women are twice as likely to be upset by online harassment, but that’s a separate question.) Yet the U.N. group appears to think women’s online harassment merits a special focus. Why?
The UN report’s explanation of the causes of “online cyber violence” echoes the tired language of 1990s moral panics, and in some cases even relies on outdated research from the same period. It blames the “mainstreaming of violence against women” on “popular music, movies, the gaming industry, and the general portrayal of women in popular culture.”
As an enterprising redditor has discovered, the UN’s source is an article from 2000, authored by former Army psychologist Lt. Colonel David Grossman, which accuses Nintendo of manufacturing “equipment for satanic video games.” In the aftermath of the Columbine school shootings, Grossman appeared on TV alongside the evangelical moral crusader Jack Thompson, where he supported Thompson’s argument that video games “trained” school shooters.
The report also has a strange preoccupation with pornography, which it accuses of causing “aggressive behavioural tendencies” as well as “increased interest in coercing their partners into unwanted sex acts.” Their citation is a link to “Stop Porn Culture,” a campaign group chaired by the militantly sex-negative and widely criticised feminist Gail Dines.
Other citations in the report are dead links to old blog posts. One has to wonder if the UN expected anyone to fact-check it at all. Given that most of their “reports” are boondoggles, I suspect they’re surprised by all the attention.
You’d think UN Women would have more pressing concerns than porn, video games, and “cyber violence.” After all, Saudi Arabia, a country with a real violence against women problem, was recently selected to chair a key human rights panel elsewhere in the sprawling UN ecosystem. But ethical priorities don’t seem to be the UN’s strong suit.
It can be pointless and pedantic to play what some of us call “Oppression Olympics,” but in this case the discrepancy between this UN group’s complaints and the real suffering of women is too great to ignore. In a world afflicted by female genital mutilation, forced marriages and acid attacks on girls whose only crime is wanting an education, the UN has chosen to focus on the professional whinging of privileged and mendacious western activists.
The UN has always been a joke, but in this case, by providing a platform for such ludicrously entitled windbags, they have provided us all with the punchline themselves.
UPDATE: This footage appears to be an event of racial profiling by white Canadian feminists.
An Anti-Roosh V and anti-rapeculture protest which occurred at Queens Park in Toronto, ON, Canada on August 15, 2015 resulted in a South American passer-by being labelled a Roosh V follower and harassed by some of the feminist activists.
News reporters Shauna Hunt of City News TV and Cristina Tenaglia of CP24 news interviewed the unnamed South American passerby and accused him of being a Roosh V follower. MP Cheri DiNovo initially accused the South American passerby of being one of Roosh V’s followers.
In addition, Shauna Hunt starts to record the passerby, but when the passerby decides to record her, Shauna Hunt felt “creeped out”.
The South American passerby nearly went into a physical confrontation with a middle-aged male after he told the passerby to “shut up”.
Toronto Police were involved, but they appeared to give more preference to the rights of the feminists, because after all, Toronto is one of the most feminist cities in North America.
It appears that Toronto’s feminists treat passerbys and tourists badly. Therefore, Tourists and immigrants must avoid Toronto Canada.
In addition, feminists created a petition against Roosh V with an aim to ban him from Canada, without much success.
Roosh V managed to make his speech without difficulty at an undisclosed location in the Greater Toronto Area on Saturday August 15, 2015.
A South American passerby who was bullied and harassed by feminists in Toronto on August 15, 2015 at Queen’s Park speaks out against the mistreatment he received under the watch of NDP feminist Cheri DiNovo and news reporters Shauna Hunt and Cristina Tenaglia.
It appears that because the South American passerby was brown in complexion, NDP feminist Cheri DiNovo labelled the South American passerby as a “Roosh V follower”.
Meanwhile, while Shauna Hunt and Cristina Tenaglia’s camera crews were busy filiming the South American passerby, Shauna Hunt refuses to be recorded and filmed by the South American passerby. Talk about typical double standards by feminist Toronto women.
Toronto may be one of the most Marxist cities in the world, because politicians such as Mayor John Tory encourage censorship of dissenting views about Toronto feminist women. Shame on Mayor John Tory!
in india Men are the only ones that can be charged rape not women.
MUMBAI: The RCF police on Thursday arrested 36 year old woman who had allegedly compelled a 16 year old to have physical relationship with her for nearly four to five months.
Woman was booked under the amended law of POSCO, wrongful confinement and blackmailing. ”We have arrested her and produced before the Vikhroli court today and she has been remanded to police custody and further investigations are going on.” said Dilip Raut, senior inspector of RCF police in Chembur.
Last week parents of a school going boy had approached the RCF police station in alleging that their son’s friend’s mother had spiked their son’s drinks, force him to keep physical relationship and she also clicked video of their act and used to threatened coaxing him to continue physical relationship with her.