Abe Cabinet’s approval rating falls to 38.5% in latest opinion poll


The approval rating for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s Cabinet fell 1.2 percentage points from August to 38.5 percent this month, hitting its lowest level since he took office in December 2012, a Jiji poll showed Friday.

The approval rating for the Abe Cabinet slipped below 40 percent for the first time in August.

The disapproval rating for the Cabinet edged up 0.4 point to 41.3 percent, according to the survey of 2,000 adults across the country in the four days through Monday. Of the total, 64.2 percent gave valid responses.

While Abe won another three-year term as the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s president on Tuesday, his administration continues to face a difficult political situation.

The popularity decline is believed to reflect concerns over national security bills under deliberation at the Diet and tensions between the national and Okinawa prefectural governments over the planned relocation of the U.S. Marine Corps’ Futenma air base within the southwestern prefecture.

Asked about the best time for the next House of Representatives election, 36.2 percent of the respondents said there was no need to call a snap election until the end of the current term. The next most frequent response, backed by 24.7 percent, was next summer, when a House of Councilors election will be held, while 14.6 percent favored a general election as soon as possible.

About reasons for supporting the Abe Cabinet, 16.3 percent said there was no one better than Abe to be prime minister at the moment, 12.0 percent said Abe had good leadership skills, and 9.2 percent said he was trustworthy.

Among respondents who did not approve of the Cabinet, 20.4 percent said they did not support its policies, 19.6 percent said they could expect nothing from the Cabinet, and 17.8 percent said they could not trust Abe.

The support rate for the LDP was down 0.8 points to 23.3 percent, while 63.5 percent said they did not support any particular party, up 2.5 points.

The largest opposition Democratic Party of Japan drew a support rating of 4.9 percent, down 0.7 points, followed by Komeito, the LDP’s coalition partner, with 3.4 percent. Ishin no To (Japan Innovation Party) polled 1.9 percent, and the Japanese Communist Party 1.2 percent.

CANADA: Muslim terrorist gets his ass kicked in prison for using threats trying to convert other prisoners to Islam


Paolo Giancaterino, the lawyer representing Wilson, told Global News Larmond had tried to convert his client to Islam on several occasions and threatened to kill him when he resisted.

“It first started with some friendly requests for him to convert to Islam and be a soldier of Islam, and my client was having none of it,” Giancaterino said. “It escalated to the point where threats were starting to be made that my client would be killed in his cell if he didn’t convert. That was followed up by another threat that my client’s family would be killed by someone on the outside if he didn’t convert.”

Muslims Traveled from China to Bomb Hindu Shrine in Thailand


Thai police have revealed that the horrific bombing attack on a Hindu shrine in Bangkok last month that murdered 20 people was masterminded by Chinese Muslims of the Uyghur minority.

The mastermind of the bombing has been named by Thai police as “Izan,” and reportedly fled to Bangladesh the day before the bombing on a Chinese passport, reports the Washington Post on Thursday.

Likewise another man who admitted to being part of the group behind the bombing is currently being held by police and has been identified as Yusufu Mierili. He was nabbed on September 1 close to the border with Cambodia in possession of a Chinese passport, which listed him as hailing from the Uyghur homeland of Xinjiang in western China near Pakistan.

In the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region separatist Sunni Muslim Uyghur factions have conducted numerous attacks, including those with guns and explosives. China has cracked down in response and is trying to have them blacklisted as terrorists, although much of the international community has denounced the Chinese actions, accusing the state of repression.

It appears the clashes in Xinjiang have now become an international problem. Speculation has suggested the bombing in Bangkok was meant as revenge for Thailand deporting over 100 Uyghur Muslims who were in the country illegally back to China in July.

Thailand has been trying to play down the “international terrorism” aspect of the incident, likely so as to avoid any damage to the tourism industry that is a mainstay of the Thai economy. Instead the police have claimed the attackers may have been human traffickers smuggling Uyghurs to Turkey.

China has also been hushing up the terror angle – in an unusual move, given that it has often tried to emphasize Uyghur attacks so as to gain international support for its crackdown as being a part of the general war against terrorism. Apparently, China views the bombing as a security embarrassment it would rather not focus on.

The Uyghur connection

“I think we can now say with a reasonable degree of certainty that there is a Uyghur/Xinjiang angle here, yet the motivations and implications remain cloudy at best,” James Leibold, an expert on China’s policies regarding ethnic groups at Melbourne’s La Trobe University, told the Washington Post.

Leibold said several motives were possible, including warring human trafficking groups or else unstable Thai politics.

“Regardless of these unanswered questions, the incident highlights the increasing internationalization of the ‘Uyghur issue’ and the ‘Xinjiang problem.’ The increasing flow of people, ideas and social media imagery into and out of Xinjiang renders these issues far more difficult for the Chinese government to deal with,” he added.

While the Chinese authorities have not played up the Uyghur terror angle of the bombing, Leibold estimated the incident would nevertheless help China’s “quest for additional resources” to crackdown on Uyghur insurgents, while human rights groups warn of more repression.

Another element that has come clear in the investigation is the Turkish angle – one suspected member of the group that was arrested by Thai police held a fake Turkish passport.

Zhu Feng, an international affairs expert at Nanjing University in southern China, told the Washington Post that “there is no denying the fact that there is an underground, cross-border organized crime group and a secret conduit for international terrorists” from Xinjiang to Turkey through Thailand.

Feng said international condemnation of China’s crackdown in Xinjiang is only “helping these underground criminal activities.”

Tensions in Xinjiang have spilled on to the international scene before, with Uyghur extremists leaving to conduct terrorism abroad.

Just this January, China reported that 300 citizens, most of them likely Uyghurs, had gone to join Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria and Iraq via Malasyia.

Sophie Tucker: false rape accuser

A woman has admitted making a false complaint of rape against a man in North Devon.

Sophie Tucker, aged 22, pleaded guilty to attempting to pervert the course of justice when she appeared before Judge Francis Gilbert, QC at Exeter Crown Court.

Tucker, of Victory Way, Torrington, admitted perverting the course of justice by making a false claim of rape against a man on August 20 last year.

Adrian Chaplin, for the defence, said: “She never actually cried rape. It is just that what she described is viewed in law as amounting to rape. There is a lot of mitigation which will be advanced in due course.”

He said Tucker had pleaded guilty as soon as her defence team had been supplied with a tape of her police interview and had a chance to give her advice.

Judge Gilbert adjourned the case for a probation pre-sentence report and warned Tucker that all options, including custody, remain open.

Read more: http://www.northdevonjournal.co.uk/Torrington-woman-22-admits-making-false-rape/story-27780040-detail/story.html#ixzz3lSr3duRr
Follow us: @NDJournal on Twitter | NDJournal on Facebook

Feminism as Sadistic Revenge Fantasy


“Radical feminism, by definition, seeks to dis-cover and examine the root of women’s global oppression by men, and the sources of male power.”
“Radfem 101: A Radical Feminist Primer”

What is seldom noted in discussions of feminism is the extent to which the movement’s ideology represents a calculated appeal to the resentments of psychological misfits. Feminism attracts maladjusted personalities who, to employ Freudian terms, displace the rage of their hypercritical superego onto a male scapegoat. The damaged ego, unable to cope with a profound sense of personal shame, must escape the superego’s condemnation and does so by an externalization of blame, projecting onto males an all-encompassing malice that in fact represents the wrongful desires which the woman’s own conscience condemns in herself. Such women are attracted to the feminist movement because it promises to “empower” them, enabling them to indulge their pathological appetite for punitive cruelty against the hated male scapegoat.

“All women are prisoners and hostages to men’s world. . . .
Each man is a threat. We can’t escape men.”

This function of feminism as a vehicle for rage-displacement explains why its adherents so often exhibit a generalized anti-male fear — a paranoid identification of men as a collective enemy — so that the feminist lashes out with frightful vehemence toward men she doesn’t even know, presuming them to be guilty of heinous crimes and bad motives, simply because they are males. The damaged ego (“broken people,” to employProfessor Glenn Reynolds’ phrase) simply cannot deal appropriately with feelings of failure and disappointment. We indulge such deformed personalities at our peril, because they crave power in order to inflict a sadistic revenge on their chosen scapegoats.

“Feminist consciousness is consciousness of victimization . . . to come to see oneself as a victim.”
Sandra Lee Bartky, Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (1990)

Believing themselves to be victims of oppression, feminists thereby absolve themselves of any moral obligation to treat males fairly. The male oppressor can expect no mercy from women who, having organized themselves to seize political power, employ that power to impose vindictive punishment on males without the need to prove that any individual target of this feminist revenge is personally guilty of wrongdoing. Anything that harms men is “social justice” according to the zero-sum logic of feminism. Studying radical feminist texts by Andrea Dworkin, Mary Daly, Kathleen Barry and others, I notice their tendency to present an indictment of “male supremacy” based upon a historical collection of atrocities compiled from all over the world, and this tendency can be observed whenever feminists try to delegitimize their contemporary critics by accusing them of tacit complicity in criminal wrongdoing. You can never rationally discuss a simple policy question with feminists; Christina Hoff Sommers was accused of “rape denial” for attempting to discuss facts and logic with Oberlin College students.

Feminists employ a cumulative, collective approach to male guilt, reciting a catalog of global wrongdoing — Chinese footbinding, Islamic female genital mutilation, medieval witch-hunts, child prostitution in Thailand, the violent abuse of women in BDSM pornography — as proof that all men are evil monsters. This is a method of anti-male hate propaganda, and it does no good to point out that you, as an individual, are not Chinese or Muslim, that you were not alive during the Middle Ages, have never been to Thailand and are not “into” BDSM. Nor, for that matter, does it do any good to point out that the feminist who recites these atrocities is a privileged member of the academic elite, whose affluent parents paid for her to attend the finest schools in the world. She has not been victimized by these atrocities, but rather wields the victimhood of other women as a weapon with which to intimidate you into silence, threatening to destroy your reputation by branding you an apologist for these crimes unless you SHUT UP and grant her whatever else she may demand in addition to your silence. (Male silence is mandatory, under the First Rule of Feminism.)

Feminists routinely resort to totalitarian tactics because feminism’s ideology is totalitarian in nature. Although the movement’s professional “mainstream” spokeswomen are usually careful to pretend to care about democracy and freedom, occasionally the mask slips and we find Julie Bindel arguing that men should “have their power taken from them” so that feminists can “put them all in some kind of camp.” Anyone tempted to dismiss such hateful rhetoric as an expression of “fringe” beliefs outside the feminist “mainstream” simply has not paid close attention to what feminists have been saying and writing for the past four decades. Inside the Feminist-Industrial Complex of academic Women’s Studies programs, blatantly anti-male attitudes are not only tolerated, they are encouraged and justified by an ideology that makes “male power” the root of all evil. We may find this belief system expressed whenever feminists gather anywhere they believe themselves beyond external scrutiny. This is from a 2012 post at a radical feminist blog:

By facing the enemy’s power I mean the big rape industries, the big male military, economic, religious and state institutions, but also male criminals, abusers, rapists. Men and their institutions are so hard to attack, socially, physically, psychologically, linguistically or institutionally, and because of this, it’s easy to feel completely powerless and hopeless. How many times, as feminists, do we punish, shame or even lock up male criminals every year, with our own hands, as a group? I have never had the opportunity to do it myself yet, although I am looking forward to when it will happen. Regularly measuring the effectiveness of our actions according to how much male power over women has been removed is a good way not to lose focus of the enemy.

Notice not only the description of males as “the enemy,” but also the feminist’s gleeful anticipation of personally inflicting punishment on “male criminals.” Is she planning a career as a police officer or prosecuting attorney? And notice also how she insists that feminists must measure “the effectiveness of our actions according to how much male power over women has been removed.”

The feminist’s obsession with power — an inability to accept the voluntary mutual cooperation that is the basis of free a society — is typical of totalitarian thought, and also of paranoia. This is why dictators like Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot so often display paranoid tendencies, because the desire to obtain vast power over others is rooted in the totalitarian’s pathological fear of being harmed by power exercised by others. Legitimate authority (as wielded by parents, teachers, police, etc.) does not bother honest, decent, moral people, but it is terrifying to those who secretly harbor wicked and selfish desires. The totalitarian is not honest, decent or moral. A warped character, permanently twisted by a sense of personal humiliation rooted in an unhappy childhood or unfortunate adolescence, the totalitarian craves power to inflict revenge on a society whose law, morality and culture are rejected as unjust.

Revenge is what feminists want, and the fact that men targeted as victims of this revenge may have done nothing to deserve punishment is irrelevant to the totalitarian worldview of deranged women who speak of men as “the enemy.” Like the Ukrainian peasants who starved to death in Stalin’s terror famine, the victims of feminist policy can never be innocent, because feminism’s ideology defines them as a part of a collective enemy. A feminist conception of “social justice” requires thatmales must suffer, and the movement thus attracts sadistic women who derive a sick pleasure from the idea of inflicting that suffering on men.

All men deserve to suffer, because they are men — this is the psychological basis of feminism, and everything else about the feminist movement is merely a means to accomplishing its punitive goal.