SOGO dep’t store accused of violating its employees’ rights

TAIPEI – Two saleswomen on Tuesday accused Taiwan’s SOGO Department Store of imposing various unreasonable restrictions on its employees such as forbidding them from sitting down or drinking water during work hours, in contravention of workers’ rights.


At a news conference, Taipei City Councilor Hsieh Wei-chou of the Democratic Progressive Party displayed a list of the store’s workplace regulations, which state that salespersons are not allowed to drink water, eat food, sit or squat on the job.

Salespersons are required to remain standing at all times or risk a fine of NT$500 each time they violate the rules, according to the list displayed by Hsieh.

At the press conference, a woman surnamed Chang said that when she was working at SOGO’s Tianmu store as a salesperson in a clothing section, her shifts lasted 11 hours per day and she was not allowed to sit down or squat during that period.

Chang said she would be scolded by a floor supervisor if she leaned against a desk or wall, even when no customers were around.

The long hours of standing caused health problems such as varicose veins, plantar fasciitis and intervertebral disk herniation, Chang said.

She said she resigned after four months and went to work at Far Eastern Department Store, where chairs are provided for salespersons.

Beyonce, Jay Z Sued by Hungarian Singer Mitsou Over “Drunk in Love”

Beyonce and Jay Z may be singing “How the hell did this s–t happen?” after getting served with a lawsuit over their hit single “Drunk in Love.”

The married performers, who worked together with producer Timbaland on the now-classic steamy ballad, are named in new legal documents from Hungarian singer Monika Juhasz Miczura, aka Mitsou, who says her vocals were unfairly sampled.

Mitsou reportedly filed papers on Friday, Dec. 12, one day before the one-year anniversary of the surprise release of Beyonce’s smash hit self-titled album, which featured “Drunk in Love.”

The lawsuit alleges that Beyonce and her team sampled Mitsou’s vocals for the opening hook of the single, taking a 1995 recording that the Hungarian singer did of a song called “Bajba, Bajba Pelem,” or the U.S. title, “Gypsy Life on the Road.”

Feminism, Sex and Hypocrisy


Perhaps readers will recall Nian Hu (@Nian_Hu on Twitter) or you may need to be reminded that Ms. Hu is the Harvard student who declared: “I am a feminist. I believe in the equality of the sexes. For me, feminism means freedom,” and that among these freedoms was “freedom to have as many sexual partners as I want without being looked down on.”

Well, this was an invitation to mockery that I could not refuse.

What Ms. Hu was saying, really, was that other people have no right to their own opinions. Everyone is required to approve of wanton promiscuity. The feminist freedom of Harvard sluts to get drunk and screw around would be infringed if they were to be “looked down on” because of their habitual and shameless fornication.

“Let me tell you what to think” — this is the dictatorial imperative of feminism, a totalitarian regime of clever college girls who have decided the rest of us are wrong about everything. You need to be constantly lectured by angry young women, because she is oppressed and you areprivileged. Therefore the only correct opinions are opinions approved by these tyrannical Ivy League brats who consider it a social injustice —“harassment!” “misogyny!” — if anyone dares to disagree with them.

Are there no adults at Harvard University who can explain to these impudent kids that having a high SAT score when you’re 17 is not proof that you already know everything? Or are the faculty and administration of elite universities so intimidated by their students that there is no one on the Cambridge campus who will stand up to these young fools?

Petted and pampered and repeatedly told how wonderful they are (because being admitted to an Ivy League school is proof of their superiority to mere mortals), the insolent youth at schools like Harvard arrive on campus as freshmen convinced that they are smarter than God. The faculty apparently believe their task is to confirm, rather than contradict, their students’ grandiose narcissistic self-regard. So if the girls at Harvard are all sluts and the boys are all perverts, the faculty will schedule lectures in the department of Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies where students will be told how awesome it is to be a slut or a pervert. The Harvard kids will of course bask in this flattery — “We’re not just smart, we’re sexy, too!” — and thus become even more deviant and immoral than they were when they arrived.

The Ivy League Is Decadent and Depraved, and we can say of Harvard University what Obi-Wan Kenobi said of Mos Eisley, that it is a “wretched hive of scum and villainy.” But I digress . . .

Nian Hu published a new column in the Harvard Crimson last week:


My friend scrolls through the photos of a man on Facebook. He’s white, lives in a predominantly white neighborhood, and went to a predominantly white high school. But in many of his photos, he is accompanied by Asian women.
“Yes, he has yellow fever,” my friend confirms . . . a preference for Asian women. The term is most commonly ascribed to white men who seem to only ever date Asian women.
Yellow fever is a widespread phenomenon. According to data collected from online dating sites, all men except Asians prefer to romantically pursue Asian women. In fact, there are many dating sites specifically tailored for white men looking to date Asian women. There is even a Tumblr blog that compiles messages from “creepy white guys with Asian fetishes.” Yellow fever was also depicted in Debbie Lum’s documentary, Seeking Asian Female, which takes a close look at relationships between white men and Asian women. . . .
It is egregiously misguided to assume that an entire ethnicity of women has one set of personality traits, and the fact that some men actually believe this reflects the limited experience they’ve had with real-life Asian women. Even worse, it suggests that perhaps they are viewing Asian women more as one-dimensional objects than human beings.
Objectification is already something that all women face regardless of race. . . . For Asian women in particular, objectification reduces them to infantile figures — delicate, submissive, and dutiful.
The fact that docility and submissiveness are viewed as favorable traits for Asian women is telling. It implies that non-Asian women are too loud, too opinionated, too intimidating, and that men would prefer women who keep quiet and acquiesce to their every demand. The stereotype that Asian women are meek, though blatantly untrue, nevertheless reveals that perhaps yellow fever is more than just an innocent preference based on physical appearance. . . .

You can read the whole thing, if you feel the urge to absorb another lecture about what a bigoted racist misogynist you are. Frankly, I got bored with these lectures decades ago. The Clarence Thomas hearings, the L.A.riots, the O.J. Simpson trial, Monica Lewinsky, Matthew Shepard — by the time the ’90s ended, like most American adults, I was sick and tired of listening to liberals tell us what to think about everything. Back then, of course, the liberal lectures were delivered by TV commentators and newspaper columnists whereas now, thanks to the Internet, every 19-year-old kid with a Tumblr blog is telling us what to think because, of course, teenagers know everything and grown-ups know nothing. But once again, I digress . . .


What is it about feminism that convinces young women they possess a monopoly of knowledge and virtue in regard to sexual behavior? How is it that I, who have six children — three of them older than Nian Hu — am assumed to be an ignorant bigot in need of a lecture about “Hey, objectification is bad, you guys”? Evidently, Ms. Hu disapproves of white men dating Asian women, and she has the right to her opinion. Likewise, the Nation of Islam and the Ku Klux Klan have the same right to disapprove of interracial relationships. It is not my job to tell other people what to think or say or do, so why should I let a Harvard sophomore tell me what to think, say and do? And how are we to decide whose sexual preferences should be condemned as harmful “fetishes” and “objectification,” whereas other preferences we are never allowed to criticize at all? Who has the authority to make this decision?

For example, ever since the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the category of mental illness, the question of why gay people are gay has been considered off-limits. Any speculation about the etiology of homosexuality incites activists to begin shrieking their insistence that gay people are “born that way,” and so it is impossible to research the possible developmental factors involved without being accused of malevolent homophobic intentions. Well, it’s still a free country, and I am therefore at liberty to say (a) I never believed the “born that way” argument, and (b) I don’t think most gay people actually believe it, either. Trust me. After two years of plowing through dozens of books about radical feminist gender theory, and monitoring the ongoing discourse on Feminist Tumblr blogs, I am if anything even more skeptical of the “born that way” narrative than I was before I began this research project. Because of the substantial overlap between feminism and lesbianism (which is apparent to anyone who bothers to look at Tumblr or, for that matter, Women’s Studies programs), an amateur student of feminist gender theory will invariably encounter various first-person narratives of the “How I Knew I Was Gay” genre.

In the course of relating their “discovery” of their “sexuality” (like they were Pizzaro and lesbianism was the Inca Empire), these women will often talk about their family backgrounds and their early childhood in such a way that would make an old-fashioned Freudian psychoanalyst puff his pipe and say, “Tell me more about your mother.” There are certain situations and circumstances that seem especially conducive to homosexual tendencies, and there is always a backstory, usually involving a sense of alienation, a feeling of being a misfit who is different from other kids, which then manifests itself as homosexuality — or not. Some misfits manage to work through their identity crises and turn out more or less normal. Of course, we have to wonder what sort of unresolved “issues” might be lurking behind the mask of normality when we see someone like Bruce Jenner, a 65-year-old married grandfather, suddenly declare that he is a woman named “Caitlyn.”


What does this have to do with Nian Hu’s criticism of “yellow fever”? Perhaps more than you would think. Radical feminists describe the transgenderism of Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner as “gender fetishism.” That is to say, the so-called “dysphoria” of transpeople involves not merely a sense that they don’t fit in the body they were born in, but also a fetishistic obsession with the superficial traits and behaviors of the opposite sex. It is very easy to say Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner is just crazy, but if it’s not yet illegal to ask, why is he/she crazy? What are the components parts of his/her delusional obsession? How does someone develop such an intense identification with the opposite sex?

Well, you can believe what you want to believe, but if Bruce can be “Caitlyn” (and you’ll be condemned for transphobia if you say he/she can’t) then why is it wrong for white boys to be obsessed with Asian girls? If Ms. Hu is going to denounce “yellow fever,” what other sexual preferences will she likewise declare to be intolerable “objectification”? Do we need a Committee for Acceptable Attraction to issue official protocols of who we are and are not allowed to like? Maybe we could have a Central Bureau of Sexual Planning that will assign us sex partners on the basis of a random lottery to prevent unfair “discrimination.” If the Bureau assigns you to have sex with Danny DeVito or Rosie O’Donnell, you must comply with your assignment, comrade!

What we perceive in Nian Hu’s diatribe against the “fetishization” of Asian women is how feminism justifies hypocrisy. Twenty years ago, liberals were constantly lecturing us that we should never be “judgmental,” but now we notice that liberals are themselves quite judgmental. Everything any heterosexual white male says or does is wrong, according to the judgmental Left, and scarcely a day goes by that we don’t get some new notice of hitherto unsuspected Thought Crimes we have have committed. We are nowadays indicted and prosecuted in absentia for Thought Crimes. No evidence is required and the first we learn of our wrongdoing is when we are told we are guilty of it: “Heteronormativity!” “The male gaze!” “Rape culture!”

And who are our accusers? Only the most privileged people on the planet — arrogant brats like Nian Hu whose status as a Harvard University student qualifies her to pass judgment on everyone else. Whatever the feminist likes is good, and whatever you like is wrong, because she is avictim and you are an oppressor. In the 21st century, the claim of victimhood becomes the ultimate privilege, entitling the victim to lecture everybody else, and if any man disagrees with her, his disagreement proves that he is a misogynist. Quod erat demonstrandum.

She’s grinding these axes while enrolled at Harvard University, annual tuition $45,278. Your parents are shelling out that kind of money to send you to college and you’ve got nothing better to do with your time than to look at a guy’s Facebook pages to see if he is “fetishizing” Asian women? And yet, you little hypocrite, you insist that you should be able to “have as many sexual partners as I want without being looked down on”?

Which is it, Ms. Hu? Is private sexual behavior off-limits to criticism, or is everything to be subjected to public scrutiny to determine if our sexual choices are appropriate? Either all choices are open to criticism or nochoices can be criticized, but I suspect most of us would never want to live under a regime in which some distant elite of self-appointed secular “experts” arrogate to themselves the authority to tell everybody else how we are allowed to have sex and with whom.

This is why most people despise contemporary feminism, because feminists do not deceive us with their talk of “gender,” which we understand correctly to be a way of talking about sex. Feminists want to dictate what we are allow to say about sex, so as to control what we thinkabout sex, and thus ultimately to tell us what we are permitted to doabout sex. What is the basis for feminist authority in these matters? On whose behalf do feminists claim to wield such extraordinary social, cultural and political power? And when we catch feminists engaged in deception and hypocritical sophistry — excluding their own sexual behaviors from criticism, while condemning the rest of us as guilty of sexual Thought Crimes — why are we always accused of “harassment” for having the effrontery to notice these feminist lies?

Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and unless people wake up to this menace, there will come a time — and perhaps soon — when we no longer have any freedom, nor any means of resisting the feminist dictatorship, which would certainly be the cruelest tyranny the world has ever known.

What a sad page in the history books it will be that tells the tale of how a once-great nation was destroyed, and a formerly free people were enslaved, by a bunch of Crazy Cat Ladies.



CONCORD, N.H. — On the eve of the New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton’s quest to become the country’s first female president has encountered an unexpected problem: she is having trouble persuading women, young and old, to rally behind her cause.

Oh! What a bitter disappointment this would be to Ms. Hu!

Quebec Imam implies: The West and Israel are the source of terrorism


Canadian Muslim Forum, Muslim community organisation based in Montreal and headed by Samir Majzoub, held it annul gala on November 13, 2015 with the attendance of Mélanie Joly, Minister of Canadian Heritage who represented the Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Thomas Mulcair, leader of NDP, Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party, Kathleen Weil, Quebec Immigration Minister, Denis Coderre, Mayor of Montreal, Dimitrios (Jim) Beis, Mayor of Pierrefonds-Roxboro Borough, Marc Demers, Mayor of Laval and Guy Ouellette, Member of National Assembly of Quebec for the riding of Chomedey in Laval.

One of the guest speakers was Saïd Youssef Fawaz (سعيد يوسف فواز), Chairman of Quebec Council of Imams, the Imam of the mosque “Mosquée al-Oummah al-Islamiah” and head of the Islamic centre “Centre culturel musulman de Montréal.” Fawaz also serves as a official Canadian representative of two foreign Islamic entities: Lebanese Dar al-Fatwa (the supreme religious authority for the Lebanese Sunni Muslims)and the Saudi Muslim World League

Dar al-Fatwa

Dar al-Fatwa of Lebanon publicly supports the “jihad” of the Palestinian people against Israel. Muhammad Rashid Qabbani, who appointed Saïd Youssef Fawaz as a representative of Dar al-Fatwa in Canada and then the Grand Mufti of Lebanon, authorized a delegation of Muslim scholars representing Dar al-Fatwa, to meet (November 20, 2012) with Hamas senior official in Lebanon, Osama Hamdan.

Sheikh Amin al-Kurdi (امين الكردي), who headed the delegation, conveyed a message from the Grand Mufti Qabbani to Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas Prime Minister, which expressed “the standing of the Grand Mufti, Dar al-Fatwa and the Muslim scholars in Lebanon by their brothers, the Palestinian people, in support of the residents of Gaza who are steadfast while facing the Zionist killing machine.”

After the meeting with Hamdan, Sheikh Amin al-Kurdi said that “all [Muslim] scholars in Lebanon support their brothers in Gaza, pray for them and as much as they can offer moral and material aid in order that the jihadi march on the land of Palestine will continue.”

Sheik Qabbani, the Grand Mufti of Lebanon, repeatedly justified the jihad against the State of Israel. On the anniversary of Palestinian “Land Day” (March 31, 2012), Qabbani said that “the battle for Palestine will not end till it is entirely liberated from the Jewish foreign occupation and entirely returned to its Arab and Islamic nation.”

A year earlier (March 28, 2011) Qabbani emphasized that the “jihad of the people of Palestine in not terrorism as it is being alleged, but a war waged by the Palestinians for liberating their homeland.”

Sheikh Abdel-Latif Derian, Qabbani’s successor as the Grand Mufti of Lebanon and the new boss of Saïd Youssef Fawaz, espouses similar positions regarding the jihad against Israel. Derian met on October 16, 2015 a delegation of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad headed by its representative in Lebanon Abu Imad al-Rifa’i (ابو عماد الرفاعي). During this meeting Derian said the following (originally in Arabic):

“The Israelis… attack us and our religion in order to take over al-Aqsa Mosque. They are trying to take over our blessed land and to deport us from it by building settlements…

“The religious, Arab, national and humanitarian duty calls on us to fight the attack on the religion [Islam], the [Palestinian] people and the land.

“The struggle was a common hobby for the Palestinians and still is today. The struggle of the Palestinians, the Arabs and the Muslims will continue till the liberation of al-Aqsa [Mosque], al-Quds [Jerusalem] and all Palestinian lands.

“Dar al-Fatwa in the Republic of Lebanon will continue to raise the issue of al-Aqsa [Mosque], al-Quds [Jerusalem] and Palestine till Allah will give us all the victory, the liberation, the realization of the Palestinian right and the Palestinian legitimate rights on the liberated lands of the defiled and brutal Zionist occupation.”

Muslim World League

The Muslim World League (MWL) is a non-governmental organization that was founded in 1962 by members of the Saudi Royal family to spread Islam worldwide. The website discoverthenetworks.orgreports that “MWL has a long history of ties to, and financial support for, Islamic extremists, terrorist operatives, and terrorist organizations including Hamas, the Abu Sayyaf Group, al-Ittihaad al-Islami, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Jemaat-al-Islamiyya, and al Qaeda. Moreover, a number of MWL’s subsidiaries, particularly the IIRO, have been involved in terrorist financing.”

The World Street Journal reported on May 11, 2004 that “The Treasury Department has designated an Islamic charity that is a subsidiary of the Muslim World League, a Saudi religious organization, as a terrorist entity. The al Haramain & al Masjid al Aqsa Charity Foundation of Bosnia was designated last week as a “global terrorist” organization by the U.S. government. The Treasury didn’t disclose the group’s ties to the Muslim World League, which lists Al Haramain as a subsidiary on its Web site. The League, which is controlled by the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, seeks to spread fundamentalist Islam around the world, according to scholars.”

The Treasury Department designated in 2006 The Human Relief Committee of the Muslim World League in the Philippines and Indonesia as terrorist entities.

Shiekh Saïd Youssef Fawaz’s speech

The Montreal-based Sada Al-Mashrek reported about the annual gala held by the Canadian Muslim Forum quoting parts of Saïd Youssef Fawaz’s speech at the event (originally in Arabic):

“The Shiekh Saïd Fawaz condemned the massacre in Paris, but he asked: ‘Why those who were killed yesterday in Bur al-Barjneh [in Lebanon] and those who are killed everyday in Palestine and in my country are not lamented by anyone’?

“He added, ‘We stand against terrorism. We are those who suffer from terrorism. We are asking: from where those who are accused of terrorism get weapons? Block the pipes of money… dry out the sources of weapons.

“There are people who are killed everyday in Palestine, their blood is flowing and and their souls are killed.

“Those who are ostensibly advocating for peace are the arms dealers. They are those who finance terrorism.

“His Eminence said: ‘In the land of the Israa and meraaj [Jerusalem] and The birthplace of Issa [Jesus] peace be upon him, everyday nails are hammered in the coffin of peace.

“In my country, women are killed on a daily basis. The necks of the children are struck, the dignity of the men are violated in front of their eyes while the world is watching and where is the leader who will stand up and say: We are all al-Quds [Jerusalem]?

“But, they stood up and proclaimed: We are Paris. They only send us weapons and later talk about asylum and refugees. Our countries used to spread good, but they did not want that for us.

“Our countries used to teach [others], but they did not want us to gain knowledge. In this regard, it is should be mentioned that all religions came from our countries. In spite of that they are saying: terrorism.

“The name of Islam came from the word peace, from the name of Allah, Glorified be He, and it does not derive or goes in line with terrorism.

“Terrorism is not related to us. Terrorism is not part of us, of Islam, of the Christians and of the Jews. Those who follow the book of Allah [Quran] and what Allah and what Allah revealed to them [The Torah to the Jews and the Christians] is the pure helper [Note: according to Islam, all Jewish prophets and Jesus were in fact Muslims who received the message of Islam from Allah, but their people rejected the “true message” and distorted it to what has become modern Judaism and Christianity].

We all stand up against those who trade blood and arms. Based on that, we called for working together and sending a united message…

“Here, with your support of the Canadian Muslim Forum and specifically the Islamic community and the Arab community in general, I think that you have made a difference in Quebec provisional elections and in the federal elections in terms of the unity we are looking to see.

“I’m not talking only about the Islamic or Arab unity, but the unity of the noble persons, the unity of the peace seekers.’

“He called for cooperation, spending money [for the rights purposes], activity and a united message. ‘The march will not continue but with activity, financial and moral support in order to reach to results like other communities.’”