Japan aims for world’s safest roads by 2020




The Japanese government announced a plan Friday to reduce the annual number of traffic fatalities to 2,500 or fewer by 2020 and make the country’s roads the safest in the world.

The 10th traffic safety program, covering five years from fiscal 2016 starting April, calls for promoting automatic braking and driving technologies to slash the number of the deaths per 100,000 people in the country to the lowest in the world.

“By steadily implementing the plan, we seek to become the world’s leading safe-traffic society,” said Prime Minister Shinzo Abe at a meeting on traffic safety measures.

Road accident deaths in Japan rose to 4,117 in 2015, marking the first increase in 15 years, with many elderly victims.

While the figure meant the country failed to achieve the target of 3,000 or fewer deaths set under the current five-year safety program, government officials said they believe they can achieve the new target by improving safety measures targeting the elderly.

The current target number accounts for fatalities within 24 hours of an accident.

The new program simultaneously calls for cutting the number of deaths within 30 days of a traffic accident to 3,000 or less and reducing the total number of casualties to 500,000 or fewer per year.

Among other transport covered by the program, the government plans to make all elevated tracks of major railways quake-resistant by fiscal 2017 in regions that could be hit by major earthquakes.





Beijing asked to free HK from torture convention



Former security secretary Ambrose Lee has asked China’s top legislative body to start the process of withdrawing Hong Kong from the United Nations Convention Against Torture, citing the ‘high number’ of torture claimants here.

Lee – a member of the National People’s Congress (NPC) – proposed that Beijing can consult the SAR government on whether the territory should be released from the international convention, even though China will stay on as the signatory of the UN treaty. Lee made the proposal on Friday during the ongoing NPC plenary session in Beijing.

He said the flood of torture claimants in Hong Kong has added to the city’s financial and security burden, and freeing the city from its obligations under the convention would be one ‘drastic’ way to deal with the problem if it’s not possible to stop the claimants from seeking asylum here

The Chief Executive, CY Leung, had in January suggested that Hong Kong could unilaterally withdraw from the torture convention if necessary, sparking concerns from legal experts and human rights groups.

Lee conceded the move would affect Hong Kong’s international image a “little bit”. However, he warned that action needs to be taken before the problem grows out of control, citing the example of some European countries who’ve slammed their doors on asylum seekers after being overwhelmed by a flood of refugees.

‘The Enslavement of Women’


“Sex is compulsory in marriage. . . . It is clear that the compulsory nature of sex in marriage operates to the advantage of the male. . . . The enslavement of women in marriage is all the more cruel and inhumane by virtue of the fact that it appears to exist with the consent of the enslaved group.”
Sheila Cronan, 1970

Marriage is slavery, “cruel and inhumane.” This is a fundamental tenet of feminist ideology. No feminist would consent to marriage, because this involves “compulsory” sex. Feminists are against marriage because they are against sex, which “operates to the advantage of the male.”

Sheila Cronan was a prominent member of a group co-founded by Ti-Grace Atkinson and Anne Koedt. Atkinson, who had been handpicked by Betty Friedan as president of the New York chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW), walked out in 1968 in a dispute with NOW’s national leadership and formed what she called “The October 17th Movement.” This was subsequently renamed “The Feminists,” thereby giving a name to the movement they led. They announced their goal and described their ideology in their June 1969 manifesto, “The Feminists: A Political Organization to Annihilate Sex Roles”:


The class separation between men and women is a political division. . . . The role (or class) system must be destroyed. . . .
Men . . . are the enemies and the Oppressors of women. . . . Both the male role and the female role must be annihilated. . . .
The pathology of oppression can only be fully comprehended in its primary development: the male-female division. . . . The sex roles themselves must be destroyed.
(Radical Feminism, edited by Anne Koedt, et al., pp. 369-370)


This view of “the male-female division” as a political system, a “pathology of oppression” which “must be destroyed” and “annihilated,” has defined feminism for more than four decades. To disagree with The Feminists — to doubt their claim that men are “the enemies” of women, to deny that marriage is slavery, etc. — is to reject feminism as it has existed since the 1960s. Attempting to evade this history, to define the movement as having some goal other than what The Feminists declared in their founding manifesto, has the effect of depriving “feminism” of any useful definition, making it possible for any woman to call herself a “feminist” without bothering to know what this word actually means.

What does Beyoncé Knowles mean when she calls herself a feminist? Does she mean that her marriage to Jay Z is “enslavement”? Is her husband her enemy and an oppressor? Does she believe “sex roles themselves must be destroyed”? Has Beyoncé ever studied feminist theory? Probably not.

One of the earliest protests staged by The Feminists in 1969 was at the marriage license bureau in New York City. Ti-Grace Atkinson told a Timemagazine reporter: “Love has to be destroyed. It’s an illusion that people care for each other. . . . It may be that sex is a neurotic manifestation of oppression. It’s like a mass psychosis.” Other leading members of The Feminists were Pam Kearon and Barbara Mehrhof. Kearon had participated in the Women’s Liberation Movement’s first public protest in September 1968 against the Miss America pageant. In a 1971 paper called “Rape: An Act of Terror,” Mehrhof and Kearon declared:

There is no group other than slaves that has been singled out for such systematic and total exploitation and suppression as the class of women. . . .
Sexual intercourse . . . provides sexism with an inimitable act which perfectly expresses the polarity male/female. . . . Rape adds the quality of terror.
Terror is an integral part of the oppression of women. Its purpose is to ensure, as a final measure, the acceptance by women of the inevitability of male domination. . . . There are no actions or forms of behavior sufficient to avoid its danger. There is no sign that designates a rapist since each male is potentially one.
(Radical Feminism, edited by Anne Koedt, et al., pp. 228-230)


Another one of Pam Kearon’s contributions to The Feminists was a defense of “man-hating” as “the realization of our past and continued subjugation,” in which she denounced men as “misogynists” and declared: “Our whole society (including too many of the women in it) hates women.”

Is this true? Was it true in 1969? Was my mother in “continued subjugation” to my father? Has every wife in human history been a victim of “cruel and inhumane” enslavement by her husband, the oppressor?

“And it’s not just rape that’s the joke — it’s women. Our very existence is presented to young men as fodder for sex and laughs, our humiliation and pain as goal posts for their masculinity. Basically, we’re anything other than people deserving respect and humanity.”
Jessica Valenti, 2013

Is this true? Does it apply to Jessica Valenti’s husband? Does her husband treat women as a joke? Does he enjoy inflicting “pain and humiliation” on her? Does her husband view her as not “deserving respect and humanity”? If this is not the case, then why does Jessica Valenti expect us to believeher husband is better than other women’s husbands? Why would Jessica Valenti think she can libel my sons — and every other young man included in her categorical denunciation of masculinity — and expect me not to resent her recklessly hateful anti-male rhetoric?

Feminism is an insult to the intelligence of everyone who has two eyes and a brain. Feminism’s ideology and rhetoric are insulting to every honest man who ever lived and to every honest woman who ever loved a man. Why do feminists today constantly denounce men as “misogynists” for disagreeing with them? Why do feminists claim to be victims of “online harassment”? Why do university students engage in disruptive protests whenever anyone who dissents from feminism’s anti-male ideology — George Will, Wendy McElroy, Christina Hoff Sommers, Milo Yiannopoulous — dares to speak on campus?

Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement
to Destroy Civilization as We Know It

Liars hate the truth, and feminists therefore seek to silence those who tell the truth about feminism. When I undertook the Sex Trouble project in 2014, at the behest of readers who urged me to write a book about radical feminism’s War Against Human Nature, I had already studied the movement’s history and ideology for years. Readers are encouraged to consider a few of the books (including accounts by feminists themselves) that explain how feminism began and what feminism means:

This brief list of 11 books would suffice as the syllabus for an introductory course, “Critical History and Theory of Modern Feminism.” The histories by Brownmiller, Evans and Echols — all feminists who were directly involved in the movement in the 1960s and ’70s — are particularly useful in understanding how modern feminism emerged from the radical New Left of that era. The works of Professor Goldberg (a sociologist), Professor Tiger (an anthropologist) and Dr. Smith (a psychologist) serve as learned discussions of male/female differences and the consequences of feminism’s demand for “equality.” Professing Feminism andHeterophobia both examine the influence of feminism in academia. Professor Sommers and her landmark 1994 book perhaps need no introduction. Graglia’s book is a defense of traditional womanhood, and Lukas offers a comprehensive survey in an easy-to-read format.

“All that is necessary to discredit feminism is to tell the truth about feminism.”
Robert Stacy McCain, Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature

Feminists know this as well as I do. Feminists refuse to engage in dialogue with opponents and do not even acknowledge informed criticism, instead engaging in efforts to silence dissent. Feminism is always a lecture, never a debate. The First Rule of Feminism is “Shut Up!”

Ordinary men and women who attempt to express their disagreement with feminists find themselves accused of “harassment.” This is a dishonest tactic by which feminists smear their critics as dangerous and violent, falsely implying that it is a crime to criticize feminism. These propaganda tactics function to marginalize anyone who calls attention to the radical ideology and deranged rhetoric of feminists. If everyone who criticizes feminism is a misogynist, and if it is “harassment” to express disagreement, the critic of feminism is a Thought Criminal.

Because feminism exercises hegemonic authority in academia, 21st-century college and university students are never exposed to any opposing perspective. This is why students now claim to be “invalidated” and “traumatized” when critics of feminism appear on campus.


Hezbollah-supporting Arab Israeli MP to speak at Palestine House in Mississauga



Ayman Odeh, a controversial Haifa-born Israeli Arab Member of Knesset (MK) who heads the anti-Zionist United Arab List faction, will be a guest of honour at Palestine House in Mississauga, Ontario at an event to mark “Land Day” on Saturday, April 9th.

On March 7, 2016 Odeh and his predominantly Arab Joint List came under fire from both the Israeli political left and right for supporting Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite terror group, after Balad and Hadash, two Arab parties which make up the factions of the Joint List which Odeh heads, formally condemned the decision by a number of Arab countries to list Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. The condemnation said that the move came “in the service of [Israeli] occupation and the continued occupation of Arab land.”

Even Zehava Galon, leader of the radical leftist Meretz party, slammed the Arab politicians by writing the following on her Facebook page (originally in Hebrew): “The decision made by Balad and Hadash to advocate against the designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization is a moral slump. Hezbollah is a murderous and fundamentalist organization which systematically exerts indiscriminate violence. This is an organization which is responsible for the killing of many dozens of Israelis and killing innocent Syrians at the service of Assad on a daily basis. I have zero sympathy to the Saudis who promoted the decision regarding Hezbollah and whose hands are also stained with blood not less [than Hezbollah]. However, this cannot explain the insistence of Israeli parties to defend an organization that cherishes the death and declares that its goal is to annihilate the State of Israel and to slaughter Israeli citizens. Shame.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu mocked the Arab MKs’ support for Hezbollah as “amazing,” noting that Israeli Arabs are as much of a Hezbollah target as Israeli Jews. “[Hezbollah] wants to destroy the country, you’re citizens of the state; you’re in the state. Did you fall and hurt your heads?”

Odeh, who claims to be the “moderate” voice of the Israeli Arabs, also supports the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement. At the Haaretz Q conference in New York last December, when asked about BDS, Odeh responded, “First, I would like to salute the people who are working on BDS, I think this really puts Israel on the spot in world public opinion.” And in October 2015 during an interview on Army Radio, Odeh said that he supported the first Intifada (a violent Palestinian uprising which lasted from 1987 to 1991), which in his opinion was “fully justified” because of the “occupation. The first Intifada claimed the lives of 160 Israeli men, women and children.

After the most recent Israeli elections, during the inaugural session in which the newly elected MKs were sworn in, Odeh, an Israeli citizen who enjoys all the privileges afforded to him by the State, including an opportunity to be elected to the Israeli Knesset, refused to sing the national anthem, later saying “I chose to… stand in silence. That was my protest against an anthem which does not represent me, which for me is the symbol of exclusion.”

Odeh and other radical anti-Zionist Arab Israeli MK’s were heavily criticized by Ali Salem, the Arab Mayor of Nazareth, Israel’s most populous Arab city, for their role in violent demonstrations in October 2015. Salem told Army Radio at that time that he blames the Arab leaders. “They [Arab MK’s] are destroying our future, they are destroying coexistence”.

Palestine House

Palestine House, which represents the Canadian Palestinian community, rejects Israel’s right to exist, demands the so-called “right of return” – the flooding into Israel of millions of “Diaspora” Palestinians – which will effectively end the existence of the Jewish State.

Its leaders praised Palestinians who carried out attacks against Israelis and expressed support to the Palestinian Intifada (also known as the al-Quds Intifada or the Knife Intifada) – the most recent wave of Palestinian terrorism which since September 31, 2015 left 34 people dead and 394 people (including 4 Palestinians injured). During this period there have been 201 stabbings and attempted stabbing attacks, 81 shootings, and 41 vehicular (ramming) attacks. Some of the victims of Palestinian terrorism include an Israeli mother of 6 who was stabbed in front of her children, an Israeli couple who were shot in front of their children, an American war veteran who was stabbed while on a school trip to Israel, as well as a rabbi who was murdered in front of his wife and children, soldiers, tourists and peace activists. The youngest Palestinian terrorist to carry out a stabbing attack was 13 a year old boy, and the oldest was a 50 year old female.

In 2012, Palestine House was de-funded by the federal government for a “pattern of support for extremism.” The decision to de-fund Palestine House was prompted, in part, by a gathering hosted by Palestine House which celebrated the release of hundreds of terrorists from Israeli prisons, as well as an event honouring Dr. George Habash, founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The PFLP is one of the groups forming the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) which in the 1960s and 1970s was responsible for numerous armed attacks and aircraft hijackings.

In 2014, The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) submitted several complaints of possible hate crimes allegedly committed by Meshwar newspaper which operates out of Palestine House to Peel Region Police. The complaints documented cases of anti-Jewish rhetoric including sympathizing with the 2014 terrorist attack in Jerusalem, posting an article questioning the veracity of the Holocaust and a cartoon which depicted the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a vampire drinking blood of Palestinian children.

Nazih Khatatba, the editor of Meshwar and a senior Palestine House board member, openly sympathizes with the Palestinian “struggle” which includes activities and operations that are deemed by Israel, US, Canada and the West as acts of terrorism. In an editorial titled “al-Quds Operation and the Quiet Intifada” published on November 28, 2014, Khatatba portrayed the horrific massacre of 4 rabbis in a Jerusalem synagogue by Palestinian terrorists who hacked their victims to death with meat cleavers as a “courageous and qualitative” operation. One of the victims was Howie Rothman, an Israeli Canadian, was died of his wounds a year after he was struck in his head and neck with a cleaver.

Khatatba also praised the Lebanese terrorist Samir Quntar who was killed in an Israeli airstrike last December for his “bold offensive operation”. What Khatatba called a “bold offensive operation” was a savage 1979 terrorist attack which shook the world, during which Quntar murdered an Israeli civilian and crushed the skull of his 4 year-old daughter with the butt of his rifle.

On January 19, 2016 members of Palestine House and their children celebrated the 14th birthday of Ahmad Naser, a Palestinian terrorist who, together with his cousin, went on a random stabbing spree in Jerusalem and critically injured two Israelis, including a 13 year old Jewish boy. Palestine House called for Naser’s immediate release from an Israeli prison. The birthday cake baked in honor of the Palestinian child terrorist said: “Happy Birthday. Freedom for Ahmed Nasser, a 13 year old who was shot and imprisoned behind bars in Israeli hands.”

Palestine House recently “honoured” Palestinian who carried out attacks against Israelis. On Saturday, February 20, 2016, during a demonstration in downtown Toronto, several dozens of anti-Israel activists, including senior board members of Palestine House and their children held a rally during which they held pictures of Palestinian “martyrs” who they claimed were “executed” by Israel. CIJnews research department was able to conclusively verify that most of the so-called “martyrs” were, in fact, terrorists, including Hamas and Fatah operatives, who were killed while trying to carry out terrorist attacks against Israelis or during violent clashes with the IDF.