You won’t lose your identity: Zhang Dejiang assures Hong Kong it will not be absorbed by mainland China

Beijing’s third-highest ­official has assured Hong Kong that it will not lose its identity or autonomy to become just another city in China, but warned against independence moves ­.

In an unexpectedly forthcoming and wide-ranging speech during a banquet in his honour on Wednesday night, visiting state leader Zhang Dejiang tried to ease fears about the erosion of the “one country, two systems” policy ­governing Hong Kong.

But in his call for the city to safeguard the rule of law, the chairman of the National People’s Congress singled out the ­judiciary, which he said should implement the law “seriously” and “justly” without tolerating ­offenders. It was not clear if he was ­referring to recent court rulings in favour of some of the activists being prosecuted over the ­Occupy movement of 2014.

“I hope the SAR government and the judiciary would firmly fulfil the solemn duty to safeguard the rule of law,” he said.

Zhang added society should reprimand any behaviour that breached the rule of law.

NPA to dispatch 23,000 police to Mie for G-7 summit security


The National Police Agency said Thursday it will dispatch up to 23,000 police officers next week to guard the venue of the Group of Seven summit in central Japan, while placing around 4,600 police officers in Hiroshima when U.S. President Barack Obama makes a historic visit to the western Japan city.

Large numbers of police officers are expected to be deployed to guard Chubu airport as well as around the venue of the G-7 summit on Kashikojima, an island in the southern part of Mie Prefecture, agency officials said.

Special assault teams and units in charge of intercepting drones in the air will also be dispatched to the summit venue and Hiroshima, they said, adding police will also coordinate with the Japan Coast Guard to be on alert for possible terrorist attacks from the sea.

Following a series of terror attacks in Paris and Belgium, police across the country also plan to tighten security for such facilities as theaters and stadiums where security has been relatively lax.

Japan deployed about 22,000 police officers when hosting the 2000 summit in Okinawa Prefecture and some 21,000 officers for the 2008 summit in Hokkaido.

The G-7 groups Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States and the European Union.


50 more Christians, including women and children, slaughtered by Islamist terrorists in the Congo

More Christians are being targeted and slaughtered by an Islamist terror group in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a predominantly Christian nation in Africa.

This May alone, about 50 Christians have been mercilessly killed by Islamist jihadists, CBN News reports.

In one incident, the militants stormed the eastern region of the Congo on the night of May 4, slaughtering some 34 people, including eight women and four children, according to Agence France-Press (AFP).

“Between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m., the enemy managed to get past army positions and kill peaceful residents in their homes, slashing their throats,” local administrator Bernard Amisi Kalonda told AFP.

Two days later the militants attacked again, killing 13 people, including two members of the Church on the Rock mission.

The terrorists belong to the Muslim Defence International, which has been operating in the Congo for more than 20 years. In 2014, the group began an intensified campaign to kill more Christians. Since then, the terrorists have killed more than 500 people in the eastern part of the country, United Nations sources say.

The unrelenting violence in this region of the Congo, which is more than 95 percent Christian, has forced many people to flee their homes.

The ever increasing level of danger has forced the Church on the Rock to shut down its missions and schools.

“We are heartbroken, questioning our faith, half-terrified, but determined and carrying on,” Church on the Rock’s founder Mike Anticoli told World Watch Monitor.

“We may be targeted due to the fact that we train local leaders and aspiring missionaries from several churches and denominations,” he said.

On Saturday, a confidential report to the United Nations Security Council revealed that a Congolese army general recruited, financed and armed elements of a Ugandan Islamist group to kill civilians while he was in charge of a military operation targeting the rebels, Reuters reports.

A panel of U.N. experts, who monitor sanctions on Democratic Republic of Congo, said “it has become clear that FARDC (Congolese army) officers were involved in recruiting and supplying armed groups involved in the killings (of civilians).”

More than 500 people have died in a wave of attacks in eastern Congo since October 2014, rights groups say. The Congolese government has blamed most of those on the Allied Democratic Forces.


Guys: Leave @Jindi Alone


Jindi Mehat (@jindi on Twitter) is a radical feminist and digital project manager for the Vancouver-based web services firm

Ms. Mehat despises liberal feminists:

Liberal feminists stop debate by crying “choice” when radical feminists unpack the context and impacts of choices — especially choices that reinforce male supremacy. . . .
Unquestioningly celebrating “choice” helps women feel good about themselves while they avoid confronting the system of patriarchy and even, in some cases, uphold it. It allows them to earn the benefits society gives women who don’t challenge male supremacy while comforting themselves with the idea that their behavior — no matter how problematic — is feminist.
There are real and dangerous consequences when women do misogyny while thinking they’re doing feminism. Convinced they’re on the side of women without critically examining the behaviour they are supporting and beginning the real work of feminism, they lash out in anger at radical feminists who ask them to consider that they might actually not be on women’s side. . . . Instead of directing their anger at patriarchy and male entitlement, third wavers pile on radical feminists who dare ask the difficult questions that need to be answered if we are to bring about actual change.

Got that? Real feminism is inherently radical — it’s about “confronting the system of patriarchy,” to “challenge male supremacy,” directing “anger at patriarchy and male entitlement . . . to bring about actual change.”

On this, Ms. Mehat and I are in complete agreement. The difference is, Ms. Mehat thinks radical feminists, by virtue of being “on the side of women,” are going to bring about an egalitarian utopia, whereas I recognize radical feminism as a dangerous Death Cult Ideology.

Radical feminism is akin to the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Khmer Rouge, Jonestown, the Branch Davidians, Heaven’s Gate and every other doomstruck paranoid kook squad you’d care to name. The radical feminist worldview flourishes on university campuses, where tenured professors teach it to rich girls spending Daddy’s money to get their Women’s Studies degrees. Subsidized by taxpayers, the university campus is a bubble of make-believe where feminist gender theory — the social construction of the gender binary within the heterosexual matrix — is protected from criticism by speech codes, and where its practitioners can avoid contact with the facts of human life as it exists in the real world.

Everywhere she looks, the radical feminist perceives herself threatened by the sinister forces of patriarchy — misogyny, objectification, heteronormativity, male privilege, rape culture, etc. — and views men with paranoid suspicion. Her hostility toward “the system” feeds paranoid delusions of persecution. She lashes out at male scapegoats with constant accusations of “sexism,” convinced that she is always being unjustly victimized by oppression. The only way a man can avoid offending her is to avoid her altogether. Never talk to a feminist. Unfortunately, some guys think they can be exceptions to the rule and these “Male Feminists”are always causing trouble. Men know nothing, the feminist believes, and therefore he has nothing to say that she needs to hear.

Jindi Mehat hates “Good Guys”:

One of the most frustrating parts of talking with men about sexism is the amazing ability so many of them have to remain absolutely convinced that they are “Good Guys” while they behave in ways that reveal their sexist beliefs.
You know these guys. They are the ones who tell sexist jokes and then chastise you for objecting because “it’s just a joke.” They are the ones who constantly interrupt and dismiss women but definitely aren’t sexist because they “love women.” . . .
It’s like these men keep a list of the most abhorrent, misogynistic behaviour possible and, as long as they don’ t regularly do those things, believe they can confidently declare themselves Good Guys and wash their hands of this whole sexism business, while continuing to behave in ways that harm women. These self-identified Good Guys are convinced they needn’t bother with silly things like listening to what women say about the impacts their behaviour has on us, or working to challenge the messages they’ve absorbed that allow their problematic behaviour to continue.

Ms. Mehat offers a list of 25 questions for “Good Guys,” including:

1) Do you get annoyed when women aren’t as nice or quiet as you think we should be instead of recognizing how the expectation that women are nicer and quieter than men is harmful? . . .

4) Do you interrupt women when we’re speaking? . . .

11) Do you stare at women you find attractive, instead of considering how threatening this feels to most women? . . .

18) Do you think a woman you’re in a sexual relationship with should have sex with you even if she doesn’t want to?

19) Do you pout or try to convince her if she doesn’t? . . .

24) Do you think it’s women’s responsibility to make sure you understand sexism?

You can read the whole thing, but you get the idea here. What Ms. Mehat implies is that women should be rude to men and men should never notice their rudeness; that once a woman starts talking, a man’s job is to shut up until she’s finished lecturing him; that men should never so much as look at an attractive woman; that men should never have sex with women, nor even think about having sex with women, never mind trying to convince a woman to have sex with him; and that men should understand all these rules without women having to explain them.

In summarizing her argument, Ms. Mehat asserts that “the behaviours that define masculinity are inherently misogynistic ones”i.e., to be masculine is to hate women. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Guys, do you see why I keep saying never talk to a feminist?

When a woman tells you, “I am a feminist,” what she is actually saying is:

  1. Shut up,
  2. Go away,
  3. Leave me alone.

If a guy is in a room and Jindi Mehat walks in, this is his cue to walk out of the room — quietly, without making eye contact. If possible, men should never go anywhere near Vancouver, rather than risk the chance of an accidental encounter with Jindi Mehat. You have been warned.

Toronto ex-Muslim accuses Trudeau of betraying Canada, caving in to radical Islam


Few days after Canadian John Ridsdel was beheaded in Philippines by the Islamic terrorist group Abu Sayyaf, Sandra Solomon saw upon herself an obligation to warn Canadians of the looming danger of radical Islam to their freedoms and lifestyle.

Sandra was born to a Palestinian Muslim family in Ramallah, but moved with her family to Jordan and subsequently settled in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where she grew up.

Forced into marriage to a Palestinian man at the age of 21, Sandra moved to Canada in 2004. In 2005, when her son was three years old, she returned to Saudi Arabia to divorce her husband. In 2012 she converted to Christianity.

Alongside other like-minded activists, Sandra came to Toronto’s Dundas Square equipped with a copy of the Quran in Arabic and a picture of John Ridsdel. Passionately she talked about her own life experience in Saudi Arabia and how she was taught in school to hate non-Muslims.

To substantiate her arguments about the violent message of Islam she read verses from the Quran, translated them into English and explained the historical background of the genocidal war launched by Mohammad against the Christians and Jews who used to live in the Arab Peninsula.

“Islam is about terrorism, killing, following your role model Mohammad, the pedophile, the rapist, the murderer, the killer who wiped [out] every christian and every Jew in the Arab Peninsula,” Sandra said. Where are the Christians in the Arab Peninsula? Can I build a church in Saudi Arabia? Can I wear my cross in Saudi Arabia? I can’t.”

She criticized the complacency of Canadians with regard to the beheading of a fellow Canadian by the hands of Muslim terrorists, and called on them to rise up and defend Canada from Islam. “Islam is not a religion, it is a cult, it is a political system,” she said. “I‘m ex-Muslim I used live in Saudi Arabia. I know Islam.”

Holding a picture of John Ridsdel, Sandra said: “This man was killed because of Allah, the Satan. Shame on you Canadians, Shame on Canada, Shame on Trudeau. Trudeau, he doesn’t give a damn. Trudeau is dragging the country into hell. Trudeau is traitor for Canada. Trudeau, he doesn’t even deserve to be called a Canadian. He is the Amir [أمير], He should be called Amir. He should be called a Shiekh [ألشيخ], the Shiekh Trudeau, the Amir Trudeau… Allah is Satan, and Mohammad is his messenger.”

She challenged Muslims who surrounded her to bring a Muslim scholar to debate him peacefully on issues related to Islam.

Some engaged in a peaceful debate with her and others became more and more intimidating. A young man called Sandra and other protesters “stupid”, accused them of “promoting hatred” and said that “they should be stopped.” Other man suggested a reason for her attack on Islam by saying that “nobody loved her as a kid.”

Another man blew cigarette smoke in the face of one of the protesters and later forcefully grabbed the picture of John Ridsdel from Sandra’s hand and tore it to pieces chanting in Arabic “Praise be to Allah” (ألحمد لله). The cameraman was intimidatingly asked to stop videotaping the scene and soon after he was physically attacked.

Sanda told CIJnews that the Police, who were called to intervene, advised the protesters to leave Dundas Square to avoid being attacked and return later when the situation is calm. The men who attacked the protesters were not arrested, Sanda added. The Police took only the personal information of one of the attackers and let him go.

for Barbara Ellen at the U.K Guardian: Married geography teacher, 27, SCREAMS as she is jailed for 12 months for having sex with a 16 year old pupil

Barbara Ellen: “do we seriously think that a female teacher sleeping with a male pupil is on a par with a male teacher sleeping with a girl pupil? I don’t”


A married geography teacher who had sex with a 16-year-old pupil during a six-month affair screamed as she was jailed for 12 months today.

Lauren Cox, 27, form Oxted in Surrey, initiated the illicit encounters after propositioning the boy after giving him a lift home.

The affair developed with the pair having oral and full sex in her car, at her marital home and at his home.

She also sent him explicit photographs and videos of her naked and indulging in sex acts.

Cox screamed as she was jailed, after she pleaded guilty to five counts of sexual activity with a boy aged 13 to 17 at Croydon Crown Court.

She admitted to sexual touching with the boy on two occasions in March last year as well as sexual intercourse between April and September whilst being in a position of trust.

The teacher said ‘I’m sorry’ to her tearful family sitting in the public gallery as she was taken to the cells at Croydon Crown Court..

An emotional exchange took place between the victim’s mother and Cox’s mother.

Judge Adam Hiddleston jailed Cox after commending the boy’s mum for the way she handled the situation.

He said Cox kept the relationship secretive, but the boy’s suspicious mum spotted him getting into her car before contacting her telling her to resign and never see her boy again.

Judge Hiddleston said: ‘Her calm and sensible reaction to this came to her as she suffered considerable shock.

‘After you made a full confession you begged to break the news and she allowed you do to so.

‘And then you didn’t do as you said. At that further meeting you had sex with him again in a flagrant breach of trust instilled in you by his mother.

‘Despite being warned to desist by the victim’s mother you offended again.’

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook