About Me

My Photo
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Benjamin Franklin

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

Islamic school in Sydney loses AUD $19M in state funding. Why?

Australia’s largest private Islamic school, located in Sydney with 2,400 students is about to lose $19M AUD Government funding following allegations that the money was not being used just for education.

‘On Monday, the Department of Education issued a notice to the Islamic institution - revoking its Commonwealth funding - with the move placing hundreds of teaching jobs on the line.  Education Minister Simon Birmingham said that the funding will be axed as of April 8 after the school had failed to address how the money was being spent, as required under the Education Act.’

The Sydney Morning Herald late last year reported that there were six Islamic schools at risk of having their state funding cut.  It appears that Malek Fahd Islamic School in Greenacre, south-west of Sydney is the first to be cast into the outer darkness.

It has always appeared to be self defeating to me to have the Infidel State funding an educational environment whose underpinning religious ‘distinctive character’ was based upon the Koran that is anti-democratic, misogynist, and religiously supremacist.

No one is saying what this school spent it’s $19M of state funded money on if it wasn’t education, and it would take a vivid imagination to believe that some of it might have been spent supporting people and causes that were, what shall we say … not so much in the national interest?

But what’s the kuffar’s money for if not to be used against them?

Only five other investigations to be completed, but if Malek Fahd Islamic School is any guide, the results are not going to be encouraging.

That’s not to say our Department of Education in New Zealand has not been sympathetic towards support for Islamic schools in the past although to be fair the plans for an Islamic boarding school for boys (naturally) in Dunedin has not progressed. 

The ODT reports that a visiting delegation from Kuwait was prepared to fund the establishment of a Mosque on the site, (of course) along with sports facilities, but more Kuffar money was required to proceed with the school project.

But enough talk about Muslim boys, how are Muslim girls doing? 

The Independent reports that in England another case of Female Genital Mutilation is reported every 109 minutes.  That is where Muslim pre-pubescent girls have their clitoris cut without anesthesia and as wikipwedia reports the procedure includes the removal of the clitoral hood and clitoral glans, removal of the inner labia, and in the most severe form (known as infibulation) removal of the inner and outer labia and closure of the vulva. In this last procedure, a small hole is left for the passage of urine and menstrual fluid; the vagina is opened for intercourse and opened further for childbirth. Health effects depend on the procedure, but can include recurrent infections, chronic pain, cysts, an inability to get pregnant, complications during childbirth, and fatal bleeding. There are no known health benefits.

This is happening in Britain folks, not some ‘far off Islamic hell hole’, but wait… my mistake, that is exactly what Britain is becoming.

And that is what we have to look forward to here in New Zealand, as we, like Britain (and Germany) welcome refugees and migrants from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the Muslim world.  We can celebrate their cultural diversity with a healthy dose of FGM, forced marriages, honour killings, and a rush of candidates to compete for Rebecca Kitteridge’s SIS top 50 of those Muslims who wish to do us harm.

Happy new year.

Thursday, 4 February 2016

Obama identifies the problem - It's those Christian bigots once again.

When President Obama visited a Mosque in Baltimore today he said “We have to reject a politics that seeks to manipulate prejudice or bias and targets people because of religion,”

No he wasn’t speaking to the gathered Muslims about their visceral hatred of the Jews, he was speaking to ‘fellow Christians’.

The full quote as follows:

If we’re serious about freedom of religion – and I’m speaking now to my fellow Christians, who remain the majority in this country – we have to understand, an attack on one faith is an attack on all our faiths,” he said.

He demanded that Americans stop profiling Muslims and treating them differently because of their faith – criticizing political rhetoric for inflaming hatred against the Muslim community.

“We have to reject a politics that seeks to manipulate prejudice or bias and targets people because of religion,” he said.

As is the case so often with Obama, his rhetoric is full of half truths and silence where it really matters.  But let’s examine his words.

We have to understand, an attack on one faith is an attack on all our faiths.”

Surely this can only be true if all faith narratives are essentially the same and devoid of any difference?  While nothing is to be gained by ‘attacking’ anyone’s faith, there is considerable value in critiquing Islam in particular against the established values of Western civilization, especially when it comes to its treatment of women, homosexuals, Jews and infidels in general.

He demanded that Americans stop profiling Muslims and treating them differently because of their faith.

Americans are by and large reasonable people.  They judge people by their actions and if those actions are violent they may ask ‘what prompted them’?  If the answer is ‘Islam’ then this will inevitably cast a shadow of doubt over all those who follow Islam.

If Muslims want Infidels to stop ‘profiling’ them, then they must reject violent jihad.  Until that happens we have every reason to be cautious.

I do understand that the American President has a problem. Islam has proven itself time and again to be incompatible with the values expressed by western civilization.  That’s not to deny there are many Muslims who have found a way to reconcile their faith with the western world, but far too many have not, and have no wish to.

The role of the President is to facilitate peaceful coexistence amongst All Americans.  At the same time, it’s difficult to see how he might accomplish this if he constantly suggests it’s the Christian (bigots) that need to change, not the followers of Islam, and particularly those who embrace violent jihad. 


By way of surprise it seems Donald Trump (ban all Muslim immigration till we find out what the hell is going on) has more support from Muslims than all his GOP rivals combined.  Go figure.


Wednesday, 3 February 2016

Bankrupt politician offers 'free stuff' (yawn)

When a politician of any political persuasion offers you something for ‘free’ then you should look into it immediately.  Over time you will learn that ‘free’ is simply code for ‘others will pay’, or more correctly ‘eventually you will pay double’.

That’s because as we all know, politicians have no money of their own to give anything away for free, they only have your money obtained by means of taxation or borrowing.  If, as Andrew Little has promised, there is ‘free tertiary education’ on offer then rest assured eventually you will pay for that ‘free stuff’ he has promised.

That a 21st century politician in New Zealand resorts to these offers is a reminder of just how bankrupt Labour is for fresh policy ideas, and how banal they have become.  We used to have free tertiary education – remember, and how did that work out?

It also speaks to Labour’s view of their own party and the electorate.  As National has moved increasingly to the Left of the political spectrum, Labour has been forced to do the same in order to provide a point of difference.  This move mirrors what is happening in the UK, where the ‘Conservative’ [in name only] party has pushed British Labour into the arms of a hard core socialist ‘old Labour’ leader.

There is only so much space ‘in the middle’ where conventional wisdom says elections are won or lost.

For many of us living in the west however, it feels as if our mainstream politicians are driving on ‘cruse control’ while ignoring some of the larger existential threats to western civilization.  Perhaps that’s unfair, there are limits to what Government’s can and should do.

Rod Dreyer comments recently:

Let’s turn to David Brooks’s column today, which focuses on a speech that the Tory Prime Minister David Cameron recently gave, about the future of Britain. In it, Cameron said (or Brooks implies that he said) that the usual Left-Right solution to this kind of thing — wealth redistribution downwards, or cutting taxes to free up the market so all boats can rise — no longer work. From his column:

Cameron called for a more social approach. He believes government can play a role in rebuilding social capital and in healing some of the traumas fueled by scarcity and family breakdown.

He laid out a broad agenda: Strengthen family bonds with shared parental leave and a tax code that rewards marriage. Widen opportunities for free marital counseling. Speed up the adoption process. Create a voucher program for parenting classes. Expand the Troubled Families program by 400,000 slots. This program spends 4,000 pounds (about $5,700) per family over three years and uses family coaches to help heal the most disrupted households.

Cameron would also create “character modules” for schools, so that there are intentional programs that teach resilience, curiosity, honesty and service. He would expand the National Citizen Service so that by 2021 60 percent of the nation’s 16-year-olds are performing national service, and meeting others from across society. He wants to create a program to recruit 25,000 mentors to work with young teenagers.

To address concentrated poverty, he would replace or revamp 100 public housing projects across the country. He would invest big sums in mental health programs and create a social impact fund to unlock millions for new drug and alcohol treatment.

It’s an agenda that covers the entire life cycle, aiming to give people the strength and social resources to stand on their own. In the U.S. we could use exactly this sort of agenda. There is an epidemic of isolation, addiction and trauma.

Read the whole thing. Brooks goes on to say that the GOP desperately needs to take this “Burkean” approach to repairing the social fabric. I think he’s right, but I also think that is not remotely adequate to the problem we face. The State can help economically, but it simply cannot do the work of culture.

Read Dryer's whole article.

It is this sense that ‘something is broken’ that fueled the rise of Donald Trump in the GOP selection race.  He came second in Iowa but I suspect is still very much in the hunt.  It’s doubtful however that Trump can fix the problems of the USA but he is at least talking about them.

As is Cameron.  Imagine a NZ Prime Minister advocating for a tax code that ‘rewards marriage’, or the promotion of a ‘character module’ for schools that teaches the benefits of personal resilience, curiosity, honesty and service’?

What Cameron has identified as lacking in British society he is seeking to promote by means of Government initiative.  The problem he faces, as we face, is that failure to marry, to have children within marriage, and to live honest lives of good character are cultural issues that Governments cannot solve.

Right now our culture is not being shaped by Government, or by the Church, or by our Universities, nor for the most part through functional family life.  It is being shaped by social media, sitcoms, the trivial and the banal. 

No amount of free education will change that.