Noisy minority abuse their National Day

Australia Day has come and gone, and it has been sobering. It was far from us "singing with one Voice that we are Australian" and celebrating the wonderful country that we have collectively created and inherited, Instead, it has been the most divisive spectacle that I have seen over my many decades of Australian life. Councils cancelling citizenship ceremonies, loud mobs rallying in our cities screaming anti-Australian and anti-Semitic slogans, corporations refusing to stock Australia Day merchandise and vandals painting anti-Australian slogans on monuments and even sawing off a Captain Cool statue. 

This is not the Australia I know and love. This is NOT the mainstream average fair dinkum, larrikin, good bloke, tolerant and freedom-loving, and respectful Aussie. Where has he gone?  Are these anti- Australian protesters representative of the rest of us? I believe not. I think the quiet good old Aussie is 

still here. And he is still the same. He does not accept what the noisy loudmouths scream at him. He just says let them scream, who cares. Confident in himself he does not speak up easily, perhaps avoiding confrontation. As a result, the majority view is being drowned out by a noisy minority. Really a very noisy minority. 

So how do we fight back? How do we get back to the old Australia's peaceful tolerant acceptance of each other? How do we quell these noisy haters?

I am not sure. But I am guessing the type of decisive feedback that the Voice referendum gave to those who wanted to divide us by race gives a clue. Our politicians must give us a choice and must have the courage to put forward the old-fashioned, conservative, views that the majority of us would support. We need the LNP to be willing to take part in the 'culture wars' to allow the silent majority to have their voices heard. There is evidence that Dutton and Littleproud have read the room. Their successful rejection of the Voice has boosted their confidence. With Albo and his team trying to impose further left-wing policies, there are plenty of opportunities to take a stand. 

About Australia Day, certainly Jacinta Price's suggestion that the LNP proposes to legislate the date of Australia Day is worth considering. It would receive majority support and may wedge Labor. A similar stand can be made with regard to the councils that refused citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day. Perhaps those that refuse to hold them on Australia day, they should lose all rights to hold citizenship ceremonies.

 

Of course, I am not the only one disappointed in our Australia Day this year. Manu commentators have voiced similar concerns
. Here is just one of them. This article by James McPherson's Notes on a Depressing Australia Day gives one more view.

Safe and secure, NOT!

In a recent post I asked the question "Will 2024 US election be safest and most secure?"

Most opportune I came across a tweet, really a series of tweets,  by KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) providing extensive "Summary of Election Fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election in the Swing States", released by President Trump

Please follow the link and judge for yourselves. 

Ongoing… https://twitter.com/kanekoathegreat/status/1742670648433090764?s=66&t=q2iz8V0FgcEI87xu5VRU0w

There does seem to be a lot of smoke! 

If that were not enough, again just recently, in a court case against Dominion voting machine company a witness for the Plaintiff hacked the Dominion tabulators in the courtroom in a matter of minutes. Proving the machines are far from secure.  See https://x.com/JohnBasham/status/1749013140472271269?s=20

As noted in the above tweet; -

"UPDATE: The Federal Judge In Atlanta, Judge Amy Totenberg, Is A

@BarackObama

Appointee. This Lawsuit; On The Asserted Easy Hackability Of Dominion Voting Systems Used In Georgia, Was Originally Filed By A Coalition Of Plaintiffs That Judge Totenberg Describes As NOT “Conspiracy Theorists Of Any Variety” Who Are Largely POLITICALLY LEFT-LEANING PLAINTIFFS Whose Suit Was Filed In Georgia LONG BEFORE THE 2020 ELECTION. They Argue That The Dominion Voting Systems Used In Georgia Present Security Risks That State Officials Are Constitutionally Obligated To Address & They Have The Support. In An Order Setting This Lawsuit For Trial Judge Totenberg wrote, The Machines Vulnerability To Simple Hacks Has Been Identified By “Some Of The Nation’s Leading Cybersecurity Experts & Computer Scientists.”

Incidentally, the plaintiffs are NOT Republicans, they are "politically left leaning" group use of protesting the Dominion Voting machines becasue of their vulnerability. Follow the link for more details.

What does this all mean? Certainly, there is plenty of evidence to show the elections of 2018, 2020 and 2022 were not "safe and secure". The inevitable conclusion is that there is no way the 2024 elections will be safe and secure either.

The US must address election practices, lest the erosion of trust by voters will destroy their democracy.

Will 2024 US election be safest and most secure?

A recent article in the Epoch Times titled Voter Fraud Convictions Challenge Narrative of Secure Elections provides an overview of the many electoral , lets call them 'shenanigans', that have become inconvenient truths to the 'safe and secure' declarations by those liking the results. For decades American machine-based complex electoral system has been suspect. After every election usually just the losing side has declared they have been robbed due to fraud, miscount, Russia interference, machine malfunction, foreign hacking and the like. 

There have also been many cases of proven fraud in various forms and even proven machine malfunction. 

The most recent presidential election of 2020 was perhaps the most debated and even today according to a Rasmussen poll some 30% of voters believe that the election was 'rigged'. Of course 'rigged' is a broad term and it includes electoral interference in a multitude of ways; fraudulent votes, misinformation or disinformation, by media withholding information on Hunter Biden's laptop, the ex CIA authorities claiming the laptop was a Russian plot, the modification of absentee vote procedures contrary to state legislation with COVID as the excuse. Indeed an article in Time magazinedetailed the extent to which the Democratic party 'fortified' their votes by let's face it 'shenanigans'. 

The Epoch Times article lists several recent electoral fraud cases when laws were broken courts found and sentenced guilty parties, and even nullified elections.  After the 2020 election, there were thousands of affidavits by observers and election workers of what appeared to be fraud. Many led to court cases, some 60 in total. Most however did not go to face judgement as the claims were dismissed due to technicalities. The few that did go to court mostly resulted in wins for the claimants.

So why am I revisiting this issue today some 3 years after the last election? We are now 11 months from the next significant election and nothing seems to have changed to tighten up the electoral system. Indeed it is in many cases far worse. The media, big tech, Biden's institutions (DOJ and FBI) are even more polarised than they were in 2020. So no matter who wins the election there will be extensive claims of electoral fraud. 

If Republicans win it will be against the tide of anti-Republican leanings by most of the power centres of the US political scene. The Democrats will no doubt generate a crescendo of calls to nullify the results, as they did in 2016. 

If the Democrats win the Republicans will no doubt also claim they have been cheated, as Trump has claimed now for 3 years, and no doubt with some justification.

So what can be done about this? I would suggest the electoral system must be simplified. Machines invite abuse, absentee voting invites abuse, and lack of identification opens abuse. A majority of the World's democracies have elections with paper ballots, manually counted, with in-person voting on election day.   Absentee ballots are allowed but they are highly restricted and with mandatory identification. Results are out within the day or in unusual cases a week. It is not that hard.

The key elements; -

• paper ballots
• in person voting on election day 
• voters marked off against a roll after providing ID
• all ballots are manually counted in locations close to where voting takes place

Australia has mandatory voting which also eliminates all the effort by parties to get people out to vote. You do not actually have to vote, but you do have to go and have your name maarked off on the electoral roll, again on the day of the election. Elections are on Saturdays , again allowing people to vote without affecting most people's work. It is your duty as a citizen. This also ensures the electoral roles are up to date, to some extent.

Unless there is substantial reform of the system the US will repeat the farcical situation where a substantial proportion of the population believes the election was rigged. No democracy can survive if elections are not trusted by the voters.

Humorous Short Videos poking fun at the Woke

This afternoon my grandson showed me some humorous videos on TikTok that I thought was worth sharing. The videos are quite short and point fun at the Woke Left in a direct humorous way. 

Here are a couple. 

The first is on 'masks are symbolic' ;-

and another 'Liberals confuse me'

Yeh, they are simple, and humorous and poke fun at the strange ideas that the Woke seem to accept without question.

I was curious about the background and found these videos are really part of the marketing materials for a dating app for conservatives. I did not realize this was a demographic in demand, but on reflection can see the logic of it. After all, being young, single, conservative and seeking a date with someone with similar views would not be easy. 

The presenter of the shorts is one of the founders of The Right Stuff,  John McEntee. You can check the background on Wikipedia at "The Right Stuff".  (Of course, treat all Wikipedia entries with some caution especially when they cover topics that have a current political aspect, like this one.) 

On YouTube you can see the full range of shorts, quite a lot of them. Of course you can also check out some of the dating options.

In praise of meritocracy

Meritocracy is the system that rewards individuals based on their abilities and achievements, regardless of their social, cultural, or economic background. "The concept originates, at least by the sixth century BC, when it was advocated by the Chinese philosopher Confucius, who "invented the notion that those who govern should do so because of merit, not of inherited status."  Since that time it has evolved into an absolute ideal to promote a successful society that does not discriminate against individuals based on their race, sexual orientation or any other group identity, while encouraging personal development and effort. So why would any post suggest that meritocracy needs to be praised?

 

Of course, anyone reading this is well aware that meritocracy, the long-sought ideal has been all but subsumed by DEI, Diversity Equity and Inclusion. DEI upends meritocracy and prioritizes identity groups over merit. No longer do we choose the best person for the job based on their abilities, we now select based on a whole range of factors that define the so-called 'identity group' to which the individual belongs.

The idea is that by doing so we will have redressed the inequities that hold back some identity groups in our societies. Historical inequities due to race, gender, sexual orientation, or any one of a whole range of other factors. So instead of appointing an individual on their merit we should evaluate all the candidates and select the one most qualified by their identity group. When appointing someone not best suited for the job, we should assume he will either grow into the job, by magically developing the skills required. Or even if he doesn't, we accept the poorer performance on the basis that society has benefited by our having given this person an opportunity he would otherwise have not had. This trades off excellence for some theoretical societal benefit.

However, this is sophistry. Most of us know it, but like the crowd watching the naked emperor, we are all too weak to call it out. So let me do it. Society is NOT better off when we choose mediocrity over excellence. By failing to appoint the best person for the job, we destroy the driving force of social progress; incentive. People will not make the effort to improve themselves if there is no incentive to do so. Moreover, if less capable people are appointed to an organisation, the organisation too will suffer.

DEI has other issues too. Selecting one race in preference to any other is simply racist. Selecting one gender over any other is just sexist. Selecting one sexual orientation over any other is clearly discriminatory. So any analysis of DEI fails to justify its use. Yet over the past decade, it has infiltrated every aspect of many Western Societies. It has spread like a virus from academia, through education, media, politics, and business. Most organisations now have DEI officers and work to subjugate candidate merit in favour of identity groups. 

Despite its wide influence, DEI has had its problems of late. People are waking up, and fighting back. I expect this to continue. Several US states have legislated to prevent the use of DEI by corporations. Some large investment funds, perhaps as a consequence of the government edicts, have removed their DEI edicts. And most recently following a SCOTUS ruling Ivy League universities have come under fire for their discriminatory enrolment policies. 

Nevertheless, DEI remains a cancer that is eating away at the very fabric of our societies. The appointment of any person not best qualified to perform a job is the road to mediocrity. Yet I am sure we can all think of many senior and public appointments that can only be explained by some sort of  DEI selection. Sometimes the incompetence is blatant. 

Just look at the short list of senior appointments by the Biden administration and consider whether these people should have been appointed to their positions if it wasn't for DEI. Would they be the best suited for their jobs?

Kamala Harris -  She is the first woman, the first Black American, and the first South Asian American to be elected Vice President

Pete Buttigieg - The first openly gay person confirmed to serve in a president’s Cabinet

Karine Jean Pierre - Jean-Pierre will be the first Black woman and the first openly gay person to hold the position.

Katanga Jackson Brown- the first black woman to sit on the highest court in the United States in its 233-year history.

Admiral Rachel Levine - The US assistant secretary for health has been sworn in as the first transgender four-star officer in the country's history.

Of course one can never deny these people as having any merit, however, when the announcement of their jobs includes their identity group, it implies that the identity group played a significant role in their appointment.

Merit, the best person for the job, the one who will deliver results. It is not difficult. If you subjugate merit to ANYTHING else, you will get inferior results. Sometimes disastrous results. 

There is no greater poison in society than the abandonment of meritocracy.

What is life like for citizens of Gaza?

The war between Hamas and Israel has been going for 3 months. It has wrought devastation for Gaza and its citizens. It has also spawned many vocal, often antisemitic rallies, marches, and convoys in support of "Palestine"/Hamas in most Western Cities. 

Given Hamas started this war, many, most probably a large majority, believe Israel had no choice but to fight back and that if Israel were successful in eliminating Hamas, it would liberate Gazans from their oppression by Hamas. Most Western media have given some twisted legitimacy to Hamas's atrocities in an inverted morality, blaming the victims for the crimes of Hamas. No doubt it is partly support for the weaker party, support for the innocent victims, and partly anti-Israel and antisemitic bias. 

While this is widely debated in the Western media there is very little coming out of Gaza. Perhaps this is not surprising given Hamas' absolute control of Gaza's citizenry. Nevertheless, we have had some snippets of dissent mainly on the Middle East-based media, Egypt, Al Jazeera etc.

In November a longer piece titled "What Is Life Like for Palestinians in Gaza? was posted on YouTube. Using video snippets and commentary by Gaza's citizens together with historical footage from a wide range of media, it paints a different picture than we are traditionally shown in our Western media. Life in Gaza is terrible and it seems Gazans, at least some would love to get rid of Hamas and be allowed to live their lives without Hamas' oppression.

So well worth view!

https://youtu.be/PgAq-9_4Rzs?si=4R9dUk1cTiAFRDXx

Pfizer malfeasance?

A recent edition of Trialsite News highlighted what appears to be a smoking gun indicating Pfizer 'shenanigans' relating to the data they published on the efficacy of their COVID vaccine.  In their article titled Intensive Interrogation of Pfizer BNT162b2 Trial Data—Appears to be Research Malfeasance, Cover-Up?

They refer to a study by Australian researchers Corrine Michaels et al, titled Forensic analysis of the 38 subject deaths in the 6-Month Interim Report of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trial. 

I hve incldued the references so you can get into the details, if you are so inclined. It becomes very technical quite quickly. And I try to avoid the technicalities whenever possible. 

In summary they reviewed the data Pfizer published of their own testing of their COVID vaccine. They found inconsitencies in the reported success rate. Given the extent and significance of the missing data they imply this was due to intentional 'manipulation' of the data.

I reproduce the abstract here and highlight the section implying issues with the data.

"Abstract and Figures

The analysis reported here is unique in that it is the first study of the original data from the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine clinical trial (CA4591001) to be carried out by a group unaffiliated with the trial sponsor. Our study is a forensic analysis of the 38 trial subjects who died between July 27, 2020, the start of Phase 2/3 of the clinical trial, and March 13, 2021, the data end date of their 6-Month Interim Report. Phase 2/3 of the trial involved 44,060 subjects who were equally distributed into two groups and received Dose 1 of either the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccinated or the Placebo control (0.9% normal saline). At Week 20, when the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine received Emergency Use Authorization from the U.S. FDA, subjects in the placebo arm were given the option to be BNT162b2 vaccinated. All but a few accepted. Surprisingly, a comparison of the number of subject deaths per week during the 33 Weeks of this study found no significant difference between the number of deaths in the vaccinated versus placebo arms for the first 20 weeks of the trial, the placebo-controlled portion of the trial. After Week 20, as subjects in the Placebo were unblinded and vaccinated, deaths among this still unvaccinated cohort of this group slowed and eventually plateaued. Deaths in the BNT162b2 vaccinated subjects continued at the same rate. Our analysis revealed inconsistencies between the subject data listed in the 6-Month Interim Report and publications authored by Pfizer/BioNTech trial site administrators. Most importantly, we found evidence of an over 3.7-fold increase in number of deaths due to cardiovascular events in BNT162b2 vaccinated subjects compared to Placebo controls. This significant adverse event signal was not reported by Pfizer/BioNTech. Potential sources of these data inconsistencies are identified."

This paper was published in October. Have you read about it at all?  Our mainstream media, our medical fraternity and our politicians continue to have their heads in the sand. One day, I expect this dam of silence will break and all hell will break lose. Let's hope it is before we continue to vaccinate people with a vaccine that seems to do more harm than the disease it is trying to prevent.