From an old Australia but comfortable in the new

I just thought that this was a story worth making sure everyone interested in this sort of thing would see. It is from cricket, and the opposite end of the Adam Goodes story told so well by Jupes. This is about Alan Davidson turning 90.

No other sport is like cricket, and certainly there is nothing like it I can think of from the North American sports I grew up on. Possibly my favourite quote is from hockey, from the owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs when I was growing up, Conn Smythe: “if you can’t lick ’em in the alley, you can’t lick ’em on the ice.” Cricket is different, very different, and Alan Simpson Davidson showed it. A wonderful article, from which the following two stories are told in succession:

After play on the third evening of the last Test of the 1961 Ashes, Alan was having a drink with Ken Barrington, England’s ruggedly dependable No 5. What was Alan doing the following night, he asked. Would he come along to help at a junior presentation night? They agreed to rendezvous at 6.30pm.

It happened that Alan was bowling the last over of the day’s play to Barrington, stubbornly ensconced on 33. He finished the over with a fierce bouncer; rather than hook, Barrington stopped it with his chest.

As stumps was called, spectators saw Barrington gesturing towards Alan with his bat, seemingly in remonstrance. In fact, he was saying: “Remember! 6.30!”

Familiarity maintained behavioural bounds in play as well. During the Headingley Test, Barrington’s teammate Colin Cowdrey was 93 when he gloved a ball down the leg side but looked like getting away with it when the umpire’s finger stayed down.

Cowdrey’s reputation as a “walker”, even as a man of piety, was briefly jeopardised by the scent of a hard-won 100. From Alan’s wicketkeeper, Wally Grout, emanated a delicious sledge: “Are you reading the lesson this Sunday, Colin?” Cowdrey hastily tucked the bat beneath his arm and departed.

Another world, in relation to the times these stories are from and in comparison between cricket and every other sport ever known.

Corruption and criminality

A fantastic series of posts from today that outline not just the corruption but outright criminality among the left in the United States in which they have used the levers of the Federal Government to attack their enemies and benefit themselves. Start here with a story found nowhere else I could see: True the Vote Wins Stunning Court Ruling Against IRS in Lois Lerner Scandal.

The True the Vote v. IRS lawsuit has finally come to a close with a stunning ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton ruling in favor of True the Vote; penalizing the IRS with maximum attorneys fees due to their unconstitutional discrimination against the group and their unethical behavior in the case.

This decision marks the end of a nearly decade long battle that first began in 2010, when federal government agencies including the IRS, DOJ, FBI, ATF, OSHA weaponized against True the Vote and its founder, Catherine Engelbrecht. Under Obama Administration leadership, the agencies leveled a barrage of attacks, including twenty-three audits, investigations, and inquiries, against the group in an attempt to stop their work in election integrity. “

At one point the IRS got Child Services to try to take Ms. Engelbrechts’ children from her—this is how vicious Lerner and the crowd became, to stop honest elections. To stop those exposing the corruption of elections.

There is then this: Investigation finds Ilhan Omar illegally used campaign funds to pay lawyers related to allegations that she married her brother.

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., is facing financial penalties for campaign finance violations following a Thursday ruling from the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board.

Which may be supplemented by this: WHEN THE CAT HAS OMAR’S TONGUE. Which gets into her fraudulent marriages and tax fraud.

She held out Ahmed Hirsi as her husband on her campaign site and elsewhere. We found that Omar had legally married Elmi in 2009 and wondered if he was her brother. Omar remained married to him from 2009 to 2017. Although Omar has three children with Hirsi, Omar never did marry him until last year….

Although she didn’t marry Hirsi until last year, Omar has held Hirsi out as her husband at all times since she became a public figure. Over what period of time did Omar and Hirsi file joint tax returns? My guess is that it runs back to 2002. We know she filed joint tax returns with Hirsi while she was still married to Elmi. In addition to the IRS issues, the questions intersect with those arising from Omar’s marriage to Elmi.

Then there’s this: Profiles in Treason Bruce and Nellie Ohr.

The latest emails and memos uncovered shows clearly that Fusion GPS, hired by Hillary Clinton and the DNC in an attempt to destroy the Trump candidacy was assisted in its agenda by the FBI the DOJ and the intelligence agencies of the Obama administration. The notes, some of which are from Associate Deputy District Attorney Bruce Ohr, whose contact was Deputy AG Sally Yates. Bruce Ohr was demoted four times since the investigation began, at least twice for failing to disclose his involvement with figures associated with the unverified dossier from Fusion GPS. Sally Yates was fired for insubordination and refusing to implement a legal order from the President. Both are members of the Deep State Resistance doing everything they can to usurp the power of President Trump.

Finally, in the midst of actual criminality and fraud, there is this question over possibly the most-investigated political leader of modern times, A Serious Question For Democrats: What Exactly Was Trump’s Crime?.

Democrats need to answer the question. Impeach Trump for what?

Specifically, what law did our President violate?

If you asked any one of them, really pressed them, they wouldn’t be able to come up with an actual crime. Trump is so vile and we are so virtuous and enlightened will no longer cut it.

And a reminder we are this week celebrating the 70th anniversary of the publication of Orwell’s 1984: George Orwell’s prescient novel 1984 is turning 70 and only growing more relevant with age. To add to how fantastic this is, truly space age incredible, the article is from our ABC.

This was not a borderline issue

If you don’t think that stopping the boats won the election for the Coalition you are completely out of it. Adani also mattered. But without both, we would have a Labor Government right now.

Speaking of which:

DEVELOPING: Trump announces tariff-avoiding deal with Mexico.

Pop the tequila and pass the guacamole — the US has struck a trade deal with Mexico that will avert tariffs on imports.

“I am pleased to inform you that The United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico,” President Trump tweeted Friday night.

“The Tariffs scheduled to be implemented by the U.S. on Monday, against Mexico, are hereby indefinitely suspended,” he added.

“Mexico, in turn, has agreed to take strong measures to stem the tide of Migration through Mexico, and to our Southern Border,” he said.

Related: Mexico Capitulates to Trump’s Tariff Threat, Deploys 6,000 Troops to Guatemalan Border to Curb Migration.

And that will be just a start. Incredible there are votes in open borders for the Democrats, since the certainty of maintaining an open border will be the submergence of everything that has made America the great country she is.

 

In defence of Professor Ricardo Duchesne

The following has been take verbatim and in total from The Other McCain. It is titled, Sociology Professor Who Quoted ‘Red Pill’ Sites Forced Out of Canadian University.

In 2011, University of New Brunswick sociology professor Ricardo Duchesne published The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, a critique of multiculturalism. In 2017, Professor Duchesne published Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age:

At this pivotal moment in recent Western history, Richard Duchesne tackles what may be the most crucial question for people of European descent:

‘What makes us unique?’

Casting aside the dominant cultural Marxist narratives and dismissing the popular media attacks on concepts of ‘whiteness’, Duchesne draws on a range of historical examples, sources and philosophies to examine the origins of European man, his achievements, and the nature of the Faustian spirit that has driven his innovation and creativity.

Last month, Huffington Post published an article detailing how Professor Duchesne was “peddling white supremacist views while the university’s leadership is unable or unwilling to intervene.” As a result, Professor Duchesne has now been forced into retirement:

A University of New Brunswick professor accused of being a white supremacist and denounced by more than 100 colleagues for his views on immigration is taking early retirement, the university announced on Tuesday.

Prof. Ricardo Duchesne provided his notice “to focus on his own pursuits as an independent scholar,” vice-president Petra Hauf said in a statement.

“We respectfully accept his decision and thank him for his 24 years of service.” . . .

Duchesne, who teaches sociology at the Saint John campus, has appeared on far-right podcasts and YouTube channels. He has also written about what he calls the “relentless occupation of the West by hordes of Muslims and Africans,” and asserts that “only out of the coming chaos and violence will strong White men rise to resurrect the West.”

He says he’s looking forward to retiring at the end of the month and pursuing independent studies.

He plans to write about “why European civilization was far more creative than all the other civilizations combined” and “why all European-created nations are being forced to diversify themselves through mass immigration,” he said in an emailed statement.

He will also address “why the mainstream media never allows any critical thinking about the mandated ideology of diversity,” he said.

Googling some of the phrases attributed to Professor Duchesne, I found a March 2017 article, “There Is Nothing the Alt Right Can Do about the Effeminacy of White Men,” a historically informed analysis of cultural decadence. Professor Duchesne cites such sources as Plutarch, Polybius, Sallust and Livy on the similar trend of decadence in ancient Rome. Interestingly, Professor Duchesne also cites “red pill” sites Chateau Heartiste and Return of Kings. He does this to refute their claim that feminism is to blame for the decline of the West, concluding instead that this decline is a consequence of historical forces:

The expectation recently articulated in a Counter-Currents article that reading about Rome’s glories can teach current White men to regain their valor and heroism is pure wishful thinking. White men today will never build up their “resolve as great as that of the Romans” by reading about the Romans. The Romans built their character, before and during the time of Cato the Elder, by living at a point in the historical cycle when anarchy and savagery demanded hardness, by working extremely hard as farmers, by living in a very patriarchal culture that had harsh laws and expectations, and by undergoing intense military training and warfare. The Rome of Cato was a civilization at its peak; the West today is senile and childless, its families in decline, preoccupied with appearances, and overall too lazy and comfortable.

Decline is irreversible. The relentless occupation of the West by hordes of Muslims and Africans is an expression of White male decadence and effeminacy. Only out of the coming chaos and violence will strong White men rise to resurrect the West.

Well, these startling assertions would make an interesting topic of debate, if only Professor Duchesne’s critics were willing to debate him, but instead they have sought to silence him, to terminate his employment and ostracize him as persona non grata. How odd is it that disciples of Marx and Lenin — advocates of revolutionary socialism — are tolerated in academia, but a professor who makes reference to Plutarch and Livy is condemned as a Thought Criminal? The point is not whether one agrees with Professor Duchesne’s racial beliefs or his bleak assessment of future prospects, but instead whether these beliefs can be the subject of open discussion and debate. There is a totalitarian tendency in academia that now seeks to silence certain perspectives by labeling them “hate speech,” and it’s never the Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries who are silenced.

PDT interview with Piers Morgan

THE VIDEO HAS BEEN FOUND: The interview can be viewed via Bing here. We’ll see how long this lasts but at least it is available so you can watch it for yourself. Still not on Youtube. My thanks to Eddystone for picking it up.

And in a further update, here is the video once again restored to life.

BUT THIS IS THE MORE IMPORTANT QUESTION – WHY ISN’T THIS THE SCANDAL IT OUGHT TO BE: What the interview showed was how knowledgeable and sensible the President is. It also brought out a warmth you never normally see portrayed. The comments thread at Powerline where the interview was also shown is divided between those who watched the interview as I had, and those who found the video had been removed by Youtube. Here are a couple from the latter group.

This flushing of this video should be a big story, as it clearly demonstrates intention to smother and suppress any story involving Trump that is NOT full-blown accusation. You can find out-of-context quotations from this interview on CNN’s site that follow their narrative. Shocking! I’m SHOCKED!

If Trump came off looking ‘human’ then it’s been relegated to the internet trash can………….never happened.

The video is now unavailable. I can’t find the full version, or transcripts anywhere. I suspect this has been done to prevent anyone from checking on the narrative of his comments that has been/is being spun. Free press, people. An interview with the President is…unavailable.

Wow. They took it down. I watched it just in time. Really impressive interview- Morgan was civil and Trump is just so impressive: both with his grasp of wide-ranging topics and his self-deprecating humor. This video made me like him even more. Could that be why it was taken down?? 🤔

And this is the last of the comments from someone who was able to watch the interview:

What strikes me is how this puts the lie to the idea, universally proclaimed in the mainstream media, that President Trump is an ignorant, uneducated buffoon. Morgan touches in quick succession upon a very wide range of topics, presumably without the President having being informed in advance so that he could have brushed up on those matters, and I don’t detect one time when Trump stumbles. In particular, with regard to an area I have studied extensively, Trump gets the history and details discussed of World War II and Winston Churchill quite correct, such as Churchill’s reaction to Pearl Harbor, which he relates dramatically in his history of World War II. Morgan on the other hand stumbles on a major historical point when he mistakenly says repeatedly that Churchill declared war on Germany from the Cabinet War Rooms where the interview was filmed. It was in fact Neville Chamberlain who declared war on September 3, 1939, and he did so not from the Cabinet War Rooms — which had only just started operating a week before — but via a BBC broadcast from 10 Downing Street. That same day Churchill was appointed First Lord of the Admiralty and did not replace Chamberlain as Prime Minister until May 10 the following year.

The notion that we get anything remotely like a reflection of reality from the media has seldom been more clearly shown. This is what you get instead if it shows the President in a positive light.

Topics covered:

Meghan Markle
Climate change
Winston Churchill
Ronald Reagan
Jeremy Corbyn
Conservative Party leadership
D-Day
Vietnam War
LGBT in the military
Iran
Nuclear weapons
John McCain
2020 election
Guns
Who’s the British Trump?

The video has gone. So this:

And this:

Watching the human side of the President where he explains himself and his policies is apparently not seen as suitable for television. Same problem shown at Powerline where I found the interview in the first place.

Free speech is an ethical obligation

A interesting comment on an interview of Janet Fiamengo:

It appears that these students need an ethics course to explain the concept of rights and obligations. Free speech isn’t a right, it is an obligation, you fulfil your obligation by allowing your worst enemy to speak, they fulfil their obligation by ensuring that you can speak. If you only support those you agree with, and label everything you disagree with “hate speech” you have not fulfilled your obligation and have no right.

Here’s the interview, if you can stand the footage of the protestors she has had to deal with.

The Queen may be the only one in England who really likes Donald Trump

Image result for queen trump

In contrast, let us say, with Theresa May: Donald Trump to get parting shot from Theresa May during London visit.

US President Donald Trump and Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May. Picture: Getty

Here’s some text.

Theresa May will give Donald Trump a copy of Winston Churchill’s blueprint for the United Nations in a parting shot at his America First approach to international and trade relations.

The prime minister today will hand the US president a framed copy of the wartime leader’s Atlantic Charter agreed with Franklin D Roosevelt in August 1941.

The eight-point agreement on Allied war aims and vision of a post-war world became the basis of multilateral institutions including the UN and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

The document, with Churchill’s handwritten amendments, is an explicit reminder that many of the institutions opposed by President Trump were conceived by the US and UK.

President Trump has repeatedly criticised multilateral bodies including the UN and his willingness to use tariffs to further US economic aims runs directly counter to one of the key tenets of the Atlantic Charter.

Mrs May’s choice of gift may lack subtlety but is consistent — she has been trying to give him the same lesson since he took office.

At least on this one matter, she can agree with the leader of the Labour Party: Jeremy Corbyn to lead massive protest against Trump in London

Do you think things might have changed just a tad since 1941? I imagine that Churchill and Trump would have gotten on extremely well. I cannot think of anything of importance they would have disagreed about.

And from P in the comments:

These are truly people who like each other.

Remember, remember the fourth of June

Chinese navy personnel stand guard aboard one of the warships docked at Garden Island in Sydney yesterday. Picture: AAP

OK, so it doesn’t rhyme, but we should remember the date all the same. Here’s the story from today, fourth of June even: Storm over surprise warship visit.

Defence experts said it was ­important there was transparency about engagement with China, ­arguing the decision not to form­ally announce the arrival of the biggest Chinese naval taskforce to Australia in years was “a bad look”.

It is a bad look, a very bad look. And here’s the context which, long though it may be, you should read from start to end if you want to understand the Great Game of the era in which you live: Much More Than a Trade War with China. Here’s a bit.

Chinese actions today mirror those dating back 4,000 years, when the Shang Dynasty—China’s first major dynasty—rose to prominence thanks to totalitarianism and imperialism. By assessing these basic patterns over the course of thousands of years, then, one can see how China has identified the United States as a major threat to be toppled. And, it is also why the United States cannot compromise with China in the ongoing trade war—no matter what Beijing offers. For, if the Trump Administration makes a deal, the Chinese will continue their aggressive assault on the American economy—moving from the manufacturing sector to the higher-paying innovation sectors (they already are).

Unlike the United States, China desires to not merely exist as a preeminent power in an anarchic international system. Instead, they view the United States as the hegemonic global power. Such a global power threatens Chinese state security and, as such, China’s leadership cadre believes that they will only be safe if the American hegemon is dismantled and eventually replaced by themselves.

No more surprise visits! We are part of the free, democratic West and want to stay that way.

Toronto life

I suppose something like it could happen in Melbourne. And then there’s this: A Call to Slaughter Jews at Toronto’s Al Quds Day March.

If you don’t understand the reference, go to the link. And it just so happens that something like it did just happen in Melbourne: WATCH: Melbourne Al Quds Rally Participant: “Hamas Should Be Here”.

So while reading about that, I was also reading this: Spinoza and Friends about seeing the world as God might Himself. And then most unexpectedly, right in the middle came this.

I have followed Israel’s situation for nearly two decades now. I see what the Palestinians are up to and I see what the Israelis are up to and I conclude that peace will only come about when Israel extends sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Gaza and kicks out the Palestinians who refuse to recognize the Jewish state. Which means most of them. People call me right-wing. Most of my friends call me right-wing or worse. I barely talk to them now. I do not understand how they can believe in a two-state solution when the Palestinians, in word and by deed, proclaim their desire to liquidate the Jewish state and murder its people. Has not one Holocaust been enough? I understand people’s predilection for peace. It is an expectation normal to a democratic society. But the Arab Muslim world is not a democratic society and is not going to become one anytime soon. Why observe their world through western eyes? Do not excuse what they say or do by claiming it is a response to western arrogance, colonialism, or any of the other sins which so many have so wrongly laid at the doorstep of the West. As if peoples and countries have not been conquering and plundering each other since time immemorial! My friends would do better to read the Bible, but they don’t do that anymore either.

If you want peace, prepare for war, and if war comes, kill your enemies. Is that really the message? Whether it is or not, it is the message our enemies have in store for us, but one we cannot use ourselves.

AND THERE IS ALSO THIS: Toronto Muslim: Executing gays may sound “unfair,” but that’s sharia law and “it’s coming to Canada”.