This is the single most Islamophopbic event in Australian history. And it’s equally anti-semitic which is really saying something. Not to mention disgusting and cowardly as well. This is the story: Bondi synagogue ban over terrorism risk leaves Jewish community shocked and furious. And before I get into the detail, let me say that I think such an occurrence is wildly improbable, on the level of a gas main explosion or being hit by a falling rock.

A LOCAL council has banned the construction of a synagogue in Bondi because it could be a terrorist target, in a shock move that religious leaders say has caved in to Islamic extremism and created a dangerous precedent.

The decision, which has rocked the longstanding Jewish community in the iconic suburb, was upheld in court this week as the nation reeled from the alleged airline terror threat and debate raged over increased security measures at airports and other public places.

The Land and Environment Court backed the decision by Waverley Council to prohibit the construction of the synagogue in Wellington St, Bondi — just a few hundred metres from Australia’s most famous beach — because it was too much of a security risk for users and local residents.

The people who made this decision are repulsive scum. If the Jews who attend this synagogue aren’t afraid who are they to be fearful on their behalf. ISIS blows up churches, and Buddhist statues too. If we are going to worry about that, should we also stop airplanes from flying, people going to sporting events or allowing pedestrians to wander through the Bourke Street Mall. Here is their “evidence”, bizarre as it no doubt is:

Its evidence, as summarised by the court decision, was:

“The PTRA concludes nothing more than stating:

• western countries face a security threat, currently primarily from ISIS;
• the threat level in Australia is “probable”;
• Jewish communities across the world are no stranger to the threat of violence and as such will generally take security measures into account when planning, constructing or renovating buildings;
• the CITED design considers “potential possible threats” that are relevant to Australia; and
• the design measures focus on the persons inside the buildings only

“The PTRA does not raise concerns as to the safety and security of future particularly users of the synagogue, nearby residents, motorists; or pedestrians in Wellington Street.”

Australia is rapidly moving from a home of freedom and tolerance to a slavish craven stupidity as it appeases radical Islam in every opportunity it gets. You know that bit about “first they came for the Jews”? If this is what the members of Waverley Council think of our Muslim neighbours, there may yet be a role for the Human Rights Commission after all.

Travelling among the educated elites on this excursion into North America has been a depressing experience. I know that policy has been my line of work for the past thirty-plus years, but even so, you would think that for most people there would be a natural wish to see the world managed in a way so that the outcomes they preferred would be the kinds of things they would like political leaders to do. Instead, I find almost everywhere a bizarre sentimentality in which some infantile wish for a nicer world is what shapes the policies they support. The herd-like disdain for Donald Trump in a world where niceness is brushed aside by savagery at every turn is astounding. Donald Trump is all that stands between the continuation of our culture and its utter devastation at the hands of anti-Western invaders. Almost no one I have met up with gets it. Evan Sayet gets it.

Sayet has written an article on Donald Trump with the title, He Fights, and the war he is fighting is a Culture War that will require every ounce of our will and ingenuity to win. Here’s Sayet’s point in which he speaks for me although for few others among the educated classes:

Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming. Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”

General George Patton was a vulgar-talking, son-of-a-bitch. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum, then Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich. . . .

It’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics.

Here’s his conclusion:

So, to my friends on the Left – and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do. These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president – I get it, he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights.

There is no doubt in my mind that Trump wants to achieve the same ends I want to see achieved. He is also the only political leader the West has produced that truly sees the problem and will fight this out using every tactic he can find. He also has such personal disdain for his ideological enemies that their criticisms have no effect on what he does. He has defined out Cultural War aims and is working out the necessary tactics to achieve these ends. He may lose, but you know what, he might actually win.

Tis is the article: The millennial success sequence: Marriage, kids, and the ‘success sequence’ among young adults. These are the opening points:

Millennials are much more likely to flourish financially if they follow the “success sequence”—getting at least a high school degree, working full-time, and marrying before having any children, in that order.

While 55 percent of 28- to 34-year-old millennial parents had their first child before marriage, the vast majority of millennials who married before having any children are now steering clear of poverty and appear to be headed toward realizing the American dream. Additionally, 95 percent of millennials who married first are not poor, compared to 72 percent who had children first.

Even millennials from low-income families are more likely to flourish if they married before having children: 71 percent who married before having children made it into the middle or higher end of the income distribution by the time they are age 28–34. By comparison, only 41 percent of millennials from lower-income families who had children first made it into the middle or higher end of the distribution when they reached ages 28–34.

Boring, but what can you do?