[television https://youtu.be/VM4lHFlJtk4 ]
UK media outlets have largely attributed the death in Gaza of eight-month-old Layla al-Ghandour on May 15 to tear gas used by the IDF to quell violent border riots. Though serious questions were raised about the Palestinian girl’s death from out outset, most reporters appeared to accept the family’s claim that the girl accidentally ended up at the border clashes and died of asphyxiation as a result of inhaling the commonly used riot control agent.
Most reports included heart breaking photos of the mourning Palestinian mother, like this at The Telegraph.
The Independent even seemed to evoke, in an official editorial, some sort of moral equivalence between Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons against civilians and Israel’s use of tear gas (which they actually referred to as the “gassing” of a baby) in Gaza. Though most reports didn’t go as far as the Indy in attempting to demonise Israel, the…
View original post 247 more words
Free speech must include the right to offend. Granted, there are limitations upon free speech which do serve valuable and necessary functions – such as the prohibition against incitement to violence, or the prohibition concerning the deliberate causing of a panic that would likely result in imminent injury, etc – yet such limitations are not a valid basis for arguments that seek to increase restrictions on free speech. Put simply, the existence of common-sense limitations on free speech in no way testify to the alleged benefits of restricting speech that offends or hurts people’s feelings. Feelings should never be placed above fundamental human rights, particularly when the human right in question is the primary mechanism by which societies and cultures progress. George Bernard Shaw penned upon the lips of one of his fictional characters, “All great truths begin as blasphemies”. The validity of this noble and enlightened sentiment has been…
View original post 5,340 more words
French butchers are coming under physical, verbal and moral attacks by vegans and animal rights groups and have pleaded with police and the French government for protection against their campaign of terror.
According to The Telegraph, butchers allege the increased media exposure of the anti-meat cause has fueled a campaign of violence and intimidation against them. One butcher shop was recently vandalized while a fishmonger and restaurant that served meat dishes were attacked in the city of Lille. Seven butchers and charcuteries were attacked and sprayed with false blood in April in Hauts-de-France. Butchers organizations also say similar incidents occurred in the Occitanie region.
While animal rights groups have been making headlines with videos alleging terrible conditions animals are kept in meat production facilties, The Telegraph also points out a butcher group revealed that a vegan activist cheered the murder of a butcher named Christian Medvès by a Muslim…
View original post 153 more words
An ambitious attempt to extort vast sums of money from the oil industry, by using the US legal system to bypass normal democratic political process on the pretext of supposed climate problems, has drawn an expensive blank in court.
H/T The GWPF.
San Francisco (AP) — A U.S. judge who held a hearing about climate change that received widespread attention ruled Monday that Congress and the president were best suited to address the contribution of fossil fuels to global warming, throwing out lawsuits that sought to hold big oil companies liable for the Earth’s changing environment.
View original post 182 more words
The U.S. Supreme court has ruled, and sustained, the use of race as an admissions criterion for colleges and universities as a tool for increasing ethnic diversity. The stipulation, though, is that there cannot be racial quotas, and that there cannot be policies that “consciously aim at racial balancing.” This summary comes from today’s New York Times op-ed below (click on screenshot), and it confuses me. There’s also a related article in last August’s New Yorker by Jeannie Suk Gersen, an Asian-American professor at Harvard’s Law School (click on screenshot). Both take up the issue of Harvard’s historical discrimination against Asian-American applicants, which of course is related to racial balancing.
I am in favor of affirmative action to rectify the historical discrimination against underrepresented and oppressed minorities, though the ultimate goal should be to eliminate affirmative action, accepting people solely on the basis of their achievements, interests, and other…
View original post 1,546 more words