Race-conscious schoolkid refuses to stand for Australian national anthem

She has obviously absorbed the Leftist political attitudes of her academic parents.  Seeing us all just as Australians is beyond her. Why?  Because seeing us all just as Australians is exactly the opposite of what Leftists do. As part of their program of destroying our "unjust" society, they do their best to divide people against one-another.

It's undoubted that there are many ways in which Aborigines are not "equal" to other Australians but what do you do about that? The kid probably hasn't heard that all Australian governments, Left and Right, State and Federal, have done just about everything conceivable to help them but nothing works.  Only the missionaries did any good for them but the Leftist hate of rival religions precludes any repetition of that.

This event is of no broad importance but it took my attention because I too in my High School years made a similar refusal. No anthem was sung at Cairns State high in 1961. Kids were told to salute the flag. I refused. I was very religious at the time and considered that my only loyalty was to the Kingdom of Heaven.  I was not penalized in any way but got to have a good chat with Principal Crosswell.  The kid below was also eventually allowed to go her own way. We are lucky in Australia that we do have such freedoms even for kids, even if the freedoms are used in pursuit of dubious causes


Teachers at a Brisbane primary school have disciplined a nine-year-old girl for refusing to stand for the national anthem during assembly. Primary school student Harper Nielsen was given a lunch time detention on Friday for peacefully protesting against the song she said is "wrong".

"When it says 'we are young' it completely disregards the Indigenous Australians who were here before us for over 50,000 years," she said. "When it was originally written, Advance Australia Fair meant advance the white people of Australia."

Harper told ABC Brisbane she felt annoyed the school was punishing her for expressing her beliefs. "I felt like they were trying to take my power away and that made me feel a bit upset because everything that I fight for is for equality and for equal power for everyone," Harper said.

The Year 4 student said the decision to take a stand was made "mostly" by herself but the subject had been discussed with her parents.

Her father Mark Nielsen, who is an Associate Professor at the School of Psychology at the University of Queensland, said he completely supported his daughter and her views.

"She's shown incredible bravery in wanting to stick to what she believes in and make a stance for something she believes right and I couldn't be more proud of her for wanting to do this," he said.

Associate Professor Nielsen said despite meeting with the school to discuss the issues, they claimed the school rules would not allow his daughter to continue to protest. "They have said that she has to stand or she has to leave the assembly area," he said.

Associate Professor Nielsen said forcing his daughter to go against her stance "doesn't fit" what she was trying to achieve.

"One of the things she was really hoping to do with this is to raise awareness and get people thinking about institutionalised racism and how that looks and how that might feel to people who these kinds of things affect," he said.

In response to criticism of his daughter's actions, Associate Professor Nielsen said it was important to give everyone the opportunity to stand up for things they believed in. "This is not just someone wanting to do whatever the heck they want — this is just a very specific isolated incident for which there are sound, thoughtful reasons behind that, that have to do with human rights," he said. "This is not someone just saying they don't want to go to math class."

Harper's mother, Yvette Miller, is an Associate Professor in Public Health at Queensland University of Technology.

Brisbane Aboriginal community elder Sam Watson said Harper's parents should be congratulated.

"They've obviously raised a very bright and vivacious young woman and this one is going to grow up and do big things in her life," Mr Watson said.

Talkback callers on ABC Radio Brisbane had mixed opinions, with some calling it "flat-out disrespect", while others said freedom of expression should be encouraged in children.

However, in a video posted on Facebook, Senator Pauline Hanson rejected the nine-year-old's views, saying "here we have a kid being brainwashed".

"I tell you what — I'd give her a kick up the backside," Senator Hanson said. "We're talking about a child who has no idea about history — what we should do and what we need to do to pull everyone together, regardless of their cultural background — we are all Australians. "This is divisive and I don't know what the other kids around her are thinking, but where is it coming from?

"This kid is headed down the wrong path, and I blame the parents for it for encouraging this — no, take her out of the school."

In a statement, a spokesperson for Queensland's Department of Education said it had met with the student and family involved to discuss the issue.  "The school has been respectful of the student's wishes and has provided other alternatives to singing the national anthem," the spokesperson said.

SOURCE 







Open letter to Marise Payne: Will Australia let James Ricketson unjustly spend 6 years in Cambodian prison?

I am putting up this letter because I deplore corrupt "justice" but I actually have no sympathy for Mr Ricketson.  Anybody who goes to a Third World country and makes vigorous  criticisms of the government is asking for trouble. He must have had delusions of invincibility. A better drafted prosecution alleging sedition would probably have succeeded anyway

Dear Foreign Minister,

Human Rights Watch writes to urge you to press the Cambodian Government to quash the conviction and immediately release imprisoned Australian journalist and filmmaker James Ricketson.

We ask you to publicly denounce his trial and six-year sentence for what it is: farcical legal proceedings on bogus espionage charges.

The muted response thus far by the Australian Government to Ricketson's conviction follows what had been more than a year of wholly ineffectual "quiet diplomacy" pursued by previous Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.

Australia's "quietly, softly" approach to human rights diplomacy in South-East Asia seems to have made it easier for Cambodia's Government to ignore "soft messages" from Australia and confidently jail an Australian citizen without a credible basis for 14 months without fear of repercussions.

During the seven-day criminal trial that ended on August 31, no evidence was produced that demonstrated Ricketson had committed espionage.

Australia has yet to condemn a prosecution widely seen as a politically motivated attempt by the Cambodian Government of Prime Minister Hun Sen to silence independent journalists in the country ahead of the discredited election on July 29.

On June 3, 2017, police arrested Ricketson in Phnom Penh without informing him of the reasons for his arrest. He was held at the immigration police headquarters without charge for four nights, beyond the legal period of 72 hours.

On June 9, an investigating judge charged him with espionage and sent him to pre-trial detention.

A day before his arrest, Ricketson had flown a drone without a permit over an opposition rally in the capital. However, the case quickly surpassed any legal violation from the use of a drone.

Ricketson had long been vocal about corruption and poverty in Cambodia, and the Cambodian Government's involvement.

He also had produced several documentaries about the main political opposition party, the Cambodian National Rescue Party (CNRP), and was in contact with its leadership.

On November 16, 2017, the Supreme Court arbitrarily dissolved the CNRP, effectively turning the upcoming election into a one-party contest.

That court judgment mentioned Ricketson as one of the key players in fomenting a so-called "colour revolution," which the Government had alleged without credible evidence was led by the CNRP, supported by civil society, and financially assisted by foreign governments.

Under Cambodian criminal law, espionage is defined as the collection by a foreigner of information that undermines the national defence. The crime requires the suspect to have obtained such information with the intent to share it with another country.

The court never made such a finding, prompting Ricketson to ask during the proceedings: "Please, tell me, which county was I spying for?"

The prosecution's entire case rested on three pieces of evidence from Ricketson's emails that demonstrated no crime, let alone espionage: a letter to then-prime minister Malcolm Turnbull critical of the Cambodian Government, an email to former Cambodian opposition leader Sam Rainsy regarding an arrest warrant and another containing detail of Hun Sen's personal bodyguard unit, and a dozen photographs of riot police at an opposition protest in Freedom Park in Phnom Penh.

Given the Government's control over the courts in Cambodia, particularly in political cases, a conviction was a foregone conclusion.

Hours after the verdict, Australia's new Prime Minister Scott Morrison told the media that it was best "to deal with these things calmly, directly and in a way that best assists the citizen," but said nothing about the charges or the conduct of the proceedings.

That day, you "acknowledged" the conviction, and stated that, "Ricketson is subject to legal proceedings under Cambodian law and must now consider his response to the court's decision using the avenues open to him under Cambodian law".

You added, "the [Australian] Government continues to provide full consular assistance" and "will consider what further appropriate support we can provide during that time".

This weak response sends a message to the Cambodian Government that Australia does not intend to support its citizen against an outrageous prosecution before a politicised legal system in violation of his basic rights.

We urge you to strongly, publicly and persistently condemn Ricketson's trial and imprisonment and seek his immediate release.

The horrendous conditions inside Cambodia's prisons makes it critical that Australia's consular officials ensure that Ricketson has adequate food and medical care for however long he is incarcerated.

And you should make clear that Australia-Cambodia relations cannot be "business as usual" so long as he is unjustly imprisoned.

More broadly, Australia's failure to press the Cambodian Government on this case sends a message to abusive governments everywhere that Australian citizens can be used for political purposes without repercussion.

This ultimately puts all Australians abroad at risk. If there was a clear case for Australia to send a contrary message – one of support for its citizens abroad -- the James Ricketson case is it.

SOURCE 






Sri Lankan asylum seekers forcibly deported from Australia despite torture risk

That any of these removals were improper is simply a Leftist allegation so is probably fake news.  After the dreadful attacks on it by the Tamil Tigers, the Sri Lankan government has restored civil calm and is under no pressure towards unjust actions.  If however any of those returned to it were Tamil Tigers, I think they have richly earned any retribution that they suffer

At least a dozen Sri Lankan asylum seekers have been forcibly deported back to Sri Lanka, having been put on a specially chartered jet that left Perth at 2am on Tuesday.

Some of the men deported had been in detention for more than six years in Australia, while others still had challenges before Australian courts pending. The majority were Tamil, but at least one was Sinhalese.

Guardian Australia has been provided with details of some of those returned but has chosen not to name them out of concern for their safety. Several had reported to Australian authorities they had previously been abducted and tortured by security forces in Sri Lanka.

The asylum seekers were transported from detention centres across Australia and taken to Perth, from where they were flown out on a charter flight run by Skytraders. The flight left at 1.57am.

The group landed in Colombo on Tuesday but has not made contact with family or legal representatives. Returned asylum seekers are, without previous exception, interviewed, arrested and charged by Sri Lanka police on arrival.

Human rights groups and legal advocates have serious concerns over the safety of returned asylum seekers.

The United Nations rapporteur on countering terrorism wrote in a report in July that Sri Lanka’s progress towards peace had “virtually ground to a halt”, and that he heard evidence of “very brutal and cruel methods of torture, including beatings with sticks, the use of stress positions, asphyxiation using plastic bags drenched in kerosene, pulling out of fingernails”.

With airlines under pressure globally over their role in forced deportations, the Australian government is increasingly using charter flights to deport asylum seekers it has judged not to meet its protection obligations.

The Department of Home Affairs recently awarded Skytraders a three-year $63m tender, to begin in December, providing “a dedicated airframe to meet operational demands for the movement of high-risk persons and departmental staff between on-shore and offshore locations”.

The tender, to follow on from an existing $144m contract, stresses the “variable, discreet and confidential nature of ABF’s operations” and says the department needs to take “long-range, multisector flights with limited notice”.

The issue of corporate cooperation in forced removals came to renewed international attention last month when Swedish student Elin Ersson refused to sit down on a plane at Gothenburg airport, protesting that an Afghan man was being deported “to hell”. She succeeded, and the man was removed from the plane.

Similar protests have been staged in Australia, resulting, in some cases, in criminal charges laid against protesters.

In June in the UK, Virgin Atlantic said it would no longer assist the Home Office in deporting people classed as illegal immigrants, after growing unease over the wrongful removal of members of the Windrush generation to Caribbean countries, despite their status as British citizens.

In Australia both Qantas and Virgin are under pressure over their participation in forced removals and internal movement of asylum seekers and others in immigration detention.  Both airlines have said they comply with Australian law and are advised by the Australian government on forcible removals and transportations.

Brynn O’Brien from the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) said Australian airlines were taking a struthioid [ostrich-like] attitude towards potential breaches of international human rights law.

The Australian government does not comment on the specific cases but has consistently defended its removal processes, saying it adheres strictly to international law. “Australia does not remove people to Sri Lanka who engage Australia’s non-refoulement [dangerous repatriation] obligations,” a spokesperson said. “Australia takes its non-refoulement obligations seriously.”

SOURCE 






No basis to bias science

I have been pointing to the invalidity of the IAT for years

News that the Australian Taxation Office has been running unconscious bias training (UBT) courses raises the question: why are taxpayers footing the bill for a potentially flawed psychological test?

The course uses the Harvard Implicit Association Test (IAT), which employs image and word association to determine the level of ‘unconscious bias’ an individual has towards those of a different race, sex, and so on. My colleague Dr Jeremy Sammut highlighted the socially destructive nature of this test, but the origins themselves are equally disturbing.

The IAT was introduced into the scientific literature in 1998 by researchers Anthony Greenwald, Debbie McGhee and Jordan Schwartz. However, not only does the test suffer a replicability problem — meaning that some of the results have not been successfully replicated — a number of psychologists have come out and challenged its efficacy.

A 2009 report by psychology professor Hart Blanton demonstrates the evidence between IAT scores and real world behaviour is virtually non-existent. A Kirwan Institute Study on implicit bias found such tests can be damaging because the range of responses are limited. And a paper published by Gregory Mitchell and Philip Tetlock argue the claims made by proponents of the IAT are exaggerated, and the test fails to consider alternative factors that could influence an individual’s responses.

After the IAT was introduced in 1998, many private companies such as McDonalds and Google started teaching their employees about unconscious bias. But now, in the era of diversity bureaucracy, the adoption of pseudo-scientific programs that place feelings over facts has sadly also become the new norm for taxpayer funded institutions.

The Australian Public Service Commission dedicates a page to ‘unconscious bias.’ The Queensland Government claims the IAT can be used to bring awareness to organisational and individual biases. And many more government agencies now cite ‘unconscious bias’ in their diversity programs.

The idea that a government agency would want to test the unconscious thoughts of its employees and try to change them, is disturbing enough. But when a test is this flawed, it is also an egregious waste of taxpayer money.

SOURCE
 





Politician slams egotistical feminist

I had a previous comment on this on 7th

A politician has shared an airline experience of his own in response to an academic who complained about being called 'miss' by a flight attendant.

Peter Phelps, a Liberal Party member of the New South Wales Legislative Council since 2011, targeted Philosophy PhD Siobhan O'Dwyer in a Wednesday Twitter post.

'Oh my God, Qantas I just got "Welcome abroad, Mister Phelps" despite my boarding ticket clearly stating that it is "Doctor Phelps",' Dr Phelps, who has a PhD in Australian History, wrote.

'So I just said "Thank you" .. because I'm not a massive academic feminist prat whose time is spent looking for patriarchal insults where there are none.'

Dr Phelps followed up the post with an additional comment that the experience 'destroys her ex post facto justification that "it would never happen to a man".'

Dr O'Dwyer sparked controversy with a viral tweet last week in which she slammed Qantas for not calling her 'doctor' during her flight.

The lecturer then accused the airline of 'everyday sexism' and complained she was deluged with hate mail for her Twitter post about the incident.

SOURCE 

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here