Links - 6th September 2025 (2)

Eva Vlaardingerbroek on X - "Democracy is dead, but the illusion of it is kept alive. Our regime says that to maintain peace in Europe, we need to go to war with Russia. To protect democracy, we have to ban right-wing parties and to protect freedom of speech we have to censor disinformation. Just like in Orwell’s 1984: War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength."

Zordon Is Not Who You Think He Is | Power Ranger Fan Theory - YouTube

Can you truly be Malay without being Muslim? : r/askSingapore - "My Malay Muslim colleagues criticize and ostracize my Malay Catholic colleague. The latter doesn't give the former a shit and doesn't eat with them."
Can you truly be Malay without being Muslim? : r/askSingapore - "They will tell you it's possible but in reality and practice you will never be truly accepted.  Hear about many anecdotes of those who left Islam at great personal cost to themselves and their relationship with their families / extended family.  If you wanna be an apostate or atheist Malay, most people who do either keep it quiet/to themselves, or leave Singapore entirely for some other country to start a life afresh and apart."

Cabot Phillips on X - "In the last six months leftists have:
-Murdered a healthcare CEO
-Murdered two Israeli diplomats
-Murdered a State Rep. in Minnesota
-Firebombed Tesla dealerships
-Firebombed Jewish demonstrators
-Burned Los Angeles
Which side is extremist, again?
Oh, I forgot to add "attempted to burn down the Pennsylvania Governor's mansion."  And for those keeping track, it's also the 8-year anniversary of the mass shooting targeting Republican Congressman."

Chinese hotel told ‘wake-up service’ of red pandas climbing onto guest beds must stop - "Lehe Ledu Liangjiang Holiday Hotel, a popular family resort in Chongqing, has been called on by the local forestry bureau to stop one of its most popular services. Many guests are attracted to the hotel solely for its red panda wake-up experience.  The service involves bringing one of the hotel’s red pandas up to a guest's bedroom in the morning, allowing the panda to roam freely around the room and climb onto the bed.  Reviews online for the resort show guests checking in just so they can book the experience and get up close to cute, furry animals from the comfort of their hotel room... The YouTubers stroke the panda while it eats the apple from the palm of their hands... four red pandas are kept onsite and take turns participating in the wake-up call room visits.  A member of staff will lead them up to the guest rooms, and visitors are allowed to interact with them for a few minutes before the animal is led away again.  There have been concerns about injury or disease transmission voiced by people online, but the hotel said that the red pandas are borrowed from a zoo, have been vaccinated and a cared for by dedicated staff."

This Left-wing myth about Windrush is an insult to Britain - "Support for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK continues to surge – while Left-wing alternatives are struggling to compete. Why is this? Zack Polanski, who’s standing for the leadership of the Green party, believes that it’s because Right-wingers enjoy a key natural advantage.  Basically: they’re liars.  Interviewed on The Rundown, a political podcast, Mr Polanski argues that political campaigning is “easier if you’re on the Right” because you can “just tell lies” or “just tell an emotive story”. People on the Left, by contrast, prefer to base their campaigning “on facts and information”.  Well, there’s certainly no denying that. After all, if there’s one thing that Left-wing campaigners are famous for, it’s their rigorous adherence to factual accuracy. You’ll never catch them resorting to emotional manipulation or peddling baseless conspiracy theories.  I’ve always admired them for it. Especially during the several decades they spent relentlessly claiming that the Tories were about to privatise Our NHS, any moment now.  Of course, their commitment to rational, evidence-based argument remains every bit as resolute today. We see it in the Western LGBTQIA+ activists protesting in defence of Iran, a country that hangs gay people from cranes. And we see it in the many prominent Left-wingers insisting that Palestine Action mustn’t be proscribed by the UK Government, because breaking into a military base and causing over £30million worth of damage to aircraft, thus weakening this country’s defences, can’t possibly be classified as terrorism.  Indeed, if I had to pinpoint the defining characteristic of the modern progressive mindset, I would say it’s a cool-headed, clear-sighted embrace of common sense. That’s always my first thought, any time Left-wing activists argue that it’s racist to say women don’t have penises, or attempt to save the planet by tearfully glueing their buttocks to the M25.  In Mr Polanski’s opinion, however, progressive campaigners need to adapt their approach, if they wish to “cut through” with the public. The Green party, he says, must get better at “telling a powerful story”.  In which case, he’s surely the perfect man to be its leader. Let us never forget that 12 years ago, when Mr Polanski was working as a Harley Street hypnotherapist, he told a female journalist from The Sun newspaper that, by harnessing the powers of her unconscious mind, he could help make her breasts grow bigger.  If that doesn’t demonstrate a gift for powerful storytelling, I don’t know what does."

Peta attacks Prince and Princess of Wales because their dog had puppies - "Animal rights activists have criticised the Prince and Princess of Wales for breeding their cocker spaniel.  A photograph of Prince William surrounded by four new puppies bred from the family dog Orla was posted on social media to mark his 43rd birthday on Saturday... People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) have called the royal couple “staggeringly out of touch” for “churning out a litter” when animal shelters are so full of dogs needing new homes... Campaigners including Tory MP Andrew Rosindell have written to the Charity Commission to call for Peta’s charity status to be revoked.  The letter, from Peta Watch, alleged that the charity operates as an “extremist political protest group”, which organises protests, demonstrations and stunts without providing any evidence of undertaking charitable activities. Mr Rosindell, the former chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Zoos and Aquariums Group, said he had “major concerns” about the organisation’s charitable status.  “It is completely wrong that an extreme organisation like Peta, which is blatantly political in its activities, is given the tax advantages afforded to a charity while failing to use the donations it receives to help animals in need,” he said.  The campaigners have alleged that although Peta claims to produce educational materials for schools, it admitted in a response to a Peta Watch report “that the organisation does not monitor how many schools use its materials, nor does it track student responses”.  They said: “Worse still, Peta has gleefully attacked other genuine animal welfare charities such as the RSPCA. Only genuine charities should have charitable status.”  They have also accused Peta of “spreading baseless fake science” by linking dairy consumption with autism and equating zoos to the slave trade."
Time to remove tax exemption from churches (but not mosques, because that would be Islamophobic

Meme - "CURSE OF RAH KILLS CANCER??? WHAT THE FUCK"
@Dexerto: "Deadly fungus thought to be a pharaoh's "curse" has been turned into a compound that kills cancerous leukemia cells in lab tests via UPenn"

PR is the electoral weapon that could keep Nigel Farage out of Downing Street - "Not since the 1950s has a party won office with around 50 per cent of the vote. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair both won large majorities with around 43 per cent, but on bigger turnouts than we are now seeing, which provided legitimacy.  The social attitudes survey suggests the turnout has fallen precisely because voters are fed up with the way their wishes are ignored and have lost confidence in parties to do what they promise. In 1987, almost half of voters said they trusted the government to place the needs of the country above the interests of their party. In the recent survey, that had fallen to 12 per cent, an astonishing collapse. Again, in 1987 30 per cent of voters wanted to change the voting system – now 60 per cent do.  Unsurprisingly, perhaps, support for PR has surged among Tory supporters and fallen, though only marginally, among Labour voters. The Lib Dems, funnily enough, have also stopped talking about PR after winning 72 seats, which roughly reflected the support they received... FPTP usually produces strong government able to get things done, though the system does not need PR to produce a coalition, just the failure of one party to win a majority, as in 2010. The trouble with PR is that the need to keep disparate coalition partners on board leads to solemn election pledges being abandoned.  It can also give disproportionate influence to small parties, as happened when the DUP held the balance of power after the 2017 election. In Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu is in thrall to extremist settler parties without whose support his government would collapse."

Sadiq Khan is Britain's most cynical politician, as he embarrasses Starmer over welfare cuts - "Sadiq Khan is posing a unique problem for Keir Starmer at the most inconvenient time. At least part of the solution lies in the Prime Minister’s grasp. It is striking how the era of devolution brought forth a cohort of politicians with absolutely no respect whatever for the basic principles of devolution.   John Swinney, the First Minister of Scotland, whose responsibilities include keeping the health service and the ferries running, loves nothing more than to wax lyrical about the conflict in the Middle East, despite his having no more locus in Gaza and Israel than any other member of the Scottish public.  Similarly, the Mayor of London just cannot resist any opportunity to stick his oar in where, from a strictly legislative perspective, he has absolutely nothing to contribute. Khan has announced (and I have no doubt that at least in his mind, his words were accompanied by a not-remotely-modest fanfare) that Labour must “think again” about its welfare reforms, offering implied support to the more than 100 Labour MPs actively thinking of scuppering the Government’s legislation.  And why shouldn’t Khan pontificate on issues over which he has absolutely no responsibility? It’s not as if there are any problems in the capital that might need his attention."

Universities take advantage of a tax dodge while students struggle to pay tuition - "while they enjoy tax-exempt status, they're gobbling up massive swaths of land in cities and towns across America—and not paying a single dime in property taxes... Universities are rapidly expanding their land holdings under the guise of "academic use," but the reality looks more like a real estate portfolio. According to a 2023 study by the Urban Institute, colleges and universities own more than 1 million acres of land nationwide—much of it in high-value urban areas. Boston? Tufts, Harvard, Boston College and MIT dominate the landscape. In New York? Columbia has been snapping up entire blocks in West Harlem. Out west? Stanford owns more land than many private developers. This tax-free sprawl chokes city revenue, drives up housing costs, and starves public services of funding. Cities are left scrambling to fund police, fire departments, and schools—all while these bloated institutions build climbing walls, gourmet cafeterias, and student luxury apartments. And don’t be fooled—this isn’t just about education anymore. With Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals now the norm, major college athletic programs have fully transformed into business operations. Star athletes are pulling in seven-figure endorsement deals, while schools rake in hundreds of millions through media rights, merchandise, and donor contributions tied to athletics. Cooper Flagg pulled in a cool $28 million last year. What part of this resembles a charity? You’ve got universities cutting sweetheart TV deals, launching national ad campaigns, and building multi-million-dollar stadiums and recreational facilities—all while hiding behind their tax-exempt status. In any other industry, this would be called corporate tax evasion. But in higher ed? It's just another day at the office. While the ivory towers get richer, the average student gets poorer. College tuition has soared over 170% in the past 20 years, far outpacing inflation, wage growth, or any other economic measure. The average cost of attending a four-year private college now tops $60,000 per year—and that’s before books, fees, or a single slice of dining hall pizza. And who benefits from this inflation? University administrators—who are making CEO-level salaries. Over 100 public university presidents earn more than $500,000 annually, with many topping $1 million. This is no longer about learning. It’s about building empires—on our tax dollars."
Time to tax churches!

Human Error and Commercial Aviation Accidents: A Comprehensive, Fine-Grained Analysis Using HF ained Analysis Using HFACS - "Although percentages vary, most would agree that somewhere between 60-80% of aviation accidents are due, at least in part, to human error"
This didn't stop people from blaming Boeing cost cutting for the Air India 787-8 crash 7 hours after the accident

NDP became too 'leader focused': Charlie Angus - "The NDP suffered an “unmitigated disaster” in the last election because it lost touch with its grassroots and became too “leader-focused,” former MP Charlie Angus said... “People feel that the party lost touch by becoming very much a leader-focused group as opposed to the New Democratic Party of Canada,” he said, when asked about the dismal April election results. “We have to be a democratic party from the grassroots. We have to re-engage with people. We lost touch and we have to be honest about that.” The NDP saw the worst results in its history in the April 28 election. It won just seven seats, lost official party status and watched then-leader Jagmeet Singh lose his own seat in British Columbia... “We became a party very focused on TikTok likes. I’m sure that helps, but TikTok didn’t get us elected”"
Time to obsess more about Palestine and trans issues

Don’t charge your phone at airport USB ports, warns the TSA - "“Hackers can install malware at USB ports (we’ve been told that’s called ‘juice/port jacking’),” the TSA wrote on Facebook. “So, when you’re at an airport do not plug your phone directly into a USB port. Bring your TSA-compliant power brick or battery pack and plug in there.” The advice mirrors what security experts have been urging for quite some time. The FBI and FCC issued a similar warning two years ago. The TSA didn’t stop there. The agency also warned people about using public Wi-Fi in airports and other locations, with an added warning to never make online purchases while using it. The unsecured nature of those hotspots makes it an easy target for hackers to pilfer your information."

Letters, June 4: Carney's project projection - "Regarding B.C and Quebec refusing to allow oil and gas pipelines through their territory, I have a suggestion: When it comes time to issue our billions in transfer payments, Alberta should calculate how much of those transfer dollars come from oil and gas. Make what each province will get public knowledge. Then B.C. and richer provinces like Quebec, can decline this portion of the transfer so other needy provinces and territories can benefit from the resource bounty. Hmm, I wonder if B.C. and Quebec will put their principles aside and take the money? Perhaps they will act like Canadians and forgo the billions to benefit others. Somehow, I don’t think their patriotism will exceed the money."

Why Canada hosts more old passenger jets than any other country — by far - "Much of the rationale boils down to unpaved airstrips. Air Inuit flies aircraft on gravel runways, and the 737-200 is among the few jets approved to land on such surfaces. That’s because the beefy Boeing, which entered into service in 1968 and ceased production 20 years later, was designed to be fitted with a gravel kit."

Spaniards turn water pistols on visitors to protest tourism - "Spanish authorities are striving to show they hear the public outcry while not hurting an industry that contributes 12% of gross domestic product... The boldest move was made by Barcelona's town hall, which stunned Airbnb and other services who help rent properties to tourists by announcing last year the elimination of all 10,000 short-term rental licenses in the city by 2028... The short-term rental industry, for its part, believes it is being treated unfairly. "I think a lot of our politicians have found an easy scapegoat to blame for the inefficiencies of their policies in terms of housing and tourism over the last 10, 15, 20 years," Airbnb's general director for Spain and Portugal, Jaime Rodríguez de Santiago recently told the AP."
Xenophobia and hating change, while dealing with a bad economy and high unemployment and sabotaging an industry that keeps them from becoming worse, are good
The Airbnb ban takes effect in 3 years, so they have time to come up with new scapegoats

Majorca panic as 'tourists being scared away' - "Anti-tourism protests in Spain are making a lasting impact as industries warn of the alarming visitation decline. Hoteliers, restaurateurs, retailers, nightlife operators, tour guides, and taxi drivers have revealed that July has been worse than 2024 following on from numerous anti-tourism demonstrations across the country... “The anti-tourism messages are scaring visitors away,” says Juanmi Ferrer, president of Mallorca CAEB Restauración, who said turnover in July has fallen. “This year, hundreds of restaurants in Mallorca will close.” He added that, in some areas, restaurants saw a drop in bookings by up to 40%, emphasising that those who do are also spending less. Pedro Oliver, president of the Official College of Tourist Guides of the Balearic Islands, agrees that “the anti-tourism messages coming from Mallorca are taking hold”. He highlighted that “the sale of excursions has fallen by 20% this summer.”"
Hopefully they get what they ask for and see their towns ruined

The vigilante 'Robin Hoods' waging war against B&B lock boxes - "One tactic, widely documented on Italian social media, involves sabotaging the lock boxes that hold the keys to B&Bs, preventing tourists from accessing their accommodation.. The note encourages people to buy glue, then sabotage the locks by ‘blocking their functioning’, before leaving behind a Robin Hood symbol such as a hat or a feather."

Bryan Caplan on X - "Arguably the biggest change in higher ed in my lifetime: IQs of humanities profs have crashed. Back in the 80s, even English professors, for all their flaws, were brilliant. I saw it with my own eyes."
2 percent is fair on X - "Growing up, you saw these professors speaking 5 languages including Latin or Ancient Greek and it lent authority to their crazy idea. Now you just see a barista that’s taken the theory of ‘white man bad’ as far as it can be taken."

Councillor Chris Moise in yet another renaming controversy - "A group of neighbours are upset that their tiny green patch at Sumach and Shuter Sts. will soon bear a name from outside their community – one, they argue, that was imposed top-down by their ward councillor, Chris Moise. Bill Eadie has lived on Shuter for 40 years and is one of about a dozen people in neighbourhood working together to fight the renaming. He told The Toronto Sun the process was flawed and the consultation was so “selective,” City Hall didn’t so much as put up a sign at Stinky’s park to inform the public. “They didn’t want the neighbourhood to know,” Eadie said. The Stinky’s name is part of the lore of the Trefann Court neighbourhood, and predates Toronto’s glassy condo era by decades. The parkette earned the name because of its proximity to a nearby business and, like a stubborn odour, Stinky’s has clung to the spot since. That name will soon give way, at least officially, to Louis March Park, as the parkette is renamed after a Toronto activist best known for his opposition to gun violence who died in July 2024. Eadie said he thinks Louis March Park is “a good name,” but March wasn’t from the area and the neighbourhood has its own heroes to celebrate... In addition to Sankofa Square, the parkette renaming also closely follows the rebranding of the TTC’s Dundas station, adjacent to Sankofa Square, to TMU station as part of a largely secret deal with Toronto Metropolitan University.
Activist voices are more important than community voices

Taste of Little Italy attendees say there wasn’t much of Italy to taste - "many celebrated the annual Taste of Little Italy as it is not only one of Toronto’s premier food festivals but it also marks the unofficial beginning of summer... many who attended the weekend-long street festival found there was a lack of actual Italian food. One Toronto content creator, who goes by @lifewith_kaiya on TikTok, shared a video of her search for “any semblance of a taste of Italy” – but only found Japanese and Mexican cuisine, as well as “meat on a stick” and “corn juice,” though their origins remain a mystery. Another TikToker, @theharrisoncrookss, wrote on his video , “I don’t know why it’s called Taste of Italy, I saw more jerk chicken and empanadas than pasta.” One commenter wrote, “Facts because that strip of College is barely Italian anymore.” Some took their complaints to Little Italy’s Instagram page, writing, “Nothing to do with Italians. What a shame.” One visitor commented there was “very little Italian this year,” while another mentioned that the last time they attended there were “next to no Italian vendors.” One person wrote: “The only reason I don’t like this is because now all of the festivals have the exact same vendors! There’s kind of no point in going to all of them if the stuff is the same.” Another agreed, noting the same vendors were at Do West Fest the weekend before."
Too bad if you complain, some people will say it's Taste of Little Italy, not Taste of Italy, so as long as it's places from Little Italy, they fit the theme even if they're not Italian (one was quoted in the article). Just like in England, curry is fine at traditional English festivals and only racists complain. Of course, if it's a "minority" festival...

Arnold Schwarzenegger warns America creating a 'generation of wimps' - "“For me, it’s all about hard work … There’s no shortcut … The human mind can only really grown through resistance … The more you struggle, the further you’re gonna go, and the stronger you’re going to get,” the 76-year-old action man said during a recent appearance on the Howard Stern Show. “It’s just the way the world works. Anyone who tries to baby themselves or pamper themselves or protect themselves, it’s over. You’re never going to get there. That’s just the way it is... “young kids today … have to be able to struggle.” “The more you experience the things you really don’t like, the more you can grow and the tougher you get and the more you can handle. It’s just that simple. We all have our failures. People are so scared of failures … don’t be afraid of failure. Make failure something you feel comfortable with. Remember when you see Michael Jordan, he always said that what made him a great basketball player was not just looking at his successes. It was the 5,000 shots that [he] missed and the 280 that [he] lost. All of the struggles and times that [he] failed. That’s what made [him] the greatest.” Schwarzenegger said unless young people learn to be “tough” they won’t be able to achieve great things in their life. The Hollywood icon, who celebrated 40 years of U.S. citizenship this year, then praised older Americans for helping foster a strong foundation for his adopted country... "Don’t start creating a generation of wimps and weak people who are concerned with, ‘How are you feeling today?’ and ‘I don’t want to hurt your feelings.'” He continued: “It’s nice to be considerate, but let’s not over-baby the kids and let’s not over-baby the people. Let’s teach kids to be tough and go out and do sports and study and go through these painful moments sometimes.”"

Why your workday never ends, and how Microsoft thinks AI might fix it - "According to trillions of anonymized Microsoft 365 productivity signals, the average knowledge worker’s day starts before sunrise and ends somewhere between inbox zero and a Sunday-night panic scroll. No punch cards. Just an unspoken understanding that your phone is always within reach – and so is your boss. Microsoft calls it the “infinite workday.” You and I might call it just a regular Wednesday...
Emails are now being checked before 6 am by 40% of users. We’ve trained ourselves to wake and scroll as though inboxes are breakfast.
The average worker receives 153 Teams messages daily – up 6% year-over-year. In other words, the tempo of our day is being set by pings, not by our own priorities.
Employees are interrupted every 2 minutes on average. Focus time? What focus time? It’s a mirage we keep on chasing but never quite seem to reach.
The report is damning in its findings, to say the least, suggesting how the modern worker isn’t just busy, but besieged from all possible sides. Evenings now come with an unofficial third shift – what Microsoft calls the “triple peak” workday – where inboxes flare up again by 10 pm. Meanwhile, weekends are no longer sacred. Word, Excel, and PowerPoint usage quietly spikes on Saturdays and Sundays as knowledge workers seek solace in undisturbed productivity, while nearly one in five people are actively emailing before noon on weekends. Long story short, they are no longer rest days."

DEI at the University of Saskatchewan

More proof that when left wingers complain about "harassment" and "hate", they mean people disagreeing with left wing orthodoxy: 

He mildly questioned DEI. His law school calls that 'misconduct'

"The University of Saskatchewan’s law school allows some of its Indigenous students to take more time on exams for the purpose of “equity.” So, when this blew up into a faculty controversy in 2022, with proponents of the benefit aghast that anyone would ever question the idea as others quietly made their concerns known to student leaders, one member of the law school tried to make peace between the factions — only to be punished by the university for his efforts.

Tim Haggstrom’s crime? Writing an open letter to his fellow students, from a neutral position, to foster dialogue and attempt to inject reason into the debate. His punishment? A campaign by other students to sabotage his career, culminating in an official finding of misconduct by a spineless university that appears to have forgotten its role in protecting free expression on campus.

That campaign, at least, didn’t work. Now a lawyer (and the national director of the Runnymede Society, whose local chapter events I often attend) Haggstrom, via his legal team at civil liberties charity Freedoms Advocate, is asking the Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench to have the misconduct ruling thrown out — along with the university policies that work to deny procedural fairness to those who don’t emphatically agree with diversity, equity and inclusion...

The institution had, since 2020, a diversity, equity and inclusion policy that implored the entire campus to uphold DEI values, cementing identity-based thinking — and with it, the idea that procedures are only fair when they result in equal outcomes between groups — into campus culture. That year, the university president committed himself to the “dismantling of institutional structures, policies and processes that contribute to inequalities faced by marginalized groups.”

In 2021, the university signed a memorandum of understanding with the student union, committing to deliver anti-oppression and anti-racism training to staff, which was being rolled out by the next year. That initiative was led by anti-racist scholar Verna St. Denis, who has openly called for biasing university education to favour her own progressive, deeply racial worldview. St. Denis also contributed to the university’s Indigenous strategy, also released in 2021, which planned for institution-wide decolonial change. 

Further, according to the originating application filed in court by Haggstrom, the university had made training materials available on the topic of “power and privilege.” The materials are no longer on the university website, but were archived online. They teach a hierarchical understanding of race (specifically, that white people have better access to education and success); they characterize meritocracy as a feature of “settler mindsets”; they state that internalized colonialism causes oppressed people to commit sexual assault; they instruct readers to “refute colonialism” (that is, the very basis of our nation) to assist in making Canada “the friendly, open, welcoming country it espouses to be.” They remark that anti-oppressive education “ought to be uncomfortable as white students begin to unlearn what they have been taught through their previous learning experiences.”

The course ends on a question: “As an individual how can you decolonize yourself and what can you do with your power and privilege to help in the betterment of Canada?”

Senior management began having to take mandatory training on these concepts starting in April of 2022, according to the university. In 2025, these courses appear to still be required for professors who wish to participate “in future tenure and search meetings.”

Despite gatekeeping the hiring process to only those who have taken a crash course in far-left thought, the University of Saskatchewan insisted in an email to me Tuesday that it “has not mandated anti-racism training,” and that the training was required as part of the faculty agreement (to which the university is a party). Spokesperson Heather Persson went on to tell me, of the university more broadly, that “There is no evidence of ‘new political objectives’ at USask,” and that “Ensuring that qualified candidates from a wide range of backgrounds are not overlooked is not a political value of the left or the right.”...

Iit’s embraced DEI, objectively a left-wing pursuit, and put a hyper-progressive critical race scholar openly in favour of politicizing education in charge of the campus rollout. Professors must literally accept lessons on race astrology as a condition for full participation in the university. The former president of the institution, Peter MacKinnon, has referred to the faculty course as a “propaganda module in which scholarly expertise and balance will not be found.” (The current university president continues to insist on providing one-sided political instruction to anyone participating in hiring.) 

The law school is a lot like the rest of the university. Along with its policy of granting extra test time to certain Indigenous students which has been around since the 1990s, (specifically, those who were admitted through an Indigenous-specific pathway and attended an academic support program), the school began mandating a full-year Indigenous course for first-year students in 2018. These courses include sharing circles and personal reflection assignments, and cover colonialism, reconciliation and Indigenous legal traditions.

On top of that, the law school instituted mandatory anti-racism training for first-years in 2022, according to the court application, which was organized by another law student who had advocated for such training in the past.

All of this formed the backdrop to the law school’s affirmative action controversy, which is illustrated in the exhibits that Haggstrom filed with the court. In January 2022, some students became concerned with the doling-out of extra exam time; in response, the law students’ association president suggested investigating the matter at a meeting that month. The meeting minutes, filed with the court, recorded his concerns: “High number of students who get extra time on exams. Our numbers are higher than most college of laws (sic), is turning into an issue of equity.”

When word of this reached the law students’ Facebook group, the association president was inundated with paragraphs from students outraged that anyone would ever question the fairness of exam accommodations. A letter by the faculty’s Indigenous law students’ group invoked the “unmarked graves” of 2021 (which have not actually been found to exist), made broad accusations of “blatant racism,” demanded a public apology and insisted on mandatory anti-racism training in student governance. The law students’ association president apologized (twice). The dean promised the faculty would spend even more resources on reconciliation in the next year. (All of these comments were filed with the court.) 

It was at this point that Haggstrom entered the discourse. As a classical liberal, he personally supports pluralism, tolerance, dialogue and equality. When it came to the law school, he applauded the faculty’s history of standing against racism, but was concerned that its more recent enthusiasm for racial training materials was contributing to student tension. He hypothesized that it might be corrosive to tell some students that they’re being constantly oppressed, and others that they’re constantly oppressing. Perhaps, he thought, that philosophy was a factor driving the souring state of student relations...

In the same meeting, he also questioned whether the law students’ association should add a requirement to open meetings with a land acknowledgement to its constitution (but ultimately voted in favour, according to his court filings).

This unleashed the ire of some students, who sought to punish him for expressing his views.

Classes wrapped up on April 1 that year, but faculty business continued. On April 20, a fellow student lodged a non-academic misconduct complaint against Haggstrom, alleging that he’d breached the university’s harassment policy through his letter-writing and his resistance to the land acknowledgements.

Haggstrom “made numerous attempts to spread hate throughout the College” that year, according to the complainant. She listed his letters to the faculty and the student body as prime examples of misconduct, and expressed concern with his “racist views.”

“His actions have contributed to the creation of an unsafe atmosphere for Indigenous students, myself included, within the College of Law. His various actions have had significant emotional, psychological and physical impacts on many of the Indigenous and non-Indigenous professors, teachers assistants (sic), and students alike within the College of Law.” She had made, but withdrew, very similar accusations against another student the month prior, according to Haggstrom’s court filings.

The court application notes that the complainant never went on to explain, throughout the bureaucratic process, what physical impacts his open letter had on others. No evidence of psychological harm was advanced, either.

The complaint “conveys, inter alia, a position that is against permitting dissenting dialogue, based on subjective concerns of harm experienced by the listener, including potentially creating psychological ‘safety’ concerns,” states the court application.

Nevertheless, the complaint was taken seriously by school officials, perhaps because so much of the university’s mission had been redirected towards a new goal of social transformation. University policies and documents, note the court application, “demonstrate a prioritized institutional commitment to a social or political mission.” And indeed, it was clear that the institution had embraced a cancerously aggressive stance on eradicating all forms of oppression — so it tracks that even a student’s tepid letter in favour of open-minded discussion found itself in institutional crosshairs...

One of these new accusers had contacted his employer, a Calgary law firm, about the unfolding misconduct allegations...

Haggstrom went on to file a complaint about the student who contacted his employer that fall, on Oct. 6. On Oct. 7, the university changed its mind about whether Haggstrom should be entitled to a mediated conversation with his accusers, and ordered that mediation take place — but only if he’d agree to acknowledge the “harm” he caused. He refused, so a formal mediation was once again directed...

One high-ranked diversity consultant at the university, according to the application, attended to provide “emotional support” for the six remaining complainants, a physical demonstration that the University of Saskatchewan was not a neutral party.

At the hearings, the complainants argued that Haggstrom breached the harassment policy by carrying out a discriminatory “one-sided debate” about whether “Indigenous students are deserving of exam accommodations.”"

 

Free expression is only to push the left wing agenda. Opposing it is misconduct. Calling for Jews to be murdered definitely isn't harassment, of course. and it is very important to protect freedom of expression by letting people advocate for that.
 

 

The University of Saskatchewan is on an ideological mission

"I was employed by the University of Saskatchewan for 40 years including 13 years as president. The institution’s distinctive origins combined the development of liberal education with a responsibility to build the province’s agricultural industry, and it did the latter with world-class agricultural programs and research institutes, and with faculty and students of many backgrounds from around the globe.

Now, we are told, the academic personnel in this worldly environment require mandatory training on racism: an Anti-Racism/Anti-Oppression and Unconscious Bias Faculty Development Program. It is compulsory; those who decline its offerings will be shut out of collegial processes previously thought to be their right as tenured faculty...

“Program” is a euphemism. It is a propaganda module in which scholarly expertise and balance will not be found. It does not appear that the instructor has a university academic post and the program’s ideological hue is revealed in the two required readings, one by Idle No More co-founder Sheelah McLean whose theme is that the success of Saskatchewan’s white people is built on “150 years of racist, sexist and homophobic colonial practices.” The second is by five “racialized” faculty who claim that Canadian university systems are rigged to privilege white people. Dissent, contrary views or even nuance are neither expected nor tolerated here. Opinions that are different are not on the reading list. One participant, a law professor, was invited to leave after 30 minutes because he did not lend his voice to its purpose and orientation; he revealed that he was present because it was required. The purpose of the program is indoctrination and there is no room for dissent.

The program is part of an ideological crusade within our universities, one that includes identity-based admissions and faculty appointments, and discourages those who differ from speaking out or taking issue with its direction. It is not present to the same degree in all of these institutions, but it is visible in most and prominent in many. It disparages merit, distorts our history and rests on the proposition that a white majority population has perpetrated a wide and pervasive racist agenda against others. It takes its conclusions as self-evident and not requiring evidence. It is authoritarian and intolerant, and should have no place in institutions committed to excellence and the search for truth.

The question, of course, is what is to be done. There is a view that “this too shall pass;” it is a fad that will recede in time. But, we must note, these are public institutions supported by tax dollars, and by the contributions of time and money by alumni and supporters. We should not tolerate their politicization and sidetracking of the academic mission in favour of the ideology on display here. The pushback should begin with governments and extend to others who care about these vital institutions.

But first the ideology must be recognized. There is no public uproar and little clamour from within the institutions; dissenting professors and students fear that negative professional and personal repercussions may follow. University-governing bodies stand down or away, not wanting to be involved in controversy. Resistance must come from outside the institutions: governments must insist that the propaganda must end, and they should be joined by alumni, supporters and the general public. The credibility of our universities depends on their willingness to say no."

 

Tenure is only sacred if it pushes the left wing agenda. University indoctrination is a far right conspiracy theory and misinformation. 

Clearly a president of three Canadian universities doesn't know anything and is a dinosaur who just needs to die so his bigotry will no longer exist and pollute the world.

 

Saskatchewan professor blogs through mandatory anti-racism 'boot camp'

"A University of Saskatchewan law professor provided a unique window into the equity mandates now ubiquitous at Canadian universities by blogging the details of a compulsory anti-racist “learning journey.”

The course was officially known as an Anti-Racism/Anti-Oppression and Unconscious Bias Faculty Development Session, and is a mandatory requirement of University of Saskatchewan faculty looking to participate in hiring committees.

An email announcing the program was given the subject line: “Mandatory unconscious bias and anti-racism training.”

“The training is intended to further your personal journey of learning and action, regardless of how knowledgeable or experienced you are, so attendance is mandatory irrespective of previous training or academic field of specialization,” faculty were told.

The course materials tell participants that they’ll be taught about the “systemic racism” of the university environment and how they have benefited from unearned racial privileges.

By session’s end, participants are told that they’ll be able understand their own “unconscious bias” and “reflect on and understand how power, privilege and meritocracy lead to inequities.”

One of the activities is to fill out a “power and privilege” wheel. These wheels, prepared and distributed by the Government of Canada, ask users to grade their “privileges” on everything from mental health to sexuality to skin colour. The most privileged identity, as identified by the wheel, is a white, able-bodied, heterosexual “colonizer/settler.”

Michael Plaxton, an expert in criminal law and statutory interpretation, alternately called the course a “mandatory DEI bootcamp” and a “forced march of self discovery.” He noted that it began with a declaration of “we’re not here to debate.”...

The third reading was also from the United States. A paper from the American Association of University Professors entitled Achieving Racial Equity in Promotion and Tenure. The document argues that if the racial makeup of university faculty doesn’t mirror the racial makeup of social generally, standards should be altered to “increase the number of tenured faculty members of color on campus.”

Plaxton was asked to leave the meeting after about 30 minutes, although not because he was posting its details on social media. As he detailed in a follow-up post, when a coordinator asked him why he was there, he replied, “I was there because my union made it a condition of participating in future tenure and search meetings.”...

Plaxton’s experience is now the norm. Academia has been at the sharp end of a wholesale Canadian institutional embrace of the doctrine of “anti-racism,” and everything from grant funding to hiring to promotion now hinges on a candidate’s willingness to accept the tenets of “equity, diversity and inclusion.”

In February, an analysis by the Aristotle Foundation found that nearly all Canadian academic job postings now contain a “diversity” requirement. This could be a mandatory “diversity survey” in which the applicant is required to detail their various racial and sexual identities. Or, in some cases, it could be a job that is explicitly limited to select demographics, such as a Black, Indigenous or female applicants.

It is also standard practice for research funding to be incumbent upon the racial or sexual diversity of the applicants. As far back as 2021, McGill University’s Patanjali Kambhampati went public with criticism of new guidelines from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada that required applicants to list the identity characteristics of research assistants they would be prioritizing.

Anti-racism is different than traditional Canadian guidelines on racial tolerance, which mostly advocated for race to be treated as an irrelevance.

Rather, anti-racism is based on the premise that any inequality of outcome is itself evidence of a racist system, and must be remedied via special treatment for groups deemed to be marginalized or “equity-deserving.”"

 

If there's anything universities are definitely not meant for, it's debate. 

Links - 6th September 2025 (1 - General Wokeness: Islamophobia in the UK/Conservative Subreddits)

Connor Tomlinson on X - "The Guardian argues Muslims are the real victims of Islamic terror attacks, on the twentieth anniversary of 7/7.  The article quotes Qari Asim, the Imam at Makkah Masjid in Leeds.  Asim is a trustee of the HOPE Not Hate Charitable Trust, and a member of Angela Rayner's Islamophobia working group.  “Islamophobia has consistently increased in the last 20 years, and that’s not just due to extremism and terrorism but also a multitude of factors,” Asim said.  Reminder: HOPE Not Hate conducted the polling for the 2019 All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims' definition of Islamophobia, which said conversations about the grooming gangs scandal are “aimed at (and can achieve) harm to individual Muslims, and is not rooted in any meaningful theological debate but rather in a racist attempt to ‘other’ Muslims in general”.  They also cite the Muslim Council of Britain, which a 2009 government report stated were responsible for 80 percent of British-trained imams being of the anti-British Deobandi branch. A 2015 government report found the Muslim Brotherhood "played an important role in establishing and then running the Muslim Council of Britain".  In 2023, their General Secretary, Wajid Akhtar told Muslims to raise generations of "Saladin after Saladin after Saladin until you don’t know what to do with them" in Britain.  It cites the Runnymede Trust: infamous for having introduced the term “Islamophobia” into British politics in 1997, after it was invented by the Muslim Brotherhood to silence critics.  Former Islamist, Abdur-Rahman Muhammad confirmed a meeting took place where members of a Muslim Brotherhood outfit, the International Institute for Islamic Thought, plotted to “emulate the homosexual activists who used the term ‘homophobia’ to silence critics.” Communists and Islamists are still trying to gaslight you to protect Islam from criticism, and are using the tragic and preventable deaths of innocent Brits in Jihadist attacks to do it.  All the while, the media and Home Office help them.  Sickening and insidious stuff."

UK ‘faces social unrest’ if Labour pushes ahead with Islamophobia definition - "Britain will face social unrest and a perception of a two-tier society if the government pushes ahead with plans to come up with a formal definition of Islamophobia, the head of a new campaign group has warned. Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, has set up a working group to provide recommendations to the government on “appropriate and sensitive language” to describe “unacceptable treatment, prejudice and discrimination against Muslims”. Fiyaz Mughal, the founder of the Tell Mama organisation which monitors anti-Muslim hate incidents, is leading a campaign against the definition, which he believes risks having a “chilling effect” on free speech and creating a “blasphemy law by the back door”. The campaign is called Keep the Law Equal. While the definition will not be legally binding, Mughal raised concerns that the police, prosecutors, other public authorities and employers would adopt it and that criticism of any practices associated with the Muslim faith would effectively become an offence. He suggested it could curtail public discourse about the grooming scandals amid concerns that a disproportionate number of Asian men have been responsible. He also said that it could discourage legitimate debate about the hijab, the niqab and sharia courts. “We are seeing a sense of people being very unhappy about two-tier application of the law, two-tier society,” he said. “The same narrative is being potentially, I’m hearing, it’s being used around this definition. Why are Muslims getting extra protection? Why do they have to have more laws? “I worked with the police. We have seen the systems work really well. We need proper enforcement of existing laws, not additional definitions which in fairness given that the world has also changed, given our country and the dynamics has changed, any definition that marks out one community is going to cause major social divisions. and it’s happening in our society. We don’t need social divisions. We need the implementation of existing laws which are more than sufficient. “It will raise community tensions and it will just add to the narrative that actually one community is getting a better deal than another. And that just leads to local anger.” He said it would have a “chilling effect” on free speech. “It creates a sense of a deeply chilling effect, where people are scared to raise things about religion, which can be used against them, and where digital traces can be placed online that are difficult to remove,” he said. “It creates a vastly, deeply problematic element of a chilling effect in society. It doesn’t matter whether it’s statutory or non-statutory. Defence and prosecutors, defence solicitors and prosecutors could use this in legal argument. Now the judges could say, actually, I’m not going to listen to this because it’s non-statutory. But some judges may well listen to it.” An independent review by Baroness Casey of Blackstock recently found that the ethnicity of grooming gangs was “shied away from” by the authorities. It said that disproportionate numbers of Asian men have been responsible for child sex grooming gangs but successive governments and authorities have failed to address their crimes. Mughal said: “This is an issue where we can say we need to look at what kind of cultural elements have brought about actions against young girls. Now even a simple statement like that could be twisted to suggest that actually this is an attack on my identity, that you’re suggesting that all Muslims are groomers and paedophiles.” He said employers could also adopt the definition. “The reality is that if there is one charge of something around Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hatred that is made against an employee, that employee is going to go through a very long and difficult process.” The government faced criticism for attempting to limit public input into the plans by circulating a call for evidence to only a limited number of groups. But its plans were derailed after Claire Coutinho, the shadow equalities minister, found a link to the online consultation form and circulated it widely. “This whole process has been so, so troubling because it’s so private,” Mughal said. “The way that the government has reached out to a selected handful of individuals is not a consultation.”"

Hate-crime definitions risk making things worse - "It’s comforting to believe we can cast most disputes in black and white. But we live in a world that’s much murkier. He experiences his manager’s behaviour as bullying; she says she was just giving forthright feedback: what’s the reasonable interpretation? So many situations require leaders and managers to make finely balanced judgments that can have serious consequences. The weak ones cling to badly drafted definitions and policies in the vain hope that they will eliminate the need for uncomfortable determinations. It’s this tendency that partly explains the mess Labour has got itself into by trying to define Islamophobia... In 2018, the all-party parliamentary group on British Muslims called for the government to make its preferred definition — “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness” — legally binding. The Conservatives resisted this but it was quickly adopted by Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP and Plaid Cymru, and many local councils... There are a number of serious flaws with the APPG definition. It conflates faith-based discrimination with racism; this matters because the law distinguishes between the two and provides robust protections for speech that criticises religion as a belief system. It is vague. It confuses prejudice, discrimination or hostility against an individual or group because they are of a faith with legitimate opposition to that belief system itself. It does not clearly delineate what types of criticism of Islam are permissible; indeed the APPG report uncritically included perspectives that any criticism of the Birmingham schools involved in the Trojan Horse affair — schools known to have seriously failed their mostly Muslim pupils — is “Islamophobic”, and referenced “Asian grooming gangs” as a “modern-day iteration” of an Islamophobic “trope”. It is also unclear how this definition would help in any of the cases the report cites of already-criminal anti-Muslim bigotry, such as a Muslim woman who had a firework posted through her letterbox that the police failed to follow up properly. But when adopted by institutions and incorporated into disciplinary policies its expansiveness will intensify chilling effects that already operate when calling out unlawful or even criminal behaviour by certain individuals, for fear of being accused of bigotry; a factor highlighted by numerous investigations in partly explaining why rape gangs of mostly Asian men were allowed to continue their violent sexual assaults of children for so long, for example. Anti-Muslim discrimination and prejudice is already defined in law by the Equality Act; the Public Order Act already makes it an offence to stir up religious hatred (while including robust protections for criticism of religion). The impetus to create an additional bespoke definition is political; driven by a well-meaning desire to be seen to be doing something — anything — about a horrible form of bigotry, regardless of the unintended consequences. It is also understandable given the widespread adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which shares some of the same problematic features. To criticise the IHRA definition is not to deny concerning evidence of increasing levels of antisemitism in the wake of the Israel-Gaza conflict and the failure of leaders and institutions to adequately address this insidious form of bigotry. But the definition was originally drafted by an American academic for data collection purposes, not to inform disciplinary policies."
It's ironic that the APPG claims that opposing self-determination for Muslim populations like the Palestinians or Kashmir is Islamophobic. Does that mean that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitic?

Labour must abandon its project to define Islamophobia - "In February, under the stewardship of the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, the government established a parliamentary working group to come up with an official definition of “Islamophobia”. Since then, there have been multiple warning signs that this ill-conceived project was on the wrong track. Meeting in private, the group solicited evidence from only a small number of interested parties. Concerns that any definition of Islamophobia would prejudice free speech and academic freedom were naively downplayed, as too were plausible objections from opposition parties that the definition would introduce anti-liberal blasphemy prohibitions by a legislative backdoor. Most worryingly, the group’s chairman, the former attorney-general Dominic Grieve, praised a bizarre report authored by the all-party parliamentary group on British Muslims: it claimed that the public discussion of the “grooming gangs” had been an example of recent “anti-Muslim racism”. The government has now been forced to delay its working group’s deadline till the autumn, after its online consultation form was leaked on social media. Unsurprisingly, that leak led to the group being inundated with responses from the public. That expression of public concern should be taken by Labour as a signal that their ill-thought-through plans ought to be abandoned altogether. There are problems both in practice and principle with trying to circumscribe allegedly Islamophobic speech and action. Any definition broad enough to satisfy its proponents will inevitably be couched in language so generic and vague as to have a chilling effect on speech that is merely critical of religion or culture. Even non-statutory guidance tends to have this anti-liberal effect, because its force and remit is often subject to confusion. Though Labour’s working group was set up in response to evidence of instances of anti-Muslim criminality, to point to this concerning increase is simply a distraction. Britain, by comparison with other liberal democracies, already has a surfeit of laws covering hate speech. Such existing laws should be properly enforced, rather than free and open speech subject to sinister restrictions. When it comes to codifying Islamophobia there is a specific danger that legitimate criticism of religion will be conflated with bigotry. These days, it is the outspoken proponents of free speech who need protection, rather than their alleged victims... The recent audit by Baroness Casey of Blackstock into the grooming gangs scandal has revealed how a slew of officials culpably turned a blind eye to appalling child abuse and rape allegations for fear of appearing prejudiced. Such evidence of officials’ cowardice rightly draws public outcry"

Islamophobia row academic: I wore a disguise. Better ridiculous than dead - "As Steven Greer relates his long-running battle to shake himself free of false accusations of Islamophobia, he describes moments of absurdity. At one stage, this respected law professor, a quietly spoken grandfather of four, was so worried about his personal safety that he did not venture out to the corner shop in the leafy Bristol suburb where he lives without wearing a disguise. When a social media storm engulfed him, he grew a Taliban-style beard, wore empty spectacle frames and a hoodie and carried an umbrella and a screwdriver for protection. “I was mostly thinking, ‘This is ridiculous’. But it’s better to be ridiculous than dead,” he said.  This week, free speech campaigners and academic groups asked the Office for Students (OfS), the higher education regulator in England, to examine what they believe are failures of governance and management at the University of Bristol, where Greer was a professor of law and had worked for 36 years... Bristol University is accused of failing to protect Greer, a respected expert on human rights law, from a potentially life-threatening social media campaign and of taking decisions that damaged his reputation and chilled lawful academic debate. Greer, 68, who was eventually exonerated, believes he had come to the attention of some students because he was a public defender of Prevent, the government’s strategy to stop individuals becoming terrorists, which he said was not racist or Islamophobic. In 2020, a complaint was made by the university’s Islamic Society (Brisoc) alleging that he had made Islamophobic comments. The student who formally submitted the complaint had not attended the module — Islam, China and the Far East — which Greer had been teaching for many years as part of a course he devised on human rights in law, politics and society.  The Islamic society claimed to have reports of Greer making discriminatory remarks and insulting the Quran. He was accused of Islamophobia for referring, in a discussion on the traditional Islamic death penalty for blasphemy, to the Islamist attacks in Paris in 2015, in which journalists and cartoonists at the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine were murdered. “One thing that the students either didn’t understand or didn’t want to understand was that part of the purpose of a lecture is to flag up issues for discussion rather than to instruct or deliver a doctrine,” he says... in February 2021 Brisoc launched a social media campaign accusing Greer of bigotry and demanding an apology. A petition to have him sacked acquired 4,000 signatures. This was a breach of the confidentiality of the complaints process for which Greer believes the perpetrators should have been punished. “The university routinely disciplines students for cheating in assessments. But they wouldn’t discipline students who put the life of one of their staff at risk,” he said. How concerned was Greer for his own safety? “I was scared, but I come from Northern Ireland. I survived the Troubles.”...  in October 2021 the MP Sir David Amess was killed by a terrorist who had apparently targeted him because he had voted for airstrikes on Syria years earlier. “So you never know when you’re in the clear,” said Greer as we talked in the living room of his home. The Brisoc’s allegations were “an attempt at character assassination [which] raised concerns that someone else might attempt a literal assassination”... In the summer of 2021 an assessor from another university department exonerated him... To his dismay, the module the society had complained about was taken off the syllabus. “I wanted to stand up in front of the students and say, ‘You may be aware that I was accused of Islamophobia because of what I’m about to tell you — and I was exonerated’.”... Some students sent unsolicited messages of support, but few colleagues showed solidarity. “One of the more disheartening aspects of the whole thing was that people I regarded as friends stayed completely silent.”... He immersed himself in writing a book, Falsely Accused of Islamophobia: My Struggle Against Academic Cancellation, and will publish another about Islamophobia and free speech later this year. He is research director at the Oxford Institute for British Islam, a think tank... He worries about British universities and what he describes in his book as the tendency of students and teachers to be “seduced into hunting non-existent witches”. All he did in his classes, he said, was refer students to the literature and invite them to make up their own minds. “Young people increasingly expect education to be about the delivery of information and the ‘correct’ point of view and not playing devil’s advocate or setting out a framework for debate.”"
Academic freedom is only to call for the death of Jews and the destruction of the West, not to say anything that might make "minorities" look bad (even if they did it themselves)

Government-backed Islamophobia group linked to foundation that slammed counter-extremism programme - "Supporters of a highly-controversial plan to set “appropriate limits to free speech” about Muslims have been given up to £2.6million by the Government to police and monitor “Islamophobia”. The British Muslim Trust has been awarded a £1million-a-year contract by ministers to “combat hate against Muslims”. The trust — which only launched its website today — replaces the group Tell Mama, which had done the job for the last 13 years but withdrew after what it called a “smear campaign” against it by Islamists and the far-right. The new group is co-run by the Aziz Foundation, which has said that the Government’s counter-extremism Prevent programme “actively harms Muslims”. The Aziz Foundation also funded and supported a report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims calling for a highly restrictive legal definition of “Islamophobia”. The Aziz-funded APPG report said an Islamophobia definition should set “appropriate limits to free speech” when talking about Muslims. It said that “free speech and a supposed right to criticise Islam results in nothing more than another subtle form of anti-Muslim racism”. It specifically listed “the issue of 'grooming gangs',” which it placed in inverted commas, as a “real-life example” of Islamophobia and racism. The Aziz Foundation strongly supports the APPG Islamophobia definition, saying that with its “encouragement and engagement,” almost a dozen universities have adopted it... the Aziz Foundation has also funded the Centre for Media Monitoring (CfMM), which until this month was part of the Muslim Council of Britain, which has been boycotted by ministers for more than 15 years because of its hardline views. It has also funded the Islamophobia Response Unit, which is part of the Muslim Engagement and Development, which was being assessed for extremism by the last Government. The IRU was established by Mend, which ran it until 2021. It is now independent of the organisation. Last year, then-Levelling-Up Secretary Michael Gove said in the Commons that Mend had an “Islamist orientation and views” and that it was a “divisive force within Muslim communities”... Fiyaz Mughal, the founder of Tell Mama, told GB News: “We need to look very closely at who these foundations have previously funded and if they have been involved in the production of the 2018 Islamophobia definition. “We also need to be clear about the past histories of those involved in delivering a national service and how they can include servicing members of the Ahmadiyya, LGBTQ+ Muslims and Muslims who dissent from their opinions of Islam.” He added: “They also need to show us how they will serve those individuals and actively challenge discrimination within Muslim communities against other Muslims.”"

RadioGenoa on X - "Muslims with knives, clubs and brass knuckles looking for British patriots. For Keir Starmer problem in UK is Islamophobia."

Dan Burmawi on X - "Why Sadiq Khan can tweet about “Islamophobia” more than terrorism, and critics of Islam face more institutional backlash than actual jihadists? Because in countries like the UK, France, Belgium, and Germany, Muslim communities now make up significant voting blocs, especially in urban areas. Politicians, particularly on the Left, know that criticizing Islam, or even refusing to bow to its demands, could mean electoral suicide. In the UK, the Labour Party is heavily dependent on the Muslim vote. That’s why its leaders tiptoe around issues like grooming gangs, forced marriage, or sharia influence in schools."

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "You get banned from most subs on Reddit for saying anything remotely conservative. It’s kind of hilarious this thread is just comment after comment about conservatives needing an echo chamber when they have like one sub and practically all of Reddit is a liberal echo chamber lol"

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "Years ago I was banned from one of the Bernie subs because one of the mods misinterpreted my comment as being anti-Bernie. When I messaged the mods to appeal the ban I was muted for 2 weeks. When I was finally unmuted and could appeal my ban again I wasn't even given an apology, just "friendly fire happens, get over it".  People acting like it's only the conservative subs are being willfully ignorant."
"I was banned from my favorite sub because someone posted an easily disprovable comment.  Turns out he was a mod and didn't like being disproven. Ban happy mods suck imo"
"I used to care, I don't anymore. It's just some loser flexing the only power he has in his life. If banning me makes him feel powerful then he can have it. Don't forget the part-time dog walking philosopher, that's the type of person who moderates on this site."

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "I got banned from whitepeople twitter for saying the cops who shot Breonna Taylor were wearing Police vests. That was literally it- someone said they weren't wearing anything identifying them as cops and I said "They were wearing police vests" and linked to an article showing pictures of them from that night wearing police vests. Instant permaban for going against the narrative by literally just stating a fact with zero commentary. The ban message said I was "spreading terrorist apologia".  I got banned from r/news for posting an NPR interview with Emmet Till's cousin who was with him the day he whistled at that woman that led to his murder. Someone said he didn't whistle at her and stuttered or something? And I linked to actually a few articles with Emmett's family members who were with him where they all confirmed, yeah he wolf whistled at her. I made it VERYYYYYYY clear in my comment that doesn't at all mean he deserved anything close to what happened to him- once again just clarified a fact that went against the narrative- again instant permaban.  I got banned from r/politics for pointing out those pictures of "kids in cages" that made the rounds were taken during Obama's term in 2014, with a link to the original Arizona Republic (or something) article they'd been posted in. Again instant permaban for clarifying a fact.  Again in none of these comments did I say ANYTHING remotely close to justifying what happened to Breonna Taylor/Emmett Till/unaccompanied minors crossing the border. I do not think any of those things were remotely close to justified. Literally just stated a fact with links to sources (and trustworthy sources, not like right-wing sites). Personally I'm nowhere close to right-wing, nowhere close to a Trump supporter, I just think sometimes the truth is bad enough that you don't have to lie about it? Like does it fundamentally change or justify anything that happened if we know the police who shot through the door at Breonna Taylor were wearing vests when they couldn't be seen through a door anyway? So why lie about that? But that simple fact was not allowed to be shared.  Idk people think the "big" subs on reddit like r/news or r/politics aren't just as biased and moderated as more fringe subs but they really are. (And yes I'm banned on r/conservative too, lol.)"
"I got banned for correcting someone when they said Kyle Rittenhouse "went out and killed a bunch of black people". I simply said that everybody he shot was white. Ban."
"I got banned from r/gaming for saying maybe we shouldn't wildly label people as Nazis and then advocate for violence against them."

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "I was banned in other subreddits for just commenting in certain subreddits. Like I can’t go to r pics anymore and comment.  It’s not just conservative sub Reddits at all. Worst part for me is I agree with democrats on something’s and republicans on others and disagree with both on some stuff. At least republican and libertarian subreddits still let me comment."

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "Just like anything Rask. “Older conservatives of Reddit why do believe this?”
“As a 18 socialist I can answer that they believe that because of all the leaded gasoline being used in the 60s and 70s.“"

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "Can confirm. Despite me being left and vehemently anti fascist, I am banned from more left wing subreddits than I am right wing ones.  The infighting among leftist is absurd and is the biggest reason leftists get nothing done."

Why are conservative subreddits so locked down? Are other political subreddits the same generally? : r/NoStupidQuestions - "Playing devil's advocate, as a minority if they DON'T lock the sub down it would be overrun with people who just want to contradict the entire point of the sub which is not to be an echo chamber but to talk about Conservative opinions in politics.   Every other post would be "why do conservatives think xyz" and every comment from an actual conservative person would be down voted into oblivion and within days it would be a subreddit for people to hate on conservatives.  Like every subreddit that's NOT one of theirs does.   For the record: I'm as liberal as they come.  But I live in one of the reddest red states in the country and I therefore have no voice and no safe spaces, so I emphasize with conservatives on Reddit even though I strongly disagree with literally everything they believe politically."
"To add on to your point, there’s a sub that sometimes comes across my timeline that allows people to ask a conservative/liberal and consistently I would see someone ask conservatives a question and ALL the top initial comments were removed because they weren’t conservatives; they were liberals that spoke for conservatives. Which isn’t exactly the most helpful when you’re trying to hear and understand what the other side is saying. So, while I don’t necessarily agree with highly moderated content, there is enough sufficient evidence to prove that your devil’s advocate would be correct"
"Should see posts in asktrumpsupporters. It defaults to sort by controversial, and without that it would be difficult to navigate and see the real answers. Any trump supporter who does answer gets heavily downvoted."