Politics UK on X - "🚨 NEW: Mohammed Fahir Amaaz and Muhammad Amaad have been cleared over the alleged assault of a male police officer at Manchester Airport Two juries failed to reach a verdict and no further trial will take place"
Tom Harwood on X - "Lee Kuan Yew abolished trial by jury in Singapore after determining that it was too easy for defence lawyers to appeal to racial and religious biases of juries in multicultural Singapore. He writes in his memoirs how as a young lawyer he was able to get three clients acquitted who he was sure did commit murder. LKY writes that he "worked on the weaknesses of the jury -- their biases, their prejudices, their reluctance really to find four Muslims guilty of killing in cold blood or in a heat of great passion, religious passion, an RAF officer, his wife and child." He writes "The judge was thoroughly disgusted. I went home feeling quite sick because I knew I'd discharged my duty as required of me, but I knew I had done wrong.” Study after study shows that in multi ethnic societies, there is significant in-group bias on juries."
FischerKing on X - "The jury system isn't some static thing that emerged in England and has remained unchanged as the bedrock of common law. It started more as a fact-finding enterprise. Traveling judges, in the name of the King, would go around to hear cases in far away places, and gather evidence from the locals - this was the "jury." They were more like witnesses and fact-finders. Over time this evolved into a "jury of your peers" who decided guilt and innocence, which was a way to decentralize power away from potentially corrupt judges who might be doing the bidding of the monarch or someone else who paid him off. Now we are at a point in diverse societies where we cannot expect juries to convict guilty people for tribal or ideological reasons. Everyone remembers OJ Simpson. It was for this kind of reason that Singapore abolished juries in criminal trials back in the 1960s - because it wasn't working to administer justice. We may have to rethink the jury system in the USA - which wouldn't be the end of the world, just a recognition that things have changed."
The American Tribune on X - "The other thing is that the "jury of your peers" part came about because of the Peerage, and everyone knowing that allowing cross-class juries would lead to spite-driven rulings. Hence why until the 1950s, the Lords could choose to be tried in the House of Lords Now, the point of the jury selection process is to screen out the "peers" of a normal, productive person. Particularly, the defense of a career criminal will try to get as many of his co-ethnics on the jury as possible, screen out the learned and competent, screen out men who look like they don't like criminals, etc. And of course it's the same thing when suing some normal guy who had to defend himself from such a criminal If you aren't a multi-generational welfare lout with a penchant for criminality, to deal with a jury trial is to, in almost every case, be tried by those who are definitively not your peers"
Meme - Harrison H. Smith: "Black jurors show a 50-point swing based on the race of the defendant. That's an insane level of bias. We're talking about life-and-death decisions."
"BME= black minority ethnic jurors. This study shows that the bias in BME jurors render them utterly useless for a fair trial.
"Juror Guilty Votes by Defendant and Juror Ethnicity (n=319)"
"White Defendant Guilty - White Juror 39%, BME Juror 73%
BME Defendant Guilty - White Juror 32%, BME Juror 24%"
Dapper Detective on X - "🚨BREAKING: Judge declares mistrial in Tren de Aragua capital murder case after a Liberal packed Dallas jury remained deadlocked. These illegal aliens of a designated foreign terrorist organization kidnapped a man and his children and then executed him in front of them. UNREAL."
Councilwoman Vickie Paladino on X - "Leftist jury nullification is very real, and it’s going to destroy the last semblance of public trust in the social compact. This is happening in blue jurisdictions nationwide. If we can no longer trust juries to convict a gang member who executed a man in front of his children, we cease to have a constitutional means to persevere public order. Trust in the jury system is nothing less than the cornerstone of civil society, and the left is eagerly destroying it through identity politics and oppression theology. Once it’s gone, things will get very brutal very fast."
Unlimited L's on X - "🚨NEW: Trial for the murder of NYPD hero Jonathan Diller erupts into chaos after one jury said they couldn't reach a unanimous verdict; FOUND NOT GUILTY OF MURDER Guy Rivera, 34, was waiting for his verdict when a juror suddenly spoke up, saying the decision read in court was not unanimous When the foreman first announced an acquittal on the top charge, the fallen officer’s family broke down in the courtroom The jury later returned and confirmed Rivera was not guilty of first-degree murder He was found guilty on lesser charges, including aggravated manslaughter, attempted murder, and weapon possession Rivera was on trial for the fatal shooting of an NYPD officer during a traffic stop in Far Rockaway on March 25, 2024"
The American Tribune on X - "Jury trials don’t work because they are no longer trials of our justice-minded peers, but rather ethnic headcount’s that are determined by the in group preferences of the jurors Particularly, black and Hispanic jurors show a notable tendency to side with their ethnic group"
J.T. Alexander on X - "I prosecuted in a very heavily White area. Jury trials aren't only failing because of ethnic tribalism. They're failing in large part because a jury's expectation of evidence is cartoonishly high, completely divorced from reality. They expect *everything* to be on video nowadays. They're also failing because juries are more prone to nullification than ever before. Not for any principled reason, such as believe the crime was just, but that they simply don't trust the state to charge and punish people properly and/or they don't care. E.g., I've had DUI cases where someone who was OBVIOUSLY guilty was acquitted. Multiple. In one of them I spoke to the jury afterward and they flat out told me "All the evidence was there." They just felt bad for the defendant and wanted to go home. They're also failing because judges and statutes are more pro-criminal than ever before.
Judge Example: In a prosecution for DV Assault, I was prohibited from introducing evidence the Defendant having assaulted the victim previously, despite the fact the law in our jurisdiction explicitly allows for this, because the judge felt it was "too prejudicial." (Btw, this Defendant testified and confessed to every single element on the stand and the jury still returned a verdict of Not Guilty.)
Statute Example: I prosecuted a woman for stealing $400,000. By law, I could not even ask for jail time because it was her first offense. The Judge had no power to grant a sentence of jail time.
If you try to break the collapse of the justice system down to being only an ethnic/tribal thing, you're going to fail, because that's not anywhere near the only issue."
Yuri Bezmenov's Ghost on X - "Leftists use pathos to override logos in order to push their activism. The “pity play” is a common form of this. It disarms you by flooding you with pity, guilt, & moral urgency so your judgment and discernment never gets a chance. Cue the crying child, or the one-sided history. Then comes the demand: accept the leftist moral frame and the activism that follows. If you resist, the label is not just an insult. It’s a social activation switch, greenlighting attacks on you: “racist,” “hateful.” The point is to mobilize bystanders, raise the social cost of saying no, and make you the example so others learn that compliance is the price of staying “decent.”"
Santa Clara University’s Crazy Idea of Human Sexuality - WSJ - "Recently, I walked out of class. Prof. Chongzheng Wei had just played a video of a female “influencer” engaging in sexual bondage activity. When the lights came up, the professor smiled and asked if we wanted to try it ourselves. Maybe it was a crass joke to break the tension, but I didn’t want to find out if a live demonstration was next. What began as a simple accommodation request in a required course called Human Sexuality turned into a case study in the reshaping of therapy training—not by science but by critical theory, a worldview that filters human experience through left-wing assumptions about power, oppression and identity, particularly regarding race, “gender” and sexuality. The first time I enrolled in the course, students were assigned to read sadomasochistic erotica and a book called “The Guide to Getting It On,” featuring sexually explicit illustrations. We were told to write an eight- to 10-page “comprehensive sexual autobiography,” which could include early sexual memories, masturbation, current experiences, and future goals with an action plan—all uploaded to a third-party platform for grading. The syllabus allowed that students “are not required to disclose anything that causes extreme discomfort,” but that disclaimer rang hollow attached to an assignment requiring us to discuss such personal matters. On ethical and religious grounds, I requested an alternative assignment. Cary Watson, the department chairman, denied my request, suggesting I change my plans and pursue a different type of license. In an email, she described the course as “an ‘inoculation’ of sorts . . . exposing you to content you *might* come across” as a licensed therapist. She told me that if I did encounter such things in a professional setting, I could “assuredly communicate that discomfort” to clients and decline to work with them. So why did it have to be part of my training? I appealed to the dean, the provost, the Title IX office, the university president and even Campus Ministry. I’m not sure who was more shocked, the priest reading the syllabus or me, screen-sharing sexually explicit videos and images with him. The course is a graduation requirement, so I re-enrolled with Mr. Wei, who is new to the school. I requested the same accommodation that Ms. Watson said “Muslim women students” had received: to complete the course remotely. Mr. Wei instead scheduled a Zoom meeting with me. He promised a professional tone and said sexual disclosure wouldn’t be required. But in the classroom, among other things, he showed a how-to bondage video featuring a submissive wearing a “gimp suit” (a full-body garment designed to restrict movement) and played songs like “WAP” and “I Beat My Meat”—racial slurs included. A guest speaker, a male transgender psychologist, told us “only trans women have p—s that can blow up the world” and described being sexually aroused while looking in the mirror. One exercise included anonymously writing down something we disliked about our genitals or breasts, to be read aloud in class by another student. I again requested to complete the course remotely. I was told no—I could drop the course or be dropped. Ms. Watson granted a “one-time exception”: take the W (for withdrawal, not win), pay out of pocket for a continuing-education course to fulfill licensure requirements, and enroll in an extra three units at Santa Clara to be eligible to graduate. When I asked for a tuition refund, she called my request “astonishing.” My objections weren’t treated as signs of a systemic issue but as a personal grievance to be managed quietly. (Ms. Watson didn’t respond to a request for comment from my editor at the Journal. Mr. Wei referred the editor’s inquiry to a university spokeswoman, who offered no comment on the record.) When I went public anonymously on Substack, I realized I had stumbled onto something larger. The entire field of educating therapy has been hollowed out and filled in with critical theory. Therapists are no longer trained to be neutral; they’re trained to be agents of political change. Concepts like modesty and marital privacy aren’t merely treated as optional or even dismissed. They’re seen as oppressive norms to be actively combated. In Multicultural Counseling, we were told that “objective, rational, linear thinking,” “delayed gratification,” and making a “plan for the future” are traits of “white culture.” I was required to preface mock therapy sessions by “naming my whiteness” and warning that I might misread clients because of my race. In Human Sexuality, we were taught that children with six months of “gender distress” should be “affirmed” in their belief that they are of the opposite sex—without deeper assessment, even when trauma or autism was present. These ideas are being promoted by the field’s top bodies. The American Psychological Association, American Counseling Association and Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs have adopted standards grounded in critical theory. Therapists influence decisions about “gender transition,” family custody, school discipline and even criminal sentencing. When clinicians are trained to see everything through an ideological lens, rather than with ethical neutrality, the consequences extend far beyond the therapy room."
Facebook - "Naomi asked for the same remote accommodation that Muslim students were given for their human sexuality class at Santa Clara University. As a Christian, she was denied. In just two classes, she was told to discuss m*sturbation in a mixed group and later write an 8–10 page “sexual autobiography”—including her past, present, and future erotic goals. This is what passes for “education” in therapy programs today. Watch episode 1207 of Relatable for my entire interview with Naomi."
Naomi Best on X - "Blew the whistle in @WSJopinion on ideological rigidity in therapy training. A week later, I am fired from my internship with the regret of my boss. This field is in crisis. The public needs to know."
Ontario Proud on X - "#REPORT: The Waterloo Region District School Board admits that they spent over $175,000 to rename Sir John A. Macdonald Secondary School. The WRDSB only released the full cost after Ishan Acharya, a 10th grade student at the school, submitted a Freedom of Information request."
Damn Poilievre wasting money on an unnecessary by-election! But when it pushes the left wing agenda the amount spent is a rounding error. Not to mention they wanted to spend millions to rename Dundas Street
Meme - "The 34-Year-Old Anti-Asoomer
"You can't just assuuume that."
Believes literally no generalization is valid
Confuses being a free-thinker with refusing to acknowledge obvious patterns
"I can't argue with that data, but every individual is different. You can't make blanket statements."
Believes past incidents have absolutely no predictive power regardless of closely correlated they are
Demands carefully collected data to support basic anecdota observations
Hides behind the moral shield of individualism to explain away things he doesn't want to acknowledge. Fine with assumptions that suit his beliefs."
Meme - Seth Simons @sasimons: "Mark Normand says Netflix asked him to remove a joke about Muslims from his new special, and he told him he'd only do it on condition they admit Muslims are "a dangerous people" - which he says they did"
Seth Simons @sasimons: "Mark Normand on his new special: "I hit every group. I feel like everybody does trans jokes; I do trans, Mexican, Black, gay, Muslim, everyone. Equal opportunity. I'm inclusive... I'm writing jokes that I would want to hear or my friends growing up would want to ..."
Ottawa announces funding for new initiative to support young Muslims in the Maritimes - "The federal funding will support the Ummah Society’s new youth initiative, supported through Public Safety Canada’s Youth Gang Prevention Fund. The project, Gang Busters: Reducing Youth Violence and Gang Involvement, focuses on Muslims aged 15 to 30 in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The government says it will address risk factors such as social isolation, discrimination, and economic instability."
Isn't it Islamophobic to say that Muslims are more likely to join gangs?
Mike Solana on X - "yeah no, we need to 100x the muslim jokes. until a comic can mock islam without *fearing for his life* we have a problem on our hands, and it isn't islamophobia."
Lachlan Markay on X - "As @DouthatNYT put it after the Charlie Hebdo shooting: “If a large enough group of someones is willing to kill you for saying something, then it’s something that almost certainly needs to be said, because otherwise the violent have veto power over liberal civilization, and when that scenario obtains it isn’t really a liberal civilization any more. Again, liberalism doesn’t depend on everyone offending everyone else all the time, and it’s okay to prefer a society where offense for its own sake is limited rather than pervasive. But when offenses are policed by murder, that’s when we need more of them, not less, because the murderers cannot be allowed for a single moment to think that their strategy can succeed.” https://archive.nytimes.com/douthat.blogs."
Nurseries urged to report racist toddlers’ hate crimes to police - "Welsh nurseries have been advised to report children for “racist incidents” in guidance backed by the Labour Government. The taxpayer-funded guidance for childminders aims to make nurseries and play groups “anti-racist” environments. Childcare workers are advised to call police if a “racist incident” occurs that could be deemed a hate crime. Advised actions include calling 999 for emergencies, or otherwise speaking to police officers and taking “relevant action in conjunction with the police, ensuring you record all details of the incident”. If the incident is not a hate crime, childcare workers can instead take steps including offering “age-appropriate learning support opportunities for the perpetrator”. Should this be “met with resistance”, childcare workers are advised to draw up a “disciplinary route”, with various outcomes explained in a flowchart... Childcare professionals are advised to audit their spaces to ensure that books, dolls, posters and displays are suitably diverse, and to “make sure your anti-racist stance is visible”, including in snacks provided. The guidance also tells workers: “Toileting practices vary across cultures. These practices may be very different from your own, but it does not make them unsanitary or incorrect.” The toolkit suggests that a risk assessment could be undertaken by leaders to protect “global majority” staff against the threat of racism, which it says has been heightened by a “changing political context” and “racist demonstrations taking place across the UK”. This guidance is contained in a document created by Diversity and Anti-Racist Professional Learning. The organisation, based at Cardiff Metropolitan University, has been allocated more than £1.3m by the Welsh Government since 2021, and Labour ministers have endorsed its teaching in Wales. Guidance, including advice on reporting hate crime, has also been shared by the National Day Nurseries Association... The toolkit advises that it is “never too early” to speak to children about skin colour, and that children should be told about the “beauty/complexity of melanin”... In 2022, following Black Lives Matter protests, Welsh Labour announced plans to make Wales an anti-racist nation by 2030."
Thread by @America1stLegal on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "🚨EXPOSED — Biden CIA’s War on Motherhood: Newly released CIA documents reveal the Biden Administration identified “motherhood” and “homemaking” as indicators of “white racially and ethnically motivated violent extremism” (REMVE).
The intelligence assessment reveals the top-to-bottom bias at Biden’s CIA. An agency with critical intelligence responsibilities was spending its resources targeting women promoting motherhood. The Trump Administration recently retracted a 2021 intelligence assessment titled “Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment.” The now-retracted CIA intelligence assessment defines “white REMVE-sympathetic” actors as those who “may not openly advocate violence” but instead amplify “narratives” about “perceived threats” from multiculturalism and globalization.
What are these “narratives” that Biden’s CIA viewed as threats? Promoting TRADITIONAL MOTHERHOOD and HOMEMAKING as “women’s most important responsibility.” Motherhood and homemaking may be added to the list of other everyday behaviors that made everyday Americans “radicalization suspects” under the Biden Administration.
The CIA intelligence assessment is just the latest example of the Biden Administration’s War on Parents, in addition to its other efforts like branding concerned parents as “domestic terrorists.” Biased intelligence products like this undermine Americans’ confidence in the federal government — and reveal yet another viewpoint the Biden Administration treated as a domestic terror threat. After branding mothers, parents, and government critics as domestic terrorists, the Biden Administration utilized the full force of the federal government to censor them. The Biden Administration didn’t stop there. It also coordinated with foreign governments to censor domestic extremist threats.
President Trump has rightfully retracted this Biden-era CIA intelligence assessment. U.S. intelligence agencies exist to protect Americans — not target them."
Paul on X - "I still think this is the wildest police footage I've seen. Guy is the victim of a hit and run, tells dispatch he's going to follow the guy because he looks like he's going to run and black, and the officer lets the hit and run driver go while citing the victim because of "Racism". This is Green Bay Wisconsin. People will look at this and say "White men aren't discriminated against"."
Farewell to the Liberal Patriot - WSJ - "The Liberal Patriot announced Thursday that it is shutting down after five years of what president and executive editor John Halpin called “upsetting the partisan applecart” with its signature mix of “economic nationalism and cultural moderation.” TLP was a home for sane liberals. Neither party seemed to want to hear its message. But I did. So I’m very sad to see it go. Ruy Teixeira co-founded TLP with Mr. Halpin in December 2020 to push the Democratic Party toward a “pro-worker, pro-family, pro-America” platform. Mr. Teixeira signed off with a lengthy post Thursday outlining what he considers the problems Democrats must solve if they’re going to figure out a way back to the “vital center” of American politics. The first problem is cultural, specifically “the yawning gap between the cultural views of the Democratic Party, dominated by liberal professionals, and those of the median working class voter.” The Democrats are too haughty, too elite, too cocksure. They believe things about race, sex, biology and economics that are alien to most Americans. And they are pigheaded about it. They expect hatred of Trump to force normies to hold their noses and join the unruly coalition of angry misfits and smiling communists who increasingly set the Democratic agenda. Problem No. 2 is the inability of Democrats to figure out how to appeal to working-class and rural voters... The third problem is related to the first two: the trans issue, which Mr. Teixeira calls “a massive political liability” and “the most potent exemplar of Democrats’ lack of connection to the real world of ordinary Americans.” Most people think Democrats have completely lost their minds on this matter. Until they come back to earth on simple, objective, biological reality, Democrats aren’t going to get anywhere with the middle of the country. Immigration is problem No. 4. Democrats are for the unrealistic policy of open borders. Over time, Mr. Teixeira writes, the “intense unpopularity” of this position “has contributed hugely to tanking Democrats’ working-class support.” If Democrats want to win back the working class, they have to come up with an approach other than let ’em all in. Problem No. 5 for Democrats is economics. In Mr. Teixeira’s eyes, their policy has been mostly subsumed by the green agenda and sloganeering—“tax the rich,” etc. Their latest empty catchphrase is “affordability.” So far, he writes, Democrats have offered nothing on affordability other than a “grab bag of price caps and controls, subsidies and new regulations.” In other words, a return to the Biden economy that Americans ran from in 2024. They ran like it had the cooties...
'Looking over this list of problems, one thing that stands out to me is that Democrats have never come to terms with how profoundly mistaken many of their priorities have been. These haven’t just been minor errors in implementing an otherwise fine program. Much of the program was simply wrong and, arguably, not even progressive. It’s time—past time—for Democrats to discard the conceit that they are on the right side of history and that therefore their positions are, and have been, noble and correct. Until they do so, I do not expect them to develop the dominant majority coalition they seek and vanquish right populism. Indeed, it could be the other way around. That’s a sobering thought.'"
Thread by @aimeeterese on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Biden was giving a giant pot of money exclusively to black farmers ($2 billion), they still complained even though it was so discriminatory as to have been found illegal by SCOTUS, Trump winds back this measure & black farmers refuse to do the paperwork necessary to get his grants, reframe it as racism & exclusion from the program. You can’t make this shit up.
Refuse to do the paperwork to get the money, blame the admin & call them white supremacists."
Thread by @lymanstoneky on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "A LOT of people look at the mental illness diagnosis data and assume that conservatives stigmatize seeking help so just get fewer DIAGNOSES. This view is false, and we can prove it. Conservatives really are mentally healthier.
The Pew survey has diagnosed mental illness, has a battery of questions about mental health (anxiety, deepression, happiness, worry, loneliness, etc), and has ideology. We can ask, of respondents who have THE SAME REPORTED MENTAL HEALTH, do rates of DIAGNOSIS differ by ideology? I include controls for age, race, and sex. Here's rates of diagnosis by ideology and intensity of mental health symptoms. As you can see, among bad-mental-health-symptomatic people, conservatives have the SAME diagnosis rate as liberals. In fact, "very conservative" people who are in the upper-third most sad, lonely, worried, anxious people have HIGHER rates of being diagnosed than liberals! So when it comes to people with the "highest third" of bad mental health symptoms (i.e. plausibly mentally ill people), there is NO DIFFERENCE is dignosis by ideology.
There IS a difference among people with low-to-moderate symptoms of poor mental health. But.... that proves the point of conservative resiliency! Liberals have higher rates of mental illness because liberals who are NOT objectively experiencing bad mental health nonetheless PURSUE DIAGNOSES.
In other words, the difference in diagnosed mental illness between conservatives and liberals has two factors:
1) Conservatives are actually happier, less worried, less anxious
2) Objectively fairly-mentally-well liberals nonetheless pursue diagnoses of mental illness
If you want to say conservatives are just "undiagnosed mentally ill," then prove it. Shoe me evidence that conservatives have worse mental health in terms of symptoms, and show me evidence that poor-mental-health conservatives go undiagnosed. It's not there...
Yes, conservatives probably observe emergent negative affect and respond in the healthy way, that is, not identifying with that negative affect. If we assume all people experience emergent episodes of negative affect at similar rates, we must ask why for some people it seems to metastasize so much. Many factors, external, genetic, social, etc matter. Among those many factors, one contributor however is exactly what @JonHaidt flags: how you cognitively respond to emergent negative affect. CBT gives one particular healthy script.
CBT is not the only possible healthy script for responding to emergent negative affect. But the point is, we do know some very UNHEALTHY scripts, which CBT helps name, that basically boil down to dwelling on negativity all the time. So the argument that conservatives actually are experiencing unhappiness, but just not reporting them, is dubious, because it presupposes that people experiencing emergent unhappiness SHOULD preserve that mental state long enough to report it. But that argument.... is itself arguing IN FAVOR OF cognitive scripts that we know lead to poor mental health! It's an ouroboros!
Now, I am not arguing FOR repression. But I am saying that in principle if you start to feel sad for no super strong reason it is not unreasonable to try to focus on happier things and to not give the sadness power over your life by identifying with it. Notice, acknowledge, move on, and when you take a survey the next day, ask yourself what defined the day, not what happened for 3 minutes before you moved on."
Clearly, this proves that conservatives are in denial and refuse to seek out help for their mental illness, and getting a professional diagnosis so you can identify as ill and a victim when you have minimal symptoms is very important and healthy. There is no problem of overdiagnosis, only underdiagnosis and everyone is crazy. Because it was posted on Twitter and doesn't push the left wing agenda, even though Lyman Stone has a PhD in Sociology at McGill University and has worked at many organisations in related fields, anyone citing this is a joke and not credible
