Oh they’re challenging topics, are they.
The Spectator can now reveal that Abdul Qader Ismail is an active member of Greens for Palestine and co-sponsored the group’s ‘Zionism is Racism’ policy. He is also the author of a book series titled An Introduction to Challenging Topics for Muslim Teens. The books provide justifications (within specific conditions) for stoning, crucification, cutting off hands and female genital mutilation.
Gosh, that is challenging.
Kunwar Khuldune Shahid writes:
Bangladesh’s response to the killing of its citizens over ‘indecency’ has been to profess ignorance and to issue a subdued request for Saudi Arabia to share legal details of the case. Suffice to say, should the kingdom offer the formality of a response, Bangladesh, like most Muslim states, would accept the sharia ruling, which brazenly tramples the sacrosanctity of human life under the intangible ‘sanctity of the mosque’. And in its deafening silence, Bangladesh would be joined by the rest of the Muslim world, where violent protests frequently erupt over sacrilegious cartoons and foreign wars.
Indeed, Muslim protesters, including in the West, are trigger-happy when it comes to unleashing any rage directed against non-Muslim entities. There is deafening silence, however, when Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, Syria or others massacre hundreds of thousands, or when jihadist groups such as Isis use Islamic scriptures to carry out some of the worst crimes against humanity.
It is self-preservation that necessitates the al-Saud family’s enforcement of sharia. Any dissension would pave the way for dissidence against the royal family’s absolutist rule over the kingdom. A totalitarian regime is best sustained by a totalitarian ideology, especially when its adherents around the world are willing to accept, if not endorse, pretty much any act of violence committed in its name.
What’s the problem here?
I didn’t even watch the whole thing, but I can tell you anyway. Starting at 43 seconds he says “…the British government has just made it compulsory for trans women like myself to be placed in male wards in hospital. [long dramatic pause] And the cruelty of that is [very soft pained voice] extraordinary.”
Oh yes? That’s cruel is it? But what about the British government making it compulsory for women to be placed in hospital wards with one or more men in them? I ask that because you see if the government says you can be placed in female wards, you’re doing the same damn thing to women that you’re so distraught about when it’s being done to you. How do you manage to overlook that fact? How do you manage to have so much tender and dramatic concern for your plight and none whatsoever for the plight of the women who would be forced to put up with you in their wards?
Sadly, we all know how. Because you’re a self-centered pig who does not give two shits about women, that’s how.
Much as I dislike agreeing with Conservative Anythings, they’re not wrong on this one.
(Anyway, as I keep pointing out, with more or less exasperation depending on circumstances, there’s always some overlap – some agreement with the Other Team and/or disagreement with Our Team.)
It always strikes me as more ridiculous than despicable, because I never can see how adults can persuade themselves to talk such silly gibberish. Why do managers of grown-up institutions like the Civil Service feel it necessary to blather about idennniny and genner expression and all the rest of it?
That man just wants to destroy everything.
A Montana District Court today granted a preliminary injunction preventing the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from removing more than 900 bison from federal land in Montana. Earthjustice and Cochenour Law Office requested the injunction on behalf of American Prairie in August, arguing that the agency misinterpreted the Taylor Grazing Act and violated federal law.
In the decision, Judge Brian Morris states, “No statutory language or judicial precedent exists that requires a livestock operation to focus exclusively on production and entirely ignore conservation, range improvement, preservation, or other values.” The Court goes on to say, “Congress recognized livestock grazing and livestock management often includes and considers preservation, improvement, and thoughtful development, hand-in-hand with other uses.”
American Prairie’s bison will now remain on public lands in Montana while the underlying lawsuit proceeds. Without the injunction, American Prairie would have had to cull or relocate hundreds of bison by the end of September.
…
For over 20 years, BLM authorized American Prairie to graze its bison on federal lands. The agency abruptly reversed course on American Prairie’s permits after the change in presidential administrations, adopting the livestock industry’s position that it had long rejected. BLM’s new position disqualifies livestock owners who prioritize conservation practices from obtaining grazing permits, even though these practices benefit rangeland and riparian health. BLM’s new test would jeopardize permits across the country for bison and other animals under BLM’s longstanding interpretation of grazing statutes.
…
American Prairie’s bison have not caused harm to public lands in Montana. On the contrary, the Bureau of Land Management itself has documented that bison grazing has improved rangeland productivity and riparian health. Bison are a keystone species, creating a cascade of environmental conditions that benefit countless other wildlife.
Yes but bison don’t vote for Trump, so away with them.
Trump ignoring a judge’s ruling again.
Trump posted on Truth Social on Sunday that “restoration work will begin” on 15 November to a historic public golf course in Washington DC despite a federal judge’s court order to pause his plans over environmental and historic preservation concerns.
US district judge Ana Reyes had ruled earlier this year that the federal government must give notice before any substantive construction work on the East Potomac golf course could proceed, and last week issued an order halting the removal of trees at the site, which she called “inexcusable”.
Trump said Sunday in a post on Truth Social that work on the golf course would begin on 15 November and that it would reopen in about 15 months. He wrote that the facility would be transformed into “one of the Best and Most Spectacular Golf Courses anywhere in the World”. Trump did not acknowledge the legal fight in his post, which included an artist’s rendering for the course redesign.
The judge in the case took notice of Trump’s online message and ordered the government to notify her by 8pm ET on Sunday whether its position had changed from a court filing Friday that said “at most” Trump has given “preliminary thought” to the rebuilding plan and “there is no final agency action”.
He hates the golf course as it is because it’s public. Public is not glamorous! Public is not shiny gold! Public is yuck! Except of course when it’s a bunch of people cheering for Trump.
The renovation is among a number of projects Trump was pursuing to reshape the White House and other Washington landmarks. Many of his projects, including plans for a huge ballroom at the White House, the installation of his own name on the Kennedy Center and construction of a massive arch, have been challenged in courts.
The 106-year-old park and golf course, alone, has been the subject of many emergency hearings as the president has sought to renovate it. While it has been open to Washingtonians of all income levels, opponents of Trump’s plans to turn it into a high-end course have argued it will alter the character of the space and make it less affordable to people.
Right, so it will keep the ooky ordinary people out.
Reyes has also ordered key members of the Republican administration to testify on the recent tree-cutting and whether those actions are tied to the president’s plans for the historical public links.
On Friday, the government filed a motion to disqualify Reyes and move the case to another district judge, saying her actions had shown “deep-seated and unequivocal antipathy” and “open hostility” toward the Trump administration, according to court records. The plaintiffs in the case oppose the motion.
Give us a different judge who will give us the ruling we want. Or else.
This is interesting. I’ve often noticed, and maybe occasionally pointed out, that Ukanians as a nation pride themselves on being ironists, especially in comparison to their gullible clueless cousins on the other side of the Atlantic. But are they ironists really? No sacred cows at all? Taking the piss about absolutely everything?
I ask that question occasionally. I did yesterday, and got a reply that I think is quite funny.
Wouldn’t it be simpler to just…not have them?
By way of illustration, consider Trump. We rip the piss out of him as fast as we can shout or scream or type – but oddly enough he’s still there. He’s still destroying everything he can reach. Taking the piss is all very well but if it doesn’t make anything happen…well there you are, stuck with the bad institution that costs a ton of money and does a lot of bad things.
Oh so that’s how they see themselves – they’re the creative people, the rebels. It’s only the dull people, the uncreative people, the people who don’t like the arts and wear grey clothes, who know that men are not women.
What has Fred ever created?
The righteous doing a righteous.
…against JK Rowling who has repeatedly called men men and faced backlash over her comments about a ridiculous fatuous anti-reality ideology that stamps all over women’s rights.
Newspapers shouldn’t lie about this stuff.
Oh dear that naughty naughty man – how rude of me to share one of his naughty remarks yet again.
Does remind me of Basil’s “Is this a piece of your brain?”
This has to be the dumbest thing the Bonehead Law Project has done to date.
Sadiq Khan: Pull the plug on transphobia
Sadiq Khan says he’s an ally of the trans community, declaring that trans rights are human rights, and that London will remain a safe, welcoming space for trans people.
So why is he allowing one of the most famous anti-trans people in the world to take over Oxford Street?
To what??? A famous person is taking over Oxford Street? How? Tanks? Poison gas? What?
Harry Potter lights in one of the busiest streets of London will not make trans people feel Christmassy, welcome, or safe.
Thud. Oh that kind of “take over” – the kind that isn’t taking over. I don’t know what “Harry Potter lights” are, but I do know that lights on streets do not equal takeovers of said streets.
I suppose I can imagine some kind of lights or decorations that could make people feel unwelcome or unsafe – Hitler-themed ones for instance. But Harry Potter? He’s a character from a children’s book series, that’s all.
JK Rowling has promised she’ll use some of the money from the new Harry Potter series to fund the anti-trans rights movement. This will only make her more money.
Khan told trans people “this city is yours too”. If he really means it, he’ll stand with the trans community, and against hate. Email him now and ask him to pull the plug on transphobia.
Shouldn’t Jolyon instead be telling everyone to write to the publishers to pulp every copy of Harry Potter they still have? Seems more direct.
Is Trump just plain married to Putin?
Trump has put on hold a sweeping new sanctions package targeting the Russian economy, telling Congress the pause on the legislation passed by both chambers was in the national interest.
In an executive order on Friday, the US president said he was waiving many sanctions, restrictions and duties on Russia, in a move that comes as he has been publicly criticising Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, including suggesting that Ukraine needs a new leader.
The move was greeted by Russian presidential envoy Kirill Dmitriev, who wrote on social media: “The Trump administration’s suspension of the Graham Act is an important and truly historic moment.”
Trump signed the legislation last month, after Congress passed the measure in an act of rare bipartisan agreement. It sought to clamp down more quickly on the flow of financial resources fuelling Russia’s war against Ukraine.
But Trump wants to fuel Russia’s war against Ukraine. Trump loves Putin and hates Zelenskyy. Trump is a simple man, and his loves and hates are right out there in the open for everyone to see.
Friday’s announcement comes a week after Trump said the US had agreed to purchase diesel from Russia to try to bring down global energy prices, upending years of US and western pressure on the Kremlin to end its war against Ukraine.
Trump said last week that Russia would immediately supply more than 300,000 metric tons of diesel, followed by an additional 500,000 tons in November and 1m tons “immediately thereafter”. Russia would deliver an additional 3m tons “within a short period of time” after that, he wrote.
The president has face widespread criticism after making the announcement, with a dozen US senators – including six Republicans – calling on Trump to rescind his diesel deal.
And annoy his darling Vlad? Never.
The Court of Appeal has refused permission to the Good Law Project (GLP) to continue to challenge
tothe Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)’s interim guidance on single-sex facilities.In February the High Court refused GLP permission to bring its claim for because it lacked “sufficient interest” to standing, and rejected a claim brought by the three individual claimants that the EHRC’s update was unlawful. It upheld the lawfulness of the EHRC’s interim update. Sex Matters intervened in the case in support of the EHRC.
Lady Justice Andrews has now refused Good Law Project (GLP) permission to appeal and adjourned the three individual claimants’ application to an oral permission hearing.
Take that, Joly! Wallop!
Let’s get the BBC version of today’s excitement.
Katie Zacharia’s stint as White House press secretary will soon end. At five days since she started the job, that’s a new record.
Yay congrats Ms Zacharia! Oh wait – that’s not really a good kind of record, is it. Oh dear.
Trump told reporters that he thought Zacharias should “reconsider” the job. The White House later confirmed to the BBC that Zacharia would be “transitioning out” of her role, but did not provide further details on the timeline of her move.
Classic Trump. He hired her, then two days later he’s all “Uhhh duhhhh I think she should reconsider, it was a dumb idea of hers in the first place.”
Zacharia has faced heavy criticism since she made her first appearance in the role on Tuesday.
The briefing lasted less than 15 minutes and saw only three questions from reporters.
Well, yes, when you put it like that it’s not really a great beginning, but…er…her shoes were too tight.
After the briefing, Trump commended her performance, but just three days later, the president seemed to have reconsidered, saying he told her “you don’t have to do this if you don’t want to” and “honestly, if I were you, I’d reconsider”.
Subtle. So so so very subtle. Also courageous.
Peak chutzpa.
They keep doing this cheat – this “men are to women as white people are to people of color” cheat. No, liars, it’s the other way around. Women do not hold the whip over men; it’s the other way around.
No, Rob, you are not Rosa Parks, and you are not a woman either.
Yet more of Trump abusing his power:
Trump on Friday [last week] asked the U.S. Supreme Court to revive his dismissed 2022 lawsuit accusing Hillary Clinton and others of conspiring to tie his 2016 campaign to Russia.
His lawsuit was dismissed because it was bullshit.
The 2022 complaint named defendants including Clinton, Trump’s Democratic opponent in the 2016 presidential race, as well as former FBI Director James Comey, the Democratic National Committee, and former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.
The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal and the sanctions in November 2025.
…
U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks dismissed the suit in September 2022 and in January 2023 imposed nearly $1 million in sanctions on Trump and his then-attorney Alina Habba, describing the complaint as a “two-hundred-page political manifesto,” Al Jazeera reported.
A three-judge panel of the appeals court, including Andrew Brasher, a Trump appointee, unanimously upheld both rulings, finding that “many of Trump’s and Habba’s legal arguments were indeed frivolous.”
Because that’s all Trump has. His head is empty; all he has is vanity and rage and spite.
Just the other day we were being told (aka shouted at) that John Cleese had become a terrible reactionary who should be shunned and denounced.
If I want to be with someone, I let them know. I don’t like to pretend. As a lesbian, that’s not always been easy. I’m old enough to remember Clause 28, old enough to remember men telling me they didn’t want me in the same changing room as their wives because I wasn’t a real woman. I knew people who’d spent fifty years in the closet but I didn’t want to live half a life.
Back then there was a lot of fear and hostility, especially in the working-class community I came from, in Kirkcaldy, Fife, but my parents were extraordinary. There was no big discussion or anything like that, just the understanding that they wanted me to be happy. In many ways they were the ones who gave me that template. Sure, they had disagreements, but it was obvious that they had each found the person they were meant to be with.
Life is a lot simpler for gay couples than it was fifty years ago — Scotland is one of the best places in Europe for civil partnerships — but there are still mountains to climb. I think the persecution of trans women has been appalling. Trans does not damage lesbianism. Womanhood is a big tent; it goes all the way from Kim Kardashian to me and everything in between. First, we bring people in, then we sort out the problems.
Well, of course womanhood is a big tent, because women are half of humanity. The tent is massive, but that doesn’t mean it includes men. If Big Tent Womanhood includes men then it’s no longer Big Tent Womanhood. Men are the opposite of women, and vice versa, so men can’t be included in womanhood; it’s a logical impossibility.
Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce at Miscellany Room 15.
Last weekend my wife and I were sitting outside at our favourite local cafe. A woman sat down at the next table. On her jacket were a number of embroidered patches. One was “NO MEANS NO.” Another said “PROTECT TRANS LIVES.” Oblivious, unironic, culture civil-war in a single jacket.
Trans lives are no way in danger, but wearing this patch is supposed to make us believe they are. They’re not an endangered species, but slogans like this are just a part of the “NO DEBATE!” gambit, which is designed to protect the ideology as much as, if not more than, trans people themselves. We have more than enough instances where questions and criticism of genderism are taken as “denying trans people’s right to exist”. This patch is basically more of the same, thought-terminating transperbole. (Pointing out the relative safety of the trans demographic would make me a transphobic bigot plotting trans genocide, exactly the sort of person against whom this this baby blue, pink, and white patch is supposed to act as a shield and talisman.)
I’d spotted the “NO MEANS NO” patch first, but somehow suspected the other one (or something like it) would be there too. Trans “rights” (at least those espoused by and for TiMs) depend almost entirely upon the violation of women’s boundaries, the deliberate flouting of “No means no.” I thought she was lucky that her jacket didn’t spontaneously combust from the cognitive dissonance to which it had been subjected.
As a coda, just before we left, while my wife was using the bathroom, the first woman was joined at her table by a second. Soon after, a TiM who was a mutual friend of the two women showed up, and Ms. Jacket (after shrieking in delighted shock at Mr. Tim’s dyed blonde hair) asked me if “she” could have the empty seat my wife was no longer using. I said sure, as we were leaving soon. Mr. Tim was taller than I am, had an unremarkable, though distinctly male voice, and sported five o’clock shadow. He wore leggings that left no doubt as to the nature of his “material reality.” I wondered if this guy was part of the impetus behind the “PROTECT TRANS LIVES” badge. I wondered if he had ever broken the spirit of the other badge by entering women’s spaces under the cover of the central lie of transactivism, that men can be women? I wondered, if push came to shove, whose side Ms. Jacket would take if a woman were to object to her male friend’s use of a woman’s restroom or changing space? Sadly, I think I already know the answer. I suspect she would protect her friend’s “trans life” by letting him violate a woman’s “No.”
What’s wrong with this menu of assertions?
First, the “deserve to be visible” item.
No they don’t. That’s just silly. Nobody “deserves” to be visible.
Perhaps the intended meaning is that trans people shouldn’t be kept out of sight as if they were the Alien, but then that’s a much more limited and hence plausible claim. It’s not clever to overreach this way on human rights issues. You just sound like a crank instead of a thoughtful observer.
Then, the second column, where all the ways we have to flatter trans people are listed. They don’t work. There are too many of them, and most of them demand too much. Sure, other things being equal, everyone deserves to be safe. All the others are extras, which depend on circumstances and facts and inconvenient criteria like that. Most of them depend on other people being massively generous with our time and attention and emotional labor, and it’s just not at all clear why we all owe that to trans people in particular. We all deserve nice things unless we don’t, and trans people don’t have some magic extra layer of deserving. Nobody is required to cherish them or celebrate them or understand them or uplift them.
All this baby talk is so cringeworthy. Feminists didn’t come bouncing up demanding love and cuddles and 24/7 attention. We demanded equal rights and an end to contempt. The basics.