All posts by gcw

Archbishop Peter Wilson and the (mis)use of faulty law

Philip Wilson’s dead letter day

Fr Frank Brennan in Eureka Street

The show trial of Archbishop Philip Wilson has backfired badly causing hurt to many people, most especially victims of child sexual abuse who thought the law was being rightly applied to put an errant Catholic bishop in the frame.

Wilson was charged under a provision of the New South Wales Crimes Act, section 316, which has hardly ever been used. It’s a provision which was introduced in 1990. It was reviewed by the New South Wales Law Reform Commission in 1999 and comprehensively trashed. Some commissioners thought the provision should be abolished. Others thought it should be retained.  Read on…

Can Catholics ever trust the ABC?

The following appeared in Gerard Henderson’s popular Media Watch Dog No. 435, 7 December 2018.

HOW THE DRUM REPORTED FR. PHILLIP WILSON’S CONVICTION BUT IGNORED HIS ACQUITTAL

Fr Philip Wilson, the former Catholic Archbishop of Adelaide, was found guilty by Magistrate Robert Stone in Newcastle Local Court on 3 July 2018 of failing to report a child sex abuse allegation.  The prosecution maintained that Fr Wilson had been told that a Catholic priest was a child sex abuser in the mid-1970s and that he had failed to report this matter to NSW Police between April 2004 and January 2006 – as required by Section 316A of the NSW Crimes Act.

That night Julia Baird presented The Drum on ABC TV with a panel that comprised Dee Madigan, Stephen O’Doherty, Megan Motto and Karen Middleton.   It was a total pile-on against Fr Wilson. So much so that even Dr Baird declared “there seems to be a consensus on the panel here” – having previously bagged the Catholic Church herself for what she described as “obstructive clericalism”.

The pile-on occurred despite the fact that neither the panellists nor the presenter had read Magistrate Stone’s judgment. Indeed, the judgment is still not readily available –as Fr Frank Brennan documents in his article titled “Philip Wilson’s dead letter day” in today’s edition of Eureka Street.

Yesterday in the Newcastle District Court, Judge Roy Ellis overturned Magistrate Stone’s decision. He found that Fr Wilson should not have been convicted beyond reasonable doubt.  Judge Ellis, while believing that the complainant in this case was an honest witness, said that he was not satisfied with the accuracy of some of the complainant’s recollections.  He found that Fr Wilson was an honest and forthright witness. Judge Ellis also held that it was possible for entirely honest individuals like the complainant to have false memories.

So what did The Drum do last night with respect to Judge Ellis’ decision?  Nothing. Absolutely nothing.  The case was covered by ABC TV News but ignored by The Drum and 7.30.

When Fr Wilson was convicted by Magistrate Stone, the ABC reported that this was a finding of international significance and discussed the case at length.  However, when Fr Wilson was acquitted by Judge Ellis, the matter was not covered by The Drum or 7.30.

The decision in R v Phillip Edward Wilson has been released with certain names redacted.

The Romance of Edmund Burke

For those of us who love Russell Kirk, T.S. Eliot, and Irving Babbitt, the extravagantly convoluted term, “the moral imagination,” rolls readily off the tongue and warms the heart like few other things. Yet, most of our closest allies on the right scratch their collective and individual heads in confusion. “What is this moral imagination,” they ask in some understandable bewilderment. The term comes from Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France. It only appears once in this seminal writing, but it is the cornerstone of the entire work. And, yet, even for those of us who love the term and the concept… we too easily employ it, more often than not, out of its context, thus rendering this precious Burkean-ism somewhat un-Burkean.  Read on…

UK Spectator’s books of the year

Andrew Motion

Regular reviewers choose the best — and most overrated — books of 2018

Short stories seem to fare better in the US than the UK, and among this year’s rich crop, Deborah Eisenberg’s Your Duck is My Duck (Ecco, £20.70) is outstanding.
Everything about Eisenberg’s writing is highly controlled — watchful, well-made — and everything it describes teeters on the verge of chaos or collapse. It makes for a brilliant mixture of a book — at once compact and capacious, eerily familiar and extremely strange.

Roger Lewis

One of my favourite authors is Laura Thompson. Her biographies of sundry Mitfords, of Agatha Christie and Lord Lucan (recently revised in the light of the unpleasant Countess’s demise) are brilliant and forensic. This year she published a memoir of her grandmother, The Last Landlady (Unbound, £16.99), which is a typically eclectic mix of social history and elegy, ironic comedy and indelible Englishness. It is about the pub as theatre, and like everything else worth cherishing, pubs are closing down — replaced with gender-neutral lavatories, compulsory veganism and virtue-signalling teetotalism.

A Hero for High Times (Cape, £16.99), Ian Marchant’s account of being a wild old hippie with a bucket for a toilet in a copse on the Welsh Marches, made me laugh.

Matthew Sturgis’s biography of Oscar Wilde, Oscar: A Life (Head of Zeus, £25) made me furious. How idiotic to trail this book as putting Richard Ellmann right, when it is full of copycat flourishes. Ellmann, for example, in 1987, called Bosie Douglas ‘totally spoiled, reckless, insolent and, when thwarted, fiercely vindictive’. Sturgis now says Bosie was ‘selfish, spoilt, vain, intemperate, needy and demanding’. It is like a bad translation.  Read on…

Muhammad’s Bloody Creed

Islamic groups, leftists and empty-headed multiculturalists did everything they could to foil the publication of Robert Spencer’s new book on the history of jihad. No wonder. With the possible exception of thuggee stranglers, there has never been a religion more devoted to rape, murder and conquest.

The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS
Robert Spencer
Bombadier Books 2018

Once upon a time in a primitive land of polytheist idolaters far, far away, an egomaniac zealot with high ambitions hit on a bright idea.  On learning of the ancient Jewish prophecy of a Messiah, and the newish Christian communities’ worship of Jesus as the “Chosen One”,  he decided to nominate himself  as the latest in the line – the  Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets.  If the Angel Gabriel could give the name ‘Jesus’ to Mary, why couldn’t Gabriel be recruited to authenticate Muhammad’s pronouncements?

The polytheists who worshipped 360 idols in the Ka’aba of Mecca thought this was fake news and made life difficult for the would-be prophet-poet. In thirteen years he attracted only 150 followers.  So he decamped to another town. The Jews of Medina first welcomed him as a protector, but after they heard his story about travelling to Jerusalem and then to Paradise on a winged white horse with a human head, and questioned him on religion, they declared him a phony. Muhammad decided a new business model was needed: conversion by the sword. Beginning as a highwayman raiding passing caravans, he invented a unique rallying cry: “Allahu Akbar!” (My) God is the Greatest!  The shout inspired his followers to kill, loot and enslave. It continues to terrify the world 1400 years. later.   Read on…

The rise and rise of virulent anti-white racism

No one should miss Jennifer Oriel’s commentaries in the Australian. Here’s her latest 5 Nov 2018. It’s too important to remain behind a paywall.

FIRE-BREATHING SISTERS JUST TRUMP THEIR OWN GENDER
Stupid, brainless and servile. It’s how the American sisterhood describes women who vote Republican. Ahead of the US mid-term elections, left-wing sexism has reached fever pitch. While claiming to support women’s right to vote, the Left has subjected women who vote right to dehum­anisation, public shaming and mis­ogyny. White women are bearing the brunt of the Left’s hate speech as desperate Democrats try to coerce conformity among female freethinkers.

Shortly after the 2016 US election, pundits revealed a shocking truth: millions of women had voted freely, and had freely chosen Donald Trump for president. Exit polls revealed white women were the culprits. Supposed progressives responded with vile speech about Republican women the content of which rivalled the sexist diatribes 19th-century men used to silence the suffragettes. Like the suffragettes, women who vote conservative are deemed too stupid to vote rationally.

Continue reading The rise and rise of virulent anti-white racism

What is MGTOW?

The ‘Men Going Their Own WAY’ movement, at least the current social expression, has its origins in the early 2000s. It has only come up on my radar recently – say, in the last twelve months. Then, again, I only twigged to the rampant anti-white racism around the same time.

MGTOW seems allied to Men’s Rights Activism (MRA).  A number of popular US (female) youtubers are pleading the cause of men’s disadvantage in our thoroughly feminised society while Bettina Arndt seems to be the only Australian dealing with it. She has an embarrassing sympathy for the complaints of MRAs and MGTOWs.

It is Karen Straughn, though, who best articulates men’s disadvantages – the law is stacked against them, for a start. Her ‘Reponse to Jordan Peterson’s comments on MGTOW’ is a compelling presentation, informative right to the last minute.

Men are not marrying – why?

Karen Straughn is a popular youtuber who talks about men and their place in modern (feminist) society. An attempt in 2012 to explain why men are retreating from (feminized) society and avoiding marriage has drawn 1.9 million views and 33,000 comments. Her views are not what your average finger-wagging feminist wants to hear, and what should frighten the life out of the average young woman who wants it all, including marrying a reliable man and having children.