Category Archives: Politically Incorrect

Tuesday October 22, 2019

Today, readers debate the funding and fashion of public art, and question if Adelaide needs so many local councils.

Commenting on the story: Unloved statue to call Adelaide home in 2020

The absurd debacle of the Terrance Plowright sculpture that has already become a perpetual headache for Adelaide highlights the need for greater transparency and public accountability in the practice of gifting cultural material of questionable merit to our major public institutions, in this case the Art Gallery of South Australia.

Did the gift provide a big tax deduction to the philanthropist who donated it?

Who determined the seemingly inflated value of $2 million for an unwanted public sculpture with a dubious political history and no apparent critical support for its merits?

Given the obvious practical liabilities of the gift, why did AGSA consider it an acceptable addition to its collection of Australian contemporary art, when the artist has almost no national reputation beyond his various projects for local councils and community organisations within his own region in NSW?

Australias scheme that provides generous tax incentives for gifts to public cultural institutions is exemplary in its intentions, but too often questionable in its execution.

The reliance on tax deductible donations has also allowed state governments like that in South Australia to avoid their responsibility to provide adequate funding for acquisitions.

In short, the practice needs a serious public review to ensure that proper standards of probity and cultural value are maintained. Bruce Adams

The recycling of unloved sculpture gives pause for thought.

I recall that the now-loved statue of Queen Victoria between the QVB and the Town Hall in Sydney came from an Irish rubbish dump, doubtless placed there when she became politically incorrect after 1921.

The Romans were more direct, usually re-cutting the facial features to those of someone more acceptable to the next generation or simply destroying the offending items in a process neatly called damnatio.

The Liberal party rooms in Canberra seem to preserve their images of past Prime Ministers, even those who were dumped by machination or, like John Howard, by his electorate at the ballot box. Dont they care?

Think of the fuss about portraits of Margaret Thatcher. And then what will happen to images of Trump? J R Green

Commenting on the story: Mayoral interference claim over city councillor motions

When I came from Queensland (where the Brisbane City Council is reasonably effective for the whole city ) I was shocked to see the number of small suburban councils in Adelaide.

I understand the argument for local representation, but surely in a city the size of Adelaide one united council can achieve lower costs and more strategic planning. Julanne Sweeney

Send us anemail, making it clear which story youre commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put Reader views in the subject.

Well publish the best comments in a regular Reader Views post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Goherefor an explanation.

InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to become an InDaily supporter.

Powered by PressPatron

View post:
Your views: on an unloved sculpture, and cutting councils - InDaily

You know the world is twisted when a top Pakistani Twitter trend after the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) decision on Friday was #indiafailedatfatf, with everyone sharing interviews of loose-tongued Indian politicians.

It is only a marginal concern that FATF has retained Pakistan in the grey list, issuing a set of withering criticisms that should throw up red flags all over Pakistan. The roadmap is clear after February 2020, when Pakistans current reprieve expires, it would face a series of actions that are currently used only against Iran.

Look at the FATF kicker in the last line of its post-plenary statement, where it excoriates Pakistan for barely comprehending the enormity of its actions or lack thereof: should significant and sustainable progress not be made across the full range of its action plan by the next Plenary, the FATF will take action, which could include the FATF calling on its members and urging all jurisdictions to advise their financial institutions to give special attention to business relations and transactions with Pakistan.

This language is uncannily similar to what has been used against Iran, which, along with North Korea, are the only two in the blacklist.

Pakistan did not escape the FATF blacklist because China, Malaysia and Turkey stood by it, though that played a part. Almost all countries at the FATF plenary used this argument: throwing Pakistan off the cliff would crash its economy and whatever government-army cocktail is in charge there would come under increasing pressure.

The issue of terror-funding would not be addressed, terrorist groups would continue to be able to access funds, launder money, etc, and basically become bigger monsters than they are already. And lets not forget the nukes.

Its a familiar argument and used for Pakistan by a world that continues to need it for several things. It brought many of the countries together in Paris this past week. With FATF holding three plenaries and therefore six reviews in a year, Pakistan will have its nose to the grindstone regarding increased compliance.

Increasingly too, a new tactic is discernible Pakistan may not be placed formally on the blacklist, but FATF is unobtrusively but surely tightening the screws.

The warning to financial institutions on transactions in Pakistan is a red flag that it can ignore at its own peril. But the army-Imran Khan combo are more likely to believe that since Pakistan gets regular billion-dollar lifelines from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and China, they can ride this through. Pakistan may not be on the blacklist, but they are not getting out of the grey list for a long time to come.

Meanwhile, in India, a sense of unrealism pervades. Nobody seriously following this issue in government ever thought Pakistan would get into the blacklist. But between ministers who should know better and mindless mavens on TV, public opinion was whipped up into a frenzy about supposed colour shades at the FATF grey, light grey, dark grey, purple, black, jet black and what have you. None of which exists, by the way. FATF does not put anybody on a blacklist, a usage deemed politically incorrect since 2012.

A public statement has replaced the blacklist, as in the case of Iran, and proactive counter measures have replaced what used to be the jet black grade, as in the case of North Korea. India, however, has been the most assiduous in collecting and analysing information regarding Pakistans egregious actions on terror funding, among others, and this goes a long way in being able to nail Pakistans lies.

So, no, Indian FATF diplomacy has not failed, but our diplomacy would be much better served if spinmeisters actually knew what they were shouting about. Once again, highlighting the growing convergence between India and the US, both countries had coordinated their positions last week, despite the fact that the US State Department remains, as ever, in awe of Pakistan actually arresting a couple of terror leaders days before the FATF plenary. It was Chinas first plenary as head of FATF, and, by all accounts, Xiangmin Liu acquitted himself rather well.

Will the continued pressure on Pakistan prevent it from openly exporting terrorism into India? You would think so, right? You would also, as always when it comes to Pakistan, be wrong.

Their desperation and pressure from the jihadi ecosystem is apparently proving too much for them. The security establishment in India has detected a quantum jump in terrorist infiltration into Kashmir in the past couple of months (and September figures arent out yet). Terror threat levels in the Kashmir valley are at an all-time high. The worry is the increased possibility of terror attacks in other parts of India as well.

The removal of Article 370 robbed Pakistan of a fundamental pillar of its domestic, international and security policy. Its not going to give up without a fight. India has to expect that Pakistan will exploit every tool that it can remotely lay its hands on. But we can also expect Pakistan to overplay its hand, as its loyalists in the US recently did, by feeding that countrys lawmakers that the Indian government was playing piped Hindu music in the Valley to indoctrinate Muslims. Mamata Banerjee has been playing piped Rabindra Sangeet on Kolkatas crossings for years. By now, the rest of the country should be singing, too.

Read more:
FATF Actions: Pakistan is under severe international pressure that India has helped mount - Economic Times

The left is becoming more unapologetically totalitarian every day. Every freedom-loving American should be alarmed.

From hounding conservatives out of restaurants to spitting on Trump supporters at rallies, from firing employees for politically incorrect statements to fining people for misgendering a person, the left is on a path toward absolutism.

Even some former and current leftists have recognized this intolerant trend and broken from their colleagues, lamenting their intolerance of opposing ideas and disturbing mission to suppress dissenting opinion.

Just the other day, three incidents typifying the lefts authoritarianism popped out at me as I was surveying the morning news.

The Federalist reported that venues in three North American cities Toronto, Brooklyn and Portland canceled screenings of a movie about Canadian psychologist and author Jordan Peterson because of leftist criticism. Peterson exploded onto the scene in recent years with his no-nonsense, brilliant and clear-eyed critique of insane cultural trends, especially those concerning gender.

Petersons book 12 Rules for Life is wildly popular, and there are countless viral videos featuring his encounters with various leftist interviewers, panelists and audience members who have tried and failed to entrap him on a number of issues, and been reduced in every case to blundering, ineffectual bullies. If you havent partaken of these videos, you owe it to yourself to witness one arrogant leftist after another being gobsmacked by the simple weapon of unadulterated logic. These videos are irresistibly contagious and imminently satisfying for those longing to see intellectually defenseless, virtue-signaling finger waggers brought to their knees through the medium of polite debate.

Peterson, you see, wont kowtow to the leftists demand that we embrace the tenets of gender ideology, which teaches that gender is less about biology and more about personal identification. He refuses to support laws that criminalize ones failure to use a persons preferred pronouns, such as they instead of she.

Peterson has the temerity to say that men and women are biologically different, and that gender is not a fluid, human construct. That doesnt sit well with the left, who not only insists that we accept its cockeyed ideas as normal but also advocates imposing them on us by force of law.

Can you get your mind around the irony of the left banning a movie about Peterson because hes dangerous? Who is more dangerous: a person who peaceably expresses an opinion that happens to be supported by thousands of years of human experience and common sense, or those who try to ban his voice or even a movie about it? This is 1984-level scary, and its getting worse by the hour.

On what possible grounds is the left arguing that Petersons views are dangerous? He doesnt advocate violence; he isnt a rabble-rouser or revolutionary. He simply states his opinion instead of genuflecting to the despotic left.

But they claim that if Petersons views are openly expressed, he might convince other people that hes right, and that could lead to the proliferation of conservative thought. Petersons conservative perspectives on feminism and gender, according to an opinion piece in The New York Times, are very popular among young men and often are a path to more extreme content and ideologies. Think about this. Conservative speech is dangerous because it is a slippery slope to the adoption of conservative ideas? This must be satire. Do these clueless cranks know how ridiculous they sound?

Again, who is more extreme and dangerous: Jordan Peterson, who advocates the silencing of no one and expresses mainstream opinions, or leftists, who are actively trying to censor Peterson?

Please dont make the reckless mistake of dismissing this crusade against Peterson as exceptional. This is the lefts pattern, and it is becoming more aggressive all the time.

The second and third incidents I came across are further proof that the left is increasingly Stalinist. In the most recent Democratic presidential debate, Sen. Kamala Harris pushed for the suspension of President Trumps Twitter, speciously alleging that he is trying to obstruct justice and intimidate and threaten witnesses. You see, the left always has some urgent rationale to smother conservative speech whether its to prevent the incitement of violence or obstruction of justice. But it just wants to shut us up.

Those who would silence the other side are the very definition of dangerous. Dont take Harris musings lightly, even if she is mostly posturing to gin up more support from the Trump-hating Democratic base. It is instructive that efforts to muzzle speech almost always come from the left, not the right, because the left is insecure about the popularity of its kooky ideas.

The third incident involved demagogue and former Rep. Beto ORourke, who said in a CNN forum on LGBT issues that churches and religious organizations should lose their tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage. If I have to explain how outrageous this is, the country is in even greater danger than I imagined.

I found these examples in 15 minutes of reading this week. They are everywhere. America was founded on the idea of claiming and preserving our God-given liberties. The illiberal left, which believes our rights and freedoms come from government, is hell-bent on destroying our liberties and forcibly imposing its thoughts and ideas on all of us.

God save us.

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is Jesus Is Risen: Paul and the Early Church. Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at http://www.davidlimbaugh.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at http://www.creators.com.

Read more:
LIMBAUGH: The Totalitarian American Left - The Daily Wire

"Welcome to Thanksgiving" - Dave and Gemma host a memorable Thanksgiving in their new home when Dave's politically incorrect mother, Paula (Marilu Henner), visits from out of town and meets Calvin, Tina and the rest of the Butler family for the first time, on a rebroadcast of THE NEIGHBORHOOD, Monday, Nov. 11 (8:00-8:30 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network. (Originally broadcast 11/19/18.)

THE NEIGHBORHOOD stars Cedric the Entertainer in a comedy about what happens when the friendliest guy in the Midwest moves his family to a neighborhood in Los Angeles where not everyone looks like him or appreciates his extreme neighborliness.

Dave Johnson is a good-natured, professional conflict negotiator. When his wife, Gemma, gets a job as a school principal in L.A., they move from Michigan with their young son, Grover, unfazed that their new dream home is located in a community quite different from their small town. Their opinionated next-door neighbor, Calvin Butler, is wary of the newcomers, certain that the Johnsons will disrupt the culture on the block. However, Calvin's gracious wife, Tina, rolls out the welcome wagon; their chipper younger son, Marty, thinks the Johnsons could be good for the community; and their unemployed older son, Malcolm, finds Dave may finally be someone who understands him.

Dave realizes that fitting into their new community is more complex than he expected, but if he can find a way to connect with Calvin, they have an excellent chance of making their new neighborhood their home.

See the original post:
Scoop: Coming Up on a Rebroadcast of THE NEIGHBORHOOD on CBS - Monday, November 11, 2019 - Broadway World

The greatest and oldest democracies are the United Kingdom of Great Britain and the United States of America. The UK, in the early period, and the US, in the present one, acted and act as propagators and supporters of democratic movements across the world. However, all democratic political entities evolve, and in the process strain the relationship between the electorate and their democratically elected rulers. What is surprising is that the UK and the US are simultaneously in major constitutional crises.

The issue in the UK was increasing dominance of the European Union, of which it is a member. The growing operations of European institutions override the power and authority of national institutions of the member states. What precipitated the crisis was the EUs decision to allow entry of millions of refugees from Muslim countries in the Middle East. This move worsened the existing problem of legal migration to the UK from the poorer central and eastern EU member-states.

When jobs and livelihoods were at stake, and cultural issues became prominent, the electorate began to assert its rights. To settle the matter, the UK Parliament decided to seek the sovereign will of the people through the direct referendum of June 2106. While the majority was in favour of Leave, a significant section voted to Remain.

The map illustrates the results by geographical spread. Scotland in the far north voted to Remain, but its population was much smaller and counted for less. In the region around the international and metropolitan city of London, the population voted to Remain. The United Kingdom was clearly not united on this issue.

This result stunned the EU and the political, economic, judicial and other state organs in the UK, including the mass media. For nearly three years the government has been negotiating with the EU to reach agreement for orderly withdrawal.

None of the agreements approved by the UK cabinet and the EU was acceptable to the UK Parliament. As a result, after an election, a new government took over determined to leave the EU with or without an agreement.

This strategy triggered open opposition within the ruling and opposition party MPs, the media, the judiciary and the bureaucracy, which were anyway opposed to leaving the EU. This situation in the UK has resulted in unseemly conduct in Parliament, judicial interference in parliamentary affairs, and an incredibly graceless, rude and violent discourse across the country.

In the United States of America, there is an almost similar situation. The general economic, political and social crisis for a large proportion of the American people largely working-class and lower-middle-class sections and living mostly in the middle of the country had come to a tipping point.

The presidential election of November 2016, instead of resolving the issue, seemed to have complicated it further. The Democratic Partys candidate was a veteran politician, former secretary of state and former senator as well as wife of a previous president. Her gender also made her attractive to the female electorate.

An unusual candidate stepped in and secured the nomination of the Republican Party. He was a seasoned and veteran businessman and had a major media presence in the entertainment sector. Over his long career, he had made an enormous fortune, lost much of it, regained most of that, and was still a billionaire. As a result, his name was well-known to the American people. His style and forthrightness of speech, as well as his robust, politically incorrect views on the problems besetting the US and his unusual and unprecedented solutions appealed to the electorate.

He secured a massive win in the Electoral College, which is the constitutional body that elects the president. But he did not get a clear majority of the popular vote. The geographical spread and population are illustrated in the maps below red for Republican and blue for Democratic. The geographical spread of the presidents support was massive, but the heavy concentrations of the population on the two coastal fringes voted against him. The United States was clearly not united.

The opposition Democratic Party did not accept the loss with grace. The economic, political, judicial and bureaucratic elite and the mass media control the levers of power, authority and opinion in the US. The new president threatened to overturn established policies in trade, immigration, foreign policy, employment, health, and education. These had been built up over the past decades under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

The president had an unorthodox way of speaking and acting. The permanent state bureaucracy, especially the CIA and FBIintelligence agencies, were against his continuation. This opposition sees his presidency as a threat not only to the existing cultural, political and economic traditions but also to the livelihood, positions and income of those who managed the US government in the past.

The opposition effort has been to try and remove the president by impeachment. The president is now an unpredictable and formidable force domestically and internationally. The extraordinary success of his tenure in promoting economic growth and employment both for the majority and also for minorities and women may ensure his re-election in 2020.

In democratic politics, the people choose their rulers in periodic elections and the losing side accepts the results. The state apparatus has to be neutral between the political parties and implement the policies of the elected government.

Currently, in these two democracies, this principle does not hold and has led to sharp and vicious divisions between their regions, voters, and even families. Hopefully, better sense will prevail and they will be again united as their names suggest.

More:
The tale of two divided democracies - The New Indian Express

The older this 97-year-old home in Los Feliz gets, the more action it sees. The Colonial-style spot has traded hands four times in the last 15 years, including a six-year stay by actress Katherine Heigl.

Its currently owned by comedy writer Tim Long, whose credits include The Simpsons and Late Show With David Letterman and his wife, Miranda Thompson. The couple are asking $4.45 million for the abode, or $780,000 more than they paid for it two years ago, records show.

Past a lushly landscaped front yard, the two-story digs draw the eye with a crisp black-and-white faade and a portico over a red front door. Well-maintained since it was built in 1922, the home has four bedrooms and five bathrooms across 4,340 square feet.

1/16

The entry. (Alex Zarour)

2/16

The foyer. (Alex Zarour)

3/16

The living room. (Alex Zarour)

4/16

The formal dining room. (Alex Zarour)

5/16

The breakfast nook. (Alex Zarour)

6/16

The kitchen. (Alex Zarour)

7/16

The family room. (Alex Zarour)

8/16

The office. (Alex Zarour)

9/16

The deck. (Alex Zarour)

10/16

The master bedroom. (Alex Zarour)

11/16

The wraparound patio. (Alex Zarour)

12/16

The back patio. (Alex Zarour)

13/16

The backyard. (Alex Zarour)

14/16

The swimming pool and spa. (Alex Zarour)

15/16

The guesthouse. (Alex Zarour)

16/16

The front yard. (Alex Zarour)

White walls mingle with hardwood floors in most of the common spaces, including a living room with a fireplace, a column-lined kitchen and sunny breakfast nook. The family room adds a bold splash of turquoise, while the formal dining room features floral wallpaper and a wet bar.

All four bedrooms are upstairs, as well as a treetop deck. Down below, a wraparound patio descends to the grassy backyard.

At the other end of the property, theres a chic swimming pool and spa. A newly renovated guesthouse, complete with beamed ceilings and polished concrete floors, sits adjacent.

Michael Maguire of Compass and Michael Maloney of Keller Williams Realty hold the listing.

A native of Canada, Long has penned 29 episodes of The Simpsons and has produced hundreds more. He has co-written a number of episodes with his wife including this years episode Doh Canada with his wife.

Longs other credits include Politically Incorrect and Spy Magazine.

Heigl, who starred in Roswell and Greys Anatomy before film roles in Knocked Up and 27 Dresses, bought the home in 2007 for $2.55 million. She sold the property in 2013 for $2.622 million, The Times previously reported.

Read more:
Simpsons writer lists Los Feliz home once owned by Katherine Heigl - Los Angeles Times

In 2005, the world was a different place. George W. Bush occupied the White House, YouTube was a brand-new novelty, and Donald Trump was content to yell youre fired at reality-show contestants. At the same time, and with little fanfare, FX was prepping its newest series: Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia, a jet black comedy about a group of largely despicable peopleMac (Rob McElhenney), Dennis (Glenn Howerton), Charlie (Charlie Day), and Dee (Kaitlin Olson), with Frank (Danny DeVito) joining the Gang in season twowho run (aka spend most of the day drinking at) Paddys Pub, a derelict bar in South Philly.

If the premise doesnt sound like the setup for a daring political sitcom, thats because it was never meant to be one. [Sunny] wasnt born out of wanting to get up on a soapbox or wanting to be controversial, says Rob McElhenney, Sunnys creator, executive producer, writer, and star. It was a function of us trying to figure out how we could be different from other shows. Ultimately for Sunny, that meant constructing a politically incorrect world in which self-interest was the main currency, taking the selfishness of Seinfelds characters and ramping it up dramatically for the basic-cable boom.

Fourteen years later, televisions comedy landscape is wildly differentFleabag won Emmys, Barry took dark comedy to a bloody new level, and even on the networks theres The Good Place building a sitcom around moral philosophy. But back in Philadelphia, the Paddys gang remains as nihilistic and boundary-pushing as ever, keeping up with modern developments like the #MeToo movement and Trump presidency with the same commitment to making audiences laugh at the inanity of the world around them. Now tied with The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet as televisions longest-running live-action comedy, Sunny continues to keep up, even as the real world matches the absurdity its been dishing up for more than a decade.

As characters living in the real world in (almost) real time, weve seen the Gang tackle topical issues in episodes like Gun Fever, The Gang Goes Jihad, The Gang Solves the North Korea Situation, The Gang Exploits the Mortgage Crisis, and Mac Fights Gay Marriage. But the series has a well-established tradition of addressing hot-button topics in the most extreme ways possibleand coming at them from both sides (even when that other side originates in a dark or dangerous place). Whereas other shows are content to dance around controversial concerns, Sunny smacks them right in the facesometimes literally. Sunny has regularly been overlooked as one of televisions most adroit political satires, but you dont have to go too deep below the surface to see it.

Our show has really always been based on giving the characters a very strong point of view or a strong want or need or desire, and having that desire come into conflict with somebody elses desires, wants, and needs, says executive producer-writer-star Glenn Howerton, who also directed two season 14 episodes (including its opener, The Gang Gets Romantic). I think weve taken that basic tenet of writing and just added the element of something topical to that.

One of the benefits of having an ensemble cast of characters who are often at odds with each other, or at least suspicious of each others motives, is that its easy to introduce a controversial issue and have everyone come down on a slightly different side of it. We look at what the conversations areand what are the interesting arguments. Because the argument is whats entertaining to watch, says executive producer-writer-star Charlie Day.

Original post:
How Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia, the Longest-Running Sitcom on the Air, Keeps Up - Vanity Fair

Most unexpected sequels the kinds of movies you see a trailer of in theaters and ask your seatmate, Did that really need a sequel? are usually watered-down retreads of the original movie. They either make you miss what made the first movie so fun or memorable, or, at worst, make you question why you liked that original film in the first place.

Fortunately, Zombieland: Double Tap dodges many of the signs of sequel fatigue by acknowledging the ten-year gap between movies and developing the characters from where they started. Their adventures take on delicious new turns but never stray too far from the original idea of what it means to be a family when most of humanity has turned into brain-eating corpses.

Remarkably, all four members of the original gang are back for another round: The neurotic and bookish Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg) is much less of a lonely college boy thanks to his relationship with Wichita (Emma Stone), whos still as flighty and moody as when she was first introduced a decade ago. Since then, her younger sister Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) is little no longer and has started to resent the couples relationship and their ragtag familys de facto patriarch, the trigger-happy Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson).

Watch Video: 'Zombieland: Double Tap' Red Band Trailer Brings Bill Murray Back From the Dead

Wichita and Little Rock run off again its one of several callbacks to 2009s Zombieland leaving the guys to deal with a half-empty household. Being that theres danger in every corner of Zombieland, whether its a pacifist musician (Avan Jogia from Now Apocalypse, as Berkeley) who doesnt believe in killing zombies or running into an almost complete copy of yourself, its not long before Columbus old rules for zombie apocalypse survival come in handy.

Like its predecessor, Zombieland: Double Tap has a bit of mean streak and a fondness for gross humor, especially where zombies are concerned. In this new movie, the world of Zombieland feels much more expansive and less isolated. Perhaps not everyone outside the main group is on board with Tallahassees violent version of dealing with life and zombies, which seemed to go on unchallenged in the first film. Speaking of which, if you havent seen Zombieland lately and want to see Double Tap, the new movie is full of fan service nods to the original (including the sequels title and Columbus love for both Code Red Mountain Dew and the girl in Apartment 406) throughout the sequel.

Also Read: 'Maleficent: Mistress of Evil' to Lead Box Office as 'Zombieland 2' Battles 'Joker' for Second Place

Director Ruben Fleischer (Venom) returns to guide the sequel to his 2009 movie for yet another zippy and silly whirlwind road trip. He doubles down on squeezing in even more zombie kills even as he lays off using slow motion as often outside the opening credits. Once again, Eisenbergs voiceover leads the way through a zany story, meticulously explaining the new types of zombies, occasionally veering off into tangents where we see more gruesome zombie kills as well as animated texts popping up around characters to show Columbus still-growing list of rules.

The Expendables writer Dave Callaham joins original Zombieland scripters Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick to add more characters for our leads to deal with, along with pop-culture punchlines (which got some of the biggest laughs from my screening audience) and weirder scenarios to keep us guessing.

Some of the fresh blood that reinvigorates the Zombieland franchise belongs to Rosario Dawson as a mysterious Elvis-obsessed survivor known as Nevada; it seems like the trend of using cities for names has caught on outside our main group. There are more women in the mix, but essentially, all of them feel distant in Columbus singular point of view.

Also Read: Emma Stone Wants to Make Another 'Zombieland' in 2029

In what could have been a dismally uninspired part, Zoey Deutch plays a millennial Marilyn Monroe type who falls into the lap of a heartbroken Columbus with boundless energy and pep. Like Monroes character in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, Deutchs Madison is constantly looked down upon for the way she talks and behaves, but shes smart when the occasion calls for it and occasionally even gets to have the last laugh.

Thats not to say Zombieland: Double Tap is not without its bumps. There are moments where the movie toes the boundary of whats funny and whats a tired clich too closely, and occasionally it crosses over into neither funny nor clever territory, like when Berkeley, who becomes Little Rocks new love interest, is first seen on-screen; the ambiguously ethnic character is accompanied by sitar music, and he greets the audience with Namaste. He barely improves as the movie wears on, so you either have to laugh at the low-bar hippie jokes or cringe whenever hes on-screen.

Always politically incorrect and uncouth, Tallahassee remains almost entirely unchanged from 2009, a living fossil as it were. In the sequel, other characters point out his most egregious statements in a kind of semi-meta-comedy turn even as the audience is laughing at his outbursts and vulgar references. Also, stick around through the credits for two post-credit sequences that again heavily reference the original.

Also Read: 'Maleficent: Mistress of Evil' to Lead Box Office as 'Zombieland 2' Battles 'Joker' for Second Place

In the first Zombieland, there were few other humans to keep this band of misfits company (RIP fake zombie Bill Murray). Now, it seems like there are few others who could keep up with this roaming pack of lone wolves who lovingly snipe at each other, and thats OK. Theyre not meant to get along with everyone.

Most importantly, Zombieland: Double Tap continues the originals cheeky tone and irreverent humor, while it also acknowledges that its a series a little out of place and time with the current political age. But if all youre looking for is Shaun of the Dead, but American, then this is the movie for you.

The rest is here:
Zombieland: Double Tap Film Review: Emma Stone and Co. Battle the Undead in Lively Sequel - TheWrap

You have 15 free articles left today, enjoy reading.

Disclosure: Calgary lawyer John Carpay is president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (www.jccf.ca), which represents Valerie Thomas Price and Madeline Weld in their court action against the Ottawa Public Library.

Lastweek, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice declared that it had nojurisdiction to hear the claim of Valerie Thomas Price and Madeline Weld againstthe Ottawa Public Library.

In November2017, the Ottawa Public Library cancelled a room-booking for the showing of thedocumentary Killing Europe.

KillingEurope is aboutthe 1.3 million migrants who came to Europe in 2015, of whom 73% are male; the2015 Copenhagen shootings; the Organization for Islamic Cooperation pushing tocriminalize the criticism of Islam; the erosion and decline of free speech inEurope; welfare fraud committed by refugees in Europe; the honour killing ofBanaz Mahmod in the U.K. by her own biological family after she left herabusive husband; Oslo rape statistics showing that rape victims areoverwhelmingly Norwegians, and perpetrators are overwhelmingly foreigners;Ingrid Carlqvists report on the massive increase in rapes in Sweden (421/yearto 6,620/year) while Swedens population grew by only 19% in the same period;and the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation by Alexis Jay aboutthe Rotherham child sexual abuse scandal, where 1,400 children were beaten,raped and trafficked, while police refused to act because they fearedaccusations of racism, because the perpetrators were of Pakistani descent.

The Library cancelled the film-viewing in response to political pressure and claims that the film was Islamophobic propaganda. If the Library had honoured its contract, the film would have been seen only by people who paid a small admission to see it; nobody would have been forced or tricked into watching it.

Killing Europeis certainly biased.So is every documentary, website and media report. Every documentary is necessarily limited in its scope and depth; every media story fails to set out all of the facts; every publication fails to present all sides of a story fully. Every writer and every filmmaker approaches each project from a particular angle.

The film paints some Muslims as theocrats, as violent, as criminals, as rapists, as enemies of Western civilization, and as creating dangerous no go zones where secular law is absent and sharia law prevails. Obviously, Killing Europe will be highly offensive to many Muslims and non-Muslims. But if offensiveness was the standard used to determine criminal hate speech, Canadians would self-censor at all times, fearing criminal prosecution.

Should weban speech that hurts the reputation of a religious group, an ethnic group, asexual minority, or members of a certain trade or profession?

The sexual abuse of children by some Catholic priests has hurt the reputation of all Catholic priests, and the public standing of Catholics generally. This is unfair to the majority of priests and Catholics. But this unfairness should not become an excuse to suppress the truth about the bad behaviour of some.

The same can be said about police officers, lawyers, and various ethnic groups: protecting the reputation of a group should never be a justification for preventing accountability, healthy criticism, and robust public debate as a tool for seeking the truth.

If itstrue that some Muslims oppose the free society, or want to import sharia lawinto western democracies, why should this not be the subject of a documentaryfilm? Suppressing speech under the guiseof preventing group defamation is a sure way to eliminate public discussion ofa long list of important issues.

Are the contents ofKilling Europetrue, false, or part-way between?

In a free society, citizens get to decide that for themselves, and public libraries are one of the venues for doing so in a safe, peaceful and civil manner. In contrast, in a totalitarian society, the government decides on behalf of citizens what they may and may not hear.

The contents ofKilling Europecan be challenged as false or misleading or praised as accurate and informative.

People should be free to criticizeKilling Europe as hateful anti-Muslim propaganda, and people should also be free to see the movie and promote it.

Amid controversy about Killing Europe, a governmental authority like a public library should not interfere in a debate by playing politics with room-rentals. The content of the film is not illegal. A public librarys very purpose is to facilitate expression, and to provide access to a diverse range of alternative ideas.

A public library need not make rooms available to the public for rental, but if it does so, then the public library cannot discriminate based on belief or opinion. Whether it concerns books or room-rentals, a library should not prevent people from expressing their opinions, or from hearing alternative views.

Bybreaking its contract and cancelling the viewing of Killing Europe in November 2017, solely in response to questionableaccusations of anti-Muslim hate propaganda, the Ottawa Public Librarydeparted from its legal duty of neutrality, and from its constitutionalobligation to uphold freedom of expression.As a government entity, the Library has violated theCharterrightsof both speakers and listeners.

Practically speaking, this troubling and erroneous court ruling opens the door to taxpayer-funded libraries renting out their public spaces only to individuals and groups whose beliefs and expressions concur with the majority opinion.

This court ruling allows libraries to discriminate against groups who express unpopular or controversial opinions: pro-life groups, mens rights activists, traditional radical feminists (denounced as trans-exclusionary radical feminists or TERFs by transgender activists), climate deniers, conservative church groups who say anything critical of homosexuality, etc.

Inthe same way that libraries, as public bodies, should not be censoringincorrect books, libraries should not be censoring incorrect opinions whenit comes to room-rentals.

Go here to see the original:
'Killing Europe' and killing politically incorrect expression - The Post Millennial

Bili the British bonobo champanzee has had a brutal start to life.

First, he was rejected by his mum and then heartbreaking footage emerged of him being beaten up in his new home at Wuppertal Zoo.

People were so horrified by the attacks, almost 300,000 signed a petition calling for him to be returned to the UK.

Several animal welfare groups said Bili had been left badly traumatised by his ordeal after being sent to the zoo in April last year.

The young chimp even had his ear bitten off in the repeated attacks.

Zookeepers, who received death threats after footage of the abuse emerged, were adamant the attacks were perfectly natural.

Now Bili has bounced back and made some new friends - and even bagged himself two girlfriends.

Monkey curator at Wuppertal, Dr Severun Dressen, 31, said: "We are really pleased to see how Bili is developing.

"He is becoming much more confident."

Staff at the zoo were determined that Bili would fit into his new home and split the animals into two groups.

Dr Dressen explained: "We now have two separate groups and can now focus more individually on Bili's needs.

"The main problem was thought to be a female bonobo called Eja, 29, who did not like Bili.

"In the bonobos world, woman are the bosses. Eja has two sons Azibo and Ayubu, eight, and they together with their mother's support made Bili's life hell from the start."

Bonobo mothers protect their sons even as adults.

But because Bili was rejected by his and moved to Germany to be raised by hand, it made life very difficult for him.

Bili has now been separated from Eja, and her two sons now spend some time with the Brit chimp with no issues.

And Bili has also formed a close bond with two females Mahdeblu, 18, and Kichele, 30, who are BOTH his girlfriends.

Dr Dressen said: "Bili mates with both of them. Sex seems to be really important to Bili. They seem to get on well and Bili is accepted."

Bili is also close to Mahdeblu's daughter, five-year-old Akeena, and is often seen hugging her

Bili even has some male camaraderie as the troop's grandfather Mato, 55, has also accepted him and plays with him in the enclosure.

A zoo spokesman said: "Bili looks much more relaxed overall. We could no longer observe any aggression against him lately."

Wuppertal Zoo director Dr Arne Lawrenz said people have a romanticised image of nature.

Dr Lawrenz added: "This is why there must be zoos, where we can show what nature really looks like.

"That is our mission and that's why we, as zoos, might be at a crossroads here.

"For example, in the US there is a tendency to not exhibit bonobos because they are politically incorrect in terms of their sexual behaviour and aggression.

"I believe that zoos need to show people that nature is not all about peace, love and harmony, and that it's also about rivalry and that the animals are subject to different laws to humans."

Bili's mum, Maringa, failed to care for him when he was born in Twycross Zoo, Leicestershire, in October, 2008.

Because she didn't protect him when he was growing up, Bili was moved to Frankfurt, where he was adopted by two female chimps

Bili was adopted by loving female chimps in Frankfurt who have experience dealing with unwanted youngsters.

He was then sent to Wuppertal Zoo on the recommendation of the Specialist Group of the European Zoological Community and the European Conservation Breeding Programme.

Original post:
Brit chimp brutally bullied by other primates in German zoo finally makes pals - Mirror Online