October 2017
M T W T F S S
« Sep    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Thank God for British Moozerlums! Thank you for all the benefits they have brought to Britain!

(weekend blog) When you think of British Moozerlums, some people – stupid, stupid, ignorant, racist people – think of murder, mayhem, intolerance, bombings, beheadings, violence, oppression of females, FGM, interbreeding (first-cousin marriages), benefits-scrounging, cruel slaughter of animals, women dressed like Darth Vader on a bad hair day, refusal to integrate, rape gangs, continually claiming victim status and a cancer on our society.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

So we should be grateful to the Lincolnshire police for producing this wonderful video explaining to us – stupid people included – that Moozerlums coming to Britain is probably the best thing that has happened to our country since the invention of the bacon sandwich (oops, sorry, I meant “best thing since the halal bacon sandwich”. Oh, you can’t have a “Halal bacon sandwich”. Well, how about the “best thing since the doner kebab”?)

Well anyway, here’s a link to the Lincolnshire police’s fabulous video.

Some people might think that at almost 13 minutes it’s a bit too long. But Moozerlums have made so many amazing contributions to British life, it would have been difficult to squeeze these into a shorter time.

Here it is then – a guide from the Lincolnshire thought-police helping us to know which opinions are politically acceptable and which are supposed ‘hate crimes’. It’s amazing that the Lincolnshire police have so much money and so little crime that they have time and cash to make films helping us all understand how to think:

 

It’s official – Moozerlum terror attacks are NOT ‘hate crimes’

You’d better be sitting down before you read today’s blog. Otherwise you might fall over and hurt yourself and then blame me for your injuries.

It’s official – Izlumic terror attacks committed in Britain are NOT considered to be ‘hate crimes’ – but if you (as a white indigenous Brit) criticise anyone for any of the five bases for a supposed ‘hate crime’:

  • race or ethnicity
  • religion or beliefs
  • sexual orientation
  • disability
  • transgender identity

Or if you use satire or make a joke about any of these five themes, then that’s a ‘hate crime’ and you’re in trouble.

Let me explain:

I’ve written before about how the invented concept of a supposed ‘hate crime’ is just a thoroughly dishonest way of our rulers preventing anyone criticising their policy of censorship, thought control and race replacement. Just to remind you, here’s the official definition of a ‘hate crime’:

As you can see, pretty much anything you say, write or do can be construed as a ‘hate crime’ as long as there is just one twat who claims either that they are offended or that they believe someone else might be offended. Apologies that the above is difficult to read, but the key words are “which is perceived by the victim or by any other person to be motivated by hostility or prejudice….”. So, if I think you’re hostile to someone or prejudiced against them for their religion, appearance, sexuality or whatever, you are automatically guilty of a ‘hate crime’. Why? Because I say so.

So, you might think that someone mowing down innocent pedestrians on Westminster Bridge because of their religious hatred or stabbing innocents to death because of their religious hatred or setting off a bomb at a concert at Manchester Arena because of their religious hatred would be committing a ‘hate crime’. Right? No, wrong!

Here’s another official document which helpfully explains that the West-hating Moozerlum who murdered twenty-two innocent people (many of them children) and injured another 250 in the Manchester Arena bomb attack was NOT committing a ‘hate crime’:

The key words here are “terrorist activity (such as the Manchester Arena attack) may be targeted against general British or Western values rather than one of the five specific strands, so….it would not be covered by this statistical collection (as a hate crime). Conversely the Finsbury Park Mosque attack did appear to be against a specific religion so would be included as a hate crime for the purposes of this collection”.

Have you got that? Any attack by our friends from the religion we all admire would not be considered as a ‘hate crime’ because it would be considered as an attack “against general British or Western values rather than one of the five specific strands” of ‘hate crime’ – race or ethnicity; religion or beliefs; sexual orientation; disability; transgender identity

But any attack by a white indigenous Brit – bacon sandwich on a mosque steps, for example – clearly would be a ‘hate crime”.

Isn’t this wonderful? Using our rulers’ definition of a ‘hate crime’, with the killing of MP Jo Cox and the man who died of a heart attack in the Finsbury Mosque attack by a white Brit, this means that two people have died in ‘hate crimes’ by white extremists in Britain whereas no people have been killed in ‘hate crimes’ by our Moozerlum friends because Jihadi attacks are not considered as ‘hate crimes’.

This conveniently allows our rulers to claim that right-wing extremism is more dangerous than Izlumic extremism.

Are we being shafted? Yes we are!

Oh, and in case you didn’t know about it, here’s the 140-page (yes 140 pages!) guide to supposed ‘hate crimes’ produced for the police college.

No wonder real crime (not supposed ‘hate crime’) is shooting up out of control and our police are so utterly useless.

Look upon it and despair!

http://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/Support/Equality/Documents/Hate-Crime-Operational-Guidance.pdf

“It was ‘culture shock’ that made me rape them!”

No time to write a full blog today. So instead, following the theme of yesterday’s blog about how some of us get punished for invented ‘hate crimes’ while others get lenient or no sentences for real crimes, here’s a lovely little story from Australia.

A Libyan student has had his sentence of just 3 years in prison for a series of sex attacks reduced because a psychologist judged that the man felt “anger and arousal at the way Australian women dressed” due to the “cultural shock” he experienced when arriving in Australia.

So, Australian women, if you’re raped by a Middle-Eastern or African migrant, remember that they just can’t help themselves because of their “culture shock” at way you dress. Therefore it’s your fault, not theirs, when they feel “anger and arousal” and rape you and sodomise you and hit you etc etc.

Australian ladies, enjoy the future that most of you bleeding-heart, rapefugees-welcome, ever-so-liberal, brainless Sheilas keep voting for!

Here’s a link to the story:

AUSTRALIA: Why did a judge reduce the sentence for a Libyan Muslim scholarship student charged with sexually assaulting six women and a 13-year-old girl?

Some people’s “hate crimes” are more “hate crimes” than other people’s

You probably saw the reports yesterday from PC Plod claiming that the number or supposed ‘hate crimes’ had shot up by 29% from 62,518 in 2015-16 to 80,393 offences in 2016-17

This was apparently the largest increase since the Home Office began recording figures in 2011-12

Let me just remind you of the extraordinarily all-encompassing definition of a ‘hate crime’ from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS):

‘The Association of Chief Police Officers and the CPS have agreed a common definition of hate crime: “Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”

So, if I see you calling someone a “dickhead” and I believe you have called that person a “dickhead” because I believe you perceive they are in some way mentally challenged, then you have committed a hate crime purely because I think you have. So much for being innocent until proved guilty.

Personally, I suspect the police’s figures of a supposed rise in ‘hate crimes’ are total bollox. What I suspect is happening is that the definition of a ‘hate crime’ keeps getting broadened by our rulers to crush anyone daring to criticise their policy of race replacement and, due to political correctness, more and more police time is being wasted on trying to find supposed ‘hate crimes’ rather than on catching real criminals.

But there’s another not totally insignificant problem with the new catch-all criminal offence of ‘hate crimes’ – it seems that the white indigenous population are much more likely to be punished for ‘hate crimes’ than anyone from a foreign country or culture.

This, for example, is apparently a ‘hate crime’ – putting a bacon on a mosque door handle – or as the police claimed “attacking a mosque with a bacon sandwich”:

For this ‘appalling hate crime’ Kevin Crehan was sentenced to one year in prison where he died. He was probably murdered by a certain peaceful group in prison, but we’ll never be told the truth about Kevin Crehan’s death.

However, this is apparently NOT a hate crime:

Nor is this:

Nor is this:

And, of course, in Britain making a sarcastic comment in a supermarket or on the street about a woman wearing a Burkha is a ‘hate crime’ whereas raping over 40,000 white girls over a 15 year period in many of our major cities is not. Raping and sodomising white girls is apparently not racist or a ‘hate crime’ even though white girls were targeted which I would have thought of as ‘racist’, but clearly I have misunderstood how ‘hate crimes’ should be identified.

Welcome to Canadistan

And here’s a lovely story from the People’s Caliphate of Canadistan. A white Canadian has just been sent to prison for the ‘hate crime’ of scrawling “No more M*sl*ms” on a few bus-stop benches. But a taxi-driving gentleman from our favourite religion avoided prison even though he, like several of his taxi-driving co-religionists, had sexually assaulted a white teenager.

I rest my case:

Here’s a story that’ll make you choke on your morning coffee

Here’s a story that will hopefully have you choking on your expresso or latte or cappucino or whatever fashionable kind of coffee you drink in the morning.

It concerns a Somali woman who has been living illegally in Britain – on benefits, of course – for several years. This lady, who has never worked and never contributed anything to Britain, has just won a European Court of Justice case (no doubt paid for by legal aid) forcing her local council to provide her with council housing for the rest of her life. The reason – because she has four children in British schools.

Assuming this lady and her litter cost British taxpayers about £50,000 a year in housing, benefits, schooling and healthcare, then her continued presence in this country will cost British taxpayers over £1 million while her children are growing up here. After that, we can expect to pay several million more for her and her progeny – especially if her children decide to follow their mother’s fine example and live off benefits for the whole of their lives while also producing seemingly endless litters of useless garbage for us to subsidise.

Once they hear about this in Somalia, we can expect a new flood of supposed “refugees” pouring into stupid politically-correct, soon-to-be-bankrupted Benefits Britain.

Someone much more intelligent than me once said you could either have a social welfare system or open borders, but you cannot have both as the supply of migrants will be infinite.

Unfortunately, our rulers cannot understand this.

Anyway, enjoy your generosity to the ‘new Britons’:

Sex for stardom – doing deals with the devil?

Here at snouts-in-the-trough our mission is to inform and we would NEVER do a story just to show titillating pictures of naked women – well, almost never.

The constant stream of stories about Harvey ‘Fatman’ Weinstein’s alleged tendency to sexually exploit and even rape any female he could get near seems to expose several levels of rottenness in both Holywood and US society.

1. Were all the females ‘victims’?

I worked for many years in advertising and management consultancy. These are both ‘professions’ that tend to attract extremely greedy, self-centered people with large egos, huge appetites for other people’s money and few moral scruples. And given the recent revelations about Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein allegedly pressuring aspiring actresses for sex, I’ve been slightly surprised by the surprise.

Thinking back on my own sad excuse for a career, I’ve been trying to remember if I ever came across a female manager who didn’t have sex with her bosses in return for career advancement. But I can’t think of any. The beautiful ones had sex with the top bosses, the ugly ones had sex with the mid-level bosses, nobody had sex with me. In company after company, I saw the same pattern.

Given that the people attracted to lucrative careers in films are a thousand times more greedy, more self-centered, more narcissistic, more egoistic and more immoral than those I met in advertising and management consultancy, I’m not in any way surprised to learn of the allegations against the slim, attractive, personable Harvey ‘FatMan’ Weinstein.

Seeing the limited physical attractiveness of the FatMan, I can well believe that many women were reluctant to submit to his unwanted attentions. But given my own observations of the behaviour of many female managers in advertising and management consultancy, I suspect that some of those now bleating about sexual exploitation or assault actually willingly entered a deal with the devil – sex for stardom, Oscars and unimaginable riches – with their eyes (and mouths and legs?) wide open.

I’m not condoning the FatMan’s behaviour. I’m merely pointing out that in an imperfect world bad things happen

2. Liars, liars and more liars

Hollywood’s male stars have been fairly quick to condemn FatSlob’s shenanigans claiming (implausibly in my humble opinion) that they knew nothing. Hollywood is a small place. Gossip is rife. People on the inside know what’s going on. So, I suspect that many of the male stars now energetically distancing themselves from the LardLump (who may have helped them in their careers) and claiming complete ignorance are naive at best, but most probably blatant liars

3. Those stinking Clintons

But in all this stinking affair, surely nothing smells quite as bad as the behaviour of the Clintons and all their democratic, libtard hangers-on? The Clintons and the Democrats courted Weinstein, kissed his fat arse whenever possible and took a fortune from him. And now they too claim – “we knew nothing”. Yeah right.

And what about Crooked Hilary currently in Britain trying to sell her new book? There seems to be evidence that she worked hard to destroy the credibility and lives of any woman claiming to have had sexual relations with Randy Old Bill. Hilary seems to have had a fair bit of experience of hanging out with men who use their power and position to sexually exploit females.

And now, under pressure, Hilary says she’ll give the money she got from FatPig to charity. Hmmm, which charity, Hilary? The Clinton Foundation?

4. Some innocent victims?

You have to be careful on the Internet as many supposedly ’embarrassing’ photos of celebs are faked or photoshopped or whatever. But taking that into account, I believe that several of the photos below are genuinely of ladies who are now accusing Harvey LardBucket of sexual abuse. From the little I understand, most of these photos were taken from films the stars did before they became famous, so it’s not obvious that all these ladies have always been as overly concerned about their modesty as they now claim.

Here’s possibly one of FatTurd’s accusers if the photos are genuine:

And here she is again if the photos are genuine:

Here’s possibly another lady whose name has been linked to the alleged FatBully:

And here’s yet another:

I could show you a lot more similar pictures, but I’m sure no readers really want to see such gratuitous nudity. Oh well, just one more then:

Birmingham – 2: Tower Hamlets – 3

Birmingham – 2: Tower Hamlets – 3!

No, these are not the football results. These are the number of times a girl (almost always white) can expect to be raped in one evening by “Asian” men should she dare go out alone in some of the more ‘diverse’ areas of our major cities.

Birmingham – 2

You might remember this story from earlier this year:

A 15-year-old girl was raped by two different attackers, including a man she flagged down for help.

Detectives said the teenager was first assaulted in a secluded part of Birmingham’s Witton railway station, near the Aston Villa football ground, some time between 7pm on Tuesday and 2am the following morning.

The victim had walked to the station with her friend, but was led away by a man who approached her.

Shortly after that attack, the girl walked out of the station and flagged down a passing vehicle to ask for help.

However, after getting in the car she was then raped a second time by another man.

The first attacker is described as Asian with light skin and brown eyes, and was of a skinny build and about 6ft tall.

He was wearing a tracksuit top and bottoms, black trainers and was in his early 20s.

The second attacker is also described as Asian, in his early 20s, 5ft 6in or 5ft 7in tall, and of large build with a tight-cropped beard, and was wearing a blue jumper and black jeans.

Tower Hamlets – 3

But now we have an even better story of probable multi-cultural enrichment from the Londonistan borough of Tower Hamlets

A 17-year-old girl was sexually assaulted three times in an hour as she walked home from a nightclub in east London.

Detectives have released CCTV images of two suspects wanted in connection with the attacks two weeks ago. Images of a third man are said to be too unclear for release.

Police said that the student’s “horrific” ordeal had started shortly before midnight on Friday, September 29. A CCTV image shows her being carried by a man on Cambridge Heath Road. They disappear into a doorway.

The CCTV images were taken on the night of September 29. The girl was later found lying on the street by a member of the public who called 999
The CCTV images were taken on the night of September 29. The girl was later found lying on the street by a member of the public who called 999METROPOLITAN POLICE

The man, in dark clothes is not seen on camera again. Clothes belonging to the girl were found near by later.

Shortly after midnight another CCTV camera shows the girl stumbling down Mint Street, this time followed by a bearded male on a racing bicycle. Officers say that footage shows him pursuing the girl and approaching her on Corfield Street. The next time they are picked up by CCTV cameras she looks dishevelled.

Then, at about 12.45am, detectives believe that the victim suffered a third attack, involving up to three men, also on Corfield Street.

A man with a bicycle was seen following the girl and approaching her
A man with a bicycle was seen following the girl and approaching herMETROPOLITAN POLICE

A short time later a member of the public found the teenager lying on the street in distress and called 999. Police believe that she may have been drugged and toxicology tests are under way.

Detective Inspector Suzanne Jordan, of the Metropolitan Police’s child abuse and sexual offences command, said: “This is a horrific multiple sexual assault on a young female who was simply making her way home after a night out”.

Of course, we don’t yet know if all the men who attacked this girl were “Asian”. But it looks awfully like it

Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Slough etc etc etc

But these twice in one night and three times in one night sex attacks are nothing compared to what the “Asian” grooming gangs were up to when probably over 50,000 almost exclusively white girls were gang-raped, gang-sodomised and gang-tortured 20 to 30 times a day over a period of 15 years and this is still happening as our politically-correct, West-hating police choose to do next to nothing to stop it.

Multi-cultural enrichment – great for the enrichers, great for Britain!

Energy companies – ripping us off again and again and again!

Here we go again. As soon as our useless supposed energy market regulator, Ofgem, or even more useless MPs start talking about trying to cap energy prices, the energy companies begin bleating about how they’re being treated unfairly. The usual story the energy companies come up with has two main themes:

  • they only make a few pounds profit per household per year and therefore any price controls would “hurt investment”
  • a cap on energy prices would just lead to increased prices for all of us

What amazes me is that there doesn’t seem to be a single mainstream journalist who understands the well-worn but effective trick the Big Six energy companies play on us year after year after year.

So, I’ll just remind any readers who don’t understand the game the energy companies are playing.

Here’s a breakdown of a supposedly typical household’s dual fuel energy bill:

There are two main parts to our energy industry – generation (producing the energy – the blue section on the chart above called “wholesale costs”) and supply (getting the energy to our homes and businesses – the other sections on the chart above). With me so far?

Hopefully you’ll notice the reddish brown part – “supplier margin”. This is usually quoted as being around a very modest 5%. But this is a fix by the Big Six energy companies who choose where to make their profits. In the supply part, there is the semblance of some degree of competition and you can switch suppliers if you want and possibly save a few quid. But power generation requires massive investment to build power stations and so there is little to no competition. What the Big Six energy companies do is make their main profits on energy generation (where there is no competition):

So, while claiming they are only making a modest 5% profit – about £55 per household per year, the Big Six energy companies are actually making at least four times that and probably nearer six times – 30% – around £330 per household per year. That’s a very healthy profit margin indeed when most other businesses would be happy with profit margins of 5% to 6% and be delighted to get anywhere near 10%.

Moreover, by deliberately leaving depressingly small profit margins on the supply part, the Big Six energy companies achieve three things:

  • this discourages too many competitors from entering the market
  • this makes switching supplier almost a waste of time for many people as they save so little
  • this allows the Big Six to claim that they make very small profits on supplying energy to us (while not mentioning the huge profits they make on generation)

And here some other facts about the UK energy market:

1. Our often foreign-owned energy companies make four to five times as much profit in the UK than they are allowed to make in their properly regulated home markets

2. They are so profitable in the UK that Scottish Power’s Spanish owner Iberdrola could lend its American subsidiary £800m leeched from its UK customers, as the American subsidiary needed the money to meet investment commitments it had made to US regulators

3. Since 2006-7, the useless UK regulator Ofgem’s budget increased from £18.6m to over £33m and yet due to Ofgem’s pathetic efforts, the UK is one of the most profitable energy markets in the world.

Whenever there is publicity about the profits made by the Big Six energy companies, they always hide behind the dishonest “we only make about 5% profit” story and our MPs and journalists are so financially ignorant that they don’t see through the energy companies’ trick and challenge them on the massive profits made from power generation. As for the supposed regulator, Ofgem, they know what’s going on. But like most of our supposed ‘regulators’ – Ofwat, Ofcom etc etc – they side with those they are meant to regulate rather than those whom they are meant to protect from exploitation.

So, please don’t get taken in by the Big Six energy companies’ claims of their profits being squeezed by any attempt to cap their prices.

The Big Six energy companies are making so much profit in Britain that they’re laughing all the way to their (usually foreign) banks due to our Government’s, Ofgem’s, our journalists’ and our own stupidity.

Women of Europe – you’re voting for your own oppression!

I spent quite a bit of time writing the last two days’ blogs. So today I thought I’d relax and just bring you a very short video showing the kind of scenes that will become ever more frequent as we allow ourselves to be invaded by millions of migrants – most of whom are violent, intolerant, misogynistic, sex-obsessed males of military age.

Moreover, if the studies of IQ levels per country on which the chart below are to be believed, most of the invaders have an IQ level of between 70 and 80, when the average IQ in the civilised West is 100:

To put it bluntly, most are what we would call mentally retarded and will never have jobs or contribute anything to the societies they are being invited to invade apart from violence and criminality.

So ladies, enjoy the wonderful smug feeling of holier-than-thou self-righteousness as you proudly march with your idiotic “Refugees Welcome” banners when hardly any of the invading armies are real refugees:

Ladies, enjoy your narcissistic display of your own achingly open-minded libtardism when you vote for lefty, migrant-hugging political parties. But be careful what you wish for. You could be the next person to feature in videos like the one below:

Racial discrimination? Yet more total bollox!

I thought that by writing about Transgenderism, Izlumophobia and Man-Made Global Warming yesterday, I had dealt with the three areas of biggest bollox being forced on us by our virtue-signalling, West-hating, politically-correct ruling elites. How wrong I was. I forgot about supposed racial discrimination.

As you probably know, yesterday the UK government has published what was billed as “one of the world’s most extensive audits of racial disparity”. When she announced the audit, back in August, the prime minister promised it would make for “difficult reading”.

Of course, as soon as the report was published, the usual self-aggrandising, holier-than-thou, preachy c*nts were all over our TV claiming that the report showed that Britain was “institutionally racist” and as usual demanded more laws to control what we plebs did and thought. But then something amazing happened. One day later, the report seems to have disappeared almost without trace. Imagine that – a report supposedly proving Britain was “institutionally racist” not being mentioned on most media less than 24 hours after the results were known.

How could this happen?

It happened because, in reality, the report shows that the opposite is true – not only is Britain NOT institutionally racist, but certain immigrant groups actually perform much better than white ethnic British. Ooops. That’s not what the libtards, desperate to create more ‘victim groups’ and a ‘grievance culture’ wanted.

Let’s just look at a few of the findings

  • At key stage two, the second stage of primary school, 71 per cent of Chinese primary school pupils meet expected standard in reading, writing, and maths, compared with 54 per cent of White British pupils and 13 per cent of White Gypsy and Roma pupils
  • Indian people were the most likely of any group to work in highly skilled occupations: one in ten were in manager, director or senior official roles and over three in ten were professionals
  • Chinese pupils were the most likely to go to university. Indian pupils made better progress than Pakistani children, and white British pupils made less progress than average
  • White offenders received the shortest average jail terms at 18 months, compared with 24 and 25 months for black and Asian offenders respectively. However, the conviction rate was highest among white defendants
  • White youngsters were four times more likely to smoke than black youths
  • Pakistani women are “shockingly badly integrated” into British society
  • White British pupils on free school meals perform the worst at key stage two with just 32 per cent reaching the expected level
  • Black Caribbean pupils are being permanently excluded from school three times as often as White British pupils
  • Indian and Pakistani people have similar rates of home ownership to white people in Britain, but black people and those from Pakistan and Bangladesh were less likely to own their own property

It’s about culture, not discrimination

From what I can see, the high performance of different ethnic groups has everything to do with culture and nothing to do with discrimination:

  • The best performing groups in British society are Hindus, Sikhs and Chinese because of the value they put on family stability, education and work
  • The worst performing groups Roma and gypsies for reasons I believe should be more than obvious – truancy from school, widespread criminality etc etc
  • Another low-performing group are many Black Carribbean and ethnic white males who fail to do well in society because they often come from broken families where work and education are less encouraged and where there may be several generations who have never got any qualifications and have never worked
  • The failure of Pakistani and Bangladeshi women is quite clearly due to a culture which encourages them to dress like Darth Vader on a bad hair day and discourages them from educational achievement, work and from integrating into society. Moreover, many of them will be illiterate and uneducated imported for a first-cousin marriage and be unable to speak any English

The report claims to try to understand why there are differences in the performance of different ethnic groups. But actually the report dishonestly hides the reasons for differences by including the highest-performing groups – Hindus, Sikhs, Chinese – with one of the lowest performing groups – our friends from the Religion of Peace – together under the catch-all title of “Asians”.

However, as usual this lack of evidence had not prevented the usual sh*theads from screaming “waaacciiissssmmmn” and “discrimination” probably even before they had read the report.

Theresa May is supposed to have said “this audit means that for society as a whole – for government, for our public services – there is nowhere to hide”. But the opposite is true – the ruling elites are trying to use the report to prove there is discrimination where there is none and as an excuse to oppress us with ever more unnecessary thought-control laws when the report actually proves that culture rather than supposed discrimination explains disparities between different groups.

So, in the category of total politically-correct bollox, in addition to Transgenderism, Izlumophobia and Man-Made Global Warming which I wrote about yesterday, I’d like to add racial discrimination.