November 2017
« Oct    

Political correctness and the thought-police

Only the politically-correct can adopt

Last year a couple were blocked from adopting their two foster children after expressing concerns about them being raised by a gay couple.

The husband and wife had looked after the young children since the early part of the year. When they were told that a gay couple were being put forward to adopt them, the pair admitted that they “expressed a degree of shock and asked if this was a ‘joke'”. We are Christians and we expressed the view that a child needs a mother and a father. We expressed our views in modest, temperate terms based on our Christian convictions

The practising Christians, who have biological children, were said by their social worker to find the situation “very challenging”, and two days later formally applied to adopt the youngsters themselves.

However the council turned them down, saying that their views about gay parenting were “concerning” and “could be detrimental to the long-term needs of the children.”

This year there was a case of a 18-month-old baby girl, Elsie, adopted by a homosexual couple being bludgeoned to death by one of the adopters. If I remember correctly, Elsie’s biological grandparents offered to adopt her. But the adoption authorities decided it would be in the girl’s best interests (more politically correct) to be adopted by a gay couple.

But who cares about Elsie beaten to death by one of the homosexuals who adopted her? After all, allowing homosexuals to adopt is a supreme act of political correctness and therefore beyond reproach even though one of the adopters was a murderer. The baby was just collateral damage in the admirable cause of political correctness. No doubt the person who made the decision to hand Elsie over to her murderer, rather than her grandparents, got promoted for displaying political correctness above and beyond the call of duty.

Will the politically-incorrect be allowed to keep their children?

Now we have a new story about political correctness gone mad. In one local authority, parents who withdrew their children from a visit to a mosque were labelled ‘Izlumophobic’. But perhaps these parents don’t want this to happen?

Anyway, were Moozerlum parents to withdraw their children from a visit to a church, a Hindu temple or to, God forbid, a synagogue, that would be perfectly acceptable. In fact, there would be outrage from the usual idiots if Moozerlum children were forced to go on a trip to (and even pray in) a synagogue. Can you imagine the protests? Can you imagine the froth-flecked fury? Can you imagine all the libtards screaming that this was an ‘attack on Izlum’?

But when non-Moozerlum parents don’t want their children forced to bow down and kiss the floor in obedience to the Great One, the hypocritical local authority brands them as committing a ‘thought crime’ and questions their suitability to be parents.

Here’s someone explaining this outrageous situation better than I could:

Are EU migrant workers bankrupting us?

Lots of numbers

Today’s blog is going to be really, really boring. It’s full of figures and we British seem allergic to figures, even simple arithmetic. But given that it’s the budget tomorrow, surely I can be forgiven for throwing in my modest contribution to the deliberations of the ‘experts’?

You might find it surprising: employment in Britain is at an all-time high and unemployment is at a record low. And, of course, we’ve got at least 2.1 million Europeans fleeing the economic disasters in their own countries to work in Britain also contributing to our economy. So you might be tempted to think that public spending, especially on benefits, should be falling. But it keeps rising:

You might even think that taxes collected by HMRC from the ever-increasing number of workers would be at record levels. You could be forgiven for imagining that, with record numbers in work, the Government would be taking in more in tax than it spends and so wouldn’t need to keep borrowing money. But we still have a deficit so our debt is still increasing.

Buried in a recent HMRC report on tax and NI paid and benefits claimed by nationals from various countries in 2015 were some startling figures.

Put simply the UK total tax take from income tax (£156bn) and NI (£108bn) was roughly £264bn. The amount of tax credits and child benefit paid out was about £43bn, giving a net tax take of £221bn.

With a total population of ~65m that results in an average net tax and NI per person of £3,400 and for the actual working population of 31.8m an average net tax and NI take per worker of ~£7,000.

According to the ONS and HMRC’s reports there were a total of 1.81m EU10 (8 East European countries plus Cyprus and Malta) nationals living in the UK in 2015 and of those 1.353m were registered for NI.

Their total net tax and NI contribution after tax credits and child benefit is deducted was £2.911bn giving an average net tax+NI per East European citizen in the UK of ~£1,600 and an average per East European citizen working in the UK of £2,150.

So we have been expanding the population of a group (East European workers) paying £1,600 which is just over a third of the average net tax and NI in terms of total population (£3,400). As for payments per worker, at £2,150 they are ‘contributing’ less than a third in terms of working population (£7,000). Ooops!

Furthermore, with low income and spending, the tax take from East European workers from other sources such as VAT or council taxi is also correspondingly lower. In fact, with UK public spending approaching £800bn+, any worker contributing less than £11,000 in total taxes and less than around £7,000 in income and NI is probably using more in public services than they’re contributing to our country – they have a negative effect on our economy.

GDP looks good as numbers of workers swell. That makes the Government look good. But we would be much better off if, instead of relying on lower-paid EU workers, our businesses invested in automation to produce more with the existing number of workers. This is why you’ll keep hearing economists blethering on about the “UK’s productivity problem”. A country can only become wealthier if it produces more from each worker, not by importing millions more lower-paid workers. Moreover future liabilities in healthcare, pensions etc are rising sharply in line with increasing population.

In a modern globalised economy, importing an army of lower-paid workers might be the natural reaction to labour cost pressure from developing economies. But the end result, if we continue on this path, is that we can no longer afford the kind of infrastructure, services and benefits we have enjoyed so far on a steadily reducing net tax base per capita and per worker. Pretty soon we are going to have to face this and either raise tax considerably and/or cut expenditure drastically.

So, when our politicians bleat on about how we need immigration to help grow our economy, this is total and utter bollox. What we need is more business investment to produce more with a stable population.

Cow objects to Halal slaughter

And here, if you managed to survive the first part of today’s blog, is a very short video of a cow apparently reluctant to allow some highly civilised gentlemen from the world’s most advanced religion to slit its throat:

Zimbabwe – an ‘African Spring’? Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

The ‘Arab Spring’ (sorry, I meant ‘Arab Winter’)

Remember the ‘Arab Spring’? Remember the BBC and C4 News and the rest of the mainstream media hyperventilating about a “new era” in the Arab world, about people just like us wanting freedom from their ruling dictators, about democracy sweeping across the Middle East?

Nobody talks much about the ‘Arab Spring anymore. Why not? Because the supposed ‘Arab Spring’ turned into an ‘Arab Winter’; because we now have civil wars in Syria, Yemen and Iraq; because the Arab Spring gave birth to the so-called Izlumic State (which, of course, has nothing to do with so-called Izlum which is a religion of peace):

because the ‘Arab Spring’ led to a new Izlumist (not ‘Izlumic’) uprising across the Middle East, Africa and Izlumist (not ‘Izlumic’) terrorism; because once secular Turkey is being turned into an an oppressive Izlumic (not ‘Izlumist’) dictatorship, because Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shiite Iran will probably soon go to war against each other; because, when you give freedom to people who are ‘slightly’ less than civilised, slaughter ensues:

An ‘African Spring’?

When we first heard about the military coup in basket-case Zimbabwe, some idiot British journalists started blethering about “elections” and “democracy” and “freedom”. Thankfully nobody has yet been so foolish as to suggest an ‘African Spring’.

I sincerely hope the best for the long-suffering people of Zimbabwe. But the signs don’t look great: the senile Mugabe is still refusing to resign, Mugabe’s mates from the SADC and South Africa in particular have sent delegations to Zimbabwe to try to protect Mugabe’s position, the people trying to throw him out are the generals who all became rich under Mugabe’s and their thieving oppression and the man who will probably replace Bob Mugabe, Emmerson Dambudzo ‘the crocodile’ Mnangagwa was Mugabe’s murderous right-hand man for decades:

We’ll get fleeced again

At the time of writing, the situation in basket-case Zimbabwe seems unclear. But there are some certainties. One is that, with Zimbabwe being the former British colony of Rhodesia, British taxpayers will be told that we must contribute hundreds of millions to help promote democracy, freedom and economic development in Zimbabwe. We might even be told by the libtards that ‘Zimbabwe needs a ‘Marshall Plan’ to help it develop just like Europe got the Marshall Plan after WWII and it’s an absolute certainty that all the hundreds of millions we give to Zimbabwe will be stolen by the Crocodile and his mates while Zimbabweans continue to live in a poverty-stricken cesspit.

Can we really help Africa?

The holier-than-thou mob are always claiming Africa needs more money and even witter on about a “Marshall Plan for Africa”. But after WWII, under the Marshall Plan, Europe received $20bn a year (in today’s money) for just 5 years and this was enough to stimulate the complete rebuilding of our continent. Over the last 50 years Africa has received about $1trn in aid – $20bn a year. So for 50 years Africa has been given as much each year as Europe got for just 5 years and little to nothing has been achieved with all the money. In fact, most African countries are now poorer than they were in the mid 1960s when this deluge of aid started

Research by the Global Financial Integrity project indicates that African rulers steal about 3 times as much money each year from their countries as their countries receive in aid (please see the YouTube video I made – link below). So, if we could just cut the level of corruption in Africa by a half, Africa wouldn’t need any aid at all and would still be richer

None of this is ever mentioned by the libtards and the politicians and the charities. They know that if ordinary people in the West were aware of the truth of 50 years of their failure in Africa, we would stop giving and the gilded, usually taxfree lifestyles of our hundreds of thousands of charity workers – the Lords of Poverty – would end

After 50 years of giving, there are more Africans living in destitution than ever before in Africa’s history. Well done Oxfam and Save the Children! You should be proud of your achievements!

After 50 years of failure in Africa, it’s time to stop this foreign aid farce.

As for poor Zimbabwe, it’s likely that its suffering is very far from over as its murderous kleptocrats replace Mugabe with the Crocodile (Mugabe Mark II) and continue enriching themselves at their country’s and our expense:


If Sweden is the future – I don’t want it!

(weekend blog) Throughout the 1960s, 1970s and even into the 1980s Sweden was always held up as one of the world’s most successful countries. Whenever lefties wanted to show us the wonderful future we would have under their rule, they would point to Sweden – almost no poverty, excellent education system, world-class healthcare, virtually no crime, social equality and the state looking after you from cradle to grave. OK, the weather was lousy and taxes were high. But as compensation there was beautiful scenery, clean lakes, unspoiled nature and, of course, all those sexually-liberated blondes:

Then Sweden decided to be a world leader in taking in largely uneducated, often inbred, usually intolerant, mostly male, virtually unemployable, almost always misogynist refugees and supposed refugees – many of them claiming to be ‘children’ although clearly in their 20s and 30s. Sweden took in more ‘refugees’ per capita than any other country and soon the wonderful Swedish social experiment became an experiment in multi-culturalism and didn’t look so great after all.

There have been a few rather jolly stories from Sweden over the last couple of weeks which have exposed how far this once admirable country has fallen:

Microphones instead of police stations

Stockholm police announced a plan to place hundreds of microphones in the Järva area of Stockholm in order to automatically alert authorities to crimes in progress as they can identify screams and other sounds.

The project is the first of its kind in Sweden and will see hundreds of microphones placed in Järva, a heavily migrant-populated suburb of Stockholm considered to be a no-go zone by many.

The microphones will be able to automatically differentiate various sounds and when they hear particular sounds, like a woman screaming, gunshots or explosions, the microphones should automatically alert police in the area through text or email according to a Sveriges Radio report

Police expect that the system will be fully operational at some point in 2018 and claim that the new project could reduce their response time by an average of two minutes. Earlier this year it was revealed that the final remaining police station in the troubled area was forced to close its doors. Swedish terror expert Magnus Ranstorp said the move was a “disaster” and added, “They should open four more instead!”

Last December, migrant residents of the area protested the epidemic of criminality in the suburbs with many of them claiming that the real problem was “colonisation”. In other areas, like the suburb of Rinkeby, the government has put forward plans to build a new, and more secure, police station in the area but the plans have been hindered by the fact that no construction companies are willing to take on the job due to the danger of the area.

One in seven Swedish girls sexually molested

The number of Swedes who fell victims of some or all types of crime that are collectively defined as “crimes against individuals,” has sharply increased over the last two years, the National Security Survey (NTU) conducted by the Swedish Crime Prevention Council (Bra) says. Crimes against individuals involve assault, threats, sexual offenses, mugging, fraud and harassment under the Bra classification.

According to the survey, 15.6% of the Swedish population were subjected to some or all of these types of crime in 2016, which is more than two percent higher than in the previous year.

The 2016 crime rate is said to be the highest one recorded since the Bra started conducting its annual crime surveys. The report went on to say that the number of harassment, sexual offenses and fraud cases saw the biggest increase over recent years. Out of six types of offenses mentioned in the survey, five rose to their highest level on record in 2016. The number of assault cases reached its second-highest level over a decade, the report shows.

The number of victims of fraud rose from 3% to 4.3% of the entire Swedish population while the number of those who were subjected to threats or harassments increased from 4% to about 5.5% from 2014 to 2016. At the same time, the number of the victims of sexual offenses doubled from less than 1% to 2.5%.

“Young women aged between 16 and 24 is the group that’s most subject to sexual offenses, with 14% of young women stating that they were victims of at least one such crime during 2016,” the Bra said. It also added that most crimes recorded in the survey had not been reported to police.

The council said that sexual offenses and harassment were the least reported types of offense as only 11% of those subjected to such crimes reported the incidents to police. “The most common reason for not reporting the crime is that the victim does not believe the police can do anything,” Thomas Hvitfeldt, a unit manager at Bra, said, commenting on the issue.

The survey, however, “gives no answers” to the reasons behind the increase of these particular types of crime, the council said in a press release. It added that “additional analysis” is needed to better understand the causes of the trend. The survey is based on interviews with approximately 12,000 people aged between 16 and 79. It has been carried out annually since 2006.

Swedish rape victim kills herself when police drop their investigation

A Swedish girl committed suicide after finding out the police had closed the investigation into her rape by two migrant men from the Middle East one of whom lived on the same landing in the block of flats as her.

This is a translation of her last message, posted just before her death

Victims of rape! Those who do not want to know – don’t read this! He who raped me got a chance here in Sweden. He lives next door to me and a friend of his was there that night. Everything happened in my own house. Late one evening the doorbell rang and I thought something happened to my neighbour, who is seriously ill with cancer, but no… I was trapped in my bedroom, where he raped me while his mate was standing in the hall. Despite reports, interrogation, forensic investigation which found bruising/damage caused by rape, gynaecological investigation proving the same, technicians finding evidence in my home, etc. I still received a phone call from the police on my 30th birthday that he was released because of lack of evidence… His friend has been haunting me since that day, looking me up online under false names, and stalking me in real life. What does the police do? – NOTHING!!

Some bits and pieces

It must be love, love, love

Two beautiful love stories from the last couple of weeks:

  • A 14-year-old boy has been arrested on charges of sexually assaulting a hen in Pakistan’s Punjab province. Mansab Ali, a resident of Hafizabad, some 200km from Lahore, told police that his neighbour Ansar Hussain “abducted” his hen on November 11 and “raped” it. The hen died while being sexually assaulted by Hussain. Station House Officer Sarfraz Anjum told The Express Tribune that the suspect had been arrested after a medical examination of the hen confirming the sexual assault.
  • Police have arrested a 23-year-old Syrian for allegedly raping a pony at a children’s zoo in Berlin; the man’s crime was witnessed by shocked visitors who took a photo of the incident and handed it over to the authorities. The incident occurred at the Kinderbauernhof (children’s farm) area of the German capital’s Goelitzer Park. The man was spotted by a babysitter, who was visiting the zoo with a child. “My babysitter was at Goerlitzer Park with our son when they witnessed the man carrying out a sexual act on the pony,” a woman told the Berliner Morgenpost, adding that her babysitter had informed park staff about the incident but is unwilling to talk about it anymore because it was too traumatizing.


    Please give generously to BBC ‘Executives In Need’

    Today is finally the BBC’s ‘CHILDREN IN NEED’ day.

    The BBC claims that “every penny you give makes a difference”. But a difference for whom? The children in need? Or the BBC bureaucrats and pen-pushers?

    Before you hand over your money, let me just tell you a few inconvenient truths about this great charitable event. Then you can judge for yourself whether you really should be throwing your already heavily-taxed cash into that great, corrupt, politically-biased, left-wing, steaming cesspit of parasitical, self-serving, overpaid, over-pensioned bureaucrats that is the BBC.

    The BBC’s CHILDREN IN NEED charity only has 110 employees. But they seem to be awfully lucky employees indeed. While the average employee cost (salary, NI and pension contributions) at our larger charities is between £20,000 and £30,000, the employee cost at the BBC’s CHILDREN IN NEED is a wonderful £42,546, slightly up from £41,270 just two years ago . That’s considerably higher than employee costs at charities like OxfamSave the Children, Red Cross and Age UK:

    Moreover, the CHILDREN IN NEED boss managing these 110 people (probably all based in comfortable offices in Salford) pocketed about £110,440 of our ‘charitable donations’ in 2015 and £119,934 in 2016 – an 8% increase in just one year. Not much austerity for him. That’s almost as much as the boss at Oxfam who got £137,773 in salary and pension for managing over 5,000 employees across the world, many of them in some of the world’s most dangerous countries and generating and spending income of over £140m, rather more than the BBC CHILDREN IN NEED’s more modest £57m.

    Current employees at the BBC’s CHILDREN IN NEED are fortunate enough to be eligible for one of the most generous pension schemes in Britain – the BBC’s pension scheme, which will give them guaranteed, inflation-protected pensions for the rest of their lives.

    Sadly for us licence-fee payers and for contributors to CHILDREN IN NEED, the BBC’s pension scheme is so unbelievably generous to BBC employees that it doesn’t have enough money to meet its liabilities. In fact, it has a shortfall of over £1bn. No problem – the BBC has decided to fatten up its own pension scheme with our money. Over the 12 years from 2014 to 2026 around £905,000,000 extra of our money (in addition to the regular contributions the BBC makes each month for each employee) will be put into the BBC pension scheme to ensure all BBC employees can have a comfortable, secure, well-rewarded retirement at our expense. So, Fiona Bruce and Angela Rippon and others of their ilk can relax in the knowledge that we will be paying for their luxury lives for many more decades.

    As for the CHILDREN IN NEED part of this pension scheme, it was also underfunded and so in 2015 got an extra £274,000 of our charitable donations which rose to £298,000 in 2016. The BBC CHILDREN IN NEED would need 29,800 people donating £10 each just to help top up the CHILDREN IN NEED employees’ pension scheme for this year.

    Do you really want your charity donations ending up in the pockets of arrogant, jobs-for-life, virtue-signalling, self-serving BBC executives and penpushers?

Autocracy ⇒ Democracy ⇒ Pathocracy

My thanks to a reader for sending me a definition of a word I had never heard of – Pathocracy

Definition: pathocracy (n). A system of government created by a small pathological minority that takes control over a society of normal people; from Greek pathos, “feeling, pain, suffering”; and kratos, “rule”

Polish thinker Lobaczewski adopted the term “ponerology”, which is derived from the Greek word poneros, from the branch of theology dealing with the study of evil.

A form of government interesting to ponerologists is one they have called pathocracy, in which individuals with personality disorders (especially psychopathy) occupy positions of power and influence. The result is a totalitarian system characterized by a government turned against its own people.

Soros? The EU elites? The British elites?

A pathocracy may emerge when a society is insufficiently guarded against the typical and inevitable minority of such abnormal pathology. Lobaczewski argues that in such cases these individuals infiltrate an institution or state, prevailing moral values are perverted into their opposite, and a coded language like Orwell’s doublethink circulates into the mainstream, using paralogic and paramoralism in place of genuine logic and morality.

A pathocracy can take many forms and can insinuate itself covertly into any seemingly just system or ideology. As such it can masquerade under the guise of a democracy or theocracy as well as more openly oppressive regimes.


1. suppression of individualism and creativity.
2. impoverishment of artistic values.
3. impoverishment of moral values; a social structure based on self-interest and one-upmanship, rather than altruism.
4. fanatical ideology; often a corrupted form of a valid viable ‘trojan’ ideology which is perverted into a pathological form, bearing little resemblance to the substance of the original.
5. intolerance and suspicion of anyone who is different, or who disagrees with the state.
6. centralized control.
7. widespread corruption.
8. secret activities within government, but surveillance of the general population. (In contrast, a healthy society would have transparent government processes, and respect for privacy of the individual citizen).
9. paranoid and reactionary government.
10. excessive, arbitrary, unfair and inflexible legislation; the power of decision making is reduced/removed from the citizens’ everyday lives.
11. an attitude of hypocrisy and contempt demonstrated by the actions of the ruling class, towards the ideals they claim to follow, and towards the citizens they claim to represent.
12. controlled media, dominated by propaganda.
13. extreme inequality between the richest and poorest.
14. endemic use of corrupted psychological reasoning such as paramoralisms, conversive thinking and doubletalk.
15. rule by force and/or fear of force.
16. people are considered as a ‘resource’ to be exploited (hence the term “human resources”), rather than as individuals with intrinsic human worth.
17. spiritual life is restricted to inflexible and indoctrinare schemes. Anyone attempting to go beyond these boundaries is considered a heretic or insane, and therefore dangerous.
18. arbitrary divisions in the population (class, ethnicity, creed) are inflamed into conflict with one another.
19. suppression of free speech – public debate, demonstration, protest.
20. violation of basic human rights, for example: restriction or denial of basic life necessities such as food, water, shelter; detainment without charge; torture and abuse; slave labour.

Are we living in a pathocracy?

Looking at the above definition, there seem to be an awful lot of similarities between what is happening in Britain and Western Europe and a pathocracy:

  • The ruling elites with their pathological obsession with political correctness have turned against the people
  • They are trying to flood our continent with millions of mostly low-IQ, inbred, violent, misogynist, intolerant, unemployable Third-Worlders destroying social cohesion and 2,000 years of Judeo-Christian civilisation
  • Free speech has been crushed by the invention of supposed ‘hate crimes’ which are only used against the indigenous population. So, a bacon sandwich eaten in the wrong place or a sarcastic comment on a bus or in a supermarket becomes a ‘hate crime’. But a bomb exploded at a concert full of teenagers is “just a normal part of life in a big city”
  • While claiming they are short of resources to fight real crime, the police have managed to find the money for 900 officers to spend their days trawling the Internet in search of supposed ‘hate speech’ in order to prevent anyone expressing any views which deviate from those put out by the governing elites
  • The media have abandoned all pretence at independence and now just parrot the views of the politically-correct elites. Anyone who dares to deviate from the politically-correct message is lambasted as a bigot, racist, fascist or whatever and will generally either be forced into a grovelling apology or else have their career destroyed
  • The elites are desperately trying to divert our attention away from their destruction of our civilisation by inventing fake enemies (Russia?). Meanwhile they dance to the tune and the money of West-loathing  billionaires like George Soros who has recently donated $18bn to groups trying to wreck our countries and society allowing the elites to impose totalitarian control – in our own interests, of course
  • Words have come to mean the opposite of their original meanings – grown military-age male economic migrants have become ‘child refugees’; diversity has actually led to isolated mono-cultural communities who refuse to integrate; democracy is when we vote the way the elites tell us – when we don’t vote as our rulers command, that’s ‘populism’ and we’re told to vote again till we give the ‘right answer’; anti-fa (those who supposedly are fighting against fascism) are actually the real fascists as they forbid any views which contradict their own
  • Sweden has already been handed over to the invading millions and Belgium looks like being the next country to surrender

There are many similar indications which suggest that most Western countries have moved from autocracy through a period of democracy and are now entering a period of pathocracy.

It seems that only a catastrophic event – a breakdown in society and extreme violence somewhere – can save us from the totalitarian hell where the elites are trying to take us.

It woz Putin and the Russkies wot done it!

I wasn’t going to write a blog today. But the anti-Russian propaganda spewing out from hapless Theresa May and the British mainstream media is so ludicrous that there’s a need to show it up for the garbage it is.

Let’s try to deal with a couple of May’s and the mainstream media’s ridiculous claims:

Russia invading other countries

In her recent Mansion House speech, May claimed that Russia was destabilising the world by invading other countries. She based this ‘judgement’ on the fact that Russia has taken over the pro-Russian Crimea and was supporting pro-Russian separatists in the Ukraine.

Meanwhile Britain has participated in the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and the overthrow of Libya’s ruler. Every one of Britain’s interventions has been a disaster resulting in the unnecessary loss of hundreds of thousands of innocent lives and the invasion of Europe by millions of fake refugees who will eventually take over our continent and destroy 2,000 years of civilisation

Compared to Britain’s mass murder of people in countries where Britain had no right to interfere, I’d say that Russia’s activities have been rather minor. Wouldn’t you?

Russia using propaganda to influence elections

The next great anti-Russian claim is that the real reason Trump beat the repulsive Clinton in the USA and the British voted for Brexit is due to Russian propaganda and ‘fake news’ on the Internet. There are a couple of problems with this:

  1. The Russians may well have sent out thousands of pro-Brexit messages and stories. Who really knows? But the Remain side had the BBC, C4 News, the Times, Guardian, Independent, Mirror, the Treasury, the Bank of England, the CBI, trade unions etc all spewing out anti-Brexit propaganda. Plus we had direct threats to our economic future made by Hussein al Obama. How is this tsunami of pro-Remain nonsense from the ruling elites different from possible Russian sources sending pro-Brexit comments?
  2. We’re constantly told that those who voted for Trump and Brexit are the less well-educated, backward, poorer sections of society. These are precisely the people least likely to use the Internet for their news. The Russia-hating elites can’t have it both ways. They claim it was the stupid unwashed who didn’t vote the way the elites told them to vote. If that’s the case, then this group is precisely the one least likely to be influenced by Russian Internet propaganda

Russia is not the real threat – and ordinary people know this

May’s speech and the media’s current obsession with attacking Russia is just a diversionary tactic. To divert our attention from the almost unbelievable mess our rulers are making of the Brexit process. Perhaps they will even try to use the supposed ‘Russian interference’ to nullify the referendum result or call another referendum? Who knows what depths they will sink to?

I have repeatedly written about how our Izlumophiliac rulers are making a catastrophic historical mistake. The West and Russia both face the same threat – Izlumizm.

We should be uniting with Russia against this threat.

Instead we are handing over our continent to our enemies while our rulers try to stoke a fake conflict with Russia.

This is madness!

This is what George Orwell warned us about in “1984”

Here’s the truth behind the manufactured media outrage against Johnson and Gove

(Tuesday/Wednesday blog)

I’m no fan of bumbling Boris Johnson. Or of backstabbing Michael Gove. But I’ve been outraged over the hypocrisy, lies and media-manufactured outrage over Johnson’s and Gove’s comments about the British/Iranian woman currently locked up in an Iranian prison. So, I thought it worthwhile using today’s blog to give my few readers the true facts about the story – facts they’ll never hear from the BBC and Channel 4 lynch mob being set against Boris Johnson and now Michael Gove

Fact 1 – Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is an Iranian

We’re repeatedly told by the howling media that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is a British citizen and therefore deserves the protection of the Foreign Office. In fact, she has dual nationality and probably travelled to Iran using her Iranian passport as that would avoid having to apply for a visa. This means that for the Iranians she is an Iranian citizen and therefore subject to Iran’s laws (however reprehensible we believe those laws may be). And, according to Iranian law, anyone criticising Iranian rulers is headed for an awful long time in prison

Fact 2 – The Iranians do not dispute that she was on holiday

The media and Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s husband keep repeating that she is innocent of any crime as she was in Iran on a private holiday visiting her family. The Iranians do NOT dispute this version of events. They are angry with her for work she did in Britain several years before her latest visit.

Fact 3 – She may have been involved in training Iranian journalists

Tehran’s prosecutor general said in October that Zaghari-Ratcliffe was being held because she ran “a BBC Persian online journalism course which was aimed at recruiting and training people to spread propaganda against Iran”.

In fact, Zaghari-Ratcliffe worked for BBC Media Action between February 2009 and October 2010 before moving to Thomson Reuters Foundation, the news agency’s charitable arm, as a project manager. The BBC’s Media Action is a charity which works to support journalism around the world and (as far as I understand) was involved in the development and dissemination of an online course for training journalists which was used by several Iranian journalists. The normally lefty-biased Amnesty International has also confirmed that this was why Zaghari-Ratcliffe was arrested.

BBC Media Action has described the Iranian accusations as ridiculous, saying that Zaghari-Ratcliffe had a junior administrative role. But Tehran’s objection shows that it is under the impression that she played a bigger role. One thing is certain – we will never be told the truth about Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s real role at the BBC

Fact 4 – She took a huge risk going to Iran

When you go to Iran, you’re going back about 1,500 years in time. Being an Iranian, Zaghari-Ratcliffe should have known that. Moreover, in 2014 several Iranian journalists who took part in the BBC Persian Service journalists’ training programme were arrested and given lengthy prison sentences.

The Iranian establishment loathes the London-based BBC Persian Service and considers it to be a subversive arm of MI6 aimed at fomenting regime change in Iran. The BBC World Service, which controls the foreign language services, received funding until 2014 from the FCO – a factor that has fanned the Iranian establishment’s distrust.

If you have dual nationality then you know that you are taking a risk if you go to the country of your ‘other’ nationality, especially if that country is run by undemocratic autocrats who delight in manipulating the lives of individuals for their strategic advantage. So she took that risk.

In view of Iran’s record on human rights, Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s possible previous involvement in the BBC journalists’ training programme and the Iranian journalists’ arrests, it could seem more than careless for her to visit Iran

Fact 5 – Boris Johnson’s statement may not have been as inaccurate as the media suggest

Boris Johnson would have been briefed by the Foreign Office that Zaghari-Ratcliffe had been involved in training Iranian journalists. It’s hardly something he could have made up. Although Johnson expressed himself poorly given that Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s latest visit was just to see her family, his statement that Zaghari-Ratcliffe may have been involved (however indirectly) in training Iranian journalists was probably accurate. Although she wouldn’t have been doing this on her most recent visit as Zaghari-Ratcliffe no longer worked for the BBC.

Blaming Boris makes no sense. What is the U.K. supposed to do? Bomb Tehran? Occupy Abadan? Colonialism is over! Why are there no demonstrations outside the Iranian Embassy? Why does the BBC not give the Iranian Ambassador a hard time over this and demand answers? Or is the agenda not exactly about Ms Zaghari-Ratcliffe?


What we’re actually seeing is a concerted media campaign to get rid of two influential Brexiteeers – Johnson and Gove – in an attempt to bring down Theresa May’s Government and sabotage Brexit.

What is particularly vomit-inducing is the sight of people like the BBC’s Andrew Marr harassing Gove and others while not even mentioning Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s work for the BBC which is the real reason for her arrest and imprisonment. In yesterday’s Times, Gove was lambasted for supposedly casting doubt on Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s claim she was on holiday. All that happened was that Gove said he didn’t know why Zaghari-Ratcliffe was in Iran. Given that Gove is Environment Secretary, why would he know? And why did Abdul al Marr even ask him the question?

So, once again, please don’t believe the mainstream media’s hyperventilating outrage. This story isn’t really about Zaghari-Ratcliffe – it’s really an undemocratic attempt by the privileged, UK-hating, treacherous, europhiliac elites in the media and the Labour Party to damage our Government and prevent us leaving the clutches of Germany’s Fourth Reich – otherwise known as the EU.

Oh, and here’s the first of the John Lewis Christmas ad spoofs:

Let them kill Christians! Our rulers don’t care!

(Monday blog)

Obama’s Izlumophilia?

I have previously (June 2016) written about how, under Obama, pitifully few of the Syrian ‘refugees’ allowed into the USA were from the two main persecuted groups Christians and Yazidis.

Christians used to make up about 10% of the Syrian population. Yet between the start of the conflict and May 2016, of a total of 4,646 Syrian refugees admitted into the USA, only 60 (1.3%) were Christians; 4,422 (95.1%) were Sunni M*sl*ms. The remaining 163 include Shi’a, other M*sl*ms, Zoroastrians, Baha’i, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Yazidi, and refugees identified as “other religion” or as having “no religion”.

Trump’s ‘Christians first’ policy

On taking up office, democratically-elected US President Donald Trump issued an executive order giving Christians priority as throughout the Middle East they were clearly the persecuted minority. The results of Trump’s ‘Christians First’ policy have been stunning. Here are the figures showing the % Christian refugees being granted asylum in the US:

These include refugees from all countries so are not comparable with the figures for Syrian refugees admitted under Hussein al Obama. But they still show a rising % of Christians and a falling % of the adherents the world’s most admired religion.

For more than obvious reasons, you won’t have seen this Trump success story reported on the Izlumophiliac, Christian-hating BBC or C4 News.

Britain and the UN are still Izlumophiliac

But now we’re finding out that the UN and UK Government have been playing the Hussein al Obama game – grovelling to the Sunni Moozerlums while leaving Christians and Yazidis to be slaughtered:

A group called Barnabas Aid said numbers obtained in a Freedom of Information Request to the Home Office showed in 2015 that out of 2,637 refugees pushed to the UK by the UN, only 43 (1.6%) were Christian, just 13 were Yazidi and there was only one Shia Moozerlum.

In 2016 the statistics were even worse. Out of 7,499 refugees only 27 (0.4%) were Christians, 5 were Yazidis and 13 Shia Moozerlums.

The Barnabas Fund is an international, interdenominational Christian aid agency that supports Christians who face discrimination or persecution as a consequence of their faith.

Further, Barnabas Aid reported that the UK Government tried to conceal what it was doing in partnership with the UN:

Barnabas Aid said that last week it “finally obtained figures proving that the UN has only recommended tiny token numbers of Syrian Christians, Yazidis and other minorities for resettlement in the UK”

Disturbingly, UK officials tried to prevent the release of this information. Barnabas Aid submitted a Freedom of Information request to the UK Home Office in February. And in spite of being legally required to release it within 28 days, officials failed to do so and repeatedly stalled or simply did not answer correspondence.

Eventually, Barnabas Aid lodged a formal complaint with the Information Commissioner’s office. On 19 September the Information Commissioner issued a formal notice requiring the Home Office to release this information within 35 calendar days or face contempt of court proceedings. Even then, the information was only released at the very last minute after Barnabas Aid had contacted the immigration minister’s office, alerting him to the situation and asking him personally to ensure civil servants complied with the order.

It seems our West-hating, Christian-loathing rulers hope that Christians will be wiped out in the Middle East in the same way that they stood by the sidelines in 1939-1945 and watched with glee while Hitler was exterminating the Jews.

It seems that Donald Trump is one of the few Western leaders prepared to defend our Judeo-Christian heritage.

Stupid, more stupid, unbelievably stupid

(weekend blog)


Two days ago I was watching the last few minutes of a TV quiz called Tipping Point. A lady, who must have had some education as she is a former nurse, was asked the following question:

Q: “Which of these political parties could be called ‘left wing’? Is it the Greens, the Conservatives or UKIP?”

(tough question, I know)

A: The lady replied – “I don’t know much about politics and I’m always getting ‘left-wing’ and ‘right-wing’ confused. But I know it’s not the Greens. I don’t think it’s the Conservatives. So I’ll go with UKIP”

And to think that this person is allowed to vote! Aaaarrrrggghh!

More stupid

A few days ago I passed a group of about thirty immigrants and a few libtard supporters protesting and holding banners demanding that their families should be allowed to join them in Europe and that all borders should be torn down.

In my usual polite way I suggested to them that if they didn’t like life in Europe, they could always go home to their own countries. This suggestion wasn’t met with much enthusiasm, except for enthusiasm to beat me up. But anyway, some of the libtards – young, university-educated men and their admiring girlfriends – did start to engage in a discussion  with me.

It went something like this:

Me: “If you don’t like the way we do things in Europe, why not just go back to your own countries?”

Them: “You’re a fucking racist!”

Me: “Wait a minute. You want all borders torn down? So, once we remove borders, how many people from the Third World would you allow into Europe?”

Them: “Fuck off, racist!”

Me: “Would it be 10 million? 50 million? 100 million? 500 million? Because if you removed borders, it’s certain that hundreds of millions would move to Europe”

Them: “You’re just a fucking racist. Who the fuck wants to talk to you? Why don’t you just fuck off!”

Unbelievably stupid

A violent Somali Muslim criminal with 30 convictions to his name has won almost £80,000 compensation from British taxpayers after a leftist judge decided he was locked up for too long. Abdulrahman Mohammed (below), 39, has been jailed more than a dozen times for crimes including affray, knife possession and multiple assaults and robberies:

Yet he still won’t be deported, thanks to the sharia-compliant European Court of ‘Human Rights’

But a judge has now ruled that the Home Office kept him in prison for 445 days too long whilst trying to deport him:

Despite describing him as ‘a prolific and violent offender’, Judge Edward Pepperall QC awarded him £78,500 in compensation. In a description described as ‘ironic understatement’ in court, Mohammed’s own lawyer had said ‘he might not be considered an asset to society’ The judge said: ‘I can well understand why the Home Secretary might wish to deport him.’

But Judge Pepperall ruled that Mohammed had been ‘falsely imprisoned’ and was ‘entitled to justice in a civilised society’.

The European Court of Human Rights had ordered that he stay in Britain despite the government’s attempts to deport him and it has now been ruled he was unlawfully detained while authorities worked out how to handle his case.

I wonder how many millions of pounds this (IMHO) repulsive, worthless individual will cost British taxpayers during his completely useless life causing misery to everyone he comes into contact with?