(Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday blog – I’ll start 2018 slowly to give readers time to drift back)
We all know that all races have exactly the same level of intelligence. To think otherwise would be a “thought crime” and to express such a thought would be a “hate crime”.
But almost every time there’s an Izlumic terror attack, which as we all know has nothing to do with Izlum, the usual excuse wheeled out is that the perpetrator had mental health problems and/or drug problems.
But I’d like to play a game in this blog. The game is called “Let’s Pretend to be Politically Incorrect”. In this game, we pretend to believe the extensive research proving there are differences in intelligence between different races. I know this idea is absurd, but please stay with me for the moment.
The normal IQ Bell Curve
Here is a normal distribution of IQ levels in a typical Western country:
The average is 100 and most people tend to be bunched near to the average.
When IQ tests were more widely used, the lower levels of IQ were classified as follows: Borderline Deficiency (IQ 70-80), Moron (IQ 50-69), Imbecile (IQ 20-49) and Idiot (below 20).
You’ll see that about 14% of Westerners fall into the Borderline Deficiency category and only 2.1% are classed as either Morons or Imbeciles.
IQ levels are probably the result of two things – heredity (the IQ inherited from your parents) and environment (the complexity of the environment in which you grow up and live) – the more complex the environment, the more your IQ is likely to develop. For example, it’s possible that the complexity of the Chinese and Japanese languages helps their children develop higher IQs and there’s evidence that children who study music also develop higher IQs
Differences between different races
Now, as part of our game, here are the results of IQ studies for the main regions of the world along with the regions’ GDP per head of population:
We could also look at this in terms of Bell Curves:
(Asian in the above Bell Curve drawing of course means Japanese, Chinese and Koreans etc not the ‘Asians’ our press refer to when trying to obscure the religion of our many rape gangs)
As you’ll see, the average IQ of Hispanics and North African Arabs is just 85 (in our game, not in real life, of course) meaning that about 40% of them would be classed as mentally deficient in Europe. And then when you look at Sub-Saharan Africa, the average IQ is just above 70 meaning that probably 80% of them would be classed (in our game) as mentally retarded.
Our rulers’ race replacement policies
When Chinese or Hindus or Jews or Sikhs move into a country or an area, you don’t hear all the progressive lefties and virtue-signallers screaming about how we need to do more to integrate the new arrivals. Why not? Because they come from races with high IQs (in our game, of course) and so get jobs or set up businesses and make sure their children get education to become the doctors, teachers, scientists and professionals of the future.
But our rulers have decided to open Europe’s borders to millions of multi-cultural enrichers who come from races with much lower average IQs than Western Europeans (in our game, of course, not in politically-correct reality). Using the figures on average IQs in our game we can see that over half the newcomers are likely to have an IQ that Europeans would consider makes them mentally retarded. This means they can’t learn any useful skills to get jobs and have nothing to contribute to our society. In Sweden just 3% of ‘New Swedes’ have taken advantage of generous government support to get an education – an amazing 97% can’t be bothered to get any education and/or don’t have sufficient IQ to benefit from any education. Moreover, latest research suggests that the median IQ of the Swedish population has fallen by a point every four years since 1995.
This inability of the millions of Merkel’s, Macron’s and May’s multi-cultural enrichers to function in an advanced Western society has at least two destructive consequences:
1. Criminality
Due to their low IQs, many of the new wave of multi-cultural enrichers are likely to drift into drug use and criminality. After all, if they can’t get the things we can have through working and earning, they’ll take them anyway through burglaries, robberies and rapes.
2. Hate and Violence
The other typical reaction of someone who is unable to function in an advanced Western society because of their low IQ is a need to find someone else to blame for their problems. After all, they cannot accept that they are the agents of their own misfortune because most of them are not intelligent enough to function in Western society. So they will tend to be easily seduced by any cult or belief system that tells them they are really superior to us Westerners and that they should take over and destroy our societies to impose their own vision of society – violence, barbarism, rape, murder, tribalism and constant conflict – on us.
Conclusion
Of course, all the above is just a game – “Let’s Pretend to be Politically Incorrect”. Clearly we all know that all races have exactly the same IQ levels and therefore everything I’ve written above must be total rubbish.
I really am a complete idiot to have written such tripe!
By the way, given that all races are exactly equal in every way in a world of perfect political correctness, I wonder why so many men of colour have won gold medals in the 100 metres Olympics sprint and so few Chinese have? Odd, don’t you think?
(click on title if you wish to leave a relevant comment)
Normally at this wonderful time of the year, we at snouts-in-the-trough like to wish our readers a multi-cultural ‘Winterval Holiday’ and a diversity-rich 2018. In the interests of not offending anyone who is not a Christian we, like many schools, businesses and other institutions in the West, have tended to drop the word ‘Christmas’.
But this year we’ll break with tradition and use the politically-incorrect word ‘Christmas’. Because this year we’d like to remember all the Christians across the world being persecuted and beaten and killed by you know who purely for being Christians.
While our cowardly rulers try to look the other way as they grovel to an ever more aggressive Religion of You Know What takeover of the once civilised West, Donald Trump and Viktor Orban seem to be the only leaders who have dared take steps to protect our Judeo-Christian heritage. As we’ve shown previously, under Hussein al-Obama, over 90% of ‘refugees’ accepted into the USA were from al-Obama’s favourite religion. But under Trump around half of refugees accepted are now Christians and that percentage is still rising.
Here’s our very own Theresa May looking thoroughly sick as a Christian charity Open Doors UK, along with an Iraqi pastor and Conservative MP Dame Caroline Spelman presented a burnt Bible to Mrs May on Wednesday in Parliament:
Their goal was to highlight the plight of Christians and minorities in the Middle East and ask for help in securing a better future for them. Father Daniel from Erbil in Iraq gave Mrs May the Arabic Bible, which was found at St Mary’s shrine in Karamles, Iraq, after been burnt by IS.
Theresa May doesn’t look too thrilled at this reminder of which religion is actually the most persecuted in the world and that her very own bestest friends for life are the persecutors.
Anyway, as we break for the Christian festival of Christmas, we hope that we all avoid the fate that our treacherous ruling elites are preparing for us in the next few years.
We’ll be back on Monday 8 January 2018 with lots of new stories including our ever popular review of the best rapes of 2017 committed by May’s and Merkel’s multi-cultural enrichers.
Merry Christmas! And a violence-free New Year!
(As usual, we ask readers NOT to watch the video below. It is NOT funny! It should be banned! Everything that makes fun of or criticises our ruling elites’ plans for us should be banned! And, under Director of Public Prosecutions boss Alison Saunders’s ever-widening definition of a ‘hate crime’, everything our rulers disapprove of soon will be banned)
I’m not going to watch this video. Though I have no doubt that it is appalling and I advise you not to watch it either.
After all, you might agree with what is being said and that would be ‘hate thought’ which is a ‘hate crime’.
Although, maybe it doesn’t matter. If you’re a white indigenous Brit who believes that your country somehow belongs to people like yourself, rather than to often violent, often misogynist, often barely-literate, often unemployable invading Third-World hordes, then maybe you’re already guilty of ‘hate thought’ and ‘hate speech’? And both of these are ‘hate crimes’ in the eyes of our Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, who defined ‘hate crimes’ as any statement written or spoken or otherwise expressed or any action “which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice”.
According to this definition, if I believe that you have expressed an opinion that is motivated by hostility or prejudice against anyone, than you are automatically guilty of a ‘hate crime’ just because I perceive your supposed ‘hostility’. It is totally irrelevant in today’s Britain that you may not have been hostile at all. What is important is that someone else perceived your ‘hostility’. Forget the old-fashioned “innocent until proved guilty”.
However, there are exceptions to the use of ‘hate crimes’. If you are a multi-cultural enricher, however much foam-flecked bile you spew out against Christians and Jews and apostates and atheists, however many white girls you gang-rape and gang-sodomise, however many people you stab or deliberately run over with a car or truck and however many people (even if they are children) you blow up at concerts or other public events, then you are never guilty of ‘hate crime’. No, you have merely misunderstood the teachings of the world’s most peaceful religion. So you cannot have committed a ‘hate crime’.
And here’s the video I have not watched and you should not watch either:
You’ll all know that most advanced Western countries (including Japan) are facing what alarmists like to call a ‘demographic time bomb’. Actually, all that is happening is that the indigenous populations are not reproducing at replacement rate.
This has two main consequences:
A shrinking economy as older people tend to spend less
The number of working age people to every pensioner, or the “old age support ratio”, is forecast to fall to 2.9 by 2050, from 3.3 in the mid-1970s to 2006. And the ‘experts’ give us warnings such as “Tax revenue from those in work may fail to keep up with demand for social security and healthcare from an increasingly large proportion of people aged over 65 and out of work and who have poor health”.
A once in a lifetime opportunity?
But is this situation actually the disaster our rulers and the ‘experts’ and journalists in search of an attention-grabbing story predict? After all, is Britain a better place with an ever-growing GDP as the population rises to 70 million people then 80 million then 90 million? What if our rulers were to realise that the quality of life in Britain would actually improve if we could slowly manage the population down towards 55 million or 50 million or even fewer people? There would be less overcrowding, less congestion, less pressure on public services, less pollution. Yes, in terms of GDP the economy would shrink, but perhaps this would give a better life for everyone?
As for the fact that there would be fewer people of working age supporting the retired – well firstly, with the pension age rising and in order to maintain a healthy life, many people are choosing to work well past 65. And secondly, with robotics and automation, there are ever fewer people working in industry and agriculture producing ever more. So ratios of working people to the retired that applied in the past are no longer meaningful or relevant.
Of course, this summary is necessarily over-simplified. But hopefully it shows that with a little imagination, the supposed ‘demographic time bomb’ is nothing of the sort. In fact, it’s a wonderful opportunity to substantially improve the quality of life of British people – precisely the people whose interests our rulers are supposed to work for.
Turning opportunity into catastrophe?
But what have our rulers done? They’ve taken the opposite path and decided that we must keep increasing the population to maintain supposed ‘economic growth’. But it’s not totally obvious that many of the people they are bringing into Europe and thus Britain are really going to make a substantial contribution to our economy.
Are we getting this?
or are we getting this?
Not all the members of the migrant invasion army are highly-educated doctors, architects and engineers. In fact, well over 95% of all the migrants to Austria, Germany and Sweden over the last 2 to 3 years are unemployed and most have absolutely no intention of ever getting a job. Why not? Our rulers have the wonderful idea that we need more people of working age to support the increasing elderly population. But these ‘people of working age’ have to want to work. Unfortunately for our floundering rulers, many of the new arrivals have their own retirement plans – father as many children as possible with several wives and they could easily be getting €100,000 or £100,000 a year in benefits. If you can do this, why would you bother working?
So there is a more than insubstantial conflict between the ‘contributions’ our rulers hope the ‘New Europeans’ will make and the plans the ‘New Europeans’ have for their own lifelong comfort at our expense.
Running harder for ever less reward?
In Britain, there are more people in work than ever before. Moreover, more older people are working than ever before. The Government should be raking in tax revenues. But it isn’t. Every year the Government borrows increasing our national debt and the interest we’ll all have to pay. Why? Because the Government’s open-doors immigration policies mean we are importing ever more people who have no intention of ever contributing anything to our country and are only here for what they can leech from us.
I humbly propose that our useless rulers have managed to turn a huge opportunity into a catastrophe which we’ll all be paying for in an ever-declining quality of life – increased over-crowding, inter-communal violence, collapsing public services, terrorist attacks, pollution and social breakdown.
When Trump recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel last week, the “experts” and the Trump-hating libtards and the lefty buffoons at the BBC and Channel 4 News all claimed that Trump had made a massive blunder and they predicted Armageddon with vast, violent protests and a wave of terror across the world.
Rather than waves of protest, the waiting world got tepid statements of disapproval from otherwise-occupied Arab governments, demonstrations in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip that, combined, barely put a thousand activists in the streets and yes, four deaths: two demonstrators and two Hamas terrorists hit by an Israeli airstrike. Also two synagogues were fire-bombed in Swedistan. And some idiot blew himself up in New York.
All in all, not much sign of the lefties’ eagerly-predicted Armaggeddon
A generation ago, a US president’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital would, indeed, have led to mass demonstrations and widespread violence. But now? While the endlessly recycled experts snoozed, the Middle East changed profoundly.
Once the Palestinians were world-class experts at the propaganda game and a marvelous tool for Arab leaders to divert attention from their own greed, incompetence, failing economies and totalitarian cruelty. But the Arabs’ previously successful ‘victim status’ halo has been profoundly trashed – by themselves. We had al Qaeda, the so-called “Arab Spring” which turned into a winter of slaughter and bloodshed and ISIS which took cruelty and murder to new depths. And now we have increasing conflict between decaying Sunni (Saudi Arabia) power and rising Shia (Iranian) power.
But by far the most significant factor is that Israel has become an indispensable, if quiet, ally of Sunni states against Iran. Although well-armed, Saudi Arabia remains inept on the battlefield, bogged down in Yemen and terrified of Iranian gains in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Israel doesn’t need Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia definitely needs Israel.
Perhaps it’s finally time to blame the Palestinians, not Israel, for their lack of statehood. Since the failed 1948 Arab assault on newly reborn Israel, the Palestinians have had literally dozens of opportunities for an advantageous peace. Yet even Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton — no friends of Israel — ended up frustrated as Palestinian leaders, on the brink of peace time and again decided that three-quarters of the pie was insufficient. They wanted the whole of Israel and all Israelis put to death. As for Arab-loving Obama – he also apparently found it beyond his power to help the ‘peace-loving’ Palestinians either.
Yet again Trump has dared to defy the ‘experts’ and lefty libtards in the mainstream media. And yet again Trump has been right and proved the habitual, ‘we-know-best’ doomsayers wrong.
Apparently there’s an Asian proverb “The dog may bark, but the caravan moves on”. The Palestinians are still barking (and barking mad?) but the world has moved on. Meanwhile, all but the dimmest lefty libtard idiots are beginning to realise that Israel is the only admirable and livable state in the Middle East – a haven of civilisation, economic progress, scientific achievement and humanity surrounded by huge deserts of primitive, bloodthirsty barbarism. That’s why the lefties are always screaming for a boycott of Israeli products – they want to destroy a country that doesn’t fit into their pitifully inaccurate world view – “all Arabs good, all Israelis murderers”.
The Trump our media refuses to admit
Everything you’ll ever see or read about Trump in our mainstream media is mockingly critical of the US President for his supposed ignorance and blunders. And we’re repeatedly told he is the most unpopular president ever.
But here’s a video which tells a different story. This shows Trump actually leaving the comfort of the White House to address a rally of thousands of adoring supporters. I only watched the first few minutes, but I rather doubt any of our leaders – the three Ms (Merkel, Macron, May) – could achieve the same enthusiastic support if they even dared to leave their carefully protected cocoons:
Today I wanted to write about how Britain is being threatened by an Irish pederast (I hope that is a politically-correct term). But as some cretinous reader commented on yesterday’s blog about Global Warming bollox asking how it was that I thought I knew more about climate change than the oft-quoted “97% of scientists agree….”, I thought I’d explain, yet again, how the totally fraudulent “97% of scientists agree…” figure was conjured up.
Ever since their infamous “Hockey Stick” graph was shown to be based on fraudulent data, the Himalayan glaciers didn’t melt as predicted and there was a pause in warming, the Warmists have been desperately looking for a new weapon with which to attack anyone who didn’t subscribe to their Man-Made Global Warming cult.
The Warmists thought they had found their latest weapon of mass deception when some guy called Cook (or should that be “Crook”?) published a study claiming that about “97% of scientists agreed that Global Warming was caused by human activity” (Anthropogenic Global Warming – AGW). There’s only one problem – Mr Cook was either a liar or a buffoon.
Mr Cook’s group looked through the abstracts of 25 years of articles about supposed Global Warming – they didn’t read the actual articles! Based on just a few lines of each abstract (not the full article), they classed each article into one of 7 categories ranging from articles that appeared to endorse the AGW theory to those that rejected it (click on the image below to see the 7 categories more clearly):
The results were as follows:
1. Endorsed AGW with quantification – 65
2. Endorsed with no quantification – 934
3. “Implicit” endorsement – 2,934
4. Uncertain – 8,269
5. “Implicit” rejection – 53
6. Reject without quantification – 15
7. Reject with quantification – 10.
Total papers included – 12,280.
Then Mr Cook’s group did something very clever/dishonest (delete as appropriate). They took out the 8,269 papers which didn’t take a position. That left 3,933 papers which possibly endorsed the AGW theory and just 78 which rejected it. So suddenly you have just 4,011 papers which expressed an opinion and of these 3,933 (97%) could be interpreted as endorsing the AGW theory. This is madness. This is an absurd abuse of all mathematical and scientific processes. And remember, Cook’s group didn’t read the actual scientific papers – they just looked at the abstracts!
But here is the worst part of this (IMHO) fraud. There were a large bunch – 2,934 scientific papers (75% of those papers Cook’s group deemed to have taken a position on AGW) – which didn’t explicitly endorse AGW but which Mr Cook’s group (perhaps creatively?) interpreted as “implicitly” supporting the AGW theory.
Let’s look at the figures another way. There were 12,280 papers discussing supposed Global Warming. Of these, a minuscule 65 (0.5%) endorsed the AGW theory and were confident enough to quantify by how much the earth would warm. Then there were just 934 (7.6%) which endorsed the AGW theory, but were not confident enough to make any numerical predictions about the expected warming. So, we actually have a pathetic 8.1% that explicitly backed up the theory of AGW. This is laughable! And it’s rather far away from the claimed 97%! You can only get to the 97% by including the 2,934 papers which Cook’s group helpfully interpreted as “implicitly” supporting the AGW theory.
So, to claim that 97% of scientists agreed that humans are responsible for supposed Global Warming is utterly ludicrous. As usual with figures used by the Warmists, there seems to have been blatant manipulation of the data to prove a point that the data didn’t actually support.
Sorry there are so many numbers in today’s blog. But hopefully this analysis of the figures totally debunks once and for all the fanciful and misleading claim that the vast majority of scientists agree that supposed Global Warming is due to human activity.
It’s a pity that none of the politicians and journalists and Warmies who have parroted the “97% claim” bothered to look at how the original figures were manufactured as I have done.
A few weeks ago, BBC journalists were creaming their knickers in delight at a new UN report which revealed that last year’s CO2 levels were higher than they’d been for at least the past three million years.
Global levels of CO2 reached over 403 parts per million in 2016 and, as usual, BBC ‘experts’ blethered and moaned about the need to curb climate change before humanity causes its own extinction.
The BBC also made much of the World Meteorological Organization’s (WMO) claims that the last time in Earth’s history that CO2 concentrations were so high – about 3 million years ago – the entire Earth was around three degrees warmer, and sea levels were up to 20 metres higher than they are currently.
And, of course, we got the usual apocalyptic warnings: “Without rapid cuts in CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, we will be heading for dangerous temperature increases by the end of this century, well above the target set by the Paris climate change agreement,” WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas. “Future generations will inherit a much more inhospitable planet.”
But unlike slavering BBC supposed ‘journalists’ let’s apply a little analysis to the latest report. If we do, we can note three things:
CO2 levels have previously reached today’s levels – about 3 million years ago – long before the industrial revolution and long before the BBC had so many ‘experts’ to warn us about our imminent self-destruction. So, today’s rise in CO2 while rapid, has taken CO2 to levels that have been seen before in the Earth’s history and probably will be reached again
Last time CO2 reached current levels, sea levels were around 20 metres higher than they are currently. Ooops, if CO2 is ‘causing rising sea levels’, why are sea levels not approaching where they were 3 million years ago? In fact, as the Earth warms (either as part of a natural cycle or because of human activity – take your pick) sea levels are rising at around 3.2 mm a year. So at current rates of sea level rise, we’ve got a fair way to go before we get back to the 20 metres of 3 million years ago
The BBC and others of their ilk also always ‘forget’ to mention that CO2 has a fertilising effect and that increasing CO2 levels have been proven to increase plant growth leading to a ‘greening’ of some areas that were previously barren and increased food production in more fertile areas. The BBC doesn’t dare mention that increased CO2 can have positive as well as negative effects as that would totally destroy their party line that everything man does is destructive to the environment
And let us not forget that the same institutes and other scientific bodies that are screaming about supposed ‘Man-Made Global Warming’ are the very same organisations that were warning us in the 1970s about an impending new Ice Age:
This new Ice Age would wipe out agriculture in much of the Northern Hemisphere and lead to millions of deaths from starvation:
Well, they got that wrong. But if the ‘scientists’ keep predicting some climatic disaster or other, one day their predictions will be right, just as a broken clock is right twice a day.
Obviously I’m not a ‘scientist’ in receipt of a generous government grant to prove that Global Warming is due to human activity. All I’m suggesting is that it would be a rather good idea if the BBC applied a little intelligent analysis and balance to the increasingly alarmist and regularly discredited reports of the imminent extinction of the human race rather than hyperventilating every time a supposed ‘scientist’ decides to issue yet another ever more dire warning to get awarded yet another lucrative research grant.
This 14 second video is apparently from Germany. It appears to show some of Merkel’s migrant millions having a bit of innocent fun.
They start by asking an old man the way to the nearest Burger King. And when he turns to show them, they thank him in the only way they know how. Once the old man has fallen down, the ‘new Europeans’ start kicking him. But when they realise he’s already unconscious, they quickly lose interest. Hopefully, their next victim will provide them with a bit more entertainment.
And, of course, these highly-educated ‘new Europeans’, who are going to make such a huge contribution to our economy, film their attack and upload it onto the Internet to show their friends back home how wonderful their new life is.
Remind you of Clockwork Orange?
Enjoy this glimpse into our future:
And here’s why, one day, many of our children or grandchildren may decide to go and live in Poland:
We’ve all seen the headlines – Trump’s security adviser, General Mike Flynn, lied to FBI about contacts with the Russians. But, as far as I know, no mainstream media has bothered to report the nature of Flynn’s contacts with some highly-placed Russians.
That’s why I found the piece below by US commentator, Pat Buchanan, interesting. He suggests that just before the election Obama tried to sabotage a possible Trump presidency by expelling 35 Russian ‘diplomats’ thus causing tensions with the Russians and by backing an anti-Israel, anti-semitic resolution at the UN.
Reading Pat Buchanan’s piece, I do vaguely remember Obama expelling the Russian ‘diplomats’ and then the media’s surprise when, rather than retaliating, Putin invited US diplomats and their families to a Kremlin New Year’s party.
Anyway, see what you think. Does Buchanan’s explanation of events sound plausible?
Why did Gen. Mike Flynn lie to the FBI about his December 2016 conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak? Why did he not tell the FBI the truth?
As national security adviser to the president-elect, Flynn had called the ambassador. Message: Tell President Putin not to overreact to President Obama’s expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats. Trump will be president in three weeks, and we are committed to a new relationship.
Not only was this initiative defensible, it proved successful. Putin accepted the loss of his diplomats and country houses on Long lsland and the Eastern Shore. Rather than expel U.S. diplomats in retaliation, he invited them and their families to the Kremlin’s New Year’s parties.
“Great move…(by V. Putin),” tweeted Trump, “I always knew he was very smart.”
This columnist concurred: “Among our Russophobes, one can hear the gnashing of teeth. Clearly, Putin believes the Trump presidency offers Russia the prospect of a better relationship with the United States. He appears to want this, and most Americans seem to want the same. After all, Hillary Clinton, who accused Trump of being ‘Putin’s puppet,’ lost.”
Flynn, it now appears, was not freelancing, but following instructions. His deputy, K. T. McFarland, sent an email to six Trump advisers saying that Obama, by expelling the Russians, was trying to “box Trump in diplomatically.”
“If there is a tit-for-tat escalation,” warned McFarland, “Trump will have difficulty improving relations with Russia.” Exactly.
Flynn was trying to prevent Russian retaliation. Yet, as the ex-director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, he had to know his call to Kislyak was being monitored and recorded. So, again, why would he lie to the FBI about a conversation, the contents of which were surely known to the people who sent the FBI to question him? The other charge of lying about a call with Kislyak was Flynn’s request for Russian help in getting postponed or canceled a Security Council vote on a resolution denouncing Israeli settlements on the West Bank. Obama’s White House was backing the anti-Israel resolution. And Bibi Netanyahu had asked Trump to weigh in to block the vote.
Bottom line: Flynn, acting on instructions, tried to prevent a U.N. condemnation of Israel, and to dissuade Russia from a mass expulsion of U.S. diplomats, lest this poison the well against a rapprochement for which the American people had voted.
In the court of public opinion, Flynn’s actions would find broad support. Rather than deny knowledge of them, Trump should have taken credit for them.
Why the general would lie to the FBI about conversations he had to know U.S. intelligence had recorded is a puzzling question, but now also an irrelevant one, water over the dam. For Trump’s general is now the newly conscripted collaborator of the media-Mueller-Democrat-deep state conspiracy to overturn the election of 2016 and bring down the Trump presidency. Remarkable.
After 18 months, we have no evidence Trump colluded with Russia in hacking the emails of the DNC or John Podesta, which is what the FBI investigation was supposedly about. There is no conclusive evidence Flynn committed a crime when, as national security adviser-designate, he tried to prevent Obama from sabotaging the policies Trump had run on — and won on.
Yet there is evidence Russian intelligence agents colluded with a British spy in the pay of the oppo research arm of the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign — to find dirt on Donald Trump. And there is evidence James Comey’s FBI wanted to hire the British spy who appeared to have access to the Russian agents who appeared to possess all that wonderful dirt on the Donald.
It is hard to see how this ends well.
This weekend, after Flynn’s admission he lied to the FBI, Beltway media were slavering like Pavlov’s dogs at anticipated indictments and plea bargains by present and former White House aides, Trump family members, and perhaps Trump himself.
The joy on the TV talk shows was transparent.
Yet the media have already been badly damaged; first, by the relentless Trump attacks and the cheering for those attacks by a huge slice of the country; second, by their reflexive reaction. The media have behaved exactly like the “enemy” Trump said they were.
In this us-versus-them country, the media now seem to relish the role of “them.” The old proud journalistic boast to be objective and neutral reporters, observers and commentators is gone.
We are all partisans now.
As last Friday’s sudden 300-point drop in the Dow reveals, if Trump’s enemies bring him down, they will almost surely crash the markets and abort the recovery that took hold in Trump’s first year.
And if the establishment, repudiated by Trump’s victory, thinks it will be restored to the nation’s good graces if they destroy Trump, they are whistling past the graveyard. When Caesar falls, the cheering for Brutus and Cassius tends to die down rather quickly. Then their turn comes.
In 2005 police sergeant Mohammed Perwaze was tasked with helping to boost race relations in Darlington, working along with officials from the Darlington and County Durham County Racial Equality Council (DDREC).
At the time he was chairman of the force’s Black and Asian Police Association (BAPA).
So, our friend Mohammed Perwaze was a pretty key member of Darlington plods. He seems to have been a real poster boy for multi-culturalism and diversity and inclusiveness and all that kind of stuff.
But Mohammed Perwaze has allegedly been a very naughty boy. Last week, according to his local newspaper, the very same Mohammed Perwaze appeared in court accused of a string of sex offences, including five counts of rape. Mohammed Perwaze, who until last week worked as a sergeant with Durham Constabulary, faces a total of 19 charges, which are alleged to have happened between 1996 and 2016.
Perwaze was brought before Peterlee Magistrates’ Court on Friday morning. Wearing a black padded coat, he spoke only to confirm his name, address and date of birth during the hearing. Simon Clements, prosecuting, asked all the charges be sent to the crown court.
Matthew Savage, defending, made an application for bail on behalf of Perwaze.
However, the bench decided the 45-year-old should be remanded in custody until his next hearing, which will be at Durham Crown Court early next year.
Police sergeant Mohammed Perwaze is charged with: five counts of indecent assault, sexual activity with a young person, four counts of sexual assault, five counts of rape, coercive behaviour, two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and one count of child neglect.
Of course, these are just allegations and no wrongdoing has yet been proven. Moreover, we don’t know what religious or racial group Mohammed Perwaze belongs to. And we shouldn’t jump to any conclusions. But it does seem like a case of: Oooops!
Izlumic terrorism does NOT exist
Part of our duty at snouts-in-the-trough is to inform and educate people. And we’ve been perturbed by suggestions from right-wing bigots and Izlumophobes that we should be worried about so-called Izlumic so-called terrorism.
So here is our very own so-called Theresa May explaining in just over a minute that there is no such thing as Izlumic terrorism and that the real danger facing us all is right-wing terrorism. Of course, there may be some idiots who could claim that as more than 162,000 people have been killed by Izlumists in the last ten years while less than one hundred have been killed by right-wingers (77 of them by Anders Breivik in Norway) then so-called Izlumic so-called terrorism is the real so-called threat. But as so-called Theresa May explains, those so-called people are stupid:
David Craig, on January 7th, 2018
