On Friday I wrote about two videos that readers should NOT watch. Since then, I have been contacted by several readers recommending the videos that I advised you NOT to watch. Clearly my advice was ignored or not understood by some readers.
So, here again are two videos – one by Pat Condell and one by Paul Joseph Watson that you should NOT watch as they both, in my humble opinion, promulgate opinions that deviate from the politically-correct mantras of the holier-than-thou, virtue-signalling, do-as-I-say liberal elites that we are meant to believe otherwise we could be arrested for ‘hate thought’.
Here’s the Pat Condell video you should NOT under any circumstances watch:
And here’s the Paul Joseph Watson video you should NOT watch:
All week BBC TV and radio have been running programmes about the psychological problems young people are supposedly having due to the ‘pressures of modern life”. And sure enough, the lead story on BBC Breakfast on Sunday morning was “Government to launch new drive to help young people with mental health problems”.
Of course, the BBC were blaming the Government for “not providing sufficient mental health support for young people” as various BBC reporters whined about “long waiting times” and a “postcode lottery” and “betraying young people” and the “risk of suicide” etc etc
To support their case, the BBC managed to produce an almost endless stream of stupid, ‘we’re-all-victims’, libtard ‘experts’ and ‘psychologists’ and ‘youth mental health support workers’ and suchlike who all bleated on about how “It has never been more difficult to be a young person”. And of course, there were also plenty of yoof interviewed moaning about how complex and challenging their lives are.
“Bollox” I thought “double bollox and triple bollox”.
All this bleating and whining and blethering and moaning was apparently due to some new report by some mental health charity which claimed:
A tenth of girls aged 16 and 17 were in contact with mental health or learning disability services last year
Figures from the NHS, published for the first time, show that 69,000 girls in the age group, or 11 per cent, were referred to the services, including those offering assessment or treatment for autism
There were 52,000 boys in the same age range — eight per cent — with open referrals
NHS Digital said that the true figure for people younger than 18 could be higher. The numbers do not include people being treated for mental health conditions by their family doctor
A spokesman for the NSPCC said: “These findings sadly reflect what children have told our Childline service, with one in three counselling sessions last year relating to mental and emotional health and wellbeing issues.”
OK, I’m lucky. Being a babyboomer, I haven’t had to go and fight in any wars. But I rather suspect that those sent to fight in the trenches had slightly more difficult things to cope with in their (usually brief) lives than today’s yoof:
I do agree that with massive student debt and ludicrously-high house prices (due to uncontrolled immigration) young people have some problems that previous generations may not have had.
But in general, I rather suspect that today’s self-obsessed, narcissistic, social-media-addicted, snowflakes have a much better life than most previous generations:
Oh dear. Sorry snowflakes. Have I offended you? You’d better report me to the police for a ‘hate crime’. How about ‘snowflakophobia’? Yes, I must be a ‘snowflakophobe’ because I have dared criticise the snowflake generation. And the snowflake generation cannot cope with any criticism or with anyone who doesn’t agree with their ‘we-love-Jeremy’, ‘all-immigrants-are-welcome’, ‘all borders-should-be-torn-down’ views.
Now you know – tweets are more offensive than bombs, bullets, beheading knives and truck of peace attacks. And tweets are certainly more offensive than ‘Asian’ gangs raping, sodomising and torturing over 40,000 white British underage girls over 10 to 20 years
Each time there’s a Jihadist attack killing and injuring innocents or another case of rape gangs abusing British girls, there is not a bleat of outrage from our MPs and the mainstream media. In fact, we’re warned that we most be careful of rising Izlumophobia and the police immediately spend thousands of hours trawling the Internet for supposed ‘hate speech’ and ‘hate crimes’.
But each time someone like Trump dares point out, in a comment or tweet, that there might be a slight problem with Izlumist terrorism, there is total outrage in Parliament and the mainstream media, Trump is called a racist (even though Izlum is a religion, not a race) and there are calls for Trump to be banned from coming to Britain.
Following the latest “Get Trump” tirades by the holier-than-thou, virtue-signalling, lefty, Izlumophiliac libtards, I wanted to provide links to the latest YouTube videos by Paul Joseph Watson and Pat Condell.
Both of these were uploaded onto YouTube yesterday (Thursday 30 November).
However, providing links to either of these might be considered a ‘hate crime’ as there’s probably someone somewhere who will claim they think someone else somewhere else might be offended by one or both of these two videos.
And as I’ve hopefully demonstrated in previous blogs, just someone somewhere believing that anyone might be offended by something is sufficient to make you guilty of a supposed ‘hate crime’:
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 I cannot recommend that readers go onto YouTube and do a search for either Paul Joseph Watson’s video or Pat Condell’s video.
I hope that my position is quite clear.
Do not, repeat not, go onto YouTube and watch Paul Joseph Watson’s “The Truth about Trump and Britain First” or Pat Condell’s “Britain’s Hate Speech Police” 30 November 2017 videos.
After all, just watching them might make you guilty of a ‘hate crime’.
And sending a link of the videos to anyone will almost certainly make you guilty of a ‘hate crime’.
Today, I thought I’d plagiarise and adapt someone else’s work to bring you the 12 Rules of Political Correctness:
Only white people can be racist. All Muslims are ‘Blacks’, all Christians are ‘Whites’. All non-white people are ‘black people’
‘White culture’ is inferior to ‘black culture’. There are only two races: Oppressors who are ‘white’ and victims who are ‘black’
‘White people’, being oppressors, are guilty, selfish and arrogant from birth. ‘Black people’, being the oppressed, are innocent, good and unselfish from birth. ‘White people’ always exploit ‘black people’. ‘Black people’ cannot exploit anyone. Anyone confused about their sexuality is a ‘black person’ and therefore a victim of white oppression
All social ills and wars are caused directly or indirectly by ‘white people’. If ‘black people’ appear racist or violent or do wrong, it is because of mistreatment by their oppressors – ‘white people’
It is impossible to be left-wing and a racist or fascist. Anyone who is not left-wing is a right-wing fascist and racist even if they fight against racism
Upsetting someone’s feelings if they are a ‘black person’, however innocuous your comment, is as offensive as physically injuring them. ‘White people’ being oppressors have no feelings and therefore whatever you say about them is justified, however offensive or threatening your comments are
All people are not equal. Some are more human than others. A Hierarchy of Human Worth based on guilt and oppression applies, going from the most guilty and least worthy of social respect, legal protection and status. The hierarchy automatically reflects the degree of fault and incorrectness in anything said by each grade going from total fault and worthlessness (‘white people’) to the absolutely correct and valuable (non-white people). It represents a sliding scale of human worth from the least human to the most worthy and best type of human.
The people lowest down on the Hierarchy of Human Worth are:
a. Old white male
b. Middle aged white male
c. Young white male
d. Old white female
e. Middle aged white female
f. Young white female
g. White female child
The above are all white oppressors, guilty and racist and fascist from birth. Questioning this hierarchy or any of its precepts is an oppressive, racist act
The Hierarchy of Human Worth is absolute. Guilt, racism, dishonesty and a wish to oppress is in the genetics of all white people. Criminal guilt depends on where you are on the Hierarchy of Human Worth. For example, the offence of rape is considered very serious if any white is accused. But if it is by a ‘black’, including any Muslim, things like culture and their superior human worth automatically reduce the nature of the offence and, in some cases, eliminate laws that must apply to racist, oppressive, inherently evil whites. Justice is flexible depending on your position on the Hierarchy of Human Worth
Whites, particularly males, claiming discoveries or achievements are fraudulent. As oppressors the credit for their claims belongs to blacks. All pictures, statues and false commemorations of whites must be replaced with rightful displays of respect to black people.
Where necessary, history must conform to the new PC reality where everything done by whites is oppressive and racist. Where these rules are contradicted by reality, ignore reality. Censorship or oppression to ensure the higher wisdom of PC is correct. Ignorance, where it promotes Political Correctness, is a virtue
Unquestioning obedience or compliance to these rules do not automatically make you a good and pure person. If you are a ‘black person’ you are already good, by definition. If a black person appears bad this is the fault of ‘white people’. Black people cannot be guilty or responsible for anything because they are victims of ‘white people’. All white people are guilty of oppression and racism however politically-correct they are unless they work for the BBC or the Guardian
(Maybe I’ll add one more: Anyone buying a book written by David Craig or caught reading his blog – snouts-in-the-trough – is a right-wing racist fascist and is automatically guilty of a ‘hate crime’)
Whenever the (IMHO) self-regarding, attention-seeking, virtue-signalling, holier-than-thou, look-at-me-me-me luvvie Emma Thompson gets involved in a ’cause’, the truth is usually the opposite to that spouted by Emma Thompson and her admirers.
In 2014, luvvie Emma traveled to the Arctic to warn us all about supposed Man-Made Global Warming melting the polar ice cap. Conveniently she didn’t try to visit the Antarctic where, just a few months earlier, record amounts of ice stranded a boat full of environmentalists on a similar mission and then stranded the boat sent to rescue them.
Nor, as far as I know, has Emma or any of her idiotic companions in stupidity yet explained how – if the polar ice caps are now melting because of Man-Made Global Warming – a US submarine managed to surface in open water at the North Pole in 1958 and 1959:
and then three US submarines surfaced there in 1987 – again in open, ice-free water:
something that would be completely impossible now due to the increased amount of polar ice.
Can brave Emma save Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe? (and does any one really care?)
And now the mighty Emma Thompson has emerged from her sickbed – she claims to have pneumonia or what I suspect the rest of us might call “a cold” – to lead a march demanding the British Government acts to free Iranian citizen Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe from an Iranian jail. And the mainstream media have been lapping up the great Emma’s version of events and praising her for her courage.
I have written before that the Iranian citizen Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe once worked for the BBC Media Trust – the BBC is hated by the Iranian authorities – and then for a Reuters news charity. It would appear that certainly one and possibly both of Nazanin’s employers were involved in training and supporting journalists in countries that don’t particularly like journalists. What role Nazanin played in both organisations is unclear. But given that she speaks Farsi (or whatever they speak in Iran), it’s not improbable that she was involved in some way in one or both of these organisations’ work with Iranian journalists.
Moreover, in Iran’s eyes, she is an Iranian citizen, who visited Iran on an Iranian passport, and was therefore subject to Iranian laws however reprehensible we in Britain may find those laws.
The Foreign Office advises
But let’s not accept my ignorant, biased opinions about Nazanin and the wonderful, courageous, selfless Emma Thompson. Let’s instead look at Foreign Office travel advice for Iran:
“There’s a risk that British nationals and British/Iranian dual nationals could be arbitrarily detained in Iran. In such cases the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has serious concerns that the subsequent judicial process falls below international standards. The Iranian authorities don’t recognise dual nationality for Iranian citizens and therefore don’t grant consular access for FCO officials to visit them in detention.
Any behaviour that doesn’t have an obvious explanation can put you at risk, no matter how innocent you believe it to be. This may include travel off the beaten track, being present near crowds or sensitive sites, having contact with Iranians who are of interest to the authorities, taking photographs (except in major tourist sites), or behaviour that could be perceived as contrary to official Iranian interpretations of Islam. The threat to travellers is likely to be higher if there’s any national unrest, terrorist incident or an increase in tensions between Iran and the international community.
You should consider carefully the risks of travelling to Iran. If you choose to travel, you may wish to keep a low profile.”
Ooops! Was Nazanin unable to read? Can’t Emma Thompson read? Couldn’t Nazanin’s British husband read simple, straightforward English? In view of the above, wouldn’t Nazanin have been better advised to bring her parents to Britain if she wanted to see them and them to see her daughter? Or has Nazanin never heard of Skype?
The Foreign Office advice concludes:
“If you’re a dual national and are arrested and detained, the British Embassy won’t be able to provide routine consular assistance as Iran doesn’t recognise dual nationality.”
I’m really not sure the warning could have been much clearer – you put yourself in danger, you get yourself out!
Did the biased, dishonest, misleading British mainstream media ‘forget’ to mention this as it lambasted Boris Johnson for not doing enough to free Nazanin?
Sorry Emma. Sorry Nazanin. But it seems to me that Nazanin’s present predicament is entirely self-created and Britain has no responsibility to get this woman out of the rather unpleasant hole she has got herself into, whatever the (IMHO) blethering, virtue-signalling, self-promoting, publicity-hungry, multi-millionaire luvvie Emma Thompson and her adoring fans in the lying mainstream media claim to the contrary.
(Of course, I hope Nazanin soon gets out of prison and is reunited with her family. All I’m asking is that this is done honestly without having to listen to BS from attention-seeking former one-dimensional actresses and a pack of lies from the utterly corrupted mainstream media)
Across Europe, councils are putting up Christmas decorations.
Here’s a lovely picture from one German town:
And here’s a similar picture from Hull:
A spokesperson for Hull City Council said: “We’re delighted people are enjoying the changes we’ve made. They are all part of getting everyone into a festive mood ahead of Christmas celebrations.”
What mealy-mouthed garbage!
In fact, these supposed ‘decorations’ are actually concrete barriers put up to protect Christmas shoppers against ‘truck of peace’ attacks like the one at a Christmas market in Germany last Christmas which killed 12 innocents.
And, in case you haven’t seen it, here’s a rather jolly Christmas song about our friends from the Religion of Peace and their new-found enthusiasm for using ‘trucks of peace’ at this ‘most wonderful time of the year.
This weekend I wanted to write about the two attacks on mosques (in Nigeria and Egypt) which killed over 350 innocents and badly injured at least 150 more. The title of my blog for this weekend was going to be – “Do Moozerlum lives matter – to other Moozerlums?”
But I probably can’t write that as it would be seen as “Izlumophobic”.
When Izlumists (who are Moozerlums but who, of course, have nothing to do with Izlum) attack markets and tourist buses and concerts and whatever, the libtards and Izlumophiliacs and our political leaders always try to explain this away as being the work of a few “militants” who have misinterpreted the Izlumic Holy Book which preaches only peace, love and tolerance:
But when these Izlumists (who are Moozerlums but who, as we all know, have nothing to do with Izlum) attack mosques, explaining this away becomes a little more difficult. After all, with attacks on markets or tourist buses or whatever, it’s not obvious that the Izlumists (who are Moozerlums but who, as we all know, have nothing to do with Izlum) are targeting any specific group. But when these Izlumists (who are Moozerlums but who, as we all know, have nothing to do with Izlum) attack mosques, it’s more than obvious who they are trying to slaughter – other Moozerlums.
And this is why one could be tempted to ask the question “Do Moozerlum lives matter – to other Moozerlums?”
In the last 10 years (and remember, 2017 isn’t over yet) there have been over 25,000 Izlumist attacks killing around 162,123 innocents and severely injuring another 214,473. Probably over 80% of those killed and injured have not been evil, Izlumophobic, scum of the earth infidel pigs like me and probably you. No, most of the killed and injured have been Moozerlums.
So, given that Izlum is a peaceful and tolerant religion, why would those who take it rather too seriously be so enthusiastic about slaughtering other Moozerlums?
I don’t know. Or rather, political correctness prevents me from proposing an answer to the question I dare not ask.
Of course, there are some idiots who think they know the answer. But that’s just because they are stupid Izlumophobes who know nothing about anything – so here’s a little quiz for you:
Although there is a lot of scepticism in the British media, there was also a lot of excitement about Emmerson ‘The Crocodile’ Mnangagwa’s first speech on his return to the hopeless ruined, looted basket case of a country, Zimbabwe.
The English bit
When speaking in English his message seemed to be targeted at those listening in from the international community. He declared that Zimbabwe is open for business and he’s going to bring “jobs, jobs, jobs”. He pledged to reach out to the international community to canvass their support in rebuilding the economy. “I pledge myself to be your servant,” he said.
Yes, he really said “I pledge myself to be your servant”. Stop laughing you at the back!
How reassuring. The Crocodile, while grinning, says he’s not going to eat you:
He went on to say “I appeal to all genuine, patriotic Zimbabweans to come together, we work together. No one is more important than the other. We are all Zimbabweans. We want to grow our country. We want peace in our country. We want jobs, jobs, jobs!
Then he went to to possibly reveal some of his true agenda “We need also the cooperation of our neighbours in Sadc, the cooperation of the continent of Africa, we need the cooperation of our friends outside the continent. That we shall achieve. I am already receiving messages of cooperation and support for us to grow our economy.”
A cynic might think that there’s so little wealth left to steal in Zimbabwe, that The Crocodile has realised that only if there’s a huge inflow of aid and investment from gullible Western countries can he become as rich as his predecessor Robert ‘I stole $3bn’ Mugabe. Mugabe now conveniently has immunity from prosecution which is presumably what The Crocodile will be expecting when he has finished looting all the money we give to Zimbabwe to help it recover from the thieving of Uncle Bob Mugabe.
The Shona bit
But what most of the mainstream media ‘forgot’ to mention was what The Crocodile said when he switched to Shona at the end of his speech. Then his message was quite different. When he spoke in Shona, Mnangagwa’s message was more along the lines of ‘if you’re expecting democracy then you can go whistle’.
When speaking in Shona he told the Zanu PF Party faithful that those outside the party can “bark and complain” but the ZANU-PF train is moving forward. “Let them bark while we carry on ruling this country,” he declared.
Umm, to someone rather dim like me, this rather suggests that The Crocodile is in no hurry to cooperate with the Opposition and have anything resembling free and fair elections. Instead he is resolved to make sure his bloodthirsty, oppressive party clings to power with the support of the multi-millionaire generals in the army who served Mugabe so well. No wonder Zimbabwe’s supposed ‘parliament’ were so delighted that Mnangagwa would be taking over and they could carry on stealing.
As for any Zimbabweans who feel inclined to take to the streets to protest for freedom over the next few months – they should expect to be beaten, imprisoned and even murdered. That’s democracy African style.
As the Who warned us in “Don’t get fooled again” – “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”
As every libtard knows, videos like this are NOT funny and are likely to give stupid people the wrong idea about the world’s most peaceful tolerant and wonderful religion.
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:
David Craig, on December 4th, 2017
