Wednesday - July 01, 2020

Boston Caves To Insanity

Good Lord, if these destructors would only spare one statue, wouldn’t it be this one?

With a unanimous vote, the Boston Art Commission voted Tuesday to get rid of the Emancipation Memorial commemorating President Abraham Lincoln’s signing of the proclamation that ended slavery in America.

The statue, first erected in 1879, is a replica of the monument in Washington, D.C., that depicts Lincoln standing with a freed slave in the process of standing up as shackles fall from his arms. The inscription at the base of the statue, which was paid for by freed slaves and dedicated by the beloved abolitionist Frederick Douglass, reads: “A race set free and a country at peace. Lincoln rests from his labors.”

...

During his dedication of the original statue on April 14, 1876 — 11 years after Lincoln’s assassination — Douglass delivered a powerful dedication in front of then-President Ulysses S. Grant, members of the U.S. Congress as well as justices of the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Let it be known everywhere,” he declared, “[that] we, the colored people, newly emancipated and rejoicing in our blood-bought freedom, near the close of the first century in the life of this Republic, have now and here unveiled, set apart, and dedicated a monument of enduring granite and bronze, in every line, feature, and figure of which the men of this generation may read, and those of after-coming generations may read, something of the exalted character and great works of Abraham Lincoln, the first martyr president of the United States.”

Posted by Drew458     on 07/01/2020 at 03:26 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Politically Correct B.S. • Racism and race relations •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - May 30, 2020

Protest BS

Another Day Of Disruption, Burning, Looting

Because the entire country is fed up with police brutality, in the instance of ONE man, so this justifies riots from sea to shining sea? I do not effing think so.

Protests continued Saturday as more demonstrations erupted in cities nationwide following the death of Minneapolis man George Floyd.

In some cities, authorities issued curfews in light of the at-times violent protests and destruction taking place.

Police and protesters clashed in Brooklyn Saturday night resulting at least 200 arrests and “countless” officers hurt and in the emergency room.

NYPD vehicles windows were broken and set on fire.

One person was arrested near the 79 Precinct with loaded .380 semi-automatic pistol.

Two women were reportedly arrested for throwing a molotov cocktail at an NYPD van that had four officers inside.

Thirty-seven patrol cars have been vandalized so far, according to reports.

Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms established a curfew starting Saturday at 9 p.m. following a night of disruptive and at-time violent protests.
An Atlanta Police Department vehicle burns during a demonstration against police violence, Friday, May 29, 2020 in Atlanta. The protest started peacefully earlier in the day before demonstrators clashed with police. (AP Photo/Mike Stewart)

An Atlanta Police Department vehicle burns during a demonstration against police violence, Friday, May 29, 2020 in Atlanta. The protest started peacefully earlier in the day before demonstrators clashed with police. (AP Photo/Mike Stewart)

Protests continued Saturday and police arrested demonstrators that were purposefully blocking traffic.

Security officials surrouned Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp’s house as crowds of protesters gathered around the massion. A brick was reportedly thrown at one of the police officers.

Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms denounced the riots and said in a Saturday press conference, “When you run it down the street with a Gucci bag, that’s not about black people dying in America. That’s about killing ourselves when we do things like that.”

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti announced a curfew Saturday night after 500 people were arrested and five police officers were hurt after protests turned violent.

I’ve had enough. Bring out the water cannons, the mace, the dogs, and the rubber bullets. And warm up the MRAPS with their machine guns.

It’s time to grow up, or die. And I don’t give a flaming shit which one you choose.

Posted by Drew458     on 05/30/2020 at 09:37 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Jack Booted Thugs • Justice - LACK OF • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - May 24, 2020

COVID Equality

Color blindness?

via Justin Hart. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this data, but county by county numbers are available in all the states if you make the effort.

The total number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 is the same in all three color areas: red, yellow, green.

Somebody took all the county death numbers, put them in a spreadsheet, and sorted them. Then cut that sorted data into 3 roughly equal chunks, and then found that one chunk was just a few counties, the next chunk was a couple dozen counties, and the final chunk was the entire rest of the county. So they mapped it, and every county in the lower 48 got an associated color. Red for the first chunk, yellow for the next chunk, and green for the last chunk.

All the deaths in all the green areas added together are equal to the total number of deaths in all the yellow areas added together, and both green and yellow are equal to the total number of deaths in all the red areas added together.

And what a non-surprise: the yellow areas are right around the red areas. They are NOT the population centers of the country. Not all of them anyway.

Makes you wonder why national policy is being set based on the red zones. Which are all super blue, actually.

Posted by Drew458     on 05/24/2020 at 09:40 PM   
Filed Under: • FREEDOM • Miscellaneous • Pandemic Pandemonium • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

More Back To Normal: Pushing Identity Politics On Children

Every body is beautiful — and Crayola has released an inclusive new line of crayons to celebrate just that.

The iconic art supply company has created a palette of 24 global shades for its new “Colors of the World” box, which is designed to illustrate more than 40 skin tones.

Because Crayola believes that every child should be able to “creatively and accurately color themselves into the world they see around them,” the brand hopes the new line can help cultivate a more inclusive world for kids of all ages, races, cultures and ethnicities.
...
Slated to hit store shelves in July, the exciting new crayons will be sold in 24 and 32-packs, the latter featuring new hair and eye colors as well.

Each of the Colors of the World crayons will be wrapped in “gradient” skin tone labels with the color names listed in English, Spanish and French. Color names like “light golden,” “deep almond” and “medium deep rose” were selected to be realistic and relatable, helping kids easily chose the shade they most identify with.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their crayons but by the content of their character.”

I don’t buy in this at all. Maybe it is a good product for the few artists who do portraiture with crayons, but for children? No. I think it’s much better, more innocent, for little kids to draw mommy, daddy, and the family dog in red, green, or purple. Do little kids REALLY need to be skin tone aware, and “identify” with only the shades of that they see around them?

Wouldn’t it be a better, more inclusive world if ALL of us could get past this kind of simplistic classification? 

Posted by Drew458     on 05/24/2020 at 10:26 AM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. • Racism and race relations •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - February 22, 2020

Stockholm Syndrome In Stockholm

Nobody says the “J word”. Or even the “M word”

Violent Swedish Gangs Are All Lead By Immigrant Muslim Jihadis

A Swedish news outlet has revealed that 17 of 32 gang leaders committing violence in Stockholm were born overseas, with the other 15 born in Sweden but from migration backgrounds.

The 32 men are believed to be leaders of various criminal gangs in the Swedish capital and have been the focus of Stockholm police as part of Operation Rimfrost, a nationwide police operation to tackle the growing violence among gangs in Sweden, according to an Expressen analysis quoted in a Nyheter Idag report.

Of the 15 gang members who were born in Sweden, just one is said to have a Swedish-born parent, while the rest reportedly have parents who migrated to Sweden.

“I’m not naive. There are other crimes where the deportation and migration issues are more relevant, but when it comes to the leadership layers of the worst criminal gangs in Stockholm, it is obviously a failed integration,” Expressen journalist Fredrik Sjöshult wrote.

The report echoes a prior report in the city of Malmo in September of last year that revealed the majority of the shooting suspects in the multicultural southern Swedish city were also from migration backgrounds.

A total of 20 cases were reviewed by Swedish newspaper Sydsvenskan, which found that 14 of the 20 individuals were born to parents who had migrated to Sweden from Africa, the Middle East, or elsewhere.

And then PC and Stockholm Syndrome get in the way of things ...

While some have pointed to a lack of integration, ghettoisation of no-go suburbs, and other immigration factors to explain the rise in gang violence, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven has rejected such claims.

In November, the Swedish leader stated: “The segregation is because there is too low employment and too high unemployment in these areas. But that would have been the same regardless of who had lived there. If you put people born in Sweden under the same conditions, you get the same result.”

Right. Because in 3000 years there have never been poor people in Sweden, or unemployed people in Sweden, or even unpopular people in Sweden, who haven’t turned en masse to violent crime. Riiiight.

And there is no mention that the other people in these gangs are also nearly exclusively of the same background. Oh heck no. Everybody knows that all the grenade tossers, rapists, arsonist, muggers, killers, drug pushers, and thieves are blonde, blue eyed Swedish milk maids. They just happen to be lead, accidentally I’m sure, by despotic psychotic jihadi types who are as naturally Swedish as last week’s sashimi.

Riight.

Posted by Drew458     on 02/22/2020 at 12:10 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • International • Politically Correct B.S. • Stoopid-People • Terrorists •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 11, 2020

Hannity Goes PC And Gets It Wrong

2015 video of former NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg on Fox’s Hannity show tonight. OMG BLOOMBERG IS SUCH A TOTAL RACIST !!!

In the video recently former Mayor mini-Mike says how too many whites are subject to Stop ‘n Frisk; it should be far more minorities. That’s why we put ALL the cops in minority neighborhoods, because that’s where ALL the crime is.

He also states how 95% of violent crime in the city is done by, (and to?) minorities. (OK, I think he said 95%. Maybe he said 92%, maybe he said 97%. A couple of points doesn’t change the reality of his statement)

And Hannity had a fit. Maybe he’s just as “woke” as the rest of media. He certainly made a leftist mistake tonight, denying the 300lb gorilla reality. Better to have focused solely on Bloomberg’s callousness during that video clip.

Here are the statistics from NYC’s report 2017 Crime and Enforcement Activity In New York City:

•  97% of Homicide suspects are non-white. 88.7% of them are either black or hispanic.
•  97.6% of not fatal shooting suspects are non-white
•  95.7% of robbery suspects are non-white
•  89.2% of rape suspects are non-white
•  95.7% of firearms arrests are non-white

Maybe in 2015 things were radically different, but I don’t think so. These kind of numbers are pretty stable year after year after year. But you have to wonder, is 95.7% or 97% conversationally close enough to “all”? How about 97.6%? It seems ballpark enough for me. But some will have stinky over “absolutist” terms, and I can’t deny that using the qualifier “almost” or “nearly” before the word “all” would have been a smarter thing to do.

When Bloomberg was mayor from 2002 to 2013, he was HUGE on Stop ‘n Frisk, with nearly 700,000 people “thrown up against the wall” in 2011, although 88% of those resulting in no conviction (not necessarily no arrest, just no conviction. Plea bargaining, court overload ... lots of reasons other than innocence).

Metrics on the program were mixed, more often than not leaning to a rating of non-effective. Is that our favorite invisible giant simian on the couch making an appearance again?

[ While Bloomberg was elected mayor as a Republican, he had been a Democrat before that, and finally left the office as an Independent. He didn’t rejoin the Democrat party until late in 2018. ]

While the report does use several ethnic categories, including Native American, it lumps Asian/Pacific Islander together, meaning that a criminal from Fiji goes in the same statistical bucket as criminals from Saudi Arabia, India, China, Korea, and the Seychelle Islands. Regardless of lumping nearly a third of the world’s population into one generic group, in NYC those people are suspects or victims in a relatively small percent of criminal events.

in 2019 New York City, [ whites 33% ] blacks represent 22.8 percent of population, Hispanics 28.6 percent, and Asians 12.6 percent.

So there are roughly 24% as many “Asians” there as black and hispanic people combined, but they commit just 4% as many killings.

But according to Hannity, Bloomberg is a terrible horrible no good racist for speaking about very similar numbers in 2015, and drawing the obvious conclusions. You don’t fish in the desert. You drop your line where the fish are.

Remember when the governor of NJ fired some top cop for racism because he read the FBI crime statistics out loud? I do, but I can’t find it online. I think it was Gov. Christie Whitman. 1999 or so?

Posted by Drew458     on 02/11/2020 at 09:22 PM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - December 22, 2019

It’s Just OK, Get Over It

huh?

A Democratic state lawmaker from South Carolina was facing backlash Saturday from critics who accused her of going silent after previously accusing Army and Navy personnel of being “cruel and disrespectful” at last weekend’s Army-Navy football game in Philadelphia.

In a since-deleted tweet, state Rep. Mandy Powers Norrell wrote, “Three separate candidates making the white power symbol on television. Wonder what the culture is like for the cadet in the front? There’s no excuse and he and other minorities there shouldn’t have to deal with such a cruel and disrespectful environment.”

But since her tweet appeared, U.S. Military Academy cadets and U.S. Naval Academy midshipmen have been cleared of wrongdoing in separate military investigations.

Both the Military Academy, in West Point, N.Y., and the Naval Academy, in Annapolis, Md., said this week that the personnel at the game were playing the “sophomoric” game that had nothing to do with racism.

“Multiple individuals stated that the circle game is commonly played at the Naval Academy and in other military and civilian settings,” the Navy report stated, according to the Navy Times. “Additionally, when viewed in context with the other behavior displayed by both midshipmen and cadets during Gameday, it is reasonable to believe the midshipmen were playing the circle game.”

The Navy said the midshipmen showed “genuine shock” over the controversy, insisting they weren’t aware of the symbol’s racist ties.

You know why? Because there aren’t any. This whole thing is made up. Rickrolling. A 4Chan gotcha. But the frantic left will seize anything if they can use it to condemn white people.

I’m glad she’s catching some flack. Push back. Fight the “fash”. First Amendment be damned, if you drop an idiotic statement and get caught out, the very least you should do is apologize.

Norrel is a babe. Pity she’s also a leftist tool.

Posted by Drew458     on 12/22/2019 at 09:22 AM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - August 12, 2016

Hide Your Eyes!!

It blows me away to see just how insanely over sensitive our current generation of college students are. They’ve been protected from every last little raindrop that could fall, and have never ever learned to deal with anything that could be dangerous, or upsetting, or even anything that might perhaps make them wonder or even doubt any of their previously held conceptions. Everything that isn’t exactly in line with their infantile world and worldview has been kept away from them, for safety.

And then they were raised by the State, which taught them that all White people are evil racists, and that America is evil, the Constitution is meaningless, and that they should be subservient to Blacks in all aspects of their lives, from music to fashion to dance to mating habits to social outlooks. And that gave us such things as Justin Beiber. But wait, it gets worse. The worst part is that not a single one of them finds anything wrong with extreme reactions to things they don’t like. Got the wrong opinion? Kill him. Trump giving a rally? Protest and riot. Conservative radio host scheduled to give a humorous talk? Faint, throw up, crap your pants, demand immediate counciling. Because you’ve been RAPED. Violated. Assaulted by the idea that such a talk would be allowed. Not actually given. Certainly not actually attending and hearing the guy’s words. No. Total hairy conniptions over merely the awareness that such an event might take place. That’s what a risk-panic bunch of shit weasel PC pussies those wonderful helicopter parents and the socialist school system have raised. That’s the future of our nation.

Colleges have “free speech zones”, little walled off enclaves where the students are allowed to say whatever they want. But you know that isn’t entirely true. Schools routinely police Facebook and other social media sites, and punish their students for things they say there, even if it has nothing to do with the school. Why, just last week there was that story about the young woman of Indian descent who was BWOC in her university’s student council, who had the temerity to disagree with the #BlackLivesMatter nonsense, and wrote instead that #AllLivesMatter. Indian descent, remember. Quite possibly a Hindu, a faith that believes in the sanctity of the soul far more than just in humans. That’s why they won’t eat meat. “Nothing with faces”. Even plants have their own little spark of God within them. So of course All Lives Matter to them. And perhaps her. Not that that mattered. Her school allowed the student council to make special double secret rules up, so that she could be punished for her offense outside of normal channels and with no recourse. Due Process? Fuck due process, burn her at the stake.

And now the latest. Artworks have to be hidden away. Because they’re so offensive. Why are they so offensive? Because they show white explorers getting along just fine with Indians, way back in the fur trader days. Heck they might depict fur pelts too, faint and double faint.  And no slaves, or any other negroes being abused or building anything.

Unreal. So they have to deny the existence of such things because they percolate thoughts and awarenesses that go against the accepted wisdom. Double Minus Ungood. If you can’t destroy them, lock them away. Now get us emergency counseling because we’re so upset at having to even think such things could exist. We’ve been physically assaulted. Raped. Again!!

Historic paintings moved to ‘controlled’ campus rooms after university finds them ‘harmful’

Historic paintings that adorned the halls of a Wisconsin university for decades—until someone took offense at their depiction of Native Americans—will be seen by appointment only. 

The paintings, which critics say show the Native Americans in a subservient role to white settlers, were destined for storage until the latest compromise was reached. University of Wisconsin-Stout President Bob Meyer said the potentially “harmful” art will be kept locked in conference rooms.

“...Their current uncontrolled access pose a risk of having a harmful effect on our students and other viewers,” Meyer said in a statement last week on the paintings.

The 80-year-old paintings, which had hung in the hallways of Harvey Hall, depict French fur traders canoeing down the Red Cedar River with American Indians and a French fort. Both were produced by artist Cal Peters in 1936 and were recently restored with money from the Wisconsin Historical Society.

The controversy over the artwork began when the school’s Diversity Leadership Team complained the paintings were offensive to Native American students and promoted acts of “domination and oppression.”

In response, Meyer first ruled that the artwork be placed in storage but later changed his decision after criticism from First Amendment groups. He has since ordered “Perrault’s Trading Fort” taken to the university archives, while the “French Trappers on the Red Cedar” will be placed inside the dean’s conference room in Harvey Hall, the largest academic building on campus.

After a series of consultations with students, Chancellor Bob Meyer announced the works would removed from the first and second floors of Harvey Hall, as they risked “having a harmful effect on our students and other viewers.”

If the paintings are displayed, it should be in a “controlled gallery space,” he said, with appropriate “context”for viewers. However, the school says that for now, Peters’ works will most likely stay out of public view.

“There’s a segment of Native American students, that when they look at the art, to them it symbolizes an era of their history where land and possessions were taken away from them, and they feel bad when they look at them,” Meyer told Wisconsin Public Radio.

Oh dippity-do dogshit on that. Even if that were slightly true, these paintings depict a time before that, so STFU.

In response to the action at the University of Wisconsin-Stout, the National Coalition Against Censorship wrote a letter to Meyer arguing that “removing representations of historically oppressed groups from view will not change the facts of history.”

No, it won’t change the facts. Just the reality. If you deny it or hide it and pretend things were different, then those who come after will accept your subterfuge as the truth. Why do you think the Taliban blows up ancient statues of Buddha, and the far older winged gods of Sumeria?

Golly. I think I really want to get violent with these idiots. A bit of forced exposure, as it were.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/12/2016 at 11:23 AM   
Filed Under: • Education • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - March 08, 2016

it always has to be about race for some. and if it isn’t, they will make it so

Much of this sort of insanity it now occurs to me, has been learned before young folks ever got to college, and were taught in grade school by the very authorities who make decisions and think this way by the time those kids arrive here. While story originates in the USA at a private college in Maine, the very same is also taking place on the very same topic here in the UK.
There really is, to quote various conservative thinkers, “a mood of censorious political correctness sweeping university campuses”.
What?  Are they just waking up now?  This kind of thinking while getting worse it must be said, has been going on for quite some time.

SOMBREROS HAD RACIST OVERTONES ?

You betcha.  In this brave new world, even the Mexican hat is racist when worn by an Anglo.

An American college in Maine is offering “counseling” to those students who may have been “injured and affected” by classmates who wore small sombrero hats to a tequila themed birthday party.

What happened was, photos of party goers ended up as these things are want to do, on social media.  College authorities immediately upon being made aware of this latest outrage against the common good, sent out emails notifying students about an “investigation” into a possible “act of ethnic stereotyping”.
And .... while that was happening in the USA, not to be outdone by the colonists, Brit college authorities followed suit on the very same issue.
So what else might cause offense? 
Well ... there’s always something ppl can find to build a cause around. Like this, from March of 2015.

H/T The Federalist Papers Project

University Bans Hoop Skirts Because of Racist overtones
By Jason W. Stevens

The issue for the university is not whether the hoop skirt is racist. That question had nothing to do with their decision, and was never considered. What was most important when weighing the ban was whether people perceive the hoop shirt as racist, which is a different issue entirely.
The self-professed object here is to keep students from feeling “uncomfortable.”

This means that the appearance of anything potentially, or even remotely, offensive can and will be banned. It seems that no one on or off campus ever complained about the hoop skirt in the first place. The university took preemptive measures to ban the thing before anyone actually complained, because it was thought that someone might complain at some point in the future.

I don’t care about the hoop skirt.
And I really don’t care that it was banned from campus.
But what I do care about is the reason WHY it was banned, because the same logic might be used to ban just about everything.

The University of Georgia’s Student Affairs officials met with fraternity and sorority leaders this week to discuss the perceptions of Greek life after a video surfaced from a Sigma Alpha Epsilon party at the University of Oklahoma that featured members chanting about lynching and exclusion of black students from the fraternity, Jacksonville.com reports. …

UGa officials met with members of the university’s chapter of SAE and Kappa Alpha, both of which have deep ties to the Old South. Students and administrators discussed appropriate attire for Kappa Alpha’s “Old South Week” and SAE’s “Magnolia Ball,” events at which students have been known to dress in costumes that include hoop skirts and other period wear, according to the new site.

“The discussion was about more than dress, but about how to present yourself, and dress was a part of that,” Victor Wilson, vice president for student affairs, told Jacksonville.com.
He said students decided for themselves that hoop skirts send the wrong message.
Ashley Merkel, president of the student Panhellenic Council, issued an emailed statement Tuesday with Alex Bosse, Interfraternity Council president.

“A standard aspect of event planning for Greek organizations is that costuming for events must be evaluated as to its appropriateness,” the email read. “The student leadership, staff and advisors agree that Antebellum hoop skirts are not appropriate in the context of some events. We will continue to review costuming and themes for future events to ensure their appropriateness for our organizations.” …

Wilson believes the hoop skirt is far more dangerous than a historical fashion, and likened the Old South attire to Confederate solider uniforms that were worn by fraternity members on special occasions until around 2006, when the college ended that tradition.

“We’ve made a lot of progress,” Wilson said. “This is just one more step. We applaud our students for being courageous and making a tough call.”

The following is impossibly long which does not mean it has no value.
So for those with a lot of patience and want to read for a week, I offer this link.

A LONG READ

Here’s a newer race issue.

I never heard a Brit use the expression “Spic and Span” but apparently the term was used in a promotion to clean up the country and some dim light saw the word SPIC and immediately tied it to a slur used against Mexicans and ppl from South and Central America and the Caribbean.  I had always accepted that it only applied to Mexicans, as those are the folks most prominent where I’ve lived. And btw, I guess I have managed to live all these years without actually knowing how the word ‘spic’ was actually spelled.  Really.  All I recall was Spic and Span laundry powder. I never actually saw the word in print any other way. Anytime I ever saw it used away from the laundry product, it was always spelled spic. Never spick. But apparently the Brits do spell it with a ‘k’ and so any other way can only be, a racist slur.

Here’s part of the current outrage and what has some Brit knickers in a twist. 

‘Clean For The Queen’ Campaign Poster Confuses ‘Spic’, A Racial Slur, With ‘Spick’

· Posters and T-shirt used the spelling ‘spic’ instead of ‘spick’
· It is used in the US as an offensive term for Hispanic people
· Clean For The Queen is backed by MPs including David Cameron
· Was created to mark Queen’s 90th by cleaning rubbish blighting our towns

It is a wholesome campaign to clean up Britain for the Queen’s birthday – but last night a race row erupted over an unfortunate gaffe.
Posters and T-shirts designed to advertise this weekend’s Clean For The Queen drive mistakenly included a racist slur.
They were meant to show the slogan ‘Spick And Span Ma’am’ but instead used the spelling ‘spic’ – used in the US as an offensive term for Hispanic people.
Twitter users noticed the error last week. One asked: ‘Are you aware you’ve put a racist term on your asinine posters? You’re missing a k.’
Sam Taylor, editor of The Lady, said: ‘If they’re going to go around cleaning up the country they should start by cleaning up their language. It’s an unfortunate mistake and whether or not people are offended, they’ve used the wrong word.
‘I wouldn’t suggest they put it on a commemorative tea towel.’

SPIC AND SPAN CAUSES UPROAR

Posted by peiper     on 03/08/2016 at 11:35 AM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. • Racism and race relations •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - February 25, 2016

Since when did CIA stand for Central Inclusion Agency?

Sorry for the delays. But I’ve been busy for more or less the past week and a half with family stuff, helping someone with travel prep, and getting ready for my Birthday (which is tomorrow on the 25th). So I’m just coming back out of my shell now. But it seems like the news keeps outpacing me. I began working on this analysis on Scalia’s funeral and Obama’s priorities (or lack thereof). Then I received news of a death and started work on an obituary. But now… Now...... I learn of THIS. THIS damn mess. https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/Diversity_Inclusion_Strategy_2016_to_2019.pdf

Yes, apparently the CIA has a “Diversity and Inclusion Strategy.” Heck, not only that, but an ANNUAL one. You want to read all that? I sure don’t. But I think the money quote is really on the first page, coming from John Brennan- the CIA Director HIMSELF. And what does this fine defender of America and secretive public servant go out and write when he comes out to justify the tax dollars he’s been given?

Embracing and leveraging diversity through an inclusive culture that fosters innovation, new ideas, and new insights which is at the heart of what we are charged to do and will drive mission success.”

Soooooo..... see a bit of a problem with this?

The CIA is a damn spy agency. The heart of what it is tasked to do is conducting covert operations against our enemies, try to keep our own stuff secret, and interdict operations and other threats against us. It is meant to Spy. In that line of work, diversity and especially inclusiveness are NOT virtues.

Why? Because spying and intelligence gathering are ultimately based on a bedrock of exclusiveness. Terms like “Need to Know” and “Security Clearance” are inherently exclusive and the very basis for the world these groups operate in, in large part because they need to. From the very start they are dependent on EXCLUDING those who Do Not Need To Know from those who Do. Excluding people who cannot be trusted with given intelligence from those that can. Exclude the people who might be vulnerable to external pressure or compromising things from those who are. On any given issue or operation the former categories will include the VAST MAJORITY of the people on this planet, including the country the agency or operation in question is working for. And all of this is before those select few who people do decide to trust are further shuffled and compartmentalized with their own, even more finely grained “Need to Know” restrictions, security clearances, and other dividers; all so that if there’s a break in one compartment the entire ship doesn’t go down.

This is not merely useful for these organizations, they are integral parts of what they are and what they need to do in order to Survive At All. Now, since we got here by asking why being inclusive and diverse is not always a good thing in the spook business, it’s only fair to ask “Why?” again. Why is this pervasive secrecy and exclusion needed for intelligence services?

Well, I decided to start this off with a snippet of this fascinating alternate history article from the BBC, dealing with a centuries old case. Namely, The Gunpowder Plot. Now, this was not an intelligence operation or something conducted by a government authority. It was in fact a highly murderous terrorist plot devised by people who wanted to utterly destroy a significant chunk of London and thousands of people just to get at the King and Parliament to (regardless of what the average Fawkestard or 4Chan apologist would have you believe) establish an even more repressive and absolutist government. But not only is this the kind of terrorist threat that modern intelligence organizations are supposed to per-empt, but it also featured people operating as spies, planning military (Emphasis in following is mine)

As history actually turned out, there are two very good reasons why the Gunpowder Plot had to fail. The first was that the plotters were caught in the double-bind of most early modern conspirators: in order to make a rebellion work, it had to involve a lot of people, but the more people who knew about the plot, the more it was likely to leak.

In the case of this one, the means of effecting it, by murdering most of the English political élite, was so sensational and so morally disturbing to most people, that the chances of somebody blowing the whistle on it were unusually high.

That is exactly what happened; one of the people brought into the plot in its later stages (probably the unstable Francis Tresham) told an opportunist peer, Lord Monteagle, who tipped off the government.

Whoever sent that letter to Baron Monteagle most likely was not disloyal to the plan or the cause (of establishing a tyranny more in line with the likes of 17th century Spain over the ashes of London). If he had been, he probably would have sent it to someone else. A player in the well-oiled Elizabethan network of spies and informants that James inherited, or actual authorities of the Crown rather than Lord Monteagle. Someone actually in the government rather than just standing in Parliament. The Monteagle Letter (as it’s called now) was probably sent by a sincere, loyal terrorist who wanted to avoid killing someone he thought could be an ally because Monteagle was a fellow Catholic.

So in many ways the Gunpowder Plotters were perversely lucky compared to a lot of modern spy rings, planners, and other operatives. And it still did them in. The letter was the crucial straw that led to the end, and within two weeks of the letter’s delivery the plan had collapsed and most of the group accounted for, and in less than two and a half months all the known conspirators were arrested or dead. 

This example helps demonstrate one of the key concepts of intelligence work, or really using any kind of lie or deception. That you should have as few people in the know as possible in order to make it work. Enough that (hopefully) whatever you have planned should be successful, but no more to avoid the risk that somebody will write something, say something, get caught, or otherwise expose it. It’s the reason why care must be taken in who investigates even the absolutely, gobsmackingly criminal security breaches Hillary made in her private server (which some investigators do not even have the authorization to look at, or didn’t).  In the case of the Gunpowder Plot the result was that Western Civilization and constitutionalism dodged a very nasty bullet, but these kind of breakdowns do not always work in favor of the good guys. All one has to do to see that is observe the resistance martyrs- like those of the World Wars and Cold Wars, but also people as far back as Nathaniel Hale- to see that. Here is just one sobering example out of countless thousands we know about and God only knows how more we do not. http://www.executedtoday.com/tag/french-resistance/

Now, I can understand that overwhelming uniformity also can be a major problem. All I have to do to see that is observe how the Japanese spy rings in North America, the “White Dominions” of the Commonwealth (Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc), and India crashed and burned during WWII. * . Part of the reason why the massive “Cambridge Ring” of Soviet spies within the higher echelons of the British Government happened was because the Brits tended to recruit too much from a upper crust students of a handful of “Ivy League” schools, who were the demographic most likely to be radicalized by Communist propaganda or student politics, were the most likely to be able to radicalize others in their orbit, and were likely to have even non-traitors who would defend them. 

But I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that being too diverse or inclusive would be the even greater risk for an intelligence organization, precisely because it runs against the very grain of what it is meant to do. Spying is about trying to manipulate and uncover the enemy without being manipulated or uncovered by them. Having a rainbow coalition of security risks just for the sake of inclusion or diversity will only undercut the ability to try that in a game where there are incredibly high stakes and the slightest trip up could tip the balance. I would hope our spymasters and intelligence dons and donas would understand that. But then, I am just an uninitiated civilian. However, one of my friends who decidedly Wasn’t one of that did have something to say about this, and gave me permission to quote him.

You do want diversity in intel analysis, but moreso diversity of THOUGHT than anything else. Now from a HUMINT** perspective, you do need diversity of race, to whit you need trusted and capable agents of the races which you need to infiltrate.
Beyond that, race is irrelevant.

That is broadly my thought as well. Intelligence is a field where it helps to be able to think outside the box and have a lot of different thoughts and methodologies working together( though with caveats that there is a limit to the use of diversity of thought when you start employing enemy sympathizers like Kim Philby, leader of the aforementioned Cambridge Ring). But I would argue that the explicit focus on diversity and inclusion is a good sign that- like in universities- diversity of thought is going out the window. And in particular trying to intentionally jigger with the race/sexuality/gender quotas is defeating the purpose.

He also had this to say.

Well sure, in that sense yes, if the existence of any restriction at all becomes definitively what can fairly be called “exclusive” then yeah, it’s exclusive. Except that logic doesn’t make sense. Or rather… If the existence of any restriction immediately disqualifies you from being able to be characterized as inclusive, then yeah, it’s not inclusive. Except, see, it doesn’t. You can be inclusive and not be all-inclusive.

And on some level I can understand this. I’m sure that if you ever wanted to spy from within the genocidal Islamist-Arab Supremacist nightmare ruling out of Khartoum you probably wouldn’t want to use a Black agent. Likewise if you wanted to deal with some genocidal Baptists or Transsexuals who want to murder all the “Heretics"/"Cis-Gens" it would probably help if you had somebody who could pass off as the former or was an actual transsexual.

But let’s be clear here. the differences and diversities of these people (no matter how vastly different they might seem in their private lives or as individuals) are not nearly as important in recruiting them as what they have In Common. Bravery, loyalty, discretion, and willingness to answer the call of duty is the common thread that we will rely on.  There have been many, very colorful and diverse heroes, heroines, and martyrs have served the cause of freedom. Take Neil Munro “Bunny” Roger, the camp, publicly gay fashion designer who served through WWII in glory.  Take Julia Child, the very het, very ‘50s celebrity chef who joined the OSS and served for years from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Take my Grandfather’s quasi-namesake “Garbo” the straitlaced, booky Spaniard anti-Communist and anti-Fascist who was turned down by the British and then decided to go work for German intelligence and sell them a line of bull in order to get SIS’s attention.

Are these people diverse enough for you? Yes, in many ways they are. But what makes them noteworthy is not what makes them diverse but what makes them SIMILAR. It is what made them all trusted agents and heroic figures.

Intelligence gatherers must be exclusive because the cost of failing to do so tends to be paid in blood and worse. And there must be limits to their diversity in order to avoid inviting enemy sympathizers, mercenaries, or other untrustworthy vessels into places where they can do incalculable, often irreplaceable damage.

Diversity and inclusion for the sake of diversity and inclusion alone is the death of serious intelligence gathering. When that is our first line of defense against another 9/11 and a new dark age (in whatever shape) that is something we CANNOT afford. I’d like to hope that this is just a PR stunt by the CIA Director while continuing on doing their work, but in this age of Obama I do not trust it. Would you?

Footnotes/snark below the fold. I’ll try and get back on my posting schedule now.

Posted by Turtler     on 02/25/2016 at 01:35 AM   
Filed Under: • DIVERSITY BS • Homeland-Security • Military • Outrageous • Politically Correct B.S. • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - January 21, 2016

the least debate

London (CNN):  Donald Trump is used to being the one doing the tough talk.

But on Monday the Republican presidential hopeful was on the receiving end of the harsh words—with no opportunity of rebuttal—as British MPs made their disdain for him clear during a parliamentary debate on whether to ban him from the country.

In doing so, the parliamentarians served up blunter criticisms than some of his rivals for the Republican presidential nomination have landed, labeling the 69-year-old “poisonous,” “a buffoon” and even a “wazzock”—British slang for “a stupid or annoying person.”

“I don’t think Donald Trump should be allowed within 1,000 miles of our shore,” Jack Dromey, the Labour Party’s shadow home affairs minister, told the assembled MPs.

The debate was triggered by a public petition launched in the wake of Trump’s call to ban Muslims from the U.S., which called on the British parliament to ban Trump from the country for hate speech.

It received more than 576,000 signatures—more than five times the number required for MPs to consider sending the matter for debate in parliament.

But the debate was non-binding, with no vote taken at the end, and was always going to be used by MPs as an opportunity to vent their thoughts on the divisive Republican under the protection of parliamentary privilege, which legally shields them from accusations of defamation or slander.

Trump’s camp responded to the debate via a statement from one of his companies Monday.

Sarah Malone, executive vice president of Scotland-based Trump International Golf Links labeled the debate “ridiculous” and “absurd,” saying the British Parliament was setting a “dangerous precedent” and “sending a terrible message to the world.”

But at least one of the MPs participating in the debate felt that the brash New Yorker was unlikely to be overly concerned about the opinions of a gathering of British MPs.

“I’m not sure that he’s going to be terribly worried about this debate,” said Conservative MP Sir Edward Leigh.

Probably not. That’s his New York Attitude coming through again.

Posted by Drew458     on 01/21/2016 at 02:07 PM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - October 28, 2015

what’s in a name?

Unreal. Yesterday I was freezing my tail off standing outside in my winter parka. Today it rained like mad, and now it’s 70 degrees out. At midnight.

Once upon a time this would have been called Indian Summer. Because that’s when the redskins would raid and steal your harvest. But my goodness, a term like that is beyond the pale (face) these days. I guess we’ll have to call it Get Whitey Week instead. 

Posted by Drew458     on 10/28/2015 at 11:06 PM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - September 19, 2015

illegals held by brits complain about the menu ….

The S***s at the Mail put this behind a paywall.

So I had to do a screen shot, and then enlarge the print.  Hope anyone looking, if anyone there tonight, can see this okay.

Just shows you how well these vermin know the west, what buttons they can push etc, etc.

Take a look.

Posted by peiper     on 09/19/2015 at 01:20 PM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. • REALLY WORTHLESS and PUTRID PEOPLE •  
• Comments (10) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - August 12, 2015

when mommy and daddy are both the same sex and other stuff

I doubt I’d find too many if anyone at bmews, that would argue against the proposition that there is no longer anything that would surprise us any longer.

When most of us here were growing up, mom and dad were males and females.  We knew who and what mom and dad were. You know, boys and girls. Right?

But no longer.  Now, boys can marry other boys and girls can marry other girls, and one of em if children are involved, will be called; what?  On the one hand (no puns here, Rich excepted cos he can’t resist ) how can a kid call a guy daddy when his partner refers to him as his “wife”?  It gets confusing.

I once heard that cow Rosie O. refer to her, “wife”, which when ya look at her yeah, you can see a male. But you know she isn’t.  I don’t care anyway. I’m just saying that things I once took for granted I now find are upside down.

I heard a panel show had nothing to do with that subject, but one female panelist continually referred to her ‘wife’ so often, it sounded like she was just itching to be offended or challenged.  But nobody said anything to her, which must have been a great disappointment.

Queers are no longer odd, they’re gay. They’re now mainstream, they would have us believe and it might be true.  Who among us would have thought that remotely possible even ten years ago?

The letters “ism” are added to things I had never heard before recent times.

Age-ism.  Ageism?  It sounds so stupid to read or hear.

I can accept consumerism.  I understand that and it’s been around a long time.
Altruism, I know that word too. No probs.
No problems with capitalism either.  It’s all the recent politically correct ism’s I have problems with.  There are so damn many isms recently introduced one can not keep track ovem all.  Well, some have actually and I was surprised how far back it goes.
This is from 1991 and my opening remark about not being surprised has already been shot full of holes by this.  Really folks. Take a look at what some ppl were serious about.

Would you believe, thighism ? And how about this?

The University of Connecticut contributed ``laughism,`` which goes far beyond gaffawing at verboten ethnic jokes and includes all kinds of social and personal snickering.

Oh well. Ct.  Why am I not surprised about that. If pc didn’t exist already, the state of CT. would have invented it.  And some of you are critical of CA. calling it the land of fruits and nuts.  Well okay you do have a point but it’s a bit harsh since it had become my adopted home state for most of my life.  How I wish I could return to Palm Desert. 

Then there are words normal to us all with no isms, that were okay yesterday but today are racist, nationalist, dehumanizing and just bad language.
To make matters even worse, now some UN idiot has stepped into the fray, well in reality there wasn’t one till he made it so.

A week or so ago the Prime Minister of this country described the migrants flooding the borders and doing their best to enter the UK illegally, as a “swarm”.
He was referring to the refugees at Calais as, “A swarm threatening to come to Britain.” Well don’t ya know the left in its usual disingenuous bleating said the use of swarm hinted at insects and was racist, blah, blah and more blah. 
Thankfully, this time the PM did not follow the usual sorry and bad Brit habit of saying sorry. 

So last week Britain’s foreign secretary described the migrants in Calais as,
“A marauding threat to Europe”.  He went on to state that in Calais, “there are large numbers of desperate migrants marauding around the area and that African arrivals in Europe were undermining its “standard of living”.

One only has to turn to the net or TV news to see the truth in that.

Enter a spokesman for the schmucks at the UN who said that Britain’s approach to the Calais migrant crises has an element of …. “racism and being a nationalist populist reaction to migration”.  This from the UN special rep. on “The Human Rights of Migrants”.  The UN has a special office for them?
Guess so.

The secretary was roundly condemned for using …. “dehumanising language” in the use of that one word, marauding.

So in conclusion, the words swarm and marauding should now also be accepted as race terms. So then ….  Shall we soon be seeing, Swarm-ism and Maraud-ism?

It would not surprise me at all.

Posted by peiper     on 08/12/2015 at 07:22 AM   
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner