Wednesday - August 27, 2008

Another Criminal Mastermind

     

An Illinois man who police say held five people hostage in a Fort Madison motel was arrested after he sent two of his hostages on a beer run.

Police say 33-year-old Jason Slagel, of Moline, Ill., is charged with five counts of false imprisonment and going armed with intent. They say Slagel pulled a knife during an argument Tuesday night with another man and told the people in the room that they wouldn’t be allowed to leave.

One man was cut and Slagel had a cut on his hand, but police say the injuries weren’t serious.

Police say that after awhile, Slagel got thirsty and sent two of his hostages out for beer.

After the hostages left, they called police and Slagel was arrested without incident.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/27/2008 at 11:48 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Humor • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - August 26, 2008

‘Man on the street’ is offensive to women.  MAJOR MOONBAT STUFF HERE. OH BOY. can I say boy?

I ONCE ASKED WHERE THIS SILLY CRAP IS GONNA END. AND WHEN?  WELL, I GUESS NEVER, EVER.  AND THE BRITS WILL LEAD THE WAY IT SEEMS.
ACTUALLY, THE POWERS THAT BE AT ANY TIME THINK UP THIS OUTRAGIOUS CRAP.  I VERY MUCH DOUBT THE AVERAGE “MAN ON THE STREET” EVER THINKS ABOUT THIS.  I MEAN, IN ORDER TO BE OFFENDED THEY (PTBs) HAVE TO TELL PPL THEY ARE BEING OFFENDED.  EVEN IF THEY NEVER KNEW IT.
AND IF ANY FEMALE ANYWHERE IS OFFENDED BY THIS VERY OLD PHRASE, PLEASE.  STOP BREATHING NOW. RIGHT THIS MINUTE.  JERKS!

The phrase “man on the street” should not be used in case it offends women, according to a politically-correct language guide for council staff.
By Jessica Salter
Last Updated: 6:56AM BST 26 Aug 2008

The document claims the popular saying is based on the assumption that the world is male and makes the views or work of women invisible.

It suggests that town hall officers should use “general public” a positive and less offensive alternative.

The guide also kills off the phrase “manning the switchboard” and suggests “staffing” or “running the switchboard” instead.

The suggestions, put forward by Chichester District Council, West Sussex, have been criticised as an example of “repulsive” political correctness.

Tony Colpoys, chairman of Ebernoe parish council, West Sussex, said: “This kind of thing really gets my goat - it’s not as though anybody in their right mind would believe that the “man in the street” referred solely to the male sex. It’s just stupid, I’ve never heard anything like it.

“I think political correctness is one of the most ghastly things about our society - it’s one of the most repulsive things ever to be invented.”

The council said that the document, which is distributed to all staff and council members, is not a rulebook but a guide to help staff and members find the correct words.

A spokesman said: “We introduced the guide because as community leaders we must be aware of what modern society requires of the public sector. This includes the sensitivity of various individuals and groups, and current thinking in society in general.

“It is easy to make fun of individual phrases or words but what we are seeking to do is to be more sensitive and responsive to the needs of others in our society.”

The seven-page guide offers other suggestions, including avoiding phrases like “old woman”, “old fool” and “old codger”, which, the council said, make old people seem fussy, stupid and dependent. It suggests simply using the phrase “old person” instead.

Have Your Say: Is the phrase ‘man on the street’ offensive to women?

http://tinyurl.com/6c5qr2

ah-ah-ah.  Don’t touch that dial. Stay Tuned for more !  Coming up after the break .....  Moonbats Galore.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/26/2008 at 05:11 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - August 25, 2008

Prius Drivers: Big car drivers are ugly

Just in case you weren’t yet 648.2% percent certain that Greenies are also total Elitists ...

Every morning, as Lynn Schmidt walks out of her Long Island, N.Y., home, opens the door to her baby-blue Prius, waves to her grumbling neighbor and pulls out of the driveway, she has every reason to smile.  It’s not just the 45 miles per gallon her gasoline-electric hybrid vehicle is getting. And it’s not only that she can go three weeks without a fill-up.  It’s also because that through her choice of automobile, Lynn is doing what she considers her share of being ecologically reasonable.

“Everyone should be concerned about the level of emissions,” says Schmidt. “We all need to do our part and make changes for the better.”

She’s not alone. With skyrocketing oil prices, many owners of hybrid vehicles and practitioners of the “green” lifestyle are seeing their eco-friendly choices pay off.  But that’s led to some grumblings from late adopters — and charges that the greener-than-thou are guilty of “eco-snobbery.”

The other day, she pulled up next to another Prius — and the two drivers exchanged a knowing smile of eco-camaraderie.

“There can be some smugness on the part of the Prius owners because it’s distinctive,” says Michael Omotoso of the automotive-marketing-data giant J.D. Power and Associates. “It’s ‘Hey, look at me, I’m driving a hybrid!’”

Studies conducted by J.D. Power show that the typical hybrid purchaser is better educated and wealthier than the average car buyer. Furthering the exclusivity is the fact that available hybrids are hard to find.

And how much would you like to bet that at least 80% of the typical hybrid purchasers are lefties?

“I think that we Prius owners need a dating/whatever program, to hook us up with other Prius owners,” says one poster on Priuschat.com. He admits it’s half a joke, but says it “stems from my inability to look at people with gas-burning cars as attractive.”

It’s clear that hybrid buyers want to appear environmentally conscious, observes Aaron Bragman, a Detroit-based research analyst with the Global Insight economic-forecasting company.

“A big component [of hybrid ownership] is the social aspect,” he says, adding that if a consumer just wanted to save money on gas, he or she could buy a new subcompact for $11,000 instead of forking out a minimum of $22,000 for a hybrid.

Peiper sends me newspaper clippings from England. There are always car ads in there. I don’t know how putt-putt the little cars sold over there are, or even really how little they actually are, but the MPG numbers all the Pius owners are so high on actually suck. Quite a number of cars in the UK get 15 - 20 mpg better “extra urban” (ie highway) mileage than this thing does. They also have less of a “carbon footprint” too I think.

Posted by Drew458     on 08/25/2008 at 10:33 AM   
Filed Under: • Environment • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - July 30, 2008

Another Daily EWW

Two women were charged with prostitution in Camden County on Thursday after they were arrested in a sting operation at a Lake Ozark hotel last week.  Two other women were also arrested, and three of the women are pregnant. Alexandra Wells and Allysia Waldrop were both charged on Thursday. Waldrop is pregnant, but is not known if Wells is also.  The undercover bust went down at a Lake Ozark area hotel after the sheriff’s department received several reports that pregnant women were advertising prostitution on an internet advertising site. One of the women arrested was eight months pregnant, another six months pregnant, and another was three months pregnant. They ranged in age from 18 to 22 years old.

Is this just an Ozark thing, or is this a common perversion? Women becoming prostitutes because they are pregnant? There’s a market for that? I admit I live under a rock. I may have seen a prostitute once on the sidewalks of the meat cutting district in NYC. It’s an alien world to me. But come on. This is just sick.

Posted by Drew458     on 07/30/2008 at 11:41 AM   
Filed Under: • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - July 29, 2008

I’m gonna heave

Gosh, ya think these turd lickers might be a little late? Say, by about 143 years or thereabouts? But hey, wasting their time and your money on useless crap like this sure beats working!

The House of Representatives was poised Tuesday to pass a resolution apologizing to African-Americans for slavery and the era of Jim Crow. The nonbinding resolution, which is expected to pass, was introduced by Rep. Steve Cohen, a white lawmaker who represents a majority black district in Memphis, Tennessee.

While many states have apologized for slavery, it will be first time a branch of the federal government will apologize for slavery if the resolution passes, an aide to Cohen said.

By passing the resolution, the House would also acknowledge the “injustice, cruelty, brutality and inhumanity of slavery and Jim Crow.”

“Jim Crow,” or Jim Crow laws, were state and local laws enacted mostly in the Southern and border states of the United States between the 1870s and 1965, when African-Americans were denied the right to vote and other civil liberties and were legally segregated from whites.

Aww crap, I feel another heave a-comin:

The resolution states that “the vestiges of Jim Crow continue to this day.”

“African-Americans continue to suffer from the consequences of slavery and Jim Crow—long after both systems were formally abolished—through enormous damage and loss, both tangible and intangible, including the loss of human dignity and liberty, the frustration of careers and professional lives, and the long-term loss of income and opportunity,” the resolution states.

That takes care of my lunch. Note that this announcement is coincident with a long series of recent articles from CNN on Being Black ... all geared to show us just how much we need Obama to come save us all. Could the government play into the meme any harder if they tried?

Now hold onto your own cookies, because ... you knew it, right? ... here it comes:

The resolution does not address the controversial issue of reparations. Some members of the African-American community have called on lawmakers to give cash payments or other financial benefits to descendents of slaves as compensation for the suffering caused by slavery.

Fuckin hosers just won’t quit on that one. Here’s your reparation: you are a citizen of the United States, with rights and opportunities equal to everyone else. At the end of slavery your ancestors were not shipped back to africa, nor were they executed. It may have taken you all those extra decades to gain full equality, but up until the very last years you didn’t fight for it. So shut up.

Posted by Drew458     on 07/29/2008 at 12:58 PM   
Filed Under: • Government • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - July 28, 2008

Eww! Your utterly classless act of the day

Like Ypres, the Somme, the battle for Arras, and the St Miheil Salient, the fight for Vimy Ridge was another WWI battle that claimed the lives of tens of thousands. Vimy was especially catastrophic to the Canadian troops who won the fight; they suffered more than 14,000 casualties in just 3 days of fighting; one quarter of their losses from the entire war. 18 years after the war, King Edward unveiled the massive memorial pictured above. This soaring and somber edifice remained a respected site for generations, but alas, no more.

Pornography has become the latest threat to graves and memorials on the First World War battlefields of northern France.
While common acts of desecration have in the past included vandalism and graffiti, indecent photographs and videos are increasingly being shot around the magnificent structures built during the post-war years to remember the fallen.
The latest incident saw a French couple given a four-month suspended prison sentence for making a pornographic video at the Vimy Ridge memorial near Arras.
After being found guilty of exhibitionism, they were fined £400 each and ordered to pay a symbolic one euro (80 pence) in damages to Canada, which lost 60,000 men in the Great War.
...
Despite the courageous deeds and sacrifice honoured by the Vimy Memorial, the couple are believed to have stripped naked and performed sex acts beside the soaring stone structure.  They then posted the video on a website, invited people to pay to watch it.

Their punishment came just six months after another couple were fined for taking nude photographs of themselves in the same place.  In the latest case, heard at Arras criminal court, involving the married couple, who are in their 30s, lawyers expressed concern at the gradual increase in such incidents at the memorial.  The prosecutor, Elise Bozzolo, said: “The memorial has been known for a long time as a place where exhibitionism and voyeurism is common.”

Police who investigated the case said similar incidents were regularly reported at other memorial and military graveyards.  “It is a problem which appears to be getting worse - people appear to get a perverse pleasure out of this behaviour,” said a police spokesman in Arras.

EWW. Just eww. This disgusts me. Some things are sacrosanct. But it doesn’t surprise me; almost all of the brave and heroic Frenchmen died in the first World War. After that the Socialists took over, and started rewriting history and downplaying their sacrifices. Today ... well, you know. Al-fwance. Car burnings. “Disaffected youths”. It’s no surprise that monuments like this one are being defiled.

Posted by Drew458     on 07/28/2008 at 02:07 PM   
Filed Under: • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - July 10, 2008

FUNDING FOR THE ARTS BUT FIRST, SHOW US YOUR BISEXUALS, HOMOSEXUALS, LESBIANS OR ‘NOT KNOWNS’

BMEWS readers, it just doesn’t get any crazier then this.  Maybe.

A couple of days ago I think I said something similar, except that I also qualified things by saying every time I claimed to have found the dumbest item worthy of a Moonbat award, darn if something else didn’t come up to challenge that opinion and so the last post I did on a dumb story I left open.  That is, I refrained from saying yet again, this is the stupidest thing so far.

Well, being as how the Brits continually come up with things that outdo themselves, I can’t say it won’t get dumber then this either.  Who knows what politically correct lunacy they’ll follow this with.  But I’m certain they’ll come up with something.  They have so far.

OK first, I have a url >>> http://www.mediauk.com/magazines/344246/compass-wessex, but it was no help at all in supplying a proper link to the story.
I am doing a word for word copy here.  I suppose I could have tried to do a scan, but my software isn’t good enuff to do a readable copy justice.
So finally, here we go.

SHAME on the ARTS COUNCIL

Actors Ian Mckellen, Ralph Fiennes and Kevin Spacy are outraged by the Arts Council’s new rules for obtaining funding.

The council now REQUIRES all arts organizations to state how many board members are Bisexual, Homosexual, Heterosexual, Lesbian or ‘Not Known.’

It says it’s necessary to see if the applicants are representative.  “We see diversity as broader then race, ethnicity, faith, and disability,” says Audrey Roy, the director of grants.

(I edited out the word ‘gay’ and used the proper term Homosexual altho I confess I was tempted to use the queer word. Bothers me that a perfectly good word like gay has been hijacked by deviants and we all have to live with it. )

So then. This week we have been treated to, a study that proves babies can be racist if they make a face at spicy food, and a call again for sex ed. for 5 years olds.  What next?  Stay Tuned!


Drew sticks his nose in:

Morning Peiper. I think these are the links you’re looking for?

The Arts Council has encountered ridicule and anger over attempts to force theatre and museum trustees to disclose their sexuality to obtain funding.

New grant forms require arts organisations to state how many board members are bisexual, gay, heterosexual, lesbian or “not known”.

Sir Ian McKellen and Vanessa Redgrave are among leading figures of the stage who have condemned the move, which appears to discriminate against mainstream venues.

Oscar-nominated Sir Ian, who is gay, said: “It sounds extraordinary. It shouldn’t be on a form. It’s quite inappropriate.”

Redgrave said: “Everyone should put down ‘trisexual’, whoever you are.

Britain has become the world’s leading population of trisexuals.”

They were joined in their condemnation by Christopher Hampton, whose adaptation of God of Carnage, starring Ralph Fiennes, has just opened at the Gielgud Theatre. He said: “It’s bureaucracy and political correctness gone mad.”

The application form notes that the question is for government purposes only and will not enter into the grant decision, but that claim was contradicted by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

Its spokesman said: “We appreciate that, as a responsible public body they need to monitor their overall grant-making programmes. But it is absolutely not the case that sexual orientation monitoring is a government requirement.”

Condemnation of the question spanned the arts. Julian Spalding, the former director of galleries and museums in Sheffield, Manchester and Glasgow, said: “I can’t see what relevance it’s got. It’s a horrible invasion into one’s personal and private life.” He added: “What they like to do in bed is not the Arts Council’s business.”

The Arts Council has defended its decision to ask grant applicants to state their sexuality on application forms after the policy was ridiculed by stars such as Sir Ian McKellen and Vanessa Redgrave.

Yes, this is major moonbattery. Hello, it’s the thee-ate-ah ... where the percentage of “other than hetero” is roughly 5 times greater than almost all other occupational groups. No kidding. So who cares? Shows can be good or bad whether written/produced/choreographed/acted in by people of any sexual orientation. I don’t think that aspect matters a whit.

Posted by Drew458     on 07/10/2008 at 09:00 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Stoopid-People • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - July 06, 2008

Police sniffer dogs may wear bootees to avoid offending Muslims

I JUST THIS VERY SECOND MINUTE TRIPPED OVER THIS STORY.  JUST WHEN I THOUGHT LAST WEEKS POST ABOUT DOGS AND MUSLIMS WAS AS DUMB AS IT COULD POSSIBLY GET .............
ALONG COMES THIS!

SO HERE WE GD GO AGAIN. DAMN IT.  ARE THE AUTHORITIES OUT THERE LOOKING FOR ANY TINY LITTLE THING THAT IS GOING TO OFFEND SOME MINORITY THAT SHOULDN’T BE HERE ANYWAY?  AND CAN I BE ARRESTED FOR SUGGESTING THAT?  JEEEEEZZZZ.  THIS PLACE IS STARK RAVING FREEKIN MAD.  MAD I TELL YA. 

note to Drew.  Can we keep this on top for Monday somehow?  Unless there something even more stupidly bizarre out there. But surely there can’t be. This HAS to be the ultimate. Right?

POLICE SNIFFER DOGS MAY WEAR BOOTEES TO AVOID OFFENDING MUSLIMS
Last Updated: 3:00PM BST 06/07/2008

Police sniffer dogs may be forced to wear bootees when entering mosques and Muslims’ homes to avoid causing offence.

In a bid to respect cultural sensitivities, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) is considering the move while drawing up new guidelines on the use of police dogs.

Many Muslims refuse to have direct contact with the animals, which are considered “unclean” in Islamic culture.

An ACPO spokeswoman said current guidelines were being re-drafted, but the suggestion that police dogs wear bootees had not been ruled in or out.

“Where possible the police will take cultural sensitivities into account, providing this does not interfere with effective operational policing,” she said.

The suggestion comes after a police force apologised to Islamic leaders after a police advert featured a puppy sitting in an officer’s hat. 

http://tinyurl.com/63mdyl

Posted by Drew458     on 07/06/2008 at 09:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Animals • Insanity • RoPMA • Stoopid-People • Typical White People: Stupid, Evil, Willfully Blind • UK •  
• Comments (10) • 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