Who would have thought so: Obama is incompetent!

This is the most singularly stupid bit of writing, with comments to match, I have read in a long time:

A US analyst says US President Barack Obama is unlikely to end his first term as there are serious efforts by American officials to remove him due to his incompetence.

“It is very doubtful at this time that he will last his first term,” Edward Spannaus of Executive Intelligence Review said in an interview with Press TV on Wednesday.

“There are people who are upset within the administration and the Democratic party who are seriously considering how to remove Obama from presidency,” Spannaus added.

Many of them put out all their calls for removing Obama under the amendment 25th of the US Constitution.

The amendment allows for the removal of the US president if he is incapacitated either physically or mentally.

Spannaus also opined that people in the military are upset because Obama “is not attentive” to what is going on. “We have troops killing and being killed and he is not interested in dealing with it,” he further explained.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Spannaus said people inside the White House say, “Once he got into the White House he is very unhappy having to govern …

But then it gets really bad:

... he is very frustrated, he is very depressed, some reports say he is on medications and he cannot concentrate or focus, which is a mental problem.”

“It is the question of what he is going to do now in this term, the question of the second term is out of the question,” he concluded.

With comments like, for example:

tertiary Syphilis . . . Sickle cell anemia. AIDS, remember there were a lot of rumors of him being gay or bi. His lovers that were killed from his church . . . blah blah blah Thus enabling the real puppet master to come forth and take control of a manipulated crisis.

Of course, there are a couple of intelligent comments as well, for example the one that pointed at Edward Spannaus' La-Rouche-ian background, or this one:

lastconservativeblackmanonearth
October 28, 2010 at 7:26 pm

always remember that Obama isn’t the problem … it’s the suk-butts that voted for him

Amen! Obama is incompetent because he is incompetent. Or, for those who find "incompetent" too difficult to understand: S-T-U-P-I-D. Was, is, always will be. His Harvard degree a conspiracy? But yes! It's called "Affirmative Action". Rumours about illness, medication, a grand conspiracy, are just a smokescreen to conceal the fact that the American people elected him. A stab-in-the-back legend American style. Elected him by choice, I'd like to add, and for the oh-so extracerebral valid reason that it must be wonderful to have a "black" president. Now they have what they wanted. They have an incompetent president and the world STILL doesn't like them any better for their pains to appear "non-racist".

So much about "Post-Racialism"

This is priceless: Jared Taylor, the man behind AR, debating a black man and a Latina on Obama's racial importance.



I mean... do the producers of such broadcasts INTEND to make non-white opinion makers appear as dumb as possible? To answer my own question: No, I don't think so. At least, not consciously so. However, no intelligent person would defend Obama and had they chosen a white Obama apologist he would have come across JUST AS dumb and everybody would have complained that it's an all white and thus not sufficiently "balanced" panel.

Had they chosen an intelligent, conservative black instead of Jared Taylor, everybody and his pet ferret would have complained that it's an "all black" panel.

Had they chosen one intelligent black Obama critic and two dumb white Obama apologists, there would have been complaints about "a-typical" opinons.

Now, with one intelligent white man critical of Obama shouted down by an embarassingly dumb Latina and a barely literate black man, everybody seems to be happy, because that's what seems to be an acceptable version of "reality" for most people.

Ain't it sad?

Hat tip: VFR!

The Post-Racial Age Has Arrived in Germany

...or: About people born on the right side. Twice.

The post-racial message of America's President Obama has finally arrived in Germany. How have we survived so long without it?

The director of the publicly funded "Workshop of Cultures" (Werkstatt der Kulturen), "theatermaker" and ethnologist Philippa Ebéné, decided Thursday to remove educational panels covering the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini from a planned exhibiton at her premises to the disgust of a district mayor, the curator of the exhibit and the Berlin Jewish community.

The exhibit covers the immensely topical issue "The Third World during the Second World War" and three of 96 exhibit panels are dedicated to the REALLY topical issue of the mufti's collaboration with the Nazis who had a decisive influence on the Holocaust (we reported many times already). Ebéné stated that she refused to display the information on Husseini out of respect for joint Arab organisations. Her decision was supported by migration commissioner of the Berlin Senate, Günter Piening. In a neighbourhood (heavily dominated by Muslims) like Neukölln a "differentiated presentation" was paramount, Piening stated.

"Not differentiated enough". The mufti and his German buddies.

Maya Zehden, a spokeswoman for the Berlin Jewish community, termed Piening's statement "an appeasement attempt" to ignore the fact that "there was no official resistance from the Arabic world against the persecution of Jews" during the Shoah. She accused Piening of showing a false tolerance to German-Arabs in a heavily Muslim-influenced neighborhood.

In an e-mail to the JPost, Heinz Buschkowsky, the district mayor in Neukölln, wrote that it is a sign of "anticipatory obedience to avoid probable protests. I do not consider this position to be good", notabene pointing out that Piening's statement is a "repression of the facts dealing with anti-Semitism."

Meanwhile, Ebéné denied that there was an "agreement" with the local Muslim community to censor the exhibit. She termed media queries regarding an agreement as "Eurocentric." The Jeruslem Post was informed that the exhibit was intended as a "homage to soldiers from African" countries who fought against the Nazis. Indeed, a crucial aspect of WWII so far totally neglected.

When asked about her opposition to the inclusion of the mufti panels, she asked, "was there ever a commemoration event in Israel to honor the [African] soldiers?" In an Interview with Radio Berlin Brandenburg Ebéné, who has a German mother and a father from Cameroon and is thus, so to say by birth and per definitionem, on the right side, stated: I am not white. I have no reason to be afraid of Arabs", which is rather endearing for somebody who is allegedly heavy into informing the world about the African slave-trade.

My take on all this? This is so rock-solid, die-hard, intransigently and impregnally stupid and so full of the usual German "antifa", politically correct, "fight against the right", "multiculti"anti-West and racist crap, that it defies any serious comment, because that would lend her antics a credibility they don't possess. That Ebéné is first confusing Fascism and National-Socialism and then, when challenged, peddling her family's (the German side, that is) history of saving Jewish children to show that she is by birth DOUBLY on the right side, is only the icing on the cake.

Of course, the reaction of the public, the political classes and the media, or the question how Ebéné could end up in such a position at all, are a different matter.

Promoting Grievance and Polarization

President Obama, Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Sergeant James Crowley met "for a beer" the day before yesterday. This official White House photo by Pete Souza shows them walking from the Oval Office to the Rose Garden.

The story behind that meeting is by now old news. In brief: White cop arrested black Harvard professor (and Obama chum), Henry Louis Gates jr, professor accused cops of racism, Obama ended up stuck both feet in mouth.

How could that happen? As conservative writer Thomas Sowell put it:

The racial-profiling issue is a great vote-getter. And if it polarizes the society, that is a price that politicians are willing to pay in order to get votes. Academics who run black-studies departments, as Prof. Henry Louis Gates does, likewise have a vested interest in racial paranoia.

For “community organizers” as well, racial resentments are a stock in trade. President Obama’s background as a community organizer has received far too little attention, though it should have been a high-alert warning that this was no post-racial figure.

What does a community organizer do? What he does not do is organize a community. What he organizes are the resentments and paranoia within a community, directing those feelings against other communities, from whom either benefits or revenge are to be gotten, using whatever rhetoric or tactics will accomplish that purpose.

To think that someone who has spent years promoting grievance and polarization was going to bring us all together as president is a triumph of wishful thinking over reality.

And predictably, Gates is cashing in now on the publicity he triggered off by attributing his July 16 arrest to racism. He is, too, a frustrated elitist. The cops main misdoing was that they treated the professor like an ordinary man. Not like an ordinary BLACK man, mind you, but not with the reverence the professor thought he deserved. He was really lucky that a white cop happened to be the first one on the scene, which enabled him to play the race card.

What is remarkable about that?

First, that it shouldn't take a man with a Ph.D. to know that mouthing off at police officers will dramatically increase one's chance of being arrested. Police officers have the moral and legal authority to use force to serve and protect. They may overstep or fail to exercise their authority, but the general idea is that they must be ready and willing to use force. That means that one should exercise one's best behaviour around them. Always. Gates obviously thought that he was above that.

For Obama, it wasn't quite that easy. After all, he is supposed to show some statesmanship. Therefore, it was remarkable that the Commander in Chief, whose job it is to choose the Attorney General to be the chief law enforcement officer in the United States, was instinctively not, as he ought to have been, on his default position to support the police. Instead, he was in automatic "Promoting Grievance and Polarization" mode, and this is probably the most remarkable bit about that whole sleazy story indeed!

Now the picture! It shows Sergeant Crowley politely helping the older and slightly handicapped Professor Gates down some steps. Both are wearing suits and ties, while the Commander in Chief, in his shirt sleeves, walks ahead, totally detached from the scene, when it ought have to been his, the host's, task to stay close to his guests and to help the professor, his guest and friend, on his way.

I'm sure there are already, and will soon be, many and more clever interpretations buzzing through the Internet, but to me it just seems that the Commander in Chief has simply no manners. One doesn't expect that from a man with such a gentlemanly posture, but, so it seems, it's not enough to look good in suits.

As for Professor Gates, I don't think I will see another poseur and arrogant prick QUITE that awful in a hurry -- when he hasn't been caught on the wrong foot and yelling abuse at police officers, that is.




I, for one, congratulate Sergeant Crowley on his professionality, discipline and restraint.

The Selective View of Who Makes a Victim

Not quite two years ago we reported the case of Ermyas Mulugeta, a "Germano-Ethiopian" (as the politically correct definition goes) who had come to grief in Potsdam, the capital of the state of Brandenburg, on Easter night. The two suspected "right wing extremists", who had been arrested as perpetrators on the strength of their appearance and because they had been there, were helicoptered manacled and blindfolded about 600km to the federal prosecutor at Karlsruhe, all self-righteous whining about "Guantanamo" momentarily forgotten.

All of Germany was in an orgiastic frenzy of "fight the right" Gutmenschentum, the sale of candles and flowers soared.

It then turned out that the suspected perpetrators were no "right-wing extremists" and that they weren't even the perpetrators. In fact, there hadn't been any perpetrators. It turned out, too, that Ermyas Mulugeta, pissed as a newt, had started a brawl and acquired his severe head injuries by falling and hitting the pavement.

An old German joke goes like this: "When I saw you coming, I thought it was you, then I thought it was your brother, and now you are close, I see it's neither you nor your brother."

Sadly, this is no joke.

Did the entire sordid affair teach anybody anything? Apparently not. Since then, a 15-year old boy has been expelled from his school on the strength of a hairdo that LOOKED "rightwing" and other coloured victims of violence did not become darlings of a depraved and rotten-to-the-core media, because in their cases the perpetrators had been youths "with a migration background".

No, the case of Ermyas Mulugeta did NOT teach a lesson indeed. Recently, the local court in Potsdam convicted him of defraud and imposed a fine of some hundred Euro on him. He had lied about his financial circumstances to get legal aid. To pay for the legal charges and to help Mulugeta to get over his traumatic experience, the organisation "Brandenburg Against The Right" (Brandenburg gegen Rechts) had collected about 50,000 Euro. And in an, otherwise amazingly subdued, media, the man from Ethiopia is still described as a "victim of violence".

The Emperor's Clothes

Update:

Two comments at VFR caught my eyes:

So now we have a manufactured ancient Negro to show whites that they are not even the legitimate heirs of their own lands.

Yes, that may be a possible implication. In fact, the discussion about the legitimate ownership of land is a specifically hot topic here because of the ongoing discussion about the lost eastern territories of the German Reich, which has been projected to "Palestine". But frankly, it didn't occur to me that any sane person would use that argument 35,000 years after the case.

And:

I suppose it's almost too obvious to remark on, but the subtext here seems to be "your ancestors were black, so you shouldn't mind your descendents being so, too."

Yes, it IS that obvious and yes, it totally and utterly escaped me. The emperor DOES wear clothes, after all.

Start of yesterday's original entry:

Larence Auster writes at VFR:

Talking about scientific hype in service to fashionable liberalism, here, as reported by the Telegraph, is a British forensic scientist's reconstruction of the head and face of the first Cro-Magnon European of 35,000 years ago, which he created using fossilized fragments of a skull and jawbone found in a cave. But before you click on the link to see the full entry page where I've placed the photo, guess what the first European "really" looked like, just guess.

The first modern European: Forensic artist Richard Neave
reconstructed the face based on skull fragments from 35,000 years ago

Then see the attractive white female anthropologist and BBC presenter Alice Roberts looking with deep satisfaction and self-satisfaction at this consummate creation of politically correct science:

Alice Roberts contemplating the bust of Homo ...
europeansis. 'I look at that face and think "I'm actually looking
at the face of somebody from 40,000 years ago"', she says

Oh, the joy, the bliss! It's as good as having a black U.S. president! Give that woman a cigarette. This is the one of the funniest things I've ever seen. The sheer shameless obviousness of these liberals, completely unembarrassed to reveal what they're really about.

I guessed and I was right. It wasn't all that difficult to guess, though.

The question remains what the implications of those findings are supposed to be, granted, for argument's sake, that they are true. So our ancestors in the mists of history didn't look like us. How very unexpected. They bore a vague resemblance to what we would identify now as a black person. So? Does that elevate the black race in any way? If yes, it seems to go over those scientists' heads that it is racist and demeaning to imply that it lends kudos to the black race having been the ancestors of white Europeans, but nobody will ever accuse them of thinking more far than their immediate demagogic goal. Do we owe blacks increased respect now for that performance? Why? By what logic? If yes, don't we then owe increased respect to everything further down on the ladder of phylogeny now? Oh we are SO proud to be derived from the protozoon! And are those non-racists really not twigging that one could draw the conclusion now that the white race has, in 35,000 years ... continued to develop?

A Pundit with an Agenda

The Times used to be, long ago, a great newspaper when it was still the mouthpiece of the British establishment, or rather when the British establishment had a different face. Today, Times Online publishes the comment of one Sunny Hundal, headed Burning Satanic Verses lit the flame for better race relations, and yes, he means it exactly like that. To summarize: Frightening the living daylight out of Salman Rushdie and the stupid, white- and colonial guilt-ridden Brits in the same process was a good thing because it paved the way to the total submission we now see in Britain and what Hundal calls "remarkable civility". The entire comment is so incredibly full of politically correct leftist-liberal bullshit that it could as well be published at The Onion as a travesty and nobody would notice.

It has become such a frequent occasion that some profiteer from the fact that the Brits once, long ago, shouldered The White Man's Burden spits on that very tradition, that I have given up following it. However, Hundal didn't limit his bias to the country that gave him his passport and that irritated me:

Despite the rows and arguments, the British experience has been much better than that in Europe. France sticks to its official colour-blind approach but it has failed to make minorities feel that they have a stake in mainstream society. Germany has yet to shake off its history of associating nationality with bloodline and makes it difficult for even third or fourth-generation Turks to be full citizens. The Netherlands has careered from extremely liberal attitudes to much more xenophobic ones. Britain, in marked contrast, has conducted itself in remarkable civility.

Does this Times columnist really not know that France did not fail "to make minorities feel that they have a stake in mainstream society" but that the problem lies just with one of several minorities that prefers to burn cars instead of taking up its stake in mainstream society? That the Netherlands have not "careered from extremely liberal attitudes to much more xenophobic ones", but are trying to make up for their past mistakes, namely confronting a minority, that considers any liberal attitude as weakness, with such a despised and, at the same time, easily exploitable concept?

And Germany? Does it really have "yet to shake off its history of associating nationality with bloodline" that "makes it difficult for even third or fourth-generation Turks to be full citizens"? The cliché of the "racist" German is always gladly taken up, but that doesn't make it any more real. Germans are probably less racist than those European people with a colonial past -- or most third-worlders, for that. Germans are traditionally antisemites. That is a huge difference, which is hardly ever acknowledged. Germany, the only major European country without much of a stake in colonialism, is deeply provincial, always has been and after reunification even more so. Any cosmopolitanism is a totally alien concept to us, as is thinking in international terms. When the first Turks arrived in larger numbers in the early Seventies, nobody bothered to waste much thought on them because they were supposed to go back to their native country sooner or later anyway. They didn't, but at first it seemed as if Turks, coming from a secular country, didn't do so badly in the field of assimilation, no bearded men, no burqa-wearing women, they kept themselves to themselves, but their children, so it seemed, were going to do well.

And then, somewhere along the way and the Germans being tired of being branded forever as the world's premier racists, the suicidal family reunion schemes were started and instead of sending those who hadn't grown any roots in Germany, back, spouses from the deepest Anatolian sticks were imported while at the same time the alarming signs of a re-Islamisation of the Turkish minority were ignored. Again, at the same time, our little country took in Asians, Russians and other immigrants from non-Muslim countries without major problems, with the result that a Sikh in a British newspaper may ride now the old nag of German "racism" to death and nobody laughs.

Angry, I commented at the Times website:

This is an insult to your readers. How can one write a sensemaking, literate and informative comment covering such a complex topic having just 300 characters at one's disposal? But then, "You have no idea about what you are talking" only needs 40 odd characters and says it all.

I think I was wrong. Some hours and a bit of online search later, I have to concede that Sunny Hundal knows very well about what he is talking. He is a man with an agenda.

German Feel-Good-Experience Busted

No this is not, as the pictures may suggest, about Guantanamo and the misdeeds of the enemy of everything that is good and noble in Germany, the Americans. This is about two men who were suspected of beating a dark-skinned man into a coma on Easter night last year in Potsdam. Two befitting perpetrator-figures were quickly found and to the glee of the media helicoptered heavily blindfolded and handcuffed from Berlin to the premises of the Federal Investigator in Karlsruhe who found the case important enough to grab it contra legem from the regional investigator. The German public and media stopped – just - short of calling for wood and matches for the two arrested men and everything was done to show Ermyas Mulugeta, the victim, in the most shining of lights. Ermyas M. "the family man", "the engineer", "the German citizen", Ermyas who "played soccer with children".

Of course, even those outside the "fight racism anywhere as long as it's safely within what is perceived as 'right-wing extremism'" faction where all hot and bothered about the incident because it bode ill for the imminent (football) World Cup.

BILD, a particularly nasty shitrag and forever on the side of the current Zeitgeist, whatever it calls for, screeched: "Potsdam Mugging Night: They Only Stopped When They Thought He'd Be Dead".

Well, it wasn't quite so, in fact hardly anything of the above. And we've commented on it before.

Ermyas Mulugeta, the family man, had, on Easter night, not quite been on his way to Easter Vigil and Solemn High Mass with his wife and children when he was hit at four o'clock. He had been on something like a pub-crawl and, pissed as a newt with a blood alcohol level around 2 o/oo, thrown out of a disco, where he had had a drunken brawl with two men already. He then got into a screaming match with a bus driver who had insisted on giving him change in coins for a 20 Euro note and after he left the vehicle, he embarged on a fight with two men by kicking them. At 1,97 m, roughly six foot seven inches, Mulugeta wasn't physically quite the typical victim either. He too, had a history of aggression and intimidating people.

So it shouldn't have come as a surprise when the doctors found out that his life-threatening injuries corresponded with falling and hitting a hard surface and not with being punched or kicked.

Confirmation of the fact that he had, in fact, started the brawl that sent him to hospital, transpired only very slowly. The incident had been partly pieced together from a recording of the voice mail box of the victim's wife whom he had called while the fray started. The epithet "Nigger" was audible, preceded by "Schweinesau" (which is best translated as "swine sow") uttered by the victim-to-be. "Schweinesau", so Mrs. Mulugeta (of whom according to some sources Ermyas is separated) stated, was one of her husband's terms of endearment for her and nobody laughed.

Candlelight vigil for Ermyas Mulugeta.

Last Friday now, the two men accused of having beaten Mulugeta into a coma, the two men worthy of Guantanamo-treatment, those skin-headed paragon-perpetrators were acquitted, the judge following the application of the public prosecutor. The lawyers for the defendants said in their closing arguments that the case had become a political issue, which it had been indeed from the start.

What remains is a faint feeling of Schadenfreude at the idiocy of the Gutmenschen faction who react to each and every misdeed, real or perceived, of the "extremist right", real or perceived, with outraged Pavlovian promptness.

Largely unnoted remained what the newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine reported at an unconspicious corner of their website FAZ.NET, namely that shortly after the crime a (female) public prosecutor who was not involved in the case threatened one of the defense lawyers with a criminal charge should he make known the true facts of a case, which didn't resemble the so far alleged Right-wing extremist excess of violence.

And of course, nobody with a mind yet not entirely removed from reality will expect any outrage over the treatment of two innocent men. The media have, after all, long ago jettisoned any resemblance of clarifying what really happened. It's all about the correct societal reaction, which has been removed from any cause long ago. And never mind the future of two little men without importance. They are not the sort one sees at candlelight vigils and peace rallies anyway.

Disappointment that even a biased justice system wouldn't go out of the way of due process to satisfy the politically public urges hangs like a wet rag now over the German media.


Ermyas Mulugeta before the crime and at the trial, where he couldn't remember anything.

Gutmenschen in full fly: "Why" said the placard at the rally last year and: "Which Black will be next?"

Never mind, really, about the victim either. The interest in coloured victims fades as quickly as the perpetrators are not ethnic Germans and thus do not serve to hatch the odious feel-good sentiment because they can not, by any stretch of the imagination, be subsumed under the "right-wing extremist" label. Like for example the Turks who had recently beaten another African into a coma. Different from the Potsdam case, it never made the headlines.

Some Facts about Leeds University

About two weeks ago, the lecture of the German political scientist Matthias Küntzel (picture) scheduled at Leeds University was cancelled.

The as usually well-informed and level-headed Melanie Phillips informs us at her blog and she -- chapeau -- even gets his name right, Umlaut and all :

… A non-Jewish German academic, Dr Matthias Küntzel, was shocked when his planned lecture, ‘Hitler’s Legacy: Islamic Antisemitism in the Middle East’, was abruptly cancelled by the university along with two smaller scheduled seminars.

The university insisted its decision had nothing to do with freedom of speech; nor was it bowing to threats or protests from interest groups. The meeting had been cancelled on safety grounds alone, and because ‘contrary to our rules, no assessment of risk to people or property has been carried out, no stewarding arrangements are in place and we were not given sufficient notice to ensure safety and public order.’

But there was no security risk. No threats had been received. The only ripple was a couple of protests from Muslim students, who claimed the lectures would increase hatred and threaten their ‘security and well-being’ on campus. The university’s excuse was absurd.
[…]
Now, fresh information has reached me which reinforces the view that the cancellation was indeed designed to suppress Küntzel’s views. After meeting the university authorities the head of the German department, Professor Stuart Taberner, told his staff that, although he didn’t think censorship was the issue, if Küntzel were to be re-invited the university would have to ‘look closely’ at the subject of his talk.

‘Having now found the text of what I take to be his talk on the web,’ he said, ‘I’m convinced that the university would want to be reassured that it was striking the correct balance between free speech — the expression of ideas — and its obligation to be mindful of the language in which these ideas are framed’.

The real reason for the cancellation was thus laid bare. It was because of what Küntzel was saying… Indeed, Küntzel sees a seamless connection between Nazism and the jihad against the west. Hitler, he says, fantasised about the toppling of the skyscrapers of New York, the symbol of Jewish power. And the Hamburg trial of terrorists associated with 9/11 heard evidence that New York had been selected for the atrocity because it was a ‘Jewish city’.
[...]
The result is that Leeds has now joined the growing list of universities which have spinelessly given up the defence of free speech, and thus, in the great battle for civilisation against barbarism, run up the campus white flag.

So far, so bad. What amazes me, however, is that nobody took the trouble to look at background and infrastructure of Leeds University, which would have clarified that Leeds is far more than just another spineless university.

Well, maybe the following is obvious to residents of the UK, so take this brief information to be for non-UK readers: Leeds, together with its neighbouring city Bradford, is the Islamic heartland of the north, infamous for localised sharia law, home of some of the London Tube bombers, religious riots, segregated schools and other segregation issues.

But back to Leeds University:

In the November Referendum 2004 of the Leeds University Union, two of five motions, number 2 and 5, were about such pressing issues like "Palestinian Students’ Right to Education" (thwarted by – you guessed it – the Jews), proposed by Akram Awad and seconded by Mariam Al-Jaajaa, and "LUU Policy towards PSG [i.e. Palestinian Solidarity Group] and Other Politically Active Societies" proposed by Akram Awad and seconded by (are we amazed?) Mariam Al-Jaajaa. In the latter, the aspiring academics are defining, quite in the spirit of Hermann "Wer Jude ist, bestimme ich" Goering who is a Jew and who isn't. You don't believe me? Read it!

Not too surprisingly, the student voted "most powerful on Leeds University campus" in the "Leeds Student", notabene Britain's biggest weekly student newspaper, is one Hind Hassan (self-description: "British Iraqi, live for the battle"). She writes a near-weekly column for the newspaper, makes frequent appearances on BBC radio Five-Live, BBC Yorkshire and blogs at BBC online.

When this "passionate anti-war Respect [i.e. the party of George "You are totally wrong in saying that in most people’s eyes Hezbollah are terrorists. In most people’s eyes Israel is a terrorist state" Galloway] activist" isn't talking politics, she is writing juvenile (which would be forgivable) and simperingly self-serving (which is not) drivel like "Do you ever remember not having a mobile phone?":

Gone are the days when friends would arrange to meet for lunch at a particular time and place in person or on the old fashioned corded dog and bone . I yearn for those days, but why I hear you all cry out. Why would one, so clearly progressive in all other aspects of society hold such reservations against a harmless lump of plastic?

Have I caught tinnitus or is that Mr. Pulitzer rotating in his grave?

However, class war is never far away from this passionate anti-war activist's mind. Little Miss (excuse me: Ms.!) Equality and Diversity informs us:

The one good use of the cordless portable media phone thingy is throwing it in the direction of that annoying cow who won’t shut up about her pony from daddy dearest.

Well, it clearly wasn't that infantile bilge her skill for social analysis that made her eligible for frequent appearances on BBC radio Five-Live, BBC Yorkshire and blogging at BBC online. Then, what was?

Maybe it's her political savvy. At her website, gems like

Dictatorship:
Pseudo definition
Middle East.
True definition
A country that continually veto’s resolutions backed by majority of Nations so as to protect their own interests.
[…]
A country that jails a man and places him in solitary confinement for exposing the largest Nuclear weapons program in the Middle East.
A country that arrests and tortures innocent humans without charge just because they can

(and so on, I think you get the gist) can be found. I wonder if that swollen-headed little bitch REALLY thinks the Middle East is preferable to the Americanised West or whether she is just being deliberately obnoxious.

I wonder, too, why she is suffering the awful conditions of a Western cesspool when the entire Middle East with all its freedom, respect for human rights, diversity and equality (specifically for women) is open to her and whether she has ever asked herself what might happen to people there who'd out themselves as "lifelong Christians" when she is free to make herself known as what she is in the despised West.

(As an aside: Why the editor wasn't interested in a Christian perspective must have something to do with the fact that in Britain more people are attending mosques than the Church of England and making demands. So he is, after all, only adhering to democratic standards when he does that, or isn't he. That must be the reason, too, why a fledgeling hack as singularly untalented as Little Ms. Social Justice is courted by a medium of the importance of the BBC.)

But there is more to Hind Hassan than her valiant fight against little upper middle class girls with ponies and for the clearing of the name of Middle Eastern dictatorships havens of human rights, racial and gender equality. So it doesn't amaze us all that much that she was instrumental, too, in the ousting of Dr. Frank Ellis. Who is Frank Ellis? Ellis used to be a lecturer at Leeds University. He was thoughtless enough to express his support for the outcome of scientific research done by others, namely the "Bell Curve". The Al Guardian, in an unappetising huff over such an appaling display of such non-politically correct scientific findings, even transcended their usual lopsided reporting to lie outrightly:

Yesterday more than 300 students and staff gathered in Leeds to call for him to be sacked and campaigners said the struggle was picking up momentum at other universities. Hind Hassan, treasurer of Unite Against Fascism at Leeds University, said: “This is a fight that is going to go on and on until we get rid of this man. It has gone beyond an issue of freedom of speech or academic freedom and now directly impinges on the rights of students to live and work in a safe and tolerant environment. How can female students or those from ethnic minorities possibly get a fair educational experience?”

Well, apart from the fact that there is no "right" for students who do not hold a British passport to live and work in a British environment at all, I wonder what "educational experience" women would get in the fatherlands of those ethnic minority students, or why European and US-American students aren't crowding the educational institutions in same countries to get a wonderful alternative educational experience of high-class academic standard, enlightenment and racial equality.

Students from several universities attended the rally. Shaheed Fazal, who travelled from Warwick University, said: “It is completely inappropriate for a lecturer in his position to push these views.”

Pav Aktar, NUS anti-racism organiser, said the campaign was gathering national momentum…

What Ellis really said can be read here.

My take on that? As long as students Hind Hassan, Pav Aktar and Shaheed Fazal can oust lecturer Dr. Frank Ellis, things can't be quite so racially unbalanced as they seem to think they are in Britain.

Or rather: not in the way they think they are.

However disgusted by it, the Al Guardian nevertheless found the case of Frank Ellis useful to discredit another academic presenting other unpopular facts, namely Matthias Küntzel and thus our circle closes.

The University of Leeds this morning hit back at critics accusing it of censorship after it cancelled a public lecture on 'Islamic anti-semitism' due to be delivered by a visiting academic.

The university said it had cancelled the lecture on security grounds and insisted it had nothing to do with "academic freedom, freedom of speech, anti-semitism or Islamophobia."

The university's secretary, Richard Gair, said: "Those that are claiming that is the case are making mischief."
[…]
Dr Küntzel is a research associate at the Vidal Sassoon international centre for the study of anti-semitism at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He had been due last night to deliver a lecture called 'The Nazi legacy: the export of anti-semitism to the Middle East'.
[…]
This is the second time in less than a year that Leeds has found itself at the centre of accusations of preventing academic freedom of speech.

Last March, Frank Ellis became the first university lecturer to be suspended under the new Race Relations (Amendment) Act. The decision by Leeds came after he told the university's student newspaper that black people and women were genetically inferior.

Dr Ellis, who worked in the same school of modern languages and cultures which is at the centre of this latest row, took early retirement last summer.

A spokeswoman for the university said the two cases were unrelated and neither were to do with academic freedom of speech. "The Ellis case had nothing to do with freedom of speech, neither does this [latest] case."

No and presumably neither has a comparison of Küntzel with Ellis, who had defended controversial findings outside his own field of research (I am NOT justifying Ellis' ousting, mind you, any further discussion would just go beyond the scope of this blog entry), whereas Küntzel was presenting rock-hard evidence within his very own field of research.

And surely the fact that Küntzel was fussily introduced by the Guardian as a "research associate at the Vidal Sassoon international centre for the study of anti-semitism at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem" whereas the information that he is a German gentile was NOT mentioned is purely accidental as well…

The only fact that is not accidental is the fact that those not graced with minority status at Leeds University are scared shitless.

The selective politically correct perception of who makes victim fodder

The North British Person has got an excellent didactic play on political correctness for us:

TV contestant's racist views leave parents on a tide of bad PR
FERGUS SHEPPARD MEDIA CORRESPONDENT (fsheppard@scotsman.com)

IT WAS simultaneously a nightmare for any parent and a demonstration of the extraordinary power of reality TV in modern Britain.

A middle-class Edinburgh couple yesterday found themselves forced into the unfamiliar world of public-relations spin control as a row over their daughter's racist remarks on television came to the doorstep of their Georgian home.

David Buchanan, father of 18-year-old Lucy Buchanan, enlisted Edinburgh PR firm Profile Plus to issue a statement which amounted to a "wholehearted" apology for their daughter's conduct.

Lucy, a former pupil of the £19,662-a-year St Peter's School in York, won a place on a Channel 4 reality show in a gap year before going to Bristol University.
[...]
Lucy - who lists her hobbies as lacrosse and shooting - gave her fellow contestants camped on the South Pacific islands of Motoraku and Rapota a crash course on her views on society.

She said Britain was home to "way too many cultures", adding: "Britain is a complete mess. I just don't appreciate people coming into our country and taking over our culture." In another aside, the teenager declared: "I'm for the British Empire and things. I'm for slavery, but that's never going to come back."

The Buchanans were forced into defending their daughter as journalists descended on the family home. Mr Buchanan is understood to be an IT executive while his wife, Nicola, is a former model.

In his statement, Mr Buchanan said: "Lucy has been brought up in a loving and caring home, she has been privately schooled, as is already known.

"By definition, she has had advantages in life, which mean that she has been cosseted in a way that for most children is simply not available to them. It is our firm belief that Lucy, as a naïve teenager, made these silly and very unfortunate remarks on the back of her excitement at being on Shipwrecked."

The statement claimed Lucy had been "challenged" by teammates on the show, a process which had altered her views over five months of filming.
[...]
Mr Buchanan added: "We hope that on Lucy's return she will be afforded the opportunity to use this life experience in a positive way to demonstrate that she can act as an ambassador for change and moderation."

Lucy's trenchant views have extended to more than race. She has also described fat people as "disgusting", calling for them to get their stomachs stitched, and branded lesbians "sinister".
[...]
The Commission for Racial Equality said it was monitoring Shipwrecked.

Campaign group Anti-Slavery International actually backed Channel 4's decision to screen Buchanan's remarks, arguing they illustrated how little slavery was understood.

Group spokeswoman Beth Herzfeld said: "These sorts of comments and the cavalier attitude to slavery clearly show a lack of recognition that slavery does continue to exist, as well as an understanding of what the transatlantic slave trade involved."
[...]

We are living in a culture of envy. If Lucy'd attended, say, the local comprehensive, nobody would have given a damn. The fact that the article revels oh-so-subtly in the details of her privileges ("Lucy - who lists her hobbies as lacrosse and shooting...") makes it a perfectly vile bit of journalism.

The parents are spineless morons,
1) because they apologised for their daughter's opinions,
2) because they let their daughter, whose education they obviously intended to be elitist, prostitute herself at such a crappy TV show. No... that's an oxymoron. Make that ANY TV show,
3) because they are using politically correct lower-middleclass-isms like "caring" and "privately schooled", which, so I suspect, are anathema at the school for which they forked out all that money.

So The Thought Police Commission for Racial Equality is monitoring Shipwrecked. What sort of importance do they grant the bimbos in a pathetic travesty like Shipwrecked? Besides, apart from the slavery bit, which was pretty brainless (Yeah! Too bad about all those school fees...!) Lucy didn't say anything about race and made perfectly good points and I doubt that her views extend to her duskier class mates at St Peter's from the former colonies, which would prove that it's really about culture and not about "race". (I may be wrong.)

Did it ever occur to those moronic parents that their "cosseted" daughter who, according to her father "made these silly and very unfortunate remarks on the back of her excitement at being on Shipwrecked" that she made these remarks not out of "excitement" but PRECISELY BECAUSE SHE WAS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HER LIFE EXPOSED TO THE REALITY OF YOB-LIFE?

I have been at the receiving end of quite some aggro for similar views to those Lucy espressed on fat people.

That is, I can understand that it is vile and unfair to discriminate against people who can't do anything about their condition, be it colour, handicap or whatever. Fat people CAN. At least the vast majority of them. Why are they still mollycoddled and protected as "victims" by the politically correct brigade? To quote myself: After holocaust survivors, cancer survivors, rape survivors, abuse of various sorts survivors, we now have - obesity survivors! The terminology reveals the agenda: "Something bad has happened to me; it must be someone else’s, preferably the men's, doing".

By standing up for fat women, feminism [incidentally another ideology of envy] creates a perverted system of female solidarity. Fat women get encouragement, support and even acclaim for an unhealthy lifestyle. Feminists WANT women fat. They want to proselytize women who feel that they are ugly or potentially rejected by men. These are the first and easiest prey for an ideology that fosters men-hating.

It's not men who force their views on women; it's a women-shaped society that forces its views on women and it is not beyond feminists to fish even at the very bottom of that self-made foodchain.

Thank you for your acclaim. I think that was rather good, too.

And lesbians... who would care what they are doing if it were behind closed doors. I wouldn't and, so I presume, Lucy wouldn't either. Hell, I don't even WANT to know what sort of activities people prefer behind closed doors. It's the fact that so many of them are aggressively flaunting their sexuality, which makes them (and homosexuals) so unpalatable. They are cramming their sexuality down our throats, and we, who don't share such proclivities, are supposed to like it -- and AGAIN in the name of the new tin god political correctness.

Not to mention the disgusting hypocrisy of all those who are now appalled that a yobbo-programme, designed to be sensationalist, turned out to be just that and are targeting the young woman instead of the makers of that cynical bit of taste- and soul-corrupting dirt.

All that said, the article, in all its political correct righteous outrage, misses entirely the probably most crucial point, namely that Whites were rather gifted amateurs when it came to enslaving people and the professionals were (and, worse still ARE) people of various Middle Eastern and North African extraction who enslaved Whites as well.

But to say all that is, of course, racist. And it might, mind you, hurt the overdeveloped sensitivities of the followers of the "Religion of Peace".

The politically correct perception of who makes victim fodder and who doesn't is pretty selective.

A list of titles at amazon.com for further education:

Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800 (Early Modern History) by Robert C. Davis

White Gold: The Extraordinary Story of Thomas Pellow and Islam's One Million White Slaves by Giles Milton

They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America by Michael A. Hoffman

White Slaves, African Masters: An Anthology of American Barbary Captivity Narratives by Paul Baepler

Race and Slavery in the Middle East: A Historical Enquiry by Bernard Lewis

Rotten to The Core

The man who coined the, no doubt inadvertently, funny phrase: "Sexual perversion leads to death. That is why the Jews promote it." (If it only did!) was arrested on charges of possessing child porn. No doubt, it's all the Jews' fault! Thanks ABC News for that little gem:

White Supremacist Busted on Child-Porn Charge
Leading Intellectual of Racist Movement Was Arrested by Federal Agents
By MARCUS BARAM

Jan. 4, 2007 — A leader of the white supremacist movement was arraigned today on charges of possession of child pornography and witness tampering after being arrested by FBI agents Thursday night at his home in Charlottesville, Va.

Kevin Alfred Strom, founder of the National Vanguard white supremacist group, was considered the leading intellectual of the movement since the death of William Pierce, the author of the notorious "Turner Diaires."

Strom was arraigned in U.S. District Court in Charlottesville, charged with the two counts, and is currently being held at a facility in the city. According to the indictment, he allegedly possessed or attempted to possess "multiple images of child pornography" on his computer's hard drive.

Strom was also charged with witness tampering, which involved physically assaulting and mentally intimidating a witness to his criminal activity.

Last July, Strom took a leave of absence from National Vanguard, citing "family and health matters" and saying that he had "made mistakes, sometimes serious ones," according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks white supremacist activity.
[...]
Strom wrote frequently about art and beauty, often rhapsodizing about the physical attributes of white women and girls.

In an 2003 essay titled "Millstone for the Mogul" for the National Alliance's Web site, he condemned the producers of the movie "Thirteen" for "what they are doing to our little children -- teen and preteen White children -- to normalize perverse and degenerate sexual behavior for them, to normalize homosexuality, to prematurely sexualize them, and to make interracial sex fashionable to them -- can never be forgiven, can never be explained away. The media moguls who are doing this to our children deserve to be tried and punished for conspiracy, rape, gang rape, murder and attempted murder."

Later in the essay, he goes on to describe his desire to give children "self-respect, respect for their ancestors, respect for the future of their people, a deep respect for their own sexual nature, and respect for the members of the opposite sex who will be their mates and life companions."

That would be so funny weren't it so vile! Doesn't that guy positively SHOUT: "Look at me, I am a poofter!"? Many of those who are waxing a tad too lyrically about preserving children's "innocence" are only interested in preserving it for their own use. So this shouldn't come as too big a surprise.

Racism That Must Not Be Called by Its Name

Another one of my archived pieces! Will political correct idiocy stop someday, somewhere?

This is from The University at Buffalo Reporter, not new, but still topical, nevertheless.

...thousands of Africans emigrated to Germany during the past 500 years, many of whom were brought to Germany as "living curiosities" or as slaves. The establishment of German colonies in Africa at the end of the 19th century increased the number of encounters between Africans and Germans [...]

With the American occupation of Germany after World War II, Afro-Germany was reborn from relationships between black American GIs and German women. Their ranks swelled further as many thousands of immigrant workers from Mozambique, Angola and Namibia were imported to deal with East Germany's chronic labor shortage. African students and refugees who settled in Germany have brought additional depth and breadth to the Afro-German cultural mix.

"One of the reasons that Afro-Germans have captured the interest of scholars across the humanities, ...is because looking at their experiences allows us to see another dimension of the 19th- and early 20th-century ideas of race that led to the Holocaust.

"The experiences of Afro-Germans in today's Germany offer insight into the transformation of that nation-willing or not-into a multicultural society, ...Our discussion is especially timely in light of the wave of violence against foreigners and persons seen as such in Germany since its reunification."

Granted, for argument's sake, all this is factually right, which it isn't (there has never been intermarriage or cohabitation on a larger scale between Germans and Africans and what impact are "thousands" bound to have on a population in the millions and over several centuries anyway, nor has slave-holding ever been part of the German culture): If I understand this shameless bit of politically correct drivel correctly it is trying to convince us that there are enough Black genes among the German population to make us more open towards the ideas of multi-culturalism and to renounce racism and anti-Semitism.

Of course, this implies that openness towards other cultures (whatever that may be worth), racism (or freedom from it) or antisemitism (or freedom from it) are genetically pre-determined, which is - racist. But that's okay as long as such racism is only focussed on Whites.

To what length will the politically correct idiot brigade in America go to make us believe that 1) Whites can per definitionem not be the victims of racism, that 2) Blacks are better people and that 3) a multicultural society has the slightest merit. (Or that antisemitism and racism are the same, but that's a side-issue here).

"Black genes" would help us Germans to become better citizens of the World my ass! A thoroughly racist statement if I have ever seen one.

And now excuse me, I am going to join the Reverend Louis "Calypso Louie" Farrakhan's congregation in search for God, peace of mind, love, tolerance and philosemitism!

How White Guilt Has Created A Monster

The Al Guardian knows, as usual, what REALLY matters. Oh well, what can one expect from a medium that is constantly spoiling the taste of the masses by bandying about disgustingly euphemistic lower middleclass-isms like "communication devices" or "anger management":

Campbell in court accused of assault
Andrew Clark in New York
Wednesday June 28, 2006

Naomi Campbell added a touch of glamour to a downtown Manhattan courtroom yesterday as she faced one of several allegations of assaulting her staff with communication devices.
[...]
Ms Campbell, 36, faces a charge of second degree assault after a former maid, Ana Scolavino, accused her of hurling a jewel-encrusted Blackberry emailing device at her head, leaving a 7cm (3in) gash. Ms Campbell is said to have become enraged when she was unable to find a pair of jeans she wanted to wear for an appearance on the Oprah Winfrey show.

Shortly after her arrest in March Ms Campbell described the allegation as "completely untrue". This week another former assistant, Gaby Gibson, filed a lawsuit in New York's supreme court, claiming her employer smacked her on the head with a mobile phone - also in an altercation over missing denim.
[...]
Ms Campbell has a history of vitriolic disagreements with employees. An administrative assistant alleged in 2003 that the model had hurled a phone, assaulted her and held her hostage in a Beverly Hills hotel. In February 2000 she pleaded guilty in court in Toronto to beating a former assistant, Georgina Galanis, who said Campbell had attacked her several times, at one point throwing a telephone at her. Ms Campbell said at the time she blamed her temper on having been abandoned by her father in childhood.
[...]

And nobody laughed.

Ana Scolavino is a Chilean married to an American, Georgina Galanis doesn't sound quite like Aunt Jemima either. Now imagine a WHITE employer whacking her BLACK "staff" with "communication devices"! If that bulimic bitch weren't Black, they'd simply sent her back from whence she came or to where she belongs long ago.

I am not saying that there isn't a comparably humiliating picture of Campbell anywhere. But I have yet to find it and I searched literally for hours. To find this picture of Moss cost me about 20 seconds.

What a degenerated society, where a drug-addicted, totally and utterly unhinged hag without the slightest ability for restraint or dignity can become stinking rich and -- much worse -- a role-model just because clothes look good on her in photographs. Whether all that is sugar-coated by cute-isms like "brat", "wild child" or possessing a "fiery nature", because of her race (the media is by far not as forgiving when it comes, for example, to Kate Moss, who is, compared to Campbell, a paragon of virtue) or whether they really just don't see what a monster they are courting, or better: creating, is, when all is said and done, immaterial.

But she added a touch of glamour (whatever that is) to the courtroom -- and that's all that matters, after all.

Incompetence and Ingratitude and What Is Worrying Bishop Tutu

This is a bit of a late starter, because the Beeb informed us on May 1st already about what is worrying Bishop Tutu. It'll teach me to dabble in wafflers instead of targeting things that matter.

White 'ingratitude' worries Tutu

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has said South Africa's white community has not shown enough appreciation of the generosity shown to them by black South Africans.

Ex-President FW de Klerk said in turn that black citizens should be grateful to whites for surrendering power.

Archbishop Tutu headed the country's Truth and Reconciliation Commission which began work in April 1996.

In an interview with BBC News, he said the commission failed to engage the white community sufficiently.

He also expressed concern about social inequalities and levels of poverty in South Africa.

'Magnanimity'

Archbishop Tutu was an icon of the struggle against apartheid and led the Truth and Reconciliation Commission through the pain of the healing process in the 1990s.

He said that under apartheid, black South Africans were the main victims of a political system from which the whites benefited greatly.

"By and large, the white community does not seem to have shown an appreciation for the incredible magnanimity of those who were the major victims of a system from which they [the whites] benefited so much," Archbishop Tutu told the BBC's Peter Biles.

The archbishop expressed concern over instances of "demeaning" poverty in South Africa today.

"I have warned, and I am not the only one who has, that we are sitting on a powder keg," he said.

"It is the obligation of all of us to be trying to do something about it."

Sacrifices

On Sunday, Mr de Klerk admitted in an article in the Sunday Independent newspaper that white rule had been "morally indefensible", but said whites had made sacrifices.

Mr de Klerk, who was president from 1989 to 1994, was South Africa's last white head of state who opened the way to majority rule by releasing political prisoners and lifting the ban on the African National Congress and other organisations.

"Would it not be appropriate for black South Africans also to give more recognition to the contribution whites have made to the new South Africa?" he wrote in the Sunday Independent.

"It required considerable courage... to overcome their reasonable fears and put their trust in their erstwhile enemies," Mr de Klerk wrote.

In another development, an apartheid-era general has released a report commissioned by Mr de Klerk on the involvement of the South African military in clandestine measures to destabilise the country in the early 1990s, the Sunday Independent reports.

The report by General Pierre Steyn is said to identify military and other figures who allegedly plotted violence aimed at hindering the transition to democracy.

'Failing'

Ten years after the Truth Commission began its work, Archbishop Tutu said one of its failings was not being able to engage the white community sufficiently.

A major shortcoming was not persuading senior figures such as former president PW Botha to take part.

The government has indicated that it may, in the near future, prosecute certain individuals who were not granted amnesty by the Truth Commission.

Archbishop Tutu said his concern was that once again it might be the foot soldiers and not the big fish that were targeted.

So the White rule had been "morally indefensible"? What does moral have to do with it? It always puzzles me if people don't understand that simple quasi-law of nature, which history has taught us for millennia, namely that land belongs to those who are able to grab and hold on to it.

(By the way, if that simple fact wouldn't be constantly ignored the entire Middle East conflict would exhale like a burst bubble and no biblical claims, genetic proof that Jews are no "Khazars" and other weird arguments would be necessary, but that is a different matter.)

Wasn't it White law (and order), medicine, hygiene, food technology and so on that enabled the Black Africans to explode their numbers? Wasn't it a White economy that attracted countless more from other parts of Africa? Weren't it infrastructures like those the indigenous rulers took over and of which they didn't quite make a roaring success? Maybe they didn't need to say "Thank you Whites", but at least they could have gone on using it for their and their peoples welfare. I, personally, think incompetence is much worse a trait than ingratitude.

Not that he current situation is NOT the Whites fault. They had been in the majority in the 19th century but couldn't resist the temptation of cheap non-White labour, a mistake, of course, in which they are not alone. Australia may serve as an example for a country that DID resist that temptation.

Isn't it time to admit that there aren't many redeeming qualities in the post-colonial African societies and that this can't be ALL colonialism's fault, simply because the post-colonial countries in Asia are faring much better?

But I guess that would be racist.

A Day in the Life of a Gangsta Rapper

This is newsworthy, or so it seems. Monsters and Critics give us the gist:

Snoop Dogg and posse held in London fracas
Apr 27, 2006, 16:02 GMT

LONDON, England (UPI) -- Rap superstar Snoop Dogg and members of his entourage have been arrested for a melee at London`s Heathrow Airport that injured seven police officers.

Most of the officers suffered cut and bruises, but at least one broke his hand, in the Wednesday night disturbance involving 30 people in a business lounge at the airport, the BBC reported.

The fight reportedly began when Snoop and Co., en route to a concert in Johannesburg, South Africa, were told they could not board their flight and 'became abusive and pushed officers,' police told the BBC.

Snoop, whose real name is Calvin Broadus, and five of his fellow travelers were arrested on charges of suspicion of violent disorder and affray, the BBC said.

The Los Angeles-based rapper was still being questioned Thursday morning, but would most likely be allowed to leave the country with an order to come back at a later date if he is formally charged with a crime.

Copyright 2006 by United Press International

Yeah, and if one of the officers had defended himself and socked him one it would have been a "hate crime", right? Shadows of Potsdam are looming.

Here we have a man who makes a bomb (SOME underdog!) out of the glamourising of drugs, guns and misogyny and an image as someone who despises the law (Hey, I even know now what "gangsta rap" is!) and people are surprised that this is what he (and every single one of his hangers-on, lackeys and sycophants) is actually DOING!

One of his heavies was, when finally in handcuffs, reportedly shouting: "This is how it goes down in LA."

He’s right.

But thanks to the wonderful, unarmed (save with pepper spray) Bobbies not in England anymore in a hurry.

Let's hope that sickeningly PC Britain has arrived at the end of the tether for players of the race and "underdog" card.

Udderly Incredible

My first reaction was to assume this is an April fool's jest, but I am afraid, reality has beaten travesty once again. The Age from Australia reports:

The bottom line in kids' books is udderly unreal
By Chee Chee Leung
April 1, 2006


Different look: Publishers simply rejected the bare-bottomed baby by Ann James.

CHILDREN'S book illustrator Terry Denton is no stranger to controversy. Over a 25-year career, he's contributed to popular books featuring nose picking, dog poo and runny vomit.

But it is not just excrement that can raise eyebrows. When he was illustrating an American school reader a few years ago, Denton was asked by a US publisher to redraw a picture of a multi-race couple. Denton's drawing of a black person married to an Hispanic was for some reason deemed inappropriate. He was asked to draw a black couple instead.

Denton is one of a growing number of Victorian illustrators who say restrictions on educational books for children have intensified as the publishing market expands globally.

One highly successful book was not accepted in the US because it showed a bare baby's bottom. Another illustrator was asked not to draw any udders in a book about cows.

Illustrators have been asked to avoid showing uncut loaves of bread and freestanding wardrobes because they might be unfamiliar to American readers.

Others report being given strict ratios about the gender and multicultural balance of characters, but without too much physical detail.

"(Large) lips on any blacks are completely out, the eyes on any Asian child have to not look Asian at all and the colour for any black child has got to be the softest brown," explains Craig Smith, who drew the udderless cows.

"It's unreal, that's what I think the most despairing thing is. It means a book does not necessarily reflect what kids patently see around them, they see a cleaned-up version."

Fellow illustrator Roland Harvey, who abandoned an educational project several years ago because of what he believed were excessive demands, described it as political correctness gone mad.

"It's not only gone mad, I think it's completely irrational … to start to think that portraying a race in a true and honest way is somehow derogatory or demeaning."

At Thomson Learning Australia, Lee Walker has overseen the removal of genitals from a mouse, nail polish from children's hands, and skull and crossbones from pirates' clothing. "And we Photoshop out cows' udders all the time."

Ms Walker, publishing manager in Thomson's primary division, agrees there are now more changes applied to illustrations to suit the international market, especially the "overly politically correct" US market, but she sees it as "just part of the business".

"From a cost perspective, it's easier," she said. "I'm sure all of us feel a little bit challenged sometimes because we might not necessarily agree, but … we would always put our market first."
[...]

GUIDELINES FOR ILLUSTRATORS FROM A US PUBLISHER

■ Avoid stereotypes such as females as peripheral/helpers to active/leading males, or senior citizens as infirm, with canes, doddering.

■ Elderly people should be shown as active members of society; unless relevant to text they should not be shown in wheelchairs.

■ Show mothers involved in outside employment (not in aprons in kitchens).

■ Show African-Americans in positions of power, not just in service industries.

■ Show African-Americans and other people of colour with a range of skin tones. Hair texture should vary from straight to curly.

■ Do not stereotype Asian people with glasses, bowl-shaped haircuts, or as intellectuals.

■ Never use slanted lines to illustrate Asian eyes.

■ No large groups of people without an appropriate ethnic mix and male/female ratio.

■ No "help the disabled" pictures — show disabled people doing for themselves and others.

■ Show many types of family grouping. Take care not to imply that one-parent homes are broken.

I wouldn't mind political correctness so much, if they'd put a bit more emphasis on the "correct" bit. I mean, one-parent homes ARE broken, aren't they? Of course not for the Andrea-Dworkin-type feminists who would like to keep a couple of choice males as semen-donors only (and are NOT laughed out of the door or institutionalised in America), but whose standards and values are they applying there?

Yes, they ARE rather idiots, those political correct "Amis", aren't they?

Now to the ratio bit: A couple of months ago there was a poster campaign for day school launched by the government here (yes, dear reader, in the former country of poets and philosophers most children are attending school only long enough to be back home for lunch). One poster showed one boy and two girls, of which one was Asian and the other one, if I remember correctly, two girls of which one was not White either. And that in a country with a non-White population percentage in the low single figure range and the ratio of boys is not reduced to semen-donor level (yet).

(Big thanks to KEWIL who found that!)

I STILL object to Tookie Williams' execution!

One of the pictures in my last blog entry shows a pro-Tookie Williams demonstator displaying a statement "STOP THE RACIST DEATH PENALTY".



I have neither the inclination to discuss, nor is this blog the place for topics related to the problems of race and crime or punisment and crime. Not because they are so explosive, but because they need in-depth, unbiased and expert discussion and rock-solid figures, all things for which is no room in a blog like this.

However demonstrators who demand mercy for a convict usually claim that they would oppose capital punishment as such and protest the execution of any convict with similar passion.

Clarence Ray Allen, a 76 year-old blind diabetic with a heart disease and confined to a wheelchair, was executed at San Quentin last Tuesday. His death has stirred very little public irritation. Allen was a Choctaw Indian, but few records mention his "racial" affiliation, specifically here in Germany. Allen was largely perceived as White (whatever that is), and indeed he must have looked "White" to most.



Williams was, as we all know, black.

I took the trouble to perform two Google searches. The one for Clarence Ray Allen yielded about 228,000 results, that for Tookie Williams about 2,290,000.

Capital punishment in America MAY be applied in a racist way, but those complaining about racism in capital punishment certainly ARE it.

I object to Tookie Williams' execution!

I am just asking myself, humbly, tentatively and shaking at the thought of being called an advocate of capital punishment because only being called a RACIST is even worse that being called an advocate of capital punishment...

Yes, I am asking myself...

... if you will forgive my presumptuousness...



Where were the candlelight vigils

and rallies hold for HER?

Nappy Heads

Here we have one of the nastiest bits of racism I have come across for a long time. Why was it not met with the angry twitter of the usual suspects? Have a guess.

An Image A Little Too Carefully Coordinated
By Robin Givhan
Friday, July 22, 2005

It has been a long time since so much syrupy nostalgia has been in evidence at the White House. But Tuesday night, when President Bush announced his choice for the next associate justice of the Supreme Court, it was hard not to marvel at the 1950s-style tableau vivant that was John Roberts and his family.

There they were -- John, Jane, Josie and Jack -- standing with the president and before the entire country. The nominee was in a sober suit with the expected white shirt and red tie. His wife and children stood before the cameras, groomed and glossy in pastel hues -- like a trio of Easter eggs, a handful of Jelly Bellies, three little Necco wafers. There was tow-headed Jack -- having freed himself from the controlling grip of his mother -- enjoying a moment in the spotlight dressed in a seersucker suit with short pants and saddle shoes. His sister, Josie, was half-hidden behind her mother's skirt. Her blond pageboy glistened. And she was wearing a yellow dress with a crisp white collar, lace-trimmed anklets and black patent-leather Mary Janes.

Even the clothes are conservative: Judge John G. Roberts, left, and his wife Jane, right, with their children Jack and Josie listen to President Bush's announcement.
(Pool Photo By Shawn Thew)

[...]

The wife wore a strawberry-pink tweed suit with taupe pumps and pearls, which alone would not have been particularly remarkable, but alongside the nostalgic costuming of the children, the overall effect was of self-consciously crafted perfection. The children, of course, are innocents. They are dressed by their parents. And through their clothes choices, the parents have created the kind of honeyed faultlessness that jams mailboxes every December when personalized Christmas cards arrive bringing greetings "to you and yours" from the Blake family or the Joneses. Everyone looks freshly scrubbed and adorable, just like they have stepped from a Currier & Ives landscape.

In a time when most children are dressed in Gap Kids and retailers of similar price-point and modernity, the parents put young master Jack in an ensemble that calls to mind John F. "John-John" Kennedy Jr.

Separate the child from the clothes, which do not acknowledge trends, popular culture or the passing of time. They are not classic; they are old-fashioned. These clothes are Old World, old money and a cut above the light-up/shoe-buying hoi polloi.

[...]

Dressing appropriately is a somewhat selfless act. It's not about catering to personal comfort. One can't give in fully to private aesthetic preferences. Instead, one asks what would make other people feel respected? What would mark the occasion as noteworthy? What signifies that the moment is bigger than the individual?

But the Roberts family went too far. In announcing John Roberts as his Supreme Court nominee, the president inextricably linked the individual -- and his family -- to the sweep of tradition. In their attire, there was nothing too informal; there was nothing immodest. There was only the feeling that, in the desire to be appropriate and respectful of history, the children had been costumed in it.

Well, there is one thing of which Ms Givhan certainly can't be accused and that is looking "freshly scrubbed and adorable". Neither does she look like a fashion icon who can be forgiven being condescending on the strength of her own style and perfection. And frankly, it is beyond me why the Washington Post (or ANY newspaper, for that) makes such a frump fashion editor, or why this sort of sartorial bullshit is allowed to take up a lot of perfectly good space in a "serious" newspaper in the first place. But I guess that's America and it's not the point anyway.

Neither is the point that this piece of catty jealous trash has obviously not the slightest compunction about abusing children to vent her well-calculated, politically biased, racist, and class-ridden rants.

(Yeah, GAP has got it SO right! Wouldn't you just LOVE to see your little girl clad like a sad clown or a seasoned hooker? Everything not to appear "classy".

The point is, that, had a White journalist written about the appointment of a Black man to a major office and, being obviously and openly racist, referred to his family's hairdo as "too self-consciouly rastafarian" with "their nappy heads standing out too much" we would have had a major earthquake in the media with politically correct do-gooders swooning all over the place, whereas a not-so-sly dig at a white child's "blond pageboy's" is quite okay for the media and the majority of self-hating whites.

That's it for now. I will be back once I've finished rummaging for my puke bag.