Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Ethnic minorities face ‘entrenched’ racial inequality – watchdog

So reported the BBC this morning anyway, it was such a lousy, inadequate report that one would perhaps think it was created by a guide dog.

“Black graduates earn on average 23.1% less than white ones” reported the Beeboids somewhat breathlessly.

Isn’t this proof of inequality?

Well no, obviously not. I read the source material and there didn’t seem to be any info on the type of degrees black graduates got compared to other grads. So if they all have identical degrees from identical universities and passed at identical rates, that’s fine. It’s eliminating variable parameters which any statistician will tell you, is very important of you want to make meaningful comparisons.

But given that’s not clear, would we be shocked if graduates with lower second class degrees from Slough Polytechnic in gender studies were paid less than those with double firsts in computer science from Cambridge? This could just possibly explain the difference. I simply cannot believe any employer these days thinks to himself “Hmmm…. A Negro eh? Let’s pay them 76.9% of the while salaries”

The report also claimed that “Black people in England are more than three times more likely to be a victim of homicide than those who are white” which is probably true but it doesn’t say the race of the perpetrators of the crimes. If they were also black, it is hard to know how this could be racial discrimination.

The report also said “New targets to improve opportunities and outcomes for ethnic minority communities should be introduced” Opportunities, fine, no problem – Outcomes? Outcomes? Are you kidding me? Put me in a class with 25 Singaporean teenagers and I will likely be the 26th most successful mathematician. Who would you want calculating the bearing capacity of a new bridge, the no 1 Singaporean or me who got the job as the token white guy?

This is destructive, race-baiting garbage which actually harms the people it purports to help.

If this isn’t offensive, I don’t know what is.

It’s disrespectful and it’s probably hate speech. The very nerve! It should be banned.



Gloom Descends. :>((

From Paul Hunt, 1980.

USA-USSR display, Los Angeles, 1988.


Vote 2016

America is a constitutional republic not a democracy, claim many of the twitterati. This strikes me as something of a mis-reading of reality since there are elections. So in rather more than an abstract sense, they can claim to be democratic, if not an out-and-out democracy. It’s imperfect of course; the primaries seem like a great idea but the uncommitted delegates (such as I understand the nuances of the system) strike me as an awful one. And there seem to be mechanisms to keep pesky candidates off the ballot in some states, and voter fraud seems like an issue. But in the end, there is some kind of a choice.

So the question then becomes, who shall we elect. If you were eligible to vote, or if you are, who would you vote for? None of the candidates fill me with much hope, but let’s have a jaunt through the options:

Trump – I can’t quite see why so many Libertarians have fallen in lock-step behind this guy. Sure he fucks with the media and PC culture and he’s not Hillary, but half the economic stuff seems demented, tariff barriers?

Clinton – I would vote for Saddam Hussein before this evil lying bitch and it simply baffles me why anyone falls for her race-baiting, money from Saudis, lying, lying, lying shit. Then there is the question of her health. I’ve not followed this closely, but is she ill?

Johnson – Supposedly a libertarian but hardly one I’d recognise

Stein – Green lunatic, nuff said

5th party candidate – pick your own

So who amongst this lot, if anyone, would you vote for and who do you expect to win?

I know the polls favour Clinton but I can’t take ‘em seriously anymore and the propaganda and hate in this election seems worse than anything I’ve yet seen. I just wonder if there are enough shy Trump voters lying to pollsters for him to do it?

Narratives and reality 2

Sylville Smith was unlikely to win a Nobel prize (unless he became a community organiser of course). He did however have a pretty substantial arrest record for some serious crimes. He was the individual the Milwaukee police shot recently and this was the incident that sparked the “protests” It must be said the lazy, formulaic media coverage doesn’t help. It’s always black ‘youth’ killed by white police officer and you are invited to imagine you are back in segregated Alabama in 1950.

There is rarely if ever any coverage of the huge number of black “youths” being killed by other black youths. I saw 2016 figures from Chicago recently and of the over 2,000 gun-shot victims in the city, seven were shot by police. If the 350+ homicides, none were shot by police. You might reasonably conclude this is the bigger story. That is unless you just wanted to hawk the white racism angle.

You might also want to address the absolutely epidemic levels of black on white crime eloquently highlighted in the book “Don’t make the black kids angry” by Colin Flaherty. Mr Flaherty absolutely demolishes the myth of black victimisation and shows how they are in fact, the aggressor not the peaceful victim.

Now whether this reporting is just lazy, repetitive journalism at its worst or deliberately seeing one thing and calling it something else is not clear. Perhaps there is some kind of leftie journalistic pressure to peddle the narrative. But one thing is for sure, the scenes we’ve seen on television do not resemble a protest. Call me pedantic, but I’d define a protest as people with placards assembling to hear speeches with a clear outcome in mind. For example, legitimate protestors might say “We do not trust Milwaukee PD, instead we’d like to have the justice department investigate” Fine.

However arson, violence, looting, robbery, shooting at police, none of these things can be fairly called a protest. A more accurate description maybe opportunistic, atavistic crime. The “protestors” are simply seizing any excuse to commit larceny.

The reporting continues to stoke the fake racial narrative, the ever reliable BBC tell us “In 2014, police shot dead an unarmed black man, Dontre Hamilton, in Milwaukee, leading to protests in the city. Prosecutors chose not to charge the officer responsible”

“Chose” this suggests they casually thought “Pfft, we’re kinda busy” In fact there would have been a detailed review of the evidence, and had there been any chance of a conviction, the officer would have been thrown to the wolves. He was in fact, exonerated, shown to have acted properly. Not that you’d get that from the coverage.

Khalif Rainey, a Milwaukee’s city councillor, said people were “tired of living under this oppression” He added “Now this is a warning cry…Where do we go from here? Where do we go as a community from here?”

Hmm…. Well I’ve never struggled under the burden of slavery, but then neither has he or anyone else alive today in the West but I’d suggest the following.

Don’t steal cars, don’t steal guns, don’t flee from the police, and do drop the gun when a police officer is pointing his at you. Maybe also stop blaming white racism for everything, take responsibility, get an education, when you see black crime call it out rather than offer excuses. Oh and of you want to have kids, marry the woman in question. One of the very worst things you can do to a child is not be married to its mother.

Oh and in case you missed it, the officer who shot Mr Smith was African-American and the whole incident was captured on his body cam. Perhaps the protestors will volunteer to rebuild the stores they burned if its shown the shot was legitimate?

Quote of the Day, Aug. 13, 2016

*** Disarming a nation is easy if you first disarm it of its reason. ***

Raymond Ibrahim (One of the Good Guys.)

Let’s exaggerate problems like it’s 1974

The TUC are probably feeling a bit irrelevant at the moment, (this maybe one of their rare sojourns into reality). What is the point of a 19th and 20th century industrial-society dinosaur in today’s world? Their soul-mate Corbyn has seized control of Labour and looks set to start de-selecting anyone not sufficiently deranged. So what are they for?

It is against this backdrop, they’ve fallen back on a made-up cum exaggerated out of all proportion problem of yesteryear, namely sexual harassment in the workplace. The TUC tell us that more than half of the women surveyed cite the problem. That’s unclear language, I can cite the problem of a lack of goals from my favourite football team, but is doesn’t mean I’m missing open goals personally.

But to take this at face value … well I just can’t. I’ve worked in a few places over the years, almost always in construction. This is not a politically correct industry like the local council, housing association or major charity. Yet in all the years I’ve worked, I can’t recall seeing a single incidence of this. Literally zero, no touching, no groping, no “get your tits out” remarks.

Part of this reflects a culture change and part reflects legislative changes since the 1970’s. If a person feels (and can prove) harassment, they can sue and potentially be handsomely compensated. And I don’t know of anyone with the opinion our society is insufficiently litigious. Furthermore, HR departments realise this too, and they aren’t keen to be on the hook because of some oaf acting boorishly. Pretty much everywhere I’ve worked has a clear code of conduct and very clear procedures of what to do if you feel you are victimised in this way.

My suspicions were further raised when half way through the article, the BBC ground-shifted from harassment to discrimination, the second head of their Cerberus-like obsession. They then go on to cite someone from the “every day sexism project” which might give us a hint into that particular cognitive bias. The BBC page contains a link if you’re particularly interested.

Finally, the ever impressive Frances O’Grady the TUC general secretary tells us “we want the government to send a clear signal that this kind of behaviour is unlawful” Er, we know, everyone knows. We know because it’s not 1974. Just for balance, they quote some middle-aged guy complaining about sexual harassment from a younger female member of staff. This is where whatever vestiges of sympathy I was feeling completely disappeared.

You see this with a lot of pressure groups. It’s almost like they need a problem to feel relevant. Like a lot of the 1970’s problems, they are all but solved, addressed, done. But some people just can’t let it go. They kinda like being paid for moaning and so ever more miniscule problems are highlighted. Like ‘everyday sexism’

The Olympics – Why does anyone care?

I might get why some of the competitors care, especially if they receive some kind of sponsorship. I rather enjoy mountain biking and if someone would pay me for four or eight years to ride around mountains rather than actually work productively, that would be lovely.

Being a libertarian I couldn’t take any government largesse of course, but if someone voluntarily paid up, great.

And I see why the elite competitors, especially those who are telegenic might see it as an opportunity for self-promotion. Who wouldn’t like pots of cash for smiling next to a picture of some product or other?

I understand (but clearly don’t sympathise with) politicians who want a “legacy” of “delivering” the games. Quite why they think that’s a good thing is another matter. The justifications for London seemed to be that it would put London “on the map” But I checked; it was already on the map, just look at any map.

Then there were the supposed “economic benefits” Sure, tourism peaked during the games, but the Stadium alone cost £537m and now we rent it to a football team for £2.5m PA. Anyone seriously claim this is a good deal for the taxpayer? Don’t even start me on Tessa Jowell’s cost estimates.

The politicians want it as an easy distraction in the Roman tradition of Panem et Circenses, but this phenomenon is getting to be well-known.

Once you’ve taken this particular red pill, you can’t take the whole spectacle seriously.

Then you have the whole faux patriotism nonsense. If the Somali born Mohamed Muktar Jama Farah wins some running what does this possibly mean to anyone? Do I feel somehow better about Britain or being British? Who cares? Even if a competitor could trace his ancestry back to William the Conqueror wins some prestigious or obscure event, so what?

Finally there was the nonsense idea that having the Olympics in your country would encourage participation in sport and somehow fight obesity. I’m sure many of you will have seen the recent report that could find no evidence for this.

But there is one thing I care about.

I care about being stuck with the bill for this boondoggle, I care about the ghastly over-zealous security, the pointless development, the placing of missiles on people’s roofs without their consent and the implied cultural imperative that one ‘has’ to be excited about the Olympics. I care about being forced to fund any number of sports and competitors I don’t care about. It’s a jumped-up sports day to distract proles, nothing more.

Narratives and reality

I am feeling slightly sorry for the mainstream media. Not that sorry, but slightly sorry. The days of their hegemony are over. As recently as the 1990’s the TV channels as well as some newspapers were unchallengeable.

Now, they are dying. Newspapers (mocked today as the dead tree press) seem cumbersome, and slow to respond. The ones that do survive are seeing their advertising revenues plummet and their serious journalism shrinking. Instead they downgrade to click-bait garbage, stories about such-and-such a starlet’s ‘bikini beach body diet’ and reporting what people tweet.

Similarly, the TV news has seen its influence diminish and its ability to spew clumsy propaganda shattered by near instant fact checking. They too engage in so-called “churnalism” with near verbatim parroting of cut-and-paste of press releases from friendly sources. They are like the dinosaurs that saw an asteroid hit. They realise it’s getting cold and dark and they are simply clueless on how to react.

Of late, we’ve seen a doubling-down of the hysterical propaganda. Global warming has been unchallenged orthodoxy for years and somehow, as a white man in the West, everything is your fault. Slavery is your fault. Set aside the fact that the culture that did more than any other to abolish slavery and actually recognise human dignity was the white Western culture. When was the last time you heard the Ottoman Empire or the
Barbary slave trade condemned? Didn’t the Romans keep slaves? The ancient Egyptians? Weren’t over a million white people kept as slaves in North Africa? You won’t hear that much on the MSM

And it’s against this backdrop of decay and hysteria that we come to the BBC reporting of the recent stabbing in London. Any thought that the Beeboids report this sensibly or authentically must now surely be dropped. The Metropolitan police were reporting early on that the perp was mentally ill. It’s hard to know how they could have concluded a psychiatric evaluation before they even knew his name but that was the story. The Beeb parroted this for a while before putting on their website “Norwegian” teen arrested over stabbing (sic). By this morning, the story had disappeared down the memory hole. Nothing to see here, move along.

The “Norwegian” was not someone called Lars Svenson or Torben Erikson, no this Scandinavian was called Zakaria Bulhan who was a Somali.

The cops have not yet told us this person’s religion but we do know that 99.8% of Somalis are Muslim and Islam is the state religion of the provisional constitution. We also know that the average Somali IQ is 68 (that’s not a typo), so probably not too many critical thinkers or great movements of religious reform coming out of Somalia anytime soon. But they might be susceptible to clumsy terrorist propaganda

The cops have assured us however that there are no known links to terrorism. So that must be true because you really should trust the state and the MSM.

Protests, what’s the point?

Yes, I know, writing to your MP is more or less redundant. They might send a letter to someone about something trivial, but anything significant which defies the party whip? Forget it.

So what can you do? Many people seem to think protests make a difference, but I don’t think they get how modern politics works. First, the sometimes unpalatable, but absolute truth; the view of the electorate is more or less irrelevant for four years and ten months out of five. Only when the politicos are afraid of losing power do they (pretend to) listen.

We’ve had three recent examples of futile, pointless protests. The Remain supporters demanding the people be given a voice after the referendum, sic, the black lives matter campaigners blocking the road at Heathrow today because of perceived problems with various American police forces and Father’s for justice who seem under the impression that climbing onto Crobyn’s roof will change things.

Last to first, Corbyn is out of power, he can’t change anything and these clowns have been doing this for 20 years and achieved nothing. I have real sympathy with the aims of fathers 4 justice but come on. Is there some strategy meeting they have that says “well this has been a total and complete failure for two decades so let’s do more of that”

The BLM crew today were even more ridiculous. There really isn’t an ongoing and endemic problem of police officers shooting black men regularly in the UK. They were talking about Mark Duggan. So if you want to avoid being shot by the cops, don’t be a criminal gangster wannabe carrying illegal handguns about your person. You should be more or less safe. That would actually work but it wouldn’t get you on TV!

As to the remainers, some made good cases to remain some did not, but one cannot have a referendum then declare the result invalid because you did not like it regardless of how much you protest. Indeed this obvious truth should have been clear from both the countryside marches of the 90’s and the anti-war marches somewhat later on. These were very substantial and completely ignored.

What does work in politics is forming pressure groups and giving money to the offices of various politicians. Then the legislative program is yours for the taking. So F4J, BLM, just organise subscription fees and pay the politicians whose votes you want. In later years you can get handouts from government itself to bribe MPs with. So put away your ladders and understand what actually works to change things.

I got you Babe… And a Dynasty!

They say we’re young and we don’t know
We won’t find out until we grow… But they didn’t

Now they are back for the Supermarket Sweep of the Presidency again.

Both shaggy-haired, it’s a rather hippy Hill and Bill pictured at Yale Law School, where they met in 1970 in their early 20s

Bill Kristofferson  and Shrillary Mitchell (Bill was a Rhodes Scholar as well as Kris. How come so many lefties freeloaded on what is now considered to be nasty Imperialist racism?) No wonder their kid is called Chelsea.

Venezuela institutes forced labour

Venezuela Forced Labour in Agriculture

A new decree by Venezuela’s government could make its citizens work on farms to tackle the country’s severe food shortages. That “effectively amounts to forced labour,” according to Amnesty International, which derided the decree as “unlawful.”

In a vaguely-worded decree, Venezuelan officials indicated that public and private sector employees could be forced to work in the country’s fields for at least 60-day periods, which may be extended “if circumstances merit.”

“Trying to tackle Venezuela’s severe food shortages by forcing people to work the fields is like trying to fix a broken leg with a band aid,” Erika Guevara Rosas, Americas’ Director at Amnesty International, said in a statement.

President Nicolas Maduro is using his executive powers to declare a state of economic emergency. By using a decree, he can legally circumvent Venezuela’s opposition-led National Assembly — the Congress — which is staunchly against all of Maduro’s actions.

According to the decree from July 22, workers would still be paid their normal salary by the government and they can’t be fired from their actual job.

CNN Money – Venezuela’s new decree on forced labour

This is what happens when the blood-sucking ticks of the Maxist-Leninist-Maoist spectrum get hold of the economy, you rapidly go from subsidised foodstuffs and the promise of cradle-to-grave protection by the state to starvation and forced labour.

The only thing new in all of this is the date; socialist induced famines being a well documented feature, albeit seldom advertised. Certainly Venezuela’s policies from nationalisation of the petrochemical industry to price fixing and currency manipulation have a familiar feel to any student of post-WW2 Eastern Europe. Thus we prepare to entire the next stage of the consequences of economic denial, the Road to Hyperinflation.

Venezuela’s inflation for 2016 is estimated at 481.5% this year and by a staggering 1,642.8% next year, according to the latest International Monetary Fund World Outlook. Given that smuggling food is now a crime in the country as is taking photographs of the queues outside supermarkets, these figures are probably understated.

The supermarket shelves are empty, not because of a US government plot to bring down Maduro (as the Chavistas claim), but because simple economics says that goods cannot be sold at below the cost of production, which is what Chavista policies require at this time given the massive budget deficit.

Maduro continues to occupy the presidential palace, with attempts to remove him taking a glacial pace. One would perhaps wish for a coup to end the deadlock quickly, but that was the route by which Hugo Chavez began his populist climb into power, so possibly not.

I think Venezuelans will have to get a little thinner before the Presidential cockroach is forced to finally “check out”.

What does work against terrorism?

We recently discussed what doesn’t work when dealing with radical Islam. That phrase maybe redundant, perhaps literalist Islam would be better, but that is also redundant to some extent, rather like saying wet water. Fundamentally, a great number of the faithful believe in the literal and inerrant truth of the Koran, rather like the Medieval Christians were bible literalists.

So pedantry aside, what can be done?

Assimilation would be nice but government efforts to achieve these are feeble, ultimately you either want to integrate or you don’t. Many don’t and have no trouble finding Koranic justifications for the same. And I dismiss the deportation of populations and closing of mosques as not politically deliverable.

So what can be done?

First, call an immediate halt to all immigration from war torn countries, refugees and all, (especially this god-awful “unaccompanied child” program. Any number of Pakistani, Afghani, Iraqi and other immigrants claim to be 17 when they are obviously in their mid-twenties). No point importing more of the problem.

Second, on the committal of any crime, any newcomer to the country should be immediately deported back, even if to a place of danger, regardless of circumstances with no right to return. If you want to stay in the haven that is the UK, obey all the laws, or leave. This would cut down re-offending dramatically as well as initial offending.

Third, tackle worklessness (and thus radicalisation) by insisting that after a certain qualifying period, anyone (UK national or newcomer) must, must be competent in English. If not, no state aid should be available.

Fourth, much as I would like it, there is no public appetite for removing the restrictions on handgun ownership (even now). So, why not borrow an idea from the American old West. When law enforcement was strained and outnumbered by the bad guys, the local sheriff could deputise people. Why not have a modern take on this? Allow the modern deputies to ‘conceal carry’ handguns whilst in plain clothes. Of course it would be possible to monitor applicants for these positions for criminal records etc and you could insist on mandatory monthly training at army pistol ranges. If it were possible to achieve 1% coverage, then the average terrorist scumbag would have cause for concern. If they tried something on the scale of say a 2,000 person event, they would know that after firing the first shot, approximately 20 safety catches would be disengaged and shortly thereafter, they would be dead. As it is, they know we are utterly defenceless. And much as I blame the terrorists for wanton murder, I also blame the politicos for refusing us the means of self-defence. Some obvious targets in Northern Ireland were permitted to carry weapons during the troubles. We are all now possible targets and should all enjoy the possibility of armed protection as politicians do.

Such a policy would likely have saved lives at the Bataclan theatre, Nice and possibly even in the church if the gun men were statistically unlucky.

Morning view

For reasons that are of no import, I am staying at my mothers place at the moment. I woke early a day or so ago, and this was the view from her balcony.


There are occasional benefits in living on Queensland’s sunny Gold Coast.

True, but

Tim Blair points out:

“In Germany,” claims the Washington Post, “anti-Muslim extremists may pose as big a threat as Islamist militants.”

True, but only to the reputation of the Post.