One Login

The fuller context of the Digital ID excrescence can be seen in this below, from Stark Naked Brief on X ... core reason why the whole mess must be implacably opposed.

In which I try to reply to Ada Lluch

Ada is the Spanish lass who spoke at the September 13th rally and fiesta in London. She was popular. Ada is on X and appeared in this exchange:

As with most issues, it's yes and no ... plus it quite depends on what sort of man ... an idealised knight in white armour? Or a satyr, brute, milquetoast, perv, creep or simp? A slob?  Too well fed? Couch potato?

So it's obvious we're talking a reasonable contender for the hand of a fair maid with a moral compass. If I might illustrate with a tale of the noughties ... I was asked to join a faculty in a university teaching English ... it was the language faculty in that city and what became obvious quickly was that 900+ girls went through that place each day and about 50 boys. 

I would say the only reason that wily dean let me anywhere near them was that I had a certain someone at home who was a headturner, not unlike Ada or Leonarda. It was blindingly obvious that I'd have to go one of two ways ... either sleazy professor, availing himself of the obviously constant offers, simply by being the only male in that department ... or else be the bastion of chivalry, which is what Ada's referring to.

You'd agree though that that was a highly unusual situation, almost artificial and without my upbringing by my pre-Boomer parents, plus a good education ... it was never going to be possible to survive. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the central problem with Two Tier's invaders brought in under cover of night ... but also don't forget the white, often older satyrs, brutes, milquetoasts, pervs, creeps and simps.

These things can only be, as in the fall of the Roman Empire, when those at the top are depraved psycho creeps, hating the people who themselves have lost all moral direction ... the men as violent predators and the girls trained to be 304s ... that's before we even get onto the mutilat-ants.

Throw in hypergamy where female 5s or 6s see themselves as worthy of 10s ... chads and adonises. To my mind, they're all zeros to 2s ... we're in the Kardashian Era.  Just glance over some of these sshots below, in no particular order:

Also, ask yourself another question and then go back to Leonarda's opening statement about females making it impossible ... I don't mean to love them but by putting themselves in naive positions, either glued to cellphones, unaware of their surroundings, or meeting an online creep in a park at night or going to Morocco and then wondering why their throats get slit ... just ask Lara Logan about all that.

Often, the ladies and girls are nowhere near sufficient men who can then step in and rescue the damsel surrounded by rapists ... yes, even Lola and Ruby Moir were nowhere near sufficient white knights.

For all we now revere Lola, why was she even there, unprotected in this day and age?

Which does not answer the main question Ada asks ... there actually were some men around ... so why would they not?  My first reply is they were probably unemployed "modern men", woke left liberals, useless specimens. My second reply is men have had chivalry knocked out of them since toddlerhood now and if they did step in, alone, to stop these imported and local creeps, blades do come into the equation.

But it's not just that ... it's standing up on public transport, opening doors, even caring for females any more ... look at that sshot with the power chick in shades ... it's not that I would not step in ... I'm actually foolish enough to do it, same with many mates ... it's that long before that moment, I'd have crossed the road and gone another route.  This is the reality, girls.

And men ... which of the descriptors used above for us men do you actually aspire to? Which allow you to live with yourself in your head?  Satyr? You do see the issue.  And yet, my fellow men point to having been taken to the cleaners by bad women bringing little to the table. Also true.

Xer Moosh and I were discussing love and partnerships last evening ... she made good points ... I replied that the first requirement was that both in the arrangement, each, first extract ego from the equation. She retweeted that bit.

Anyway, nuff for now.

Who’s Driving Our Tubes?

As many as 300 London Underground staff are at risk of being deported after changes to immigration rules, it is feared.

And the Union is furious. No, Reader, not at the fact that these immigrants have taken jobs from British workers, of course not! 

More than 100 union activists, led by Mr Dempsey, mounted a protest outside the Home Office on Wednesday morning. MPs John McDonnell and Zarah Sultana also attended the demonstration, while Diane Abbott tweeted her support.

All the usual suspect, of course!  

Mr Dempsey told the protesters: “This is a really serious situation. We have got members working for Transport for London who are facing deportation in a few short weeks’ time.

”On Wednesday, Mr Dempsey accused the former Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, of making a “knee-jerk decision” toughening the rules on how long foreign-born workers can remain in the UK, in response to growing political pressure from Nigel Farage’s Reform party over rising immigration levels.

It does seem an answer to the questions of why so many Tube announcements are unintelligible, and why so little is ever done to prevent foreign fare dodgers from jumping the barriers - a significant proportion of the workers on the system are themdselves foreign!   

But what has caused this sudden change?

The new rules increased salary thresholds for visa sponsorship to £41,700 a year for new applicants and removed key transport roles, including station assistant, from the “skilled worker” list - meaning it is harder for some foreign workers to remain in the UK.

Many TfL station staff began their employment on the London Underground on two-year graduate visa schemes believing they could move into skilled worker positions.He said: “Our members were employed with the full expectation that they would become full British citizens and would be staying here. They have brought their families, and bought their homes here. Now they could be forced to leave.

Oh dear, how sad, never mind. 

“This is unfair. We are not for open borders. We are for a fair migration policy – one that is humane and fair and treats people properly. This doesn’t meet that test.

“So what we are calling for, as a bare minimum, is that this should be paused until the Migration Advisory Committee can finish its work. There should be transitional arrangements put in place.”

Good luck arguing that in this political and financial climate! 

I've no devices of any kind ...

... not even a phone, so this post is not going up.  More on that further down.

Meanwhile, decisions decisions ... have to decide whether to go with Canada's ostriches (empire strikes back) or with Rupert Lowe's discovery that Bar internships (law, not t'other place) are black only or with the autopen president or with ... there are dozens of topics.

Thought I might open with this:

... and move onto this:

Think what you will dot dot dot ...

Dickens Wouldn’t Recognise This ‘Poverty’

It’s the totality of the conditions in which so many of the generation I call austerity’s children – young people born into poverty in the Tory years – are living: homes without heating, bedrooms without beds, kitchens without kitchen utensils, floors without coverings and even toilets without toilet rolls.For many it is much worse: damp mouldy rooms, outside toilets and no kitchen table to eat at or write up their school work on, only a cold floor.

Lacking toilet rolls and kiychen utensils  is now an indication of 'poverty'? Not an indication the parents are incompetent? 

As the Trussell Trust has just shown, the inequities of the two-child benefit cap mean a family with three or more children is twice as likely to call on food banks for emergency help.

Because they bred more children than they could support and expected the taxpayer to pick up the slack. Well the Tories did a few things right, and this is one of them! 

Children themselves do not talk about “poverty” as such, the commissioner reported. Instead, they talk about living without food and furnishings in insecure, crowded, even unsafe houses, like the eight-year-old boy who reported “there’s stuff like robbing and sometimes there’s drunk people and stabbing”.

 The consequences of living with other 'poor' (in spirit, not in cash) people?

It is time to do more than chronicle this pain as Dickens and Orwell did. The next few weeks are decisive. Today, actor David Tennant will launch an appeal to end the suffering of millions of Britain’s children. Hope for our poorest children lies in the child poverty review’s recommendations and November’s budget: to fairly tax the excess profits of gambling, and if more money is needed to remove some of the interest rate subsidy enjoyed by commercial banks when they deposit money at the Bank of England.

Oh, if only someome hadn't sold off half of the country's gold reserves... 

The party conference season and the Labour deputy leadership hustings must now become platforms for an urgent discussion on how we end the biggest cause of social division in Britain today.

Well, for a start, we could stop listening to a has-been, never-was washed-up old socialist who caused more poverty tthan he ever solved in her term of office. 

Barging in is a can of worms

Most of the 12 minutes is just him protesting that he supports the police, plus there are things he can legally say. He ran an initial vid and this is the update. The small part relevant to us is at 08:12, after his advertising is seamlessly slipped in.

His conclusion ... and remember he says all through that there are aspects he cannot divulge and how wonderful the police are ... is that the two "officers" were out of order barging in, then asking for the filming to stop, with no warrant. And especially seizing the child's phone.

You yourselves are restricted by English law about commenting, as am I ... it reminds me very much of the superinjunctions brought by Giggs and Clarkson, where everyone knew but no one could say. Also TR reporting outside a courtroom while the BBC did ... MSM knew of the injunction, TR was not aware he could not report ... so he says.

Many commenters have done so over at his youtube account, the BBB, expressing their opinions on the whole matter.

Whole thing reminds me of a can of worms.

......

Sorry me, laze and gem, I'm going to have to insist that comments on this post have some sort of moniker attached somewhere.

Why Not? Didn’t The Left Rewrite George Floyd’s?

 As we often say, if it wasn't for double standards, the Left wouldn't have any...

Perhaps it was these noble gestures toward generosity and sympathy that led some commentators to be more laudatory to Kirk’s memory than an honest recounting of his life would allow. In the days following Kirk’s death, several bewilderingly inaccurate postmortem hagiographies have appeared, including from prominent voices on the left and center, that seem to wish that the tragedy of Kirk’s death could retroactively have given him a more honorable life.

Not as egregious as raising monuments to a fentanyl-addicted long time career criminal who wasn't even 'killed by police' in any case, but by the consequences of his own addition, surely? 

The most egregious of these came from Ezra Klein, a center-left columnist at the New York Times known for his ability to channel and influence elite opinion. In a piece published the morning after Kirk’s death, titled Charlie Kirk Was Practicing Politics the Right Way, Klein made a series of strained, bizarre and outright untrue assertions about Kirk’s career and character. Kirk, Klein argued, was, if anything, an example of civic virtue. “Kirk was practicing politics in exactly the right way,” Klein said. “He was showing up to campuses and talking with anyone who would talk to him. He was one of the era’s most effective practitioners of persuasion.” Klein’s point was that political persuasion – the rational debate of ideas between equals in which violence is unthinkable and good faith is presumed – is a cornerstone of liberal democracy, the kind of thing we should all be striving for, the kind of thing we need more of.

And...shouldn't we? What happened to 'it's better to talk'? The left csn'y possibly disagree that that's what Kirk spent most of his time doing, can they? 

Fair enough, I suppose, on its merits, but such a description of reasoned, honest, good-faith debate is so inaccurate a description of what Charlie Kirk engaged in on college campuses – in his series of large, staged events where he “debated” untrained liberal undergraduates with cameras rolling – that it reads as willfully naive, if not outright dishonest.

Reader, it appears they can. 

Charlie Kirk’s “debates” were aggressive, unequal, trolling affairs, in which he sought to provoke his interlocutors to distress, shouted them down and belittled them, spewed hateful rhetoric about queer and trans people, women, Black people, immigrants and Muslims, and selectively edited the ensuing footage to create maximally viral content in which his fans could witness him humiliating the liberals and leftists they perceived to be their enemies.

Ah, the Left's 'argument' is that when he spoke, people got upset? Maybe ask why these people couldn't argue their points calmly and logically and without bursting into tears at the mean man who failed to agree with them that men could become women and vice-versa? 

In the rush to canonize Kirk and revise his history, honest accountings of his life have not only become rare – they have also become dangerous. In the days since his death, journalists, media personalities and others who have not been sufficiently laudatory to Kirk in public have lost their jobs for telling the truth about his life.

No, they've lost their jobs because in celebrating political murder, they've brought the brands they represent into disrepute, and thus breached their terms of employment. 

It is easy for me, even, to show sympathy for the humanity of Charlie Kirk, who, for everything else he was, was a human being who has now been robbed of the opportunity to learn, grow, and repent. But such commitments – to human life, to nonviolence, to a faith in the possibility of redemption and reconciliation – need not lead us to lie to ourselves about Charlie Kirk.

But you've already introduced the concept of lying about people's lives, even if these people you are complaining about were actually lying, you'd have no leg to stand on. 

The Indians are coming

... no, not the Red Indians.  I'd not thought much about Indians till now to be honest ... yes, there was this Vivek Swamirami, forgive the spelling, Eva Vlaar is just as difficult and Vivek and I mutually follow ... but I'd seen the sniping and lack of gruntledness among Americans, including with this H1B thing.

Seems it's quite a deal more than that at this ultrasensitive time when westerners are starting to wake up en masse to what's being done to them.

Sunday post on a Saturday morning

This below is an abridged form of the photo and screenshots over at Unherdables on the topic (Sat 14), below which is this:

Remember?

Grinning Hancock, Fauci and Birx, Gates and Brock, Pence and Pepfar, DJT’s stupid Warp Speed, the heads of the FDA and their other interests, nightingale tent hospitals, dancing tiktok nurses, empty wards and clinics, single point of truth Ahern, Northern Territory, Oz concentration camps, thug plod, armed, accosting women and children in parks and on beaches, standing on spots in the supermarket after queuing 6 feet away from anyone, never 5’10”, masks while eating out, standing in the street at 8 p.m., clapping like demented seals.

Care home deaths, Fredo’s brother in NYC … the most horrible people at large … Whitty, Ferguson … it goes on and on … and then the Karens. Oh yes … the Karens, inc. Andrew Neil and others here, Kimmel across the pond. The dark side of human nature.

Nasty, nasty people, superior people in their own estimation wanting horrors visited upon us for not complying with what, by any sane measure, were barely tested or untested, but planned well ahead of time, DNA altering measures.

I'm not even sure this was left versus right ... seemed Karens infested both sides of the political aisle.

Saturday post on Friday evening

Two excellent pieces came through from sources I don't usually visit.  The first was from Konstantin Kisin whom we saw as an anti Trump left liberal and he admits as much here:

"My entire public career since 2016 has been predicated on describing what anyone could see with their own eyes: the Left was going off the deep end. The first and most obvious sign of this was the response to the Brexit vote here in Britain and the election of President Trump in the United States. As a Remain voter and Trump skeptic myself, I could not believe what I was seeing.

I devoured Ayn Rand’s writings in my youth and, while much of my thinking has evolved significantly since, one quote stayed with me: “Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think that you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.” In other words, if events you cannot believe keep happening, you are missing something.

Because of this, even as a default liberal in 2016, I had one choice and one choice only: to ask what I was missing and seek information outside my bubble. This, incidentally, was the genesis of TRIGGERnometry.

But that is not what my soon-to-be-former friends on the Left did. Instead, they buried their heads even deeper into the sand."

The second was from John Ward, surprisingly:

The line that ‘life was always this crap’ is trying to hoodwink Millennials:

Governments used to design socio-economic policy based on the needs of the 96%. Now it's devised solely by and for the 4%.

The Baby Boomer parents of the late 1940s begat the Beautiful People of the 1960s.....who in turn begat the Millennials born during the Noughties.

But along the way, things went terribly wrong.

In education and science, the search for Truth turned into the politically correct.

In public life, punishment for malfeasance turned into do what you have to do and tell any lie necessary to get away with it.

Among showbizz celebs and the media, a talent to entertain and investigative journalism turned into if it feels good do it, and lock-step elite propaganda.

In service industries, after-sales care turned into 'No Reply' emails and AI jargon....thus ensuring that accountability turned into inaccessibility - and then invisibility.

In Silicon Valley, hitech progress turned into surveillance State process.

In soccer, playing attacking ambitious football turned into play-safe midfield pass-tapping, and corner kicks turned into all-in penalty area wrestling.

In government, being a politically neutral bureaucrat turned into neutured elected assemblies and revolving door corporatocracy.

In politics, explaining necessity turned into rationalising expediency.

In banking, our money became their money and their losses became our responsibility.

In pharmaceuticals and healthcare, making sick people better turned into making money from addicted patients. 

Overall, in fact, natural tribal mutuality capitalism turned into monopoly-globalist greed.

Clearly this must stop, plus Millennials and Zoomers need to understand that while, overall, greed at the top did always rule and plebs were turned into cannon fodder on a whim, the better to keep populations controlled ... this in the past few decades has seen a real cranking up of the hell and departure from all ethical precepts ... at least they made a show of decency earlier ... MPs resigning etc.

Even soft MPs such as Badenough and Cooper, Kendall, have lost all decency whatever ... suggestion the elderly lose their pensions? Should be eased out of the world?  Babies aborted up to and after birth? All the body mutilation? Nope, this stuff was not around earlier, except in narrow clubs and dens.