I Don't Want Such A Society Either...

As one of the many people who experience anxiety and poor mental health brought about by the trials and tribulations of modern life in our wealthy country, I urge people not to accept that this is “just the way it is”. There is clearly something wrong if doing something as simple as your weekly shopping involves such distrust.

...but I want one where shoplifters are allowed to go free, unchallenged, even less. 

I don’t want to be part of a society where shop staff behave like law enforcement, where homelessness, hardship and poverty are accepted, and a small percentage of individuals hold the bulk of the country’s wealth and assets. Things need to change. The current model doesn’t work, nor is it morally and ethically justifiable.

As I believe someone very famous once said, "Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the others."

Yes, Because The Laws You Demand Apply To You Too...

The President of the National Union of Students, who was sacked following an investigation into allegations of antisemitism, says she was 'discriminated against as a black Muslim woman'.

Is there some sort of clause that says it's OK for black Muslim women to be anti-semitic, then? 

Shaima Dallali, 27, became the first president to be fired in the 100-year history of the NUS after 'significant breaches of policy' were found. It came after she was suspended from her role at the end of August, just a month into her two-year term.

But she has rejected the findings of an independent disciplinary panel and is considering taking legal action after her contract was terminated yesterday.

Hah! What sort of law firm would take on such a... 

In a statement released on her behalf today, law firm Carter-Ruck...

Oh. Right.  

...said she had already 'apologised fully for an inappropriate Tweet which she had published in 2012 (that is, a decade before becoming President)'.

Didn't you get the memo? It doesn't matter how long ago transgressions were made... 

Lawyers added that she had also made clear her position that other tweets which faced criticism and which pre-dated her election to her NUS role 'were not antisemitic'.

Didn't you get the memo that says 'it's what those offended feel that matters' either..? 

No, Please, Do Tell Us How You Suffer From 'Racism' Again...

...and how that's not a perfectly normal reaction from law abiding people when you act like this:

One man, who lives nearby, said shaken locals fear for their safety.

He said: 'They (the responding officers) had to wait for the riot police as back up before opening the gates on a public road. How do you think we local residents feel?

'The gates were locked another couple of times after the police opened them.

'The travellers have simply ignored the order. How can they be allowed to just do that? Law abiding citizens are being left to put up with this and suffer.

'We know police have the power to move them on but they're too scared. It is disgusting that this is allowed to continue.'

Yes, it's disgusting that West Mercia Police do absolutely nothing when travellers turn up and cause havoc, but they do have a long and undistinguished history of letting them get away with it, so it should hardly be surprising, should it?

They've now moved on, leaving their usual mess behind them. Would it be too much to hope they've moved somewhere close to the Chief Con or his relatives?

"I Didn't Know My Own Mind..."

"...so neither do you, and you must be prevented from doing what I did for your own good."

The current proposals to allow adults to give “informed consent” would not have protected me, nor indeed the thousands of others like me who willingly undertook conversion therapy because we believed it was the right thing to do. Indeed, everyone we knew believed it was the right thing to do.

...

I am a relatively strong person, and it nearly broke me – sadly many others are not so lucky, and tragically come to a point of believing that the only way out is to take their lives. That’s why conversion practices need to be banned outright, with no exceptions.

Does that include the sort of 'conversions' practiced by the transgender clinics as well, I wonder? I bet it doesn't! 

The government needs to think again. First, it must learn from the experiences of survivors and prioritise their concerns, for we are the true experts. We know better than anyone what needs to be banned, and how best to do this.

There's a reason we don't let victims determine the punishment for an offender for any other crime. So why should we let them determine policy?

Second, the government needs to listen to the senior human rights lawyers who have set out in the Cooper report why religious freedoms can and must be limited when significant harm is being caused.

Does anyone else suspect that all religious freedoms is really what is meant by this? Or only certain religions? 

Digging In...

The Metropolitan police want go to the high court to insist it was correct in its decision to sack a decorated black officer after she was found with a child abuse video, sent to her on WhatsApp, on her phone.

In June, the police appeals tribunal (PAT) overturned the Met decision, saying it had acted unfairly and Williams was able to return to work.

And instead of giving in...they doubled down: 

In a statement the Met said it wanted to seek a judicial review of the decision to quash William’s sacking by the PAT. Britain’s largest force said it also wanted to challenge the reinstatement of another officer ordered by the PAT after a criminal conviction, but details of that case are not being made public.

They must want rid of these two very badly. I wonder why? 

Explaining its actions and decision to spends tens of thousands of pounds in the legal challenges, the Met said public confidence could be at stake and added: “The PAT has made findings in two separate cases that overturned carefully considered decisions to dismiss officers from the Metropolitan police, which had been made in special case hearings following criminal convictions.

“The special case hearings had deemed that the convictions amount to gross misconduct, and that the officers should be dismissed. In both cases the PAT did not agree with these findings and replaced the officers’ dismissals with a final written warning.

“In both cases the Met believes there was a failure by the PAT to make a proper assessment of the seriousness of the convictions. The Met also finds the duty to reinstate, as a result of the decisions of the PAT, is also in potential conflict with vetting processes.”

It's interesting to see who the Met decides to protect, and who they don't... 

It Should Cost Them, Not Us...

A council has publicly apologised after it was fined for 'breaching human rights' by...

Oh boy! *gets popcorn* 

...removing bus adverts for an evangelical Christian event.

Of course! It'd never be done for a Muslim Eid gathering, would it? But Christians are fair game, right?

Wrong, as it turned out. But what was so objectionable?

Ahead of an event at the town's Winter Gardens, the council removed advertisements that read 'Lancashire Festival of Hope with Franklin Graham - Time for Hope'.

'Hope'..? Hope is objectionable? To whom?

They had initially them (sic) but changed their position after a social media campaign against Mr Graham's 'offensive' opposition to same-sex marriage.

Ah! The usual suspects. And no doubt the council thought that they'd been played a winning hand in Victimhood Poker, until the courts slapped down a Royal Flush... 

'We accept the findings of the Court that we discriminated against Lancashire Festival of Hope because of the religious beliefs of Franklin Graham and in doing so interfered with Lancashire Festival of Hope's right to freedom of speech,' the council said in a statement.

'We sincerely apologise to the organisers of the event for the upset and inconvenience caused.'

What about an apology to all the ratepayers who will actually be paying for your miscalculation? 

Release, And Let Them Scream...

The National Rural Crime Network (NRCN) – made up of 32 crime commissioners and their forces – ordered the research into serious and organised crime in the countryside and found the traveller community featured prominently in offences such as hare coursing, fly-tipping, farm vehicle theft and poaching.

The only astonishing thing is that it required research... 

The study was due for release last October, but the organisation’s bosses ruled it should be delayed so more evidence could be gathered.

Because 'more evidence' will help them fend off the woke mob? What a waste of money! You cannot reason with people like this. No amount of evidence will ever convince them. 

A police source said: ‘The report has been hugely delayed as there were real concerns at the fall-out because it found travellers played a big part in rural crime. They’re terrified the woke brigade will jump down their throats, so they asked for more supporting evidence to ensure against that.

'But every month delayed is another month we delay having this out in the open and a proper debate about how we help rural communities who feel under siege.’

The woke mob will scream. Let them. No-one who matters should care. 

Last night, Conservative MP Peter Bone said: ‘We’ve had problems in the past when police forces have gone soft on certain sections of the community and, as a result, finding out terrible crimes have been carried out.

'People feel there is one set of rules for us, and one set of rules for travellers. Let’s have the report out and let’s have the arguments.’

There is indeed one set of rules for them and one for the law-abiding settled population. It's been going on for years. And if people are too afraid to admit that, it'll keep going on. Enough is enough.