The curious case of the sudden hit on anti-Woke online forces across the west … a personal tale

This blog is Orphans of Liberty, it is a group blog and not an outlet pour moi, it is led by Julia, of Ambush Predator and I do try to keep my posts off here in the main … but occasionally it’s an OoL type issue of personal freedom to speak and there’s a case for reposting, esp. if it also appears on Gab and Twitter … this one I’m also putting on substack.

The OoL readers include those who don’t visit N.O. so please bear with me here. Let’s start.

1.

That M53 bus crash near Liverpool

The immediate question it raises which no one is coming out and asking ...

At around 8am this morning (Friday), police, paramedics, fire crews and an air ambulance were called to the northbound carriageway of the motorway between J5 for New Chester Road to J4 for Brimstage Road following reports of an overturned school bus carrying children.

The family of (the) schoolgirl who died in a crash on the M53 have released a picture (and) Merseyside Police have confirmed her name as Jessica Baker.

The family of (the) bus driver who was killed in a crash on the M53 today have named him as dad-of-two Stephen Shrimpton (who) "suffered medical issues" at the wheel of the coach on the M53.

The dislocated nature of this report is because of issues in copying from the Liverpool Echo who were doing very strange things ... breaking it into separate articles ans each page crashing several times, such that I had to rush to get any text copied before the ads swamped it and it disappeared.
 

Obviously commiserations and there's a go fund me at the Echo, should you wish.

Now, between us => the driver => medical issues => such that he hit a middle plantation it seemed and the bus overturned. What is the betting it was heart and that it was jab related? You can be sure they won't release that. In fact they're swamping the reports in all the other detail.

Who Is The Customer?

It's not you or your child, is it?

Bean Primary School has banned packed lunches for children in Year 1 and Reception due to the need to guarantee a certain number of cooked dinners from the meal provider. But parents are outraged by the implementation of the policy which they say strips their children of their choice between a packed lunch or a hot dinner.

Why would a school ever sign such a contract? You never agree to something that's not in your control, or you have to then attempt to control it... 

Some also bemoan the quality of the cooked lunches - citing meals such as 'onion bhaji and chips'.

Surely a carb-heavy meal is the worst thing for promoting attentiveness in an after-lunch lesson? 

However, the headteacher of the school in the village of Bean, Kent, insists the lunches are of excellent quality and include alternatives for children with special dietary requirements.

I wonder if she - and the rest of the staff - are forced to eat them too? I can bet what the answer is... 

Fay Armitage, whose lactose intolerant daughter Bonnie is in Reception at the school, is vehemently opposed to the new policy. She says four-year-old Bonnie regularly comes home with tummy aches from school as she's no longer able to control how much dairy she has in her diet. Mrs Armitage was hoping to send Bonnie to school each day with a packed lunch so she would know exactly what she'd eaten throughout the day. But parents have now been forbidden to do so, as all children in Reception and Year 1 must partake in school dinners.

It should never, ever be the case that a school tries to dictate what children must eat. Haven't they learned that lesson in the past? 

The new policy currently only applies to children in Reception and Year 1. But under the government's universal infant free school meals (UIFSM) policy, the same scheme will gradually be rolled out to each new academic year group until it covers the entire school, and there are three choices to order from. Parents are now arguing that under the new policy, Unicef children's rights, which the school is signed up to, have been breached.

Is popcorn allowed, because I need to go get some! 

Rip off Britain

The overwhelming opinion I’ve seen is that this is precisely what it is … sheer greed on the part of local govt so they can reduce collection services, stop fixing infrastructure such as roads and go off on their jollies, courtesy of obscene salaries.

What disturbs me more is the two narrators here who don’t agree with the consensus, thinking it’s all fine … who’s paying them? Particularly her, who runs him. Society is sick today. However, let’s look at it:

Writing about OoL’s prime directive here

It’s broadened a bit since we began in 2011 and now includes all the wrongdoing of the past few years but essentially it comes down to us being prevented from speaking out on perceived wrongs, esp. when those wrongs very much impact our daily lives.

This one today starts with the risibly considered bastion of free speech, GB News:

For readers not from GB or without a TV, which we often call a tele, GB News was set up as an alt-site within the MSM range of view of the normie out there. Naturally, the far-left Wokerati plus their gods the globopsycho ruling class labelled the site far right … anything to the right of Trotsky is far right to them. Actually, we’re one mass of centrist people just wishing to live our lives in some sort of decency, not worrying about where the next meal is coming from.

Some loony feminazi called Ada who hates men was invited on … the rest stemmed from that:

What Use Are The Police..?

It took thieves just 47 seconds to steal Rosie Wetherhill’s ebike from outside a Chinese takeaway.

Wetherhill, a 23-year-old bike courier from Leeds, had considered locking her bike to the railing when she went in to collect the order, but she knew the takeaway was fast. So she locked the back wheel with a D-lock instead. A mistake. As she saw her £1,300 ebike disappear around a corner, Wetherhill felt a sense of dread. “I knew I would probably never see that bike again,” she says. “Because I know how it is.” The bike wasn’t insured. She’d only had it for two months. She called 999, and told police that the bike was fitted with a tracking device, but it wasn’t working. They told her to call back if it started working again.

A few days later, an officer called. “He told me that if there was CCTV from the Chinese takeaway, then I would need to go and get that myself because the police were not going to do it for me,” says Wetherhill. “It was quite insulting.”

It's more than that, it's utterly appalling. Whet are they being paid to do, if not this? 

“It’s a crime where there is no jeopardy for the perpetrators,” says Tom Parker, 35, a marketing worker from near Epsom. In July, Parker witnessed two teenagers stealing a bike outside a Surrey train station. “I ran at them, shouting,” Parker says. They threw the bike at him and disappeared. Parker called 999. “‘We can’t do anything,’” he recalls the handler telling him, advising him to take the bike home. “But then,” Parker told her, frustrated, “I’ve stolen it!”

I always thought they staffed the emergency lines with the dumbest recruits, and it seems I'm right... 

Parker posted about the incident in a local Facebook group. The following morning, he rang Surrey police. “I said, ‘I have this bike. I don’t want it in my garage. I can’t be the guardian of it for ever.’” The police officer told him to keep posting on Facebook. “They said,” he remembers, “‘We can’t call it a crime, because no one has reported it.’ I said, ‘It is a crime! I saw it happening.’”

Is it laziness? Is it lack of care? Are they told to limit the number of crimes recorded? 

Is it all three? 

Just as he was beginning to despair, someone got in touch via Facebook. His bike had been stolen that evening – and he had reported it to the Metropolitan police. He shared his crime reference number with Parker and Parker reunited him with the bike. A few days later, Parker received an email from the police. He says it advised him that no one had reported the bike stolen. “I responded,” Parker says, “and said, ‘They did report it. Here’s the attachment. I consider the matter closed, because I gave the bike back!’”

Can we ever trust the crime figures, if they are collated like this? No wonder they keep repeating the mantra that 'crime is down'... 

And when they do show a touch of concern, it's for the wrong people:

In Cambridge, police estimate that 70% of cycle crime is committed by people with substance abuse problems. “We have these chaotic, disastrous offenders,” says Tudor, “who tend to have heavy drug habits. They take bikes opportunistically. They sell them for a flat fee to informal handlers within local criminal networks, usually for about £50.” Tudor has interviewed these offenders. “They come across as quite vulnerable,” she says.

Funny, normal people would say that's how the victims of crime should be described. 

These incidents have eroded public trust in the police even further. “We have these ideas of what the police are there for,” says Andy Higgins of policing thinktank The Police Foundation. “If something bad happens, the police are there for you. Or they should be.” In policing terms, bike theft is a high-volume, low-level crime. But that’s not how its victims experience it. “These things may be mundane and transactional from the police point of view,” says Higgins, “but they actually are not to many people.”

Indeed. And if they can't get the little stiff right, why trust them on larger stuff? 

Police forces had their real-terms funding cut by 19% from 2010/2011 to 2018/2019. “People get very angry about the police and their shortcomings,” says Tudor. “But they are operating in a very limited sphere. They are constantly given political directives they have to adhere to. They have funding cuts. They have staffing cuts. It is an impossible task.”

Not when they can send so many police after the fact, no... 

The baton of reportage is now ours to carry

Today’s Conservative Woman:

All power to TCW and all other similar publications => these are the respective western nations’ lifelines right now, with the MSM long ago abrogating their responsibilities and the baton passing to amateur online pundits of variable quality. TCW is one of the respected outlets.

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/a-new-front-in-the-attack-on-free-speech/

In an article headed ‘Attorney-general is showing contempt for press freedom’ Sean O’Neill wrote, this was a grave misunderstanding of contempt of court laws: ‘Victoria Prentis KC, both a cabinet minister and the government’s primary legal adviser, wished “to amplify the importance of not publishing any material where there is a risk that it could prejudice any potential criminal investigation or prosecutions”. “Publishing this material,” she added, “could amount to contempt of court.” Anyone with even the sketchiest knowledge of how the media works surely knows that every single word of reporting on Brand has been rigorously scrutinised before publication. And one of the many things looked at is whether there is a contempt issue . . .

Quick word about The Conservative Woman.  Unfortunate name, “conservative” because it is soooo misunderstood along party poltical lines, the Remoaner and Globopsycho, Uniparty Tories having hijacked the word and done dirt on it.

What we mean by “conservative” is something utterly different … we see it as someone from any party they’ve formerly voted for who, frankly, have had enough of all this guff we’re seeing rolled out by low quality myrmidons and karens, under the direction of the psychos above.

When we say “we the people”, we are not including the Wokerati, the snowflakes, the purple haired “refugees welcome” Wokerati and SJWs, the leftist “teachers” instructing kids in the finer arts of sex and gender change, the professors with bicycle chains at rallies attacking women then scarpering … nope, you know exactly whom we’re not including … those gluing themselves to things and blocking commuter traffic for example.

These are not “the people” in the least.  “The people” are those increasingly finding it impossible to operate normal day to day lives because of this monstrous collusion by the clowns and utterly corrupt psychos.

The pushback has begun

Consider this wholesale reposting from another blog:

1.  Man from the West Country one

a.  CDC Refuses To Release Updated Information On Post-C-19 Jab Heart Inflammation

https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/cdc-refuses-to-release-updated-information-on-post-c-19-jab-heart-inflammation/

b.  Some nasty little surprises in the C**id-19 mRNA “vaccines”

https://expose-news.com/2023/09/25/some-nasty-little-surprises-in-the-covid-19-mrna-vaccines/

c.  The Great Demoralization

https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/the-great-demoralization/

d.  Megyn Kelly calls out Trump for gaslighting America about C**ID lockdowns – “you actually gave Fauci a presidential commendation before leaving office”

https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-09-25-megyn-kelly-trump-gaslighting-covid-lockdowns-fauci.html

e.  For All The People To See!

https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/for-all-the-people-to-see/

f.  Rumble Could Be Banned In UK Under New Online Safety Laws

https://expose-news.com/2023/09/25/rumble-could-be-banned-in-uk-under-new-online-safety-laws/

g.  Elon Musk’s Starlink Exceeds 2 Million Users — Democrats furious with Elon Musk’s huge success

https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/elon-musks-starlink-exceeds-2-million-users-dems-furious-with-elon-musks-huge-success/

h.  Jeffrey Prather drops major bombshells in powerful interview with Health Ranger about Russia-Ukraine war and why Russia is beating the West with ease

https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-09-25-jeffrey-prather-bombshells-russia-ukraine-war-military.html

2.  Skim down n1 if you would, esp n1a

... then the very pointed extra below this summary below in red:

Indeed, Dr. David ... indeed.

3.  We're talking nothing less than medical malpractice

... coupled with collusion to misinform on the part of medical "authorities" and media combined. 

Now consider the ordinary reporter in her 20s, the subby in her thirties ... why "her" for a start?  More malleable, more employable today ... far less educated, in fact wrongly educated in schools. Meaning conscienceless or else stressing out badly, as young women are right now or screwing around.

I am involved in a course just now which I shan't describe but it's almost completely women and goodness, are they a mess ... empty shells as far as any any spiritual strength or oomph goes, yet feeling they're entirely self-sufficient. I say nothing of it there because there's no percentage. I've no doubt the "men" are as bad ... no moral oomph and yet quite vicious if crossed ... thing is ... no men anywhere to be seen, except a few old, demoralised ones.

The obvious question is how did it come about?  Look at n1c again ... the great demoralisation. Remember Yuri Bezmenov in the 80s who said just this in a series of interviews?

What did he mean by demoralisation? Being depressed, being at the end of the tether?  

Well yes ... that ... but what he meant more at the time, looking forward, was the lack of morals any more in public and private life, sort of like William S Burroughs' Lost Boys, with a distinct gay edge to it. Or as illumined Svali said in her 2000 interview ... dog eat dog, vicious, all for themselves and devil take the hindmost.

All right, who's speaking out about these new oomphless, amoral (not immoral) Eloi and the monsters above in globopsycho? Well the labelled alt-right, yes, but also the remnant of the dwindling numbers of Christians (quick, everyone shriek and turn away).

And what happens to them? Well look at Isabel Vaughan for a start:

https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/17645/woman-arrested-for-silent-prayer-at-uk-abortion-clinics-gets-police-apology

Look at the gay cake non bakers, look at Pastor Pawlowski:

Don't get me wrong ... these real Christians are a small percentage of the overall conservative (small c, not CINO or RINO) coming together on social media ... you see them on Twitter and Gab, in blogs, you see them at The Daily Sceptic and The Conservative Woman (those feisty lasses) ... both men and women of some sort of moral oomph ... not in a preachy way but also not backward in coming fwd and calling wrong out for what it is.

But there's also demoralisation here in the strict sense of sadness and anger ... for example, Vox and Karl Denninger:

https://voxday.net/2023/09/24/tilting-at-windmills/

By Karl’s chosen metric, saving the American nation from itself, he has been a complete failure and all his efforts have been a complete waste of time. And it’s true, he has been and it was. But this failure was inevitable, because there is no saving a nation from itself. The task that he set himself was always impossible from the start.

A better metric, I think, is to ask whether one’s efforts have been beneficial to others.

I believe the pushback from primarily these two demographics ... the antiwoke secular, plus the real Christians ... has begun.

Well, The Answer Should Have Been 'No'...

...shouldn't it, chancellors?

As the number of serious sexual assaults escalates across universities, experts say female students often do not want to go to the police, fearing delays and traumatising questioning, and knowing only 1% of rape cases end in conviction. Universities say increasing numbers of women are instead turning to them to investigate​...

Why would a university ever decide that this is something they should agree to do? 

A student conduct panel, often comprising academics, support staff and students, takes evidence from both sides and decides whether a student has broken the rules by committing sexual misconduct and should be suspended or expelled. Universities stress this is not like a court of law.

Of course it isn't. and a court of law is precisely where allegations of wrongdoing snhould be examined and tested. But as Longrider points out, increasingly, that's not the case. Extrajudicial means are sought, even by those who should know better... 

Prof Sir Steve West, the vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England and president of Universities UK until earlier this year, said: “As expulsion is a penalty, parents of the accused often start to raise the stakes by hiring a lawyer. It is a power game, because usually the victim has no representation, and I think it is completely unacceptable and unfair.”

No, actually, it's pefectly fair. What you were doing is the unfair approach.  

West said that parents “rarely tell us that they’re going to do this in advance”, typically turning up with a lawyer to the final student conduct committee hearing. He worries that this will “drive silence”, with victims frightened of being subjected to exactly the sort of adversarial investigation they wanted to avoid by not complaining to the police.

Unfortunately, there's no avoiding it. Sexual assult almost always takes place in private, so a proper investigation is always going to be adversarial in nature.  

Smita Jamdar, a partner at the law firm Shakespeare Martineau who advises universities on sexual assault hearings, said: “There are increasing numbers of students choosing to bring cases of sexual misconduct of all sorts to their university rather than the police, and increasing numbers of very serious allegations.” She added that choking and sadomasochism (S&M) were now “not uncommon”. Jamdar said institutions often brought her firm in because an accused student had hired a lawyer and the university needed support. “Everyone ends up arguing over legal principles that are utterly bamboozling to most student conduct panels,” she said.

Because they aren't the right place or the right people to be handling them.   

Is it race or is it gender? Maybe age?

There's a bit of an edge to this post which requires me to get personal before I begin. 

I'm no MGTOW, deeply resenting the female species as a whole ... in fact quite the opposite ... maybe I get a bit too effusive, e.g. running knitting vlogs by ladies, e.g. yesterday ... plus my partner here at OoL is simply the best, plus all my novels and stories have the male and female protagonists working together in tandem in a realistic way as it used to happen.

This also illustrates how we can get along, think along the same lines, vaguely:

This long intro is to underscore that I'd have to agree with Will Jones below and I’d bet Natalia does too:

https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/23/football-focus-in-peril-as-viewing-figures-plummet-following-replacement-of-dan-walker-with-alex-scott/

The most dramatic fall in viewing figures coincides with Alex Scott replacing Dan Walker as Focus’s main presenter in 2021. 

In Walker’s last season before he was moved on the average weekly August audience was 827,000, before dropping to 809,000 in 2021, 599,000 12 months later and 564,000 this year.

Scott is not being blamed by her bosses, though, and remains highly regarded at the BBC, who are set to give the former England defender a prominent presenting role at next summer’s Olympics.

Brand and culture expert Nick Ede told MailOnline that the departure of Dan Walker was a huge blow to the Beeb, with new host Alex Scott struggling to stem that tide of viewers who left with him. …

The future of Football Focus is the subject of urgent talks at the BBC due to a dramatic drop in viewing figures.

Could it have anything to do with the diversity hire replacing the white bloke? Of course not. And if it is (which it isn’t) then it just shows how deplorable the audience is, who must be duly ignored.

That last paragraph has a real edge to it, does it not? Apart from the gross insensitivity to the sensibilities of the indigenous majority (still a majority, overall) and certain topics really having an edge to them in this land, the BBC press on and in fact redouble their insensitivity.

We've been through why ... globopsycho controlled bosses, kool aid wokerati ... deliberately sticking it to a people they hate as much as Jack Straw did and today's invaders do ... or is it just sheer M25 bubble pig ignorance?  Is it bloodymindedness, knowing they're resented and still pressing on regardless?

The sad part is that this Alex Whoever ... was she a former women's player (?) ... is also insensitive to the extent of putting a high paid cynosure before the deep resentment of the land ... pardon me but I'd think twice before accepting an anti-indigenous-people role within the land.

The opening part of this post was obviously about the female over male thing but now I'm starting to think ... was that actually the primary issue here? 

Or was it that blacks are shoved down our throats every single advert, every single TV or online moment these days? I used, for example, to run Osibisa and two-tone ska at my site but now … l'm not so sure it would go down well.