Isn't It Time They Faced Charges Of Aiding And Abetting?

A schizophrenic artist stabbed a dog walker to death after being allowed out of a mental hospital despite a warning that she had ‘discussed murdering people’, an inquest heard today. Emma Borowy, 32, was sectioned after stealing and slaughtering two goats in a ‘witchcraft’ ceremony. But doctors continued to grant the mother-of-one short spells of leave from the unit despite Borowy repeatedly absconding and twice being found armed with a knife.

Yes, it's this case.

Consultant psychiatrist Dr Dilraj Sohi insisted that ward staff would have asked police for any ‘relevant’ information. He confirmed he hadn’t met Borowy before granting her leave on August 4, having just taken over as her doctor. Asked by senior coroner Tanyka Rawden if this was ‘acceptable’, Dr Sohi said ward notes assessed her as ‘settled’ in preceding days.

Then why are you collecting a salary for not doing your job and actually meeting the people you're supposed to be assessing? 

Coroner Ms Rawden asked the psychiatrist whether the speed of her deterioration made him ‘reflect’ on whether Borowy should have been granted leave. Dr Sohi replied that he had ‘reflected a lot’, but that he would probably have approved it even if he had assessed her face-to-face first.

WTAF? 

‘We do live in hope that people will improve when we try to work with them,’ he added.

And everyone else takes the risk caused by your hopeless naivety, of course. 

Mr Leadbeater was described by his family as a ‘good, hard-working and decent man’ whose job was to drive children with special needs to school.

Why should Sohi continue to be employed? Indeed, why should he not face charges of aiding and abetting Mt Leadbetter's murder? If they had to face genuine consequenses for their decisions, they'd make better ones. 

It’s that nativity time again

My comment on DAD’s item was:

Grand idea at the naturalisation exam, in French language … explain the Nativity story, whether or not you buy it. Another question is to explain laïcité, whether or not you buy it, also the St Bartholomew’s massacre, whichever side you’re on, also the foreign legion, perhaps Vietnam, Algeria.

And DAD’s item:

This year, again, the installation of a nativity scene in the courtyard of the town hall of Beaucaire, in the Gard, is causing controversy. After the Human Rights League (LDH) filed a legal appeal, the town will have to explain itself on Wednesday, December 18, before the administrative court of Nîmes. “There are citizens who want to be able to go to the town hall, to get a birth certificate, for a public service, and who do not want to have a religion imposed on them, whatever it may be. We are in France, a secular country, with the separation of church and state,” justified the LDH lawyer, Sophie Mazasse, in an interview with France Bleu Gard Lozère.

[What a feeble argument, Sophie, ‘your citizens’ walk in the public square with Christmas lights without worries.]

https://www.fdesouche.com/2024/12/16/beaucaire-30-la-mairie-assignee-en-justice-pour-atteinte-a-la-laicite-apres-une-plainte-de-la-ligue-des-droits-de-lhomme/

Do We Need To Book 30,000 One Way Flights, Home Office?

The Home Office would like to facilitate the return of refugees to Syria, a minister has said, saying about 6,500 asylum claims had been suspended as the government waited to assess the fallout from the end of the Assad regime.

And what about the ones already here? Claiming asylum from a regime which is no more?

Homsi is one of nearly 30,000 displaced Syrians in the UK celebrating the fall of Assad and what Keir Starmer described as his “barbaric regime” over the weekend, when Hayat Tahrir al-Sham rebels seized power in a fast-moving offensive.

Shimale’s story is similar to Homsi’s. He came to the UK in 2016 because he would have been imprisoned if he had stayed. He said: “I’m sure I can [return to Syria] now. With Assad away, I will be able to go back.”

Ruba Sulaiman Khaled, a trainee solicitor and influencer from Stockport who has been unable to return to Syria since 2011, said she hoped there would be a “revolution, a new start for Syria” and that it was a time to “establish the country from the ground up”.

Anyone taking bets on how many will actually go back? 

The impossibility of governing by Party

Was just looking at these two ... one in Britain, one in the States:

The second was by an Xer called Publius.  With the first, there really can be conflicting realities the moment you plan to be an alternative party ... I'm not Nigel's greatest fan but what June says above is probably so ... he's the flagship ... but at the same time, whilst the council election results were good in a few areas, with wins over Labour, there's the old issue of "close but commendable" second in other, usually Tory seats of power.

With the other, Johnson has shown himself to be distinctly iffy on important matters ... not necessarily this one, as it's "sources said" again ... plus there are reports that hardline Hegseth, after talking to Senators one on one, has softened his stance on certain issues such as women on the front line, plus LBGwhatever "rights" ... which is clearly against the MAGA platform they were elected on.

Broadening this ... if your personal manifesto on a dozen issues is then broken into subdivisions of issues within issues ... what chance that if every voter were tasked on his/her stance on every sub-issue, that there'd be uniform agreement across the range ... even between two people?

So how can a Party put out a manifesto, have a platform it runs on, when that involves compromising your stance on various important matters? It seems to me to bring in two other things ... proportional representation, plus some sort of qualification to vote based on merit.

Which is, of course, fraught.  Plus the instability of minority coalition govts is a known-known ... as distinct from Starmer having a massive majority with from 20 to 25% of the eligible national vote?

I see no solutions here, only least bad compromises.

Why Can’t We Do This?

The three Gardai - Irish police officers - walk down the rows of passengers on the bus, a few kilometres south of the border with Northern Ireland. Observing this is the head of the Garda National Immigration Bureau, Det Ch Supt Aidan Minnock. “If they don't have status to be in Ireland, we bring them to Dublin,” he explains. “They're removed on a ferry back to the UK on the same day.”

And why is Ireland doing this now, when they've long been a welcoming country to Third World trash? 

Asylum applications in Ireland have risen by nearly 300% so far this year compared to the same period five years ago. A spike in arrivals from the UK has been driven by various factors, among these the UK’s tougher stance post-Brexit, including the fear of deportations to Rwanda, as well as Ireland’s relatively healthy economy. Most asylum seekers coming from the UK to the Republic of Ireland enter the country from Northern Ireland, as - unlike the airport or ferry routes - there is no passport control. The Garda checks along the 500km-long (310 miles) border are the only means of stopping illegal entry.

Heh! Sooner or later, the taxpaying population has had enough of what progressive policies are turning their country into...

In the village of Dundrum, County Tipperary - population 221 - a group of locals attempted to block the arrival of asylum seekers at the gates of a former hotel in August. The proposal to house up to 277 people at Dundrum House, which hasn’t operated as a hotel since 2015, would double the local population. Locals worry that it will be a permanent fixture.

“How can our government not engage properly with us?” asks Andrea Crowe, a local teacher and protester who has frequently spoken in public. She cites concerns over housing, health and education provision for the community.

None of which will be made any easier by importing the 'new Irish' in huge quantities.  

So why indeed are we paying compensation to former criminals?

We learn this morning that homosexuals who were justly dismissed from service in the past with Her Majesty’s Armed Forces because they broke the law against Homosexuals; are to receive compensation and possible restoration to the rank previously achieved.

My question is simply:Why?

They knew that they were breaking the Law when they were  serving, they knew the consequences, but they did not resign, but instead waited until they were ‘outed’ before being dismissed from the Service they were serving in.

I repeat, they knew they were breaking the Law which governed their behaviour; so why on this Earth should we, as taxpayers, fund this weird ‘compensation’?

Definition of a “human right”

There’s a thing we hear chanted about “manifest destiny”, a political invention to justify outrageous intrusion … and another one used to justify, to cover up, to exonerate, is “human rights”.

Which is not to say that the U.S. Founding Fathers should not have written it to aspire to, just as Christians have the gospels to aspire to, though close to unachievable, just as this Magna Carta thing sounded good at the time.

There are at least three glaring dangers though imho:

1.  What about aspirations bundled in with it which a large proportion of the population do not embrace, no way, e.g. communistic talking points a la Starmer?

2.  All well and fine stating our own aspirations but unless backed by brute force, by political will, then that stairway lies on the whispering wind.

3.  And if the enemy’s aspirations involve dispossessing the industrious who have built nest eggs for posterity, then right there is a set of enemies who will ultimately tear down the communist ideal … people start asking, strongly, en masse:

But if people are not willing to put themselves at least partly in danger to defend their own aspirations such as industriousness, incentive, stability, protection of what is ours, then a rough and neanderthal set of thugs and vandals are most certainly going to tear them all down, steal them, give them to the feckless bottom feeders.

As we ourselves moan our way into penury and slavery.

More Political Upheaval in Europe

An ultranationalist, Moscow-friendly Nato critic is set to face a centre-right candidate in the runoff of Romania’s presidential elections after a shock first-round result that has upended the country’s politics and could jeopardise its support for Ukraine.

It seems voters everywhere have finally had enough of left-leaning governments, and want some adults back in charge. 

With 99.98% of votes counted, Călin Georgescu, an independent who has praised Vladimir Putin as “a man who loves his country”, was on 22.9%, with the reformist Elena Lasconi, of the Save Romania Union (USR), second on 19.17%. The result, one of the biggest electoral upsets in Romania’s post-communist history, triggered the swift resignation as leader of the country’s centre-left, pro-EU party of prime minister Marcel Ciolacu, the pre-ballot frontrunner, who finished third on 19.15%.

That shows a lack of faith in your vision, doesn't it? 

The election focused largely on Romania’s soaring cost of living: the Black Sea country has the EU’s biggest share of people at risk of poverty, as well as the bloc’s highest inflation rate and largest budget deficit, at 8% of economic outlook. Georgescu said on Facebook after he had voted that he was standing “for those who feel they do not matter, and actually matter the most”. Later, he said the results were “an extraordinary awakening” of the people.

Long may it continue! Why, we might one day see it here, too. 

Information exchange

Last evening, I saw an item on X where some big MSM funder was apoplectic over Elon’s comment about us now being “the media” … at least the MSM being untrusted legacy media … useful for snippets but ignore their analysis like the plague.

In lieu of the MSM’s now rejected view on almost anything, what we’re left with is diffuse … there are some very good amateur pundits and then a continuum down to trash&troll. Trouble is … who’s whom … which is which?

Going back to first principles, we might start with a catalyst, a clip or snippet one of us saw:

It certainly did … they lost control of many of our minds … an increasing number of such minds, though we’re still a minority, the anti-globo-psycho, anti-Wokerati, anti-Karen, which underpins our politics.

My suggestion is that, when you meet any news snippet at all, immediately ask yourself:

• Who is this person, who funds this person, cui bono, whom is he/she part of, what are the hidden connections etc. etc.?

And to answer that, you need to delve … yes, ggl and bing are highly biased left, they almost all are … it’s today’s paradigm, zeitgeist, default position … and yet they can be “got around” by technique:

• Always seek the dirt first … enter some outrageous slur in search, see what comes up … you’re not going to take it onboard but it gives you other lines of enquiry.
• Always go to their About section, where they operate from, to whom they answer, with whom affiliated, how long they’ve been operating, who funds them?

Remember, chaps and chapesses … we’re only as good as our sources. I’m about to quote two iffy ones … one is The Slog where I’m still not sure where he’s at, politically … plus Atlas Obscura, quite Woke left, so beware of that. But as Andy pointed out, there are still stories there, pointers to explore.

Our model as an information exchange is the old journo one of always seeking the truth, the nitty gritty, what the bottom line is:

• Knowing it’s always constrained by Them’s interference and censorship ruses, plus our own safety … there are things we’re simply not going to put into the public domain about ourselves, unless it impinges on or colours our comment … we need to disclose that, e.g. who funds us?
• We’re not godlike … beware the narcissistic pundit who speaks of his/her “followers” … your reputation is only as good as the quality of your input today, measured against your previous.
• We go the way of all things, eventually, we’re a candle or beam from a lighthouse for now … for now, folks … then you must look elsewhere … same painstaking evaluation.
• Don’t rely on one source, e.g. us … have a range, a bloground or soc-med round … but every single one needs delving into … what is his bias? Why? What’s his “thang”? Never take information exchange at face value.

I’m going to run this at Unherdables as well.

Humble apologies to OoL readers/comenters

Julia’s in Edinburgh and we did not get our act together about clicking through comments … I’ll take on the moderator duties for now until the boss gal’s back in harness.

Everyone Else Is A Realist, Love...

Someone struggles with reality...

I have spent most of the last week on Zoom calls with accountants in New York, trying to figure out the personal finance implications of moving to the UK – lugging dual citizenship behind me. (Short version: they’re not good.) Since these conversations deal with economic outcomes it has felt, as a matter of form, necessary to mention that given the US just elected a maniac, at some level – don’t we think? – all bets are off. Joking not-joking: we can talk about pensions or college savings until the cows come home but really, why aren’t we screaming? A remark that has elicited, to a man, either blank looks or cheerful entreaties not to be so alarmist.

I'd entreat you to get psychiatric help, personally... 

The spectacle of Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, co-hosts of the fiercely anti-Trump MSNBC show Morning Joe, beetling down to Mar-a-Lago to meet with the president-elect as fast as their little legs could carry them, was presented by the pair as a necessary piece of journalistic engagement.

It's their job, of course they will want to do that. Not everyone has the luxury of acting like a spoiled child and refusing to do something they find distateful. 

Under the auspices of pragmatic engagement, or “holding Trump to account”, or the reasonable accommodation of a new American reality, there is the usual sucking up to money and power. Despite Trump’s conviction that the entire mainstream media is against him, it seems unlikely that he will be sitting alone in a ballroom at the White House Correspondents’ dinner next April while the US news media takes a stand.

And it’s true: sulking or ranting does nothing.

I wouldn't say that. It clearly gets you a column in the 'Guardian'...