The Grand Theft

Sometimes, it’s better to run a size compressed screenshot or three, rather than rabbit on secondhand … it puts the issue more succinctly, is more human … it could be us. Deryl Lynn is a grandmother, former model, pundit on X, otherwise occupied walking the dogs or grandchildren.

There’s not a lot I need to add … we’re up against some major theft here … some time back, this was the quote I used … just as relevant now:

Go Woke, Get Broke!

Yes, Disney, that applies even to you.

Disney’s $300m-plus reboot of Snow White has generated a slew of headlines for all the wrong reasons. First, given the original relied on the outdated social mores of the 1930s, it rapidly became engulfed in a row over sexism, a debate over whether or not to keep the original seven dwarves and was plunged into the center of America’s bitter culture wars over race. Its lead star, Rachel Zegler, said she “hated” the original 1937 film and branded its story “weird” with a stalker-like Prince Charming character who steals a kiss from a girl in a coma who could not give consent. Then a row broke out over whether Disney should have seven dwarves as characters. Then America’s right wing piled on because of Zegler’s Latina background; the original Snow White was conceived as having very pale skin.

It is, in fact, the very reason for her name.  

All in all, it showed how the temptation of instant brand recognition could be trumped by the problem that many 1930s movies contain racial and other stereotypes that are simply better left alone.

But Hollywood is in a 'remake' fix, because there seems to be a lack of talent to do anything else. And so it will always run up against today's snowflake audiences. And as if that wasn't enough of a kiss of death, there's the casting....

But last week, just to add to the movie’s woes, Snow White also found itself embroiled in a fight between its two biggest stars over Middle Eastern politics. Zegler is an outspoken advocate for Palestinian rights and Gal Gadot, who plays the Evil Queen, is a high-profile Israeli actor. Not surprisingly the two have very different takes on the bloody conflict in Gaza.

"Let's throw this snake and mongoose together, what could possibly go wrong?" 

Alia Malak, of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, wrote in an email to the Guardian that people should boycott Snow White because of Gadot.

Save your ink, Alia, I don't think anyone's rushing to see it anyway!  

Dirk Gently

... and the fundamental interconnectedness of all things.  This is a wise take by "one of our own":

We might think that the problem is the terrorist murder by an Islamist migrant, but the establishment thinks the real danger is that German/French/UK voters are angry…

This summer’s events could hardly have shown us more clearly how Europe’s spineless, self-loathing attitude to the fight against Islamism here and abroad is putting democracy and Western civilisation at risk. Yet our leaders refuse to face the truth.

... but when put alongside another "one of our own", it alters the picture significantly or rather adds to it ... for example the Sa'udi-Podesta connection ... and then to actually name one not of our circle but certainly on "our side", the side of humanity surviving, let's say ... Lara Logan ... the question arises how do her clips still get shown with what she says about the mindset of Them ... the real mindset ... the filth?

Answer is that Them are confident enough that she'd be taken as loony ... therefore of little threat anymore ... a bit like Svali on Centrex radio in 2000 in Toronto, where she blew Them wide open.  Have you heard of her or what she said?

In the main, no ... except in things a few pundits have now and then brought. Do not forget my site was stolen on July 26th ... wonder why. I saw a name of a commenter here some time back ... one of "the opposition" let's call it ... Julia would not be aware of that and I'm not saying ... point is that there are some punditry truisms which spring to mind:

* People, all of us, inc. me, are operating within our own reality bubble, shaped by our own experiences and reading ... nothing whatever wrong with that ... those visiting this site, for a start, are more perspicacious than the average bear.

But they don't see all the other items, mainly because they're not looking ... therefore they miss those items, which would have significantly altered the picture, esp. if you string four or five of those together and maybe add Harman's and Hewitt's PIE promotion ... also don't forget Cyril Smith ... also add Dolphin Square, also come back to Lara Logan whom someone ran on Gab ... I was going to run it, then thought it would only get the site shut down as mine was.

What are we left with?

* Well for a start, the readers, regular and occasional, are not all onside.  There are those who know and are onside, there are those still in finding out mode ... there are those in that river in Egypt ... and then there are the hostile, officially and occasional ... plus all the bots.

* Therefore it behoves pundits to be cryptic on the deeper dives, but that's a double edged sword, as in any trial in a court of law. If you lay down the receipts, if you document them, if you tie them to an informer's name ... that informer is then dead meat, as Al Capone could have told you.

* Therefore, must we, for survival, stay shtum and allow the Starmer Stasi to do their worst with no pushback whatever? Most readers on our side (that of the survival of western society as we knew it) would say no, "we" must be bold and fearless. Yeah? So who's going to bell the cat then? Are you stepping up yourself, head above the parapet? What of the keyboard warriors Starmer's jackbooted are going after, quite illegally?

Ladies and gentlemen ... you do see the issue, do you not? And what of, say, the blind leftist academic, quite convinced he's the intellectual here, the one with (handed down) truth at his fingertips, the one convinced he's the good guy coz he subscribes to all these noble generalisations such as equality and diversity, save the planet ... yes we can?

Did you see the response to Lee Anderson in parliament to his question how would you define "islamophobia"? It was not just the response itself, it was the smug smile on her face after she'd sat down. What a meathead, completely unaware of the suffering of countless people in the land.

This post's become too long.

As if it needed any further evidence

Westminster clown show:

Sigh.

But If They Are Coming Here To Work...

NHS nurses from overseas are being “pushed into poverty” because of rules that deprive many people coming to work in the UK of welfare benefits for five years after they arrive.

...why would they need benefits?

They are being forced to borrow money, run up credit card debts and go without food because they are unable to make ends meet, according to a report from the Royal College of Nursing (RCN).

Ah. Because the NHS is employing them on the cheap. Despite the billions poured into it and its sanctimonious pontificating about 'poverty'. 

The nurses are on temporary visas, which means they are subject to the “no recourse to public funds” rule that bars them from claiming child benefit, housing benefit and universal credit for at least five years before they can apply for indefinite leave to remain. The RCN is urging ministers to scrap the rule, which it says is unfair because foreign-trained nurses cannot obtain the benefits despite paying income tax and national insurance.

Well, pay them more, then. Or start training people already here, and let them nurse in their own countries, who probably need them more. 

Last Friday, the United Nations said that it too wanted the rule axed for migrants.

Of course it did. And it too can GTFO.

Stopping the fanatics?

On the 20th anniversary of Beslan:

... comes this move in Poland:

Contrast that and in other European nations to the policy in the English and French speaking west ... the polar opposite ... born of course of bitter experience within those nations.  

There it is before us ... and still Woke left fanatics want more of the same.

Even by their own “Science” …

The point of this post is … are we talking:

1. mendacity, the auto-mania to lie, lie, lie … deliberately
2. pig ignorance from a poor education, a brainwashing narrative, even youth
3. psychosis … complete lack of compassion, ethics, a moral compass
4. agenda to destroy, related to 3 and the other points?

Complication that question is … are we talking:

1. your average normie, esp. the now poorly brought up and educated, media owned
2. karens … those of the “lock up any seeming to threaten my charmed life” sort
3. myrmidons … the army of hate not hopers etc.
4. henchmen, e.g. the Emmanuel Goldsteins
5. co-conspirators
6. the Evil Muvver himself?

The answer to the first question might be different for each in the second.  Now a bit of meat on the bones, something to actually debate … from The Daily Sceptic today:

Dangerous stuff all this ‘green’ hydrogen. Apart from a tendency to explode unless handled with extreme care, its higher combustion temperature can produce more harmful nitrogen dioxide than natural gas. Nitrogen dioxide is a nasty pollutantand has been linked to childhood asthma and other major ailments. Furthermore, hydrogen is the lightest of gases and escapes easily into the atmosphere – where a newly-published science paper suggests, pound for pound, it produces 37 times the warming of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. 

This is because hydrogen is oxidised by the hydroxyl radical leading to the formation of tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water vapour. Both these gases are so-called ‘greenhouse’ gases and alarmist scientists are keen to exaggerate their effect. If you are worried about atmospheric pollution and greenhouse gases, despite all past observational evidence that suggests the ‘greenhouse’ impact of the gases ‘saturates’ at certain levels, then promoting hydrogen is a very bad look indeed.

It has all the hallmarks, does it not, of a group of grinning psychos sitting around a table, dreaming up more and more insane ways to hook the normies … the poor, taxpaying sods … to ruin them, to wreck them, to reduce them to penury and misery … to kill them.

And why would you even wish to do that? Seething hatred for humans leading productive, happy lives.

And lastly … what does that say about the minds, the personas of these monsters?

And I'm Just Fine With That...

...because as a taxpayer, I expect parents to feed their own damn kids!

More than half a million children will go hungry during school holiday periods from the October half-term if the government fails to renew a £1bn local welfare crisis fund due to end in six weeks’ time, charities have warned.

English councils last year spent £370m from their household support fund (HSF) allocations on holiday food vouchers for pupils on free school meals (FSM) – but more than a quarter of authorities say this support could disappear if the fund is ditched.

Well, they've still got the child benefit. They could always spend it on feeding the child for a change.  

“If HSF ends, with no long-term strategy to replace it, it will instantly plunge millions into more financial turmoil. The effects of poverty, deprivation and even malnutrition will be exacerbated and the additional costs to public services will be huge,” a report by the charity End Furniture Poverty report concludes.

'Furniture Poverty'...? What on earth..? 

Yes, Reader, it's a real thing, apparently. 

Council-run local crisis support would disappear from nearly a third of English local authority areas covering 18 million people, including Birmingham, Bradford, Nottingham, Westminster, Croydon, Hampshire, Slough, and Stoke-on-Trent. Its removal would also push scores of local food banks to the brink of insolvency, with many having become reliant on HSF cash grants to meet the explosion in demand for charity food as a result of Covid and the cost of living crisis.

Give something away for free and there's a rise in demand for it? Well, imagine my shocked face!  

The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, last month identified the £500m HSF budget for the first six months of this year as one of a number of “unfunded” commitments made by the previous government – part of a £22bn spending shortfall – which would come under Treasury scrutiny. Campaigners say they believe ministers will be wary of provoking a public backlash if school holiday food vouchers disappear in many areas of England. A popular campaign led by the footballer Marcus Rashford in 2020 twice forced the then prime minister, Boris Johnson, to reverse plans to scrap holiday free school meals support.

I think campaigners should be well aware by now that Starmer's government couldn't care less about a 'public backlash'... 

Campaigners are urging the HSF to be maintained for at least six months. Claire Donovan, the head of policy at End Furniture Poverty, said: “We know the HSF is a sticking plaster, but we desperately need one last extension of funding while an urgent review of local authority crisis support is carried out.”

Let's hope you don't get it. Because you should never have got the initial money in the first place.  

Noble and Weasel ideas

Two screen shots I'm afraid. This 👇🏻

A Rose Weed By Any Other Name....

Gypsy and Roma traveller pupils are to be referred to as 'mobile children' under new government guidance. New pupil absence advice issued by the Department for Education uses the term to refer to students 'of no fixed abode' who miss school while their parents are 'travelling during the course of their trade or business'.

Wouldn't this now put them on the same level as children of force's families who get moved around with their squadrons? 

The law allows children to be away from the classroom while their parents are travelling for occupational reasons. Such as absence is commonly marked with a 'T' by teachers in what is called the 'T code'.

So will it now be an 'M' code? Is that the only change? Seems pretty pointless...and not just to me. 

Minister of State for Skills Baroness Smith of Malvern said that the change had been made to clarify that a child's 'mobility' rather than ethnicity qualifies them for authorised absence. But the purpose of the move has been questioned by advocacy groups.

The Advisory Council for the Education of Romany and other Travellers (ACERT) said it was unclear what purpose the altered wording served given that the corresponding legislation remains the same.

Sounds like change for change's sake. Just more makework for the public sector.