Schroedinger's Muslim.

I've been concerned by the Government's warning about the Far Right (with no direct evidence of a significant far-right presence).

I think I've solved the problem: I'm calling it Schroedinger's Muslim. 

The theory is that the same Muslim can be Far-Left on issues like Racial Intolerance, welfare, housing, and appear oppressed but can also instantaneously appear far-Right on issues like women's rights, Racial Intolerance, Street Violence and the existence of Jews and the Jewish state.

Politicians just pick which quantum state of Muslim they chose to observe in the dinghy, or that which suits their agenda. 

Observations of the quantum Muslim can be skewed by the observers own bias or their inherent desire to appear holier than thou. Or idiocy.

The Labour Party are Everything they Hate about Us.

The Labour party and it's MPs are always justifying attacks on critics, saying critics are racist, or misogynist, or incompetent, or uncaring, or criminal, or incompetent.. 

You name it, the Labour party had used numerous slurs against their critics and political opposition.

But really, the Labour party, it's MPs and it's supporters need to look in a mirror, because those slurs are applicable right back at them.

People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, is the adage. And Labour most live in the biggest glass house ever. The glass house of hypocrisy, lets call it.

Because Labour are protecting criminal rape gangs, gangs that perpetrate the worst form of misogyny: rape..

A council worker continued to work at Labour-controlled Oldham council for a year after being accused of child sexual exploitation. His job? A welfare officer.

Not only that, but the same article says accused taxi drivers kept their licences after being accused of sexual assault. One went on to commit another sexual assault.

I can't state how incompetent that looks. For the safety of the public, those licences should have been suspended automatically until the drivers were cleared, or not.

Labour MPs may now be trying to play the victim, but it won't wash. It was Labour controlled Labour authorities in the main that let the victims of the grooming gangs down. 

Some female Labour MPs are clutching pearls, refusing to hear the gory details lest their sensibilities be offended. I can't comprehend how offensive that must be to the victims who actually lived through the rapes and abuse, to heard that effete MPs don't have the stomach just to heard the details read out.

Or, as in the (anything but) Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips, they complain that decades of inaction is somehow now putting them at risk. To now try and play the victim from a position of privilege is past hypocrisy, it's just sick. 

It's now been highlighted that some Labour MPs in the house of commons were members of the very same councils that denied the grooming gang victims justice. 

Well, you have your answer why the Labour government won't commit to a national enquiry right there: the very people that would be in the spotlight and criticised for inaction, incompetence and possibly criminal conspiracy are themselves now voting on whether there should be an enquiry regarding their actions back then. 

It's a sick, grotesque morass of sleazy, almost criminal conspiracy, to deny the victims of the rape gangs the justice they should have and also a failure to protect future victims. Because you can be damn sure that in taxis and Kebab shops across the country, the same thing is going on right now.

But hey, it's racist to say these rape gangs are criminals. It's racist to say they have easy access to class-A drugs with which to ensnare their victims because they are dealers. 

It's not much of a leap to imagine the corruption and incompetence that allowed the rape gangs to flourish a decade ago is now in the house of commons, because the people involved in local government back then are part of the national government now. 

Elon Musk "Endangering" Jess Phillips?

Is he fuck.

The only way Elon Musk is endangering Jess Phillips is by making her do her job. 

If Jess Phillips actually investigated the rape gangs properly, then the enriching Muslim population of her constituency would be knocking on her door and wanting to take physical action against her.

It's this very point that such an inquiry would try to identify. Why the demographic (Pakistani Muslim) is so over-represented in such crimes. What shapes their attitude to women and their physical violence against women.

If Jess Phillips feels threatened by the Muslim bullies in her constituency, then really I have no words to describe the hypocrisy of her using imagined victimisation by Muslim men to deny the actual victims of Muslim Men a public enquiry, justice and a safer environment.

Government is a Criminal Enterprise?

Well, it would seem there is increasing evidence to back up the claim that government (in this case the Labour party) is a criminal enterprise.

We've had the highly publicised vote in the commons against having an inquiry into the criminal Pakistani rape gangs. Why would Labour and previously Conservative parties protect criminal activity? Why wouldn't they want an inquiry into how the criminal activity happens, is supported and is ineffectively being dealt with by local authorities?

You see the failure to properly investigate at a national level, the national issue of rape gangs.

You see the failure to properly investigate at a national level the issue of money laundering using Turkish barber shops, hand car washes and Chinese Nail Bars.

You see the gambling companies getting preferential treatment with regard to VAT.

Human traffickers bringing thousands of illegal immigrants over, coached to give the correct responses to UK immigration authorities so they don't get instantly deported.

Party donors getting honours. 

I'm beginning to ask the question, is government part of a larger criminal enterprise?

Rape gangs? Protected.

Human Traffickers? Protected.

Money Launderers? Protected.

Party Donors? Protected.

There is a complete lack of morality and decency at the heart of government. A moral government wouldn't give tax breaks to gambling companies that exploit the weaknesses of their customers, a moral government would instantly want an enquiry to halt the cases of child rape, a moral government wouldn't put up with human traffickers swamping the country with illegal immigrants.

However, an immoral government would do these things, an immoral government would want all of the above to thrive, in order to raise money for the exchequer. Without the immoral industries, we have nothing that generates revenue. We have to manufacturing industry and the retail sector only recirculates money. We need to produce, to manufacture, to create, in order to generate honest, moral revenue. 

An immoral government would do all of these things, because they can, protected by an immoral  Police Force. Because they have all the weapons and we have none with which to resist the immorality. They can imprison the moral with impunity. They can bankrupt the moral with the immoral judicial system.

 

Just a Few Thoughts on Different Topics.

VAT on School Fees.

VAT was envisioned originally a luxury tax, only on luxury goods and services. Hence why children's clothes, education fees and supplies, book, newspapers, and even biscuits. Are VAT free. 

Of course the EU changed that perspective, forcing VAT to be applied on energy. 

VAT has encroached on ever more items, as it's original use as a luxury tax has diminished.

Now VAT is being used as a weapon of envy. VAT has started to be applied on education, but only one form of education: private education. Directly targeting supposedly the rich. Except there are many people that scrimp and save to be able to keep their kids out of the clutches of the far-left hegemony in education.

Except it's worse. The government assumed there would be places in local schools able to take those children removed from private schools, but those places don't exist. Scores of children now are sitting at ho9me, waiting for a place in a state school. So, parents may take a punt, lose a wage and home-school their kids.

Except:

Parliament Debate New Home Schooling Laws.

Yes, that's right, the government now want to stick their oar in Home Education. They want rules enforced so that if necessary if they deem the child not to be correctly educated (Aa an  example, lets say they don't like critical thinking), they can put an end to the home schooling and enforce sending the kid to a state school. 

There's a pattern emerging: the government and their bosses want drones, not truly freethinking, or critical thinking people.

Local and National Government Fail to Plan for Climate Change Whilst Demanding Money for it.

I've banged on about Net Zero and how evil the policy is, but we are paying over the odds for Home energy (because there is a green surcharge) we pay more for fuel, we pay more for a lot of things and climate change is the supposed reason. Yet it appears that the extra money we pay isn't being used to mitigate the affects of climate change. Take the current floods in the North. Yet again, the usual rivers have burst their banks. We are told incessantly it's a result of climate change. So why isn't the money we are paying as a direct result of climate change being used to mitigate the affects of climate change?

Is it instead (as I suspect) being used to bankroll big corporate projects like wind farms, to pay wealthy landowners to put up large wind and solar farms. But none of it is being used to improve rivers to remove the risk of floods?

Are the rivers being left to continually flood year after year so the government and it's agencies can keep banging on about climate change? Rather than fix the problem, is it not being fixed deliberately?

Is the removal of winter fuel supplements more evil than we thought and a deliberate move to kill people so the government can say it was climate change that did it. Rather than give the people the money to mitigate the affects of climate change?

Or is it all a cynical ploy in the first place just to extort money for pet projects of large political donors?

Is the Labour Party Inherently Racist?

Well, I think so. I think the grooming gang scandal and the local government environment where it wasn't investigated and stamped out is a massive example of Labour's overt racism.

My opinion is that Labour's attitude to immigrants hasn't changed since the Sixties. I believe they still think in terms of foreign immigrants as savages. How else do you excuse the inaction by local Labour councils?

It's the mentality of "poor savages, they can't help themselves". There is no expectation of immigrants to be accountable by Western standards, instead immigrants are excused as "it's just their culture". 

It's the racism of the sixties, when the African and Caribbean immigrants were viewed as savages that couldn't integrate into Western society. 

Personally, I know immigrants can and do integrate. Very successfully. I had Indian friends during my childhood and even beck then they and their parents integrated. There was no issue. We all got along with the Polish, Romanian and the early Muslim immigrants. 

But there are immigrants who refuse to integrate, who choose to live apart. My next-door neighbour in the Eighties, who didn't speak a word of English, who refused to integrate, refused to be part of a community that welcomed him. He lived apart, isolated, because of his arrogance.

And that arrogance is what I see in the current waves of immigrants that have not been asked to integrate, who demand interpreters, who demand community centres just for them funded by the public purse. 

Back in the day, the Poles, Romanians and Indians built their own community centres with their own money. They understood that they were in England, and it's not up to England to preserve their old-world traditions. They integrated and kept their traditions alive for themselves, by themselves. 

But it seems the Labour council attitude is inherently racist, their is no expectation to integrate. When Pakistani immigrants bought the majority of houses in an area of Oldham and created a slum, the Labour council decided to "improve" that area at taxpayer's cost. No improvements for anyone else, because they respected their area. That's what caused the so-called Oldham race riots.

Grooming Gangs: An Indication of Silent Racism in the Labour Party?

It's telling that the grooming gang cases have occurred in predominantly Northern towns and cities, who are governed mostly by Labour-run councils.

There's an argument that the crisis was caused by councils not wanting to stir racial tensions.

But is there another reason: Racism?

I ask, because I remember that racism of the 60s, the racism that thought the African and Caribbean immigrants were savages and couldn't act civilised. Is there a similar attitude in Labour councils?

Is it the inherent racism in the Labour party? Did they actually think the poor savages couldn't help themselves? Or it's their culture? Did Labour councils think it the white slut's fault for flaunting themselves in front of the Muslim savages? 

Because I can't understand why Councils and the Police wouldn't act to arrest the men raping children. After all the offence is statutory rape. If you have sex with a child under 16 then it's assumed by the law that the child doesn't have the capacity to consent and the offence is automatically rape, if it can be proved there was sex between and adult and the child. There is no defence against statutory rape, it's an absolute offence.

Sure, there could be sex between two under-age children, but then the law takes a more balanced view. However, sex between a 17-year old and a child under 16 is still illegal and cases can and have been prosecuted.

So how have the Labour councils excused the lack of action in prosecuting as an example middle aged men having sex with minors? Platitudes like "Lessons will be learned", that's how. Yeah, no excuse at all.

And here is the I think why there isn't going to be a full public enquiry by the Labour party. It would show them as inherently racist. 

The Best option would be it shows them as corrupt: not implementing the law so as to not enrage the Muslim population on who's votes they rely to win elections in Northern towns. 

Corruption could be close, because at least one official in a labour council was complicit and was part of the grooming gangs and helped protect them. He was finally arrested and sent to prison, but he's one man in a raft of officials that should be held complicit.

Or the even worse thing is the party were scared. Scared that investigating grooming gangs could spark a backlash and riots from the Muslim community. Hence why one Labour MP said the victims should stay quite for the sake of diversity...

The Sadiq Khan Knighthood.

Time was you got a knighthood for helping people, for making lives substantially better.

Sadiq Khan has objectively made London worse under his tenure as Mayor. Knife crime is up, the expense of living in London is up, London Transport is less safe since he started.

So why has he got a knighthood? Other than appearing to be a suck-up to the World Economic Forum and other Supra-national undemocratic organisations, I can't see what he has done to better the lives of those living in London.

Why the Fuck has he been given a knighthood? Time was the old boys club was a criticism of the Tories, but it seems that Khan has received a knighthood just for being a Labour Mayor and sweet FA else.

Andy Burnham will be waiting for the call next year, I expect.