Friday, January 21, 2011
Sympathy for the Devil?
Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards recently published his autobiography. It has topped best-seller lists across the world and has attracted acclaim from the most unlikely sources. Writing in Britain’s conservative Daily Telegraph, the Tory Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, was so impressed he called for Richards to be knighted!
Keef is an unlikely Tory hero. His book makes clear his disdain for authority and contempt for the governing classes, and it documents repeated clashes with the police, years of illegal hard drug use, and legendary promiscuity. But few of us nowadays are shocked by tales of sex, drugs and rock n’ roll.
But what about thieving? Before he became famous, Richards tells us he was ‘always nicking things from the other flats’ where he lived. Later, he knocked around with gangsters and drug dealers, on one occasion unwittingly driving the get-away car in a jewellery heist. He boasts that ‘all my close friends have been jailbirds.’ How does Boris square all this with conservative respect for law and order?
Richards is also a violent man. He boasts of booting one fan in the head and kicking a photographer for taking his photograph. He threatened a taxi driver with a knife, and attacked a man in a nightclub with a broken wineglass stem. A music journalist was told he’d have his hands smashed if he mentioned our hero’s acne, and Richards threw a knife at someone in a recording studio for suggesting changes to the arrangement he was playing. He brags that the chauffeur who informed on his drug-taking in 1967 ‘never walked the same again.’
Richards carries a knife and packed illegal guns and ammunition for many years. He was twice involved in shoot-outs at drugs deals and discharged guns at parties. He tells us the best strategy in a blade fight is to slash your opponent’s forehead so the blood gushes into his eyes. Is this really someone the Conservative Mayor of London should seek to honour?
In the 1970s, Richards took his seven year-old son on tour with him, charged with waking him from his drug stupors and helping him to stash his drugs at border crossings. His daughter was raised by his mother because neither he nor his increasingly violent and delusional junkie girlfriend could care properly for her. His second son died in infancy, but Richards didn’t even go home for the funeral. In the most chilling sentence in the book, he writes: ‘I don’t even know where the little bugger is buried, if he’s buried at all.’
Where do the Tories stand on family values nowadays, Boris?
Richards expresses contempt for the establishment, but he has made good use of it down the years, pulling strings and mobilising friends in high places to win favours and get him out of scrapes. Presidents, movie stars, aristocrats and tycoons have all prostrated themselves before our Keef, so the Mayor of London is in good company.
But why is a conservative like Johnson so desperate to condone such a gross and vile lifestyle? The answer is that Keef is cool, and Boris wants to distance himself from the stuffy old establishment values that conservatives used to uphold. Never mind the lawlessness, violence and destruction; better to appear cool than to be seen as dull and boring.
Of course, Richards would never accept a knighthood, and he is scathing about ‘Sir’ Mick Jagger for accepting his. He cherishes his image as a folk-rebel, so he’d never risk tarnishing his reputation by accepting a bauble from the Queen. But for leading conservatives to suggest he is worthy of honouring shows just how far Britain has slid into moral relativism and nihilism. Arise Sir Keef, so we may all pay obeisance to the base values that your life celebrates and which our leaders have lost the confidence to condemn.
The above is a press release from the Centre for Independent Studies, dated Jan. 21. Enquiries to firstname.lastname@example.org. Snail mail: PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW, Australia 1590.
NAACP Boxes George Washington
While reading her emails, I heard my wife say, "This is so absurd, it has to be an internet hoax doctored photo". It was a photo of a rally on MLK Day hosted by the South Carolina NAACP held at the state house. The statue of George Washington at the state house was boxed in on three sides hidden from the rallying crowd. The NAACP said they covered the statue because they "didn't want to offend anyone".
Upon investigation, the photo was confirmed to be real.
This misdirected ridiculous behavior by the NAACP epitomizes why I, a black American, will never join or give one nickel to this exploitative divisive organization. With black high school dropout rates at epidemic levels, 80% of black kids growing up in fatherless homes and 50% of black pregnancies ending in abortion, why on earth would the NAACP invest time and energy into running around covering up statues of long dead white guys; rather than addressing "real" issues plaguing black America today?
Regardless of what you think about George Washington, he was our first president. Exploiting the occasion of MLK day to diss America's first president is part of the NAACP's continuing effort to find irrelevant crap to protest about, impugn the greatness of our country and live in the past, as if American race relations have not progressed since the 50s.
The NAACP's mantra is blacks are eternal victims of an eternally racist America; white America should feel eternally guilty, and loyal blacks should feel eternally entitled.
I've heard, "Always follow the money". Somewhere along the way, the once great NAACP strayed from being dignified true advocates for fairness, civil rights and holding blacks accountable to "gettin' paid".
The NAACP's searching the past for evidence to reenforce their victim status and protesting things which have zero effect on the lives of contemporary black Americans is laying the foundation for more government handouts, extortion of businesses and reparations.
The NAACP has morphed into a left wing political action committee committed to electing liberal democrats who support their eternal victim, America sucks; eternal entitlement agenda.
I am president of the NAACPC, National Association for the Advancement of Conservative People of All Colors. If he were alive today, MLK would be a proud member. [MLK was in fact a Republican]
British judge condemns 'enormous emotional pressure' put on Muslim women after rape case collapses
A judge today condemned the 'enormous emotional pressure' exerted on women in Muslim communities after a rape case collapsed at the eleventh hour when the wife of an Asian man refused to give evidence against him.
The 35-year-old woman had accused her 34-year-old husband - a convicted sex offender - of raping her twice and was due to testify against him at a trial earlier this week.
But prosecutors were forced to offer no evidence and the case collapsed when the women suddenly decided to retract the allegations.
Judge Simon Newell said he was concerned ‘sections of the community’ were ‘exerting influences’ and ‘inhibiting the police’ from carrying out their duties. He implied justice was being interfered with by those close to the woman who wanted her to drop the charges.
The husband, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has two previous convictions - one for assault causing actual bodily harm against his wife and another for a sexual offence against another woman. He has already been ordered to sign the sex offenders register until September 2014.
Despite expressing concern that the woman had been pressurised into withdrawing the rape claims, Judge Newell allowed the husband to walk free from court. However, he warned him that the matter would ‘lie on his file’ and could be brought before the courts again should new evidence come to light.
'It seems to me there are persons who have an interest in this case, who are minded to express opinions and exert influences which are possibly inhibiting the police, the prosecuting authorities and the courts in carrying out their proper functions,' the judge said.
'This will not be tolerated. It is for the courts to carry out judicial functions and it’s not for individuals or sections of the community to attempt to resolve these matters outside the court.'
Burnley Crown Court was told that the husband, of Burnley, Lancs, denied both rape charges against him.
Sara Dodd, prosecuting, said the alleged victim was at court, but did not wish to give evidence against her husband. She said the complainant had been put under 'enormous emotional pressure from her community' over the case. Miss Dodd said the Crown Prosecution Service would not be proceeding with the case against the husband as it would 'do more harm than good' to the alleged victim.
It is understood that no action will be taken against the woman for retracting the allegations.
Last month Keir Starmer, the chief prosecutor in England and Wales, admitted there had been failings in the treatment of women who withdraw rape claims.
His comments came after a 28-year-old woman, from Welshpool, North Wales, was jailed for retracting allegations of rape against her husband. The young mother, who was bullied into withdrawing the charges by her controlling and manipulative husband, was sentenced to eight months imprisonment for perverting the course of justice by a crown court judge after the case against her husband collapsed.
But she was freed after spending 18 days in jail by the country’s most senior judge in November, who said a community punishment would have been more ‘compassionate’.
Mr Starmer publicly apologised to the woman and said that any moves to prosecute women who retract a rape allegation would now need his personal approval. 'If the victim has decided to withdraw a rape allegation, we must explore the issues behind that, particularly if the victim is under pressure or frightened,' he added.
Pakistani-origin Conservative triggers backlash over 'Islamophobia' in Britain
Tory chairman Baroness Warsi faced a fierce backlash last night after claiming anti-Muslim bigotry was commonplace around British dinner tables.
The peer, the first Muslim woman to be appointed to the Cabinet, said Islamophobia had ‘seeped into our society’.
She also suggested that followers of Islam should not be divided into ‘extremists’ and ‘moderates’.
Her remarks were condemned by the Right of her party and church leaders, and Downing Street refused to endorse her views.
In a speech, Lady Warsi said: ‘It’s not a big leap of imagination to predict where the talk of “moderate” Muslims leads; in the factory, where they’ve just hired a Muslim worker, the boss says: “Not to worry, he’s only fairly Muslim”. In the school, the kids say: “The family next door are Muslim but they’re not too bad”.
‘It has seeped into our society in a way where it is acceptable around dinner to have conversations where anti-Muslim hatred and bigotry is openly discussed.
‘At various times, Britain has not been at ease with various religious minorities, whether that’s the Catholic community, eventually resulting in Catholic emancipation, or more recently the British Jewish community.
‘I look at the way those challenges were dealt with and indeed are continuing to be dealt with and how we must bring some of those lessons to the rise of anti-Muslim hatred.’
She added that perceptions of criminality among Muslims were of particular concern.
‘Sadly, one of the concerns that has been raised as I travel around the country is that somehow because there are a minority of people who commit criminal acts who come from the faith of Islam, that somehow means that it is fair game to have a go at the community as a whole,’ she said. ‘'It has seeped into our society in a way where it is acceptable around dinner to have conversations where anti-Muslim hatred and bigotry'
She also suggested that Muslim communities must do more to make clear to fundamentalists that their beliefs and actions are not acceptable.
Downing Street is understood to have insisted on significant changes to the final version of Lady Warsi’s speech. One source said: ‘Her remarks do not represent Government policy.’
Lady Warsi’s veteran predecessor Lord Tebbit said she should be more concerned about anti-Christian sentiments expressed by Muslims.
‘The Muslim faith was not discussed over the dinner tables of England, nor in the bars, before large numbers of Muslims came here to our country,’ he said. ‘I would have told her to go to our Christian churches and listen to what was said about her religion and those who practise it, then to the Mosques to hear what is said in some of them about the Christian faith and those who practise it.’
The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, former Bishop of Rochester, rejected Lady Warsi’s suggestion that distinguishing between ‘moderate’ and ‘extremist’ Muslims fostered prejudice. ‘Extremism as a mindset is spreading throughout the Muslim world’ he said.
‘That is why we must distinguish between those Muslims who want to live peacefully with their non-Muslim neighbours and those who wish to introduce Shari’a into this country, restrict freedom of speech and confine women to their homes.’
Alex Deane, director of Big Brother Watch, which campaigns against State interference in people’s lives, said: ‘I think all but a tiny handful of people are able to distinguish between those who hold to the Islamic faith, and Islamist extremists.’
But former Tory MP Paul Goodman said: ‘She’s right about Muslims because some of what’s broadcast and written about them is dangerous. Try swapping the word “Muslim” when you see it in a newspaper headline with the word “Jewish”.’ He said she was wrong on extremism, however.
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine). My Home Pages are here or here or here or Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.