Tag: Evil Bastards

Turnaround

Religion

Well now, this is an interesting development:

Polling by a Christian organization, Tearfund, has found that 45 per cent of British adults are planning to attend church this Christmas. This is a sharp rise on recent years. Piety is strongest in Generation Z, 60 per cent of whom (born between 1997 and 2012) will, the poll suggested, be heading for a Christmas service. Baby-boomers and the ‘silent generation’ of older pensioners are only half as devout.

Meanwhile, the late American activist Charlie Kirk’s Christian revival movement, Turning Point, has a British youth ambassador called Young Bob. He is 17, highly articulate and tours campuses and public venues, setting up a trestle table and encouraging members of the public to debate him not only about theology but also its application to contentious political issues such as immigration, nationalism and multi-culturalism. Young Bob, real name Thomas Moffitt, is in some ways a Right-wing version of Greta Thunberg, but without the scowl.

Needless to say, Young Bob is hated not just by the Usual Suspects on the Left, but by the Anglican Church hierarchy.

The Guardian newspaper discerned a ‘far-Right misappropriation of Christian imagery’. The likes of Rowan Williams and the Bishop of Manchester fear that Tommy Robinson may be piggybacking on Jesus to promote nefarious political ends.

But some senior Anglicans are unhappy. Rowan Williams, a former archbishop of Canterbury, talked of the political ‘weaponization’ of Christmas. The Bishop of Manchester said Christmas must not become a ‘prop in a dim culture war’. Giles Fraser, a prominent London vicar, said he would refuse Mr Robinson communion at his altar rail.

That’s very Christian of you, vicar.  And when it comes to “dim”, the Church hierarchy are the absolute dimmest.

Here’s the interesting thing about all this.

I asked a cousin of mine why he and his 20-something university friends had discovered an interest in churchgoing. It was nothing to do with Scripture or tongues or Pentecostal fire. His answer was simply: ‘We want to defend our culture.’ They were fed up with their Christian heritage being ignored and diminished by their university authorities. Dribbly middle-of-the-road Anglicanism won’t cut it for them. They want a religion that is proud of its values and doesn’t shrivel in the face of political correctness.

If only Anglicanism was “middle-of-the-road”.  It isn’t.  It’s a bastion of Leftism and wokist cant.

I always knew that Christianity would at some point rise up against the modern trend of Muslim appeasement and Leftist dogma, in the United States.  (The late Charlie Kirk was emblematic of this resistance, which is why the Left murdered him.)

I had little hope that Christianity would do so in Britain, a nation where well over half the non-Islamic population professes to be atheistic.

All I can say is:  Onward, Christian soldiers.

Addendum:  for those who can’t reconcile the above with the fact that I myself am an atheist, allow me to remind you that while religion itself has little interest for me, I am absolutely firm in my support for the Judeo-Christian culture and heritage.

And I am even more supportive when I consider the alternatives of atheistic totalitarianism (i.e. Communists) and, even worse, radical Islamism.  They both suck big time, without reservation.

More Bondi Beach Reflections

Law and Order, Terrorism

A story has come out about the OzCop who is supposed to have shot and killed one of the Muslim terrorist assholes, ending at least that one’s participation in the fun and games.

Some salient facts:  the gun was a Glock (model unknown), and the guy took his shot from just under 50 yards and dropped the dirtbag.

That’s some good shooting, or else just very lucky.  (That’s why we shooters concentrate on shooting 3- or 5-shot groups:  do it once, fine;  do it again, good;  do it five times, now we’re talking.  Consistency takes luck out of the equation.)  Consider the pic:

Couple of comments:  Note that Our Hero did two things that helped him:  he took cover behind a hefty tree, and used the trunk as a rest.  (If he’d made a 50-yard kill shot offhand, I’d have to go with a 60% luck factor unless he was a highly proficient handgunner with maybe some competition experience.)

As for the tree, it’s a well-known fact that a thick tree trunk will stop the vast majority of calibers, and as anyone will tell you, if you’re going up against a hostile shooter, cover is essential because the less of you he can see, the better chance you have of surviving.

Anyway, all’s well that ends well.  It’s just too bad the other asshole wasn’t shot and killed as well.

Outrageous Travesty

Anti-Gun Nannies, Government Thugs

We’re all familiar with the “registration leads to confiscation” trope.  But that’s not the only way that a gun registration regime can fuck with you.

It all started with a Righteous Shooting:

Foehner collided with our criminal justice system in May 2023 when he went out for a pack of cigarettes in the early hours of the morning. Crime in his Kew Gardens neighborhood became a problem after a now-shuttered seedy hotel had opened up in 2017, so Foehner took a revolver with him as protection.

In an eerie twist, Foehner had complained to this very paper about the disorder in 2020.

“This isn’t our nice little neighborhood anymore,” he told The Post at that time, noting the brazen drug deals taking place.

But on that fateful night, he returned from buying smokes and saw an unhinged man banging on the door of his building. It was Cody Gonzalez, who then menacingly approached Foehner, demanding a cigarette and his phone.

“He kept coming closer and clearly he was going to attack me.” Foehner said he pulled out a gun and pointed it at the ground. But Gonzalez didn’t stop. He motioned toward Foehner’s neck with an object and his instincts kicked in. Foehner shot the man dead. The ordeal was caught on security camera.

“I didn’t want to hurt anyone. He left me no choice,” said Foehner.

He called 911 and cooperated with authorities.

Of course, the corpus delicti  was a charming choirboy:

Gonzalez had at least 15 priors dating back to 2004 and a history of mental illness.

In any American state, Our Hero would have been given a pat on the back and sent home to his wife.  But this happened in Noo Yawk fucken Siddy, so now it’s time for a Red Curtain Of Blood Warning:

He wasn’t charged in the death of Gonzalez, which was deemed justified, but the DA threw the book at him for criminal weapons possession.

And so Our Hero, age 67, is going to jail, for four years.  For owning a couple of “unlicensed” guns.

Read the whole disgusting thing to get the full flavor of life in the Big City.

And this, children, is why you should resist any government which wants to register your guns.

Malice Aforethought

Journalist Scum, Legal Stuff, Trumpism

I haven’t been keeping up with the Trump vs. BBC saga much, because as a rule trials make my eyes glaze over.  This one, however, may be different:

MAKE no mistake, Donald Trump’s $5billion (£3.7billion) defamation lawsuit against the BBC, filed yesterday, is a formidable document: it is a tightly constructed, meticulously argued claim that accuses the Corporation not merely of error but of intentional deception on a scale that, if proven, could be the most damaging legal defeat in its history.

Filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the complaint names the BBC, BBC Studios Distribution, and BBC Studios Productions as defendants. It seeks $5billion in damages for defamation and for alleged violations of Florida’s consumer protection laws.

What makes the filing so potent is that it weaves the BBC’s factual admissions, internal whistleblowing, patterns of bias in BBC coverage, timing, motive and governance failure – caused essentially by the BBC acting as its own judge and jury – into a coherent narrative of wrongdoing.

…and the article just gets better and better as Dave Keighley lays it all out for TCW’s Brit readers.  Read the whole thing.

Best part of all this?  The suit has been filed in Florida, where Trump’s a longtime resident (at Mar-A-Lago, for my Brit Readers).  In Florida (as opposed to NYfC or Kollyfornia) the jury is going to be made of Floridians, nay even a goodly number of Trump voters who, if all goes Trump’s way, will deliver a sound financial wacking to the BBC’s corporate pee-pee.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of smug, Leftist assholes, who will have their bias and underhanded skulduggery exposed to the entire world.

It’s just too bad that in the end, the financial penalty will be borne by the BBC’s license holders, i.e. the public, rather than by the BBC executives who perpetrated this travesty.

But hey… all the more reason for the Brits to dump the whole licensing bollocks altogether.  The public hangings can come later.

Some Pushback Required

Asshole Cops, Shootin' Time

Okay, here is where all my hackles start rising, and my sense of fair play starts to load up some spare magazines:

The UK’s West Midlands Police used fictitious evidence to justify its advice to ban Israeli fans of the Maccabi Tel Aviv soccer team from attending a match in Birmingham last month, the force’s chief admitted to a parliamentary committee Monday, as MPs grilled police brass on the basis of their controversial decision.

The Aston Villa soccer club announced in October that no Maccabi fans would be allowed at a November match following a police assessment that classified the event as “high risk” and suggested banning Israeli fans from the stadium.

In the report presented to the club that suggested banning Israeli fans, police presented information about a 2023 match between Maccabi and West Ham, which the report said was the Israeli club’s “last appearance on UK soil to date.”

“The most recent match Maccabi played in the UK was against West Ham in the Europa Conference League on Nov 9, 2023,” the report read.

Well, fine, except:

However, no such match was played, and Maccabi has never faced off against the East London club.

Here’s the outcome I would like.  This asshole cop, and every single cop involved in this disgusting fabrication should be fired, stripped of their pension and benefits, and face charges of fraud (or whatever the official term for wrongdoing by a policeman may be).  Under Hammurabic Law, they’d all be executed for bearing false witness, but sadly, we’ve come a long way (too long a way) since then.

Basically, these dickless Tracys invented a reason to avoid a potential clash between two groups of people so that they wouldn’t have the responsibility of policing it.  And they could hide behind the fact that Maccabi are a Jooooz team, so who cares.

In the broader picture:  if these little shits can do this, any police force can, and most probably will.  (In totalitarian states they already have, multiple times.)

Disgraceful.

Changing The Rules

Anarchist thugs

Speaking of things that enrage me (admittedly, a very long list), we have this little situation:

Authorities have released of the name of the suspect accused of throwing Molotov cocktails into a federal building, adding that they believe he was “motivated by anti-immigration enforcement sentiment.”

The incident occurred on Monday, with the suspect identified as 54-year-old Jose Francisco Jovel. Authorities have released images showing the moment Jovel allegedly carried out his act.

Here’s the reason for my rage.

The first recorded use of said bombs was during the Spanish Civil War, when Nationalists threw them at the Soviet-supplied tanks of the Communistic Republicans.  The actual term “Molotov cocktails” was coined by the Finns as they battled the Soviets during the Winter War of 1939, and was actually used ironically, the target being the then-Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov.

Anyone else see a trend, here?

Let’s not put lace panties on this pork chop:  the Molotov cocktail is a weapon of war.  More to the point, it is a horribly-dangerous and malevolent weapon.  When it works, it is capable of setting fire to everyone and anything around it — an inflammable grenade, if you will.

Throwing a Molotov cocktail at a structure shows an intent to set the place on fire, endangering the lives of everyone inside.  Throwing a Molotov cocktail at a person or group of people shows an intent to burn someone to death.

So here’s my question.  How is it that when someone fires a gun at a building or a person, the rules of engagement for police (or the military) allows for the immediate shooting of said miscreant;  yet when someone lobs a Molotov cocktail, the response is (metaphorically) a shrug of the shoulders?

It’s wrong.

Let me tell you:  anytime a “protestor” is seen to be preparing a Molotov cocktail — that would be setting fire to the wick tied to the bottle’s neck — this action should be regarded as an act of war, and constitute grounds for a sniper or designated marksman to shoot the motherfucker dead on the spot, whether said tosser [sic]  has thrown the thing or not.

Let’s get back to our terrorist wannabe:

Bill Essayli, First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, said in a statement that the building he targeted “houses our U.S. Attorney’s Office, ICE, and is where illegal immigrants are processed.”

“Jovel was targeting our immigration enforcement operations and wanted to send a political message,” he said.

“Thankfully, the devices did not ignite and no one was injured. Jovel was immediately arrested. Federal officers seized Jovel’s belongings and discovered five other Molotov cocktails,” Essayli, said, adding that Jovel is charged with “attempted malicious damage of federal property, and faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal prison and up to 20 years’ imprisonment. This is an ongoing investigation and we’ll be looking at adding additional charges.”

Wrong, wrong and again, wrong.  In the first place, the charges should include attempted murder — fuck that “damage of federal property” jive — and should carry a mandatory sentence of life without parole.

More important, however, is this.  Had there been an armed guard on duty at the establishment in question, the rules of engagement should have been such as to allow the guard to shoot this Jovel asshole at the very minute he lit the wick, or drew back his arm to throw the bomb.

And I want law enforcement’s rules of engagement changed to take care of this little reindeer game, immediately.

If you can’t shoot someone who is committing an overt act of war against you, who the hell can you shoot, then?