Thursday, January 15, 2015

First feel-good story of 2015

I always say, credit where credit is due.
In that spirit, I wish to commend Jamal Rutledge, a teenager who was being booked on a charge of bulgary at the Ft. Lauderdale Police Department last September.
When Officer Franklin Foulks collapsed at his station, while entering Rutledge's information, Rutledge—who was in handcuffs—started shouting and banging on the security gate. Luckily, another officer heard the commotion and responded immediately.
Officer Foulks had been having a heart attack, but EMTs were able to save him.
The police department noted Rutledge's quick actions. They determined that if the young man had not kicked up a racket, Foulks likely would have died.  Rutledge, along with three other officers who responded, will be publicly honored at a Fort Lauderdale City Commission meeting later this month.
I don't know Jamal Rutledge's back history. He was arrested for criminal mischief and bulgary. That's all the story tells us about him. So it would, of course, be prudent to not lay too much praise upon him.
But in this day and age, and given the insane antipathy toward police that is part of American culture right now, this is a great story. Despite whatever further actions will be taken against Rutledge by the law, this young African-American and the city's police have a healthy amount of respect for each other.
That mutual respect between the police and the communities they serve is something I hope gets replicated very soon on a massive and nationwide basis.

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

I don't know about you—but I am unequivocally Charlie Hebdo

Say what you will about France, dear reader. Its citizens still have patriotism and principles. In America, we have people gathering at the site in Brooklyn where two innocent cops were executed, shouting lines from the works of fiction whipped up by the Obama rumpswab media: "Hands up, don't shoot" and "I can't breathe!" Neither of which, by the way, was actually ever said.
In France, they are marching and protesting, chanting "Je suis Charlie" and "Not afraid". This is in response to the savage attack on staff of a notorious left-wing satirical publication called Charlie Hebdo. (Pronounced "sharlee-ebdoh".)


In America, right now, those who aren't demonstrating simply for the sake of demonstrating, endorsing the killing of cops and the evil white man, are shuffling about, talking about the latest episode of ... whatever, I don't even know what shows are popular in the U.S. anymore, nor do I care. Or they're chatting about sports. Who cares about Charlie Hebdo and a blatant attack on Western ideals of free speech and free expression? The Seahawks could win back-to-back Superbowls, damn it! The first time an NFL team has done so since ... since, well, I don't know, but it's important! How can we show up at our jobs on Monday not knowing about every footfall taken on the gridiron over the weekend?
"Dude, that, like, happened in, like, Paris.  Sucks to be them, I guess.  So what're your picks for this weekend?"
Of course, we've seen no marches in support of Parisians here in London either. People who protest and riot over the shooting of a drug dealer or because the Government is cutting the fat out of the bloated public sector can't concern themselves with real threats to their livelihoods, you see. Who cares about some Frenchies who got shot at the offices of a magazine they'd never heard of? It's so much more important to show solidarity with Americans by conducting a "die-in" at the Westfield mall in Stratford. Black lives matter. Not other lives.
Just to give you some background, in case you're one of the dumbbells who was too busy with fantasy football to notice the news: Charlie Hebdo is a very anti-religious publication, satirizing nearly all religions, especially Catholicism. They got in trouble, however, when they made fun of Islam, the prophet Mohammed in particular. Their previous office was firebombed in 2011 in revenge for less-than-flattering drawings of him, in particular, one showing him as the magazine's editor and promising lashings if its audience did not laugh. Actually, you could draw Mohammed in the most flattering way possible, and these fanatics will still kill you, so the point is moot.
Anyhow, not satisfied with the first attack on the publication, two Islamofascist gunmen broke into the "new" office on January 7 and slaughtered twelve people. They also seriously wounded eleven. How can we be clear that this was an Islamic attack? Because the two gunmen—stick with me here—shouted "Allahu akbar!" and "the Prophet is avenged" (also in Arabic). I don't know how much more proof would be required at this stage.
Before their escape they also shot a moderate Muslim police officer in the head. The officer had pleaded for his life. To no avail.
Naturally, even those outside France who are commenting on the Charlie Hebdo attack see this issue as a clear-cut case, not of Islamofanaticsm, but of Islamophobia. In a piece which is entirely representative of how the Left views such incidents, which they never refer to as terrorism since that could never be associated with "The Religion of Peace," published in The Huffington (Puffington) Post, Alexandra Chaloux writes that the French outpouring of outrage over the attack on free speech is close-minded and hypocritical.
In France, if you are a Muslim female teenager and you decide to express your identity by wearing a headscarf—not covering the face, just a headscarf—you will be kicked out of school. Permanently—until you agree not to wear it again. If a grown woman decides to wear the Niqab, French law renders her a prisoner of her own home, subject to arrest and hefty fines for simply walking down the street ... And we talk of free speech. The truth is, you are free to express your identity as long as it's our identity. As long as you aren't one of them. We don't want them. We don't care when they die. We don't like their religion or their culture, and when it tries to sit beside ours, fear-mongering newspapers burst into flames of indignation. When they commit crimes, we call them 'terrorist', because there are laws to protect criminals, but you can do anything you like to a terrorist. The recent CIA torture report made that crystal clear.
One, in France, there is complete separation between church and state. It's true that Muslim women can't wear the garb which demonstrates their acceptance of submission. Christians can't wear crosses around their necks, nor can Jews wear Stars-of-David or yarmulkes. This prohibition on religious symbolism applies to everyone.
Two, the actions of the CIA, even if you were to consider it true torture considering it's what Navy SEALS go through as part of their training, was requested by Congressional Democrats spooked by the anthrax attacks in 2001. They gave the green light for the authorities to do whatever was necessary to get those who had been captured to talk.
Three, it is ridiculous irony to want to defend on free-speech grounds those who would completely remove free speech. Most of the speech we would find offensive is protected because it normally does not threaten our right to express ourselves as we see fit. But by stipulating that sharia has a place at the round table of free thought is contrary to the ideals we hold dear, as it threatens the entire table. Allow that a spot in the marketplace of ideas and you will soon find yourself without one, and you will be killed for questioning its disappearance.
Now for the million-dollar question:  Would you trust a person like this to stand up and be counted on behalf of your freedoms and way of life?  I thought not. Chaloux is demonstrably willing to submit to those who would force sharia on her.  But I am not.
The fact of the matter is, Parisians—as well as people from all across France, even across the whole of Europe—saw it as their duty to protect their freedoms and way of life. Anti-Iraq War marches in Paris in 2003 saw barely a million. The march in response to the attack on Charlie Hebdo on Monday, January 12 totalled 3.7 million—over three times the anti-war numbers.
Leaders from all over the world, including Britain's David Cameron, were in attendance. Where was Mr. Hope and Change, our Messiah and Dear Leader, Barack Obama? Nowhere to be seen. There was not even a representative for him in attendance. The lack of any American participation or support for this march was starkly obvious.
At least the French, who initially thought the Americans were such wonderful people for electing this boob to the Oval Office, can finally see for themselves what a vainglorious but gutless wonder the man truly is.
We need more of this response to Islamic fundamentalism. The monolithic crowd in Paris was not grandstanding; they meant it. There was no #illridewithyou shite in the wake of the massacre.  They were lucid in their indignation.  It'll be up to France, apparently, to save the way of life we cherish. The only thing that remains is for the Gallic nation to arm its police, every one of them.
Don't look to America. Its fat, stupidly happy and willfully ignorant citizens concern themselves with sinister imaginations and breads-and-circuses. And they are led by a candyass political establishment that cares only about control and manipulation and beset by moral cowardice. And the rest of the world knows it.
Protesting to protect what actually matters? Ain't no-one got time fo' that!

Postscript: Up until the 15th of January, for two days after this piece was published, an image of the "offensive" cover of Charlie Hebdo that had caused all the controversy and revenge attacks could be seen on this page, in the midst of the entry.  I was not one bit afraid to post it.  I have removed it at the request of my wife, as she had misgivings about it.  I stress, this is the only reason why I censored my piece.  I was at pains to do so, but my wife's concerns must be met.   If you want to see the image for yourself, dear reader, just do a search for "Charlie Hebdo Mohammed" and you'll know it when you see it: He is pointing and saying that there will be "100 lashes if you do not die laughing".  Long live freedom of speech!  NOT AFRAID!

Monday, January 12, 2015

Comedian of the House ...

Quoth John Boehner, courtesy of Reuters:

"During my years here when I voted, I have the eighth most conservative voting record in the Congress. And it does pain me to be described as spineless or a squish."

Snickers.

"I'm the most anti-establishment speaker we've ever had."

Snorts.

"I'm going to do my best to show all of our members, Democrats and Republicans and those members who voted against me, that I'm up to the job that I was given."

A-HA HA HA HA HA HA! A-HA HA HA HA HA HA! HA HAAA HA HA HA!

The Orange Man, ladies and gentlemen. Give him a warm round of applause. (After all, it's the only time from now until America shortly ceases to be that he'll be deserving of one.)

Thursday, January 8, 2015

The Republicans can have Bonehead

You know, there's a lot to be said for integrity, folks. But the Republican Establishment has none of it.
Speaker of the House John Boehner, the Bonehead—the crybaby, the milquetoast, the orange man—survived a challenge in the House. Twenty-five Republican representatives voted in favor of removing Boehner from his position, but the vote fell short of the twenty-nine required to see him off.
Godspeed to those twenty-five.
Unfortunately, we have a Republican party being controlled not only by its country-club Establishment, but the banks, corporate America and the Chamber of Commerce, as well as the media. All want amnesty, and it doesn't matter that the President defied the Constitution to enact it. All want Obamacare, and it doesn't matter that, as Jonathan Gruber demonstrated, deceptions are what led to its passage. And all want a yes-man, one who won't rock the boat, one who will ensure that whatever Big Business and the elite wants, they will get.
What have we got instead of a serious challenge to Obama's abuse of executive privilege? Talk of tax reform and a free trade agreement with Guatemala. Big whoop. That's going to mean a lot in the midst of a foreign invasion. You'll sleep easier at night knowing Guatemalans are going to have better access to DVD boxsets of Breaking Bad, now won't you?
The whole stinking political class in Washington is the bad, and it's what we need to break. If there is any silver lining to the (latest) betrayal of Republicans, who will clearly not do what we voted them in to do, it's that there was a challenge. True conservatives, genuine spokespeople for their electorates, made their feelings known.
The Tea Party and other people who value the Constitution will not go away, just because Bonehead, the Squish (Mitch McConnell) and the Establishment wish it. FOX can prop up Jeb Bush all it likes. There is always Ted Cruz or Rand Paul waiting in the wings to launch an alternative campaign. Do we dare to dream that such a candidate can swim up the middle between the progressives and the pretenders and deliver us from ruin?
I know that I am done with the Republican Party. I don't know what GOP stands for now, but it most certainly cannot be "Grand Ole Party". It is no longer what it was under Reagan. In fact, I believe it is closer to what Gorbachev would have found familiar.
I was wrong to be as enthused as I was in my entry of November 6. I was duped. I admit it. I dared to trust and it bit me in the you-know-where. I have had it with the corporate class and the business conservatives running the Republican Party.
So screw them all.  The nightdragon, from this point, endorses either Ted Cruz or Rand Paul for a possible bid in 2016. I trust either of these men to stick to their principles. They have integrity.

Friday, January 2, 2015

The "new year" won't be new until we fight change

Happy New Number, ladies and gents. In celebration of this shiny new figure, I have a quote for you:
"We're against everything that's 'good and decent' in honky America. We will burn and loot and destroy. We are the incubation of your mother's nightmare."
A student leader, perhaps from Harvard, announcing the latest wave of "protests" coming soon to a city near you? A statement of irrationality that could only be born of the 2010s?
No, no. That was John Jacobs, leader of the Weathermen and Students for a "Democratic" Society, 46 years ago, shortly before the Weather Underground's "War Council" blew up a townhouse in Greenwich Village. This insiduous garbage has been around all my life—literally.
Eventually the country healed. By the late 1970s, nobody thought they'd ever hear this sort of speech again from any American. Most of the violent revolutionaries were either dead or in exile, on the run. By the late 1980s, the whole revolutionary '60s ethos and milieu was history, rear-view mirror stuff. People shuddered when you wore a hippie costume to a Hallowe'en party in 1985, because it was truly scary. They remembered the madness of the era, and had no desire to go back to it.
Unfortunately, the further we got from the '60s, the more the cognoscenti painted a picture of it for my generation: Green grass, flowers, acoustic guitars, holding of hands, blue sky, drifting clouds. A hearty rendition of "This Land is Your Land". A toke or two to ensure you didn't lose the vibe. Isn't that just lovely? Who couldn't want to live in such a decade?
While we were busy daydreaming over a manufactured image, the creeps slowly crept back into our lives, largely because the fervor never died. It survived in academia. The older the intelligentsia got, the more power they had. They owned the Clinton administration and, as Hillary Clinton attempted to make clear in 2008—as if to wash her hands free of such filthy associations herself—former Weatherman Bill Ayers and Barack Obama worked together on urban educational reform in Chicago.
Ayers wished for a "free schools movement" in which no report cards or test grades existed and teachers were addressed by their first names. Grades still exist, though they have been curved so radically that you must remember that today's "A" is yesteryear's "C". This is not your father's "A", dear reader. If you're my age, it's not even your "A".
Educational reform is a necessary first step to tearing down a healthy respect for authority, and the hard-Left academic elite knew it. Former Obama administration member Van Jones could tell young people to forget about respecting their elders and that they were all gods.  This served to illustrate what Government-run education amounts to.
One wonders why one of the students didn't stand up and say, "Well, if that's the case, stop lecturing us and get off the stage, old man!" Would Van Jones have approved? We'll never know since this audience of students had one critical link in their thought processes missing, one that was robbed from them by the powers that be.
We would be foolhardy to be surprised that, in 2015, there are young and even middle-aged people calling for the upheaval of law and order and the murder of cops. The suspension of reality, in which facts must be regarded as irrelevant whenever there is a good work of civil-rights fiction to be concocted, is possible because today's kids were never taught critical thinking and never allowed to ask questions. They are being controlled by the Bill Ayers' and Bernadine Dohrs' of the world.
This hard-Left bile has come around full circle because we never eradicated it. The country moved on for a bit, but we were being tailgated the whole time by a sickness which has caught up with and consumed our society even stronger than it did the first time.
You know things are bad when someone with an apparently somewhat grounded mind like Pharrell Williams is forced to apologize by a fan base who would accuse him of betrayal for daring to opine that Mike "Gentle Giant" Brown was "bullyish".
New year?  On the contrary.  It's been 1968 for far too long.
If 2015 is to be new in any meaningful way, the silent majority must refuse to be silent any further.  They must stand up to this domestic terrorism.  This must be the year our citizens stop being so concerned with America's Got Talent and Survivor and Eminem's latest collection of profane, self-absorbed rantings, laughably referred to as an "album", and start concerning themselves with the dawn of a society that will benefit no-one but the academic elite if brought to fruition.
Young "protestors" must be made to realize that they will not be part of whatever change they're demonstrating for. They are useful idiots to be thrown on the scrap heap when the war is over. They will realize the true nature of what it means to be white and middle-class, re: ignored. Nothing much will change, we just won't have a productive private sector or a Constitution. We will, however, have gulags.
Happy 2015.

Thursday, December 18, 2014

Response to Sydney tragedy: "Why you gotta hate?"

On Monday, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott addressed his country's people while the terrorist hostage siege in the Lindt Café in Sydney played out.
Standing in front of a Christmas tree (oh, how anti-diversity of him), Mr. Abbott said: "'[O]ur thoughts and prayers must above all go out to the individuals who are caught up in this. I can think of almost nothing more distressing, more terrifying than to be caught up in such a situation, and our hearts go out to those people".
But if I was Mr. Abbott, I would have said at Martin Place, in the wake of the siege, while Sydneysiders were lying flowers on the ground near the café in honor of victims Tori Johnson and Katrina Dawson, "to all of you who took selfies of yourselves in front of the Lindt establishment while the drama was going on, who thought this situation was 'cool', and was nothing more than an opportunity to earn likes on Facebook or Twitter, go home. Get out of here now. You did not care then; why should you care now? No-one wants to see you here. As a result of your selfish, callous and morally vacuous actions, you have nullified any right to be here."
There are many questions to be asked about the gunman Man Haron Monis, who Abbott noted had "a long history of violent crime, infatuation with extremism and mental instability". Australian authorities will have to account for why Monis had his asylum accepted, why he had a gun license, why he was walking free in society after murdering his wife and, above all, why he was not on a terrorist watchlist.
But more chilling than Monis's actions in Sydney's financial district earlier this week was the reaction to it. Social media has not only given us the cretinous Cro Magnons that thought they were clever to snap photos of themselves in front of the café during the height of the drama. It has also given us those halfwits whose response to this tragedy is to think not of the victims and the suffering and anguish of the siege survivors, but to re-assure Australian Muslims.
The Australian sense of "fair go" used to be what made that country so charming, and so great.  Not now.  Not with regard to this.  This type of acceptance will bring Australia down.
The hashtag generation, the same people that have shown such jurisprudence and acted with such dignity with regard to Mike "Gentle Giant" Brown and Eric Garner by protesting in the middle of main thoroughfares and calling for the death of cops, struck back against "Islamophobia" by creating #illridewithyou, to show solidarity with Muslim citizens.
While I certainly agree that no innocent Muslim should have to suffer for Monis's crimes, this movement speaks to a larger issue. Namely, if you even for a moment questioned Islam's place in Australia's open and generous society in the wake of Bali and now the Lindt café siege, then you are the problem. You are what's wrong with Australia and the West. The Muslim community must be protected—über alles!
Social media was either in its infancy or practically non-existent during the time of 9/11 and the Bali bombings. One now wonders what the righteous response of liberal mush-heads everywhere would have been: #illflywithyou and #illgotoanightclubwithyou?
This absolutely spits in the face of every siege survivor, that the first thoughts of their young liberal countrymen was not, "how are the hostages?", but "oh, anyone with a dark beard or a hijab is going to face potential abuse today."
And what credit will this buy us with the Muslim community? We'll just end up, as usual, looking like saps—useful idiots—to them.   They won't be appreciative for more than three seconds before declaring jihad all the fuck over again. No wonder they're slowly taking over the entire world. Vladimir Putin shakes his head at how the rest of the West automatically celebrates Islam and regularly turns a blind eye to its atrocities. The Russian leader is correct in this assessment.
It doesn't matter how often this happens, at Ford Hood, in Moore, Oklahoma, in Pakistan, in Sydney, in London, in Madrid, in Boston, in New York, etc. It's always, without fail, a case of forgive and forget.
It's only a matter of a very short time before this generosity of thought and action results in a networked caliphate of the West, a land where Sharia law is the only law.
Imagine if this curse known as social media had existed during the 1970s and '80s. How many mulligans do you believe would have been handed to the Irish community in the wake of an IRA bombing? How many hashtags showing solidarity with them would have been created, do you think?
And, where were the hashtags offering to walk and ride with ordinary Jewish citizens during the Hamas-initiated atrocities concerning Gaza earlier this year? Anti-Semitism is at record levels across the world. One could argue that Jews are in danger everytime they step out their front doors. How many people have offered to protect Jews? Oh, gee, that's right: There were no such offers. Nothing makes a social media-dependent Left-winger happier than a beaten-up, degraded Jew. Of course, these people would throw their own mothers into a gas chamber if some bespectacled beardy-weirdy patted them on the back and told them that they were a good, tolerant, diversity-celebrating person to do so.
I'll demonstrate to you how seriously the Muslim community takes its role in a Western society, dear reader: You may have heard about the indefensible (because it was absolutely preventable) tragedy that afflicted the town of Rotherham in northern England. Between 1997 and 2013, sixteen years in total, local white girls as young as twelve were drawn into white slavery by men of Pakistani extraction. The authorities did nothing about it because, (1) they simply couldn't be bothered and (2) they were fearful of getting on the wrong side of the political correctness fence. If they exposed this wrongdoing and attributed it to Asians (a.k.a. Muslims), it would bring about repercussions that they weren't prepared (i.e. weren't willing) to handle.
Sure, you can blame the complete cowardice of the Rotherham police force. But that would be akin to blaming a dog for its fleas, simply because it is accustomed to rolling about on the ground. The police were tied by the then-Labour government's absurd law enforcement guidelines. The real issue is the total callousness with which members of the Muslim community went about exploiting the native population.
And how have they responded to the Rotherham scandal? A group of Muslim cab drivers have spoken out against a policy in which their taxi company will provide a white driver if so requested by a customer. This, in their view, amounts to "unprecedented and unacceptable" racism. The Rochdale Muslim Community group has taken up their cause, and this the statement they released, in full:
"It has become evident to anyone that follows events in the media that Islam is being portrayed negatively and that Muslims living in Britain are bearing the brunt of discrimination and violence. There is little doubt that this has resulted in not only the community feeling vilified but could potentially break down social cohesion within society. Irresponsible comments from senior local and national politicians are aiding the negative portrayal of the Muslim community. Time and time again some politicians and the media have attempted to equate issues such as grooming and the Muslim community as being one and the same. It is only natural that this sort of misinformation will stigmatise the whole of the Muslim community. This has meant that casual xenophobia towards Muslims has now become an acceptable norm. Unfortunately, we are now facing a situation where a disdain of the Muslim community is something which is deemed acceptable. We do not wish to go back to a situation where discrimination against minorities becomes the norm. We believe that all segments of society have a duty to stand up against Islamophobia in all of its guises no matter how subtle or apparent. We intend to double our efforts in order to alleviate the misconceptions that have been manufactured by irresponsible speech, not only by farright but mainstream politicians and the media. Part of our action plan will be to educate the wider society about the Islamic belief to help overcome stereotypes against Islam."
Tempted as I was to truncate the above statement, I couldn't. Why? Because I wanted to demonstrate that there were no apologies offered for the scandal or even any recognition of why it was such a sensitive issue for the local population. There is not even one sentence stating, "While we can understand the sentiments of the local community and its justifiable anger and distrust, we want to work to correct that." I don't know if I'd believe it, frankly, but it would have been nice to see it in the statement. But, alas, this declaration amounts to nothing more than "We are having a tough time of it. You need to try harder to understand our concerns. When something rotten happens as a result of our community being here, you will just have to suck it up. If there is any social cohesion breakdown as a result, then it is your fault for not being tolerant of Islam, the ultimate religion of peace, which you stupid white infidels refuse to embrace and over which we would happily slaughter you all if there was any chance of getting away with it".
This is the sort of attitude that gets handed down to us by the Muslim community and their defenders, everywhere, every day. I don't know why the hashtag generation is so worried. Their precious pet people have got the world by the balls. But yet, so do liberals, and they don't realize it either. Everyone's got to be a victim.

Friday, December 12, 2014

A jerk is a jerk, period

Here we are in the lead-up to Christmas (not "holidays," thank you very much, but Christmas), a mere fourteen days away. But you wouldn't know it by the way some people act.
Anyone who hasn't been brainwashed by Mary Poppins or any Hugh Grant movie you care to mention knows that London has its fair share of downright nasty people, the sort you find yourself wishing would get a pistol-whipping sometime soon. You can't help but think, how did they get this far in life without once having had the bejesus beaten out of them?
Standing in line at the Marks & Spencer Simply Food store at Liverpool Street last night, I heard a man who was probably in his 40s raising his voice at one of the check-out points. The cashier had made the decision to deny him the purchase of a bottle of wine because he already appeared too loaded.
Predictably, in the manner of a spoiled, entitled, elite-educated schoolboy, he kicked off. "What do you mean I can't have this?" Then, a flurry of curse words and ad hominems. And the accusation that the cashiers—by this time, three of them were present to confront this "gentleman"—were the type "to join and fight for ISIS." More curse words, more insults, more crybaby behavior. And finally, for the parting shot, "Marks & Spencer, run by Jews!"
At one point, he pulled the ol' "Do you know who I am?" schtick, identifying himself as working for The Evening Standard. Ah, The Evening Standard. The same rabble-rousing rag owned by a former KGB agent, Alexander Lebedev. No wonder the paper is free; no sane person would pay a penny for it.
Why exactly am I relating the tale of this shit smear on two legs? Good question, dear reader. Firstly, I guess it's to demonstrate that there are bad apples on any position on the political spectrum. I would postulate that he and I would agree on many things. He may have voted for David Cameron. I would have done so as well, had I the vote here. He also may have voted for Boris Johnson, loathes Ken Livingston and bristles at the way his taxes are being used to fund layabouts. Again, same here.
But I am not going to defend a loud-mouthed bully. I don't know if the workers at the M&S food store are all Muslim. They do seem to be predominantly Pakistani or Indian. Some of them could be Hindu. At least they're working. I don't care if they break out the prayer mats at certain times of the day. They're fellow tax-payers.
I'm often tough on the Muslim community myself.  But only when it displays intolerant or jihad-sympathetic behavior or appears to be on the receiving end of special treatment.  In this sense, I regard them no differently than gay militants, black militants, feminist militants, et al.  These people talk about celebrating diversity, but it's just a means to an end, and a very convenient one at that, for them.  They don't live by their rule at all, but will tell me that I have issues with diversity and acceptance.
I have three simple rules by which I abide. One, that you get your butt out of bed and out of the house and contribute to society in some meaningful way. Two, if you're OK living next door to me, I won't give you any attitude either. Three, that you aren't possessed of a desire to kill me. That's it. Simple, is it not? Work. Show me respect (and expect to receive it in return). And don't advocate the death of me or others like me. That's all I ask.
If you're going to break one of my cardinal rules by being disrespectful and not taking responsibility for yourself, then I will not befriend you. I don't care how much we may have in common. I really like German Shepherd dogs. That does not make me a fan of Adolf Hitler.
Secondly, I wanted to demonstrate that I am not blind to the jerks of the world who may so happen to hold conservative views. Again, there are bad apples in every group, every walk of life. When was the last time a liberal, anywhere, told off the idiots in their midst who go too far? One of the biggest reasons why the Occupy protests quickly became so infamous was due to the fact that no standards were maintained. They absorbed any bum with a grievance and a penchant for hard drugs or alcohol abuse into their camps.
Any Lefty protest anywhere is going to have a very sizeable contingent of black-clad anarchist creeps in Guy Fawkes masks. You can bet the house on it.  But do these cretins ever get called out or challenged by the protest leaders?
Here's another rhetrocial question, just for the hell of it: If you didn't wipe your behind, would it stink? (Just ask an Occu-pooper.)
As for you, Mr. Evening Standard guy: You're lucky that I was headed into work after making my purchases and didn't have the time for a confrontation. Otherwise, I absolutely would have taken you to the woodshed.