I don’t want to post too much on this theme lest people think I’m somehow racist. I’m not. But I am interested in how the liberals who are now driving the resurgent (and media-driven) ‘Black Lives Matter’ discourse are so willing to tell lies. It is as if they want to create a narrative about racism not based on the facts but in spite of the facts.
This is a tiny example in the Guardian. The journalist who is lying on this occasion is someone called Mattha Busby. He is reporting on a case when a black man (there is no actual evidence in the story that the colour of his skin is relevant to the case) was stopped by the police for a search. He refused to get out of his car and tried to negotiate the terms of his exit. This isn’t how the law works. The police then interpreted this as him refusing to cooperate with the search and broke his window. At this point the man says he will get out of the vehicle. This is what the video on the page shows. But the writer says:
As he queried why he was being stopped, Colaço, 30, was forced into handcuffs, video footage shows. He agreed to leave his car and stood with officers who searched him, while others combed through his BMW and found nothing.
Based on the video provided this is a complete lie. He didn’t simply “query why he was being stopped”; he tried to negotiate the terms of his exit from the car. And in point of fact he refused to leave his car and only offered to do so after officers started to break in. Continue reading “Liberal narratives on racism in the media”
The Guardian is running a series of articles about “race” of which the main theme appears to be that white people just by being white people have a lot to answer for.
White people say they want to be an ally to black people. But are they ready for sacrifice?
If the white people in my life could hit a button and instantly remove the privileges afforded to them along racial lines, would they hit that button? 
This is the idea of “white privilege”. This is a new front in the war. It is no longer enough to condemn racism (which undoubtedly exists and is horrible) but now “white people” are faulted – just for being white. Continue reading “The lowest common denominator on race”
This is a story in the Guardian about a woman who was stopped by police while driving. They had concerns about her tinted windows. (There are regulations about the degree of tint). The woman refused to get out of the car. The police officers (after several minutes) removed her from the car. They believed her refusal to get out of the car was suspicious. One can easily see why busy street-level officers would draw such a conclusion if someone refuses to allow a lawful search of their car to take place.
That is really all there is to it. The police acted lawfully. There is no claim that they used racist language.
The tone of the complaint – from the woman, her barrister and of course the writer in the Guardian is that this was some kind of racist incident. This is purely manufactured racism. (And itself is therefore racist). Continue reading “Manufactured racism”
The performance in the Rose Garden, in which the government’s senior adviser Dominic Cummins attempted to explain his breaking of quarantine rules and his creative interpretation of the guidance, was absurd. Dominic Cummins attempted to frame his deciding to do his quarantine in Durham rather than in the place where he was living (London) and to visit a beauty spot on his wife’s birthday to “test his eyesight” as “legal and reasonable”. He set out, he said, to clear up the “confusions and misunderstandings”. But the backdrop to this is the article in the Spectator, written by his wife and to which he, apparently, put his name, in which they attempted to give the false impression that they spent the quarantine period in London. His wife wrote how they had “emerged into the London lockdown”. No explanation for his trip to Durham could have been credible unless it had been prefixed with a sincere apology for this attempt to mislead people. It wasn’t. (Apparently he was asked about this article by journalists in the follow-up questions to his statement and, according to John Crace of the Guardian, failed to offer an explanation ). Unless you explain why you lied about something you can’t, meaningfully, clear it up. This should be obvious. To anyone except a phantasist. I didn’t understand this at the time but having read one of Mr Cummin’s articles on his own blog site it transpires that the basic problem here is that Mr Cummins is a teenage phantasist. Continue reading “Who is Dominic Cummins?”