Boris Johnson humiliated.
- Thread starter moon
- Start date
moon
Satire for Sanity
The Bozo moron claimed on Sunday that English schools were safe. He sent millions of kids to school on Monday to infect each other and their contacts.
Then he closed all schools on Tuesday because they weren't safe.
At the same time as 'Carry on up the Brexit '
Haw, haw.......................haw.
Then he closed all schools on Tuesday because they weren't safe.
At the same time as 'Carry on up the Brexit '
Haw, haw.......................haw.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Oh no a black Tory, Moonshi'ite and the Welsh Wanker's heads will explode.
Last edited:
moon
Satire for Sanity
' A tragedy of indecision '
https://www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/1260059421030272
Right on.
https://www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/1260059421030272
Right on.
moon
Satire for Sanity
A quick look at the English press...........
The UK also has eighty thousand dead, a thousand deaths a day, the highest infection rates in Europe and its dumbass prime minister REFUSED to put Brexit off until the pandemic was under control. He should be charged with manslaughter.
The UK also has eighty thousand dead, a thousand deaths a day, the highest infection rates in Europe and its dumbass prime minister REFUSED to put Brexit off until the pandemic was under control. He should be charged with manslaughter.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
.
Moonshi'ite only ever reads the Guardian, the Bible for loony lefty Corbynites, mullah cock munchers, Hamas humpers and Chicom arselickers.
https://markhumphrys.com/guardian.html
Moonshi'ite only ever reads the Guardian, the Bible for loony lefty Corbynites, mullah cock munchers, Hamas humpers and Chicom arselickers.
https://markhumphrys.com/guardian.html
Last edited:
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Boris hasn't created illegal wars, unlike Blair. Hasn't folded to the EU, unlike Major. Hasn't sold our gold, unlike Brown.
Truly a People's Prime Minister
cancel2 2022
Canceled
The sickest thing ever written in The Guardian
In between the endless support for third world fascist thugs fighting to enslave their own peoples, it is hard to single out any one piece in The Guardian. But here is one candidate.
It is written by Neil Clark, who has some form:
Neil Clark defends Milosevic (and here).
Neil Clark defends the dictatorship of Belarus, 13 January 2011.
Neil Clark hopes Iran is building nuclear weapons. "The President of Iran has of course denied that his country has any plans to build a nuclear bomb and that his only interest is to develop nuclear energy. In the interests of peace, I do hope he's lying."
He is of the hard left. He says here: "I am a democratic socialist". And here: "I always remember my first visit to Belgrade, in the summer of 1998. As an unreconstructed socialist, completely out of step with the spirit of the age, I had spent most of the Nineties trying to escape, as best I could, to a place where it was still 1948. So imagine my delight when I arrived in Belgrade and found a city that seemed miraculously to have escaped all the horrors of global grunge."
Neil Clark calls for an alliance of the world's tyrannies, 16 Oct 2007. He hopes that they can band together to protect themselves from the free world. "The formation of a mutual defence pact between Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and any other countries threatened by neocon aggression is urgently required. The pact would stipulate that an attack on any of the states would be considered an attack on them all: and would be met with immediate military retalitation, as well as economic measures, such as the disruption of oil supplies." What an idiot. Does he not know that tyrannies, like gangsters, make hopeless allies? Does he not know that the Soviets and Nazis made an alliance in 1939? Does he not know how that turned out?
Václav Havel, one of the heroes who brought down the Soviet Empire and freed Europe, one of the greatest heroes of my lifetime, died in Dec 2011. The disgusting Neil Clark, 19 Dec 2011, questions his legacy: "Yet the question which needs to be asked is whether his political campaigning made his country, and the world, a better place. Havel's anti-communist critique contained little if any acknowledgement of the positive achievements of the regimes of eastern Europe in the fields of employment, welfare provision, education and women's rights." A comment sums it up: "I feel slightly ill reading this man's work."
Before we see his article, first we consider the brave Iraqi interpreters working for the allies in Iraq. These true heroes of Iraq are risking their lives to bring democracy, human rights and the rule of law to their country. These real Arab heroes risk a terrible death for them and their entire families, including their children, if the forces of totalitarianism and religious fundamentalism win. To any leftist, it is a no brainer: These men and women are heroes - fighting for human rights against people who do not believe in human rights. They are the people in Iraq who share the western left's values. They are the people in Iraq that the western left should stand beside unconditionally. And yet, blinded by hatred, many on the left don't see it that way.
Iraqi Interpreter interviewed by Michael J. Totten, August 07, 2007:
Totten: "How did you feel when the U.S. invaded Iraq?" Interpreter: "Happy. It was like I was living in a jail and somebody set me free. I don't want Saddam ruling me. Never. I was just waiting and waiting for this moment."
Totten: "What do you think about the possibility of Americans leaving?" Interpreter: "It is like bad dream. Very bad dream. A nightmare. Worse than that. Like sending me back to jail. Like they set me free for four years then sent me back to jail or gave me a death sentence."
Totten: "Why is Iraq such a mess? Is it the Americans' fault?" Interpreter: "No. You can't blame it on the Americans. Iraqis are number one at fault for this mess. They are greedy and will do anything for money. They are like people who were in jail for 30 years, were suddenly set free, were given money, then had their money taken away. What will they do next? They will kill for money. They are selfish. They got selfish from Saddam. Iraqi people used to be different."
Totten: "Is there a solution to the problem in this country?" Interpreter: "... Ok, if you want a serious solution try this: Charge money to the families of insurgents. Fine them huge amounts of money if anyone in their family is captured or killed and identified as an insurgent. Make them pay. You can put it into law. Within one week they won't do anything wrong because they want money. Their familes will make them stop. The militias pay them 100 dollars to set up IEDs. Fine them thousands of dollars if they are caught and their families will make them stop. Give them that law. Go ahead. Try it."
Totten: "What will happen if the Americans leave next year?" Interpreter: "Rivers of blood everywhere. Syria and Iran will take pieces of Iraq. Anti-American governments will laugh. You will be a joke of a country that no one will take seriously. I will kill myself if it happens. I am completely serious. The militias will hunt down and kill me and my family."
Totten: "Anything you want to say that I didn't ask you about?" Interpreter: "... I'll tell you what I tell my family. If I die here, wrap me in the American flag when you bury me. I don't want to be wrapped in the flag of Iraq."
As a comment above says: "If we - U.S., U.K. - leave these people behind, we can forget about having allies in the future. And frankly, we don't deserve them."
And what of the Iraqi "resistance"? What are they fighting for? What are they like? Let the interpreter above speak:
"60 guys from Al Qaeda kidnapped an interpreter's sister. She had a baby boy, 6 months old. They raped her, all 60 guys. Then they cut her to pieces and threw her in the river. They left the 6 month baby boy to sleep in her blood. We found him on a big farm south of Baghdad. All that was left was his legs and his shoes. The dogs ate him. ... These people are like animals who came from another planet."
Is this normal? Of course it is:
"Marines from Golf Company said they recently fished two bodies out of the local river: a man had been decapitated, and his 4-year old tied to his leg before both were thrown into the river and the little boy drowned. The killings were a product of Al Qaeda terror." - Andrew Lubin report, Feb 2007.
Do you not know what the Iraqi "resistance" is like? Can you not read? Have you heard of the endless bombs of markets, weddings, funerals, churches and mosques? The torture of civilians - including children - with power drills? Do you not know what they do? Read the following links, but you better have a strong stomach:
What is the Iraqi "resistance"?
OK, are you ready now? Now I can present you with my candidate for the sickest thing ever written in The Guardian. (And what a contest that would be.) Note that it seems this piece was only on their website, not in the paper:
Keep these quislings out: Calls from pro-war bloggers for Britain to grant asylum to Iraqi interpreters are truly nauseating (also here), Neil Clark, 10 Aug 2007.
Neil Clark, though British himself, sneers at anyone who helps the British army, describing them as "quislings" and collaborators, and saying that we should not protect them from a horrible death at the hands of Britain's enemies.
He then crosses the line to the dark side with this outrageous statement: "The interpreters did not work for "us", the British people, but for themselves - they are paid around £16 a day, an excellent wage in Iraq - and for an illegal occupying force. Let's not cast them as heroes. The true heroes in Iraq are those who have resisted the invasion of their country."
He claims, in his strange moral world, that deposing dictators is a crime: "all those who aided the occupation are complicit in what the Nuremburg judgment laid down as "the supreme international crime": the launching of an illegal war of aggression against a sovereign state." Maybe that's his moral world, but it's not mine. I don't see how any leftist could call a breach of sovereignty "the supreme international crime". Not when compared to genocide and democide. What is so holy about sovereignty? Why should we worship sovereignty? Surely human rights are far more important.
He claims that all invaders are always wrong, no matter who they depose: "how would you view fellow Britons who worked for the forces of a foreign occupier, if Britain were ever invaded? History tells us that down through history, Quislings have - surprise, surprise - not been well received, and the Iraqi people's animosity towards those who collaborated with US and British forces is only to be expected." The simple answer is that if Britain was a dictatorship, and was invaded by a democracy that removed the dictator, then Britain should welcome the invaders with open arms. Has Clark never even thought about this? Does he think the French would have been justified attacking invading American troops in 1944? If not, why not, according to his bizarre moral universe?
Comment: "Did it ever occur to you that poor, brown skinned people might actually be smart enough to support the idea of democracy and human rights, and believe that defending their democratically elected parliamentary government from the fascist, terrorist religious right of Islam might be a positive thing for the future of their society?" No, it doesn't seem to have occurred to him.
He is clearly opposed to the British army intervening to stop genocide in Sudan, or indeed anywhere else: "let's do all we can to keep the British army out of war zones. And in the meantime, let's do all we can to keep self-centred mercenaries who betrayed their fellow countrymen and women for financial gain out of Britain."
In the comments, Neil Clark keeps going:
Incredibly, he claims that the Iraqi resistance want to free their country (rather than enslave it): "Iraq was illegally invaded and the Iraqi people have a right of self defence. If they're not allowed to take up arms to try and free their country what rights do the Iraqi people have?"
He rejoices in the fact that tens of thousands of Iraqis and allies have died as the forces of totalitarianism fight to enslave Iraq: "I am pleased that Britain and the US have had a major setback in Iraq, in the same way I'm pleased that the German invasion of the Soviet Union was defeated."
He claims to be "anti-war" yet is almost gung-ho in support of violence: "I do think that when a country is illegally invaded, its people have a right to resist. We quite rightly see the French resistance in world war two as heroes, yet when it comes to Iraqis - all action against the occupying forces is denounced as terrorism".
Here's a question for the war-loving Clark: Why didn't the Iraqi resistance form political parties and stand in the Iraqi election? If people support them, they could win the election and then ask America to leave. Why didn't they try that? Why do they turn immediately to roadside bombs and mass killings in marketplaces, without even attempting to get people to vote for them?
If you can understand why the jihadis go straight to violence without even attempting civil disobedience, or trying to win elections, then ... well, then you would actually understand the jihadi resistance.
On Neil Clark's blog, more of the same ranting WW2 analogies, as if he would have been the type of intellectual who would have supported the allied effort in WW2:
"The line "I was against the Iraq war, but now that it's started let's hope the illegal invaders win easily and no one fights back" is as absurd as saying '" don't really agree with the Nazi attack on the Soviet Union, but let's hope Hitler gets to Moscow before the winter and finishes the job quickly'. In the 1940s the Nazis HAD to be defeated." So Britain and America have to be defeated in Iraq? And that will be good for the Iraqis?? And will Clark be embarrassed if it turns out not to be good for the Iraqis?
By the way, saying "Britain must be defeated" would have got you jailed in WW2. Does he think that was wrong?
He again bangs on about the UN and state sovereignty as if we all should support them: "It's called the UN Charter, Chris. If we're going to argue about the legitimacy of the UN Charter, then we may just as well argue about the legitimacy of the law which makes burglary a criminal offence." Such arrogance these lefties who believe in the UN and state sovereignty possess. Like Nelson Mandela saying we should "obey" the UN. How would Clark like it if I told him he should "obey" the US.
More from Neil Clark: "all of us who abhor war and illegal attacks on sovereign states do indeed owe a great debt to those Iraqis who did resist the illegal invasion: they have done the world an enormous favour by derailing the neo-con war juggernaut." How can he "abhor war" and not abhor what the Iraqi resistance do? Why doesn't he urge a non-violent Iraqi resistance? Why is he so happy with a violent one? Maybe it's not war that he abhors, but rather western power and western victory.
What can you say in response to such an article? What can you say in response to such hatred of decency and such praise for evil? All you can do is be amazed by the diversity of western intellectuals.
From Hitler to Lenin to Trotsky to Stalin to Khrushchev to Mao to Pol Pot to Castro to Ho Chi Minh to Saddam Hussein to the Ayatollah Khomeini to the PLO to Hamas to Hezbollah to Milosevic to Al Qaeda to the Iraqi resistance - It seems that every single evil in the world has been supported by at least one western intellectual. It doesn't seem to matter what bleak, grinding totalitarian vision you are fighting for, or what staggering, inhuman barbarisms you commit. There will always be at least one western intellectual willing to call you a "hero".
cancel2 2022
Canceled
.
Amazing but true - the UK leading the world in the fight against the virus
As deaths from Covid-19 in our hospitals reach a new high, while the country endures a third lockdown in the dispiriting cold and damp of a British winter, we need a boost to our national self-belief.
As it happens, there is a genuine reason to feel such positive emotion — and, believe it or not, it has everything to do with our performance over the virus.
This will seem odd to many British people: not only because of dilatory action by the Government but also because of our demography, the UK has suffered one of the very worst fatality rates, per capita, from the disease.
Yet in our contribution to the treatment of this plague, Britain leads the world.
I am not indulging in mere chauvinism: this is recognised beyond our shores. The American economist, Tyler Cowen, whose Marginal Revolution blog is respected across the globe, wrote an article entitled 'The UK's response to Covid has been world class'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...g-true-leading-world-fight-against-virus.html
Amazing but true - the UK leading the world in the fight against the virus
As deaths from Covid-19 in our hospitals reach a new high, while the country endures a third lockdown in the dispiriting cold and damp of a British winter, we need a boost to our national self-belief.
As it happens, there is a genuine reason to feel such positive emotion — and, believe it or not, it has everything to do with our performance over the virus.
This will seem odd to many British people: not only because of dilatory action by the Government but also because of our demography, the UK has suffered one of the very worst fatality rates, per capita, from the disease.
Yet in our contribution to the treatment of this plague, Britain leads the world.
I am not indulging in mere chauvinism: this is recognised beyond our shores. The American economist, Tyler Cowen, whose Marginal Revolution blog is respected across the globe, wrote an article entitled 'The UK's response to Covid has been world class'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...g-true-leading-world-fight-against-virus.html
