The tidiest ransacking ever. Ever!

I'm hideously late to this one, as I started the draft and then plum forgot about it. Better late than never, I suppose...

Shocking video has emerged of mask-wearing pro-Trump thugs ransacking a socialist bookshop in London, wearing ‘Make Britain Great Again’ hats.

Imagine a ransacking. What comes to mind? Something like this?

Click to biggen

 Or maybe this?

Also biggenable

Well that's not what happened in the Socialist Bookshop. Watch the video to see what an idiot left wing journalist thinks is a ransacking

The actions of these people might be questionable, but they were also inevitable. Left wing groups have been attacking anyone who disagrees with them, shouting them down on social media and in public, closing businesses, demanding resignations and applying outright violence

It was only a matter of time until people not on the Left responded in kind

And this isn't even in kind. Compared to how Left wing protestors behave, this was like tea and crumpets on the lawn

Of course when the Left do it, the Left wing media ignore it, but when the Right do it, it gets described in newspapers using extremely inflammatory and over exagurated language like this:

Shocking video
noisey mob
bursting into
Far Right
Pro Trump

One shirtless man [...] is shown in the video gleefully chanting "Fuck Communism"

That's a sentiment I can get right behind,
The Left are constantly chanting "Fuck Fascism", but they are never pulled up for it as though it's wrong, even though the Left barely understand what Fascism actually is. Why then do we villify someone for chanting "Fuck Communism", a philosophy just as evil as Fascism?

The men refused to leave the shop despite staff asking them repeatedly to do so

Maybe they picked up their manners from the Left? Would a Left wing protest leave private property if asked to do so? Would it F....

Fortunately no one was hurt

Of course not. Because barely anything happened

Hate Crimes I have Committed

Some Police 'Force' in Yorkshire has just got themselves in a lot of Twitter trouble over this tweet:

In addition to reporting hate crime, please report non-crime hate incidents, which can include things like offensive or insulting comments, online, in person or in writing. Hate will not be tolerated in South Yorkshire. Report it and put a stop to it #HateHurtsSY pic.twitter.com/p2xf6OLoQZ

— SouthYorkshirePolice (@syptweet) September 9, 2018

Police Forces are often getting themselves in Twitter trouble over some PC divvel or another that they come out with, it isn't uncommon these days
What is uncommon is for a Police Force to ask people to report others for non-crimes, so they can be treated as actual crimes anyway
Because apparently, 'Hate will not be tolerated in South Yorkshire'

Well I'm glad I don't live in South Yorkshire, because even though I don't hate anyone and I don't go gay bashing on the internet or some such, I'm pretty sure I would still fall foul of the new South Yorkshire definition of hate and still end up with my collar being felt

I did a little experiment to find out. Let's take a look at their statement:

Hate crime is an incident or crime which is perceived to be motivated by prejudice or hostility against a persons' race, faith, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity

Hate crime is an incident or crime...
So the law no longer defines what a crime is. Crimes are defined by the Offence Industry and their enablers. A non criminal incident is now a crime

...which is perceived to be...
It doesn't matter what was the actual meaning or your words / text, it only matters how other people perceive them. There will always be some offendatron mong out there, willing to be outraged by your viewpoint, so literally any speech could be treated as a crime under these definitions.

Of course it won't be the case that all 'incidents' are treated with equal zeal, it will only be the ones that offend some snowflake on the left. White males need not apply

...motivated by prejudice or hostility...

Well I can safely say I am not prejudiced against anyone at all. In fact, I can scratch that all together

I am sometimes hostile though. And there's nothing wrong with that in my opinion. Hostility is not really all that strong an emotion. It's not a hate emotion or a violence emotion, it's more an annoyance emotion; the kind of emotion you may feel towards someone you think is a complete muppet, but just won;'t go away and leave you alone

It's a crime though apparently and as I sometimes feel it, it has to stay

...against a persons...

being a person who judges others on their own merit, I should be able to cross all these off
I'm not racist, despite what the Left thinks of my opinion
I don't judge people for their disabilities
If you want to be gay, be gay
Really, I'm not the judgy type. If you're a nice person, I'll probably like you

What do we have left?

Oops. Still a couple on there

Faith?
Yes, I'm afraid so. I did say I only judge people on their merits and I stand by that. The trouble is, if you believe in an all powerful sky fairy who tells you to do horrible things to your fellow human beings who don't believe in such nonsense, I'm not going to believe you have many merits

I can feel hostile towards people whose existence is defined by the pixie in the sky

Gender Identity?
That used to come under sexual orientation, which I've crossed off. Now there are twenty odd different genders and we are supposed to teach primary school children about them so they can pick one at five years old, even if it means cutting off their cocks when their balls have not long dropped

Oops, that sounded a little hostile, didn't it

Your sexual preferences are no business of mine and nor do I want them to be, but if you tell me you are a gender fluid omnisexual and I must use your preferred pronouns, I'll probably feel a degree of hostility

So dear reader, I really am a nice guy, so if I were to say something like, "Islam is a hideous religion that should be consigned to the dark ages", or, "There are only two genders", please don't dob me in to South Yorkshire police

I don't think I could handle prison

I don't think Tobacco Control understands intellectual property

It seems someone has been busted for selling under the counter fags. There's a lot of it about around here and it's frowned upon. Personally I think these people are doing a enormous public service at great risk to themselves. It's just a pity I only seem to find out someone is selling cheap tobacco when they get busted and end up in the paper

Salim Balesaria was jailed for 18 months in June 2017 for selling counterfeit cigarettes and tobacco and tobacco products without health warnings from two shops in Nelson and one in Accrington.
County Councillor Albert Atkinson, deputy leader of the council, with responsibility for trading standards, said: "We have an excellent trading standards team, whose record speaks for itself in terms of the number of convictions secured over recent years of people involved in the supply of illegal tobacco.
"This report shows the lengths they will go to in bringing these people to justice, and just how determined they have to be to overcome often sophisticated attempts to cover up these activities, and the identities of those responsible."

So jail for two crimes:
Selling counterfeit fags
Selling fags without health warnings

What are health warnings? Well these days, it's the full plain packs malarky. Green background, massive picture of some horrible unrelated disease. Brand name in small letters. No logos. Absolutely no intellectual property what so ever

And what are fake fags? Presumably, fags knocked together cheaply in a makeshift factory and sold as proper brand names

So who is responsible for policing these things?

The intellectual property office crime and enforcement report revealed the lengths to which...

"The intellectual property office"

Hmm

So if you steal the intellectual property of a tobacco company, by selling fake packs branded with their name, that's a crime?
But if you are a tobacco company, you're not allowed to use your intellectual property on your packets, because the Government made that a crime?

So the Government are the only people who can legally steal your intellectual property?
And once they have it, if someone else steals it, they will be prosecuted?
By the Intellectual Property Office?

I need a smoke...

Headlines (and people) that could be better

Click to biggen

OMG! What is the world coming to? Slow news days, it looks like

What the headline does not tell you, is that she'd already thrown out her partner and when she woke to find him standing over her, he kicked off, broke a lot of stuff and assaulted her

And after reading that rather boring headline, it's unlikely you'd click through to the article and find out

Must do better!

What the article also tells us, is how incredibly dim this woman is

"She doesn't want a restraining order as they intend to get back together," she added. 

 People like her should get one visit only, from the police. After that, if they go back to their partners, they should be on their own

Maths is a social construct

Maths textbooks should be banned because they intimidate pupils, a leading girls’ school headmistress has said.
Jane Prescott, head of Portsmouth High School said that students risk becoming anxious if they can see that their classmates are “galloping ahead” of them.
The move has been a “confidence booster” for girls, and allows them to “feel encouraged, and feel they are good at Maths”, Ms Prescott said.

Now I always thought that maths is something you can do or can't do, not something you are good at simply because you 'feel' good at it. If there is some area where you are struggling, you need to be taught by a good teacher in order to get a grasp on it. Being made to feel you are doing well, even when you are not, is a load of bollocks

Maths is science, not art

Instead of using textbooks in classes, teachers write questions on the board which cater to different abilities

Eh? Sounds like that would keep everyone at the same level of ability. If some students are anxious "that their classmates are galloping ahead of them", keeping their classmates down at their own level is no good solution in my book. Maybe assisting the anxious pupil and helping them understand the areas they're having trouble with, might be a better idea?

It is the latest school to have taken steps to ensure that pupils’ self-esteem is not dented by the classroom environment.

By reducing everyone to the lowest common denominator

Earlier this year, Putney High School in south-west London banned teachers from writing negative comments on pupils’ end-of-year exams.
The £19,000-a-year school had already stopped grading pieces of work for pupils aged 11 to 14 in order to stop girls getting overly “fixated” on their mark.

Erm...

So if your work isn't graded, how do you know how you have done? It's all very well to not have your work graded if you're rubbish at it anyway. You can just 'feel' you're doing good, and all's well

But what if you actually are doing good? Where's the incentive to keep pushing and keep learning, if you're no different from the bottom rung and your work doesn't get graded anyway?

When marking the Year Nine girls’ end-of-year exams, teachers were banned from making any comments “other than a brief line of genuine praise”.

I remember one particular lesson at my secondary school very well. The usual teacher was off sick, so the PE teacher took over. He had cause to bollock one of the pupils for something or other, but after he was done, he came out with the biggest rubbish I have ever heard. He said that if anyone says something to put someone down, they should follow it with something that brings them back up again. He then praised the lad for his football skills

I pointed out there and then, that he was a PE teacher and knows none of us in any other setting. As I was rubbish at all sports, what could he possibly say to me to 'bring me up again'?

That shit stopped right there

Thinking about it, this being 1990, that teacher was far ahead of his time

Gary Schlick, the head of Bedminster Down School in Bristol, said that issuing pupils with grades, scores and comments on their work may come across as negative, and does little to encourage children to improve.

Showing complete indifference to their performance is probably going to harm them a lot more, particularly the good pupils.

And children need negativity. If they are not doing so well, they need to be told that. They need to be told why and they need to be told what has to be done to improve.

Totally avoiding imparting any negativity at all on children, in case their delicate feelings are hurt, only serves to make sure they are never able to deal with negativity. When they become adults, they will find very quickly how few people care about their feelings in the real world, and because of teachers like these idiots, they will have no way of dealing with that

That's how we get snowflakes

Under the new regime, teachers are encouraged to replace traditional marking with a series of techniques which Mr Schlick believes will boost attainment.

What a twat!

They've already paid

Ministers are considering a so-called “retirement levy” which would see taxpayers pay a lump sum to the Government in order to meet the spiralling costs of residential and social care in old age.

But they've already paid

The proposals would see retirees make a one-off payment into a ‘national care fund’ which would go towards meeting the costs of funding their stay in residential homes, it is understood.

They've already paid

Officials in the Treasury and the Department for Health are considering the scheme as an alternative to hiking taxes to pay for the country’s social care costs, which are expected to soar as the number of over 65s balloons by 75 percent in the next two decades.

But, but..

They've already paid. We all have. All though our working lives we have to pay National Insurance. In fact we don't even pay it, in the true sense; the money is taken from us before we even get to hold it, straight out of our wages

So is it our fault that the Government did not wisely invest this money and use it for the things that NI is supposed to cover?

Is it our fault that the Government decided to spend all the money as soon as it went into the treasury?

Is it our fault that the Government thought it would be better to spend our hard earned money on wanton welfare, foreign aid, illegal wars, the EU and a plethora of other crap that it was never intended for?

No. Is it bollocks. So why should we have to stump up again?

National Insurance is clearly another Government scam that should be abolished. And so should all the rubbish that the Government saw fit to spend the money on. I fail to see why we should foot the bill for a fiscally irresponsible Government

Oh yeah. They have all the guns