Defending The Indefensible

This was written in 2014.  I sincerely doubt whether it could be published today without an outbreak of total mass hysteria.

Which is why I’m posting the link, as well as a representative sample:

The Constitution allows a defendant to make three crucial decisions in his case. He decides whether to plea guilty or not guilty. He decides whether to have a bench trial or a jury trial. He decides whether he will testify or whether he will remain silent. A client who insists on testifying is almost always making a terrible mistake, but I cannot stop him.
Most blacks are unable to speak English well. They cannot conjugate verbs. They have a poor grasp of verb tenses. They have a limited vocabulary. They cannot speak without swearing. They often become hostile on the stand. Many, when they testify, show a complete lack of empathy and are unable to conceal a morality based on the satisfaction of immediate, base needs. This is a disaster, especially in a jury trial. Most jurors are white, and are appalled by the demeanor of uneducated, criminal blacks.

And then there’s this:

This inability to see things from someone else’s perspective helps explain why there are so many black criminals. They do not understand the pain they are inflicting on others. One of my robbery clients is a good example. He and two co-defendants walked into a small store run by two young women. All three men were wearing masks. They drew handguns and ordered the women into a back room. One man beat a girl with his gun. The second man stood over the second girl while the third man emptied the cash register. All of this was on video.
My client was the one who beat the girl. When he asked me, “What are our chances at trial?” I said, “Not so good.” He immediately got angry, raised his voice, and accused me of working with the prosecution. I asked him how he thought a jury would react to the video. “They don’t care,” he said. I told him the jury would probably feel deeply sympathetic towards these two women and would be angry at him because of how he treated them. I asked him whether he felt bad for the women he had beaten and terrorized. He told me what I suspected—what too many blacks say about the suffering of others: “What do I care? She ain’t me. She ain’t kin. Don’t even know her.”

As so many have said before of this attitude:  “You can take the African out of Africa, but…”  I prefer to think of it as “Africa Wins Again;  Just Not In Africa.”

Read the whole thing.  The observations made by the writer are based on years and years of experience, and are not his opinion.

Afterthought:  Just so we’re clear about the whole thing:  this attitude isn’t confined to Blacks (see here);  it just seems to be more prevalent.

Trump, You Idiot

The story of the late Bush 41 — a man respected by many and distrusted by an equal number — should have proved an object lesson to the once-god-emperor Trump, but it seems like Trump doesn’t want to learn from history unless it’s his own history.  Which makes him an idiot.  Here’s why.

Facing election, Bush 41 got what would be the loudest cheers of his entire presidency when he made the unequivocal statement:  “Read my lips: no new taxes! ”  Well, we all know what happened later:  “no new taxes” became a “great big huge tax”, passed as part of a deal made with arch-socialist and “Lion Of The Senate” Senator Ted “Swimmer” Kennedy.  The result for Bush?  The loss of the Presidency, because the Republican base, which hates taxes of any kind let alone new big ones, felt they’d been betrayed by the President.

Anyone see any parallels with the current incumbent, Trump 45?  Here it is:  “We’re going to build a wall to secure our southern border:  a big, beautiful wall!

And now, this week?  No wall.  Why no wall?  So he can keep a friendly working relationship with not one but TWO Congressional Socialists, Chuck “No-Guns” Schumer and future Repeat-House Speaker “Red” Nancy Pelosi?

Then Trump 45 gets pissed off when Ann Coulter — the same Ann Coulter who back in early 2016 predicted Trump’s eventual Republican nomination, to the loud jeers of a Jon Stewart audience  — entitles one of her articles “Gutless President In Wall-Less Country“.

Well guess what, Donald old chum:  just like Bush 41, you’ve managed to piss off your most loyal supporters, the ones who thought you were different, the ones who thought that if anyone could build a big, beautiful wall it would be a billionaire property developer.

Too bad you fucked up.  And here’s another lesson you’re about to learn from Bush 41 (a.k.a. President Juan Term):  just as Bush 41’s with Kennedy, your “partnership” with Schumer and Pelosi will last as long as the wet ink on the surrender document (“continuing resolution”) that you’re about to sign tomorrow (Friday).  On Monday morning (if not Saturday morning), they’ll go back to sabotaging what’s left of your your agenda, attempting to have you impeached, and turning what was to be a transformational presidency into just another fucking swamp.  Your last two years in the Presidency are going to be dead in the water, and nothing you said would happen, will happen.  And you will go from God-Emperor Trump to President Juan Term II.

I hope it was all worth it, you blithering moron.

The Dying Of The Light

[This should have appeared over a week ago, but I screwed up the posting date thingy, sorry.  It’s still relevant, and now updated.]

From the Diplomad, talking about the revolting French:

France is in real trouble. I mean REAL trouble.  That once great country, in fact, is dying.  It, along with most of the rest of Europe, has a worthless leadership class that, as we saw at the WWI commemorations, sees nationalism as a bad thing. That leadership argues that true patriotism means going along with the elite’s efforts to kill the sense, the very idea of nation;  it means allowing one’s culture, traditions, and history to be wiped away, and rewritten to justify the on-going social, economic and political destruction.  To object, for example, to the importation of hundreds-of-thousands of poor, illiterate and often violent migrants from some of the most failed countries on earth, many espousing an ideology of hatred for all that France and Western Civilization represent, makes you a vile racist and a deplorable, one who should not be heard, a “far right” pariah.  In other words, Citizen, fermé la bouche and let your betters decide for you.  Nothing to see, keep moving. Leadership should be left to the professionals;  do not attempt decision-making at home . . .

Before any of us start to crow at the Frogs’ expense, however, look carefully at the words “true patriotism means going along with the elite’s efforts to kill the sense, the very idea of nation;  it means allowing one’s culture, traditions, and history to be wiped away, and rewritten to justify the on-going social, economic and political destruction”  and try to deny that this is precisely what our own “leadership” class — political, academia and corporate — is doing to the United States[Hint:  you’ll fail]

Now go and buy some more ammo.

(Some of you may wonder why I haven’t suggested also buying a hi-viz jacket as used by the French protesters.  That’s because we Murkins don’t do hi-viz — we do camo.)

As I Said

Longtime Readers will know of my loathing for modernist architecture — the squared-off, ugly and unfriendly style which resembles nothing as much as large cubes of concrete stacked on top of each other.  Specifically, my ire has been directed towards the brutalist works of Swiss designer Le Corbusier who, if there is any justice in the world, is spending eternity revolving slowly on a spit in a room where the temperature has been set to “Broil”.

But lest anyone think I’m just being petulant about this asshole, allow me to point you to an older article by Theodore Dalrymple, who lays out Le Corbusier’s works and his philosophy about society.  Here’s an excerpt:

I spoke of the horrors of Le Corbusier’s favorite material, reinforced concrete, which does not age gracefully but instead crumbles, stains, and decays. A single one of his buildings, or one inspired by him, could ruin the harmony of an entire townscape, I insisted. A Corbusian building is incompatible with anything except itself.

And:

Le Corbusier wanted architecture to be the same the world over because he believed that there was a “correct” way to build and that only he knew what it was.

A terminal inhumanity—what one might almost call “ahumanity”—characterizes Le Corbusier’s thought and writing, notwithstanding his declarations of fraternity with mankind. This manifests itself in several ways, including in his thousands of architectural photos and drawings, in which it is rare indeed that a human figure ever appears, and then always as a kind of distant ant, unfortunately spoiling an otherwise immaculate, Platonic townscape. Thanks to his high-rise buildings, Le Corbusier says, 95 percent of the city surface shall become parkland—and he then shows a picture of a wooded park without a single human figure present. Presumably, the humans will be where they should be, out of sight and out of mind (the architect’s mind, anyway), in their machines for living in (as he so charmingly termed houses), sitting on machines for sitting on (as he defined chairs).
This ahumanity explains Le Corbusier’s often-expressed hatred of streets and love of roads. Roads were impressive thoroughfares for rushing along at the highest possible speed (he had an obsession with fast cars and airplanes), which therefore had a defined purpose and gave rise to no disorderly human interactions. The street, by contrast, was unpredictable, incalculable, and deeply social. Le Corbusier wanted to be to the city what pasteurization is to cheese.

The only possible reaction to this monstrous philosophy should be horror.  That is hasn’t been, and instead has fostered a long line of copycat architects and town planners, is the reason Le Corbusier should be roasting.

Earlier on, Dalrymple compares Le Corbusier to Lenin in his malevolence towards humanity in general;  I would say that while Lenin killed more actual people, Le Corbusier has  destroyed the souls of more cities and the spirits of the people who live and work in them.

It says much about UNESCO that seventeen of his buildings have been designated World Heritage Sites by that foul organization.  Here’s one, by way of illustration:

Pass me the dynamite, Sheldon.

And speaking of dynamite, I should save a little for the Huffington Post  if for no other reason than because of their breathless lionization of this monster.  Not that anyone should ever read anything in HuffPo, but should you want to see more architectural monstrosities, said article contains lots of examples of his work, all of which should make you recoil in horror.  I couldn’t bear to publish more than one;  they’re not so discriminating, the poxy little Marxists.  Huffpo marvels at Le Corbusier’s influence on the modern world;  so do I, but I regard it more in the same perspective as that of the Black Plague on the medieval period.

News Roundup

Stuff I noticed over the past week or so:

Rome is blanketed in putrid smoke and residents are told to stay indoors.  I’m surprised anyone noticed.

Nigella does post-Christmas recipes.  Amazingly, some of them look quite tasty (unlike her usual offerings, which make me gag).

Company figurehead caught beating up his pregnant girlfriendAustralia:  ’nuff said.

The I.R.S. is being gutted by budget cutsGood.  All the more reason to eliminate the corporate- and income taxes and replace them with an end-user (national sales) tax.

Nearly one in five men fantasize about having sex with a robotIf the feministicals continue with their nonsense, expect this number to increase.

And finally:

Artificial steak tastes 70% like the real thing, and will cost about $60Make them mandatory for vegans, and serve them right.  I, however, will just stick with something like this:  

And now, if you’ll excuse me…

Fucking Busybodies

I don’t know how much more nannying I can stand.  How about this one:

James Bond is a ‘severe’ alcoholic and should be offered medical help by his employer, M16, academics have said.
The… agent drinks a total of 109 drinks over 24 films – an average of 4.5 per film, an analysis by researchers at the University of Otago in New Zealand found.
His record binge in the Quantum of Solace (2008) saw 007, played by Daniel Craig, consume 24 units of alcohol in one sitting – ‘enough to kill some people’.

Well it didn’t kill him, did it?

MAYBE BECAUSE JAMES BOND IS A FUCKING FICTIONAL CHARACTER!!!!!

But it’s actually his employer’s fault, of course:

The authors suggested work-funded counselling or psychiatric support would be appropriate, considering he could have had post-traumatic stress after killing so many people and being tortured in films such as Casino Royale (2006) and Spectre (2015).

I could suggest a few others for torture and killing, but I’ll stop before I burst a blood vessel.

The best part (?) of all this bullshit is that the “study” was performed by some professors from a university in New Zealand, a sub-species not exactly renowned for their sobriety.

Myself, I think these so-called “academics” are totally fucking retarded, and need to be driven over a cliff.

In a short bus.