Monday, 5 February 2018

Never Explain Insurance To A Moron

Nor to a woman who is clearly not right in the head, whatever her other faults.

The barely readable missive below arrived this morning in response to, well, the young woman concerned has been running a campaign including a petition over what she calls discrimination against people who are mentally ill. Yes Dr Szasz, I know there is no such thing as mental illness, but this head case does not. Queen E was narked she couldn’t get travel insurance for the regular price, that only a handful of companies would provide any such insurance anyway, and these charged up to twenty times as much as normal.

First though, let me dispose of the Queen E moniker. This woman has no class, she is less like the real Queen E than her sister, the late Princess Margaret, although I doubt she has yet got round to shagging Mick Jagger.

As I tried to explain to Queen E patiently, time and time again, an insurance company is in business to make a profit. It does this by taking in more money than it pays out. Insurance is something people buy hoping they will never need. Ever bought an umbrella? Sure you have. Some insurance is mandatory; driving without insurance is a very serious offence. Insurance companies use people called actuaries to calculate the risk involved in insuring people, buildings, etc. This includes life assurance. Obviously, calculating when a particular person will die is not possible, but in a group of X thousands of people chosen by various criteria - especially age - it is likely that a certain number will be dead in a set period of years.

Clearly, in the absence of special circumstances, men aged 60-65 will die before a similar group of men aged 30-35. And just as clearly, a group of women who are not right in the head or have other negative characteristics, will be more likely to be taken ill on holiday, or in Queen E’s case to be arrested, than a similar group of normal women. Just as it is not possible to predict when a particular individual will die, so it is not possible to make specific predictions about Queen E. Therefore she will be insured not on the same basis as an ordinary woman but on the same basis as a group of mental defectives.

She and her supporters can whine and wail and sign petitions galore about the evils of discrimination, but no insurance company worthy of the name will buckle to them. Not if it wants to stay in business.

Monday, 22 January 2018

Sound Advice Is Not Victim Blaming

Three days ago, the cyber version of my local freesheet reported on the sexual assault of a 13 year old girl. As sexual assaults go it was not that serious - try telling that to the judge - there is no suggestion she was raped, and appears to have simply been fondled. As you might suspect, the police are looking into this as a priority. Although details are virtually non-existent, the paper reports this assault took place on a Saturday morning, at 3.50am.

Unsurprisingly, a number of readers have commented on this report, the consensus being what the fuck was a thirteen year old doing out alone at this time of the morning? Nobody blamed the girl for this assault, but the parents, that is a different matter. Would you allow your thirteen year old daughter, or son, out alone at that time of night/day? If you answer yes, then clearly you are equally unfit to be a parent. Yes, the person responsible for whatever happened to this child is first and foremost our as yet unidentified assailant, but are the parents not responsible?

Now transfer this to a woman who is out drinking, perhaps too much, is she not responsible if she gets into a car with a man she doesn’t know or trust? Is she not responsible if she gets drunk out of her mind and wakes up next to a stranger without remembering or claiming not to remember having consented to sex ? Are the police and hospital A&E departments victim blaming when they advise women not to act so? According to the sisterhood they are, but women should not put themselves in that position, and the same applies to men who might just find themselves falsely accused six months or six years down the line in the current insane climate.

Tuesday, 16 January 2018

Me Times Two

December 20: I arrive in Humanities 1 from the Newsroom just before 14.15 and ask for my books. The assistant gives me a pile in a foreign language and says I have more. Would I like those too?

These aren’t mine, I say. Would you believe they were for a different A. Baron? And there was me thinking I was unique.

Actually, it’s amazing how often this sort of thing happens. There are two journalists named Duncan Campbell, two named Jill Dick, and two named Matthew Kalman. And let’s not forget Alexander Baron (1917-99), the one who was merely famous rather than notorious!

Sunday, 7 January 2018

Notes From A Contrarian

My adoptive mother was not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and that is being diplomatic, but she was right about one thing: I would argue black is white, she would tell me. I’ve always gone against the grain, and still do out of habit, but I never go public until I am absolutely certain. Yes, we are surrounded by lies, bombarded by them constantly: religion, spirit mediumship, political propaganda, and in this supposedly enlightened age by all manner of chimeras such as sexism, homophobia, and even microaggressions. But, and this is a very big but, leaving aside argumentum ad antiquitatum, if an idea, taboo, belief, shibboleth, law...has been around for a long time, there is usually a reason for it, and more often than not a good reason.

Don’t buck the status quo just because, and when you are wrong, admit it. When you have been duped, admit it, as soon as you realise it. Throughout history some incredibly intelligent people have been fooled by con-men and shakedown artists; there is no shame in admitting you have been conned, and if you don’t, you may waste the rest of your life promoting some ridiculous idea or lost cause.

Thursday, 4 January 2018

The Further Decline Of Trafalgar Square

Wow, it gets worse! No screens or music like in previous years, and even smaller crowds. Down, down, down. So small in fact that there was never any problem getting in and out. The fountains were of course boarded up as usual, even more so, and it was so low key that there was no meaningful security. Yeah, there were police and stewards; on the way back at Embankment Station there were police armed with automatic weapons, but it was clear that no suicide bombers were expected, and the pickpockets must have been extremely disappointed.

True, there was a spectacular firework display at midnight that was clearly visible, but when you’ve said that, you’ve said it all. Even worse for me were the travel arrangements. I ended up taking the Underground to Balham then a train to East Croydon, upon boarding of which I decided to get off at Streatham Common, whereupon I found a Morley’s Chicken where I demolished an extremely nourishing bargain basement meal before a long walk towards Crystal Palace when my luck changed, and with two bus rides I was home some time after 3am.

Not sure what I’ll be doing next year but probably not Trafalgar Square as it stands. That is assuming I have not departed this Earth.

Thursday, 23 November 2017

The Persecution Of Alison Chabloz

If you haven’t heard of Miss Chabloz (technically Mrs Chabloz), she is a talented singer-songwriter who for the past few years has been making waves by writing and performing what might be loosely termed politically incorrect songs.

If you haven’t heard of the Campaign Against Antisemitism (spelt thus) you can probably guess from its name that it is a charity that campaigns against anti-Semitism. To that one should add the qualifier “real and imagined”, and also that for a so-called charity it is extremely uncharitable. To that one should add a further qualification that the people who run it are either incredibly stupid, incredibly venal, or both.

What happens when you put Alison Chabloz together with the Campaign Against Antisemitism? You get a toxic mix of censorship and legal persecution, because some of the songs of Miss Chabloz are regarded by the people behind the Campaign Against Antisemitism as offensive, and, would you believe, anti-Semitic? One of these songs is (((Survivors))) written so, although she stole the melody from Hava Nagila. No, they are not accusing her of plagiarism, just anti-Semitism.

If you haven’t heard (((Survivors))), you can check it out on YouTube. As Google, the company that owns YouTube, is based in the United States along with its servers, one is entitled to ask if there is not the little matter of jurisdiction. However, this is far from the first time an innocuous video hosted overseas has resulted in a UK national facing prosecution, so the Campaign Against Antisemitism and the clowns who control our criminal justice system are obviously sure of themselves on this point if no other.

Alison Chabloz has had her property seized, in particular a computer, been arrested, and last month was arrested again. Have you played the song yet? Right, yes, it is mildly humorous, it also takes a swipe at two people who deserve to be ridiculed, both of them Jews, both of them shameless liars.

Elie Wiesel who died last year is considered one of the patron saints of the Holocaust. Recently he was accused of sexually assaulting a teenager at a charity event in the 1980s. We need not take such rubbish seriously even if some in the mainstream do, especially in the current climate, but credible allegations have been made against Wiesel by credible sources. Myklos Grüner was a Jew who was interned in Buchenwald camp at the same time Wiesel was allegedly interned there. For years he waged a campaign against Wiesel claiming he was an imposter. As pointed out in (((Survivors))), Wiesel had no tattoo. There is an entire website devoted to this issue. Although Grüner found no satisfaction in the courts, the enigma remains.

The other person featured in the song is Irene Zisblatt, whose tale about how she survived Auschwitz beggars belief. Best not to ask about the diamonds or what she says she did with them. Even mainstream exterminationist scholars are embarrassed by the likes of Irene Zisblatt, although few dare to say so publicly, but the young American Revisionist Eric Hunt has produced a series of videos about the forbidden subject, one of which highlights what might be politely called anomalies in her testimony.

It could be mildly embarrassing for the Campaign Against Antisemitism if these issues are raised in court.

Leaving that aside though, what do they hope to achieve? Could it be to persuade Alison Chabloz and others they consider anti-Semites that a number of well-known anti-Jewish stereotypes are false?

Well, let’s look at a few such stereotypes that might arise out of this prosecution:

A belief that Jews are a specially protected class.
That they exert undue influence over the criminal justice system.
That they are mendaciously censoring their perceived political enemies.
That they are trying to suppress the truth.
That they are malicious.
That they are simply not nice people.

In the United States, which has a much larger Jewish population than the UK, there are constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression. Organised Jewry may whine to High Heaven about hate speech, bigotry, anti-Semitism, ad nauseum, but does anyone who matters take any notice of genuine anti-Semitism? We live in troubled times; there are those of a certain political persuasion, Islamists, who if they could would murder us all in our beds: heathens, Jews, even moderate Moslems. By persecuting and prosecuting innocuous people like Alison Chabloz, the Campaign Against Antisemitism and the Jewish establishment risk alienating people they might one day be glad to have in their corner.

Friday, 3 November 2017

How Feminist Airheads Lie With Statistics

The screengrab below is of a message posted to Reddit shortly after I posted an advert/appeal for the False Rape Timeline. I haven’t been able to identify this individual but I don’t think it is assuming too much to say she is a radical feminist, or some kind of self-identifying feminist. Regardless of either political affiliation or gender, the argument used is typical, so I use this refutation as an example of how to deal with these braindead morons.

She begins by pointing out that every timeline entry is separated from the one above by an hr tag - in reality an hr followed by a p (paragraph) tag. As hr appears 3,250 times, there are 3,249 entries, one fewer than I claimed. While it is nice to meet a woman who can understand HTML - even the code I write! - this was an unnecessarily niggardly comment. As I make clear, the timeline doesn’t contain simply false rape allegations, there are false allegations of attempted rape, indecent assault, and such things as journal articles. However, there were at the time more than 3,250 false allegations of rape. The December 14, 2006 entry alone alludes to over two thousand false allegations which resulted from a scam pulled by the corrupt law firm Leigh Day in Kenya, and the entry for August 28, 2017 relating to false rape allegations in the Congo contains an unspecified number of false allegations, and explains how and why they came about.

Before addressing the substance of her claim I would like to point out that I am not, have never been, and will never be, an MRA. I am very much a traditionalist, albeit a failed one, and a somewhat reluctant MGTOW.

Now coming to her statistics, she claims - using the timeline - the rate of false allegations amounts to 11 per 100,000. But only assuming we can trust these numbers. Then using some dubious arithmetic she claims this makes it thirty times more likely for (a man) to be struck by lightning than to be falsely accused of rape.

According to a BBC report from 2014, around 24,000 people are actually killed by lightning every year, a shockingly high figure (no pun intended). On October 13, 2016, the Guardian reported there were 23,851 official allegations of adults being raped in the year 2015/6, almost all of them women, yet there were a total of only 2,689 convictions over the same period (for rapes of adults and children). Granted there will be some overlap from 2014, and many of the above reports not having come to trial, but it is clear that the vast majority of allegations do not result in conviction.

Feminist airheads would have us believe that the criminal justice system is at fault, but as many police officers and lawyers will admit, albeit only off the record, at least half of all reports are false, like they never happened, or are regret sex, ie women who have had consensual sex then withdrawn their consent retroactively. One of the very few willing to go on the record is the former district attorney Craig Silverman.

Finally, the entry for October 24, 2003 reports that since the beginning of the year, in the city of Dunedin, New Zealand (population less than 150,000) there had been no fewer than seven false reports of rape, two in the previous two weeks. The feminist statistics (read lies) are parrotted incessantly, but they have no basis in fact. As for me, I’ll take my chances with the lightning.