Since I am apparently banned from posting comments on Sott articles, I thought I might offer an example of what I might have posted. Due to the further left-drift of soot’s, I mean Sott’s editorial board, their reasons for ignoring my pleas for an explanation will become apparent.
To the Editors:
I read with interest Mr. Quinn's article on the police response, or more accurately, lack of it, to the recent violence in London and other parts of England. In my view, his article is tendentious and politically biased propaganda, and evinces a patently Marxist left-wing viewpoint more befitting a University sophomore shooting for “A”’s than a professional writer whose aim is to get at the truth. Indeed, Quinn’s propagandistic article seems to have an agenda all its own. He references an incident from 1971, 40 years ago, and argues unconvincingly that that event has a relation to the events over the last few days in England. Pure rabble-rousing. The plagiarizing Communist sexual deviant Michael “Martin Luther” King Jr. would be proud.
To begin with, the thesis of the argument, if there is one, is flawed. While Mr. Quinn denounces the use of rubber bullets against, well, anyone, his tone would suggest that UK police actually had used them to quell rioters. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Not one rubber bullet has been fired by English police. There is not one water cannon on English soil at this time either.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...d-observe.html
“Police were ordered to 'stand and observe' rioters as they laid waste to London's streets instead of confronting them, it was claimed today.
Scotland Yard insiders have revealed teams were frustrated at their inability to wade in and arrest troublemakers while they looted and burnt out shops.
They had apparently been told to try and contain any violence but not to haul away offenders who would instead be identified through video footage later, according to The Times.”
Mr. Quinn blames the English government as having “bred...millions of poor, uneducated and frustrated Britishers.” No doubt there is some truth to this, but who really “bred” what to the degree that this rioting was microsocially intentional and imminent? In truth the perpetrators of the mayhem were already “poor, uneducated and frustrated” and obviously determined to remain that way, lest they be condemned by their peers as “acting White,” while they organized to visit havoc upon White Society, long before they began freeloading off of English taxpayers, in spite of the numerous government programs in place to give them every opportunity to better themselves. Note that bookstores were spared from the looting. By design.
Does Mr. Quinn imagine that e.g. Liberia, a nation that was freely given to Africans by American President James Madison over two hundred years before anything happened in Ulster, now offers better opportunities for individual betterment, social advancement and equality than does England? One might look to the present condition of Liberia for a clue. The purported “disenfranchisement” of the rioters is intentional on their part. The Sub-Saharan Negro race want no part of the franchise. Such a role would jar their sense of identity. In fact, the rioters intentionally unleashed a colossal Hate Crime upon White people simply because there was the slightest opportunity to do so. Which Mr. Quinn apparently condones, destroyed English productivity notwithstanding
As far as “brain-jellifying frankenfoods,” go, well, those are probably made widely available by design too, but the biological fact is that the crack cocaine that illegal-gun-toting Mark Duggan (who was on his way to committing a revenge murder) made his living selling to his willfully “disenfranchised” blood brothers who purchase (with taxpayer money) and ingest by their own Free Will does more to “jellify” the brain in one dosage than a lifetime of eating said “frankenfood”, which is also paid for with the tax money the English government appropriated from decent working native English citizens straight into the hands of those people who are genetically incapable of coping in a White society. By design.
“Life in the UK” would be a lot more “pleasant” for every denizen if the English race didn’t have the wealth created by their honest hard work re-distributed by a Socialist government whose apparent aim is to destroy the quality of life of those who who created that wealth from their sweat and blood in the first place. But Mr. Quinn would no doubt assert that even more wealth needs to be hopelessly thrown at the problem to make things all better.
The “disenfranchised” could have used their free, government-appropriated taxpayer money to purchase healthy foods and cook them at home in order to eat healthier foods at a lower cost, but that would be too White, and besides, the preparation of nutritious foods requires a measure of intelligence which is also a White thing that the rioters want no part of. They wouldn’t be able to feed their childish vanity making the scene at the take-away if they were home preparing healthy foods. Free Will. The riots are pure resentment, pure Hate Crime.
Finally, Quinn recruits as character witness a senile, babbling high Marxist agitator who in addition to having no business existing on English soil, also has little interest in civilized dialogue with the BBC presenter. He does not respond to the questions, he only continues his invective on his own terms. This woman displayed a great deal of forbearance and patience with this babbling nutbag, and finally was forced to cut short the interview, no doubt on cue from her producers, who rightly perceived that this loon was no help to the Socialist cause, which the BBC has on policy done backflips to present in a positive light. Not even the BBC could help this guy. And Quinn thinks those fixated ramblings support his argument? Guess again.
The only positive point Quinn makes is to speculate that the lack of police enforcement was by design. You got that right. Generate Chaos, then establish the pre-designed Order. An old game.
What will result, a crackdown on drug dealers, on black-on-White violence? I doubt it, but the riots do provide an excuse to remove Everyone’s right to electronic media. There will be more police passivity, more damage to White creativity, and a more invasive eye into everyone's doings, with a studied selectivity toward who is prosecuted and who is not. Prosecutorial discretion indeed.
To his credit, it is noted that Mr. Quinn did not blame the rioting of a maladjusted race artificially displaced into a social order that is alien to them on a comet.
Feed your head,
Howard Leyland
