VIDEO: Is wokeness really dead?

Is the voting public finally losing patience with progressive politics? How real is the anti-woke backlash? Brendan O'Neill, the chief political writer at Spiked (or Sp!ked, if you like) is the author of a new book which tackles these questions.

In, Vibe Shift: The Revolt Against Wokeness, Greenism, and Technocracy, Mr O'Neill.makes the case that across western countries in both North America and Europe, the tide is turning against so-called “wokeism” and that the pendulum is swinging hard the other way. But, he warns, the hydra-headed monster isn't dead yet.

In this video, Mr O'Neill is interviewed by Spiked editor Tom Slater. They discuss how the elites' crazy ideologies are colliding with reality, common sense and public fury. If you can handle the English accents, you'll hear why he believes the common sense of the ordinary people is prevailing over woke politics, but that the left lunacy, although receding, is far from dead. 

 

There's a free speech issue here... indeed, freedom of thought... particularly in Canuckistan, where the Minister of Justice (so-called) announced on Tuesday that the Liberal government of Marx Carnage are ready to limit debate on their bill banning hate symbols, which also removes the religious exemption to some hate speech laws. 

Leftist ideology is inherently authoritarian. When moral certainty is paired with institutional power (universities, HR departments, media, professional bodies), dissenting views are treated as not mere disagreement but heresy.

As our old friend Dr Jordan Peterson learned, there are social and/or professional penalties for expressing unpopular views. The consequences of speaking out are such that academics and professionals find that discretion is the better part of value and start censoring themselves.

Disagreement from the prevailing orthodoxy is treated aas a moral defect. Framing complex social issues in binary moral terms -- you're either right (like us) or wrong -- reduces tolerance for ambiguity and gives people kudos for virtue signalling rather than the seeking of pragmatic solutions to problems.

Instead of being treated as individuals, people are now treated as members of identity categories. That's  how we find people "identifying as" a group of initials: L, G, B, T, 2S, POC, and so forth. This actually encourages divisions in society rather than the tolerant multiculturalism which is the stated goal of the ideologues. "Let's all form a circle, hold hands and sing 'Kumbaya'." Not any longer!

Canuck asks, "How can we prevent Bondi Beach from happening here?"

Barbara Kay is a prominent Canadian journalist and columnist known for her work with the National Post, often focusing on social and political issues from a conservative viewpoint. She has also contributed to other outlets like Rebel News and The Post Millennial, both of which are on Walt's reading list. She is Jewish.

Her latest column for the Notional Pest is headed "Bondi Beach shows Canadians can no longer shy away from the immigration debate". Since you may find yourself behind NP's paywall, we present here the first part of Ms Kay's essay, which Walt thinks makes a point worth saying again... and again...

Canada’s post-October 7 antisemitism crisis mirrors Australia’s. It’s small wonder that the Bondi Beach Hanukkah pogrom is perceived by numerous Canadian observers as a bullet dodged.

If it had happened here, we would be sifting through the same forensic breadcrumbs that helped pave the road to Bondi: principles bent for Muslim votes, calculated tolerance for criminal activity directed against Jews and the demonization of Israel in high political and cultural places. 

The question now is: what can we do to prevent such a tragedy in Canada? We should start by believing what Islamists say. Hamas has stated that, "Killing Jews is worship that draws us close to Allah." We should also acknowledge that the phrase "Globalize the Intifada" is incitement to violence against Jews. We should prosecute, imprison or, when feasible, deport those who preach it. 

Second, we must remove the cone of heresy over debates about multiculturalism and immigration. Following the massacre, former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott told Sky News that, "Some versions of Islam are not really compatible with life in a liberal, democratic, pluralist society." He said it and the sky didn’t fall. Fear of radically anti-semitic jihadists is rational. 

As former Alberta premier and federal immigration minister Jason Kenney said in a recent debate Andrew Coyne about immigration, "Social cohesion (is) hard to measure, hard to quantify and sometimes a dangerous thing to discuss. But we damn well should." He’s right. Mental comfort on this file is a luxury we can no longer afford.

Further reading and viewing: "Angry words on the streets of Canada say it all – Division is growing", by Kevin (not Calvin) Klein, Winnipeg Sun, 21/12/25. Warning: Contains disturbing (to non-BIPOC Canadians) videos.

The failure of multiculturalism: the British and Irish examples

For decades now the liberal democratic governments of the AABC countries (America, Australia, Britain, and Canada) as well as western Europe, notably France and (above all) Germany, have forced on their people the premise of the Great Replacement, i.e. that multiculturalism is a Good Thing.

It is not. Enter "multiculturalism" in the search window above and you will find numerous articles on the subject proving that the premise is wrong and reporting the results of the disastrous experiment in One-Worldism and the attempt to force human persons to love one another. You'll also find links to a number of videos which have been scrubbed from YouTube by the wokesters who refuse, like the Three Wise Monkeys, to see the truth which is there to be seen.

Today we present yet another article on the failure of multiculturalism, this one by London-based journalist Michael Murphy. Mr Murphy created a fine documentary entitled "Ireland is full! Anti-immigration backlash in Ireland", which we suggest you watch ASAP, before it too disappears. Mr Murphy writes:

Now we know what globalizing the intifada looks like. In Manchester last week, a rabbi addressed his congregation in a robe stained with blood. Hours earlier, on Yom Kippur, Judaism’s holiest day, a jihadi terrorist rammed a car into worshippers at the gates of a synagogue before going on a stabbing spree. By the time officers shot the attacker, two were dead and four more injured, some from accidental police fire.

To show they would not be cowed by violence, the congregation resumed their prayers as Britain’s Special Air Service (SAS) forces patrolled outside. Underneath the defiant posture, though, many of them will likely have wondered whether Britain remains a safe home for Jews. For the first time in centuries, the answer is not straightforward. Neither are the solutions to this predicament. 

Britain’s multicultural project rested on assumptions that have not survived contact with reality. We told ourselves immigrants would assimilate, or at least bring only harmless aspects of their cultures with them. Diversity was held up as our greatest strength. It has been apparent for some time that this was a monumental act of self-delusion. While many immigrants do share our values and become productive members of society, the people who don’t are more numerous than we have long cared to admit, and are wreaking havoc.

Consider the Manchester killer. Jihad al-Shamie was born in Syria and brought to the United Kindgom as a child, attaining citizenship in the mid-2000s. With that passport he was thenceforth regarded by our institutions as British. The problem is that when a bearded man in a suicide vest begins murdering Jews “in the name of the Islamic State,” as he put it, what once seemed like a harmless accommodation becomes an affront to the British people themselves. 

Al-Shamie was less an example of diversity being our strength than a life-long liability. He dropped out of university, spent his life unemployed and housed at public expense, and was earlier this year arrested for rape. His online footprint is limited to a 2012 death threat against a parliamentarian who had defended Israel.

What kind of society not only tolerates but subsidizes such a man? The same country that, when the Islamist refugee Salman Abedi murdered 22 people at a Manchester concert in 2017, consoled itself with the pop lyric “don’t look back in anger.” The same country that for decades ignored the rape of thousands of white girls by mostly Pakistani grooming gangs to avoid accusations of racism. A country that insisted Islam is simply a “religion of peace,” even as Islamism continued to inspire atrocities on its soil.

This posture is clearly self-destructive. It breeds resentment among the native population, and cynicism among immigrants, including those who have fully embraced British society, culture and norms, and who now see Britain as unwilling to defend itself. It has now also made life unsafe for other minorities. 

Britain spent centuries dissolving its own tribal rivalries to unite under the banner of one nation. But it has since managed within two generations to begin to re-tribalize. Its melting pot has proved too lukewarm. Take al-Shamie’s father, Faraj, a trauma surgeon who publicly denounced his son’s killings. He seemed at first to be the model immigrant, until his own views were unearthed: he had called on social media for Israel’s destruction, also praising Hamas and even Hitler. The rot in this case, as with many others, was inter-generational. 

The authorities may have missed a window in 2012 to flag al-Shamie. But they arguably missed a greater opportunity to prevent his family coming to the U.K. in the first place. It has long been a matter of liberal etiquette to pretend that all immigrants arrive with only superficial differences and are, in the round, a net bonus to Britain. 

This mantra has helped the establishment dismiss calls for a more selective admissions system. Yet, too many migrants arrive with the prejudices and ideological baggage one might expect. Polling by the Henry Jackson Society, for instance, found that 53% of British Muslim men believe Jews have too much power, while fewer than a quarter think enforcing Sharia law would be undesirable. 

Al-Shamie senior’s admiration for Hamas is also far from unusual. While most British Muslims would no doubt abhor the murder of Jews, there is a dissonance in the fact that many of them are supportive of Hamas, which is dedicated to killing Jews. Clearly, immigrants need to be more thoroughly screened before they are admitted. 

This reality undermines a central pillar of Britain’s immigration mythology. We convinced ourselves that the great danger was native prejudice against newcomers, despite the country’s exemplary tolerance. The far greater threat has been importing hatreds we had long tamed within our own society. 

At core, Britain’s multicultural experiment is failing because we insisted on seeing the world in our own image. Rather than admit it, our leaders have constructed an alternative reality in which failures are repackaged as opportunities for cohesion, with the leaders of otherwise siloed communities uniting briefly to denounce extremists. But the problem is far more daunting, and possibly intractable, than our politicians are willing to admit.

This post is a shortened version of "British multiculturalism has failed", which appeared in Canada's National Post, 11/10/25.

Further reading: "'Allahu akbar!' in Texas - Hostage-taker was British Muslim" WWW 16/1/22.

Worth watching: "Douglas Murray discusses 'The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam' with Mark Steyn", WWW 31/10/17.

2024 Wally Awards: Most Egregious Reverse Racism

Rather than do a lengthy yearend review of stuff you already know and will read about elsewhere, we've decided to just hand out the coveted Wallies, without further ado. There were plenty of submissions from the US of A for the Wally for Most Egregious Reverse Racism, but they were pipped at the post by news from Montréal of the cancelling of this year's Shake La Cabane FAM-JAM, a community dance planned for December 23rd. Here's a photo of last year's soirée.

The organizers of the Shake La Cabane party said on Instagram, "we looked around and were not satisfied with the diversity of our parties." They quoted an American (of course) group saying, "micro-reparations in the name of solidarity, not charity, like these stand to gesture towards ways we can create more access."

"Micro-reparations"? What did they mean? Just this: White people would have paid a premium to attend the multiculti bash. The cost of a ticket was $15 for BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, or People of Colour) adults, but the price jumped close to $26 for adults with paler complexions. 

But wait, there's more! While "racialized" yoofs under 12 could attent for free, their white peers under 18 would have paid $13. 

Reaction from the larger community was instantaneous and negative. Lawyer Julius Grey said the pricing policy was not only discriminatory, but unlawful. "This flies in the face of the Québec Charter of Rights," said lawyer Julius Grey. "All of the charters have exceptions for affirmative action...but this is not one of them." 

Université Laval law professor Louis-Phillipe Lampron called the scheme "a clear cut case of direct discrimination." Mathieu Lacombe, Québec's Minister of Culture, wrote on X, "This is completely unacceptable." Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon said, "[this] now opens to the door to laws and social programs that would apply by racial group, again increasing tensions and finger-pointing."

On Saturday night, La Cabane posted on Instagram and Facebook that they had cancelled the event after their team was flooded with hateful and "threatening" comments, and would refund all ticket holders. "We received SO much hate and misunderstanding about our BIPOC ticket pricing, that for the safety and security of all, we prefer to stay on the safe side with this one. We really regret this situation and are so deeply disappointed."

Walt hopes receiving the prestigious Wally Award will assuage their hurt feelings.

Entering Week 2 of British race riots.

Well, that's what it is, eh. The polite term is "ethnic conflict", a phrase which British meeja politicans (except for Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson) have difficulty uttering. To them, uncontrolled mass immigration is something to be celebrated, a core value of all correct-thinking Britons, not to be politicized, challenged, or even discussed. 

It must be accepted, without question. But now the common people of Not-so-great Britain have started to do more than ask questions. They have roused from their slumber and started to act to make their objections not just heard but seen. 

This all started, you may remember, with the killing of three innocent little white girls by a yoof whom the police and meeja refused to identify, except to say that he was English, born in Wales. (That would make him Welsh, of course, but never mind.) When the truth finally emerged -- see "'Allahu akbar!' in Southport, England" (WWW 29/7-1/8/2024) -- the stabber turned out to be, errr, black -- the "emotionally disturbed" child of immigrants from Rwanda. 

Meet Axel Rudakubana, portrayed in the lickspittle media as "just a kid", as in the schoolboy photo shown at left, not the grinning golliwog pictured at right. Even before the recent photo appeared, when the accused's name was revealed after a judge's order, people began to ask (as they now do every time somethingn like this happens), "How did he get into this country?!"

The answer of course is the political choice of successive British governments, both liberal-socialist (Labour) and Cuckservative, to put out the welcome mat for the wretched flotsam and jetsam washing up on Britain's shores, without regard to their suitability or willingness to join British society. 

British politicians are not alone in this, of course. The borders are being opened in Canada (and how!), Germany, France, the Excited States of America, and every country apart from Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Australia. It's all part of the Soros-backed One-Worlders' Great Replacement strategy.

The pinko globalists who dominate British media and politics intend to transform Once-great Britain into a specifically multi-ethnic -- rather than multiracial -- society. Ethnic identities, of which being British was framed as one among many, are to be embraced, within the parameters of the newly multicultural state and immigration restrictions lifted to achieve this goal.

Of this multicultural bullshit, patriotriotic Britons, proud of their race and culture, have had enough! Clashes between white Englishmen, on one side, and Muslims, gypsies, Africans and the police (!) on the other have broken out in cities across the "Sceptered Isle", and showed no signs of abating over the weekend.

In Rotherham, a hotel used to house asylum seekers was set ablaze, and another in Tamworth was targeted by anti-immigration protesters. In Bolton, Muslim groups shouting "Allahu Akbar!" clashed with people who Sir Keir Stürmer, Britain's new leftist Prime Minister called "far-Right rioters". 

Sir Keir didn't call them "racists", but nowadays it's understood by all correct-thinking, progressive people that "far right" and "racist" are synonymous.

In Middlesbrough, a mob shouted "Smash the Pakis" and "There ain't no black in the Union Jack", while targeting the homes of migrants. They're the "racists", of course, not the Asian men attacking white men in footage from elsewhere in the city seen on social media.

Yesterday, more than 200 hooded rioters [shades of the KKK! Ed.] descended on the Holiday Inn Express in Rotherham, which has previously been used to house asylum seekers. After smashing several ground floor windows, the attackers then attempted to set the hotel on fire, torching bins and then using them to blockade the exits.

In Bolton, there were scuffles in the town's streets between anti-immigration protesters and Muslim counter demonstrators. By early afternoon the counter-protesters, who were mostly Asian and many in Muslim dress, outnumbered the anti-immigration protest by two to one.

Also yesterday, the Home Office announced that extra police and security forces will be deployed to protect mosques (!), after they were targeted by anti-immigrant demonstrators.  

In an emergency address from Downing Street, Sir Keir Starmer warned the rioters would regret taking part and vowed to do “whatever it takes to bring these thugs to justice as quickly as possible”.He added: “This is not protest. I won’t shy away from calling this what it is – far-Right thuggery... The police will be making arrests. Individuals will be held on remand. Charges will follow. And convictions will follow."

In his statement, Sir Queer [= weird. Ed.] opened the door to tougher prison sentences for rioters, and announced suspects will be held on remand and locked up immediately after being charged. These were the authoritarian actions he took in 2011, when he was Director of Public Prosecutions, to tackle "ethnic conflict" and quash dissent.

Whether that strategy will work this time is an open question. Doubts have been raised over whether there are enough jail places available for Sir Keir to mount a 2011-style response to the unrest. Britain's prison system is running at almost-full capacity, with only around 700 spaces available in "male prisons" around the country. 

Unless some of the transgendered protesters are sent to "female prisons", a researcher at the Institute for Government told the meeja that locking up all the rioters was "not an option" unless more prisoners are released. "The situation in prisons is desperate," she said. "We simply don’t have the prison spaces available for mass arrests like we saw in 2011."

Walt sez: Political action -- like voting -- isn't working. Only mass protests get the attention of the elites that, through our inaction, rule us.  Have at them!

"Project Déjà Vu" proves Greater Toronto a truly multicultural city

This is the third in what promises to be a long line of posts, with identical headlines, about black crime and brown crime in the "Greater" Toronto Area of Canuckistan. We'll get to theat in a moment, but first.... 

Yesterday was Khalsa Day, a celebration of the Sikh religion combined with mostly peaceful demonstrations in support of the Free Khalistan movement. It's a must-attend event for Canadian politicians, including Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface. He's the one on the extreme left [Geddit? Ed.], holding what appears to be a sword.

M Trudeau (for it is he) endeared himself to non-Sikh Indians and real Canadians by promising that he would always be there to defend Sikh rights. 

So impressed was the government of India that they summoned Canada’s Deputy High Commissioner Stewart Wheeler to explain "separatist slogans" shouted at the parade where Mr Sox gave his customary laudatory remarks. 

The leaders of Canada’s two major opposition parties — the Cuckservatives' Pierre Poilievre and the National Democratic Socialists' Jagmeet Singh, Canada's Most Important Sikh (TM) — also spoke at the event. 

All three pols agreed that Sikhs are wonderful people and have enriched the social fabric of Canada, especially Toronto and Vancouver. with their truck-driving schools, pro-Khalistan mostly peaceful demonstrations (such as the bombing of Air India flight 182), and political acumen that has seen them elect scores of turbaned politicians at federal, provincial and municipal levels. 

Of course the 1000s of Hindus and Muslims -- especially those who came to Canada as "refugees" and asylum-seekers -- have made their own Very Important Contributions, to be sure, but the Sikhs are Very Special Indeed, as Messrs Trudeau, Poilievre and Singh never tire of telling you. Got it? 

OK, now we come to the story of Project Déjà Vu, or Project Deja Vu, as it is known west of the Ottawa River. The project began in October of 2022, when Toronto police finally began investigating a synthetic-identity credit fraud scheme that had started some six years earlier. Right on the ball, guys!

Synthetic-identity fraud is a form of financial fraud where fictional personal information is used to open accounts in banks, financial institutions and other businesses. "But," said a spokesthingy for the TPS financial crimes unit, "this isn’t just about fraud. Accounts obtained under synthetic-identity are known to facilitate other serious criminal offences, including the laundering the proceeds of human trafficking, drug trafficking and armed robbery among other serious crimes

"The fraudulently obtained credit accounts were then drawn upon by way of in-store and online purchases, cash withdrawals, or electronic fund transfers. In many cases, fraudulent payments were made into the credit account to allow them to be drawn beyond their defined limits. To date, this scheme has resulted in confirmed losses of approximately $4 million."

The perps are alleged to have created more than 680 unique synthetic identities used to open hundreds of bank accounts. The boys in blue [black, shurely. Ed.] have executed more than 20 search warrants and 80 production orders to investigate this case and seized several dozen synthetic identity documents, electronic templates to create false identifications and false documents, hundreds of payment cards associated with bank/credit accounts obtained under synthetic identities, and approximately C$300,000 in cold, hard, Canadian cash.

12 Canadians (???) have been charged with 102 offences, including laundering proceeds of crime, fraud over $5000, and uttering forged document. Here are their names. Hasnain Akram, 28, of Brampton; Muhammad Hamza Baig, 31, of Ayr; Zelle Ali Choudary, 34, of Brampton; Rashad Iqbal, 41, of Caledon; Ranafayysal Masood Khan, 38, of Mississauga; Anmol Khurana, 27, of Markham; Fahad Ben Mofeez, 30, of Brampton; Muhammad Usman Saif, 32, of Brampton; Ali Sana, 26, of Brampton; Mian Muhammad Saud, 35, of Belle River [Where dat? Ed.]; Sibt Hussain Syed, 60, of Brampton; and Mueed Tanveer, 27, of Brampton.

A perusal of the list reveals three "Muhammads" and an "Ali" but not one "Singh" so it would be wrong to say that this is totally a Sikh thing. But there's not a single Irish or Scots or even English name in the lot. That proves my point, as stated in the headline, that Project Deja Vu demonstrates once again the benefits of mass immigration and government-mandated multiculturalism. Marvelous, isn't it?

Previous examples of the fruits of multiculturalism: "'Project Kraken' proves Greater Toronto a really multicultural city" (WWW 29/6/19); "'Project 24K' proves Greater Toronto a really multicultural city" (WWW 17/4/24).

Suggested reading: "The Unprotected Class", i.e. White Americans

According to the website of the Claremont Institute, of which he is a senior fellow, Jeremy Carl's primary focus is on immigration, multiculturalism, and nationalism in America. 

Prior to joining Claremont, Mr Carl worked for a decade as a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, serving as a policy advisor to many national political figures. While at Hoover, U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz praised his "mastery of subject matter" and "ability to write comprehensively and with clarity." 

He is the author and editor of several books on energy policy, most recently, Keeping the Lights on at America’s Nuclear Power Plants, lauded by Nobel-Prize Winning nuclear physicist Burton Richter and former Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre. His political writing and commentary has been featured in the National Review, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, T, National Review, and the Economist, among others.

Jeremy Carl's latest opus, The Unprotected Class (Regnery 2024), makes a strong argument that anti-white racism, undisguised and unembarrassed, is now official policy in America. 

One class of citizens -- whites -- is openly discriminated against in every sphere of public and private life. The Unprotected Class is a comprehensive explanation of how we got here and what we must do to correct a manifest and dangerous—injustice. 

Launched with an appeal to justice for all, the civil rights movement went off the rails even as it achieved its original goals. Soon its excesses and failures were exploited to justify discrimination against whites in business, education, law, entertainment, and even the church. With the death of George Floyd and the shedding of all pretense of racial justice, vindictiveness, resentment, and hatred were unleashed in America.

The Unprotected Class is available directly from the publisher (a lot cheaper than Amazon!) in hardcover or e-book form. Tell `em Walt sent ya! I haven't actually read it yet [That's a hint, dear reader! Ed.], but if Victor Davis Hanson recommends it, that's good enough for me.

"Project 24K" proves Greater Toronto a really multicultural city

Today, 17 April 2024, is the first anniversary of the Great YYZ Gold Heist. (Regular readers will know that YYZ is the airport code for Toronto's Pearson airport.) This was the largest theft of gold in Canadian history, and possibly the sixth-largest in the history of the world. Here's a CCTV image of (police say) the robbery in progress.

According to the Peel Regional Police, the take was 6,600 gold bars, valued at over C$20 million ($14.5 million in real money) and roughlyC$2.5 million in folding money. The gold and currency was ordered from a refinery in Zurich, Switzerland, then transported in a container through an Air Canada flight that landed at YYZ at 1556.EDT.

The cargo was then offloaded to an Air Canada cargo facility, where, a couple of hours later, a suspect arrived at the facility with a "fraudulent airway bill...for a legitimate shipment of seafood that was picked up the day before." A police spokesthingy told the meeja today, "This duplicate airway bill was printed off from a printer within an Air Canada cargo facility." 

Shortly thereafter, a forklift arrived with a container of gold and foreign currency and was loaded into the rear of the suspect’s truck. He then hauled ass with the haul. [You're not quoting the copper, right? Ed.] Almost six hours after the plane landed, Brink’s Canada employees arrived at the Air Canada cargo site to collect up the shipment of gold and currency, only to be told it had already been picked up. Everyone had a good think overnight, and called the cops the next morning.

An investigation dubbed "Project 24K" was launched right away... kind of... and has now identified nine suspects, who have been arrested, charged or had Canada-wide warrants issued against them. Let's see who they are.

Durante King-Mclean, a 25-year-old resident of Brampton ON, has been identified as the driver who allegedly stole the cargo from the airport. It was his bad luck to be stopped last September by a Pennsylvania state trooper, who found dozens of illegal firearms inside his rented car. 

Police say the driver ran away but was arrested shortly after. He appeared to be illegally in the United States, and when they checked him on the police database, it flagged him as wanted by Peel police. 

When troopers opened the Nissan’s trunk, they didn’t find gold bars, but 65 guns instead, that were destined to be smuggled into Canada, according to an indictment filed in the US of A. Besides the guns, American investigators found messages between King-Mclean and Prasath Paramalingam, 35, another Bramptonian. Paramalingam sent King-Mclean a photograph of large amounts of Canadian currency wrapped in stacks with rubber bands. 

Paramalingam and another unnamed person from Toronto flew from Toronto to New York City to deliver money to King-Mclean. Five days later, Paramalingam flew back to Toronto via Miami. King-Mclean stayed in Fort Lauderdale, where he allegedly took several photos of guns and large amounts of real money. He left Florida in August 2023 in a rental vehicle and drove north. That's when he was stopped just outside Washington DC by Pennsylvania state troopers. 

In today's presser, Peel police named nine people identified and/or charged as a result of  Project 24K. Arrested in Canada were: 

Parmpal Sidhu, 54, of Brampton [Again? Ed.] who was named as an Air Canada employee. He is charged with theft over $5,000 and conspiracy to commit an indictable offence; 

Amit Jalota, 40, from Oakville, charged with possession of property obtained by crime, theft over $5,000, and conspiracy to commit an indictable offence; 

Ammad Chaudhary, 43, from Georgetown, charged with accessory after the fact; 

Ali Raza, a 37-year-old jewelry store owner from Toronto, charged with possession of property obtained by crime; and 

Prasath Paramalingam, charged with accessory after the fact.

Durante King-Mclean, the alleged getaway driver, is formally listed as wanted by Peel police, although he is in custody in the United States.

Peel police are also searching for:

Simran Preet Panesar, a 31-year-old Brampton man who was an Air Canada employee at the time of the theft but resigned after the heist. He is wanted for theft over $5,000 and conspiracy to commit an indictable offence.

Archit Grover, 36, from Brampton, pictured at right [Sorry, Walt, this is the only photo I could find. Ed.] is considered a fugitive in Canada and the United States. In Canada. He is wanted for theft over $5,000 and conspiracy to commit an indictable offence. In the US. he is accused of helping King-Mclean after his roadside arrest and hindering the investigation, including removing possible evidence from the Floridea Airbnb where King-Mclean stayed, and arranging a $1000 payment to the car rental agency for an amended rental agreement. 

Arsalan Chaudhary, 42, from Mississauga, wanted for theft over $5,000, possession of property obtained by crime and conspiracy to commit and indictable offence.

Reading through that list of names, Walt is struck by the apparent ethnicity of the suspects. Not an Irishman among them! With the exception of "Jimmy" Durante King-Mclean, they all appear to be... errr... south Asian. Paramalingam is a Lankan name. The rest are probably Indians, some of them Sikhs. By their turbans ye shall know them, and large numbers of them work in and around Pearson Airport.

I mention this because I'm reminded of Project Kraken, about which I wrote in "'Project Kraken' proves Greater Toronto a really multicultural city", WWW 29/6/19 -- one of our most-read articles. Project Kraken had to do with drugs and guns. I've asked Ed. to find out if any of the same names appear in the list of those charged in that case, but he hasn't got back to me yet. [Don't hold your breath. Our readers got the point already. Ed.]

"Who asked?!", asks Canuck blogger

Let's start with the first five paragraphs of an article which appeared today in the Wall Street Journal under the headline "Canada Tests the Limits of Its Liberal Immigration Strategy" 

High levels of immigration made Canada the second-fastest growing developed-world economy in recent years, trailing only the U.S., as it competed to attract high-skilled workers from around the world.

Now, the newcomers are starting to strain the country’s ability to absorb them, putting at risk an important engine of the country’s growth. The country of 40 million people last year welcomed more than one million permanent and temporary immigrants, Statistics Canada said. That influx generated a population growth of 2.7%; the increase of 1.05 million people was nearly equivalent to last year’s increase in the U.S., a country with more than eight times Canada’s population.

In the next two years, Canadian officials say they will boost the number of permanent newcomers by almost a third, with most being skilled migrants such as carpenters, computer scientists and healthcare workers who qualify under a merit-based points system.

The system, touted by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government but first developed in the 1960s, has helped drive economic growth, attract entrepreneurs and fill vacancies for skilled positions. It has been broadly supported across the Canadian political spectrum, with the goal of attracting the world’s best and brightest to Canada.

But the intake of newcomers is increasing so rapidly that analysts and newly arrived immigrants say it is adding fuel to an overheated housing market, straining a stressed healthcare system and clogging up roads in cities unaccustomed to traffic jams. 

The problems listed in the fifth paragraph are there, to be sure, but the WSJ neglected to mention the greater problems of race, crime and the degradation of Canada's cities, with the Toronto and Vancouver areas now resembling Mumbai and Kingston, Jamaica in every respect but the climate.

The creator of Blazing Cat Fur (a daily read for Walt and Ed.) dipped his pen in vitriol and wrote this answer to the WSJ's blinkered analysis: 

Canada is known for its embrace of immigrants? Submission to mass immigration is more like it. Romanticized views of immigration in Canada are the domain of politicians selling snake oil nowadays.

No one signed on for an inundation of incompatible cultures or to have their own government dismiss their heritage and nation as so much racist garbage. Multiculturalism was weaponized and the smear of racism was used as a bludgeon to smash dissent and ensure Canadians clapped like trained seals in approval whenever the topic of immigration was raised. Ethnic disaporas possessed of little in common with Canadian values are catered to by our political class who tolerate the intolerable for votes.

Who asked that hiring decisions be made on the basis of government ordained victim status? 

Who asked that being white be considered a virtual hate crime and Canada be turned into a low trust society? 

Who asked for “racialized sentencing guidelines” for criminals as if the average Joe who just wants to be left alone is somehow responsible for the alleged historic oppression of predators? 

No one asked for a balkanized society where foreign ethnic conflicts spill out into our streets. 

Who asked for an immigration policy that does not benefit citizens? 

No one asked because it was imposed upon us and its true purpose is to benefit the corporate and political classes at our expense. 

No one asked because divide and conquer works best when its victims are forbidden to talk about it until it’s too late. This so called “embrace of immigration” is better described as a choke hold. 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Looking for a good place to live?

Readers who live in dirty, crime-ridden, broken but expensive American city -- all Democrat-controlled, by the way -- may be wondering if there is somewhere better to which they can move. The answer is yes, but not in the Excited States of America, where peaceful and prosperous, Republican-controlled cities are few and far between. 

The Economist Intelligence Unit has just published its index of the world's most liveable (and unliveable) cities. Not one American city made it into the Top 10. The could-be-worse news for Crooked Joe Biden is that not even San Francisco or Portland sank into the 10 worst. Here's the Economist map. I know it's a bit hard to read, so I'll elucidate [and magnify -- thank you! Ed.) in my comments follow.

The best city in the world in which to live is... wait for it... Vienna, which the EIU scores at 98.4 out of a possible 100. I note that both these cities are the capitals of countries which put up walls of dykes and sandbags to divert the tsunami of "refugees", asylum-seekers and other riff-raff which has swept across Europe over the last decade.

The Danes, in particular, have been sticking to their guns [made from Lego kits? Ed.] about keeping Denmark for the Danes. See "New Danish law: refugees will no longer become immigrants", WWW 23/2/19. No wonder they're the happiest people in the world! 

Third and fourth on the index of liveable cities are Melbourne and Sydney, in the wonderful land of Oz. Auckland, New Zealand, is in 10th spot. If you want to get away from it all/get away from them all --  you know what/who I mean -- the Antipodes is a good bet. Australia sends all the boat people and other undesirables to desolate islands off its north coast. New Zealand had a couple of years of wokeism under former Jacinta Ardern, the pinko feminist prime minister, but has gone back to a peaceful slumber.

No fewer than three Canadian cities make the list: Vancouver in 5th spot, Calgary tied for 7th, and Toronto behind the 8-ball. I'll give you Calgary. Poor Len Canayen says they'd rank higher if they had a better hockey team. 

But the inclusion of Vancouver surprises me. I think it must have ranked so high because of the location between the seashore and the mountains. You can drive an hour east or west and go water-skiing or snow-skiing. As for the city itself, all that can be said is that it looks great in comparison with Seattle or Portland. 

As for Toronto, my guess is that the EIU researchers haven't actually been there, and have been taken in my the relentless advertising of the Wormy Apply as "the city that works", "a world-class city", "the world's most multicultural city", yada yada yada. It's all bullshit, except for the multicultural part. Folks with pale complexions are a beleaguered minority in the "Greater Toronto Area". IMHO, Montréal is a much more liveable city than Toronto. The difference is like that between the Canadiens and the Maple Leafs. Nuff said.

What cities remain to be discusssed? Geneva is tied with Calgary for 7th. Like the Danes and Austrians, the Swiss don't welcome foreigners and aren't hopelessly woke... yet. But I've been to Geneva more than once, and find it clean to the point of sterility, expensive, and boring. But at least they speak French. I imagine Zurich (6th) to be the same except that it's German-speaking, and full of bankers rather than watch-makers and chocolatiers.

And then there's Osaka, Japan, tied with Auckland for 10th. I note that the Japanese are even more xenophobic than the Europeans, and they don't like foreigners very much either. Your chances of being allowed to live there range from slim to none, and after endless meals of suski and seawood you wouldn't want to.

About the most unliveable cities, I shall say very little beyond giving you the EIU's ranking. Four of them -- Douala (164 - 46.4 out of 100), Harare (167), Lagos (170) and Algiers (171) and Tripoli (172 - 40.1) -- are in Africa, which is all ye need to know. 

I lived in Ha-ha-harare, the fun capital of Zimbabwe, for six years in the 90s. When it was known as Salisbury, the capital of Rhodesia, it was the best sub-Saharan African city outside3 of South Africa. But the roads, water and electricity forced on the poor black people by the evil colonialists are no longer functioning. That too is all ye need to know.

I was dismayed to see Kiev (aka Kyiv) in the Worst 10 list (165 - 44.0). In normal times it's a city of beauty and culture. But now it's a war zone, so what can be said except Слава Україні! 

As any traveller knows, South Asia is rich in shitholes, and you can apply that word literally. It's no accident that millions of people from thatblighted sub-continent risk everything to our blighted continent. One would expect to see Mumbai (formerly Bombay) and "New" Delhi on the list, but believe it or not, there are two worse cities: Dhaka, Bangladesh (167, tied with Harare) and Karachi, Pakistan (169 - 42.5). 

From World War I until its independence in 1975, New Guinea was a dependency of Australia. Even today it is largely unexplored and undeveloped, peopled by "savages" [Be careful, now. Ed.] who not very long ago wore penis sheaths and hunted heads for sport. Now they have their own country, its capital being Port Moresby (168 - 43.4 out of 100).

And now it's time for the presentation of the Economist Intelligence Unit's award for Least Liveable City in the World. May I have the envelope please? The winner is [drum roll]... Damascus, the capital of Syria, scoring 30.4 out of 100 and dead last of the 173 cities studied. 

Kind of discouraging, isn't it. I'm considering Asuncion, which I hear has become quite popular with Germans fleeing the new multicultural Stepfatherland. Meanwhile, I'll just stay right here.

Québec election: Anti-immigration sentiment propels CAQ to landslide

Ed. here. Normally we don't cover regional/local politics, but yesterday's election in the province of Québec has implications for all of Canuckistan, so we pressed our National Sports Editor, Poor Len Canadien, into service to analyse the result. Over to you, Len.

Tank youse, Hed. Hier soir au Centre Bell [Len? Len! The election, Len. Not the hockey game! Ed.]

Oh... yeah... Well... Four years and two days ago, François Legault led his fledgling Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), theretofore barely a blip in the polls, to a surprise victory over the Québec establishment, winning a majority of the seats in the Assemblée Nationale to form a new government.

The CAQ government made good on his promises, passing a number of controversial laws, including Bill 21 on the secularization of the state, which bars public school teachers and government officials in positions of authority from wearing religious symbols, including headgear. The law also denies fully veiled Muslim women access to health care and other government services. 

The very first major piece of legislation passed by the CAQ on coming to power drastically reduced the number of immigrants admitted to Quebec, and requires them to provide evidence that they have learned democratic values and Quebec values.

Last May, M Legault's government passed into law Bill 96, which reinforces the primacy of French, "the official and common language of Québec", making it the only official language of la Belle Province.

All these measures were condemned by English-speaking federal and provincial politicians, the lickspittle media and all progressive thinkers, including Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface, as reactionary, xenophobic, divisive, discriminatory, anti-immigrant, chauvinistic, and (of course) racist. But the Québécois approved overwhelmingly, and the CAQ was almost universally predicted to win a second term in Monday's election.

So last night's result came as no surprise. The only shock was the extent of M Legault's re-election triumph. With most polls reporting (as of 0100 today, EDT), the Coalition Avenir Québec had bagged 89 seats (out of 125) in the Assemblée Nationale, 13 more than they started with, and close to the contemporary record established in 1989.

Both Radio Canada and TVA predicted a CAQ majority within 10 minutes of the closing of the polls at 2000. The only question for the rest of the evening was who would form the official opposition and how many seats would be left for the other three parties. In the end the once-mighty Liberals retained the title with 21 seats, six less than they had when the legislature was dissolved.

It is noteworthy that the Liberals, led by a Woman of Colour who grew up in Haïti, slipped to fourth place in the popoular vote, behind the Parti Québecois and socialist Québec Solidaire. That they got so many seats is due to the concentration of their support in Montréal, where their candidates were elected in predominantly English-speaking, Jewish and immigrant-majority ridings. The Liberals failed to elect a single candidate outside of the Montréal-Laval region. One commentator said (repeatedly), "There are  now two Québecs."

At the outset of the campaign, Premier Legault proclaimed immigration a key ballot issue. He implored voters to give him a clear majority so he would be in a strong position to demand the federal government cede to the province all but exclusive control over immigration. In a speech to the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal, M Legault said it would be "suicidal" for the Quebec "nation" to increase its intake of immigrants since they are responsible for the decline of French.

This followed earlier remarks in which the Premier associated immigrants with crime and violence, and suggested they were a threat to Quebec values. CAQ Immigration Minister Jean Boulet was forced to apologize after stating in a radio debate, "80 per cent of immigrants go to Montreal, do not work, do not speak French or do not adhere to the values of Quebec society." 

M Legault responded by saying M Boulet had "disqualified" himself from the position of Immigration Minister if the CAQ retained power. Note the careful wording. M Boulet remained the CAQ candidate in the riding of Trois-Rivières, which he won handily, and will probably remain in cabinet, just not in the immigration portfolio.

This photo, of Mounties welcoming "asylum-seekers" (fleeing the racist USA!) at Roxham Road, near Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle QC, illustrates perfectly the unfettered mass migration which Québécois reject. Since 2017, thousands of these "refugees" have crossed the US-Canada border illegally at this "unofficial" point of entry. 

A recent Radio-Canada investigation revealed that the Just In Trudeau's ultra-woke government has spent half a billion dollars on infrastructure and services at the border crossing, to accommodate these illegal aliens in the name of "diversity". 

Québec Conservative Party leader Eric Duhaime (whose party won 0 seats in yesterday's election) condemned illegal immigration and raised the idea of building a wall along the border. Imagine that! M  Duhaime’s rejection of illegal immigration is shared by the vast majority of Québécois outside of Montréal. 

Over the last 15 years, as more and more "refugees" who cannot and will not be assimilated into Québec society have flooded into the province, people have become fed up with unreasonable accommodations being made for religious and racial minorities. 

Call it "white supremacy" or "nationalism" or whatever you like, but the people of Québec, like those of France, Italy and even the American heartland are uniting against multilingualism, multiculturalism and the New World Order. There should be a lesson in that for politicians in TROC (The Rest of Canada). Whether they, especially Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives, will wake up and smell the coffee remains to be seen.

Multicult fails, France heading for civil war, sez former intelligence chief

"All my accumulated experiences make me foresee a dark, and even very dark, future for our children and grandchildren." That's what Pierre Brochand, the former director of DGSE, France’s top intelligence agency, told Le Figaro in an interview published on March 24th.

The interview is in French (of course) and is behind a paywall, so we're quoting from a translation posted on Remix News, a trustworthy site for European news. Their summary is headed: France's former intelligence chief warns against possible civil war due to mass immigration.

The stone truth which the people of western Europe and North America recognized -- but which their woke liberal leaders won't acknowledge -- is that the mass immigration of unassimilable racial and religious minorities is destroying our societies and our countries. As M Brochand puts it,  "All 'multicultural' societies are doomed to more or less deep rifts. In such a situation, it happens that minorities are violent winners, and majorities placid losers."

According to the former DGSE head, there is so much talk about immigration in France today because it is "increasingly difficult to prevent the French from seeing what they see" -- scenes of urban guerrilla warfare, fights between police officers trying to enforce the law and violent multi-recidivist criminals that were the initial cause of riots, shootings, and arson, as well as ambushes set up against the police squads called in as reinforcements.

M Brochand goes on to say that "a breakthrough personality has suddenly appeared in the formulaic world of politics that has encouraged them to open their eyes." He is referring to Éric Zemmour, who has succeeded in placing immigration at the heart of the current campaign for the presidency of the French Republic. Polls show an overwhelming majority opposed to immigration.

Although M Zemmour has succeeded in fixing voters' focus on the immigration issue, the more moderate Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, looks like the choice of conservative voters in the election to be held later this month. An Ipsos Sopra Steria Cevipof poll for Le Monde showed the small-but-perfectly-formed incumbent, Emmanuel Macron, would lead in the first round of votes on April 10th, with 26.5% versus 21.5% for Mme Le Pen. In the April 24th run-off, the pollsters say M Macron would beat Mme Le Pen by 54% to 46%. QED.

The Remix News article notes that Éric Zemmour is drawing the biggest crowds to his election rallies, and breaking audience records during his television appearances? Ironically, it may be M Zemmou's "unacceptable views" which make Mme Le Pen look like a moderate by contrast, although they both advocate the same solution for which M Brochand argues. "If we really want to regain control over our demography, we have no other choice than to make a 180-degree turnaround, that is to say, to send the message, loud and clear, that France will no longer be, for the foreseeable future, a welcoming country. This implies a global approach to the problem and unabated resolve in its implementation."

M Brochand goes so far as to warn that if Emmanuel Macron is re-elected and France does not radically change its policy, a civil war is on the horizon. "I hold the type of immigration, which we have been experiencing for half a century, to be an event 'out of category', without precedent in our history. And, quite honestly, I confess that I do not understand how free and enlightened minds can still underestimate its seriousness."

In order to see the seriousness of it, he explains, "one just needs to enumerate coldly its characteristics" and look at "the impact of what is happening to us." He points to the massive immigration flows, the type of immigration, with mostly migrant settlers, the "absence of political and economic regulation," the fact immigrants are mostly Muslims from outside Europe, their "spirit of post-colonial revenge," their "reluctance to mix" with the French, their "preference for endogamy," their "crystallization in diasporas," their fertility rate (higher than that of the French), and above all their "non-convergent evolution over generations," i.e. the fact that younger generations born of immigrants are "even less integrated with French society than their parents." 

For the former head of French intelligence, "this gradual upheaval of the French population, if not the only challenge we face, is the only one that directly threatens civil peace on our territory."

Le Figaro asked M Brochand if it's already too late to avert the destruction of French society. He answered, "It is very late. Let us face it: We are no longer dealing with dispersed individuals, that is to say, so many 'special cases', but with diasporas -- entities formed by immigrants and their descendants...who are grouped together and whose numbers reach a critical mass sufficient for social pressure to encourage the perpetuation of the beliefs and ways of life of the countries of origin, with which relations remain tense. This way, more or less closed foreign enclaves are spontaneously formed that turn their backs on the host country and its customs."

Sadly, M Brochand is very pessimistic about his country's future: "While I refuse to give up hope, I do not have too much illusion either about the possibility of the authorities regaining control over immigration flows. When we see that the program of the incumbent president, who is running for his re-election, continues to superbly ignore the subject, one cannot but reflect on how much history can be inescapable and irreversible, even when it leads us straight to the greatest misfortunes. 

"All my accumulated experiences make me foresee a dark, and even very dark, future for our children and grandchildren. At best, they are heading toward an unsuspected collapse of their quality of life (an implosion); at worst, we are leading them to terrible confrontations (an explosion)...." 

Biracial families (?)

 A reader who believes strongly in racial equity/equality -- "We're all the same under the skin" -- takes me to task for daring to suggest that many white women are desperate (for whatever reason) to hook up with black men, and for suggesting that biracial relationships are less to likely to succeed than those in which both parties share race and culture.

Those who know me will know that I am not prejudiced against people of other races, or against biracial/bicultural relationships. Everything depends on the people, and their motivation for being together.

On the first point, I will say that not all white women who get involved with black men are plain-looking and fat, desperate for a little (or a lot) of love. Ed. has found pictures of two white girls who could have gotten guys of any race, had they so wished. Which begs the question of why they chose these celebrity partners.

In the photo above you see the very white and very blonde Lindsey Vonn, who married hockey hot dog P.K. Subban, about whom Poor Len Canayen had many kind things to say in the daze when he (P.K.) played for the Montréal Canadiens. P.K. is no longer with les Glorieux, and Lindsey is no longer with him. They had no children.

This very white, very blonde lady is Sara Jeihooni, who (according to Ed.) was for three years the main squeeze of the famous rap artiste R. Kelly (no relation to Walt Kelly, creator of Pogo and inspiration to YVT). Turns out Mr Kelly had a number of other squeezes, some of whom were well under age, so he and Ms Jeihooni parted ways, again without bringing any mulatto children into the world.

"So what?", I hear you ask. So nothing. Lots of white-white and black-black couplese break up too. Make of it what you will. 

FOOTNOTE: To the reader who took me to task for what he called the "racist" [of course. Ed.] implications of my previous post about black and biracial families headed by single mothers, I reply with a quote from The Age of American Reason (Vintage Books, 2018) by Susan Jacoby, a very progressive American atheist and secularist. In the Chapter headed "Junk Thought", she writes:

Nationwide, more than half of African-American boys drop out of high school -- a statistic with deeply rooted social causes.... [N]one of the commentators focuses on genetics or the supposedly different learning styles of girls and boys. Instead, they examine a street culture that glorifies violence as proof of manhood and denigrates learning, as well as the absence of a father in so many poor African-American homes.

TV families in the Age of Woke

I don't watch TV much any more, except for news and politics, and (of course) hockey [and sometimes Judge Judy! Ed.]. I avoid dramas, soap operas and sitcoms like the plague, because I'm sick of the constant propagandizing for the liberal agenda, besides which the sitcoms just aren't funny any more. So also sketch comedy, like SNL, which I guess is funny if you're a Dumbocrat.

Although I restrict my TV diet, I can't escape commercials, which appear at intervals of 40 seconds or so during the hockey games and fake news broadcasts. Some of them are entertaining, and every now and then we at WWW give the good ones the coveted Wally award for creativity. But I've noticed lately a trend in the portrayal, in TV ads, of American families. That's our topic for today.

Here's the kind of American family we saw on the toob in TV's so-called "golden years".

Yes, folks, it's the Andersons, of Father Knows Best. They're often held up as examples of the happy, well-adjusted, fully functioning family who should be role models for those of us who aren't so happy, well-adjusted, etc. Of course they're white folks. But there were happy, well-adjusted black families too, like the Huxtables.

You remember the Huxtables, don't you? Wow, they were even better than the Andersons because both parents were hard-working professional people. No stay-at-homee mom there! Some people complained that the Huxtables were "too white" in their speech and lifestyle -- "Oreo cookies" or, dare we say it, "black Republicans". But there were other black families, such as the Evans Family, from Good Times.

More down-to-earth than the Huxtables, eh? Climbing back up the social ladder, we find the Banks family, of Bel Air, who were always coping with their home boy relative, the Fresh Prince.

Elsewhere in America, we were invited to laugh along with the Keatons of Family Ties, as Alex faced the challenge of being a Republican in a family of Democrats.

All of these families are uniracial -- white or black, period. SJWs have been complaining for years that blacks have been under-represented on American TV. When challenged to square that assertion with the existence of shows like Good Times, Fresh Prince and the Cosby Show, they say that those shows were "blacksploitation" or (more recently) failed "to accurately portray the Black lived experience". 

The result is this year's remake of The Wonder Years, which featured the all-white Arnold family, to portray the all-black Williams family. Is that better? Apparently not. In response to the "wokeness" fad, Corporate America and the MadMen have decreed an end to segregation. What we need to see... must see... now are biracial families, like this one.

Ah, there you are! A happy biracial family -- black father, white mother, two adorable mulatto children, apparently one each of the two leading genders. I haven't seen a family like that in a sitcom yet, but there are lots of them in commercials for "woke" corporations. That's the way America is spozed to be, in the Age of Woke.

If you want to know how it really is, look no further than the evening newscasts of the latest episodes of black crime in your community [especially Lori Lightfoot's Chicago. Ed.]. Both victims and perps will be described as "a future basketball star", "an aspiring rap artist", and/or "a good boy who was trying to turn his life around." 

That desccription will come from the boy's mother. There will be no father in sight, or anywhere around.  That's how it is, even in the many cases where the mother is white. For the sad fact is that there are 1000s of plain-looking, fat white women who will do anything, anything to  get a black guy to show them a little love. And that includes being a baby mama. 

It is a statistical fact -- evident from the welfare rolls, if nothing else -- that black and biracial families are more likely than white families to be broken -- headed by women whose partners have deserted them. The happy biracial family we see in TV ads is largely mythical, the creation of propagandists pushing the liberal, BLM agenda as a matter of "social justice" to make reparations for the second-class status to which black people have been supposedly consigned.

The funny thing is that black people no longer buy into the concepts of integration and multiculturalism. Just last week, two white Arizona State University students were harassed at the school's "multicultural center" over their race and their support for police. Video of the incident shows black students attempting to force two white male students to leave the area, claiming they were making the space "uncomfortable" with their whiteness and a pro-police sticker. 

That's  how things are, really, not in TVland but in America, in the Age of Woke.

Les mots prescients du Général de Gaulle

On 5 March 1959 -- over nine years earlier -- the war hero turned president of France, Charles De Gaulle, had some prophetic words to say about the problem of increasing Muslim immigration to his country. 

C'est très bien qu'il y ait des français jaunes, des français noirs, des français bruns. Ils montrent que la France est ouverte à toutes les races et qu'elle a une vocation universelle. Mais à condition qu'ils restent une petite minorité. Sinon, la France ne serait plus la France. 

Nous sommes quand même avant tout un peuple européen de race blanche, de culture grecque et latine et de religion chrétienne. Qu'on ne se raconte pas d'histoire! 

Les musulmans, vous êtes allés les voir? Vous les avez regardés avec leurs turbans et leurs djellabas? Vous voyez bien que ce ne sont pas des français. 

Ceux qui prônent l'intégration ont une cervelle de colibri, même s'ils sont très savants. Essayez d'intégrer de l'huile et du vinaigre. Agitez la bouteille. Au bout d'un moment, ils se sépareront de nouveau. Les arabes sont des arabes, les français sont des français. 

Vous croyez que le corps français peut absorber dix millions de musulmans, qui demain seront vingt millions et après-demain quarante ? Si nous faisions l'intégration, si tous les arabes et les berbères d'Algérie étaient considérés comme français, comment les empêcherez-vous de venir s'installer en métropole, alors que le niveau de vie y est tellement plus élevé? Mon village ne s'appellerait plus Colombey-les-Deux-Églises, mais Colombey-les-Deux-Mosquées. 

Prophetic words, but the people of France have not yet fully realized the danger posed by the hordes of of foreigners who have turned large areas of many French cities into slums like those of Rabat, Baghdad and Algiers. 

Les mots de Walt aux Français!

Est-ce que vous avez eu assez de...

l'Europe? la globalisation? 

la diversité? l'inclusivité?

la connerie!

Soulevez-vous!

Confiance au Rallye National!

Confiance à Marine Le Pen!

UPDATED: Two more countries (European & Asian) ban the burqa

Can you guess which peaceful, prosperous, European country has voted to ban full facial coverings in public places? Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands and Sweden all have full or partial bans on religious (read: Islamic) and non-religious face coverings. This Sunday, they were joined by... wait for it... Switzerland.

Following years of debate, a referendum showed 51.2% of the conservative Swiss in favour of a ban. Why so? Here are quotes from three Swiss "influencers". 

• "In Switzerland our tradition is that you show your face. That is a sign of our basic freedoms." — Walter Wobmann, member of the Swiss People's Party, the biggest political party in Switzerland.
• "Some Muslims also understood that the niqab is a clear symbol of radical Islam." — Jean-Luc Addor, member of the Swiss People's Party.
• "Saying yes to the ban on veiling is saying no to a totalitarian ideology that has no place in a democracy." — Saïda Keller-Messahli, founder and president of the Forum for a Progressive Islam (!!!)

The referendum reflects the determination of a majority of Swiss voters to preserve Swiss traditions and values in the face of runaway multiculturalism and the encroachment of political Islam.

Although the refernedum was known as "the burqa initiative", the ballot question didn't specifically mention burqas or niqabs, the face-coving garments worn by some Muslim women. Indeed, the face covering shown in the poster, appears to be a niqab. See "Hijab, niqab, burqa -- what's the difference?" WWW 28/7/10.

The ban encompasses most face coverings, including the bandanas and masks sometimes used by violent street protesters [Really? Can we get such a law here? Ed.], and applies to all public spaces, including parks, restaurants, shops, and public transport. 

The measure allows for some exceptions: health (anti-Covid masks); weather (scarves), safety (motorcycle helmets) and local customs (carnival costumes). Face coverings may also be worn inside houses of worship. In line with the Swiss system of direct democracy, the country's constitution will now be amended to incorporate the ban. The government has two years to draw up the necessary legislation. 

Further reading (and viewing): "'Ordinary Muslim' sez banning the burqa makes sense", WWW 18/1/19,

UPDATE ADDED 13/1/21: BBC News reports that Sri Lanka -- a country dear to Walt's heart -- has taken a significant step towards banning the burqa and other face coverings in public. The Asian country's Public Security Minister Sarath Weerasekara told the BBC that he had signed a cabinet order which now needs parliamentary approval. 

Officials say they expect the ban to be implemented very soon. The move was made for reasons of public safetey, nearly two years after a wave of co-ordinated attacks on hotels and churches on Easter Sunday of 2019.