Games that people play: "Liberal"

Thesis: This is a game played by men who desire to prove they are Tolerant and Good Persons. In it the Jerk takes over and gains great satisfaction.

Man goes up to the Pretty Coloured Girl in the office.

CHEESE: Hi there. How's the job going?

PCG: Umm.

C: I sure am glad they hired you here. I like to see you people get ahead. I'm a big supporter of the NAACP.

PCG: Wat dat?

C: How about having lunch with me?

PCG: I'm busy, man.

C (adapting): Well, listen, man. I mean like we'll splitsville and maybe swing a little, cool-wise. I'm a hipster. Man.

PCG: That's the strangest patois I ever heard. Have you a speech impediment?

C: Crazy!

PCG: Get your cotton-pickin' hand off my shoulder.

Aim: Cheese retires a Winner for the next two years he is able to tell the Other Fellows (Auditors) about the fantastic lunch-hour romances he has had with the PCG.

Social Advantages: The PCG, after a couple of experiences with various Cheeses, comes out against Integration. "Who needs those clowns, man!" 

Psychological Advantages: None.

Adapted (very slightly) from People Games, by Dr Otto Kitzenger & Dr Albert Schwine, Pocket Books, 1966. How far we've come since the Civil Rights Act changed everything!

Fighting racism with racism: Segregated study hall opens at Canuck U

I must be getting old. [What do you mean, "getting"? Ed.] I can remember when protests like this (left), calling for an end to segregated schools, were commonplace in the Excited States of America, particularly in Dixie. 

You didn't see them so much in Yankeeland because in places like Connecticut Persons of Colour knew their place and didn't want to go to school wif the white chilluns. And in Canada, back then, there were no coloured people (except the Indians, of course), so segregation/integration wasn't an issue.

Along came Brown v Board of Education and, later, the Civil Rights Act, and separate-but-equal came to an end. Governor Faubus got out of the doorway, and white and black students across the land have studied together in peace and harmony ever since. You know how true that is!

But lately there has been a push by "progressives", SJWS and assorted wokesters to de-integrate schools, and reintroduce segregated classrooms and even residences. Can you believe it? How come? Was integration some sort of ghastly mistake? Why turn back the clock to the bad old days of racist America?

Last month, Brock University, a small public university in Saint Catharines ON, set up a racially segregated study hall!

The school's Learning Services Department said the initiative is "part of many ongoing efforts by Brock to address inequity in post-secondary learning, and [was] developed in collaboration with the University's Hadiyaˀdagénhahs First Nations, Métis and Inuit Student Centre, and BIPOC Caucus."

OK, but why?! A spokesthingy for the university told the meeja, "We know BIPOC students are historically under-represented in academic spaces in general and had less opportunities in terms of getting to university. Feeling welcomed and supported academically in the study hall and throughout the University is just one of the ways we are trying to address that.”

Could we  have some specifics please? Well, the "BIPOC Study Hall", which takes place every Tuesday and Wednesday evening at the school's "Student Success Centre", offers participants (not you, whitey!) free tutoring from fourth-year students, and "an exclusive study space". 

"The twice-weekly gatherings will also welcome various on-campus units to provide more tailored resources during specific weeks, as well as partners to donate snacks and refreshments." What kind of snacks and refreshments? Surely not fried chicken and Colt-45!

Jonathan Kay, the well-known author, editor and contributor to the National Post, Tweeted,  "Brock University in Ontario has set up a racially segregated study hall. (Please) check out the first sentence [highlighted in green above] from the in-house university mag article announcing how proud they are of t heir new race-restricted amenity."

Mr Kay, who has written before about Brock's swan-dive into progressive politics and dysfunctional nature, then added this comment, which was followed by another from Sue-Ann Levy.

The Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship, which has a local chapter at the woke university and just held a Brock event featuring its national president at the end of October, asked its followers “Is the future a segregated one?"

Speaking in reference to someone who commented that Brock "clearly recognizes Black Indigenous People of Colour need all the help they can get to keep up," SAFS replied, "A rather uncharitable explanation would be either 1) the presence of white people is some sort of threat, or 2) the other groups can’t succeed without extra supports, or 3) both. None of these sound good."

Indeed. Well, Ed. tells me that's enough social justice commentary for one day. I'm going to go visit my alma mater (not Brock) to see if the doors are still labelled "blankes" -- that would be me -- and  "nie-blankes". I'll be talkin' at ya.

New Danish law: refugees will no longer become immigrants!

As Walt told you in "Why the Danes are the happiest people in the world" (WWW 17/3/16), the blonde, blue-eyed people of Denmark have, almost alone among western Europeans, discouraged dark, brown-eyed "refugees" from the shithole countries from entering their little country. There are many more cows than asylum-seekers in Denmark, and the Danes like it that way. That's why they're happy!

The Danes are much happier than their neighbours to the south -- the Germans -- who have been forced by the barking mad Angela Merkel to accept nearly two million asylum-seekers, who are now settling in nicely, apart from a few terrorist attacks, mass rapes, patrols of Sharia law police. Having got their noses in the German tent, the "refugees" now intend to get all of themselves in... forever... leaving real Germans in the minority. Although there are only a few thousand migrants in Denmark, the prospect of the same thing happening in their country is starting to worry the Danes.

To keep Denmark for the Danes, the country's government, with the assistance of the right-wing Danish People's Party and (surprisingly) the Social Democrats, has passed a law which is described as a "paradigm shift" in Danish refugee and asylum policy. Under the new policy, refugees should be sent home when conditions in their countries of origin are deemed safe enough. The integration allowance -- a financial handout to the newcomers -- will be reduced, and opportunities for them to bring their large families for "family re-unions" will be further limited. As well, residence permits will become temporary as the default, and it will become easier for the government to withdraw or not extend them.

As Danish Finance Minister Kristian Jensen put it, Denmark will no longer have a system where "refugees become immigrants." The new legislation is aimed at drastically reducing the number of refugees who stay in Denmark indefinitely by shifting the focus from integration of refugees to sending them back to their home shitholes. The message to immigrant wannabes is clear: Don't get too comfortable here; you're not going to be staying long!

Immigration and Integration Minister Inger Støjberg of the centrist Venstre party stressed that it is yet to be seen how many refugees will be sent home as a result of the new legislation, but promised a concrete effect. The bill was backed by the right-wing anti-immigrant Danish People's Party, as well as Denmark's largest opposition party, the Social Democrats, who previously criticised parts of it, such as the reduction of social welfare benefits for people who have been granted asylum. The socialists' immigration spokesthingy said he supported the general shift towards a temporary status for all refugees.

Further reading:
"Politically incorrect Denmark bans burqa, niqab", WWW 31/5/18.
"'Ethnic cleansing' of Europeans opposed by Danish parliament", WWW 17/2/17.

VIDEO: Speaking the truth at Aretha Franklin's funeral

Rev. Jasper Williams Jr., pastor of Atlanta's Salem Baptist Church, was chosen to deliver the main eulogy at yesterday's funeral celebration -- word chosen with care -- for the late Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul. Rev. Williams had form, having had the same role at the 1984 funeral of Ms Franklin's father, C.L. Franklin, a noted civil rights activist. So when he chose this occasion to speak the truth about problems in the black community, there was shuffling of feet and nervous sideways glances, followed by a Twitterstorm. The usual gang of SJWs and progressive thinkers piled on Rev. Williams, calling his eulogy a "disaster" and questioning why he was chosen as the one to honour the poster girl for strong black women everywhere. "No R-E-S-P-E-C-T!", said one angry tweet.

What was it that Rev. Williams said that caused such gnashing of teeth and rending of garments on the part of America's black leaders and black lovers? Check out this compilation of key quotes from his sermon.



To my mind, the key thought is: "Black America has lost its soul." "Where is your soul, black man?", asked the fiery orator. "As I look in your house, there are no fathers in the home no more." He went on to say that "as proud, beautiful and fine as our black women are, one thing a black woman cannot do, a black woman cannot raise a black boy to be a man." And he described as "abortion after birth" the idea of children being raised without a "provider" father and a mother as the "nurturer".

Rev. Williams blamed integration and the civil rights movement for ripping the heart out of black micro-economies that once relied on black-owned small businesses such as grocery stores, hotels and banks. Then he moved on to black-on-black crime, which apologists claim is caused by poverty and the social effects of being "disadvantaged".

The preacher, in cadences familiar to anyone who's ever attended a service in a black evangelical church, declaimed, "It amazes me how it is when the police kills one of us we're ready to protest, march, destroy innocent property. We're ready to loot, steal whatever we want, but when we kill 100 of us, nobody says anything, nobody does anything. Black-on-black crime, we're all doing time, we're locked up in our mind, there's got to be a better way, we must stop this today."

But what about Black Lives Matter? "No, black lives do not matter," said Rev. Williams. "Black lives will not matter, black lives ought not matter, black lives should not matter, black lives must not matter until black people start respecting black lives and stop killing ourselves."

For his candour, Rev. Jasper Williams Jr was excoriated, immediately and savagely, on Twitter and elsewhere for "misogyny, bigotry and the perpetuation of false science on race." That's what happens when you tell the truth. The only surprising thing is that he hasn't been charged with "hate crime", but then he was speaking in the United States, where freedom speech is protected by the First Amendment, not in, say, Canada, where the liberal thought police punish those who say double plus ungood things about minorities, even if the things they say are, errr, true.

VIDEO: Canuck government hides failure of Syrian "refugees" to adapt

One of the grandiose, virtue-signalling promises Justin "Mr Socks" Trudeau made on his way to becoming Prime Minister of Canada was that, by the end of 2015, he (meaning the Canadian taxpayer) would welcome ­25,000 "refugees" from the Muslim civil war in Syria. Coming as it did only days after a picture of the corpse of a little kid washed up on the shores of Greece drew tears from right-thinking people all over the world, that promise was a big factor in getting the Gliberals elected.

And so it came to pass that planeloads of "refugees" started arriving in Toronto just in time for Christmas. Mr Socks was prominent in almost daily photo ops with smiling Syrian refugees, such as doctors and, errr, well, never mind. They're all great people, Just In assured a gullible nation, and will make a great contribution to Canada -- so much so that another 25,000 would be welcomed in 2016! "Diversity is our strength" became the Liberal catch-phrase, repeated by Mr T and all his minions day after day, ad nauseam.

Canada's Auditor-General, Michael Ferguson, suggested that the government keep track of the 25,000 or 50,000 refugees they dumped into the middle of the Canadian winter, to see how they were adjusting to life in the Great No-longer-white North. Were the mostly Arabic-speaking refugees learning English or French? Were they working (ha!), going to school, or just sitting in their government-provided houses, receiving social assistance?

It would be nice for Canadian taxpayers to know those things, but a cone of silence has been dropped by the Ministry of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship -- the name says it all! -- over the fate of the "refugees". After more than two weeks of inquiries by Postmedia, a government flak-catcher acknowledged that the ministry has not produced any report in almost two years on the degree to which the "refugees" have been able to integrate into Canadian society.

In this video (running time 4:10), the Vancouver Sun's Douglas Todd tells of his efforts to get the truth (or any information at all) from the Trudeau Gliberals. Check it out.



Footnote: Did you check out the "man-bun" on the interviewer? The "metrosexual" look, I guess. Gay as 18 balloons...

Diversity does NOT make us strong, sez Ann Coulter

I don't know about you, dear reader, but I am sick, sore and tired of having pro-diversity propaganda shoved down my throat by the lamestream media 24/7. Fifty years ago the aim of all progressive and right-thinking people was "integration". It didn't take long for people to realize that "integration" lasts from the moment the first black family moves into the neighbourhood until the last white family moves out. So, in much the same way as "global warming" morphed into "climate change", yesterday's push for integration became today's shove towards "diversity", the more the better. Because diversity makes us strong. Right? Well, I call BS on that!

"Diversity is a strength" is a big black crock of bullshit, a Big Lie of which Joseph Goebbels would be proud. That's not just my opinion, but that of Ann Coulter, expressed very forcefully in Adios America! (Regnery Publishing, 2015), which I am just now getting around to reading. [My keyboard won't make the upside-down !. Ed.] Here, by way of my strong recommendation, is an excerpt.

The companion lie to the "America is a nation of immigrants" lie is "diversity is a strength." Praising diversity is simply part of the PC dogma, a mantra constantly being pounded into our heads. Repeat after me: Diversity is a strength. Diversity is a strength. Diversity is a strength. It's like the shrieking radios permanently attached to bright people's ears in the Kurt Vonnegut story "Harrison Bergeron", to prevent them from using their superior intelligence. Contrary to everything you've heard, never in recorded history has diversity been anything but a disaster.

Look at Ireland with its Protestant and Catholic populations, Canada with its French and English populations, Israel with its Jewish and Palestinian populations. Or consider the warring factions in India, Sri Lanka, China, Iraq, Czechoslovakia (until it happily split up), the Balkans and Chechnya. Also review the festering hotbeds of tribal warfare -- I mean the "beautiful mosaic" -- in Third World disasters like Afghanistan, Rwanda, and South Central LA. If diversity is their strength, I'd hate to see what their weakness is. The fact that we have to be incessantly told how wonderful diversity is only proves that it's not....

In response to the wanton slaughter of thirteen American troops at Fort Hood by a disgruntled second-generation Muslim immigrant, Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, Army Chief of Staff General George Case went on Meet the Press and said, "Our diversity, not only in our army but in our country, is a strength." Then a few years later, after two Chechen immigrants bombed the Boston Marathon, former CIA director Michael Hayden told a Fox News Sunday panel, "We welcome these kinds of folks coming to the United States." Really? The kind that launch murderous attacks on Americans? Do people even listen to themselves when they spout these bromides, or is it just background music? Saying he was speaking "as the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency," Hayden added, "Immigration to this country contributes to our national security." The 9/11 attackes must have been fantastic for national security!

Hayden also made the strange announcement that America is "required to look like the world." Is that in the CIA charter? I know it's in the Democratic Party's platform and also in the wedding vows of John Kerry and Teresa Heinz. This wasn't some nut from the ACLU. It was a former government official -- the head of the CIA. At least it becomes less of a mystery why no one at the CIA saw 9/11 coming.

A few days later on MSNBC, Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff of California responded to Muslim immigrants' bombing the Boston Marathon by saying, "The American-Muslim community is a source of great strength to us...our strength in America has always been our diversity." Do these people have a silicone chip in their brains that makes them say that? How about a rousing chorus of: "Four legs good, two legs bad!" This is the sort of brainwashing Americans are relentlessly subjected to, day after day, from every major news outlet. The good news is, even after years of wall-to-wall propaganda, Americans still aren't sold on the idea.

Thus endeth the excerpt. Buy or borrow Adios America!, and read the truth the government and the lamestream media won't trust us with.

VIDEO: Is this how it ends? Diversity = white genocide

Back in the hippie-dippy 60s, when "integration" was the flavour of the month (OK, decade) and the "progressives" were touting the loveliness of a multiracial (therefore non-racial) society, there was a joke that a neighbourhood was integrated only from the moment the first black family moved in until the last white family moved out.

As residents of places which have been "integrated" to the point of becoming ghettos know, it's not funny. There's a large group of "refugees" who get no sympathy these days from the lamestream media and liberal politicians. I call them the "white flees", who are getting out of the new ghettos (Hello, Brampton, Ontario!) and heading for the hills. And not without reason, as this disturbing and depressing video shows.



Hellery Clinton says "white genocide" is a kooky (and dangerous) conspiracy theory. says the Alt-Right is concerned about White Genocide. Walt says white genocide is not a theory, but a fact. Mass immigration, racial integration, miscegenation, low fertility rates and abortion are being promoted by Mrs Bill Clinton and her liberal admirers and fellow-travellers in predominantly white countries to deliberately turn them minority-white and hence cause white people to become extinct. That is how white civilization on Planet Earth will come to an end.

Thanks to Agent 6 for the link to the video. Click here to read more on white genocide and what you can do to fight for the preservation of our culture and our race.

Anti-immigrant backlash grows across Europe

While I was away [Watch this space for "Tales from Down East". Ed.], Agent 17 sent along the link to "'Enlightenment values': Austria enacts anti-burqa & compulsory integration law", RT News 9/6/17. "Enlightenment values" strikes me as a good phrase. What are those values? They must be the "values" -- a loaded word for the progressive do-good wienies -- which "enlightened" people share and hold dear. "Enlightened" is nowadays equated, quite properly, with the word "civilized". (See the article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.)

Enlightened civilization -- European civilization -- is under threat now as never before from the hordes of unenlightened -- read Muslim -- invaders pouring into Europe from the Middle East and North Africa. Even such famously tolerant peoples as the Swedes and the Austrians are getting tired of it, and fearful of being drowned in the wave of Islamization sweeping across the continent. That's what the article is about.

Like King Canute trying to turn back the tide, the Austrian parliament has passed a law that will fine women who wear Islamic dress covering the whole face, and takes away welfare benefits from immigrants who fail to learn the language. It says, remarkably frankly, that "those who are not prepared to accept Enlightenment values will have to leave our country and society."

According to the law, women will face a fine of €150 ($168 in real money) if they wear Islamic dress, either the niqab or the burqa, in public places. In addition to the fines, all new migrants -- even the "refugees" and asylum-seekers -- coming to Austria will now be forced, if they want to suck on the public tit [receive welfare benefits, surely! Ed.] to take a 12-month "integration course" that includes German language lessons.

But wait (as Vince Offer used to say), there's more! The new law also makes it illegal for newcomers to distribute "incendiary materials". Migrants will also be encouraged to volunteer -- do unpaid community work -- to prepare them for life in the workplace, before acquiring permanent work permits. Good luck with that one.

Austria's latest attempt to integrate new immigrants has come in response to the migrant crisis rocking most European countries. At least 90,000 migrants, mostly from Muslim-majority countries outside Europe, have arrived in Austria since 2015. Nothing like the hundreds of thousands who've entered Germany, but still you have to hand it to the Austrians for trying to do something about the problem before it's too late. Oh... wait....

Meanwhile... Virginia Raggi, the Mayor of Rome, has asked the Italian government to stop the flow of immigrants into the Eternal City. Here's why.

This is one of several "camps" -- read "instant slums" -- which have sprung up in Rome. The unenlightened people who live here in squalor are Roma. That's the PC name for "gypsies", the people our mothers warned us would pick our pockets, steal our horses and kidnap our children. They do do those things, except maybe for the horses, of which there's a dearth in Rome, which is why, this past Tuesday, Sra Raggi asked the Italian interior ministry to suspend migrant arrivals to the capital. "I find it impossible, as well as risky," she wrote, "to think up further accommodation structures." See
Rome mayor promises to close Roma camps in the capital , The Local it, 31/5/17.

Mayor Raggi cited as reasons for the request the "strong migratory presence" in the capital and "the continued influx of foreign citizens". According to the most recent figures published by the administration, on 1 January 2016 -- nearly 18 months ago -- there were approximately 364,632 foreigners living in Rome, almost 13% of the total population.

Across Italy as a whole [Ed., please check spelling] around 8.3% of the population is foreign. In Rome, around half of the foreign population were from Europe, with Romanians -- gypsies -- making up 23.2% of the total. Although over half the 170,000 or so Roma in Italy are Italian citizens with regular jobs and houses, attacks on the ousiders are common. According to a 2015 Pew Research Centre survey, anti-Roma sentiment is significantly stronger in Italy than almost any other European country. Not hard to understand, is it?

Speaking of integrating Muslims into European society...

When British Prime Minister David Cameron told female Muslim immigrants to learn English or get out, he said the taxpayer-funded language courses being set up for newcomers were meant to help them integrate into British society. Walt doubts that any number of well-meant education programmes -- in language, sexual mores or whatever -- can ever turn Muslim aliens into good citizens of post-Christian Europe.

Case in point: the New Year's Eve sex attacks in Köln and other cities of Germany and northern Europe. When German police finally admitted that some of the suspects were Arabs and North Africans, the usual anti-racism said we mustn't rush to judgment, blaming Muslim immigrants/refugees/asylum-seekers, as no charges had yet been laid.

Well, charges were laid today. The first person charged is a 26-year-old Algerian man. Prosecutors said Monday that the unidentified asylum-seeker [probably "Mohammed" something-or-other. Ed.] was arrested at a refugee home in the nearby town of Kerpen over the weekend. A spokesthingy for the public prosecutor told AP the Muslim -- for that's what he is -- stands accused of groping a woman and stealing her cellphone.

Two other Algerian asylum-seekers, aged 22 and 24, were also arrested in Kerpen and the western city of Aachen, respectively, over the weekend, both for robbery. The number of people accused of committing crimes in Cologne at New Year's now stands at 21, of whom eight are in detention.

Almost three weeks after the wave of assaults, thefts and general bad behaviour, 838 people have filed criminal complaints. That includes nearly 500 women who allege that they were sexually assaulted. Some of the victims have jointly filed a single complaint, so that the number of alleged crimes stands at 766, of which 381 are sexual offences, including three rapes.

Is it OK now, Walt asks, to point the finger of blame and shame at Muslim "refugees" and asylum-seekers? What should be done with these alleged people, if they are convicted? Perhaps they should be sentenced to several hours of sensitivity training, or maybe a little time in "re-education camps" -- something which the Germans have some experience with.

Further reading: "Mark Steyn is Islamed out", WWW 12/1/16.

PC police fail to control German backlash against immigrants

North America's oh-so-PC lamestream media are underplaying reports from Germany that real ethnic Germans, infuriated by the wave of sex and criminal attacks on white women and girls in Cologne and the surrounding area, have started to strike back with coordinated attacks on the non-white, Muslim invaders.

A spokesthingy for Cologne police told reporters that four separate attacks on asylum-seekers took place this past Sunday evening. Six of them were injured, Inspektor Katzenjammer said, and at least two had to be hospitalized. In an earlier press statement, the Polizei said they had "received information that there were groups of people who were deliberately seeking confrontations in the city centre."

The police immediately deployed in large numbers "to ensure the safety of visitors to the old town" area. In the course of the evening, more than 150 German men -- meaning ethnic Germans -- were stopped and checked. Four were taken into custody and 199 restraining orders were issued. Nevertheless, six Pakistanis were attacked by a group of about twenty men. They were all beaten, and two of them were taken to a nearby hospital where they were discharged after treatment. Later, another group attacked a 39-year-old Syrian, who was injured, but did not require treatment.

That's the news from Germany. Why are we on this side of the pond not hearing and reading more about the anti-immigrant backlash? Because drawing attention to the fact that refugees and asylum-seekers from the Middle East and North Africa are really not welcome in Europe and North America would cast doubt on the wisdom of our governments' pro-immigration, pro-multiculturalism, be-kind-to-the-refugees policies.

Maragaret Wente, often quoted here, has a good piece on the subject in today's Globe and Mail, headed "Germany's brutal immigrant awakening". For those who can't get through the Glob's stupid paywall, Walt presents the highlights from Ms Wente's excellent analysis.

After Cologne, the ugly truth can no longer be ignored. The assailants, described by a senior German official, Ralf Jaeger, as being mainly Arab and North African men, including asylum seekers who arrived in the past year, come from cultures that are deeply misogynistic. Their attitudes toward women are the worst possible fit with Europe’s tolerant, sexually egalitarian liberal norms.

The Cologne police media department initially described the celebration as “peaceful.” As disturbing details began to emerge, police were reluctant to identify the origin of the alleged attackers because of its “politically awkward nature,” as one leading German broadcaster put it. The main German TV station took a pass on the story. Henriette Reker, the pro-refugee mayor of Cologne, said there was no evidence that the assailants were “refugees.”

Until now, sensitivity to anti-immigrant backlash has prevented honest talk about sexual misconduct among immigrant men; such talk has been condemned as racist in the past.... But what happened in Cologne was too big to cover up. News has now emerged of similar New Year’s Eve assaults in Austria, Switzerland, Finland and Sweden, as well as other German cities.

The Viennese police chief has warned women not to go out alone at night. Sweden is now dealing with its own cover-up at a music festival last summer, where young girls were assaulted by hundreds of mostly Afghan men. As the official in charge of the festival’s policing told a local news source, “We sometimes dare not to say how it is because we think it might play into the hands of the [right-wing] Sweden Democrats.”

Yet even now, some of Europe’s liberal humanitarians are still in deep denial. In an interview with Der Spiegel, Cologne’s mayor expressed genuine shock that so many immigrant men do not act like German men. What’s needed, Ms. Reker said, is more language and integration courses, to give them a better grasp of German culture (which begs the question of whether they are interested in grasping it). As for how to behave at public festivals, she thinks pictograms might help.

There are other solutions, but they might be more difficult. Refuse asylum to single men (as Canada has done). Deport the ones who’ve already arrived. Choose who comes. Don’t choose people who can’t tell the difference between a kiss and rape.

As for avoiding a right-wing backlash, it’s way too late. After years of official lies and cover-ups, it’s already here.

Further reading: "Trump warns Germans after asylum-seekers' sex and crime spree", WWW 6/1/16.

UPDATE: Oopsie! Not all the lamestream media are ignoring the backlash. Canada's National Post has just, errr, reposted "Angela Merkel says Germany has lost control of the refugee crisis amid public anger over Cologne sex attacks", a report from the London Telegraph. Here's a key quote: "[Ms Merkel's] comments came after authorities in Cologne confirmed for the first time that the attacks were "almost exclusively" carried out by men "of an immigrant background".

Book review: "Some of My Best Friends Are Black"

Some of My Best Friends Are Black, by Tanner Colby (Viking, 2012) is a book I didn't expect to like. Just skimming a few pages at random to get a feel for it, I recognized the author's white, liberal, anti-Republican stance. (He calls Richard Nixon an asshole, which may be true but he should've said the same of Bill Clinton!)

Obviously, I thought, "The Strange Story of Integration in America" -- that's the book's subtitle -- is going to be a defence of the noble ideal, the downtrodden "African-Americans" and a condemnation of the "white racism" that caused integration to fail. Not so.

True enough, the bias is there, but Mr. Colby sees and writes truthfully about the problems and fallacies of the greatest experiment in social engineering in the history of America. He finds that, 50 years after Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, true integration has made few inroads into the lives of most Americans. Some of My Best Friends Are Black tells four stories to make this point.

Part 1 is "Letter from a Birmingham Suburb", which recounts the fight of wealthy, white-flight Vestavia Hills AL to keep its schools white. When federal courts ordered desegregation by busing, Vestavia's high school got some black kids from neighbouring Oxmoor, and some other black kids from the inner city. A handful of the better-off black kids were accepted by their white peers. The rest segregated themselves, for instance by establishing their own section of the school cafeteria. Meanwhile, the Birmingham schools became blacker and blacker, and today are effectively as "separate but equal" as they were before Brown v. Board of Education.

In "Planning for Permanence" (Part 2) we learn the geography and history of Kansas City MO, where Troost Avenue marks the "Berlin Wall" between the blighted black part of town, to the east, and the prosperous white areas to the west. The further west you go, the nicer KC becomes, until finally you get to the very posh "Country Club District" which spills over into Kansas. This, Mr. Colby tells us, was all planned and deliberate, achieved by a technique called "block-busting", which he describes in detail for any realtors who don't know how to do it.

One small area on the east side of Troost held out. It's called "49/63", after the intersection of two streets at its centre. There, a couple of Jesuit priests and some white folks who were not horrified by the prospect of white neighbours organized a citizens' group to help newcomers get decent financing, and keep up the neighbourhood (and property values). They tried to build a community, and were moderately successful, albeit without much participation from the black newcomers, for reasons which Mr. Colby doesn't quite get a handle on. Today, "49/63" is the only quasi-integrated neighbourhood east of Troost.

Possibly the weakest of the book's four parts is No. 3, "Why Do Black People Drink Hawaiian Punch?" It's about Madison Avenue and the world of advertising, which Mr. Colby writes about from personal experience as a creative in more than one New York agency. He analyzes the hard choice faced by blacks entering the industry -- whether to try to join the "old (white) boys network" which pervades general advertising even today, or try to make it on their own, using black media to sell black stuff to black folks.

Because of the colour-blindness of the Internet, Colby argues, black-only advertising is no longer viable. Does that mean black practitioners are now working in general advertising in large numbers? Errr, no. Despite a spike in black employment in the industry in the 1970s, top black creatives in New York today number in the single digits, just as it was in the early `60s.

Finally, Mr. Colby looks at the world of religion in "Canaan", Part 4. He tells the story of the twin Roman Catholic parishes -- Sacred Heart and Christ the King -- of Grand Coteau LA, deep in the heart of Acadiana -- southern Lousiana's Cajun Country. In theory a Roman Catholic parish should correspond to a defined geographic area, and each parish should have one (1) church. But in LA -- unlike any other place on earth -- it had become the norm to have overlapping white and black parishes.

In the 1960s the Church decided that it should try to make "real" the principle of the equality of the races, by integrating its white and black parishes. The author describes in detail the struggle of two bishops and 11 parish priests -- 13 if you count the ones that came back twice -- to unite "The Church of the Sacred Heart of Christ the King". The white parishioners were willing, although not very happy about it. The real opposition came from a black faction, who wanted to stay in their own building, worshipping in their own way with people they were comfortable with. Human nature!

After 40 years of struggle, the two churches finally coalesced as St. Charles Borromeo. In the rest of Louisiana, dual parishes -- black and white -- are still the norm. And across the entire country, separate (but equal?) churches are stronger than ever. As Dr. King said, "11 a.m. on Sunday is the most segregated hour in America." Here's a quote from Some of My Best Friends Are Black:

"As the black middle class spread out in search of suburbia, black churches followed the migration. Once established, they became centers of gravity, accelerating the move and concentrating it...
"It would seem that just about everyone has settled quite contentedly on opposite sides of the spiritual tracks. By the most widely cited statistic, 93 percent of all churches in America are racially homogeneous. And if you every stop to suggest that maybe those churches should do something about it, people just look at you like you're crazy."

I know we're running a bit long here but I can't resist adding one more snippet, buried in the middle of Part 3, which sums up the dilemma of integration very nicely. The emphasis is mine.

"Starting in the late 1960s, America hurled its public schools headlong into a hugely disruptive, shot-in-the-dark experiment. We spent billions of dollars, all of it just to corral the Children of White Flight and the Children of the Dream and put them under the same roof. Given that historic opportunity, we call came together and...we sat on opposite sides of the cafeteria. Then we went and hung out at different clubs and fraternities at opposite ends of college campuses, or at completely separate colleges altogether.

"Ever since Brown v. Board, there's been a steady chorus of academics and politicians pronouncing all the wonderful things that integration is supposed to do for America. Integrated schools will produce better educational outcomes. Diversity programs will give us integrated workplaces that offer competitive advantages in a multicultural world. Etc. It's all a lot of crap.

"Integration doesn't do anything. It's something that is done, by people, and only by mutual choice.... Among those who were give the opportunity to integrate, most of us chose not to."

Go Dutch!

Agent 3 wants to know if an e-mail rant he received from a business associate is the Real McCoy. It's headed "Go Dutch - but why wait until 2013?" and comments approvingly on a news report that the Dutch government is planning to do away with multiculturalism. Here's the text.

The Netherlands , where six per cent of the population is now Muslim, is scrapping multiculturalism. The Dutch government says it will abandon the long-standing model of multiculturalism that has encouraged Muslim immigrants to create a parallel society within the Netherlands.

A new integration bill, which Dutch Interior Minister Piet Hein Donner presented to parliament on June 16 [2011. Walt] reads: "The government shares the social dissatisfaction over the multicultural society model and plans to shift priority to the values of the Dutch people.
In the new integration system, the values of the Dutch society play a central role.With this change, the government steps away from the model of a multicultural society."

The letter [see below] continues: "A more obligatory integration is justified because the government also demands that from its own citizens. It is necessary because otherwise the society gradually grows apart and eventually no one feels at home anymore in the Netherlands .

"The new integration policy will place more demands on immigrants. For example, immigrants will be required to learn the Dutch language, and the government will take a tougher approach to immigrants who ignore Dutch values or disobey Dutch law."

The government will also stop offering special subsidies for Muslim immigrants because, according to Donner: "It is not the government's job to integrate immigrants."

The government will introduce new legislation that outlaws forced marriages and will also impose tougher measures against Muslim immigrants who lower their chances of employment by the way they dress. More specifically, the government will impose a ban on face-covering, Islamic burqas as of January 1, 2013. [Walt reported this in "Muslim eyes aren't smiling -- Dutch to ban the burqa", posted 16/9/11.]

The e-mail forwarded by Agent 3 continues:
Holland has done that whole liberal thing, and realized -- maybe too late -- that creating a nation of tribes will kill the nation itself. The future of Australia, the UK and Canada may well be read here.

Muslim immigrants leave their countries of birth because of civil and political unrest created by the very nature of their own culture. Countries like the Netherlands, Canada, the UK and Australia have an established way of life that actually works, so why embrace the unworkable? If Muslims do not wish to accept another culture, the answer is simple: stay where you are!

This gives a whole new meaning to the term "Dutch courage". Unfortunately Australian, British, and Canadian politicians don't have the guts to do the same. There's a whole lot of truth here!

Agent 3 expresses his agreement, but before forwarding it to his long list of correspondents wants to be sure the report isn't a hoax. Well, Mr. Three, you'll be happy to know it's the real thing -- old news, to be sure, but worth repeating.

The text quoted in the first part of the e-mail was written by Soeren Kern and posted on the Gatestone Institute's website 23/6/11. Needless to say, the story was generally ignored by the PC, "pro-diversity", American media.

The "letter" referred to is apparently the covering letter attached by Minister Donner to the new integration bill. The Gatestone article gives the background to the new legislation and the reasons why the Dutch government thought it necessary.

Polls taken just before the introduction of the bill showed that a majority of Dutch voters supported the government's skepticism about multiculturalism. 74% of Dutch voters told the Maurice de Hond organization that immigrants should conform to Dutch values. And 83% of those polled supported a ban on burqas in public spaces.

The problem of course is the increasing number of Muslim immigrants, including many 1000s from largely Muslim Indonesia, a former Dutch colony. As their numbers increase, the Muslims become more and more assertive in carving out a role for Islam within the "host" society. For example, the Dutch TV programme Netwerk reported in June 2009 that Dutch law was being systematically undermined by the growth of Sharia "justice".

An earlier report, "From Dawa to Jihad", by AIVD (the Dutch equivalent to the CIA), concluded that Dutch society is poorly equipped to resist the threat of radical Islam because of "a culture of permissiveness" that has become synonymous with "closing one's eyes to multiple transgressions of the law".

In his letter, Minister Donner said the Dutch government "will distance itself from the relativism contained in the model of a multicultural society." Although society changes, he wrote, it must not be "interchangeable with any other form of society."