Mason Verger’s Tears

Mason Verger’s Tears

Mason Verger is the odious and sadistic paedophile who is both Hannibal’s patient and nemesis. Verger, the degenerate heir of a vastly wealthy American dynasty, was referred to psychiatrist Dr Lecter because of his monstrous proclivities to sexually and physically abuse helpless children in the Third World. He was able to do this under the banner of his father’s need to cosmetically conceal the stains of his corporation’s depredations in those countries whose children were most vulnerable. Verger leapt at the opportunity: charitable instincts, noble purposes, unimpeachable credentials.

He was meticulous: he caught in vials the desperate tears of every child he violated. When in need of a liitle pick-me-up he would sip those tears from the vials he had lined up in his refrigerator.

Dr Lecter’s diagnosis was exact; his prognosis certain; his treatment, to drug Mason Verger to a state of surgical stupefaction under the guise of popping amyl nitrates as a prelude to orgiastic gay sex. In fact Dr Lecter instructed Verger to take a very sharp cut-throat razor and slice pieces of his face off to feed to his dogs. Verger’s lips and eye-lids proved particularly tasty to canine appetites.

Verger unfortunately survived the treatment, as Dr Lecter intended.

And now, every catastrophe in the Third World is brought to our screens instantly and, like Mason Verger, we sip the tears of the suffering children and feel better for it.

Extinction Rebellion = Democracy Extinction

Extinction Rebellion = Democracy Extinction
If you wanted further proof of the collapse of democracy, the feebleness of our policing and criminal justice system and the rise of minority extremists taking to the streets in numbers and with force, the classic tactic of fascist insurgents, look no further than London today. Green shirts, brown shirts, there is of course a difference of degree but not of principle: if you cannot achieve your goal by peaceful, legal and democratic means, take to the streets. I pity the poor police: the ‘Rebels’ claim to be simply sitting on the moral high ground in the sunshine, harming no-one. When the police ask them to move, they refuse. If the police attempt to use their powers to lead them away or arrest them, violent resistance ensues, including ‘Rebels’ gluing themselves to public transport.
We are clearly now ruled by increasingly aggressive, intolerant and extremist minorities. If Parliament and the courts do not stand up for the great silent majority of citizens, what on earth are they for?

O Brother George, Where Art Thou?

                          O brother George, where art thou?

Politics and the English Language Revisited

The House of Jargon

Let me be perfectly clear about this. Nope.

Order! Order!                                       Disorder, Chaos and Dread

My Right Honourable Friend             Loathsome unspeakable shit

The precedent of this House               is whatever I make up

There is no place for anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Just ask Karl Marx.     Well, these jewish money-boys are the capitalist enemy after all.

We are fighting to protect British jobs. Primarily my own because there’s bugger-all I can do about Honda and £78k a year plus upwards of £30k expenses is not to be sniffed at. Do you know how much private schools cost these days?

We will always respect the people’s views and their democratic rights.

So long as they agree with mine. Ours. The Party’s. The Leader’s. If people are so stupid as to vote en masse for something their MPs (aka betters) oppose, well, they don’t deserve the right to vote. Rabble. Riff-Raff. ‘Oh hello, dear, can I count on your vote . . . ‘

The NHS is safe in our hands.   Well, all those PFI contractors and the people we outsourced health care too. And the prisons. And the Probation Service. And the major transport infra-structure projects. So if they all fuck it up, don’t blame, me I don’t run Carillon or Serco or whoever. Mind you, I wouldn’t mind the money they’re on. Senior execs £2 million plus bonuses! CEO £3 Million plus shares!! Sheesh.

We will make sure the police keep Britain’s streets safe.   I wouldn’t know because I never walk along a street. I’ve got a ministerial car and a driver. And a security escort. But I do back Cressida Dick and other police leaders for their crack-down on crime: if you’re threatened with a knife, run away. WE advise you to join a gym to get fit enough to outrun a drug-crazed, feral knife-wielding youth over at least 100 metres. We also think that every parent should escort their children of whatever age everywhere. We regard ‘Stop-and-Search’ as deeply racist and a hate crime in itself so the police are hardly like to arrest themselves are they? And no we don’t bring knife crime offenders to court, colossal waste of the court’s time and money. And even when we do the judges will only sentence to jail 1 in 3 of the feral scum who’ve slashed up all and sundry because a) it’s not their fault, we blame ‘Drill’ music and b) it limits prison-overcrowding. Anyway, they’d only meet their old gang and start dealing drugs again. Stuffed rats! What will they think of next?

One could go on, but the point is clear. Trust in British politics, Parliament, MPs and the democratic process has been broken, perhaps terminally. When George Orwell wrote his lucid and readable essay, intelligible to anyone with a modicum of education, he did so in a different world, or so it seems.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“Politics and the English Language” (1946) is an essay by George Orwell that criticised the “ugly and inaccurate” written English of his time and examines the connection between political orthodoxies and the debasement of language.

The essay focuses on political language, which, according to Orwell, “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind”. Orwell believed that the language used was necessarily vague or meaningless because it was intended to hide the truth rather than express it. This unclear prose was a “contagion” which had spread to those who did not intend to hide the truth, and it concealed a writer’s thoughts from himself and others.^[1] Orwell encourages concreteness and clarity instead of vagueness, and individuality over political conformity.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Orwell, writing shortly after the end of World War Two, drew on experiences which were already informing his major political ‘Nineteen-Eighty Four’, published in 1948. He claims to have drawn extensively on his time spent working at the BBC during the war.

One might suppose the contrast between then and now is great. But is it?

Clarity instead of vagueness. Individuality over political conformity.

Debasement, contagion, words evoking corruption and disease, but one man-made for very powerful reasons: Power itself – gaining it, retaining it, defending it. But how can this be done in an open society, a free democracy?

Orwell tells us how. Before you seek out his masterly essay, which I hope you will, I’ll draw your attention to two recent news items.

 

‘NOT backing off’

LABOUR MP David Lammy has defended himself after he was confronted by BBC Andrew Marr for his comparison between Jacob Rees-Mogg’s European Research Group and Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party.

By Alessandra Scotto di Santolo Alessandra Scotto di SantoloPUBLISHED: 08:08, Mon, Apr 15, 2019 | UPDATED: 09:14, Mon, Apr 15, 2019

The Labour MP was shown a clip of himself speaking at an anti-Brexit rally in which he implied the ERG should not be appeased, comparing it to the appeasement of the Nazis before World War 2. At the rally, he said:“I’m just looking over there at Winston Churchill. On the 30th of September 1938 he stood up in Parliament and he said we will not appease Hitler. I’m looking across to Nelson Mandela who will not give into apartheid. And today we say ‘We will not give in to the ERG’.”

 

Confronted by BBC’s Andrew Marr on the “unacceptable comparison”, he responded: “Andrew, I would say that it was not strong enough. In 1938 there were allies who hatched the plan for Hitler to annex parts of Czechoslovakia and Churchill said no, and he stood alone. We must not appease.

“We’re in a situation now – and let me just be clear, I’m an ethnic minority – we have in the ERG and in Jacob Rees-Mogg someone who is happy to put onto his web pages the horrible, racists AFD party.

“A party that is Islamophobic and on the far right of the German system.

“They’re happy to use the phrase ‘Grand Wizard’: KKK is what it evokes to me when I think of that phrase and the deep south.

But as Mr Marr pointed out Jacob Rees-Mogg has made clear he does not endorse the AFD and it is a “dangerous thing to accuse him of being close to Nazi ideology”, Mr Lammy replied: “We do know that Boris Johnson is with Steve Bannon who is a white supremacist.

“We do know that there are links between Viktor Orban and Salvini and others.

“I’m not backing off on this. Never will I back off on this on behalf of my constituents.”

“And the BBC should not allow this extreme far-right fascism to flourish.I don’t care how elected they were, so was the far right in Germany.”

Clearly comment is superfluous but for the record:

In the Referendum on the EU in 2016 votes were cast as follows: LEAVE –

Conservative voters                                                                                   61%

Labour                                                                                                           65%

Lib-Dem                                                                                                        32%

In the General Election of 2017 both Conservative and Labour manifestoes pledged to hon the results of the referendum and support Brexit. Together they received 85% of the votes cast in that election.

WOMAN EJECTED FROM ‘INCLUSIVE’ TRANS EVENT

Daily Telegraph, 23 March, 2019

An academic was forcibly removed by police from a ‘transgender visibility’ event after organisers complained she made members of the panel “feel uncomfortable”.

Dr Julia Long was one of a group including a journalist, a Labour Party activist and a woman who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisals. The group refused to leave because they had tickets for the event and had merely sat in the audience, not contributing to the panel session.

Organisers from the Pride in Accenture diversity network had sent a message to ticket holders saying,”This event is centred around inclusion, open to everyone of all ages.”

The rest is silence. And will be forever once freedom of speech is denied and truth is turned on its head.

The question is what we will do about it, when the last safe space is consecrated and the last speaker no-platformed.

                                                                                                                                   ?