Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - This Week in Stupid (08⧸01⧸2017)

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 8, 2017 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

27:40

This Week in Stupid (08⧸01⧸2017)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello everyone, welcome to This Week in Stupid for the 8th of January 2017, the first This Week in Stupid of the Year.
	And we get to start the year on high notes, as the BBC release a comedy sketch called The Real Housewives of ISIS, and are obviously heavily criticised for this insensitive new sketch.
	I can't play the clip due to copyright issues, but there's a link in the description if you want to go and see it, and I recommend you do, because it's really funny.
	It's actually genuinely funny.
	And so I'm not surprised whatsoever that a bunch of moralising busybodies got their panties in a bunch.
	So Revolting's Real Housewives of ISIS skit, based on the popular US television model recently exported to Britain, features actors dressed as brides of ISIL fighters taking selfies and shoving off suicide belts.
	The humour in this comes from the juxtaposition of general British attitudes and the context in which they would be found under the Islamic State.
	So the women are complaining that the suicide belts make them look fat and things like that.
	The humour is only funny if you look down on someone else and enjoy seeing them unhappy because they are not white and Christian is a bizarre criticism of this.
	Because this is actually a commentary on how British Muslims are so different to Middle Eastern Muslims.
	They have a totally different set of priorities, a very British set of priorities, and that's what's being highlighted.
	And of course the joke that this isn't exactly how it was described when I was groomed in a chat room.
	As in, there's no point going over to ISIS because it's certainly no better than where you are.
	Another wrote, I'm mortified that the BBC had produced such a programme.
	This is simply bad taste.
	The fact that it is comedy makes it even more worrying that humour should be associated with the actions of ISIS.
	Yes, humour is a coping mechanism.
	This is in fact one of the reasons that many historians tend to say that the British actually coped better with the trenches than their opposition is because they could make dark jokes about their situation.
	In fact, a lot of British comedy comes from very dark situations that people have found themselves in and have had to use humour in which to cope.
	It's entirely healthy to do so.
	And what annoys me more about this is that the idea of it is to dissuade people from travelling out to join ISIS.
	It's very obvious that the whole point of the satire is to say, look, going over to ISIS is awful.
	The people there are terrible, they're oppressive, and the actual material conditions of the state you'd be in are poor.
	You would be drastically decreasing your own standard of living by doing this, to go and live under a murderous Islamic theocracy.
	So yes, we are going to mock the idiots who thought that might be a good idea.
	It's obviously not.
	And this kind of like sanctimonious fucking moralising just pisses me off.
	It's a joke.
	And it's actually a good one.
	But this one was my favourite.
	You are utterly abhorrent, BBC.
	You are going to joke about mass rape too, or the use of children as suicide bombers, or make light of your role in promoting extremism to deceived and abused women?
	Sick!
	You are truly sick in the head and morally bankrupt.
	It would be better to condemn the ideology that these people are following when they go to the Islamic State and become child suicide bombers or abusing women or whatnot.
	But no, instead you vent your anger on a parody of these things, on a way of coping with these things, on a way of highlighting that they are bad things, that they are obviously incompatible with secular moral values, and it takes a religious ideology to make it seem as if it might be acceptable.
	But the thing is, these people aren't really bothered.
	They don't care.
	What they really want to do is have attention drawn to themselves.
	They are, in their own way, virtue signalling, saying, look at me, I'm going to call out the BBC for being morally bankrupt for producing a satire.
	No one who has ever produced a satire has been morally bankrupt on the grounds that they produced satire.
	In fact, I would absolutely say anyone trying to suppress people's ability to produce satire are those who are actually morally bankrupt.
	And this kind of grandstanding just pisses me off.
	It's a joke at the expense of the most awful people in the world and the idiots who thought they could go and join the most awful people in the world.
	And it would be a good idea.
	This sort of shit does need to be exposed, it does need to be called out, and it does need to be roundly mocked.
	So anyone who even suggests it will simply get laughed at.
	And that, in the long run, will save lives.
	But I have to say, to their credit, I have not seen anyone conflating this with an attack on Islam, which means they are at least sticking to their assertion that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam.
	I don't agree with that assertion, but at least they're being consistent.
	And on the subject of consistency, you really have to hand it to Lily Allen.
	If you're going to be ignorant on almost every subject you talk about, Lily Allen is the very model of consistency.
	She is one of the most annoying virtue signalling celebrities you will ever see.
	This week she got into a Twitter spat with Tommy Robinson over sexual assaults and Muslims.
	And you can imagine that the data simply was not on Lily's side.
	And when it finally came down to the wire, she turned around and said, only white men have sexually assaulted me.
	This is possibly the most solipsistic thing I've ever seen in my life.
	From a multi-millionaire pop star who lives in a gated community in Gloucester.
	Yes, you only are likely to be sexually assaulted by white men because you are surrounded only by white people.
	If you happened to live in Luton or Peterborough or Rotherham, Lily, you might find that the situation might be slightly different.
	And naturally, the author writing in defense of Lily Allen can do nothing but straw man almost everything that is being said.
	There is something faintly ridiculous about watching a woman say that she's been sexually assaulted by white men and then witnessing a deluge of white men denying that that can possibly be true.
	Nobody has said this.
	Nobody is saying that she hasn't been sexually assaulted by white men.
	It is entirely possible, and I mean I don't know about Lily Allen's history, but I'm happy to believe her at her word, as I'm sure most other people are.
	But her response by the reason she said only white men have sexually assaulted me was in response to the idea that other people of other races are capable of sexual assault and often they do it at a disproportionate rate, which, as I will show you in a second, are the facts.
	They say, Alan was clearly trying to make a simple point.
	White people are just as likely to be sexual predators as their non-white counterparts.
	Well, I have some bad news for you.
	That's actually not true.
	And that's not true by the numbers.
	In 2016, there are approximately 3 million Muslims in the UK.
	And we can round off the male population of that to about 1.5 million.
	This is 5.3% of the male population of England and Wales, which is about 28 million people.
	According to a Freedom of Information request from the Ministry of Justice from June 2014, the male prison population of England and Wales for all offenders serving immediate custodial sentence for rape was 5,682.
	Of this, there were 676 offenders who self-declared their religion as Muslim, which is 12% of the total from 5.3% of the overall population.
	And that's assuming that all of the Muslims in Britain live in England and Wales.
	Yes, these people are being disproportionately represented in rape statistics.
	Now, it's not as bad as it sounds.
	It's actually, I honestly thought the figure was going to turn out to be a lot higher.
	So it's not as bad as it seems, but to say that there is an equal chance is not an accurate thing to say.
	Of course, it is a politically correct thing to say, which is why they're saying it.
	And it's worth pointing out that these are the convictions for rape alone.
	It doesn't include rapists who were simply ignored by the police because they were afraid of being called racists, which is something that Dr. Alexis J's reports showed happened constantly.
	Anyway, back to the apologia.
	Where Tommy Robinson brought up Muslim grooming gangs, and I love that that's just in quotation marks.
	That isn't really a thing, that's just his crazy right-wing rhetoric.
	And linked to a video about violent crime and sexual assault with a tweet, anyone wondering what it's like for English people growing up here in towns with large Muslim communities, then watch here.
	Alan brought up her own experience as a counterpoint to the idea that it's dark-skinned men and their insatiable sexual appetites and uncontrolled violence who threaten the good women of the United Kingdom.
	That's not a counterpoint.
	It's absolutely not.
	That's just her saying, yeah, but it didn't happen to me.
	Okay, that's great.
	Unfortunately, it's happening to thousands of other girls, Lily.
	Can you have some compassion for them?
	Do you care?
	Do you not?
	I mean, are you literally trying to say, look, it's okay because it didn't happen to me?
	Why would you even bring that up thinking it's a counterpoint?
	What kind of selfish, callous motherfucker would think that?
	But anyway, I'm honestly in awe.
	You'd be like, well, look at all these thousands of people who are being raped by Muslim gangs.
	Like, well, didn't happen to me though, did it?
	Oh my god, you psycho.
	Why the fuck would you even think that's an acceptable thing to say?
	What kind of selfish fucking person must you have to be?
	Just fucking.
	Honestly, it's funny because it's just so absurd.
	Only, I mean, you can make up a person like this.
	And then you go, well, yeah, actually, they're an upper-class multi-millionaire with a mockney accent trying to be community miles away from all these problems.
	You think, Jesus Christ, I think Lily Allen might actually be the sort of person I might smother to death with a pillow if left alone with her.
	Sometimes, in some conversations, it's still necessary to say, yes, white men can be rapists too.
	No, no, no, no, it's never necessary to say that.
	Unless the conversation was specifically, white men never rape.
	And nobody ever says that.
	Nobody thinks that.
	Everyone knows that men of all races are capable of raping.
	That's not the issue.
	The issue is what levels are they doing it at?
	And let's be honest, there is a disproportionate level of Muslim rape against white women, or young girls in this case, in Britain.
	That's reality.
	You can say that I don't like that.
	You can say, well, I think that's wrong.
	You can say, this very conversation is making me uncomfortable.
	But that won't change the reality that there are Muslim gangs who predate on young British girls because they are young British girls.
	Because they are not Muslim.
	Now, no one is saying that we need to take Muslims on helicopter flights and throw them out.
	This is not something that the people who did not commit these crimes need to be held responsible for.
	Ever.
	No one other than feminists want to do that.
	Do you understand?
	It's only feminists when they go, oh, it's white men, isn't it?
	No, you're trying to blame all white men for the crimes of a few, and you think we're trying to blame all Muslim men for the crimes of a few.
	And we're not.
	Obviously, we're fucking not.
	But because you think it's acceptable to do that towards white men, you think we think it's acceptable to do that towards Muslims.
	We don't.
	But accepting the reality is important.
	Accepting what's actually happening is important.
	And saying, well, it just hasn't happened to me yet, is not a defense.
	It's no secret that when the same people who try to justify their racism against refugees and immigrants with the Muslim men are raping our white women narrative are often happy to turn a blind eye when the perpetrators of sexual assault are white men.
	No, they're not.
	It's just they don't need to be activists for arresting and locking up white men who sexually assault women because the government has no problem doing that.
	There are no forces in the British government or any of the subsequent authorities under their supreme authority that are in any way biased in favour of letting white men off of sexual assault.
	No one is doing that.
	There is no issue with white men not being arrested because they're white men.
	If you can believe it, which I'm sure you can't.
	But that's not something that's happening.
	And I don't see organized gangs of white men going around and sexually assaulting people.
	It's just not something that generally happens in Britain by the native population.
	The incidents that happen appear to be isolated assaults and they are punished accordingly, as they should be.
	But when you actually see coordinated efforts to prevent this sort of thing from certain communities that have a history of doing this, such as Cologne on New Year's Eve, SJW-style feminists will say things like, that's racist.
	And this is actually something that happened.
	I should have got the thing in advance, and I'm just too fucking lazy.
	I was talking to Crowds and T about this.
	This is actually something that happened.
	There wasn't a mass sexual assault and raping on Cologne New Year's Eve 2016, like there was in 2015, because the police basically corralled all of the North African-looking men into one area.
	And that was decried as racism.
	So what they're effectively saying, as Kraut adequately points out, they are effectively saying these people are rapey and preventing this rape is a form of racism.
	This is where the progressive narrative is at the moment.
	And this is amazing because what they're basically saying is that prevention is not better than cure if prevention involves actual police work on the part of the police, identifying likely perpetrators and preventing it in advance.
	If the likely perpetrators happened to be people of North African origin, for example, in the example of Cologne, then that is a form of racism and that's unacceptable.
	Even though we could be quite sure that these gangs of men who arrived at Cologne City Centre on New Year's Eve were undoubtedly planning a repeat of the previous year.
	Undoubtedly.
	Because so few of them were punished from that as well.
	Just, it's incredible.
	These people want to create victims.
	That's what they want.
	And I think they want to create victims because it furthers their narrative, whether they understand it or not.
	Whether they even get what they're doing is actually creating damage for other people, it doesn't matter because it's not happening to them.
	Only white men have sexually assaulted them, so that's fine.
	And I'm sorry to spend so much time on this, but this really got in my craw.
	The last time Lily Allen prompted a Twitstorm and a media outcry across the tabloids is when she apologised on behalf of England to a young refugee in the Calais jungle, tearfully telling a 13-year-old boy from Afghanistan that she felt guilty because the English in particular have put you in danger.
	A statement so stupid, I'm not going to spend the time refuting it.
	Our author says it would be absurd, of course, for us to say that white men are any better or worse than any of us.
	As far as I can tell, that certainly isn't what Alan is trying to imply.
	When she tweeted this week that people need to realize how the reality of how white males and their attitudes towards our laws have continued to threaten our values and communities, while linking news stories about crimes committed by white men, she was clearly parodying the language used by people like Robinson when they talk about British Muslims and refugees from Arab countries.
	No, she wasn't.
	She was not parodying anything.
	It wasn't just a prank, bro.
	She is actually of this opinion, and unfortunately, the statistics do not bear this opinion out.
	and she doesn't care.
	Again, I'm just annoyed that this is even being given any kind of credence.
	But of course, there are plenty of apologists in the mainstream media for every fucking progressive thing that she says, regardless of the truth of it.
	And again, it's white males.
	I mean, no one is even saying it's actually Muslim males.
	It's some Muslim males.
	And it's some Muslim males because of the ideology they have in their head.
	The thing that they believe allows them to do this.
	It's not all of them.
	Not all of them believe this.
	In fact, the majority of them don't believe it.
	Which is why it's a tiny minority of them that actually do it.
	But we have to accept that there is a significant minority that is victimizing people based on their race and religion, and they're getting away with it.
	And it's people like this author and Lily Allen who are helping them.
	They are creating the atmosphere, the political atmosphere for the police to be afraid of arresting Muslims.
	This is what these people are doing.
	This is why they are so pernicious.
	The people committing these crimes should be arrested and the people arresting them should not be afraid of allegations of racism when they do it.
	I guess this week is going to be a long one because I can't resist from documenting Jeremy Corbyn's complete failure as the leader of the Labour Party as support for Jeremy Corbyn to be the next Prime Minister hits new low of 14%.
	And that's in comparison to 47% of the YouGov survey who said they would prefer Theresa May, with 39% saying they don't know.
	And this is part of a steady decline of Corbyn's ratings, which were 18% in November and 16% in December.
	And I imagine they're going to be around 12% in February.
	Corbyn, you are killing the Labour Party.
	People do not have confidence in you.
	You should recognize this reality and step down.
	You are a damaging element to your own party.
	That must, you would think that you have some duty of care to your own political movement if you are a dead weight around its neck.
	The Labour Party is really struggling.
	I mean, they're struggling with UKIP and the Lib Dems.
	And recently they actually managed to claw back a couple of points from the Liberal Democrats.
	But there's absolutely no change in Conservative popularity in this country.
	And that's going to continue until you realize you have to get on side with the interests of the working class.
	Basically, you need to come out in full-throated support of Brexit.
	You need to be anti-immigration, you need to be anti-EU, and you need to be able to understand why there is a left-wing case for these things.
	And I will explain it to you in fucking basic terms right now, Jeremy, right?
	Every new immigrant that comes in damages the financial prospects of the previous one you let in.
	Each and every new migrant that enters the country helps suppress the wages of the ones already here.
	That is your case.
	To protect the migrants, you must stop further migrants.
	Do you understand?
	And that will obviously have a general knock-on effect to the working class of the country as a whole.
	As they are currently being pressed out of the job market by pressure from sheer numbers.
	Just market forces are operating.
	Supply and demand.
	Even a child can understand this.
	You surely can understand this.
	We do not need more migrants in this country.
	It's just not helping.
	It's putting adverse pressure on the NHS.
	It's putting pressure on all of the public services.
	And when these public services begin to fail, that gives the conservatives the mandate they're looking for to privatize them.
	That gives them an excuse.
	They're costing the taxpayer money.
	We should sell them off so they can actually become profitable entities for someone else.
	You're making this happen by defending mass immigration, Jeremy.
	By defending open borders, defending the EU.
	Defending your position is hurting the working class and the working class immigrants that have come to this country.
	You have to stop.
	You will never, you could rob UKIP and the Conservatives of so many of their laissez-faire voters.
	Of the people who just are concerned about mass immigration to this country and the damage it's doing to them and their livelihoods.
	You could win all of them back in a heartbeat by simply changing your minds on this one issue.
	But you're so ideologically entrenched, you can't possibly do that.
	And the problem is you, Corbyn.
	The problem is you and the government apparatus you are fostering around you.
	The people who you have around you.
	They are not electable.
	And the idea that back in December you were like, yeah, Labour are ready for a snap general election.
	You are so unbelievably detached from reality, Jeremy.
	And people are going to say, well, you know, you can't trust the polls.
	And I agree, you can't trust the polls.
	You need to look at the polls in the wider context of what's going on.
	And Jeremy, you do not have public support.
	You can go to any comment section, any forum, any Facebook discussion group, and you can see the comments.
	You can see what people say about you.
	There will always be some middle-class commenters who are like, well, I really support Jeremy Corbyn.
	I'm a socialist.
	I think this is all good.
	And then you'll see dozens of working class replies of people saying, well, I have to live with mass immigration.
	I don't like it.
	Get with the fucking program or you are never going to be elected and you will be the thing that kills the Labour Party.
	And I'm so annoyed that you are currently destroying the only viable opposition to the Conservatives because I don't agree with anything the Conservatives are doing beyond Brexit.
	I don't agree with them selling off parts of the NHS.
	I don't agree with them opening up British land fracking.
	They're thinking about clearing parts of Sherwood Forest to frack under it.
	I don't agree with them censoring the internet, censoring pornography.
	I don't agree with any of these things, but I can't agree with the EU on a more basic, fundamental, principled level, and that has to come first.
	Because the EU is more dangerous than me not being allowed to see my porn.
	So I'm sorry, Jeremy.
	You have to pull your fucking finger out and you have to accept that you are the problem here.
	So the final thing I'm going to talk about is the quote-unquote evidence of Russian hacking of the DNC's emails.
	We went through the CIA's report in detail on a Hangout last night that I did on my other channel, my live stream channel.
	And I'll leave a link to that in the description.
	So if you'd like to see this in detail, you can see why I'm saying what I'm saying now.
	But there are basically three points that you can take away from this that are incontrovertibly true.
	The first one is that no proof has been provided.
	The CIA claim that they have high confidence that this is true.
	Which is exactly the same thing that they said prior to the Iraq war.
	And they refuse outright to provide any evidence to show that this is the case.
	And point two, the claim has originated from the CIA.
	It hasn't come from anywhere else.
	It's an anonymous source from the CIA who has said this.
	And they will not give us the evidence.
	Basically, the CIA are asking you to take them at their word, which is something I frankly will never do.
	Because I have read about the CIA and I simply do not trust them.
	And then we come to the third point, which is the weasel words, the way that this is being presented in the press.
	Other intelligence agencies confirm a campaign of influence took place, but not that Russian hackers are responsible.
	And the way that the press is portraying this in a very lazy, reductionist way is that other agencies agree that the Russians hacked the DNC.
	This is not what they're saying, but this is how the press is misrepresenting it.
	And again, I strongly advise that you take a look at the live stream or even go through the thing yourself to see it's a 13-page document, only five pages of which are actually dedicated to establishing that the Russians did it, and that's done on the basis that they say we think the Russians did it.
	There is a concerted effort to try and conflate the idea of Russian propaganda also being the same as Russian hacking.
	This campaign of influence is based on Russia Today, the Russian state media outlet, and paid Russian trolls on the internet who are paid to put pro-Russian propaganda out onto message boards and whatnot.
	Now, these things are not illegal, they are not hacking, and they are exactly the same as what the Hillary Clinton campaign did.
	So there is absolutely no grounds on which to say what they did was wrong, unless you're also going to say what Hillary did was wrong.
	And even then, I don't think it is.
	Everyone is entitled to put out whatever propaganda they want, whatever kind of worldview they want people to agree with, everyone is entitled to do this.
	This is insidious, this attempt to conflate the Russians voicing their opinion as being an illegitimate means of influencing the election.
	Well, I'm sorry, I do recall Barack Obama coming over to Britain and saying something like, oh, what was it?
	Brexit's a bad idea.
	You should stay in the EU.
	If Britain leaves the EU, they will be back of the queue.
	You fucking hypocrites.
	But not only that, a CNN commentator accused Julian Assange of being a pedophile, which Wikileaks are, of course, threatening to sue them over if they don't retract the statement.
	Which, of course, they did.
	I mean, this guy actually called him, and he said this as if it was nothing, a paedophile who lives in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
	By Wednesday, CNN had removed clips of Mudd's comments from the show's Twitter account and tweeted a correction.
	An analyst on our air earlier today asserted that Julian Assange was a pedophile and regrets saying it.
	In fact, CNN has no evidence to support that assertion.
	We regret the error.
	Well, I fucking bet you do.
	Honestly, this goddamn fake news epidemic that is coming from the mainstream media is intolerable.
	At every turn, they're being outed as liars, and they just won't stop lying.
	I just can't understand it.
	Just tell the truth.
	Tell the fucking truth.
	I'll share mine with you.
	I don't trust a single thing the CIA says now or has ever said.
	Okay, and I have excellent reason not to do so.
	Had to write a whole book about how it was the CI who told the South Africans where to find Nelson Mandela when he was on the run, because the South African police were too dumb to find him.
	About Chile, about Guatemala, about Greece, about Indonesia.
	A record of crime and disinformation and lying to the American people.

▲