All Episodes
Previous Next
April 22, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
27:13
This Week in Stupid (22⧸04⧸2018)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello everyone, welcome to this week in Stupid for the 22nd of April 2018.
So this is it.
The day before the sentencing of Count Dankula, where we will find out just how badly the British state intends to punish someone for making a joke.
So there are going to be two protests held at roughly the same time.
One at Airdrie Sheriff's Court between 9 and 12 tomorrow, which will cover the announcement of the verdict.
And the other one will be a march to Downing Street that begins in Leicester Square in London.
This is the one I'll be attending, but if you're local to the Scottish one, please do attend that one.
So the proceedings for the London protest will be midday gather at Leicester Square and at one o'clock depart.
The march will be escorted by the police using a moving cordon and the route will take about 20 or 30 minutes to walk and will conclude at Richmond Terrace directly opposite Downing Street where there will be a symbolic five minute silence to highlight the lack of free speech in this country.
And then there'll be several speeches given.
I will be one of the people speaking and my speech will probably be entitled something like Was Enoch Powell Right?
And after the speeches there'll be public engagement until the event comes to a close.
I'll leave the links to these in the description and in the comment section so please go and check them out if you're anywhere near and you are also concerned about the state of free speech in this country.
We will have more to say about that later on in this video.
But first an update on this stupid goddamn Starbucks story.
So for anyone who didn't see the previous video I did on this, two men refused to leave Starbucks when they were asked because they refused to become paying customers.
This made them trespassers and the manager of Starbucks understandably called the police and the police removed these men and then everyone decided that this was some sort of racial injustice, which it wasn't.
So Rashin Nelson and Dante Robinson came forward this morning on ABC News' Good Morning America to publicly share their story for the first time.
How brave.
The 23 year old entrepreneurs and longtime friends said they were waiting to meet a potential business partner at the Starbucks and Philadelphia's Rittenhouse Square neighbourhood on April the 12th when a barista asked them if they wanted to order anything.
They declined and told her they were just there for a quick meeting.
Nelson said he immediately asked to use the bathroom when they walked in but was informed it was for paying customers only.
So the pair sat at a table and waited for the person whom they were scheduled to meet.
Then they saw the police officers enter the store and speak with the manager.
I was thinking they can't be here for us, said Robinson in the interview.
We have meetings at Starbucks all the time.
They didn't think anything of it until the officers approached their table and told them they needed to leave.
It was just get out, you have to leave, you're not buying anything so you shouldn't be here.
Which is a perfectly valid reason for Starbucks to ask you to leave their store.
They said they calmly told the officers they were there for a meeting and Robinson said he even called the person for whom they were waiting, but the officers repeatedly insisted that they leave.
It's a real estate meeting.
We've been working on this for months, Robinson said.
We're days away from changing a whole entire situation, our lives, and you about to sit here telling me I can't do that.
You're not doing that.
Well here's a thought for you buddy.
Buy a fucking coffee.
Holy shit.
Why are you acting like you had no idea that these people wanted you to buy something or leave?
You said, oh, I'll just come into a private establishment and tell them to get fucked, shall I?
Unbelievable.
This is a weird level of entitlement you have.
If I go into a coffee shop and I want to sit down for a bit, I'd buy a fucking coffee.
Do you know why?
It's because then I have a legitimate right to be there as a customer.
And the thing is, the story told to us by Melissa DePino even contradicts the story they've just given.
She's a 50-year-old writer and mother of two, so of course she was in a Starbucks.
And she told ABC News a Starbucks barista shouted from behind the counter at the two men to make a purchase or leave.
Perfectly reasonable.
They were sitting quietly minding their own business and waiting for their friend to come.
Yeah, okay, but they need to make a purchase or leave.
So according to Robinson, there was no reasoning.
They had nothing.
They just kept using defiant trespassing as an excuse for putting us behind bars.
You mean being held in custody for eight hours before being released, because Starbucks didn't charge you with trespassing, where they actually could have done.
You're acting like you had no idea that they wanted you to buy something on leave, despite the fact that we know from the person who recorded this that Barista was yelling at you to fucking buy something.
The idea that I'm supposed to believe that two scruffy-looking gentlemen will come into a Starbucks in order to do a real estate property deal or something like that that they've been working on for months and would actually willfully endanger this meeting and endanger all the planning that has apparently gone into it by simply not buying a coffee is frankly too much for me to stomach.
This seems like a giant setup to me, but I guess that's because I'm rather cynical at this point.
So naturally, Starbucks announced that they were going to close 8,000 company-owned stores across the nation for the afternoon of May 29th to train its staff on how to avoid racial bias in an effort to prevent discrimination in our stores.
There's no evidence that this was a case of racial bias, and it seems to just be assumed because these people are black.
But I'll tell you what, if you're listening to this and you work in Starbucks, please do everything you can to record these sessions.
I would absolutely love to see what they're teaching you.
But really, this comes from a place of incredible entitlement.
You are not actually entitled to just sit in a Starbucks and not buy something, and just partake of their facilities without actually contributing to the business.
There's no particular reason that they should let you do that.
And it's this kind of entitlement that I'm seeing absolutely everywhere.
For example, Duke students who hijacked an alumni event say punishing us would hurt us mentally.
Yes, it would.
It's called discipline.
So two dozen student activists crashed an alumni event at Duke University on Saturday using a megaphone to make their demands and drown out the speaker.
The speaker being an absolute nobody who happened to be the president of Duke University.
The students were surprised to discover that their interruption had irritated many alumni in the audience, if you can imagine it, some of whom heckled the activists and turned their backs while the demands were read.
Good on them.
Now Duke's administration is considering whether to discipline the students whose behaviour unquestionably violates university policy.
That doesn't sit well with them.
Protest leader Gino Whenever accused the administrators of aggravating the mental health problems of student activists.
Okay, well I agree with you.
All of these student activists appear to have mental health problems.
Instead of being free to roam around and protest and disrupt everyone else's lives, maybe they should be given the treatment they clearly need.
The administration's letters informing students that they are under investigation have had the effect of exacerbating any pre-existing mental health conditions.
Clearly there is a massive problem with mental health conditions in universities in America and it's amazing how far-left professors will take advantage of this and radicalize these students to the point where now even criticizing them for their own bad actions is a threat to their mental health.
So the protest happened during an alumni event reflecting on the 50th anniversary of the 1968 Silent Vigil at Duke, a series of student-led sit-ins on campus.
Nazilio and his comrades sought to channel the spirit of silent vigil, although their protest was anything but silent.
About 25 students stormed the stage inside the page auditorium while Price was speaking and chanted, President Price get off the stage and whose university our university until they had command of the room.
Then they read a list of demands which included raising the university's minimum wage to $15 an hour and hiring more faculty members of colour and spending more money on counseling services.
Well I definitely agree that these people need a great deal of counseling and maybe they should be kept at home for their own safety.
The Duke Chronicle reported that some of the audience supported the students while others did not.
The protesters received mixed reactions from the alumni in the audience.
Some did nothing while others booed loudly or clapped in support.
Many alumni stood up and turned their backs to the stage, some shouting vulgarities.
The protesters reported hearing racial epithets.
Oh no, what about their feelings though?
The protesters noted that they were surprised by the extent of the alumni's negative reactions.
Why?
You're acting like an insufferable bunch of spoilt children who are running around claiming to have mental health problems.
Why would people be happy to hear from you in protest form?
I mean, what injustice do you think you are protesting?
You guys happen to be students of colour who presumably would like to become faculty members of colour and you would like to increase the minimum wage that the university pays out to presumably new hires after they've hired you.
It seems that you are literally just demanding the university give you a job and lots of money because you feel entitled to such a thing.
But the protesters noted that they were surprised by the extent of the alumni's negative reaction and one of the student organizers added that he was disappointed that the administrators focused more on stopping the students than the angry alumni.
Well of course he is.
He's an entitled child with mental health problems.
Of course he thinks that everyone else who did nothing wrong are the problem and the people doing something wrong are not the problem because he happens to be part of the group that happens to be doing something wrong.
Instead of actually going to the alumni and saying that's not appropriate or removing them from the space, they were more worried about us.
Well that's a pretty incredible thing for you to say given how your presence there was not appropriate and you should have been removed from that space.
Because from your own description you appear to be mentally infirm children.
This was not an uncommon opinion among the protest leaders.
Nazalio expressed disappointment that the adults whose job it is to care for us failed to do so.
You're an adult!
You're in your 20s!
Nobody is supposed to care for you, you're meant to care for yourself, you child!
Readers may find it remarkable that these students expected the other people in the room to applaud and validate them for derailing the event.
I do find it absolutely remarkable.
It's amazing how entitled American college students have become.
The students also think the university should refrain from punishing them.
Of course the mentally infirm children who have been disrupting other people's lawful events think that they shouldn't be punished for their actions.
Because any punishment would contribute to their mental health problems.
I think these people need to be fucking sectioned.
These people clearly have too many mental health problems to be dealing with the real world, let alone the university campus.
I think we are particularly concerned that the university knows that by sending these conduct letters out they will be concerning the students and that will be exacerbating any pre-existing mental health conditions and like Bryce said, traumatizing and starting new ones.
Maybe you should stay fucking home then.
If the consequences of your actions are too much for you to bear, don't take these actions.
It's really very simple.
I think that among the many things that we share in common with the administration, the number one thing is we all want to see the university be better and more accommodating and make changes.
Not where it suppresses other people's free speech, no.
I mean if you had stood outside of the hall and said the things that you are saying, I would be in complete support of what you did.
I would say yep, they had every right to protest, even though I think what they were protesting was childish and entitled and infantilizing, but they had every right to protest and they protested in the appropriate way.
They did not shut down the event but they made their voices heard.
I completely stand behind what these students did.
Marching in and taking over the stage to prevent the president of the university from speaking is not something I can support and means that you are the problem, not the solution.
Not that really there is a solution to the problems that you have beyond medication.
We're not sure why they're taking that approach too and reaching out to us in good faith rather than initiating a conduct process because they don't fucking have to, alright?
There is no reason that they should treat you as equals when you are clearly their inferiors in both institutional power and mental ability.
You are not a separate sovereign faction within the university.
You're an uppity bunch of children and you should be put in your place.
This story in particular really annoys me.
It really annoys me on dozens of different levels.
The internet is head over heels for this adorable, openly gay three-year-old.
I am the father of an adorable three-year-old.
I do not know the sexuality of my three-year-old, because at this age, three-year-olds have very limited conception of sexuality.
At three years old, they are actually just learning to speak properly, actually form their own sentences.
I honestly do not believe a three-year-old has any real conception of what it is to be gay.
Can you imagine how different life might have been if we were all allowed to be who we wanted at the earliest age?
Between gender reveals and gendered toys, our sexuality and genders are policed before we even leave the womb.
What if we are allowed to figure out who we are with unconditional support of our families?
One three-year-old is living that dream.
Three-year-olds have these kind of dreams.
They don't think I'm going to be a fireman, they think I'm going to be gay.
At three years old, he proudly admits that he is gay, tweeted his aunt slash godmother.
He braids his hair, does makeup of his dolls, and sometimes pretends to be a beauty queen.
No one taught or forced him.
He on his own showed interest in these things.
Okay, I'm happy to agree that a child could show interest in braiding hair, doing makeup, or pretend to be a beauty queen, but he doesn't know what it is to be gay.
That is a concept that you have taught to him.
And I'm just saying, I really don't think that three-year-olds have any time to be deciding whether they are straight or gay.
They should be deciding whether they need to use the potty or not.
Some wonder how a three-year-old could understand what it means to be gay and worry that he's being sexualized very early.
Well, hands up, you got me, but that's only because I come from a big family and I have a three-year-old son myself.
That I know that three-year-olds have no conception of sexualization, and this is something being projected onto him by the adults.
She explains that's simply how RJ sees himself, and Karen and her family simply love and accept him however he identifies.
Nobody doubts that, but the fact that he has any idea of these concepts at all speaks volumes about the kind of nonsense that you say to him on a daily basis that he is picking up from you.
Do I have to explain how easily influenced a three-year-old is, especially when it comes to a parent figure teaching them how to do something?
He says what he feels and admits to himself that he is gay.
What do you mean admits?
He doesn't have a value judgment for being gay or straight.
He doesn't admit to himself that he's gay.
He doesn't know anything about sexuality.
He isn't afraid to express himself.
I didn't mean that being gay equals showing doing feminine stuff.
I completely knows that no, they aren't the same things.
So if being gay to you is not showing and doing feminine stuff, even though that does appear to be what you think being gay is, then what do you mean?
Do you mean that he said, mummy, I would like to take a dick in my ass?
But I love this.
To the people killing the positive vibe here, forget the label.
This isn't about gender.
This is about living your life freely and happily without messing with other people's lives.
He's a good kid.
He loves being himself.
You do you.
And heck yeah, I'm going to protect him from people like you.
People who don't want to see your child sexualized.
What monsters?
What absolute monsters.
People who actually think that the child should be allowed to grow up to be the person that he is without your gender ideology being forced upon him.
A three-year-old should not know what homosexuality is.
End of story.
But the story apparently has almost 15,000 retweets.
15,000 absolute loons who think there can be a gay three-year-old.
The stories this week are all over the place.
Sorry, there's no rhyme or reason to them really.
But this is another one that absolutely cracked me up.
Saudi Arabia wins seat at UN Commission on Women.
And as you can see, the person appointed is an austere old Arab man who clearly has a lot to say about women's rights.
So Saudi Arabia has been granted the place on the Executive Council of the UN Commission on the Status of Women.
Well, I suppose they'd be the ones to consult if you were worried about the status of women.
Where can we find where women are treated with the lowest status in society and then work up from there?
Is that the plan?
The kingdom was one of 12 new countries elected on Tuesday in a secret ballot during a meeting of the UN Economic and Social Council in New York.
It will serve a three-year term beginning the next year.
This comes almost a year after being elected the 45th member of the Commission.
It's a token of appreciation of the kingdom's efforts to empower women and have them become an integral part of Saudi society.
Wow, I mean, I suppose you could say that.
I suppose that when you are the most oppressive society on earth for women, allowing them to, I don't know, leave the house without a male guardian?
No, no, you can't do that yet.
Allowing them to leave the country without a male guardian.
No, you can't do that yet.
Allowing them to vote.
Oh, it's not a democracy.
Oh, allowing them to drive cars.
Fucking progressive.
The role of the Commission is to promote women's empowerment.
The body meets annually to evaluate the progress and formulate policies to promote the advancement of women.
Well, I suppose if you're gonna need it anywhere, you're gonna need it in Saudi Arabia, aren't you?
So to finish up this week, we'll come back to Britain and honestly, Britain should be serving as a warning to the rest of the Anglosphere.
This is what happens when you allow political correctness to run rampant.
You get things like this.
80s pop star Morrissey going on an absolute rampage, denouncing halal meat as evil, which it is, attacking Theresa May, Sadiq Khan and Diane Abbott and more, with good reason.
So Morrissey has made extraordinary, even by his standards, series of pronouncements in a new interview published on his website attacking halal meat producers Theresa May, Diane Abbott and Sadiq Khan.
The former Smith's frontman, already infamous for his statements on race, animal welfare and more, has criticized halal meat production, the Islamic method of animal slaughter.
He claimed that halal slaughter requires certification that can only be given by supporters of ISIS and described as evil.
That's pretty bloody woke.
He also described Jewish kosher food production as very cruel and called for it to be banned.
Halal slaughter involves live animals having their throats cut and their blood drained.
The vast majority of halal meat producers stun the animals before killing them, just as they do in non-halal production.
To carry out halal slaughter, you must be a Muslim with a certificate of competence from the Food Standards Agency and work in an approved abattoir.
I'm not saying that stunned slaughter is acceptable because it couldn't ever be, Morrissey added.
If you use the term humane slaughter, you might as well talk in terms of humane rape.
Morrissey, my good chap, there are Muslim countries where they basically do.
He criticised Theresa May for calling the Muslim Ayid Al-Adar festival a joyous celebration as millions of animals have their throats slit to mark the occasion.
I wonder what kind of compassion she could possibly have.
It's a fair point.
He also said that May was incapable of leadership.
She cannot say her own name unless it's written down in a cue card in front of her.
Well, that's completely true as well.
Here we go.
Accusations of racism have long dogged Morrissey, who once referred to Chinese people as a subspecies.
Okay, Morrissey, yeah, I disagree with you on that.
I wouldn't describe Chinese people as a subspecies of human.
But he said that British identity was under threat from immigration, and he's correct.
And this is actually one of the things I will be addressing in my speech outside of Downing Street.
As far as racism goes, the modern loony left seems to forget that Hitler was left-wing.
Wow, you were just lighting up all of those buzzers, aren't you, Morrissey?
This is great.
When someone calls you a racist, what they're actually saying is, hmm, you actually have a point and I don't know how to answer it.
So perhaps if I distract you by calling you a bigot, we'll both forget how enlightened your comment was.
This is amazing, Morrissey.
Morrissey, you're complaining about the way that people slaughter things, but I've never seen such a butchering.
He argues that the worst form of racism is against animals.
Oh, that's amazing.
Speciesism.
This is great.
If you eat animals, isn't it a display of hatred for a certain species?
And what gives you the rights to eat another species or race?
Would you eat people from Sri Lanka?
Well, only with enough salt.
Elsewhere in the interview, he describes UK politics as a moral disaster on every level.
Even Tesco wouldn't employ Dian Abbott, later's shadow home secretary.
London Mayor Sidiq Khan is also criticised.
London is debased.
The mayor of London tells us about the neighbourhood policing, and this is the mayor of London.
He cannot talk properly.
I love how this is a genuine rampage for Morrissey here.
This is great.
Morrissey instead throws his weight behind For Britain, the far-right party set up by former UKIP member Anne-Marie Waters, someone he name-checked in a recent concert at the BBC.
He said he was supporting the party because they have the best approach to animal welfare.
On the subject of Brexit, he argues that it did not happen, the EU would not allow it to happen, it is now a dead issue.
The people wanted to leave the EU because of the complete erosion of freedom under EU rules, and the fair-minded majority now see in even more frightening ways how very much they are hated by the EU, not to mention the British political elite.
For people outside of Britain, this might not seem very extreme, but in the politically correct echo chamber that is the British media, this is absolutely wild.
Frankly, I'm amazed that he hasn't been arrested for hate speech.
And on that note, we come back to the very reason for tomorrow's protest.
Woman guilty of racist snapdog rap lyric, Instagram post.
A teenager who posted rap lyrics which included racist language on Instagram has been found guilty of sending a grossly offensive message, presumably under the same section 127 of the Communications Act that Count Dankula has been arrested and convicted under.
Chelsea Russell, 19 from Liverpool, posted the lyric from Snapdog's I'm Tripping to pay tribute to a boy who died in a road crash the court heard.
She argued it was not offensive, but was handed a community order.
Prosecutors said her sentence was increased from a fine to a community order as it was a hate crime.
This just goes to show you the complete lack of humanity behind these hate crime laws.
These are not a method with which to try and protect people or improve society.
These are a way of persecuting people for stepping out of a particular ideological boundary.
She was charged after Merseyside Police were anonymously sent a screenshot of her update.
Because why wouldn't you?
You'd look at that and go, right, this teenage girl needs to be punished.
So she had posted the lyrics to her account after the death of a 13-year-old in a road accident in 2017.
The words Russell used in her account contained a racial label which some people find extremely offensive.
Well some people can get fucked, can't they?
They can just be fucking offended.
Because do you know what happens when someone's offended?
Fucking nothing!
Nothing at all.
They sit there and go, I didn't like that, I'm going to go home, and then they fuck off home.
The screenshot was passed to hate crime unit PC Dominique Walker, who told the court the term was grossly offensive to her as a black woman and to the general community.
Well, fuck you, Dominique.
I don't give a shit what you as a black woman find grossly offensive in the same way that you don't give a shit what I as a white man find grossly offensive.
It does not matter if we offend each other.
Section 127 has to go.
The thing that annoys me most about this, all of this, is that this is the police acting in exactly the same way as the Saudi police of vice and virtue.
They are here to enforce a morality on you.
They are not here to protect you from harm.
And they are in no way judges of what is right and wrong.
You are the judge.
You as an individual citizen are the one who judges what you consider to be right and wrong.
And before anyone even mentions it, no, we do not derive our morality from the law.
Despite a fine defense from her lawyer pointing out that Jay-Z had used the word in front of thousands of people at Glastonbury Festival, she was found guilty of sending a grossly offensive message by public communication, but given an eight-week community order, placed on an eight-week curfew, and told to pay costs of £500 and an £85 victim surcharge.
This is tyranny.
The government, you posted a certain word to your Instagram page.
Now you've got eight weeks community order and an eight week curfew.
This is why tomorrow's protest is necessary.
If you live anywhere near London, please be at Leicester Square at midday.
Did you think that was the only example that we had this week?
Because you were wrong.
As this article on Fahrenheit 211Net says, we all deserve much better policing than this.
So the author says, a short while ago I wrote of the death threats presumably from Muslims and leftists that the independent journalist Janiah English had received.
The article outlined claims by Miss English backed up by social media screenshots of the conversation that the police were blaming her for the death threats she had received on the grounds that she had criticized Islam.
Miss English persisted with her complaint to the police but to no avail.
After failing to get any satisfaction from the officers to whom Miss English originally took her complaint, she visited a police station and had a conversation with a member of police staff, which Miss English wisely live-streamed.
By doing this, she was able to show her followers and the public at large that a member of police staff was implying that she had caused the threats herself because she had criticised certain religions, which will go unnamed, I'm sure.
And he doesn't call me at any point, so I decide to go into the police station and I explain my issue.
Now, I live streamed all of this and it makes for a pretty interesting viewing.
Essentially, the man at the desk at the front desk at the police station told me exactly what Michelle Davies told me, which is that I caused this myself, it was unnecessary, and that I shouldn't have been doing what I was doing, which was criticising certain religions.
Let's watch the video.
If people were threatening to kill you and your family, well, I won't just put the messages out there that you put in the first place.
What messages are those?
This is all live, by the way.
Everyone can hear what you're saying.
What messages are those?
Look, I'm not going to discuss it anything.
What messages are those?
You told me that you were putting messages out there which answered certain religions, yeah?
Yeah, yeah.
Go, can you all hear this, guys?
So are you saying that I deserve it as well?
No, I'm not saying that at all.
I'm saying I think it's a problem that could have been avoided.
I love the way he said that.
I'm sorry, Miss English.
These problems could be avoided if you just shut your fucking mouth and know your fucking place.
You don't have the right to criticise Islam.
Because if you do and they start threatening you, we're going to say it's your fucking fault.
I am honestly incensed what's happened to Janiah English here.
She's a very brave woman for going out and actually putting herself on the line to get the police to actually demonstrate how they're going to react.
For some reason, the British police are like the Muslim Defence Force.
We're here to protect Muslims from things they don't want to hear, from criticisms of Islam.
And when they start threatening you, well, maybe you should just stop criticising Islam.
But by the way, the police don't really have time to investigate the child slave gangs that they're told about.
So they failed to investigate these and the slavers go free in modern Britain.
But if you post something on social media, you're going to get a fucking curfew.
So again, just to really hammer this point home, we need to protest this.
This will continue going on until we stand up and make them change.
And they're not going to want to do it.
It's not going to be easy.
But we're going to have to do it.
And it starts by protesting these injustices.
I'll see you guys at midday at Leicester Square and I'll have my fucking megaphone.
▲
Export Selection