Saturday, 16 January 2016

ZERO TOLERANCE FOR INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM

(2016)

This is what Anti‑Racism sounds like - get used to it

At around 15:30, on Thursday, 7 January 2016, at Tunbridge Wells Library, a White male (sitting with a friend using PC4, in the chair for PC3) refused to move from this chair to allow me to use PC3 - after my asking him politely to do so (hear attached audio). (PC3 had been booked for me by a member of staff.)

He arrogantly suggested I use the chair in front of PC2, but I pointed‑out the rather obvious fact that if someone uses PC2, then they will have no seat. He then suggested I use the seat for the Computer Buddies - but, then, where would they sit? I was clearly addressing someone of limited intellectual ability and achievement.

Work‑related image:


img0393b.jpg
Work-related image…

I then asked the same member of staff who booked PC3 to ask him to move. At first, she offered to book another computer, but I demurred; preferring to use the original computer she booked me; to avoid being placed in the position of the Black man having to kow tow to the White - for no good reason.

He still refused to move at her request and lied (hear attached audio) about my being impolite to him, in the first instance - I then immediately entered anti‑racism mode, in direct response to his playing the Race Card in the White environment of the library. Because he had no rational defence for his socially‑inferior behaviour, I made it very clear what I thought of him, in words that could not - under any circumstances - ever be misunderstood. I have no time, nor obligation, to enter into a negotiation (every time I use a UK public service) with a White supremacist about the civil & human rights I already possess. If Whites have not already figured‑out what equality means, they never will.

I also took photographs of him (attached) and he hid his head; revealing his tacit understanding that he was in the wrong - otherwise, why hide his head? (A member of the library staff once verbally implied to me [see 30-05-2015] that there existed a video surveillance system in the library, so this may avail him nothing.) In any case, at no point did he explain (without resorting to lies) his rather obvious desire to obstruct a Black man going about his lawful business.

Work‑related image:


img0394a.jpg
Work-related image…

Other White customers and staff entered the fray by siding with the White malcontent (no surprise there, given the prejudicial nature of White culture). One White male implying that the virtue of White women must not be sullied by hearing swear words - as if White women were somehow mentally‑retarded (& in need of protection from Black men). Racism, which leads to people being killed, is somehow (in the White mind) much less worse than swearing in public - which kills no‑one. And yet Whites behave as though the anger they incite is a threat to Western civilisation! - so why incite it?

Focusing on trivia is the moral inversion of a people who clearly have their ethical priorities back‑to‑front. It is also an unintelligent way to change the subject, since politeness only benefits the racist; while fighting fire‑with‑fire (my preferred method) wastes as much of their time as they wish to waste of mine. Such a focus also attempts to effectively‑legalize racial‑discrimination by trying to deliberately‑provoke Black people with whom Whites do not wish to share the same public space. Whites evade this issue by claiming that they can tell Black people how to act in public - more of the same racism Whites deny exists - while allowing contumely Whites to run roughshod over Black people’s rights.

Whites are not threatened by White supremacy (they benefit from it), so they can pretend never to see it as being a threat - in stark contrast to those who are disadvantaged by it. This means a Black person can be publicly‑abused, but woe betide them if he calls any White supremacist a cunt. This is an unwritten rule Whites never have to follow, since they are never racially‑abused by Black people. I am happy to allow myself to be provoked, because it affords me the opportunity to offer free, hard‑to‑forget lessons to those who still have much to learn about race‑relations. And it is better than putting my fist in their faces, which would clearly be a disproportionate response in this case.

As a White female member of staff stood in my way for God‑knows‑what reason (technical assault?), it was then demanded that I leave the library and never come back that day. Since I was offered a low opinion of Black people to my face (that Blacks have no rights Whites need respect) I offered my, very clearly expressed, view of Whites; resulting from such unprovoked incivility and hostility.

Work‑related image:


img0396a.jpg
Work-related image…

Racist incidents will continue to happen, so long as White people are unwilling to muzzle the racist dogs that their particular ethnic‑upbringing encourages. In particular, those who think that public space exists for the venting of private prejudices, in the hope that Black people will be handicapped by having to live in perpetual fear of being harassed for the non‑crime of being Black; making it my job - out of self‑respect - to punish them for such superstition. The only equality and fairness here is to fight back, on the basis that: If non‑Blacks get in a Black man’s way, they are racist - unless they have good reason for so doing.

As Black people have had to become used to the existence of White supremacy - in order to survive and overcome it - Whites will have to get used to anti‑racism, since any violation of the principle of live‑and‑let‑live can result in a response every bit as nasty. The advantage for Blacks is that anti‑racism is ethical, because it is based upon the principle of self‑defence; while racism is immoral, because it is not. If Whites are not required to act in a reasonable and civilized manner, why is anybody else?

As I mentioned in my e‑mail of 5/6/2015?, I am happy to take the legal risks implied by my behaviour (under the Public Order Act 1986), in order to clear the White trash from my path - upon which they have no lawful business being.



Thursday, 31 December 2015

CAUCASIAN CHEEKINESS

FYI: THE WAY WHITES ARE

The Necessary Corrective to Caucasian Propaganda

Today, at about midday, I went to Tunbridge Wells Library to pick up six DVD reservations.

A White woman behind me asked to be excused before I had finished making my selections from the reservation shelf; obviously believing that she had some kind of right to queue jump.

She became rudely sarcastic when I refused to believe she had more civil rights than she and I was, in turn, sarcastic to her. (see attached audio recording below)

It is noticeable that when Whites talk to each other, they are generally polite. But when they think they can get away with being rude to a Black person, they will be rude to a Black person; by implying the latter has no human nor civil rights - as a member of staff did to me on 30 May 2015 (15:15) by implying I was a liar, before I had even opened my mouth to speak. Yet, Whites vigorously deny that any such recorded behavior actually occurs; proving them either schizophrenic or amoral.

I make these complaints to show that I am not complaining for the sake of it, Whites - both customers and staff - really do have psychological problems dealing with those they consider inferior (as if they would prefer less customers & a failing service?!) and that my complaints do not come from any problems it is believed I possess, but from an odd attitude to life that tries to deny its own existence, despite the mountain of evidence that it does exist. in the long term, this helps correct the Caucasian propaganda referred to in the title of this e-mail.

(2009)

WEBSITE: ???...
(???)

Copyright © 2015 Frank TALKER.
Permission granted to reproduce & distribute this posting in any way, shape or form; provided mention of this Blog is included.
All other rights reserved.

Friday, 25 December 2015

Why are British Home Stores (BHS) Worth only GBP1.00?

Why are British Home Stores (BHS) Worth only GBP£1.00?


Perfection of means and confusion of goals seem - in my opinion - to characterize our age.


Albert Einstein, (1879 - 1955), German-born US theoretical physicist. Out of My Later Years, chapter 14 (1950).

The obvious answere is because they make a loss; the less obvious answer is because they have nothing to offer the British public that the British public actually wants - they have lost contact with their market, demographic and customers and know no way to restore contact that does not involve the hard work they are too lazy to undertake.

legal threats: Racial harassment, discrimination and vicarious liability

problems with Muslims, Whites & Jews

the mediocre employed compared to the superior self-employed: Laziness couplked with greed - a deadly combination since the desire is there but the talent to achieve. The basic problme with the lower-class and the uneducated is a lack of ambition, something obvious at BHS since so few staff are inteligent, well-educated, resourceful, efficient, effective, motivated or motivating, etc.


If A is a success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut.


Albert Einstein, (1879 - 1955), German-born US scientist. Quoted in: Observer (London, 15 January 1950).

BHS’s profitless decline as a symptom of poor management and culture

scapegoating to blame others for the inability to work as a team or to set and achieve cleary-stated goals. meaningless pseudo-philosophical gobshite-ing injunctions pasted to walls that no-one ever follows or wishes to. managing those one does not employ. Management with no ideas because they have no business experience.

each BHS employee

each COMPASS employee

communication skills, teamwork, initiative, interpersonal skills or ability with time management

Retail Acquisitions and Dominic Chapel could just be asset strippers if they decide not to turn BHS’s fortunes around - and there is not the slightest evidence they can; leading to the end of a 97-year-old company.


If men as individuals surrender to the call of their elementary instincts, avoiding pain and seeking satisfaction only for their own selves, the result for them all taken together must be a state of insecurity, of fear, and of promiscuous misery.


Albert Einstein, (1879 - 1955), German-born US theoretical physicist. Out of My Later Years, chapter 7 (1950).

Copyright © 2015 Frank TALKER.
Permission granted to reproduce & distribute this posting in any way, shape or form; provided mention of this Blog is included: E-mail notification requested.
All other rights reserved.

Wednesday, 2 December 2015

When is a computer not a computer?

(2015)

Annoying, Unpaid Super Volunteers

On Monday, 23 November 2015, at about 15:45, I was seated at the Ground-Floor Booking PC in Tunbridge Wells Library, when a man sitting at PC5 rudely interrupted what I was doing (making me jump with a start) to tell me that the PC I was sitting at was not actually a computer! (I assume he meant it did not connect to the Internet; while he assumed I was wearing a sign around my neck that said “Ignoramus”: Relevant 37-second audio or e-mail attachment.)

How did he know what my intention was? Is he claiming psychic powers?

How does he know what I do (or do not) know about the working of the library’s computer system? Is he clairvoyant?

On what basis does he issue unsolicited interruptions to library customers going about their lawful business, in the bizarre guise of being helpful? Is he a member of some secretive organisation whose members interrupt, distract and otherwise annoy others?

Why would he assume others are more ignorant (or more stupid) than he? Does he somehow know the level of technical competence &/or IQ that complete strangers possess?

About half-an-hour later I noticed him annoying another customer in the Reference Section - again, by offering unsolicited help to someone who was in the process of solving their own technical problems. Is he an unpaid library guide, provided to solve customer problems even before customers know they have such problems?

Because he obviously does not work for the Library Service, is he - perhaps - a mentally-ill and/or rather lonely eccentric offering pseudo-help to those who have not asked for it, whom he clearly believes (without supporting evidence) are either ignorant or stupid - or both; thereby, actually being more irritating than helpful?

The mind boggles.



Sunday, 8 November 2015

Gangway: Comin’ thru!

(2015)

ATTEMPTED RACIAL INTIMIDATION

I was using nearing the end of my session on PC19 at Tunbridge Wells Library this morning at around 11AM, when a White woman interrupted me - for no reason at all - to tell me that she had booked it for 11:00.

Because she was standing over my left shoulder while I was still using the computer, she was obviously expecting me to move out of her way immediately - even though she could clearly see that my session had not yet ended.

She never claimed she was to use the PC after me, so her basic assumption was that I was somehow in her way - right there and then - with no right to be. (Hear relevant 45-second audio.)

I continued working and, even after I requested she stop looking over my shoulder, she persisted in doing so. This - and her needless interruption - made me lose concentration and provoke my anger. She logged-in to PC19 as I left the building.

I never see Whites interrupt other Whites in the library to tell them that they are using any PC after them, because queuing is largely understood as a concept and a practice in the UK and so Whites (rightly) would not tolerate such molesting behaviour. She also forgot the Common Law fact that possession is nine-tenths of the law; while refusing to wait her turn.

Racist Whites believe that Black people must step out of their way - without question - simply because the former assume an automatic right-of-way over non-Whites - in public. They also believe that waiting ones turn in a queue is unnecessary when a Black man is in front of them.


Saturday, 18 July 2015

Beat the queue

(2015)

At the touch of a button…

At Tunbridge Wells library, on Sunday, 14 June 2015 (at about 11:45) I borrowed three DVDs - it was three-for-two day (see: 14-06-2015).

Since the self-service kiosks are not programmed to process such offers, I approached a member of staff to save time. She told me I should use the kiosk and that she would reduce the payment, as necessary, herself. I did so.

She then asked for my Library Card which meant processing my card twice for a single transaction - something I always avoided in the past by not using the kiosks for special offers.

This is all rather a waste of time, despite library posters declaring:

  • Beat the queue
  • At the touch of a button, you can check it out, return it or renew it.
  • Staff will be able to show you how.

Could not these special offers be programmed into the self-service kiosks or, easier, could not staff - as they have done in the past - simply handle such transactions themselves; cutting-out the kiosks entirely and saving customers’ time?

Regards,



D022317344


This e-mail & any attachments are confidential: Intended only for the individual(s) addressed.
If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and accept this apology for sending it you in error.

Sunday, 5 July 2015

…Some animals are more equal than others

(2015)

All animals are equal, but…

What happened

At about 15:30, on Saturday 27 June 2015, at Tunbridge Wells Reference Library I booked PC19 and then went upstairs to find someone sitting at - but not using - it; staring intently into a smartphone.

I politely asked him to move - he did so - but then resentfully told me he could have used any of the unused PCs. A statement of the obvious, obviously indicating he was upset by being asked to move. His childishness was exacerbated by his school-masterly attempt to intimidate me by demanding I respond to his question of whether I had heard his statement (of the obvious): Did you hear what I said?.

He then moved to PC17 and logged-in to it.

Commentary

The above incident raises a number of questions about the state of this customer’s intellect, along with the fact that the Kent library system is clearly not understood by many customers (even by members):

  1. Why would anyone think a desk with a working PC on it was intended for some purpose other than computing?
  2. Why would anyone assume that anyone else would ask them to move from sitting-at a particular PC (while others are not being unused) if that particular PC had not been booked in advance?
  3. Why did he not log-in to an unused PC, in the first place, rather than block a booked one?
    1. Is it possible to use more than one PC simultaneously?
  4. Why feel aggrieved about a perfectly reasonable request to move - reasonably expressed?
  5. Why try to give the impression of having more rights to public utilities than anyone else?
    1. Where does he obtain a right to become an obstacle to other’s?
  6. Why pretend someone else is making an irrational request to vacate a seat (without evidence) unless the pretender, themselves, is irrational? &,
  7. His moving at my request proves he knew the request valid, so why whine about it?

I assume the answer to all these questions is White supremacy, since this man was blocking a public utility - booked by a Black man - with no good reason; while clearly seeing the following words on the monitor screen of PC19: This machine has been booked. (I cannot remotely book a PC and, simultaneously, know if anyone is sitting at it when I book - so this incident cannot be the result of anything oddly anti-social on my part.)

Conclusion

Unless he has a different (or more rational) explanation for a) blocking PCs that are booked by others; b) that he is not using; or, c) whinging about being reasonably asked to move, this peculiar public behaviour of deliberately trying to undermine the library booking system - and the library’s public facilities, as a whole - will persist.

Regards,



D022317344

This e-mail & any attachments are confidential and intended only for the individual(s) addressed. If you are not an intended recipient, please delete it and accept this apology for sending it you in error.

Saturday, 4 July 2015

Without Conscience

Subtitle:
Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us
Version:
Language:
English language…
Length:
236 pages
Review Format:
Book
Year:
1999
Country:
United States…
Predominant Genre:
Non-Fiction
Author:
Robert D Hare…
Outstanding Performances:
None
Premiss:
Psychopaths are fully aware of the consequences of their actions and know the difference between right and wrong, yet they are terrifyingly self-centered, remorseless, and unable to care about the feelings of others.
Themes:
Alienation
Curative
Destiny
Emotional repression
Empathy
Ethnicity
Evolution
Family
Grieving
Identity
Individualism
Justice
Loneliness
Loyalty
Materialism
Narcissism
Nature
Nostalgia
Personal
Political
Political Correctness
Preventive
Republicanism
Role modeling
Social class
Society
Snobbery
Solipsism
The State
Stereotyping
White culture
White guilt
White supremacy
Similar to:
America’s Most Wanted

Psychology is the disease for which it pretends to be the cure

WHITE MAN’S CURSE: Self-Absorbed Gratification and a Sense of Omnipotence & Entitlement

Summary: Caucasian Psychopathy Laid Bare in an Attempt to Use Soviet Psychiatry to Imprison Those People Whites Do Not Like.

F

ascinating look at the psychopathy inherent in Whites (most psychopaths are White) but which refuses to admit this simple fact. This book tries to scare readers to make a buck for its author by evading the issue that the problem with psychopaths is predominantly a White problem - that only Whites, therefore, can fix. Extensive use of the words our & us, does not effectively-conceal that these adjectives and pronouns do not include People of Color (POC).

Science is here being used to label people that Whites simply do not like because they remind them of the personality traits they keep locked-up inside, themselves. As well as to force people to like each other or be placed in prison for not being warm or empathic enough toward Whites; thereby legislating for love. The claim is even made that psychopaths are baffling and complex (since they are not clinically-insane) when it is obvious that people who believe they can do as they please in their desire for attention, often become perverse adults. Do we really need PhDs to tell us this?

Black people, for example, have experienced the deleterious effects of White psychopathy for centuries - so find it easy to spot the variable mixture of sweet-talk and intimidation of the typical psychopath. It is only when Whites turn on each other that Whites claim to be baffled, since the murders committed by, say, the KKK are still not considered psychopathic by Whites, but as racial self-preservation and, therefore, rational.

Trying hard to distance themselves from psychopaths, Whites mis-describe the condition and pretend psychopaths are somehow different from other people in some fundamental way; that is, a lack of empathy that is really nothing more than the desire for a lack of empathy - to facilitate the exploitation of others. Here, Whites confuse the goal, itself, with the achievement of the goal, through subjective inference cloaked in the respectability of scientific discourse - all this allied with the refusal to face-up to alternative explanations for observed behavior.

Perhaps psychopaths are a different species of human or, par for the course with White supremacy, a sub-species? This is supported by no empirical data and is nothing more than a political game to make Whites feel superior to those they so label; making it obvious psychiatry is little more than a soft-science: The militant wing of psychology.

After all this hypothesizing, this book provides only meager help for protecting oneself against psychopaths, since Whites are in denial about the fact that it is White culture that produces such apparently-physiological defects. This leads to absurd advice like being less gullible (& more cynical), rather than being more aware of the nature of objective reality. As with White supremacy, Whites claim to know what racism is, but never to help Blacks distinguish between the good and the bad Whites (if such a distinction is even valid) - since all Whites benefit from no-one knowing, as then racism is harder to detect and defeat. This is because Whites do not see a difference themselves - as this book clearly proves - and they would not want anyone to know just how sick their culture truly is.

Normal people are perfectly able to protect themselves from psychopaths only insofar as they are normal. Psychopaths prey on the very weaknesses that Whites so commonly manifest: Financial greed, attention-seeking, sexual lust, etc; making the Whites the most likely psychopaths and the most likely victims.

Psychopaths are common in White media precisely because they are common in White culture. Like Whites, they know the difference between right and wrong and are fully aware of the consequences of their actions yet, like Whites, they are self-centered, remorseless and choose not to care about the feelings of others; while appearing completely normal (ie, usual) to other Whites because they share the same worldview; the blind always leading the blind.

This appearance of normality does not fool everyone else, who clearly see that this White description of the psychopath closely-matches and is an eidetic description of typical White people, as such (compare with, Bobby Wright). And while establishing a range of idiosyncrasies in linguistic and affective processing under certain conditions, Dr HARE has not confirmed a common pathology of psychopathy. His contention that the pathology is likely due in large part to an inherited deficit in cerebral brain function is speculative but persuasive.

Despite the title of this book, there is no evidence that psychopaths lack a conscience - only the subjective claim that because they do not do what normal people do then they cannot have a conscience. But this is anthropomorphism, not science. The expressed White fear of such people, that such a view reveals, is really a the fear of ones own reflection. Of con-artists, hustlers and rapists who charm, lie and manipulate their way through life to get others to do the responsible work of individuation that they, themselves, should be doing.

The anger directed at psychopaths by this author attempts to hide the usual White resentment at anyone’s apparent ability to be free of guilt while doing as they please. Whites also envy the emotional emptiness of the psychopath who seems so easily to avoid being weighed-down with regret for anything they do.

Hardly surprising then that since Whites looted, raped and mass-murdered their way around the world for 500 years, that the vast majority of psychopaths should be White since they are taught to believe that such behavior is OK. This makes psychopaths hard to detect among Whites because one is not looking for a needle in a haystack, but something common because so numerous. That the White definition of psychopathy describes rather well the White culture that spawned it is lost on Dr HARE. And given that this book possesses a self-congratulatory political tone, throughout, amid absurd and angry claims (angry since psychopaths reveal what POC suspect of all Whites) that White society views psychopathic personality traits as pejorative, despite Whites commonly manifesting them - it is to be wondered if Dr HARE is not, himself, something of a psychopath.

Perhaps this White author will one day write an honest book about White culture and its endemic problems - serial-killing, various addictions, child-molestation, etc - and end the whitewashing that such a culture regularly receives from dishonest authors eager to pretend the problems of the world - and their solutions - have nothing to do with them. Or, perhaps, collaborate with a Black psychiatrist who can see Whites more clearly than Whites see themselves.

The most disturbing aspect of this book is, in fact, the extent to which Whites evade the truth about themselves in hiding behind scientific-sounding babble. As the psychopath must evade reality for his schemes to have any chance of success in the reality so evaded, so must this author’s in claiming to have created a reliable means of spotting and predicting psychopathic behavior; while then implying he finds it easy to function in a White society which creates and tolerates them.

This book sees human nature simplistically as the source of problems to be checked rather than as the source of human happiness; it is obsessed with regulating behavior that Whites fear rather than freeing it. It is dedicated to turning Whites into robots - as opposed to psychopaths - because the author sees humans as animals to be trained, as in A Clockwork Orange. The ultimate goal is to create a dictatorship of psychiatrists.

Angry, insincere and repetitive, as if author does not believe his own thesis and thinks whining on about terrible criminal psychopaths are (we already know how bad they are, so why keep going on about this?) will make his not-very-scientific mantra more believable. Opinion takes the place of hard facts too frequently to not be a deliberate attempt to make money out of people’s fear of psychopathy. Worse, there is no definition of normal against which to judge people you might think are psychopaths.

Either Whites are genetically-vulnerable to being psychopaths (since most psychopaths are White) or psychopaths are hard to spot in White culture because there they are so common, this being what Whites mean when they exclaim: He was such a nice boy! Who’d’ve thought he’d rape and mutilate those kids.

The lack of understanding of psychopathy is replaced with sneering and unscientific contempt - as if the author knows the right buttons to press in his readers, but lacks sufficient insight to help with the fears he attempts to exploit. This is little more than an unscientific puff for PCL-R that contains no references to other, similar metrics that just may be better in their predictive intent and result. Dr HARE describes psychopaths as social predators, while pointing out that most do not commit murder. His work possesses a high moral-tone (sensationalist & self-righteous attempt to substitute for an insightful-enough intellect) yet tends toward sensationalism and graphic anecdotes; providing a useful summary of the assessment of psychopathy while, ultimately, avoiding the difficult questions regarding the internal contradictions in his concept or how it should be classified.

Although a shallow book, it does contain some useful information that will be of use to POC in dealing with the psychopathic nature of White culture and of how to avoid being hurt by Whites by explaining their most likely behavior and the fact that psychopaths can pass for fully-human in White culture since they are so similar to all Whites - and, so, harder to pick out. And yet, if Whites spent as much time looking for sexists, White supremacists and social snobs as they do looking for other psychopaths, there would be a lot less of all of these social problems. But the lives of women, Black people and the poor do not matter to Whites: Fortunately for POC, most victims of psychopaths are White. And the peculiarity of this book is that a White scientist does not ask the victims of sexism, classism & White supremacy for their survival strategies - which would be far superior to those enumerated here. With Whites, potential victims face a simple choice: Adapt to a hopeless situation by a) giving in; b) accepting others treatment of you as an inferior; c) losing their self-identity; or d) fight back.

A curious characteristic of Whites is their desire to be seen as cool; that is, to drain away what little humanity they have in favor of aping psychopaths - which they do rather well compared to other ethnic groups who favor emotionally-expressivity. This explains why Whites are like their tv: Psychopathic in destroying the value in all it touches and treating everything as both equally-banal and equally-interesting.


See also:
  1. Problems with psychopathy checklist
  2. Psychopathy as a General Theory of Crime
  3. Review - Without Conscience

about me:

My Photo

Frank TALKER - Truth-Teller

news:

Loading...