watching the defectives

1. National media coverage of a recent supposed Blasphemy Laws case in Ireland omitted a salient fact. I say "supposed" case because the omitted fact was that the whole thing was a publicity stunt. Irish police had launched a formal investigation into a television programme hosted by one Gay Byrne in which his interviewee Mr Stephen Fry expressed what might be deemed a negative overall attitude towards God. Mr Fry's excoriation of the Almighty didn't bother me personally because whenever I see Gay Byrne I don't believe in God either. The latest reports on the matter arose because the investigating police after giggling quietly to themselves over a few doughnuts for two years and charging lunatic amounts of money to the taxpayer for their services (at a time when gangland seems to have a free hand from the police to terrorise every town, village and city in the land and to deal drugs into every school) had finally announced that their investigation had been completed. And no charges would be forthcoming. Queue the standard bog standard reportage in the standard bankrupt readerless Irish Independent newspaper to wit: "Sources say no charges will be pressed as there was no injured party." Ho hum. Here is the news they didn't print. The police investigation into Gay Byrne's television interview with Stephen Fry was instigated by the producers of the programme themselves in an attempt to attract public attention to their programme. No one in Ireland has any interest in blasphemy laws or in Gay Byrne. In fact we only have Blasphemy Laws because our appeaserish politicians dreamed them up as a sop for the Muslim Jihadis currently flooding our country. NB: The flood of Jihadis has nothing to do with Climate Change which, contrary to what the Irish Independent tells you, and contrary to the prevalence of a world wide Muslim terror army, doesn't exist.

2. Media reports on last week's sea faring incident involving an American naval vessel and a cargo ship fell somewhat below the bog standard of reportage we call the bleeding obvious. Sky News and CNN told the world that the American navy ship had collided with a Japanese registered craft. The way Sky and CNN presented it, you'd think there was nothing unusual here at all. Even as they reported it, footage clearly showed that the American Navy ship had been rammed amidships. It did not collide with anything. It was rammed. That was clear from the moment the footage was broadcast but no one said it. The early reports that the cargo vessel was Japanese were also deliberately misleading. The cargo vessel was registered to Japanese owners but had a crew from the Philippines. That smells like Jihad. There was further reticence in publishing the fact that seven American crewmen had been killed and that no one had been hurt on the vessel that rammed them. Additional information now indicates that the cargo vessel performed a U turn in order to ram the American Navy ship. That still doesn't explain how a lumbering cargo vessel could get near to a modern American Naval craft. Unless the American vessel had a crew member or two who were rooting for the Jihadis. This is my analysis of what should be the major talking points in regard to the incident. We should be stating clearly that the American ship was rammed in a probable Jihad attack. And we should be asking whether the Jihadis had help from Muslims among the crew on the American ship itself.