web analytics


By Pete Moore On July 30th, 2019

This week, the gayers are above the muslims.

Back to my old manor, Walthamstow, where a pride march (how many damned gay marches do they need!) was interrupted by a bat a letterbox a muslim woman –

No, I’m in no rush to move back. Walthamstow was alright when I grew up there. Now it’s an immigrant filled sh*thole. But anyway, the police have (somehow) identified the horribly dressed gobshite and taken her into custody. Well, they’ve taken someone into custody.

But hang on – for what? What is the alleged crime? No-one was assaulted. “Shame on you” seems to be about it. Hurty words really, and not very hurty ones at that. But here’s a thought as well. If gays (and commies) want gays to live freely, maybe we should be choosy about who is allowed to enjoy the fruits of our superior civilisation.


  1. I agree she shouldn’t have been arrested. The gays or anyone else opposed to her ranting should have just shouted back that she is the one who is obviously ashamed as she feels the need to hide her shameful female body under a black cloth for stupid made up religious reasons.

  2. damn Colm how do you really feel….

  3. People shouldn’t be arrested for being intolerant or bigoted. People probably should be arrested for having so little imagination that you can only come up with “Adam and Steve” comments.

  4. It’s rather funny how the usual lefty PC commentators seem puzzled as to which victim group to support.

  5. “It’s rather funny how the usual lefty PC commentators seem puzzled as to which victim group to support.”

    As opposed to the usual right wing commentators who only support gay rights when Muslims oppose them?

  6. Dog

    Where is your evidence of this puzzlement ?

  7. It’s rather funny how the usual lefty PC commentators seem puzzled as to which victim group to support.

    It seems this is in your head. Who are the “lefty PC commentators” and where have they been puzzled?

    Good old RT…getting to the heart of the issues that matter. LOL.

  8. Really..so the commentators on the BBC tv news were imaginary? The stonewall spokesperson imaginary. I care not a jot how ticked off you lot may be. I’m laughing my socks off at the obvious bemusement . I suggest you lot open your ears a bit !

  9. Dog

    I have seen two reports about this ridiculously overblown incident one on the BBC and one one Sky News. Both simply stated the facts of the incident. There was no evidence of anyone getting their knickers in a twist over which group to support. It’s really a non story. A slow news day and a waste of police time.

  10. She shouldn’t have been arrested.

  11. She was expressing a view. Whether you support that view or not I believe she should be free to express it in a lawful way which, I believe she was. But the irony of this is, that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon was prevented from walking down certain London streets where his presence would be deemed inflammatory to the ‘Local Community’ yet, these people (GAY Pride) were allowed to march in and around, the same ‘Local Community’ surely knowing that there would be a response like this.

    Shame on ALL of them !

  12. She absolutely shouldn’t have been arrested.

    It’s rather funny how the usual lefty PC commentators seem puzzled as to which victim group to support.

    So you’d have no problem supporting the burka clad Muslim woman then DIG?

  13. Brendan O’Neill gets to the heart of the dilemma this incident poses for woke leftists:

    “On one level, the footage of the niqab-wearering lady spouting anti-gay hate wasn’t very surprising. Shocking, yes, but not surprising. It’s not as if someone who covers themselves from head to toe in archaic black cloth (which, as Qanta Ahmed has said, is not in the least suggested let alone mandated by the Koran) is going to hold enlightened views on sexuality. Stop the press — religious fundamentalist is not a fan of gay sex!

    The clip has caused much discomfort in woke-left circles. After all, the woke crew like gay people and women who wear the niqab. How are they meant to respond to such a public spat between two of their favourite identity groups? What a pickle. Condemn the religious nutter and risk joining Boris Johnson in that camp of nasty Islamophobes who slag off niqab-wearers? Or be soft on the screaming lady and risk implying that it is sometimes okay to bark insults at gay people? What is an intersectional leftist to do!

    Their solution, it seems, is to be more gentle with this homophobe than they would be with other homophobes…”


  14. I stopped reading at Brendan O’Neill Peter:


    ‘Woke leftists’ Living Marxism anyone?

  15. I stopped reading at Brendan O’Neill Peter

    That’s a pity Paul. It means we can’t discuss whether or not O’Neill might have a point. I read stuff every day from people I disagree with. Mostly I still disagree with them, but sometimes I can see they may have a point and that I might need to adjust my view.

    Better to shut your ears, like Pete Moore and Patrick on AGW? It’s the messengers that determine their reaction to the AGW message, not whether the message may have merit or not. But of course they don’t dare admit this, not even to themselves. That’s what culture wars are all about.

  16. I read stuff every day from people I disagree with. Mostly I still disagree with them, but sometimes I can see they may have a point and that I might need to adjust my view.

    Me too.

    O’Neill is a particularly odious individual though, him and his one trick pony ‘elitist’ single transferable comment. O’Neill is a Koch brothers funded dancing monkey and all he and his cronies do is promote an agenda of misinformation and confusion designed to enrich his masters.

    From ‘Living Marxism’ to ‘libertarianism’ almost overnnight? Give me a break.

  17. Paul

    For the record, I disagree with most of what I read on Spiked, but especially their relentless crusade for fossil fuels on the grounds that any restrictions whatsoever would impoverish the already impoverished while the rich eco-warrier fascists would countinue with their jetset lifestyles totally unaffected.

    George Monbiot exposed Spiked’s funding from the Koch Brothers fossil fuel climate denialists, but in fairness I believe that the Koch funding is relatively insignificant and that Spiked’s fossil fuel cheerleading is for the reason set out above. They totally refuse to engage with the science of AGW, they just diss every single effort to wean us off the stuff in favour of renewable energy on the grounds that it will cause more poverty for the poorest in the world. No time-scale is ever suggested for this increased poverty, as in how many more millions will be fleeing from permanent drout in East Africa in about 2030 if CO2 emissions continue to accelerate as Spiked wants them to accelerate.

    And of course some of their Marxist Libertarian stuff is laughable. They seem to be in favour of no taxes on tobacco, never mind sugar. But to be fair they are consistently anti-prohibition of drugs which is at least consistent.

    But on the woked political correct issue and its many obvious contradictions I think that they are totally on the money. As in identitarian politics in all its many guises:

    “We live in a world where diversity rules. Achieving ethnic diversity, in particular, is viewed as an overarching progressive goal for businesses, the arts and politics. ‘Now more than ever, we need to celebrate the profound and enriching transformation brought by the diversity of people in this country, with all their different experiences, talents and contributions’, reads the Labour Party’s 2017 manifesto.

    In that case, you might expect Johnson’s cabinet appointments to be a cause for celebration. But you’d be wrong. Instead, many on the left – mostly other ethnic minorities, in fact – were quick to denounce the newly appointed ministers. Shadow treasury minister Clive Lewis sarcastically congratulated Conservative chairman James Cleverly, accusing him and other ethnic-minority ministers of ‘selling their souls’ for office. Novara Media’s Ash Sarkar dismissed the ‘ascendence of Priti Patel and Sajid Javid’ as ‘tokenism’, accusing them of assimilating ‘oppressive ideologies in return for representation’…

    In this worldview, people are increasingly seen not as individuals, independent of their race, but as ‘representatives’ of their race. In politics, this burdens ethnic minorities with the expectation that they will hold the ‘correct’ views. These ethnic-minority Tories have committed the cardinal sin against diversity by thinking for themselves. They have crossed a line and defied what is expected of them as ethnic minorities.

    The dehumanising slurs and accusations of race treachery thrown at Javid, Patel and others are a product of a worldview that reduces all individuals to their immutable characteristics. Identity politics is inherently dehumanising. That it has now taken such an ugly turn against ethnic minorities should surprise no one.”


  18. Peter, substitute ‘elitists’ for ‘race’ their and it’s O’Neill’s single transferable comment.

    The odious O’Neill thrives on identity politics himself:


    This is the guy who considers campaigns to tackle racism in football to be “a class war” driven by “elites’ FFS


    A dispicable troll.

  19. Peter.

    Good article you linked to in The Spectator. Cheers.