I really enjoyed
reading your article regarding the Letter from Oxford. Here in New Orleans, we
are also being forced to go through an eradication of history. Our pandering
mayor has also succumbed to Black Lives Matter and has personally forced the
issue of removing historic statues. It is so saddening….watching history being
pushed down the \”memory hole.\” Thank you for all of your wonderful,
enlightening writings. Brigitte New Orleans, Louisiana
Not long ago I wrote that every American
institution, public and private, is corrupt. And every week Robert Parry’s
reports prove the truth of my statement.
In his latest, http://www.globalresearch.ca/from-brady-to-mh-17-power-defines-reality/5522142 , Parry says that “Power – far
more than fact – determines what is defined as true in America, a nation that
has become dangerously disconnected from reality in matters both trivial and
important.” To illustrate he uses the orchestrated “Deflategate” scandal and
the orchestrated MH-17 storyline.
Parry reports how NFL team owners used NFL
Commissioner Roger Goodell to frame the New England Pariots and the team’s
quarterback, Tom Brady. It is a scientific fact that cold air and moisture
reduce a football’s internal air pressure. This scientific fact was ignored,
and Brady was successfully smeared for running a scheme to slightly deflate
footballs. He and the Patriots were sanctioned.
It was nearly three years ago that the
Malaysian airliner MH-17 was shot down over the Ukraine. US Secretary of State
John Kerry immediately declared that the US had complete proof that the
Russians were involved. Kerry has never released the “proof,” which tells us
that a US Secretary of State again lied to the world.
However, the investigation was taken
out of the hands of the indepenent international body, the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), and given, at Washington’s insistance, to the
Dutch, with the rationale that so many of the victims were Dutch.
The real reason is that it is easy for
Washington to control the Dutch. After three years there is still no conclusive
report. During this time Washington has succeeded via propaganda in placing the
blame on the Russian separatists and Putin.
The United States feigned surprise during the simulation of an attack by the Russian aviation against the USS Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea. And yet, as we have reported, Russia already has the capacity to block the ship’s Communications & Commands, and did so, observes Manlio Dinucci, because the ship was in the process of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Furthermore, the US nuclear deployment occurred as China is developing hypersonic launchers, a part of whose trajectory will be in glide mode, inspiring new research by DARPA. As from now, Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are participating in the Tactical Boost Glide Program.
The White House is «preoccupied» because Russian fighters flew over a US ship at very close range in the Baltic Sea, making a «simulated attack» – as reported by our news agencies. However, they did not inform us as to which ship it was, nor why it was in the Baltic Sea.
In fact, it was the USS Donald Cook, one of the four missile-launching units deployed by the US Navy for the «defence of NATO missiles in Europe». These units, which are to be increased in number, are equipped with the Aegis radar system and SM-3 interceptor missiles, but also with double-capacity Tomahawk cruise missiles, both conventional and nuclear. In other words, they are nuclear attack units equipped with a «shield» designed to neutralise the enemy riposte.
The Donald Cook, which left the Polish port of Gdynia on the 11th April, cruised for two days at scarcely 70 kilometres from the Russian naval base of Kaliningrad, and for that reason was visited by Russian fighters and helicopters. Apart from these missile-launcher ships, the USA/NATO «shield» in Europe, in its present configuration, includes an «advance base» radar site in Turkey, a battery of US ground missiles in Roumania, composed of 24 SM-3 missiles, and another similar battery which is to be installed in Poland.
Moscow has issued a warning – these ground batteries, which are also capable of launching nuclear Tomahawk missiles, constitute an evident violation of the INF Treaty, which forbids European deployment of intermediate-range nuclear missiles.
The United States accuses Russia of provoking «a useless escalation of tensions» with their over-flights – but what would they do if Russia were to send missile-launching units along the US coast-line and install missile batteries in Cuba and Mexico?
No-one is asking this question in the major media, which continues to cloud reality. The latest hidden news – the transfer of F-22 Raptors, the most advanced US nuclear attack fighter-bombers, from Tyndall base in Florida to Lakenheath base in England, announced on the 11th April by the United States European Command.
From England, the F-22 Raptors will be «deployed to other NATO bases in an advanced position, in order to maximise the possibilities for training, and also exercise dissuasion against any action which might destabilise European security».
This is the preparation for the imminent deployment in Europe, including Italy, of more US B61-12 nuclear bombs which, launched from approximately 100 kilometres away, will hit their target with a warhead offering «four selectable power options». This new weapon takes place in the programme for the potentialisation of nuclear forces launched by the Obama administration, which plans, amongst other things, for the construction of 12 more attack submarines (at 7 billion dollars apiece, the first of which is already being built), each one armed with 200 nuclear warheads.
The New York Times reports that a new type of nuclear warhead is currently in development, the «hypersonic glide vehicle» which, on its return to the atmosphere, manoeuvers in order to avoid interceptor missiles, and heads for its target at more than 16,800 miles/hour . Russia and China are following, and developing similar weapons.
Meanwhile, Washington is harvesting its fruit. By transforming Europe into the front line of a nuclear conflict, and, with the help of the European governments themselves, is sabotaging EU-Russian economic relations in order to permanently link the EU to the USA via the intermediary of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). By the same token, it is forcing its European allies to increase their military expenditure to the advantage of the US war industry, whose exports have increased by 60% over the last five years, becoming the strongest sector in US exports.
Censored, Surveilled, Watch Listed
and Jailed: The Absurdity of Being a Citizen in the American Police State
By John W. Whitehead
April 25, 2016
“You had to live—did live, from habit that
became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and,
except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”
—George Orwell, 1984
In past ages, those who dared to speak out
against tyranny—viewed as an act of treason—were blinded, castrated,
disfigured, mutilated, rendered mute by having their tongues cut out of their
heads, and ultimately crucified.
In the American police state, the price to be
paid for speaking truth to power (also increasingly viewed as an act of
treason) is surveillance, censorship, jail and ultimately death.
It’s a diabolically ingenious tactic for
muzzling, disarming and ultimately eliminating one’s critics or potential
However, where many Americans go wrong is in
assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the
government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character,
labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
In fact, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the
American People, all you really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the
internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel,
purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear
suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a
growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government
propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social
media and behavior sensing software, government agents are spinning a
sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings,
flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies
of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the
dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K.
Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the
surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you
say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you
support, and with whom you communicate. Computers now do the tedious work of
trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for
potentially anti-government remarks—all of which is carefully recorded,
documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of
the government’s choosing.
While this may sound like a riff on a bad joke,
it’s a bad joke with “we the people” as the punchline. Yet it is no laughing
matter that Americans are being jailed for growing orchids, feeding whales,
collecting rainwater, and praying in their backyards. There is nothing humorous
about Americans having their families terrorized by SWAT teams, their pets
killed, their children shot, their homes trashed and their privacy shredded.
And there’s really not much comic relief to be found when the citizenry is
forced to pay their own government to jail, spy on, censor, terrorize and kill
The following activities are guaranteed to get
you censored, surveilled, eventually placed on a government watch list,
possibly detained and potentially killed.
Use a cell phone:Simply by using a cell
phone, you make yourself an easy target for government agents—working closely
with corporations—who can listen in on your phone calls, read your text
messages and emails, and track your movements based on the data transferred
from, received by, and stored in your cell phone. Mention any of the so-called
“trigger” words in a conversation or text message, and you’ll get flagged for
Drive a car: Unless you’ve got an old
junkyard heap without any of the gadgets and gizmos that are so attractive to
today’s car buyers (GPS, satellite radio, electrical everything, smart systems,
etc.), driving a car today is like wearing a homing device: you’ll be tracked
from the moment you open that car door thanks to black box recorders and
vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems that can monitor your speed, direction,
location, the number of miles traveled, and even your seatbelt use. Once you add
satellites, GPS devices, license plate readers, and real-time traffic cameras
to the mix, there’s nowhere you can go on our nation’s highways and byways that
you can’t be followed. By the time you add self-driving cars into the
futuristic mix, equipped with computers that know where you want to go before
you do, privacy and autonomy will be little more than distant mirages in your
Attend a political rally: Enacted in the
wake of 9/11, the Patriot Act redefined terrorism so broadly that many
non-terrorist political activities such as protest marches, demonstrations and
civil disobedience were considered potential terrorist acts, thereby rendering
anyone desiring to engage in protected First Amendment expressive activities as
suspects of the surveillance state.
Serve in the military:Operation Vigilant Eagle, the brainchild of the Dept. of
Homeland Security, calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from
Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic
terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering
from the psychological effects of war.” Police agencies are also using Beware,
an “early warning” computer system that tips them off to a potential suspect’s
inclination to be a troublemaker and assigns individuals a color-coded threat score—green, yellow or red—based on a
variety of factors including one’s criminal records, military background, medical
history and social media surveillance.
Disagree with a law enforcement official: A
growing number of government programs are aimed at identifying, monitoring and
locking up anyone considered potentially “dangerous” or mentally ill (according
to government standards, of course). For instance, a homeless man in New York
City who reportedly had a history of violence but no signs of mental illness
was forcibly detained in a psych ward
for a week after arguing with shelter police. Despite the fact that doctors cited no
medical reason to commit him, the man was locked up in accordance with a $22
million program that monitors mentally ill people considered “potentially”
violent. According to the Associated Press, “A judge
finally ordered his release, ruling that the man's commitment violated his
civil rights and that bureaucrats had meddled in his medical treatment.”
Limp or stutter: As a result of a nationwide
push to certify a broad spectrum of government officials in mental health first-aid training (a 12-hour course comprised of
PowerPoint presentations, videos, discussions, role playing and other
interactive activities), more Americans are going to run the risk of being
reported for having mental health issues by non-medical personnel. Mind you,
once you get on such a government watch list—whether it’s a terrorist watch
list, a mental health watch list, or a dissident watch list—there’s no
clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you should actually be on there. For
instance, one 37-year-old disabled man was arrested, diagnosed by police and an
unlicensed mental health screener as having “mental health issues,” apparently
because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait, and subsequently locked up for
five days in a mental health facility against his will and with no access to
family and friends. A subsequent hearing found that Gordon Goines, who suffers from a
neurological condition similar to multiple sclerosis, has no mental illness and should
not have been confined.
Appear confused or nervous, fidget, whistle or
smell bad: According to the Transportation Security Administration’s 92-point
secret behavior watch list for spotting terrorists, these are among some of the telling signs of
suspicious behavior: fidgeting, whistling, bad body odor, yawning, clearing your throat,
having a pale face from recently shaving your beard, covering your mouth with
your hand when speaking and blinking your eyes fast. You can also be pulled
aside for interrogation if you “have ‘unusual items,’ like almanacs and
‘numerous prepaid calling cards or cell phones.’” One critic of the program
accurately referred to the program as a “license to harass.”
Allow yourself to be seen in public waving a
toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun, such as a water nozzle or a
remote control or a walking cane, for instance: No longer is it unusual to hear
about incidents in which police shoot unarmed individuals first and ask
questions later. John Crawford was shot by police in an Ohio Wal-Mart for holding an air rifle sold in the store that he may
have intended to buy. Thirteen-year-old Andy Lopez Cruz was shot 7 times in 10 seconds by a California police officer
who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an assault rifle. Christopher Roupe, 17,
was shot and killed after opening the
door to a police officer. The officer, mistaking the Wii remote control in Roupe’s hand for a
gun, shot him in the chest. Another police officer repeatedly shot 70-year-old Bobby Canipe during a traffic stop. The cop
saw the man reaching for his cane and, believing the cane to be a rifle, opened
Stare at a police officer:Miami-Dade police
slammed the 14-year-old Tremaine McMillian to the ground, putting him in a
chokehold and handcuffing him after he allegedly gave them “dehumanizing stares” and walked away from them, which
the officers found unacceptable.
Appear to be pro-gun, pro-freedom or
anti-government: You might be a domestic terrorist in the eyes of the FBI
(and its network of snitches) if you: express libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers);
exhibit Second Amendment-oriented views (NRA or gun club membership); read
survivalist literature, including apocalyptic fictional books; show signs of
self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies); fear
an economic collapse; buy gold and barter items; subscribe to religious views concerning the book of
Revelation; voice fears about Big Brother or big government; expound about constitutional rights and civil liberties; or
believe in a New World Order conspiracy. This is all part of a larger trend in
American governance whereby dissent is criminalized and pathologized, and
dissenters are censored, silenced or declared unfit for society.
Attend a public school: Microcosms of the
police state, America’s public schools contain almost every aspect of the
militarized, intolerant, senseless, overcriminalized, legalistic,
surveillance-riddled, totalitarian landscape that plagues those of us on the
“outside.” From the moment a child enters one of the nation’s 98,000 public schools to the moment she graduates,
she will be exposed to a steady diet of draconian zero tolerance policies that
criminalize childish behavior, overreaching anti-bullying statutes that
criminalize speech, school resource officers (police) tasked with disciplining
and/or arresting so-called “disorderly” students, standardized testing that
emphasizes rote answers over critical thinking, politically correct mindsets
that teach young people to censor themselves and those around them, and
extensive biometric and surveillance systems that, coupled with the rest,
acclimate young people to a world in which they have no freedom of thought,
speech or movement. Additionally, as part of the government’s so-called ongoing
war on terror, the FBI—the nation’s de facto secret police force—is now recruiting students and teachers to
spy on each other and report anyone who appears to have the potential to be
“anti-government” or “extremist” as part of its “Don’t Be a Puppet” campaign.
Speak truth to power: Long before Chelsea
Manning and Edward Snowden were being castigated for blowing the whistle on
the government’s war crimes and the National Security
Agency’s abuse of its surveillance powers, it was activists such as Martin
Luther King Jr. and John Lennon who were being singled out for daring to speak
truth to power. These men and others like them had their phone calls monitored
and data files collected on their activities and associations. For a little
while, at least, they became enemy number one in the eyes of the U.S.
There’s always a price to pay for standing up
to the powers-that-be.
Yet as this list shows, you don’t even have to
be a dissident to get flagged by the government for surveillance, censorship
All you really need to be is a citizen of the
American police state.
Readers and foreign news organizations are
asking me the meaning of Donald Trump’s foreign policy speech.
On the surface, his speech is contradictory.
Trump says he will rebuild US military might so that America will always be
first. Yet Trump emphasizes that “we want to live peacefully and in friendship
with Russia and China.”
In a multi-polar world, there is no first
Perhaps the “America first” bit is just an
effort to ward off neoconservative attacks on his policy of peace. Perhaps
Trump means that the US is going to continue to be the top dog, but that the US
is going to cease using muscle to make others do what Washington wants.
Trump says that he will put together a fresh
team of foreign policy experts, assuming the US has any. Most Americans are
full of themselves, and after two decades of neoconservative hubris, finding a
fresh team won’t be easy.
Presidents inherit messes that leave them no
time to become organized. A president’s appointees have to be confirmed by the
Senate, an entity controlled by powerful private interests. Trump will be
advised that this and that person cannot be confirmed and that he must send a
compromise candidate for Senate confirmation.
Moreover, presidents are outside the loop of
black op affairs. A false flag event can be pulled off that sends Trump in the
direction desired by the military/security complex or Israel.
In my opinion, should Trump be elected, the
importance would be that the electorate would have declared their lack of
confidence in the political establishment. Unless Trump can put the
establishment into the trash bin of history, he would not be able to accomplish
Thus, the result of a Trump failure could be a
demoralized electorate that gives up.
The letter below came to
me from Oxford University where I was a post-graduate.
I do not think it
conceivable that the letter was actually written by Oriel College, or any
authority at Oxford. This letter was written in exasperation by someone who
feels that the civilized world has collapsed around him. This is a letter that
the author of the letter wishes had been written.
By presenting the
letter, I am not endorsing a make-believe letter or its point of view. My point
is different. The world’s most famous university lacks the confidence to defend
itself from from unreasonable demands made by students from its former colonies
who desire to remove the association of Oriel College with its benefactor,
Yet, despite insuficient
confidence to stand up to foreign students, England has mustered the confidence
to align with Washington against the Muslim World and Russia. How do we explain
If the British still had
enough confidence for an Oxford College to have penned such a letter, the
British would not have forsaken their sovereignty and joined the European
Union. What saved Cecil Rhodes stature at Oriel College was not Oxford but
alumni who said they would cancel bequests of 100 million British pounds if the
university succumbed to erasing its history in order to appease foreigners who
claim to be offended by it. If they are offended, say the alumni, let them go
The future independence
of universities is in doubt, especially those dependent on alumni support. Old
grads are turned off by the erasure of what they remember. Recent grads are not
experiencing the same success. A university degree no longer brings the same
economic success that it did in the 20th century. A financialized and offshored
capitalism has heavily redistributed income and wealth to the One Percent. One
consequence is that the alumni donor base will shrink.
Moreover, the older
generation of graduates, who made their money in the past, is constantly
reminded by fund-raising materials that the college or university that they
attended has been replaced by something else. What they experienced is gone.
Oxford colleges were segregated by gender and attended mainly by British. Today
they are gender-integrated and multi-cultural. Judging from photos in
fund-raising materials, at Oxford the British appear to be a minority.
Instead of warm and
fuzzy feelings, old grads feel dispossessed. The psychological effect on those
who experienced a different Oxford environment is similar to returning to the
site of your grandparents farm and finding a subdivision, a bedroom community
for a once distant city. The creek you explored is now inside a pipe buried
under back yards, and the trees you climbed are cut down. You feel a loss. This
is what many alumni feel when they experience the transformation of their
educational institution. They experience a loss of association, which is not a
racist or sexist response.
As survivors of an era
in which economic success was more broadly based pass away, colleges and
universities will turn increasingly to corporations and the One Percent for
funds. These donors will extract a price. Colleges and universities will be
suborned, as the media and politicians are today, to serve the powerful
interests on which they are dependent.
We might think that this
is what the Oxford alumni are doing when they threatened to withhold bequests,
but it is not. The alumni are not saying what is to be taught and not taught or
how things are to be explained. The alumni are saying that it is impermissible
to destroy history by throwing it into Orwell’s memory hole. Oxford alumni have
had to accept so much change and now the physical image itself, the historial
landmarks, are to be thrown away. The result is that nothing any longer
corresponds to their memories. Their association with their college and the
university becomes severed.
There is no doubt that
the British and US governments have ground under their feet many peoples. But
history is history. We have to live with it and try to make the future better.
We cannot substitute for history our view of what should have happened.
Here is the letter that
indicates more British confidence than actually exists:
This letter is a
response from Oxford to Black Students, some of whom are
attending as Rhodes Scholars, who are demanding the removal
of the statue of their and Oxford’s benefactor, Cecil Rhodes.
Subject: OXFORD – THE
FIGHT BACK HAS BEGUN
Patten (Lord Patten of Barnes), The Chancellor of Oxford University, was on the Today Programme on BBC Radio 4 yesterday on precisely the same topic. The
Daily Telegraph headline yesterday was “Oxford will not rewrite history”.
““Education is not indoctrination. Our history is not a blank page on which we can write our own version of what it should have been according to our
contemporary views and prejudice.”
Rhodes Must Fall
“Dear Scrotty Students,
“Cecil Rhodes’s generous
bequest has contributed greatly to the comfort and well being of many generations of Oxford students – a good many of them, dare we say it, better,
brighter and more deserving than you.
“This does not
necessarily mean we approve of everything Rhodes did in his lifetime – but then we don’t have to.
Cecil Rhodes died over a century ago. Autres temps, autres moeurs. If you don’t understand what this means – and it would not remotely surprise us if that were the case – then we really think you should ask yourself the question:
‘Why am I at Oxford?’
“Oxford, let us remind
you, is the world’s second oldest extant university. Scholars have been studying here since at least the 11th century. We’ve played a major part in the invention of Western civilisation, from the 12th century intellectual renaissance through the Enlightenment and beyond.
Our alumni include
William of Ockham, Roger Bacon,William Tyndale, John Donne, Sir Walter Raleigh, Erasmus, Sir Christopher Wren, William Penn, Samuel Johnson, Robert Hooke, William Morris, Oscar Wilde, Emily Davison, and Cardinal Newman.
We’re a big deal. And most of the people privileged to come and study here are conscious of what a big deal we are. Oxford is their alma mater – their dear mother – and they respect and revere her accordingly.
“And what were your
ancestors doing in that period? Living in mud huts, mainly. Sure we’ll concede you the short-lived Southern African civilisation of Great Zimbabwe. But let’s be brutally honest here. The contribution of the Bantu tribes to modern civilisation has been as near as damn it to zilch.
“You’ll probably say
that’s ‘racist.’ But it’s what we here at Oxford prefer to call ‘true.’ Perhaps the rules are different at other universities. In fact, we know things are different at other universities. We’ve watched with horror at what has been happening across the pond from the University of Missouri to the University of Virginia and even to revered institutions like Harvard and Yale: the ‘safe spaces;’ the blacklivesmatter; the creeping cultural relativism; the stifling political correctness; what Allan Bloom rightly called ‘the closing of the American mind.’
At Oxford however, we will always prefer facts and free, open debate to petty grievance-mongering, identity politics and empty sloganeering. The day we cease to do so is the day we lose the right to call ourselves the world’s greatest university.
“Of course, you are
perfectly within your rights to squander your time at Oxford on silly, vexatious, single-issue political campaigns. (Though it does make us wonder how stringent the vetting procedure is these days for Rhodes scholarships and even more so, for Mandela Rhodes scholarships.) We are well used to seeing undergraduates – or, in your case – postgraduates, making idiots of themselves. Just don’t expect us to indulge your idiocy, let alone genuflect before it. You may be black – “BME” as the grisly modern terminology has it – but we are colour blind. We have been educating gifted undergraduates from our former colonies, our Empire, our Commonwealth and beyond for many generations. We do not discriminate over sex, race, colour or creed. We do, however, discriminate according to intellect.
“That means, inter alia,
that when our undergrads or post grads come up with fatuous ideas, we don’t pat them on the back, give them a red rosette and say: “Ooh, you’re black and you come from South Africa. What a clever chap you are!” No. We prefer to see the quality of those ideas tested in the crucible of public debate. That’s another key part of the Oxford intellectual tradition you see: you can argue any damn thing you like but you need to
be able to justify it with facts and logic – otherwise your idea is worthless.
“This ludicrous notion
you have that a bronze statue of Cecil Rhodes should be removed from Oriel College, because it’s symbolic of ‘institutional racism’ and ‘white slavery’ — well even if it is – which we dispute – so bloody what? Any undergraduate so feeble-minded that they can’t pass a bronze statue without having their ‘safe space’ violated really does not deserve to be here. And besides, if we were to remove Rhodes’s statue on the premise that his life wasn’t blemish-free, where would we stop? As one of our alumni, Dan Hannan, has pointed out, Oriel’s other benefactors include two kings so awful – Edward II and Charles I – that their subjects had them killed. The college opposite – Christ Church – was built by a murderous, thieving bully who bumped off two of his wives. Thomas Jefferson kept slaves: does that invalidate the US Constitution? Winston Churchill had unenlightened views about Muslims and India: was he then the wrong man to lead Britain in the war?
“Actually, we’ll go
further than that. Your Rhodes MustFall campaign is not merely fatuous but ugly, vandalistic and dangerous. We agree with Oxford historian R.W. Johnson that what you are trying to do here is no different fromn what ISIS and the Al-Qaeda have been doing to artefacts in places like Mali and Syria. You are murdering history.
“And who are you,
anyway, to be lecturing Oxford University on how it should order its affairs? Your rhodesmustfall campaign, we understand, originates in South Africa and was
initiated by a black activist who said in one of his lecturers ‘whites have to be killed.’ One of you – Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh – is the privileged son of a rich politician and a member of a party whose slogan is ‘Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer.’ Another of you, Ntokozo Qwabe, who is only in Oxford as a beneficiary of a Rhodes scholarship, has boasted about the need for ‘socially conscious black students’ to ‘dominate white universities, and do so
ruthlessly and decisively.’
“Great. That’s just what
Oxford University needs. Some cultural enrichment from the land of Winnie Mandela, burning tyre necklaces, an AIDS epidemic almost entirely the result of government indifference and ignorance, one of the world’s highest per capita murder rates, institutionalised corruption, tribal politics, anti-white racism and a collapsing economy. Please name which of the above items you think will enhance the lives of the 22,000 students studying here at Oxford.
“And then please explain
what it is that makes your attention grabbing campaign to remove a listed statue from an Oxford college more urgent, more deserving than the desire of probably at least 20,000 of those 22,000 students to enjoy their time here unencumbered by the irritation of spoilt, ungrateful little tossers on scholarships they clearly don’t merit using racial politics and cheap guilt-tripping to ruin the life and fabric of our beloved university.
“Understand us and
understand this clearly: you have everything to learn from us; we have nothing to learn from you.”