the brilliantly leaping gazelle

Tag: gaza

33:64 presents “Robert Bolt.”

If anyone had any doubts whatsoever that the outbreak of peace in Gaza was the ‘wrong’ kind of peace, the cover of the latest edition of ‘Time’ magazine allays them. Ostensibly, it is a photo of Tangoed captioned ‘His triumph’, recognising the most remarkable diplomatic achievement of this century, in bringing an end to the fighting in Gaza. However, out of all the photos of him that they have, they chose one of the most unflattering. No-one looks at their best when photographed from underneath, certainly not an older man, so much so that when I initially saw it, I wasn’t even sure it was even him.

There can be no question that this was an editorial choice made at a very senior level. The cover had to be repeatedly approved and passed up the chain before the magazine was even published. But management at ‘Time’ might have calculated that their readers would have correctly interpreted the cover for the back-handed compliment it was. ‘Yes’, the cover says, ‘ we acknowledge that the fighting has stopped and whilst we are overjoyed at that, did it have to be you that made it happen? 

And that, fundamentally, is the main reason why it is the ‘wrong’ kind of peace. It affects people’s business. Because if, for the last two years, lots of people had business’s that depended on the upon the war in Gaza continuing. The longer it did, the more profitable the profitable denunciation could occur, the more outrage, the more fulmination, the type of profit they were making being directly related to whom their it was that business was focused. But no matter what it was, that business has come crashing down around them. At the front of the gravy train there are the heads of governments, intergovernmental organisations and global media conglomerates. In second and third class are the NGO’s, the charities and the various domestic political opposition parties, all the way down the to those at the other end, the student protesters, the march organisers, the keyboard warriors, all of them fucked, and not in a good way. 

American politics is a prime example of what I mean by it being bad for business. If you were a Democrat politician who had constantly decried Trump as someone who was the very embodiment of Hitler, as being a very real threat to democracy itself and essentially Satan in a bad wig, then this peace deal is absolutely the worst possible news. If your whole shtick had been to make a name for yourself by castigating Israel for anything and everything, being an apologist for Hamas and suggesting that Tangoes cosying up to Notonyournelly had made the prospects for peace even more remote, then you were fucked. The profit that your business depended on, which was turning media appearances, penning opinion pieces for old and new media, visibly grandstanding at protests,  and then turning all that into votes, gone. In an instant.

The same is true for our domestic politicians. They also have the difficult task of welcoming the cessation of war whilst not wanting to acknowledge the fact of who made it possible. This is further compounded by the fact that the Americans have been explicit in critiquing the UK’s recognition of Palestine as a state as making the deal more difficult than it needed. Which in itself was a very  deliberate act of diplomatic point-scoring, a chastisement of various government leaders, highlighting exactly how much their chasing of domestic electoral success had acted against the very aims they professed to want.

The media who now find themselves in a situation entirely of their own making. When he was running for President the first time around, the media first portrayed him as a joke candidate until he emerged as a corrective to the more ‘professional’ politician they were used to. When he won, in part by appealing to those who had felt ignored by the old political order, they were appalled. In the UK it was worse, given how irrelevant we are within the American political system. However if one read most of the UK’s broadsheets, visited news websites – like The Huffington Post – or subscribed to online news organisations – like Novara Media – one would be forgiven for thinking that we were integral to its smooth operation.

Because, in a weird way, it was. Tangoed is good copy. He is news, and the business of news is to attract readers, or eyeballs and keep those eyeballs or readers doing so long enough so they can sell them to advertisers. That’s why he’s has been rarely out of news for over ten years now. The media knows this, knows that its in an ever more competitive world and ‘The Guardian’ is the most blatant example of this inevitable reality. It printed at least one negative story about him seemingly every day for years, some about the war, some not and endless opinion pieces all having the same opinion The more they printed, the more money their readers gave them. It was like a weird version of payola. 

The’ll have to some proper news now, focus on events much closer to home, do the hard years that actual journalism requires and just reinforce what their readers have been duped into believing. This is equally true for our own shyster politicians, opportunistic rabble rousers and the rabbles they rouse. How can they call for a ceasefire when there is one? How can they pretend to want peace, yet when the very peace they were calling for and which they endlessly claimed was so elusive actually happens, what now for them? What of their profit, which amounted to little more  than increased visibility, name recognition and enhanced reputational  kudos now?  

Its funny that Tangoed once wrote a book called ‘The Art of the Deal’ because with this deal, which they assured us could never happen, he’s managed to call all of their bluffs.        

33:64 presents “Heidi Fleiss.”

Whilst the fatal attack on the synagogue in Manchester was bad enough, the response to it of the media has been utterly duplicitous, brazenly shameless and hypocritically judgmental. Not that the media are alone in all of this. There’s enough guilt to be had so that everyone can have their share. Politicians, both within government and those aspiring to one day be in it. Charities, pressure groups and NGO’s. Organisations, sporting bodies and businesses. 

Of course the ultimate blame for what happened lies with the man who did it. But it could be argued that had the media been just a bit less hasty in amplifying the lie that a genocide is happening in Gaza, never mind questioning who was claiming it, why were they doing so and if their claims were supported by any actual evidence, had they been a bit more sceptical in reporting the claims of the Hamas run Gaza Health Ministry, been even slightly critical of the failure of Gaza’s neighbour Egypt to open its border and allow Gazans to flee the war zone, or practiced due diligence before reporting as fact that Israel was not only deliberately targeting civilians but starving them as well, then possibly a disturbed mind might not have become a murderous one.

But since the 8th October 2023, most of the British media has become if not an uncritical outlet for Hamas propaganda, then certainly one that abandoned any pretence of impartiality. The result of two years of the ceaseless demonisation of Israel and by extension of that, a belief in some peoples minds that all Jews share a collective responsibility for Gaza, goes some way to explain Manchester.

But politicians are culpable also. They have not staunchly and robustly refuted the claims of the keffiyeh wearing fuckwits, have not called out the pro-palestinian protest marches for being the rabid anti-semitic grotesquery’s they are. The government has calculated that given the UK only has a Jewish population of less than 400,000, whilst the Muslim population is 10 times bigger and that a significant proportion of them will vote based on how pro-palestine and anti-Israel the government is.

Lesser political chancers, from the ex-has been – Corblimey, to the never will be – Raisin, can also spot an electoral opportunity, but as recent comedic revelations have highlighted, each has their own idea as to what that opportunity is. The Groans have, to no-ones shock, seen a passing bandwagon and jumped on it, attempting to create the impression that they can do more than telling us what we can’t do by also telling foreigners what they can’t do as well, as long as those foreigners are Israeli’s. The Non Dems have done something, but it probably needed a stunt involving a paddle board or a zip line before anyone took any notice.

Assorted charities, pressure groups and other vested interest parties gave done what charities, pressure groups and vested intent groups do; raise their profile, influence, status and funds by reinforcing what all of them say. Business’s prostitute their ‘ethical’ stance by proving that they don’t have one whilst sporting bodies imagine that should.

All have been complicit to varying degree’s of promoting, amplifying and legitimising an insidiously corrosive narrative, one that they seem to have no awareness of its ultimate manifestation. It’s like leaving matches, a few gallons of petrol and a flamethrower next to a house and then being surprised when someone torches it.

33:64 presents “Al Gore.”

Say what you will about everybody’s favourite doom monger, but she certainly practices what she preaches, when it comes to recycling anyway. Tom Thumberg is once again leading a flotilla of small ships, which will again be packed with humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza. Quite whether she imagines that she has a realistic chance of doing so is beside the point. The point is that she’s trying and the point is that the worlds press will be recording her every move and most importantly of all, will be on hand when Israel enforces its naval blockade of Gaza and prevents her armada from reaching its destination.

I imagine she knows she has as much chance of getting to Gaza as there is of there being a Pride march to greet her arrival if she did. But that isn’t her goal. Her goal is to draw much needed media attention to the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza because of..you know..how the world has ignored it, and to also reposition herself as not just a climate change harridan but as a social justice warrior. And much like every other social justice warrior before her, I question exactly how much of her desire for social justice depends upon which society it is. Is hers an Orwellian concept of social justice whereby some societies are more equal than others? 

But apparently to impugn her motives is to doubt her moral probity. Ahead of the flotillas departure she gave an interview to Sky News, in which she rejected accusations of anti-Semitism “It is not anti-Semitic to say that we should not be bombing people, that one should not be living in occupation, that everyone should have the right to live in freedom and dignity, no matter who you are.” Which is true, if you take away the first five words from that statement, that is. But what is also true, uncomfortably and undeniably true, is that when you put them back, and say those words in relation to the only Jewish state in the world, then what else can it be?

The same words, save the first five could just as equally apply to Yemen or Sudan. In Yemen, a civil war has been happening since 2014 and because of this, according to the UN, over 370,00 people have been killed. There is also an humanitarian aid crisis, as one might expect there to be in a war zone. 21 millions people, 11 millions of them children are at risk from starvation. Earlier this year there was a cholera outbreak. In Sudan, the situation is depressingly similar. A civil war. Factions splintering off into more factions. Over 500,00 dead since 2023. Again, the need for humanitarian aid is urgent.  

I don’t want to play a grotesque version of Top Trumps here, but it seems as if Tom Thumberg does. Okay then. By the end of July 2025, some 63,000 Gaza’s had died. Why are their deaths more worthy of the worlds attention, why are their deaths to be so roundly condemned by people, organisations and countries whose anger seems to be exclusively focused on those in Gaza. Often by the very same countries who are who are participating in the wars in Yemen and Sudan?

Indeed, if she was serious in her intent to help alleviate the sufferings of the people of Gaza, she might better use one of her press conferences to question why, unlike in every other civil war civil war, Gaza’s neighbours haven’t opened their borders to allow for refugees to escape. And, for good measure, angrily demand to know why – according to the UN’s own figures – 85% of their food aid trucks into Gaza are hijacked by Hamas and other militia groups. And on the back of that, not only question why the UN continues to do something it knows doesn’t work, but also why that fact isn’t widely reported in the media. 

But why would she? What’s in it for her? Given how the prevailing narrative casts Israel as uniquely evil and Hamas as essentially innocent, the backlash against her for doing so would be as immediate as it was inevitable.  Much easier, and better for her long term career prospects, if she plays along.

 After all, when her last Gaza cruise was curtailed by the Israelis, and they invited her to watch footage of the 7th October massacre, she refused. So for all her bleating on about “how everyone should have the right to live in freedom and dignity”, it proved how conditional her concern is, how hollow and performative she is. It also proves that she is right to call this latest stunt symbolic.

 A load of symbolics.

33:64 presents “Palestine Action.”

Much has been written about Palestine Action (PA) recently. And most of it has concerned the various this’s and that’s which caused the British government proscribed Palestine Action as a terrorist group last month. Yet more has been focused on what wholly impartial onlookers perceive to be further evidence of something that their wholly impartial deductions have already deuced to be happening. Alas, what no-one seems to have given any thought to is the inherent contradiction in the name PA, which whilst it great for PA, also exposes the highly subjective and dangerously blinkered notion of morality upon which it claims to have been founded. 

Ostensibly founded to disrupt the UK’s arms industry sales to Israel and nowhere else, because well…Israel, and because of it being complicit in what they describe as a the genocide in Gaza, their disruption amounts to little more than some vandalism, petty theft and performative criminality. Which essentially is little more drunken stag weekend in Croatia with some photo’s posted on social media

The high-minded morality which they loudly proclaim to possess – and to which their placard waving supporters are drawn – is nothing more than disingenuous grandstanding. It wilfully obfuscates the reality of war. Yes war is brutal, innocents will be killed and regrettably, atrocities will happen. These things are universal and apply to every war ever fought ever. 

It is also disingenuous because by focusing on Gaza, other conflicts can continue out public view, and as such, easily ignored by the media. A good example of this Yemen, where a civil war has been happening since 2014. According to the UN, over 370,00 people have been killed.There is also an humanitarian aid crisis, as one might expect there to be in a war zone. 21 millions people, 11 millions of them children are at risk from starvation. Earlier this year there was a cholera outbreak.

In Sudan, the situation is depressingly similar. A civil war. Factions splintering off into more factions. Over 500,00 dead since 2023. Again, the need for humanitarian aid is urgent. 

But do the streets of Central London reverberate to the sounds of protesters denouncing the war in Yemen or the genocide in Sudan? Do they demand that the UK suspend arms sales to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), because it has somehow involved itself in both civil wars?  No, because the disingenuous grandstanding of PA offers an simplistic and easy to follow narrative of oppressed and oppressor, unlike to utterly confusing situations in Yemen and Sudan. They’re difficult.

Much easier then – and far more likely to garner approving comments from those whose approval the useful idiots crave – is to loudly declaim that whatever Israel is doing in Gaza is a genocide. Or else throw some paint, maybe steal some statues, even smash a window or two, anything that stops well short of actually helping the people of Gaza.

Because if the PA were serious about helping to alleviate the suffering help the people of Gaza, they’d bang on less about UK arms sales to Israel and more on the fact that there hasn’t been an election in Gaza since 2007. That its president, is in his 20th year of his 4 year term, or that, unlike in every other civil war civil wars Gaza’s neighbours haven’t opened their borders to allow for refugees to escape. And, for good measure, angrily demand to know why – according to the UN’s own figures – 85% of their food aid trucks into Gaza are hijacked by Hamas and other militia groups. And on the back of that, not only question why the UN continues to do something it knows doesn’t work, but also why that fact isn’t widely reported in the media. 

They might also question where all the money that the US, the EU and the UN has given to Gaza has gone – at least $10 billions since Israel handed back control of Gaza in 2005. Possibly some of that is spent on Hamas’s military budget of $200 millions a year. Or maybe some of that money is spent by the Palestine Authorities Martyrs Fund, which pays the families of those who’ve killed Israelis a monthly amount. The more Israeli’s killed, the more the amount. 

But then again, if the PA, like your friends, most of the posters on social media and politicians, aren’t asking those questions, why would you?

************************************************************

With perfect timing, the police have announced that for the next football season they will be equipping officers with a DNA misting spray. A DNA misting spray marks someones skin and clothing with an invisible solution that remains present for months and shows up under UV light. It provides forensic evidence to link individuals to a specific crime or event.

They could hasten its use and give a test at Saturdays march for something, but which a large amount of PA supporters are expected to turn up. The hope is that sufficient numbers them will be arrested – given how supporting PA is now a crime – and that this will both provide images of screaming protesters being dragged way in cuffs for the media and clog up police cells and the courts.

To my mind, why hand PA an easy win? That’s what they’d expect. Much better to arrest the supporters and then immediately let them go. Days later, announce that the police have indeed used the spray and that anyone who attended the march, regardless if they were arrested or not, can be identified. 

And when they are, they’ll go on a database to which US, Australian and other countries immigration services will have access to when deciding whether or not to grant a visa.

A win-win. Less pressure on the UK justice system and a great way for virtue signallers to signal exactly how deep-seated their virtue is.

*************************************************************

Thinking about tomorrow’s performance in Central London, the one with the arrests, the screaming protesters and the utter impossibility of it stopping UK arms sales to Israel or something equally unlikely, puts me in mind of the Popular Front of Judea (PFJ)

A couple of years ago, an anniversary of the Grenfell fire was marked by occupation by three members of PA of a factory factory in Birmingham. The reason given was that the factory – which made the cladding used on Grenfell tower-  also provided materials which were used by Israeli airplanes. Two people were arrested, one of whom went on hunger strike when he was sent to prison. Of course he did, although possibly this was due to the fact of there being no vegan food option in prison than anything else.

Regardless, he said they would end his hunger strike if any one of four conditions were met: the release of all PA protestors ; the eviction of Elbit (a UK/Israeli arms company) from its London headquarters, the closure of all Elbit Systems’ British operations and release by the government of all correspondence and documents relating to its dealings with Elbit and its subsidiaries.

In the magnificent ‘Life of Brian’, the PFJ plan to kidnap Pilates’ wife and demand that in return for her release, the entire Roman occupation and infrastructure in Judea be dismantled in two days or they’ll cut her head off. And tell him if they do cut her head off, it’ll be his fault. 

34:63 presents “Oscar Wilde”

The best kind of virtue signalling is of course the kind that has minimal adverse consequences for whoever it is that’s signalling their imagined virtue, but will conversely only accrue them a multitude of positive ones. And no virtue is more worthy to be signalled these days than support for the Palestinian people, which is essentially little more than some cunning media strategy. It demands no actual obligation upon the signaller other than to loudly and with as much fanfare as possible to announce it. So, with all of this in mind, what am I to make of the news that the Co-Op, is banning all Israeli products as part of doing something it hopes will appease it members?

Those would be same members who voted overwhelmingly at its AGM last month in support of a motion which urged the board to demonstrate “moral courage and leadership” by removing Israeli goods from the shelves. To no-ones surprise the board issued a statement at the time of about it reviewing its sourcing policies, to “ensure that they reflect both our values and principles and the views of our members, which they have made clear today”.

Talk about delusions of grandeur and an over-inflated sense of self-importance coupled with a breathtaking moral superiority. Bear in mind that the The Co-Op is a supermarket. It sells things. That’s it. It has no business other than being in the retail business. It has no obligation to anyone other than its shareholders and only then to maximise the profits it makes for them. Remember when times were simpler, when business’s  were solely involved in the business of making and selling  things things? A nice transactional arrangement that suited everyone and more importantly, one in which everyone understood the role they they played in it. Nobody was confused, mainly because there was nothing to be confused about. 

When exactly did business’s become so obsessed with not only how they were perceived by their customers, but also if that perception was a negative one, one that potential customers found off-putting, to change it to a more favourable one? Or have they always been and I just didn’t notice? But certainly, its got out of hand now, so much so that one could be forgiven for thinking that the actual business of some business’s was nothing more than an embarrassing hobby, a distraction from fulfilling their true purpose, that of being social justice warriors,?

The only values its members should be concerned about is getting value for money. Principles are fine and everything but until their customers stop using Apple products because their made in sweatshops in China, its all for show, a prop in service to the bolstering of their self-righteous smugness. By pandering so cravenly to the childish posturing of its members, the Co-Op has demonstrated that it isn’t a case of lions led by donkeys, as more donkeys led by asses.

I’ve tried to find out exactly how much the trade of Israeli goods is worth to the Co-op as a percentage of its profits, but to no avail. This invariably causes me to suspect that the sums involved are relatively small, because if they were significant, then the Co-Op would be parading that fact with gusto. Nevertheless, the internet positively abounds with articles praising the Co-Op. Because as always with anything to do with Israel, the internet mistakes pandering for principles.   

Of course, this adverse consequence free ‘virtue’ signalling nonsense has infected our politics and anything that can be presented as a robust something against Israel is guaranteed to garner approving headlines and positive social media posts. The appearance of doing something, irrespective of what that something is or even if that something has any practical impact in achieving that  something, is far less important than being seen to do something. The government knows this only too well. As its recent announcement of more sanctions against Israel amply demonstrated.

According to a report in ‘The Independent’ last month,“Britain has issued fresh sanctions against Israel over its “morally unjustifiable” escalation of violence in Gaza, and demanded an end to its “cruel and indefensible” 11-week block on humanitarian aid.”

And what, exactly, did these sanctions consist of? Suspending trade talks with Israel, basically. Which of course leads one to ask exactly how much trade Britain does with Israel and then, how does this compare with other countries?

According to the governments own figures, ‘Total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) between the UK and Israel was £5.8 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q4 2024.’ This made Israel our 44th largest trading partner. The 1st was of course the US, with a total value of over £314 billion.

There was more of this performative politics earlier this month when the BBC reported that “The UK has sanctioned two far-right Israeli ministers over “repeated incitements of violence against Palestinian communities” in the occupied West Bank.

Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich will both be banned from entering the UK and will have any assets in the UK frozen as part of the measures announced by the foreign secretary.

It is part of a joint move with Australia, Norway, Canada and New Zealand announced on Tuesday.”

Which is yet more something, although when one looks at the governments website, which most people won’t, we find that the something amounts some big talk but very little action. Freezing assets held in the UK is going to have little more than zero impact, however If Switzerland had joined in that’d be another matter. There’s also a similarity pointless travel ban. Boo-fucking-hoo. They can’t visit the UK or Norway. That’s bound to hurt.

So suspending trade talks, not the trade itself mind, or imposing functionally meaningless sanctions, might give the appearance of Britain taking a principled stance, because that is precisely what it is meant to do, give the appearance of principle. Although if that principle boils down to minimising the threat of yet more candidates winning largely Muslim populated constituencies by standing on as a pro-Gaza platform and maximising positive media coverage, then that principle isn’t that all that principled, is it?

               *****************************************

Amid all the furore about a nonentity capitalising on the faux ‘free thinkers’ of the Glastonbury crowd and seizing his opportunity to say something designed to raise his bands profile and create demand for tickets sales to their shows, the bleeding obvious truisms have been missed.

All of the headlines, all of the media agonising about various this and that’s, overlooks three things. 

Firstly, there is no such thing as bad publicity, Pop music thrives on notoriety, especially if it positions itself as not being pop music, as being radical, apart from the mainstream. Worked a treat for the Sex Pistols.  

Secondly, what did people expect? Yes what he said was crass, but it was the logical continuation of madness that has infected our politicians, hijacked the BBC, most of the press and which we see played out on the streets of London on a weekly basis.

Thirdly, the irony of him encouraging a crowd at Glastonbury of all places was to join him in wishing yet more Jews to be killed was as staggering as it was offensive. He knew what he was doing. 

He’d have known that less than three years ago, people at the Nova festival in Israel doing exactly the same thing as the Glastonbury crowd were doing and were raped, slaughtered and kidnapped by Hamas terrorists for it.

He’d have also known that no-one at Glastonbury would even realise the hypocrisy. 

34:63 presents “Yuval Raphael.”

If there’s one act that perfectly encapsulates the moral obscenity of the pro-palestinian ideology, then yesterdays attempt by two protesters to storm the stage during Israels performance in the Eurovision Song Contest is going to take some beating.

Yuval Raphael survived the 7 October 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas gunmen at the Nova music festival. She hid under a pile of dead bodies for eight hours until she was rescued. But apparently her trauma wasn’t sufficiently traumatic. So despite having survived one act of unimaginable horror by having to commit another, her ordeal continues.

The two protesters will ever know how that day changed her life, and how much bravery it takes for a Jew to stand on a stage outside of Israel and represent Israel. Because they don’t care, their warped ideology doesn’t allow for there being any Jewish victims. In their world, the only victims are the Palestinian ones and the only ‘genocide’ being committed is the one by Israel. The fact that Hamas’ founding charter explicitly and repeatedly calls for the killing of all Jews, with the ultimate aim being the eradification of Israel itself, is something else.

What that something else is, however, doesn’t much matter really. When one’s world-view is shaped by social media posts, reinforced by their friends groupthink and bolstered by dubious ‘facts’ and biased ‘news’, when the concept of ‘my truth’ becomes a thing, it does so at the expense of objective truth.

Of course, this means that the Chinese State Circus can perform around the world with impunity, despite widespread evidence of human rights abuses by the Chinese government and allegations of a genocide of the Uyghur population. Perish the thought that because Beijing has takes a hard line with protesters – even outside China – that this informs peoples thinking.

And as a result of which, we get two protesters thinking their deranged understanding of things trumps Yuval Raphael’s lived reality. Because of course, when it comes to Israel, it is only a Palestinians lived reality that has any value.

34:63 presents “Count Arthur Strong.”

Why do some people imagine that just because their success in one field of human endeavour has afforded them some measure of celebrity, it somehow confers upon them some kind of greater a moral authority, one that the rest of us should take heed of? 

Gary Crisp, who looks uncannily like Count Arthur Strong without his hat, is a serial offender who it comes to this kind of thing and like Strong, he is a someone who thinks he’s more intelligent than he is and thus fits himself in hot water as a result. Unlike Strong however, this was all done for laughs and unlike Strong, he wasn’t cancelled by the BBC years ago. Resulting in a interview in yesterdays Daily Telegraph in which he gave his opinions on two of the most divisive issues of the day, Gaza and trans.

Quite why anyone care’s what he thinks about anything other than football, I’m not really too sure. It’d be like asking Orson Welles how to bake a cake. But we live in an age where people do and where ‘celebrities’ own ego and sense of self-importance convinces them that they do. We also live in an age in which the media love to give an opportunity for someone like Crisp to say something controversial, because that will ultimately generate more revenue for them. It’s such a mutually beneficial arrangement that its essentially a digital ‘reach around’ 

So Crisp can say, safe in the knowledge that he’s saying the right thing – right in the sense that it won’t harm his career – “I think if you’re silent on these issues, you’re almost complicit.” The problem for him though, is that by not staying silent on these issues he is complicit in revealing himself to be a mental pigmy.

“It’s beyond depraved, what they’re going through, unimaginable. I’ve got kids. They’re grown-up now, but every day people are losing their children, their brothers and sisters. I don’t know how the world thinks this is OK.” Does he not understand what happens in a war? Does  Does he not understand that Israel is surrounded by countries who wish it never existed, or that the founding charter of Hamas espouses jihad – holy war – until Israel is no more. 

“Obviously October 7 was awful, but it’s very important to know your history and to study the massacres that happened prior to this, many of them against the Palestinian people.” There it is, the but. The ‘but’ that somehow transforms anti-Semitism into a bastardized moral equivalence. Is Crisp an authority in Middle Eastern history or is he just a student at the University of Twitter?

The attack by Hamas wasn’t just ‘awful.  Being stuck in a traffic jam is awful. An undercooked meal is awful. Biting into a chocolate only to discover its coffee flavoured that’s awful.  To suggest that the massacre of 1,141 people, the worst single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, was ‘awful’ belies the sheer scale of its barbarity and his stupidity.

He is lives in a country where his stupidity has no cost, where his luxury beliefs are protected by democratic freedoms that the people of Gaza can only dream of. One where having different views won’t make you fearful of a knock on the door at dead of night, one where being gay isn’t seen as a crime, and in a time where one can earn an obscene amount of money by talking  about an irrelevance to adults with who have yet to fully grow up.

He is a highly distilled iteration of the same combination of presumed moral authority, self-importance and entitlement that saw a a load of people most people had never heard of write a letter to The Guardian last week expressing something with some others.

Crisp also has deep feelings for these others. “They’re some of the most persecuted on the planet, trans people. You’ve got to be very careful not to have bigoted views on that. I genuinely feel really badly for trans people. Imagine going through what they have to go through in life. Is there even any issue?”

Of course he thinks that. Once again, at no point in his life will he ever be be confronted with the reality of his luxury beliefs. No man will. No man will ever find women demanding access to mens toilets, no man will themselves losing against mediocre women in sporting competitions just as no man will ever see their identity turned into little more than performative wish fulfilment by deluded women.

Its precisely because he’s so removed from the consequences of his luxury beliefs that he can afford to hold them.   

What a Count.