CONVERSATION ABOUT MASKS IN STORNOWAY TESCO.

Yesterday at the checkout in Tesco I met someone I hadn't seen in some time. He was wearing a mask. He's a Christian minister. He told me that he wouldn't let me step foot in his church without a mask. I said, "I had no idea you were such an extremist."

He then responded with - "You're the extremist!"

I replied, "No, I'm the normal one - THIS is normal - no mask."

He then left but the checkout lady decided to chuck her pennyworth in. She said, "This is normal", indicating to her masked-up-face.

I said, "Oh, the NEW normal I suppose?"

She said, "Yes."

I replied, "Well, it depends on what you believe, and WHY you believe it eh?"

She didn't respond to that and I didn't see any point in saying any more. But ain't it amazing how easily the human mind brainwashes itself? You can be sure the same people probably thought the original Chinese mask-wearing and the rest of their carry-on was bonkers.

And rightly so.

Herd mentality - whatever the majority does - I will do.

Dangerous. Just look at history.

MORE AUTOPARTS DRAMA

In the past week I went to Autoparts in Stornoway again for a car part. Even though I'm barred from the shop I've still been going in for stuff - without a mask - and the staff have been serving me even though most of them witnessed the first drama. After picking up the part, I was driving out of the car park when the manager came out of the shop and asked: 'Are you Derick?' I said, 'yes.' He then told me I wasn't welcome, along with other rude commentary, which immediately built up to a mad crescendo of quite insane rage - all by himself. I told him he was crazy (words to that effect), in reply to which he yelled: 'why don't you go and write another script about me?' gesticulating wildly (ah, permission). He then stormed back into the shop with my laughter ringing in his ears (I couldn't help it - it was funny).

That's twice now that this angry, crazy man has accosted me for no reason. In the first place banning me from the shop just for telling him (very politely) that the subject I and another chap were disagreeing about wasn't his business after he demanded I tell him what we were talking about. 

Being all personal about his work - very un-professional. Surely a bad advert for the shop. Especially as I have every intention of buying an expensive item from the shop. And not for the first time. 

He needs to get a grip.

LOCKDOWN: AN OVERSTEPPING OF BOUNDS

 2 Timothy 3: 1-5.

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Interesting that all this seems to be increasing proportionately with technology.

As technology develops and the modern world becomes more sophisticated, man moves further from God. And as he moves further from God it has this effect on him, as described.

So a direct consequence of increasing technological sophistication upon the human race generally is: increased hatred of God.

Why?

In a word, pride. Technology makes life easier and safer. As a rule, people today have a much easier, more comfortable and safer life than people in the past had.

What effect does this have on the human psyche?

It makes us proud in our own conceit - confident in ourselves and in our own abilities. 'Who is God over us?' 

You might presume that it would have a more 'civilising' effect. But what is 'civilised'? Certainly most people in the developed world today would baulk at having to kill, gut and skin an animal for a meal, but it was normal back in the day.

Does that mean people are more civilised, or are they just more prissy? Is that better?

Being civilised does not mean we live a higher quality life externally, as Christ pointed out to the Pharisees who were obsessed with the washing of hands before eating, and other banalities.

Being truly civilised is to treat one another in a civil manner. What does that mean?

It means this: '...all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.' (Matthew 7:12).

If this is described as 'the law and the prophets' it logically follows that it is the most important rule of conduct between men. This is our whole duty toward one another - this is true civility - this is being civilised.

But today men are not civilised. Is it civilised to force your fellow man to obey your rules just because you happen to think your opinion is right?

I am right - you are wrong - shut up. 

Is a government right to force its opinion on citizens?

This is not God's way. Christ always offered the gospel as a free choice. It hasn't changed.

The government though, assumes, Hitler-like, that its gospel must not be offered, but forced, on pain of prosecution.

Have they never heard of Magna Carta, or Oliver Cromwell? These and other names from our history serve as reminders of when goverment overstepped its bounds and had to be reined in. 

That is the trouble with ignoring history - you're doomed to repeat it. 

Certain things are self evident like theft and murder - these are to be enforced by the judiciary with external punishment. But in matters of opinion - no - absolutely not. No coercement. That is tyranny.

Today we have a divided opinion about a virus scare.

Because the government has chosen to come down on the scared side (as if they flipped a coin) therefore they believe they are justified in imposing a version of martial law - even to the point of ruining the economy - and consequently the lives and livelyhoods of many people.

This, they patently have no right to do. 

AUTOPARTS DRAMA

I had a weird experience in Autoparts in Stornoway yesterday. I was there for a window wiper. Whilst I was buying the wiper I saw a man I've known for many years, a keen mask-wearer. I acknowledged him, which turned out to be a mistake. He turned on me, angrily asking, 'where's your mask?' Saying things like, 'the whole world is doing it'; and, 'people with bigger brains than you have decided.' As if they were reasons. There was no need for this, as we had been over this very point before, quite recently, in Tesco - a shop where you can argue in peace.

We argued. Not a big deal. Then some bloke in a wild-west-bank-robber style face mask marched up to us. He demanded to know what we were talking about.

At this my original opponent slipped off to hide amongst the shelves.

I said to the guy, 'It's not your business, and who are you?'  He said he was the shop manager. He told me I was barred from the shop and to give him the wiper blade I was holding and leave. I told him I had just bought it. Again he told me I had to leave the shop and I was barred.

Talk about an over-reaction. Talk about power-crazy.

I felt rather annoyed by this irrational and disrespectful behaviour so I said to him, 'what'll you do if I don't?' He said he would call the police and motioned to the staff members who were standing behind the tills, staring, stony faced, indicating to them to call the cops. None of them moved. Interesting.

Now call me weird if you want, but I find it strangely troubling when someone in a mask gets in your face. These mad eyes. I asked him to show me his face. He didn't.

I felt it was only reasonable that if he was going to banish me and get the cops on me - for nothing - the least he could do was show me his face while he was abusing me.

Such was his behaviour I was compelled to inform him that he was 'a very unpleasant individual who needed to learn manners.'

I decided I'd spent long enough there and headed for the door. When I reached the door I noticed that Mr Crazy-Shop-Manager had followed me. I complained to him that I had no need of him escorting me out of the building. He told me that he was going to take his mask off, but outside.

Outside he stood about a metre and a half away from me and demanded that I move two metres from him before he would remove his mask. I was well and truly fed up of him by this time and so refused. He really seemed to lose it at that point and kept demanding I moved back, shaking with rage, which was quite funny really because he could have just taken a step back himself quite easily.

Anyway, that was more or less it.

Great customer relations Autoparts - very impressive.

John Macleod has blocked me on Facebook because I called him a liar. He doesn't like being called a liar. But hey, if the cap fits...

He claims he has no memory of an article I published about him 20 years ago. Here's why I say he's lying. 

A wee story.

Back in May of 2000 I and my brother Donald were at Stornoway's famous Cromwell Street railings (no longer there - removed by the stupid Western Isles Council - put them back I say). Donald spotted 'Johnny Foot' (as we called him) leaving the newsagent with a tightly-rolled copy of the Island Post in his hand. The Island Post was a small local paper I produced from '96 to '01. I had just published a story centred around allegations of sexual misconduct made against his father.

Donald being Donald and ever one to stir the pot called out to him: 'Hey Johnny, is that an Island Post I see in your hand?' 'Johnny' came straight over to where Donald was perched on the railing, which meant he was considerably higher than John who is quite short. Now Donald was fully six foot tall, well built, and could handle himself in a fight. My brother Donald went missing in Turkey in 2010: http://ararathunt.blogspot.com/.

Johnny pointed the rolled-up newspaper at him and said, 'Donald, I've never hit anyone in my life before, but there's always a first time.'

I could hardly believe my ears. Wee Johnny Foot squaring up to Donald. The Mini Metro challenges the Tiger Tank.
Donald immediately bristled and began to sit more upright, glaring at Johnny, he said, 'are you threatening me?'

Well, whatever Dutch courage Johnny had been relying on up to that point suddenly deserted him and he was off down that road like the proverbial rabbit.

The editor of the established local paper at the time, the Stornoway Gazette, was a fellow called Peter Urpeth. Someone who had no love for me as he had previously threatened to sue me in a rage over a humorous little piece I had published about him. He gave Johnny two full columns down the entire length of a page of the broadsheet. A tirade full of invective and bile aimed at me and the journalist who wrote the story (Iain X. Maciver).

Strange he forgot that.

Anyone interested in reading it could find it in Stornoway public library's Stornoway Gazette Archive. It was published shortly after I published the article, I reckon within the next week or two. The Professor Foot article being dated 5 May 2000.

Within the last year or so we argued on Facebook about the article which prompted me to post it on the same thread. This was plainly a surprise to him because he didn't expect me to have copies. His immediate response was to delete everything. Then he was gone.

Strange he forgot that too.

The Facebook spat:

The YouTube podcast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1nvQFTDqRA&t=12s

The lie:

The article:

 

THE HYPOCRISY OF VIRTUE SIGNALLING

He'd plainly taken the wrong drugs. Throwing off his clothing, he ran around in the nude. Shouting and jumping up and down on the roof of a car. The police appeared and had to restrain him, holding him down until assistance arrived.
Before police assistance arrived the owner of the aforementioned car thinking it was a lone policewoman and that she might be in some danger approached the commotion. When he saw that a male officer was also present and that things seemed to be under control he thought he might as well take a photo or two. While he took the photos seruptitiously over the hedge he was spotted by the eagle-eyed male constable who proceeded to roar: 'hoy, who's that taking photos?' The picture taker then peered over the hedge and replied: 'it's OK, it's perfectly legal.' The cop then said: 'have some respect.' As if the guy they were restraining was deserving of it. The policewoman said nothing.
The man was later removed in an ambulance. Yes, an ambulance.
The next evening the owner of the car was in the sports centre sauna and met a local dentist he knew. He told the dentist the story. The response from the dentist was 'poor guy, maybe he had mental problems.'
No mention at all about the car or the possibility that maybe the guy might have been just a wee bit out of order.
This happened in Stornoway over the last couple of days.
I think this situation is rather revealing when it comes to the present malaise which afflicts modern society.
Both the male police officer and the dentist instinctively adopted protection mode. That would be protection of the offender. He needs help. Who cares about the offended party when there's important virtue signalling to be done.
And virtue signalling trumps all.
In Scotland this politically correct approach comes from the very top: namely the SNP administration.
Concerning the dentist, I can't help wondering how he'd have felt had it been his car that had received the attention.
Talk is cheap, and it's very easy to be liberal when it involves other peoples' stuff or money. That's the nature of virtue signalling - it has to be cheap - dirt cheap. That's why I hate it so much. Under its wafer thin skin lies a thick layer of sheer hypocrisy.

SUPREME COURT WINS 11 NIL.

So there you are, Supreme court 11 (playing for remain) win 11 nil.
Brexit 11 (who weren't allowed to turn up) lose by a landslide.
Well, now we know.
It seems the higher you go up the greasy pole the greater the arrogance and therefore the greater the corruption.
Unlawful? That's a eufemism in this context isn't it? If Boris has broken the law, which law has he broken? And if he has broken the law, he therefore must be prosecuted. The law must be clear or it cannot be the law.
He's accused of 'lying to the Queen'. Well, knock me down with a feather - how shocking. I'm not condoning lying to anyone, but even if he did - since when is that illegal? And what exactly WAS the lie?
It reminds me of the start of Hot Fuzz when the Sergeant mutters under his breath, 'I'd like to move to the country sometime Jenine.'
Dishonesty. Smoke and mirrors. You know what I mean.
Do they really think people came down the Clyde in a banana boat?
It's as if these Supreme Court judges have spent so long in their insulated other world that they have completely forgotten what the real world is like. The family guy clip of the old guys reading the papers and clearing their throats comes to mind.
This is more thought policing. But this time it's aimed at the prime minister: 'what was his motive?', they ask. Completely ignoring the fact that simply having a dubious or even dishonest motive is not a crime. Bad thoughts or intentions have never been actionable crimes in a truly just society. The prosecutable part is ONLY the physical action, motive or intent may help to prove a crime has been committed, but they themselves are not crimes. And neither should they be. We move into a dark place when we start prosecuting for wrong think. Ask Orwell.
It's a depressing development, but a clarifying one. At least now we have a clearer picture of the enemy forces and who exactly they are.
In this case they are the 11 judges of the Supreme Court. Now, possibly for the first time in their experience, they will find themselves in the spotlight. This, I am confident, for them, will not be a pleasant one. The reason is because rightfully angry people will now question the right of 11 individuals to sit in final judgment on an ambiguous but important question of national sovereignty.
The last time an individual acted with such hubris - he lost his head - remember that?