Document Title

The Thought Police Have Taken Over New York

The East and West coasts of the USA are astoundingly illiberal places these days yet the leaders of the march to authoritarianism insist on calling themselves 'liberals', 'progressives' or 'progressive liberals.' There seems to be a contests going on between the municipal authority in New York City and the state government of California as to which of these 'liberal' bodies can pass the most authoritarian and repressive laws to curtail the right of citizens to make their own choices. Needless to say the solidly left leading, Obama felching mainstream media are shilling for every curtailment of freedom, every attack on personal liberty.

Perhaps is the reason that a recent story about a new advance of authoritarianism didn't attract much worldwide attention. Under the Obama administration and their ruthless Thought Police each new craziness is greeted with a resigned sigh and a roll of the eyes that say, "Well some of us did try to warn you.".

Under a new city ordnance New York's Finest have not yet been reduced to handing out fines for smoking in city parks, but they are still booking park visitors for crimes like...eating a doughnut in a playground. Yes, in this enlightened era, the era of everybody's rights when the California State Legislature is busy passing laws to protect goldfish's rights, the police gave two young women in the Bedford - Stuyvesant borough summonses for eating doughnuts in a playground while unaccompanied by a minor.

"This cop attempted to be sympathetic. He proceeded to tell us that he was trying to be a gentleman by just giving us summonses instead of taking us in for questioning, because that was what “they” wanted him to do." One of the women told reporters.

Finally, we were given our summonses and were free to go. Because we hadn’t been drinking alcohol or urinating in public, we do not have the option of pleading guilty by mail. Not that I am planning on pleading guilty. But either way, we have to show up in court or a warrant will be issued for our arrest." It's incredibly sad that the main objection in the blogosphere was that the police should have just 'moved them on' instead of issuing a ticket. Not that the law itself should quite simply not be in place at all!

There was a time not so long ago when one of life's pleasures for many was sitting in a sunny park taking in all of the relaxing atmosphere. The open space, breeze, birds, greenery, and yes, the sight and sounds of kids happily playing. Now it is an offence in New York, punishable by a fine to be near children unless accompanied by a minor. Presumably a paedophile accompanied by a child they had groomed would be quite safe from prosecution and - presumably again because the bureaucrats who work for the 'liberal' authoritarian city government - the next step if one refuses on principle to pay will be imprisonment.

And don't make the mistake of thinking the same kind of politically correct lunacy can't happen where you are, either. The Progressive Liberal Politically Correct Thought Police are coming soon to a town, street, park, house near you. House? Yes, they a planning laws controlling how you behave in your own home.

The only 'crime' or misdemeanour committed in the donutgate case is to have contravened an ordnance constructed by the state to tackle a problem that simply doesn't exist. Punishing people for sitting watching kids playing is dangerously legitimising 'thought crime' as a concept - the criminalisation of someone having cirtain (in this case dirty) thoughts while in a park. Well I have had lots of dirty thoughts in parks but never about children. I have done lots of dirty things too but we need not go into that now, I and the ladies I was with at the time were careful to make sure we could not be seen.

The truly sinister thing about this case is that exactly like the Thought Police in George Orwell's novel 1984, though the authorities can never know what is really going on in someone's head, there is no defence. To place oneself in a position where one might possibly be tempted to think the unthinkable is to be guilty of having the potential and the equipment (a brain) to commit a thought crime. In effect a judge might say "You are guilty of being guilty. The women in the donutgate case were punished not because they did anything wrong because there was the potential for them to have dirty thoughts; that they might commit a thought crime. Echoes of Big Brother and 1984 again. The "All men are potential rapists," brand of ~~fat ugly lezzas~~ feminists are going to have fun with this.

Now it is possible every adult - male or female except me - has this uncontrollable urge to fuck an 8 year old if they see them having fun on a climbing frame, don't they? Can it be that I am the only person so perverted I don't want to have sex with children just as I am, according to Freud, the only male human so crazy I never wanted to have sex with my Dear Old Mum? I think not.

The only disgusting, creepy perverts to be seen in this sorry story are the filthy-minded wannabe Nazis who believe our imaginings default to the most vile sexual crimes over something as innocent as just enjoying a coffee and a doughnut while watching kids play.

And before stupid liberal fuckwit pulls the puerile "how would you feel if it were your kids" argument. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if someone watched my two in the park then went home and emptied a box of kleenex at the thought. If for no other reason than I would be none the bloody wiser.

If a atnyone attempted to abduct my grandchildren on the other hand (the kids a big enough to look after themselves now), - an occurrence so unlikely that I have more chance of winning the national lottery - then I would rip their head off and throw it to a pack of hungry rats.

Which reminds me, I wonder how Obama's kiddie fiddling Czar, that Kevin Jennings guy who got a job in the US Education Dept on the strength of his publishing books about the desirability of sexualising pre pubescent children is getting on with his project to sexualise America's five year olds. That's the thing with American 'liberals you see, it's always hard to tell which face you are talking to.

(Quick science lesson for those who can't stand anything 'unscientific'; though snapping the neck of an adult human would be a piece of cake as the vertebrae are non rotating joints and the spinal cord is soft tissue, to actually rip off the head of an adult human is a different proposition. The elasticity and tensile strength in skin and tendons would yield to the strength of a silverback gorilla but would give me a problem. Still, it would be fun trying.)