You can’t laugh at that! How the middle class liberals have hijacked British comedy

I don’t know when it happened exactly, but at some point during the last decade I stopped watching British stand-up comedy. It wasn’t a conscious decision, but rather a dawn get-a-way, tiptoeing with stealth and acuity out of a dodgy hotel room you might leave a whore in (I’ve been told) or a heap of hung-over drunken sailors after a night of debauchery. It just stopped-being-funny and became more of an angry pedantic lesson on how to think and what political beliefs were and were not acceptable in polite society.

Take, for example, ‘alternative’ comedian Stewart Lee in last night’s episode of Comedy Vehicle entitled ‘Migrants’ – go on, I bet you can guess what Mr Lee’s views are on migrants? Go on try it. You’re going to be right. You are right. He has exactly the same views on migrants as every other dinner party liberal; same as he does with UKIP, Islam, the Tories and a whole host of other stuff that preoccupy this narrow minded sub-strata of society. You know what they’re going to say before they utter a syllable and it’s boring.

In fact, Stewart is such a stereotype that he even has a regular column in the Guardian – the bible of the faux left chattering classes. It’s a shame, because he was, once, actually very funny and genuinely alternative (watch his stuff from the 90’s). Now, he seems to have fallen in line with every other comedian: stand-up saturated with rigid political orthodoxies, right-on, faux left and generally mocking of anyone who doesn’t share his twisted liberal view of the world – particularly the common muck.

Stewart, bizarrely, spent 20 minutes of his stand-up routine mocking Spectator and Sunday Times columnist Rod Liddle (who is side-splittingly funny, by the way); which is fine, only, it wasn’t funny at all – which is a bummer if you’re a comedian. What is revealing is that he chose to mock not only Rod’s political beliefs per se but also his working class roots and ‘plebeian’ background (as he sees it); which, I assume, he believes is responsible for all of his awful uncivilised views.

Embarrassingly, the pompous wanker could barely conceal his utter contempt for the working class, as he rounded off his tiresome pageant of Rod being covered in gravy, angel delight, suet, jelly from a pork pie (not anything as middle-class and foreign as pate, he insinuated) and Tunnocks teacakes. The last ten minutes was particularly cringing as he mimicked Rod eating a poppadum in an Indian Restaurant – it went on and on, until I actually started to feel sorry for the guy. But hang on Stewart, isn’t that racist? You could’ve at least chosen an English chippy – you’re supposed to resent the culture you come from, right?

Anyway, Stewart Lee has spent his career being the anti-hero of comedy, but now, unbeknownst to him and his legion of smug Guardianista fans, he is no longer alternative but rather the choirmaster of a seemingly endless chorus of ‘comedians’ who advertise for the liberal establishment – there’s nothing alternative about him. He’s totally mainstream. And the same goes with practically all of them – except maybe Ricky Gervais – at least not yet.

Whether it’s the cross-dressing Euro-nut Eddie Izzard who used make brilliant surrealist observational comedy, but is now content with moronic jokes comparing Nigel Farage to Hitler. Or star of the brilliant Peep Show, David Mitchell, who now presents ‘soap box’ videos for the Guardian Website – guess what gets on his nerves the most? Go on guess. Even his co-star Robert Webb, again used to be funny, but now writes a weary column for the Guardian’s big brother – the endlessly tedious and humourless New Statesman.

Then, there’s Marcus Brigstock, who loathes working class culture and mocks ‘overweight women who tuck a copy of a women’s magazine under the pizza in their shopping trolleys’ and lazy builders who ‘need eight gallons of tea every five minutes’. (Maybe some of those builders are Polish – the coward wouldn’t dare mock them). Even risqué standup Frankie Boyle has a Guardian column in which he slags off the Tories and hurls insults at Americans – the only nationality you can mock without being called a racist – again, another coward.

So, you see there’s something a lil’ bit fishy going on; but don’t be fooled – this isn’t just a troupe of annoying elites spitting bile at anyone who has the audacity share an opinion other than what they deem acceptable; no, this is much darker and has more wider cultural significance.

A few years back I attended a Christmas party and as is the norm on these occasions I, along with my co-workers, got pebble-dashingly pissed faced. The conversation turned to British Comedy and why it isn’t funny anymore – because you can’t laugh or joke about anything – a wry and fellow piss head observed; someone even suggested that Thatcher put an end to jokes about the Irish – this, though, has yet to be proven.

Anyway, I can’t entirely recollect what happened next, but I recall putting a serviette on my head and performed my embarrassing gay Jesus routine – this went down well (everyone was hammered); then I pretended to be Mohammed and the scene turned nasty – that’s offensive, that’s racist, stop it, they all cried – even though nobody was Muslim and everybody was, supposedly, a Christian.

Make of that what you will – but when society at large, and increasingly the state, starts to police jokes, we’re in very dangerous territory indeed. Old working class pub stand up, Bernard Manning, was probably a bigot, but I’ll take him any day over this new breed humourless, PC, patronising bien pensants.

RIP, Ronnie Corbett

After Brussels, Europe must abandon its safe space and face reality

It’s only matter of time before London gets the nothing-to-do-with-Islam welcome card – it’s inevitable, and that it hasn’t happened sooner is a testament to our effective security services. There are just too many bearded men mired in the sticky glue of self-proclaimed victimhood for it not to happen.

Watching the news coverage this week and the endless stream of so-called ‘experts’ offering explanations about tackling radicalisation and preventative measures; baffled as to why it happens in some places and not others. The reason is so obvious that it’s hardly worth saying: the more Muslims you have in your country, the more chance of terrorism; the more Islamic your country is, the worse off you’ll be.

Brussels is a hotbed of Islamic extremism and Belgium has contributed more fighters to the Islamic State than any other European country. In particular, the district of Molenbeek is a Jihadist swamp, has 22 mosques and it’s where the Paris attackers originated from. Why? Because Brussels has a Muslim population of 25 per cent – that’s why. And of this 25 per cent, 98 per cent belong to the Sunni denomination, which has a significant Wahhabi presence thanks to funding from our good friends and allies in the Middle-East Saudi Arabia.

And what about the Islamic Republic of France? Well, France has a Muslim demographic of around 9 – 10 per cent making it the largest Muslim population in Europe. The UK around 5 per cent and Germany about 6 per cent – and there’s more on the way, thanks to Angela Merkel’s suicidal immigration policies and high Muslim birth rates.

By contrast, the terrorist-safe places to be in Europe right now are Romania (0.1%), Poland (0.13%), Iceland (0.3%) and Latvia (2%). Western Europe is the new Pakistan; and it’s a wonder, given the West’s dodgy relationship with the Islamic world throughout history, why we let them all in in the first place. This isn’t racism it’s reality.

After the Cologne sex attacks I wrote:

It might be a good idea if Europe (or what’s left of it) at least quivered from its multicultural stupor, and accept that this very real Islamic threat – in all its wonderful multifarious forms – will only get worse until we’re at a point of near societal collapse.

 But this isn’t about them – the Islamists, the Arabs, the Muslims, the migrants, the asylum cases, the Tower Hamlets, the Mohammeds, the Quran and the Jihadists. After all, we can’t expect much from that lot, coming as they do from cultures where women are second, nay, third-class citizens, sexual assault is normal, homosexuals are pushed of cliffs, young girls are genitally mutilated, freedom of expression is held in contempt, apostasy treated with a routine beheading.

 No, this is about us. We’re the real problem. Our very culture (or what’s left of it) is imploding; we no longer have the will to fight for our civilisation; we are, as Osama Bin Laden succinctly put, ‘the weak horse’

And it will only get worse. Thousands of European jihadists have returned from Syria and are roaming at will throughout Europe – thanks, largely to open EU borders and the useless European security services (Belgium in particular is a joke). Many have hid among the asylum seeking army of young men entering Europe from Asia and Africa – more of that this summer.

And while obviously, not all Muslims (you have to say this) are roaming through the streets brandishing a scimitar looking to hack off an infidel head. The ghettos and sharia zones in which they live fester and incubate this ideology – why else would it take so long to capture the Paris attackers. When a community decides on one direction, namely isolation and victimhood, the others naturally follow suit – it’s human nature. This is war and it’s time Europe roused itself from its stuffy sleep – before it’s too late.

Television: Inside Obama’s White House and The Tube

Did you know that being president is really hard and it’s almost impossible to get anything done? I bet you didn’t, but you will after watching the tiresome BBC 2 documentary Inside Obama’s White House. Bloody people everywhere preventing this really cool amazing black dude from doing all these really hope filled stuff like spending bucket loads of cash when you’re already in shit loads of debt, and really awesome climate deals to de-industrialise his country and the rest of the third world with it, and Guantanamo – no he got nowhere with that either – and the bastards in the Senate who won’t let him do anything because they’re all mean, and the nasty bankers and the republicans who disagree with him on just about everything.

I’m sure that Obama is a genuinely nice guy who believes in all his silly liberal policies and genuinely wanted to wreck his country and turn it into Europe or whatever – and he did quite a decent job; but can you imagine if he got everything he wanted, it doesn’t bare thinking about – but I suppose that’s what happens when you elect a president who knows nothing about anything (a bit like electing Randy from South Park to do the job – both have striking similarities, by the way).

But imagine if you were a lefty, Obamaland must have sounded like cloud 9 or something – getting everyone hooked on social health care (no going back after that), all your bucks blown like confetti on welfare, green subsidies to push your energy bills into the stratosphere, no military, no uncomfortable word associations like Islam and terrorism, listening to the jerk bang on about identity politics until it made you puke but without the bizarre euphoria that follows.

But the most annoying thing about him – I know I’m biased, bear with me – is that he’s not really black, is he? Let’s be honest, I’d probably be that shade of black if I spent the summer sunbathing in the midday sun in the Costa del Sol; no Obama like everyone else these days is a little bit of everything – a bit black, a little white, 25.01% Hawaiian, 26.5% Muslim, a little Irish and tad English – a transracial, a bi-cross heritage instigator, a multicultural pariah if you will – and it’s really annoying.

But the best bit of the documentary – despite all the whingeing and complaining about how hard everything is – is at the 2009 climate change conference in Copenhagen, when the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao ditches him to have secret talks with the heads of Brazil and South America. Obama is royally pissed off and pushes his way past the bouncers to confront the conspirators, “Are you ready for me now?” he demands, until they let him enter the negotiations – imagine the president of the most powerful country in the world being treated like that? No wonder he’s always complaining.

Political documentaries are often boring and almost always have a simmering undertone of left-wing bias – especially on the BBC and its sinister whore Channel 4 – and this was no exception.

So, while we’re on the theme of politics and tiresome repetitive television, following the 2012 BBC documentary The Tube, Channel 5 has decide to give it a crack with its trademark of unoriginality and insouciance in The Tube: Going Underground – the point of which seemed mainly to put people off ever going anywhere near London ever again and to make those already there even more anxious and tragic.

The documentary told us nothing  we didn’t already know about the capital and it’s rackety metro system: it’s overpopulated to the point of collapse; it’s old, really old, everything is so old that servicemen are scouring eBay for train replacement parts; everyone is very ugly, haggard looking and bloody miserable – and you’re very lucky if you live elsewhere.

I’m not sure how the next seven episodes of the series are going to pan out – we get it, it’s busy. Now for the political bit: no, it’s not the odd drunk or visiting football fans that cause such chaos, it’s mass immigration – get that under control and those poor souls in the dark cavernous bowels of London might stand a chance.

TV Review: My Failed Novel and Grantchester

You’re a writer, people often proclaim, why don’t you write a novel about all the places you’ve visited, all those characters. But the truth, when push comes to shove (as it so often does), is that hacks are not really writers. Only hacks, editors and the cleaning ladies in newsrooms know this unpalatable truth – but it’s good to play along. Obviously, the ladies love a writer – dark, mysterious, eccentric, grey shallow bags and thin wristed. The contrary is true of hacks. Almost no one likes hacks, not even hacks. We killed Princess Diana, remember – and almost everyone liked her.

What hackers and writers do have in common is the constant unedifying steady sludge of rejection, disappointment, failure and moments (or sometimes weeks) of that dreadful paranoia that at any moment you’re going to be caught out, uncovered, for the obvious fake that you undoubtedly are. And even when you do reach the dizzy heights of a daily national, I’m only guessing here, there’s still that nagging sensation that this is merely a stop gap, a day job – imagine an air hostess pretending she’s anything other than a glorified cocktail waitress and you’ll be close to the mark.

The remarkable thing about Giles Coren’s new documentary Giles Coren: My Failed Novel (Sky Arts) is that it captures all of the insecurities and nagging self-doubt of a wannabe writer perfectly – but only just, and almost certainly not intentionally, more as a natural matter of course.

Giles – we should get this out of the way – is one of Britain’s most successful restaurant critics and columnists; but it turns out that none of this matters, when you’ve always dreamed of being a novelist, and your first and only novel was a commercial and critical flop selling only 771 copies in hardback and 1400 copies in paperback – everyone from his agent to Jeffrey Archer smirks at the dismal sales.

So, Giles goes around in his annoyingly affable boyish way, meeting lots of publishers, authors, critics and women in book clubs to find out what makes a writer successful and why his novel was such a disaster. And what begins as a resignedly jaunty exploration into the publishing world bizarrely turns into self-analysis and pursuit for the soul of the artist (ok, I exaggerate – this is Giles Coren we’re talking about, but you get the idea.)

I have to say, I did feel sorry for him when his book was being scrutinised, ridiculed and ultimately tossed on the bonfire by a group of awfully patronising creative writing students; who basically said it’s all bollocks and you were only published because you’re a famous journo (and hacks, as we know, are not writers) and you should stick to your day job.

The usually confident and opinionated Giles was at pains to read it out loud and red-faced when they tore it to pieces. “If you can’t live through the failure, then your screwed,” Howard Jacobson said to him. Maybe, but he isn’t a failure – it’s just that his first novel wasn’t very good. I was ambivalent about Giles before this, now I quite like him.

Since everyone now accepts that all men (especially noble prize winning scientists, and those of a catholic disposition) are sexual deviants, predatory rapists and just all round nasty misogynists, apart from, of course, Arab, Muslim and North African men, who are all just lovely, thank you very much. It’s quite fitting that we should kick off this year’s spurge of new detective shows with a drab crime drama set in the 1950s, to remind us that men were just as awful and sleazy back then and fifteen-year-old girls just as randy.

What is baffling about the new series Grantchester (ITV, Wednesdays) is why the village vicar Sidney Chambers (James Norton) – who was at the beginning accused of sexual offences against a child, who then turns up dead – plays at being sleuth with local detective DI Geordie Keating (Robson Green); are the police low on staff, or is this just how it was back then? And back then is just another problem. I’m tired of back then. I want a back to the future, or a Phillip K Dick style drama set sometime in the next 5 minutes.

It’s not that Grantchester is particularly bad, and isn’t a perfectly amiable way to flitter away a Sunday afternoon (only it’s on Tuesdays – which might make you think twice). It’s just that it’s so dreary, laboured, been-there-done-that and certainly on a period (so to speak) that it made me want to either scream to wake up or hit myself to pass out. The best character was the dead girl’s father played by Neil Morrissey – I haven’t seen him for ages – because he looked like Hitler – if Hitler had decided to swap his trademark toothbrush moustache for a more socially acceptable variety of facial hair. But other than that, I’ll give this one a miss.

 

Why does Manchester hate dogs? Are we androids?

Something ridiculous happened at this year’s hideously over managed, tiresome and predictable Christmas markets in Manchester. An employee of the dog Stasi, aka Manchester City Council, prohibited me from entering Albert Square (a public area, by the way) because I was carrying my beloved Chihuahua in a bag. I’ll say it again: a Chihuahua in a bag.

That wasn’t the worse bit though (and came as no surprise considering how increasingly regulated our lives are); no, the worse bit was the look of horror, and near panic on the official’s countenance. As though I’d strapped a suicide vest to the poor animal and darted toward one of those silly mock Disneyesque beer huts screaming Allah-Akbar.

‘Why’, I asked. ‘Don’t know, council ‘ave banned them,’ she replied, in your typical dim bat council employee fashion. But why? What’s the precedent? What possible disturbance could my Chihuahua in a bag inflict on the hundreds of already loud, mouthy drunken Christmas revellers?

In typical patronising fashion, here’s what the council say on their ‘we-know-better than-you-poor-peasants’ website: ‘Sorry pooch, but Albert square’s market area has a strict ‘no dogs’ policy…We love our canine friends but the enclosed space is just too busy and crowded, which isn’t a very suitable area for dogs…You can bring your dogs to other markets though…but it’s probably best to leave them at home while you visit the Christmas markets.’

Is it really probably best? Thanks nanny for informing me what probably is or isn’t best for my dog. The hundreds council pen-pushers (probably) who were paid to come up with that drivel are (probably) ignorant idiots. And here’s why: as any dog owner knows, the best way of bringing up a well behaved dog is by ensuring it is well socialised; in other words, by introducing it to a variety of social situations no matter how raucous, busy or enclosed, the dog will adapt and therefore behave more agreeably outside of the house. Restricting dogs in every conceivable arena of public life, as we do these days, is more likely to produce a problem dog.

The council though, in their new designated role as public life-coaches, have decided that it would probably be best if they legislated our dogs (along with smokers) out of existence.

Take, for example, the Metrolink, which has had a bye-law prohibiting dogs since 1992. Despite recent public consultations, which revealed that a majority were in favour of allowing dogs on board, they still refused to have the ban lifted – citing the usual waffle about health and safety, fouling damage, stress induced behaviour and allergies (By the same logic, you might as well ban children, the elderly, people displaying flu like symptoms, vomiting drunks, the agitated and infirm).

Bizarrely, dogs are now being discriminated against in the city’s parks. Certain restrictions apply in designated areas; or you must walk them on a lead, and a very short lead at that, or else. Some parks, including Platt Fields, have designated dog-walking areas – but watch your mutt like a hawk, in case they frighten an innocent bystander or maul a pigeon to death.

Anyway, I was reminded of all fascist big state stuff when reading Phillip K Dick’s brilliant dystopian novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sleep? (Later filmed and renamed as Blade Runner.)

In the novel, a simple empathy test is performed to determine who among the populace is an android. ‘Subjects’ are given hypothetical situations relating to animals (such as pulling the legs of a spider and lots of other weird stuff) and tested to see their reaction.

As you might expect animal empathy is pretty much a hard-wired human emotion, so naturally none of the androids pass (schizophrenics also fail, so it’s important to differentiate). The point being that loving and caring for animals is a basic human emotion; and since our city’s leaders clearly hate dogs, it naturally follows they too must be either androids or schizophrenics (I’d proffer the latter – in the novel androids have really high IQs).

So, the wonderfully diverse city of Manchester that caters and panders to every conceivable minority – no matter how ludicrous – has stuck two fingers up at the dog owning population, which you know, only accounts for between 200,000 – 300,000 council tax paying households in the region; 52,000 of whom live within 80 metres of the dog hating tram. And yes, of course, there are some skin headed hoodlums out there straining a pit bull on a lease – but these surely are a minority. Get a grip.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TV review: The Jihadis Next Door

Don’t we live in such a vibrant multicultural country? Don’t we? We do, don’t we? I’m sure, like me, it gives you a warm fuzzy feeling – a sense of stability and security, that we’re all basically human beings underneath the facade, pulling in the same direction.

What can one say about Channel 4’s new documentary The Jihadis Next Door, other than: how did we allow our country to sleepwalk into such a terrible mess? And: Islam again, bored now.

The kind of footage aired in the documentary is pretty much the usual stuff we’ve grown accustomed to in our perpetual state of 24/7 Islam: radical hate preachers subsidised by the tax payer, roaming at will through inner city London; blokes with beautifully moisturised beards; footage of the odd Muslim condemning it – never a mass rally mind or even a moderately attended street protest, just the odd one (I’ll guarantee this will be the focus of most of this week’s reviews, along with something about the programme dividing communities); the odd infidel beheading and, obviously, how we’re all going to burn in hell fire.

So, pretty much your average weekday in the religion of peace (you should see what they do for New Year’s, crikey).

Having said all that, it doesn’t make it less shocking to watch – we’re not completely desensitised, yet. The range of emotions you go through watching the documentary is quite remarkable, I counted: fear, concern, sadness, helplessness and anger; I laughed twice, nearly cried once, and vaporised about 20ml of my super strength blackjack e-liquid. The most interesting bit however, is how articulate and goal orientated these people are and, of course, how stupid we are.

Clearly, your average bog-standard Jihadi isn’t stupid; they know how to manipulate the law and exploit the weakness, as they see it, of our democracy; they understand how decadent our culture has become and how to use it to their advantage.

“The people in this country are living in ignorance, their country is involved in war,” says Siddhartha Dhar (aka Abu Rumaysah), a bouncy castle salesman and the man now suspected of being the new Jihadi John in the latest Islamic State execution video. He continues: “If they continue to have this indifferent approach, it is not going to help them.” Check! I totally agree, albeit in a different way, but you get the idea.

Another radical, YouTube sensation Abu Haleema, tells a group of reporters outside of court that Islam will eventually dominate the UK and the flag of Islam will fly above Downing Street. A reporter shouts out “You’re joking?” “No, I’m not,” Haleema replies. And he isn’t, and it will, if we carry on like this.  Bored now.

The Jihadis Next Door, Channel 4, 9pm, Tuesday 19 January

 

Restaurant review: The Beagle (Manchester)

Food 0/5     Atmosphere 3/5

So it’s settled then. Manchester needs a kick up the arse – a how’s your father, an eke-name, a moniker, a diminutive term of endearment. London has Londonistan, Las Vegas went for Sin City; Bangkok pegged the City of Angels and Berlin The Grey City. It’s more of a US of A thing, isn’t it? We’re not as grandiose, freewheeling, riding off into the sunset to the beat of Fleetwood Mac as the ‘ol gas station smudges into the vista. That’s not us. We’re more subdued. Don’t want to blow our trumpets – didn’t know we had one.

But it’s time here in Albion that our reserved cities, towns and even small hamlets, buckled up and promoted their very own affectionate appellations – Manchester in particular. So, here goes: what about Madchester or Gunchester? (been there, done that) – never again, too nineties. The Rainy City? Boring, and besides, I think Seattle got there first. Cottonopolis? Reasonable and has a nice ring – but out of date. Granadaland? Forget it. Manny. Man Many Manny. Manchesterford? Spluttering and too eighties. Warehouse city. Manky. Manky mess. Manky mess messy? Manky messy public transport?

Obviously, nothing works.

How about a nod to our illustrious musical heritage? Again, out of date – nobody likes music anymore. What tickles our fancy? Drinking – yes that’s it! We love drowning our sorrows; lurching out of watering holes four hours too early, staggering into our hangovers as we hunt down some questionable halal certified eatery.

Eating, do we like to eat? Tough one that, it appears we do. There are restaurants popping like acne all over the Cottonopolis these days. Baying like jackals, a siren call of chain Italian restaurants, fusion street tapas, cocktails with hefty burgers, NQ this that and the other, New York inspired bold cartas brimming with hope – promising anything but Fish and Chips, black pudding, hot pot, anglicised curries and shepherd’s pie. And at 12 quid a smack it better be good – especially if it’s on an Ikea wooden chopping board – rimmed perfectly for collecting those lukewarm crimson juices.

It happened about 10 years ago. Mancunians decided they didn’t really like depressingly authentic public houses, music, bands and all that stuff to do with being a miserable Northerner. No, what really got their rocks off was playing at being restaurant critics – connoisseurs of the palate. The problem is, they’re awful at it. Watching Mancunians go out to eat is like watching partially blind lemmings stumble about in total darkness (obviously with a decent pair of night vision goggles).

Is it a bar or a restaurant? It’s a…look love, there’s some sort of la-di-da fusion food on offer if you can be bothered – the bar’s on the right, near the entrance/exit. Be sure to have a few pints on the way out. In fact, The Beagle in Chorlton, Manchester advertises as such: craft beer, cocktails, terrace, wine and vibes. Notably, there’s no mention of food, and for good reason – it’s awful.

It also appears to be Mexican, which is bizarre considering it’s called the Beagle, instead of the Chihuahua; and the walls are decorated with birds – not obese Mexican birds (I’m talking about women here), just your average bland English variety. ‘The birds’ bring plates of food to you, and the service is…well, they managed to bring it to the table without dropping it among the boozy revellers, which I suppose is commendable. The problem is what they stick in front of you makes you regret not spending it on booze.

The Al pastor pulled pork burrito was bland, stuffed with red cabbage, way too expensive at £8 (two beers, imagine) and almost definitely not spit roasted as advertised. We also went for the Lawndale burger – another £8 – a terrible idea of halloumi and soggy aubergine – the less said about that the better. The pick n’ mix snacks (3 dishes for £9.95) looked like pre bought frozen convenience lumps of charcoal.

After that, we decided like everyone else in the place, to just buy drinks. Only avoid the cocktails, they have really stupid names like Tommy’s Margarita and Jalapeno and Cucumber Margarita and ‘classics’ like Godfather and a whole list of other waffle. By closing time, we were all authentically pissed. I can’t remember, I think we went for a giant £4 greasy pizza at some nasty takeaway – you know, the kind that’d make you cringe if you were the opposite of paralytic. But what could I do? I was starving.

The Beagle, 456-458 Barlow Moor Road, Chorlton, Manchester, M21 0BQ. (0161 8818596)

 

After Cologne, Facebook morons are relieved that David Bowie died

You may have noticed that liberals ain’t been liking, sharing and spluttering with their usual smug faux outrage over the past week or so. Funny that. You would’ve thought mass sexual assault on a previously unseen scale would’ve sent the algorithms of Facebook into a meltdown. But alas, no. Dead silence.

Now, here’s a rouse. Could it have something to do with the perpetrators being Muslim immigrants and the victims privileged white women? And hence, contradicting their core belief system? Does not compute. Beep, crash.

And when the likes of the Guardian and Independent realised they couldn’t get away with ignoring it anymore and had to at least come up with something. The excuses where so bafflingly idiotic (Read here and here) that not even the Facebook warriors bought it.

Then Bowie died. Everybody started liking, sharing, and pretending they loved the guy; Cologne was forgotten – business as usual (phew).

Incidentally I did (nay, still do) love the music of David Bowie. RIP.

 

The New Year’s Eve sex attacks reveal a disturbing truth about the future of Europe

What is it about young Muslim men and sex? Arabs and Pakistanis in particular; I’m sure that Indonesians and Malays are far less rampant. I’m not being totally hypocritical; I have been known to gawp like a sex starved Sistine monk on a number of occasions. Most notably in Thailand, where I found drooling like an obese Pug a somewhat daily occurrence. The girls in Italy and Israel are pretty hot as well. But I’ve always managed to restrain myself from groping, assaulting and raping them – in my culture (or what’s left of it) it’s not the done thing.

Anyway, on the back of the New Year’s Eve sexual assault carnage across European cities by barbarian hoards of, yes you’ve guessed it, Muslim immigrants. It might be a good idea if Europe (or what’s left of it) at least quivered from its multicultural stupor, and accept that this very real Islamic threat – in all its wonderful multifarious forms – will only get worse until we’re at a point of near societal collapse. Think the Walking Dead, but replace the zombies with hoards of Darth Vaders (I’m only half joking).

But this isn’t about them – the Islamists, the Arabs, the Muslims, the migrants, the asylum cases, the Tower Hamlets and the Mohammeds, the Quran and the Jihadists. After all, we can’t expect much from that lot, coming as they do from countries where women are second, nay, third-class citizens, sexual assault is normal, homosexuals are pushed of cliffs, young girls are genitally mutilated, freedom of expression is held in contempt, apostasy treated with a routine beheading. No, this is about us. We’re the real problem.

Our very culture (or what’s left of it) is imploding; we no longer have the will to fight for our civilisation; we are, as Osama Bin Laden succinctly put, ‘the weak horse’. The establishment holds its citizens in contempt; the police are useless and corrupt, mired in misplaced notions of ‘ethnic sensibilities’ (let’s not forget the Muslim grooming gangs of Rotherham).

And whether it’s the political elite who opened the floodgates to these iPhone carrying ‘refugees’; or the metropolitan BBC, which routinely patronises the licence fee payer and took days to report on the New Year’s Eve assaults, and, when it did, drenched its coverage in nauseating political correctness (they first reported it as a protest against migrants in the vain of a PEGIDA rally). Or even worse, the Major of Cologne, who said that in future white women should cover up, and think about wearing something over their heads. (And yes, eventually white women will don the Burka in Europe.)

And what happened to the perpetually outraged feminists and social justice warriors? Of course, we haven’t heard a stir out of them; different rules when it’s immigrants or some other victimised minority group – again proof that what they really hate is Western civilisation, rather than the self-righteous causes they espouse.

‘You ain’t seen nothing yet’ was Frank Sinatra’s epitaph, but it’d be more aptly applied as a new motto for the European flag – the quiet before the storm. Europe is fast becoming a colony of Islam – remember, we submit to them, not the other way around. They assimilate us. The more Islamic Europe becomes, the more intimidated women will feel walking down the street; the more our freedoms diminish and the less tolerant we become.

There’s an excellent quote in the mind your language column of last week’s Spectator:  ‘To know who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.’ My advice is get out of this continent while you can, there’s some really cheap flights to Asia at the moment –  and best of all, it’s not multicultural in any way.

 

Restaurant review: Urban Cookhouse (Manchester)

Food 0/5     Atmosphere 0/5

What is commendable, and indeed ‘unique’, about this place, is that everything they put in front of you tastes of nothing at all; and when I say ‘nothing’, I truly, from the bottom of my heart, mean no-thing.

With a mind-boggling array of new dining experiences seemingly opening up at the rate of one an hour in Manchester, the city is currently in the throes of an eating revolution. Although with abstract names like Artisan, Scene and Poop (that last one’s mine) the casual eater can be forgiven for being somewhat confused even after they’ve paid the bill.

So, once you get over the initial ‘What does that mean?’ and ‘What is this?’ – then comes the even more difficult soul searching question of whether you like any of it. Because it used to be easy didn’t it. Deciding whether you like Fish and Chips. The fish is moist and succulent. The batter light and crispy. The chips nicely seasoned. Or a steak – was it juicy? Cooked just how you like it?

It is of course more difficult deciding if a Japanese twist on Spaghetti carbonara sates your palate; or whether drinking a cocktail with a burger is a good idea; or indeed, whether forking out a tenner for fusion street food, in a restaurant, inside, is really worth the hassle.

Anyway, with a new menu, Urban Cookhouse, located on Princess Street, on the fringe of the Gay Village, definitely falls into the ‘baffling’ category. Baffling, because it claims to bring: Inspiration from New York’ and ‘a taste of downtown Manhattan to central Manchester’. Yet does nothing of the sort.

As you’d expect the place is nice enough and has the sort of urban feel that we’ve come to expect – shiny Meccanoesque patterns; ghostly, slightly camp purple haze with the occasional hint of classical Greece; shiny grey everywhere; high stools you’ll need a stepladder to access; purple candles and dangling energy efficient lights. It’s lunch hour on a Thursday and the place is almost empty.

In fact, it is so dim that we opt for a window highchair. The menu is grey and bleak and surprisingly contains very little. I opt for the Gin Cured Salmon for starter. If it was ‘gin soaked’, then it soaked any flavour out of this sweet delicate fish. It is mushy and bland. (And I’m guessing defrosted about a half hour before we arrived.) The pecans, being earthy and crunchy, make no sense at all, the same with the accompanying pancakes, which were dry and added nothing to the dish. My companions choose the Potato Gnocchi – which was drenched in oil – and the Sweet Potato Soup, which was bland, way too grainy, and came with two dry half bitten morsels of coconut.

For mains I went for Rhode Island Chowder, which contained no clams and tasted – when push comes to shove – of tinned vegetable soup. It came with a side order of cock and bollocks, that is: two balls of some tasteless starchy substance and a burnt stick of streaky bacon stuck in the middle. We also had the Seared Duck Breast, one piece of which was raw, the dish was covered in a sickly sweet marmalade sauce; a burning cinnamon stick completed this uninspired dish – the ash gracefully fell all over the meat.

As I said the menu is sparse, but the dessert option contains almost nothing. With three options, none of which was slab of New York cheesecake, it doesn’t look promising.

Now, I don’t know what the chef was smoking when he came up with Mexican Rice Pudding, or whether I was high when I ordered it. But, it was undercooked and went doolally on the cinnamon. The lovely waitress – hands down for staying positive throughout the whole experience – informed us that the tequila in the accompanying chocolate paste made it Mexican. Maybe, but I couldn’t taste it; and besides, I was expecting something with chili anyway. The Midnight Manhattan, strawberry soufflé, was nice, but the Pumpkin Panna Cotta, you’ve guessed it, missed the mark, and didn’t taste of anything.

Even more baffling than the food, is that the kitchen seems intent on arranging your food into various phallic symbols – possibly a talking point – but personally I only found marginally funny.