I would like to cunt the ITN news. Many of your nominations have often cunted the bbc news, however the ITN news is just as bias.

On the 15th of june the I T N news could not wait to mention the urine episide at Pc palmers memorial. Yet there was no effort to question if the thug who set fire to the union flag at the cenotaph was in custody.

Now although i agree that someone disrespecting pc palmers memorial deserves his custodial sentence, i think the yob who disrespected the cenotaph is more nasty. This was also almost to the day of the D day landings. Yet these anti british yobs seem to get a easey ride from the I T N biased reporters.

Nominated by: Tono

I want to nominate Marvin Rees, mayor of Bristol, who whilst being interviewed (ie fawned over) by the obnoxious Kay Cuntley of Sky News, said that people shouldn’t display selective outrage and condemnation. Yet he, just like the BLM movement are totally selective in their outrage over deaths of black people and only ever protest when a black man is killed by some thuggish white cop. But there is no sound from them when black men and boys are being murdered by the 100s every year by other blacks. He perfectly demonstrated the hypocrisy and double standards of BLM, but naturally, Cuntley did not challenge him, I’ve yet to see any so called journalist do that.

Nominated by Mystic Maven

The BBC’S favourite communist chutney ferret watched, as we all did, as a riotous mob (no, not peaceful protesters, BBC) tore down or defaced statues, including Sir Winston Churchill’s on the anniversary of D-Day of all fucking days.

And what does this little cunt do? Get on Twitter and post pictures and locations of various statues that he finds offensive. Of course, I’m sure this was just to inform the public, and to seek out the local authorities to ‘educate’ them into ‘removing’ (a word the BBC used to describe a statue being thrown into a river by a baying mob) these statues.

Certainly not for the mob to go to these places and commit wanton criminal damage.

I didn’t see him posting pictures of Karl Marx’s statue or Nelson Mandela’s. Marx was the father of communism and therefore responsible for more death than any other human in history. Mandela was a terrorist who blew up kids in a shopping centre. His wife burned others to death (including kids) that she did not trust. There was no map and rant in such cases.

No, let’s have it right. This shit stirring, race baiting, degenerate communist was urging others, by using his influence (thanks BBC, again) to commit criminal damage and go on rampages in an attempt to ‘tear down the system’.

He’s been quiet lately but the cunt is back with a cuntish bang I’m afraid.

And isn’t incitement to riot a crime? Alas, I think the police are too busy taking a knee and applauding the riots to notice…

Nominated by Cuntybollocks

IsAC regulars will know that I have a visceral hatred of the EU which borders on the pathological. Hardly a day passes without something new to remind me of my abject loathing of the bastards, and today is no exception.
So what’s boiling my piss this time? Well in April, Ursula von der Leyen unveiled a £2.7 bill. ‘coronavirus relief package’, with funds to be distributed throughout the bloc. The UK recently paid £750 mill. into this fund, but now the EU is demanding that we throw another £270 mill. of our wedge in the direction of the financial Black Hole of Brussels. This is on the basis that (get this) ‘the UK remains fully liable to contribute to, and fully eligible to benefit from, the fund’. So cough up, say the Brussels’ bandits, or guess what, the UK-EU trade talks will be ‘jeopardised’.
Now I stand to be corrected, but I was under the impression that the UK left the EU on 1st January. Okay, no doubt we have residual obligations to contribute to EU finances under the Withdrawal Agreement, but as I see it, the ‘recovery fund’ was formulated in the wake of the C-19 pandemic, ie AFTER we had left. On this basis, it’s unclear to me why we’ve actually ended up agreeing to contribute anything at all to this fund in the first place.
Notwithstanding the circumstances, the Brussels weasels are maintaining that we are ‘fully eligible to benefit’ from the scheme. Now I call that downright neighbourly of them, so let’s have a look at how this might actually work in the event that we throw this extra £270 mill. into the pot (put the matter of our involvement and initial contribution to the fund to one side for now). Let’s say that in its infinite generosity, Brussels graciously awards us £50-60 mill. (we could of course get fuck all, but that that would put Brussels in a very bad light politically). The funds will arrive with due fanfare, wrapped in sparking paper with a huge red bow, labelled ‘a generous gift to the people of the UK from the EU’. Remoaners will jump up and down, cheering such munificence, and shout from the rooftops about the abundance of benefits which flow from EU membership. ‘Look how foolish we were to leave!’ they’ll trill. Meanwhile of course, the reality of the situation is that we’ll be out of pocket to the tune of another £200 mill. plus.
The are two things absolutely nailed on when it comes to the UK’s financial dealings with the Bastards of Brussels; no matter how much we give them, they always want more, and we always get back less than we put in. No wonder they’re gagging for an extension to the Brexit transition period. They see us as their ever-full ATM. You honestly couldn’t make this shit up. Fuck off you grasping, parasitic cunts. Enough already.

Nomintated by Ron Knee

Oh shite, the “transphobia” saga has broken out again. Front and centre this time is Jo “Harry Potter” Rowling, who in December voiced support for a researcher who posted that “men cannot change into women”. More recently, JK responded to a headline which read “creating a more equal post C-19 world for people who menstruate”. Rowling wrote ” ‘people who menstruate’? I’m sure there used to be a word for them… wumden? wimpund? woomud…”.

Naturally howls of protest have greeted these comments, and JK’s been accused of “hating upon” marginalised people. Virtual signalling luvvies have been lining up to have a go. The most famous, Oscar winner Eddie Redmayne, opined pompously that “respect for transgender people remains a cultural imperative, and I’ve been trying to constantly educate myself… I want to make it clear where I stand… trans women are women, trans men are men”.

Now personally I’m for people living the best life they can, as the cliché has it. If Joe wants to call himself Joanne, take hormones, have surgery, wear a dress, that’s his business. Same goes for Georgina who wants be George. But I sincerely disagree with the dogma that says that it’s biologically possible for a person to change their sex. This to me is a fact of genetics; it’s in the DNA. Ultimately any changes that are made to this effect are cosmetic. It might hurt some people’s feelings to say this, but it isn’t being transphobic, it’s just pointing out the way something is in life.

Now I could walk around in a funny hat and long coat, demanding that people shout “long live the emperor!”. I could squat on all fours and howl at the moon. I could paint myself green and claim to be from the planet Zog. Persistent insistance on my part would not, however, make me Napoleon, or a wolf, or an alien. Indeed, if I persisted in identifying as an amputee, demanding the removal of a healthy limb, I’d probably be sectioned. What any of these things would make me is delusional, and I’d be regarded as such.

Transgender people travel a tough road, and I admire and respect them for the choice they make. But I do believe that sadly, they too are delusional if they think that they can actually change their sex, and I won’t collude with anyone in their delusion. That goes double for any “woke” doctrine which expects complete compliance with the view that “trans women are women, trans men are men”, and with those zealots only too ready to treat a differing view with a scream of “phobic bigot!”. If they can’t tolerate a differing view, that’s too bad.

No doubt the zealots will expect a snivelling apology from Rowling for causing “emotional trauma and stress” or what-have-you (it’s par for the course these days) but I hope she doesn’t offer one. She’s got a valid point of view and has nothing to apologise for.

Nominated by: Ron Knee