Dimwit Dawn: Face Coverings DO NOT Affect National Security?

Have you ever had the “pleasure” of reading something so asininely stupid that you ever wondered if those words originated from a human being?

Let me introduce to you, Dawn, also known as Dimwit Dawn (twitter.com/Opticheart), another Leftist fantasist who strongly insists that face coverings do not affect national security… because the Las Vegas shooter, Stephen Paddock, wasn’t wearing a face covering.


This is the typical reply of a Leftist fantasist.

Isn’t it funny she’s lecturing others on common sense when common sense will tell you that wearing face coverings in public, which is essentially a disguise is not a good idea. People who don face coverings in public and commit crimes are able to get away with it as no one will be able to identify them. It seems like such a simple fact, which a 3-year-old could comprehend, is beyond the intellectual level of Dimwit Dawn. Take a look at her bio.


“Suffer no fools”? The biggest fool of all is you, my dear.

As if her original tweet wasn’t vacuous enough, she simply has to flaunt her ignorance even more.


“False equivalency”? What a complex word used by the least complex of people.

Keith Walton, another Twitter user, replied to her by stating that he would be arrested if he showed up at a bank or government office in a ski mask, which Dimwit Dawn retorted by claiming it is a “false equivalency”. Dimwit Dawn, do you even know the meaning of “false equivalency”? A false equivalency is when you compare the burqa/niqab with a facial piercing! When you compare a ski mask to a burqa/niqab, you’re basically comparing apples to apples, so there is no false equivalency here! If anything, you are the one engaging in false equivalency as a ski mask has an opening for the eyes and mouth, whereas a niqab/burqa only has an opening for the eyes!

My response to Dimwit Dawn was to kindly ask her if she would allow her kids to hang out with a bunch of balaclava-wearing thugs since they pose no danger at all.


Dimwit Dawn failed to reply my very legitimate question.

As a self-proclaimed Liberal, I guess Dimwit Dawn would love to engage in a logical and mature debate and is open to opposing viewpoints and discussing them. Therefore, I sent her a second tweet.


You want false equivalency? Here’s another one for you.

As I pointed out, to claim that face coverings do not affect national security because the Las Vegas shooter wasn’t wearing one is like claiming lung cancer isn’t caused by smoking as there are smokers who die in car accidents.

If you follow Dimwit Dawn’s logic, you could say that lack of revision doesn’t cause poor examination grades as you could attain poor grades if you’re sick too. Accidents do not cause traffic jams as traffic jams could be caused by fallen trees. Sexual intercourse does not lead to pregnancy as artificial insemination leads to pregnancy too. Can you see how utterly ridiculous these her logic is? Yet, she claims to “suffer no fools”. I guess the mantra that modern-day Liberals & Leftists are deluded and living in their own bubble is true.

Back to the Twitter “debate”, I stated that Dawn’s liberalism which opens her up to new ideas and differing opinions would lead to an interesting debate where we could put our point forward and support them with logical arguments. Somehow, I failed to garner a response from her. Why is that so?


She’s blocked me!

Like many modern-day Liberals and Leftists who pride themselves on being Liberal, she has decided to block me instead of countering my points with a well thought-out and logical response. I guess the original assertion that she made is so weak she can’t even defend it and she had no choice but to block anyone who questions her point of view to avoid further embarrassing herself.

If it was me making such a preposterous statement, I wouldn’t be able to find a way to defend it, as it goes against logic and common sense. What I would do is to hold my hands up, admit my mistake and concede that my statement was built on weak foundations, and I would do more research on the topic at hand to further equip myself with the differing viewpoint. However, that seems to be too difficult for Liberals, as they never admit their mistakes, but start playing the victim and crying about “discrimination” and “hate”, demanding a “safe space” where they could hide in.

People like Dimwit Dawn is an utter insult to the traditional meaning of the word “Liberalism” and is the by-product of the “you-can-do-no-wrong” culture in the West, indulged by the Left-Wing indoctrination machines (also known as schools, universities and Mainstream Media) all over America and Western Europe. If she isn’t prepared to have her viewpoints questioned and scrutinised, she shouldn’t be spouting these utterly ludicrous viewpoints on a public platform in the first place.


The Dilemma of Remoaners; Performing Mental Gymnastics

It has been a year and 4 months ever since the historic EU referendum was held in the United Kingdom. It is incredulous that 16 months after the results were declared, there are still many people who are unable to accept the result of a democratic election and are calling for the subversion of democracy by holding a second referendum, even though the result of the first referendum has not yet been honoured!

What is hilarious about the attitudes of these Remoaners is their sheer hypocrisy and double standards, and yet they don’t even seem to notice that! They seem to be totally ignorant of the fact that they hold contrasting beliefs when it comes to issues involving the EU. What do I mean by that? You’ll find out soon enough.

When the Remoaners start to get questioned by people who possess basic logical thinking, they start to squirm their way out of the debate, performing mental gymnastics to justify their contrasting views. I think that says it all about their intellectual ability to understand and analyse the contradicting views that they hold.

The main argument that Remoaners trot out is that curbing of freedom of movement will have a negative impact on the economy and healthcare of the UK. Remoaners don’t seem to understand that the restriction of freedom of movement doesn’t mean a total stop on all immigration; in fact the tightening of immigration laws will allow the British Government to allow only the best talents to enter the country which will help to boost the economy and healthcare, instead of letting all and sundry in with no checks whatsoever. However, I understand such a concept is too difficult and complex for the average Remoaner to understand, so let’s put that aside (and I’ve not even gotten to my main point!).

Majority of the Left-Wing Remoaners claim to stand up for the rights of the less fortunate and vulnerable, which is the rationale behind their demands for open borders, so as to allow the less fortunate and vulnerable from other countries to seek a better life in the UK. Their main argument is that the NHS and economy will collapse without immigrants, and Brexit will be a detriment to the UK. Maintaining an open border by allowing all immigrants into the UK will boost the NHS and grow the British economy, as most of these immigrants are skilled nurses, doctors, scientists, engineers, mathematicians (you name it, you got it). That’s according to the majority of the Remoaners, not me.

Think about this for a minute. If the majority of these immigrants are really skilled doctors, scientists and engineers, they will definitely be a net contributor to any country’s economy. The Left claims to stand up for the rights and welfare of the less fortunate, yet they support the poaching of these talented doctors, scientists and engineers from other less well-off countries so these people could work in the UK and contribute to the UK’s healthcare and economy.

Isn’t this what we call “brain-drain”? Once these skilled doctors, scientists and engineers leave their countries and move to the UK, that would negatively impact the healthcare and economy of their home countries. Mortality rates in their home countries will continue to rise, and their economy will crash to the level of Venezuela’s. Left-Wing Remoaners who claim to look out for the welfare of the less fortunate don’t seem to be doing much looking out by demanding that the UK maintains an open border to allow these talented and skilled migrants to leave their countries en masse, whereas their home countries will have to deal with the consequences of brain-drain. Remoaners love to paint all Leavers as selfish people who are racist and xenophobic. I think it’s fair to say that on this basis, the Remoaners are the racist and xenophobic ones, as they don’t seem to be particularly concerned about the welfare of less well-off countries.

When you question a Remoaner on their contradicting views, the most common response is since they’re in the UK, they’ve got to look out for British interests first, and by remaining a member of the EU and keeping freedom of movement, that will allow skilled migrants to enter the UK and it will boost the UK’s healthcare and economy, and surely that’s a good thing. If a person who voted for the Conservatives or UKIP said something like this, they will be the first one to cry “racist” and “xenophobic”! However, it’s perfectly not racist and xenophobic at all to put your own country first if you’re anti-Brexit. Can’t you see the sheer hypocrisy in this?

I think it’s apparent now that the Left-Wing Remoaners are facing a dilemma here. If they truly believe in the welfare of the less fortunate, they should be calling on the British Government to start strictly enforcing British immigration laws, so as to curb the brain-drain affecting less well-off countries and ensuring the talented doctors, scientists and engineers remain in their own countries to boost their own healthcare and economy, which will raise the standards of living for their people. That is simply not possible if the UK remains a member of the EU!

The Left-Wing Remoaners will then proceed to claim that such a scenario will negatively impact British healthcare and economy.

Hold on a minute, since when did Left-Wing Remoaners start to side with the “lazy and privileged native British people”? Surely a negative impact on the NHS and the economy is a punishment for these “white supremacists”? By allowing these skilled migrants to leave their countries for the UK, enriching the UK in the process while leaving their home countries in a state of dilapidation, isn’t that beneficial for the UK and detrimental for the less well-off countries and their people who the Left-Wing Remoaners claim to stand up for?

Since when did the Left-Wing Remoaners start to prioritise the interests of their own country over the interests of people from other countries? Isn’t that… xenophobia? So what do they really believe in? Let’s do a summary of the quandary the Left find themselves in.

  1. If they believe that the UK should remain a member of the EU, they cannot claim to look out for the welfare of the less fortunate, as it will cause brain-drain in less well-off countries.
  2. If they believe in looking out for the less fortunate, the UK should not remain a member of the EU, as it will cause brain-drain in less well-off countries.

Good news, Remoaners, I will offer you two solutions to solve your contradicting beliefs once and for all.

  1. Continue to advocate for the UK’s membership of the EU, while focusing strongly on improving the NHS and the economy, stop claiming to stand up for the less fortunate, as you support the brain-drain of their countries.
  2. Support the democratic decision made by the British electorate on the 23rd of June, 2016. Advocate for stricter immigration laws, and train your native British people to become doctors, scientists and engineers to boost the NHS and economy, which will keep skilled would-be migrants in their home countries and contribute positively to their own healthcare and economy which will lead to a higher standard of living for the people in their home countries. A win-win situation.

Dear Remoaners, isn’t it tiring to hold such contradicting beliefs, and having to perform some kind of mental gymnastics to justify your beliefs whenever you are questioned, and if all else fails, cry about being a “victim of hate”, just because you’re unable to hold your own in a mature and sensible debate?

Which solution will you choose then to absolve yourselves from further quandaries and mental gymnastics? If I were you, I would go with solution #2.





Denouncing Liberalism, from an ex-Liberal

The saying “Liberalism is a Mental Disorder” is a saying that is perpetually used by people on the Right of the Political Spectrum to label Liberals and people who are on the Left of the Political Spectrum.

I was a hardened Liberal. I held concrete Liberal beliefs and I genuinely believed anyone who identified as Conservative and Right-Wing are selfish and heartless individuals who are more concerned with their own well-being than the well-being of the underprivileged and less fortunate around them. I was very adamant that my Liberal beliefs will never waver.

The 2nd President of the United States, John Adams once said: “If you’re not a liberal at 20 you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at 40 you have no brain”. When I first came across this quote, I was frankly insulted. Deep in the crevices of my mind, I insisted that I will still be a Liberal at age 40; a compassionate and intellectual Liberal, just to prove Adams wrong. Boy, I got it so wrong.

What exactly is a Liberal? Someone who identifies as a Liberal can be described a person who is willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own and are open to new ideas. Even today, I believe I am the perfect fit for this description.

From a political standpoint, Liberals are on the Left of the Political Spectrum (Left-Wing), whereas Conservatives are on the Right (Right-Wing). I was proud to identify as a Liberal. Little did I know that a few years down the road, I would come to the realisation that people who identify as Liberal usually turns out to be extremely illiberal and intolerant. Perhaps I was guilty of being just that little bit naive.

What are the political beliefs and viewpoints of Liberals and Conservatives? There are many issues but for the sake of time, I’ll list 5 of the most common viewpoints in the table below:

No. Issues Liberals Conservatives
1 Immigration Believes in open borders and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Believes in legal immigration and strict enforcement of immigration laws.
2 Healthcare Believes in Universal Healthcare. Believes in privatised Healthcare, the state should not be in control of Healthcare
3 LGBT Marriage Marriage for all individuals should be legal. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman; opposes LGBT marriages.
4 Social Security Social security acts as a safety net for the vulnerable and therefore should not be reduced. Social security is a financial burden on the state, individuals should manage their own savings.
5 Abortion A woman has the right to decide what happens with her body. A foetus is not a human life, so it does not have separate individual rights. Abortion is the murder of a human being, human life begins at conception.

As the staunch Liberal that I was back then, I held Liberal beliefs for all the above-mentioned issues. I felt the Conservative point of view was too inhumane and lacked compassion. As of 2017, the only issue that I still retain a Liberal slant on is healthcare.

The turning point in the shift of my political views was a General Education lesson that was part of the curriculum at Singapore Polytechnic back in 2012. The lecturer, an entertaining and genial African lady, was discussing euthanasia with our class. Majority of the students in the class were insistent that an individual should have the right to end his own life (a Liberal viewpoint). In the midst of the debate, I remarked that I am extremely uncomfortable with legalising euthanasia as they could lead to assisted suicides of non-critical patients. Insurance companies would also encourage doctors to deny life-saving treatment, which is often expensive.

Hold on a minute, anti-euthanasia is a Conservative viewpoint! As someone who dwells on his thoughts for a prolonged period of time, I started mentally regurgitating the things I’ve said in that particular lesson. I actually held a Conservative belief, but Conservative beliefs are often self-serving and not in the interest of the general population! Although I can see why there are many people who believe that euthanasia should be legalised and I respect their point of view, I simply could not bring myself to adopt a pro-euthanasia belief.

A few weeks later, the topic of the debate was abortion. During the heated debate, I stated that I am against the idea of abortion, as human life begins at contraception and to abort the foetus is against the human rights of the foetus. Unsurprisingly, the words “sexism” and “misogynistic” rang out across the classroom. Once again, I sided with a Conservative point of view in a debate. It was a very different experience though, as the heated debate eventually descended into profanity-filled slurs and insults (which was ultimately resolved with a few humble apologies from both sides).

To say that I was shocked would be an understatement. I was taken aback at the uncivilised retorts and profanity-filled remarks by the pro-abortion side. Being pro-abortion is a Liberal belief, and Liberals are supposed to be respectful of opposing views and be open to new ideas. Their behaviour did not fit the definition of Liberalism! As Liberals, they should be respectful of the opposing point of view and not try to shut down the debate with profanity-laden insults.

Remarkably enough, those on the anti-abortion side are the ones who actually made the effort to ensure the debate was respectful and emphasised that we understood why people might be pro-abortion, even though we are not in favour of abortion.

In 2013, I started taking a deep interest in the events unfolding in Syria. As a Liberal, I was aghast at the atrocities (or some would call it alleged atrocities) committed by the Syrian President, Bashar Al-Assad on the ordinary Syrian citizens. General Education lessons in 2013 were focused on the Arab Spring and the escalation of violence in Syria, and as a Liberal, I remarked that Bashar Al-Assad should be deposed immediately so peace could be restored in Syria. What a naive and foolish person I was back then.

With the escalation of the violence and rise of ISIS in 2014, refugees started to flee Syria and made their way towards Lebanon, Jordan and Europe. Being the Liberal that I was, I was critical of the European countries who refuse to take in the “refugees” and disgusted at the concerted efforts made by countries such as Hungary to stop them entering their countries. I was naive enough to believe that these “peaceful refugees” should be granted asylum in countries such as France and the United Kingdom, despite them breaching the international law that states refugees should seek refuge in the first safe country they set foot on.

At the start of 2015, the “refugee” situation in Europe was beginning to descend into a full-blown crisis. Photographs of the “refugees” violently breaking down fences in Macedonia in an attempt to cross into Greece struck my beliefs hard.

I’ve always believed these “refugees” are peace-loving people like you and me, who just want to live their lives in peace. Why are they behaving so violently? Isn’t Macedonia a safe country? Why do they need to break down the border fence and get to Greece? Why are they in Macedonia in the first place? To get to Macedonia from Syria would require passing through Turkey and Bulgaria, and both of these countries are safe countries! I was supportive of these “refugees” breaking the “First Safe Country Law” as I believed all they want is a chance at a peaceful existence. Their violent and barbaric behaviour in Macedonia was the start of my shift in political stance on immigration.

From 2012 to 2015, my views on euthanasia, abortion and immigration changed completely, and I started to question myself. “Am I a true Liberal?” was the question that raged in my head.

I’ve always prided myself on my liberal attitude. I am very open to new ideas and I am very respectful of the differing beliefs of others. I am able to befriend someone who has a totally opposite political standpoint. However, I have adopted Conservative beliefs with regards to euthanasia, abortion and immigration! How can I hold Conservative beliefs, yet be open to new ideas and respectful of differing opinions? That’s not possible, Conservatives are self-centered! I tried to force myself to accept euthanasia, abortion and open borders, in order to return to being a “full-fledged Liberal”, but I just couldn’t do it.

Is it really possible to hold Conservative beliefs and yet be liberal? Many people will claim that’s an oxymoron, but I beg to differ. I was so blind all along that I couldn’t reconcile the fact that people who identify as Conservatives can be liberal in their attitudes too, without identifying politically as a Liberal.

Did I try too hard to adopt views that are traditionally held by those to the Left of the Political Spectrum, so that I could be labelled as an open-minded, tolerant and inclusive Liberal? I think it’s crystal clear now that adopting Liberal beliefs doesn’t make one a Liberal, having an open mind and respect for differing political opinions, be it Left or Right, makes one liberal.

In recent years, it is very prominent that majority of the people who call themselves Liberals, preaching peace and love are the most illiberal and intolerant people out there. From the celebrations and disrespectful remarks from the Liberals at the death of Margaret Thatcher (and I am no fan of her, trust me), to the Brexit Referendum and the election of Donald Trump, people who identify as Liberals have showcased their utter intolerance on social media, especially Twitter.

From shutting down debates with cries of “racism”, “sexism” and other types of -ism’s and -istics to physical assaults as seen by violent, hooded Antifa thugs, these Liberals have demonstrated just how illiberal they are. They are frightened to hear an opinion that is different from theirs. They are too emotionally immature to deal with it. They simply cannot allow someone with a differing opinion to voice their opinion as they lack the intellectual capability to engage in a proper debate. These people call themselves Liberals. It seems like a dictionary is something that is lacking in their homes. I suggest doing a 1-minute check in the dictionary, it will do these intolerant “Liberals” a world of good.

Dear Liberals, stop lecturing others about tolerance when the behaviour you exhibit is the exact opposite of tolerance. When you display your utter intolerance and contempt for what being liberal stands for with your sore-loser attitudes with regards to the Brexit Referendum and the election of Donald Trump, you have lost the moral high ground to preach. “Do as I say, not as I do” seems to be the new motto of the Liberals nowadays.

To all Liberals (people who identify as Liberal/Left on the Political Spectrum) and are genuinely respectful of differing opinions and beliefs, I take my hats off to you. It seems like you’re in the minority among everybody who identify as Liberals.

As for the Conservatives, there are many people who hold Conservative beliefs who are intolerant as well, but I personally find that it’s not as rampant as compared to those who identify as Liberals.

You do not see Conservative Party supporters in the UK attacking Labour supporters at a Labour Party Conference, yet the opposite is true. You do not see Donald Trump and Republican supporters attacking people for holding an American flag, yet the display of such uncivilised behaviour is rampant among the Democrats and Antifa, whose attitudes are as fascist as they get. You do not see Conservatives rushing onto the stage to grab the microphone from a Liberal speaker, yet Milo Yiannopoulos has had his speeches cancelled and microphone snatched away by hysterical and unhinged Liberal members of the audience.

If anything, people who identify as Conservatives are now the modern-day liberals. Majority of Conservatives hold staunch Conservative beliefs but they respect the differing political opinions held by their Liberal counterparts and are more than willing to get into a detailed and mature debate. Whereas for the majority of Liberals who are as intolerant and illiberal as they get, from stifling debates to physically attacking Conservatives for expressing their point of view, it seems like the comparisons to Joseph Stalin, Kim Jong-il and Nicolae Ceaucescu aren’t too far off the mark.