Spiralling Off Into Insanity

Imagine trying to explain recent events in Britain's worst Police force:

"So, anyway, it turns out that senior police were part of a conspiracy to discriminate against some of their subordinates on racial grounds"

"Wow, bet the Libs are already building a gallows"

"Well, not exactly...."


Not only has there been a grand total of no firings, but now "Britain's Top Cop" has given two fingers to the whole process. It might just be me, but I'm thinking that if a PC can be fired for telling a naughty joke, then senior manager should be fired for implementing an obviously racist disciplinary policy. But that's almost by the by. Here we have a number of employess who exercised their rights under existing employment legislation, the tribunal set up for that purpose ruled in their favour, and a senior public servant, a police officer no less, is telling them to shove it. Delusions of granduar, much ? Or just a realistic assessment of how much the PC warriors can get away with these days ? Talk about things coming full circle. Now it's the Liberals that are the ones excusing cops who bend the rules to nail the 'obviously guilty'.

Hey, That Could Work!

Nick has the perfect answer to MRSA. The only adjustment I would make is to suggest that at random intervals the Police burst into operating theatres, spend 30 minutes checking the scapels in minute detail then insist that the Doctors present present their degree certificates at a Police station across town within seven days.

It's for the children.

A Blood Libel For The Twenty-First Century

The Libs have finally found an example of Arab violence that they can’t support. Yes, indeed, it's the latest iteration in the Hurdnall World Victim Tour. Honestly, you need a score card with these people: we must understand the root causes of 9-11, the folks in the WTC were ‘little Eichmans’, and a foreign terrorist enabler who inserts himself into a war zone is perfectly innocent. A-huh.

Perhaps sensing a little disconnect in their story, the Left has been carefully soft-pedalling the facts in this case, hence why the Beeb inflicts lines like this on us:

Witnesses said Mr Hurndall, from north London, had been escorting children away from gunfire when he was hit in the head by a single shot.

‘Witnesses’ ? You couldn’t get away with this kind of reporting if you were writing for the Fulchester Gazette. We’re talking about a place that is somewhat short of disinterested parties, yet Auntie won’t tell us who these witnesses are. Then again, Auntie does appear to be leaving a few thing out here:

Mr Hurndall, a Manchester Metropolitan University journalism and photography student, had been operating as a human shield in the Gaza Strip with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM).

This is a Palestinian-led organisation that includes Westerners and aims to oppose Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories by non-violent means.

Well, no. This is a Palestinian-led organisation that claims to use non-violent means yet, gosh darn it, keeps getting caught up in acts of violence. Sort of like now. We have an Israeli facility coming under attack and at the very moment an exchange of fire occurs [remember, the ISM tools claim Tommy the Tosser was ‘escorting children away from gunfire’] up pops little Tommy, the self-confessed ‘human shield’. Who’d have thunk it ?

Not that any of this impresses the Beeb. In fact, they don’t even mind carrying comments like this:

His father, Anthony, said the Israeli army acted with impunity too often…. he also expressed concern about the "culture in which this incident took place.

Doubtless, these comments are the results of years of careful study of the doctrine and tactics of the IDF. Truly, the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Say, anyone think the Beeb will be allowing the family of Major Singh Gill to make generalisations about Islam anytime soon ? Anyone ?

There’s a deeper humbuggery at work here though. After all, they keep banging on about an alleged disparity between Israeli strength and Palestinian weakness – well, here’s a case where a filthy rich Western family has pursued a vendetta against a penniless Arab, and the L3 media has been running paeans of praise to our plucky millionaires brave fight to nail a peasant. Wasszat ? You didn’t know Hurdnall Senior was a famous lawyer, with the media savvy and financial resources that implies ? Oops – the Beeb must have forgotten to report it.

The thing is that if you were into beasting the Yids, this would be a pretty good case to do it. Nothing to do with the absurd suggestion that an individual who spends his time acting as a kind of human smokescreen must be the victim of a vast conspiracy when he finally gets shot, just to do with the big question that hangs over much Jewish support for Israel: is it morally-based or just ethnic self-interest ? Or to put it another way, if we take a Gentile who’s done as much for Israel as anyone can (only Jewish Israelis can be conscripted into the IDF) and subject him to victimisation from the British establishment as a result of that very service, will Britain’s Jewish community rally round him or leave him to sink ?

Glug, glug!

No top legal team for this bloke – in fact, he couldn't even afford more than one visit from his family. Setting this guy up against experienced wagers of judicial Jihad was never going to end well, so where’s the outrage ?

Maybe He Handled The Koran Without Gloves ?

Yes, yes, yes. As everyone who smart enough to watch BBC1 knows, the GWOT is merely an exercise by white racists to spread fear of dark skinned folk. Once you take out the influence of these white thugs, peace will reign. Sort of.

Two men have been jailed for life for killing a man wrongly targeted in a dispute between Sikhs and Muslims.
Shimraz Kahn, 35, got a minimum of 18 years for the murder of Major Singh Gill at his West Midlands shop. Waheed Akhtar, 22, was given 15 years.

The men believed Mr Gill's Sikh son was in a relationship with a young Muslim woman, Stafford Crown Court was told.

This is the very essence of dhimmitude, the gutless inability to make even the slightest criticism of Muslims without resorting to ludicrous moral equivalence. Here we have the brutal premeditated killing of a man and the Beeb can’t get through the first line without telling us that it was ‘a dispute between Sikhs and Muslims’. So who did the Sikhs kill ? Ah yes, there’s the problem, but for now, just consider the likelihood of the Beeb describing the killing of a Muslim by six BNP thugs as arising from a dispute between Christians and Muslims.

Table Terminates Template Troubles

The Great Blog Mystery of 2005 has been solved: it was the fairground owner trying to scare away people so he could reclaim the pirate’s treasure….no, wait, that was Scooby Doo. This, on the other hand, was Blogger. I think Mark was right to put the finger on the STYLE tag but I’m guessing it’s in some kind of non-user accessible section – certainly, other folk have been affected and, more to the point, have a work around. Just for future reference: the answer is make each blogpost a one cell table (and congrats to the rottweiller puppy for suggesting that independently).

St George And The Mouse

Laban neatly covers the essential humbuggery of the Left's attitude to boycotts. Speaking personally, I can't get too steamed about the clash of the midgets: Christian Voice Vs the Coop. I wouldn't want to live next door to either type of santimonious twerp.

Actually, that has been this week's revelation. To hear the tools from the Coop reverently intone the phrase 'human rights' and all the rest of the neo-Marxist garbage, was to hear Liberalism finally strip away any pretence at not being a religion. Nary a Crusader could have burned with the righteous fury of the Coop drones when confronted with those who blaspheme the name of the European Court of Human Rights. Against that kind of bulging-eyed nutiness even the folks from Christian Voice sounded grounded.

The other dominant theme I noted was an old one: the strange definition of equality now in operation. The charge against Christian Voice is that they have odd views. Just that. Gay Rights activists used to claim they wanted to get the government out of the bedroom. They never mentioned the fact they only wanted it to go next door to the spare room and check no one was writing anything disparaging about them. That's equality nowadays: blokes in biker caps score government grants to teach seven year olds about felching, then they demand public execution for anyone who supports traditional morality. Hey - if you want 'alternative lifestyles' these days, try married couples (a real marriage, dammit!).

That's the thing that really sticks in the throat. Christain Voice are the very definition of a fringe-organisation. They have approxiamtly zero public support and, unlike you-know-who, they never resort to violence. Yet we're all supposed to applaud the Coop giving them the boot as the greatest act of courage since the storming of Pegasus Bridge. Then again, the Left has spent so long disparaging soldiers, sailors and the like as fascist neandathals that people working over the God Squad are probably all they've got left in the hero stakes.

What Is This ? National Outrages Week ?

Snafu notes a guy who capped a cop has scooped a big win on the lawsuit lottery. Meanwhile, back home in the UK, things aren't any saner:

A rapist serving four life sentences is suing Essex Police because he claims they used photographs of him illegally.

Richard Baker, 40, from Cornwall, was jailed in May 1999 after being convicted of three rapes and a string of sex assaults.

The force allegedly breached copyright laws for handing photographs belonging to Baker to national newspapers.

So Which Is It Then ?

Some of the most serious BBC bias takes the form of an absurd double standard, whereby no conspiracy theory is too wacky to discredit enemies of the Beeb, while Auntie gobbles up any old rubbish if it suits her aims. Take, for example, the absurd 'Power of Nightmares' series, with its sub X-files view of the WoT, as compared to the Beeb's coverage of the Iran elections("Just drop the proganda there, Mullah, and we'll have it on the air for you in a couple of hours"). You simply wouldn't guess from the BBC coverage that serious question marks hang over the whole election process.

On the contrary, not only has the BBC soft-pedalled any criticism of Iran, they've even put up a (Don't) Have Your Say page, whence the blindingly ignorant and the crazily fanatic can celebrate the elctions. Hey - let's take this at face value, and assume that all the enteries are - ahem! - kosher. What does that say ? The public is woefully misinformed about the nature of the Iranian government ? Is this really something the Beeb should boast about ?

In fact, let's take this to the next level. To listen to the BBC, the Iranian people have freely and fairly chosen to be governed by a complete loon. Can we now dispense with the whole 'Tiny Minoritry of Extremists' meme ? After all, the Beeb has just got through telling us how democratic was the process by which a bloke who wants to nuke the infidels got elected. I mean, I'm just trying to keep the scorecard straight here. Are the Iranian people innocent victims who just want to live their lives or are they crazed Islamofascists ? I think we should pin the Beeb down now, before we have to put up with Orla Moron interviewing Iranian goat farmers who've lost their favorite goat to that fascist Bush's attempt to bomb a perfectly peaceful ballistic missile factory.

Bad Sidebar! Must Be Punished!

Thanks to Mark at Blognor Regis for diagnosing the problem alluded to below - unfortunatly, with my level of technical knowledge even the answer isn't enough, so for now the sidebar is history, until I can get a sense of STYLE.

No, I Don't Know Why the First Post Is Like This Either

Exactly

Has there ever been anything more absurd than the Government's frankly ludicrous argument that you can seperate criticism of religion from criticism of the people who believe it ? The Rottweiler Puppy hits the nail on the head.

Hey, This Could Work!

James Lileks has the perfect answer for the Left's Gitmo whining:

It’s time to institute Disintegration Chambers in our major America cities.

If you recall that episode of Star Trek – and I would be rather stunned if you did not – there were two warring planets that had long ago decided against waging physical war, and started to wage a virtual one. Computers fought the war, and if your planet’s computer somehow let the other guy’s virtual cobalt bomb in, it would calculate the death toll. Those people who lived in the area hit by the virtual bomb would walk into a Disintegration Chamber and poof! Very tidy, and the infrastructure was left standing. Kirk, naturally, put a stop to it by wrecking the mainframes and snarling “now you have a real war on your hands, Chancellor.” Supposedly the planets would be so frightened by the prospect of ruptured sewer lines they would immediately sue for peace. They never did go back to that system. I would have liked to have seen if the planets stopped warring, or got together and started invading others, or just blew each other up six times over. But that was Kirk: he got the ball rolling, and that was his job.

Anyway. Here’s the deal. We decide what constitutes torture, and identify it as the following: insufficient air conditioning, excess air conditioning, sleep deprivation, being chained to the floor, and other forms of psychological stress. The United States is free to use these techniques against hardened terrorists. Those who disagree with the techniques sign a register that records their complaints. When the terrorist finally spills the details of a forthcoming attack, on, say, Chicago, the people who signed the register and live in Chicago are required to report to the Disintegration Chamber. Very simple. Everyone’s happy.

Well, it's certainly no stupider than those Chickenhawk arguments the Left is always coming out with.

Some Might Say

Hmmmm.....whiny Southern moonbats Vs the Clan McScally. Now that's entertainment. MInd you, things must be getting serious - even Noel Gallagher is making sense.

Royal Humbuggery

Get this - the Beeb hosted a topic on (Don't) Have Your Say asking whether the Royal Family was worth the £37 million pa. Isn't that the perfect barometer of the central absurdity of Liberal's class war posturing ? A Corporation that gobbles up £2.8 billion pa of public money posturing as Robin Hood becuase it's prepared to question Royal expenditures equivalent to 1.3% of its own budget. It's bad enough that these people act like Marie Antoinette, but now we've got to listen to them try to convince us that they're Spartacus.

The Beeb slobbers over the loopier items in the Royal budget, but try getting a real breakdown of where the Beeb's money goes. How much, for example, did the Beeb blow on its coverage of Woman's Euro 2005 ? But Prince Andrew once spent... Spare us. How about a thread on whether the Beeb is good value for money ?

Beeb Has Moment Of Truthfulness

At last - the Beeb has found a felon whose religion can be reported. Step forward Edgar Ray Killen BAPTIST. We await the decision on whether or not he was practicing True Baptism, but I do understand the Beeb will shortly be commissioning a documentary called 'Baptist Boys' in which a group of hip young Baptists will explain that they aren't really all KKK psychos but they think lynching is an acceptable response to rap music.

Still, it's good to see the Beeb taking a hard (i.e. sane) line here. A crime is a crime is a crime. If scumbags don't want to be in court at 80, they should get caught earlier. Mind you, there is something disconcerting about hearing the L3 channel Joseph Dredd, something that doesn't ring true. I can't help feeling that if it was some geriatric scumbag identified as 'one of theirs' they'd be... no, wait, I think we did that one. In a carefully controlled experiment it was found that the self-same people who claim there can be no sanctuary for a killer were equally adamant that there was no point persuing a sweet old lady merely because she'd helped a mass-murdering dictator try and turn Britain into a radioactive crater.

Can we call these people amoral scumbags yet ?

Modern Jounalism

Speaking personally, I never bought into the whole mythology of jounalism's golden age, with stories of hardbitten jounalists being decapitated on the way to filing a scoop, then scooping up their head and carrying on to the telegraph office, only then going to hospital. Still, it was a lot better than what we've got now.

Marc at USS Neverdock passes on the perfect quote for anyone seeking to know just how far journalism has gone down the rabbit hole.

A Pint Of Chutzpah

The Libs are all a-flutter: the accounts are done and it turns out the Royals cost us £37 million last year. Aromatherapy for paedophiles - that'll pay for itself, but paying for Royalty is dead money.

So, when did the Left get all concerned about value for money ? If you want to see the true heirs of the degenerate aristocrats of eighteenth century England, you should be checking out our alleged public servants. For a perfect example of this, consider the coming train-wreck over licensing laws. Now, it's undeniable that if the Dog & Duck wants a 24 hour licence, they should have to apply for a variance, but that's not what's happening here. No - everyone, from Yuppie scum chain pubs, to the local Legion is going to have to reapply. Why ? Think of all the resources that is going to gobble up - and for what ? Yes - the transfer of responsibility from magistrates to local councils does mean some changes, but the same pubs are still in the same places doing the same thing. Does anyone imagine a private business would carry out such a pointless exercise ? More to the point - if you do think this farce is justified, you have given up the right to whine about loose change like £37 million.

The Kids Are Alright

Its another wisdom of crowds moment. Even our modern day yoofs - minds destroyed by endless texting - can recognise losers when they see them. Scroll down to the comments to hear some top class whining.

Crime ? What Crime ?

As is well known amongst the L3, crime is actually an invention of the Daily Mail. All of which means that this is not happening. That's a relief.

Multiculturalism Reality Check

After all, who are we tro say that this sort of thing is somehow 'evil' ?

So, Can We Call Him A Bigoted Moron Now ?

Now, here’s a question: is it ironic, or merely stupid, that the Spectator’s latest dose of Scousenhass comes from a guy with form for domestic violence ? Not that you can call Rod Liddle a wife-beater, not since the incident in question involved the young girlfriend he took up with after deserting his wife and kids. Classy, n’est pas ?

Fortunately, where Bigoted Boris is concerned any kind of logical backflips and moral limbo dancing are just ducky as long as the hate is there. Hence, articles such as this get published, despite making no sense whatsoever. For proof of that, consider the title: A City Above Suspicion. He’s writing about Liverpool Football Club. Does he even understand that a football club and the city in which it’s situated are not quite the same thing ? Apparently not – and it doesn’t get any better. Try this:

What the Football Association has done to Millwall is pretty staggering — and in the relentless competition between self-important, unelected institutions to win themselves badges of political merit, I think the FA gets the nod over the coppers from Reading.

Now, it may just be me, but I can see a certain difference between the Police and the Football Association. But Mr Punch likes the unelected tag, in fact he uses it again later, calling the FA an ‘ossified, undemocratic and self-serving institution’. As it happens, the FA does have a democratic structure which ensures that every member club has a voice. The only sense in which the FA is undemocratic is that, like every other comparable sporting body, it doesn’t give votes to people outside the sport. It says a lot about the current state of the Conservative Party that one of its MPs thinks it worth publishing a complaint that a private body conducts its business privately.

It is important though to maintain perspective, and not allow the asinine nature of Mr Punch’s point to cloud the insane chutzpah on display. The whiny one is complaining that the FA aren’t accountable enough to change their views, yet lower down we find him whining about FA boss Brian Barwick:

Liverpool-supporting chairman Brian Barwick, has been fighting to get reinstated in next year’s European Champions League, in direct contravention of Uefa rules.

Let’s move on from the sinister revelation that the English FA is involved in a dark conspiracy to increase English representation in Europe, and consider the essential humbuggery of the charge. Here’s how it happened: originally winners automatically qualified for next year’s cup. With the recent reorganisation that changed, until such time as UEFA was faced with the reality of a holder not being able to defend their title, at which point all and sundry realised that was insane. So, Mr Punch is really complaining that the footballing authorities don’t change their minds enough, except when they do. A-huh.

As far as actual specifics go, Mr Punch claims that at last year’s FA Cup game, Millwall fans were viciously attacked for no reason whatsoever by a bunch of crazed scousers. Except that the Millwall fans may have been chanting some stuff, except they weren’t really, and even if they were, the scousers were worse. Folks – does that really pass the smell test ?

But that’s not the half of it. Not only are scousers vicious Morlocks attacking the peaceful Millwall Eloi, but they’re also Lord Snooty, trampling on gritty working class grafters like Mr Punch. I couldn’t quite work out why this sounded familiar, then it suddenly came to me.

Actually, Millwall aren’t quite the epicentre of ‘lovable Cockney’ blather. West Ham have always led the way, but at least they really do have a great footballing pedigree. When idiots like Mr Punch start babbling about loveable ol’Millwall it’s always by way of excusing acts of stupid violence. Then again, at the Spectator it’s always better to be arch than accurate:

There is now a petition condemning the FA, signed by supporters of everyone from Tranmere to Torquay, and an early day motion has been put before the House of Commons expressing similar sentiments.

This is one of those lines where the dominating thought on reading is ‘how stupid does he think we are’ ? Talk about a double whammy of BS. How likely is it that Tranmere fans would sign up to this brand of ‘Nuke Merseyside’ lunacy ? Equally, Mr Punch not only hopes you know nothing about geography, he thinks you don’t understand the difference between private action and state action. He wants to posture as a bold defender of freedom against PC, yet he also wants to use the power of the state to crush the ability of a private organisation to disciple its own members. No, the argument is a nonsense.

Indeed, the whole attempt to cast Millwall as somehow martyrs to free speech is absurd. As it happens, the courts have already started the process of dealing with actual offences committed that night, but it is quite in order for the governing body of a sport to act to protect the sport, even where no criminal offence has been committed (hence concerns about ‘tapping up’ and the like). What happened is that Millwall fans decided to pass the time chanting their approval of mass slaughter. Unlike Bigoted Boris, I’m a real Conservative, but even I agree that the concept of free speech doesn’t preclude the idea of sanctions for ‘fighting words’. In fact, such chanting may indeed be illegal but even if it were not so, whether or not it is appropriate for members of an association to sing songs about killing other members is certainly is a matter on which its governing body are perfectly entitled to take a view.

That is the real analogy with the ‘gay horse’ fiasco. Abstract away from the PC details and ask if the Police should take action against an obnoxious drunk abusing people in the street. To ask it is to answer it. Ditto, if the concept of offensive chanting means anything at all, singing songs celebrating the slaughter of opposing fans qualifies. Mr Punch turns out to be a good choice after all. Who else would be shameless enough to put their name to this garbage ?

UPDATE:

Of course, one reason for Bozza's urge to push the 'crazed scousers' line is the desire to bury his own role in these events.

Liberals Win Debate [With Dead Guys]

Say what you like about the Left, but they're certainly persistant - much like cockroaches. They might keep losing the argument, but just you wait until their opponents die - no one beats a Liberal at kicking corpses.

Take this for an example. It's a Liberal dream - a chance to libel some British heroes combined with the opportunity to define sexual deviency down. Best of all, being dead they don't have the protection of the law. Not that the Left needs to rely on this kind of technicality, not when they've got such good evidence as... citing another Leftist. No wonder the Lefty worldview is so FUBAR if they regard good scholarship as citing each other's work. How can new information get in the loop ?

More to the point, there's a certain lack of killer facts here, or even mildly irritating ones. General Gordon claimed he preferred helping out kids in the East End to holding high office ? Hey, this doesn't even rate 7.5 Geldorfs on the sentimental rubbish scale. Would the Left like him more if he hadn't spent his time working with what even they admit was an early precursor to the welfare state ?

What this indicates is three things. Firstly, and most directly, the intellectual exhaustion of the modern Left. These people have given up arguing the point, in favour of calling people names. Secondly, and moving on from point one, it shows how deep the hatred of Britain lies in the modern Left. These people have done nothing to deserve the Left's odiium except be British heroes. That's all it takes to get on the Left's hit list. Finally, this is symptomatic of the Left's attempt to mainstream sexual deviancy. That might sound paradoxical compared to the first two points, but no more so than the Left normally is. After all, the Left championed the cause of gay rights, even while ferociously gay-baiting whole train loads of Conservatives. Indeed, notorious Lefty pukefest Angels In America slips effortlessly from saccharine scenes of hip 1980s yuppie scum Americans coming to terms with AIDS to triumphalist sneering over former McCarthy staffer Roy Cohn's death from AIDS. Apparently, it's verbotten to claim AIDS is God's punishment for homosexuals but it's gigglesville to claim it's God's punishment for Conservatives. Ditto, the Left will use paedophillia as a stick to beat British icons with, even while using the self-same claims to prove that nonces are people too.

There's an important point here. For years Conservatives have been smeared as racists, with Liberals constantly claiming to find 'code words' scattered through Conservative speeches - ooh, ooh, he mentioned 'education vouchers', that means he wants to kill Sikhs. Well, this case is just one of many examples where the Left has flirted with paedophillia. No, this isn't another of those 'unrepresentative minorities'. We've had a Labour government for eight years - I think that's enought time for a fair test of how the Left feels about perverts. What conclusions can we draw from cases like this ? If Conservatives are supposed to be shamed by claims that the Vice-Chairman of South Fulchester Conservative Association told the one about Ian Wright and the prostitute, what conclusion can we draw over Labour's failure to protect children from perverts ? How about the plunging sentances for perverts ? Or Labour's determination to allow perverts to set up shop on housing estates without any warning for the local community ? What does that say about the Left ?

This is another case of the Conservatives' prissy reluctance to take the Left on properly. It is well gone time we had a Conservative MP prepared to stand up and tell the truth: as a body, the Labour Party objectivley supports paedophiles, while many of their members go much further. That's why they won't take any real action against either perverts or their enablers - even the ones in their own Party. The Conservatives often complain about Labour 'stealing their policies' - as if such a concept applies in politics - welll, here's area where they can't steal anything. The Conservative Party should make one thing unmistakably clear: a Conservative government will have no truck with perverts. A Conservative government will aim for nothing less than the total elimination of all forms of paedophilia. Labour will be forced either to tear itself apart over this, or to expose it's true nonce-coddling agenda. Hey - even if Labour does somehow rise out of the gutter over this issue, they may just finally take action to protect British children - and that is the point, after all.

Hattrick Of Hammerings

James Lieleks with the final word on the loons who claim Gitmo is exactly the same as the Gulag - and with a Python reference too.

Meanwhile, proving once again that some people have no conception of private property, a Federist demands that the Serf gives him a right of reply (and never mind that Serf was only responding to the prat in question being given a publically-funded platform for his eurodribblings). It's happened to me - I told the bloke in question to shove it. The Serf is more cunning, recognising the truth of Abe Lincoln's line that the thing that kills a skunk is the publicity it gives itself - and, indeed, this blokes arguments do stink.

Over at the Rottweiller Puppy, they've found a GP taking a stand over a serious moral issue, namely the huge proportion of his colleagues that are blitzed on the job.

Not really.

What's really burning the prissy one is that we don't throw huge welfare checks at anyone who turns up at Heathrow claiming they're being, like, persecuted or something. Hey, Doc, we'll meet you halfway: we'll let in the next ten folks who claim they're being persecuted by the Iraqi Government for totally no reason whatsoever, but you've got to provide board & lodgings for them at your place, deal ?

Dafydd Speaks!

Well, that’s the Conservative Party saved then. Alan Duncan is standing for the leadership. His campaign theme is a return to the timeless principles of Conservatism.

Just kidding.

It’s déjà vu all over again, or to put it another way:

Shadow transport secretary Alan Duncan has confirmed he wants to stand for the leadership of the Conservative party.
The Conservatives' first openly gay MP said the party had "alienated a whole generation" and risked "being stuffed" at the next election.

Well, alright. At least the Beeb took until the second sentence to mention it, but then again, what else is there ? If Alan Duncan was straight, he wouldn’t exist. For proof of that, consider the bizarre reasons he cites for standing:

Asked if he wanted to be a candidate for the leadership, Mr Duncan, said: "I think I'm one of about eight or nine."
But he said he had "no illusions" about his chances, adding: "I know that my parliamentary support is limited".
Mr Duncan told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I know that there are a lot of us on this particular side of the party who haven't distilled around one person but more importantly I want to say things."

Like words, and numbers and stuff, y’know. Some might say that it would be more traditional to actually lay out your philosophy before standing, but it will soon become obvious that in Duncan’s case this is clearly a genetic impossibility:

In a speech on Friday, Mr Duncan warned his party risked "historical oblivion" if it failed to learn to reflect modern Britain.

Like, modern, dude. Baseball caps all round. Hmmm….any wild guesses as to which aspect of ‘modern Britain’ he’s on about. Still, it proves a theory of mine, namely that if you wanted to hear a negative stereotype about a group, just listen to what its advocates are saying. Femiloons claim we can’t prosecute women who kill their kids because, hey, being a mother does the head in, right ? Armani Trev claims black kids who rob other students shouldn’t be expelled because they’re expressing their culture. Meanwhile, Tory modernisers try to convince us that gays are a collection of narcissistic morons, incapable of voting on any issue above the waistline. Hey – call it instinct, but I‘ve got the strangest feeling the average BritQueen is closer to this guy than to Duncan’s exercises in self-obsession.

He argued the party appeared "socially distasteful" and "economically irrelevant".

You speaka da English ? This is just how far down the U-bend British journalism has sunk, that a pol can come out with a phrase as vacuous as ‘economically irrelevant’ with no fear that anyone will stick their hand up and say ‘what the Hell does that mean’ ? Mind you, his other statement is all too self-explanatory - yes, indeed, ‘socially distatsteful’ – poor Al’s feeling left out at the chintzy parties. How will the Conservatives ever win power again without the support of the Islington set ?

That’s about it for Duncan actually. It’s all very well to talk about the benefits of being ‘socially and economically liberal’ but is there any public support for compulsory lessons on anal sex for your seven year old and a £15 bill if you take him to the doctors ? Then again, Al’s electoral arithmetic seems a little off: here’s what he considers a devastating indictment:

It is impossible to exaggerate the extent to which anyone under the age of 35 is more likely to vote against us than for us.

See if you can see the problem with that line of logic. Come to think of it, what are we to make of lines like this:

"Our attitudes over the last 20 years have alienated an entire generation of voters, whose respect and affection Labour have ruthlessly harnessed for themselves,"

Labour is held in respect and affection ? But, loopy grasp of politics aside, the most striking thing about Duncan’s speech is the sheer chutzpah:

Mr Duncan said the Tories would only regain power if they came to terms with a "crisis of identity and reputation" that had gripped them for a decade.

Now, why’d that be ? Could it be the actions of people like Duncan, not least their constantly proclaiming how awful the average Conservative Party members are ? Consider that this is a man who can’t even stand for the Party leadership without speaking at great length about how terrible it is. The only crisis affecting the Conservative Party is the one brought about by Duncan and his fellow travellers. For once Duncan is telling the truth when he claims that he’s only standing to ‘say things’. That is the very essence of the soi-dissant modernisers contribution – not doing anything, contributing anything, just whining and carping. Sooner or later, the Conservative Party will have to grasp the nettle – these people have proven themselves to be the Militant Tendency of the Conservative Party. They are essentially parasites and the sooner the Party gives them the old heave ho the better.

If This Was 'Fark', This Would Be Tagged 'Obvious'

There is hope after all. Following on from the Government’s outrageous demands that parents grovel to some member of the salaried unemployed for permission to take their kids on hols, it now turns out that an epidemic of fourteen day ‘flu has swept the country. Who’d have thunk it ?

The Horror, The Horror

Well, now isn’t this lucky. We’ve just had Amnesia International’s whingefest over the cruel persecution of people simply because they’re sociopathic terrorists, which means I’ve got the nanoviolin all set up and ready to play a sad song for an equally deserving group of people.

Yes, indeed. M’learned friends are teed off and I love it. Not just for the usual reasons though. This is particularly sweet in light of the way so many lawyers try to pass themselves off as ‘concerned citizens’. Hearing these folks yammering on about how £33.50 an hour for a twenty-something is practically nowt should put paid to that. I mean, I’m glad they put in that qualifier about flexible childcare, but how flexible can it be that the north side of £64K pa (including 4 weeks on the beach) ain’t enough ? Who’s providing this care, Wayne Rooney ? Also amusing to see the whiny comments beneath that Beeb post. Lots of twenty-something whiners complaining that after expenses they’re left with less than £30K pa. It’s a scandal – particularly when you consider that this is for a job with the near certainty of being filthy stinking rich after a couple of decades in the job.

This kind of prissy whining is exactly what the public needs to hear – it’s a useful reminder of exactly how divorced these people are from real life.

Liberals Aim To Preserve Primitive Cultures

I wasn’t sure exactly why some the poncy report from the hamster molesters at the New Economics Foundation got me so cranked up. Who cares about another outburst of L3 drivel ? But still…..

Fortunately, the Rottweiller Puppy has helpfully put their finger on what was so thoroughly batterworthy about the report’s authors. Yes, indeed – another bunch of Metropolitan twerps for whom the rest of the country is a kind of theme park, with the locals in small country towns like Leeds, Nottingham and Bristol expected to forsake the big stores in favour of twee little corner shops.

Here’s a free clue Liberals: folks in Sunderland probably don’t care that there town centre looks too much like Stoke – they don’t shop in Stoke, they shop in Sunderland and they want the mix of quality, value and choice that only a chain store can provide.

International Jewry Stole Our Fire Engine

So, can we call George Galloway nuts now ?

Arrogant Elitist Offers Advice On Dealing With The Public

There is no better measure of both the intellectual exhaustion of the modern Left and their grip on the institutions than that they consider it a substantial argument to call their opponents ‘right-wing’. Modern Liberals can seemingly spend their whole lives without meeting anybody who doesn’t experience an almost Pavlovian reaction to the words ‘right-wing’. Equally, if you’re a flatulent fraud whose most visible distinction was being number two in the most despised government of recent years, then it’s always worth knowing that you can burnish your reputation as a fearless truth –teller by attacking your fellow Conservatives for being right-wing. Just look at Jabbah the Hut.

Not to say we couldn’t learn a lot about politics from the guy who once described the ambulance service as ‘professional drivers’, but has this guy given up even trying to make sense ? Apparently, the Tories are both an unelectable rump and too populist. Ah huh. Unsurprisingly, Jabbah doesn’t actually name the policies he thinks are too right-wing. It’s obvious he means Europe and immigration, but can’t say that without some ordinary pointing out that all the polling showed the complete opposite – these were about the only policies the proverbial man in the street agreed with. Apparently, calling people ‘right-wing’ isn’t the trump card the Beeb would have you believe.

But, for now, let’s ignore the fact that the gifted politician Ken Clarke would have had the Tories ditch their two most popular policies, and consider whether there’s an appetite for more touchy-feely policy in less hot button issues. If Liberals have an equivalent of mom, God and apple pie, it’s aid for Africa. What kind of hard-hearted Nazi can object to that ? Well it turns out that – even now in the middle of the Live 8 maelstrom – most of the public is sceptical about aid, while few buy the ‘blame the west’ rhetoric of the Left. Or to put it another way, yet again it turns out that the 'extremist Right' is far more in tune with the public than the supposed elite. Note too that while the public has a far more sophisticated understanding of the issue than you would ever guess from the BBC, it is our alleged betters who can conceive of no policy more innovative than doing what we’ve done for fifty years, but more so.

In its own way, this question of foreign aid may be as significant as the excesses in privatised industry were for the Major government. What had previously been a vote winning policy became a massive embarrassment for the Tories, as board members awarded themselves huge pay rises for successfully competing in monopoly markets. These excesses not only besmirched the concept of privatisation, they also became fixed in the public mind as symptomatic of a wider failure of the Tories to deal with the proverbial ‘unacceptable face of capitalism’. So it may be with foreign aid. After all, virtually all of ZaNu Lab’s reforms turn out to be, at heart, just variations on throwing money at the problem. If the public is now sceptical about this strategy in Africa, there’s no reason at all why they should necessarily buy it in the classroom.

Mirror, Mirror

In a bold attempt to shrug off its reputation as an elitist collection of ponces perennially pandering to the PC demands of the Islington set, the Beeb decided to devote 2 hours 20 minutes last Sunday to live coverage of women’s football.

I didn’t know that at the time – I was just watching some people run very slowly. It’s when only when I noticed the high representation of designer stubble that I realised what was going on. Here’s the thing though – I could tell it was an international because the English team has shirts that looked just like…no, in fact, it was exactly the same shirt as worn by Becks and Co. Anyway, I flicked through the channels later on, and yes, the Beeb is still trying to ram it down our throat, except this time the game must have finished because – yep, one presenter and three experts in a studio facing onto the pitch. Déjà vu ? Yes indeed – that’s the self-same set-up the Beeb uses to cover actual football. Then again, thinking back to the absurd ‘dancing dinosaurs’ football earlier on, it occurred to me that these fat chicks weren’t actually trying to play football – no, they were trying to play a bloke playing football. Hence, why the whole thing was so inescapably weird.

Derivative is too weak a word. Derivative suggests some attempt to adapt, to adjust, to leave your own mark on it all. Even plagiarists have to make some effort. Not these girls. That was the irony of it all. Here they were, mau-mauing their way onto prime time TV with the equal-representation thing, demanding that women get the same treatment as men – including the studio with the big window - but when they get all that, what do they do ? Produce a seventh-rate facsimile of male football. Ladies, please, you may indeed be condemned to suck at football, but you could’ve at least, y’know, done something with the shirts - something – wear red, stick a blue stripe on it, anything really, but no, not a thing.

Isn’t that just the perfect metaphor for feminism in general ? A group of whiny chicks with nothing to say and a firm belief everyone should be forced at gunpoint to hear them say it. Look at the Blair Babes for proof of that. These people were supposed to revolutionise Parliament. Don’t ask how or why – they’re girlies, that’s all you need to know. Meanwhile, ladies who aren’t in the sob sister sorority, who actually do stuff, like, oh, I don’t know, serve as PM for 11 years and revolutionise Britain, they can go to Hell.

Feminism: - losers only need apply.

Quote D'Jour

lengthy, obsessive discussion of urine-spattered Korans really is about as low as the left have ever gone. Barely 120 years since Karl Marx's death, they've gone from the lofty (though unworkable) notion of equality between all men to digging through reports on piss blowing through an air-vent. Liberals should be real proud.

Question D'Jour

Pitch Invasion

One of the defining characteristics of the Liberal is that he is plagued by the constant fear that someone, somewhere is outside the reach of government . For proof of this, look no further than the latest deranged idea to emerge from the Clown Payment Service oops, I mean Crown Prosecution Service.

Yes, indeed. With law and order collapsing around their ears, CPS has decided the real danger is from footballers. No more will the public have to walk in fear of being mugged by Frank Lampard, or burgled by Steven Gerrard. But wait…. it turns out that the law already covers sportsmen in their normal lives. You can go to the bank, free of the fear of Ledley King bursting in with a sawn-off shotgun.

CPS claim to be worried that sportsmen are committing acts of violence that would be illegal in other contexts. Well, that just about wraps it up for Ricky Hatton. Perhaps sensing that this line of argument is kind of weak, Liberals have resorted to one of their favourite tactics: the insane yet offensive analogy:

Nazir Afzal compared the FA's reluctance to address the issue with Asian communities where police encountered silence over so called "honour killings".
"They prefer silence to dialogue and it would appear to me that the football community is like one of those communities," said Mr Afzal, a CPS regional director.

Yes, indeed. A heavy tackle at Anfield is exactly like murdering your daughter because she has the wrong boyfriend. For the benefit of the hard of thinking, I’ll spell it out: murder is a serious offence; a reasonable level of violence on the pitch is part of the game of football. The irony goes a little deeper though – when it comes to murder, CPS is notorious for letting scumbags plead down to manslaughter, thereby evading the mandatory life sentence. Killing people CPS is flexible about, but go in with the studs showing and it’s zero tolerance. But let’s not let the insanity of the basic point obscure its arrogance. The football authorities ‘prefer silence to dialogue’ ? Like, really ? This is like a mugger complaining that his victim isn’t prepared to sit down and talk about the most effective way for him to steal their wallet. A more blatant example of Liberal fascism you could not conceive of. What justification can these creeps claim for this outrage ? Ah yes – that one, cliché no 1, the most exalted of insane Liberal talking points: IT’S FORDA CHILDRUUUUUUUUUUUUN.

It is important that we demonstrate that those involved in sport demonstrate the highest standards because children watch it and learn from it.

Most Liberal ideas fall apart on closer examination – this one doesn’t even make sense to begin with. Here’s this tosser earlier in the self-same speech:

Footballers and rugby players in particular were warned that prosecutors would be looking more actively at bringing charges against them for acts of aggression during or immediately after games.

Ah yes – rugger: not a game known to shy away from on-pitch violence. Hence why rugby matches are so notorious for crowd violence, referees are constantly being abused and junior rugby teams are known to be so much worse behaved than their footy counterparts. But wait… none of that happens. It’s almost as if CPS is talking garbage.

Nope – this plan is judicial imperialism in its purest form. These proposals combine the politics of envy, mindless grandstanding and gesture politics while diverting resources away from the actual, legitimate business of the CPS. In years to come, students will study this proposal as the very epitome of Nu Labour.

Suck It Up, Plod!

Liberals are going to have to start hiring air-traffic controllers with all these chickens coming home to roost. Take the latest example down south: the Police have decided that the law on ‘reasonable force’ isn’t so reasonable after all. So what tipped them off ? Guess.

Yada, yada, yada. Standard disclaimer follows: yes, this does look awfully like a show trial, but c’mon, if you make a life and a living claiming women with pointy hats are poisoning the wells, you can’t hardly complain when it’s you who's tied to the stake.

This case reflects two dismal trends in modern Britain: stupid hoplophobia and the slow strangulation of the right of self-defence, both of which the Filth have been vigorous cheerleaders for. If Linda Walker can be jailed for discharging an empty air pistol near to some actual criminals, is it unreasonable to investigate when the Police shoot an innocent man ? At least Tony Martin shot an actual criminal during the commission of a crime; meanwhile it appears that an anonymous phone call and carrying a pointy object are enough for a death sentence in modern Britain.

Yes, I return to my earlier point: this could well be a witch hunt, but it is a witch hunt being carried out under laws that the Police have vigorously supported, so it’s a bit late for them to start on the whole ‘it’s a jungle out there’ riff.

The Left Eating Itself

I think I've worked out why Liberals are so anti-gun - it's because they couldn't pick one up without shooting their own foot off. Even by their usual pathetic standards, the latest example of PC blowback is a lu-lu:

A bold plan by Irish rocker-turned-activist Bob Geldof for multi-city concerts to combat poverty in Africa ran into flak when it became clear how few black artists are involved.

With the arguable exception of Mariah Carey, none of the headliners for the centrepiece Live8: The Long Walk to Justice concert at Hyde Park in London on July 2 are black, let alone African

Oooh oooh - onion-weilding millionaire rock garbage vs race-hustling weasels. It's the intellectual equivalent of duelling midgets.

If you wanted a perfect microcosm of what's really wrong in Africa, this would be it. On the one hand we have asinine economics, on the other crazed ethnic grievance miners. Marxism and stupid nationalism - what ails Africa in a nutshell. More than that though, the Liberals have unwittingly exposed what's wrong with the whole aid industry - namely, where's the Africa in all this ? The denziens of multi-million pound sink estates are babbling about banks, big corporations, capitalism and the like while the ethnic pests are dribbling about how it all just proves that every white guy who ever lived is involved in a massive conspiracy to make them seem like a bunch of whiny inadequates. Neither side appears to have spent a moment considering that, say, Uganda's experience may have lessons for the rest of the continent in dealing with AIDS. The actual details of Africa hardly matters - that's the truth about it all. Forget all this bleeding heart stuff. If Africa didn't exist, the Left would have to invent it. For the Left, Africa is just another way to try and foist their own loony agenda on the rest of us.

Sinister London Organisation Discriminates Against Conservative Party Members

There’s a rare old ferment going on over at Once More. Like them, I would welcome a Conservative government, but I don’t see any reason to drag the Tories into it. True confession though – I was once in the Conservative Party. It took approximately five seconds of the first meeting for me to realise that the branch was dominated by tossers. Little did I know that I was witnessing the future of the Conservative Party.

For proof of the tosser nature of the Conservative Party, look no further than the latest leadership shenanigans. Talk about a double whammy: not only are the Party’s face cards changing the rules to prevent the membership having a meaningful say in the leadership contest, but they’re freely admitting that they’re doing so to prevent the bloke who’s overwhelmingly supported by the members from being elected. After all, you can’t trust the members after they elected that loser IDS – you’ve got to rely on the people who chose Major, Hague and Howard - you can’t argue with a track record like that.

So there you have it: we have a major party dominated by union godfathers, lawyers and showbiz skanks – and they still give their members a bigger effective say in the leadership than the supposed party of the Right. But don’t let anyone say that the Conservative Party has become unmoored from its ideological roots – after all, they’ll still let even the lowliest members contribute money, pound pavements and deliver leaflets. What more do they want ?

Seriously, are Conservative Party members the battered wives of politics or what ? What do the modernisers have to do to get rid of them ? We’ve had Teresa May do all but denounce the membership as counter-revolutionary imperialist running dogs, now there’s this latest outrage, for which the sole justification is the theory that the fact someone is a member of the Conservative Party means they don’t understand politics. If Michael Heseltine stopped by each members house to paint obscene slogans on their front door, would they get the hint then ?

All this wouldn’t be so bad if the Parliamentary Conservative Party wasn’t the political equivalent of the chimp’s tea party, but a glance at the new rules for MPs reveals exactly what the Party’s face cards think of them. What with these plans to disenfranchise the members and employ only Stepford MPs, you have to keep reminding yourself that this is a nominally right-wing party.

That’s the basic problem right there. For all the Conservative Party’s rhetoric about trusting people, transferring power back to the fron lines, blah, blah, blah, they won’t even trust their own members with actual power, never mind the man on the Clapham omnibus. The Conservative Party is truly Blue Labour. Indeed, it is true to say of much of the Parliamentary Party that their sole motivating force is snobbery. They think that if they joined Nu Lab they might have to rub shoulders with the oiks, while – to paraphrase Ann Coulter – they think Conservatism involves nothing more than horsewhipping the servants. If the public treats Conservative MPs with contempt it may purely be because they sense that the feeling is mutual.

Indeed

The Left Eating Its Own

Isn't PC blowback fun ?

Cambridgeshire's chief constable, Tom Lloyd, has resigned after newspaper claims that he made inappropriate sexual comments to a woman official.
A statement issued on Wednesday said Mr Lloyd, 53, was resigning to safeguard the reputation of the Cambridgeshire Constabulary.

According to the Daily Mail, the woman was allegedly "pestered" during a police conference in Birmingham.

The sting's in the tail though:

Mr Lloyd was later called as a witness in the Bichard Inquiry into how police cleared the girls' killer, Ian Huntley, to work at a college despite a string of sex allegations.

Mr Lloyd told the inquiry that he took full responsibility for errors made and failings in vetting processes.

And there you have it. Let a shark loose in a paddling pool and the L3 will queue up to praise your epic courage in admitting that yes, you do suck at your job. Maka de naughty comments to a member of the female species and it's hari-kiri time.

I feel safer already.

The Happy Couple

See, I told you – Galloway is an honest Liberal after all. He’s just let the cat out of the bag over the War on Terror. The Left isn’t ‘anti-war’ – it’s just on the other side.

True, superficially Liberalism and Islam don’t seem like obviously compatible philosophies but that’s only if you take their public pronouncements at face value, and why would we do that ? It’s not like the Left even pretends to live up to those values. Consider, for example, the Liberal’s constant babbling about ‘zero tolerance’ right up until the moment the violence in question has an Islamic dimension. No, Liberal moralising about gay rights, animal rights and Martian rights was always merely a useful stick to beat the West with.

Equally, Islam and Liberalism certainly have a lot in common. Both Islam and Liberalism are monotheistic religions: Islam has Allah, Liberalism has Society. Islam has laws on blasphemy, Liberalism has PC. Islamic law claims jurisdiction over every aspect of life, so does Liberalism. Muslims aren’t allowed to convert to other religions, while Liberals conscript everyone into their society, whether they like it or not.

All of the above is merely symptomatic of the corruption at the heart of both Islam and Liberalism. What truly joins them together, the central evil shared by both, is this: these ideologies are virulently anti-life. Islam is at least more honest about it – after all, you can’t get more honest than a name which means submission – but both philosophies deny human agency, in fact, deny humanity itself. In these worldviews there are no heroes, no geniuses, no stars – all achievement is the ‘will of god’ or the ‘product of society’. In such a warped world it naturally follows that the most exalted achievement of all is martyrdom – whether quickly with Semtex or more slowly, being worked to death to support people who despise the very idea of productivity.

Fortunately, Islam and Liberalism both have the same fatal flaw: to state their philosophy clearly is to refute it. This is why the Left go so bananas about Charles Johnson – he simply allows Muslims to speak for themselves. This is why the Left is so obsessed with labelling folks ‘extremists’ – they know their insane ideas can’t stand up to actual debate. If civilisation is to survive the twin threats of Islam and Liberalism then above all else, we need to draw them into that debate. Too often Conservatives will push a point right up until the point where someone calls them a nasty name. Racist, because they oppose Sha’ria ? Let the public hear what Sha’ria actually means. Extremists, because they want paedophiles stopped in their tracks ? Make Liberals tell the public what they really think about child molesters. Above all else, Conservatives need to stop cringing: we live in the richest, most successful civilisation in history – we might not be an Earthly paradise, but we’re surely better than anything these loonies could come up with.

The Beeb In One Comment

Is Live 8 the best way to beat world poverty ? We'll be asking Richard Curtis, creator of the Vicar of Dibley and one of the organisers of the event.