Steyn D'Jour

Actually, looking at those last two posts, I'm guessing we should start running a sweepstake on how soon it'll be before the Guardian/BBC Axis of Wibble starts running with the line that the Fiona Pilkington case is a really huge witch hunt (except, you know, with actual witches).

But wait....here come our PC PCs. Wouldcha'believe it? They claim the Clan Scumbag needs a police guard after receiving death threats. Dang! I guess we'll all have to stop talking about it rather than risk provoking one of those rampaging mobs of conservatives that are so much a feature of British life.

So for those of you keeping score at home, when it comes to defending vulnerable families, the police's resources fell down the stairs, guv, but political theatre meant to intimidate conservative critics into silence? Go, go, go!

I bet it's all the fault of the Daily Mail. But for any of our intestinally-challenged 'respectable conservative' friends out there who may be tempted to ease off, here's a post from the Great Steyn with a relevant point:

But, if we're talking about letting the Left "set the rules," Mr. Marcus's column reminded me of a larger point: Don't take your opponents at face value; listen to what they're really saying. What does the frenzy unleashed on Sarah Palin last fall tell us? What does Newsweek's "Mad Man" cover on Glenn Beck mean? Why have "civility" drones like Joe Klein so eagerly adopted Anderson Cooper's scrotal "teabagging" slur and characterized as "racists" and "terrorists" what are (certainly by comparison with the anti-G20 crowd) the best behaved and tidiest street agitators in modern history?

They're telling you who they really fear. Whom the media gods would destroy they first make into "mad men." Liz Cheney should be due for the treatment any day now...

The media would like the American Right to be represented by the likes of Bob Dole and John McCain, decent old sticks who know how to give dignified concession speeches. Last time round, we went along with their recommendation. If you want to get rave reviews for losing gracefully, that's the way to go. If you want to win, look at whom the Democrats and their media chums are so frantic to destroy: That's the better guide to what they're really worried about.

Exactly. The left's imminent whining about a backlash is nothing more than confirmation that they're caught bang to rights. If 'respectability' means turning a blind eye to the hideous results of leftist lunacy, we extreme extremists are better off without it.

You Can Never Underestimate Liberal Morality

Don't speak too soon! The hipster pushback has already started.

Still, this set me thinking. These people keep telling us that, oh yes, they do hate paedophiles too, so what's missing from this case? Here we have a 43 year old individual who drugged and raped a girl he knew to be underage despite her clearly refusing consent. If sexual predation has any meaning at all, this is what it means, but gosh darn it! it turns out that even this doesn't clear the bar for hipster outrage. In what sense do they oppose paedophilia?

Anti-Social Behaviour Is A Fraud

NNW runs the latest from Alan Johnson through the liberal - English translator. Read, enjoy and think what it says about the MSM that Postman Pat is being put forward as an example of a politician who can pass as human.

It's always good to remind people that this is exactly the kind of case that the left said never happens. Like I keep saying, if liberals ever denounce vampires as a right-wing myth, start laying in the wooden stakes. Now we have on record just how liberals deal with thugs:

The parents from all five families received a letter warning that further action would be taken unless the behaviour ceased. While four families replied to the letter and were seen by the council officer, only the one family, who cannot be named, was believed to have “torn up” the letter and was never visited, Mr Grantham said.

Yes, the 'tearing up letters' gambit. If only Ronnie Biggs had thought of that.

Still, there is a land mine lurking under the right's position. When we accept slippery euphemisms like 'anti-social behaviour', we're implicitly accepting the left's view that, sure violent thuggery is kind of bad and all, but there's no need to use negative labels like 'criminal' and hey, can't we all just get a along?

What we're talking about is a police force turning a blind eye to persistent, violent criminality and a left that supports them in doing so, and for that their collective feet should be held to the fire.

Conservatives Hate Hot Chicks

Yep, time for another round of Open Border Theatre. As ever, it involves the No Borders Agency targeting a sympathetic illegal immigrant while ignoring the many and varied lunatics pouring into this country.

Steyn D'Jour

No wonder they get on so well with libs - they're seventh century post-modernists:

One sympathizes with Benjamin Netanyahu. But he’s missing the point. Ahmadinejad & co aren’t Holocaust deniers because of the dearth of historical documentation. They do so because they can, and because it suits their own interests to do so, and because in the regimes they represent the state lies to its people as a matter of course and to such a degree that there is no longer an objective reality only a self-constructed one.

Ayn Is Innocent!

Great post by NNW over here, but there's one thing I don't agree with. The whole 'Objectivism' thing was intended as a rebuttal to libertarianism which, even back then, was sliding rapidly downhill into the moral equivalence sludgebucket.

I'm sure Ayn Rand would be no friend to a police service that refused to actually provide any actual policing services. Equally, she would have no problem with condemning this kind of harassment as objectively wrong. Then again, you can say the same for Frank Field or, for that matter, Clement Atlee. It's not about the state.

We're not screwed because the state is too big or too small, we're screwed because our political culture is mired in exactly the kind of goofy relativism Rand predicted years ago. Some are liberals, some are libertarians, but all are firmly wedged in the Starbucks of the soul where objective reality is, like, squaresville, dude, vicious thugs are just sticking it to The Man and it's considered a winning argument to sonorously intone 'first they came for the violent headcases...'.

UPDATE:

Knew I had it somewhere....

Here's Ayn Rand on libertarianism:

All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies, except that they’re anarchists instead of collectivists. But of course, anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet they want to combine capitalism and anarchism. That is worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It’s a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don’t want to preach collectivism, because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. The anarchist is the scum of the intellectual world of the left, which has given them up. So the right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the Libertarian movement.

UPDATE II:

Actually, the quote at the bottom of the page sums it up even better:

Libertarians are a monstrous, disgusting bunch of people: they plagiarize my ideas when that fits their purpose, and they denounce me in a more vicious manner than any communist publication, when that fits their purpose. They are lower than any pragmatists, and what they hold against Objectivism is morality. They’d like to have an amoral political program

Motorists of No Appearance

It's a mystery, alright!

A Few Quick Comments On B-BBC

.... since, hey, it's not like I can comment over there. Not without Bill Gates stopping by to talk me through it so away we go:

That Was Then, This Is Now: Two weeks ago, the Beeboids were explaining in their usual charming way that, doh!, of course they didn't cover some stories. Obviously, their job was to filter the news, and only report truly important stuff.

Now suddenly, it turns out that they're just simple reporters, and so they report the news without comment, even if it's obviously garbage.

Guess That Wraps It Up For The Human Rights Act: Yes, indeed: Beeboids do seem to spend an inordinate amount of time slobbering over dictatorships. But how come all this never applies to Britain? After all, the NHS is 'the envy of the world' so we should be able to get by with even less rights than Cuba. We certainly have plenty enough social problems, but Universal Shami is never off the BBC. So how about it Beeboids? How about we take the kind of bold, decisive action the Chinese government is rightly famous for and string up the Law Lords before they invent another 600 human rights?

Context Now Racist: Wasn't it great to hear every Radio 2 news bulletin yesterday report that French Police had cleared a refugee camp of 'men, women and children'?

Seriously, when have you ever heard that phrase used outside of a war crime or similar atrocity?

In fact, the BBC was so anxious to cast this as an Oradour Sur Glane for the new century, they went with this line even though there weren't, strictly speaking, any women there.

Of course, it would be tempting to wonder how the BBC's bonkers invocation of the 'men, women and children' line meshes with its normal, snooty attitudes about bloggers and their 'inflammatory' language. But that would be to neglect the other chunk of humbug: what about the all-important context that professional journalists are supposed to supply, as opposed to the nasty 'shoot from the lip' world of blogging? Or, to put it another way, how come no one mentioned this?

Hey, that right there exposes the left's line as a load of bull. These people weren't cutesey victims who just wanted to make a life for themselves in Britain. Staggeringly enough, it turns out that illegal immigrants are criminals with absolutely no respect for our nation's laws or its people. The BBC chose not to suppress this story because, even in the BBC bubble, they know that complaining that our 'cruel' immigration laws keep sexual predators out of the country is not a winning strategy.

Slow Unwinding of British Civilisation Continues

Boss giving you a hard time at work? Call the cops!

Yes, indeed, they may not have known he was the boss, they might have thought he was just a paying customer, annoyed at being kept waiting while they sat around. Hmmmm... in sane countries that's not really much of an excuse.

Hey, say what you like about lawyers, but in twelve years they've managed to bring back all the problems of unionisation without any of the advantages. The reason these folks can behave like they do is because they know that sacking anyone is a legal minefield. Management doesn't run companies any more, they just act as liaison with the government - y'know, the body that hires people who can explain with a straight face how they did a great job except for the whole 'deaths' thing.

Verdict On Cold War Overturned On Appeal

Given that the left is normally obsessed with 'sending the right message', 'code words' and the like, I'm not sure this is a coincidence.

Is Your Journalist Stupid?

Zut alors! The Racism is everywhere! Now even babies are really huge raycists.

Only white babies though, obviously. There must be some kind of genetic damage present in their bloodlines that isn't present in superior races. Well, either that, or the Freepers are right and this really is the leftist version of Original Sin.

Still, one things for certain: clearly this prejudice prevents white people from fairly judging black people, even though they probably try and hide their prejudices behind stupid rationalisations like claiming the victim is an empty suit who hangs out with a freak show collection of Marxist lunatics and sounds like porky pig every time his Teleprompter breaks down.

Quote D'Jour

Via the Great Steyn, here's a perfect diagnosis of what ails conservatives:

The Tory story rarely varies. Whenever the centre-right wins an election, the centre-left allows that its opponents have the office, but denies they have the mandate. They can govern for a term, yes, but only by consensus, not according to their own lights. They may steer the bus to a mutually agreed destination. Driving it along a route of their choice is out of the question...

Some centre-right leaders in the United Kingdom and the United States haven't been as vulnerable to the syndrome of pussyfoot-conservatism as Canada's centre-right leaders. But even the least wobbly, Margaret Thatcher, say, and Ronald Reagan, weren't entirely impervious to it. With all their self-confidence and charisma, Thatcher and Reagan never radiated that cocksure, hubristic aura of self-righteous intellectual and moral conceit that's the hallmark of centre-left leaders from Pierre Elliott Trudeau to Barack Obama.

Highly-Skilled Hoovering

Like any right-thinking person, I'm am naturally shocked that a government minister could be accused of corruption - and after all the work they've put in to securing our borders.

Still, one mystery remains: they're checking to see if the cleaner had a visa or not. Say what? I thought immigration was meant to bring us the 'highly skilled migrants our industry needs'. When did shake & vac get to be brain surgery?

Question D'Jour

If it's the right that's dominated by fascist lunatics, how come it's always the left that gets caught in incidents like this?

You May Find This Hard To Believe....

Heh.

Libs complaining about bogus accusations of racism. Sweet, sweet blowback!

Still, I'm not sure about Laban comparing Mr J to a sleaze like John Taylor. As far as I can make out, Mr Jones is a bona fide businessman, has at least some conservative convictions and isn't just another avatar of the Metropolitan hive mind, so that's three up on Lord Weasel. Then there's the other thing...

Don't be shocked, but it turns out the professional victim and racial arsonist in question is fielding an ethics complaint. Who'd have thunk it?

Why Bad Conservatism Is Still Better Than Bad Libertarianism

Exhibit A.

Courts Too Lawless Even For A Lawyer

This is all good stuff, but the key point is this:

[Lady Deech] blamed judges for creating a 'half-and-half' divorce law without any reference to Parliament....[she said] 'The notion that a wife should get half of the joint assets of a couple after even a short, childless marriage has crept up on us without any parliamentary legislation to this effect.'

Well, quite.

Whatever marriage is now, back when these changes were being driven through it was a cornerstone of society, yet femiloons and their castrato allies were able to blow a hole in it without so much as a question in the house.

A vote of thnaks to for the (mostly self-appointed) leaders of the social conservative movement. Folks like IDS may indeed be well-meaning, but all their talk of defending the family is just blathersgate as long as it takes a lawyer to point out the femiloon elephant in the room:

'It is far more difficult to terminate those other pillars of a stable life, employment and a tenancy, than marriage.'...

'Any other situation that is known to harm children, sometimes not nearly as much - for example school food or paedophilia - attracts legislation and extensive public campaigns without dissent.

'But even when public debate focuses on the plight of single parents and their children, the fact that over half of them are created by divorce and separation is overlooked.

Clearly, we need more tax breaks for marriage.

Paleocons: Still Nuts

Old Meme: Bush sucks cause he couldn't even nail Bin Laden!

New Meme: Bush sucks cause he nailed Bin laden (but kept it totally secret)!

Just Thinking...

If you think the prospect of people being allowed to demonstrate against your wackadoodle philosophy justifies going on the rampage, you may be the fascists.

Liberal Multiculturalism Is A Fraud

If it's the right that's supposedly full of idiots, how come it's always liberals who come out with stuff like this?

A judge lambasted a rapist for claiming his victim was a liar - then commended him for becoming a muslim.

Judge Anthony Goldstaub QC sentenced Stuart Wood for seven years for the attack, then told him: 'You have turned to Islam and this promises well for your future, particularly as you are now an adherent of a religion which respects women and self-discipline.'

Say what? You could pick ten names out of the phone book and find five people who were better informed about Islamic doctrine that this guy. But that's the thing. It's the modern left who are the real little Englanders. They're incapable of seeing the world in any but the most parochial terms, with everyone else in the world being just like them, but with a penchant for funny hats and over-heated rhetoric.

Note that this doesn't even come under 'the enemy of my enemy....'. This loon isn't suggesting that Islam is a fabulous philosophy overall, even if they do have some odd ideas about chicks. Nope, he's actually praising the treatment of women, even after being slapped in the face by reality:

Speaking at Chelmsford Crown Court, Judge Goldstaub strongly criticised Wood, 34, for pleading not guilty at his trial which meant his victim was put through the ordeal of having to tell 12 strangers 'the most intimate details'.

'This she did with dignity and courage,' said Judge Goldstaub. 'You, through your counsel, called her a liar and suggested she had invented rape.

Not that respectful then.

The idea of Islam as being a complete world view and doctrine of its own - very definitely separate and distinct from that of liberalism - is alien to the British left. Doesn't everyone dream of becoming a chattering class douchebag?

Questions D'Jour

Since the left's new rule is that anything goes short of Schindler's List, does that must mean they'll finally stop whining about St Augusto of Santiago? After all, he delivered his country from a brutal and chaotic regime, defeated a savage insurgency, rebuilt the economy and restored democracy - and all with less deaths than Stalin managed in the average day.

As for the CIA... hey, they helped win a global struggle against tyranny and still got comfortably out-paced on the bodycount front by tiny little Cambodia and its lovably authentic agrarian reformer Pol Pot.

Best of all though was Tailgunner Joe. Joe McCarthy never killed anyone, yet by exposing the US establishment's shameful refusal to deal seriously with Marxist infiltration of American institutions, he helped save the free world. Surely he's a hero we can all get behind?

MONA + 10

Hmmmm.... I wonder what proportion of the people who've seen MSM reports of the 'Islamophobic' slaying of Ekram Haque realise that the suspects were black?

Hey, I didn't know until I saw it on Julie's blog. It's taking MONA to the next level: not only hiding the offender's true nature, but subtly implying they're natives.

Of course, now we know the truth, that does explain why the left's 'wider isshoes squad' has been conspicuous by its absence. If there was native involvement, they'd be out there claiming that this was all a clear indictment of the Islamophobic culture of the native British. Meanwhile, Hell will freeze over before anyone on the left will postulate a connection between black violence and the left's promotion of violent retards as exemplars of black authenticity.

Victimhood Poker Footy

Sweet, sweet blowback: race-hustling imbecile and accomplished thug Ian Wright has been denounced for 'neo-colonialism'.

It don't get better than that.

Liberals: We Were Just Kidding About That Diversity Thing

Creepy liberal weirdo and police impersonator Hugh Jarse Orde has rightly been widely ridiculed for his 'the Nazis are coming' warning about the dangers of elected chief police officers - not least because of his track record on the one occasion the police really did fall under the influence of murderous bigots.

Still, you have to say this for Chief Weasel: in one line he's summed up perfectly what liberals really think about the public.

If you have a system whereby anyone can stand to be elected as the local police commissioner, you could have any Tom, Dick or Harriet standing.

Murders of No Airtime

Like I keep saying, no topic brings out the BBC's bias like BBC bias. Look at the mutants infesting the comments thread here.

As far as I can make out, the argument is that the BBC doesn't 'censor' inconvenient news, it simply 'filters' it. See? Completely different. Oh, and if you disagree you're a Nazi.

Hey, let's take that last point: yes, the BNP do enjoy reporting stuff the BBC's tried to suppress, but in so far as their reports are factually correct, it's not the BNP that should be embarrassed by that. Suggested new slogan: BBC News - now nearly as accurate as some guy with a swastika tattoo!

But that's not even it. The Beeboids admit they filter the news, but not in a biased way. A-huh! As the much defamed Joe McCarthy would say, if they just had appalling news judgement, wouldn't they sometimes go too heavy on the stories Laban points out? Not in this lifetime. So just what criteria do they use then?

It is entirely legitimate to question how a news organisation determines news value, and that goes triple for a publicly-funded one. To the point: can you imagine the likely reaction of Beeboid interviewers to the head of a private business who gave such slippery answers to valid questions? How about if a CEO responded to the latest diversity witch hunt by claiming his company didn't 'discriminate', it merely 'filtered'. Or perhaps he should claim their recruitment criteria depended on lots of factors and so, gosh darn it, you couldn't infer anything about prejudice just by looking at who they actually hired.

No, that would be ridiculous, but our state broadcaster claims the right to rummage through private industries garbage, even as it demands we all acknowledge its own right to carefully ration what the public is allowed to know. They're highly-trained gatekeepers, see?

Not any more, pal!

Quote D'Jour: Respectable Edition

As ever, Kathy Shaidle hits the nail on the head:

As long as there is such a thing as "class" (in the "hard hat" sense, not the Buckley one...) these disputes will continue within conservatism. The advantage we of the lower classes have is that we are not afraid to call it what it is, whereas Ruffini, Frum & Co. are forced to invent elaborate new theories to "explain" why their personal tastes represent "true" conservatism.

Moderates!

Rod Liddle with the latest from the people the Nu Tories are desperate to reach out to:

Late last week the gay rights organisation Stonewall released the shortlist for its prestigious and sought-after bigot of the year award...

Hot favourite for the title, for example, is the Bishop of Winchester. He is nominated for having spoken in a House of Lords debate about freedom of speech, during which he said that people “should be allowed to question the current political orthodoxy” that sexual orientation is a fixed characteristic, like race.

He didn’t actually say he would agree with people if they said that, just that they ought to be allowed to say it without being arrested. Come to think of it, that really is what we fought a war for — and the polar opposite of bigotry

Free clue for the pretendey-cons: not being on good terms with lunatics is a good thing.

Inflammatory

What I want to know is why, if it's the right that's stoopid, it's the left that keeps falling for obvious hoaxes.

Actually, one reason might be that truth has never been a big seller with the left. As Ross points out, when it comes to racial incidents, reality is purely incidental. Still, that does raise one important point.

The left has spent years whining about supposedly inflammatory language - even to the point of absurdity - but now we have a case of an extremist who really is trying to stir up trouble with a fraudulent atrocity story and it turns out the bad guys are the ones who are pointing that out. Apparently, inflammatory language is OK providing you don't use it to describe stuff that actually happened.

Today's 'Liberal Projection' Story

Hey, wasn't the whole excuse for equality industry pretty much that the evil white male establsihment were shutting everyone else out and just awarding contracts to each other? You know, kind of like this.

Hmmmmm.... let's check the scorecard here: in Trevland, the police are really huge racists, even though he can't provide any actual evidence (it's institutional, doncha'know), but race hustlers hiring each other on bloated contracts? Diverse, pal!

Question D'Jour

In so far as even America's most MSM of MSM are now having to admit that Levi Johnson is a sleaze, a trip over the water to the United Kingdom Home for the Terminally Irrelevant is surely due. All of which is by way of saying, which reality show do you think he'll appear on? I'm guessing 'I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here'.

PoMo + Mainstreaming = Insanity

Uh oh...looks like another predator's loose:

A sex offender deemed to be a danger to women and children has absconded from a psychiatric unit in West Yorkshire...

The public have been warned not to approach him but to contact the police if they have any information.

Pretty dangerous guy, huh? But how did he get loose? Ah well:

Mohammed Rafiq Passwala did not return to Fieldhead Hospital, near Wakefield, after being given unsupervised leave.

Say what? A sexual predator's untrustworthy? What's the world coming to?

But let's think this over logically: he's a danger to women and children, except when he's officially allowed to walk free on the streets, unless he doesn't come back, in which case we're allowed to call him dangerous again?

See, it makes perfect sense!