Genius Ain't What It Used To Be

Say what you like about Tommy Boy, but he does a great - if inadvertent - job of illustrating the latent fascism that underpins much modern libertarianism. Here he is trying to explain away the Bulger/Venables case without referencing the elephant in the room.

The thing with it all is this: the knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal, tabloid-addled, drunken, dirty, illiterate, sewer-dwelling, Ford driving, football watching, coupon clipping Untermensch...... were right. They - we - always believed two things: Venables & Thompson are violent felons and should be treated as such, and the legal system could not be trusted to do so.

As luck would have it, Venables was declared rehabilitated and released from yoof custody (aka Playstation Prison) approximately one second before he was due to be moved to an adult prison, then - as we now know - he embarked on an odyssey of drug-fuelled criminality, much of it in the city he was specifically barred from visiting.

Meanwhile, the Certified Super Smart Set are busy explaining that Goodison Park is 'on Liverpool' but not 'in Liverpool'. Besides, who'd have guessed that a convicted killer would react badly to a snoot full of Bolivian marching powder?

The bottom line is that John Venables was 'too big to fail'. By hook or by crook, Venables was always going to be classed as rehabilitated, and he was going to stay rehabilitated, no matter how many felonies he committed.

From the start, this was supposed to be the flagship case for the supposedly enlightened, and definitely privileged, to throw in the face of the unsophisticated masses with their stupid ideas about 'public protection', 'deterrence, 'vindication' and other childish nonsense. They wanted the success of this case to be the metric by which we judged their claims to sophistication versus the ignorant moralising of the peasantry.

Hell, if they'd managed to keep the fraud going just that bit longer, they'd doubtless be trying to cram a BBC docu-drama about it all down our throats. But now it's all gone horribly wrong, and the truth about the rehab industry has leaked out (it's exactly the sleazy farce the right always said it was), they think we shouldn't talk about it, otherwise lynch mobs will rampage through the streets and eat your neighbours!

It's genius, Jim, but not as we know it.

OK, Libs, You Win!

....the Stephen Lawrence train wreck proves the police are institutionally racist. So what does this prove?

The Essence of Dhimmitude

There's a lot of overlap between the phenomena of creeping sharia and dhimmitude, but with one huge difference. Sharia is at least an objective body of law, whereas the defining feature of dhimmitude is the absurd lengths to which Infidels will go to humiliate themselves even (or especially) in the absence of any rational reasons to do so. Which brings me neatly onto the Hairdressing Jihad.

It goes without saying that, in so far as 'indirect' discrimination is defined so loosely, this is almost a textbook case of an unconstitutional law, but it's even worse than that. Consider that the left's new baby seal wasn't turned down for a job at interview (no matter how often the MSM will claim otherwise). Nope, she'd already been turned down, had asked to stop by for an informal chat, then turned round and sued her hostess (say, anyone know why conservatives accuse lawyers of poisoning our society) ?

Never mind the question of whether this case should even be actionable in the first place, the alleged victim suffered absolutely no loss whatsoever, but the tribunal decided to award her compensation anyway. Huh ?

Ditto, even if you accept the absurdity that not allowing a hairdresser to wear a bed sheet on her head constitutes 'indirect discrimination' - and try to imagine the left's reaction if terrorism was defined so loosely - that would only work if wandering round under a sheet really was an Islamic requirement. Don't be shocked, but it ain't.

Head covering is an avowedly political statement, not a religious one, and pretty extreme politics at that. This isn't banning crucifixes, it's banning Klan regalia.

So, for those of you keeping track at home, we have a small businesswoman being subjected to legal harassment by an Islamofascists lunatic, who has suffered no hardship whatsoever but still gets awarded compensation anyway for the trauma of potentially being turned down for a job because of her demand to wear fascist regalia on the job. See ? That is dhimmitude!

We're All Evil

Yep, this was pretty much my response to this story too.

Actually, it did give me pause for thought - isn't it normally the degenerates on the left that go in for blood dancing ? Shouldn't some things be above politics ?

Well, yes, they should, but it's people like Regan who decided personal tragedy is fair game for politics in the first place. To paraphrase Ann Coulter, if the case for gun control is so strong, how come it's never made by someone we can answer back to ?

Regan ruthlessly exploited her victim status to advance some truly vile positions, for example casting country doctors who like to blow off steam by shooting a few clays as slathering, homicidal maniacs. That would have been objectionable enough at the best of times, but consider just who her son actually was....

Or rather don't - the BBC omits his background from its report. You have to know to click on the supporting links to find out the real story:

When Danny Regan was shot dead a few days before Christmas in 2002, he was not mourned by many beyond his close family and friends.

After all he was a drug dealer who carried a gun and wore a bullet-proof vest because of the treacherous circles he moved in.

He wasn't a victim of gun crime, he was gun crime!

Hey, if having guns on the street mean people like this get shot, let's give glocks away free in cornflake packets. Cruel ? No - just making a point. It was already illegal for the 'victim' to have a firearm - and no one is seriously suggesting that it should ever be legal for a piece of slime like him to own a gun - but that didn't stop a known drug dealer from obtaining an illegal firearm. The only thing the death of Danny Regan says about gun control is that it doesn't work.

Equally, for all that Regan and her fellow hags were trying to convince us that suburban school kids on the way to the library were at risk of being gunned down by deranged accountants, just how many of the alleged victims of gun crime turn out to be 'playas' themselves ? Meanwhile, you could harass every GP in the country and it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to the scumbag classes.

Like JuliaM points out, looking at the Regan family history, guns are not their biggest problem. You couldn't have a better metaphor for everything that wrong with modern Britain than the matriarch of a clan of dysfunctional lunatics being hailed as a courageous truth teller for defaming tens of thousands of law-abiding professionals who just like to shoot at the weekend.

Victimhood Comes To Those Who Wait

If this trend continues, there's only going to be one guy in Britain who it won't be a hate crime to punch - and it could be me.

It's not even as if this'll change anything:

Sentencing guidelines dictate that a victim's vulnerability should be taken into account when a judge is deciding on a sentence. The new guidelines set out how the CPS will bring cases against suspects, and how victims will be supported.

Well, quite. It's all blathersgate.

Still, there is some evidence of a common thread connecting many cases of abuse of the elderly, and I for one am sure the left will be doing all they can to clamp down on these cases.

Of course, if libs really are worried about people targeting the elderly, they might want to look closer to home.

It's The Special Olympics Of Victimhood

Hmmmmm......

What a dilemma for libs. On the one hand, the chance to bag one of the last serious Churches, on the other, the opportunity to slime England. Looking at the background doesn't make it any easier either. There's murderous theocrats waging war to enslave free nations - see, the libs were right about those 'Catholics' after all - but there's also England standing alone as an outpost of freedom in a Europe enslaved by unelected degenerates. Catholicism or Euroscepticism ? Which do libs hate more ?

Actually, I'm guessing the whole 'fighting against murderous religious nutcases' thing will finally push libs into the Vatican's corner. Besides, the Royal Navy used fire ships - just think of all that CO2.

It's The Iran-Iraq Of The Culture War

Does the ladder of victimhood really exist ? Consider that the BBC's employment of ex-Sun editor Kelvin Mackenzie as a pundit is under fire, not because he's a known fraud who was the main player in smearing nearly a hundred dead civilians, many of them children. Nope, libs are down with that, it's just claiming the People's Republic of Caledonia isn't much of a place for business they can't stand.

Still, I can't help thinking that they may just have found the only bad reason to criticise Mackenzie. Consider the basic chutzpah of it all. These people keep quoting William Wallace's line about England being a land foreign to them, but now a foreigner in the aforementioned foreign land has spoken out against them, they claim the right to impose their views of permitted speech on this foreign land. Huh ?

At risk of stating the obvious, Mackenzie is a pundit known for extreme rhetoric, while the SNP is an successful Scottish political party that doesn't so much have a platform as a series of unhinged conspiracy theories - I'm thinking Scottish claims to victimhood will have to wait until being a semi-literate anti-English bigot is no longer considered a plus point with the Scottish electorate.

Ironically enough, nothing makes Mackenzie's point like the reaction to his appearance. Scots trundle along to the polling station to vote for a bunch of Neanderthal racists, but cast themselves as victims when someone points out the blindingly obvious point that socialism doesn't exactly encourage the entrepreneurial spirit. See, that's the other knock on socialism: it's turned a bunch of hard-drinking sociopaths into whiny girly men.

Don't Mention It

While Trevor Philips was taking on all those fascists who want to exclude stuff from the history books just because it never actually happened, his minons were providing the yang to that yin, by trying to ban simple expressions of fact.

Even if you accept the insane PC tenet that there are words which are so evily evil that merely to utter them is worthy of public execution, this guy didn't use any of them. He simply called things what the dictionary does. But no - turning public debate into a game of verbal minesweeper was only ever a fringe benefit of PC. It was always aimed at fencing off whole areas of public debate.

Hey, not to ram the point home, but here's what the Thought Police's spokesmoron actually said:

The organisation's director Chris Myant said they were taking action under section 31 of the Race Relations Act which "made it unlawful to bring pressure on someone to act in a discriminatory way".

Well, firstly, libs: if you don't want us to call you a bunch of snivelling wimps, you might want to think again about claiming a petition constitutes 'pressure'. But. Still. Let's think about what we're discussing here: huge amounts of public money being used to provide freebies for the people who shall not be named. So now opposing a massive boondogle for a Designated Victim group = discrimination. Presumably, if Call Me Dave announced a proposal to give lesbians free trips to Santa Barbara - and who's to say he wouldn't ? - it'd be equally discriminatory to oppose that, right ?

The CRE's position isn't just anti-free speech, it's anti-democratic. If people aren't allowed to discuss what the government does, what's left ? In fact, the CRE's position is so extreme, I understand that Liberty offered to represent the guy concerned, until they found out he hadn't tried to murder anyone.

Still, we do get the perfect example of liberal fascism:

Chris Myant said the act existed to "enable solutions to be found through debate" in which public expressions of prejudice play no part.

Yes, it's public debate, but you'll be arrested if you disagree with them. See ? Nothing totalitarian about that.

(and a tip of the hat to JuliaM)

Steyn Quote D'Jour

The great man on Afro-Victimhood:

As a conference on 'Racism, Racial Intolerance, Xenophobia and/or Related Intolerance', it was perhaps misnamed, though it exhibited large quantities of all four. But as a UN Conference Against the West, Zionism and Capitalism - or, in the preferred formulation, 'techno-racism' - it was a roaring success, and, for those who think the world could use fewer Canadas and more Zimbabwes, an important milestone in human progress.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

Someone should tell these people, their fifteen minutes is ovah!

Non-Outrage D'Jour

Remember that church in America that refused to hold a funeral service for an ex-serviceman just because he was gay ?

Well, you'll never guess but.....

Even More Liberal Frauds

Returning to a theme from last week, the folks over at Ace of Spades reminisce over a few more famous Liberal frauds in this post and comments.

You Don't Have To Be Mad To Be A Liberal Pin-Up, But It Helps

Spookily enough, the week after the David Shayler meltdown, the unspeakably wonderful Ann Coulter has given us a rundown of some of America's favourite Liberal pin-ups. Apparently, the Left's 'hump 'em and dump' attitude to the victim d'jour isn't just a British thing.

Worst Attempt At Victimhood Evah!

Will no one speak up for millionaire authoresses ?

There's No Business Like Leftbusiness!

If you've read the comments to this post, you'll already have heard from JulieM about the latest absurd twist in the case of Truther pin-up David Shayler. Yep, he finally gone all the way round the bend.

Speaking personally, I feel robbed. All the other public statements fat boy has made have been gobbled up by the MSM and discussed endlessly. How come there's no opening segment on Jeremy Vine this time ? Even if his claim is not technically true, surely it speaks to a wider truth ? Shouldn't we ask what it says about the 'overall climate' ?

I tell you, these people are ruthless. Guy picks one bad script and suddenly he can't get his calls returned by anyone on the Left.

Actually, that's kind of the point. Joking apart, the Left has spent years positioning Shayler as a courageous whistleblower, but now we find out his whistle's well and truly blown. It's Cindy Sheehan again: an obviously mentally-unbalanced individual ruthlessly exploited by the Left, then discarded when no longer useful.


Extra Factoid:

Reading Shayler's page at W********, we see this:

He later attended the University of Dundee starting in 1984 where he was editor of the student newspaper Annasach and was responsible for publishing extracts of the book Spycatcher by another former MI5 officer Peter Wright (banned in the UK at the time).

So, even before he joined MI-5, Shayler was playing to Leftard gallery by sticking two fingers up to national security. Nice bit of recruiting!

Absolute Moral Authority Update

In so far as we're not allowed to question even their loopiest comments, lest we be accused of questioning the authenticity of their suffering, freaks like Doreen Lawrence perform a useful social function in letting us know what Libs would say, if they thought they could get away with it. Take the question of supposed 'anti-racism' - Liberals would rather get a job in the private sector than admit there was anything Orwellian about it, but then we get comments like this from Doreen Lawrence:

"[Boris Johnson] felt that people should be entitled to say what they want. It sounds to me that what he believes is that because something is said and done in private it is acceptable, but clearly it can never be acceptable to hold those views."

No room for misquote there then. Merely having the wrong views should be a crime (unfortunately, we never hear what kind of sentence she thinks would be appropriate).

Still, in so far as having the wrong views should now be an offence, I'm wondering what Mrs Moral Authority thinks should be done about those who try and stir up racial hatred with insane conspiracy theories ?