Davis Meltdown Continues

Having watched David Davis' performance since Thursday, I'm beginning to think we're witnessing the first ever case of Shellshock By Proxy. Take today's interview with Jeremy Vine. There were the obvious insanities, of course. Davis accepts the figure of 3000 British passport holders trained in Al-Quaida camps, but thinks there are only a few really dangerous people. Say what ? You mean 2950 of them were only there to take advantage of the spa facillities ? Even Jeremy Vine caught that one, and when he pressed Davis the thrashing about was truly Majoresque. Then there's the really weird constant refrences to the possibility of unduly harsh legisaltion acting as a 'recruiting seargent' for Al-Quaida. The Great One has already disposed of this insanity in another context:

Let's also pause to ponder the image of the middle-of-the-road, "centrist" Jihadist who could be "recruited" to Jihad by reports about abuse at Guantanamo. You know — the kind of guy who just watches al-Jazeera for the sports and hits the "mute" button whenever they start in about the Jews again, already.

Liberals want us to believe such a person exists and that he is perusing newspaper articles about Guantanamo trying to decide whether to finish his coffee and head off to work or to place a backpack filled with dynamite near a preschool.

Note to liberals: That doesn't happen.

Not only did Davis show a bizzare inability to understand what really motivates the enemy, he showed specific ignorance of the current state of the war, flatly denying that known terorists were being cut loose by the courts. By my reckoning, this makes Davis the only person in the country not to know about the malign influence of the Law Lords on the war effort. Indeed, it was almost to Davis' advantage that he spent so much of the interview thrashing about since whenever he was able to make a clear point, it was invariably wrong.

Yes, standard disclaimer applies. Davis does have to be afraid of scaring the horses, ditto this is hardly the time for full-on politics, but there are serious questions that have to be asked. Consider the question mark over the role of our 'Turn 'em Loose Bruce' judges. A large part of the reason why judges can cause so much damage is the way Nu Lab has outsourced responsibility for national defence to the twelve dwarves in the House of Lords. Conservatism means a strong defence of ancestoral rights, but the corollary to that is that, precisely because we believe that rights are basic, fundemental and inalienable, we oppose the type of mass production of rights that has been the halllmark of the Blair years.

To put it another way, there is no inconsistancy in opposing attempts to deprive the public of genuine rights, while questioning lunacies such as the Human Rights Act. But that isn't what Davis is saying. In fact, it's hard to tell precisely what his point is. This should be the real worry for the Conservative Party. Here's their next leader being asked about the most urgent topic of the age, and he sounds like he's still trying to work out which is Iraq and which Iran. Can we really trust this guy in office ?