Mixed Messages?

...Or just proof the rules are different for the High Priests of the Media.

The Mail supports restrictions on free speech when it comes to you-know-what, but issues pious proclamations about the vital importance of the press being free to slime a dead guy.

Elves!

Because it's still funny.

Liberals: Still Scum

I'm thinking this case is the perfect microcosm of the difference between left and right.

Yes, indeed, HSBC were their usual sleazy selves, and it's disgraceful that their senior management have managed to avoid disbarment for conduct that would have got a small town IFA strung up, but at least they've faced some consequences.

Meanwhile, the supposed charidees wot exist to help the helpless? Ah yes: they traded on their (undeservedly) good reputations to lead the marks into the lion's den, and they've got away with the cash, their reputations intact and in all probability a press release ready to go asking for the government to give them a grant to help protect their clients from predatory capitalist pig dogs.

Victim of No Appearance

Further proof for my theory that, just like the Ultimate Question & Answer in the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, you can either know the felon's background or the victim's, but never the two at once.

Yep, two Afghanis - probably Mormons - stalk the streets and rape a 'woman'.

Really? Any particular type of woman? Anything in particular driving this choice of victim? Considering she was pulled off the street, there can only be a limited number of things that could have driven them to target this particular victim. It's not like they were driven by an irrational hatred of left-handed dental technicians.

Hey, in so far as this was a premeditated rape of an Infidel woman by Islamosavages, exactly as demanded by the Koran, this is a textbook case of a hate crime. This is what 'hate crime' means: the use of violence to intimidate members of the target demographic.

Needless to say, m'learned friends huffed and they puffed, but then they carefully steered round the elephant in the room on their way to Jokesentanceville:

Jailat Khan, of Beeston, Leeds, was ordered to be detained for five years and Shahzada Khan, of Leeds, was ordered to be detained for four years after both admitted kidnap and rape.

Sentencing the pair on Tuesday, Judge Christopher Batty said they had targeted a vulnerable woman alone in the city centre and the effect on her was 'immeasurable'.

Phew! Just think if it hadn't affected her so badly, he might have let them off with a light sentence. As it is, it now appears you can take part in a brutal rape and get exactly the same sentence Jeffrey Archer got for perjury.

Meanwhile, the femiloons have all gone quiet. Well, duh! They can sneer all they want at the Fifties, but compared to their craven toeing of the leftist line, the Stepford Wives look like Madonna.

Quote of the Day

Hey, some of us have been saying this for years:

Dave Cameron always knew he was born to rule. What he never stopped to analyse, unfortunately, is the more important question of why – ie to what useful purpose – he might have been born to rule.

Actually, I think the truth is even worse. It's increasingly obvious that The Dave doesn't even think the 'why' comes in to it. He simply rules by divine right. Hence the tantrums and the thuggery when any of the lower orders question God's representative on Earth. Hence the contempt for public opinion except in the most cynical posing for contrived photo-ops way. Hence the refusal to engage with even the most basic demands of the job - like turning up (five holidays already this year).

I give it two years before he starts selling indulgences.