If It Wasn't For Projection, Liberals Wouldn't Know What To Say About Conservative

Faux Ordinary Joe and actual Marxist John Crudas manages to slime the EDL and Tea Partiers both at once because of The Extremism.

Except here's the thing: it's never folks on the right who get caught planning stuff like this.

Then again, the left doesn't just coddle Islamic lunatics. They have their own brand nutters too.

That's how we ended up with people who are literally Tolerance Nazis: diversity freaks fantasising about eliminating whole swathes of the population, but presumably not in an extreme way.

About That Extremist Rhetoric...

One more thing about the Bulger case: is it just me, or is there a certain 'motes and beams' quality to the left's sermonising about this case? You'd have to search for hours to find anything as unhinged as the average MSM liberal ranting about the coming vigilante holocaust. Hell, a whole week of Daily Mail editorials couldn't come up with something as utterly foul as this from Guardian moron Steve Bell.

Yes, indeed: he really is suggesting that people who report stuff what the justice system does are exactly the same as murderous savages. Which is not at all a deranged position to take.

Never Forget

Glad to see 'Biased BBC' reminding everyone of the BBC's role in acting as a publicly-funded PR agency for a bent copper. Still, I do like to ram the point home, so let me say it explicitly. The BBC - ever anxious about the rise of 'extremism' - granted a violent criminal the chance to push inflammatory, racist rhetoric without even the inconvenience of dealing with an interviewer.

But what was worse was that this lunatic's rantings were presented as objective commentary on the state of modern Britain, and the police in particular. Anyone right of Tony Blair is introduced as a 'right-winger', but a sleazy, race-hustling crook needs no warning label.

And Finally...

If the right is so extreme, why do liberals have to lie about just who's really committing crimes?

And Another Thing...

Again, if it's the right that holds the patent on 'inflammatory rhetoric' and the like, how come it's always right-wing public figures that are the victims of violence?

Party Protocol For Extreme Extremists

Hey, anyone know if sending out party invitations to extremists with links to violent lunatics is a bad thing....

...or a good thing?

See, this why all liberal blather about 'right-wing extremism' boils down to dark hints about 'code words', 'dog whistling' and 'institutional racism'. There's simply no one on the mainstream right doing anything equivalent to inviting an unrepentant terrorist to relive his glory years at the site of one of his greatest hits. Ditto, note that for all the alleged extremism of the conservative base/the Daily Mail/the Blogopshere, it always turns to be the Guardian/BBC Axis of Snivel that pals around with savages (say, I wonder if Martin will turn out to be 'warm, funny and blunt' too)?

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?

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.

Extreme Extremists Being Extreme

Hey, how come whenever the political class has a girly tantrum about extremism, it's never about the guys who take a nuanced position on mass murder?

Of course, there is something else. As Stan points out, it's not just that the political establishment is losing the battle of ideas, it's that they're not even fighting there. Look at The Dave: he's reaching out to C2 married couples in the East Midlands, gays who work in the service industries and Blacks who wear hats and don't watch 'The X-Factor', but in amongst all these targeted messages and niche marketing, where's the substance?

Outing: Now Back In

Say what you like about the BNP, but they perform a useful social role in letting us know what Liberals say when there’s no social pressure to dial down the crazy. Take, for example, Liberal outrage at MI-5 monitoring of Islamic groups: they’re shocked – shocked! – at the idea of Five infiltrating these groups, but Liberal journalists infiltrating the BNP ? Why sir, that’s a whole different kettle of fish.

Then there’s the Left’s ever-changing burden of proof when detecting extremism:

In my seven months as a party member I heard very few racist epithets, and no anti-semitic comments. Such language appears almost to be frowned upon in Griffin's post-makeover BNP. Perhaps it is a tribute to the Race Relations Act 1976 and the Public Order Act 1986, and to the gently shifting mores of British life, that racists rarely feel able to express themselves, even among like-minded people. But some of the fear and the hatred remains: it just emerges in code.

Code words, ah yes. As with much else Liberals have written about the BNP, you find yourself asking - who couldn’t that charge be levelled against ? They’re writing about school vouchers, but really they mean ‘kill the Welsh’. I guess our Secret Squirrel is just hacked off because he’s had to admit that BNP members are less anti-Semitic than the average edition of the Guardian.

Even stranger, our Mata Hari constantly mocks the BNP for their obsession with security. Hey, it’s not like they have to put up with, say, sleazy journalists trying to infiltrate the Party to cause trouble for their members, is it ?

Actually, this is the part that really sticks in the throat. The article publishes the names of several party members. Back in the day, the Guardian waxed lyrical about how digusterated they were by the News of the World publishing the names of convicted paedophiles. So, let’s check the scores on the doors here: outing perverts who prey on kids: bad, outing people who support a party the Left disapproves of: good. It’s not even as if the subtext is well hidden so, after a seven months investigation, the only evidence of people subtly endorsing violence or harassment comes from the Guardian itself. Classy!

The strange thing is that in outing several respectable folks who support the BNP, the Guardian contradicts its own line about super-sinister BNPers secretly plotting to blow up the local Tandori. Take, for example, this one:

Among my members, I discover, is Simone Clarke, principal dancer with the English National Ballet. During a subsequent conversation, Ms Clarke says that she believes immigration "has really got out of hand", despite her partner, both on and off-stage, being a Cuban dancer of Chinese extraction. She adds: "If everyone who thinks like I do joined, it would really make a difference."

This is only a mystery if you believe, as Liberals do, that any opposition to open borders must be racially-based. Maybe she just doesn’t see why we should be paying welfare to people who want to blow up the No 27 bus ?

This is the problem when you use the same language to describe people who want to deport mad mullahs as you do to talk about people who want to murder anyone darker than Casper the Ghost. Tell people that wanting Britain to have an immigration policy makes them knuckle-dragging thugs and they’ll naturally conclude that knuckle-dragging thugs are just people who have opinions Liberals don’t like.

Put it this way, there’s more evidence of moderates successfully overcoming violent radical factions in the BNP than there is in the Iranian government, so how come the Guardian isn’t calling for constructive engagement with Nick Griffin ? The same folks obsessing about BNP code words are the ones who think that Iranian President Achmakindofmad is just using colourful metaphor when he refers to Israel being wiped from the map.

See, that’s the irony right there. It’s articles like this that drive people to the BNP. The determination to detect evil subtexts in everything BNP members say contrasts sharply with the Guardian’s relaxed attitude to even the most extreme rhetoric from Abu Hamza, Lee Jasper or the rest of the Left’s insane clown posse. Hell, look at July 7: Islamopaths blow up trains and a bus, and Liberals think that means police officers should be used to protect mosques from a non-existent backlash. However toxic the BNP’s rhetoric about ethnic minorities, it can’t hardly match the intense loathing Liberals have for native Britons.