'Radicalised'

Yep, it's those wacky 'Asians' again!

Radicalised to what, Mr MSM? Clearly, hard-line Buddhists, hey?

Also exposed: yes, the education system does victimise white youths while turning a blind eye to ethnic violence, just like those right-wing loons always said it did.

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.

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.

They're Killing The People The British Just Won't Kill

I can't help thinking that in so far as liberals keep telling us that 'open borders' is a myth, wouldn't screening out murderous lunatics be pretty much a basic requirement for a functioning immigration system?

Today's Non-Mainstreaming Story

Like the man says, this case is beyond satire. Still, three things bear repeating.

Firstly, we have another entry for the 'Tory cuts' file. The left keeps telling uas that any cutbacks in government spending means people dying in the streets, then we find that the taxpayer is stumping up for aphrodisiacs for perverts.

Second, there's this from probation service spokesman John McAngus:

We could not and would not restrict the use of prescription medication, be it Viagra or anything else. What we do is our utmost to help sex offenders address their offending behaviour.

Hmmmm.... so absent 'offending behavior' - I think he means child molestation - what would be the other use for Viagra?

I'm kind of getting a mixed message here. We told parents shouldn't worry about known perverts walking the streets because they're closely monitored by Brer John and pals, but now it turns out an unrepentant predator has been stockpiling powerful aphrodisiacs and that's just yawnerooney.

All of which brings me onto my final point: this is a perfect example of liberal projection. You can't open the paper without seeing some hipster douche whining about so-called 'paedo panic'. Well, here we have one of the poor, suffering nonces and it turns out he's not only been allowed to offend again and again, public servants are all but acting as his accomplices. Or, to put it another way, everything the right said was, well, right. Meanwhile, the hipsters are whining about non-existant atrocities committed against paediatricians. Just who's peddling hysteria and myths here?

Courts: Reality Now Illegal, Libs: Yeah, We Never Really Liked It Anyway

Mainstreaming? I see no mainstreaming!

Like I keep saying, if liberals ever denounce vampires as a 'right-wing myth', start laying in garlic and stakes.

Needless to say, the logic on show in this decision is up to the usual standard. There's no facility for offenders predators to seek a review of their inclusion on the register. Well, y'know, apart from the whole 'trial by a jury of their peers' thing. That's the review right there. They were found guilty and put on the register as part of their sentence.

Ah, but that's the thing: even people with Captain Hook's feel for the public mood can sense that going easy on predators just days after their crimes have been described in open court might be a little too obvious. They'd much rather kick that can down the road until the public spotlight moves on, and a whole bunch of folks making a life and a living out of supposedly rehabilitating dangerous predators can get together and decide that the dangerous predator in question is indeed rehabilitated.

This is the crucial issue. The hipsters would rather we kept the whole thing on the abstract level, as though a penchant for sexual predation was a psychological quirk like claustrophobia or OCD. When our alleged betters whine about 'emotionalism', this is what they mean: folks reminding the public that for every offence there's a victim who's life will never be the same again. How're they supposed to keep up the whole Therapy Nation vibe when people keep dumping bodies on the floor?

Still, even stating all the above is giving this argument too much credit. Let's pretend that the rehab industry isn't a bunch of sleazy snake oil salesmen and all these freaks really need is a psychological oil change and some karmic WD40 - they're still convicted sex offenders and the Register is merely calling them what they indisputably are.

Again, this is a crucial battleground in the culture war. What is PC if not an attempt to prevent people calling stuff what it is? It says a lot about how good the hipsters argument really are that they want to stop anyone actually discussing them.

(Oh... and by the way, how come libs aren't taking out onions for wife beaters unfairly refused firearms certificates? They've served their time - shouldn't they get the chance to have their cases reviewed too? Presumably by the owner of the local gun shop. Fair's fair!)

Unicorn Arrested!

Not really - it's the even-rarer creature, the sexual predator released to strike again.

At least, I assume they're rare, judging by the way the hipsters whine and complain when anybody raises this issue. See, now I'm wondering - are we still lager-swilling idiots, sucking our brains out with daytime TV, or is the fact that this kind of thing keeps happening exactly as we predicted proof that it might just be our eye-rolling pals who are the idiots?

This isn't passive smoking or mobile phone towers. A dangerous predator was set free and struck again almost immediately. Conclusion: releasing predators is a bad idea.

At this point you're probably wondering just what kind of idiot judge could set a known predator free. Well, keep wondering:

The judge, who cannot be named for legal reasons....

Hey, I think the idea of giving convicted criminals anonymity is an legal and moral outrage, but judges? These people hold public office but we're not to know how they choose to perform their duties? Say what?

Like I keep saying, judicial independence means independence from political influence, it doesn't mean independence from the wider culture. Judges are meant to reflect the common morality, not just the warped morality of our fashionably disengaged hipster class. Still, in so far as they feel the need to hide behind anonymity, at least they can't deny knowing where the public really stands on this issue.

Extremism

Hey, we keep hearing from the MSM how Britain is descending into the dark night of fascism, so how come the heavily-armed lunatics always turn out to be guys like this?

Seems Like A Nice Boy

Famous non-terrorist Moazzam Begg has found a new outlet for his artistic leanings. It's a video game in which a teddy bear has to rescue all his chums from an evil wizard who's trying to take over Toyland. No, wait... this is it.

I'm telling you, I'm just shocked - shocked - to find Moazzam Begg involved in producing Islamofascist propaganda. Doubtless, the game will doubtless flop, given that the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving, right? Of course, that does lead onto the next question: what are the odds? For a bunch of racist buffoons who just want to victimise peace-loving Muslims, it's amazing how every time the completely innocent victim picked up at random turns out to exactly fit the profile of a hardcore terrorist.

Right about now, I'm thinking it's going to be simpler to keep track of all those liberal baby seals who haven't turned out to be utter scumbags. Still, let's check the scores on the doors: the BBC won't interview whole swathes of right-wing commentators because of The Extremism but a man who produces Islamofascist murder fantasies strikes them as an entirely credible witness. Come to think of it, if it's true he has a financial stake in the game, what with all the appearance fees and free publicity he had over the years, you can make a case that our licence fees may have indirectly helped fund terrorism.

Again.

They Must Have Been Mythtaken

Another despatch from the parallel universe of the BBC, and it's a lu-lu.

Like Laban says, what definition of normality are we talking about here? Plus if the town is a quarter Muslim, it's isn't 'greatly divided'. I'm guessing most Infidels are pretty clear about where they stand on the whole slavery question - and we'll have to keep guessing since the BBC never gets round to interviewing any of them.

So, for those of you keeping score at home, right now the BBC refuses to cover the BNP because of The Extremism! but it also runs stories giving both sides of the slavery debate a fair crack of the whip. If a Tory MP suggested beating lazy wives there wouldn't be enough Novocaine suppositories in the galaxy to calm the Beeboids down.

But the real prize is who they choose to supply the closing quotes:

Musharrat Zia is the director of Practical Solutions, an organisation which works to challenge stereotypes and negative myths about different cultures.

Hellooooo! I think the whole 'case proved beyond reasonable doubt' pretty much suggest that it isn't a myth after all. Ditto, if the whole 'to enslave or not enslave' debate has split the exploding communidee, it's not a stereotype either - large numbers of them really do support slavery (y'know kind of like those right-wing loons always said they did).

This is the essence of BBC bias. It's not just about the incidental stuff like negative labelling of conservatives, unbalanced debates or the like. It's about a deep, ingrained belief that reality is whatever they say it is. This case has given the world a rare chance to look under the veil and confront the true nature of Islam, and the BBC's response is to demand 'who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes'?

Mailers of No Appearance

Got to admit, I've never liked the whole idea of the Joke Police checking e-mail accounts for all the obvious reasons, but there's more to it than that. This case shows the other problem with PC. If these folks are who I think they are - and I think you know who I mean - jokes are the least of it. They hate Jews, and everyone knows it, but leftists would die in a ditch rather than admit that.

This is why we keep seeing anglo professors on TV, telling us what members of the Religion of Peace would say, if only they were on in place of said professor. Every time normal people get the chance to hear the RoP speak for itself, they realise that the left has been lying about Islam for years.

Have Yourself A Very, Merry Winterval

Take that right-wing maniacs and your pathetic claims of a war on Christmas!

Meanwhile, also at that link, the Reverend Stephen Coulter besmirches a glorious name by banning the hymn 'O Little Town Of Bethlehem' because he considers the lyrics no longer appropriate now that Bethlehem is a war zone - y'know, as opposed to the oasis of peace and reason 1st Century Judea was.

Still, the winner of Best In Show is the Reverend Wriiiiiight, for remembering that 7th December all those years ago when America dropped the bomb on Japan.

Hey, how was Obama to know his spiritual mentor of 20 years standing was a complete loon?

Liberals Against Diversity

How come we never need Depts of Social Work that 'look like Britain'? Instead, we have departments that look like the student's union from hell. Take this for the latest example.

Yep, someone who's married to the Mad Bomber gets to define what is and is not a dysfunctional family. What could possibly go wrong?

In that role [i.e. director of children’s services], she approved the forced removal of Mark and Nicky Webster’s three children, all then under five – a decision condemned by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb as ‘an appalling miscarriage of justice’ and which has been highlighted by The Mail on Sunday.

The Websters fought a long battle to prove they had not harmed their children. Last year, experts agreed that leg injuries suffered by one youngster were due not to physical abuse but to a disorder that stopped him eating anything other than soya milk.

So someone who thinks terrorist bombers are cute, has no qualms about pursuing the innocent. Who's have thunk it?

This is what I keep saying: it's not about 'judgement calls'. It's about the fact that these people are fringe lunatics whose world view is completely out of the mainstream.

Gene Hunt Is Innocent!

Who says hipsters can't be religious? While the sane people are gearing up for Christmas, these guys are busy with the feast of St Jean the Martyr. Whether groovy liberals or prissy libertarians, the ostentatiously disengaged rollers-of-eyes have been getting ready to party like it's 1999.

Trouble is, the Great British Public is strangely unmoved by the fact ten morons, drawn from the electorate that twice voted for Livingstone as Mayor, have ruled that Kops Suck!!!!!!

Hence the hipsters' descent into madness. Still, at least some of them are keeping their heads, like libertarian Tom Paine, who writes this:

The witch-hunters cannot have it both ways. However much they may describe any attempt at rational thought as "...near-lunatic ranting..." If they are allowed to get away with their afternoon-TV, chav sentimentalism, what next?

I keed! I keed!

That was him criticising me for being too harsh on child molesters, but that was then and this is now, and 'chav sentimentalism' is in! My favourite is this bit:

This, even after the defence team walked out in protest and the bereaved family made their feelings clear.

I'm pretty sure Sarah Payne's family made their feelings clear too! Where exactly is the dividing line between 'addled, tabloid emotionalis' and boldly speaking truthiness to power? Hey, the cops thought that at any second a fanatic might detonate himself and take them - plus a carriage full of passengers - with them. What was the Parole Board's excuse?

We have actual, specific objections to the way the legal system handles paedophiles. We are opposed to the mainstreaming of paedophillia. We demand more accountability in the rehabilitation industry. We don't believe it's the government's role to help paedophiles insert themselves into unsuspecting populations. More generally, we believe the law should reflect the common morality, not the agenda of the supposedly enlightened, and definitely privileged, few.

On the other hand, what is it that these people are so ranty about? Say what you like about 9/11 Truthers, but at least there was a grandeur to their loopiness, there was Chimpy McHitlerburton blowing up the twin towers so the neo-cons could invade Iraq and steal their oil. 7/22 Truthers? Not so much. As far as I can tell, they claim there was a vast conspiracy reaching to the heart of government, all to kill a bogus electrician. Huh?

That must have been some bad rewiring job.

Ditto, for all that he wants to convince us that the operation proves that the police are knuckle-dragging, semi-literate 'chavs' with guns, wasn't the actual commander of this op, Cressida Dick, with her blue chip CV, friend of the Fortesque-Bouquets background, and Oxbridge degree just the epitome of Tommyism?

This is equally true of the organisational structure the police operated under. This too reflected the belief that the average police officer was a borderline moron. Individual units were cogs in the machine, expected to perform their specific task while exercising zero initiative. They could talk to HQ, but not to each other. Everything had to run through Czarina Cressida.

In other words, this operation proves the exact opposite of the point Tommy is trying to make. The problem wasn't chaotic, ill-disciplined thugs in uniform going on the rampage, it was a plan that demanded a tight, centralised control of operations yet collapsed almost immediately, producing the worst of all possible worlds.

The firearms team were kept in the dark until the last moment, then ordered to race forward and intercept the mad bomber just before he could complete his dastardly deed. Complaining that they hit the wrong guy is like complaining that the postman delivered stuff to the wrong place just because you put that address on the parcel (actually, that analogy only works if you also prevented the postie from talking to anyone else and the package was ticking).

We can speculate as to whether alternative structures would have served better, but they can't. The organisation structure used reflected perfectly the hipster view of the police and policing. Other structures might have worked better, but in so far as that would require Cressida, Tommy and the rest of their pals to trust the boots on the ground, don't expect that to happen any time soon.

Executive Summary: Gene Hunt was not in the building.

Of course, one big clue is this: we want to wage war on all child molesters. The hipsters? Well, like I said, how come James Ashley and Harry Stanley aren't featuring in any movies? Come to think of it, ridicule people for still be hacked off at the police's role in the death of nearly 100 people and you get to be London Mayor.

The Cult of St Jean is a rescue hypothesis. From September 11 to July 7, hipsters regarded terrorism as a punchline. As late as December 2004, Law Lord Hoffman was hailed as a hero for ridiculing the threat from terrorism and - unlike where conservatives are alleged to have said something stupid and it always turns out to be have been twenty years ago with no independent witnesses - he said this in court while striking down anti-terrorist legislation.

Right up until July 7, there was no easier way to affirm your status as one of the too-cool-for-school, fashionably cynical pseudo-intellectuals than to refer to the 'so-called war on terror'. Suddenly, with eight bomb attacks in two weeks, that joke had gone flat. It turned out that terrorism wasn't an invention of the neo-cons after all.

Hence, the sudden canonisation of St Jean the Martyr post-July 22. In less than a month we went from these people arguing that terrorism was a fraud, to terrorism being kind of bad, but not as bad as fascist state death squads roaming the land. As political sleight of hand goes, this shows a certain chutzpah, but the Great British Public isn't buying it. Hmmmm... seems like those 'chavs' aren't so stoopid, after all.

Karen Matthews: Conservative Heroine

Well, why not? At least she's forced the MSM to break their Omerta on the underclass.

Hell, these people are second only to members of the religion of peace in the MSM's reluctance to actually let them speak for themselves. Nope, whenever you see someone getting interviewed about this, it's always some professional activist who explains what the underclass would say, if ever they were allowed on air.

Ditto, with swords, oak leaves and gold cluster, the news about just how much Karen Matthews was soaking the welfare for. If it hadn't been for this case liberals would still be insisting that these people were living in a Dickensian nightmare.

Fabulous! Quotes Of The Day

KS nails it!

What today's obnoxious gay brownshirts activists who dare to think of themselves as the next Rosa Parks don't get, is that Rosa Parks just wanted to sit at the front of the bus.

She didn't try to take the wheel and drive the thing in the opposite direction.

Kind of like this:

There are many different versions of the Bible; I don't see why we can't have one

No Mainstreaming Going On Here!

Actually, it's an interesting moral question: who's worse, the scumbags who did this, or the sleazy hipsters who'll doubtless hail it as 'bold' and 'transgressive'

We Have Aways Been At War With Eastasia

Hey, you can't accuse the BBC of just plain refusing to report suspicions about the crime figures. Nope, BBC's Home Affairs Editor Mark Easton actively mislead the public on this issue.

That might sound harsh, but consider that when that article was written, informed citizens could hardly not have been aware that something was going on, yet Mark Easton, BBC Home Affairs Editor and certified better-than-you, refused to engage with the substance of any of these charges. It's all bluster and airy dismissal, as if the mere fact the BBC disagrees with these charges is proof enough that they're bogus. Indeed, if you wanted a textbook example of how the BBC's bloated status encourages it to try and dictate the news agenda, this would be it.

Doubtless, if it hadn't all gone horribly wrong, the BBC would still be claiming that the crime figures were fine even today. Meanwhile, the people who did warn of these problems, who were sneered at by the likes of Easton - right up until they were proven right - will still be idiots and hacks the next time they blow the whistle.

Best Talibin Story Evah?

It's for the polar bears!

Last week it was the turn of Frank Hughes, who runs a small scaffolding hire company. The inspector asked him how he disposes of his waste.

Frank said he doesn't. He explained that scaffolding is a relatively simple business which doesn't generate waste.

But you must eat lunch, the inspector retaliated. I bring sandwiches, Frank told him. And before you ask, I take the wrapping home with me.

In which case, you're breaking the law, the jobsworth informed him. Sandwich wrappings are classified as industrial waste within the meaning of the Act. You need a licence to dispose of them.

And since you don't have one, you are committing a criminal offence. Frank would be hearing from the litigation department in connection with this heinous crime and could expect a minimum fine of £300.

Like I keep saying, if liberals ever deny the existence of vampires, start sharpening the fence posts. Liberals have spent years denying that this sort of thing happens, but here it is. Now suddenly it turns out they were lying just like us loonies always said they were.

Ditto, I'm sure the local authority will generously drop the case (now they've been exposed) but I'm equally sure that no one will lose their job over this. Let's stop the tape here: these people tried to extract money out of someone on bogus grounds. Isn't that kind of illegal? Equally, even if it doesn't rise to the level of a felony, shouldn't people who claim they can our spend our money better than us be setting the bar just a little higher than 'not technically breaking the law'?

BBC: Lying For The Common Good

And people said my plan to put scopolamine in the BBC's water supply was stupid! Behold the latest fruits of my brilliant plan!

Yes, there's a lot to be said about the specifics of this particular case, but we shouldn't let that obscure the more general point. Right up until Thompson's attack of clarity, Beeboids were insisting that detecting any bias in the BBC's coverage was proof positive that you were some kind of crazed, Nazi, moron bigot. Now, suddenly it turns out that there is bias there, but good, happy, justifiable bias - and, furthermore, we have always been at war with Eastasia.

Consider the brass neck of the BBC's position: finally admitting the critics were 100% right, our publicly-funded state broadcaster states that not only has it spent years spinning for a particular ideology as a matter of policy, it intends to keep on doing so, all the while still slimeing critics of the BBC - especially the ones who claim it's abusing its dominant position to behave unethically.