Guardian Hits Rock Bottom, Digs

Anyone still sceptical about whether the Left will go to any lengths in their quest to destroy anyone who stands in their way will have been swiftly disillusioned by the identity of the Guardian's latest addition to its posse of Hutton haters.

...he'd better talk, or he'd 'be able to talk to me the way he wanted, hung upside down in a cattle shed. He said it didn't matter about me screaming because no-one would be able to hear'.

Given that this gets the Guardian seal of approval, can we at least be spared the faux outrage about Gitmo ?

Daybreak

Seems like at least a few prominant American blacks are starting to question exactly what the Left has done for/to them:

Too often black history is hijacked by racial hucksters who use it not as a platform for social activism, but as a stage to shout about victimization and retribution," said Armstrong Williams (search), host of a nationally syndicated radio talk show.

Weasel Crackup

Oh dear! The Hun is starting to think he backed the wrong horse:

Germany is seeking to distance itself from France's tight embrace and realign itself more closely to Britain and America, senior German officials signalled yesterday.

Here's a question for the modern philosophers: how many weasels would have to jump ship before the BBC started talking about French unilateralism ?

Nope, no matter what the Beeb will babble about our simplistic foreign policy. But wait ? What's this ?

But Berlin apparently wants to redesign the once all-powerful "Franco-German motor" to include Britain and perhaps Poland.

Funnilly enough, the two European countries which have the biggest commitments in Iraq. Seems like the Hun got the message even if our Metropolitan sophisticates are still suffering from Post-Bong Fatigue.

Teenage Party

Stick a fork in the Lib Dems, they're done. I mean, WTF ? They've whined like stuck pigs about intel lapses then they refuse to take part in an inquiry into...intel lapses. That's weird enough, but their excuse is even stranger: they want an inquiry that deals with politics and will hold ministers to account. Hey, I know they're a small party but you think one of them would point out that we already have a Parliament that does just that. But no, this is the Party which doesn't understand the concept of double jeopardy so the Constitution doesn't stand a chance. But that's the Lib Dems all over. They don't have policies, they have postures.

Actually, it's just the same ol' posture again and again, the wacky, iconoclastic group of rebels. So they whine about an inquiry then, when they get it, they whine some more and storm off. Of course. Lib Dems aren't into politics to advance actual policies, they're there to drop their trousers and shout rude words.

Your Country Needs You!

I've often been tempted to veer into satire, but I keep running into happenings that remind me that, no matter how much imagination I put into parodying the L3, the reality is far, far wackier. Take the Guardian's poll for the best political weblog. Really, you should visit it - eleven of the twelve choices are truly 'satire-proof'. Which makes it all the more surprising that the other nominee is Conservative Commentary.

Maybe they had a last minute flash of sanity, and realised that a poll without a single blogger to the right of Gordon Brooon would open them up public ridicule - more so than usual. Anyway, Peter is there and the Liberals may live to regret it. But only if we actually get out the vote (metaphorically speaking - it's actually done via e-mail). So go on - remember, Peter might win and then what could happen ? Well, anyone seen the start of 'Scanners' ? Imagine Leftoid head popping all over Islington. Not only fun but also educational -at last we'd get to see what the L3 use for brains.

Minority Reports

Pesky victims. You do everything for the victims of our racist, phallocentric society, yet still some of them refuse to drink the Kool Aid and assume full-blown victimhood.

Take this story: a young girl in the People's Republic of Kalifornia who came out against racial discrimination affirmative action. The response ? Ridicule from the teacher plus threats of violence from thuggish fellow students.

Jackie D (who's a friend of the family) has some words to say, while Samizdata also covers it.

In fact, I don't have a lot to add to these two blogging heavyweights except to say two things:

1/ There's a shedload of humbug in how the race-hustelers want us to react to claims of racism. On the one hand any white bloke merely accused of racism is supposed to be burnt at the stake, yet when a member of a minority is found to have made a bogus claim that's 'just politics'. The Hell with that: if racism is a serious charge then using it as a stick to beat opponents with is also serious. And vice versa. You can't have a situation when someone can almost destroy someone's career with a fatuous charge yet walk away without so much a slap on the wrist.

2/ There are no circumstances in which kids in school should face the threat of violence. None. If threats are being made then those who made them should be ejected pronto.

Of course, that's true generally, but here there's something far worse going on. The hippy-dippys running big education don't really think that when a black threatens a white, on the ground of alleged racism, that it's really violence. The thug in question in merely resisting the 'violence inherent in the system' or waging war on an unjust society, sort of like Ghandi and Martin Luther King did - or might have done, if they been so oppressed that they'd actually had to listen to someone say something they disagreed with.

What it means is this: we have a situation were an increasingly large number of blacks think they're perfectly justified in murdering any white bloke who it occurs to them may be racist or may be plausibly cast as one. This is bad for whites, but this tacit acceptance of mob violence has also played a large part in making black culture in Britain and America the train wreck it is today. Which brings me neatly onto the next atrocity.

Given that schools in the US, as in Britain, are whining constantly about not being able to get enough good people you'd think they'd roll the red carpet out for a young black bloke like Marquis Harris with a CV that's... well, just read it:

College educated to the hilt (double-major in liberal arts subjects, dean’s list more than once), he’s brilliant and accomplished. He’s a member of Mensa. He interned with a US senator. He was a Rhodes Scholar candidate.

You'd be dead wrong, too. The rejection letter speaks for itself:

"Though your qualifications are quite impressive, I regret to inform you that we have selected another candidate. It was felt that your demeanor and therefore presence in the classroom would serve as an unrealistic expectation as to what high school students could strive to achieve or become. However, it is highly recommended that you seek employment at the collegiate level; there your intellectual comportment would be greatly appreciated. Good luck."

So, to summerise, in the US it's alright for black students to aspire to lynch any honkey who says something they disagree with, but 'failure to be a knuckle-dragging bum' ? Now that's a serious charge. No school can have that type of despicable non-delinquant on its staff. Losers, idiots and druggies only need apply.

Not Getting It

You know what the real lesson of Hutton was ? Really ? It's that MMR is perfectly safe.

Like, right. Not to burst any bubbles, Prof, but Princess Tony's clean bill of health is the result of a senior judge being given unprecedented access to the inner working of government, including some very revealing e-mails and diary enteries, plus public servants from the PM down being subject to cross examination in open court. I mean, it's not exactly the same as how the scientific establishment has conducted itself over MMR, is it ?

Not A Threat

True confessions - I caught about 30 seconds of Rory Bremner tonight. I don't think I'm suffering any after effects though. Anyway, I think I got a glimpse of the Liberal's main angle of attack on Michael Howard. There was a sketch featuring Howard as a Jekyll and Hyde character. First, he makes with the nice at the Dispatch Box then suddenly his evil side breaks out - and how do we know the evil side has won ? He claims 'Prison works!'.

That's it.

That's the bogeyman Liberal seek to scare the public with: a bloke who believes scum deserve a holiday at Hotel Greybar. Liberals think they can win the next election by pointing out that under Howard people like this would spend real time in jail.

I think we'll risk it.

BBC Meltdown Continues

Tim Blair points out this article in the Absurder:

Some of the BBC's biggest names are considering quitting in protest at the attitude of its acting chairman and the greatest-ever threat to their journalistic independence.

Leading figures including Joan Bakewell, Ben Brown, Gavin Esler, Jonathan Ross, John Simpson and Jeremy Vine were among 10,000 BBC employees who backed a newspaper advert yesterday, expressing 'dismay' at the loss of Dyke and vowing their commitment to a 'fearless search for truth'.

They'll search for the truth alright, it's the actual capturing of it that they have trouble with: Scott reports one particular bit of truth that seems to have slipped under their radar.

Still, unless we let Auntie run riot, a shedload of overpaid bums will take their hand out of our collective wallet. Hmmm...it's a toughey, but I think, maybe, we should fight it out.

But....wait, there's more. Biased BBC reports this moment in unbiased journalism:

On the morning thing, they had David Attenborough, they showed 2 minutes of one of his excellent nature shows and then cut back to the sofa. "Will we ever see programmes like that again?" asked Bill Turnbull.

No, of course not. Now they've had to give up libel the Beeb's on a downhill slope. Give it twelve months and it'll be wall-to-wall sex, guns and cars...just like the Discovery Channel.

Hippies Found To Be Right!

Or perhaps not, the Biotechnology industry is vapourware central, still recent research suggest that flowers may beat bombs after all.

Groovy!

Draw Your Own Conclusions

Jackie reports that the Independant and the Morning Star both had the same headline today. Wonder what the Indie would say if the Daily Mail and the BNP News shared a headline ?

Not To Be Used As Advertised

Jacki D draws attention to what's likely to be the slithering filth's next talking point: You can't trust a Law Lord to judge these things. Ian Murray points out the basic insanity in this argument.

I'd add a hearty 'WHS' while pointing out a further insanity here. One of the distinguishing features of the L3 agenda has been support for judicial activism. So now they argue that judges can't be trusted to do their own job, but they can be trusted to do Parliament's job by legislating from the bench.

How much weed do you have to smoke before that makes sense ?

Why I Hate The BBC

Thanks to Scott Burgess for bringing to light an incident which summerises better than Shakesphere could what's wrong with the BBC.

Need any more proof be sought that the inhabitants of the BBC bubble regard facts and people from outside as mere props and patsies, brought in to add a degree of credibility to the BBC's transmission of a predetermined message ?

No, I'd rather not do that. Let's talk about [Defence Secretary] Geoff Hoon, which is what I asked you to talk about.

I don't have a lot of time for politicians - we haven't had a genuinely well-intentioned man in Parliament since Guy Fawkes - but doesn't it sum up perfectly the sheer arrogance of the BBC that a complete non-entity like Nick 'Who ?' Clark genuinely believes he can order about a former defence minister and member of the House of Lords like some Victorian aristocrat dealing with a village idiot.

Say what you like about Monkey Man, but weasels like Clark would never take that approach with John Prescott.

History v. 1.0

So, anyway, now journalists have abandoned actual journalism in favour of full-time spinning, who's going to write the first draft of history ? May I suggest bloggers ? Here's Nicholas on the day the BBC got run over by a truck.

One thing that does hit me from that report is how fast the BBC reverted back to type after the initial shock. Natural arrogance may have played a part, but I suspect a far larger one was played by Howard's disgusting decision to side with the BBC. Had the Conservatives gone for the throat, they could've turned a retreat into a rout. They did not. Never again can Consrvative MPs complain of BBC bias. They had the chance to tear its heart out and drink its blood, yet they threw it all away for the chance to jeer at Princess Tony. No doubt updated versions of history wil judge them.

Paranoia Refuted

So, anyway, you remember how those Right Wing Extremists claimed that once the Government claimed the right to outlaw offensive speech, then sooner or later speaking against the Government would be an offense ? Well, it's so not true!

We Should Sue!

Tony is innocent, after all. It's amazing to think there are actually things about which Blair has been honest. Sort of the stopped clock hypothesis really. Still, Blair being in the clear has thrown into sharp relief the utter collapse of a once great British institution.

This has been a truly terrible day for the Conservative Party. Even before publication of Hutton, Michael Howard's strategy was looking distinctly strange. Howard seemed to argue that, even though the Conservatives supported the war they had their fingers crossed (or something). Apart from the fact that this makes the Conservative Party sound really stupid, it makes no political sense. The anti-war groups were 90% made up of… well, people like Glenda Jackson. Howard can tattoo 'BUSH=HITLER' on his forehead but there ain't no way these loons are going to vote Conservative. Similarly, Peter Hitchens style Conservatives aren't going to vote Lib Dem under any circumstances.

Howard's position would only make political sense if there was any hope of finding proof that Blair had, in fact, carried out a huge deception to lure Britain into war with a middle eastern Shangri-La. If this were the case, it would now be game over but even pre-Hutton this was hardly likely. Leaving aside the fact the PM is slicker than a vaselined rattlesnake, not only did SIS genuinely believe that Saddam had WMD so did the US, the French, the Russians and most of Saddam's army. Yet, we were supposed to believe that Blair had taken part in a complex deception relating solely to a tangential issue (how quickly the WMD could be brought into action). The only suggestion more absurd than that is the idea that the Conservatives would have lined up with the Saddamites and the Hate America crowd, if only they hadn't been bamboozled by Tony's spin.

Howard's position was so blatantly opportunistic and cynical that it achieved the almost impossible: it made Blair look principled. All of which would've been bad enough yet Howard not only managed to make himself and his party look stupid, he threw away a once a generation chance to damage one of the key institutions of the Liberal establishment.

What was refreshing about Hutton's criticism of the BBC was not so much the content (old news in the blogsphere) but the source and setting in which it occurred. The Beeb has always maintained that the mere fact a person criticises the BBC proves he's too unenlightened to have a worthwhile opinion anyway. Well, here's a Law Lord slapping them senseless: what flavour of moron is Hutton, exactly ?

The BBC has long traded on its reputation for objectivity to allow it to slander Conservatives. Just when we were getting ready to enjoy the Beeb catching a full load of consequences, up pops Howard to stand shoulder to shoulder with the self-same people who are normally employed trying to convince the public that he eats babies. Absolutely brilliant.

Here is one of the biggest, yet least recognised, schisms in British politics: that between the Conservative Party and actual Conservatives. The Conservative Party is seemingly incapable of taking the long view about anything: everything is dominated by purely tactical and cynical calculations which themselves are thrown out by the Party's inability to comprehend the existance of intelligent life outside the Westminister Village. So, of course the Party chose to push the line that Blair is a conniving fraud (who did they think didn't know that ?). Thanks to the Conservative Party, Hutton looks like being next weeks chip paper yet it could all have been so different.

With the possible exception of the weather and 'The Sky At Night', a pervasive Liberal bias creeps into everything the BBC does. What percentage of their dramas feature sinister factory owners who put profit before the safety of their workers ? Is the BBC even capable of making a comedy series which doesn't rely on at least one stereotyped Conservative character to be the butt of jokes ? In fact, when's the last time the BBC featured a Conservative character (in any program) who wasn't there merely for the main (hipper, smarter, better looking) characters to react against ? The Conservative Party could have shredded for ever the BBC's reputation for objectivity and let the BBC be recognised for the snarling, partisan, activist's employment agency it undoubtedly is. This wouldn't necessarily mean privatising it, but that's where the logic would inevitably led once the public started to think of the BBC as a way to transfer public money to overgrown student politicos. But that would've taken actual vision, and there ain't none of that in the cesspit that is the modern Conservative Party.

By choosing to base their entire strategy on the political equivalent of arguing over angels and pinheads the Conservative Party emphasised how utterly bereft they are of any long-term strategy. We have one of the worst governments in our nation's history and all the Tories can do is the political equivalent of pulling faces and mooning. Can't they at least change the name of the party ? They're giving us real Conservatives a bad name.

Self-Defence: An Imperial View

Of all the things that tee me off, one of the biggest is the whole 'Crime Prevention' scam: fit a lock to your windows so burglars can't break in - yeah, like that'll work, unless the housebreaker in question has mastered rock technology - Doh!. Naaah - it's just a way for our rigor mortised law enforcement community to try and shift the blame onto the victim: 'Well, ma'am, we might have stripped you of both the right and the means to defend yourself on the implied promise that we would defend you then utterly failed actually to do so BUT you didn't seal yourself in a concrete tomb, so you were asking to get raped anyway'. Enough already, if the state claims it'll protect us, then it should. If it can't (If ?) then it should shut the hell up and let us protect our familes.

Anyway, the point of that rant is this: His Majesty, Emperor Misha I, shreds Canadian government advice dealing with this very subject.

L3 And Denial

Laban Tall's got the dirty details about how the educrats are using the teaching of the history of the Holocaust to indoctrinate kids with Liberal drivel. Needless to say that all the usual objections to this sort of thing apply double here. There's the obvious point that money extorted from security guards and checkout girls in the name of education is being used to fund political thought control. There's the arrogance of the educrats, believing in their divine right to extort money from a large section of the population while using it to libel those self-same people. There's the humbuggery of the teaching unions, constantly claiming that they lack the time or resources to teach basic literacy yet ever ready to find time and money for Tory baiting. There's the sheer moral cowardice of the Left, having comprehensively lost the argument in the adult world they now resort to trying to brainwash youngsters. There's the inherent thuggery in someone in an position of power abusing that position to libel those under him (and their families), knowing those he targets have no 'right of reply' by virtue of the uneven power relationship. There's the…. Well, let's just say there's plenty wrong with it all.

But that ain't it.

What's really sickening about it is this: they're demagoging the holocaust. Here's one of the great crimes of history and the L3 are using it to bash Conservatives. Suddenly, one of the results here makes a lot more sense. Our nation's alleged deep thinkers were shocked to find that scepticism about the Holocaust was most marked not only amongst the very old but also the young - how can this be, they said, when the Holocaust is taught as part of the National Curriculum ? Well, here's your answer: if the Tories are as bad as Hitler, then Hitler was only as bad as the Conservatives and Auschwitz was a sort of hard-line alternative to Care in the Community that got out of hand.

Trying to link Dr Mengle to Conservatives cutting the budget for the Arts Council isn't just juvenile stupidity. The Holocaust stands out in history as a great crime - to claim that Conservative policy is 'like something out of Nazi Germany' is to whitewash the full evil of what it was the Nazis did. In short, it is to indulge in a form of Holocaust denial.

Greased Weasel Escapes!

With one bound Tony was free. He got away today, he'll get away tomorrow. There won't be any great breakthrough and the chances are that Blair will jump long before he's anywhere near being pushed. Still, with all that, this is perhaps the worst of all possible worlds for Blair.

For a start, while Blair has quelled the rebels this time, rebellion is apt to become a habit. Blair has, once again, resorted to the diva gambit - threatening to take his ball home if the vote goes against him - but this only works a certain number of times (and, indeed, only partially worked this time).In this case the rebels have succeeded in getting significant concessions - which will hardly deter them from trying again later.

About those concessions: the tuition fees idea was never well thought out but the bill as passed is a legislative monstrosity. Students will be charged huge fees, since they'll make a shed-load of cash later, except they won't pay the fees if their parents are poor. Like, why? Surely if mere graduation results in being swept away by a tidal wave of filthy lucre then it hardly matters who your parents are ? The main result of these concessions is that the lower middle class will take it in the shorts again. If you haven't worked since Lady T was at the helm, then the Government will throw money at you. Similarly, if you're filthy rich then who cares ? Nice of the government to knock out some of Orlando and Olivia's competition. In short, smackheads and lawyers are in clover, cops and nurses are going to get the hammer. Again.

This isn't Labour's Poll Tax - the point about the poll tax is that everyone paid it, while tuition fees impact worst on those who actually work for a living. Neither the partners at Scumbag, Weasel and Slime nor their clients really give a rat's backside. If tuition fees are a replay of anything, then it's the collapse of the housing market in the early nineties. Then, people felt betrayed by a Conservative Government that had encouraged house ownership yet (so Liberals claimed) had let buyers sink into negative equity. Note that it was the perception, rather than the reality (and how exactly was the Conservative Party responsible for the market doing what markets do anyway ?) that did for John Major. There's no such ambiguity here: Blair talked about education, education, education and served. up debt, debt, debt. He's betrayed the aspirations of the very people whose support put him in No 10 in the first place.

They won't like it.

Random Thoughts.....

Say what you like about them but, in some things, the French are resilient. Hardly have they overcome the disappointment of their old friend Saddam's Really Bad Year than they find a whole new bunch of thugs to suck up to.

Why is this not terrorism ? Never mind wider issues, here we have a group of people who want to do something entirely legal being prevented from doing so by the fear of attack by - ahem - 'militants' as the Beeb would have it. Is there no one amongst the 650 or so castratos in our Parliament who can see that this is a massive defeat for democracy ? Thugs who try to push their agenda through violence are terrorists, it's that simple. But find an MP willing to push for a full-throttle econut stamp-o-thon ? Nada.

Everyone in the known universe has already commented upon this. Yes, it's a disgrace, but it illustrates a more general problem with the BBC. Here's the Beeb, it's allowed to extort money from janitors because it supposedly provides a vital public service ('educate, entertain, inform') yet it's spending money (arguably) to leave the public less well-informed. After all, by dominating Hutton coverage it seeks to prevent people going elsewhere so that they get the Party line rather than an independent view.

This is it - there may be good reasons for the licence fee, but supporting Greg Dyke's attempts to spin his way out of trouble isn't one of them. The BBC's own actions have confirmed that, far from being an objective news organisation, it seeks to grind it's own axe. Why should we persist with it when it has so clearly turned it's back on its rightful role in favour of partisan activism ?

Finally, let the Tinfoilfest begin: Mel P flags up this letter in the Guardian. I blame the French, myself.