A Telling-Off From Judith Wanga

The Telegraph has an article by someone called Judith Wanga today and I have to say I haven't read such confused, yet pontificating drivel in quite some time. And I say that despite the Left squealing loudly everyday about some affront, hurt or pretend crisis.

Judith feels that her personal opinion trumps that of millions of people, so a standard Leftie. She has to be right, because she knows how lovely she is. And she only asks you to hate people she doesn't like.

The article is about Jeremy Clarkson. Well, it is in passing because Judith is spectacularly comfortable interpreting what Clarkson meant in any utterance and invents others that he, probably only an oversight, never got around to saying.

Admitting we don't know the details yet, she prattles on about how his supporters leapt to his defence without knowing what he had done, but she knows he did a horrible thing. Although, we don't know what happened.

She says he called his dog Didier Drogba because he is racist and was 'harking back to the days of dehumanising black people and comparing them to animals'. I don't remember these days and I'm a bit older than Clarkson, but young Judith remembers them. When you are looking to take offence it is good to have done your research (or make it up).

The chance that he has the dog because he likes it and, as a Chelsea supporter named his dog after one of their stars not only doesn't occur to her, it is in fact a disallowed thought, because it suggests way too much humanism against someone she is demonising.

And that is clearly her underlying creed; when she wants to take offence everything you say is wrong. She will set the standard, she will tell you what you are allowed to think. The comment that Clakson supporters think 'PC gone mad' is what Clarkson is against, she makes the usual lazy Leftie assertion.

Naturally something as mad a political correctness doesn't need any additions to do its harm. Designed solely to allow lightweights such as Judith to shut down debate (you can't say that) and accuse anyone they target with a range of -isms invented possibly on the spot, tailored to suit. Even the phrase 'people like Clarkson' admits to stereotypes which is something Judith complains bitterly about.

National stereotypes always seem to have some real world relevance, but that can't be allowed in Marxist fantasy land, where everything must be seen through their political prism.

I don't know what happened in the 'fracas' and I don't know how one of Clarkson's employers, the BBC should react to an incident that didn't happen on their premises or while he was 'at work'. But the Left of course don't do truth, justice or fairness when they have a target in their sights. Judith proves it with an article of personal (affected) affront, full of arrant nonsense. There must be real and talented writers and commentators out there surely, Telegraph?

Peter Oborne Separates From Trolley

I have just read a complete pile of claptrap written by Peter Oborne in the Telegraph. He must be busy on something else, because he clearly didn't think before he wrote so glowingly of how Britain should be proud of having Abu Qatada in our midst. Not because he isn't a nasty piece of work, Oborne is careful to say, but because it demonstrates how great our system of justice is.

Oborne quotes Churchill and it is here he should have realised his mistake; “We must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man which… through Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, habeas corpus, trial by jury and the English common law,

I think you will find that most of these laws have been superseded by the Code Napoleon via the primacy of EU law, or are otherwise ignored as inconvenient by the government (in particular, the Bill of Rights). We, the people have scant protection in law and are not part of a truly democratic society.