The Blaney Mail

The Quail prefers not to stray too often from the dead tree press; all the news one could ever need can be found in the print copies of The Mail, Express, Sun, Star and News of the World, all for low, low prices, and only a day or so behind confusing online news sources.

Besides, it is widely accepted that the "Internet" is nothing but lies and piffle, while the "Blog-o-sphere" is riddled with sleaze and petty bickering.

Occasionally, though, some shining example of internetular topical opinion particularly catches our eye and we feel dutiful to briefly relay our discoveries. Having eked every last drip of incisive current affairs coverage and fine idiotorial from Saturday's Mail and "logged on" to the internets in search of more, we were excited to happen across the splendid work of an author working under the pseudonym "Donal Blaney".

The issue of "racial profiling" has received much attention in the former British colony of Virginia recently, with pundits from both sides of the country's political spectrum conclusively declaring it A Bad Thing. Even the looniest of American right-wing WalMart nuts seem to agree that current police practice of arresting people simply on the grounds that their skin contains more melanin than most is, at best, a haphazard method of preventing crime.

Blaney, though, is a bold man. Recognising that the criticism of "racial profiling" stems only from that ubiquitous beast, political correctnessgonemad, the idealistic young lawyer [sic] busts the debate open like an angry Bruce Banner in an ill-fitting sweater, concluding that, actually, we should encourage greater reliance on the authoritarian profiling of people by race.

Using a gripping tale of waiting in a queue at a Washington airport to show how both British and American security measures are in fact an act of terrorism, Blaney ruminates:

It is an unpalatable fact but in the way that people are treated at airports, we are doing the terrorists' bidding for them.

Plaintively, he asks: 'Why must we be delayed and demeaned like this?'

Why indeed, Donal. What right thinking person would not tolerate a few more buildings crumbling after a targeted collision with a 747 or the odd exploding shoe, if it ensured smooth and speedy passage through Heathrow?

Not one to complain without positing a solution, however, Mr Blaney continues:

Just as when the police look for a knife or gun wielding maniac in South London they don't focus their enquiries on muslims, Jews or whites, and just as when they look for City fraudsters their suspicions focus rightly on white middle class yuppies rather than black women, shouldn't the fact that each and every one of the psychopaths who killed thousands on 9/11 (and, indeed, who killed dozens on 7/7) was a jihadist?

Behind the tortured grammar and absent syntax lies an undeniable truth: all terrorists look the same. The beards, the shoes, the turbans [do they wear turbans? Ah well, we all know what you mean -ed.], all tell-tale signs of the Islamist terror monger. And yes, the police officers of South London are entirely right to exclude suspects from investigations based only upon the colour of their skin, clothing, or ethnicity.

For the love of Yahweh, why won't those airport security jobsworths just stop and search brown people, and allow us whites to go about our business without fear of suspicion? Who ever heard of a caucasion terrorist for heaven's sake?