At times, you register news in an accidental sequence. Items are meant that were not intended to be related even if, suddenly, a link between them emerges in your mind. Indeed, you discover, a relationship exists because their cores are fused by a common denominator.

Duly Noted’s first case is well known. On a train between Paris and Amsterdam, three Americans and a Brit tackled an AK47 yielding “person” who fired on the passengers. Since then the group has achieved hero status. Astonishingly, even the Islamist connections and the nationality of the perpetrator have been acknowledged early in the game.

That last sentence demands an explanation. The PC governed press prefers not to publicize the identity of criminals when their origins contradict its norms. De-natured reporting results even if all can deduce that the hood must be an asylum seeker, an uninvited migrant or a maladjusted “citizen” from a self-chosen ghetto. The guessing is facilitated by mentioning when appropriate, something like “a native-born from the town of….”. If this is missing, even those that believe in the Easter Bunny can guess the silent-treated, but for public security, critical component of the story.

This bit about “de-fanged” identification brings to mind a matter that has just become public. A Swiss police department is not to mention certain characteristics in “wanted” notices. Thus, the public was asked to help find an amply pigmented rapist-robber without mentioning that and his ethnicity. The goal is to avoid “prejudices”. Next, it will be forbidden to say something like “the suspect is blond and has a …. accent”.

To your correspondent’s surprise, a letter-writer commented the train incident in the German “Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung” (a high rated paper) that the nationality of the heroic rescuers is no surprise. Americans, the thought, are encouraged to take action in behalf of themselves and their values. Not being collectively emasculated — it begins with girls made to play with tools and boys with dolls — this action would have hardly been duplicated by natives. (Indeed, the train’s personnel ran and locked itself up in a safe space.)

With the passing of time, unintentionally, the incident gained a humorous aspect. The “perp” claims that he is not a terrorist. He was only hungry. Having found in a park the AK47 and ten loaded clips, he decided to grab a pistol, a carpet-cutter, a canister of gasoline, and to take the train. (How did the starved chap pay the ticket to get on the train?) All he wanted was to rob the passengers. Apparently, in town no candidates could be found. Anyhow, the gun with which he fired did not function.

This might be a unique criminological case. Has anyone yet pleaded innocence because he intended to commit another major crime? Although the state has decided to prosecute for terrorism, the shameless excuse tells much about the respect the West’s legal system enjoys in certain circles.

Additionally, the governing elite’s odd regard for the rule of law provides the context out of which the claims of our ruling bozos issue. The absurd case about the disrespect toward the law and common sense finds an illustration from another area. A Swiss court ordered the deportation of a resident alien. His crime: He abused his daughter sexually. The highest court invalidated the decision. Reason: The expulsion would create a hardship as the man has a child in the country. Try to smile. In doing so remember that, wherever you reside, you might run into comparable travesties.

It would appear that we experience the adulteration of an originally praiseworthy endeavor. It was to protect the innocent from the errors of a mindless “justice”. In our day, the PC-driven courts see it as their duty to cleanse proven felons to reappear as proper citizens. What is officially practiced as law and its “protection” aspect has become a contraption that defies society’s sense of fairness and reason. Instead of protecting society, in the hands of those that have kidnapped it, the law became a force that protects villains at the expense of society. The protection of apparent miscreants from any possible judicial error has grown into the a system in which society’s rights and ability to function are sacrificed

Having said that, it occurs that the “train terrorist” has failed to bring charges against his apprehenders. Once he injured one of them, they knocked him out by banging his head against the floor. The charge could be “excessive, racially motivated violence”. Add something about “humiliation” and the absence of a state-paid attorney. (Let us wait for the trial and the defense’s allegations.)

The thing about the “paid attorney” steers an ignored news bit into the picture. Remember Jihadi John? He had accomplices in England. When investigated they fled. Currently they are in the arms of the IS. However, they still have feelings for England. Thus, with the help of free lawyers, the fugitives sue the British government. The exercise has cost the taxpayer “hundreds of thousands” of pounds.

Item two is a “somewhere in America” story. It is about the shooting at the recruiting station of the military. A serviceman that carried -an unauthorized- private weapon, stopped the terrorist. Yes, there was no court martial. Good for the cause of sanity. However, it took a public outcry to achieve that, ignoring an absurd ordinance, had no consequences. Apparently, for a Green Beret in Afghanistan there might be no similar happy end. His crime is that he did to a rapist and his victims what every decent person would have. He leaned on the lowlife official and protected his prey. Once you shield delinquents, the decent are punished.

Increasingly, ruling elites do not pursue realistic solutions but seek to meet PC generated norms of good behavior. Incrementally, the sense of the abusive mismanagement of the system penetrates the cocoon with which the average and non-political person surrounds his private sphere. A growing sense that “something is wrong here” pushes masses into political activism. Due to their hither passivity these are unaccustomed to scrutinize problems in the pursuit of rational solutions.

The results of the first Republican debate point to the troubles that this process brews. An unusually large crowd followed the encounter. Persons that by the standard of an earlier wisdom were unelectable have done excellently. Why? Because they articulated positions that none dare to state — even if these connect to the experience of an alarmed multitude. The role of these newcomers to public affairs could become a major one. They might transform existing political parties and then the modus operandi of the political system.

Not accidentally, a growing mass grows skeptical regarding the distorted diet that is fed to it. What the elites pretend and what the plain people experience are separated by a growing gap. This cleaving Grand Canon makes the mass turn away from the tutelage of its dominating experts. Thereupon, they begin to rely on the standards suggested by the people’s own common-sense perception of matters.