Tuesday, January 13
Tomorrow's Guardian today:
WE ARE ALL DIMINISHED BY THIS MAN'S DEATH
The sad news of Harold Shipman's death yesterday should bring neither joy nor happiness to anyone hearing it. Certainly, he was a very bad man, and it is not being overtly judgmental to say so.
The murder of over two hundred pensioners should never be glossed over. Yet perhaps it is time to put this all in perspective. During the time period Dr. Shipman was busy acting - as he no doubt saw it - as an Angel of Mercy, over twenty women and children were being killed on the streets every hour, by drivers, alcoholics, and husbands. The combined total of Shipman's victims could be crammed into a small one bedroom flat in Glasgow.
In no way does this diminish what Shipman did, but it is worth thinking about the next time you hear some right-wing commentator describe Dr. Shipman as evil. It is also worth bearing in mind all the people Shipman did save. As a hard-working doctor, there are, even now, many people still alive who would not be here if it hadn't been for his own heroic acts.
Nonetheless, questions must be asked about the role of the prison service in all of this. What moves were made to try and prevent this? Perhaps a Suicides Charter should be instigated. And does Britain need a Suicide Czar? As Polly Toynbee has often had cause to point out within these pages, such a minister has already been appointed in Sweden. Suicide rates have declined by as much as twenty percent. We still have much to learn from our Nordic brethren.
This brings us to another matter. While Rupert Murdoch and his lickspittles in the tabloid press will try and use the example of Dr. Shipman as yet another hammer to batter the NHS, it is worth considering the causes that forced Dr. Shipman to act as he did. The stresses and strains of being a general practitioner have been much documented. It is a thankless task, not helped by 18 years of Tory underfunding, and no doubt these were all contributory factors in the rise of Dr. Shipman.
And as for the theological question as to whether Shipman is evil: we leave that sort of language to those simplistic neoconservatives, people like George W. Bush and his minion Paul Wolfowitz. They like to bandy about these kinds of words with gleeful insouciance. We, here, at the Guardian, are far more circumspect. We also feel that Tony Blair knows this. If only he could mention this to his gun-toting Texan pal the next time he saw him, the world be a far better, and safer, place.
|
WE ARE ALL DIMINISHED BY THIS MAN'S DEATH
The sad news of Harold Shipman's death yesterday should bring neither joy nor happiness to anyone hearing it. Certainly, he was a very bad man, and it is not being overtly judgmental to say so.
The murder of over two hundred pensioners should never be glossed over. Yet perhaps it is time to put this all in perspective. During the time period Dr. Shipman was busy acting - as he no doubt saw it - as an Angel of Mercy, over twenty women and children were being killed on the streets every hour, by drivers, alcoholics, and husbands. The combined total of Shipman's victims could be crammed into a small one bedroom flat in Glasgow.
In no way does this diminish what Shipman did, but it is worth thinking about the next time you hear some right-wing commentator describe Dr. Shipman as evil. It is also worth bearing in mind all the people Shipman did save. As a hard-working doctor, there are, even now, many people still alive who would not be here if it hadn't been for his own heroic acts.
Nonetheless, questions must be asked about the role of the prison service in all of this. What moves were made to try and prevent this? Perhaps a Suicides Charter should be instigated. And does Britain need a Suicide Czar? As Polly Toynbee has often had cause to point out within these pages, such a minister has already been appointed in Sweden. Suicide rates have declined by as much as twenty percent. We still have much to learn from our Nordic brethren.
This brings us to another matter. While Rupert Murdoch and his lickspittles in the tabloid press will try and use the example of Dr. Shipman as yet another hammer to batter the NHS, it is worth considering the causes that forced Dr. Shipman to act as he did. The stresses and strains of being a general practitioner have been much documented. It is a thankless task, not helped by 18 years of Tory underfunding, and no doubt these were all contributory factors in the rise of Dr. Shipman.
And as for the theological question as to whether Shipman is evil: we leave that sort of language to those simplistic neoconservatives, people like George W. Bush and his minion Paul Wolfowitz. They like to bandy about these kinds of words with gleeful insouciance. We, here, at the Guardian, are far more circumspect. We also feel that Tony Blair knows this. If only he could mention this to his gun-toting Texan pal the next time he saw him, the world be a far better, and safer, place.
|
Or can it? Here's another quote from another Guardian leader. It's almost two years since Dubya made his Axis of Evil speech, and the tranzis are not in a celebratory mood. Okay, there have been some successes:
"North Korea, for example, has just opened its nuclear facilities to an unprecedented US inspection; it repeats that it is ready to abandon its weapons, if various conditions are met. Iran, likewise, has agreed to additional nuclear safeguards. Libya, an associate member of the axis of evil, has executed a volte-face on WMD. States linked to proliferation and terror, such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and Sudan, are now focused instead on building regional peace. Others, such as Syria, are under intensifying diplomatic pressure to change tack. In all these cases, Mr Bush can argue that his uncompromising stance is bearing fruit two years on".
Indeed he can.
"The president and his supporters will argue, too, that all these developments have been positively encouraged by the US invasion of Iraq - and again, such a view should not be dismissed out of hand".
How very broadminded.
"Even those passionately opposed to the war should acknowledge that it concentrated minds in the Middle East and beyond. As one analyst noted, it has become necessary to take Uncle Sam a bit more seriously than in the past".
I know. One minute Uncle Sam is a coke-swilling ham-burger-chewing bozo ripe for a laugh, the next he's out killing the bad guys. It's all so serious, isn't it?
"This may be deplored as a bully's triumph; but lesser bully boys everywhere have taken note of it and thus to a limited, probably temporary extent, it has worked".
As opposed to the White Flag policy encouraged by the Guardian, which was working a treat until Dubya stole the 2000 election, eh?
"Yet this argument, that the war has had an overall beneficial geostrategic and security effect, remains fundamentally flawed nevertheless. The reasons may be found in Iraq itself. By invading Iraq, which had no WMD, the US and its allies, bogged down there indefinitely, have been rendered less able to respond to a real "rogue" state WMD crisis. By invading Iraq, Mr Bush appears, predictably, to have exacerbated the terrorist threat - the second of the two "great objectives" of his axis of evil speech. In truth, al-Qaida's creeping menace is more pervasive than ever. By invading Iraq, Mr Bush has not advanced peace or democracy in the Middle East. The reverse may be more nearly true, given the political unrest in Iran, unresolved tensions between Israel, the Palestinians and Syria, violence in Saudi Arabia, Iraq's ongoing, potentially splintering instability and the deeply paradoxical US refusal to agree to the Iraqi Shia majority's demand for free elections. In point of fact, the Libyan shift was in train well before Mr Bush went after Saddam; North Korea would likely have started talking sooner, but for bellicose US posturing".
Well, I suppose it's possible to quibble with one or two of these claims, and to do so would take all day: suffice to say, it completely undermines paragraph 2. I mean, you can believe one, or the other, but you can't believe both. Unless you write for the Guardian, of course.
"By its heavy-handed pursuit of evil, the US has undermined the western alliance, the UN, international law and civil rights - what might be called the "axis of good".
And nothing must stand in the way of the UN, after all.
|
"North Korea, for example, has just opened its nuclear facilities to an unprecedented US inspection; it repeats that it is ready to abandon its weapons, if various conditions are met. Iran, likewise, has agreed to additional nuclear safeguards. Libya, an associate member of the axis of evil, has executed a volte-face on WMD. States linked to proliferation and terror, such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and Sudan, are now focused instead on building regional peace. Others, such as Syria, are under intensifying diplomatic pressure to change tack. In all these cases, Mr Bush can argue that his uncompromising stance is bearing fruit two years on".
Indeed he can.
"The president and his supporters will argue, too, that all these developments have been positively encouraged by the US invasion of Iraq - and again, such a view should not be dismissed out of hand".
How very broadminded.
"Even those passionately opposed to the war should acknowledge that it concentrated minds in the Middle East and beyond. As one analyst noted, it has become necessary to take Uncle Sam a bit more seriously than in the past".
I know. One minute Uncle Sam is a coke-swilling ham-burger-chewing bozo ripe for a laugh, the next he's out killing the bad guys. It's all so serious, isn't it?
"This may be deplored as a bully's triumph; but lesser bully boys everywhere have taken note of it and thus to a limited, probably temporary extent, it has worked".
As opposed to the White Flag policy encouraged by the Guardian, which was working a treat until Dubya stole the 2000 election, eh?
"Yet this argument, that the war has had an overall beneficial geostrategic and security effect, remains fundamentally flawed nevertheless. The reasons may be found in Iraq itself. By invading Iraq, which had no WMD, the US and its allies, bogged down there indefinitely, have been rendered less able to respond to a real "rogue" state WMD crisis. By invading Iraq, Mr Bush appears, predictably, to have exacerbated the terrorist threat - the second of the two "great objectives" of his axis of evil speech. In truth, al-Qaida's creeping menace is more pervasive than ever. By invading Iraq, Mr Bush has not advanced peace or democracy in the Middle East. The reverse may be more nearly true, given the political unrest in Iran, unresolved tensions between Israel, the Palestinians and Syria, violence in Saudi Arabia, Iraq's ongoing, potentially splintering instability and the deeply paradoxical US refusal to agree to the Iraqi Shia majority's demand for free elections. In point of fact, the Libyan shift was in train well before Mr Bush went after Saddam; North Korea would likely have started talking sooner, but for bellicose US posturing".
Well, I suppose it's possible to quibble with one or two of these claims, and to do so would take all day: suffice to say, it completely undermines paragraph 2. I mean, you can believe one, or the other, but you can't believe both. Unless you write for the Guardian, of course.
"By its heavy-handed pursuit of evil, the US has undermined the western alliance, the UN, international law and civil rights - what might be called the "axis of good".
And nothing must stand in the way of the UN, after all.
|
The Guardian has a leader on the Kilroy-Silk affair:
"Some commentators wonder why, if the BBC is now so fastidious, the poet and academic Tom Paulin was not similarly treated, after telling an Egyptian newspaper that Jewish settlers in the occupied territories "should be shot dead". The answer is that Mr Paulin is a critic, paid to have views, however offensive. If he hosted a daytime talkshow called Paulin, then he would deservedly be in the same boat as Mr Kilroy-Silk".
Making up the rules as they go along, ain't it? The Guardian's own Aaro hosted a radio show on Radio 2 last week - called David Aaronovitch, no less - John Humphreys and Libby Purves of the Sunday Times and the Times regularly host shows on Radio 4, and they all opinionate like it's going out of fashion. Come on Guardian! You can do better than that.
|
"Some commentators wonder why, if the BBC is now so fastidious, the poet and academic Tom Paulin was not similarly treated, after telling an Egyptian newspaper that Jewish settlers in the occupied territories "should be shot dead". The answer is that Mr Paulin is a critic, paid to have views, however offensive. If he hosted a daytime talkshow called Paulin, then he would deservedly be in the same boat as Mr Kilroy-Silk".
Making up the rules as they go along, ain't it? The Guardian's own Aaro hosted a radio show on Radio 2 last week - called David Aaronovitch, no less - John Humphreys and Libby Purves of the Sunday Times and the Times regularly host shows on Radio 4, and they all opinionate like it's going out of fashion. Come on Guardian! You can do better than that.
|
Monday, January 12
"Much as I love to sound off, I consistently refuse to appear on Kilroy. One must have some standards in life",
announces the Yazzmonster to a sceptical world. Well, I myself have no such compunctions. The truth must be spread, and if that means appearing on daytime television, on the BBC no less, well that's why we have principles, isn't it, in order to break them?
But then, back in the mid-eighties it wasn't even called Kilroy. It was Day by Day. At any rate, I spotted an ad along the lines of "Want to take part in a tv debate?", and, being an opinionated chap as I then was, I rang the telephone number given and called in.
"Oh, right, well what do you think of rape, then?" I was asked by the switchboard lady. I gave a suitably disapproving response, and was invited on the next day. Freshly attired with new shirt and haircut, I was sat in the front row, a microphone attached to my lapel. Then Robert ( the production staff all called him this ), who was then even more of Greek God than he is now, descended to meet the masses. He promptly asked me where I came from. Being a sensitive semi-Mediterranean type, I assumed this was a racial reference, which, far from putting me at ease, completely disarmed me ( I'm not the first it seems ). It soon transpired that this was his standard friendly question, and what he wanted to hear was Bow, East London. But he didn't, and after my initial confusion I told him. But by then he wasn't even interested. That hasn't changed - not listening to what people are saying to him is his big weakness, and, in my humble view, makes him a hopeless tv presenter. But that is by the by.
Anyway, after the warm-up, the programme started. Robert bounded on, and announced to camera that there were some shocking new rape statistics just out, the streets weren't safe, and what should we do about it: Fred ( or something like that ) here, has some very straightforward thoughts on the subject:
"Castrate them", he proclaimed.
And Peter, turning to a bearded gentleman next to me.
"More counselling".
And another Peter. This was me. I hesitated. The whole thing was completely unnerving. Who were these people? Why was one from the far right, and another from the deranged liberal left? Was I really supposed to be the voice of moderation?
"I think... longer sentences".
There really was a pause in the middle. Which made me look thoughtful, anyway.
It was downhill from then on. We then had two former rapists wheeled on, shown in shadow for the viewers, but we the audience could see them all right. They looked pretty normal, I suppose, but were defiantly unrepentant. And the rest of the audience, those sitting behind us Three Wise Men, were a plethora of rape victims and psychiatrists. The whole show rapidly became a shouting match between the two pervs and the ladies, with Robert egging the latter on, and occasionally getting all steamed up on their behalves.
"How could you do this, supposing this was your daughter?" type stuff.
I myself kept trying to butt in and suggest that all this fulminating wasn't getting us anywhere, but that wasn't getting me anywhere either. He didn't take a blind bit of notice. About twenty minutes in, I dare say this thought had even penetrated Robert's skull, and he started asking the shrinks what they all made of it. But by then the whole pantomime had collapsed under the weight of its own righteousness, and what little of interest they had to say was lost among the catcalling that carried on behind them. And as for me? My microphone had been switched off as soon as I had uttered my four words ( as I suspect, were those of my fellow opinion-formers ). So there was a lot of crushing of dissent going on, even then. After the recording I spoke to a shrink seated next to me.
"You must find appearing on this sort of thing very frustrating," I suggested. "You get used to it", she smiled sadly.
The strange thing was, though, that the show was a lot more political back then. Now it's all transvestite dads and lesbian husbands. Things have actually got worse.
And I wiped the tape. Not something you'd ever want to show your grandkids, really. But that's my Kilroy story, and I'm sticking to it. I think you had the right to know.
|
announces the Yazzmonster to a sceptical world. Well, I myself have no such compunctions. The truth must be spread, and if that means appearing on daytime television, on the BBC no less, well that's why we have principles, isn't it, in order to break them?
But then, back in the mid-eighties it wasn't even called Kilroy. It was Day by Day. At any rate, I spotted an ad along the lines of "Want to take part in a tv debate?", and, being an opinionated chap as I then was, I rang the telephone number given and called in.
"Oh, right, well what do you think of rape, then?" I was asked by the switchboard lady. I gave a suitably disapproving response, and was invited on the next day. Freshly attired with new shirt and haircut, I was sat in the front row, a microphone attached to my lapel. Then Robert ( the production staff all called him this ), who was then even more of Greek God than he is now, descended to meet the masses. He promptly asked me where I came from. Being a sensitive semi-Mediterranean type, I assumed this was a racial reference, which, far from putting me at ease, completely disarmed me ( I'm not the first it seems ). It soon transpired that this was his standard friendly question, and what he wanted to hear was Bow, East London. But he didn't, and after my initial confusion I told him. But by then he wasn't even interested. That hasn't changed - not listening to what people are saying to him is his big weakness, and, in my humble view, makes him a hopeless tv presenter. But that is by the by.
Anyway, after the warm-up, the programme started. Robert bounded on, and announced to camera that there were some shocking new rape statistics just out, the streets weren't safe, and what should we do about it: Fred ( or something like that ) here, has some very straightforward thoughts on the subject:
"Castrate them", he proclaimed.
And Peter, turning to a bearded gentleman next to me.
"More counselling".
And another Peter. This was me. I hesitated. The whole thing was completely unnerving. Who were these people? Why was one from the far right, and another from the deranged liberal left? Was I really supposed to be the voice of moderation?
"I think... longer sentences".
There really was a pause in the middle. Which made me look thoughtful, anyway.
It was downhill from then on. We then had two former rapists wheeled on, shown in shadow for the viewers, but we the audience could see them all right. They looked pretty normal, I suppose, but were defiantly unrepentant. And the rest of the audience, those sitting behind us Three Wise Men, were a plethora of rape victims and psychiatrists. The whole show rapidly became a shouting match between the two pervs and the ladies, with Robert egging the latter on, and occasionally getting all steamed up on their behalves.
"How could you do this, supposing this was your daughter?" type stuff.
I myself kept trying to butt in and suggest that all this fulminating wasn't getting us anywhere, but that wasn't getting me anywhere either. He didn't take a blind bit of notice. About twenty minutes in, I dare say this thought had even penetrated Robert's skull, and he started asking the shrinks what they all made of it. But by then the whole pantomime had collapsed under the weight of its own righteousness, and what little of interest they had to say was lost among the catcalling that carried on behind them. And as for me? My microphone had been switched off as soon as I had uttered my four words ( as I suspect, were those of my fellow opinion-formers ). So there was a lot of crushing of dissent going on, even then. After the recording I spoke to a shrink seated next to me.
"You must find appearing on this sort of thing very frustrating," I suggested. "You get used to it", she smiled sadly.
The strange thing was, though, that the show was a lot more political back then. Now it's all transvestite dads and lesbian husbands. Things have actually got worse.
And I wiped the tape. Not something you'd ever want to show your grandkids, really. But that's my Kilroy story, and I'm sticking to it. I think you had the right to know.
|
Who is "perhaps the most teeth-grindingly nauseating politician ever to have been spawned by the Loony Left"?
You'll have to read I.M. Beck, Malta's answer to Hugo Young, to find out.
|
You'll have to read I.M. Beck, Malta's answer to Hugo Young, to find out.
|
Saturday, January 10
Jeremy Seabrook:
"Whoever heard of anyone having too much sex, too much money, too much fun?"
Well, aside from the entire editorial staff of the Guardian, I can't think of anyone.
|
"Whoever heard of anyone having too much sex, too much money, too much fun?"
Well, aside from the entire editorial staff of the Guardian, I can't think of anyone.
|
The decision to use Osama Bin Laden as an op-ed columnist has caused some breast-beating apparently:
"Readers of the Guardian appear to have accepted the decisions both to carry the extract and to run it on the comment pages. As I write (midday Thursday), no reader has been in touch with me to register any objection to it, either its presence or position in the paper. Most of the dozen or so who wrote letters to the editor, four of which were published the following day, confined themselves to sardonic comments welcoming Bin Laden to the ranks of Guardian columnists, with one or two noting how well he fitted in".
Twelve wrote in, none objected, though the majority were somewhat 'sardonic'. So how many actually approved, then? We aren't told.
|
"Readers of the Guardian appear to have accepted the decisions both to carry the extract and to run it on the comment pages. As I write (midday Thursday), no reader has been in touch with me to register any objection to it, either its presence or position in the paper. Most of the dozen or so who wrote letters to the editor, four of which were published the following day, confined themselves to sardonic comments welcoming Bin Laden to the ranks of Guardian columnists, with one or two noting how well he fitted in".
Twelve wrote in, none objected, though the majority were somewhat 'sardonic'. So how many actually approved, then? We aren't told.
|
Friday, January 9
Free the Neverland One! I too hope he gets off ( as it were ). Or rather, I hope he didn't do it. ( Well obviously I wish none of the nonces did it, but you probably know what I mean .) I don't quite know why. Other than the song 'Billie Jean' I have always disliked his music, but still... I guess it's my instinctive love of the underdog, coming through as it usually does.
|
|
What's more scary? The Guardian's hip new replacement for Hugo Young? Or a slowly-dissolving iceberg? This guy knows.
|
|
The Guardian:
"On Wednesday, President George Bush announced a plan to bring 8 to 10 million illegal immigrants in from the shadows by giving them a right to work legally in the US. Like everything else that Mr Bush will do this year, this was an electorally motivated announcement".
Going for the non-voting illegals vote again, eh, Dubya? Still, coming from a newspaper whose every word is motivated purely by a consideration for truth I suppose there must be something in this. However, a couple of points do occur. One: Dubya is pretty much hands down going to win the election anyway, so he has less to gain by such opportunism than many a Prez in similar circumstances. And two, there are one or people who disagree with this plan. Still, the Guardian does tend to know its stuff, so I bow to its greater knowledge.
|
"On Wednesday, President George Bush announced a plan to bring 8 to 10 million illegal immigrants in from the shadows by giving them a right to work legally in the US. Like everything else that Mr Bush will do this year, this was an electorally motivated announcement".
Going for the non-voting illegals vote again, eh, Dubya? Still, coming from a newspaper whose every word is motivated purely by a consideration for truth I suppose there must be something in this. However, a couple of points do occur. One: Dubya is pretty much hands down going to win the election anyway, so he has less to gain by such opportunism than many a Prez in similar circumstances. And two, there are one or people who disagree with this plan. Still, the Guardian does tend to know its stuff, so I bow to its greater knowledge.
|
Stormin' Norman interviews law professor Glenn Reynolds, whose blog Instapundit is always worth a look if you haven't ever checked it out. He man reveals that his favourite movie is the Stuntman, which also made my top ten. Interesting. Clearly this guy might be worth noting.
|
|
This story is one that ought to be stored in the 'ones to watch' file. Honkie cops are suing Scotland Yard for racism. I wonder if the CRE will be giving its backing.
|
|
Thursday, January 8
I sometimes think that Tony Blair's uneasy relationship with the truth is actually the reason he is so popular. Thus, so many people spend their waking hours trying to decide if he really is the pretty straight guy he insists he is that it distracts them from how bad things are: health, education and all the other things that keeps middle england awake at night. I mean, if we an honest cove we wouldn't have anything else to think about. Thus, when he spoke on tv the other night about his reignited love affair with Red Ken and it was put to him that the only reason he wanted the latter back in the Labour Party was because he knew he would win the mayoral election, well what did the Master say? Well, to paraphrase:
"No. Not at all. If that were the case we'd have done it four years ago. I mean, we knew he was going to win then".
Excellent. I'm sure Frank Dobson, who quit as Health Secretary to be the Labour Party candidate, was well-chuffed with this.
|
"No. Not at all. If that were the case we'd have done it four years ago. I mean, we knew he was going to win then".
Excellent. I'm sure Frank Dobson, who quit as Health Secretary to be the Labour Party candidate, was well-chuffed with this.
|
Wednesday, January 7
All right. Seeing as you're asking:
Abel
Assault on Precinct 13
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls
Body Heat
Double Indemnity
Invasion of the Bodysnatchers
Notorious
The Stuntman
This is Spinal Tap
Touch of Evil
|
Abel
Assault on Precinct 13
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls
Body Heat
Double Indemnity
Invasion of the Bodysnatchers
Notorious
The Stuntman
This is Spinal Tap
Touch of Evil
|
The German Cannibal trial rumbles on, and the eminent miserablist Theodore Dalrymple wonders what all the big deal is:
"Thanks to one of the wonders of modern technology, the Internet, they both could avoid that most debilitating of all human conditions, frustrated desire. What is wrong with that? Please answer from first principles only".
Well here's one first principle: nothing. Indeed, I'd go further. Anyone who disagrees is guilty of the most oppressive carnophobia. If two consenting cannibals want to pair up, who could possibly object? What they get up to in the privacy of their own kitchen is entirely their own business. Why in fact, can't the get married? After all, they may not last longer than Britney's brief liaison. Indeed, those of us in the heterosexual community could learn quite a lot from them. The divorce rate would I should have thought, be pretty close to negligible. We could even let them be priests.
|
"Thanks to one of the wonders of modern technology, the Internet, they both could avoid that most debilitating of all human conditions, frustrated desire. What is wrong with that? Please answer from first principles only".
Well here's one first principle: nothing. Indeed, I'd go further. Anyone who disagrees is guilty of the most oppressive carnophobia. If two consenting cannibals want to pair up, who could possibly object? What they get up to in the privacy of their own kitchen is entirely their own business. Why in fact, can't the get married? After all, they may not last longer than Britney's brief liaison. Indeed, those of us in the heterosexual community could learn quite a lot from them. The divorce rate would I should have thought, be pretty close to negligible. We could even let them be priests.
|
Tuesday, January 6
Inside every George Moonbat lurks an inner Perry de Havilland. He doesn't like these guys much, though. And he's got a bit of nerve calling them "swivel-eyed ideologues" . Don't be deceived by the glasses. Last time I caught him on Newsnight they weren't so much swivel-eyed as virtually popping out. Pot kettle, not to mention mote beam.
|
|
The Times has an op-ed today by Colin Powell. The Guardian, on the other hand, has one by Osama bin Laden. You can't say their editors don't know their audiences.
|
|
Monday, January 5
"I have a bit of a reputation with some people at my university for being a ladies' man".
says Brett Allen, as he contemplates bounteous riches and a date with the ultrabuttocked songbird Kylie Minogue.
"I am not a nutter and I will not follow her around everywhere, but if the chance comes up to meet her then I will take it. But I won't use chat up lines, as girls don't go for them".
No chance, mate. This girl, on the other hand, is available, and, I humbly suggest, very open to chat-up lines. "Wanna get married?" goes down a treat, I believe.
|
says Brett Allen, as he contemplates bounteous riches and a date with the ultrabuttocked songbird Kylie Minogue.
"I am not a nutter and I will not follow her around everywhere, but if the chance comes up to meet her then I will take it. But I won't use chat up lines, as girls don't go for them".
No chance, mate. This girl, on the other hand, is available, and, I humbly suggest, very open to chat-up lines. "Wanna get married?" goes down a treat, I believe.
|
"For people in poor countries",
explains the Yazzmonster.
"life has always been fragile, unpredictable, risky, scary and murderous, which is perhaps why they believe so ardently in the next world, or try, even if it kills them, to reach places of wealth and safety. Although unfair trade agreements, grinding poverty, corrupt and pitiless leaders, illness, death, violence, degradation and natural disasters devastate generation after generation, they still laugh and sing and manage to dream a little".
It sounds just like the east end of London, where you can hardly move for chuckling, yodelling fantasists. I wonder why they bother coming here, really. Can't be the weather.
|
explains the Yazzmonster.
"life has always been fragile, unpredictable, risky, scary and murderous, which is perhaps why they believe so ardently in the next world, or try, even if it kills them, to reach places of wealth and safety. Although unfair trade agreements, grinding poverty, corrupt and pitiless leaders, illness, death, violence, degradation and natural disasters devastate generation after generation, they still laugh and sing and manage to dream a little".
It sounds just like the east end of London, where you can hardly move for chuckling, yodelling fantasists. I wonder why they bother coming here, really. Can't be the weather.
|
Some changes in the blogroll. Both Cinders and Steve Chapman have gone into cryonic suspension, and Ms Raper has clearly not got over seeing Concorde's last flight. Oh well. Of course, if they ever come back I will welcome them with the fatted calf they richly deserve. In the meantime, au revoir. Or not.
|
|
Friday, January 2
it comes in pints? What does? Love, beer, oppression? Whatever, it's Jonesy's new site. And there I was Giving War a Chance. Apparently that was all sooo 2003. And if you check out her permalinks - and mine, now - you'll discover that Andrea Harris has also moved. It's hard to keep up with these chicks sometimes, y'know. Specially when they don't want to meet me.
|
|
"Class is the great taboo".
Says Polly Toynbee.
"Politicians don't talk about it: it is the great unmentionable everyone conspires to pretend is a thing of the past, laughing at the old upstairs/downstairs hierarchies as if class itself had vanished along with domestic service".
Well I mention it all the time. There are scuzzers everywhere. Car thievers, burglars, scagheads: this is Bethnal Green, baby. Anyway, Polly agrees with me - class really does exist.
"A key ingredient in determining future social class is language - the basic tool for thought, argument, reasoning and making sense of a confusing world. There is only a short time during the first three years that the brain absorbs language, the concepts it embodies and the culture implied".
Uh-oh. I feel a SureStart moment coming.
"By the age of four, a professional's child will have had 50m words addressed to it, a working-class child 30m and a welfare child just 12m. Consider this: they found the professional child at the age of three had a bigger vocabulary than the parent of the welfare child".
Again, we're in agreement. But is this a bad thing? Perhaps conversation is merely a bourgeois construct, a manifestation of the hegemony of the white, male, patriarchal society we live in, and by moving into a post-linguistic culture we will all be better off. Perhaps indeed, the proles really will be happier, touching each other, pointing, and generally communicating via telepathy.
"Smug conservatives might think this confirms all their prejudices: class is in the DNA, or at least permanently deep-dyed into a child's immutable culture. But the point of this work is to prove it is not so. Intervention works. Give very young children intensive interaction with teachers and they make up for what they lack at home; parents can easily be taught to read and talk to their children constructively. IQ, they say, is only a measure of the child's early experience and that can be changed. But it takes a major effort: to get the welfare child up to the vocabulary standard of the working-class child, it would take 41 hours a week of talking at the level offered by the professional parent".
You know one day Polly is going to give up on all this. The penny will drop, and the sheer almightly cost of all this will make even her figure out that she's missing out on the root causes. As an extremely smug conservative, I would like to suggest that fatherlessness was a bigger factor in the moronisation of the underclass, and far more significant than the scheming of the multinationals, the fact that her mother reads the Sun and watches Sky. etc. etc. Rather like the French Health system SureStart may one day be the envy of the world, but six months later it will be threatened with bankrupty. It's gonna happen one day. I have faith.
Anyway, I really don't know why she's so worried. I mean, when it comes to the most important issues facing mankind Norway rules the roost, so victory surely is inevitable.
|
Says Polly Toynbee.
"Politicians don't talk about it: it is the great unmentionable everyone conspires to pretend is a thing of the past, laughing at the old upstairs/downstairs hierarchies as if class itself had vanished along with domestic service".
Well I mention it all the time. There are scuzzers everywhere. Car thievers, burglars, scagheads: this is Bethnal Green, baby. Anyway, Polly agrees with me - class really does exist.
"A key ingredient in determining future social class is language - the basic tool for thought, argument, reasoning and making sense of a confusing world. There is only a short time during the first three years that the brain absorbs language, the concepts it embodies and the culture implied".
Uh-oh. I feel a SureStart moment coming.
"By the age of four, a professional's child will have had 50m words addressed to it, a working-class child 30m and a welfare child just 12m. Consider this: they found the professional child at the age of three had a bigger vocabulary than the parent of the welfare child".
Again, we're in agreement. But is this a bad thing? Perhaps conversation is merely a bourgeois construct, a manifestation of the hegemony of the white, male, patriarchal society we live in, and by moving into a post-linguistic culture we will all be better off. Perhaps indeed, the proles really will be happier, touching each other, pointing, and generally communicating via telepathy.
"Smug conservatives might think this confirms all their prejudices: class is in the DNA, or at least permanently deep-dyed into a child's immutable culture. But the point of this work is to prove it is not so. Intervention works. Give very young children intensive interaction with teachers and they make up for what they lack at home; parents can easily be taught to read and talk to their children constructively. IQ, they say, is only a measure of the child's early experience and that can be changed. But it takes a major effort: to get the welfare child up to the vocabulary standard of the working-class child, it would take 41 hours a week of talking at the level offered by the professional parent".
You know one day Polly is going to give up on all this. The penny will drop, and the sheer almightly cost of all this will make even her figure out that she's missing out on the root causes. As an extremely smug conservative, I would like to suggest that fatherlessness was a bigger factor in the moronisation of the underclass, and far more significant than the scheming of the multinationals, the fact that her mother reads the Sun and watches Sky. etc. etc. Rather like the French Health system SureStart may one day be the envy of the world, but six months later it will be threatened with bankrupty. It's gonna happen one day. I have faith.
Anyway, I really don't know why she's so worried. I mean, when it comes to the most important issues facing mankind Norway rules the roost, so victory surely is inevitable.
|
"The overwhelming majority of humanity lives under "liberal capitalism" and has gained nothing from it but unrelenting misery and squalor".
Says Kola Odetola, a letter writer, in the Guardian.
|
Says Kola Odetola, a letter writer, in the Guardian.
|
Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, and Excessive Government Nannying Tessa Jowell defends herself:
"It is not easy to define precisely the line between where government interference in private conduct is legitimate and where it isn’t. But it is not hard to recognise what falls either side: preventing child abuse, domestic violence and drink-driving are, now at least, seen as issues of public interest in the realm of private conduct. But where do the following fall: eating habits, smoking, the content of television advertising and physical fitness?"
Big questions indeed. I err on the side of nowhere. Tessa doesn't.
"There are many who consider it ridiculous for the Government to take a position on these issues, or most of them. Right-wing columnists’ word processors are practically programmed to spit out the phrase “nanny state” at the slightest mention of government interference in these areas, and there are powerful commercial interests which support them".
So? So? What the hell has that got to do with it? There are even more powerful governmental interests which don't support them.
I believe we have to treat grown ups as adults, and everyone has to be free to make his or her own choices. At the same time, however, the Government would be failing in its general responsibility to promote the welfare of the country where it can, if it did not give warning and, sometimes, wield the legislative stick".
Why?
"Not that it is simply a matter of warning, legislating and nothing else. There is no point in exhorting people to take more exercise if there are no attractive facilities available, or in telling parents to give their children a better diet when they cannot afford to do so. And on the other side, government can often work with commercial interests as much as against them".
Exactly. It never stops.
"So call it the nanny state if you like; I call it the empowering, co-operating state".
And I call it the Liberalist Terror.
|
"It is not easy to define precisely the line between where government interference in private conduct is legitimate and where it isn’t. But it is not hard to recognise what falls either side: preventing child abuse, domestic violence and drink-driving are, now at least, seen as issues of public interest in the realm of private conduct. But where do the following fall: eating habits, smoking, the content of television advertising and physical fitness?"
Big questions indeed. I err on the side of nowhere. Tessa doesn't.
"There are many who consider it ridiculous for the Government to take a position on these issues, or most of them. Right-wing columnists’ word processors are practically programmed to spit out the phrase “nanny state” at the slightest mention of government interference in these areas, and there are powerful commercial interests which support them".
So? So? What the hell has that got to do with it? There are even more powerful governmental interests which don't support them.
I believe we have to treat grown ups as adults, and everyone has to be free to make his or her own choices. At the same time, however, the Government would be failing in its general responsibility to promote the welfare of the country where it can, if it did not give warning and, sometimes, wield the legislative stick".
Why?
"Not that it is simply a matter of warning, legislating and nothing else. There is no point in exhorting people to take more exercise if there are no attractive facilities available, or in telling parents to give their children a better diet when they cannot afford to do so. And on the other side, government can often work with commercial interests as much as against them".
Exactly. It never stops.
"So call it the nanny state if you like; I call it the empowering, co-operating state".
And I call it the Liberalist Terror.
|
According to the World Health Organisation the French healthcare system is "the best in the world". And it's about to go bankrupt.
|
|
"I know it's stupid. So why can't I stop smoking?"
wonders Deborah Orr. Me too. I just can't understand it.
|
wonders Deborah Orr. Me too. I just can't understand it.
|
Thursday, January 1
Got a hangover, perchance? Well if this guy has his way, soon it'll take more than an Alka-Seltzer to sort it out. Six more years? Haven't we suffered enough? Can you imagine what six more years of the neosocialist terror will do to the collective constitution? We'll all be alkies. Still, at least someone will step into the breech and sort out all out, courtesy of Jackie Ashley, standing up on behalf of beleaguered female government ministers everywhere:
"It is time to stand up for the "nanny state" - for Jowell and Hodge and, in other areas, Patricia Hewitt and Harriet Harman. And also, in general, for the state's right and duty to involve itself in questions of diet, health, family budgets and good parenting".
No, please. Leave me alone. Leave us alone. Leave everyone alone. If we haven't done anything wrong, just leave us all alone. Tories, Liberals, and Lefties. We can all agree on that, can't we?
"The crucial point which critics of the nanny state fail to mention is that individuals and families don't stand alone. None of us lives in a neutral social space, unharassed, and free to make wise long-term choices. Whatever the philosophical ideal, in the real world we are bombarded by corporate messages cajoling us and our children to consume and borrow. We are inhabitants of the more, now, spend-it, eat-it society, which - let us not forget - boosts the profits of the multinationals".
Indeed. If it weren't for the multinationals we'd still be in our caves. You're right there, love.
"Just as in urban America, it is the poorer British who are most visibly damaged by the downside of consumerism. This is pretty simple. If you can't afford the expensive consolations of winter travel or dinners out, then the homelier treats of chocolate, burgers and alcopops are that much harder to resist. Fat now means poor. Pop Idol's 15-stone Michelle is a working-class girl who stands, and wobbles, for millions. Pass a group of kids smoking and the odds are they will be female and poor".
Or stressed out tax cattle fed up with the New Labour hellhole that is Britain, 2004-style.
"Who really thinks that a centre-left government should stand aside and do nothing? The whole point of progressive politics is to stand with the most vulnerable people. Today that means helping counter the great commercial, short-termist forces that rain down.
Nanny state? Once upon a time, nannies were the carers and the copers for middle-class families whose parents had opted out. Today, in trying to help all families struggle with consequences of consumerism and social change, these ministers are doing a vital and noble job. It's time their friends on the left gave them some support".
No, it's not. Leave us alone, you interfering bat. It's time for all good people to unite and fight for the right to wobble. I'm off to McDonalds for a cheeseburger and milkshake. And then it's down the boozer. Anyone fancy a scotch?
|
"It is time to stand up for the "nanny state" - for Jowell and Hodge and, in other areas, Patricia Hewitt and Harriet Harman. And also, in general, for the state's right and duty to involve itself in questions of diet, health, family budgets and good parenting".
No, please. Leave me alone. Leave us alone. Leave everyone alone. If we haven't done anything wrong, just leave us all alone. Tories, Liberals, and Lefties. We can all agree on that, can't we?
"The crucial point which critics of the nanny state fail to mention is that individuals and families don't stand alone. None of us lives in a neutral social space, unharassed, and free to make wise long-term choices. Whatever the philosophical ideal, in the real world we are bombarded by corporate messages cajoling us and our children to consume and borrow. We are inhabitants of the more, now, spend-it, eat-it society, which - let us not forget - boosts the profits of the multinationals".
Indeed. If it weren't for the multinationals we'd still be in our caves. You're right there, love.
"Just as in urban America, it is the poorer British who are most visibly damaged by the downside of consumerism. This is pretty simple. If you can't afford the expensive consolations of winter travel or dinners out, then the homelier treats of chocolate, burgers and alcopops are that much harder to resist. Fat now means poor. Pop Idol's 15-stone Michelle is a working-class girl who stands, and wobbles, for millions. Pass a group of kids smoking and the odds are they will be female and poor".
Or stressed out tax cattle fed up with the New Labour hellhole that is Britain, 2004-style.
"Who really thinks that a centre-left government should stand aside and do nothing? The whole point of progressive politics is to stand with the most vulnerable people. Today that means helping counter the great commercial, short-termist forces that rain down.
Nanny state? Once upon a time, nannies were the carers and the copers for middle-class families whose parents had opted out. Today, in trying to help all families struggle with consequences of consumerism and social change, these ministers are doing a vital and noble job. It's time their friends on the left gave them some support".
No, it's not. Leave us alone, you interfering bat. It's time for all good people to unite and fight for the right to wobble. I'm off to McDonalds for a cheeseburger and milkshake. And then it's down the boozer. Anyone fancy a scotch?
|
Wednesday, December 31
Like the vast majority of the human population of Great Britain, Madeleine Bunting watched the last episodes of The Office. And guess what? She's found herself a new role model:
"In reality, the Dawns of this world are extremely intelligent. She's acutely observant, shrewd and funny; but she's been brought up to keep all of that to herself. She's been instilled from birth with that great feminine virtue of forbearance. Meanwhile, her good nature is endlessly taken advantage of by bosses who find her far too useful to ever think of promoting her. The really chilling thing about Dawn is that her character would sit as easily in a Jane Austen novel as it does in the 21st-century office; despite 150-odd years in the advance of women's education and professional achievement, the same contours are visible of female subservience to male ego".
I know. To think of all the Great Strides that Have Been Made by Women these 150-odd years. And yet, things haven't changed at all!
"So will 2004 be the breakthrough year when she finally gets out of the rut?
Probably not. It always requires such a lot of pushiness, self-belief and risk-taking to make it, and any incipient evidence of such are meticulously squashed from the moment little girl toddlers first get up on their chubby legs. These are women who have been schooled into passivity, so they're left with the fantasy of being discovered, of someone else stepping in to make their destiny - a man, a talent scout or a headhunter".
In fact, in many respects, things are so much worse.
"What makes New Year so intimidating is the idea that we have to make our own destiny. In the past, we could leave that onerous responsibility to fate or providence, and then rail against them when it went wrong. Now it's all down to us".
Which might prove too much. Things were so much simpler in olden times, weren't they?
|
"In reality, the Dawns of this world are extremely intelligent. She's acutely observant, shrewd and funny; but she's been brought up to keep all of that to herself. She's been instilled from birth with that great feminine virtue of forbearance. Meanwhile, her good nature is endlessly taken advantage of by bosses who find her far too useful to ever think of promoting her. The really chilling thing about Dawn is that her character would sit as easily in a Jane Austen novel as it does in the 21st-century office; despite 150-odd years in the advance of women's education and professional achievement, the same contours are visible of female subservience to male ego".
I know. To think of all the Great Strides that Have Been Made by Women these 150-odd years. And yet, things haven't changed at all!
"So will 2004 be the breakthrough year when she finally gets out of the rut?
Probably not. It always requires such a lot of pushiness, self-belief and risk-taking to make it, and any incipient evidence of such are meticulously squashed from the moment little girl toddlers first get up on their chubby legs. These are women who have been schooled into passivity, so they're left with the fantasy of being discovered, of someone else stepping in to make their destiny - a man, a talent scout or a headhunter".
In fact, in many respects, things are so much worse.
"What makes New Year so intimidating is the idea that we have to make our own destiny. In the past, we could leave that onerous responsibility to fate or providence, and then rail against them when it went wrong. Now it's all down to us".
Which might prove too much. Things were so much simpler in olden times, weren't they?
|
Tuesday, December 30
"Most of you probably have little or no interest in what's top of the charts over the weeks surrounding Yule".
proclaims Zoe Williams in today's Guardian. Well I dare say she knows her readership. Preoccupied as it is with global warming, unemployment, racism, the rising tide of homophobia, religious fundamentalism and the ever-widening gap between we in the west and them in the third world, such matters may seem trivial. But you lot are different. Well you are if you're anything like me, and if you aren't, what the hell are you reading this for?
"I think it's fair to say that the cultural landscape of the year ahead is defined by whichever ditty the nation awards this sentimental plaudit. The supremacy of Mad World says big things about 2004, almost all of them good".
Wrong! It was a travesty of justice. Indeed, if I were Justin Hawkins I'd be off to the Supreme Court demanding a recount. But we do things differently in Britain, I'm afraid.
"So what message do we take from this chart sensation? Quite possibly, that manufactured pop has died; that the world has suddenly woken up from its 90s slumber and realised that relentlessly upbeat songs about discos and fun and self-belief will choke us unless we move fast and reject them in favour of something more suicidal. I'd lay odds that 2004 will be the year we all grow up".
That is unlikely. So long as the Guardian continues to publish the likes of Gary Younge, Polly Toynbee, and Ms Williams herself, that target will be a long time coming.
Altogether, this has not been a great week for our Justin. Still, any single chicks out there will know what to do. Come on, kids!
|
proclaims Zoe Williams in today's Guardian. Well I dare say she knows her readership. Preoccupied as it is with global warming, unemployment, racism, the rising tide of homophobia, religious fundamentalism and the ever-widening gap between we in the west and them in the third world, such matters may seem trivial. But you lot are different. Well you are if you're anything like me, and if you aren't, what the hell are you reading this for?
"I think it's fair to say that the cultural landscape of the year ahead is defined by whichever ditty the nation awards this sentimental plaudit. The supremacy of Mad World says big things about 2004, almost all of them good".
Wrong! It was a travesty of justice. Indeed, if I were Justin Hawkins I'd be off to the Supreme Court demanding a recount. But we do things differently in Britain, I'm afraid.
"So what message do we take from this chart sensation? Quite possibly, that manufactured pop has died; that the world has suddenly woken up from its 90s slumber and realised that relentlessly upbeat songs about discos and fun and self-belief will choke us unless we move fast and reject them in favour of something more suicidal. I'd lay odds that 2004 will be the year we all grow up".
That is unlikely. So long as the Guardian continues to publish the likes of Gary Younge, Polly Toynbee, and Ms Williams herself, that target will be a long time coming.
Altogether, this has not been a great week for our Justin. Still, any single chicks out there will know what to do. Come on, kids!
|
Monday, December 29
So there it is. The end of The Office. When Dawn gave Tim a tongue sandwich even I felt my upper lip tremble. I haven't cried so much since John McClane gave Holly Gennaro a great big hug at the end of that other Yuletide favourite. Or is it the end? Well, not quite. I must say, though, what makes people think up names like this? How does it work in the discussion, exactly? Does someone go: Gareth Keenen? No. Dwight Schrute? I like it. I suppose they do. It wasn't as good as the first series of course, and I think our writers really got things wrong, playing Brent as an Alan Partridge-like buffoon so much. He was much better when he was subtler, and actually had some cred. That's the trouble with sequels and long-runners, they so often end up caricatures.
Anyway, I hope Santa brought you lots of nice things. In the mean time, if you really want to reacquaint yourself with some liberal-leftoid idiotarianism, check out the Guardian hits of the year. Some worthy winners there, including AL Kennedy's laughfest about pod people, and Matthew Engel's inspired masterpiece about the US eco-kill. Enjoy.
|
Anyway, I hope Santa brought you lots of nice things. In the mean time, if you really want to reacquaint yourself with some liberal-leftoid idiotarianism, check out the Guardian hits of the year. Some worthy winners there, including AL Kennedy's laughfest about pod people, and Matthew Engel's inspired masterpiece about the US eco-kill. Enjoy.
|
Tuesday, December 23
How often does something have to happen for it to be termed a tradition? Who knows. At any rate, last year I posted the lyrics to the finest Christmas song ever made. But then nobody outside Suffolk had heard of The Darkness. This year they are rightly all over the radio with a song that will be playing in apartment stores for years to come, long after Mad World has been consigned to the ashheap of history. So, on that bombshell, have yourselves a merry little eco-friendly, compassionate, caring, lesbian-sensitive, socially inclusive, multicultural, sexually-diverse Christmas. See you soon.
Feigning joy and surprise at the gifts we despise over mulled wine with you
On the 25th day of the 12th month
The sleigh bells are in time ringing true
How we cling each day long to that snowflakes and hope in hell
that it won’t end
Don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, just let them ring in peace.
Well the weather is cruel,
and the season of Yule warms the heart, but it still hurts.
You’ve got your career, spent the best part of last year apart and it still hurts
So that’s why I pray each and every Christmas day that it won’t end
Don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, just let them ring in peace.
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Dust underneath the mistletoe leaves when you’re not here,
You went away upon boxing day,
Now how the hell am I gonna make it into the New Year.
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, just let them ring in peace.
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
|
Feigning joy and surprise at the gifts we despise over mulled wine with you
On the 25th day of the 12th month
The sleigh bells are in time ringing true
How we cling each day long to that snowflakes and hope in hell
that it won’t end
Don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, just let them ring in peace.
Well the weather is cruel,
and the season of Yule warms the heart, but it still hurts.
You’ve got your career, spent the best part of last year apart and it still hurts
So that’s why I pray each and every Christmas day that it won’t end
Don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, just let them ring in peace.
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Dust underneath the mistletoe leaves when you’re not here,
You went away upon boxing day,
Now how the hell am I gonna make it into the New Year.
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, just let them ring in peace.
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
Christmas time, don’t let the bells end
|
Monday, December 22
It ain't over till the fat lady sings. And boy, did she sing! A worthy winner indeed. Still, there are some travesties of justice out there - who the hell honestly prefers that hideous dirge to the latest tune by retro-rockers the Darkness? - but tales like these put it all in perspective. Yet the Guardian is still in a hateful mood. First up, Max Hastings:
"it is hard not to hate George Bush. His ignorance and conceit, his professed special relationship with God, invite revulsion".
announces the cigaristical sage.
"The president's personal odyssey touched a new low this week, when he asserted publicly that Saddam Hussein should die".
After due process, admittedly. Mad Max, however, far from being repulsed by capital punishment, thinks that the controversial dictator should have fried already:
"We can agree, perhaps, that Saddam Hussein does not deserve to live. It is a pity that he made no show of resistance when American soldiers found him, to justify tossing a grenade into his spider hole".
Make your mind up, Max. And Roy Hattersley claims solidarity with socialist firebrand Red Ken:
"I am, in a manner of speaking, a Livingstonian. I share his contempt for George Bush". etc. etc.
Need I say more? Still, it is the Guardian. You wouldn't expect anything, and between you and me, you wouldn't really want it either. There's something terribly reassuring about its year in year out peevishness, isn't there?
|
"it is hard not to hate George Bush. His ignorance and conceit, his professed special relationship with God, invite revulsion".
announces the cigaristical sage.
"The president's personal odyssey touched a new low this week, when he asserted publicly that Saddam Hussein should die".
After due process, admittedly. Mad Max, however, far from being repulsed by capital punishment, thinks that the controversial dictator should have fried already:
"We can agree, perhaps, that Saddam Hussein does not deserve to live. It is a pity that he made no show of resistance when American soldiers found him, to justify tossing a grenade into his spider hole".
Make your mind up, Max. And Roy Hattersley claims solidarity with socialist firebrand Red Ken:
"I am, in a manner of speaking, a Livingstonian. I share his contempt for George Bush". etc. etc.
Need I say more? Still, it is the Guardian. You wouldn't expect anything, and between you and me, you wouldn't really want it either. There's something terribly reassuring about its year in year out peevishness, isn't there?
|
She wouldn't let it lie! It's the Yazzmonster, returning to an issue you might have thought she'd have wanted to be left dead and buried:
"If there were any justice in this world, Benjamin Zephaniah would be honoured in the new year for blasting open the doors that guard the secrets of our archaic and dubious honours system and for making many of us think again about the perils and delusions that come into play when we accept medals from, and collude with, the British state".
Like anyone cares any more. I mean, this is all so 2003. And talking of Yazza, you may ( or may not ) be relieved to know that my bid for Yasmin's favours has failed. £1100 for the old girl to cook me a curry? No way, Jose. That's way out of my 2 quid fifty ceiling. What do you think I am, made of money? And I had a sneaking suspicion I might end up like this poor sap.
|
"If there were any justice in this world, Benjamin Zephaniah would be honoured in the new year for blasting open the doors that guard the secrets of our archaic and dubious honours system and for making many of us think again about the perils and delusions that come into play when we accept medals from, and collude with, the British state".
Like anyone cares any more. I mean, this is all so 2003. And talking of Yazza, you may ( or may not ) be relieved to know that my bid for Yasmin's favours has failed. £1100 for the old girl to cook me a curry? No way, Jose. That's way out of my 2 quid fifty ceiling. What do you think I am, made of money? And I had a sneaking suspicion I might end up like this poor sap.
|
A while back there was a raging debate in the comments section about the gender of noted Scots satirist AL Kennedy. I went for the male option, whereas other, wiser heads reckoned she was a chick. Well, Tim Blair has gone undercover and found out the truth. She's not just a chick, but a scrawny one. She also writes very hyped-up prose. I can't imagine what her novels are like. Could anyone keep that up for 70 000 words? Tim notes that she's 'vegan-looking'. A throwaway line that explains quite a lot I think. I mean, she's fallen for the plastic turkey routine. Maybe it's because she's never eaten a real one. Perhaps she couldn't tell the difference.
|
|
Wednesday, December 17
So there it is. Two evildoers nailed in the space of four days. Three if you count Ms Carr. Must be Christmas time. I'm off to celebrate. Back on Monday. Tootlepip.
|
|
"In the revolting world of spam, among the penis enlargements and worse, are the money laundering frauds so palpably absurd you might think only idiots would fall for them".
Which for the cynical among us, must surely be true. Yet the Guardian today has a touching confessional from a vulnerable, big-hearted lady from Clapham whose non-idiocy has never been in question. This lady - let's call her Polly, to protect her identity - was taken in.
"How could anyone be so stupid? Easily.
With embarrassment, feeling a fool, I admit I was a victim of a Nigerian fraud. Looking back now, I can't think why I was so easily taken in"-
and neither can we.
-"but I did make a reasonable check. A hand-written letter arrived from a Nigerian 14-year-old called Sandra".
Sandra, clearly, had not been through the government's SureStart programme.
"It was nicely written on a religious school's headed paper, though not too perfect, telling me her sad story. Both her parents had died and she had to complete her last two years of school. Her results were good, and it would only cost £100 a year for the last two years to cover the cost. I wrote back and I also wrote to her headmaster, whose name appeared on the school letterhead, at a PO box. He wrote back in more adult handwriting to say Sandra was indeed a needy and promising student, and he enclosed her last term's report. It was an impressive document, each subject carefully filled in by a teacher with different writing, giving an excellent but not over-the-top report, with some subjects subtly lagging a bit behind. So I sent a cheque for £200 and received another of Sandra's letters, a bit too full of God's mercy and Jesus's blessings for my taste".
They should have done their homework and said they were great fans of Richard Dawkins. Then they could have creamed off a little bit more, I fancy.
"I had an idea I might keep in touch with her to see what became of her. If I had any doubts, £200 was a modest sum for all the effort a fraudster took to create these letters.
But it wasn't about the £200. Not long afterwards my bank received a letter with a perfect copy of my signature, giving my bank account numbers, asking for £1,000 to be transferred at once to a bank in Osaka, Japan. Luckily, the bank thought to ring me up and query it".
Those caring capitalists, eh?
"It turned out that a host of recent scams had asked for money to be transferred to Japan and the police had alerted all banks. It took me a little while to work out how they got my signature and my bank details, but then it clicked. Sure enough, when I reported it to the police, they laughed".
Bastards.
"They knew the Sandra letters very well and the real purpose was to sting the victim's bank account. It happened again last week when my bank got another request for a £1,000 transfer to Japan and I do feel a fool. Looking back at the letters now, I can see it all. For heaven's sake, she even said both her parents had died of the ebola flesh-eating virus".
Yes, it's a tragic tale. But let's cut to the chase. Who's to blame for all this nefariousness?
"The US is about to hold another election that will be largely bought and sold by business and oil interests. Think of the corruption that US and UK conservatives carelessly unleashed upon the former Soviet Union in the name of extreme free market ideology.
The image of capitalism now being spread about the world is cowboy stuff: little gleaned from America extols the virtue of regulation, restraint and control. We reap from the third world what we sow: if some Nigerians learned lessons in capitalism from global oil companies that helped corrupt and despoil that land, it is hardly surpising they absorbed some of the Texan oil values that now rule the White House. Alas, the querulous, navel-gazing and increasingly non-internationalist EU seems in no mood at present to offer a different and better face of capitalism to the world".
It could never happen in Norway, you know.
|
Which for the cynical among us, must surely be true. Yet the Guardian today has a touching confessional from a vulnerable, big-hearted lady from Clapham whose non-idiocy has never been in question. This lady - let's call her Polly, to protect her identity - was taken in.
"How could anyone be so stupid? Easily.
With embarrassment, feeling a fool, I admit I was a victim of a Nigerian fraud. Looking back now, I can't think why I was so easily taken in"-
and neither can we.
-"but I did make a reasonable check. A hand-written letter arrived from a Nigerian 14-year-old called Sandra".
Sandra, clearly, had not been through the government's SureStart programme.
"It was nicely written on a religious school's headed paper, though not too perfect, telling me her sad story. Both her parents had died and she had to complete her last two years of school. Her results were good, and it would only cost £100 a year for the last two years to cover the cost. I wrote back and I also wrote to her headmaster, whose name appeared on the school letterhead, at a PO box. He wrote back in more adult handwriting to say Sandra was indeed a needy and promising student, and he enclosed her last term's report. It was an impressive document, each subject carefully filled in by a teacher with different writing, giving an excellent but not over-the-top report, with some subjects subtly lagging a bit behind. So I sent a cheque for £200 and received another of Sandra's letters, a bit too full of God's mercy and Jesus's blessings for my taste".
They should have done their homework and said they were great fans of Richard Dawkins. Then they could have creamed off a little bit more, I fancy.
"I had an idea I might keep in touch with her to see what became of her. If I had any doubts, £200 was a modest sum for all the effort a fraudster took to create these letters.
But it wasn't about the £200. Not long afterwards my bank received a letter with a perfect copy of my signature, giving my bank account numbers, asking for £1,000 to be transferred at once to a bank in Osaka, Japan. Luckily, the bank thought to ring me up and query it".
Those caring capitalists, eh?
"It turned out that a host of recent scams had asked for money to be transferred to Japan and the police had alerted all banks. It took me a little while to work out how they got my signature and my bank details, but then it clicked. Sure enough, when I reported it to the police, they laughed".
Bastards.
"They knew the Sandra letters very well and the real purpose was to sting the victim's bank account. It happened again last week when my bank got another request for a £1,000 transfer to Japan and I do feel a fool. Looking back at the letters now, I can see it all. For heaven's sake, she even said both her parents had died of the ebola flesh-eating virus".
Yes, it's a tragic tale. But let's cut to the chase. Who's to blame for all this nefariousness?
"The US is about to hold another election that will be largely bought and sold by business and oil interests. Think of the corruption that US and UK conservatives carelessly unleashed upon the former Soviet Union in the name of extreme free market ideology.
The image of capitalism now being spread about the world is cowboy stuff: little gleaned from America extols the virtue of regulation, restraint and control. We reap from the third world what we sow: if some Nigerians learned lessons in capitalism from global oil companies that helped corrupt and despoil that land, it is hardly surpising they absorbed some of the Texan oil values that now rule the White House. Alas, the querulous, navel-gazing and increasingly non-internationalist EU seems in no mood at present to offer a different and better face of capitalism to the world".
It could never happen in Norway, you know.
|
Tuesday, December 16
Who says that every penny spent by the government isn't money well spent? Here's a Department of Health carol to warm the cockles of your hearts.
( Link found via the combined might of Richard Littlejohn and Google. )
|
( Link found via the combined might of Richard Littlejohn and Google. )
|
Like most normal people, I too have had my suspicions of airline pilots. All that "If you care to look out of your window now, you will see on the left, the lost city of Atlantis", and "We hope you have enjoyed flying with Coconut Airways, and will fly with us again soon" stuff. I mean, how tricky can it be? After all they do have autopilots, don't they? Actually I reckon it's all done on tape, and they just sit in the cockpit sipping pina coladas while getting the stewards and stewardesses to take turns giving them blow-jobs. However, I'm not sure I'd go quite so far as the Moonbat on this one. Tomorrow, you see, is the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brothers first flight, and the fabled eco-warrior is extremely concerned:
"At Kitty Hawk, George Bush will deliver a eulogy to aviation, while a number of men with more money than sense will seek to recreate the Wrights' first flight. Well, they can keep their anniversary. Tomorrow should be a day of international mourning. December 17 2003 is the centenary of the world's most effective killing machine".
Think of that, next time you gallivant off to Tuscany, you Guardian-reading scum, you.
"Those with access to the aeroplane control the world".
Pilots of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your aeroplanes.
"Flying is our most effective means of wrecking the planet: every passenger on a return journey from Britain to Florida produces more carbon dioxide than the average motorist does in a year. Every time we fly, we help to kill someone".
We are all guilty.
"Just as Alexander the Great worshipped his horse, George Bush, the new conqueror of Persia, will tomorrow worship the aeroplane. Our societies are built upon these technologies of war: the current world order fell from the hatches of the aeroplane. At 10.35am, North Carolina time, George Bush and the other enthusiasts for domination will bow down before it. The rest of us should observe 12 seconds of silence, in commemoration of the deeds wrought by those magnificent men in their killing machines".
Yes. Well it's all very well for the Moonbat. He just has to spread his wings and take to the skies. But not all of us ordinary mortals have sonar. How the hell are we supposed to get around? Rickshaws?
|
"At Kitty Hawk, George Bush will deliver a eulogy to aviation, while a number of men with more money than sense will seek to recreate the Wrights' first flight. Well, they can keep their anniversary. Tomorrow should be a day of international mourning. December 17 2003 is the centenary of the world's most effective killing machine".
Think of that, next time you gallivant off to Tuscany, you Guardian-reading scum, you.
"Those with access to the aeroplane control the world".
Pilots of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your aeroplanes.
"Flying is our most effective means of wrecking the planet: every passenger on a return journey from Britain to Florida produces more carbon dioxide than the average motorist does in a year. Every time we fly, we help to kill someone".
We are all guilty.
"Just as Alexander the Great worshipped his horse, George Bush, the new conqueror of Persia, will tomorrow worship the aeroplane. Our societies are built upon these technologies of war: the current world order fell from the hatches of the aeroplane. At 10.35am, North Carolina time, George Bush and the other enthusiasts for domination will bow down before it. The rest of us should observe 12 seconds of silence, in commemoration of the deeds wrought by those magnificent men in their killing machines".
Yes. Well it's all very well for the Moonbat. He just has to spread his wings and take to the skies. But not all of us ordinary mortals have sonar. How the hell are we supposed to get around? Rickshaws?
|
Monday, December 15
Sometimes I just take my hat off to the Guardian. I mean, I did wonder how they'd spin it. First the uncontentious celebrating. Then the subtle and highly-contentious baloney. And then the gratuitous sneering. That much was predictable. But even I was unprepared for this one:
"In the end, they found him in a hole in the ground. The man who ruled millions by fear, who built palaces, myths and monuments to rival his Babylonian forebears, who aspired to lead and dominate all Arab nations, looked old, tired and scruffy, more like a tramp than a world-renowned tyrant".
Okay so far, I suppose. But you know there's going to be some thorns among the roses coming up.
"Eight months on the run had left him with nowhere to hide. Saddam Hussein, the wily fox, the perennial survivor of 30 years of Middle East power politics, had been literally run to earth. But it was not US or British military force that ultimately proved to be his undoing. It was old-fashioned intelligence work on the ground, among bodyguards, clan and family members, sweetened by the incentive of a $25m reward, that made the difference".
Well, up to a point. I'm sure all those military types made a little bit of a difference. I mean, if they hadn't had guns, maybe Saddam wouldn't have come quietly.
"Like his sons, Iraq's deposed dictator appears to have been betrayed by an informer or informers. But unlike Uday and Qusay, who resisted to the death, perishing in a murderous blizzard of bullets, there was no fight left in Saddam".
Murderous? Saddam's little munchkins were murdered? Please explain.
"Saddam went quietly, with not a shot fired. Perhaps, at the age of 66, he no longer had the stomach for it. Perhaps he was simply caught napping".
I know. Just a shadow of his former self. Tragic, really. Surely the US ought to have fired a warning shot. And picking on an oldster... I mean, it's just not cricket.
"Saddam may continue to live, in perpetual custody; once what will be a very lengthy interrogation is completed, he may eventually face some form of trial, which must be in public and preferably under international, UN-authorised auspices".
Preferably? Why?
"For Mr Blair, as the Hutton inquiry report looms close, and after all the political damage Iraq has caused him, Saddam's capture is both a relief and (to some eyes at least) a vindication. For George Bush, too, it is as if Christmas has come early and this time, the turkey is real".
Turkeygate, eh? Now that takes genius.
|
"In the end, they found him in a hole in the ground. The man who ruled millions by fear, who built palaces, myths and monuments to rival his Babylonian forebears, who aspired to lead and dominate all Arab nations, looked old, tired and scruffy, more like a tramp than a world-renowned tyrant".
Okay so far, I suppose. But you know there's going to be some thorns among the roses coming up.
"Eight months on the run had left him with nowhere to hide. Saddam Hussein, the wily fox, the perennial survivor of 30 years of Middle East power politics, had been literally run to earth. But it was not US or British military force that ultimately proved to be his undoing. It was old-fashioned intelligence work on the ground, among bodyguards, clan and family members, sweetened by the incentive of a $25m reward, that made the difference".
Well, up to a point. I'm sure all those military types made a little bit of a difference. I mean, if they hadn't had guns, maybe Saddam wouldn't have come quietly.
"Like his sons, Iraq's deposed dictator appears to have been betrayed by an informer or informers. But unlike Uday and Qusay, who resisted to the death, perishing in a murderous blizzard of bullets, there was no fight left in Saddam".
Murderous? Saddam's little munchkins were murdered? Please explain.
"Saddam went quietly, with not a shot fired. Perhaps, at the age of 66, he no longer had the stomach for it. Perhaps he was simply caught napping".
I know. Just a shadow of his former self. Tragic, really. Surely the US ought to have fired a warning shot. And picking on an oldster... I mean, it's just not cricket.
"Saddam may continue to live, in perpetual custody; once what will be a very lengthy interrogation is completed, he may eventually face some form of trial, which must be in public and preferably under international, UN-authorised auspices".
Preferably? Why?
"For Mr Blair, as the Hutton inquiry report looms close, and after all the political damage Iraq has caused him, Saddam's capture is both a relief and (to some eyes at least) a vindication. For George Bush, too, it is as if Christmas has come early and this time, the turkey is real".
Turkeygate, eh? Now that takes genius.
|
Sunday, December 14
"THEY'RE out there".
Which rules out Saddam.
"They look like me and you, they're intelligent, they are in control of their faculties".
Which also rules out Monbiot.
"They live in England. They live in France. They live near the Spanish beaches where you take your children on holiday. And they're at work in Venice and Florence when you're on that romantic break".
Who are they? Communists? Socialists? Liberals?
"The internet provides a way for people with specific and troublesome sexual or emotional problems to band together into online communities which make them feel "normal".
Oh My God. Must be bloggers.
"For thousands of years mankind has controlled its baser urges through society. If the internet creates opportunity for micro-societies to grow with no reference to the wider moral code, what future lies ahead of us?"
Indeed.
"It is not an urge that will vanish with the passing years".
Oh well. Still, the News of the World knows what to do.
|
Which rules out Saddam.
"They look like me and you, they're intelligent, they are in control of their faculties".
Which also rules out Monbiot.
"They live in England. They live in France. They live near the Spanish beaches where you take your children on holiday. And they're at work in Venice and Florence when you're on that romantic break".
Who are they? Communists? Socialists? Liberals?
"The internet provides a way for people with specific and troublesome sexual or emotional problems to band together into online communities which make them feel "normal".
Oh My God. Must be bloggers.
"For thousands of years mankind has controlled its baser urges through society. If the internet creates opportunity for micro-societies to grow with no reference to the wider moral code, what future lies ahead of us?"
Indeed.
"It is not an urge that will vanish with the passing years".
Oh well. Still, the News of the World knows what to do.
|
- Comment Central
- Stephen Pollard
- Natalie Solent
- Two Blowhards
- Tim Blair
- Daimnation!
- Machinery of Night
- The Bewilderness
- Freedom and Whisky
- Jackie Danicki
- Biased BBC
- Civitas
- Samizdata
- Normblog
- Jim Miller
- White Sun of the Desert
- Progressive Reaction
- Dodgeblog
- Laban Tall
- Atlantic Blog
- House of Dumb
- Blognor Regis
- Burning Our Money
- The England Project
- Mick Hartley
- Iain Dale
- Tim Worstall
- An Englishman's Castle
- Unenlightened Commentary
- Squander Two
- Patrick Crozier
- Stumbling and Mumbling
- Guido Fawkes
- Brian Micklethwait
- Battenburg.co.uk
- The Devil's Kitchen
-
- February 2002
- March 2002
- April 2002
- May 2002
- June 2002
- July 2002
- August 2002
- September 2002
- October 2002
- November 2002
- December 2002
- January 2003
- February 2003
- March 2003
- April 2003
- May 2003
- June 2003
- July 2003
- August 2003
- September 2003
- October 2003
- November 2003
- December 2003
- January 2004
- February 2004
- March 2004
- April 2004
- May 2004
- June 2004
- July 2004
- August 2004
- September 2004
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
- February 2009
- April 2009
- May 2009
- June 2009