So it turns out ecstasy is an extremely safe drug.
Anyone want to lay bets on the first media organization to get Paul Betts to comment? After all, death of a child always makes you an appropriate person to quote on pubic and health policy.
And a child must have been murdered over night. Sara Payne better be ready to get her meejah fix.
Sorry, but I love the wonderful brilliance of this.
It might be on Fox and all, but it ranks with a ‘Richard and Judy’ fxed phone in for coolness, I mean, whose gonna be taken in? And do any of those people matter?
Wait a minute. Prescott condemns the ‘Saddam killing’?? Or so says all the meejah that matter (BBC, Metro, Guardian, google news sources).
Sorry, but maybe I didn’t hear it right. What he said was
‘I think the manner was quite deplorable really. I don’t think one can endorse in any way that, whatever your views about capital punishment. Frankly, to get the kind of recorded messages coming out is totally unacceptable and I think whoever is involved and responsible for it should be ashamed of themselves.
It’s not the execution itself he’s condemning (contrary to ALL the reports) but the fact that someone was allowed to film it and then release that film on YouTube. It’s that action that he thinks people should be ashamed of.
It’s typical NuLab–don’t care what people are doing as long as no one knows.
Or have I got a stick at the wrong end?
Journalism is so easy these days. A pressure group comes along, makes a few mocking noises about someone or something, and it gets coverage as news. Hence ‘Sense about Science’. All over the press this morning (here, the TOday programme, here, T’Grauniad), mocking celebrities for their lack of knowledge about science.
Now, this is probably all very good. Though I can’t help thinking that anyone who follows Chris deBurgh’s advice on spiritual healing or ‘Dr’ Gillian McKeith’s on nutrition deserves all they get. But then I started to wonder. Why criticise celebrities who simply want not to eat too may pesticides?
Well, how about because your lobby group is funded by agri-chemical industries? Or biotech industries? Or is connected to the somewhat odd Living Marxism cult? Contrary to the news reports, ‘Sense about Science’ isn’t an objective pressure group. It’s virulently pro-GM, and the current reports seem to be part its long-standing campaign to deride opposition to GM-trials as ‘anti-scientific’.
Oddly, however, the BBC has frequently chosen to work closely with the pressure group (stories here and here) without explaining its actual beliefs and role. So let’s list those funders (inter alia) once again–
Amersham Biosciences
BP
GlaxoSmithKline
AstarZeneca
Pfizer
And remember people, you can never believe a word you hear or see on the meejah.
Police marksmen, right, what is it they do?
They shoot people, right, don’t they?
That’s their job…
So why the fuss over this story…?
Next headline, Pope heretic shock, bear dumps in wood , etc., etc.
Love this thread from CiF–the masterpieces you’ve always thought are crap.
Sums up CiF contributors. All the tedious people pointing out the obvious–Emin and Hirst. Then the others desperately defending their own pet loves.
Me, I never understood the Keats vs Beatles debate that was the meejah’s desperate attempt to understand postmodernism (that Derrida writes very long words don’t he?). Both are awful. The Beatles went from copying Buddy Holly to copying the Beach Boys, and Revolution No.9 is the only decent thing they ever did (blatant musique concrete rip-off though)—okay, Helter Skelter was all right for its influence on certain californians, but Siouxise did a much better version.
Wuthering Heights is just terrible. A wimpy wankfest for girls who don’t know how to use their hairbrush handles. All of the Austens–ancient chick-lit, of no interest to anyone with a Y chromosome. Trollope–Eastenders writer of his day. All female crime writers except Dorothy L Sayers and that Icelandic one. Lowry, David Hockney (no, being gay doesn’t make you good), any classical composer between Orfeo and the Rite of Spring, the Arctic Monkeys–George Formby for the modern generation-, Pele, George Best, David Gower (what a total wanker, and what an ugly player), Seinfeld, Moby Dick (have you read that? fecking awful), and on and on….
EDIT–oh yeah and ANY modern fiction. Emperor’s clothes people, emperor’s clothes. Amis (MArtin–did you read that piece in T’Grauniad on Atta, could anyone but an autistic six year old in a wheelchair get away with such rubbish?), McEwan, Barnes, Smith, Ali, all total and utter shite. The Americans (except Pynchon) are worse–Cormac McCarthy? Richard Sportswriter Ford? Updike? Roth? Utter and total shite.
I like this game. As the INsane Clown Posse put it–
“Fuck Celine Dion and fuck Dionne Warwick
You both make me sick, suck my dick
Fuck the Berlin Wall, both sides of it
And fuck Lyle Lovett, whoever the fuck that is
Fuck everybody in the hemisphere
Fuck them across the world, and fuck them right here
You know the guy that operates the Rouge River draw bridge in Delray on
Jefferson? FUCK HIM!
Fuck your idea, fuck your gonnoreha
Fuck your diarrhea, Rocky Maivia
Fuck your wife, your homie did, he’s fuckin you
Fuck the police and the 5-0 too
Fuck Spin, Rolling Stone, and fuck Vibe
Fuck everybody inside
Whoever’s on the cover, fuck his mother
Fuck your little brother’s homie from around the way
And fuck Violent J!”
(just noticed I dropped off Devil’s Ktchen’s essential reading..what have I done?) Not sworn enough I suspect.
Is there anything more pointless than an art critic, other than an art critic writing a completely pointless article about being a critic?
Read it, iust to see how NOT to construct a meaningful article.
Well, it appears that we DO have capital punishment in this country. But we even save the money necessary to employ a Pierrepoint, and just let murderers do away with themselves. First Fred West, now Huntley.
Indeed, it now appears that only innocent people, like Michael Stone and poor Barry Bulsara, will live for very long in prison. Maybe its a survival of the fittest? If you aren’t dead within a few years, chances are you’re probably innocent.
In related, the news about Huntley has given the TV channels a chance to show lots of footage of Holly and Jessica playing. Seemingly, Holly (or is it Jessica?) never took off her ManUre shirt, (though the new sponsors will probably be asking for their names to be put over the word ‘Vodafone’ on the shirt—they did buy image rights, after all).
This morning, Sky showed footage of the two, with two of their friends, playing on a slide. With a supermarket trolley. Indeed, pushing the trolley down the slide. And then playing ‘golf’ on what was doubtless a public park where ball games would be banned.
Such activity, of course, is regarded as ’sweet’. Only, do that sort of thing today and you’re likely to end up with an ASBO. Stealing supermarket trolleys? Pushing them down slides? Pure vandalism. Under Blair’s new rules, they’d probably have been identified and tagged as trouble-makers even before they were born. .
my sadness to the general feelings over STeve-O dying. Being a cynical old misanthrope, I have more than a sneaking admiration for people who can be so genuinely enthusiastic about everything they do.
Similar to the lovely Simon Reeve and his Equator programme, and of course to the even lovelier Bruce Parry who meets the maddest people, does the maddest things, and just seems to charm them all, never mind the language barriers, by his affection and regard for them.
(The reaction when PArry asked one of the West papuan Kombai whether they were interested in where he came from is total class…
“Not interested really. We like you, you’re very funny, but we have no interest in where you come from…Whatever jungle it is, it must be pretty s**t �cos you can’t climb trees, you always have to carry ridiculous items on your body, you’re too fat, you can’t cross logs without a hand…In general you’re pretty sh**…Why would we want to know about this place?”)
All three are official cynicalbastard walloffamers. The world is a slightly colder place tonight.
Well, bought T’Grauniad on Saturday, and saw no mention of this. Apologies placed carefully on the website on a SUnday. Who’d have thnk it.
Not tht it could have ruined the guy’s life, after all.
Somebody needs to do a version of this for the pinko-loving, Israel-hating BBC. (From Boingboing obviously—do you need another website?)
Now I, along with most of the world, think Frank Lampard is a pointless and rather ugly waste of space.
But criticising his ‘autobiography’ in t’Grauniad, Marina Hyde runs through her distaste for the famous Ayia Napa video (one memorable for the News of the World referring to Kieron Dyer as ‘good looking’ and a ’stud’, which were certainly firsts).
Admittedly, there were some disturbing images therein. However, this is a woman who had (and still might have for all I know) a long running affair with Piers Morgan. Distaste? Horrid, eye-melting imaginings? The thought of Morgan having sex with anything is surely right at the top of the chart.
Glad to see, after tackling 100-year old crime, the Police are tackling some other difficult targets.
Yes, those toddler muggers are a real problem.
(but, seriously, get the State out of my fucking life please. Now).
By way of DK (who I’ve started visiting again now I have time tactually read what he’s writing), an alternative ending to Doctor WHo
A better alternative would have been for that gurning idiot to die in agony of course.
I’ve complained before of the tactics of the TV licensing people.
This morning the press was full of the news that watching the world cup on your home or work computer means you have to buy a TV licence. The story from The Sun is straight-forward (with the note that you don’t need a license to listen to their audio coverage).
The Guardian typically tries to follow what has always been the previous understanding of the law regarding the need for a licence–that TV receiving equipment is needed (ie. a decoder card), and no licence would be required if one is simply watching TV over broadband.
However, and this is where it gets interesting, others have actually asked. Out-law.com carry the story and have a quote from a rep of the licensing authority making clear that a special card isn’t needed:
“We make no distinction between those watching TV via PC-TV, broadband or any other way,” said the spokeswoman. “If you are watching TV at the same time as it is being broadcast in the UK you need to be covered by a valid licence
This is based on a statutory instrument issued by the secretary of state in 2004–
“‘television receiver’ means any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is installed or used for any other purpose.”
Out-law suggests that the law would probably accept that a computer would be included in that definition. Not that this is a new story—TV licensing made the same announcement back in February when TV on mobiles was the target.
However, OFCOM has, in the past, said that the law does not apply to broadband connections. And the DCMS (the government department responsible for TV licensing) has said likewise. TV licensing’s own webpage still only mentions PCs with a broadcast card (presumably they don’t care about Macs).
With regard to mobiles, the TV licensing site is also explicit that TV sets using their own internal batteries do not require a license. Presumably a mobile could be so defined?
Basically, the authorities are trying it on. TV licensing have expanded the definition of TV equipment to include ‘virtually live’ thanks to government support, which gets round the time lag on streaming, but the regulations still await testing in court. When OFCOM believes there’s a loophole, you’ve got to wonder who to believe.
Of course, they also have no way of knowing who is using broadband to watch TV (unless BT hands over their subscriber list), so the whole thing is rather moot.
Luckily, they have a solution in the long term: a tax on computer equipment itself. Now there’s a way to end the digital divide. .
Elsewhere Jonathan Miller (no, not the Beyond the Fringe guy) is challenging licensing in court using the Human Rights Act, which guarantees individuals the right to receive and impart information and only allows the state to license the broadcasters rather than individuals receiving the broadcasts.
If the inspectors do come to call, some information on your rights may help. They can’t enter your home without a search warrant, and they can’t get one of those without evidence.
In another visit of the d’uhhr monkey to T’Grauniad, the ever-desperate to be published Dave Simpson writes that ex-Goths are likely to be lawyers, meejah types and other professionals. And therefore that parents shouldn’t be frightened of this particualr youth craze.
Apart from the fact that parents today were probably punks or summat worse (bobby-soxers?). its alwasy been the case the gothdom has been relentlessly middle-class. The fact that middle-class kids get to be professionals is hardly news.
And Simpson gets in another quote from main man of Leeds indie music, Choque Hosein. I count that to be the third mention of his name in Simpson’s articles this year. While a lovely guy, his label isn’t that important. Anyone who brought Black Wire to us deserves an occasional kicking.
Never quite sure about Prospect magazine. I always think it’s a front for something. But a couple of articles caught my eye. Kenan Malik’s excellent opinion piece on why free societies shouldn’t become less free as they become more diverse is in the March issue (subscription required online)–and nails the Guardianista hypocrisy.
And as a web exclusive, there’s a very good debate between Daniel Dennett and Richard Swinburne on issues around science and religion. Given the usual level of atheist comment on xianity owes more to playground abuse than it does to an understanding of xian thought (see the dumbest clever man in the west, Richard Dawkins), it’s nice to see a proper and civilized debate.
That Pete Doherty.
He’s not Oscar Wilde is he? Guardian desperate for some younger readers presumably.
Worstall carries a story from Michelle ”teeth whitener’s best friend’ Malkin.
It’s one of those typical IPCGMITY stories, school in suffolk bans hot cross buns because it might offend religious sensibilities of non-Christins. Seemed a bit odd to me as it’s still a way to go even till Lent. Unlike most of these stories (straight bananas, banning xmas, etc) however there’s a grain of truth. But only a grain. The story was picked up by that mighty organ of record the Ipswich Evening Star and then on to the Mirror and elsewhere and lots and lots of places in the US. It’s rushing round the blogosphere as we speak.
With the result that the head in question is getting hate mail. But what’s this? The papers and blogger haven’t got the whole story. Says the head,
I have not imposed an outright ban on hot cross buns and we look forward to having them before we break up for the Easter Holidays.”
So what happened? Well, she requested the suppliers to remove the cross because it wasn’t yet Easter and THIS might offend non-christians. Well, okay, the latter bit is a bit odd (though most of us would applaud anything that delayed xmas till the start of December). But the actual decision is perfectly sensible. It wasn’t the time to eat hot cross buns, so they weren’t going to. Perhaps, rather than the appaling attacks on this woman, she should be applauded for resisting arrogant consumerism threatening to turn important xian festivals and their associated rituals into all year-round excuses for consumerism.
The Evening Star plays both ends by asking its readers, ‘do you think Miss Jackson deserves hate mail?’
The IWF and BT release figures demonstrating that the number of access attempts to banned child porn sites has increased, and this is therefore a major concern. Everyone repeats the story. Because no one can question the child porn epidemic, uhhr, no one looks twice at the figures.
The story suggests that because attempts to access the banned sites (on the IWF list) have risen from 10,000 eighteen months ago to 35,000 per month now, it shows a worrying increase in the number of evil kiddy-fiddlers on the net. Extrapolation from the BT figures (across 1/3 of the UK net) to the whole of the UK business suggests a shocking 100,000 attempts made every day to access child porn sites. Well, uhhr, no. Shock horror.
As the IWF themselves point out, they’ve increased the number of banned sites from 3,500 to 6,000 in the last year, thus quickly accounting for a doubling in the number of visits (I know, dodgy statistics too, but we’ll keep it rough). But, wait a minute, these sites are banned. So people trying to access them will probably make multiple attempts before realising that 404 is REALLY there. Thus accounting for more failures.
At heart though is some major disingenousness. If the sites are banned, how do people find out about them? You can’t just put ‘pictures of nekkid little girlies’ into google and come up with a list of child porn sites (I’ve just tried ‘little girls cunts’ and got, yes, lots of images and sites around quite mature ladies, not an under-18 in sight). Child porn sites are hard to find. So how are these supposed attempters attempting? Could it be spam? Yup, that’s what’s most likely. Clicks on spam e-mail of the ’see teen girls’ type. They aren’t deliberately trying to access this material at all.
The extrapolation is even more nonsense. If only BT are actually banning these sites, we have to assume that some of the attempts through other ISPs are successful, which would suggest a lower number of attempts, and a lower overall figure. And likely a lot of people visiting sites where they’re rather disappointed by what they find…
So what’s it about? Well, it’s funny that this major social story is accompanied by BT and children’s representatives calling for everyone to adopt the BT Cleanfeed system (a system which can be reverse-engineered to provide the banned list). That’s a commercial system. So, congrats to the BT commercial PR team for getting their product enthusiastically endorsed by every major news organization under the sun. But still we’re no further forward in understanding paedophilia.
