Key Posts Category
To mark the Battle of Hastings (1066), the Royal Mint has produce a commemorative 50p coin. Over five million Battle of Hastings 50p pieces are expected to enter circulation. The Mint calls the Battle “the date that made history”.
So big is it that advertising a sterling silver version of the coin in the BBC’s History magazine, the Mint manages to get its facts wrong. The advert runs:
The Battle of Hastings altered the course of British history. This epic clash fought between two kings, and won by William the Conqueror, brought about huge social advancement that set the foundations for the nation as we know it today.
That would be King Harald and William, Duke of Normandy – one king and one wanna-be king.
How can you tell a migrant’s age? The tabloids lead with faces of child refugees heading to the UK. “THE ‘CHILD REFUGEES’ DEBATE” is the Mail’s lead story. You can tell the paper has suspicions about the age of these children because it uses inverted commas to cast doubt on their status.
Over pages 4 and 5, we see men – only men – “Mature Beyond Their Years”. One child migrant has the “features of a 38 year old”. No, not a 38-year reality TV star – rather one with crows’ feet around his eyes and skin that moves. This 18-year-old from sunny and bucolic Afghanistan “says he has an older brother living in the UK”. So says an unnamed “source”, who claims to have access to such information, although apparently not the authority to check the child’s/man’s claims.
The Mail says two thirds of child migrants “quizzed” about their age were fund to be adults. Yeah, who knew that people desperate enough to look for a new life in the UK could lie about their ages? Shock of shocks, indeed.
As Tim Worstall notes:
Many will read that as two thirds of so called child refugees are not children. No. Two thirds of those that officials suspected were not children, and thus investigated, were found to be adults.
So how do well tell a person’s age?
David Davies, the MP for Monmouth (not to be confused with “Brexit” secretary David Davis, says the Indy) says: “I hope British hospitality is not being abused”. He wants migrants to have their teeth checked to determine their ages. If teeth are covered in a film of Coca Cola, they belong to a child. If shards of butterscotch are stuck to their stumps, they are adults. Simple.
CAUTION: If the kids have black teeth full of holes, they are most likely British children and unless Afghanistan wants them, should be allowed to remain.
Last night Liverpool and Manchester United bored the watching public to their second 0-0 on Premier League history. Manchester United were unambitious, carrying 35% possession, their lowest total in a Premier League match since Opta began recording this data in 2003-04.
Jose Mourinho side have won their lowest points total after his first eight league games with a new club since his time with Uniao de Leiria (10 points).
The BBC say the game was “rubbish”.
Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp says: “No one will show this game in 10 or 20 years.”
Chris Crocker adds: “Reality is if Van Gaal’s team had played like that every ‘expert’ would be slating him for weeks. Jose does it he is a genius.”
Not everyone. But some, yes.
This is what Neil Curtis said in the Sun on the morning of the big match:
JOSE MOURINHO is desperately trying to rid Manchester United of the memories from the Louis van Gaal era. That is why he will never serve up a borefest like the Dutchman with his much vaunted ‘philosophy’…
Mourinho is up for another tactical masterclass just like he delivered two years ago…
The Portuguese said: “Last season Liverpool vs United and Liverpool had 14 shots on target and United had one and the result was 0-1. I don’t think that is going to happen again.”
It didn’t. Last night United had one shot on target and failed to score. Under Van Gaal United player Liverpool four times in the Premier League. They won them all.
It’s all about Mourinho in the media. The BBC holds a debate on the United manager with itself:
“Is this a new United way?” asks the BBC. Yes there is, says the BBC.
How United fans will be thrilled by supporting a pragmatic team.
Says Jose Mourinho:
“I think was a positive performance. If you analyse the game see the reason why did it, playing Young and Fellaini. We had control of the game – there were two amazing saves by David de Gea it’s true but they were out of context. The reaction from their crowd was permanent disappointment. People expected us to come here and be really in trouble, which we were not.”
To recap: United were boring when they won at Liverpool with a philosophy; United are exciting and new when they draw 0-0 with a “masterclass” and a “new way”.
Still, at least Jose has won over the media. Van Gaal never did.
After the televised witch-hunt, Sir Cliff Richard has come out fighting. Angered and upset by the BBC’s antics in filming a raid on his home in August 2014, Cliff is suing Aunty for £1m. You will recall how the BBC saw fit to scramble the newscopter to broadcast live footage of South Yorkshire police raiding the singer’s home in a sex abuse investigation.
The police and BBC have form with this high-profile shaming. In 2013, comic Jim Davidson was arrested at Heathrow airport on the eve of filming Celebrity Big Brother. He was flying into the country not out of it when police pounced. They could have waited and nicked Davidson at his home. But the cameras were there and the police fancied a spot of PR. So Davidson was put in the stocks and paraded for our pleasure and reassurance. Operation Yewtree was here to help.
Hang the fact that allegations against an innocent Davidson had nothing to do with Jimmy Savile and child abuse. The Celebrity Police Force had a new old face. They never even charged him.
So to Sir Cliff. After the raid and 22 months of investigating claims made against the singer, the police dropped it. Again, no arrest made.
You might wonder how the BBC knew Cliff was under investigation and his home was to be raided? How they were there at the exact time the police swooped?
Cast your minds back further and recall how the BBC spiked its story on Sir Jimmy Savile but saw fit to broadcast allegations against former Tory party chairman Lord AcAlpine. The BBC was forced to apologise to the innocent Lord and pay him £185,000 libel damages. Savile went to his grave a hero. It was only later he was dug up and beaten with sticks.
He’s rarely on the telly these day, Although the BBC News at Six saw fit to broadcast footage of the depraved knight of the realm with – yep – Sir Cliff. A report on Dame Janet Smith’s investigation into sex abuse at the corporation featured tape of Savile’s voice saying Cliff Richard’s name.
The BBC and police are damaged.
This is why so many take pleasure in micturating on investigations into historic sex abuse and VIP paedophiles.
A judge will put a number on the damage inflicted on Sir Cliff’s good name.
And Rod Stewart’s is here to help. “Pay attention please, Cliff. You’ve been persecuted, mate, and we all know it,” said Rod at a charity event he and Cliff were performing at. “We are one hundred million per cent behind you. You sue those b******* – I’ll give you half.”
Heads will roll.
Donald and Hillary will now sing I’ve Had The Time of My Life:
The video was produced by Dutch broadcaster Lucky TV.
When I saw them I kept thinking of Dolly Parton (Trump) and Kenny Rogers (Clinton).
Make it happen, internet.
Take them away:
He’s back! The str of ‘thirdeaglebooks’ is a Donald Trump supporters. He’s written a song for Don. As the blurb says, this is the “unofficial” campaign song for the 2016 Trump-Pence Republican Presidential ticket. The official song will find this impossible to beat.
Take it away…. William Tapley (co Prophet of The End of Times)
We know all about Donald Trump and TV host Billy Bush sharing a “locked-room” chat during which the tsunami-haired bricks-and-golf tycoon advised randy males to “Grab her by the pussy“? But why are we hearing about this now?
Is Trump’s exposure linked to media bias? Rupert Murdoch’s Heat Street says NBC is part of the problem:
More to the point, why hasn’t all this terrible audio already surfaced? At any point in the last year, when there was still time to deprive Trump of the GOP nomination, did NBC brass ask Apprentice producer (and Trump friend) Mark Burnett for a look into his archives? Or were they complicit in allowing Trump to cruise to the GOP nomination when they knew there was likely evidence in Mark Burnett’s basement that could disqualify him?
Reality TV is a cut and paste job. The amount of stuff edited out would fill a silo. But is it right to blame the messenger? The Mail has been blaming the victim.
There are clear lines of accountability here – to NBC News Chairman Andy Lack and NBCU CEO Steve Burke. Did these executives just look the other way for many months while a former employee whose bad behavior was well-known got closer and closer to the White House? And did they place the career of Billy Bush – reportedly being groomed to replace Matt Lauer on the hugely profitable Today program – ahead of the US presidency? That sounds absurd, but this is the twisted world of network television and NBC has some explaining to do.
Billy Bush comes across as a pathetic wingman to the class pratt Trump. But why can’t it be that NBSC are just a bit rubbish.
NBC Nighty News host Brian Williams “misremembered” being aboard a helicopter hit and downed by two rockets and small arms fire fire during the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Williams had been on a different Chinook. “I would not have chosen to make this mistake,” Williams said. “I don’t know what screwed up in my mind that caused me to conflate one aircraft with another.”
People at NBC are fallible. People make mistakes in wartime.
Glenn Reynolds adds:
HE WAS A DEMOCRAT WHEN HE MADE THOSE REMARKS, SO IT WAS OKAY. IT’S ONLY WHEN HE SWITCHED PARTIES AND BECAME GOP NOMINEE THAT THE REMARKS TURNED DISGRACEFUL.
Back then he wasn’t in or standing for public office.
Bill Clinton to Gennifer Flowers – ‘Hillary Clinton has eaten more pussy than I have’ and other Trump defences
How do we tell the story of reality TV star Donald Trump telling gibbering TV host Billy Bush “Grab her by the pussy“? The British news has made Trump’s “crass” comment (Express) the lead news story. Bigger than mass murder in Syria, desperate migrants and bellicose Russia is Trump’s “sex boast” (The Observer).
The Mirror looks at more pressing issues.
Trump is a story. The reality TV creation is news because he’s said something pathetic and is cheap to produce.
But should one comment scupper Trump’s White House bid?
Nick Kristoff opines in the NYTimes: “In fairness to Trump, other senior men in politics and business — John Kennedy and Bill Clinton come to mind — also sometimes showed a sense of entitlement toward young women.”
The digging for dirt begins.
Said Gennifer Flowers: “I just know what Bill told me and that was that he was aware that Hillary was bisexual and he didn’t care. He should know. ‘He said Hillary had eaten more p***y than he had.’”
In the Washington Post, we read:
Trump, facing a GOP exodus from his campaign and apparently desperate to change the subject, just retweeted two tweets from an account featuring the name of Juanita Broaddrick, the woman who publicly alleged in 1999 that Clinton had sexually assaulted her two decades prior. In both tweets, the Broaddrick account reiterates her accusation that Clinton raped her and accuses Hillary Clinton of enabling him.
Jonah Goldberg stuck it to Hillary:
Then, the country was presented with proof, incremental and suggestive at first, overwhelming and indisputable by the end of the decade, that Bill Clinton was an irrepressible and irresponsible sexual predator, at least by the moral and evidentiary standards established by feminist activists and the press corps that loves them. And, rather than face the consequences of applying their own principles consistently, they prostrated themselves to the Oval Office. Gloria Steinem raced to the pages of the New York Times to advance the “one free grope” rule. Susan Estrich, Susan Faludi, and countless other professional feminists defenestrated their principles in a desperate attempt to defend Clinton.
And can we blame the woman seen in the film when Trump went full frat house?
To the Mail it is not Trump’s ugly comment that could cost him the White House – it is elegant TV soap actress Arianne Zucker, a woman who diplomatically dealt with TV host Billy Bragg’s pathetic comments as to which of he or Trump she’d sleep with.
The obsession with Trump, the close monitoring of his every utterance, has reached the point that his political and media foes have – ironically – become important generators of support for him. Every time they tell Trump ‘you can’t say that’, he says it. Every time they demand an apology from Trump, he doubles down on it. Just by defying the strictures of political correctness, and not caving when challenged, Trump can look authoritative and daring.
We keep reading that Republicans have deserted Trump. Will his supporters care? No. Trump has turned the election into a referendum on the political establishment. Clinton should be miles ahead in the polls. Why isn’t she? Seen as untrustworthy by many, her policies should be more than ‘I’m not Trump’. Remember Bernie Sanders, who said failing to vote Hillary will lead to “more drought, more floods, more acidification of the oceans, more rising sea levels.”
The Republican nominee Donald Trump spoke for 75 minutes and for most of his speech, he outlined a laundry list of every conceivable fear he could conjure. Radical Islam, immigration (legal, illegal, Mexican, Muslim, whatevs), stagnant wages, rising violence in the streets, and really terrible trade deals were among the litany.
The US Presidential campaign has a long way to run.
And like so much in Trump and Clinton’s lives, it is a race to the bottom.
‘Grab them by the pussy’: WikiLeaks, Hillary Clinton’s potential cover up and Trump’s Tic Tacs for sex
WikiLeaks has released bits of speeches Hillary Clinton gave in the years before her 2016 presidential campaign. It was a lucrative tour. Private audiences paid her “at least $26.1 million in speaking fees”.
We get to see the speeches because versions of them appeared in emails now hacked, such as an account operated by Campaign Chairman John Podesta.
We love a cover up. But if we don’t find any juice, then so what? Aren’t private emails part of everyday conversations – some things we say are good and others less so. Do emails give us the full context?
Meanwhile Clinton’s rival Donald Trumps is in the mire over his attitudes to women, what the BBC calls “obscene remarks on women”.
In the video, posted by the Washington Post, Mr Trump is heard bragging to TV host Billy Bush about trying to have sex with a married woman as well as kissing and groping others.
A clip was part of unaired footage for an Access Hollywood segment ahead of Mr Trump’s appearance on the soap opera Days of Our Lives.
“I moved on her and I failed. I’ll admit it. She was married. And I moved on her very heavily. I moved on her like a bitch, but I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phoney tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.”
He then says when he sees a pretty woman he hones in.
Bush notes actress Arianne Zucker, who’s waiting for Trump outside the bus. “Your girl’s hot as s***, in the purple,” Bush said.
“Whoa!” Trump replied. “Whoa!”
“I’ve gotta use some Tic-Tacs, just in case I start kissing her,” Trump continued. “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything.”
“Whatever you want,” said another voice believed to be Bush.
“Grab them by the pussy,” Trump replied. “You can do anything.”
All unedifying stuff. But what do we have but Clinton talking to the paying fans and what Trump calls “locker-room banter”?
Listen in. Language is NSFW. Trump is revolting. Bush is sleaze personified.
Trump has now apologised. Well, sort of. He said: “This was locker room banter, a private conversation that took place many years ago. Bill Clinton has said far worse to me on the golf course – not even close. I apologize if anyone was offended.”
His apology is not for his comments rather for your taking offence at them. It’s a remarkably dishonest approach to saying ‘sorry’.
Expert to hear lots now on Bill Clinton’s attitude to women and Jill Harth, the woman who sued Trump over an alleged sexual assault. The Guardian dished the dirt:
She first met Trump in December 1992 at his offices in Trump Tower, where she and her then romantic partner, George Houraney, were making a business presentation. The couple wanted to recruit Trump to back their American Dream festival, in which Harth oversaw a pin-up competition known as American Dream Calendar Girls. Harth described that meeting as “the highlight of our career”.
But in other ways, it was something of a lowlight: Trump took an interest in Harth immediately and began subjecting her to a steady string of unwanted sexual advances, detailed by Harth in her complaint.
She claims that in January 1993, Harth and Houraney were visiting Trump’s Florida mansion. She alleges:
“He pushed me up against the wall, and had his hands all over me and tried to get up my dress again, and I had to physically say: ‘What are you doing? Stop it.’ It was a shocking thing to have him do this because he knew I was with George, he knew they were in the next room. And how could he be doing this when I’m there for business?…
“Trump did everything in his power to get me to leave him. He constantly called me and said: ‘I love you, baby, I’m going to be the best lover you ever had. What are you doing with that loser, you need to be with me, you need to step it up to the big leagues.’
“He was constantly working on me during that time and that took a toll on me. But I moved on. I’m a forgiving type person, OK? I’m a Christian, I moved on.”
He denies the allegations.
America waits to elect one or the other of what must be the least appealing choice since Michael Barrymore asked “Top, Middle or Bottom?”
Emma Phillips, Wallasey, Wirral, is the trainee teacher who got a large dildo stuck in her anus (?). This is no secret. Emma has not been exposed or outed in some way. She wants to tell us all about her “embarrassing” accident because it is a “taboo” we need to be warned about.
She’s told her story to Mercury Press, who have sold it to the Daily Mirror. How you prove the story of the vanishing viby is a moot point. Emma just wants to tell us about it. And we are all ears.
And no giggling as “Emma offers a thumbs up from her hospital bed”. Let’s hope she washes it first and removed any false fingernails.
One day her child will get to read about the tale of “Mum-of-one Emma Phillips”, her partner Lee Miller, 29, and the the 7 inch sex toy that “disappeared”.
When she leaned forward she could feel it vibrating inside her bottom wedged behind her hip.
Lee tried to extract the toy with a fork handle and BBQ prongs before calling for an ambulance.
In Wrexham hospital Emma underwent the “minute-and-a-half surgery which involved placing a camera down her throat and the surgeon pressing on her stomach before manually extracting i”.
And “Doctors offered her the toy as a keepsake but she decline”.
Next week: I got a BBQ stuck inside my vagina.
Alcohol remains relatively good value. Cinema tickets less so. Laura Donnelly is shocked, telling Telegraph readers: “Alcohol now so cheap 13 pints can be bought for price of cinema ticket.”
Or to flip that: Cinema is so expensive you can buy 13 pints and watch telly for the price of one ticket.
Teenagers are able to buy more than 13 pints of cider for the price of a cinema ticket, according to a new report which says children are being put at risk by “pocket money prices.”
Teenagers buying cider? Do they get it cheaper than the rest of us. She means people over 18, right?
The study from the Alcohol Health Alliance says supermarkets are selling alcohol at prices that are attracting children and harmful drinkers, because of the absence of minimum prices.
And now the facts:
Consumers could buy two and a half bottles of the cheapest white cider – Frosty Jacks – containing more than 13 pints for the standard £8.24 paid for an off-peak cinema tickets, the study found.
You can get big bottles of cider for the price of a discount cinema tickets. Why not forgo a peak-time trip to the cinema and buy a bottle of champagne?
PS: drink enough and everyone looks like a movie star – in glorious technicolour (yawn).
Hillsborough is back in the news. It never went away. We still await justice for the 96 people killed at the FA Cup semi-final in 1989. It took 26 years for the State to admit the dead were innocent. How long will it take to nail the guilty?
Today the Guardian reports on moves to bring back standing at Premier League football grounds.
We’d argue that standing on the terraces never caused the horror at Hillsborough. When the victims were crying out for help behind those cages the police sent for the attack dogs. The deaths were accidental. But they were the result of a policy that portrayed and treated football fans as scum.
The Liverpool supporters’ union (LSU) Spirit of Shankly wants to bring back standing. Premier League Football is sanitised and stripped of the passion that made the game so magical. Standing is one stop towards breaking the myriad controls forced on fans.
The LSU will ask other Liverpool fans and the families of those killed at Hillsborough for their views on a return to standing at top-flight grounds.
The Guardian says the Hillsborough Family Support Group is strongly opposed to standing. The Hillsborough Justice Campaign says: “There has always been a variety of views amongst HJC members. We do however, support a full and objective debate on the issue with safety being paramount.”
The LSU floated the idea at last month’s AGM. It said:
“There have been ongoing campaigns for the implementation of ‘rail seating’ at football grounds, similar to those often found in Germany. This has been alongside debate about supporters who currently stand in seated areas. It should be recognised and acknowledged that this occurs.
“LSU has never formally adopted a position on ‘rail seating’, ‘safe standing’ or these matters by whichever name it goes by. The debate, in recent months, has moved on, following the implementation of rail seating at Celtic and with football clubs openly discussing the idea. Supporters at other clubs are actively campaigning for the introduction of rail seating. Whilst LSU recognises that opinion amongst our fan base is divided, with supporters and Hillsborough campaigners and groups on both sides of the debate, our stance and opinion on such matters should be one directed by our members.”
It is an emotive issue. All-seat regulations were introduced into English football by Lord Justice Taylor’s report into the Hillsborough disaster. Rather than censure the police and look to themselves, the authorities moved swiftly to enforce further controls on fans. Sat in numbered seats these criminals-in-waiting were more easily monitored.
And don’t you dare move. In 2006, West Ham United sent the following note to 20 season ticket holders: “You have ignored repeated requests to remain seated and are therefore placing the club in jeopardy of losing capacity. As a result you are banned from attending Upton Park for two matches.”
Sit down or else.
And then came the advice to shut up. (Spurs fans must not champion the ‘Yid Army’. Celtic’s ‘Green Brigade’ and should stop singing the wrong kinds of songs, and so too Glasgow Rangers fans. Never mind that the bawdy chants are reminders of what binds fans to their clubs, they are possibly offensive to sensitive ears and must be banned. Songs will be censored or drowned out by blaring PA systems, piped music, anthems and ridiculous countdowns to kick-off.)
You want to know why 60,000 fans at Arsenal’s shiny new Emirates ground make less noise than half that number did at Highbury? They’ve been pacified. Sit down. Don’t drink. Book your seats in advance – no groups of mates rocking up to let off steam have a hope of getting in.
When the Emirates opened, the club heard the silence. They soon advertised for a ‘Singing Section’, a licensed place where the noisiest fans could sing approved songs. It was pathetic. And so too are standing zones. Football fans have been reduced to accepting scraps of legislated freedom.
Don’t stand up in the zone of tolerance. Stand up to the marketeers, control freaks and State that have subdued the fans and taken the fun out of football.
As Christmas rolls up we wonder about the atheists. Steve Martin is here to help. Steve Martin and the Steep Canyon Rangers perform at Merlefest 2010.
A little tune called “Athiests Don’t Have No Songs”
Christians have their hymns and pages.
(Hymns and pages)
Hava Nagila’s for the Jews.
(For the Jews)
Baptists have the rock of ages.
(Rock of ages)
Atheists just sing the blues.
Romantics play Claire de Lune.
(Claire de Lune)
Born agains sing He is risen.
But no one ever wrote a tune.
(Wrote a tune)
For godless existentialism.
(For godless existentialism)
There’s no good news.
They’ll never sing,
A song of faith.
In their songs,
They have a rule.
The “he” is always lowercase.
The “he” is always lowercase.
(Some folks sing)
Some folks sing a Bach cantata.
Lutherans get Christmas trees.
Atheist songs add up to nada.
(Up to nada)
But they do have Sundays free.
(Have Sundays free)
Pentecostals sing, sing to heaven,
(Sing to heaven)
Gothics had the books of scrolls,
Numerologists count, count to seven,
(Count to seven)
Atheists have rock and roll.
There’s no good news.
They’ll never sing,
A song of faith.
In their songs,
They have a rule.
The “he” is always lowercase.
The “he” is always lowercase.
Don’t have no songs!
Christians have their hymns and pages.
(Hymns and pages)
Hava Nagila’s for the Jews.
(For the Jews)
Baptists have the rock of ages.
(Rock of ages)
Atheists just sing the blues.
Dress up for mass.
And listen to,
Just take a pass.
Watch football in their underpants.
Watch football in their underpants.
Don’t have no songs!
(Don’t have no songs)
Knock. Knock. The anti-free speech police are surely on their way to Margate, Kent, home of “Extremist Zebadiah Abu-Obadiah”. The Daily Mail says he’s called for the death of former Ukip leader Nigel Farage. He “labels the Queen a ‘w****’ in vile video…. Abu-Obadiah, real name Robert Boaler, also warns ‘chat s***, get Rigby’d’.”
Alex Matthews has exposed this heinous behaviour.
Among the disturbing lyrics he warns people that if they ‘chat s***’ they will get ‘Rigby’d’ – referring to the fatal stabbing of fusilier Lee Rigby by Islamic extremists Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale in 2013.
Nigel Farage is name-checked:
Some brehs [sic] are destined for damnation like Farage, off with his head.
There are a couple of people who are more than evil, that make you frustrated and need decapitating.
They spread the hate and fear and they get no rating around here. So lets make it clear I want their heads on spears.
Sing along if you know the words:
The chorus then repeats: ‘Kill them, Kill them.’
At one disturbing part of the film a voiceover is heard calling for the death of ‘children and babies’ while in other sections a child’s doll is pictured among flames.
Who is this nutter? He must be stopped. Well done to the Mail for bringing this underground rapper to the nation’s attention.
Boaler ran against Mr Farage for the South Thanet seat under the Al-Zebabist Nation of OOG party, in the General Election, but only garnered 30 votes.
Al-Zebabist Nation of OOG party? Who are they? Helpfully, they run a website. But Matthews could have kept his browser history from alerting the Internet Watch team by looking at less dark sources.
RT: “The Nation of Ooog [“a semi-satirical group”], which takes its name from the deity it worships, also vowed to legalize the use of heroin and consumption of dog meat.”
Vice: “We meet the party’s leader, Zebadiah Abu Obadiah, to talk about why they don’t have time for spoof parties, why every female in Britain should wear a hijab and why everyone should take a massive fatal heroin overdose on their 50th birthday.”
“The group, officially registered as a political party in the constituency with the Electoral Commission, says it wants to eradicate Broadstairs, one of the towns on the Isle of Thanet, and establish a “a Zebabist state run by Boalia Law”. The party, led by the ‘Prophet Zebadiah’, real name Robert Bealer, campaigns to ban all hetero-marriage and to lower tax for bearded families – with women and children allowed to wear fake beards.
Yesterday the Mirror reported that Zlatan Ibrahimovich had left Manchester United for a holiday. The Mirror said the “holiday” would mean Ibrahimovich missing Manchester United’s Europa League match with the mighty Zorya Luhansk.
The Sun agreed: “Manchester United striker Zlatan Ibrahimovic looks set to miss Thursday night match vs Zorya as he holidays in Milan.”
So what did Zlatan do on his holiday? Well, he played for Manchester United in the Europa League and scored the winner.
Update: The Mirror has now changed its story to read: “Zlatan Ibrahimovic returns for Manchester United’s clash with Zorya Luhansk after holiday in Italy.”
Update 2: When the big media speaks the websites follow. Get a load of this terrible reporting on Sports Mole.
Such are the facts.
Look out for the “if” in Momentum vice chair Jackie Walker’s apology over what the Indy call her “‘appalling’ Holocaust comments”. She says: “If offence has been caused, it is the last thing I would want to do.”
It’s not her. It’s you. It’s your reading of her inoffensive comments that create problems. Jackie Walker, vice-chair of the Jeremy Corbyn support group Momentum, was speaking – get this – at a Labour Party anti-Semitism training event. She said: “In terms of Holocaust day, wouldn’t it be wonderful if Holocaust day was open to all people who experienced Holocaust?”
Like Nazis, perhaps?
No. Don’t be silly. But we can’t work out who she means because Holocaust Memorial Day includes all victims of Nazism. Walker is wrong. Whoops!
She then tweeted a comment about multiple “Holocausts”.
The ‘typo’ related to a delated tweet in which she had noted:
(As a comment on that deleted tweet we’d say that Holocaust denial should not be banned. Bigots who seek to make liars of the millions dead should not be banned and martyred by law. They should be debated and their ideas ridiculed and proven wrong, as they have been. We don’t want to live in a space where free speech is managed. As you will read below, Jackie thinks us knowing what goes on inside her safe space is “unethical”.)
The Huffington Post has more of what Walker reportedly said: “I came in here … and I was looking for information and I still haven’t heard a definition of anti-Semitism that I can work with… and in terms of Holocaust day wouldn’t it be wonderful if Holocaust day was open to all people who experienced holocaust… in practice it’s not actually circulated and advertised as such.”
She then apologised some more:
“A number of people made comments in a private training session run by the Jewish Labour Movement. As we all know, training sessions are intended to be safe spaces where ideas and questions can be explored.”
A safe space, for those of you not in the know about censorship, is a place where everyone agrees with everyone else. Those who do not are barred. They are popular at Universities. The NUS loves them. Indeed, it agrees that Holocaust memorial days is too Jewish.
Walker went on:
“A film of this session was leaked to the press unethically. I did not raise a question on security in Jewish schools. The trainer raised this issue and I asked for clarification, in particular as all London primary schools, to my knowledge, have security and I did not understand the particular point the trainer was making. Having been a victim of racism I would never play down the very real fears the Jewish community have, especially in light of recent attacks in France.”
Jewish schools are behind razor wire and gates. On Saturdays and other times of Jewish worship, synagogues are patrolled by guards. The HuffPost adds: “Walker also said extra security measures in Jewish schools in the UK were not due to fear of anti-Semitic attacks.”
No. The huge security exits to prevent Jews attacking any passing Quakers. Well, that’s what I heard in my safe space. And we all agreed it was true. So it is.
Walker said in her apology:
“In the session, a number of Jewish people, including me, asked for definitions of antisemitism. This is a subject of much debate in the Jewish community. I support David Schneider’s definition and utterly condemn antisemitism.
“I would never play down the significance of the Shoah. Working with many Jewish comrades, I continue to seek to bring greater awareness of other genocides, which are too often forgotten or minimised. If offence has been caused, it is the last thing I would want to do and I apologise.”
In May 2016, Walker was readmitted to the Labour party after she was suspended over alleged anti-Semitic comments on Facebook. She said Jews were the “chief financiers of the sugar and slave trade”.
To conclude: There is no anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Shami Chakrabarti, who Corbyn invited to lead the party’s investigation into anti-Semitism in the ranks, proved that beyond doubt.
Arsenal’s Theo Walcott has grown up. “I’ve worked hard from the back end of last season and I’ve just continued to do that throughout the whole summer and that’s all I’m doing,” says the player who at just 16 was drafted into England’s World Cup squad. Injury and form mean he’s not appeared at the World Cup since. Does that make him a failure, a man frustrated by what might have been?
Walcott could be forgiven for feeling melancholy, that life, however glorious it appears to many, has been a tad disappointing. But Walcott wants to be better. He’s driven. Failure can be inspirational. Learning from failure is a quality that sets the best apart. You might not make it – there are no guarantees – but negative thinking encourages change and innovation. You learn to move on.
“Me and the manager sat down and I’ve just looked at myself,” he tells the Times. “There’s no point dwelling on the past, that’s what I’m like. I know what I can do and I don’t mind what people say because I do know that as long as I work hard, I know what I’m going to be. It’s just come down to that.
“The manager has shown tremendous faith in me and I just want to repay that. You can see that in my desire and the way that I’m playing at the moment. I want it more than anyone else, but that’s just me and the way that I work now. It’s a shame that it only hit me a few years ago because there’s been a slight change in my attitude ahead of big games.”
Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger is effusive in praise of his attacker.
“Why did I always stick with him?” he tells the Arsenal website. “Because I think he is ambitious but he is intelligent and with intelligent people there is always a chance. He has what the big players have. They have a fair assessment of their performances and their weaknesses… I think he was clear, and in all our lives that clarity is the most important factor. He had clarity in his head. Once you have that you have a chance.”
Failure is healthy is you embrace it.
Paulo Coelho, the author of The Alchemist, puts it well:
I’m never paralyzed by my fear of failure… I say “Ok, I’m doing my best… ” And, from the moment that I can say that I’m doing my best … I sit down, I breathe, and I say “I put all of my love into it, I did it with all my heart.” … And whether they like [the book] or not is irrelevant, because I like it. I’m committed to the thing that I did. And so far nobody has criticized or refused it. When you put love and enthusiasm into your work, even if people don’t see it, they know it’s there, that you did this with all of your body and soul, so that is what I encourage you to do.
Go for it.
‘Big’ Sam Allardyce left the England manager’s job in a hurry. It takes most a bit longer to realise how hopeless the team is and mutate into a root vegetable. Allardyce says he is “deeply disappointed” to have left the job after just 67 days. He had hoped to win a few matches against the might of Malta and Slovakia, qualify for a big tournament and then have his lack of tactical nouse pilloried in the Press. Instead his apparent greed has fast-tracked him to a foreign side with less scruples than England.
Allardyce “mutually agreed” with Football Association chairman Greg Clarke and chief executive Martin “I am not a football expert” Glenn it was time for him to go.
Allardyce has made a “wholehearted apology” for being caught in a newspaper sting mouthing off about Prince Harry’s arse, mocking Roy Hodgson’s speech impediment and discussing how to circumvent rules governing player transfers. He said it was “not a problem” to bypass rules on third-party player ownership, and claimed he knew of agents who were “doing it all the time”.
Claims against him include a £400,000 deal he allegedly agreed to represent a company to Far East investors and speak at events.
Sam Allardyce did nothing illegal. He talked about a rule he found “ridiculous” and opined how it could be got around. He was chatting over drinks with ‘businessmen’ in a hotel bar. He said he would speak to the FA before taking the speaking engagement.
The Press are loving it. And they should do. The Telegraph’s sting is a cracker. What is unclear is why they thought Allardyce was open to offers in the first place? And we’d like to see the full video and transcript, not just a few snippets.
But what next for England?
Ray Parlour, formerly of Arsenal, says Steve Bruce should be the next England boss. Henry Winter says Bournemouth’s Eddie Howe is the best fit. Martin Samuel wants Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger. Neil Ashton says Princess Anne look-alike Gareth Southgate would be a sound option.
But why not take this as the ideal chance to give up, take a break from international football and start again in a few years, perhaps in 2066, when the marketeers who run the national game could package new England as a celebration of the World Cup centenary ? England aren’t all that good at football and a few years of quiet reflection would be therapeutic and save excited fans from watching too many players for whom money and adulation are their football goals.
Or the FA could go for Plan B: sell England as a franchise to wealthy overseas buyers, it being the Premier League way to see football less as a sport than a cash cow, flogging off clubs as vanity plates for billionaires?
The FA called Allardyce’s behaviour “inappropriate”. When you look at what football has become, you can sympathise with greedy Sam. Wasn’t he the manager English football deserved?
England manager ‘Big’ Sam Allardyce wraps the Sun in a choke hold. He’s embroiled in an alleged “dodgy deal”. The FA have launched a “probe” into his affairs.
Allardyce is accused of trying to cash in on his England position – one that pays a mere £3m a year plus bonuses for tournament wins (so that’s £3m a year, then). Undercover reporters from the Daily Telegraph posed as foreign businessmen keen to deliver overseas players to England. Allardyce, 61, told the stingers “how they could circumvent FA rules which prohibit third parties ‘owning’ players”.
The key point is not that Allardyce comes across as greedy and thick, but that third-party ownership of players was banned by the FA in 2008 for being akin to “slavery”.
The BBC lays it on:
During the meeting with the businessmen, who were undercover reporters, it is alleged Allardyce – who was only named England boss in July – said it was “not a problem” to bypass the rules and he knew of agents who were “doing it all the time”.
It is alleged by the paper that a deal was struck with the England boss worth £400,000, which could represent a conflict of interest if he is paid by a company whose footballer clients could benefit from preferential treatment by an international manager.
The Mail says this is the end of Allardyce who should be “axed”.
But it’s the Telegraph that has the big scoop.
In the “England manager for sale” readers are told
Before he had even held his first training session as England’s new head coach, Allardyce negotiated a deal with men purporting to represent a Far East firm that was hoping to profit from the Premier League’s billion-pound transfer market.
He agreed to travel to Singapore and Hong Kong as an ambassador…
Unbeknown to Allardyce, the businessmen were undercover reporters and he was being filmed as part of a 10-month Telegraph investigation that separately unearthed widespread evidence of bribery and corruption in British football.
Allardyce really is in the mire.
But that bit about his calling Roy Hodgson “Woy” makes us chuckle. After all, this is what the Sun said when Hodgson got the job:
What a load of Wubbish!
When WBTV News of Charlotte Tweeted “LIVE NOW: Protesters on I-277 stopping traffic and surrounding vehicles. AVOID. Watch live » http://3wb.tv/1TGw8DS #KeithLamontScott”, @Instapundit, aka Glenn Reynolds responded, “Run them down.”
For that Reynolds was banned from free-speech loving twitter for a day. And it got worse. He was then suspended for one month by USA Today, which runs his twice-weekly column.
Reynolds works as a law professor at the University of Tennessee and publishes the Instapundit news aggregator and comment sheet.
The Dean of the University of Tennessee College of Law Melanie D. Wilson says: “Professor Reynolds has built a significant platform to discuss his viewpoints, but his remarks on Twitter are an irresponsible use of his platform…. The university is committed to academic freedom, freedom of speech, and diverse viewpoints, all of which are important for an institution of higher education and the free exchange of ideas. My colleagues and I in the university’s leadership support peaceful disobedience and all forms of free speech, but we do not support violence or language that encourages violence.”
Did he encourage violence? Would anyone sane who follows Instapundit see the tweet and be inspired to run someone down?
Twitter has a pretty low view of its users if it thinks they can be driven to commit violent acts in just 13 characters (including spaces). And does Tennessee College of Law really think Reynolds was advocating violence?
The tweet was snappy, a tad glib and, well, a tweet. The great American tweet has yet to be written. In the meanwhile, millions struggle to make a defining comment in 140 characters or less. The trouble is that in the current climate of ‘You can’t say that’ one tweet can be held up as something that defines you. The twitter mob love a twitter hunt. One tweet can ruin you.
Free speech needs context. Reynolds is no rabble-rouser bent on civil disobedience and violence. But stripped of context, a three-word tweet can be corrupted to reveal something essential about the tweeter and the banner. If you agree with it, then you’re a right-wing loon. Disagree with it and the tweet signals your virtue. You can get a T-shirt bearing the message: “Deliberately killing innocent people with a car is WRONG.” Honk twice is you agree. Don’t bother honking if you don’t (it’ll only warn them that you’re coming).
The backdrop to these tweets and their fallout is the death of Keith L. Scott, a 43-year-old black man shot dead by police officer outside an apartment complex.
It’s a highly sensitive subject. Was the victim armed? Are the police institutionally racist?
Do these questions scare twitter, the Press and the universities? If the subject is big enough, do the aforesaid champions of free speech start advocating a need for censorship, slapping a big ‘but’ after ‘I believe in free speech…”? Yes. It sure looks that way.
Reynolds has explained his position: “Sorry, blocking the interstate is dangerous, and trapping people in their cars is a threat. Driving on is self-preservation, especially when we’ve had mobs destroying property and injuring and killing people. But if Twitter doesn’t like me, I’m happy to stop providing them with free content.”
He says he removed the offending tweet “so that I can tweet my response to this affair. But once that’s over, I intend to shut it down. I don’t see why I should provide content to a platform that will shut me down without notice.”
The USA Today ban hurts more. That gig pays. Reynolds apologised to the paper’s readers. He explained some more, saying automobiles in a riot should keep driving, in order to ensure driver safety. “What I meant is that drivers who feel their lives are in danger from a violent mob should not stop their vehicles,” he said. “I remember Reginald Denny, a truck driver who was beaten nearly to death by a mob during the 1992 Los Angeles riots. My tweet should have said, ‘Keep driving,’ or ‘Don’t stop.’”
Two words beats three. On twitter, brevity rules. Play it safe and say nothing.
Reynolds explained some more: “But riots aren’t peaceful protest. And blocking interstates and trapping people in their cars is not peaceful protest – it’s threatening and dangerous, especially against the background of people rioting, cops being injured, civilian-on-civilian shootings, and so on. I wouldn’t actually aim for people blocking the road, but I wouldn’t stop because I’d fear for my safety, as I think any reasonable person would.”
That’s the run down.
It’d been looking iffy for a while. We at Anorak were not the first to notice that MODE media were not the best payers. They routinely paid 90-120 days. MODE got the money into their bank accounts, used it for a while and then paid the bloggers who hosted their ads, typically on a 50-50 split (after their company costs have been paid for).
Now MODE has gone bust. Bloggers – people from all walks of life and businesses – have been creamed.
Putting a lot of energy into building a readership and letting MODE take first dibs at getting ads in front of those readers’ eyes was a mugs’ game.
Bloggers have been told nothing since the company abruptly ceased training last week. Your money has sat in MODE’s bank accounts while their directors and owners knew the company was in peril. All the while they let everyone carry on working to keep their side of the bargain and said nothing.
Those contracts MODE made bloggers stick to – the ones that commanded their ads to be shows only above the fold and before all others – are worthless.
For online publishers who depend on page views to sell advertising against, MODE have pulled a fast one. We wrote the copy, built audiences and they sold the ads. It was a two-way reciprocal arrangement. We also advertised their company – contracts stipulate bloggers must slap MODE’s log on their sites.
And then they shafted us.
We, like many others, simply can’t afford to lose the money MODE owe us.
We can sympathise with the perils of business. But MODE are cowards. A visit to the company’s website, MODE.com, reveals nothing.
Disgusting. Talk is that MODE also screwed their workers.
We and hundreds if not thousands of others who bought into MODE’s business want our money.
Do you find golliwogs offensive? The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) does. It’s banned the Ginger Pop store’s advert featuring a golliwog holding a glass of ginger bear. The golliwog has caused “serious or widespread offence”.
The Ginger Pop store is housed in Dorset, just by the foot of what remains of the 11th century Corfe Castle. Store owner Viv Endecott had covered the window of her shop with golliwog-themed tea towels she had designed. The tea towels were inspired by author Enid Blyton, who was partial to a golliwog and had visited Dorset.
The towels feature a thirsty golliwog in the centre surrounded by slogans: “freedom of speech”, “political correctness gone mad” and “English Freedom”.
Adnan Choudry, chief officer of Dorset Race Equality Council, opines:
“Golliwogs don’t just offend black people, they’re offensive to people of any race. People used them as a means to abuse black people in the 1970s and 1980s – people still remember those days. I thought we had all moved on but obviously not. I have had dealings with her in the past – I have told her my opinion, that they should not be sold, but goes on selling them.”
It boils down to a difference of opinion.
One side says golliwogs are dolls, and therefore incapable of thought and racism. Children, for whom they are intended, see them as cheery dolls and are blissfully unaware of their controversial nature.
But to say the golliwog has no racial connection is as ridiculous as it is monocular and thick-headed. When Florence Kate Upton debuted the ‘Golliwogg’ in a 1895 book, she called him “a horrid sight, the blackest gnome”. Enid Blyton’s Gollywogs were called Golly, Woggy and Nigger. They ambled around the place “arm-in-arm, singing merrily their favourite song – which, as you may guess, was Ten Little Nigger Boys”. Enid’s Noddy character was once mugged by golliwogs, who nick his car.
In 1939, the cover of Agatha Christie’s Ten Little Niggers portrayed a golliwog hanging from a tree.
Should golliwogs be banned? No. Of course not. You could try to ban them, just as you might ban people who dress up as Nazis to relax and teach their dogs to salute whenever they hear the word ‘Hitler’.
Forget these loons and fantasists. Let people who shop for novelty tea towels in 1950s-themed ‘shoppes’ deal with them whilst the rest of us with our mechanised dishwashers get on with more vital issues, like discussing Jose Mourinho’s coat and Prince Harry’s sex life.
Paul Gascoigne is not in the best of health. This we know because the tabloids love to feature Gazza in various stages of trouble. He’s back in the news for the criminal offence of telling a joke. At Dudley Magistrates Court, the former England footballer’s joke was appraised. It was found wanting. Gascoigne was deemed guilty of using ‘”threatening or abusive words”. Those words also cost him a £2,000 fine.
By now you all want to know what Gascoigne said. What does a £2000 joke look like? At An Evening With Gazza at Wolverhampton Civic Hall last year, the show’s eponymous star told a black security guard, Errol Rowe: “Can you smile please, because I can’t see you?”
Anyone heading to an evening with Gascoigne, a man who seemed to run on nervous energy, is unlikely to attend expecting a night of coherent thought and incisive wit. Nonetheless, District Judge Graham Wilkinson was outraged, telling Gazza, “it is not acceptable to laugh words like this off as some form of joke… We live in the 21st century — grow up with it or keep your mouth closed.”
The 21st Century looks a a draconian place. Gascoigne’s joke was sad, weak and, worst of all, unfunny. And that’s crucial to the crime. The advice is that if you’re unsure of what is and what is not acceptable to the state, you should not speak. You should censor yourself lest you cause the State to be offended.
And take care not to be famous and unfunny. Wilkinson told Gascoigne that his punishment is a warning to us all. “A message needs to be sent that in the 21st century,” said the Beak, “such words will not be tolerated.”
Intolerance will not be tolerated. How’s that for freedom?
PS: If you want to look for racism. you can find in a pathetic joke, if you want. But what about in the judiciary? Wilkinson told Gazza: “”It is the creeping ‘low-level’ racism that society still needs to challenge.” And what about the institutional racism?
Dame Linda Dobbs opines:
The Sun bring news of “Maddie Hope”. What hope? The Sun tells us: “Madeleine McCann fund given £100k of government money to keep search alive until April.” That word “alive” is an odd choice. Why not ‘going’?
The paper notes that the police hunt “has already cost taxpayers millions”. So is £100 enough – or too much? When should the money end. If £12m has been spent on the hunt so far, why stop now?
The Star adds that this cash means the search can continue until April 2017. Madeleine McCann vanished in May 2007. It’s pretty safe to expect lots of news about the child one month after the police’s latest budget runs out – unless, of course, she has been found before then.
We then hear of the family fund. The Star says more than £4.2m has been donated to Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd since its launch 12 days after she vanished in May 2007. Unnamed sources says there is “as little as” £480,000 left. If £100,000 buys six-months of police work, surely nearly five times that sum is enough for private detectives to look for the child for the next five years?
Yes, maybe. But the fund’s money has been earmarked for other causes. “The McCanns face paying £434,000 to ex-Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral’s lawyers after losing their libel action against him,” says the Star, “which would leave less than £50,000 in the coffers.”
That libel action was always fraught with danger.
Maybe the McCanns can raise funds from their daughter’s appearance on TV shows. E! has rather tasteless article entitled: “Nancy Grace’s 10 Most Captivating Cases: Casey Anthony, Jodi Arias and More Crime Stories We Couldn’t Stop Watching.” In the Top Ten grim stories about loss, murder and death, the entertainment broadcaster includes Madeleine McCann.
From a bit sick to depraved. Australian news tells us, “A convicted paedophile has been convicted of producing child pornography material after he was caught scrawling notes on his prison cell wall and writing stories about missing children William Tyrrell and Madeleine McCann.” Sick stuff. But a crime? Did he abuse children or just think about abusing children? If you can be convicted for drawing revolting images and writing nasty stories, can you be convicted of thinking things you don’t put down on paper?
A Tasmanian man who wrote fictitious stories in prison about the fate of high-profile missing children William Tyrell and Madeleine McCann has pleaded guilty to producing child exploitation material.
Can you tell the difference between fact and fiction?
Sonny Day, 60, pleaded guilty after he was caught writing about the sexual activity of children on the walls of his prison cell, under a desk and on paper. He was convicted of accessing, transmitting and possessing child pornography in 2014 after being jailed for similar offences in 2011.
Writing things is a crime in Australia.
Meanwhile, in the world of non-fiction, Madeleine McCann is still missing.
Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt will end their marriage of a whole 2 years and being together since 2004. Divorce has been triggered. She wants sole physical custody of all the couple’s collection of children – 6 of them.
The media is filled with weeping and wailing among the couple’s fans. How can the love of its age be broken by, in Angelina’s words, “irreconcilable differences”? Brangelina were the media match made in portmanteau heaven. What were the differences? Did one of them think By The Sea was great movie – a good movie?
TMZ dishes some dirt:
Sources connected with the couple tell us… Angelina’s decision to file has to do with the way Brad was parenting the children… she was extremely upset with his methods.
Our sources say, Angelina became “fed up” with Brad’s consumption of weed and possibly alcohol, and mixed with what she believes is “an anger problem” became dangerous for the children.
We’re told there was no alleged “third person”… her decision to file was solely over Brad’s interaction with their children.
InTouch Weekly says Brad’s a great dad and will petition for custody of the children.
The Sun says: “ANGELINA ‘HAS PUT KIDS IN DANGER’ ‘Furious’ Brad Pitt hits back at claims over anger and alcohol issues and ‘blasts Angelina for putting kids in firing line in bitter divorce’”
Will things get nasty? Will Brad get the kids or be forced to find 6 other children to fill the void? If he does, will their be auditions?
Expect lots more on this.