Anorak

Key Posts | Anorak - Part 2

Key Posts Category

To all the fat nurses everywhere: keep taking the sugar

After a lengthy stay in hospital, I was advised by a charming, caring and professional nurse to go out for ice-cream and champagne. She told me this as we chatted over a huge plate of biscuits and sugary tea. I felt instantly better. But sugar is taboo at an NHS hospital in Greater Manchester. Staff are being weaned off the stuff.

Karen James, Chief Executive Tameside hospital, says: “My staff work very hard. Long hours and shift patterns often make it very difficult for people to make healthy choices, so they opt for the instant sweet fixes, which until now have been readily available. These are dedicated healthcare professionals who believe they should be role models for their patients but the food environment has been working against them.”

Role models? I just wanted the nurses to give me the right drugs at the right time and stay wake.

“We’ve taken away the sugary drinks, we’ve taken sugary snacks out of vending machines, we’ve taken away cookies and muffins and replaced them with fruit,” thunders Amanda Bromley, director of human resources at Tameside “You’d go to the till and there’d be a Twix and a Bounty bar staring back at you. People are working long shifts and if things are in front of them we know they are going to reach for them.” Adding: “Nurses and other health professionals need to be leading by example. They need to be role models for patients.”

“If someone is visibly overweight people don’t necessarily trust that advice. The public expect nurses to be role models,” says Richard Kyle, of Edinburgh Napier University, who led a recent study to find measurements on people working in health professions, and found them to be as obese as the rest of us. “It’s a priority of Simon Stevens [head of NHS England] that the NHS should be an exemplar, have a better proportion than the general population.”

So the vending machines have been cleansed.

The Times has more:

Simon Stevens, chief executive of NHS England, is planning to ban the sale of sugary drinks in hospitals this summer if on-site shops cannot get them down to under 10 per cent of sales.

Maybe the shops can sell other stuff to get the higher-spending punters in, like running machines and cannabis, say.

He is also imposing calorie caps on sandwiches, crisps and chocolate to fight a “snack culture that is causing an epidemic of obesity, preventable diseases, tooth decay, heart disease and cancer”.

After so much PR guff – and the message to nurses to buy cheaper multi-pack of snacks at the supermarket – one thing is missing for the table: hospital food is disgusting. On my first night on the ward I was fed a baked potato with more ‘eyes’ than a Piers Morgan column. Thankfully, I had a someone who bring in fresh and edible food. And when I felt like a pick me up, well, the nurse was always there with biscuits. I can’t recall her weight, BMI or vital statistics, largely because I didn’t give a shit. But next time I’ll be sure to check as I seek her views on religion, politics, investment strategies and other things that I need from her to make sense of my own life.

Posted: 10th, January 2018 | In: Key Posts, News | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Donald Trump was the first person to think Oprah Winfrey should be in the White House

trump oprah daily news

In 2009, Donald Trump said his ideal running mate would be Oprah Winfrey. The actress used her acceptance speech for  receiving a lifetime achievement gong at the Golden Globe Awards to tell a room full of her peers (including the cheaters, narcissists and SADOS – Sons and Daughters of Stars ) that the time for social change for nigh. Oprah for President, came the media response. and the job is surely hers should she give away a free car with every vote.

But the idea was not of the media’s making. In 2009, Donal Trump told us that Oprah would be his dream deputy:

 

 

“Oprah would always be my first choice… I’ll tell ya, she’s really a great woman, though. She is a terrific woman. She’s somebody that’s very special… If she’d do it, she’d be fantastic… She’s popular. She’s brilliant. She’s a wonderful woman. If she’d ever do it, I don’t know if she’d ever do it… She’d be sort of like me. I mean, I have a lot of things going, she’s gotta a lot of things going.”

And Oprah seems to love The Don:

 

 

Spotter: EW

Posted: 9th, January 2018 | In: Celebrities, Key Posts, News, Politicians | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


John Warboys: sex attacker worse than Savile grooms the CPS

In 2009, London taxi driver John Worboys was given a prison sentence of indeterminate length after being convicted of rape and sexual assaults. He’s to be released on licence. The trial judge ordered Warboys to serve a minimum eight years behind bars for one rape and 19 charges of drugging and sexually assaulting at least 12 women. He has convinced the three-strong Parole Board panel that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public that he remain in custody. The therapy has worked.

 

 

The problem is that police “believe” there are many more victims. In October 2010 detectives stated their “belief” that Worboys had attacked at least 102 women. The Sun says Warboys attacked 200 women. The Mirror leads with the headline that Warboys took part in “100 rapes and sex attacks”. Police “believe” Warboys is “probably Britain’s most prolific sex offender”, says the Times. Wore than Jimmy Savile, even, the BBC DJ and TV presenter who never got his day in court but post-death was nonetheless branded the man “who groomed an entire nation” and “one of the UK’s most prolific sex offenders”. Savile was a depraved criminal hiding in plain sight. But, as with Warboys, to accept each claim as proof is troubling. There’s no need to hurdle barriers to justice in court, where both sides of a case are heard, when you can announce guilt and trawl for ‘victims’.

And there are lots of victims:

Detectives told The Times that they feared he might have assaulted as many as 500 women, but his use of drugs meant that many could not recall details of what happened to them.

The Mail says “police suspected him of more than 500 attacks”.

It’s worth looking at this BBC story from April 2009:

The Metropolitan Police was told sex offence units were overstretched months before the arrest and release of taxi rapist John Worboys, it has emerged.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission is investigating why he was released after an arrest in July 2007.

A report said specialist sex offence units, known as Sapphire teams, were understaffed and overstretched.

A report by Government inspectors, which was seen by Met chiefs nine months before the original arrest and release of Worboys, found that Plumstead CID, in south east London, needed urgent reform.

Ch Supt Nicola Grevatt, of HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, said the Greenwich borough only had six officers with specialist training to deal with sex offences. Detectives were investigating up to 20 rape investigations each, the report added.

The effect had been that rape victims were losing contact with the police or withdrawing their support.

Ms Grevatt also said senior officers were responsible for poor communication, in-fighting and an atmosphere of political correctness and paranoia.

Worboys was held at a police station in Plumstead, south-east London, but released on bail.

In February last year he was arrested for a second time, which led to the charges on which he was convicted.

Do we have faith in the police, who failed women seeking help but when talking to media believe everyone is a victim; choosing to tell rather than to listen? Do we trust the justice system? Here’s an easier one: do we admire politicians? The Times makes the link between Warboys and the Labour Party explicit in its reporting. The headline tells readers: “Labour law chief backed ‘lenient’ term for taxi rapist John Worboys”:

Baroness Scotland of Asthal, the former Labour attorney-general, decided against referring the sentence handed to John Worboys back to the courts despite an outcry over its leniency, it emerged last night… Lady Scotland’s decision not to challenge the sentence is one of a series of actions by legal authorities that might have enabled his early release…

And:

Scotland Yard said that in the aftermath of the trial it had been contacted by 19 further suspected victims and referred their cases to the Crown Prosecution Service in October 2010. It was told that further prosecutions were not in the public interest.

The director of public prosecutions was Sir Keir Starmer, now Labour’s frontbench spokesman on Brexit.

The Sun also notes that Starmer was “in charge of the CPS as 115 new victims told police Warboys had attacked them”. The Mail (page 5), thunders: “How Labour’s Keir Starmer let him escape more charges”. Starmer is “accused of ignoring scores of women” who claim Warboys attacked them. A “senior Whitehall source” opines: “If Warboys had been ordered to stand trial for more attacks, it is possible he would have been convicted”. If. Possible. So much for considering the facts. And do we know if Starmer had any role to play in the Warboys trial? No. The Mail concedes: “It is not known if he was personally involved in the decision not to prosecute.”

In the Left-wing papers, the Guardian makes no mention of Starmer and Baroness Scotland in its report “John Worboys: MP demands reasons for release of ‘black-cab rapist'”. The Mirror declines to mention Baroness Scotland and Starmer in its tale of the “sex beast”.

Biased reporting to the fore, then, in a story about a sexual predator’s depravity and prison’s ability to rehabilitate even the most sickening criminals.

 

Posted: 5th, January 2018 | In: Broadsheets, Key Posts, News, Tabloids | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


How to be a Social Justice Warrior by JP Sears

By JP Sears

Posted: 4th, January 2018 | In: Key Posts, Strange But True, Technology | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Facebook bans anti-fascist art

O Tannenbaum im deutschen Raum, wie krumm sind deine äste!

 

“Excuse me, where are the white supremacists?” That question was asked by an anti-fascist at a protest against the far right in Boston back in August. The Nazis turned out to be a “couple of dozen courteous people linked by little more than a commitment to — surprise! — free speech”. The 40,000 anti-Nazis who turned up stop Hitler’s return and prevent the world ‘returning to the 1930s’, as if a decade were an actual place or even a planet, couldn’t find the enemy they see everywhere, anywhere.

Facebook is also looking for Nazism where none exists. And because it’s got more feelers than a Harvey Weinstein AGM, Facebook can stare at things really hard until it finds something to be offended by and use to showcase its sound morals. It can see fascism in John Heartfield’s 1934 anti-Nazi photomontage, O Tannenbaum im deutschen Raum, wie krumm sind deine äste! (‘O Christmas Tree in German soil, how crooked are thy branches!’), one of the best known and powerful anti-fascist images of that era (see above).

For the hard of understanding, Heartfield (born Helmut Herzfeld; 19 June 1891 – 26 April 1968), who used photomontages to take on Adolf Hitler, wrote beneath his tree:

“According to the decree of the Reich Minister of Nutrition, the Tannenbaum is forbidden to reproduce as a foreign intruder on German soil from Christmas 1934. In the future, only the brown uniform tree bred in Walhall is allowed .”

He created and worked extensively for the left-wing workers’ daily Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung (AIZ). Here’s a brief biog of the man:

John Heartfield anglicized his name as a protest against German nationalism during World War I. In 1929 Heartfield began his long collaboration with AIZ, furnishing full-page photomontages nearly every month. Forced to flee Germany after Hitler came to power, he continued to create work for AIZ while in exile. He spent the war years in England, where he worked as a graphic artist. Heartfield was an active supporter of Communism and in 1950 returned to what was then East Germany. He continued to work there, mostly designing scenery and posters for the Berliner Ensemble and Deutsches Theater. Heartfield died in East Berlin in 1968, leaving an extensive archive, which, upon his widow’s death, was transferred to the Akademie der Kiinste zu Berlin. Given Heartfield’s leftist political leanings, his work has rarely been shown in the West. His first exhibition in New York was in 1938; the next was in 1991, when pages from the AIZ were shown.

A 1991 show of Heartfield’s caused the NY Times reviewer to notice the artist satirizing “the Nazi curtailment of civil rights and the Reichstag fire, to pronouncements about German eating habits, made in the face of severe food shortages. One image shows a typical German family dining on a bicycle beneath the heading: ‘Hooray, butter is finished.’ Underneath is a quote from Goebbels to the effect that iron ore makes a people strong, lard and butter only make it fat. Nearby, a related image shows a man being spread onto a piece of toast like butter, along with the Suggestion that, when all else fails, Germany can always eat its Jews. A larger caption reads: ‘Goebbels’s recipe against the food shortage in Germany.'”

 

Goebbels's recipe against the food shortage in Germany."

“Goebbels’s recipe against the food shortage in Germany.”

 

In 1993, MOMA wrote of Heartfield, whose work was being showcased:

His aim was to expose the dangers and abuses of power in the Nazi regime. For example, Adolf, the Superman: Swallows Gold and Spouts Junk (1932) shows Hitler from the waist up. A swastika replaces his heart, and his torso is an x-ray revealing gold coins flowing down his throat and collecting in his stomach. Meaning of Geneva (1932) shows a dove spiked on a bayonet in front of the League of Nations palace. The headline reads: “Where Capital Lives, There Can Be No Peace!” Such images remain among the most vivid satirical images of German political conditions of the 1930s. Although they deal with figures and events of more than half-a-century ago, they are instantly comprehensible today.

 

John Heartfield, With this sign we want to betray you

John Heartfield, With this sign we want to betray you

 

Heartfield’s work was vehemently anti-fascist. but Facebook saw the Hitler tree and commanded it to get thee hence. Stephen Ellcock published the tree on his Facebook page. And for that he’s been blocked and banished to the Facebook gulag for 30 days.

 

Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung, 10 August 1933

Arbeiter Illustrierte Zeitung, 10 August 1933, cover by Heartfield

 

John Heartfield - Gefährliche Mitesser (Dangerous Dining Companions),

John Heartfield – Gefährliche Mitesser (Dangerous Dining Companions)

 

nazis john heartfield

 

“The irony of this is glaringly obvious and in the grand scheme of things it is a ridiculously piffling matter, but it is definitely indicative of much wider and very important issues,” says Stephen, who wrote to Facebook to alert them to their idiocy. “Facebook HQ’s only response so far is along the lines, ‘Well, somebody may have have mistaken it for pro-Nazi propaganda.'”

We live in the age of the prude, for whom the overriding desire is to be offended. Triggered by the ‘inappropriate’, the knowing, smug and panicky engage in their demand for universal adherence to their monocular view. There is no alternative viewpoint to theirs. You are wrong. They are right. Things must be banned lest the race-riot in waiting (you) erupt. In the 1930s, we had a word for these censors. But to scream “fascist!” in their cloth ears would only get lost in the din because today everyone you don’t agree with is a fascist. For the censors to see is to do. One minute you’re looking at a demented tree on Facebook, the next you’re wearing felt and burning Jews.

 

1935 John Heartfield photomontage from the AIZ. The caption reads: 'How did this man get this spinal curvature?' 'That is the organic result of the incessant Heil Hitler salute.'

1935 John Heartfield photomontage from the AIZ. The caption reads: ‘How did this man get this spinal curvature?’ ‘That is the organic result of the incessant Heil Hitler salute.’

 

“The most disconcerting aspect of this sentence is that I cannot even respond or react to messages,” Stephen continues, “which is a very draconian and unfair, particularly as I don’t have alternative contact details for many of my closest virtual friends and collaborators. I am also going to lose quite a bit of money as a result of this, as I was going to be paid a reasonable sum for guest ‘curating’ the Thinking 3D FB page over the next week or two.”

Until Facebook sees the light, Stephen will be posting on Facebook via Flashbak.

Posted: 27th, December 2017 | In: Key Posts, News | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Rebecca Dykes: abducted, murdered by the Uber killer and a rape that wasn’t

Rebecca Dykes

 

The man arrested in connection with the death of British diplomat Rebecca Dykes is Tariq H, says the Guardian. Rebecca Dykes’s body was found by the side of a motorway in Beirut, where she’d been working for the British government.

Reporting has been sketchy. The Mirror leads with news that the woman “in her early 30s” (she was 30) was “raped and murdered”. The Sun agrees, stating that she was “raped and murdered”. But she wasn’t raped, at least not according to autopsy reports. And we don’t know that she was murdered. Indeed, the Express says she was, er, “strangled to death”.

Still, at least we know that the dead woman “graduated with a 2:1” (Mirror) and went to “posh Rugby School” (Sun). 

The Telegraph says she was “abducted some time after” leaving a cafe where she’d been out with friends.

Kidnapped? No, says the Standard, which delivers the headline: “Uber driver’ arrested after British embassy worker found ‘raped and strangled’ in Beirut.” Did she catch a cab using the Uber app? An Uber spokesman goes on the record: “We are horrified by this senseless act of violence. Our hearts are with the victim and her family. We are working with authorities to assist their investigation in any way we can.”

Can it be that a taxi driver hired using an app which tracks his movements and that of his client did it? And if he did, is this an open and shut case?

The Telegraph also notes: “The Lebanese driver picked her up from Gemmayzeh and then drove to the nearby Achrafiyeh neighborhood where she lived, but did not drop her off there. Police traced the suspect’s licence plate through surveillance cameras on the highway, where he dumped the body around 4am, Lebanese news agency NNA reported. The suspect has a criminal record, but it is not known if he was picking Miss Dykes up in his capacity as an Uber passenger or not.”

The Telegraph also tells us for reasons unclear: “She had not been drinking as she had an early flight to catch home early the next morning for the Christmas holidays.” Or as the Times puts it: “Another of the crowd at the bar said Ms Dykes had recently been suffering from a bug and was not drinking heavily.”

The only thing certain is that Rebecca Dykes is dead.

A family spokesman tells everyone: “We are devastated by the loss of our beloved Rebecca. We are doing all we can to understand what happened. We request that the media respect our privacy as we come together as a family at this very difficult time.”

How does bad reporting help them?

Posted: 18th, December 2017 | In: Broadsheets, Key Posts, News, Tabloids | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Liam Allan is a victim of a police policy to treat all accusers as ‘credible and true’

Liam Allan, the poor sod falsely accused of rape and betrayed by the police, is “not an isolated incident”, says Angela Rafferty QC, chairwoman of the Criminal Bar Association. She also warns that the Crown Prosecution Service may be “unconsciously biased” towards people who report sex offences. In other words: if you claim you’ve been raped, you will be believed. You will be referred to as the “victim” by the PR-driven police and “survivor” by a venerating media.

The apogee of this police, political and media collusion, the creation of their self-serving agenda to form a moral force for good in the face of depraved and powerful criminals, thus keeping the plebs in thrall to the heroes protecting us from evil, can be seen in those instances of celebs being nicked for the cameras, as in the cases of comic Jim Davidson, who was pinched at Heathrow Airport as he flew in to the country, and the no less innocent Sir Cliff Richard, whose home was raided on live telly.

In the words of retired judge Sir Richard Henriques, in his review of the police’s Operation Midland into an alleged VIP paedophile ring operating out of Westminster, a policy that automatically believes the accuser “perverts our justice system”. Sir Richard cited a 2014 statement of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary which stated that “the presumption that a victim should always be believed should be institutionalised” – a monocular policy echoed in the police’s assertion that ‘Nick’, who claimed to know of the alleged ring and had seen it all, was “credible and true“.

 

 

Said Sir Richard:

“Since a complainant may or may not be telling the truth, the present policy causes those not telling the truth to be artificially believed and, thus, liars and fantasists and those genuinely mistaken are a given free run both unquestioned and unchallenged.”

Of course, you might have missed Sir Richard’s report, as Daniel Finklestein quipped in the Times:

Bad luck for the Metropolitan police that on the very day it published a report into its handling of celebrity sex-abuse claims, the Americans held an election that took up most of the media’s attention. How were the police to know that would happen, eh?

Had belief counted for all, Liam Allan could have been sent to prison for a crime that was never committed. But prosecuting counsel Jerry Hayes was someone involve in the trial who saw sense and saved the day. Thanks to him and lawyers on Mr Allan’s defence team, police produced a copy of the ‘victim’s messages that exonerated the accused.

“Police officers do not seem to understand their duties of disclosure,” Mr Hayes, told the Mail. ‘They have a statutory duty to look at everything – not just the bits that will help the prosecution. They should log all the material and then send it up to the CPS lawyer handling the case. That did not happen here. The first thing I knew about [these messages] was when we were halfway through the trial. The defence counsel asked if I was sure there was no digital download from the complainants’s phone. She said, ‘Are you sure there’s nothing there?’ I said I would check. I asked the officer if he had the disk of phone material.’Oh yes,’ he said. But he said it was clearly not disclosable, as some of it was very private. I asked him if there was anything on the disk which could undermine the prosecution case. ‘No,’ he said.”

The officer was wrong.

As the Times notes:

The woman who accused Liam Allan of rape told police that she hated sex, but hundreds of messages sent to friends during the preceding months detailed her obsession with the student and her love of sex.

The messages were downloaded by police from the woman’s telephone shortly after she was interviewed in January 2015. Police then stated there were no messages of interest to either the prosecution or Mr Allan’s lawyers.

A few examples of her messages are shared:

“Honestly I was just a mess and I was like I’m asking for one last chance to show you how much you mean to me.”

 “After the initial pain of the train getting into the tunnel it’s not that bad, after a while it’s alright and it’s fun . . . everyone knows I enjoy it but it still hurts me to this day but no pain no gain. It’s worth it.

“It’s always nice to be sexually assaulted without breaking the law. You clearly don’t love me because you keep revoking my sexual advances, have I got to drug you.”

Conflate sexual experimentation with abuse – is that what the police do? And if it is, does it reveal how they view the sexes: women as inherently weak and men as rapists-in-waiting? Is the police force obsessed with identity, unable to treat people as equal in the eyes of the law? And how does a lack of circumspection and open mindedness help actual victims of heinous abuse who do pluck up the courage to make an accusation?

Posted: 16th, December 2017 | In: Key Posts, News | Comment (1) | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Tania Amisi jailed: Express turns crook into a story about immigration

If Tania Amisi is “Queen of the Scroungers”, are her subjects also scroungers? And where might they be found?

The Express leads with Tania Amisi, 27, who on Monday began a four-year prison sentence for defrauding 22 councils out of at least £244,000. She raked in the cash by claiming benefits on properties she did not live in. To put the tin id on it, she was living in a swanky flat in Chelsea Harbour.

 

Tania Amisi

 

Congo-born Amis, who came the UK as a 12-year-old asylum seeker (she was granted indefinite leave to stay) after her father was murdered, would have most likely gone to prison earlier, having pleaded guilty to three charges of fraud. But she legged it. The law caught up with her in Paris in July.

On Monday the judge at Southwark Crown Court told her:

“You had a flat in Chelsea paid for by your fraudulent activities and your son had all the material benefits he could want. Once discovered, you could not face up to the consequences and you fled to mainland Europe until you were brought back.”

So how do you tell the story?

The BBC told it in a story called Britain on the Fiddle:

 

 

Over in the Express, there’s no word on why Amisi was granted asylum. The paper punctuates its front-page story with a “Daily Express Vote” (page 5) in which readers are invited to respond to the question “Should Britain be more careful about who get asylum?” – which begs another question not asked by the paper: how can you best vet a 12-year-old whose dad’s been murdered for any future crimes she may commit?

To help Express readers reach an answer, on page 12 the paper delivers the editorial: “Fraudster made fortune from soft-touch Britain.” Amisi is the “pregnant mother-of-three, who came to Britain from the Congo as an asylum seeker”. When she was 12. She didn’t come when she was pregnant and take Britain as a soft touch by pointing to her kids and her bump. This is a story on benefits fraud. But the Express makes immigration its thrust.

The London Evening Standard mentions Amisi’s place of birth not once. The Guardian doesn’t report on the story at all. But to the Express she is “the shameless former asylum seeker”. Why can’t she just be a crook?

 

Posted: 13th, December 2017 | In: Key Posts, Money, News | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Meghan Markle: show us your dirty laundry

Meghan Markle has a “rift “with her father. Well, she had, apparently, because in a video from when she was 19 in the summer of 1999 that’s now the Sun’s front-page news (“MEGHAN: MY RIFT WITH DAD”), the actress tells her pal “my dad and I aren’t on the best of terms”. We’d like to keep up with the Markles, but we’d have to check a new source because the video shooter was Ninaki Priddy, a woman no longer mates with Meghan, 36.

Alongside a photo of Meghan in a short dress, we read that Thomas Markle “now lives a nomadic life driving between rented homes on LA and Mexico in an old Volvo” – a car the Mirror tells us is an “old batted blue Chrysler PT Cruiser”.

The Sun says Thomas’s home is a “cliff shack”. He “proudly tells the locals Meghan’s is his daughter”. Odd because the Mail was looking for the “elusive” Thomas and telling readers that “placed in his position, many fathers would be singing their joy from the rooftops”. The Sun says Thomas’ roof might not take the weight, given that it’s atop a “tiny red-tiled home…on a 120ft cliff overlooking the Pacific.”

Having given a front page and two inside pages to Ninaki Priddy’s scrapbook, the Sun today finds space for Jane Moore to accuse Priddy of “betrayal”. So the tabloids don’t do chequebook journalism any more, expose celebs and feature kiss ‘n’ tells about the beautiful people? Or is it different for Royals? Why shouldn’t a woman sell her story for loadsa money when her ex-pal – and do we know why they fell out?; Priddy says “What came to light after Trevor [Engelson – Meghan’s ex] and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan”? – is due to remarry, this time to a billionaire’s scion?

We never did get the full story of Princess Diana and Charles when they were engaged. The media kept the knobs on a pedestal by delivering a narrative soaked in magic and star-written love. Let’s not have it again.

Much guff has been written about Meghan and Harry. “Don’t underestimate the symbolism of a royal marriage. From now on, it will be impossible to argue that being black is somehow incompatible with being British,” trumpets the Guardian. “Is it too mad to wonder, once the Brexit dust settles, whether the younger royals may – against all the odds – represent a Britain looking forward to the future rather than an imagined past?” the Indy muses. Once more the royals are showing us the way. But if we want to be modern – and wouldn’t that involve getting shot of them? – then surely we should know who they are and why we need to crane our necks to see them.

Posted: 6th, December 2017 | In: Broadsheets, Celebrities, Key Posts, News, Tabloids | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Media obsession over Kate Maltby and Damian Green is something Rotherham girls can only dream of

It’s always big news when a journalist becomes the story. Access is easy.  The newspaper with the hack’s number on speed-dial gets to ride high on the news cycle and be relevant. And all other media can take sides and judge. Kate Malby is the young Conservative activist in the limelight, writing in the Times about how “awkward I felt” when Damian Green, the Tory MP and first secretary of state, allegedly came on to her. He denies doing so. But the story is out there. And it’s open season on Green and Maltby, teh story veering between the invasive and the endemic.

Maltby kicked off her story with context. “After the Weinstein scandal we are asking new questions about the sexual abuse of power: all to the good,” she wrote, linking a powerful Hollywood figure’s alleged rapes and serious sexual assaults to her experience. What did Green do? Was it criminal?

Mr Green is almost exactly 30 years older than me. He has always cropped up in the peripheral circle of my parents’ acquaintances; he generously agreed to be interviewed by my school newspaper when I was the 16-year-old editor and he the shadow education minister.

Oh, god no!

I did not conduct the interview myself, and had no contact again until I became involved in Tory activism in my twenties.

Ah. Phew! The 16-year-old and the man in this 40s is not a story laced with sex and crime. We rejoin the story with Maltby in her twenties…

At that point I began to ask him for advice on internal matters. We met for a daytime coffee in 2014 to discuss a political essay collection I was co-editing. He was helpful and avuncular…

We fast forward to 2015, Maltby and Green are meeting once more:

He steered the conversation to the habitual nature of sexual affairs in parliament. He told a funny story about finding himself in a lift with the Cameron aide Rachel Whetstone and her alleged lover, Samantha Cameron’s stepfather, Lord Astor. He mentioned that his own wife was very understanding. I felt a fleeting hand against my knee – so brief, it was almost deniable. I moved my legs away, and tried to end the drink on friendly terms. I then dropped all contact for a year. I wanted nothing to do with him.

Awkward, right enough.

For a while I wondered if I’d imagined the incident. I had no proof. And was I self-regarding to think myself attractive? Women are trained to doubt our desirability.

Only women? Aren’t men also presented with ideals? They go loopy for a man with his shirt off drinking a Coca Cola or serving a yoghurt, but can only pity the hapless husband who can’t operate soap. And aren’t men now being recast as suspects? An LA Times article told us: “Sexual harassment is neither a Republican problem nor a Democratic one. It’s a man problem.” Like womanhood before liberation, manhood is a restrictive condition.

In May 2016, Maltby was” persuaded by The Times to write a piece about the history of corsets… It ended up being quite light-hearted, and I was talked into posing in a not-very-revealing corset.” The phone rang. It was Green:

“Long time no see. But having admired you in a corset in my favourite tabloid I feel impelled to ask if you are free for a drink anytime?” I ignored the message.

Indeed. She “wanted nothing more to do with him”.

Six weeks later, David Cameron fell and Mr Green was suddenly one of the most important men in Theresa May’s cabinet. As an aspirant political writer, it seemed impossible to avoid him professionally. So I sent him a message. “Many congratulations on joining the cabinet — you and your family must be delighted. I’ll look forward to seeing what you achieve in government.”

Cue Jan Moir, Mrs Michael Gove, the apogee of school gates knowing, who tells Mail readers:

Clearly driven mad with lust by the sight of the 31-year-old in a lace-up bodice and lumpy leggings, Green had only one thing on his mind. The brute! So she ‘actively ignored him’ until this June, when he was suddenly promoted to Deputy PM in Theresa May’s new government. The fact that Green was suddenly hugely important did not escape the single-minded Miss Maltby, who put the trauma of what had happened behind her and began texting him again.

 

maltby green

 

Will anyone stick up for ‘Miss’ lumpy legs? The Mail won’t. It’s Team Green, backing the man allegedly involved in Daily Mail scoops? The Mail’s double-page spread comes with a free hatchet:

One very pushy lady: Kate Maltby’s dad is a banker who dated Ann Widdecombe, and a family friend of the minister she accuses of touching her knee. ANDREW PIERCE profiles a woman determined to make it in politics – whatever the cost

Isn’t being determined a good thing?

Kate was brought up in Geneva, Switzerland, before the family moved back to Britain and into their £5 million home in Holland Park, West London. Kate, a highly- strung teenager, dropped out of Cheltenham Ladies’ College and moved to the £25,000-a-year St Paul’s Girls’ School.

Well-travelled, well-connected and well educated. Maltby can either spend her days lunching or work hard to put her nous to good use. Good on her for having a go, right?

In 2012, Maltby moved into a £1.3 million flat in Notting Hill… She bought the flat, now worth around £2 million, with no mortgage.

Which surely garners the reaction: so what? If this were a story about how anyone seeking a career in media needs to have private means, then we’d get it. We’d expect every Mail’s byline to come with a word on the writer’s schooling, market rate of their home and a family tree linking them to the owner. But it’s a story is about a woman feeling uncomfortable.

While she was in Notting Hill, the ambitious Maltby targeted Samantha Cameron… One member of the now defunct Notting Hill set recalled: ‘She was relentless and persistent in courting Mrs Cameron and others. We all got bombarded with emails and calls from her after she just sort of appeared in our midst. But I’m afraid there was something not quite right. I wasn’t sure we could ever fully trust her.’

And who better to trust than the anonymous source? The same or maybe it’s another anonymous voice tells us: “She might be more careful the next time she’s asked to write a piece trashing a decent man.”

Team Green is in full cry, then? But in the New Statesman, Sarah Ditum says Maltby is “paying the price” for speaking out as a woman. Damian Green’s relations with Maltby are being investigated by Cabinet Office. Green is also being investigated for alleged misuse of his Commons computer, namely to access porn, something he denies. Anna Soubry, a Tory MP, says he should be suspended. A “senior figure” tells the Sunday Times Green should contemplate suicide: “It’s time for the whisky and the revolver.”

Ditum wonders: “How posh does a woman have to be for her account of a man’s behaviour to be dismissed? How ambitious?”

The questions are rhetorical. It’s also clear Ditum is writing less about Maltby than the Mail’s reaction to her. You see. Media loves to talk about media. It’s the easiest news beat there is.

And if accusations of betraying friends, shaming family and publicising herself are too mild for you, don’t worry: Jan Moir is there on the facing page, calling Maltby “poison”, “disingenuous” and “not afraid to use all her charms to get herself noticed”.

But what about Maltby?

When a woman comes forward, she knows her credibility will be undermined, her past picked over and her character demolished. She might, like Labour activist Bex Bailey when she reported a rape, simply be told to hush up.

Rape? Is the heinous crime of rape relevant to Green? Isn’t that, you know, a bit unfair? Isn’t this about an alleged light brush of the knee, and flirtation? And if the media wants to investigate young vulnerable women being abused by older men, why don’t they talk more about attitudes to poor women in Rotherham and elsewhere? No #MeToo hashtags for the poor, ordinary and isolated. You stat to wonder if this about women or class? To rework Ditum’s question: How poor does a woman have to be for her account of a man’s behaviour to be dismissed? And does she have to live in London?

She continues:

When a national paper is willing to go to war for the hand on the knee and the presumptuous text, it’s not because they fear for one man’s career (which, again, was never threatened by Maltby): it’s because these are the things that keep women where we are.

Which is…where? Writing a column in a national newspaper or magazine? Four days after her original story, Maltby wrote in the Times:

Baroness Helena Kennedy QC came forward to confirm that I had confided in her a year ago about Green and was unlikely to have fabricated the story. At least two other women have said the same in public — and there are others who have offered to give similar evidence in private to a forthcoming Cabinet Office inquiry.

So my accusers changed tack. Seeming to accept that I genuinely believe my own claims, “friends of Damian Green” now suggest I may not have been able to tell the difference between the touch of a human hand and the flicker of tablecloth. This is the only story in a very difficult week that has given me reason to crack a hollow smile. Women know the difference between a hand and a tablecloth.

Women do. But do men, who are clueless when it comes to household items and laundry. Discuss.

Posted: 3rd, December 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Politicians | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


The Daily Mail’s List Of Things That Give You Cancer: From A To Z

SCARE Stories in the Daily Mail – here’s a list of things that give you cancer:
AFTERNOONShere
ARTIFICIAL FLAVOURS http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-55023/Cancer-causing-chemicals-soy-sauce.html
BAGELS – here
BELTS – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2439962/Wearing-tight-belt-throat-cancer-Constricting-waistbands-cause-acid-reflux–increasing-risk-disease.html
CANDLE-LIT DINNERS – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1207726/Candles-release-scents-laced-cancer-chemicals-warn-scientists.html#ixzz0dufFps6a
CANNABIS – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-146853/Why-cannabis-greater-cancer-risk-tobacco.html
CATS: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2019170/Can-cat-cancer-Parasite-bellies-linked-brain-tumours.html
CHEESE (CHEDDAR) – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4322418/How-cheddar-cream-cheese-breast-cancer.html
CHILDLESSNESS http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-474820/SUZANNE-MOORE-Im-sick-told-fault.html
CHILDREN’S FOODhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-201390/Health-warning-childrens-food.html
CHIMNEY SWEEPING: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3293707/Revealed-116-things-cause-CANCER-according-world-health-experts.html
COCAINE – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267864/Drug-dealers-add-cancer-causing-chemical-cocaine-maximise-profits.html
CONTRACEPTIVE PILLShttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-181273/Cancer-risk-45-higher-Pill.html
DADS: http://www.anorak.co.uk/431859/tabloids/daily-mail-scare-story-dad-gives-you-cancer.html/
DEPRESSION http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2442249/Depression-triple-risk-developing-Parkinsons-disease-scientists-say.html
DILDOS –  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2611376/These-toys-arent-sharing-How-sex-aids-spread-cancer-causing-HPV-virus-partners.html
EGYPTIAN MOOBS – here
ENGLISH BREAKFASThttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1049142/Traditional-English-fry-raise-risk-bowel-cancer-63-cent.html
FREQUENT FLYINGhere
GADGETS http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3772629/Cancer-cases-children-40-20-years.html
HAIRDRYERS  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3772629/Cancer-cases-children-40-20-years.html
HOLIDAYS – http://www.anorak.co.uk/400678/tabloids/the-daily-mail-lifestyle-gives-you-cancer.html/
KIDNEY TRANSPLATShttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-459097/TV-prize-kidney-carries-risk-cancer.html
KINDER bars – http://www.anorak.co.uk/436477/tabloids/scare-stories-nutella-and-kinder-eggs-give-ambassador-farages-guests-cancer.html/
LIFESTYLE – http://www.anorak.co.uk/400678/tabloids/the-daily-mail-lifestyle-gives-you-cancer.html/
LIFESTYLE – here
LIVER TRANSPLANTS http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-207838/Cancer-liver-transplant-killed-husband.html
LONG FINGERS http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2439430/Why-long-fingers-mean-youre-likely-depressed-small-ears-make-prone-kidney-disease.html
MIDDLE CLASS – here
MISSING A PERIOD – here
NUCLEAR POWER (there is no hint of irony in this article)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-42066/New-study-links-nuclear-sites-c…
NUTELLA http://www.anorak.co.uk/436477/tabloids/scare-stories-nutella-and-kinder-eggs-give-ambassador-farages-guests-cancer.html/
ROAST POTATOES – http://www.anorak.co.uk/436735/tabloids/scare-stories-roast-potatoes-give-you-cancer.html/
X-RAYS http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-207035/X-rays-bring-risk-cancer.html
ZEBRA TOYS – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2439656/Start-Your-Senses-Zebra-toy-recalled-cancer-risk.html
Spotter:

Posted: 1st, December 2017 | In: Key Posts, Tabloids | Comments (22) | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Donald Trump and Britain First: a Twitter romance made in a safe space

Is a retweet an endorsement? It is if you’re cuddly Donald Trump, who has amplified anti-Muslim propaganda tweeted by Jayda Franse, the woman who fronts Britain First, the odious far right group.

That Trump has the brain of a cretinous adolescent is certain. It’s also a sure thing that when Trump tweets, it’s news. Four national newspapers lead with Trump’s retweets. The Times, Telegraph and Guardian all lead with Theresa’s May’s condemnation of the tweets Tump broadcasted to his millions of followers.

The i goes further. It says Trump’s sad, deeply pathetic and short-fingered grasp on the big issues of diplomacy, bigotry and racism, his undermining of the weight of high office, call into question his State visit to the UK. His retweets, says the paper, constitute “an attack on Britain”.

 

Trump tweets britain first

 

Should the UK be a safe space, where Donald’ Tump is banned from entering?

Trump takes pride in claiming to be saying the ‘unsayable’, telling it like it is. In his head, Trump’s engaging in home-spun wisdom. He’s a plain talking pioneer stripped of politicians’ artifice and cunning. His Twitter account’s a virtual stoop wherefrom he shares wisdom with the simple folks who gather at his feet. Little surprise he finds kindred spirits in fringe groups who purport to be doing the same, self-styled brave souls daring to speak the truth at a time when free expression is increasingly oppressed.

As debate withers and dies on the vine – free speech stymied by policed speech, activists posing as journalists and offence-seekers watching us for any misstep; when accusation is enough to establish guilt; when identity is all (and you know who agrees with that liberal view? Yeah: Nazis) – extremists with loud mouths position themselves as the voices of freedom. You want an alternative to the suffocation. There it is on the side, circling life’s plughole.

The last word is with Trump. Having been called out for his actions, he tweets:

@TheresaMay, don’t focus on me, focus on the destructive Radical Islamic Terrorism that is taking place within the United Kingdom. We are doing just fine!

 

No, Donald. No! That’s the wrong Theresa May.

 

 

America. Would someone over there please take Trump’s phone away from him and put him to bed. Grown-ups are talking. Well, we will just as long as those progressive liberal voices who view human interaction as a potential crime scene allow it…

Posted: 30th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Politicians | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Trumpy Bear: your very own Donald Trump-themed teddy to groom

Stuck for gift ideas? Looking for a warm hug ? Want something to groom? Well, Trumpybear is the answer.

 

Trump bear

 

Trumpy Bear is a plush 22″ bear with an attached 28″ by 30″ flag themed blanket. $39.90 plus $6.95 shipping. Trumpy has a zippered neck where the blanket is stored. Texas residents will be charged sales tax at the rate of 8.25%- all other states are neither collected nor remitted.

Do not set detonate your bear, pull its hair nor delve inside for sign of substance:

There is a 30 day money back guarantee for product price only. Shipping charges non refundable. Sorry, we cannot accept returns of intentionally damaged bears. Most orders are shipped within three business days. However, during periods of excess demand, please allow up to 6 weeks for delivery.

 

Trump bear donald trump tedy

 

‘God bless Anerica. And Good Bless Trumpy Bear!”

 


Spotter: TrumpBear

Posted: 29th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, Politicians, The Consumer | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Ant McPartlin: airbrushing the drugs doesn’t make him a role model

Ant McPartlin, the taller one from Ant ‘n’ Dac, is on the Sun’s cover. “ANT NOT GOING HOME TO WIFE,” runs the headline. A “source” tells the paper that Ant and his wife, Lisa Armstrong, are “struggling to find a way to move forward together”.

Lest anyone suppose there was something more to this story, on page 7 readers are told: “ANT’S FACING XMAS ALONE.” Poor Ant! The “telly favourite faces a lonely Christmas in a rented pad.” Anything else? Well, Ant is “getting over an addiction to painkillers following knee surgery”. Nothing illegal, then. No illegal drugs are mentioned, just the ones sanctioned by the State and pumped out by big pharma. “Ant is focused on recovery,” adds the source.

Lest we wonder why Ant has left home and how it is that recovery does not include being in the bosom of his family, the “source” tells us that Ant is delighted the “public still support him” and his wife is “having a good time with her pals”.

We do like Ant and Dec, who are easily the best things about I’m A Celebrity, which features a nice enough platoon of celebs. The pity being that none of them are interesting. But there is something PR-driven about the Sun’s “exclusive”. It was the Sun which broke the story about “booze, pills and substances”:

 

 

In a world exclusive interview, emotional Ant tells The Sun on Sunday: “I was at the point where anything — prescription drugs, non-prescription drugs — I would take.

“And take them with alcohol, which is ridiculous. The doctors told me, ‘You could have killed yourself’. ”

Dec is the victim:

Squeaky-clean Ant’s descent into dangerous prescription drugs came after he damaged his knee in 2014, then had a botched operation on it the following year.

Is he that squeaky clean? Dan Wootton says he is. And he adds: “Ant is bright-eyed, trim and sporting a youthful new hairstyle when we meet.”

 

 

In 2013, Ant and Dec were interviewed in the Guardian:

By the laws of show business, at least one of them should have succumbed to the traditional hazards of child stardom – drink and drugs, sexual transgression, monstrous egomania. Yet, with the solitary exception of a drunken night involving Dec and a lap dancer, which ended up in the tabloids, the pair have been almost freakishly clean. Have they never even tried taking drugs?

“Years ago, yeah,” Ant admits, “but we’re not really druggy people, that’s the thing. I think you either go into that crowd as a kid or you don’t, and we didn’t. We found the love of alcohol very early on and we stayed with it.” Laughing, Dec adds, “There’s a real pub culture where we’re from in Newcastle, so we’re just more boozy people.”

If one had ever been at risk of self-destruction, though, who was the likelier candidate? Without hesitation, both point at Ant. “Probably me, yeah,” he admits. Dec points out affectionately: “There’s nothing like the love of a good woman, though.”

Ant’s plight then becomes a campaign:

“‘I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO DIE’ Three ex-addicts reveal agony of getting hooked on prescription medication like TV star Ant McPartlin

The number of opioid painkiller prescriptions in the UK has doubled over the past decade to 24 million – yet nobody knows how many people are struggling with addictions

 

 

We should all wish Ant McPartlin well. But to suppose he’s not a human being susceptible to the same temptations as the rest of us buys into the myth that anyone who appears on the telly is a ‘role model’. We don’t mind it when rockers and artists take drugs and illuminate our lives with bursts of vibrant culture, so why should we care if a talented, immensely likeable and engaging TV presenter does? Screw the PR guff. What Ant does to his own body is his own affair.  We’re big enough to understand that, right?

Posted: 27th, November 2017 | In: Celebrities, Key Posts, Tabloids | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


The Daily Mail versus The Guardian: wrapping Nazis and eugenics in Paperchase guff

Have you boycotted Paperchase, sellers of printed stationery – yep, people really do still send letters (though not to Daily Mail readers who communicate by holding their noses and yelling into the wind)?  Hope not. Paperchase tried its best to shine a light into society’s darkest recess. It reached out to the Daily Mail’s  Untermensch readership, hoping that in offering them two free rolls of Christmas wrapping paper, they’d be put on the path to decency.

 

paperchase brexit

Paperchase – not fan of Brexit

 

But Stop Funding Hate thought Mail readers beyond salvation and bombarded Paperchase’s social media account with complaints. Paperchase didn’t rescind the offer, but did vow never again to reach down into the sewer. It was “truly sorry”. Some people are just not worth the effort. Wrapping paper is a not a right; it’s a moral choice. The tree gods gladly give up their own to wrap useful gifts like photos of Jeremy Corbyn, DVDs of The 100 Best Silences and the Pop-Up Book of Safe Spaces. But save for the odd Japanese knot weed and leylandii, no vegetation wants to be seen dead around the kind of stuff Mail readers buy at Christmas – jackboots, flaming torches and Jeremy Clarkson audio tapes.

Sarah Baxter tells Times readers Stop Funding Hate is interested in muzzling the Press. The group’s founder, Richard Wilson, ‘admitted on Newsnight that “the end point for us is a media that does the job we all want it to”.’ Which is? Baxter says it’s “suppressing the array of opinion reflected in the British press… Stop Funding Hate, however, has morphed into an arrogant group of hate-mongering activists who are outraged about an ever-expanding range of subjects”.

The idea is simple: starve the publication you don’t like of advertising money and watch it die. If this also deprives thick-as-custard people of reading the tabloids, all to the good. If those mouth-breathers can’t be banned from sharing views of the right-minded, their reading material must be censored. The caring Left knows best.

The Advertising Association is concerned, stating: “The UK has a free press and advertising plays a vital role in funding that. Pressure group lobbying of this kind has negative implications for our press freedom.” Advertising body Isba, warns: “We shouldn’t take for granted the freedom of the press.”

Over in the Guardian, which would surely be the only newspaper on the bottom shelf when the anti-haters have won the day, Peter Peston thunders:

Stop Funding Hate may legitimately urge Mail readers to quit (and Mail readers may, equally legitimately, examine the causes SFH espouses and make up their own minds). But trolling rather nervous companies such as Paperchase isn’t legitimate. It’s the thin end of a dangerous wedge – with no winners in sight, from left or right.

As last week’s Ipso complaints ruling on Trevor Kavanagh’s “The Muslim Problem” column for the Sun mordantly observes: “There is no clause in the editors’ code which prohibits publication of offensive content”. Nor should there be.

In the same paper, Stewart Lee writes beneath the headline: “My futile attempt to sell satire to the Daily Mail.” Well, the paper does employ the sublime Craig Brown, so maybe he’s enough? Guardian readers are told:

Usually, I am the sort of person who thinks that anyone who has ever worked for the Daily Mail is worse than Adolf Hitler, even the temps and the tea lady. And I’m not alone. So disgusted are youth voters by the repellent newspaper, it’s now clear that the Daily Mail’s increasingly hysterical attacks on Jeremy Corbyn, the coddled egg of British politics, may even have helped secure his triumphant loss in the last general election.

Worse than Hitler? Satire, right? Phew! And people not voting for Corbyn because the Mail told them, too? I thought it was about anti-Semitism. But, then, I’ve not been keeping up with the Guardian’s news on Jews and Jezza’ Labour Party, not since one of their columnists wrote in the Guardian: “I have developed a habit when confronted by letters to the editor in support of the Israeli government to look at the signature to see if the writer has a Jewish name. If so, I tend not to read it.”

I didn’t call for a boycott. And the sport pages are good. Boycotts are, after all, for censors and Nazis.

Lee also turns to the subject of Nazis, riffing on when the Mail hailed the blackshirts.

And a sepia-toned card of the first Viscount Rothermere, the paper’s 1930s proprietor, declares, in Daily Mail font, “I urge all British young men and women to study the Nazi regime in Germany. There is a clamorous campaign of denunciation against ‘Nazi atrocities’ which consist merely of a few isolated acts of violence, but which have been generalised, multiplied and exaggerated to give the impression that Nazi rule is a bloodthirsty tyranny. Congratulations on passing your driving test.”

Haha. Got one about the Guardian opposing the creation of the National Health Service as it feared the state provision of healthcare would “eliminate selective elimination”?

This is not to defend the Mail. It’s to highlight how censorship is formed by bigotry.

Owen Jones disagrees. He writes in the Guardian: “Paperchase rejecting the Daily Mail is another victory against hatred.” No, he’s not being ironic.

This paper, whose less than glorious history includes cheerleading for the Nazis and Oswald Mosley’s blackshirts, is one of the most vindictive bullies in Britain.

And the Guardian? The Spectator tells us that not all leading figures in the Left, including eugenicist George Bernard Shaw, minded tyranny. ( In March 1933 Shaw was a co-signatory to a letter in The Manchester Guardian protesting at the continuing misrepresentation of Soviet achievements: “No lie is too fantastic, no slander is too stale … for employment by the more reckless elements of the British press.”)

Malcolm Muggeridge, was initially supportive of the Soviet regime. But then he went to Moscow as a correspondent for the Manchester Guardian and learned about the Ukrainian famine. The Guardian censored his reports. The left was divided by the atrocities of the Soviet Union into honest, moral people and those who turned a blind eye.

Is this a row between newspapers: the Guardian in need of the Mail to showcase what it is not; the Mail and right-wing Press, doing much the same? The difference is, though, that only one side supports censorship.

Posted: 26th, November 2017 | In: Broadsheets, Key Posts, News, Tabloids, The Consumer | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Jon Venables: turning James Bulger’s murder into good and moral entertainment

Jon Venables, the child who killed a child, is back in the news. News is that he’s been caught in possession of child abuse images, just as he was in 2010. This means he’s back in prison.

The Sun leads with the news, saying how Venables’ probation officials spotted the images on a computer belonging to the 35-year-old who together with Robert Thompson killed James Bulger in February 1993. Over pages 4 and 5, we see the familiar photos: Venables at age 10 stood for the police cameras; his partner in crime Robert Thompson in the same pose; and that haunting CCTV picture of James Bulger being walked form a Merseyside shopping centre to his gruesome death.

Venables, of course, is not known by that name. He got a new name, one which cannot and should not be revealed. Right now he’s in a category A prison, his alleged offences under investigation. If it goes to court, the paper says Venables will be afforded a crown court trial. Venables keeps costing the State money. Last time in prison, we learn he was given around-the-clock protection, and “access to guitar lessons and a rowing machine”. Before his release in 2001, he was given “years of costly treatment”.

The crime was heinous, one that shocked us all. But the story is without end. The country does try to seek out Venables, much less exact vigilante justice. So what is the purpose of the Sun’s story? Is it to show that rehabilitation does not work. Surely not because Robert Thompson is “now hailed as rehabilitation success story”.

Venables served seven years of a life sentence for the murder of James Bulger. In 2001, aged 18, he was set free, albeit under license, able to be recalled for any misdemeanour. He got a new name, a job that enforced unsociable hours on just above minimum wage and a place to live. The press were forbidden by law from revealing any details on Venables’ new identity. But we only knew their real names because the judge told us the killers’ names in an adult court, moving on from ‘Child A’ and “Child B’. Was that right? Venables was ordered never to reveal his original identity to anyone. He must live a lie. Was that freedom?

Then, aged 27, Venables was back in prison, serving a two-year sentence for downloading and distributing indecent images of children. Now he’s back inside again. And the media continues to stoke the fires. Denise Fergus, James Bulger’s mother, is back on our screens, her pain clear to all. Her lot is to be a media celebrity dished up for us to gawp at. On Sky News, once more she is encouraged to revisit the horror. Our utmost sympathy must be with her and Ralph Bulger, James Bulger’s father. They have no need to forgive.

But why are we invited to stare? Why are we being invited to be entertained by their suffering?

It was ever so. The rare murder of a child by children might have been sui generis had the Labour spokesman on home affairs not milked the story. Tony Blair, for it was he, seized the moment to amplify the murder into a national crisis. Thompson and Venables’ crimes were “hammer blows struck against the sleeping conscience of the country, urging us to wake up and look unflinchingly at what we see”. He told us: “A solution to this disintegration doesn’t simply lie in legislation. It must come from the rediscovery of a sense of direction as a country… We cannot exist in a moral vacuum. If we do not learn and then teach the value of what is right and what is wrong, then the result is simply moral chaos which engulfs us all.”

There are other murders. But this one served a purpose. Blair tapped into the trial judge’s comments on it being a crime of  “unparalleled evil and barbarity”. If that was evil the likes of which had never been seen before manifest in our midst, then Tony Blair was the force for good.  And so it was that the murder of James Bulger became a totem for the nation to rally around. James Bulger, the innocent child, became a New Labour symbol and a political football. The crime was submerged in the age’s reaction to it. And there was the video and the pictures to promote the message on rolling news. They’re still being used in a crime packaged for our age.

 

Posted: 23rd, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Tabloids | Comments (2) | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Jack Maynard: outrage as ‘racist’ vlogger avoids being eaten by rats

So farewell, Jack Maynard, aka ‘YouTuber Jack Maynard’, who has left I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here! to sort out “circumstances outside camp”. Maynard wanted to “do the internet proud”. And he did just that, introducing the TV-watching tribes to life on the web. As the Sun thunders: “YouTube sensation, 22, was forced to apologise for racist and homophobic slurs on his Twitter account where he branded users ‘retarded’.”

Twitter’s a bit like a 1970s comedians showcase, albeit without the wit, laughs, likeable characters and fun.

 

 

The Sun took it upon itself to “reveal” some of Maynard’s “racist and homophobic tweets”, although it saw reason to edit them. Too rude for the paper that used to feature stunnas on Page 3 and still advertises phone lines for onanists seeking on-the-clock relief – yesterday readers were invited to call “X-Rated Cheap Girls – 18-94 Year Olds” and “HOT GIRLS [age unspecified]”. Thankfully, Pink News is less prudish. Damning Maynard as someone “famous for being the younger brother of singer Connor Maynard”, we read:

When an abusive commenter suggested he had profited off of his brother’s fame, Maynard hit back: “Completely forgot you know how I got it YOU RETARDED FAGGOT”.

He also used what the mainstream media terms ‘the N-word”. Censorship is provided by the Sun. (If you want to read the bad words, you need to get yourself on twitter.)

 

 

So Jack’s gone to spend time with his selfies, denying his accusers the chance to watch him being locked in a buried coffin and terrorised by rats. You had your chance.

Even better is the “spokesperson for the vlogger” – yep, even narcissists have their limits – who tells the Sun:

“Jack is ashamed of what he said in these tweets, many of which were deleted a long time ago and were sent in response to a neighbour who was bullying him. Jack was a lot younger when he posted them in 2012 but realises that age is no defence.”

Anyone else read that and see an adult explaining the action of a child? Jack is a big boy, says the grown up, and he knows he has done wrong. That leads to the a classic non-denial denial with sympathetic back story:

“He would never use that language now and realises that, as someone who was bullied himself, this kind of retaliatory, inflammatory, insulting language is completely unacceptable.”

Look at Jack Maynard less as the perpetrator, but as a victim living out fantasies born of a difficult childhood.

Posted: 22nd, November 2017 | In: Celebrities, Key Posts, News, Tabloids, TV & Radio | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Scientists make shock discovery: the internet invented sex

Stop sniggering. News is that sex education “may need to become more graphic” to keep pace with experimental teens engaging in “taboo practices”.

Boffins at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and University College London have been monitoring what the Telegraph terms the “changing sexual practices of youngsters since 1990”. Is monitoring young people having sex a kink, one of those taboos? The sex researchers’ findings are published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, and via a press release.  In it we read:

Whilst vaginal intercourse and oral sex remained the most common combination of sexual practices experienced in the past year, the proportion of sexually active 16-24 year olds who said they have had vaginal, oral and anal sex during the last year has risen, from approximately one in ten women and men in 1990-1991, to one in four men and one in five women in 2010-2012. Some of the largest increases in the prevalence of oral and anal sex over the past decade were observed among those aged 16-18.

Observed? No. Just what those surveyed felt able to say they engaged in. No need for a dark room anymore when you can just click and save. Every generation likes to feel as though they invented sex, and him, her and the turkey baster did it just the once in order to create the wonder of you. But the sex that doesn’t lead to a missionary’s idea of procreation has always been popular.  (Have you seen Catherine the Great’s furniture?) Still, we’re at the bleeding edge of sex, so the Sun can read the researchers’ notes, overlook the fact that in 1275, the first age of consent was set in England at age 12, and declare: “Brits are having sex younger than ever – and experimenting more in bed.”

And it’s all about the internet, sink of porn and depravity.

 

Literature from the staid 1950s (more)

 

The press release tells us:

Lead author Dr Ruth Lewis, who conducted the work while at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine but is now based at the MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, said: “At a time when much sex and relationships education is being updated, keeping pace with current trends in sexual practices is crucial so that curricula are tailored to the realities of young people’s experiences.”

Masturbation: discuss.

“By shedding light on when some young people are having sex and what kinds of sex they are having, our study highlights the need for accurate sex and relationships education that provides opportunities to discuss consent and safety in relation to a range of sexual practices. This will equip young people with the information and skills they need to maximise their wellbeing from the outset of their sexual lives.”

Kaye Wellings, senior author and Professor of Sexual and Reproductive Health at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, echoes the view that sex is a problem. “It is important to keep up to date with trends in sexual lifestyles to help young people safeguard their health and increase their well being,” she says.

Then this:

They found that the number of 16-24s moving away from traditional sexual intercourse had doubled, with experts claiming that the easy access to internet pornography was partly behind the rise..

Medieval French manuscript showing nuns picking “fruit” from “a medieval penis tree”.

Before web porn: French manuscript showing nuns picking “fruit” from “a medieval penis tree”.

 

 The thinking is that as the kids find new way to get their rock off, adults must keep overtake them and get in tune with what they might be into next (good luck guessing what they’re into) . The sex educator explains everything to the rutting youth, who realising that what hasn’t been said is the new ‘taboo’, decide to have a go at that bit. One upon a time, kids had the ‘dirty squad‘, pop stars, saucy postcards, wartime sado-masochism, art and mucky books to tell them what was naughty. Now they have adult experts in what to do and how to do it.

Posted: 20th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Gaia Pope: suing the police for a crime that never happened

After the febrile reporting and shadowy photos of innocent people, police say foul play played no part in the death of Gaia Pope, the 19-year-old who went missing in bucolic Dorset.

 

murder gaia pope

 

You might wonder why police arrested three people on suspicion of murder. All three were released under investigation. Greg Elsey, whose son Paul Elsey was arrested by police, accuses investigators of behaving like “wooden tops“. He says his son can prove he was elsewhere when Gaia Pope went missing. So why was Paul Elsey arrested and subjected to harsh media scrutiny?

The newspapers piled in, as ever they must when a photogenic blonde is missing. But from front-page news, the Express relegates the case of “tragic” Gaia Pope to page 4. The police says the young woman might have taken her own life or died of natural causes.

The Mail presents her death as a mystery, asking a question we will never know the answer to. “Did fear of prisoner who assaulted her push Gaia to suicide?” asks the Mail, wrapping two questions into a headline to which the only sensible answer is ‘no’.

 

Gaia Pope newspapers front pages

Blonde woman goes missing

 

As for that assault, a “friend” tells the paper: “She was assaulted when she was 17 and I think she thought the man would be released early from prison.”

We are free to speculate, of course, but why did an apparent objective police investigation lead to the arrests of three people and talk of murder? Surely they knew of Gaia Pope’s past, and of her severe epilepsy, which, we are told, could take her life at any time? We read now that Paul Elsey, Nathan Elsey and Rosemary Dinch, the three innocent people arrested for a crime that never took place, are planning to sue police for wrongful arrest.

 

The Sun zooms in on innocent Paul Elsey

 

Over in the Sun, which talked of police “swooping” on Paul Esley’s “prized” car – no, not that car –  the story (page 7) is one of “Tragic Gaia’s Attack Agony”. The paper reads the dead woman’s mind. “She feared fiend’s release,” says the paper. She did? Well, maybe. Maybe not.

In the Daily Mirror (page 9), Gaia is the “tragic teen”. She is “Gaia from Langton Matravers”. In the Sun she is “Gaia from Swanage”. Gaia Pope was from Langton Matravers. She was staying at an address in Swanage when she disappeared on Tuesday 7 November 2017.

Such are the facts.

UPDATE: Det Supt Paul Kessell, of Dorset Police tells everyone:

“We have today released from our investigation two men, aged 19 and 49, and a 71-year-old woman, all from Swanage, who had been arrested and were assisting with our enquiries. I appreciate our enquiries would have caused these individuals stress and anxiety, however we have an obligation in any missing person investigation to explore every possible line of enquiry. The public would expect Dorset Police to fully investigate the sudden disappearance of a teenage girl. Our aim was not only to find Gaia but to find out what happened to her. Gaia’s family has been informed of this latest development and our thoughts remain with all her family and friends at this incredibly difficult time.”

What happened to people ‘helping he police with their enquiries’? Why the rush towards arrest?

 

Posted: 20th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Tabloids | Comments (5) | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Ian Wright: Arsenal great was ‘bullied’ at Crystal Palace

Former Crystal Palace and Arsenal footballer Ian Wright is an ambassador for Cartoon Network’s anti-bullying campaign CN Buddy Network. Helping to promote the cause, Wright is telling media about his own experiences with bullies.

Alyson Rudd writes in the Times:

It is the silence that worries Ian Wright. The silence of those who suffer at the hands of bullies. The former England striker wants children who are picked on to speak up. If they keep their secrets they will, he says, find themselves suffering in the shadows.

We are introduced to Crystal Palace club captain Jim Cannon, there when Wright started out at the London club at the tender age of 21. In 2005, Cannon was part of Palace’s Centenary XI, losing the title “The Player of The Century” to – yep – Ian Wright.

“He was oppressive, a bully and he was nasty,” says Wright, who comes over as a resilient and engaging character. “He was threatened by me for some reason and I don’t know why. He was a horrible bully. It didn’t last long because once I started playing well, my confidence came and I didn’t feel that if I said anything they would let me go. When I told Steve Coppell [the manager] about it, he said he [Cannon] wouldn’t be around for long, that I should carry on doing what I was doing and stand up for myself.”

Cannon gets a right to reply. “I wasn’t a bully, he was just a loud-mouth upstart,” says the 64-year-old. “I was an experienced centre half and I knew he was going to come up against people worse than me so I gave him a little slap one day and that was the extent of the bullying. I’m not interested in Ian Wright, he was an exceptionally good player and if he thinks I bullied him maybe I bullied him into being a good player.”

Not altogether a bad point. For some individuals, being bullied can damage your confidence, leading to depression and isolation. For others, there can be less negative outcomes. It might be even positive, making the victim tougher, better able to navigate society and more self-aware. Professor Dennis Hayes, co-author of The Dangerous Rise Of Therapeutic Education, argues: “The more you talk about bullying, the more it sensitises people to every social slight and the more it becomes a problem.”

So, Wrighty, any more bullying? Wright recalls a lift home with another player, Micky Droy: “He never spoke to me in the car but he knew I needed a lift. It felt like a headmaster driving you home after being in trouble.”

Wright says that he does not know why Droy never spoke but that “deep down he was a good man and knew if he didn’t give me a lift I wasn’t getting home.”

This gives rise to the headlines:

 

ian wright bullying

 

Is bullying the right word? Wright’s experiences suggest a fraught adult relationship, perhaps one based on professional rivalry. Upsetting? Yes. Life-defining? No. If you look for toxic human relationships, surely you’ll find it in many places. How Wright’s story speaks to youngsters suffering abuse is moot. The story and cause seem to be all.

Posted: 16th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Sports | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Josh Rivers: Gay Times editor’s only crime was to be unfunny

Josh Rivers Gay Times bigot tweets

 

Today’s hate figure is Josh Rovers, editor of Gay Times magazine, now suspended for tweeting things between 2010 and 2015.  Examples of Rivers’ tweets are many. One mocked women and the fat:

“I’ve just seen a girl in the tightest white tank & lord help me if she’s not pregnant, she should be killed. #gross.”

And, of course, there’s always the nastiness about Jews:

josh-rivers-jews are gross

And:

“I wonder if they cast that guy as ‘The Jew’ because of that fucking ridiculously larger honker of a nose. It must be prosthetic. Must be.”

In the Guardian LGBTQ rights campaigner Peter Tatchell is aghast: “His history of grossly offensive tweets is such a letdown. It undermines whatever good he was planning to achieve in the magazine.” Looks like equality rules: LGBT people can be every bit as nasty as the rest of us. Who knew?

Want some more examples of Rivers’ tweets? Of course you do. Here goes:

 

Josh Rivers Gay Times tweets

 

Josh Rivers Gay Times tweets

 

Josh Rivers Gay Times tweets

 

Josh Rivers Gay Times tweets

 

Josh Rivers Gay Times tweets

 

By way of background, it turns out that Rivers is not a person: he’s a walking box-ticking exercise. The Guardian notes that Rivers “is the first BME editor of a gay men’s magazine, and took on the role with a mandate to promote inclusivity and diversity.” And you thought he was just the best person for the job on account of his editing abilities and cutting-edge wit.

Outed and suspended from the post he only got in October, Rivers has issued an apology, the language of which might be a better reason than the lame tweets to dislike him:

 

 

The apology is terrific, isn’t it. It’s not about you, it’s about him. Josh, an arch narcissist, is now on a therapeutic journey, taking “steps” to self-discover a better him, to be the kind of wonderful person he truly is and knows he is. After guffing about “pivoting” and “empowering”, Rivers – he used to work in marketing, natch. – co-opts us all into his ugliness, hoping that “we” can “grow”, “heal” and move “forward”. It’s a journey. Get on the bus. You too, fatso.

But I’ll pass. I’m okay, Josh. You’re the berk, not me, the dick who thought it clever to make jokes about Jews, women, Asians and pretty much anyone not just like you.

Rivers’ sentiments expressed in his tweets are pathetic, puerile and horribly unfunny. He appears to be aiming at waspish humour, a snarky, offensive, live-it-loud gay laugh-in where anything goes. He fails miserably. Josh Rivers is not like his namesake Joan Rivers, the caustic, tough-talking American who wielded a comic stiletto with gusto and precision. Josh’s attempts at humour are every bit as wet as his name suggests. And he’s a fool. Rather than explaining it all as misplaced banter, stupidity, letting off steam and the result of his over-arching vanity, Rivers tells us that the tweets actually explain him, each presenting an insight into his mind. To wit, he was a racist, sexist, anti-Semitic misogynist. Those tweets weren’t just idiotic. They really meant something.

Let’s not trivialise Rivers’ tweets, but remind ourselves that Rivers has committed no crime. He’s apologised and that should be an end to the matter. He can hold the most abhorrent views on Jews, women, Asians and more but if he keeps them to himself, or else voices them to an audience more sympathetic to his prejudices – just as many of us have down in the privacy of our own homes and amongst friends – I’m fine with it. Shocked? Offended? “Oh, grow up!” as the aforesaid Joan advised.

Josh Rivers’ offence wasn’t to hold childish and nasty views; it was to voice them in the wrong context. Now, back to work. But time for a quick survey: anyone out there actually read Gay Times?

Posted: 16th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Jeremy Corbyn doesn’t count Israel among his Jew-hating ‘friends’

Corbyn anti-semitism

 

In 2015 then Labour leadership candidate Jeremy Corbyn went on the telly to explain why he addressed Islamist militant organisations Hamas and Hezbollah, a group that calls for the murder of all Jews,  as “friends”. (Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah opined: “If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.” Hamas states in its charter a mission to “fight the Jews and kill them”.)

Saying he met his “friends” Hamas in Lebanon and Hezbollah in this country and Lebanon, peacenik Corbyn told us: “What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.”

Can this be the same Jeremy Corbyn, now leader of the Labour Party and with a decent shout of becoming Prime Minister, who called for an investigation into anti-Semitism in his Labour Party and found it squeaky clean (in much the same way a defecating bear cannot see the wood for the trees) and of whom the Sunday Times reported on October 29 2017:

Jeremy Corbyn has refused to attend an official dinner with the the country’s [Israel’s] prime minister this week to mark the centenary of the Balfour Declaration, which helped to pave the way for a Jewish nation state.

The Labour leader’s snub came as Israel’s ambassador to London told The Sunday Times that those who oppose the historic declaration are “extremists” who reject Israel’s right to exist and could be viewed on a par with terrorist groups such as Hamas…

The move is reminiscent of last month’s Labour Party conference in Brighton, where Corbyn avoided a Labour Friends of Israel reception attended by Regev.

So much for talking with people with whom you profoundly disagree…

Posted: 16th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Politicians | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Prince Charles has Jewish ‘friends’ but they’re all self-serving lobbyists

Jews Prince Charles letter IsraelIn 1986, Prince Charles penned a letter to his pal Laurens van der Post. In it he bemoaned the “Jewish lobby” and the state of the State of Israel. None of what you are about to read suggests Charles is, like some of his fellow toffs in harbouring an intense dislike of Jews. Indeed, the Mail, which publishes the story of Charles’ letter, tells readers: “He has many prominent Jewish friends and in 2013 became the first Royal to attend a chief rabbi’s inauguration ceremony. In a speech that year, he expressed concern at the apparent rise of anti-Semitism in Britain.”

Off hand, I couldn’t name any of Charles’ Jewish pals, and scouring pictures of the perpetual heir to the throne’s skiing hols and shooting jaunts, I’m unable pick out any Jews in the happy throng. Although rumours abound that he did one fancy Barbara Streisand.

The paper also notes, “Charles has always enjoyed a close and supportive relationship with the Jewish community in Britain”. What the Jewish community is can be hard to define, but most often in community matters, it amounts to a few well-appointed, pushy knobs and knobesses serving to represent anyone and everyone who shares their faith, religion or skin tones. It’s a handy shortcut that saves on gentile shoe leather and hand sanitisers.

And so it is that Charles – not a Jew hater – writes:

‘Tried to read bit of Koran on way out and it gave me some insight into way they [Arabs] think and operate. Don’t think they could understand us through reading Bible though!”

Well, so long as you read one of the good bits, understanding an ancient religion need cost you no more than a copy of York Notes. Charles looks up from the text that consumed minutes of his busy day and continues:

 “I now appreciate that Arabs and Jews were all a Semitic people originally and it is the influx of foreign, European Jews (especially from Poland, they say) which has helped to cause great problems. I know there are so many complex issues, but how can there ever be an end to terrorism unless the causes are eliminated? Surely some U.S. president has to have the courage to stand up and take on the Jewish lobby in U.S.? I must be naive, I suppose!”

“Incendiary,” says the Mail. And it is odd. Was it not the Jews returning to their God-given homeland after being forced to ‘wander’ for eons, taking in lands such as Poland where they were punished for BWJ (breathing while Jewish) with State-sanctioned murder? Was Israel not their birthright, taken from them by enemies that caused them to suffer? Can we include some of Charles’ ancestors in the list of Crusading angels who caused Jews to wander into Nazi death camps in German-occupied Poland?

As for the Jewish lobby, what is that? It’s an old anti-semitic trope of a Jewish cabal running the world for their own advantage. You can be black, white, male, female, transgender, disabled, a peacenik, a veteran or whatever, but if you are a Jew, then in the eyes of Charles your campaign is driven by Jewish self-interest. It’s echoed throughout society, alluded to by the likes of Richard Ingram, who wrote in the Guardian: “I have developed a habit when confronted by letters to the editor in support of the Israeli government to look at the signature to see if the writer has a Jewish name. If so, I tend not to read it.”

So much for the deserving Jews, one big shadowy mass of group-think. But what of the royals, specifically the blood and oil-socked kings who rule with an iron fist over many Arabs? Well, Charles rather likes them.

“Much admire some aspects of Islam,” says Charles to his Afrikaans friend. “Especially accent on hospitality and accessibility of rulers.” When they’re not booting out Jews, those Arab toffs are tops. Julie Raven nails him:

He likes Islam because monarchs aren’t answerable for the vilely hypocritical lives they lead (the drinking and whoring of Muslim monarchs compared to the treatment meted out to their subjects who indulge) and because they can divorce at their whim with no comeback. The very worst and weakest Western men are attracted by Islam – he’s no exception.

This is Charles who on Mar. 21, 2006 weighed in on the Muhammad cartoon controversy, telling an audience of more than 800 Islamic scholars at Cairo’s Al-Azhar University: The recent ghastly strife and anger over the Danish cartoons shows the danger that comes of our failure to listen and to respect what is precious and sacred to others.” No, not freedom of expression, a cornerstone of our democratic right. He didn’t mean that. Charles is all for the sanctity of theocratic Islam, which abhors our hard-won freedoms, stymies womanhood and raises monarchs to the pantheon of living gods. That’s what righteous Charles wants defending: the powerful.

Charles is a weak and feckless sort, a man searching for a legacy but failing to find a purpose.  He’s exactly the type of right-on plodder who eventually reasons that the main cause of trouble are Jews. To wit it’s worth reminding him that his son and heir is married to Kate, of whom Iran’s Mehr News Agency warns:

“This lady’s family roots show that she is considered a Sephardic Jew from her mother’s side. Moreover the timing of the wedding and the way it was held which was based on Jewish culture verify the evidences. William’s marriage as the inheritor of the crown to a Jewish girl will leave the future of Britain to the hands of the couple’s Jewish children.” *

Yeah. They got you Charles. They got you good…

 

 

Posted: 13th, November 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Royal Family | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


All MPs are suspects as sexual harassment panic grips Westminster

In time for Halloween, a witch hunt. Allegations unspecified are front page news. No need for reason and objective judgement because the story of MPs allegedly sexually harassing “furious female researchers, secretaries and aides working across Whitehall and the Houses of Parliament” (Sun) has a life of its own.

Women have “shared horror ­stories and warned of sleazy male politicians”. And they’ve chosen to do so on WattsApp. The Sun has a list of accusations, which include “groping”, “leering”, “pursuing” and having sex with staff in Parliamentary offices. The paper tells of anticipated resignations. Because an allegation is enough to end a career. It’s not justice we grave; it’s guilt.

Readers are told that these “revelations”, or what would be better termed ‘accusations’, “follow Hollywood’s Harvey Weinstein sex scandal, in which the movie mogul was accused by multiple women”. Weinstein has been accused of the heinous crime of rape, which he denies. And his innocence must be presumed. We can agree on that, right? Arrests, charges and trials are staging posts to truth. Allegations mean just that. Nothing tested in court and made to hurdle barriers to justice serves no purpose in a society founded on reason. If Weinstein did it – and, boy, are there a lot of claims made against him – put him through the system.

 

Harassing Who?

No MP has been named in the Sun’s expose. And none has been accused of the heinous crime of rape. But in our hot and heavy sexually-charged world, an unwelcome advance, a lewd comment or a misjudged flirtation is on a par with violent physical assault. How does that help victims of brutal, life-changing crimes?

Reading the Press is to realise that Westminster is embroiled in a sexual-harassment crisis. Is it?

 

 

Stymied from reporting on consensual sex between cheating showbiz stars, ministers, footballers and even snooker players in raucous and saucy kiss ‘n’ tells by the Leveson Inquiry, papers turned to the less potentially libellous news that dead men had been embroiled in a murderous VIP paedophile ring. The new focus is on another group in urgent need of protecting: adult women cowed into silence by a predatory patriarchy operating out of Westminster. (Anyone else miss the News of The World?)

 

BBC secret

Jimmy Savile is away

 

The story has reached the top. Theresa May’s spokeswoman tells media:

“Any allegations from anyone would be taken very seriously. We would encourage anyone who has a serious allegation to report it to the police, no matter who it is or where it is.

“My understanding is it would be House authorities [they would report to]. But obviously if they are working for an MP or party they can approach the party. If it’s a serious allegation they can go to the police.

“All parties, all employers in any walk of life including politics must take this seriously. No industry or area is immune to that, including politics.”

 

You Will Be Believed

Will the police be any more or less objective than May?

In 2016, Nottinghamshire Police said sexual harassment was a hate crime. “What women face, often on a daily basis, is absolutely unacceptable and can be extremely distressing,” stated chief constable Sue Fish. A spokesperson for End Violence Against Women added: “What we are talking about is not trivial behaviour – some harassment that women and girls receive in public is upsetting and should have the attention of the authorities.”

 

sex toys

Delicate, chaste woman shown sex toy! Ann Summers shocked

 

So much for equality. Women are vulnerable and in need of State protection from men, who are all sex criminals-in-waiting. For those of you unable to hire your own police guard, the message is don’t drive or cycle. If you must leave the house, travel in women-only train carriages, or wait until a trusted male relative is free to accompany you to the market. And wear a crinoline burka. The police can’t be everywhere, but you can take precautions.

In the meantime, it’d be sage for every MP, politico, sitting Lord and civil servant to publicly praise any woman saying #MeToo (what police might term “credible and true“) on an encrypted messaging App as ‘brave’. Failure will do this will place any man in the role of enabler and suspect.

Because equlity matters.

Posted: 29th, October 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Politicians, Tabloids | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0


Jared O’Mara is the worst of mankind

jared o'mara

 

I’m relieved Labour MP Jared O’Mara has been exposed. To think that young Bear Payne will one day read the crude remarks made by this man about his dearly loved mum, Cheryl Cole – a national treasure – is appalling. O’Mara, MP for Sheffield Hallam, told an internet bulletin board as recently as 2004 that he fancied an orgy with Chery’s old group Girls Aloud, said Michelle McManus won Pop Idol “because she was fat” and imagined jazz star Jamie Cullum being “sodomised with his own piano”.

Rightly Labour is looking into O’Mara’s words. “The party is investigating Jared O’Mara MP in relation to comments and behaviour which have been reported from earlier this year,”says Labour.

“If only he’d just slagged off Jews and denied the Holocaust, this would have been a storm in a tea-cup and easily ignored,” says on insider. “But he spoke about Cheryl and Sarah and the ginger one whose name escapes me, and there can be no excuses when it comes to commenting on Great British celebrities.”

And that’s not all. A woman called Sophie Evans bravely told the BBC’s Daily Politics she had met Mr O’Mara on a dating app and there had been “no hard feelings” when things didn’t work out between them. The BBC adds:

Mr O’Mara, who was DJing in a nightclub, made comments to her that “aren’t broadcastable” and called her an “ugly bitch”, she said.

Blimey. That’s from the broadcaster that shows us Mrs Brown’s Boys and EastEnders. It really must have been terrible – beyond god-awful. On yer knees, bitch O’Mara. Repent.

Mr O’Mara says it is “categorically untrue”.

But we’ve heard enough, No smoke without a pre-vape shafting, as they say. And in an open letter to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, Justine Greening, the Education Secretary and Equalities Minister, thunders: “Violent, sexist and homophobic language must have no place in our society, and parliamentarians of all parties have a duty to stamp out this sort of behaviour wherever we encounter it, and condemn it in the strongest possible terms. It is time you step forward, as leader of the Labour Party, and send a message that this sort of behaviour will not be tolerated.”

Perish the thought Girls Aloud and a row between a man and his ex can be used for political gain. Indeed, Lib Dem leader Sir Vince Cable says it’s only right Mr O’Mara has the whip removed. And who more reasoned and sober than he?

Says O’Mara: “I’ve stood down from the Women and Equalities select committee… I think it’s the right thing to do. I don’t think I can continue on that committee when I feel so deeply ashamed of the man I was 15 years ago.”

Oh, don’t beat yourself up, mate. Girls aloud were pretty shaggable back then.

Posted: 24th, October 2017 | In: Key Posts, News, Politicians | Comment | Comments RSS feed:RSS 2.0