We don’t just report off-beat news, breaking news and digest the best and worst of the news media analysis and commentary. We give an original take on what happened and why. We add lols, satire, news photos and original content.
Former Chelsea team doctor Eva Carneiro is at an employment tribunal. Did former Chelsea manager Jose Mourinho call her “daughter of a whore” who was only suited to working with the juniors or the “ladys [sic]”? Mourinho, now at Manchester United, might not care about the ruling. After all, the case hasn’t prevented him from joining Manchester United.
The Times says Carneiro rejected an offer for £1.2m to settle out of court. She claims constructive dismissal against Chelsea. She also claims, in another case, that Mourinho targeted her for sexual discrimination.
You will recall, of course, how this nasty row started last August, when Mourinho, the then Chelsea boss, hurled abuse at Carneiro as she raced onto the pitch to treat Chelsea player Eden Hazard. Mourinho says he yelled “filho da puta” (son of a bitch). She says he yelled “filha da puta” (daughter of a bitch or daughter of a whore).
What Mourinho did say, after Carneiro was banished from the bench, was, “She works in academy team or lady [sic] team not with me.”
Such are the facts.
And what of the reporting on alleged sexism in football? Well, the Star pretty much carries on regardless. An educated women in her early middle-age is a “girl doc”:
John Oliver is the news king of talk telly. But unlike Oprah, he’s not giving away free cars – he’s burning cash! The host of HBO’s Last Week Tonight is a hero:
“Any idiot can get into it, and I can prove that to you, because I’m an idiot and I started a debt buying company and it was disturbingly easy,” Oliver said. John Oliver forgave nearly $15 million of medical debt with a tap of a giant red button on Sunday night.
No. Wrong. It was cracking TV. But he did not do as CNN said he did. He purchased his lot on the secondary market at a huge discount.
Last Week Tonight spent about $50 to create a debt-acquisition company in Mississippi. The corporation’s name is Central Asset Recovery Professionals Inc – also known as Carp. According to Oliver, soon after its creation, Carp was offered a portfolio of medical debt worth $14,922,261.76 at a cost of “less than half a cent on a dollar, which is less than $60,000”.
Not $15m, then. And at $60,000 it was a marketing and PR bargain.
It’s Euro 2016 and the newspapers are full of fear. Today’s Fear Story is in the Sun, where we learn that the England’s team hotel is next to a dogging site. The Sun says people have had sex in the grounds near the five-star Auberge du Jeu de Paume in Chantilly.
The Sun has seen racy photos posted on a French dogging site. One shows a woman sat by a wall at the Chateau de Chantilly. She is topless. “Art-loving England manager Roy Hodgson is expected to encourage his squad to visit the chateau which houses masterpieces by Raphael, Delacroix and Poussin.” Some are nudes, maybe.
Roy might care to rouse the troops on Wednesday and Fridays, when, as the Sun says, the doggers convene. The paper even produces a map of the area and adds a picture of former England player and now TalkSport commentator Stan Collymore asking, “What time is kick off?” In 2004, Collymore, reportedly, “confessed to having sex with strangers in car parks – an underground practice known as dogging.”
But dogging can occur in both underground and overground car parks. Dogs go free.
In Wales there are dragons. There are also unicorns.Turks know this, which is why Turkey’s customs officers allowed Emily Harris, 98, to pass though customs with a passport identifying her as a unicorn.
The passport belongs to Emily’s toy unicorn, Lily Harris. Emily’s mum, Nicky, handed it to the boarder goons who stamped it and waved Nicky through.
Says Nicky, 43, from Cwmbran, South Wales: “I didn’t realise until I was putting the passports away. There was a moment of panic when I thought someone would come chasing after us, but nothing. The passport doesn’t even look real – it’s got gold teddy bears on the front and was a completely different size from mine and my husband, Allen’s. The man even asked Emily how old she was, and she told him nine, before he stamped it. The picture ID wasn’t even of Emily, it was of a pink unicorn. And to make it worse, the unicorn wasn’t even on holiday with us.
She adds: “It’s a worry to any parent, how easy it would be to smuggle a child through customs and into another country.”
Not to mention child unicorns.
On Vox, news of a problem with Uber:
Partnering with a country that won’t let women drive is a huge PR blunder for Uber
Eh? Women can’t drive in oil-rich Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia’s dictators invest $3.5 billion in a taxi company. Join the dots. Kerching!
Amazing facts in the Hindustan Times:
According to a new study in the UK, overweight infants consume larger meals but they do not eat more often than healthy toddlers. Hayley Syrad from University of London in the UK and colleagues used parent-reported intake for 2,564 children aged 4-18 months to study meal size and meal frequency in relation to weight.
The BBC has more news from the “experts”:
The report found overweight children were consuming larger meals than their counterparts (141 calories versus 130 calories). Report author Hayley Syrad, from University College, London, said: “The research suggests eating frequency is having no impact on weight and it’s not that parents of larger children are giving them an extra Mars bar or apple – it’s that their portions are bigger.”
Yes, it is true! Fat people eat more than skinny people. Who knew?
Did you know that watching William Shakespeare on the telly is dangerous to any young minds tuning in? As part of the year’s Shakespeare celebration, the BBC is going large on the Bard. In the Times, Russell T Davies, executive producer of the BBC’s new adaptation of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, explains why he’s censored the original script. It is wonderful nonsense, entirely in keeping with the kind of bilge people in the arts spout when they talk about Will. Invariably, they make it all about themselves:
Russell T Davies said that he had excised the scenes in which Helena threatens suicide over her love for Demetrios because he believed that they were not fit for broadcast in the modern day. He said that he did not want the suggestion that a young woman would commit suicide because of thwarted love…
When a member of the audience at the Hay Festival asked whether he would change the ending of Romeo and Juliet, so that a young woman did not herself over love, he described the question as trite, and said he was offended that the comparison had been drawn.
Shakespeare is not set in stone. Adaptation keep it all alive an relevant, not least of all the pupils in class forced to study it, who seek shortcuts to the tricky texts through TV and video. But when you start cutting out the bits you don’t like it all smacks of censorship:
“I don’t care what Shakespeare was thinking, I don’t care, it is my name on it. It was standard in 1590 for a woman in a love story to say that I am about to kill myself. It is not standard now. I am deliberately hoping to get young girls watching. I will not transmit lines in which women are so much in love that they are threatening to commit suicide.”
Exit, pursued by a chicken.
PS – if you want young girls to watch, hire Kim Kardashian to play Bottom.
No-one likes a grass. But no-one told 6-year-old Robbie Richardson from Quincy, Massachusetts.
When young Robbie saw his dad drive through a red light on their journey home, he vowed to call the police. When they arrived home Robbie did as promised, dialling 911 and grassing up his father, Michael Richardson.
“My dad went past the red light and I told him that I was going to call the police,” Robbie told the police. “Red means stop, green means go, yellow means slow.”
Language changes. New words arrive and old words go out of fashion. Some people can’t wait. They want words banned. They want less words. In the Guardian Jessica Valenti writes on Paula Broadwell, a woman best known for her affair with married US military type David Petraeus:
In a New York Times profile, Broadwell talks about her behind-the-scenes campaign to get media outlets to stop using the word “mistress”, a term that has no similar male counterpart.
She wants the word banned.
“On the one hand, I don’t want to define myself by this” she told the Times. “But on the other hand, I’ve been defined by this. So if I can change things for the better because of it, then why not?”
We know what mistress means. It is well defined. Ban it and what will we use instead to describe a woman who dates and shags a married man? Valenti agrees with the ban:
Why stop at “mistress”, though? It’s hardly the only word reserved for women…. A man is a “bachelor” but a woman is a “spinster”. (Please spare me the argument that “bachelorette” is a word ever used outside of reality television and drunken parties.)
So mister is out, then?
We even use “female” words to insult men. On the first day of an English class I took in college, for example, the professor asked us what words were the worst things you could call a woman.
Dear. Call a woman “dear” as in “yes, dear” and watch.
In minutes, the board was filled with misogynist invectives – words like “slut” and “cunt”. When she asked us to do the same thing for men, the board filled up again: all the worst words you could use against a man – “bitch”, “pussy”, etc – were also distinctly female.
Balls. I’d go for knob, prick, dickhead, wanker – and feel free to use them toward women, in the spirit of equality. Or maybe we can ban all those words and just go for the unisex “arse”.
How do you fend off carjackers? On YouTube, we find an answer:
When this foot switch is pressed, two things happen. One, a 14-thousand volt spark would appear here in this nozzle, and then you have these four jets here shooting out gas. Liquid gas from the gas bottle in the boot. Liquid gas, as soon as it exits over the spark here, will ignite and a ball of flame will shoot out of both side of the vehicle. Incapacitating the hijackers immediately.”
Amazingly perhaps, the system’s legal in South Africa – provided the driver is acting in self defence as depicted in this mock-up.
Joseph Fuller, 65, picked up the wrong child went he meant to collect his grandson from Edisto Primary School in South Carolina on May 19.
He was not alone in this case of mistaken identity:
The report said the grandfather approached the boy, gave him a hug, and said he was there to pick him up early. He asked the boy, who he thought was his grandson, if he was ready to go and the little boy said “yes.” A teacher’s assistant told deputies that she asked the student, “Was this your granddad?” and the student said “yes.” At that point, the report said, the student and the man went to the front office so the boy could be signed out. According to the school, the grandfather was on the approved list of people who can pick up students. The report goes on to say the grandfather put the child in his car and his wife, without turning around in the car, handed the boy a Happy Meal.
When they got home, Fuller looked at the child again. “He had a tooth missing in the front, and I know my grandson did not have a tooth missing in the front,” he says. “Immediately, I brought him back to school, and I am very sorry.”
One more reason to vote to leave the European Union arrives. “The internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech,” says Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality.
Jourova was born in 1964 Czechoslovakia. She grew up under Communist rule. You might suppose she’d know better than to meddle with hard-won freedoms. She says she understands what freedom means. Vera Jourova loves free speech. But Vera Jourova wants to censor free speech, to shackle it. The bits she does not like, she calls hate speech. These parts of free speech, says its champion, must be banned. And because the undemocratic EU works the way it does, what she says goes for every country in the bloc.
There’s a lot about European regulations, or regulatory intentions, that U.S. Internet giants don’t like. They hate being described and treated as monopolies, and a mention of paying taxes where they operate — as European countries have long wanted them to do — instantly puts them on the defensive. Yet ask Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube to censor their content, and they will happily oblige. Of all the U.S. rules that have allowed them to get as big as they have become, freedom of speech appears to be least important.
The four U.S. companies have accepted a European Union-dictatedcode of conduct, which obliges them to “review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content.” The reviewing is to be done by “civil society organizations” and “trusted reporters”: the EU and its member states are to “ensure access” to them…
Laws limiting free speech have a tendency to change in response to terrorist attacks, electoral upsets, changes in public attitudes. Russians and Turks can attest to how quickly anti-terrorist legislation can turn into a system of censorship and suppression. Europe is not immune to versions of these developments. The U.S. giants’ willingness to work with governments and advocacy groups to uphold speech limitations makes them unreliable as platforms.
On Twitter, a few see the dangers:
You can vote to change this. You can vote ‘out’.
On the day the two women who murdered two-year-old Liam Fee ride high on the news cycle, the Guardian features the words of Professor Mirko Bagaric, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Sentencing at Deakin University, Melbourne. His story is entitled:
Why we should close women’s prisons and treat their crimes more fairly
Liam Fee was murdered by his mother and her wife, who also tortured two other boys.
Women almost never scare us; commit random acts of serious violence; violate our sexual integrity; or form organised crime networks and yet their prisons numbers are now the highest in recorded history.
Women “almost never scare us”.
The homogeneity of the human species breaks down when it comes to criminal behaviour. Women, who constitute slightly more than 50% of population, commit only about 20% of all crime. They commit even a lower portion of all serious crime.
Serious crime is a full-time job. Maybe the women involved with serious criminals prefer to run the home. And do we talk about serious criminals’ mothers yet?
Moreover, when it comes to sexual offences, rounded off to the nearest whole number, women constitute 0% of all offenders – that’s right, zero.
Liam Fee was beaten to death. The other boys were forced to strip, tied to chairs, caged and told they would be castrated by a drill the women kept hidden.
And as the Guardian puts it elsewhere:
Such are the facts.
Rachel Telfa, 31, and Nayomi Fee, 29, murdered their two-year-old son, Liam Fee, by beating him to death in March 2014. The couple were in a civil partnership. Telfa was the child’s birth mother. Both women denied killing Liam. There is every chance they still think they did nothing wrong. Indeed, as Trelfa was found guilty of murdering her son, she mouthed “I did not”. The tabloids report:
Daily Mirror (front page): “MOTHERS OF ALL EVIL”
That’s an odd headline given that the women were the mothers not of evil, rather an innocent child.
Page 4-5: “NOW CAGE THEM”
Well, that seems likely. The women – or one of them; the court could not decide which – hit Liam so hard in the abdomen his heart ruptured. Fee and Telfa tried to pin the blame on a six-year-old boy, one of two boys other than Liam who seem to have been living with the couple in Fife, Scotland. The women were found guilty of abusing the two other boys, including keeping one in a cage, forcing them to eat dog poo and vomit, and mentally torturing them. Fee told one she had killed his father with a drill she kept to castrate young boys.
In order to implicate the innocent boy in Liam’s murder, Fee shoved his hands into the dead’s boy’s mouth to leave traces of his DNA on the corpse. When paramedics arrived she told them Liam had been strangled by the other child.
We then get to know more of the killers’ lives. The Mirror says the women got drunk “and watched Shameless on TV”. It wasn’t all bad telly because the paper says Telfa kept a horse at riding stables. We get the lowlights, but the normality escapes reporting. It is the ordinary that helped mask their crimes.
In Voice of The Mirror, the women are labelled “monsters”. They are not. They are human beings. That’s what makes them terrifying.
The paper than tries to make some point. It says the killers “demonstrated sadistic women can be as depraved as violent men”. Why not violent women and sadistic men? Why is this even worth saying? The story has nothing to do with men behaving badly. Indeed, the only men to feature in it are the judge who found the women guilty and Liam’s father, Joseph Johnson, 33, who “sobbed uncontrollably” in court.
The Sun (Page 9): Tortured to death”
Liam was killed my his mum and “her lesbian partner”. He had more than 30 injuries, including “two broken legs and fractured arms”. As they were found guilty, the women “showed no emotion”. But the Times said Trelfa spoke out.
The Sun says the innocent 6-year-old framed for the killing “initially admitted he had strangled” Liam. It was only under questioning by police that the whole story came out. The child – not social services – cracked the case. He said Fee would make him lies on the floor. She’d place his foot on his next until he passed out. She beat him often.
Daily Express (Page 21): ” Lesbian loves face life for savage murder of Liam, 2″
The killers’ sexual orientation is to the fore. Sadly, the facts are less certain from there. The Express says the boy bullied into claiming he had killed Liam is age 7. Fee told one boy she killed his father not with a drill, as the Sun claims, rather with a “saw”. Fee and Trelfa are not merely “lovers”, they are a married couple, tying the knot in 2012.
Daily Mail (Page 6-7): “Lesbian couple battered son, 2, so brutally his heart ruptured”.
The Mail places the State in the dock:
Horrific failings by social services were exposed yesterday as a mother and her civil partner were found guilty of murdering her two-year-old son.
Liam was failed.
Karen Pedder, a manager with Fife Council, told the court a caseworker had been assigned to investigate reports of abuse after the concerns were first raised in January 2013.
But a social worker and a police officer sent to visit the family had accepted the ‘plausible explanation’ given that he had simply bumped his head. The social worker who had been dealing with Liam’s case then went off sick in April and it was not looked at again until the nursery got in touch in June, she said.
During cross-examination, Rachel Fee’s defence counsel Brian McConnachie asked: ‘What seems to have happened here is basically, as far as Liam is concerned, this case just went off the radar?’
Mrs Pedder replied: ‘It did. Yes.’ She said a case would normally be reviewed after about four weeks, but this had not happened.
Hideous stuff. And what also hurts is that Liam Johnson was renamed Liam Fee, forced to carry the name of his abuser. Our thoughts must be with his father.
They hated and criminalised football fans when 96 innocent Liverpool fans died at Hillsborough in 1989. They hate and criminalise football fans now, idiots included.
A 50-year-old man has been charged with a public order offence after he was seen at a pub wearing a T-shirt mocking the Hillsborough disaster. Paul Grange, from Worcester, was charged by West Mercia police with displaying threatening and abusive writing likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.
Any police officers been charged with, you know, treating innocent people like criminals, putting their loved ones through years of hell, branding the survivors as killers, sending for the dogs as the dying cried out for help, causing distress, harassment and alarm?
Maybe if one of these ultra-sensitive coppers pulls on a rude T-shirt, his comrades will lock him away for the good of society…
More news on Harambe, the gorilla at Cincinnati zoo who died for our sins. The Mirror leads with a statement punctuated to look like a question: “Proof the gorilla was trying to protect the boy?” That question mark won’t show up on Google searches, so lots of people campaigning for Harmabe’s “murderers” to be tried in court and the boy’s mother, Michelle Gregg, to be punished, will see it as evidence they are right.
On the ridiculous and shrill Justice for Harambe petition, kind hearts want Michelle in prison and the child ripped from the family home:
It is believed that the situation was caused by parental negligence and the zoo is not responsible for the child’s injuries and possible trauma. We the undersigned want the parents to be held accountable for the lack of supervision and negligence that caused Harambe to lose his life. We the undersigned feel the child’s safety is paramount in this situation. We believe that this negligence may be reflective of the child’s home situation. We the undersigned actively encourage an investigation of the child’s home environment in the interests of protecting the child and his siblings from further incidents of parental negligence that may result in serious bodily harm or even death. Please sign this petition to encourage the Cincinnati Zoo, Hamilton County Child Protection Services, and Cincinnati Police Department hold the parents responsible.
The Mirror has no idea what Harambe was and was not thinking. Yesterday, the same paper told readers Harambe was “violently pulling the boy” who had fallen into his pen. If Harambe was a child minder, and we are to treat dumb animals as human beings, affording them the same legal rights as so many demand in online petitions and twitter, Harambe stands accused of child abuse. That gorilla’s a beast.
On Page 9, the Mirror says “Harambe was holding the boys’s hand… responding to Isaiah’s frightened cry”. Only when we reach paragraph 11 are we told that Isaiah was “dragged around the enclosure’s moat”.
The Mail also loads the dice against humanity, leading with another question: “Was this gentle giant trying to protect boy he took by the hand.” In other words, was Harmabe behaving like a caring human being? No. Harambe was a massive gorilla. He is kept in a cage surrounded by water, less to protect him from human being than to protect us from him.
Simon Barnes tells us: “Death seems a harsh punishment for a chance encounter with a naughty child.” Barnes says humans share 95% of our genes with gorillas, who “seem to have the capacity to experience emotions we think of as human.”
It is very difficult to find reliable data comparing the human genome to animal genome. The principal reason is that few animals have had their full genome sequenced. Even those that have cannot be easily compared in terms of percentages because the genomic length and chromosomal division can vary greatly from one species to another.
– Cats have 90% of homologous genes with humans, 82% with dogs, 80% with cows, 79% with chimpanzees, 69% with rats and 67% with mice. (source)
– Cows (Bos taurus) are 80% genetically similar to humans (source)
– 75% of mouse genes have equivalents in humans (source), 90% of the mouse genome could be lined up with a region on the human genome (source) 99% of mouse genes turn out to have analogues in humans (source)
– The fruit fly (Drosophila) shares about 60% of its DNA with humans (source).
– About 60% of chicken genes correspond to a similar human gene. (source)
Barnes adds: ” The ungorilla-like noises of the terrified child in Cincinnati might have confused Harambe and contributed to his ambiguous response to this difficult situation.”
To recap: Harambe did not call 911, 111, nor 999. But had he had his phone and a pocket to keep it in, he might have called for help. Maybe.
Johnny Depp says – yes! – he did buy a £5,000 bathtub from Stiffkey Bathrooms, in Upper St Giles Street, Norwich, in 2014. Depp took the 1880 French Bateau bath on ornate feet to the USA.
Does he still have it? “We disposed of the thing and everything’s fine,” says Mr Depp. “The thing” and it being now “fine” arouse suspicion that the bath might well have been a problem.
Depp denied rumours that he was spotted buying spatulas in Bath, Somerset.
The plot thickens…
For a brief period, Harambe, the 400lb silverback gorilla, had a playmate in his Cincinnati Zoo pen. Harambe dragged his pal, a four-year-old boy who had fallen into the enclosure, to his feet and then showed him around for ten minutes. The boy called for his “mommy”. From above, his mother replied, “Mommy’s right here. Mommy loves you.”
Deciding that a huge gorilla was not a suitable playmate for the young child, zookeepers thought it best to shoot Harambe dead. So they did. The boy was taken to hospital, where he is said to be in a “serous condition”.
On twitter, Brian May the Queen guitarist, was keen to know more, asking,”Why was the gorilla murdered?” It turns out that May is more moralist than zoologist, ending his question with a series of statements, “No trial – no reason. No excuse. Who will prosecute?”
We’d suggest a kangaroo court, of which May seems to be a founding member.
Others are less antagonist. The Daily Star says the the gorilla was shot to save the child, who will “make a full recovery”.
The Sun says the “28stone” gorilla was trying to protect the child. And it could be argued he was doing a better job of it than the aforementioned “neglectful” mommy. But, then, surely that is to place the animal on a higher plinth to a human being. To think the child was in no danger requires a leap of fancy. Do we know how a gorilla thinks any more than we do a bat or a frog? A mother and a child we can reason with. A huge gorilla speaks a different language, and when the conversation lulls, Harmabe has massive arms and teeth to support his argument.
In the Mirror, where the story is front-page news and the gorilla is “violently pulling the boy”, Harambe, now boosted to “30-stone”, illustrates the story “Miracle of the Gorilla Boy“. Wow, indeed. The boy falling, his rescue and the slaying of Harambe are all signs of god’s love. Take that May. It’s what god wanted. Divine wonders slew the beast and saved Isaiah, which we’re told the boy is called.
Like Isaiah of old, little Isaiah teaches us to stay on the right path, lest we fall by the wayside or into a gorilla’s lair and cause the loveable critter to be shot dead.
Compare and contrast the Daily Mail’s reporting on Becky Nicholson’s wedding to Leicester City and England footballer Jamie Vardy and Camilla Parker Bowles marriage to Prince Charles.
Alison Boschoff and Andy Dolan write on the Becky-Jamie alliance:
The most brazen WAG of all: Three children by three dads. A fling with Peter Andre. No wonder England football hero Jamie Vardy’s parents won’t be at his wedding…
For Vardy’s mother Lisa and stepfather Phil — who has raised him since he was a baby — will not be there because they do not approve of their son’s choice of wife, a glossy, risque brunette named Becky Nicholson…
So, what’s the problem? Well, perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Becky, who will be gliding down the aisle in a £5,000 traditional white dress, is anything but a blushing bride. For she has not only been married once before as a teenager, but has also gone on to have two children by two other men….
As is perhaps customary when a high-profile footballer makes it official with a WAG, Hello! magazine will be in attendance, with its sizeable chequebook and security retinue…
Since Jamie’s rise to fame she has kept her colourful mouth shut, except when there is a cheque in it for her.
Now enjoy “Charles and Camilla: Married at last“. Charles, who may recalls was cheating on his wife, Princess Diana, with married mum-of-two Camilla. Charles once expressed a desire to be Camilla’s tampon. Cheating Charles, heir apparent and with it a defender of the faith and good morals, had a civil ceremony with Cheating Camilla, and then scored a televised Anglican blessing by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, at St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle. Charles’s parents did not attend the marriage ceremony.
Charles and Camilla were in the ancient surroundings of St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, for the service, conducted by the Archbishop of Canterbury in front of more than 700 guests. Earlier they had married in more humble surroundings in the Windsor Register Office, with just 28 guests but without the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh.
The Duchess of Cornwall changed into a porcelain blue silk dress with hand painted ikat design, hand embroidered with gold thread work, for the blessing of her marriage this afternoon.
The designers’ starting point was the Duchess’s comment that she liked the style of the velvet dress they had designed for her to wear for the gala night at the Royal Opera House…
At the reception, the Duchess wore a court shoe with a soft point toe and a 5.5cm heel in pale grey shot silk…
She carried a small, simple elegant floral bouquet bound with silk from her dress. Auricular flowers in dusty shades of greys and creams with touches of gold had been mixed with clusters of Lily of the Valley both for the scent and the sentiment…
The flowers were cut from English plants later to be grown in the gardens at Highgrove. A sprig of myrtle, representing happy marriage, was sent from a well wisher in Cornwall for the bouquet.
And what colour dress did chaste Camilla wear to that civil wedding to the down-at-heel Prince?
Good job Camilla’s not like that Becky. But if she wants to get the “brassy” look, the Mail is here to help her. Below photos of Becky in her undies – “Blushing bride: Rebekah appeared in a downmarket newspaper modelling ‘wedding lingerie’ (pictured)” – the Mail offers readers the chances to “GET THE LOOK” and “Say ‘I do’ like Becky in bridal lingerie”:
It’s not about money, readers. No. It’s about class…
Long ago, we kept up a feature called Now Watch, a look at instances of “NOIW” in front-page news headlines. Today we revisit the meme with a look at the Daily Express front-page laments: “NOW EU WANT TO BAN OUR KETTLES.”
Stopping just short of hailing the death of the Great British Kettle (made in Germany), the Express is at least prove that the boiler is reusable, having earlier thundered in 2014: “NOW KETTLES FACE EU BAN.”
Now, then, now, then…
Hey, celebs, you need a new, more exclusive drug:
Drugs furore at the Groucho Club over ‘bankers’ cocaine binges’: Veteran members pen letter to management over ‘open drug use taking place on the premises’.
So says The Mail, which fails to add that now is a great time for Groucho patrons to nip to the loo – no queue!
To New South Wales, Australia, where butcher Jeff Rapley from Naroomais talking about the sign in his shop window that promises, “Eating two strips of Rapley’s award-winning bacon for breakfast reduces your chance of being a suicide bomber by 100%.”
He fails to “or your money back!” but Jeff does add that he meant no offence and “no particular religion was mentioned“. “I’m definitely not a racist and didn’t mean for it to cause offence,” says Jeff.
The Vegan Militia has yet to respond.
When Harriet Harman, the Labour former deputy leader, told us Kim Kardashian’s naked breasts and pouting buttocks possessed “a kind of bravery and pioneering spirit” and that Page 3 Girls with their naked breasts and pouting buttocks were just “fodder”, we realised how right she was. So today we’re offering all Guardian readers a free Kim Kardashian Pioneer Kit. Each kit contains:
- A leaked sex tape
- A litre of baby oil (organic)
- A famous father
- A famous step-mother who used to be a famous step-father
- A copy of The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir
What they’re saying:
“Kim’s a pioneer, like Amelia Earhart, albeit with a better airplane and killer luggage” – Helen of Anjou
“You go, girl” – Emmeline Pankhurst
“Phwaor!” – Sun reader
See if you can fathom what it is Harriet Harman, the Labour former deputy leader, is saying. Appearing on ITV morning telly to talk about women’s issues, Harman turned to nudity, celebrity, Page 3, onanism, feminism and narcissism. Yeah, she was talking about naked-to-deadline, sex-tape stunna Kim Kardashian:
“I am an expert on the Kardashians, I have to confess. I think, if you step back, the overall message that comes out of the Kardashian women is that they are kind of going to make their own decisions, make their own way in the world, they’re not going to be told by anybody what to do.
“They are going to try things differently. If they make mistakes, well, they’ll get up back and try and do it differently. There’s a kind of bravery and pioneering spirit in them.”
Kim’s porn and naked pictures are” brave and pioneering”. Kim’s like Amelia Earhart, albeit with a better airplane.
Now Harriet talked about the Sun and Daily Star’s Page 3 girls, who are mostly not rich:
“I think it’s an issue of control actually, because I get the sense from the Kardashians that they are in control of their own agenda. The thing about Page 3 girls in the Sun is it was male editors producing young girls for the male readers as fodder.”
No male readers ogle Kim Kardashian? No women read the Sun? No Page 3 Girl wanted to pose topless? Male editors get young girls as “fodder” but young Kardashians on TV stations and Twitter – any men on the board of MTV, Instagram or Twitter? – are empowered and possessed of the pioneering spirit?
What hideous elitist balls.
PS – Rupert Murdoch, why not get Kim Kardashian on Page 3? Admittedly, you’ll have to tell it’s just topless, but if she tones it down a notch, Harman will be even more confused.
It’s Health Tuesday in the Mail. Scare Story highlights are:
Page 47: “Just one court of antibiotics may raise risk of depression.” The thinking is if you take antibiotics, you cause in imbalance in bugs in your guts which upsets your brain cells’ ability to communicate.
You might have read the same tory in 2015, when it appeared on a website as, “Antibiotic exposure associated with increased risk for depression, anxiety.”
But what of one courts of antibiotics making you depressed?
Exposure to antibiotics was not associated with a change in risk for psychosis. A single course of antifungals was associated with a mild increase in risk for depression and anxiety, however, there was no increased risk with repeated exposures.
, Leo Galland has more:
No, antibiotics do not directly cause panic attacks.
They can, however, exacerbate symptoms in those who already have anxiety disorders.
There has been a wealth of research in the recent years connecting gut bacteria to mental processes. This connection is aptly named the “gut-brain axis.” Antibiotics are prescribed to get rid of bacterial infections. Unfortunately, most antibiotics don’t just kill the bad bacteria, they kill the healthy bacteria living in your gut. This healthy bacteria has a lot of different functions, one being to line the gut and basically reinforce its “walls.” They can also influence neurotransmitters.
When you destroy these bacteria, it makes sense that you may notice a bodily change. This could be intestinal distress or mood changes. In scientific studies “germ-free” mice, or those without gut bacteria, are more reactive to stress than non-germ-free (normal) mice. It’s important to remember this is a mouse study, not a human study. It can give some important clues, but might not be the whole picture.
In short, antibiotics will not induce a panic attack, but may increase reactivity, making it more likely that a person prone to panic attacks will feel anxious. This can possibly turn into a panic attack, but with an established treatment regimen, it can be avoided.
You can read the the research first-hand here.