|
|||||
|
Heh. Who was that speaker again? From an email circular promoting think-tank events around Europe:
February 16th, 2006 | 40 comments - (Comments are closed)
Indeed. February 16th, 2006 | 53 comments - (Comments are closed)
February 10th, 2006 | 17 comments - (Comments are closed)
I wrote to the Department of Culture, Media & Sport (!) back on 10th January to nominate the CCTV camera as an ‘icon of England’… and they have just written back accepting the nomination. Interesting. February 9th, 2006 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
… in October of last year and nothing happened. So obviously it took a while for the people who wanted to blow this up some time to get all those highly inflammable Danish flags made and organise the outrage. Maybe we are looking in all the wrong places for the people behind this. Radical Islamic clerics? Nah, it was all a conspiracy by Middle Eastern flag makers. February 8th, 2006 | 37 comments - (Comments are closed)
Exhibit A from the United States. That 100 pattie burger looks tasty… (Spotted on Marginal Revolution) Exhibit B from the United Kingdom – wait a few seconds to be diverted. Both sites for the epicureans amongst us, most certainly. January 30th, 2006 | 4 comments - (Comments are closed)
Fire up Google and type in “chav stakhanovites“… and you get us! January 24th, 2006 | 15 comments - (Comments are closed)
As befits his role as grand pyjama person of external trade, Peter Mandelson has paid great attention to his image and position. There are a whole series of photographs of Peter meeting other responsible dignitaries as he promotes the European interest throughout the world. The jolly capers with the Chinese Minister of Commerce, Bo Xilai, are especially heartwarming. Peter makes great play of his distinguished career at Westminster, detailing the achievements of his tenure at Trade and Industry and Northern Ireland. A mere snippet suffices…
A mere bagatelle of an omission and I am sure that it is unintentionally overlooked. But didn’t he resign a couple of times? January 23rd, 2006 | 19 comments - (Comments are closed)
It would be fair to say that telling the truth often makes you no friends, and thus the need to protect ‘whistleblowers’ from being penalised for telling what they know is an issue that should be close to the heart of any who value truth above all else. It is often only people on the inside who can reveal the dirty deeds and malfeasance that would otherwise never come to light. Therefore when I read of a person losing their position because not only did they tell the truth, they refused to allow the truth to be forgotten, it just makes me sick as a parrot. January 17th, 2006 | 16 comments - (Comments are closed)
I came across this “Oddly Enough” item over at Reuters this afternoon. It seems that the straight-laced culture of Norway is alive and kicking:
But the priest was not judging the moral worth of women, he was judging just how physically attractive they are, which is not the same thing at all. Dearie me, standards of logic in the churches these days seem to be on the skids. Not that I am remotely interested in such shallow contests, you understand. January 13th, 2006 | 10 comments - (Comments are closed)
Since I live in Australia, I am not particularly up-to-date with the ins and outs of British reality television. Hell, I am woefully uninformed regarding television produced in my own country. So it came as a surprise to see Scott Burgess poking fun at George Galloway, who is appearing as a contestant on Celebrity Big Brother. What is Galloway playing at? I do not doubt that for washed up entertainers and discarded spouses of stars, something like Celebrity Big Brother is a potential second, third or fifteenth chance. However, I cannot understand the benefits for someone like Galloway (or anyone in a position requiring credibility) of becoming involved in such a tacky programme. Contrary to popular belief, not all publicity is good publicity – especially in regards to politicians. Surely this must be mightily unimpressive to Galloway’s constituents. Shouldn’t he be representing them rather than swanning around some birdcage with a microphone strapped to his belt, making a tit of himself? Admittedly, he probably does less damage surrounded by morons in “The House” than in the House of Commons. Three words spring to mind – why, why, why? The only answer I can think of is that the man’s a bloody fool and an egomaniac, to boot. January 9th, 2006 | 57 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
