Congratulations to BT on their ingenuity in getting some easy extra publicity by running an internet poll to decide how the 'mini-soap' in their ad campaign should proceed. But the problem I have is with the question that was asked, ie. "is Jane pregnant?". Well, blow me down with a feather, it turns out that the Great British Public wanted her to be pregnant. Actually, I'd hazard a guess that most of the 30% who voted "no" were just being contrary because they knew full well they were being steered towards the 'correct' answer. I think perhaps BT take the Chinese view of democracy - in principle it's an excellent thing, just so long as the result is known well in advance.
Couldn't they have run a more unpredictable poll, like "what colour is the meteorite that crashes into Kris Marshall's foot, seconds after being told his wife is pregnant?".
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Murder on someone's mind
A few years back I was somewhat mortified to read a post listing some of the more unusual Google searches that had taken people to the blog in question - mainly because one of the searches was my own. Thankfully, my anonymity was preserved! It's occurred to me a few times to do a similar post myself, but sadly most of the searches for this blog have tended to be fairly routine. But a handful of recent ones did catch my eye...
bethan jenkins breasts
The blog list on the right can probably explain the first two words, but the third is a bit of a mystery. And on a vaguely similar theme...
her bosom as weapon
Ljubica, Ljubica...
will someone please kill alex salmond
Perhaps Senator Menendez is stepping up his "inquiries" once again?
bethan jenkins breasts
The blog list on the right can probably explain the first two words, but the third is a bit of a mystery. And on a vaguely similar theme...
her bosom as weapon
Ljubica, Ljubica...
will someone please kill alex salmond
Perhaps Senator Menendez is stepping up his "inquiries" once again?
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Jaw-dropping line of the day
Iain Dale : "When the Coalition was formed back in May, the cynics said it wouldn't last."
Hmmm. I think, after a mere three months, it's not unreasonable to suggest that the jury is still out on that one. I dare say even the "cynics" might have conceded that the coalition had a fair chance of making it through the summer holidays in one piece...
Hmmm. I think, after a mere three months, it's not unreasonable to suggest that the jury is still out on that one. I dare say even the "cynics" might have conceded that the coalition had a fair chance of making it through the summer holidays in one piece...
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Nationalism, culture wars, and willful misinterpretation
There's a lengthy post at the Dallas Morning News website, in which local religious thinkers are asked to give their reactions to Cardinal O'Brien's article last week about the US "culture of vengeance". Refreshingly, his views do attract a limited amount of sympathy, but you won't be surprised to hear where the balance of opinion lies. I haven't been having much luck leaving my own comment at the website, so I'll post it here instead -
Whenever Europeans express concerns over the use of the death penalty in the US (even when one of our own citizens is the prospective victim of judicial murder) we're told to "butt out". Equally, then, I think a European country is perfectly entitled to say "this was the correct decision based on our own laws, which are grounded in our own values - please respect that". The basis for O'Brien's anger is that many Americans seemingly cannot even conceive of the possibility that Megrahi was released as a result of straightforward due process, rather than corruption. It's a textbook example of imposing an American worldview on the actions of another country.
It's hard to keep a straight face when seeing Matthew Wilson dismiss the Cardinal's views as being coloured by "Scottish nationalism". The Cardinal (an Irishman, incidentally) only responded after weeks and weeks of the most disgraceful attacks on the integrity of the Scottish authorities - we were effectively being told "Americans understand justice, Scots don't". In any case, if you can find an example of an external attack on the US way of doing things that hasn't provoked a knee-jerk nationalistic response from some quarter or the other, I'd be very surprised. No-one does it better than the "God Bless America" brigade.
Amy Martin : "Even considering the growing doubts about al-Megrahi being the sole perpetrator of the bombing..."
It was always accepted that if Libya was the guilty party, there must have been many others than just Megrahi involved. The "growing doubts" are over whether he was guilty at all - he had been granted a second appeal after a key piece of evidence was discredited.
Daniel Kanter : "The question I have is whether Megrahi has reformed his ideas that led him to kill the people on Pan Am 103 or is he being released to potentially teach violence and hate to young terrorists of Libya who might look up to him as a hero?"
To me, this question simply illustrates the extent to which many Americans have willfully misinterpreted the 'hero's welcome' Megrahi received in Libya. Yes, it was wrong, yes, it was insensitive - but he's not a hero to those people because they think he killed westerners. He's a hero because they believe him to be innocent and think he has suffered terribly for a crime he did not commit.
William Lawrence : "Even the physician, whose judgment about the man's medical condition was trusted to be authoritative, is now acknowledging a need to have been more thorough in his professional assessment."
Frankly, Mr Lawrence should be looking to his own need to be more thorough in his checking of facts. Karol Sikora was not one of the doctors whose opinions were taken into account during the compassionate release process.
Whenever Europeans express concerns over the use of the death penalty in the US (even when one of our own citizens is the prospective victim of judicial murder) we're told to "butt out". Equally, then, I think a European country is perfectly entitled to say "this was the correct decision based on our own laws, which are grounded in our own values - please respect that". The basis for O'Brien's anger is that many Americans seemingly cannot even conceive of the possibility that Megrahi was released as a result of straightforward due process, rather than corruption. It's a textbook example of imposing an American worldview on the actions of another country.
It's hard to keep a straight face when seeing Matthew Wilson dismiss the Cardinal's views as being coloured by "Scottish nationalism". The Cardinal (an Irishman, incidentally) only responded after weeks and weeks of the most disgraceful attacks on the integrity of the Scottish authorities - we were effectively being told "Americans understand justice, Scots don't". In any case, if you can find an example of an external attack on the US way of doing things that hasn't provoked a knee-jerk nationalistic response from some quarter or the other, I'd be very surprised. No-one does it better than the "God Bless America" brigade.
Amy Martin : "Even considering the growing doubts about al-Megrahi being the sole perpetrator of the bombing..."
It was always accepted that if Libya was the guilty party, there must have been many others than just Megrahi involved. The "growing doubts" are over whether he was guilty at all - he had been granted a second appeal after a key piece of evidence was discredited.
Daniel Kanter : "The question I have is whether Megrahi has reformed his ideas that led him to kill the people on Pan Am 103 or is he being released to potentially teach violence and hate to young terrorists of Libya who might look up to him as a hero?"
To me, this question simply illustrates the extent to which many Americans have willfully misinterpreted the 'hero's welcome' Megrahi received in Libya. Yes, it was wrong, yes, it was insensitive - but he's not a hero to those people because they think he killed westerners. He's a hero because they believe him to be innocent and think he has suffered terribly for a crime he did not commit.
William Lawrence : "Even the physician, whose judgment about the man's medical condition was trusted to be authoritative, is now acknowledging a need to have been more thorough in his professional assessment."
Frankly, Mr Lawrence should be looking to his own need to be more thorough in his checking of facts. Karol Sikora was not one of the doctors whose opinions were taken into account during the compassionate release process.
In a spirit of reciprocity...
I propose that the Scottish Parliament External Relations Committee urgently sets up a Whistleblowers' Hotline, to enable "concerned citizens" in the US to report on any suspicious behaviour on the part of Senators Menendez, Lautenberg, Gillibrand and Schumer that might shed some light on the true motivations behind their vexatious "inquiries" into the Megrahi release, which for the most part seem to consist of grandiose requests by smailmail for links to information freely available on the Scottish Government website. The anonymity of brave Americans prepared to come forward and assist in this important matter should of course be fully protected, and any information provided must be treated in the strictest confidence.
Mind you, I don't think any of us are going to faint with amazement at what we discover. There are elections in November.
Mind you, I don't think any of us are going to faint with amazement at what we discover. There are elections in November.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)