the humour of the late left-wing Labour MP Tony Banks, “known for acid tongue and sharp wit“, who “will be remembered for his hilarious insults“
“Tory MP, Terry Dicks, was dismissed as “living proof that a pig’s bladder on the end of a stick can be elected to Parliament”.
The former sports minister, who became Lord Stratford last year, showed reputations did not intimidate him when he accused Lady Thatcher of having “the sensitivity of a sex-starved boa-constrictor” during a Commons debate.
He added to that by calling the former Prime Minister a “half mad old bag lady” on another occasion.
Former Chancellor Kenneth Clarke was “a pot-bellied old soak” while another former Prime Minister John Major was “so unpopular, if he became a funeral director people would stop dying”.
During the 1997 Labour Party conference he sparked controversy by describing then-Tory leader William Hague as a “foetus”.
Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats were “woolly-hatted, muesli-eating, Tory lick-spittles”.”
Just let me pick myself up off the floor – that is so funny. And so original.
Although the BBC don’t tell us his brilliant follow-up to the ‘foetus‘ jibe.
“I bet a lot of Tory MPs wish they hadn’t voted against abortion“
First Ronnie Barker. Then Richard Pryor.
Now, as the BBC remind us, another comic genius has left us.
Rob Read…
Google “helen waldie”…
I really dont know what way to turn on this…
…but why has she(him?) a BBC email account?
Sorry – “an email account”
WHY has this person got a BBC email account!!!!
http://www.bellydancela.com/USLegendsPresent.html
R.Reads link was from the 9th of this month.
The ‘Have Your Say’ video on ‘What impact will Sharon crisis have?’ provides a rare opportunity to observe the BBC playing fair in their reporting on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Palestinians were allowed to predictably whine and moan and propagandise on the programme but were not given too much leeway by the host. And the knowledgeable Israeli guest – a professor who has not fallen under the spell of the anti-Semitic left – was given the space and time to present his views and debunk Palestinian myths.
Well worth a watch. And let’s give the BBC credit where it’s due.
If you follow enough google leads you do in the end discover that “Helen (Waldie) of Romford” who works at the Beeb, is indeed the transexual belly dancing fanatic who, while going through her sex change, has been learning to belly dance and writing pieces about the history of belly dancing. Personally I think this is all rather splendid, and in the highest tradition of English (or whatever) eccentricity and I am willing to forgive her her moonbattish political views, and her employment by the BBC. Nobody with belly dancing monomania can be all bad.
HYS asks
What do you think of Apple’s Mac plans?
Like B-BBC there are some respondents who notice the suspicious connection between the BBC & Apple.
This isn’t news
I agree with the previous poster, this is not news. How long has the BBC been an extension of Apple’s overblown marketing department? This is merely the latest in a long long line of Apple press releases to be granted equal status with the Iraq war
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=736&edition=1&ttl=20060111003112&#paginator
Socialist BBC take note
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/01/11/do1101.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/01/11/ixop.html
A tragic accident in Soweto makes the news on BBC Online:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4600050.stm
No doubt to the approval of the Beeboid writer, “The Anti-Privatisation Forum – a pressure group opposed to pre-paid electricity and water meters – has vowed to take the matter up to court.”
You have to scroll all the way down to find that there might possibly be another explanation:
“There have also been suggestions that an illegal electricity connection at Oprah’s home could have contributed to her death.
The family has admitted that the home has been running on an illegal connection for power for over two years.”
Hmmmm.
Bryan
Good point, but you have to search very hard to find that sort of stuff on the BBC.
More typical was the BBC coverage of the Iranian crisis.
On pm last night, Eddie Mair discusses the situation, then brings on a spokesman from the Israeli Government, and Mair proceeds to… yes, you’ve got it, try to blame Israel for the crisis. I suppose Mair finds it difficult to look at these situations any other way – after all, to the average Beeboid, Iranians are just hot blooded Middle Eastern types, they don’t really mean what they say, and anyway can you blame them given the ongoing occupation?
It would have been better for the BBC to get off their backsides and interview representatives of the awful Iranian regime and ask them some hard questions for a change.
I also get tired of Beeboids dismissing antisemitic rants by Iranian leaders (and other assorted muslim leaders) as amusing rhetoric.
If, as seems increasingly likely, Iran nukes Israel and wipes out her major cities, at whom will the BBC point the finger of blame, I wonder?
Israel, of course!
TAoL
One hopes that the Israelis wont let it get that far and will themselves conduct an operation of anticipatory self defence as they did against Saddam’s Osiral facility in 1981. I dare say they already have some contingency plan. Lets hope so for all our sakes.
Eamonn, agreed. That’s why I indicated that fair play by the BBC is a rare event.
On pm last night, Eddie Mair discusses the situation, then brings on a spokesman from the Israeli Government, and Mair proceeds to… yes, you’ve got it, try to blame Israel for the crisis.
Now why didn’t Eddie Mair refer to The Book of Ezra and Cyrus of Persia – then he could have interviewed the Iranian Ambassador and asked him why the change of policy towards Israel ?
The BBC is pushing the line that preventative action against Iranian nuclear installations is ‘unthinkable’, but the consequences of not taking action really are unthinkable. Is it something to do with Israelis being Jews? God forbid!
One hopes that the Israelis wont let it get that far and will themselves conduct an operation of anticipatory self defence as they did against Saddam’s Osiral facility in 1981
Not that simple. The Osirak facility was a similar French design to Dimona and the Russians had not supplied such advanced SAMs to defend the facilities. This time it will require the US to eradicate the facilities and is beyond Israel’s capabilities.
India cannot be best pleased to have nutcase Pakistan and nutcase Iran both pointing sharp stuff at them with China playing encirclement.
The Russians are just afraid of Iranian influence in their fast-growing Muslim areas of Central Asia.
There are quite a few people who would have a vested interest in using Iran as Christmas Island if things develop adversely. It is not usually a good idea to let countries where the leadership believes it is better to be dead than alive, have sharp instruments let alone rockets.
Since the Iranian dictatorship is obsessed with its millennial suicide cult of Shiite flagellation it migt be time to ask Iranian youth if they are ready to go the way of those tap-dancers who performed on Iraqi minefields in 1978-82…………….or if they would prefer not to have Qom and Teheran spoken of as the Hiroshima and Nagasaki of the 21st Century.
Rob Reid & Rob White
follow up re Helen of Romford
this posting
“I’m sorry, I would genuinely enjoy continuing this debate, but have folishly allowed my employer to be identifiable. As I will be FIRED if my opinions embarrass them I simply cannot continue.
Especially as one person has seen fit to contact me directly accusing me of abusing BBC impartiality. The next step would no doubt be an official complaint to the Corporation and then I really would be in deep shit. Tim, it never occured to me that you be so careless in this respect”
Tim adds: Helen. I am not the person who placed your email on this site. I’m afraid that’s you.
Posted by: helen_of_romford | Jan 11, 2006 10:10:20 AM
from here
http://timworstall.typepad.com/timworstall/2006/01/gary_younge_on_.html
Top in ‘readers recommend’ on BBC (D)HYS
Should Iran develop nuclear energy?
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=2&threadID=729&edition=1&ttl=20060111123203&#paginator
Added: Tuesday, 10 January, 2006, 10:15 GMT 10:15 UK
“Let’s see…Leader of Iran is threatening daily to purport the destruction of another country, hates the west and all it stands for, is sitting on plenty of oil to heat the home and drive the cars, and we’re all just supposed to take his word that he’s just a slightly misunderstood, actually nice guy who will never, ever, ever use the technology for nuclear weapons. Sorry, but I’m not that gullible. But in order to appease, the world will probably elect him king of the UN.
L Monroe, New Richmond, Wisconsin, United States
Recommended by 134 people
Excellent!
Rick’s view doesn’t quite add up (I think) because of who Iran’s chief supplier is. Russia has provided weaponry and nuclear fuel to Iran so I’ll take that at face-value. Alternatively, Putin may be thinking that if Iran destroys Israel, and Israel then destroys Iran, one of Russia’s future rivals is removed. I hope that’s not what he’s thinking, but the Russians are the world’s top chess players.
Verity,
Sorry, I missed that post.
As I recall (from mediaeval languages 101 20 years ago at university), eth differs from thorn in that the latter can be pronounced in two ways to eth‘s one.
In the phrase “the slothful BBC hack”, either of the ths can be rendered by thorn. Only the second, in slothful, can be rendered by eth.
Thorn is a dental fricative sound, whereas eth is an interdental fricative. The tongue is behind the teeth for the word the and between them for slothful.
In short, thorn is correct for th- in any location whereas eth is not.
Clarification to the above – should read “Thorn can be a dental fricative sound, whereas eth can only be an interdental fricative”.
No Allan in Aberdeen you caricature things. Russia sells weaponry to Iran because Iran will buy it simply because the US will not supply. Russia exports Oil, Gas, Weapons to earn forex.
I think you make Putin sound like some cartoon character. It is simply that Iran is a maverick and supplying weapons gets influence. The USSR sold Syria, Iraq, Egypt, India, et al tonnes of weapons over the years just to have influence.
You might ask why the British Govt operates a JV company with Germany and Netherlands called EURENCO which manufactures centrifuges to produced HE Uranium.
Why that company permitted a Pakistani metallurgist called Khan to work there on secondment; why an employee sent him photographs of centrifuges to go with the blueprints he had stolen.
Or do you Allan think this was part of an Anglo-German-Dutch conspiracy to proliferate nuclear weapons to Pakistan, Libya, North Korea, Iran etc and undermine the Non-Proliferation Treaty ?
You analyse things on a very simplistic and mechanistic level. The fact is since the USSR asked the USA to assist it in a first nuclear strike on China in 1969, none of these countries have dared launch a pre-emptive strike – just as France balked when invited to join Poland in 1935 in a pre-emptive strike against Nazi Germany.
SiN,
Why would a BBC employee use their work email account like that?
Same as someone who didnt know what the entry field titled “Email Address:” was used for iether I guess…
Regarding Helen of Romford, I think it would be VERY unfair of anybody to report her to the BBC.
Please do not do this. It would be vindictive and spiteful to attempt to have that lady sacked.
I’ve never heard of her until today and doubt that she has any say over editorial content.
It never ceases to amaze me how slow the BBC can be when it wants, in terms of reporting things like this:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/11012006/325/blair-aims-iranian-referral-security-council.html
The problem Blair has is that he sold his soul to the devil in convincing the country that Iraq was a major problem.
Problem now is, like the boy that cried wolf, he’s the politician that cried WMD.
Iran has the potential to develop Nukes, missiles that can possibly reach the UK.
I find it very worrying and do agree with the PM.
Problem is, the country is now sceptical of the truth, the facts and is Iran really a threat?
Put it this way, if the Iranians killed their own as they did in the revolution, then they have no qualms about popping us off.
That said, i’d doubt they’d be foolish enough to do so? But more likely, a nuclear device, made in Iran, might accidentally ‘find its way into Hizbollah or some other terrorist groups hands and then we have a major problem’
Seeing that terrorists move freely into Europe and the UK, moving a small device wouldnt be too difficult either? Hence the need for tighter security at borders, this is no longer about party politics, moreover, National Security.
I’d be very surprised if the Russians opposed action at the Security Council.
In Short, Blair has lost credibility, he had better be right this time…
Rick, most people don’t have your insight and resources. To me, if Putin is supplying iran with nuclear materials which could be made into nuclear weapons, then that is as much as I know and I’ll base my opinions on that. It doesn’t fit with your assertion that “The Russians are just afraid of Iranian influence in their fast-growing Muslim areas of Central Asia.”
If your assertion were correct then Putin wouldn’t be supplying said materials; unless he has some other idea perhaps?
almost forgot The British Army is in no state for action, nor are the americans, so i don’t know quite what Blair wants to do, but it won’t be via the military.
[jest]
I think I know what Ian Barnes got for Christmas. A dictionary 🙂
[/jest]
Actually the Russians were prepared to supply Enriched Uranium but NOT Highly-Enriched Uranium.
You enrich Uranium to create Uranium Hexafluoride (UF6) and the more you increase the U235 component of the U238 isotope the nearer you are to building weapons-grade HE Uranium.
The Russians were proposing to sell U238 enriched to 12% U235 which is what is used in civilian nuclear reactors (The Iranians want to generate electricity they say) but NOT to supply U238 enriched to 85% U235 which is Highly-Enriched Uranium as used to build a bomb.
The gas-centrifuge is used to increase the proportion of U235 in the isotope, the Russians were proposing simply to enrich it themselves and take back the waste for re-processing which gave them an ability to monitor what the Iranians were doing.
The fact that the Iranians broke the seals and rejected the Russian proposal suggests they are building weapons-grade materials.
http://www.uic.com.au/uran.htm
Oh and to add spice to matters – depending upon the kind of reactor the Iranians are using they could convert the U238 to U239 plutonium suitable for a bomb.
The Russian reactor at Chernobyl was used to produce plutonium presumably for their weapons systems.
This is why the Iranians are such a problem and the IAEA is so pathetically weak. Some really irrational people are getting access to some very dangerous weapons without understanding any of the implications
O/T (what is the on-topic topic?) 🙂
A hawk-eyed Five Live (if you’re reading, Augustus, a big hat-tip) listener picked up on something interesting this morning.
The phone-in, hosted by the gifted Victoria Derbyshire, featured a debate on ‘failing schools’. One of the ‘expert’ guests was a lady by the name of Paulette North, a teacher and local NUT apparatchik in Bristol.
Paulette was also a Respect candidate in the Bristol East constituency in the 2005 general election. She finished sixth, earning 532 (1.2 per cent) votes.
The voters of Bristol East may not have appreciated the prodigious talents of Paulette but clearly the producers of Victoria Derbyshire’s programme do.
And did Victoria ask Paulette about Respect’s education policy? What about Paulette’s views on her party leader’s appearance in the Big Brother house?
Er, we never found out because Five Live did not disclose Paulette’s party allegiance.
Interestingly, it performed a similar trick some months ago when it invited a ‘spokesman the de Menezes family’ onto the Derbyshire show without informing us that this spokesman was a political advisor to George Galloway and a Respect member, Asad Rehman.
If Paulette had been a BNP activist or candidate, or a member of a ‘right-wing’ think-tank, would Five Live have ‘forgotten’ to tell us, do you think?
Can we not call “Respect” by its real name ?
Socialist Workers’ Party has so many front-names it is absurd…………
Wikipedia states:
Respect allows its members to hold membership of other political organisations.
Its main components are:
* George Galloway, Respect’s sole Member of Parliament, expelled from the Labour Party.
* The Socialist Workers Party.
* Leading figures from the Muslim Association of Britain.
Clematis
Thanks for that. However, having listened to part of comrade Paulette’s rantings, I could tell that she must have some connection to left-wing-almost-extreme-right-wing- swivel-eyed-loonery that is Respect.
BTW, who else thinks that Victoria Derbyshire is excruciatingly bad? Ever noted the sharp intake of breath and 5 second silence she exhibits when anyone says anything non-PC?
Fi was married for not very long,(I remember her talking about getting married and all) and her hubby was the producer on Victoria’s show or one of the shows on Radio 5, and she had an ‘alledged’ affair with Fi’s hubby, he left Fi, and now him and Victoria have a baby and she has Fi’s morning slot, and Fi has left the station
http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=277643
Re my 3:18pm comment: sorry Ian, I think I got you mixed up with Gary Powell – hence my surprise at such a well-spelt post 🙂
I’ll get me coat.
I tried to post the following onto
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/ …=20060110150926
“The naivety of many who have added comments here is astounding.
An Iran capable of possessing nuclear-tipped missiles is an obscenity that the world should not tolerate (forget the preposterous UN).
Clearly the EU, when not demonising Israel, is in hand wringing mode and secretly praying that they, the Israelis, carry out a pre-emptive strike.
The way the BBC have portrayed this potential catastrophe brings them no credit, but then what can one expect of an organisation that only exists by way of an enforced poll tax.”
Get past the BBC appointed moderators, of course not, yet many pearls of wisdom from those who choose to knit their own yoghurt and live in tepees in Aukland. Where did I go wrong.
Sorry, I’m new at this game. It was the BBC news forum to do with the Iranian nuclear issue
By the way any ideas on how I can get rid of this homepage thing?
NKOTB
I think you just leave it blank.
I tried .. won’t work
Newkidontheblock
You need to download a program called HijackThis.exe. Use it to remove any items that refer to an IE homepage.
Then install your prefered homepage via (IE) Tools, Internet Options, Homepage
“Thanks for that. However, having listened to part of comrade Paulette’s rantings, I could tell that she must have some connection to left-wing-almost-extreme-right-wing- swivel-eyed-loonery that is Respect.”
Eamonn, but why couldn’t they just say she is a member of Respect? Are Five Live’s grandes fromages concerned that if we know they are members of Respect, we will automatically treat what they say with contempt?
Well, maybe they have a point. 😀
PS: I don’t actually listen to Derbyshire’s morning programme. No, I really don’t.
Rick
the major problem is that the Iranians have absolutely no idea of what they want a bomb for.
It is already a given that a terror group of some sort will acquire a nuclear weapon and will use it.
In pressing on for enriched uranium the Iranians have painted a big fat target on their collective selves. As soon as terrorists detonate a nuclear device, it’s bye-bye Teheran.
The involvement of Iran in state-sponsored terrorism, the unending tirades of hate, the lack of openness and the unwillingness to make any sort of compromise by the Iranians means the world won’t stop to look for a signature.
Anybody could set off a weapon and the Iranians will take the fall.
Far from being a deterrant, the Iranian nuclear programme is a suicide declaration.
Thanks gordon
Will try it tomorrow
off to bath the baby now
Has anyone considered that a Nuke capable of the compleat destruction of London,can fitt in a small suitcase. I think the main concern for western goverments is the potential for blackmail and intimidation that Irans nukes pose. As I have said before their is little point in blowing up Israel as it is to close to the West Bank and Gaza, and Iran. Also Israel will just Nuke them back. No, as with Iraq and Afganistan post 9/11 the main concern is nukes or else getting in the hands of terrorist organisations that are not located in any particular state that the West can theaten or control. If a terrorist anounced he was a Saudi what would Bush do blow up 20% of the worlds oil supply, because of a few nuts? This is a problem any Western leader given our history has no alternative but to confront ASAP. There are a lot of lefties out there that think this war was all about OIL and protecting the capitolist system. Do they think we are stupid. Of cause it is. But it is not only that important. It might just save the whole world and everybody that lives in it.
Off Topic
Botswana brings back school fees
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4601360.stm
Even just a friendly nod in the direction of balance or fairness would have made this a *very* different article. Surely even the most bigoted extremist socialist swivel-eyed headbanger must accept that this page shows no sign of impartiality or neutral news reporting. If I’d wanted to read this sort of nonsense, I’d buy the Socialist Worker…oh, hold on, I actually get a choice about paying for that if I decide to read it….
Muslim head’s gay remarks checked
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4603474.stm
‘checked’? as in checked for spelling mistakes? How very kind of the police.
How come Sacranie’s homophobic comments get ‘checked’ by police, whilst the BBC reports this couple are ‘accused of homophobia’ for doing pretty much the same thing.
Christians accused of homophobia
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/4555406.stm
A non racist broadcaster would surely treat both cases in a similar way, the accurate & consistent headline being:
‘Muslim accused of homophobia’
but that would never do on the BBC, oh no.
The Thought Police………..Orwell warned us about them…………
I don’t think terrorists will get a nuclear weapon even from Iran – but when Khameini and this loon of a President talk about the end of the world and awaiting the Mahdi it is time to wonder if their desire for Armageddon is not a little too dangerous.
You are so ethnocentric thinking like a European paulc – these nutcases are not interested in surviving – they think that Dead is a superior state to Living.
Mao Tse-Tung spent a long time saying that China could survive a nuclear war; the Iranians know that the West is chicken and are calling its bluff. The talk of nuclear attack on Iran is as much hot air as “Shock & Awe” was in Iraq, simply because they know they will get away with it and the West will do nothing but huff and puff.
That Arnie film True Lies is what essence of what will face us in the west if the Iranian theocrazy gets its N-weapon. I think that film should be shown again. Something tells me that there won’t be a True Lies II. Here are some sites on the islamo-menace.
http://listislam.freeweb-hosting.org/
“Muslim head’s gay remarks checked”
don’t know whether to laugh at the almost comical bias of that headline or cry at my direct debit funding the PC news corporation each month.