It’s Easter time, when the BBC gear up to cover the annual ritual that means so much to so many of the faithful – the annual conference of the National Union of Teachers.
This year, those teachers who want a national strike against Government education policy are being described on Radio Four as ‘committed activists’. Way back in December 2001, when I searched the BBC News website for occurrences of the phrase ‘far-left’ and ‘far-right’, the NUT, with its ‘various far-left groups’ was one of only five mentions of a British far-left.
The other four were in a Scritti Politti review, a story about Peter Hitchens having been a youthful far-leftist (how come we never hear that about Andrew Marr – or indeed any of the vast number of other BBC journalists to which it would apply ?), a story that the Animal Liberation Front had both far-left and far-right members, and a Peter Tatchell profile.
There were 32 stories about the British ‘far-right’ – of which no less than 11 involved the Tory party.
The overall figures were – ‘far-left’ 46 stories, ‘far-right’ 338. I repeated the search in August 2002 – 66 far-left, 502 far-right.
And one minute ago – Fascinatingly 97 far-left, 420 far-right. Is this an indication that the BBC is now reporting at a 1/4 ratio rather than 1/8, or does the BBC’s search engine needs its indexing looking at ? Fortunately I kept all the 502 search results, but further analysis will have to wait till I have more time.
Not needed – try the ‘advanced search’ option and drop down the date listboxes, while leaving the range at 1997-2006. You still get 97 far-left stories, while the far-right feature in a staggering 1,550. Looks like the ratio is 1/15. Anyone using BBC search is advised to use the advanced option.
If, like most human attributes, political views were subject to a normal distribution about a mean, you might expect far-left and far-right views to have a pretty equal distribution. Unless, of course, there’s bias in the measurement. The kind of bias, say, that doesn’t consider the Socialist Workers Party, who support the Iraqi ‘resistance’ while simultaneously controlling the ‘anti-war’ movement, to be far-left. After all, half their college friends were in it.
Apologies if this is a repost.
Queen meets the Beeb (and its millionaires)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2143254,00.html
“But there was no smile when John Humphrys, inquisitor-in-chief on Radio 4’s Today programme, asked the Queen why she had not invited President Castro, who turns 80 in August, to join in this week’s celebrations.
“I suggested it was a bit mean not to invite Fidel Castro to the Palace because he’s 80 as well and she didn’t seem to think it was a very good idea,” Humphrys told reporters after the visit.
Wogan, who also met the Queen, added: “No she didn’t. She thought in fact you were showing marked communist leanings – and showing republican tendencies.”
Humphries and Naughtie show their communist leanings every morning on Today. Does the Queen have to pay the tv tax?
john reith
A rare visit to a brothel and untreated syphilis lead to dementia. Rather disgusting of you to imply some form of mental incapacity as a result of a physical illness.
VD was rampant in Europe pre WW2
The Italian campaign was very nearly lost because so many G.I’s deliberately infected and re-infected themselves with VD to get our of the line.
At any one time about 50,000 were estimated to be sick, as in WW1 it was regarded as an outer.
The treatment was deliberately made very painful but they still carried on until penicillin turned the tide.
Your remarks do betray a certain laxity in definition.
JR:
Here is the 1st para of your link:
The White Defence League and National Labour Party united to form the British National Party (BNP). The party, not to be confused with the modern day BNP, was a neo-Fascist party active between 1959 and 1962.
“not to be confused with the modern day BNP”
Ritter | 20.04.06 – 5:31 pm
Was humphreys smirking as he retold the story of how so clever he had been in the presence of our Queen?
I wonder if he has any idea why people are fleeing cuba in numbers.
Gordon-Bennett
…you’re wrong as usual. The 1959-62 BNP should not be confused with today’s BNP. Absolutely. No-one is confusing it – I’m not. But Tyndall WAS the founder of today’s BNP (after his NF days. Or do you dispute that?
Sarge
‘Rather disgusting of you to imply some form of mental incapacity as a result of a physical illness.’
Clearly you are unacquainted with the symptoms of tertiary syphilis/ neurosyphilis. They’re consistent with the sort of atheistic claptrap your man N was spouting.
John Reith
You describe yourself as socially and economically conservative in your political views. Does that mean you are an advocate of low taxes, small government and personal responsibility?
Please let me know if you are in favour of any of the following policies:
State-provided soap operas, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided reality TV, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided comedy shows, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided costume dramas, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided nature programmes, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided pop music radio stations, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided easy-listening radio stations, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided classical music radio stations, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided talk radio stations, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided fly-on-the-wall documentaries, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided local radio stations, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided cookery programmes, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided gardening programmes, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided makeover programmes, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided arts programmes, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided docu-soaps, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided quiz shows, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided cartoons, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided chat shows, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided news programmes, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided political commentary, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided entertainment web sites, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
State-provided celebrity dinner-parties, funded by a regressive tax, backed by the threat of fines and (ultimately) imprisonment, regardless of ability to pay.
Let me know if I left anything out.
john reith,
Would that be about the time John Reid was a communist?
john reith
Saying Nietzsche was spouting claptrap because he was an ulcerating log is like saying a gay supports an HIV charity because he has AIDS. please, you are scraping the barrel now. I know priests and vicars who have AIDS and some have committed suicide because of it, are you saying that they were ill makes their sermons ‘raving’
As for fighting the SS they were mainly on the Eastern front. The British soldier fought the German soldier each side honourably and according to the rules of war.
As for emotive ‘Terrorfliegen’ this is similar to German propaganda that told the German population that bomber command was ‘Churchill murder boys’
PS How many Tories have the pox?
I’ll ask you a question
What is the difference between a Nazi and a Fascist?
Sarge…you asked a question.
‘What’s the difference between a Nazi and a fascist?’
A fascist is an adherent or advocate of a party or political movement that desires a system of government marked by centralization of authority under a (sometimes charismatic) dictator, tough socioeconomic controls, a corporatist economic structure, suppression of opposition by political violence and censorship, and, more often than not, a policy of belligerent nationalism, racialism and frequently – pronounced anti-semitism. A Nazi is an adherent or advocate of that brand of fascism that flourished in Germany in the 1930s and early 40s under the aegis of the NSDAP.
As for fighting the SS they were mainly on the Eastern front. The British soldier fought the German soldier each side honourably and according to the rules of war.
Hogwash – Waffen-SS units were rotated from the Eastern Front to France, and major Waffen-SS formations like Grossdeutschland fought in France in 1944……….who did the massacres at Oradour-sur-Glane and at Malmedy ?
What about the Massacre at Revin carried out by Waffen-SS troops in June 1944 ?
There were Waffen-SS divisions in Italy and in Greece and Serbia – why was it that so many civilians were butchered in Italy ?
Wherever the Waffen-SS appeared a msaacre soon followed
john
A fascist is an adherent or advocate of a party or political movement that desires a system of government marked by centralization of authority under a (sometimes charismatic) dictator, tough socioeconomic controls, a corporatist economic structure, suppression of opposition by political violence and censorship,
That sounds like the labour party
British soldier fought the German soldier
Not at all true. At The Battle of the Bulge Skorzeny’s men wore US uniforms to attack US formations – breach of Geneva Conventions.
The Waffen-SS were not Wehrmacht soldiers but were an adjunct of the NSDAP and not part of the Wehrmacht line forces.
A Nazi is an adherent or advocate of that brand of fascism that flourished in Germany in the 1930s and early 40s under the aegis of the NSDAP.
Actually “Fascism” builds The Movement and its power structures around The Man – as with Hitler, Peron, Mussolini, Franco, Salazar, Chavez, Castro
Communism tries to build on the basis of a supposedly “scientific” ideology of historical forces but usually ends up with the Cult of Personality not unlike Fascism – usually The Party is the power structure and exists independently of the man, whereas under Fascism/Nazism The Man is The Party
You know damn well you are still ducking the issue on the BBC and its avoidance of the T word on Middle East affairs, except when used as a quote by someone else. The practice of the BBC is to avoid the T word. Reporters like Orla Guerin and Caroline Hawley right up to John Simpson avoid it like the plague. Whether in Israel/Palestine, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey or Iraq, no matter how bad the atrocity against civilians. Even if British citizens are involved.
So – once again, can we have a non-slippery answer ? Do you agree with this consistent practice of BBC reporters avoiding the T word except when quoting someone else – or not ?
The last post was to try to get reith to give a straight answer to a straight question.
JohnofBorg
I am indeed an advocate of low taxes, small government and personal responsibility.
I am not however a free-market fundamentalist/classical liberal. I have a small, but perfectly formed, paternalist streak.
I also believe in the importance of a vibrant national culture as a bulwark against some of the unwanted side-effects of globalization ( specifically its tendency to erase cultural particularity and impose a Disney world).
I also believe that a variant of Gresham’s law works in the media and cultural industries….in that bad TV forces out good. Bad music forces out good. Ditto books/films etc. A pure market would offer little more than pornography.
I therefore believe that there is a place for free-standing (not State) mediating institutions in the national culture. It is important that these institutions should have some power because power should be diffused in society and should not be the preserve either of the state or of the economically powerful. I believe in a strong voluntary sector and would prefer that most schools and hospitals were run by independent charitable bodies operating side by side with commercial ones. I also believe that a strong broadcasting institution, established under Royal Charter and independent of politicians and commercial interests can offer significant public goods working side by side and complementary to commercial broadcasters. I also believe that such an institution should be funded by some kind of levy that is different from general taxation and is not under the day to day control of politicians such that its services are free at the point of use to all citizens, irrespective of means. I am uncomfortable with the fact that the licence fee is backed by the sanction of imprisonment and would hope that such a sanction were not often used.
Then we come to the various genres you list. In an ideal world the BBC would stick to excellence/ news and current affairs and high culture. It would tend to avoid things that the commercial broadcasters are good at – e.g. reality TV; soaps; cooking/gardening; pop music etc UNLESS it could show a need for a particular kind of soap/cooking/property/gardening show that the market wouldn’t supply. (the late John Peel’s music show might be a good example – I dunno, I never heard it).
However, as a realist I accept that any cultural venture of this sort must command majority support in a democratic society – and if the price of that is that the BBC must entertain as well as educate, edify and inform – then so be it.
I also believe that Britain’s premier cultural institution should be a world class player active on every platform that technology provides and should strive to disseminate Britain’s values to the world at large….. and getting as much cash out of foreigners as it can.
I think the BBC does a pretty good job of all this….given the constraints. It also provides a focus for our national conversation, integrates rather than segments the nation (as media rivals do) and provides social value in innumerable ways.
Dumbcisco
You are being unfair. I am not being slippery or dodging anything. First, you misrepresented BBC policy and then asked whether I agreed with it. The policy – as I have correctly quoted it above – consists in being careful and sensible and thinking things through. I agree with that.
Now you have subtly changed the terms of engagement away from BBC policy and on to new ground – the habits of certain journalists. That’s slippery.
If something is clearly terrorism, I am in favour of calling it that. I am not in favour of devaluing the currency by using terrorist as a general sneer word. I can imagine that from time to time the odd correspondent might get in a tangle by being over-cautious. I have never been struck by any instance of that in my daily viewing or listening. I can, however, imagine a hypothetical instance:
If a BBC report ran:
“Insurgents have planted a bomb at Edgware Road Tube station killing 65 schoolchildren” I would jump out of my seat thinking it was daft.
Equally ‘IRA militants bomb BBC News Centre’. A good general rule for reporters would be – if avoiding using the word terrorism sounds crass, go ahead and use it. If using the word is mere sloganizing, avoid it.
In some theatres of operation things are more complicated. If a Palestinian shoots an IDF soldier on the West Bank – is that terrorism? Even if you think it is….should the BBC be making that value-judgment for you?
…and another thing, Dumbcisco
In case you still don’t get it: Mike’s Place = terrorism; Tel Aviv this week, ditto.
Mind you, having seen so many regular posters outing themselves as BNP supporters/activists today, I’m beginning to wonder if the prevailing pro-Israel tone of this blog isn’t a classic false flag operation designed to mask a hidden agenda – the indubitably anti-semitic one of the BNP nasties.
“This country not only needs a Conservative victory it needs a landslide one. This could not happen if the Tories got every single BNP and UKIP vote in Britain. DC knows this.
Gary Powell | 20.04.06 – 1:57 am ”
i stand corrected. thanks for the education lesson Gary. i may well take you up on your suggestion to join my local Conservative party.
“Mind you, having seen so many regular posters outing themselves as BNP supporters/activists today”
when no less than Margaret Hodge, a government minister, worries about BNP support, and the media run with the story, then its worthy of discussion.
“Mid-East executions are condemned”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4925922.stm
Why is Sharia Law or the word “Islam” never mention in the above article?
Also note the photo.
The BBC fails to mention that the two young chaps in that photo were executed just for being gay – again, under Sharia Islamic Law.
John Reith writes: “Mind you, having seen so many regular posters outing themselves as BNP supporters/activists today, I’m beginning to wonder if the prevailing pro-Israel tone of this blog isn’t a classic false flag operation designed to mask a hidden agenda – the indubitably anti-semitic one of the BNP nasties.”
You are Alastair Campbell and I hereby claim my free knightood.
Well done, Reith – a smear job undertaken in the classic BBC manner!
“classic false flag operation”
interesting wording. used a lot on 9/11 conspiracy sites – and by Islamists who think Mossad were behind 911.
bit of freudian slip there methinks.
reith:
I am a regular/fequent poster here. I am not a supporter, either openly or secretly, of the bnp. I am (rather proudly) a capitalist. The nearest party to this is the Conservative Party, to which I used to belong.
I dont agree with your assertion that the word terrorist can be devalued by frequent usage – if there are frequent acts of terrorism then use the word frequently.
The argument on this blog is that the beeb does not use the word even when it would not be contrversial so to do.
A spade is no less a spade just because one keeps calling it a spade.
reith:
And another thing.
If the beeb thinks overuse of a descriptive term devalues its meaning why dont they stop calling the bnp far-right?
It’s a lie but they keep saying it to smear the Conservatives by association.
Rick
SS units were withdrawn from the Eastern Front for the ‘Battle of the Bulge’ but returned quickly when the battle was lost in the west.
Why do you think the SS fought to the last man? British paratroops sent in against them took no prisoners and disembowelled them as a calling card.
On the battlefield, in the west certain conventions were adhered to, i.e. a German anti-tank crew would disable a British tank with a first shot and then allow the crew to escape before finishing it off. If you didn’t follow these rules you were dead. The concession did not apply on the Eastern Front.
NAZI used as a swear word, not as a political association.
John Reith
” What’s there to be proud of in poverty, squalor and ignorance?”
when you allude to the working class in these terms you exemplify everything that is wrong with the BBC.
It’s a sweeping generalisation, who do you think built the roads railways tunnels canals bridges railway stations airports harbours. Who builds the ships, trains and planes that use them?
I challenge you to walk into a working mans club on a Saturday night and call the working class
” poor. squalid and ignorant” or am I twisting your words.?
Rick
Nazi as in “My Mother is a right nazi in the kitchen”
Countless other examples
reith
You ARE ducking the issue. Time and time again, even over the past few days, people have criticised the BBC practice of NOT using the T word to describe atrocities all over the Middle east like the Tel Aviv bombing. You know that is the core point. And I used the term policy and practice. Because the standard practice is the de facto policy. I also used the word “usage”. You avoided the words practice and policy, and ducked behind the formal statement which actually lets the weaselly use of English through every time.
Who cares if you the atrocities terrorism. The whole point is that BBC doesn’t – not a single report from anywhere at the BBC that I have seen used the T word, except when to quoting someone else, usually in quotes. Not a single BBC report or reporter uses the T word except as a quote. Exactly the same thing happened when British and other tourists were bombed at the resort in Egypt a few months ago. Nil use by the BBC itself of the T word. Likewise for Mike’s Bar. Likewise for the dozens of kids killed and maimed in Iraq. Likewise for the headchoppings. Of courswe I quoted individual reporters – because they have been the main reporters of these incidents.
So don’t keep ducking behind the slippery and equivalent BBC statement of policy that is in fact a non-policy because it that allows this weaselly use of the English language EVERY TIME. The actual policy pursued by BBC reports and reporters can only discerned by the consistent usage that we see every time. That avoids the T word.
Once again – do you or do you not criticise the BBC for failing to use the T word in these cases ? Yes or no ?
I bet I do not get a straight answer from reith to the straight question – does he criticise the BBC for consistently avoiding the T word when reporting on suicide bombings and such-like atrocities targetted against civilians ?
Watch for another swerve from him.
john
I support Israel. A suicide bomb there is every bit as bad as 7/7. I’m not anti – Semitic and I don’t know anyone who is. We have more in common with Jewish people than we have against, I don’t believe it is in their interests or ours for any further Islamification of Britain. I welcome with open arms those that have joined.
At the end of the day all I want is a sensible immigration policy, as does most people but it looks like things are going to come to a head first.
I wonder if the BNP comes up on question time tonight? and what the panel thinks. Let me guess..
Humphrys really is a nasty piece of work. His stupid and impertinent question to The Queen yesterday about inviting Castro to the 80th birthday celebrations was bad enough. But then to tell the press about it was particularly cheap – and deserved the slapdown Terry Wogan gave him.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2143254,00.html
John Reith writes: “Mind you, having seen so many regular posters outing themselves as BNP supporters/activists today, ……… reminds me of the time a solicitor asked me, “Are you a member of the BNP?”
I said “No”
She then asked ” Have you EVER been a member of the BNP?”
I laughed.
The liberals just can’t abide someone who doesn’t think like them.
I Coy
Tessa Jowell evades questions on proper scrutiny of the BBC’s expenditure :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4928684.stm
Off with his head I say.
Really though, did Humphreys think he was being amusing? What an immature little twerp. And he thinks he is so good at his job.
You can imagine all the sniggery jokes by the Beeboids about the Queen’s visit can’t you? Just to show that, hey, we are progressives and republicans at heart you know, even though we have to be polite for Her Majesty.
gordon-bennett
“why dont they stop calling the BNP far-right”
Gordon-bennet!!!!!why indead: In fact it is at the heart of what has gone wrong with British politics, and for the last 9 years especialy.
I have said it before and It seems I have to say it again
Far right means classic Libertiarism.
Which is the compleat opposite of Socialism. Which is exactly where any intelligent honest person would expect far-right to be.
The BBC is very intelligent so they must be being DISHONEST.
FAR-RIGHT IS OPPOSITE TO FAR-LEFT
Has BBC and the states education system failed so badly, that so many of you lott cant seem to get your heads round this simple proposition.
It is particualy sad as you all seem to be much better educated than me.
How can we have a serious debate when there is no consensus of the meaning of basic terms.
It is not my fault that so many of you have no idear what a liberal is supposed to believe in. I do not run the education system or the BBC.
I am white working class and I quite resent the sterio-typing, that we are all or mostly illiberal facist louts with only football on our minds.
I believe my core believes are at the heart of all true British people. I am a direct product of my countries glorious history. As are the vaste magority of this countries citizens right now. Whether they understand what the bugger I am going on about, or not.
Castro, the so-called “friend of the people” is actually richer than the Queen. His personal fortune clocks in at around 1/4 of a trillion dollars.
Never see that figure quoted on the Beeb though.
I am white working class and I quite resent the sterio-typing, that we are all or mostly illiberal facist louts with only football on our minds.
But that is classic BBC Evolutionary Theory Gary,
Their theory states that starved of education and left to fester in troglodytic ignorance the basic White male is a closet fascist who uses blacks to pick cotton and thinks all wogs are lower class than his bull-mastif.
Whereas if you inject education into the moronic White male he becomes a quiche-eating, latte-drinking, lover of men and gay fashion icon.
When you have this Neo-Darwinism of the BBC the stereotype is quite understandable and it is clear Gary that properly “educated” you too would be like Julian Clary
Eamonn
I had posted the stupid insulting remarks by John Humphrys.
It is a mark of the times that the lead presenter of the BBC’s main news programme should behave in such a crude and nasty way – and that a DJ had to step in to show some class.
No doubt the spineless BBC Governors will turn a blind eye to this latest sign of Humphrys’ arrogance.
And it is highly revealing that he should apparently think fondly of Castro.
She was also presented with a digital radio as a birthday present “from Auntie”.
It is not the DAB Radio she needs it is batteries. Just read the reviews on Amazon of the Sony DAB radio – it chews its way through 6 “C” Cells within 4 hours or so. Apparently DAB radios eat batteries as a feature – noone tells you that before you fork out for these things. DAB radio is another BBC joke.
Humphrys’ arrogance.
Probably senility rather than arrogance – he is smug and self-satisfied and actually vastly overrated.
Why do you think the SS fought to the last man?
because many like the Dutch, the Albanians, the Indians, the Ukrainians had nowhere else to go. The 14th SS-Galician were moved out to Canada and Australia by MI5 in reserve for the expected 1952 War against the USSR.
The Waffen-SS was a banned organisation at Nuremberg but it hardly prevented Franz-Josef Strauss emerging in German politics or Hans-Martin Schleyer becoming Head of the German Employers’ Federation
Rick
Yes, Humphrys is smug. A smirking tacky fool. He regards himself beyond the control of managers, editors or even the BBC Governors. Roll on his retirement – he is well past his sell-by date. Unlike HM The Queen.
Rick
The battle of the bulge was between the Americans and Germans, the British didn’t get a look in other than flank support.
The main attraction of fighting the SS was the opportunity to get a souvenier SS dagger or a Luger but the opportunity was few and far between.
Many so called SS were Waffen SS.
The last recipient of the Knights Cross was a French corporal in the Charlemagne division who received his medal in a candlelit ceremony in a Berlin bunker.
Waffen SS all being volunteers.
The German soldier fathered 5 million babies in occupied Europe (with consent) not rape.
History is written by the Victors.
British farmers used German POW’s on the land, they were given an allocation by the war office.
The same thing happened in Germany.
POW’s were assigned to farmers by the German Army.
In both cases they lived and slept with the family, eat meals with them and were generally part of the family.
The differences is that at wars end the POW’s who had worked on German farms sued the Germans for using them as ‘slave labour’
Holocaust survivors get paid a pension by the German government.
John Reith
One authority in fact stated that the Great War was fought “to make the world safe for syphilis,”
Famous syphilitics are Martin Luther, J.S. Bach, Voltaire,
Thomas Aquinas, John Alden, Diogenes, and Pocahontas.
Of the literature dealing with syphilis, Pinocchio is, with its obvious symbolism, the best known.
The first documented outbreak of
syphilis, or “the great pox,”
followed the siege of Naples by the
French in 1494.
“He who knows syphilis, knows
medicine..” (Sir William Osler).
Prince Lentille, who upon learning that he had contracted syphilis, caused every courtesan of the Royal Family to be killed and interred dans les jardins de palais. This is the first record of syphilitic dandelions.
The Colombian school believes that syphilitic infection was endemic in Hispaniola (Haiti) and was subsequently contracted and carried to Europe by Columbus , crew when they returned to Spain following his second voyage.
JR
Those of a sensitive disposition may wish to stop reading and, indeed, avoid a career in sexual-health nursing. But everyone should, at least, know the dangers posed by sexually transmitted infection (STI). In 2004 alone, genitourinary-medicine clinics in the UK diagnosed 22,320 cases of gonorrhoea; 18,923 cases of herpes; and a whopping 103,932 cases of chlamydia. And 2,252 people were found to have syphilis. Yes, syphilis, the one that sent royal families across Europe mad in the 1700s. It’s back on the rise.
http://education.independent.co.uk/careers_advice/article328887.ece
Jr
As you rightly assert I have no personal knowledge of the teriaty stages of syphillis not having contracted it, thanks to my dreadnought kit, but I know some who have i.e.
had syphilis in London, in Paris, in Timbuktu, in Istanbul, on the road, in Hong Kong in Delhis old and New. I’ve had syphilis in Warsaw, in Cracow, in Berlin (twice); in Juarez, in Rio, in Liverpool, in absentia.
Several tribes consider it a sacred disease, proof of enduring ancestral spirits; for others it is a rite of passage, with coming of age marked from its first inception.
In 1530 an Italian pathologist, Hieronymus Fracastorius, wrote a
poem entitled Syphilis Sive Morbus
Gallicus, which described the plight of a mythical shepherd lad named Syphilus afflicted with the French disease as punishment for cursing the gods. The poem recognized the venereal nature of the infection and was a compendium
of knowledge of the time regarding
the disease.
Henry
I understand that you are a member of the BNP. But you say that you just want a sensible immigration policy.
Dont vote for a socialist party unless you want a socialist goverment.
I suggest you can have your protest at local and European level, but voteing anything but Conservative at the next general election is tottaly counter productive.
However bad you think the immigration problem is now, do you really think it will get any better at all after a 4th term of a Gordon Brown led Labour goverment?
You are not stupid so try to grow up a bit. Dont throw your rattle out of the pram,to often, your mummy wont always be there to pick it up for you.