Interesting profile on the lady in the Question Time audience last week who actually spoke up and contradicted the nonsense spouted by lefty Mary Beard that migrants were not overwhelming the market town of Boston. Do have a read.
BOSTON
Bookmark the permalink.
Yep, great to see democracy in action on the No.1 forum for democratic debate on television in the UK.
Nothing like a bit of sarcasm with your cornflakes.
Judging by his comments elsewhere I suspect he wasn’t being sarcastic! 😯
I suspect jill was.
Interesting but the story also gives the opportunity to again re -state the positive biased attitude towards the Polish people.
At least a lot of Poles work , are here legally , don’t keep telling us that they hate us, don’t try to blow us up and share a European culture. All in marked contrast to other groups that the BBC and the Liberal Left Establishment fawn over.
Dont believe all the stories you hear on the BBC about those’hard working’ Poles.
Just try googling Polski benefity!
There are many ‘self help’ forums, where they are VERY well informed about their ‘rights’!
Poles are a spectrum just like Brits. Are there only “hard working Brits”? Spongers are no-ones monopoly.
The problem is our useless open door to handouts. Give away benefits housing rights health education help yourself – then don’t be suprised if some come forward to take it. More fool you.
Remember those Polish pilots in Spitfires. Right, now remember the muslim ones. No, I can’t either.
Thanks for the link, most intrigued by this one:
Free TV licences:
http://www.benefity.org.uk/free-tv-licences
Any Slavic translators available?
Unfortunately, I think the BBC will instead use Mrs. Bull’s points to call for even more government funding of public services, and as proof that you desperately need to spend lots more money on social housing. If only the nasty Tories hadn’t cut everything to the bone, these poor hard-working new Britons wouldn’t have to sleep in the fields.
A reprise:
“Professor Mary Beard should visit Boston, Lincs, as I did.”
By Peter Hitchens.
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/01/professor-mary-beard-should-visit-boston-lincs-as-i-did.html
She doesn’t deal in reality. These people never do, that’s why we are in the doo doo up to our necks. She should also visit Bradford, Blackburn, Dewsbury, Birmingham and lots of other citys that have changed beyond recognition. Forget visiting try living there for a few months. Holier than thou “interlectuals” should wake up and smell the coffee.
She’s skirting round the real problem. It’s true that we don’t want East Europeans roasting our swans, or getting mindless on cheap vodka, but at least they are not likely to be Al Qaeda sympathisers.
As I no longer watch any BBC output I missed Question Time entirely so when Rachel Bull stomping on Mary Bull made the news I thought I’d check it out by searching on on bbc.co.uk to watch either the highlights or the full episode.
“Rachel Bull” produced no results.
“Mary Beard” produced “Mary Beard: ‘Life still left’ in high street shopping” – A highlight from the right Question Time but talking drivel about HMV.
No results by any search I could think of would take me to ANYTHING relating directly to this story from the search on bbc.co.uk.
John, it’s freely available on bbc i-player.
I have viewed the whole show there. However they dont stay available for long!
You are missing the point. Mary Beards opinion on HMV is news but her opinion on immigration being utterly trashed by Rachel Bulls reality isn’t?
The clip I first saw was on Youtube. Finding the full version meant cross referencing the dates to find the right show. PITA.
Well said sir!
I know the BBC just loved to pull up their 1983 “Nationwide” pre-election piece where Diana Gould( CND lefty, granny etc) was said to have “ambushed” Mrs Thatcher over the sinking of the Belgrano.
That Thatcher was proved to be largely right-and Gould to be a stooge of Greenham Common proportion-was not, has not and nevel will now be addressed.
Gould dined out on this “stickin` it to Thath” stuff until she died…and the BBC needed no excuse to show it ever since…and , no doubt: it`s all ready for when Mrs Thatchers legacy becomes newsworthy for the wrong reasons.
Just like those pics of her with Savile.
Now then-will “Beards bearding” become a stickin` it to the feminist, belfry-baying , old bat who talks crap-but with words like Stephen Frys granny might be able to read from a script?
Will Bulls sinking of Belgrano Beard ever be stocked as archive gold for stickin` it to lefty clots with flat pack thinking?
Need I ask?
I hope Bull ushers in our Tunisian revolution against the permit monkeys of academe and the Guardian /BBC…
‘Need I ask?’
The BBC does have ‘form’ for what makes it onto air, stays on air and gets hoiked off. Depending.
Oddly, over the last few months, this URL was ‘unavailable’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/helen-boaden-director-of-bbc-news-at-the-lse
Now it is back.
Given the person it featured, what she was up to her neck in, and the circumstances behind the modding, quite why it was removed ‘by accident’ during this period, who knows?
I saw the QT in question and almost felt sorry for Mary Beard. Without an auto-cue and away from her comfort zone, ie talking about events hundreds of years ago, she appeared vague and rambling. Of course the usual audience members applauded every nonsensical sentence she spouted like performing seals. However, I would think most sane people thought she was talking cliched, uninformed, left wing clap-trap.
I will watch the odd BBC4 documentary. They do some programmes rather well, even if I admit it with gritted teeth.
But whenever that horrible old hag is presenting something about the Romans it makes me sick just looking at her.
Her lefty perspective makes her blind to what’s going on in the present, so I’m going to go right ahead and assume it’s colouring her view of history to the same degree, therefore making her just as rubbish at that as well.
The difference being she can be as wrong as she likes over history, virtually no one cares and no one makes policy on the basis of it. But when she wants to come spout over real world stuff, like what its like to live in Boston, she should STFU or at the very least visit the place.
Her leftie political viewpoint does colour her view of history.
Her series “Meet The Romans” ticked ALL the Beebs PC boxes. She actually stated that the Roman Empire was a beacon of multiculturalism with the way it allowed foreigners to be Roman citizens. What a load of revisionist cobblers! Indeed, the Romans did allows foreigners to become citizens, but they had to live by Roman Law and custom and adopt Roman ways. Conquered peoples were invited to adopt the Roman way of life and all its benefits – which included military protection from hostile tribes and nations, or be slaughtered. This was done to extend and pacify troublesome borders which then kept conflict well away from Rome itself (Yes I know Rome descended into a number of civil wars and were also given a bloody nose by the Carthaginians in the first two Punic Wars).
However, the Roman system of citizenship was hardly the definition of British multiculturalism as we know it where immigrant culture and custom is celebrated at the expense, and in some cases outlawing, of indigenous culture.
The late historian Michael Grant once wrote that any worthy historian must record historical fact objectively without imposing his or her personal prejudices on their subject.
Mary Beard is definitely not worthy of the title “historian”. She’s just a left wing re-interpreter of history giving a 21st century spin on the lives of the Ancients.
Orwell would have had a field day with the likes of Beard:
‘The past was erased. The erasure was forgotten. The lie became the truth’.
A good place to start at 23 minutes-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01q0hqx/Question_Time_17_01_2013/
Beardy drones on and on, sounding clever but obviously not in touch with reality.
However, Farage comes up with a rather salient point at 29 minutes.
Well worth watching. A couple of things I noted:
The look of impatience or irritation on Beard’s face when confronted with inconvenient facts.
Dimbleby’s smart arse question about why Brits aren’t prepeared to pick cabbages for 50p/hour (or whatever it is).
The middle class twit who, typically, thought that “diversity” was all about German cars and a nice choice of restaurants.
And lastly, how do restaurants, Chinese televisions, German cars, and cabbage picking by Poles justify the mayhem caused by certain other immigrants in certain parts of the UK?
The Rachel Bull comment is on YouTube
Unite Against Fascism video.
So they are saying she’s a fascist. They even slyly put a swastika in at the end to make sure you get the message.
David Cameron is a signatory of that (violent) organisation.
She is white, therefore, according to UAF, she is a evil ‘waaycist ‘ bigot and nazi.
You can not reason, discuss or argue with the Left, it’s a mental illness.
What a coincidence that a certain town is mentioned here :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01q1g11/
You have to read a long way down before it mentions immigration, and even that reads as ‘Slight possibility that Pope may be Catholic.”
Oops sorry that link shoould be here :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21120593
“Other “hotspots” include Bournemouth, Boston in Lincolnshire , the London borough of Barking and Dagenham, Slough and Norwich (48%), Peterborough, Watford, Southampton, and Bristol, says the RCM’s report called The State of Maternity Services.”
Beard = fail!
All outside Zone 3 so not on the BBC radar screen
To be fair to Prof Beard she probably rarely goes out beyond Newham College’s rather lovely grounds to mix in the world of men. She certainly won’t have been down Boston High Street.
What horrors she must have to close her mind to, poor dear.
As a resident of the delightful town of Watford, I can tell you where the rise in births is coming from….something that might just trouble Ms. Beard.
Hint: they are not little white babies.
I heard this on BBC Radio Manchester this morning; not a mention of immigration though. For the beeb it’s the lack of midwives that’s the problem rather than the uncontrolled immigration stretching maternity services to their limit.
Same as its the lack of houses, shortage of school places, shortage of jobs – nonne of it affected in any way by mass immigration!
Don’t forget the up and coming hose pipe bans in the South East this Spring.
Not down to having far too many people washing and drinking – must be down to global warming or summink?
The BBC view is if it were not for mass immigration the maternity services would not be able to get staff.
While the watching the Beardy Wierdy on a rerun snippet from You Tube, despite the overwhelming sensation of boiling piss welling within my loins, my first thoughts were of Basil Fawlty in hospital when he said to the nurse “My God, you’re ugly, aren’t you”.
I thought I had seen all Fawlty episodes,, don’t remember that scene?
I could not resist..
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3ZnzK1Ax0?feature=player_detailpage&w=640&h=360%5D
Beard reminds me of the crazy cat woman in The Simpsons.
She also reminds me of Cardew Robinson in Carry on up the Khyber.
Fakir Off.
Doesnt link?
Btw this bloody i pad screenloaded input k board is making me into crabtree the gendarme off alo alo
I feel for you bro.
shhh…don’t mention the war ;0)
From The Germans episode, right at the beginning when Basil is in hospital.
Thank you mr notasheep! Itnow dawns on me he has the bandage around his head.
Cheers!
Pity you find her appearance relevant, when there are plenty of SOUND reasons to disparage this silly woman. 🙁
Tend to agree.
But in the spirit of of #2rights I have to wonder why comments on a niche blog (where ‘robust’ teasing is a given, often) gets the full high horse, but when a rather broad spectrum of national broadcast treasure comedic talent errs on the personal in passing, an entire Graun issue can be filled with CiFfers extolling the virtues of getting a life.
Another of those uniques the BBC enjoys, I guess.
Don’t feel upset, I promise you I despise everything this woman says and believes in, I wouldn’t piss on her if she was on fire.
There will be plenty of people bashing away at their keyboards typing the old ‘predictable’ reasons for loathing this lobotomized dog turd in drag. I just thought I brighten everyone’s day with a little bit of Basil Fawlty.
On a serious note, if we don’t raise this issue now, TV will be over run with ugly people and I don’t pay my telly tax to look at ugly people in the evening.
Thanks for sharing that Scooby.
A real corker.
I somehow think I’d prefer M/s Beard’s company than yours.
Don’t fret Hippie, for people like you there’s always radio.
I always assumed, given her subject matter, that she modeled herself on Senna the soothsayer from ‘Up Pompeii’:
http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Senna_the_Soothsayer.gif
I accept it is slightly mean to go on about Beard’s looks and not every TV person has to be telegenic. But it’s her arrogant airy dismissal of little people’s concerns, (look the EU brought you clean beaches!) and the agitprop of her TV programmes (Rome was a multi-cultural paradise spoilt by lax building regulations etc) that somehow does very little to enhance her appearance.
I always thought that the Roman Empire was many things but certainly not multi-culti, it had many people in it from all over the world but every “free” person was a Roman first and foremost as they understood that they could only survive by having a populous that swore allegiance to Rome above all other things; it was arguably one of the reasons that they needed a relatively small army in a lot of countries as once the people were “Roman” there was a reduced chance of rebellion….
Mind you, we Brits were such a cantankerous lot even then, lol.
I heard Ceasar wouldn’t go anywhere without his Ethnic Outreach Worker.
Just to be pedantic.
The Roman Empire was very much a multi-cultural empire – it could never have been anything else given the variety of cultures the Roman sandal trod upon. It was not however the mealy-mouthed and devisive policy of the left in the UK. There was one over-arching culture and that was Roman. All other cultures within the empire were subserviant to that.
The Romans insisted that to be Roman citizen was a privilege to be earned and not one granted by mere conquest. Even the Italians had to earn full citizenship. Most didn’t need to so didn’t bother.
As to Romes armies of occupation, well, with the exception of the Greeks, the people conquered by the Romans were being conquered by a people with a civilisation far in advance of their own. Their leaders were either bought off or killed. What did they gain from rebellion?
As to what did the Romans do for them? Cue Monty Python …
I agree.
Whilst the Roman Empire was entirely ‘multi-cultural’ to its very core it had a very pronounced set of fundamental civic values., or more specifically ‘virtues’ The Roman way was clearly the best as far as the Romans were concerned. They were Multi-cu;ltural in the way that most people in Britain understand the term, tolerant and welcoming of other views and practices. Unfortunately this is NOT multi-culturalism as espoused by the Neo-Puritan left and as practiced by the pusillanimous West today.
The Lefts’ wicked policy of multi-culturalism is specifically one of social and cultural relativism where all cultures are of the same value (so long as their behaviour conforms with leftist orthodox litany. It may be OK to insist that women should not show their faces in case this incites rape, but just try to impose a fundamentalist christian view on hotel guests and see how long you are ‘tolerated’ and ‘celebrated’ all the way to chokey). A hypothetical example of MC in operation would be if someone wanted to kill a goat in line with their cultural preferences by cutting its throat over the drain by the end of your drive you should have no grounds to complain as this act is a valid as an expression of cultural identity (I guess that the public health laws may intervene though).
Multi culturalism therefore creates lots of sepatate (“but equal” – where have we heard that before?) enclaves. It is a blatant manifestation of Marxist identity politics – there is no working class any more lets have some new classes – and it is quite literally balkanising Britain, Holland, Sweden, Norway, France etc.
It is a fantastic success of course – and celebrated ‘officially’ in France by the ritual burning of a couple of thousand cars every new years (not that this is reported by the BBC)
Yup. As I have said many time on here Multi-Culturism is just another form of ‘divide and conquer’.
All together now;
[sham69] ‘If the kids are united they will never be divided'[/sham69\] 🙂
Sham 69 – what a load of ….
Beware Rachel Bull. You are now a target. You will be derided and scorned and laughed at by the News Quiz team. You be sneered at by Sandi Tosvig and Jeremy hardy. You will be Palinized and Bush whacked. You had better be ready.
But Bravo! It was a great moment watching the panelists – and Dimblebore himself – stunned by a note of reality in the echo chamber of the left. You could almost hear them thinking, “How did she get in?”
Boston is in the Look North area with Peter Levy. He reported that the birth rate in Boston is the highest in the country – no reason – end of report. (I assume this is what other other posters here were mentioning but were too polite to spell it out).
You mean Boston Spa.
No – Boston, Lincolnshire
Today on Radio 4 today : censorship by topic avoidance x 2 : *1. much angsting over why the national birth rate has rocketed, with the Chief Midwife … why oh why ? quel mystere, etc … the answer was not touched on. *2. much yapping with the Govt’s Foresight Unit … looking ahead for the nation etc … pre empting promlems … immigration ignored again …
Is there any way to follow up on this? What I mean is, because there’s no evidence that Mary Beard, Dimbleby, the QT producers, or any of the other dedicated multiculturalists at the BBC came away with any thought other than, “Who let in this bigoted woman”, is there a way to follow up with Beard and/or the BBC to force them to continue the conversation, to hold her and them to account for what they say and believe?
Beard and the BBC will get away with this as it’s a one-off, quickly swept under the rug and forgotten. She’ll be back on Today or one of Will Self’s brilliant new schemes on Radio 4 or some such, talking about something else entirely, as if this massive faux pas and direct insult to the majority of the population never happened. Like a Conservative politician who made one error decades ago, her face should be rubbed into it every time she’s on air.
Is there a way to start a campaign or petition or something to continue this argument? That’s the only way the BBC is going to be held to account for this sort of thing. I know Prof. Beard is not a BBC employee or management, and she was speaking her own views, not as a representative of the BBC. But we know from BBC output that they all hold the same approved thoughts on the issue that she does, and it would ultimately force the Beeboids to address the issue in a real way. Until now, they mostly get away with framing the debate in terms of everyone on the side of multiculturalism is with the angels (you need the workforce to grow the economy, diversity is strength, blah, blah) standing up against the stock villains of the EDL and occasionally UKIP. Just like with Mardell’s belief regarding opposition to the President’s policies, Beard and the BBC feel that racism must be the only possible reason behind Mrs. Bull’s objection to what’s happened to her high street. One has only to remember the way the BBC handled the aftermath of Mrs. Duffy saying pretty much the same thing to Gordon Brown. He was right: she was pretty much a racist little-Englander, and his only error was saying it over an open mic right before an election.
Beard’s rambling revealed the intellectual vacuum on this issue, so how to follow up on it?
Enough now of the Bearded Lady.
I see The Arrogant Great One has been inaugurated again today, with 500,000 devout followers in humble attendance. Turned over from Sky because of the wall to wall coverage to find someone on BBC News referring to the Great Pretender as being aloof and unable to work with the Congress or the Senate. The other presenter was of course desperate to find excuses for The Smug Almighty, suggesting that perhaps it was just a little bit of intolerance towards the tiresome procedures he has to undergo to get things done. “GET THING DONE?” The man is spelling the end of capitalism for the USA and the good folk are following him like lemmings over the precipice. Oh boy, he is getting things done OK!
Anyway, I double checked my channel and yes I was really on BBC News. So, was this a modern-day miracle of media maleficence (a cock up) that I witnessed or was I just in deep day time sleep mode? Something I am prevalent to at my age. Or is the BBC now allowing other opinions to surface? It was a worrying moment I can tell you. Is this blog now for nought or is this sort of thing on the rise. OMG what will happen next?
Will the Cameroon allow us an opt out of the European cess pit?
Will Global Warming aficionados and their proven science be given a good slap?
Will the winter ever end?
Signed,
Disaffected of Daventry.
No need to check the channel. The sycophancy and dedicated defense of The Obamessiah should have told you it was BBC News.
BBC Journalists: Shame He has to deal with the tedious machinations of representative democracy in a constitutional republic, eh? Pity about that silly checks & balances stuff. If only He was able to rule as a King for a little while, as He so rightly deserves……
Indeed. Terrible overkill on the coverage and what banal pap too: primary school patriotic 101.
Indeed : a weasel speech by a chilling and mediocre bureaucrat …
Had the misfortune to watch CNN’s fawning over the Obama Inauguration> Katty Perry (squeal!) Usher! (Who?) The cast of Glee!!! Vomit. The first lady, Michele, she’s so elegant witty intelligent! The woman interviewed almost orgasmed over The One -“special thanks to Women and Latinos who helped him get re-elected” unquote, barefaced. If you think the bBC is bad, try a dose of theUS Lamestream.
CNN has Piers Morgan. Say no more.
If individuals on this site could pester the BBC. for answers , it would be a start., There is not an option to do nothing! Writng letters and demanding replys, getting MP’s involved if BBC delay responses, getting the BBC to work hard giving answers, causing them to employ more people to answer letters,it could make a difference.
How about a competition here to publicise the best and worst answers from the BBC. Then we can see if there is progress. Giving them information they are not aware of is also important so that their employees at the complaints department can know how biased they are. This could help as well.
‘How about a competition here to publicise the best and worst answers from the BBC. ‘
Sue suggested something of the sort.
I was all for it, but felt it needed a sidebar as their answers can err on the epic, as they use attrition above all else to get an early termination.
The irony is when they pull the plug anyway, claiming protracted exchanges cost the licence fee payer money, and them having to reply to detailed counters to their sending the entire editors’ guidelines as no replies to valid complaints is not the best use of their time.
The employees know exactly what they are part of, which is why few stay the course very long below unaccountable Director level where the money is too good not to lie for the team straight-faced.
David Preiser:”Is there any way to follow up on this?”
Ouch….damn you Preiser I just fell off my chair laughing.
People have been telling their MPs what Sarah Bull said on QT for years but the spineless reptiles are too worried about getting pushed off the gravy train to do anything meaningful about it.
If you wrote to the BBC, assuming they deigned to reply it would be a standard letter full of the same old pish.
If you wrote to another TV channel, they would probably get confused as they don’t normally get letters.
If you wanted write to the radio channels you’d be out of luck as it’s dominated by the BBC but if you wrote to the independent stations they’d probably be too afraid of loosing their sponsors to take any notice.
And if you stood outside and made some sort of protest, you’d better be ready to take on the UAF thugs.
Quote:”That’s the only way the BBC is going to be held to account for this sort of thing”
Owww, bugger…there I go again Dave…. has the Saville affair taught you nothing?
Compare the coverage given over to the BBC’s roll in the Saville scandal vs coverage given to the rest of the media when they got caught out listening to a few answer machine messages, something that everybody either knew about of should have figured out for themselves given the nature of our press. As far as the BBC are concerned Saville has virtually been swept under the carpet and it’s now the turn of some ex-celebs who are taking flack from a few disgruntled groupies whose affections were rebuffed 20+ years ago. All the BBC have to do now is hand over a load of telly tax cash to the victims, conduct an investigation purely for PR purposes and carry on as normal. Compensation should be paid out from the BBC pension fund…but I digress.
In short, for all intents and purposes the liberal left dominate the mainstream media when it comes to voicing public opinion. I suspect that a lot of avid readers of this website have had opinions formed by the left without even realizing – an interesting experiment maybe to try and avoid the BBC altogether for a few months then come back to it to see just how much left wing liberal bias creeps almost into everything on the BBC, not just what crops up on this blog.
‘If you wrote to the BBC, assuming they deigned to reply it would be a standard letter full of the same old pish.’
Indeed.
But it’s what I have found can score on the same attrition basis they use.
Trouble being they are paid for it.
However the political classes have shown their ineptitude, venality or plain bovine ignorance on anything so far, and given what’s been handed them and as you say slickly passed off on ‘others’, such a chance seems unlikely.
Well until the consequences of having zero accountability work their magic again and the next howler sees another raft of idiots promoted sideways and paid quadruple.
If you’re not interested in starting a campaign, and are happy to roll over and take it from the BBC, just say so.
As you can see the BBC machine has revved up about the “vile abuse” suffered by Mary Beard!
Paul Lewis@paullewismoney
The wonderful @wmarybeard on @BBCWomansHour explaining the vile abuse she has had and her response to it. Listen now or podcast later
The Pro doesnt seem to care too much what people think of her appearance:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/9240667/Mary-Beard-I-wont-lose-sleep-over-Samantha-Brick-insults.html
The below is interesting though, some of you might recognise yourselves:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jan/21/mary-beard-suffers-twitter-abuse
Clearly she doesn’t care too much about her own appearance either.
She does invite ridicule with her appearance which I would guess is part of the image she has cultivated for herself. Just a rug re-think would make a massive difference.
‘The Pro’
Not sure, given there is no character limit here to constrain full text editorial as there is with the world’s most trusted news monopoly, whether that contraction is the best that could have been used in the circumstances.
Especially when getting all-inclusive on a thread you are part of too.
What’s all this about Sylvia Plath ?
I was wondering today if this was an unprecedented level of arse kissing by the BBc regarding Obama’s inauguration so i did a couple of quick google searches…
http://tinyurl.com/b2zgsy7
http://tinyurl.com/af5hk79
Draw your own conclusions, but at least I’m more confident that it’s not my imagination fuelled by too much time here.
Defenders of the indefensible: EDL! EDL! You’re mean ’cause you insulted someone’s appearance! ZZZZzzzzzzz
At least BBC-NUJ now has this:
“Boston immigration levels to be discussed in Parliament”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-21157749?
Peter Hitchens had this in 2011:-
“Boston Lincolngrad: Peter Hitchens investigates the troubling transformation of a sleepy English town after mass immigration from Eastern Europe”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037877/Boston-Lincolngrad-The-strange-transformation-sleepy-English-town.html
The BBC is making it out to be a problem caused only by the Recession. If not for the nasty Tory Cutz, there’d be plenty of money to go round and social services wouldn’t be squeezed. Unfettered immigration and a free ride for all isn’t anything to worry about, really.
Still, it’s nice to see that one single individual can speak out and get a positive reaction. Not that anything will necessarily come of it, mind. But the Beeboids must be aghast at how they let a bigoted audience member speak out, leading to this anti-immigration discussion going in Parliament. Dimbleby will have to be more careful in future.
Mary Beard is a historian with a history of taking the ‘alternative’ view (the orthodox mainstream view which has such power in the academic world.) This is Mary Beard’s interpretation of the terrorist atrocities of 9/11, published in the ‘London Review of Books’ (Vol. 23 No. 19, 4 October, 2001). A brief summary, for those who are tired of reading about the political views of people like Mary Beard: the United States had it coming. We refused to listen to what the terrorists have to say. For other readers, this is is the full version, Mary Beard’s actual words (or, as she might put it, as a Latin scholar, her ‘ipsissima verba’) Mary Beard should stick to Latin and the Romans, although she’s disgraced herself sometimes in her academic speciality. She writes,
‘ … when the shock had faded, more hard-headed reaction set in. This wasn’t just the feeling that, however tactfully you dress it up, the United States had it coming. That is, of course, what many people openly or privately think. World bullies, even if their heart is in the right place, will in the end pay the price.
‘But there is also the feeling that all the ‘civilised world’ (a phrase which Western leaders seem able to use without a trace of irony) is paying the price for its glib definitions of ‘terrorism’ and its refusal to listen to what the ‘terrorists’ have to say. ‘