Britblog roundup #169

Britblog roundup #169 is now up at Redemption Blues.

The next one’s being hosted by ackart of A Very British Dude. As always, nominations should be sent to britblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Tits and cocks at the RSPB

The RSPB’s website runs censoring software: You’re not allowed to say cocks, but tits are alright, apparently.

On a similar note, the BBC’s running the story that Great tits cope well with warming.

(via Liberal England)

A platform for the BNP

Adam Bienkov thinks that the policy of “no platform for the BNP” is a mistaken one, because when they’re given a platform and allowed to speak for themselves, they tend to show themselves in a light that isn’t at all appealing:

I have always thought that the ‘no-platform’ approach is wrong. To deny the far-right a voice is to give them a status that they do not deserve.

But as it is, the vast majority of the almost 200,000 people that gave Barnbrook a first or second preference vote, have never seen him speak in public. For these voters, the fact that their man has seemingly been hidden by the media, will only have hardened his appeal.

Now if over the past few months Barnbrook had instead occupied the seat of Lindsey German at the various hustings and TV appearances, then his appeal could have been dramatically reduced. Rather than being seen as the maverick outsider speaking for the ’silent majority,’ Barnbrook would have been exposed as the racist loudmouth that he is.

Unfortunately, the media enabled Barnbrook and the BNP to pose as victims of a vast conspiracy intent on hiding and destroying them.

He posts a YouTube video of Richard Barnbrook, the BNP’s candidate for London Mayor, demonstrating the man’s utter lack of charm or credibility. See it here.

Britblog roundup #168

Britblog roundup #168 is now up at Liberal England.

Next week’s BBRU will be hosted by Chameleon at Redemption Blues. Nominations should go to britblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Britblog roundup #167

Welcome to this week’s roundup of all that’s best in British blogging!

Sport

We start off with a sporting link from Norfolk Blogger: Why England didn’t qualify for Euro 2008. Here’s an excerpt:

A wall is not a difficult thing to kick. A wall does not move and is a pretty large target. What highlights our problems as a footballing nation is that Rio Ferdinand apparently missed the wall (presumably it jumped out of the way) and instead he kicked a female Chelsea steward.

History

We have a few posts relating to the reformation in one way or another…

Natalie Bennett has a post up about women’s lives during the dark ages, in particular about how women did work for the church. The late middle ages were a time when most people’s leisure and social activities (an many people’s working lives) were bound up with the church, and the reformation, which ended or modified a lot of these links, must have seemed a revolution at the time.

One thing that wasn’t killed off by the reformation was St George’s Day which this year for the first time ever was a bank holiday. Greenman and Diamond Geezer celebrate it in different ways.

Philip Wilkinson recently visited Launde Abbey in Leicestershire. During the reformation, when Henry VIII abolished the monastries, his henchman Thomas Cromwell bagged it for himself. Reminds me of Mugabe’s land seizures in Zimbabwe. Plus ça change…

Crime and punishment

PC Bloggs recounts the career of Judge Julian Hall who has made a number of questionable statements — although to be honest I thought most of the judge’s comments were reasonable — but not this one:

August 2007: Two years for a child rapist because she “dressed provocatively”. How provocative can a 10yr old really be?

I disagree with PC Bloggs when she says this:

March 2008: He jails a woman for a year who lied about a rape allegation. He also denounces her as “evil” and says she has let down “womankind”. Slightly different language than that used to describe the child rapists and pornographers he has discharged from his court on previous occasions, no?

The bit about letting down womankind is obviously absurd, since no one person can be held responsible for the reputation of the entire group of people with similarly-configured genitals as themselves. But anyone who makes false allegations is in my opinion committing a very serious crime, one at least as serious as the allegations they are making of others, because they are offending against the legal system itself.

Meanwhile, Bystander at The Magistrate’s Blog recounts this master criminal:

A man was stopped for money laundering after a dog detected a million of our English pounds in a bag that was on its way to the Middle East. So far, so average. But the smuggler had checked the bag in as hold baggage: given the combined track record of airport loaders and airport baggage handling systems (T5 anyone?) would you entrust a million quid, even a million dodgy quids, to airport check in?

Society

The British apparently care more about donkeys than abused women, says Louise Livesey, who notes the amounts given to different charities:

The 200 biggest charities working with abused women or campaigning against abuse received a total of £97 million funding (all sources). This is contrasted with £110 million for the RSPCA and £149 million for the Lifeboats.

The Thirteenth Carnival of Radical Feminists is up at Shut Up, Sit Down. One bit that caught my attention (though possibly not for the reason the author had in mind) was this:

There is nothing immoral about eating something that tastes good, even if it does become apparent that you’ve done so after the fact. There is nothing ethically unsound about nachos (they make vegan ones, you know). What’s ethically objectionable is harming your health and removing all the joy from your life in order to increase the number of Coors Light drinkers who want to pork you.

Quite right too! The ignominy of being lusted after by people with crap taste in beer!

Simon Bellwood writes about his whistle-blowing at Greenfields secure centre in Jersey.

Earthpal gets nostalgic about the teachers’ strike:

Yes, a real-life proper strike. How retro does that seem? Remember those glorious days of industrial action and picket lines and angry workers shoving placards into car windows and shouting things like scab! scab! at anyone who crossed the picket line . . . days of trade-union power and militant solidarity and passionate working class heroes?

Gavin Whenman writes about the OGC’s striking new logo. Personally I think the agency who designed it are a bunch of wankers.

Politics

Jim Jay is concerned that the BNP may win a seat or two in the London Assembly elections:

But it is the BNP who are the real threat here. With 5% of the vote the BNP could gain the highest profile political position that they’ve ever had but, worse, with a touch more they could win two seats on the assembly which would notonly be disastrous in the fight against fascism but could also have a significant impact on the direction the Assembly takes over the next four years.

However, fortunately the far-right vote may be split several ways:

In this sense it is very good news that the BNP have four main rivals for their detestable affections, not including the single issue anti-congestion charge grouping who may also steal some of the BNP’s potential vote.

Jonathan Calder has his Lord Bonkers column up.

Bill Jones notes that Gordon Brown has climbed down over the 10% tax band, but thinks he could have done it more gracefully:

Brown would have done better to admit that he just got it wrong rather than keep on that he had not reneged on his determination to abolish the 10p band. But the question remains, how come he missed the significance of the measure to 5.3 million of the poorest people in the country?

Ministry of Truth writes about the EU’s transnational regions. Yes, they are rather artificial and silly. No, they are not a sinister plot to abolish England.

And that’s all for this week! Hope you enjoyed it. Next week’s Britblog roundup will be by Jonathan Calder at Liberal England; nominations should go to the usual address, britblog at gmail dot com, unless you’re a spammer, in which case you should ritually disembowel yourself.

Britblog roundup #166

Britblog roundup number 166 is now up at Mr Eugenides.

I’m hosting next week’s Britblog roundup; nominations should go to the usual address, britblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Mr Eugenides on psychics

This is good:

Was there ever a more transparently fraudulent money-making scheme than the “psychic industry”? Most of the psychics I am [dimly] aware of operate out of tiny fleapits in run-down shopping arcades, or do guest readings in the upstairs rooms of Edinburgh pubs between 1pm and 4pm on weekday afternoons. If I had the gift of second sight, you can be fucking sure I wouldn’t be reading people’s palms in the Felcher and Firkin for a fiver a time; I’d be making thousands of pounds an hour on Betfair from the balcony of my villa in the Seychelles, watching a naked girl try to mix a pina colada with her free hand. No, wait; two naked girls.

Britblog roundup #165

Britblog roundup number 165 is now up at The Wardman Wire.

Next week’s Britblog roundup will be hosted by Mr Eugenides, and nominations should go to the usual address, britblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Britblog roundup #163

Britblog roundup number 163 is now up at Philiobiblon.

Next week’s Britblog roundup will be hosted by Westminster Wisdom, and nominations should go to the usual address, britblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Why should religion get a free ride?

Chris Dillow notes that Gordon Brown is privileging religion:

What is a conscience? This is the question Brown opened when he said that “exercising your conscience will mean for Labour Party members a free vote” on parts of the embryology bill.

But, as Janine asks, why should conscience only permit a free vote here? To take just one example, many Labour MPs consciences might - or should - stop them wanting to put people in jail for 42 days without charge. But there’s little hope of a free vote on the Counter Terrorism bill.

What Brown means by “conscience”, then, is “religious belief.” Which raises the question: why should religious beliefs have a special status in politics that allows MPs free votes when they don’t get them on other grounds?

Why should religion be privileged above other belief systems? Dillow says it shouldn’t be. I go further than that: religious beliefs should be accorded less respect, less status, than for example secular liberal beliefs.

There are about 6 billion people in the world, and about 100 million of them die every year. Most of these people die of diseases, many (or all) of which could be curable over time with medical research. So medical research saves lives, and being against medical research — which opponents of the embryology bill are — kills people. Hitler only killed 50 million or so; these people want 100 million potentially preventable deaths to happen every year.

Most of the religious people who oppose the embryology bill are I suppose in their private lives good and decent people; certainly the vast majority don’t personally go round killing people. Which leads me to the conclusion that although good people do good things, and bad people do bad things, it takes religion to make good people do bad things.