Haha, yeah, he's a character. He gets a lot of stick but he's so over-the-top with the insults that in a way, it's hard for people to get too offended as you can't take it too seriously. I stay out of the mobbing being a peaceable sort and just watch...
Ey there were that. However - what a bonus - have once again increased my vocabulary. I shall be ever indebted to PB for finding and using the word 'Slattern'. Such a despicable word to use on somebody one does not know.
From http://www.urbandictionary.com
slattern: slut whore skank ho tart floozy prostitute trollop tramp hussy wench woman strumpet bitch slag harlot sleaze britney spears skeev slapper
I read a story once where the Royal Astronomer, unaware that his eyesight is failing, starts to get all worked up because the stars are fading; it's meant to be a warning about looking back at mythical golden eras etc..it's a useful corrective in many cases but it's become a bit of a truism that nostalgia and memory always have a tendency to airbrush and edit to the past's advantage. I think people possibly subconsciously pay too much lip-service to this phenomenon when examining the past...loads of things are just absolutely shite these days in comparison with the past but anyone saying so will inevitably be hit with a barrage of seemingly germane quantitative data suggesting otherwise; quite missing the point that in a qualitative sense, a lot of stuff was just so much better.
Football is a case in point. There's a piece on cif celebrating increased diversity at football grounds...there are probably also figures proving how much safer, less 'intimidatory', more hygenic...there's probably more consumer choice involved and I bet all the stewards have had a CRB check...whatever..it's shit these days...I know the players are bigger, fitter, faster, stronger, eat better...all that stuff...but it's shit..the game's shit, the atmosphere is shit..if you like "the whole inclusive experience" is just fuckin shit...anyone with any sort of data suggesting otherwise is talking shit.
Chelsea weren't even a team you'd think, worry or care about...most of the time, they were second division...Newcastle were pulling in 5000 at home...football specials..chips and gravy...terraces..heaven
I've got no issue with increased diversity, safety..blah...but it rather misses the point when the game's gone shit
Other things that are shit..
Pubs Chips Coronation Street CIF Books about vampires Unions World Heavyweight Champions
Things that have improved..just to show I'm not victim of any Royal Astronomer syndrome
Technology Pies..seriously..you used to get some fuckin rank pies Shoes Take aways Power Tools
Good call monkey. Other things that have gone downhill a bit
- Music - cars... ok, safer, but look more and more the same - beer
Things that are about to go seriously downhill... Hospitals, Education, Libraries, roads, policing, welfare, the arts, aqueducts, everything, basically...
Just to try and be cheery... other things that have improved... - Sundays - being able to buy continental foodie delights at your local Tescos - internet shopping (Though cancelled out a bit by the delivery thing)
One of the most overused phrases in my roving food-critic narrative is "these aren't chips".
In the past year, I've had little matchstick efforts which are a blend of salt and deep fried edible fluff
I've been to chip shops which use oil which is never hot enough and they come out kinda broiled in grease
I even had some (six..to be precise) big chunky, 'artisan', 'hand crafted' 'chips' arranged symmetrically like a fuckin megalithic sacrificial altar...I still had my 'what-the-fuck?' face on when the waiter asked me if I wanted any ketchup...and I got some weird looks all round when I told him: "no, just a virgin and a stone axe thanks"
Don't try telling me that it's all in my head..that I'm looking back through a rose-tinted prism...it's real..chips are shit these days.
Just a quickie as I am at work, not idling around like yesterday. But I have to mention something about that song at the top.
Not long after it was being used as an advert I got involved in a campaign to help workers for Coca Cola in Guatamala who were trying to unionise. The franchisee of Coke had hired thugs and they kidnapped, tortured and killed the guys that were trying to organise the union.
But here is the thing. One of the things that they did as a little extra flourish was to cut the tongues out of the union guys they killed and stick them in their lapel pockets. It was a little sign to say shut up with this union shit.
I always thought it was ironic. I mean, how the fuck do you sing with your tongue cut out?
I didn't think that last night was so bad - most of the abuse was pretty good natured (well I don't know about Peter's ravings...), and I don't think anyone got too offended (apart from Peter maybe?).
A pretty good advert for zero moderation really - if the debate is left alone, sooner or later it sorts itself out. Even Peter's fury was ignited by the moderation on CIF, rather than anything here.
Heavy-handed moderation just makes angry people angrier. I know - I've been where Peter was last night, though my rage was directed by email at CIF editors and moderators, rather than in a public forum. I can't help thinking that most of the friction between UT and CIF posters stems from past moderating decisions, rather than any current topic.
Would people keep returning to CIF under new names if they weren't banned?
I've been in pre-mod for over two months now, and I don't even know why. I've posted only sporadically since, but have now stopped completely because only about 30% of my (carefully inoffensive) posts ever got through. Most just failed to ever see the light of day - and for no apparent reason. It seems to me that the purpose of pre-mod is simply to stop awkward posters commenting, whilst avoiding the problems that might arise if Cif banned them. It's pointless, since if someone really wants to post, then they'll just return under a new name and the pre-mod vanishes. Until the next time, and the next, and the next....
monkeyfish - the range and low price of reasonable power tools is awesome. What needed a £500+ Hilti before I can do with a 26 Euro Chinese drill. Granite around here.
Just got back from 35 minutes with the local notaire (solicitor) gettting advice for a friend transfering property . Do you pay for that in UK ?
For the first time I looked at the whole range in the newsagents. Forgetting the german, dutch, and the Herald Tribune, everything from the FT down to the Daily Star , except the Guardian ! Top sale year-round is the Mail, closely followed by Torygraph, the Times,then a very few Suns and Stars. In summer she sells a lot of Suns and Stars.
I bought yesterday's Mail . hehe
PS maybe G readers are just more savvy, and all read on the net tho.
I think they'll still mourn the demise of religion and the traditional Sunday as they can't deposit their kids off at the local Sunday School for a few hours like they used to...
#I didn't think that last night was so bad - most of the abuse was pretty good natured (well I don't know about Peter's ravings...), and I don't think anyone got too offended (apart from Peter maybe?).#
It's a fairly well established principle...everyone loves a good row..especially people who pretend they don't..any time there's a good row on here or anywhere else, the comments go through the roof..and it gets funny...and it's worth reading
The saddest part of any such row is the odd poster who pops up desperate to establish a bit of kudos and assume a bit of gravity with a "can't we keep it civilised" routine...this tactic rarely works
First..it's actually plainly fuckin obvious that for all their "look at me..I'm a grown-up"..they were actually enjoying it as much as anyone else
Second..99 times out of 100, when said poster is told to loosen up and drop the coin from their arse, it turns out they get offended and join in anyway
Third..if it's hermione, it's just cos when things kick off she misses the limelight of being star-turn in the five-handed 'Good Old Days' Cabaret re-run show that waddaya has become
You've put your finger on the single biggest problem in CIF moderation - it only affects serious posters.
I have no wish to post anywhere under a different handle - I've been posting for about 6 years as exiledlondoner, and there is a history of thousands of posts which are easily attributed to me. Far from being anonymous, my username means far more online that my real name - it's my George Elliot or George Orwewll.
So for me being put in pre-mod, or being banned, represents a stop on my posting (you're right about pre-modded posts vanishing, or even worse, app[ear4ing hours later....).
However for others, it is little more than a minor inconvenience - recently I saw the same poster appear under 6 names in a single day. It's a troll's charter.....
The end result of weeding out serious posters (or at least those who care about the name they post under), and allowing trolls to reinvent themselves at will, should be obvious, even to Matt Seaton. It's already happening - hundreds of good posters have vanished, and most threads are dominated by new, unknown usernames.
Football is a case in point. There's a piece on cif celebrating increased diversity at football grounds...there are probably also figures proving how much safer, less 'intimidatory', more hygenic...there's probably more consumer choice involved and I bet all the stewards have had a CRB check...whatever..it's shit these days...I know the players are bigger, fitter, faster, stronger, eat better...all that stuff...but it's shit..the game's shit, the atmosphere is shit..if you like "the whole inclusive experience" is just fuckin shit...anyone with any sort of data suggesting otherwise is talking shit.
Amen, hallelujah and praise the word of the lord.
Celtic comprehensively gubbed last night by a second rate Dutch outfit.
When I was very young and starting to go to the games (80-81), Celtic were rubbish in Europe but we had Charlie Nicolas, Johnny Doyle, Tommy Burns, Danny Mcgrain, players you could identify with from the jungle.
Last night we were represented by blokes who've got the gig by their agents desperately sending around a pre season dvd of their clients best moments from all parts of the world.
We've replaced second rate Scottish diddies with second rate foreign diddies. Dire. Globalisation and football is shit.
At least when we used to fail miserably in Europe we were represented by players I could identify with. We now fail miserably with players who have all the feelings towards the club of an automaton.
I agree with most of what you say - most posters come unto talkboards for a bit of friction, though whether they can handle it or not is another matter.... The main exceptions are those who really believe they can change the world online, and who come here to pass on words of wisdom - they're the best of the lot.
Don't knock the "can't we keep it civilised" posters - they're as essaential to the dynamics of a good row as the abusive protagonists. There's nothing better to throw on the fire than an appeal for calm - they burn beautifully.
As for Hermoine - she's a fucking star, and I'll chin any cunt who says otherwise.
I couldn't agree more. Weren't all of the Lisbon Lions born within 5 miles of Park Head?
The London Clubs don't really have the same issues, as they've always had players from ourside their local areas, but it really becomes noticable at clubs like Celtic, Newcastle, Sunderland etc, who have a tradition of fielding local boys made good.
There's an article today on the Guardian about Wilf Mannion - Middlesborough legend and one-club hero. Nowadays he would end up in Manchester or London, and his replacement would be a Montenegran player bought from Seria B....
"As for Hermoine - she's a fucking star, and I'll chin any cunt who says otherwise."
Not bad..but "any cunt who says otherwise." is a bit vague..bit hit and miss...best way to get things kicked off is "Hey X..you're talking shite..you always talk shite..bit, bad, boring shite"...that cuts straight to the heart of the matter.
I'm not really a fight starter. I tend to be more of the other type of combatant you mentioned - the poster who appeals for calm, gets told to fuck off, and then wades in.
When I do start a row it's normally unintentional (honest) - I just keep badgering away at something until the toys come flying out of the pram. It worked a treat on CIF Watch - I never lost my temper once...
What I really miss is going to Old Trafford, confident of a win..and getting one...and still hearing some strutting little Manc announcing "yeah..but we're still the biggest club in the world".
I saw one of those David Attenbrough (I think) things once where a bunch of killer whales were ripping into a blue whale carcass..."yeah but I'm still the biggest animal in the world" he was no doubt consoling himself in whale Valhalla...problem these days is...that's all it takes..big enough is all it takes
If it weren't for Newcastle and their particularly comic and poignant "Aye but we're still a big club" mantra, I'd abandon hope and resign in the face of global capitalism.
Just notice Giyus is still up from last night...he is small town club that punches above its weight..he was always a kinda Wrexham from the late 70s and 80s but he's more a Villareal type now..the novelty value has gone and there's a bit of real substance these days..he's eating properly, training's going well and he's just taking things one game at a time
Not bad..but "any cunt who says otherwise." is a bit vague..bit hit and miss...best way to get things kicked off is "Hey X..you're talking shite..you always talk shite..bit, bad, boring shite"...that cuts straight to the heart of the matter.
To be fair, the vagueness has the upside that someone can just name people who may have had a go at Herms in the past, or just make some up frankly. Then sit back and watch the carnage...
You might play safe and try PB, since there probably isn't anyone he hasn't had a go at. But you never know...
I'm developing something of a soft spot for Mr Hoffman - the combination of swivel-eyed extremism and tourettes is certainly entertaining. His blogs at the JC are always worth a look, as he hurls abuse at anyone who dares to disagree with him.
Anyway, I'm posibbly the only person on earth who Jonathan Hoffman has declared not to be an anti-semite (he's not an anti-semite, but he is ......).
It reminded me of the old St Trinians film where Beryl Reid tells the court that she's the only one there who has a bit of paper to prove she's sane....
I have no wish to post anywhere under a different handle
I can understand that, exiled, but surely your message should be more important than the fact that it is you that is posting it?
Cif can be a bit of a personality cult where recognized posters get recommends and responses just because of the name and not the content of their comment. I've seen eg allyf get hundreds of recommends for posting 6th form drivel and excellent posts totally overlooked/ignored because they're not from a recognized poster.
An interesting Cif experiment would be to run a few threads where ALL the posts were 'anon' and then evaluate the reactions and recommends. I think quite a few Cif 'faves' would be unpleasantly surprised.
#‘One of the main claims of Enlightenment philosophy’, the writer Ian Buruma observes in Murder in Amsterdam, his meditation on the significance of the killing of Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh by a Moroccan Islamist, ‘is that its ideas based on reason are by definition universal. But the Enlightenment has a particular appeal to some . . . because its values are not just universal, but more importantly “ours”, that is European, Western values.’
Once the Enlightenment is turned into a weapon in the clash of civilizations rather than in the battle to define the values and attitudes necessary to advance political rights and social justice, then it becomes more a measure of tribal attachment than of progressive politics. And once that happens everything from discriminatory treatment to torture becomes permissible in the name of defending ‘our’ Enlightenment values that are denied to others, and the pursuit of Enlightenment itself becomes a source of de-Enlightenment. Or as Tzvetan Todorov puts its, ‘placing Enlightenment at the service of a denigration of others’ is to ‘amputate the real tradition of the Enlightenment which was able to combine the universality of values with the plurality of cultures.’#
I can understand that, exiled, but surely your message should be more important than the fact that it is you that is posting it?
It depends on whether you view each post as a fully formed statement, or whether you think that ideas can be developed through interacting with other ideas?
If all posts were anonymous, then it would cease to be a debate, and become a notice board. How could you follow a poster's line of thinking over the thread, let alone over a period of years?
Unfortunately, with the constant bannings and multiple usernames, that's what CIF is becoming. I think it's a good thing that anyone can delve through my posting history (subject to Pluck malfunction), and say "but you said this 6 months ago...."
The problem I see is that neo-liberals see enlightenment as a manichean absolute, rather than a process. They see themselves as 'enlightened', and those who may be in an earlier stage of the process as 'unenlightened'.
This self-satisfied sense of their own rightness inevitably leads to a form of extremism - liberal extremism.
I've posted this before, and I don't know who wrote it, but as a definition of extremism I have yet to see better...
"When concepts such a good and evil, right and wrong, and guilt and innocence, are a matter of faith, rather than evidence"
Suddenly extremism isn't limited to extreme views, but includes those who see the world around them in an extreme way. In what way are Tony Blair or Christopher Hitchins, who believe in converting the world to liberal democracy by the sword, less extreme than the Prophet Mohommed, who converted people to Islam in the same way?
Hope you're feeling a bit better today? Welcome back to the Village of the Banned and pre-modded, to life on the 'outside'.... you too can be a prize fuckwit, you can be cuddled and stroked as long as you don't bite me friggin' arm off with your weapon dog ;0) (joke)
You never did tell us whether you're on the naughty seat... Are you in pre-mod?
If you are, I'm told that the secret is to post loads of inane bland posts in backwaters like style and living.... I don't think you'll be any better at that than I am....
La Rit
The Jewish Inquisition (copyright: Jewdas) court of Hoffman has declared you not to be an anti-semite???? Bloody hell, that's incredible ;0)
Incredible, but true.
He did list a litany of my apparent failings that would make mere rabid anti-semitism seem like having bad breath, and it was couched in 'risque' language that would have made Peter blush, but he did say that I wasn't an anti-semite.
If I merit an obituary, I think I'd like that to be included (maybe without the further embellishments....).
yeah, the whole team was born in Glasgow or a 10 miles radius from except for Bobby Lennox who came from the Clyde Coast. As Hugh MacIlvanney famously put it, "Celtic didn't win the European cup with a Scottish side, they won it with a Glasgow district XI select."
Martyn,
you would be thinking of the 1972 Cup Winners Cup final between Dynamo Kiev and Rangers at the nou camp.
It is rumoured that it was the first and only time that Franco's Guardia Civil took an absolute shit kicking.
There's a famous anecdote involving Lev Yashin, the legendary Soviet goalkeeper. He was there as a pundit for Soviet TV (Dynamo Kiev obviously being part of the USSR at the time). As the full time battle raged between refreshed Glaswegians and the Guardia Civil, Yashin was pontificating about how disgusting the Rangers fans behaviour was etc.
Until someone in the studio pointed out that it was the first time in contemporary Spanish history that Franco's fascist police had taken a shit kicking. At which point, Yashin burst out laughing egging the Rangers fans on.
Bit of both with the occasional suicide of someone who voted for the libs to keep the tories out.
Jesus! Did anyone do that?
I thought that the only reasons to vote liberal were to drive a stake into the heart of New Labour, and to stop the Tories getting a majority....
However appalling the coalition might be, I only need to think of how the illiberal drones and sock-puppets of New Labour would have behaved, had they been returned to power. Lessons learnt? No chance. It would have been vindication for their control freakery, and an end to civil liberties....
Despite being on the left (or maybe because of it?) keeping the Tories out came second to consigning New Labour to the dustbin of history.
Some bod with a double barrelled name on CIF has written this article about rough sleepers.A worthy subject indeed.But no real mention about the complex problems that can lead to people rejecting even the emergency hostel accomodation available and 'opting' for a life on the streets.-alife that is usually fraught with danger and where the life expectancy is just 42.
A stint on the streets for all those at Guardian Towers might just give 'em the reality check they all need.Something to pause and think about whist they're supping their next glass of chianti.Although by the same token pigs might fly some day.
Much as I understand the anger at Tory butchering of public services, and more so Lib Dem support for those policies, it isn't enough.
There seem to be only one approach that the Labour movement is considering.
Elect David Miliband, or some other New Labour drongo, and hope that things get so bad everyone will forget how shit they were, and power will just fall back into their hands....
Problem is that while it might be a good plan for the entryist scum who have taken over the Labour Party, it isn't so great for the rest of us. We get 5 years of coalition vandalism, then a return to the politics that were so bad, they persuaded us to let the Tories in.
Some bod with a double barrelled name on CIF has written this article about rough sleepers.A worthy subject indeed.But no real mention about the complex problems that can lead to people rejecting even the emergency hostel accomodation available and 'opting' for a life on the streets.
I think you've got it the right way around - this isn't an article that uses someone on death row to illustrate a point about homelessness, it's an article that uses homelessness to illustrate a point about someone on death row.
The bod with a double barrelled name is Clive Stafford-Smith, a tireless and thoroughly laudable campaigner for people sentenced to death around the world.
CharleySays 27 Aug 2010, 1:46PM The middle classes will go to any lengths to get their children into favoured schools, including moving into temporary accommodation.
Absolutely shocking that parents want the best for their children!
To be bluntly honest, a key decision when finding a school for my own children was to identify the one with the least number of immigrant children and children from deprived backgrounds.
What a cunt! Makes P-Brax look like the Mahatma. I used to go to Ingestre Hall Arts centre? Any relation IRGNS?
Argh! Tried to post above and forgot I was signed in with the work GMail! Cancelled the post but the profile remained. Anyone know how to get rid of it?
...which...in conjunction with a post just below.. also serves as a stark warning to those who are ever tempted to post "LOL" as a comment...sometimes it just looks outta place and heartless
Top Internet Tip
Don't ever be tempted to use..
LOL dude you're twisting my melon beam me up Scottie feck frickin f**k Trotskyite..(always Trotskist) footie monkeyface I'm a political analyst
It's not an excellent idea at all Thaumaturge. Think about it for a minute. You would be systematically weeding out a tranche of the better educated and more civilised and generally less rabid Americans from the electorate.
Do you really wan't to go down that road for the sake of banning a bit of Irish swearing?
To be honest with you i,ve never heard of the bloke who wrote that article about rough sleepers/death row.Which is why i suspect a lot of people may well have interpreted it as a sloppy bit of writing that doesn't really deal with the root causes of rough sleeping.Rather than an article using the issue of rough sleepers to make a point about death row as you've suggested.
Bearing in mind what you've said i'll have a look at it again later.Might read it differently now i,m fully awake.
re your question of yesterday. I was told the bit about homosexuality being a bourgeois aberration by a member of Militant. And he was quite serious. How senior he was though, I can't remember. Though I am pretty sure that he wasn't stroking a white cat.
Ha, that Twunt CharleySez got modded! Just parking this excellent response.. whitesteps 27 Aug 2010, 3:09PM Charleysays
"What on earth was wrong with my original comment for crying out loud?!"
What's wrong is that you originally said;
"a key decision when finding a school for my own children was to identify the one with the least number of immigrant children and children from deprived backgrounds"
And now you've just said;
"as a parent I sought a school with less deliquent children in it so mine might have a chance to learn something"
Which confirms that you believe that foreign = delinquent, and poor = delinquent. Neither of which is true.
Now, you may be about to turn to statistics to support your position, and point out that schools with more immigrants and more poor children perform worse, but that's only because parents who could afford to give their children the best advantages in early life have gone to baffling lengths to ensure that their children stay away from the foreigners.
In short, it's a vicious circle, which the snobbery of parents who can afford it upholds.
The Irish are excellent swearers - I think it's a combination of the vowel sounds, and a religious history that gives context to the words.
For many Catholics swearing is an act of rebellion against the control of Catholicism, and they rarely do it lightly, even if they do it often. The result is often that swear words are used for their true purpose - for effect and emphasis - rather than mindlessly, as many Londoners do.
MoveAnyMountain might be back, but all is not well.. He hasn't appeared yet on the ATOS thread (I've got ME, I'm not a benefits cheat).
A year ago he would have been first up with a post saying that ATOS are doing a great job, ME doesn't exist, that the author was indeed a benefit scrounger, and that hardworking taxpayers like him shouldn't have to subsidise layabouts with made-up illnesses....
Of course it is possible that MAM is in receipt of benefits himself.....
This piece is the sort of lobotomy-fuck that I hate on CiF.
And this is especially choice:
Against this backdrop, bright, law-abiding young people (of whatever religion or race) can feel conflicted while hardcore terrorists can be granted the badge of soldier rather than criminal.
Maybe heyhabib could find time to apply his vaunted textual analysis to that excerpt of brainless, pernicious funk.
This piece is the sort of lobotomy-fuck that I hate on CiF.
What do you actually object to? Here's the whole paragraph, which puts the sentence you quoted in context.
In 2005 a regime of indefinite house arrest was constructed. "Control orders" punish suspects and their families without charge or trial – their dehumanising effect causing untold trauma without improving collective security. Pre-charge detention rose to almost a month, wrecking innocent lives and leaving scars that survive long after the prison cell is unlocked. Meanwhile "community engagement" degenerated into an unprecedented spying operation, singling out Muslim areas for blanket surveillance. Against this backdrop, bright, law-abiding young people (of whatever religion or race) can feel conflicted while hardcore terrorists can be granted the badge of soldier rather than criminal.
I've got no real issue with the piece...the sentiments aren't a million miles from those you endorsed this morning. My only concern is that for me various rights and liberties should be permanent and sacrosanct. I'd be a lot happier if Liberty stuck to the preservation of those rights rather than engaging in public policy speculation...if members of the BNP had complained of harassment or invasions of privacy, I don't know that Liberty would have bothered their arse.
There's some things, civil liberties included, that shouldn't be fucked with for short term speculative consequentialist arguments...she should be arguing from an absolutist point of view..."this is wrong from a fundamental civil liberty stance, a gross invasion of privacy and an unjustified restriction of freedom" etc. Riffing badly and speculating on short term disenchantment in particular communities has its place but not when you're dealing with an absolute principle; it cheapens it; makes it look contingent and malleable.
There are rights which can justified by universal notions of fairness and humanity...not by particular arguments about their relation to community relations.
There's some things, civil liberties included, that shouldn't be fucked with for short term speculative consequentialist arguments...she should be arguing from an absolutist point of view..."this is wrong from a fundamental civil liberty stance, a gross invasion of privacy and an unjustified restriction of freedom" etc. Riffing badly and speculating on short term disenchantment in particular communities has its place but not when you're dealing with an absolute principle; it cheapens it; makes it look contingent and malleable.
I think that pretty much describes Amnesty's position - that "this is wrong from a fundamental civil liberty stance" - but the attacks on civil liberties from "the war against terror" are largely targetted at a single community.
The parallel would be with the fight against terrorism in Northern Ireland - internment, Diplock courts, shoot to kill policy, collusion between the authorities and paramilitaries etc. While the civil liberties case is general, the effects of civil liberties abuses were particular.
It's a hard line to walk, and I'm by no means convinced the article has got it right, but Peter's accusation of "polluted, undisguised if weasel-worded apologia" is nothing but verbose grandstanding.
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity. Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
Clear as day - and symptomatic of the gangrenous quality of the deluded Left.
Good post MF at 16.52. See you mention a mention of Todorov on the Enlightenment. Put up a link here maybe three weeks ago to a review of Todorov's latest (well, latest in English translation). Interesting stuff (and gives the lie to the hijackers of the term Enlightenment, like Matthew Taylor). (n.b. not a great fan of spiked, but that was worth a read). Another review here.
Re: CiF Article The intelligent response to the terrorist threat Isabella Sankey
I really don't see what the fuss is about.
What is it that some people find so contentious about the article? Because, so far, it's been given some stick, but without actually anything tangible to back up the criticism.
If you can't justify your position, you can't justify your position....
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity.
No, I believe that seeking to understand a problem, however unpalatable, is a necessary part of the process of solving it.
Conversely, refusing to understand on the spurious pretext that to understand is to justify, is to elevate willfull ignorance to a virtue.
Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
But you're not prepared to engage in any discussion as to why you've pronounced so....
I've said this before, but you have the mindset of an 18th century pamphleteer - you publish your pre-prepared tracts, but are either unable or unwilling to defend them in debate.
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Do you not accept that heavy-handed security measures might have some effect on the communities targetted by them? Why the hell wouldn't they? Do you actually understand what the author means by 'conflicted'? Do you think 'conflicted' means 'going to become a suicide bomber'?
The experience from Northern Ireland (which I guess you have some experience of?) tells us that it's far more complicated than a simple linear cause and effect. Some security measures had negliagable effects on support for terrorism, while others had a far greater effect.
The measure mentioned in the paragraph - detention without charge or trial - is widely believed to have had a disproportionate effect on support for Republican paramilitaries. Sensible security measures weigh the costs and benefits of any measure - not to rule out any measure that might inflame any group, but to rule out any measure whose cost outweighs its benefit.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
No she isn't - she's highlighting measures that, as well as doing little to protect us, have done more to destroy our freedom than bin Laden could have dreamed of.
You seem to believe that any measure that is sold as "protecting our freedom" must be defended, even if it does nothing of the sort, or indeed the opposite. Detention without trial doesn't protect my freedom - it's a step on the road to destroying it.
Clear as day - and symptomatic of the gangrenous quality of the deluded Left.
In this case, 'deluded' seems to be a synonym for 'considered'. What next? Thinking is unpatriotic?
Just apply an alternative scenario to see the article's jaw-dropping apologia:
"White youths are being alienated by immigration policy. Jobs that might have gone to them are being taken by ethnic minorities. The youths are being radicalised - turning to violence in the face of this root cause of racial tension. The government should be mindful of the 'conflicted' outlook of alienated whites."
That's the the tripe - suitably adjusted - that Sankey posits.
#The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.#
No..she's blaming the methods chosen to try and protect those "freedoms you and I and others here enjoy" and the fact that they affect whole communities of which, if at all, only a tiny proportion may harbour any desire to deny freedom to others.
My issue is that she justifies her article by reference to the negative consequences on particular communities rather than appealing to general principle of freedoms whose suspension is a clear offence against human dignity..end of
Melodramatic and emotive comparisons with the rights and dignity of those reduced to shredded flesh and viscera don't apply...it's the same thing she's up to in the article..they're a case of using the "Enlightenment itself becomes a source of de-Enlightenment"..if you're applying reason alone, and steering clear of Hitchenesque 'humanitarian' rants, then you apply a universal principle.
You might argue against this universal principle in general terms ie. This not be a human right because...and there may indeed be pragmatic reasons..but they'd have to be very very good to merit a suspension of those rights and any such suspension should only ever to temporary...I've never heard a convincing case yet.
If you can’t justify it, you can’t justify it.....
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity.
No, I believe that to understand a problem, however unpalatable, is a necessary step to solving it.
Conversely, to refuse to understand, on the spurious pretext that to understand is to justify, is to raise wilful ignorance to a virtue.
Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
But you’re not prepared to provide any reasoning or explanation as to why you have pronounced so...
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Don’t you accept that heavy-handed security measures might have some effect on the communities they’re targeted against? Do you understand what the author means by ‘conflicted’? It isn’t a synonym for “going to become a suicide bomber”....
All the evidence from Northern Ireland (somewhere I guess you have experience of?) suggests that detention without charge or trial had a large effect on support for paramilitary groups. Different measures have different costs and benefits – only a fool would discount such factors.
This isn’t about saying “there is a cost – let’s stop doing it” – it’s about saying “if the cost outweighs the benefit, it would be insane to keep doing it”.
If you can’t justify it, you can’t justify it.....
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity.
No, I believe that to understand a problem, however unpalatable, is a necessary step to solving it.
Conversely, to refuse to understand, on the spurious pretext that to understand is to justify, is to raise wilful ignorance to a virtue.
Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
But you’re not prepared to provide any reasoning or explanation as to why you have pronounced so...
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Don’t you accept that heavy-handed security measures might have some effect on the communities they’re targeted against? Do you understand what the author means by ‘conflicted’? It isn’t a synonym for “going to become a suicide bomber”....
All the evidence from Northern Ireland (somewhere I guess you have experience of) suggests that detention without charge or trial had a large effect on support for paramilitary groups. Different measures have different costs and benefits – only a fool would discount such factors.
This isn’t about saying “there is a cost – let’s stop doing it” – it’s about saying “if the cost outweighs the benefit, it would be insane to keep doing it”.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
No she isn't - she's highlighting measures that, as well as doing little to protect us, have done more to destroy our freedom than bin Laden could have dreamed of.
You seem to believe that any measure that is sold as "protecting our freedom" must be defended, even if it does nothing of the sort, or indeed the opposite. Detention without trial doesn't protect my freedom - it's a step on the road to destroying it.
Clear as day - and symptomatic of the gangrenous quality of the deluded Left.
In this case, 'deluded' seems to be a synonym for 'considered'. What next? Thinking is unpatriotic?
Do you think that immigration is comparable to detention without trial?
Your pastiche pretty much describes the position of the BNP, but when debating whether something should be stopped (either immigration or detention without trial), 'giving in to pressure' is only one factor - another is whether that something is right or wrong.
There are those who would happily give in to the racist right, but who would extend detention without trial indefinately.
Your formula takes no account of the merits of the case, and relies exclusively on doing the opposite of what your enemies want, regardless of the stupidity or cost.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
PeterB
I know you don't give a shit if I do or not but I'd be more inclined to listen to what you say if you weren't always foaming at the mouth every time you post something - it doesn't inspire confidence (although it can be very entertaining).
Difficult to know what to believe when the establishment are waving 'terrorist threats' at you, especially after the WMD weasel words and farago of lies.
I get the feeling they'll say what suits their purposes in any given situation and really don't give two hoots about the 'rights' of the hoi polloi.
When they attack and undermine civil liberties in the name of protecting them it really does raise serious questions as to their motives.
We're now being told to expect more activity from dissident Irish Republicans. How serious a threat is this do you think?
MF
There are rights which can justified by universal notions of fairness and humanity...not by particular arguments about their relation to community relations.
Are Enlightenment values a passive or an aggressive (defensible) position? What does or should plurality embrace? Fascism? Is it consistent with the Enlightenment to engage with those that seek to denude its message and influence?
Well, clearly I think not. Enlightenment values do not indulge the bigotry they oppose. They crusade against it. Otherwise you'd be left with a value system that doesn't discriminate, that doesn't judge, and that doesn't matter.
It would have been nice if that statement was followed by an attempt to address your accusations against the article directly, rather than a retreat to the safer ground of philopsophical generalisations...
..but for what it's worth...
The problem is what you define as "indulging bigotry" - anyone would think that the article was proposing that we cave in to bin Laden's demands for a caliphate, and hand him the keys of Buck House as his palace....
What the article actually suggests is that we should rethink some parts of the war against terror because...
1) They are deeply illiberal, and threaten our freedoms more than the terrorism they purport to protect us against.
2) They damage our relations with British Muslim communities, with no equivilent benefits.
3) On balance, they probably do more to encourage terrorism, than to prevent it.
So which bigots are we indulging here? How are we embracing fascism? These measures are far more redolent of the type of society craved for by bigots and fascists, than of a liberal democracy....
I do discriminate. I do judge. In fact I think I do both rather better than you do - I actually can recognise that there are some intermediate positions between good and evil, or between enlightenment and darkness.
Oh is the "money tree" thing back? We'd more or less gotten on top of that. And the whole "the economy is just like running a household budget thing"...
#Is it consistent with the Enlightenment to engage with those that seek to denude its message and influence?#
It's totally consistent with the enlightenment to believe in human rights and universal principles, universally applied to all. I think you've missed what the nub is: the nub is whether the suspension of those rights is acceptable in given situations. Certain rights have been suspended for all. The rights or wrongs of that suspension, which in practical terms makes itself felt in some quarters more pronouncedly, are the issue.
"Engaging" with potential 'enemies of the enlightenment' or whatever you want to call them is another matter..and not one I'd have thought Liberty should be bothering itself about.
Andrew Brown has a bit about a Bishop bashing the enlightenment, as it happens.
Can't understand that link instruction above though. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/aug/27/religion-tom-wright-enlightenment-today?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments
Something that is really starting to annoy me on CIF is stuff like this on a new thread on the Bank Holiday.
"Traffic jams, bad weather, crowded beaches, muddy festivals – what's not to love?"
There were two football articles that did the samed thing but over the whole piece. "Modern football is terrible the new season will be shit, they herd us in like pigs and then fleece us like sheep and we have to pay £20,000 a month for the privilige. You aren't even allowed to throw bananas at black players or poke opposing fans with a screwdriver any more. It's just shit, shit, shit....
But I can't wait for it to start!Cos I'm mental me!"
Well, that was the Hunter Davis one though I am not sure if he really said that about screwdrivers.
I blame the creative writing teachers at Oxbridge myself.
Recently I have started to be pissed off with the articles that are about little episodes in the writers lives that would be much better served by being written in their journals and then forgotten.
Apparently some bloke lost sight of his grandson for a bit at Blackpool Pleasure Beach and another (unless it was the same one) was late for his plane and had to stay in a hotel.
These articles were both on the main page FFS.
I spilt coffee all over a textbook this morning does anyone want me to write an article about it?
If this analysis is correct, it looks like the banks are getting ready to take us all to the cleaners yet again: http://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/ As for the terrorist threat; the spivs and charlatans in The City and on Wall ST are much more dangerous than a nutter in a semtex waistcoat.
I've got more chance of winning the lottery than being blown up by a "God botherer" with a death wish.
Alexander Chancellor has long been a mystery to me. Why the Guardian thinks we would be interested in his holidays in Tuscany defeats me.
Why they don't pay me to write about my holidays in Tuscany, which are much more interesting (but still not that exciting) is an even greater mstery.
But I presume he has a contract and they have to pay him to write something. Trouble is he seems to have run out of anything to write about some decades ago.
You should submit a piece on your traumatic experience - it will fit in the general cif theme of 'little things mean a lot' rather well. I would post in sympathy and tell you how I broke a plate this morning.
Asset classes, commodities, treasuries - they all carry risk in varying degrees.
One thing that is woefully underappreciated in the amateur world of wealth-creation-preservation (and I dare any fucker on here to deny the objective of either) is that risk drives return.
However one dispenses with the proceeds of risk (assuming there are proceeds to dispense with), no one should overlook that the proceeds are necessary.
Oh, no. I see that some on here believe that money, like coffee, grows on trees.
That's why I love UT. It spends what it has no sense of having been made.
My God that's weird! I had a sudden vision of some old bloke with his arse hanging out the back of his trousers reading the financial pages that cover his shivering frame on a park bench.
I'd like to discuss that in greater detail, but this probably isn't the forum for it - the subject is far too boring I suppose, although I still find the subject of risk and human nature to be quite fascinating, even after thirty years of it.
If I hadn't risked breaking the law by burning my parents house down (with them in it) then I wouldn't have been returned loads of money . Is that what you mean Peter. ;)
I take the nasty things I said about Alexander Chancellor all back. He had a horrid journey home from Tuscany, apparantly. Had to stay the night in an excellent hotel in Lucca. Lucca.
"However one dispenses with the proceeds of risk (assuming there are proceeds to dispense with), no one should overlook that the proceeds are necessary."
Indeed, which why it makes sense to distribute the proceeds equitably, otherwise the plutocrats just end up wasting it on gold taps for the bathrooms on their yachts whilst the people who make the phones on which they make their billions struggle to tread water above the breadline.
It's not all about economics.
What the fuck happened to our sense of morality?
Isn't that what we inherited from the Enlightenment?
BTW:thanks to whoever it was who suggested e-mailing myself to transfer documents (I think it was PeterJ) I'd not thought of that. I'll give it a bash tommorrow.
This website maybe of interest to anyone who sometimes wonders what the fuck is going on!
The analysis is by no means definitive and it's not inconceivable, it could be wrong but there is something definitely and desperately wrong with our so called "democracy" so I suggest it behoves us all, for the sake of our children to share as much information as possible. Call me naive if you like but I was under the impression that was what the internet was for!
Gold - if you can avoid the loaded potency of the noun - is a hedge against the potential fall in the value of the reserve currency: the dollar.
If you believe that the dollar is fucked, for want of a better term, then you should buy gold or shares in gold miners. FWIW, I think that's sound advice.
Not sure how many know this fact, but all the gold mined since Christ would only fill a large oil tanker.
"Gold - if you can avoid the loaded potency of the noun - is a hedge against the potential fall in the value of the reserve currency: the dollar.
If you believe that the dollar is fucked, for want of a better term, then you should buy gold or shares in gold miners. FWIW, I think that's sound advice.
Not sure how many know this fact, but all the gold mined since Christ would only fill a large oil tanker."
27 August, 2010 22:20
What's that got to do with the arguement about the Enlightenment or terrorism?
@PeterBracken: I wasn't suggesting you were trying to make a connection between the "yellow commodity" and either the Enlightenment or terrorism for that matter. Far from it; my point was that since you could not address the discrepancies in your arguements about the Enlightenment and terrorism you simlpy moved on to change the subject,ie;"moved the goalposts"
Not my cuppa tea at all.Heard this oldie recently.Probably not your cuppa tea either.If we keep working at it i,m sure we'll eventually find we've got something in common:-)
I neither changed the subject, chekhov, nor moved the goalposts (I say neither/nor because they are quite different, though you conflate them.)
I've written at length about the capacity for a section of the Left to find anti-western shelter with totalitarian stalwarts. I notice, by way of contrast, that you've written fuck all.
I had replied at (half decent) length to exiled but re-reading his three-point scandal I realised I hadn't captured the analytical contempt it deserved. And I'm not sure if I can be arsed to set him straight.
As for MF's botched, if concerned response, I figured he needed a tad longer to tease sense from his mess.
@Peter Bracken: thanks for replying. Perhaps it would make sense if we both understood where each of us stand and I'm not suggesting it should be from a left or right point of view.
In your article "The Deluded Left" you said you were "from the left".
I like some clarity when debating so what did you mean by that? Are you still "from the left" or have you crossed the floor to the right?
I'm just a bit confused at how you set your stall out.
I think your contributions are worthwhile and I'd like to make an effort to reconcile our differences but can you post in plain English because to be honest I haven't got a clue what you are on about!
69-79 indeed ! Bowie *owned* the seventies basically. No other artist made continuously great music *throughout* that decade like he did. That's my reckoning. Anyone else ?
This was pretty good too (originally from Station to Station as ani fule no).
I'm going to kick things off with this lovely ballad, unintentionally written to promote a syrupy, semi-poisonous soft-drink.
ReplyDeleteI hope it will be a calming influence on everyone.
I'd like to build the world a home
and furnish it with love
grow apple trees and honey bees
and snow white turtle doves
I'd like to teach the world to sing
in perfect harmony
I'd like to hold it in my arms
and keep it company
I'd like to see the world for once
all standing hand in hand
and hear them echo through the hills
for peace throughout the land
When I said "kick things off" I did not mean start a fucking kick-fest - OK?
If you can hurl insults, you can just as easily blow kisses.
If you can have a virtual brawl, you can have a virtual slumber-party.
Remember, the internet is filled to bursting with people whose egos have been blown up beyond reason or their capabilities to manage.
It only takes one prize fuckwit, running around with needles and pins, for the whole fucking balloon to go up.
So, be careful out there.
It's a battlefield.
Morning
ReplyDeleteI thought last night was most entertaining and there were some pearls amongst the poo, too.
I'm not convinced some need any help with the needles and pins thing, but hey...
ReplyDeleteI quite enjoyed the debating to be honest, Sheff. Leni knows a lot of stuff it seems...
Night time skirmishes are quite a feature of the UT hevers, but have to say PeterB added a whole new level of amusement. Long may he thrive!!
ReplyDeleteHaha, yeah, he's a character. He gets a lot of stick but he's so over-the-top with the insults that in a way, it's hard for people to get too offended as you can't take it too seriously. I stay out of the mobbing being a peaceable sort and just watch...
ReplyDelete'some pearls amongst the poo.'
ReplyDeleteEy there were that. However - what a bonus - have once again increased my vocabulary. I shall be ever indebted to PB for finding and using the word 'Slattern'. Such a despicable word to use on somebody one does not know.
From http://www.urbandictionary.com
slattern: slut whore skank ho tart floozy prostitute trollop tramp hussy wench woman strumpet bitch slag harlot sleaze britney spears skeev slapper
Can't wait to call someone a 'Britney'
tascia said...
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to call someone a 'Britney'
Bet PB beats you to it. He does have a commendable vocab, it must be said...
I read a story once where the Royal Astronomer, unaware that his eyesight is failing, starts to get all worked up because the stars are fading; it's meant to be a warning about looking back at mythical golden eras etc..it's a useful corrective in many cases but it's become a bit of a truism that nostalgia and memory always have a tendency to airbrush and edit to the past's advantage. I think people possibly subconsciously pay too much lip-service to this phenomenon when examining the past...loads of things are just absolutely shite these days in comparison with the past but anyone saying so will inevitably be hit with a barrage of seemingly germane quantitative data suggesting otherwise; quite missing the point that in a qualitative sense, a lot of stuff was just so much better.
ReplyDeleteFootball is a case in point. There's a piece on cif celebrating increased diversity at football grounds...there are probably also figures proving how much safer, less 'intimidatory', more hygenic...there's probably more consumer choice involved and I bet all the stewards have had a CRB check...whatever..it's shit these days...I know the players are bigger, fitter, faster, stronger, eat better...all that stuff...but it's shit..the game's shit, the atmosphere is shit..if you like "the whole inclusive experience" is just fuckin shit...anyone with any sort of data suggesting otherwise is talking shit.
Chelsea weren't even a team you'd think, worry or care about...most of the time, they were second division...Newcastle were pulling in 5000 at home...football specials..chips and gravy...terraces..heaven
I've got no issue with increased diversity, safety..blah...but it rather misses the point when the game's gone shit
Other things that are shit..
Pubs
Chips
Coronation Street
CIF
Books about vampires
Unions
World Heavyweight Champions
Things that have improved..just to show I'm not victim of any Royal Astronomer syndrome
Technology
Pies..seriously..you used to get some fuckin rank pies
Shoes
Take aways
Power Tools
Good call monkey. Other things that have gone downhill a bit
ReplyDelete- Music
- cars... ok, safer, but look more and more the same
- beer
Things that are about to go seriously downhill...
Hospitals, Education, Libraries, roads, policing, welfare, the arts, aqueducts, everything, basically...
Just to try and be cheery... other things that have improved...
- Sundays
- being able to buy continental foodie delights at your local Tescos
- internet shopping (Though cancelled out a bit by the delivery thing)
One of the most overused phrases in my roving food-critic narrative is "these aren't chips".
ReplyDeleteIn the past year, I've had little matchstick efforts which are a blend of salt and deep fried edible fluff
I've been to chip shops which use oil which is never hot enough and they come out kinda broiled in grease
I even had some (six..to be precise) big chunky, 'artisan', 'hand crafted' 'chips' arranged symmetrically like a fuckin megalithic sacrificial altar...I still had my 'what-the-fuck?' face on when the waiter asked me if I wanted any ketchup...and I got some weird looks all round when I told him: "no, just a virgin and a stone axe thanks"
Don't try telling me that it's all in my head..that I'm looking back through a rose-tinted prism...it's real..chips are shit these days.
Just a quickie as I am at work, not idling around like yesterday. But I have to mention something about that song at the top.
ReplyDeleteNot long after it was being used as an advert I got involved in a campaign to help workers for Coca Cola in Guatamala who were trying to unionise. The franchisee of Coke had hired thugs and they kidnapped, tortured and killed the guys that were trying to organise the union.
But here is the thing. One of the things that they did as a little extra flourish was to cut the tongues out of the union guys they killed and stick them in their lapel pockets. It was a little sign to say shut up with this union shit.
I always thought it was ironic. I mean, how the fuck do you sing with your tongue cut out?
Yeah..Sundays..they are definitely better
ReplyDeletewhich incidentally is something you should throw in the face of any religious/ conservative/ Edmund Burke/ value of tradition types..
Look what happened to Sundays once we dropped the religious observance bullshit...1000% improvement
Morning all.
ReplyDeleteI didn't think that last night was so bad - most of the abuse was pretty good natured (well I don't know about Peter's ravings...), and I don't think anyone got too offended (apart from Peter maybe?).
A pretty good advert for zero moderation really - if the debate is left alone, sooner or later it sorts itself out. Even Peter's fury was ignited by the moderation on CIF, rather than anything here.
Heavy-handed moderation just makes angry people angrier. I know - I've been where Peter was last night, though my rage was directed by email at CIF editors and moderators, rather than in a public forum. I can't help thinking that most of the friction between UT and CIF posters stems from past moderating decisions, rather than any current topic.
Would people keep returning to CIF under new names if they weren't banned?
Pre-mod usually only lasts a few days
ReplyDeleteI've been in pre-mod for over two months now, and I don't even know why. I've posted only sporadically since, but have now stopped completely because only about 30% of my (carefully inoffensive) posts ever got through. Most just failed to ever see the light of day - and for no apparent reason.
It seems to me that the purpose of pre-mod is simply to stop awkward posters commenting, whilst avoiding the problems that might arise if Cif banned them. It's pointless, since if someone really wants to post, then they'll just return under a new name and the pre-mod vanishes. Until the next time, and the next, and the next....
monkeyfish - the range and low price of reasonable power tools is awesome. What needed a £500+ Hilti before I can do with a 26 Euro Chinese drill. Granite around here.
ReplyDeleteJust got back from 35 minutes with the local notaire (solicitor) gettting advice for a friend transfering property . Do you pay for that in UK ?
For the first time I looked at the whole range in the newsagents. Forgetting the german, dutch, and the Herald Tribune, everything from the FT down to the Daily Star , except the Guardian ! Top sale year-round is the Mail, closely followed by Torygraph, the Times,then a very few Suns and Stars. In summer she sells a lot of Suns and Stars.
I bought yesterday's Mail . hehe
PS maybe G readers are just more savvy, and all read on the net tho.
RE: Sundays and the traditionalists...
ReplyDeleteI think they'll still mourn the demise of religion and the traditional Sunday as they can't deposit their kids off at the local Sunday School for a few hours like they used to...
#I didn't think that last night was so bad - most of the abuse was pretty good natured (well I don't know about Peter's ravings...), and I don't think anyone got too offended (apart from Peter maybe?).#
ReplyDeleteIt's a fairly well established principle...everyone loves a good row..especially people who pretend they don't..any time there's a good row on here or anywhere else, the comments go through the roof..and it gets funny...and it's worth reading
The saddest part of any such row is the odd poster who pops up desperate to establish a bit of kudos and assume a bit of gravity with a "can't we keep it civilised" routine...this tactic rarely works
First..it's actually plainly fuckin obvious that for all their "look at me..I'm a grown-up"..they were actually enjoying it as much as anyone else
Second..99 times out of 100, when said poster is told to loosen up and drop the coin from their arse, it turns out they get offended and join in anyway
Third..if it's hermione, it's just cos when things kick off she misses the limelight of being star-turn in the five-handed 'Good Old Days' Cabaret re-run show that waddaya has become
Top Internet Tip...start a row
Anon (how do you do that?)
ReplyDeleteYou've put your finger on the single biggest problem in CIF moderation - it only affects serious posters.
I have no wish to post anywhere under a different handle - I've been posting for about 6 years as exiledlondoner, and there is a history of thousands of posts which are easily attributed to me. Far from being anonymous, my username means far more online that my real name - it's my George Elliot or George Orwewll.
So for me being put in pre-mod, or being banned, represents a stop on my posting (you're right about pre-modded posts vanishing, or even worse, app[ear4ing hours later....).
However for others, it is little more than a minor inconvenience - recently I saw the same poster appear under 6 names in a single day. It's a troll's charter.....
The end result of weeding out serious posters (or at least those who care about the name they post under), and allowing trolls to reinvent themselves at will, should be obvious, even to Matt Seaton. It's already happening - hundreds of good posters have vanished, and most threads are dominated by new, unknown usernames.
Football is a case in point. There's a piece on cif celebrating increased diversity at football grounds...there are probably also figures proving how much safer, less 'intimidatory', more hygenic...there's probably more consumer choice involved and I bet all the stewards have had a CRB check...whatever..it's shit these days...I know the players are bigger, fitter, faster, stronger, eat better...all that stuff...but it's shit..the game's shit, the atmosphere is shit..if you like "the whole inclusive experience" is just fuckin shit...anyone with any sort of data suggesting otherwise is talking shit.
ReplyDeleteAmen, hallelujah and praise the word of the lord.
Celtic comprehensively gubbed last night by a second rate Dutch outfit.
When I was very young and starting to go to the games (80-81), Celtic were rubbish in Europe but we had Charlie Nicolas, Johnny Doyle, Tommy Burns, Danny Mcgrain, players you could identify with from the jungle.
Last night we were represented by blokes who've got the gig by their agents desperately sending around a pre season dvd of their clients best moments from all parts of the world.
We've replaced second rate Scottish diddies with second rate foreign diddies. Dire. Globalisation and football is shit.
At least when we used to fail miserably in Europe we were represented by players I could identify with. We now fail miserably with players who have all the feelings towards the club of an automaton.
Monkeyfish
ReplyDeleteYou're giving away your trade secrets here....
I agree with most of what you say - most posters come unto talkboards for a bit of friction, though whether they can handle it or not is another matter.... The main exceptions are those who really believe they can change the world online, and who come here to pass on words of wisdom - they're the best of the lot.
Don't knock the "can't we keep it civilised" posters - they're as essaential to the dynamics of a good row as the abusive protagonists. There's nothing better to throw on the fire than an appeal for calm - they burn beautifully.
As for Hermoine - she's a fucking star, and I'll chin any cunt who says otherwise.
Duke
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more. Weren't all of the Lisbon Lions born within 5 miles of Park Head?
The London Clubs don't really have the same issues, as they've always had players from ourside their local areas, but it really becomes noticable at clubs like Celtic, Newcastle, Sunderland etc, who have a tradition of fielding local boys made good.
There's an article today on the Guardian about Wilf Mannion - Middlesborough legend and one-club hero. Nowadays he would end up in Manchester or London, and his replacement would be a Montenegran player bought from Seria B....
"As for Hermoine - she's a fucking star, and I'll chin any cunt who says otherwise."
ReplyDeleteNot bad..but "any cunt who says otherwise." is a bit vague..bit hit and miss...best way to get things kicked off is "Hey X..you're talking shite..you always talk shite..bit, bad, boring shite"...that cuts straight to the heart of the matter.
13thDukeofWybourne said... Didn't Celtic win a UEFA cup final against the Guardia Civil back in the sixties?
ReplyDeleteExiled,
ReplyDeleteI think the debate 'sorts itself out' when one or more of the fuckers ends up face down in the keyboard.
monkeyfish
ReplyDeleteHave you been giving lessons to Peter B?
I'm not really a fight starter. I tend to be more of the other type of combatant you mentioned - the poster who appeals for calm, gets told to fuck off, and then wades in.
When I do start a row it's normally unintentional (honest) - I just keep badgering away at something until the toys come flying out of the pram. It worked a treat on CIF Watch - I never lost my temper once...
Colin
ReplyDeleteI think the debate 'sorts itself out' when one or more of the fuckers ends up face down in the keyboard.
Through drink, or through despair?
What I really miss is going to Old Trafford, confident of a win..and getting one...and still hearing some strutting little Manc announcing "yeah..but we're still the biggest club in the world".
ReplyDeleteI saw one of those David Attenbrough (I think) things once where a bunch of killer whales were ripping into a blue whale carcass..."yeah but I'm still the biggest animal in the world" he was no doubt consoling himself in whale Valhalla...problem these days is...that's all it takes..big enough is all it takes
If it weren't for Newcastle and their particularly comic and poignant "Aye but we're still a big club" mantra, I'd abandon hope and resign in the face of global capitalism.
Talking of ShiteWatch - In case you missed it from last night - for you Exiled - it made Leni laugh!!!
ReplyDeleteJonathan Hoffman - Anti-Zionist Hero
exiled said...
ReplyDeleteIt worked a treat on CIF Watch
Although, to be fair, If some people just said "hello" on Cifwatch they'd be accused of starting a second Holocaust.
Just notice Giyus is still up from last night...he is small town club that punches above its weight..he was always a kinda Wrexham from the late 70s and 80s but he's more a Villareal type now..the novelty value has gone and there's a bit of real substance these days..he's eating properly, training's going well and he's just taking things one game at a time
ReplyDeleteNot bad..but "any cunt who says otherwise." is a bit vague..bit hit and miss...best way to get things kicked off is "Hey X..you're talking shite..you always talk shite..bit, bad, boring shite"...that cuts straight to the heart of the matter.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair, the vagueness has the upside that someone can just name people who may have had a go at Herms in the past, or just make some up frankly. Then sit back and watch the carnage...
You might play safe and try PB, since there probably isn't anyone he hasn't had a go at. But you never know...
La Rit -- bonjour ! I recommend Wordpad,if you are a M$-sufferer, but I always try to write there first. Enjoyed the link !
ReplyDeleteHi La Rit
ReplyDeleteI'm developing something of a soft spot for Mr Hoffman - the combination of swivel-eyed extremism and tourettes is certainly entertaining. His blogs at the JC are always worth a look, as he hurls abuse at anyone who dares to disagree with him.
Anyway, I'm posibbly the only person on earth who Jonathan Hoffman has declared not to be an anti-semite (he's not an anti-semite, but he is ......).
It reminded me of the old St Trinians film where Beryl Reid tells the court that she's the only one there who has a bit of paper to prove she's sane....
I have no wish to post anywhere under a different handle
ReplyDeleteI can understand that, exiled, but surely your message should be more important than the fact that it is you that is posting it?
Cif can be a bit of a personality cult where recognized posters get recommends and responses just because of the name and not the content of their comment. I've seen eg allyf get hundreds of recommends for posting 6th form drivel and excellent posts totally overlooked/ignored because they're not from a recognized poster.
An interesting Cif experiment would be to run a few threads where ALL the posts were 'anon' and then evaluate the reactions and recommends. I think quite a few Cif 'faves' would be unpleasantly surprised.
This is worth a look...particularly but not exclusively if your name's Bracken..
ReplyDeleteUsing the Enlightenment's name in vain
#‘One of the main claims of Enlightenment philosophy’, the writer Ian Buruma observes in Murder in Amsterdam, his meditation on the significance of the killing of Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh by a Moroccan Islamist, ‘is that its ideas based on reason are by definition universal. But the Enlightenment has a particular appeal to some . . . because its values are not just universal, but more importantly “ours”, that is European, Western values.’
Once the Enlightenment is turned into a weapon in the clash of civilizations rather than in the battle to define the values and attitudes necessary to advance political rights and social justice, then it becomes more a measure of tribal attachment than of progressive politics. And once that happens everything from discriminatory treatment to torture becomes permissible in the name of defending ‘our’ Enlightenment values that are denied to others, and the pursuit of Enlightenment itself becomes a source of de-Enlightenment. Or as Tzvetan Todorov puts its, ‘placing Enlightenment at the service of a denigration of others’ is to ‘amputate the real tradition of the Enlightenment which was able to combine the universality of values with the plurality of cultures.’#
Anon
ReplyDeleteI can understand that, exiled, but surely your message should be more important than the fact that it is you that is posting it?
It depends on whether you view each post as a fully formed statement, or whether you think that ideas can be developed through interacting with other ideas?
If all posts were anonymous, then it would cease to be a debate, and become a notice board. How could you follow a poster's line of thinking over the thread, let alone over a period of years?
Unfortunately, with the constant bannings and multiple usernames, that's what CIF is becoming. I think it's a good thing that anyone can delve through my posting history (subject to Pluck malfunction), and say "but you said this 6 months ago...."
monkeyfish
ReplyDeleteThe problem I see is that neo-liberals see enlightenment as a manichean absolute, rather than a process. They see themselves as 'enlightened', and those who may be in an earlier stage of the process as 'unenlightened'.
This self-satisfied sense of their own rightness inevitably leads to a form of extremism - liberal extremism.
I've posted this before, and I don't know who wrote it, but as a definition of extremism I have yet to see better...
"When concepts such a good and evil, right and wrong, and guilt and innocence, are a matter of faith, rather than evidence"
Suddenly extremism isn't limited to extreme views, but includes those who see the world around them in an extreme way. In what way are Tony Blair or Christopher Hitchins, who believe in converting the world to liberal democracy by the sword, less extreme than the Prophet Mohommed, who converted people to Islam in the same way?
Mornin' one and all.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the link to that essay, MF. Share its sentiment entirely.
Well waddaya can shut down for the day...ifitsasix has just slinked quietly in, delivered a 2 word post of the month and slipped away into the ether
ReplyDeleteIs ifitsasix who I think it is?
Yep, MF! I've been wondering about ifitsasix's identity....
ReplyDeleteAlthough, to be fair, If some people just said "hello" on Cifwatch they'd be accused of starting a second Holocaust
ReplyDeleteMartyn - hahahahahahahahahaha!!! Brilliant!
Exiled
The Jewish Inquisition (copyright: Jewdas) court of Hoffman has declared you not to be an anti-semite???? Bloody hell, that's incredible ;0)
I do think you're right,he is quite mad in a rabid Lady Bertram sort of way! (Fighting all these anti-Israel supporters has quite worn me out!)
x
PeterBracken:
ReplyDeleteHope you're feeling a bit better today? Welcome back to the Village of the Banned and pre-modded, to life on the 'outside'.... you too can be a prize fuckwit, you can be cuddled and stroked as long as you don't bite me friggin' arm off with your weapon dog ;0) (joke)
Peter Bracken
ReplyDeleteOK..glad to hear it..hope that statement doesn't come back to haunt you.
Amongst all the seriousness, I'd like to proffer this little quip, gleaned from Frasier this morning.
ReplyDeleteFrasier: (excitably booming, on the promise of a shag)
"I'm hoping it's going to be lift off from Cape Crane-averal tonight"
Nialls: (with a hint of impetuosity)
"Frasier, if you torture that metaphore any further, you'll end up on trial at the Hague"
;0)
Morning Peter
ReplyDeleteYou never did tell us whether you're on the naughty seat... Are you in pre-mod?
If you are, I'm told that the secret is to post loads of inane bland posts in backwaters like style and living.... I don't think you'll be any better at that than I am....
La Rit
The Jewish Inquisition (copyright: Jewdas) court of Hoffman has declared you not to be an anti-semite???? Bloody hell, that's incredible ;0)
Incredible, but true.
He did list a litany of my apparent failings that would make mere rabid anti-semitism seem like having bad breath, and it was couched in 'risque' language that would have made Peter blush, but he did say that I wasn't an anti-semite.
If I merit an obituary, I think I'd like that to be included (maybe without the further embellishments....).
Morning all
ReplyDelete@PeterB
You do realize you're now a fully fledged member of the UT.Hope the hangover,s not to grim.
@Hevers
You still here?
Exiled,
ReplyDeleteBit of both with the occasional suicide of someone who voted for the libs to keep the tories out.
Musty! Good to see you, how've you been?
ReplyDeleteexiled,
ReplyDeleteyeah, the whole team was born in Glasgow or a 10 miles radius from except for Bobby Lennox who came from the Clyde Coast. As Hugh MacIlvanney famously put it, "Celtic didn't win the European cup with a Scottish side, they won it with a Glasgow district XI select."
Martyn,
you would be thinking of the 1972 Cup Winners Cup final between Dynamo Kiev and Rangers at the nou camp.
It is rumoured that it was the first and only time that Franco's Guardia Civil took an absolute shit kicking.
There's a famous anecdote involving Lev Yashin, the legendary Soviet goalkeeper. He was there as a pundit for Soviet TV (Dynamo Kiev obviously being part of the USSR at the time). As the full time battle raged between refreshed Glaswegians and the Guardia Civil, Yashin was pontificating about how disgusting the Rangers fans behaviour was etc.
Until someone in the studio pointed out that it was the first time in contemporary Spanish history that Franco's fascist police had taken a shit kicking. At which point, Yashin burst out laughing egging the Rangers fans on.
Colin
ReplyDeleteBit of both with the occasional suicide of someone who voted for the libs to keep the tories out.
Jesus! Did anyone do that?
I thought that the only reasons to vote liberal were to drive a stake into the heart of New Labour, and to stop the Tories getting a majority....
However appalling the coalition might be, I only need to think of how the illiberal drones and sock-puppets of New Labour would have behaved, had they been returned to power. Lessons learnt? No chance. It would have been vindication for their control freakery, and an end to civil liberties....
Despite being on the left (or maybe because of it?) keeping the Tories out came second to consigning New Labour to the dustbin of history.
Some bod with a double barrelled name on CIF has written this article about rough sleepers.A worthy subject indeed.But no real mention about the complex problems that can lead to people rejecting even the emergency hostel accomodation available and 'opting' for a life on the streets.-alife that is usually fraught with danger and where the life expectancy is just 42.
ReplyDeleteA stint on the streets for all those at Guardian Towers might just give 'em the reality check they all need.Something to pause and think about whist they're supping their next glass of chianti.Although by the same token pigs might fly some day.
exiled,
ReplyDeleteFair enough. Would have been awful if the bastards had been vindicated.
Heyhabib
ReplyDeleteIs that picture at the top of the thread you mate?Dig the new hair style :-)
Much as I understand the anger at Tory butchering of public services, and more so Lib Dem support for those policies, it isn't enough.
ReplyDeleteThere seem to be only one approach that the Labour movement is considering.
Elect David Miliband, or some other New Labour drongo, and hope that things get so bad everyone will forget how shit they were, and power will just fall back into their hands....
Problem is that while it might be a good plan for the entryist scum who have taken over the Labour Party, it isn't so great for the rest of us. We get 5 years of coalition vandalism, then a return to the politics that were so bad, they persuaded us to let the Tories in.
Surely we can do better than that?
Paul
ReplyDeleteSome bod with a double barrelled name on CIF has written this article about rough sleepers.A worthy subject indeed.But no real mention about the complex problems that can lead to people rejecting even the emergency hostel accomodation available and 'opting' for a life on the streets.
I think you've got it the right way around - this isn't an article that uses someone on death row to illustrate a point about homelessness, it's an article that uses homelessness to illustrate a point about someone on death row.
The bod with a double barrelled name is Clive Stafford-Smith, a tireless and thoroughly laudable campaigner for people sentenced to death around the world.
I think you've got it the right way around
ReplyDeleteEr.. that should be "wrong way around"....
..and yes, I do know right from wrong.... normally...
Musty,
ReplyDeleteAnd I'd forgotten how cantankerous you were you pustulant little ferret!
13thDukeofWybourne said...
ReplyDeleteyou would be thinking of the 1972 Cup Winners Cup final between Dynamo Kiev and Rangers at the nou camp.
Yes, that's probably the one I was thinking of. Nice anecdote about Lev Yashin.
Radio 4 spirit level
ReplyDeletefrog2: cheers.
ReplyDeleteNice and quiet today, Post Flame-War Depression perhaps ?
ReplyDeleteJust had to say,
ReplyDeleteCharleySays
27 Aug 2010, 1:46PM
The middle classes will go to any lengths to get their children into favoured schools, including moving into temporary accommodation.
Absolutely shocking that parents want the best for their children!
To be bluntly honest, a key decision when finding a school for my own children was to identify the one with the least number of immigrant children and children from deprived backgrounds.
What a cunt! Makes P-Brax look like the Mahatma. I used to go to Ingestre Hall Arts centre? Any relation IRGNS?
Argh! Tried to post above and forgot I was signed in with the work GMail! Cancelled the post but the profile remained. Anyone know how to get rid of it?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, what I posted was:
So yesterday wasn't typical then?
@turminder, I doubt it, unless the art centre was in Kentish Town.
ReplyDeleteLeni -- lightacandle 27 Aug 2010, 1:54PM waddya post on food parcels in North Wales .
ReplyDeleteCracking post by..
ReplyDeletelightacandle
27 Aug 2010, 1:54PM
on waddaya
...which...in conjunction with a post just below.. also serves as a stark warning to those who are ever tempted to post "LOL" as a comment...sometimes it just looks outta place and heartless
Top Internet Tip
Don't ever be tempted to use..
LOL
dude
you're twisting my melon
beam me up Scottie
feck
frickin
f**k
Trotskyite..(always Trotskist)
footie
monkeyface
I'm a political analyst
Spencer - I've disappeared it.
ReplyDeleteTa
ReplyDeleteThe Arts Centre was (is?) in Staffordshire, but your work may have a tenebreous connection to the Earl of S? Or the Road may once have had...
ReplyDeleteExcellent idea, Spencer! ;-)
ReplyDeleteIt's not an excellent idea at all Thaumaturge. Think about it for a minute. You would be systematically weeding out a tranche of the better educated and more civilised and generally less rabid Americans from the electorate.
ReplyDeleteDo you really wan't to go down that road for the sake of banning a bit of Irish swearing?
#Do you really wan't to go down that road for the sake of banning a bit of Irish swearing?#
ReplyDeleteI've never met an Irishman who said feck..it was always fuck..till Father Jack.
It's like dog and bone..which didn't exist until Arthur Daley coined it in minder
No way some TV script writer's gonna have any fuckin say in my vocabulary..Feck that LOL
Sorry, I should have said "Irish swearing"
ReplyDeleteI agree with that, smeghead.
ReplyDeleteHey Paul, y mama tu tambien!
Hi exiled
ReplyDeleteTo be honest with you i,ve never heard of the bloke who wrote that article about rough sleepers/death row.Which is why i suspect a lot of people may well have interpreted it as a sloppy bit of writing that doesn't really deal with the root causes of rough sleeping.Rather than an article using the issue of rough sleepers to make a point about death row as you've suggested.
Bearing in mind what you've said i'll have a look at it again later.Might read it differently now i,m fully awake.
@heyhabib
ReplyDeletere your question of yesterday. I was told the bit about homosexuality being a bourgeois aberration by a member of Militant. And he was quite serious. How senior he was though, I can't remember. Though I am pretty sure that he wasn't stroking a white cat.
Hi Habib
ReplyDeleteHow very dare you.In her day my mum was widely recognized as an Irish beauty.And unlike yours she's never grown a tache.
Shagging got better but then worse again.
ReplyDeleteHa, that Twunt CharleySez got modded! Just parking this excellent response..
ReplyDeletewhitesteps
27 Aug 2010, 3:09PM
Charleysays
"What on earth was wrong with my original comment for crying out loud?!"
What's wrong is that you originally said;
"a key decision when finding a school for my own children was to identify the one with the least number of immigrant children and children from deprived backgrounds"
And now you've just said;
"as a parent I sought a school with less deliquent children in it so mine might have a chance to learn something"
Which confirms that you believe that foreign = delinquent, and poor = delinquent. Neither of which is true.
Now, you may be about to turn to statistics to support your position, and point out that schools with more immigrants and more poor children perform worse, but that's only because parents who could afford to give their children the best advantages in early life have gone to baffling lengths to ensure that their children stay away from the foreigners.
In short, it's a vicious circle, which the snobbery of parents who can afford it upholds.
Paul :-)
ReplyDeleteBilly Hoyle: You calling me ugly?
Sidney Deane: Your mother did.
Good point, Spencer. I hadn't thought that through.
ReplyDeleteBut I must inform you that Irish people never swear. We are all models of propriety.
How about "Irish" people?
ReplyDeletethauma
ReplyDeleteBut I must inform you that Irish people never swear. We are all models of propriety.
My sentiments entirely.
Fuckin' jeesus tits-oops!
(Me uncle used to say that btw)
Don't get me started on plastic Paddies.
ReplyDeleteJesus had moobs?
ReplyDeleteThe Irish are excellent swearers - I think it's a combination of the vowel sounds, and a religious history that gives context to the words.
ReplyDeleteFor many Catholics swearing is an act of rebellion against the control of Catholicism, and they rarely do it lightly, even if they do it often. The result is often that swear words are used for their true purpose - for effect and emphasis - rather than mindlessly, as many Londoners do.
Mr Monkeyfish must have Irish roots.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis post has been struck by the author.
ReplyDeletePaul, don't you just love a straight bun fight? Here's my favourite, from White Men Can't Jump.
ReplyDeleteMoveAnyMountain might be back, but all is not well.. He hasn't appeared yet on the ATOS thread (I've got ME, I'm not a benefits cheat).
ReplyDeleteA year ago he would have been first up with a post saying that ATOS are doing a great job, ME doesn't exist, that the author was indeed a benefit scrounger, and that hardworking taxpayers like him shouldn't have to subsidise layabouts with made-up illnesses....
Of course it is possible that MAM is in receipt of benefits himself.....
This piece is the sort of lobotomy-fuck that I hate on CiF.
ReplyDeleteAnd this is especially choice:
Against this backdrop, bright, law-abiding young people (of whatever religion or race) can feel conflicted while hardcore terrorists can be granted the badge of soldier rather than criminal.
Maybe heyhabib could find time to apply his vaunted textual analysis to that excerpt of brainless, pernicious funk.
Peter Bracken
ReplyDeleteThis piece is the sort of lobotomy-fuck that I hate on CiF.
What do you actually object to? Here's the whole paragraph, which puts the sentence you quoted in context.
In 2005 a regime of indefinite house arrest was constructed. "Control orders" punish suspects and their families without charge or trial – their dehumanising effect causing untold trauma without improving collective security. Pre-charge detention rose to almost a month, wrecking innocent lives and leaving scars that survive long after the prison cell is unlocked. Meanwhile "community engagement" degenerated into an unprecedented spying operation, singling out Muslim areas for blanket surveillance. Against this backdrop, bright, law-abiding young people (of whatever religion or race) can feel conflicted while hardcore terrorists can be granted the badge of soldier rather than criminal.
Sorry, Bracken, I have no time for you.
ReplyDeleteThe context adds nothing to the polluted, undisguised if weasel-worded apologia she advances, exiled.
ReplyDeleteJessica and PaulBJ and lightacandle are on the ME Thread, just saw it .
ReplyDeletePeter Bracken
ReplyDeleteThe context adds nothing to the polluted, undisguised if weasel-worded apologia she advances, exiled.
You know better than that Peter - vague insinuations cut no ice.
What has she said that amounts to "weasel-worded apologia", and why does it?
I've got no real issue with the piece...the sentiments aren't a million miles from those you endorsed this morning. My only concern is that for me various rights and liberties should be permanent and sacrosanct. I'd be a lot happier if Liberty stuck to the preservation of those rights rather than engaging in public policy speculation...if members of the BNP had complained of harassment or invasions of privacy, I don't know that Liberty would have bothered their arse.
ReplyDeleteThere's some things, civil liberties included, that shouldn't be fucked with for short term speculative consequentialist arguments...she should be arguing from an absolutist point of view..."this is wrong from a fundamental civil liberty stance, a gross invasion of privacy and an unjustified restriction of freedom" etc. Riffing badly and speculating on short term disenchantment in particular communities has its place but not when you're dealing with an absolute principle; it cheapens it; makes it look contingent and malleable.
There are rights which can justified by universal notions of fairness and humanity...not by particular arguments about their relation to community relations.
Does anyone know how to find people by their Cif name?
ReplyDeleteI have decided that my new mission in life is to hunt down and punish anyone who uses the phrase 'magical money tree'.
Just kidding but it is very tempting.
monkeyfish
ReplyDeleteThere's some things, civil liberties included, that shouldn't be fucked with for short term speculative consequentialist arguments...she should be arguing from an absolutist point of view..."this is wrong from a fundamental civil liberty stance, a gross invasion of privacy and an unjustified restriction of freedom" etc. Riffing badly and speculating on short term disenchantment in particular communities has its place but not when you're dealing with an absolute principle; it cheapens it; makes it look contingent and malleable.
I think that pretty much describes Amnesty's position - that "this is wrong from a fundamental civil liberty stance" - but the attacks on civil liberties from "the war against terror" are largely targetted at a single community.
The parallel would be with the fight against terrorism in Northern Ireland - internment, Diplock courts, shoot to kill policy, collusion between the authorities and paramilitaries etc. While the civil liberties case is general, the effects of civil liberties abuses were particular.
It's a hard line to walk, and I'm by no means convinced the article has got it right, but Peter's accusation of "polluted, undisguised if weasel-worded apologia" is nothing but verbose grandstanding.
exiled
ReplyDeleteIf you can't see it, you can't see it.
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity. Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
Clear as day - and symptomatic of the gangrenous quality of the deluded Left.
Good post MF at 16.52. See you mention a mention of Todorov on the Enlightenment. Put up a link here maybe three weeks ago to a review of Todorov's latest (well, latest in English translation). Interesting stuff (and gives the lie to the hijackers of the term Enlightenment, like Matthew Taylor). (n.b. not a great fan of spiked, but that was worth a read). Another review here.
ReplyDeleteRe: CiF Article The intelligent response to the terrorist threat Isabella Sankey
ReplyDeleteI really don't see what the fuss is about.
What is it that some people find so contentious about the article? Because, so far, it's been given some stick, but without actually anything tangible to back up the criticism.
Peter Bracken
ReplyDeleteIf you can't see it, you can't see it.
If you can't justify your position, you can't justify your position....
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity.
No, I believe that seeking to understand a problem, however unpalatable, is a necessary part of the process of solving it.
Conversely, refusing to understand on the spurious pretext that to understand is to justify, is to elevate willfull ignorance to a virtue.
Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
But you're not prepared to engage in any discussion as to why you've pronounced so....
I've said this before, but you have the mindset of an 18th century pamphleteer - you publish your pre-prepared tracts, but are either unable or unwilling to defend them in debate.
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Do you not accept that heavy-handed security measures might have some effect on the communities targetted by them? Why the hell wouldn't they? Do you actually understand what the author means by 'conflicted'? Do you think 'conflicted' means 'going to become a suicide bomber'?
The experience from Northern Ireland (which I guess you have some experience of?) tells us that it's far more complicated than a simple linear cause and effect. Some security measures had negliagable effects on support for terrorism, while others had a far greater effect.
The measure mentioned in the paragraph - detention without charge or trial - is widely believed to have had a disproportionate effect on support for Republican paramilitaries. Sensible security measures weigh the costs and benefits of any measure - not to rule out any measure that might inflame any group, but to rule out any measure whose cost outweighs its benefit.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
No she isn't - she's highlighting measures that, as well as doing little to protect us, have done more to destroy our freedom than bin Laden could have dreamed of.
You seem to believe that any measure that is sold as "protecting our freedom" must be defended, even if it does nothing of the sort, or indeed the opposite. Detention without trial doesn't protect my freedom - it's a step on the road to destroying it.
Clear as day - and symptomatic of the gangrenous quality of the deluded Left.
In this case, 'deluded' seems to be a synonym for 'considered'. What next? Thinking is unpatriotic?
Just apply an alternative scenario to see the article's jaw-dropping apologia:
ReplyDelete"White youths are being alienated by immigration policy. Jobs that might have gone to them are being taken by ethnic minorities. The youths are being radicalised - turning to violence in the face of this root cause of racial tension. The government should be mindful of the 'conflicted' outlook of alienated whites."
That's the the tripe - suitably adjusted - that Sankey posits.
#The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.#
ReplyDeleteNo..she's blaming the methods chosen to try and protect those "freedoms you and I and others here enjoy" and the fact that they affect whole communities of which, if at all, only a tiny proportion may harbour any desire to deny freedom to others.
My issue is that she justifies her article by reference to the negative consequences on particular communities rather than appealing to general principle of freedoms whose suspension is a clear offence against human dignity..end of
Melodramatic and emotive comparisons with the rights and dignity of those reduced to shredded flesh and viscera don't apply...it's the same thing she's up to in the article..they're a case of using the "Enlightenment itself becomes a source of de-Enlightenment"..if you're applying reason alone, and steering clear of Hitchenesque 'humanitarian' rants, then you apply a universal principle.
You might argue against this universal principle in general terms ie. This not be a human right because...and there may indeed be pragmatic reasons..but they'd have to be very very good to merit a suspension of those rights and any such suspension should only ever to temporary...I've never heard a convincing case yet.
peter bracken said...
ReplyDeleteJust apply an alternative scenario to see the article's jaw-dropping apologia:
I still don't see it. The scenario you gave would also be cause for concern IMHO.
Peter Bracken
ReplyDeleteIf you can't see it, you can't see it.
If you can’t justify it, you can’t justify it.....
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity.
No, I believe that to understand a problem, however unpalatable, is a necessary step to solving it.
Conversely, to refuse to understand, on the spurious pretext that to understand is to justify, is to raise wilful ignorance to a virtue.
Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
But you’re not prepared to provide any reasoning or explanation as to why you have pronounced so...
This author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Don’t you accept that heavy-handed security measures might have some effect on the communities they’re targeted against? Do you understand what the author means by ‘conflicted’? It isn’t a synonym for “going to become a suicide bomber”....
All the evidence from Northern Ireland (somewhere I guess you have experience of?) suggests that detention without charge or trial had a large effect on support for paramilitary groups. Different measures have different costs and benefits – only a fool would discount such factors.
This isn’t about saying “there is a cost – let’s stop doing it” – it’s about saying “if the cost outweighs the benefit, it would be insane to keep doing it”.
To be continued......
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePeter Bracken
ReplyDeleteIf you can't see it, you can't see it.
If you can’t justify it, you can’t justify it.....
You and I have previous on what amounts to understanding and what seeks to justify. As I recall, you believe that any attempt at explanation advances humanity.
No, I believe that to understand a problem, however unpalatable, is a necessary step to solving it.
Conversely, to refuse to understand, on the spurious pretext that to understand is to justify, is to raise wilful ignorance to a virtue.
Whereas I'm prepared to pronounce on the stupendous stupidity and complacency of some accounts.
But you’re not prepared to provide any reasoning or explanation as to why you have pronounced so...
To be continued.....
...continued.
ReplyDeleteThis author advances the opinion that were it not for the actions of security forces, the individuals it targets would not be 'conflicted'.
Don’t you accept that heavy-handed security measures might have some effect on the communities they’re targeted against? Do you understand what the author means by ‘conflicted’? It isn’t a synonym for “going to become a suicide bomber”....
All the evidence from Northern Ireland (somewhere I guess you have experience of) suggests that detention without charge or trial had a large effect on support for paramilitary groups. Different measures have different costs and benefits – only a fool would discount such factors.
This isn’t about saying “there is a cost – let’s stop doing it” – it’s about saying “if the cost outweighs the benefit, it would be insane to keep doing it”.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
No she isn't - she's highlighting measures that, as well as doing little to protect us, have done more to destroy our freedom than bin Laden could have dreamed of.
You seem to believe that any measure that is sold as "protecting our freedom" must be defended, even if it does nothing of the sort, or indeed the opposite. Detention without trial doesn't protect my freedom - it's a step on the road to destroying it.
Clear as day - and symptomatic of the gangrenous quality of the deluded Left.
In this case, 'deluded' seems to be a synonym for 'considered'. What next? Thinking is unpatriotic?
Peter Bracken,
ReplyDeleteDo you think that immigration is comparable to detention without trial?
Your pastiche pretty much describes the position of the BNP, but when debating whether something should be stopped (either immigration or detention without trial), 'giving in to pressure' is only one factor - another is whether that something is right or wrong.
There are those who would happily give in to the racist right, but who would extend detention without trial indefinately.
Your formula takes no account of the merits of the case, and relies exclusively on doing the opposite of what your enemies want, regardless of the stupidity or cost.
Conflicted my arse. The silly bitch is blaming efforts to protect the freedoms you and I and others here enjoy to account for the actions of those that would deny them.
ReplyDeletePeterB
I know you don't give a shit if I do or not but I'd be more inclined to listen to what you say if you weren't always foaming at the mouth every time you post something - it doesn't inspire confidence (although it can be very entertaining).
Difficult to know what to believe when the establishment are waving 'terrorist threats' at you, especially after the WMD weasel words and farago of lies.
I get the feeling they'll say what suits their purposes in any given situation and really don't give two hoots about the 'rights' of the hoi polloi.
When they attack and undermine civil liberties in the name of protecting them it really does raise serious questions as to their motives.
We're now being told to expect more activity from dissident Irish Republicans. How serious a threat is this do you think?
MF
There are rights which can justified by universal notions of fairness and humanity...not by particular arguments about their relation to community relations.
Absolutely.
Blimey! Auld blighty is back in the sixties. Till death do us part, innit!
ReplyDeleteWe get to the nub of the issue, MF and exiled:
ReplyDeleteAre Enlightenment values a passive or an aggressive (defensible) position? What does or should plurality embrace? Fascism? Is it consistent with the Enlightenment to engage with those that seek to denude its message and influence?
Well, clearly I think not. Enlightenment values do not indulge the bigotry they oppose. They crusade against it. Otherwise you'd be left with a value system that doesn't discriminate, that doesn't judge, and that doesn't matter.
Paul said...
ReplyDelete@Hevers
You still here?
Hey Paul.
Peter Bracken,
ReplyDeleteWe get to the nub of the issue, MF and exiled:
It would have been nice if that statement was followed by an attempt to address your accusations against the article directly, rather than a retreat to the safer ground of philopsophical generalisations...
..but for what it's worth...
The problem is what you define as "indulging bigotry" - anyone would think that the article was proposing that we cave in to bin Laden's demands for a caliphate, and hand him the keys of Buck House as his palace....
What the article actually suggests is that we should rethink some parts of the war against terror because...
1) They are deeply illiberal, and threaten our freedoms more than the terrorism they purport to protect us against.
2) They damage our relations with British Muslim communities, with no equivilent benefits.
3) On balance, they probably do more to encourage terrorism, than to prevent it.
So which bigots are we indulging here? How are we embracing fascism? These measures are far more redolent of the type of society craved for by bigots and fascists, than of a liberal democracy....
I do discriminate. I do judge. In fact I think I do both rather better than you do - I actually can recognise that there are some intermediate positions between good and evil, or between enlightenment and darkness.
Don't mind me; just checking the lines of communication.
ReplyDeleteOh is the "money tree" thing back? We'd more or less gotten on top of that. And the whole "the economy is just like running a household budget thing"...
ReplyDelete#Is it consistent with the Enlightenment to engage with those that seek to denude its message and influence?#
ReplyDeleteIt's totally consistent with the enlightenment to believe in human rights and universal principles, universally applied to all. I think you've missed what the nub is: the nub is whether the suspension of those rights is acceptable in given situations. Certain rights have been suspended for all. The rights or wrongs of that suspension, which in practical terms makes itself felt in some quarters more pronouncedly, are the issue.
"Engaging" with potential 'enemies of the enlightenment' or whatever you want to call them is another matter..and not one I'd have thought Liberty should be bothering itself about.
Andrew Brown has a bit about a Bishop bashing the enlightenment, as it happens.
ReplyDeleteCan't understand that link instruction above though. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/aug/27/religion-tom-wright-enlightenment-today?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments
Text
ReplyDeleteBit better.
ReplyDeleteSomething that is really starting to annoy me on CIF is stuff like this on a new thread on the Bank Holiday.
ReplyDelete"Traffic jams, bad weather, crowded beaches, muddy festivals – what's not to love?"
There were two football articles that did the samed thing but over the whole piece. "Modern football is terrible the new season will be shit, they herd us in like pigs and then fleece us like sheep and we have to pay £20,000 a month for the privilige. You aren't even allowed to throw bananas at black players or poke opposing fans with a screwdriver any more. It's just shit, shit, shit....
But I can't wait for it to start!Cos I'm mental me!"
Well, that was the Hunter Davis one though I am not sure if he really said that about screwdrivers.
But it really is getting tired as a technique.
Hevers
ReplyDeleteI blame the creative writing teachers at Oxbridge myself.
Recently I have started to be pissed off with the articles that are about little episodes in the writers lives that would be much better served by being written in their journals and then forgotten.
Apparently some bloke lost sight of his grandson for a bit at Blackpool Pleasure Beach and another (unless it was the same one) was late for his plane and had to stay in a hotel.
These articles were both on the main page FFS.
I spilt coffee all over a textbook this morning does anyone want me to write an article about it?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJen, what kind of coffee, what was the text book?
ReplyDelete(and if anyone reads Bracken, let me know if it's worth doing so...)
Oops, I looked at the thing I was moaning about and it is a Livedraw cartoon. Bloody good one too.
ReplyDeleteWow , Bracken vanished! I must have clicked my heels three times...
ReplyDeletehabib
ReplyDeleteIt was instant coffee and a text book I got from a second hand shop, but don't tell anyone at the Guardian will you I don't want to be banned. ;)
It was cheap instant too, oh the shame.
jennifera30 said...
ReplyDeleteI spilt coffee all over a textbook this morning does anyone want me to write an article about it?
If the coffee stain looked like a Miliband, you might be on to a winner.
If this analysis is correct, it looks like the banks are getting ready to take us all to the cleaners yet again:
ReplyDeletehttp://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/
As for the terrorist threat; the spivs and charlatans in The City and on Wall ST are much more dangerous than a nutter in a semtex waistcoat.
I've got more chance of winning the lottery than being blown up by a "God botherer" with a death wish.
It's elementary probabilities.
Ha ha, Martyn!
ReplyDeleteShame on you, Jen, instant coffee? You obviously didn't buy gold when Bracken told you to; you would have had a plantation of your own, by now.
Alexander Chancellor has long been a mystery to me. Why the Guardian thinks we would be interested in his holidays in Tuscany defeats me.
ReplyDeleteWhy they don't pay me to write about my holidays in Tuscany, which are much more interesting (but still not that exciting) is an even greater mstery.
But I presume he has a contract and they have to pay him to write something. Trouble is he seems to have run out of anything to write about some decades ago.
Jenni
ReplyDeleteYou should submit a piece on your traumatic experience - it will fit in the general cif theme of 'little things mean a lot' rather well.
I would post in sympathy and tell you how I broke a plate this morning.
Leni said...
ReplyDeleteI would post in sympathy and tell you how I broke a plate this morning.
Sheer luxury. I walked into a glass door, left a head print on the glass. Didn't look like Jesus.
Oh no not a plate !!!
ReplyDeleteDeano, I don't know if you're around, or what the sky cover is like over there, but look outside, there is a moon the colour of a peach rising.
ReplyDeleteAsset classes, commodities, treasuries - they all carry risk in varying degrees.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that is woefully underappreciated in the amateur world of wealth-creation-preservation (and I dare any fucker on here to deny the objective of either) is that risk drives return.
However one dispenses with the proceeds of risk (assuming there are proceeds to dispense with), no one should overlook that the proceeds are necessary.
Oh, no. I see that some on here believe that money, like coffee, grows on trees.
That's why I love UT. It spends what it has no sense of having been made.
Harvestmoon Habib - clear skies here tonight.
ReplyDeleteShould I still buy gold Peter?
ReplyDeleteThat's it Peter; can't win the argument? Move the goalposts!
ReplyDeleteMy God that's weird! I had a sudden vision of some old bloke with his arse hanging out the back of his trousers reading the financial pages that cover his shivering frame on a park bench.
ReplyDeleteCoffee grows on bushes
ReplyDeleteAnyway, where's the risk? Make eyewatering losses and become effectively insolvent...no problem ...hold everyone else to ransom to bail you out.
ReplyDeleteIt's called a protection racket!
Leni, just too damn pretty.
ReplyDeletepeter bracken said...
ReplyDelete... risk drives return.
I'd like to discuss that in greater detail, but this probably isn't the forum for it - the subject is far too boring I suppose, although I still find the subject of risk and human nature to be quite fascinating, even after thirty years of it.
jennifera30 said...
ReplyDeleteShould I still buy gold Peter?
I wouldn't.
Martyn
ReplyDeleteI couldn't if I wanted to. ;)
Spencer said...
ReplyDeleteCoffee grows on bushes
And Lavazza trees, in Tuscanny, apparently.
Martyn
ReplyDeleteUnless a pair of gold stud earrings (99p) from H Samuel counts.
PeterBracken "risk drives return"
ReplyDeleteYou didn't used to work for Northern Rock, by any chance, did you?
Martyn,
ReplyDelete"risk drives return"
It is a fairly reasonable approach when you're out on a Friday night.
jennifera30 said...
ReplyDeleteUnless a pair of gold stud earrings (99p) from H Samuel counts.
Only if they are made with blood diamonds.
Risk drives return is exactly right.
ReplyDeleteIf I hadn't risked breaking the law by burning my parents house down (with them in it) then I wouldn't have been returned loads of money
.
Is that what you mean Peter. ;)
heyhabib said...
ReplyDeleteIt is a fairly reasonable approach when you're out on a Friday night.
Hehehe! It's dated quite well IMHO
Here tracks from Jerry Williams and Tami Lynn for Hank and any other UTers into Northern Soul.
ReplyDeletePaul, I haven't seen Hank in ages.
ReplyDeletePlus this one from Al Wilson
ReplyDeleteI take the nasty things I said about Alexander Chancellor all back. He had a horrid journey home from Tuscany, apparantly. Had to stay the night in an excellent hotel in
ReplyDeleteLucca.
Lucca.
The heart bleeds.
Dobie Gray
ReplyDeleteGood stuff, Paul, let's bring things forward a little bit?
ReplyDelete"However one dispenses with the proceeds of risk (assuming there are proceeds to dispense with), no one should overlook that the proceeds are necessary."
ReplyDeleteIndeed, which why it makes sense to distribute the proceeds equitably, otherwise the plutocrats just end up wasting it on gold taps for the bathrooms on their yachts whilst the people who make the phones on which they make their billions struggle to tread water above the breadline.
It's not all about economics.
What the fuck happened to our sense of morality?
Isn't that what we inherited from the Enlightenment?
Habib
ReplyDeleteDunno if i,ve played this one here but it's more contemporary and i like it.
BTW:thanks to whoever it was who suggested e-mailing myself to transfer documents (I think it was PeterJ)
ReplyDeleteI'd not thought of that. I'll give it a bash tommorrow.
Hiya Checkhov, play a tune.
ReplyDeletePaul, you do like your "time to get down" music, don't you? Got to admit, I've enjoyed it.
Here's something with a bit more (angst?)
This website maybe of interest to anyone who sometimes wonders what the fuck is going on!
ReplyDeleteThe analysis is by no means definitive and it's not inconceivable, it could be wrong but there is something definitely and desperately wrong with our so called "democracy" so I suggest it behoves us all, for the sake of our children to share as much information as possible.
Call me naive if you like but I was under the impression that was what the internet was for!
http://www.landvaluetax.org/current-affairs-comment/renegade-economist.html
Gold - if you can avoid the loaded potency of the noun - is a hedge against the potential fall in the value of the reserve currency: the dollar.
ReplyDeleteIf you believe that the dollar is fucked, for want of a better term, then you should buy gold or shares in gold miners. FWIW, I think that's sound advice.
Not sure how many know this fact, but all the gold mined since Christ would only fill a large oil tanker.
Habib
ReplyDeleteIf you're looking for angst this lady should sort you out.
This Lady is more where i'm at right now.
Habib
ReplyDeleteWas that clip some sort of grunge fest?
Anyone remember Birthday by the Sugarcubes?
ReplyDelete@Peter Bracken:
ReplyDelete"Gold - if you can avoid the loaded potency of the noun - is a hedge against the potential fall in the value of the reserve currency: the dollar.
If you believe that the dollar is fucked, for want of a better term, then you should buy gold or shares in gold miners. FWIW, I think that's sound advice.
Not sure how many know this fact, but all the gold mined since Christ would only fill a large oil tanker."
27 August, 2010 22:20
What's that got to do with the arguement about the Enlightenment or terrorism?
For Jen x
ReplyDeleteThanks paul. x
ReplyDeleteJen
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome :-)
Habib
ReplyDeleteOut of interest what sort of music do you prefer?
@PeterBracken: I wasn't suggesting you were trying to make a connection between the "yellow commodity" and either the Enlightenment or terrorism for that matter.
ReplyDeleteFar from it; my point was that since you could not address the discrepancies in your arguements about the Enlightenment and terrorism you simlpy moved on to change the subject,ie;"moved the goalposts"
"Out of interest what sort of music do you prefer?"
ReplyDeletePrefer
Like
ReplyDeletehabib
ReplyDeleteNot my cuppa tea at all.Heard this oldie recently.Probably not your cuppa tea either.If we keep working at it i,m sure we'll eventually find we've got something in common:-)
Hell, no, I love that song.
ReplyDeleteHabib
ReplyDeleteI,m signing off now.Take it easy!
You, too, Paul :-)
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't recommend either the buying or selling of gold, but then again, I'm not a CTA.
ReplyDeleteLiked the sugar coated iceberg track
ReplyDeleteForbes on Gold
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.forbes.com/investor/2010/08/23/why-you-need-to-own-gold-now/
I neither changed the subject, chekhov, nor moved the goalposts (I say neither/nor because they are quite different, though you conflate them.)
ReplyDeleteI've written at length about the capacity for a section of the Left to find anti-western shelter with totalitarian stalwarts. I notice, by way of contrast, that you've written fuck all.
I had replied at (half decent) length to exiled but re-reading his three-point scandal I realised I hadn't captured the analytical contempt it deserved. And I'm not sure if I can be arsed to set him straight.
As for MF's botched, if concerned response, I figured he needed a tad longer to tease sense from his mess.
@Peter Bracken: thanks for replying. Perhaps it would make sense if we both understood where each of us stand and I'm not suggesting it should be from a left or right point of view.
ReplyDeleteIn your article "The Deluded Left" you said you were "from the left".
I like some clarity when debating so what did you mean by that? Are you still "from the left" or have you crossed the floor to the right?
I'm just a bit confused at how you set your stall out.
I think your contributions are worthwhile and I'd like to make an effort to reconcile our differences but can you post in plain English because to be honest I haven't got a clue what you are on about!
"I neither changed the subject, chekhov, nor moved the goalposts (I say neither/nor because they are quite different, though you conflate them.)"
ReplyDelete"Neither and Nor are quite different" err... ok please explain why.
Space Argument
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_DjsmkD1fw
UT in Space
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOjmPJxAuXA&NR=1
For Bidisha... Show Them To Me
ReplyDeleteFair tickles them BW.
ReplyDeleteA guy playing in a bar in Dublin with some mates...
ReplyDeleteOne of the best covers I've heard - and my favourite Bill Broonzy song.
Just great
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f00kUeks9EM&feature=player_embedded#!
If you don't like this you ain't right.
The drummer's got he's stuff going on. That harmonica is too abrupt. Fuggit, 'Blues'; Ain't got a clue BW.
ReplyDeleteJust listened to this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IJsAuUgSgc
Ace. My favourite Bowie era.
ReplyDelete69-79. They're all pretty great. Not too keen on 'Pin-ups'.
ReplyDeleteHad this one though
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdsedY0foGc
69-79 indeed ! Bowie *owned* the seventies basically. No other artist made continuously great music *throughout* that decade like he did. That's my reckoning. Anyone else ?
ReplyDeleteThis was pretty good too (originally from Station to Station as ani fule no).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT__JxncHEs
I'm off
ReplyDeleteHere's the Johnny Mathis - yes Mathis - original of Wild Is The Wind...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbMEW6IvULg
Jonny Mathis. Eeeugh.
ReplyDeleteSome math-ish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zru_mgJmBjA&feature=related