Fisking Trenton Oldfield

The Boat Race saboteur Trenton Oldfield's online manifesto includes this:

'The boat race itself, with its pseudo competition, assembled around similar principles of fastest, strongest, selected …etc, is an inconsequential backdrop for these elite educational institutions to demonstrate themselves, reboot their shared culture together in the public realm. It is also inconsequential to the performance that the overwhelming majority of the population continue to remain interested in their own lives and disinterested in the boat race. The boat race, while accessible to everyone, isn’t really advertised or promoted as something for the general public to attend, you know when it’s on because it is part of the social networking calendar. This is a public event, for and by the elites with broader social relations aims.'

Let's examine the 'logic':
' pseudo competition' - anyone who has ever rowed knows the effort involved in becoming a good rower, let alone of the standard to compete in the Boat Race. The 16 rowers who made it to the Oxford and Cambridge Eights have been competing for at least a year just to get a place in the boat, let alone the effort involved in keeping free of injury so as to make it to the stake boats at Putney. As to the racing itself, the Olympics and World Championships are raced over 2,000 metres. By the time Trenton Oldfield raised his ugly head in front of the crews they had rowed far further than that and had further to row. 'pseudi competition'? I think not.

'assembled around similar principles of fastest, strongest, selected' - yes that's how elite sports selection works and much more in this society should.

'inconsequential backdrop for these elite educational institutions to demonstrate themselves, reboot their shared culture together in the public realm' - anyone who has studied up at Oxford and Cambridge knows how important the Boat Race is to both of those great educational institutions, obviously one being greater that the other.

'inconsequential to the performance that the overwhelming majority of the population continue to remain interested in their own lives and disinterested in the boat race' - Just as the majority of the population of this country are disinterested in cricket, rugby and maybe even football. Sport is for the people who are interested in that sport, the rest are free to ignore it if they wish. The Boat Race is about more than just sport, it is a piece of tradition that helps to bind this country together and keep it rooted in its shared past. People choose to support Oxford or Cambridge despite never having studied there, not knowing anyone who has studied there or often never having even having visited either. It's about feeling connected to history.

'The boat race, while accessible to everyone, isn’t really advertised or promoted as something for the general public to attend, you know when it’s on because it is part of the social networking calendar' - What utter rubbish. The Boat Race is covered live by the BBC who, along with the broadsheet newspapers, for days beforehand show the course of the race, the best vantage points and of course the best pubs to watch the race from. What is the social networking calendar? I think the very confused Trenton Oldfield may be thinking of the social calendar that includes the far more exclusive Henley rowing regatta as well as tennis at Queens and horse racing at Ascot.

'This is a public event, for and by the elites with broader social relations aims.'' - This makes the least sense of all of the pillock's claims. It is a public event, in that it is held on a public river, in full view of the public but the rest of the claim is tripe...

Barack Obama he's an impressive orator but an even more impressive liar

7 lies in uder 2 minutes; impressive Barack Obama.

Where's the outrage from the BBC consumer champion programmes?

The BBC has a long history of consumer champion programmes from That's Life to whatever Anne Robinson vehicle is currently running. Will they be looking into the absolute scandal that The Telegraph has discovered:

'The BBC is over-charging millions of people for their licence fees by selling "annual" permits that only last 11 months, it can be disclosed.

The corporation has been making up to £25m a year through the little-known loophole, which has been condemned as "unfair" and a "rip off".

Any viewer buying a TV licence for the first time is charged £145.50 for a year-long permit.

But under current arrangements, the new licence expires 12 months from the first day of the month in which it is purchased. This means that an ‘annual’ licence bought on April 30 2012 will actually run out at midnight on March 31 2013.

Licence fee payers have complained that the payment quirk means they are getting as little as 11 months’ worth of licence when they have paid for a full year.

...

The £145.50 cost of an annual licence breaks down at £12 a month. Around 2.1 million people bought a new licence last year, a BBC spokesman said. This means that the BBC could have profited by up to £25 million last year due to the curtailed length of the ‘annual’ permits it sold.

It is understood that the loophole has been in place since 1991 when the BBC took over the administration of TV licences from the Licensing Authority, but it has only just come to light after a complaint to the BBC Trust.

John Whittingdale, MP for Maldon and chairman of the Culture, Media and Sport select committee, said: “I entirely understand why people think it is unfair. They are having an average of 15 and anything up to 30 days of TV watching - which they think they have paid for - taken away from them.”

“I quite understand why people feel they’re being ripped off.”

The news comes as the BBC is trying to save £670 million a year by 2017 as part of a cost-cutting drive.

The monthly renewal issue affects all people who buy a licence for the first time, either online or through the post. Once they already have one, it is updated annually on the same date.'

The BBC's mealy-mouthed, pathetic excuse:

'A spokesman for the BBC’s TV Licensing division denied that the corporation is short-changing consumers.

The spokesman said that it would cost “hundreds of thousands of pounds” to change the monthly renewal system.

“Setting monthly renewal dates minimises collection costs and means more money is invested in the BBC’s programmes and services. This issue affects a small proportion of payers and only affects them the first time they buy a licence.

“To give each a daily renewal date would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds which is not good value for the majority of licence payers,” the spokesman said. '

Would Esther or Ann or one of their team allow a giant corporation to get away with deploying that feeble excuse for ripping off customers? why should the BBC get away with it now?

Thanks for almost ruining British rowing's big day - Trenton Oldfield

Oxford crew member William Zeng used Twitter to send Trenton Oldfield, the protester, a series of emotional messages after the race.

Mr Zeng, a doctorate student at Oriel College, tweeted:

‘When I missed your head with my blade I knew only that you were a swimmer, and if you say you are a protester then no matter what you say your cause may be, your action speaks too loudly for me to hear you.

‘I know exactly what you were protesting. You were protesting the right of 17 young men and one woman to compete fairly and honorably, to demonstrate their hard work and desire in a proud tradition.

‘You were protesting their right to devote years of their lives, their friendships, and their souls to the fair pursuits of the joys and the hardships of sport. You, who would make a mockery of their dedication and their courage, are a mockery of a man.’

Nice and lucid sentiments from an articulate as well as athletic young man, who is a credit to his family and life.

On the other hand we have the ramblings of Trenton Oldfield from his own website:

'THIS IS A PROTEST, AN ACT OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, A METHODOLOGY OF REFUSING AND RESISTANCE. THIS ACT HAS EMPLOYED GUERRILLA TACTICS. I AM SWIMMING INTO THE BOATS IN THE HOPE I CAN STOP THEM FROM COMPLETING THE RACE AND PROPOSING THE RETURN OF SURPRISE TACTICS. THIS IS ‘PEACEFUL’ … I HAVE NO WEAPONS (DON’T SHOOT!) MY ONLY FEAR, IS NOT SWIMMING FAST ENOUGH TO GET IN THE RIGHT POSITION TO PREVENT THE BOATS.'

Trenton Oldfield's manifesto continues:

'The boat race itself, with its pseudo competition, assembled around similar principles of fastest, strongest, selected …etc, is an inconsequential backdrop for these elite educational institutions to demonstrate themselves, reboot their shared culture together in the public realm. It is also inconsequential to the performance that the overwhelming majority of the population continue to remain interested in their own lives and disinterested in the boat race. The boat race, while accessible to everyone, isn’t really advertised or promoted as something for the general public to attend, you know when it’s on because it is part of the social networking calendar. This is a public event, for and by the elites with broader social relations aims.'

I will give that statement a good fisking tomorrow.

As for Trenton Oldfield's suggestions for other class warriors:

' If you work in a restaurant where elitists eat, can you serve the food once it is cold or cook the wrong food?

If you are a builder repairing the house of an elitist can you also bug it and share the footage and audio online?'

There is a word that is coming to my mind...

Kate Upton playing with scissors - A Rule 5 Saturday night post

Kate Upton, oops

Good news - Ted is coming in July

That's the 'green band' trailer for the upcoming Seth MacFarlane live-action comedy Ted. For any Family Guy fan it looks a must watch, Ted and Brian do seem to share a voice!

Next is the 'red band' trailer which is slightly NSFW

Ted: Restricted Trailer - watch more funny videos

Mark Wahlberg playing a guy whose best friend is a teddy bear who he wished into life some years ago and Mila Kunis playing hot. It's the story of how Ted gets in the way of his relationships and how Ted didn't stay pure and cuddly but is now a lewd, pot-smoking, chauvinistic stuffed toy!

George Galloway in his own words - inconsistent chap isn't he?

Which George Galloway to believe? The one who denies any wrong doing by himself on his Press TV show or the one we see and hear in the Middle East?

Anna Friel - A Rule 5 Friday night post

Anna Friel from the days of Brookside has been a pin-up star. So here's some pictures and videos from her past and up to the present day making of the film Mr Soho.

First as Beth Jordache in Brookside

The lesbian kiss from Brookside

A topless'ish picture

An arty photo from a photo shoot

Some topless paparazzi shots

The following two photos are from behind the scenes shooting Mr Soho

And some videos...





anna friel nude bath by bonzille


anna friel me without you by actla99


Anna Friel Nude by penguin_2012

Take a wild guess as to which story the BBC link to...

A while ago I reported on the differences in tone between the two BBC pieces about comparing life in Israel and life in Gaza; the headline for the two articles being 'Gaza-Israel clashes: The view from each side'. The two pieces are headlined thus:
'Gazans 'inured' to conflict' and 'Israel's iron Dome hopes'. Guess which one the BBC give priority to in their links section of the Middle East news?

Not too difficult to guess was it? Although did you guess that they'd editorialise the headline to add the word 'endless'?

A fortunate coincidence

Rather fortuitously, Good Friday and the first night of Pesach (Passover) fall on the same day this year. I say fortuitously because the Last Supper that Jesus and his disciples shared is generally accepted to have been a Seder night meal, that being the meal eaten on the first night of the Pesach festival. This is not surprising bearing in mind all of Jesus's disciples, along with Jesus himself, were Jewish.

So whether you are Jewish or Christian may I wish you a hearty Chag Sameach and a Happy Easter.


The whole matter of setting the dates for Pesach and Easter is quite fascinating and a perusal of the relevant Wikipedia article does leave my head spinning slightly:

'Easter and the holidays that are related to it are moveable feasts, in that they do not fall on a fixed date in the Gregorian or Julian calendars (both of which follow the cycle of the sun and the seasons). Instead, the date for Easter is determined on a lunisolar calendar similar to the Hebrew calendar. The First Council of Nicaea (325) established the date of Easter as the first Sunday after the full moon (the Paschal Full Moon) following the northern hemisphere's vernal equinox.^[6] Ecclesiastically, the equinox is reckoned to be on March 21 (even though the equinox occurs, astronomically speaking, on March 20 in most years), and the "Full Moon" is not necessarily the astronomically correct date.
In Western Christianity, using the Gregorian calendar, Easter always falls on a Sunday between March 22 and April 25, inclusively.^[50] The following day, Easter Monday, is a legal holiday in many countries with predominantly Christian traditions.
Eastern Christianity bases its calculations on the Julian Calendar. Due to the 13 day difference between the calendars between 1900 and 2099, March 21 corresponds, during the 21st century, to April 3 in the Gregorian Calendar. Easter therefore varies between April 4 and May 8 on the Gregorian calendar (the Julian calendar is no longer used as the civil calendar of the countries where Eastern Christian traditions predominate). Among the Oriental Orthodox some churches have changed from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar and the date for Easter as for other fixed and moveable feasts is the same as in the Western church.^[51]
The precise date of Easter has at times been a matter for contention. At the First Council of Nicaea in 325 it was decided that all Christian churches would celebrate Easter on the same day, which would be computed independently of any Jewish calculations to determine the date of Passover. It is however probable (though no contemporary account of the Council's decisions has survived) that no method of determining the date was specified by the Council. Epiphanius of Salamis wrote in the mid-4th century:

...the emperor...convened a council of 318 bishops...in the city of Nicea...They passed certain ecclesiastical canons at the council besides, and at the same time decreed in regard to the Passover that there must be one unanimous concord on the celebration of God's holy and supremely excellent day. For it was variously observed by people....^[52]

In the years following the council, the computational system that was worked out by the church of Alexandria came to be normative. It took a while for the Alexandrian rules to be adopted throughout Christian Europe, however. The Church of Rome continued to use an 84-year lunisolar calendar cycle from the late 3rd century until 457. It then switched to an adaptation by Victorius of the Alexandrian rules. This table was so inaccurate that the Alexandrian rules were adopted in their entirety in the following century. From this time, therefore, all disputes between Alexandria and Rome as to the correct date for Easter cease, as both churches were using identical tables.
Early Christians in Britain and Ireland also used a late 3rd century Roman 84-year cycle. They were suspected of being Quartodecimans, unjustly because they always kept Easter on a Sunday, although that Sunday could be as early as the fourteenth day of the lunar month. This was replaced by the Alexandrian method in the course of the 7th and 8th centuries. Churches in western continental Europe used a late Roman method until the late 8th century during the reign of Charlemagne, when they finally adopted the Alexandrian method. Since 1582, when the Catholic Church adopted the Gregorian calendar while the Eastern Orthodox and most Oriental Orthodox Churches retained the Julian calendar, the date on which Easter is celebrated has again differed.

Computations

Main article: Computus

In 725, Bede succinctly wrote, "The Sunday following the full Moon which falls on or after the equinox will give the lawful Easter."^[53] However, this does not reflect the actual ecclesiastical rules precisely. One reason for this is that the full moon involved (called the Paschal full moon) is not an astronomical full moon, but the 14th day of a calendar lunar month. Another difference is that the astronomical vernal equinox is a natural astronomical phenomenon, which can fall on March 19, 20, or 21, while the ecclesiastical date is fixed by convention on March 21.^[54]
In applying the ecclesiastical rules, Christian churches use March 21 as the starting point in determining the date of Easter, from which they find the next full moon, etc. The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches
Easter is determined on the basis of lunisolar cycles. The lunar year consists of 30-day and 29-day lunar months, generally alternating, with an embolismic month added periodically to bring the lunar cycle into line with the solar cycle. In each solar year (January 1 to December 31 inclusive), the lunar month beginning with an ecclesiastical new moon falling in the 29-day period from March 8 to April 5 inclusive is designated as the paschal lunar month for that year. Easter is the third Sunday in the paschal lunar month, or, in other words, the Sunday after the paschal lunar month's 14th day. The 14th of the paschal lunar month is designated by convention as the Paschal full moon, although the 14th of the lunar month may differ from the date of the astronomical full moon by up to two days.^[55] Since the ecclesiastical new moon falls on a date from March 8 to April 5 inclusive, the paschal full moon (the 14th of that lunar month) must fall on a date from March 21 to April 18 inclusive.
Accordingly, Gregorian Easter can fall on 35 possible dates—between March 22 and April 25 inclusive.^[56] It last fell on March 22 in 1818, and will not do so again until 2285. It fell on March 23 in 2008, but will not do so again until 2160. Easter last fell on the latest possible date, April 25, in 1943 and will next fall on that date in 2038. However, it fell on April 24, just one day before this latest possible date, in 2011 and will not do so again until 2095. The cycle of Easter dates repeats after exactly 5,700,000 years, with April 19 being the most common date, happening 220,400 times or 3.9%, compared to the median for all dates of 189,525 times or 3.3%.
The Gregorian calculation of Easter was based on a method devised by the Calabrian doctor Aloysius Lilius (or Lilio) for adjusting the epacts of the moon,^[57] and has been adopted by almost all Western Christians and by Western countries who celebrate national holidays at Easter. For the British Empire and colonies, a determination of the date of Easter Sunday using Golden Numbers and Sunday letters was defined by the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 with its Annexe. This was designed to exactly match the Gregorian calculation.

Relationship to date of Passover

In determining the date of the Gregorian and Julian Easter a lunisolar cycle is followed. In determining the date of the Jewish Passover a lunisolar calendar is also used, and because Easter always falls on a Sunday it usually falls up to a week after the first day of Passover (Nisan 15 in the Hebrew calendar). However, the differences in the rules between the Hebrew and Gregorian cycles results in Passover falling about a month after Easter in three years of the 19-year cycle. These occur in years 3, 11, and 14 of the Gregorian 19-year cycle (corresponding respectively to years 19, 8, and 11 of the Jewish 19-year cycle).
The reason for the difference is the different scheduling of embolismic months in the two cycles.

Further information: computus

In addition, without changes to either calendar, the frequency of monthly divergence between the two festivals will increase over time as a result of the differences in the implicit solar years: the implicit mean solar year of the Hebrew calendar is 365.2468 days while that of the Gregorian calendar is 365.2425 days. In years 2200–2299, for example, the start of Passover will be about a month later than Gregorian Easter in four years out of nineteen.
Since in the modern Hebrew calendar Nisan 15 can never fall on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday, the seder of Nisan 15 never falls on the night of Maundy Thursday. The second seder, observed in some Jewish communities on the second night of Passover can, however, occur on Thursday night.^{[citation needed]}
Because the Julian calendar's implicit solar year has drifted further over the centuries than those of the Gregorian or Hebrew calendars, Julian Easter is a lunation later than Gregorian Easter in five years out of nineteen, namely years 3, 8, 11, 14, and 19 of the Christian cycle. This means that it is a lunation later than Jewish Passover in two years out of nineteen, years 8 and 19 of the Christian cycle. Furthermore, because the Julian calendar's lunar age is now about four to five days behind the mean lunations, Julian Easter always follows the start of Passover. This cumulative effect of the errors in the Julian calendar's solar year and lunar age has led to the often-repeated, but false, belief that the Julian cycle includes an explicit rule requiring Easter always to follow Jewish Passover.^[58][59] The supposed "after Passover" rule is called the Zonaras proviso, after Joannes Zonaras, the Byzantine canon lawyer who may have been the first to formulate it.^[60][61]'

Why bother to vote in local elections?

Why indeed, when so much of the areas that local councils are meant to control or manage are in fact controlled by the EU.

'This video aims to highlight a sample of just 8 local issues upon which the EU Parliament has usurped the control of central and local government in the UK - often to disastrous effect. Some appear scandalous, others farcical, but all illustrate that the EU is the hidden local issue. www.hiddenlocalissue.co.uk

This film was produced by the Europe of Freedom & Democracy Group in the European Parliament. It incorporates EU-critics, eurosceptics and eurorealists. The main goals of the Group are to reject the Treaty establishing a constitution for Europe and to oppose all forms of centralisation.
www.efdgroup.eu'

Europe, and by that I mean the EU, is not a marginal issue; it is the main issue in the UK as it affects so many aspects of our lives. So you have a choice in the upcoming local elections: vote for a pro-EU Labour party, vote for the mostly fanatically pro-EU Lib Dems, vote for a Conservative party with many EU-realists in the party but lead by pro-EU people or vote for a truly EU-realist party UKIP.

When a tornado strikes

'"The Minicks of Manchester were on their way to Snap Fitness on Broad Street in Dexter when they found themselves in the heart of the tornado that ripped through the village early Thursday evening. After driving around in the pounding hail looking for a place to hide, they found themselves at the Village Car Wash and Laundry on Second Street.

From Metro Airport on Friday morning, Chris, 43, recalled the minute they will never forget."
Read more: http://www.freep.com/article/20120316/NEWS05/120316017/With-video-Couple-foun...

second clip: 'Michigan tornado: Security camera catches tornado blowing in a garage door in Dexter''

Who to believe Ken Livingstone or Ken Livingstone?

Last week I read in The Standard one of the most incredible headlines that I have ever read 'Ken vows to freeze C-charge in a car-friendly transport manifesto'. The story explained that:

'Ken Livingstone today promised to freeze the congestion charge at £10 for the next four years if he wins the race for City Hall.

 Labour's mayoral candidate ruled out reinstating the zone's western extension which was scrapped by Boris Johnson.

And he rejected a £25 gas guzzler charge - a key pledge at the the last election - saying it would be too expensive'

Hmm those are some interesting promises for the usually anti-private motoring Ken Livingstone.

So should I believe the above promises made by Ken Livingstone in full cuddly vote-garnering mode or look at his history and previous statements?

Remember it was Ken Livingstone that introduced the congestion zone in the first place, before that Londoners could actually drive into the centre of their city without having to pay for the privilege; imagine that. Ken also introduced the western extension to the congestion zone during his second term despite massive opposition to it. It was Boris Johnson who kept his election pledge when he scrapped the western extension, with none of the dire consequences that Ken and others predicted.

As to the £25 charge for family sized 'gas guzzlers', Ken Livingstone introduced this policy in 2007 when mayor, here is the TFL proposal leaflet. Please remember that this wasn't just an idea Ken Livingstone was just considering, he had even decided on the date it was to be introduced - 27th October 2008. Thankfully Boris Johnson was elected mayor and scrapped the policy immediately. On 6th April last year Ken Livingstone was asked about this £25 charge and replied "Oh yes the £25 charge for gas guzzlers we’ll be straight back for that’, he also told the Guardian "It's definitely an idea we will revisit."

So who to believe: Ken Livingstone or Ken Livingstone? Well I tend to discount anything Ken Livingstone promises those, other than his core constituency, during an election campaign when he is just looking for votes and instead believe what he says when in his normal mode. So I believe Ken Livingstone wants to extend the congestion zone to the west again and to introduce a £25 charge for 'gas guzzlers' and these are jut two more reasons not to vote for Ken Livingstone.

The one hundred and sixty-fourth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's award is presented to Migration Watch for the title of its latest report - 'Benefits Regime Makes UK Attractive Destination for East European Migrants'

"No shit Sherlock"


The press release is here and the whole research paper is here. I await the BBC's coverage of this report.......

The BBC shamelessly promoting Ed Miliband

The BBC Radio 4 news at 7pm runs for less than two minutes but the BBC still manged to find the time to broadcast an Ed Miliband soundbite re News International.
Do the BBC have any shame?

Is Ken Livingstone a "f***ing liar"?

It is being reported that Boris Johnson thinks this and said it to Ken Livingstone's face in a lift after LBC debate this morning. What do you think?

At last the Surface Stations report

I have blogged previously about the way that surface (weather) stations are located and how this may influence their readings. I have just noticed that Surface Stations  have produced a paper on this. I need time to read and absorb; so in the meantime, why not take a look yourself.

James Delingpole vs Richard Bacon (update)

On 22 March I posted this piece about James Delingpole's appearance on Richard Bacon's 5Live show. I was appalled that Richard Bacon didn't sound a) impartial or b) knowledgeable. And wondered if you ever heard him sound so angry throughout an interview and so triumphant when he thought (usually incorrectly) that he'd made a good point? Are BBC interviewers meant to treat interviewees like this? Can anyone think of another interviewee that Richard Bacon has so taken against?

James Delingpole has posted his own reaction to this interview which is well worth a read.

So far as I know Richard Bacon has not revealed if he has found time in his busy schedule to check James Delingpole's rebuttal of the 97% figure.

Delighting in the economic woes of the country he wants to play a part in governing

"We’re living through amazing times. For anyone on the Left… it’s like an orgasmic wet dream. Think about it: Capitalism in crisis again; unemployment’s on the rise and so is inflation."

Labour Shadow Cabinet John Trickett MP gets a touch over-excited by bad economic news.

Not a word about this on the BBC, but can you imagine the coverage if during a Labour government a Conservative shadow minister had been gleeful about the poor state of the economy? As I have said before, with the BBC it is not just their bias by commission that appals me but also the bias by omission.

George Galloway and the people he calls "the face of the Iranian opposition"

If George Galloway describes the two gentlemen who try and speak truth to power as "the face of the Iranian opposition" does that make him "the face (or voice) of the Iranian government"? George Galloway's work for the Iranian Press TV would seem to support that claim.