Saturday 31 December 2011

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

This week's award is presented to Prof. Chava Muchnik of Tel Aviv University for the amazing discovery that teenagers who listen to too much music at too high a volume on their MP3 players are risking their hearing.

Wow, "no shit, Sherlock"

Friday 30 December 2011

Tim Minchin - 'Rock 'N' Roll Nerd'

Very nice and clever... I like Tim Minchin but Mrs NotaSheep is not so sure...

Or could there be another explanation?

Yesterday's Telegraph informed us that 'Service-cutting councils are hoarding £10.8bn' and oddly that:
'The figures show that some of the biggest increases in reserves come from the Labour-led Wakefield council, which is expected to have more than doubled its cash pile from £21million to £51million by March. Labour-run Bolton council is likely to have more than tripled its reserves of £23million to £81million'
Now why might a Labour council prefer to cut services, and blame the cuts on a Conservative government) rather than dip into reserves?

Thursday 29 December 2011

Thought for the day

"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains."

Or in other versions:
Not to be a Republican at 20 is proof of want of heart;
to be one at 30 is proof of want of head.
    - François Guisot (1787-1874)
A man who is not a liberal at 16 has no heart;
a man who is not a conservative at 60 has no head.
    - Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)
Not to be a socialist at 20 is proof of want of heart;
to be one at 30 is proof of want of head.
    - Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929)
Any man who is under 30 and is not a Liberal has no heart; and
any man who is over 30 and not a Conservative has no brains.
    - Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

  Any man who is not a socialist at age 20 has no heart.
   Any man who is still a socialist at age 40 has no head.

The most likely reason is that Bennet Cerf once reported Clemenceau's
response to a visitor's alarm about his son being a communist:
   If he had not become a Communist at 22, I would have disowned him.
   If he is still a Communist at 30, I will do it then.

George Seldes later quoted Lloyd George as having said:
   A young man who isn't a socialist hasn't got a heart;
   an old man who is a socialist hasn't got a head.

The earliest known version of this observation is attributed to
mid-nineteenth century historian and statesman François Guizot:
   Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart;
   to be one at 30 is proof of want of head.

Does Nigella use too many innuendos?

80GumDrops thinks she might do... Nice job sir.

And Harry Hill agrees...

Wednesday 28 December 2011

Daily Mail fail

The Mail speculates on Roman Abramovich’s New Year’s Eve party, apparently this will be
'a glittering celebration on which the Russian billionaire is spending more than £5million with plans to eclipse even last year’s sparkling event.

Mr Abramovich, 45, is back on the island of St Barts'
Fine and fair enough but then I spotted this picture and its caption...
The original Daily Mail caption for this photograph was 'Festive: Abramovich and his partner Dasha Zhukova celebrated Christmas on the Caribbean Island' which is a little odd as Roman Abramovich is actually lighting a menorah, to celebrate the Jewish festival of Channukah.

Addendum: The Mail have changed their caption to now read: 'Joining in: Abramovich was mingling with the locals on the island and even stopped to light some large candles' Still no mention of Channukah or Judaism though?

Nice buns!

Lorraine Pascale is a TV chef who I am not that impressed by. I find her delivery a touch annoying and her recipes pretty unexciting.

Then I discovered that she used to be a model; now I find her buns more interesting...

Sexist? Probably, but hey I am on holiday!

Just listen to what they say (again)

The Western media is full of the news that Hamas and Fatah PLO are seeking to merge and that this indicates a softening of line by Hamas who are now dedicated to seeking peace with Israel based on the pre-1967 war borders. This is of course complete crap.

This is Hamas's leader in the Gaza Strip, Ismail Haniyeh, saying on 14 December that whilst Hamas may work for the "interim objective of liberation of Gaza, the West Bank, or Jerusalem," this in an "interim objective" and "reconciliation" with Fatah will not change Hamas' long-term "strategic" goal of eliminating all of Israel. Ismail Haniyeh also said this:
"The armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the invaders and usurpers [Israel]... We won't relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine."
From the sea to the river, now where have I heard that before? Oh yes, remember that every time someone chants "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" they are calling for the destruction of Israel, the ending of the Jewish state. The river is the Jordan, the sea is the Mediterranean; from the river to the sea is not calling for a two state solution, it is calling for the destruction of Israel.

Two days after Ismail Haniyeh's speech, the Palestinian Authority's Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said that Hamas leader abroad Khaled Mashaal had agreed that:
"There will be no military resistance."
"The permanent solution is on the '67 borders."
According to Mahmoud Abbas, Hamas had agreed to a permanent solution based on the 1967 borders. However, Haniyeh said that Hamas agrees to a temporary solution on the 1967 borders as a first stage only.

Who to believe?

Before you say Mahmoud Abbas, remember that for many years, the PLO itself promoted a "stages plan" that would first create a Palestinian state on the 1949 - 1967 armistice lines, and then work from that position to destroy Israel. Indeed senior Fatah official Abbas Zaki recently stated that this remains the goal for Fatah as well, but that "you can't say it to the world. You can say it to yourself."...

The west listens to and believes what Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas say about wanting a two state solution and a return to 1967 borders because that fits in with their world view of an evil Jewish state stealing land from poor Palestinians. The truth is some way from this narrative but the western media, especially the BBC, just don't care; facts will not be allowed to intrude into this narrative.

Cheetah has died

Cheetah, Tarzan's chimpanzee sidekick in the Tarzan movies of the early 1930s, has died at age 80 in his Florida animal sanctuary home. One of the movie greats is no more...

Here he is in action...

Worth a repost as Israel is not an 'apartheid state' but many of its neighbouring countries are

From 31 May this year:

Yvonne Ridley needs educating re Israel and 'apartheid'

That was Yvonne Ridley's Tweet that I read this morning.

This accusing of Israel of being an 'apartheid state' has got to stop as it isn't true and also because the Islamic states near Israel are far closer to being apartheid states than is Israel.

Here are some examples as to why Israel is not an 'apartheid state':

1) From May this year the story that:
''Hundreds of people are estimated to flee Eritrea every month, often making risky journeys to reach Europe or Israel in search of better opportunities.' The BBC report

a strange tale of people fleeing Eritrea and wanting to go only to Europe or Israel; the story really does not fit with the BBC's usual portrayal of Israel as vile 'apartheid state'.'

2) From March the story of Rania Fadel, an Israeli Arab who belongs to StandWithUs and takes real exception to Israel being characterized as an Apartheid state. A video well worth watching.

3) From January the story of tennis standout Nadine Fahoum and her mother, Wafa Zoabi Fahoum, a lawyer by trade, who was formerly the head of Beit Hagefen, a non-profit organization in Haifa that works toward improving relations between Arabs and Jews. As I asked in January 'What is wrong with Israel that an Arab girl can do so well and represent her country from 2003 to 2008? Israel the apartheid state; I think not.' Contrast that with the attitude of many Islamic states who refuse to allow Israeli sportsmen to enter tournaments in their countries and sometimes all Israelis.

4) From November 2010: In Jerusalem, Israel's capital stands the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosques, entry to which is forbidden to Jews; this is in the capital of the 'apartheid state'. Meanwhile in Saudi Arabia no non Muslim is allowed to enter Mecca.

This situation in Jerusalem contrasts starkly with the state of affairs that existed in Jerusalem between 1948 and its liberation in 1967. During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War the Old City including the Wailing Wall were captured by Jordan. Article VIII of the 1949 Armistice Agreement provided for Israeli Jewish access to the Wall. However for the following nineteen years, despite numerous requests by Israeli officials and Jewish groups to the United Nations and other international bodies to attempt to enforce the armistice agreement, Jordan refused to abide by this clause as part of a policy of Islamization. Some sources claim Jews could only visit the wall if they travelled through Jordan (which was not an option for Israelis) and did not have an Israeli visa stamped in their passports. Others say Jordan even barred non-Israeli Jews, demanding that tourists present a certificate of baptism before a visa would be granted.

The most sickening thing about this, is that if you presented this information to the sanctimonious hypocrites that call Israel an apartheid state they wouldn't even care. They 'know' the 'truth' and everything else is irrelevant. They know that Israel is an 'apartheid state' and nothing will change their sick, closed, hate-filled minds.

5) In 2007 I explained that Israel was not an 'apartheid state' but that many Islamic ones were:
'Saeb Erekat, one of the PLO/PA's most senior spokesman recently declared that the "Palestinians" will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state. He was speaking on Palestine Radio Monday when he gave the rationale for the "Palestinian" position. "There is no country in the world where religious and national identities are intertwined,". An interesting position to take and of course one that is frequently referred to by the "Israel is an apartheid state" crowd.

The truth is somewhat at odds with the statement as I have mentioned before. Here is a longer list than my last:
1) Saudi Arabia - The Saudi constitution states "Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion." (see * below)
2) Pakistan - "The Islamic Republic of..."
3) Afghanistan - "The Islamic Republic of..."
4) Iran - "The Islamic Republic of..."
5) Jordan - The Jordanian constitution describes that country as an "Arab State" and notes that "Islam is the religion of the State."

Just remind me why Israel is an apartheid state and not Saudi Arabia...

"Saudi Arabia is an Islamic monarchy and the Government has declared the Qur'an and the Sunnah (tradition) of Muhammad to be the country’s Constitution. Freedom of religion is severely limited. Islam is the official religion, and all citizens must be Muslims. The Government prohibits the private and public practice of other religions. The Government bases its legitimacy on governance according to the precepts of the rigorously conservative and strict interpretation of the Salafi or Wahhabi school of the Sunni branch of Islam and discriminates against other branches of Islam."

"Under Saudi law conversion by a Muslim to another religion is considered apostasy, a crime punishable by death if the accused does not recant."

"Saudi Arabia prohibits public non-Muslim religious activities. Non-Muslim worshipers risk arrest, imprisonment, lashing, deportation, and sometimes torture for engaging in overt religious activity that attracts official attention."

"Proselytizing by non-Muslims, including the distribution of non-Muslim religious materials such as Bibles, is illegal. Muslims or non-Muslims wearing religious symbols of any kind in public risk confrontation with the Mutawwa'in. Under the auspices of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, approximately 50 so-called "Call and Guidance" centers employing approximately 500 persons work to convert foreigners to Islam. Some non-Muslim foreigners convert to Islam during their stay in the country. According to official reports, 942 foreign workers converted to Islam in the past year. The press often carries articles about such conversions, including testimonials. The press as well as government officials publicized the conversion of the Italian Ambassador to Saudi Arabia in late 2001."

"The Government requires non citizen  residents to carry a Saudi residence permit (Iqama) for identification in place of their passports.[4] Among other information, these contain a religious designation for "Muslim" or "non-Muslim."

"Until March 1, 2004, the official government website stated that Jews were forbidden from entering the country"

"According to Alan Dershowitz, "in Saudi Arabia apartheid is practiced against non-Muslims, with signs indicating that Muslims must go to certain areas and non-Muslims to others.""

"According Saudi policy for tourists, it is not permissible to bring Christian or Jewish religious symbols and books into the kingdom and they are subject to confiscation" '

Yvonne Ridley says that Israel is an 'apartheid state'; is she misinformed or deliberately misleading people?

Tuesday 27 December 2011

An historical question

Mrs NotaSheep and I have just watched 'The Duchess' which is 'A chronicle of the life of 18th century aristocrat Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire'. My question is this: Wikipedia relates  that her much needed son, William George Spencer Cavendish, was 'Born in Paris, France' on 21 May 1790, what was a British aristocrat doing giving birth in Paris less than a year after the start of the French Revolution?

It's not easy being an American 'liberal' - so show them some love

Wild Bill feels their pain...

Monday 26 December 2011

The best mashup?

Still my favourite mashup, I think... Stayin' Alive In The Wall (Pink Floyd vs Bee Gees Mashup) by Wax Audio

Although this is also rather good

Bob Marley vs The Beatles - Let It Be, No Cry - Mashup by FAROFF (No Woman, No Cry and Let It Be)

And this has a certain something, not as obvious as many...

ABBA vs Soft Cell - Tainted Waterloo

I have posted mashups before; do you know of any others that are really good?

This might explain the 'atmosphere' at Casa NotaSheep

Sainsbury's have marked the festive season by producing a list of the most fart-making vegetables. In first place the Jerusalem artichoke, a delicious tuberous vegeatble that neither comes from Jerusalem nor is an artichoke. I love these roasted but have been banned from eating them for some years now as the effect they have on me is quite incredible. However this year Mrs NotaSheep has relented and they are on the Boxing Day menu! In second place comes my favourite regularly eaten root vegetable, the parsnip, this was on our Christmas Day menu. In third place came the predictable Brussels sprout which we also partook of on Christmas Day. Fourth place was taken by the cabbage which we forgot to serve but there is a dish of red cabbage still waiting for us. In fifth place came the cauliflower which I never eat, except raw.

So yesterday we had the vegeatbles that came second and third in the list and the effects were mild. Today we will be consuming those that came first, second, third and fourth; a scary prospect... I fear the spare bedroom may see some use tonight!

NB: Must make sure all candles are extinguished before dinner!

Sunday 25 December 2011

We wish you a satirical Christmas

Genius, sheer genius...

Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

'Baby it's cold outside'

Tom Jones & Cerys Matthews with my favourite version of this old classic.

Merry Christmas

Yellowman - 'We wish you a Reggae Christmas'

And also...

Mariah Carey(?) - 'All I Want for Christmas is Jews'

Saturday 24 December 2011

The gayest music video ever?

I saw this video for Dr Hook's 1976 hit "A Little Bit More" on Top of the Pops 1976 this week, I had not seen it before. Mrs NotaSheep and I were left open-mouthed by the on-screen chemistry between the two singers; we had no idea when we listened to the song 35 years ago.

Teaching the next generation to hate Israelis

Yesterday I blogged about the Saudi Arabian schools still teaching that Jews must be killed. Today I turn to the United States of America. Camera report that:
'According to The Tab, a Boston-area newspaper, Newton resident Tony Pagliuso was shocked when he examined a reading selection on the treatment of women in the Middle East his daughter brought home from her history class at Newton South High School. The article, from a controversial textbook called The Arab World Studies Notebook, falsely accused Israeli soldiers of murdering Arab women.'
That was just the starting point for an investigation that uncovers worrying and indeed disgusting anti-Israeli lies being taught at Harvard. The trouble is that this is not an isolated case, much of the further educational system  in the UK is infested with anti-Semites (although they would describe themselves as anti-Zionists) who regularly produce vile lies about the Israeli/Palestinian situation. The next generation is being brainwashed to hate Israel and by extension Jews and the authorities ignore the problem.

Try wearing a kippah and attending the LSE, that's the university that accepted money from the tyrannical Libyan regime, or any number of other further educational establishments in the UK and see how you are treated. Try defending Israel's right to exist and see how you are treated by loud-mouthed and aggressive members of the University's Islamic society. To be Jewish in London is to be at risk from attack, as I have asked before - is it time to leave and if so, where to?

My words were taken 'out of context' - the last refuge of the scoundrel?

YNet report that:
'French President Nicolas Sarkozy met on Thursday with Jewish leaders and tried to explain the embarrassing incident in which he was overheard calling Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a "liar".
One participant at the meeting told the JTA news agency that Sarkozy said the relationship between Netanyahu and his family was "strong" and claimed that his remarks were taken out of context.'
Ah that old excuse 'out of context'. As I blogged in 2007:
'It seems that whenever someone is caught saying something that they shouldn't, they defend themselves by saying that what they said is "being taken out of context". The next time someone says this, ask yourself in what context it would have been OK to have said what was said. Even better maybe the interviewer could ask the question "you say you have been quoted out of context, please could you explain the context in which you said what you said".

Here are a couple of examples of the "taken out of context" excuse being used.

First the principal of the King Fahd Academy in Acton, an Islamic school in West London, who admitted that the school uses textbooks which describe Jews as "apes" and Christians as "pigs" and has refused to withdraw them. Dr Sumaya Alyusuf was interviewed on Newsnight back in February when she said that the quotations about apes and pigs had been taken out of context. I would like to know the context and how Dr Alyusuf thinks that it was alright to liken the majority of people in this country as apes. You can read more about this story here.

Second let's examine the Channel 4's Dispatches documentary Undercover Mosque, in the programme a preacher called Abu Usamah spread his message of inter-communal respect and understanding thus "No one loves the kuffaar! Not a single person here from the Muslims loves the kuffaar. Whether those kuffaar are from the UK or from the US. We love the people of Islam and we hate the people of kuffaar. We hate the kuffaar!" In case you do not know, 'Kuffaar' is a derogatory term for non-Muslims used by many Muslims. As Andrew Anthony's article from The Observer about the police action against the Channel 4 programme makers here made clear "Usamah was not asked to cite any examples of misrepresentation. Nor was he confronted with the recordings of his sermons broadcast in the documentary. Now that would have made for a compelling piece of radio. The police and CPS suggest that comments like these were taken 'out of context'. I've read extended transcripts of Usamah's quotes and I'm satisfied that they were perfectly 'in context'. But let's ask what conceivable context could make these quotes acceptable or reasonable? Was he rehearsing a stage play? Was it a workshop on conflict resolution? Or perhaps it was the same context in which a spokesman from those other righteous humanitarians, the BNP, might attempt to aid community relations by repeatedly stating that his followers 'hate Muslims'. Yes, you can well imagine their excuses if they got caught at it: 'No, we don't really hate Muslims, we just want them to leave the country.' Except no one in the media swallows it, much less gives them air time."

You can see Abu Usama defend his comments here including a lot of "out of context" comments. Listen to his excuses and make up your own mind; do bear in mind the interviewing that makes even James Naughtie interviewing a Labour minister look rigorous.

Undercover Mosque was made by Hardcash productions. David Henshaw, its managing director, said it was "one of the programmes I'm most proud of. It's absolutely copper-bottomed and everything was properly contextualised. It's hard to understand what the proper context for some of those comments could be."'

In other words... Merry Christmas

"I wonder if I might crave your momentary indulgence in order to discharge a by no means disagreeable obligation which has, over the years, become more or less established practice... as we approach the terminal period of the year — calendar, of course, not financial — in fact, not to put too fine a point on it, Week Fifty-One — and submit to you, with all appropriate deference, for your consideration at a convenient juncture, a sincere and sanguine expectation — indeed confidence — indeed one might go so far as to say hope — that the aforementioned period may be, at the end of the day, when all relevant factors have been taken into consideration, susceptible to being deemed to be such as to merit a final verdict of having been by no means unsatisfactory in its overall outcome and, in the final analysis, to give grounds for being judged, on mature reflection, to have been conducive to generating a degree of gratification which will be seen in retrospect to have been significantly higher than the general average."
As Sir Humphrey put it so memorably in Yes Minister.

Friday 23 December 2011

The FedEx delivery man video

I only heard about this video today, apparently it has been everywhere - well now it is here!

Happy channukah - 'Some Rabbis do have 'em' or 'It shouldn't happen to a Rabbi'

Digital stimulation

Erostek is a company that seems to take digital stimulation very seriously:
'We're often asked "what's so great about digital e-stim?" The answer is simple: Variety! Instead of a device that can only turn the output on and off over and over, a digital device opens up a whole new dimension. We like to compare it to playing the same note over and over on a piano versus playing real music. Which would you rather listen to?

By producing waveforms in the digital domain, and including a powerful microprocessor, our products can deliver vastly more complex stimulation. The output can be constantly changing and choreographed between multiple channels. It's simply a night and day difference.'
Is this the stocking-filler that you have been looking for this Christmas?

Should Jerusalem stay Jewish?

Mordechai Kedar says yes, explains why and takes on al-Jazeera. It would be nice to see him explain Middle East history to the anti-Israel lobby at the BBC.

Teaching the next generation to hate Jews

YNet and Fox News report that the Saudi Arabian education system is still teaching children to hate Jews.
'Despite promises to clean up violent and xenophobic content from textbooks, recent editions in Saudi Arabia

continue teach school children barbaric practices, Fox News reported.

The news network, which was able to obtain translated copies of the recently-printed books from the Institute for Gulf Affairs in Washington, DC, said that the books teaches ninth graders that the annihilation of Jews is imperative.

"The hour (of judgment) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them," one part reads. "There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."

The reviewed editions were printed for the 2010-2011 academic year.  Another book teaches 10th graders how to cut off the hands and feet of a thief.

"This is where terrorism starts, in the education system." Ali Al-Ahmed, director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, said, noting that the books were financed by the Saudi government.

In addition to coaching kids to kill Jews and amputate body parts, the text books depict women as weak and irresponsible. Moreover, al-Ahmed said the textbooks call for homosexuals to be put to death "because they pose a danger at society, as the Saudi school books teach.” '
In 2006 when such textbooks were reported upon in the West, the Saudi Ambassador to the US, Prince Turki al-Faisal, said that King Abdullah is determined to eradicate the hateful ideology in his country.
"In recent years, the kingdom has reviewed all of its education practices and materials and has removed any element that is inconsistent with the needs of a modern education," al-Faisal said. "Not only have we eliminated what is objectionable from old textbooks that were in our system, we have also implemented a comprehensive internal revision and modernization plan"
 The problem is that whilst we in the West might see these comments as disgusting, to the Saudi authorities they are simply the words of the Koran and so immutable law and  absolutely to be taught.

If you think 'well what does that matter, it's only children in Saudi Arabia, how could that affect me'; remember which country most of the 9/11 terrorists were from - Saudi Arabia. And if you think that these beliefs were only being taught in Saudi Arabia or in other Islamic theocracies, think again. In 2007 I blogged about the principal of the King Fahd Academy in Acton, an Islamic school in West London, who admitted that the school uses textbooks which describe Jews as "apes" and Christians as "pigs" and has refused to withdraw them. Dr Sumaya Alyusuf was interviewed on Newsnight back in February when she said that the quotations about apes and pigs had been taken out of context. Out of context, the easy excuse of the guilty

Thursday 22 December 2011

I knew I'd seen that look before...

Noel Fielding

David Walliams as Anne


David Walliams as Emily

Mix them all together and do you think you get Christopher Lee from the procession scene in the original and only proper Wicker Man?

What about Ed?

The BBC are please to report that:
'French prosecutors are investigating a Nazi-themed stag party attended by the Conservative MP Aidan Burley.

Mr Burley lost parliamentary private secretary post after he was photographed at a stag party in the Alps with a man wearing Nazi costume.


A Downing Street spokesman declined to comment about the decision by the French authorities to investigate the stag party but reiterated that Mr Burley's conduct had been "offensive and foolish".

Possible charges under French law that could stem from wearing Nazi uniforms include incitement to racial hatred and being an apologist for Nazi war crimes.'
If it is so disgusting to be photographed with a man wearing a Nazi uniform, so disgusting in fact that the BBC also tell us that:
'Ian Austin, shadow work and pensions minister and Labour MP for Dudley North, said: "David Cameron and the Tories tried to brush this under the carpet, but the scandal surrounding Aidan Burley's disgraceful conduct is not going away.

"Surely the prime minister must take the whip off Mr Burley while this investigation is taking place." '
... then what action should be taken against an MP who has been pictured actually wearing a Nazi uniform? If it was a Conservative MP then I am sure that the BBC would be giving publicity to people calling for the expulsion from the Conservative party. However as it is a Labour politician, indeed the Labour politician who the BBC still hope could lead their beloved Labour party, Ed Balls, the silence is deafening and I have yet to see any reference to this photo on the BBC...

Happy Channukah

<param name="movie" value="">param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always">param>allowscriptaccess="always" height="225" src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%">For the third night of Channukah take a listen to the Idelsohn Society's Hanukkah Mix, featuring Milton Berle, Johnny Mathis, Neil Diamond, Woody Guthrie, and many many more...

The one hundred and fifty third weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's prize is awarded to Bill Clinton for admitting "No doubt about it" that the press favoured Barack Obama over Hilary Clinton during the battle for the Democratic party nomination in 2007.

A piece of news that I cannot find on the BBC News website nor do I think will be given any prominence

Fox News are reporting that:
'A total of four Democratic officials and political operatives have now pleaded guilty to voter fraud-related felony charges in an alleged scheme to steal a New York election. 

The latest guilty pleas expose the ease with which political insiders can apparently manipulate the electoral system and throw an election their way, by the forging of signatures of unsuspecting voters that are then cast as real votes. '
As of now I can see no mention of this story on the BBC US & Canada news page. Somehow I think that if the guilty pleas had been entered by Republicans that the story would be 'front and centre'.

Is Piers Morgan a liar or are his diaries unreliable evidence?

“Tea with Tony Blair at No. 10. He was yawning a lot and drinking endless cups of tea. I tried to wake him up a bit.”
Piers Morgan's diary entry for 26 March 1997, taken from his 2005 book The Insider: The Private Diaries of a Scandalous Decade.

I presume that most people would remember that the 1997 General Election was not held until 1 May 1997, so on 26 March did Piers Morgan have tea with John Major but thought it was Tony Blair, have tea with Tony Blair but at another location and thought Number 10 would sound better or did he just make it up?

During the Leveson Inquiry Piers Morgan was asked if his diaries, of his decade up to 2004 as editor of both The Mirror and the News of the World were reliable, he replied "Well, that’s a moot point" Indeed it is Piers, indeed it is.


Well that went well. Firefox crashed and on restart fifty or so tabs were irrecoverable. Bang goes a lot of research sources for upcoming articles.

Wednesday 21 December 2011

And bang goes my support...

I was reading The Standard's piece about the latest piece of Argentinian sabre rattling over the Falklands. I have covered the Falklands before on this blog and it is clear where my loyalties lie, so this article was successfully winding me up and then I read the last quotation from the president of the Falklands Chamber of Commerce, Roger Spink, apparently he told the BBC 'if we were Palestine, the European Union would be up in arms."

Now maybe Roger Spink was trying to appeal to the BBC's hatred of Israel, a hatred that trumps their 'anti-colonial' support for Argentina's claim on the Falklands, if that is the case then I could almost excuse his remark. However I doubt that was the reason and so although I will continue to support the rights of the Falkland islanders to stay British, it will be with a degree of reluctance whilst Roger Fink (deliberate misspelling) holds any position of influence in those islands.

Barack Obama - such a modest chap, and with so much to be modest about

I’m the fourth best president in American history - Barack 'Modesty' Obama in a comment from a 60 Minutes interview that was left on the cutting room floor but really should have been highlighted. Barack Obama declared he was the 4th best president in history.

Why was the comment cut? Too vainglorious even for the Obamamessiah?

What a difference in tone

When James Murdoch had given evidence to the Leveson Enquiry the BBC filled its airwaves and web space with analysis of how his evidence was at best questionable, however following Piers Morgan's testimony the BBC seem happier to present testimony from the Mirror group rather than James Hipwell. One might almost imagine that the BBC were supportive of the Labour supporting Mirror and antagonistic to the (albeit currently only) Conservative supporting News International papers.

How to mark the second night of Chanukah?

The anti-Zionist menorah, or should that be anti-Semitic?

Is this really an improvement in security?

I like to keep up to date with technology but the consumer tech industry issues 'must have' updates far too often for this to be possible, at least with my financial resources. So when I heard that Android 4.0 aka 'Ice cream sandwich' was out on some new smartphones I was both interested and irritated; I already own, and am really pleased with, a Samsung Galaxy SII. There does not seem to be a killer feature on the new os so I will probably wait until it is free upgrade time again.

However one of the features being touted as a reason to buy a new device running ice cream sandwich is the face unlock feature. This means that rather than having to type in a four digit unlock code, which is apparently so tricky to remember, you just hold the phone up to your face and it unlocks. Hmmmm... How many people out there have to carry a security pass to enter their office building? How many of you have a head shot photo on your pass? Am I being stupid but unless this face recognition is cleverer than I predict it is, can it not be fooled by someone else holding up a picture of my face to the screen?

Piers Morgan can't remember much - how convenient

Gawker has the video.

Tuesday 20 December 2011

Happy Channukah

“Put on a yarmulke, here comes Channukah”

"Just a bunch of smoke and mirrors and bullshit"

I have long wondered about the scare tactics used by the environmental movement, so was intrigued to come across the above video.

The YouTube description for the above video is this:
'The following is an outtake from Joe Berlinger's movie Crude. At the March 4, 2007, lunch meeting between plaintiffs' lead U.S. lawyer Steven Donziger and plaintiffs' U.S. consultants Charles Champ, Ann Maest and Richard Kamp, they reveal the truth about plaintiffs' lack of evidence and their intent to manipulate the Ecuadorian court. Maest tells Donziger that they need evidence of groundwater contamination, because plaintiffs did not submit any. Maest admits that, "Right now all the reports are saying it's just at the pits and the stations, and nothing has spread anywhere at all." Donziger responds, "Hold on a second, you know, this is Ecuador. ... You can say whatever you want, and at the end of the day, there's a thousand people around the courthouse. You're going to get what you want. Sorry, but it's true." Donziger continues, "Because at the end of the day, this is all for the court just a bunch of smoke and mirrors and bulls**t. It really is. We have enough, to get money, to win." View more outtakes at For more information about the Ecuador lawsuit, visit'
Fascinating, do take a read of Chevron's website but also of The San Francisco Examiner and The Wall street Journal amongst other linked articles.

Monday 19 December 2011

Palestinian children throwing stones

The BBC are happy to attack the disproportionate response of Israelis to stone throwing Palestinian children. The videos of such stone throwing are not easy to come by, so I was interested to receive news of this one that shows a n Israeli Jew being attacked by Palestinian youths and having dozens of stones thrown at him. The attacks only ends when his friends come to his assistance.

I am awaiting the BBC's coverage of this incident...

Sunday 18 December 2011

This is just so wrong

Why? How? Why?

Who said educational standards had fallen in the UK?

I read that school pupils could be expected to learn their times tables by the age of nine instead of 11. By the age of nine? I attended primary school in the late 1960s/early 1970s and I am pretty sure that I had learnt my times-tables (1-12) by the age of seven. What has happened to education in this country such that the target age for knowing the times-tables is currently 11 and the aim is to reduce that to just nine?

The dumbing down of education in this country started under the Conservatives but it was under the last Labour government that it accelerated. Standards fell, exams were made easier and all in the name of equality & opportunity and of course so as to show that everything was getting better under Labour.

What idiots really believed that educational standards were rising over the last 30 years? Who really believed that students were so bright that suddenly anything less than an A* was a sign of failure? Who really believed that the average English teenager was more intelligent and better educated than their predecessors from the 1980s?

Of course those of us who pointed out the dumbing down of educational standards were told that we should be celebrating the achievements of pupils & teachers and that we just didn't understand that pupils were working that much harder. The fact that many university students were graduating unable to do mental arithmetic or write a coherent document was irrelevant. The fact that many science and mathematics university entrants needed a term or longer remedial courses to bring them up to the standards of 20 years ago went all but unmentioned. The fact that parts of modern maths A-Levels were on a par with parts of my O-Level maths paper were deemed unsayable. I could go on and on but what's the point?

Educational standards in England were dumbed down so Labour could claim ever rising standards even as the international comparisons showed this to be a lie. This country has suffered for many reasons at the hands of the last Labour government but their alliance with the educational establishment to falsely reward so many of this country's children may be amongst their most heinous of crimes.

Saturday 17 December 2011

Why did the Euro come into being? Baldrick asks Blackadder...

Baldrick: "What I want to know sir, is before there was a Euro there were lots of different types of money that different people used. And now there's only one type of money that the foreign people use. And what I want to know is, how did we get from one state of affairs to the other state of affairs"

Blackadder: "Baldrick. Do you mean, how did the Euro start?"

Baldrick: "Yes sir"

Blackadder: "Well, you see Baldrick, back in the 1980's there were many different countries all running their own finances and using different types of money. On one side you had the major economies of France , Belgium , Holland and Germany , and on the other, the weaker nations of Spain , Greece , Ireland , Italy and Portugal . They got together and decided that it would be much easier for everyone if they could all use the same money, have one Central Bank, and belong to one large club where everyone would be happy. This meant that there could never be a situation whereby financial metldown would lead to social unrest, wars and crises".

Baldrick: "But this is sort of a crisis, isn't it sir".

Blackadder: "That's right Baldrick. You see, there was only one slight flaw with the plan".

Baldrick: "What was that then sir?"

Blackadder: "It was bollocks".

Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

The unprecedented warming of the Earth due to man

The above graph is thanks to The New Scientist, I await such a graph being shown by the BBC.

Thanks to Omniclimate for the spot.

The first song played in space - a day late for the 46th anniversary

16 December 1965:
'On December 16, 1965, while in orbit above planet Earth, the crew of Gemini 6 added another milestone to their already historic mission.

Astronauts Wally Schirra and Thomas Stafford reported sighting an object, a satellite, in a "polar orbit...traveling North to South."

"Stand by, he's trying to signal something," reported Schirra.

The next thing heard at Mission Control was a rendition of Jingle Bells performed by the astronauts using instruments which they had smuggled onboard.

The story is well known. The harmonica and string of bells are now housed at The Smithsonian, and the incident is believed to be the first time human beings ever played music in outer space.

But no recording of the song has ever been made available. Until now.

I've been looking all over the Internet for this recording for more than a year with no success. So I started asking for help.

KUOW reporter Phyllis Fletcher pointed me toward NASA's Media Resource Center in Houston Texas.

After digging around their Web site and calling the phone tree at Johnson Space Center, I eventually reached Librarian Jody Russell. Her contacts in the Audio Department pointed me to the online archive for the entire Gemini 6 and 7 joint mission.

They narrowed it down to 8 audio files for me, which covered about 33 hours of the mission. They also provided me with links to mission transcripts that I could use as reference to find the song.

The message from NASA ended with "'s in there somewhere."

And it was.


The NOW Show audience have one of their certainties challenged

Radio 4's Now Show is generally a safe place for lefty types. The humour is safely aimed at Conservatives and those further to the right, the NHS is sacred, the Daily Mail worthy only of disdain and so on. So I was somewhat shocked last night to hear John Holmes's rant on yesterday's show. It's target was The Guardian and its hypocrisy. The Now Show audience seemed a trifle nonplussed by the attack on one of the good guys and so the laughs were sparse and a little forced. I hope it did the audience good and that this is the start of a less leftist viewpoint on BBC Radio 4 satirical shows, although somehow I doubt it.

You can hear the Now show repeat at 12:30 today on Radio 4 or on BBC iPlayer.

Friday 16 December 2011

Ed Miliband - "Tall, arrogant and weak handshake"

Nick Hewer, the new host of Countdown, on Have I Got News For You tonight said he had met Ed Miliband and described him as "Tall, arrogant and weak handshake"

The BBC - not every power source is held to the same standards

Prior to the today I had stopped listening to the BBC Radio 4 Today programme as I found it bad for my blood pressure and temper in the morning. Unfortunately I left my car tuned to Radio 4 last night and when I got in this morning it was at the start of a piece about the Cadarache nuclear fusion research centre in Provence, something that I thought might be interesting. The language used (by Evan Davis?) in this report was so biased that I turned off after under a minute. First the project was described as a 'huge gamble' and then we were told that it would be many decades before we knew if this power source was 'economically viable'. Those two statements in isolation would be just about acceptable but ask yourself when the BBC last questioned whether the building of wind farms (especially offshore ones) was 'economically viable', without the huge subsidies they currently receive? Likewise when did the BBC last question whether these wind farms were a practical proposition when they fail to produce power all year round and often fail to do so when it is most needed, thus necessitating the building of other more reliable power producing plants in any case? 

I think a return to my previous policy re the Today programme may be in order...

Thursday 15 December 2011

When will the BBC stop misleading us?

Forget David Attenborough and the polar bears, what about tonight's Master Chef? Ash, who I predict will win, is described as coming from Barnes but the pub shown under the title 'Barnes' is definitely on the north (Hammersmith) side of the river, the Blue Anchor I believe...

Yes this article is very much tongue-in-cheek but then why not!

Wednesday 14 December 2011

PCHR Gaza let the act out of the bag re East Jerusalem and the Palestinian state of Jordan

PCHR Gaza (the Palestinian Centre For Human Rights Ltd) issued a press release yesterday which included this:
'PCHR reiterates condemnation of all the Israeli policies aiming at the obliteration of Islamic and Christian features in East Jerusalem, and:
2. Confirms that East Jerusalem, which has been occupied since 05 June 1967, is an integral part of the oPt, and that procedures taken by Israel following the occupation of the city do not change its legal status.'
So PCHR Gaza claim that East Jerusalem has been 'occupied' since 1967, this surely menas that East Jerusalem was not 'occupied' immediately prior to Israel's capture of East Jerusalem in the defensive war of that year. Does that mean that the Palestinian's position (or at least that of PCHR) is that East Jerusalem belongs to Jordan and thus not a previous Palestinian state? Is this therefore recognition that Jordan was setup in 1929 as the Palestinian state, on land taken from that promised to a future Jewish state (itself not setup until 1948) and that what I first blogged here in 2010 is accepted by the Palestinians:

'The other uncomfortable truth about Jordan is that it is the Palestinian State. It was set-up in 1929 on part of the land promised by the 1917 Balfour declaration for the 'establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'. Here's a map of the Palestinian Mandate, can you see how it divides between what is now Israel and what is now Jordan?

Do remember that back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

Read that again: "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva ."
The enemies of Israel make no secret of what they want and how they intend to achieve it but we are expected to pretend that they want peace and a return to 1967 borders?
With that last thought in mind remember that on the same day Yasser Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV thus "Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel."

The removal of East Jerusalem from Israel and a general return to the 1967 is not the aim of Hamas, Fatah or the rest of the Muslim Middle East, it is but a staging post on the way to the eventual destruction of Israel. The various parties have made this clear over the years but for some reason many politicans and most of the media in 'The West' seem blind to this fact; I wonder why...

Tuesday 13 December 2011

A day for 1980's pop music

Following on from this morning's Duarn Duran article I found that Blondie have a new single out 'Mother' and a video to accompany it.

The link to the Duran Duran article? Duran Duran's single is 'Girl Panic', the Blondie album is 'The Panic of Girls' - ooh synchronicity!

The other connection? Debbie Harry, not raunchy in this video but oh the memories from earlier years...

Sexism and ageism in The Telegraph

Yesterday's Telegraph included an article about Duran Duran's video to promote their latest single 'Girl Panic', and more specifically the fact that it had been banned by two music channels for being too raunchy. The aforementioned video features some of the original supermodels portraying the members of the band. The line that caught my eye was this one:
'Though most of the women are mothers in their 40s, the video was still considered too raunchy'
Savour the casual ageism in that line, why can't women in their 40s be raunchy?

Purely for research purposes I have watched the video and yes it is rather raunchy and what's wrong with that? But then why shouldn't women in their 40s be raunchy? In any case Yasmin Le Bon, Eva Herzigova, Cindy Crawford, Naomi Campbell and Helena Christensen are hardly your average 40 something woman and mother are they?

I am no expert but I think that's  Eva Herzigova portraying Nick Rhodes, Helena Christensen as Roger Taylor, definitely Naomi Campbell playing the front man Simon Le Bon, Cindy Crawford as John Taylor and Yasmin Le Bon as the fill-in guitarist.

Too raunchy for TV I think not. Women in the prime of life being too raunchy for young music channel execs...

Monday 12 December 2011

Has Barack Obama gone too far with his neutering of the American intelligence services with regard to combatting Islamism?

Yet again Barack Obama and his administration seem to be not only deliberately ignoring what Islamist terrorism is founded upon but actually seeking to hide the facts. "Islam has a proud history of tolerance" - Oh really, please! Let's fight the 'campaign of misinformation'.

Another brainwashed Arab child

It doesn't matter what Israel does, the next generation of Arab Muslims are being raised to deny its existence and to hate its people.

Sunday 11 December 2011

OK what's Konnie Huq done?

I only ask because 40% of the visitors to this site in the last few hours have been to look at this old Rule 5 Saturday night post

Doing a bit of digging, I think it may be connected to the Channel 4 series Black Mirror which was co-written by Konnie and her husband Charlie Brooker.
Tonight's episode, 15 Million Merits, aired at 9pm on Channel 4. Apparently, because I missed it:

'15 Million Merits is set in a time - supposedly at some point in the future - when people 'are confined to the drudgery of real life unless they can impress the judges of a popular TV talent show'.

If the premise sounds familiar, the newly released pictures of the upcoming episode will seem like even more of a dig at The X Factor, as three judges are seen sitting behind an X Factor-style desk as they pass judgement on contestants.

The first episode of Black Mirror, The National Anthem, was a resounding success, attracting high ratings for Channel 4 and gripping critics and viewers alike.'
Maybe Mrs NotaSheep and I should catchup online...

In the meantime, I bid welcome to my new visitors; may you come for the scantily clad photos and videos of Konnie Huq but stay for the politics!

An early Merry Christmas from HMS Ocean

Nicely done guys and girls...

HMS Ocean returned to Plymouth on friday after serving off the coast of Libya.

What's happening to the Coptic Christians in Egypt and why this is nothing new

Raymond Ibrahim’s testimony to the US House of Representatives Human Rights Committee on Shariah, Dhimmitude and the Copts.

In just fifteen minutes Raymond Ibrahim demonstrates clearly how the contemporary persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt is simply a continuation of the near identical suffering meted out to the same Coptic Christians for fourteen previous centuries.

Raymond Ibrahim shows that this is no “accidental aberration” as he points to the Quranic injunctions – the literal commands of god – that instruct Muslims to behave in the ways that lead to the inevitable suffering of any non-Muslim who falls under the reach of Islam’s power.

The worry for me is that whilst I have heard all this before, there are so many people who are completely unaware of the Islamic construct. The blame for this lack of knowledge can be laid squarely at the feet of the western 'liberal' media (especially the BBC), much of the West's educational system and the Western establishment who just cannot face the truth about Islamism.

Why are the BBC so opposed to, and angry at, David Cameron's stance at the recent EU summit?

The BBC's anger at David Cameron's stance has to be about more than the usual BBC hatred of anything Conservative. The hatred has been more visceral than that. We all know that the BBC loves non-democratic supra-National bodies, it is after all a non-democratic internationalist body itself But is there another explanation for the BBC's over the top reaction? As always the answer is to 'follow the money'. It was widely reported in the non EUphile media in June 2008 that:
'THE BBC last night faced accusations of pro-Brussels bias as it was revealed that the corporation had taken out £141m in “soft” loans from the European Union.

The broadcaster has taken out three separate low interest loans from the EU-backed European Investment Bank (EIB) to fund the expansion of its growing commercial empire.

It also emerged that the BBC has received grants from the EU worth £1.4m over the past five years.

The Brussels deals raise awkward questions for the corporation about its coverage of European affairs and its burgeoning profit-making arm whose interests extend to property, publishing and the internet.

The details of the loans and grants stretching back six years emerged in a letter written by Zarin Patel, the BBC’s finance director, to Bob Spink, a Conservative MP.

The first £66m loan in 2003 was used to fund “the fit-out” of a new building in the BBC’s Media Village development in west London, which was later sold for a profit. The second loan for £25m and the third for £50m were made to BBC Worldwide, the corporation’s profit-making arm, to pay for the acquisition of overseas rights to programmes made by the BBC in the UK.

The EIB has described itself as “an autonomous body set up to finance capital investment furthering European integration by promoting EU policies”.

It specialises in providing low interest loans below the normal commercial rates. However, the BBC refused to disclose exactly what rates the EIB was charging.

The BBC letter, written in response to a parliamentary question, also discloses a series of grants to help to fund online educational programmes and preserve the BBC archive.

Spink said yesterday that he would be putting down a Commons motion condemning the BBC for accepting the cash: “I am concerned that the independence and objectivity of the BBC may have been improperly influenced by funding from the EU.”

A BBC spokesman denied any pro-Brussels bias: “There were no editorial obligations whatsoever attached to the three EIB loans. The BBC’s commercial businesses go to the European Investment Bank as opposed to any other commercial bank for purely commercial reasons.”

He added: “The BBC occasionally receives some EU funding in relation to specific educational or research and development projects.”

However, the size of the EU loans highlights the rapid growth in the BBC’s commercial activities, which are kept separate from the core programme-making funded by the £3.5 billion a year licence fee.

Critics question how commercial contracts fit into the BBC’s “public services” remit.'

The key line is this one 'The EIB has described itself as “an autonomous body set up to finance capital investment furthering European integration by promoting EU policies”.'Can anyone deny that the BBC has shown itself time and time again to follow a pro-EU line, often at the expense of Britain's interests? The BBC again and again shows itself to act in direct opposition to the interests of Great Britain (and especially Northern Ireland), to promote the interests of anti-democratic organisations and to support terrorists; what can be done to end its reign of terror?

Israel is always to blame

Over this weekend around 18 rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel. 18 potentially lethal devices that only didn't kill and maim because Israel protects its people and the targeted population flee to bunkers (or similar) when they get the short warning of incoming missiles. The BBC chose not to report the Palestinian attacks on Israel, as is their policy. The BBC have however decided to report the Israeli response. So the BBC can print the headline 'Palestinian killed in Gaza air strike' and start the article thus:
'One civilian has been killed and at least 20 others have been hurt after an Israeli air strike on a militant base in Gaza City, Palestinian medics say.

Missiles reportedly struck a Hamas training facility overnight, sending shrapnel flying into nearby houses.

Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya accused Israel of an "unjustified and serious escalation" in the Gaza Strip.'
In this instance the BBC do place the Israeli explanation quite high in the report which is refreshing:
'Israel's military expressed "regret", but blamed Hamas for operating "while embedded within a civilian population".

A statement said the civilians were not harmed directly by the missiles, but by the explosion of rockets stored at the Hamas facility. Hamas, it added, had used the civilians "human shields to protect their actions".'
However the historical context is buried and obfuscated further down:
'On Thursday, Gaza-based militants fired rockets into southern Israel in response to another air strike that killed two militants.

The men died when missiles hit a car in which they were travelling on a crowded street in Gaza City.'
So the Palestinian missiles only started on Thursday and only in response to an Israeli attack! Is that really the BBC case? Have the BBC really no knowledge of the regular firing of rockets at Israeli civilians or do they see their role as to propagandise on behalf of Islamist terrorists rather than to impartially report the news? Now, more than ever, the BBC's withholding of the Balen report makes total sense.

The BBC end the piece with these odd sentences:
'The Israeli military said the men had been planning an attack on Israeli civilians and soldiers along Israel's border with Egypt's Sinai peninsula.

Palestinian sources say one of those killed was a member of the Fatah movement's military wing; the other was his nephew, a Hamas member.

The BBC's Wyre Davies in Jerusalem says much of southern Israel is on high alert.

At least one major road near the port of Eilat has been closed, and according to Israeli intelligence sources a significant cross-border attack in the area is expected anytime soon, our correspondent adds.'
'The Israeli military said the men had been planning an attack on Israeli civilians and soldiers along Israel's border with Egypt's Sinai peninsula.' - Palestinian terrorists have been attacking Israelis almost every week this year, not that the BBC have reported this news, so why do the BBC pretend that this is a new threat? Is it because they can portray Israel as attacking Palestinians at just the rumour of an ataack?

I hate, absolutely hate, the way the BBC pretends that Fatah and Hamas have political and military wings, as though the political wing has clean hands and no control or influence over their 'military' wings. Fatah and Hamas are terrorist organisations with the same aim - the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews. Just as the BBC portrayed Sinn Fein as being somehow separate from the IRA during 'the troubles', the position is laughable and disgusting - terrorists and their associated 'politicians' are as guilty of murder and hate-crime as each other and all should be treated the same. There is no moral difference now between a Hamas terrorist firing a rocket in the direction of an Israeli school and a Palestinian politician who protects this terrorist by lying to the world about why the rocket was fired and what the aims of the joint organisations are.
'The BBC's Wyre Davies in Jerusalem says much of southern Israel is on high alert.'
Does the BBC's Wyre Davies not know how much of Israel is on near permanent alert because of the rockets being fired at Israel? Does he not know or does he not care?