I'm off to town imminently to get a battery powered radio to put in my apocalypse survival bag for next time!
What you really want it one of those wind up ones
I was thinking of that, but realistically, how long will we have radio if it all really does go tits up? One we're on The Road, scavenging for food and fighting off the neighbours, do I really want to be carrying a wind up thing? I'll just carry a small radio and guard the batteries like they're the future of mankind.
Can you get a radio that will work off one of those power blocks, be much better than batteries and you can recharge if you ever get power back.
I was actually a bit ashamed when I realised we didn't have a basic radio. We do everything online, TV, radio, music. One little blip and we were totally incommunicado. You can tell I'm retired and washed the Emergency Services right out of my hair!
I am sure that I should know the answer to this but is murdering the person opposite who has been loudly sniffing every minute for the last hour merely provocation or self defence? Maybe one for the office today.
I think it would be difficult to prove the force was proportional to the perceived threat, as it'd be difficult to argue that you were in fear of serious injury - though perhaps I doubt the art of the possible when it comes to skillful advocacy. I suspect during COVID you might be able to make the case.
Provocation is judged from the perspective of a reasonable person (I think) so you'd obviously be grand there!
I wonder how long it'll be before second-hand bookshops become targets for woke-ists, because they're places where you can buy old copies of books that haven't been "updated" with the latest language. For example, if you want to buy a copy of a Roald Dahl book that definitely hasn't been altered, a second-hand bookshop will be the place to go.
I actually think the Roald Dahl bowdlerization will be dropped (when the owners think no one is looking) sooner rather than later. What I found telling was how few people on the Left even bothered to defend it. For once this really was a case of Wokeism/political correctness gone made.
The problem was more the naff way that the Dahl rewrite was done rather than the principle of it.
Works have long been altered to suit contemporary mores. The term "bowdlerisation" originates from the early 19th century editing of a version of Shakespeare to edit out the naughty bits. The schools edition of The Canterbury Tales I did for O level in the 1980s too. Agatha Christies "Ten little redacteds" has long been renamed as ""Then there were None" etc. Dahl himself changed the origin story of the Oompa Loompas.
Updating these works to modern tastes isn't itself a problem, but it does need to be done in tune with the authors style. There may be some right wing culture warriors gleefully reading to their children "Tintin in the Congo" *, but I don't thinknthat the worst thing that they will do to their children.
*as a TinTin fan, I do have a copy, and my boys have read it. We had an interesting discussion about colonialism and racist stereotypes as a result, but they were teenagers by then, and up to that sort of analysis while retaining their love of Tintin.
Really good post.
Not often I agree with you but this is well reasoned and well put.
I recently watched the Germans episode of Fawlty Towers again and it made me cringe. It's not the parts with the Germans, which can be covered by the 'fact' that Basil was concussed, and which remain very funny.
It's the Major's remarks about w*gs and ni*gers which really aren't on in this day and age.
I had a similar thing when I decided to watch some of Ronnie Corbett's soliloquy sketches and discovered that they are really homophobic. Not in a funny way. Just vile.
I know the Daily Malicious loves to wind everyone up about such things but sometimes we really do need to move things along.
What really shocked me about the remake of the Dambusters was the way in which it was [edit] fericiously attacked by those woke-hunters who were only worried about the name of one dog. Yet the original dog's name would be a total wtf to anyone of the younger generation who would have been wondering what those people were like to call dogs that name. So, just for a little bit of woke-baiting, the attempt to bring the heroism and, it should be remembered, self-sacrifice of the crews to a modern audience was completely derailed.
The worst bowdlerisation is when they remove the scene showing the drowning foreign slave workers.
Any honest portrayal of war should show that innocents do suffer, even when the cause is just.
And also showing why we fought in the first place. On the dogs name, I am conflicted. It’s a historical fact, and the film is based on history. It’s not, however, a documentary, any more than the Longest Day was, or Saving Private Ryan, or Band of Brothers. So actually, calling him Bob or whatever doesn’t amount to much, but avoids unnecessary questions. There is an issue with what happens to older TV programmes. If you recoil from Fawlty Towers ‘The Germans’ because of the Major, you are somewhat falling into the Alf Garnett trap. We are mocking the Major for his antiquated views. Yet the scene with the doctor is arguably far far worse. I get that Fawlty is concussed but his reaction is incredible.
We should cut people slack for creating art in the accepted norms of the time. Otherwise we will have no art left at all.
On the dog's name, the answer is simple. Remake the film without the sodding dog. Are there any other films where a character's pet takes up so much of the narrative, or any? There's Sid's horse-picking budgie in Carry On At Your Convenience, I suppose.
From what I’ve read about Gibson he seems to have been a prickly character. I wonder if the script writers felt that the dog was a humanising element?
One of Scotland's main police control rooms used a fake system to manipulate response time targets for eight years, according to documents seen by the BBC.
These are the sorts of thing where generally no-one goes to prison. And these sorts of corruptions are more common than they should be. It is top people in the system who should be serving prison sentences for this kind of corrupt failure. Only then will values improve.
A Labour government would freeze council tax, Sir Keir Starmer is expected to say on Thursday as he tries to cast himself as the candidate of low tax for workers.
As he launches Labour’s local elections campaign in Swindon, Starmer will say that if he were prime minister, council tax bills would stay at the same level rather than rising as they will do this weekend. Labour would fund this with a “proper” windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies.
Starmer argues that voters have a clear “choice” on tax, contrasting his wish to freeze council tax with the scrapping of the tax-free lifetime allowance limit for wealthy pensioners announced by Jeremy Hunt in the budget a fortnight ago.
In a speech to party supporters, Starmer is expected to say: “There is a choice on tax. A Tory choice — taxes up for working people, tax cuts for the 1 per cent — or a Labour choice, where we cut business rates to save our high streets and where, if there was a Labour government, you could take that council tax rise you just got and rip it up.
“A Labour government would freeze your council tax this year — that’s our choice. A tax cut for the many, not just for the top 1 per cent. So take this message to every doorstep in your community: Labour is the party of lower taxes for working people.”
"Labour would fund this with a “proper” windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies."
Thereby buggering up your pensions. Not so clever.
Labour really do still think the profits of BP and Shell go to four or five massively rich people. Instead of being paid out in dividends to pension funds. They are still not to be trusted when it comes to money.
Tory excess profit levies good; Labour windfall taxes bad. Is that it?
The pension fund thing is such a feeble response. Even if you haven't chosen to have an environmentally-focused pension fund (in which case the impact on you is zero), what's the typical share of oil and gas investments? 10% max? Say the windfall tax reduces their profit by 25% for one year. The impact on your pension fund in this extreme case is 2.5%, marginally affecting your pension N years in the future.
Marginally ?
Assuming it is 2% compound it and see the difference.
I wonder how long it'll be before second-hand bookshops become targets for woke-ists, because they're places where you can buy old copies of books that haven't been "updated" with the latest language. For example, if you want to buy a copy of a Roald Dahl book that definitely hasn't been altered, a second-hand bookshop will be the place to go.
I actually think the Roald Dahl bowdlerization will be dropped (when the owners think no one is looking) sooner rather than later. What I found telling was how few people on the Left even bothered to defend it. For once this really was a case of Wokeism/political correctness gone made.
The problem was more the naff way that the Dahl rewrite was done rather than the principle of it.
Works have long been altered to suit contemporary mores. The term "bowdlerisation" originates from the early 19th century editing of a version of Shakespeare to edit out the naughty bits. The schools edition of The Canterbury Tales I did for O level in the 1980s too. Agatha Christies "Ten little redacteds" has long been renamed as ""Then there were None" etc. Dahl himself changed the origin story of the Oompa Loompas.
Updating these works to modern tastes isn't itself a problem, but it does need to be done in tune with the authors style. There may be some right wing culture warriors gleefully reading to their children "Tintin in the Congo" *, but I don't thinknthat the worst thing that they will do to their children.
*as a TinTin fan, I do have a copy, and my boys have read it. We had an interesting discussion about colonialism and racist stereotypes as a result, but they were teenagers by then, and up to that sort of analysis while retaining their love of Tintin.
Really good post.
Not often I agree with you but this is well reasoned and well put.
I recently watched the Germans episode of Fawlty Towers again and it made me cringe. It's not the parts with the Germans, which can be covered by the 'fact' that Basil was concussed, and which remain very funny.
It's the Major's remarks about w*gs and ni*gers which really aren't on in this day and age.
I had a similar thing when I decided to watch some of Ronnie Corbett's soliloquy sketches and discovered that they are really homophobic. Not in a funny way. Just vile.
I know the Daily Malicious loves to wind everyone up about such things but sometimes we really do need to move things along.
What really shocked me about the remake of the Dambusters was the way in which it was [edit] fericiously attacked by those woke-hunters who were only worried about the name of one dog. Yet the original dog's name would be a total wtf to anyone of the younger generation who would have been wondering what those people were like to call dogs that name. So, just for a little bit of woke-baiting, the attempt to bring the heroism and, it should be remembered, self-sacrifice of the crews to a modern audience was completely derailed.
The worst bowdlerisation is when they remove the scene showing the drowning foreign slave workers.
Any honest portrayal of war should show that innocents do suffer, even when the cause is just.
And also showing why we fought in the first place. On the dogs name, I am conflicted. It’s a historical fact, and the film is based on history. It’s not, however, a documentary, any more than the Longest Day was, or Saving Private Ryan, or Band of Brothers. So actually, calling him Bob or whatever doesn’t amount to much, but avoids unnecessary questions. There is an issue with what happens to older TV programmes. If you recoil from Fawlty Towers ‘The Germans’ because of the Major, you are somewhat falling into the Alf Garnett trap. We are mocking the Major for his antiquated views. Yet the scene with the doctor is arguably far far worse. I get that Fawlty is concussed but his reaction is incredible.
We should cut people slack for creating art in the accepted norms of the time. Otherwise we will have no art left at all.
On the dog's name, the answer is simple. Remake the film without the sodding dog. Are there any other films where a character's pet takes up so much of the narrative, or any? There's Sid's horse-picking budgie in Carry On At Your Convenience, I suppose.
From what I’ve read about Gibson he seems to have been a prickly character. I wonder if the script writers felt that the dog was a humanising element?
Also to show concern for crew morale when he had the hound's demise kept quiet. So deleting the pooch would lose that.
A Labour government would freeze council tax, Sir Keir Starmer is expected to say on Thursday as he tries to cast himself as the candidate of low tax for workers.
As he launches Labour’s local elections campaign in Swindon, Starmer will say that if he were prime minister, council tax bills would stay at the same level rather than rising as they will do this weekend. Labour would fund this with a “proper” windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies.
Starmer argues that voters have a clear “choice” on tax, contrasting his wish to freeze council tax with the scrapping of the tax-free lifetime allowance limit for wealthy pensioners announced by Jeremy Hunt in the budget a fortnight ago.
In a speech to party supporters, Starmer is expected to say: “There is a choice on tax. A Tory choice — taxes up for working people, tax cuts for the 1 per cent — or a Labour choice, where we cut business rates to save our high streets and where, if there was a Labour government, you could take that council tax rise you just got and rip it up.
“A Labour government would freeze your council tax this year — that’s our choice. A tax cut for the many, not just for the top 1 per cent. So take this message to every doorstep in your community: Labour is the party of lower taxes for working people.”
"Labour would fund this with a “proper” windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies."
Thereby buggering up your pensions. Not so clever.
Labour really do still think the profits of BP and Shell go to four or five massively rich people. Instead of being paid out in dividends to pension funds. They are still not to be trusted when it comes to money.
Tory excess profit levies good; Labour windfall taxes bad. Is that it?
The pension fund thing is such a feeble response. Even if you haven't chosen to have an environmentally-focused pension fund (in which case the impact on you is zero), what's the typical share of oil and gas investments? 10% max? Say the windfall tax reduces their profit by 25% for one year. The impact on your pension fund in this extreme case is 2.5%, marginally affecting your pension N years in the future.
I agree it is a feeble response but you are assuming that the affect on a pension fund is a reduced dividend. This may not follow and in any case it is the share price of the company that takes the more significant hit.
Just the whiff of a windfall tax sends the share price tumbling and more generally windfall taxes reduce company confidence in a system which can impose retrospective taxes in this way.
I wonder how long it'll be before second-hand bookshops become targets for woke-ists, because they're places where you can buy old copies of books that haven't been "updated" with the latest language. For example, if you want to buy a copy of a Roald Dahl book that definitely hasn't been altered, a second-hand bookshop will be the place to go.
But we already have 'woke bookshops' being condemned on PB.
Abe, Amazon, Biblio etc and second hand bookshops at the moment are, maybe accidentally, stout defenders of freedom of thought and liberty to look at texts as they were written.
Because of this it is not difficult to get the Satanic Verses, Mein Kampf, and, uncensored, Richmal Crompton's 'William the Detective' (I am not making this bit up).
It is characteristic of both left and right (especially the US right) that they wish to stop this. Just as it is characteristic of left and right that they have competing 'Free Speech' beliefs.
I wonder how long it'll be before second-hand bookshops become targets for woke-ists, because they're places where you can buy old copies of books that haven't been "updated" with the latest language. For example, if you want to buy a copy of a Roald Dahl book that definitely hasn't been altered, a second-hand bookshop will be the place to go.
I actually think the Roald Dahl bowdlerization will be dropped (when the owners think no one is looking) sooner rather than later. What I found telling was how few people on the Left even bothered to defend it. For once this really was a case of Wokeism/political correctness gone made.
The problem was more the naff way that the Dahl rewrite was done rather than the principle of it.
Works have long been altered to suit contemporary mores. The term "bowdlerisation" originates from the early 19th century editing of a version of Shakespeare to edit out the naughty bits. The schools edition of The Canterbury Tales I did for O level in the 1980s too. Agatha Christies "Ten little redacteds" has long been renamed as ""Then there were None" etc. Dahl himself changed the origin story of the Oompa Loompas.
Updating these works to modern tastes isn't itself a problem, but it does need to be done in tune with the authors style. There may be some right wing culture warriors gleefully reading to their children "Tintin in the Congo" *, but I don't thinknthat the worst thing that they will do to their children.
*as a TinTin fan, I do have a copy, and my boys have read it. We had an interesting discussion about colonialism and racist stereotypes as a result, but they were teenagers by then, and up to that sort of analysis while retaining their love of Tintin.
Really good post.
Not often I agree with you but this is well reasoned and well put.
I recently watched the Germans episode of Fawlty Towers again and it made me cringe. It's not the parts with the Germans, which can be covered by the 'fact' that Basil was concussed, and which remain very funny.
It's the Major's remarks about w*gs and ni*gers which really aren't on in this day and age.
I had a similar thing when I decided to watch some of Ronnie Corbett's soliloquy sketches and discovered that they are really homophobic. Not in a funny way. Just vile.
I know the Daily Malicious loves to wind everyone up about such things but sometimes we really do need to move things along.
What really shocked me about the remake of the Dambusters was the way in which it was [edit] fericiously attacked by those woke-hunters who were only worried about the name of one dog. Yet the original dog's name would be a total wtf to anyone of the younger generation who would have been wondering what those people were like to call dogs that name. So, just for a little bit of woke-baiting, the attempt to bring the heroism and, it should be remembered, self-sacrifice of the crews to a modern audience was completely derailed.
The worst bowdlerisation is when they remove the scene showing the drowning foreign slave workers.
Any honest portrayal of war should show that innocents do suffer, even when the cause is just.
And also showing why we fought in the first place. On the dogs name, I am conflicted. It’s a historical fact, and the film is based on history. It’s not, however, a documentary, any more than the Longest Day was, or Saving Private Ryan, or Band of Brothers. So actually, calling him Bob or whatever doesn’t amount to much, but avoids unnecessary questions. There is an issue with what happens to older TV programmes. If you recoil from Fawlty Towers ‘The Germans’ because of the Major, you are somewhat falling into the Alf Garnett trap. We are mocking the Major for his antiquated views. Yet the scene with the doctor is arguably far far worse. I get that Fawlty is concussed but his reaction is incredible.
We should cut people slack for creating art in the accepted norms of the time. Otherwise we will have no art left at all.
On the dog's name, the answer is simple. Remake the film without the sodding dog. Are there any other films where a character's pet takes up so much of the narrative, or any? There's Sid's horse-picking budgie in Carry On At Your Convenience, I suppose.
I disagree a bit - the dog's death right before the raid may have contributed to Gibson's state of mind.
I wonder how long it'll be before second-hand bookshops become targets for woke-ists, because they're places where you can buy old copies of books that haven't been "updated" with the latest language. For example, if you want to buy a copy of a Roald Dahl book that definitely hasn't been altered, a second-hand bookshop will be the place to go.
I actually think the Roald Dahl bowdlerization will be dropped (when the owners think no one is looking) sooner rather than later. What I found telling was how few people on the Left even bothered to defend it. For once this really was a case of Wokeism/political correctness gone made.
The problem was more the naff way that the Dahl rewrite was done rather than the principle of it.
Works have long been altered to suit contemporary mores. The term "bowdlerisation" originates from the early 19th century editing of a version of Shakespeare to edit out the naughty bits. The schools edition of The Canterbury Tales I did for O level in the 1980s too. Agatha Christies "Ten little redacteds" has long been renamed as ""Then there were None" etc. Dahl himself changed the origin story of the Oompa Loompas.
Updating these works to modern tastes isn't itself a problem, but it does need to be done in tune with the authors style. There may be some right wing culture warriors gleefully reading to their children "Tintin in the Congo" *, but I don't thinknthat the worst thing that they will do to their children.
*as a TinTin fan, I do have a copy, and my boys have read it. We had an interesting discussion about colonialism and racist stereotypes as a result, but they were teenagers by then, and up to that sort of analysis while retaining their love of Tintin.
Really good post.
Not often I agree with you but this is well reasoned and well put.
I recently watched the Germans episode of Fawlty Towers again and it made me cringe. It's not the parts with the Germans, which can be covered by the 'fact' that Basil was concussed, and which remain very funny.
It's the Major's remarks about w*gs and ni*gers which really aren't on in this day and age.
I had a similar thing when I decided to watch some of Ronnie Corbett's soliloquy sketches and discovered that they are really homophobic. Not in a funny way. Just vile.
I know the Daily Malicious loves to wind everyone up about such things but sometimes we really do need to move things along.
What really shocked me about the remake of the Dambusters was the way in which it was [edit] fericiously attacked by those woke-hunters who were only worried about the name of one dog. Yet the original dog's name would be a total wtf to anyone of the younger generation who would have been wondering what those people were like to call dogs that name. So, just for a little bit of woke-baiting, the attempt to bring the heroism and, it should be remembered, self-sacrifice of the crews to a modern audience was completely derailed.
The worst bowdlerisation is when they remove the scene showing the drowning foreign slave workers.
Any honest portrayal of war should show that innocents do suffer, even when the cause is just.
And also showing why we fought in the first place. On the dogs name, I am conflicted. It’s a historical fact, and the film is based on history. It’s not, however, a documentary, any more than the Longest Day was, or Saving Private Ryan, or Band of Brothers. So actually, calling him Bob or whatever doesn’t amount to much, but avoids unnecessary questions. There is an issue with what happens to older TV programmes. If you recoil from Fawlty Towers ‘The Germans’ because of the Major, you are somewhat falling into the Alf Garnett trap. We are mocking the Major for his antiquated views. Yet the scene with the doctor is arguably far far worse. I get that Fawlty is concussed but his reaction is incredible.
We should cut people slack for creating art in the accepted norms of the time. Otherwise we will have no art left at all.
I have liked but I would rather keep the dog's name in with just a comment before the film starts. Alf Garnett is an interesting one. People do seem to miss that he is being made fun of because of his views. We shouldn't edit out racism, sexism, etc as if it didn't exist or that acknowledging times were different.
With Alf Garnett the criticism was always a bit sneering too - the 'intellectuals' obviously getting that Alf is the butt of the joke, but fearing that the 'masses' saw him as a hero, saying what they thought they couldn't say.
Comments
Provocation is judged from the perspective of a reasonable person (I think) so you'd obviously be grand there!
Assuming it is 2% compound it and see the difference.
Just the whiff of a windfall tax sends the share price tumbling and more generally windfall taxes reduce company confidence in a system which can impose retrospective taxes in this way.
Fine Gael TDs ‘getting more emails on transgender issues than on the eviction ban’ party meeting hears
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/fine-gael-tds-getting-more-emails-on-transgender-issues-than-on-the-eviction-ban-party-meeting-hears-42410101.html
Looks like “No Debate” is over there too….
NEW THREAD
Because of this it is not difficult to get the Satanic Verses, Mein Kampf, and, uncensored, Richmal Crompton's 'William the Detective' (I am not making this bit up).
It is characteristic of both left and right (especially the US right) that they wish to stop this. Just as it is characteristic of left and right that they have competing 'Free Speech' beliefs.