h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"I thought a cartoon might cheer you all up."


Perhaps 'twould if I knew what t'was about.

Perhaps this will cheer you up, anhaga:

It's reported that Saunas can be dangerous... They involve steam - and steam is hot. A rather distressing syndrome is appearing among serious devotees.
Two doctors are investigating. The condition is called the Boil-deLedegg eye.

Didn't I get that wrong!

Boil-Edegg eye

>> Perhaps 'twould if I knew what t'was about, << Don't know much about it myself but it seems to be about a recent revelation of police cover-up in regard to some serious brutality at a place called Hillsborough at least a couple of decades ago in the Maggie Thatcher years. Apparently the apologies from current politicians are not being well accepted. See this thread about other reactions: http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F19585?thread=8296562&skip=0&show=20 And if you want to, search for the 'Hillsborough Tragedy'. ~jwf~

Just a very quick precis of Hillsborough for younger H2G2ers and those from abroad.

1989 semi-final of the FA cup between Liverpool and Nottingham Forrest played at Hillsborough, Sheffield Wednesday's ground, a neutral venue. This was at a time when football fans would stand throughout a game by choice and there were limited safety features on a stepped surface AND crucially, we had seen many pitch invasions, so many major football pitches were ringed by fences to keep the fans on the terraces.

Close to the start of the match it was evident that many Liverpool fans were not going to get into the Leppings Lane end before the game started. The decision was made by the police to open the (wide) exits and allow fans to enter avoiding the bottleneck at the turnstiles.

The enclosure at the Leppings lane end quickly became too full and a surge from the back where fans were coming in caused a wave of people down the raked stand towards the fencing. In the ensuing crush, 96 people were squeezed to death.

There were a series of errors which contributed to this from opening the large gates at the back, to the refusal to open the exits onto the pitch at the front.

It has now been confirmed that police records were altered to deflect blame from them and their management and onto the fans.

A national daily paper in the UK alleged that Liverpool fans urinated on police officers and picked the pockets of dead fans. The Steve Bell cartoon refers to the apology from The Sun, 23 years too late.

Everybody now seems to be apologising after the friends and families of fans have campaigned for the (up to now) confidential records to be made public. What they knew was being suppressed has now been made public.

PP.

First Harry's tackle, now Kates boobs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19595221

For goodness sake. Do we really care! This will dominate the news when there is much more important stuff happening out there.

PP

What get's on my tits is the media amplification of the story - the faux rage of the BBC and other media outlets in headlining the story of the story.

Narry's tackle was posed; it is obvious he knew. But Kate's boobs where

Semi detached next to main road dump, and why is it newspaper photographers never heard of tilt and shift lenses or manual exposure or composition or anything.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202491/UK-house-price-record-Hyde-Park-super-mansion-sale-300m.html

It seems that it was the actual US ambassador to Libya that was killed, which of course is a very serious matter with potentially serious consequences. It had earlier been said that it was an unspecified US american that had been killed. It now seems that four US americans were killed at the embassy. Obviously if a country can't protect its foreign embassies then there is something seriously "wrong" with it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19570254

It seems that as well as UK & US Embassies, the German Embassy in Khartoum has also been attacked.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19602177

That's crazy! What have the Germans ever done to offend anyone?

Mystery lies in the provenance of the offending amateur film called "Innocence of Muslims": "a that film depicts the Prophet Muhammad as a womaniser and leader of a group of men who enjoy killing. Clips were distributed online with an Arabic voice-over." [according to BBC]

The question is was it made by a "disgruntled westerner" to let off steam regarding their personal view of the Prophet Muhammed & to deride muslims, or was it made by a "disgruntled muslim" who was hoping for this reaction (jumping on a significant muslim view that the US /West is the Imperial Satan).

The fact that it was released in bits in time for the 9-11 anniversary is significant no matter where it's provenance,

Is the free market just one big amoral globalised casino for the elite and their minions?

A 32 year old man, of Whitechapel, east London, exceeded his city trading chip limit, in gambling (away) £1.4bn ($2.3bn) in a bid "to get a bigger bonus and boost his ego": http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19595217

I don't know the people involved, but this happened so close to one of my favorite locations, one of the most beautiful landscapes I've ever experienced that I couldn't help but have this tragedy catch my eye this evening:

"Three adults are dead and two children and a man were sent to hospital with injuries after a crash just south of Three Hills, Alta., Friday night. "

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/story/2012/09/14/calgary-three-hills-accident.html

Islam hate video?

Did you see the video?
To be honest, I did not.
Still there are some questions that can be considered in light of the current events.

Does some video violate youtube guidelines? Well this is from youtube:

We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).

"Hate speech" refers to content that promotes hatred against members of a protected group. For instance, racist or sexist content may be considered hate speech. Sometimes there is a fine line between what is and what is not considered hate speech. For instance, it is generally okay to criticize a nation, but not okay to make insulting generalizations about people of a particular nationality.

http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines

So it seems youtube thinks it okay to voice hate of Islam not the people of Islam. This seems too fine a line to me! Is anti-semitic messages banned on youtube? I was not able to find a factual answer.

The USA is founded on religious tolerance and protects Islamic religious practice.

What you think?

"The Czech Republic indefinitely banned all sales of liquor with more than 20 percent alcohol on Friday after 19 people died from drinking bootleg vodka and rum containing poisonous methanol." http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/14/us-czech-alcohol-idUKBRE88D1BY20120914

They haven't thought that one through, have they?

"Mystery lies in the provenance of the offending amateur film called "Innocence of Muslims": "a that film depicts the Prophet Muhammad as a womaniser and leader of a group of men who enjoy killing. Clips were distributed online with an Arabic voice-over." [according to BBC]
"

This is confirmed by RT via Al Jazeera; apparently even the actors and actresses were unaware of its purpose and its maker claims it was made to root out terrorists badly was dubbed and had only one showing in Hollywood.

I saw this on my mobile via twitter so cannot provide a link, somebody managed to get a trailer shown on an Islamic channel, and I think the maker should at least face charges, minimum causing death with reckless behaviour.

Looks like Bradford voters are realising they've been played for mugs by George Galloway - http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2012/sep/13/georgegalloway-bradford-west-byelection-2012-muslim-women-salma-yaqoob-rape

I didn't know much about George Galloway, except that his name kept cropping up in the news. He seemed to make reasonable statements and I could see why he might be a popular figure.

However with the latest stuff, and getting to know just a little bit more about him, it seems to me that he is a self-popularist, with his own agenda for personal self aggrandisement - seeking opportunities to get himself on the big stage.

It seems that he is not someone prepared to work at the coal-face. It seems to me that he has hood-winked the Bradford muslims and urban poor - perhaps "pretending" to listen to and care about their grievances, but actually merely a band-waggoner exploiting their grievances to get himself elected. It seems that he is really only interested in himself taking opportunities to air his own personal issues and grievances.

He should be working for the people of Bradford - which seems to me to require 100% of his time - rather than engaging in international politics and sticking his oar into the Assange debate (at the expense of his own electorate).