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

I'm going to let someone else take over because I'm going on holiday.

Bah...come back here...

Enjoy.

ex-Leeds United footballer revelas he is gay:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21479520

***

"We do have players who've said that, while they are gay, they don't feel comfortable enough to come out," said chief executive of the Professional Footballers' Association Gordon Taylor.

"It's not dissimilar to many black players, and we need to create a safe environment for them on and off the field."

***

Yeah, well said Gordon. I wonder who will be the first footballer to publically reveal he is black?

Well said, Icy...what a weird thing to say.

I also find it a little strange that the player has packed in football on his announcement. Surely it would be better to keep in the game and see what reaction that has.

Another sporting story:

Mo Farah announces he's going to run in the London Marathon, but will only tackle half the distance:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/athletics/21474779

***

Paula Radcliffe, who won the women's race in London in 2002, 2003 and 2005, questioned Farah's decision.

She said: "... Either you find a good half marathon somewhere or you take the plunge and attack the distance and race it.

"Here he's caught between two stools."

***

Wise words, Paula. Nobody knows being caught short between two stools in the London Marathon like you do.

I had to check the article to see if she had said 'stools'...has she any idea what she's said?

"Four foreign nationals have been arrested in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi on suspicion of being Christian missionaries, officials say. Agents reportedly found the suspects in possession of 45,000 books about Christianity when they were arrested at a publishing house on Tuesday. Another 25,000 were thought to have been distributed."

It sounds like an open and shut case. Not sure what the normal penalty would be although I suspect it would involve stones or a ceremonial sword?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21488976

"Agents reportedly found the suspects in possession of 45,000 books about Christianity when they were arrested at a publishing house on Tuesday."

What were the books?

25,000 copies of The God Delusion and 20,000 copies of God Is Not Great?

Could be an even distribution of these:

Where God Went Wrong
Some More of God's Greatest Mistakes
Who Is This God Person, Anyway?

Punishment might include Poetry Appreciation Chairs.

or perhaps Cliff Richards autobiography

Suspects in sex cases should have their identities protected until they are convicted, a senior lawyer has said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21487266

Quite right IMO. However, "Jo Wood, of the charity Rape Crisis, said it would "never condone" anonymity for defendants in sex cases. "There are so many barriers to victims reporting sexual violence," she said. "Hiding the name of their perpetrator is just one more way to victimise victims further."

"Jo Wood, of the charity Rape Crisis, said "Hiding the name of their ****perpetrator**** is just one more way to victimise victims further."

This pretty much negates almost anything the "Rape Crisis" charity can say in my opinion.

Miss/Mrs/Ms Wood needs to be sat down and have explained how the law works in this country which is innocent until proven guilty.

Her sentence above would indicate that anyone accused of rape is guilty until proven innocent and should be treated as such - which is not how democracy works. And where the 'no smoke without fire' mindset around these sorts of allegations a man's life and career can be absolutely stuffed if they are innocent even if it doesn't get to court.

As it so so easy for someone to make a false allegation and where it is one word against another some form of protection for all is required.

A false accusation of theft/fraud etc do not seem to have the same out0fall after someone has been proven innocent.

The argument goes is that once they are named - if they are in fact guilty - it would persuade others to come forward (as per Jimmy Savile). If they are innocent, then there shouldn't be any others coming forward to make a like-wise claim. In any case only those that are charged get their names published as per other offences (robbery, murder etc).

The BBC should have clarified that Ms Wood was speaking for Rape Crisis (England and Wales) and not Rape Crisis (Scotland). The important distinction is the English organisation does not support male survivors of rape, only women. This sexist and discriminatory approach was eventually rejected by Scottish member groups, thus allowing access to government funding and a more effective service. It could be said that Rape Crisis (England and Wales) needs to be controversial in order to receive support, which would explain Ms Wood's remarks.

This post has been removed.

Figure 1 is particularly instructive ...

The round headed buffoon that is Ian Duncan Smith has tried to defend the government against the high court decision that forcing people to work for nothing is wrong.

He suggests that some people refuse to do the back to work schemes because they consider themselves too good for such unpaid work. He is of course referring to Cait Reilly who described her 2 weeks stacking shelves as a waste of time because it didn't help her to get a job:

"I was not given any training and I was left with no time to do my voluntary work or search for other jobs."

She also made it clear that she did not think she was above shelf stacking:

"I don't think I am above working in shops like Poundland. I now work part-time in a supermarket. It is just that I expect to get paid for working."

It seems that the round headed buffoon is constructing a rather poor argument to defend his unjust right wing dogma.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21490542

The little people won this time...get used to it IDS.

A comment that contains a link to a peer reviewed scientific article, is removed - now I know my time on H2G2 is up.

So, she did unpaid work in a supermarket, and claimed it didn't help her get a job, yet she now works part time in a supermarket?

Am I the only one to see the hypocrisy there?

She wasn't working for nothing. She was getting paid by the taxpayers.