³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Once again, we, the great British public can sleep well in our beds knowing that our reputation of 'may the best man win' let's hear it for the runner-up' is safe and well in our empty trophy cupboard. The Chambers decision was once again a typical 'over the top' more worthy of an Albanian dictator with a ten year year sentence thrown in.Do we not cherish the very British tradition of 'he has payed his debt to society' and now the slate can be wiped clean......not with the stuffed shirts of the BAA, they must have redress in the form of national humiliation of an athlete who cheated but was denied a chance to earn his living and also help his country to what could have been a gold. We are pretty thin on the ground as far as gold medals go, our football is a joke nationally, tennis the same so any real chance of genuine talent should have been nurtured not pilloried. This was the most draconian decision of modern athletics and most other countries would have excercised discretion but we prefer empty trophy cupboards and endless committees.

OLYMPIC GOLD

As the athletes train like something being reared in Huxley's Brave New World, often spending months in a foreign land, perhaps at a contrived altitude, eating a diet a battery hen would look twice at; as their bloodline frequently has little root in the country represented; as the games were originally about INDIVIDUAL performance;
as the drug-cheats will always be one step ahead; as sport is now commerce; as 'on the cusp' you can't tell man from woman; surely it is time to either call the whole thing off or
just let it rip as a unisex event held in the nude, without constraint. At least it would kill Big Brother and Jeremy Kyle stone dead.

Fiscal Rules OK:

A Request -

When you talk about the economy , can you mention out trade figures , it's like they don't matter anymore ?

If they don't matter anymore , could someone explain why they don't ?


My advise to the Gov -

I think we need higher interest rates to stop Sterling devaluing more and increasing fuel inflation. Labour needs to do whats right for the long term and should not be thinking about their election prospects in 2 years time !

So letting people cheat by taking drugs and then letting them back in afterwards is a price worth paying for a full trophy cabinet?

How about the athletes who have never taken drugs? How would you feel if you've worked your life to be the best you can be without cheating, only to have to play 2nd fiddle to someone who cheated and now wants everyone to forget he did? Do you think this guy would have stopped cheating if he never got caught?

Re Dwane Chambers and keeping up the true Brit spirit of "playing the Game", I believe athletes in all the other countries practice as well.

The rot set in when cricket abolished the word "gentlemen" and they became "players". I am pleased that athletics are trying to uphold the spirit of gentlemen.
Athletes should return to wear loose vests and baggy shorts in the true spirit of Alf Tucker, of the comic-strip fame who trained on a diet of fish and chips.

It is good to be British!!?? It is the taking part that matters not medals.

WHY THE NEW LEFT'S 'CONSULTATION EXERCISE' AND GRAND PLAN HAS GONE WRONG

"Last week, Millward Brown IMS, a leading polling company, was given a lucrative contract to mount extensive confidential polls to "clarify the reasons underlying the referendum result".....This isn't to find out why people voted as they did. They already know that. Marketing people will recognise the exercise. This kind of polling is designed to figure out how to manipulate the public mind when preparing to sell a new product.

This is officially described as the "first step in the Government's response" to the referendum."



I'd like to hear from supporters of the Socialist Internationalist advocates still extolling 'Liberté, égalité, fraternité' (which finds greatest expression in the 53 article Fundamental Charter of Human Rights of the Lisbon Treaty). How in practice does this amount to anything more than cynical opportunism for a 'business/political elite'? Will they not unscrupulously prey upon ever burgeoning dysgenic populations across Europe given that it's the diversity in the fraction of 1% of the human genome which really matters, not the 99%+ which we all have in common. After all, we also share something like 50% of our genes with bananas, 75% with worms and 98% with apes, yet we don't see many (sane) people demanding 'Liberté, égalité, fraternité' for bananas, worms and apes. Most of the genome doesn't code, only about 1.5% does that, so if we have 99.9% in common with each other, what does that mattter? We have 95% in common with apes, and most of it's junk DNA (i.e it doesn't code).

"Behind the lofty ideals of supranationalism in short, evoking an image of Commissoners sitting like Plato's Guardians, guiding the affairs of Europe on some rarefied plane far above the petty egotisms and rivalries of mere nation states, the project Monnet had set on its way was a vast, ramshackle, self-deluding monster: partly suffocating in its own bureaucracy; partly a corrupt racket, providing endless opportunities for individuals and collectives to outwit and exploit their fellow men; partly a mighty engine for promoting the national interests of those countries who knew how to 'work the system', among whom the Irish and the Spanish had done better than most, but of whom France was the unrivalled master. The one thing above all the project could never be, because by definition it had never been intended to be, was in the remotest sense democratic."

Booker and North: The Great Deception 2005

It's the mutations in our genomes which make us differ and which account for the Gaussian (normal/'bell curve') distribution of human abilities/behaviour. It looks more and more like our upbringing and other environmental factors don't positively shape our behaviour as much as we once were led to belive by Marxists/teachers (they may make matters worse through damage though).

Pseudo-libertarians are prone to cynically (or naively) deny/distort/exploit diversity by creating equalities legislation which furthers their opportunistic commercial/hegemonic ends, egregiously asserting that diversity is environmental in origin (it's not), and so doesn't matter (it does) so long as people are provided with the OPPORTUNITY to acquire wealth and education. The reality is that people aren't equally free to make 'choices' because ability to 'choose' is a function of discriminative ability, and this conforms to a normal/Gaussian distribution, not a uniform one. 'Diversity' means not(equality), and some of those proteted by equalities race relations legislation actually turn out to be a lot more equal than others, yet campaign more vocifierousy than any other group for others to be treated as equals whilst they prosper as a protected, pseudo-persecuted ethnic 'minority'. A very cunning, wrong-footing, ruse indeed.