Showing posts with label Sanctimonious prigs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sanctimonious prigs. Show all posts

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Large bacon sandwich, please...

Regular visitors to the Throne may recall that I entertain a healthy scepticism as regards the opinion of certain ‘scientists’, as they always seem to be described, as to what is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ for our health.

That scepticism has been significantly reinforced this weekend by the publication of two wholly contradictory reports (here and here) as to the possible health risks – or otherwise - of eating too much red meat.

Why on earth should we entertain the opinions of the merchants of doom, who claim that eating more than one bacon sandwich a week will result in colorectal cancer, if heart disease doesn’t kill us first? Weren’t they saying the same things about the cholesterol content of eggs a decade ago, (don’t eat more than two a week or you’ll have a heart attack!) only to see that ill-founded scare story comprehensively repudiated?

And what about the campaign to get people to eat five portions of fruit and vegetables a day? I actually do so because I happen to like them, but other countries recommend eating far more – the Japanese for instance recommend the consumption of quantities in the teens; so who’s scientists are correct, if any?

We’re also told, at interminable length, that drinking more than a thimble full of alcohol a week will leave us with livers resembling a use teabag, whilst simultaneously urging us all – but especially middle class, middle aged wine drinkers, for some reason - to sign the pledge or face a slow, painful death. At the risk of repeating myself for a third time, the much-vaunted numbers of ‘Units’ of alcohol we are ‘allowed’ to drink each day or week (without supposedly catastrophic consequences for our health) were the result of completely unscientific, finger-in-the-air guesswork by people who should (and probably did) know better.

Moving on, I am not and never have been a smoker; in fact, I have never held a lit cigarette to my lips, let alone suck on one. But whilst acknowledging that smoking cigarettes is very likely to damage the health of the person doing it, I utterly reject the hysterical nonsense surrounding the issue of second-hand smoking and even more ludicrously, third hand smoking: I simply don’t believe it.

I am a firm believer that there is no such thing as a ‘bad’ food, only bad diets and in closing, can anyone tell me why, if we are eating and drinking ourselves towards ill-health and an early, painful death, we are now living longer than we have done in the history of mankind?

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Ex-PC Mark Kennedy courts the press...

Whatever your views about the rights and wrongs of using 'undercover' police officers to infiltrate environmentalist groups bent on 'direct action' (and for what it's worth I would be very disappointed in them if they weren't), you may agree with me when I observe that for a man supposedly living 'in fear of his life' after he was exposed as such an officer, Mark Kennedy has hardly acted as he might have been expected to if his fear was genuine.

On what do I base that assertion?

Well call me old-fashioned, but agreeing to have your photograph taken (after transforming your appearance back to what most people would refer to as 'normal') and printed in a national Sunday newspaper is hardly the action of a man fearful of an imminent lethal attack, is it?

Either that, or he's an imbecile.

And by the way; has anyone else noticed his rather startling resemblance to the late Marty Feldman?

Thursday, September 09, 2010

Ian O'Doherty and the sanctimonious Angelina...

My regular reader will be aware that I frequently link to articles written by the excellent Kevin Myers of the Irish Independent.

On this occasion, however, I am reproducing a section of the column published in today's Indo written by one of his colleagues, Ian O'Doherty, who in a few short paragraphs, gives the increasingly ridiculous and nauseatingly pious Angelina Jolie a richly deserved and wildly overdue fisking.

I hope you enjoy it as much as I did...

Suffer the little people

With a new movie to promote, the Pakistan disaster couldn't have come at a better time for Angelina Jolie.

Having never met a disaster she didn't like, Jolie was quick to head off to Pakistan -- in full, fetching, repressive head gear, natch -- to show the peasants that they might be starving, dying of cholera and typhus and suffering from chronic dysentery, but at least they can take succour from the fact that Lara Croft has deigned to use them as backdrop in a photo-shoot.


According to her: "I am very moved by them and I hope to be able to do something to help bring attention to the situation for all of the people in need in Pakistan. This is not just a humanitarian disaster; it is an economic and social catastrophe."

And, indeed, she is right.


Although her perch on the moral high ground is rather lowered by the fact that she has just splashed out $40m on a giant pad in Italy ...

How many of her beloved Pakistanis could have benefited from that type of money?


Answer -- probably none, because most of the aid money is being filtered away by corrupt politicians or the Taliban.

But hey, if it makes Angelina feel good about herself, that's all that matters, right?

Hear, hear, Ian.