[hindenburg] explosive sausage

Long time since I strafed and quite frankly, it's overdue. What better subject than the conflagration of the Hindenburg, thereby killing two birds with one stone - the strafing aspect and an air disaster which I'm sorry I haven't posted on for over a week now, in deference to Ruthie Zaftig.

It's a fascinating tale when you get into it and I admit that this is virtually a Wiki-summary but it's a good article:

Named after Paul von Hindenburg (1847-1934), it was a visually striking "ship of the air", at 245 m (804 ft) long and 41 m (135 ft) in diameter, longer than three Boeing 747s placed end-to-end and only 24 m (78 ft) shorter than the Titanic. It was originally equipped with cabins for 50 passengers and a crew complement of 40.

It was originally intended to be filled with helium but the United States, the main world supplier, had imposed a military embargo on helium. Dr. Eckener, the chief designer, expected this ban to be lifted but it wasn't, leading to the modification of the design to use flammable hydrogen - 200,000 m³ of the gas in 16 bags or cells.

It wasn't as dangerous as it sounds. Germany had extensive experience with hydrogen and accidents had never occurred on civil zeppelins.

Summarized story of the disaster is continued here.

[poll result] feeding pigeons

Should we be able to feed the pigeons?

Yes - cruel not to 68%

No - let them starve 19%

At certain times 14%

37 votes total, which is not bad for summer. So, Ken, what do you think of this result? Hello? Ken? Ken? Oh, he's over there cleaning pigeon dos off his livery.

[boris reassessed] a blogger can be wrong

In shape and ready to assume the mantle

Now you've gathered that the thing this blogger dreads above all else is to be labelled a hypocrite and so, when he wrote, insignificantly, here:

Note the Bullingdon eyes. This is one aristocratic Rottweiler of a candidate.

and

There is a deep disrespect for and indifference towards what others hold dear in the Bollinger modus operandi and by extension, in Boris himself,

Tom Paine took exception and opined:

Is it me, or is this post unadulterated snobbery? Your youthful escapades differ only from those of the Bullingdon Club in that the members of the latter paid for the damage.

Tail firmly between hind legs. Why am I railing against a fellow maniac? So when I read Prodicus' thing about Boris and bearing in mind Lady Ellee's appreciation:

The reason I like Boris Johnson is because he is obviously very intelligent (and I have a weakness for brainy men), and the way he tends to smile and charm his way through life, through his various gaffes,

… well, so OK, I was wrong. Prodicus then quotes Tim Hames' comparison with Milligan:

For instance, when he was asked by an officer who found him lurking in an “inappropriate” place “Milligan? What are you standing there for?” he replies: “Everybody's got to be standing somewhere, sir.” It can be on this logic alone that Boris Johnson is standing for Mayor of London.

Hames continues:

Four candidates have been selected by the Conservative Party to woo the activists and then members — plus anyone else who wishes to participate in the process. They are Mr Johnson, Mr Neverheardofhim, Ms Neverheardofher and Mr Neverheardofhimeither.

He then offers three reasons Boris should withdraw:

1] He will not be able to be the Boris he has become.

2] Boris is incapable of maintaining discipline until next spring.

3] It could easily be the end of his political career if only because of timing.

When I moseyed on over to Longrider and read:

It’s starting to look that way. I happen to like Boris. Indeed, I frequently share his views. This is because Boris supports such liberal concepts as free speech, freedom of association and so on; the hallmarks of a civil, civilised society,

… Well, it was time to do this post.

Vote 1 Boris!

… and this time I mean it. I desperately want to see how the lovable rogue handles the 2012 Games. I bet the IOC won't know what hit them.

For that reason alone you should give him your hard-earned vote. Hell, he might even make a good fist of it, with absolutely no breaking glass.

Boris is Mayor and Prodicus is his prophet

[catharsis] have to let it out

Blogging can be quite a cathartic exercise, really - purges the pent up emotions and leaves one refreshed and if someone has read and commented along the way, that's the icing on the cake.

For someone like Prodicus, whom I've always admired, to blog is the thing. He can have his rant, get it down "on paper", shake his fist, nod and go off to the kitchen, feeling braced.

Competition.

Nothing to do with Prodicus but one of the two topics of this post. Competitiveness. Ben Johnson, the drug takers, the ones who stretch the rules, Hand of G-d. Alonso and Hamilton.

And hypocrisy.

It's everywhere and goes with competitiveness - the practice of spouting about fine and noble virtues whilst behind the façade pursuing an aggressive policy of self-aggrandizement.

Long ago, in sportsmaster days, there were a series of incidents still etched in the mind. I'd been seconded to an older rugby team and they were, quite frankly, appalling. They had no spirit as it had been knocked out of them and had won nothing in two years.

Players were not getting to the ball and when the ball came to them, some sort of malaise came over them, some hesitation. We had a pow wow during the week and though nothing had been expressly said, it came out that their coach had drilled them with such discipline that they were afraid to try anything which wasn't by the book.

There's not a lot wrong with self-discipline and playing for the team, especially on a wet day and against tougher opposition but there's also not a lot wrong with breathing freely, trying nifty plays and throwing it about a bit, especially if you'd had no taste of success for two seasons.

Lateral thinking

With our younger teams, you had to take a more Irish approach. There were more constant breakdowns of play and as long as everyone was in support, kicking the ball along the ground was a real option - it broke the opposition plays open but the key to this was playing to your teammates.

However, the purists didn't like it. Said it was teaching bad habits, like William Webb Ellis who in 1823 had had enough, picked the ball up and ran. There'd been a complaint from the opposition coach from the last match that though we'd played within the rules, we hadn't played within the "spirit of rugger".

Oh really? And did the "spirit of rugger" include the eye-gouging and testicle grabbing they'd been allowed to try on our boys whilst ours were expressly forbidden to indulge in that competitive advantage? I suggested our head coach put that to the complainants.

Such rank hypocrisy. It's a competitive game and our small school was a terror in the district precisely because the players were totally ball aggressive, with back-up discipline. Plus, that attitude, with good conditioning, lessens injuries through the season.

I can't see any logical reason, when in a competitive situation, to pursue vague notions of "fair play" the opposition likes to cite at you, as long as you play within the rules and take no unfair advantage. Take unfair advantage and the victory is hollow.

Two case studies

Yesterday I saw two examples of this sort of hypocrisy.

1] I visited one particular blogger outside our sphere who'd been rabbiting on about how statistics don't matter and someone had commented "yes they do" and he'd started about how the main thing's the joy of conversation with others and so on and some people had admired his calm wisdom.

Three comments further down, someone had then commented about his own 5000 visitors that month and this blogger countered, in a throwaway line, about his 7000 that month. Two posts further down the page the blogger had run a graph of his stats for the last month. I nearly spilt my coffee.

2] The second incident was an "A" student on a scholarship in America, at a college whose buzzwords are "civility", "tolerance" and "diversity of opinion" who told a professor in 2006 that she was due to attend a conference and when asked which conference and saying it was conservative, promptly received failing "F" grades on every work she submitted from then on and eventually brought a lawsuit against the professor.

Now, as a professor of sorts myself, I don't smile kindly on troublemakers like this but she seems to have had a point here. She won her case and the college was forced to rewrite its tolerance regulations. Now she was sent constant rape and death threats from the feminist lobby who'd organized her demise and an anti-Ruth site was set up on campus, all condoned by the admin and academic staff.

Detractors said she was an intolerant bigot because Christianity does not accept homosexual marriages and she spoke against them. By also speaking against radical feminism and lesbianism, she'd effectively taken on the whole university as these are the two fascistic groups who control all campuses today.

What she took offence at was a play which was being taken round 650 major campuses, at taxpayers' expense, where actors dressed up as vaginas and other women's organs and "celebrated the throwing off of the fascism of shame", "women as victims of a male-dominated society"; marriage as an "instrument of oppression"; and fathers as "foreign male elements."

All with the full backing of staff and administration. The woman who'd written this stuff, Ensler, had been raped as a child and was now "reclaiming her private parts" by pushing it onto students across the U.S. How much collusion does it take to reach 650 universities before someone complains about the obscenity?

The rest of the story will have to wait for another post as this post was just about competitiveness and hypocrisy.

Photo below: admittedly this sort of thing would be red rag to the bull with the leftist controlled academia.

[chainsaw massacre] this time in britain

Do only Ents look after trees?

Matt Wardman has a horrifying piece about local councils across Britain tree lopping and felling. It reminds me of Lord of the Rings and the mad Saruman's uprooting of trees. We need some Ents now, to stop the murderous foe. Matt reports:

Councils across Britain have embarked on what environmentalists have called a “chainsaw massacre”.

Why? Who is deciding these things?

Trees are coming down as a Health and Safety risk (”trip hazard”), or being replaced by “lollipops”.

Who specifically has given these orders and is that person a horticulturalist?

And trees that will take 50 years to regrow are being removed without thought being given to long term consequences.

Don't the idiots understand that trees aren't just trees - they are an ecosystem for birds, for us? No, they don't understand that, do they?

Bureauman sits in his office and gets a great idea - let's lop down the trees. Or else he gets a directive from above.

I find it highly surprising that in an age of “Environmental Friendliness”, and at a time when birds are under threat, that this is even possible. This state of affairs is unacceptable under Environmental Policy - never mind Tree Policy.

The thing is, Matt, we need a Tree Policy and fast. The blogosphere is good at petitions and campaigns. I wonder what can be done about this atrocity?

[3rd photo quiz] try your hand

Click the photo for a better look.

Half a mark for each part of each question, adding up to ten marks overall but with two possible bonus half points as well:

1. Who was he and what was his union?

2. British poet who wrote about it and name of the bird

3. Work and sculptor please

4. His name and country if you can

5. The Roman who took his surrender and his name - bonus half-point if spelt correctly

6. Which city is it and what do they call a division of it?

7. The ancient wonder and the painter of the picture

8. Neil Armstrong is known. Who were the second and third and what was the flight?

9. Word starting with "d" for this type, the name of the ship and the decade - bonus half point for the exact year of the disaster

Answers here.

[bitta bovver] lewis and fernando

"I'm the top driver, Lewis."

"No, I'm the top driver, Fernie."

"No - you new kid on block. Vete a la mierda, Cabron! Tu mama calata! Tu madre tiene un bigote ... deje el cuolo de mi novia paz! Joder! Comprate un bosque y pierdete dentro."

"I love you too, Fernie."

Wouldn't you find it galling? You drive for the same team, you are the highly paid star, the team tells your running mate to move over and let you through, he refuses, you then get your revenge by stalling him in the pits, you're penalized and then the bstd goes on to win the race.

What do you do? You say things like:

"But I guess he will have a different relationship with the team in the next race, because I don't think they are very happy, and I will have the same one (relationship)."

… and:

The Spaniard admitted to BBC Sport he was not being treated in the way he expected he would be by McLaren. Asked if he was happy to stay at McLaren, Alonso said: "We'll see."

And Ron Dennis's view of the matter?

"Отношения у двух пилотов натянутые, они оба молодые и оба чрезвычайно любят соревноваться, оба лидируют в чемпионской гонке. Это тяжелое для команды время, ответственность лежит на обоих пилотах", - сказал Деннис.

I'm enjoying it as, clearly, are the Russians. Anyway, we've always had a bit of trouble kow-towing to the Spaniards.

[misandry] as destructive as misogyny

My heart is lifted.

There are some, not a majority, of truly excellent rhetorical writers and a few who are truly unsung. Cassandra is shut away in the high white tower of her Lighthouse and though she's radiant in her style, sadly, not many will share her convictions.

I do.

It is glaringly obvious to many by now that I am opposed to radical feminism, among other things, for reasons outlined here and here.

However, the feminist construct placed upon me as a closet misogynist you can judge for yourself as I acknowledge Cassandra, on bended knee, as my master [or perhaps mistress] in the field of rhetoric and in general, am overawed by the power of intellect and beauty combined in so many women, to which there is no masculine defence.

To the point. Commenting on Virginia Woolf, Cassandra posts:

Theodore Dalrymple decries the icon of women's literature Three Guineas as the locus classicus of self-pity and victimhood and suggests an alternative title: "How to be Privileged and Yet Feel Extremely Aggrieved".

Current Postmoderns (Pomos) must have taken several leaves out of the Woolf book, as she is no doubt the uncrowned queen of the ludicrous equation and false analogy; of logic so bent it could put the kitchen plumbing to shame.

Unrestrained emotions and high strung aesthetics notwithstanding, Woolf leaves our contemporary Pomos far behind in the use of false analogies and the inability to distinguish metaphor from literal truth. Dalrymple: She "... collapse[s] all relevant moral distinctions, a technique vital to all schools of resentment ...

Ruth Malhotra - pro-reason, anti-feminist

I throw misandry into the same pit of ordure as misogyny and quote a little Woolf:

- There is no real difference between a university degree convocation and a Nuremberg rally;

- A club not admitting women members is the same as Nazi death camp Treblinka.

- Both the British policeman and the Nazi stormtrooper wore a uniform", rendering them both brutes.

It's not that there is zero value in the sentiment but it is the "all or nothing" generalizations which are so galling. For example, there is a certain amount to be said for this one:

Were men to see the error of their ways and consider women their equals (you see what feats of logic can be accomplished once you set your mind to it), the will to war would vanish as by miracle.

War is caused by those who finance it, who suggest then enable it, whilst grooming leaders in their image over the centuries to be amenable to their persuasion. In this group are women. I won't name her but the ex-head of Tesco is one of these. Sutherland, Kaletsky and Balls are three of the men.

These groups are dominated by men but the women are right in there doing their worst as well. Felicia Cavasse, Veronique Morali, Birgit Breuel, Virginia Rogononi are just some of the names of those who've sold their souls.

Would there be war without men in charge? Of course there would - the finance needs war. But Woolf, who from her privileged background must have had some inkling of this, ignores it in her misandropic rantings.

It was Germaine Greer who said:

'Bitter women will call you to rebellion but you have too much to do. What will you do?" [The Female Eunuch]

It is the same bitterness as the misogynist who says all women want is money; it's no different in its mindset, this virulent feminism. It's a form of socialism in that it readily leaps to draconian legislative solutions and compulsion.

Minette Marrin [herself a CFR but let's not hold that against her here], put it succinctly:

…when I recently wanted to write a book called The Misandrist my publisher told me the title would be incomprehensible. This is odd, because there is misandry all around us, even if it is a feeling that dares not speak its name. It is misandry that has so muddied the waters of the current debate about rape and date-rape, and led to so much wilful misunderstanding.

There is a terrible danger that these attitudes are going to alienate men from women even more tragically than nature did in the first place ... Of course it is not difficult to understand misandry. But it would be a tragic mistake to be as unjust to men as they have traditionally been to us. Yet that is what women seem constantly tempted to do...

Over many articles she has quoted many instances, of which this is one:

Misunderstanding is the word for it - last year Cosmopolitan reported that hundreds of women wrote in to say that until they read the magazine's article on date-rape, they had not realised they had been raped. And if they did not know it at the time, how could their unfortunate assailants?

To the feminist - a plea - don't you understand that being "anti-bitterness" between the genders - being against anything which contrives to drive a wedge between men and women, through a one-sided misunderstanding and indifference to the other side's sensitivities, does not necessarily constitute being "anti-women"?

What gives the feminist the monopoly on speaking for women any more than this man speaks for men? [I just picked one at random from the net].

It's the old story - the sane and rational rarely get a look in and when they do speak, they're drowned out by the radical.

[windigo] taming the monster inside

Love the understatement:

The Canadian Encyclopedia describes Windigo as a "spirit...that takes possession of vulnerable persons and causes them to engage in various antisocial behaviours, most notably cannibalism."

Steve Pitt gives the lowdown:

Sometimes a Windigo breathes fire. It can talk, but mostly it hisses and howls. Windigos can fly on the winds of a blizzard or walk across water without sinking. They are stronger than a grizzly bear and run faster than any human being, which is bad news because human flesh happens to be a Windigo's favourite food.

In most cases, it was believed that white people were immune to becoming either victims of or Windigos themselves but John Long, a Hudson's Bay trader travelling through Ontario in the year 1799, came across a white Windigo. The victim did not become a towering, fire-breathing monster but he did exhibit the classic symptoms of Windigo Psychosis.

So much for the story and it is repeated here by Tamim Ansary but there is a serious psychological point behind it which the Ojibwa appreciated:

Almost all Windigos are self-created, Basil H. Johnston, Ojibwa scholar, states. A Windigo was a human whose selfishness has overpowered his self-control to the point that satisfaction is no longer possible. That is why Windigos are always hungry no matter how much they eat. In former times Ojibwa people would strive to keep their selfishness under control.

Now we're getting closer to home. Do you know anyone whose lust for something or someone - money, sex, power, overcomes his/her "human-ness" and the person becomes not unlike a monster? The more he has, the more he needs. He consumes and having consumed, moves on to another victim.

He can't be reasoned with, he doesn't operate that way any more.

The Cree tried to bribe the Windigo by offering him gifts but the Algonkin killed him quickly before he could kill them. I prefer to think the Windigo can somehow come out of it himself.

At least it has to start that way. Then it's a brave person who will come to the rescue.

[crossroads] blogosphere meets politisphere

So the Yearly Kos Convention has taken place and the Democratic big guns were all there. Does this mean the blogosphere is indeed packing a punch in the political sphere? The Boston Globe reports:

The "Netroots," as the progressive blogging community has dubbed itself, has in only a couple of years become a major force in electoral politics, able to influence what gets covered in the media, raise money, and whip up partisan outrage.

The Netroots helped the Democrats take back Congress last year. Yet the presidential candidate they championed in 2004, Howard Dean, failed miserably. And their antiwar candidate for Senate in Connecticut, Ned Lamont, lost last fall even after defeating longtime incumbent Joseph Lieberman in the Democratic primary.

In Britain, the closest anyone has got to influence was the Guido debacle, although 18 Doughty Street certainly has its moments.

Hard to know how much influence we have. We certainly see that others think like us - other bloggers, that is.

[zero sum blogging] not just a bp issue

Lord Nazh posted recently on a matter which Pommygranate had previously posted on.

Visitors.

They both have a case and I see it as a question of:

1. a "zero sum game";

2. you have to walk before you can run.

Everyone wants to be read and appreciated. Everyone wants 200+ uniques a day. Many want entry into the unofficial "club" of established bloggers, especially the political males, a club with gentle ribbing and repartee. Some of the guys want this "real bad" and only frequent big boy blogs.

No one wants to be stuck down in the 50 or so uniques, almost begging for someone to visit. But it takes time and one must have a product to start with and blog consistently. You can't fail to blog for a month and then e-mail someone to nominate you for the Dale 100.

There are those, not many, who couldn't care less about stats - as long as their blogfriends visit, they're happy but these are a minority. Into this scenario came Blogpower last December and BP carried a clear obligation - visit others as you would have them visit you.

Now, before going any further, yes I'm aware:

1. it's the holidays and many are away;

2. it's hot and people are at the beach and outdoors;

3. people are tired after a gruelling working year.

Nevertheless, yesterday, I did a trawl through every Blogpower blog and the result was grim. Leaving aside those who have posted that they're away, there were 5 who were hardly blogging at all anyway, about 7 who regularly visit others but a whopping 22 who clearly do not visit others [at least they don't appear on MyBlogLog or in the comments] and this is contrary to the agreement.

Yet I then go to Dale/Eugenides/Dillow/Worstall/Croydonian/Dizzy and many of these 22 are out in force. And some of these 22 are the most vocal in the sphere about rights and wrongs.

I'm sorry but this is just unfair to fellow members. Let's look at this scenario:

Let's say I run a blog called Daily Comment. On Tuesdays I have up to 80 visitors but on the weekend it can drop to 35 or 40. These 40 are all good people and close blogfriends, plus a few google hits and referrals.

I join Blogpower. Instantly the regular 7 start visiting, sometimes twice a day and what's more - they're commenting intelligently [generally] on what I said. Oh gosh. Yippee.

Now twenty or thirty other BPers start to trickle in and my next Tuesday shows over 100 uniques. Avidly I visit others and slowly my Tuesdays and even Wednesdays stay over 100.

Nice theory but as Lord Nazh says, the reality is different. No more than 4 or 5 are visiting him from BP but I know he is visiting dozens. This isn't a zero sum game. It's a minus. This negates the whole purpose of Blogpower and it's not just endemic to us either.

[blogfocus saturday] the silly season

We're definitely in the silly season when major bloggers turn off the moderation and word verification in an effort to get commenters and when almost everyone talks of going away for some time.

The clever get other bloggers to guest post during the hiatus but it's a losing game really - people just aren't blogging to the same extent. We begin with a triumvirate of friends and there was a recent birthday party extraordinaire.

1 Geoff Jones explains the itinerary:

On Saturday July 28th I finally come off age. That is the age when you get free bus tickets, 30% of rail travel and 10% of ski passes.

Everyone is welcome to join me at one or more of the following places on the big day.

09:00 In line at Cambridge railway station to collect my pass :-)

10:30 Swimming at Jesus Green followed by celebratory drink.

11:30 Walk to Grantchester and lunch at The Orchard

15:00 Punting on upper river (weather permitting).

19:30 See Taming of the Shrew in the gardens of St Johns College (Queens Road entrance).

2 And Sally in Norfolk reports on it:

My favorite part of the day was going to see Taming of the shrew in the gardens of St Johns college. It was so good I almost didn’t notice that it was pouring down with rain. My cake turned out really well and was enjoyed by everyone… not a crumb was left.

3 But Ellee Seymour was elsewhere engaged at the time:

When we last stayed in Centre Parcs two years ago, I was in the spa having a detox seaweed wrap and had been coated all over with green slimy stuff and wrapped in silver foil, the lights were dimmed, the music played softly and I was dreamily dozing off when the fire alarm suddenly went off. I half hoped/dreaded a hunky fireman would come and rescue me, but I was unceremoniously rushed into the shower by staff and ushered out quickly in a toweling robe; and all for nothing as it turned out to be a false alarm.

4 Meanwhile, either in South Africa or Scotland, not sure which, The Good Woman reflects on expat bloggers:

Expat postings can be compared to marriages. At first there's the frisson of being in something new - finding your way around, forming early opinions, the desire to be open minded and to make it work. Then there's the wedding - the day you find your new home, the furniture arrives and you celebrate having done it.

The honeymoon follows closely thereafter. The routine is new and, therefore, not boring. You relish the new things that are better than the old things that irked in your last posting. You begin to explore your new home. But it still feels like a long holiday.

5 Juliet Pain or Julie if you wish goes back in time to the day the dingo supposedly took the baby:

The Lindy Chamberlain case (1980s), wherein baby Azaria was carried off by dingos, while the mother was accused and found guilty of her murder, being sentenced to life in prison. Some years later the torn and blood stained clothing belonging to baby Azaria was found, upholding the mother's version of events, that she had been taken by dingos.

6 Ian Russell went to WOMAD and reflects on the hygienic standards in eating in public places:

Furthermore, she said, getting into her stride, this is also why there is a ridiculous amount of wrapping of foodstuffs in shops. A banana in cling film?! Onions in a plastic bag?! Plastic bags provided for all sorts of foodstuffs already blessed by nature with a hermetic, inedible coverings?! She certainly does have a point. Modern western human is paranoid about picking up germs.

7 Mr. Fact earned one cent from his AdSense and wonders:

Does anyone know people who actually make any money from Google Adsense? As today’s total shows, I’m not sure it’s worth it to have all those irritating ads on the page (but are they more irritating than the text itself?) - although it would appear that some people can use it properly… Do you hate them (the ads, not the people who make thousands with them)? Should I get rid of them?

8 Inspector Phil A is right on the case of the EU and its clandestine wording of the constitution which was rejected in referenda but went ahead anyway:

The official English translation of the New EU Constitutional ‘Treaty’ is now out – It has not gone unnoticed that they waited until Parliament were off on their 10 week summer break. They have taken out the actual word 'constitution' and have avoided enshrining legal status to the EU flag, motto and anthem.

They have done a Find/Replace on ‘Foreign Minister’ and changed those references to ‘High Representative’. Mmmm - ‘Catchy’. They must have been reading Lord of the Rings again.

I'd like to announce that I shall not be going away on holiday and though my stats have suffered an extraordinarily major and inexplicable [to me] slump today, still we'll soldier on and reiterate that it's the quality of the readership, not the quantity.

Hope to see you on Wednesday evening.

[celeb couples] pass me the paper bag

I looked for ages for a suitable celeb couple photo, from Lennon/Ono to Brangelina and they were all sickening. Had to go back to a real celeb couple here.

Devout Christian Scientist Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes "have reportedly decided to pose nude for a magazine", in accordance with their beliefs.

As Michelle Johnson of the Melbourne Age pleads:

Tom, please, we've already been scarred by your couch-jumping antics and public displays of affection - enough is enough!

Or as one of the commenters pleaded:

Why can't couples just do it like john and yoko - straight up nude no effects with lighting or props or computers just "have a look at me todger and check out me missus tits".

Bogie and Bacall were my parents' generation so it's hardly likely that they would be touted by me as a romantic couple and yet who else since the 50s would be worthy to tie their boot laces? Posh and Becks?

Of course you recognize this famous couple, don't you?

[stop press] female gives birth

Birthday cake for previous daughter, Su Lin

Hot off the world press today - a 16-year-old female has given birth after two and a half hours in labour:

The cub's gender was not immediately known. "All we've seen so far is a leg and a tail," said Dr Ron Swaisgood, co-head of [San Diego Zoo's] panda program.

"Usually the mother will bobble the cub or her paw will slip and the cub will cry until it's repositioned," said Swaisgood. "But [Bai Yun] was keeping that cub so content it didn't cry at all. It made a few squawks and that was it."

I'm getting confused with this family tree. Bai Yun, Hua Mei, Su Lin. And do Panda's really squawk? These are the pressing questions this Saturday morning. Have a nice day.