March 12, 2006

Back When London Was Really Swinging

Responding to the surprising public interest sparked by John Profumo's recent death, today's Sunday Times has a fascinating play-by-play of the Profumo affair, including steamy details of high society orgies and all sorts of fun times. The piece, by Matthew Parris, is extracted from a book-length account he wrote with Kevin Maguire and published in 2004: Great Parliamentary Scandals : Four Centuries of Calumny, Smear & Innuendo. (Copies may also be ordered from the London Times here.)

Here is one of the more salacious bits, taken from Lord Denning's official report on the matter:

There is a great deal of evidence that there is a group of people who hold parties in private of a perverted nature. At some of these parties, the man who serves dinner is nearly naked except for a small square lace apron round his waist such as a waitress might wear. He wears a black mask over his head with slits for eye-holes. He cannot therefore be recognised by any of the guests.

Some reports stop there and say that nothing evil takes place. It is done as a comic turn and no more. This may well be so at some of the parties. But at others it is followed by perverted sex orgies: the man in the mask is a ‘slave’ who is whipped: that guests undress and indulge in sexual intercourse one with the other: and indulge in other sexual activities of a vile and revolting nature.

And you thought Bill Clinton had all the fun.

Here are a few more links to interesting overviews of the scandal:

  • The Guardian's special report on politics past: The Profumo Scandal

  • The BBC's "infamous crimes" series piece on the Profumo Affair

  • Of course, be sure to read this link to John Profumo's obituaries, for the human side of this unfortunate circus.

March 12, 2006 at 12:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 23, 2006

Winter in America

Columnist Gerard Baker, writing in today's UK Times, sees broader significance in Harvard President Larry Summers having been run out of office:

TWENTY YEARS AGO the American philosopher, Allan Bloom, published a book called The Closing of the American Mind, a devastating indictment of the nation’s universities and, more broadly, of its cultural elites.

Its premise was that the spirit of openness, a willingness to consider ideas freely, the great virtue of American life and the guiding ethos of a university had been perverted into a cultural relativism. From the 1960s liberal philosophy had taken hold, defiantly asserting that truth was in the eye of the beholder, and that notions of absolute ideals or virtues were anachronistic. In this new world, liberal democracy was no better than totalitarian theocracy, Plato’s philosophy was no more valid than Marianne Faithfull’s and Mozart should be considered on the same terms as the Monkees.

The resignation of Larry Summers as President of Harvard University this week indicates that the closing of the American mind is a continuing process, remorselessly squeezing the light out of its academic enlightenment

Technorati Tags:

February 23, 2006 at 11:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 16, 2006

You Make the Call!

Is this Jeremy Clarkson piece in the Sunday Times a review of the Mini Cooper S Convertible or an exploration of the meaning of social class in contemporary Britain?

February 16, 2006 at 09:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 08, 2006

This Planet Ain't Big Enough for the Two of Us

One of the (few) downsides of globalization is that it has become impossible for peoples to ignore each other. With the rise of trans-oceanic cables, cheap, fast international travel, CNN, and now the internet, it's hard to turn around in the global kitchen without elbowing someone in the ribs. Back in the good old days, people in the Mideast didn't give a rat's ass what people in the West said or wrote or drew about Islam. But now, thanks to the miracles of modern technology, we are all in their face about it.

Conversely, back in the day, we never knew (or at least paid any attention to) what people in the Mideast said about the decadent West, or the need to drive the jews into the sea, or what kinds of anti-semitic tripe state television networks broadcast or newspapers printed.

As Rodney King once said, "Can't we all just get along?"

And while I'm ranting, Michelle Malkin makes some excellent points about how the MSM is misleading its remaining customers by refusing to actually show the 12 cartoons which started this stupid controversy. If you bother to actually look at the cartoons, they are really quite inoffensive.

Cropped images of all 12 mohammed cartoons

Finally, read this interesting column by the NY Sun columnist Nibras Kazimi on why the Mideast is so violent and volatile:

. . . The people of the East are waiting for an avenger, not a savior. They long for whoever will wash away the humiliation of having their principal cities, once seats of far flung empires, now roamed by infidel troops or their perceived lackeys. "More schools, hospitals, and functioning sewers? Better Copenhagen burning to the ground!" And these days, the names most talked are those of Bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Zarqawi. They provide the fantasy of victory: American soldiers in body bags, and American diplomats in retreat. The mujaheddin toughing it out in the mountains, or flicking off scorpions in the desert, while huddled down with rusty rifles to waylay a tank or helicopter - shaping the battlefield and expanding the writ of havoc - conjure up powerful images and role models for idle youths. They project the heady aroma of masculine virility: It used to be about nationalizing the Suez, but now it is about bombing trains in Spain. It is now about the nation of Iran, forgetting about its massive economic and societal ills, wanting to reequip itself with a nuclear weapon.

February 8, 2006 at 09:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

February 04, 2006

The Third Rail of Punditry

Journalist/blogger La Shawn Barber, who just so happens to be black, has touched off a shite-storm of criticism by daring to touch the third rail of punditry: discussing differences in average intelligence among racial groups. The comments on her post (and she reports that she did not delete or block any comments) were impressively intelligent and high-minded, though, of course, some commenters did not agree with her conclusions.

Ms. Barber should be thanked for daring to raise this issue. Perhaps she was inspired by Charles Murray's decision (co-author of the controversial 1994 best-seller The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life) to break eleven years of silence on race and intelligence with his recent essay The Inequality Taboo in Commentary. (I wrote about Murray's essay here back in August.)

Keep the faith, La Shawn.

February 4, 2006 at 12:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 29, 2006

The Left's OJ Case

The infamous murder trial of OJ Simpson continues to polarize American public opinion. An NBC News poll conducted ten years after the trial shows that whites believe Simpson was guilty by a margin of more than 7:1. Conversely, blacks believe he was innocent by a more than 2:1 margin.

Similarly, more than fifty years after the conviction and execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg for stealing nuclear secrets for Stalin's Soviet Uniion, leftist continue to believe in the innocence of this benighted couple. This in spite of numerous declassified Soviet files unambiguously proving that the Rosenbergs were valued KGB agents who made significant contributions to the USSR's atomic weapons program. Joseph Rago reports for the WSJ's Opinion Journal from a forum at Fordham Law School on the "artistic influence" of the Rosenbergs, featuring lefty writers E.L. Doctorow and Tony Kushner:

You would think, by now, with a half-century of scholarship behind us and a great deal of damning evidence on display, we would not have to be arguing about the guilt or innocence of various iconic figures of the late 1940s and 1950s: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White or, perhaps most notoriously, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. But the martyr status of such figures seems irresistible, even today, to a certain kind of sentimental leftist. They still remain symbols of some malevolent American quality--never mind the truth of what they actually did.

. . . The notion that anyone would today deny their fundamental complicity in Soviet subversion is extraordinary, almost comically so. But comedy was not quite the mentality at the Rosenberg event. "Ambiguity is the key word, I think," said Mr. Doctorow, regarding our understanding of the past, though in this instance ambiguous is precisely what it is not.

Mr. Kushner argued the Rosenbergs were "murdered, basically." Mr. Doctorow went further, explaining that he wanted to use their circumstances to tell "a story of the mind of the country." It was a mind, apparently, filled with loathing and paranoia--again, never mind the truth of the charges against the Rosenbergs or other spies of the time. "The principles of the Cold War had reached absurdity," he continued. "We knew that the Russians were no threat, but we wanted to persuade Americans to be afraid" and so impose "a Puritan, punitive civil religion." Pronounced Mr. Kushner: "Our failure to come to terms with a brutal past, our failure to open up the coffins and let the ghosts out, has led to our current, horrendous situation."

January 29, 2006 at 10:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

January 02, 2006

The American Disease is Spreading

This is from today's UK Guardian:

A man who tried to sue a local council after he soiled his trousers tops a list of spurious public liability claims which cost local government and insurance companies an estimated £250m each year.

The man blamed the incident on the council's decision to close a public lavatory at the bus station and argued he was owed the cost of a new pair of trousers.

Compiling the list, the public sector insurer Zurich Municipal said exaggerated and dubious claims were an increasing problem. They include a man who claimed to have injured his arm after slipping on steps owned by a housing association. He had jumped out of his window to avoid being caught with another woman when his girlfriend returned home unexpectedly.

The list also features a bin man who made a claim against his council after being "startled" by a dead badger which fell out of a bag, a shoplifter who sued because she fell down stairs while running from the scene of a crime, and a motorist who claimed he did not see a traffic roundabout in daylight - despite there being a large tree in the middle.

You've got to admire someone who would think of suing over being startled by a dead badger...

January 2, 2006 at 09:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 12, 2005

Hasta La Vista, Baby!

The Governator decided not to grant Stanley "Tookie" Williams clemency for the four cold-blooded murders he committed more than twenty five years ago. For me -- and evidently for the Governor as well -- the key question in Williams' request for clemency was whether or not he had sincerely atoned for his crimes. As Schwarzenegger put it in his formal opinion to deny clemency:

Is Williams’ redemption complete and sincere, or is it just a hollow promise? Stanley Williams insists he is innocent, and that he will not and should not apologize or otherwise atone for the murders of the four victims in this case. Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption. In this case, the one thing that would be the clearest indication of complete remorse and full redemption is the one thing Williams will not do.

Clemency decisions are always difficult, and this one is no exception. After reviewing and weighing the showing Williams has made in support of his clemency request, there is nothing that compels me to nullify the jury’s decision of guilt and sentence and the many court decisions during the last 24 years upholding the jury’s decision with a grant of clemency.

Therefore, based on the totality of circumstances in this case, Williams’ request for clemency is denied.

I do not relish the thought of another person being put to death, regardless of the crimes they have committed. But Tookie forfeited his right to live when he callously took the lives of four others to eliminate any witnesses to his crimes. When Williams is executed this evening at a minute past midnight Pacific Time, justice will have been served.

Technorati Tags: ,

December 12, 2005 at 05:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 08, 2005

Tookie's Last Chance

Stan "Tookie" Williams' clemency hearing with the Governator began at 10am today. As an earlier LAT story by Jenifer Warren and Henry Weinsten noted, since there are no new legal issues or evidence to consider, it all comes down to a question of mercy.

Meanwhile, NY Daily News columnist Stanley Crouch does not seem to have been persuaded by Tookie's claims of redemption.

Technorati Tags: ,

December 8, 2005 at 02:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 04, 2005

LAT's Tookiethon

Today's LAT has a number of OpEd contributors opining on whether Stan "Tookie" Williams should be granted clemency or face execution on December 13th. (Their tag-line is "Should we kill this Crip?") Here is a synopsis with links:

Technorati Tags: ,

December 4, 2005 at 10:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack