simply stu Not Just another WordPress weblog

Rich?

Thursday 29th October

Hostage negotiator Dr James Alvarez, talking about the couple assumed to have been kidnapped by Somali pirates:

He said being white, it will be assumed the Chandlers, from Tunbridge Wells, are rich.

“These guys don’t understand about mortgages and having to pay rent and, of course, comparatively, the hostages will be wealthy from their point of view,” Dr Alvarez added.

I would have thought the fact they were swanning around the Indian Ocean in their yacht would suggest they’re rich.

I really hope they have a safe return but I can see why pirates may think they were good pickings.

This might be a good opportunity to have a rant about the news, too. May have been kidnapped. Ransom would have to be paid. The news so far is that a couple have gone missing. That’s it. Anything else is conjecture, as beautifully conveyed in “How To Get Ahead In Advertising”

Businessman 1: (reading the newspaper) One discovered naked in the kitchen…breasts smeared with peanut butter. The police took away a bag containing 15 grams of cannabis resin… it may also contain a quantity of heroin.
Bagley: Or a pork pie.
Businessman 1: I beg your pardon.
Bagley: I said the bag may also have contained a pork pie.
Businessman 1: I hardly see a pork pie’s got anything to do with it.
Bagley: Alright then, what about a large turnip. It might also have contained a big turnip.
Priest: The bag was full of drugs.
Bagley: Nonsense.
Priest: The bag was full of drugs, it says so.
Bagley: The bag could’ve been full of anything. Pork pies, turnips, oven parts… it’s the oldest trick in the book.
Priest: What book?
Bagley: The distortion of truth by association book. The word is “may.” You all believe heroin was in the bag because cannabis resin was in the bag. The bag may have contained heroin, but the chances are 100 to 1 certain that it didn’t.

Written by admin

October 29th, 2009 at 8:15 am

Posted in Current Affairs

4 Responses to 'Rich?'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Rich?'.

  1. Yes?

    Oh sorry I thought you were calling me.

    Rich

    29 Oct 09 at 4:44 pm

  2. What does “the chances are 100 to 1 certain that it didn’t” mean? Are the chances 100 to 1 that it didn’t or are they certain that it didn’t? It can’t be both.

    (obligatory pedantic statto bit)

    Rich

    29 Oct 09 at 4:50 pm

  3. Yes, coverage of the news can be a bit crap. It’s not so bad if you read between the lines, but not if you take what is said at face value – and its very easy to do so.

    It’s very easy to see how the media can be used to present distorted messages. One of my favourites was this one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7408681.stm

    Later amended, it originally said the the cyclist “collided with” a car, which does not suggest that the Police are still investigating, or even that the car collided with him (more likely considering the grave injuries, but it would still be unfair to make assumptions).

    Good old Beeb – at least if you contact them and make known valid concerns about wording, they do tend to amend their articles appropriately…

    Kouros

    29 Oct 09 at 6:24 pm

  4. mmmm… pork pie… *drool*

    Divine

    30 Oct 09 at 10:31 pm

Leave a Reply