Blog Page 1554
Mansfield Ball throws up a nasty surprise
Students across Oxford are experiencing virus-like symptoms which have been linked to the Mansfield College Ball, which took place last Saturday.
Mansfield Ball President Anna Ploszajski said, “We have had reports from a minority of students of virus-like effects like vomiting and diarrhoea.”
The college’s main site Junior Dean Claire Palmer emailed students on Monday, stating, “We have had a number of reports today regarding students (Main Site and Off-site) feeling unwell with a suspected virus.”
On Tuesday, a further email was sent around students by Palmer, saying, “Since the email below was sent last night, the College has been in contact with the Environmental Health and Public Health Authorities. Environmental Health has requested that all students who have experienced symptoms in the last few days contact their GPs so that samples can be taken (and the guilty organisms readily identified).”
The Ball President told Cherwell, “There have been allegations of food poisoning. It appears to be the seafood bar that has come under questioning.”
She stressed however that the causes of the illness remain unclear, saying, “Mansfield College are carrying out a full investigation into the possible cause of the illness and until the investigation is complete, I am unable to offer a suggestion as to what has brought on the symptoms.”
She suggested that the seafood bar may not have been responsible for subsequent illnesses, saying, “Some people who got ill ate at the seafood bar, but others who got ill didn’t eat there.”
She added, “This unfortunate incident should not, and will not, belittle the achievement of what has been the culmination of almost two years of preparation. The event has consistently been trumpeted as unquestionably the most successful ball in Mansfield’s history.”
One Mansfield student told Cherwell, “At the moment there is no confirmation of this being food poisoning as a result of the ball or if people have just caught a virus from each other. I don’t think it is as straightforward as ‘food poisoning at the ball’ because as someone who was there and enjoyed (with all of my friends) all the food on offer there, neither I nor any of my friends or anyone I have spoken with have contracted this lurgy.”
Another noted, “A lot of college are ill; no one’s really sure what the mystery lurgy is, although it striking so soon after the ball seems to indicate there’s some causal link. A lot of people have Norovirus-y symptoms, so we think it could be that someone came to the ball carrying it. Now people seem to be catching it off housemates/people in the same accommodation block.”
The Queen’s College Welfare Officer Mark Holmes has confirmed that students at his College are suffering from the same illness. He told Cherwell on Tuesday, “A number of students from Queen’s have come down with sickness and diarrhoea since Saturday evening, with most recovering by now…As far as I am aware all the students who are ill were part of the group who attended Mansfield Ball.”
Students at St Anne’s are also claiming that they are suffering from food poisoning. One St Anne’s student, who wished to remain anonymous, said, “In St Anne’s there have been at least a dozen cases that I know of, but there’s likely to be more.
“I don’t think anyone has been hospitalised but everyone who has had it has been pretty much bed ridden for a day. I fully intend to be chasing Mansfield up for a full refund if I can get it. I believe our JCR President has sent an email on our behalf and I’ll be interested to see what Mansfield Ball committee come back with.”
St Anne’s JCR president Oscar Boyd sent an email to the Mansfield Ball Committee, alerting them to illness within the College. He stated, “Following a splendid ball, I’m sorry to inform you that there has been a bout of food poisoning at St Anne’s with numerous people who attended the ball severely affected. While I know this is not the fault of anyone on your committee, those affected have been confined to their beds due to sickness since yesterday afternoon and have been inconvenienced as a result. I hope you will be able to talk to your suppliers and offer some compensation to all those affected.
“Again, I’m sorry to have to contact you like this after what was otherwise a fantastic ball, but it is a serious matter and should be dealt with appropriately.”
Physicist Tiber Karadag told Cherwell, “My symptoms kicked in at around 2am on Monday, so roughly 24 hours after the ball. I think the symptoms definitely point towards food poisoning. I don’t think it is the Norovirus, as people who I spent Sunday evening with would be showing symptoms by now.”
Karadag concluded, “I think the least the Mansfield Ball Committee could do is to cover the cost of toilet paper used in college the past few days!”
Third-year Mansfield lawyer David Lukic had a positive experience at the Atlantis-themed ball. He told Cherwell, “Although our crew were seemingly made seasick from a mysterious illness, the treasures that we plundered from the lost city made the adventure a success. YARR!”
Mansfield student Thomas Adlam pointed out that not everyone who ate at the seafood bar has fallen victim to the bug, saying, “I ate at least a dozen oysters and was completely fine. In fact the only thing I consumed all night beside one hog roast burger at the start was seafood. I feel 100%.”
World’s largest biotech ideas competition opens
A competition designed to impel a new generation of bio-entrepreneurs has opened, offering a £100,000 prize for innovative ideas with the potential to improve the lives of patients.
The OneStart contest, the result of a collaboration between SR One, the corporate venture capital arm of pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, and the Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable, a student-run initiative to bring academic and industry groups together on-campus, is the largest of its kind in the world.
The competition consists of three rounds and covers four tracks: drug discovery, medical devices, diagnostics and health information technology. Entrants are first required to fill in an entry form which sketches out the idea, before up to 35 teams progress to the semi-final round.
“Ideas at all stages of development are accepted,” says D.Phil Organic Chemist and OBR events team member Peter Crane. At the semi-final stage, teams are invited to a day of seminars, breakout sessions and workshops, with the chance to refine their ideas and build a business plan in conversation with industry leaders from across the venture capital, biotech, pharmaceuticals and advisory communities.
Teams will also have the chance to make pitches to expert panels (“like on Dragon’s Den,” Pete says) for specific feedback and advice on how to take their idea forward. The one-day “Business Boot Camp” will take place in mid-March.
President of the Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable, and dual-doctorate student at Lincoln College and The Scripps Research Institute in California Dan Perez says, “to be a successful entrepreneur, especially in a field as complicated as the life sciences, you need mentors. Our goal is to equip all the participants (and not just the winners) with the tools they’ll need to get their current and future biotechs off of the ground.”
“It’s about breaking down the barriers between a good idea and its market,” Pete adds.
Entrants come from any profession or degree field, as teams are encouraged to incorporate a range of skills from business savvy to legal knowledge. “If you don’t have an idea, you can still participate,” Dan says. “there are a lot of entrepreneurs looking to complement their ideas with co-founders of a particular skillset. All you need to do is register online, and get networking.”
Judges will be looking for ideas which demonstrate innovativeness, impactfulness upon patient health and potential economic benefit. The winning idea will, by the time of the final rounds, be backed-up by a watertight business plan, which displays the range of talents and backgrounds which make up the team.
“Most of all, you’ve got to believe in your project,” Pete says. “It’s all about the idea. Though there are contacts to be made throughout the process, and doors will open for talented people, the competition isn’t a recruitment exercise, it’s an ideas competition!”
The competition couldn’t come at a more important time for the healthcare industry, with patent cliffs looming, the pursuit of new “blockbuster” drugs on the part of big pharmas seeming ever more futile, and government selectivity narrowing production options.
The competition is an extension of the Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable’s broad aim to reconcile the worlds of business and scientific research in the university milieu and beyond: “The aim of the society is to engage people,” Pete says. “Sometimes it feels like there is a link missing between the business students and research scientists. OBR is a great way for scientists who are interested in commercialising their research to really get involved with the business side of things, which may be outside of their comfort zone.”
Budding bio-entrepreneurs from any discipline are eligible to apply, on the condition that each team member is under 36 years of age, and currently living, working or studying in the UK or an EU member state. Entrants needn’t be UK or EU citizens.
The prize money can be used to develop the idea to the point at which it will be able to raise further funds from investors. Dan Perez says, “Science is expensive and risky. While a lot of small web start-ups can be born on a laptop at Starbucks, science needs serious capital to get going. Our goal was for this not to be just a fun prize, but an opportunity for serious entrepreneurs to build a business.”
“Sadly it’s not a chance to go on a holiday of a lifetime. Or several holidays of a lifetime,” Pete jokes.
Also up for grabs is valuable Lab Space at Stevenage BioScience Catalyst, and a year-long membership to a number of life-science related business networks in Oxford, Cambridge, London, and Europe.
The competition launched on the 24th of January at the Said Business School. Initial entries are due by midnight on the 21st of February.
Review: The Aleph
★★☆☆☆
Two Stars
What is The Aleph, and what significance does it hold for the salvation of humankind? This is the ominous question posed by the opening of this new, student-written production, performed within the tense confines of the Burton Taylor. Sadly, however, the intrigue is short-lived.
We find ourselves in the future, where the titular Aleph – a mysterious device with the power to end an apocalyptic, all-consuming war – has landed in the hands of the enemy. Stealing it back will require a crack team of spies capable of infiltrating their ranks and stealing the Aleph right from beneath their noses. Unfortunately for the world, however, it is instead perplexingly entrusted to a group of clichéd military ‘specialists’, none of whom have ever met and all of whom seem to hate one another for no particular reason.
The Aleph is plagued by a total lack of likeable or relatable characters, and this is largely due to the dialogue. The actors are all fine; they might even be great but get few chances to show it, because their lines fail them at every turn. A notable example is Junks, who seems to have been intended as a loveable rogue but comes off instead as a childish nuisance. More insufferable still is Lawson, who is inexplicably angry all the time and prone to jarring changes of attitude, and whom the script awkwardly tries to make us sympathise with by having him constantly spout off about his two children back home. Comparatively consistent characters like Tom, Captain Evans, and Madison (who comes closest to being likeable but gets used to little purpose) do not manage to make up for these shortfalls, and often get dragged down by clumsy melodrama. Some lines even come off as unintentionally funny – including, unfortunately, the last one.
Ultimately, for this story to work, we needed The Aleph itself to draw us further into the plot. Had there been a building sense of foreboding around the object then we might have felt some sort of tension. Instead it serves as no more than a lazy plot device in a play with little plot – a sci-fi element that is used to no effect save at the end, where we are told in one lengthy and uninspired monologue exactly what it does. The one hope for real tension is rapidly vaporised, and though the acting and the direction manages to hold things together sufficiently, there is never much for us to care about or become invested in.
Review: Patrick Wolf @ The Church of St. John the Evangelist
Even as the first chords of ‘Wolf Song’ echo through the Church of St. John the Evangelist, Patrick’s accompanying violinist and accordionist play along, occasionally glancing at each other with an overt affection which betrays a relationship deeper than that between artist and backing band. Almost immediately the night takes on a mystical quality, enhanced by the high-ceilinged church which is lit only around the stage itself. The church is filled with seats, which unfortunately have all been filled by the time we arrive. Eschewing the few remaining scattered seats, we favour a particularly comfortable area of the floor to one side of the stage which affords us a great view of the back of Patrick’s head as he sits at the piano (“Can you see my pants?” he queries when he notices us).
The set itself is mostly drawn from last year’s release Sundark and Riverlight, an acoustic reinterpretation of some of Patrick’s existing songs.‘London’ is one of the especially successful examples, capturing both the spirit of the original while adding a new depth of emotion. He explains the story behind the song, describing how he never wanted to go back to the place of his birth, but had now found himself back home. This moves nicely into ‘Paris’, a chronicle of the city that took him in after he fled his birthplace which is filled with a startling fragility which is noticeably absent from the original. Patrick continues to explain the stories behind the songs, most notably ‘Damaris’, the tale of the gypsy lover of a vicar’s son, who died after discovering that they could never marry. Rewritten specifically for the tour, the song lingers in the mind with heart-breaking poignance.
Patrick also tells us excitedly that he met Prince Charles earlier and “mostly talked about our hair and our outfits”. His outfit is certainly worthy of discussion: a waistcoat and knee breeches, with a flamboyant bow at his throat and a glitter-covered collar. This is apparently homemade with materials sourced from Poundland and his local market; “there’s a recession on, you know”, he remarks. He spent two days before the meeting locked in a room writing a poem which he reads out to the audience, saying that he might be more nervous because we’re “more important than the monarchy” (small round of applause from the somewhat left-leaning audience). The poem unfortunately leads directly into an extended tuning session, during which Patrick suggests that we take the opportunity to ask him any questions (or go to the toilet). We can easily forgive him this though, as he is taking up his fifth instrument of the night; he’s moved from tenor guitar to piano to harp to viola to baritone ukulele and is proficient in each.
Patrick’s eventual departure from the stage prompts deafening applause, followed by his reappearance in an indescribable cape for an encore which, though manufactured, nonetheless leaves the concert on a high note with natural show-stopper ‘The City’. The night ends with a particular significance for us as, on the way to the toilets, we run into Patrick who exclaims “you were sat behind me! …Sorry.” No need to apologize, Patrick. No need at all.
Is the Revue back from the dead?
“Tell me about Audrey.” This isn’t an enquiry about an elderly relative, but rather the Oxford Revue’s New Big Thing. Audrey is a fortnightly event being held above the Wheatsheaf this term, which aims to widen participation and establish a decent and popular comedy scene in Oxford. It’s a kind of auditioned open-mic night, where prospective participants try out during the preceding week in front of the Oxford Revue, and can test their various ideas out in front of a large friendly audience. I spoke to Will Truefitt (President) and Barney Iley (Director) about this attempt to kick-start student comedy.
“It provides a platform for those who otherwise wouldn’t be able to try things out,” explains Truefitt, “even if it’s a bit rough around the edges. It’s a service to performers. Historically in Oxford, comedy has been cordoned off into specific groups. This is a way of liberating it from that.”
The concept is essentially mimicking the successful formula used in Cambridge. It’s a way of encouraging new writing, and creating an atmosphere in which it’s the norm to take the first step and give comedy a go. “If you go to Cambridge,” says Iley, “there’s a culture that you will write comedy if you want to, and you will perform it if you want to. Here, one of the biggest challenges is saying ‘go on, do it!’”
But whereas in Cambridge the Footlights act as an umbrella organisation for the comedy scene (similar to the way OUDS operates in relation to Oxford drama) the Revue are keeping themselves distinct and separate from Audrey performances. “One of the great strengths of the Revue,” says Iley, “is that we can operate as a closely knit group, a comedy troupe. We just make sure Audrey happens; Revue members are just in the pot with everyone else. It’s not a Revue show.”
The first show was popular – with an audience of around 120 – and many of the performers were doing stand-up routines for the first time ever. To succeed, though, the events will need to keep up their momentum. “Hopefully there were people in the audience who came and saw that it wasn’t a hyper-critical environment; people are there to have fun and it’s very relaxed.” says Trufitt.
It’s surprising that nothing has been done to try to kickstart student comedy before now. Oxford has no comedy culture; what is produced seems to be almost solely for the performers and their close group of friends, and there’s nothing like the scale of involvement or interest as there is in Cambridge, where the Cult of the Footlights reigns supreme. The Imps are fine before the novelty wears off by the end of Michaelmas of first year, and after that they become just another irrelevance wheeled out for college balls. And the general student consensus towards the Revue is negative; Oxford’s most recent and widely-known comedy success, the sketch group Rory and Tim, left the Revue in a state of disillusionment.
This all seems at odds with the plethora of successful comedic alumni: Rowan Atkinson, Michael Palin, Armando Iannucci and Patrick Marber all started their careers here. And although their Cambridge counterparts are famous for their Footlights involvement, the Oxonians seem to exist as independent entities. This must be down to the fundamental structural difference in the way in which the comedy scenes are set up. Truefitt defends the Oxford model: “We have a set group of repertory writer/performers, who work together on each show, and they take that to Edinburgh. It can create something that is altogether different from a Footlights show. Theirs is often much more disparate, despite their high yield.”
So if the structure’s going to remain the same, then something quite drastic is going to have to change in order for Oxford’s comedy culture to undergo a resurrection. The Revue puts on two shows each term. Of this I had no idea. Whereas plays are heavily marketed through posters, trailers, interviews and reviews, until this year the Revue has done very little to promote itself.
“Hopefully the Audreys will establish a comedy scene, like ramming a flag in the ground and saying ‘comedy is here!’” says Iley. The question remains, however, as to where exactly that flag needs to be rammed. One of the principle difficulties Oxford comedians face is not having an established performance space, a hub around which a culture might congregate. The Revue, Iley says, “has to be nomadic”; their next show is at the Old Fire Station, which is lovely but seldom frequented by students. Over the year they’ll pop into the Burton Taylor Studio, show up at a couple of comedy debates at the Union, do a one-night-only Playhouse show, and then whisk themselves off to the Fringe. It’s quite easy to miss.
Marketing and location aside, it all comes down to quality. If the Audrey events can widen participation, give people the space to practise, and forge good working relationships, then we can hope to see not just more comedy, but better comedy.
Cryptic Female Choice: This is a Woman’s World
Nature has a reputation for being red in tooth and claw – a warzone with bloody battles ensuing between the biggest and bravest males of a population. The prize? The hand of a fair maiden and the guarantee of an heir to carry on the family line. If nature were to be hollywoodised the film might be called “Clash of the Titans: Survival of the Fittest” – a lesser known sequel to a well known franchise. It would be a macho, action-packed thriller starring the animal equivalents of Tom Cruise, Bruce Willis and Liam Neeson. The trailers would be full of large male mammals drawing blood and fighting to the death – there would be close-ups of bared teeth and wounded rhinos. The only light relief would come as the audience watches two giraffes whip their long necks and propel their heads into each other’s backsides (for those of you who haven’t been following David Attenborough’s “Africa” you need to watch the end of episode one to see this highly entertaining display!). Females would occasionally appear but they would not venture far from the sidelines as they looked upon the scene, passively awaiting their fate. The victor would claim his prize and walk off with her into the sunset, and the trailer would finish with the big booming Hollywood voice declaring; “Clash of the Titans – who will get the girl?! Only the fittest survive!”
The above view of sexual selection is rooted in Victorian sexism. The idea is that exaggerated male weaponry evolved in order to win battles against rival males. Darwin tried to convince people that, whilst this is almost certainly true, females do actually have a choice in the matter. Male elaborations that seemingly serve no adaptive purpose evolved purely as a way to attract the opposite sex. A female can therefore use these elaborations as a proxy for detecting the quality of her mate and make her choice according to the brightness of his plumage or the length of his tail feathers.
Further research into sexual selection has uncovered an even higher degree of female control. “Cryptic female choice” occurs after mating and it is a way in which females are able to bias the outcome of sperm competition. A situation might arise in which a male forces himself on a female, and the cost of resisting the forced mating is too high so the female lets it happen. However, the female may well have already decided not to mate with this particular male because she did not deem him to be good enough. Through mechanisms of cryptic choice the female is able to prevent her eggs from being fertilised by this male’s sperm and therefore prevent her offspring from having unworthy genes.
There are many mechanisms of cryptic female choice. Female insects use sperm storage organs (spermatophores) which prevents direct fertilisation of the eggs. If a female has mated multiple times then this delay between copulation and fertilisation allows her to sieve off the sperm which contain “less fit” genes that she does not want for her offspring. Female mice prevent inbreeding by producing enzymes in the vaginal passage that break down sperm containing the same MHC genes as their own. MHC genes are responsible for control of the immune system – the more diversity an individual has in these genes the greater the flexibility of the immune system. Individuals with flexible immune systems are more likely to fight off infection and survive to the age of sexual reproduction. A female mouse, therefore, increases her offspring’s survival chances by stopping her eggs from being fertilised by the sperm of a male that possesses an immune system that is too similar to her own.
Ducks provide us with one of the best examples of “girl power” that nature has to offer. Males have evolved to have extremely long and elaborate penises that rotate in an anticlockwise direction in order to allow “forced copulation” of the female – a polite, scientific way of saying rape. For a long time it was thought that there was nothing that the female could do to prevent this from happening and that her offspring would be fathered by the last male that raped her. However, recent research has shown that female ducks are not powerless and that they have evolved mechanisms to counter these forced copulations. In many duck species females have evolved vaginal passages that rotate in the clockwise direction – this reduces the efficacy of forced copulation as males are unable to fully penetrate. Only the sperm of the fittest males will be able to navigate the vaginal passage and fertilise the female’s eggs – the fittest male will have the fittest sperm containing the best genes. Whilst the female still has to put up with periodic, and unpleasant, forced copulation, she is able to bias the outcome of sperm competition so that ultimately she has the best offspring with the best genes.
If Hollywood were to make “nature” into a film it would be much more interesting to follow the female of the species. It would be a tale of intrigue and espionage in which the females play the damsels in distress in order to determine the fate of their male counterparts. The female would test her potential mate in ways unknown to him in order to assess his suitability to father her offspring. Ultimately, all females will produce offspring but only the very best males that can prove themselves worthy will be chosen to help females propagate the species. In reality nature is run through the choices that females make, not the aggression that males display – this is a woman’s world, but it wouldn’t be nothing without a man or a boy!
Check out wwww.bangscience.org for more articles , as well as events, and past issues of Bang!
"Middle Class Food Column": Houmous Wars
Houmous is a true staple of the bourgeois diet. It is to the middle-classes what gasoline is to automobiles, and what pastry, coal and batter are to people in the north (presumably). No dinner party warm-up, picnic or fully loaded trip to the local racecourse would be complete without this most ubiquitous of dips. So when we set forth to sample Oxford’s finest non-essential lifestyle foods, the ol’ chickpea paste seemed as good a place as any to start.
Like most influential world religions, Houmous was invented in the near east, under Egyptian influence, by people living somewhere between the desert and the sea. Nonetheless, it soon spread to all surrounding regions, and has been at the heart of Mediterranean dipping culture for centuries. Naturally, it was adopted by the British middle class near the end of the last century.
Like most aspects of life in this volatile and contested part of the world, houmous has never been far from controversy. Precisely which people invented it remains the subject of brain-achingly convoluted debate. How best it should be served, whether it should be smooth or grainy in texture, whether it should ever be used as a paste, or eaten with raw carrots; all are questions over which gallons of scholar’s ink have been spilled. Most controversial of all however, is the question of who makes the best houmous. Greek vs Turk, Jew vs Arab, Sunni vs Shi’ite, the French vs almost everyone, no rivalry in the eastern Mediterranean has yet to be touched by houmous’ sticky and slightly aromatic embrace. In the ends of resolving conflicts as old as civilisation, (and finding a decent dip to sit alongside salsa and guacamole at our next canapé sesh), we set out to find the best houmus in Oxford. Belt up.
Hummus #1: G & D’s Big, Fat, Greek Hummus
Lewis: Not the best texture: harsh, and reminiscent of an under-done Stifatho. A pleasant flavour, subtle as an Aegean breeze, but with a slight kick, like spending five minutes in Kavos then being air-lifted out. 7/10.
Katie: A mouthful of sand, redeemed by some lemon and a couple of chickpeas. Should we blame offshore thrift or longshore drift for Greece’s national crisis? 3/10
Hummus #2: Taylor’s Turkish Delight
Lewis: Horrible. This is probably a bit like how Albanian peasants felt when they were kidnapped for the Ottoman Sultan’s armies- robbed of all life’s pleasures. Lacking flavour, and with an unpleasant, buttery consistency. Beware of Turks bearing chickpea pastes. 2/10.
Katie: Horrendous. As seemingly innocuous as the Turkish command structure at the siege of Vienna, this textureless, odourless substance came with a nasty gustatory surprise: porridge. After thoroughly washing my finger, I announced that this houmus would not be making it to the falafel test. 2/10
Hummus #3: Franco-Israeli Jewmus
Lewis: Confused provenance probably accounts for limited resemblance to actual houmus. A weak, Gallic imitation of houmus, trying to be a cheese. I don’t want to stick my finger in this one. 4/10.
Katie: A strident substance that unashamedly breaches the spread/dip divide, landing very creamily in the former category. Pleasant in taste to begin, it hits with a dry aftertaste of sesame. Although tempting in its own right, this multinational spread has little to no resemblance to houmous. 5/10
Hummus #4: Tesco’s ‘Made in UK with Lebanese chickpeas’ surprise
Lewis: A solid option, acceptable to bourgeois sensibilities. Authentic texture (I think), and a multi-layered flavour. Yields hidden delights, like the world food section of Tesco itself. Aftertaste too creamy. 6/10
Katie: International relations at its finest. A delightful Middle-Eastern texture matched with an ingenious kick of red pepper. Abandon the weekly M&S shop and venture down the road to try this hidden gem. 8/10
Hummus #5: Chez Hassan’s ‘Assyrian’ morning-after cure
Lewis: The surprise King of Oxford Hummus, a perfect accompaniment to inebriation, vomiting and nocturnal misadventures. Good, thick texture and a flavour that can punch above the inevitable, lingering taste of Jagerbomb. Probably not actually from ancient Kingdom of Assyria (sadly). 8/10
Katie: It does exactly what it says on the tin. Which, in this case is a lurid, paper box. Dry and cement like, the stodgy texture was only outdone by its viciously pungent flavour. Like cockroaches, this substance has somehow survived the test of time, and, having brought about the decline of the Assyrian Kingdom is back and ready to plague naïve, drunken students. 1/10
Lewis’ conclusion: The old ways really are the best, at least when it comes to hummus.
The Assyrians, it would seem, did three things well: 2-dimensional stone carvings, genocidal campaigns of conquest, and hummus. We can only thank Hassan and his team for their superb archaeological work in uncovering this genuine ‘fossil-food’. (I think he meant ‘Syrian’- Ed.).
Katie’s conclusion: Step back and relax.
Too busy competing for idiosyncrasy, the celebrated houmous-bearing nations were all unfortunate let downs, with (As)Syria and Turkey producing shameful, and potentially dangerous, products. Britain, in its splendid position of isolation, had the nous to survey the available options and, albeit in Tesco, came up with a majestic, all-conquering substance. Rule Britannia!
WikiLeaks accuses Union of "censorship"
WikiLeaks has accused the Oxford Union of “censor[ing]” footage of Julian Assange’s address to the debating society in January.
It alleged on Twitter that the Union had replaced the backdrop of the video, which was personally selected by Assange, with a plain still of the Oxford Union logo.
The footage that Assange selected came from a controversial video released by the whistleblowing organisation in 2010. Popularly known as ‘Collateral Murder’, it shows the gun crew of a US Apache helicopter firing on Reuters journalists and civilians in Baghdad, Iraq in 2007.
WikiLeaks stated that Assange chose to use the video “to highlight the importance of whistleblowers”, and denounced the Union’s contention that using the footage would expose them to copyright claims by the US government.
In a statement to Cherwell, the Oxford Union said, “After taking extensive legal advice on this matter, the Union was advised not to display the background video in question for copyright reasons.”
WikiLeaks said they themselves had “advised” the Union by asserting that “by law and practice the US government does not claim copyrights on footage or documents that it produces”.
In response to accusations of censorship, the Union said, “We would like to point out that none of the speeches made during the evening in question were ‘censored’; neither was any part of the Q&A sessions.
“Mr Assange’s speech was broadcast in its entirety, and as such we would encourage people to appreciate the distinction between censorship and respecting copyright.”
WikiLeaks have tweeted the “censored” footage with the ‘Collateral Murder’ backdrop three times since Friday.
Julian Assange addressed the Oxford Union on Wednesday 23rd January amid debate over whether or not to host him. He spoke as part of the Sam Adams Awards for integrity and ethics, via video link from the Ecuadorean embassy in London.