« Previous | Main | Next »


Eddie Mair | 13:22 UK time, Wednesday, 4 July 2007

one of our famed editors, has just put down the phone having spoken to a man he described as "the most boring in the world". We've decided not to put him on air.


  1. At 01:30 PM on 04 Jul 2007, witchiwoman wrote:

    He's not not based in Swindon is he?

  2. At 01:51 PM on 04 Jul 2007, Charlie wrote:

    Jeremy's mistaken.

    The title's mine...

    And, I don't need to be put on air. I'm full of it already. And, it's hot...

  3. At 02:02 PM on 04 Jul 2007, admin annie wrote:

    why have you decided not to put him on air? if you did, we could decided whether he really *is* the most boring peson in the world. Because I know a fw people who would be in contention.

  4. At 02:03 PM on 04 Jul 2007, RJD wrote:

    Why was he talking to my brother-in-law?

  5. At 02:07 PM on 04 Jul 2007, tony ferney wrote:

    That's what comes from talking to yoiurself.

  6. At 02:16 PM on 04 Jul 2007, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    ANd let us not forget to wish America a Very Happy UDI Day!

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. -- Thomas Jefferson, (and many co-signatories) July 4th 1776

    Old Tom would be spinning in his grave.

    Houb Salaam
    04/07/2007 at 14:18:39 GMT

  7. At 02:33 PM on 04 Jul 2007, ian wrote:

    Nigel Mansell?

  8. At 02:35 PM on 04 Jul 2007, Frances O wrote:

    He must come from Vanuatu, which is in Error 404, and where they/'re not happy, because no-one can post about them.

    Marc? You there?

  9. At 04:24 PM on 04 Jul 2007, Fifi wrote:

    That's no way to talk about our new PM ... the ministerial sort, I mean.

    Oh, that was too obvious wasn't it?

    I'll get me coat...


    * hangs head in shame, grinning secretly *

  10. At 04:46 PM on 04 Jul 2007, tony ferney wrote:

    Boring(ness) in itself does not seem to me a "boring" concept. To state the obvious, one man's (oops, I mean "person's") bore is another person's sound, solid and serious citizen. Oh did someone mention Gordon Brown already? How boring of me.

  11. At 11:27 PM on 04 Jul 2007, admin annie wrote:

    that would be the Tom with the slave plantation right?


    now that might be challenging but it definitely wasn't malicious.

  12. At 11:48 PM on 04 Jul 2007, Aperitif wrote:

    I'd have thought that calling the speaking clock was unnecessary in the PM office -- you have the unfailingly accurate pips, after all...

  13. At 11:04 AM on 05 Jul 2007, admin annie wrote:

    oh and seemingly modded off this one too. I'm starting to feel paranoid, howver I will give this one another try - what I said was re 6

    'that will be the Tom who had the slave plantation then'.

  14. At 11:53 AM on 05 Jul 2007, Ed Iglehart wrote:


    Aye, Tom died owning some 300 humans and having offspring by at least one of them. He was a man of his times, but did often argue legislatively and administratively against his 'class'.

    The original draft of the Declaration of Independence contained a remarkable 'polemic' against slavery which had to be removed to keep Georgia and South Carolina on board.

    It can be found here.


  15. At 01:42 PM on 05 Jul 2007, Chris Ghoti wrote:

    Ed @ 14, the thing I found extraordinary when I looked briefly at one point into the institution of slavery in what was then not yet The United States of America, was how *quickly* the status of the negro changed in some parts of what were then colonies from "anyone apart from indentured labour, of any colour, is a citizen who can be for instance the local doctor or the mayor, and anyone with property worth x amount has a vote" to "anyone with a dark skin is not really human, cannot own anything, and can only be the property of someone white". Laws were passed, and overnight the home-owning negro became a non-person by legal fiat. The timing varied from place to place, but it all seemed to happen within a single generation. Very strange, and very frightening.

    This sudden change seemed to be directly related to the importation of negro slaves and fears that there were so many of them that they might overwhelm the European settlers, but there were negroes in the Americas before that vile trade really got underway on a large scale, and the negroes who were already there were not slaves to begin with.

    It's not a field I've studied particularly, and if anyone has information that goes against this impression I got I'd like to know about it...

This post is closed to new comments.

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.