FIRST OFF, YOUR CORRESPONDENT WISHES TO APOLOGISE @ THIS TIME FOR THE TARDINESS OF THESE COMMENTS on the news appearing in this blog.

He was held up a little bit @ the motel here in Winona this morning while Mein Innkeeper Friend had to run on an errand to get an anti-stomachic for his daughter, requiring me to keep the que vive in the office for awhile. Followed by a shopping trip to the Watkins Museum Store here in Winona to buy some new-stylee furniture polish and toilet bowl cleaner for his flat.

(I acknowledge a fondness for Watkins Products @ this time out of hometown loyalties, never mind the price. As along as I'm @ it here, I should also point out that Watkins' new Lemon Liquid Laundry Detergent Concentrate, blended with Calgon--blame it on the hardness of the local water supply--has produced some rather pleasant results in the laundry since I began using it.

(One slight problem, though: With the laundry detergent, there's a serious want of clear measurement advice on the cap. Fortunately, though, Watkins has pledged to look into the matter, and plans to bring in caps that contain measuring marks.)

=============

GETTING BACK TO MOTELS FOR A MOMENT, Your Correspondent would like to start a modest little campaign through this blog.

As in urging ye who travel, be it for business or pleasure, to start spending more time in the smaller, indepenendent motels and resorts as manage to hold their own in the face of stiff competition from the sterile and antiseptic "cookie-cutter" predictability of the major chains.

Which, come to think of it, can get to wear on you after awhile.

Any of you care to agree?

*************

THE RACISTS AND WHITE SUPREMACISTS AMONG US ARE STARTING TO WHINE AND POUT AND CATERWAUL in their own senseless and helpless way about the news that whites could be a National Minority in the United States by the 2050 Census.

Guaranteed, no doubt, to call for appeals to "racial honour and integrity" to excuse deliberately unprotected displays of fornication whereby The Fourteen Words ("We must secure the Existance of our Race and a Future for White Children") will be used as both defence and excuse--especially among "right-thinking Aryan Youth" not expected to realise that they're committing an illegal act under normal circumstances.

Remember apartheid South Africa's "Make Babies for Botha" campaigns in the mid-1980's?

*************

ONE LIKELY CULPRIT IN THE ONGOING OBESITY WAR happens to be artificial sweetnners based on saccharin (usually in pink packets), which Sweet & Low popularised after the FDA banned cyclamates for sweetening purposes in 1969 as having carcinogenic properties.

As it turned out, the same FDA would raise questions about saccharin nearly ten years later, prompting them to require the following caveat on products containing saccharin:

USE OF THIS PRODUCT MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH. THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS SACCHARIN, WHICH HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO CAUSE CANCER IN LABORATORY ANIMALS.

The which, it turns out, could actually have been based on flawed or otherwise faulty research procedures. (Similar claims have been suggested for such which led to the cyclamates ban.)

Now, you have aspertame (light blue packet) and sucralose (Splenda; yellow packet) competing with saccharin, which some have suggested may be equally to blame for the obesity problem.

And Another Thing:

Since the mid-1970's, soft-drink manufacturers have been using high-fructose corn sweetners instead of sugar--"to cut costs," or so the official line hath it.

Which, too, have been held to blame for obesity problems.

Now that corn is likely to become more expensive because of its diversion in large measure to ethanol production (@ least until switchgrass-based ethanol becomes socioeconomically feasable enough to produce in cost-efficent stylee), can we expect soft drink companies to return to using sugar within measurable distance?

*************

START STOCKING UP ON THOSE "FOREVER" RATE STAMPS @ YOUR POST OFFICE, boys and girls: From 12 May, letterpost rates will increase by a penny (i.e., 42¢ for letters, 27¢ for postcards), per edict of the Postal Rate Commission just announced.

By buying the "Forever" rate stamps now, you can be ready for the forthcoming letterpost rate increases, as same are designed to cover any ensuing increase in letterpost rates subsequent to their purchase.

Meanwhile, read what the Federal Trade Commission found (shock! horror!!) about how certain laws and policies as apply to the Postal Service (notably the Government-Protected Monopoly on universal letterpost service) may be @ variance with established consumer law and policy as applies to competing delivery services like UPS, FedEx and DHL.

*************

FROM THE "IT'S A SMALL WORLD, AFTER ALL" DOSSIER, with particular regards to Parental Responsibility for the Acts, Deeds and Exploits of their children--via news.com.au's AdelaideNow portal:

PARENTS of children who repeatedly break the law could be fined, have their televisions seized or be made to attend counselling under a radical plan to crack down on juvenile crime in the Northern Territory.

Youth camps and compulsory guidance workshops are also part of the three-pronged attack on anti-social behaviour announced today by NT Chief Minister Paul Henderson.

"As part of the plan, juvenile diversion will no longer be a revolving door. Parents will be made more accountable and youth camps will help get kids back on track,'' Mr Henderson said.

"Our community is paying the price for a small group of kids who don't respect the law, their parents or the public - and enough is enough.''

As part of the package, legislation will be introduced to parliament that holds parents accountable for their children's criminal activity.

"The contractual agreements will require parents to better monitor their children and may require parents to attend counselling or guidance programs,'' Mr Henderson said.

He said parents who refused to enter an agreement, or those who breached their agreement, faced a court-imposed Family Responsibility Order.

They could also be forced to pay fines of up to A$2,200 (US$1,985/C$1,988/£1,012/€1,362/¥213,147) or face the seizure of non-essential household items such as plasma televisions and stereos.

The bill also prevents juvenile offenders being referred to diversion programs more than twice.

"Repeat offenders will have to go to court to face the consequence of their actions, including detention,'' Mr Henderson said, adding that a youth camp would be established in the Top End.

"We want to get those kids who are at risk of criminal offending back on the right path, as well as give guidance and support to others who need to build self-esteem, develop life and work skills, get back in to school and reconnect with family,'' Mr Henderson said.

Opposition Leader Terry Mills welcomed the move.

"Putting troublesome teenagers through the physical and emotional rigours of a boot camp can help drag them away from other unhealthy influences,'' he said, adding that time would tell if the overall package worked.

"It is easy for governments to announce tough new measures. Territory Labor has made a habit of it,'' he said.

"The difficult part is turning vague policy commitments into effective programs.''

Which the Fox Noise crowd would certainly love to recommend for the "morally superior" United States, targeting in particular the likes of such deemed "chronic and habitual welfare cases***lacking any healthy respect for industry, self-reliance, personal responsibility, thrift and a Wholesome and Simple Home Life" based, methinks, on Rabbie Burns' "The Cotter's Saturday Night."

Especially if the corrective measures are "faith-based."

AS IF THE DECLINE OF GREYHOUND WASN'T ALREADY DESPERATE ENOUGH for the intercity motorcoach industry in the United States, never mind where the K Street crowd sees same as a better use of resources than continuing to subsidise Amtrak (forever seen by that ilk as "wasteful," "unnecessary" and "pandering to nostalgic feelings unrelated to Reality"), there seems to be a woeful lack of healthy competition there as would appease K Street enough.

Which K Street will quickly blame on "undue and unnecessary regulatory burden," to use a rather lame platitude as ignores the presence of Megabus (a Stagecoach Group joint offering cut-price bus services on "hub-and-spoke" networks out of Chicago and now Los Angeles, with fares as low as $1 single) and Chinese motorcoach operators (whose Chinese name translates as the rather colourful "wild chicken trucks") along the Northeast Corridor (the ignorance of the latter, perhaps, suggesting some class of racist jealousy up there with many of the same arguments used in the late 19th century to justify blanket bans on Chinese immigration into the United States).

=============

AGAINST THIS BACKROP, PERHAPS IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING to imagine the possibilities of some company operating overnight motorcoach services with specially reclining seats similar to what VIA Rail Canada used to call "Dayniter" (as in reclining to a sleeping position @ night) along many of the same corridors which, for example, Megabus operates in the Midwest out of Chicago, with provision for a rest stop about halfway into the journey to allow the passengers to stretch their legs and have a light snack.

One such I have imagined this being possible would be between Chicago and the Twin Cities, with the rest break @ Tomah, Wisconsin--which could also be the rest stop on a hypothetical overnight bus between Chicago and the Twin Ports (Duluth/Superior).

As if that weren't enough: In the interest of the environment, consideration ought be given to having the buses run on biodiesel (in particular the sort derived from a variety of bitter hazelnuts whose planting is being encouraged as a way to stabilise hillsides @ risk of soil erosion) or, failing that, cheap, stinking chip oil such as is otherwise left to waste from fast-food restaurants of the worst sort.

After all, even those cut-price motels with their "cookie-cutter" sterility and predictability can easily get to travellers after awhile. So how about considering some class of overnight bus as a viable alternative to such insanity-producing sterility @ cut prices?

=============

MEMO TO K STREET: Satisfied with what I suggested?

MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA, IN ITS ROLE AND POSITION AS WATCHDOG AND MONITOR FOR CONSERVATIVE BIAS, "SPIN" AND PERVERSION of journalistic standards that a certain Britt Reid would find so loathsome and vile that he'd be quick to send in his Green Hornet personna against the purveyors thereof, has been taking especially close que vive @ MSNBC of late in response to a pattern of sexist, chauvinistic and misogynistic comments from the lips of Chris "Hardball" Matthews.

If the following by Jamison Foser is any indication, One MSNBC Plaza still has a lot to do in cleaning up its depraved act:

Three weeks ago, in the wake of Chris Matthews' quasi-apology for one of his countless objectionable comments about women in general and Hillary Clinton specifically, I argued that Matthews' apology was not enough. Neither Matthews nor MSNBC had acknowledged that the problem ran far deeper than one comment by Matthews--and their failure to make such an acknowledgement was an ominous sign that the apology would not be accompanied by a change in behavior, no matter how forcefully Matthews insisted: "I get it."

So what has happened in those three weeks?

MSNBC has turned Matthews' purported apology into a promotional campaign, using clips of his statement to advertise MSNBC programming. Not the parts of the statement in which he acknowledged having been "callous," "nasty," and "dismissive" toward Hillary Clinton, of course--the parts in which he spoke of his love for politics.

Turning a forced apology into a promotional campaign seems like a pretty good sign that MSNBC and Matthews don't "get it" at all.

But it isn't the best sign. Consider what else has happened during MSNBC broadcasts since Matthews' apology.

First, Matthews' MSNBC colleagues leapt to his defense. Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough and reporter David Shuster lashed out; Scarborough declaring it "offensive" and "outrageous" that Matthews had to apologize, and Shuster adding "this is absolutely infuriating, to see the way these groups used him for pure political gain is absolutely infuriating." As I noted at the time, Scarborough and Shuster have their own history of questionable comments about women:

At the end of his rant, Scarborough insisted, "This ain't about Hillary Clinton's campaign."

Scarborough got that part right. This isn't about Hillary Clinton's campaign. This is about a consistent pattern of misogynistic comments by Chris Matthews. Comments about and directed toward a variety of women. A consistent pattern of Matthews objectifying women. And a consistent pattern of MSNBC looking the other way.

It's about an MSNBC host saying things like this: "I've been trying to call Alessandra Stanley with The New York Times for some time just to have lunch with her, and she thinks it's because I'm trying to influence her--that's not the case at all, it's because, I was surprised, I saw a picture of her and I thought she was kinda hot!"

That one wasn't Chris Matthews, though. That one was ... Joe Scarborough.

It's about things like a male MSNBC host describing a woman running for president as "shrill" (and "very shrill") and asking, "[W]hat about her housekeeping skills?" Those were Joe Scarborough, too.

MSNBC's David Shuster also chimed in with a defense of Matthews: "[T]o see him have to go through this is absolutely infuriating, to see the way these groups used him for pure political gain is absolutely infuriating."

But this isn't about political gain. This isn't about one comment about Hillary Clinton, or even 30 comments about Hillary Clinton: This is about Chris Matthews' pattern of inappropriate treatment of women, and about MSNBC's continued acceptance of it. It's about things like a male journalist doing a mocking "impersonation" of the women who host The View - an impersonation that featured a high-pitched, whiny voice.

That one wasn't Chris Matthews, either. That one was ... David Shuster.

Then, after defending their colleague, it was back to business as usual for NBC/MSNBC reporters.

Tim Russert suggested that there is irony in a "self-avowed feminist" having shown "some emotion," as though feminists are the dour, humorless beings Rush Limbaugh and Tucker Carlson think they are. At least Russert stopped short of using the term "feminazis."

A few days later, Tucker Carlson mocked the idea that Hillary Clinton could have been a "victim of gender discrimination," noting that she had gone to Yale Law School. Clinton's comments about "gender equality," to which Carlson was purportedly responding, were in fact general, and not about her specifically. And his invocation of Clinton's graduation from Yale Law as evidence of a lack of gender inequity in her life was just bizarre: As Clinton noted in her autobiography, "When I entered Yale Law School in the fall of 1969, I was one of twenty-seven women out of 235 students to matriculate. This seems like a paltry number now, but it was a breakthrough at the time and meant that women would no longer be token students at Yale."

Incidentally, Carlson doesn't seem to have defended Matthews. Maybe he didn't want to draw attention to his own on-air behavior:

And then there's MSNBC host Tucker Carlson, who has described Hillary Clinton as "whining" and suggested the reason there are so few women in Congress is that "most women are so sensible, they don't want to get involved in something as stupid as politics" and said of Clinton, "[W]hen she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs," and described her as "castrating, overbearing, and scary." (MSNBC can't say they didn't know what they were getting when they hired Carlson; before joining the cable channel, he said women "want to be spanked vigorously every once in a while" and told Elle magazine that Clinton is his "guilty fantasy," explaining: "Every time I see her I think I could, you know, help. ... She seems tense.")

On January 23, an (all-male) Morning Joe panel laughed along as Mike Barnicle compared Hillary Clinton to "everyone's first wife standing outside a probate court."

Then on January 30, Joe Scarborough told co-host Mika Brzezinski, "Mika, don't make me backhand you."

On February 4, Matthews led a panel discussion of what the Associated Press described as Clinton's "emotional reunion Monday with a colleague from the early days of her legal career as a child advocate." The discussion featured a suggestion that Clinton had cried on purpose in order to win votes the next day, a statement by Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson that "with some people it's sad movies ... with Hillary Clinton ... it's an impending primary. It just breaks her down." Even Chris Matthews seemed to understand that something might not be quite right about the obsessive focus on Clinton showing emotion; near the end of the discussion, he said, "I wonder what [sic] we're focusing more on this than we would if it were a male candidate."

During MSNBC's February 5 primary coverage, correspondent Lester Holt seemed surprised that "[t]he first woman candidate with a serious shot at winning the presidency beat out her male rival" in exit polls on the question of "[w]ho would make the best commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces?" Holt even reminded viewers, "Keep in mind, this at a time the nation is fighting on two fronts." This wasn't the first time an NBC personality seemed to question whether a woman could be an effective commander in chief of the armed forces:

• On June 24, 2007, Chris Matthews asked if Clinton's "being surrounded by women" makes "a case for commander in chief -- or does it make a case against it?" Matthews went on to say, "But isn't that a challenge, because when it comes down to that final decision to vote for president, a woman president, a woman commander in chief, will be an historic decision for people. Not just men, but women as well."

• On May 30, 2005, Matthews asked retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey if "the troops out there" would "take the orders" from "Hillary Clinton, commander in chief." When McCaffrey responded, "Why wouldn't they listen to a [female] commander in chief? Sure," Matthews responded: "You're chuckling a little bit, aren't you?" When McCaffrey responded, "No," Matthews said: "No problem? No problem? No problem?" McCaffrey answered, "Absolutely not. None."

Most recently, David Shuster said on the February 7 edition of Tucker that "there's just something a little bit unseemly" about Chelsea Clinton contacting super delegates on behalf of her mother, adding, "[D]oesn't it seem like Chelsea's sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?"

This morning, Shuster offered a Matthews-esque quasi-apology for analogizing Chelsea Clinton to a prostitute.

But, like Matthews, Shuster didn't seem to "get it."

Shuster first claimed to have praised Chelsea Clinton on Tucker: "I said a lot of wonderful things about Chelsea. I praised her; I said Americans should be proud of her. ... as I said last night, everybody, all of us, love Chelsea Clinton." In fact, Shuster had not said Americans should be proud of her, or that "everybody, all of us, love Chelsea Clinton." Not even close.

Then Shuster reiterated that Chelsea Clinton's efforts on Hillary Clinton's behalf are "unseemly"--though, again, he did not explain why they are unseemly, or whether it was unseemly for Mitt Romney's sons to campaign on his behalf.

Finally, Shuster got to the real issue: "[L]ast night, I used a phrase--some slang about her efforts. I didn't think that people would take it literally, but some people have."

That's just ridiculous. Nobody took Shuster's statement that Chelsea Clinton is "being pimped out" literally. Nobody. People were bothered that he analogized her to a prostitute, not that they thought he was actually saying she has sex in exchange for money. Shuster's "I didn't think that people would take it literally" excuse is like calling someone a b*tch, then saying, "Hey, I didn't think people would think I was saying she is literally a dog." It completely misses the point.

This afternoon, NBC News President Steve Capus issued a statement calling Shuster's comments "irresponsible and inappropriate" and announcing that Shuster "has been suspended from appearing on all NBC News broadcasts" other than to make another apology, which aired tonight. Shuster then offered a more complete apology at the beginning of the February 8 edition of Tucker.

Capus' statement is the best sign yet that NBC News is beginning to take seriously the lengthy pattern of inappropriate comments about women made by NBC and MSNBC reporters. (NBC News did not issue a statement about Matthews, allowing Matthews' overly narrow, on-air quasi-apology to stand as the closest thing to an official statement.)

But apologies and statements and even suspensions don't mean anything unless they are followed by an actual change in behavior. Things didn't change at NBC/MSNBC after the Matthews controversy; hopefully they will this time.

According to Capus, "NBC News takes these matters seriously." If NBC News wants viewers to believe that, it would help if it told us how it is taking these matters seriously. What steps has NBC News taken to ensure that things like this don't happen again? Have executives given their reporters and pundits guidance about what kinds of things are not appropriate to say? Have they talked to Matthews and Scarborough and Carlson and Shuster and the rest about their lengthy history of objectionable comments to and about women?

Three weeks ago, I wrote: "A week ago, MSNBC had a Chris Matthews problem. If things don't change, the cable channel may have a much bigger problem."

Maybe this time they'll listen.

If you need further proof of what Media Matters means, see for yourself in this dedicated section. And see if such doesn't make you sick to your gulliwuts.

THIS MORNING'S FORMAL ANNOUNCEMENT OF INDICTMENT BY THE PENTAGON of the six "masterminds" behind the Unfortunate Events of 9/11, for which the death penalty is being sought some 3,000 fold, methinks suggests that His Fraudulency's Great Within must be desperate for some sort of credibility in the closing year of his Administration as would translate into anything remotely resembling a legacy.

The which, if anything, could provide plenty of opportunity for challenges galore to His Fraudulency's bill of charges, in particular that which contends the "confessions" were procured through torture or duress (as witness the charges of "waterboarding" being used to procure the confessions) and, hence, cannot be admitted into evidence.

Not to mention where said Great Within (howbeit privately) wants convictions desperately to avoid the likelihood of their facing charges of Crimes Against Humanity before an international tribunal, let alone "prevent further acts of terrorism" by way of a warning. This notwithstanding the likelihood that the terror threat can exist as much from within as from without, and not so much from Muslim extremists as from home-grown terror movements like the Ku Klux Klan.

The National Alliance, or what remains of it.

The Minuteman movement.

Illicit or otherwise questionable "militias" as are fronts for agents provocateur in the race war department.

Pseudochurches practicing the false doctrines of "Christian Identity" or "Creativity," both known to invoke Holy Writ for racist purposes.

Even such as call for "lone wolf" approaches to avoid suspicion.

=============

MEMO TO THE SO-CALLED "PATRIOTS" AMONG YOU WHO READ THIS PATHETIC(?!) EXCUSE FOR A BLOG: If, judging by the preceding, you get the impression that I am somehow "giving aid and comfort to Our Sworn Enemies"--theoretically holding me liable for treason by your Weltanschauung--may I ask that you please "show us your facts" to support your obviously feeble argument.

Besides, I am beholden to no paymasters vis-a-vis the opinions I express through this blog, in case you have any ideas along those lines with an eye towards questioning my loyalty or True Patriot Love in All Thy Sons Command.

Remember what James Boswell had to say in his Life of Samuel Johnson on the matter: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

As well as Josiah Quincy's reminder that "Liberty is not safe where the people are not watchful."

*************

AS IF THE FALTERING NATO CAMPAIGN IN AFGHANISTAN IN SERVICE TO THE UR-RAHOWA AGAINST TERRORISM wasn't already bad enough for the Afghan people and nation, this winter has been particularly rough in the mountainous regions thereof.

To date, some 750 people in mostly isolated or remote villages have died from hypothermia, exposure or starvation aggravated by colder-than-average winter weather, heavy snowfalls blocking mountain passes and highways for days on end and sharp winds worsening drifting conditions.

Is the NATO command in Afghanistan, perhaps, too preoccupied with the American mandate towards "complete and final elimination of International Terrorism***by whatever means necessary" to consider food and medical-supply air drops in the affected areas?

*************

LET'S JUST HOPE IT WASN'T NORTH KOREAN SABOTEURS as put the flametorch to Seoul's 610-year-old (and, hence, historically-significant) Namdaemun ("Great Southern") gate (a/k/a Sungnyemun, "the Gate of Exhalted Ceremonies") yesterday, with much in the way of wholesale national sorrow ensuing.

Let alone so-called "Great Leader" Kim Jong Il watching with sadistic glee and delight the live coverage from South Korean television back in Pyongyang, laughing all the while--especially considering where his official palace must be on standby generator power while the rest of Pyongyang is in deliberate blackout ahead of their version of Hate Week.

*************

REMEMBER PAT "700 CLUB" ROBERTSON CALLING FOR THE CIA TO DISPATCH VENEZUELAN DICTATOR HUGO CHAVEZ a couple of summers back, thereby attracting considerable condemnation and a rather awkward apology?

WELLLLLL--!!!

Expect there to be a reiteration of such advice (excused, no doubt, as being necessary for G-d, Country and Cheap Gasoline, not to mention Socioeconomic Stability) in response to Chavez' latest threat to cut off all oil supplies to the United States in case ExxonMobil goes ahead with its threat to sue the Venezuelan Government (or reasonable facsimile thereof) for "just compensation" ove rand above that which Caracas had offered for its Venezuelan oil fields in consequence of the nationalisation of their oil and gas industries.

Caracas, for its part, contends where the compensation paid ExxonMobil was adequate enough--"take it or leave it," in other words.

How do we know His Fraudulency's Great Within isn't secretly plotting designs to open a further front in the ur-RAHOWA Against Terrorism in Venezuela, using Guantanamo Bay Naval Station as a staging point, in the wake of these fresh developments in paranoia?

*************

A NEW PILL FOR XENOPHOBES, ESPECIALLY SUCH OF THE LYNDON LaROUCHE PERSUASION seeing Britophobia as "healthy" and @ once "patriotic:"

Newly-published estimates reveal that, for the first time since perhaps the reign of Queen Victoria, the average per-capita income between Land's End and John O'Groats for 2007 is actually higher (if slightly so) than that of the "morally superior" (or so we're expected to believe) United States.

No doubt attributable to the warped socioeconomic delusions of His Fraudulency's Great Within suggesting that low taxes=jobs creation=sustained socioeconomic stability=Prosperity for All, conditioned by the "unswerving" acceptance of free-market capitalism with American characteristics as Great White Father of the Lower Classes in particular.

No doubt translating further into the importance of Indecision 2008 to our national and soverign identity as much as the maintenance of socioeconomic stability. Not to mention the danger that elements weird and unwholesome could endanger the elections, and the fairness and transparency thereof. 

THE ADVERTISING STANDARDS AUTHORITY (ASA) IN GREAT BRITAIN IS NOT ONE TO TAKE KINDLY to advertising claims as invoke faith in targeting the vulnerable in particular.

Witness the following recent adjudication involving British (pseudo)religious broadcaster Passion TV as illustrates what American such may want to avoid, and why--and PLEASE, spare us your platitudes about "Christian Persecution" all the while:

Ad
A long-form direct response ad for a series of religious books was broadcast on Passion TV. Rebecca explained that a doctor had told her that she had a brain tumour. Rebecca said "I was like this in the out-patient praying, praying with this book, you know, that says The Power That The Witchcraft Cannot Prevail. When I went in, the man look at the scan and said to me there is no tumour in your brain ... there is no tumour in your brain.  This is the results that came out.  I said are you sure? He said yes, there is no tumour. It could be a misunderstanding but initially the blood test shows that I did have a tumour. From then, when Bishop said never you leave this church again, I said God help me that I should never leave this church again ... always be in the house of God ... only God will protect you from any danger from any trouble or any witchcraft powers ... We black people are struggling in this nation so its good to be in the Lord you know. When you are in the Lord, there is nothing that can touch your life."  On-screen was a close-up of the book "Receive Your Healing Now In Jesus Name".  "Just believe in God and I pray that I continue to believe and trust in God.  I encourage anybody that is watching this programme to believe in God. Get these books and it will help your life.

The presenter said "that was Rebecca who was healed from a brain tumour. And, with Receive Your Healing Now In The Name of Jesus, we always tell our viewers that every book that we send to you Bishop Deya himself will actually pray for them as a point of contact. Which actually happened to Rebecca as she was going through things. The Bishop actually prayed over the issues she was going through. So Receive Your Healing Now £7.99, The Power the Wicked Cannot Prevail Against is also £7.99. Call in for the books now ... This is teleshopping with a difference that will actually change and transform your life ... Call now and it will change your life ... If you are sick, if you are going through issues, theres a lot of people that are calling us because of different kinds of sickness. The book you need that will actually help you to go through what you are going through is Receive Your Healing Now cos [sic] healing is meant for you and the Bible actually confirms that. If I were you I would order these books written by this great man Archbishop Gilbert Deya and The Power The Wicked Cannot Prevail Against and The Power Is In The Name Of Jesus.
 
The presenter said "in my hands we have a lot of testimonies of people that are being changed by this book ... A family in Italy, they had a son who had a brain tumour just like Rebecca ... and then they started praying with Dangerous Prayers and the tumour started disappearing ... All the books that we are sending to you will be personally signed by Archbishop Deya to confirm to them that he has touched it, he has prayed for it. And then, when they come to you, they will actually have a meaning and then it will be a point of contact for your miracle. So, if I were you, I would start to believe a miracle and start ordering the books right now ... These books are meant for you; they are not feel-good books but they are anointed, anointed books that will actually turn and transform your life ... Order it now I beseech you and this something a powerful powerful, powerful, powerful investment ... I will just read something that is in one of the books. And I want you to listen carefully cos it will change your life. And the Bible says in Deuteronomy, every book that we have there is a scripture in it and a scripture reference ... it actually says just as the Lord your God promised your ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He will give you a land with large and prosperous cities which you did not build [shows Faithful Ways to Success book]. Houses will be full of good things which you did not put in them and there will be wells that you did not dig and vineyards and olive orchards that you did not plant ... God is said to prosper you; God is said to make a difference in your life and it is for you and it will transform your life.  It will turn you from zero to hero, from nothing to something; it will turn your test into a testimony ... I know there is some people that are working three jobs, two jobs, struggling but nothing is happening. Especially here in the UK you cannot see an answer. Nothing is actually happening in your life. Here is a book that will transform and change your life.  Prosperity is set for you ... here is a book Dangerous Prayers To Destroy Satan's Forces and your life will never be the same ... And actually you will discover a whole load of things that will transform your life. Order these books that transform your life ... We bring loads of people from different backgrounds, from different countries, whose lives were actually transformed.  It actually shows that whatever we have here works and it will work for you ... Order now and get your life changed ... Order now and get the help that you need and that is necessary for you ... Archbishop Gilbert Deya will personally touch and pray for every book before it reaches you. He will sign it and you will know that it is come from his desk and he has actually touched it and a bottle of oil will be sent to you also as a point of contact.  If I were you, I would start to expect a miracle ...The teleshopping that changes people, real people, real lives and God is changing and transforming their lives."

Issue
Monitoring staff challenged whether:

1. evidence substantiated the testimonial and the references to people who had been healed as a result of ordering the books;

2. evidence substantiated the claim that peoples financial circumstances would change as a result of ordering the books;

3. the references to healing were benefit claims that were prohibited by rule 10.10 (Benefit claims);

4. the ad exploited the hopes and fears of vulnerable people.

Response
Passion TV did not respond.

Assessment
1. Upheld
In the absence of evidence to prove the efficacy of the books, the ASA concluded that the claims were misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleadingness), 5.2.1 (Evidence) and 5.4.4 (Testimonials).

2. Upheld
In the absence of evidence to prove the efficacy of the books, we concluded that the claim was misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleadingness) and 5.2.1 (Evidence).

3. Upheld
We considered that the references to being healed as a result of believing in God were benefit claims associated with a doctrine and we concluded that that was unacceptable.

On this point the ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 10.10 (Benefits claims).

4. Upheld
We considered that, by referring to people who had been healed of brain tumours, the ad exploited the hopes and fears of vulnerable people.

On this point the ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 10.13 (Vulnerable viewers).

Action
The ad must not be shown again in its present form and the books should not be advertised in a similar way without adequate substantiation for the claims made for them.

And speaking of "teleshopping with a difference:"

This weblog is pleased to offer "online shopping with a difference" themselves--in particular, plans to donate part of the proceeds so generated to Reduction of the National Debt.