The US government hasn’t been happy at all that there is any press coverage of the Bradley Manning trial, and seems to bend over backwards to make their lives more difficult. However, it appears that they took things to an entirely new and ridiculous level this week in actively spying on and harassing journalists covering the trial.
@carwinb, @kgosztola, @nathanLfuller, and @wikileakstruck have tweeted about armed guards standing directly behind them as they type into laptops in the designated press area, being “screamed at” for having “windows” open on their computers that show Twitter in a browser tab, and having to undergo extensive, repeated, invasive physical searches.
Even the NY Times has noted how extreme it was:
Two military police officers in camouflage fatigues and armed with holstered handguns paced behind each row there, looking over the journalists’ shoulders, which had not happened during the trial. No explanation was given.
Reading through the various tweets, the MPs were specifically trying to stop journalists from using Twitter. Kevin Gosztola was directly told not to use Twitter and was later admonished for having “a window” open on his computer. No joke. The reporters also noted that they had to go through an incredibly detailed TSA-style search before they could enter the courtroom — and that this had not happened previously in their coverage of the trial. Multiple journalists noted how “creepy” it was and how intimidating it is to have military police with guns looking over your shoulder and watching everything you do. Freedom of the press? Not at all.
In response to all of this attention, the judge apparently claims that she ordered the “extra security” because of “repeated rule violations” of rules that no one was told about. But, reading through the details, it sounds a hell of a lot more like intimidation of the press than than about any attempt to stop “rules violations.”
Got a job teaching kids how government works. I told them to put their sweets on the table, took everything and told them to fuck off.
— J.D. Gallagher (@jd_gallagher) July 12, 2013
On May 27 this year, almost two million people in 436 cities across the world marched against what they believe is ‘corporate greed’ and an attack on human health. Increasing information about the adverse effects of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) has left people appalled and outraged, however, it has had no effect on the growth and profits of the companies that are manufacturing these products.
In order to remind the world of this indifference and insensitivity of corporations towards the health and well being of innocent people, a video revolt has been organized. According tomonsantovideorevolt.com, ‘In an effort to generate even more awareness across the globe, the largest players in the natural health field are coming together to push this Monsanto Video Revolt into hyper space. Together, they are joining forces and asking YOU to help even further on July 24th, 2013, in the Monsanto Video Revolt.’
The website has also described the three basic steps involved for people who wish to join the revolt:
Step 1 – Create a video of any length detailing why you stand against Monsanto and GMOs at large. The video can be as long as you want – it’s your choice.
Following are two videos that have been posted as part of the protest:
And this is an animated video explaining GMO and its effects on health in a very interesting way. Have a look:
Do you have a video planned for the protest? Do share it with us.
So what is it that you’re doing, and why?
Over the past seven business days, I’ve been meditating for 3 to 4 hours directly outside the entrance of Goldman Sachs headquarters. And I intend to continue sitting silently at Goldman HQ every single business day for the coming weeks and months. Soon this effort will grow beyond me, however. Starting yesterday, we’re holding hour-long group meditations three days per week.
The reason for my meditating at Goldman is that I seek to extend compassion to its employees and demand that they do the same for the worldwide billions affected by the bank’s practices. By meditating, I’m quite literally modeling a technique that cultivates the capacity for emotional states like compassion and empathy. On another level, I’m trying to communicate that I come in peace; I understand that Goldman Sachs bankers are people just like you and me. There’s nothing inherently evil or malicious about them. Like all people, they are the beautifully complicated products of a personal and social history.
Does that mean that we allow them to acquire huge amounts of money, while exacerbating global inequality and its effects? Absolutely not. But we intervene in the way that a family might intervene when their son has a drug addiction. That’s how I think of Goldman Sachs: addiction to greed. And greed, in its various forms, is something that everyone struggles with. The difference with Goldman Sachs is that greed on this scale is causing atrocious human suffering. So we need to put the harmful practices to an end, but with the love and goodwill of a global family.
What drove you to commit to doing this?
The large scale human suffering that is taking place, and the sense that our global trajectory is moving toward even greater amounts of suffering. That, coupled with the realization that our global and national systems of governance are simply not up to the task of preventing such harm. I’ve come to believe that a dramatic shift on inequity issues — like regulating Wall Street — will only result from a mass nonviolent social movement. I see myself as a small, sustained part of that effort.
It’s kind of like the “Standing Man” in Turkey. Has anyone joined you, like people joined him? Do you expect them to?
Yes, exactly. I draw a lot of encouragement from the Standing Man’s passive resistance. He exuded such dignity in his commitment to bearing witness. He seemed to say, “I may not be able to forcibly remove your tear gas cannisters, but I will not gratify you with the act of turning away.”
No one has joined me in the spontaneous way that they joined the Standing Man. However, people did reach out to me after I posted some photos to Facebook and Twitter. Also, from day one I’ve envisioned this Goldman Sachs meditation presence growing beyond me. As a former community organizer, I know that power is in numbers. In this case, we’re seeking to dramatically reign in one of the most powerful institutions in the world, so we must have lots of people as a counterweight.
What kinds of reactions are you getting from Goldman Sachs employees? What about other people?
To be honest, it is very difficult for me to tell how Goldman Sachs employees have reacted. I meditate with my eyes looking down at a 45-degree angle, so I do not know what their facial expressions have been like. No Goldman employees have spoken to me yet, either — well, that’s not entirely true. After the first couple days, the security guards became more and more chummy. Now, when I arrive, they ask me how my day has been. Recently, when my friend came to take a bunch of pictures, they stopped him to make sure it was all right with me.
Most other people have been supportive. They ask me what I’m doing or why, and they respectfully engage with my response. The meanest thing that happened so far was a man yelling, “Get a job!” Little does he know that I work full-time at a Mexican restaurant in Crown Heights. But millions of Americans do not have a job. Does that disqualify them from speaking out — or, in my case, sitting out — against injustice? I think not.
What would be your ideal outcome when you’re done?
The ideal outcome is the formation of a massive meditation protest that helps create political space for the dramatic reform and regulation of the finance industry — especially the megabanks like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. I know this is a lofty goal, but it’s so terribly important. I envision a perimeter of meditators around the entirety of the gigantic Goldman Sachs headquarters. How incredible would that be?
Are you doing any support work to make your action part of a broader campaign, to make it more effective? Or are you focused on this act of witness?
Yes, I’m most definitely doing support work. As I said, I come from a community organizing background; so I know the importance of coalition building, outreach and trusting relationships. I also know that this kind of organizing is a slow process.
Your sign says “Begin Anew With Compassion.” Why that? Do you really think what Goldman Sachs lacks is compassion? Is meaningful compassion even possible in these institutions of hyper-capitalism?
The sign “Begin Anew With Compassion” is directed toward the employees of Goldman Sachs, not the bank itself. I’m not naïve enough to think that compassion can overcome the structural forces and financial incentives that dictate Goldman’s practices. In that sense, I think it’s absolutely valid for you to speculate about whether “meaningful compassion is even possible” within the constraints of a megabank like Goldman.
However, what I would say is that Goldman’s policies — as with all policies at all institutions — are enacted by people. And those people make a choice about whether or not to extend ethical consideration to those affected by their choices. That’s what we saw with Goldman Sachs Vice President Greg Smith in 2012. He realized that his actions were unethical, and he chose to resign from the firm.
What has the quality of your meditation been like, so to speak? Better or worse than at home?
To answer this, I need to describe my meditation a bit. My meditation practice is following the breath, which means that I focus on the sensations of a single body part — usually the belly — as air comes in and out. The challenge is that when thoughts arise, you simply notice that you’re thinking and immediately return your attention to the breath.
At Goldman, it has been a lot more difficult to sustain continuous attention on the breath. The noise of the street corner — combined with the personal and political significance of the location — makes for an extremely distracting environment. So, if we think of meditation as the practice of focus, then I would say the meditations are worse. But another crucial component of meditation is the practice of acceptance. The more and more I’ve meditated over the years, the more I’ve been willing to be nice to myself when I get distracted. And I think for that practice of compassion — for myself as a struggling meditator and for bankers as human beings — I think my meditations have been significantly better.
The military trial in the case of Wikileaker Bradley Manning continued earlier this week. An interesting legal point in the case has arisen, as Manning’s defense lawyers pushed back against tweets that the prosecution wanted introduced as evidence.
Allow me first to provide a little bit of background on why the tweets in question are even being discussed in the case.
One of the key issues in the case has been the relationship between Army Private First Class Bradley Manning and Wikileaks, and its founder Julian Assange. Prosecutors have alleged that Manning was influenced by Wikileaks to leak some of the confidential documents. (Manning has already admitted to leaking the documents, but has denied more serious accusations, including that he knowingly aided the enemy).
Previously released chat logs between Manning and ex-hacker Adrian Lamo, who earlier testified in the case, have established that Manning had been in contact with Wikileaks, but there remains contention between prosecution and defense about to what extent and when that contact occurred. They also continue to argue over whether or not Manning’s actions were influenced by Wikileaks, or if there was any collusion between the two. This has been a crucial point as well for federal prosecutors seeking to build a case against Julian Assange.
On Tuesday, prosecutors and defense attorneys argued over a couple of tweets in particular. One of those tweets, alleged to have been posted from the Wikileaks Twitter account on 7/8/2010, asks for the public to assist in providing .mil email addresses to Wikileaks. Another on 1/8/2010 posted by Wikileaks referenced having an encrypted video of a U.S. air attack (referring to what we now know was the “Collateral Damage” video, one of the items in the files leaked by Manning and later edited and published by Wikileaks). Prosecutors argue that this further emphasizes evidence of a leak, and that it should be admissible as part of its broader argument on the point.
Special Agent Mark Mander of the Army Criminal Investigative Command testified about how he went about determining the tweets were from Wikileaks’ account. In the past, he first went to the Wikileaks Twitter account directly and saw the tweet personally; then he more recently collected it from a Google cache version and the content in both was the same. Mander testified that Google cache is something that he has used regularly in his capacity as a CID agent investigating computer intrusions and computer crimes. He also explained a variety of other steps he took, in addition to obtaining cached versions of the tweets, to cross-check the authenticity of the tweets as being that of Wikileaks.
But Manning’s defense attorneys challenged the authenticity of such tweets.
“Anyone can create a Web page…that looks like WikiLeaks or that looks like Twitter,” argued defense attorney Captain Joshua Tooman when the government sought to admit a May 7, 2010 tweet from WikiLeaks seeking military Internet addresses, and the Web page of the Internet archive site archive.org that showed a 2009 WikiLeaks “Most Wanted” list of items it was seeking from the public.
Tooman said a government investigator had accessed the tweets indirectly, through Google, rather than directly through Twitter or WikiLeaks. He said the evidence failed to meet the test of authenticity since there was no way of knowing what the website looked like when the tweet or page was published.
The argument from the defense about the tweets’ authenticity raises an interesting legal point that could potentially influence similar arguments in civilian cases.
While it’s accurate that anyone can create a web page that mimics a legitimate site – in fact we’ve seen this in other circumstances that have been the subject of recent news reports, such as when Wikileaks Punked the NY Times – there surely needs to be some acceptable standard for authenticating tweets and other content that has since been archived and may no longer be available online. Most would assume that the standard tools regularly used to find archived content, like Google cache and the Internet Archive (formerly the WayBackMachine), would be acceptable in these instances, coupled of course with additional cross-checking. But the Manning defense team argues that it’s not.
If the judge determines that Google cache and other such tools are not an acceptable way to authenticate archived tweets, it poses an interesting question about how this might influence similar arguments going forward (not necessarily as precedent, but just as a general point).
You can read the entire day’s testimony in this particular argument in the unofficial court transcript for 6/18 provided by Freedom of the Press Foundation.
It will be interesting to see what the decision is on this matter. Proceedings resume in the Manning trial on June 26th.
Own Our Oil is an Irish group of citizens with no political affiliation, who are deeply concerned that deals cut between previous Irish governments and oil and gas exploration companies are depriving people of Ireland of what is rightfully theirs.
Our mission is to change the terms relating to licensing and oversight of Ireland’s offshore and onshore oil & gas. We need (your help) to act now and we need you to be the driving force to bring about change urgently.
A Festival of Cruelty curated by as pure a curmudgeon as ever sprang from Eire’s grassy hills. Culturalfatwa looks beyond the haranguing to the true message of Tonight with Vincent Browne.
By any measure Tonight with Vincent Browne at the unearthly hour of 11pm on TV3 is a weird yet wonderful phenomenon. In fact, in a political landscape almost completely devoid of genuine debate, it might just be said to be unique.
Stranger still the fishies that swarm and nibble about in the associated twitter hashtag, #vinb. Here extreme lefty meets dedicated republican, hard core begrudger and random Twitter smartarse, and all on a roughly even footing. Within this tag swim small schools of wrigglers of the anti-bailout right (the Karl Wheelan/Paul Somerville shoal for want of a better term), and occasionally, even in these shallows, drifting thoughtlessly under a bridge you hear a faint shout, “TROLL!” Too late! A doughty rock lobster of the Fianna Fáil, Labour or (horror) Fine Gael variety has you held in its vice-like claws.
The #vinb tag, rightly described recently on Twitter by @soundmigration as a genuine social/sociological phenomenon, would repay study – maybe someone is already on it?
Moving out of ‘virtual pools’ for a moment what we have is simply a TV panel show presided over by the mighty Vincenzo. It’s extraordinarily hard to describe to the uninitiated this man of (apparently) lefty-liberal leanings. Of course his arsenal of ticks, shudders and eye-browy moves and gestures have been well mimicked, if not quite equalled, by the short-lived Mario Rosenstock sketches on the show. But beyond the baleful sighs and the eyes up to a heaven he doesn’t believe in, to a god that’s not taking calls, Vincenzo is as pure a curmudgeon as ever sprang from Eire’s grassy hills.
Besides a photographic memory stretching back eons there is his most dreadful weapon, the phrase “Just answer the question”. So strong is this stinger that it seems to have been the main reason that the Troika refused to meet either opposition or press on their last tour of inspection. It is deployed with limpet-like tenacity, the hapless victim (be they left, right or centre) is allowed to blather on at will for a brief period. Then “the question”.
“The question” is always of a “have you stopped beating your wife?” nature. It might be nice to think that a simple yes/no could be returned as an answer, but that would be far too easy! Rarely has the harried victim even the microseconds to draw breath, yet alone stretch to audible sound. “The question” is always completely ‘loaded’, entirely and intricately of arch Vincenzo design and almost never, ever, drawn from whatever has been the media pre-approved ‘argument’ or ‘side’ in any particular debate.
Some choice examples of this include asking Leo Varadkar, “Why did you put the ‘gun to head clause’ in the preamble to the Fiscal Compact Treaty?” (he also deployed this particular bludgeon during the first Compact Treaty debate with Micheál Martin and Simon Covney), asking Troika member Klaus Masuch, “did your taxi driver tell you how the Irish people are bewildered that we are required to pay unguaranteed bondholders billions of Euros for debts that the Irish people have no relation to or no bearing with, primarily to bail out or to ensure the solvency of European banks? And if the taxi driver had asked you that question, what would have been your response? That’s my first question”, or September’s evisceration of the hapless Kieran O’Donnell, “are you proud of what your party colleague, Phil Hogan, did in this instance – reassuring or assuring neighbours in this area that a Traveller family wouldn’t be housed in that area?”.
There are many other things that you are liable to see on Tonight with Vincent Browne that you will never see anywhere else on the Irish airways or, possibly, anywhere in the world.
There are the Festivals of Cruelty or bloodings, horrible rituals in which one of the major political parties supplies a young innocent for the specific purpose of a verbal savaging by Vincenzo. This seems to be based on the misguided notion that the victim will be steeled/tempered or toughened in some way. The repeat throwing of FG TD Paschal Donohoe into the metal box shows that particular theory up as a complete non-starter. The casual savaging of doe-eyed Paschal only seems to draw him back for more and at times even this seasoned anarchist antichrist feels like throwing a towel into the ring on his behalf. Seasoned ministers and party leaders generally will not be found even accidentally within a 50 mile radius of Vincenzo under any circumstances. In our lovely wee democracy in the year 2012 they are basically terrified of a ‘mere’ TV presenter. This is, obviously, hella cool.
There are times when an ‘ordinary head’, be they homemaker or community activist, is allowed to spout forth at and, occasionally, annihilate some stuffed shirt or other. There are times when an academic or expert is called out, though mind you one or two (Diarmuid Ferriter springs to mind) take to it like ducks to water. There are live embedded outside broadcasts from within protests ignored elsewhere on the airwaves. They have a presenter who reads viewers’ tweets, texts and comments out live, later reproducing them fully credited on a blog (politico.ie), responding in detail and often using that to generate debate in future shows.
This show never so much ends as fizzles out – usually in a bad-tempered, inconclusive and incoherent morass. Each ending is a tiny, beautiful example of another glib and easy closure (the sine non qua of most political broadcasts), deliberately and successfully elided. As a resigned Vicenzo stares directly into the void and mumbles something about the weather forecast the message is clear: if there is to be resolution or closure, indeed change of any stamp, it’s gonna have to come from out there beyond the TV screen, from you (yes, you!), the humble viewer.
Orla Cox in the secure room of Symantec’s office in Dublin. Photograph: Kim Haughton for the Guardian
Inside the tightly controlled security area of Symantec‘s Dublin headquarters, a screen on the wall flashes up hacking hotspots as they are detected around the world. Last year the company estimated it blocked nearly 250,000 cyber-attacks. One out of every 532 websites was infected with viruses, it said, and 1.6 million instances of malware were detected.
Overall, cyber-attacks were up 42% in 2012. They range from “hacktivist” targeting of industries such as defence to the fast-growing area of “ransomware” blackmail attempts, but more than a third of attacks focused on small- to medium-size businesses employing fewer than 500 people.
Orla Cox, the senior manager of security response at Symantec’s office in north-west Dublin, said hackers – including criminal gangs, individuals and even states – regarded smaller enterprises as “stepping stones” to enable them to attack larger corporations.
In a briefing last week, Cox also said Twitter was perceived as a weak link. Last month Syrian hackers claimed responsibility for a bogus tweet from an Associated Press account that sent stock markets into temporary freefall. “The security of Twitter is not strong and Twitter is going to have to do something about that,” Cox said.
Symantec’s Dublin hub, with 800 workers including 60 in its security division, plays a key part in global computer security because in terms of timezones it lies between the company’s two other main operations, in California and Tokyo.
The Irish office was the first to detect the Stuxnet virus, which has caused severe damage to the Iranian nuclear programme in Natanz. The virus, which entered the country’s nuclear industry system via computers sold to Iran from Europe, caused centrifuges used in uranium enrichment to spin out of control. Symantec is reluctant to state its view on the origin of the highly sophisticated virus but most security analysts believe Israel was behind it.
Cox said Stuxnet was probably not the end of it. She predicted those behind the virus were probably developing a new “son of Stuxnet” in the campaign to sabotage Iranian nuclear efforts.
Ransomware has become a bigger challenge in the last 12 months, according to Symantec. The company has identified 16 cybercrime gangs using ransomware, which in the space of 18 days in 2012 alone infected 500,000 computers.
“It works by shutting down your computer with a virus and then sending out a bogus warning that a user has been looking at something illegal,” Cox said. “They tell the user they can only get the computer back running if they pay a ransom, in some cases of $100, usually by buying a moneypack voucher and then sending the code transferring the amount to the gang. If the user for instance has been browsing a porn site they are going to believe the warning and pay up.
Such scams netted the 16 gangs about $5m in 2012, she said. In many cases paying through an anonymous money transfer system did not necessarily ensure an infected computer was unlocked, the company pointed out. In some cases ransomware can capture images of the targeted user via webcam, which is displayed when a computer screen is frozen to intimidate the victim.
Cox said there were now online toolkits hackers could buy on the internet to enable them to break into bank accounts. She said hacking into the financial system and online banking theft was mainly the work of gangs from Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet states.
Symantec also expressed concern about teenagers and young adults being targeted on Twitter, Facebook and other social networks because they were less guarded about their personal data and in particular their usernames and passwords. The company said the intersection of smartphones and social media would become an important security battleground.
Cox said Symantec believed Apple products were less prone to attack, with iPhones for instance being safer because they are “completely locked down”. However, she said Apple Macs are “not impervious” to hacking.
In the last weekend of April the Guardian also came under a cyber-attack from Syrian hackers who have targeted a series of western media organisations in an apparent effort to cause disruption and spread support for Bashar al-Assad‘s dictatorship. The Syrian Electronic Army (SEA) claimed responsibility for the Twitter-based attack, having previously also targeted the BBC, France 24 TV, and National Public Radio in the United States.
Cyber-attacks believed to emanate from North Korea have recently caused disruption to media organisations in South Korea.
Typicl food snobbery – okay to eat a pig, not okay to eat a horse; fine to eat a leg, awful to eat tripe… I’m a meat eater – i eat animals, horse=big-nosed-pig-on-stilts to me.
‘I got some Tesco burgers out of the freezer earlier aaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnndddddddddd they’re off!
Why were they testing the DNA in the first place?” Someone found a jockey’s whip in their 1/4 pounder.’
Can’t believe that woman was sent to hospital after eating a horse meat burger…… Her condition is said to be stable.’
‘Is eating horsemeat really that bad? Let’s put it to the vote. All those in favour say ‘aye’, all those against say ‘neigh’.’
Traces of Zebra found in Tesco barcodes.
29% of the meat content in Tesco’s hamburgers turns out to be horse?! No wonder they gave me the trots!
A Tesco burger walks into a bar. “Pint please”. “I can’t hear you” says the barman. “Sorry” replies the burger. “I’m a little bit horse”.
Best burgers recipe. Mince meat, garlic powder, paprika, fresh herbs, an egg and fine diced stallions. I mean…. Scallions..
went to a Tesco café yesterday and ordered a burger. They asked me if I
wanted anything on it, and I said: ‘Yes – a fiver each way.’
Does anyone have a tooth pick? I had a Tesco burger last night and there’s
still a bit between my teeth.
My daughter has always wanted a pony, so I’m buying her a Tesco Quarter
Pounder for her birthday.
My doctor told me to watch what I eat, so I went out and bought tickets for
the Grand National.
If you think horse meat’s bad, wait until you try Tesco’s veggie burgers.
They’re made of genuine uniQuorn.
Scientist: ‘Sir, we’ve discovered horse meat in your burgers.’
Tesco boss: ‘Why the long face?’
I won’t eat Tesco burgers. They may be low in fat, but they have a very
high Shergar content.
Tesco are giving treble points on your Clubcard for all burgers and petrol,
starting today. The deal’s called Only Fuel and Horses.
What do you call a burnt Tesco burger? Black Beauty.
A motorist gets pulled over by a police officer, who asks him to blow into
a breathalyser. The machine beeps. ‘I’m sorry Sir,’ says the officer.
‘You’re over the limit. Can you tell me what you have had tonight?’
‘Nothing Officer,’ replies the man. ‘Just a burger from Tesco.’ ‘That
explains it,’ says the policeman. ‘I knew I could smell Red Rum.’
They’ve found horse meat in Tesco burgers? It’s an unbridled disaster.
A Tesco burger walks into a bar. ‘A pint please.’
‘I can’t hear you,’ says the barman.
‘Sorry’ replies the burger. ‘I’m a little bit horse.’
I selected some burgers on the Tesco website. And then clicked ‘Add to
Those Tesco horse burgers were nice, but I prefer My Lidl Pony.
A woman has been taken to hospital after eating Tesco burgers. Her
condition is said to be stable.
I used to work on the Tesco meat counter, but it was like flogging a dead
Last night I ate a Tesco burger, an Iceland burger and an Aldi burger to
find out which had the best taste. Tesco won by a short head.
I think someone may be sending me death threats. I woke up this morning
with a Tesco burger in my bed.
Have you heard? Now traces of zebra have been found in Tesco barcodes.
I bought an ‘award-winning’ Tesco burger. I didn’t realise they meant it
had won the Cheltenham Gold Cup.
I used to work for Tesco, but I was fired. I got an email about a delivery
of horse meat and I marked it as spam.
Horse meat in Tesco burgers? What are the odds on that?
I tried to take some burgers back to Tesco but they said they wouldn’t
accept them. Looks like I’m saddled with them.
Husband: ‘I’m so hungry I could eat a horse.’
Wife: ‘Why don’t you go to Tesco?’
Personally, I think people who don’t like eating horse meat are being a bit
Despite the recent news, Tesco says that their beef burger sales remain
Are you in favour of horse meat in your burgers? Yay or Neigh?
I won’t be switching to Tesco Finest burgers. They’re so expensive that
buying enough for a big family dinner won’t leave you much change from a
I was going to give up fast food for January, but I fell at the final
hurdle and had a Tesco burger.
Just been to Tesco and bought a bottle of Bacardi, a bottle of Lamb’s and
some burgers. So that’s white rum, navy rum and Red Rum.
Despite the recent scandal, Tesco insist they use only meat of the highest
quality. A spokesman said: ‘Our meat has to clear several hurdles before it
goes on sale.’ And the most groan-inducing’.’.’. What’s in this burger? It
just jumped over my chips. I don’t know why there’s a fuss all of a sudden.
There’s been horse meat in Tesco burgers for donkey’s years.
I like my burgers with a side saddle and neighonnaise.
I hope Tesco were selling those burgers at hoof price.
So there’s horse meat in Tesco’s burgers. Don’t worry, it’s not the mane
Forget the Everyday Value burgers – I only eat those mini-burgers you have
as snacks. You know, the horse d’oeuvres.
I bought some Tesco burgers – I wanted to get venison ones, but they were
I ordered a Tesco burger the other day – but asked them to hold the
Tesco would’ve got away with it if it wasn’t for the DN Neigh test.