Must I explain?

Before I took my week's break, I posted this imaginary article, which was intended to make a point about the foolishness of taking seriously the UN block that is attempting to grasp control of the internet from the US. I figured that, by suggesting the obviously idiotic notion that the UN should take control of the BBC’s World Service because it is used by so many people worldwide, the idiocy of allowing the UN to take control of the internet simply because so many people worldwide use it would be made apparent. I also thought the point would be rather obvious, given that I linked to a BBC story about the UN internet imbroglio, and essentially reproduced it, simply substituting “the World Service” for “the internet”. Happily, some folks got the point. Unfortunately, others did not.

This person, for example, seems to think I was making some kind of point about the BBC’s World Service (which, apparently, he very much enjoys from his vantage point in America). He links to TAE as an example of the “ridiculous idea” that the World Service pushes a “sinister agenda as the Saudis or Iranians might do”. Well, perhaps it is a ridiculous idea, but it certainly wasn’t mine. If “Sloshings”, as he calls himself in his anonymity, happens to find himself reading this (there is no e-mail link on his site to which I could send the suggestion directly), I suggest he take another look at the post in question, and see if he might get his “old brain pan” cooking a bit better.

Certainly, in any event, we shouldn’t take Sloshing’s observations too much to heart. After all, how seriously can one take the judgment of a person who thinks that, among the things that give “greatness” to Britain, the NHS ranks among the most notable?