Update: At the top.
Unity; read. Now.
What we have here is quite simply a framework for law-maling by propaganda; an attempt to define the precise parameters of this offence by banging away at the public in the press with their preferred definition - which does include glorification - in the hope that when the time comes and a relevant case comes to court, jurors will have swallowed their bullshit wholesale and deliver a precedent that suits their purposes.
Bastards.
PaulJ, last October:
How do you glorify terrorism?
Pretty much no change to my opinion since then either. Lords ping-pong anyone?
2 comments:
Yeah, making the ministers look stupid on the subject is easy.
Getting the mud to stick passed the 'traitors' media pressure is another thing entirely. Ah well. The media rules all.
Surely the problem isn't just confined to the legal deefinition of 'glorification' ?
I believe even the UN tripped when attempting a definition of 'terrorist'. Any half decent brief with an eye ofr the cameras will assemble a parade of experts willing to either challenge any definition offered by the prosecution or to debate the moral equivalence of Government actions with those being charged.
For once Blair has managed to plonk one of his off-the-cuff morning headline "policies" onto the statute book. If he thinks it's uncomfotable being ridiculed in serious newspapers for some of his daftness, just wait till the law courts excoriate his Government for wasting their time.
Helen
Post a Comment