Category Archives: law

Posted on by

Yanks to the world – fuck you all, we can do what we want

The Times reports on a rather chilling legal message (and I use the term ‘legal’ quite wrongly) from the Home of the Free – America claims that it is perfectly legal under their barbarous legal system to kidnap foreign citizens in any country, even kidnapping citizens of allied countries such as British citizens in their own country. Bad enough the extremely dodgy and morally bankrupt practise of extraordinary rendition but now they claim this highly immoral and illegal (at least in any civilised country which has actual rule of law) is perfectly acceptable according to their own legal standards.

Well, what laws they set in their own borders is up to them, of course, but to act in this arrogant, cavalier manner in other countries, breaking the laws of those nations, is normally what we would refer to as the actions of a ‘rogue state’. And since that’s a rogue state who ignores international law and has weapons of mass destruction then by the warped logic of their own retard monkey president then surely they should invade themselves and impose a regime change? I mean we all know the current administration is of the opinion it can do whatever it wants anywhere and get away with it, but it is chilling to see such a barbarous set of actions given official blessing by the judiciary of a supposedly civilised democratic society. (link via Boing Boing and Warren Ellis)

Posted on by

Government minister makes twat of himself

How funny was it this week seeing Home Office minister Liam Byrne being done for driving while using a handheld mobile phone? Especially as he is a member of the government which made that a criminal offence. And I loved his limp defence that he had an ‘important call’. Eejit. Should have been a bigger fine for him to make a public example of the bugger, especially as there are still far too many arrogant, ignorant, dangerous buggers who are still driving while yacking away on a handheld – you see a score of them every night going home after work in Edinburgh.

In fact I was nearly hit by a stupid woman in a Range Rover (and what is it with the amount of bloody Range Rovers in Edinburgh? Its a city, not a grouse estate you stupid, selfish bastards!) who decided to turn into a side street and through the crossing as I and others were on it, one hand trying to turn the wheel of the huge vehicle, one holding a phone to her brainless head and a whine that said she needed another arm to change gears rather badly. And oh yes, she had the kid strapped in the back too… The stupidity of some people knows no bounds. And you have to assume if you can afford a brand new Range Rover you can afford a hands-free phone kit for it…

Posted on by

Naughty children

A court in Florida has prosecuted two people for taking pictures of underage kids in sexual acts; the kicker is that they are a teenage boyfriend and girlfriend who took snaps of each other for themselves. The court wasn’t fussed about 16 and 17 year olds shagging, but how dare they take pictures of each other. That makes a huge amount of sense; I am sure these teens are now chastised and in awe of the majestic reason of the law.

Christian bigots

Posted on by

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor (well, he’d be hard pushed to be a Calvinist minister with a name like that, really, wouldn’t he?), head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales is demanding that legislation which makes it illegal to discriminate against gays is not applied to church organisations, a law which makes it a crime for people like the narrow minded B&B owner who refused to give a double room to a gay couple to do so again, just as it is illegal for businesses, organisations or public services to discriminate against people on grounds of colour, ethnicity or religion. In fact new laws are going alongside this to ensure equality protection for Catholics, ironically, while the head Catholic demands the right for the church organisations to be exempted and practise bigotry. Specifically he is threatening to close down the successful Catholic-run adoption service if the law goes through without an exemption because they will not want to give a child to a gay couple to adopt.

There are two huge things wrong with this request. First of all, the minute we start making exemptions for one law like this for one religious cult (and all organised religions are by definition cults, be they tiny fringe groups or huge ones like the RC church) then we open the floodgates for a slew of religious groups and others to demand they are allowed to pick and choose what they want to follow, which is useless. This is one of the reasons we base law on reason today and not on religious dogma, as most civilised countries do. The second is simple and plain bigotry – I don’t care how much the Cardinal and his chums say it isn’t, it bloody well is, they are bigoted bastards and that’s it. If an ultra protestant or Muslim adoption agency refused to let Catholic couples adopt the Cardinal would (rightly) kick up a stink. And the fact he is prepared to shut down the agencies rather than comply with the law, in other words to put his prejudices ahead of the kids needing new homes shows that his argument that they are principally interested in the welfare of the children is utter hypocrisy. Imagine a man in charge of an organisation run entirely by men who dress in what looks like dresses and have a reputation for interfering with choir boys being worried about placing kids with gay couples, what a nerve…