Does the law apply to all of us?

Or just some of us, are the special ones exempt?

There was a recent legal case involving two British Muslims thought to have prior knowledge of their brothers attempt to detonate a bomb in Israel. They were prosecuted for not informing the authorities, (and found not guilty).

So it strikes me, that if my friend told me he was going to blow up a TV station in a neutral country, that was basically a friend, and he didn’t have any kind UN mandate to do it, he just thought, “fuck it, I’m gonna blow ‘em up” that would be

1. An act of terror – ‘cos it’s a non-military target, civilians could be hit, there would be no declaration of war etc, and also

2. I would have to tell the police – as I am legally bound to do

So surely, Tony Blair has to tell the police (about Bush's plans to bomb Al-Jazeera), as he is subject to the same laws I am. Instead he hides behind the official secrets act. Plus, if it's not true, it's hard to know what could be the subject matter of the secret? Unless you've something to hide, you have by definition, nothing to hide (as Blunkett was fond of tellling us when he still mattered)

If the law doesn’t apply to all of us, and the principle of equality before the law is overtly abandoned, then great trouble lies ahead.

Rape case dismissed

Media's been making a huge deal out of a case today. Some girl got drunk and couldn't remeber whether she'd given consent or not. So the case was dismissed.

The media seem to be baying for blood.

Surely we risk jailing the innocent unless the victim is sure there has been a crime?

Or am I being simplistic?

At last, the company is launched

www.berkshirekeble.co.uk

With thanks to my partner Matt, and invaluable technical assistance from G-force

Stu: "So G, what's HTML again?"
G-force "Dude, just let me do it"

90 Day detention without trial or charge

okay, loads of hyperbole about this at the moment, and thank god it was defeated, but this is classic authoritarianism. PM says "Oh, scary monsters at large, I need total power to defeat them"

I'm not sure that's even true, there are alternatives, like using intercept evidence in court, lesser charges etc, but the really scary thing about this ain't the bombers, it's Clarke, Blair et al. The great unwashed (80% support for this policy) seem to miss the fact that the cops would have power to jail them !! not just islamic types.

And you think the cops wouldn't misuse this power? Just ask Walter Wolfgang the old boy who was arrested under the terrorism act for heckling.

General Musharaf….

..the Pakistani dictator (no he’s not the fucking president Mr Blair in the absence of free elections and all, and has nuclear weapons so why don’t we attack him, not the hapless Iranians, but I forgot, YOU like him, so that’s okay - - - I digress)

Recently complained about a lack of aid coming to his country, following the earthquakes in Kashmir. He said it was due to a lack of tourists and contrasted this disaster with the tsunami. Well there’s some truth in that, but other factors are;

Tsunami was over last Xmas, so no other news, so 24 hour TV coverage for about 9 days, ergo bigger impact, and more chillingly:

BBC news last Wednesday, story 1, lack of response to the appeal, story 2, three Brits of Pakistani descent arrested for conspiracy to cause explosions, story 3, three Pakistani men killed this other guy for getting their sister/daughter pregnant. Now this doesn’t justify it, but I wonder if some people are thinking “Christ these people are bombers and savages in our midst, why should we help them?” (Again, not my view, but I wonder if there is that feeling?)

Last point, despite all the great Satan bullshit you hear about the English speaking West, guess who the top two cash aid donors are to Pakistan?

United States
Britain

The gulf states have pledged loads, but have a habit of big public gestures then forgetting to actually send the aid when the news has gone away. And the other Muslim nations ? All very pious and condemnatory of the West, but in reality, where are they ?