Archive
Legal?
I was interested to read a cou0le of days ago that Osama Bin Laden’s son-in-law had been arrested by the CIA in Jordan and flown to the US where he has already appeared in court, charged with ‘plotting against America’. He may well be a bad man, in line for his just deserts, but . . .
As a Kuwaiti citizen is there any basis on law for his arrest on foreign soil? If there is, when can we expect to see Kim Jong-un in a US courtroom?
Question
If the Jordanian government were to drop all charges against Qatada, then could he be deported?
Right but wrong
You got it wrong in so many areas, Ed, the government of which you and your pals were a very recent part. You screwed everything up by incompetence or neglectful oversight: not just immigration but also the economy, the banking industry, health, justice. It’s a long list.
So, why should the electorate believe for one second that you would get any of it right next time?
Greenhorns
One for Scottish visitors. Click on this link, read the page carefully and then work out why I will not be calling this company for advice.
http://www.greendealorb.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=132&assessor_id=93
Vince Jong-un
I had a breakfast brainwave this morning, while watching the news, headed by North Korea and the LibDem conference. Why not send Vince Cable to negotiate a treaty with Kim Jong-un?
However it wasn’t long before I saw the flaw in the idea. Given that in his time Vince has been a member of four political parties, he’d probably join him.
Holding out for a journo
I have just misread a headline on the BBC News home page. It said ‘Bonnie Tyler selected for Eurovision‘, but to my first fleeting glance it came across as ‘Brian Taylor selected for Eurovision‘.
For all I know, my good friend BBC Scotland’s Political Editor is a dab hand at the karaoke, but even if he’s tone deaf, he’d have a better chance of success in Malmo than our official entry.
Howzat?
I’m going to visit a friend this morning. He has been incommunicado, and will be anxious for news of his cricket team. I wish it was better: I may consider lying.
Distraught
I’m still almost speechless after the twilight robbery at Old Trafford last night. The Champions League is meant to be the world’s premier football club competitionl, yet the probable outcome of last night’s match was changed by one decision by a man who would wind up being lynched refereeing in the Scottish Division Three. Anyone who has ever played football (Apart from Roy Keane whose alienation from Man U has developed into open bias) knows that the collision between the two players was completely accidental. It was completely mystifying . . . until I followed a link this morning that took me to the following
Okay, it’s the Daily Star, but even that newspaper has been known not to make things up from time to time. If that story is true, United have a case for going to UEFA and demanding a replay.
Buyer beware
I read this morning that 2,000 new claims are lodged every day for compensation in respect of improperly sold payment protection insurance. PPI has become a huge industry. It’s a dripping roast for ambulance chasing lawyers. It’s costing banks billions at the very time when they are supposed to be rebuilding after the crisis.
Why?
I have no trouble in accepting that in cases where borrowers were pressured aggressively or coerced into signing up for such insurance, payback is due. But in others, where the punters simply didn’t know that PPI was included in their package, I’m sceptical. I don’t see why people should be compensated for their own failure to read the small print. I did Latin at school; I know what caveat emptor means.
Why do I give a toss about this? Because I am seriously pissed off by unsolicited text messages from con-men telling me that I am due two or three grand in compensation for missold PPI when I know for sure that I have never had that sort of cover.
A sensible Westminster government would put a statutory time limits on PPI claims. Unfortunately we don’t have one.
Graven image
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21665179
I’m giving a lot away here, but what exactly is a ‘Justin Beiber’? I’m assuming that he’s some sort of living idol. if so, I prefer the inanimate sort. They don’t treat their followers with contempt, or rip them off for a few hundred of their hard earned bank-notes.
Stock Exchange Blues
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-21652353
Another couple of years of this, and it could be back to square one. Hope not.
Cardinal Sin
In the wake of the O’Brien affair, I may be splitting hairs here, but are priests allowed to have any sort of ‘sexual conduct’? Can we expect more compromised clerics to beat the gun and ‘fess up before potential accusers come forward? Or can we expect that the Catholic church will re-examine the discipline that it imposes on its ordained priests? Many of us will remember the scandal of Roddy Wright. Indeed I believe I met him once, at a family gathering. He was guilty of love; for that he was disgraced, and was lucky there was no tar or feathers handy. But what is the basis of priestly celibacy? It’s church law not God’s. It makes clergy stand apart from their congregations. I wonder if it might not be better if they stood closer to them, sharing all the situations of their everyday lives, so that they might better understand their problems?
I’ll watch what I like, and like what I watch whether the ******* Guardian likes it or not
My thanks to Joy for drawing this patronising twat to my attention. Taxi for Hogan; you really don’t have clue do you?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2013/feb/11/death-in-paradise-how-viewers
Can’t be ar*ed
Hell, I should be working, but it’s a nice day.
Babble
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/21574930
Flavour of the month, but what language does she speak and why the **** should anyone care? People are homeless, people are hungry, people are dying of preventable disease, so why are we giving airtime to some spoiled kid in a posh frock?
Meat is murder
QJ’s view of the horse meat scandal. It serves us all right for eating our fellow mammals. We should have risen above that centuries ago, but we’re all cannibals at heart really.
What’s the real story?
Thirty years ago, I worked in politics. Back then I believed that the BBC’s coverage was institutionally biased, not necessarily against one party but against the perceived favourite in any situation. Looking at its coverage this morning of the Eastleigh by-election, it seems to me that nothing has changed.
BBC reaction to the LibDem victory has been neutral, UKIP’s second place being the big story. The Tories on the other hand, have been ‘humiliated’, according to its political correspondent.
Really? Presumably Robin Brant is experienced, or he wouldn’t be standing in front of the camera with a microphone in his hand. In that case he should have taken a closer look at the numbers. They suggest that if ‘humiliation’ is being alleged, both the coalition parties stand accused, but it seems that the concept of a humiliating victory is beyond Mr Brant’s comprehension. It seems so, but there’s a greater story in play.
Let’s look at the numbers. While beaten into third place, the swing against the Conservatives was actually less than that against the winners, and the margin between the two coalition parties was less than Chris Huhne’s LibDem majority at the 2010 general election. While acknowledging that the turnout was only 52.8%, the numbers are still spectacular. The LibDems polled 11,624 votes fewer, while the Tory vote fell by 10,543. Its majority over the party in second place was cut from 3,864 to 1,771. On the face of it it won only because it started from a higher base than the Tories. The UKIP leader Nigel Farago (I know, it’s Farage, but isn’t my version a far better name for a politician?) suggests that his party may have polled more votes than anyone else in the ballot box, losing only because of postal votes cast ten days before election day. He may have a point; 20% of Eastleigh electors voted postally in 2010 and for yesterday’s by-election over 14,000 postal ballot papers were issued.
Where did I get these numbers? From the coverage by Sky News, which in my humble, left the BBC lagging behind years ago in the quality of its political analysis.
What will all this mean in two years, come the next General Election? Nothing directly, but what does it mean now for the party leaders? It means we will see a lot more of Mr Farago from now on. It means that Nick Clegg is absolutely secure. Most significantly, it means that the nail holding Dave Cameron’s jacket has become very shoogly, and that is the real story that the BBC is seeking to advance, through its florid, if unsupportable language.
Quintin Jardine's blog 