It is the crux of the matter, which is why I make that point in my message. You should bear in mind, however, that someone on remand, though charged, remains innocent until he is proven guilty. Thus you are still detaining innocent people. What amazes me is that no-one seems perturbed about how long people spend on remand. It is not uncommon in my experience for someone to be found guilty only to be released from jail immediately because the period of time spent on remand is longer than the time they would have served under sentence.
Mate, I think you may be losing it here. Ask for an Amnesty International membership for Christmas. The UK (Freedom House rating: Free) is not, on any rational analysis, the closest democtaic state to a Police State. Take two of the places I have sent many an Amnesty International letter to: Turkey (Freedom house rating: Partly Free) or Russia (Freedom House Rating: Not Free). Bear in mind that the latter has a former head of the KGB in charge. Heck, even the US had a former CIA man as President in living memory.
As to locking people up without trial for 3 months; this is utterly commonplace. It is called "remand". It is hard to get a criminal trial of anything beyond trivial complexity on in three months even if the lists permitted. The problem is locking people up without charge for three months.
NOt sure what you have in mind by price transparency. For me a price is not transparent if:
(1) There are "hidden extras"; or
(2) If the pricing structure is suffciiently complex to make price comparison difficult.
In the case we are discussing the only lack of transparency that you posit is people not knowing the euro exchange rate. I think most would know that 99p is more than 99c.
If you travel by cross-channel ferry you will find it loaded with people on booze cruises wo could tell you the exact exchange rate. Anyone who shakes their booty in Ibiza, gets a tan in Greece or goes off to Paris for a dirty weekend and some oily food will know. I carry euros round with me in my wallet.
You are right that what used to be Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty of Rome are designed to help ensure free movement of goods and they have been used to foster parallel importing. Indeed I have bought a number of CDs from abroad.
You can also import your own wine. The only control on that is that if Customs thinks you are importing for resale they will want their duty. It was the breaking down of barriers which led to the vanishing of "duty free" booze (though not, bizarrely of duty free shops). I would certinaly not suggest ordinring boxes of wine though. Stick to bottles and buy them in cases.
The pricing is transparent. We now know for certain that we are being ripped off. That's as much transparency as we could nee.
What the Euro does not do is slap about the greedy w**kers who are ripping us off. That takes consumer pressure or regulation. As the later is unlikely becuase the regulators are being lobbied non-stop by those who are benefitting from the system that just leaves consumer pressure.
I'll be sure to stop buying music... but maybe just one more Kylie download before I give up.
As a textbook writer myself I can reveal that this is just a step on the path to our long-schemed glory. Ultimately we wish to move to knowledge licensing. Retention (in your head) of any information or knowledge that we impart will be subject to an annual licensing fee. If you fail to pay Mr Igor here pays you a visit and rummages about (in your head... with this patented knowledge retrieval stick) and recovers the knowledge you have unlawfully retained.
Of course installing knowledge from other sources may lead to incompatibilities and conflicts that cause your brain to crash at... hmmm... let's say the point you begin your final exams, so it is important to take out an annual knowledge support contract in case you need assistance at a critical moment.
a film about someone bombing central London. Expect outrage and then a dupe of this article to appear under "your rights online" when people call for the film, the comics, comic-book readers, the nerdularly challenged generally, etc to be banned.
Even if measures do not actually improve security they may serve a useful function. One has to bear in mind that terrorists aim to leave people feeling insecure in the hope that political pressure will result in their demands being met. Acts of terrorism lead to disproportionate insecurity. Expensive machinery leads to a disproportionate (but desirable)sense of security for many.
______
Send the terrorists a message at www.defy.org.uk
Ah but you wouldn't be sat on the sofa; you'd be driving your unlicensed mini-cab around making a bit of money on the side.
Now a version of Hasbro's game that followed mini-cabs would be more interesting:
"Your Driver is crawling the kerbs in Streatham muttering 'cab?' at drunken women coming out of a disco" (0 points)
"Your driver is attempting a sexual assault" (0 points)"
"Your driver is attempting to explain to the police why he has no insurance" (0 points)
Sean
I am surprised that this omits "A Grief Observed". It is true that he is not there writing as an apologist per se but in its minute account of the impact on him and his faith of the death of his beloved wife it is almost unbearably moving. It is most certainly "Christian".
He was a Christian apologist so that is scarcely surprising. Philip Pullman uses the same method to opposite effect in the "Dark Materials" books. Lewis did a pretty poor job as I loved the books and never even spotted the Christian parallels (Aslan as Christ etc). I think the books assume a basic familiarity with Christiantiy and increasingly that is lost on kids leaving them to just enjoy the story (and their souls to burn eternally at the end of Screwtape's toasting fork).
Pullman assumes less knowledge and is much more explicit in his condemnations of the Church. However, his account of his hatred of the Church being based in part on the repression in children of their sexuality does begin to creep me out.
The Screwtape Letters is slightly different to my mind as it is aimed (as I read it) at an explicitly Christian audience.
If you just select UK as the country the search will return all the UK MEPs. I found that the few whose details I selected had a snailmail address (albeit mostly in Brussels).
I have a friend who is an MEP and she spends most of her time there so that may suggest that the Brussels address would be more fruitful than the UK one in any event.
This is now in the hands of our beloved European Parliament. I understand that most of the MEPs have long since been lobbied to the brink of resignation on this issue, but let's make them work for their croissants and travel expenses. The linkk below is to a list of UK MEP's email addresses: http://vox.org.uk/MEPMail.htm
Sean
All the comments that suggest that the removal of governors is an attempt to bring the BBC to heel miss the rather obvious point that the governors were all government appointees.
Here in the UK precedent works in the following way:
(1) A decision of a superior court on a question of law binds all junior courts. It is only the parts of the decision which are a necessary part of the conclusion reached that are binding (we call those parts the "ratio decidendi"). A judge may opine away (and they frequently do) on matters which are not a necessary part of their decision but they will not bind (we call those opinions "obiter dicta").
(2) Some (but not all) courts are bound to follow their own earlier decisions (our Court of Appeal is, our High Court is not).
(3) Decisions of lower courts or decisions reached in other jurisdictions are not binding precedent but may be "persuasive" which means the court will look at them and follow the decision if they agree with the reasoning. Judges take comfort from the fact that other judges have reached similar decisions. As I understand US contitutional law each state counts as its own jurisdiction.
(4) The most important point is that precedents are concerned with law and not fact. If your facts are different the precedent may not apply. Where you persuade a judge that your facts differ sufficiently that the precedent should not bind him (or persuade him) you are said to "distinguish" the precedent.
In this case it is impossible to tell whether the conviction was quashed because of a question of law or whether it all turned on the specific facts. Unless we know that, it is impossible to judge whether the decision is likely to have any utility as a precedent.
Yours boringly
Sean
Excellent, a new way for us suits to make tech support's life a misery.
Suit: Er... is that the computer thingy department
Underpaid Tech: Yes... what now?
Suit: My LAN is down could you lot come up to my office, strip naked and lie on the ground holding each others' ankles so I can sync my PDA with Outlook.
MWAHAHAHAHAHA
Whoa there! Better dress up as a native american first so they get the blame. And dude, is this stuff decaffineated? I don't want to end up wrestling a seriously wired lobster.
My anger at my burglar subsided long before my rage with the *&^+ing insurance company who, 12 months on, still have not paid out against a non-contested claim.
Grrrr. Hanging's too good for them
Sean
My clerk always calls me the minute I sit down on the loo. It happens with such dependable regularity that I am beginning to wonder whether he has hacked a remote sensing device into my belt buckle.
Slashdot Mirror
As Earth's magnetic field helps deflect cosmic rays, the absence of a field on Mars would mean playing gene damage bingo on a daily basis.
It is the crux of the matter, which is why I make that point in my message. You should bear in mind, however, that someone on remand, though charged, remains innocent until he is proven guilty. Thus you are still detaining innocent people. What amazes me is that no-one seems perturbed about how long people spend on remand. It is not uncommon in my experience for someone to be found guilty only to be released from jail immediately because the period of time spent on remand is longer than the time they would have served under sentence.
As to locking people up without trial for 3 months; this is utterly commonplace. It is called "remand". It is hard to get a criminal trial of anything beyond trivial complexity on in three months even if the lists permitted. The problem is locking people up without charge for three months.
Fawn IS a weird colour for a suit.
Replying to my own message - you can buy wine from Italy shipped to UK at Wineshop.it
(1) There are "hidden extras"; or
(2) If the pricing structure is suffciiently complex to make price comparison difficult.
In the case we are discussing the only lack of transparency that you posit is people not knowing the euro exchange rate. I think most would know that 99p is more than 99c.
If you travel by cross-channel ferry you will find it loaded with people on booze cruises wo could tell you the exact exchange rate. Anyone who shakes their booty in Ibiza, gets a tan in Greece or goes off to Paris for a dirty weekend and some oily food will know. I carry euros round with me in my wallet.
You are right that what used to be Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty of Rome are designed to help ensure free movement of goods and they have been used to foster parallel importing. Indeed I have bought a number of CDs from abroad.
You can also import your own wine. The only control on that is that if Customs thinks you are importing for resale they will want their duty. It was the breaking down of barriers which led to the vanishing of "duty free" booze (though not, bizarrely of duty free shops). I would certinaly not suggest ordinring boxes of wine though. Stick to bottles and buy them in cases.
What the Euro does not do is slap about the greedy w**kers who are ripping us off. That takes consumer pressure or regulation. As the later is unlikely becuase the regulators are being lobbied non-stop by those who are benefitting from the system that just leaves consumer pressure.
I'll be sure to stop buying music ... but maybe just one more Kylie download before I give up.
As a textbook writer myself I can reveal that this is just a step on the path to our long-schemed glory. Ultimately we wish to move to knowledge licensing. Retention (in your head) of any information or knowledge that we impart will be subject to an annual licensing fee. If you fail to pay Mr Igor here pays you a visit and rummages about (in your head ... with this patented knowledge retrieval stick) and recovers the knowledge you have unlawfully retained.
Of course installing knowledge from other sources may lead to incompatibilities and conflicts that cause your brain to crash at... hmmm ... let's say the point you begin your final exams, so it is important to take out an annual knowledge support contract in case you need assistance at a critical moment.
a film about someone bombing central London. Expect outrage and then a dupe of this article to appear under "your rights online" when people call for the film, the comics, comic-book readers, the nerdularly challenged generally, etc to be banned.
______ Send the terrorists a message at www.defy.org.uk
Ah but you wouldn't be sat on the sofa; you'd be driving your unlicensed mini-cab around making a bit of money on the side. Now a version of Hasbro's game that followed mini-cabs would be more interesting: "Your Driver is crawling the kerbs in Streatham muttering 'cab?' at drunken women coming out of a disco" (0 points) "Your driver is attempting a sexual assault" (0 points)" "Your driver is attempting to explain to the police why he has no insurance" (0 points) Sean
Greek Orthodoxy? Time for you to Google Homer I think (make sure you exclude "Simpson").
I am surprised that this omits "A Grief Observed". It is true that he is not there writing as an apologist per se but in its minute account of the impact on him and his faith of the death of his beloved wife it is almost unbearably moving. It is most certainly "Christian".
May I say in my defence that I was only six or seven years old at the time! Sean
He was a Christian apologist so that is scarcely surprising. Philip Pullman uses the same method to opposite effect in the "Dark Materials" books. Lewis did a pretty poor job as I loved the books and never even spotted the Christian parallels (Aslan as Christ etc). I think the books assume a basic familiarity with Christiantiy and increasingly that is lost on kids leaving them to just enjoy the story (and their souls to burn eternally at the end of Screwtape's toasting fork). Pullman assumes less knowledge and is much more explicit in his condemnations of the Church. However, his account of his hatred of the Church being based in part on the repression in children of their sexuality does begin to creep me out. The Screwtape Letters is slightly different to my mind as it is aimed (as I read it) at an explicitly Christian audience.
http://wwwdb.europarl.eu.int/ep6/owa/p_meps.short_ list
If you just select UK as the country the search will return all the UK MEPs. I found that the few whose details I selected had a snailmail address (albeit mostly in Brussels).
I have a friend who is an MEP and she spends most of her time there so that may suggest that the Brussels address would be more fruitful than the UK one in any event.
If you let me know which bounced I will try to find newer addresses. Sean
This is now in the hands of our beloved European Parliament. I understand that most of the MEPs have long since been lobbied to the brink of resignation on this issue, but let's make them work for their croissants and travel expenses. The linkk below is to a list of UK MEP's email addresses: http://vox.org.uk/MEPMail.htm Sean
Calling it C# certainly has made web-searching difficult. Google only turned up 7 million three hundred thousand entries.
All the comments that suggest that the removal of governors is an attempt to bring the BBC to heel miss the rather obvious point that the governors were all government appointees.
Here in the UK precedent works in the following way: (1) A decision of a superior court on a question of law binds all junior courts. It is only the parts of the decision which are a necessary part of the conclusion reached that are binding (we call those parts the "ratio decidendi"). A judge may opine away (and they frequently do) on matters which are not a necessary part of their decision but they will not bind (we call those opinions "obiter dicta"). (2) Some (but not all) courts are bound to follow their own earlier decisions (our Court of Appeal is, our High Court is not). (3) Decisions of lower courts or decisions reached in other jurisdictions are not binding precedent but may be "persuasive" which means the court will look at them and follow the decision if they agree with the reasoning. Judges take comfort from the fact that other judges have reached similar decisions. As I understand US contitutional law each state counts as its own jurisdiction. (4) The most important point is that precedents are concerned with law and not fact. If your facts are different the precedent may not apply. Where you persuade a judge that your facts differ sufficiently that the precedent should not bind him (or persuade him) you are said to "distinguish" the precedent. In this case it is impossible to tell whether the conviction was quashed because of a question of law or whether it all turned on the specific facts. Unless we know that, it is impossible to judge whether the decision is likely to have any utility as a precedent. Yours boringly Sean
Excellent, a new way for us suits to make tech support's life a misery. Suit: Er ... is that the computer thingy department
Underpaid Tech: Yes ... what now?
Suit: My LAN is down could you lot come up to my office, strip naked and lie on the ground holding each others' ankles so I can sync my PDA with Outlook.
MWAHAHAHAHAHA
Is that a datapipe in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?
Whoa there! Better dress up as a native american first so they get the blame. And dude, is this stuff decaffineated? I don't want to end up wrestling a seriously wired lobster.
My anger at my burglar subsided long before my rage with the *&^+ing insurance company who, 12 months on, still have not paid out against a non-contested claim. Grrrr. Hanging's too good for them Sean
My clerk always calls me the minute I sit down on the loo. It happens with such dependable regularity that I am beginning to wonder whether he has hacked a remote sensing device into my belt buckle.