Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by ssupersixfour, Oct 13, 2009.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Without knowing the detail I find the story below quite disturbing.
Guardian online article
This is a real hot one. If anyone was to publish the details (and yes I know what they are but I can't tell you what, where or who - in fact I can't tell you the offshore website that can tell with out breaking a High Court Injunction that I should not know about) they would be in contempt of the High Court. The order was issued by them for an event no one can report. The issue was raised in Parliament - MP's can not be sued for speaking in Parliament. But no one can report this action.
Lawyers circle and will slap injunctions in. Ignorance of the injunction is no defence and the whole thing stinks. The rotten legal system of liable needs reform.
I would advise against anyone give any details about this - the firm of lawyers are quick to sue. See Private Eye passim.
On a different note can recommend the following web site for all the latest news from Westminster
As a now-expat Brit I like to try and keep abreast of developments in the Mother Country. Although I prefer reading magazines and newspapers physically I realise that the distance means I will need to rely more on web-based media.
Following on from Guns' last comment, can anyone add to this list of media sources which would enable me to keep up to date with Parliamentary news?
They Work For You
Official Parliament website
Please accept my apologies for taking this thread off-topic.
Losing the Guardian totally would be little loss to real news and current affairs reporting
Yes it's quite a biatch. when the other side get to air there views
I would love to know what the sibject is....
However, the Guardian has a barefaced bloody cheek to complain about infringement of The Bill of Rights, despite all the battering the Bill of Rights has recieved from this government over the last decade the Guardian only bothers to worry about it when its themselves on the pointy end of that abuse.
Precisely, considering The Gurdianistsas are mainly responsible for the Orwellian state we now live in you'd think they'd applaud the governments brave stance against wicked press intrusion on their private criminal lives.
The last issue of Private Eye had a very good report about this.
Its on various other web sources too, makes you wonder why the Guardian has been gagged. Evidently somebody still believes stories on the internet carry no credibility and don't matter.
As I said earlier, its a bi rich for the Guardian o get all affronted about the abuse of The Bill of Rights now, its never bothered them before.
From Guido Fawkes website,
According to the Guardian, despite the 1688 Bill of Rights, it has been gagged from reporting a question to be asked in parliament later this week. The gag was obtained by Carter-Ruck. Wonder if it is this question:
Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura.
Note to Carter-Ruck â Guidoâs publishers will only accept service as per the requirements of the Hague Convention. Come to Charlestown, the weather is fantasticâ¦
The Bill of Rights 1688 has been virtually ignored by the 'lawyer' Bliar and his grinning coterie of 'spivs', psychopaths and third-hand car-dealers for a dozen years or more.
Now that their ludicrous Party newspaper the 'Grauniad' is precluded from some 'non-story' or other, all hell is let loose.
A pox on Bliar and his wife; a pox on the 'Grauniad' and a pox on all libel lawyers - or 'liable' lawyers as they are invariably referred to on this site.
Really? Are you being serious. I'm not an avid Guardian reader but do tend to check it regulary and I'm pretty sure it has been one of the loudest voices stating that our rights are slowly being eroded and that we are sleepwalking into an Orwellian state. I'm not really sure how you can accuse the so-called 'guardianista's of this either; they are usually the ones that protest (both legally and illegally) outside Parliament are the erosion of rights in the UK.
Back on topic:
I quite like the fact that the injuncted question is one about injunctions. Nice of Barclays to try and cover up their tax evasion and the law firm to cover up dumping of Toxic waste in the Ivory Coast. Good on teh MP who has made sure the public will get to hear about this by asking it in Parliament. The law can be both a sheild and a sword.
he is a cheeky monkey and the comments are most illuminating
oh look its almost coup o'clock
To be fair, you are mixing my comments in with those of another poster, I made no reference to Guardianista's and have never used the term.
And yes, I am serious. The Guardian (and other media too for that matter) have made precious little effort to address the removal of our rights long gauranteed by The Bill of Rights and Magna Carta. I didn't here them grumble much when the right to silence was binned in favour of Gatso's, did you?
Separate names with a comma.