About me
Bookshop

Get new posts by email.

About me

Fathers group in Downing St stunt

Hold up!

See that little date above?

This post was published years ago.

My opinions have changed over time: I think it's quite fun to keep old posts online so that you can see how that has happened. The downside is that there are posts on this site that express views that I now find offensive, or use language in ways I'd never dream of using it today.

I don't believe in airbrushing history, but I do believe that it's important to acknowledge the obvious: some of what I've written in the past has been crap. Some of it was offensive. Some of it was offensively bad. And there's may be some brass among the muck (you can make up your own mind on that).

Some of what I've presented as my own views has been me—wittingly or unwittingly—posturing without having considered all the facts. In a few years, I'll probably think the same about what I'm writing today, and I'm fine with that. Things change. People grow. Society moves forward.

The internet moves on too, which means there might be broken links or embedded content that fails to load. If you're unlucky, that might mean that this post makes no sense at all.

So please consider yourself duly warned: this post is an historical artefact. It's not an exposition of my current views nor a piece of 'content' than necessarily 'works'.

You may now read on... and in most cases, the post you're about to read is considerably shorter than this warning box, so brace for disappointment.

It is exactly this sort of thing that makes me uncomfortable with the idea of the proposed new terror legislation. The security services could detect that they were planning to ‘attack’ the foreign office, but clearly would not have the necessary proof of this being a destructive attack. Without the burden of proof being upon them, the police could have then placed these men under house arrest, without trial, and not even telling them why this measure has been taken. This would have a huge psycholigcal impact on the individual and their family, and would, now we know the full facts, have been completely unjust.

And this news is too conveniently timed for most people. They tend to think that Mr Blair has annoucned this because there’s an election round the corner. Which is either a reflection of the cynicism people feel towards the Blair government due to their extensive spinning in the past, or just a true reflection of a dishonest and deceitful government. Either way, they shouldn’t be elected again this time round.

This post was filed under: Election 2005, News and Comment.

Recently published posts




Random posts from the archive

A bit of County Durham / 29 January 2019

Photo-a-day 156: Ward Park / 04 June 2012

Why does it work? / 04 October 2006

Humphrey has died / 21 March 2006

Photo-a-day 146: Rock in Exhibition Park / 25 May 2012

ABC News: People of the Year / 31 December 2004





The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. Information about cookies and the handling of emails submitted for the 'new posts by email' service can be found in the privacy policy. This site uses affiliate links: if you buy something via a link on this site, I might get a small percentage in commission. Here's hoping.