On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 20:34:43 +0100 someone who may be Pyromancer
<
[email protected]> wrote this:-
>>It reminded me of the infamous comment by some legal bod at the Lady
>>Chatterly's Lover trial, "is this the sort of book you would want
>>your wife or servant to read?"
>
>That was more a case of culture clash between different generations with
>wildly different viewpoints than anything else, methinks.
I don't think so. All sorts of people of all ages rightly pointed
out that the book had been badly misrepresented by those who would
protect us from ourselves and was in many ways a very moral book.
>>>Paul Boateng said when the pavement cycling fixed penalties
>>>were introduced these were NOT intended to target people who are
>>>intimidated off the roads.
>
>Much as I agree with your general perception of many politicians, in
>this case if the letter really was sent to the Chief Constables then
>presumably he's telling the truth?
Mr Liar had several dossiers sexed up at the behest of Alastair
Campbell. The dodgy dossiers were published, but that does not mean
Mr Liar was telling the truth.
In a similar vein we are told about many "terror plots" that are
nothing of the sort. Much as I recognise the cockup theory I find it
difficult to believe officials and party politicians are telling the
truth all the time. Indeed, I know that they are not, because the
"ricin plot" is still wheeled out by both groups even though Porton
Down have said there was no ricin. The article at
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/10/352464.html outlines some
other cases.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
)
