Friday, 28 June 2013

LIAM AITCHISON MURDER TRIAL PROCESS QUESTIONED.

The very sad case of the murder of teenager Liam Aitchison has been brought before us again by the sentencing today of the pair convicted of his killing.
But a question mark has been placed above the process which led to the conviction.
Local journalist Iain X. Maciver points out in the article below some areas which concern him.
Now don't get me wrong, all things considered I have to say that it really does look like the convicted pair are indeed guilty. But is that enough to convict? That is the question.
Iain makes a valid point.
Now in my view (this view is based on my reading of the Bible. In days gone by, all UK laws were fundamentally based on the Bible - what else would you base it on?) all justice must be seen to be done before it can possibly be called justice. The only way we can do this is to make it completely public. In the olden days before modern technology existed, we had the area in courtrooms reserved for the general public so that we could say that justice had been witnessed by the people and therefore had been 'seen to be done'. A crucial point. As soon as something is done in so-called 'private' we have crossed the line. When used in this context the word 'private' is just a euphemism for 'secret'. We have the same problem in churches. Self-important and self-righteous people assuming they know best and imposing their will.
So what's my point?
Well it's this. That all courtroom proceedings should be open to every means of facilitating public scrutiny. We still have the public gallery of course, but nowadays we have something more. We have the god of the age - Television. We have the technology - let's use it. They've been televising court cases in America for years. Remember O.J. Simpson? This is not for entertainment. Just because some people get a thrill out of the wrong things doesn't alter what's right.
Public scrutiny - the only process which can protect us from the abuse or misuse of power.
Link to Iain X. Maciver's article.

Thursday, 13 June 2013

DAFT BUREAUCRACY

I have misplaced my car registration document so I've had to fill out a form for a replacement and send it to DVLA Inverness. In the same envelope I sent them an application for a new tax disc. Today, I received the whole lot back in the post with an accompanying letter regretting to inform me that I had failed to write my vehicle chassis number on the log book application form. That sounds reasonable enough, until you realize that along with my application for the replacement log book I was also required to include my MOT and insurance certificates because I was applying for road tax. Recorded very clearly on the MOT certificate is my vehicle chassis number. Were they unaware that my MOT certificate includes my chassis number? Could they not have done it the easy way and just copied the number from the MOT form? Perhaps they have rules which say I have to write it myself.
I wouldn't be surprised.

Thursday, 6 June 2013

"YOU DON'T HAVE TO APOLOGIZE AT ALL FOR YOUR FAITH!"


With our politicians guilty of this kind of blindness they are certainly the problem rather than the cure. How do they expect to be able to tackle Islam-inspired murder and mayhem when they wilfully reject the truth. And the truth is that every bit of this problem has been caused by what is written in the Koran. I repeat:

STOP TALKING ABOUT MUSLIMS, PEOPLE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM - THE KORAN IS THE PROBLEM - THE KORAN COMMANDS THEM TO KILL UNBELIEVERS - THAT'S YOU, ME AND THIS SILLY WOMAN.

Wednesday, 5 June 2013

Question: Which would win a drag race, Honda CBR1000RR Fireblade or home made Harley chopper?


Thanks to Colin Macalpine for link.

Sunday, 2 June 2013