Feeds:
Posts
Comments

The Hindu has published an editorialBrinjal and beyond.

Did N Ram the Editor of The Hindu write these words:
“He (India’s environment minister) should ignore the huge pressure from organisations that have no time for the scientific evidence while claiming to speak for the environment and the public.”

The editor is saying Greenpeace has no time for scientific evidence!

Did the editor at least try to get in touch with Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini of the Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN) – who called Bt Brinjal: Bt Brinjal Unfit for Human Consumption.

Save democracy in the UK

The United Kingdom is a ‘democracy’ with a Monarch. Oxymoron.

In such a society, this news shouldn’t be big: Guardian gagged from reporting parliament

If the citizens have no right to know what’s happening in the Parliament… it represents the biggest challenge to democracy – a big one.

For the sake of democracy, Chayakada is reproducing the entire Guardian report.

The Guardian has been prevented from reporting parliamentary proceedings on legal grounds which appear to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 Bill of Rights.

Today’s published Commons order papers contain a question to be answered by a minister later this week. The Guardian is prevented from identifying the MP who has asked the question, what the question is, which minister might answer it, or where the question is to be found.

The Guardian is also forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented – for the first time in memory – from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret.

The only fact the Guardian can report is that the case involves the London solicitors Carter-Ruck, who specialise in suing the media for clients, who include individuals or global corporations.

The Guardian has vowed urgently to go to court to overturn the gag on its reporting. The editor, Alan Rusbridger, said: “The media laws in this country increasingly place newspapers in a Kafkaesque world in which we cannot tell the public anything about information which is being suppressed, nor the proceedings which suppress it. It is doubly menacing when those restraints include the reporting of parliament itself.”

The media lawyer Geoffrey Robertson QC said Lord Denning ruled in the 1970s that “whatever comments are made in parliament” can be reported in newspapers without fear of contempt.

He said: “Four rebel MPs asked questions giving the identity of ‘Colonel B’, granted anonymity by a judge on grounds of ‘national security’. The DPP threatened the press might be prosecuted for contempt, but most published.”

The right to report parliament was the subject of many struggles in the 18th century, with the MP and journalist John Wilkes fighting every authority – up to the king – over the right to keep the public informed. After Wilkes’s battle, wrote the historian Robert Hargreaves, “it gradually became accepted that the public had a constitutional right to know what their elected representatives were up to”.

Looks like the GAG is based on what BBC and Guardian exposed on Trafigura’s toxic dumping in Ivory Coast. Wikileaks has the full Minton Report.

What is Roman’s Crime?

The law in most democratic and civilised nations is very clear when it comes to having sex with a minor: it is statutory rape. It is very clear in most countries – where the law says at what age a person can legally consent to have sex. There are no ambiguities at all when it comes to R A P E!

Rape is a crime. If you do crime, you do time – that’s how it works in civilized societies. Paedophiles are sick in their head, really sick people. Raping a child is a crime that no society should tolerate.

There is nothing consensual sex in the case of the thirteen-year-old girl, Samantha Geimer, who was drugged and raped by noted movie-maker Roman Polanski. Whoopie Goldberg and many others in the US believe that the long arms of justice shouldn’t reach Polanski.

Back in 1977, the day after the crime, Roman Polanski was arrested – and he pleaded guilty. Before the court could sentence him – Polanski fled the US – making France his permanent abode.

In 2002, Hollywood even gave Polanski an Oscar for The Pianist. Whoopie Goldberg thinks what Polanski did to the 13-year-old girl wasn’t a ‘rape-rape’. How convenient it is to come up with different degrees of rape! Roman Polanski drugged and raped a young girl, and then ran away before justice could be served to him. Polanski is a criminal – and he must serve time.

It is also important to ask the question: Given the judicial record it has, can America really treat Polanski as a criminal? He even agreed to pay (or have paid) half a million dollars to the victim; some sort of western bloody money!

It seems to me that Polanski’s crime in the US is that he is the wrong kind of Roman. Though his first name is Roman, he is not a Roman Catholic priest for the law to not chase him for 32 years!

So many Roman Catholic priests have escaped the long arm of justice and escaped prison – because the Roman Catholic Church ‘settled those criminal cases’ outside the court. When it comes to Roman Catholic priests, the American justice system thinks raping a child/minor is a civil offence; let’s say an inconvenience to the American society. The church is only happy to open their ‘war chest of billions’ – collected from the believers – and pay the victims. It seems, in the US, if you are rich and powerful – you can dodge the ‘justice bullet’ – and not spend time in Jail.

How is Roman Polanski’s case any different from a rapist priest? How many rapist priests are in the US prison these days? How many of them roam around free in the US today, because the Catholic Church bought their ‘freedom’ – saved them from spending the rest of their life in a prison cell? Settling such criminal cases out of court – abusing money power is perversion of law, justice and even criminalisation of the state itself.

That said, the law has to be applied evenly to all. Just because Roman Polanski was born to Jewish parents doesn’t make the American legal system to hunt him down in Switzerland. Polanski is not a priest who has access to small children – especially the ones who so innocently believe that this old man is a messenger/agent of God.

I am all for Polanski to be thrown into jail. He is a criminal, no doubt.

Ben Johnson, the 100-m sprinter – was denied his chance of continuing with his profession of running – cause he took drugs to enhance his performance. Ben Johnson was a drug cheat in sport; once he was caught and punished – Johnson lost his career as an athlete. How did Polanski suffer in the three decades after the crime/rape? He continued with his career as a movie-maker and even won many awards!

The American hypocrisy is amazing: they want to condemn and punish Polanski – and yet turn a blind eye towards the child-raping priests!

If they want to crucify Roman the Jew, then they will have to put hundreds or even thousands of Roman Catholic priests in jail.

This is the biggest real Test for the American Justice System. Soon we’ll know how the cancer of crime has spread and is killing the STATE!

REF:
ABC NEWS [Video]

Statutory Rape

Older Posts »