Coming Soon: Website Update

Really, really, really. By the end of August the main site will be revamped. Oh well, I am good at making promises!

Is This Puzzle Wrong?

"8, ?, 4, ? 1, ?, 6, ?, 2

Add some odd numbers to make the odd sequence logical (pun intended)."

This an apparently simple number sequence puzzle familiar to you from IQ tests.

I, so far, find it difficult. It may be that there is an ambiguity that needs to be resolved (see my posts on the the title link) or it may be that I am simply stupid.

You decide.

Bob Marley - No Reason

Well, there is no particular reason why I should upload this today. But no reason is ever needed to upload anything by Bob Marley.

Hey! I Know You Are Visting: Leave A Comment!

Zimbio and Stat Counter indicate I have visitors. Please comment on something even if you just want to say this all a load of rubbish and I am wasting my time.

The Great British Menu 2008: Exemplary Sportsmanship

THE JUDGES

I admit that I was addicted to The Great British Menu. What attracted me was not, however, the cooking.

I loved the cooking. I wish the winners would come around to my house and cook me the winning dishes.

Something impressed me more than the cooking.

These chefs were engaged in a heavy competitive exercise. It was just as competitive as a high level sport.

Yet, they HELPED each other. If one of them experienced a difficulty, THERE WAS ALWAYS SOMEONE WHO WOULD HELP THEM.

These guys are to be applauded for their humanity and sportsmanship.

We cannot now refer to cricket as a game that is conducted with an exemplary reference to a moral code but we can say that our chefs represent a league of true gentlemen.

They played hard and they never cheated. If an opponent fell, they helped him up. They did not want to win by fair means or foul. They only wanted to win fairly.

I applaud all of them.

Dead Embryos

This is a simple matter.

Should we use them to save lives?

The answer to the question is yes.

Manic Miner

Another free game today for fans of old games. Manic Miner was probably the best game for the ZX Spectrum. Older readers may remember this machine; which was the first really affordable PC. It worked with a TV set and a cassette tape recorder. Younger readers may regard such a primitive set up as, well, prehistoric. Consult the link to reassure yourself that I am not pulling your collective legs.

Click on the Manic Miner link to go directly to the download page for the game. The title link goes to the home page for the distribution site. This site provides many more free downloads of old games and is worth a visit.

I was addicted to Manic Miner during my postgraduate years. It is still a very good game despite the release of Quake IV, Bioshock, GTA IV et al. As is said in the readme supplied by takegame.com:

"Miner Willy, while prospecting down Surbiton way, stumbles upon an ancient, long forgotten mine-shaft. On further exploration, he finds evidence of a lost civilisation far superior to our own, which used automatons to dig deep into the Earth's core to supply the essential raw materials for their advanced industry. After centuries of peace and prosperity, the civilisation was torn apart by war, and lapsed into a long dark age, abandoning their industry and machines. Nobody, however, thought to tell the mine robots to stop working, and through countless aeons they had steadly accumulated a hugh stockpile of valuable metals and minerals, and Miner Willy realises that he now has the opportunity to make his fortune by finding the underground store. Can YOU take the challange and guide Willy through the underground caverns to the surface and riches. In order to move to the next chamber, you must collect all the flashing keys in the room while avoiding nasties like POISONUS PANSIES and SPIDERS and SLIME and worst of all, MANIC MINING ROBOTS. When you have all the keys, you can enter the portal which will now be flashing. The game ends when you have been "got" or fallen heavily three times.

NOTE: This was taken from the original BUG-BYTE inlay. I have never seen any POISONUS PANSIES, SPIDERS or SLIME anywhere in the game.

For those of you who have never played Manic Miner before, all you have to do is collect X number of objects from each screen to open the exit before your air runs out. Sounds easy? Just give it a try."

Try it. You may like it.

Amy Whitehouse: World's Silliest Woman

Yuk! This is is the silliest woman in the world. See the title link. £10m allows you to biff lesser mortals with impunity.

Thai Boxing And Child Abuse: Mum says "It Don't Bother Me."

OK, there are limits to any parent's freedom. That kicks in when you expose your children to harm.

The parents who allow their children to participate in Thai kick boxing are simply the lowest members of our growing underclass.

They are stupid. They have no morality worth speaking of.

The fact that their children have been coached into expressing pleasure in this "sport" means nothing other than that it exemplifies the psychological abuse accompanying the physical abuse.

Where are social services when they are really needed?

Ryanair Again and Again!

Gosh! I thought I would research Ryanair's involvement in legal cases but a quick search on BAILII for the occurrence of the company's name revealed 94 cases in which the name of the company has been mentioned.

I do not say they were a party in each case; merely that this is a more daunting task than I had envisaged.

A love of litigation does not seem uncommon among the wealthy; however parsimonious they might be in other respects.

Previous Posts:

Ryainair Disregards The Law, Again!

The King Canute Defence To Breaching Rights of Privacy

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects a person's right to privacy. There are exceptions. For a more detailed explanation try this site.

None of the exceptions applies in the case of Max Mosley and his interaction with prostitutes. Mr Justice Eady accepted this today:

"A relevant consideration here is whether there is a public interest in revealing the material which is powerful enough to override Mr Mosley's prima facie right to be protected in respect of the intrusive and demeaning nature of the photographs. I have little difficulty in answering that question in the negative. The only reason why these pictures are of interest is because they are mildly salacious and provide an opportunity to have a snigger at the expense of the participants. Insofar as the public was ever entitled to know about Mr Mosley's sexual tastes at all, the matter has already been done to death since the original coverage in the News of the World. There is no legitimate element of public interest which would be served by the additional disclosure of the edited footage, at this stage, on the Respondent's website."

A clear case then that The News of the World breached Mr Mosley's Article 8 rights and had no public interest defence. They should therefore be restrained from further publication of the video. Well, no, actually.

Paragraphs 22-24 of Eady J's judgment are as follows:

"When it comes to privacy, however, Mr Price emphasises that, when balancing his client's Article 8 rights against the Respondent's Article 10 rights, the visual display of the edited footage serves no legitimate purpose and that its grossly intrusive nature is unnecessary and disproportionate.

I was reminded of a passage in the speech of Lord Hoffmann in Campbell v. MGN Limited [2004] 2 AC 457, 475 at [60], where he referred to a hypothetical case in which there would be a public interest in the disclosure of the existence of a sexual relationship (e.g. because of corrupt favours), but where the addition of salacious details or intimate photographs would be disproportionate to any legitimate purpose and unacceptable. He observed that these would be likely to be intrusive and demeaning – even if accompanying a legitimate disclosure. Mr Price submitted that this would also be true in the present case.

I was also invited to have in mind similar observations made by Waller LJ in D v. L [2004] EMLR 1 at [23]:

"A court may restrain the publication of an improperly obtained photograph even if the taker is free to describe the information which the photographer provides or even if the information revealed by the photograph is in the public domain. It is no answer to the claim to restrain the publication of an improperly obtained photograph that the information portrayed by the photograph is already available in the public domain.""

He also said at paragraph 32:

"I am quite satisfied that Mr Mosley, even though he may have been misunderstood by some commentators, has accepted that he took part in the "S and M" session with the prostitutes. What he is denying is the link to Nazism. I do not consider that the edited footage shows, convincingly, that his denial is false. But, even if it is capable of being so construed, there is nothing to prevent the News of the World reasserting, with whatever prominence it thinks appropriate, that there was Nazi role-play. Accordingly, if there is any case for saying that Mr Mosley's denials have, in any way, misled the public, and that the record should therefore be put straight for that reason, the objective can be achieved effectively without displaying the edited footage of bottoms being spanked."

It seems all to be going Mr Mosley's way so far. He may therefore have been surprised by the closely following paragraph 34:

"As Mr Millar has pointed out, if someone wishes to search on the Internet for the content of the edited footage, there are various ways to access it notwithstanding any order the Court may choose to make imposing limits on the content of the News of the World website. The Court should guard against slipping into playing the role of King Canute. Even though an order may be desirable for the protection of privacy, and may be made in accordance with the principles currently being applied by the courts, there may come a point where it would simply serve no useful purpose and would merely be characterised, in the traditional terminology, as a brutum fulmen. It is inappropriate for the Court to make vain gestures."

And he may have been even more surprised by the conclusion:

"In the circumstances now prevailing, as disclosed in the evidence before me, I have come to the conclusion that the material is so widely accessible that an order in the terms sought would make very little practical difference. One may express this conclusion either by saying that Mr Mosley no longer has any reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of this now widely familiar material or that, even if he has, it has entered the public domain to the extent that there is, in practical terms, no longer anything which the law can protect. The dam has effectively burst. I have, with some reluctance, come to the conclusion that although this material is intrusive and demeaning, and despite the fact that there is no legitimate public interest in its further publication, the granting of an order against this Respondent at the present juncture would merely be a futile gesture. Anyone who wishes to access the footage can easily do so, and there is no point in barring the News of the World from showing what is already available."

I have read the judgment twice and it still seems to mean that newspapers can get away with the Canute defence if they act quickly, generate enough interest and are copied widely over the internet. They are then (a) immune from attack, (b) can then get away with republication of material originally published in breach of Article 8 and (c) profit from that republication.

THE CANUTE DEFENCE: A GUIDE FOR NEWSPAPERS:

(1) Obtain information in breach of a person's human rights.

(2) Do so illegally if that is to your taste.

(3) Put it up on your website until you receive a letter of protest from that person's solicitors.

(4) Immediately take it down.

(5) Tell the court that so many copies were made whilst it was (illegally) on your site that there is no point in restraining you from putting it back up.

(6) You then say: "Yah! Booh! Sucks!" to the complainant.

QUIZ QUESTIONS:

(1) What principles were applied here (if any)?

(2) Even if the material is now in the public domain, should The News of the World be allowed to make further profit from admittedly unlawful behaviour - even if other people will do so?

(3) Does it make any difference to your answers to the above two questions that you are or may be personally disgusted by Max Mosley's behaviour?

(4) Should it?

(5) Are any of the above "leading questions" and, if so, which?

IMPORTANT NOTE:

I hold no brief for Max Mosley and I have no prurient interest in his personal life. I have not posted before concerning this and have not linked to the "salacious" material, although ordinarily I would not hesitate to do so. This post relates to an important decision on Human Rights and issues of principle. I hope Mr Mosley appeals. Not for his sake but because we need something better on this subject than, I am afraid, Eady J's judgment provides.?

Genome Master Of The Universe Believes In God

I am looking forward to the publication of The Language of God by Francis Collins.

I am not encouraged, however, by the asserted basis of his claim to authority:

"His epiphany came when he went hiking through the Cascade Mountains in Washington state. He said: “It was a beautiful afternoon and suddenly the remarkable beauty of creation around me was so overwhelming, I felt, ‘I cannot resist this another moment’.”

Collins believes that science cannot be used to refute the existence of God because it is confined to the “natural” world. In this light he believes miracles are a real possibility. “If one is willing to accept the existence of God or some supernatural force outside nature then it is not a logical problem to admit that, occasionally, a supernatural force might stage an invasion,” he says."

If that is the foundation for his mere assertions, can we really expect a rigorous intellectual argument, or can we only expect a bunch of improbable declamations?

I accept that it is unfair to judge an author in advance of publication but this surely does not augur well.

Cast your runes carefully.

Deleted Post re Sebastian Coe and Tim Henman

I deleted a post this morning. I do not normally do this. I decided, however, that the conclusions I had drawn (that Lord Coe and Tim Henman were liars and hypocrites) did not necessarily follow from my premises (that they had each made public statements in support of the Chinese Olympics).

My conclusions were non sequiturs. Whatever difficulties I may have had with their arguments, it is entirely possible that they are sincerely espousing beliefs that they genuinely hold. I therefore entirely withdraw all and any such allegations, whether or not I made them or not and whether or not any record of any such allegations survive on the internet or not.

By way of recompense I only include entirely positive images of our two heroes.


Postscript on Site Maintenance:

I am getting the hang now of the new google run dashboard. This means that I might be cluttering up the internet some morewith what is essentially no more than a medieval day book.

The SS: Yes, The Acronym Has The Correct Associations For Our Social Services

The title link leads to what is far from the worst Social Services case of which I am personally aware. Fortunately, the Firm gave up its legal aid franchise some years ago and I no longer have to deal with dispiriting child care cases. This case, however, represents at a fairly average level, the arrogance, incompetence and self-confidence of our SS. That is why it is important. It is not an aberration.

It is the "self-confidence" that really grates. They never admit even the remotest possibility that they could be wrong. Once you come on to their radar; you are finished, your life is finished.

AND IT IS A LOTTERY WHETHER YOU ARE TARGETTED OR NOT!

This is the real disgrace. It is not about funding (although, it is about that as well). It is simply about which neighbour picks up the telephone and reports you.

Read the story; for once the Daily Mail have got it right.

The Martians Have Not Landed

It is being universally reported that the Martians have not landed. Certain British politicians, who are widely suspected to be Martians, are not Martians at all, but have quite other explanations for their unearthly behaviour.

A Very Good Interview with Hugh Laurie of House

The Death Cat

Never let it be said that I do not report miracles.

Apart from the headline article you can view a typical Daily Mail response by, well, clicking on Daily Mail. I hope that will not be too confusing for Daily Mail readers. If it is then they can click here.

A cat's affinity for dying people is hardly unusual in a nursing home.

Cats are wonderful beings and so unlike dogs and humans. Their insouciance is unsurpassed by any other creature. They have an individuality and a complete disregard for man-made law that renders them supremely admirable. Yet, they are not wholly anarchistic and will be lovable and comforting to their human companions when it suits them.

It is the "when it suits them" bit about cats that dog-lovers hate. A dog will obey orders. A dog will fetch a stick but a cat will only fetch a small rolled up ball of silver paper if it happens to be in the mood for a game. If it is not then it will toss you a disdainful look indicating that the whole idea of this game at this time is simply beneath contempt. You will then end up apologising to the cat. No-one apologises to dogs.

Here, in Worthing, England, cats stroll across the road and if they see a car coming, they lie down in the middle of the road and start washing themselves. The car stops. The horn is tooted. Eventually, the cat gets up and strolls nonchalantly to the same side of the road it had come from.

It has made its point. Cats rule. Humans are merely servants or slaves to the cats' needs.

I have not bought The Satanic Verses but...

We only ban what we fear.

To threaten to kill the author takes it a step further.

I have tried to read a Rushdie book or two once (never twice). I did not get very far because they were not very good. They were too, well, Rushdie. Rushdie is, to my mind, a synonym for "boring".

He should not have been knighted. He's not a very good writer. Subject him to literary criticism by all means - even, if you have the willpower and patience, critically assassinate him. But, put a bullet in his brain because of Tony Blair's shallow literary taste! Come on!

All that has been achieved by renewal of the fatwa is to emphasise the degenerate nature of religious belief at its fundamentalist heart.

If further proof were needed that Dawkins is right, here it is. A god who believes in terrorism to enforce belief in himself is, hopefully, a contradiction in terms. But then, god is just that, a contradiction in terms.

Are they twins?

Surely they are!

My Driving Licence, the DVLA and Diabetes

The good people at DVLA (the Driver Vehicle Licencing Authority in the UK) have revoked my driving licence following a minor road accident.

This is because I am a diabetic.

I should add that the police confirmed verbally on the day they would be taking no further action and subsequently confirmed this in writing. That is, not even the most minor road traffic offence (probably, driving without due care and intention - I am a civil litigator not a criminal lawyer) was to be brought, nor was I to be warned or cautioned.

The form I filled in for DVLA asked for details of my consultant and my General Practitioner. I (I think, reasonably) assumed that this meant that they would consult them before reaching a decision.

They did not. This was confirmed when I asked if they had received my fax enclosing a diabetic unit medical opinion following the accident. Apparently, it takes up to 72 hours for a fax to register on the system. It can take up to 15 days for an ordinary letter to register on the system.

They have twelve doctors and "thousands" of medical applications to deal with.

The letter informed me that I could appeal to the Magistrate's Court (months of delay) but, over the telephone, I was told that I could apply for a review.

This, I have done. I will post the results.

Lack of Recent Postings

Not that anyone is interested, or looking, I have been trying to get the main site up.

Nick Griffin Exposes Oxford Students' Totalitarian Views

Oxide Radio has been banned by the student union from interviewing Nick Griffin, the BNP chairman. I have been thus informed by my daughter who also sent a link to an article Death Threats Sent to Oxide DJs in The Oxford Student.

It is sad to be forced to agree with Nick Griffin (his views are disgusting) but he has justifiably complained about this infringement of his right to free speech.

A university is one institution that is entirely dependent on freedom of speech. It ia a pity that every generation of students seems to have to relearn that:

• freedom of speech is worthless if it is extended only to those who share your own views;


• it is your freedom that you risk when you adopt such an attitude because the prevailing view may change against you;


• having accepted the principle that free speech may be curtailed you will have lost the right to complain if your views are then suppressed;


• the way to defeat and undermine false positions is to expose them to the light of open debate; and


• suppression of particular views tends to lend them revolutionary cachet attracting rather than deterrring followers.

University Challenge: Who famously said words to that effect? The answer is at the end.

Oxford University is supposed to be a home to enlightenment and so it is a big disappointment that the students (or some of them) have provided Griffin (whose views they rightly despise) with the opportunity to portray himself as oppressed.

Tony Blair, although not a great fan of his critics being entirely free to express their views, has yet to threaten to assassinate any of them.

What did the students who made this decision think was going to happen as a result of a radio interview, in the course of which I assume the DJs would have challenged Griffin's views? Griffin was going to gain vast support among their fellow students? This does seem to show some disrespect for their fellow students' intelligence.

Answer to Uniiversity Challenge:

You probably thought the answer was Voltaire. It is not. It was a made up saying summing up Voltaire's attitude written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall writing under the pseudonym S G Tallentyre in The Friends of Voltaire.

"The men who had hated [the book], and had not particularly loved Helvétius, flocked round him now. Voltaire forgave him all injuries, intentional or unintentional. 'What a fuss about an omelette!' he had exclaimed when he heard of the burning. How abominably unjust to persecute a man for such an airy trifle as that! 'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,' was his attitude now."

Site Maintenance = Boring Post

I have had a little trouble with site maintenance over the past few days. This had to do with my using google's blogger but hosting the blog on my own site. I started fiddling with the files outside of blogger and seem to have created conflicts. If you can see this post the conflicts have been resolved and I can start posting again. You may wonder why I am bothering since so far I have an audience of 1. You know who you are, Tina. All blogs take time to build an audience, so we will see.

My answer to Tina's comment on an earlier post is as follows:

Wow! I did not cancel a conference at the last minute

I have been to a family law conference at the Gatwick Hilton today. This diary item is, of course, of no general public interest whatsoever. But as so often happens in my life something came up of direct relevance to a case I have in the near future: indeed, tomorrow is the adjourned final hearing. As a committed atheist these serendipitous moments so regularly occurring give me a sense of unease. Did the unsought adjournment occur because someone decided I should go to this conference first? Do I have a guardian angel?