Sim-O

BBC:

Two solicitors who took millions of pounds from compensation payouts given to sick miners have been struck off.

Jim Beresford and Douglas Smith, of Doncaster-based Beresfords Solicitors, had denied 11 counts of serious professional misconduct.

The Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal heard the men acted “unacceptably” by charging clients even though the government was paying their fees.

It found eight of the 11 allegations against the lawyers proven.

Inadequate advice

The law firm argued there was “absolutely nothing wrong” with earning substantial fees from its business conduct.

Beresford, 58, said last year to be Britain’s highest-earning solicitor, and Smith, 52, made millions of pounds from personal injury claims for miners under the government’s coal health compensation scheme.

Tribunal chairman David Leverton said: “If ever there was a group of persons who needed the full care and attention from solicitors, it was these miners.

“Mr Beresford described himself as an entrepreneur. Unfortunately, his attitude allowed himself and Mr Smith to put commercial goals before his clients’ best interests.”

What complete cunts.

Also see: Chicken Yoghurt – The Pits

*I know it’s not nice to wish death on someone, but hey, fuck ’em

Haaretz:

The President of the United Nations General Assembly tried to prevent Israel’s ambassador, Professor Gabriela Shalev, from speaking at a special commemorative plenary session marking 60 years since the UN adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, scheduled for Wednesday.

The General Assembly President, Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, tried to cancel speeches that were to be given by representatives of the unofficial regional group known as “Western European and others,” after he learned that Israel’s ambassador was to represent the group as its rotating chairman.

*Applauds Mr Brockmann* Ooh, hang on. What does it mean ‘tried’?

However, European representatives rejected the motion to cancel the meeting, and voiced outrage at his attempt to prevent the address.

Oh, so the Europeans are ok with a representative of a country that has continously flouted human rights, and in fact its’ very existence is predicated on the abuse of those rights, to speak at the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Once again, the Palestinians are shown to be sub-human. Way to go Europe.

Via

From D-Notice.

Yahoo News:

Christian campaigners have lost their High Court challenge over university researchers being allowed to create human-animal embryos for research purposes. Skip related content

The Christian Legal Centre (CLC) and Comment on Reproductive Ethics (Core) were refused permission to bring a test case application for judicial review. Mrs Justice Dobbs, sitting at the High Court in London, ruled that the application was “totally without merit”.

The campaigners wanted to overturn a decision of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in January this year, granting research licences to scientists at Newcastle University and King’s College London.

Heh.

So, in another ‘looking after the children’ move, fags are going the same way as dodgy pr0n: under the counter.
And the reason?
The Guardian:

[Health Secretary Alan Johnson said] “When they [children] see a point of sale display and as a result of seeing of it they take up smoking … it’s the key evidence as to why 200,000 11-15 year-olds are smoking,” said Johnson.

You what? Is Mr Johnson seriously trying to tell me that spotty youths are going about their business, of buying football cards and Special Brew, spy this:
[[popup:fags.jpg:(thumbnail)::1:center]]
and suddenly, they are stood there, jaw open, dribble running down their chin, staring, mesmerised by the beauty of the cigarette display. The only thought running through their heads is “Pretty packets. Gotta have”.

That can’t be right, can it? If it is, then surely the logic follows that if you hide the spirits and booze, that’ll be the end of Binge Drink Britian.
It’s a good job kids don’t spend much time in pharmacists, their shelves are positively sexy.

Press Complaints Commission:

The Editors’ Code of Practice Committee, which writes and revises the voluntary code of standards overseen by the Press Complaints Commission, is undertaking its annual review of the Code.

It welcomes suggestions from the public, civil society and the industry on how the Code might be revised to improve the system of self-regulation of the press, of which it is an essential component.

Suggestions should be sent as soon as possible, but no later than 31 January, 2009 to:

Ian Beales, Code Committee Secretary,
PO Box 235, Stonehouse,
Glos
GL10 3UF.

Or by email to: ianbeales@mac.com

Here’s a suggestion for starters, how about having non-industry people on the commitee so that the commitee can be and be seen to be a little more independent.
I don’t know about you, but if I had to submit a serious complaint to the PCC, I wouldn’t be especially confident it’s neutrality.

Here’s why:

The Editors’ Code committee members are:

• Chairman, Paul Dacre, Daily Mail
• Neil Benson, Trinity Mirror’s regional newspapers
• Adrian Faber, Express and Star, Wolverhampton
• Mike Gilson, The Scotsman
• Douglas Melloy, Rotherham and South Yorkshire Advertiser
• Ian Murray, Southern Evening Echo
• David Pollington, The Sunday Post
• Jonathan Grun, Press Association
• Alan Rusbridger, The Guardian
• June Smith-Sheppard, Pick Me Up magazine
• Neil Wallis, News of the World
• Harriet Wilson, Conde Nast magazines
• John Witherow, Sunday Times.

Did no one at Chorley FM really not think the strap line “coming in your ears” is just a little bit, well, dirty?

[[image:dirty_ears.gif:Chorley FM. Hmm, nice:center:0]]
(Sorry for the quality of the picture. It’s taken with a shit phone on full zoom)

Via

CommonDreams.org:

Governments from around the world today began signing an international convention banning the production of cluster bombs…There will, however, be a number of notable absentees, including the US, China, Russia, India and Pakistan as well as Israel, which fired many cluster bombs during the 2006 Lebanon war

It’s a start…

Via

Alex Hilton is in the shit and asking for help.

I sold Labourhome in July, though I still run it and with no interference from the new owner.

However, last year, someone started a defamation action against me over a Labourhome article and the expenses are bourne by me, they were not transferred to Progressive Media, the new owner.

So far this legal case has cost me £4,022 and it is still on-going. This is my plea to Labourhome readers for contributions towards my legal costs.

Harrys’ Place:

What you can do – and what I am doing – is giving some money to Alex. He’d do the same for us, if we were in the same boat.

This is a matter of principle.

No he wouldn’t (that’s just one example and didn’t even involve giving money) so fuck him. And I’m skint.

Although I do think that it is a bit off not accepting the offer of the right of reply.

Dave Osler (also being sued by this person):

It’s not time to launch a ‘Free the Osler One’ campaign just yet. I am mounting a defence of justification and fair comment, and like Alex, I am confident of victory.

Via

BBC:

The jury at the inquest into the death of Jean Charles de Menezes will not be able to consider a verdict of unlawful killing, the coroner has said.

Sir Michael Wright said that having heard all the evidence, a verdict of unlawful killing was “not justified”.

The title is obviously based on what Henry Ford told his customers with regard to the colour they could have their Model T painted.
The jury in the inquest have been told a similar thing, any verdict as long as it isn’t the polices fault.
The jury can return an open or narrative verdict or one of lawful killing. Oh, the narrative must not blame the police. It wasn’t their fault you see. They weren’t there. Hadn’t been to Stockwell for a couple of days actually. Ask Dave. He’ll tell you. The police were with him. All day.

The jury must place the fault at the feet of either Jean Charles de Menezes, the victim, or on absolutley no one at all because Cressida Dick, and that is a Disney villian name if ever I heard one, the police chief bore “no personal culpability” at the trial of the Met that found them guilty of, an understated charge, of Endangering the Public under Health and Safety. Where or not Cressida is personally responsible or not, I don’t know, but the police as a body are.

Lets look at the facts:
The rozzers have been found guilty of endangering the public but the inquest cannot find that a man was killed by that transgression (is that the proper use of that word?). If the inquest did find that de Menezes was killed by the police breaking H & S law, then that would mean the police were guilty of unlawfully killing someone.

1. A jury cannot return a verdict of unlawful killing of a man the police shot dead after wrongly identifying him
2. the police were found guilty of ‘endangering the public’, under H&S law
3. as a direct result of the police ‘endangering the public’ a man has died.
4. if a man is wrongly jailed, due to mistaken identity, would he be lawfully imprisoned? No, of course not.

According to my logic, items 2 & 3 points to police being responsible for Jean Charles death and item shows he was unlawfully killed.
This means that the jury are being told to return a false verdict.
Jean Charles de Menezes didn’t die from misadventure.
Or by an accident.
Or by suicide.
Or from natural causes.
Or because he was on a wanted list.

Or from a long rambling story that doesn’t involve the words ‘identity’, ‘mistaken’, ‘shoot’, ‘police’ or ‘sniper’.