a good decision
Feb. 24th, 2005 03:53 pmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4295007.stm - Maxine Carr, the former girlfriend of Soham murderer Ian Huntley, has been granted an indefinite order protecting her new identity by the High Court.
I think that's entirely properl
I think that's entirely properl
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-24 08:06 am (UTC)If it wasn't for the frenzy stirred up by the newspapers, none of this would be necessary in the first place, but hey! They need to sell copy so why not stir the shit whenever they can? Grr!
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-24 09:48 am (UTC)On the other hand, I also hope that she's got effective advisers as she does seem to be way on the wrong side of clueless about dealing with her own situation and is as likely to blow her own cover again because she doesn't quite grasp how the world works.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-24 10:26 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-24 10:29 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-24 11:35 am (UTC)In any event, she's done her time, she's free; it's clear that there are people out to get her; the only thing a decent society can do is protect her as far as we can.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-24 12:48 pm (UTC)>excused from doing stupid things because somebody else told you to.
Unless you are in the army....
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 02:13 am (UTC)Or is the line here that soldiers are stupid and do stupid things because they're told to?
Either way, bollocks.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 04:24 am (UTC)Please Note: Stupid does not mean "unlawful".
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 09:09 am (UTC)Note that the UCMJ applies to members of the US military service and that the equivalent British legislation is the Army Act 1955, as renewed annually.
Further note that it is equally as likely that civilian organisations issue just as many stupid orders as a given military organisation,
Note, finally, that military organisations which exist on stupid orders tend not to continue existing as they usually get tested to destruction.
In re wetware histrionics, I briefly considered a measured response and then thought, fuck it, he won't get it. So:
Fuck off unless you want to put your money where your mouth is.
Sorry for the distraction, /\/\/ac, I promise this is the last time I rise to this jerk's bait in your LJ.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 10:50 am (UTC)I'm open to having my p.o.v challenged, but not like that.
I define "wetware histrionics" as someone who accuses me of bollocks without actually backing up an outburst without anything more rigorous; sorry if you feel patronized by that but you're hardly convincing me you're capable of anything more.
Regards
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 04:42 am (UTC)it's a paradox - you have to have obedience in a fighting force because otherwise you couldn't get them to go march into a battle, but you have to have smarts for when they're out of the chain of command and needing to deal with something unusual. isn't there a chunk in one of the Tom Holt historicals about it?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 04:56 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 05:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 05:13 am (UTC)Are you possibly mistaking "stupid" for "illegal"? There are many instances of soldiers being told to do stupid things in order to keep them busy (and in basic training to break down some undesirable personality aspects of a soldier finding it hard to adjust to life in the ranks) -- but these are not illegal orders and thus while they can be seen as stupid, they have a purpose and cannot be disobeyed.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 05:36 am (UTC)I don't think 'stupid' is a term you can define rigourosuly enough for debate, let alone it being an emotive word ;-) But I'm honestly not sure what you're saying about the responsibilities of soldiers and the stupid things they can or can't get away with doing - do you think they should be more independant, or held to a different level of account or what? Or what it's got to do with Ms Gullible Carr ;-)
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 07:01 am (UTC)>than the latter.
I assumed that was taken as read. I'd of course edit my comment to make this clear but I can't.
>Or what it's got to do with Ms Gullible Carr ;-)
Me neither. I replied to a comment that simply pointed out an instance where something is not always the case.
BTW considering this has made me miss my train so I sadly won't be able to come down for the gig tonight.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 02:16 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-25 04:24 am (UTC)