Apathy Sketchpad

Here are my NewsBiscuit submissions for the last month. First, one that made the front page:

• Government Agrees Rescue Package For Snowmen (original submission)

Now the others. Tip of the hat to anhodika for inspiring the first one and to Smudge for the headline on the second one. (Community site, see?)

Straw refuses to publish details of amendments to Freedom of Information Act

Following backlash against the scrapped publication of Parliamentary minutes from the run-up to the Iraq war, Jack Straw has announced that there will be a series of reforms to the current Freedom of Information Act. He promised reporters that the new Act would be more efficient and less easily circumvented, but he refused to divulge how this would be achieved or exactly what the proposals were.

Speaking on BBC Radio 7, he said that the new rules would stop politicians ‘publishing embarassing information in obscure places where it would be unlikely to be widely seen, such as Hansard or this show’. When asked where the information would instead be published, Straw looked puzzled, and after a pause said that the new proposals favoured openness but that the specifics of the proposals were not intended for public dissemination.

Straw went on to explain that while it is important that the public has a right to access information about government, that must be balanced with other concerns, such as security. ‘Of the nation?’ prompted the presenter, to which Straw replied, ‘well yes, obviously, but also of my job.’ When pressed for more information, he explained that ‘if the public know how to get information, then so do al-Qaeda, and that could pose serious threats.’ Instead, the government is set to bring in a replacement Act, whereby the public has a right to access large amounts of government information, including Parliamentary minutes and MPs’ expenses, but will not be told how to do so. He promised, however, that details of the process would be made freely available to anyone who asked to see them, as long as they submit their request in a correctly formatted letter to the new Information Commissioner’s office, whose address was also available on properly presented request.

The new Act is expected to come into force at the start of April, however Straw promised that information important to the public, such as war minutes and MPs’ expenses, would be covered by the new rules immediately ‘to aid transparency in government’.

Read the rest of this entry »

From time to time I submit stuff to Newsbiscuit. More occasionally they use it. Their submission board is pretty awkward to work, though, so I thought I’d post my favourites on this blog also, where I can keep an eye on them. First, the ones they used:

• Large Hadron Collider “may destroy universe”, say stupid people (original submission)
• Department for Children, Schools and Families to ‘give up on schools’ (original submission)
• Labour to use ‘guest leaders’ (original submission)
• Halloween update; local youths ‘less frightening than usual’ (original submission)
• Book of phone numbers ‘left on doorstep’ (original submission)

(I do like my headlines-with-quotes-in.)

Next, some of the ones they didn’t. I’ll put most of them after the fold, since there are a lot of them. Also, some might be offensive if you’re easily offended. First, though, my favourite, from early to mid October:

Gordon Brown has new kitchen sink installed under anti-terrorism laws

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has had his kitchen refitted under laws brought in in the wake of the September 11th and July 7th terrorist attacks.

The refit was proposed in August, as part of a larger reorganisation of Number 10. Brown’s wife Sarah raised objections to the plans at an early stage, saying that the new system would make cooking difficult and that she didn’t like the colour. It seemed that the deadlock was unresolvable until September 17th, when the Prime Minister realised he could use existing anti-terror laws to push the installation through without first gaining his wife’s approval.

Critics have claimed that this is “a clear abuse” of the power handed to the PM’s office by these new rules. One backbench MP said that while he understood the need to have special new measures to deal with the new kind of threat faced today, the government had taken advantage of the fear to pass laws granting themselves more power than they had ever been elected to. Other recent applications of the anti-terror laws include freezing the assets of Iceland UK, resolving the double-booking of a conference room in Parliament, and the emergency resolution on Tuesday which mandated it was James’ turn to do the washing up.

Brown has insisted that neither he nor the government has abused the trust placed in them by Parliament, saying that there are “other kinds of terrorism” besides violent attacks on civilians, and that these might be said to include refusal to wash dishes or bad taste in kitchen units.

The House of Lords is expected to overturn the decision, but James Brown has said that as he’s already done the washing up, it’s too late to reverse the damage and a system must be put in place to prevent these situations from arising in the first place.

Read the rest of this entry »

Answers to ‘Why Did You Vote For Bush?’:

You may not like our president but you’d better thank God he’s in office. My world – your world -is much safer because President Bush understands the need to seek out and punish those who have and would continue to harm us. … Just remember that you sleep in safety tonight because Americans, led by our president, are willing to die for your safety.
Gary Williams, Granbury, Texas

Only because the UK doesn’t have any oil.

Bush has turned the recession into a growing economy… That’s worth my vote any day.
Joe Brassard, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

How’s that working out for you?

I voted for Bush because he is an honourable man who makes decisions based on principles, not polls and a man who can be taken at his word. Unfortunately, this seems to be a rarity among politicians.
Cathy Jones, Bayonet Point, Florida

He panders to his conservative base rather than doing what the public want.

President Bush may be polarizing in his international policies, but at least I can be certain that he will not allow terrorist actions to go unpunished…
Hayley, Dallas, Texas, USA

…whether they did it or not.

I voted for Bush to usher in the complete and utter destruction of the United States. Sometimes, you just have to tear it all down and start over again. No one will destroy America faster than Bush. Go Bush!
Tim, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Fair enough.

Your average European needs to watch the movie “Open Range” to better understand their American cousins. We all must defend Western Civilization before it is subsumed by the barbarians. The Europeans are going to (not) breed themselves out of existence and only the US will be left to carry on the civilization that has come to us all from the Greeks, through the Romans and brought into the modern age by the Europeans.
Mark Salas, Boswell, OK

You voted for Bush because you’re a crazy person. Okay.

He makes me feel safe.
Danielle, Illinois, USA

Well, he would. ‘Danielle’ is not a very Islamic-sounding name.

Bush is against abortion and that is all that matters to me. That is the only issue I consider and there are a lot of Americans who feel the same way. Some people say it is ignorant to disregard the other issues, and maybe it is, but that is how I feel.
Bertha, Upstate NY

As long as we’re clear.

If he had been president in the 90’s UBL [Usama bin Laden?] would not have gotten away with everything he has done. He will be caught by President Bush, that most American believe, even if the liberal media doesn’t want to report what Americans really feel. President Bush is Great!
Rebecca Saunders, Houston Texas

Certainly bin Laden never managed any major terrorist attacks durng Bush’s presidency. Unless us Democrats are forgetting something, as Hayley seems to think.

I voted for Bush because I am a Bible-thumping right-wing gun lunatic who hates gays, isn’t that right? That’s not actually true, but it doesn’t matter what the reality is, because that’s how the European media will depict it. According to them, if I don’t agree with pacifism and appeasement, I must be an inbred redneck idiot. So I suppose that’s why I voted for Bush: I am an idiot.
Gonzalo Rodriguez, London, UK

As long as we’re clear.

I voted for George Bush (to the disapproving consternation of my European cousins) because an election is a choice, and the two candidates offered two different approaches to leadership.

I think they wanted more than “because there was an election”.

Ever since an attempt was made in the 1770s to tax our favourite breakfast beverage, Americans have never liked being told what we should do, or how we should do it.

From what I have read, I expect the majority of the European populace, most of whom I assume were born post-war, not to approve of the American people’s decision. For insight, however, I suggest that holidays or other visits to the US not be limited to Boston, New York and Los Angeles.
Arthur Xanthos, New York City, USA

Anyone?

Because he doesn’t believe that our foreign policy needs a global test. Europe needs to get on board with us or get left behind!
Ben Rice, Chambersburg, Pennsylvania

Do you know what foreign policy is?

Staunch supporter of economic freedom for all Americans and freedom for all nations 
Miek Kondracki, American in Poland

Except Iraq. And Afghanistan. And parts of Cuba.

And America.

I voted for George because: 
1. He is intelligent. He graduated from Harvard Business School. They don’t give out free passes there. 

Yeah…

2. He has character. I grew up in backwoods Texas where bank loans were granted upon a handshake. Your word was your bond.
Warren, Salisbury, NC, USA

How’s that working out for you?

I voted for Bush because I will not have Bruce Springsteen, Gerhard Schroeder, Osama Bin Laden and Michael Moore telling me who to vote for.
Peter Sosniak, New York

Except for bin Laden.

The US was founded on Judeo-Christian values and a majority of Americans still hold close to these. Some may want to deny this, some may be deceived by what they see on the television, and some actually may not know this. This is hard to comprehend for a lot Europeans who have discarded these values and embraced secularism.
Michael, Texas

You voted Bush because you don’t understand the way your country works. Makes sense.

Jesus Christ, the American flag, the Ten Commandments, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are as sacred as the Bill of Rights.

So, not sacred, then.

Only President Bush and the Republicans have consistently stood up for these ideals.
David Belland, USA

Liberty? Really?

And Bush has shown the heart to bring democracy to two of the worst places on earth – Afghanistan and Iraq.
John, Boston, Mass, USA

Heart, maybe. Competence would have been a useful ally.

Bush is our president, we elected him, we care about religion, and Europe better get used to it because we’re not about to let you vote!
John, Stockholm, Sweden

Hang on, didn’t John from Boston just say… oh, forget it.

I voted for Mr Bush because he stands for the values as defined by the word of God.
Mike McF, Frisco, Texas, USA

Such as slavery.

I hope his second term will bring peace and democracy to the troubled regions of the world and domestically bring greater prosperity not only to America but also to the Third world.
Ben, New York

That would have been nice.

To the rest of the world, whose comments have been nothing but disparaging: You simply do not understand Americans! You never have, and I doubt that you will ever fully understand our thought process…
Leah, Richmond, VA

I expect so.

I voted for President Bush, because what others saw as stubbornness and arrogance… I saw as strength and perseverance.
Laura, USA

As long as we’re clear.

I voted for Bush because I could not stand the elitist media and the pundits telling me that he was a fool. I was tired of people like Michael Moore trying to influence my decision by making movies that had only one purpose – tear down the president. I disagree with many of his policies and would not have voted for him except for the fact that I am sick and tired of these people telling me that I am not smart enough to figure out for myself what is right and what is wrong. The Republicans should thank Moore and give him a prominent table at the inauguration!
Michael C, NY, USA

It just got on my nerves so much that people who only get a sliver of heavily bias coverage about America could hold such closed-minded opinions about our elections. Maybe four more years will give you a chance to open your minds to new ideas and consider that there are Americans who have a right to believe differently than you.
Andrew, Washington, DC

So you won’t be voting for a black liberal in four years, then?

I voted for Bush, so that he can clean up all his mess during his second term. No-one else should be made responsible for all his folly and self-disillusioned war on terror. The only war that the world needs to fight is to eradicate poverty, diseases, genocide, atrocity and many unjust situations in many parts of the world. These are the real terrors that breeds human terrorists. Go to the roots of the cause. Don’t try to be a fool to treat symptoms of these terrors.
Jaime Stuart

He’s not an unruly child, you twat, he’s the President! While you’re teaching him a lesson which he won’t get, other people are being tortured horribly to death. You twat.

He needs to win the heart of the world by fighting this war more broadly and involving every one with a freedom flag. We hail Bush. 
Saurabh K, Santa Cruz, CA

And, by Godwin’s Law, that is the end.

Apparently, tomorrow George W Bush is going to give a big speech at the Republican convention, a pointless bit of formality that has to be done before McCain will be allowed to run for President under a Republican banner. On Tuesday, McCain will seek to downplay the association with Bush (lest any of us notice that he’s borrowed all Bush’s pulicies) by associating himself with someone else: he’s naming his running mate.

I can’t see how this could help him. Since, if elected, John McCain is definitely going to die in office, he’s basically naming his Gordon Brown. Unfortunately, he only has two options. He can pick someone nobody’s heard of, in which case he’s basically pitching an unknown quantity against a far more popular unknown quantity, or else he can pick a high profile Republican, the problem there being that they’re all mental.

It’ll be interesting to see who he picks, but there’s no way it should ever make any difference.

From Thursday’s Times:

George Bush admitted yesterday for the first time that terror suspects had been held in secret CIA prisons outside US borders, saying that they were now being transferred to Guantanamo Bay.

Oh, well that’s alright, then, isn’t it?