Eine Kleine Nichtmusik

Witty and pertinent observations on matters of great significance OR Incoherent jottings on total irrelevancies OR Something else altogether OR All of the above

Wednesday, May 06, 2009

Bombing + beheading = breach of the peace

With the "war on terror" in which we are all supposed to believe, it will come as no surprise that a Muslim extremist who threatened to bomb Glasgow's main synagogue and behead one Jew a week until all Scottish synagogues were closed would attract the attention of the counter-terrorist agencies. So of course when a member of the National Front telephoned the police with a threat to bomb the Glasgow Central Mosque and to behead a Muslim a week until all Scotland's mosques were closed, he was charged with...er.... breach of the peace. WTF?

Update: sentencing has been deferred for a fourth time for reasons which are unclear but probably connected with desperate attempts to find a loophole by which the government can avoid the embarassment of having to lock up a white man (not even a Brazilian for God's sake) just for wanting to murder a few uppity Scottish Muslims. It would never have happened when Charles Clarke was Home Secretary, let me tell you (or Jack Straw, or David Blunkett....)

3 Comments:

At 06 May, 2009 16:05, Blogger JoeinVegas said...

Can't a home grown white guy be a terrorst too?

 
At 06 May, 2009 20:47, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Rob

You know that I know a fair bit about the law. This guy can actually get a year in jail for breach of the peace (I don't think for a moment he will but the court has the power) and if the case had been brought on indictment he could have got life. There's a lot more to breach of the peace than singing in the street at three in the morning! I'll be happy to enlighten you over a dram or three sometime.

I'm afraid I don't buy your conspiracy theory about the deferred sentence tongue in cheek as it undoubtedly is. The boring truth is that chronic inability to take a decision is actually part of the job description for most Scottish Sheriffs of my acquaintance. I wouldn't credit the UK government with the wit to try to interfere in something like this.

Happy blogging.

Cousin-in-Law

 
At 07 May, 2009 03:00, Blogger Rob said...

Hi there CiL (I'll respect your anonymity!). You correctly spotted my encheeked tongue, and I'm sure you're right about indecisive Sheriffs. It's not really a question of what he could get as a sentence if the court were so minded, more the fact (which I'm sure you wouldn't contest) that a Muslim making similar threats to Christians, Jews or indeed Hindus would be automatically tagged as a suspected terrorist and charged accordingly. My point remains even if that would have attracted a lower sentence: why the double standard? (OK, rhetorical question there.)

I look forward to the dram. If you don't fancy blogging yourself, maybe you should drop by on Facebook, that is if my comments about its time-wasting propensities haven't put you off.

Regards to Mrs CiL.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home