The gag has been dropped. Also: write a freaking constitution already. 
*NM*
Ghavrel Send a noteboard - 14/10/2009 12:40:01 AM
*NM*
Ghavrel Send a noteboard - 14/10/2009 12:40:01 AM
I really, really enjoyed this particular piece. I never knew this much space could be used to say "we are not allowed to tell you anything". I am not being snarky. I love it. It is beautiful. And it really does pique my curiosity.
The Guardian has been prevented from reporting parliamentary proceedings on legal grounds which appear to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 Bill of Rights.
Today's published Commons order papers contain a question to be answered by a minister later this week. The Guardian is prevented from identifying the MP who has asked the question, what the question is, which minister might answer it, or where the question is to be found.
The Guardian is also forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented – for the first time in memory – from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret.
More in link.
Has anyone seen State of Play? (The real one, not the new silly one with Russel Crowe, but the one where Bill Nighy is the editor.) I am reminded of one of the most spectacular scenes there.
The Guardian has been prevented from reporting parliamentary proceedings on legal grounds which appear to call into question privileges guaranteeing free speech established under the 1688 Bill of Rights.
Today's published Commons order papers contain a question to be answered by a minister later this week. The Guardian is prevented from identifying the MP who has asked the question, what the question is, which minister might answer it, or where the question is to be found.
The Guardian is also forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented – for the first time in memory – from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret.
More in link.
Has anyone seen State of Play? (The real one, not the new silly one with Russel Crowe, but the one where Bill Nighy is the editor.) I am reminded of one of the most spectacular scenes there.
"We feel safe when we read what we recognise, what does not challenge our way of thinking.... a steady acceptance of pre-arranged patterns leads to the inability to question what we are told."
~Camilla
Ghavrel is Ghavrel is Ghavrel
*MySmiley*
~Camilla
Ghavrel is Ghavrel is Ghavrel
*MySmiley*
Guardian gagged
- 13/10/2009 10:19:23 AM
1114 Views
The new "silly" one is quite excellent, thankyouverymuch *NM*
- 13/10/2009 10:52:33 AM
339 Views
*NM*
- 13/10/2009 10:52:33 AM
339 Views
And you do NOT replace David Morissey with Ben Affleck
- 13/10/2009 11:28:51 AM
703 Views
It was Affleck's best performance to date
- 13/10/2009 11:39:22 AM
710 Views
Re: It was Affleck's best performance to date
- 13/10/2009 11:52:16 AM
711 Views
This argument is irrelevant.
- 13/10/2009 01:27:01 PM
695 Views
Re: This argument is irrelevant.
- 13/10/2009 02:39:35 PM
703 Views
*NM*
Apparently....
- 13/10/2009 01:41:39 PM
718 Views
Fascinating
- 13/10/2009 02:40:58 PM
728 Views
The article itself is highly amusing. The content... somewhat disturbing actually.
- 13/10/2009 05:06:38 PM
730 Views
I'm very curious
- 13/10/2009 05:10:03 PM
1052 Views
The gag has been dropped. Also: write a freaking constitution already. *NM*
- 14/10/2009 12:40:01 AM
348 Views
*NM*
- 14/10/2009 12:40:01 AM
348 Views
Don't really need one. There is an earlier rulin which makes this one problematic, I think?
- 14/10/2009 08:49:22 AM
693 Views
Re: Guardian gagged
- 15/10/2009 12:16:17 AM
877 Views
Re: Guardian gagged
- 15/10/2009 09:43:00 AM
655 Views