Monday, 2 March 2009

Harriet Harman: Perverting the Course of Justice?

Further to Gordon Brown's intention to undermine or bypass the Rule of Law the other day, we now have Harriet Harman QC MP saying this on the Andrew Mmmmmaaaaarr* Show:
"Sir Fred should not be counting on being £650,000 a year better off as a result of this because it is not going to happen," she said.

"The Prime Minister has said it is not acceptable and therefore it will not be accepted.

"It might be enforceable in a court of law this contract, but it's not enforceable in the court of public opinion and that's where the Government steps in."
So, we have a person who is a Lawyer, an MP, a Queen's Council, Leader of the House of Commons and Lord Privy Seal who is openly and brazenly pushing for subverting the Rule of Law in exchange for the Rule of the Mob.**

Harriet Harman should not only be stripped of her QC, Leader of the House and Lord Privy Seal position, but should be, in my opinion, indicted for attempting to pervert the course of Justice.

If the "Court of Public Opinion" had any force, Harriet, Gordon Brown and the entire pestilential pustule that is the Parliamentary Labour Party would have been dragged out into the street and shot like the dogs they are - and that would be the humane option for them, as I suspect many would like to see a Spandau Ballet.

However, I believe in the Rule of Law, so that is not a move I endorse. Rule of Law is more important than "voting". Democracy serves two purposes, as the least bad way to preserve and protect the Rule of Law and as a means to remove bad government. It is not very good at installing good government as we have seen for decades. 

With Rule of Law upheld, the Government becomes far less important, for if it is obeying the Rule of Law it will busy itself with issues of Law and Order and National Defence and be doing all it can to keep it and other people's hands off our property, mouths, ears and bodies.

Some hope that the Guardianistas and other sorts have now seen how New Labour (and indeed Old Labour given half a chance) is Authoritarian and most certainly no friend of Civil Liberties, let alone the Economic Liberties which most never agreed with in the first place - except for themselves and their own children, natch. I am not sure if they have had a deep enough realisation. I do wonder if they will remain in denial despite the now constant dissonance all around them. I bet they will protest that this is not "real" or "proper" Social Democracy or even Socialism. They will remain in denial that while the State is seen as "the answer" or in any way as a "good", it will grow and grow, taking over more and more of our lives. It is in its DNA. To deny it is to deny fungus. 

The State needs to be considered a necessary evil that needs constant re-justification in what it does. Unless it is restrained by our constitutional DNA and the constant vigilance of the population and our institutions of Law, it will cease to be a useful organ of life and turn into a tumour that will drain our resources, cause untold pain and eventually kill us all.

The only party that clearly understands this about the State and recognises the true value and supremacy of the Rule of Law and its best articulation and realisation in the form of English Common Law, is the Libertarian Party, UK.

* Interviewer for the Sheeple.
** I also consider the move as a means for Harriet to appear to support Gordon Brown. It is of zero cost to HH, though, as I am quite sure she already wanted to do this or worse. One can even see it as a triple win - she gets to kick and humiliate Jacqui "Jackboot" Smith, the Second Home Secretary.