Gary Monro’s blog

Anybody who can bear to pay even scant attention to the European Union (EU) and its naked desire to form an unelected super-state will not be surprised to learn this:

Immigrants to Britain will have to swear an oath of allegiance to EU laws and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, rather than the Queen, under a proposal announced by Brussels.

Franco Frattini, the European Commissioner for justice and security, proposed an “oath of faithfulness” requiring all immigrants to the EU to swear allegiance to the union. He said: “One can get every immigrant to somehow declare they will respect national law, EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.”

My wife is not yet a British citizen but I will fight tooth and bloody nail to make sure that, when she becomes one, she doesn’t swear her allegience to the corrupt, unelected and thoroughly reprehensible bureaucrats of The United States of Europe. My family’s allegiance is to Queen Elizabeth II and whatever’s left of Parliamentary democracy once the Labour Party has finished with it.

Any swearing I do with regards to the EU will be blasphemous, not loyal.

[Thanks, A Tangled Web]

The constitutional affairs minister, Harriet Harman, will allow the relatives of killers’ victims to try to persuade judges to hand out longer prison sentences.

Asked whether a statement from the relatives might affect a judge’s sentencing she said ‘it might’. She added:

“If it means the sentence is higher on a manslaughter than it might otherwise have been at first instance without hearing from the victim’s relatives, then I think that would be a good thing and that would be right.”

So now justice, which at times already seems fairly arbitrary, will take on another dimension as sentences for similar crimes vary according to the articulacy of the relatives of the deceased. Presumably the lower working class - the main victims of crime and also the least articulate - will see sentences imposed on their tormentors fall short of those imposed on the tormentors of the middle classes. Is this any way to dispense justice?

The point of a judicial system is that it - and it only - conducts the trial, considers the facts and then passes judgement. A crime isn’t less or more severe according to the emotional distress of the victims. The crime itself stands alone. If the sentencing isn’t reflecting the seriousness of the crime committed then we have a sentencing issue. Let’s deal with that directly rather than opting for tabloid-friendly populist measures.

We do not need Jerry Springer-like outbursts in the British judicial system.

One of the problems with the story of the London bombing was that the apparent suicide bombers were so unlike previous suicide bombers.

In particular, there was no message left by any of them explaining why they did what they did. Now, al-Jazeera has broadcast a video of the oldest of the bombers, 30 year-old Mohammad Sidique Khan, doing just that. The statement Khan makes in his short video places the blame for his actions on the shoulders of Tony Blair and his Iraq escapades.

Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people and your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters.

Until we feel security, you will be our target. Until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people, we will not stop this fight.

The possibilty, for some time now, is that all four were duped into blowing themselves up. A theory says they were carrying the bombs to where they were to detonate by timer rather than set them off themselves. This theory has two drawbacks. First, police have found no evidence of timing devices at any of the scenes of the explosions. And now this part of Khan’s statement also casts doubts on the unwitting suicide bomber idea:

I’m sure by now the media has painted a suitable picture of me, this predictable propaganda machine will naturally try to put a spin on it to suit the Government and to scare the masses into conforming to their power and wealth obsessed agendas.

These sound like the words of a man who doesn’t expect to be around to actually know whether the media painted a suitable picture or not. Khan, at least, seems to have expected to die.

New Orleans is starting to resemble a battle zone:

A series of huge explosions were reported along the riverfront in New Orleans today as hundreds of US troops with orders to shoot-to-kill looters and gunmen were sent into the flooded city.

Kathleen Blanco, governor of Louisiana, said: “They have M-16s and they’re locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill, and they are more than willing to do so, and I expect they will.”

As President Bush is roundly blamed for the disaster, the alleged shortage of troops to deal with the disaster and, no doubt, the weather that caused it Ray Nagin, the Mayor New Orleans, made a televised plea for more resources:

“This is a desperate SOS,” he said in a statement. “Right now, we are out of resources at the convention center and don’t anticipate enough buses. We need buses. Currently, the convention center is unsanitary and unsafe, and we are running out of supplies for 15 to 20,000 people.”

Storm survivors are succumbing to searing heat, lack of food and water and insanitary conditions. There is no electricity inside the emergency rescue centres - centres include the Superdome sports stadium (see picture, right). Looters have done their part to hinder the relief effort including attacking hospitals, robbing of survivors and firing at a rescue helicopter.

One is left bewildered by the turn of events in the US. America’s ability to help the tsunami victims so quickly was under-reported but impressed many of us who cared to notice. Similar speed is needed at home. The heat of New Orleans will exacerbate at an escalating rate the problems of insanitary conditions and water polluted by filth, chemicals and dead bodies. As tens of thousands of people remain stranded one can only imagine the diseases that will prosper in such conditions.

Evacuation must be the priority, surely. Feeding people in situ might be the best short-term remedy - it saves lives - but clearly there is no city for people to live in anymore. Houses are damaged or destroyed, the economy has been ruined in some areas and basic amenities - clean water, electricity and communications - just don’t exist in large areas. The government will quickly need a re-housing scheme for tens of thousands of its homeless citizens. America may well need to build its own refugee camps.