19.12.04
"Framing"
While we dither about on the American left talking about how to say the things we really want to say in order that we most effectively trick people into voting for us, over there in Britain there's an actual good example of what "framing" is all about. From the House of Lords, no less (current occupants of the Senate are making that much-mocked institution look...hmmm, no so bad?). These are one Lord Hoffman's remarks (via William Gibson's blog) on the defeat of a measure in Britain which would have given the guvmint the right to indefinitely detain terror suspects without evidence (sound familiar?):
Yeah, I can think of exactly one person in this country who could formulate - much less get away with - saying something even approaching this (see Byrd, Robert).
This is a nation which has been tested in adversity, which has survived physical destruction and catastrophic loss of life. I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive Al-Qaeda. The Spanish people have not said that what happened in Madrid, hideous crime as it was, threatened the life of their nation. Their legendary pride would not allow it. Terrorist violence, serious as it is, does not threaten our institutions of government or our existence as a civil community….
Such a power in any form is not compatible with our constitution. The real threat to the life of the nation, in the sense of a people living in accordance with its traditional laws and political values, comes not from terrorism but from laws such as these. That is the true measure of what terrorism may achieve. It is for Parliament to decide whether to give the terrorists such a victory.
Yeah, I can think of exactly one person in this country who could formulate - much less get away with - saying something even approaching this (see Byrd, Robert).
perma-linky posted by jkd : 10:59
