news this morning on the radio, also apparently her solicitor is saying she does not have immunity. In that case we should be applying for extradition and if she receives a penalty for the death the police/courts should also examine if she was trying to avoid justice and if she was, add a bit for that.

I would have expected that the police could have been able to check on the day, if someone has diplomatic immunity. If there is no system in place to check then one should be created

macafee2

I've just read she has no immunity only because she has said she will not be leaving USA. Therefore, according to the USA, the question of dip immunity is no longer relevant. ? Sounds very much like US lawyer double speak. They'll probably get a hit TV series out of it with Cruise or Madonna.

The $ is very heavily propped up courtesy of more than a bit of goodwill from some parts of the world. The yanks do have a lot of national debt and without the sub for their currency, a sub which some think is not fair and should be shared among other currencies, their economy and the lifestyle they take for granted might not fair so well. They need to be encouraged to drag themselves out of the gutter which some of them aspire to and which puts them on the very same pedestal of shame as Gaddafi's Libya of April 1984. Shame on all concerned ... you are not smart and you bring disgrace on the vast majority of decent Americans. :flushed:

In the news today: The deceased's family lawyer says there is a well known and comprehensive list of all those eligible for Dip Immunity to enable necessary procedures to be adopted in the event of the question arising.

Neither the driver, nor her 'diplomatic attache' husband, are among the some 20,000 names on it. Therefore it has been known since the accident whether or not she was entitled because her husband was definitely not and therefore not entitled to Dip Immunity. The lawyer also says this revelation also has a number of consequences. I should say so.

One thing of concern is the allegation that the missing husband is a member of USA security, read secret, services. Also, was he in the country legitimately and what were the circumstances surrounding his leaving (and leaving his wife to face the music?). Another thing of concern is the identity and source of the individual who first put it about that it was an Immunity matter.

The Foreign Office now state 'the matter is now in the hands of police and the Crown Prosecution Service'. Our PM says the US has been 'absolutely ruthless' in its safeguarding of their citizens.

Are we now getting into matters that might arouse some official sanction of reporting? I wish UK defence of its citizens might be similar, but deplore the 'absolutely ruthless' activity of the US state. I'm conflicted, I wonder who else is.

On the other hand, I do wish everybody would behave responsibly, respectably and truthfully, and just damn well own up when they flagrantly do something wrong - like killing somebody. Causing a death should mean automatic disbarment from any list, no matter whom or why, or wherever.

I agree with yours about many Americans. The antics and various habits of some influential or entertainment-based individuals are by no means typical of the general population, just as the same applies here.

Some years ago we were in Hawaii and found ourselves stranded at the far end of the island. Some US service men and their wives, they had 'borrowed' a base troop carrier, took us the full length of the island, miles out of their way. It was the most enjoyable trip ever, with much mutual mockery of national stereotypes. Their helpless laughter at my impersonation of John Wayne was a joy. Strangely, they were not impressed with my Tonto. We still correspond with two of them some 15 years later. It is a land of great pride let down by a few renegades.

the whole situation is sad. For members of the public, like with anything important, how the naughty word are we to know what the truth is and how are we to make an informed decision?
The news reporting is telling us different things.

macafee2

The truth is there is no such thing and can be many things. The truth is whatever we are told by those that assume they know best. That's the benefit of a free press and why it is so valuable.

It's also why the internet can be a good thing used badly. It's easy to plant a seed and watch it grow whilst assuming no responsibility for the outcome. Exactly what the other thread on Extinction Rebellion is about.

Using impressionable or immature minds to proselytise a new or alternative religion is easy because they are largely too young to have experienced the phenomenon. When they mature it's too late, the damage is done and the instigators have moved on. It usually has leaders that continually reinvent themselves to start newer religions that they can exploit. That's the truth.

Too true. Take the popular music industry. How many older people measure their lives by memories of the songs they knew in their teens? And derive great pleasure and nostalgia from it? Those simple school-yard skipping songs were mass marketed to a simplistic youthful audience

The influences stayed with them all their lives and coloured their view of the world. Many of those songs were 'torch' anthems and have become hymns to wasted youth! There are great similarities of method with current influences.

Meat loaf advises, "wasted youth is better by far then a wise and productive old age":D

macafee2

He can advise what he likes. I prefer the strategy of waste what you want to waste but have the sense to keep an eye to the front. Up to the age of 19 my youth is a blur. And I wouldn't have missed it for a world of promises. Come to that, I wouldn't mind having it all over again now that I'm old enough to know how much you can get away with.