Search This Blog

Saturday, 18 August 2012

"Can Anybody Explain This Video?"

"Any Idea Anyone?"




Apparently, this video was filmed on Thursday night at 6.30pm

Why?
What's it about?
Why at 6.30pm?
Why no info from Stuart?
.............


Some comments from Stuart's blog below

Anonymous said...
'And we'll be considering the vital importance of free-speech and investigative journalism in such circumstances - and taking a look at how the powerful can suppress that free-speech; for example - by using super-injunctions.' Ha ha ha! Try and mention me now!!!
Anonymous said...
It is interesting that the words super and injunction have been mentioned.A lawyer friend of mine has suggested that one has been applied in Jersey recently. What do you think about that?
Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Well, I'm in no position to comment about whether such things have been applied for in Jersey. But, certainly there is a valid public interest discussion to be had about the theoretical implications of super-injunctions for free speech, open justice and the public good. One need only consider all of the very detailed and extensive debate that occurred throughout the UK media on the question of super-injunctions. Obviously, the Fourth Estate and civil society in general regarded super-injunctions as potentially fraught with danger. I shall try and address the hypothetical subject in detail in a substantive posting. Stuart
Anonymous said...
They haven't have they? Who has? Who paid for it? How long for? Globally? What will people outside the Bailiwick do about it ?

21 comments:

  1. Surprise, surprise!

    Our local TROLL gets there first again with the insults to Stuart :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Super injunction? Whatever it is it must be ****ing good if it makes Stuart say "I can't tell you anything about it".

    Nobody has managed to silence him yet so this is very interesting indeed!

    ReplyDelete
  3. So, 'if' it is a Super Injunction, why???

    The Oligarchy are always telling us that Syvret is barking mad and that all his claims and assertions are pure fantasy.

    They also constantly assure us that they are whiter than white and not in fact covering 'anything' up, so why in God's name would they need 'any' injunction against Syvret?

    Someone in power is clearly terrified of Stuart's honesty and knowledge :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is a most interesting development. I have laughed many times when watching the stupidity of the Jersey establishment from afar. Mr Evans, my contact, a person in the know, has informed me that there is a very realistic chance that one of the names on the Super Injunction in non other than the halfwit you call Haworth. The question for you and the readers is simple. "who is supporting this man?" One must be very 'Wherry' when making assertions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon, I am not a "MR" I am just a man :)

      Haworth is not a man, and he could well be on the list judging by the first comment I took from Stuart's blog.

      It matters not who supports Haworth, that knowledge changes nothing.

      And you don't spell "Wherry" like that....It's "D - A - N - N - Y"

      But seriously, the only way that anything is going to change is through non compliance. Stop paying tax, stop paying social, go to jail for your fines, what can they do? NOTHING!!!

      Delete

  5. Hi Ian,

    I wasn't too sure why Ryan Giggs being seen in the Royal Square was relevant until I read your link to super injunctions, and I remembered he didn't want his name 'outed'.

    Stuart 'trying' to address the 'hypothetical' subject in a substantive posting will be a major case of reading between the lines, can't wait.

    C-L-P

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lets hope its not too long before even some of this makes a tiny bit come to light.

    Surely The end of the beginning starts to see some light at the end of that tunnel?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ian.

    Former Senator Stuart Syvret to table action against UK JUSTICE SECRETARY

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nice one VFC, watching it now :)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mr Evans,

    How many have brought the alleged injunction?

    Have they had any establishment help?

    How have they funded it? We know Jersey Lawyers aren't the cheapest.

    Is it a Data Protection issue? If so, are the Jersey Taxpayer funding this Injunction?

    If it is the Halfwit and DW how are the affording it?

    Find the answers to these questions.

    Remember, there are people who monitor these Jersey Blogs who don't come under the word "shyster" and are shocked at what passes as the rule of law in Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dear Sir/Madam

    I am not a Mister, I am just a man.

    I would wager that if there is a super injunction, and there was any way of finding out the original complainants, there is not a jot of hope of doing anything about anything.

    Stuart would be the only one entitled to that information, and by the same token, would be bound to silence if this alleged injunction is really in place.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Man of Evans,

    When Parliamentary privilege is used to reveal an injunction. For example, the Liberal Democrat John Hemming used Parliamentary privilege to reveal the Premiership footballer who obtained an injunction in the case CTB v News Group Newspapers.

    Jersey has 51 sitting States Members. You don't have to wait for the next sitting of parliament. A member of your legislature could enquire of the Attorney General as to what is transpiring with Mr Syvret. This posting I hope will be followed up with the relevant questions having been asked.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Man of Evans, I like that, Ian would be just fine being my given name :)

    All I can do is put the request to the two or three people who would probably act on it, we shall see what transpires.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I am somewhat optimistic about Stuart's chances of winning in the court of public opinion. If there is a Super-Injunction, Stuart has a great many non-EU and non-UK supporters who will be quite willing to say it loud and clear through US-based social media. The use of a Super-Injunction against Stuart could well become more interesting to outsiders than any other goings-on in Jersey, and could even go viral.

    Here is why a Super-Injunction certainly could have the unintended consequence of becoming a sensation in itself. Consider how many people around the world were fans of Pussy Riot. Probably few. I had never heard of them until Putin made them an international phenomenon. The misuse of power to gag free speech is something ordinary people are passionate about. Corrupt governments? Not of as much outside interest without the human interest story of oppression of free speech.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ian
    Even if one of the 51 States members asked the question in a States sitting the answer would more than likely be given ''in-camera'' and as we now know they can say one thing ''in-camera'' and state the opposite in house.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anon @ 12:01 AM, My thoughts exactly. It would only be discussed in camera. Then they would probably lie about it, contradicting themselves during a later investigation...

    ReplyDelete
  16. ian are you doing your le gresley post soon

    ReplyDelete
  17. I have watched the video & am confused about it, as I think everyone is ??????

    I would like to know how the dispicable Danny Wherry is involved in this, because I hate this man undenyably (HDLG)

    So can somebody please let me know how or why he is involved.

    Thanx Jane

    ReplyDelete