uk: 
 berlin. 
 To:Subject: 
 Encoding: 
 Received: 
 X6L08aueOJLrw8EW/ 
 From: the_todal@icloud.com 
  
 On 04/11/2025 16:19, Jethro_uk wrote: 
 > On Tue, 04 Nov 2025 15:20:30 +0000, Jeff Gaines wrote: 
 > 
 >> On 04/11/2025 in message <10ed00m$2nrf8$51@dont-email.me> Jethro_uk 
 >> wrote: 
 >> 
 >>> On Tue, 04 Nov 2025 10:19:03 +0000, Pancho wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>> On 11/4/25 09:29, Norman Wells wrote: 
 >>>>> [quoted text muted] 
 >>>> 
 >>>> I thought yesterday about making a very similar comment, but on 
 >>>> reflection decided not to. Morality is a social construct. Morality 
 >>>> doesn't have to be sensible or pragmatic, it can just be group 
 >>>> prejudice. 
 >>> 
 >>> Which is why successive regimes always insist the law is about "justice" 
 >>> - even though it obviously isn't. 
 >>> 
 >>> The TL;DR is the law is there to ensure the upper strat of society (and 
 >>> their booty) are protected from the plebs. (So no change there). 
 >> 
 >> Do you think Judges like Denning did try to dispense justice? 
 > 
 > "Appalling vista" Denning ? Most certainly not. 
 > 
  
 He was arguably right about the appalling vista, though. 
  
 All judges, not just Denning, try to dispense justice. There are 
 sometimes creative ways of doing so, and maybe Denning was slightly more 
 creative than most, but he always claimed he followed precedent. 
  
 The problem we have always had is that ambitious, arrogant politicians 
 believe that if a judge overrules them, the judge is wrong and "the 
 people" are totally supportive of the politician because they elected 
 him and in so doing, gave him a mandate to follow his gut instincts. 
  
 And the popular press usually backs the politician because that usually 
 pleases the readers. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)