Preserved Ephemera

• 21:41 Testing an ingenious notion: old boots + hacksaw = new sandals? #

Automatically shipped by LoudTwitter

Weak Sauce

On the radio this morning, Lord Carlile offered a highly convincing argument for why terrorist suspects should be detained for up to 42 days before being charged. Perfectionist that I am, I went back and listened to the bloody thing again. After all, I'm not at my personal best when I've just woken up, and I was concerned that I might not be doing the old bastard full justice. And indeed, it turns out that he was even more shameless than I had remembered:

LC: I've just watched, out of your radio car window, children setting off to get a bus to school in central London. In 2001, children were the subject of bombs in central London. Much worse could occur.
[Blah blah Iran (a dismissive "yes" from the interviewer when this comes up) blah blah murder using nuclear material (presumably the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko. Bad, but irrelevant here to the point of being disingenuous.)]

BBC: I understand that, but you're not claiming, surely, that the 42 day provision will help to prevent disgraceful attacks on children in central London? It wouldn't. It's not set up to do that.

LC: Well it might, it might. That's exactly what I am claiming.

BBC: By what mechanism?

LC: By this mechanism. If somebody is released because the police are not able to carry out a proper investigation, and that person continues on their terrorist way, they may use their skills to do something even more terrible than they were attempting to do or have done before.

Conveniently, this argument would work just as well for lengthening the period beyond 42 days, lowering standards of evidence, or even locking up people suspected of other crimes that could affect kids on buses. How reassuring that he's thinking of the children.

Hypothesis confirmed!

Every so often, for no discernible reason, I will be suddenly inspired to do something (somewhat) creative, such as making a cake, writing something strange, or customising some clothing. I like to indulge such urges, not least because I know from past experience that they rapidly dissipate if ignored, leaving a vacuum which soon fills with self-disappointment and ennui. That is why, when yesterday's hypothesis sprang to mind, I had little choice but to act.

The inspiration came from two sources:

1. tinyjo telling me that I needed sandals to go with my shorts (made from cut-off Levis, debuted on holiday in Las Vegas holiday, and quite possibly the first time she'd ever seen me in short trousers.) At the time, I was dubious.


2. Buying some new army surplus boots on a lunchtime expedition with archie and wondering what to do with my old, knackered ones. It seemed a waste to throw them away, but I know from Oxfam bookshop experience that it's even more of a waste to donate to charity things that are too knackered to be of any use.

With tinyjo out drinking with her feisty female friends, I had nothing better to do, so I rummaged through the tool box and went outside with the boots, a hacksaw, a kitchen knife and some misappropriated fabric scissors. After a few hours and a few injuries (most of my projects cost a little blood. I'm not the most dexterous of people, and my tendency to use whatever tools are to hand regardless of suitability doesn't help.) I was done, despite the (welcome) distractions of rain, cat, guest, girlfriend, Guitar Hero, etc.

The results? Well, I'm not cross-posting this to stylishly_yours, but I am quite pleased with them, and I think I'll be trying them out at Glastonbury in a few weeks time.

( HOT NEW AMATEUR SANDALS PHOTOS!!! )