From Op-Ed News:
In the last few days, I learned from a credible and informed source that a former senior Labour government Minister, who continues to be well-connected to British military and security officials, confirms that Britain and the United States"... will go to war with Iran before the end of the year."
Yay! That’ll learn ‘em for having a Euro-denominated oil bourse!
24 July, 2006
09 July, 2006
ID Cards are a balls-up: Official!
From the Sunday Times:
TONY BLAIR’S flagship identity cards scheme is set to fail and may not be introduced for a generation, according to leaked Whitehall e-mails from the senior officials responsible for the multi-billion-pound project.
The problems are so serious that ministers have been forced to draw up plans for a scaled-down “face-saving” version to meet their pledge of phasing in the cards from 2008.
However, civil servants say there is no evidence that even this compromise is “remotely feasible” and accuse ministers of “ignoring reality” by pressing ahead.
One official warns of a “botched operation” that could put back the introduction of ID cards for a generation. He added: “I conclude that we are setting ourselves up to fail.” Another admits he is planning Home Office strategy around the possibility that the scheme could be “canned completely”.
In one e-mail the prime minister is personally blamed for the fiasco with his proposal for a scaled-down or “early variant” version. “It was a Mr Blair apparently who wanted the ‘early variant’ card. Not my idea,” writes a top Home Office civil servant.
They reveal that the government is “rethinking” the entire scheme with an alternative “face-saving” compromise, which Smith blames on Blair. This “early variant” plan appears to involve collecting and storing biometric data on a temporary ID register but makes no mention of actually using it on cards.
However, officials doubt that this will work. Foord writes: “Just because ministers say do something does not mean we ignore reality — which is what seems to have happened on ID cards until [the contracts were due] to be issued and then reality could not be ignored any longer.”
The emails in question are available here.
Blairwatch has a good analysis. As they say, this must be why they’re stopping Government reports from being published and are trying to clamp down on people leaking things to the media – shoot the messenger and all that…
TONY BLAIR’S flagship identity cards scheme is set to fail and may not be introduced for a generation, according to leaked Whitehall e-mails from the senior officials responsible for the multi-billion-pound project.
The problems are so serious that ministers have been forced to draw up plans for a scaled-down “face-saving” version to meet their pledge of phasing in the cards from 2008.
However, civil servants say there is no evidence that even this compromise is “remotely feasible” and accuse ministers of “ignoring reality” by pressing ahead.
One official warns of a “botched operation” that could put back the introduction of ID cards for a generation. He added: “I conclude that we are setting ourselves up to fail.” Another admits he is planning Home Office strategy around the possibility that the scheme could be “canned completely”.
In one e-mail the prime minister is personally blamed for the fiasco with his proposal for a scaled-down or “early variant” version. “It was a Mr Blair apparently who wanted the ‘early variant’ card. Not my idea,” writes a top Home Office civil servant.
They reveal that the government is “rethinking” the entire scheme with an alternative “face-saving” compromise, which Smith blames on Blair. This “early variant” plan appears to involve collecting and storing biometric data on a temporary ID register but makes no mention of actually using it on cards.
However, officials doubt that this will work. Foord writes: “Just because ministers say do something does not mean we ignore reality — which is what seems to have happened on ID cards until [the contracts were due] to be issued and then reality could not be ignored any longer.”
The emails in question are available here.
Blairwatch has a good analysis. As they say, this must be why they’re stopping Government reports from being published and are trying to clamp down on people leaking things to the media – shoot the messenger and all that…
08 July, 2006
Craig Murray vs the Foreign Office
Craig Murray, the UK’s former ambassador to Uzbekistan and for of Blackburn’s beloved MP, Jack Straw, has finally managed to publish his book.
However, due to copyright laws, the juiciest documents are not in the printed version, only on the Internet (as per his torture memos). As a result, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office are trying to get an injunction to get them removed, not that they’ve owt to hide, of course…
A defence in an attempted suppression of information is that the information is publicly available… which is where blogs come in. In response to the Government’s actions, various blogs are publishing the documents on their site.
Due to technical reasons, I'm not able to publish them on here (i.e. i don't know how to, but if someone's wants to email me with instructions I'd be grateful.). Until then I suggest you go to Many Angry Gerbils and get 'em off there.
UPDATE: Thanks to a comment by A Big Carrot & a Small Stick on the Blairwatch site, I’ve come across this free uploading site, so I’m able to help out. Yay!
However, due to copyright laws, the juiciest documents are not in the printed version, only on the Internet (as per his torture memos). As a result, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office are trying to get an injunction to get them removed, not that they’ve owt to hide, of course…
A defence in an attempted suppression of information is that the information is publicly available… which is where blogs come in. In response to the Government’s actions, various blogs are publishing the documents on their site.
Due to technical reasons, I'm not able to publish them on here (i.e. i don't know how to, but if someone's wants to email me with instructions I'd be grateful.). Until then I suggest you go to Many Angry Gerbils and get 'em off there.
UPDATE: Thanks to a comment by A Big Carrot & a Small Stick on the Blairwatch site, I’ve come across this free uploading site, so I’m able to help out. Yay!
- FCO Comment
- IMF Telegram
- Declaration
- Speech
- Hill negotiation
- Michael Woods memo of 13th March 2003
- Telegram of 18th March 2003 – US Foreign Policy
- Letter from Simon Butt dated 26th June 2003
- Exchange of emails with Linda Duffield
- Colin Reynolds report of 26th June 2003
- Minutes of meeting with Howard Drake
- Letter from British businessmen in Tashkent
- Email to Kate Smith
- Minute of 26th September 2003
- Telegram
06 July, 2006
Nothing to see here...
From the BBC:
The government is battling to ensure that estimates of the benefits and risks of identity cards remain secret.
The freedom of information watchdog ordered the Department of Work and Pensions to publish its findings about how the cards could fight ID fraud.
Now the department has decided to appeal against the information commissioner's ruling.
Not that they’ve got anything to hide…
The government is battling to ensure that estimates of the benefits and risks of identity cards remain secret.
The freedom of information watchdog ordered the Department of Work and Pensions to publish its findings about how the cards could fight ID fraud.
Now the department has decided to appeal against the information commissioner's ruling.
Not that they’ve got anything to hide…
02 July, 2006
NO EVIDENCE LINKING BIN LADEN WITH 11/9!
I came across this via the comments on Americablog re Bin Laden's re-appearance (strangely, after the US Supreme Court's & our own High Court's decisions on Guantanamo Bay and Control Orders repectively). Apologies if it's been mentiond elsewhere, I've been distracted due to the World Cup...
On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
What the fuck's TWAT for then (apart from being an excuse to take away our freedom and give the government even more power)?
On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11. The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
What the fuck's TWAT for then (apart from being an excuse to take away our freedom and give the government even more power)?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
