D-Notice Specials

Good news on ID cards?

2007-01-05T18:20:00.000Z

From VNUNET:

Plans to use iris biometrics for the government’s national identity card scheme have been shelved because of cost and technical uncertainties.

I.e. they won't scan your eyes, but will still take your finger prints (even though some people don't actually have fingerprints due to genetic conditions and the prints also match up with Koala bears!). What about the plans for face scans (which only work if you're white and young)?

Also Not Saussure has stumbled across an article by Bruce Sneider which shows that the Yanks are no longer wanting facial and fingerprint scans, as the technology is too expensive and won't work! One of the reasons our Dear Leader is in favour of ID cards (see here for an article he wrote in the Telegraph, which I fisked) is due to US pressure, so now what will he do?

The costs of ID cards

2006-12-28T20:11:00.000Z

From the Sunday Telegraph:
People would be fined up to £1,000 for failing to return a dead relative's ID card, while women who marry will have to pay at least £30 for a new card if they want to use their married name, risking a £1,000 fine if they do not comply.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said the fines revelation shows that the scheme "will hit the taxpayer not the terrorists" and is "just another Labour stealth tax".

He said: "It is shocking that the Government is considering charges and fines on people at some of the most sensitive times in life. The Conservatives would scrap this plastic poll tax and invest the savings in practical measures to improve security."

Joan Ryan, the Home Office minister, said that charges would apply "if a person wished to add a married surname to his or her register entry". Based on an estimate of 311,000 marriages a year, that would net up to £9 million a year for the Exchequer.

People would be charged at least £30 for lost or stolen cards. Based on the 930,000 driving licences lost or stolen each year, this would earn the Treasury more than £28 million a year, say the Tories.

In a separate plan that the Tories say could hit millions of students, Mr Reid admitted that applicants will be asked for "all current alternative addresses". Failure to update the register with details such as term-time halls of residence could result in a £1,000 fine.

Just another way to scam the public...

The Telegraph's leader column also states:

Terrorists act by concealing their intentions, not their identities: the three countries in the world that suffer most from terrorist violence [I'm assuming one of them is Israel] all operate ID card schemes.

If there is any doubt in your mind about the efficacy of the proposed system, ponder the following. The one group of people exempt from having to own ID cards will be foreigners who have been in Britain for less than six months. Recall this extraordinary fact the next time you hear a minister blathering about the need to tackle terrorism and control our borders.

ID cards don't prevent terrorism. When will the government take notice?

2006: A Musical Odyessey

2006-12-27T23:00:00.000Z

Well another year has almost finished. To coincide with this momentous event, once again I’ve decided to review the CDs I’ve got and gigs that I’ve been to over the year.

Albums

Before I list my albums, I must point out that, due to reasons of personal bias, I’ve excluded three albums: (Fiery Furnaces: Bitter Tea, Sonic Youth: Rather Ripped and Thom Yorke: The Eraser) as it’d be unfair to compare the other stuff to my favourite band that no-one’s heard of, my favourite band ever and the solo album of the singer from my favourite current band… Anyway, let’s get the stuff reviewed shall we?

Be your own Pet: Be your own Pet

Noisy, shouty, punky and, er, young-y.

Beck: The Information

Odelay-esque, but with the added bonus of a cover that comes with stickers, so you can make your own unique artwork. Is this helping the fans become creative/show their support, or just laziness on the part of Mr. Hansen?

Cansei de ser Sexy: Cansei de ser Sexy (a. k. a. CSS: CSS)

Fit Brazilian women (one of whom has the appropriate name “Lovefoxxx”!) do NY disco-rock. I wish they would “make love and listen to Death from Above”…
The Fallout Trust: In case of the Flood
No, not a homage to New Orleans, but slightly dramatic indie-pop, with a very nice looking keyboardist…

Flaming Lips: At War with the Mystics
Typical Flaming Lips – weird psychadelia.

Futureheads: News & Tributes
Not as up-front/immediate as their debut, as it takes longer to get into it. It’s still as good though, but a pity their record label dropped them. It happened to BRMC, before coming back with “Howl” so don’t let it get you down!

Hot Chip: The Warning

Slightly nerdy indie-dance electro-pop from the mean streets of Putney! Local band!

Isobel Campbell & Mark Lanegan: Ballad of the Broken Seas

Her who was in Belle & Sebastian with him who was in the Screaming Trees get together and go all folky.

Jeniferever: Choose a Bright Morning

A lot more blessed-out than their live performances (see below), but just as good!

Junior Boys: So this is Goodbye

Canadian electro-pop.

The Knife: Silent Shout

Weird Swedish brother-and-sister duo does even weirder electro/synth stuff. This is possibly why it’s my album of the year. One question: how can you share your mothers’ health?

Larrikin Love: The Freedom Spark

Skiffle, folk and punk mixed together somewhere around the western part of Greater London…

Liars: Drum’s not Dead

So are the tunes! Only kidding, I like albums that consist of stuff which verges on the unlistenable – I’m the sort of person who raves about Lou Reed’s Metal Machine Music, which probably explains a few things…

Mission of Burma: The Obliterati

New York’s punk/funk veterans go even noisy than before! Yay!

Mystery Jets: Making Dens

Like Larrikin love, but with less folk and more pop. What is it with the area around the western Thames?

Oneida: Happy New Year

Weird US band do an album that appears to be based upon English Mediaeval folk music… but with punky guitars…

Polysics: Now is the Time

Mad Japanese band – a mixture of electro, rock and metal! Fantastic live as well (see below).

The Rapture: Pieces of the People we Love

I didn’t like their debut as they just annoyed me; however, they’ve more than made up for it on this one! Think Radio 4 (when they were good), without the politics, or !!! less the cowbell. “Gotta get myself into it” and they did!

The Secret Machines: Ten Silver Drops

Less shoe-gazing than their debut, more prog.

The Sleepy Jackson: Personality. One was a Spider. One was a Bird

The new Brian Wilson? Well, he’s as mad as him, and his music’s just as orchestral, so who knows?

Spank Rock: Yoyoyoyoyo

If you can’t tell from the title, it’s a hip-hop album! Not NWA-style “Pop a cap in yo’ ass, mutha’fucka”, more party hip-hop.

The Sunshine Underground: Raise the Alarm

Named after a Chemical Brothers’ song (from their Surrender album, if you’re interested), but they don’t sound like them. They’re more indie/dance-rock; think Bloc Party less the politics.

The Strokes: First Impressions of Earth

Are they the forgotten men of New York? Not when they make albums like this!

TV on the Radio: Return to Cookie Mountain

I guess the best way to describe this lot is “Shoe-gazing barbershop quartet”…

The Victorian English Gentlemen’s Club: The Victorian English Gentlemen’s Club

They’re right when they say “Ban the Gin” – it’s the devil’s drink… well, OK, it comes second to a Flamin’ Houman (Brandy, Tequila and Tabasco sauce!)

Yo la Tengo: I am not Afraid of you and will Beat your Ass

Appalling title, but great music! Feedback, ballads and hard rock amongst others. They’re Sonic Youth-esque, but not as good (but I guess that’s unfair, as few/if anyone is).

Young Knives: Voices of Animals and Men

Like a punky, nerdier British Sea Power… they could only be British!

Gigs

!!!: Islington

Pronounced “Chk-chk-chk”. They’re one of many New York disco-punk bands that have been noticed in the past few years, but the gig was more like a late-80s/early 90s rave! Gig of the year.

Bonkersfest: Camberwell Green

Free mid-summer festival. From what I remember, it was a boiling hot Saturday and there was a lot of free-jazz – yay! – and just general noise. I hope they have another one next year.

The Fallout Trust: Islington

See their album review.

Jeniferever: Kilburn and Kingston

A Swedish band who are a mixture of Sigur Ros and My Bloody Valentine. They look like a bunch of physics students, but make a wall of sound! I was so impressed that I saw them twice in under a month and bought their album on top of their performances.

Polysics: Islington

They’re fantastic, but they had the misfortune of having the gig during the spell in the mid-summer when we had the record temperatures, which kinda spoiled it. Also the venue doesn’t have air-conditioning and the venue refused to leave the doors open!

The Stills: Shoreditch

Canadians do miserable mid-80s English indie-band – think Cure, Echo & the Bunnymen, but with a bit more of an upbeat side.

Transglobal Underground: Old Street

Davide at Nether World dragged me along to it, as they’re his mates, and I’m glad he did! A mixture of house/rave music and what gets termed “World music”, i.e. that which isn’t based on a rip-off of Chuck Berry riffs. On the down side, due to a lack of public transport in central London (!), I had to walk from the gig venue all the way to Vauxhall station in order to get the bus, instead of getting a bus from Liverpool St to Vauxhall, as was planned… bah!

Yo la Tengo: Kentish Town

2½ hr, including 3 encores, of feedback, indie-pop, piano ballads, and various other types of music.

Also various other obscure bands – so obscure, that I can’t remember their names! – in places in central London and the weekly Thursday gig night in Wimbledon.

UPDATE: See Obsolete for his list, which has a lot more detail than my list....

The Lone Carol Singer

2006-12-21T20:16:00.001Z

I've stuck photos on Flickr from last night's SCOPA Carol Service/Protest. I'll do a proper write-up over the weekend...

UPDATE: I'll only do a short write-up on what happened as it's been more than adequately covered by Davide, Rachel and Tim, amongst others, and there's not that much to add, apart from the fact that I'd already decided on my SCOPA form to protest against carol singers - I was being seasonal, I didn't know at the time that Tim had this planned!

This was the coldest one yet - guess the freezing fog that's hanging around the Village and south-east England didn't help. It was more a case of keep moving and try and prevent frost-bite, even if you're not actually protesting...

After the usual one hour Tim handed out song sheets and candles and a saxophonist led us in traditional Christmas songs (one of the things I was protesting against!). Tim also passed round a bucket for charity and we raised over £80 plus 75 eurocents.

I should have worn more than one pair of socks - my toes went numb! - but at least we got warmed up in the pub afterwards - yay alcohol! - where Rachel handed out little muffins and I dished out some choccies I had on me (thank you work!).

Hi to the Disillusioned Kid, Rabbit Strike and the Chris from Radio 5's Pods & Blogs site.

The Lone Carol Singer

2006-12-21T00:40:00.000Z

I've stuck photos on Flickr from last nights SCOPA Carol Service/Protest. I'll do a proper write-up over the weekend...

Not one, but three databases!

2006-12-19T18:31:00.000Z

From the BBC:

The government has abandoned plans for a giant new computer system to run the national identity cards scheme.

Instead of a single multi-billion pound system, information will be held on three existing, separate databases.

Now the information will be spread across three existing IT systems, including the Department of Work and Pensions' (DWP) Customer Information Service, which holds national insurance records.

This might seem a good thing, but, one of the many reasons I'm opposed to the cards is the fact that the data will be linked together. all they're doing is swapping a big, independent database, for several smaller ones, all of which will be linked together - there's no real difference! On top of that, the information in the databases will have errors - what to do if the data in one conflicts with that in another?

Also, once again, the Tories and Lib Dems have the right idea:

Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, for the Conservatives, said ... the decision to use existing databases was "an admission of what will turn out to be a financial disaster for the taxpayer".

He said Mr Reid "has tried to sneak this announcement out in a written statement that is not subject to scrutiny betrays just how fragile the government's confidence in their own scheme actually is".

Nick Clegg, for the Liberal Democrats, said: "These are sticking plaster measures in which the government is cutting corners to make the increasingly unpopular ID card scheme more palatable.

They can see what a disaster it'll be, why can't Labour?

Non-illegal protests?

2006-12-07T21:25:00.000Z

According to the Parliament Protest blog comes word of a Bill in the House of Lords (the Public Demonstrations (Repeals) Bill) to repeal, amongst other things, the SCOPA Parliament protest ban. Unsurprisingly, the proposer is a Lib Dem Peer.

I don't think it's likely that it would pass as it'd mean that the government would vote to repeal part of its own Act.

I sent this email to her - hopefully others will do the same:

Dear Lady Miller

I came across a website which mentions your Bill to revoke, amongst other things, the SCOPA Parliament protest ban.

Thank you for proposing this, you have the majority of the public behind you.

I hope it passes as I am only one of many people who have had to waste the Police's time and taxpayers' money by registering in order to use my democratic rights.

Yours sincerely

Let's hope it gets a lot of publicity and passes!

Bliar's not as bad as Hitler!

2006-11-29T18:39:00.000Z

The NO2ID campaign placed the following advert in the Guardian, which resulted in a total of 8 complaints (it's not known how many were from Labour people):

Due to the number of complaints, the Advertising Standards Authority were called to make a decision on whether the ad should be removed due to it causing public offence. They said the following:

The ASA noted the ad had been intended to encourage discussion on a sensitive political issue. We considered that, although the ad may have been distasteful to some, it was unlikely to be seen as making a serious comparison between Tony Blair and Hitler but instead as highlighting a lobbying group's opinion that ID cards should not be introduced because of the threat to civil liberty they posed. We concluded that, as such, the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.

You should read the full article including their judgement, it's quite interesting, especially the evidence the NO2ID people use.

Thinkpol

2006-11-27T18:34:00.000Z

From the Guardian:

Police are to demand new powers to arrest protesters for causing offence through the words they chant and the slogans on their placards and even headbands.

The country's biggest force, the Metropolitan police, is to lobby the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, because officers believe that large sections of the population have become increasingly politicised, and there is a growing sense that the current restrictions on demonstrations are too light.

After all, we all know that SCOPA doesn't go far enough...

The civil rights group Liberty said the powers would make the police "censors in chief".

I guess SCOPA isn't enough!

Trouble at recent protests involving Islamic extremists has galvanised the Met's assistant commissioner, Tarique Ghaffur, into planning a crackdown... Mr Ghaffur has previously advocated banning flag burning. But this document would take the police a lot further. Mr Ghaffur says there is a "growing national and international perception" that the police have been too soft on extremist protesters, which has led to rising anger across the country. "The result has been to create an imbalance in public perception that is manifesting itself in passionate responses from elements of the community not traditionally given to publicly protesting. What we are seeing in effect is a rise in the politicisation of middle England and the emergence of a significant challenge for capital city policing."

Aside form the fact that people having opinions is obviously a bad thing in this country, this sort of thing causes "the politicisation of Middle England". As Issac Newton said "For every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction".

As well as the absence of a law banning the burning of a flag, there is no law banning the burning of a religious text.

... and? Is just a book - no-one's harmed by it.

"There must be a clear message that we will not allow any extremist group to display banners or make public statements that clearly cause offence within the existing law," the document says.

Someone will always be offended, no matter what you do. What's worse is that some people will claim to be offended. How will you be able to distinguish actual "offence" from feigned "offence"?

A solicitor who has defended protesters, Mike Schwarz, said: "Causing offence, if there is no other ingredient, is not against the law." He said such proposed powers would clash with article 10 of the European convention on human rights which protects freedom of expression.

Damn right it would, although, unfortunately, the Human Rights Act is a bit of a waste (if a law if found to conflict with it, the law is still valid and enforceable, it's up to the politicians to decide whether to change it. Do you really think they'd amend or scrap a law which made it easier for people to protest? Of course they would...)

RFID passports cracked!

2006-11-17T22:00:00.001Z

From the Guardian:

"The information contained in the chip is not encrypted, but to access it you have to start up an encrypted conversation between the reader and the RFID chip in the passport.

"The reader - I bought one for £250 - has to say hello to the chip and tell it that it is authorised to make contact. The key to that is in the date of birth, etc. Once they communicate, the conversation is encrypted, but I wrote some software in about 48 hours that made sense of it.

"The Home Office has adopted a very high encryption technology called 3DES - that is, to a military-level data-encryption standard times three. So they are using strong cryptography to prevent conversations between the passport and the reader being eavesdropped, but they are then breaking one of the fundamental principles of encryption by using non-secret information actually published in the passport to create a 'secret key'. That is the equivalent of installing a solid steel front door to your house and then putting the key under the mat."

Within minutes of applying the three passports to the reader, the information from all of them has been copied and the holders' images appear on the screen of Laurie's laptop. The passports belong to Booth, and to Laurie's son, Max, and my partner, who have all given their permission.

Booth is staggered. He has undercut Laurie by finding an RFID reader for £174, which also works. "This is simply not supposed to happen," Booth says. "This could provide a bonanza for counterfeiters because drawing the information from the chip, complete with the digital signature it contains, could result in a passport being passed off as the real article. You could make a perfect clone of the passport."

"The problems could get worse when they put fingerprint biometrics on to the passports. There are established ways of making forged fingerprints. In the future, the authorities would like to have automated border controls, and such forged fingerprints [stuck on to fingers] would probably fool them.

"But what about facial recognition systems (your biometric passport contains precise measurements of key points on your face and head)? "Yes," says Grunwald, "but they are not yet in operation at airports and the technology throws up between 20 and 25% false negatives or false positives. It isn't reliable.

It takes around four seconds to suck out the information with a reader; then it can be relayed and unscrambled by an accomplice with a laptop up to 1km away. With a Heath Robinson device we built on Tuesday using a Bluetooth antenna connected to an RFID reader, Laurie relayed details of his son's passport over a distance of 10 metres and through two walls to a laptop.

There's more on Wired:

In other words, electronic passport theft is about as handy as regular, commercial identity theft. The real hell would come if the authorities didn't bother to stare at the passport but simply trusted the signal from the chip. Which was supposed to be the idea in the first place: these arphids are supposed to be making transit SAFER AND FASTER AND MORE CONVENIENT, not just introducing a new level of Rube Goldberg snafu.

If we simply returned to the security situation status quo ante on 9/10 instead of 9/11, it would be like the civilized world suddenly got over a massive, self-inflicted stupidity virus. Furthermore, we'd be a lot safer.

There's always hope...

The People vs ID Cards

2006-11-17T20:00:00.000Z

From the Mirror:

[R]eaders of the Yorkshire Post were asked in a phone-in poll if Identity Cards should be made compulsory. Seventy-six [%] said "No", and 24 per cent said "Yes".

Tony's wrong about saying people support the things then...

Delays and extra costs

2006-11-15T18:08:00.001Z

From Computer Weekly:

Computer Weekly has learned that the Identity and Passport Service is running more than a year behind schedule on an online passport system that is far simpler than the ID cards scheme and costs less than one hundredth of its price.

If they can't do it with something a lot simpler, what makes them think they'll succeed with ID cards?

No wonder the government's going to Court to overturn a ruling under the FOIA that it has to release it's costing of the ID cards project. It would also explain why the roll-out for ID cards to those of us who aren't Johnny Foreigner has been put back to 2009.

How things change...

2006-11-13T19:34:00.001Z

From Peter Black (Lib Dem Member of the Welsh Assembly for SW Wales) on Bliar's comments on ID cards:

In a speech to the Labour Party Conference on 3 October 1995, Tony Blair outlined how he was going to be tough on crime. This included a passage on ID cards:

"We all suffer crime, the poorest and vulnerable most of all, it is the duty of government to protect them. But we can make choices in spending too. And instead of wasting hundreds of millions of pounds on compulsory ID cards as the Tory Right demand, let that money provide thousands of extra police officers on the beat in our local communities. But the truth is that the best two crime prevention policies are a job and a stable family."

What made him change his tune?

The Citizen Registration Programme II

2006-11-09T19:27:00.000Z

I've previously mentioned where the ID cards centres will be based.

Well, NO2ID have a list of the locations where the ID card processing centres will be based. There appears to only one for the whole of London, in Victoria. Some of them, e.g. Blackburn, require planning permission. To any one in the area: lodge lots of complains and then there'll be a public enquiry over the location.

CCTV is a waste of time

2006-11-07T22:23:00.000Z

In my fisking of our Dear Leader yesterday, I questioned the evidence about the effectiveness of CCTV, which our Dear Leader says the public support.

Thanks to Not Sassure, I've come across a report by the Information Commissioner which says:

During the 1990s the Home Office spent 78% of it crime prevention budget on installing CCTV46 and an estimated £500M of public money has been invested in the CCTV infrastructure over the last decade. However a Home Office study concluded that ‘the CCTV schemes that have been assessed had little overall effect on crime levels’.

The Home Office study itself also has the following (on p. vi)

Out of the 13 systems evaluated six showed a relatively substantial reduction in crime in the target area compared with the control area, but only two showed a statistically significant reduction relative to the control, and in one of these cases the change could be explained by the presence of confounding variables. Crime increased in seven areas but this could not be attributed to CCTV. The findings in these seven areas were inconclusive as a range of variables could account for the changes in crime levels, including fluctuations in crime rates caused by seasonal, divisional and national trends and additional initiatives.

and this (p. 48):

[T]he presence of CCTV in an area actually increases worry about crime, possibly because the assumed need for CCTV to be installed makes the area seem more problematic than the respondents had previously thought.

A government report contradicts Blair's own arguments... any other reasons you wanna try, Tone?

Bliar's reasons for ID cards

2006-11-06T19:05:00.000Z

Our Dear Leader's written an article in the Telegraph: about why we need ID cards. Let's fisk it shall we?

The case for ID cards is a case not about liberty but about the modern world. Biometrics give us the chance to have secure identity and the bulk of the ID cards' cost will have to be spent on the new biometric passports in any event.

Yet..

I am not claiming ID cards, and the national identity database that will make them effective, are a complete solution to these complex problems.

So he admits they're a failure!

Nor is the Government alone in believing that biometrics offer us a massive opportunity to secure our identities.

How about some evidence?

I am convinced, as are our security services, that a secure identity system will help us counter terrorism and international crime.

Speak to people in Madrid about this...

It will also help us tackle the problem of identity fraud, which already costs £1.7 billion annually

By having a big, centralised database of everyone's details?!

The National Identity Register will help improve protection for the vulnerable, enabling more effective and quicker checks on those seeking to work, for example, with children. It should make it much more difficult, as has happened tragically in the past, for people to slip between the cracks.

Praying on the public's fear of Paedophiles & Ian Huntley. Not a reason, barely an excuse... Anyway, what if the data's wrong? Who pays for screwing up people livelihoods?

Crime detection rates, which fell steadily for decades, should also be boosted. Police... will be able to compare 900,000 outstanding crime-scene marks with fingerprints held centrally.

No such thing as a presumption of innocence then... not bad for a Barrister.

Biometric technology will enable us, in a relatively short period of time, to cut delays, improve access and make secure a whole array of services.

See the LSE's ID cards report on the problems involving biometrics...

It should prevent us having to tell every agency individually when we move house. In future, we could be automatically alerted when our passports are running out.

A fantastic use of £X billion! I'm sure people are capable of looking at the inside of their passport for the expiration date...

I know this will outrage some people but, in a world in which we daily provide information to a whole host of companies and organisations and willingly carry a variety of cards to identify us, I don't think the civil liberties argument carries much weight.

A lot of completely separate databases - which are completely voluntary and free - are a hell of a lot better than one costing billions and is compulsory. Also the worst thing about the current ones is junk mail, not thousand pound fines and a criminal record!

Individuals will have the right to see what information is held on them; the register will not contain medical records or tax and benefits information

... at the moment... anyway, Tony, your own government has said medical records WILL be on there!

It was also very clear from last week's arguments about surveillance and the DNA database that the public, when anyone bothers to ask them, are overwhelmingly behind CCTV being used to catch or deter hooligans, or DNA being used to track down those who have committed horrific crimes. And that's what surveys suggest, too, about their position on ID cards.

Any chance of evidence of the effectiveness of CCTV? As far as I can tell it just moves crime into another area - this is used an excuse to have more cameras, not scrap 'em on the grounds of being completely ineffective... Surveys, apart from Home Office ones, show that the more the public know more about ID cards, the less they want them!

On present estimates, biometric passports make up 70 per cent – or around £66 – of the cost of the combined passports/ID cards we want. The additional cost of the ID cards will be less than £30 — or £3 a year for their 10-year lifespan.

Any chance of letting us see the evidence for this Tony? after all the innocent have nothing to fear, do they?

He also did a press conference today, which gave another "reason":

But he believed that it was more an issue of "modernity" and of "modern life" - and he backed the use of these new technologies to tackle the new types of crime.

In that case, I want to be Old Skool, mutha'fucka!

But he also confirmed the timetable for Britons' cards has slipped to 2009.

A potential election year - that'll be fun!

The Tories have it right:

"He claims they will deal with benefit fraud, whilst his own minister pointed out that 95% of benefit fraud is caused by people lying about their circumstances, not their identity.

"He claims they will tackle terrorism, whilst his home secretary on the 7th July last year said 'I doubt it would make a difference'.

"...Microsoft tells us it is more likely to trigger identity fraud on a massive scale.... it will almost certainly cost £20bn, will solve very few problems... it will be Labour's final act of ineffective and expensive authoritarianism."

So have the Lib Dems:

"All the evidence from Britain and abroad shows that big government databases just become the favoured target for ever more sophisticated organised criminals."

UPDATE: Reading Bliar's comment about them preventing terrorism reminds me of a quote from the sorely-missed World Weary Detective:

The scene: An anonymous provincial town in middle England somewhere. Four plotters gather together in a darkened room. The year is 2008.

Plotter 1: Right everyone. Today is the day. Is everyone ready?

All: YES!

Plotter 1: Is everyone a 'clean skin' that has avoided the attention of the greatest security agencies in the world?

All: YES!

Plotter 1: Does everyone have a rucksack packed with explosive?

All: YES!

Plotter 1: Is everyone fully aware of our warped religious justification for committing mass murder?

All: YES!

Plotter 1: Is everyone suitably brainwashed that they will follow my commands without question?

All: YES!

Plotter 1: Is everyone willing to die in the name of their cause?

All: YES!

Plotter 1: Is everyone in possession of their ID cards?

All: Errr...

Plotter 1: What? What if you require access to key services on the way to cause carnage on the transport infrastructure of Britain?

All: Err...

Plotter 1: Right that's it. Take off those bloody suicide belts. No ID card no mass murder. If it wasn't for that blasted Blair we would have got away with it....

Government censors evidence of corruption

2006-10-28T22:01:00.000Z

From the Guardian:

The government was yesterday scrambling to recover secret documents containing evidence suggesting corrupt payments were made in Britain's biggest arms deal. The documents, published in full today by the Guardian, detail for the first time how the price of Tornado warplanes was inflated by £600m in the 1985 Al Yamamah deal with Saudi Arabia. A telegram with the details from the head of the Ministry of Defence's sales unit had been placed in the National Archives. Yesterday it was hastily withdrawn by officials who claimed its release had been "a mistake".

A PDF of the agreement is here.

A telegram relating to the progression of the sale (PDF).

A briefing to the government about the sale is here (PDF).

A PDF of minutes of the meeting between the government & the Saudis.

How much will they cost?

2006-10-23T17:38:00.000Z

From the Yorkshire Post:

A devastating document slipped out by the Government yesterday revealed that the Home Office believes it is impossible to work out exactly what ID cards will be used for, and what biometric data they should hold, until after they are introduced.

A solution looking for a problem...

Home Office Minister Liam Byrne insisted last week that the scheme would cost £5.4bn over 10 years, close to previous official estimates, and that it would be introduced according to plan from 2008.

But his claims were spectacularly contradicted last night in the Government's official reply to a hard-hitting report published by the Commons Science and Technology Committee addressing flaws in the project.

The reply is in paragraph 32 on pages 23-4.

The cost estimates published are based on a reference design and as such are improved and revised as our understanding of the underlying cost assumptions improves. These will continue to be refined through discussion with the market and comparisons with appropriate benchmark projects throughout the procurement and, therefore, remain flexible... Whilst we are keen to remain open and transparent on the level of detail provided to the public in the cost estimates for the programme, we must also protect the commercially sensitive information of our suppliers. The price that they are charging for the technology services will be commercially sensitive.

Sounds about right for Labour - private profit above public need... How much are they going to waste on them before realising they're an awful idea, which no-one wants? I'm assuming a hell of a lot, as the government are incapable of admitting they're wrong & our only hope is that Labour are thrown out a the next election, and replaced by preferably a Tory-Lib Dem coalition, which won't be until either 2009/10...

I like this reply in paragraph 38 on page 28:

During the development of the Identity Cards Programme there is no evidence that Government has thus far imposed politically-motivated deadlines, and no timetable is dictated by the legislation.

Oh really? See one of my previous posts which had the following from the FT:

Labour plans to race forward with the contentious identity cards scheme to ensure the multi-billion pound infrastructure is up and running before the next election, neutering a Tory pledge to scrap it.

But Andy Burnham, the home office minister responsible for the scheme, said Mr Cameron’s “throwaway line” would be rendered irrelevant by the rapid roll-out of the scheme. He said it would be a fait accompli by the 2008 or 2009 expected date of the next general election. “I’m keen to see plenty of ID cards in circulation come the next election,” he said. “The whole landscape will have changed by the time if – and it’s a big if – the Tories ever get anywhere near power.”

How can they make such a blatant lie in an official reply of all places?

In the Designated Area (III)...

2006-10-22T09:13:00.000Z

Finally got around to stick up some photos from last Wednesday's protest - sorry it's taken a while, but I've been busy.

I got there slightly late - bloody District Line being delayed & then making me change trains... Anyway, lots of new people there this time, but strangely no Mark Thomas, despite the fact it's his idea!

Unfortunately, I don't have as many photos this time - ther're on Flickr of course - as the batteries in my camera ran out & I didn't have any spares. Kinda pissed me off as there was some old woman in a fantastic costume protesting against the Russians killing journalists. Just wished I'd managed to get a photo of her beforehand...

White people are terrorists too!!!!!!

2006-10-10T22:01:00.000Z

A mate emailed this story from the Nelson News:

TWO Pendle men have appeared before Pennine magistrates accused of having "a master plan" after what is believed to be a record haul of chemicals used in making home-made bombs was found in Colne.

Robert Cottage (49), of Talbot Street, Colne, and David Bolus Jackson (62)...

The 22 chemical components recovered by police are believed to be the largest haul ever found at a house in this country.

Cottage is an ex-BNP member who stood as a candidate in the Pendle Council elections in May.

To quote my mate's email:

Funny how this didn't get coverage - but if their names had been Abdul and Mohammed it may have been different...

In the Designated Area (II)...

2006-09-24T18:04:00.000Z

On Friday I went along to the Parliament protest to register my disgust at various items:

There seemed to be slightly less people this time - only about 100 - but there was a lot of different people from last time, so maybe the word is spreading...

Some of my favourites:

We also had some political representation in the name of London's Lib Dem MEP Sarah Luford.

Hopefully at the next one there'll be more of our elected representatives...

I've got a load more photos over on Flickr.

From now on it’s a monthly thing, taking place the third Wednesday of the month. The next one is on 18^th October, with the forms being handed in on 11^th October.

I’m actually thinking of going along to the next one, but not getting permission in advance. What I’ve noticed with the other two that I’ve been to is that the police don’t check whether you have the forms, as long as there’s quite a big group of you present. So, what I’m thinking of doing is not getting permission, but still go and protest, just to see what the police actually do… anyone else interested? Of course, there can’t bee too many of us without permission, as it’d ruin it completely, and, obviously, the police would have a record of the number of people who’ve been given permission and the numbers actually present.

Applying for Permission...

2006-09-15T20:29:00.000Z

I went and handed in my form for next week’s protest – this time you have to protest against two things:

“Radiohead”: their song “No Surprises” contains the lyrics “Bring down the government/They don’t, they don’t speak for us” which I feel is apt…
“Pointless bureaucracy”: the fact that I have to spend my precious free time filling in a form and then having to traipse along to the police station to get them to sign and authorise it which also wastes their time.

While I was doing this I bumped into Davide of Nether-World and Blairwatch and we went to the pub for a few drinks and talked about various things…

On my way home, I got a call off the police! They said that they were unable to authorise my protest as I’d asked for permission to protest within the entire “Designate Area” which they said was not allowed! I then said “In that case, please can you change it to Parliament Square?” which was acceptable…

In the Designated Area...

2006-09-02T23:21:00.000Z

Last week, I queued up to hand in my form for the Lone Protest (for which I was given permission). Unknown to me was that people were taking photos of us handing in our forms, and that one picture (from Davide on The Nether-World) did capture me in all my “glory”. There was one woman who gave her permission on a cake – I like it. Next time I’ll do summat other than fill in the form – anyone got a suggestion?

On Wednesday evening – sat at home killing time on the Internet, as it was the day before payday – I got an email off Tim Bloggerheads inviting me for a piss-up afterwards. After spending a few seconds considering the consequences: give up the (relative) anonymity he has built up over the past 16 months to meet people whose rantings and ravings he reads in exchange for alcohol. I realised, to quote that great philosopher Homer, “Ahh, beer! My one true weakness, my Achilles-heel if you will”, so, yeah!

On Thursday, after a “busy day” at work, I run to the train station to make my date with destiny. I got to the protest at 5:45pm but due to my permission letter, I’m unable to bring out my sign, as the permitted time hasn’t yet started, so I was just talking to people…

At 6pm Big Ben chimes and it starts – 200 people, all protesting different things, but at the same time and in the same place – lots of noise, from Brian Haw – who needs a car battery for his megaphone; has anyone got one they don’t need? – through to me “No to ID Cards”, as per my sign. Others I enjoyed were the campaign to ban Robbie Williams for crimes against music – which I wholeheartedly agree with – demanding improvements in public transport, namely the North London Line, people showing the absurdity of the law as people have been arrested for reading newspapers and the Socialist Wanker.

The other bloggers who I spoke to were Justin – protesting to ban everything, as well as to legalise everything [I’m now in possession of it. Justin left it in the pub and, as it would have been a waste of all the time and effort he put in, I decided to rescue it (this isn’t theft as he gave me permission to do it!). I got quite a lot of looks when I was walking back to the train station and I’m a bit surprised as I was holding it up on my shoulder within the Designated Area and so this could have been classed as an illegal protest]; Tim – demanding his £2000 from Transparent Tony (see here for the background), Rachel – demanding an inquiry to the 7^th July bombs and Davide – protesting against invasions of our privacy [I can't seem to find a photo with your sign, sorry!].

See here for my photos, while other people have put theirs on here, London Daily Photo, Chris King or on the official Mark Thomas website).

BBC London were there doing a report (I’m briefly in the background at 1:27.2) which has an argument between the organiser Mark Thomas and Brian Coleman, the Tory member of the London Assembly for Barnet & Camden (his view boils down to “Money is more important than freedom of expression.” Please, if he is your “elected representative” vote this guy out)

At 6:45 Tim announced that he had permission to march on Downing Street, in order to collect his money off our Dear Leader. We sent off and Tim used Rachel’s banner as a loudspeaker to get Bliar’s attention (stolen from Justin’s moblog). Unfortunately, our Dear Leader is too much of a deadbeat to pay up. [Tim, how about sticking an ASBO on him? Or, as you’re claiming money for services provided for him, sue his arse for breach of contract! Free legal advice: you’ve got 7 years from when the breach occurred to issue court proceedings. As you sent the invoice in 2003, you’ve got plenty of time!].

Then we went to Bliar’s local, the Red Lion – the pub opposite Downing Street – for many a drink, where we discussed politics and blogging (Chris King seems to have taken photos of the gang itself! Yay!). Nice to see that real-life is no different to t’internet life ;-)

Not everyone was impressed by our actions: the Devil’s Kitchen, who slags off the government more than anyone, is having a go at those of us who dare to protest against the government! Dickhead… all talk, no action…

Oh yeah, everyone there got a badge of honour. I wonder how many have gone on eBay?

Permission granted!

2006-08-26T09:27:00.000Z

As you know I went to the Charing Cross Station on Thursday.

Well, this morning I received the following letter from the Metropolitan Police Force:

Re: Demonstration – ID Cards received 24 August 2006-08-26

Dear Mr. D-Notice,

I, Superintendent [some Copper], give authority under s. 134 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 for your demonstration to proceed on 31 August 2006 between 6pm and 7pm in Parliament Square.

I do not intend to impose any conditions on your event.

In the event that your demonstration causes any of the following, the senior police officer in attendance may impose conditions on you and the participants

(a) Hindrance to any person wishing to enter or leave the Palace of Westminster,

(b) Hindrance to the proper operation of Parliament,

(c) Serious public disorder,

(d) Serious damage to property,

(e) Disruption to life in the community,

(f) A security risk in any part of the Designated Area

(g) Risk to safety of members of the public (including any taking part in the demonstration)

Yours sincerely,

[some Copper]

Yay!

Let’s see what happens!

Protest

2006-08-26T09:26:00.000Z

Well, as promised, I went to the Charing Cross Police Station to apply for a protest within the "Designated Area", i.e. within 1 km of Parliament.

After being in the queue for 1 hour, briefly speaking to Mark Thomas and others - hello to the guy protesting to highlight the plight of the crayfish - I managed to get my form signed and stamped to enable me to protest aainst ID cards next Thursday, at 6 pm.

Now all I have to do is wait for the poice to send me a letter authorising my protest and seeing what restriction they put on it. I'm assuming only one placard and no loud-speakers...

Let's see what happens!

The Citizen Registration Programme

2006-08-22T19:17:00.000Z

I know this is late – going on the date of the article, it was just after I’d moved down to the Village and so was without the t’internet – but I’ve only just discovered – via Blair Watch – the locations of the ID card registration centres.

Of interest to me are the ones for London, as well as the ones for back home Oop t’North-west and also north Wales, which are as follows:

Blackburn

I gown up in east Lancashire and I can have a real go at this.

They’re expecting one office – in Jack Straw’s constituency – to serve not only east Lancashire (Blackburn, Burnley, surrounding areas, total pop. approx 250,000), but it appears they’re also expecting it to serve central Lancashire (Preston, Chorley and possibly Bolton), which will have a greater population, and it appears they also want it to Blackpool (pop. 125,000), Morecambe and Lancaster (total pop. 200,000) which will be a real bastard to get to Blackburn from. From experience I know it’ll take the best part of an hour from Blackpool on the train, but at least it’s direct; for Morecambe and Lancaster you’re expecting people to travel for more than an hour and a half on the train (the road is a no-no, as it’s the M6!) with at least one change in Preston! That or they’re expecting you to travel to Kendal, i.e. the Lake District, which will be even worse for public transport, due to it being a rural area!

In total they expecting one office, in an area with bad public transport, to serve the best part of 1 million people!

Liverpool

Manchester

Obvious choices: biggest cities in the area and can catch a lot of the out-lying areas.

Wrexham

This is a bit of a strange choice. Yes it’d be useful for Chester & western Cheshire and north-Staffordshire, but what about people in the rest of north Wales? I’ve got family in north Wales and so I know how bad the public transport is: small, crappy buses, very slow trains (where they exist, i.e. not everywhere). Anywhere west of Rhyl and you’re fucked with this office, especially if you’re one of the island-dwellers (Anglsey/Ynys Mon). There is the possibility of using the one in Aberystwyth, but, again, the problems with public transport apply, possibly more so. They could use the “Remote Communities Service” which will consist of a webcam – nothing like using a secure system, with high resolution pictures! It’s ideal for ID cards!

As for the Village:

London

One centre?! One fucking centre?! One fucking centre to serve 8 million plus people?! As well as the out-lying suburbs? Are they serious? Fair enough there is the (very slight) possibility of those in western London using the Reading centre and those in the far south of London and Surrey using the Crawley one, but come on…

There’s a map on the locations of centres here.

The Lone Protestor

2006-08-21T22:55:00.000Z

There's a plan to have simultaneous "lone demonstrations" within the 1 km SCOPA "Designated Area" from Rachel (also here):

A recent damn-fool law has made it illegal to protest anywhere near Parliament without official police permission, and comedian Mark Thomas is organising a stunt to highlight the danger and stupidity of having this law in a democracy.

Please note that taking part in this is 100% LEGAL, and the whole purpose of the stunt is to overload the system by dozens of people all asking for permission to protest all at the same time.

The law: Under section 132 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 [PDF] it is an offence to organise or take part in a demonstration in a public place within the “designated area” if authorisation has not been given by the Metropolitan Police Commissioner. Participants may be subject to a fine of up to £1000 and “organizers” face up to a year in Jail...

Many people see this legislation as an assault on our civil liberties and human rights. It’s not always practical to plan a week in advance what government activities you may or may not disagree with. Sometimes a spontaneous response is called for. And surely the most appropriate place to demonstrate against the government’s actions is within the newly “Designated Area”, at the very core of this country’s democratic foundation.

Get the application form here (word document).

Meet on Thursday 24th August outside Charing Cross police station any time between: 5.30pm-6pm to hand in your SOCPA forms. The address is Agar Street, London, WC2N 4JP and a map is attached. You have to fill in form and hand it in to the police 1 week before you protest, so everyone has to turn up at the same time to give their forms to the Police. This will mean if 100 people turn up and apply for permission, then the unfortunate police have to license and approve 100 lone demonstrations... If you can’t make it to hand the forms in but want to demonstrate on the 31st, post them to: Ben Stern S2S Suite Z009 Old Truman Brewery 1 Brick Lane London E1 6QL.

The mass lone demonstrations will be 1 week later on Thursday 31st August and will again be at 6:00pm for 1 hour.

5.30 - 6pm Thursday 24th August, show up at the same time as other "lone protesters" at Charing Cross Police Station.

6pm Thursday 31st August, show up and protest about your personal issue in Parliament Square.

See you at the Police Station!

Cloned Biometric Passports/ID cards

2006-08-08T18:59:00.000Z

From Wired:

A German computer security consultant has shown that he can clone the electronic passports that the United States and other countries are beginning to distribute this year.

The controversial e-passports contain radio frequency ID, or RFID, chips that the U.S. State Department and others say will help thwart document forgery. But Lukas Grunwald, a security consultant with DN-Systems in Germany and an RFID expert, says the data in the chips is easy to copy.

Grunwald says it took him only two weeks to figure out how to clone the passport chip. Most of that time he spent reading the standards for e-passports that are posted on a website for the International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations body that developed the standard. He tested the attack on a new European Union German passport, but the method would work on any country's e-passport, since all of them will be adhering to the same ICAO standard.

I've already posted that this has been done to the Dutch ID cards, so corroboration about how they're a complete waste of time.

Meet the new boss...

2006-08-06T09:20:00.000Z

From the Observer:

Gordon Brown is planning a massive expansion of the ID cards project that would widen surveillance of everyday life by allowing high-street businesses to share confidential information with police databases.

The government doesn’t seem to listen to anyone: no-one wants ID cards.

Far from intending to dump ID cards once he is in Downing Street, Brown is quietly studying how biometric technology - identifying people by unique markers such as fingerprints and iris patterns - could be expanded over the next 20 years to fight crime.

So much for Gordy being different to the Dear Leader… time for a new government.

The plan would make the ID cards scheme cheaper, since companies would pay for access to the national identity register - a government database of biometric information being compiled for the ID cards programme. Brown's plans belie reports that the Treasury, concerned about the cost of ID cards, would ditch them when he became Prime Minister. 'It's almost the opposite - Gordon's thinking about ID cards is that it's part of the answer but there's a much wider picture,' said a source close to him.

Well that’s one way to back the millions… er, sorry, BILLIONS they’re going to spend on them before the whole thing falls apart…

Deja-vu, all over again...

2006-08-05T23:34:00.000Z

From the Sunday Times:

IRAN is seeking to import large consignments of bomb-making uranium from the African mining area that produced the Hiroshima bomb, an investigation has revealed.

A United Nations report, dated July 18, said there was “no doubt” that a huge shipment of smuggled uranium 238, uncovered by customs officials in Tanzania, was transported from the Lubumbashi mines in the Congo.

Iraq was alleged to be obtaining uranium – the old “Yellow cake” – from Niger…

It has also emerged that terror cells backed by Iran may be prepared to mount attacks against nuclear power plants in Britain. Intelligence circulating in Whitehall suggests that sleeper cells linked to Tehran have been conducting reconnaissance at some nuclear sites in preparation for a possible attack.

The build up seems to be underway…

Iran

2006-07-24T20:55:00.000Z

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!

ID Cards are a balls-up: Official!

2006-07-09T10:31:00.000Z

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…

Craig Murray vs the Foreign Office

2006-07-08T15:27:00.000Z

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!

The whole lot are also available as a Torrent file.

Nothing to see here...

2006-07-06T18:08:00.000Z

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…

NO EVIDENCE LINKING BIN LADEN WITH 11/9!

2006-07-02T17:13:00.000Z

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)?

ID Cards delayed

2006-06-12T18:25:00.000Z

From the Sunday Telegraph:

The roll-out of the Government's controversial identity card scheme is set to be delayed by a Home Office failure to begin the procurement process on schedule.

The Sunday Telegraph has learnt that the process of allocating contracts to private companies to build and manage the ID card scheme was due to begin towards the end of this month. However, the starting date has now been put back to September at the earliest.

A senior executive at one company that has already expressed an interest in carrying out work on the programme said: "We still know nothing about what the Home Office requires of us.”

Otherwise the Government would have to come up with some justifications which will not be destroyed straight-away… also everyone would have an idea how much it’ll cost us.

Phil Booth, the national co--ordinator of the No 2 ID Campaign, said: "Having forced legislation through, saying it was of the utmost importance to national security and public services, it seems bizarre that the Home Office is taking so long to issue specifications when they have had truly years to prepare them and having said it has consulted widely with the private sector."

The Manifesto

2006-04-19T14:09:00.000Z

A group of British Neo-Cons have come up with their own version of PNAC, which they have entitled “The Euston Manifesto” (any idea why they’ve named it after a train station?). I’ve had a look through it and it seems to be an attempted justification of TWAT with (an oddly placed) mention of support for Open-Source software. It has quickly been spoofed with The Houston Manifesto.

Anyway, to try and counter this, I’ve come up with my own manifesto, but I’m not sure which train station I should name it after: possibly the Piccadilly Manifesto (the one I use most often), or the Mill Hill Manifesto (after where I grew up).

Preamble

We the undersigned have a fresh vision for the future of the UK and the world in general. We believe that the following ideas, which admittedly, need fleshing out, are a good basis for an optimistic future of the UK.

Article 1: Democracy in the UK

We believe that Britain should finally become a functioning democracy, which entails having two Houses of Parliament (elected on a voting system which accurately reflects the public’s voting intentions), a written Constitution and a Bill of Rights.

Article 2: Freedom of Ideas

We believe that people should be free to put forward ideas, without fear of sanction (including those ideas known as “Holocaust Denial”) and that their ideas should be there to be freely challenged by others.

Article 3: Freedom of Assembly

We demand that all restrictions on the right to protest passed since TWAT was started, for example, the banning of protests within 1 km of Parliament, should be scrapped, as they have no place in a democracy.

Article 4: The Right to Liberty & to a Fair Trial

We demand that the ancient right of Habeas Corpus should be upheld, and that laws such as control orders or infinite detention in HMP Belmarsh should be scrapped forthwith, as they have no place in a democracy.

Article 5: Right to Privacy

We demand that the Identity Cards Act 2006 and the National Identity Register should be scrapped with immediate effect, as there are no proper reasons for them to be created; it will be a massive drain on the UK’s economy; will be a prime target for criminals; the technology is shown to be fundamentally flawed and the legislation is full of loopholes.

Article 6: The War Against Terror

We believe that the current way of pursuing The War Against Terror (hereinafter called “TWAT”), should be ended with immediate effect.

We believe that we should be tackling the causes of “terrorism”, namely the following:

Invading Middle Eastern countries in order to install regimes which will do our bidding,

Supporting Third World dictatorships, and

Sorting out the Israel-Palestine problem once and for all.

Article 7: The War on Drugs

We believe that the War on Drugs should also be ended with immediate effect and prohibition has been shown to be a complete failure.

We acknowledge that there are three main aims of the current drug policy, to ensure that:

There is very little, if any supply, of the substances,

The prices will be extortionate as a result of the above, and

The remaining quantity of the substances will be of very low quality.

We note that the effect of the current policy is that drugs are freely available to anyone who wants them; that they are of a very low cost and are of a relatively high quality.

We believe that a solution to this is to legalise, regulate and tax those substances that are currently prohibited, which would eliminate a major source of gang violence and violent crime against people and property.

We believe that heroin should be placed on prescription as well as providing safe places for its injection and that acid, grass, speed, E and coke should be available from licensed premises (in a similar way to tobacco and alcohol). We do not believe that crack should be available; however, as this is merely a very poor quality version of cocaine, once cocaine is legally available, very few if any people will actively seek it out and so the marketplace will eliminate it.

Article 8: Prostitution

We that prostitution should be legalised and regulated like in Holland and Germany as it would mean that they would no longer be exploited by criminal gangs and they would be able to work in safe, clean premises.

Article 9: Copyright

We believe that the concept of Crown Copyright should be abolished on the grounds that the taxpayer funds all “Government Papers” and so they should not have to pay again for documents created in their name.

Article 10: Public Transportation

We believe that the government should reverse it current short-sighted policy on public transportation, based on increased numbers of busses, and should give the go-ahead for the tram networks in Liverpool and Leeds (as well as other areas in the UK that have come up with feasible plans for them). We welcome the go-ahead to fund the extension of the Manchester Metrolink.

We also believe that the government should fund the building of a high-speed, magnetic-levitation-based train network, linking the major cities throughout the UK.

We also believe that the government should authorise the Superlink idea instead of the waste of time and money that is Cross Rail.

Signed

D-Notice

Sooner than you think!

2006-04-18T18:27:00.000Z

According to the Financial Times, the government are planning to go into overdrive when it comes to issuing ID cards:

Labour plans to race forward with the contentious identity cards scheme to ensure the multi-billion pound infrastructure is up and running before the next election, neutering a Tory pledge to scrap it.

David Cameron, the Conservative leader, this month said that ID cards were a monument to over-mighty government. “I promise you this – in office, we will pull it down,” he said.

But Andy Burnham, the home office minister responsible for the scheme, said Mr Cameron’s “throwaway line” would be rendered irrelevant by the rapid roll-out of the scheme. He said it would be a fait accompli by the 2008 or 2009 expected date of the next general election. “I’m keen to see plenty of ID cards in circulation come the next election,” he said. “The whole landscape will have changed by the time if – and it’s a big if – the Tories ever get anywhere near power.”

At first I thought “Fuck!”, but that I thought “The more the rush it, the greater the chance of a complete balls up occurring as they technology won’t be ready, especially with this government’s record with big IT projects,” so I’m in favour of this plan – the earlier the better, I say!

By the way, does anyone find it disturbing that the government are rushing through the ID card roll out simply because they want to screw the Tories (or a potential coalition government) into keeping them, not because they are confident about the technology?

I am a man, not a number!

2006-04-11T17:04:00.000Z

From the International Herald Tribune:

Most South Korean Web sites require members to register by presenting a name and matching 13-digit "resident registration number.”

The number, issued by the government to every South Korean at birth, is the closest thing the country has to a human bar code. For four decades, it has been a dominant form of identification, used when people buy a house, open a bank account or apply for a library card. The first six digits are the holder's year, month and date of birth. The numbers also reveal sex and place of birth.

The system, however, has a big problem: It is relatively easy to steal names and their matching numbers.

The police say that some people with access to the databases of businesses that store customer information have been collecting them and selling them to data brokers. Web sites with poor firewalls are vulnerable to hackers who can extract the personal data. Indeed, it is possible to find names and matching ID numbers just by using Google.

“It has become too easy to get random resident numbers,” said Kim Young Hong at Citizens’ Action Network, which campaigns for greater online privacy. “The resident number no longer serves as a proper way of identification.”

Our ID cards will also have their own number, which will be as easily to fake as the Korean one.

Good news!

2006-04-02T10:47:00.000Z

From the Sunday Telegraph:

The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran.

A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran.

It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran's ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is "inevitable" if Teheran's leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment programme.

Yay! Another war in the Middle East which we can’t possibly win! What lies will they come up with this time?

While the Sunday Times has this:

SPY chiefs have warned Tony Blair that the war in Iraq has made Britain the target of a terror campaign by Al-Qaeda that will last “for many years to come.”

A leaked top-secret memo from the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) says the war in Iraq has “exacerbated” the threat by radicalising British Muslims and attracting new recruits to anti-western terror attacks.

The memo was approved by Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5, John Scarlett, the chief of MI6, and Sir David Pepper, head of GCHQ, the government’s eavesdropping centre.

The leak of the JIC’s official assessment — marked “top secret” — will alarm Blair as it appears to be directed at undermining the public statements in which he has denied that the war in Iraq has increased the terror threat from Al-Qaeda.

It says: “There is a clear consensus within the UK extremist community that Iraq is a legitimate jihad and should be supported. Iraq has re-energised and refocused a wide range of networks in the UK.”

Written in April last year and circulated to Blair and other senior ministers before the July attacks, it says: “We judge that the conflict in Iraq has exacerbated the threat from international terrorism and will continue to have an impact in the long term. It has reinforced the determination of terrorists who were already committed to attacking the West and motivated others who were not.”

Two pieces of good news in one day!

More on ID Cards

2006-04-02T10:24:00.000Z

You’re probably heard that the ID Cards Bill has been passed. I was going to say summat but I’ve been so pissed off, that I couldn’t do anything – paralysed by hatred, I guess…

Hell! Even Bloggers4Labour are opposed to them! as they say:

It's pessimistic, but perhaps the new ID infrastructure has to completely crash and burn as a lesson for future Governments.

Anyway, here’s an article about how badly things will turn out – hopefully, things will be even worse.

Also take up this (which I found over at Not Little England):

At the next General Election [and also in the up-coming Local Elections], at every Hustings, in every constituency up and down the country, we ask

Will you vote to abolish the National Identity Register?

If they don't say yes, we get them out. Regardless of party.

The Guardian has this:

People who opt out of having an identity card when they renew their passport will still have to pay the full £93 combined cost of both cards, the Home Office disclosed yesterday.

The decision is a setback to anti-ID card campaigners hoping to develop a boycott on the back of the last minute opt-out compromise which defused parliamentary opposition.

And, if Labour win the next election:

Mr Clarke also confirmed that he would expect the legislation making it compulsory for everyone to hold an ID card to be introduced after the next general election.

See also this, about the logistics of the system, especially the database.

ID cards news

2006-04-02T10:23:00.000Z

From the NO2ID newsletter:

The BBC announced this week that they are considering issuing a photo ID card to accompany Blue Peter badges after the coveted trinkets have appeared on the auction website ebay. The badges have been touted on ebay as a way of gaining free entry to zoos and stately homes. The BBC are considering issuing bona-fide badge winners with a photo ID card, though they have made no mention of a centralised database or the inclusion of biometrics. We imagine the government will be watching this one closely for ways to cut the astronomical ID card scheme budget using washing up bottles and sticky back plastic.

They also link to this story:

The Conservatives will scrap ID Cards if they win the 2010 election, shadow home secretary David Davis promised last night.

"While I recommend that my party support the amendment, let there be no doubt that my first act when I take over as home secretary after the next election will be to do away with the Bill," declared shadow home secretary David Davis in the Commons last night.

I may vote Tory on this measure alone...

Open for business?

2006-03-20T20:55:00.000Z

According to the Asia Times, the euro-denominated Iranian Oil Bourse was due to start today (20th March 2006), which could mean the Canukistanish Globe & Mail was incorrect.

After Googling “Iran Bourse”, I came across this site.

Anyone speak Persian?

Iranian Oil Bourse delayed

2006-03-19T11:07:00.000Z

According to the Canadian Globe & Mail, the start of the Iranian Oil Bourse has been delayed (as well as labelling those who link the start of the Bourse to the up-coming war as “conspiracy theorists”). On the plus side, it gives the US & UK more time to plan the invasion.

Freedom? Yeah, right!

2006-03-16T20:04:00.000Z

From Liberty Central comes a list of the Acts which the government has refused to exclude from being possibly repealed due to the powers contained in the Abolition of Parliament Act (no, not the Abolition of the Parliament Act Act):

Act of Settlement 1700
Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
Bail Act 1976 [i.e. bring back detention without trial]
Bill of Rights 1688
Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919
Church of Scotland Act 1921
Civil Contingencies Act 2004
Claim of Right 1689 [Scottish version of the Bill of Rights 1688]
Constitutional Reform Act 2005
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
European Communities Act 1972 [out of the EU on the say-so of the govt]
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Government of Ireland Act 1920 [independence to Republic of Ireland]
Government of Wales Act 2006 } Powers of the Welsh Assembly
Government of Wales Act 1998 }
Habeas Corpus Acts 1679 to 1862 [detention without trial]
House of Lords Act 1999
Human Rights Act 1998 [nice while it lasted…]
Identity Cards Act 2006 [i.e. can make them compulsory!]
Immigration Act 1971
Local Government Act 1972
Magna Carta 1215 [nothing to add!]
Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975
Ministers of the Crown Act 1975
Northern Ireland Act 1947
Northern Ireland Act 1998 [N. I. Assembly]
Official Secrets Acts 1911 to 1989
Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 [defining the powers of both Houses]
Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 [what can and can’t be used as criminal evidence as well as defining the Police’s powers]
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 [control orders, etc]
Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Act 1706
Public Order Acts 1936 to 1986
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Representation of the People Acts 1981 to 2002
Scotland Act 1998 [devolved Scottish Parliament]
Security Service Act 1989
Statute of Westminster 1931 [granting legal independence to Oz, Canuckistan]
Succession to the Crown Act 1707 [ensuring a Protestant Throne only]
Terrorism Act 2000
Terrorism Act 2006
Union with England Act 1707 } [i.e. Britain could legally be split up
Union with Scotland Act 1706 } on the order of a Minister!]
Welsh Church Disestablishment Act 1914

(Only a)£2 billion defect on ID cards!

2006-03-15T19:36:00.000Z

From those bleeding-heart civil libertarians at Computer Weekly:

The government's £5.8bn ID card project will be more than £1.81bn in deficit by 2008 unless the Home Office finds additional funding, a report by the London School of Economics (LSE) has claimed.

From the first page of the actual report:

Taking into consideration the

£93 fee for passport and ID card,
costs of potential verifications against the National Identity Register;
estimated benefits arising from a national identity scheme for the Home Office,

we found that the Home Office accounts will have an estimated £1.81 billion cumulative deficit by 2018 for the combined passport-ID scheme. The Home Secretary has referred to such deficits as 'a small contribution from public funds, which is the only amount that could be spent on other things'.

These figures seem to indicate a number of problems still exist.

There are still no reliable figures for enrolment rates.
Significant benefits of the scheme will not begin to be realised for many years.
The Home Office will probably have to raise the costs of the combined passport and ID card to break even.
Alternatively, to maintain a sustainable scheme, the Home Office ID Card Team will have to greatly increase the number and/or cost of verifications beyond current projections and/or impose significant accreditation charges on private companies and other organisations wishing to use the Register.
The deficit will likely hamper the development of other Home Office programmes [which may be a good thing!].

Finally we suggest that the process of combining the ID and passport for the purpose of accounting does not prove to be beneficial to either programme. Indeed if the Home Office insists on the biometric passport but drops the compulsory issuance of the ID Card, this could free up £1.8bn for other programmes over the next ten years.

While the conclusion states:

Based on the figures offered by the Home Office Identity Card Team, the Home Office is likely to be subject to an operating deficit due to the Identity Card Scheme. To make ends meet under the current scheme, the Home Office will need to either increase the fee for the passport and card, designate further documents for necessary registration on the NIR, or charge other Government departments and the private sector greater fees for verifications against the NIR.

[I]f the Home Office insists on the biometric passport it has planned but drops the compulsory issuance of the ID Card, this could free up £1.82bn for other programmes over the next ten years.

How long until the government launches a new smear campaign against the LSE & the authors of the report?

Council Elections

2006-03-11T10:45:00.000Z

There’s an interesting discussion over at the Political Betting website, using local election results to predict the General Election outcome.

The author of the original article, Sean Fear, states:

How then, have the parties performed since the start of the year? There have been 39 contests so far. The Conservatives have won 22 seats (a gain of 6), Labour 8 (a loss of 2), the Lib Dems 5 (No change) and Others 4 (a loss of 4); 4 of the Conservatives’ net gains have come from Independents and Plaid Cymru. Of these 39 seats, only 14 have been contested on both occasions by the three main parties.

My back of the envelope estimate, based on those 14 seats, is that the Conservative vote share is at about 37%, Labour at about 28%, and the Lib Dems at about 27%.

Putting those figures into the Electoral Calculus site, we get the following:

Tory 309 seats
Labour 225
Lib Dems 80

Making the Tories 15 seats short of a majority

Later on, a commenter called Andy states:

There have been 246 local council by-elections since the general election, over a third of which changed hands

Con Held 82 Gained 33 Lost 21 net +12
Lab Held 40 Gained 20 Lost 18 net -2
Lib Held 28 Gained 20 Lost 21 net -1
Ind/Oth Held 10 Gained 13 Lost 26 net –13

Vote shares (change on previous)

Con 33.97% +3.38%
Lab 25.14% - 2.18%
Lib 28.17% +3.12%
Ind/Oth 12.71% -4.32%

Using the Electoral Calculus site, this gives the following:

Tory 304 seats
Labour 206
Lib Dems 106

We end up with a Tory minority government (20 short of a majority). Interestingly (from my point of view anyway), one of the seats Labour lose to the Lib Dems is Burnley… Bye bye, Ms. Usher?

It’ll be interesting to see how the main local elections in May turn out.

Lords will oppose ID cards

2006-02-28T15:03:00.000Z

From the BBC:

Conservatives and Lib Dems in the House of Lords say they will continue to oppose identity card plans despite MPs rejecting their earlier objections.

Ministers say anyone getting a passport should have to get an ID card and be registered on a database. Opposition peers say people should have a choice.

Guess my letter must have helped! You send one as well!

Public support and oppose ID cards!?

2006-02-28T12:50:00.000Z

From the Telegraph:

Public support for identity cards is far lower than the Government claims, an opinion poll for The Daily Telegraph shows today. Ministers maintain that 80% of voters back their plans for the cards and want them introduced quickly. But a YouGov survey has found that just 52% back the plans

The public shows no sign of looking forward to the introduction of identity cards.

People doubt whether cards will materially assist in the war on terror and clearly think that a national scheme will be shot full of holes. Yet a small majority, 52%, persist in saying that the cards should be brought in. They appear not to have noticed the contradiction between their long-standing predilection for cards and their up-to-date assessment of what having cards will actually mean.

However, only 21% believe cards will reduce the chances of further terrorist atrocities and opinion is evenly divided on whether they will make it easier for the police to catch criminals.

There is an almost equal division on whether having cards will make people's lives more convenient.
Opinions on the negative side of the debate are far more one-sided. Every one of the seven negative statements receives majority support, most of them by a wide margin. No fewer than 80% of YouGov's respondents are convinced that determined criminals and potential terrorists will always find a way of forging the cards.

More than 70% of those in the survey believe that the proposed national system of cards will be enormously expensive to install and maintain and will certainly cost far more than the Government claims.

More than 70 % are also convinced that some of the data stored on people's cards will inevitably be leaked, sold, hacked into or used improperly in other ways.

Perhaps because they recall the passport fiasco of the late 1990s, 60% fear that the introduction of cards will be time-consuming and cause an immense amount of disruption and inconvenience.
Roughly 61% fear that the data on people's cards will sometimes be passed on without proper authorisation to foreign governments and other foreign agencies.

Given the experiences people have already had with credit cards, it may be surprising that fewer – 55% - believe a portion of the material stored on the cards will inevitably contain errors of one kind or another. Roughly the same proportion, 50%, believes that the equipment that reads the cards is bound from time to time to malfunction and fail to read the cards accurately.

Overall the proportion of the population that believes the cards will be largely fool-proof and forgery-proof and that they will also be cost-effective appears to be no more than 30%.

Even so, 52% of people still say that they favour a national ID scheme.

WTF? Despite all of the above, a majority of people are still in favour!?

ID cards are already too expensive!

2006-02-23T19:39:00.000Z

From the Manchester Evening News (see also the Mirror & Daily Telegraph):

The Government was accused of contempt for Parliament today after it emerged that it has spent £32 million preparing for ID cards before they have even become law.

Guess they want to waste as much taxpayer money on the system as possible…

Letter to the Lords

2006-02-20T21:08:00.000Z

I have sent the following letter to the Lords from my area who will be voting on the ID cards Bill next months:

Dear X,
I am writing to you in advance of the House of Lords debate on the Identity Cards Bill, which is scheduled for 6th March 2006, as, being from XXX – where I spent the first 18 years of my life – I note that you are one of the Members who is the most local to me. I am writing to ask that you vote against the amendments that were passed by the House of Commons and in favour of the reinstating the amendments that your House inserted into the Bill at the start of the year.

I am against the Bill for a number of reasons, including the following:

They will not prevent Terrorism, as has been shown by the unfortunate experience of people in Madrid, and also the Home Secretary himself stated as much in the aftermath of the London bombings last July.

They will cost an exorbitant amount of money, according to the London School of Economics (LSE) in their review which they published last year, and have confirmed in subsequent updates. It is worth pointing out that the Government has not been able to counter their report, despite claiming that their own figures have been vetting by the accountancy firm KPMG, which the Government refuses to publish.

The Salisbury convention does not apply in this situation, as the Government’s election manifesto only committed it to a “Voluntary” scheme, not a compulsory scheme, which is what the effect of the Bill will be.

It has been shown that the technology does not work. For example, in tests, it has been shown that the facial recognition software only works on people who are white and young, i.e. they do not work on people from minority groups or are elderly. I do not feel it is in the Government’s interests to be passing a Bill which is in direct conflict with the Race Relations Act 1976, as well as various pieces of legislation on age discrimination. I would suggest that you see the LSE’s report for more.

The government does not have an encouraging record when it comes to large-scale technology projects, for example, passports, the Civil Aviation Authority’s computer systems, NHS software upgrades.

The proposed database to go with the cards is not something that should be encouraged, especially with the current fears over “Identity Theft”. As everybody’s personal details will be stored centrally, it only takes a few determined hackers to get into the system and cause complete havoc to the whole system.

It has been shown in the Netherlands that biometric cards can be hacked (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/30/dutch_biometric_passport_crack/ ).

Yours sincerely,

If you want to, you are freely entitled to copy/amend this to send to your own Lords, just link to this article. Thanks!

How to get Labour out

2006-02-20T20:32:00.000Z

Following on from the past few days in Parliament, comes a way to get rid of New Labour:Bloggers can play a role in defeating New Labour.

Liberal Labour bloggers can work within the party in an attempt to bring the control freaks to heel

Lib Dem and Conservative bloggers can emphasise the links between the parties, and persuade activists to put aside old scores

The non-partisan can continue to highlight issues and attack the govt on its record

I fully support this. Living in Burnley, there’s a (very slight) possibility, going on the make-up of the Council, that the Lib Dems could take the seat – taking out the beloved Kitty Usher – if we got our act together, as the Lib Dems are the second biggest party on the Council. What could hold us back is that there is a significant BNP presence on the Council, which would draw votes from Labour; although this could be a positive, as long as enough votes are drawn from them.

Local Elections 2006

2006-02-20T20:29:00.000Z

Following-on to the campaign to get Labour out, here’s a list of all areas which are having local council elections in May. Burnley, which currently has “No Overall Control”, i.e. has a coalition (21 Labour, 11 Lib Dems, 6 BNP, 4 Tory, 3 Independent), is included.

Reasons

2006-02-20T20:27:00.000Z

Blogzilla has a list of why Labour need kicking out, including amongst others:

ID cards,

Protests bans,

Control Orders,

ASBOs

“Glorifying Terrorism”

Attempting to abolish Parliament

No ID in Ireland

2006-02-20T20:15:00.000Z

A few weeks ago I had an article which said that if we have ID cards over here, then they might be forced upon the Irish.

Now it appears that they won’t have to have them over there…

Fingerprints

2006-02-19T11:14:00.000Z

From the Observer:

The credibility of Scotland's criminal justice system was in tatters last night after the country's most senior law officer effectively dismissed fingerprint evidence as junk science.

Colin Boyd QC, the Lord Advocate, took the unprecedented step of explaining his decisions in the case of former police officer Shirley McKie, who was wrongly accused of leaving her fingerprint at a murder scene in 1997. His intervention, rather than defusing the issue, led to repeated calls for an independent public inquiry.

On Friday, the Lord Advocate said 'there have always been, and there remain, conflicting expert views on the issue of identification of the relevant fingerprints'. He had concluded in 2001, after Tayside Police reported, 'that the conflict in expert evidence was such that there could be no question of criminal proceedings'.

Allan Bayle, a UK fingerprinting expert, said the disputed dab had been analysed by more than 170 experts in 18 countries. 'Every single person said there is no question, it was not Shirley McKie's.... Fingerprinting is now finished in Scotland.'

ID cards will have fingerprints on them, which is another reason they’re a complete waste of time.

Driving licence & ID cards

2006-02-18T18:41:00.000Z

From 2008/9, it won’t just be compulsory to have an ID card when you apply for a passport, you’ll also have to have one if you want a driving licence!

ID cards & discrimination

2006-02-18T18:32:00.000Z

When I was in work on Thursday, I was speaking to one of my colleagues over ID cards. I told her that, being black, she won’t be able to have one, as the technology doesn’t work if you’re not white and/or old and/or blind, i.e. the technology is racist, ageist and discriminates against disabled people (see the LSE’s report on ID cards in full, but especially p. 139-150, 183-199).

I’ve now come across an article on why black and Asian people should be afraid of ID cards, as, shock-horror – they’ll more likely to be used against them compared to white people. It’s like the 1970s all over again – stop ‘n’ search, etc. When/where will we have another Brixton riot?

No ID Cards until 2009

2006-02-16T20:01:00.000Z

The Commons passes the ID Cards Bill on Tuesday stating that ID cards will be voluntary (read compulsory for anyone wanting to have a passport and/or driving licence) from 2008.

However, from Computer Weekly, comes this:

The government’s £5.8bn national ID card project has slipped back a year following delays in passing the ID card bill through Parliament, a government minister conceded yesterday.

Home Office minister Andy Burnham said that the first ID cards would not be introduced until 2009, a year later than originally planned.

I knew there’d be problems with ID cards, but, fuck me, I didn’t think they’d happen this quickly!

The £580m a year running cost of the scheme [according to the government, but not according to anyone else] does not include spending on ID cards by other government departments, who will have to make their own business cases for making use of ID cards.

But so far, Burnham said, other government departments had not approached the Home Office with funds for the project.

Maybe they’re thinking “You made the bed, you lie in it”…

It should also be pointed out that the government still has no idea about what it wants from the system!

It should be noted that every time the government has to make a statement defending ID cards, it’s Andy Burnham (MP for Leigh, i.e. a safe Labour seat) who makes it. He must be the scapegoat for when it all falls apart…

How to get Labour out

2006-02-15T20:28:00.000Z

Following on from the past few days in Parliament, comes a way to get rid of New Labour:

Bloggers can play a role in defeating New Labour.

Liberal Labour bloggers can work within the party in an attempt to bring the control freaks to heel

Lib Dem and Conservative bloggers can emphasise the links between the parties, and persuade activists to put aside old scores

The non-partisan can continue to highlight issues and attack the govt on its record

I fully support this. Living in Burnley, there’s a (very slight) possibility, going on the make-up of the Council that the Lib Dems could take the seat – taking out the beloved Kitty Usher – if we got our act together, as the Lib Dems are the second biggest party on the Council. What could hold us back is that there is a significant BNP presence on the Council, which would draw votes from Labour; although this could be a positive, as long as enough votes are drawn from them.

Here come ID cards...

2006-02-15T20:26:00.000Z

From the BBC:

Ministers have won a Commons vote making it compulsory for people to be given ID cards - and put on a register - when they apply for passports. The plans, rejected by peers last month, will now go back before the House of Lords.

Guess this means that when my passport comes up for renewal in 10 years time I won’t be renewing it. They don’t mention driving licences though; were they not included in this vote? Or was it not intended to include them anyway?

Earlier, MPs approved a measure requiring new legislation before ID cards are made compulsory for all.

I’d like to see if that’s what the House of Lords voted in favour of before I comment.

A list of Labour MPs who voted in favour of freedom is here. Not suprisingly, my MP - the dear Kitty Usher - voted with the government. Fucking New Labour robots, I'll dance on their graves.

UPDATE: you will have to have an ID card when you renew your driving licence!

Iran would fight back

2006-02-12T17:07:00.000Z

From the Boston Globe:

Iran is prepared to launch attacks using long-range missiles, secret commando units, and terrorist allies planted around the globe in retaliation for any strike on the country's nuclear facilities, according to new US intelligence assessments and military specialists.

What? You mean that they’d want to defend themselves against an attack? How dare they?

What odds on an attack making Iraq even worse than it currently is by the Iranian-leaning groups no longer wanting to (officially) be on our side?

But military and intelligence analysts warn that Iran -- which a recent US intelligence report described as ''more confident and assertive" than it has been since the early days of the 1979 Islamic revolution -- could unleash reprisals across the region, and perhaps even inside the United States, if the hard-line regime came under attack.

Quite good odds then! Especially when hey make deals such as this:

Amid the escalating crisis around Iran's nuclear programme, Russia said Thursday that it will still arm Tehran with missiles that can secure nuclear facilities from attacks."We concluded a contract for the supply of air-defence systems to Iran and there is no reason not to fulfil it," Mikhail Dmitriyev, the head of Russia's military-technical cooperation agency, told journalists here.

LSE vs Home Office

2006-02-12T15:52:00.000Z

From the Times:

An academic claims he is being hounded by ministers for criticising the government’s identity card scheme and has compared himself to Dr David Kelly, the scientist who committed suicide over the Iraq weapons scandal.

Simon Davies, a visiting fellow at the London School of Economics (LSE), says he has lost valuable consultancy work and seen his income fall to below £10,000 a year as a result of ministers’ repeated personal attacks.

Davies has been backed by the director of the LSE, Sir Howard Davies, a former chairman of the Financial Services Authority, who said his complaints to Tony Blair about the treatment of the academic and the LSE had been ignored.

“Independent academics have done their best to produce costing for the scheme and the report has been dismissed,” he said. “This is brutal politics because ministers are desperate to win the vote on identity cards.”

When will people learn? You can’t go around criticising the government and its policies! Memo to Mr Davies: stay out of the woods & light aircraft.

What I find strange, though, is the following:

Blair last week agreed a compromise that new legislation would be introduced before the cards became compulsory. Ministers have refused to reveal the findings of a new official study of the cost, conducted by consultants KPMG.

Davies was one of a group of academics at the LSE whose investigation found the costs of the national identity card scheme would be as much as £19 billion — three times the government’s initial estimate.

Surely, if the government had a report which supported its policies, it would publish it and so discredit it opponents… The lack of action on the government’s behalf suggests they know he’s right, which would lead to the attempted destruction of his career… just like Dr. Kelly.

War on Drugs failure, redux

2006-02-11T20:01:00.000Z

Last summer it was leaked to the press that the government admits that the War on Drugs was a complete failure. However, the follow-up report (which formed the basis of the completely pointless Drugs Act 2005) was not released, until now that is.

There’s a good analysis of it on Transform:

Acknowledges that supply side interventions are futile but argues that they should be continued anyway;
Calls for drug seizures to be ‘proclaimed’ despite acknowledging that seizures are ineffective at reducing availability or drug harms;
Notes that increased drug availability does not increase problematic drug use - thereby torpedoing one of the central tenets of the UK drug strategy, and one of the major arguments against legalisation, control and regulation of drugs;
Analyses current intervention programmes in detail and concludes they are ineffective at reducing crime harms because too many ‘High Harm Causing Users’ who come into contact with the Criminal Justice System slip through the net. It suggests that planned changes (pre-Drugs Act 2005) will only have a marginal impact;
Recommends that heroin use be criminalised, and a register of addicts be established – as a way to ‘capture and grip’ problematic users into treatment – and thus reduce offending;
Calls for an expansion of heroin prescribing.

So let’s see:

The current system doesn’t work, but we’ll carry on anyway… Nothing like evidence-based policies, are there?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t 5 & 6 conflict with each other? I agree that heroin should be prescribed; however, you can’t do that if at the same time you’re making it an offence! How can you give someone a substance legally, if then you’ll lock ‘em up for it?

There’s also one in the Guardian:

The report says if heroin prescription for registered addicts was widely adopted, the £4bn a year demand for illegal heroin and crack cocaine would drop significantly. It would be better to draw the 260,000 heroin users who have serious habits funded through crime into an environment where they can inject safely and be persuaded to move towards abstinence. "In principle, there is a strong rationale for a more widespread use of heroin prescription in the treatment system," says Lord Birt.

He says there is a general consensus among doctors that heroin prescription can help older heroin users, but that expert opinion is divided, with some arguing it would attract new users. Trials in Switzerland and the Netherlands suggest such schemes can cut crime and improve users' health. The strategy unit recommended starting £2m a year pilot schemes in Britain to establish the evidence here. The Birt report concludes that "introducing such a policy would be contentious and disruptive, though the gains, especially in reducing crime, should be substantial".

Although the cabinet did not adopt Lord Birt's proposal to make heroin use a crime or introduce more widespread heroin prescribing, the more coercive approach he recommended has been included in the Drugs Act 2005. Its measures include the compulsory drug testing of 240,000 suspects a year arrested for drug-related crimes.

"I can stands no more!"

2006-02-03T18:59:00.000Z

I know yesterday I said I wouldn't be publishing the Mohammed cartoons; however, after last nights events, I've been left with no option:

Some people need to grow a thicker skin. It's just a few (crap) drawings of some guy who lived 1500 years ago. There's no excuse for riots over them. There's cartoon depicting God (breaching the 10 Commmandments of Christianity & Judaism) & Jesus but Christians & Jews don't use them as an excuse to make death threats (as ever, see Wikipedia for more).

People need to accept that religion isn't important.

I'm just glad that Religion Bill wasn't passed in the government's original version, else these would be classed as "insulting religion" & so I would be commiting a crime over these. Unsuprisingly, the government is opposed to people publishing them.

It's not the first time Mo has been depicted, there's this from 1595! Wonder if whoever made it got death threats?

A million here, a million there...

2006-02-01T19:55:00.000Z

Interesting point from NO2ID:

the Home Office budget is £13 billion a year. This is roughly twice the Home Office’s claimed start-up costs of the National Identity scheme. Since the Home Office is claiming the scheme won’t cost anyone else anything extra, one has to ask, which half of the Home Office’s current activities will be cut during the start up of the scheme? Or will this cost (which the LSE estimates to be closer to two times the Home Office annual budget) be swept under the carpet with more incompetent accounting?

Guess this is why there are problems with the Home Office’s accounts…

Another illegal protest?

2006-02-01T19:01:00.000Z

Yesterday there were protests outside Parliament during the debate on whether it should be a crime to “insult” religion (which the government lost by one vote, due to the absence of one Anthony Bliar…)

I wonder if the protesters got prior approval off the Met Police?

UPDATE: the BBC have a list of which way MPs voted. Depressingly (although not unexpected), my MP voted in favour of making it a crime, as did my ex-MP (Chester's one).

Biometrics AREN'T safe!

2006-01-30T19:12:00.000Z

According to the Register, Dutch researchers have managed to hack into their compulsory, biometric ID cards.

The crack is attributed to Delft smartcard security specialist Riscure, which here explains that an attack can be executed from around 10 metres and the security broken, revealing date of birth, facial image and fingerprint, in around two hours. Riscure notes that that the speed of the crack is aided by the Dutch passport numbering scheme being sequential.

According to the Dutch Interior Ministry ways to improve the security of the passport are being looked at. But note that they say "improve", not "fix".

How long would it take to hack into the ones over here?

Troop build-up

2006-01-26T19:06:00.000Z

The government are sending more than 4000 extra troops to southern Afghanistan.

A quick look at the ClustrMap thingy on my blog shows that southern Afghanistan borders Iran… Say no more.

More protest convictions

2006-01-24T19:38:00.000Z

Five more bastards have been convicted of getting in the way of the business of our Deal Leader:

Everyone charged was convicted and fined £50 with a year's conditional discharge so if they get in any trouble this charge will be taken into account and could be made more serious. Previous cases have received higher fines so that could be seen as progress. Although for the people involved, the criminal convictions will do more damage than the fine.

Emma defended herself and called a few witnesses, Brian Haw and 2 coppers who both looked like army recruits speaking in robotic voices. The police testimony was rather amusing and possibly the highlight of an otherwise rather boring day in court. Emma was kept to the individual charges in her questioning so couldn't really get Brian talking about the background as much as she seemed to want to. In the end she adopted the other defendants argument and was sentenced with the rest.

Deja-vu all over again

2006-01-19T18:49:00.000Z

According to the Irish paper the Evening Echo, if the ID Cards Bill is passed, then Ireland will adopt ID cards as well, albeit on a voluntary basis for those who regularly visit the UK.

Hmm… the English oppressing the Irish, why does that seem familiar?

Try, try again

2006-01-17T20:03:00.000Z

There’s a great post on Obsolete on the numerous justifications that the government has tried to come up with for ID cards, all of which have been pulled apart.

It also has this:

Perhaps the best criticism though came from Lord Philips, who quoted a Labour politician who attacked the then Tory plans for ID cards by saying the money should be used on more police instead. That Labour politician? Tony Blair.

If the Tories do it it’s a bad idea, if Bliar does it it’s a good idea…

LSE ID cards report

2006-01-15T20:10:00.000Z

An updated version of the London School of Economics’ report on ID Cards has been published.

Includes this on page iii):

We are extremely concerned at the ongoing culture of secrecy endemic in the planning of the identity cards proposals. The Home Office has conducted most of its work in a covert fashion, refusing to disclose information that would inform debate, and conducting negotiations in a closed environment. This process is inimical to the creation of trust. This situation also makes further research on the proposals impossible.

We find it incomprehensible that Parliament has been denied crucial information about costs. We cannot see a justification for any claim of commercial secrecy and believe this assertion is misleading.

We are mystified as to why, after three in the planning, no government department has either signed up to the scheme or has provided published material on costs and benefits. We conclude that there still exists widespread uncertainty and scepticism about the proposals to an extent that may make the scheme unworkable at a level that goes beyond even that predicted in our first report.

The main part is that they predict they'll cost £500.00 each!

UPDATE: The House of Lords have voted to force the govt to disclose the full costs of ID cards before they can become law.

We'll have to see if the govt are able to overturn this in the Commons (hope not).

4 more guilty of protesting

2006-01-12T19:41:00.000Z

Four more people have been found guilty of the heinous crime of protesting near Parliament.

On the SOCPA offences there were three 12-month conditional discharges of which two had to pay £150 costs, and the third (Mr. Simpson who had not presented evidence) only £50 costs. Because of the unspent conditional discharge, the fourth defendant had to pay £100 fine for the previous public order offence, £100 for the new SOCPA offence, plus the £150 costs (ouch!!). For the obstruction offence, Maria had to pay an additional £100 fine.

Bastards! Hanging’s too good for ‘em!

Mysteriously, one of those arrested and put in a police van then disappeared from the record. Police claim to have no knowledge of him. What was his 'get out' card? Possible explanations might be that he was some sort of 'agent provocateur' - he was standing very near the megaphone throughout the half an hour or so leading up to the arrests. Alternatively, he was in some other way in cahoots with the police.

The next SOCPA case will be heard next week on the 18th at Bow Street, and 'Picnicker Mark' will be defending himself in court. After that, the arrestees from Sunday 7th August will be in court from the 23rd and on 22nd Feb., lone demonstrator Barbara Tucker (who held up a banner 'I am not the serious organised criminal' outside parliament just before Xmas) will appear in court. In the meantime, it is likely that today's defendants will be appealing against their convictions.

According to the Parliament Protest blog, the judge didn’t rule on how the Human Rights Act applied to the act. Hopefully, the defendant’s will manage to get it declared incompatible and the “Designated Area” quashed on appeal.

UPDATE: Bloggerheads have more on the guy who was whisked away; he's the spitting image of Detective Seargent John Pickersgill., who works for the Metorpolitan Police, i.e. (non-City of) London police!

I've put Bloggerheads' wanted poster on the right-hand side if anyone has more info.

Worst technology of 2006

2006-01-11T20:08:00.000Z

The latest issue of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers’ Spectrum magazine lists the five worst technology projects of 2006, one of which is the ID card plan. The summary they give is that “The design of the system is based on unreliable and inadequate technologies that could result in privacy and security problems”.

How SCOPA works II

2006-01-11T19:44:00.000Z

Interesting article on Indymedia about how the Parliament protest ban works in practice:

A pattern is emerging that police only arrest people when they think that they can get away with it without much media attention:

When American anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan came over to meet Brian Haw in parliament square in December, police issued a SCOPA warning telling them to disperse, but as the deadline passed, a crowd of up to a 100 people staged a full-scale demonstration, marching up to the gates of Downing Street with banners and chants, and because of the sensitive nature of any arrests in the week Maya Evans had appeared all over the media, they backed down and allowed the protest to continue.

Just before Christmas, a 'carol-singing' congregation in Parliament Square listened and cheered while Brian Haw harangued the government, and a megaphone was briefly used illegally. The crowd numbered more than a hundred, and yet the police failed to investigate, and studiously ignored the throng rather than be reported by the attendant media as arresting carol-singers.

The previous day however, Barbara Tucker had been arrested and charged under the act for standing alone outside parliament with a placard stating, "I am not the organised criminal". There were no press around on that occasion.

Today, media attended the ceremony, and so despite the fact it was virtually a rerun of Maya’s offence (though with a larger crowd of 9 rather than 2!), the police watched but did not act. When questioned, one of them said they were just keeping an eye on things and said, "We're not all bastards".

On the 18th an activist is due in court - he was attending a picnic at parliament square in august, and was nicked for wearing an A4- size placard around his neck stating 'Protest my Right'. And yet today, one of the participants was wearing the exact same banner in full view of the police but was not even warned let alone arrested. Press included Spanish TV, London Tonight, Channel 4, News of the World, and the London Evening Standard. Could this explain the police reticence? Another banner asked for a public inquiry into the London bombings.

That’s it; next time in within the “Designated Area,” I’m taking a video-camera & boom.

Memo leaked by Labour MPs

2006-01-09T18:51:00.000Z

From the Guardian:

Two Labour MPs have defied the Official Secrets Act by passing on the contents of a secret British document revealing how President George Bush wanted to bomb the Arabic TV station, al-Jazeera.

David Keogh, a Cabinet Office employee, is charged with leaking information damaging to international relations to Leo O'Connor, researcher to Tony Clarke, former MP for Northampton South. The two are due to appear in court tomorrow for committal hearings.

Mr Kilfoyle, MP for Liverpool Walton and a former defence minister, said last night: "It's very odd we haven't been prosecuted. My colleague Tony Clarke is guilty of discussing it with me and I have discussed it with all and sundry.

I agree with their comments… why haven’t they been prosecuted?

"Voluntary" ID cards

2006-01-09T18:33:00.000Z

From the Metro (dead-tree version):

Town halls could be given the power to fine households that have not applied for proposed ID cards.

The recommendation comes despite ministerial promises that the ID card will be voluntary.

Unless Labour have come with an entirely new definition of the word “voluntary, ”that is…

The proposal, which says councils can check electoral registers to see who has not applied for a card and fine them up to £2500.00, was contained in the small print of a Department of Constitutional Affairs [who have the ironic motto: Justice, Rights & Democracy] document released during the Christmas holidays [see p. 49], it was reported yesterday.

Nothing like being open and honest…

The Telegraph also has it, as well as a Leader article about the whole thing.

How SCOPA 2005 works

2006-01-08T16:58:00.000Z

From the Friday Project: (via the Bloggerheads comments)

THE SERIOUS ORGANISED CRIME AND POLICE ACT - AN ABSOLUTELY GENUINE PHONE CALL FROM A TFT CONTRIBUTOR Ring, ring. Ring, ring.
Click.

'Hello, New Scotland Yard, how may I help you?'

'Hello, I wonder if you can help me?'

'Muh.'

'Good. I've just been looking at the map of your protest exclusion zone around Parliament Square.''It's not an exclusion zone, sir.'

'Muh?'

'It's not an exclusion zone. If you want to protest, you need to get permission. We're not excluding protest.’

'Muh.'

'How exactly can I help you, sir?'

'Well, the funny thing is, I was looking at your exclusion...'

'Permission.'

'Permission zone around Parliament Square and I realised my new flat is right smack-bang in the middle of it.'

'And?'

'I have a question.'

'Yes?'

'Well, you see, I have a roof terrace which can be seen from the road. I was just wondering whether I'd be allowed to protest there if I wanted to? I'm just worried about being arrested and having all my banners torn up.'

'Who owns the property, sir?'

'I do.'

'And who are you planning on protesting against?'

'Muh?'

'Who are you planning to protest against?'

'Does that matter? The point is whether it's now illegal for me to protest on my own roof... Let's say I'm protesting against myself.'

'Are you planning to protest against yourself?'

'Well, I don't like myself very much at the moment, so let's say yes...’

'Then that's a good question, sir. I'll have to put you through to my colleague who deals with SOCPA at Bloomsbury.'

'OK.'

Ring, ring. Ring... Click.

'Hello?'

'Yes... protest... exclusion...'

'Permission...'

'Sorry, protest... permission... roof terrace... myself...'

'Let me look at my map. Well, as far as I know, as no-one would be likely to complain if you were to protest against yourself...'

'They might.'

'It's unlikely.'

'OK. Forget me then. What about if I was protesting against my neighbour?'

'On your roof?'

'Yes.'

'Well, then that would depend whether they were likely to see it and be upset by it.'

'Not see it and not be upset? OK. Got it. Oh, only thing is, my neighbour is the Home Office.'

'Muh.'

'Sorry.'

'Well, if you're protesting against the Government and they were likely to see the protest then you'd need to come in and have a chat with us.'

'Oh, right, OK. But only if I'm likely to upset them.'

'What do you mean, sir?'

'Well, if I protested *for* the Government that would be OK?'

'*For* the Government? You mean protesting in favour of the Government?'

'Essentially, yes.'

'Then that wouldn't be a protest.'

'Got it. So it's only illegal if I'm protesting against the Government in a way that might upset them?'

'Yes, no. That's not what I actually said.'

'Oh, I'm terribly sorry. What did you actually say?'

'I said that if you wanted to protest against the Government on your roof terrace then you should come in and have a chat with us first.'

'But only if I'm protesting against the Government.'

'That's right.'

'In a way that might upset them.'

'That's right.'

'Otherwise I might be arrested?'

'It's possible, sir, yes.'

'Ok. Thanks.'

'Thank you sir, is there anything else I can help you with?'

'No. Yes. Are you going to the carol concert in Parliament Square tomorrow?'

'Parliament Square comes under Charing Cross, sir, you'd have to ask them.'

'Right ho! Merry Christmas.'

'Thank you for your call, sir.'

Click.

Transparent Tony

2006-01-07T10:36:00.000Z

From the latest (dead-tree) issue of Private Eye

“When you’re at school and tell a whopping great lie to get yourself out of trouble, you probably think you’re being clever. In fact, it’s not you at all. It’s Transparent Tony. He likes to sit in children’s hair and whisper half-truths in their ears. A word of warning though. Transparent Tony is the worst liar in the whole world, because everyone can see straight through him. So, if you are telling a lie, and you think it’s one of Tony’s, stop! Nobody will be fooled.” Rix, J. (1992) Ghostly Tales for Ghastly Kids.

At last! I don’t have to call the bastard “Poodle” or “Bliar”. From now on it’s Transparent Tony!

Note to self: buy this book…

Albums of the Year

2005-12-30T13:50:00.000Z

Instead of a political rant, I thought I’d give my views on the albums I’ve bought this year (only counting those which were released this year, not stuff on special offer), and try to come up with some sort of ranking:

Arcade Fire – Funeral (ltd. ed)
Dramatic, noisy, quiet, Canadian. What else needs to be said?

Best track: Neighborhood (damn Yank-lish) #3 (Power Out)

Autolux – Future Perfect (ltd. ed)
Shoegazing! Because of this it automatically gets a good rating!

Best track: Turnstile Blues.

Black Rebel Motorcycle Club – Howl (ltd. ed)
They’ve stopping being a Jesus & Mary Chain rip-off (not that that’s a bad thing) and decided to become a blues band. They still sound like they’re on the smack though…

Best track: Weight of the World.

Beck – Guero (ltd. ed)
Linking up again with the Dust Brothers to make Odelay II (minus the commercial success) – yay!

Best track: Girl.

Bloc Party – Silent Alarm (non-ltd ed)
I was a bit disappointed with this album, especially after seeing how great they are live – the singles are top, but there’s a bit too much filler material. Hopefully, they’ll get into the swing of things next time round.

Best track: Helicopter (it would be She’s Hearing Voices, but they re-recorded it, instead of using the original version which came out in February 2004)

British Sea Power – Open Season (ltd. ed)
I’d actually forgotten how good this album is – they should play it more on the radio. Are you listening XFM and 6 Music?

Saying that, it needs an obvious radio-friendly (unit-shifting) track, like their debut The Decline of BSP that had Remember Me.

Best track: Oh Larsen B

The Chemical Brothers – Push the Button
After the letdown of Come With Us, comes this, which is possibly their best work, or at the very least equal to Dig Your Own Hole, even if it doesn’t quite reach the level of Surrender.

Best track: Galvanize – what a way to mark your comeback!

DJ Format – If you can’t join ‘em, beat ‘em
Old-skool daisy-age hip-hop (mo’fo!).

Best track: Ugly Brothers – true to life…

Doves – Some Cities (ltd. ed)
I was really looking forward to this one, as their first two (Lost Souls and The Last Broadcast) are fantastic. Unfortunately, like with Bloc Party, I felt a bit let down – they didn’t seem to push on like they have done before. It’s a bit more laid back, but lacks the shoe-gazing aspects of their previous work. Just hope it’s a temporary blip.

Best track: Black and White Town: living in a satellite-town it rings true.

Editors – The Back Room
Part-Joy Division, part-Doves – yay!

Best track: Munich.

Elbow – Leaders of the Free World (non-ltd ed)
More misery from the only good thing to come out of Bury (No, the Neville brothers DO NOT count)!

Best track: Leaders of the Free World.

The Fiery Furnaces – Rehearsing my Choir
Typically weird stuff from the Furnaces: a concept album about their grandma!

It takes a few listens to get into (even more than their previous one: Blueberry Boat), but, like Blueberry Boat, it’s definitely worth the effort.

Best track: it’s hard to pick one stand-out track, as they all link together so you really need to listen to the whole album.

Franz Ferdinand – You Could have it so much Better (non-ltd ed)
Expanding on their debut – I think I prefer this. I guess we do have it so much better…

Best track: You’re the Reason I’m Leaving.

Goldfrapp – Supernature (non-ltd ed)
More electro from Ms. Goldfrapp & t’other guy. Not as in your face as Black Cherry – it’s more sensual (?) – but still worth listening to.

Best track: Fly me Away.

Gorillaz – Demon Days (non-ltd ed)
Ten years ago, who would have thought that mockney-stereotype Damon Albarn would be able to successfully re-invent himself as a B-boy, not once, but twice?

Best track: Dare – it’s got Shaun Ryder sounding even more rambling than normal, which is always a good sign!

I am Kloot – Gods and Monsters
Pity they’ve been dropped – shame on you Echo.

Best track: Over my Shoulder.

Joy Zipper – The Heartlight Set
Part-shoegazing, part-Beach Boys-esque sunny-ness.

Best track: 1.

The Kills – No Wow (non-ltd ed)
Part-dance, part-smack-filled rock. Similar to their debut, but slightly more dance-y.

Best track: Good Ones.

LCD Soundsystem – LCD Soundsystem (ltd. ed)
NYC punk-dance. Leaning more to the dancier-side, unlike Supersystem.

Best track: Daft Punk is Playing in my House (despite the poor grammar: it should be Daft Punk are Playing in my House)

M. I. A. – Arular (ltd. ed)
A mixture of hip-hop, bhangra and dance.

Best track: Amazon – more of a laid-back track, but somehow it appears more dramatic in context.

Maxïmo Park – A Certain Trigger (non-ltd ed)
Mates of the Futureheads (even though MP are Geordies, not Mackems) and sound similar to ‘em. Again, this is not necessarily a bad thing.

Best track: Apply Some Pressure – spiky stop-start guitars and easy to sign along (but not to dance) to.

Out Hud – Let us Never Speak of it Again
More NYC punk-dance, this time sounding like !!! (possibly because it’s their spin-off band).

Best track: One Life to Lead.

Rilo Kiley – More Adventurous
Like the British Sea Power LP, I’d actually forgotten how good this album is. Indie-folky-country stuff.

Best track: Portions for Foxes.

Sigur Rós – Takk… (ltd. ed)
Glacial, Icelandic, weird (possibly a repetition).

Best track: As with the Fiery Furnaces, it’s hard to pick out a stand-out track, as they’re as good as ach other and mostly sung in Icelandic (I think).

Supersystem – Always Never Again
(Even) more NYC punk-dance. Leaning more to the (fast-paced) rockier-side, unlike LCD Soundsystem.

Best track: Born into the World.

The Warlocks – Surgery
Sounding like BRMC did on their first album, i.e. they sound like the Jesus & Mary Chain!

Best track: Just like Surgery.

26 albums (excluding stuff that I bought on special offer) – I buy too much music!

My Top 10 Albums of 2005:

Arcade Fire – Funeral

Maximo Park – A Certain Trigger

LCD Soundsystem – LCD Soundsystem

M. I. A. – Arular

Fiery Furnaces – Rehearsing my Choir

Sigur Rós – Takk…

Chemical Brothers – Push the Button

Gorillaz – Demon Days

Franz Ferdinand – You Could Have it so Much Better

Autolux – Future Perfect

Craig Murray, pt II

2005-12-29T19:02:00.000Z

Following on from the earlier post about Craig Murray’s troubles over his book, we have this transcript of fax sent 25 March 2003 (pinched from Bloggerheads) from the Foreign Office (the actual fax is here):

From: Michael Wood, Legal Advisor
Date: 13 March 2003
CC: PS/PUS; Matthew Kidd, WLD
Linda Duffield

UZBEKISTAN: INTELLIGENCE POSSIBLY OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE

Your record of our meeting with HMA Tashkent recorded that Craig had said that his understanding was that it was also an offence under the UN Convention on Torture to receive or possess information under torture. I said that I did not believe that this was the case, but undertook to re-read the Convention.

I have done so. There is nothing in the Convention to this effect. The nearest thing is article 15 which provides: "Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made."

This does not create any offence. I would expect that under UK law any statement established to have been made as a result of torture would not be admissible as evidence.

[signed]
M C Wood
Legal Adviser

There are some real sick bastards working for the government; it’s people like Mr. Wood who give the rest of us lawyers a bad reputation.

This would explain why the government went to the House of Lords to try and get torture allowed in our courts.

Craig Murray, pt I

2005-12-29T18:47:00.000Z

According to Blair Watch, Craig Murray (the guy who was the UK’s ambassador to Uzbekistan) is attempting to get a book published, but the Foreign Office, i.e. Jack Straw, are trying to make him delete certain parts, including the following:

Association for Democracy in Uzbekistan – Confidential letters
Association for Democracy in Uzbekistan - Confidential letters
Confidential letters from Ambassador Craig Murray...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter #1
Confidential
FM Tashkent
TO FCO, Cabinet Office, DFID, MODUK, OSCE Posts, Security Council Posts
16 September 02
SUBJECT: US/Uzbekistan: Promoting Terrorism

SUMMARY

US plays down human rights situation in Uzbekistan. A dangerous policy: increasing repression combined with poverty will promote Islamic terrorism. Support to Karimov regime a bankrupt and cynical policy.

DETAIL

The Economist of 7 September states: "Uzbekistan, in particular, has jailed many thousands of moderate Islamists, an excellent way of converting their families and friends to extremism." The Economist also spoke of "the growing despotism of Mr Karimov" and judged that "the past year has seen a further deterioration of an already grim human rights record". I agree.

Between 7,000 and 10,000 political and religious prisoners are currently detained, many after trials before kangaroo courts with no representation. Terrible torture is commonplace: the EU is currently considering a demarche over the terrible case of two Muslims tortured to death in jail apparently with boiling water. Two leading dissidents, Elena Urlaeva and Larissa Vdovna, were two weeks ago committed to a lunatic asylum, where they are being drugged, for demonstrating on human rights. Opposition political parties remain banned. There is no doubt that September 11 gave the pretext to crack down still harder on dissent under the guise of counter-terrorism.

Yet on 8 September the US State Department certified that Uzbekistan was improving in both human rights and democracy, thus fulfilling a constitutional requirement and allowing the continuing disbursement of $140 million of US aid to Uzbekistan this year. Human Rights Watch immediately published a commendably sober and balanced rebuttal of the State Department claim.

Again we are back in the area of the US accepting sham reform [a reference to my previous telegram on the economy]. In August media censorship was abolished, and theoretically there are independent media outlets, but in practice there is absolutely no criticism of President Karimov or the central government in any Uzbek media. State Department call this self-censorship: I am not sure that is a fair way to describe an unwillingness to experience the brutal methods of the security services.

Similarly, following US pressure when Karimov visited Washington, a human rights NGO has been permitted to register. This is an advance, but they have little impact given that no media are prepared to cover any of their activities or carry any of their statements.

The final improvement State quote is that in one case of murder of a prisoner the police involved have been prosecuted. That is an improvement, but again related to the Karimov visit and does not appear to presage a general change of policy.

On the latest cases of torture deaths the Uzbeks have given the OSCE an incredible explanation, given the nature of the injuries, that the victims died in a fight between prisoners.

But allowing a single NGO, a token prosecution of police officers and a fake press freedom cannot possibly outweigh the huge scale of detentions, the torture and the secret executions. President Karimov has admitted to 100 executions a year but human rights groups believe there are more. Added to this, all opposition parties remain banned (the President got a 98% vote) and the Internet is strictly controlled. All Internet providers must go through a single government server and access is barred to many sites including all dissident and opposition sites and much international media (including, ironically, waronterrorism.com). This is in essence still a totalitarian state: there is far less freedom than still prevails, for example, in Mugabe's Zimbabwe. A Movement for Democratic Change or any judicial independence would be impossible here.

Karimov is a dictator who is committed to neither political nor economic reform. The purpose of his regime is not the development of his country but the diversion of economic rent to his oligarchic supporters through government controls. As a senior Uzbek academic told me privately, there is more repression here now than in Brezhnev's time. The US are trying to prop up Karimov economically and to justify this support they need to claim that a process of economic and political reform is underway. That they do so claim is either cynicism or self-delusion.

This policy is doomed to failure. Karimov is driving this resource-rich country towards economic ruin like an Abacha. And the policy of increasing repression aimed indiscriminately at pious Muslims, combined with a deepening poverty, is the most certain way to ensure continuing support for the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. They have certainly been decimated and disorganised in Afghanistan, and Karimov's repression may keep the lid on for years – but pressure is building and could ultimately explode.

I quite understand the interest of the US in strategic airbases and why they back Karimov, but I believe US policy is misconceived. In the short term it may help fight terrorism but in the medium term it will promote it, as the Economist points out. And it can never be right to lower our standards on human rights. There is a complex situation in Central Asia and it is wrong to look at it only through a prism picked up on September 12. Worst of all is what appears to be the philosophy underlying the current US view of Uzbekistan: that September 11 divided the World into two camps in the "War against Terrorism" and that Karimov is on "our" side.

If Karimov is on "our" side, then this war cannot be simply between the forces of good and evil. It must be about more complex things, like securing the long-term US military presence in Uzbekistan. I silently wept at the 11 September commemoration here. The right words on New York have all been said. But last week was also another anniversary – the US-led overthrow of Salvador Allende in
Chile. The subsequent dictatorship killed, dare I say it, rather more people than died on September 11. Should we not remember then also, and learn from that too? I fear that we are heading down the same path of US-sponsored dictatorship here. It is ironic that the beneficiary is perhaps the most unreformed of the World's old communist leaders.

We need to think much more deeply about Central Asia. It is easy to place Uzbekistan in the "too difficult" tray and let the US run with it, but I think they are running in the wrong direction. We should tell them of the dangers we see. Our policy is theoretically one of engagement, but in practice this has not meant much. Engagement makes sense, but it must mean grappling with the problems, not mute collaboration. We need to start actively to state a distinctive position on democracy and human rights, and press for a realistic view to be taken in the IMF. We should continue to resist pressures to start a bilateral DFID programme, unless channelled non-governmentally, and not restore ECGD cover despite the constant lobbying. We should not invite Karimov to the UK. We should step up our public diplomacy effort, stressing democratic values, including more resources from the British Council. We should increase support to human rights activists, and strive for contact with non-official Islamic groups.

Above all we need to care about the 22 million Uzbek people, suffering from poverty and lack of freedom. They are not just pawns in the new Great Game.

MURRAY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter #2
Confidential
Fm Tashkent
To FCO
18 March 2003
SUBJECT: US FOREIGN POLICY

SUMMARY

1. As seen from Tashkent, US policy is not much focused on democracy or freedom. It is about oil, gas and hegemony. In Uzbekistan the US pursues those ends through supporting a ruthless dictatorship. We must not close our eyes to uncomfortable truth.

DETAIL

2. Last year the US gave half a billion dollars in aid to Uzbekistan, about a quarter of it military aid. Bush and Powell repeatedly hail Karimov as a friend and ally. Yet this regime has at least seven thousand prisoners of conscience; it is a one-party state without freedom of speech, without freedom of media, without freedom of movement, without freedom of assembly, without freedom of religion.
It practices, systematically, the most hideous tortures on thousands. Most of the population lives in conditions precisely analogous with medieval serfdom.

3. Uzbekistan's geo-strategic position is crucial. It has half the population of the whole of Central Asia. It alone borders all the other states in a region which is important to future Western oil and gas supplies. It is the regional military power. That is why the US is here, and here to stay. Contractors at the US military bases are extending the design life of the buildings from ten to twenty five years.

4. Democracy and human rights are, despite their protestations to the contrary, in practice a long way down the US agenda here. Aid this year will be slightly less, but there is no intention to introduce any meaningful conditionality. Nobody can believe this level of aid – more than US aid to all of West Africa – is related to comparative developmental need as opposed to political support for Karimov. While the US makes token and low-level references to human rights to appease domestic opinion, they view Karimov's vicious regime as a bastion against fundamentalism. He – and they – are in fact creating fundamentalism. When the US gives this much support to a regime that tortures people to death for having a beard or praying five times a day, is it any surprise that Muslims come to hate the West?

5. I was stunned to hear that the US had pressured the EU to withdraw a motion on Human Rights in Uzbekistan which the EU was tabling at the UN Commission for Human Rights in Geneva. I was most unhappy to find that we are helping the US in what I can only call this cover-up. I am saddened when the US constantly quotes fake improvements in human rights in Uzbekistan, such as the abolition of censorship and Internet freedom, which quite simply have not happened (I see these are quoted in the draft EBRD strategy for Uzbekistan, again I understand at American urging).

6. From Tashkent it is difficult to agree that we and the US are activated by shared values. Here we have a brutal US sponsored dictatorship reminiscent of Central and South American policy under previous US Republican administrations. I watched George Bush talk today of Iraq and "dismantling the apparatus of terror… removing the torture chambers and the rape rooms". Yet when it comes to the Karimov regime, systematic torture and rape appear to be treated as peccadilloes, not to affect the relationship and to be downplayed in international fora. Double standards? Yes.

7. I hope that once the present crisis is over we will make plain to the US, at senior level, our serious concern over their policy in Uzbekistan.

MURRAY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter #3
CONFIDENTIAL
FM TASHKENT
TO IMMEDIATE FCO
TELNO 63
OF 220939 JULY 04
INFO IMMEDIATE DFID, ISLAMIC POSTS, MOD, OSCE POSTS UKDEL EBRD
LONDON, UKMIS GENEVA, UKMIS MEW YORK
SUBJECT: RECEIPT OF INTELLIGENCE OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE

SUMMARY

1. We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek intelligence services, via the US. We should stop. It is bad information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to confessions showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to believe, that they and we are fighting the same war against terror.

2. I gather a recent London interdepartmental meeting considered the question and decided to continue to receive the material. This is morally, legally and practically wrong. It exposes as hypocritical our post Abu Ghraib pronouncements and fatally undermines our moral standing. It obviates my efforts to get the Uzbek government to stop torture they are fully aware our intelligence community laps up the results.

3. We should cease all co-operation with the Uzbek Security Services they are beyond the pale. We indeed need to establish an SIS presence here, but not as in a friendly state.

DETAIL

4. In the period December 2002 to March 2003 I raised several times the issue of intelligence material from the Uzbek security services which was obtained under torture and passed to us via the CIA. I queried the legality, efficacy and morality of the practice.

5. I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to use intelligence acquired by torture. He said the only legal limitation on its use was that it could not be used in legal proceedings, under Article 15 of the UN Convention on Torture.

6. On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that they found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct bearing on the war on terror. Linda Duffield said that she had been asked to assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and understood.

7. Sir Michael Jay's circular of 26 May stated that there was a reporting obligation on us to report torture by allies (and I have been instructed to refer to Uzbekistan as such in the context of the war on terror). You, Sir, have made a number of striking, and I believe heartfelt, condemnations of torture in the last few weeks. I had in the light of this decided to return to this question and to highlight an apparent contradiction in our policy. I had intimated as much to the Head of
Eastern Department.

8. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that without informing me of the meeting, or since informing me of the result of the meeting, a meeting was convened in the FCO at the level of Heads of Department and above, precisely to consider the question of the receipt of Uzbek intelligence material obtained under torture. As the office knew, I was in London at the time and perfectly able to attend the meeting. I still have only gleaned that it happened.

9. I understand that the meeting decided to continue to obtain the Uzbek torture material. I understand that the principal argument deployed was that the intelligence material disguises the precise source, ie it does not ordinarily reveal the name of the individual who is tortured. Indeed this is true – the material is marked with a euphemism such as "From detainee debriefing." The argument runs that if the individual is not named, we cannot prove that he was tortured.

10. I will not attempt to hide my utter contempt for such casuistry, nor my shame that I work in and organisation where colleagues would resort to it to justify torture. I have dealt with hundreds of individual cases of political or religious prisoners in Uzbekistan, and I have met with very few where torture, as defined in the UN convention, was not employed. When my then DHM raised the question with the CIA head of station 15 months ago, he readily acknowledged torture was deployed in obtaining intelligence. I do not think there is any doubt as to the fact

11. The torture record of the Uzbek security services could hardly be more widely known. Plainly there are, at the very least, reasonable grounds for believing the material is obtained under torture. There is helpful guidance at Article 3 of the UN Convention;
"The competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights."
While this article forbids extradition or deportation to Uzbekistan, it is the right test for the present question also.

12. On the usefulness of the material obtained, this is irrelevant. Article 2 of the Convention, to which we are a party, could not be plainer:
"No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."

13. Nonetheless, I repeat that this material is useless – we are selling our souls for dross. It is in fact positively harmful. It is designed to give the message the Uzbeks want the West to hear. It exaggerates the role, size, organisation and activity of the IMU and its links with Al Qaida. The aim is to convince the West that the Uzbeks are a vital cog against a common foe, that they should keep the assistance, especially military assistance, coming, and that they should mute the international criticism on human rights and economic reform.

14. I was taken aback when Matthew Kydd said this stuff was valuable. Sixteen months ago it was difficult to argue with SIS in the area of intelligence assessment. But post Butler we know, not only that they can get it wrong on even the most vital and high profile issues, but that they have a particular yen for highly coloured material which exaggerates the threat. That is precisely what the
Uzbeks give them. Furthermore MI6 have no operative within a thousand miles of me and certainly no expertise that can come close to my own in making this assessment.

15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two of his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a confession on the family's links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.

16. I have been considering Michael Wood's legal view, which he kindly gave in writing. I cannot understand why Michael concentrated only on Article 15 of the Convention. This certainly bans the use of material obtained under torture as evidence in proceedings, but it does not state that this is the sole exclusion of the use of such material.

17. The relevant article seems to me Article 4, which talks of complicity in torture. Knowingly to receive its results appears to be at least arguable as complicity. It does not appear that being in a different country to the actual torture would preclude complicity. I talked this over in a hypothetical sense with my old friend Prof Francois Hampson, I believe an acknowledged World authority on the Convention, who said that the complicity argument and the spirit of the Convention would be likely to be winning points. I should be grateful to hear Michael's views on this.

18. It seems to me that there are degrees of complicity and guilt, but being at one or two removes does not make us blameless. There are other factors. Plainly it was a breach of Article 3 of the Convention for the coalition to deport detainees back here from Baghram, but it has been done. That seems plainly complicit.

19. This is a difficult and dangerous part of the World. Dire and increasing poverty and harsh repression are undoubtedly turning young people here towards radical Islam. The Uzbek government are thus creating this threat, and perceived US support for Karimov strengthens anti-Western feeling. SIS ought to establish a presence here, but not as partners of the Uzbek Security Services, whose sheer brutality puts them beyond the pale.

MURRAY

Greece/MI5

2005-12-28T22:41:00.000Z

A Greek newspaper Proto Thema (can’t find a website for it) has named the head of MI6 in Greece, who’s supposed to be involved in the abduction and mistreatment of 28 Pakistani immigrants (or as the Secret Service would probably call ‘em “Fuckin’ Paki’s”). Our beloved government has banned the media from naming him, but has sent him back home.

If anyone has his name, send it to the address linked to on the top right of the screen. I'd also accept any English-langaue artuicles which name him (original or translated from Greek).

UPDATE: According to Cryptome, the guy's name is Nicholas Langman and is on the Foreign Office's Diplomatic list. Why try to stop his name being published then, if you've already released it? They also have a scan of the actual Greek paper article. The Greek version of MI5 are complaining about it.

UPDATE: Private Eye have also published his name in their latest issue (dead-tree version only).

Enjoyed the Silence

2005-12-28T21:36:00.000Z

... as Depeche Mode once said.

You may have noticed that I've not posted on this thing for almost 2 weeks.

There's nothing important to blame: part-Xmas-related work/family things, part-buying a Gamecube & spending my time playing on that, and part needing time to replenish the bile. A down-sde of this is that I'm a bit out-of-touch with current world events: I didn't know the following:

A US judge had banned "Intelligent Design" as it violated the First Amendment,
Iraqi elections which have created a theocracy... (yay!), or
A big carol service/demonstration within 1 km of parliament, without prior aproval (and so was illegal),
The Canadian Supreme Court says that group sex in private clubs is legal
The US Government has severe problems with due process "One government official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the administration complained bitterly that the FISA process demanded too much: to name a target and give a reason to spy on it.
Bolivia is the latest S. American country to vote for someone not backed by the Yanks (expect a coup next year), as CNN says it is a "nightmare" result,
The stupidest political quotes of the year (being US-biased, it doesn't include Poodle's "There is no justification for Iran or any other country interfering in Iraq"),
The FOIA blog had a response to their request over their Al-Jazeera memo request: the govt admit they have info on it, but say they won't release it as it's exempt under s.27 FOIA 2000, which refers to confidential information which could piss off other countries (which shouldn't be a reason at all).

My next post (which I've been working on for a while) won't be a political rant (!), but will be about the different albums I've bought during this year, giving my views & recommendations on them and then coming up with (or at least trying to) a list of what I think has been the best of the past 12 months (some you will have heard of, some you may have heard of, some you probably won't!).

Who is this aimed at?

2005-12-15T19:38:00.000Z

A quote from an official at the Israeli Foreign Ministry over the Iranian President’s Holocaust comments:

"The combination of extremist ideology, a warped understanding of reality and nuclear weapons is a combination that no one in the international community can accept."

As I wrote on Whatever it is I’m Against it: This could apply to so many countries.

No inquiry into bombs

2005-12-14T19:52:00.000Z

Bliar’s not going to have an inquiry into the London bombs, on the grounds that "we would end up diverting a massive amount of police and security service time and I don't think it would be sensible", instead we’ll have a “definitive account” of what happened, i.e. what they want us to think happened. Relatives of the victims are opposed to the idea and will keep on campaigning for one.

I know this is a complete long-shot, but I don’t think it’ll mention the problems with the train times that the bombers supposedly boarded.

Move along, nothing to see here…

Israel plans Iran attack for March

2005-12-11T21:26:00.000Z

Ariel “Little Mermaid” Sharon wants an attack on Iran by March.

Once again I refer you to the start up time of the Euro-denominated Iranian oil bourse (see this article for more), after all: money talks.

Torture quotes

2005-12-09T22:19:00.000Z

I was reading yesterday's House of Lords judgement on torture and thought I'd quote some enlightening parts:

One of the first acts of the Long Parliament in 1640 was... to abolish the Court of Star Chamber, where torture evidence had been received, and in that year the last torture warrant in our history was issued. (p. 6)

"Once torture has become acclimatized in a legal system it spreads like an infectious disease. It saves the labour of investigation. It hardens and brutalizes those who have become accustomed to use it." Sir William Holdsworth (quoted on p. 7)

The prinicple agsint using forced evdience has spread to other legal systems (although the ones listed are based on English law):

"Rochin v California: “States in their prosecutions respect certain decencies of civilized conduct”

The People (Attorney General) v O’Brien, the Supreme Court of Ireland held... that "to countenance the use of evidence extracted or discovered by gross personal violence would... involve the State in moral defilement.” (p. 10)

There can be few issues on which international legal opinion is more clear than on the condemnation of torture. Offenders have been recognised as the “common enemies of mankind” (Demjanjuk v Petrovsky) Lord Cooke of Thorndon has described the right not to be subjected to inhuman treatment as a “right inherent in the concept of civilisation” (Higgs v Minister of National Security), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has described the right to be free from torture as “fundamental and universal” (Siderman de Blake v Argentina) and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture (Mr Peter Koojimans) has said that “If ever a phenomenon was outlawed unreservedly and unequivocally it is torture” (p. 28)

Article 12 of the 1975 Declaration on Torture: “Any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment may not be invoked as evidence against the person concerned or against any other person in any proceedings.” (p. 30)

Article 15 repeats the substance of this provision, subject to a qualification: “Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.”

The additional qualification makes plain the blanket nature of this exclusionary rule. It cannot possibly be read, as counsel for the Secretary of State submits, as intended to apply only in criminal proceedings. Nor can it be understood to differentiate between confessions and accusatory statements, or to apply only where the state in whose jurisdiction the proceedings are held has inflicted or been complicit in the torture. It would indeed be remarkable if national courts, exercising universal jurisdiction, could try a foreign torturer for acts of torture committed abroad, but could nonetheless receive evidence obtained by such torture. (p. 30-1)

In the United States.. it had been said to be “unthinkable that a statement obtained by torture or by other conduct belonging only in a police state should be admitted at the government’s behest in order to bolster its case”: LaFrance v Bohlinger.

In their work on The United Nations Convention against Torture (1988), p 148, Burgers and Danelius suggest that article 15 of the Torture Convention is based on two principles: “The rule laid down in article 15 would seem to be based on two different considerations. First of all, it is clear that a statement made under torture is often an unreliable statement, and it could therefore be contrary to the principle of ‘fair trial’ to invoke such a statement as evidence before a court... In the second place, it should be recalled that torture is often aimed at ensuring evidence in judicial proceedings. Consequently, if a statement made under torture cannot be invoked as evidence, an important reason for using torture is removed, and the prohibition against the use of such statements as evidence before a court can therefore have the indirect effect of preventing torture.” (p. 32)

Lord Bingham also states "I am not impressed by the argument based on the practical undesirability of upsetting foreign regimes which may resort to torture. This is an exercise which could scarcely be carried out without investigating whether the evidence had been obtained by torture, and, if so, when, by whom, in what circumstances and for what purpose. Such an investigation would almost inevitably call for an approach to the regime which is said to have carried out the torture." (p. 39), as well as saying "But the English common law has regarded torture and its fruits with abhorrence for over 500 years, and that abhorrence is now shared by over 140 countries which have acceded to the Torture Convention. I am startled, even a little dismayed, at the suggestion (and the acceptance by the Court of Appeal majority) that this deeply-rooted tradition and an international obligation solemnly and explicitly undertaken can be overridden by a statute and a procedural rule which make no mention of torture at all." (p. 40)

As Lord Caswell says "[By not resorting to torture, a country] will uphold the values encapsulated in the judgment of the Supreme Court of Israel in Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v Israel: “Although a democracy must often fight with one hand tied behind its back, it nonetheless has the upper hand. Preserving the rule of law and recognition of an individual’s liberty constitutes an important component in its understanding of security. At the end of the day, they strengthen its spirit and its strength and allow it to overcome its difficulties.” (p. 80-1)

Operation Mirrorball follow-up

2005-12-08T19:38:00.000Z

A follow-up to a previous D-Notice about an arms dealer called Viktor Bout.

The Green Ribbon did an FoIA to the Ministry of Defence & their response seems to verify the original story.

Guess a D-Notice must've been served...

Civil liberties

2005-12-08T18:59:00.000Z

Over the past two days there's been two important court decisions from a civil rights perspective:

Yesterday, an anti-war protestor was convicted for protesting within 1 km of Parilament without prior approval (Section 132 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005). What's worse is the Magistrate said the statute didn't violate the Human Right Act! She was given a conditional discharge. Let's hope it gets overturned on appeal... See also the other links in the Illegal Protest special report, as well as the always informative Parliament Protest blog. I've previously told Distillated that the reason we need jury trials is for laws like this - no jury is ever going to convict someone of protesting their government, especially when it's a peaceful protest, while a Magistrate will convict someone, as they just look at the law itself, not the wider aspects. This probably explains Labour's war on jury trials.
Today the House of Lords ruled 7-0 (see here for judgement) that "evidence" gained from torture can't be used in UK courts (thank fuck!). It shows how much society's standards have dropped that this case ever had to get to the Lords.

7/7 trains FoIA

2005-12-06T19:12:00.000Z

I've previously said there is some dispute as to the exact times over the train times that were used by the alleged bombers on 7th July. A Freedom of Information request has been made over the exact times that the trains set off.

It was rejected as the Met Police claim the information is already in the public domain.

The blog has made previous efforts to obtain the information via the Home Office & Department of Transport, with some success, but not enough to complete their queries (which is why they asked the Met Police).

The Antagonist has more on the subject.

Iran preps to sell oil in Euros

2005-12-04T21:31:00.000Z

In the past I’ve said that Iran plans on selling its oil in Euros (€), instead of the standard US$.

Well the ability to buy Iranian oil in is one step closer:

The Chairman of the Majlis Energy Commission, Kamal Daneshyar said here, on Friday, that preparatory measures have been taken to sell oil in euros instead of dollar, adding that such a measure is quite positive and should be taken as soon as possible.

As for the probable consequences of such a decision, Daneshyar said that when such a measure is taken, the United States would soon realize that it is not the one who can always inflict economic damages on the Islamic Republic and that Iran can also get even with it.

Daneshyar who also represents Mahshahr in the Majlis noted that prior to this the way was not paved for undertaking such a program, adding that fortunately the present government possesses the necessary management bravery to prepare the ground for taking such a measure.

Doesn’t say for certain when it’ll happen, just a case of when not if though (as long as the US/UK/Israel don’t bomb the shit out of it first…).

Remember, the USA officially is bankrupt (over $8 trillion in debt, as of 1st December). The only reason anyone buys US$ is because oil is demoninated in it (and so you have to have US$ in order to buy it). If the world changes to Petro-€ standard, then, according to the US Navy's Center for Contemporary Conflict, it would lose somewhere between 20-40% of its value (as countries would have to swap their US$ reserves for €s)!

Memo campaign in the Times

2005-12-03T22:50:00.000Z

The Al-Jazeera memo campaign’s had a mention in today's Times, which has this comment:

The bloggers’ strategy could complicate the position of Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney- General, who warned the media not to publish the document. Being seen to send hundreds of ordinary people to prison over the matter could prove politically suicidal for the Government.

They’ve stumbled upon our motive! However, this is the Labour “Let’s ban people from protesting within 1 km of Parliament & arrest people for shouting ‘Nonsense’ at Jack Straw” Party we’re talking about…

Which is more accurate?

2005-12-03T17:35:00.000Z

This is a very good satire (AVI format)/more accurate version of the government’s official ID cards propaganda video (for which they spend £72,000 on 250 DVDs!) done by someone at my old university.

Memo update

2005-11-29T20:21:00.000Z

Latest news on the Al-Jazeera memo: according to Blair Watch, there are two memos, i.e. the one in the Times from last year & the one in the Mirror from last week are different & that the two people on trial are charged over only one of ‘em.

As Blair Watch say:

If what was reported by the BBC on 17th November, prior to the Mirror story is correct; that Keogh and O'Connor are being prosecuted over the leak of the document 'Iraq in The Medium Term' as published in the Times [May 2004], and not for leaking the source of the Mirror article then the Bliar and his official spokesman would be leaving themselves wide open by describing the Mirror story as 'sub-judice'.

If the Mirror is correct in it's assertion that Keogh and O'Connor are being charged over the source of their story [the transcript], then the story reported by the BBC about them being charged over the leaking of the 'Iraq in the Medium Term' memo was a construct, a 'beard' to cover up the existence of the document referred by the Mirror.

This means our government must have pre planned and disseminated the lie [or spin if you prefer]; that Keogh and O’Connor were being prosecuted over the leaking of the 'Iraq in the medium term' memo.

To cover up the existance of the 'Lets bomb Al-Jazeera' transcript?A plan derailed by the Mirror obtaining a copy and publishing it's story.

The BBC ran the story about Keogh and O'Connor's prosecution on the 17th of November.The Mirror state they approached the Government with their story about Bush wanting to Bomb al-Jazeera 24 hours before publication, on the 22nd of November.

This was four days after we 'learned' via the BBC that Keogh and O'Connor were to be charged with the leak of the 'Iraq in the Medium Term' memo.
If this is the case, the Mirror story did not precipitate the lie [spin] that was reported either wittingly or unwittingly by the BBC on the 17th November, it exposed it.

If we accept Peter Killfoyle's word (and I do) that the Times article and the Mirror article are from different sources, then Keogh and O'Connor cannot be facing charges over both leaks.Either way we are being told lies by our government, and either wittingly or unwittingly by the mainstream media.

Memo FoIA request

2005-11-28T19:16:00.000Z

The FoIA blog has put in a FoIA request for the Al-Jazeera memo & has got a reply back within a day… maybe they’re responding to public pressure…

There’s also an opinion piece in the Guardian over the situation.

More Parliament protests

2005-11-27T17:46:00.000Z

Some more people have been arrested for an unauthorised protest within 1 km of Parliament.

Two women were arrested on Friday 25th November while holding a bell-ringing ceremony outside Parliament to remember the estimated 100,000 people who had died since the beginning of the war in Iraq.

However, according to Indymedia UK (at least some of) the police don't seem to support the law:

One policeman was heard saying 'I wish I could join you. I wish I could do what you're doing. This is filthy. This is very hard for all of us'.

The women were taken to Charing Cross Police Station but later released without charges. As well as being reluctant to arrest, the Police also seemed concerned at the possibility of two more people challenging the new laws.

This may explain the lack of action when I put a new sign up in the "Designated Area"... I wonder if they've mentioned their concerns to the head of the Met Police Sir Ian "Give us more powers for your own good" Blair?

Civil disobedience can make any law unworkable, as seems to be happening!

Time to move on...

2005-11-27T17:44:00.000Z

I've previously mentioned that the Serious Organised Crime Act was created to victimise an anti-war protestor who's camped outside Parliament.

Well from Bloggerheads, comes this:

Britain's most persistent anti-war demonstrator was today ordered to quit his protest. Parliament Square protester Brian Haw has been served with a legal notice to dismantle his makeshift peace camp opposite the House of Commons. Ministers expect him to be gone by August.... Mr Haw's removal would end demonstrations outside the Houses of Parliament for the first time in 350 years. [i.e. since before the Civil War when we had a war-mongering leader who thought he had a divine right to rule the country & no-one could tell him otherwise... Wait a minute... that seems strangely familiar. Why?] The Home Office brought in special laws last month overturning the centuries-old right of people to challenge their elected representatives outside Westminster. They claimed the measures were needed for security reasons.

"Security reasons", yeah right! It's to embarrassing seeing him every day reminding everyone what you've done & you can't handle it.

So much for having a democratic right to speak out & protest about the actions of your government... Guess it only applies if you're supporting the government.

D-Notice Specials

Good news on ID cards?

The costs of ID cards

2006: A Musical Odyessey

The Lone Carol Singer

The Lone Carol Singer

Not one, but three databases!

Non-illegal protests?

Bliar's not as bad as Hitler!

Thinkpol

RFID passports cracked!

The People vs ID Cards

Delays and extra costs

How things change...

More technological problems with ID cards

The Citizen Registration Programme II

CCTV is a waste of time

Bliar's reasons for ID cards

Government censors evidence of corruption

How much will they cost?

In the Designated Area (III)...

White people are terrorists too!!!!!!

In the Designated Area (II)...

Applying for Permission...

In the Designated Area...

Permission granted!

Protest

The Citizen Registration Programme

The Lone Protestor

Cloned Biometric Passports/ID cards

Meet the new boss...

Deja-vu, all over again...

Iran

ID Cards are a balls-up: Official!

Craig Murray vs the Foreign Office

Nothing to see here...

NO EVIDENCE LINKING BIN LADEN WITH 11/9!

ID Cards delayed

The Manifesto

Sooner than you think!

I am a man, not a number!

Good news!

More on ID Cards

At the next General Election [and also in the up-coming Local Elections], at every Hustings, in every constituency up and down the country, we ask

Will you vote to abolish the National Identity Register?

ID cards news

Open for business?

Iranian Oil Bourse delayed

Freedom? Yeah, right!

(Only a)£2 billion defect on ID cards!

Council Elections

Lords will oppose ID cards

Public support and oppose ID cards!?

ID cards are already too expensive!

Letter to the Lords

How to get Labour out

Local Elections 2006

Reasons

No ID in Ireland

Fingerprints

Driving licence & ID cards

ID cards & discrimination

No ID Cards until 2009

How to get Labour out

Here come ID cards...

Iran would fight back

LSE vs Home Office

War on Drugs failure, redux

"I can stands no more!"

A million here, a million there...

Another illegal protest?

Biometrics AREN'T safe!

Troop build-up

More protest convictions

Deja-vu all over again

Try, try again

LSE ID cards report

4 more guilty of protesting

Worst technology of 2006

How SCOPA works II