By Larry Chin

With the hanging of Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration, the mastermind of 9/11, has stayed true to criminal form, staging yet another offensive, grotesque and violent act of murder, “celebrating” it, propagandizing it, and demanding that the entire world join the George W. Bush lynch mob.

The week-long Saddam murder carnival is classic Bush administration, classic Karl Rove: find a relatively quiet moment (a holiday for most of the world), during which people are distracted, to lob a political bomb that dominates world media for days, in the hopes of “shocking and awing” public opinion and destroying political opposition.

Bush-Cheney-Rice has promised to “stay the course,” and here is more proof that they will, and thumb their noses at the entire world in the process.

The barbaric hanging of Saddam Hussein, and the resulting gibberish from the mouth of the insane, murder-loving George W. Bush, does not change worldwide opposition to the criminal Anglo-American policy one iota. It does not hide the criminality of the Bush administration’s illegal invasion and occupation, or the multitudes of crimes committed over the past several years. It will not halt for one moment the investigations underway — the political hanging — that the opposing Washington faction has in store.

It does not hide the historical fact that Saddam Hussein was, and remains even in staged death, a creation of the United States — America’s strongman, the CIA’s Iraq asset, put into power, funded, nurtured and loved by the United States, and the best friend and business associate of George H.W. Bush. Let the photographs of Saddam Hussein shaking hands with the likes of Donald Rumsfeld speak for themselves.

Let the fact that all of the weaponry that Saddam Hussein used to commit atrocities was supplied by the United States, along with logistics and the political a-okay directly from Washington.

Indeed, who was truly responsible for those massacres?

Indeed, which individuals — which “brutal regime,” which “horrible dictators” — truly deserve to go to the gallows for mass murder and crimes against humanity?

Which individuals are responsible for the atrocities and mass murder that have been continuous and daily since 2003?

Like his historical strawman brethren (Manuel Noriega, Osama bin Laden, etc.) Saddam Hussein, for whatever reason, never fingered the men who made him, despite many opportunities presented during his three-year kangaroo court. A final act of loyalty, perhaps.

But facts are facts, and these facts are documented history, for anyone to look up.

Saddam Hussein’s execution, Bush’s latest incitement, is sure to fan more hatred, and roil the mushrooming civil war and chaos. It will make the despised Iraqi puppet government (composed entirely of US intelligence assets and traitors), all the more unable to manage the chaos and anger, and the impossible rifts between factions. This, too, is part of the larger Bush plan to foment further violence and create more terrorism across the Middle East, and end all talk of negotiation; all talk of a “change of course.” All so that US forces will never leave the region, never end the “war on terrorism.”

Could a staged capture and execution of “Osama bin Laden” be far behind?

The nightmare reality of a world in chaos, in flames at the hands of the Bush administration, can no longer be obscured by violent, grotesque Orwellian propaganda designed to distract and divide.

Information Liberation

On the Holy day of Eid, the world watched in horror at the barbaric lynching of President Saddam Hussein of Iraq, allegedly for crimes against humanity. This public murder was sanctioned by the War Criminals, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair.

This sadistic act broadcasted to the whole world is a travesty of justice, and was meant to demonstrate the imperial power of the United States and serves as a warning to peace loving peoples that we must either bow to the dictates of the Bush regime or face the consequences of a public lynching.

The lynching was also an insult to all Muslims, as it occurred on the Holy Day of Eid, whereby Muslims devote themselves to prayer and forgiveness. It is all too clear that the war criminal Bush has no sensitivities whatsoever for Muslims on their pilgrimage to Mecca. This barbaric act is a sacrilege!

The entire trial process was a mockery of justice, no less a Kangaroo Court. Defence counsels were brutally murdered, witnesses threatened and judges removed for being impartial and replaced by puppet judges. Yet, we are told that Iraq was invaded to promote democracy, freedom and justice.

A peaceful country has now been turned into a war zone. Over 500,000 children died as a result of the criminal economic sanctions, and the latest findings by the medical journal, Lancet reveals that over 650,000 Iraqis have died since the illegal invasion of 2003.

The War Criminal Bush has killed more Iraqis than President Saddam ever did, if in fact he was guilty of any crime. If President Saddam Hussein is guilty of war crimes, then the world must find Bush, Blair and Howard equally guilty and the International Criminal Court cannot but prosecute these war criminals. The inaction thus far by the International Criminal Court against Bush, Blair and Howard exposes the double standard of the said Court, when it does not hesitate to prosecute war crimes committed in Dalfur, Rwanda and Kosovo.

If we support human rights and justice, we must condemn this barbaric lynching of President Saddam Hussein. There can be no excuse whatsoever for this injustice under any circumstances. War Criminal Bush and the puppet regime in Iraq have made a mockery of the Rule of Law.

Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad,
Former Prime Minister of Malaysia,
Member of the International Committee, For the Defence of President Saddam Hussein

A new civil liberties controversy has flared up over the news that police chiefs are considering using high-powered microphones to “eavesdrop” – as critics will see it – on crowds at the London 2012 Olympics.

A high-ranking officer told the BBC the proposal to strengthen security by using microphones alongside closed-circuit TV involved “taking public surveillance to an entirely new level”.

But the former home secretary David Blunkett called publicly on the government to block the scheme.

He told BBC Radio Five Live’s Weekend News programme that the suggestion was “simply unacceptable”, and smacked of the “surveillance state”.

As you walk down the street you expect to be able to have a private conversation
David Blunkett

Mr Blunkett said the idea echoed the fictional authoritarian Brave New World of Aldous Huxley’s novel.

“As you walk down the street you expect to be able to have a private conversation,” he said.

“If you can’t guarantee that – and here is someone speaking who has been pretty tough in terms of what should be available to protect society – I believe we have slipped over the edge.”

As you walk down the street, you expect to be able to have a private conversation.

This simply CANNOT be real.

Does the subhuman adulterer actually think this? Is he joking? This is the very same loathsome David Blunkett that did all the evil that we railed against…..

But Mimi Majick chimes in:

Its because he is BLIND; sound to him is equivalent to sight for us. That is why he understands this. It shows you why you shouldn’t have somebody who is disabled in a position like Home Secretary, because they cannot represent us. He cannot possibly understand what having CCTV cameras in the street means, because he has no sight.

And I agree totally, and have said this before; a blind Home Secratary cannot judge what is obscene and what is not obscene because he cannot see porn.

But I digress.

This BASTARD now wants to defect from the dark side (no pun intended) and join the side of what is right?

What utter rubbish.

This proves yet again that the people behind the push for ID cards, biometrics and all that other hogwash simply don’t understand what it is that they are doing. They don’t understand the consequences, the ramifications, the results, and if it all gets rolled out, the police will be in charge and they will have the power to silence any politician that goes up against them because they will be able to see into every bedroom, every bank account and every nook and cranny of this great country. No one in any position of power will dare defy them because it means, as in the case of asshole Blunkett, that adulterous affairs will be exposed, and in the case of Bliar, bribery uncovered.

Told you so!

and this from Bruce’s November newsletter:

We can’t turn back technology; electronic communications are here to stay. But as technology makes our conversations less ephemeral, we need laws to step in and safeguard our privacy. We need a comprehensive data privacy law, protecting our data and communications regardless of where it is stored or how it is processed. We need laws forcing companies to keep it private and to delete it as soon as it is no longer needed.

And we need to remember, whenever we type and send, we’re being watched.

Foley is an anomaly. Most of us do not send instant messages in order to solicit sex with minors. Law enforcement might have a legitimate need to access Foley’s IMs, e-mails and cell phone calling logs, but that’s why there are warrants supported by probable cause–they help ensure that investigations are properly focused on suspected pedophiles, terrorists and other criminals. We saw this in the recent UK terrorist arrests; focused investigations on suspected terrorists foiled the plot, not broad surveillance of everyone without probable cause.

Without legal privacy protections, the world becomes one giant airport security area, where the slightest joke — or comment made years before — lands you in hot water. The world becomes one giant market-research study, where we are all life-long subjects. The world becomes a police state, where we all are assumed to be Foleys and terrorists in the eyes of the government.

http://tinyurl.com/ymmnee

Yes indeed. What you are describing is not a ‘giant airport security area’ but a Prison Planet.

Me too Me too!!!! :

Passengers at Heathrow had their fingerprints taken for the first time yesterday, in tests which could lead to routine biometric scanning at Britain’s airports.

A high-tech scanner was unveiled by the Government and eventually all passengers could be required to have iris and face scans.

Initially, passengers are being invited to have their fingerprints scanned in return for skipping boarding queues. If the scheme, known as miSense, proves succesful, it could be rolled out across the UK…

Telegraph

Copycat imbeciles!

This article, in the independent, is full of lies. Lets go!

There are up to 30 alleged “mass casualty” terror plots in operation in Britain,

This is a lie, just like all the other lies that have been dished out about bogus threats.

as well as hundreds of young British Muslims on a path to radicalisation, the head of MI5 has said.

There is no such thing as ‘radicalization’. You are murdering the relatives of these people and that is intolerable to any civilized person, as these people are. If someone were incinerating your cousins, you too would go berserk with anger.

Furthermore, you are shooting innocent people in their own homes simply because they are brown and have a beard. That is enough to make anyone take a bad attitude towards HMG, and its all for naught.

In an unprecedented public announcement yesterday, the MI5 director general, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, revealed that the caseload of the Security Services had risen by 80 per cent since January, and that the counter-terrorism agency was fighting to keep the rapidly growing threat under control

It has risen because you illegally invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, and committed mass murder in those places. If you withdraw and repent, then your caseload can return to levels and consist of what it should be; keeping track of what is in people’s garbage.

Describing the scale of the home-grown terrorist problem, she said MI5 and the police were tackling 200 groups or networks totalling more than 1,600 identified individuals in the UK who were “actively engaged in plotting or facilitating terrorist acts”.

The only thing ‘home grown’ about the ‘home-grown terrorist problem’ is that it has been hatched, nurtured and hand reared at Number 10 Downing Street. You know this. If you do not, you need to be sacked and replaced by someone who understands the problem and who genuinely has Britain’s interests at heart, and who is neutral. By coming out with this twaddle, you demonstrate that you are either not neutral (another one of Bliar’s liars) or you don’t understand the causes of the rage your government is fomenting. Either way, you are part of the problem.

Islamic militants linked to al -Qa’ida were recruiting teenagers to carry out attacks using chemicals, bacteriological agents, radioactive materials and even nuclear technology.

This is all a pack of nonsense. Just like the bogus ‘Ricin Plot‘ and the more recent ‘Liquids On Airplanes’ sharade. There are no such plans afoot, and if anyone is discussing them, it’s just ‘chatter’ and nothing substantial. In any case, if you want to talk about mass casualties, lets talk about the 650,000 murdered by Bliar and his henchmen. If you address that, in public, in an ‘unprecedented statement’ with frankness, you would be doing FAR MORE to shut down the chatter that is keeping you so ‘busy’, and perhaps these angry young men would start to believe that everyone in the UK is not out to kill them.

These people, are not stupid. Do you not think that they are using cellphones and the web to flood the channels with the keywords that you are looking for? Cypherpunks used to do this to make ECHELON incorrectly flag up communications. It’s done (in email) by putting trigger words in the body of your mail. The computers pick this up and flag it for the attention of a human. This keeps the ‘security’ services busy running around chasing phantoms.

This ‘battle’ cannot be won by using an axe to chop up the bucket carrying brooms. You have unleashed an unstoppable army of people who if they are cut down, bifurcate into two fighters, each as dedicated as the original. The only way to stop the onslaught is to break the magic spell that started it all off in the first place. And you know what that means.

Speaking to an audience at the department of contemporary British History at Queen Mary College in London, Dame Manningham-Buller said she was not seeking to be alarmist, and did not wish to stir up fear.

Now we are sure. You are one of Bliar’s Liars

But she added that because of the sheer scale of what MI5 faces, the issue is a daunting one. “We shan’t always make the right choices and we recognise that we shall have ‘scare sympathy’ if we are unable to prevent one of our targets committing an atrocity,” she said.

The only atrocity here is the dismantling of Britain and its cherished freedoms by a venal, monstrous, criminal gang of lying murders in thrall to The Great Satan. Yes, a mouthful. Leaves a bad taste too.

The nature of the threat was increasing because of the radicalisation of British Muslims, she told the audience, including some as young as 16, and it “will be with us for a generation”.

They can be disempowered in an instant. The cabinet that went to war should be sent immediatly to the Hague to face trial for war crimes. Justice will not only have been done, it will have been seen to have been done. All these 16 year olds will go back to music, mobile phones, girls and everything else that they should be doing.

Its being said all over the internets. If The President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein can be found guilty of crimes against humanity, then Bliar Bush and Murder Inc. should also be put on trial, because their crimes are actually greater than Saddam Hussein’s in the thoughts of every fair minded person, and that means 16 year olds in Birmingham. If you put a stop to their indignation right now, it will not have a chance to fester grow and harden. It will melt away like the pimples on their faces. This is your one and only chance to calm them down. I suggest that you take it.

The young age of potential terrorists also made it difficult for MI5 to infiltrate the groups. “Young teenagers are being groomed to be suicide bombers,” she said. “We are aware of numerous plots to kill people and to damage our economy. What do I mean by numerous? Give 10? No, nearer 30 that we know of.”

Lies and hysteria mongering. Shameful. Counterproductive. Evil.

At the extreme end, there were resilient networks directed by al-Qa’ida in Pakistan or some more loosely inspired by it, who were planning the attacks, she said. And while the training and the guidance comes from al -Qa’ida, it was “largely British foot soldiers here on an extensive and growing scale”.

Turn down the heat and the milk will not boil over. You should know this.

Given the scale of radicalisation, this indoctrination was happening to some while still at school, she said, adding: “If the opinion polls conducted in the UK since July are only broadly accurate, over 100,000 of our citizens consider that the July bomb attacks in London were justified.”

Think about why that poll returned those results. You invaded a country without cause, in fact, on the basis of a lie. It was an unjustified act, resulting in the murder of 650,000 innocent people. In the minds of these 100,000 people, revenge for that act is completely justified, because it is in retaliation for a real injustice.

But there is more to it than that.

We know that those ‘London Bombers’ in the mythical and staged ‘7/7’ were patsies that didn’t know they were going to blow up anything but that is not the point. These 100,000 simpletons who answered those questions believe that ‘7/7’ was real, and they are basing their answers on that assumption. But you know this, because you know that ‘7/7’ was a piece of theatre, and you are, like Lord Tyrannus, holding up this bogus poll about a bogus event to bolster bogus claims about imaginary threats to further your ultimate goal.

What is really saddening is that the Independent publishes something like this without comment, without rebuttal, and doesn’t even let people comment on this garbage at their shitty website.

They have grand single issue covers “It’s the War Stupid” (or should that have been “It’s the Stupid War”??!!) and then inside, they revert to the ordinary, very stupid, twentieth century newspaper style, where they act as mouthpiece to whoever has the fistful of fivers and a good PR firm, printing the drivel verbatim.

Shame on you!

My 14-year old daughter asked me to ask you this question: Which ID card should she go for to show that she is entitled to concessionary fares on public transport.

She is in the process of opting-out of random drug testing at school because she believes that the swab will be used to collect DNA

~SLip

Tony Bliar talks trash in The Telegraph about ID cards.

Let us tear him to bits:

On any list of public concerns, illegal immigration, crime, terrorism and identity fraud would figure towards the top.

Illegal immigration: Close the borders
Crime: Lock up the criminals
Terrorism: Stop terrorizing other people in their countries
Identity Fraud: not the business of government

In each, identity abuse is a crucial component. It is all part of a changing world: global mass migration; easier travel; new services and new technologies constantly being accessed.

The world is not changing; what HMG has done is opened the floodgates to migrants instead of thinking about the future carefully. It is this open borders policy that has caused the ‘problem’. The world has not changed at all; people are exactly the same as they used to be. Had you not, Mr Bliar Mass Murderer, invaded Iraq, we would not be on the top of the list of skunk nations. That is a fact. If the UK removes itself from Shengen and the EU, then the migration problem goes away. That is a fact. No matter how easy travel is, if you are stopped at the border, all the woes of unchecked immigration melt away.

As for new technologies being accessed, where these are transactions between private entities, the government has no place butting its terrorist head between the two parties. Period.

The case for ID cards is a case not about liberty but about the modern world.

The case against ID cards is all about liberty in the modern world, murderer, traitor and betrayer Bliar.

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.

Biometrics do not solve the ultra flexible list of problems you are trotting out, scumbag, and as for the bulk of the ID cards’ cost having to be spent on new biometric passports, this is a blatant lie. The new passports, in order to conform to the international standards need only have a digital photograph in them. Everything else you are doing is by the design of your criminal vendors.

I am not claiming ID cards, and the national identity database that will make them effective, are a complete solution to these complex problems. That is the tactic of opponents who suggest that, if their introduction is unable to prevent all illegal immigration or every terrorist outrage, they are somehow worthless. What I do believe strongly is that we can’t ignore the advances in biometric technology in a world in which protection and proof of identity are more important than ever.

They are certainly not worthless. They have a great value to HMG as a tool of absolute control and surveillance. You have completely lost this argument you bastard Bliar, thanks to ‘Frances Stonor Saunders’: the thread in that link is highly representative of what happens to people when they find out what your bogus ID Card scheme really means. Once people understand the true horror of it, they turn against it 180°. Precisely this conversation and millions like it have appeared up and down the country. You have LOST this argument Bliar, and the more people are informed of precisely what you are doing, the less likely it will be that your evil scheme will be pulled off.

Nor is the Government alone in believing that biometrics offer us a massive opportunity to secure our identities. Firms across the world are already using fingerprint or iris recognition.

That is a PRIVATE matter between customer and business. It is not by compulsion that they identify themselves in this way to a business, and if it is, that is a matter for them to deal with. Also, providing this information to a business is not by compulsion of the law, and neither does doing it expose ALL of your personal details to millions of civil servants, criminals, the police and every busybody in the UK.

Providing your biometric to a business is completely different. Not only do you have a choice, but if you do decide to be identified in this way to them, they have a legal obligation to keep your details secret, and if they fail in this obligation, you can seek redress in the courts. As we have shown on BLOGDIAL again and again, HMG doesn’t give a DAMN what damage they do to you. If you are mistakenly branded a criminal or an alcoholic, “TOUGH SHIT, we don’t care” is the response.

You can hardly claim that this is of benefit to the British public…oh, I’m sorry, yes you can, because you are a pathological liar.

More than 50 countries are developing biometric passports. France, Italy and Spain plan to make their ID cards biometric.

I have just covered this. This means only a digital photo. You are misrepresenting this, as expected.

Visitors to the United States now digitally record their fingerprint, and new UK passports from last month must carry a facial biometric.

I’m glad that you mention USVISIT, because that evil system shows EXACTLY what this ‘biometric net’ is going to be used for; catching innocent people, like the heads of the absolutely legal internet gambling businesses who were intercepted thanks to USVISIT.

USVISIT is not about stopping terrorists, its about arresting people who are in no way a threat to the USA, but who represent a way to extort monies from foreigners trying to visit that beleaguered and once great country.

It is also not about stopping illegal workers, since those are able to WALK into the USA in their MILLIONS on an annual basis.

This is the truth about USVISIT and these systems in general:

Since January 2004, US-VISIT has processed more than 44 million visitors. It has spotted and apprehended nearly 1,000 people with criminal or immigration violations, according to a DHS press release.

I wrote about US-VISIT in 2004, and back then I said that it was too expensive and a bad trade-off. The price tag for “the next phase” was $15B; I’m sure the total cost is much higher.

But take that $15B number. One thousand bad guys, most of them not very bad, caught through US-VISIT. That’s $15M per bad guy caught.

Surely there’s a more cost-effective way to catch bad guys?

Yes indeed there is, and it does not involve this faddish Biometric madness.

USVISIT is a lie, just like your ID card scheme is a lie. It is there to control the decent people, the people with disposable cash who are economically active.

We also know how effective it can be. In trials using this new technology on visa applications at just nine overseas posts, our officials have already uncovered 1,400 people trying to get back into the UK illegally.

So, for 1,400 people, the liberty of the ENTIRE UK is going to be flushed down the toilet. BILLIONS are going to be spent setting it up, and we are going to have all of our details recorded and made available to anyone who wants to see them, for life.

I don’t think so.

A national identity system will have direct benefits in making our borders more secure and countering illegal immigration.

That is a lie. Illegal immigrants WILL enter this country, and they WILL find work. If they are not able to find work, and are not able to leave, then they will turn to crime to survive, unleashing a crime-wave the likes of which this isle has never before seen.

Biometric visas and residence cards are central to our plans and will be introduced ahead of ID cards. I also want to see ID cards made compulsory for all non-EU foreign nationals looking for work and when they get a National Insurance number. This will enable us, for the first time, to check accurately those coming into our country, their eligibility to work, for free hospital treatment or to claim benefits.

Biometric residence cards for EU citizens are illegal. In France, the ‘Carte de Sejour’ was found to be in contravention of EU law for anyone with EU citizenship wanting to live in France. This will be challenged and it will be put down.

I am convinced, as are our security services, that a secure identity system will help us counter terrorism and international crime. Terrorists routinely use multiple identities – up to 50 at a time – to hide and confuse. This is something al-Qa’eda train people at their camps to do.

More lies. All the Madrid bombers had valid ID, as did the ‘hijackers’ in ‘911’ and the people who perpetrated ‘7/7’. ID will do nothing to stop these outrages, and you know this Bliar you mass murderer. This argument has been defeated many times since it was first trotted out by the adulterer Blunkett. It was a lie then and it is a lie now, which is why you have written it like it is the truth. You are a liar. That is what you do.

It will also help us tackle the problem of identity fraud, which already costs £1.7 billion annually – a figure that has increased by 500 per cent in recent years.

‘Identity Fraud’ is a problem of service providers and the customers they serve. The market will take care of it in a highly efficient way. For example, the market for paper shredders has skyrocketed because discarded paperwork is one of the root causes of people having their identities taken over. Remove the discarded paperwork, the threat is greatly diminished. That is the market solving problems efficiently. It is not the place of government to guarantee the identity of anyone to a business. Of course, this is not your true aim. Your true aim in this is to have a frictionless taxation system, where everyone and every penny they earn is taxable and transparent to you.

But that is another blog post.

Building yourself a new and false identity is all too easy at the moment. Forging an ID card and matching biometric record will be much harder.

But not impossible. Meaning that the small number of ID thieves that are working now will simply tool up to the next level, while the bleating UK population are fleeced, and the crime carries on unabated. And of course, since all the IDs of everybody in the UK will be in one place, criminals will have a one stop shop to get your ID from, and staffers in Whitehall will be happy to facilitate them, as they have been proven to be in the past.

There will also be the added ‘bonus’ to you, Bliar, of being able to look into everyones lives at will; you and the millions of people around the world who will be able to buy info on any UK citizen from the illegally created databases that will emerge, not to speak of the journalists, and corrupt civil servants who will make a fortune out of this gold mine.

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.

The only evil here is you, Bliar. What this sentence actually means is astonishing. We have said on BLOGDIAL before how this will work. Everyone in this system will have a criminal record (even though the legislation does not provide for this). It will either be blank or not. Every company, individual an entity in the UK will be able to check wether or not you have a criminal record, simply by telephoning a service and dictating your number or asking you to swipe your card.

It should make it much more difficult, as has happened tragically in the past, for people to slip between the cracks. Crime detection rates, which fell steadily for decades, should also be boosted. Police, who will have access to the national database, will be able to compare 900,000 outstanding crime-scene marks with fingerprints held centrally.

This is total speculation. Bliar says it SHOULD make it more difficult, crime detection rates SHOULD be boosted. Its a gamble, and a gamble with the liberty of every British person in the land. It is unacceptable, even if the detection rates went up; after all, they do not keep criminals locked up long enough to make a difference, so this is totally absurd.

This is how a national identity system will help tackle some of the major challenges facing our country. However, I believe its benefits go beyond helping us counter problems. 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. By giving certainty in asserting our identity and simplicity in verifying it, biometrics will do away with the need for producing birth certificates, driving licences, NI and NHS numbers, utility bills and bank statements for the simple task of proving who we are.

The problem with all of this, is that in each of these scenarios, the government keeps a record of when you identified yourself, and where you were when you did it. They track you, keep you under surveillance, and none of this is needed to prove your identity. Systems can be developed that do not require a central database to verify identity but which are 100% infallible and accurate. Of course, these systems empower the user and leave the government with no way to centrally track you, which is why they were not pursued. This is a project of control, pure and simple, designed from the outset to facilitate the needs of government surveillance.

A national identity system will quickly become part of the national infrastructure. 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.

Just because everyone might become used to it if it becomes reality doesn’t mean that its right. The people in the USSR were used to living in their totalitarian state for decades, so much so that when it ended, some of them wanted it to be brought back.

This line also demonstrates amply that every agency will know your address, because they are watching you.

So these are the benefits against which we have to gauge the disadvantages of introducing a secure national identity system. There are three main lines of attack — the civil liberties argument, effectiveness and cost. 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.

It doesn’t outrage us Bliar. After participating in the murder of 650,000 this is peanuts. Your points need to be shot down nonetheless.

Just because we CHOOSE to give our private data to organizations and companies, and because we WILLINGLY CHOOSE to carry a variety of cards for clearly defined purposes, doesn’t imply that YOU and your murderous cabal of genocidal traitors have the right to COMPEL us to carry YOUR CARD.

This is the difference that totalitarianists cannot understand; we choose what we want to do in a free society, and we let the market solve our problems. If there was a need for a centrally controlled database where your every move was under surveillance, accessible to every civil servant criminal and busybody, someone would have created it and sold it to the public. That is guaranteed. And what’s more, it would work VERY WELL unlike the IT projects that HMG perpetually fumble. NO one wants this when they find out what it really means. You know this, you liar.

More than two million shoppers in the US already use a “Pay by Touch” system that links their fingerprints to their bank accounts, and a similar system is on trial here in the UK.

Not compulsory, and your entire life is not laid bare to everyone through it, though your shopping habits are. These systems are facing opposition, which is due to grow exponentially once people find out what it really means to hand over your fingerprints like a criminal.

Parliament has attached important safeguards to the scheme, which should meet reasonable concerns.

Bhwaahhaahhahahahahahha!!!!!

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;

That is a lie. We now know that the personal and private medical data of everyone in the UK is about to be uploaded to the NHS spine in 2007 (unless something is done about it) and to think that the NIR unique number that is issued to you will not be used as your universal patient number is simply absurd. 250,000 people will have unfettered access to the spine, meaning that once these two systems are up and running as designed, it will be trivial to match you with your medical records, and literally, millions of people will be able to see everything about you, including and not limited to, your medical records.

One of the reasons why this system is being built is, ostensibly, to cut benefit fraud. That means that anyone in the DSS system will have their NIR unique number in that database, meaning that all the people who have access to that system will be able to pass your information on that database to anyone else.

Any database run by HMG where your NIR unique number is attached to your name creates in effect, a virtual database, that is trivial to ‘short circuit’ into a connected single database, accessible as if it were a single entity. Everyone knows this.

This is an experiment not only in mass surveillance, but in how much intrusion and violation a civilized population will take before it breaks. That is why it is vital that no matter what the consequences, we all absolutely refuse to let it happen, by denying access to our GP records, not registering in the NIR by renewing our passports right now and not applying for new ones should the system come on stream. If we don’t do this, the message is, “fleece us, we don’t care”.

full accreditation will be required for any organisation that wishes to use the data – and they will have to get consent from each individual before they access their details.

That is bullshit not only because of what I just wrote, but consent in this case means handing over your card for a swipe, which will be construed as consent for your records to be accessed. ‘Full accreditation’ in this case means anyone who can pay the trivially small fee for accessing the Identity verification service, which will be an online service, and if you are not accredited, you simply pay someone who is. More lies from the Maximum Liar.

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.

The surveys that have been done have been shown to be wholly inadequate because the questions used did not address what the ID card scheme actually means to the interviewee. Questions like, “If an ID card could cut crime, would you be for it?” does not tell us anything at all about the real opinion of the interviewee, and the people who ran these polls knew this when they conducted them. As I said before, people are waging their own infowar on this subject, and the facts about this system are so chilling people go ballistic when they understand what it all really means.

Then there is the argument that ID cards and the national register simply will not work. This rests largely on the past failures, which I accept exist, of IT projects of all governments. This, however, seems to me an argument not to drop the scheme but to ensure it is done well.

‘Done well’? Bliar, you have absolutely no understanding of databases and computers; in fact, you are computer illiterate. This is clearly demonstrated by your statements on this subject. You are a luser. An asshat, and a murderer. Your next victim will not be the freedom of the British.

There are plenty of examples of how this can be achieved. The Passport Service database, which holds 70 million records, has already issued 2.5 million biometric passports since March.

See? A total moron.

That leaves the cost to the individual. Here, too, there has been some confusion. I simply don’t recognise some of the figures that have been attached to ID cards which, too often, include the costs of biometric passports. This is unfair and inaccurate.

You will be MADE to ‘recognize’, Bliar!!!

We will have no choice but to have a biometric passport, if we want to travel abroad.

That is a lie. We DO have a choice. ‘Biometric Passport’ means only a digital photo as the minimum requirement to qualify as ‘Biometric’. All the rest of it, the eye scans, fingerprints etc is all optional.

The United States has started to require them.

Yes, and we should REALLY follow them further into the abyss shouldn’t we?

This will soon be the case throughout the world. On present estimates, biometric passports make up 70 per cent – or around £66 – of the cost of the combined passports/ID cards we want.

and will not get.

The additional cost of the ID cards will be less than £30 — or £3 a year for their 10-year lifespan. Not a bad price for the problems I am convinced they will help us tackle and for the benefits they will bring. […]

Telegraph

My God, the evil of this man is beyond belief. The lying bastardy, the baseness, the misdirection, omission, ignorance…The only price that matters in this bogus equation is that of LIBERTY and FREEDOM. The value of liberty and freedom are infinite. That means you cannot use them in an equation of any kind where you are trying to do a cost benefit analysis. You traitor. And even if we were to take your figures seriously, which we do not, they are totally bogus. The cost of running the system must be taken in aggregate and not on the individual level, since that is the context in which the money is going to be spent. Also, the benefit is not to the individual, but to the state, and since the man in the street is being made to pay and not the state (yes, they really are two separate things, now more than ever) HMG is getting a total surveillance system for free. The only people who are benefitting financially are the venal vendors.

Tony Bliar is a bad guy. With this scheme, he is single handedly throwing away what greater men than him died for in two world wars. He is a traitor to this nation, as are all the people are helping put this together, and those who voted for it.

It is not too late however to dismantle the whole thing. It has been done before, right here in the United Kingdom There is no justification, no excuse, no rationale that can be trundled out to justify enslaving people.

That is the bottom line. That is what this system is; a radical dehumanizing slave grid. The answer is ‘no’ and this scheme will be destroyed; mark it well nunckle.

The Times November 02, 2006

DNA pioneer accuses the police of being overzealous By Stewart Tendler, Crime Correspondent

The man who developed DNA testing in the 1980s has attacked the spread of data collection by police as mission creep. Sir Alec Jeffreys said that the tool, which was meant to catch criminals who reoffend, has created a vast database of gene profiles of thousands of innocent citizens.

Professor Jeffreys, who is head of genetics research at Leicester University, said: Now hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent people are populating that database, people who have come to the polices attention, for example by being charged with a crime and subsequently released…

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,173-2433318,00.html

Yet another scientist who’s work is being abused.

You remember Oppenhiemer and his post Manhattan success ‘Shiva’ quote don’t you? Google it if you haven’t got a clue about what I am talking about.

The government no longer serves the people

Bev Conover / Online Journal | October 21 2006

Actually, the government hasn’t served the people for a long time. But now, with a stroke of a pen, George W. Bush wiped out the last vestiges of the US Constitution, nullifying our democratic republic, and has all but declared himself dictator. So what are we going to do about it?

Are we going to sit back and hope that the US Supreme Court will declare the Military Commissions Act of 2006 unconstitutional? A hard thing to do in the absence of a constitution, i.e., if someone can even bring the case to the court, given that Bush declared “enemy combatants” have no rights.

Are we going to cross our fingers and hope that the military will effect a bloodless coup by marching into the Oval Office, the Executive Office Building, the Pentagon, the State Department and the Department of Justice and removing Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Gonzales? Doubtful, since today’s so-called patriots, unlike those who risked all in 1776 to declare our independence from Britain, are not apt to risk their careers, much less their lives.

The Declaration of Independence states that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed [that’s us, folks], —

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

From top to bottom, this government has become destructive not only to us, but the world.

The Declaration goes on, “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. –”

Have we not arrived at “absolute Despotism” with the Bush administration? Have we not a worthless Congress that has abdicated its constitutional duty to be a check on the executive and reduced itself to nothing more than two worthless houses, which are nothing more than expensive show, by handing over its power to Despot Bush?

How much more abuse will we take; how many have to disappear into Despot Bush’s gulags, how many more of our soldiers will we allow to be turned into war criminal torturers and murderers before we find our spines and say, “Enough!”

Kid yourselves not that you can rid us and the world of these monsters at the ballot box. First, with the easily rigged voting machines, even if the Democrats take back both houses of Congress, you will never know if it was with your vote or the actions of the people behind the curtain who, for whatever reason, want change. Second, even if the Democrats weren’t Republicans Lite, they would need a veto-proof two-thirds majority in both houses to undue all the hideous legislation the despotic Bush administration demanded and got. Third, as long as Despot Bush has the military in his pocket, how likely are the Democrats to undertake impeachment proceedings against Bush and his whole administration?

And don’t count on the Republicans being defeated on Nov. 7, with your vote or the fixing of the vote. Despot Bush’s Rasputin, Karl Rove, may pull an October Surprise. Another 9-11, anyone?

Finally, if Despot Bush & Co. are allowed to remain in office, what makes you think they will leave on Jan. 20, 2009?

We the people have the power to do what the Declaration tells us we must do, if only we would exercise it. We don’t have to resort to armed rebellion, either. We can bring the country to a halt with national strikes. A few of those and the leaders of Congress, be they Democrats or Republicans, will get the message, march into the White House and tell Bush, Cheney et al that it’s over and hand them over to the US marshals to be, as former Ambassador Joe Wilson put it, “frog-marched” to the nearest jail cell to await trial for their crimes.

[…]

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_1339.shtml

He leads me around the corner to Wardour Street. We enter a dark and dank warehouse and negotiate our way past men making a mighty din as they fill metal cages with brown boxes of consumer stuff. We take a lift – which stinks – two floors down to the sub-basement. There, we walk through sub terranean concrete corridors, past industrial-sized dustbins emitting odours of rotting food, towards a pristine wooden door that seems out of place in this sewer-like setting. Brown taps in a code, and we walk through.

Interesting critique of CCTV from the New Statesman with a few factoids:

I ‘knew’ this one: 12 number of people per CCTV camera in Britain

But this is quite astounding: 20 per cent of all the world’s CCTV cameras are in the UK

Also the Telegraph has a report that shows the non-effect of speed cameras on vehicle accidents.

`The world changed after Sept. 11,” Brown said. “No one can be neutral in the fight against terrorism.”

Good lord, how many times have we heard this crap ? It should be a glaring clue that such a pre-soiled gargoyle seeks to print his ticket to power on the back of 9/11 and paint this hideous deranged picture of himself as some sort of winged saviour to the plebs, showering them in ID cards, laws, and other drivel. It makes you wonder what constituency Brown is trying to appeal to with this incessant stream of garbage, which proves already beyond a shadow of a doubt that Brown is not a fit candidate.

Of course, just in case you didn’t know, the world did not change after 9/11, this is the most noxious lie of all, written down in fact by 9/11 Commission director Philip Zelikow three years before 9/11, and should be a warning sign not only to the British, but to some Americans who think that the bloody nose gleaned on Bush’s wars (and domestic police state in the making) from Blair’s departure, will somehow be eased if Gordon Brown is coronated to power in the UK.

To tell you the truth, I’m sick of writing about Gordon Brown, because in reality Brown is a meaningless, dreary, boring little turd, but I make no apology for doing so because he is also a poisonous and very dangerous one, already stained in the blood and hell of Blair’s years, and contrary to all reasoned reality, believes he has a divine right to install himself one notch up and make things even worse.

So it needs to be constantly loudly rebroadcast to the world that the last decade of unbearable misery has not been due to Tony Blair alone. Gordon Brown has been very much the other half of that partnership; helping to deliver perpetual war, a sickening police state in the UK, and a host of other repulsive crap. Indeed as Ewen MacAskill recently reminded us in the Guardian,

“After that meeting, Mr Brown briefed a group of his supporters, one of whom recalled him producing a memo he had written at the restaurant listing 12 points, including promises of posts in the shadow cabinet for allies, a promise to stand aside for Mr Brown in the second term and control not only of the Treasury but of other domestic departments related to the economy.

The promise about domestic control meant that when Labour won the general election in 1997, Mr Blair was deliberately left in the dark by Mr Brown about much of domestic policy and the prime minister began to focus more and more on foreign policy, with disastrous results in the case of Iraq”

To let Gordon Brown in, is not to renew or reinvigorate a soiled, damaged and worthless political party or to lift the burden of disgrace from the UK. On the contrary, it is to moronically applaud the horrors inflicted on Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and our own troops, as well as to celebrate the relentless, crushing, humiliating police-state in the UK which Brown himself has been eagerly inflicting for the last decade.

And on the latter, I find it quite extraordinary that Brown’s star policy would be a written constitution which far from empowering anyone, will mercilessly and permanently lock-in Brown’s extended-ID slave grid, databases, CCTV, DNA stockpiling, terror laws and so on.

Aside from the grotesqueness of pretending to give back democratic rights, processes and essential liberties stolen by Brown when he was ‘only’ half-leader, Gordon Brown will exalt and make lasting and constitutional these attrocious wounds on the population. Do not be fooled for a second, you are being led into a trap, now is not the time for a constitution and Labour parties should not be touching constitutions in any event. […]

Jultra. 

It seems that there is no free public access to a complete database of all the laws in the UK. The Guardian reported in August 2006 the following:

Shhh – don’t pass it on. It’s the kind of secrecy one might expect for a database of proposed nuclear reactors or plans to go to war. But a database containing the laws of the land? Surely the only way to obey the law is to know what it is in the first place? On August 2, the government rolled out the second stage of a long-delayed project to make the consolidated law of parliament accessible to the people. So how does it look? The public – who paid for the whole project – can’t get a look in. […]

No free public access sites have been granted permission to view the current system and testers of the database – predominantly from commercial legal publishing firms – have been told not to share their login and password. Even so, some testers are not entirely happy with what they’ve found after logging on to the top secret database of our country’s laws. […]

Firstly, an astounding Crown copyright notice greets the reader: “The Statute Law Database and the material on the SLD website are subject to Crown copyright protection. The Crown copyright waiver that applies to published legislation generally does not apply to SLD because it is a value-added product. Any reuse of material from SLD will be the subject of separate and specific licensing arrangements. No such arrangements have yet been entered into. Users should not therefore reproduce or reuse any material from SLD until further guidance is issued.” […]

No matter that the value was added by public officials at taxpayer expense. Small commercial legal publishers and democracy advocates are outraged. “It is appaling that a government feels it should sell the laws it makes to the general public who must obey them,” said developer Francis Irving, who last month won two New Statesman new media awards for his web sites www.writetothem.com (the contribution to civic society award) and www.pledgebank.com (advocacy award). “Because the DCA’s data cannot be reproduced, it makes it impossible for anyone else to compete by providing new and innovative ways of accessing and learning the law.”

Irving had hoped to create a free, user-friendly legal database to rival his previous successes. As such he filed Freedom of Information Act requests last year asking for the raw data held by the Department for Constitutional Affairs. Instead of thanking Irving for his interest, the DCA denied his request. Matthew Elliot, the chief executive of the Taxpayers’ Alliance, is appalled by the government’s response: “Any information collected by the government at taxpayers’ expense should be freely available to the public. If private organisations are willing to collate information at no expense to the taxpayer, why on earth is the government spending money doing exactly the same thing?” […]

US law is copyright free

This is not how it could, or should, have happened. In the US, where information compiled at public expense by public officials is copyright free, the public has had access to consolidated law for decades. Since 1992, the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University in New York has been the leading online resource for US law and Supreme Court decisions. “The raw material for our United States Code collection is provided us by the law revision counsel’s office in the House of Representatives,” says institute director Thomas R Bruce. “They have actively helped us with the things we publish.”[…]
The Guardian

I was aware that crown copyright exists on documents created by the state; when helping prepare a database of all the schools in the UK we found that none exist for download as a single SQL file, and the companies that compile and rent lists charge one hundred pounds per 1000 entries, for a one time use.

We managed to put together an entire list by hand. The same needs to be done with the law.

Look at this:

© Crown Copyright 2002

Acts of Parliament printed from this website are printed under the superintendence and authority of the Controller of HMSO being the Queen’s Printer of Acts of Parliament.

The legislation contained on this web site is subject to Crown Copyright protection. It may be reproduced free of charge provided that it is reproduced accurately and that the source and copyright status of the material is made evident to users.

It should be noted that the right to reproduce the text of Acts of Parliament does not extend to the Queen’s Printer imprints which should be removed from any copies of the Act which are issued or made available to the public. This includes reproduction of the Act on the Internet and on intranet sites. The Royal Arms may be reproduced only where they are an integral part of the original document. […]

Which is from the Office of Public Sector Information.

it seems that you CAN make available the law free of charge as long as you do not use the Queen’s Printer imprints or Royal Arms. This means that it is doable to make a complete and accurate copy of the entire UK law, to make it available to the public for free, and to do interesting things with it in a Web 2.0 context.

It needs now, to be compiled by hand. It is as simple as that.

If we cannot get a hold of the raw SQL dump of all the laws in the UK we will have to build this database ourselves, by hand, with a front end (a Wikipedia of UK law?) and lots of volunteers. We will license this work under a GPL style license, meaning no copyright on our work (crown copyright will continue to persist), and if you want to use any of our work (the typing out, the SQL dump), what you make must also be made available in an SWL dump.

The Guardian article in typical fashion, does not say how big the law is; how many laws there are, and how long it would take for an army of volunteers to type it all in to a database. It doesn’t quote the copyright statement from the site that the article itself links to. As usual they talk only about ‘the problem’, without describing it in detail, and don’t even attempt to offer a solution, and this is in the Technology section. Same old Guardian!

Now, we have some choices to make. Should be create a wiki of laws that we want removed, or create a wiki of all the laws and then build the Web 2.0 service that is described in this post. Its a chicken and egg problem; how can you create a service to prune bad law when the entire text of the law is not freely and easily available to search and read?

hmmmmmmm!

I just saw this webisite thanks to SpyBlog. It is from the Liberal Democrats who are proposing a ‘Great Repeal Act’ to sweep away unnecessary laws.

“We need a single act to roll back a generation of illiberal legislation and illiberal regulations; a single act to dismantle the apparatus of authoritarianism that has been forced on the nation,” says Nick Clegg.

Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats have identified a list of the top ten laws we don’t need, but you can also submit your suggestions, whether they are for a small piece of annoying detail, laws that have been overtaken by events or laws that were never a good idea.

Now. I know for sure that somewhere on BLOGDIAL I talked about setting up a website where people can enter legislation that they want removed from the statute books and vote on other laws that other people have inserted, but I cannot for the life of me find the post, either in the new or the old BLOGDIAL. A lollipop to the person who finds the text.

Either way, here is the LibDem List:

1. Restrictions on protests in Parliament Square
Sections 132 to 138; Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005

The police can now impose any restrictions they think fit on demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament Square. Citizens of this country should not have to ask for the right to protest outside the Parliament that they elect.

2. Identity Cards
Identity Cards Act 2006

Identity cards are unworkable, expensive and illiberal. Labour is already spending £95,000 a day on developing the project but it will not stop terrorism, crime, illegal immigration or benefit fraud.

3. Extradition to the US
Part 2, Extradition Act 2003

This act makes it much easier for the US to extradite people from the UK than it is for the UK to extradite people from the US. Not only is the treaty unbalanced, but it means that British citizens can extradited without any evidence being provided.

4. Conditions on public assemblies
Section 57, Clause 123, Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003

Labour has given the police the power to impose conditions on any protest or gathering even if just two people attend. Until 2003, these restrictions could only be imposed on larger gatherings, of 20 people or more. There is no reason to curtail the right to protest in this way.

5. Criminalising trespass
Sections 128 to 131, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005

Thanks to this part of the act, a Home Secretary can make trespass a criminal offence on any land where they say it is in the interests of national security. This is defined very broadly however – and there is no need for them to justify their decision. If there is a need for restrictions like this they should be agreed democratically.

6. Control orders
Section 1, Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005

These allow restrictions, potentially going as far as house arrest, to be imposed on the mere basis of ‘reasonable suspicion’. They can be made for up to 12 months and renewed indefinitely. The Home Secretary can also decide to opt-out from the European Convention on Human Rights and issue control orders that amount to detention without trial. Liberal Democrats would repeal the law and start again: the Home Secretary should not be allowed to opt out of our human rights agreements, or impose control orders outside the judicial system.

7. DNA retention
Sections 78-84, Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001
Sections 9-10, Criminal Justice Act 2003

The UK has the largest DNA database in the world, but many of those stored on the system have never been charged with, let alone convcited of, a crime. Thousands of innocent children are on the database – because the police have the power to take DNA when they arrest someone and then keep it permanently, even if the person turns out to have done nothing wrong. Ethnic minorities make up 8% of the UK population but 24% od the database. We understand the case for keeping DNA of the convicted, but innocent people’s DNA should not be kept indefinitely.

8. Public interest defence for whistleblowing
Official Secrets Act 1989

It is important that national security is protected, but sometimes it will be the case that it is in the public interest that malpractice or illegal activity is exposed. The Official Secrets Act includes no public interest defence, however – so whistleblowers remain unprotected, even if their action is very much in the public interest. Part of the reason for this was a series of high-profile embarrassments for the Conservative government of the time; ministers’ embarrassment should not be allowed to overrule the public good.

9. Right to silence
Sections 34-39, Public Order Act 1994 – England and Wales

It was a long-established principle of a fair trial that defendants had the right not to be forced to incriminate themselves. In 1994, however, the Conservatives allowed juries to draw adverse inferences from a defendant’s silence. This represented a major attack on the idea of “innocent until proven guilty.”

10. Hearsay evidence
Sections 114-136, Criminal Justice Act 2003

Protections against the use of hearsay evidence were in place to ensure that a trial was decided on the facts of the case. Hearsay evidence cannot in practice be cross-examined in court, which removes a vital safeguard for the accused. Labour, in 2003, widened the circumstances in which it could be used. We would repeal these changes and return to focussing on securing fair trials and reliable convictions.

Applicability: this item refers to the UK. […]

Liberal Democrats

Amazing, the first one is the LEAST OF OUR PROBLEMS, and the most symbolic.

Liberal Democrats have their hearts in the right place (hell, they HAVE a heart unlike the other monsters!) but sadly are as thick as shit…..

Before we fire up Rails, lets add to this list shall we?

• The Maastricht Treaty
• R.I.P.A.
• The Criminal Justice Act of 1994
• All drug classification law that makes ‘drug taking’ illegal
• Parts of the Wireless and Telegraphy Acts
• Computer Misuse Act 1990

Oh dear, there are SO MANY.

To repeat, in case no one finds my original text, you do this list by setting up a website, where the entire legislation of the country is stored. You then invite people to go there and search for law that is bad. They are then presented with some radio buttons and a form to post comment in that is attached not only to the ‘top’ of every law, but to every clause and section of each piece of legislation.

The radio button will give you two choices;’keep’ and ‘discard’. Votes are tallied and we present a REAL top ten THOUSAND of laws that need to be repealed.

The comment boxes are for posting your rationale for any piece of law being kept or discarded.

Its that simple. Some MySQL, Rails (or PHP) and its done. Then we can …. hmmmmm … I might have found it:

What we need to do now is to complete these documents using the above guidelines. We then need to take the next step, which is to prune the existing legislation of the UK, removing all offensive and illiberal laws. We do this by writing down a list of laws that are to be removed from the statutes at the next election on an emergency basis.

We will charge the conservatives with this task since that is the easiest route; should they balk or refuse, we will create our own party with this sole agenda. If we win the same number of votes that Bliar did to gain power, we will consider ourselvs the winners, and then assert our rights. Parliament would be nullified and our new government put in place by default; a government created by the electorate and obedient only to the electorate. […]

BLOGDIAL

Which takes care of the ‘Liberal Democrats will never win an election’ problem.

While I’m at it, the LibDems want to remove ID cards, but they want you to pay a LOCAL INCOME TAX to replace your rates, which means that every council has to get into your private stuff; another layer of mass intrusion. Like I said, they are not very smart people. BUT they seem to be getting smarter…by definition, anyone that moves towards the BLOGDIAL position is smarter.

But you know this!

UPDATE

The Bush administration had to empty its secret prisons and transfer terror suspects to the military-run detention centre at Guantánamo this month in part because CIA interrogators had refused to carry out further interrogations and run the secret facilities, according to former CIA officials and people close to the programme.

The former officials said the CIA interrogators’ refusal was a factor in forcing the Bush administration to act earlier than it might have wished.

When Mr Bush announced the suspension of the secret prison programme in a speech before the fifth anniversary of the September 11 terror attacks, some analysts thought he was trying to gain political momentum before the November midterm congressional elections.

The administration publicly explained its decision in light of the legal uncertainty surrounding permissible interrogation techniques following the June Supreme Court ruling that all terrorist suspects in detention were entitled to protection under Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions.

But the former CIA officials said Mr Bush’s hand was forced because interrogators had refused to continue their work until the legal situation was clarified because they were concerned they could be prosecuted for using illegal techniques. One intelligence source also said the CIA had refused to keep the secret prisons going.

Senior officials and Mr Bush himself have come close to admitting this by saying CIA interrogators sought legal clarity. But no official has confirmed on the record how and when the secret programme actually came to an end.

John Negroponte, director of national intelligence, who was interviewed by Fox News on Sunday, said in response to a question of whether CIA interrogators had refused to work: “I think the way I would answer you in regard to that question is that there’s been precious little activity of that kind for a number of months now, and certainly since the Supreme Court decision.”

In an interview with the Financial Times, John Bellinger, legal adviser to the state department, went further, saying there had been “very little operational activity” on CIA interrogations since the passage last December of a bill proposed by Senator John McCain outlawing torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners.

Mr Bellinger said the secret prisons remained empty for the moment. But he defended the US position that use of such prisons did not contravene international conventions as some in Europe have argued. He also said that, theoretically, the Pentagon as well as the CIA had the legal right to run such facilities. The CIA declined to comment.

Key figures among the 14 prisoners transferred to Guantánamo, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, had been held in secret centres for three years or more. […]

Financial Times

“You do not know these men. You may have looked at them, but you did not see them. They are the wind that blows newspapers down a gutter on a windy night… and sweeps the gutter clean.”

If only….

The truth is, these CIA torturers KNEW that they could be sacrificed to placate the international community should the whole facade fall to pieces. Bush would get away with ordering the war crimes because all presidents give unconditional pardons to their predecessors. Someone would have to pay, and that would be the people who did the dirty work.

This means that they (the CIA) believe that it is possible that everything can change and that civilization can indeed re-assert itself and that the USA will be made to back down.

They are frightened.

We can win!

One of the greatest leaders of any country today is His Excellency President Perves Musharaf.

We have just had confirmed what we suspected all along; The Great Satan threatened to obliterate Pakistan if they did not go along with the bogus, illegitimate, murderous and totally insane ‘war on terror’.

What is interesting is the pathetic simpering denial by Murder Drone Richard Armitage; does this demonic minion REALLY think that his phone call to Pakistan WAS NOT RECORDED?! Should he continue his denial, this tape MUST BE RELEASED, to prove once again, as if it needed proving, that these people are the most violent uncivilized bunch of venal lying murderers ever to hold the reigns of a modern nation.

His Excellency President Perves Musharaf is a great strategist and leader. He has kept Pakistan off of the Neocon radar, kept his nuclear weapons, kept his relations with whomever he wants, AND he is finally making peace with India. He has his cake and is eating it.

After this storm, this Terrorstorm is over, and civilization re-asserts itself, Pakistan will have weathered it intact, and they can then forge ahead into the clean future. Iranians I am sure, are looking at this very carefully. The Gardens of Isfahan should not be burned up over a short term dispute over nothing…over ‘honor’. Iran should weather this storm intact….how can they do it?

If you have seen any of the ‘interviews’ with His Excellency President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (like the appalling one that recently appeared on CNN where the human vermin ‘interviewer’ quipped that he worked in a country where there is a ‘free press’ after His Excellency President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad asked him wether he asked questions that he wanted to ask or wether the questions were given to him by someone else) you will see that despite being 100% in the right, with all moral authority, His Excellency President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, ruins the perception of Iran every time with his poor PR skills. His Excellency President Perves Musharaf has these skills and more. That is why Pakistan is in such an enviable position. Not only do they have all of the above, but now, they have TGS on the defensive, and The Times of London on their side; the side of an Islamic nation!

Its astonishing actually.

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

America Freedom To Fascism

There are many great documentaries out there today. We are finally seeing the critical mass of both near zero cost distribution and  super cheap filming and editing equipment coming together in a runaway chain reactoin of information that is literally changing the world before our eyes.

Now all we need is the next element to go critical; the mass refusal of the population to engage with the global insanity that has gripped this world. A world-wide chain reaction of non cooperation with the nonsense, warmongering, waste and unrefined sleaze that makes all of our lives less pleasant than they should be.

Ariel Sharon, the incapacitated former Israeli Prime Minister, is wearing an SS uniform. A man with Jewish side locks is depicted as a vampire drinking from a container marked ‘Palestinian blood’. An Arab figure is impaled to the ground by the absurdly long nose of a man in a black hat characteristic of orthodox Jews and marked ‘Holocaust’.At their worst, the images conform to lurid western stereotypes of Iran as a hotbed of anti-Semitism, as evoked by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s dismissal of the Holocaust as a ‘myth’.

They are among the results of a competition run by the country’s biggest-selling newspaper, Hamshahri, to find the ‘cleverest’ cartoons satirising the slaughter of six million Jews by the Nazis in the Second World War.

More than 200 images have gone on public display in an exhibition at Tehran’s Palestine Contemporary Art Museum. The exhibition’s opening was attended by the de facto Palestinian ambassador to Iran, Salah al-Zawawi, who has full diplomatic status in Tehran.

Organisers say they received about 750 entries from around the world, including America and Britain, as well as many Muslim countries. The winning entrant will be announced next month and will receive a prize of US$12,000 (£6,380).

The contest, condemned by Israel and Jewish organisations, was launched in February in response to widespread Muslim outrage at the publication of Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed in European newspapers. It followed a series of anti-Israeli outbursts from Ahmadinejad, including a call for the Jewish state to be wiped off the map.

Massoud Shojai Tabatabai, director of the Iranian House of Cartoons which co-ordinated the project, said its aim was to challenge perceived western double-standards on free speech, which Iran’s leaders insist precludes openly debating the authenticity of the Holocaust.

‘Why is it acceptable in western countries to draw any caricature of the Prophet Mohammed, yet as soon as there are any questions or doubts raised about the Holocaust, fines and jail sentences are handed down?’ Tabatabai told The Observer.

That sentiment finds expression in a split-image cartoon from a Brazilian entrant in which a stand-up comic is portrayed performing in a venue called the West Club. In one image, captioned ‘Making jokes about Islam’, the comedian is greeted with raucous laughter. But the accompanying picture, marked ‘Making jokes about the Holocaust’, shows him being booted out of the window.

The exhibition’s other themes are a contention that the death toll of the Holocaust is exaggerated and a comparison of the Nazis’ behaviour with Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. The latter is explored in a cartoon, purportedly by a Belgian Jewish artist, in which two parallel railway lines – one marked with a swastika, the other with a star of David – merge before leading into a building resembling Auschwitz and bearing the slogan ‘Welcome home’. […]

Graniaud

I wonder if the Guardian printed any of these drawings…or any other newspaper running this story for that matter. hmmmmmmm!

While we are on the subject of publishing, they apologise today for publishing the name of someone who they said was arrested in the phony turrr plot, but who in fact was not arrested at all. They do not say how they made this mistake, they just say ‘sorry’. They should also say ‘sorry’ for whipping up hysteria whenever these false plots are unleashed to scare the the (half)wits out (there) of(in) the public.

And here is a TV report on the exhibition, via MEMRI.

Dear Dr. Waldron, All my life I was affected by the tragic end of Mr. Lumumba. My father could not explain why this very intelligent and lovely man who was the incarnation of our socio-political dreams and hopes was killed with the blessing of the USA president of the time, UN general secretary and the local leaders of the time, My question is why Lumumba was so hated? Why nobody could hear him and understand him objectively? Why king Baudouin who was so intelligent and religious could not take time to discuss with Lumumba to know him better and understand his vision for his home country? From South Africa to Algeria, Egypt to Ivory Coast, I heard similar stories of the best men who were killed to satisfy the international community.

Dear Rev. Doctor, I don’t think anyone in America had anything personal against Lumumba. They did listen to him and they understood very well what he had to say, and that is why Western economic interests killed him. Lumumba was killed by the European and American mining and banking interests because Lumumba was the only person who could hold the Congo together after Independence, and those economic interests wanted to break the Congo apart for their own profit. In order to justify killing Lumumba, they had to create the propaganda lie that he was a Communist. The assassination of Lumumba also suited the Russians who could not control Lumumba alive, but after his death could wrap their man Gizenga in his mantle. Lumumba was doomed. If the West hadn’t killed him, Russia would have, and Lumumba’s Congolese political rivals were equally determined to get rid of him so they could carve out their own little kingdoms within the Congo. This was not just Tshombe in Katanga, but do not forget that Kasa-Vuba originally called himself King Kasa in his election campaign, in which he promised to make his own ethnic group an independent entity. In the months before Independence, most of the Belgians in the Congo knew perfectly well that the Belgian Government, for the sake of the profits of Union Miniere de Haut Katanga and its other economic interests, was already engineering the conditions in which the Congo could not survive as a unified country. The Royal Family of Belgium were major stockholders in Union Miniere de Haut Katanga, and King Baudouin of the Belgians was just as profit motivated as the notorious King Leopold II was when he set up that company to exploit the mineral riches of the Congo. Ordinary born-Congolese Whites and those among the provincial administrators who were caring and honest, were outraged by what the government in Belgium was doing, not just to the African Congolese, but to the White Congolese. You can read more about this in the Luluabourg excerpt from my book THE SECRET IN THE HEART OF DARKNESS; The Sabotaged Independence of the Belgian Congo, which is on this Web site There is a saying in English, that to understand something you “Follow the Money”. Therefore, don’t look for answers to what happened to the Congo in political ethics, or animosities, or misunderstandings of what Lumumba was saying and wanted to do. Look for the answers in who was planning to profit. The people who were behind the chaos and the murder of Lumumba then looted the Congo of all its resources both through taking them directly and through loans to Mabutu at crippling interest rates to have European companies the lenders designated build (or in many cases not actually build) unneeded huge projects while letting the basic infrastructure crumble, impoverishing the country and depriving the people of the necessities of life to service the debts. The people of the Congo need peace, good government, and a viable infrastructure, and I do not know how any of these can be attained in the present conditions of corruption, chaos, war and poverty. A BOOK I RECOMMEND TO SERIOUS SCHOLARS: THE CONGO CABLES THE COLD WAR IN AFRICA–FROM EISENHOWER TO KENNEDY Author: KALB, MADELEINE G MACMILLAN, 1982, These are the actual cables back and forth between Washington, the Congo and the UN.

Source: D’Lynn Waldron